Bank can't foreclose do to paper work error.

[Mitchell Andrus]

The real downside is that he'll never get a clear title. Who'll sign the quit-claim deed?

He's living for free, but soomer or later, somebody's going to win, and it won't be him.

[John Shuk]

Hate to play devils advocate, but civil rights wasnt a bad thing.

But I do agree anytime the Gvmnt touches anything FINANCIAL it turns out to be wreck....

Too many politicians scrapping over who gets their cut and how much. LOL.

Civil Rights of course is a good thing. I just never saw in the constitution where home loans are mentioned.
I don't believe in pure capitalism however when a segment of the population becomes more viable then the banks will naturally move to them for investment as they look for new ways to make money. The gov't just seems to think that bureucrats can make things move better.

[John Shuk]

There are or were a lot of housing market where 2.5 times income isn't going to buy any sort of liveable house. Of course, liberal lending was part of the reasons those markets got so overheated in the first place.

My current house is my first house and I had about 35% equity when I built it in 2001. Even so, the mortgage was more than 2.5 times my income. There is little chance of a foreclosure unless the economy really gets bad.

If these junk loans weren't being made the market would have stabilized at prices people could afford.
I could think of a choice way of saying what was done to folks but it is a family forum.

[keith ouellette]

Wouldn't it be better for the guy to just to pay his mortgage than to keep paying lawyers to sue the bank? I wonder if he pays the property taxes?

If the bank loses my loan paperwork does that mean I don't have to pay off that loan? I have to believe somebody is sending this guy a monthly bill that is going unpaid or they wouldn't be trying to foreclose.

I can't believe somebody who has the finances to take out a $1.5 million mortage would risk a foreclosure on his credit report unless the loan was a fraud to start with.

I don't know what the guy is thinking. I think he is a crook most of all. I don't like banks either But I also don't like thieves. Maybe he figures if he can get a multi million dollar house without using his own money he won't need credit any more. Read the story on bloomberg. It sounds like he has won a number of times and there is no mention of him having a layer. The banks go to court and make a claim and are denied right off because they can't prove they hold the mortgage and the original mortgage holder no longer exist. The guy knows he owes the money to someone.

[Mitchell Andrus]

The letter of the law - and what's right - are often not the same.

[Chris Padilla]

Blame Wall Street for pushing these things in the first place. Greed is good says Gordon Gecko but not in this case.

Any of you read Peter Schiff's "Crash Proof: How to Profit from the Coming Economic Collapse" ?? Scary book that was written in 2006 or 2005...so far, he is pretty much right. He is known as "Dr. Doom".

[John Shuk]

I have a book I bought in 93 called the coming crash in the housing market. Pretty on target as well.

[Jeffrey Makiel]

Before the 1980s, housing always increased in value but at a slow and reasonable rate commensurate with individual earnings.

The housing market in my area became cyclic beginning in the late 1980s when housing rose at an incredible rate then went down in the early 1990s. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, it went up at an incredible rate. Now it's falling again. This has to be a symptom of a deeper illness in our economy in the last 20 years.

Too many non-sensical things dictate the cost of a house these days beyond the value of the materials and labor to make a home. And I fear that these things are emotionally hyped and/or corrupted.

As with the owner of the Florida home, and so with the folks within financial institutions, they are of the same cloth. Unfortunately, as Ken pointed out, nobody holds either of them financially, civil or criminally liable anymore. I believe this absentyeesm of enforcement and oversight also fuels many of our other growing social problems in our country.

-Jeff

[keith ouellette]

Blame Wall Street for pushing these things in the first place. Greed is good says Gordon Gecko but not in this case.

Any of you read Peter Schiff's "Crash Proof: How to Profit from the Coming Economic Collapse" ?? Scary book that was written in 2006 or 2005...so far, he is pretty much right. He is known as "Dr. Doom".

My neighbor has told me about the book. My response was the next big economic collapse is going to have grave consequences for everyone.

Cash won't be king when its worthless. Gold and silver are always worth something to someone but they won't buy order. To this day people find chests of roman gold and silver that were buried by people who thought they would get to come back for their treasure after the Gauls and Vandels were done making a mess of things. They never came back for the treasure.

[Terre Hooks]

..."due to"...

Plus one.



Ten characters added.

[Jon Lanier]

All I can say is that we don't have any right to be happy. But we do have the right to pursue happiness.

(if that makes any sense in this thread... there you go.)

[Phil Thien]

If this guy set out to defraud the lender(s), then I hope he gets his.

OTOH, if he simply hit hard times and is forcing the bank to provide all the documentation, then I say that is fair.

After all, it IS entirely possible that a foreclosure could occur where the WRONG note holder does the foreclosing. Once the mistake is noticed, the TRUE note holder would still want their money. And I guarantee you, they (TRUE note holder) would come after the homeowner AGAIN. There is no doubt in my mind.

So I say insisting that they provide some sort of provenance of the loan is, in fact, in order.

I realize this increases all our costs. But unless it is done, any bank can walk into a court of law and take your house by signing an affidavit saying they are the mortgage holder. And I bet your real note holder wouldn't even lift a finger to help until your several thousand dollars into legal fees.

[keith ouellette]

If this guy set out to defraud the lender(s), then I hope he gets his.

OTOH, if he simply hit hard times and is forcing the bank to provide all the documentation, then I say that is fair.

After all, it IS entirely possible that a foreclosure could occur where the WRONG note holder does the foreclosing. Once the mistake is noticed, the TRUE note holder would still want their money. And I guarantee you, they (TRUE note holder) would come after the homeowner AGAIN. There is no doubt in my mind.

So I say insisting that they provide some sort of provenance of the loan is, in fact, in order.

I realize this increases all our costs. But unless it is done, any bank can walk into a court of law and take your house by signing an affidavit saying they are the mortgage holder. And I bet your real note holder wouldn't even lift a finger to help until your several thousand dollars into legal fees.

Very good point.

[Chad Voller]

Revive the rule of thumb that the house you can afford should not exceed 2.5 times your annual income.

So someone that makes 40K should be buying a $100,000 house? You can't find one of those around here unless it's from 1910 and the house is in need of extensive repairs. Should they then be living in an apartment that charges $750 a month (lowest price you'll find around here without living in the ghetto), which is more than the mortgage payment on a $100,000 home, and prevents them from saving enough to actually buy a home?

Doesn't make it any easier when new home owners get tricked into loans that aren't fixed, and their payments increase $400 a month out of no where, forcing them to sell or claim bankruptcy if they can't get it refinanced.

[Jeffrey Makiel]

I believe Ken's point is that the market will re-adjust with lower housing costs when following this rule instead of folks being scammed into an overpriced home with a volatile variable rate mortgage.

I also believe that we've been denied a corrective recession to fix housing and many other issues. Instead, we've over-extended our worth on a 'sugar high' that is destined to crash. Now, a huge corrective recession seems eminent and our lack of real tangible equity in manufacturing and housing to help buffer this situation is gone.

But, what do I know.

-Jeff