If the homeowner has a title for their home listing them as the sole owner, then they can tell the bank to DIAF.
		
		
	 
Except when they arrive at the door with the sheriff and a foreclosure notice signed by the appropriate authority...it happens (fortunately, not very often) and the house gets sold before the legal owners can get a court judgement to stop it.
All that kind of bullshit aside, (because as I said, it happens very seldom) my biggest bitch isn't the banks foreclosing on mortgages, but rather with the government bailing out the big banks who gambled and lost on mortgage-backed financial instruments. THEY should have to take the same kinds of hits that the homeowners have to take when the economy goes south.
In one of my college classes in 2009, we saw a presentation/film/ (??) from one of the big economists/financial gurus that explained that the government could have bought up all the bad/underwater mortgages that were due to foreclose or predicted to go into foreclosure...kept people in their houses, prevented MOST of the big banks from going under, prevented the housing bubble collapse and resulting near-collapse of the economy from being as bad as it has been...and not spent as much taxpayer money. Yes, the payback from the homeowners would have taken longer...as people paid off their mortgages, but the economy wouldn't have taken nearly as big of a hit as it did when the government bailed out the banks with taxpayer dollars...and the banks proceeded to hoard the money, causing further damage to the economy as credit got tighter and tighter, plus they paid it out in obscene bonuses to executives who caused the financial problems to begin with...would SOME of the mortgages still have been foreclosed? Yes, as people lost their jobs and didn't find new ones, but it was predicted that the foreclosure rate would have been only slightly higher than it had been before all this started...and fewer people would have lost their jobs as the economy stayed stronger. Adjustable mortgages wouldn't have adjusted, or the adjustment would have been much smaller, and more people could have afforded to keep their houses.
A pipe dream? Perhaps...I don't remember all the particulars of the film/presentation, but bailing out the big banks instead of the homeowners didn't make sense then...and it doesn't make sense now.
If "Wall Street" wants to privatize gains, they should also have to privatize losses instead of depending on the taxpayers to cover their gambling debts.