It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cook County Sheriff Suspends Evictions from Forclosure

page: 4
80
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by 38181
It's all fine and dandy, and I agree with the sheriff decisions, but what happens when they declare Martial Law?


I would think that it would be nice to have a sheriff on the side of the people in that case.

Good for him. Good for Cook County. Good to see humanity trump TPTB agenda.




posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by grimreaper797
 


Please see U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence for instructions on what to do when "Checks and Balances" no longer work for the people . . .

Once again . . . way to go Sheriff Dart!!!

edit - spelling

[edit on 10/8/08 by solomons path]



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by grimreaper797
 


Wrong, he can deem anything illegal that he wants to. Whether or not it truly is, is another story.

But, I'll tell ya what, when your eviction comes around (god willing it doesnt), tell me if you hope that someone would stand up for YOU if you had no clue about why it was happening to you , or if you will take it with the same grain of salt and 'screw em let em carry out the law' mindset that you are right now.

AB1



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 03:52 PM
link   
I keep saying:

As soon as they try to evict.....burn the house down!!! If I can't have it....NO ONE WILL!!!!!!!!



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 03:52 PM
link   
I guess they can always still hire a process server. Then they would have to goto court , and then the sheriff would have to enforce the courts ruling. Just buys more time.

Ama



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 03:55 PM
link   
There are three levels of "interests" in this story. The Sheriff is ultimately protecting renters who are current on their payments from landlords who are skipping town once the bank has started foreclosure proceedings.


CHICAGO (CBS) ― Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart announced Wednesday morning that he plans to suspend mortgage foreclosure evictions conducted by his officers, so that renters living in foreclosed buildings are protected.

As CBS 2's Jim Williams reports, the temporary action has been taken in the wake of the national foreclosure crisis. But the action was taken not out of pity for those who have defaulted on their mortgages, but to protect those who are evicted from their rented houses or apartments because their landlords have foreclosed.

In many instances, tenants can find themselves living in foreclosed properties and not even knowing it until they are evicted despite being current with the rent.


This is a supremely noble act as he is taking care of the innocent families and renters who really have no representation in these proceedings.

[edit on 8-10-2008 by DancedWithWolves]



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by alphabetaone
 


Show me where it says a sheriff is allow to interpret the law.

It won't come around, since this house is paid off. If it did, let them try to evict us. If they are trying to illegal boot us, not a chance. The fact is though, the bank has every right to evict a person who doesn't pay their dues.

The banks didn't destroy these peoples lives, these people destroyed their own lives by over extending themselves and putting themselves in a spot they can't get out of. Who's fault is it? It is their own.



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by grimreaper797
 


The bank actually does NOT have the right to foreclose and it was upheld in court . . . and never overturned.

1969 Credit River v. Daly



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   
I understand what you are saying.

If I bought 2,000 worth of merchandise on a credit card, and default, they do not take what I bought away. They put it on my report as debt owned.

Now they can garnish for that debt on my wages, where I do not think they can do that on a house. Maybe they can ? I don't know.

Ama



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by grimreaper797
 


Do you even read what the interpretation is grim????

It's TENANTS, not the LANDLORDS.... the sheriff is preventing the TENANTS WHO HAVE NO SAY from getting evicted....read it first man.

And I want to edit to add that I dont have to show you SQUAT....if you havent the common human decency to understand this, then I find it academic to waste my time furthering this... see ya...


AB1

[edit on 8-10-2008 by alphabetaone]



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 04:35 PM
link   
You all need to realize that the Sheriff in his county is the SUPREME law enforcement person. NO ONE has higher legal authority in his county.

There is a supreme court decision on this one, from Montana, Nebraska, or one of the Dakotas, I believe. I don't remember the citation.

If I remember the details correctly, it goes like this. Basically, this sheriff told the IRS and FBI that ***NO*** arrests were to be made in his county without his being present. They didn't listen to him, so he ordered his deputies to arrest any FBI or IRS agents in his county, if they were attempting to serve warrants or arrests. Several were, in fact, arrested. The case went to the Supreme Court, and they said that he, in fact, does have that power, and that the IRS and FBI would have to follow his rules in his county. This wasn't that long ago either.



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Artista
 


Thanks for posting that link for Me! Three years later I still haven't figured out how to link this site to another. I've starred and flagged this one!


Peace. K*



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 04:41 PM
link   
I live in the next county over, and I have to say this is absolutely surprising. Most people I run into around here are so self-absorbed and uptight it isn't even funny. Not to mention most cops here are power hungry fools. Kudos to the sheriff if he keeps this up he'll win my vote and many many more.



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 04:43 PM
link   
I think it's awesome what the Sheriff is doing, heh.. more power to him. We'll see how it plays out I guess.

A word about people and evictions however. There is a mindset that anyone getting evicted is being unfairly treated by our government. Unforunately, it's usually foolish, ignorant, or unwary people that end up losing their homes. Most look at a mortgage of say, 1300, and think that's what it costs for that house. They don't consider taxes, upkeep, interest, changing interest rates, etc. They buy homes they cannot afford. Happens all the time. People live beyond their means very often. Is it the governments fault for that? It IS their fault for approving nodoc loans, or allowing folks to get homes they cannot afford. But people need to take some accountability as well.

I was recently a Grand Juror for a real estate scam. We served for 18 months, it was a long case. This guy ripped off SO many people. But here was the sad thing. Every single person he ripped off, let him. Not ONE read the fine print. None. One guy actually signed an agreement for a 48 month lease, although he thought he was agreeing to a 24. He didn't even read it. Dozens of people signed off on homes, and EVERY single one lost their homes (not all were living in them, it was part of the scam). But person after person came up to the stand over the months, crying.. and I felt terrible for them.. but crying, as they admitted they did not read the agreement, they didn't read the fine print, they just signed papers, assuming it was "ok." And there were some respectable folks there, including military officers, professionals, and even a real estate guy. It was fairly sad.

So... I applaud that folks feel for their fellow humans. But please remember, humans should take some accountability. The "evil government" isn't stealing homes. They are foreclosing on homes people signed for, when they couldn't afford them. These people are adults. They have control over what they sign. No one put a gun to their heads and made them NOT read the loan agreements.



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 04:46 PM
link   
The Sheriff is the highest law enforcement officer in a County. This is important for you to remember because if their where no Federal system, he'd be like a General in the military. And any US troops operating in American cities would do so Under the Command of the Sheriff (Possee Comitatus Act) Most Sheriff's today don't use all the power's they possess.

As law enforcement officers they maintain a peaceful and manageable County. Blindly putting people on the street, no matter what the reason is a direct threat to this responsibility. He's probably seeing a lot of this type of thing coming up and headed it off. I am sure his decision was based on pubic safety and not necessarily a soft heart.

Just as a Bank has no responsibility for keeping an orderly society and have shown that not only do they have no intention of doing this but will even help throw society into chaos for the right price, A Sheriff has no responsibility to the Bank!

A Sheriff stepping up like this at this time in the story should be quite reassuring to non-enemies of this Republic.

[edit on 8-10-2008 by bruxfain]



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 


Agreed, but the tenants are being given no warning to their impending doom.

THIS is what he is putting a stop to. Not those malevolents who decided to just up and bail on their responsibility. If that were the case, I would say yes of course, foreclose!


AB1



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 


Well if the banks and lending institutions weren't telling the "people" that they could afford them or approve them for loans that they clearly couldn't afford . . . we wouldn't be admonishing these damn theiving "people" anyway. This article was about a renter, by the way, not a lazy loan dodger.

I'm totally behind holding someone responsible for their actions, but if the bank tells me I've been approved for $X and I can afford it . . . then the economy gets worse and I can't or I can't over time because the bank had no business lending me the money in first place . . . who is to blame?

Plus everyone seems to be just glazing over the fact that the courts have already ruled against the lawfulness of the practice of foreclosure . . . show me any court case that overturns this and I'd gladly listen to the typical "lazy shift-about" v. personal responsiblity argument. Until then, the point is moot because banks don't have the "right" to foreclose or seize your property.

1969 Credit River v. Daly



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by amatrine
 


He's the Sheriff.
He can do that.
He even trumps the federal government in his county.



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 05:02 PM
link   
I dont feel real sorry for some idiot that paid 500K for a home worth 125K with balloon payments, and nothing down.....How about us other folk that PAID their bills and did not ruin their credit for a quick "easy" deal. I would not expect Cook county to do anything else
He wants the poor folk to come out and elect him again. Just another campaign trick.



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Leading by example! This should be done on a national level. No sense on evicting people when the homes wont be resold.

It would be nice to see the government care for its people for once and at least give them a real chance of not loosing their american dreams.



new topics

top topics



 
80
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join