It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
“A Bank of America Corp. (BAC) unit conducting home foreclosures in Utah is violating the law, the attorney general said in a letter as individual states advanced their investigations of mortgage servicing.
ReconTrust Co. isn’t meeting requirements for carrying out foreclosures in the state, Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff said in a letter to Bank of America Chief Executive Officer Brian Moynihan. The letter, dated May 19, was released today by Shurtleff’s office.
All real estate foreclosures conducted by ReconTrust in the state of Utah are not in compliance with Utah’s statutes, and are hence illegal,” Shurtleff wrote.
Over 62 million mortgages are now held in the name of MERS, an electronic recording system devised by and for the convenience of the mortgage industry. A California bankruptcy court, following landmark cases in other jurisdictions, recently held that this electronic shortcut makes it impossible for banks to establish their ownership of property titles—and therefore to foreclose on mortgaged properties. The logical result could be 62 million homes that are foreclosure-proof.
The lesson here? When you borrow money to buy something, you don't own it until the money is paid back. Most children understand that.
Originally posted by Danbones
because of derivitives and credit default swaps...Gambling losses that are actually outright theft...
the banks had to get a whole bunch of assets onto the books or they would go under
so they inflated the hell out of house prices on the way up to create the financial vehicles based on debt
and then used those fictional values gained by illegal forclosures to stay solvent.
just googled "illegal forclosures legal" looking to see how that story was progressing, and i found this:
5,000 Active-Duty Military Foreclosures Reviewed for Violations of Law
my sympathies OP... every homeless person due to evil
...veterans are terrorists dontcha know?
also eminent domain has been used to take houses from people who own them and they are then sold to private companies..in one case a pharma company in Virginnia I think it was..the home owners lost their homes and had to PAY over 60,000 dollars as a penalty for fighting it.
This guy needs to have all of his paperwork gone over for irregularties from the securtizating process.
Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by XPLodER
Hi, XPlodER. Nice to see you join the discussion.
Nice graph! I hadn't seen that before.
Some people will always believe that the bank can do no wrong and everyone who got booted from their homes are deadbeats.
I'm so happy that some of us aren't drinking the kool-aid.
Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
I understand how the pendulum swings both ways, but we're talking about this man's issue in this thread and how I can identify with him and his situation. There are several threads about people taking a bigger bite than they could chew, but that isn't happening in this case. I just don't want to junk up this thread with all the other circumstances surrounding the housing crisis. The bottom line in this case is that he tried to pay and they wouldn't take his money. A bank cannot decide to reject legal tender. If they wanted him out, they should have found a better way. I'm sorry to see that he folded by moving out, but the bank should have to explain their actions. They should not be allowed to simply pick and choose whose money they are going to accept. Not to mention, his house was still vacant. They hadn't even sold it yet, so what's the deal with that? The bank is just allowing it to rot instead of allowing someone to live there so it can be tended to, which also keeps the value of the houses around it from falling? Very wasteful if you ask me.