May
23

Smith, Hiatt & Diaz Case v ABBY G. LOPEZ | Fraudclosure Hearing Involving LPS May 24 at 1:30pm PBC, Florida FRAUDCLOSURE COURT WATCHERS Needed

May 24 at 1:30pm Palm Beach County, Florida FRAUDCLOSURE COURT WATCHERS needed Time: May 24, 2012 from 1:30pm to 2:15pm Location: “Palm Beach County Circuit Court room 4A Street: 205 North Dixie Hwy City/Town: West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Event Type: fraudclosure hearing There is a hearing in Palm Beach foreclosure court on May 24th … Read more Related posts:
  1. Smith, Hiatt & Diaz Case v ABBY G. LOPEZ | Fraudclosure Involving LPS On Despite Glitch, Confusion
  2. OUCH! Judge Dunnigan Just Fined Smith Hiatt & Diaz $49,000 to be paid in 4 days and if not then add $7,000 per day
  3. Smith, Hiatt & Diaz Motion to Purge Lender Processing Services’ (LPS) Accidentally Leaked Internal Email
May
23

Occupy Homes Planning | Tonight – Wednesday Training Call Featuring Lynn Szymoniak & Jeff Thigpen

Hi folks, Please register for this call using the new registration link which is: http://myaccount.maestroconference.com/conference/register/PGN7Q695KMB78DN The next call will be Wednesday 5/23 @ 9pm ET / 6pm PT. You need to register before this call at the link above. Wednesday May 23 @ 9pm Eastern Robosigning is at the core of foreclosure fraud. We will … Read more Related posts:
  1. Foreclosure Fraud | Guilford County Register of Deeds Jeff Thigpen and Lynn Szymoniak to Hold Press Conference Wednesday at 10 AM
  2. Lynn Szymoniak and Jeff Thigpen Video | Mortgage Fraud Investigation in Guilford Co.
  3. REJECTED | Robo-signed documents rejected by John O’Brien following 60 Minutes show featuring Lynn Szymoniak
May
23

Thankfully, FHFA & Banks Killed Homeowner Bill of Rights

I am officially proclaiming the Homeowner’s Bill of Rights in California to be DOA – Dead on Arrival.  And… good.  I’m glad it didn’t take until June.

In fact, if it wouldn’t be too much to ask, banking lobby… just hang out in Sacramento another week or so and dispatch whatever other bills remain in the California legislature as early as possible… start the recess early this year!

The Big Banks and the FHFA’s Ed DeMarco brought their considerable political muscle to the job of killing the Homeowner Bill of Rights in California, and although technically there’s still some voting to do… trust me… that’s all she wrote.

This makes the third year in a row that the banking lobby has said a resounding no to any sort of change that’s supposed to protect homeowners from abusive foreclosure practices.  Why do we keep doing this?  Haven’t we learned anything by now?

So, I’m glad it’s over… early.  I’ve had a tough year, and I didn’t need to spend any more time on this pipe dream of a proposal.

Okay, sure… our politicians running for office and elected officials did essentially nothing… BUT NEITHER DID WE… so I’m not blaming them.  The simple fact is that we don’t deserve to have such laws on the books.

The Homeowner Bill of Rights is the name that’s been given to a collection of six legislative proposals.  I’ll give you an overview of each and you decide for yourself how important it would have been to get the bill passed.

1.     SB 1470The Anti-Dual Tracking Bill

Dual tracking is when the servicer invites a borrower to apply for a loan modification, but proceeds with foreclosure proceedings anyway.

Now, I realize that some people are going to see nothing wrong with that practice, saying that a loan modification is an accommodation granted at the discretion of the bank, and therefore the denial of a modification should not delay a foreclosure.  The problem is that as a practical matter, dual tracking violates California’s foreclosure statutes because it deprives the homeowner of the intended time to reinstate the loan.

In California, the law says a homeowner is to receive a Notice of Default, which gives the homeowner 90 days, and then after that they are to get a Notice of Sale, which provides an additional 20 days… and then up until five days before the sale, the borrower has the right to reinstate the loan.

But, if you’re told that you are under consideration for a loan modification, and then you’re told that you’ve been denied… let’s say 10 days before the scheduled sale date… then you can find yourself with a handful of days to reinstate your loan… and that, at the very least, violates the intent of the law.

That’s what happened to Norman Rousseau, who took his own life last week, and that I wrote about HERE.  By the time Wells Fargo Bank told Norm that he was being denied for a loan modification, he only had six days to reinstate the loan, and Wells refused to delay the sale.  He had the money in his IRA, but by the time it arrived, his home was sold.

SB 1470 would prevent banks from starting the foreclosure process while homeowners are still being considered for a loan modification. The bill would also require servicers to render decisions on loan-modification applications in a more timely manner.

Assembly companion bill is AB 1602.

2.     SB 1471 – Single Point of Contact & Fines for Document Fraud

This requires servicers to streamline the foreclosure process by assigning a single point of contact for each borrower. It also imposes a $10,000 fine for any incidence of document fraud.

Assigning a single point of contact shouldn’t be much of an issue, after all the banks have already agreed to do that as part of the OCC’s consent orders, which were issued last April.

And as far as fines for committing fraud or forgery… well, there’s an easy strategy to get out of paying those, right.  Just don’t commit fraud or forgery.  And I happen to know the strategy works because I’ve been employing it for years and I have yet to pay a single fraud or forgery related fine.

Assembly companion bill is AB 2425.

3.     SB 1472 - Fight Neighborhood Blight

Neighborhood blight happens when foreclosed properties are not properly maintained.  Among other things, this bill would allow cities to fine purchasers of foreclosed properties that fail to remedy code violations within 60 days. (I believe the Senate committee unanimously approved this bill last Thursday.)

The companion bill is AB 2314.

4.     SB 1473 – Renter Protection

This bill simply ensures that renters of foreclosed properties are given at least 90 days before an eviction process is started. Seems pretty reasonable to me.

The companion bill is AB 2610.

5.     AB 1950 – File an NOD, Pay $25

This bill would requires servicers to pay a $25 fee for each Notice of Default recorded, which kicks off the formal foreclosure process. The money collected would pay for state-run fraud investigations into the fraudulent practices of servicers.

6.     SB 1464 – Special Financial Crimes

This bill would allow the state Attorney General to create a special grand jury to look into special financial crimes that involve multiple victims and I simply cannot believe that this bill isn’t already a law.

The companion bill is AB 1763.

 

HERE COME THE BANKS… ALL RISE…

In a letter to California legislators, written by the FHFA’s General Counsel, Alfred Pollard, the FHFA said that these laws could “restrict mortgage credit and hamper necessary home seizures.”

The letter also said that the proposed legislation would loosely define robo-signing so that it may include any incomplete mortgage document.

“Such a strict liability approach is punitive, will have a chilling effect on the processing of lawful foreclosures and may lead to reduced credit availability or higher interest rates,” Pollard said.

Pollard didn’t even like the idea that renters should get 90 days before being evicted, saying that the legislation “did not include a ‘bona fide’ lease requirement and could result in property owners gaming the system.”

The FHFA also claimed the new laws could possibly pose “significant risks for the housing markets.”

Good Lord… those would be terrible things to have happen.  I’m sure glad he pointed it out before it was too late.  Doesn’t anyone check these things out with the bankers before they become legislative proposals?  Why do we go to all the trouble to write them and get them into legislative committee, just to have a few bankers show up and make us look like fools for having done so.

I think we should ask the bankers if they wouldn’t mind reviewing all draft pieces of legislation before write and and propose it… I’d bet collectively we’d save a lot of time.  I know I would.

Next up were the banking representatives, and I hear they were beautifully dressed by the way.

One of the bankers testifying was Ms. Stephanie Mudick, Executive Vice President, Head of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, Mortgage Banking, J.P. Morgan Chase.  For the most part, she lied her ass off about how wonderful Chase has been when handling loan modifications.

But the one thing that she said I think I’ll remember above all…

“We’re also concerned that the private right of action included in draft legislation will likely impair the housing recovery of California.”

 A  private right of action means that if someone broke a law, a homeowner would be allowed to go to court and sue whoever it was that broke the law… you know… get a day in court.
But, if homeowners could do THAT, apparently it would IMPAIR the housing recovery in California.  Well, I’m sure glad to have learned that… let’s definitely NOT do that.  We don’t need anything to impair the recovery of our housing market.
Thanks Steph… for pointing that out and saving us from ourselves.
Mandelman out.

You can read her testimony here:
Mudick, Stephanie VP Chase Testimony 15may2012 PDF FILE

 


 

May
22

Billion Dollar Bait & Switch: States Divert Foreclosure Deal Funds

Billion Dollar Bait & Switch: States Divert Foreclosure Deal Funds by Paul Kiel and Cora Currier ProPublica Answers to homeowners’ questions about the Independent Foreclosure Review.The administration’s website for the foreclosure prevention program. Provides an FAQ, homeowner examples, and other tools to see whether you might qualify for the program.A list of HUD-approved housing counseling … Read more Related posts:
  1. Pimco | $25 Billion Foreclosure Deal to Hit Pensions Harder Than Banks
  2. $80.35 Million in Foreclosure Fraud Settlement Funds Now Getting Redirected to State Budgets
  3. California | Brown Proposes Clever Raid of Foreclosure Fraud Settlement Funds
May
21

MERS FRAUD & WALL SREET BANKSTERS: You Probably Don’t Even Own the House You Are Paying For

In 2012, when we think Wall Street we think: MF Global theft, JPM criminality, Goldman naked shorting, DTTC failures to deliver, precious metals manipulation, fractional reserve banking, Comex games, HFT trading and endless derivatives. But don’t forget about MERS and mortgage fraud – because according to Vermont Trotter, the National Director of ‘Protect Americas Dream’ … Read more Related posts:
  1. Strategic Default – The Banksters Keep Stealing – Why Keep Paying?
  2. Devil’s Bargain: Wall St. & the Martin Act | Wherein BANKSTERS cry their rights to “due process” are being violated
  3. Die Banker Die by J Glenn Lowe – A Tribute to Wall Street Banksters and Fraudgate
May
18

GOP leadership piling the pressure onto AG Holder over Fast & Furious

Somebody's in trouble.


Democrats are hoppin’ mad about Congressional Republicans’ calls to hold Attorney General in contempt of Congress — even though he’s consistently failed to comply with the House Oversight Committee’s requests for information concerning the not-botched gunwalking operation known as Fast and Furious, including a Congressional subpoena. “Unprecedented,” “witch hunt,” “unwarranted,” and etcetera are some of [...]

Read this post »

May
17

Video: Imagine if the federal government had a monopoly on cell phones

Obama's policies old, not bold.


An amusing moment from yesterday’s speech in Iowa on the economy, in which Mitt Romney explains the difference between R&D in the public and private sectors.  All you really need to know is the history of technological innovation in the 30 or so years since the breakup of the AT&T monopoly, but Romney’s parable is [...]

View the video »

May
17

California Foreclosure Laws

CLICK BELOW FOR:

State of California Foreclosure Laws

The link above will take you to the page dedicated to California’s foreclosure laws.  But, always remember… often people have a hard time understanding exactly what our laws mean just by reading them, so we always recommend that you contact an attorney and ask any questions you may have.

In California, the Mandelman Matters “trusted attornies,” are Gordon F. Dickson & Deborah P. Gutierrez.  You can reach them by clicking below, and they are happy to answer your questions about California foreclosure or anything related, so don’t worry about calling or sending them an email.

PROSPER LAW PLC

May
17

California Foreclosure Defense Attorney

Gordon F. Dickson, Chairman & Senior Partner

Deborah P. Gutierrez, Managing Partner

PROSPER LAW – The Homeowner’s Law Firm

6100 Center Drive, Suite 1050
Los Angeles, CA 90045
info@prosperlaw.com

Telephone: 310.893.6200
Toll Free: 800.808.9798
Facsimile: 800.808.0428

Website: www.prosperlaw.com

May
16

The Better Business Bureau, the State Bar, Loan Mods & Lawyers in California

 

For going on three years now I’ve watched the State of California more so than any other engage in a debate over loan modifications and lawyers, the key questions being: do you need one, should you have one, are lawyers scamming homeowners, and most notably, since California’s Senate Bill  94 (“SB 94”) became law in October of 2009, when can a lawyer be paid when providing loan modification services.

 

Throughout this “debate,” the Better Business Bureau has played a role by rating law firms offering loan modification services.  If the BBB says that someone is ‘A’ rated then presumably consumers are more likely to turn to that firm for assistance, and obviously, being rated ‘F’ tends to have the opposite effect.

 

Well, recently a law firm with which I’ve become very familiar over the last three years, CDA Law in Orange County, California, was rated ‘F’ by the BBB, and predictably, within a couple of weeks the firm started losing clients because of the rating.

 

Before I explain the background for what’s going on here, I want to be clear about a few things:

 

  1. I have no financial interest in CDA Law, nor am I being paid to write this.
  2. I’m sure that I’ve referred at least 200 hundred homeowners to CDA Law over the last few years, I don’t keep track of the number, but it’s in that range without question, and all I have to show for it are thank you notes.
  3. CDA Law does not deserve to be rated ‘F’ by the BBB.  The BBB’s ‘F’ rating is based on a politically motivated intentional misstatement of the law by certain individuals.
  4. This past year I personally audited 400 randomly selected 2011 client files at CDA Law, so I know how they perform first hand.  Over almost four years, firm records show it obtained permanent loan modifications for more than 3,000 California homeowners.

 

I also want to be clear that I am not writing this to tell homeowners that in all cases they should retain CDA Law.  Every homeowner’s situation, facts and goals are different, and the decision as to which law firm one should or shouldn’t engage depends on the specifics involved.

 

What I am here to do is state unequivocally to homeowners that it is my considered opinion that the decision not to retain CDA Law should not be based on the firm’s BBB’s rating, because that rating is baseless and entirely inappropriate.

 

 

The fact is that upon learning of the BBB’s ‘F’ rating of CDA Law, I offered to write this because I’m all but certain that some number of homeowners who decide to avoid CDA Law because of its BBB rating will end up getting scammed and homes will be lost to foreclosure as a result.

 

And, at this point in the foreclosure crisis, the fact that I can say that about the chances of a homeowner getting ripped off by a scammer, or wrongfully made homeless by a servicer, is both an unthinkable tragedy and a shameful testament to the failure of our state and federal regulators to protect homeowners from predatory servicers and unscrupulous operators of various foreclosure avoidance schemes.

 

Okay, so why is CDA Law rated ‘F’ by the BBB?

 

To understand where we stand today in California as related to lawyers and loan modifications, you have to understand a few things about how it all started back in 2009, when we went through a phase where we were told by banks, government agencies and the mainstream media that everyone involved in loan modifications was a “scammer.”

 

According to a knowledgeable insider who worked at the California State Bar Association at the time, the State Bar had no history of lawyers committing acts of misconduct related to loan modifications until the very end of 2008 when complaints started to trickle in, and then in 2009, inundate the Bar with 800-900 a month.  No one knew what was going on back then.  I’m sure just seeing the raw numbers of complaints was shocking, never mind what was being said.

 

California is the only state with a State Bar that is both a trade association and regulatory agency.  Technically, the Bar reports to the state’s Supreme Court, but at the same time the Governor can prevent the Bar from collecting its dues, and as a result the state legislature is known to put pressure on the Bar as well.

 

Most often, over the last 25 years, that pressure has come in the form of criticism that the Bar is not vigilant enough when it comes to prosecuting lawyers for misconduct.

 

By Spring of 2009, a joint task force was being set up to go after these “scammers” who were taking advantage of distressed homeowners.  Included would be the Office of the Attorney General, the state’s Department of Real Estate, the FTC… and of course, the State Bar.

 

Then State Bar president Howard Miller saw the task force as an opportunity to show politicians in Sacramento that the Bar was ready to get tough on crime, on behalf of the defenseless victims of the foreclosure crisis.

 

So, during summer of that year, Howard Miller, made the following statement to the press…

 

“At least hundreds and perhaps thousands of California lawyers who have been victimizing those who are already victims at the most vulnerable point in their lives… every one of those lawyers will be subject to discipline and some will go to jail.”

 

How many of the scammers were lawyers?  No one had any idea, in fact the State Bar hadn’t even had time to read the vast majority of the complaints, but there was no question that there were many charging up-front fees and claiming to be able to get loans modified, and with increasing and alarming frequency, they were definitely ripping off homeowners.

 

Back then, I think every major bank played messages to those waiting on hold that said: “You don’t need a lawyer, call (insert bank name) for assistance with a loan modification.”  And both the state and federal government’s positions were almost identical: “You don’t need a lawyer, call your bank or a HUD counselor for assistance with a loan modification.”

 

To anyone watching, one thing was very clear: Neither the banks nor our government wanted homeowners to retain lawyers to help them save their homes from foreclosure.

 

That the banks took this position wasn’t surprising.  Obviously, it would be easier to deal with a homeowner than a homeowner’s attorney.  And attorneys in the mix would mean the threat of litigation, which would be both costly and time consuming for banks to defend.  And as to why, in 2009, those in our government also assumed an anti-lawyer stance related to lawyers and loan modifications, to me the answer was the obvious one… they went along with the banks.

 

Miller’s statement always seemed to be a preposterous one to me, and I wrote about it at the time, saying that I found it impossible to accept that there were “hundreds if not thousands” of lawyers scamming homeowners in California or anywhere else for that matter.

 

Were there some?  Of course there were some.

 

California is a state of enormous size; over 37 million residents, roughly 7 million homeowners and more than 235,000 licensed attorneys, according to the California State Bar Association.  There are “some” of just about anything you can think of here.  I’d bet money that in California today there are “some” wearing tin foil so that the space ships can’t see them.  But were there ever “hundreds if not thousands” of lawyers scamming homeowners having to do with loan modifications?  Not a chance.

 

By 2010 it was becoming increasingly obvious that that what the Bar’s president had told the press about “hundreds if not thousands of lawyers” scamming homeowners was in fact false.

 

Just consider that as of May 12, 2012, and this is according to the State Bar Press Office, since February of 2009, more than three years after Mr. Miller voiced those inflammatory allegations:

 

  • Since 2009, only 18 attorneys in California have been disbarred related to providing loan modification services. 

 

  • The State Bar has “pursued disciplinary charges related to loan modification services involving about 153 attorneys.”

 

  • Of those, only 69 have been disciplined in some way, which includes anything from being required to attend an ethics class to a temporary suspension.

 

  • None have gone to jail. 

 

In California, a state with over 235,000 licensed attorneys, the disbarment of 18 lawyers is hardly to be considered pandemic.  And it’s a far cry from Miller’s “hundreds if not thousands,” to be sure.

 

There simply never were hundreds much less thousands of lawyers scamming homeowners in California.

 

The Banking Committees Get in On the Act…

 

Other politicians were fast to get in on the consumer protection act as well.

 

Senator Ron Calderon and Assembly Representative Pedro Nava, each the chairs of their respective banking committees, were both quick to sponsor bills claiming to protect homeowners from the proliferation of loan modification scammers.

 

Ex-Mortgage Banker, Sen. Ron S. Calderon

Chaired Senate Banking Committee, Sponsor of SB 94 

Senator Calderon’s bill, known as SB 94, was the one signed into law on October 12, 2009, with the Mortgage Bankers Association, the California State Bar Association and the California Department of Real Estate all listed among the supporters of the bill.

SB 94 was written to apply to both lawyers and Department of Real Estate (“DRE”) licensees.  The language pertaining to lawyers is found in the California Civil Code, and the language pertaining to DRE licensees is in the California Business & Professions Code.

 

The scams, in all cases, involved homeowners being required to pay an up-front or advance fee, so SB 94 focused on making it illegal to charge an advance fee related to providing loan modification services.  So, whether we’re talking about a licensed attorney or DRE licensee, the operative language is identical.  Neither is permitted to…

 

“…claim, demand, charge, collect, or receive any compensation until after the person has fully performed each and every service the person contracted to perform or represented that he or she would perform.” 

 

But, as it pertained to DRE licensees, however, SB 94 went a step further by modifying language contained in Business & Professions (“B&P”) Code Section 10026 to prevent DRE licensees from breaking up loan modification services or fees into component parts as shown below in bold:

 

DIVISION 4.  REAL ESTATE

    PART 1.  LICENSING OF PERSONS

     CHAPTER 1.  GENERAL PROVISIONS …………………………. 10000-10035

10026.  (a) The term “advance fee,” as used in this part, is a fee, regardless of the form, that is claimed, demanded, charged, received, or collected by a licensee for services requiring a license, or for a listing, as that term is defined in Section 10027, before fully completing the service the licensee contracted to perform or represented would be performed. Neither an advance fee nor the services to be performed shall be separated or divided into components for the purpose of avoiding the application of this division.

 

As a result, a DRE licensee can only view a loan modification as a single service, and therefore only be paid after that one service has been provided, which would be when the homeowner is either approved or denied for a loan modification… the very end of the process.

 

However, there is no language in SB 94 that prohibits lawyers from breaking up loan modification services and/or fees into parts, as there is for DRE licensees.

 

Therefore, while SB 94 precludes lawyers from charging advance fees, the law does allow lawyers providing loan modification services to be paid for a specific set of contracted services upon their completion, regardless of whether at the beginning, middle or end of the loan modification process.

 

The legal profession refers to this as the “unbundling” of services.

 

Even though literally hundreds of lawyers from all over California contacted the State Bar to ask about the unbundling of services into separate contractual agreements under SB 94, with compensation being received at the end of each contract, for more than two years, the State Bar remained quiet on the subject.

 

Of course, it didn’t much matter what the banks or government entities had said in early 2009, many homeowners discovered very quickly that calling their bank directly, or a HUD counselor, did not result in their loans being modified… and on top of that, it was a maddening and even torturous experience.  It was becoming clearer every day that having a lawyer to help get your loan modified wasn’t such a bad idea.

 

It seemed that the storm had passed.

 

Enter: The Better Business Bureau

 

In 2010, the BBB reacted to the rhetoric by giving an ‘F’ rating to just about everyone providing loan modification services in California.

 

Frankly, I always found that policy to be disadvantageous to homeowners because it forced consumers to choose a firm from a basket of ‘Fs,’ and since clearly some deserved the low rating and others didn’t, I reasoned that such a policy actually increased the potential for consumers to make a bad choice.

 

Having successfully completed more than 3,000 loan modifications for California homeowners over the last four years, not only is CDA Law not a scammer, but they’d certainly appear at or near the top of anyone’s list of most effective firms modifying loans.

 

Eventually, the BBB apparently agreed, awarding CDA Law an ‘A-‘ rating for a period of time.

 

And, yes… I am the authority on this issue. 

 

I want the reader to know that what I’m saying is not based on a cursory review of the subject matter.  My qualifications to make the statements I’m making about loan modifications and the foreclosure crisis in California at the very least equal anyone else’s.  Although it was never my intention that this be the case, on the subject of the foreclosure crisis, I’ve become a leading expert, and I can’t imagine anyone contesting that claim.

 

In point of fact, this past year I was accepted as an “expert witness” by the California State Bar Court and I provided expert testimony on loan modifications and the foreclosure crisis in an administrative hearing on behalf of an attorney in that court.

 

I started writing about the foreclosure crisis in 2008.  Since then I’ve written close to 700 articles on the political, economic, social and legal aspects of the financial and foreclosure crises.  To do that, as you might imagine, I’ve read essentially all of the most widely known articles, reports, or studies that have been published nationwide.

 

Last year, when I stopped counting, I’d received more than 30,000 emails from homeowners all over the country.  I’ve personally interviewed close to 4,000 homeowners at risk of foreclosure along with hundreds of attorneys involved in representing such homeowners.

 

In 2010, I also conducted a qualitative study of homeowner complaints, which included reading 1200 letters written by homeowners who had either hired a lawyer, a mortgage broker, or no one at all to help them with their loan modification.

 

I was an invited speaker on the subject of loan modifications at the American Bar Association’s Conference on Consumer Financial Services, appearing on a panel with Thomas Pahl, an Assistant Director in the FTC’s Division of Financial Practices, and I was invited to speak on the crisis again, from the homeowner’s perspective, at the 9th Circuit Judicial Conference in front of a few hundred federal court judges.

 

Additionally, I’ve been invited to speak at numerous homeowner meetings, and at a luncheon held by the Orange County Bar Association, for whom I also taught a CLE class for attorneys on loan modifications, alongside a compliance and mortgage banking attorney, and an ethics and bar defense attorney.

 

 

And I have not let up for what is now going on four years.  I continue to write my blog, Mandelman Matters, which is among the most widely read on the subject, and I continue to make my email and phone number available online, which means I get hundreds of calls and emails each month from homeowners at risk of foreclosure, and attorneys involved in foreclosure defense in almost all 50 states.

 

Lastly, I have no dog in this race, as they say.  I’ve never been in the mortgage or real estate industries, never been paid a nickel by a homeowner, nor for referring anyone anywhere.  I’m not personally at risk of foreclosure… today, anyway… and I have no direct financial incentive to say anything specific about the crisis or about CDA Law.

 

Now back to the BBB…

 

This past fall, members of the state legislature told the State Bar that they needed to clean up the back log of disciplinary cases, and once again, politics appears to have played a role in the Bar’s use of inflammatory rhetoric and behavior.

 

Suzan Anderson, Supervisor of the State Bar’s Special Team on Loan Modification Fraud, while speaking at the State Bar’s Annual Meeting last September, announced that the Bar would now be taking the position that lawyers helping clients with loan modifications would not be permitted to unbundle services related to loan modifications.

 

Ms. Anderson said that it was now the position of the California State Bar that lawyers working on obtaining loan modifications on behalf of their clients could not be paid until the end of the loan modification process, even though no such language is found in the statute. Not only that, but a disclaimer at the bottom of her presentation’s front page stated that this was not the official position of the State Bar, so once again the Bar wasn’t willing to make it a policy.

 

Following the State Bar’s annual meeting, prosecutors at the Bar began using the threat of SB 94 to get attorneys who were offering loan modification services to accept some sort of disciplinary action for unbundling their services.  These attorneys were only accepting payment for services upon the completion of contracted services, and they therefore were complying with both the language contained in SB 94 and the bill’s legislative intent, according to its drafter.  None that I knew personally ever charged advance fees.

 

The State Bar has provided no basis for their new opinion, nor have they allowed the issue to be argued in front of a judge.  Maybe the basis is their misreading of the statute.  Maybe it’s because the banking lobby has pressured the state legislature to do everything possible to stop homeowners from hiring lawyers to help them get their loans modified.

 

Or, maybe it’s just a feeling they have… I really don’t care.  The Bar’s made up of lawyers and they’ve had almost three years to figure it out, so unless they’re remedial readers, I’m done giving them a free pass.

 

Never mind for a moment what the law says, the fact is that lawyers could not offer to help homeowners with loan modifications if they couldn’t be paid until the end of the process, and the reason should be very easy to understand.

 

Homeowners applying for a loan modification… by definition… are experiencing a significant financial hardship and as a result, many end up filing bankruptcy at some point in the process.

 

That means if a lawyer were not paid along the way as services were completed, then he or she would often work for six months or a year to get a loan modified… and then, upon advising the client to file bankruptcy… have his or her bill for services placed into the bankruptcy as unsecured debt to be discharged.  The lawyer would never be able to receive payment for what could easily be months of time spent working on getting the loan modified.

 

It’s an unresolvable conflict.  Work all year.  Advise your client to file bankruptcy.  And then tear up your bill for your year’s work on the loan modification.  Do you know anyone that could or would work under such a condition?

 

The State Bar, if asked, says that they’re not trying to prevent homeowners at risk of foreclosure from being able to hire lawyers to help them get their loans modified.  But, that statement strains credulity when their so-called interpretation sets up the type of conflict as is found with SB 94.

 

What the State Bar started doing last fall is clearly politically motivated and very wrong.  And at this point, the issue is going to have to be settled by the courts as there is already one lawsuit filed by an attorney against the State Bar over their interpretation of SB 94, and most assuredly others are going to be filed very soon.

 

By the way, it’s interesting because as I mentioned, outside of threatening lawyers with charges of unbundling services under SB 94, the Bar has never actually brought such charges into court.  Instead, the State Bar only threatens attorneys with violations of SB 94, but then offers the lawyers some sort of deal to avoid have charges filed, and in all cases to-date the lawyers have taken the deal rather than take on the risk and expense of fighting the State Bar in court.

 

Once the lawyer accepts the discipline deal offered by the Bar, his name goes onto the Bar’s regulatory scorecard that they can then show to whichever members of the state legislature are interested, as proof that they are cleaning up their backlog of cases and being tough on the lawyers they regulate.

 

But, let’s be honest about this… we know which members of the state legislature we’re talking about here, right?  Why, the members of the senate and/or assembly banking committees, of course.  Do I know that to be a fact?  No.  But, if anyone is feeling lucky, let me know and I’d be happy to see if we can’t arrange a little wager.  Who else do you think it could be… telecommunications?  Agriculture?  Please…

 

It’s really quite scandalous.

 

The California State Bar has been getting away with using attorneys that offer to help homeowners obtain loan modifications as their political piñata for far too long.  It’s an example of a state agency abusing its power for political purposes and it must be stopped before its behavior causes any further harm to California homeowners.

 

Three years after SB 94 was signed into law, and its become abundantly clear that Miller’s statements were made for political purposes, without any regard for the truth or consideration of the harm such statements could cause.

 

Miller was all too aware that the State Bar was under attack by some in the state legislature for not aggressively disciplining lawyers, and he saw what was going on related to loan modifications and the foreclosure crisis as a way to look like a tough regulator of the legal profession.

 

The BBB Strikes Again…

 

One of the ways the Bar has endeavored to made life difficult for lawyers offering to help homeowners obtain loan modifications is by telling the BBB about what I would call their incorrect and baseless interpretation of SB 94.

 

And if you’re a lawyer helping homeowners with loan modifications, it’s not at all unusual to wake up one morning to find your firm has been rated ‘F’ by the BBB.

 

Why?  Because you’re unbundling loan modification services, of course.  Contracting to perform services A, B, C & D… and not being paid until those services have been completed to your client’s satisfaction.  Just like the language in SB 94 says you can do.

 

And just so everyone knows… I’m far from alone in this view.  Most or all State Bar Defense and Ethics attorneys in California share my view, as do numerous legal scholars and literally hundreds of other licensed practicing California attorneys.

 

We’ve learned a lot since 2009, or at least we should have…

 

In 2009, when President Obama announced his Making Home Affordable plan, most people in this country believed it would work.  Obama was the smart president… the man of the people.

 

It hasn’t worked though, at least nowhere near as he said it would, and we’ve also learned that he is as Wall Street friendly as they come… at least that’s how he behaved during his first term.

 

 

During the summer of 2009, when someone’s loan didn’t get modified, a lot of lawyers and others got the blame… many were even wrongly branded “scammers” as a result.  But, today we should all know what was actually going on, right?  It was the servicers that were at best giving homeowners the run-around and failing to modify loans as required under the president’s program.

 

And as State Bar Deputy Trial Counsel Victoria Molloy said back in 2010…

 

“If an attorney is hired to assist in a loan modification, and they make good faith efforts, whether they’re successful or not, presumably they’ve earned their fees.”

 

We know that today, but we didn’t know it then.  There were never “hundreds if not thousands” of lawyers scamming homeowners, that number was closer to 18.  The damage, however, was done, and many California homeowners who chose to go it alone lost their homes as a result.

 

Without question, that erroneous statement made by the Bar’s president continues to cause significant harm to the legal profession and to the numerous licensed and ethical attorneys in California who want to help, or do offer to help homeowners get their loans restructured.

 

Beyond those egregious outcomes, the State Bar’s lie has also caused irrevocable harm to California homeowners who have either not been able to find lawyers to represent them when seeking loan modifications, or have been too scared of being scammed by the fictitious thousands of illicit lawyers to try.

 

California has roughly two million homeowners either already in foreclosure or seriously delinquent, far more than any other state.  Whether the media wants to admit it or not, our state is literally drowning as a result of foreclosures, with our state’s budget deficit now at $16 billion and potentially rising.

 

And there should be no question, in light of the recent National Mortgage Settlement, among many other factors, that mortgage servicers are quite capable of abusing the rights of homeowners seeking to modify loans.

 

With all of that being the case, it would seem obvious that what the State Bar continues to do to prevent the legal profession in California from helping homeowners modify their loans is unconscionable and must be stopped.

 

The BBB is just acting as a witless and willing accomplice in this plot to deprive homeowners of lawyers should they find themselves at risk of foreclosure.  They’re certainly not protecting anyone by rating CDA Law ‘F.’  In fact, they’re only harming homeowners by doing that.

 

Over a four-year timeframe, and having helped over 3,000 homeowner get their loans modified, CDA Law has had only 15 total complaints with the BBB, as follows: 2009… 2, 2010… 7, 2011… 5 2012… just 1.  It’s not an easy business, dealing with servicers and homeowners at risk of foreclosure.  Not everyone will be happy.

 

But, in CDA’s case, complaints are under one-half of one percent, and every one has been answered… some of the complaints were made by homeowners who got their loans modified with CDA Law’s help, but they didn’t like the terms offered by their servicer.

 

At the same time, if you do visit the BBB’s website, be sure to check out the TrustLink positive comments made by 243 of CDA’s very satisfied clients who are still in their homes because of the work done by the attorneys and support staff at CDA Law.

 

And, by the way… SB 94 has not stopped scammers in California… they are as plentiful as they ever were.  Throw a dart at Google’s front page after searching for loan modification or anything close and I can all but assure you of getting robbed.

 

And the State Bar knows what I’m saying is true, because at the end of 2010, Suzan Anderson, Supervisor of the State Bar’s Special Team on Loan Modification Fraud, speaking last December to David Streitfeld of The New York Times about SB 94 said the following: “I wish the law had worked.”

 

Yeah, well don’t we all.

 

I look forward to the day when this area of the law can no longer be muddied by mortgage banking industry lobbyists and the politically motivated opinions of members of banking committees.

 

California is the only state having this debate, by the way.  The other 49 states figured things out ages ago, if they ever had the debate in the first place, and the FTC’s MARS rule, which allows lawyers to accept retainers into their trust account, receiving amounts as earned.

 

Soon enough, the courts will rule.  I have no doubt that California’s courts will uphold the rule of law, and not succumb to the wishes of the banking elite.

 

Banks have lawyers that help them, and should I ever find myself at risk of losing my own home to foreclosure, I want to be able to hire a lawyer to sit on my side of the table as well.  I don’t need the State Bar or the state legislature “protecting” me from scammers, imaginary or otherwise, if by doing so they are going to take away my absolute right to legal council.

 

Feel free to email me with questions or comments at mandelman@mac.com.

 

Martin Andelman

Mandelman Matters

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

May
16

Florida Foreclosure Laws

 CLICK BELOW FOR:

State of Florida Foreclosure Law

The link above will take you to the page dedicated to Florida’s foreclosure laws.  But, always remember… often people have a hard time understanding exactly what our laws mean just by reading them, so we always recommend that you contact an attorney and ask any questions you may have.

In Florida, the Mandelman Matters “trusted attorney,” is Cox & Sanchez.  You can reach them by clicking below, and they are happy to answer your questions about Florida  foreclosure or anything related, so don’t worry about calling or sending them an email.

The Law Offices of Cox & Sanchez

May
11

The Ed Morrissey Show: Duane “Generalissimo” Patterson & the Week in Review

3 pm ET, 90 mins!


Today, on the Ed Morrissey Show (3 pm ET), we’ll take a look at the past week with Duane “Generalissimo” Patterson of the Hugh Hewitt Show. Duane and I will talk about the fallout of the gay marriage endorsement from Obama, the media’s obsession with bullying in 1965 rather than in 2012, and Obama forgetting [...]

Read this post »

May
11

Attention Homeowners & Lawyers: AG Mortgage Settlement Launches Online Complaint Sites

Finally, there are places online where homeowners, lawyers and other advocates can go to lodge complaints about a mortgage servicer’s handling of mortgage modifications, et al.  And all I can say is, it’s about time.

 

A story by Ben Hallman in the Huffington Post, quoted Joseph Smith, the ex-banking commissioner charged with enforcing the national mortgage settlement…

 

“This allows me, as monitor, to hear complaints and learn more about advocates’ impressions of how the settlement is working,” he said. “Although I’ll extensively review reports and monitoring from the banks and my own team of auditors, it is still critical for me to receive information from the heart of each community this settlement serves.”

 

Now, it’s probably at least somewhat important to remember that Smith has no power to investigate individual complaints or help individual homeowners in any way. Here’s what it says on the complaint form in bold…

 

“Please note that the Monitor cannot intervene with the servicer on behalf of your individual client.”

 

Of course, I’d also guess that he doesn’t have the manpower to read the hundreds of thousands of complaints the sites would no doubt receive if homeowners and their lawyers were actually to hear about the website.  (I’m also betting that there’s not much of an advertising budget with which they’ll be getting the word out across the nation.)

 

But, so what?  There may be another way to view these new online complaint sites.

 

Sure, there won’t be any action taken based on the complaints filed online, and nothing will likely change as a result.  And I realize that if a homeowner is being dual-tracked, can’t get a response from a mortgage servicer for months, or is losing a home to a wrongful foreclosure, these sites may only represent websites effectively dedicated to ignoring complaints online.

 

But, wait… there may be more.  Here’s what it says on the new sites…

 

“The Monitor and the Office of Mortgage Settlement Oversight can assist you by providing information about the organization in your state that is appropriate for you depending on your situation. By filling out the simple form below, you will open a webpage that has state-specific contact information of various organizations that may be able to help you. The Monitor will use this information to better understand how the servicers are treating their customers and detect any patterns in violation of the agreement.”

 

So, I really do hope that everyone takes advantage of the new websites should they have problems with their servicers related to the National Mortgage Settlement.  Here’s what Mr. Smith says about the two new sites…

 

“Lawyers, caseworkers and other consumer advocates are the eyes and ears on the ground who will know first, and know intimately, what kind of difference these payments, adjustments and programs are making,” Smith said. “That’s why we’ve created this dedicated tool -– to see what they’re seeing.”

 

Look, people… the man used to be the banking commissioner in North Carolina, but now Mr. Smith has gone to Washington and he says he needs us to be his “eyes and ears on the ground,” as far as the AG settlement’s effectiveness goes.  So, let’s not let him down, okay?

 

 

Besides, if you consider the math, the whole thing becomes that much more fun…

 

Assuming one person can read a complaint in 10 minutes, and they were to read them 6 hours each day, working the standard 2080 hours a year, it would take 1.3 years to read 100,000 complaints.

 

So, if the same numbers applied and there were a million complaints, it would take 13.3 years for one person… they’d need to hire a thousand people to get it done in 1.3 years.  And that assumes everyone is writing fairly short complaints.  Stretch those babies out to a 20-minute read and now we’re talking two thousand people to read them in 1.3 years.

 

So, look… do you want to help create jobs in this country or what?  Oh, and don’t forget to attach a large file to your complaint, I’m sure the servers are quite robust, and someone may want to read the details.  Like they said back in the 60s… can you dig what I’m saying here?

 

So, for HOMEOWNERS who want to file a complaint having to do with the National Mortgage Settlement, click here: WHERE CAN I FIND HELP?

 

For LAWYERS or ADVOCATES. click here: REPORT CLIENT ISSUES HERE.

 

Here’s a list of topics under which your complaint may fall, as listed on the new sites…

Documentation: Documentation problems with foreclosure, bankruptcy or your loan file

Fees: Improper assessment of fees, including default, foreclosure, bankruptcy, attorney, late, or third party fees.

Loan Modification: Failure to modify or refinance loan.

Customer Service: Poor customer service, including no single point of contact or no customer portal.

Third Party Firms: Failure to properly oversee firms working for servicer on your mortgage.

Military Personnel: Failure to comply with legal protections afforded military personnel.

Bankruptcy: Improper failure to provide relief to homeowners in bankruptcy.

Force Placed Insurance: Required purchase of property insurance unnecessarily or improperly.

Community Blight: Failure to minimize community blight.

Tenant Rights: Violation of the rights of tenants in foreclosed properties.

Other: __________.  No issues. I just would like further information

 

The Huffington Post story also pointed out that the federal government has also made available two other avenues where borrowers can appeal for direct assistance.

 

1. CFPB

One is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), which you can access here: File a Mortgage Complaint.  According to the Huffington Post, the CFPB,

 

“… promises to forward a grievance to the financial institution, assign it a tracking number and keep borrowers updated on the status.”

 

So, that’s very exciting, I would think.  I mean, if nothing else it sounds like you’ll have your very own individual tracking number, so that’s something right there.  I wonder how effective it will be when trying to persuade a judge not to have you evicted?

 

“But, hold on Your Honor… not so fast… have I showed you my tracking number?”

 

 

2. The OCC

And for homeowners who were in foreclosure during 2009 and 2010, don’t forget about the OCC’s infamously dishonest and entirely corrupt, Independent Foreclosure Review, which you can access here: Submit a Request for Review.  I visited the site to check out what would be involved and the best part was that right in the middle of the page there’s a warning for homeowners that reads:

 

“Watch out for scams – There is only one Independent Foreclosure Review.”

 

So, for parents reading this who have been looking for a really good example with which you could teach your children the meaning of the word “IRONY,” I’d have to say that your search has ended. 

 

The deadline to submit your complaint is July 31st, so if you’re planning to be condescendingly placated by the equivocation of your claims, you don’t want to put it off.  Fewer than three percent of eligible homeowners have submitted their cases for review, so the Obama Administration is no doubt planning to announce that 97 percent of those foreclosed on during those two years were okay with it.  I think that’s really taking one for the team, and I, for one, salute you.

 

And although it would seem that no flaws have been uncovered as yet, that’s no reason not to participate in the process.  I mean, look… someone has to win something, right?  Like the lottery.  Or, maybe not in this case… I really don’t know.

 

Here’s what the OCC’s site says about the review:

 

“The Independent Foreclosure Review will determine whether individual borrowers suffered financial injury and should receive compensation or other remedy because of errors or other problems during their home foreclosure process.”

 

The OCC’s site also STRONGLY WARNS HOMEOWNERS who want to file their case for independent review NOT TO PAY A LAWYER to help them do it under any circumstances.

 

Good heavens no… who would ever think of doing such a thing?  I mean, give us some credit, would you?

 

I think everybody knows by now that when it comes to authoring a document that alleges the suffering of financial injury for which damages or other remedy may be assessed in conjunction with errors committed by a party purporting to be the holder in due course or to have been assigned the rights of a beneficiary to a deed of trust, and or the substitute trustee who is seeking to enforce said rights as part of a foreclosure or unlawful detainer action… the last thing you’d ever want to do is hire a lawyer.

 

Sheesh, it’s not like we’re children.

 

After all, we handled getting our mortgages all by ourselves, initialing and signing all those contractual pages containing 3 point type about how our snapping turtle, spring loaded mortgage might result in payments that exceed our monthly income by three-fold at a time when the credit markets would require a 780 FICO and 30 percent equity to refinance.

 

And if we can competently handle that sort of complicated transaction, surely we all know not to pay a lawyer a nickel for something as simple as filing a complaint with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

 

Look, even if the OCC finds nothing was wrong with the foreclosures in 2009 or 2010, I think we’ll all be able to join in a giant collective sigh of relief.  At least we’ll know that no one “suffered financial injury” because of errors in the foreclosure process during those two years, and we can finally move from insult to injury as we close the chapter on the unnecessary destruction of some two million family’s lives.

 

It reminds me of the stress tests they use with the banks… you know, the ones where every bank always passes.  Like something from a Monty Python skit.  Aren’t those the best?

 

Move along people, there’s nothing to see here.

 

Mandelman out.

May
11

Attention Homeowners & Lawyers: AG Mortgage Settlement Launches Online Complaint Sites

Finally, there are places online where homeowners, lawyers and other advocates can go to lodge complaints about a mortgage servicer’s handling of mortgage modifications, et al.  And all I can say is, it’s about time.

 

A story by Ben Hallman in the Huffington Post, quoted Joseph Smith, the ex-banking commissioner charged with enforcing the national mortgage settlement…

 

“This allows me, as monitor, to hear complaints and learn more about advocates’ impressions of how the settlement is working,” he said. “Although I’ll extensively review reports and monitoring from the banks and my own team of auditors, it is still critical for me to receive information from the heart of each community this settlement serves.”

 

Now, it’s probably at least somewhat important to remember that Smith has no power to investigate individual complaints or help individual homeowners in any way. Here’s what it says on the complaint form in bold…

 

“Please note that the Monitor cannot intervene with the servicer on behalf of your individual client.”

 

Of course, I’d also guess that he doesn’t have the manpower to read the hundreds of thousands of complaints the sites would no doubt receive if homeowners and their lawyers were actually to hear about the website.  (I’m also betting that there’s not much of an advertising budget with which they’ll be getting the word out across the nation.)

 

But, so what?  Sure, there won’t be any action taken based on the complaints filed online, and nothing will likely change as a result.  But, at least now, if a homeowner is being dual-tracked, can’t get a response from a mortgage servicer for months, or is losing a home to a wrongful foreclosure, there’s a website effectively dedicated to ignoring complaints online.

 

Very cool, don’t you think?

 

I for one am glad to see that this country is finally taking the foreclosure crisis seriously and that my tax dollars are being put to good use, and I really do hope that everyone take advantage of the new websites.  Here’s what Mr. Smith says about the two new sites…

 

“Lawyers, caseworkers and other consumer advocates are the eyes and ears on the ground who will know first, and know intimately, what kind of difference these payments, adjustments and programs are making,” Smith said. “That’s why we’ve created this dedicated tool -– to see what they’re seeing.”

 

Look, people… the man used to be the banking commissioner in North Carolina, but now Mr. Smith has gone to Washington and he says he needs us to be his “eyes and ears on the ground,” as far as the AG settlement’s effectiveness goes.  So, let’s not let him down, okay?

 

 

Consider the math, and the whole thing becomes much more fun…

 

Assuming one person can read a complaint in 10 minutes, and they were to read them 6 hours each day, working the standard 2080 hours a year, it would take 1.3 years to read 100,000 complaints.

 

So, if the same numbers applied and there were a million complaints, it would take 13.3 years for one person… they’d need to hire a thousand people to get it done in 1.3 years.  And that assumes everyone is writing fairly short complaints.  Stretch those babies out to a 20-minute read and now we’re talking two thousand people to read them in 1.3 years.

 

So, look… do you want to help create jobs in this country or what?  Oh, and don’t forget to attach a large file to your complaint, I’m sure the servers are quite robust, and someone may want to read the details.  Like they said back in the 60s… can you dig what I’m saying here?

 

So, for HOMEOWNERS who want to file a complaint having to do with the National Mortgage Settlement, click here: WHERE CAN I FIND HELP?

 

For LAWYERS or ADVOCATES. click here: REPORT CLIENT ISSUES HERE.

 

The Huffington Post story also pointed out that the federal government has also made available two other avenues where borrowers can appeal for direct assistance.

 

One is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), which you can access here: File a Mortgage Complaint.  According to the Huffington Post, the CFPB,

 

“… promises to forward a grievance to the financial institution, assign it a tracking number and keep borrowers updated on the status.”

 

So, that’s very exciting, I would think.  I mean, if nothing else it sounds like you’ll have your very own individual tracking number, so that’s something right there.  I wonder how effective it will be when trying to persuade a judge not to have you evicted?

 

“But, hold on Your Honor… not so fast… have I showed you my tracking number?”

 

 

And for homeowners who were in foreclosure during 2009 and 2010, don’t forget about the OCC’s infamously dishonest and entirely corrupt, Independent Foreclosure Review, which you can access here: Submit a Request for Review.  I visited the site to check out what would be involved and the best part was that right in the middle of the page there’s a warning for homeowners that reads:

 

“Watch out for scams – There is only one Independent Foreclosure Review.”

 

So, for parents reading this who have been looking for a really good example with which you could teach your children the meaning of the word “IRONY,” I’d have to say that your search has ended. 

 

The deadline to submit your complaint is July 31st, so if you’re planning to be condescendingly placated by the equivocation of your claims, you don’t want to put it off.  Fewer than three percent of eligible homeowners have submitted their cases for review, so the Obama Administration is no doubt planning to announce that 97 percent of those foreclosed on during those two years were okay with it.  I think that’s really taking one for the team, and I, for one, salute you.

 

And although it would seem that no flaws have been uncovered as yet, that’s no reason not to participate in the process.  I mean, look… someone has to win something, right?  Like the lottery.  Or, maybe not in this case… I really don’t know.

 

Here’s what the OCC’s site says about the review:

 

“The Independent Foreclosure Review will determine whether individual borrowers suffered financial injury and should receive compensation or other remedy because of errors or other problems during their home foreclosure process.”

 

The OCC’s site also STRONGLY WARNS HOMEOWNERS who want to file their case for independent review NOT TO PAY A LAWYER to help them do it under any circumstances.

 

Good heavens no… who would ever think of doing such a thing?  I mean, give us some credit, would you?

 

I think everybody knows by now that when it comes to authoring a document that alleges the suffering of financial injury for which damages or other remedy may be assessed in conjunction with errors committed by a party purporting to be the holder in due course or to have been assigned the rights of a beneficiary to a deed of trust, and or the substitute trustee who is seeking to enforce said rights as part of a foreclosure or unlawful detainer action… the last thing you’d ever want to do is hire a lawyer.

 

Sheesh, it’s not like we’re children.

 

After all, we handled getting our mortgages all by ourselves, initialing and signing all those contractual pages containing 3 point type about how our snapping turtle, spring loaded mortgage might result in payments that exceed our monthly income by three-fold at a time when the credit markets would require a 780 FICO and 30 percent equity to refinance.

 

And if we can competently handle that sort of complicated transaction, surely we all know not to pay a lawyer a nickel for something as simple as filing a complaint with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

Look, even if the OCC finds nothing was wrong with the foreclosures in 2009 or 2010, I think we’ll all be able to join in a giant collective sigh of relief.  At least we’ll know that no one “suffered financial injury” because of errors in the foreclosure process during those two years, and we can finally move from insult to injury as we close the chapter on the unnecessary destruction of some two million family’s lives.

 

It reminds me of the stress tests they use with the banks… you know, the ones where every bank always passes.  Like something from a Monty Python skit.  Aren’t those the best?

 

Move along people, there’s nothing to see here.

 

Mandelman out.

May
10

Florida | Meet Candidates Who Combat Securitization Fraud and Foreclosure Fraud, Lisa Epstein & Alan Grayson

Hello Friends, Please join me for a Meet and Greet Campaign event where we are honored to welcome special guest Alan Grayson, Congressman with Guts running in 2012 Congressional District 9, (District 9 is a Hispanic-minority seat and includes all of Osceola County and part of Orange and Polk counties) and thank him for endorsing … Read more Related posts:
  1. HuffPo | Lisa Epstein Aim’s To Take Over Palm Beach County County Courthouse, Lands Endorsement from Rep. Alan Grayson (D)
  2. Tonight LiveStream or Live! Lisa Epstein, Campaign Kick Off – Clerk of Circuit Court, Palm Beach County, Florida
  3. Palm Beach Post on Politics | Clerk Candidate Epstein Touts Alan Grayson Endorsement in Dem Primary
May
08

Florida Foreclosure Defense Attorney

Cox & Sanchez, Attorneys at Law

The Law Offices of Cox & Sanchez
4488 Star Street North St. Petersburg, Florida 33743
Ph. 727-869-2691
Website: www.coxsanchez.com

May
04

MBS | Bank Loan Bundling Investigated by Biden-Schneiderman: Mortgages

“I can’t imagine a better securities law claim than to say that you represented that these were mortgage-backed securities when in fact they were backed by nothing.” ~ Bank Loan Bundling Investigated by Biden-Schneiderman: Mortgages New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and Delaware’s Beau Biden are investigating banks for failing to package mortgages into bonds … Read more Related posts:
  1. Abigail Field | Schneiderman Sues BNY; Homeowners Validated; Will Deutsche Bank Be Next?
  2. Alliance | NY AG Schneiderman and FHFA Inspector General Linick Share Resources & Evidence
  3. NY Times | Two States Ask if Paperwork in Mortgage Bundling Was Complete
May
03

Lee Camp | Pigs, Bankers, & Date Rapists (VIDEO)

Explicit Language So Viewer Discretion Advised The big banks have FINALLY been held to account!! …Never mind, I was thinking of something else. ~ 4closureFraud.org TweetRelated posts: Fox Business Video | Robo-Signing Deal Nearing Conclusion Lee Camp | We Are Nothing (VIDEO) Lee Camp | You’re A Slave And Here’s Why (VIDEO) Related posts:
  1. Fox Business Video | Robo-Signing Deal Nearing Conclusion
  2. Lee Camp | We Are Nothing (VIDEO)
  3. Lee Camp | You’re A Slave And Here’s Why (VIDEO)
May
03

CBS: House Oversight Committee to take first steps on contempt charge against Holder on Fast & Furious

Brinksmanship.


The fight between House Republicans, the Department of Justice, and the White House over Operation Fast and Furious will escalate this morning, according to CBS News.  The House Oversight Committee will take the first steps to charging Attorney General Eric Holder with contempt of Congress over continued stonewalling of demands for documentation and testimony on [...]

Read this post »

May
01

Lock ‘em Up | Fraud on the Court – In Re Delva: Fraudclosure, Fabrication, Bankruptcy and Lies

Well lookie what we have here… More fraud, more deception, more lies. All this AFTER the so called mortgage settlement that was to stop all this… The case below goes a little something like this: Foreclosure filed by INDYMAC bank filed in Jan 2009 ONEWEST takes over INDYMAC in March 2009 Summary judgment granted to … Read more Related posts:
  1. MERS / BAC Bankruptcy Court Bashing In RE: BOX Order Denying Motion for Relief from Stay
  2. In Re: Arizmendi – CA Bankruptcy Court, HAMP Scam & “the court concluded it was left trying to guess which note OneWest actually held.”
  3. IN RE PHILLIPS, US Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Alabama | AURORA LOAN SERVICES Motion to Dismiss GRANTED, Except for Fraud on the Court
Apr
30

An Important Message about 2012 for both President Obama & Mitt Romney

 

I realize you’re both very busy and were it not important, I would not presume to take up any of your time, or the time of your advisers, but it has long since become clear that neither of your campaigns understands several of the key dynamics that will have a major impact on which one of you wins in November of 2012.

 

The dynamics I’m referring to have to do with the foreclosure crisis, a topic which, for a variety of reasons, some shared and others divergent, neither of you wants to talk much about, but it is the topic that will continue to destabilize either of your chances to win the upcoming election.

 

That this is the case, should not be hard to accept… in 2012, the road to the White House runs directly through the states hardest hit by the foreclosure crisis, most notably Ohio and Florida, but also Michigan, Nevada, and North Carolina, et al.  For the Obama campaign, I would say that this issue alone would normally be enough to cost you the election, but as luck would have it, you’re the frying pan running against the fire.

 

In 2008, the Obama campaign won the election by roughly eight million votes.  By this coming November, we will have lost roughly that same number of homes to foreclosure.  If you assume two voters per household, then there are 16 million that don’t want to vote for you.  I didn’t say they wouldn’t vote for you, the alternative being voting for fire, but rest assured, they don’t want to vote for you.

 

There are another four million plus in foreclosure or seriously delinquent today, so at two per household, that’s another eight million, bringing the total to 24 million.  And forecasts by Amherst Securities show 9.5 million foreclosures coming soon to a neighborhood near you, so soon enough there will be about the same number of people directly affected by foreclosure than voted in the presidential election in 2008.

 

 

The point is that the number of Americans seriously harmed by the mishandling of the foreclosure crisis are now more than enough to sway a national election.

 

These people are not merely upset about losing a home to foreclosure, they are enraged over having been misled, deceived and entirely abandoned, as the Obama administration ultimately stood by and did essentially nothing while their servicer tortured them as they lost their homes to foreclosure.

 

And, I can assure you that my description is not hyperbole to those in this unfortunate group.  In fact, many would call it understatement.

 

It’s interesting to realize that neither of you wants to bring up the situation related to housing and foreclosures in your campaigning.  I say that because, although it’s easy to see why the Obama campaign would avoid the topic, but one would think that the Romney campaign would be exploiting such an obvious weakness of the opposition to garner support.  And yet, the Romney campaign doesn’t want to talk about housing and foreclosures any more than the Obama campaign does.

 

In fact, Mr. Romney, this past year while campaigning in Nevada of all places, quite shockingly, you decided to answer a question about foreclosures by saying that what’s needed is a faster foreclosure process… in Nevada… a faster foreclosure process.

 

Basically, after being asked the only question certain to have tens of thousands of Nevada voters paying close attention, your response gave the Obama Administration credit for programs that successfully delayed or prevented some significant number of foreclosures in a state that’s been devastated by foreclosures more so than any other.

 

For a moment, all I could think was that you were trying to help Obama win Nevada in 2012, but I’ve since realized that its far more likely that you were caught off guard and didn’t know what else to say at that moment, because since then you’ve adopted the Obama campaign’s approach to the issue: Pretend it doesn’t exist.

 

I’m quite sure both of your campaigns have people monitoring the Internet, so you must know how ridiculous the absence of any meaningful discussion on foreclosures appears to millions of voters.  Therefore, it must be that you’re both so deathly afraid of the Tea Partiers and Rick Santelli that your campaign managers figure mums the word is your only viable option.

 

Well, since I see no other explanation for your mutual silence on the subject, I thought I’d offer both of you some insight and advice about your respective 2012 campaigns.  I may not know enough to be President of the United States, but I know the people of the foreclosure crisis as well as anyone could… to use the hip vernacular of a few years back… they’re my peeps.

 

First, to President Obama:

 

Okay, I understand you’ll probably win staying silent on the issue.

 

For one thing, Mitt Romney isn’t likely to mention the subject of foreclosures either, and if he does, it’s fairly likely that he’ll say something stupid, as he did in Nevada.

 

Secondly, your campaign strategists probably figure that by next fall, if asked, you’ll be able to tout your administration accomplishments related to housing and foreclosures, which, however inadequate they may be, are still heads and shoulders better than anything the GOP has suggested since 2008.  So, as I said, you’ll be running on the premise that people will vote frying pan when the alternative is fire.

 

Thirdly, I’m sure your people have realized that a significant number of the independents you’ve lost AND many of the Republicans who are disgusted with the economic situation have moved into the Ron Paul camp, which may very well give the Paul campaign a double digit election outcome, and lock in a loss for Romney in a replay of Clinton-Bush-Perot, 1992.  (Clinton-43%, Bush-37.5%, Perot-18.9%.)

 

Lastly, it’s no secret that the Republicans in both the House and Senate, since day one of your presidency, have been practicing a bizarre sort of obstructionist politics, voting in unison against anything you’ve proposed, as our nation-on-fire has continued to burn, economically speaking.

 

In fact, the only thing you’ve done that Republicans have not opposed was the pumping of untold trillions into TBTF financial institutions.  To everything else, they’ve very clearly said “NO,” and bringing up this track record will make it near impossible for anyone concerned about foreclosures to vote for anyone on that side of the aisle.

 

It all makes sense, and could be right… but you’ll be biting your nails right into the wee hours of election night, because you’ll remember what happened in the 2010 mid-terms when far too many voting Democrats, furious with you for letting them down, closed the curtains in their voting booths and chose Republican candidates out of spite.

 

If you want to ensure your second term, stop listening to Tim Geithner’s Moral Hazard Band, and anyone who’s ever met Larry Summers, and follow your instincts.

 

 

I know you have them because I heard you talking about how you and Michelle only paid off your student loans less than a decade ago.  I also heard your speech announcing the settlement between state attorneys general and the five largest mortgage servicers, and you said we need to do more to help Americans losing homes due to no fault of their own… and how we “have each others’ backs” in this country.

 

Those were smart things to say, but stopping there won’t carry you to November, you need to seal the deal and start telling the American people the truth… that we need to stop pretending that 20 million Americans all became irresponsible at the same time, buying homes they couldn’t afford, blah, blah, blah.

 

Our financial crisis and economic downturn took out all the investment banks on Wall Street, caused over a thousand smaller banks to become insolvent so far, crippled small and large businesses alike leading to unemployment that will take a decade to improve if we’re lucky, and threw the EU into financial chaos that may still bring an end to the union and its currency.  That’s the truth, so stop pandering to the Tea Party types, they’re short on facts, long on crazy… and won’t be voting for you in 2012 anyway.

 

What the American people want is an economy that doesn’t feel like the United States of Quicksand.  Surely by now you’ve started to suspect that you could double down on pumping money into the banks over the next four years and still no recovery would come.

 

How many quantitative easings do we need to try before we diversify our approach to include America’s middle class… QE-1 didn’t do it… QE-2 didn’t either… and don’t even get me started on the “operation twist” nonsense, which is Bernanke’s only idea to spark consumption by getting credit flowing to consumers.  Should we wait until we’ve tried QE-7… QE-12… QE-18… should we try “twisting” the decade away?

 

Surely you can see that the desired results of these programs haven’t occurred yet, and even if you want to think they will someday, isn’t it time to add a few other strategies to the mix?  Interest rates are simply not the problem, Mr. President, they’re low and they’ve been low… so what and who cares?

 

Remember last June, Mr. President?  It was Bernanke’s second post-FOMC press conference.  The Fed Chief admitted that he had no idea what was causing the economy’s so-called “soft patch,” he only knew that it would persist.  The FOMC statement blamed everything outside the United States… something about Japan along with rising food and oil prices.  He was humble, candid, and relieved that QE 1&2 had reduced the threat of deflation for the moment anyway.  But as to what wasn’t happening in our economy, he didn’t have a clue.

 

 

And yet, you’re doing nothing but bemoaning the fact that Republicans won’t pass your jobs bill even on a stand-alone basis, and following the Fed Chief’s admitted unknowing lead?

 

Our housing market is either double or triple dipping, whichever you’d prefer, but recovering?  Not even close.  Truth be told, it’s been in the same downward slide for almost six years, with slight interruptions caused by a fleeting combination of hype, tax incentives and the transformation of the FHA into the new sub-prime, which is now reporting defaults approaching 20 percent on loans made SINCE 2009.

 

I understand that American consumers are being forced to deleverage, just as the banks will have to do soon.  I understand that the credit markets are broken for the foreseeable future and that there’s nothing you can do about that.  And I understand that Europe’s economy will ultimately come crashing down into ours, causing all sorts of pain and anguish from coast-to-coast.  These things we should hold as being self-evident.

 

But, if you allow the housing markets to continue to fall, and foreclosures to continue to rise, you will be setting our country up to be hit hard while it’s too far down, and there will be no recovering from such a blow at such a time.  Your legacy will be such that you’ll wish Mitt Romney had won in 2012.

 

You’ve got the opening, or will certainly have it very soon… everything is getting worse, and it won’t be long before the Bureau of Economic Analysis will be reluctantly announcing the “R” word once again.  At that point you can reinvent yourself… and do it differently this time… the way you wanted to last time.

 

Be the man of the people… inspire hope and deliver change.  The only real moral hazards you have to worry about are named Geithner and DeMarco.

 

Take them out, save the economic day, and go down in history a hero.  This time do more than anyone says is needed… remind everyone of their obvious propensity for underdoing everything… and if it’s the Republicans that cause you to fail, then let us see you go down fighting.

 

Now, to presumed GOP candidate, Mitt Romney…

 

Okay, so I realize that you’re not the right-wing nutcase you pretended to be during the primaries… fair enough.  And I also realize that you’ll try to move to the center, without alienating the crazy factor that considers itself the GOP’s base.

 

But, if you’re banking, pun intended, on Reagan-esque lofty speeches and loudly criticizing the Obama Administration’s first term over things like spending and health care, your creating a situation in which your shot at winning the election in 2012 will depend purely on the vote-against-Obama-turnout… assuming that no one in Florida or Ohio brings up foreclosures, that is.

 

In other words, you could be anyone running… you’re doing essentially nothing to help yourself win.  Election night will be something like watching the results of a poll come in where the choices were “Anonymous Republican v. Obama.” 

 

If you don’t accept that, just consider the two clowns you just beat in the primaries.  Santorum, who described condoms as a “grievous moral wrong,” and said that “huge moral failings” were causing our economic problems… and good old Newt Gingrich, who attempted to make a serious case for repealing child labor laws in order to put 9 year olds from poor families to work cleaning schools after school… oh, and who promised a “moon base by 2020.”  And those two were the GOP’s saner candidates… the even crazier contenders left the stage earlier.

 

 

Oh yeah… and then there’s Mitt… the former Governor of Massachusetts and a Republican centrist with a JD/MBA from Harvard who was the first in the nation to reform health care into something near-universal in his home state… who turned around Bain & Company as its CEO, who led the committee that made the 2002 Winter Olympics a financial success… and whose father who was CEO of American Motors, Governor of Michigan, and U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

 

Mr. Romney, you managed to beat out a perennial alter boy obsessed with anything of a sexual nature, and an ex-Speaker of the House who was forced by his own party to resign after countless ethics violations, including misleading the House Ethics Committee and ultimately earning the distinction of being the first Speaker to be disciplined, (the vote was 395 to 28), for an ethics violation including being fined $300,000.

 

Okay, so congratulations… I suppose.

 

So, your advisors are obviously telling you that slamming Obama is the ticket to the Oval Office, and largely because the president has failed to mitigate the damage being caused by the foreclosure crisis, they could be right… but probably aren’t.

 

Exclusively slamming Obama in order to win in 2012 would be a strategy much more likely succeed if, in addition to ignoring foreclosures as an issue, you didn’t also have to run on a GOP-friendly platform that favors cutting such things as food stamps, child tax credits and Social Service Block Grants, while carrying states like Florida and Ohio that continue to be destroyed by the economic collapse and specifically the foreclosure crisis.

 

In other words, you’ll be trying to win a national election on a platform that only the one percent… or others in the insensitive class… could love.

 

Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) funds enable States to provide things like daycare for children or adults, protective services for children or adults, special services to persons with disabilities, health-related services, foster care for children, substance abuse, housing, home-delivered meals… you know… luxuries.

 

Oh, and what are you worth, by the way… a quarter of a billion and change?  And you’re going to cut food stamps?  Screw the working poor and long-term unemployed?  You’ll redefine “fat cat” and make Herbert Hoover look like FDR in your first 100 days in office if you do what the Republicans expect you to do.

 

 

We’ve got 46.4 million people on food stamps in this country.  One in four children are eating based on food stamps right now in any given month.  The average monthly benefit comes out to be about $8 per household, per day… roughly $2.67 per day for food assuming a three person household.  That’s the program that House Budget Committee Chairman, Republican Paul Ryan wants to cut, calling it a “comfortable hammock” instead of a “safety net.”

 

(By the way, Ryan and his Republican cohorts have helped me as a writer by providing me with a much better understanding of when it’s most appropriate to use the word “asshole,” and for that I suppose I should thank them.)

 

In Florida alone, there are 3.29 million people on food stamps as of this year, a number that’s doubled since 2008, although the dollar value of the benefits has nearly tripled to $5.15 billion as more families have been forced to seek assistance from the program.  Under the Republican budget proposal, estimates show that 234,000 Florida households will lose their food stamps benefit

 

So, you’re basically planning on winning Florida by ignoring foreclosures, reducing the availability of food, and saying how bad Obama has been?  It’s possible, I guess… but I’d stop way short of considering it a sure thing, that’s for sure.

 

I also have to say that running this way is insane, because even if you somehow pulled it off and won, you’d spend the next four years either doing the GOP’s bidding while watching civil unrest be redefined American style, or you’d resist such asinine policies and soon find yourself abandoned by your own party, shunned by Wall Street, branded a liberal… and all but certain to be back home in four years.

 

You look pretty darn good for your age now, but under those conditions, you’d start your presidency looking like Michael Douglas and head back home four years later looking like Kirk Douglas.

 

Mr. Romney, I don’t believe you’re not a smart guy… you have to be a smart guy.  So, can you honestly tell me that tax cuts for business and the recently branded “job creators,” combined with reduced government spending is anything but sheer idiocy during times like these?

 

You must know that American companies have oodles of cash and Treasury securities in their coffers, but no one is going to invest and expand when there is no demand for what they’d produce.  American consumers both can’t and won’t spend more than they are today… and consumer spending today is anemic compared to what it was in let’s say 2005.

 

American consumers have seen their access to credit slashed and their home equity stripped to essentially nothing.  And, as if that weren’t enough, inflation and higher oil and food prices are sure to wipe out what little discretionary spending has survived the collapse.

 

Our first quarter GDP number should say it all, not only because at 2.2 percent it came in below expectations, but also because had it been calculated using the Consumer Price Index, instead of whatever B.S. number was used, the actual GDP was ZERO.  Yes, indeed… now that’s what I call a recovery, right Mitt?

 

 

Here’s the deal… if you want to win the presidential election this fall, you need to stop pretending foreclosures are helping someone, because clearly they are not, and as long as you have nothing to say on the subject, you might as well stop concerning yourself with figuring out how many ways you can call Obama a socialist, because he may be the frying pan, but you’ll be the fire.

 

What you really need to do is figure out how to become the transformational leader that leads his party to success, instead of one who allows his party’s offensive ideologies to drag our nation further towards utter ruin.

 

President Obama has already taken care of those at the top.  If you want to ensure a victory for the Romney campaign this November, you need to start at the bottom.

 

That’s all I have to say about that…

 

Okay, that’s all I wanted to say.  I’m pretty darn sure that you’ll both ignore what I’ve said and proceed with your what-you-ignore-can’t-hurt-you strategy.  So, good luck this summer on the campaign trail.

 

And, Mr. President… we all know that four years ago you were dealt the lousiest of hands, but once your second term begins… know that it’s all on you, sir.

 

Mandelman out.

Apr
27

The Ed Morrissey Show: Duane “Generalissimo” Patterson & the Week in Review

3 pm ET, 90 mins!


Today, on the Ed Morrissey Show (3 pm ET), we’ll take a look at the past week with Duane “Generalissimo” Patterson of the Hugh Hewitt Show. Duane and I will talk about the latest economic indicators, NPR’s attempt to spin the bad news, the presidential race, and EPA’s crucifixion policies. All of this and more [...]

Read this post »

Apr
26

Deutsche Bank Earnings Fall 34%, Worse Than Expected

Deutsche Bank Earnings Fall 34%, Worse Than Expected FRANKFURT–Deutsche Bank, the largest German bank, said on Thursday that profit had fallen 34 percent in the first quarter, more than expected, as the European debt crisis continued to depress fees from trading and other investment banking activities. Net profit fell to 1.4 billion euros ($1.85 billion) … Read more Related posts:
  1. ARKANSAS | JOHNATHAN D DIAL ET AL V DEUTSCHE BANK NAT ET AL – Deutsche Bank Wasn’t Cleared To Foreclose, Suit Says
  2. Feds Seize $404 Million from Deutsche Bank after Bank Enters Into a Non-Prosecution Agreement with US Government
  3. IBEW LOCAL 90 PENSION FUND vs. DEUTSCHE BANK | Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Announces Class Action Suit Against Deutsche Bank AG
Apr
25

MERS, Banks Call A.G.’s Suit Factually, Legally Deficient

MERS, Banks Call A.G.’s Suit Factually, Legally Deficient MERS and several banks who were sued by New York’s attorney general for allegedly initiating faulty foreclosure actions have struck back in the high-profile litigation by strongly defending their practices and discounting the office’s assertions as factually and legally deficient. In February, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman sued … Read more Related posts:
  1. Houston’s County Joins Texas Suit Seeking $10 Billion From MERS, Banks
  2. Class Action RICO Suit Against MERS Alleges Tens of Thousands of New York Foreclosure Frauds Orchestrated by “Foreclosure Mill” Attorney Steven Baum & Banks
  3. Bank of America, MERS Ask Court to Dismiss Texas Counties’ Recording Fee Suit
Apr
25

MERS, Banks Call A.G.’s Suit Factually, Legally Deficient

MERS, Banks Call A.G.’s Suit Factually, Legally Deficient MERS and several banks who were sued by New York’s attorney general for allegedly initiating faulty foreclosure actions have struck back in the high-profile litigation by strongly defending their practices and discounting the office’s assertions as factually and legally deficient. In February, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman sued … Read more Related posts:
  1. Houston’s County Joins Texas Suit Seeking $10 Billion From MERS, Banks
  2. Class Action RICO Suit Against MERS Alleges Tens of Thousands of New York Foreclosure Frauds Orchestrated by “Foreclosure Mill” Attorney Steven Baum & Banks
  3. Bank of America, MERS Ask Court to Dismiss Texas Counties’ Recording Fee Suit
Apr
25

MERS, Banks Call A.G.’s Suit Factually, Legally Deficient

MERS, Banks Call A.G.’s Suit Factually, Legally Deficient MERS and several banks who were sued by New York’s attorney general for allegedly initiating faulty foreclosure actions have struck back in the high-profile litigation by strongly defending their practices and discounting the office’s assertions as factually and legally deficient. In February, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman sued … Read more Related posts:
  1. Houston’s County Joins Texas Suit Seeking $10 Billion From MERS, Banks
  2. Class Action RICO Suit Against MERS Alleges Tens of Thousands of New York Foreclosure Frauds Orchestrated by “Foreclosure Mill” Attorney Steven Baum & Banks
  3. Bank of America, MERS Ask Court to Dismiss Texas Counties’ Recording Fee Suit
Apr
24

Yale Economics Professor Robert Shiller | Maybe No Housing Rebound for a Generation

Maybe no housing rebound for a generation: Shiller NEW YORK (Reuters) – The Housing market is likely to remain weak and may take a generation or more to rebound, Yale economics professor Robert Shiller told Reuters Insider on Tuesday. Shiller, the co-creator of the Standard & Poor’s/Case-Shiller home price index, said a weak labor market, … Read more Related posts:
  1. National Home Prices Hit New Low in 2011 Q1 According to the S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Indices
  2. Fedspeak White Paper | The U.S. Housing Market: Current Conditions and Policy Considerations
  3. 60 Minutes | Homeless Children: The Hard Times Generation
Website Designed and Developed by Tampa Web Designer