Skip to main content

View Diary: Take Action! Obama Administration and Banks Close to Unacceptable Foreclosure Settlement (20 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Both have responsibility. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe, 2laneIA, lurkyloo

    Homeowners had the responsibility to agree only to what they could pay, but they were given false information by the loan officers and were encouraged to lie on the applications.  The loan officers collected huge bonuses, the homeowners paid money to the banks, the loans were sold off ultimately to suckers so the loan officers had no reason to not repeat their actions again and again, and now that the "owners" can't pay their mortgages anymore, all the money they'd been paying for all those years is now just gone.  They have no equity because of the lies given to them by the loan officers.  Lies which should not have been allowed to be made.

    In addition, now the banks which own the mortgages are busy foreclosing on people when they don't legally own the mortgages with the active assistance of courts.  It's the government's responsibility to enforce the laws and the contracts, and the government is not doing so.  Instead, they're trying to whitewash all the illegalities so that the banks get away with it, people lose their homes and the ones who broke the laws chasing big bonuses are allowed to laugh all the way to the Caymans.

    Yes, people shouldn't have signed for more than they could afford.  Loan officers shouldn't have been allowed to say "sure, you can refinance that loan in 2-3 years when the rate adjusts" without having to have some guarantee on that.  Most people believed that those bankers had some duty to speak the truth, and in reality, the bankers/loan officers lied their asses off because they knew nobody was looking over their paperwork and it would be sold multiple times before anyone would, at which point there was no way they'd have to answer for their manipulations.

    Furthermore, those real estate titles were packaged and sold to pension funds and investors as AAA rated when even the companies selling them were betting that they'd fail.  That's further evidence of wrong-doing, and the ones holding the bag are people who didn't get the huge bonuses for creating the crap.  

    Only the federal government has the power to go after these gangsters and it sounds like they're trying hard to avoid doing their duty to the public.  

    Banks got bailed out, People got sold out.

    •  Agree on all but one thing (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ColoTim, splashoil, gooderservice
      Only the federal government has the power to go after these gangsters

      There was a reason that Eliot Spitzer was called the Sheriff of Wall Street.  The NY AG has tremendous power because so much of the financial industry is located there and it has strong laws.  Eric Schneiderman is putting those powers to good use.  MERS is a Delaware corporation and Beau Biden is going after it.  Catherine Cortez-Masto is suing BofA in Nevada.  There will be more of this, I predict.

      Looking on the bright side, when the feds get involved sometimes they preempt states and private actors.  So in the circumstance, as here, when they have no intention of imposing any accountability from the federal level, it's a good thing if they can't stop the state prosecutors who want to, you know, prosecute.

      •  I got the message from the diary that the (0+ / 0-)

        fed action would prevent even those state AG's who wanted to pursue this from having the power to go forward.  Must have misread it (not uncommon).  I recall Massachusett's AG was also not settling for the minimum, but that, too, could be only in my mind.

        Here in Colorado, our AG is only happy if he's challenging "Obamacare".

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site