View Full Version : redacted
VooDoo6Actual
05-05-12, 10:24
redacted.
I'm trying to find in these articles how the banks stole the money from homeowners through their off-shore companies. Accounting and finance are not my strongest subjects, so a layman's terms explanation would be helpful.
See item 2547 (tried copy or print screen but it won't let me). It's way down there but it will explain. It's incredibly bad and also confirms, if true, why the problem was as widespread as I tried to tell you it was.
This is the link with the complaint: http://4closurefraud.org/2012/04/27/abeel-v-bank-of-america-complaint-the-laundering-of-trillions-of-dollars-of-u-s-taxpayer-money/
Great find HOP.
FromMyColdDeadHand
05-05-12, 16:22
http://www.scribd.com/doc/91540154/Lawsuit
http://4closurefraud.org/2012/04/27/abeel-v-bank-of-america-complaint-the-laundering-of-trillions-of-dollars-of-u-s-taxpayer-money/
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/home-owners-across-the-nation-sue-all-bank-servicers-and-their-offshore-havens-spire-law-officially-announces-filing-of-landmark-lawsuit-2012-04-23
http://s355160796.onlinehome.us/category/new-york-state-supreme-court/
http://fightthefraud.com/tag/bear-stearns/
https://www.bankclassactions.com/usefullinks.php
http://wakeup-world.com/
I frankly expect better out of you HOP. This is one law firms press release echoed in the blogosphere.
A press release published by Marketwatch (a website owned by the Wall Street Journal) via Marketwire on April 23, 2012, by America’s Spire Law Group,
It is a press release, but they try to make it sound like it is an investigative report by Marketwatch and the WSJ. My company sends out press releases all the time, where I quote myself and make all kinds of claims. There is no editorial process to getting these things out there.
I'm not saying the banks are virginal in all this, but this has just been filed as a lawsuit. I think it is interesting that the press release is long on hyperbole and pretty short on facts. The only thing I see is that people were paying their mortgages and it wasn't being credited to their accounts. Not the most sophisiticated criminal enterprise and seemingly easy to straighten out.
This thing smells of BS.
Moose-Knuckle
05-05-12, 16:25
Folks that loose their homes are a lot easier to "resettle".
Without clicking all the links, is this yet another bunch of crap that's supposed to make us feel sorry for people that bought at the peak of a market and are now upset at the fact and looking for others to blame?
I expected better on this site, if so.
By far the biggest downside of the conservative mindset is the desire to defend capitalism so much that we then condone outright fraud. Surely just as ****ing dumb as liberals telling us that we need big government, but maybe even more loathsome due to overt facts conveniently being ignored to serve the group ideology.
To any and all who believe this is a non-issue generated by the wild imaginations of losers, dumbasses or otherwise lesser human beings, start learning and stop pointing the righteous finger. You're wrong and your cluelessness detracts from our otherwise nobel cause.
montanadave
05-05-12, 18:46
This just in!
Wall Street banks ****ed people over, made out like bandits, and got the same government that handed them the keys to the candy store help cover their tracks because ... it's the same cabal of plutocrats running both shops.
How is this news to anyone?
Without clicking all the links, is this yet another bunch of crap that's supposed to make us feel sorry for people that bought at the peak of a market and are now upset at the fact and looking for others to blame?
So oddly reminiscent of your immediate blasting of the man asking for input regarding the WW he purchased. You can't be bothered with checking for yourself, somehow you just already know.
I expected better on this site, if so.
Likewise and then some.
FromMyColdDeadHand
05-05-12, 19:44
By far the biggest downside of the conservative mindset is the desire to defend capitalism so much that we then condone outright fraud. Surely just as ****ing dumb as liberals telling us that we need big government, but maybe even more loathsome due to overt facts conveniently being ignored to serve the group ideology.
To any and all who believe this is a non-issue generated by the wild imaginations of losers, dumbasses or otherwise lesser human beings, start learning and stop pointing the righteous finger. You're wrong and your cluelessness detracts from our otherwise nobel cause.
That press release has to be 500 words + and all it seems to do is throw out the Patriot Act a few times. WTF did the banks do that is so bad? There is a contract, an asset and payements- this isn't rocket science- I pay mine everymonth and nobody ****s with me.
This hasn't seen the inside of a court room so as far as I'm concerned it is complete bullshit. What kind of press release like this doesn't have some kind of personal story attached as an example. We all know about the family that fully owned their house without a loan and was foreclosed on- and then put a lean on the bank.
What is the 'there' here? Banks are evil make a nice t-shirt, now make an arguement and win a case.
There is a contract, an asset and payements- this isn't rocket science- I pay mine everymonth and nobody ****s with me.
It's really just unbelievable that otherwise smart individuals can shut down when they don't like the facts as presented. "It didn't happen to me, so what's the problem?". Brilliant.
This hasn't seen the inside of a court room so as far as I'm concerned it is complete bullshit. What kind of press release like this doesn't have some kind of personal story attached as an example.
You're right. Here you go, an example from 2010. Or perhaps this fellow is either another loser or in on the gag...
http://www.examiner.com/article/victims-of-wells-fargo-mortgage-fraud-speak-out-story-1
I have more, want to see them?
Banks are evil make a nice t-shirt, now make an arguement and win a case.
The case is being made, but please don't take my word for it. Just take a moment to read up more if you want to better understand.
This just in!
Wall Street banks ****ed people over, made out like bandits, and got the same government that handed them the keys to the candy store help cover their tracks because ... it's the same cabal of plutocrats running both shops.
How is this news to anyone?
^ That about sums it up.
I'm pissed. You're pissed.
What's for dinner.
I frankly expect better out of you HOP. This is one law firms press release echoed in the blogosphere...This thing smells of BS.
I don't. I've noticed a pattern to the last couple of threads that he has posted. He is obviously a smart guy, talented writer, and shootist - this site does not bestow IP titles liberally. Unfortunately, I think that his own bias clouds his judgement about the veracity of his sources when it comes to his politics.
It is the continued posting of crap like this that is going to force the closure of the General Discussion section, to which I say, good riddance.
VooDoo6Actual
05-06-12, 06:47
redacted.
It is the continued posting of crap like this that is going to force the closure of the General Discussion section, to which I say, good riddance.
As someone I usually respect here, I need your help understanding something. What specifically about this thread do you find to be so disturbing? Is it the content, the context or the sources?
I find it especially interesting that this thread has been targeted by haters, yet somehow I was the only one who took the time to suggest that a recent thread about a transvestite's sex appeal was inappropriate. The only responses from that point were in favor of the thread and others told me to pipe down. But somehow here the anger mounts...
Has this forum become so right wing that we can talk bad about the banks? Or perhaps is it that we feel the OP has walked a little farther with some of his suggested scenarios in general recently? I can certainly go about my days not knowing for sure, but the question seems worth asking at this point.
I am with lanesmith, FMCDH and rob_s on this.
Do banks FU? Sure they do. They process hundreds of millions of transaction every day. But a conspiracy? Please explain to me, in plain english, just how this huge conspiracy worked from an accounting standpoint, because I don't get it. And I am pretty good at accounting.
Anybody can file a lawsuit for anything, but it doesn't make it so. Where is the proof?
I am only a sample of 1, but I have dealt with numerous different financial institutions (banks, investment brokers, credit unions) over the last 50 years since I opened my first bank account. I currently have deposit accounts with 10 different commercial banks and loans with 3.
I have never been late on a payment; therefore, never paid a late charge. I have never bounced a check; therefore, never paid a NSF fee. Banks are constantly trying to get my business.
I have encountered bad service, but when I do I switch banks in a heartbeat. And, I have experienced errors on the part of banks but they were always promptly fixed when the error was brought to their attention.
I would never have been able to buy any of the 3 houses I did were it not for banks willing to make a mortgage loan to me.
Surely bad things have happened to some customers. I don't doubt this. But a conspiracy? Show me the money!
Eurodriver
05-06-12, 09:32
It is the continued posting of crap like this that is going to force the closure of the General Discussion section, to which I say, good riddance.
Exactly.
Does anyone even believe these sources? What a joke.
Do banks FU? Sure they do. They process hundreds of millions of transaction every day. But a conspiracy? Please explain to me, in plain english, just how this huge conspiracy worked from an accounting standpoint, because I don't get it.
I suppose this is where the disconnect is then. Personally I don't see it as a being conspiracy, I see it as bad business accompanied by what may be widespread fraud.
Just the mistakes made by "robo-signers" alone are now well documented, yet are often dismissed here as being irrelevant because the homeowners were "probably going to lose their house anyway". So with that we form a blind, uneducated conclusion to suit our viewpoints, this while also dismissing what is at the very least severe incompetence on the part of the banks.
I have worked with and represented numerous homeowners who have been in these exact same situations. My concern is not generated by news articles, it's generated by what I have dealt with firsthand. I have no reason to lie or exaggerate, as I am not anti-bank or anything of the sort. I am just relaying fact as I have witnessed it and can understand the complaint as written.
It may be flawed in places and I agree that overall it seems unthinkable, but that doesn't mean there is not something to it on a fundamental basis. Geitner was with Goldman and has "conspired" all kinds of shady things to protect his people throughout the bailout, but we don't call that a conspiracy, we call it corruption. Does someone here want to dispute this reality as well?
And again, we are talking about loan modifications going awry, not standard payments. There is a huge difference between the two and the fact remains that the modifications pushed and endorsed by the banks themselves are handled so poorly that it has defied explanation.
And I am pretty good at accounting.
Good to know. As such, I'd bet you'd be pretty disappointed to make mtg payments that don't reflect on your monthly statements.
Exactly.
Does anyone even believe these sources? What a joke.
How about the law firm's webpage itself? Plenty of info about this right on the home page.
http://spirelawgroupllp.com/Home.html
Amazing, I called the number and it actually is a real law firm. But since they're closed, I'll call again tomorrow. If this is legit I have some referrals for them.
Edit: Here you go Euro, unless you want to debunk Yahoo as well.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/home-owners-across-nation-sue-040100659.html
montanadave
05-06-12, 10:56
Geitner [sic] was with Goldman and has "conspired" all kinds of shady things to protect his people throughout the bailout, but we don't call that a conspiracy, we call it corruption. Does someone here want to dispute this reality as well?
Minor point and I'm no Geithner fanboi, but Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner has never been employed by Goldman Sachs. While he has served in a variety of positions in the public sector and several privately funded economic "think tanks," Geithner has never worked for an investment bank.
If your statement "Geitner [sic] was with Goldman" is in reference to Geithner's support while serving as president of the New York branch of the Federal Reserve Bank for Bush's former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson's (given that Paulson was a former Goldman Sachs CEO) plan to bail out AIG and the TARP program, then you would be correct.
Good to know. As such, I'd bet you'd be pretty disappointed to make mtg payments that don't reflect on your monthly statements.
And I'd know it in less than 30 days and address it with my bank or thier servicer to make sure it got fixed. Proof of payment is just not that hard to come up unless made in cash, and even then a reciept would have been issued.
And I wouldn't be waiting until I was being foreclosed on to complain that the bank or servicer didn't do it correctly. Most of that, but not all, IMO, is the result of people trying to scam the lender or servicer into delaying the foreclosure any way they can as long as they can.
Notice I said not all of it was. I have already acknowledged there are most likely cases where the lender or servicer screwed up, but as a percentage of all mortgage transactions they are very, very small.
Just because a borrower or their servicer used robo signing doesn't mean they are also stealing your payments. I personally don't even object to robo signing as long as the facts being attested to were correct, which they were in the vast majority of cases.
And I'd know it in less than 30 days and address it with my bank or thier servicer to make sure it got fixed. Proof of payment is just not that hard to come up unless made in cash, and even then a reciept would have been issued.
Sounds great, but the issue you are apparently unaware of is the near impossibility to have the missing payment(s) accounted for, this despite the efforts of the homeowner. I had bank statements from clients that I would submit both via fax and mail showing that they cashed the checks, yet nothing would be accounted for months if ever.
Plus I logged up 20-30 actual phone hours per client, over a period of days and weeks, trying to account for payments before I learned what a waste of time it was. What could possibly justify this happening over and over?
I have already acknowledged there are most likely cases where the lender or servicer screwed up, but as a percentage of all mortgage transactions they are very, very small.
Really? And you can confirm this via what credible means?
Just because a borrower or their servicer used robo signing doesn't mean they are also stealing your payments. I personally don't even object to robo signing as long as the facts being attested to were correct, which they were in the vast majority of cases.
Good heavens man, the whole point is that they were signing off on bad, incorrect paperwork.
This is obviously hopeless, which is unfortunate because I thought we had a more sensible and rational group here. Think whatever you want, doesn't mean anything to me and I have yardwork to do. Wasted more than enough time with this nonsense.
FromMyColdDeadHand
05-06-12, 12:17
First off, I hold HOPs & Safetyhits insights in the highest regard, that's why I pointed out the lack of third party or independant viewpoints, even though there are multiple sources listed. I'm 40 years old and I've finally gotten old enough to realize that things are never as good as they seem and never as bad as they seem at first light.
How about the law firm's webpage itself? Plenty of info about this right on the home page.
http://spirelawgroupllp.com/Home.html
Amazing, I called the number and it actually is a real law firm. But since they're closed, I'll call again tomorrow. If this is legit I have some referrals for them.
Edit: Here you go Euro, unless you want to debunk Yahoo as well.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/home-owners-across-nation-sue-040100659.html
Nothing to de-bunk here. There is no 'here' 'here', it is a copy of the press release again. It is bad enough that the line between editorial and straight news reporting has blurred, but when the fact that a major news aggregator echos a press release and people think that carries some weight- that is a serious breakdown. A lie repeated loud and often enough is little different than a press release echoed in the blogosphere.
It seems that the real issue is that people who weren't repaying their loans where supposed to get relief from the banks. In return, the banks got cash (was it actual cash or breaks), but then didn't modify loans. I just find it really hard to believe that no one in the press or congress has looked into it- and it is only a law firm- that seems to be angling for a class of everyone who has a mortgage and a third of that huge potential pool of money.
Bankers vs Lawyers- forgive me if I'm not a fan of either.
See item 2547 (tried copy or print screen but it won't let me). It's way down there but it will explain. It's incredibly bad and also confirms, if true, why the problem was as widespread as I tried to tell you it was.
This is the link with the complaint: http://4closurefraud.org/2012/04/27/abeel-v-bank-of-america-complaint-the-laundering-of-trillions-of-dollars-of-u-s-taxpayer-money/
Great find HOP.
Read claim 2547 from your link and to me the description of the wrong doings sound more like the actions of fraudulent credit counseling agencies. You know the guys who send out notices to people with lots of credit card debt claiming that they can lower their payments and interest. The consumer then makes payments to the counseling agency instead of the banks holding the debt. Counseling agency takes the money and runs.
That is what that descriptor sounds like. People who were initially suckered into taking out debt they couldnt afford were once again taken advantage of by assholes who finished ripping them off. Now tying them to the original lending institutions and the administration is going to be tough.
My guess on the outcome is going to be that the banks can easily show they have no interest in the modification agencies named in the suit and there is no way in hell someone will be able to factually tie the admin to it. Just not going to happen. The people who took out the huge loans they couldn't service and got ****ed are most likely only going to stay ****ed. I find it difficult to believe that a court will overturn any foreclosures unless they find the banks do own these modification agencies. They may stop any pending foreclosures and make the banks do the modifications themselves, but that's about the best we can hope for.
As for the administration being tied to anything, about the only thing that could happen is they get tied to creating an environment where these fraudulent companies could thrive. They may get a wrist slapping for not thinking about the potential negatives and placing safeguards in place, but to show that they purposefully allowed these fraudulent agencies to sprout and operate with the intent to cause foreclosures is going to take an act of God.
IMO none of this addresses the root cause of the problem, which is government meddling in lending practices to buy votes and make people FEEL better, something they have no business meddling in; coupled with a general populace whose lack of common sense is only matched by their lack of personal responsibility. I'm willing to go 80-20 in favor of the meddling being the biggest contributor though.
Before you jump me s being as being an unsympathetic asshole, I do feel for those who made their financial obligations and for whatever reason, error, fraud, bad judgement on the bank side were wrongfully foreclosed upon. I believe these people should go after the erring bank like a pack of rabid dogs and get their pound of flesh(out of the banks pile not my tax funded pile of stimulus $$). I also feel for those who made a bad decision and honestly tried to get their notes modified and keep their financial obligations but got taken for a ride by some modification agency. They too should go after the people who screwed them and get their pound of flesh. In this case I'm not very hopeful for them cause it seems a lot of these agencies are off shore and most likely nothing more than PO box. I have absolutely no sympathy for those who took out a loan they couldn't afford cause someone told them they could and now want to have their financial obligations met by someone else.
Sounds great, but the issue you are apparently unaware of is the near impossibility to have the missing payment(s) accounted for, this despite the efforts of the homeowner. I had bank statements from clients that I would submit both via fax and mail showing that they cashed the checks, yet nothing would be accounted for months if ever.
No, I am not "unaware" of what you are referring to. I just don't believe it happens that often in the larger universe of all mortgage loans. And most likely can be tied back to a few bad eggs and not to all lenders or servicers, as some would have us believe.
And, if the proof of payment was there, it would make a very nice exhibit in a stay of foreclosure action by the debtor.
What could possibly justify this happening over and over?
How many times is "over and over", in your experience? I am not saying it doesn't happen, I am just saying that in the larger universe of all mortgage lenders and servicers it isn't that common.
Really? And you can confirm this via what credible means?The fact that only a few people are bitching about it and that most mortgage borrowers don't have the problem.
Good heavens man, the whole point is that they were signing off on bad, incorrect paperwork.
Not in all cases they weren't, not even in most cases. Did you not read where I said "as long as the facts being attested to were correct"? Heck, you even quote it.
Would you have us believe all robo signing involved "bad, incorrect paperwork"? Some did, but in the vast majortiy of cases, the suits against robo signing were simply a way to stop or slow the foreclosure process despite otherwise correct paperwork.
Wasted more than enough time with this nonsense.
Nonsense indeed!
Good heavens man, the whole point is that they were signing off on bad, incorrect paperwork.
This is obviously hopeless, which is unfortunate because I thought we had a more sensible and rational group here. Think whatever you want, doesn't mean anything to me and I have yardwork to do. Wasted more than enough time with this nonsense.
My understanding of the robo-foreclosure controversy was that the bank's agents signed-off on affidavits without having personally reviewed the foreclosure documents as required by law in the 25 states having judicial foreclosure requirements. This is technically illegal since a sworn affidavit generally requires that the submitting party has some personal basis to support its contents. Thus, I can see how your statement that the paperwork was "bad" is correct since it does not appear to have been legally executed. However, I've not seen any data to refute the bank's assertion that the robo-foreclosures were a response (albeit improper) to the massive volume of accounts becoming delinquent. In other words, many of us suspect that the vast majority of robo-foreclosures contained paperwork that was technically accurate in that the accounts were delinquent, but executed in an improper manner.
Finally, we do have a largely sensible and rational group. We just happen to disagree on this issue.
This is obviously hopeless, which is unfortunate because I thought we had a more sensible and rational group here. Think whatever you want, doesn't mean anything to me and I have yardwork to do. Wasted more than enough time with this nonsense.
As one wise protester wrote so succinctly on his sign:
"I like nuanced, erudite, rational, discussion - Pander to me."
There's nothing wasteful about a civil point / counterpoint discussion. Everybody wins, even if nobody's position is changed. Unfortunately, this is something that is lost on many here. I've tried repeatedly with the OP but he just keeps posting links to his pet issues and refuses to debate them, considering anyone who disagrees "a sheep." That seems irrational to me, and rather despotic / dictatorial...approaches most of us are opposed to.
Keep talking, keep debating, and don't get frustrated. While you may not change anybody's mind, we'll all learn something through the process.
When disagreement automatically leads to animosity or causes people to shut down and refuse to tease out the nuances of an issue, we've got problems.
After I posted I went back and read through some of the links.
Looks like I was right afterall.
Smells like a turd, probably is a turd.
"robo-signing", while shitty, doesn't change the fact that people DIDN'T MAKE THEIR ****ING PAYMENTS. It's like an epidemic down here and every person I hear crying about this is someone looking for a loophole. Is it impossible to prove who owns your loan? OK, sure. Does that mean you just get to stop paying on it for two years and then cry when they put you out on your ass? No.
It may not be that particular bank's house, but it ain't yours either.
As someone who patiently waited for this bubble to burst, and watched as greedy homeowners sole one house to pay for another, larger, fancier, house for no reason other than to impress their friends, I'm as pissed off at them as I am at the banks for all this stupid shit. It's greed all around and for one segment to act like they're all innocent and lilly white while the other is evil is just plain pathetic.
Do I agree with the bank bailouts? No, not at all. But that doesn't mean I think we should compound the issue by bailing out those that bought high in a panic market and act shocked at the results.
This "lawsuit" is nothing more than an attempt at publicity for the law firm and, if any plaintiffs do really exist, for the homeowners to take advantage of the public buzzword of "robo signing".
This is obviously hopeless, which is unfortunate because I thought we had a more sensible and rational group here. Think whatever you want, doesn't mean anything to me and I have yardwork to do. Wasted more than enough time with this nonsense.
right, insensible and irrational because we don't agree with you. Check.
I think you're perfectly sensible and rational, just deluded and wrong in this case.
:dance3:
right, insensible and irrational because we don't agree with you. Check.
I think you're perfectly sensible and rational, just deluded and wrong in this case.
:dance3:
Well I appreciate the comment regarding my sensibilities at least.
I think that maybe I'm coming from a place where I have experienced things firsthand regarding this specific topic to the extent that I have concluded the problem is on a far greater scale than most here who don't have that same experience. So with that maybe we just wait and see how the whole thing plays out. And I also appreciate the civil discussion, make no mistake.
By the way Rob, check that last thread that was locked in AR GD. It seems someone hacked into your account and used your name to discourage harsh comments being made to a newer member. If it continues your reputation here could be forever altered.
:)
VooDoo6Actual
05-13-12, 18:34
redacted.
VooDoo6Actual
10-26-12, 18:11
redacted.
VooDoo6Actual
10-28-12, 08:42
redacted.
davidjinks
10-28-12, 10:58
43 Trillion dollars…
It would be nice to see them all rot and burn for this.
Thank you for the follow on information!
VooDoo6Actual
10-28-12, 11:35
You are most welcome Sir.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.