Stop the Eviction of Jennifer Britt in Rosedale Park!

[Shollin]

OK, if we have people supposedly in the know quibbling over the terms, conditions and loopholes, how is the resident supposed to be aware of things?

The main question for me still is, was she paying the full monthly note on time? If not, she has no expectation of staying in the house. If yes, the legalities need to be worked out so she can remain.

There may be another question as to whether her name is even legally on the papers though from what I'm reading.

She clearly didn't make the payments or they wouldn't be foreclosing. The issue comes with the modification and/or short sale. If she isn't on the loan note, they can't modify a loan that doesn't belong to her.

[GPCharles]

When I closed mortgage loans at First Fed [[of Detroit) many, many moons ago, I always told the purchaser[[s)/borrower[[s), after the formal explanation of the mortgage, that it all boils down to "you don't pay, you can't stay."

[Shollin]

When I closed mortgage loans at First Fed [[of Detroit) many, many moons ago, I always told the purchaser[[s)/borrower[[s), after the formal explanation of the mortgage, that it all boils down to "you don't pay, you can't stay."

That's what it should boil down to but it never does. I've worked in foreclosure departments and I have never seen anyone admit they lost the house. It was always something the bank did. They feel like they are entitled to loan mods.

[Meddle]

And really, the bank should make every effort to work with the resident if they actually live in the house. Tossing them out doesn't really benefit anyone if there is any chance of making it work.

[Shollin]

And really, the bank should make every effort to work with the resident if they actually live in the house. Tossing them out doesn't really benefit anyone if there is any chance of making it work.

You can't change the terms of a loan that doesn't belong to you. What is there to work out? Why is the bank obligated to work with them?

[SWMAP]

When Leon Britt took out that last mortgage in 2001 he refinanced a 1999 mortgage that had been for $99,000. He refinanced for $145,000 on what terms we don't know. Look, if you really want to see the truth, at Jennifer Britt's YouTube discussion of this. She acknowledges that Flagstar lowered the payments for Leon temporarily when he was still alive. Then the schedule must have reverted to original amortization, which was onerous for the widow. She says the payments were "ridiculous" - but she never says anything about the $46,000 she was able to walk away with in the last refinancing.It really does look like she can't understand her legal standing.

[Shollin]

She probably doesn't understand that Flagstar is likely paying her taxes and insurance as well. It's not their responsibility so it's being added to her escrow account. That doesn't matter. How dare the bank charge her something she owes.

[brandon48202]

Does anybody know what ever happened with this? Was the eviction successfull or was it thwarted by the protesters?

[Shollin]

Does anybody know what ever happened with this? Was the eviction successfull or was it thwarted by the protesters?

They could always take their rally here http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...xt|FRONTPAGE|p

Apparently the bank should be responsible for their failed business decisions. By the way, the picture in the article looks weird. It looks photoshopped.

[brandon48202]

Ha! The proportions of the dude on the right are off- his head looks way too small for his body!

[Downriviera]

Really good article on this by Curt Guyette in the Metro Times:

http://metrotimes.com/news/facing-down-fannie-1.1347758

[Bham1982]

Really good article on this by Curt Guyette in the Metro Times:

http://metrotimes.com/news/facing-down-fannie-1.1347758

Pretty much all the article claims are contradicted by the public records. Starting with the claimed premise: "Britt and her husband Leon purchased the home in 1999".

How on earth is this a "really good article"?

[Shollin]

Wow so she wants the bank to modify a loan that doesn't belong to her? They mention the payment going up, but conveniently forget to mention it was due to escrow and the fact the bank was likely paying her taxes for years. If the bank didn't pay her taxes, Wayne county would foreclose on the home and evict her.

What's the point anymore in securing a loan with a home anymore? If all you got to do is complain and protest when you don't pay, why bother even using collateral.

[Shollin]

Pretty much all the article claims are contradicted by the public records. Starting with the claimed premise: "Britt and her husband Leon purchased the home in 1999".

How on earth is this a "really good article"?

A Fannie Mae loan is also not a government backed loan either. Then this home solution has the nerve to offer 11000 on a 121,000 dollar debt? This isn't how the short sale process works. It's unbelievable to me that the bank is holding up their end of the agreement the homeowner signed and yet are made out to be the bad guys.

[Downriviera]

Pretty much all the article claims are contradicted by the public records. Starting with the claimed premise: "Britt and her husband Leon purchased the home in 1999".

How on earth is this a "really good article"?

Its a really good article because it gets to the crux of the issue. Everything you state is obvious and makes sense in normal economic times. So ok, lets throw her out. The home gets stripped and we have another crack house. How is this good? The banks accepted the tarp funds to help these people out and they are not doing it. The ecomomy can't recover until this gets fixed. Go to a Moritorium Now meeting and your eyes will be opened.

[Shollin]

The crux of the issue is she hasn't paid her loan. Now because the house is in the city of Detroit and may get stripped, we shouldn't make her responsible for the home. Hell, we might as well just forgive all the mortgages in the city of Detroit.

The banks accepted TARP funds to stay afloat so they could continue to lend. I own a GM vehicle so I should just quit paying on it since they accepted government money.

I feel like such a sucker. I continued to pay on my house in Harper Woods knowing full well I was losing money. I should've rounded up a posse and held protests and candle light vigils and quit paying on it.

[Shollin]

I think I'm going to organize a rally to save Charles Pugh's condo from foreclosure. The city of Detroit in it's rebuilding efforts doesn't need another vacant condo in the center of their rebuilding.

[Wheels]

What about all the people that paid their mortgages and now own homes that are worth less then half of what they once were? Is the government going to help me out with a windfall to take me into retirement? Can I get a huge loan that I don't have to pay back and still keep my home? I didn't think so.

[Shollin]

I paid 60,000 for my house in 1993 and sold it in 2010 for 40,000. Now factor in interest and improvements and I paid over 100,000. I took the 40,000 invested it towards retirement and now rent. I rent a townhouse and have no maintanance, no lawn to cut, and a swimming pool and rec center. It's great.