🚀 go-pugleaf

>Screwed up your mortgage? Made all the wrong choices? You lucky real 
>estate investor, you STILL made the right choice! Thanks to recent 
>federal Debt Relief Legislation, by just walking away from your 
>overpriced speculative loser property and your lender, your credit can 
>recover faster than you can say "Bankruptcy? What's that?"

Personally I think its wrong that Americans allow  private companies
(the credit reporting agencies) keep secret  files on citizens that
determine whether they are "credit worthy or not" and largely
determine what they will pay in interest charges for credit cards,
mortgages, etc.

What if you walked into a grocery store that charged high or low
prices for the same item dependant upon the the race or gender of the
person making the purchase? Nobody would put up with that...

The credit issuing companies are perfectly right in denying each
applicant credit or not, but if credit is granted...  Everyone should
pay whatever market rate is in effect at the time.

It makes no sense to declare someone a deadbeat and then say "for you,
you get a 9%, 10%, or 15% mortgage when every else is paying 5 1/2%
or, we will start you at a low rate for a year, but after that, you
are going to pay bonzo big bucks at twice or three times the market
rate.

Beachcomber

Beachcomber wrote:

> Personally I think its wrong that Americans allow  private companies
> (the credit reporting agencies) keep secret  files on citizens that
> determine whether they are "credit worthy or not" and largely
> determine what they will pay in interest charges for credit cards,
> mortgages, etc.


What's really ridiculous is that the credit reporting agencies receive a 
special exemption from liability for the damages caused by reporting 
false information about you.  Their only obligation is to remove the 
information once *you* prove them wrong.  That's right, maintaining the 
accuracy of their highly profitable database is somehow *your* job.

invalid@notreal.none (Beachcomber) writes:
>>Screwed up your mortgage? Made all the wrong choices? You lucky real 
>>estate investor, you STILL made the right choice! Thanks to recent 
>>federal Debt Relief Legislation, by just walking away from your 
>>overpriced speculative loser property and your lender, your credit can 
>>recover faster than you can say "Bankruptcy? What's that?"
>
>Personally I think its wrong that Americans allow  private companies
>(the credit reporting agencies) keep secret  files

Secret?  You can pay these agencies to get a complete copy of your
credit report any time you want.  All of them are legally obligated by
Federal law to give you a free copy every year, and there are various
situations in which they would be legally obligated to give you a copy
more frequently than that.  Not only will they give you a complete
copy of your credit report, they'll also, for little and often no
money, tell you what your FICO score is and even tell you specifically
what you can do to improve it.

>on citizens that
>determine whether they are "credit worthy or not" and largely
>determine what they will pay in interest charges for credit cards,
>mortgages, etc.

Your credit file does not determine what interest you pay; your
FINANCIAL HEALTH determines what interest you pay.  The information in
your credit file is used to determine your financial health, but that
information is driven by your own behavior and financial circumstances;
it doesn't appear there like magic.  And if there are mistakes, you
are legally entitled to correct them.

People who are better risks get better interest rates.  It's really
that simple.  It makes perfect sense.

>What if you walked into a grocery store that charged high or low
>prices for the same item dependant upon the the race or gender of the
>person making the purchase? Nobody would put up with that...

You seem to have gone off on a tangent here, because there's nothing
about race in credit files, and sex is not a factor in your FICO score.
While it's certainly true that some lenders discriminate based on race,
and who knows perhaps some also discriminate based on sex (although I
don't recall hearing anything specific about that), this really has
nothing to do with your credit file, and it's ILLEGAL to boot.

>The credit issuing companies are perfectly right in denying each
>applicant credit or not, but if credit is granted...  Everyone should
>pay whatever market rate is in effect at the time.

No.  The credit issuing companies are perfectly right to charge higher
interest rates to people who are higher risks, because a larger
percentage of those people are going to default on their debts, and the
interest the companies earn from the other borrowers in those risk
pools needs to make up for the losses.

Furthermore, purely from the point of view of supply and demand,
lower-risk borrowers are more attractive to lenders, and therefore
lenders have to compete to earn their business by offering them lower
rates.

This is simple, straightforward capitalism.  There's nothing illogical
or unethical about it.

>It makes no sense to declare someone a deadbeat and then say "for you,
>you get a 9%, 10%, or 15% mortgage when every else is paying 5 1/2%
>or, we will start you at a low rate for a year, but after that, you
>are going to pay bonzo big bucks at twice or three times the market
>rate.

People aren't "declared" deadbeats by the credit agencies.  Their own
actions earn that status for them.  No one has the "right" to spend
more than they earn; it is a privilege that a person earns by proving
that s/he is a safe enough borrower that lenders will want to lend him
or her money.  If a person doesn't like the interest rates being
offered, then s/he doesn't have to borrow money.

And please spare me the canard about how it's a Catch-22 because you
can't fix a bad credit rating without being able to borrow money,
because it isn't true.  Even the worst deadbeats can get credit cards,
and it doesn't matter if the cards have an obscene interest rate,
because if you spend money on the card every month and then pay it off
at the end of the month without paying a penny of interest, that does
wonders for your credit rating.

-- 
Help stop the genocide in Darfur!
http://www.genocideintervention.net/

"Beachcomber" <invalid@notreal.none> wrote in message 
news:47aa6566.3777890@news.verizon.net...
>
>>Screwed up your mortgage? Made all the wrong choices? You lucky real
>>estate investor, you STILL made the right choice! Thanks to recent
>>federal Debt Relief Legislation, by just walking away from your
>>overpriced speculative loser property and your lender, your credit can
>>recover faster than you can say "Bankruptcy? What's that?"
>
> Personally I think its wrong that Americans allow  private companies
> (the credit reporting agencies) keep secret  files on citizens that
> determine whether they are "credit worthy or not" and largely
> determine what they will pay in interest charges for credit cards,
> mortgages, etc.

It's called freedom of speech. Something that Americans supposedly believe 
in.

Your creditors freely chose to tell the credit bureaus their experiences 
(good or bad) in investing in a loan to you. That information is purely 
factual and is just as much theirs to share as it is yours. It's no 
different than sites like bankrate.com rating credit card companies based on 
experiences shared with it by its readers. Only difference is that bankrate 
is far less regulated.

If you don't like it, you can try to negotiate a gag clause into your next 
credit contract - though you probably don't have chance in hell of getting 
anyone to agree to it.

Similarly, the credit bureaus don't "determine" anything. Nobody forces a 
prospective lender to buy a FICO score or assign any importance to it in 
deciding whether to invest their money in a loan to you. If a lender does 
so, it's by that lenders choice. It's their money that they're investing. 
Yes, you're unhappy that you have less than an iron grip on what information 
the guy on the other side of the negotiating table gets to see - well who 
isn't, but life doesn't work that way.


> What if you walked into a grocery store that charged high or low
> prices for the same item

Which many do, depending on whether you're targeted for coupons, whether 
you're buying additional units of the same item on the same shopping trip 
and whether you're willing to barter your privacy as part of the trade via 
those so-called "loyalty" cards.



> The credit issuing companies are perfectly right in denying each
> applicant credit or not, but if credit is granted...  Everyone should
> pay whatever market rate is in effect at the time.

"Market rate" is inherently different for different debtors just as with any 
other investment. Just as the "market value" for an equivalent stock of one 
company varies from that of another based on peoples perception of how much 
growth potential the company has and how competent its management is, among 
other factors.

"Beachcomber" <invalid@notreal.none> wrote in message 
news:47aa6566.3777890@news.verizon.net...
><snip>
> It makes no sense to declare someone a deadbeat and then say "for you,
> you get a 9%, 10%, or 15% mortgage when every else is paying 5 1/2%
> or, we will start you at a low rate for a year, but after that, you
> are going to pay bonzo big bucks at twice or three times the market
> rate.

Risk vs. reward. Read up. 

On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:29:18 -0600, Snowbound
<loosebowels@ixnay.invalid> wrote:
>Golly gee, thanks Congress! Thanks, Mr. President! You all may be total 
>fuckheads intent on ruining the country, but you are OUR kinds of 
>fuckheads! These are the kinds of moments that make you glad we sent all 
>those soldiers to die in Iraq. This is what it means to be American.
>
><http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/06/real_estate/walking_away/index.htm?secti
>on=money_topstories>

Indeed. The whole American economy is based on borrowing Chinese money
to buy Chinese manufactured goods. Thank god for our wonderful
relationship with a communist country. All the Korean war vets should
be proud.

As long as the stock market is happy with the fed's interest rate cuts
and Joe Schmoo gets his rebate check to buy plastic Chinese crap at
Walmart, EVERYTHING'S GOLDEN! And now everyone who bought overinflated
houses with borrowed  Chinese money can get out of their bad decisions
with no consequences. Yippee!

All this makes so much more sense than an actual economy based on
manufacturing goods to sell to your own people, and keeping the money
in the country. Oh - and keeping your military troops in your own
country on the border.

-N

> Personally I think its wrong that Americans allow  private companies
> (the credit reporting agencies) keep secret  files on citizens that
> determine whether they are "credit worthy or not" and largely
> determine what they will pay in interest charges for credit cards,
> mortgages, etc.
>
> What if you walked into a grocery store that charged high or low
> prices for the same item dependant upon the the race or gender of the
> person making the purchase? Nobody would put up with that...

Completely bogus analogy.  The grocery store has no risk when they
sell groceries to a deadbeat, because they're getting the money at the
time of the purchase.

> And please spare me the canard about how it's a Catch-22 because you
> can't fix a bad credit rating without being able to borrow money,
> because it isn't true.  

Not only that, paying your rent on time every month will help ones
credit rating.

On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:29:18 -0600, Snowbound
<loosebowels@ixnay.invalid> wrote:

>Just don't declare bankruptcy, like someone in real financial trouble 
>might consider. If you declare bankruptcy, like some joker who lost 
>everything to unforseen disaster or illness, you are putting yourself at 
>the mercy of courts and banks (who make today's bankruptcy laws). If you 
>just walk away from a massive mortgage YOU freely chose, you get off 
>scott free, without any substantial penalty! After all, what 
>asset-draining cancer or chronic workplace injury could POSSIBLY be 
>worse than losing a home you couldn't afford in the first place?  


This sounds good.  The most logical part is the lender who made that
unjustifiably risky loan to Mr. J Doe will lilkely disappear as a
corporate entity before they catch up with Mr. Doe who walked away
from his foreclosed house.  Whichever new company that takes over the
property will likely find it impossible or just too costly to clear
the paperwork necessary to track down John Doe the walker and make him
pay.  There will be a few millions of such foreclosures that will
trash any industrywide attempt to clean them up.

Napoleon <anarch@666yes.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:29:18 -0600, Snowbound
> <loosebowels@ixnay.invalid> wrote:
>> Golly gee, thanks Congress! Thanks, Mr. President! You all may be
>> total fuckheads intent on ruining the country, but you are OUR kinds
>> of fuckheads! These are the kinds of moments that make you glad we
>> sent all those soldiers to die in Iraq. This is what it means to be
>> American.
>>
>> <http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/06/real_estate/walking_away/index.htm?secti
>> on=money_topstories>
>
> Indeed. The whole American economy is based on borrowing Chinese money
> to buy Chinese manufactured goods. Thank god for our wonderful
> relationship with a communist country. All the Korean war vets should
> be proud.
>
> As long as the stock market is happy with the fed's interest rate cuts
> and Joe Schmoo gets his rebate check to buy plastic Chinese crap at
> Walmart, EVERYTHING'S GOLDEN! And now everyone who bought overinflated
> houses with borrowed  Chinese money can get out of their bad decisions
> with no consequences. Yippee!

> All this makes so much more sense than an actual economy
> based on manufacturing goods to sell to your own people,

Modern first world economys are about a hell of a lot more
than just that, and have been for a hell of a long time now.

> and keeping the money in the country.

And that stupid blinkered mentality is what produced the worst of the great depression.

> Oh - and keeping your military troops in your own country on the border.

Havent done that for centurys now. Just as well too now that the US oil has run out. 

On Feb 7, 9:45 am, Larry Bud <larrybud2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > And please spare me the canard about how it's a Catch-22 because you
> > can't fix a bad credit rating without being able to borrow money,
> > because it isn't true.  
>
> Not only that, paying your rent on time every month will help ones
> credit rating.

Since when did paying "rent" on time help a credit rating?  Landlords
don't submit payment records to the big 3 credit reporting agencies;
however if you default and get evicted; the judgement from that might.

On Feb 7, 1:22 pm, PaPaPeng <PaPaP...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:29:18 -0600, Snowbound
>
> <loosebow...@ixnay.invalid> wrote:
> >Just don't declare bankruptcy, like someone in real financial trouble
> >might consider. If you declare bankruptcy, like some joker who lost
> >everything to unforseen disaster or illness, you are putting yourself at
> >the mercy of courts and banks (who make today's bankruptcy laws). If you
> >just walk away from a massivemortgageYOU freely chose, you get off
> >scott free, without any substantial penalty! After all, what
> >asset-draining cancer or chronic workplace injury could POSSIBLY be
> >worse than losing a home you couldn't afford in the first place?  
>
> This sounds good.  The most logical part is the lender who made that
> unjustifiably risky loan to Mr. J Doe will lilkely disappear as a
> corporate entity before they catch up with Mr. Doe who walked away
> from his foreclosed house.  Whichever new company that takes over the
> property will likely find it impossible or just too costly to clear
> the paperwork necessary to track down John Doe the walker and make him
> pay.  There will be a few millions of such foreclosures that willtrashany industrywide attempt to clean them up.

Which is a good thing?

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:24:46 -0800 (PST), Foobar
<bamberbert@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Feb 7, 1:22 pm, PaPaPeng <PaPaP...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:29:18 -0600, Snowbound
>>
>> <loosebow...@ixnay.invalid> wrote:
>> >Just don't declare bankruptcy, like someone in real financial trouble
>> >might consider. If you declare bankruptcy, like some joker who lost
>> >everything to unforseen disaster or illness, you are putting yourself at
>> >the mercy of courts and banks (who make today's bankruptcy laws). If you
>> >just walk away from a massivemortgageYOU freely chose, you get off
>> >scott free, without any substantial penalty! After all, what
>> >asset-draining cancer or chronic workplace injury could POSSIBLY be
>> >worse than losing a home you couldn't afford in the first place?  
>>
>> This sounds good.  The most logical part is the lender who made that
>> unjustifiably risky loan to Mr. J Doe will lilkely disappear as a
>> corporate entity before they catch up with Mr. Doe who walked away
>> from his foreclosed house.  Whichever new company that takes over the
>> property will likely find it impossible or just too costly to clear
>> the paperwork necessary to track down John Doe the walker and make him
>> pay.  There will be a few millions of such foreclosures that willtrashany industrywide attempt to clean them up.
>
>Which is a good thing?


In normal situations there is enough of a paper trail to track you
down anywhere in the country.  So you have to declare bankruptcy (the
new rules I don't know about but its no longer easy to declare it) and
your credit rating goes to hell.  

But in this subprime crisis the banking system isn't sure who actually
holds the original mortgage, who holds the invertment to a bundle of
these original mortages, who is the third party (bank or financial
institution)  that had lent to the secondary party who held the
bundled mortages to the original mortgage.  And this can cascade into
the fourth or fifth tier.  If you can't follow the connections so far
neither can the banks and the financial institutions.   The original
one million dollar bundle of mortages may have generated another four
to five millions if not more in secondary market..

Now if you are already in deep doggydoo and cannot pay your mortage
anyway. You walk away.  In the good old days they will get you.  In
the current crisis your original mortgage dollar has enabled other
parties to generate a debt worth five or more dollars.  All these
people hold are IOUs and have no fixed asset (a house or property)
backing the debt.  They are going to worry how to get payment on their
IOUs pronto before some other IOU holder gets his hands on the money
first.  The guy who holds the bundle of actual mortages will have to
fight off three or more IOU holders who, as banks and financial
institutions, have considerable clout and legal resources.   Whatever,
the actual mortgagee is a small fry with a single house.  Its not
worth the legal fees or the effort to go after the more than a million
small frys yet.  Don't forget there are perfectly good mortgage loans
mixed up with lapsed subprime ones that they will have to sort out.
With the mess they are in they may just lose the paper trail.  I would
just walk away.  Nothing worse can happen.

In article <0lt1r3t7b2f0a81cumrpaiqndkh1kugick@4ax.com>,
PaPaPeng  <PaPaPeng@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:24:46 -0800 (PST), Foobar
><bamberbert@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Feb 7, 1:22 pm, PaPaPeng <PaPaP...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:29:18 -0600, Snowbound
>>>
>>> <loosebow...@ixnay.invalid> wrote:
>>> >Just don't declare bankruptcy, like someone in real financial trouble
>>> >might consider. If you declare bankruptcy, like some joker who lost
>>> >everything to unforseen disaster or illness, you are putting yourself at
>>> >the mercy of courts and banks (who make today's bankruptcy laws). If you
>>> >just walk away from a massivemortgageYOU freely chose, you get off
>>> >scott free, without any substantial penalty! After all, what
>>> >asset-draining cancer or chronic workplace injury could POSSIBLY be
>>> >worse than losing a home you couldn't afford in the first place?  
>>>
>>> This sounds good.  The most logical part is the lender who made that
>>> unjustifiably risky loan to Mr. J Doe will lilkely disappear as a
>>> corporate entity before they catch up with Mr. Doe who walked away
>>> from his foreclosed house.  Whichever new company that takes over the
>>> property will likely find it impossible or just too costly to clear
>>> the paperwork necessary to track down John Doe the walker and make him
>>> pay.  There will be a few millions of such foreclosures that
>willtrashany industrywide attempt to clean them up.
>>
>>Which is a good thing?
>
>
>In normal situations there is enough of a paper trail to track you
>down anywhere in the country.  So you have to declare bankruptcy (the
>new rules I don't know about but its no longer easy to declare it) and
>your credit rating goes to hell.  
>
>But in this subprime crisis the banking system isn't sure who actually
>holds the original mortgage, who holds the invertment to a bundle of
>these original mortages, who is the third party (bank or financial
>institution)  that had lent to the secondary party who held the
>bundled mortages to the original mortgage.  And this can cascade into
>the fourth or fifth tier.  If you can't follow the connections so far
>neither can the banks and the financial institutions.   The original
>one million dollar bundle of mortages may have generated another four
>to five millions if not more in secondary market..

A small ray of hope.
http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/article/20071115/WIRE/711150413
At least there's one judge who stood up to financial institutions to
make them follow the law.  Until this article I hadn't been aware that
it was customary for courts to let foreclosing entities foreclose
without providing proof of ownership as required by law.

m

On Feb 12, 2:27 am, no-s...@sonic.net (Fake ID) wrote:
> In article <0lt1r3t7b2f0a81cumrpaiqndkh1kug...@4ax.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> PaPaPeng  <PaPaP...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:24:46 -0800 (PST), Foobar
> ><bamberb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>On Feb 7, 1:22 pm, PaPaPeng <PaPaP...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:29:18 -0600, Snowbound
>
> >>> <loosebow...@ixnay.invalid> wrote:
> >>> >Just don't declare bankruptcy, like someone in real financial trouble
> >>> >might consider. If you declare bankruptcy, like some joker who lost
> >>> >everything to unforseen disaster or illness, you are putting yourself at
> >>> >the mercy of courts and banks (who make today's bankruptcy laws). If you
> >>> >just walk away from a massivemortgageYOU freely chose, you get off
> >>> >scott free, without any substantial penalty! After all, what
> >>> >asset-draining cancer or chronic workplace injury could POSSIBLY be
> >>> >worse than losing a home you couldn't afford in the first place?  
>
> >>> This sounds good.  The most logical part is the lender who made that
> >>> unjustifiably risky loan to Mr. J Doe will lilkely disappear as a
> >>> corporate entity before they catch up with Mr. Doe who walked away
> >>> from his foreclosed house.  Whichever new company that takes over the
> >>> property will likely find it impossible or just too costly to clear
> >>> the paperwork necessary to track down John Doe the walker and make him
> >>> pay.  There will be a few millions of such foreclosures that
> >willtrashany industrywide attempt to clean them up.
>
> >>Which is a good thing?
>
> >In normal situations there is enough of a paper trail to track you
> >down anywhere in the country.  So you have to declare bankruptcy (the
> >new rules I don't know about but its no longer easy to declare it) and
> >your credit rating goes to hell.  
>
> >But in this subprime crisis the banking system isn't sure who actually
> >holds the original mortgage, who holds the invertment to a bundle of
> >these original mortages, who is the third party (bank or financial
> >institution)  that had lent to the secondary party who held the
> >bundled mortages to the original mortgage.  And this can cascade into
> >the fourth or fifth tier.  If you can't follow the connections so far
> >neither can the banks and the financial institutions.   The original
> >one million dollar bundle of mortages may have generated another four
> >to five millions if not more in secondary market..
>
> A small ray of hope.http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/article/20071115/WIRE/711150413
> At least there's one judge who stood up to financial institutions to
> make them follow the law.  Until this article I hadn't been aware that
> it was customary for courts to let foreclosing entities foreclose
> without providing proof of ownership as required by law.
>
> m- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Ah, yup, ok.  But you still don't own the property and you'll still
have to walk away from it.

On Feb 12, 2:27 am, no-s...@sonic.net (Fake ID) wrote:
> In article <0lt1r3t7b2f0a81cumrpaiqndkh1kug...@4ax.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> PaPaPeng  <PaPaP...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:24:46 -0800 (PST), Foobar
> ><bamberb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>On Feb 7, 1:22 pm, PaPaPeng <PaPaP...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:29:18 -0600, Snowbound
>
> >>> <loosebow...@ixnay.invalid> wrote:
> >>> >Just don't declare bankruptcy, like someone in real financial trouble
> >>> >might consider. If you declare bankruptcy, like some joker who lost
> >>> >everything to unforseen disaster or illness, you are putting yourself at
> >>> >the mercy of courts and banks (who make today's bankruptcy laws). If you
> >>> >just walk away from a massivemortgageYOU freely chose, you get off
> >>> >scott free, without any substantial penalty! After all, what
> >>> >asset-draining cancer or chronic workplace injury could POSSIBLY be
> >>> >worse than losing a home you couldn't afford in the first place?  
>
> >>> This sounds good.  The most logical part is the lender who made that
> >>> unjustifiably risky loan to Mr. J Doe will lilkely disappear as a
> >>> corporate entity before they catch up with Mr. Doe who walked away
> >>> from his foreclosed house.  Whichever new company that takes over the
> >>> property will likely find it impossible or just too costly to clear
> >>> the paperwork necessary to track down John Doe the walker and make him
> >>> pay.  There will be a few millions of such foreclosures that
> >willtrashany industrywide attempt to clean them up.
>
> >>Which is a good thing?
>
> >In normal situations there is enough of a paper trail to track you
> >down anywhere in the country.  So you have to declare bankruptcy (the
> >new rules I don't know about but its no longer easy to declare it) and
> >your credit rating goes to hell.  
>
> >But in this subprime crisis the banking system isn't sure who actually
> >holds the original mortgage, who holds the invertment to a bundle of
> >these original mortages, who is the third party (bank or financial
> >institution)  that had lent to the secondary party who held the
> >bundled mortages to the original mortgage.  And this can cascade into
> >the fourth or fifth tier.  If you can't follow the connections so far
> >neither can the banks and the financial institutions.   The original
> >one million dollar bundle of mortages may have generated another four
> >to five millions if not more in secondary market..
>
> A small ray of hope.http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/article/20071115/WIRE/711150413
> At least there's one judge who stood up to financial institutions to
> make them follow the law.  Until this article I hadn't been aware that
> it was customary for courts to let foreclosing entities foreclose
> without providing proof of ownership as required by law.
>
> m- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

It's a very interesting article.  Problematic, but interesting.


So, who owns the property?

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 13:19:43 -0800 (PST), Foobar
<bamberbert@gmail.com> wrote:

>It's a very interesting article.  Problematic, but interesting.
>
>
>So, who owns the property?

I don't have a simple answer.   It bugged me long enough.   Here's an
article(below)  by William Engdahl with a section that will interest
you.  Do read his four part series of articles in full.


Part I: Sub-Prime Mortgage Debt is but the Tip of the Iceberg
F William Engdahl, November 23, 2007

Part II: The Financial Foundations of the American Century
F William Engdahl, January 16, 2008

Part III: Greenspan’s Grand Design
By F. William Engdahl, January 22, 2008

Part IV: Endgame: Unregulated Private Money Creation
by F. William Engdahl
Global Research, February 8, 2008 
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8032
===========================================

Part 1

by F. William Engdahl
 
Global Research, November 23, 2007 
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7413 

Part 1: Deutsche Bank’s painful lesson                 

Even experienced banker friends tell me that they think the worst of
the US banking troubles are over and that things are slowly getting
back to normal. What is lacking in their rosy optimism is the
realization of the scale of the ongoing deterioration in credit
markets globally, centered in the American asset-backed securities
market, and especially in the market for CDO’s—Collateralized Debt
Obligations and CMO’s—Collateralized Mortgage Obligations. By now
every serious reader has heard the term “It’s a crisis in Sub-Prime US
home mortgage debt.” What almost no one I know understands is that the
Sub-Prime problem is but the tip of a colossal iceberg that is in a
slow meltdown. I offer one recent example to illustrate my point that
the “Financial Tsunami” is only beginning.

Deutsche Bank got a hard shock a few days ago when a judge in the
state of Ohio in the USA made a ruling that the bank had no legal
right to foreclose on 14 homes whose owners had failed to keep current
in their monthly mortgage payments. Now this might sound like small
beer for Deutsche Bank, one of the world’s largest banks with over
€1.1 trillion (Billionen) in assets worldwide. As Hilmar Kopper used
to say, “peanuts.” It’s not at all peanuts, however, for the
Anglo-Saxon banking world and its European allies like Deutsche Bank,
BNP Paribas, Barclays Bank, HSBC or others. Why?

A US Federal Judge, C.A. Boyko in Federal District Court in Cleveland
Ohio ruled to dismiss a claim by Deutsche Bank National Trust Company.
DB’s US subsidiary was seeking to take possession of 14 homes from
Cleveland residents living in them, in order to claim the assets. 

Here comes the hair in the soup. The Judge asked DB to show documents
proving legal title to the 14 homes. DB could not. All DB attorneys
could show was a document showing only an “intent to convey the rights
in the mortgages.” They could not produce the actual mortgage, the
heart of Western property rights since the Magna Charta of not longer.

Again why could Deutsche Bank not show the 14 mortgages on the 14
homes? Because they live in the exotic new world of “global
securitization”, where banks like DB or Citigroup buy tens of
thousands of mortgages from small local lending banks, “bundle” them
into Jumbo new securities which then are rated by Moody’s or Standard
& Poors or Fitch, and sell them as bonds to pension funds or other
banks or private investors who naively believed they were buying bonds
rated AAA, the highest, and never realized that their “bundle” of say
1,000 different home mortgages, contained maybe 20% or 200 mortgages
rated “sub-prime,” i.e. of dubious credit quality. 

Indeed the profits being earned in the past seven years by the world’s
largest financial players from Goldman Sachs to Morgan Stanley to
HSBC, Chase, and yes, Deutsche Bank, were so staggering, few bothered
to open the risk models used by the professionals who bundled the
mortgages. Certainly not the Big Three rating companies who had a
criminal conflict of interest in giving top debt ratings. That changed
abruptly last August and since then the major banks have issued one
after another report of disastrous “sub-prime” losses.

A new unexpected factor 
 
(....more)