Who would buy (or write a title policy for) a home that you cannot prove you would actually own?
It is quite noteworthy that BoA is only halting the foreclosure mill in the 23 states which require them to prove ownership in court.
Now tell me again why regulation of the banking industry is a bad idea?
In fact, the laws in these 23 states do adhere to the libertarian principle– private property ownership rights are a pillar of our society, and taking someone’s home without proof or proper due process is un-American at best and outright fraud at worst.
Exactly! Good Lord, what are we coming to? The communists are now using Libertarian pillars to prop up their ideas?
Yes, I’m calling you a communist, Matt.
Until you’ve paid the house note off, you don’t OWN much. I realize that it’s become un-American to pay off a home these days, but that’s the best way to keep your home from being foreclosed.
I know, the ceaseless whining is about to start. How they lost their jobs because of evil W, and the greedy mortgage companies made you sign those balloon notes without you knowing that **** could happen. Waaa, Waaaa, Waaa.
Just pay your bills. Period.
And, don’t worry …Barney Frank will step in soon and sue all those greedy mortgage companies that foreclosed their home. They he’ll kick out the grannies that saved enough money to purchase their foreclosed homes, just so the whiners can have their American Dream back …whether they could afford it, or not. Anything less would be Un-Ameri-Communist.
You don’t get to keep the house and default on the mortgage. The documents issue only delays the inevitable though it might give banks a little more incentive to renegotiate the terms to a fixed rate.
For example Bank #1 might file foreclosure notice only to find out later that Bank #2 in fact owns the securitized note. Thus Bank #1’s foreclosure proceedings are halted and the homeowner is “in limbo” until Bank #2 files for a valid foreclosure.
I don’t understand “buyers” who complain that their adjustible rate mortgage is too high. Many of these people put no money down. They’re not real home owners. They’re renters. If the rent is too high, move. These people aren’t losing anything because they never had equity to begin with. They were merely renting from a bank (or MBS bond fund) rather than a commercial real estate company.
It’s not about keeping something you did not pay for.
This is about making sure that an entity has to be able to prove, with documents and in court, that they in fact hold the note and have the legal right to foreclose and seize the property. That’s not communism, that’s common sense!
And you seem to misunderstand the issue of “blighted titles” — this has absolutely nothing to do with any of the rant in your comment. This is about what the effects of a large number of blighted and uninsurable titles will be as respects the overall housing recovery.
It is unamerican to buy something you cant pay for. I also think that not paying your mortgage is also unamerican. At least in the America I used to know. But now, with this congress and president who knows.
Barney Frank and Chris Dodd think it is just fine getting a loan for a home without a job and nothing down. That is why we are were we are, Fannie and Freddie pushing banks to loan money to the worst credit risks out there.
Sarah I hate to say it but neither this article nor any of my comments have the slightest thing to do with buying something you cannot afford…
The topic is title insurers amending their guidelines so that they will no longer write title policies for homes which were foreclosed on by Chase & GMAC because inadequate internal policies & procedures resulted in sloppy document handling. It has absolutely nothing to do with buying something you cannot afford, although that is certainly a likely reason why some of these notes defaulted to begin with. We are talking about title insurance, not the Democrats past and present policies regarding affordable housing initiatives…
Here is a simple definition of “Title Insurance” courtesy of Wikipedia:
Title insurance in the United States is indemnity insurance against financial loss from defects in title to real property and from the invalidity or unenforceability of mortgage liens. Title insurance is principally a product developed and sold in the United States as a result of the comparative deficiency of the US land records laws. It is meant to protect an owner’s or a lender’s financial interest in real property against loss due to title defects, liens or other matters. It will defend against a lawsuit attacking the title as it is insured, or reimburse the insured for the actual monetary loss incurred, up to the dollar amount of insurance provided by the policy.
Matt…I agree with all that you said. Very cogent…and true…how can commerce continue if titles are blighted? How did this all happen in the first place? Stop arguing with Sarah, Peon Agent and Scrooge; they do not care about the topic…they are just looking to rant and rave and to call someone a communist today. The fact that their arguments are idiotic just underscores that point.
They are IRRELEVANT…and they also miss the point of the article.
I agree with Cassandra Matt. Too many people here have no interest in insurance or the legal aspects of it. They merely wish to corrupt someone’s viewpoint to push their political agenda forward. As long as the “Angry American” holds the mike, we will be unable to have civil discourse over the various points of view of any position.
Apparently “my way or the highway” is carrying the day now.
Back to your question, I can imagine that title companies are very scared learing that mortgage lenders decided to engage in assembly line processes to speed things up instead of doing what is required by law. Why don’t we have 50 states that look out for these kinds of corner cutting? I know the homeowners are only getting a short reprieve and this will eventually get corrected and they will be out.
We should not be surprised that mortgage companies are cutting corners now, because that is exactly what they did when they made the original loans. Uncle Sam put them in an armbar and forced them to make bad loans…WRONG !!
Their own greed led them to make the loans. No commercial enterprise engages in poor practices because that is what Uncle Sam says to do, they engage in them because they are going to make lots and lots of money.
Mat, I’m with Sara on this. The whole thing is about buying a home or anything else you can’t afford. Its about peoples attitudes about money, spending, financing, and yes repayment of debt. When I bought my first condo i paid 104k i was making about 40k at the time, the mortgage broker kept telling i could buy a nicer place that needed less work because he could get me a loan of at least 180k. He said this several times until one day a turned to him and said “just because your bank is dumb enough to loan me more than i can afford doesn’t mean I’m dumb enough to take it. Its time people take responsibility and say “I effed up” I’ll move out, I wont screw the place up on my way out, because it’s my fault so I’m sorry”. I just bought a house last week and again they would have loaned me 300k, I wasn’t willing to spend more than 250k. Now I do exclude from the “I effed up” category those who had jobs and could afford their payments and got layed off, I feel terrible for those folk because they did nothing wrong. Last thought this crises IS BARNY’S fault! An to the spell checker reading this (you know the guy that retorts with you spelled a word wrong, your to dumb to listen to so I am disregarding your comments) I’m sure there is at least one spelling error, get over yourself your not perfect either.
I’m afraid it is you that is missing the point. I was not responding to the article, hun. I believe it makes perfect sense that the Title Insurance providers would not offer to cover “blighted titles”. Who would? Well, Barney Frank would, if given the opportunity, but that’s another rant.
Rather than responding to the article, I was responding to Matt’s ridiculous assertion that it was Un-American to take somebody’s private property away from them.
That’s a completely ridiculous, and unintelligent position. These squaters that bought too much house with too little income need no protection from thier idiocy. They signed their name to the loan, now go out and figure out how many jobs it will take to fulfill your obligation so you can remain a man (or woman), or walk away a child and try not to look at yourself in the mirror from now on. It will be disgusting.
It’s real simple. The banks that loaned the money, have every right to foreclose if somebody isn’t making their payments. When they start foreclosing on homes where the buyers are making every payment early, then it’s time for some protection.
For now, I see it like this. If Chase, and the others want to cut corners and foreclose on thier homes improperly, then that’s their problem. When nobody can purchase the home they’ve chosen to foreclose improperly, and their balance sheets look like they did pre-mortgage crisis, they maybe the crumbs will finally get swept away to go work as Walmart greeters, where they probably belong.
Let’s just not bail out the bum bankers for this next go-round.
If anyone has ever obtained a mortgage, there is a very important document in the stack of documents that you sign, which states if there is any document missing or any typo’s done that do not change the terms of the original loan offer then you agree to execute such documents as soon as possible or forfeit your interest in the property. Dont you think that this document that we all sign would do the trick for the courts to determine that the banks own the home and because the past owner didnt pay a mortgage payment for 2 years might also be a good reason to allow the foreclosure to take place and give clear title to the banks.
My comments were directed at the statements of Matt and Casandra who stated it was unamerican to take someones home away and their tireless defence of the illogical and sometimes illegal acts of this administration and or congress.
Yes I am angry as your last statement says, I and about 150 million others are fed up with being told one thing and another happens. I was never told my new president is a Socialist/Communist. We were also all promised we would leave Iraq on day one of his administration. 2 years later still there. That his administration would be transparent. Oh! the healthcare debate or lack thereof /takeover was transparent. Unemployment would never go above 8% if we followed his stimulus. Mrs. Pelosi, “You have to vote for it to find out whats in the bill” GIVE ME A BREAK! Yeah I am Mad as hell.
I’ve taken a break from commenting on these issues for quite some time, but I just had to say something after Matt dared to call the foreclosure process to be un-American. Funny!
I’m finding it true that Liberlism (at least after the age of 30) really is a mental disorder. What sane person could have logic such as they?
Who would buy (or write a title policy for) a home that you cannot prove you would actually own?
It is quite noteworthy that BoA is only halting the foreclosure mill in the 23 states which require them to prove ownership in court.
Now tell me again why regulation of the banking industry is a bad idea?
In fact, the laws in these 23 states do adhere to the libertarian principle– private property ownership rights are a pillar of our society, and taking someone’s home without proof or proper due process is un-American at best and outright fraud at worst.
but keeping a house when you default on the mortgage is a totally American idea.
Exactly! Good Lord, what are we coming to? The communists are now using Libertarian pillars to prop up their ideas?
Yes, I’m calling you a communist, Matt.
Until you’ve paid the house note off, you don’t OWN much. I realize that it’s become un-American to pay off a home these days, but that’s the best way to keep your home from being foreclosed.
I know, the ceaseless whining is about to start. How they lost their jobs because of evil W, and the greedy mortgage companies made you sign those balloon notes without you knowing that **** could happen. Waaa, Waaaa, Waaa.
Just pay your bills. Period.
And, don’t worry …Barney Frank will step in soon and sue all those greedy mortgage companies that foreclosed their home. They he’ll kick out the grannies that saved enough money to purchase their foreclosed homes, just so the whiners can have their American Dream back …whether they could afford it, or not. Anything less would be Un-Ameri-Communist.
You don’t get to keep the house and default on the mortgage. The documents issue only delays the inevitable though it might give banks a little more incentive to renegotiate the terms to a fixed rate.
For example Bank #1 might file foreclosure notice only to find out later that Bank #2 in fact owns the securitized note. Thus Bank #1’s foreclosure proceedings are halted and the homeowner is “in limbo” until Bank #2 files for a valid foreclosure.
I don’t understand “buyers” who complain that their adjustible rate mortgage is too high. Many of these people put no money down. They’re not real home owners. They’re renters. If the rent is too high, move. These people aren’t losing anything because they never had equity to begin with. They were merely renting from a bank (or MBS bond fund) rather than a commercial real estate company.
It’s not about keeping something you did not pay for.
This is about making sure that an entity has to be able to prove, with documents and in court, that they in fact hold the note and have the legal right to foreclose and seize the property. That’s not communism, that’s common sense!
And you seem to misunderstand the issue of “blighted titles” — this has absolutely nothing to do with any of the rant in your comment. This is about what the effects of a large number of blighted and uninsurable titles will be as respects the overall housing recovery.
It is unamerican to buy something you cant pay for. I also think that not paying your mortgage is also unamerican. At least in the America I used to know. But now, with this congress and president who knows.
Barney Frank and Chris Dodd think it is just fine getting a loan for a home without a job and nothing down. That is why we are were we are, Fannie and Freddie pushing banks to loan money to the worst credit risks out there.
Sarah I hate to say it but neither this article nor any of my comments have the slightest thing to do with buying something you cannot afford…
The topic is title insurers amending their guidelines so that they will no longer write title policies for homes which were foreclosed on by Chase & GMAC because inadequate internal policies & procedures resulted in sloppy document handling. It has absolutely nothing to do with buying something you cannot afford, although that is certainly a likely reason why some of these notes defaulted to begin with. We are talking about title insurance, not the Democrats past and present policies regarding affordable housing initiatives…
Here is a simple definition of “Title Insurance” courtesy of Wikipedia:
Title insurance in the United States is indemnity insurance against financial loss from defects in title to real property and from the invalidity or unenforceability of mortgage liens. Title insurance is principally a product developed and sold in the United States as a result of the comparative deficiency of the US land records laws. It is meant to protect an owner’s or a lender’s financial interest in real property against loss due to title defects, liens or other matters. It will defend against a lawsuit attacking the title as it is insured, or reimburse the insured for the actual monetary loss incurred, up to the dollar amount of insurance provided by the policy.
Matt…I agree with all that you said. Very cogent…and true…how can commerce continue if titles are blighted? How did this all happen in the first place? Stop arguing with Sarah, Peon Agent and Scrooge; they do not care about the topic…they are just looking to rant and rave and to call someone a communist today. The fact that their arguments are idiotic just underscores that point.
They are IRRELEVANT…and they also miss the point of the article.
I agree with Cassandra Matt. Too many people here have no interest in insurance or the legal aspects of it. They merely wish to corrupt someone’s viewpoint to push their political agenda forward. As long as the “Angry American” holds the mike, we will be unable to have civil discourse over the various points of view of any position.
Apparently “my way or the highway” is carrying the day now.
Back to your question, I can imagine that title companies are very scared learing that mortgage lenders decided to engage in assembly line processes to speed things up instead of doing what is required by law. Why don’t we have 50 states that look out for these kinds of corner cutting? I know the homeowners are only getting a short reprieve and this will eventually get corrected and they will be out.
We should not be surprised that mortgage companies are cutting corners now, because that is exactly what they did when they made the original loans. Uncle Sam put them in an armbar and forced them to make bad loans…WRONG !!
Their own greed led them to make the loans. No commercial enterprise engages in poor practices because that is what Uncle Sam says to do, they engage in them because they are going to make lots and lots of money.
Mat, I’m with Sara on this. The whole thing is about buying a home or anything else you can’t afford. Its about peoples attitudes about money, spending, financing, and yes repayment of debt. When I bought my first condo i paid 104k i was making about 40k at the time, the mortgage broker kept telling i could buy a nicer place that needed less work because he could get me a loan of at least 180k. He said this several times until one day a turned to him and said “just because your bank is dumb enough to loan me more than i can afford doesn’t mean I’m dumb enough to take it. Its time people take responsibility and say “I effed up” I’ll move out, I wont screw the place up on my way out, because it’s my fault so I’m sorry”. I just bought a house last week and again they would have loaned me 300k, I wasn’t willing to spend more than 250k. Now I do exclude from the “I effed up” category those who had jobs and could afford their payments and got layed off, I feel terrible for those folk because they did nothing wrong. Last thought this crises IS BARNY’S fault! An to the spell checker reading this (you know the guy that retorts with you spelled a word wrong, your to dumb to listen to so I am disregarding your comments) I’m sure there is at least one spelling error, get over yourself your not perfect either.
cassandra you must be a liberal and a socialist. They are american citizens and will always be relevant whether people of your ilk like it or not
If i were a title insurance company i would do the exact same thing!
Cassandra,
I’m afraid it is you that is missing the point. I was not responding to the article, hun. I believe it makes perfect sense that the Title Insurance providers would not offer to cover “blighted titles”. Who would? Well, Barney Frank would, if given the opportunity, but that’s another rant.
Rather than responding to the article, I was responding to Matt’s ridiculous assertion that it was Un-American to take somebody’s private property away from them.
That’s a completely ridiculous, and unintelligent position. These squaters that bought too much house with too little income need no protection from thier idiocy. They signed their name to the loan, now go out and figure out how many jobs it will take to fulfill your obligation so you can remain a man (or woman), or walk away a child and try not to look at yourself in the mirror from now on. It will be disgusting.
It’s real simple. The banks that loaned the money, have every right to foreclose if somebody isn’t making their payments. When they start foreclosing on homes where the buyers are making every payment early, then it’s time for some protection.
For now, I see it like this. If Chase, and the others want to cut corners and foreclose on thier homes improperly, then that’s their problem. When nobody can purchase the home they’ve chosen to foreclose improperly, and their balance sheets look like they did pre-mortgage crisis, they maybe the crumbs will finally get swept away to go work as Walmart greeters, where they probably belong.
Let’s just not bail out the bum bankers for this next go-round.
How about that?
Matt and Casandra,
If anyone has ever obtained a mortgage, there is a very important document in the stack of documents that you sign, which states if there is any document missing or any typo’s done that do not change the terms of the original loan offer then you agree to execute such documents as soon as possible or forfeit your interest in the property. Dont you think that this document that we all sign would do the trick for the courts to determine that the banks own the home and because the past owner didnt pay a mortgage payment for 2 years might also be a good reason to allow the foreclosure to take place and give clear title to the banks.
My comments were directed at the statements of Matt and Casandra who stated it was unamerican to take someones home away and their tireless defence of the illogical and sometimes illegal acts of this administration and or congress.
Yes I am angry as your last statement says, I and about 150 million others are fed up with being told one thing and another happens. I was never told my new president is a Socialist/Communist. We were also all promised we would leave Iraq on day one of his administration. 2 years later still there. That his administration would be transparent. Oh! the healthcare debate or lack thereof /takeover was transparent. Unemployment would never go above 8% if we followed his stimulus. Mrs. Pelosi, “You have to vote for it to find out whats in the bill” GIVE ME A BREAK! Yeah I am Mad as hell.
I’m with you, Sarah.
I’ve taken a break from commenting on these issues for quite some time, but I just had to say something after Matt dared to call the foreclosure process to be un-American. Funny!
I’m finding it true that Liberlism (at least after the age of 30) really is a mental disorder. What sane person could have logic such as they?