Facing Foreclosure from the banks? Tell them to PRODUCE THE NOTE!!

page: 3
79
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by stevegmu

Originally posted by northof8
reply to post by spinkyboo
 


This is America. Most of these people that are in sad shape have no one to blame but themselves. ...
I am supposed to feel sorry for these people? I don't and I never will.



Hear, hear! I'm so sick of this lack of personal responsibility, and deadbeats trying to find ways to beat the system, while costing other people money. These people should never have taken out mortgages on homes they couldn't afford, and should be renters.


Ah, isn't it interesting that these two posters expects the little guy to follow the rules and letter of the law, but they think big corporations should not have to follow the same law?

It's a little hard for me to get riled up over a bunch of thieves getting things stolen from them. As for the "it costs us money" B.S., when have banks EVER made things cheaper?

You see, banks aren't satisfied with a "good enough" profit. They aren't satisfied with a "great" profit. They wouldn't be satisfied with an "outstanding profit".

Before you cry too hard for the banks, everyone remember the following:

THE BANKS KNEW THAT THEY WERE LOANING MONEY TO PEOPLE THAT PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO REPAY IT. How did they get bit? Why those same banks thought that the market would continue to increase, and they would be able to foreclose on a house that had a 25%, 50%, or more, greater value than it had when they loaned the money. They didn't see the housing bubble getting ready to burst. THEY GOT BIT BY THEIR OWN GREED. And you expect us to be angry at the homeowner?


Are any of you old enough to remember when ATMs were introduced, and people wouldn't use them? I remember. Guess what the banks said? "Oh, if you use these, it will allow us to lower costs by having less tellers!" ATMs are everywhere now. Are your banking costs any lower?

Here's another little scam that banks have going. When it receives several items that will remove money from your account (checks, electronic checks, atm withdrawals, check-card withdrawals, etc.), they take the BIGGEST amount first. Do you know why? Because if you overdraw your account, they get to hit you with MULTIPLE overdraft charges, whereas if they took the biggest item out last, you would only get hit with one.

One more scam banks are doing now. Let's say you roll up to an ATM, and Get $100 out. The problem begins when you have, let's say, $90 in that account. They will go ahead and give you the $100 (in effect, LOANING YOU $10.) Then, they get to charge an overdraft fee of $35. That's 350%. Mafia loan sharks don't even charge that much interest!

And you expect us to be sorry for the banks?

I got an idea! How about, instead of being pissed off at a person who just wanted to own a home (after all, didn't the banks scream that it was the best way to invest money back in the 1990s?), how about you get pissed off at the GREED shown by the people who own/run the banks? How about you get pissed off at the banks for being so damn greedy, that they loaned money they KNEW people wouldn't be able to pay back, with the thought that they could foreclose later, and still make big bucks? How about you get angry at the banks for inventing derivatives, which, when they crash, will make the dollar less valuable than a roll of toilet paper? There is a reason Andrew Jackson wanted to kill the bankers back in the early 1800s you know.

Further proof of the insatiable greed on the marketplace? Microsoft, in the mid-to-late 90s was expanding their profit at 1,000% per year. The major stockholders were STILL screaming that it wasn't enough. (Yes, I realize Microsoft isn't a bank, but the example still stands.)

The banks are failing. They are failing because of their own greed. I, for one, think it is hilarious. I believe that fairly soon (within 1-2 years), heads will begin to roll. And I do NOT mean that figuratively.

Oh, and BTW, it is ESTABLISHED LAW that the "mortgage company" or the "bank" HAS to produce the note. Otherwise, there is no way to know that they actually own the debt!

Would you pay any Tom, Dick, or Harry that called up and claimed you owed them money, simply on their word that they now own some debt or other that was yours? The derivative market is so messed up, sometimes the banks THEMSELVES don't even know who owns what.

And you two expect people to pay just on a bank's say-so? If that's your attitude, what are your addresses? I'd like to send you a bill saying you owe me some money, and if you don't pay, I'm going to attach a lien to your house. After all, you won't be asking me to produce the original note, right?

[edit on 24-2-2009 by sir_chancealot]




posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Pauligirl
 


Well I wouldn't expect to win against a big bank lol.. I am actually surprised that given they where going to court, they did not find the note. I am under the impression that if pushed, the note will turn up, eventually anyways.



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by northof8
 


Perhaps you should be complaining about your Government insisting on giving money to the banks, and not the "idiots". The Government is not really helping anyone stay in their house.. just compensating banks for lost income under a disguise. Good job managing your debts though,


Well, yes I will give you that. I do complain to anyone who will listen but this thread is about the Note... The Bank Note... People seem to forget about the loan number and the loss the bank will take which, then becomes my debt... It's only the Note they talk about.. I find it immoral..



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by sir_chancealot
 


Her in lies YOUR problem... I am not worried about the banks. I could care less about the banks. I am worried about myself and having to pay the free loaders debt.

Do you see the difference or do you equate me with the evil banker? Me the one who pays my bills and can afford to live a decent but modest life because I live within my means?

Is that who you are? You expect the tax payer to bail you out? Because if the banks default on the debt who do you think is going to pay?

What you are saying is that it is ok to be an immoral life sucking scum. You are saying its ok to steal from your neighbor to pay your debt? Am I correct?

Two wrongs make a right and the end justifies the means?

Who's John Gault? Do you know who he is?



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:18 PM
link   
I have never understood how all of the blame and hatred and vitriol can be directed toward your fellow Americans who all work and pay taxes and are simply trying to live their American dream just like you.


These people rarely ever blame the greedy corporate hitmen who created explosive mortgage loans like 2/28 ARMS and pay option ARMs, loans they knew would be poisonous to the borrower and the economy alike. Loans that could not be sustained, loan programs that were poorly explained and leveraged in a way that allowed the greedy lender maximum profits while placing the borrower at ultimate risk.

What did they think would happen when they were putting borrowers into 2 years adjustable rate mortgages that carried 3 year pre pay penalties? When and how did it sound like a good idea to close someone with a 520 credit score on a 100% LTV loan with NO verification of income? Lenders were all too eager to sign these loans even though they were ultra high risk products. Why? Because they made way more money on them than on conventional 30 year fixed loans to 750 + borrowers. They were able to gouge poorly qualified borrowers to the tune of billions.

Corporate greed.

Blame your fellow working Americans for being so greedy that they only wanted to also be able to live the American dream of home ownership. Imagine if you are a working class American with little knowledge of the lending industry working a 9-5 job and you have always dreamed of owning a home. Then imagine having the option of owning a home waved in your face by an unscrupulous lender who promises you the moon. Would you not sign anything put in front of you in order to make that happen? Even if it is a horrible, high interest rate adjusting sub-prime loan? My guess is yes, you would.


The difference is the lender knew full well how volatile that loan program was. They knew the high likelihood of default. Yet they closed the loan anyway, pocketed their fat commissions, sold the loan off to the next company, cooked the books and made it seem as though these loans were performing well, and the subsequntly created a ticking time bomb and a tidal wave of future foreclosures.


Hence what you are witnessing today.


Blaming the American homeowner for todays foreclosure crisis is like blaming the people who died on the Titanic for being greedy and wanting to take a pleasure cruise.


It makes no sense at all and blaming the victim does no good.



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlackOps719



I have never understood how all of the blame and hatred and vitriol can be directed toward your fellow Americans who all work and pay taxes and are simply trying to live their American dream just like you.


These people rarely ever blame the greedy corporate hitmen who created explosive mortgage loans like 2/28 ARMS and pay option ARMs, loans they knew would be poisonous to the borrower and the economy alike. Loans that could not be sustained, loan programs that were poorly explained and leveraged in a way that allowed the greedy lender maximum profits while placing the borrower at ultimate risk.

What did they think would happen when they were putting borrowers into 2 years adjustable rate mortgages that carried 3 year pre pay penalties? When and how did it sound like a good idea to close someone with a 520 credit score on a 100% LTV loan with NO verification of income? Lenders were all too eager to sign these loans even though they were ultra high risk products. Why? Because they made way more money on them than on conventional 30 year fixed loans to 750 + borrowers. They were able to gouge poorly qualified borrowers to the tune of billions.

Corporate greed.

Blame your fellow working Americans for being so greedy that they only wanted to also be able to live the American dream of home ownership. Imagine if you are a working class American with little knowledge of the lending industry working a 9-5 job and you have always dreamed of owning a home. Then imagine having the option of owning a home waved in your face by an unscrupulous lender who promises you the moon. Would you not sign anything put in front of you in order to make that happen? Even if it is a horrible, high interest rate adjusting sub-prime loan? My guess is yes, you would.


The difference is the lender knew full well how volatile that loan program was. They knew the high likelihood of default. Yet they closed the loan anyway, pocketed their fat commissions, sold the loan off to the next company, cooked the books and made it seem as though these loans were performing well, and the subsequntly created a ticking time bomb and a tidal wave of future foreclosures.


Hence what you are witnessing today.


Blaming the American homeowner for todays foreclosure crisis is like blaming the people who died on the Titanic for being greedy and wanting to take a pleasure cruise.


It makes no sense at all and blaming the victim does no good.



Did anyone force these people to take out loans?
That's like blaming the credit card company for extending credit to someone who doesn't make their payments.
The biggest problem with this country is the lack of personal responsibility. Blame the mortgage companies, blame the banks, blame Bush. It's always someone else's fault.

These aren't homeowners you speak of. No down-payment and few mortgage payments does not = ownership.



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by BlackOps719
 


But who is the real victim here? The one who signed? The one who was not forced but signed freely and now they can't pay their bills and I am supposed to pay?

You can't tell me they are not to blame. The blame falls squarely on them and the bankers and I will have to pay for it. So will my children and grand children.

It is immoral to say they are not to blame. They are to blame and they need to suffer for it. They need to be out of their homes and into rentals where they belong. They are renters plain and simple.

You can't own a home without actually "owning" it. Owning it means accepting and living up to your end of the deal.

If I am going to pay for loses on foreclosed homes as a tax payer I don't want the original losers in them. Not because I am spiteful. Its because the losers need to learn a lesson. Learning to live within your means is a responsibility of everyone. Not just the ones who are willing and know how to do it.



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by stevegmu
 




Trust me when I say that I am more conservative than most people on this board. I am not some bleeding heart who thinks people should be given something for nothing.

But also understand that I have had the unique view of actually working in the mortgage industry and writing these very loans for a living. I know what I am talking about when i say that these mortgage companies were horribly irresponsible hotbeds of greed and corrupt business practice.

These loans were designed to over leverage and even defraud consumers. I have no sympathy for greedy bankers who did what they knew was wrong and did it happily in order to reap maximum profits.

Bottom line, the US home buyer has been screwed. They have been set up to fail. They have been defrauded. And if you cant recognize this is fact then I suggest you do some research on the subject as I have lived it and seen it take place first hand for the better part of the last decade.




Edit-spelling

[edit on 2/24/09 by BlackOps719]



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by northof8
reply to post by BlackOps719
 


But who is the real victim here? The one who signed? The one who was not forced but signed freely and now they can't pay their bills and I am supposed to pay?

You can't tell me they are not to blame. The blame falls squarely on them and the bankers and I will have to pay for it. So will my children and grand children.

It is immoral to say they are not to blame. They are to blame and they need to suffer for it. They need to be out of their homes and into rentals where they belong. They are renters plain and simple.

You can't own a home without actually "owning" it. Owning it means accepting and living up to your end of the deal.

If I am going to pay for loses on foreclosed homes as a tax payer I don't want the original losers in them. Not because I am spiteful. Its because the losers need to learn a lesson. Learning to live within your means is a responsibility of everyone. Not just the ones who are willing and know how to do it.




Why dont you sepnd less time placing your misguided anger toward the victims of the fraud and start focusing on the mortgage giants, the Wall Street traders and the lobbyist groups who made sure that we were all left holding the bag.

Why not get angry at the politicians who are stealing YOUR tax dollars and using them to pay off corporate CEO's and their cronies for being incompetant and for destroying our economy

You seem to be pissed because of what it is costing YOU. Look at the real ones who are responsible, not the ones who are victims, just like you and I. It is like blaming the victim for being raped. Misguided and stupid.



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:39 PM
link   
To be fair, many people losing their homes are people who DID read the contract, COULD pay their mortgage and taxes, and lost their jobs ultimately because of this economic mess, and are now screwed. There are also far, far too many people that do NOT read the contract, and assume that mortgage is the extent of home owning responsibilities, ignoring upkeep and taxes.

So in a nutshell, it's not as black and white as people make it. And there is plenty of blame to go around, including on the banking side of things.

Imho, saying either "yay go people!" or "omg they are scum, I hope they end up on the streets" is incredibly shortsighted and ignorant. This is a deep issue, and many who don't deserve to be screwed over and getting just that.



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Oh, look! Your righteous indignation is SO noble!



Originally posted by northof8
reply to post by sir_chancealot
 


Her in lies YOUR problem... I am not worried about the banks. I could care less about the banks. I am worried about myself and having to pay the free loaders debt.


And exactly how do YOU have to pay the "free loader's debt"? After all, if the banks cannot produce the original note, THERE IS NO DEBT. I may THINK I'm buying the Brooklyn Bridge, but until I get a clear title, it's not mine.

Where is your moral outrage, and righteous indignation of the banks not doing their due diligence (as REQUIRED by law)?


Do you see the difference or do you equate me with the evil banker? Me the one who pays my bills and can afford to live a decent but modest life because I live within my means?

No, I equate attitudes like yours to be the ones that ALLOWED this situation to begin with. "Live within my means" is relative. I owe less than $250 debt at this very time. Can you say the same?

Is that who you are? You expect the tax payer to bail you out? Because if the banks default on the debt who do you think is going to pay?
See my previous sentence. I expect I owe less debt that you have on a single credit card. A bank should be like any other BUSINESS. If you have bad business practices, you GO BANKRUPT. The banks have to purchase insurance for just that type of scenario. It's not "taxpayer funded", the banks have to PURCHASE THE FDIC INSURANCE.


What you are saying is that it is ok to be an immoral life sucking scum. You are saying its ok to steal from your neighbor to pay your debt? Am I correct?

Is it ok to go crying to the federal government for money (because of your own bad business decisions), then hand out multi-million dollar bonuses? Is it ok to get loans because you are "going broke" and then have a "corporate retreat" to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars?

And to answer your question, NO! You are NOT correct. The banks have a FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY TO PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL NOTE. Let me put that another way: [B][I][U]The banks have a LEGAL DUTY to produce the original note.

Here's my question for you: Why do you hold the homeowner up to the law, but give the banks a free pass for not following the law?


Two wrongs make a right and the end justifies the means?

Can you show me where I stated that, or even implied it? If not, you should appologize.


Who's John Gault? Do you know who he is?


Never heard of him. Have you ever heard of the "Credit River Decision"? That one has never been over-ruled (as far as I know).

Again, why do you want to hold the homeowners to one standard, while having a completely different (translated: lesser) standard for the banks?

Oh, and btw, you are perfectly free to transfer your banking needs to a bank that DOESN'T pull greedy shenanigans that risks your money. Or are you having trouble finding one of those?



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlackOps719
reply to post by stevegmu
 




Trust me when I say that I am more conservative than most people on this board. I am not some bleeding heart who thinks people should be given something for nothing.

But also understand that I have had the unique view of actually working in the mortgage industry and writing these very laons for a living. I know what I am talking about when i say that these mortgage companies were horribly irresponsible hotbeds of gre4ed and corrupt business practice.

These loans were designed to over leverage and even defraud consumers. i have no sympathy for greedy bankers who did what they knew was wrong and did it happily in order to reap maximum profits.

Bottom line, the US home buyer has been screwed. They have been set up to fail. They have been defrauded. And if you cant recognize this is fact then I suggest you do some research on the subject as I have lived it and seen it take place first hand for the better part of the last decade.


Regardless of how the mortgage lenders sold the loans, am I correct in thinking everything the lendee needed to know was in the paperwork? If they aren't intelligent enough to read a mortgage contract, perhaps they can argue that point in court.
The US home buyer hasn't been screwed anymore than the college kid who racked up $1000s in credit card debt, because he was greedy and wanted things he couldn't afford. I guess in those cases their parents bail them out. In the case with housing, I will be asked to bail out these 'homeowners'.



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlackOps719
reply to post by stevegmu
 

Bottom line, the US home buyer has been screwed. They have been set up to fail. They have been defrauded. And if you cant recognize this is fact then I suggest you do some research on the subject as I have lived it and seen it take place first hand for the better part of the last decade.


Then how can you have millions upon millions of people not having a problem paying on their NOTE in this country? I'm paying my NOTE and paying it every month just like millions of others.

Is it because I have an older car and an older TV that I don't have "I can't pay my bills" syndrome? Its like its some kind of disease that everyone is catching. That's just not the case! It's called being childish!

Just because you worked in the industry and saw some bad things doesn't mean we give moral authority to the losers and tell them they are now entitled to not pay their NOTE.



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by BlackOps719
 


HM....

It sounds good, and I'm sure it's legal ... however...

When you close on a house, your mortgage company uses a title agency to "record" on public record the deed of trust, or whatever paperwork you are signing at closing.

These records are held in each state at district/county levels in a "Recorder's Office".

EXAMPLE OF ONE IN WA STATE

Now anyone, or any lending institution may freely search these databases.

"Producing the Note" may be as easy as doing a simple name search for a Deed in the correct County/District/Parish.

How do I know this?

I work in a recorder's office.


I've PM'ed Skeptic Overlord w/my credentials and work email.

This is how I also saw weeks before the Fannie/Freddy buy-out TONS upon TONS of liens/debt being placed on them via other smaller banks. (if they are going to get bought out, why not eh?)....



I see all kinds of whacky stuff...people placing liens for millions against themselves (so that they have first standing in court if someone else tries to take their property) ...

What is recorded at a recorder's office are *not* legal documents -- merely public record. Now perhaps if it is sold over and over and the public record is not updated (my local banks here do this, but larger ones like Citi may not...) new documentation is filed -- an "assignment" if you will, reflecting the new grantor/grantee indexing information in the database.

It should be no problem to find out the "note" assuming proper paperwork was done.

I simply know that in my little corner of the USA, the banks here *do* the proper paperwork and take it very serious to avoid legal issues.

[edit on 24-2-2009 by MystikMushroom]



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by stevegmu
 



Well guess what chief...you are already bailing out the bankers who did it!!!

Not sure how YOU are bailing out homeowners who are being thrown out on the street. Doesnt look like anyone is being bailed out here except for the crooks who actually perpetrated the crime. Does that make sense?



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by stevegmu

Did anyone force these people to take out loans?



Forced... no.. .manipulated and con'd... yes



That's like blaming the credit card company for extending credit to someone who doesn't make their payments.



Actually that's exactly what happened here. Loans were given to people who could not possibly ever make the payments after rates adjusted. That's why the problem with that market was so huge, because so many of these con jobs occured, without regulations.

You can't blame pigs for being pigs, whether the loaner or the loanee... you can however blame legislation which removed regulations and created crazy, no STUPID, exotic loans.




The biggest problem with this country is the lack of personal responsibility. Blame the mortgage companies, blame the banks, blame Bush. It's always someone else's fault.



Nope... if our problem is personal responsibility... then yes... it is the people in the mortgage companies, the people at the banks, Bush, and a lot of people.





These aren't homeowners you speak of. No down-payment and few mortgage payments does not = ownership.


oh... you think that's the only people who had this issue?

Come now, you aren't that blind are you? You think the entire mortgage issue was caused buy non-home owners?

wow



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by northof8
 




You seem very smug in your position that these people are all "losers" as you keep calling them. How about someone who lost one or both incomes through no fault of their own? Business closes, plant closes, jobs sent over seas, people laid off in retail due to poor economy.

Are these poeple "losers" also? You obviously have no sympathy for your fellow man. Who will take sympathy on YOU when your livelihood is yanked out from under you?


Will you be a "loser" when you are no longer able to pay?



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by BlackOps719
 


A friend's elderly parent died suddenly recently. Unbeknownst to her children, this slightly recluse, sickly, and emotionally unstable parent had taken on mortgages to her house, way beyond any value the house currently had. The money was gone. A lawyer told the kids, walk away. The mess was just ungodly. No one with good conscience/business ethics should have ever given this person a loan.

Again. Thank you for all your threads and posts on this loan mess.



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:56 PM
link   
reply to post by BlackOps719
 


This should work. The problem is they cannot retain council if they admit the contract existed. They must allege that there was no contract at law. An attorney risks being dis-bared, and would be sanctioned(under FRCP R.11) for filling a meritless claim, and only a court can file a show cause order sua sponte. Personally I would revise the rules to allow pleading this in bad faith without sanction, but that will never happen. Good luck to those that go it alone. I wish we could help.



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:58 PM
link   
I'm just saying -- I could find the "note" for just about anyone at a Recorder's office ... most Title Agencies also have their own "Plants" that are backups of a State's public records on deeds and mortgages and tax liens...

You can find out how much the mortgage is for, the lot/block on a particular plat ... and in most cases view the documents via a .pdf or similar way (and see the actual signatures).

The video does mention "electronically" finding your documents, and I think this is what they mean.

Right now our office is *swamped* with recording "Refi's" ... (even those are recorded in conjunction to the original deed)

Quite a few "Quit Claim" and "Warranty Deeds" being filed....(so yes, there is a paper trail out there)

[edit on 24-2-2009 by MystikMushroom]

[edit on 24-2-2009 by MystikMushroom]



  exclusive video


new topics
top topics
 
79
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join