Page 3 of 20 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 487
  1. #51
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,319
    It doesn't matter who passes it until it does!

  2. #52
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    the financial sector's crimes are going to be unprosecuted/absolved by the govt at the expense of the citizens.
    The investor class (and its intermediaries) may have something to say about that in civil and criminal process before this is all over.

  3. #53
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,533
    Yeah, the fat lady ....

    just a reminder how property transfers and ownership have been buttressed by extreme levels legal, procedural, multi-party controls

    http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/148898

  4. #54
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    That's the OP, boutons.

    lol

  5. #55
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    (meh)
    Last edited by Winehole23; 01-11-2011 at 04:29 AM. Reason: meh

  6. #56
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,319
    :facepalm:

  7. #57
    Scrumtrulescent
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Post Count
    9,724
    It doesn't matter who passes it.
    Right. It doesn't matter who passes it, it only matters that there might be a repug out there who didn't voice objection to it and that "proves" that dems are better than repugs.

    the financial sector's crimes are going to be unprosecuted/absolved by the govt at the expense of the citizens.

    and we won't hear a peep out of Fox, the Repugs, Beck, Palin, etc.
    We've officially moved on to stage 3 of a boutons topic.

    Stage 1: boutons crafts a one sided, biased and misleading arguement against repugs
    Stage 2: someone calls him on it and points out culpability on the other side
    Stage 3: boutons ignores democrat culpability and takes the discussion to a more transcendental state along the lines of "the man" trying to keep everybody down.

    All we need now is another round of rebuttals (stage 4) and the inevitable boutons retreat involving some kind of personal insult (stage 5) and our business will be done here.

  8. #58
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,319
    Right. It doesn't matter who passes it, it only matters that there might be a repug out there who didn't voice objection to it and that "proves" that dems are better than repugs.



    We've officially moved on to stage 3 of a boutons topic.

    Stage 1: boutons crafts a one sided, biased and misleading arguement against repugs
    Stage 2: someone calls him on it and points out culpability on the other side
    Stage 3: boutons ignores democrat culpability and takes the discussion to a more transcendental state along the lines of "the man" trying to keep everybody down.

    All we need now is another round of rebuttals (stage 4) and the inevitable boutons retreat involving some kind of personal insult (stage 5) and our business will be done here.
    Brilliant!

  9. #59
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    Do you read the links, boutonski?
    No. boutonski barely reads anything at all. He just spams us with his RSS feeds and free-associates.
    Last edited by Winehole23; 11-18-2010 at 06:31 AM.

  10. #60
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    How else would he end up reposting the OP on page three?

  11. #61
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    51,098
    No. boutonski barely reads anything at all. He just spams us with his RSS feeds and free-associates.
    All part of the internet flora and fauna.

    I have become somewhat sanguine about boutons and bizzaro_boutons et al.

    Occasionally, boutons will drop the schtick and post genuine, surprisingly well-thought out original stuff. There is a real person under the persona that I suspect would be good to have a beer with.

  12. #62
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    There is a real person under the persona that I suspect would be good to have a beer with.
    I've not seen much evidence for that.

  13. #63
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    But it could be true.

  14. #64
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    US Bancorp and Wells Fargo & Co. lost a foreclosure case in Massachusetts’s highest court that will guide lower courts in that state and may influence others in the clash between bank practices and state real estate law. The ruling drove down bank stocks.
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...sure-case.html

  15. #65
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    The closely-watched decision involves two foreclosures: that of Antonio Ibanez and Mark and Tammy LaRace and whether U.S. Bancorp and Wells Fargo, respectively, had proper legal standing to take back the homes after the borrowers missed their payments.


    After examining the paperwork filed by the banks, a lower court judge, the Massachusetts Land Court's Keith C. Long, said he had determined that the mortgage "note" that proves who the owner is had not been properly transferred when the banks auctioned off houses.


    Long's decision hits on one of the most sensitive issues related to how mortgages were securitized: something called "endorsements in blank." In the rush to aggregate and sell and then resell mortgages, many of the mortgages do ents were transferred without explicitly naming who the note was being sold to.



    The financial services industry has argued that this practice is legally valid but Long ruled, "These blank mortgage assignments were never recorded and they were not legally recordable."


    The banks had appealed Long's decision, arguing that they had clear le to the properties. But on Friday, Massachusetts Supreme Court Justice Ralph D. Gants wrote that the court agreed that the banks "failed to make the required showing that they were the holders of the mortgages at the time of foreclosure."
    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/pol...ts_forecl.html

  16. #66
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    (H/T, Daily Bail.)

  17. #67
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    153,131
    What property rights? /sarcasm

  18. #68
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    Like Hernando De Soto said recently, this is how things look when trust breaks down. Trust is breaking down in the US.

  19. #69
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    FDIC Calls for Better Disclosure of Servicer Conflicts of Interest in Second Mortgages

    There are lots of reasons why servicers are failing to make deep enough mortgage mods to salvage viable borrowers (ones who still have a decent level of income). One of the most troubling is that the parent bank often also has a large book of second mortgages, and writing down first mortgages would require them to ding their second mortgage book. Various conservative estimates have indicated that more realistic valuations of second mortgages would blow a big hole in the balance sheets of the four biggest banks in the US. (The banks’ defense is that borrowers are often still paying their second mortgages when they’ve defaulted on their first. And that occurs because borrowers who are stressed try to stay current on as many obligations as they can, so if they can’t pay both their first and second mortgage, they will often default on the first but keep paying like clockwork on the smaller second mortgage. BTW, that also is in contrast to the widespread “deadbeat borrower” meme, the fact that borrowers keep trying to stay current on the obligations they can meet).


    The FDIC seems to be the lone regulator trying to protect investors. And this is simply common sense. Investors are refusing to buy any new deals save those with some sort of government guarantee precisely because securitization industry participants behaved so badly during the housing bubble. Yet the industry refuses to implement even minor measures to make it safe for investors to get back into the pool (no pun intended).
    Even more peculiar are the efforts underway by the Treasury (which will also be taken up with even more vigor by the incoming Republican house) to “reform” Freddie and Fannie, which is code for “reduce the role and have more done in private markets”. That’s a great goal in theory, but there IS no private market now. You can’t sensibly be in favor of Fannie and Freddie reform and not also be promoting reform of the securitization process. Yet bizarrely, that is exactly the posture the Administration is taking.



    From Marke ch:
    …the FDIC is considering whether big banks that own both servicers and second-lien loans should need to disclose to mortgage investors, before loans are packaged and sold, what would happen to the second-lien loan if the first mortgage comes into distress…


    In many cases big bank holders of second lien loans haven’t disclosed what their arrangement is on those loans with the corresponding owner of the primary mortgagee….


    The servicer won’t modify the second-lien loan because of what it means for their parent bank’s balance sheet, and the mortgage investors of the primary loan, in return, won’t want to modify the primary mortgage if the second lien is not being modified,” says Henry Sommer, director at the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. “However, the servicer is supposed to act in the best interest of all parties, not just the second-lien loan its parent bank owns.”…


    Regulators may soon want banks issuing primary mortgages for securitization to disclose in pooling and servicing agreements with mortgage investors what happens to the second lien they own if the first lien is in trouble.


    With this kind of disclosure, Sommer insists, investors would only agree to buy mortgage securities from banks that agree in advance in the PSAs to completely write off or proportionately write down the second-lien loans in situations where the primary mortgage comes into distress…


    One way bank regulators are considering to address this issue would be to have significant disclosure and PSA requirements of this kind for mortgages that are approved as “qualified residential mortgages.” The FDIC and other bank regulators are working on writing a definition for what kind of mortgages would fall into this category. The definition of what cons utes a QRM is controversial because these types of mortgages would be exempt from soon-to-be- approved “skin in the game” rules requiring banks to retain some of the risk of loans they package and sell.


    Greater disclosure is a much less intrusive response than that being sought by a group of 10 Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill. Rep. Brad Miller (D., N.C.) and nine fellow Democrats want regulators to go one step further and require bank regulators and a newly formed Financial Stability Oversight Counsel to consider requiring big banks to divest their servicer units.
    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/...mortgates.html

  20. #70
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    Last edited by Winehole23; 01-11-2011 at 05:47 AM.

  21. #71
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    Judge Arthur M. Schack of New York State Supreme Court in Brooklyn has taken aim at an upstate lawyer, Steven J. Baum, referring to one filing as “incredible, outrageous, ludicrous and disingenuous.”



    But New York judges are also trying to take the lead in fixing the mortgage mess by leaning on the lawyers. In November, a judge ordered Mr. Baum’s firm to pay nearly $20,000 in fines and costs related to papers that he said contained numerous “falsities.” The judge, Scott Fairgrieve of Nassau County District Court, wrote that “swearing to false statements reflects poorly on the profession as a whole.”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/11/bu...1&ref=business

  22. #72
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    “When the consequence of a lawyer plying his trade is the loss of someone’s home, and it turns out there are do ents being given to the courts that have no basis in reality, the profession gets a very big black eye,” Professor Gillers said.

  23. #73
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    The mortgage servicing industry should fund a new commission to compensate homeowners who may have wrongly been kicked out of their homes, a top U.S. banking regulator said on Wednesday.


    Federal Deposit Insurance Corp Chairman Sheila Bair said this claims commission could be modeled on those created to compensate victims of the BP oil spill and Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. She said the size of such a claims fund would have to be negotiated.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1922390420110119

  24. #74
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,533
    I read where "some think" Congress will make all the paperwork fraud legal ex post facto, as being the only way to "settle" a hyper-complicated, humongous pile of the predatory, avaricious lawyers, yes the ing lawyers, and the predatory, avaricious financial sector have shafted the mortgage system while stealing from citizens.

    Trust has broken down? G M A BIG FAT F B

    A "country of laws" not of men? G M A BIG FAT F B

    USA is ed into UCA, and is un able.

  25. #75
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    93,833
    F b?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •