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.

 

Foreclosure abuse rampant across U.S., experts say

page: 2
18
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:30 PM
link   


84% of illegal foreclosures? You have to be kidding me. How does something like this not make top NEWS?

Because it's not true. What happens in California doesn't equate to what happens in South Dakota, despite delusions to the contrary. You can't generalize one tiny study in fruity-tooty California to the rest of the country. And, consider the source: an attorney at the National Consumer Law Center. No bias there!

Sure would be nice if they had an objective, even academic source that did the study, eh?



....needs to lose his job, along with all these other crooks who are taking peoples houses away...

Yeah, like those crooked borrowers that lied on their mortgage applications and inflated their incomes! They shouldn't just lose their jobs, they should be locked away for committing criminal mortgage fraud!



You are looking at this the wrong way, it is not about the borrower getting away with not paying, it is about the banks destroying the ownership chain of custody through massive fraud. That potentially effects anyone that wants to purchase property, not just the borrowers.


So, if I stop making my mortgage payments, and my bank sold my loan to another bank -- or another investor -- I should be able to live in my home scot-free, right? Gee, that sounds like mortgage fraud, too, only this time on the borrower's side.

Listen, the banks and investors can fight over who owns the mortgage. At the end of the day, if you don't make your mortgage payments, you are not entitled to a free house, okay?

Lenders have been buying and selling loan notes for centuries. It's only the magnitude and velocity -- and the speed -- with which this was done recently that is new. At the end of the day, a lender paid for the house at a closing table, and the borrower owes the money. No amount of technical mumbo-jumbo changes that fact.



My friend has a morgage with Bank of America, who BTW refuses CASH payments for morgages

All banks accepts cash for mortgage payments. In fact, they will even auto debit the cash in your checking account every month for your mortgage payment if you so desire.

They don't accept cash payments from clients that are in default on their mortgage. This then becomes a technical legal matter, and you must comply with their terms of repayment or face foreclosure.

You can't attempt to make a partial payment in cash at a branch if you are in foreclosure and then make a bogus claim that the bank doesn't accept cash payments.



Later over drinks my lawyer told me BoA is on its death throws like Lehman was in 2008, toxic morgages and failing economy is killing it. The stock is in the below 30 dollar range (my estimate last I checked) and falling


In recent weeks, their stock is rising, not falling. This past year it was a low as $4.92/share and currently is trading at $8.11/share. In fact, the most recent financial results indicated a rather large billion dollar profit, not loss.

Yes, it was the purchase of Countrywide Mortgage and their toxic mortgages that have caused their stock to tumble last year. They get the unfortunate task of cleaning up Countrywide's mess, along with all of the negative publicity attached to the mess.



I shall tell you factually, on the part of the majority it was a premeditated scam predicated by and on those participating in the ‘team’ as I was told in my initial training, to convince thousands to buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell so the 'team' could make millions.

Amen, brother. And the purpose of the scam was to inflate the market, dupe borrowers, and scam the banks to write mortgages on inflated property values. The banks got scammed big-time by this market hype.



Houses which had been constructed in the late eighties and early 90s and sold new originally for $150 / 160k were ‘being sold’ for $250k, and ‘being sold’ btw is the operative term for what I suggest was the scam created by the realtors, appraisers, mortgage companies....


A bubble. Banks lost their shirt in this scam. You left out mortgage brokers. They were some of the worst perpetrators.



Now the second lie, “and since you’re new here in Arizona, let me tell you about the market and how almost everyone out here buys, sells and moves every two years. Take a look at these figures and let me show you how in two years, based on the past five years of real estate history, you can make more than $50, maybe a $100k by buying this house for $225k.”

And then the mortgage broker convinces the buyer that they can live in a mansion, and not a starter home, if they only take out an Interest-Only loan and flip the house in 3 years when the ARM resets to a higher payment.

"For the same $1500/month payment, you can now live in a $350M house versus a small $150M house. Ain't that grand, Mr. Borrower?"




posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 04:59 AM
link   
reply to post by CookieMonster09
 


ya know, I've heard reports where the people told the truth about their income, and well, were encourged to sign the papers before all the details were in the paperwork, and low and behold!! when all was said and done, they had way more income than they had reported!!!
it was a scam from top to bottom!! appraisers that wouldn't inflate the value of the homes were blacklisted, the people originating the loans were lying through their teeth, not just on the paperwork but to the buyers also, the banks were selling some of these notes to more than one buyer!! heck, notes were actually shredded after being scanned into a data base!!! so well, when it came time to foreclose, the paperwork was so crappy, they had to resort to robosigning...

now, keep in mind....the actual amount owed on these loans, even with interest considered somehow doesn't even come close to the amount of money that is in the mortgage backed securities that were created, and neither of those can account for the massive amount of money that has been thrown at the problem by the gov't and the fed. it was what happened after the buyer signed the note that has created such a big mess!!!
yes, if everyone had paid their bills, the problem wouldn't have erupted like it had, but it would have been still there, and possibly brought to light when these same people started trying to sell their homes and found out the titles were so screwed up they were uninsurable..which would have been just as big and costly of a problem!!!

edit on 22-2-2012 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 05:22 AM
link   
Only 84% of foreclosures around the US are illegal...

Remember Mr. Richard Bowen, former senior vice-president and business chief underwriter with CitiMortgage Inc (part of Citibank) before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Hearing on Subprime Lending and Securitization and Government Sponsored Enterprises back in 2010...

Richard Bowen

These mortgages were sold to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and other investors. Although we did not underwrite these mortgages, Citi did rep and warrant to the investors that the mortgages were underwritten to Citi credit guidelines.

In mid-2006 I discovered that over 60% of these mortgages purchased and sold were defective. Because Citi had given reps and warrants to the investors that the mortgages were not defective, the investors could force Citi to repurchase many billions of dollars of these defective assets. This situation represented a large potential risk to the shareholders of Citigroup.

I started issuing warnings in June of 2006 and attempted to get management to address these critical risk issues. These warnings continued through 2007 and went to all levels of the Consumer Lending Group.

We continued to purchase and sell to investors even larger volumes of mortgages through 2007. And defective mortgages increased during 2007 to over 80% of production.

So the top guy at one of the biggest bank in America in charge of mortgages ADMITTED to congress that the bank was committing fraud at a 60% rate in mid-2006 and by 2007, it was at a rate of 80%!

But eh, don't worry, Obama and the states attorneys general made a deal with the banks to make it all legal... so no problem.



posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 06:19 AM
link   
The Big Bankers own our government.
Look at all the donations to all parties and you will see them behind it all.
The Bankers control the wars we are in.

The Bankers call the shots.
You want to know who the enemy is, it is the bankers that own our government.


www.pbs.org...





Brooksey Born tried to regulate derivatives in 1994, well before the financial crisis happened, and the bankers told her and Summers who is Boss.


"I walk into Brooksley's office one day; the blood has drained from her face," says Michael Greenberger, a former top official at the CFTC who worked closely with Born. "She's hanging up the telephone; she says to me: 'That was [former Assistant Treasury Secretary] Larry Summers. He says, "You're going to cause the worst financial crisis since the end of World War II."... [He says he has] 13 bankers in his office who informed him of this. Stop, right away. No more.'"


Read more: www.pbs.org...



posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 08:48 AM
link   


ya know, I've heard reports where the people told the truth about their income, and well, were encourged to sign the papers before all the details were in the paperwork, and low and behold!! when all was said and done, they had way more income than they had reported!!!

Yeah, there is a name for this criminal act: Mortgage fraud. If you lie on your credit application, and inflate your income, you have defrauded the lender.




These mortgages were sold to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and other investors. Although we did not underwrite these mortgages, Citi did rep and warrant to the investors that the mortgages were underwritten to Citi credit guidelines.

Yeah, this is a key issue. Read carefully. CITI did not originate these loans: Mortgage Brokers did. So the feet on the street actually submitting the credit applications weren't even bank employees, but independent third parties that had no skin in the game if the loan turned sour.

Banks thought it would be cheaper to originate mortgage loans from outside third parties -- Heck, you don't have to pay a salary, benefits, and the like, just a one-time commission. Turns out, these mortgage brokers were among the worst perpetrators of mortgage fraud. In fact, at the time cited, the FBI issued warnings about the rampant mortgage fraud being committed by these very same mortgage brokers that were doctoring loan applications. The banks and investors who actually funded the loans got duped because they funded loans for borrowers that could never repay the loan, and the banks ended up holding the bag in the end.




The Big Bankers own our government.

Well, we need to make some distinctions with this statement. There is a huge difference between a traditional brick and mortar bank that holds deposits and makes loans at the retail level, and an "Investment Banking" outfit such as Goldman Sachs that bundles mortgage loans to be sold on Wall Street to investors.

The two types of businesses are not one and the same. Investment banking and Retail banking are two different worlds, and should not be confused. Now, the 4 mega-banks - Chase, BOA, Wells, and CITI -- have both retail banking platforms and investment banking platforms. Goldman does not.

Retail banks got slaughtered in this mortgage fiasco, and hence we have seen record numbers of bank failures. The real winners were the investment banks like Goldman, though even some of these investment banks got slaughtered, such as Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers.



posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by CookieMonster09
 


are you being dishonest in your thinking,


Yeah, there is a name for this criminal act: Mortgage fraud. If you lie on your credit application, and inflate your income, you have defrauded the lender.


you attempt to blame the wrong person
that would be imposable if the banks were not facilitating fraud,
84% think about that number for a minute,

were all 84% criminals?
in your opinion

cognitive disidence is at work here.
an epidemic of morgage fraud is not created by the borrower, they are the mark in the scam

please do some reasurch, when you do you will find an FBI document that says 60% of new morgages were fraudulent and it was lender based fraud

sometimes its better to read for speack second.

you are following the main stream naritive, which in the case of money is heavily biased in favour of the banks

Top Areas for Mortgage Fraud

■Analysis of available law enforcement and industry resources indicates that the top ten mortgage fraud areas are California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Utah. Other areas significantly affected by mortgage fraud include Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia.
■There is a strong correlation between mortgage fraud and loans which result in default and foreclosure.
Emerging Schemes

■Recent statistics suggest that escalating foreclosures provide criminals with the opportunity to exploit and defraud vulnerable homeowners seeking financial guidance.
■Perpetrators are exploiting the home equity line of credit (HELOC) application process to conduct mortgage fraud, check fraud, and potentially money laundering-related activity.


fbi.gov web

60% in 2006 look at the first state, california which now has a 84% fraud rate in forclosure

wake up noddy

xploder



posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   


you attempt to blame the wrong person


Let's use a reliable third-party to settle the disagreement. Here's what the FBI stated in their Mortgage Fraud Report in 2006, just prior to the real estate collapse:

"Mortgage Fraud is defined as the intentional misstatement, misrepresentation, or omission by an applicant or other interested parties, relied on by a lender or underwriter to provide funding for, to purchase, or to insure a mortgage loan."

The whole purpose of Mortgage Fraud is to defraud the lender. The lender is the Bank, not the borrower.

Borrowers committed mortgage fraud. The bundling and sale of mortgage assets wouldn't have been a problem if the loans that were originated weren't bogus from the onset.

The bank is the patsy. Why is the bank the patsy? Because they ended up funding loans that were never intended to be repaid in the first place.

The borrower speculated that they could afford an Interest Only payment, and intended on flipping the house before the ARM reset. Borrowers speculated and lost. They inflated their income on their mortgage loan application, and doctored their tax returns. Banks are the ones that took the financial hit. Borrowers lost a home they could never have afforded in the first place, and that they never deserved to purchase in the first place.

Yes, some legitimate borrowers lost their home due to medical problems, job loss, and the like. But the bulk of the problem in California, Florida, etc. was due to rampant mortgage fraud on behalf of speculative borrowers and crooked mortgage brokers using elaborate schemes to defraud banks. Criminal appraisers were at fault as well.

Borrowers were even using the popular Home Equity Line of Credit (HELOC) bank product to commit fraud. From the Mortgage Fraud Report of the FBI in 2006, just prior to the real estate crisis:

"Perpetrators are exploiting the home equity line of credit (HELOC) application process to conduct mortgage fraud, check fraud, and potentially money laundering-related activity."

The report continues:

"Mortgage loan fraud is divided into two categories: fraud for property and fraud for profit. Fraud for property/housing entails minor misrepresentations by the applicant solely for the purpose of purchasing a property for a primary residence. This scheme usually involves a single loan. Although applicants may embellish income and conceal debt, their intent is to repay the loan.

Fraud for profit, however, often involves multiple loans and elaborate schemes perpetrated to gain illicit proceeds from property sales. It is this second category that is of most concern to law enforcement and the mortgage industry. Gross misrepresentations concerning appraisals and loan documents are common in fraud for profit schemes and participants are frequently paid for their participation. Recent events likely resulted in an increase in mortgage fraud as higher housing prices tempted borrowers to commit fraud for property in order to qualify for a mortgage loan. Also, mortgage fraud perpetrators likely seized the opportunity to take advantage of the relaxed lending practices to commit fraud for profit.

The most common form of mortgage fraud is illegal property flipping which entails false appraisals and other fraudulent loan documents..............Lenders are plagued with high foreclosure costs, broker commissions, reappraisals, attorney fees, rehabilitation costs, and other related expenses when a mortgage fraud is committed."

www.fbi.gov...



please do some reasurch, when you do you will find an FBI document that says 60% of new morgages were fraudulent and it was lender based fraud

See the refutation above. Lenders were defrauded. In 2006, per the FBI, the fraud being perpetrated at the time was coming from borrowers, mortgage brokers, and crooked appraisers -- not banks. Here's a prophetic statement from 2004:

“The potential impact of mortgage fraud on financial institutions and the stock market is clear. If fraudulent practices become systemic within the mortgage industry and mortgage fraud is allowed to become unrestrained, it will ultimately place financial institutions at risk and have adverse effects on the stock market.”

-Chris Swecker, former FBI Assistant Director, Criminal Investigative Division, Introductory Statement: House Financial Services Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, 7 October 2004


edit on 22-2-2012 by CookieMonster09 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by CookieMonster09
 


the lenders were insulated from the damage of fraudulent loans perpertrated by the lenders, by onselling the pooled morgages as MBS.

the banks stood to gain by selling these frauds onto the open market,

THAT IS AN ECONOMIC INSENTIVE TO MAKE LOANS THAT WILL DEFAULT.

how on earth can you say that it was borrower fraud?

have you investigated the fact that banks set up MERS to FLIP these morgages as they sour?


See the refutation above. Lenders were defrauded. In 2006, per the FBI, the fraud being perpetrated at the time was coming from borrowers, mortgage brokers, and crooked appraisers -- not banks. Here's a prophetic statement from 2004:


so the banks commited no fraud and it was the borrowers fault,??????

really? the bankers bonus was directly tied to the new morgages they made,
to them any morgage made them money, and they onsold them to investors so couldnt lose

you are disingenious
if the agents originating the loans KNEW they were fraudulent,
then you have motive
bonuses,
finacial gain
the mark was the borrower,
to flip the morgage was MERS (morgage electronic registery service) they set this up to resell the same morgage after it went bad.

the lender was not going to lose money no matter what happened.

this is a simple lesson on fractional reserve banking i suggest you watch it.



are you an aplogist for the bankers?

they risked nothing of their own,
they couldnt lose

sound like a scam?

xploder



posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   


the lenders were insulated from the damage of fraudulent loans perpertrated by the lenders....

Nonsense. We have had a record number of bank failures in this country since the sub-prime real estate crisis took full effect. Even investment banking outfits on Wall Street -- Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers -- failed.

To say that retail banks and investment banking houses were insulated from the mortgage crisis is simply a false statement. About the only "bank" that appears to have gone relatively unscathed is Goldman. And they aren't even a retail bank. They're an investment banking outfit.

As I stated earlier, you need to make a distinction from the two types of banks. Retail brick and mortar banks are not the same as Wall Street investment banking outfits. Apparently, you don't know the difference.

Regardless, the "banks" weren't insulated. If they were, how do you explain the massive number of bank failures? Coincidence? Not so. Just read the FDIC autopsy reports as to why these banks failed, and most of these can be attributed to the sub-prime real estate crisis.



how on earth can you say that it was borrower fraud?


Read the FBI reports on Mortgage Fraud yourself. Don't take my word for it. I posted the link in my last post, and gave you several credible quotes from the FBI.

The FBI points the finger at the borrower -- in collusion with the mortgage broker and appraiser -- as defrauding the banks by committing mortgage fraud. These were pretty sophisticated schemes and rackets, some put together by organized crime.



the lender was not going to lose money no matter what happened.

Nonsense. Hundreds of banks have gone out of business because of this fiasco. Even big name investment banking outfits like Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers failed due this mortgage crisis. The banks have been bleeding money ever since. To say otherwise is plainly against the facts.



this is a simple lesson on fractional reserve banking i suggest you watch it.

No thank you. First, if banks could "magically create money out of thin air", then there would be no such thing as a bank failure. If you quoted an academic source, I might find your argument credible. I don't.



if the agents originating the loans KNEW they were fraudulent, then you have motive bonuses, finacial gain


The agents originating the loans were called mortgage brokers. They are not bankers. They are outside third parties that solicit borrowers for loan applications. They are distinct legal entities from banks. Don't confuse the two.

Taylor, Bean, & Whitaker was not a bank. Neither was Countrywide Mortgage. Get your facts straight.



are you an aplogist for the bankers?

Are you an apologist for borrowers that committed mortgage fraud? You tell me. It appears that you are turning a blind eye to the rather egregious and rampant mortgage fraud that took place at the time of the loan origination. Are you an apologist for real estate speculators? Mortgage Brokers? Appraisers? How about people that lied on their credit application by doctoring their tax returns and inflating their income - Are you an apologist for these criminals as well?



posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by CookieMonster09
 


ever hear of a credit default swap?
or reserve requirements?



now do you explain the fact that houses are being sent to foreclosure while arranging loan modifycation?

the "credit contraction" that caused some of the smaller bank failures was caused because the larger banks could get deposit with the fed at rates higher than their borrowing costs

you know,
0.025% interest cost to borrow,from the fed
fed pays 4.25% to park reserves, at the fed
this caused a contraction in the money markets.


why loan at all easy money for NOT loaning is safer
then a credit contraction hits because its safter and more profitable to park money at the fed.

if fraud is easy to see at these levels,
lending agent,
MBS pool (emails show the people selling this stuff called them #ty investments)
fake ratings on subprimes as AAA
MERS
ROBOSIGNING (fraudulently prepairing documents to perpertrate fraud in court to gain tittle)
SEC filings

i could go on but i think you get the point,
if fraud exists thougout the process
HOW THE #$*% can you say
BLAME THE BORROWER?

i realise the media loves to blame the little guy,
so i can understand,
if you are confused,

xploder



posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by CookieMonster09
 



As we detailed in our series the Wall Street Money Machine, Rekeda was involved in the creation of several CDOs with Magnetar, a hedge fund that helped put together more than $40 billion of the securities. Magnetar often lobbied for riskier assets to be put into the CDOs and then placed bets against many of the investments, reaping tremendous profits when the deals soured. (Magnetar has never been charged with any wrongdoing, and has always maintained that it did not have a strategy to bet against the housing market.) The investigation into Rekeda is one of the few public signs that regulators are considering charges against a top banking executive involved in a Magnetar deal.


this is why i say they couldnt lose,
they bet against their own MBS

source

and acually wanted more risky morgages and bad morgages to add to thier pool or hedge fund.

sounds to me like the banks WANTED more risky investments,
why?
because they made money at every step and if it all callapses,
they knew they would be bailed out.

in the short term bonuses all round,
when a collapse happens,

loan modifcation based on taxpayers own money

IT IS CLEARLY A SCAM

xploder



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 04:53 AM
link   
reply to post by CookieMonster09
 





Yeah, there is a name for this criminal act: Mortgage fraud. If you lie on your credit application, and inflate your income, you have defrauded the lender.


you've missed my point...
some have claimed that they were truthful, but when they got the completed signed paperwork (ya, they signed paperwork with all the info not fill in it) and well, what the paperwork said wasn't what they said....
signing paperwork without all the blanks filled is is stupid, not sure if it is considered fraud or not...
but it wasn't the borrowing that lied, it was the originator of the loan....
ya know, you can still probably "make money online" peddling loans for the bankers!!



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:31 PM
link   


now do you explain the fact that houses are being sent to foreclosure while arranging loan modifycation?

Wow. You put a lot of faith in the word of borrowers in default. Just because they make a false claim that they applied for a loan modification, doesn't make it so.

First, lenders are not required to modify anything. The contract stands on its own two feet. It is purely at the discretion of the lender as to whether they want to modify the loan or not. In many cases, the borrower has proven that they cannot make timely payments due to credit problems, unemployment issues, or medical problems.

The banks are dealing with a borrower showing severe signs of distress, and it is -- unfortunately -- sometimes more economically feasible to foreclose than to continue to waste time, energy, and money on a borrower who simply cannot repay the note, whether it was modified or not.

And, ultimately, most of the time the decision boils down to the bank's assessment of the borrower's character. Yes, that's right. Character. It's the number one credit criteria for making a loan. Does the borrower have enough character to meet this loan obligation? Do they keep their word? Are they honest and trustworthy? During the modification process, have they been truthful? If not, the bank may opt to foreclose rather than deal with a dishonest, untrustworthy individual. Who can blame them?



the "credit contraction" that caused some of the smaller bank failures was caused because the larger banks could get deposit with the fed at rates higher than their borrowing costs


No. The reason these banks failed -- small and large banks mind you -- is because they had bad loans on their books and not enough capital on hand to recoup the losses -- thus placing depositors' money in jeopardy. Banks large and small have failed. And hundreds of them have failed -- Record numbers.

What kind of bad loans? Construction loans to home builders. Residential loans to sub-prime borrowers. Lot inventory loans to speculative residential construction outfits. You get the idea. When the sub-prime crisis hit full steam, it was a domino effect and any loans tied to the residential real estate market got hammered.



MBS pool (emails show the people selling this stuff called them #ty investments) fake ratings on subprimes as AAA MERS ROBOSIGNING (fraudulently prepairing documents to perpertrate fraud in court to gain tittle) SEC filings


You're still missing the point. Listen, MERS doesn't matter if the loan is a good loan. Packaging up loans and selling them on Wall Street isn't a bad deal for investors if the loans are good loans.

However, when the loans at inception are originated through mortgage fraud, then what happens later -- MERS, packaging of loans for sale to investors -- gets ugly.

The cause and root of the problem was rampant mortgage fraud from Borrowers at the inception of the loan. The after-effects of these sub-prime loans are problems with loans packaged and resold to investors, problems with title issues, problems with MERS, etc. These after-effects only occurred because the loans were rotten from the onset.

It's almost like blaming the apple cider for tasting so bad when the root of the problems are the bad apples. The bad apples are the mortgage fraud. Cider is just what takes place after the fact.

Now, I do concur that Wall Street Investment Bankers -- the folks that packaged these rotten apples and sold them as AAA investments -- were criminal in their conduct. Many of these folks knew that these were bad loans and still sold them as rotten apples. Agreed. However, you cannot have this situation without the bad loans originating from mortgage fraud from the onset. Root, cause, after effect.

None of this ever would have happened if borrowers hadn't committed mortgage fraud.



HOW THE #$*% can you say BLAME THE BORROWER?

Because the borrowers committed mortgage fraud, and lied on their loan applications. If they hadn't done so, then there wouldn't have been the problems that resulted later: MERS, Wall Street packaging loans as AAA investments, etc.

Borrowers are the root cause. Retail Banks were defrauded. And yes, Wall Street packagers of these loans made money on the back end, big time.



sounds to me like the banks WANTED more risky investments,

Again, don't confuse the FEW -- Wall St. banks such as Goldman -- with the many -- retail banks that fund mortgages. They are not the same kind of "banks".

We have 4 mega-banks in this country - BOA, Wells, CITI, Chase. They are involved in both retail and investment banking. These big boys play in both sand boxes.



but it wasn't the borrowing that lied, it was the originator of the loan....

It was collusion between both parties -- the mortgage broker and the borrower. Sometimes one, and not the other, sometimes both.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 06:23 AM
link   
reply to post by CookieMonster09
 



sorry, things didn't work the way I thought they should...double post.


edit on 24-2-2012 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by CookieMonster09
 





First, lenders are not required to modify anything. The contract stands on its own two feet. It is purely at the discretion of the lender as to whether they want to modify the loan or not. In many cases, the borrower has proven that they cannot make timely payments due to credit problems, unemployment issues, or medical problems.


are you sure about that, or did the "lender" give up all say in the matter when they sliced and diced all those mortgages and then bundled them up and sold them to a multiple of investors...
maybe the one that is servicing the loan can determine it, but, I seem to recall that one of the problems in the beginning was that the servicer's hand were rather tied in the matter...I may be wrong but do seem to remember something to that line and it might be coming from the time when we had a refi, and was just asking them to do away with the early payment penalty.. so well, if we ever get our jobs stabilized, we'll try it again, but we are kind of stuck at the moment...since both me and my husband seem to spend about half the year working part time at our jobs due to lack of work...



and well, MERS isn't a problem?? really??
I kind of think MERS decimated the property rights in this country!! While if circumvented the laws within many communities that required the tranfer of title and note to be recorded on the local level!! it managed to avoid paying millions of dollars in fees for that transfer, and we wonder why our local gov'ts are in such a mess!! and since they didn't record the transfer anywhere buy some computer database, well, there is no easy way to validate the chain! thus placing everyone's ownership of the home in question!!!

yes all us subprimers were liers!!!
got a question for ya....
does this look like a subprime home to you???
money.cnn.com...

ya, when the rich walk away from their debt obligations, it's a strategic default, but when the normal people do, we cause world wide economic collapse with billions in bailout money necessary to keep the economy on life-support!!!

and got to tell ya something, as one of those subprimers....
we verified our income, honestly, and forthright....we didn't lie...although I think the originator of the loan lied to us, but that is another story....and we are still in our home, and still the bills are paid up, even with both of us working what seems to be close to a half a year part time!!!

I am serious, there's one person I was reading about when their final paperwork was delivered to him, he learned that he had a second job, making a nice sum of money at...he didn't lie, the originator of the loan did!! more money for him!!! the whole mess valued quantity over quality and rewarded people for the number of customers they could get through the door and offered little oversight as to the quality of the work that they were performing...so what do you expect....
but ya, the whole problem could have been avoided, if only the people hadn't lied about their incomes andkept paying on their loans, right!!!
all those people that went under did was open the can of worms and let us all see the mess that had been created!!!

people have had to be foreclosed on for ages, at least one other time in my lifetime in mass!! there was never any need to commit fraud through robosigning to get the people out of their homes, or people who's home was paid for being foreclosed on, or half the crap that has happened this time around!!!
that only happens when the wall street player's bet on weather we will or will not pay on our debt....
it only happens when our debt translates into big money for the few who know what game is being played and how to play it!!!



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   


are you sure about that, or did the "lender" give up all say in the matter when they sliced and diced all those mortgages and then bundled them up and sold them to a multiple of investors...

The borrower is servant to the lender. It has always been that way since time immemorial. Only in America would borrowers be so arrogant and ridiculously ignorant to think otherwise.

A bank can sell its interest in any given loan at any time. In fact, this right to sell is written right into the Mortgage Loan Agreement itself.

Does the management of Exxon have the right to take legal action against an oil wholesaler that stiffs Exxon for an oil delivery bill? Of course. The investors in Exxon are passive investors, and not involved in the daily operations of the business. Same with investors in mortgage securities. These are passive investors. The actual legal action is done by the operating entity servicing the loan itself -- typically a bank or third-party mortgage servicing company.



and well, MERS isn't a problem?? really?? I kind of think MERS decimated the property rights in this country!!


MERS only became a problem after the loans soured. MERS is the result, and mortgage fraud is the cause. While I certainly agree that MERS can potentially cloud the title of a property, it is not the root cause of the meltdown. The cause of the meltdown was loosey-goosey lending to sub-prime borrowers and rampant mortgage fraud. That's what caused the meltdown. MERS is just symptomatic of the root cause.



and got to tell ya something, as one of those subprimers....

Oh, well at least you are honest enough to identify yourself truthfully.



but ya, the whole problem could have been avoided, if only the people hadn't lied about their incomes

If mortgage brokers and borrowers had actually been truthful and given proper disclosures to the banks and lenders, then the crisis would have been averted.

Are you actually advocating and supporting the idea that people should lie on their mortgage loan applications? Are you telling me that you are publicly advocating mortgage fraud, a criminal offense, in a public forum no less?

About the best that you can blame the retail bank lenders for is the following:

- Caving into government bureaucrats who shoved the concept down the throats of the banks that "everyone", including sub-prime borrowers, "deserved" a home
- Loosening credit standards at the behest of the government bureaucrats to such a degree that practically anyone with a pulse could get approved for a residential mortgage.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 05:44 AM
link   


Oh, well at least you are honest enough to identify yourself truthfully.


hey, at least all of our bills are paid up!!! and......we didn't lie about our income.....or any other info we gave for the loan...
matter of fact, about the only time I will lie and when I get sick and tired of someone lying about me or to me!! then it's kind of turns into a no rules game....I might figure one good lie deserves another, or I might just decide to spare the poor person god's damnation and turn their lie into truth, and well, do whatever it was they said I was doing!!!







Are you actually advocating and supporting the idea that people should lie on their mortgage loan applications? Are you telling me that you are publicly advocating mortgage fraud, a criminal offense, in a public forum no less?


no, I am not advocating anything, just pointing out that in some cases it WASN'T the people lying, it was the originators of the loan adding income without them knowing, along with the appraiser, along with the banks who chopped up these loans and bundled and sold them, along with those who were rating these bundles of crap AAA!!! it seems that lying was systematic throughout the whole process!! to say that all this lying wasn't a problem, it was just those pesky sub-primers......when I am sorry, but some of the homes that have gone through the foreclosures ARE NOT SUB -PRIME properties, they are mansions!! ...well, it's not accurate at all!!
we could have all lied on our loan applications, and if it wasn't for them designing mers to circumvent the fees for to participate in the process that has existed and served us so well for probably centuries (filing the tranfer of rights at the local level)...there would have been no need for robosigners and fraud to get the people out of the homes!!! yes, there would have been a mess, just like there has been messes before when there was mass foreclosures, but the mess wouldn't have cost this much money to clean up (and it ain't cleaned up!!)

but let's cut to the chase...
the attorney gerneral of NY along with the attorney generals of many other states foresaw this problem before it blew up!! and they were trying to do something to prevent it...
they were told by the bush administration to keep their hands off, it was a federal problem....
a problem that the bush administration saw fit to ignore!!
so, well, here is what I think is a pretty accurate assessment to the problem....
9/11 happened and bush started two wars, to keep from having to enrage the public over the cost of those wars he hid the costs, cut alot of the money that was destined to go to the states for things like medicare and medicaid out of the budget but not out of the mandates, leaving the states scrambling for funding and finding a hundred and fifty ways to come up with the money to pay it...namely increasing taxes, which led nearly to a tax revolt!! so all of a sudden hey, it's an ownership society, and hey these arms are good!!! well, the people bit, the property values increase, more money going into the local governments, tax revolt averted, timebomb set to go off at the end of his term...
and of course, the lowly subprimers, well, they'd be the scapegoats and get the blame!!

sorry, I ain't no scapegoat!! find another, or blame the who were running the show on the federal level at the time!

like I said, our mortage payments are made on time every month, and will continue to be as long as we don't find out that the title is so muddied that we won't be able to sell it when we want to, then as far as I am concerned, the BANK has committed the breach of contract and the contract is null and void! after all if you had a rare antique that was worth millions and you used it as collateral for a loan and found out that the employee of the bank threw the piece across the floor shattering it into a million pieces, wouldn't you consider that a breech of contract?

as for the little local bank that holds my checking account I have nothing against them. but, well, I also recognize that this whole thing has put them into peril, and made them easy pickings for the big megabanks.
they were forced to take the bailout money, not that they needed it....and well are suffering the repercussions from this mess....and they aren't "too big to fail"..
so well, my guess is that this whole scheme has served a side purpose of consolidating the industry with the idea of those megabanks having a monopoly in the end....
by the way, I am pretty sure there isn't that many million dollar bonuses being handed out at my little local bank either!
edit on 25-2-2012 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by XPLodER

Foreclosure abuse rampant across U.S., experts say


www.reuters.com

(Reuters) - A report this week showing rampant foreclosure abuse in San Francisco reflects similar levels of lender fraud and faulty documentation across the United States, say experts and officials who have done studies in other parts of the country.

The audit of almost 400 foreclosures in San Francisco found that 84 percent of them appeared to be illegal, according to the study released by the California city on Wednesday.

"The audit in San Francisco is the most detailed and comprehensive that has been done - but it's likely those numbers are comparable nationally," Diane Thompson,
(visit the link for the full news article)



I guess we should make a list of things not to do in the future.

We can learn from our mistakes.

-- Lets just pass on all of the - No Doc - loans in the future. Full Doc sounds smarter.

-- This is an easy one. -- If can't afford to buy a home,..................don't buy one.


-- Don't put Barney Frank or Maxine Waters in charge of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.


It's almost as if they created this big real estate mess on purpose.

Hmmm........



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   


hey, at least all of our bills are paid up!!! and......we didn't lie about our income.....or any other info we gave for the loan...

During the run-up to the mortgage crisis, a sub-prime borrower could fairly easily obtain a mortgage for a house they could never have afforded under traditional lending standards. The easiest way to do so was to inflate one's income on the mortgage loan application, and doctor one's tax returns. As a result, you had $10/hour hairdressers suddenly claiming to earn $120,000/year and obtaining credit approvals to purchase million dollar houses.

In a lot of cases, the lender didn't even require tax returns, or supporting information like W-2's to substantiate income.

Worse yet, in most cases, the lender did not even require a down payment. Lending guidelines such as these were very loose. It was a prime opportunity for speculators and criminals to take advantage of the banking system.



I might figure one good lie deserves another

Just because the mortgage broker and the appraiser are criminals, doesn't make it morally acceptable for the borrower to be a criminal as well. If my mortgage broker is committing fraud, then the morally correct action would be to cease doing business with them...immediately, and cancel the transaction. Not turn a blind eye.



just pointing out that in some cases it WASN'T the people lying, it was the originators of the loan adding income without them knowing, along with the appraiser,


Yes. It's called committing mortgage fraud. Sometimes it's the borrower. Sometimes it's the borrower in collusion with the mortgage broker and appraiser. Doesn't matter. Fraud is fraud. And, I just don't buy the argument that borrowers had no clue what was happening at the time. I mean, really? A $10/hour hairdresser can afford a $1MM mansion? Don't you think the hairdresser would think that is quite odd? No, they just "went along" with the fraud, and didn't say a word -- Heck, they now got to live in a mansion, so who wouldn't keep their mouth shut, right?



the attorney gerneral of NY along with the attorney generals of many other states foresaw this problem before it blew up!! and they were trying to do something to prevent it...

Spitzer, right? The radical leftist politician caught in the illegal practice of structuring his cash deposits so he could pay his prostitutes without being caught? Now, there's a winner, and certainly a reliable party, right?



blame the who were running the show on the federal level at the time!

So now rampant mortgage fraud is Bush's fault somehow? Huh? How about the American people take a good hard look in the mirror and take some responsibility for trying to take advantage of the loose lending criteria at the time?



by the way, I am pretty sure there isn't that many million dollar bonuses being handed out at my little local bank either!

No, the local community banks just give out "good-ol'-boy" loans showing favoritism to the friends and cronies of the Board of Directors at these same banks. That's how "community banks" operate.

And "community banks" are some of the worst offenders of loosey-goosey lending, as evidenced by the vast number of community banks that have failed in the past few years. Same with credit unions, who operate outside of the supervisory and regulatory climate to which traditional banks must adhere. Complain all you want about "big banks", but community banks and small credit unions are 10x worse because there is no oversight whatsoever.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by CookieMonster09



hey, at least all of our bills are paid up!!! and......we didn't lie about our income.....or any other info we gave for the loan...

During the run-up to the mortgage crisis, a sub-prime borrower could fairly easily obtain a mortgage for a house they could never have afforded under traditional lending standards. The easiest way to do so was to inflate one's income on the mortgage loan application, and doctor one's tax returns. As a result, you had $10/hour hairdressers suddenly claiming to earn $120,000/year and obtaining credit approvals to purchase million dollar houses.

In a lot of cases, the lender didn't even require tax returns, or supporting information like W-2's to substantiate income.

Worse yet, in most cases, the lender did not even require a down payment. Lending guidelines such as these were very loose. It was a prime opportunity for speculators and criminals to take advantage of the banking system.



I might figure one good lie deserves another

Just because the mortgage broker and the appraiser are criminals, doesn't make it morally acceptable for the borrower to be a criminal as well. If my mortgage broker is committing fraud, then the morally correct action would be to cease doing business with them...immediately, and cancel the transaction. Not turn a blind eye.



just pointing out that in some cases it WASN'T the people lying, it was the originators of the loan adding income without them knowing, along with the appraiser,


Yes. It's called committing mortgage fraud. Sometimes it's the borrower. Sometimes it's the borrower in collusion with the mortgage broker and appraiser. Doesn't matter. Fraud is fraud. And, I just don't buy the argument that borrowers had no clue what was happening at the time. I mean, really? A $10/hour hairdresser can afford a $1MM mansion? Don't you think the hairdresser would think that is quite odd? No, they just "went along" with the fraud, and didn't say a word -- Heck, they now got to live in a mansion, so who wouldn't keep their mouth shut, right?



the attorney gerneral of NY along with the attorney generals of many other states foresaw this problem before it blew up!! and they were trying to do something to prevent it...

Spitzer, right? The radical leftist politician caught in the illegal practice of structuring his cash deposits so he could pay his prostitutes without being caught? Now, there's a winner, and certainly a reliable party, right?



blame the who were running the show on the federal level at the time!

So now rampant mortgage fraud is Bush's fault somehow? Huh? How about the American people take a good hard look in the mirror and take some responsibility for trying to take advantage of the loose lending criteria at the time?



by the way, I am pretty sure there isn't that many million dollar bonuses being handed out at my little local bank either!

No, the local community banks just give out "good-ol'-boy" loans showing favoritism to the friends and cronies of the Board of Directors at these same banks. That's how "community banks" operate.

And "community banks" are some of the worst offenders of loosey-goosey lending, as evidenced by the vast number of community banks that have failed in the past few years. Same with credit unions, who operate outside of the supervisory and regulatory climate to which traditional banks must adhere. Complain all you want about "big banks", but community banks and small credit unions are 10x worse because there is no oversight whatsoever.


60 Minutes has done a few shows on this - mess -.

Apparently, a major player was Countrywide Financial.
- Countrywide Financial -
edit on 25-2-2012 by Eurisko2012 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join