patrick.net

If you see a bad judge you can out them at some links here: http://hubpages.com/hub/Foreclosuregate-Sue-Judges-Who-Allow-Fake-Foreclosures or just post the name of the judge and where they are from in my comment section at the bottom of the page.

This article even referenced from CNBC:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/40156107

Not important? The banks have to prove they are the note holder...and follow all applicable laws in order to actually succeed in foreclosing. The information must be accurate...sweeping any inconsistencies under the rug can be fraudulent. These Robo-Signers they have been employing don't know whether the documents they are signing are accurate...and they won't know unless they exercise due diligence. This is not the case, and so many of these transactions are fraudulent. In the banks rush to make profit, they came up with MERS...but this does not jibe with the laws on the books of many of the states. The not must be produced. This is a cluster fuck.

I see, then what about cases where they foreclosed homes that were fully paid for, due to paperwork mistakes?

"I assure you, Mrs. Buttle, the Ministry is very scrupulous about following up and eradicating any error. If you have any complaints which you'd like to make, I'd be more than happy to send you the appropriate forms." - Brazil, 1985.

The entire stinking edifice of MERS, which enables mortgages to be "virtually traded", needs to end. The basis of the entire fraud stems from the ability of every cornshucking con-artist to shuffle the risk off to someone else. When we go back to your local bank holding your note for the life of the note, maybe I'll be more inclined to this it's "mere paperwork" that 2 reasonable parties and maybe 1 court can arrive at an equitable solution to. When it's ConglomCo Bank representing Security #4321A versus Mr. Buttle, we know how it ends.

Matt Taibbi points out, a BANK holding a note will have an interest in a modification.

However with securitization, the incentive is instead to push people into foreclosure. No workouts. Oh you want a workout, fine you need to be in arrears first before we can make a case for it. Oh you are in arrears now? We laid on a bunch of penalties you can either pay up on all that or we can foreclose on you.

On the one hand, we are to be forgiving of bank errors. Penalties? Pffft. Not required, just refile the paperwork next day.

On the other hand, with LoanOwners OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!

If the laws are outdated then they need to be changed. But they still have to be followed until that happens. No one gets to ignore the laws they don't like or they consider outdated. The banks and loan servicers knew the laws, they tried to cheat and they got caught. They are big boys, they need to take their lumps and go back and fix it all. No one is seriously suggesting someone get a free house because of a screw up in paperwork.

bob2356 says

They are big boys, they need to take their lumps

What lumps? Courts are giving no penalties. Unless homeowners dig in their heels and fight their foreclosures there are no consequences for them. For RobertoAribas, this is the desired outcome. Bankers get to play fast & loose and skate out with a fat bonus for being so smart.

robertoaribas says

No, actually the primary issue is really very simple:
Have you been paying your mortgage for the past year? NO? claiming you should get a home for free because MERS isn’t technically allowed to be a nominee is, in terms of equitable solutions, simply not important.

It depends on what the definition of "is" is. ;)

Vicente says

bob2356 says

They are big boys, they need to take their lumps

What lumps? Courts are giving no penalties. Unless homeowners dig in their heels and fight their foreclosures there are no consequences for them. For RobertoAribas, this is the desired outcome. Bankers get to play fast & loose and skate out with a fat bonus for being so smart.

There are 50 states attorney generals looking to make political brownie points that should administer some lumpiness. Not to mention pretty much every class action lawyer on the planet. There will be well deserved pain for the banks unless congress manages to make a midnight end run. Congress got caught last time so I don't think they will have the balls to try again. Being painted as a protector of banker bonuses is pretty much political suicide for any elected official right now.

bob2356 says

Not to mention pretty much every class action lawyer on the planet.

Yeah about that....

Supreme Court Weighs Class-Action Suits

Pretty soon we'll just swear fealty to the sovereign corporations.

Vicente says

bob2356 says

Not to mention pretty much every class action lawyer on the planet.

Yeah about that….
Supreme Court Weighs Class-Action Suits
Pretty soon we’ll just swear fealty to the sovereign corporations.

I disagree, class action started as a mess in this country in the 1820's with a very bad interpretation of older English common law which was already obsolete in England. The changeover to the "opt out" rule in 1966 which says you can be included in a class action unless you specifically ask not to be included led to our current class action mess.

Unless you live outside the US for a long period of time and come back, you really don't appreciate how much fear of litigation permeates and circumscribes every aspect of life in America. I can't even begin to describe it. The total abdication of personal responsibility in America because "someone else must be responsible" no matter how stupid or egregious a person's actions are has truly dramatically altered the American believe system in my lifetime.

I am not against the legal concept of class action per se, even though no other country has it. I am very much against class action in it's current form which is just a lottery for lawyers almost always without tangible benefits to the represented class at great expense to society in general.

IF someone hasn't made a payment in over a Year, and the bank can't produce a Contract, then I say the Government should pace them in the Gov Owned Foreclosure pile, and foreclose any way.
Because at this point, the Government owns almost every house that is mortgaged since 2001 that a bank can't produce paper work on.

Now if a Bank is foreclosing on some hapless person that owns his house out right, or is paying on it, and the said bank don't even own the house, or similar egregious affair. Then that homeowner should have the right to Sue everyone invoked in the process from the bank to the lawyers that filed to the single Clerk at the Court who's high paying job it is to protect the Tax payers, and the interests of the City.

It shouldn't be so hard to do the right thing. When did we turn into a Nation of Gerrymandering terds?

ger·ry·man·der   /ˈdʒɛrɪˌmændər, ˈgɛr-/ Show Spelled
[jer-i-man-der, ger-] Show IPA

–noun
1. U.S. Politics . the dividing of a state, county, etc., into election districts so as to give one political party a majority in many districts while concentrating the voting strength of the other party into as few districts as possible.
When all else fails, try using the term on a different thread. There are still thousands to go, and if you keep it up you just might get it right.

But I shant bet on it.

Yup that's the word, what's your point?

It's a verb where Loosing political forces screw with the results, push and ignoring outcries from constituents and every thing else to impose their political will on either unwilling or unsuspecting forced constituents. Fuck they've even mastered redistricting your issue, by either dismissing it, with a massive media campaign or attacking the messenger to undermine the message. Gripe too damn much, and we'll just redistrict your opposing ass into our Electoral district and marginalize your vote when it comes down to your voice being garbled up in new district in the electorate.

And the day I have to take a Liberal Arts test to exercise my Artistic license, is the day, I'll pull out an extra finger.

Tenouncetrout says

Loosing political forces

who did we let them loose on?

bob2356 says

If the laws are outdated then they need to be changed. But they still have to be followed until that happens. No one gets to ignore the laws they don’t like or they consider outdated.

See California...

I enjoyed the article, Matt Taibbi is really funny and insightful as always. I totally agree that foreclosees (is that a word?) are an easy target and a distraction from the much more important and sinister story of wholesale securities fraud perpetrated by the very banks who are getting bailed out. I'm not sure what he's really suggesting for the forclosed-upon, though...its really hyperbole to say that they will be made homeless and in fact the great majority of them will be better off renting. If a few of them get a "free" house because the banks screwed up that bad then its nice for them but makes little to no difference in the overall picture.

bdrasin says

I enjoyed the article, Matt Taibbi is really funny and insightful as always. I totally agree that foreclosees (is that a word?) are an easy target and a distraction from the much more important and sinister story of wholesale securities fraud perpetrated by the very banks who are getting bailed out. I’m not sure what he’s really suggesting for the forclosed-upon, though…its really hyperbole to say that they will be made homeless and in fact the great majority of them will be better off renting. If a few of them get a “free” house because the banks screwed up that bad then its nice for them but makes little to no difference in the overall picture.

Foreclosuregate shows to the average guy in the street what we have been yelling at them, that the banksters are stealing this nation blind with a very sophisticated scam to drive prices up by crap loans, and mop up after the crash even if it means defrauding the courts to do it.

Sure, the courts should follow the laws. But I'm still willing to bet that a majority of the people losing their homes weren't scammed, they were greedy.

My heart goes out to those people who lost their jobs or were victimized, tho. This whole thing has been devastating.

This is still being far too lenient on the former homedebtors. The Court should also require them to pay what they owe their lender (if that's too complicated they can just make it out to the Treasury) for the (national average) 16 months of missed/skipped mortgage payments. Foreclosing on a home should be every bit as quick, simple and painless as repossessing a vehicle whose owner has not made payments.

schmitz_kris says

This is still being far too lenient on the former homedebtors. The Court should also require them to pay what they owe their lender (if that’s too complicated they can just make it out to the Treasury) for the (national average) 16 months of missed/skipped mortgage payments. Foreclosing on a home should be every bit as quick, simple and painless as repossessing a vehicle whose owner has not made payments.

So you want to revise contracts after the fact? How about debtors prison? The base assumption of mortgage business is that down payment is to compensate for the risk of the loan. Lender in foreclosure gets the house, whatever down payment was made, and the payments in between. This seems adequate and was in fact what they agreed to. There are in fact in most states civil means for lenders to pursue additional compensation although it's generally more trouble than it's worth for them unless you are really rich.

thunderlips11 says

Anybody see “Inside Job” yet?

I did - I even reviewed it here!

http://patrick.net/?p=573816