In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
This explains the no foreclosure mods
SG_Niner
Member Posts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
Everyone in forclosure should strip the house down to the studs rather than let the damn bankers steal it out from under them and make a profit on it. I have more respect for dog poop than I do bankers.
Why? I saw the vid but I don't get the argument for defaulting is OK. Joe Smith borrowed $250,000 for his house; he did not pay it back as agreed. The lender foreclosed. Where is the wrong in the banks actions????
Two wrongs do not make it right. We are equally to blame for this crapola for allowing the feds to get involved in home loans to begin with. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd need strung out to dry in the desert sun. Elitist are on notice; The Tea-Party, the non-party-party is making a dent in your junk.
my .02.
Explain to me how I stole anything from anybody.
Explain to me why someone should be allowed to strip a house to the studs, so that I would lose money. Not MY money, but my depositors money.
Yes, this all sucks. People lose jobs, get sick or injured. People die or get divorced, all reasons to cause financial hardship and loss of property.
But again, how is that MY fault.
By the way, there isn't a hell of a lot of profit in foreclosed properties these days. If there was profit, I imagine the individuals would have sold their homes and pocketed the profit rather than face the misery of a foreclosure and eviction.
KC
Everyone in forclosure should strip the house down to the studs rather than let the damn bankers steal it out from under them and make a profit on it. I have more respect for dog poop than I do bankers.
That still does nothing to hurt the bankers. It does put the person doing the stripping of the house in possible criminal trouble and the last thing we need is more people going through the court system.
I suspect there is also another benefit to the bankers in that scenario which wasn't mentioned. Even though they profit from the total transaction I would bet there is a way for them to use creative accounting to still show a loss. How long do you suppose Americans will continue to cater to our "elite" class?
1st Qtr 2009 mortgage loans on non-accrual (loans that are so far past due and otherwise suspect in repayment they aren't even allowed to recognize interest earnings on them) $1 million.
3rd Qtr 2010 mortgage loans on non-accrual $2.37 billion. Looked like another $2.7 billion in the foreclosure pipeline. Just think about how many people that is, it is sickening.
This also shows no money left in the allowance for loan loss reserve.
KC
People like nice new homes, nothing wrong with that. But you still have to pay for that home. I would love a nicer home but mine is payed for and I refuse to go in debt just to have a nicer home. The home and acreage I have I payed for with cash. I could have used that cash to purchase a much bigger home but then there is those payments every month. Still have a roof over my head. Still am warm in the winter and cool in the summer so why go in debt?
Well, I'm a banker. Why don't you explain to me how it is my fault that someone loses their home?
Explain to me how I stole anything from anybody.
Explain to me why someone should be allowed to strip a house to the studs, so that I would lose money. Not MY money, but my depositors money.
Yes, this all sucks. People lose jobs, get sick or injured. People die or get divorced, all reasons to cause financial hardship and loss of property.
But again, how is that MY fault.
By the way, there isn't a hell of a lot of profit in foreclosed properties these days. If there was profit, I imagine the individuals would have sold their homes and pocketed the profit rather than face the misery of a foreclosure and eviction.
KC
First off Boltactionman nobody accused you directly of anything. If you watched the video and still saw nothing wrong with the way that deal was structured then nothing I say will be of help to you.
The "bankers at fault" are not your neighborhood lenders per se although they help propagate the lie that the bank is actually "lending something". Can't you see the closed loop between the bankers at the Goldman sucks level and the policy makers which not only makes it impossible for these scammers to lose money but guarantees them an obscene profit at the taxpayers expense.
If you are a banker then you know the basic deception built into the fractional reserve banking system is based on the bank actually bringing nothing real to the party.
quote:Originally posted by BoltactionMan
Well, I'm a banker. Why don't you explain to me how it is my fault that someone loses their home?
Explain to me how I stole anything from anybody.
Explain to me why someone should be allowed to strip a house to the studs, so that I would lose money. Not MY money, but my depositors money.
Yes, this all sucks. People lose jobs, get sick or injured. People die or get divorced, all reasons to cause financial hardship and loss of property.
But again, how is that MY fault.
By the way, there isn't a hell of a lot of profit in foreclosed properties these days. If there was profit, I imagine the individuals would have sold their homes and pocketed the profit rather than face the misery of a foreclosure and eviction.
KC
First off Boltactionman nobody accused you directly of anything. If you watched the video and still saw nothing wrong with the way that deal was structured then nothing I say will be of help to you.
The "bankers at fault" are not your neighborhood lenders per se although they help propagate the lie that the bank is actually "lending something". If you cannot see the closed loop between the bankers at the Goldman sucks level and the policy makers which not only makes it impossible for these scammers to lose money but guarantees them an obscene profit at the taxpayers expense.
If you are a banker then you know the basic deception built into the fractional reserve banking system is based on the bank actually bringing nothing real to the party.
Sure the way the banks do business is a scam but no matter what the banks do in their business practices you the home owner still agreed to pay back X amount of dollars. You the home owner agreed to that loan by signing a contract. By signing that contract you give your word that you will make those payments each month and pay back that loan. Your obligation to the bank has nothing to do with their shady business practices behind close doors. You are the one signing that contract. If you do not want to do business with the bank then do not. No one forces you to sign that contract but once you do sign it you are obligated to the terms of that contract. When the bank forecloses on your home there is no one to blame except yourself.
Once you sign that contract you are obligated to the terms of that contract. Same as when you bid on a gun on GB and win that bid. You are obligated to that purchase. If you can't pay for the gun do not bid on it. If you cannot pay those mortgage payments each month do not buy that big house. Not rocket science here. If an old farmer like myself can figure this out anyone can.
quote:Originally posted by skicat
quote:Originally posted by BoltactionMan
Well, I'm a banker. Why don't you explain to me how it is my fault that someone loses their home?
Explain to me how I stole anything from anybody.
Explain to me why someone should be allowed to strip a house to the studs, so that I would lose money. Not MY money, but my depositors money.
Yes, this all sucks. People lose jobs, get sick or injured. People die or get divorced, all reasons to cause financial hardship and loss of property.
But again, how is that MY fault.
By the way, there isn't a hell of a lot of profit in foreclosed properties these days. If there was profit, I imagine the individuals would have sold their homes and pocketed the profit rather than face the misery of a foreclosure and eviction.
KC
First off Boltactionman nobody accused you directly of anything. If you watched the video and still saw nothing wrong with the way that deal was structured then nothing I say will be of help to you.
The "bankers at fault" are not your neighborhood lenders per se although they help propagate the lie that the bank is actually "lending something". If you cannot see the closed loop between the bankers at the Goldman sucks level and the policy makers which not only makes it impossible for these scammers to lose money but guarantees them an obscene profit at the taxpayers expense.
If you are a banker then you know the basic deception built into the fractional reserve banking system is based on the bank actually bringing nothing real to the party.
Sure the way the banks do business is a scam but no matter what the banks do in their business practices you the home owner still agreed to pay back X amount of dollars. You the home owner agreed to that loan by signing a contract. By signing that contract you give your word that you will make those payments each month and pay back that loan. Your obligation to the bank has nothing to do with their shady business practices behind close doors. You are the one signing that contract. If you do not want to do business with the bank then do not. No one forces you to sign that contract but once you do sign it you are obligated to the terms of that contract. When the bank forecloses on your home there is no one to blame except yourself.
Once you sign that contract you are obligated to the terms of that contract. Same as when you bid on a gun on GB and win that bid. You are obligated to that purchase. If you can't pay for the gun do not bid on it. If you cannot pay those mortgage payments each month do not buy that big house. Not rocket science here. If an old farmer like myself can figure this out anyone can.
You are missing the point of the argument. I don't believe anyone here is advocating abandoning your contractual obligations. As men of honor we are bound to uphold our promises.
What we are addressing here is an abuse of the banking system which only continues because people are too stupid or lazy to object. Pathetic! At the level this fraud is being perpetrated the small community banks are often as much victim as the taxpayers. They take the hit as well while the uber bankers are running a sideshow carny scam which is impossible to lose.
In time, most people figure out that the midway games at the carnival are rigged. Make those same people walk into a building with a fancy stone facade and marble floor and they immediately surrender half their brain cells and all of their options.
The average American might not be the brightest, but all the BS small print legalese ain't "See Spot Run".
bleening neo-capitalist parasites ARE the dirty problem...
Then everything you take with you was not given to you by the bank. Joe
Interesting...there are 2 different problems being addressed in this thread. One concerns recognizing graft by the re-purchased bank and the other highlights poor financial understanding by the borrower. The OP seems to want to discuss the obscene profit realized by the current arrangement depicted in the example.
While I don't condone crooks.....
The people signed the contracts. They were willing participants in the scam. Without the WILLING partticipants, there could be NO scam.
These morons thought they were getting something for nothing, thought THEY were going to benefit big. Common sense and reason never kicked in for them. They bought into something they could not afford.
So while I blame the politicians for creating the mess, I blame the borrowers more. THEY set this in motion.
If you don't like it don't borrow the money.
Everyone in forclosure should strip the house down to the studs rather than let the damn bankers steal it out from under them and make a profit on it. I have more respect for dog poop than I do bankers.
So you borrow money and you can't pay it back, it's the guy who loaned it to you's fault? That's not the dumbest thing I ever heard but it's close.
Please explain how a banker is going to make a profit by foreclosing on a house that is worth less than the amount owed.
If you destroy someone's property, because of your own screwup, you should go to jail.
quote:Originally posted by wittynbear
Everyone in forclosure should strip the house down to the studs rather than let the damn bankers steal it out from under them and make a profit on it. I have more respect for dog poop than I do bankers.
So you borrow money and you can't pay it back, it's the guy who loaned it to you's fault? That's not the dumbest thing I ever heard but it's close.
Please explain how a banker is going to make a profit by foreclosing on a house that is worth less than the amount owed.
If you destroy someone's property, because of your own screwup, you should go to jail.
You didn't watch the original poster's video did you? Nothing of value was ever lost by the bank. They reap pure profit either way. If that doesn't make sense to you then read up on how fractional reserve banking actually works.
This is part of the paln to have us begging the government for help which they will do, at a price. the price will be our country as we know it.
TOP DOWN, Bottom up and inside out. Don't forget!
If they don't pay for the house it should be foreclosed on. If the bank can't sell it for enough to make up for the original loan value the foreclosed owner should be on the hook.
If you don't like it don't borrow the money.
pretty much. the rules heavily favor the banks, but they arent a secret. if you get in bed with the bank, you have realize that getting porked is at least a possibility...
how about banks appraising a 150,000.00 house at 500,000.00 and making a 250,000.00 loan on the house making it look like it has 50% equity to a person who could'nt make payments on a 50,000 house....then the bank getting bailed out by the tax payers
I agree with Stallone's character regarding bankers [:D]
side note: one of the bankers totally looks like Dick Cheney, and the guy who played mobster "Vendetti" looks a bit like Rahm Emmanuel
First of all, thank you for not putting me on the hook personally.
Second of all, those two idiots in that video couldn't think their way of of a wet paper bag. What they have done is take parts of a deal, put them together, without any proof and spouted it on the web.
Did One West buys those assets, no doubt. Did they pay less than book? Obviously. Do they have a guarantee from the FDIC on some of those assets, they sure do. Did they make $200 grand on that sale, not a chance in HELL. I deal with the FDIC every year, you might get ahead on those assets purchases, but you're gonna earn every penny.
Just remember, the D in FDIC stands for D!#k.
KC
If they don't pay for the house it should be foreclosed on. If the bank can't sell it for enough to make up for the original loan value the foreclosed owner should be on the hook.
If you don't like it don't borrow the money.
Depends on which State you live in. Some states have 'sufficiency' laws that permit the loan holder to go after the borrower for the amount difference between the loan and the value of the seized property. Other states only allow the loan holder to retreive their security, which is the property.