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

page: 3
85
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
 


Speaking as a card caryying 'liberal democrat,' I can honestly say that I am looking forward to the day when all labels go the way of the Whigs, and we can focus on more pressing issues, such as this debacle.

Obama turned out to be underwhelming, but I don't regret voting for him.

Seems change is coming, just maybe not the one we all thought.




posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   
(proximo) thank you for the excelent interpretation, very informative and understandable, well done...



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Don't worry about who owns what houses. The government will end up with them all.
I'm suspicious of any government body doing anything at all to help a citizen.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   
No worries, guys. The State AGs, upon hearing of this ruling, will fast track the so-called "settlement" ($20B - haha) which will make everything the banks did that was illegal, retroactively legal.

Write to your state AGs NOW and warn them NOT to take this settlement!



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



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...


What -laws- did they break?

Many of the Wall Street share traders, that is (not sure what a "wall street executive" is - it sounds like a straw man, to me).

Legally, I can sell you a device that doesn't work. Look at all those magnetic bracelets or those goofy necklaces the Cardinals wear as part of a sponsorship (that also don't work).

You can't bring someone up on tampering with evidence if there's no crime being investigated, either.

What you're boiling down to is: "I'm angry and think these people should be in jail because they were supposed to be in control of all of this!"

Even though they weren't. Poor design of business models is not illegal. Failure to see the storm on the horizon and act on it is also not necessarily illegal. You have to be able to demonstrate some kind of individually attributable fault to individuals in order to place them under criminal charges - or even civil suit.


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


en.wikipedia.org...

Yeah, if you go on a multi-million dollar witch-hunt, you can probably catch a couple dozen share traders up in a couple hundred thousand dollars of embezzlement schemes or some other nonsense that would normally be brought to prosecutors by internal auditors for those companies.

I'm just not seeing where the laws make what has been going on illegal. Granted - it should have never been going on, I agree. Not only is it underhanded, but it's also a very, very bad way of conducting business that is inherently unstable.

reply to post by proximo
 



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.


Here's where you need to have some proof, though I thank you for naming something specific that can be proven.

This can also be somewhat murky - What are the laws on what can/can't be claimed as an asset? You would, normally, not claim a computer as an asset - but conceivably could from a legal standpoint (it is something you own and can exchange for money).

Again - "Getting creative" is not illegal. It may, certainly, be wrong and very underhanded given the circumstances; but it is not necessarily illegal.

Here is the other problem - you have to prove that "executives" ordered and/or knew of the behavior. For example - telling brokers to "be creative" isn't necessarily ordering them to commit fraud.


Second the the financials that bought these loans figured out they were garbage and still sold them as AAA.


Is that labeling one that comes with legal liability? This is one that can be pretty gray. Companies can make up their own labels that mimic or mirror the labels used by other industries or standards unless those are copyrighted/trademarked and/or a legally enforced standard. It doesn't stop companies from getting as close as they can without teams of ninja-lawyers showing up.


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


I'm not seeing that as falling under fraud or insider trading, legally. Is there a historic case that you can use to establish precedent or a specific mentioning in the laws that places this kind of behavior within the realms of illegality?


Forth, Robosigning.


This one is certainly more plausible. However - you're looking at years of investigation and trying to figure out who knew what, when, and prove illegal activity. More than likely, there will simply be class-action retribution for this with a rather minimal witch-hunt (that would accomplish very little). Title Insurance companies, though, will likely fry over this - as they should be paying close attention to the titles and groups they are insuring.


You do realize that Fannie and Freddie were victims of the fraud as well do you not.


Not really. They buy the MBSs from smaller banks and re-sell them as larger chunks of stock. Had they not been around, the trend would have never been so broad. The market for MBSs would not have been nearly as lucrative and enticing for fraud without the negligence of FM&FM (hmm...).



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


Ive never heard of the dailybail... Its an interesting ruling, one of which is bound to head to Federal Appeals courts. The ruling doesnt affect courts outside of the state.


Most likely heading to the the 9th Circuit Court of appeals federally.

If the 9th upholds this decision and most likely they will, then on to the US Supreme Court but rarely does the US Supreme Court overturn the 9th Circuit Court of appeals decisions.

This is going to be a freakin mess.

Attorney's are going to get rich off of this mess, on many levels, because most likely they will sue on state and federal levels.

"Facepalm"
edit on 21-10-2011 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 12:38 PM
link   

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.


but it punishes the purchasers of those homes too, is that fair? Are they crooks? NO!
Well now some investors or families are going to lose their property they purchased at a reduced rate as it was foreclosed and short saled, they are victims, too a lot more criminal taking their purchase from them. WTH?
edit on 21-10-2011 by ldyserenity because: spelling



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by ldyserenity
 



but it punishes the purchasers of those homes too, is that fair? Are they crooks? NO!
Well now some investors or families are going to lose their property they purchased at a reduced rate as it was foreclosed and short saled, they are victims, too a lot more criminal taing their purchase from them. WTH?


This is putting the cart before the horse.

Should all of this come 'crashing down' - what is more likely to happen is a re-issuing of property titles by the states with settlement pay-outs going to previous owners.... or something along those lines....

For example - my father passed away and we had to let the house foreclose (which the bank -may- not have had a legal title to...). There really isn't anyone to live in the house other than the current owner. Of course... the owners before us (and before us) .... complicate things.

In many cases - it would simply be impractical or impossible to locate the last -real- title-holder to appear and sign over the title.

Then you also have "squatters' rules" that can come into play... basically - if you have lived on and worked the property for longer than seven years (in most jurisdictions, I believe) - you now own it.

.... Yeah - a mess is an understatement.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by ldyserenity
but it punishes the purchasers of those homes too, is that fair? Are they crooks? NO!
Well now some investors or families are going to lose their property they purchased at a reduced rate as it was foreclosed and short saled, they are victims, too a lot more criminal taking their purchase from them. WTH?
edit on 21-10-2011 by ldyserenity because: spelling



That is the conundrum here everyone is going to be suing everyone, but "due process" is one of the highest laws of our land.

I would not want to be a federal judge right now.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   
So basically if you were illegally foreclosed on, the title was never transferred and technically it's still in your name. As for the buyer, they'll have to go after bank/whoever sold them the property for fraud to try and get their money back.

So now as long as no one tries to bring a class action lawsuit against the banks and settles for pennies on the dollar, the buyer should at least have a fighting chance to get his money back. As for any reality improvements he/she's done since purchase, that money is gonna be a bit tougher to get back



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Here is what many people will claim that lost their homes.

It caused them great duress, which in turn they lost their Job, not able to hold a job, or their family together, etc.....you get the point, so not only will they sue for the property, but for extreme duress.

I would wager they'll want their properties back plus a few million each.

Just saying.
edit on 21-10-2011 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by SilentNoise
So basically if you were illegally foreclosed on, the title was never transferred and technically it's still in your name. As for the buyer, they'll have to go after bank/whoever sold them the property for fraud to try and get their money back.



Most likely it will not matter much if the properties were transfered, or new titles issued to the new owners, because the courts will have to uphold, that they did not receive "due process" and therefore the new titles would be null and void. The new owners would have to sue the banks, title companies, and anyone else that is, or was in the loop.

This is most likely the biggest financial mess in History, next to the corruption on Wall Street.
edit on 21-10-2011 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


It will go to the US Supreme Court where it will get overturned by the Conservatives.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


Short the bejeezus out of the title insurance companies.

Check first: do they have alumni from Goldman?

Too Privileged to Fail?
edit on 21-10-2011 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   
I hope this is true. And for All.
us in UK to!
then they banks go cap in hand AGAIN.
dont give them any thing.
just TAKE the bank Off them.
silly ideots keep failing any way.
cos they know so ideot will give them are money.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by SilentNoise
So basically if you were illegally foreclosed on, the title was never transferred and technically it's still in your name. As for the buyer, they'll have to go after bank/whoever sold them the property for fraud to try and get their money back.

So now as long as no one tries to bring a class action lawsuit against the banks and settles for pennies on the dollar, the buyer should at least have a fighting chance to get his money back. As for any reality improvements he/she's done since purchase, that money is gonna be a bit tougher to get back


This will be a huge legal clusterffkk.

Trying to turn back the clock: The first owner still has title. However, the first owner is thus still liable for all mortgage payments which would have been made during the interim, a few years' worth. How many can afford that?

The second buyer will be really screwed. Do they make mortgage payments to their existing bank? If they don't the servicer will surely report them to the credit agencies. But if they do, and the original owner is confirmed to still have the title, then they will have been screwed out of all the principal they've paid. I I see a scenario where the new mortgage owner will continue to demand mortgage payments even after the new buyer gets evicted. guess they and the new mortgage owner would have to sue the title insurance company for the money. How long will that take?

It will create yet another center of pain, and work for lawyers.
edit on 21-10-2011 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheCounselor
Don't worry about who owns what houses. The government will end up with them all.
I'm suspicious of any government body doing anything at all to help a citizen.


Yeah I agree which means more homes rented/sold HUD to illegal immigrants who will just walk away and go back to their home country and leave the property.


Man, I really hate this world I hope something takes me out of it very soon!



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by DavidsHope
 



Those who stand to profit the most? Lawyers. those who stand to loose the most? the American taxpayer.
When the banks get into serious financial trouble they will be simply bailed out again. With our tax monies.
The banks instigated this, they initiated it, and in the end they will once again be considered too big to fail.


Isn't deregulation fabulous.

This is what was warned about when Newt got his banking dereg plan passed.

Back in the thirties, the homes were auctioned off, and the people who lost their home bought them back for pennies on the dollar. That is how is should be done, not some crook with a line of credit flipping the place for a quick buck.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 01:19 PM
link   


No worries, guys. The State AGs, upon hearing of this ruling, will fast track the so-called "settlement" ($20B - haha) which will make everything the banks did that was illegal, retroactively legal. Write to your state AGs NOW and warn them NOT to take this settlement!



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by mbkennel
 


The true market solution would be to publicly auction off these homes. People get pre-qualified, proving they have the funds available to back up their bids, and then they bid on properties, and the homes go for what ever is bid.

Of course home prices would plummet, but that is exactly what should happen. That is the law of supply and demand.

All this legal swirl is about banks trying to fix the markets and defy the laws of supply and demand.

edit on 21-10-2011 by poet1b because: add word publicly





new topics
top topics
 
85
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join