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.

 

This could be what ends the Banking System once and for all

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 09:19 PM
link   
This is a disturbing story and is a precedent setting case. Don't get me wrong, I hold no love lost for the big banks and they have dealt with Americans horrendously. But, this spells SERIOUS trouble and I believe could collapse the banking system.

If Lenders Say ‘The Dog Ate Your Mortgage’

Oct. 9 in federal bankruptcy court in the Southern District of New York. Ruling that a lender, PHH Mortgage, hadn’t proved its claim to a delinquent borrower’s home in White Plains, Judge Robert D. Drain wiped out a $461,263 mortgage debt on the property. That’s right: the mortgage debt disappeared, via a court order.

So the ruling may put a new dynamic in play in the foreclosure mess: If the lender can’t come forward with proof of ownership, and judges don’t look kindly on that, then borrowers may have a stronger hand to play in court and, apparently, may even be able to stay in their homes mortgage-free.


Now, what do you think people might be willing to do to be rid of the mortgage on their home? This case applies to foreclosures, so do you think it's possible that people might deliberately go delinquent if they believe that their bank doesn't hold a document that says that they own their mortgage? I do. Especially when there are ways that one can find out if their bank has their mortgage documents and if they are legal (which in a lot of Florida cases they are not). See: Foreclosure Fraud - Guide to Looking up Public Records for Fraud on the part of Banks and remember that almost every mortgage is digital now.

Now, imagine if, say, 10% of the good mortgages defaulted on top of the ones that already have and are due to people not being able to pay them. Then, imagine that judges all over the country start making these righteous judgments. What do you think would result? Disaster, is what.

Although this was the right decision for this judge to make, it certainly will put these thoughts in people's minds. It was the very first thought in my mind and if you're honest about it (and hold a mortgage) you thought it too.




posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 09:29 PM
link   
I've heard about this several months ago, and my understanding is this: You signed a mortgage with the original lender. The lender then went around and bundled your mortgage together with a bunch of other mortgages and sold it to huge sovereign wealth funds, hedge funds...whatever financial institution. Not only did some people not sign an agreement but the banks were paid. Also, since the banks sold your mortgage, how is it the banks can foreclose on the home?

So in other words, it's not the end of the banking institution. Just the end of fraud and rampant greed.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by American_Soviets
I've heard about this several months ago, and my understanding is this: You signed a mortgage with the original lender. The lender then went around and bundled your mortgage together with a bunch of other mortgages and sold it to huge sovereign wealth funds, hedge funds...whatever financial institution. Not only did some people not sign an agreement but the banks were paid. Also, since the banks sold your mortgage, how is it the banks can foreclose on the home?

So in other words, it's not the end of the banking institution. Just the end of fraud and rampant greed.


Ok, so you're saying that a full 20% of mortgages being cancelled allowing the homeowner to stay in their home is not enough to end these banks? Because, you see, it's not just the banks here, what about the FDIC? And, if the FDIC can't cover it, which they can't, then it could result in a repeat "run on the banks" because the FDIC was enacted for that reason. It will ripple a loooooong way out. I just don't follow your logic at all.

The difference here is that the judge actually canceled the mortgage not just the foreclosure process to the tune of almost 1/2 million dollars. What happened several months ago is that the judge canceled the foreclosure process - not the mortgage itself.

[edit on 24/10/2009 by Iamonlyhuman]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 09:43 PM
link   
These original documents are often lost as a result of mortgages constantly being sold. When I was being foreclosed upon because I got behind on payments because of accumulating medical bills that had to be paid first, it was noted in the court paperwork that had to be filed that they too could not find my original loan documents. Never the less, that did not mean I did not owe them, particularly morally. The judge can and does rule on these technicalities, and in damn near every case I've seen they rule in favor of what is just and right, and some lost paperwork doesn't mean it makes it just and right for one to be entitled to discharge their promise and obligations. Everybody knows who owns what and who owes who, regardless of any missing original paperwork. To scam those that lent the money to us on our promise of repayment simply because of a technicality, some lost paperwork, doesn't seem morally right. That would make us no better than that Madoff thief, we would be stealing other peoples savings and investments. I doubt many would take advantage of others like that in these cases of minor technicalities, but you know there will be some dirt bags that will, and know that those that do are ripping the rest of us off.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 09:43 PM
link   
You know, it just occurred to me that the whole Obama declaring a National Emergency could be a way to keep people's attention away from this story. It certainly would warrant it.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Divinorumus
 


I definitely agree with what you said - except for the part that you think that not many would take advantage this way. I do think that many would - even if it was just to "get back at the man". Our culture of entitlement ensures this will happen. People will not think about what ripple effect this will have and quite honestly won't care as long as they get their house for free.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 09:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


I highly doubt that. The faked pandemic has been staged to frighten and keep everyone home during martial law to prevent all that public rioting that would otherwise result this winter when our dollar collapses and becomes rejected around the world for any more imported oil and goods ... and thus our federal and state governments begin to go bankrupt.

Anyhow, the judges make the call in these mortgage cases, and a missing "original" document is no big deal, it is only the BEST proof of ownership/title but it is certainly not the ONLY proof available. This is just a case of a judge giving a home owner a little more time to get their act together. Eventually the guy will loose his home if he doesn't settle up. Heck, he can't even sell it now himself because of this mess, ha, who would buy it?



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   
If someone owes you a debt, you can sell the note (the debt owed to you) to whoever you want without the debtors permission.

Let's say someone took a commercial loan from you for $500,000 due back in monthly installments over 30 years.

10 years into the loan, someone offers to buy the note from you at a reduced rate. The amount they are offering you is less then the amount owed, but they are paying 100% of it in cash RIGHT NOW, as opposed to getting it gradually over the next 20 years.

If your an investor, you might rather have the reduced amount all at once.

So you notify the debtee that the loan has been purchased and all future payments must be sent to such n such company at the new address.

The person in debt does not have to agree. As long as the transfer of the note was a legal transaction, the person in debt must comply.

HOWEVER, if you are buying the debt, you would be a moron to not verify you have the paperwork associated with the note.

What happens is this, a bank will transfer 10,000 notes from one financial institution to another. Will there be record keeping errors made? LOL, ABSOLUTELY!!!!

I having banking experience, financial research experience, and extensive bookkeeping experience. There will be plenty of errors when these types of transfers take place.

So maybe you will get lucky and maybe you won't. If you house is cheap enough (for lack of a better term), a bank is not going to pour tons of money down the toilet in appeals. So you get the house, lucky you.

Don't brag about it to your neighbors or anyone else. If people think you have extra cash laying around, they will come calling for a free hand out. Be discreet about your legal victory. As far as your friends, relatives, coworkers, and kids and parents are concerned, you are still paying the note.

Is this a slime ball way to victory? Well, you are dealing with a slime ball organization. You think they wouldn't slime ball you?

The laws are written with loop holes so smart people (like the people who wrote the laws) can wiggle out of being required to follow those laws.

Just like software programs always have a back door. That NEVER happens by accident.

If you play by the rules and you keep a high standard of morals and ethics, you will lose. You'll score points with God but you will lose on Earth.

That is the way the system was designed and it wasn't designed that way by accident.

"Let ye who be without sin
cast the first stone."

If we actually followed that philosophy, there would not be a single person in prison.

The criminals would love that, wouldn't they?

So if you can buck the system that has been bucking you, buck the system that has been bucking you.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Divinorumus
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


I highly doubt that. The faked pandemic has been staged to frighten and keep everyone home during martial law to prevent all that public rioting that would otherwise result this winter when our dollar collapses and becomes rejected around the world for any more imported oil and goods ... and thus our federal and state governments begin to go bankrupt.

Anyhow, the judges make the call in these mortgage cases, and a missing "original" document is no big deal, it is only the BEST proof of ownership/title but it is certainly not the ONLY proof available. This is just a case of a judge giving a home owner a little more time to get their act together. Eventually the guy will loose his home if he doesn't settle up. Heck, he can't even sell it now himself because of this mess, ha, who would buy it?


Did you even read the story? The judge CANCELED THE MORTGAGE.


Judge Robert D. Drain wiped out a $461,263 mortgage debt on the property. That’s right: the mortgage debt disappeared, via a court order.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Genfinity
If you play by the rules and you keep a high standard of morals and ethics, you will lose.

Lose? Well, I suppose, depending upon what you are playing for. Sorry, but I'd rather be living in a tent under a bridge than to rip others off, that would make me no better than them big evil corporations. Instead of one Madoff, a whole bunch would be better? Sorry, but that's not the kind of world I want to see, where everyone is trying to justify ripping others off all the time, where two wrongs apparently make a right.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Genfinity
Is this a slime ball way to victory? Well, you are dealing with a slime ball organization. You think they wouldn't slime ball you?

If you play by the rules and you keep a high standard of morals and ethics, you will lose. You'll score points with God but you will lose on Earth.



Thank you Genfinity for exemplifying the attitude that I was trying to convey to Divinorumus. I do think that many have this attitude in common with you and THAT is why I think that this is a very dangerous (to our economy right now) precedent this judge is setting even though I think it's a righteous decision on his part.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Divinorumus

Originally posted by Genfinity
If you play by the rules and you keep a high standard of morals and ethics, you will lose.

Lose? Well, I suppose, depending upon what you are playing for. Sorry, but I'd rather be living in a tent under a bridge than to rip others off, that would make me no better than them big evil corporations. Instead of one Madoff, a whole bunch would be better? Sorry, but that's not the kind of world I want to see, where everyone is trying to justify ripping others off all the time, where two wrongs apparently make a right.


But surely you do know that this is how many, many people think. Do you still think that most will do the moral thing here? Do you still think that canceling this mortgage - not just delaying the foreclosure - is not a HUGE problem?

[edit on 24/10/2009 by Iamonlyhuman]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


Indeed...And you have just given me and others an Idea....

I think I may just ask to see the documents proving my mortgage...Just to make sure they still have all the right files still in good order...

Couldn't hurt nothing right?



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
Did you even read the story? The judge CANCELED THE MORTGAGE.

The article said PHH Mortgage hadn’t proved its claim to a delinquent borrower’s home. That was just the ruling on that day. No doubt they will appeal and bring proof next time. And, you don't need the original documents in order to establish proof. All this means is that the mortgage company will have to also ALWAYS bring proof of ownership when going into court, instead of it always just being assumed because the respondent acknowledges the mortgage is owed because they have after all been making payments to them. The home owner is not out of the woods. Going on the premise that the original documents are required, not even the mortgagee has the paperwork to prove the home is theirs. If the bank hasn't ANY legal proof of ownership, then neither does the one living in the home. At worst, they are now both screwed. This will all be settled in court, eventually, fairly, morally. You don't think the judges will start making rulings that will bring down society, do you? That is what would happen if everyone with a mortgage right now got a free home simply because of some missing original paperwork, when everyone really already knows who owns and owes what and whom. The judges are not going to bring down all the banks and bankrupt us all, it just ain't gonna happen.

Oh, and what about missing paperwork on all those loans that aren't going into default. Once the loan is paid off in good faith, how can someone that doesn't have ownership/title transfer that ownership/title to YOU once you've paid your mortgage off? If the original paperwork is missing but required, there is a house that can never be sold! Should everyone with a mortgage today write their mortgage company requesting proof that they owe them any further payments? And what happens one day after you THINK you paid off the right holder of your house title and then a few years later someone with the original paperwork comes along and says "I own it, prove to me that you've paid ME for this house?" How many people are sending their mortgage payments to a company that doesn't even own their house right now?



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Divinorumus
Never the less, that did not mean I did not owe them, particularly morally. The judge can and does rule on these technicalities, and in damn near every case I've seen they rule in favor of what is just and right, and some lost paperwork doesn't mean it makes it just and right for one to be entitled to discharge their promise and obligations.

Everybody knows who owns what and who owes who, regardless of any missing original paperwork. To scam those that lent the money to us on our promise of repayment simply because of a technicality, some lost paperwork, doesn't seem morally right.

That would make us no better than that Madoff thief, we would be stealing other peoples savings and investments. I doubt many would take advantage of others like that in these cases of minor technicalities, but you know there will be some dirt bags that will, and know that those that do are ripping the rest of us off.


The banks are ripping YOU off with their so called loan. They are lending you exactly NOTHING - the only thing of value in the entire transaction is 1. the real estate which you pledge, but don't even own at the time of the loan, 2. your promise to pay.

Don't get all defensive about the banks - they lent you nothing, you owe them nothing. All they really deserve is a bullet in the head.

If you are able to wipe out the debt and the bank pays - good for you. They have stolen, defrauded, lied and the whole banking system is purely based on a scam.

Don't EVER feel that you have some 'moral' obligation to them - they should simply be killed, thats what the moral response is.

Your default costs them nothing - it does not cause anyone else to lose money - the bank simply loses your promise to pay - in other words, the promise you made that they got from you by fraud and deceit.

NEVER FEEL sorry if you can rip off the banks. I wholly recommend that people get as many credit cards as possible - use false names - whatever - use them all up and buy silver and gold, then default.

Fk the banks - they are scum - they are killing everyone around the world every day - and your feeling bad because you can't give them something that they only stole from you anyway?

[edit on 24-10-2009 by Amagnon]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Divinorumus

Originally posted by Genfinity
If you play by the rules and you keep a high standard of morals and ethics, you will lose.

Lose? Well, I suppose, depending upon what you are playing for. Sorry, but I'd rather be living in a tent under a bridge than to rip others off, that would make me no better than them big evil corporations. Instead of one Madoff, a whole bunch would be better? Sorry, but that's not the kind of world I want to see, where everyone is trying to justify ripping others off all the time, where two wrongs apparently make a right.


There is only one wrong - that is the bank.

Do you really not understand the system? Have a look at the link in my sig if you don't understand.

The way your describing it looks exactly like the following analogy;

Someone breaks into your house and is stealing your TV - you feel that is ethical and moral that you should give them your DVD player as well?

The correct response is to shoot them - and get your TV back.

Your logic is based on some idea that what the bank is doing isn't stealing and fraud - but it is.

That is exactly what you should do given the chance to get your house back from the bank - shoot them - and take it back.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 11:38 PM
link   
Your title is WWWAAAAYYYYY misleading. this is an extremely rare and seemingly one of a kind case. HOW could this possibly bankrupt the banking system?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!



If the lender can’t come forward with proof of ownership, and judges don’t look kindly on that, then borrowers may have a stronger hand to play in court


did you eve read the entire article?!?



To be sure, many legal hurdles mean that the initial outcome of the White Plains case may not be repeated elsewhere


I take it you dont usually root for the underdog, huh?

Do you have ANY CONCEPT of how easy it is to be swept under the rug and have you livelyhood DESTROYED by Beuarocratic red tape?



Securitizations allowed for large pools of bank loans to be bundled and sold to legions of investors, but some of the nuts and bolts of the mortgage game — notes, for example — were never adequately tracked or recorded during the boom. In some cases, that means nobody truly knows who owns what.


OK, so what we have here is the money men reaching and grabbing like rabid dogs for every bloated and over priced mortgage securty package they can see. AND THEY DIDNT DO THEIR BASIC FUNCTION to KEEP TRACK of these dealings?

If I didnt fill out my station program logs correctly at my TV station, EVER, I would be FIRED without a second thought and quite possibly fined by the FCC.

This is GREAT and I mean EXCELLENT news for the everyman because -



The case is an alert to lenders that dubious proof-of-ownership tactics may no longer be accepted practice. They may even be viewed as a fraud on the court.


God dont you just hate it when corporations are forced to be accountable?!?






In the secondary market, there are many cases where assignment of mortgages, assignment of notes, don’t happen at the time they should. It was standard operating procedure for many years.


NO WONDER why we have all these blasted BUBBLES BURSTING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




Judge Drain concluded that what had been presented to the court just did not add up. “I think that I have a more than 50 percent doubt that if the debtor paid this claim, it would be paying the wrong person,” he said. “That’s the problem. And that’s because the claimant has not shown an assignment of a mortgage.”


-------------------all that being said----------------

The lenders can go back AT ANY POINT once they produce the needed documents and make the bankrupt lady pay three times the vaule of her home, so this thread is rendered bunk...




Either they will return to court with a clear claim on the property — including all the transfers and sales that are necessary in the securitization process — or they won’t be able to produce that documentation. If they do produce it, they will then have to explain why they didn’t produce it before.


ALL QUOTES TAKEN FROM THE ORIGINAL NEWS SOURCE

[edit on 24-10-2009 by drsmooth23]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 11:45 PM
link   
What you have been taught is moral and ethical is a lie;

Once you really understand what is being done to you, you will understand the following is the list of moral actions to take;

- Do NOT pay taxes
- Do NOT pay state or banks
- Do NOT obey the fraudulent and evil laws
- Do NOT do what your told
- Do NOT cooperate with the state
- Disrupt the state wherever you can
- Disrupt and destroy the banks wherever you can
- Go armed in public at all times
- Become self sufficient (grow food, collect water, produce electricity)
- Remove YOUR money from the banks - IMMEDIATELY
- Do not sign anything
- Do NOT give your name
- Do NOT admit to being the legal fiction that is your name

If you keep trying to be a 'good' citizen - that is what they are relying on - you will be crushed underfoot - your life means nothing to them - they WANT YOU DEAD.

Fight - and disobey - or you are just in the way.




top topics



 
3

log in

join