Bank Of America’s Christmas present: Foreclose Even Though Not A Payment Missed

[FreakinDJ]

Bank Of America’s Christmas present: Foreclose Even Though Not A Payment Missed

By George Gombossy

In one of the more bizarre foreclosure cases, Bank of America is threatening to throw a West Hartford family out of their home even though the couple never missed a mortgage payment.

The largest bank in the United States earlier this month notified Shock Baitch and his wife Lisa (Friedman) Baitch that foreclosure action will start today – Christmas eve – unless the couple agrees to put their home up for a forced sale.

Why?

Because another unit of Bank of America erroneously reported to credit agencies that the family was seeking a loan modification, ruining their credit rating and as the result putting their mortgage into default.

All this is happening even though the bank – after admitting it erred and sent a letter of apology in September – handed this case to a special unit at Bank of America that is charged with dealing with severe customer issues. It promised to notify the credit reporting agencies that the couple were not deadbeats, but were good credit risks.

http://4closurefraud.org/2010/12/25/foreclosure-fraud-bank-of-americas-christmas-present-foreclose-even-though-not-a-payment-missed/

[Hawkeye-X]

1. Wikileaks on BoA cannot come soon enough.

BoA needs to be liquidated and removed from its existence, permanently.

[Joanne98]

3. Yep

[FreakinDJ]

4. All the Banks are doing it - even after they were Bailed Out

with Tax payer dollars

[47of74]

10. The Government should change the addresses of the executives of BoA to

5880 Highway 67 South
Florence, Colorado 81226

(That's the address of the Florence Supermax)

[shireen]

2. sue the bastards for emotional distress

someone needs to teach those banks a lesson. Creeps!

[snappyturtle]

6. IF the victims in this article can afford an attorney for this proposed suit,

what attorney would take it on? The demise of BoA can't come soon enough. My ex and I had issues with them. They were nasty, rude and arrogant to deal with.....the sad thing is that this discord contributed to my divorce. I lost everything I had worked for for thirty years and find myself just hanging on. I'm currently working on a plan and have 'hope'. Hope is all I have left.

[shireen]

14. it makes me livid ...

hearing stories like yours ... in the newspapers, you're just statistics or the occasional human interest story. But here on DU, I meet people like you and it's chillingly terrifyingly real. I wish more people i know would come to DU and meet people like you. They nod and say, yes, the economy is terrible. But do they know how terrible? Do they know people like you? NO!

You deserve better.
:hug:

[snappyturtle]

39. Thank you! Trust me, I WILL come out of this. I've had other

hard times and worked through them but I'm so much older now...that's my biggest hurdle. SO-O many are lots worse off than me...it's them I ache for....especially the younger ones who may never experience the few really good years I had. I believe DU is a great sounding board and I come here to re-gain my balance. I want to know what people are thinking and how they're coping.

:hug:

[CoffeeCat]

63. I am so sorry...

...that this happened to you. I wish there was something I could say. I can
only imagine the pain that you have endured and it's just not fair. It's
so damn wrong.

Did BOA do the same thing to you that happened to the people in the article?

Please know that people at DU do care. Thinking of you. :hug:

[CoffeeCat]

62. That's what I was thinking...

I would sue these bastards so hard and so fast--their ATMs would spin.

You can't just screw with people like that, and run them out of their
home when they've done nothing wrong.

I'd hire an attorney, and I'd be making a video diary every day--and
documenting the financial pain and stress that was intentionally
inflicted on my family. Plus, I'd call them at least three times a
day, attempting to resolve the matter and I'd record all calls.

Take these classless freaks to the cleaners and fire a civil suit!

[Angry Dragon]

5. The American people need to demand

a federal moratorium on foreclosures until this mess is fully investigated and the guilty parties are arrested.

Every day more and more people are being kicked out of their homes because banks are breaking the law

[FreakinDJ]

8. It is because the protections were stripped out of Bankruptcy Laws

At the meeting, Miller advocated for mortgage principal reductions, such as those that were used in the Midwestern farm crisis in the 1980s. The big difference between now and then is that some crucial protections have been stripped from bankruptcy laws, mostly at the behest of lobbyists for creditors.

http://www.totalmortgage.com/blog/mortgage-rates/jail-time-promised-in-foreclosure-fraudrobo-signing-investigation/8658

[JDPriestly]

74. This robbery of the American people was well planned way

in advance. It all fits together like a Mafia hit. The Glass-Steagall Act was ended, then Greenspan lowered interest rates and the housing sector was encouraged to overheat. The bankruptcy laws were changed. They are now draconian. (Of course corporate bankruptcy is still a cakewalk.)

And just as Bush was about to leave the stage, having set the trap, we were all caught. It was so perfectly choreographed. It cannot have been just by chance or coincidence.

Next they will gut Social Security and leave the tax breaks for the rich. The inhumanity of it is incredible. Only the Mafia or a similar organization could organize this. Only they would be cruel and greedy enough to want to do this.

[MedicalAdmin]

79. Wrong. The mafia had rules and limits and looked out for people.

Do not compare these crooks to the mafia. The mafia are much nicer and hurt a lot fewer people.

Let me give you one small example. When my bookie loses a bet he pays up in full and on the spot. When my insurance company loses a bet they don't pay up, never in full and never on time.

Corporations make the mafia look like Polly freakin Anna.

[unapatriciated]

92. lol so true

battled BC for ten years (in the 90's) and they still have not paid in full.

[shireen]

16. +1

hell! YES!

[treestar]

7. People sign without reading or understanding the mortgage

There are all sorts of other things that can cause a default. It's probably right there in the mortgage.

People don't negotiate at all, they just "cave" (:rofl:) and sign the papers because they want the loan. They don't even start to try to make any sort of deal.

They'll go to some lawyer now, while it's too late. No way were they going to do that when they just wanted to buy the house and understand what they were signing.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[anamandujano]

11. Our house is paid off,

I wonder when we'll get a foreclosure notice. I am just kidding but considering the ineptitude and outright malice of the banks, who knows.

I am dazzled by the dancing banana.

[Statistical]

13. There was (at least one) house foreclosed which had no mortgage (paid in full)

Not only was it foreclosed it sold at auction before he could stop it.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2010-09-23/business/fl-wrongful-foreclosure-0922-20100921_1_foreclosure-defense-attorney-foreclosure-case-jumana-bauwens

[treestar]

19. These are mistakes however.

Such things will happen; government programs will make mistakes, too. That can be dealt with. There's no reason to be outraged at them.

[MedicalAdmin]

80. Mistakes? Are you freakin kidding me?

There is no reason for any mistake ever. Are you saying ( who am I kidding? You are saying...) that a foreclosure or sale of a paid off home is just an "oops - my bad" moment?

Sorry mr. apologist for criminals, there are zero excuses for that kind of mistake. None. Ever.


As a little thought experiment I asked a friend who is a mortgage broker in Canada if he could find a similar case of foreclosure in Canada and he sputtered and then said "He'll no, Eh? That ain't how we do things up here. It can't happen."

[Heywood J]

82. Zero tolerance for any mistakes.

This is people's life that they're screwing with. A house is, bar none, the single largest asset most people will ever have. It contains nearly all of their other assets, memories, and personal effects. To steal someone's house and dump their belongings because of an "error" that benefits the bank is unforgivable. Considering the value of what's involved and the difficulty of undoing it, there should be no tolerance of any mistakes on the bank's part. Due care and concern would have avoided every one of these issues so far, and it's pure negligence on the part of the bank that these things are happening.

Liquidate BoA, then strip their offices and executives bare to make restitution.

[LanternWaste]

87. I imagine that should one lose their home to a "mistake"...

I imagine that should one lose their home to a "mistake", one would be rightfully outraged.

[anamandujano]

24. I'm not going to read that article because

there's already enough angst in my life.

I've been dealing with a gov't agency (that on it's face seems like a good program) where the workers have been caught lying by me and third parties and no matter how high up I complain, they stand behind the lies.

[treestar]

18. Well then there is no mortgage on it.

There is no way for a bank to foreclose unless you still owe money. But there are many ways in which they might while you still owe.

[TNDemo]

25. Read that article Statistical linked.

They guy paid cash for his house, no mortgage, and they still foreclosed.

[treestar]

41. Then there was some sort of factual error

That site does not look objective. He could not have paid the mortgage off completely, as the poster above did. Just because you are caught up on your payments does not mean you don't owe the bank money. If the guy had paid outright cash for his house there would not even be a lender in existence. If you own your house outright, no bank can foreclose (though the county possibly could, if the owner failed to pay property taxes, or the IRS for failure to pay taxes).

[FreakinDJ]

46. WHY ARE YOU SPREADING DISINFORMATION

Nothing in the article would lead anyone to DISBELIEVE the Bank's statement that the "Bank made an Error"

Yet you gone up and down this thread attempting to persuade anyone who would listen that some how the home owner is at fault

Is there any thing you can prove from the article that even remotely suggest this

[Statistical]

48. My guess is works for a bank or family member works for a bank.

I mean in the article BofA clearly indicates it was a mistake on their part but according to the poster they are wrong and in fact it is the homeowner fault because they didn't read the contract and/or hire a lawyer.

Hell freepers don't even go that far. So only thing that makes sense if the person works for a bank and is taking it personally that nobody likes the crooked banks.

[Foo Fighter]

57. I think you're on to something there.

And the "homeowners are at fault" meme is BS. It's fraud on the part of the lenders that is responsible for 80-90% of the foreclosures. Here's a quote from Bill Black:

"Credit Suisse says that by 2006, 49% of all mortgage originations in the United States were liars loans. The lowest incidents of fraud is 50% and that’s when the fraud fraudsters study it themselves. When independent folks study it, it’s in the 80 to 90% range."

http://www.distressedvolatility.com/2010/10/william-black-on-foreclosure-crisis.html

Ah, but aren't "liar loans" caused by homeowners lying on the forms? No. Once again, it was fraud on the part of the banksters because they WANTED people to default. Here's another quote from Bill Black:

"Let us deal with the "borrower fraud" argument first because it is the area containing the most erroneous assumptions. There was fraud at every step in the home finance food chain: the appraisers were paid to overvalue real estate; mortgage brokers were paid to induce borrowers to accept loan terms they could not possibly afford; loan applications overstated the borrowers' incomes; speculators lied when they claimed that six different homes were their principal dwelling; mortgage securitizers made false reps and warranties about the quality of the packaged loans; credit ratings agencies were overpaid to overrate the securities sold on to investors; and investment banks stuffed collateralized debt obligations with toxic securities that were handpicked by hedge fund managers to ensure they would self destruct.

That homeowners would default on the nonprime mortgages was a foregone conclusion throughout the industry -- indeed, it was the desired outcome. This was something the lending side knew, but which few on the borrowing side could have realized.

The homeowners were typically fraudulently induced by the lenders and the lenders' agents (the loan brokers) to enter into nonprime mortgages. The lenders knew the "loan to value" (LTV) ratios and income to debt ratios that they wanted the borrower to (appear to) meet in order to make it possible for the lender to sell the nonprime loan at a premium. LTV can be gimmicked by inflating the appraisal. The debt to income ratios can be gimmicked by inflating income. "Liar's" loan lenders used that loan format because it allowed the lender to simultaneously loan to a vast number of borrowers that could not repay their home loans, at a premium yield, while making it look to the purchaser of the loan that it was relatively low risk. Liar's loans maximized the lender's reported income, which maximized the CEO's compensation.

The problem is that only the most sophisticated nonprime borrowers (the speculators who bought six homes) (1) knew the key ratios they had to appear to meet, (2) had the ability to induce an appraiser to inflate substantially the reported market value of the home, and (3) knew how to create false financial information that was internally consistent and credible. The solution was for the lender and the lender's agents to (1) instruct the borrower to report a certain income or even to fill out the application with false information, (2) suborn an appraiser to provide the necessary inflated market value, and (3) create fraudulent financial information that had at least minimal coherence."

Much more at http://dailybail.com/home/william-black-with-dylan-ratigan-there-is-bank-fraud-everywh.html

(The part I quoted above starts with the "Who is Guilty" heading partway down. The whole thing is worth reading if you have the time.)

[JDPriestly]

76. Thanks for posting those quotes, Foo Fighter.

Having discussed these matters with some of the people who were defrauded by mortgage companies, I have to agree with the fact that up and down the mortgage industry there was fraud.

Many of the homebuyers were utterly ignorant about what they were getting into.

In addition to fraud, a lot of people simply lost their jobs and no longer had the income necessary to pay their mortgage. Normally, they would have been able to sell their homes, but thanks to the fact that so many homes were being foreclosed and the prices on homes were falling, they couldn't sell and fell into foreclosure.

Imagine how horrible -- first you lose your job, then you lose your home. It's really an awful thing that is happening to so many, many people.

[Foo Fighter]

90. No problem.

I have no doubt that the whole foreclosure debacle was caused by fraud in the mortgage industry. They set it up so that people would default and the banks could maximize their profits. Then the banks would get the homes back and start the whole process all over again. Unfortunately, it backfired on the banks because with so many homes in foreclosure, property values plummeted and the banks were stuck with homes that were underwater. Of course, the bailout fixed that pesky issue. The end result is that the banks kept their profits and the taxpayers picked up the tab for their losses. That worked out very nicely...for them.

But the big losers in this whole thing (aside from the taxpayers) are the homeowners that lost their homes in the scam. And my neighbor is one of them. She had no trouble making her payments but she wanted to re-fi to take advantage of the lower interest rates. Her bank told her that to qualify for a re-fi, she needed to stop making payments (and I almost screamed when she said that) so that's what she did. Of course, the bank then put her into foreclosure but she's fighting it. She qualifies for a re-fi under HAMP but we all know what a scam that program is. I really hope she can keep her place but it's going to be an uphill battle. And I REALLY wish I had known about this beforehand as I would have told her to NOT stop making the payments under ANY circumstances. Once you do that, it's pretty much a done deal. And the banks know that but unfortunately, most borrowers don't.

[JDPriestly]

96. Excellent points, Foo Fighter

[treestar]

50. You are no longer thinking, just emoting.

Maybe all caps indicates so.

The person must still owe the bank money. The mortgage can't be paid off, nor could it have been paid in cash with no mortgage in the first place!

You are simply lacking in any objectivity on the subject. Everything must be some evil conspiracy of the banks to take homes from homeowners without legal process.

[FreakinDJ]

56. OK - You work for B of A - We get it

Just stop the Bullshit and no one will think the less of you for it.

[Statistical]

65. Ask your boss for some time off. You have been shilling the BofA angle for hours.

I hope they are paying you overtime, you earned it.

[snort]

84. This should happen to to you.

But it probably wont, will it?

[cui bono]

69. Read the article before you make assumptions. The house was paid for in cash.

B of A still foreclosed on it. It was sold to the guy as a short sale due to foreclosure proceedings on the previous owner. So yes, a bank can still foreclose on you even if you don't owe them money, albeit erroneously.

[Gormy Cuss]

44. Wrong. There are more stories out there like the one linked by Statistical

Here's another: http://www.foreclosurelistings.com/content/foreclosures/couple-from-new-bedford-filed-a-lawsuit-wrong-foreclosure.htm

These are people who never had a loan on the property, never mind had a loan with BofA.

[CoffeeCat]

64. That happened...there was an article on DU...

The guy had no mortgage. He owed nothing on his home. They foreclosed on him.

I believe he was from Florida.

I will try to find a link, but I remember reading the article here, and the vigorous
discussion.

[Foo Fighter]

60. As others have posted, people have been foreclosed on even though

they owned their houses free and clear. It could happen. Seems like no one is immune.

[treestar]

15. OMG. If you read them, then you'd know that many other things

besides failing to make the payment will trigger a default. All to the convenience of the mortgage company. Likely in the case in the OP it is all there in black and white. But when people want that house and want that loan, they immediately cave without even reading the papers or understanding what else might trigger a default. And surely they don't even start negotiating the matter.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[katnapped]

22. Doesn't matter to them

A foreclosed house means the homeowners was SOMEHOW at fault, no matter how much evidence to the contrary. You'll see this meme repeated in a lot of places. Big business can do NO WRONG

[TBF]

23. Yup - the Reagan democrats are now supporting Obama. They are quite

apparent here on DU.

[RegieRocker]

27. And if you understand this you think it's ok for them to put

items like that in home loans? What if they put "You have to be able to dead lift 500lbs or foreclosure will be initiated"? Promise to pay is all that should be in any loan period. Read for amount, rate, total payed and length of loan should be all a person needs to know. That is if our government was doing it's job, and people who know that this is the only right thing to do, make if happen. All other things in contracts should be illegal and punishable as a crime.

[cui bono]

70. self delete. thought I was replying in a subthread...

but the typo I had in the subject should remain: shituation. Might be my new word.

[Tesha]

34. You can be put into default of your loan terms by a wide variety of events.

Treestar is probably right; it probably was in the fine print.
That the other bank made a mistake is, of course, actionable
and hopefully, these folks will sue and win a whopping big
judgement against one or both banks.

Happily, the DLC and the Republicans haven't yet negotiated-
away *THAT* right, though I'm sure they're hard on the case
as we speak.

Tesha

[cui bono]

71. self delete. thought I was replying in a subthread upstream.

[Statistical]

12. Can you read? Are you reading the same article? Obviously not.

Here let me simplify it for you:

Because another unit of Bank of America erroneously reported to credit agencies that the family was seeking a loan modification, ruining their credit rating and as the result putting their mortgage into default.

All this is happening even though the bank – after admitting it erred and sent a letter of apology in September – handed this case to a special unit at Bank of America that is charged with dealing with severe customer issues. It promised to notify the credit reporting agencies that the couple were not deadbeats, but were good credit risks.

--------------

So how exactly would having a lawyer at signing protect them from BofA making blatant mistakes to their account which ended the home falsely in forcelosure? That's right it wouldn't.

More reading; less time looking like an ass blaming the victims.

[treestar]

17. That is a matter of fact

the shock apparently was in the fact that something other than failing to pay could trigger a default.

If B of A was wrong on the facts, that is one thing. But there is no call for outrage from one who signed a document that this could become an issue.

[sammytko]

28. I agree with you. They would not have qulified for that type of mortgage if they were not in trouble

Here is the link to the program

http://makinghomeaffordable.gov/modification_eligibility.html

The only way I could even start to qualify is if I answered yes to all their questions which include - Are you having problems making your payments and Is your mortgage more than 31% of your pay.

Even though they did not sign the papers, they were already categorized as "qualified" for the program. So the bank saw them as a risk.

I don't understand if they had such large credit lines already, why not use that and make the upgrades. Why add more risk to the house?

[Hello_Kitty]

33. Yeah, people on the brink of losing their homes through no fault of their own

Really need to calm down.

:eyes:

[FreakinDJ]

45. Quit spreading DISINFORMATION

By the Bank's own admission the Bank made an error

This has NOTHING to do with Other conditions of the loan

[ProfessionalLeftist]

67. Listen BoA representative, I'm blocking you

because I don't want to hear your excuses for this sheister of a bank. You obviously work for these schmucks or know someone who does. Take your propaganda elsewhere.

While you're at it, get some help for your delusions. ""IF" BoA was wrong on the facts?" Hello? Do you know how to read or just write? The article clearly states that BoA *admitted* they were in error. In your little perfect bank world I guess banks never make errors. But this one DID. They even said so. Yet you continue with your false premise. You think like them, sound like them, act like them and as far as I'm concerned you are them.

Bye! :)

[cui bono]

72. self delete. thought I was replying in a subthread upstream.

[brentspeak]

52. In a post last year, Treestar has claimed she's an attorney

Either she's a lawyer for the banks or she's a really inept attorney.

[Hello_Kitty]

32. Just when I thought you couldn't kiss more corporate ass than you already do

You surprise me anew.

[Tesha]

35. "New Democrats" and all that.

The old ones were a lot more useful to "just plain folk";
I wonder if they'll ever be back?

Tesha

[RegieRocker]

93. Lol you disputed the fact that foreclosure should only be for non payment!

[Rex]

37. You mean like making all your payments on time?

I can't understand why some DUrs hate The People and love BigBiz. Sad and pathetic.

[mwooldri]

42. Our family lawyer made sure we knew what we were doing with our mortgage.

He spelled it all out, said what we needed to do, etc, etc etc. Plus I had a buyers' agent.

I didn't know the full thing about buying a home, that's why I got specialists involved.

You are right, there are people who fully don't understand their mortgage, and have crappy banks that service them. But the OP was talking about a family who was paying on time, assuming keeping up their house (paying on time is usually paying the mortgage part plus some into escrow for tax & insurance) and Wank of America deciding to foreclose on them.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rhett o rick]

55. So you sympathize with Bank of America???? No sympathy for the common folks, right? nm

[demwing]

73. Why do you laugh?

What's so fucking funny about this issue?

[JDPriestly]

75. "People" can barely read a newspaper, much less a loan agreement.

You have to be able to understand the terminology used in the loan papers. That is way, way beyond most people. Don't blame people who sign papers without understanding what they say.

It takes a lot of experience and education to understand legal documents.

For example, people do not understand the statue of frauds, which is a legal concept found in certain statutes and in the Commercial Code that requires that certain agreements be in writing. Because people do not understand that concept, because their real estate agent or mortgage salesperson tells them orally that they will be able to renegotiate their loan in the future, they sign a binding contract that says that their interest rate will go up and that there is no guarantee that they will be able to renegotiate the terms to get a lower rate. Ordinary people just don't think about the fact that the writing on the paper is the agreement and what the agent or salesperson says is just sales-talk.

That is how many of the people being foreclosed got into the mess they are in. They did not understand the meaning of the papers they signed. They really did not. Of course people do not bother to read things they know they will not understand. People sign contracts all the time without really understanding what the contracts mean.

[RegieRocker]

21. The only legal item that should cause foreclosure is

NOT MAKING PAYMENTS! Any other illegal B.S. in a contract by a loan company should be a criminal offense. PROMISE TO PAY only!

[Tesha]

38. Nonsense.

You're commonly obliged to do many other things besides
just make the payments, for example:

o Maintaining the property in roughly equivalent condition.

o Paying the property taxes (and that's usually forced through
an escrow account)

o Paying the hazard ("fire") insurance (and that's usually forced
through escrow as well).

The reason why this is all permitted is that for the entire life
of the mortgage, the bank owns rights to at least a portion
of the property and for much of the mortgage, the bank
probably owns rights to the vast majority of the property.

Read your mortgage sometime.

This doesn't excuse the bank fucking-up, of course; I'm just
explaining that your obligations are far wider than just "making
the payments".

Tesha

[RegieRocker]

58. You're right, your reply is nonsense.

Good title. If you don't pay your taxes you will lose your house to the county. That is not foreclosure. Credit rating only has relevancy in applying for a loan. Maintaining a house is vague and is a perception that doesn't apply to loans. Insurance requirement is a given all people understand that, the reason not mentioned. All money collected from claims for home is obviously to be used for repairs.

[Tesha]

61. You've never actually read your mortgage, have you? (NT)

[RegieRocker]

66. Yea i have and I cant stop them from inspecting my house from the outside

from afar bit there will never be a day your beloved jack booted thugs step into my home to inspect it. I not only read it but made sure the items I mentioned were the only ways I could be foreclosed on. If I am current on my payments they can kiss my arse. One more thing I bet I have a beter loan than you.

[Tesha]

78. Better loan?

Probably not.

Ours is the second mortgage we've taken with the same provider:
back in the days when mortgage rates were dropping and we
were thinking of refinancing, our lender made a very attractive
*UNSOLICITED* offer to re-fi us at a completely competitive
fixed rate with no closing costs to us at all, in order to retain
our business.

So we took them up on it, but only re-fied the existing
principal; we took no "extra" cash out. And we wrote the
new loan for a shorter term than remained on our existing
loan.

So now, we're within only a little more than two years of
having the house paid off and there's no better mortgage
than one that's stamped "Paid in Full".

Tesha

[RegieRocker]

83. No facts what is your interest rate? Can you be foreclosed on

because of your credit rating. Answer these questions and have a real discussion if you're able (stay on topic). One more thing answer the question " do you think credit rating after the loan is made should have anything to do with foreclosure? Do you think it is completely ok to include credit rating and other non pertinent b.s. as a way to foreclose on people?

[Tesha]

88. "have a real discussion if you're able (stay on topic)."

I'm sorry, I don't discuss things with rude people.

Tesha

[RegieRocker]

89. Saying what someone has to say is nonsense is rude.

You need to follow your own guidelines when dealing with people.

[kelly1mm]

68. If you do not pay your taxes the bank will foreclose as if the county actually

sells the property, it will wipe out all inferior liens which are basically everything except IRS liens. Thus the lender would be left without colateral for the loan. That is why many (not all) loans have an escrow account set up.
Additionally, you are the one who said the "only" legal reason for a foreclosure should be nonpayment. Now you are saying that the insurence requirement is a given and thus not mentioned. Which is it?

[RegieRocker]

91. Non payment and insurance is a given

And since you mentioned escrows most payments include the insurance premiums and taxes also. You didn't mention that little tidbit. So really all that is left is what? I bet you too won't answer and won't answer my initial question. Do you think it should be legal for credit rating dropping to a determined level be allowed for foreclosure. If you don't answer that question in your reply it signals that you don't want to carry on a discussion and therefore are pushing another course which is a waste of my time.

[kelly1mm]

94. I believe that it should be legal for people to enter into contracts. If

the terms are not to your liking, seek out another lender. Thus, if the mortgage contract says the lender can call the note and/or foreclose in any number of situations including, but not limited to a credit rating drop, and the borower signs it after having had the oppertunitunity to read it, then yes, that should be legal.

Do you not agree that adults should be allowed to form contracts? You do understand that the lender needs to have colateral for the loan and that colateral needs to be protected right?

Before you ask/imply, I do not work for a bank. However, I do hold mortgages on several properties I have sold.

[RegieRocker]

95. I do not agree

that a lender should be able to put anything they choose on a contract. Obviously that is wrong and you know it. They're should be laws allowing only foreclosure for non payment.

[DeadEyeDyck]

26. I am nit sure if it is true, but have read somewhere that

you can be forclosed simply because your home has been devalued to a point where they bank does not feel its mortgage is protected by the lost value in your home.

i.e. You borrow $300,000 on a $400,000 home. Bank is protected because your home is collateral

Home decreases to $250,000 in value and the bank's loan is no longer secured.

I am told it is generally in the mortgage contrat that you must be able to collateralize the loan or have it called. Never owning a home, I cannot say for sure.

[anamandujano]

31. I always liked living in apartments.

Refrigerator breaks, they bring a new one. Property taxes, no. Lots of other stuff like that but they're kind of like Grand Central Station, always getting notice that so and so will be dropping by to do this that or the other.

I've known people who were always talking about house value or resale value whatever. I have always thought of a house as a place to live, not as something to trade away sometime in the future. No matter how bad things get, somewhere to sleep and a hot cup of coffee the morning makes one tend to not complain too much. When I hear about people being threatened with no home, I get depressed.

[sendero]

81. Which, if so..

.... is a perfect justification for "strategic default" by underwater, but solvent, homeowners.

[mainer]

29. Wasn't there a "foreclosure" of the wrong house recently?

The owners never had a mortgage with the bank, the house was fully paid off, the owners had title -- and the bank seized the wrong address.

[mainer]

30. Foreclosures on WRONG houses -- a few examples

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/bank-america-sued-foreclosing-wrong-homes/story?id=9637897

It's one of the reasons I dumped all my B of A stock last week. There's something really wrong with that company, and I think it's about to go crashing down if they're making mistakes like this.

[Rex]

36. And this all came about because of lackluster leadership in D.C.

Letting BigB rule over our lives and politics was the worst idea ever invented by govt. Why is it our govt LOVES to punish weak individuals to the fullest extent of the law, BUT lets OBVIOUS terrorists like BoA destroy peoples lives and welfare?

I hope it comes back to bite all political parties in the ass one day...sadly not in my lifetime.

[flvegan]

40. Credit rating based default?

Admittedly, I have never heard of this. That's just wrong.

[jberryhill]

47. Risk of liens against the property

If the homeowner engages in actions that risk a lien against the property, then that jeopardizes the security of the loan.

Those are not the actual facts in this situation, but as a general principle, there are a variety of things that could impair recovery IF there was a default, that the lender would also want to prohibit.

[brentspeak]

53. It's outrageous that one's credit rating could be ruined simply for seeking a modification

But then again this is America, where everything greedy has been made perfectly legal.

[flvegan]

54. A lien of that sort wouldn't be superior to the mortgage lien.

Subsequently, they'd be wiped out in the event of a foreclosure. That's at least the case in the states in which I underwrite in.

[Jack Rabbit]

43. OK, Julian Assange . . .

Sick 'em, boy!

[mdmc]

51. waiting for wilki

[Arctic Dave]

59. Sounds like a deleted scene from Brasil.

[eridani]

77. I can understand why a poor credit rating (accurate or not) would prevent someone

--from getting a mortage in the first place. But what in fucking HELL does your credit rating have to do with whether or not you are paying your mortage? If refinancing fell through, so what? Couldn't they just keep paying on their original note?

[The Wizard]

85. What will it take to

drag banking functionaries into the street for a good beating?

[snort]

86. It will take a first incidence.

Once it happens there won't be any stopping it. They've earned it. I hope that soon these assholes will have to start living in fear.