What would it take to get you to move to Des Moines Iowa? A free $370,000 house?

[sportage]

This is interesting. A couple paid one payment on their $370,000 new house, were foreclosed on, and won the house back FREE using an 123 year old Iowa law.

And they were not the first to do so!

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/ar...closed-in-court?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|News

couple salvaged their house from foreclosure in 2007 after making one payment, using a 123-year-old law

Mortgage lenders and readers were outraged this week by news that the couple salvaged their house from foreclosure in 2007 after making one payment, using a 123-year-old law that requires both spouses to sign a mortgage.

The Des Moines Register reported Friday that Troy Hudson, a cousin of Jamie Danielson, managed the same feat in 2006. His wife had not signed his mortgage.

In both cases, which were upheld by the Iowa Court of Appeals, the couples voided their mortgages and kept their houses.

 

[wuliheron]

Nice to see some real Americans succeeding with a little hard work, talent, and guts.

 

[dawp]

This just shows just how sloppy the mortgage industry has been.

 

[PeshakJang]

Nice to see some real Americans succeeding with a little hard work, talent, and guts.

LOL, nice start to my morning.

 

[Doppel]

Funny, but these people deserve to be kicked to the curb, we all know this. There are a lot of silly laws on states books. I would move to Iowa for a free $370k house. Maybe.

 

[Engineer]

Law needs to be repealed now before others try to jump on the bandwagon and screw the banks out of money. It's a slap to all of us who do work hard and actually PAY our bills.

 

[boomerang]

I wonder what the plan is to pay the taxes on these homes? The whole family sounds pretty resourceful, I'm thinking they'll find a way for the rest of us to cover that expense too.

 

[rudeguy]

I wonder what the plan is to pay the taxes on these homes? The whole family sounds pretty resourceful, I'm thinking they'll find a way for the rest of us to cover that expense too.

the family is beyond broke. How is that resourceful?

Why not post the rest of the story instead of just this one bit?

 

[boomerang]

the family is beyond broke. How is that resourceful?

That part was sarcasm. They're good at gaming the system and will find a way for the rest of us to cover their taxes so they can keep their "free" homes.

 

[Darwin333]

Law needs to be repealed now before others try to jump on the bandwagon and screw the banks out of money. It's a slap to all of us who do work hard and actually PAY our bills.

I agree that the law should be repealed, I see no reason why my wife should be forced by law to sign the mortgage on our house if she or I do not wish it.

With that said, I have absolutely no sympathy for the banks. They freaking invented "fine print", I can understand getting caught on the first one but after that they should require both signatures from married couples before loaning them the money.

It is just too easy of a solution, add question to loan application "Are you currently married" as well as a form at the actual signing "I am currently not legally married". If they are married then the spouse is required to be at the signing or you don't get a loan. If they lie that should be fraud and enough for the bank to get the house back and as long as you make them sign something at the same time they are signing the loan docs it prevents them from getting married right before they get (but after they applied) for the loan.

 

[Jhhnn]

In the US, "System Games You!" has played out millions of times over the last several years, but when the reverse occurs, it's supposed to be some kind of outrage.

Due diligence isn't just for buyers, but for lenders, too. Which party in agreement had enormous prior experience, plus armies of lawyers, actuaries, and accountants, anyway? The lender was just running a scam on the investors who bought the MBS of which the mortgage was likely a very small part, anyway. Perfectly legal, of course. The only people to profit at all in many foreclosures are the servicers, usually the original lenders, because of the way MBS fees are structured. Screw the investors, screw the buyers, profit all the while.

The Iowa law was clearly intended to protect spouses from being unknowing parties to debt taken on by the other half of the marriage contract. This can be a very large problem in the event of divorce, for example, where the unknowing and non-signing partner can be held liable for debt they had no part in creating.

 

[Acanthus]

In the US, "System Games You!" has played out millions of times over the last several years, but when the reverse occurs, it's supposed to be some kind of outrage.

Due diligence isn't just for buyers, but for lenders, too. Which party in agreement had enormous prior experience, plus armies of lawyers, actuaries, and accountants, anyway? The lender was just running a scam on the investors who bought the MBS of which the mortgage was likely a very small part, anyway. Perfectly legal, of course. The only people to profit at all in many foreclosures are the servicers, usually the original lenders, because of the way MBS fees are structured. Screw the investors, screw the buyers, profit all the while.

The Iowa law was clearly intended to protect spouses from being unknowing parties to debt taken on by the other half of the marriage contract. This can be a very large problem in the event of divorce, for example, where the unknowing and non-signing partner can be held liable for debt they had no part in creating.

this. The law does have a purpose and exists in other states.

While i disagree that they should just get the house for free... The lender had a responsibility to keep everything legal.

 

[her209]

They should change their name to "I owe what?"

 

[Red Dawn]

TWhat would it take to get you to move to Des Moines Iowa? A free $370,000 house?

It'd take a lot more than that.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Maybe this will encourage the mortgage companies and other lenders to be more careful next time and to pay more attention the laws and proper paperwork. If this couple never should have received a mortgage in the first place, then the mortgage company is getting what it deserves.

 

[boomerang]

Good points made by many. Two guilty parties. The law is the law and it played out as such.

Who's taking the loss? If you think it's the evil bankers, you might want to put some more thought into that.

 

[wuliheron]

Funny, but these people deserve to be kicked to the curb, we all know this. There are a lot of silly laws on states books. I would move to Iowa for a free $370k house. Maybe.

You should watch the movie "Fun With Dick and Jane". That's the American system boy. The Wall Street bozos who drove the economy into the toilet were celebrating right afterwards with champaign massages and million dollar bonuses. Some of the public cried for their heads, but the banks started bidding for their services. Guess who got what they wanted.

Of course, these two a small potatoes. That's life. Bust some teenage kid with a joint and send him away for twenty years, while the real crooks get away with murder.

 

[Jhhnn]

Good points made by many. Two guilty parties. The law is the law and it played out as such.

Who's taking the loss? If you think it's the evil bankers, you might want to put some more thought into that.

Meh. It's hard to say in this particular instance, but Wall St rigged the game before it even started. MBS are structured in such a way that when the revenue stream drops below the fees charged by servicers, the investors receive nothing. It's therefore in servicers' interest to stretch out foreclosures, charging increased delinquency fees to the MBS investors, holding foreclosure sales down. That way, they can bleed the trust dry over time, divert funds that would have gone to investors to themselves. They get their fees off the top, while investors get what's left. They just make sure there's nothing left by stretching it out over time.

Increasingly, servicers are abandoning houses in lesser neighborhoods where most houses are rentals- they don't foreclose and sell, they just keep collecting delinquency fees from the revenue stream generated by other good mortgages in the MBS pool. This serves to further blight not so hot neighborhoods and to milk investors at the same time.

With Republicans in blocking positions in Congress and many Statehouses, there's not a damned thing that will be done about any of it, either. Wall St knew full well that the Greenspan Put was in place long before they began this looting spree, and that they'd be bailed out so long as the Bush Admin was in power, rather than sacked, nationalized and reorganized, which is what really should have happened.

 

[Patranus]

Just another couples of leeches dragging down society.

 

[Thump553]

I hope the bank's counsel who did the closing had malpractice insurance.

 

[wuliheron]

I hope the bank's counsel who did the closing had malpractice insurance.

If they have a lawyer who doesn't know how to cover their own ass then they obviously need a good lesson.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

After reading the glut of daddy follower posts in this thread it is nice to see that such an insightful, intelligent person still posts on this forum. Jhhnn, this bud's for you!

 

[theeedude]

Just another couples of leeches dragging down society.

But enough about the bankers...