Pilant's Business Ethics

Business Ethics Blog

Tag: foreclosures

Citizen-Led Movement in California Proposes to Outlaw Foreclosures (via Ketron Property Management, Inc.)

If you think this is a little crazy, you’re right. But in the light of how home owners have been treated over the last few years, it is totally understandable.

You can do a lot to people when they’ve been trained to take it. Currently they believe that the system is fair and that the terrible things that have happened to hundreds of thousands of Americans will be remedied once the right people figure out what’s going on.

Many of the right people knew from the beginning what was going on in the housing market and when the massive number of foreclosures began, those same right people closed their eyes.

A lot of Americans are waking up each day a little more sure that no one cares about them, their property or their rights. When justice is denied, people are going to start looking at other remedies.

This may look crazy now but if simple justice is denied large parts of the population, it’s going to get a lot crazier than this.

And it should.

James Pilant

Citizen-Led Movement in California Proposes to Outlaw Foreclosures Posted by Carole VanSickle on Wednesday, August 3rd 2011 In Sacramento, California, one citizen is taking on the lenders directly, using his “Foreclosure Modification Act” to demand that lenders provide principal and interest rate reductions in order to keep borrowers in their homes[1]. And according to the author of the proposal, David A. Benson, the best way to make this happen … Read More

via Ketron Property Management, Inc.

Enhanced by Zemanta

What is Really Happening in the Foreclosure / REO Real Estate Process / Market? One Agent’s Point of View (via East Bay Real Estate: Caldecott Properties )

What is Really Happening in the Foreclosure / REO Real Estate Process / Market? One Agent’s Point of View (via East Bay Real Estate: Caldecott Properties )

I like this.

He asks, “When will we do the right thing for all Americans?”

I would like the answer to that question myself.

James Pilant

This is a great article and it sums up the mortgage crisis brilliantly. JP

What is Really Happening in the Foreclosure / REO Real Estate Process / Market? One Agent's Point of View Is it possible there is a corrupted process at the very top (wall street executives, wall street investors, bank executives, hedge funds, etc.) Here is a thought: We know banks are not willing to reduce the principle loan amount for owners under water. That can easily be measured by the number of completed loan modification that include a principal reduction. Very (very) few: About 49,000 of all the proprietary modifications completed reduced bot … Read More

via East Bay Real Estate: Caldecott Properties

Bank of America Forecloses on Santa Clara Woman After Telling Her to Miss Her Payments | | St. George News

008bBank of America Forecloses on Santa Clara Woman After Telling Her to Miss Her Payments | | St. George News

How many times do we have to read this same story? Telling someone that they have to stop paying to access a federal program, encouraging them to believe that they are going to get a loan modification, when your bank has already decided that no one is going to get this kind of deal, and then foreclosing on them when they fall for the bait – is this they way banks are supposed to make money?

What is the business ethics here? The bank should be telling its customers the truth, not a set of lies. I don’t think that requires much analysis.

Banks are a utility in the United States. That is, they have government protection in return for the bank following a set of rules. That’s why your accounts are insured and banks are supposed to be accountable. Because in a real sense a bank is public institution, it has privileges in the law to protect and profit it. How much less incentive should this kind of institution have than private companies from misleading and cheating its clients out of their homes?

Since, I wrote this article my own students have come forward with the same story of being told to miss payments by the bank and then being foreclosed on. There is great and calculated cruelty in these acts.

James Pilant

SANTA CLARA – Bank of America foreclosed on a Santa Clara woman’s home, despite her doing everything she was instructed to do in order to prevent it. Annette Lake resided in her house in Santa Clara from 1986 until May 24, 2011, when Bank of America foreclosed on her home. Just after her divorce from her husband was finalized in 2008, Lake was diagnosed with breast cancer. She was laid off from her job during chemotherapy treatments. She began ha … Read More

via

Enhanced by Zemanta

About Those Notes…Evidence of Securitization Fail (via foreclosuresinmass)

About Those Notes…Evidence of Securitization Fail  (via foreclosuresinmass)

English:

English: (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I’ve been arguing the same thing, – that there was much more to the mortgage crisis than robosigning. So, give this a read. I like skepticism and intelligence. This article has both.

James Pilant

Since last October, shortly after the robosigning scandal broke, I’ve been talking until I turned blue in the face about robosigning being the tip of the iceberg with mortgage problems and that the real issue was chain of title. Robosigning appeared to be an almost unexpected deposition by-product; the real goal in the depositions that uncovered the robosigning was exposing the backdating of mortgage endorsement. And that they did–the notaries’ … Read More

via foreclosuresinmass

From around the web.

From the web site, Living Lies. (There is really no way to do this article justice by a couple of paragraph quote – Go and read the whole thing. This is good legal writing, clear and concise. The advice is excellent. This is a great web site!)

http://livinglies.wordpress.com/2012/10/23/can-a-broken-chain-lead-to-cancellation-of-instrument-no/

Which brings us to the second break in the chain. “for value received” is so commonplace, nobody reads it or pays any attention to it. But the fact is that the payee on the note never loaned the money nor purchased the loan. So in discovery, when I say follow the money, I mean follow the actual transactions in which the other side can prove money ex changed hands. It didn’t. Nobody paid for anything because the whole scheme was funded by investor-lenders ignorant of how their money was actually being used.

But by creating paperwork that carries with it the assumption or presumption that the assignee of course paid the assignor, the banks and servicers have so far accumulated title to more than 6 million homes most of which with a credit bid from a party who neither funded nor purchased the loan and who therefore could not be a creditor and who was not permitted under statute to submit a credit bid. This break in the chain of title is more akin to civil theft but it qualifies as a break.

From the web site, Findsen Law.

http://findsenlaw.wordpress.com/2012/09/11/prudential-v-goldman-sachs-raises-chain-of-title-in-securitization-of-mortgage-notes/

Several Prudential Insurance companies filed a lawsuit against Goldman Sachs related to a series of mortgage-backed-securities deals, particularly a lot of the GSAMP deals.  Prudential v Goldman here.  It contains some interesting allegations based upon Prudential’s systematic review of the collateral files:

Evidence That Goldman’s Representations Concerning the Mortgage Loans’ Chain of Title Were Systemically False

Goldman’s representations about the valid transfer of title of the Mortgage Loans to the Trusts were false. In many instances, the collateral did not properly secure the underlying Mortgage Loans and the Trusts could not foreclose on delinquent borrowers because Goldman.  Contrary to its representations, Goldman did not properly assign large numbers of the Mortgage Loans to the Trusts. In its rush to securitize loans and thereby offload risky collateral onto investors such as Prudential, Goldman did not comply with the strict rules governing assignment of mortgages and the transfer of promissory notes and loan files.  Goldman lost much of the paperwork relating to the Mortgage Loans underlying the securitizations, or made no attempt to assign the Mortgage Loans and deliver the original mortgage notes to the issuing trusts, as represented.

As part of its loan-level analysis of the Mortgage Loans underlying its Certificates, Prudential also examined if the chain of mortgage assignments was complete with respect to the Mortgage Loans. The review demonstrates that Goldman’s representations regarding the title for the Mortgage Loans were false and misleading, and that Goldman fraudulently failed to disclose problems in the chain of title for the Mortgage Loans.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén