3 Words Might Keep Your Home Out Of Foreclosure

[OhioChick]

POSTED: 11:42 am EST March 4, 2009

PHOENIX -- Kathy Lovelace lost her job and was about to lose her home.

“I got a letter, they were going to foreclose,” she said.

But before that happened, she spoke three words to the bank: produce the note, NewsChannel5 partner KNXV-TV reported.

Her foreclosure came to a screeching halt.

“I haven't heard a word from them," she said.

Lovelace and other homeowners around the country are using the tactic to stay in their homes.

Their strategy uses the mortgage mess that's been going on. When real estate was booming, companies sold and resold mortgages over and over again.

"No one really knew who owned what," said Chris Hoyer, an attorney with the Consumer Warning Network. "They were sold and resold so many times."

In some cases, the original note was lost, stored away or destroyed, said Hoyer.

His Web site helped Lovelace file a single piece of paper in court that requested the bank to produce her original promissory note.

"Our message was simple. Make them show who owns the note," said Hoyer. "And make them show the person who has that note has the authority to take your home away."

Ultimately, if the bank can't provide the proof, then there may not be a foreclosure. The judge may throw it out of court.

At the very least, it could simply buy you time, experts say, because the bank has to find the original mortgage company. And since many have closed, they may no longer be around.

In a study done at the University of Iowa, 40 percent of banks did not produce the note despite the law.

So far, Lovelace has put off losing her home for about four months. After she asked for the note, the bank told her it was lost or destroyed.

“If they can't produce the note, how can they say they own my home?” said Lovelace.

http://www.newsnet5.com/money/18852523/detail.html

[xchrom]

1. 'In a study done at the University of Iowa, 40 percent of banks did not produce the note' nt

[slackmaster]

4. That means about 60% of us who are making payments are just suckers

:nuke:

[xchrom]

6. as someone who makes a mortagage payment -- it does make me wonder. nt

[slackmaster]

7. Yeah, let's all stick it to the Man

:rofl:

[xchrom]

10. hey -- who ever The Man is -- we used to Know. now? not so much. nt

[lovuian]

17. yep

so check it out

[Doremus]

21. No, it might *possibly* mean that more people may be able to renegotiate.

If a lender can't provide the original documents that spell out the terms of the note, perhaps they will be more inclined to renegotiate them, or perhaps be compelled to by the courts.

I should think that would be welcome news to those of us watching our equity decline faster than a thermometer in winter due to the vacant/foreclosed homes in our neighborhoods.

Suckers are those who eat RW spew because they have no brain of their own. I'm not a sucker, are you?

[slackmaster]

37. If the current owner of a loan is so inept as to not be able to produce supporting documents

They are vulnerable to a lot of loss of value of that loan. It seems to me completely daft for a servicer not to be able to come up with at least a defensible copy of a loan document, and of the chain of custody by which they came to own it.

I've worked in financial services and companies that support it for most of my work life, and it boggles my mind to hear that a lot of them can't produce a note.

[Doremus]

39. Agreed.

But that isn't what you said originally.

I believe you called those of us with up-to-date mortgages "Suckers."

[slackmaster]

41. That was sarcasm

I believe people who can pay their loans, should pay their loans.

:-)

[Doremus]

46. I've had some weird conversations before

But this one takes top honors.

Like trying to converse with Cybill, an exercise in futility from which I shall take my leave.

Say g'nite to all the personalities for me. Ciao.

[louis-t]

2. Attorneys are recommending this. Here's why:

A lot of mortgages were bundled and sold as securities. Not just sub-prime loans either. The original instrument or note is often destroyed or lost. Even if they do find it, it can delay the proceedings for awhile.

[slackmaster]

9. Delaying the proceedings sounds like a reason an attorney would recommend it

Not that there is anything fundamentally RIGHT about not complying with contractual terms that you agreed to.

[louis-t]

12. And if it turns out that the note is lost?

A judge just might throw out the foreclosure. I don't know what that would do for the ownership status of the property. Bank can't prove they loaned the money. The guy living there owns it free and clear?

[slackmaster]

14. I seriously doubt that any judge would throw out the foreclosure because of a lost note

Public tax assessor and recorder records would show that the title to the property is encumbered, to whom, and for how much. There are ways of filling in the gaps for lost documents - For example, by going back to the loan originator (who probably does have some microfilm records) and tracing forward.

[rufus dog]

23. I disagree

You are talking about mortgage brokers that learned they could earn more by becoming the banker and then selling the package of loans to real banks. These guys had no regulation and opened up shops with basic infrastructure. These guys then folded and have the boxes stacked in a garage, or immediately tossed into a dumpster.

[slackmaster]

33. A loan servicer should have some kind of verifiable record of the terms of every loan it services

It would be sheer madness for them not to have some kind of written justification for what they are collecting from the mortgagor.

If they were foolish enough not to have something that would stand up in court, they and the investor who is paying them to service the loan deserve to lose their interest in the property in some moral sense.

OTOH the mortgagor did agree to certain terms, so that person also has a moral obligation to pay or accept the consequences of not paying.

[quiller4]

90. "Should" is the key word. Many servicers lack such paper

and without it courts are unlikely to act. The delay often permits a homeowner to renegotiate terms and preserve his/her home.

[Hippo_Tron]

77. There's also nothing fundamentally right about taking advantage of ignorant people

The sub-prime crisis undoubtedly has a personal responsibility component but it also has a bank responsibility component as well.

[slackmaster]

86. I do agree with that - the industry has not policed itself well and deserves to be regulated

I was fortunate to work for a bank when I was very young in the early '80s. It's intuitively obvious to me that when lenders offer adjustable rate loans, they are betting on interest rates going up. But I had to see it happen once before the light went on.

[slackmaster]

3. There's no reason to use that method just to stave off foreclosure

Everyone who makes mortgage payments should just stop paying unless their servicer can produce the original note.

Anyone who keeps making payments just because they agreed to is nothing but a sucker.

[dysfunctional press]

5. you first.

tell us how it works out.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dysfunctional press]

15. coward?...okay- if you're so brave then- why don't you risk your home and put it on the line..?

as i'm permanently disabled, i guess i just don't have your kind of courage, as far as being willing to be tossed out of my home...:shrug:

you will let us all know how forgoing your mortgage payments in your manly stand against banking industry works out, right?

[ORDagnabbit]

29. Well I dont think its manly but I think its the right thing to do...when the colonies revolted from

england they were only about 40% of the population.

there comes a time when people wake up and go "what the F?" I think were reaching that time period.

I did win on 2 credit cards and a promissory note for an automobile.


heres a great video on the system and why you might want to see it change

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVkFb26u9g8

[frylock]

16. cuz people are defaulting just for the fuck of it..

got a job? good for you!! keep up your payments.

[slackmaster]

20. I intend to make my payments for as long as I can

If there ever comes a time when I can't, and the house isn't paid off, I won't play amoral lawyer games to delay the inevitable time when I have to move out.

I agreed to make payments every month. I intend to honor my word.

[napi21]

11. Sombody else in Congress has been promoting that tactic. I can't

remember who it was, but I've heard them speak several times on different TV shows. Apparently a lot of the people in charge of the foreclosure process have no idea where the mtg. came from, or who owns the note. It's especially difficult when you get into the mtg.s that were bundled, slilced & diced. Nobody knows who has what!

[slackmaster]

13. I used to work for a data processing company that serviced mortgage banking companies

One of our services was loan servicing. I saw personally how documents were handled at the time.

For the most part, at least back then (1992-1994), the owners of packaged mortgages (known as "investors" in the business), were very careful to keep the original files of signed documents intact. Even if a note had been sold several times, I believe there was a very high probability that the servicer could produce the note within a few days. Original documents were microfilmed, and then warehoused in secure facilities.

Somewhere along the way they must have become complacent. Storing documents is expensive, and there is a real cost every time you have to retrieve one. Microfilming then shredding may be the way some servicers are handling documents now. If it backfires on them, they'll go back to the old way.

[napi21]

40. I think WS was so happy about making so much money, they didn't

pay any attention to such stupid details like maintaining documents! After all, like you said, it's expensive and god forbid they had to give up any part of their multimillions!

I think this is a brilliant piece of advvice to the mortgage holders. Push them to conform to the law, or suffer!

[Greyhound]

18. Wish I'd tried that two years ago. Shit. n/t

[Deja Q]

19. Just like subcontracting subcontractors, nobody has a clue.

Help me out here, should I cry or laugh?

[progressivebydesign]

22. Cool. Let's all buy houses and default on them! They're FREE NOW!!!

Woohoo!!! She still owes the damn money... is this supposed to be some feel-good story? because all it tells me is that people are trying to get away with NOT paying for their homes. And guess who pays WE DO?

[scisyhp1]

26. She may very well still owe the damn money. The problem is

she just doesn't know to whom. Are you saying it makes no difference
if she pays off her debt to a wrong party as long as she pays it to
someone? What if after she paid it of someone produces a note and
claims that she owes him and she paid all that money to a wrong guy?
How can she be sure that her money was properly forwarded by the
servicer? Would she still be responsible for the unpaid mortgage? It is only
prudent on her part (and that goes for all mortgage holders) to protect
herself from such an eventuality by making sure that it is the note holder
who gets the money. The simplest way to make sure is to produce the note.
I don't see how is she out of line with such a simple request. If the note
is indeed lost somehow, I am sure there are legal ways to trace the chain
of ownership and re-issue it. But failing to do that, she should be granted
a clear title, by virtue of being in possession of the property to which
no other party can lay a legitimate claim.

[slackmaster]

38. You raise some interesting questions

The possibility that someone might be making the correct loan payments, as required by a promissory note or mortgage or whatever, to the wrong party.

I don't believe such a situation is likely to occur. You'd probably have both the legitimate mortgagee and the pretender billing customers at the same time. People would figure out that something is wrong.

[ladywnch]

42. this is a very valid response. I saw video about a woman who

who refinanced and was making the payments but the payments were never applied to the originator and she is facing forclosure. Even though she has cancelled checks.

This is also the advice of every credit bureau for things like credit card disputes so why not for something larger. They tell you to make the creditor produce proof of the debt....not an invoice or statement, the proof of the debt.

[Hippo_Tron]

78. It's not good for anybody when the bank is sitting on a bunch of foreclosed homes

The bank's lawyers will eventually find a solution to this problem but hopefully in the meantime she will be able to get the money to make her payments.

[Vinca]

24. If there is no note, how can there be a mortgage lien on the property?

Someone ought to challenge that in court. Can you imagine if all the mortages were removed from the public record so people suddenly owned their properties free and clear?

[slackmaster]

34. There has to be a deed somewhere

e.g. a Deed of Trust, recorded with the county or whatever other kind of district.

Those aren't supposed to be able to come into existence without supporting documentation, like a Promissory Note, which is also recorded somewhere.

:D

[Occulus]

45. But do changes to that deed get recorded at the time of sale to a third party?

If not, well, the information recorded at the county level is a dead end. There may be two or three (or even more!) "generations" of "owners" of the mortgages, after all.

This. Is. A. MESS.

Should we just ban the sale of mortgages in bundles? It's certainly looking like it...

[slackmaster]

52. No, there is no public record of who holds a note

It's up to the note holders to notify mortgagors to whom they should be making payments.

All of the rules for how that notification is handled, is spelled out in the fine print of the note.

[flvegan]

60. Not necessarily true.

Many states mandate that any time a mortgage changes hands, an Assignment of Mortgage be recorded and the Note stamped and signed on the back.

[slackmaster]

69. Interesting piece of information. Thanks.

That is not done in California.

[flvegan]

71. Not surprising.

California is vastly non-judicial.

As an addition to my post, many (MANY) of the lenders don't properly record their assignments. A nice foreclosure loophole here in Florida.

[slackmaster]

74. I learned recently that in many states there is an attorney involved in every real estate sale

It's almost unheard of here, except for very large transactions or when there is a probate situation.

[rufus dog]

25. based upon an experience yesterday this would work

I am getting an equity line of credit for my business which is quite an experience. One of the assets is my house. So the line of credit is through a major bank who also happens to hold my mortgage. The mortgage was originally written and funded by a relative who sold the loan within of month or two of filing. The guy working on my line of credit calls me (knowing full well that I am paying his large bank my monthly mortgage payments) and asks if they own the mortgage because they can't find the originals.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

88. Hopefully you said "No speaky English" and hung up and changed your number.

[yodermon]

27. Curious: Can I just ask to see the Note, please, no foreclosure or anything

just a curious homeowner who wants the details on his mortgage?
Is there a mechanism to do this? Is the Bank legally obligated to do so if I ask?

[ORDagnabbit]

30. Yep Heres a sample letter... still waiting on their response and prepping for my legal challenge

TO: CountryWide Home Loans, Inc., xx/xx/2009
SV-314B
PO Box 5170
Simi Valley CA 93062-5170



Re: Inspection of original Promissory Notes
Name: xxxxxxx
Property Address: xxxxxxxx Portland OR xxxxx
Promissory Note 1: xxxxxxxxx


Within ten days of receipt of this letter I wish for CountryWide Home Loans, Inc., dba America's Wholesale Lender to produce the original Promissory Notes #xxxxx and #xxxxxx with the original ink signatures for my in person, visual inspection.

The Countrywide office at xxxxxxxxxxx is closest for in person visual inspection of the original Promissory Notes.

If you have any questions regarding my request, please call me at xxxxxxxxx

Thank You

xxxxxxxxx

[ecstatic]

61. Thanks! Will use that but I'm not sure where I'll go with it

I have an FHA loan so this may not even apply to me.

One more thing: Will I end up on their sh*t list if I ask for this? Thanks

[SammyWinstonJack]

84. I would imagine so.

Will I end up on their sh*t list if I ask for this?

I was actually thinking the same.

Bet they wouldn't be too happy about it. :shrug:

[tangent90]

28. So...honesty is the stupidest policy now?

:eyes:

[Occulus]

31. That's what's being asked for.

Why is it that, when the average person asks a business to be honest "or else", some people here flip out?

I mean, "Can you produce the note" is a perfectly honest, rational, reasonable question. It is also perfectly honest, rational, and reasonable to refuse to pay someone a debt they can't prove you owe... original agreements be damned.

Apart from that, any bank so negligent as to lose or destroy a mortgage agreement deserves to lose the money they're "owed". Crush them into bankruptcy for all I care- we can no longer afford that level of incompetence.

[tangent90]

32. If that's the way I'm supposed to think as a Democrat, fuck it. I might as well be

a low-life thieving republican scum

jeezus

I sold a car to a guy just before Christmas, he is paying me every month. I don't know exactly where I put the paperwork, it might be lost... so if he calls up and tells me he won't pay any more unless I produce it I should just forget it?

I cannot believe some of the stuff I read here sometimes.

[Robeysays]

35. hahaha

seriously?

better get on that one.

[Occulus]

43. If you're actually serious in your post, you better find that paperwork

and hope the guy doesn't learn you no longer have it. Because, yes, he could do exactly that.

I'll say it one more time: it is incredibly negligent to lose or destroy such paperwork, and you do indeed deserve the loss if you get burned. These laws are in place so that one person cannot hold another accountable for debt that does not exist, and without the actual signed paperwork, the debt does not exist.

I wish more people would realize this. We're talking about legal accountability here, not morality or honor. Frankly, I'm shocked that people here would ascribe such notions to dealings with any corporation; they are without morality, honor, empathy, compassion, altruism, and all the other good things that make us human. Thus, they do not deserve any of those things from any of us.

YOU are not a corporation, so a "verbal contract" rule or law or doctrine between individuals in your state may well be in play regarding your sale (but I would search for that paperwork in any case). But banks? Forget it. If you feel like it, fuck 'em however you can, because God knows they'll financially rape you at the slightest inclination.

[tangent90]

51. Sure, let's all behave in accordance with the lowest common denominator we can find.

That'll fix things right up.

jeezusfuckingchrist
:eyes:

[slackmaster]

53. So, if your house is damaged or destroyed by a fire,

And among the casualties is YOUR copy of your mortgage; and the mortgage company says your payments are going up because of what their copy of the note says, even though that doesn't agree with your recollection of what you signed, YOU are shit out of luck. You fucked up by not keeping your mortgage in a bank's safe deposit box or other offsite secure location. You don't have paper to back up your position, so you are at the mercy of whatever the loan servicing company says.

Right?

[MattBaggins]

55. Yes

If the Bank tries that nonsense you make them produce the original and show it to you.

If folks do not have their Title and Mortgage papers safely stored away they are idiots.

[Pisces]

87. You would never have the original unless the house was paid free and clear.

[Pithlet]

92. Not the same scenario at all.

The only way it would be similar is if you weren't the original person who sold him the car. In fact, let's just say that note had changed hands several times. Then the guy defaults. One of the persons who held that note at some point goes to him holding their hand out. How does he know they're the one he owes the money to? THAT would be the equivalent. It's a legitimate request, sorry. It also happens to buy some time. So what? And if those papers got lost in the shuffle by someone careless, then yes, that careless person may be out the money. Tough break. Handle important papers better. Why should the original car buyer have to give money to someone he doesn't owe it to just because they happen to claim it without proof? Just because? The person making the claim may actually have sold off that note. Who knows?

And keep track of important papers to protect yourself. If the person who bought the car reneged because you lost them, it would be theft, but it wouldn't be anywhere near the same thing at all, and you would probably still have some legal recourse.

[slackmaster]

36. I agree with much of what you say

But if you remember signing a promise to pay, you are obligated to pay whoever owns the loan.

Mortgagors are notified in writing when a loan changes hands, but those aren't certified letters. The deck is stacked against you as the consumer. The servicer may not be able to produce the note that you signed, but they can still foreclose if you don't pay.

[Occulus]

44. No, you are NOT

Between individuals, it's a different story. But when it comes to dealing with corporations (in this case, banks), any sense of honor, morality, or basic human decency flies right out the window. Incorporated businesses (hell, any large business, like the banks we speak of here) have no sense of morality. They are amoral institutions from the start, and lack the very capacity to behave in a moral or honorable manner. In fact, they are actually legally bound from doing exactly that- their first and only interest is shareholder value.

They, very literally, do not, and can not, care about you.

"The servicer may not be able to produce the note that you signed, but they can still foreclose if you don't pay."

If they cannot produce the note, they very well may not be able to foreclose or force you to pay. That's what this is all about. And I wouldn't pay in such a case, because it's a very very stupid thing to do (and even dumber to admit to having the paperwork yourself!). For one thing, what happens if you end up paying a bank who claims to service your mortgage when they actually sold it in a bundle to an "investment" firm? Do you pay twice? Do they send the money you've paid thus far to the actual holder of the mortgage? Or do you just get fucked in the rear from both directions?

Far, far better to say, "prove I owe you", in other words, "produce the note". And it's not, in any sense, a dishonorable or immoral request. If they can't prove you owe them, you do not owe them. Since their inability to prove it is their fault and not yours, they deserve to be burned on the loan. Refusing to pay would be a business decision on your part, and business is, as they say, business.

There is no morality or honor or anything of the sort involved. You made a deal with a nonperson. Break it if you can, soak them if you can, take them to the cleaners if you can. Take advantage of every last loophole available to you (because they would, and will, if they think they can profit from it). If they are amoral and honorless (and as a bank/corporation, they are) then you cannot be accused of being immoral or dishonorable in your dealings with them.

Your mortgage is a line on a spreadsheet to them. To you, it's your home. You should think enough of yourself to take advantage of their own negligence and irresponsibility if the opportunity presents itself, because with them being a business, it's not in any way personal.

(Please note: none of what I've posted applies to debts between individuals. That's a whole other ball game, and honor and morality and decency most certainly do apply.)

[slackmaster]

48. I don't buy into that kind of moral relativism

As amoral as they may be as a whole, a corporation employs people to do its work. It's not the fault of the low-paid person who processes payments that his or her employer has failed to keep adequate records of a contract. It's not the fault of loan servicing supervisors, or the people who work in collections, or in the accounting department.

If mortgagors were to stop making payments en masse, lots of people would lose their jobs.

BTW - Your obligation to pay a party to whom your mortgage gets sold, and any successive owner of the instrument, is CLEARLY spelled out in the docuemnt you signed.

[tangent90]

50. Oh, NOW I get it. It's okay to steal from SOME people.

Sounds like something straight out of Rove's playbook.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

62. You are correct. Statute of Frauds applies.

This is BASIC CONTRACT LAW, folks.

Any contract for the sale or lease of real estate MUST be in writing to be valid. That's why you type up deeds, promissory notes, and such and file it with the county clerk.

Any bank who cannot produce the note and the paperwork is utterly incompetent.

[slackmaster]

76. OK, so the mortgage company sues the homeowner

A company representative shows up armed with a certified copy of the recorded note (obtained from the county recorder's office), and testifies under oath that his or her company is now the rightful owner of that note.

Judge puts the homeowner on the witness stand, and asks him or her to acknowledge the debt.

Homeowner has three options:

A. Tell the truth, and the foreclosure proceeds.

B. Lie, and risk a criminal perjury charge.

C. Take the Fifth, and the judge rules in favor of the plaintiff.

Heckuva job, Mr. Pettifogger.

[quiller4]

91. Judges do not accept oral testimony regarding rightful

ownership of notes. The claim must be backed up with written documentation. The issue is not whether the home owner has a note with somebody. All county documents prove, certified or not, is that a note was recorded. They don't show it the note has been sold or satisfied.

The homeowners's demands written proof that the company starting the legal proceedings has a legal right to payment and a claim upon the property. Without such proof and judge stops the proceedings and chastises the initiator. The homeowner never gets near the stands. Actually in most cases the homeowner doesn't even enter the courtroom.

[slackmaster]

94. According to Maricopa County, AZ public records, Kathy Lovelace no longer owns a home in Phoenix

The woman featured in the article cited in the OP has lost her home to foreclosure.

Can you provide documentation of any case where a foreclosure was stopped outright, and could not proceed simply because the mortgagee could not produce the original note?

I'm interested to see if any person who stopped making payments has ever acquired a free piece of real property because of that kind of situation.

[Kansas Wyatt]

47. Corporate America does not give a shit about honesty.

In fact, they prey on and take advantage of people who are honest.

Piss on them... Time for them to squirm and take it up the ass for a change.

[slackmaster]

49. Yes, let's all piss on those corporations

And put all the people who work for them out on the streets when they can't pay their mortgages.

:eyes:

[Kansas Wyatt]

54. Corporate America is doing one Hell of a job of that on their own.

Did Corporate America give a damn, when they put people out of work and outsourced their jobs? NO!!! Will Corporate America give a damn, when they throw more people out of work, so they can pay the CEOs even more? NO!!!

What is good for Corporate America, does not mean that it is necessarily good for the American People. And the flawed thinking that it is good for the American People is what got this country into this mess in the first place.

Corporate America did not give a shit about people and REFUSED to work with them, to avoid foreclosure and to avoid what it snowballed into. Oh no, they played hardball with people and leveraged the law against them. Well guess what... That is a two way street, and they can have the law leveraged against them too. If the shoe was on the other foot, Corporate America would demand to see proof as well. Corporate America can go straight to Hell, because they sold the American People out long ago.

[slackmaster]

56. That's a whole lot of broad generalities with no constructive suggestion for alternatives

The fact is, lenders and mortgage servicers do try to work out mutually beneficial terms to prevent foreclosures whenever possible.

It doesn't bother me that my employer doesn't give a shit about me. We have an arrangement: I work for them, they pay me.

[Kansas Wyatt]

57. Nice to know that you don't depend on your job.

It's also nice to know that you think Corporate America can do whatever it wants, without any consideration for the American People. That's fine, but don't be whiny when I say that Corporate America MUST follow the law as well, since they roll over people to the fullest extent of the law. It's very simple... Those people have a right to say, 'prove it.' PROVE IT is what it all boils down to, and you cannot simplify it any more than that. You may not care about your rights, but DO NOT presume you have the right to tell others to not exercise their rights.

I'm sure you think that Corporate America belongs above 'We The People' too.

[tangent90]

58. You seem to be saying that emulating the evil of one entity is justified because

"they did it first."

I can't even imagine how to explain what a morally bankrupt position that is to someone who obviously doesn't care.

[Kansas Wyatt]

63. Nope, just saying that the people being foreclosed on have the right to say....

"Prove that I owe you a damn thing and that you hold the note to the property."

Ha! And they didn't need a bunch of fine print for it either.

[tangent90]

65. Look, there are different agendas described in this thread: The first (from the OP)

is essentially an action to delay a foreclosure because of missing paperwork. That might work for a while, in some cases. Perhaps even long enough to engineer a workable and affordable alternative. It did not include the rationalization described

in

This very different approach: Some have advanced the theory that a debt is somehow rendered nonexistent by virtue of
misplaced paperwork and it results in a "get out of trouble free" card...that 'putting one over' on a creditor is just fine because some or most of them are scum. Basically saying "fucking over a dirtbag is justified because dirtbags did it to us first."

As slackmaster pointed out, that kind of moral relativism is something he (I suspect, and I) would expect from Republicans, it pains me to see it exhibited by people who claim, or at least aspire to, a superior position.

[slackmaster]

68. Yes, they do have a right to say that

But it won't do a whole lot of good. The fact that they were making payments up until the point where they stopped strongly suggests that they know they are obligated to make payments.

Lack of presence of the actual piece of paper they signed once upon a time does not relieve them of the obligation of paying. The original loan documents invariably state that the mortgagor is obligated to make payments to whatever party happens to own the instrument at any given time.

When you peel away the layers of the onion of righteous indignation, demanding to see the actual note is really nothing but a cheap stalling tactic.

[slackmaster]

59. I learned at an early age that an employer is not your mommy

In my parents' generation, it wasn't uncommon for a person to be with the same employer for an entire career. My stepfather worked for General Dynamics from the time he got out of the Navy in 1956 until is retirement in 1987. It's never been like that for me. My first "real" job lasted 11 months and culminated in a layoff of over 150 people. Seeing a couple of the less pleasant middle management people standing in the same line at the unemployment office was kind of empowering.

It's also nice to know that you think Corporate America can do whatever it wants, without any consideration for the American People.

Please point out where I have ever written such a thing.

I'm sure you think that Corporate America belongs above 'We The People' too.

You do have a vivid imagination, but your skills as a mind-reader leave much to be desired.

Corporations belong to their shareholders, which usually include individuals across a broad spectrum of levels of affluence; and organizations like pension funds on which a lot of "little people" depend.

[Kansas Wyatt]

64. Thank you for agreeing that Corporate America is NOT going to...

Look out for the American People's best interest or care about the position they put the American People in.

Don't forget all the foreign investors in Corporate America. What is good for Corporate America, is NOT a guaranteed good thing for the American People. Is it?

I never said you did. That is why I said, 'I suppose you think' that.
Kind of quick to defend yourself, when I never ACCUSED you of anything, though.

So, do you think Corporate America belongs above 'We The People' when it comes to the law and our government?

[slackmaster]

70. I'm not going to bother answering any more of your insulting questions

Have a nice day.

[Kansas Wyatt]

73. "Insulting questions" Well, thank you for proving who you are.

If you didn't feel MORE loyal to Corporate America over 'We The People' and if you didn't think that Corporate America belonged above 'We The People' with regards to the law and government, then you would not have been insulted. Or maybe you just got tired of being a Corporate America defender. A Corporate America, heavily invested with FOREIGN entities. You just couldn't come up with an argument against, what's good for Corporate America, doesn't mean it's good for the American People.

You have a quality evening catapulting for Corporate America.

[slackmaster]

75. Yeah, I'm someone who believes people should abide by the terms of contracts they sign

:eyes:

[Kansas Wyatt]

79. More like...

Subjects are to be exploited by Corporate America. Those subjects are only low-life "people" when THEY take advantage of poor hardworking barely getting by defenseless corporations.:rofl:

[slackmaster]

80. Let's all cut the soles off our shoes, sit in a tree, and learn to play the flute

Shoes for Industry, compadre.

[Kansas Wyatt]

81. Your High & Mighty Corporate America destroyed it's own foundation.

Don't blame the people, which just happened to be the foundation your Corporate America destroyed. You must feel so proud of Corporate America to continue to advocate for them, as people wake up to what Corporate America has really done to this country.

[slackmaster]

82. You really haven't thought things out very thoroughly

Not only do you believe that someone who is facing foreclosure deserves free housing, you don't care about the PEOPLE who get hurt when dishonest people don't make their mortgage payments. They get their pay cut. They get laid off. They can't pay their mortgages and face losing their homes too.

The more people who engage in sleazy stalling tactics when they are facing foreclosure, the weaker mortgage-backed securities become, which further weakens our battered economy. But you think it's OK because it's stealing from a corporation, never mind the people who count on that corporation for their livelihood.

It's all well and good with you, until your pension fund takes the hit.

[Kansas Wyatt]

83. You don't seem to fucking understand...

That there are millions of people who have been taking it up the ass by Corporate America for years.
WHO FUCKING PUT THEM IN MORTGAGES THEY COULD NOT PAY???

Are the same people counting on that corporate 'livelihood,' the same ones who pushed mortgages on people they knew they couldn't pay for, with 'sleazy tactics' to shave off more pay for themselves, make their company's performance look better, to climb that corporate ladder, etc. etc.? No? Were they the ones who knew better, but kept their mouths shut, because it still benefited them anyway?

Did your Corporate America give a flying fuck about the 'livelihood' of millions of Americans they threw under the fucking bus, by shipping their jobs overseas, slashing and gutting their pay and benefits, and gouging them every damn chance they got?

Sorry, but I am not going to feel sorry for those of YOU in Corporate America who are worried about your jobs NOW.

Where the fuck were you people when millions were sacrificed and had 'sleazy tactics' used against them for YOU and YOUR Corporate America's benefit? WHERE WERE YOU??? Yapping about how great it was for Corporate America?

Those of us who have been on the losing end (and we are millions) of your Corporate America's prized 'trickle down economics' have been living and experiencing your new found fears for several years. Welcome to the pissed on by Corporate America club!

*A little advice... It's not wise to keep parroting Corporate America's propaganda on the unemployment line.

[slackmaster]

85. I do understand irony when I see it

Like someone using a computer, on the Internet, to rail against "Corporate America".

WHO FUCKING PUT THEM IN MORTGAGES THEY COULD NOT PAY???

Yes, Corporate America held guns to their heads and forced them to sign those loan documents.

Sorry, but I am not going to feel sorry for those of YOU in Corporate America who are worried about your jobs NOW.

Are you employed?

Where the fuck were you people when millions were sacrificed and had 'sleazy tactics' used against them for YOU and YOUR Corporate America's benefit? WHERE WERE YOU???

Most of te time I was at work, earning money so I can make my fixed mortgage payment on time every month, as I have been for the last 15 years. When I wasn't at work, I was looking for a job.

[Kansas Wyatt]

89. Funny how 'trickle down' now has those doing the pissing-on, scared shitless. ROTFLMAO!

'Like someone using a computer, on the Internet, to rail against "Corporate America".' - Or still pump Corporate America propaganda.

WHO FUCKING PUT THEM IN MORTGAGES THEY COULD NOT PAY???

'Yes, Corporate America held guns to their heads and forced them to sign those loan documents.' - Kind of left out all the sleazy tactics corporate tools used to just pump up the numbers to make it look like they were doing better and to raise the price of the corporate stock.

Sorry, but I am not going to feel sorry for those of YOU in Corporate America who are worried about your jobs NOW.

'Are you employed?' - Under-employed and shit on every step of the way, due to your prized Corporate America. And yes, I actually work for my money and pay my bills, rather than shuffling paperwork, sponging off the backs of my fellow Americans, like so many corporate tools do in Corporate America. You were saying how great Corporate America is over actual people, again? I have also endured this government's unholy merger with Corporate America in the name of a 'Business Economy' to a 'Shopping Economy' right into the fucking mess Corporate America has put this country, and more importantly, 'We The People' in.

Where the fuck were you people when millions were sacrificed and had 'sleazy tactics' used against them for YOU and YOUR Corporate America's benefit? WHERE WERE YOU???


'Most of te time I was at work, earning money so I can make my fixed mortgage payment on time every month, as I have been for the last 15 years. When I wasn't at work, I was looking for a job.' - Hmm... Sure that wasn't working to roll more suckers into a Corporate America scam? Well, you do place Corporate America over 'We The People' all the time. Maybe that's why you chose to remain silent about what was going on for so long. Wouldn't want to rock the boat and risk what you 'had coming to you.' Your failure to acknowledge Corporate America's complete and total failure to regulate themselves, in your effort to BLAME those foreclosed on, is very noticeable. But again, at least you got yours.
Oh how rude of me... No, I have never been, nor will I ever be foreclosed on, so continuing to project your hatred of foreclosed homeowners onto me is misdirected.

[slackmaster]

93. If you aren't happy with your situation, why don't you try something else?

Start a business. Get into farming. Take a government job.

...Well, you do place Corporate America over 'We The People' all the time....

Something you seem to have overlooked here: A corporation, like any other business, is among other things a group of people. The way our economy is structured, you can't separate the two. Most people work for businesses in this country. That's just where most of the jobs are right now.

Your failure to acknowledge Corporate America's complete and total failure to regulate themselves, in your effort to BLAME those foreclosed on, is very noticeable.

I guess you haven't read reply #86 in this thread. You've jumped to all kinds of bizarre conclusions about me, without bothering to ask any reasonable questions or just look a few inches up and see what else I have written here. Being spitting mad will do that to a person.

[Kansas Wyatt]

95. You are the one unhappy with people exercising their RIGHTS.

I came to the conclusion long ago, that Corporate America will NEVER look out for the best interest of this country's citizens and they will screw anyone over they can. That is just a simple fact that YOU cannot accept. Organized crime is made up of people too, just like Corporate America. Hell, if the Mob did what Corporate America has done, we'd have the trial of the millennium going on.

The major thing you OVERLOOK is that there is a big difference between Corporate America and small business. Furthermore, you have failed yet again to acknowledge that Corporate America (which owned the government through republicans for at least 6 years) have completely fucked up the economy. Corporate America burned it all down, not the people you want to blame.

Enjoy paying your mortgage after you find out that Corporate America will throw you under the bus, right along with the people you blame for your crisis. Even after you've sacrificed and catapulted so much propaganda for them. You might want to try having a little more faith in people and real work, rather than the Wealthy Elite's gambling house and it's glorified racket called Corporate America.

By they way slacker, I said that I pay my bills, I owe nothing, and I actually do real work. I said it was slow and I've paid the price for Corporate America's sleazy tactics over the years, but I still make more in one day than I would sitting on unemployment. Unlike paper pushers, I earned my position and I actually make things work. I'm not the one worried about losing my job or how others are allegedly 'not paying their loans and costing me my job.' If you are going to keep riding the coattails at Corporate America... Don't bitch about the blow-back, when their failures reach out and put you in the very same position as the people you blame. Maybe you should get a government job in the Commerce Department, since you think Corporate America is better than people and it does no wrong.

Seriously though, you really do need to stop your hatred for people who only exercise their rights under the law. Corporate America has you so ate-up, that you actually think there should be a totalitarian state run by Corporate America, if you think people don't have any rights. Oh, and if anyone in Corporate America was foreclosed on, their lawyers would first demand to see the proof of everything. Again, don't blame people for demanding the very same.

[slackmaster]

96. I support people exercising their right to stall a foreclosure if there is a legitimate reason

For them to doubt the veracity of the mortgagee's pursuit of a foreclosure action.

I do NOT approve of people using cheap stalling tactics to try to avoid their obligations.

I do not approve of articles like that cited in the OP, giving people false hope to people like Kathy Loveless, that they can actually avoid a foreclosure because of a paperwork snafu. I think at the end of the day she got taken advantage of by her own attorney.

By they way slacker...

Personal attack is often the last resort of people who have lost a debate. Congratulations. Nothing you have to say means squat to me from here on in the conversation.

Corporate America has you so ate-up, that you actually think there should be a totalitarian state run by Corporate America, if you think people don't have any rights.

Pure straw. No substance. You are flailing impotently here. And you still fail to recognize that when a person stops making mortgage payments, that it isn't just an abstract construct of a corporation that gets hurt. Corporations are made up of people, and people depend on them.

For example, my first mortgage is with Countrywide, a company that I dislike intensely for its past business practices and mediocre customer service. I didn't choose to do business with Countrywide. My refinance mortgage was sold to Countrywide one month after it was funded in 2003.

But I don't mind making payments to Countrywide for a couple of reasons:

1. First and foremost, it's what I agreed to do when I signed those loan docs. Satan himself could own the note, and I'd still pay because I gave my word.

2. Countrywide happens to be a major customer of the company I work for. If everyone stopped paying their Countrywide mortgages, Countrywide would be even slower to pay its bills than it is now. That might hurt people who work for Countrywide, some of whom I know personally, as well as people like me who depend on that flow of money for our own livelihoods.

[Kansas Wyatt]

97. "slacker" I apologize.... 'slackmaster' you still lose.

You work for Corporate America, I don't. You may have something to fear, but I do not.

Keep propping up your flailing Corporate America, you depend on it. I do not.

You blame and categorize people who were handed sleazy tactics and/or laid off from Corporate America as the reason for your woes. I see the real culprits in the whole mess... Corporate America. Don't believe me, then go educate yourself at this thread - "Wall Street is Officially Over...The End!" Make sure you follow the link and actually read all 9 pages.

Whether you chose to push paper in a house of cards or not is your "business." I chose to actually work for a living, which actually serves a purpose and use when I walk away from it. To be fair to you though, I've always viewed "business" as a dirty word that means screwing someone somewhere. You ran to embrace it, but I avoided it, because knew it for what it is.

Evidently you do give a squat, because you keep coming back for more. If you really don't give a squat, then just go away. Perhaps you would have more time to focus on that government job you've been working on, since you are so worried about a scheme* catching up to you too.

*Read the link and think about who you are really blaming.

[slackmaster]

98. It's amazing how often people misattribute thoughts, feelings, emotions, etc. on this board

I have no fear of losing my job. If that happens, I'll get another one.

Keep propping up your flailing Corporate America, you depend on it. I do not.

Says someone who is using a computer.

Powered by electricity.

On the Internet.

And almost certainly uses some form of transportation that burns fuels.

:rofl:

But the main lesson I've learned in this thread is that the DUer known as Kansas Wyatt is not someone to be trusted.

[Kansas Wyatt]

99. Glad to know that government job will be working out for you!

Maybe you'll play a part in the government making sure those evil people who can't pay their loans back are put into debtor's prison.

Yes, I use a computer that is powered by electricity and I use some form of transportation that burns fuel. You still have no idea what I do, and I do not care if your Corporate America fails. I will survive just fine, but you will just be more pissed at people.

The main lesson I learned from this thread is that slackmaster cannot follow simple instructions, hates losers who get fooled by sleazy tactics and/or get laid-off by Corporate America, could possibly stab others in the back to save slackmaster's own hide, and is so pissed off about being placed in the same category as 'Countrywide' borrowers. Oh that's rich... You think you are so superior, and you have a Countrywide mortgage. :spray:

*Read the link about your Corporate America.

[Kansas Wyatt]

100. P.S.

For someone who thinks this tactic is wrong, you sure do want it seen a lot more.
:rofl:
:woohoo:
:applause:
:headbang:
:bounce:

[Zhade]

67. That's not a fact. That's an assertion.

There is NOTHING dishonest about demanding to see the contract before paying.

[conscious evolution]

72. When they foreclose

ask them to produce the note.
It may stave off foreclosure.




:hide:

[Zhade]

66. I support this.

NT!

[upi402]

101. If you've been victimized by banks or RW courts, you have no pity

for a bank when they have to swallow their own medicine. All the talk of personal responsibility and honor means something to us. But it means nothing to banks. If they could kill you for the gold in your mouth and were certain they'd get away with it, they would.

They don't care about fair. Come on now people, don't be naive.

effemall

[OwnedByFerrets]

102. If you get to the end of your payments.....do they have to produce

a note at that time? What if they cant??