BOMBSHELL: Mass. Supreme Court Rules That Most Foreclosure Sales From Previous 5 Years Are VOID

reply to post by Aim64C


Aw, the ole blame the victim scheme. Not everyone who is raped or robbed was foolishly wandering down a dark alley. This is just another ridiculous argument on your part. Just the same, not everyone who was scammed did anything wrong, except expect the business they were dealing with to fulfill their end of the contract.

This is why you fail to grasp that this mess was not created by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, but by the bond raters who falsely rated bad loans as good investments.

If you act stupid and allow people to take advantage of you (in legal or illegal ways) - there's no amount of regulation on the face of the planet that -can- protect you.

You keep making this claim, as if that makes fraud alright, which displays a completely lack of morality.

If some dumb girl walks down a dark alley and gets raped, do you think we shouldn't put the rapists in jail?

If not, why do you think when some rube gets scammed by some con artist, we shouldn't put the con artist in jail?

Why shouldn't you get your full investment back when you were scammed, and money in compensation as well?

What you don't get, is that when these fraudulent crimes are allowed to be perpetrated, even all of us who did not get pulled into the scam, wind up paying for it.

You want to let the criminals walk away, and blame the victims, and that is total nonsense.

And your final argument is that because investigating fraud is difficult, it shouldn't be done. The final argument of the slave, we can't do anything about our situation.

Good thing the founders of the U.S. didn't think like you.

Originally posted by watcher3339
That's huge. It is also a testament to the fact that our country, for all its problems, is not actually broken. We have a system in place to address grievances. It can be slow. It can be better. But it beats anarchy hands down.

This is the way to punish the crooks.
Nobody is above the law.

anarchy is what just happened.

The people got shafted then the people stood up to the banks and thier theft.

reply to post by Aim64C

The thing is - what happened had nothing to do with the regulations that were changed. Point out to me, please, what regulations were changed and how those led to the current issue at hand.

You really should do some research before getting into a discussion on this sort of thing. This info is easily available with a google search, including right wingers like yourself trying to blame Clinton for Gingriches plan.

en.wikipedia.org...

You keep ignoring the fact that the securities bought by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were FALSELY rated as good investment, allowing the GW admin, who you probably helped vote into office, to pretend they were good investments. You continue to cling to denial.

You can chicken and egg the whole government/economy relationship all you want, it doesn't change the reality that without good governance, the economy does not prosper.

reply to post by poet1b


That's the main thing: people who were not involved in bad investments or financial practices were the ones who got burned the worst. The failure of institutions like Fannie Mae didn't just harm the people who had invested money or were tied to it. It sent forth a domino effect that took out or severely harmed alot of other financial and corporate institutions, and severely harmed alot of economies beyond the US. Peoples jobs were lost, retirements lost, ect. The individual can only make descisions and have control over their financial situations to a certain extent, they have no control over national and international financial laws, regs, trends, and tides.

I do believe the sub-prime lending was the biggest culprit and catalyst for the global economic meltdown, and as far as I am concerned, what was most criminal was that these lending practices, then selling off the bad debt, was permitted by everyone across borders and markets. Over here in Europe, many banks collapsed or faltered, govornments are getting bailed out, all from the domino effect of the sub prime lending and selling.

It is too late now to stop it, but I believe that for the future, such practices should be banned, and offenders severely punished. Because such practices were clearly risky and dangerous, not only to investors, but national economy. They created a hyperinflated ghost market and illusion of prosperity, but the writing was on the wall.

A house of cards is a neat trick for kids parties and magic shows, but is an epic fail as a basis for political or economic drive. You need solid foundations and concrete limits in some areas, with less regulation and more stimulation for growth in other areas. Not illusions, smoke and mirrors.

Gold has passed the tests of all economic systems throughout time. I honestly do not see why it is no longer used.

reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


For seventy years, banking regulations kept this kind of con from happening. Then Gingrich got his dereg plan passed, and Clinton foolishly signed it, and the U.S. economy was destroyed once again the way it was destroyed by bad business practices in the twenties.

We had these problems fixed, now we need to put those fixes back in place.

Originally posted by LrBc1275
reply to post by JohnPhoenix

 

I myself own a home that was foreclosed in MA. If you have title insurance, you should be, again SHOULD be somewhat worry free. If you notice on your covered risks, one of which is "protection from a defective title" A defective title is an invalid title because a claimed prior holder of the title did not have title, or there is an inaccurate description of the property, or some other "cloud" over it, which may or may not be learned from reading the deed.
This is also not ALL foreclosures being void, simply the ones that were done via "robo-signing"
Which is still a large number of foreclosures, but nowhere close to being "all". Worst case scenario is that the property will go into reforclosure, and people will then have to re-bid on property. Again that is worst case scenario
If you notice in the Bevelaqua case, he did not have title. insurance and is now suffering dearly.
Bottom line, it is worth the few hundred $$ to have an attorney review the title and purchase title insurance. Also, if you dont see a quitclaim deed from the previous owner to the bank...something stinks!!

From Massachusetts Real Estate Law Blog FULL ARTICLE

Title insurance companies who have insured Ibanez afflicted titles have been steadily resolving these titles since the original Ibanez decision in 2009. I’m not sure how many defective foreclosure titles remain out there right now. There certainly could be a fair amount lurking in titles unknown to those purchasers who bought REO properties from U.S. Bank, Deutsche Bank, etc. If you bought such a property, I recommend you have an attorney check the back title and find your owner’s title insurance policy. Those without title insurance, of course, have and will continue to bear the brunt of this mess.

edit on 22-10-2011 by LrBc1275 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-10-2011 by LrBc1275 because: (no reason given)

UPDATE:
Just met with an attorney to make sure that I am safe with my asset. Therefore if anyone else out there is from MA and currently owns a home that was foreclosed, here is what I was advised.
1) If you do own one of these homes and have title insurance, you are safe. If a title search is conducted and the attorney (or whomever) deems it to be a "good title" the purchasing of title insurance DOES cover a defective title in the event that someone signed or did not sign without authorization.
2) In MA (not sure about other areas of the US), there are 2 types of foreclosers:
* Foreclosure By Entry- Bank assumes physical control of property and holds an auction
* Foreclosure By Deed - Bank merely conducts a paper trail on the property ***THIS IS THE ONE YOU MUST BE CAREFUL OF**

Also, a foreclosure by entry cannot be contested after 3 years of original foreclosure date.

This is not going to be the "bombshell" originally presumed. This is going to be very painful for a handful of people who do not have title insurance, and the end result will most likely be changing of laws for the future.

Foreclosure is a very touchy subject, but the bottom line is that if you cannot afford your mortgage than you cannot afford your mortgage. Believe me, I will be the FIRST one to bash these crooked banks, but just because these scum did not cross their "T's" and dot their "i's" does not make them the martyr for people who couldn't pay their bills in the first place.

Defective titles are considered VOID regardless of the Bevilacqua decision because they are still illegal. But here is the rub, if no one looks into it, then it goes unnoticed. Its kind of like if you speed on the highway and you dont get pulled over, you still did it, but no one was there to give you the ticket."IF A TREE FALLS AND THERES NOBODY THERE, DOES IT MAKE A NOISE?

It's not the government's job to secure the value of your stock or ethics of business. It is the responsibility of share holders to make aggregate decisions regarding the future of the company and keep an eye on the people appointed to the management positions within it.

reply to post by Aim64C


I agree the government has no vestige in you making money or not, however the "ethics of business" is a charter bullet item in the SEC. A public company that does not " represent itself correctly" in it's filings with the SEC is in violation with the law, pure and simple. This goes deep, because on paper, it may seem legiit, and it has to appear that way for the SEC not to get involved, however, behind the scenes, the minutia that develops this report may be full of micro violations that result in a fraudulent report. Believe me, I programmed a lot of the SEC Hoover applications that dove into the meat of these reports and what comes out of many companies is a complete smokescreen designed to make something appear what it is really not.

Manipulation is the key word. How much time and how much money will it take you to go deeper down the rabbit's hole? They (corporations) know this, and they passively implore such scrutiny but know it will never happen.
So, what we need is the constructs that do indeed scrutinize as such, and it would not cost that much if it was built into this very sophisticated system. Why it has not been?, well , you be the judge. Plausible deniability comes to mind, and that comes from the political and lobbyist part of the house, with the cooperation of a corruptible CEO/CFO that will substantiate it with rhetoric.

reply to post by charlyv


Nice post.

These fraudulent business practices of the International Corporate Bankers can be stopped, and the process cleaned up. The WW II generation did it with strong regulations and high taxes on the super rich back in the fifties and sixties, climbing out of the deepest debt our nation has ever owed, rebuilding our nations infrastructure, sending a man to the moon, and at the same time rebuilding the nations of our enemies in WW II, and fighting a couple of conflicts.

Why is it that the boomers have failed so badly?

reply to post by DavidsHope


The statement that the lawyers will profit most is wrong. I am a lawyer and I handle foreclosure defense cases in Florida. I associate with about 50 lawyers who handle foreclosure defense. We make about $75,000 a year. Our clients are poor - they either lost their jobs or had their wages cut and are losing their homes because they don't have money. Clients without money can't pay much to their lawyers. There are 5 big law firms in Florida that represent the banks. Those five big firms make millions of dollars for their owners - they generally don't share that with their employee lawyers. The big winners are always the banks. They are insured seven ways to Sunday and they win when they lose.

BIG NEWS!!!

Mass. sues major banks over unlawful foreclosure practices such as robosigning
www.orlandosentinel.com...

Massachusetts sued five major banks Thursday over deceptive foreclosure practices such as the "robo-signing" of documents, potentially undermining negotiations between lenders and state prosecutors across the nation over the same issue.

The lawsuit named Bank of America Corp., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells Fargo & Co., Citigroup Inc., and GMAC. It was filed in Massachusetts by Attorney General Martha Coakley.


"We have two clear goals with this lawsuit — one is to provide for real accountability for the role the banks have played in unlawful and illegal foreclosures, and secondly to provide for real and enforceable relief for the harm that the misconduct has caused," said Coakley in a press conference to announce the lawsuit.

The lawsuit also named Mortgage Electronic Registration System, Inc. and its parent company as defendants. The company, a mortgage registry database, has been accused of shoddy record-keeping in large numbers of foreclosure proceedings.

Please see my thread here regarding investigations into banks and foreclosures.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here is your BOMBSHELL

As of Feb 12, 2012 the class action law suit against MERS was brought on by several county registry of deeds offices to "recoup recording fees"
There you have it folks, monies illegally transferred by banks is going right back to the government....and will ultimately end up back in the banks hands."Thanks for comin' out"

SOURCE

Let's face it, the banks have managed to invalidate just about every mortgage in the USA. They legally should all be canceled. However that wouldn't be too fair to the banks and investors either. What I think is fair is to make them forfeit any future profits from these mortgages.

You do this by having the government buy every mortgage at 100% of principal. i.e. banks and investors get their money back .Government then turns around and refinances with the homeowner at 4% and removes up to 30% of negative equity. Over the term of the loans the government gets paid back all the money from the initial outlay so no taxpayer is going to be subsidizing this program. Those who did everything right and own their houses outright will benefit from a suddenly strengthened housing market. Homeowners get some flexibility and lower payments. Banks and Investors will have to invest in more productive endeavors in order to get their returns but get off the hook for their fraudulent dealings.

It is so simple that it should already be happening..