world

Bank of America to resume seizing more than 100,000 homes

42 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

42 Comments
Login to comment

a wave of foreclosures that have depressed the housing market.

seems to me, it is actually spending beyond your limits and a failure to pay for something you entered into a contract to buy, along with good old fashion stupidity, that is depressing the housing market..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

11234 foreclosures in Chicago, IL as of today 10/18/10 and more to follow. This is a mind boggling data.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mmm...hereandthere has basically just called the entire American population stupid. Doesn't he know that all the USA's problems were caused by left-wing radicals forcing banks to lend to unqualified investors? Hehehe!!! Apparently the entire population was unqualified.

The USA's housing market is not "depressed", it is adjusting down to a rational level, after being intentionally and fraudulently pumped up by international racketeering groups known as "banks". The crime continues today, as two of the groups, or "gumi", known as the US government and the US Federal Reserve, hold a gun to the heads of the American and world economies demanding that they pay for the clean-up. This will allow the racketeers to keep all the money they paid themselves during the "good" times. Apparently, judging by the completely passive response by the sedated masses, the perfect crime.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This isn't the end of the story regarding delayed foreclosures. There will still be the issue of banks not having the proper paperwork because they used something called MERS(Mortgage Electronic Registration System)and simply discarded hard copies with signatures. Expect lawsuits from homeowners challenging the validity of the bank's claims. Also expect lawsuits against the banks from institutions that bought flawed mortgages and are seeking what's called a "putback", basically returning them to the bank.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

GJDailleult: all the USA's problems were caused by left-wing radicals forcing banks to lend to unqualified investors.

Wow, what a statement. GJ, where did that come from? If the government is responsible, it was a bipartisan effort. Both republicans and democrats alike rigged the rules in favor of too much lending. I'm with hereandthere on this one, no one forced anyone to take a loan that they could not repay. I'm not talking about honest folk who took a reasonable loan and then lost a job. But some of the loan amounts were way out there, like 10 times the annual salary where 3 used to be the norm.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I've never had any trouble with Bank of America, but maybe that's because I make my mortgage payments on time, and in the amount I agreed to make. I urge anybody who's having trouble with B of A to try this method.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tokorobam at 08:26 AM JST - 19th October. But some of the loan amounts were way out there, like 10 times the annual salary where 3 used to be the norm

This was not the only problem. Many of the 10 times the annual salary you mentioned was based on fudged and false numbers that was exaggerated was and not verified. The ususal norm for lending is 4 to 4-1/2 times the income. Also, the adjustable mortage that is considered a teaser rate at sometimes under 2 percent was for the first two-three years. After that, the banks would raise to 6.5 - 7.5 percent rate in which you have substantial increase in monthly obligations and could no longer afford. This led to many foreclosure.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

seems to me, it is actually spending beyond your limits and a failure to pay for something you entered into a contract to buy,

Ever thought about people actually losing their job and not being ABLE to pay, instead of only spending money on cars etc? Granted there are some people who spent (banks)money like water.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The American Dream: Free to get rich and free to get thrown out of your home.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What happened to the conservative-led small-government-frontier-spirit dream of being independant and picking yourself back up when you're down? The conservatives are only for small government when they're not crying out for Big Government, or some agency, or foreign taxpayers, or their senator or Peter Pan to save them. More self responsibility please. Wait! Isn't it situations like this that led the Obama administration to pass a massive bill to overhaul and tighten finance industry regulations so that banks couldn't continue screwing the taxpayer? Hang on...wasn't the GOP totally 100% opposed to this bill? Gosh, I think they were. So, besides the GOP and tea partiers having no idea whatsoever how to cut the deficit they were instrumental in creating, they also want hard-working American taxpayers who have their homes foreclosed on them to just drown in debt and poverty? Amazingly, there's some posters on JT who are hollering from the rafters to vote for the GOP.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

B of A should forgo profit for the next 3 years and write these debts off. That will teach future generations a useful lesson about thrift and meeting their obligations.....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"seems to me, it is actually spending beyond your limits and a failure to pay for something you entered into a contract to buy, along with good old fashion stupidity, that is depressing the housing market.."

Nonsense. The booming market only existed because cheap, easy access to money drove up demand. No credit, no demand, no market. Simple.

Without the legions of people trying to get into homes there would have been no market to crash. Banks and investment firms saw the opportunity to creative exotic loans with one thing in mind. "GREED" and set about enticing people to jump into homes, even if they could barely afford it.

Magazines, the media and everything backed up the wisdom of this behavior. And banks went as far as to say "Hey don't worry about that adjusting interest rate, you will be better off by then anyway." And people bought it.

When it fell apart the banks and other opportunists started pointing fingers at consumers.

The nation's propaganda drove that demand and did nothing about the obvious risks. You can blame consumers, but an equal if not greater share of that blame rests on those who empowered those purchases.

Now they will start to whine about why the market is saturated and prices are depressed. Until they sort out a new form of credit to lure in the next batch of over streched buyers to drive up demand and feed their insatiable greed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

hereandthere: "seems to me, it is actually spending beyond your limits and a failure to pay for something you entered into a contract to buy, along with good old fashion stupidity, that is depressing the housing market.."

Agreed that it seems pretty stupid to spend beyond your means, but the banks and card companies give out money so free and easily that it's quite simple to find yourself in debt. With no easy way to pay it back along with living expenses, and interest becoming sky-high once their campaigns wear off, people sometimes suddenly find themselves in debt. So what do the companies do? They give you another loan, or cashing options on the credit cards, to pay off other loans/cards. Of course they don't want you to declare bankruptcy, but they DO want to keep you in debt -- they make HEAPS of money that way.

Anyway, my point is just that it's not so easy to call people stupid. Those who are starting new families in particular tend to take out loans and/or use cards to buy new furniture and/or put a down payment on a house, get a car, what have you. Of course it would have been better had they saved for it, but I wouldn't call them stupid for it, as I'm quite sure they foresaw themselves being able to pay things back, but for whatever reason in the end could not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I really hope Mr. Obama can stop these blood sucking leaches like B of A! These bastards lent money to those they knew could not keep up with their mortgage payments, and not they are kicking these same people out on to the streets for Christmas? How heartless can anyone be! May Bank of America etc...ALL BURN IN HELL!!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I love reading the history rewrites on this. It just happened a few years ago. Noone has forgotten how things played out. The mania, the bubble, all the players and their roles.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@tokorobam - that was sarcasm, just trying to beat the banking apologists to the punch.

About the nobody was forced to take a loan they couldn't repay part. If you and others are financially responsible people then that is great, wish there were more people like you. And me. Except for foolishly running up the credit cards a few times, I have never been in any major debt. No mortgages, no car loans, no home entertainment centers on easy credit, and I fortunately got through university before education got sucked into the great wealth transfer machine. But if people think of this as a issue of the responsible vs. the irresponsible, then they are completely missing the point.

To get the point, people have to ask a simple question. What is a bank and what is its role in society? A bank is a seller of debt and allocator of capital. If that bank makes an excessive number of un-repayable loans (like in the apologist version of the banking crisis where they are victims of dishonest, greedy borrowers) then those bankers are incompetent and must go out of business and be replaced by competent banks and bankers. If the bank makes those un-repayable loans in order to run an accounting fraud (what really happened) which creates illusory short term profits which they can use to pay themselves huge salaries, then those bankers are criminals who must be sent to prison and their bank shut down. Those are basic, fundamental principles of capitalism (and have nothing to do with socialism, no matter how much the bankers scream that).

But if a country does what the USA did (and Japan in the 90's) and protects these incompetent / criminal banks by forcing the productive economy to rescue the speculative economy, they have abandoned capitalism and chosen economic suicide (that should be obvious to anybody reading a Japan related website). Why would they do that??? One, because the banks have over the years intentionally made themselves too complex to be shut down, and two, because they control the government and the politicians (obviously). Remember, one man's debt is another man's money, and if the debt can't be repaid then the money must die. And they want your money to die, not theirs.

The real tragedy though, when you read a headline about 100,000 families about to lose their homes is that is all so unnecessary. The solutions to the problems in the USA and other countries are quite simple. The details would be complex, but the concepts very simple. Unfortunately, if there were any attempts to implement these solutions, America would have another dead president (Democrat or Republican) like Kennedy, because the solution would mean the death of the international banking cartel and the myth that sovereign states must borrow money from banks to fund their operations.

Sorry about the length of the post, but you guys really are being sold down the river. It is really time to start fighting back, instead of fighting among yourselves and blaming each other.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The better question than "who is stupid enough to borrow more than they can pay back" is "who is stupid enough to lend to someone who borrows more than they can pay back."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

People being thrown out on the streets on Obama's watch two weeks before the democrats ask voters to keep them in power.

The hits just keep a comin'.

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

GJDailleut nailed it with the post above. Please read and re-read it! Seconded...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

GJDailleut. Good posts. But one point. Capitalism. Modern 21st century Capitalism is economic suicide.

Modern capitalism is not about the fundamentals you are talking about where I produce a good, you buy that good for a rational price and so on. Modern capitalism is about greed and it is no longer bound by the common sense of base trading of real definitive products and services. It is now largely fueled by financial products that do not represent anything at all. It is further driven entirely by greed and without the grounding of past common sense.

Capitalism is and will continue to falter and fail. It must be re-envisioned or replaced. The mad consumerism (housing included) is not sustainable. Cheap goods not sustainable. Energy, no longer sustainable. The planet and our resources are finite, the demand seemingly infinite. This cannot be balanced. It is destined, and always was destined, to fall in on itself.

If we are talking about 1870 capitalism for a man in Montana makes sense. But now, that system is incapable of working. Wealth is too concentrated and too much of wealth generation has nothing to do with primary concepts of capitalism.

Banks do indeed behave in irrational criminal ways. So too do governments, corporations and much of the economic system. At the center, suffering the consequences are working people and the ordinary legions of people world wide who neither benefit or gain from having such an economic system.

A new vision for future economics is required. A sustainable, rational system that shifts away from accumulation of wealth and towards broader distribution that empowers the world to resolve problems and create enviromentally viable systems of trade and labor that can secure the future of humanity.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A new vision for future economics is required. A sustainable, rational system that shifts away from accumulation of wealth and towards broader distribution that empowers the world to resolve problems and create enviromentally viable systems of trade and labor that can secure the future of humanity.

Disney World?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The real tragedy though, when you read a headline about 100,000 families about to lose their homes is that is all so unnecessary.

What makes you so sure it is 100 000 families? Town I am from had quite a few young singles and child-less couples who bought for 'investment.' Everybody has a friend or a relative or an old classmate who was 'flipping houses.'

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Many of these foreclosures have no title on paper = they are fraudulent foreclosures. You must also be very careful of buying a property with a questionable title.

This is going to be a big problem for a very long time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Tim I can always count on you to post something completely devoid of point.

Economic change has been the nature of human culture since it began. New forms of political and economic means have driven our development. It is only logical that when one system begins to fail and collapse, that humanity will devise a new system to take its place.

We have seen that modern Capitalism is falling apart. It needs to be revised and a more sustainable model implemented. One less subject to collapses brought on by unregulated greed as the housing issue so vividly demonstrated.

Now, do you have something to offer this discussion that has a point?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Everybody has a friend or a relative or an old classmate who was 'flipping houses.'" Tried it several times.. overall I failed

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@junnama- to answer your question, stupidity had nothing to with it. They knew the borrowers couldn't pay the money back and didn't care. It was what is called "control fraud", which is where those in control of what look like from the outside to be legitimate businesses use their position to engage in accounting fraud. The FBI had warned the US government that there was an epidemic of mortgage fraud in the housing market as early as 2004, and the government did nothing.

@tkoind2 - agree with you, my point is that what you call modern 21st century capitalism is not capitalism at all, just an Orwellian appropriation of the word. But the system is not in reality capitalism. In capitalism banks go BANKrupt, interest rates are not set by cental planning committees, and "capitalists" have a clue where their capital is and don't just hand it over to pension funds and mutual funds to invest in corporations that will screw up their lives. Just having those three things would eliminate many of the problems you are talking about.

So no, this system is not capitalism. But then I guess they can't go around calling it feudalism, people would get upset!

@Tim- guilty as charged. I had thought of that as I wrote but I was on a roll and thought "families" had more dramatic effect that "families and assorted real estate speculators and house flippers. I am sure you of all people will understand.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A lot of blame is out there to blame this crisis, buyers trying to buy houses that they couldn't afford, and bankers lending money knowing that there would be a day of reckoning. Blame can be shared by both.

What I find problems with is the fact that some people who did buy withing their means, made payments and played by the rules, but due to a downturn in the economy have lost their jobs. So now they fall behind, not becuase of their fault. I know you hear the common mantra "just reinvent yourself in the job market" well that is true to some point, but if 10% of the American workforce is "reinventing" themselves there won't be enough jobs to go around.

Consideration should be given for those who have been playing by the rules and lost their jobs. But for those who were just playing musical chairs with the housing market, well you just ran out of luck.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As far as I can see, only badsey and myself have commented on the subject of the article: The screwed up foreclosure process. Instead, you guys argue back and forth about the flaws and virtues of capitalism.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"We have seen that modern Capitalism is falling apart. It needs to be revised and a more sustainable model implemented. One less subject to collapses brought on by unregulated greed as the housing issue so vividly demonstrated."

Uh, no, Tkoind, we haven't seen capitalism fall apart. As the more astute here will agree, we don't have the pure laissez-faire capitalism idealistic inarticulate Lefties like yourself imagine you rail against. We haven't had it for decades. What we have, as Nobel Prize winner F A Hayek pointed out long ago, is 'interventionist chaos'. Both parties share the blame, as does the dreaming and scheming, financially semi-literate American public.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You left out the banks and the rating agencies in that list ;)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Extremism is causing these problems. The lenders are at fault for the current mortgage crisis not the borrowers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Seizing peoples houses should be illegal. Why aren`t hard working citizens getting assistance so they can get through this nonsense mortgage thing? The big companies got help. And it was the peoples cash they stole.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

When the global investment bank took all the cds being written by aig, etc and turned them into synthetic mortgage backed securities and sold them all across the world after gaming the rating agencies system... Was that also the fault of the semi/literate public or was that because we had too much govt regulation?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Housing should not normally considered an investment. Lots of people saw their neighbors/friends buy and sell houses and make money with the help of cheap financing.

People were buying houses which were beyond their means because they were betting the market would continue going up. That's not tenable. In the back of their minds, people would hope they "flipped" the properties before the financial rug was pulled from under them.

You can blame banks for being loose with their money --they indeed lent to people who could not afford a house --people who should have never been in the market. But people are idiots (optimists) and think that things are going to work out all right. I mean, look at Casinos --everyone knows that the house necessarily wins, yet there are more people than not who think they can win.

So, yes, some blame is at the feet of the banks (two and five percent down payment --what, are they on crack? But most of the blame lay at the feet of the consumer --those who overextended their finances and brought down the house of cards.

So, it's the individual debtors who are to blame. Now, in reality, this implosion had wide spread effect (i.e. it went on to affect people who were financially responsible) The market not only corrected, but in some overcorrected the market --with some exceptions.

Some people say, well, the gov't din't bail us out, why did gov'ts bail out banks? Really? Wow. Do you know what would have happened if that would have been allowed to happen? It would have affected people who did not gamble in the RE market --depositors. It would have been the Hayekian thing to do, but likely too severe for modern economies.

There was a time when buying meant having the cash or cash equivalent. Leveraging 5% (i.e 5% stake in what happens) is a great recipe for disaster and that was borne out.

So if you seek to blame or lay blame, blame the high leveragers who overextended. To a lesser extent the banks who pimped out their money.

Folk made their beds, now they must lie in them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You don't get it. The banks needed these risky loans to synthesize MBS. Who would bet against a safe loan. Why buy a CDS on a safe loan?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Rasmussen is reporting more than half of homeowners in America are "unsure if their home is worth more than their mortgage."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"So, it's the individual debtors who are to blame."

Wrong. Why? Because when an entire society says that the smart people are working the market to invest and gain wealth, what do you expect people to think? Everything from media to banking created this illusion that people could get rich turning homes or making housing a viable investment beyond having equity and a place to live.

They encouraged this behavior by making cheap loans. And they insured it by making massive trade in credit default swaps and derivatives. The banks knew the risks and saw they could make money selling insurance for them as well as for making money should losses happen.

This was widespread madness that infected everyone involved. You can't lay blame on ordinary people for taking the advice of society to dive into profit making investments if they wanted to secure the future. That is a big reason so many people took this risk.

Sure consumers should know better. But face facts, societies are largely sheep led by the media. Media says good, everyone says ok. Media says bad, everyone says bad. Media says invest you fools, fools invest.

Greed is to blame and the culture of greed that is propagated by unregulated and irrational neo-capitalism. A capitalism that is no longer driven by the exchange of goods and services, but is flooded with imaginary financial products. It is the collapse of these that killed the big banks and brought on the crash.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You shouldn't buy a house that you know you couldn't pay off in a year at less than 20% of your income.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Has to be done, until the foreclosure mess is unwound the housing market will continue to suffer. The freeze on foreclosures just draws out this painful process.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There were many deceptive practice by the loan company, and major contributors were companies like Countrywide Mortgage Co. which owned 17 percent of the U.S. home mortgage. It was more about sales commission gain by volume rather than the qualification of the loan. In most cases, other warning signs were zero to less than 10 percent downpayment. The adjustable mortage rate was one of the other major factors of default. The major increase of interest rate went in effect after inital teaser rate of 2-3 years. However, you also need to blame the buyer. The greed played a major role by people that purchased these homes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tkoind2 at 05:22 PM JST - 19th October. So, yes, some blame is at the feet of the banks (two and five percent down payment --what, are they on crack? But most of the blame lay at the feet of the consumer --those who overextended their finances and brought down the house of cards.

You got it wrong. Don't blame it on Bank of America. Bank of America was not a problem prior to acquisation of Countrywide Mortgage Co. in January 2008. B of A owned only 7-8 percent of all home loans in the U.S and had it under control. At the time, when B of A acquired Countrywide (17 percent of outstanding U.S. home loans) for approx. $4 billion, they assumed all outstanding home loans. B of A totaled 25 percent of all home loans in the U.S. after acquisation. When B of A acquired Countrywide, they did not not know the actual liabilities were alot greater then they thought. This was more of bad acquisation problem caused by Countrywide management.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Instead of foreclosure you may want to consider bankruptcy. That way the title holder is forced to come out of hiding and declare himself. =You have much less chance of fraud in front of the bankruptcy court as compared to a foreclosure (bank) court.

If you have a property loan you really need to check on that title and 3x check to make sure yours is not fraudulent. (on paper, notorized from your state --see what your state laws are --> easy way = get title insurance and if they will not insure your note you most likely have problems)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites