Skip to main content

View Diary: NY Atty. Gen. Schneiderman LOVES Today's Mortgage Fraud Deal. UPDATED x3 Liz Warren Likes it Too! (261 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm gonna take your house, (5+ / 0-)

    and give you $2k, and you'll be "compensated."

    The two things Teabaggers hate most are: being called racists; and black people.

    "It takes balls to execute an innocent man." -- anonymous GOP focus group member on Rick Perry

    by Punditus Maximus on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 11:32:50 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  More Redstate ... (16+ / 0-)

      ... oversimplification!  How's this:  "I'm not gonna take your house, here's $2,000.00, and you or your State's Attorney General can still sue me."  

      Republicans, like Zombies, just want to get a head.

      by Tortmaster on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 01:07:29 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The 2K only goes to people who DID lose their home (7+ / 0-)

        So, that is indeed the total compensation offered to victims of robosigning in this settlement.

        2K for losing their homes in an illegal process. There are larger fines in my state for speeding. In an actual foreclosure, the banks will often pay out voluntarily 3K or more to get the homeowner out - "cash for keys" which just speaks to the point that this "penalty" is in the same category as a nuisance expense to the banks.

        No matter how you look at it, this penalty as assessed is laughable and an insult to the homeowners.

        I doubt very seriously than any of these victimized homeowners has the funds to pursue their own  individual cases against the banks in pursuit of real justice and a compensation commensurate for the crimes committed

        Crime pays.

        “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR

        by Phoebe Loosinhouse on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 03:28:57 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  $2K to people that defaulted and would've been (10+ / 0-)

          foreclosed on in the normal course of business.  

          •  And those that defaulted in the ABNORMAL course (6+ / 0-)

            of business.

            I will post over and over and over again if I have to that a significant number of foreclosed homeowners were PUSHED into default by their servicers. Here is my now standard reply to all those who continually post the "it's just a bunch of deadbeats losing their homes" meme:

            It's called "servicer induced default". Google that phrase if you would like to educate yourself.

            In a nutshell:

             homeowners who were CURRENT on their mortgages had misapplied payments, interest and penalties that they could never get corrected.

            Homeowners who were CURRENT on their mortgages had "forced placed insurance" that duplicated already existing insurance. Because the homeowner couldn't afford the bogus new expense, they were foreclosed on.

            Homeowners who were CURRENT on their mortgages but who were looking for a modification, were told by the servicers that they had to be delinquent in order to qualify for the modification. They TOLD homeowners to miss 2 payments! Too bad for the homeowner because then they were caught in a spiraling web of penalties, interest, bogus additional fees and expenses, etc. and were pushed into foreclosure.

            If your response is that these cases are rare and anecdotal, that is completely untrue. These cases were prevalent and widely reported to the authorities and to the courts. The fact that they were so prevalent is the reason for this settlement in the first place, paltry as it is.

            “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR

            by Phoebe Loosinhouse on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 04:50:42 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  But isn't litigation still an option for them? (5+ / 0-)

              That's my understanding. If the facts support the case you can still sue.

              •  Yes, the wronged homeowner can still take on the (5+ / 0-)

                banking entities that the government just rolled over for and sue them on their own if they really want an equitable compensation for the crimes they were subjected to.

                Yes, you are right, that is still an option.

                They and their now government funded Legal Aid attorney can take on the industry and attempt to do a better job than the entire Justice Department and all the State AGs.

                Very comforting.

                “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR

                by Phoebe Loosinhouse on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 05:12:21 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  But the AGs (6+ / 0-)

                  will still be investigating wrongdoing, which could be used in a criminal case or in a class action suit.
                  This isn't the end of this for homeowners by a long shot.

                  If you can separate sex from procreation, you have given women the ability to participate in society on an equal basis with men. -Gloria Feldt

                  by skohayes on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 05:21:53 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Yes, but THIS was the signature 16 month long (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    mightymouse, cslewis, semiot

                    investigation that wasn't an investigation that was supposed to definitively address the issues of robosigning and foreclosure fraud.

                    THIS was the where the combined force and weight of the Justice Department and all the AGs together were supposed to prove to the banks and the homeowners and the taxpayers that yes, justice would prevail and the miscreants would be punished.

                    Only it didn't and they weren't.

                    So why is a stand alone state investigation supposed to yield better results?

                    “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR

                    by Phoebe Loosinhouse on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 05:35:19 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  There were about 6 or 7 states (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      etherealfire, PsychoSavannah

                      that had their own investigations going on. Now there will be a federal task force with several states AG and the power of the federal government behind them.
                      There will also be criminal investigations going on, and one bank has already been criminally prosecuted:

                      The criminal prosecution was one of the first to target those who sold complex investments called collateralized debt obligations that were based on the valuations of mortgages. The securities - baskets of mortgage bonds - have been blamed by some for contributing to the housing bubble and its spectacular collapse.
                      The probe - which focuses on activities in 2007 and 2008 - centers on exaggerations that brokers made about the value of subprime mortgage securities. Authorities say brokers enticed investors to pour money into the securities market for subprime mortgages by making the market sound healthy.

                      Read more here: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/...

                      If you can separate sex from procreation, you have given women the ability to participate in society on an equal basis with men. -Gloria Feldt

                      by skohayes on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 06:46:32 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                •  But isn't that the difference btwn indiv and class (0+ / 0-)

                  I'm not a lawyer, but I thought that was part of it too.  There will be individuals who have strong cases but there were many others that did not, that probably, sadly, would have gone into foreclosure anyway.

                  Am I wrong on that? Really am trying to understand.

            •  The situation you are posting is not common. (4+ / 0-)

              High cost forced placed insurance, ridiculously high fees for drive by appraisals, misapplied payments, and all the rest of the abusive fees did occur-- but generally not to people who were current on their mortgages. It was typically only when people would miss payments that they would get caught in this vortex of fees.

              Some homeowners were apparently told (or thought they were told) by their banks to default in order to qualify for a modifications.   These homeowners who were actually told by their banks to default have a good case that they were financially damaged, and their lawsuits against the banks can proceed.   But in many cases in which borrowers in good standing were told to default on their mortgages to get a modification, it was in fact not the bank who told them this, but some third party scam artist who sold them on the idea that they could get their payment reduced.  In many cases like this, the bank told correctly them that they did not qualify for a mod, but the homeowner was greedy and did not want to hear that, and they unfortunately turned to the third party scam artist who told them what they wanted to hear.  

              •  You say that the abuses only occurred to people (0+ / 0-)

                already in default - based on what? Your opinion that this is the truth? I know that it is not the truth by reading and following this issue closely for years now.

                Probably 20 minutes of Googling could show you how much in error you are:

                NYT- How to Handle Force Placed Insurance

                That article is from last month replete with examples of current homeowners subjected to force placed insurance.

                You might give this a look as well, also filled with examples of current homeowners who became the victims as their servicers ran roughshod over them.

                Senate Testimony from Attorney from The national Consumer Law Center

                I actually don't even understanding the point you seem to be trying to make - that only homeowners in default were victimized by abusive fees - does that somehow make it less horrible in your eyes? It was abusive and illegal practice, regardless of whether the homeowner was in the current or default status.

                “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR

                by Phoebe Loosinhouse on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 09:04:45 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Allow me to amend my comment. (0+ / 0-)

                  It was typically only when people would miss payments or when they were otherwise in default that they would get caught in this vortex of fees.

                  Insuring your home is a condition of a mortgage.  If you don't keep the insurance requred in the mortgage contract, you are in default on the terms of your mortgage, and yes, you will then likely get caught in the vortex of fees.

                  Fortunately, most people who have a mortgage understand that they must insure their home, and so they carry the required insurance themselves.  If you don't, it is true: your bank will get the insurance for you, and charge you some outrageous amount for it.  

                  •  Why not try reading the articles I linked to? (0+ / 0-)

                    Particularly the NYT one.

                    You don't seem to understand the concept of force placed insurance as it applies to the concept of mortgage servicer abuse.

                    Yes, we all know you have to keep your house insured if you have a mortgage.

                    “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR

                    by Phoebe Loosinhouse on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 09:33:17 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

          •  Such Bullshit--"Forclosed On in the Normal Course (0+ / 0-)

            of business."

            Try to pay attention---The sole reason for the fraudulent document forclosures was the the mortgage servicers were unable to show they had the right to forclose on properties.  Because they had no proof, they manufactured fraudulent documents to supply phony proof of the right to forclose.  

            Simply put, they would never be able to forclose in the normal course of business, so they needed to make shit up.

      •  The best thing about all of this (0+ / 0-)

        is that Obama could have used large coin seignorage to just make a $2k coin, pass it out to the "deserving" homeowners, and avoided the banks altogether.

        The two things Teabaggers hate most are: being called racists; and black people.

        "It takes balls to execute an innocent man." -- anonymous GOP focus group member on Rick Perry

        by Punditus Maximus on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 10:20:22 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site