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.

 

Bank of America just gave ME attitude!!

page: 7
17
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 02:44 AM
link   
reply to post by rogerstigers
 


Actually here in Wisconsin the appraisers are out in force. They have increased property values at about 32%. Such lovely folk, thing is that here if you disagree with their assessment you have to prove it. And guess to who, the assessors. What a fracking joke.




posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 02:59 AM
link   
Would it be fair if, let's say, your home went UP in value and then Bank of America said "We are adjusting your loan so that you pay us MORE $$$ since the value of your home went up."

Of course not, that wouldn't be fair. If your home went up in value, then your loan would stay the same and you'd get to keep the extra profit. Therefore, if your home loses value, then your loan stays the same, and you are upside down until the market comes back around.

Bank of America sucks, don't get me wrong. Any company that would buy MBNA is evil.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 03:16 AM
link   
Meh...I say walk away from all House Mortgages /Loans!!!

Drive the greedy Slackers into the Dust!!!

Sure...I'll loan ya a Nickle...for a Quarter!!!

(At 4.5% Int CMP QRT/ONR/ECT)

:shk:


[edit on 9/9/2009 by Hx3_1963]



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 03:25 AM
link   
I too have a problem with Bank of America and I believe that they are the worst Bank in the United States - as far as truthfulness and mostly customer service. They nickle & dime (more like 19-39 dollar you) for each and everything and they set up trip wires in order to trap you into paying humongous fees.

I'm at a good bank now and I have free checking and I've never paid any fees or monthly charges. BOA made money off my money plus they hit me with hundreds of dollars in monthly charges & fees constantly. I do nothing different now - except I have a bank that is not deceptive.

What I really don't understand is what the big deal is - if you are happy with your house and you can make the payments? Unless you're looking to invest your money elsewhere - you won't be able to buy another house unless you have the cash - so why wreck a good situation?

Personally I don't believe in our credit system (money game) and think it's best and safest to pay with cash. If everyone paid with cash our houses wouldn't be so expensive because it would get rid of all the speculators who don't intend on living in their house.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 06:15 AM
link   
I agree the Bank should not have been rude but why the hell should your loan go down.

You decided the house was worth that much when you bought it deal with it.

I do agree the banks where silly to throw good money after bad but its not all there fault. Greed is the problem people wanted too much to sell the house the buyers wanted more than they could pay from the banks.

Here in Scotland there is a system of offering over a homes value to buy it, it is stupid and down right greedy. When I was looking for a house I was constsnly outbid sometimes by £30k

This was down to the buyers stupidity in a way the buyers drove the prices up not the sellers, if people where not willing to pay silly money for anything its value will not increase by silly amounts.

Next time you buy a house offer less for instead of more, the more people doing this the more prices will stabalize.

As for this notion that a house must always grow in value is just as bad as thinking an economy should grow infinetly. I see nothing wrong with my house not going up in value or even down but I do think constant growth is the biggest problem facing the worlds economys today



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 07:30 AM
link   
if buying a house that is over priced you can but blame your self.

but one thing that suprices me the most is that when watching american shows on house buying and such is the price and the lack of house you get for that money ,

i mean some of the houses cost 400k and dont even have fiberglass or sellu within the walls , i mean for 400k i can get a newly built house with all the modern standards and probobly even up to 12 hektars of property within 1hour from any major city and still have money over for what ever nonsence i want to put in my triple garage.

one can but wonder how the mortage/house bubble got started over there in the first place......



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by nikiano
 


Hope you don't mind me pointing out that what you are attempting to do is exactly what I (and I hope all intelligent tax payers in the US) DON'T want the bail out money spent on???

You can make your payment but you're going to intentionally stop paying your mortgage because you bought a house when market price was up?

I've tried to think of a word that would properly describe that behavior that I could use and not get warned...and have concluded those are mutually exclusive requirements.

I hope they bring their attitude to court when they sue you and get the judgment.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by nikiano
 

You made a mistake to tell them you were thinking about walking away. Of course they are going to be insulted and get upset because their job would be at greater risk if you did that. You should not have mentioned it!

Someone being rude on you over the phone does not give you the right to break a contract. If you are breaking it because they are now a communist/fascist enterprise then fine, that is understandable.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by nikiano
 


Sorry for you ordeal, my daughter just got out of a loan with them after they refuse to lower her interest on her account that she supposedly have the best credit score you can get.

Now you know how it feels to be owned and be a slave to what in this nation is call the "banking system", the banking cartel owns all of us and got our tax payer money by congress approval and they will keep milking the tax payer and consumer as long as we the people allow them to do.


What is going in this nation is the result of we the people keeping our selves ignorant and trusting those in government that we believe have the best interest in their hart for us.

The only thing that is the hart of any bankster and politicians is enriching their dirty fat pockets while screwing the hard worker American.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by zerbot565
if buying a house that is over priced you can but blame your self.
.



I bought my house at $160,000.

Hardly overpriced for Scottsdale, Arizona.

The two houses for sale on my street are now selling for $80,000 and $90,000. They have been on the market for over 2 months....nobody is buying.

My real estage agent said that the house values in Arizona will be going down again after November, most likely, becasue that is when the 8k incentive for new home buyers ends. She said right now, most houses are going UP a little bit. (My house value continues to fall...go figure. So, in December, my house value will probably plummet.)




[edit on 9-9-2009 by nikiano]



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by nikiano
 



Originally posted by nikiano

Originally posted by loam
I'm sorry, but why should banks become guarantors of your purchasing decisions?

Just askin'



Maybe you missed it, but the whole point of the "bank bailout" was to give our hard-earned tax money to the banks, so they could stabilze the housing crisis.

...

THAT was my point.

...

...it's not about my house. It's about the attitude of the banks. They don't feel they need to modify loans....but the more they sit on the bailout money, the worse the situation gets.


So if they give you this concession, and years later the market should go the other direction, do they get to bump your mortgage to a higher amount?


Imagine if other deals worked that way...

I don't know about you, but I'd deck the restaurateur who would seek to collect more money for last week's meal just because the price of beef went up today.


In the same regard, if the price of beef dropped, would I be entitled to go back and demand some of my money back?

Without the sanctity of contract, there can be no prosperity... PERIOD.

THAT is my point.

[edit on 9-9-2009 by loam]



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by nikiano
 


funny you should mention this because they did a big segment on NPR about it this morning.

Banks are supposed to be working on keeping people in their homes. But they are not modifying loans and turning people down left and right, even people who completely qualify. Just in the interview they busted they turning down a guy who lost his job but said he made too much.

I think the banks are showing how truley evil they are. And I think Congress needs to start doing something about it.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by loam


THAT is my point.

[edit on 9-9-2009 by loam]



And my point is that you would be right....IF the government hadn't given away those two HUGE bank bailouts...with specific INSTRUCTIONS that they are to take that money and start modifying loans!!

Paulson and Bush and Obama and Geitner got those bailouts to pass Congress, by telling them that it would STABILIZE the housing crisis. It has not. Not one bit.

TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS WASTED. And the housing crisis is continuing to get worse.

When the next ARMS start to reset this winter and next spring, more of my neighbors who bought their homes with ARMs will walk away from their houses. My house value will plummet even farther.

Here is an anaology:

Let's say that a hurricane hit New Orleans. The area is devastated...the place is called a disaster area, and the government infuses 500 billion dollars into New Orleans, with instructions to get the money to the people who need it.

Should we blame the people in New Orleans who bought houses there? Well, maybe they were stupid to buy houses in a hurricane zone, but then again, the government allowed the sale of those homes. So, who is stupid....the home owners or the government? Both, I suppose.

What if the people who got the 500 billion dollars did not distribute that money to the people for whom it was intended? We would call it criminal embezzelment.

The same thing is happening to homes in California, Arizona, Florida, and um, I can't remember the 4th state. But instead of getting hit by a hurricane, we got hit by a housing crisis. Granted, our homes are still standing, but empty/foreclosed houses around us are getting stripped and destroyed by house looters and vandals.

So, who is to blame? Me? Ok, I'll take some of the blame for buying a house for 160,000 that had sold for 120,000 two years earlier. But I thought I was getting priced out of the housing market and I thought if I ever wanted a house, I would need to act fast and buy one while I could still afford to. Never did I dream that the house prices would...or even COULD.... fall to even lower than $120,000....down to 80k.

Why? Because it had never happened before in America. Because there were supposed to be regulations to prevent that kind of stuff from happening!!

The banks, should they be blamed? Yes, they should take part of the blame for selling so many bad loans. The goverment? Yes, they should take a lot of the blame for forcing the banks to sell loans to high risk people.

But, regardless of who is to blame for building in a hurricane zone, if the people who got the disaster money in New Orleans had kept the disaster money for themselves, and didn't distribute it to the people for whom it was intended...we would call it criminal.
There would be an investigation and a national outcry.

Same with the housing crisis. Regardless of who is to blame...TRILLIONS of dollars were given to the banks for them to start modifying loans. And it has not ben doon. Why aren't the banks being investigated? Why isn't Congress yelling at them to start modifying loans like they're supposed to be doing?

The truth is, our 4 states ARE disaster areas. Financial disaster areas. And if the banks don't start doing something with that money they've been given, the disaster area in our four states is going to affect the rest of the states. Those of you who are not living in our 4 states will eventually be hit, too....it's only a matter of time.

That is MY point.






[edit on 9-9-2009 by nikiano]



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 10:03 AM
link   
I'm quite surprised at the naivety of some on here.

No wonder the American financial system is screwed, so many of you have no concept of what money is and how it works in relation to you and your home.


You made an agreement to pay back a loan (one that actually didn't exist in real money to begin with, I should add), and now the market has dropped and you want to pay less?

It simply doesn't work that way!

At the moment we're at the "I'm calling the bank!" stage, people are beginning to struggle and seeing their bank taking their money in every way possible, with added charges, higher fees etc and they're calling them to work something out. That will not stand, they simply won't do it.

Next comes the angry mob stage, where protests start against banks. We'll have large groups of people (with nothing else to do since they had their hours cut) with banners and placards outside the banks shouting abuse and threatening staff.

Then, when that doesn't work, we'll see the violence against banks and bankers. The class divide will really open up and you'll see groups of wealthy people being held hostage, their homes being attacked, centres of financial power being threatened etc. We'll see damage to property, protests going bad (see London G20 attack on Banks), and we'll be on the verge of a real revolt.

That was my prediction a year ago, and it still stands.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 10:04 AM
link   
The cost of a hard financial lesson rises in conjunction with the degree of naivety, where no one is going to look out for you better than yourself.

My best advice is to be vastly more aware the next time you decide to make a major investment, as there were ample warnings that the fraud ridden housing market would collapse and there was ample time to unload for profit.

Here's another person who despises BofA.


Google Video Link


Welcome to the jungle...



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by elevatedone
 





To say that you're walking away is just wrong. You agreed to the terms, so keep making your payments and keep up your end of the deal.


Yes but WHAT was the banks end of the deal? they made a computer entry and created out of thin air, the fiat money, the fairy dust, they expect you to pay back with YOUR Labor. By the Universal Commercial code the deal wa sunlawful since one side gave nothing of value especially since the "reserve in the fractional; reserve is now ZERO"



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by nikiano

Originally posted by loam


THAT is my point.

[edit on 9-9-2009 by loam]



And my point is that you would be right....IF the government hadn't given away those two HUGE bank bailouts...with specific INSTRUCTIONS that they are to take that money and start modifying loans!!


The problem is that the government have allowed this.

Plenty of people said at the time this was not going to work. Banks are not known for being "moral". They guarantee their own survival and profit before anything else.

I can't believe anyone was so naive as to think they would "keep their end of the bargain". Did you seriously think they would?


This is a government issue. They gave away your money without adequate guarantees. If you want to fight the big bad, you'd better look to your own government as well as the banking elite. They are both in the same bed.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by detachedindividual


I can't believe anyone was so naive as to think they would "keep their end of the bargain". Did you seriously think they would?





No, I was never for the bailouts. In fact, I called my senator and congressman and PLEADED with them to NOT vote for the bailouts. But they did.

The banks were given the money...trillions of dollars...and now the banks are sitting on my tax money.....all our tax money.....and not using one cent of it to modify loans, to stop the housing crisis.

I did not want the banks to have the money...but they got it. I did not agree with TARP, but it happened. But the money has been EMBEZZLED.

They screwed the American people. They did not use the TARP money like they were supposed to: to modify loans, to stop the housing crisis from getting worse. And now MY home is worth nothing as a result of it. They screwed me... so I suppose now....I have no remorse about screwing them.




[edit on 9-9-2009 by nikiano]



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 11:06 AM
link   
Personally, I would declare bankruptcy. The BofA can go to Hell. In the UK, I declared bankruptcy after my damn bank didn't give any space to lower my mortgage payments. I was doing THEM a favour and they didn't want to know. I thought: "# it, I'm not going to stress out over this anymore."

I declared bankruptcy and then all of a sudden, they started phoning me up saying that they'll negotiate with regards to the monthly payments. I told them that they had their chance and, in a nutshell, # off. Best thing I ever did. Out of my bankruptcy period now, and renting a home without having to worry about any mortgage. This time, I'll save money first before buying a home in the future so I can pay for it outright without those vultures at the banks stealing my money through interest and getting lippy with me as if I don't know what I'm on about. It's all well and good acting tough on the phone, but you know my address details - Come down and say it to my face.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by nikiano
 



Originally posted by nikiano
Both, I suppose.


Bingo. There and now.

Stuff happens, and the government's intervention makes matters far worse, not better.


reply to post by detachedindividual
 



Originally posted by detachedindividual
Banks are not known for being "moral". They guarantee their own survival and profit before anything else.


I'm not trying to be rude or anything, but are you serious????

Of course banks are not "moral". They're businesses, not people.


Of course banks seek to guarantee "their own survival and profit before anything else."

I wouldn't put MY MONEY at any bank who didn't... Would you?

Honestly, you need to rethink your perspective, imo.



[edit on 9-9-2009 by loam]



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join