Comments on: Foreclosuregate – The “Nothingburger” Defense Gets Destroyed

By: Ramona Cooper

Ramona Cooper — Sun, 10 Oct 2010 18:54:06 +0000

In reply to Richard F. Kessler. my partner took out a loan thru countrywide, paid on it 5.5 yrs , it was 30,000 after 5.5 yrs it was 27,000. now they are stealing our home. we our current on our main mortgage but he fell behind on this loan. he has a lawn service and he lost business. when the foreclosure began he spoke to bac home loans and they said 5,000 would catch it up and pay the attorney fee so we wired it and then sent another 500. they took the money but now dont achknowdge the money and are still foreclosuing on us. we have a court date now. they are stealing our home, we have been in it 8 yrs and its a 20 yr fixed .so when we can now start paying the principle down and there is equity in our home . its in a very nice location with acreage , now they are stealing it from us. and we paid 50,000 down on the home. this year it fell under what we paid for it. thank you everyone is is disclosing the fraud of these banksters. I just hope we can save our home , that we have enough time. thanks all !!!

By: housemanrob

housemanrob — Sat, 09 Oct 2010 22:50:54 +0000

Only a fool or a member of the republican tea party would not be able to understand this by now………at this time…………with the information you pros have taught us. The intelligent enemy……..the crooks and the greedy ones who are looking the other way exclaiming DEADBEAT………. all I can say is………… FU-K YOU TOO!

By: debi J

debi J — Sat, 09 Oct 2010 22:03:53 +0000

Its about time some of this is being brought to the light. It goes so much deeper than the surface of the deception. The fdIC did several studies (oh they get all the info from lps and equitfax (oh they make our credit scores too) oh and the MLS …look deep into LPS and its sub-SIN-eraries … the study detailed the untapped underbanked market and they deducted or realized how lucurative it could be. Low and behold, the product that destroyed america!! Yes it already is destroy -it too may implode on itself like the world trade center …bin and george are together somewhere i swear- anyway, If thats not an intent to defraud i dont know what is.
Also, is it really true about the 2 something million not to investigate? Whoever took deal and dismall amount has no right to take that as a bribe for all of us. Thats not going to help any of us -they put that much in on FEES… that person or people or committe or who ever. The system is rotten and milignant -they should BE INVESTIGATED too- you dont settle a billion dollar scheme of massive fraud for a few million bucks. As an american homeowner who was also so deceived – i paid over 300,000.00 in 3 yrs and it was going backwards…i now am digging further and further (im obsessed with researching the pools)like i just said, whoever decided that was okay needs to keep digging and give them their scrap back—it goes into the trillions. No amount of money should IMPEDE or OBSTRUCT that. What are we all thinking? Who made that decision…they should be fired and investigated. Dee
Dpreston@live.com
Keep digging people the abiss is deep….

By: stopGOVTwaste

stopGOVTwaste — Sat, 09 Oct 2010 21:42:52 +0000

Rule 10b-5 — Employment of Manipulative and Deceptive Devices

It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, by the use of any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, or of the mails or of any facility of any national securities exchange,

1. To employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud,

2. To make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or

3. To engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person,

in connection with the purchase or sale of any security.

Okay… SO WHERE ARE THE INDICTMENTS???

By: Richard F. Kessler

Richard F. Kessler — Sat, 09 Oct 2010 20:15:42 +0000

The borrowers were also swindled. Banks are in the business of making good loans. A good loan is a loan likely to be repaid. Such a loan protects depositors and bank shareholders. Instead, banks made bad loans without disclosing to the borrower that the borrower could not afford the payment terms and conditions. No borrower went to a lender to obtain a loan which would self destruct in a few years.

Nonetheless lenders regularly made loans under false colors. The lenders failed to disclose that the loan would shortly result in default by the borrower and foreclosure. Accordingly, the lenders are also liable to borrowers for fraud and deceit. The bank had, at minimum, a duty to disclose to the borrower that the loan would become unaffordable and cause a foreseeable default.

By: Rob Harrington

Rob Harrington — Sat, 09 Oct 2010 20:05:27 +0000

50 – 80% of loans in this pool were defective?
http://subprimeshakeout.blogspot.com/2010/09/inside-mortgage-finance-sees-private.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheSubprimeShakeout+%28The+Subprime+Shakeout%29

By: Michael

Michael — Sat, 09 Oct 2010 20:03:01 +0000

Finally… One of Geither’s early moves was to create a digital registry of CDO’s because the work — in the mid 200’s! — was being done by fax. Banks were taking weeks to process the faxes and by the time they were finished it was not uncommon for the CDO’s to be sold.

Why does this matter? Because that’s who paid for your mortgage .. before they were repaid by Treasury. Why would Geither care about electronically clearing paperwork faster? Because he knew, years before this was going to blow up, that banks were not slotting the “assets” (read: your house; where you and your children sleep) into the pools.

This isn’t a “technical” mistake; it’s wholesale fraud, and it isn’t even an especially hidden one either; the financial publications have been writing about it for years, though typically in obscure publications or using language (or numbers) tough to slog through. It means the same thing though: reckless, irresponsible, dishonest bankers wrote loans they knew could not and would not be repaid, then sliced and diced them so much that the processed version — the “derivative,” using their terminology — didn’t resemble where it came from.

Why does this matter? Because there’s a fine chance the “bank” suing you — or even the bank you’ve been paying for those still current — has little or even nothing to do with whomever lent money for your house. Who does? This is where it gets really interesting … they’re not sure; they’d prefer that you don’t ask, if you do ask they’ll just brush you off or confuse you (ex: holding companies with the same or similar names to banks but that are legally and financially completely separate). I’m beginning to think that they’re not even sure themselves, which makes it kinda’ hard to sign affidavits in good faith about being a lender, doesn’t it?