In the beginning of Maddow’s feature, she used the word REPOSSESS, whereas she is evidently trying to say that banks are “taking back” property – this is incorrect.
As a former banker, we loved the term REpossess because it gives us the upper-hand as though the property was already ours. In actuality, there is NO WAY for a bank to repossess something because the title is in the name of the owner, not the bank. Wherefore, the correct term would be POSSESS or STEAL.
Certainly, the bank did not formerly own the property and take it back like they were letting the homeowner or auto owner borrow the property or lease the property while the property was in the name of the bank. It is a fact that I saw borrower’s get their name on title to their house and/or autos – not the bank. There is no way for a bank to REPOSSESS something, which they previously did not own.
In the beginning of Maddow’s feature, she used the word REPOSSESS, whereas she is evidently trying to say that banks are “taking back” property – this is incorrect.
As a former banker, we loved the term REpossess because it gives us the upper-hand as though the property was already ours. In actuality, there is NO WAY for a bank to repossess something because the title is in the name of the owner, not the bank. Wherefore, the correct term would be POSSESS or STEAL.
Certainly, the bank did not formerly own the property and take it back like they were letting the homeowner or auto owner borrow the property or lease the property while the property was in the name of the bank. It is a fact that I saw borrower’s get their name on title to their house and/or autos – not the bank. There is no way for a bank to REPOSSESS something, which they previously did not own.