Part of the scheme to minimize the importance of bank foreclosure fraud is the silly claim that some homeowners are getting a free ride. Here’s an example from CNBC Secular Pastor John Carney. He describes a homeowner who is trying to stay in her house by claiming foreclosure fraud:
This doesn’t change the fact that D’Amelio is attempting to stay in a house while reneging on her obligation to repay the loan she used to buy the home. ….
None of this excuses the actions of banks that falsified affidavits, did not properly transfer mortgage notes and lien documents, forged documents, and sold shoddily securitized mortgages to investors. But the wronged party in these situations is not the defaulting borrower—it’s the investors in the banks, the courts, the buyers of the securities, and the broader American public.
Thanks Secular Pastor John, but really, there are only two issues here, and neither one of them has anything to do with your fake morality.
1. The obligation to pay the note.
2. Disposition of collateral.
If you want to make someone pay, or take their property away from them, you have to act in accordance with the law, not your Ten Commandments of Money. So let’s see where we are in the real world instead of before the altar of corporate morality.
D’Amelio owes the money. That is not the issue. As soon as someone files a lawsuit based on the promissory note, a judgment will go down against her, and the noteholder will be able to use judicial process to collect from all of her assets (less statutory exemptions). I assume, of course, that the incompetents who run banks, trusts and servicing companies can find the note, or enough evidence of its existence to give them the right to enforce it.
What about the collateral? The general rule is that all creditors should have the same right to get at your assets. If you don’t pay, each creditor can sue you and get a judgment, and the sheriff will sell your non-exempt assets to pay the judgment. One exception to the rule is that if a creditor jumps through the right hoops, including paperwork and recording, that creditor gets first call on specific assets covered by the paperwork.
The hoops for real estate are simple. The creditor needs a mortgage document that complies with state law, That usually includes signatures, notaries and recording. If the person who is entitled to enforce the mortgage changes, usually because someone else acquires the note, the new creditor must record evidence of the transfer in the right office. Not that hard. But the point is that if you don’t do it right, you don’t get to step in ahead of other creditors. You don’t get first call on the assets.
Of course, as we know, the incompetents who manage this paperwork have failed repeatedly to get their paper in order, and have resorted to fraudulent tactics to hide their incompetence.
All that means is that the general rule goes into effect, and all unsecured creditors can reach the real estate. . . .
Suppose D’Amelio owes the hospital (if Carney can invent facts, so can I) $40,000 for surgical expenses not paid by WellPoint. In that case, the hospital can sue her, put a lien on her house, sell the house, and collect what is owed to it. If she files bankruptcy, the Trustee can sell the house and divide the money up among all the unsecured creditors.
What happens to the note? If some entity can prove it has the right to enforce the note, it can sue D’Amelio, get a judgment, and execute on her house. More likely, though, D’Amelio will just file bankruptcy. In that case, the money gets divided pro rata among all the creditors including the note holder, again assuming the incompetents can prove its existence to the bankruptcy court.
The only way I can think of for a homeowner to get a free ride is if the lender can’t find the note and can’t prove that it is entitled to enforce a copy under UCC § 3-309, which is a corporate mortal sin. Other homeowners might not be pushed out as fast as creditors would like, but that isn’t because of anything the homeowner did. It is solely the result of sins of the creditors.
Perhaps Secular Pastor John can administer the sacrament of confession to them. It cleanses the corporate personhood soul.




16 Comments




Well said. Keep repeating it. The banks are the ones who “screwed up” or to put it another way, committed fraud. Any delay is their fault.
The CNBC link needs fixing. What happened to this front-paged post? It disappeared around the time this one was posted.
Is this D’Amelio case the same as this one? The onew where Citi tried to foreclose on a mortgage owned by Fannie Mae?
Is it possible that one way the Obama administration is helping the banks is to look the other way and let banks foreclose on FNMA loans that the banks service? This would be a simple scam, seeing as the courts don’t require proof of standing, and accept whatever documents are presented by plaintiffs. How would a judge know that the servicer foreclosing was merely servicing a Fannie loan if the government doesn’t step up?
My error on the front page post, maybe it will return. I fixed the link, thanks.
Thanks! It’s good to call them out on this kind of stuff every time(although it can be hard to keep up!).
CNBC, CNN and the rest have been putting out “one armed man” stories on the forclosure crisis for a while now so I’m not surprised to see this latest example.
As for the bankers who’d “failed repeatedly to get their paper in order”, that’s a huge story in itself. There could be a mountain of fraud hidden behind that seemingly incompetent handling of the original paperwork.
Have you thought about looking into how the three credit reporting agencies have been part of this? Folks need to quit giving them any power. They are no different than the ratings agencies that played their blackmail games in the “free market” place of stocks and bonds and other things that go bump in the night.
Nice post, masaccio. Have you seen this one? http://my.firedoglake.com/letsgetitdone/2010/10/26/foreclosing-the-banksters-part-2/
and the Black/Wray post it comments on?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-k-black/post_1115_b_772820.html
They do a really good analysis of the moral balance i the foreclosure situation.
Yes, thanks, good posts all.
Anyone whose ever watched the classic movie “the Treasure of the Sierra Madre”, starring Humprey Bogart remembers the now famous line uttered by the Bandits as they’re attacking Bogart and his pals and they ask the bandits for their badges because ( the bandits) try to fool them by saying they’re Federales.( Mex. State Policemen).
“Badges? We don’t need no stinkin Badges.”
That about sums up the Banks reactions to this whole crisis.
Btw, Nice cartoon!
Keep it going! Excellent post.
The banks want to get the inflated pricing on those unsecured documents. They know the entire American economy is flattened to pre 1990 prices. It is another hustle.
masaccio, I doubt even 200 Hail Marys and 1000 Our Fathers will get the smudges out of these souls. But it makes me smile to think of them trying ;-)
They ought to have to say an entire rosary for each foreclosure based on a subprime mortgage and one for each fraudulent foreclosure.
That might keep them so busy they couldn’t screw up anything more.
Until we mandate some form of accountability, incarceration, fines, etc. We will be going nowhere…..
I still don’t hear enough about the fees that end up being treated as “principle”, just added to the balance on the loans. My lawyer continually tells me the fees are an unresolved gray area. My bankruptcy judge told them to remove the fees and they just quietly added them to my principle debt. I still don’t think the issue of accounting fraud and escrow account manipulations is being dealt with here. I understand that with the reality prices falling, the value of the home with the debt is a bigger problem in many areas…but the truth is that accounting fraud is also going on. I think it’s interesting that in the state of Nebraska where housing prices were not high to begin with, my issue is with bogus fees, not a flexible rate mortgage or balloon payment. We have to be able to hold all the pieces of this puzzle together at the same time. It’s this AND this AND this.
Notice how the legal argument, a favorite among traders when it tends to screw ordinary people, is abandoned as soon as it becomes clear that the banks are not fulfilling their legal obligations. Then the motions and facts are brought forth.
He’s making a lawyer’s argument. In other words, he’s taking sides and running the agenda, the same agenda market jihadists have been spewing ever since they concocted the theory of “economic liberties.”
8^}
Heh!
Totally with you on that whole ‘rosary’ thing!