Banks have no standing to take away a persons home

IanMacQuaide · Feb 23, 2009

I've read more than one article about this.
Federal Bktcy and State Dist. judges are seriously denying "repo's" to Mtg holders who can't produce the original paperwork, and, as it turns out, many Mtg. Co's and Banks simply can't find the original documents.
Sticky wicket, eh?

LeeD · Feb 23, 2009

Quote from TGregg:If for some reason the banks cannot foreclose because they do not own the mortgage, you can bet that the owners of the mortgage will get whatever agreement they need to allow the banks to act as their agent.

It is porbable that the security for the loan cannot be ressigned to an investor because the permission to reassign it was not in the original mortagage agreement. So, no additiona agreement between the investor and the bank will help.

Quote from TGregg:If not, those mortgages will be sold back to the bank.

This may nott be easy because most mortgages are owned not by ultimate investors but by trusts where trustees have very limited remit to be proactive in getting teh best deal for the ultimate investor. Finding those with the ultimate interest in the performance of mortgages and authority to alter teh terms is even more difficult because many securities obtained form securitising mortgages are securitised again.

LeeD · Feb 23, 2009

Quote from TGregg:"Stop paying your mortgage - the banks cannot foreclose?"

This is not good enough a reason. Banks still have all the rights associated with a non-securitised loan such as putting claim on any homeowner's cash and sending bailiffs.

ralph00 · Feb 23, 2009

Quote from LeeD:

This is not good enough a reason. Banks still have all the rights associated with a non-securitised loan such as putting claim on any homeowner's cash and sending bailiffs.

How is this possible in a non-recourse state. People are mailing their keys in and abandoning their houses by the thousands in CA. I have not heard that even one of them has had a claim put on their other assets.

IanMacQuaide · Feb 23, 2009

Quote from ralph00:

How is this possible in a non-recourse state. People are mailing their keys in and abandoning their houses by the thousands in CA. I have not heard that even one of them has had a claim put on their other assets.

Bingo!
If ALL Mtg's were Full Recourse loans, very few would default.

Trader666 · Feb 23, 2009

Only in America.

First, it's not "someone's home" until they pay for it. So deadbeat occupier does not equal homeowner.

Second, only in America would an army of lawyers rush to help deadbeats and freeloaders.

I can hear the commercials now "You deserve to keep your home even if you haven't been paying the mortgage... "

This is how it should be done:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2313077&#post2313077

Quote from nutmeg:

"I want to see the servicing agent's power of attorney, I want to see all the paperwork before I approve it," he said. "If the paperwork is garbage, I deny it. If you're going to take away someone's home, it should be done properly."

"So far I've drafted about 1,500 lawyers into my army," Charney said in a telephone interview last week. She is scheduled to make hold her first New York seminar next month.

lundy · Feb 23, 2009

this is not new, although it is getting more attention now. I have an attorney friend who has been doing this in Hawaii since before 2000.

nutmeg · Feb 23, 2009

Second, only in America would an army of lawyers rush to help deadbeats and freeloaders.

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

Tut tut..

We are a nation of laws, if the law benefits the freeloader and deadbeat, they haven't broken the law. Congress writes sloppy laws.

jem · Feb 23, 2009

Some of California's loans are non recourse and some are not. We have a pretty complex web of anti deficiency protections in CA.

The main laws are CCP 580b and CCP 726.

With respect to purchase money loans on CCP 580b - the property goes back to the lender as payment in full after a foreclosure. Thats the deal the lender made with the borrowers per the statute. Its why it is criminal the banks were giving out 100% or more ltv with 2-5% kicks to the brokers.

You are not a deadbeat if you are following the law. The banks are the deadbeats. The took our billions in bonuses and are leaving the gov't with trillions in problems.

dve250 · Feb 23, 2009

A cc company once filed suit against me for not paying the the bill. I responded by saying I didn't recall ever opening an account with them, and I requested they produce the original agreement plus a record of all the charges including receipts for the purchases with my signature as authorization, or proof the item was delivered to my address. They had no records at all and agreed to dismiss the case. If they wouldn't have sued I would have paid them but for doing that I stuck it to them.