BOMBSHELL: Mass. Supreme Court Rules That Most Foreclosure Sales From Previous 5 Years Are VOID

page: 2
85
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 20 2011 @ 09:54 PM
link   
There's an old principle that you cannot pass bette title to any property than you yourself have - so if you do not legally own something then anyone who buys it off you doees not legally own it either - and so-one forever down any chain of sale.

the honest intent, or otherwise, of the 2 parties is not actually relevant to whether they can pass and receive good title.

In such cases each buyer can only take a case against the person they purchased from, and the last person to actually have legal title is the actual owner, and they can simply take hte property back, and the current person who thought they had ownership can only take a case against whoever they bought it off, and so on back down any chain of purchase.

In these cases I am not sure who that last legal owner would be - the only 2 options seem to be the banks that were actually mortgagees, or the "owners" who were foreclosed against??




posted on Oct, 20 2011 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by proximo
 



Come on you really believe that? Well all I can say is you haven't been paying attention. There should be hundreds of wall street execs in prison for what they have done - but not one has been charged.


Please... tell of the laws they have broken.


Just wait the feds will pass some kind of law overruling state law that will get the banks off the hook on this too. Probably give it some catchy name like the Mortgage Security act or some BS.


This is where you are behind the curve, and horribly misinformed.

The stock that these Title Insurance companies have invested in are largely Mortgage Backed Securities issued by Government Sponsored Enterprises - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The value of these securities is backed by the Federal Reserve.....

Which is exactly what happened with the mortgage "bailouts" - Contrary to popular belief - it was nothing new. It was just a bad business model and practice that jeopardizes the value of the dollar. It should have never been... but... it was and the Fed had to honor it.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:16 AM
link   
thats cool if It comes to where i am and I have to give my house back the bank better give me back every penny I paied in to include the interest and homeowners insurance etc... If they did that I would not have a problem with it I would just use that as a down payment on a new house or buy a awesome rv just incase stuff happens then my house can be my bug out bag.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 04:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
Please... tell of the laws they have broken.


Possibly -
Fraud
Conspiracy to commit fraud
theft by deceit
evidence tampering
witness tampering if any threats were used to get people to back down
for starters...


Originally posted by Aim64C
This is where you are behind the curve, and horribly misinformed.

The stock that these Title Insurance companies have invested in are largely Mortgage Backed Securities issued by Government Sponsored Enterprises - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The value of these securities is backed by the Federal Reserve.....

Which is exactly what happened with the mortgage "bailouts" - Contrary to popular belief - it was nothing new. It was just a bad business model and practice that jeopardizes the value of the dollar. It should have never been... but... it was and the Fed had to honor it.


If we want to look at FEderal, depending on the info that comes out, potential violation of RICO statutes.

While I understand what you are saying, the Court decision, until overturned on appeal which I see happening, supports the argument of wrongdoing on behalf of the companies.
edit on 21-10-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 06:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


"creates a small problem" lol. It looks like a damn big problem to me, rofl.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 08:08 AM
link   
It's unfortunate but most likely all this ruling will cause is new legislation, probably refining of the laws on the books already. Although some foreclosures may be overturned, I highly doubt that this will cause much other than more laws. Hopefully some of those laws will give us better protection and perhaps some flexibility with our mortgages.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
So who has to pay?

Who gets to own the homes?


the highest bidder.

this is a huge problem where i live in miami and everyone is suing each other over it and sadly it takes years to resolve these mazes.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lucidity
It's unfortunate but most likely all this ruling will cause is new legislation, probably refining of the laws on the books already. Although some foreclosures may be overturned, I highly doubt that this will cause much other than more laws. Hopefully some of those laws will give us better protection and perhaps some flexibility with our mortgages.


Any new legislation would only affect newer cases. Passing a law to "fix" the problem, at least in my opinion, would go against the shall not pass ex post facto laws. In this case, passing one that ends the court ruling, could be construed as legislation punishing the people who won that case by pulling the rug out from under them.

since this deals with property and seizure, this is going to go federal to be settled.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Lucidity
It's unfortunate but most likely all this ruling will cause is new legislation, probably refining of the laws on the books already. Although some foreclosures may be overturned, I highly doubt that this will cause much other than more laws. Hopefully some of those laws will give us better protection and perhaps some flexibility with our mortgages.


Any new legislation would only affect newer cases. Passing a law to "fix" the problem, at least in my opinion, would go against the shall not pass ex post facto laws. In this case, passing one that ends the court ruling, could be construed as legislation punishing the people who won that case by pulling the rug out from under them.

since this deals with property and seizure, this is going to go federal to be settled.


Oh boy.... I can see disturbing events on America's horizon, if they made this new ruling retroactive ...

It was passed in the interest of rectifying historic issues, which means that there is a strong push to make this ruling retroactive, which will set a precedent... which may thus cause other laws that pass to receive retroactive consideration... such as the law they were trying to manipulate so as to apprehend and extradite Julian
Asange with...



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 09:24 AM
link   
So, let me see if I have this right. The government forces banks to lend to people that they know can't pay back the loan. These people buy a house they can't afford, and ultimately get foreclosed on. Meanwhile, the banks are making shady deals selling scraps of paper to each other, multiplying the problem.

It all comes crashing down....

People who didn't fall into that trap, and lived within their means but may currently be at a "break even" on their current homes decide to invest money they saved, by not buying outside their means. Now, the Mass. court is saying they don't own the home?

If I was in a position where I did EVERYTHING right, and got screwed by crooks (banker) and dumb asses (people who bought more than they could afford), I'd shoot the original owners, then head straight to the bank. Suicide by cop, I suppose. It's amazing that the morons continue to get rewarded in this country!!!!


The only thing this ruling is going to do is add to the devastation, because people who saved and did everything correctly are now going to fall victim. What a G.D. joke!

Full Disclosure: I have not purchased any foreclosed property.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 09:38 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C

Please... tell of the laws they have broken.



Ok here is a few. First you have the mortgage companies such as Countrywide creating false documentation by the 1000's to get people approved for loans that had no business getting. They created false income - false assets anything needed to get someone approved. They then sold these loans - as high quality to be packaged in Mortgage backed securities. This is fraud, but nobody has been prosecuted.

Second the the financials that bought these loans figured out they were garbage and still sold them as AAA. This is fraud. I know they knew because a JP Morgan executive stated in sworn testimony before congress that they knew in 2007 that 80% of the loans in the MBS packages they were selling were below the standards they were claiming in the perspective.

Third Goldman Sachs was selling MBS and then buying derivatives betting against the MBS. This is fraud and insider trading.

Forth, Robosigning. Robosigning consists of hiring someone for just over minimum wage, having them claim to read over documentation, then sign as vice president of a company they are not employed by to transfer title. These robosigners signed as dozens of different vice presidents, have stated they signed as fast as possible and knew nothing about what they were swearing to have read, and that they were not affiliated with any of the companies they were claiming to be vice presidents of. The banks using these services, KNEW all of this, therefore they knew they did not have valid title, yet that has not stopped them from collecting money on loans that is not theirs, selling of the loans, or foreclosing on properties they KNOW they have no legal title to. They have been caught numerous times filing fraudulent documents in foreclosure cases in court as well in an attempt to prove ownership. That is fraud and theft.

Five. Hank Paulson got the leverage limit removed while CEO of Goldman Sachs. It was set at 12 to 1 - and this had been the standard for hundreds of years in the banking industry for obvious reasons. Any more leverage than that is extremely dangerous. The banks then quickly levered themselves up to 30 to 1 or more to maximize profits, then began to spectacularly collapse in 2008 because a simple 3% loss can bankrupt them. I know you can argue this is technically legal - but I would state it is criminal negligence because they have to know small losses such as 3% will send them to bankruptcy. They are doing it anyway because they believe they will not be allowed to fail due their derivative exposure if they were allowed to do so. I believe this should be considered blackmail.


Originally posted by Aim64C
This is where you are behind the curve, and horribly misinformed.

The stock that these Title Insurance companies have invested in are largely Mortgage Backed Securities issued by Government Sponsored Enterprises - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The value of these securities is backed by the Federal Reserve.....

Which is exactly what happened with the mortgage "bailouts" - Contrary to popular belief - it was nothing new. It was just a bad business model and practice that jeopardizes the value of the dollar. It should have never been... but... it was and the Fed had to honor it.


You do realize that Fannie and Freddie were victims of the fraud as well do you not. They bought tons of loans with fraudulent paperwork as well - and were victimized by having the market collapse due to the fraud of the other mortgage entities.

Look I understand technically the feds have no legal right to pass any law that will supercede the states - but that simply does not matter anymore. They seem to be able to do whatever they want illegally and get away with it. It is not only in their banker buddies best interests to have this problem go away - it is in the federal governments best interests as well - and judging by the fact none of the crimes I listed above have been prosecuted goes to show you the government will go very far to protect wall streets interest at the expense of the taxpayer.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 10:10 AM
link   
They should start arresting them if they committed fraud. The trick is they need to charge the banks with RICO so everyone sits in lock-up then they need to offer deals to all the poor bank tellers that have no real criminal backing in the back to sell out the upper level. It would be 100% legal since by definition they are a criminal organization committing felonies. That would be the quick fix for the bankers. You could always hit the CEO with a trumped up terror charge with the head line of (Economic Terrorism). Thats only if there high priced lawyers scare them. The whole idea that these banker are untouchable is so wrong if the government wanted to do right by its own people these crooks would be locked up.
This is a huge case. Am i wrong in the though that all home sales in the last 5 years are null and void. If so it will be over turned in 1-3 months. If I am right this opened the pressident to be tried in other states. My mother will be happy to hear this lost her house when she had 30k left to pay on a 150k house. She learned never rent out because people can be dead beats.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   
Thanks to our ATS legal experts for explaining this. It seems that Wall street has us by the throat.

If this is allowed to go forward and other states do the same, will the entire house of cards come down?

How can we punish the greedy without hurting the innocent?

What rules should be legislated to eventually back us out of this mess?

It seems that undoing the laws that allow banks to be both investment and commercial banks would be good. Derivative trading should be relegated to casinos. A 10:1 ratio should bring order back to the banking industry and quell the desire to overextend.
Maybe a solution would be mass forfeitures of ill-gotten gains with a triple damages clause rolled in for good measure and a hard-time Federal prison option for those attempting to hide their loot. Incomes would be attached until complete payment was made and if the guilty were to be found cheating on this, jail is the option. A nice beginning would be freezing the assets of all the big dogs so they'd have some first hand experience of the pain that they have inflicted on the other 99%.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by proximo

Originally posted by watcher3339
That's huge. It is also a testament to the fact that our country, for all its problems, is not actually broken. We have a system in place to address grievances. It can be slow. It can be better. But it beats anarchy hands down.

This is the way to punish the crooks.
Nobody is above the law.


Come on you really believe that? Well all I can say is you haven't been paying attention. There should be hundreds of wall street execs in prison for what they have done - but not one has been charged. They very much seem to be above the law. Just wait the feds will pass some kind of law overruling state law that will get the banks off the hook on this too. Probably give it some catchy name like the Mortgage Security act or some BS.

You do realize that like 90% of the houses sold in the last 10 years have a faulty title chain, because virtually everyone was and is using MERS and not registering the initial sale in the state as is required by law. That's bad enough but then millions of property changed hands multiple times to different financial agencies illegally by not properly doing the paperwork through robo-signing and various other fraudulent acts and again only transferred through MERS. Then you have the problem of the same property being pledged as collateral multiple times in different packages of Mortgage Backed Securities.

It is literally such a mess following the law at this point is guaranteed to take down the stock market, virtually every pension fund, every insurance company, every major bank. It also means getting proper title to a house you bought will be nearly impossible - which means sales of existing homes would grind to a complete halt. I'm not arguing this should not happen - It should. But if you expect the banks to allow this to happen without getting their puppets in Washington involved, I think you are very naive.



Nooo! With this, we caught them with their hands in the cookie jar! As they never owned the titles. Most if not all, are rolled up in a package and sold to another bank for profit. And then they sell the house without even having the title.

Come on North Carolina, you can do this



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   
What a mess. As Massachusetts goes, so goes the nation.

Remember, some of the top law schools, and by extention, courts, are in Massachusetts.

Now we have a situation, coupled with OWS, where the banks will be legally responsible for paying back Both those who were foreclosed upon and the buyer of said property.

No way they get out of this pickle without some serious retribution.

You may think it is just a chance to flex their corruption muscle, but The spotlight is white hot now.

The 99% won't stand for it.

Let it BE!



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C


It's one massive circle-jerk that basically ends with both mortgage issuers and title insurance companies royally screwed.

... Until you consider that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are both Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) and account for the overwhelming majority of foreclosed homes....

This is going to be really..... "interesting." I say that because I'm a young man, single, with trade knowledge and military training..... for people who have children and a little less moved by adventure... their sentiment is likely to be more fearful....


Now this part is particularly interesting to me, because you are talking about financial institutions with strong ties and investments from the democrat/Left-wing elite. In fact, the sub-prime mortgage scam really began with the Democrats under Bill Clinton, though the Republicans were seeing the potential for profitable exploitation as well.

And Massachussets tends to be a pretty liberal, left-leaning state. Even their republicans are considered closet democrats by other conservatives. So indeed, I find this interesting, because what we are now seeing is possibly part of widespread corruption and incompetance within the Left. For 8 years under Dubya, we watched corruption run rife, through through different channels, throughout the Right, and many people mistakenly believed that the Left must somehow be less corrupt. Wrong. They are just as corrupt as the Right. They just specialize in different sectors/focal points of corruption than the Right.

If we end up with Obama for another 4 years (and it seems likely we will, given I've seen nothing from the GOP that seems a prime candidate for dethroning Obama), then it will be interesting to see what sort of corruption and incompetance will ferment and blossom under a Left-leaning administration. If that is the case, I actually think it could be a good thing. We already suffered 8 years of Republican corruption and epic fails, maybe after 8 years of being reminded why Bill Clinton was a Douchebag too might make more people start looking beyond the two-party monopoly, and actually start looking at independant and third party candidates for a change.

You never know. Strange things keep happening, thanks to the internet. Look at the Arab Spring. TV media no longer has the monopoly on politics, and more and more people are looking online at previously unknown philosophies.

Regardless, I'm going to keep my eye on this, see if and how this ruling spreads beyond Mass. And maybe even the US. Snake devouring itself....very fitting image.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   
News like this gives me hope for the US. My parents have been fighting the bank on whether or not they have an actual title to the property they live, and lo and behold the court case continues to be postponed as the bank searches for the title (I am sure it does not have) Once all is settled does this mean my parents will get to keep their home free and clear??

For those who think this is people avoiding their personal obligations to pay what they promised I say "Oh well how does the system and the banks like a taste of their own tactics"



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 11:17 AM
link   
What if you bought a foreclosed property within your means and then improved it, adding in additional money (non-borrowed) into the property?

If the bank has to pay me back what I borrowed, what about the additional funds I sunk into the property to further improve it?



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
So what do you all here take it to mean? It looks like a lot of homes will be re-occupied, and a lot will just be left empty with NO OWNER and in limbo. For all the creative fraudulent practices the banking comunity used to prey on the public, they thought they could pull a fast one and return the loot before it was discovered missing...... as it were. But it appears the economic downturn they were responsible for caught them in their lies and frauds. The banks will fold now, their true deceitful ways will have been laid bare and The President BETTER NOT BAIL them out OR ELSE he is complicit. I said yesterday in another post/topic, that I thought there would be a run on banks.... it was the topic about BOA. I think there WILL be a run on banks and you will see more and more Bank Holidays. I'm glad I changed banks this month to a small comunity bank here in town, and left Chase whom I'd banked with for 15 years. I'm afraid there will be alot of hurt people if they continue with BOA, Chase and Wells Fargo.





top topics
 
85
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join