Gregory M. Lemelson On the Ethics of Mortgage Loan Default

On the ethics of mortgage loan default

Republished with the authors consent.

Is it ethical for the American homeowner whose mortgage has been securitized to default, even If they are not financially distressed?First, consider it is unlikely that marketable, fee simple, insurable title can be obtained as a result of fulfilling the obligations of the related promissory note.  On the contrary the titles to some 60 million homes in America are badly clouded.  Secondly, encouraging investment in an asset class that has been artificially inflated, then deliberately destroying the price of the asset, as part of a separate profit making scheme is unethical, and any agreement based on this type of fraud is grounds to consider the original debt instrument used in the agreement null and void.  Fortunately these grounds are unnecessary, as increasingly US courts are ruling that these mortgages are already invalid for numerous other reasons.

On November 12th, 2010 we published our article “Tattoos, Pyramid Schemes and Social Justice” in which we advocated that homeowners consider suspending their mortgage payments.  In the article we enumerated reasons why we felt this action is both ethical and prudent.   On January 11th, 2011 we published our articles “Ibanez– Denying the Antecedent, Suppressing the Evidence and one big fat Red Herring” which outlined the legal realities of securitized mortgages, and the impact of the landmark Ibanez decision on homeowners, particularly in Massachusetts.  We affirmed our conviction that Massachusetts homeowners with securitized mortgages might want to consider suspending their mortgage payment, and place instead their funds into an escrow account.

Both articles were widely published and read, and in both cases we received also some negative feedback, although strangely, only from foreclosure defence attorneys.  Their sentiment was universal “we would never advise a client to stop paying their mortgage” – we marvelled.  When challenged on this point, or presented with the evidence, none could provide any reasoning for this advice that they would so confidently given their clients, nor could they identify a fallacy in the arguments we had made, or a fact we had misrepresented.

Perhaps they recognized the intrinsic problem in responding simply “because that is what people do, and we should take it for granted that because people do it, it is correct.”  Such inductive reasoning at the corporate level can not be defended as anything more than “group think“.

In such a case, we suspect fear, shame and guilt are more powerful drivers than reason. Further, such thinking serves only to exaggerate the anxiety that stems from the perceived consequences of default.  This is not a coincidence, or something which is “hard-wired” into the human person.  These are emotional controls that have been cultivated over many decades that encourage borrowers and in particular homeowners (those in possession of real property), to follow unnatural social norms, even at the expense of critical thinking and reason.  Thus the context in which such financial obligations exist go almost entirely unexamined.

Financial and ethical considerations in which default is not only feasable but perhaps even a moral imperative are ignored.  In sharp contrast are the standards lenders within the same culture abide in their quest to maximize profits.  Needless to say, this asymmetrical ethic, leads to the possibility of abuse, and widespread economic injustice.  In our society, it is now the case that debtors, and in particular home owners are akin to indentured servants.  The severity of the condition is directly and inversely proportionate to the misdeeds of the financial system which gave rise to it.

Ultimately we were forced to conclude, that those who possess too much fear and too little confidence are acting in fact on the basis of emotion, even though the prospective outcome is not what they would otherwise choose.  A spirited response in reason is what is necessary to ensure that such emotions do not distort rational thought and overcome it.

We hope the above articles, along with the following serves as a practical, financial, and above all ethical framework for understanding the risks involved in continuing to make mortgage payments on securitized loans and their derivatives in light of what is known today about the serious defects in chain of title, and the abuses that took place by many in the securitization process.

We do not make such suggestions lightly.

A catastrophe of “epic proportions”Despite our concern over the seriousness of the advice given, we never wavered in our conviction that we were “right”, even if unpopular.

On May 25th, 2011 a report was released based on a Massachusetts investigation that identified fraudulent documents clouding the titles to Massachusetts properties.  The report cited the example of homeowners who were already in some stage of default for financial reasons, and discussed the issue of fraudulent conveyances as a result of perjury.  It would be an error to present this information only as a means to stave off foreclosure for those who no longer have choices.  Perjury is the fruit of a system built on many layers of fraud that diseased the entire securitization process.  However, the important aspect of the report was not the examples of those who are financially distressed, but rather, (and correctly) the implications to those who are neither in foreclosure, nor financially distressed.

Although it took only 8 words to say what took us just about 6,000 in our last article to say, and although it came about 7 months after our initial article, the unmistakable words “…the ownership of your house is in question” finally had emerged in main stream media.

The problem is hardly unique to Massachusetts.

We also hope that the foreclosure defence attorney’s (or more importantly their clients) who so strongly criticized our thinking on the matter, will listen to the words of John O’Brien, Register, Southern Essex District Registry of Deeds – his proclamation does not leave much room for interpretation; “This is a catastrophe of epic proportions.” 

The report is limited in scope as it cites only one example of a name used (namely “Linda Green”) to commit perjury and cloud thousands of titles to Massachusetts homes.  However, there exists far more names other than “Linda Green” which have been used to commit perjury – the math is not difficult.

Nonetheless, the report barely touches the tip of the proverbial Iceberg, for the issue of perjury pales in comparison to the fundamental and irreparable harm done in the securitization process, which universally affects securitized mortgages nationwide – a fact that will be increasingly revealed.

For example a review of what has been said on the Ibanez matter makes any investigation into mere perjury wholly unnecessary.

In the November 2010 article we wrote:

“Americans have a duty to ask critical questions about the operations of their financial institutions, and if evidence has been presented that a deal was made, but not everyone was playing by the rules, than those deals need to be looked at again. It is not good enough any longer to say, if it doesn’taffect “me” than, I’m not getting involved. We have a duty to one another as Americans, and more importantly as human beings, to care about truth and justice. What’s more, apathy, so long as we are not affected, is a short lived consolation. Ultimately, this crisis will affect everyone …”

Mr. O’Brien goes on to say of Massachusetts homeowners who have not necessarily defaulted on their mortgages, but whose mortgage documents have been perjured:
“They may not be able to sell their home, and they may not be able to refinance their home. And that is a major, major problem.”

Here is another excerpt taken from the November article:

“It has been made to appear as if those who have fallen on hard times are a matter of “incidental” inequalities in an otherwise procedurally just system. However, it is precisely the opposite which is true. Our financial institutions have created deliberate inequalities, through the use of procedurally unjust systems.”

Marie McDonnell, a Forensic Mortgage Analyst provided the following comments in the same May report (referring to the titles to Massachusetts properties):

“I’m speechless. The scope of the problem is unimaginable; the depth of the fraud is shocking.”

You mean there is something in it for the bank?

People are not stupid and ought not to be treated as such.  They make mistakes from time to time, but that is not the same thing as being stupid.

The value of your home may be going down, but this condition will not last forever – obvious though it may be, it’s still wroth stating; nothing last forever, including rates of increase or decrease in asset prices.  In the meantime, a few folks from your bank or the government (not clear if they are necessarily separate entities any longer) may try to convince you that there are some things you can do with your home to improve your lot, and help you transfer this “unwanted” asset to themselves (even if it does provide shelter – Investment qualities aside for a moment).

Here’s the recent Menu:

1. “The sucker trade” aka refinancing.  It goes something like this:  “Can I exchange your big unsecured “credit card-like” debt which was improperly secured for a properly secured mortgage on your home?” And what do you get for this trade?  A fraction of a point off the interest rate on your note.  Never mind one was unsecured and the other secured.

There is secured debt and there is unsecured debt.  The two are not the same in value to the barrower, nor are they the same in value to the lender.  We would challenge anyone to find a business in the world that would choose secured debt over unsecured debt (regardless of their financial condition), for a fraction of a point.  Why should consumers be any different? There is one adage in business that is eternally true: “there is no free lunch”.

This is why so much mortgage loan activity in the last 1.5 years has been refinancing.  Banks are not interested in taking on new risk, they are interested in mitigating old ones.    These new notes and mortgages don’t find their way to MERS, and they do not follow the “old” securitization process.  These original wet-ink notes find their way to actual bank vaults this time.

No need to worry about the 30+ pts. you’ve lost on what probably your biggest investment –  because of the asset bubble you did not see, understand, or create – after all, why worry about what may take more than 20 years to recover in value when you can save a fraction of a point on the cost of your debt – listen to the radio adds, and the brokers – there has “never been a better time” (sounds creepily like 2005).

2. “The Kumbaya”or the “we’ll get through this together” offer – aka the ‘short sale’ option.  Think of it as making smores and singing Kumbaya with your servicer.   Only when you go home from camp, you lose everything, and they gain everything thanks to PMI, GSE guarantees, credit default swaps and deficiency judgments.  If this continues unabated, use the mortgage escrow account we suggested setting up to start buying stock in Wells Fargo or US Bank – the money will be better spent – at least you’ll be on the other side of the asset transfers.

3. “The Gandhi” – aka “just give me your house because I asked nicely, and you’re an honorable person and we know you want to do the ‘the right thing’ ” option or ‘Deed in Lou of foreclosure’.  By far the best choice for the peacemakers of our modern society.  If you think you can take this high road, get ready to also walk around barefoot, spin cotton on a simple gin for hours at a time, live in a tent, and give up marital relations with your spouse – because that‘s what it means to be like Gandhi – pacifist through and through (never mind true pacifist are one in 10 million, or maybe less).  A great many who are actually afraid, claim instead to be pacifists – this might be a good time to do a Myers Briggs personality test.

4. “The Pinocchio” or “free lunch” option (don’t worry, there is really no cost) – our personal favorite which is now being espoused by an anxious Wall Street government.   Payments to homeowners who surrender their real estate, rather than raise legitimate legal challenges to the ownership of the home you and your family live in.  You will only have to trade in “real” property, for a few pieces of paper (that will get you by for a few months), backed by nothing, that make cell phones look depreciation-resistant.  For some reason the image of Pinocchio turning into a donkey keeps coming to mind.

Imagine all that work withno self-interest, bankers are a generous bunch, perhaps when they come, they will even ‘greet you with a kiss’.    A great many mortgage brokers who represented predatory lenders were also willing to offer their advice during the golden years of the housing uber-bubble.  These are the same people, with a different slant.  At that time, the refrain was “prices will only keep rising, so you can do something like pay any price” because by this logic, if prices keep rising, no price is too high.

Now the financial industry which has helped us move from a country which makes things, to a country which makes things up, are chanting their inglorious antiphon – prices will only keep sinking, so let us take that house off your hands, after all, you’re in it together and both parties are taking a loss. Right?  This way you can get rid of the discomfort of having to deal with this.  By this logic, no value is enough to fight for your home, because prices will keep sinking and thus, the value will ultimately go to zero.

Both statements are logical fallacies and indeed two sides of the same coin – although they have distinct attendant emotions.

In every transaction there is a buyer and a seller – no matter what monetary instruments are used in the consummation of the transaction (debt, equity, currency, etc.)  Your home is no different.  It may help to not think of it as shelter for a moment or as “the American dream” (needless to say the dream needs to be elevated).  Try for a moment instead to think of it first as just 2 x 4’s and drywall.  If this is hard to do, consider thinking of your American dream as being fortunate enough to live in a still largely free country of plenty, to have had a mostly good life, reflect on your positive memories – and let your house just be an object (last time we checked there were no shortages for future reacquisition) – that is what it is after all, it’s just an object.

Once you arrive at this moment of honest detachment, then you might want to consider how those who are interested in your home, see the world.  Humans are animals in a way, and they are also far more.  Through our choices we move closer to the animal kingdom of primal instincts or closer to another kingdom that is very different than that of mere animals.   Let’s just say that your bank, your servicer, the trusts, the depositors, the trust administrators, the investors, the engineers of derivative products, the CDO salesmen, the ratings agencies, the intermediaries entities, and certainly their lawyers, have made choices (not that it can’t be undone) to be a little closer to the animal kingdom – keeps this in mind when speaking to them – it’s important.   To this group your house has nothing to do withdreams – it has to do with one thing only; little sheets of green paper.   Now think of money for a moment as a redemption slip on society, and if you have many of these “redemption slips”, you in affect have much you can ask of society if you so choose.

Ad Misericordiam

These folks want to redeem a number of these “slips” on you as a member of society.  Perhaps your claim to your home is weak, if it appears that the debt is greater than the equity (understandings of both debt and equity need to be examined carefully), or because you have struggled to make your mortgage payments, or because you are legitimately concerned about getting clear title to your home, or perhaps you just don’t want to participate in a pyramid scheme that causes others to suffer.  That is ok, we understand, everyone will want you looking at yourself full time, and if it applies, your misfortunes in life.  If you have a personal misfortune such as divorce, loss of a job, or heaven forbid a sick family member, expect it to be used against you.  You might as well go lookin the mirror and read yourself your Miranda rights before you get on the phone with your servicer and divulge every detail of your personal and financial life just because they asked nicely and said they would “help”.

Try to remember, you’re not calling Mother Teresa.  That isn’t to say you shouldn’tempathize with those who would like to take your home.  Wall Street bankers and their progeny are human too.  They suffer just like you.  They have personal short comings like you.  Although their personal shortcomings less often involve layoffs and confusing financial burdens – their suffering is of a different variety altogether – nonetheless they suffer.

It is better to keep your suffering to yourself, they are not genuinely interested in hearing about it, and it is best to vet who you share with in the first place, including the details of your personal finances. There is nothing wrong with that information being entirely private, although if you were raised in America, you were not raised to understand this.  By preserving yourself, you will also preserve your dignity – even if all else is lost, nobody can take this last item away from you, and it is worth more than all of the homes in America.

It is a harsh saying, and we wish we could find something more subtle, but we could think of no other saying that more accurately describes what we are speaking of here, that is to say “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs.”  If at some point this seems like a good idea after all, it may be worth reading the line which follows from the one cited – the consequences are fairly clear.

Self-pity rarely achieves much.  Instead, if the urge to sadness at your portion in life can’t be overcome, then do it in private.  Perhaps think of those who have less than you in life – perhaps orphans in Haiti or those in some other seriously underprivileged society, than you will feel rich.  We have poor in America, but we don’t have too many who are starving just yet.    Prepare yourself to fight a good fight.  Even if you lose, you will have the swagger that you fought for what is right and just, which is easier to describe at parties than the procedure for rolling over and playing dead.

It is a curious thing to witness the endless talk of ”helping homeowners”, and of perpetual applications to “modifications” and “forbearance”.   If a person draws you into a crime unwittingly and unknowingly, a context in which you expend great time, energy and resources, believing the circumstances to be quite other than they in fact are, is it anything other than insulting when the same person offers to “help” you with your “situation”?  Does an “appeal to pity” seem like the most appropriate of responses?

Arbitrarily asserted, arbitrarily denied

These folks want you looking at yourself, because they don’t want you looking at them.  This behavior is so deeply ingrained in our culture that even seasoned consumer and home owner advocates fall prey to the proclivity of discussing primarily the circumstances of the debtor rather than that of the creditor.   However, the question isn’t how good is your claim to the security interest in the real property you call home.  The real question is how good is the security interest of those who seek to take it from you?  And how did something so simple and mundane as a mortgage become so irreparably harmed?  Could it really have been mere incompetence?

Possession is an important part of the law.   If there is a serious and legitimate dispute over ownership, which has now been well established for about 60 million properties and some 7 trillion in securitizedmortgages, why would you give up your legitimate claims?  Perhaps you would do this only if you did not realize just how legitimate your claims are (default or not), and how illegitimate theirs are, because after all it is not the topic of the many phone conversations with your servicer.

In fact, given the gravity of the question over clear title, the only seemingly prudent thing to do is to suspend mortgage payments, weather you can afford them or not, and to instead place those funds into a private escrow account, as we had previously advised.   That is why they want you to be highly circumspect of your condition in life, because you will be too distracted to notice the thief in front of you.  Remember if greed doesn’t work, fear will, and vice versa.  Think of them as the commensurate emotions associated with bubbles and collapses – they vacillate, one to the other, but the transfer of assets abides at a steady clip to those who feel no emotions.

These folks will try to help you undervalue yourself.  Don’t.  You were not designed or built to be a slave to another man through debt.  It is, for lack of a better word, a sin.  If you don’t have a Ph.D in finance from Harvard, you probably couldn’t design this Ponzischeme if you’re life depended on it.  Are you accountable?  You are.  But they are more accountable.   It is important to think for yourself when someone tells you something ridiculous like “prices will always go up”.  Intellectual inertia with a streak of greed is wrong, but it is also minor on a relative basis, and very prevalent.  However, using superior knowledge and power to prey on the ignorant in a calculated way is more serious.  You have a stronger claim to the security interest in the property than they do, on many grounds, not the least of which is ethical.  That isn’t to say you will win, but you have to try.

If they are to assert their claims arbitrarily, than you can arbitrarily deny them – should the burden of proof not be symmetrical?

It has been said that “time reveals truth and justice”.  Do not worry about what others say about you today, or next week.  Worry about what people will say about you in ten years or more.  For it is only when we look back and remember, that we bring our experiences of life into complete focus, and others see us for the intentions which work inside us, and not merely the outward appearances which can be misleading.   If somebody calls you a “deadbeat” or a “squatter” thank them, for is it not widely known that people judge others according to the way they feel about themselves inside?  Or as the great prophet Bob Marley once said “Judge not, for you judge yourself”.  Besides is there any more obvious way to poison the well, than to use such loaded language?

Your servicer wants updated details of your financial condition in order to decipher if it is cost affective to sue you for a deficiency judgment after your home is taken (if it is to be sold in the near term, they will want the fastest sale, not the highest sale), it is not primarily, as you may be told, to determine qualification for a modification.  For example, they would like to know where your bank account is so that they can attach it, and they would like to know where you work, and see a recent pay stub, so they can eventually garnish your pay.  Think through it – you live in the most litigious society in the world.

After all, you are going to pay the difference, either through a judgment, or such things as your involuntary ownership of the GSE’s (another form of indirect wealth transfer).  It is a peculiar thing indeed when we believe it is ok to hand over the details of our financial and personal matters to perfect strangers on the phone, because they have “represented” that they are the counterparty in interest to a loan that was taken out as part of our (unknowing) participation in a global pyramid scheme.

We now know much about predatory lending.  We know about liar loans that were wholly executed by highly compensated brokers.  We know that the more CDO’s and synthetic CDO’s that were sold with AAA ratings (despite being jam-packed with sub-prime paper), the more billions investment banks made.  We know that banks understand that their security interest to the real property used in the MBS trusts is not there, and that they are willing to use forgeries, and perjury as their means.  Basically, the lesson of the last few years is that the engineers of this hyper-pyramid scheme will do anything to get what they want.

Have things changed?  Is that what the evidence points to?  Or is that what we want to believe about human nature?  That these folks are not “that bad”?  Because we want to believe something, does it make it reality?  An objective review of the evidence does not indicate the players involved in your mortgage have your best interest in mind.  It would be best to accept that upfront, so that a reasonable plan, that actually has a chance at success, can be made.

This is not about “sticking it to the bank”.  This is about legitimate questions.  Protecting yourself and your family’s financial future, and coming to a reasonable business solution to this very bad situation, that does not involve your subjugation and further humiliation.   There may have been intellectual inertia, even greed, in your actions, but where is it written that you must live with that mistake forever? and who qualified the bank to do the judging?  At some point there has to be an agreement, and a settlement, but you ought to meet the bank at the negotiating table at least as an equal, if not a superior, for your misdeeds are minor in light of theirs.  Do you call their CEO, Board members, or shareholders and ask for the details of their personal and financial lives before you’ll “discuss” anything?

All that should be said by a homeowner is that the asset prices were wrong when you bought your home.  You had no control over the setting of those prices – but the folks who did have responsibility for the setting of asset prices, knew something you didn’t and stood to profit from that special knowledge.  That’s why they owned credit default swaps and not real estate when the bubble came popped.

When the bank is willing to discuss a settlement of your unsecured debt (as in they cannot legally foreclose on your securitizedmortgage), then you can talk about a number that makes sense for bothparties to avoid protracted and expensive litigation that might lead to a judgment, which at any rate will be collected over many years if at all.  Is this not the same as a principle reduction today, particularly when future payment on a hypothetical judgment will be made in dollars which are sure to be worth less.  At least in the event of a write down, your bank has the opportunity to re-invest the residual loan value in something that might actually appreciate, as opposed to fixed payment in devalued future dollars.  But then again, perhaps they already know this, which is why their first preference is foreclosure.  For one, the value of your home does not have to be impaired on their balance sheet (fancy accounting huh?), and secondly, although nobody is telling you this, your home will appreciate again, and has far superior prospects of beating the doubled edge sword of taxes and inflation, than the bank wants you to know.

There is a right way and a wrong way to plunder

Plunder?  We confess it is a strong word, and probably seems like a) it only corresponds to a small fraction of the loans made that are now clearly understood as “predatory” in nature or b) is hyperbole.  Neither is correct, it is rather the only way to describe the mortgage securitization industry in the last decade.  There is one characteristic of greed which is constant – the addict always over stays their welcome (just ask casino operators or stock brokers about the psychology of some of their clients).

Here are a few points to consider:

1. Why would such products exist which have variable features as a function of time.  For example, low front end interest rates with a later reset, or terms which allow for the annexation of more collateral at a later date (deficiency judgment).   Not unlike an actuary for an insurance company, a banker makes a decision on risk based on a statistical profile of the barrow, since past-time can only be known at that moment, why would future characteristic of the loan be determined in present time, when the future cannot be known?  Unless there is in fact some designs being made on the future.

Remember, these folks make their living from investments, and investors think far into the future.  Most barrowers make their living from a paycheck, and their future projects about as far as the Friday after next.

The case of variable rate loans:

– If at a future date, the interest rate is static, the bank gains nothing by adding this feature.
– If at a future date, the interest rate is lower, the bank stands to lose, when the customer refinances inside or outside the bank.
– If at a future date, the interest rate is higher, than the customer may not be able to afford the loan, in which case, the bank stands to make a windfall through foreclosure.

Since our economists have long held that both inflation and housing price appreciation are steady, why would these loans ever exist?  As a sort of actuary, the bank would determine the price for the risk based on historical patterns,  set the terms, and a deal would either be done or not, and every one would move on.  But that is not what happened with these “innovative” products.  There was a “lead-in” and a carefully planned design made on future time.

2. However, it will quickly be pointed out that many barrowers agreed to misrepresent both their financial history and circumstances in order to obtain these loans.  This is true.  Here are some important points to remember:

a. There are both qualitative and quantitative differences in the behavior of barrowers who made misrepresentations and lenders who planned predatory loans.  In quantitative terms it is the business of lenders to make loans, that is to say market debt.  If there were no buyers for such loans, life would continue on, and we may well have a healthier society.  However, the same cannot be said of the lender, for if they do not issue debt, they have no business so to speak of, and life does not “go on” for debt is the instrument by which their income is earned, and unlike the barrowerrepresents an “asset” to the bank under normal conditions.  Therefore both motives and incentives for the making of new loans are far greater on the part of the lender.

b. In qualitative terms, the business of the lender is a) risk assessment and b) asset appraisal.  In a consumer society it is critical that entire generations of consumers (including consumers of financial products) never learn how to do either competently.  We have largely succeeded at this task in America.  The result is that the intricacies of risk assessment are overwhelmingly within the circle of competence of lenders, and completely outside that of the barrowers.  Again the balance of power is asymmetrical.

To suggest than that the conduct of the two groups is ethically symmetrical is incorrect, and masks the truth that the real risk of systemic predation is inherently on the side of banks.

The common refrain is that it was the lack of restraint on the part of  borrower which caused the crisis, but this is nothing more than to establish a false cause.  That is to say it draws a highly questionable conclusion about the cause and effect relationship.    The child of a false cause is naturally, a false dilemma.  The bank bailouts were precisely that; a false dilemma sold to the American people, and a prototype of the much larger wealth transfer operation that was about to take place in the form of foreclosure.

In the construction of the bailout package, the US treasury reduced the options Americans had to consider to just two, which were sharply opposed and unfair to the American people to whom It was presented (i.e. bail out the banks, or else we will be facing “…the Collapse of the Global Financial System”).  It is like being victimized twice.  By accusing the American people (falsely) of being the cause, then forcing a false dilemma, those responsible have not played fair, and have caused a great many to overlook alternative explanations which are far more accurate.

Nonetheless, the fact remains that banks lent vast sums to Americans at interest rates that did not reflect prudent risk management.  There are only two possible explanations:

a) Our financial institutions somehow suddenly lost (or perhaps never possessed) the acumen that is part of their circle of competence; that is to say risk assessment and asset pricing, and were revealed to in fact be imbeciles.

b) The loans made were predatory by design and served a purpose in their ultimate failure.

Despite many Ivy league degrees, bankers are involved in a business model which is no more sophisticated than borrowing  pieces of paper (usually from their friends) for zero interest and loaning out the same at a rate of interest above zero.  Given the simplicity of their business model, we are tempted to select option “A” (our various and sundry encounters with bankers has served only to affirm this preference).  However, “B” is in the only option which excludes absurdity from the calculation.

This taken into consideration with the certainty of asset price manipulation, and other abuses in the origination, and reselling of these loans ought to be carefully considered.

In truth, greed paints you into a corner.  The only way out this time has been excessive liquidity, to blanket over the fallout, like snow over an ugly landscape.  Yet, with excessive money supply, comes excessive inflation, and with excessive inflation comes a preference for hard assets over fixed income; in short, your bank would rather have your home, than your mortgage payments, modified or not.  Imagine, at the rate we are going now, what the value of your future mortgage payment denominated in dollars will be at the expiry of your loan term say 25 years from now.  No interest rate is high enough now to outpace the real rate of inflation – and if a few rounds of golf with the folks at FASB allow you to keep your land grab on the books at unimpaired prices in the near term; well even better.

If we ascribe to a traditional definition of ethics, than we must concern ourselves with that which we do voluntarily, and not what we do because we are forced.  In this sense, the question ought not to be “is it ethical to stop paying your mortgage”?  The real question in light of everything that has been revealed, and the very real human suffering that has been caused is; “is it ethical to pay your mortgage?



39 Responses to “Gregory M. Lemelson On the Ethics of Mortgage Loan Default”
  1. Db2013 says:

    Sounds like Mr. Lemelson has some bad history with people taking homes. Did they take your million dollar mansion? Pay your bills and you won’t be in mortage default. You should know what you can afford and remember you sign the papers to the loan!

    • BOBBI SWANN says:

      @ DB2013 – your posting is about 2 years too late! This post was done in 2011 and since then a lot of what he wrote in the article has come to fruition! You are just a little behind the 8 ball and definitely not in tune with current facts! Ignorance is NOT bliss!

  2. Maggie May says:

    Yes so i suggest you hone up on your writing skills and shape up your posting:)) lol

  3. Dear Readers,

    Thank you for taking the time to read the article and to comment. There is a more complete version available at


    Again thanks,


  4. Mary says:

    Very insightful article. Some really great info we will be sure to pass along….

    In NJ, we’re educating all home-owners about the issue in the hopes that a critical mass will with-hold their monthly mortgage payments from servicers.

    We’re encouraging everyone – regardless of their payment status – to retain counsel and file Qualified Written Request (QWR). When the pretender lender fails to provide evidence of a debt and mortgage, and/or evidence of broken chain of title, the home-owner will petition the courts and file a quiet title action.

    The process takes about 90 days and costs approx $2,100.

    Everyone on this strand needs to encourage all their neighbors, family and friends to do the same. We don’t have to beg legislators or bureaucrats for assistance.

    Also – meet with your local county clerk whose primary responsibility is to ensure clear title. Many Clerks are fully aware their duties have been eliminated by MERS. They may prove to be a powerful ally. Also meet with the county Sherriff and make the case that all foreclosure property sales should be cancelled.

    We can use existing state property law to secure our private property and win one house at a time.

    • Mary….That may be the way foreclosures are handled in New Jersey and some other states. But we live in Florida…a judical state and a corrupted one at that. Florida is the talk of the country and we are No. 1….we are No.1 in anything you care to mention…that has to do with foreclosures and fraud and empty houses. Florida use to be known for growing oranges …now we are known for the corruption that reeks everywhere in the land of ‘ paradise ‘…..but the sunset is still beautiful over the Gulf.

  5. hj davidson says:

    credit ratings are another part of this scam.

    the 3 credit rating firms are in collusion w. the banks. they are conrolled by the banks.

    more than once, we faced a “maintenance” problem when trying to pay bills or our mortgage online, thus throwing us into a “late payment” situation.

    credit rating scores should be abolished along w/ the fraudclosure debacle.

    lousy service by companies that demand contracts like Time Warner and Verizon can destory credit ratings.

  6. LVLawman says:

    Mr. Lemenson’s opinion piece, and advice, is oversimplistic to the point of being scurrilous.

    While he may be correct in his ethical, actually relative ethical, arguments, the decision to stop paying one’s mortgage when one can afford to should not be taken without much forethought and analysis.

    First, and foremost, your home is shelter. You need a place to live and you must look at the cost relative to your ability to rent a similar property and do with it pretty much as you wish. Not everyone is upsidedown in their home equity…………….I’m not.

    Second, you have to decide what your good credit rating, if you have a good credit rating, is worth to you. You WILL need to finance things in the near future………………..I guarantee it. Ruin your credit and you may loose that ability, and even if you can finance it will cost you a hell of lot more. Over time it will add up.

    Third, (I assume if you follow the writers advice you will want to contest any mortgage foreclosure suit or action) if you have income and assets, how much do you want to invest in legal fees for really competent counsel in this endeavor. I engage in this fight on behalf of homeowner’s every day, in numerous jurisdictions. While we have had many encouraging outcomes, this has been slow to accomplish and we and our colleagues had lost many battles unjustly along the way, but have lost more than one at this point in any event. The outcomes for pro se litigants are appalling in spite of the successes reported on this and other blogs. You need to have the right intellect and temperment to be effective at all. Some judges won’t give a pro se the time of day. It’s just how it is in all litigation areas………………judges try to discourage pro se litigants for THEIR convenience. THIS AIN”T SMALL CLAIMS ACTIONS FOLKS. You have to learn how to write great breifs, Request For Production, Subpoenas, Requests For Admissions and how to prepare for and take effective depositions. And then how to enforce these requests and demands when you get stonewalled. Half of litigation is ALWAYS the discovery food fight.

    If your are seriously upside down in your home, your credit is shot, you have minimimal assets and income, then you might want to consider not paying your mortgage and fighting any foresclosure. If your good at it, you may be, at least able, to keep the banksters at bay for a number of years, and if your really good or have good representation you just might be able to win to the point where the banksters can’t figure out how to bring a proper foreclosure action when the first is dismissed without prejudice for lack of standing or other other reasons.

    A perfect win is an ultimate successful Quite Title action turning the note into an unsecured debt or a successful claim against the title insurer (really hard to win, but possible). A simple win is that you will be able to live in your SHELTER without mortgage payments forever.

    Unfortunately, every claimed default and foreclosure action has to be fought on an individual basis at this time, in front of as many different judges of varying calibers in myriad jurisdictions. The judicial education process has been extermely slow and painful ( with some such a Rocket Docket judges who will never get it ) with the Bankruptcy Court Judges and Trustees being the fastest to catch on and grasp the true nature of the issues involved.

    So before you voluntarily stop paying on your mortgage, think long and hard about it, ask an accountant, attorney and financial advisor for the pros and cons and ignor the rants posted here about the evils of the banks and governments. The rants are mostly correct but you need to make a non emotional financial and legal strategic decision.

    • l vent says:

      Our homes are paid for because of the Ponzi Scheme. If you think you are safe from this class warfare, you are sadly mistaken. No atttorney or accountant is going to tell you that.

    • l vent says:

      LV Lawman, this is NOT about a CREDIT SCORE, this is about OUR FREEDOM. FAKE DEBT=SLAVERY and IMPOVERISHMENT.. This about bringing death to a Foreign Multinational Tyranny who wants to destroy our U.S. Constitution, our U.S. Bill of Rights and centuries old property laws that protect our property rights from being destroyed. They never perfected their collateral lien, and that is what they did. Why did they NOT do that? Because of their PONZI SCHEME, OUR HOMES ARE PAID FOR FREE AND CLEAR. STOP TRYING TO DECEIVE MANKIND. IT IS EVIL AND UNAMERICAN.

    • l vent says:


    • Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty, Foe of Tyranny says:

      I disagree.

      I am neither a completely and solely emotional being, nor a completely and solely rational being. I am a combination. I have both emotion and ration – a heart and a brain, if you will.

      If I make any decisions, or take any actions, based in only one of these aspects it is liable to be a mistake.

      I do best when I use each to inform the other, and to make decisions, or take actions, that are based on some level of balance, or harmony, between these two. Ignoring either of them is usually a recipe for unhappiness in some way.

      For myself my decision to fight became stronger as I researched further and deeper. It became clear to me that I was being taken advantage of and that the “other side” had engaged in a number of unethical and illegal acts and practices.

      Knowing that it REASONS that I should fight to see that those who have committed the illegal acts and practices against me be held accountable (2 parts really 1) keep them from getting away with it and unlawfully taking my stuff, and 2) to have them held accountable for trying). In addition to being illegal these kinds of trickery and/or bullying are just plain wrong.

      Also knowing that it FEELS if I let them take advantage of me then I have little or no respect for myself and do not value myself enough to protect myself. I also know that if I demonstrate such little respect for myself then others will not be inclined to show me, or treat me with, any more respect than I do myself. The prospect of no longer being able to look myself in the mirror, and a lonely life as a result, is particularly unpleasant.

      So, my thinking and feeling have arrived at the same conclusion, though for different reasons.

      • LVLawman says:

        My post did not advocate not following Mr. Lemenson’s plan of action to whithold payment of mortgages. The entire point of my post is that each person must analize their circumstances and come to an “individual” decision and not succomb to the herd mentality action advocated by some here.

        You have obvioulsy given considerable thought to your situation and come to your individual decision, which I certainly respect.

        You seemed to, initially, miss the point of my post.

  7. Wayne Moon says:

    I need a phone call from someone over there…have I got a story for you. 775.250.6756.

  8. Maggie May says:

    Im asking u,,,,,,,,,Henry Cabell tice?

  9. kelly says:

    All along, the banks, lenders, knew what was going on starting in 2006 and before, there was no media then nor now just think of the all homes that could have been saved if we knew what we know now! Unfortunatly THEY did behind the seen and where too greedy to give it up and the expense of other!

  10. Steve says:

    The borrower couldn’t have known. The loan applications were pulled from the finial closing documents.
    In my loan documents its a page called Addendum B. It states, “Broker to provide finial form 1003 and signed by borrower and interviewer.” This did not happen. If you can get a hold of the loan application through the Escrow Title Agent the date will be different from the rest. This is because they say it is the first step in the process.

    The borrower went into the mortgage brokers office to get pre-approved not knowing the application in blank they were signing was NOT for pre-approval but for the actual loan. The mortgage broker had the taxes, and statements, they just altered the numbers later. Borrowers left the office thinking they were pre-qualified for the house they were looking at. The only way to prove this is at the loan finial closing the loan application was to be re-signed again in front of the notary. But will anyone in this country investigate it? No.

    It was the Department of Real Estates job to investigate the mortgage broker. Did they? No. This fraud went on for so long that if the Department of Real Estate actually prosecuted and removed all the mortgage brokers licenses, there would be no Department of Real Estate left to collect the brokers membership dues.

    Try getting your Title Company to protect your Title that you paid them for. Fat Chance. They wont hand over documents without a subpoena.

    • maggie may says:


      • Steve says:

        .Lets see from a Non-judicial state at the beginning of 2009 when every mortgage fraud rescue co. turned out to be some deadbeat unemployed from the lenders looking to rip off homeowners. Every lawyer out there in Calif. wouldn’t take on fraud. When the DRE says it can’t find anything. When the FBI says they’ll call you back and never does. When my original lender files bankruptcy and my new lender has no regulatory judicial oversight so the OCC, or the OTS or anybody can’t investigate.

        The SEC has already filed charges for stated-income fraud and accounting fraud against my lender in 2010 and has already settled outside of court. Court cases on the internet from my lender has employees stating confessions that they were altering the incomes in order to get the loan approved.

        Hows that for investigating. Any ideas you may have after foreclosure, I’m sure open to them.

      • maggie may says:

        I have faith in u!

    • Steve….You are correct. That application and others were missing from my daughters closing. Not one signature either. Two sheet of printed matter on Title Co, heading was to expalin the privacy act and the other explained the money wired to the title co, and put in escrow under the title co name. My daughter called and was refused the documents….due to the privacy act. They said it involved a social security number. To get these records my daughter had to subpoena the title co. When the title co. sent the mortgage to be redorded in county records, a cover sheet listing the bank and address had a request for the recorded mortgage to be sent back to title co…. NOT TO THE BANK. Her lawyer has not received the documents yet but it appears her mortgage was sold before the closing. So she is dealing with a mortgage broker, a bank and a title co…(.and a silent investor(s). She can’t wait to see the loan application and who the title co. mailed the recorded mortgage to. Her loan was in March 2003. The bank put their name on note and mortgage as payee/lender and title co. went along with the fraud…..hmmmm…criminal intent????

      • Bobbi Swann says:

        Marilyn – Let me help to explain the path of the documents in a closing. First of all, the title company actually is liable to the lender for issuing the Mortgagor Title Policy which insures title to the lender. At the closing the title insurance is merely a “commitment”. It will stay a commitment until the recording of all of the documents prescribed in the commitment with the county office to which the property is located. Once those documents have been recorded the originals are returned to the title company and the recording information from them is then updated to the title commitment and a final title Policy of Insurance is issued by the agent’s underwriter(s). That policy along with the original recorded documents are then sent to the lender (presumably for safekeeping). If the mortgage was sold a proper Assignment of note and mortgage must be presented to the recorder’s office and those documents must be recorded in certain sequence to be valid and provide continuity of chain of title. BUT, you see that’s where MERS came into play and decided to bypass the recorder’s office and those assignments or most of them were never recorded. The note and mortgage were probably indeed sold to an investor either prior to closing or same day to another investor via MERS where they securitized hundreds of mortgages under the PSA’s. Lenders have a caveat that has “puts” and “calls” where they can replace certain mortgages and add to if, let’s say, a mortgage does not close or fund or for some reason does not pass their so-called Quality Control. This is why it is so vitally important that these County Recorders are now stepping forth and recognizing that these documents be perfected and recorded properly to protect the chain of title. As far as the closing funds are concerned monies from the lender are always direct wired to the title company for disbursement as they are the “escrow” of the title company and again subject to issuing the Final Title Policy. The funds go into an escrow account for the title company wherein the title agent then disburses all funds to the parties involved and it must be accounted for in reconciliation to the HUD closing statement. Funds rec’d coming in are “net” funds from the lender who takes their portion of the costs involved as per the Good Faith Estimate provided to the borrower and the balance of the funds are what is received by the title agent. Those funds can be used for no other purpose than for the disbursment to all parties involved.

        I have asked several times why is the borrower provided copies of the closing documents unsigned? The reply that I have received is time and convenience. They make the copies in sets prior to the closing and then distribute them once all documents have been signed. Apparently copying them after execution is too much of a hassle for them. However, I have always protected myself as a broker by requesting “signed” copies before I leave a closing for my own files. It is part of the quality control that is exercised by my broker and it is a requirement before we are ever paid for a transaction. I would assume that any other mortgage broker would be doing similar QC so it may behoove your daughter to ask them if they have them in their files. Certain laws in the state of Florida do require us to keep and maintain files for certain periods of time. I am not sure what guidelines are in effect for other states.

        Best of luck to your daughter in her quest. The mortgage fraud goes out in “legs” like those of a centipede. The mortgage brokers who performed their jobs adequately and within the confines of the laws are not those to whom this destruction is blamed. If you are able to trace a path you will find it starts with collusion with Wall Street, Banks and DC. Go beyond that and you can trace it to where IVENT has been telling us all along!

    • l vent says:

      I have a copy of my mortgage with typos and forgeries all over it that state my husband is an unmarried man then, typoed over and say he is a married man with our forged initials next to it. This occurred after closing because I have the original and none of this stuff is on it. I had an attorney tell me the title co. would not do this. I firmly believe that they were all in on it. You can clearly see Fannie’s fingerprints all over this crime scene. The IMF is the biggest shareholder in FANNIE MAE, the foreigners own them. THE U.S. GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE NEVER ALLOWED THAT. The truth is, I have my deed with title insurance. My attorney told me that the title insurance is more valuable than the deed. I can clearly see what they ALL did and that they were all working for the foreigners, Fannie and Freddie who hid behind the scenes of all of the destruction and posed as American Institutions, are not American Institutions. Either are the banks or Wall Street or the Federal Reserve. They are foreign owned and operated Multinational Institutions. That is how they gained our trust and that is how they hijacked America and robbed us blind.. We bailed out not only the very people who robbed us, but we bailed out the very foreigners who deceived us and robbed us and are after no less than our National Sovereignty. They hate our freedom, our U.S. Constitution and our U.S. Bill of Rights. They want WE THE PEOPLE to own nothing but the debt they create. They have put America in debt spiral and it was intentional.. We have also been hijacked by the federal government who are also the foreigners. Death to the FOREIGN MULTINATIONAL TYRANNY!!!!!!!!!!!!! Damned be those corrupt treasonist greedy politicians who put America in this peril.

  11. l vent says:

    Great article!! A short sale is like making smores and singing Kumbaye with your servicer… LMAO!!!! This is as funny as when a friend of mine who has the same servicer as me because of a re-fi with the same failed bank as me told me a funny story. He told the servicer after months of playing the loan mod game and having had enough of the b.s. That’s it ,I am walking away from this house, you can have it, I am going to retire to the Bahamas. The servicers reply was OH NO!!!! YOU CAN’T DO THAT!!!! You have to sell your house first!!!!

  12. talktotennessee says:

    Is it ethical. . . . . ?
    Correct me if I have this scenario wrong?
    Knights of Columbus is suing Bank of America because the bank is holding properties without foreclosing, bleeding the Knights trust funds for add-on fees, maintenance, broker opinions, escrow (taxes and insureance) for shadow inventory the bank is holding on their books, upping the anti as they charge away. But why did they not foreclose? Was it bad title, bogus forged documentation, Countrywide’s trash or just plain fleecing the Knights’ trust funds for fees because it is revenue and they can?
    Does B of A have an ethical obligation to foreclose or use the mortgage product as an income stream?
    Who is B of A representing? Not the borrower who wants to modify his loan, which B of A staunchly refuses.
    Why? If the loan was modified B of A as servicer would lose revenue. Think of it like the credit card companies who delight in you reaching your limit or delay paying your bill a day or two or watch to see if you do that on other cards so they can gain opportunistic leverage against you and raise your rates! Remember the era of giving away free money for 0% interest? They deliberately enticed people into excessive debt. Like the card companies, B of A’s intent is to dip from any available pool. They refuse to help the borrower yet someone has to pay the expenses of the servicer. That someone is the investor? Obviously then there is no advantage to foreclosing for B of A. They aren’t taking the hit. The lenders obviously have no skin in the game of modification. Why hire people to offer modification if they lose income on the modification?
    Of course not all loans would be handled in that way but it certainly opens your eyes when you see who some of the investors are and how they are being tapped!
    So there is a vast mountain of ‘shadow inventory’ out there that is sitting on the banks’ books. Perhaps it is the tip of the berg?.
    Watching the complete breakdown of the housing industry is revealing. As one in the field, it appears that not only are we entering a double dip recession based on housing default. The complete destruction or rape of the housing market may yet play out. Millions of homes sit vacant, particularly in sub-prime areas. No one wants them back and they aren’t going to sell as REOs to investors. In some markets agents are refusing to handle them. Tax revenue is lost, cost to maintain are charged back to municipalities. In more attractive markets, homes with clouded titles are a potential risk.
    As the market continues to free fall, our reactionary society is awakening to the reality that those who never default continuing to pay are so far underwater they can’t sustain current expenditure and simply walk away. Already investors are doing that with inventory of unsold properties that can’t be ‘flipped’ because buyers can’t get credit. They simply let the bank have it back.
    So is it ethical to default. . .
    It may very well be the only answer. Frankly, there isn’t much sympathy for bailing out banks a second or third time. They just need to take the bullet on this one. Of course, if they really want to save the ‘farm’ and their own future in the long haul, they could drop principal, allow bankruptcy courts to modify and we could see the end of this mess in a couple or three years but no. . . I think they will just ride the mule right on down!

    • l vent says:

      The trusts are EMPTY, the notes were NEVER assigned. Our homes are paid for because of the Ponzi Scheme Swindle and Heist.. Tell the investors to sue Fannie and Freddie or their perps. Frankly, I don’t give a damn or feel one bit sorry for the investors. They all got filthy stinking rich off of this Ponzi Scheme and they all made enough goddamned money off of the backs of the American people. hundreds of trillions. Now I have heard we have an estimated 3 trillion in bad paper on the banks balance sheets. They can all eat it and still be FILTHY STINKING RICH and the same thing goes for the greedy investors. . I refuse to pay another effing dime for this underwater house. They can take a principal write down or a loan mod and stick it up their greedy asses. Our homes are paid for and THE AMERICAN PEOPLE are who got robbed. SCREW THE FOREIGN INVESTORS, THEY SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN ALLOWED TO INVEST IN OUR HOMES, PERIOD. WALL STREET, THE PEOPLE WHO ROBBED AND CRASHED THE STOCK MARKET SHOULD BE FORCED TO PAY BACK THE MISSING POLICEMENS AND FIREMENS PENSION MONEY AND ALL OF THE MISSING 401 K MONEY THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WERE ROBBED OF. IT IS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHO WERE BLINDSIDED. OH YEAH, AND SCREW THE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS, THEY ARE GREEDY PRICKS TOO. THE GRAVY TRAIN HAS LEFT THE STATION AND I DON’T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS. HOW DO THEY LIKE TO BE SHIT ON AND PISSED ON BY THESE CROOKS? WHO HAS EVER SAID THEY FELT SORRY FOR THE MILLIONS OF HOMEOWNERS WHO LOST _EVERYTHING_ IN THIS ENGINEERED FINANCIAL COLLAPSE????????? WERE WE NOT MASSIVELY AND PERNICIOUSLY DECEIVED? IF I HEAR ONE MORE CRYBABY WHINE ABOUT THE POOR INVESTORS I THINK I WILL PUKE. STOP ALL OF THE BULLSHIT AND THE LIES, IT IS BECOMING REDUNDANT.

    • l vent says:


    • Bobbi Swann says:

      Tennessee – you have it perfectly correct! It is NOT advantageous for a lender to modify and most certainly the loan is being held by a “servicer” who will NOT take the hit for the loss of an income stream! Then add to that the fact that the probability that the note and mortgage do not exist anymore foreclosure becomes a hard task especially these days when the population has become enriched with knowledge of how the system really works! Those lenders who cannot prove ownership were always hoping for the so-called uneducated borrower to simply cave in. Thus, when it was necessary to re-mold the documents here comes “robo signer” and the flood of fraud on the courts. Time has been a great companion to the “fighters” as more and more and more of the fraud is being brought to the public eye.

  13. Nora says:

    Some very good points have been made here. I would like to see us go further than simply cutting their payments off: I would like to see them charged with high treason, their assets forfeited and their business licenses revoked. Their assets when combined would make a sizable dent in the national debt, and should be applied to it, since we taxpayers have been footing the bill too long while they received bonuses for robbing us. I would like to see the personal assets and bank accounts of those CEOs who perpetrated this theft by design seized and taken, and the wall street banksters public humiliation by eviction; something they have done to us without conscience. It would be nice to see a few banker’s furniture on the lawn, for once, instead of it always being the homeowner’s.
    I like the idea of giving everyone their home back, free and clear forever more. It would mean instant prosperity for 400,000 homeowners who have no jobs or are underemployed due to our country’s jobs being sent over seas. The service sector and the retail sector would be rejuvenated shortly afterward, since people would have money in their pockets again, which would in turn create jobs. Finally I would like to see the American people abolish the Federal Reserve and add an irreversible amendment to the Constitution that no entity like it could ever be created again. All of this is within our capacity to accomplish if we stand together and demand our rights to due process. Charge them with fraud, perjury, extortion, theft by deception, and treason! We can prove all of those. We don’t need to resort to any of those things to do so, either.

    • I have faith in what you say will be done…not over night, but will be done. I feel it has already started and June 14th is soon…this will not stop now… enough time has passed…in fact too much time in stalling….the tide has turned and the pressure will be on. ..give it time and soon we will see it start to unfold….the silence has been broken…I can hear Madoff laughing hysterically………..

    • Readdocs says:

      The question of it being ethical doesn’t matter any more. It’s now down to a matter of survivability
      in a financial turned up side down world. All the money thrown at it is not going to put this broken
      Humpty Dumpty back together again…it is going to fail. This can be taken to the bank.
      Greed has finally destroyed the real estate market on all levels, leaving nothing but exploded bits and
      pieces behind. Any smart shopper will be looking for the rare piece of property that has been sitting
      safe in the possession of one sole owner for at least 30 or more years. The buyer will buying with cash
      without the need for a mortgage broker or a real estate agent. A good lawyer will be doing the investigating and prep work for the transfer of the property from one owner to the next.
      It won’t be long and witnesses will be seeing shuttered real estate offices, title companies out of business, and banks closed down because of the rabid greed that has destroyed them all.
      Personally I don’t weep for them, they need only look into a mirror to see who is to blame.

      • maggie may says:


  14. Pamela says:

    Very enlightening and so very true.Nicely put.

  15. maggie may says:


  16. Javagold says:

    Never for money, Home is for Love……………

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *