Axing the Bankers' Money Tree: Homeowners' Rebellion against Wall Street

reply to post by XPLodER


Nobody DESERVES anything. We should make decisions on a case by case basis what is the best actions. The banks didn't DESERVE a bailout, but they got one because at the time, it was OUR best option as a country. We did what we had to, even though it wasn't the most favorable choice.

We can't make decisions based on who deserves what because the world doesn't work like that. We have to make decisions based on what will produce the best outcome for the good of our country.

In this case, it is SOMETIMES foreclosure. If that is what ends up being the best case, then so be it. We have nobody to blame but ourselves. We each play a huge part in our own lives. We need to take some responsibility for that.

Not everyone who lost their house deserves to lose their house, but sometimes that's how the cookie crumbles. Our country needs to look out for itself the same way individuals need to look out for themselves when making decisions. Things don't always turn out fair, all we can do is learn from that to try and mold a better system down the road.

reply to post by grimreaper797


i see by your post that you do think the system is one of the problems i also see that your solution would be the banks and the owners working out a solution

well fine when the banks refinance ok for both parties
what about when the banks dont refinance?

the current arrangement acually increases defults by undermining house prices so the more people that defult the less all houses are worth

so if nothing is done then eventually everyone is underwater in their morgage as houseing prices callaspe

so if your underwater why refinance?
some people have walked away from their houses and decleared bunkrupcy

who does this benifit? it increases the cascade of foreclosures

how do you repair a system that is so broken that aspects of it are the legal definition fraud and the street name is bunkrupcy scam on the mark

have you read what the judges are saying in these cases?

xploder

reply to post by grimreaper797


here is a concise reason why this is required

In a Newsweek article a year ago called "Too Big to Jail: Why Prosecutors Won’t Hit Wall Street Hard in the Subprime Scandal," Michael Hirsch wrote that we were unlikely to see trials and convictions like those in the savings and loan scandals of the 1980s, because fraud and blame have been so widespread that there is no one to single out and jail. Said Hirsch:

“The sad irony is that in pleading collective guilt, most of Wall Street will escape whipping for a scheme that makes Bernie Madoff's shenanigans look like pickpocketing. At the crest of the real-estate bubble, fraud was systemic and Wall Street had essentially gone into the loan-sharking business.”

“Unfortunately,” he added, “prosecution of fraud is the only way you're going to get reform on Wall Street.”

link
______beforeitsnews/story/150/999/A_California_bankruptcy_court,_following_landmark_cases_in_other_jurisdictions,_recently_held_that_this_electro nic_shortcut_breaks_the_chain_of_title,_voiding_foreclosure._The_logical_result_could_be_62_million_homes_that_are_foreclosure-proof..html

please read the artical as it says that its impossable to prosicute the fraud as it is so wide spread that the only way to punish the crime is to follow the letter of the law

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER

So when someone defaults on a mortgage doesn't the bank get paid off by the mortgage insurance? So who owns the property then? "When things are complicated, they're meant to be"-me.

reply to post by Klaatumagnum


it is designed by people who use there own private language (legaleze)
and no im not joking laywer language
then you have financing jargon MBS (morgage backed securities) as an example of financial language
none of this is taught to people and most wouldnt want to know (does the head in)

i have a resonable grasp of both and still have trouble following all this but here is a dousy for ya

banks need money atm so they pledge their calateral to the fed
ie they sell your morgage to the fed to secure money to loan

so ineffect the banks are being paid twice for each property
once from the owner and once from the fed
guess where the fed gets the money?

taxpayer anyone

if you have any MERS questions feel free to ask

Originally posted by MrsBlonde
This is great news!!! and funny too

the greatest swindle in history comes full circle and bites the swindlers in the a$$!

you know what ? It almost makes me believe there is a God!

if things continue like this ,I'll be a believer!!!

Since when is a bank giving you a low interest loan, even though you can't afford to pay it...a swindle by the bank? You can just walk away from the home and file bankruptcy and the bank is stuck holding a home they can't sell. Yeah...the banks totally screwed over the people they gave loans at low interest...basically free money. Then of course I guess the banks swindled the borrowers into not reading their contract. Those bastards It's a # load easier to blame someone else than to be personally responsible. Sure, some people have gotten screwed simply because they lost their job or other circumstances...but not all of them; a crap load of people either were gaming the system or were to damn stupid to know what an ARM was.

Originally posted by yellowcard
Since when is a bank giving you a low interest loan, even though you can't afford to pay it...a swindle by the bank?

When the Bank always planned to sell the loan to an investment bank that would bundle the loans into a pool and re-sell them as mortgage backed 'securities'. The originating bank never cared if you could afford the loan, in many cases never even checked if you had a job, they just wanted your signature on the paper and made an instant profit.

reply to post by mythatsabigprobe


well said you hit the nail on the head
the bank had made a contract they intended on breaking as soon as possable by on selling the morgage to get another signature

intent is one good point to make they had the intent of selling the contract in a non legal way there fore braking the original loan contract

the intent was to defraud, its not the borrowers fault that the bank intended selling/breaking the contract as soon as possable
by selling the morgage as a MBS (morgage backed security)
most borrowers didnt get made aware of these legal changes to their contract and that constitues fraud by the banks

xploder

reply to post by grimreaper797

Meaning no disrespect but YOU HAVE BEEN BRAINWASHED!! So if a Corporation desides to strategically default on it's financial obligation's...THAT'S OK but if your average Joe does it he's a bum? Don't drink the kool-aid! But you and folk's like you probably will because you believe the propaganda. Please reconsider your position.

reply to post by Klaatumagnum


you bring up a very important point we have been conditioned to be forth right honest and upright members of the comunity
which is good for society as a whole

what these banks have done should offend your sence of morals as the average joe would not act as the banks have

and blaming the borrower is like blaming an ant that walks under a magnifying glass on a hot day

xploder

Originally posted by XPLodER
i have no morgage or home and am not directly effected by any of this i dont even live in america

Oh, it's even more curious than I thought! To you break out the wine to celebrate some legal detail of banking business in the United States? Interesting.

people have been conditioned to say its your fault for taking on a morgage that you couldnt afford

You know why? Because in many cases this was true during the bubble. The term "Liar's Mortgage" didn't appear just by itself, and neither did more traditional ARM. If you bet on your house appreciating and thus covering your risk, it's your fault and nobody else's. And it actually worked for many people!

reply to post by buddhasystem


the borrowers did not dream up arm or alt a or lyers loans
the banks did

the borrowers did not intend to defult
the banks intended these loans to fail
the banks intended to sell these loans as MBS
the owner should not be expected to know about complex security instraments and market practices

the owner had a contract they intended on completeing
the banks had a contract they intending on breaking and not making the owner aware

does it surprise you that i am celebrating that american families may keep their home and not bring their kids up in a tent city with millions of other families

remeber this one point
without families living in stable environments the collapse of society is assured and my country is in a bad way and it stems from bad banking practice from america

i am out of work because of the down turn the real estate market in your country

ie it directly affects me in my life

all it takes for fraud(evil) to prosper is when good men do nothing

i post with an agenda here to educate people of the fraud and the fact that this fraud is too wide spread to prosicute

the courts in some states have decided in law to allow victims of this crime to challange the fraud with standing

which is acually in law what should have been happening anywhay

so to infer that i have no right to help americans is to infer i have no right to help myself

xploder
ps have you lost your job?

reply to post by Agit8dChop

.... obviously not! you obviously believed you could own a home without any deposit, money or decent income.

And who makes people believe they can afford this?

Who is selling and enticing people with the American Dream, knowing full well these people can't afford it. Who is supposed to be smarter here?

Or maybe they have lost a job.

The Op is right, 62 million foreclosures and the only one not getting screwed are the Banks, for they ultimately hold the title.

reply to post by grimreaper797

Makes me sick.

Millions of people getting away with being financially and morally irresponsible. As if this wasn't already rampant in our country.

A win for the people? You have to be kidding me. If these people deserved a "win" they wouldn't have put themselves in this position to begin with.

It's a loss for everyone on every level. If millions of people stop paying because they caught a "break" and can cheat the system, there will be repercussions. Millions will lose their jobs, the economy will take a huge hit, things will get ugly.

Lets hope that some of that 62 million are RESPONSIBLE AMERICANS, who continue to pay for what they agreed to pay for, instead of trying to "Get theirs". If they do try to "get theirs" we all lose.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hundreds of BANKS getting away with being financially and morally irresponsible. As if this wasn't already rampant in our country.

A win for the BANKS? You have to be kidding me. If these BANKS deserved a "win" they wouldn't have put themselves in this position to begin with.

It's a loss for everyone on every level. If hundreds of BANKS stop LENDING because they caught a "break" and can cheat the system, there will be repercussions. Millions will lose their jobs, the economy will take a huge hit, things will get ugly.

Lets hope that some of the BIG BANKERS are RESPONSIBLE AMERICANS, who continue to lend for what they agreed to pay for, instead of trying to "Get theirs". If they do try to "get theirs" we all lose.

Edit by ErEwOhN.
Freeware.





[edit on 27-8-2010 by ErEhWoN]

[edit on 27-8-2010 by ErEhWoN]

reply to post by ErEhWoN


thanks for your support
i think the 62 million people affeccted by this pre meditated fraud
deserve under law their right to win there house as a punishment to the banks for fraud

if there is no punishment the fraud will continue
who wants that?

reply to post by XPLodER


The banks risky and even underhanded/shady deals (CDS's anyone?) are what caused this crisis.

They gambled on Credit default swaps, and lost big. The Insurance companies were in on the deal, hence AIG.

The only decent and American thing to do, is let the big bank CEO's go with one less luxury house in Zurich, one less Maybach.

Instead of take away a family from their HOME.

Tighten the credit requirements, don't let this happen again.

And the electronic trading of Titles is just immoral, in opinion. These are homes with families, not luxury cars or condos in the Alps.

Common sense implores me to agree, and so I do.

reply to post by XPLodER

Thank you for your reply. How many people have believed the big lie,so called "experts" told us that home ownership is the best investment you can ever make? We believed them and they sodomized us. Everything is a lie, complete Bull€$¥t. Even if you pay your mortgage off, you still NEVER own your home. You still have to pay property tax. Don't pay your property tax and your local government will take your property. Most people are now upside down on their mortgage. (Owing more than the home is worth) I hope more people opt to make a strategic default and tell the banks to stick it!
AND don't listen to the boneheads telling you it's a violation of some "moral" obligation. There's no ethics or morality when dealing with the financial or the political class. They are SCUMBAGS. Stick it to em! The people united can never be defeated! Let's take our Planet back from these bastards!!!

[edit on 27-8-2010 by Klaatumagnum]

reply to post by Klaatumagnum


i have stared you post above as you are spot on
lets take the power over our lives back
banks only care about profit
hit em where it hurts because without pain these banks will never
correct their crimes

this action frees up currency normally lost to stimulate the economy and improve lives

xploder thanks you for your eleqant point of veiw

A void judgment is a nullity, a brutum fulmen… and is subject to collateral attack and may be stricken at any time. The passage of time cannot make valid that which has always been void.

Ramagli Realty v. Craver, 121 So. 2d. 648

link
4closurefraud.org...

xploder

So if the bank cant foreclose and the homeowner stays in the property for however long, can they sell it at a later date? Does this break in title chain prevent clear title from being obtained to resell at some point in the future?