patrick.net

Does anyone know anything about a neighborhood in San Ramon called Windmere? My fiance would like us to look at homes in the area because she says its a pretty up and coming place for immigrants (she is Chinese - working on becoming a naturalized citizen). I want to make her happy, but I’m very reluctant to look at higher end homes that have had price runups before the crash.

Anyone have anything to say about Windmere?

I've read about the whole "if the bank can't produce your mortgage note get you house for free" thing, but I haven't read any stories where this actually happened. I did read about stories where lawyers were able to able to prevent the bank foreclosing on there house becuasse the bank couldn't produce a mortgage note. Even though these people haven't made a payment in years they are still living there. The houses are now in a legal limbo, they can't sell there houses because who legally owns them is in legal limbo. Just because they are living there isn't proof they actually owns the property. They can't produce the deed cause some bank has them probably misfiled in some box buried in a warehouse. There is a "quiet" title process that can be filed to clear a title if no one can prove they hold the title.

shrekgrinch says

Someone else on another posting wrote how the bank just called him up out of the blue for a free re-fi. Several of us smelled the ‘they lost the note’ stink with that one.

Hmm, this could very well be they lost the note situation. Perhaps they should demand to see the note before the refinance. This phone call just screams Free Houses for everyone!

Reminds me of a tenant demanding a receipts for something that is obvious (like repairing a window) .

No one wants to admit it but the banks are the being screwed here.

People living in houses without paying anything for years?

If it brings down the mortgage securitization edifice I'm all for it. I'll settle for PATCHING the system so it's done right, not "good enough for a smash-n-grab". The banksters wanted everything arranged to favor them and consequences to law & order & society be damned. English Common Law has had "chain of title" as an important concept for how many centuries? And we just toss it out blithely and let these pudknockers run this funny business where MERS and investors all pretend they own things and trade them like baseball cards without even keeping track of who owns what anymore. Time for pushback and revision. The core lesson of the last decade has been they can run roughshod over law and long-established procedures, and until that is redressed why should we expect the peasants to stay in line. Once you start unraveling all the threads of society that conceives itself as egalitarian, you can expect eventually some consequences.

shrekgrinch says

Debts can be disputed (and that is a legal phrase that involves more than just ‘challenged’) for validity. Debtor’s have the right to demand proof that the debt even exists (the note) and that holder is the correct person the debtor should send payments to. This is in state and federal law and goes back in common law for centuries.

Shrek is probably one of "those people" that think the Fed is private and that you don't have to pay those illegal federal income taxes.

To shrekgrinch:

You're defending a technicality to delay the INEVITABLE outcome. IF there are two people asking for payment of the same debt, YES you are right.

HOWEVER, this is NOT the case. There is ONLY ONE debtor in all of these cases.

What you're advocating is unethical because you know that the foreclosure process is legitimate but you're saying, "Oh, look!!! They didn't get a signature on so and so document years ago".

When I pay my credit card every month I don't ask for verification of every item with indisputable paperwork!!

Stalling is still stalling.

kronicade says

To shrekgrinch:
You’re defending a technicality to delay the INEVITABLE outcome. IF there are two people asking for payment of the same debt, YES you are right.
HOWEVER, this is NOT the case. There is ONLY ONE debtor in all of these cases.
What you’re advocating is unethical because you know that the foreclosure process is legitimate but you’re saying, “Oh, look!!! They didn’t get a signature on so and so document years ago”.
When I pay my credit card every month I don’t ask for verification of every item with indisputable paperwork!!
Stalling is still stalling.

You are absolutely right screw those that can’t or won’t pay, they should not have the houses. But the fact is still true, if you don’t know who owns your mortgage yet are still giving the money to someone you are being just as unethical. It is financially irresponsible not to know who owns each of your debts.

Each month the servicing organization that handles my Student Loan makes it very clear who the current owner is on the bill and they have told me at least a month a head of any change of ownership. There is no excuse not to be told each month who the current owner of your mortgage is. If they don't tell you don’t pay.

If you have a problem about not paying your debt, then take your monthly payments and place them in a special savings account each month and hold them until you are told how owns your note. This is no different than what the law ethically allows in many states when a landlord fails to live up to their obligations. The tenant can withhold rent under some circumstance as long has they can prove intent to pay usually by placing rent in a savings account.

This is not about defending those that should be removed from house they can not pay for. This is about everyone else that can and is willing to pay. Why don’t you know who owns your mortgage! It is extremely financially irresponsible and is completely unethical not to know.

Odds are I will never own a home at this point as I will never accept a mortgage unless I have a lawyer add a few stipulations about its re-sale and transparency of ownership.

With apologies to those that actually have or are taking the ethical actions to understand who owns their mortgages.

it's hard for people to ignore a troll.

I implemented an "ignore" link next to comments a while ago so you can ignore people if you want. If you want to argue, you can do that too.

Let me know if I can improve that somehow.

A so called financial expert goes on record as saying its ok not to know who you own money to.

Tell the police that you don’t know who the $1000.00 goes to that you send to a specific post office box each month.

Pay on a mortgage that you knowingly do not have complete and up-to-date information on.

They are irresponsible.

It’s unacceptable that the same banks that have accurately tracked and consistently disclosed ownership of Student Loans have at the same failed to track and state ownership of mortgages.

Mark_LA says

Without these 5 or so opposing viewpoints, the discussion on this board would grind to a halt and we’d be singing to the choir & have our heads in the sand.

yep! lets get out what people are thinking, and sometimes correct the myths some throw around.

Mark, yeah, that's it.

I was always curious about why some people do certain things till I personally met this local guy who is a dirty con artist. He is a son of bitch and I have no problem seeing him handcuffed though, he kind of opened my eyes up on those things I had no clue about. No one is completely useless.

I miss HaHa and OO and az_rob and all the other original gangsta's that used to stir up trouble. It was a much more clever and insightful patrick.net back in those days. I wish there were an opposite-of-ignore button that would conjure up their wild and witty commentary on any given thread I happen to be reading on this new forum.

Without these 5 or so opposing viewpoints, the discussion on this board would grind to a halt and we’d be singing to the choir & have our heads in the sand. You can choose to put your head in the sand by clicking the ignore button on everyone who doesn’t agree with you.

Even though your icon makes me want to break shit, I agree with you...I dislike the ignore button. Is this a forum or an amen corner?

i agree

bring back catvation

ptiemann says

I miss surfer-x with his unique way of expression

Yeah, he was one of the best. His use of anger and foul language never failed to be eloquent and entertaining. That musta been 4 years ago by now.

Philistine says

I miss HaHa and OO and az_rob and all the other original gangsta’s that used to stir up trouble.

I thought az_rob and Roberto Aribas was the same guy. Am I wrong, Roberto?

justme says

Philistine says

I miss HaHa and OO and az_rob and all the other original gangsta’s that used to stir up trouble.

I thought az_rob and Roberto Aribas was the same guy. Am I wrong, Roberto?

Correct roberto is the new name.

Where is Nomo nowadays?

The MLS listing for 21 Penhurst Ave, Daly City, CA 94015 shows this in the private agent remarks:

Private : REO. Title conveyed via Special Warr. Deed &/or local equiv. ALL offers subj to terms & cond in Seller Contr. Buyer to close with Seller’s Closing Firm if not buyer to pay for owner’s title policy, regardless of local custom. List seller as Owner of record

I'm assuming this is a situation where they take titles even though they have misplaced the note? The bank is willing to guarantee the title it appears.

Some us cannot resist reaching for that....

Gotta love insurance. All you have to do is look at how the companies are structured to see its a sham.

Texas wins series in 6 games.

It's very scary out there. These people have degrees and they are still out of work.

The one that was really amazing was the guy that had to settle for a part-time job at Target for $9.50 an hour and he was glad to get it. Even if you had your home paid for, how could you survive in San Jose on a part time job paying close to minimum wage?

It was $9.25 per hour. Scary, for sure.

How about the lady that was making $70K and is now reduced to digging in garbage bins for recyclables?

Yikes. Lots of sad stories. :(

The guy who made 200k+/yr, in his early 50s it looks like, but ate through all their savings AND retirement savings in 2 yrs 3 months?

I guess people didn't realize that if they work for 40 years, assuming everything goes right and you want to live a similiar lifestyle, if you live another 15 years, you probably should be saving ~20-25% of your gross income...not the -0.5% Americans have been doing.

Sadly if that situation hit most of us, including myself, I would be in the same situation. Guess all those bailouts didn't work at all.

I feel for this man.

RayAmerica says

How about the lady that was making $70K and is now reduced to digging in garbage bins for recyclables?

Obviously these people just aren't working hard enough--right Ray? After all, anyone that can't find work just isn't trying, right?

I wish I had a booth at that job fair offering Ayahuasca tourism.

RayAmerica says

The one that was really amazing was the guy that had to settle for a part-time job at Target for $9.50 an hour and he was glad to get it. Even if you had your home paid for, how could you survive in San Jose on a part time job paying close to minimum wage?

Sell it, rent, live on the profits. Or stay and try to cover the RE taxes.

klarek says

RayAmerica says

The one that was really amazing was the guy that had to settle for a part-time job at Target for $9.50 an hour and he was glad to get it. Even if you had your home paid for, how could you survive in San Jose on a part time job paying close to minimum wage?

Sell it, rent, live on the profits. Or stay and try to cover the RE taxes.

Who's going to buy it if so many people are unemployed?

The people who ARE employed are either 1) too scared to buy because they're worried they'll be unemployed 2) won't buy at the price that the sellers expect

CaffeineAddict says

Who’s going to buy it if so many people are unemployed?

Are housing prices there below $0? It's paid for. Someone will buy it. Don't be dramatic.

tatupu70 says

Obviously these people just aren’t working hard enough–right Ray? After all, anyone that can’t find work just isn’t trying, right?

When did I ever say that?

RayAmerica says

tatupu70 says

Obviously these people just aren’t working hard enough–right Ray? After all, anyone that can’t find work just isn’t trying, right?

When did I ever say that?

Maybe I misunderstood your feelings on welfare. I thought you believed that everyone on welfare was simply too lazy to find work. They enjoyed living off the government.

Do you now think that welfare is a good thing?

tatupu70 says

Maybe I misunderstood your feelings on welfare. I thought you believed that everyone on welfare was simply too lazy to find work. They enjoyed living off the government.
Do you now think that welfare is a good thing?

When did I ever say "EVERYONE on welfare" is "too lazy to find work?" Be my guest and copy and paste anything that is even remotely close to that.

If you are going to attempt to debate, at least make an effort to be somewhat truthful. This is just another pitiful example of how lame the left really is.

Republican v Dem is a debate for the goddamn scrapheap. Try the American people v the emerging Corporatocracy.

At least this theme is finally finding its way into the broader public consciousness. Five years ago, NOBODY talked about it. I don't think you can say that now.