Was expecting an epic story about how you fought that ticket you got for rolling through a stop sign or whatever. Disappointing.
Hmm - seems like there should be an additional law suit. Putting them through all that and only having legal fees paid for?
Something is missing from this story. How would b of a even be involved at all if they paid cash for the house?
Not sure either but B of A is one of the most unorganized banks my wife has to deal with when working with short sales and foreclosures in the Orlando area.
all the major banks are filled with idiots on the mortgage servicing side. it's not where you put the top talent. btw if this article is true this would be the first documented case of a false foreclosure despite the media suggesting there are millions. I still don't understand why b of a would even have this guys information if they paid cash. they shouldn't have been involved at all. my guess is this reporter doesn't understand the situation.
If there are no false foreclosures, why did major banks settle on a lawsuit for false foreclosures to the tune of almost 100 million dollars?
first off $100 million is nothing. well worth getting rid of the feds. second, what they were accused of was blind signing the foreclosure without the manager individually looking at each case ("robosigning"). there were so many at one time the bank manager couldn't possibly research in depth every one, but that's against mortgage foreclosure law. they have yet to have found anyone who was foreclosed on improperly. why? because why would it get to the bank manager to foreclose on a properly if they were actually paying the loan? and what possible incentive could they have to do so?
I don't know, but it clearly was happening in this story. And there is an awful, awful lot of smoke where people challenge banks on it (with lawyers) and the bank just goes away.
the story makes no sense. how can b of a have the title if they paid cash? robosigning is illegal and that's how Obama got his pound of flesh from the evil bankers. I'm sure there were situations where people only did a technical default, but people paying their mortgage on time and still getting foreclosed on? never happened. even with technical defauls the number of plantiffs who have actually won in court are in the hundreds. it is in the best interest of the banks to not foreclose. they have to write down the loan and sell the property which takes time and money. they'd much rather not have to foreclose if they could. I don't for a second believe that the banks foreclosed on millions of people improperly given the fact this would cost them hundreds of billions in losses. every time a fund is set up to pay off the people unproperly foreclosed on no one makes a claim. why do you think that is?
You keep saying "never happened," when that is the claim, not evidence. Repeating "never happened" isn't really moving the ball forward. I also doubt this has happened millions of times. But once is too many, and it appears to have happened at least once.
this is the first news story I've seen and this all started what 6 years ago? surely if it was even in the tens of thousands we'd have seen stories like this all the time. this story just makes no sense. it's obvious the reporter doesn't understand the foreclosure practice either and simply took the attorney at his word. btw this is only article I can find on this too.
