ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
The democrats were giving Home Loans to wino's who were living under bridges and in cardboard boxes.
__________________
Harry Boy (Genius)
In The Absence Of Law And Order Society Will Surely Destroy Itself
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Properties that people default on, need to be foreclosed. It's unfortunate, but necessary for the market both correct itself, and function properly. This whole ordeal is by design IMO. It's an attempt by the admin, or powers that be, to strong arm lenders like BofA to remodify these foreclosed on loans, by way of principle reduction. Basically, they want BofA to eat a sizable chunk of what people owe. Good times.
If you owned a home that was being foreclosed on ... and you discovered the chain of title was totally botched to the point that nobody legally had the right to take your home. Would you let them take it anyways or would you use that legal loophole to keep it?
If you owned a home that was being foreclosed on ... and you discovered the chain of title was totally botched to the point that nobody legally had the right to take your home. Would you let them take it anyways or would you use that legal loophole to keep it?
Umm, since someone else paid a few hundred thousand dollars, it is, to be technical not mine. That is why the mortgagor holds the deed in the first place.
Umm, since someone else paid a few hundred thousand dollars, it is, to be technical not mine. That is why the mortgagor holds the deed in the first place.
I didn't say that ... that much is obvious.
Not saying either that you can steal the house.
You are reading to much into those few words.
If you could keep your house from being foreclosed on because there was no clear legal exchange of title would you do it?
Why is it okay for a financial institution to circumvent the law?
There are clear and very strict laws for the legal exchange of title.
If a financial institution or any financial business for that matter used sloppy business practices that is their problem in our current legal system. There are not nor should there be legal remedies to help financial institutions stay in business and/or remedies to ensure that they make money.
If your financial group purchased a basket of financial instruments that were obtained without due diligence then that's your problem ... the government has no business changing the law to ensure that you do not lose your investment.
When the government starts getting involved in business so as to bypass the legal system that is a huge problem and every citizen should be concerned for this. Congress makes the laws and the legal system enforces them. If the laws need to be changed then Congress can change them. But our government has no business bypassing that process ... none at all.
The system of the 3 arms of government is getting muddied lately. Some are trying to bypass the clear distinctions between Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary branches of our government and this is the latest huge example of it.
If you could keep your house from being foreclosed on because there was no clear legal exchange of title would you do it?
Why is it okay for a financial institution to circumvent the law?
There are clear and very strict laws for the legal exchange of title.
If a financial institution or any financial business for that matter used sloppy business practices that is their problem in our current legal system. There are not nor should there be legal remedies to help financial institutions stay in business and/or remedies to ensure that they make money.
If your financial group purchased a basket of financial instruments that were obtained without due diligence then that's your problem ... the government has no business changing the law to ensure that you do not lose your investment.
When the government starts getting involved in business so as to bypass the legal system that is a huge problem and every citizen should be concerned for this. Congress makes the laws and the legal system enforces them. If the laws need to be changed then Congress can change them. But our government has no business bypassing that process ... none at all.
The system of the 3 arms of government is getting muddied lately. Some are trying to bypass the clear distinctions between Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary branches of our government and this is the latest huge example of it.
I believe in the rule of law, but I thought the problem was that there was talk of canceling the loan outright because of the faulty paperwork. That would dry up lending in a hurry.
The flip side is that if you aren't paying the mortgage, should you be allowed to stay in the home? Ultimately, that's what matters most. The same applies to any tenant, or borrower of a product, dwelling, or service. If you have someone renting a unit from you, and they stop paying you the rent for 6 months, are you ok with them being allowed to stay, because of some beaurocratic technicality on their lease? I'm not. That's not to say that the legal process isn't important. It absolutely is. The point is that if you can't pay, or aren't paying, you ultimately have to go. Now, if people are paying, and a bank is trying to foreclose, that's entirely different. From what I understand, that isn't the case here.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." Leo Tolstoy, 1897
Obama won't sign foreclosure challenge bill - Business - Real estate - msnbc.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama will not sign legislation that could have made it more difficult for homeowners to challenge unjustified foreclosure actions, the White House said on Thursday.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My MAN!
Well then HD, you must want the recession/depression to linger even longer. Becaue our economy can not turn around until bad debt is written down. The longer it takes for the foreclosure process to work its way out, the longer the housing industry will continue to be in tatters.
Personally, I believe no one deserves to live in any home if they've stopped paying their mortgage. If they can't find the note, who gives a damn if those in the house stopped paying their mortgage?
Well then HD, you must want the recession/depression to linger even longer. Becaue our economy can not turn around until bad debt is written down. The longer it takes for the foreclosure process to work its way out, the longer the housing industry will continue to be in tatters.
Personally, I believe no one deserves to live in any home if they've stopped paying their mortgage. If they can't find the note, who gives a damn if those in the house stopped paying their mortgage?
well, you must also want the depression/recession to continue. Foreclosing on loans is a lot worse than a bank renegotiating terms...which I'm 100% for.
If these loans have ben turned over so many times that the banks want to legistlate fraud, then its a pretty messed up situation. Would you be in favor of people who got loans forging notaries of documents? no... this is wrong on all levels. How the flunk this almost became law is beyone me...
well, you must also want the depression/recession to continue. Foreclosing on loans is a lot worse than a bank renegotiating terms...which I'm 100% for.
If these loans have ben turned over so many times that the banks want to legistlate fraud, then its a pretty messed up situation. Would you be in favor of people who got loans forging notaries of documents? no... this is wrong on all levels. How the flunk this almost became law is beyone me...
oh wait...
its congress...
How do you renegotiate terms with someone who isn't making payments? In some cases the banks only hope of being repaid is to sell the house.
Last edited by The Brandon Five; 10-26-2010 at 03:20 PM..
Re: Obama won't sign foreclosure challenge bill
Linear Mode
