Boy, does Tom Toles nail this one:

>

Hat tip Mike R

Category: Credit, Humor, Real Estate

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

13 Responses to “Conveyor Belt of Horror”

  1. rktbrkr says:

    Beautiful, the banks and judges who ran the “rocket docket” foreclosure mills are being made laughing stock. there will be a reaction of moritoria, investigations and court delays as juges are shamed into actually doing their jobs (fairly).

    I’ll take the over on this issue going away in a couple of weeks.

  2. FrancoisT says:

    If this issue is swiped under the carpet, couple of weeks or months away, kiss adios to this country’s financial standing.

    How does anyone expect to have markets you can trust if the big players first fuck with the markets, while skirting and flouting the laws, to end up rewriting said laws?

    BTW, the idea that only the US can possibly have deep, liquid and honest markets is just bloody laughable. We went from the bucket shops to great markets.

    What would prevent a select few other countries to do likewise and steal our thunder?

  3. dc20008 says:

    Banks have zero interest in doing anything other than what they have always done.

    I rent a house that was foreclosed on–the owner didn’t pay the mort. The bank origianlly tried to kick us out but had to honor our 2-year lease (still 21 months left on the lease). At the one year mark our monthly rent check to the mort. co. was mysteriously lost and when we called they said they never got it and “Your lease is up and you need to move out.” Nope–we have a 2 year lease. 1 more to go! They said they never knew that and we offered to send them a copy of the lease (3rd time mind you).

    Miraculously they said it was OK and we could stay.

    Oh, and they have NEVER offered to sell us the house. Never even asked if we wanted it. Why?? Well, because that isn’t the way banks operate. That would go against their rote of “never doing anything other than what they have always done.”

    I wonder how many other renters would buy the foreclosed house they are renting if the bank offered to sell it to them.

    Oh, and for the record we wouldn’t buy this piece of crap. 5 years old and falling apart all over the place. it’s built of molded snot as my dad would say.

  4. The Pale Scot says:

    Down here in Punta Gorda;

    “Their laptop computer and MP3 player were missing, as were six bottles of wine. A half-empty beer opened by the intruders was still cold and sitting on the kitchen counter.

    But why, then, had the locks on the front door been changed?

    It turns out that a Sarasota company working for a lender trying to retake the property through foreclosure sent two men to the Punta Gorda home to break in and change the locks, even though the home was obviously occupied.”…..

    …..”Landlord Brenda Perron of Sarasota has been in a three-year battle with Bank of America, which has sent people to change the locks on Perron’s rented condo three times because the bank mistakenly believed her condo was in foreclosure.”

    http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20101004/ARTICLE/10041051/2416/NEWS?p=all&tc=pgall

  5. Kirkspencer says:

    Actually there are other issues.

    In a previous thread I was arguing with Curmudgeon. I decided to check facts with sources because he is, after all, a former real estate lawyer.

    I talked to several county recorders or their senior clerks, and I talked to several title insurance companies. Every one of the latter agreed with Curmudgeon that there will not be a problem. When I talked to recorders, however, it became a bit different.

    First, two clarifications. First, my questions were in regard to later exchanges, not foreclosures. When the loan is paid and the borrower takes possession, will the owner get clear title? Second, most home loans in this nation are done on one of three types of notes: mortgage with promissory note, trust deed with promissory note, or deed to secure debt. It’s easy to muddy the conversation, intentionally or otherwise, by not keeping these straight. With those in mind…

    On mortgages for end of loan transfers, Curmudgeon is right. Since the deed is already in the borrowers hands and the debt is secured with a lien against the deed, the agent of record can declare the debt complete without proving any of the assigments. That takes care of between 30 and 35% of home debt in the US.

    On the trust deeds and DSDs, Curmudgeon is wrong. Now, every title company with which I spoke said he was right. The county recorders , however, did not.

    1) To record the transfer, original document showing assignments since the last record must be submitted.
    2) If the original documents cannot be submitted, an affidavit from someone with true and certain knowledge can be accepted. In this case a new deed is created, the affidavit is filed for a number of years (10 to 40, depending on state), and this is also recorded.
    3) While the affidavit is on file, it can be challenged. If shown to be wrongful the deed is vacated.
    4) One of the valid challenges is that the person filing the affidavit has perjured himself in other, similar cases. In this case the person’s True and Certain Knowledge is impeached and that person must prove otherwise.

    There was speculation and worry on the part of the recorders/senior clerks that in cases where entire offices or even companies can be impeached should one of the investigations show that the current false swearings were common practice.

    Summing. If it is a mortgage there is probably not a problem for the transfer of title (outside foreclosure). If it is a trust deed or a deed to secure debt there is probably a problem, but nothing will happen unless the situation is forced into daylight.

    Unfortunately the foreclosure issues with their demonstrations of fraud and misfeasance on the parts of these banks are forcing this into daylight.

  6. Spot on! I spit out my coffee when I saw this…

  7. willid3 says:

    i was wondering if the . ahem…mis statements on the affidavits (aka lying) was perjury. and if that raises a bar for the banks to resolve their problem. since they were trying to address the lack of documentation when they filed the affidavit. and how do they get any trust back from the courts. or do the courts even care that they lied?

  8. DiggidyDan says:

    I can guarantee you from personal experience that that’s not how they do Re-Fi’s! Bastards.

  9. rktbrkr says:

    1) To record the transfer, original document showing assignments since the last record must be submitted.
    2) If the original documents cannot be submitted, an affidavit from someone with true and certain knowledge can be accepted. In this case a new deed is created, the affidavit is filed for a number of years (10 to 40, depending on state), and this is also recorded.
    3) While the affidavit is on file, it can be challenged. If shown to be wrongful the deed is vacated.
    4) One of the valid challenges is that the person filing the affidavit has perjured himself in other, similar cases. In this case the person’s True and Certain Knowledge is impeached and that person must prove otherwise.

    What happens when the original loan is sliced and diced and the mortgage holder – say Son of Countrywide can’t obtain signoff from all the fractional note holders? Then Countrywide can sign the affidavit and create a new deed? But Countrywide has probably been purjured itself in thousands of similar cases and whats in it for them to fight to prove otherwise? It’s just easier for them to shrug and say sorry and not have to worry about even more perjury charges.

  10. Kirkspencer:

    Who is financially liable if they get the law wrong–title companies or probate clerks?

    Go w/ the title companies. Probate clerks may wish the world was as they see it, but they don’t get paid to interpret legal rights and responsibilities. Title companies do.

  11. josey says:

    If I’m a lawyer defending a borrower in a forclosure action, “standing” is my first argument/demand for proof.

    It seems to me, based on what I’ve read recently about foreclosure actions, how they go down, and the suspect paperwork associated with the lenders (and their succesor(s)-in-interest), this first stance would be tough to overcome. Does the party bringing the action have standing? Oh, there are affidavits, are there? Well, let’s take a look at them. Who prepped them? Who signed them? Who are they agent for? Is that party an interested party? What’s their history? Do they have clean hands? etc., etc.

    This is going to get ugly, time consuming and costly…

  12. Kirkspencer says:

    Curmudgeon,

    False test. If it’s company level then the comparison is to the county clerk’s office, and those offices have faced numerous suits for “getting the law wrong”.

    The title is not legally recorded in the eyes of the law until it’s recorded in the registrar’s office. That’s the deeds book, not the files at the title company offices. No matter how ingenious or experienced or anything else the title company may be, that fact doesn’t change.

    So to me the choice is between those who register the deeds every day or those who work with real estate companies every day. I’ll go with the ones who do it every day.

  13. rktbrkr says:

    The fix was in, no doubt the banks own congress is there? I assume O’Bama will sign it. Don’t know if it’s retroactive, doesn’t really solve the problem of the robo-signers claiming knowledge they don’t have, the law is just a minor detail to be worked around by the banks after all!

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/39550663/