I thought that this might be appropriate to this thread:
but decided that I should start a new one rather than wake up a month old one.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/housing/2010-11-17-foreclosures17_ST_N.htm
Anyone still want to wave this all away as “lax paperwork”.
It is lax paperwork too. Robo signing ,where they hire a person for 12 bucks an hour to spend all day signing foreclosure paperwork that they don’t read certainly is a problem. It results in tons of foreclosures to continue through the process that may not be legit. It is fraud. Often the bank can not prove in court that they actually have title because it was chopped up and sold in CDOs. No matter. They will continue taking homes as long as they can get away with it.
I hear this, but I have yet to see somebody in the news who is not in default who is actually having their house foreclosed on.
The banks have made a lot of mistakes and done a lot wrong, but banks don’t really ever want to foreclose. It’s expensive. It makes them lose money. They would much prefer that people pay on their mortgage.
“Banks are bad” is an easy news story.
So far I haven’t seen anything specific in these stories.
Any examples that this is actually happening to any appreciable degree?
Certainly if we want to be literal, “lax paperworK” is involved. But some people use the term “lax paperwork” to dismiss this issue as if it’s not a big deal; as if sloppiness with the documentation is a minor issue.
Because of the “lax paperwork” banks are now committing fraud and making forgeries in an attempt to straighten out the paperwork. They are creating “proof” of things they have no proof for and in the process, predictably, they’re “proving” things that aren’t true and foreclosing on the wrong houses.
Sure they do. But it appears that they would prefer to lose this money by foreclosing (plus the money not paid by the borrower while this stuff drags on) instead of negotiating some sort of a deal where they lose less now and have an upside of getting some of a later increase in value.
If someone is unable to pay even this reduced amount, then they can go ahead and foreclose.
Perhaps one reason we think banks bad is that the paperwork mess didn’t happen by accident, but directly from the banks cutting corners. If they did it the old fashioned government way, filing things in the county courthouse, a minimal amount of paperwork would have been lost. But it would have reduced their gasp profits - and made it impractical to trade mortgages every five minutes.
Man Makes Ridiculously Complicated Chart To Find Out Who Owns His Mortgage (CHART) | HuffPost Impact Here is a flow chart a guy did to find out who actually owns his mortgage.
Voyager:
I work for one of these very big banks, but not in the mortgage area. Nevertheless, these stories are affecting our business.
The bank is telling us that there are 0 foreclosures that occurred against people who are not in default on their mortgages and that these stories are irresponsible And false journalism that is truly damaging to all concerned.
I’ve seen some of these stories. So far, they all seem to lack a key component, that is, somebody who has been foreclosed on who is NOT in default of their mortgage.
Without such people, it’s not true. There is no story, and it’s a fabrication.
Now, I have no doubt that there are people who are in default who are being foreclosed on where there are problem’s with the bank’s paperwork. That’s one thing, and I say fuck 'em both. If the guy is in default he can be foreclosed on, and if the bank decides to foreclose on such a person, their paperwork better be right. That’s as it should be.
But, that’s not what we are talking about. We are talking about people being foreclosed on who are NOT in default.
Who? Give me an example. Show me a report from the news on somebody who lost their home who was not in default.
Without such examples, this is simply bullshit.
There was a thread recently where people listed a number of examples. For some reason I can’t find that thread (maybe someone can post it), but maybe this will help: paid cash foreclosed - Google Search
Also, the article I linked to in the OP says this very thing.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/housing/2010-11-17-foreclosures17_ST_N.htm
Are you saying that it’s incorrect?
The article says two things. One is a lawyer who is saying that 10% of her cases involve people who have bben foreclosed on who were not in default. Second is a representative of a bank who says that nobody who is in not in default has been foreclosed on.
These are mutually exclusive statements, so clearly one of them has to be incorrect.
So yes, one way or another it’s incorrect.
Earlier you posted a link referencing an incident where apparently a bank foreclosed on somebody who was in default, but then the foreclosure people actually went and changed the locks on the wrong house.
That kind of thing shouldn’t happen, and the people responsible should pay for the error, but this kind of mistaken identity accident isn’t what we are talking about, is it?
You seem to be saying that there is a systemic problem where people who are not in default of their mortgages are being foreclosed on by their mortgage companies.
Again, one asks for examples.
Why is this so difficult? Google it. I even gave you a link.
I’m saying that people who weren’t in default, some who didn’t even have a mortgage, were foreclosed on.
Yes, in some cases it was because of a wrong address on a form, but does that somehow make it better? Does it lessen in some way the problems it caused for those homeowners? Does it somehow ameliorate the fact that some or all of those errors occurred because of the mass creation of false documents?
Documents were signed by people who did not check the facts on those documents. Documents were notarized en masse with no verification. These are criminal acts.
If you can’t see that. If you’re going to continue to demand to see what’s right in front of your face, then I don’t know what else to say.
Davidm:
It’s difficult because your google link, and Runner pat’s all refer to one case, which is a regrettable accident. This could have happened anywhere at any time.
BAC foreclosed on somebody who was in default. Then, they seized the wrong house.
This is a terrible one off accident.
I don’t think that one can extrapolate that a single case of mistaken identity somehow implies that people who are paying on their mortgages are in jeopardy of being foreclosed on due to a systemic problem with the process.
I look at this as the first one. The other was a case of mistaken identity. This looks like a case of a foreclosure on somebody who was paying.
Maybe Google returned different results for you, that’s entirely possible. My fault for being lazy and giving you a Google search link.
Here are some I found:
A couple in Florida who paid cash and had no mortgage. Five years later B of A siezed the house, removed their belongings and changed the locks.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/realestate/bank-of-america-forecloses-on-house-that-couple-had-paid-cash-for/1072632
This next link I can’t tell if they’re talking about the same case or a different one but it illustrates the criminal recklessness that was engaged in:
http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2010/10/04/daily48.html
My first link in this post was about Charlie and Maria Cardoso, a couple with a house in Spring Hill. Florida which was foreclosed by B of A even though they had paid cash for it
This next one is also in Florida but it’s clearly a different case. It’s about a gentleman name Jason Grodensky who paid cash for a house in For Lauderdale and 7 months later had it foreclosed and sold out from under him by B of A.
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2010-09-23/business/fl-wrongful-foreclosure-0922-20100921_1_foreclosure-defense-attorney-foreclosure-case-jumana-bauwens
The next one is from Pittsburgh, clearly a different case.
I could go on if I wanted to but it’s late on a weeknight. Check out my link again, maybe you’ll get better results this time.
Even if you don’t lose your home, you receive a summons, have to hire an attorney, wonder if your title search wasn’t done right, worry that you will lose your home, etc. And all because the banks either, 1) were sloppy with their paperwork, or 2) were outright fraudulent in their paperwork.
Also, I don’t care if the homeowner hasn’t paid in 5 years. It is up to the bank (or anyone else in a civil procedure) to prove that they have a right to relief. And if the bank doesn’t really have a right to enforce the note anymore, this homeowner can be double screwed when the real note holder comes looking for his money and the bank has already repossessed the house.
All excellent points, especially the last one about the real note holder showing up later. I hadn’t even considered that one.
Jesus Christ. Neither had I. Are you sure the bank wouldn’t have to indemnify the borrower against any other liens on the property?
I can’t find it right now, but I remember reading a detailed write up of a case of a woman whose foreclosure was thrown out because of absurdly bad paper work and possibly fraud. The bank tried to file the lien after the foreclosure. The same woman signed affidavits as an employee for three different organizations on the same case. The judge gave the bank a period to straighten out the paperwork and clarify who signed the affidavits. The bank missed the deadline by a year and did not comply with the judges instructions so he/she cancelled the debt.
I keep finding references to foreclosures thrown out in New York, but no specifics. Does anyone else remember this?