Must be missing something on this documentation mess. Sure, some docs weren't read, perhaps forged, but has anyone come forward to say, 'wait, I paid my bills and they made a mistake and evicted me!'

No, I don't think I've read that.

So, the moratorium is basically delaying the inevitable, allowing (unfortunate) folks to stay in houses they can not afford, houses that they are not paying for in many cases.

Do they get to keep them for free? Should we all stop paying our mortgages?

And now it looks like the it on the banks could lead to another TARP.

TARP2 Just Friggin Fantastic.

They are just trying to delay the inevitable.... Complete meltdown of the housing market and the economy.

The investors with money sitting in the mortgage backed securities don't want to lose more money. Lots of these are, no doubt, pension funds (and probably many are state and local pension funds). They want the banks to take the "hit" on this whole mess---that's why the banks and "processing companies" are now being sued---the state of Iowa is leading up an effort and I believe there was a class action lawsuit out of Kentucky (?). There is no doubt that there was a lot of fraud committed in the generation of these loans, but the banking industry cannot be allowed to fail. Now many banks are stopping the foreclosures until this mess gets resolved. This whole thing means that there will be very little capital investment money available in this economy for quite some time. These suits could take time to move through the court system. If you read the Post, Congress passed legislation to make electronic notarizations legal yesterday. Apparently this was one of the problems in the lawsuits (how do you notarize something "electronically"?). Obama vetoed the legislation even though it passed 100-0 in the Senate. Amazing how there was no debate on this one and how quickly it got voted on. Obama probably figures this veto might be his only salvation, if in fact he can be saved. The Republicans are on the way back in anyway---so whatever damage he does within his own party is of no consequence to him at this point. If the populace gets mad enough at the financial system (and the government for that matter), Obama might look like Robin Hood for taking this stance.

In most cases this is just a delaying tactic. However even in those cases the homeowners may have a legitimate point.

Example: Bank A provides a mortgage on a home, then sells it to Bank B with proper paperwork. Bank B sells it to Bank C but fails to do the proper paperwork. Bank C in turn uses it to secure a loan from Bank D with the terms providing that Bank D gets to collect the loan payments under the terms of the loan. Bank B is taken over by FDIC. Who gets to institute a foreclosure action? Would you believe the answer could be the FDIC for Bank B who probably holds legal title to the loan, Bank C which has equitable title to the loan and/or Bank D which has a security interest in the loan payments? What difference does it make to the homeowner? Let's suppose that FDIC would agree to allow the homeowner to simply make up the missed payments but if they have to foreclose they would pursue the homeowner if the sales price was less than the mortgage balance, Bank D would allow the homeowner to to conduct a short sale that could leave the homeowner in the residence for up to 6 months and Bank C would insist on immediate payment in full of the entire mortgage balance, but won't go after the homeowner if the foreclosure sale does not provide enough funds to cover the mortgage balance. The terms that the homeowner can obtain depends on who brings the foreclosure action.

See this:

http://www.articlealley.com/article_752738_18.html

Maybe half of us can stop making our mortgage payments?

Apparently the originating lender can bring the foreclosure suit even though they do not own the loan and that is maybe part of the problem? Their interest in it is making money from doing the foreclosure deal---not in recouping any money. It would then appear that they have little interest in renegotiating the loan---whereas the investors may find that renegotiation or a short sale is better for them in terms of eventually getting their money??? I'm not sure about all of the players in this.

http://www.campidiot.com/ci/viewtopic.php?pid=2637986


This thing is HUGE. If you have been following any of it, you will probably understand this thread.

MERS is mortgage electronic registry system. If what this thread is saying is correct, you can probably stop paying your mortgage if it went through MERS. This whole deal turns everything on its head as far as property law goes.

I've heard plenty of stories of people who thought they had reworked deals or more time who got evicted anyway. The problem is they need to fix the system, which has been ignored for far too long.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

So, if the bank can't prove they hold the note, one can stop paying and live in the house for free? Can't see that happening, but it looks like foreclosures will be in the pipeline for a lot longer now. Not good. there is one in my neighborhood that's now off the market. The contracts keep disintegrating at the home inspection...more time without maintenance definitely isn't going to help.

Probably a good time to make sure I don't have any bank stocks in my investments. I suspect we'll see suits by both homeowners who were evicted and investors who bought mortgage backed securities.

It's almost funny to see both parties fall over themselves beating up on the evil banks. I think most of the liar loan mortgages are gone now, a lot of the past due mortgages that we're seeing now are from the piss-poor economy.

According to some articles, people who were foreclosed on in the past couple of years may still be able to sue . . .

Here's more commentary on the situation---

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/10/8/17352/2209?detail=f