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.

 

NJ town to use EMINENT DOMAIN to help homeowners in forclosure.

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Hey, I'm all for anything that sticks it to the banksters but, I'm not quite sure about this idea.

The NJ town of Irvington is considering using eminent domain to buy homes in forclosure away from the banks and write down the loans for benifit the homeowners.


Irvington to use eminent domain to bail out homeowners in foreclosure

Irvington is the second municipality in the country to declare its intent to use eminent domain to purchase homes in foreclosure, behind Richmond, Calif. Support for the tactic is gaining traction nationwide in municipalities besieged by foreclosures. Irvington's neighbor Newark, as well as Brockton, Mass., Chicago, and Yonkers, N.Y., have floated or are studying the idea.

But the practice, which gives municipalities the power to circumvent mortgage contracts, acquire loans from bondholders, write them down and give them back to the bondholders, is controversial. It has drawn zealous opposition from Wall Street, real estate groups and some in Washington.

But in other places, officials are hoping the plan can help at least a few homeowners whose lives are crippled under the weight of foreclosure and cities that are suffering from blight and scores of abandoned homes. The tactic is gaining the support of social justice groups and, in New Jersey, the state's chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, which has traditionally been wary of using eminent domain.

North jersey.com

They are only going to do this for people who have jobs and are able to pay back the loans.

I'm not comfortable with most uses of eminent domain but, this seems like it come as a real help to regular everyday people. I just can't help but wonder if they will really be better off being in debt to the government instead of to the banksters?




posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I'm a Canadian so I know I got limited input....


Anything that brings it back to local lenders interested in promoting the community we win out .

Individual communities should be self sufficient at the least, and promoted locally.

It's only in the building up of small communities that we may become stronger...disagree? Give it Time to simmer...


Cheers to all of yours and you, whom ever you may be...



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 07:30 PM
link   
With the economy and inflation the way it is, if the current owner doesn't default, then one of the subsequent owners eventually will for most every property!

Which means post foreclosure, virtually all residential property will be government owned, except for foreign owners who aren't dependant on the defuct US dollar nor as indebted to US for taxes up the wazoo.

Enter, state-provided housing. Reminds me of China, where you cant even own the property.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 07:41 PM
link   
This is a bad idea. This just prevents more financially stable investors from buying up foreclosures like they always do.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


This is a good idea and especially in "NICE TOWNS" because they realize empty homes make a neighborhood targets for crimes, undesirables squatting, banks don't care for the lawns and trash on property, until they think they have a buyer maybe, just look to Detroit to prove this, the outcome of all those things then the town becomes undesirable to buyers, so if you have good neighborhoods with good people, with low crimes you tend to want to keep those people in their homes and keep your town nice. Some towns rather make laws forcing banks into caring for the properties to keep them desirable, others do the smarter option. Anyway most of the time even where the laws try to force the banks into caring for the properties, even if they get turned in, it's usually not enforced like it should be which is why I'm guessing this town decided to go with this option.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 09:08 PM
link   

OrphanApology
This is a bad idea. This just prevents more financially stable investors from buying up foreclosures like they always do.



"More financially stable", is that what they're calling the 1 percenters anymore?

If foreclosures become bad investments for the wealthy, it will drive down the prices of the properties to where, maybe, regular, ordinary people can finally afford them without being buried in debt.

People who see homes as investments I could care less about. They are the ones sucking the soul out of our country. Homes belong in the hands of the ones who will live inside them, the ones who will care about them and maintain them to the best of their ability. Investors only see the homes for the money they can extract from them in rents. Owners see a place to raise their families.

Damn the investors. I say lets take this country back for the ordinary man once again.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   

FortAnthem

OrphanApology
This is a bad idea. This just prevents more financially stable investors from buying up foreclosures like they always do.



"More financially stable", is that what they're calling the 1 percenters anymore?

If foreclosures become bad investments for the wealthy, it will drive down the prices of the properties to where, maybe, regular, ordinary people can finally afford them without being buried in debt.

People who see homes as investments I could care less about. They are the ones sucking the soul out of our country. Homes belong in the hands of the ones who will live inside them, the ones who will care about them and maintain them to the best of their ability. Investors only see the homes for the money they can extract from them in rents. Owners see a place to raise their families.

Damn the investors. I say lets take this country back for the ordinary man once again.


Most of the investors in regular foreclosures are not the 1%. They are usually average people who want to fix a place up to sell and rent. Most 1%ers invest in other types of things not a 120k house that has just been foreclosed on.

Any house or apartment you have ever rented is owned by an investor. Landlords are investors.

Any house that is bought from a real estate company that won a foreclosure bid is being bought from an investor. The fact that you honestly think that the 1% of the wealth holders are going to get their hands dirty and waste time chasing a 60-120k home just sheds light on how much you do not know of the process.

I have known about five people that did this and all were middle income working class people who did renovations and worked their asses off.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 08:18 AM
link   

FortAnthem


I just can't help but wonder if they will really be better off being in debt to the government instead of to the banksters?



We're already in debt to the government -- NOT the banksters. This is probably the best kept non-secret within this scam of a mortgage system. The banks do not own our mortgages. They have absolutely zero dollars invested in the mortgage. When the mortgage was originated, the funds were literally created from thin air, and simply added to the balance books with the Federal Reserve. The mortgages are then turned into securities to be sold to investors ("mortgage backed securities" -- MBS). These MBS were often divided into several securities, which were sold to several investors. Many times the same securities were sold to multiple investors simultaneously. Many times these securities were sold as AAA quality investments, but they were more like D quality. The recent $13 billion settlement with JP Morgan is for just this reason: Selling poor quality MBS as high quality to investors.

But since the crash in 08, virtually ALL of these mortgage backed securities are owned (and bought) by the Feds thru one or another government agency; Fannie and Freddie, FHA, USDA, VA, etc. The federal government owns our mortgages. This is exactly what QE3 is all about -- the feds buying these mortgage backed securities and therefore owning virtually every mortgage in the nation. (This is a HUGE red flag for me... nothing good can come from this).

The banksters' job is to simply service the mortgage; i.e., collect payments, issue statements, etc. But the bankster doesn't like people who pay their mortgage on time. The bankster makes more money when the homeowner is delinquent, and even more money when in default, and even more money when they can foreclose. They have used dozens of tricks to create artificial defaults in order to foreclose (forced place insurance, for example). In non-judicial states, where the banksters do not need to take the homeowner to court to foreclose, nor prove their default in any way before foreclosing, homeowners are usually screwed: Most cannot afford the legal costs to hire a lawyer, especially because the banksters have unlimited resources to fight and drag it out. Even if a homeowner can come up with a few thousand as a retainer fee, the monthly fee (plus expenses) is just not do-able. If every empty foreclosed home out there was put on the market, housing prices would absolutely tank... so instead, these homes are left empty to rot, and we continue paying artificially high housing prices which are unsustainable.

In the final analysis, I say more power to the cities. If I have to be in debt to the government, I would definitely prefer my local municipal government to the megalomaniacs in Washington.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join