The whole foreclosure fiasco and a possible moratorium.

[spacejamz]

There should be a moratorium on forecloses until this whole mess can be straighten out. There was a story a while back about a homeowner who paid cash whose home was put into foreclosure buy one of these companies. Until all the paperwork can be verified as legitimate no foreclosure should proceed.

http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2010/10/04/daily48.html

Obama disagrees with you....

 

[LegendKiller]

You are quickly finding out that the actual foreclosures aren't a big deal. Overall, the processes were fine. The documentation chain can be re-created and a small portion of loans are being rejected. Most of those can and will be refiled.

The idea that people deserve modifications is bullshit. It's not like these people can't find shelter.

As far as the Rep&Warrant issue, it's going to be a massive legal slog for anybody trying to prove it. Most documentation has some outs and even if they don't, you're going to only be able to claim those loans that are outside of the stratifications disclosed *AND* failed as a direct result of such failure to disclose. Thus, the claim is actually not $47bn (which was face amount of bonds) but rather the % of non-disclosed * % of defaulted * principal loss on the house * settlement.

Thus, lets say that you own $47bn in bonds and find that 20% of the pool wasn't disclosed. Lets say that there was 10% OC in the pool, thus the entire pool of loans was $54bn. Of the 20%, lets say you suffer 50% defaults and 50% severity, thus you only suffer 25% net losses. That means that less than 5% of the entire pool can be rejected due to non-disclosure. Now, the bank is going to argue that not all of the 20%*50%*50% was due to non-disclosure, and they'll win some of that, so the net amount may be 50% of that, or 2% of the entire pool. They'll settle for 50% of that.

That's even if you get that far, it won't. The monolines have tried and failed thus far.

 

[dawp]

double post

 

[dawp]

Obama disagrees with you....

So what.

 

[WHAMPOM]

So whats going on here? I was not keeping up with the 1st part of the news. I heard it several times but never paid any attention, primarily because my though was - who can a foreclosures me "erroneous"? you had to have done something to get into this mess, like, maybe, not making a few payment?? You might be one of the loons who though that you social security can pay for a 500k house or you may be one of those unfortunate ppl who lost their job to Bush. Now there might be some new laws that might have protected you from a foreclosure for a while, but the bottom line is you are not making payment and the market need to move on...
Now here comes the second part, why the hell do we need a freaking moratorium on foreclosure??? isn't that just retard? and somehow it seems that the left is against it while the right is all for it!! WTF? I would have expected the opposite...

Obama administration does not support U.S. moratorium on foreclosures

Let me explain it to you. The banks are processing foreclosures with the same due diligence as they did in making the mortgages. In other words screwing the pooch.

 

[Darwin333]

I give up....personal accountability for paying one's debts has gone completely out the window it appears...

The bottom line is that these people are not paying their mortgages and are now trying to exploit an error with the system to somehow magically keep the house even though they cannot afford to pay for it and HAVE NOT MADE A MORTGAGE PAYMENT for a LONG period of time.

So what happens when issue is fixed? When all of the documents get signed and reviewed? Will these same people now be able to pay back what they owe? I seriously doubt it...

This has nothing to do with people getting a free house. If they haven't met their contractual agreements they should face the penalties which in this case usually involves losing the house.

This has EVERYTHING to do with the rule of law and due process. What part about that don't you understand or don't you agree with?

I once did a T&M change order for the government and I lost some of the paperwork. The problem was that per the contract that paperwork was required for me to get paid on that part of the change order. Wanna guess what happened? I didn't get paid. Should the government have gotten free work? Hell no they shouldn't have but they aren't the ones that lost the paperwork, I was.

Why do rules and laws like that apply to me but not the banks?

Do you realize how much of this fraudulent shit we own via Fannie and Freddie? I say fraudulent because if the paperwork in question wasn't transferred with the MBS the banks sold. That means the MBS was misrepresented to the buyers, shouldn't the banks be forced to repurchase them at full price if that is the case?

Why do you think the bank should get a free ride but are so adamant against some schmuck getting a free ride?

nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

That is all that I am asking for, what exactly is it that you want?

 

[Darwin333]

You are quickly finding out that the actual foreclosures aren't a big deal. Overall, the processes were fine. The documentation chain can be re-created and a small portion of loans are being rejected. Most of those can and will be refiled.

The idea that people deserve modifications is bullshit. It's not like these people can't find shelter.

As far as the Rep&Warrant issue, it's going to be a massive legal slog for anybody trying to prove it. Most documentation has some outs and even if they don't, you're going to only be able to claim those loans that are outside of the stratifications disclosed *AND* failed as a direct result of such failure to disclose. Thus, the claim is actually not $47bn (which was face amount of bonds) but rather the % of non-disclosed * % of defaulted * principal loss on the house * settlement.

Thus, lets say that you own $47bn in bonds and find that 20% of the pool wasn't disclosed. Lets say that there was 10% OC in the pool, thus the entire pool of loans was $54bn. Of the 20%, lets say you suffer 50% defaults and 50% severity, thus you only suffer 25% net losses. That means that less than 5% of the entire pool can be rejected due to non-disclosure. Now, the bank is going to argue that not all of the 20%*50%*50% was due to non-disclosure, and they'll win some of that, so the net amount may be 50% of that, or 2% of the entire pool. They'll settle for 50% of that.

That's even if you get that far, it won't. The monolines have tried and failed thus far.

So you like playing by the rules now or is it just when its in the banks favor? You are right though, making the banksters and the entire banking industry abide by the law and be held accountable for their illegal and unethical actions has failed thus far, but it looks like we *might* be making some headway. We can only hope.

article from Bloomberg: Banks face two front war on mortgage battle

A sampling of 6,533 loans in 12 securitizations by Countrywide found 97 percent failed to conform to underwriting guidelines, according to a lawsuit filed Sept. 29 by Ambac Assurance Corp. in New York state Supreme Court.

Its a good time to be a lawyer.

 

[Darwin333]

You are quickly finding out that the actual foreclosures aren't a big deal.

Curious if you still stand behind this statement?