Mass Protest Planned At David Trott’s Posh Real Estate Office in Birmingham

A group calling itself, “Trott Survivors” is planning a mass protest in front of the offices of Coldwell Banker Weir Manuel, a real estate brokerage owned and operated by former foreclosure fraudster turned Congressional candidate, David Trott.

http://mfi-miami.com/2014/10/mass-pr...estate-office/

Article correctly points out that Detroit has 'posh suburb's. Beyond that, political piece.

For example, the two-track criticism. They criticize Trott's firm for 'two track'. Working with a debtor to keep house while moving forward on foreclosure. Well what do you want? Foreclosure WITHOUT efforts to keep people in homes? Geez. They're trying to help. Isn't that what the critics want? Well, you can't satisfy everyone. Some have to have it all, or you're at 'war' with them.

A real gem of a guy, allegations too numerous to list, watch this http://www.eclectablog.com/2014/09/v...attention.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RapBrown

A real gem of a guy, allegations too numerous to list, watch this http://www.eclectablog.com/2014/09/v...attention.html

---

I read the 'allegations'. They are mostly allegations that he is in the foreclosure business. Nothing wrong in that. OMG the guy forecloses on little old ladies. Sad, but necessary.

Anti-foreclosure activists like Steve Dibert accuse Trott & Trott of “dual tracking,” simultaneously negotiating a loan modification and pursuing foreclosure. This practice has been subsequently banned by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The company allegedly violated Michigan law by dual tracking Jeff Reed, an ex-Green Beret, without posting the required foreclosure notices or honoring the loan modification Reed negotiated with JPMorgan Chase. The bank eventually fired Trott’s law firm from the case.

Trott’s firm also successfully lobbied the Michigan legislature for changes that make it easier to foreclose, which would boost the company’s profits. In 2009, the state narrowed the appeal process for homeowners; in 2013, the legislature passed a “fast-track foreclosure” law, which could allow a lender to evict within 30 days if the property can be deemed abandoned. Under the law, subjective findings of superficial damage or trash in the yard, or even if the homeowner refuses to consent to allow an interior inspection, can trigger the fast-track process. “It’s built on the premise that homeowners are staying there and damaging property,” said Lorray Brown of the Michigan Poverty Law Program. “Actually they’re trying to desperately keep their house.” The Michigan statute, implemented in January, was deemed so problematic that Governor Rick Snyder added a signing statement recommending changes. But the legislature ignored the request.


“They would not negotiate,” said Ven Johnson, a lawyer with several cases involving judgments obtained by Trott & Trott. “Their position was that if the homeowner wasn’t current, there was no going back. Every single week we would see courtrooms filled with Trott lawyers fighting with people who were begging to just make a partial payment or get an extension. And they would just say no.”

Ethical? Maybe in your world

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Article correctly points out that Detroit has 'posh suburb's. Beyond that, political piece.

For example, the two-track criticism. They criticize Trott's firm for 'two track'. Working with a debtor to keep house while moving forward on foreclosure. Well what do you want? Foreclosure WITHOUT efforts to keep people in homes? Geez. They're trying to help. Isn't that what the critics want? Well, you can't satisfy everyone. Some have to have it all, or you're at 'war' with them.

---

The reality of "Dual Tracking" is pretending to work to keep someone in their home, but only really pursuing foreclosure

This actully has direct correlation to the foreclosures [[gentrification) going on in Wayne county

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Article correctly points out that Detroit has 'posh suburb's. Beyond that, political piece.

For example, the two-track criticism. They criticize Trott's firm for 'two track'. Working with a debtor to keep house while moving forward on foreclosure. Well what do you want? Foreclosure WITHOUT efforts to keep people in homes? Geez. They're trying to help. Isn't that what the critics want? Well, you can't satisfy everyone. Some have to have it all, or you're at 'war' with them.

---

Very few people like vultures, Mooooooooch. Especially, those Capitalist Pig Dogs who claim they have the citizenry interests at heart, like this DB Trott. While making money off of people's hardest times is legit, it does not remove the blood on his hands or off of his mouth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroiterOnTheWestCoast

The reality of "Dual Tracking" is pretending to work to keep someone in their home, but only really pursuing foreclosure

---

I know a family who fell on some hard times. They were going to walk away from their house after not be able to pay the mortgage and taxes. The bank talked them into a "program" that was geared toward them being able to refinance their home as a means for them to keep it at a new, lower payment. These folks jumped through all of the hoops the banks wanted for a while, and got extra money through additional work [[and had to rely on family to watch their kids while they did this). They finally caught up on everything and felt pretty good about keeping their home; it was one of the folks childhood home at that. So, when the time came to re-fi, the bank turned around and said that these folks didn't qualify for anything and told them to fuck off. So, the bank enticed these folks with false hope; and in the end, if these folks ever wanted to walk away from it, everything was caught up so the bank could have flipped it no problem [[because back taxes were all paid up). Trust me when I say, very few people in this town would shed a tear over one of those bankers, or the lawyers associated, getting hit by a couple of buses after work today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroiterOnTheWestCoast

The reality of "Dual Tracking" is pretending to work to keep someone in their home, but only really pursuing foreclosure

---

Mind police alert.

What reason do you have for thinking Dual Track is not sincere and deciding what is in their individual & corporate minds?

Do you think its fair and appropriate to judge everything based on your opinion of the thoughts of others?

Folks, just don't vote for Trott!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Mind police alert.

What reason do you have for thinking Dual Track is not sincere and deciding what is in their individual & corporate minds?

Do you think its fair and appropriate to judge everything based on your opinion of the thoughts of others?

---

Could it possibly be because it's against the law?

Well, since Michigan already has some of the most pro-homeowner foreclosure laws in the nation, and since there isn't even a hint of evidence Dave Trott has done anything wrong, I'll assume these are more of the same anti-foreclosure, pro-squatter crazies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Mind police alert.

What reason do you have for thinking Dual Track is not sincere and deciding what is in their individual & corporate minds?

Do you think its fair and appropriate to judge everything based on your opinion of the thoughts of others?

---

...because it was so abused it was made illegal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bham1982

Well, since Michigan already has some of the most pro-homeowner foreclosure laws in the nation, and since there isn't even a hint of evidence Dave Trott has done anything wrong, I'll assume these are more of the same anti-foreclosure, pro-squatter crazies.

---

Doing "nothing wrong" is miles different from doing something sleazy. Trott and Trott [[and their competition over in Troy, Orleans &Associates) are nationally known for their less than stellar practices. Trott himself is walking all kinds of conflict of interest lines with owning the entire pipeline from forclosure mill law firm, to property management firms, to title company to real estate company. Hell if I were one of his Bank clients, I'd wonder where his loyalty is.... to getting those houses on the market as fast as possible or protecting my interest in it by working with the borrower.

criticizing the manner in which T&T and Orleans...et al do it IS NOT the same as saying there is something evil about foreclosing on people.

and Michigan is not THAT pro-homowner. Here, unlike other states, banks can seek to collect the deficiency. So, you can be forclosed upon, evicted, and then when the bank sells your house they can still come after you for the difference between what you owed and what it sold for. In many cases that is hundreds of thousands and it's years later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RapBrown

Anti-foreclosure activists like Steve Dibert accuse Trott & Trott of “dual tracking,” simultaneously negotiating a loan modification and pursuing foreclosure. This practice has been subsequently banned by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The company allegedly violated Michigan law by dual tracking Jeff Reed, an ex-Green Beret, without posting the required foreclosure notices or honoring the loan modification Reed negotiated with JPMorgan Chase. The bank eventually fired Trott’s law firm from the case.

Trott’s firm also successfully lobbied the Michigan legislature for changes that make it easier to foreclose, which would boost the company’s profits. In 2009, the state narrowed the appeal process for homeowners; in 2013, the legislature passed a “fast-track foreclosure” law, which could allow a lender to evict within 30 days if the property can be deemed abandoned. Under the law, subjective findings of superficial damage or trash in the yard, or even if the homeowner refuses to consent to allow an interior inspection, can trigger the fast-track process. “It’s built on the premise that homeowners are staying there and damaging property,” said Lorray Brown of the Michigan Poverty Law Program. “Actually they’re trying to desperately keep their house.” The Michigan statute, implemented in January, was deemed so problematic that Governor Rick Snyder added a signing statement recommending changes. But the legislature ignored the request.


“They would not negotiate,” said Ven Johnson, a lawyer with several cases involving judgments obtained by Trott & Trott. “Their position was that if the homeowner wasn’t current, there was no going back. Every single week we would see courtrooms filled with Trott lawyers fighting with people who were begging to just make a partial payment or get an extension. And they would just say no.”

Ethical? Maybe in your world

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but dual tracking was outlawed early in 2014. This matter was from 2011.

And unless I'm mistaken, the law firm follows the direction of their clients. Was the expectation that the law firm would disobey their client's instructions to foreclose?

I don't understand the wrath toward the attorney. Toward large, unresponsive lenders? I understand that. But toward an attorney? Doesn't make sense [[other than an attempt to prevent the Republicans from keeping MI-11).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BankruptcyGuy

Correct me if I'm wrong, but dual tracking was outlawed early in 2014. This matter was from 2011.

And unless I'm mistaken, the law firm follows the direction of their clients. Was the expectation that the law firm would disobey their client's instructions to foreclose?

I don't understand the wrath toward the attorney. Toward large, unresponsive lenders? I understand that. But toward an attorney? Doesn't make sense [[other than an attempt to prevent the Republicans from keeping MI-11).

---

Dual tracking was made illegal because places like T&T were so blatantly abusing the process. People were getting requests for supporting documentation to modify the loan the same day a sheriff is out posting notice of foreclosure. They were being outright lied to.

Unless I'm mistaken, the firm's duty is to protect the client's interest....not feed Trott's pipline of foreclosure related businesses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bailey

Trott himself is walking all kinds of conflict of interest lines with owning the entire pipeline from forclosure mill law firm, to property management firms, to title company to real estate company. Hell if I were one of his Bank clients, I'd wonder where his loyalty is.... to getting those houses on the market as fast as possible or protecting my interest in it by working with the borrower.

criticizing the manner in which T&T and Orleans...et al do it IS NOT the same as saying there is something evil about foreclosing on people.

and Michigan is not THAT pro-homowner. Here, unlike other states, banks can seek to collect the deficiency. So, you can be forclosed upon, evicted, and then when the bank sells your house they can still come after you for the difference between what you owed and what it sold for. In many cases that is hundreds of thousands and it's years later.

---

Keep in mind that the loan is NOT owned by the servicer, it's owned in little tiny bits by thousands of investors. The servicer is governed by an agreement which requires action in certain situations [[i.e. you must foreclose if the Borrower is X behind). There is absolutely no leeway to some of those situations, if even everyone thinks that the course of action could result in a lower return to the investors.

And while Michigan allows collection of deficiencies, they are rather rare. Most servicers bid in the full amount of the debt at foreclosure, which precludes a deficiency judgment. If the bid is less than the amount owed, the note holder must then pursue a deficiency through a separate court action, where defenses [["hey, you took this action which lowered the value of the house!") are allowed. The deficiency is NOT the difference between the debt and what the house sells for later--the latter is not relevant to the deficiency proceeding.

[[p.s. if the question is "is this a jacked-up way to manage mortgages?", the answer is "you bet.")

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bailey

Dual tracking was made illegal because places like T&T were so blatantly abusing the process. People were getting requests for supporting documentation to modify the loan the same day a sheriff is out posting notice of an impending sale. They were being outright lied to.

---

But the article implies what was done was illegal at the time, which it wasn't. Again, keep in mind that the attorney has no say and no control over what the client [[bank/servicer) is doing.

There is no question that the mortgage modification process was a cruel joke. I've helped many clients navigate that process. But don't blame counsel for following their client's instructions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BankruptcyGuy

But the article implies what was done was illegal at the time, which it wasn't. Again, keep in mind that the attorney has no say and no control over what the client [[bank/servicer) is doing.

There is no question that the mortgage modification process was a cruel joke. I've helped many clients navigate that process. But don't blame counsel for following their client's instructions.

---

I guess that whole MRPC thing might have something to say about when you should and shouldnt follow client's instructions and what you communicate to opposing parties...especially unrepresented ones. I tend to think if you are doing something that is so egregious that it's subsequently made illegal...you MIGHT have been over the ethical line at the time.

really that's my only issue with Trott.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BankruptcyGuy

And while Michigan allows collection of deficiencies, they are rather rare. Most servicers bid in the full amount of the debt at foreclosure, which precludes a deficiency judgment. If the bid is less than the amount owed, the note holder must then pursue a deficiency through a separate court action, where defenses [["hey, you took this action which lowered the value of the house!") are allowed. The deficiency is NOT the difference between the debt and what the house sells for later--the latter is not relevant to the deficiency proceeding.

---

What the what now? A deficiency judgment is a money judgment against a borrower whose mortgage foreclosure sale did not produce sufficient funds to pay the underlying loan in full. Yes they have to go back to court to get one...and they are now doing it more often because people are getting back on their feet and actually have money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bailey

I guess that whole MRPC thing might have something to say about when you should and shouldnt follow client's instructions and what you communicate to opposing parties...especially unrepresented ones. I tend to think if you are doing something that is so egregious that it's subsequently made illegal...you MIGHT have been over the ethical line at the time.

really that's my only issue with Trott.

---

I'm pretty familiar with the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct, and dual-tracking is nowhere near the activity for which you would withdraw as counsel. It's a legal position for the servicer to take [[foreclose in the event of default). The real failure is by the servicers--telling customers one thing while doing another. That's not on the lawyer.

The CFPB should mandate response times or procedures for loan modifications--that would be effective regulation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bailey

What the what now? A deficiency judgment is a money judgment against a borrower whose mortgage foreclosure sale did not produce sufficient funds to pay the underlying loan in full. Yes they have to go back to court to get one...and they are now doing it more often because people are getting back on their feet and actually have money.

---

There is a distinction between the foreclosure bid [[at sheriff's sale) and the ultimate sale of the house by the lender to another buyer. The former sets both the redemption price [[the borrower retains the right to redeem the debt for six months after foreclosure, unless the property is a really low loan to value, or farmland in certain circumstances, in which case it's 12 months). The latter is completely irrelevant to the deficiency. I don't see too many circumstances where residential lenders bid anything less than the full debt.

Here's an example:

House was worth $400,000
Debt is $300,000 [[75% LTV at the time)
House is now worth $200,000
Borrower defaults
The lender can decide how much to bid at the sheriff's sale.
Most lenders choose to bid the full amount of the debt
Some lenders choose to bid the value of the home

If the lender bids the full amount of the debt, a deficiency judgment CANNOT be obtained.
If the lender bids the value of the home, the lender could get a deficiency judgment of up to $100,000.

What's popping up now is situations where there were multiple mortgages, and foreclosures wiped out 2nd mortgages, and 2nd mortgage holders are now pursuing judgments. That's much more common.

At a deficiency judgment proceeding, all types of defenses are available. Bad lender conduct is the most common. Judges are not inclined to reward misbehaving servicers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baselinepunk

Very few people like vultures, Mooooooooch. Especially, those Capitalist Pig Dogs who claim they have the citizenry interests at heart, like this DB Trott. While making money off of people's hardest times is legit, it does not remove the blood on his hands or off of his mouth.

---

Well said. Wesley Mouch is everyone's apologist. So sad..... Trott makes money on people's hardships and doesn't lose any sleep over it. Do you think he actually tried to keep someone in their home? We don't need a person like him in Michigan Government. He's working for his own self interests, not the people.

Vote for Kerry Benetivolio instead! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90asEtTMTm4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BankruptcyGuy

I'm pretty familiar with the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct, and dual-tracking is nowhere near the activity for which you would withdraw as counsel. It's a legal position for the servicer to take [[foreclose in the event of default). The real failure is by the servicers--telling customers one thing while doing another. That's not on the lawyer.
.

---

The dual tracking T&T was engaging in was in giving homeowners the impression, that while they are participating in modification negotiations, the lender will work with the homeowner to avoid foreclosure. That was a demonstrably false as T&T was ALSO initiating the foreclosures at the same time they're telling the borrower the lender is working with them. I think that its at least arguable that is walking right over 4.1, .2 , .3, .4 there... .but that is just me...a guy who doesn't practice law in that area...but did pass the bar.

Its a bait and switch... it wasn't "illegal" at the time, but it sure was pretty damn shady.

Quote:

---

I don't see too many circumstances where residential lenders bid anything less than the full debt.

---

Really? from the stuff I've seen in Macomb and Wayne county, that is almost never the case. The situation seems to usually be the home was purchased for 200kish, note was some sort of stupid 0 down/ interest only/5 yr Arm garbage, house is now worth 85-90k on a good day, lender owes well over 200k [[unpaid principle +late fees, unpaid taxes and insurance..etc.) ... bank buys it at the sheriff's sale for about FMV. Then waits out the redemption period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bailey

The dual tracking T&T was engaging in was in giving homeowners the impression, that while they are participating in modification negotiations, the lender will work with the homeowner to avoid foreclosure. That was a demonstrably false as T&T was ALSO initiating the foreclosures at the same time they're telling the borrower the lender is working with them. I think that its at least arguable that is walking right over 4.1 , .3, .4 there... .but that is just me...a guy who doesn't practice law in that area...but did pass the bar.

Its a bait and switch... it wasn't "illegal" at the time, but it sure was pretty damn shady.

Really? from the stuff I've seen in Macomb and Wayne county, that is almost never the case. The situation seems to usually be the home was purchased for 200kish, note was some sort of stupid 0 down/ interest only/5 yr Arm garbage, house is now worth 85-90k on a good day, lender owes well over 200k [[unpaid principle +late fees, unpaid taxes and insurance..etc.) ... bank buys it at the sheriff's sale for about FMV. Then waits out the redemption period.

---

The MRPC rules reflect how a lawyer deals with its clients. There are sadly few restrictions on how attorneys deal with opposing parties. If so, Fieger et al would be out of business.

Your anecdotal information may be different from mine on DJs. Either way, if I'm representing a borrower who is double-crossed and THEN the lender seeks a judgment, I'd hammer the lender, including counterclaiming.

The activities of these servicers has ranged from bad to appalling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

Vote for Kerry Benetivolio instead! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90asEtTMTm4

---

If anyone was in doubt of your character I think you just proved it. Trott isn't running against Kerry Benetivolio, that was the primary. He's running against Bobby McKenzie, why is it necessary for you to post false information?

Whether or not what he did [[or does) is illegal, why in the world would anyone vote for someone who made all his money doing something so nasty and sleazy for a living? Do you really want someone who professionally takes advantage of the hardships or others, with little or no compassion, representing you and making legislative decisions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

Whether or not what he did [[or does) is illegal, why in the world would anyone vote for someone who made all his money doing something so nasty and sleazy for a living? Do you really want someone who professionally takes advantage of the hardships or others, with little or no compassion, representing you and making legislative decisions?

---

I wouldn't, but then again its been many years since I considered myself a Republican.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RapBrown

If anyone was in doubt of your character I think you just proved it. Trott isn't running against Kerry Benetivolio, that was the primary. He's running against Bobby McKenzie, why is it necessary for you to post false information?

---

Bentivolio refused to accept his loss in the primary and is running as a write in candidate.

http://www.wxyz.com/news/political/c...e-in-candidate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pam

Bentivolio refused to accept his loss in the primary and is running as a write in candidate.

http://www.wxyz.com/news/political/c...e-in-candidate

---

But that's not Trott's competition, McKenzie is running even up with Trott, I'm sure Bentovolio is not even registering. At best it was disingenuous.

Juline and Peter at the protest against the Foreclosure King under a poster of Bankula.


https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.n...d8e47fce64831f

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

Whether or not what he did [[or does) is illegal, why in the world would anyone vote for someone who made all his money doing something so nasty and sleazy for a living? Do you really want someone who professionally takes advantage of the hardships or others, with little or no compassion, representing you and making legislative decisions?

---

Would you describe the process of pandering to others for money and lying to the public repeatedly while catering to special interests "sleazy"? I would. That encompasses virtually all politicians.

In my opinion, the reason people are out protesting is that a) Trott is running for office, and b) it's a long way to Bank of America/JP Morgan Chase/Wells Fargo's offices.

Perhaps the protesters should carry torches to his home, rather than picket a business. Might be more effective, will get more press coverage.

No one takes television or the newspapers seriously in this town, they've been compromised for a long time. For all intents & purposes this is the press

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobl

Perhaps the protesters should carry torches to his home, rather than picket a business. Might be more effective, will get more press coverage.

---

Politely, to what end? If the goal is to keep him out of Congress, best to go knocking on doors in the 11th district instead.

If the goal is to stop foreclosures, do you really think that's going to do it? If Trott folded up operations, there would be dozens of law firms to take his place. People might think that sort of work is "sleazy," but I'd argue that large swaths of the profession [[trial lawyers, insurance defense, etc.) would then be placed in the same category.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BankruptcyGuy

Politely, to what end? If the goal is to keep him out of Congress, best to go knocking on doors in the 11th district instead.

If the goal is to stop foreclosures, do you really think that's going to do it? If Trott folded up operations, there would be dozens of law firms to take his place. People might think that sort of work is "sleazy," but I'd argue that large swaths of the profession [[trial lawyers, insurance defense, etc.) would then be placed in the same category.

---

Exactly! Could the best approach be to put less lawyers in political office?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobl

Perhaps the protesters should carry torches to his home, rather than picket a business. Might be more effective, will get more press coverage.

---

Even more so if they spent a whole night breaking glass,seems to be a growing trend against the posh or those who may have more weather they deserve it or not.

Was that the reason of adding the word posh into the heading? In order to bring up or capitalize on anybody with means is evil?

By doing that they have taken away the individual in the case and created a group attack,kinda hurts the case.

Kinda like protesting for $15 per hour at Mc Donald's winning the battle but losing the war,take this guy out and 15 more are ready to take thier place,unless the system is changed it is still going to be a memory 5 years down the road while everything stays the same.

"...but I'd argue that large swaths of the profession [[trial lawyers, insurance defense, etc.) would then be placed in the same category..."
On this point, we agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard

Even more so if they spent a whole night breaking glass,seems to be a growing trend against the posh or those who may have more weather they deserve it or not.

Was that the reason of adding the word posh into the heading? In order to bring up or capitalize on anybody with means is evil

---

I don't believe that is the case. By all economic measures I do very well but I can still spot a scumbag for what he is worth.

It's funny that someone struggling to eat that shakes down someone for pennies is reviled as scum of the earth but someone that takes advantage of the system and screws over those that are struggling to make millions are revered as the 'job creators'.

Seeing that, financially, I am firmly in the middle between Trott and the 'scumbags' trying to get by, I would prefer to become one of the 'scumbags' before I would ever consider becoming Trott.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Thankfully, I just purchased a home out of country and the US will be my home base but will, in the near future, be more my vacation place than my home. The priorities in this country are severely fucked up if people can truly defend this piece of trash. For some, money doesn't make the funk dissipate, it just douses a lot of cologne on top of the filth to hide it. Sadly, too many dumbasses just smell the cologne.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RapBrown

If anyone was in doubt of your character I think you just proved it. Trott isn't running against Kerry Benetivolio, that was the primary. He's running against Bobby McKenzie, why is it necessary for you to post false information?

---

Nice try trying to think I don't know what I am talking about.

Kerry B is running as a write in candidate Rappy! He filed for it. https://www.facebook.com/KerryBentivolio

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jt1

I don't believe that is the case. By all economic measures I do very well but I can still spot a scumbag for what he is worth.

It's funny that someone struggling to eat that shakes down someone for pennies is reviled as scum of the earth but someone that takes advantage of the system and screws over those that are struggling to make millions are revered as the 'job creators'.

Seeing that, financially, I am firmly in the middle between Trott and the 'scumbags' trying to get by, I would prefer to become one of the 'scumbags' before I would ever consider becoming Trott.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Thankfully, I just purchased a home out of country and the US will be my home base but will, in the near future, be more my vacation place than my home. The priorities in this country are severely fucked up if people can truly defend this piece of trash. For some, money doesn't make the funk dissipate, it just douses a lot of cologne on top of the filth to hide it. Sadly, too many dumbasses just smell the cologne.

---

Where ever one goes in the world there is always those who worship the dollar over humanity,always has been and always will be I guess.

My concern about all of this going to hell in a hand basket scenario is it has lost the fight for the future common good and become more instant gratification.Justice now instead of looking at the big picture.

like you $22k bought me a 3 bedroom high rise rooftop condo in downtown Bogota,everything one would need in life within a five minute walk.Poor but happy they call it. But there is no place like home as they say.

Maybe this saber rattling will go somewhere but personally I doubt it as we already gave both the government and the engineers of the whole mess a free pass,this is just trickle down and giving up and going for the bottom feeders,be loud enough and maybe levie some fines,pay 10 million to make 50 million,it still offers no solution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

Nice try trying to think I don't know what I am talking about.

Kerry B is running as a write in candidate Rappy! He filed for it. https://www.facebook.com/KerryBentivolio

---

Oh I would never question if you know what you're talking about, it's your intent I question

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RapBrown

Oh I would never question if you know what you're talking about, it's your intent I question

---

Just because he is still running does not mean I support him. I admire his never give up attitude, but he has no chance, too many tow the line, vote straight ticket republicans in that district.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BankruptcyGuy

The MRPC rules reflect how a lawyer deals with its clients. There are sadly few restrictions on how attorneys deal with opposing parties. If so, Fieger et al would be out of business.

---

except the rules I cited. Which are specifically about how to ethically deal with opposing parties, represented or not, and third parties.

Quote:

---

Your anecdotal information may be different from mine on DJs. Either way, if I'm representing a borrower who is double-crossed and THEN the lender seeks a judgment, I'd hammer the lender, including counterclaiming.

---

I think the point here is the borrowers tend not to be represented. Lawyers tend to work for money... someone being foreclosed upon usually doesn't have any. T&T, Orleans...et al. exploited the ignorance of the lay person. Basically they live down to every negative stereotype of shyster lawyer behavior.

Quote:

---

The activities of these servicers has ranged from bad to appalling.

---

the servicers activities were enabled by people like Dave Trott and foreclosure mill lawfirms like his.

I'm just sort of surprised the way he made his money has not been a high profile issue. He's bent over backwards to avoid mentioning it... going so far as to dress up in a hardhat costume and stroll through a factory as if manufacturing is how he "created jobs".

Part of the problem with America, jt1, is that it's considered cool in America to game the system as long as you're making money and within the "law", no matter how crooked the law is. In fact, we respect it and imagine ourselves doing something similar. It's sad.

I've long said that there is something wrong about a society where "cheating" on your taxes with inflated deductions is considered a mainstream, virtuous act. I get that we all hate paying taxes, but you can't have a society where everyone is cheating. But we all figure we've earned it, that there are enough welfare leeches to justify our worst behavior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nain rouge

I've long said that there is something wrong about a society where "cheating" on your taxes with inflated deductions is considered a mainstream, virtuous act. I get that we all hate paying taxes, but you can't have a society where everyone is cheating. But we all figure we've earned it, that there are enough welfare leeches to justify our worst behavior.

---

Tax avoidance is not illegal, tax evasion is. Tax avoidance is only possible because our representatives in Congress refuse to overhaul the tax code. People wouldn't "cheat" if they thought they weren't getting fleeced. It's not about "welfare leeches"... to me it's things like mortgage interest deductions on vacation homes and boats and all the other various and sundry breaks only available to the wealthy individuals or giant corporations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bailey

except the rules I cited. Which are specifically about how to ethically deal with opposing parties, represented or not, and third parties.

I think the point here is the borrowers tend not to be represented. Lawyers tend to work for money... someone being foreclosed upon usually doesn't have any. T&T, Orleans...et al. exploited the ignorance of the lay person. Basically they live down to every negative stereotype of shyster lawyer behavior.


the servicers activities were enabled by people like Dave Trott and foreclosure mill lawfirms like his.

I'm just sort of surprised the way he made his money has not been a high profile issue. He's bent over backwards to avoid mentioning it... going so far as to dress up in a hardhat costume and stroll through a factory as if manufacturing is how he "created jobs".

---

I don't think the T&T people are any better or worse than trial lawyers--that's my point.

Any the servicers undertook those activities in cases with foreclosures [[and attorneys) and those where no attorney was involved. I'm guessing that the T&T people were probably more careful about what they would say than the average call center person.

Either way, I think the blame is wrongly focused. There is, however, plenty to go around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nain rouge

Part of the problem with America, jt1, is that it's considered cool in America to game the system as long as you're making money and within the "law", no matter how crooked the law is. In fact, we respect it and imagine ourselves doing something similar. It's sad.

I've long said that there is something wrong about a society where "cheating" on your taxes with inflated deductions is considered a mainstream, virtuous act. I get that we all hate paying taxes, but you can't have a society where everyone is cheating. But we all figure we've earned it, that there are enough welfare leeches to justify our worst behavior.

---

The US is nowhere near the top of the tax evasion contest. It's much more prevalent in Europe and Asia.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/data...cost-a-country

Here we go, now we have BankruptcyGuy moving the goalposts. There is a huge difference between evasion and a corrupt system of deductions, and I'm sure you know that. In America, we're very careful to codify and legalize corruption.

I see China actually loses less taxes to evasion as measured by percentage of its GDP than the US. Are you gonna sit here and tell me China isn't corrupt? Your argument is irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bailey

People wouldn't "cheat" if they thought they weren't getting fleeced. It's not about "welfare leeches"... to me it's things like mortgage interest deductions on vacation homes and boats and all the other various and sundry breaks only available to the wealthy individuals or giant corporations.

---

Cheating, to me, is not a valid way to participate in a democracy or representative republic. What you're essentially endorsing is anti-state method of rebellion, abetted by corrupt politicians that are also anti-state. You want to benefit from America's economic power but you don't want to pay for anything you don't feel like paying for. You call that being "fleeced".

Though I can't speak for you, I know a lot people believe fudging their taxes is a way to get back at the country for the breaks it gives to the rich. But, to me, that's a self-defeatist approach. Why don't we just elect people that would fix the tax system? Oh, that's right, because the ADD American public only votes for people that can afford shiny ads.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nain rouge

Here we go, now we have BankruptcyGuy moving the goalposts. There is a huge difference between evasion and a corrupt system of deductions, and I'm sure you know that. In America, we're very careful to codify and legalize corruption.

I see China actually loses less taxes to evasion as measured by percentage of its GDP than the US. Are you gonna sit here and tell me China isn't corrupt? Your argument is irrelevant.

---

So there's no difference in you mind between: a) evading tax laws, and b) accepting a tax break that, by the way, passed both houses of Congress and was signed by a President?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BankruptcyGuy

So there's no difference in you mind between: a) evading tax laws, and b) accepting a tax break that, by the way, passed both houses of Congress and was signed by a President?

---

There is a difference. That said, the absence of tax evasion does not indicate a lack of corruption within existing tax laws. I mean, c'mon, you're throwing weak sauce at me here. There is no significant correlation to be had.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nain rouge

There is a difference. That said, the absence of tax evasion does not indicate a lack of corruption within existing tax laws. I mean, c'mon, you're throwing weak sauce at me here. There is no significant correlation to be had.[/COLOR]

---

I was just responding to the person who described this as an "American" problem. It is not.

Again, I don't get the correlation. Other countries are corrupt, therefore America is fine. Is that your point? Otherwise, I don't get your line of reasoning.

Changing the argument to tax evasion in other countries - or anything about other countries, period - is an irrelevant deflection on your part. We're talking about tax corruption in America.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nain rouge

Again, I don't get the correlation. Other countries are corrupt, therefore America is fine. Is that your point? Otherwise, I don't get your line of reasoning.

Changing the argument to tax evasion in other countries - or anything about other countries, period - is an irrelevant deflection on your part. We're talking about tax corruption in America.

---

The original post to which I was responding wrote "the problem with America...", making it appear that this problem is somehow unique to America.

Let me try this:

The problem with Democrats is that they take too much money from special interests.

That statement would be at the best misleading, and at the worst, false. That's a problem with both parties. Adding "with Democrats" makes it seem like a problem unique to them, which it most certainly is not.

That's all I was saying. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

The problem with Democrats is that they take too much money from special interests.

How is this not the case with Republicans as well? I don't see any difference with ANY political party. Please explain because, I must be missing something.

Cincinnati_Kid: He was using that statement about Democrats to back up why he had to 'correct' me for saying America has corrupt tax laws. It's just an elaborate exercise in wheel spinning. His view is that entire world is basically corrupt and America is comparatively good. Take that for what you will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cincinnati_Kid

The problem with Democrats is that they take too much money from special interests.

How is this not the case with Republicans as well? I don't see any difference with ANY political party. Please explain because, I must be missing something.

---

Absolutely, a remedial reading and comprehension course. I have no dog in this fight, but he just explained it the post above yours. How can you NOT understand the explanation? His viewpoint isn't "The problem with Democrats is that they take too much money from special interests", he's merely using the statement as an example, to explain his point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cincinnati_Kid

The problem with Democrats is that they take too much money from special interests.

How is this not the case with Republicans as well? I don't see any difference with ANY political party. Please explain because, I must be missing something.

---

I do not see a difference between the parties. Republicans are just as 'bad' as Democrats.

I don't understand what a 'special interest' is? Shouldn't everyone be interested in politics? Should they not advocate for their cause?

Are Soros and Koch special interests? Are Coke and Planned Parenthood? Are the MEA and the Realtors?

The "secret" Super-Pacs, pouring in gonzo dollars to back candidates, scare me. I think the general public has a right to know who they are and what do they want. From what little I know about politics, they don't do this because they think he's a great guy. Anyone who donates heavily, and pushes a candidate to election, to perpetuate THEIR cause, and not for the general good of the public, is "special interest"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

The "secret" Super-Pacs, pouring in gonzo dollars to back candidates, scare me. I think the general public has a right to know who they are and what do they want. From what little I know about politics, they don't do this because they think he's a great guy. Anyone who donates heavily, and pushes a candidate to election, to perpetuate THEIR cause, and not for the general good of the public, is "special interest"

---

You can always justify public good in the end.

Say a local bridge owner has a super PAC to gather support adding another span,some have expressed displeasure at his support for those who would see it his way.

If the bridge was twinned and the public benefited by decreased travel time and the flow of goods was smoother,would that not be considered in the public good?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard

You can always justify public good in the end.

Say a local bridge owner has a super PAC to gather support adding another span,some have expressed displeasure at his support for those who would see it his way.

If the bridge was twinned and the public benefited by decreased travel time and the flow of goods was smoother,would that not be considered in the public good?

---

Precisely. 'Public Good' is not a 100% agreed upon principle. Reasonable people have differing opinions.

The problem with limits on political campaigns is that they assume agreement on what can be said and who is allowed to speak, and by what means.

I prefer to trust the public. Look at the election vote where Matty spent massive sums of 'dark' money all over the place. He still lost. No, he got slapped down.

Tell me how it is that Matty's money didn't work, but the Koch Brothers does?

Viva free speech -- say no to limits on ads -- always. Let the public decide elections. Not bureaucrats nor the current incumbents of both parties that sometimes think campaign finance needs reforming. No. It doesn't. [[But I'd vote for a huge dose of transparency.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

Absolutely, a remedial reading and comprehension course. I have no dog in this fight, but he just explained it the post above yours. How can you NOT understand the explanation? His viewpoint isn't "The problem with Democrats is that they take too much money from special interests", he's merely using the statement as an example, to explain his point.

---

OK...OK.. I see it now.. Had a brain fart I guess.... Don't beat me up about it. :[[

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cincinnati_Kid

OK...OK.. I see it now.. Had a brain fart I guess.... Don't beat me up about it. :[[

---

No, I won't. Your posts are usually pretty good. I thought it was going to turn into one of those red & blue things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Precisely. 'Public Good' is not a 100% agreed upon principle. Reasonable people have differing opinions.

The problem with limits on political campaigns is that they assume agreement on what can be said and who is allowed to speak, and by what means.

I prefer to trust the public. Look at the election vote where Matty spent massive sums of 'dark' money all over the place. He still lost. No, he got slapped down.

Tell me how it is that Matty's money didn't work, but the Koch Brothers does?

Viva free speech -- say no to limits on ads -- always. Let the public decide elections. Not bureaucrats nor the current incumbents of both parties that sometimes think campaign finance needs reforming. No. It doesn't. [[But I'd vote for a huge dose of transparency.)

---

It is hard at this point to say it did not work for DIBC because even if everybody up the line says build it ,until the check is cut for the customs plaza it does not get built , no check yet.The only thing you have at this point is history repeating itself in Detroit. [[Poletown)

Koch is into every state in so many ways they are in essence more powerful then the president.presidents Roosevelt,Taft,and Carter were the only ones that saw the danger in that and did something about it.

I think the biggest problem is the public in general has been hard pressed in their daily lives they are missing or out of touch in the big picture,DIBC is micro politics,the rest of the country could care less other then the argument of why pay for a bridge in another city when we need a bridge here,Koch effects everybody everyday no matter where you live.

Eggs for breakfast and chicken for dinner ? No matter where you live in the country 90% chance it came from Koch that is only 2 of the many.

Because everybody is so concerned about eating from day to day they do not have time so they place the trust in others to do the right thing,that is why I say instead of fighting for $15 per per hour the same energy should have been placed towards the government and systematic change and clearly define the role of the government.

Do that and everything else is pointless,you would not need PAC or politic favors because thier job is the common good for all Americans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard

It is hard at this point to say it did not work for DIBC because even if everybody up the line says build it ,until the check is cut for the customs plaza it does not get built , no check yet.The only thing you have at this point is history repeating itself in Detroit. [[Poletown)

Koch is into every state in so many ways they are in essence more powerful then the president.presidents Roosevelt,Taft,and Carter were the only ones that saw the danger in that and did something about it.

I think the biggest problem is the public in general has been hard pressed in their daily lives they are missing or out of touch in the big picture,DIBC is micro politics,the rest of the country could care less other then the argument of why pay for a bridge in another city when we need a bridge here,Koch effects everybody everyday no matter where you live.

Eggs for breakfast and chicken for dinner ? No matter where you live in the country 90% chance it came from Koch that is only 2 of the many.

Because everybody is so concerned about eating from day to day they do not have time so they place the trust in others to do the right thing,that is why I say instead of fighting for $15 per per hour the same energy should have been placed towards the government and systematic change and clearly define the role of the government.

Do that and everything else is pointless,you would not need PAC or politic favors because thier job is the common good for all Americans.

---

Richard, my sole point was money does not determine election outcomes.

Matty spent massively. Matty did not win. Thus, money does not determine outcomes.

Is it an influence? Yes, of course. Does saying stupid 'stuff' in massive volume convince everyone? Of course not. Matty did not win -- and the progressive movement has put the '1%' into our vocabulary. And I guarantee you that the Koch Brothers did not plant that idea with their money, nor by GMO implants in my eggs and chicken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

No, I won't. Your posts are usually pretty good. I thought it was going to turn into one of those red & blue things.

---

Thanks HT...;)