Skip to comments.Show us the victims (Home foreclosures and Chris Dodd's phony rage)
Posted on 11/16/2010 6:33:17 AM PST by WebFocus
Nearly 90 percent of home owners have stayed current on their mortgages throughout the housing meltdown. Yet, in what should be his final act as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, Chris Dodd is holding hearings today about how the 10 percent of homeowners who are either seriously delinquent or in default on their loans are being screwed by the banking system.
The hearing, of course, won't dwell on the mistakes of the vast majority of alleged victims of this scandal -- namely, how they rolled the dice on the housing bubble, taking out loans they knew they couldn't afford.
Its title -- "Problems in Mortgage Servicing From Modification to Foreclosure" -- tells you all you need to know about the goal: to stoke anger at the big banks by portraying all those who've been forced from their homes in the last two years as innocent victims, seduced into taking out unaffordable loans and now victimized by the same banks and their teams of "robo-signers," who denied them "due process" by rubber-stamping foreclosure documents without proper review.
Dodd, of course, should have a special insight into the seamy side of the housing bubble and its ultimate meltdown. He got VIP treatment from one of the bubble's biggest instigators -- former Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo, whose business model centered on lending money to subprime borrowers. When it wasn't handing out subprime loans to risky borrowers (loans that were then guaranteed or bought by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, thus contributing to their demise), it was helping "influentials" like Dodd gain access to low-cost loans through its "Friends of Angelo" program.
Don't expect to hear much today about Friends of Angelo, or whether Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac stoked the housing bubble by enabling Countrywide to lend to anyone with a heartbeat.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
John Adams once said in court, “Facts are stubborn things.”
If you can’t afford a house, you shouldn’t buy one.
Simple as that.
Apparently, there are a lot of people in America who cannot count.
Good on Charley.
How 'bout not showing us the victims? I don't care about any victims of anything. I'm so tired of hearing about this victim or that victim. F'em all.
The other problem is that the bank has a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders and depositors to NOT give loans to folks who can't pay it back. That is fraud, and it's been done on a scale that long ago should have had 'banker X charged under RICO' on every daily headline for the last couple of years.
Fraud on homeowner by way of insurance switch: Now It's Kickbacks Too (Force-Placed Insurance)
Fraud on homeowner by way of faked loan workouts: Heh, Look - It's Lootie The Bankster!
fraud during the mortgage setup: Oh, It's Those E-Vile Borrowers! Oh Wait... It's Not?
Sure, there were some who took on more risk than they should. But that doesn't give the bank the right to screw them over again as they try to work it out. Nor does it excuse the bank from having lied to some at the start, nor does it excuse the bank from having sold the mortgage to more than one MBS setup.
Blaming the folks who bet wrong is a red-herring to cover up for the unbelievably huge fraud going on here.
From what I can tell the banks were giving out loans they HOPED people would not be able to pay.
They were counting on housing prices rising and rising. Then if they could forclose a year or two later, they could the house for 20% profit, pocket the down payment and the payments made.
They thought they held all the cards, and broke the law by making these loans. What they din’t count on was crashing the market.
Well right now any adjustable rate loans that I see resetting, are dropping in rate quite a bit, so no go on that being a problem.
The victims will be the clueless homeowners who try to sell their homes only to find out their mortgage was securitized, the note was destroyed or lost, and title was clouded. When the prospective buyer is denied title insurance because former owner’s note can’t be found, then you, the clueless seller, might feel somewhat victimized as your home’s value has become obliterated.
If prices kept on rising, the owner could sell for a profit and pay off the loan! Ergo, no foreclosure.
pocket the down payment and the payments made.
The bank doesn't get the downpayment. The downpayment goes to the home seller.
You mean they were too stupid to read the contract before signing it? Lucky for them as interest rates have fallen. They got the lower rate to start with and now reset with an even lower rate! Yes, facts are stubborn things.
I stand corrected on the down payment.
Loan origination fees would have remained in the banks hands. I relised this error, but could not go back and edit.
My point is that in a rising market, forclosure was not a threat but a boon to the banks. It would have allowed more fees and profits, so they had no reason to follow the laws, and every reason not to.
If you cannot figure out what kind of mortgage you are applying for, you need to go back to school and learn how to count.
That goes for bankers as well. They won’t be forgotten.
Most of the loan origination fees would be paid out to the people processing the loans. Only a small part 'remains in the hands of the banks'.
My point is that in a rising market, forclosure was not a threat but a boon to the banks.
In a rising market, the home owner can sell for a profit and never go into foreclosure. There is no 'foreclosure boon' to the banks in a rising market.
I had a house that I could afford ...
... then my wife and I lost our jobs within 2 weeks of each other.
After almost a year of being unemployed, I got a job, and tried to negotiate with the bank ...
... they forced me into bankruptcy
After bankruptcy, I hired a lawyer to try to negotiate with the bank again to save the house ...
... they still refused to negotiate ...
... and the lawyer I hired was raided by the FBI because they were a scam.
Now, I find myself debt free and gainfully employed, but looked upon by some as a pariah because supposedly I did something wrong. I did not over-buy based on my then income. I did not try to walk away from my mortgage ... in fact, I went to the bank before I missed my first payment and tried to work with them. I did not intend to walk away from my debts ... but again, raising my interest rates to 31% and refusing to negotiate left me no choice. I did not want my house to go into foreclosure, but when told that I had to write the bank a check for $180,000 before they would negotiate with me ... I walked.
When it comes to personal finance and marriage, you never know what goes on behind closed doors.
Sounds like these two enjoyed spending money. Perhaps money they did not have?
Nice liberal take... Ever hear of the 1977 CRA? ACORN?? The banks played the hand they were dealt. You ought to check it out lefty.
Have a nice day!
Tsk, tsk. All that financial know how and no manners.
The fraud on the part of the banks is far deeper than you understand.
One of the tricks used was to have a fixed rate explained on the first few pages of the mortgage doc, but deep in the pile of papers was a bit saying it was an adjustable loan, all nicely in done up in impenetrable lawyer-ese. After the signing, the bank ripped off and discarded the top pages. Another trick that seems to have happened is to just discard the original docs and show up at the foreclosure hearing with new paper and robo-signed affadavits saying it matched the first set.
I think it was market-ticker.org that had the reference to the Ameriquest fraud, but I can't find it at the moment.
The larger fraud, by far, is on the part of the bankers. That the government was part and parcel of this fraud via the CRA doesn't let the banks off the hook.
I just find it funny that out-and-out fraud by the banks (and the govt) gets a pass on this forum by folks who want to lay primary blame on the merely gullible.
That can be hard to do when the bank lies to you about it up front with deceptive paperwork, or switches the paperwork after the fact.
I'm going to enjoy the howls and lamentations myself.
Thanks for your post. But if someone doesn’t know what type of mortgage they’re applying for, they must seriously addled.
They haven't fallen enough to match the original teaser rates. The mortgages are still going to reset upwards, though not by as much.
The problem is the MERS corporation has hopelessly muddled clear title on millions of properties. Honest homeowners are going to get screwed as well. Imagine paying off your house, and not being able to get a clear title because of the frauds perpetuated by the banksters just to avoid having to pay title transfer fees.
And they played it crookedly.
Since when is shilling for the TBTF banks a conservative position?
The original teaser rates on some of these mortgages were very low, and though they won't adjust up by as much as they might have, they'll still adjust upwards.
And if the bank is going to switch terms on you, do you really think they are going to switch it to terms friendly to the borrower? No way are the new terms going to match what's currently and publicly offered to the next round of suckers.
FR is strange today, every body seems so friendly to the nice neighborhood banker. It's like nobody expects to live in Pottersville, it's all Bedford Falls - even as we read that 80% of the bank loans securitized by Citibank were in some way fraudulently handled. If there was that much fraud in the backroom, why is it hard to believe that the fraud didn't start right at the signing of the mortgage in the first place?
Pay your damn mortgage or quit squatting on the realestate!!!
No bank should ever renegotiate a loan, especially lower the principle!!!
Any that do are defraduing me as a depositor!!!
Pay your contracted amount or go live on the street!!!
And this guy should do what ...?
“And this guy should do what ...?”
Contact his Title Insurance policy company.
Not a businessman, I see.
A bank lowers the principle or the interest if and when it's a matter of getting 70% back instead of 50% or less back. Doing anything else violates their fiduciary responsibility to you, the depositor.
No. I want to see anyone not paying their morthage thrown out in the street!!!
All my money is in either Real Estate or in banks waiting to buy more real estate FOR CASH.
I don’t buy anything on payments and never have except for our first home that has been paid off for over 30 years.
1. The servicer to whom you send your check might not be able to guarantee that it's actually getting to the entity that holds the note.
2. If you do try to pay off your note, the servicer might not be able to give you back clear title. http://chinkinthearmor.net/ . If the bank can't follow through on their side, why should the homeowner continue to pay?
If the banks had the required documentation for foreclosing, it would happen. But it appears the original note has often been destroyed as an 'efficiency'. To me, that just makes the loan into a gift. Tough luck for the bank, but it wasn't the homeowner who burned up the note.
This is a royal mess, and just throwing the small guy into the street without looking into the situation isn't going to solve anything.
Well, it might make money for the folks looking to scoop up cheap real estate. And apparently, some of the bank dealings have been underhanded in such a way as to cheat the bank shareholders out of full value, cheat the homeowners, and slide the profit out to such vulture investors.
Here are the financial realities of what YOUR type of thinking cost the investors in my bank. When all this mess started, I had $200K in equity in my house. As the markets collapsed, I went upside down by $200K ... that is a $400K swing in my houses value.
The bank had idiots that thought exactly like you. They told me to write them a check for how much I was upside down on the house, then they would talk to me about refinancing the balance. In short, I was expected to not only eat the loss of all my equity, but also the difference between what I still owed, and what the market would bear today.
Now ... from your comments I see you seem to fancy yourself a saavy investor. You already took a $200K bath on an investment, and you had a choice ... willingly write a check for another $200K so that someone else does not take a bath but you are now down $400K, or renegotiate so you are both at current market value and start over.
What I was offering the bank was a chance for them to limit thier losses to ONLY $200K. But ... someone like you worked at the bank. Now, the depositors and investors in the bank dont have to worry about a $200K loss, now they have a house that is continueing to drop in value, no cash flow from it, and they are paying out of pocket to maintain it. They sent it to auction, and could not even get $350K less than what my note was for.
So I am a bum in your opinion, and I should have been thrown out. Yet had they actually been worried about thier depositors and investors, thier losses would have been cut, and today they would have had positive cash flow.
That is absolutely correct. When the bubble was expanding, foreclosure rates were practically nil.
Pay your mortgage or get out you squatter!
You know ... the more I think about your skreed, the more apparant it is that you are a troll. You are saying what you are, because you are trying to promote a stereotype of conservatives as cold hearted bastards. Well, it wont work. I know a lot of conservatives, and you dont sound like any of them ... you do however sound exactly like a liberal mocking a conservative. Be gone.
I know dalereed. He’s a friend of mine. He ain’t no troll.