Bill introduced to make it quicker to foreclose on homes.

**Cincinnati_Kid** · June-14-13, 06:15 AM

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

Not to mention that he's talking completely out of his ass with no idea of what actually happens out there. The banks not only won't work with homeowners, in many, if not most, cases we've worked on they won't even return their phone calls.

Certainly for the many mortgages that were sold to or were serviced by Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae it is almost impossible to get anyone to respond, let alone to try to negotiate a solution. And, in some cases, often those where some sort of mortgage fraud was involved [[but not always, some mortgages have just been sold several times), it is practically impossible to determine who the actual mortgage holder is.

Several months ago when the stories came out about the massive frauds and abuses going on around the country in the home foreclosure process there was a huge number of reports of homeowners who were foreclosed on and evicted as quickly as possible without ever once being able to even speak to anyone with any power at their bank. Those stories have now subsided, but nothing at all was done to address the problems or curb the abuses, which are still going on. And it really doesn't matter whether you live in Cleveland, Miami, L.A. or Detroit. There was, and is, simply a mad rush to get these bad [[and, again, often fraudulent) mortgages off of the books of the banks and lenders, even if they then get stuck with the houses [[which they can just abandon and write off anyway).

Thank you Eastside Al. Finally somebody on here that gets it. Thousands of people were wrongly put out of their homes, and nothing has been said or done about it. I see where certain banks are giving abused homeowners payouts for the crimes, but what about the homeowners who were screwed by smaller banks and mortgage companies? They get nothing.

**sumas** · June-14-13, 08:11 AM

Glad some folks have a heart.

Two stories:
Detroit/ Wayne County used a wrong address and photo regarding a tax auction. New Yorkers showed up on his door step trying to evict him. It cost time and money to set the record straight. They didn't want the building they actually bought. Never came back, secured nothing, so now it is a burned out hulk at the end on our street.

My niece in the burbs sought to refinance her home for a lower interest rate. Bank screwed up. People show up on her doorstep and tried to evict her. She had to hire an attorney and go to court. She never missed a payment. She won but the stress wasn't cool.

Many people have reversals in fortune, job loss,illness etc. Some people on this thread have no heart or empathy for people going through tough times.

Get off your ass and help people.

Fund raiser at Garage Cultural, 3439 Livernois at Otis. Saturday June 15th from 5 to 10 pm. Sponsored by Detroit Eviction Defense with all funds going to United Community Housing Coalition. This group has helped many of our immediate neighbors so we support them in other communities too. No admission charge but proceeds come from food, beer and wine sales. Usually a 50 50 raffle, pass the hat etc. Community, food and music. This fund raiser helps the Henderson and Valdez Cruz families. I can put a face to these people. Nice worthy people.

Sometimes people need a hand-up and self righteous prigs with the "I have mine who cares about others" attitude actually make me ill.Please remember, "there but for the grace of God go I".

**Bham1982** · June-14-13, 09:59 AM

Originally Posted by antongast

There are more things in heaven and earth, Bham, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

Ok, but your article doesn't contradict what I wrote.

I wrote that banks don't foreclose if you make your payments. This article says the bank foreclosed specifically because payments weren't made, though the homeowners dispute this.

So it comes down to who you believe. Do you believe the bank is really receiving payments, and secretly deciding to violate the terms of its own agreement, in order to lose money on a underwater asset? Or are the homeowners not telling the truth, and not making their payments? I think the latter scenario is more likely.

**Bham1982** · June-14-13, 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

Not to mention that he's talking completely out of his ass with no idea of what actually happens out there. The banks not only won't work with homeowners, in many, if not most, cases we've worked on they won't even return their phone calls.

Ok, then why don't you tell me why banks want to steal people's homes, and lose giant amounts of money. What would be the incentive?

Banks make a TON of money on home loans. They want you to pay them! Money is a good thing! There is no reason for them to refuse your money, just to be mean.

And based on your post, your employment is in some time of "consumer advocacy, anti-foreclosure" position, which means you aren't exactly an unbiased source. I'm not going to put much stock in your claims.

**Bham1982** · June-14-13, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by sumas

Sometimes people need a hand-up and self righteous prigs with the "I have mine who cares about others" attitude actually make me ill.Please remember, "there but for the grace of God go I".

Except you're arguing the opposite. You're saying that people scamming the system should be rewarded, and those sacrificing to keep their homes should pay for the scammers.

You're basically saying that the little old lady making her monthly payments should be screwed, and lose her home value, while the scamming neighbors get endless delays, and continue to squat in a home they don't own.

How about a system where there's clarity, and clear pathways for all parties involved? A fair system, where consumers know what's expected of them, and where they can turn to in case they run into trouble.

**ct_alum** · June-14-13, 10:30 AM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

Except you're arguing the opposite. You're saying that people scamming the system should be rewarded, and those sacrificing to keep their homes should pay for the scammers.

You're basically saying that the little old lady making her monthly payments should be screwed, and lose her home value, while the scamming neighbors get endless delays, and continue to squat in a home they don't own.

How about a system where there's clarity, and clear pathways for all parties involved? A fair system, where consumers know what's expected of them, and where they can turn to in case they run into trouble.

Bham1982: Which bank do you work for?

**sumas** · June-14-13, 10:50 AM

Take the case of Belva, East English Village. The company she worked for for 25 yrs closed. She asked her bank to work with her and they scoffed. She found another job but they still scoffed. She was/is very active in the East English Village community. On the eviction day most of the community showed up to block her removal. Demonstrations were held at the bank in GP too. Got news coverage and the bank relented. Can't say as I think the bank did her much of a favor. They raised the mortgage value and interest rate too. But she wanted to stay in her home. Guess you think she is scum too. Thank God her neighbors didn't.

**Wesley Mouch** · June-14-13, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

Maybe the bankers should keep that in mind and steer people towards homes they can afford then, or say no. The bottom line is that they want to sell mortgages at the highest cost possible. They take advantage of people. Unfortunately people have too much trust in the banks doing the right thing. They are only out for making money off of suckers.

And how can this be a surprise to anyone? Caveat Emptor.

With that said, the banks should have some flexibility when it comes to economic crashes. Although congress caused the financial crash, the banks went right along for the profit ride. In exchange for their bailout, they should have been required to allow reduced mortgage payments under certain terms.

But in the end, Caveat Emptor. Blame those who took out loans, not those who offered them so they could profit.

**EastsideAl** · June-14-13, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

Ok, then why don't you tell me why banks want to steal people's homes, and lose giant amounts of money. What would be the incentive?

Banks make a TON of money on home loans. They want you to pay them! Money is a good thing! There is no reason for them to refuse your money, just to be mean.

And based on your post, your employment is in some time of "consumer advocacy, anti-foreclosure" position, which means you aren't exactly an unbiased source. I'm not going to put much stock in your claims.

I agree with you on a lot of other things you post about, but sometimes you sure don't seem to read very well.

**Brich** · June-14-13, 12:10 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

And how can this be a surprise to anyone? Caveat Emptor.

With that said, the banks should have some flexibility when it comes to economic crashes. Although congress caused the financial crash, the banks went right along for the profit ride. In exchange for their bailout, they should have been required to allow reduced mortgage payments under certain terms.

But in the end, Caveat Emptor. Blame those who took out loans, not those who offered them so they could profit.

I did not know that Congress caused the financial crash.

**EastsideAl** · June-14-13, 12:44 PM

Oh, and since you asked, the work I'm mostly referring to is constituent services work related to housing that I do, on a volunteer basis, for a local elected official. I also do some volunteer work for an organization that addresses homelessness and housing issues whose work has increasingly had to deal with people threatened with homelessness or made homeless due to [[again, often fraudulent) foreclosures.

I'm also not sure why you think that someone who works for a bank or a mortgage company would or should have any more credibility in discussing these issues than people who work on them or experience them from the other side. Do you think I and other people here and the people cited in the news reports on this issue are all lying to you?

**Cincinnati_Kid** · June-14-13, 01:45 PM

Bham1982 must be a mortgage banker, since he vigorously defends them. Bad things happen to good people. The banks , servicing and mortgage companies aren't losing any money foreclosing on people, contrary to what you say. If that were the case Chase, B.O.A and the other big name banks would not be able to pay out that billion dollar settlement for screwing people out of their homes. And a lot more of them would be out of business. They write off the bad debt and keep it moving.

**Jimaz** · June-14-13, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

... Blame those who took out loans, not those who offered them so they could profit.

That one sentence shows that you have not paid attention to what is now known happened behind the scenes.

**gvidas** · June-14-13, 06:18 PM

Bank of America employees regularly lied to homeowners seeking loan modifications, denied their applications for made-up reasons, and were rewarded for sending homeowners to foreclosure, according to sworn statements by former bank employees.

The employee statements were filed late last week in federal court in Boston as part of a multi-state class action suit brought on behalf of homeowners who sought to avoid foreclosure through the government’s Home Affordable Modification Program [[HAMP) but say they had their cases botched by Bank of America.

http://www.propublica.org/article/ba...d-foreclosures

**MikeyinBrooklyn** · June-14-13, 06:37 PM

Any illegal activities by the banks should, of course, be punished fully. And the banks obviously gave out tons of mortgages to people not qualified for them. But if 2 people agree, "you can have X if you pay me Z dollars a month. But if you fail to pay me, you can't have it anymore" and we sign a contract to that affect, what leg does anyone have to stand on to keep Z if they don't pay? Would anyone object to the bank taking someone's house if they were making their payments? That is the bank's equivalent of someone wanting to stay in a house they aren't making their payments on. I am all for some compassion for people when they are in tough straits [[I have been in them myself). But it is outrageous to think people can just have things that aren't theirs to have.

**sumas** · June-14-13, 07:17 PM

Bless you Eastside Al for working with and for helping avert homelessness. Over the winter we housed 4 adults. All eventually found work and made other living arrangements. These are good decent people. I even got stuck with two dogs and my backyard looks like it. We struggle like many others to pay our bills etc. but knowing people would be on the streets is not acceptable.

I fail to understand the lack of compassion for when good people suffer hard times. I can't express how much such callousness disturbs me.

Actually I have some interest in housing young men or women that get kicked out of the foster care system at age 18. There are some orgs that assist these young people in transitioning.

**compn** · June-14-13, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

Banks don't want houses.

hahahahahaha

**Adamkir** · June-15-13, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by Cincinnati_Kid

Bham1982 must be a mortgage banker, since he vigorously defends them. Bad things happen to good people. The banks , servicing and mortgage companies aren't losing any money foreclosing on people, contrary to what you say. If that were the case Chase, B.O.A and the other big name banks would not be able to pay out that billion dollar settlement for screwing people out of their homes. And a lot more of them would be out of business. They write off the bad debt and keep it moving.

"Banks don't lose money". Are you kidding me? T.A.R.P. you evet hear of it? No it wasn't set up to demolish blighted homes,. nope. Not setup to save irresponsible auto companies, nope. Nor was it set up for anything else except Troubled Asset Relief Program. To bailout the banks who've lost billions of dollars due to under water mortgages.. Assets that were troubled because the loans were defaulted on.. Loans that anyone should've knew were bad.. Apparently people were to busy signing on loans without reading a thing. Loans they never had business signing for.. Sure there is exceptions to this. Nevertheless these homes are under redemption far to long. They need to do something to speed this process. As it is home are often destroyed before they are marketable. Even in the small community that I now live in this issue exist. In fact I have two 3 abandon and foreclosed homes just across from me. They are frequently broken into and stolen from and all have waist high grass. So I will once again thank Bumbling Barney Frank, the undercover liberal George W. Bush, Allen Greenspan and a plethora of other loonies who thought everyone needed a home of their own. As to the Granholm support earlier bahahaha. Really.. I can name several things Snyder has done to try and solve Michigan's and Detroit's woes, hes not done all good either. Although I cannot remember Jenny [[Garbage lady) Granholm doing a thing except dumping shit on Michigan. Not one thing of note that is a positive legacy. But then again you and many others are obviously feverish [[D) that hate and despise everything a [[R) does on some principle.. It seems crazy to me because a sain person should see that things good and bad can happen no matter the affiliation. Granholm was just a political blood sucker. Just like there is civilian blood suckers and banks that are blood sucks. God I wish people would quit being so immobile and see their surroundings..

**Cincinnati_Kid** · June-15-13, 05:03 PM

Originally Posted by Adamkir

"Banks don't lose money". Are you kidding me? T.A.R.P. you evet hear of it? No it wasn't set up to demolish blighted homes,. nope. Not setup to save irresponsible auto companies, nope. Nor was it set up for anything else except Troubled Asset Relief Program. To bailout the banks who've lost billions of dollars due to under water mortgages.. Assets that were troubled because the loans were defaulted on.. Loans that anyone should've knew were bad.. Apparently people were to busy signing on loans without reading a thing. Loans they never had business signing for.. Sure there is exceptions to this. Nevertheless these homes are under redemption far to long. They need to do something to speed this process. As it is home are often destroyed before they are marketable. Even in the small community that I now live in this issue exist. In fact I have two 3 abandon and foreclosed homes just across from me. They are frequently broken into and stolen from and all have waist high grass. So I will once again thank Bumbling Barney Frank, the undercover liberal George W. Bush, Allen Greenspan and a plethora of other loonies who thought everyone needed a home of their own. As to the Granholm support earlier bahahaha. Really.. I can name several things Snyder has done to try and solve Michigan's and Detroit's woes, hes not done all good either. Although I cannot remember Jenny [[Garbage lady) Granholm doing a thing except dumping shit on Michigan. Not one thing of note that is a positive legacy. But then again you and many others are obviously feverish [[D) that hate and despise everything a [[R) does on some principle.. It seems crazy to me because a sain person should see that things good and bad can happen no matter the affiliation. Granholm was just a political blood sucker. Just like there is civilian blood suckers and banks that are blood sucks. God I wish people would quit being so immobile and see their surroundings..

Most of these banks knew that the loans they signed off for some people, were not going to be paid back. Are you kidding me? The banks I hold more accountable because if they crunched the numbers correctly, some were not going to be able to afford their homes, and they let them purchase anyway. The consumers who signed on the dotted-line are at fault also, but the banks didn't advise them that they were potentially getting in over their heads either. They let them sign away. Which is B.S. I'll never defend the banks for the mortgage crisis. They got bailed out by the government, and are still screwing the consumer with bank fees and other B.S.

**EastsideAl** · June-15-13, 06:13 PM

Some folks here seem to have lost sight of the fact that this happened because banks and mortgage companies, and their employees, were incentivized to sell and write as many mortgages as possible - good, bad, or indifferent. The big incentive being that those loans could be sold on the secondary market and/or bundled into saleable securities for quick easy profits in a ludicrously overheated market. On both ends were sales people pushing this scam on both underinformed home buyers and underinformed investors who were told by purported "experts" [[including many in government, and supposedly impartial, but completely bought off, appraisers and rating agencies) that nothing could go wrong. And towards the end of the bubble they couldn't write the mortgages fast enough to satisfy the demand for the securities, which is part of what led to a massive amount of mortgage fraud.

Even with all that, a lot of the homes that have been foreclosed on since the crash were actually bought by people who could afford them - at the time they took out the loan. But apparently nobody here was among the millions of people who lost their jobs or businesses in the recession, or has even ever lost a job. Because they don't seem to realize that people who lose jobs - through no fault of their own - can sometimes find themselves falling behind on their mortgage.

The big problem for these people has been that once they fell behind, even if they subsequently got a new job that would enable them to start paying again, they found the banks completely unwilling to give them any kind of a break, to modify their mortgage, to restructure their payments, or even to accept back payment in full. Many thousands of foreclosures happened to people in this very position. So apparently, despite claims you may read here and elsewhere, the banks did want to foreclose on them and take their houses after all, and pretty desperately at that. Certainly that's the only rational conclusion that can be drawn from their actions [[rather than the theories put forth by some here). But people like Bham apparently choose to believe that the multitude of reports of this kind of treatment are false and that thousands of people are just plain liars.

It also never seems to occur to the Bhams of the world that perhaps homeowners in Detroit may get treated a little differently by banks and other institutions than homeowners in places like, well, B'ham. I can tell you from first-hand experience that they most certainly do, and that the relative lack of responsiveness and often just plain decency and respect is glaring.

**Jimaz** · June-15-13, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

Some folks here seem to have lost sight of the fact that this happened because banks and mortgage companies, and their employees, were incentivized to sell and write as many mortgages as possible - good, bad, or indifferent. The big incentive being that those loans could be sold on the secondary market and/or bundled into saleable securities for quick easy profits in a ludicrously overheated market. On both ends were sales people pushing this scam on both underinformed home buyers and underinformed investors who were told by purported "experts" [[including many in government, and supposedly impartial, but completely bought off, appraisers and rating agencies) that nothing could go wrong....

On top of that, they bought insurance that would pay off when the investment failed while falsely representing it as a good investment to investors — essentially betting against their own clients! It was corrupt on so many levels!