Skip to main content

This is a fantastic, eight minute overview on how the foreclosure crisis works. In it, Rep. Alan Grayson walks through from the beginning of the crisis with the mortgage buying and selling free for all through the problem today, when the multiple sales of paper, poor record keeping and basic not giving a damn on the part of lenders have led to people being fraudulently foreclosed upon. Grayson gives four real examples.

Grayson has been shining a light on the fraudulent foreclosure crisis, including Fannie Mae's "use of powerful law firms—some of which have been accused of breaking the law—to handle foreclosures," and his request to the Florida Supreme Court to halt mortgage foreclosure cases handled by firms already under investigation.

In part because of Grayson's efforts, the issue is getting national attention.

The foreclosure machinery that has forced millions of Americans out of their homes is beginning to seize up as some lenders and their lawyers are accused of cutting corners in their pursuit of rapid home repossessions.

Evictions are expected to slow sharply, housing analysts said, as state and national law enforcement officials shine a light on questionable foreclosure methods revealed by two of the country’s biggest home lenders in the last two weeks.

Even lenders with no known problems are expected to approach defaulting homeowners more cautiously and look more aggressively for resolutions short of outright eviction....

GMAC has acknowledged legal missteps in processing mortgages, and JPMorgan Chase  has acknowledged the possibility of missteps, and both have suspended all foreclosures in the 23 states where they need a court’s approval. That’s 56,000 in the case of Chase alone; GMAC declined to provide a number.

Attorneys general in half a dozen states are demanding action or opening investigations. The Treasury Department said Thursday it was asking regulators to look into “these troubling developments.”

It's a start, and finally it looks like the homeowners might actually catch a break in this crisis. But I'm with Atrios, it's time to start arresting these guys.

In the meantime, let's keep Grayson in Congress.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 06:46 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  WTF? nobodies been arrested? Where's Pres Obama? (9+ / 0-)

    why hasn't he seen that the laws were upheld?

    80 % of success is just showing up... Put that coffee DOWN; Coffee's for closers..only

    by Churchill on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 06:51:38 AM PDT

    •  DoJ is tied in knots by Republican obstruction. (12+ / 0-)

      Leura Canary, the wife of a Republican operative tied to Karl Rove is still USA in Alabama even after her outrageous political prosecution of Don Siegelman.

      The DoJ can't get new USAs confirmed because of Republican holds.

      Obama and the Dems need to fight the obstruction harder.

      look for my DK Greenroots diary series Thursday evening. "It's the planet, stupid."

      by FishOutofWater on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 06:59:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not to mention left over staffers, and even (3+ / 0-)

        career civil service who are loyal republicans, who see it as their duty to blocking everything that does not favor the corporations.

        •  Blame the GOP is pure bunk (7+ / 0-)

          Ian Walsh, William Black, and a number of others began arguing, more than two years ago, that the financial crisis was the result of pervasive fraud from bottom to top. Black wrote repeatedly that the entire financial system had become a "crimonegenic environment."

          Asswipes, including on here, who I believe make a living in the financial system, loudly and repeatedly tried shout us down.

          Here's part of what I wrote as a suggested speech for President Obama on Fri Feb 06, 2009:

          If I were President . . . [Ending Wall Street's rule]

          The same legal principle of odious debt may be extended to the millions of mortgages that were sold on false pretenses, serving only to boost the earnings and bonuses of mortgage brokers and bankers. There is a complete circle of fraud here, beginning with home buyers who were often encouraged to lie about their incomes. The banks and brokers committed fraud, not just by encouraging people to lie, but also by failing to perform the due diligence required to estimate the credit worthiness of a home buyer. The companies that bought these mortgages and bundled them together committed fraud by deliberately under-estimating the risk of cascading defaults, and by failing to inform buyers of these sophisticated instruments of their full complexity and credit risk.

          Clearly, however, where the greatest tragedy lies is in the suffering and anguish of individual human beings who are forced out of their homes. Almost all these people to some extent placed their trust in the banks and brokers that sold them mortgages to deal fairly and not place them in a situation in which they could not make the payments. This was misplaced trust.

          But stopping these individual tragedies may be the easiest thing we can do at this point. I am deputizing as Federal Marshalls all county marshals and other local law enforcement officials responsible for carrying out home foreclosures, and ordering them to immediately cease all foreclosure proceedings on residential properties. I am also instructing them to insist that all creditors that have begun foreclosure proceedings on residential properties must produce clear titles and documentation of liens to the property. If the mortgage holder refuses to work with the court and the home owner to keep the home owner in the residence, I am instructing these new Federal Deputies to seize the residence on behalf of the home owner, to protect the homeowner in that residence, and to oppose all further proceedings against that property.   (See Amy Goodman’s article on what Rep. Marcy Kaptur has been telling her constituents: Facing foreclosure? Don't leave. Squat.)

          Our banking system is comprised of over 8,000 institutions, but the crises we face is actually the result of the policies and actions of only a handful of the largest institutions. I have directed the Secretary of the Treasury, the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Director of the FDIC to work with the Federal Reserve in taking effective control of the large banks and financial institutions the taxpayers already own. These institutions are: Citigroup, Bank of America, JPMorganChase, Wells Fargo, and to a lesser degree, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley.

          According to information collected by the Comptroller of the Currency, almost 90 percent of financial derivatives activities are concentrated in just these six institutions. We have yet to determine how much of each institution’s financial derivatives activities are fraudulent, as in the case of credit default swaps discussed above, but we will move quickly to identify, and invalidate those contracts.

          I believe that the time for bold actions such as these were the first 100 days of the administration. Just swing into frenetic action, like Franklin Roosevelt's administration, and force the GOP and other opponents to play catch up. Instead, President Obama accepted as legitimate the political credibility of the Rethuglicans, and the economic credibility of the big financial institutions. It was a huge mistake, and millions of ordinary Americans are paying the price, while the President has yet to admit he was wrong.

          A conservative is a scab for the oligarchy.

          by NBBooks on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:22:06 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  yep, Obama's moral authority? acquiesced to the (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            yoduuuh do or do not

            criminal elements in the GOP

            80 % of success is just showing up... Put that coffee DOWN; Coffee's for closers..only

            by Churchill on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:24:41 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Sigh... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            The Nose, Churchill, Foxwizard

            And it has resulted in the Average Joe not telling the difference between GOP and Dems.  And it is going to cost the Dems and the nation dearly in November.

            "Nothing great was ever achieved with out enthusiasm." -Ralph Waldo Emerson

            by RichM on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:29:57 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Democrats' Fault (4+ / 0-)

              It should be blatantly obvious what is the difference between Democrats and Republicans in this election. That it isn't, that Republicans are increasing their power instead of losing it completely, is Democrats' fault. They have the majority because Americans thought they'd be significantly better than Republicans, but they blew it.

              "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

              by DocGonzo on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:44:24 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Fish for selling. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            trillian, Angie in WA State

            X sells a barrel of fish to Y for $10, telling him that he can get $20 for it.  Y sells that barrel to Z for $20, telling him that he can get $30 for it. Z sells the barrel for $30 . . .

            Finally sombody opens the barrel and the fish is rotten.  Everybody sues upline.  Everybody upline has the same defense: "We didn't say it was fish for eating."

            This crisis began when homes became fish for selling.

            Human reason treads water in a sea of animal impulses.

            by legalarray on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:40:11 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  I computerized a mortgage lender. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            The Nose, NBBooks

            I created systems for a mortgage lender from loan origination, through application processing, underwriting, closing and secondary marketing (the sale of the mortgage to a large corp who then selects a servicer). This was in the mid to late '90s.

            Systemic structural deficiencies in documentation at that time were rare, but they did happen. During that time "junk loans" were becoming popular with the brokers who preferred the shadier, more profitable  loans ($5000 worth of points to the broker build into loan principle). ... We used to call them "Hey, Guido" loans.

            As an employee, protesting against such practices were simply pushed aside with the explanation, "you don't know the whole picture".

            Even then recordkeeping and filings in local Clerks of Court were becoming a logistical nighmare. I know. I created electronic links to major banks world-wide to try perfecting this process.

            The company's Risk Management Officer, an honest, straight-shooter, and I would have an after work drink occasionally. He and both would commiserate that we were in a vise ... go along and keep your job or do what's right and lose it.

            From what I can see, those trends just continued over the years until they came home to roost ... with homeowners, lenders, insurers, banks and investors. Apparently, the path to perdition may be slow ... but inevitable.

            Political Correctness Police: may your puckered, disapproving lips forever cover your donuts.

            by FeloniousMonk on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:36:20 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Recess appointments? WTF? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RichM, Randtntx

        80 % of success is just showing up... Put that coffee DOWN; Coffee's for closers..only

        by Churchill on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:13:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I was with you until you said this.... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        flhiii88

        Obama and the Dems need to fight the obstruction harder.

        Why is every fight someone else's fight? Where is the "we" in your statement as in We need to fight the corrupt Republicans harder?

        One man, not even a President and his allies in Congress can change all about this country that needs to be changed!  Especially not in 22 months! I am so tired of everyone looking to President Obama to fix everything! He is not a slave or Superman. He is a very good man who is doing everything he can in the time that he has to change America to what it should be.  

        This country did not get in this shape in twenty two months.  It took years of illegal activities with the government looking the other way for our system to get this corrupt.

        What were you doing while that was happening? As long as people were not indiviually touched they did not care.  They went on about their business while Republicans were selling off more and more of the country, sending all of the jobs overseas and changing the tax laws to favor the rich with unearned income while penalizing those who worked for a living.  Who was trying to stop it while this corrupt system was being put into place??  Who?

        Get 10 people you know to commit to vote Democratic on November 2

        by Blogvirgin on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:27:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  He Blew the Stimulus (0+ / 0-)

          Obama didn't pass the Big Stimulus that so many said publicly was necessary. He didn't even fire anyone when it became clear that he hadn't been shown the Big Stimulus analysis, and that it was the analysis that he needed to follow.

          So no, he hasn't been doing everything he can. And that's just the most undeniable example.

          He's the president and the Democrats are the Congressional majority. They are the ones whose job it is to fix these things. Our job is to vote for them, to advocate for the right solutions, to get more people to vote for them. We have done that; we do that every day.

          We are doing our job. Obama and the Democrats are not doing theirs.

          "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

          by DocGonzo on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:47:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Of course I see this differently. In my opinion: (0+ / 0-)

            Obama didn't pass the Big Stimulus that so many said publicly was necessary. He didn't even fire anyone when it became clear that he hadn't been shown the Big Stimulus analysis, and that it was the analysis that he needed to follow.

            1.  With regard to the Big Stimulus as you call it.  There were a fairly equal number of economists on both sides of the issue of the size of the stimulus.
            1.  Christina Romer advocated for and wrote a larger stimulus and could not get it past her peers in the administration, therefore it was not one of the options presented to the President.
            1.  The bill only passed the Senate with the help of three Republicans. It was difficult to get those three votes with the size of the bill that was passed. It would have been impossible with a larger bill.
            1. Romer, Orzag, Summers have all left or are in the process of leaving. All have indicated some responsibility for the size of the Stimulus Bill passed.
            1. The advocacy on the left seems to consist of "Obama is a sellout" written on numerous left blogs.  What about getting out and advocating in a hostile environment to change the mind of those on the right and giving more visible support to those who are in office trying to do the right thing?  
            1. If "We" were doing our jobs, the Democrats would have been leading in the generic polls for this election from day one and we would not be fighting this fight from behind.  And, I might add, no one has fought harder in this cycle while still doing one hell of a job governing than the President of the United States.

            Sorry, I have to go now, I have phone banking and data entry from our last phone bank to do.

            Get 10 people you know to commit to vote Democratic on November 2

            by Blogvirgin on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:05:13 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  That's Obama's Fault (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RichM

        After the deep and well known corruption caused by Bush/Cheney/Gonzales(/Ashcroft/Mukasey) at the "Justice" Department, Obama had better justification than any previous president to replace every US Attorney who wouldn't execute Obama's justice policies. And all Obama's predecessors replaced most of the US Attorneys. Obama could have replaced all of them.

        There is no excuse for Obama leaving in place Republicans or anyone else who obstructs him at the "Justice" Department. But Obama has indeed continued and expanded many hideous Bush policies through the "Justice" Department, like protecting torturers.

        The propaganda that Obama can claim all the successes of the past couple years but none of the failures are his fault is exactly the kind of blind partisanship that kept Bush/Cheney at work destroying justice for 8 long years. And so it will do for Obama.

        "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

        by DocGonzo on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:29:52 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Laws are for the Poor. (7+ / 0-)

      Spray tons of carcinogens into the ocean to hide petroleum spewed from a hastily-drilled hole from a greedy corporation, but don't smoke pot.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:15:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  He's only been in office for 20 months, (0+ / 0-)

      What do you want instant progress?

      For the elite there are no material problems, only PR problems. Time for a new elite.

      by Paul Goodman on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:32:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  20 Months Isn't Instant (0+ / 0-)

        No, what I want is for the first half of Obama's term to have used the many crises to change the way government ran the economy after Bush/Cheney got done with it.

        Now it's too late to use the crisis to power the fixes. It's too late to use the large Democratic majorities that will be mostly gone in a month or three.

        20 months is a long time. 20 months after 9/11/2001 Bush had invaded Iraq.

        The "Obama isn't that powerful" talk is really impossible to believe.

        "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

        by DocGonzo on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:51:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  "The president shall see that the saws are upheld (0+ / 0-)

    80 % of success is just showing up... Put that coffee DOWN; Coffee's for closers..only

    by Churchill on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 06:52:10 AM PDT

  •  Title insurers are getting cold feet (12+ / 0-)

    You basically can't get a mortgage on a home purchase without title insurance.  Title insurers have been getting a free ride before the mortgage crisis because it was a very rare instance where there would be a problem with the title.  Now,  there could be a problem with some of the homes that were foreclosed and sold.  This will cause the foreclosure market to dry up.  

    •  Not to mentiona all other sales.... n/t (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lcork
    •  This is key (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wsexson, lcork, yoduuuh do or do not

      I think that in most cases courts believe, correctly, that the failure is technical.  But that's not the end of it, because the technical failures don't just affect whether you can "prove" you own the mortgage and have the right to foreclose -- if you can't prove you own the mortgage you can't prove you have title upon foreclosure.  Eventually, someone is going to object to that state of affairs, and often enough, especially where more than one institution claims "ownership" the title insurer is going to get screwed.  Why it has taken title insurers so long to figure this out is the big mystery.  

      Shame on the courts that have overlooked these "technical" failures in order to hurry foreclosures through the system.  These "tecnhicalities" (e.g., filing of mortgages in county registers) are what make property law workable in a system where lots of transactions are the norm.  (Two hundred years ago they weren't nearly as important since everyone "knew" who owned what.)

    •  yes/no (0+ / 0-)

      Yes, title insurance underwriters are getting cold feet.  No question.  

      But no...

      insurers have been getting a free ride before the mortgage crisis because it was a very rare instance where there would be a problem with the title.

      This is not accurate.  There were still plenty of claims to go around before the mortgage crisis, just not the apocolyptic level of claims that could be coming if the title insurance underwriters continue to insure millions of foreclosed properties that may or may not have been handled improperly.  And the claims were due to all sorts of things, but not system-wide fraud and incompetence.

      And seriously, lenders should not expect that they can create a cloud on the title of millions upon millions of properties across the country, and then turn around and have someone else insure the title and pay them a claim when the title can't be defended due to the improper foreclosure.  It would be like an arsonist trying to collect on a fire insurance policy, except that the problem is nation-wide and potentially every lender and loan servicing company may be involved.  No title insurance company could withstand that level of claims, it's not a reasonable expectation.

      The Republican Extremist Agenda favors tax cuts for millionaires and benefit cuts for Social Security and Medicare.

      by lcork on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 09:48:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Why only 23 states? (0+ / 0-)

      I used to practice law in NH, one of the states that generally does not require a court proceding for foreclosures. Seems to me the same problem of people signing affidavits without actually looking at the file must be tainting the non-judicial foreclosures as well. A false affidavit is perjury whether it's presented to the court, or just filed in the Registry of Deeds. Anyone know what's going on in the non-judicial foreclosure states?

  •  Icelanders stormed parliament (15+ / 0-)

    over the failure to prosecute the criminals that brought down their economy.

    Americans are angry about the crimes and corruption but corporate funded scams like the "Tea Party" have diverted anger away from the real culprits.

    Good for Grayson. He goes after the real bad guys and gets us back on target.

    look for my DK Greenroots diary series Thursday evening. "It's the planet, stupid."

    by FishOutofWater on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 06:54:49 AM PDT

  •  i agree , arrest these guys (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    trillian, DocGonzo

    but also arrest that person make $40k a year buying a $800k house. without those folks the mortgage peddlers would only have been spinning their wheels. all need to be held accountable.

    "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." ~ Mark Twain

    by VoiceFromIowa on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 06:57:23 AM PDT

    •  And What (11+ / 0-)

      If that borrower was TOLD that they could afford a home by their mortgage broker? A mortgage broker that manufactured documents if necessary (almost always with no knowledge of the homeowner, who usually was asked to sign their 1003 blank and late -- in COE) to make the appliction look like the loan was affordable? Brokers who were "independent" on paper but whose business was largely tied to a couple of lenders who deliberately did not their due diligence (aka underwriting) even when documents indicated that something was wrong? Even when federal law requires it?

      Should that homeowner, in the end, go to jail for mere ignorance?

      You have to work in this field to understand why your position, 95% of the time, is punishing an innocent victim.  Don't believe the market hype about who is responsible.  You'd be categorically wrong.

      If you don't stand for something, you will go for anything. Visit Maat's Feather

      by shanikka on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:04:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  i would like to think that i know (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        yoduuuh do or do not

        what i can afford and cannot afford. and if saying people are that ignorant that they do not know that basic economic principle then god help us all. our grandparents knew it, our parents knew it. live within your means.

        but i submit, i do not work in this field. all i can see is intentionally reckless behavior that those who were prudent are now being asked to forgive and forget.

        "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." ~ Mark Twain

        by VoiceFromIowa on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:12:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You just simply wrong. You have been convinced (7+ / 0-)

          by your corporate masters that the wrong doers are the little people, the victims. It is sad how easily and regularly the corporate masters are able to do that.

          I agree with the previous commenter. You would have to have worked in the industry to see how pervasive the fraud was and how people were often fraudulently given loans they could not afford and convinced that they could. The interest only loans were perfect vehicles for that.  I have never seen a person with a 40,000 income purchase an $800,000 house even with the most favorable loan product.  Until you can link to facts to support that statement, you should not use it.

          Get 10 people you know to commit to vote Democratic on November 2

          by Blogvirgin on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:35:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The Lenders Should be Shot (0+ / 0-)

            No question.  But the essential ingredient in this kind of fraud is greed. Almost anyone who has ever though about buying a house has heard the old saw "your mortgage shouldn't be more than 2.5 times your income."  There were plenty of stories in the papers of people making a quarter of what I make and buying houses more expensive than I'd ever feel comfortable buying This one was particularly interesting

            This problem will occur again if we don't fully understand why it happened.

            Give me government-run healthcare over Wall Street-run healthcare anyday...

            by trillian on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:04:55 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Since I have worked in the industry for (5+ / 0-)

              over 20 years I feel like I have a really good handle on what happened. I saw it developing and then come to fruition. I lost a lot of income because for nearly three years I could not make a decent income because I refused to participate.  Republicans have promoted a Greed is good posture since Reagan was elected and a lot of Democrats (the average man in the street) bought into it hook line and sinker.

              There were plenty of stories in the papers of people making a quarter of what I make and buying houses more expensive than I'd ever feel comfortable buying.

               Who owns the newspapers? Corporate masters. Whose advantage was it to turn Americans with modest homes or who did not own homes against those who did? Corporate Masters.  When the question of who ultimately profitted is asked, and at every level the answer is the corporations we have a problem that goes beyond your neighbor who had a better house than you.

              Get 10 people you know to commit to vote Democratic on November 2

              by Blogvirgin on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:15:24 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  what surprises me (0+ / 0-)

              Is that no one thought through the what if aspects.

              When my partner and I bought a home back in 1997, we thought through the following questions:

              what if one of us loses a job or gets sick?

              what if the neighborhood we're buying in loses value are we comfortable with this level of risk?

              Just simple questions that kept us from going whole hog and buying a much more expensive house than we could afford. In the end we bought one that was comfortable for us, roomy enough, not too much of a fixer upper, and that we could afford on just one of our jobs.

        •  I'm Really Happy for You (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Angie in WA State, itsbenj, The Nose

          But you are not everyone.  And I'm sorry you have no empathy for those sold a bill of goods just because of your superior intellect.  You have no idea what borrowers were told.  I do - and given the power of the American Dream combined with the expertise of the brokers -- upon which borrowers have a legal right to rely in most states, it is not as ignorant as you might think for this to have happened.

          If you don't stand for something, you will go for anything. Visit Maat's Feather

          by shanikka on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:58:31 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  You would be amazed (3+ / 0-)

          I have talked to many people who are very intelligent by objective measures but who unthinkingly bought into the idea that they could justify buying a more expensive house on the basis that prices would rise and/or their income would go up and so refinancing would smoothe the way to a more bearable financing arrangement in the future.  

          I grew up in an area that went throgh an economic tailspin, and my parents also had a lot of economic difficulties because of personal circumstances, so I have never been an optimist about the future (probably to my overall detriment) but I am constantly amazed by how many people let unbridled optimism cloud their judgment on how much house they could afford.  As a nation, we are simply psychotic when it comes to home ownership.  That's one reason why banks MUST be held accountable for exercising sane underwriting of loans.  We really are not rational about houses.

    •  Uh, no (6+ / 0-)

      Evidence is that 90% of the fraud was committed by lenders, not borrowers.

      In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra

      by blue aardvark on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:12:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  ok, so 10% of the borrowers go to jail (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DocGonzo

        guilt is guilt

        "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." ~ Mark Twain

        by VoiceFromIowa on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:13:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sure (5+ / 0-)

          But applying for a loan is not a crime. Which is what you suggested punishing.

          And since there are 9 frauds committed by lenders, who made far more money doing so, the logical thing to do is to put the lenders in jail first.

          In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra

          by blue aardvark on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:20:41 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  first is fine, but not solely. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            DocGonzo

            anyone tempted to enter a liars doc in the future should be reminded that jail time will follow.

            "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." ~ Mark Twain

            by VoiceFromIowa on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:30:37 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I'll chime in, as another person who worked in (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              The Nose

              the mortgage industry (as a loan broker).

              You are making a mistake in thinking that you know what you are talking about.

              When a consumer goes to get a mortgage, who do they ask for help? Their Realtor, of course (unless they have previously had a mortgage, in which case they go back to that lender - or unless they know someone who works in mortgage lending, then they go there).

              Just as they do in every service-oriented industry in the good ole US of A, mortgage brokers offer consumers what 'they want' - which is a fast, painless process. Painless meaning 'without a lot of my time or attention.

              Consumers depend upon Mortgage professionals to know their business, and to offer them a reasonable deal. Most people do not read their mortgage documents, other than to fill in the blanks that the mortgage broker highlights in yellow. Nor do they read their signing documents, other than to sign the highlighted portions, again.

              Why is this? Mortgage brokers/loan officers are part of the 'professional' class. Just as a consumer depends upon their banker to know and follow the laws/rule, so too do they depend upon mortgage broker/loan officers to do the same. So, when presented with documents, consumers believe that they can trust their mortgage broker/loan officer, and just follow their instructions.

              The consumer is acting in good faith. How are they supposed to know that the terms of the loan are going to come back and bite them in the ass in the three to five years? Why would they even think to ask about this possibility if the broker/loan officer never brought it up.

              You are conflating your own ability to discern 'fraudulent' actions on the part of the broker/loan officer (when in truth you would likely be just as believing as the next person) onto the average homebuyer.

              I'm telling you that you are wrong in this thinking.

              If a mortgage broker tells you that based on your income, and with the likelihood that you will not live in your home more than five to seven years, an adjustable rate mortgage is a better financial risk - then you believe them. They do this every day. It's their job. They know what they are talking about.

              That is how consumers think. They should be able to think so.

              This is exactly why re-regulation of all sorts of financial transactions is necessary.

    •  These people are like unicorns and pixies (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wsexson

      that person make $40k a year buying a $800k house

      Or at least like four-leaf-clovers, which exist, but are rare.

      Yes, there are people who got loans they should not have been offered, but the loan fraud was, in almost all cases, instigated by people who went out looking for gullible people to use in order to sell another loan.

      The people who were creating the mortgage backed securities LOVED the sub-prime loans because they made more money on them... higher risk, higher reward.  For the investors, that is.  They made it incredibly lucrative to go out and sell mortgages (and houses) to people who were financially illiterate, and in many cases didn't understand enough English to understand the process.  All they knew was that some magical - and probably very likable - person came to them and told them they could buy a house.  Wow.  The American Dream was theirs.  In many cases, these victims - yes, victims - were not even thinking about buying a house, someone just knocked on their door or called them to give them the good news.  And they believed.  It's way easier to fool someone who doesn't know anything and wasn't thinking about buying a house than someone who has been doing their research to see if it's possible.  So those were the people targeted.

      It's stuff like this that Elizabeth Warren is fighting mad about and now hopefully in a position to end forever.  

      Should people be financially literate?  Yes, they should.  Particularly if they're buying a house.  Are they always?  No, not particularly.  Should that be a crime?  I don't think so.  HOWEVER, I think it would be an awesome idea to require anyone who applies for a mortgage to complete a class as part of the loan qualification process.

      But the vast majority of people I talk to have a different story.  The crap economy caught up with them and made keeping their homes impossible.  Remember when gas was around $4.00 a gallon?  If you owned a fast-food joint back then, there was an incredible fall-off on your business.  I know of at least three Popeye's franchise owners who lost there homes because they went from having thriving operations to barely being able to keep their doors open, much less pay their mortgages.  I've met auto mechanics who work on straight commission, who didn't lose their jobs but had their income fall off to such an extent that what was once a very affordable home, well within their budget, became unaffordable.  Not because their payment rose, but because the job that they went to every day now paid a fifth of what it used to.  

      And on, and on.  In the two years I've been talking with homeowners facing foreclosure, I've yet to meet that mythical person you describe.  As far as I'm concerned they're the 21st century version of Ronald Reagan's mythical "welfare queen", they're a story that conservatives and Republicans tell themselves so they don't have to take that "personal responsibility" they're so fond of preaching about to everyone else, for the mess they made of the economy.

      The Republican Extremist Agenda favors tax cuts for millionaires and benefit cuts for Social Security and Medicare.

      by lcork on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 10:21:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm Glad (6+ / 0-)

    That something non-profits and non-profit lawyers working in this area have been screaming about for YEARS (predatory mortgage servicing) is finally getting someone's attention.  That it took so many legally insufficient judicial foreclosure actions (due to inaccurate real estate transfer formalities) to get someone to look seriously at the entire nasty ball of wax is sad.

    I cannot help but note that ACORN was a leader in this area - until the Democrats rolled over and let it be destroyed.

    Maybe something will be done now.  Not just for the problem which in the end is quite fixable for a lender (getting the title assignment chain caught up before a judicial foreclosure) and will ultimately allow foreclosure in the end.  But for the many fraudulent servicing practices that have forced many folks into foreclosure for at least the last decade, again long before anyone ever heard of MERS.

    If you don't stand for something, you will go for anything. Visit Maat's Feather

    by shanikka on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:00:30 AM PDT

  •  What I've been through personally (8+ / 0-)

    has been exhaustively frustrating.

    I am going to suck it up again and re-apply for HAMP after being denied twice already.

    Banks refuse to deal with attorneys, they will only negotiate with homeowners.

    From mineral rights to Investment properties, I have been fighting for 2 years to save what I own. It is amazing.

    After all is said and done, a lot more is said than done.

    by Brahman Colorado on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:00:34 AM PDT

  •  Please, please donate to Grayson if you are able (4+ / 0-)

    The polling has been mixed. yesterday Grayson said their internal polling had them up 13, but some other polls show them down as much as 7. This is not a solid dem district, yet Grayson has been brave and bold anyway. This is a dem worthy of your support who needs your help.

    "Yet no one could doubt President Bush's support for our troops, or his love of country and commitment to our security." -Obama

    by heart of a quince on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:04:40 AM PDT

  •  I am not so sure I understand this whole (0+ / 0-)

    foreclosure fraud thing. It was my understanding a bank couldn't foreclose on your home unless you missed a number of monthly payments. I was also my understanding that it took quite a while before the loan was placed in default. I also don't see the benefit of the bank foreclosing on too many homes. Please explain. If the loans were fraudlent in the first place the bank as well as the homeowner is at fault. Is that a cause for foreclosure? Or were these fraudlent foreclosures due to unpaid loans? I am not understanding why this is a BFD.

    •  Well because (6+ / 0-)

      they've clouded the title with their forgeries.  MERS is going to be the big problem before it's all over.  They sold these notes over and over and in some cases multiple notes on one property to multiple CDOs. Nobody can prove ownership, therefore nobody can prove in court they have the right to foreclose.  

      ~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

      by Kristina40 on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:11:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And what of the foreclosures in the states where (3+ / 0-)

        it's not necessary to go to court? It's worth noting that the foreclosures are only being held up in states where a judicial proceeding is necessary. Meaning that in a majority of states, fraudulent foreclosures are continuing at a rapid pace.

        We need those states to do something, as well.

        •  The title insurers (5+ / 0-)

          are beginning to balk now so I would guess those states that have trustee sales will be joining in soon.

          ~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

          by Kristina40 on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:16:41 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  That Battle is Being Fought Now (4+ / 0-)

          But in non-judicial foreclosure states, given the short period of time a former owner has the right to challenge a sale before the trustee's sale deed becomes final is very short.  Most borrowers do not have the funds to hire a lawyer to file the necessary injunction to stop the sale in advance.  Thus, at best it becomes a damages action.  The property itself would be permanently gone because the buyer would be a BFP (bona fide purchaser), paying consideration in good faith with no knowledge of the underlying property.

          The problem is that litigating that takes years and of course the question of damages would be shaky, if you're behind on your mortgage.  You'd have to hire accounting experts and most homeowners in trouble simply don't have the resources.

          So, it will take legislative largesse in all likelihood to get meaningful relief in non-judicial states.

          If you don't stand for something, you will go for anything. Visit Maat's Feather

          by shanikka on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:50:47 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Cloud on title (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Foxwizard

            The homeowner who lost the property may not have the ability to recoup, unless by a class action alleging massive and intentional fraud.

            However, that doesn't mean the title insurers will certify clean title for the next sale.

            •  Nope (0+ / 0-)

              But for the homeowner that bought with the cloud, that's what title insurance is for - to clear the cloud if it's really a problem.  So while the person who bought at sale has no remedy other than damages, that's not the case for subsequent buyers.  

              If judicial states are anything like non-judicial, the time to challenge the title post-foreclosure will be extremely short, anyhow.  So I see that as a temporary, not permanent, problem.

              If you don't stand for something, you will go for anything. Visit Maat's Feather

              by shanikka on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:30:55 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Good discussion at Cole on this: (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kristina40
      •  Sorry, missed link (8+ / 0-)

        http://www.balloon-juice.com/...

        Basically, all of the reselling of bits and pieces of mortgages has resulted in nobody being sure who owns what. In several instances, foreclosure has occurred and it's not clear that payments were missed. In some instances, payments were missed, foreclosure was started, but then it became apparent that no one entity had clear title, clearly owned the note. Thus, no one entity had legal standing to kick the homeowner out.

        This is a BFD on several levels. The longer-reaching one is, when you buy a home in the future, how do you know it really has a clear title? How do you know that the seller had the legal rights and privileges to sell it to you? What if some other entity shows up a day after you buy it and says "sorry, chum, I actually own this house and here's the real proof."

        •  One of the Big 19 (BofA) (6+ / 0-)

          maybe actually said they destroyed original notes when they went "electronic" with their records...That should go over well in court.  How do you prove the original wasn't altered when it's now electronic and the original is gone?  Can you say "You just won the House lottery?"

          ~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

          by Kristina40 on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:21:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I'll be keeping my humble tiny abode. (5+ / 0-)

          I have - even after all the ravages - almost $20K in "equity' I noticed recently.

          The value of my home dropped $10000 over what it had climed to (still nothing, really. its small)

          But I have been here 9 years and have made a real dent in the balance.

          I have nothing in the bank - my home has been my savings account for years and it appears it may have done OK.

          Ain't moving for years. I have the luxury of actually liking the place. I am happy here and couldn't rent a decent apartment for what I am paying.

          Spray tons of carcinogens into the ocean to hide petroleum spewed from a hastily-drilled hole from a greedy corporation, but don't smoke pot.

          by xxdr zombiexx on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:22:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm in the same boat, my small house (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            xxdr zombiexx, The Nose

            1150 sq ft and .74 acres (on two conjoined lots) went to a high of $219K & $98K of appraised and is now down to $124K & $72K... but my mortgage started at $80K and is now down to about $74K.

            I still have plenty of equity, even after the drop.

            But I only got a mortgage for as much as I needed - not as much as I could get (the loan officer tried to induce me to borrow another $30-40K than I needed because I could and the rate of interest was so low (5.86%), I'd be able to put it away and use it later, instead of getting a consumer loan at substantially higher rates of interest (10%-16%) in the future. I declined.)

            I've lived here since 1982, and I have no plans to move.

    •  What's trobuling to me is the question that has (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kristina40

      not been asked: if the banks, etc. don't even own the homes, who knows how honest they've been in their collections practices? Generally, one assumes that when a payment is sent it gets credited to the right account;

      But when as big a deal as knowing whether they even own the property they are servicing the mortgage for is unclear, how am I to trust that the banks has actually been servicing the mortgage according to the contract?

      That's the question we should be asking.

      •  Yeah (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Foxwizard

        that's another layer to all of this...

        I've read a couple of diaries where this was exactly the diarist's problem.  

        On the Alan Grayson video, he mentions a property that was foreclosed over a disputed late fee of $75.00.

        It's a mess.  From beginning to end.  It's going to be like trying to untangle a bowl of overcooked spaghetti, IMHO.

        The Republican Extremist Agenda favors tax cuts for millionaires and benefit cuts for Social Security and Medicare.

        by lcork on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 10:28:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I'll Try (6+ / 0-)

      It's not easy to explain but I will give it a try.

      There are three very different problems that are mentioned in Rep. Grayson's video:  predatory lending, predatory mortgage servicing and failure of real estate title. Each plays a different, albeit critical, role in the foreclosure crisis.

      Predatory lending has a very loose definition but the best one I've seen is this:  it is the practice of placing borrowers in loans that yield no meaningful benefit to the homeowner.  Most commonly, these loans have some or all of the following features (a couple of these practices were outlawed in the recent financial reform:  

      Adjustable interest rates calculated on a 2/28 or 3/27 basis, meaning that the payment was comparatively low and fixed for the first 2 or 3 years then adjusts, usually once every 6 months although I have seen them once a month.  Usually the initial adjustment added 3-5 points of interest to the loan.)  More traditional (A or Alt-A) adjustables are written 5/25, 7/23, or 10/20.  Accompanying the 2/28 and 3/27 structures are what is usually a very wide spread between the initial  interest rate and the maximum which can be charged.  All of which had a prepayment penalty of 5% of the original principal balance preventing refinance or payoff of the loan before either 2 or 3 years.  

      Most of which also had something called a yield spread premium payable to the broker by the homeowner (although disguised to look like it was being paid by the lender) -- a bonus payment from the extra interest.  YSP was paid ONLY for one reason:  placing a borrower in a loan at a higher interest rate than par, aka a higher interest rate than their credit score and other indicia made them eligible for.  (This was just made illegal - 11 years after given carte blanche by HUD.)

      Look at enough of these, usually marketed to Black and Latino homeowners, later to working class whites as well, and you begin to understand that these loans were intended to explode.  They were marketed at a time when values were going up.

      Predatory servicing came after loan COE.  Most of the banks involved in predatory subprime lending (predatory and subprime are 2 different things but these tended to go together) immediately transferred the servicing rights (i.e. the right to collect the payments) to a third party.  The servicers involved in predatory behavior -- and that included not only 100% servicers but the subprime lending arms of virtually every major bank at one point -- engaged in a number of practices which were designed to place a loan in default despite the best efforts of the homeowner.  

      These included but were not limited to:  "drawering" (where you send a payment in on time, and it is received, but put in a drawer until after the 15th - it then becomes a late payment and you are charged for the late fee, which is then added to your payment); suspensing, where if the payment received did not line up exactly with what was due -- if, for example, you paid the mortgage payment but not the late fee because you didn't know you had one -- the entire payment was put in "suspense" and you found out it was late only after the month ended, making it 30 days late and therefore reportable on your credit score; horrific accounting, especially in prepaid escrow accounts designed to cover insurance and property taxes; purposeful failure to apply escrows timely to insurance and property taxes, which then was used by the servicer to "force place" extremely expensive insurance and demand the premium all at once under pain of default; or resulted in penalties from one's county for late tax payments; inspection fees, which starting when a loan was deemed 30 days past due, the servicer would add up to $100/month for someone to drive by and "inspect" the property; refusal to accept full-month payments for properties with more than one month of default before a 2nd payment was late (i.e. if you could catch up 1 mortgage payment but couldn't pay the full 2 payments before the 2nd one went late, they would suspense and/or not accept either one.)

      All accompanied by a complete refusal by servicers and lenders to comply with RESPA and respond to homeowner inquiries - thus making it impossible until your credit was destroyed to learn truly what was going on and get out while you still could refinance into something decent.

      This is how a person could quickly end up 90 days behind, the average amount of time between a late payment and the beginning of formal foreclosure.  Since a servicer will not accept partial payments, once you're behind, you're done.

      And until real estate values cratered, this was a huge win-win in terms of profit making.  The homeowners was bled through extraordinary interest and/or prepayment penalties, eventually caught into a feedback loop the second their payments got even a little behing, and then not let out - all while additional fees and charges were being added to their account.

      But good luck getting an accurate accounting.  The amount of fiction that the worst of the predators engaged in is the stuff of many judicial decisions at this point, most of them in the bankruptcy courts.

      The problem that has exploded in Florida has to do with real estate securitization.  At some point, the overwhelming majority (more than 90%, and with many predatory and subprime lenders 100%) of all mortgages were bundled with other mortgages and the right to the income stream from them sold as securities in the marketplace.  Yet the primary legal right that a lender has to ensure they get paid is the right to seize their collateral (the home.)  Moreover, there was real concern that if the public knew what was happening to mortgages (i.e that the people you thought you were dealing with in fact had no ownership rights to your loan payments anymore because they'd been bundled and sold) folks would go ballistic.  So what happened is this.  As part of bundling loans, a fictional entity was created called MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Service.)  The title documents (usually the deed of trust) evincing the right to seize and sell the collateral were recorded with MERS as the "assignee" of the rights of the original lender.  MERS sole function was to exist to hide the identity of the securitization pool (aka "investor") that owned the loan, even upon foreclosure.

      Yet the actual loan was not transferred to MERS.  It was bundled with others and became part of the securitization pool.  

      The problem is that in most states, you cannot separate the right to seize the collateral (deed of trust) for non-payment from the underlying right to receive payment (promissory note.) That is what has created what is the most recent fraud, and document signing mills.

      Because in a judicial foreclosure state, you have to prove that you own the underlying debt.  Originally, MERS was proceeding in its own name even though it did not own the note.  Although it took a long time for lawyers to begin to assert that defense, it eventually happened and, other than Minnesota, most bankruptcy and other judges when advised of the separation of ownership between the note and the deed of trust would not permit a foreclosure.  So............enter the document signers, and the lawyers who helped them (the ones under investigation, most bottom-feeder mills that until this type of work really had nothing to recommend them.)  They prepared false affidavits stating that the ownership of both the loan and deed of trust were property transferred to the lender and that they had confirmed that fact.  

      Unfortunately, many of these affidavits were done and notarized after foreclosure suit had already been filed - a big no, no because of course a lender who didn't own both the loan and the right to foreclose has no standing.

      Of course, anyone who knows anything about document forgery, which has been rife in lending for at least a decade, knows that sooner or later folks trip up.  The lenders tripped up, and got caught in a series of depositions taken by plaintiff's lawyers.  And, although Florida judges were treating this process like traffic court (guilty, pay and go away) eventually a few were persuaded of the truth.  Now, it's a snowball.  Because bluntly most of the securitization pools cannot properly trace where the promissory notes are, anymore, that's how many times they are sold in and out of securitization pools in their 30 year lifetime.

      No note, no foreclosure in a judicial state.  

      So, yes, it's a big deal.

      It is indeed a BFD.

      If you don't stand for something, you will go for anything. Visit Maat's Feather

      by shanikka on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:47:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thank you for explaining to me, (0+ / 0-)

        I think I get it. It looks as though this is a bigger mess than initially thought. Can I ask what it means for homeowners who are unable to make payments and fearful of foreclosure? Are they not legally able to foreclose? This might just be the silver bullet to improve the plummetting cost of homes, no more foreclosures, no more large inventory of homes on the market. Am I dreaming?

        •  That's the Battle Being Fought Now (0+ / 0-)

          I think there is no way that the country is prepared to give to the owners, free and clear of the mortgage, the tens of millions of properties affected by the securitization problem.  I think Congress would do something to avoid that since the economic impact on both the home value and finance markets would be catastrophic.

          (Although I admit that emotionally it would feel really really good.)

          But what can be done, if politicians and the Administration seize the moment of opportunity created by the securitization problem now becoming highly public, is finally force the lenders to the table to negotiate permanent work outs for mortgages, including those underwater, in good faith (something that despite 3 federal programs trying to bribe lenders, has not happened in any meaningful way), including the reduction of principal.  Since if a lender is facing the risk of not being able to foreclose and is faced with the prospect of having only an unsecured debt (out of which a borrower can simply bankrupt) it would be more in the lender's financial interest to get the borrower to sign new loan documents at a lower principal level knowing that the transaction will now be "clean" than continuing to demand their cake while eating it too (i.e. refusing to work with homeowners except through temporary workout solutions that at least 1/2 the time leave the borrower worse off than when they started.)

          We will see.

          If you don't stand for something, you will go for anything. Visit Maat's Feather

          by shanikka on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:53:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It is a shame it had to come to this point, (0+ / 0-)

            isn't it? I wonder if the anti-regulation crowd gets it. We are a nation of laws and those laws have to be enforced for the good of all of society. When they aren't or people buy their way around them, this is the result. Not immediate, but sooner or later the shit hits the fan, and when that happens it keeps coming and coming, and messes everything up. Clean up is a bitch. It is unfortunate those who created this mess are not charged with cleaning it up.

      •  GREAT explanation right here ^ nt (0+ / 0-)
    •  Benefit of Foreclosure: Grabbing Equity (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      yoduuuh do or do not, Joieau

      A bank can foreclose after some fairly short period of payments being late. Even if only one installment of the loaned amount remains outstanding too long. Or, as is more often the case, when lots of the loaned amount remains unpaid. Which means the bank gets to take the entire equity in the house, even though perhaps 99% of the equity has been paid. Most mortgages put 20% down, though plenty put down less, and especially on mortgages set up to pay off the principal later. But the fact is that banks always get more than what's owed them when they foreclose on a house.

      Sure it's expensive for a bank to sell a house, especially when loans are much harder to get than before. Which is why banks are not putting foreclosed homes on the market, because they also got TARP bailout money instead of selling those assets.

      The banks always win. They make sure of that.

      "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

      by DocGonzo on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:58:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Did someone say Congress matters? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    xxdr zombiexx

    Hey - does this mean that we should, you know, GOTV or something?

    In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra

    by blue aardvark on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:07:56 AM PDT

  •  Thank God for Alan Grayson. (5+ / 0-)

    He can't be bought and doesn't give a shit who he offends.

    God bless him.

  •  Want to rally the base? The public? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose, Kristina40

    Make some high profile arrests, and just arrest anyone who has broken the law.

    As you all know, this is where many citizens talk of giving up.

    Two sets of rules, one for corporations, one for consumers.

    Anyone who is underwater in their homes, or near foreclosure, stop paying and stop working with these bastards.

    Force them to take you to court and prove they own the home.

    Don't give them another dime.

    It is our money they want. Let's stop giving it to them.

    by Mean Mr Mustard on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:10:04 AM PDT

  •  Private property is a sacred right (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kristina40

    It is the foundation of Capitalism, the only moral economic system, as Ayn Rand and the Churches of Mammon have taught us. The only thing that comes close is the sanctity of contract. Let no activist judges trifle with our Rights and Liberties—Oh, these aren't our Rights and Liberties, they're yours? Sacrilege! Only Real Americans have Rights and Liberties! You go to Hell!

    </snark>

    But oh, beamish nephew, beware of the day
    If your Snark be a Boojum, for then
    You will softly and suddenly vanish away
    And never be met with again.

    Yes, the Republicans are in the process of vanishing away like the Federalists (the original party of No) and the Whigs (the original Blue Dogs). Unfortunately, not softly, and not suddenly. But definitely away.

    Busting the Dog Whistle code.

    by Mokurai on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:12:02 AM PDT

  •  I said a long ago this whole thing (5+ / 0-)

    reeked of criminal activity and sho 'nuff, it reeks for a reason.

    These "troubling developments", as it is so delicately phrased, are an artificial crisis, a manmade disaster, foist upon us by criminal organizations who should be shut down..

    I like how they aren't being arrested and marijuana is still illegal and demonized.

    It'd be hysterical if it all weren't so damned serious.

    The perpetrators should be caught and choked by the police:

    It's ok to choke people for marijuana touching - it should be OK to choke them for crashing the economy due to scamming millions of people.

    Spray tons of carcinogens into the ocean to hide petroleum spewed from a hastily-drilled hole from a greedy corporation, but don't smoke pot.

    by xxdr zombiexx on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:13:44 AM PDT

  •  Everthing Rep. Grayson says is true and has been (6+ / 0-)

    known within the industry and legal circles since long before President Obama even ran for office.  Some judges have refused to allow banks to foreclose with erroneous documents, but most judges don't give a damn. They sit on the courts as tools of the corporations although supposedly elected by the people.

    Acorn the organization targeted by Republican supposedly for voter registration fraud (which was not true) was more likely targeted because of the great work they were doing helping to save peoples homes from foreclosure by exposing the fraud that was going on with the paperwork.

    This scheme to take property from Americans is sad, and although Republicans have successfully made the massive foreclosures that were going on a race/class issue in the minds of the public, as in those "poor minorities bought homes they could not afford and lied and cheated  to get those homes so they deserve to have them taken"  the case is that the foreclosure schemes are a nationwide corporate scheme to take property from some and transfer it to others.

    Get 10 people you know to commit to vote Democratic on November 2

    by Blogvirgin on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:14:13 AM PDT

  •  listen to Grayson... (6+ / 0-)

    ...he's a self-made millionaire, not a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Banksters and Wall Street. He scares the living crap out of them, and keeps them on their toes. That's why he's the #1 target on their "hit list": he's independently wealthy and untouchable by their tentacles of greed and corruption. He's the real deal. If he wasn't I wouldn't be wasting my time telling you so.

    "I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast, for I intend to go in harm's way." John Paul Jones

    by ImpeachKingBushII on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:15:20 AM PDT

  •  It's a total racket, from A to Z (7+ / 0-)
    I've met people who've boasted of running real estate and mortgage fraud scams, in which they assembled a small team of bankers, appraisers, real estate agents and lawyers to deceive unwitting dupes into selling their properties way below market, then reselling them to yet other unwitting dupes (whom they knew wouldn't be able to afford them) at way above market at crazy rates, and then buying them back way below market after the buyers inevitably defaulted on their mortgages. How these operations were allowed to go on for years w/o authorities being onto and cracking down on them is beyond me, except that they may well have been in on these scams. The rot goes all the way to the top, I suspect. If you include the crap derivatives that were issued and traded based on these crap mortgages, we're talking about the biggest con job in history. And still almost no one's gone to jail--most likely because the authorities are in on it.

    "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" --Alexander Hamilton

    by kovie on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:16:56 AM PDT

    •  It worked so well for (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RichM

      used car sales they decided to ramp that same business model up for homes.

      ~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

      by Kristina40 on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:19:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The people involved (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RichM, Kristina40

        are EXACTLY the sort one thinks of when one hears "used car salesman"--cheap con artists (not to denigrate honest and decent used car salesman, of course).

        "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" --Alexander Hamilton

        by kovie on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:21:10 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Three words. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Nose

      How these operations were allowed to go on for years w/o authorities being onto and cracking down on them is beyond me, except that they may well have been in on these scams.

      George W. Bush

      -5.38 -4.72 T. "...a mosque that rejects radicalism is not a symbol of the enemy's victory; it is a prerequisite for our own." Michael Gerson

      by trevzb on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:26:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What is the incentive to foreclose? (0+ / 0-)

    What is the incentive to force foreclosure? In this market, with so many upside-down mortgages, why would the holders want to force foreclosure rather than work out refinancing with the current borrower? With the housing market so soft, surely it makes more sense to get a steady, if smaller, stream of payment rather than holding on to a bunch of empty homes and property, all of which are taxed.

    What am I missing?

  •  and while we're at it, more points for Brown (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose, Joieau

    "Show up. Pay attention. Tell the truth. And don't be attached to the results." -- Angeles Arrien

    by Sybil Liberty on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:24:14 AM PDT

  •  Needs pictures and a flow chart (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kristina40

    Or a bullet point list so the average voter gets it.

    •  There's not much to get, really (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kristina40

      Banks are faking docs.

      •  More accurately... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        The Nose

        ...banks are hiring companies that specialize in faking docs to fake docs because without the fake docs, banks can't foreclose.

        -5.38 -4.72 T. "...a mosque that rejects radicalism is not a symbol of the enemy's victory; it is a prerequisite for our own." Michael Gerson

        by trevzb on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:24:52 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Here.....from the NY Times article: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Nose, Kristina40

      As a substitute, the banks usually present affidavits attesting to ownership of the note signed by an employee of a legal services firm acting as an agent for the lender or loan servicer. Such affidavits allow foreclosures to proceed, but because they are often dubiously prepared, many questions have arisen about their validity.

      Flat out fraud, made possible because the banks didn't want to pay for the legal stuff, so they farmed it out.

  •  So what will happen to people (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angie in WA State

    who were forced out of their homes illegally? What is the restitution for them? Foreclosure wreaks havoc on people's lives not just financially, but psychologically, etc. etc. These people deserve just compensation and damages.

    There are moments when the body is as numinous as words, days that are the good flesh continuing. -- Robert Hass

    by srkp23 on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:29:43 AM PDT

  •  More on this today in the NYT (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angie in WA State, Kristina40

    The whole house of cards is starting to collapse.  You can read the NYT coverage of it here.

  •  This is BS. (0+ / 0-)

    The idea behind MERS is to transfer ownership of notes to one corporation.  In event of a foreclosure ownership can be transferred to the foreclosing company.  This should not be a controversial practice.  Then again mortgage backed securities make sense until you start slicing them into derivatives.  It is possible that MERS got ahead of itself and turned what should be a straight forward process into a mess.  I have to worry though that Grayson is the liberal version of the "free man on the land" movement, selling hope backed by gobbldygook.

    I'll say this though, if there is a problem with MERS the shit is about to hit the fan.  Grayson is correct about the percentage of loans in that system.

  •  My Foreclosure (0+ / 0-)

    I bought a house last year that had been foreclosed. The previous owners had abandoned it in 2008, without even shutting off the water. Which froze the pipes, bursting all of them, causing a major mold infestation - all of which raised our costs to move in by many thousands of dollars. On top of which they'd "paid" an extremely high price to "buy" the house, inflating the price at which I had to buy it. Of course, they didn't actually pay that - they skipped out and defaulted after only a few years, when their ARM jumped from a tiny introductory rate to some inevitable high rate specified right in their contract.

    Those people had no business buying a house. They further did all kinds of alterations wrong, and left important ones undone, all of which damaged the house and caused even more costs to me. But they did buy this house, and damaged it. Not just because the banks "foolishly" loaned them the money, but because they were so stupid as to think they were ready when they weren't.

    The bank took a big loss, but it then got a TARP bailout for the full value of its "bad assets". It's a small enough bank (in Indiana, that has closed anyway, but not before being brought up on fraud charges it'll never face) that I can't find info on whether it's repaid its TARP bailout - almost surely not. After it got the bailout, it sold the property at a loss to a foreign bank at about a 60% loss, which sold it to me at about 200% of what it paid. Of course that foreign bank had bought CDSes on mortgages like the one on my house that defaulted, so that foreign bank got TARP money at full value of its CDS, in addition to the fantastic buying/selling opportunity in the house it sold to me. That sale to the foreign bank was not available to me, or I'd have bought it directly from the Indiana bank.

    So I paid over and over again to buy this house. Because the mortgager was incompetent and a fraudster, and because the previous "owner" was incompetent and possibly a fraudster. What I paid for this house was a little lower than the previous selling price to the previous occupants, but only a little. It was still within the Credit Bubble pricing range, especially because it's very close to NYC, where the Credit Bubble and the bailouts pumped so much money that people still buy houses at close to the Bubble peak.

    I pay my mortgage. I've paid nearly 30% on top of the sale price to fix all the damage to the house. It's not easy, even though my wife and I make a good income. Nobody's bailing me out. I'm too competent and honest to merit a bailout. My job is to keep real estate prices jacked up, so banks can make the maximum on interest without offering a useful service on the money they lend that's ultimately borrowed from me and my fellow taxpayers.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:42:37 AM PDT

    •  Do you think (0+ / 0-)

      The right type of regulation could have helped you?  From what you're saying, sounds like the Gov "bailed out" this property twice.

      Not good.

      What I don't like about this whole deal is the fact that TARP is being manipulated by banks to get doubly compensated with interest.  

      TARP bailouts should translate to cost savings for buyers, but alas, since you are not in charge of writing policy (and the banks are) that savings, err.. I mean profit, didn't go to you.

      Then again, you could have looked at the house and decided "Hmm... burst pipes, bad finish carpentry, whatever...  Looks like I need to take that into account when I make my offer."  

      Around NYC the demand for homes is still high, so you gotta pay.  Where I'm from - in SW Florida - 3 bedroom houses are available for 100-120K all day long - with negotiable price tags.  Heck you can get some seriously beautiful saltwater frontage for less than $250K.  All I gotta say is good luck making a living down here - although if you are a doctor or a lawyer - you'll do fine.  There's a lot of crooks and sick people around here.  

      "Ubermensch" is German for "Douchebag"

      by meatballs on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 11:15:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What Would Have Worked (0+ / 0-)

        What would have worked would have been letting those banks go bankrupt, getting them out of their CDS contracts, and the government buying them and their assets, including loans and foreclosed homes. Then the government could have restructured the loans directly, instead of passing the refinancing through these banks that added nothing but increased risk and cost. The restructure could have replaced the interest rate from the bank, usually an ARM that was jumping up, with something around 4-5%. If the homebuyer still didn't meet their payments, with perhaps a 6 month grace period, they'd still have to lose the house, and move someplace they could afford. Those homes should have been on the market. My own home stood empty and rotting for over 6 months, until the pipes burst and it was sold. That would have let the market reset to reasonable rates, and I would have been rewarded appropriately for waiting for the bubble to pass before buying.

        At the very least the government could have let everyone with an IRA/401k tap those funds to pay for mortgage/rent without penalty. Let us use our own money, transferred from the stock market into our home equity we actually needed to live in.

        Nothing like that happened. The opposite happened.

        "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

        by DocGonzo on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 02:30:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The other side of this story (0+ / 0-)
    I would like to provide the other side of this story, with all the talk of "arresting these guys".  That is t-bagger talk and makes you sound ignorant.

    First of all, the banks take foreclosure very seriously, and every effort is made to keep the integrity of the legal process intact.  However, when it comes down it, we're talking about enforcing contracts, and banks generally hold up their end of the bargain (that's providing funds for the homeowner) but for whatever reason, homeowners who are foreclosed on, don't keep their end of the bargain.  

    When banks foreclosure on homeowners, it's not a step taken lightly, and in states which have the judicial process for foreclosues, this means months, if not years, of legal process, and also usually means that borrowers have done everything in their power to NOT work things out with banks.  Banks usually take various steps to communicate with a delinquent borrower to see what can be worked out, but if a person cannot afford mortgage payment, banks have no choice.

    Now all this doesn't mean banks don't make mistakes (as employees working the system generally tend to be human beings -- you know, like you), and these employees and under tremendous pressure to process the paperwork,  as investors who actually own the Note are breathing down their necks to make all the loans perform, and this may cause issues such as one or two designated persons to become "Robo-signers," but the numbers and the facts are generally tend to be on the side of the banks.

    So how about we tone down the "let's-arrest-them-all-and-burn-down-the-bank" talk and realize that these employees are just doing their jobs.  Just so you know, foreclsing on homes is NOT a profitable mechanism, since banks ALWAYS lose money selling REO properties.

    •  Oh BULLSHIT (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Joieau

      The banks are NOT trying to work with borrowers.  They are getting paid on both ends by the government anyway.  They get their principle loss covered and they get to sell the house.  Take that shit somewhere else as I've "worked" with the bank and now how they operate.  The only thing that gets them off their fat asses to work with a borrower is if you threaten them with ruthless default and request the original note.  I know, I did it.  That is the ONLY way you'll get any help from the bank.  Play hardball with their sorry asses.

      ~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

      by Kristina40 on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:55:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Obviously... (0+ / 0-)
        You have NO CLUE what you are talking about...
        •  Really? (5+ / 0-)

          I went through eight months of HAMP with Saxon.  They "lost" every document I sent them twice including my tax papers.  They included some woman whom I'd never heard of in our income statement and it made it through underwriting that way.  Incompetent bastards, the entire lot of them.  They also threatened me if I didn't sign the fraudulent loan mod that included some poor woman's income I'd never heard of.  Yeah, a group of professional there.  NOT.

          ~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

          by Kristina40 on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:05:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well... (0+ / 0-)
            I truly am sorry for Saxon's lack of professionalism -- and for all the hassle you went through.  But I just want you to know that  not ALL banks operate that way, or that banks don't want to work with you.  

            The point I was trying to make was that most bank will try and work with you, and that foreclosure process is the ONLY leverage banks have to get the loans performing again, as that is the bottom line for all banks - including Saxon.  

            Once again, I am sorry for the hard time that Saxon gave you, as I can relate to the lack of professionalism from big corporations.

        •  Well, thief (aptly named poster) lets look (0+ / 0-)

          At this realistically.  Yes, there are very responsible banks out there who'd rather collect cash on a loan rather than go through the trouble of foreclosure and resale.  Sometimes, the backlog allows for folks to remain in their home for as long as 18 months even though they can't afford the mortgage payment.

          Lets not forget though that Banks are not charitable institutions.  They let people reside in homes primarily because the homes retain more value when occupied and maintained than they do when they are abandoned to rot.  All these folks that skated on short sales and what-have-you think they have gotten away free, but that is not the case either.  Banks can wait years if they want before pursuing the leftover bad debt - and that's exactly what they are doing.  Now here comes Alan Grayson informing his constituency that fraudulent document milling has become a part of the process - well isn't that nice.  Seems like there's been a little disorganization in the paper-trading free for all and in order to cash in on the full scope of available public and privately funded profit the rules must be fudged.  I'm not surprised.  

          If it happens at all then its a problem.  This whole mortgage crisis was created by the GOP to hide the demand deficiencies created by offshoring.  It was a plan to hide the shortcomings of GOP economic policy - complete with a golden parachute for banks just prior to the election.  Now that they are coming around to get their second round of payments, some of them are realizing that in their greedy haste they lost track of the details and subsequentially lost their legal claims on the properties.  Hey no problem!  We'll just forge the necessary docs!  These poor slobs can't pay anyways.  

          Where's the national outrage?  Why the heck is it pointed at Obama?  He didn't swindle half the country out of their home equity.      

          "Ubermensch" is German for "Douchebag"

          by meatballs on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 10:56:37 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  America (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      burlydee

      ...doesn't believe you anymore.

      -5.38 -4.72 T. "...a mosque that rejects radicalism is not a symbol of the enemy's victory; it is a prerequisite for our own." Michael Gerson

      by trevzb on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:14:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  America... (0+ / 0-)
        Doesn't have to believe me.  They just need to make their mortgage payments on time.
        •  What you forgot to mention... (0+ / 0-)

          ...is the other half of the story. $4.50/gal gasoline, corporate interests shipping jobs out of the country, business credit crunch, healthcare crisis, et al.

          Like they say: "In a depression, property returns to its rightful owners."

          -5.38 -4.72 T. "...a mosque that rejects radicalism is not a symbol of the enemy's victory; it is a prerequisite for our own." Michael Gerson

          by trevzb on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 09:18:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  That's why... (0+ / 0-)

      Just so you know, foreclsing on homes is NOT a profitable mechanism, since banks ALWAYS lose money selling REO properties.

      ...they sold them up the chain until the big boys were able to leave the taxpayer holding the bag. Again.

      Go piss up a pole.

      -5.38 -4.72 T. "...a mosque that rejects radicalism is not a symbol of the enemy's victory; it is a prerequisite for our own." Michael Gerson

      by trevzb on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:15:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You are pretty much correct. (0+ / 0-)

      Yours is well reasoned and I would remind people that it takes "people" to do the work in a bank and foreclosing makes the bank no money; i.e.it is a losing proposition for the bank also in that they have to spend time and resources to foreclose and they usually sell at a loss.  Once mortgages began to be securitized, they lost their local flavor and went big money and big bank.  That also means that the decision to foreclosure may even be out of the country since they likely don't even service the mortgage and it has either been sold in whole or in tranches.  I lost a condo to foreclosure and I could not get the holder of the mortgage to work with me because the servicer had no decision making power and would not let me even get to the mortgage holder.  I believe we could have worked out a compromise but instead, the lender now has a condo they cannot sell and I am likely to have a deficiency I can't pay.  Who won?  No one.

  •  Can we top making Grayson into more than he is? (0+ / 0-)

    It's great to have an effective demogogue on your team if you can keep him in a certain role, but that's pretty much all he is.

    "Man is free at the moment he wishes to be." - Voltaire

    by DrFrankLives on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:52:07 AM PDT

    •  Demogogue? Or Policeman? (0+ / 0-)

      White collar criminals don't like policeman - you know like IRS agents, SEC regulators, congressmen, etc...

      They always seek to marginalize anyone who enforces the law.  Funny how that works.

      "Ubermensch" is German for "Douchebag"

      by meatballs on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:01:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  What was your disagreement? (0+ / 0-)

      Can we stop making Grayson into less than he is?

      -5.38 -4.72 T. "...a mosque that rejects radicalism is not a symbol of the enemy's victory; it is a prerequisite for our own." Michael Gerson

      by trevzb on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:13:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  MERS (0+ / 0-)

    Was this an institution created during this administration or did it precede it? i could not get a good feel of the timeline.

    "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." ~ Mark Twain

    by VoiceFromIowa on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:54:16 AM PDT

  •  Um Mr. Greenspan... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose, yoduuuh do or do not

    What were you saying about there being no such thing as fraud?

    Boy were we led down the primrose path - including Mr Clinton who signed off on deregulation.

    Apparently, there IS a such thing as fraud and its become institutionalized.

    So tell me again Tea Partiers why deregulation is good for business?  Who's business?  Certainly not John Q Homeowner's business.  In the long run not good for lender's either, because the fraud chain won't go unchallenged forever.  When the cat gets let out of the bag - the entire system of lending freezes up.  Do these banksters and their lobbyists think that things like forcing a foreclosure sale on a home that was paid for in cash will go unnoticed and unchallenged indefinitely?  Arrogant presumption.  

    We need Alan Grayson fighting the good fight.  Without advocates like him in government to protect average citizens fraud will continue to be pervasive and people will continue to feel the harm of preditorial corporations.

     

    "Ubermensch" is German for "Douchebag"

    by meatballs on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 07:57:43 AM PDT

  •  absolutely mind-boggling (0+ / 0-)

    saw it over on FDL a few days ago.  Highly recommend!

  •  Alan Grayson (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose, yoduuuh do or do not

    I love this vid, in every regard.
    Keep kicking butt.
    We are in deep shit as a country, and need all the help we can get.
    Thanks dude.

    Free University and Health Care for all, now. -8.88, -7.13

    by SoCalHobbit on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:23:58 AM PDT

  •  That freaking Alan Grayson (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angie in WA State, The Nose

    I love that man.  I'm gonna give that dude some money.  

    Change happens because of you...Barack Obama

    by Adept2u on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 08:32:20 AM PDT

  •  Alan Grayson and re-election (0+ / 0-)

    I hate to break this to you but the district Mr Grayson represents is very conservative and his re-election is in doubt.  He is not my representative (I have Mr. Milktoast Republican, John Mica) but I wish I could vote for Mr. Grayson.

    Now, having said that, his ads lately have been trashed for being not true and he needs to clean them up.  He comes off very badly portraying Webster as a draft dodger (not true) and as "Taliban Dan" (closer to truth but still not a good comparison).  If he wants beat Webster he needs to point to the many good things he has done and portray Webster as a return to the same old tired Bush politics and those thrilling days of yesteryear when women were not in charge of their bodies.  That would resonate especially with women voters.

  •  That's strong stuff but ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose
    I don't deny anything Rep Grayson says but my personal experience has been that the bank I got my mortgage from did not bundle it with others, securitize it and sell it off. It kept it and still has it now. Being unemployed, I've fallen behind a little bit but my bank (Citi) has been very understanding and patient with me and has cut me a lot of slack. I'm very happy with them.

    The difference is securitizing. This practice needs to stop, IMO. Make banks hold the mortgages they write and they'll write good ones that will stand up over time.

    "Your Actions Are So Loud, I Can't Hear a Word You're Saying" thanhdlu.com

    by toosinbeymen on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 09:33:43 AM PDT

  •  IMPORTANT FACTS ABOUT FORECLOSURE AND MORTGAGE... (0+ / 0-)

    IMPORTANT FACTS ABOUT FORECLOSURE AND MORTGAGE FRAUD

    Foreclosures via DECEPTIVE and FRAUDULENT PROCEEDINGS enables repetitive, and illegal property flipping; it enables lenders to falsify IRS form 1099-A''s; it enables unscrupulous foreclosure mill lawyers (especially because of judges who purposefully abet deceit) to deceptively hold auctions and make insider bids to acquire those properties; and blighted neighborhoods. Fraudulent foreclosures ensure the success of FABRICATED BANKRUPTCY COURT 'Lift Stay motions' and false 'Proof of Claims'.

    Foreclosure via fraud is the reason for illegitimate homelessness and underhanded evictions, unjustified IRS tax bills due to false 1099-A's, and unfair "Deficiency Judgments." Ironically, some people who express their anger at "deadbeats" appear to be more acceptable about the manifest fraud and criminal activity being carried out by people with credentials to practice law. Equally ironic is the reality that some people pretending to be annoyed about "deadbeats"are the actual people who are participating in real estate racketeering -fully sanctioned by the majority of courts, especially Bankruptcy Courts! *more @
    http://www.lawgrace.org/...

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site