Posted on 10/13/2010 4:57:31 PM PDT by SmithL
You might want to talk to Freeper cripplecreek before making such a rash statement.
“LOL, you’re unbelievable.”
Watch the news, this situation is certainly unbelievable but its not of my doing.
So what they person trying to stop it still doesn’t own a thing.
It can be sold x times and that doesn’t change a thing, the guy still is nothing but a renter until the origional obligation is paid in full!
If he breaks in after forclosure he should be shot on sight, he is no better than a bank robber!!
“So what they person trying to stop it still doesn’t own a thing.”
True, but who does????? Thats the trick. In order to legally foreclose the lender must prove they have the legal right to do so. In many cases (tens of thousands at least) the banks cannot prove they have that right.
So instead they have filed paperwork saying they have the right and the courts just accepted their statement. Except the paperwork was never read or verified by the banks lawyer who swore to the court it was factual and accurate.
The people who run the big banks and financial companies are some of the most unethical people on this planet. I’ve personally spoken with numerous CEOs of small banks and investment bankers. THEY ALL KNEW this was coming well before everyone else did. In many cases they allowed greed to supersede their morals and common sense.
Really?? I argued the banks never committed fraud? Why don't you show us all smart guy, where I ever made that claim.
Your statement is false!
Now you argue THIS bank didn’t. And yet you have no proof they didn’t.
Are you really that stupid? I never never argued that this bank didn't commit fraud in this case. I did argue that it is up to the person making an accusation of fraud to prove that claim of fraud in a court of law, instead of breaking into a house to which they don't have title.
It's called being innocent in a court of law until being proven otherwise, it's called the rule of law, and it is you who twiiists those simple ideas, for all to see.
“it’s called the rule of law, “
Thats right, you should read up a little more on that.
Why do you think the laws should only apply to little people?
“The people who run the big banks and financial companies are some of the most unethical people on this planet. I’ve personally spoken with numerous CEOs of small banks and investment bankers. THEY ALL KNEW this was coming well before everyone else did. In many cases they allowed greed to supersede their morals and common sense.”
You are talking about legal technicalities not fraud. I am not sure about the law when documents are lost or misplaced. The home does not belong to the deadbeats. The home should be returned to the note holder. The deadbeats should be thrown out. If the deadbeats prevail, the IRS should collect taxes on their windfall.
It seems to me that if the banks don’t have clear title to these houses, then the alleged homeowners don’t either...
Bingo,we have a winner.
The question remains: Who has the right to foreclose?
Home buyer get a mortgage from Countywide (first lien holder on property), Countywide sell loan note and gets their money back by XYZ CO but remain on the title as first lien holder and agrees to service the loan, Countywide goes under, AIG insurance pays XYZ as per policy, AIG is not on the title. Countywide is bought by Bank of American. B of A wants to foreclose. Do they have the right to foreclose?
It seems to me B of A is SOL. Countywide got their money from XYZ who should have became first lien holder. But AIG paid XYZ (with our tax $), so they got their money. AIG paid out on a policy but did not buy the note and has no right to be on the title.
The Home owner really owes the money to AIG.
you have to have a specific finding of contempt. And then only in defiance of a court order directing a specific action.
you also have to have a cure period.
At this point the remedy is an eviction. The buyers have the title insurance company to go after and the title company can go after the bank.
Fraud is the term used by several State AGs. Take it up with them.
legal technicalities are what the law is all about. Ya know, things like its illegal to commit homicide in some cases but legal in others.
Who is the note holder? If the loan was ever sold or used as security in a bond the bank doing the foreclosing may not be the note holder. In which case they do not have the legal right to foreclose. These are the things the banks have been lying about.
The mortgage holder posts notice of default and they have a sheriff's sale at which in most cases the mortgage holder winds up with the new title since it's more than the value.
Any lien holders or 2nd, 3rd, etc. mortgage are wiped out unless they can buy it at the sheriffs sale.
When you buy it from the bank or the federal agency yo get clear title.
This family that broke in with an attorney should go to jail along with the attorney.
From there it goes to sale to is sold to FHA, Fannie Mae who in tern put it up for sale.
“the courts have nothing to do with it!”
really? So the bank is interpreting the law now. cool
“When you buy it from the bank or the federal agency yo get clear title.”
Why have some title companies stopped writing policies on foreclosed homes?
Because the titles are not clear.
Must be in other states that the courts are involved in forclosures.
I just bought one for cash last month and have a clear title recorded plus a title policy.
I hope you’re right. However I dont think the title companies would stop selling their product without good reason.
mortgage law is specific with regards to originals.
even lost document laws are very very very specific and targeted.
A verifiable fact. I've worked in many aspects of processing Liens and Electronic Document Recording. Many states/counties require a piece of paper. Not just a piece of paper, but a 100% accurate piece of paper recording exact facts on a given parcel/property any time a lien or other similar claim is placed on it.
When I say "accurate, exact facts" I mean that any discrepancy of information on a given parcel immediately places the said claim in "legal jeopardy", making it easy to contest should it wind up in court. Also, it's a standard practice in document recording to destroy the original documents as they are archived electronically. Bad planning, given there can be "accidents", and I've heard of them, but standard practice as I have observed it.
If a lawyer or bank submits false or misleading statements to a court, they should be sanctioned or disbarred; but it should not mean that some deadbeat gets a free house.
The new "purchasers" are going to get their money back and with home values continuing to decline, will get an even better deal.
They are squatting. If I bought that property and found squatters I would be pissed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.