Bank of America begged me to not to close my accounts - want to help?

Originally posted by seamus
reply to post by Tripnman

 

It's more than 10:1, because a lot of that money loaned ends up being deposited back in the bank as CASH. Which can then be loaned upon AGAIN at a 10:1 ratio. Ad nauseam!

Think about this for a moment: I take out a 30 year mortgage for a new house after I put down an initial deposit to the builder. I sign the promissory note, get my check and give it to the builder. The builder then cashes his check or most likely deposits the amount in his bank account.

This means the bank gave up a huge sum of money to the builder and has to wait 30 years for me to make all my payments in full to collect the principle plus interest. Sure the bank makes anywhere between 100 to 150 percent return on its initial investment but 30 years is a long time.

If the bank has to wait that long to collect, it means it DOES NOT have the money IT GAVE to the builder.

I criticise banks only when appropriate. Everything else is fantastical nonsense! Banks are greedy in the ways I mentioned above such as excessive fees and a 10:1 lending to cash ratio.

Credit unions seem to be a good alternative for non cash payments and other transactions where we need a bank.

Credit unions have some kind of alliance, so they can take and transfer deposits for a different credit union for free to the customer. I think you can also use any CU's ATM to withdraw money with no added fee.

They are also FDIC guaranteed.

My only concern if they are really interconnected with the big banks, too? I mean do they keep their assets at big banks? Maybe someone here have insider info on that?

Originally posted by Ben81
Imagine for the very rich people with a lot of money
Begging is the first step from the bankster to avoid loosing a good client
Giving expensive gift removing fees etc ..is the second step
but now they cant afford to do that anymore .. wonder why

Now they will loose everyone .. gov will no more bailout their a$$

The fifth november take your money back interest me
first time i hear about it .. no thread ?
you should do one

anyone though about what will happen if a lot of people remove their fortune from BOA ?
im not a big expert with the bank stuff

Thank you for sharing your story
you made the good choice
hope many will follow you
S&F

edit on 10/19/2011 by Ben81 because: (no reason given)

They are allowed to lend out all the money they want out of thin air up to 10% of cash holdings. Take enough out and it drops below the 10% requirement then they must come up with that money. I think this is how it works

reply to post by getreadyalready


You never paid attention to Jerry Lewis during his telethons did you?
You ask "What if those people don't have anything significant to withdraw? I don't think a bank would notice if I moved my $15 or $20 average balance"
Every one of those nickles and dimes add up bro.
Nobody hardly ever died from a stab wound in a knife fight, it is the blood loss from several shallow cuts that gets them!

Originally posted by lazydaisy67
reply to post by Tripnman

 

Finally after 6 months of that we got a letter saying, essentially, "sorry, you have an over days past due payment on your mortgage account, so you don't qualify for refinancing". Seriously? After 6 months of pushing paperwork you just now figured that out? On top of that they charged us $100 for the paperwork processing and have gone as far as to threaten us on the phone with foreclosure if we don't send it along with our house payment. Um, no. I'm not sending it. Screw them!

What happens to people like us if B of A "crashes"? What happens to our mortgage? Do they foreclose on loans like in the 1930's or what?

First question, can Bank of America produce the original loan? If not, you may get into the quagmire that others have gotten into with Bank of America and others that lost the original loan in one way or another. If they can't produce the original loan, then you may not have a mortgage and your home free and clear. Do not accept a copy, demand the original. Google it.

Second if they can produce the original, just because BoA denied you does not mean someone else will. Try other places. The only thing you need to think about and ask is if that place is going to sell it right back to BoA. Mine is with PA Housing Authority, so I don't have to worry about that.

Remember to get a fixed rate, and not an adjustable rate. You are dead in the water with an adjustable rate. Fortunately most know this on ATS, unfortunately there are still many that don't. Keep looking for ways to get out from under BoA.

I'm not sure what will happen to the loan if BoA defaults. If they do, stay in your house and demand the original mortgage. I have a feeling that BoA has lost many original mortgages, and people demanding to see them will increase. It will be a big mess. I can see many lawsuits against them. If this does happen, maybe some lawyers will work pro-bono just to be able to say they sunk their teeth into BoA.

Good luck.

guys i just wanna ask, what about other banks lol see im in UK so BoA isn't much use to me, although i am with Halifax/Bank of Scotland, i would love to follow the same.

reply to post by TreadUpon

Someone sent me a post on my utube mail, a month or so ago. I had a linked article with BoA and the Mexican 'bohemian coven' division, Owl and all...
Wished I had saved it to be able to re read and give the whole thing. But the gist was, it was in their news papers that their corporate government (as corrupt as ours) had struck a deal with Bank of America. I remember they were transferring money in gold to BoA, the guy sent me picks of the trucks loading, and lol..they had stamped the gold with the owl logo!! In your face there, huh?
And in return BoA had agreed to certain banking privileges for Mexico and its citizens in the US.

Wishing I had paid more attention now. But if that was true, it would explain the 'free housing' and considering the money system here is no longer legal tender, but based (now by exec order) on 'human capital'...I can see why BoA would want their gold!

reply to post by Mystery_Lady

It is called the 'Wet ink' copy.
And you request in writing to view the wet ink copy at a meeting with them, select a place..their office or yours..and bring your lawyer and a forensic document expert. If the doc isn't the original wet ink then..I believe what the article said..was you have your lawyer claim it null and void. No orig. doc with your signature means there is no contract. Unless you specifically state in front of witnesses there that you did take out that loan, it is legal.

What they had found up north, is that the banks had copied these doc's. The original was supposed to be in blue ink. When they copied them, and a drop of water went on the sig. it formed a smear from the copy toner.
Apparently the forensics doc guy, has a set and proven method of saying 'this is signed' and 'this is copied' and apparently it is well known science and stands up in court.

Originally posted by circuitsports
fail post on all accounts - banks have always tried to stop you from closing accounts and if you are asking for large amounts of cash there is always some concerns as they have reporting to do. I feel like the OP just needs a pat on the back.

I think either people on ATS already are or arent going to follow your lead spend your efforts discussing with everyone else.

That is not acurate at all, I've threatened banks before that I'll close my account due to the way they have treated me as a customer, and not once have they cared to try and talk me out of it, same goes for my telecom company. These organisations care less and less because they think you need them, but they will soon learn.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by seamus
reply to post by Tripnman

 

Think about this for a moment: I take out a 30 year mortgage for a new house after I put down an initial deposit to the builder. I sign the promissory note, get my check and give it to the builder. The builder then cashes his check or most likely deposits the amount in his bank account.

This means the bank gave up a huge sum of money to the builder and has to wait 30 years for me to make all my payments in full to collect the principle plus interest. Sure the bank makes anywhere between 100 to 150 percent return on its initial investment but 30 years is a long time.

If the bank has to wait that long to collect, it means it DOES NOT have the money IT GAVE to the builder.

I criticise banks only when appropriate. Everything else is fantastical nonsense! Banks are greedy in the ways I mentioned above such as excessive fees and a 10:1 lending to cash ratio.

Actually, the bank most likely sold your mortgage already to investors. They already have their money back and then some.

This is what a lot of people don't understand. The banks make mortgage loans, then pools these loans as mortgage backed securities and sells them to Wall Street.

Then they retain the "servicing rights". This means that they will still collect the "monthly payment" for the investor, skim off the "service fees" for themselves and send the rest of the money on to the investor.

So the bank makes money by selling the loan to investors.
They make money again in servicing fees from the investors.
They make money again in "foreclosure" fees (that's why they love to foreclose)

The next explosion will be the "Investors" suing the banks for not disclosing what crappy loans they were. This is already happening.

PBGC Sue Morgan Stanley Over Risky Mortgage Back Securities

And if you don't know where your pension investments are, I highly suggest you find out. Because most of the investors of these mortgage back securities are "pension" funds.

But it gets even better....
The pensions invested in these because they were told they were AAA rated investements, when the banks knew darn well they weren't. But "bought off" the rating firms like Moody's & S &P to give them the ratings anyway.

Here are some internal emails that came out in the US Senate Investigation dated April 22, 2010.

PLEASE NOTE THAT THESE EMAILS ARE FROM 2005-2007.

#5 - ...if we didn’t have to massage the sub-prime and Alt-A numbers to preserve market share

#25 ...I would like to discuss how we plan on ultimately “spinning” our revised correlation assumptions

#27 ...Let’s hope we are all wealthy and retired by the time this house of cards falters.

).

#40 ...Seasoning benefit in Alt-A model is fully functional now (...maybe this is more like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic ....).

#41 ... This is depressing. “In our skewed sample of 111 mezzanine ABS CDOs, collateral losses extend into senior AAA tranches. We predict that 10% of senior AAA tranches we examined will default. Overall, the expected loss of senior AAA tranches is 1%. For BBB tranches, 55% will default and expected losses are 65%. This is horrible from a ratings and risk management point of view; perhaps the biggest credit risk management failure ever.”

#46 ...Nightmare Mortgages (This is frightening. It wreaks of greed, unregulated brokers, and “not so prudent” lenders.).

AND THE BEST FOR LAST:

#64 ..Standard & Poor’s internal email, dated November 2005, re: Disclaimers - Help (Lord help our f**king scam ....).

Read it and weep.

Wall Street Journal The Role Of Credit Rating Agencies PDF

(And tell me when do the rating agencies get sued? Oh, ya we haven't got that far yet.)

This is what occupy wall street is all about.

*The Banks made crappy loans
*Sold crappy loans to investors (many of which were fraudulent loans - bank fraud not consumer fraud)
*Tanked the housing market as a result
*Tanked the economy as a result

Because of all this is why people have lost their jobs and now are losing their homes.

If you're interested in learning more, read my thread:
Predatory Lending is THE Cause For Systemic Mortgage Foreclosures

Yeah they are scared of what is happening all over the world... The people are finally waking up! check out this awesome video the original was uploaded 1 week ago and already has 37,000 views! It was great! But the remastered version is even better! check it out!



Original:

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by seamus
reply to post by Tripnman

 

It's more than 10:1, because a lot of that money loaned ends up being deposited back in the bank as CASH. Which can then be loaned upon AGAIN at a 10:1 ratio. Ad nauseam!

Think about this for a moment: I take out a 30 year mortgage for a new house after I put down an initial deposit to the builder. I sign the promissory note, get my check and give it to the builder. The builder then cashes his check or most likely deposits the amount in his bank account.

This means the bank gave up a huge sum of money to the builder and has to wait 30 years for me to make all my payments in full to collect the principle plus interest. Sure the bank makes anywhere between 100 to 150 percent return on its initial investment but 30 years is a long time.

If the bank has to wait that long to collect, it means it DOES NOT have the money IT GAVE to the builder.

I criticise banks only when appropriate. Everything else is fantastical nonsense! Banks are greedy in the ways I mentioned above such as excessive fees and a 10:1 lending to cash ratio.

The bank didn't give up any huge sum to anyone -- they shuffled some digits around on a computer. You gotta watch this presentation by Mike Maloney: Debt Collapse. He has a way to explain these things to Joe Sixpacks like you and me -- incl. how money is created and how loans are made, etc. He says we're basically all living in a dream world, and it only works because we all consented to sharing the same dream. Money is a fantasy; it doesn't exist; it only becomes real once YOU come into play and the money comes to represent your own blood, sweat and tears you expended to get it. Very eye-opening lecture.

Originally posted by jlafleur02

Originally posted by Ben81
Imagine for the very rich people with a lot of money
Begging is the first step from the bankster to avoid loosing a good client
Giving expensive gift removing fees etc ..is the second step
but now they cant afford to do that anymore .. wonder why

Now they will loose everyone .. gov will no more bailout their a$$

The fifth november take your money back interest me
first time i hear about it .. no thread ?
you should do one

anyone though about what will happen if a lot of people remove their fortune from BOA ?
im not a big expert with the bank stuff

Thank you for sharing your story
you made the good choice
hope many will follow you
S&F

edit on 10/19/2011 by Ben81 because: (no reason given)

They are allowed to lend out all the money they want out of thin air up to 10% of cash holdings. Take enough out and it drops below the 10% requirement then they must come up with that money. I think this is how it works

No, they can lend out 10 times MORE than they have in deposits. I.e., if someone deposits $100, they can lend out $1,000 to the next person. That's the beauty of "fractional reserve" banking; you only need a fraction of what you lend out on deposit.

Oh boy, I see lack of information among the youth, let me clear some things up for you:

THERE IS NO RESERVE requirement for a savings account. They must keep reserves on checking accounts only. Have you ever noticed bank employees bugging you about savings accounts? That's because when a bank gets a saving deposit - it can loan it in entirety - meaning the money may come back again many times over. It enables the money creation mechanism, and that's what banks crave for. It's difficult to say how much of reserve is out there - some banks have more saving deposits and some have less.

It also bothers me a little that most of you think you are safe in your local Credit Union.
What makes you think so?

You have a whole separate forum for the topic and yet you seem to be completely clueless while talking about moving your paper money from here to there. This is probably my third post on the forum since 2007 - so try to appreciate what I am gonna give you here. Take your time and think about consequences of money printing:
research.stlouisfed.org...
research.stlouisfed.org...
You think there is no inflation? See this:
market-ticker.org...
Bank of America has 1000 billion dollars in deposits. Think about this for a minute. They lost a lot of money. This amount is not recoverable without printing. Seizure of BAC equals a lot of printing. What do you think will happen with value of our currency?

Bank of America has a portfolio of derivatives which was just divided and the bigger 54T part landed right there where your money is. The 2005 Bankruptcy bill put derivative counter parties at the front of the line ahead of other creditors in bankruptcy proceedings. This means when BAC decides to shut down or FDIC decides to take over - the deficiency in funds will have to be covered externally and paid to derivative counter parties before you.
Most of it will probably go overseas right away due to currency exchange risks.

Now try to imagine a few thousand billion dollars deficiency if some of these derivatives go wrong way.
I am just giving you an example - a pure fictional number that can go wrong with the 54T portfolio. Say 3T.
You don't like the number? How about 5T dollars deficit? Improbable?
Do you know that the bank with biggest exposure to derivatives isn't even in the US? No?
OK. It is French BNP. So even if everything goes right with the 54T BAC portfolio - it may be a French counter party failure to trigger huge loses on that 54T portfolio. This way or the other - the day is coming when those derivatives destroy banking system as we know it. But what can the government do?
Well, currently they are restricted to three avenues:

1) They can ignore the 54T transfer and REMOVE the FDIC guarantee - which will force immediate collapse of BAC.
2) They can take over BAC and PRINT THE MONEY.
3) They can wait for BAC to collapse on it's own and the GOTO #2 and print even more money.
As you probably noticed options 2 and 3 are quite damaging to our mighty dollar. If you are a current customer keeping money with BAC - there are your options - you can risk #1 and lose ALL YOUR MONEY. If you keep the money there until there is a substantial movement in derivatives caused by either Greece or France, Spain, Italy - you name it - you are risking getting locked out from your account - then the government prints say 4T dollars and then dollar tanks 50% overnight and you lose 50%. The only reason nobody allowed any bank to collapse in Europe is because of the consequences of a domino effect on those derivative portfolios. Your deposits almost don't matter. It's those derivatives. The folks in DC are also panicked because China doesn't want to buy more treasuries and they stopped growing their reserves recently. No money is coming to the rescue. It's only you, your bank and the printing press. So no - your money is not safe with Credit Union. It's not safe with Chase either. And no - it doesn't mean you should buy gold or silver - because in the beginning of this crisis they will probably both go down. Hopefully gold won't lose 50% of its value. Anyway - knowing all that - and understanding you may lose some cash buying precious metals - when you cautiously decide to put some of your savings into physical silver or gold - here are some links to good places:

www.tulving.com...
caminocompany.com...
gsm.goldenstatemint.com...
www.gainesvillecoins.com...
online.kitco.com...
www.monex.com...
www.monex.com...

Originally posted by Willbert
What you did, you did for yourself. I'm not disillusioned to think believe you care about me or others who use that bank. You made your move to protect your assists and nothing more. Suggesting otherwise is just bordering on looking for attention. Asking me or others to cater to you for free on what to say to individuals who you are displeased with isn't my concern.

no star/flag.

Thus Willbert writes, from Toronto, Canada, where there is not even a 10% fractional reserve law.

That's right, Canadian banks can lend 100% Air Money!!! And the courts there are even more complicit than here in the states. My ex-brother in law lost his home, due to judges blocking his (witnessed and notarized) administrative process.

Also, Willbert seems a little overly pleased with himself for sussing out that humans work on self-preservation.

reply to post by Tripnman


thugs

Originally posted by usernameconspiracy
reply to post by Tripnman

 

And with that, you did more than 1,000 protesters will ever do sitting around in a park, carrying an ambiguous sign to effect change.

Why not do both?

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by usernameconspiracy

 

I totally agree with moving the money, no matter how little, and also on educating friends and family to do the same thing. The protest is kind of an extension of that education isn't it? Once you have moved your money, and all of your friends and family's money, why not go downtown and hold a sign to educate strangers?

Protesting Funerals is an odd thing. I ride with the Patriot Guard Riders from time to time, and I despise those WBC folks, and anyone else that would pick on a grieving family. BUT, I don't want to see the government take away their right to do so. I would like to see local law enforcement turn a blind eye when "natural consequences" happen.

Protest the funeral, take your beat down like a man, and move on. No need for government involvement, we can work this out amongst ourselves.

I like your thinking,

reply to post by Julie Washington


I do not disagree with what you are saying because I already knew that. The point I have been trying to make is that banks loan 90% of their deposits out, NOT 900% as some idiots suggest! You DON'T loan out 9 times what you already have. Is this clear yet?

Read the thread and see how many people suggest this. I think we need to dispel such ignorant tripe because misinformation can spread to plague-like porporions. Other than this, YES I do agree with what you are saying and I have spoken about that MANY TIMES with hardely any recognition, just lots of scorn from tea party-republican supporters.

OWS is all about exposing the corruption. We don't need to dramatise anything!

Originally posted by sylvie

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by seamus
reply to post by Tripnman

 

It's more than 10:1, because a lot of that money loaned ends up being deposited back in the bank as CASH. Which can then be loaned upon AGAIN at a 10:1 ratio. Ad nauseam!

Think about this for a moment: I take out a 30 year mortgage for a new house after I put down an initial deposit to the builder. I sign the promissory note, get my check and give it to the builder. The builder then cashes his check or most likely deposits the amount in his bank account.

This means the bank gave up a huge sum of money to the builder and has to wait 30 years for me to make all my payments in full to collect the principle plus interest. Sure the bank makes anywhere between 100 to 150 percent return on its initial investment but 30 years is a long time.

If the bank has to wait that long to collect, it means it DOES NOT have the money IT GAVE to the builder.

I criticise banks only when appropriate. Everything else is fantastical nonsense! Banks are greedy in the ways I mentioned above such as excessive fees and a 10:1 lending to cash ratio.

The bank didn't give up any huge sum to anyone -- they shuffled some digits around on a computer. You gotta watch this presentation by Mike Maloney: Debt Collapse. He has a way to explain these things to Joe Sixpacks like you and me -- incl. how money is created and how loans are made, etc. He says we're basically all living in a dream world, and it only works because we all consented to sharing the same dream. Money is a fantasy; it doesn't exist; it only becomes real once YOU come into play and the money comes to represent your own blood, sweat and tears you expended to get it. Very eye-opening lecture.

Classic example of someone repeating misinformation to create more hatred than needed.

And yes the money is out of thin air. Actually its goodwill papper that is issued by the Federal Reserve, printed and endorsed by the government and then recognised by the people as legal tender. Tomorrow the government may change its mind and substitute federal reserve notes for warner brothers monopoly money and if everyone agreed then that would become legal tender.

It is NOT rocket science! The real crime that comes into play is that all central banks that I am aware of are PRIVATE rather than public. But in a capitalist society one should expect that EVERYTHING IS PRIVATE!

If we had real socialism, nothing like europe or the ex-soviet union, then central banking would be PUBLIC! Read some goddamm marxist literature. It all comes down to who owns the *means of production*.

Too many people relly on raul paul for their information thinking he is some "hero". He is not! All he does is controlled opposition. If he was real opposition and given the notoriety he has, he would be DEAD like jfk and abraham lincoln.