shah269 0 #1 February 9, 2012 Listening to NPR this morning on the way to work regarding the upcoming settlement between the federal government and the large banks which did not do their due diligence with respect to robo signing and foreclosures. If the bank robo signed and foreclosed on your home.....you may get a check for $2,000 So that's where the liability for the bank stops. And that's where the award of damages stops...... You lost your home due to the banks ineptitude and inability to hire a proper professional staff that could establish property and coherent SOP's and as a result of their negligence your home was taken away though you did nothing wrong.....and you get a check for $2,000. About one month's rent in NJ. I can't help but wonder how dumb your average American is to think that this is penance of $2k is sufficient to make the now homeless person whole? As my beloved grandmother use to say, "Shah there is no justice in this life nor the next." That is to say, if you want your pound of flesh for those who have wronged you....you better take our your knife and cared it out yourself for god will not be doing it for you.Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 236 #2 February 9, 2012 I hate to break it to you, but the foreclosures that were handled badly by the banks and finance companies were the result of people defaulting on their mortgages. This is a key point. The fact that the foreclosure process was bungled badly in all too many cases does not change the fact that people lost their homes due to nonpayment. People who stayed current with their mortgage and taxes were fine. Those who quit paying were the ones who were out on the street. The issue for which the lenders are being fined is procedural. The unethical behavior on the part of lenders was issuing the bad mortgages in the first place. People who borrowed to buy houses they simply could not afford were, at the very best, stupid. I know you are mad at the financial system, and to some extent it is for cause. This does not, however, make the system guilty of every failing you would ascribe to it. BSBD, Winsor Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #3 February 9, 2012 Here's how I read your description - an idiotic that took out a loan on home he can't possibly afford can now default on his financial responsibilities and get awarded a couple grand for it. AND, the bank that normally wouldn't give that bad loan but was forced to do it under government requirements now has to pay for the privilege. Shit - If I can take out a loan every week and default on it to foreclosure, that's a 6 figure salary ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #4 February 9, 2012 There are a number of stories out there of people having their homes foreclosed on that were not behind on their payments and even had refinanced and paid off the previous loan and that previous loan had come to back to life. Banks had lost payments or documentation that a load and been paid in full. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #5 February 9, 2012 QuoteThere are a number of stories out there of people having their homes foreclosed on that were not behind on their payments and even had refinanced and paid off the previous loan and that previous loan had come to back to life. Banks had lost payments or documentation that a load and been paid in full. if this fine is absolutely restricted to this scenario, then that's at least something worth talking about do you think it is? maybe it is, that's how Shah wrote it, but he's not known for relaying a very clear picture without his bias. So the assumption is we were talking about default, not bank errors. if not, then this is a moot point - If it is - those people would have legal recourse already to address the mistake - $2000 is silly, because a civil case can already be made for reparations and damages due to an improper foreclosure. So that means this law is a crappy PR move that might hurt more than help vs the previous status quo ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
weekender 0 #6 February 9, 2012 QuoteThere are a number of stories out there of people having their homes foreclosed on that were not behind on their payments and even had refinanced and paid off the previous loan and that previous loan had come to back to life. Banks had lost payments or documentation that a load and been paid in full. This is news to me and if you could provide links i would appreciate it. you say, "a number of stories", could you be more clear? somewhere between zero and a million? Its mute though. the banks are being called to the table for abusing the forclosure process. using robots signatures and false documents to speed up the process, for example. this was only on deliquent homeowners not people current. The banks were wrong and should be punished. id say if you didnt pay your mortgage and the bank got you kicked out but did it by not following the law and extra 2k is nice. you do NOT deserve your home back IMO. your not that much of a victim. you still didnt pay your agreed payments."The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shah269 0 #7 February 9, 2012 QuoteThere are a number of stories out there of people having their homes foreclosed on that were not behind on their payments and even had refinanced and paid off the previous loan and that previous loan had come to back to life. Banks had lost payments or documentation that a load and been paid in full. BINGO! Also boys and I hate to tell this to you...because you are so balls out in defending banks and big business....THIS IS THE US NOT CHINA! (please take a moment of your day and study up on how big business/banks operate in China...will give you a very serious hard on if you are a lover of zero regulated corrupt business practices)......and as such we have this thing called business law. As such we have due process of business. The banks blatantly broke some major laws....but then again...if I broke major laws and were fined only $2k for every time I did it....well....let me put it this way there would a few empty bank vaults and a few very nice cars in my garage...and a few dozen old fuckers piled up in the street on the ceremonial cremation fire.Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #8 February 9, 2012 All I am trying to say is the Banks need to keep good records and follow proper procedures and robo signing is not it. Ruining a few peoples lives who haven't done anything wrong is something they need to fess up to and account for. The majority of people who couldn't afford the loans the took out can eat shit and die for all I care. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #9 February 9, 2012 QuoteAll I am trying to say is the Banks need to keep good records and follow proper procedures and robo signing is not it. Ruining a few peoples lives who haven't done anything wrong is something they need to fess up to and account for. The majority of people who couldn't afford the loans the took out can eat shit and die for all I care. no issue there - I did an edit in the up post - go read it and let me know what you think ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shah269 0 #10 February 9, 2012 What worries me and please correct me if I'm reading this incorrectly but by the attorney generals signing this agreement with the banks that the banks can no longer be perused by the individuals in cases where the bank clearly made egregious errors in paper processing of those who's loans were in good standing.Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
weekender 0 #11 February 9, 2012 QuoteWhat worries me and please correct me if I'm reading this incorrectly but by the attorney generals signing this agreement with the banks that the banks can no longer be perused by the individuals in cases where the bank clearly made egregious errors in paper processing of those who's loans were in good standing. completely seperate issue. this is specific to homes that were behind on payments. use some common sense. why would a bank want to forclose on a home in good standing that is under water? they would lose the monthly interest income and assume a property that they would have to sell for less than they paid?"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shah269 0 #12 February 9, 2012 Quote completely seperate issue. this is specific to homes that were behind on payments. use some common sense. why would a bank want to forclose on a home in good standing that is under water? they would lose the monthly interest income and assume a property that they would have to sell for less than they paid? From what the NPR article stated people who were in the process of "renegotiating" their loans based on what the banks had told them to do (in this case stop paying for a month or two) were also foreclosed on in an improper manner. Also there were a good number of folks who were paying their loans and still were foreclosed on. As for "why" a bank would wish to own a given property which they would sell at a loss? Well that truly is an interesting question...can we say tax write off?Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #13 February 9, 2012 It's actually a max of about 1800 dollars. Could be more, but governments are taking at least half of the 26 billion. It's not for the actual homeowners. This is a big moneymaker for the best racket out there - government. Why is the government keeping so much money for itself? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
weekender 0 #14 February 9, 2012 QuoteQuote completely seperate issue. this is specific to homes that were behind on payments. use some common sense. why would a bank want to forclose on a home in good standing that is under water? they would lose the monthly interest income and assume a property that they would have to sell for less than they paid? From what the NPR article stated people who were in the process of "renegotiating" their loans based on what the banks had told them to do (in this case stop paying for a month or two) were also foreclosed on in an improper manner. Also there were a good number of folks who were paying their loans and still were foreclosed on. As for "why" a bank would wish to own a given property which they would sell at a loss? Well that truly is an interesting question...can we say tax write off? i did not hear what NPR said. i read the statement put out by the gov't that is on the news wires. so cannot defend what i do not know. did you study about write off's in business school? your understanding of them reminds me of the Seinfeld episode where Kramer explains its ok to damage goods because they are just "written off". Business do not take a profitable transaction and purposely lose money on it. they can always just put money into employee insurance or 401k's to bring down taxable income as an example. they dont purposely lose money. not in my experience. I guess i could be wrong and your right but doubt it. edited for clarity: a business does not purposely take a profitable transaction and make it unprofitable. they have other ways to reduce taxes. i fully understand charges and buying loses. i am specifically saying they would not take a profitable property and purposely make it a loss. that makes no sense."The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #15 February 9, 2012 >I can't help but wonder how dumb your average American is to think that this >is penance of $2k is sufficient to make the now homeless person whole? But just think how happy you would be if one of those people who was foreclosed on was one of those little old ladies you dislike so much. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 380 #16 February 9, 2012 QuoteQuoteThere are a number of stories out there of people having their homes foreclosed on that were not behind on their payments and even had refinanced and paid off the previous loan and that previous loan had come to back to life. Banks had lost payments or documentation that a load and been paid in full. This is news to me and if you could provide links i would appreciate it. you say, "a number of stories", could you be more clear? somewhere between zero and a million?Quote Here's one from Atlanta. Some more from Colorado. Edited to add another recent news story. And another one. These are hard to find on Google as you get pages and pages of "how to avoid foreclosure" and similar links. I think these examples are enough to show the problem is real. Not a huge number, perhaps closer to zero than to a million, but certainly cases exist where houses were put into foreclosure despite paid-up or even paid-off mortgages. There are also cases where the homeowner was unable to resolve a situation because it was unclear until too late who actually held the mortgage; it had been bought and sold several times but the paperwork didn't follow in a timely manner. While it's clear the overwhelming number of foreclosures are due to people not making payments, there do also seem to be some cases where banks have lost track of paperwork and have initiated foreclosures on paid-up loans. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites weekender 0 #17 February 9, 2012 >While it's clear the overwhelming number of foreclosures are due to people not making payments, there do also seem to be some cases where banks have lost track of paperwork and have initiated foreclosures on paid-up loans. thanks for the reply. i was actually being more of a wise ass than looking for articles. I dont like when people say"numbers" to imply many. I thought his point was to imply it was rampant and the gov't's deal was to address it. He cleard up his point and myself and others have pointed out the deal is about deliquent homes. there is currently protections for the rarer case of banks forclosing on current homes. to be clear, im not defending anyone. if a bank commits fraud the gov't should go after them. if you dont pay your mortgage the bank should take action."The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wayneflorida 0 #18 February 9, 2012 Quote It's actually a max of about 1800 dollars. Could be more, but governments are taking at least half of the 26 billion. It's not for the actual homeowners. This is a big moneymaker for the best racket out there - government. Why is the government keeping so much money for itself?[/reply] I remember Groucho Marx asking this question on his "You bet your life show". I forgot his answer though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GeorgiaDon 380 #19 February 9, 2012 Quoteto be clear, im not defending anyone. if a bank commits fraud the gov't should go after them. if you dont pay your mortgage the bank should take action. I agree completely. Something that strikes me as particularly wrong with the current bailout proposal is that it includes $17 billion for reductions in the principle owing for "underwater" mortgages. So, my tax dollars are being used to pay off part of the principle for people who owe more than their house is worth. I'll go ahead and guess those are people without much equity in their house, which suggests they didn't put enough down to cover the cost of market downturns (cough cough shah cough). I on the other hand will not qualify for such a giveaway, as I made a decent down payment (a bit over 20%) on house #1 back in '96, and about 50% on house #2 last year. It would be sweet indeed if someone was to write off $17,000 on either mortgage, but because I (well my wife really) have been responsible and never missed or been late with a payment we get to pay off other people's mortgage too! Don't get me wrong, I don't think I should have been included in the giveaway, I disagree with the notion of the giveaway itself. I can see some argument for providing some security so people can refinance at today's rates, indeed I have a self-interest in that as I don't want more houses added to the foreclosure glut, but making me pay off someone else's principle pisses me off. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shah269 0 #20 February 9, 2012 Quote>I can't help but wonder how dumb your average American is to think that this >is penance of $2k is sufficient to make the now homeless person whole? But just think how happy you would be if one of those people who was foreclosed on was one of those little old ladies you dislike so much. Bill a man can hope and dream a man can only hope and dream! But sadly those old fucks have no skin in the game. Thus they will not be leaving their homes any time soon.....Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Southern_Man 0 #21 February 9, 2012 QuoteBut sadly those old fucks have no skin in the game. Thus they will not be leaving their homes any time soon..... It takes a twisted mind to argue that people who have completely paid off their properties have no skin in the game."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tmccann 1 #22 February 9, 2012 Well, if a bank sent a foreclosure notice on the loan that they had already paid off, they could get $2k! Score! A friend of mine got one of those - a foreclosure notice on his house by the lender to the person who sold him the property. Easy to handle - the release of their lien on the property would be in the transaction documents from the sale. Worst case situation, you would have the Title agent of lawyer (depending on location) send the paperwork to the bank. The banks lost the original paperwork on a lot of loans/houses. There are companies who figure out which properties these are, and help people squat in them long enough to gain legal title to the property. Others who get people to stop paying their mortgage, because the bank doesn't have the documentation to enforce it. How is any of that OK, but a bank that lends you the money you ask to borrow from them, and then actually expects you to repay it is Evil? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shah269 0 #23 February 9, 2012 How is any of that OK Simple, the bank failed to do it's due diligence and as such is delinquent in its position. It's not personal it's just business.Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shah269 0 #24 February 9, 2012 QuoteQuoteBut sadly those old fucks have no skin in the game. Thus they will not be leaving their homes any time soon..... It takes a twisted mind to argue that people who have completely paid off their properties have no skin in the game. They don't care about their property value...they are going to die sooner rather than later. I on the other hand have a long life to live and care to enjoy it away from them. Thus they don't have any flabby fucking skin in the game. Can't wait till time catches up with them and they die off!Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,119 #25 February 9, 2012 So . . . . flippers have skin in the game because they want to abandon their homes and live somewhere else. Owners who own their homes, and want to live there as long as they can, have no interest in their property because they will die someday. If only everyone hated their homes and were underwater, the world would be a better place. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
weekender 0 #17 February 9, 2012 >While it's clear the overwhelming number of foreclosures are due to people not making payments, there do also seem to be some cases where banks have lost track of paperwork and have initiated foreclosures on paid-up loans. thanks for the reply. i was actually being more of a wise ass than looking for articles. I dont like when people say"numbers" to imply many. I thought his point was to imply it was rampant and the gov't's deal was to address it. He cleard up his point and myself and others have pointed out the deal is about deliquent homes. there is currently protections for the rarer case of banks forclosing on current homes. to be clear, im not defending anyone. if a bank commits fraud the gov't should go after them. if you dont pay your mortgage the bank should take action."The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wayneflorida 0 #18 February 9, 2012 Quote It's actually a max of about 1800 dollars. Could be more, but governments are taking at least half of the 26 billion. It's not for the actual homeowners. This is a big moneymaker for the best racket out there - government. Why is the government keeping so much money for itself?[/reply] I remember Groucho Marx asking this question on his "You bet your life show". I forgot his answer though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 380 #19 February 9, 2012 Quoteto be clear, im not defending anyone. if a bank commits fraud the gov't should go after them. if you dont pay your mortgage the bank should take action. I agree completely. Something that strikes me as particularly wrong with the current bailout proposal is that it includes $17 billion for reductions in the principle owing for "underwater" mortgages. So, my tax dollars are being used to pay off part of the principle for people who owe more than their house is worth. I'll go ahead and guess those are people without much equity in their house, which suggests they didn't put enough down to cover the cost of market downturns (cough cough shah cough). I on the other hand will not qualify for such a giveaway, as I made a decent down payment (a bit over 20%) on house #1 back in '96, and about 50% on house #2 last year. It would be sweet indeed if someone was to write off $17,000 on either mortgage, but because I (well my wife really) have been responsible and never missed or been late with a payment we get to pay off other people's mortgage too! Don't get me wrong, I don't think I should have been included in the giveaway, I disagree with the notion of the giveaway itself. I can see some argument for providing some security so people can refinance at today's rates, indeed I have a self-interest in that as I don't want more houses added to the foreclosure glut, but making me pay off someone else's principle pisses me off. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shah269 0 #20 February 9, 2012 Quote>I can't help but wonder how dumb your average American is to think that this >is penance of $2k is sufficient to make the now homeless person whole? But just think how happy you would be if one of those people who was foreclosed on was one of those little old ladies you dislike so much. Bill a man can hope and dream a man can only hope and dream! But sadly those old fucks have no skin in the game. Thus they will not be leaving their homes any time soon.....Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #21 February 9, 2012 QuoteBut sadly those old fucks have no skin in the game. Thus they will not be leaving their homes any time soon..... It takes a twisted mind to argue that people who have completely paid off their properties have no skin in the game."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tmccann 1 #22 February 9, 2012 Well, if a bank sent a foreclosure notice on the loan that they had already paid off, they could get $2k! Score! A friend of mine got one of those - a foreclosure notice on his house by the lender to the person who sold him the property. Easy to handle - the release of their lien on the property would be in the transaction documents from the sale. Worst case situation, you would have the Title agent of lawyer (depending on location) send the paperwork to the bank. The banks lost the original paperwork on a lot of loans/houses. There are companies who figure out which properties these are, and help people squat in them long enough to gain legal title to the property. Others who get people to stop paying their mortgage, because the bank doesn't have the documentation to enforce it. How is any of that OK, but a bank that lends you the money you ask to borrow from them, and then actually expects you to repay it is Evil? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shah269 0 #23 February 9, 2012 How is any of that OK Simple, the bank failed to do it's due diligence and as such is delinquent in its position. It's not personal it's just business.Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shah269 0 #24 February 9, 2012 QuoteQuoteBut sadly those old fucks have no skin in the game. Thus they will not be leaving their homes any time soon..... It takes a twisted mind to argue that people who have completely paid off their properties have no skin in the game. They don't care about their property value...they are going to die sooner rather than later. I on the other hand have a long life to live and care to enjoy it away from them. Thus they don't have any flabby fucking skin in the game. Can't wait till time catches up with them and they die off!Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #25 February 9, 2012 So . . . . flippers have skin in the game because they want to abandon their homes and live somewhere else. Owners who own their homes, and want to live there as long as they can, have no interest in their property because they will die someday. If only everyone hated their homes and were underwater, the world would be a better place. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
