Americans face post-foreclosure hell as wages garnished, assets seized

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
It seems this even affects people who did "short pays" and avoided foreclosure.

Just so you know many banks made a tremendous amount of profit from foreclosing on homes. Here are some articles that explain how they did and why they started foreclosing on homes with zeal:

Foreclosures Are More Profitable Than Loan Modifications, According To New Report


Big banks profiting from foreclosure crisis

-------------------------------------------------------

(Reuters) - Many thousands of Americans who lost their homes in the housing bust, but have since begun to rebuild their finances, are suddenly facing a new foreclosure nightmare: debt collectors are chasing them down for the money they still owe by freezing their bank accounts, garnishing their wages and seizing their assets.

By now, banks have usually sold the houses. But the proceeds of those sales were often not enough to cover the amount of the loan, plus penalties, legal bills and fees. The two big government-controlled housing finance companies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as other mortgage players, are increasingly pressing borrowers to pay whatever they still owe on mortgages they defaulted on years ago.

Using a legal tool known as a "deficiency judgment," lenders can ensure that borrowers are haunted by these zombie-like debts for years, and sometimes decades, to come. Before the housing bubble, banks often refrained from seeking deficiency judgments, which were seen as costly and an invitation for bad publicity. Some of the biggest banks still feel that way.

But the housing crisis saddled lenders with more than $1 trillion of foreclosed loans, leading to unprecedented losses. Now, at least some large lenders want their money back, and they figure it’s the perfect time to pursue borrowers: many of those who went through foreclosure have gotten new jobs, paid off old debts and even, in some cases, bought new homes.

"Just because they don't have the money to pay the entire mortgage, doesn't mean they don't have enough for a deficiency judgment," said Florida foreclosure defense attorney Michael Wayslik.

Advocates for the banks say that the former homeowners ought to pay what they owe. Consumer advocates counter that deficiency judgments blast those who have just recovered from financial collapse back into debt — and that the banks bear culpability because they made the unsustainable loans in the first place.



“SLAPPED TO THE FLOOR”

Borrowers are usually astonished to find out they still owe thousands of dollars on homes they haven't thought about for years.

In 2008, bank teller Danell Huthsing broke up with her boyfriend and moved out of the concrete bungalow they shared in Jacksonville, Florida. Her name was on the mortgage even after she moved out, and when her boyfriend defaulted on the loan, her name was on the foreclosure papers, too.

She moved to St. Louis, Missouri, where she managed to amass $20,000 of savings and restore her previously stellar credit score in her job as a service worker at an Amtrak station.

But on July 5, a process server showed up on her doorstep with a lawsuit demanding $91,000 for the portion of her mortgage that was still unpaid after the home was foreclosed and sold. If she loses, the debt collector that filed the suit can freeze her bank account, garnish up to 25 percent of her wages, and seize her paid-off 2005 Honda Accord.

"For seven years you think you're good to go, that you've put this behind you," said Huthsing, who cleared her savings out of the bank and stowed the money in a safe to protect it from getting seized. "Then wham, you get slapped to the floor again."

Bankruptcy is one way out for consumers in this rub. But it has serious drawbacks: it can trash a consumer's credit report for up to ten years, making it difficult to get credit cards, car loans or home financing. Oftentimes, borrowers will instead go on a repayment plan or simply settle the suits — without questioning the filings or hiring a lawyer — in exchange for paying a lower amount.

Though court officials and attorneys in foreclosure-ravaged regions like Florida, Ohio and Illinois all say the cases are surging, no one keeps official tabs on the number nationally. "Statistically, this is a real difficult task to get a handle on," said Geoff Walsh, an attorney with the National Consumer Law Center.

Officials in individual counties say that the cases, while virtually zero a year or two ago, now number in the hundreds in each county. Thirty-eight states, along with the District of Columbia, allow financial institutions recourse to claw back these funds.

"I've definitely noticed a huge uptick," said Cook County, Illinois homeowner attorney Sandra Emerson. "They didn’t include language in court motions to pursue these. Now, they do."

"A CURSE"

Three of the biggest mortgage lenders, Bank of America, Citigroup, (C.N) JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N) and Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC.N), all say that they typically don't pursue deficiency judgments, though they reserve the right to do so. "We may pursue them on a case-by-case basis looking at a variety of factors, including investor and mortgage insurer requirements, the financial status of the borrower and the type of hardship," said Wells Fargo spokesman Tom Goyda. The banks would not comment on why they avoid deficiency judgments.

Perhaps the most aggressive among the debt pursuers is Fannie Mae. Of the 595,128 foreclosures Fannie Mae was involved in – either through owning or guaranteeing the loans - from January 2010 through June 2012, it referred 293,134 to debt collectors for possible pursuit of deficiency judgments, according to a 2013 report by the Inspector General for the agency’s regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

It is unclear how many of the loans that get sent to debt collectors actually get deficiency judgments, but the IG urged the FHFA to direct Fannie Mae, along with Freddie Mac, to pursue more of them from the people who could repay them.

It appears as if Fannie Mae is doing just that. In Florida alone in the past year, for example, at least 10,000 lawsuits have been filed — representing hundreds of millions of dollars of payments, according to Jacksonville, Florida-based attorney Chip Parker.

Parker is about to file a class action lawsuit against the Dallas-based debt collection company, Dyck O'Neal, which is working to recoup the money on behalf of Fannie Mae. The class action will allege that Dyck O'Neal violated fair debt collection practices by suing people in the state of Florida who actually lived out of state. Dyck O'Neal declined to comment.

In Lee County, Florida, for example, Dyck O'Neal only filed four foreclosure-related deficiency judgment cases last year. So far this year, it has filed 360 in the county, which has more than 650,000 residents and includes Ft. Myers. The insurer the Mortgage Guaranty Insurance Company has also filed about 1,000 cases this past year in Florida alone.

Andrew Wilson, a spokesman for Fannie Mae, said the finance giant is focusing on "strategic defaulters:" those who could have paid their mortgages but did not. Fannie Mae analyzes borrowers' ability to repay based on their open credit lines, assets, income, expenses, credit history, mortgages and properties, according to the 2013 IG report. "Fannie Mae and the taxpayers suffered a loss. We're focusing on people who had the ability to make a payment but decided not to do so,” said Wilson.

Freddie Mac spokesman Brad German said the decision to pursue deficiency judgments for any particular loan is made on a "case-by-case basis."

The FHFA declined to comment.

But homeowner-defense lawyers point out that separating strategic defaulters from those who were in real distress can be tricky. If a distressed borrower suddenly manages to improve their financial position – by, for example, getting a better-paying job - they can be classified as a strategic defaulter.

Dyck O'Neal works with most national lenders and servicing companies to collect on charged-off residential real estate. It purchases foreclosure debts outright, often for pennies on the dollar, and also performs collections on a contingency basis on behalf of entities like Fannie Mae. "The debt collectors tend to be much more aggressive than the lenders had been," the National Consumer Law Center's Walsh said.

A big reason for the new surge in deficiency claims, attorneys say, is that states like Florida have recently enacted laws limiting the time financial institutions have to sue for the debt after a foreclosure. In Florida, for example, financial institutions now only have a year after a foreclosure sale to sue — down from five.

Once financial institutions secure a judgment, they can sometimes have years to collect on the claim. In Maryland, for example, they have as long as 36 years to chase people down for the debt. Financial institutions can charge post-judgment interest of an estimated 4.75 percent a year on the remaining balance until the statute of limitation runs out, which can drive people deeper into debt.

"This is monumentally unfair and damaging to the economy," said Ira Rheingold, the executive director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates. "It prevents people from moving forward with their lives."

Software developer Doug Weinberg was just getting back on his feet when he got served in July with a $61,000 deficiency judgment on his old condo in Miami's Biscayne Bay. Weinberg thought the ordeal was over after Bank of America, which rejected Weinberg’s short sale offers, foreclosed in 2009.

"It's a curse," said Weinberg. "It's still haunting me. It just doesn't go away."

Link to News Article
 
Last edited:

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
Gee, so you mean to say allowing flippers and other knuckleheads to run the cost of real estate up into the statsophere, while govt cheers it on so it can collect inflated property taxes as well... and then casting this net over the heads of many least able to afford it... was a series of REALLY FUCKING BAD IDEAS?

Say it isn't so.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
198
106
Where are the people here who justified walking away from an upside down home? There have been numerous discussions here about how people were justified in walking away.

Walk away they said, it was a sound financial decision they said.

Then that decision to walk away comes back and bites you in the ass.
 

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
In other words, the United States is one giant debtors prison.

Pretty much. I just think the whole "collection agencies" thing has gotten way out of hand though. The fact that many of these banks stole from the American public and not one of the CEO's or higher ups faced jail time bothers me a great deal. What these banks have done is gone to bed with these collection agencies and now penalizing millions of American's for things beyond their control.

I think someone in Congress needs to put a stop to some of this crap by collection agencies I really do. I think it is going to get so out of hand that they will be forced to.

Short pay's are supposed to be the preferred method for banks to avoid the expense of a foreclosure process but it seems they are still giving the fees that they wrote off to the collections agencies who are in turn going after people many years later with regards to homes that they tried to sell because of the 2008 economic collapse.

This whole thing is just insane.
 

spacejamz

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
10,993
1,742
126
You have to love the 'appeal to emotion' stories...

In 2008, bank teller Danell Huthsing broke up with her boyfriend and moved out of the concrete bungalow they shared in Jacksonville, Florida. Her name was on the mortgage even after she moved out, and when her boyfriend defaulted on the loan, her name was on the foreclosure papers, too.

When you put your name on a legal binding document (like a mortgage), you should be prepared to handle everything that comes with the territory (for better or worse). This is no different than a married couple getting a divorce and the only way to remove someone's name from the mortgage is to refinance the loan.

Should the break-up fairy have magically removed her name from the mortgage to instantly absolve the responsibility she willing accepted?
 

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
You have to love the 'appeal to emotion' stories...



When you put your name on a legal binding document (like a mortgage), you should be prepared to handle everything that comes with the territory (for better or worse). This is no different than a married couple getting a divorce and the only way to remove someone's name from the mortgage is to refinance the loan.

Should the break-up fairy have magically removed her name from the mortgage to instantly absolve the responsibility she willing accepted?

Lets not divert from what these banks and collection agencies are really doing here shall we?

This is seriously F***ed up shit that is going on here. Even with people who do short sales.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
198
106
I think someone in Congress needs to put a stop to some of this crap by collection agencies I really do. I think it is going to get so out of hand that they will be forced to.

Bull crap.

Someone signs a contract to buy a home for $500k even though the home is only really worth $50k, they need to hold to their word. If they were dumb enough to get ripped off, deal with it.

All those people who walked away from their homes, they need to be held responsible for their actions.
 

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
Bull crap.

Someone signs a contract to buy a home for $500k even though the home is only really worth $50k, they need to hold to their word. If they were dumb enough to get ripped off, deal with it.

All those people who walked away from their homes, they need to be held responsible for their actions.

You do realize that many many of these people had jobs, many had good paying jobs to afford to pay for their homes that suddenly disappeared after the 2008 crash right? The crash that was caused by the big banks right?
 

spacejamz

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
10,993
1,742
126
Lets not divert from what these banks and collection agencies are really doing here shall we?

This is seriously F***ed up shit that is going on here. Even with people who do short sales.

Divert from this???? What exactly is the problem here?

Andrew Wilson, a spokesman for Fannie Mae, said the finance giant is focusing on "strategic defaulters:" those who could have paid their mortgages but did not. Fannie Mae analyzes borrowers' ability to repay based on their open credit lines, assets, income, expenses, credit history, mortgages and properties, according to the 2013 IG report. "Fannie Mae and the taxpayers suffered a loss. We're focusing on people who had the ability to make a payment but decided not to do so,” said Wilson.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
198
106
You do realize that many many of these people had jobs, many had good paying jobs to afford to pay for their homes that suddenly disappeared after the 2008 crash right? The crash that was caused by the big banks right?

A large part of the problem is the value of their home dropped during and after the crash.

There were numerous discussions here about why would you pay for a home that is worth 1/2 of what you bought it for?
 

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
Divert from this???? What exactly is the problem here?


Many of those "strategic defaulters" were denied loan modifications. In addition the banks had big incentive for causing people to go into default and I quote:

How can this be? Certainly, it is in the best interests of both borrower and lender to resolve a delinquency quickly; the borrower wants to avoid eviction, while the lender wants to avoid the typical 50-percent-plus loss associated with a residential foreclosure.

The answer lies in the perverse incentives put in place by the Wall Street securitization machine; in particular, the perverse incentives facing the once-obscure entities known as “mortgage servicers.” These servicers, the largest of which are subsidiaries of the “Big Four” banks - Bank of America, Citibank, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo - do the “grunt work” formerly done by mortgage-portfolio lenders. For a small fee, they collect monthly mortgage payments and distribute them to the investors who purchased the rights to mortgage cash flows in the form of residential mortgage-backed securities or “sliced and diced” derivative securities, such as collateralized debt obligations.

The perverse incentives arise because of provisions in the pooling and servicing agreements, which are the contracts that govern the mortgage-backed securities. These provisions provide for the servicers and their affiliates to extract late fees and other forms of income (foreclosure fees, forced-insurance premiums, property inspection fees, property valuation fees, etc.) from the often unwary delinquent homeowner. Moreover, these fees and income typically are paid to servicers before any payments go to the investor-lenders. Consequently, they rob equity from the homeowner and, once that equity is exhausted, rob principal and interest payments from the investor-lender. These fees include monthly late fees similar to those for a missed credit card payment; they can be quite substantial relative to the monthly mortgage payment and, cumulatively, can quickly move a delinquent homeowner from a positive- to a negative-equity position, making foreclosure all but a certainty.

Now consider how these fee incentives affect a servicer’s behavior regarding mortgage modifications. Should the delinquent mortgage be modified or refinanced successfully, or should a short sale occur, the servicer’s income stream is cut off - totally in the event of a short sale or refinancing. Faced with this loss of income, the servicer will do everything in its power to avoid permanent modifications and short sales; it will do everything it can to prolong the mortgage delinquency. These fee incentives also go a long way in explaining the abysmal performance of the Home Affordable Modification Program, (HAMP); servicers enticed borrowers into trial modifications with promises of permanent modifications, only to push the borrowers so much further underwater that they could not pass the infamous HAMP Net-Present-Value, which requires a permanent modification to be less costly than foreclosure. According to the Treasury Department’s October HAMP Report, servicers had converted 85 percent of trial offers into trial modifications but converted just 37 percent of trial modifications into permanent modifications.

Compounding these fee incentives is a more insidious conflict of interest. According to a Nov. 16 press release from the Association of Mortgage Investors, which represents the investors who actually own most delinquent mortgages but have delegated the servicing of them to subsidiaries of the Big Four banks, foreclosure-mitigation programs “have often proven unsuccessful due to servicers, who invariably are the second-lien holders, and who continue to inhibit sustainable modifications” of the delinquent mortgages. In other words, the banks that own the servicers also have extended second mortgages on the same properties that they are servicing and are pursuing their own best interests to the detriment of the investors they represent as servicers. Therefore, it is not surprising that Big Four banks converted just 78 percent of HAMP trial offers into trial modifications, and just 30 percent of trial modifications into permanent modifications, while the rest of the industry converted 99 percent of trial offers into trial modifications and 50 percent of trial modifications into permanent modifications. Incentives matter. Source here
 

highland145

Lifer
Oct 12, 2009
43,973
6,340
136
My house was at $280 at the height. Just got new bank appraisal at $178. I would walk away but it's paid for. Guess I failed.
 

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
Oh and here is another example of people who could have paid their mortgage if they could have gotten a loan modification but were denied. There are among millions of homeowners who were done this way: Link to New article

It’s a story heard again and again across the country as desperate homeowners try to participate in a federal program created to foster loan modifications and prevent foreclosures. Loan servicers say their hands are tied by Wall Street.

"Federal officials, bank officers, housing counselors and investors themselves say that excuse is cited far more often than is justified. In fact, they say, few mortgage deals include such restrictions.

Consider the case of the Baileys. Litton, a subsidiary of Goldman Sachs, services their loan, and Litton’s contract with investors has no clear language banning modifications. In fact, documents show that over 115 other mortgages from the same investment pool have already been modified.

Even the representative of investors in the Baileys’ mortgage says only the servicer can decide when to modify loans. While he couldn’t comment on an individual case, Bank of New York Mellon spokesman Kevin Heine says it’s “misinformation” to say that investors make these decisions.

Servicers can pass the buck because one mortgage often involves many different companies. During the housing bubble, banks often sold mortgages to investors on Wall Street so they wouldn’t have to keep the loans on their own books, freeing them to make even more loans and protecting them from those that went bad. They then hired servicers to handle the day-to-day work of collecting payments from homeowners *– and to decide when to modify loans. Now loan servicers have been inundated with requests from homeowners trying to avoid foreclosure through the government’s $75 billion mortgage modification program. The Treasury Department estimates that 1.7 million homeowners should qualify for help.

For homeowners, it can be difficult to understand who is responsible for what. This confusion gives servicers a ready excuse for refusing modifications.

Indeed, nobody knows the exact extent to which servicers are passing blame on to investors. Some housing counselors estimate that 10 percent of the denials they see are attributed to investors; others say they see as many as 40 percent. Either way, tens of thousands of homeowners may be affected, their attempts to modify their mortgage wrongly denied."
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
73,502
35,189
136
I saw the OP's article on yahoo news. The very next article was discussing the relaxation of lending standards on new mortgages. There is nothing new under the sun.
 
Last edited:

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally Posted by Texashiker
Bull crap.

Someone signs a contract to buy a home for $500k even though the home is only really worth $50k, they need to hold to their word. If they were dumb enough to get ripped off, deal with it.

All those people who walked away from their homes, they need to be held responsible for their actions.



You do realize that many many of these people had jobs, many had good paying jobs to afford to pay for their homes that suddenly disappeared after the 2008 crash right? The crash that was caused by the big banks right?

Don't waste your breathe or typing on miserable America hating scum like him.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
198
106
Don't waste your breathe or typing on miserable America hating scum like him.

We are somewhat saying the same thing.

People who could afford to pay for the mortgage walked away. Those people should be made responsible for their financial obligations.
 

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
Originally Posted by Texashiker
Bull crap.

Someone signs a contract to buy a home for $500k even though the home is only really worth $50k, they need to hold to their word. If they were dumb enough to get ripped off, deal with it.

All those people who walked away from their homes, they need to be held responsible for their actions.





Don't waste your breathe or typing on miserable America hating scum like him.

Yea I don't think he bothers reading, so your probably right. He is just blinded by his hatred of American's it seems.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
198
106
He is just blinded by his hatred of American's it seems.

I love my nation.

Does not change the fact that during the financial crash poor decisions were made on both sides.

But those poor decisions does not excuse someone from simply walking away. Those people signed a contract, they made a deal, now stand by that deal.

Someone gets sued because they neglected a financial obligation, what is the big deal?
 

WackyDan

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2004
4,794
68
91
Where are the people here who justified walking away from an upside down home? There have been numerous discussions here about how people were justified in walking away.

Walk away they said, it was a sound financial decision they said.

Then that decision to walk away comes back and bites you in the ass.

I thought this depended on state mortgage/property laws. In some states it is legal for the bank to go after the owner in default for the difference owed after a short sale or foreclosure. I'm pretty sure California is one.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
You do realize that many many of these people had jobs, many had good paying jobs to afford to pay for their homes that suddenly disappeared after the 2008 crash right? The crash that was caused by the big banks right?

Greedy people were just as culpable as the banks. They banks freely lent the money to greedy people getting interest only loans planning to sell in 2 years before a reset and after the house appreciated 50%.

Everyone should have listened to Dave Ramsey. Put 20% down, be able to afford a 15 year mortgage and only after saving up an emergency fund to last 6 months.