Facing Foreclosure from the banks? Tell them to PRODUCE THE NOTE!!, page 4

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 79 times

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 09:59 PM by northof8

Originally posted by sir_chancealot
Oh, look! Your righteous indignation is SO noble!

Originally posted by northof8
reply to post by sir_chancealot

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.

Are you that ignorant? The bank still has a loan on the books even if they can't find the note. Are you one of the free loaders losing your home? I can understand your argument if that is the case.

The bank will still have a loan. If no one will pay they off load that debt onto the tax payers. If you are on welfare or enjoy some kind of free money from the government then I understand where you come from. There are plenty of immoral people who think like you. Hopefully we can eventually weed out that kind of thinking in this country and force those people into the special camps for free loaders...

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:01 PM by SicSympreTyrannis

reply to post by desert

Ummm, there is recourse there. Look at the law of unconscionability, right to avoid, and equitable esstopple. Altlaw is a great free resource.

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:01 PM by pocamp

reply to post by fleabit

Ok here is the real deal. When you got a loan like that, the lender always said just refinance at the end of the term. Refinance to a loan you are comfortable with. So when these people go to refinance the bank won't do it, period! Screwing all those people right there and then. Meanwhile they're selling these mortgages leveraging 99-1. That would be like the average guy getting a second on his house for 198 percent of the value. This is all on the banks! Just be late on any payments and these guys will harass you to no end. Calling you up 20 times a day. Hey, remember when you got your loan and they wanted to know everything about you - where you work, how long - how many kids... They make you feel like an ant sitting under a microscope. Now they need money and they don't want us to know anything about them. Where's the 'equity' n that! There is so much more I could say but you get my point.

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:01 PM by stevegmu

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

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

Come on. We all know those who got the 'exotic' loans did so because they thought they could flip the house in a couple years and make a big profit before their mortgage payments doubled. Just because one offers another money or a loan doesn't mean one has to take it. It was pure greed on the part of the lendee.
If they owned the homes, would there be a problem?

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:10 PM by MystikMushroom

God God's sakes ... this CAN work -- but not for long because of documentation like these:

Quit Claim Deed

*and*

Warranty Deed

Can we stop arguing about who is at fault and maybe about if this could/could not actually help people?

I have first-hand, daily experience in this ... I can answer many questions.

I feel like the short little kid amongst a group of arguing teens, jumping up and down going, "I know some interesting things! Here! Here!"

Well, I'll stay tuned ...

I'd like to see if anyone here tries this and reports back.

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:11 PM by SicSympreTyrannis

reply to post by MystikMushroom

Sorry, I dont mean to be hostile at all. The term is a "quitclaim" deed/release/reversion/reverter. It is a common law principle invovleing the granting of a future interest to a present possessory estate. Beyond adverse possession and a few other obscure scenarios the "quitclaim deed" action is irrelevant.

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:12 PM by northof8

reply to post by BlackOps719

Lets take a look at your argument shall we? Is it moral for me to pay for someone who lost their job? Is it my responsibility to bail out that person because they didn't save anything for a rainy day?

I am smug... I don't have a flat screen tv or a car payment. I have no credit cards and I don't have an over extended mortgage.

You equate my measure of compassion to my ability to share in the misery of my fellow man? I am in this life for myself and my family not yours or joe six pack down the street.

Why should I care about my fellow man that had no thought for me as I was saving and scrimping? I have money saved. Does that mean you have a right to it because you didn't save? Are you that immoral?

My measure of compassion is not in my ability to sympathize with anyone. I'm not getting anything for free. Why should you? I say let them eat cake... Let them rent. That's where they belong...

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:18 PM by MystikMushroom

reply to post by SicSympreTyrannis

Perhaps, but it can be used in court as evidence of ownership/interest.

And yes ... *sigh* you are correct that there is no "space" between "quit and claim" ... Most people would, however, not know this ... you however do. Good for you

In all seriousness -- a search by a title agency at the appropriate district/county/parish recorder's office would bring up all the needed documentation to "show the note" to a judge to allow a foreclosure.

I do not see how unless a bank is a bloated whale-of-a-thing ... they would not just have one of their employees spend a few hours a day doing document requests (which we get quite frequently from large banks like Wells Fargo and Bank of America)...

The banks *are* looking for those papers that can be considered "the note" -- in advance perhaps of people using this tactic.

Just a heads up people.

PS: Sic ... no offense taken. If I am going to admit my profession, I ought to at least put info out there that is 100-per-cent anally correct. I honestly had no idea anyone else had heard of these terms. Good that someone else has.

And like you said -- they may mean little because they are *not* legally binding documents -- simply public record. However, a judge can make decisions based on these documents.

Good to meet someone else who understands real estate law.

[edit on 24-2-2009 by MystikMushroom]

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:20 PM by BlackOps719

reply to post by MystikMushroom

I think it could work, if not permanantly then again it will at the very least buy some needed time for anyone who is being forced out. It also puts you to the back of the line as far as people who these companies will target for foreclosyre, since it is more trouble than their current resources allow for.

I would also be interested in hearing from anyone who has actually tried this. I think the main focus here is on "original promissory note"...meaning not a digital copy or print out but the one that was actually signed by all agreeing parties.

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:27 PM by MystikMushroom

Lets just say this ...

Banks and lending institutions are right now bombarding my office with document requests and name-searches. (that include documentation).

The banks/mort. companies are going after the "softest targets" with gusto. Sure, they can just hope you won't fight back, but companies, retail stores, small businesses ... they are going after their paperwork because of the amount of money.

Like I said, it's legal ... and It will work ... for a while ... but all I would need to provide sufficient proof to a judge/magistrate for a contested foreclosure would be the papers in your local recorder's office.

And if the banks are just to lazy ... It'll work.

It depends on who you are with and where you live, I guess.

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:28 PM by northof8

This whole thing is like enabling a drug addict and the government is the pusher of the addicting greed of entitlement these "homeowners" have.

You don't feed or enable an addiction. You either kick it or die. Those that are addicted to entitlement must be cut off. Sink or swim folks. Kick the habit or do us all a favor and go the way all addicts go when they can't kick the habit.

This is a pay to play system we have here. If you can't pay then don't play. Go rent somewhere and leave the business of being an adult to the rest of us.

Playing the "Note" game won't last long. Hopefully they will start throwing people in jail for stunts like that. Some good old fashioned prison time would be a good lesson for them. At least they would have a place to stay then.

Maybe they would learn how to take care of themselves if they had to actually watch their back when they bent over? They sure as hell didn't when the Mortgage Banker stuck it to them...

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:29 PM by harrytuttle

I have a feeling that once you get to court, you are SCREWED. Why?

Because if you even made 1 mortgage payment to the lender, that proves an acknowledgement on your part that they are the holders of the loan. Once you've done that, the judge will ask you why would you write a check and sign it and send it to someone you had any doubts were entitled to receive the payment?

To which, you have absolutely no answer. It sucks, but that's pretty much the way it would go down in court.

[edit on 24-2-2009 by harrytuttle]

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:38 PM by MystikMushroom

reply to post by harrytuttle

Well, the people you are "paying" still have to provide ample proof that they are entitled to such payment...

So... it might work, it's def. a desperate measure.

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:39 PM by Pauligirl

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
Lets just say this ...

Banks and lending institutions are right now bombarding my office with document requests and name-searches. (that include documentation).

The banks/mort. companies are going after the "softest targets" with gusto. Sure, they can just hope you won't fight back, but companies, retail stores, small businesses ... they are going after their paperwork because of the amount of money.

Like I said, it's legal ... and It will work ... for a while ... but all I would need to provide sufficient proof to a judge/magistrate for a contested foreclosure would be the papers in your local recorder's office.

And if the banks are just to lazy ... It'll work.

It depends on who you are with and where you live, I guess.

Problem with this is, the note is not recorded, only the mortgage/deed of trust. The banks may be looking for assignments, trying to figure out who owns what, but assignments don't have to be recorded. Notes are not put on public record.

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 10:41 PM by BlackOps719

reply to post by harrytuttle

It isnt as simple as proving that a mortgage is owed, it is also a matter of proving the terms and conditions that were agreed to on said not.

How many years? What was the agreed upon rate? What was the total loan amount? What was the fully amortized amount due? Was there a ballon or a pre payment panalty? Was it fixed or adjustable? Were taxes and insurance escrowed into the payment?

There are a lot of dynamics to a mortgage loan. Proving that some sort of agreement was met is one thing, proving the specific dynamics that the lender makes a claim to would be very different.

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 11:10 PM by manjiman

Is there a "Produce the note" type deal for Canadians? I've always wanted to try this.

reply posted on 24-2-2009 @ 11:10 PM by HunkaHunka

Originally posted by stevegmu

Come on. We all know those who got the 'exotic' loans did so because they thought they could flip the house in a couple years and make a big profit before their mortgage payments doubled. Just because one offers another money or a loan doesn't mean one has to take it. It was pure greed on the part of the lendee.
If they owned the homes, would there be a problem?