Bill Beckmann MERS CEO | “Beau Biden is wrong on MERS lawsuit”
2004 GAO Report | Federal and State Agencies Face Challenges in Combating Predatory Lending
- Subprime Standardization: How Rating Agencies Allow Predatory Lending to Flourish in the Secondary Mortgage Market
- 2004 Report on Predatory Lending & Servicing Practices & Their Effect on Corporate Compliance, Conduct, Ethics & Accounting
- Predatory Grizzly “Bear” Attacks Innocent, Elderly, Poor, Minorities, Disabled & Disadvantaged With Predatory Lending Scams & Frauds!
Citizen Researchers Please Help Write This Article Why Investors, Homeowners and the Economy Benefit From Principal Write-downs
JOE NOCERA | To Fix Housing, See the Data
- Principal reduction plan for struggling homeowners could be part of settlement between lenders and states
- Second Chances Subprime Mortgage Modification and Re-Default
- Karl Rove on Robo-signing, Fraudclosures and a Bank Settlement, “Justice and the state attorneys general are demanding $20 billion for sloppiness”
FHFA Director Praises Principal Paydown Plan for Undersecured Mortgages
California Members of Congress Call for “Justice for Homeowners” in Settlement with Mortgage Servicers
- Kamala Harris | California Breaks from 50-State Probe into Mortgage Fraudclosures
- Principal reduction plan for struggling homeowners could be part of settlement between lenders and states
- Florida AG Pam Bondi Interested in Alternative Settlement with Banks that Does NOT Require Servicers to Pay Fines
William Black will be in Zucotti Park Today Oct 25th Talking with Members of #OWS Movement
- #OccupyPalmBeach Joins #OccupyLakeWorth FL | Saturday Oct 8th Bryant Park Stage located on Lake Ave between Lakeside Dr and the Bridge
- WaPo: Lenders may have foreclosed on hundreds of homeowners in Prince William County, Manassas and Manassas Park using unreliable, “robo-signed” document
- William Black: #OccupyWallStreet A Counter to White-Collar Fraud (VIDEO)
Do You Remember How Overdraft Protection, Overdraft Fees, and Free Checking Used To Work?
Calling everyone in the over-40 set to help me remember something. When dealing with those old-fashioned things called “checks,” how did your own overdraft protection used to work? My recollection is that, back in the day, as long as a person had a certain level of creditworthiness, the bank used to cover your check in a discretionary manner. Then, as I recall, middle class people were encouraged to set up various protections to keep checks from bouncing, such as automatic transfers from savings or a line of credit to cover overdraft accounts. Why don’t more people use these? Is it because they do not qualify? I keep hearing about $35 and even $39 overdraft fees, on both debit and check transactions, like in the New York Times blog today, and wondering who is paying them. Apparently lots of people, since the $38 billion in overdraft fees earned by lenders in 2009, is double what lenders made off these fees in 2000. Is this the ultimate example of banking for the “haves” versus the “have-nots?”
I became my own research subject this past week when a large check written to us bounced. Five items were presented for which we had no dough. For the first two, we were changed $3 each to take the necessary funds from our savings account, and for the last fthree, we were charged $5 each to borrow money to cover the checks from our line of credit. Total, $21.00. Neither Stewart nor I remember asking for these “protections.” They apparently just offered these things to us when we opened our account at the credit union 14 years ago. We saved over $100 by having these protections. Surely, this is very different than the overdraft “protection” that everyone has been complaining about.
Now I am reading a paper linking higher overdraft fees to increases in free checking. Does this mesh with your own experiences, readers? I cannot remember ever paying for checking. Have some of you seen increases in free checking while watching these overdraft fees go up?
Assembly Bill No. 284 | Potential Felony Charges Make Servicers (aka Illegal Debt Collectors) Pause Nevada Fraudclosures
- Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto Expected to File Criminal Charges Against Bank and Title Company Employees, as well as Notary Publics, Over Robosigning
- KABOOM | A Lawsuit That Dirty Debt Collectors Should Be Worried About
- A New Foreclosure Tactic – Lenders / Debt Collectors Holding Second Mortgages Freeze Bank Accounts
Recasting A Mortgage – What Is It and Why Is It Done?
Article by Peter Harper
A mortgage recast is more like mortgage modification but it mainly involves re-amortization of your home loan. The need for mortgage recast in general comes up in case of three situations. One is when you would want to pay down the principal and get the home loan amortized. The second situation is when a homeowner is in financial hardship and thus may want to extend the term of the home loan. Another situation is when negative amortization happens on a home loan, recast is done.
Why is recasting on mortgage done?
Mortgage recasting is done in order to lower the monthly payment on your mortgage. Thus, it is more like mortgage modification as the loan term gets changed and the payment on the mortgage is reduced. Through mortgage recasting the cost and the hassles of refinancing your mortgage gets reduced. There are many such lenders who offer the homeowners the chance which can help them in to lowering their monthly payments through recasting or re-amortization.
Amortization is when the payments against the mortgage are made and when the loan amount reduces as a result of this. Thus, negative amortization is just the opposite of this where the loan amount grows as a result of less than minimum payments made by the borrower.
The amortized loan lowers the fixed amount of money that you are required to pay each month against the home loan so that at the end of the mortgage, the principal amount gets paid off. Thus, you can use a mortgage calculator in order to understand fully the amortization schedule which shows as to how the monthly payments are broken down into the payment towards the interest and the payment against the principal amount borrowed.
Typically the homeowners do not recast the home mortgage under a situation where they make additional payments against the principal. Rather the loan gets foreshortened and this is because additional payments towards the principal reduce the outstanding balance of the loan, along with the expense on the monthly interest. In this case as the monthly payment do not change, so the loan gets paid off faster.
However, sometimes the main idea of the homeowners, in making the additional principal payments is not mainly to reduce the loan but to lower the monthly payments on the mortgage. In such a situation the home loan is required to be recast. The lender in case of recast is required to base the payments against the home loan as per the new term, thereby the lower balance of the loan and also the remaining home loan term.
But again, not all of the mortgage lenders may offer their customers the provision to recast the home mortgage. The main lenders in many cases sell off the loans and these get originated to investors. The investors in general are not much interested in providing this level of provisions and flexibility to the borrowers and so these home loans may not have the recast option. However, it is always better to talk to your lender about the mortgage recast and if you can get such a provision.
Other than this in case of the negative amortization loans or also as known as the pick and pay loan, you may be able to recast the loan. Though these loans offer you various advantage and various low payment options, this is quite a troublesome kind of loan. This is because the loan amount grows and at a point of time it becomes really tough for you to make the payments against the home loan. So, in such cases the loans can be recast and in this case the loan payments grow higher in order to lower the principal amount which you had borrowed.
Kick Em Out | Gov. Scott’s Plan to Speed Fraudclosure Process Draws Mixed Reactions
Our Guide to Obama’s Floundering Foreclosure Programs
- Letter | Merkley Urges Obama to Include Mortgage Help, Energy Efficiency Programs in Jobs Agenda
- HAMP – Treasury Department’s Mortgage Modification Programs – A Failure Prolonging the Economic Crisis
- An August Surprise from Obama? Rumors – Administration is About to Order Government-Controlled Lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to Forgive Portion of Mortgage Debt
Law Firms Descend on Florida to Take Over Fraudclosure Business
Principal reduction plan for struggling homeowners could be part of settlement between lenders and states
William Black | Lenders Put the Lies in Liar’s Loans and Bear the Principal Moral Culpability
WaPo: Lenders may have foreclosed on hundreds of homeowners in Prince William County, Manassas and Manassas Park using unreliable, “robo-signed” document
Banksters | Floridians Facing Foreclosure Should Lose their Homes Faster Under Plan Making Rounds in Tallahassee
Victory | Court Order Stops Foreclosure – Homeowner “We’re not trying to get a free house, We’re trying to save the house from Foreclosure Fraud”
Order | Washington Supreme Court to Weigh Legality of MERS Foreclosures
Florida Bankers Work with Rep Passidomo to “Fix” Foreclosure Bill
Fraudclosure | Inside Fannie Mae: Confidential Records Show how Fannie Mae Breaks the Rules
Fraudclosure | BofA’s Moynihan Said to Press Geithner on Foreclosure Agreement
Palm Beach Post Editorial Board “Bondi Picks the Wrong Side” (BANKS)
Fannie Responds to Hawaii’s New Foreclosure Law – Says… WE’RE OUT!
If you’ve been following the goings on in Hawaii as related to SB 651, the state’s new foreclosure law that requires servicers foreclosing non-judicially to produce chain of title documents, including assignments and endorsements prior to scheduling mandatory dispute resolution in front of a mediator, here’s a piece of news you’ll want to hear.
And, even if you haven’t been following the situation pertaining to foreclosures in Hawaii, but you’ve often wondered what the banks would do if they were forced to prove they actually own a home, or represent a trust that holds the actual note, BEFORE foreclosing… you’ll want to hear this too.
First of all, in case you don’t know any of the background here, you might want to click on this article: Governor Abercrombie Signs SB 651 – Toughest Foreclosure Bill in Nation, NOW LAW!
But for everyone else, those who know that recently Hawaii’s state legislature became the first in the nation to stand up to the banking lobby, passing the toughest foreclosure protection bill in the country, haven’t you been wondering what the banksters were going to do in response?
Well, I sure have… in fact, I’ve even been working on a document to send over there that analyzed the different potential bankster responses, and even after analyzing things and trying to find something out about their plans, I still really wasn’t at all sure. I just could not imagine the servicers or lenders actually being able to conform to the new law’s requirements under any circumstances.
But, you see… a lot of people, when I say that, say things like… “well, I’m sure they have the proper documentation on SOME of the loans… they can’t ALL be gone.” And I say, no they don’t.
And they say, “now how do you know that?” And I say, because of robo-signing… robo-signing does not appear on a list of alternative actions. If you chose robo-signing, it’s because you couldn’t think of anything else. And because they never have the properly endorsed note in any of the high profile cases.
If they had some, we’d have seen them by now… heard about them… instead all the banksters say is that it’s an isolated incident whenever they don’t seem to have one, or the law firm didn’t produce the proper documents… stuff like that. In the Ibanez decision in Massachusetts, they didn’t even show up with a schedule of loans…nothing.
At this point it’s at least statistically improbable that they have them… unless they have them and they’re blank on the back, as in never endorsed to anyone, in which case the are in a vault somewhere and they’ll never show them to anyone.
And even after all that and more, some people, especially journalists, still say… “well, we’ll see.” Many of them aren’t even bothered by the fact that pretty much all the banks were robo-signing… all of them… competitors… and they all seem to have the same problem and they all came up with the same idiotic solutions… and all at the same time… all of them… competitors… fascinating.
Well, I’d say that what I’m about to show you puts a proverbial nail in the benefit-of-the-doubt-coffin.
Here’s how I analyzed the situation in Hawaii… it seemed to me there were four options for the banksters:
- Conform to the new non-judicial foreclosure process.
- Go with the state’s judicial foreclosure process.
- Do nothing, stop foreclosing and hope to get the law changed next legislative session.
- Bring some sort of preemptory challenge to the new law in federal court.
That’s it, right? What else could the banks do, in light of the new law?
I figured, that if I was right, they couldn’t chose #1. They just don’t have the chain of title documents unless they forge them. They could go with judicial foreclosure, #2, but it sure could be Florida Part Two, and that’s a real mess. Besides, Hawaii courts could adopt the same standard the new law outlined for mediation, in which case there’d be little advantaged gained. #3 seemed unlikely, but was a possibility nonetheless. And #4… well, it seemed to me that banks challenging the state’s new law could be WW III.
So, I really didn’t know what the banking industry was going to do… I only knew one thing with certainty, even if everyone didn’t agree… no way would they conform to the new law governing non-judicial foreclosures. Mediation sounded nice but if you can’t prove you own the property, you can’t satisfy the requirements of the new state law in Hawaii.
That’s what’s funny, in a way… Hawaii’s new law is only demanding that the bank follow the existing laws… nothing more. SB 651 doesn’t impose some new law or new requirement on bankers related to foreclosure, it merely requires bankers to do what they should have done all along under the existing laws governing the transfer of real property.
And if they can’t do that because they didn’t follow the existing laws governing the transfer of real property, well… then that’s what needs to be addressed, right? The answer isn’t to forge documents, right? That cannot be the answer. Covering a crime with another crime cannot be the answer, right?
Let’s say I lost my pink slip to my car and I want to sell it to you. I can’t. I’m going to have to go down to the DMV and follow some sort of process to get anew pink slip. Period. The answer isn’t for me to get on my computer and make a fake new pink slip. If I do that, now I’m guilty of a crime. And no judge is going to care that I was in a hurry to sell my car and say it was okay, therefore, to forge a pink slip. I’m not a lawyer, but I’m pretty sure that what I just said is correct.
So, what’s the NEWS? Is that what you’re wondering at this point… I’m torturing you? Okay, sorry, I just wanted you to have the same foundation I did when I heard the NEWS.
Fannie Mae has announced that it will ONLY pursue JUDICIAL FORECLOSURES in the State of Hawaii. They will not even attempt to comply with the new law. And why? I know why and you should too… because they can’t… because they don’t have the properly endorsed notes and can’t produce the proper chain of title… ever.
It’s like a game of chess… they did things… Hawaii did something in response… then they make a another move… and now it’s Hawaii turn again. And I’ll be on the phone to Hawaii in the morning… because I have an idea or two about what their next move might be.
And one more thing… let us not forget that this whole thing isn’t about the borrowers. All anyone has wanted was for the banks to modify loans in order to PREVENT PREVENTABLE FORECLOSURES, as the federal government asked them to do… as they contracted with the federal government to do… as is the right thing to do after being bailed out by the American taxpayers… and after being the people that caused the economic meltdown in the first place.
Why is it perfectly okay in the mind of the banking industry that they continue to be bailed out in various forms, but it’s not reasonable to extend the same courtesy to the American taxpayers who did the bailing. Did the homeowners of this country cause housing prices to fall off a cliff in the course of a year? Or did that happen because of a global credit crisis? Because I don’t think it was the homeowners who caused the global credit crisis, was it homeowners? Did we do that?
No… we did not.
Mandelman out.
~~~
Here’s the Fannie Mae Press Release, dated today… June 10th, 2011.
Fannie Mae on Hawaii’s New Law
BANKS VIOLATE SERVICEMEMBERS CIVIL RELIEF ACT, PAY $56 MILLION!
The banks have no problems…and in fact they are becoming quite adept at crushing, kicking, stomping the rights of every single American. They don’t care, but then again why should they….YOUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS ARE BEING USED TO FUEL THEIR ARROGANT ENTERPRISE! (AND THEY’RE ONLY GETTING WORSE)
Courts, in many cases, seem content to allow the banks to slam everyday Americans, but one area that really should get the attention of every judge and every American is when they slam the rights of our men and women in Uniform. I commit once again, and I encourage every attorney out there to do the same…..if you are an active duty member of the military, I will provide you an free consultation on any case where you feel your rights under the Servicemember’s Civil Relief Act has been violated.
Read this story to get some grasp of the magnitude and scope of the damage caused……
JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), one of the lenders criticized over improper foreclosures on military families’ homes, agreed to pay $56 million to settle claims it overcharged service members on their mortgages.
JPMorgan will pay $27 million in cash to about 6,000 active-duty military personnel who were overcharged on their mortgages, cut interest rates on soldiers’ home loans and return homes that were wrongfully foreclosed upon, according to settlement terms filed in federal court in Beaufort, South Carolina.
Tweet this!
Share and Enjoy:
Scridb filter
Home Sold in Foreclosure, Owner Has No Idea He’s In Foreclosure and He’s In The Military!
One of the most important concepts in our entire system of justice, whether criminal or civil is the defendant has an absolute right to know he’s being sued….right? That’s why in civil litigation we require that process servers or sheriffs file with the court an Affidavit of Service of Process swearing that they delivered a copy of the lawsuit on the defendant.
Well, we know that in Fraudclosure World, that bizarre, alternate world where the banks and their law firms don’t feel obliged to follow the rules, they are cutting corners and avoiding completing real service. They also engaged in a widespread pattern and practice of inflating service of process charges on foreclosures by producing summonses for unknown tenants and other parties then charging the defendants for not serving those unknown tenants.
But anyway, I digress. No one cares about any of this anyway despite the fact that all of this is a direct affront to our legal system and a direct attack on all of our rights. No one cares that millions of dollars in inflated service of process charges have been incorporated into Final Judgments of Foreclosure all across this state. No one cares that these charges have almost certainly been passed along to the lenders and to the federal government….after all, what’s a few million dollars between friends, right? Now Florida’s Attorney General, and presumably federal agencies, have all the information about this, but my guess is that this multi-million dollar crime spree will just be ignored. Take that you dopey taxpayer. Too bad consumer. Turn your back lady justice, keep that blindfold on and focus on your silly scales….this ain’t your court system anymore, we sold it to the banks.
But wait, I didn’t even intend to rant about problems with Service of Process, I wanted to talk about situations where the homeowners had no service of process at all. Like the story that appeared in the Tampa Tribune Here. The pleadings filed in court reflect that this defendant had no knowledge whatsoever that his home was in foreclosure and despite this, his home was sold at a public auction. Now that’s bad enough, but it get’s worse. Much worse.
You see there’s an important laws called the Servicemember’s Civil Relief Act . The Act reflects the special challenges faced by the good men and women who serve our country in uniform and affords them practical protections that respect the unique demands placed on our military. The Act is being widely ignored and our men and women are suffering. There’s so much about Fraudclosure that people don’t care about, but this is one very important area, that we cannot let people not care about.
I will consult with any servicemember whose rights under the SCRA have been violated, and I want to make a commitment that no soldier who is in foreclosure will go unrepresented. Please learn about the SCRA, and spread this word throughout our military communities, any soldier or family can email me directly at weidnerlaw@yahoo.com for information and advice on the rights provided under the SCRA.
Tweet this!
Share and Enjoy:
Scridb filter
The “Newest” Fraudclosure Scandal- Service of Process Fraud….
The allegations and the evidence is not new, it’s like a mushroom cloud that will keep growing as more and more people understand their rights and take note of the fact that their rights have been violated. Every defendant in a foreclosure case is entitled to have the lawsuit personally handed to them, but in far too many cases, defendants are not actually receiving the lawsuits. Sometimes they are left on the doorstep, sometimes they receive it in the mail and in some cases, they do not receive it at all.
Title insurance companies and lenders need to be particularly concerned about these allegations because judgments based upon fraudulent service of process ARE VOID FOREVER! That’s right, there is no statue of limitations. There is no time limit to bring the challenge to the judgment and to invalidate the title founded upon that judgment.
Tweet this!
Share and Enjoy:
Scridb filter
New Fannie/Freddie Guidelines Discourage Short Sale/Deed In Lieu
In yet another example of how the policy makers don’t get it, the latest guidelines fail to offer any real incentive for homeowners to work with lenders..
Tweet this!
Share and Enjoy:
Scridb filter
Attacking Violations of the Pooling And Servicing Agreement
The Massachusetts Ibanez decision highlighted for all of us the fact that judges are increasingly aware…and incredulous…that these big shot lenders with their $1,000 an hour lawyers would be so careless and sloppy with the documentation relating multi million dollar’s worth of assets….
US BANK v. IBANEZ, SJC 10694, MASS 1/2011
What is surprising about these cases is….the utter carelessness with which the plaintiff banks documented titles to their assets…
It’s just utter madness and sloppiness and arrogance. These evil machines that are the titans of international finance were so busy shoving all of America’s money into their pockets that they didn’t bother to follow even the most basic terms of their own contracts.
That’s apparently been no real problem for them so far because courts have continued to let them slide, ignoring the fact that they have in fact ignored the basic documentation requirements of their own contracts.
But the fact that they are ignoring their own contracts should be used in our cases to attack their ability to proceed….
Affidavit-of-Professor-Ira-Bloom-for-US-Bank-v-Congress
Tweet this!
Share and Enjoy:
Scridb filter












