Bank Told To Pay $3.2M For New Mexico Foreclosure Despite Insurance March 10, 2014 Email This Subscribe to Newsletter Email to a friend Facebook Tweet LinkedIn Print Article Article 3 Comments March 10, 2014 at 2:20 pm Crane says: Like or Dislike: 0 0Who would ever have suspected a big bank of misbehaving? The judge ruled correctly on this one. Reply March 10, 2014 at 2:53 pm Bernie says: Like or Dislike: 0 0Really 18 inspections ??? I don’t think the punitive damages were enough. Reply March 11, 2014 at 3:11 pm Pat says: Like or Dislike: 0 0It would be very interesting to see the policy payout provisions and mortgage holder notice provisions and compare those to any regulations. It would be interesting to know if fees and penalties commonly degrade payout amounts. Reply Add a Comment Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * Name * Email * Comment ΔNotify me of comments via e-mail
Who would ever have suspected a big bank of misbehaving? The judge ruled correctly on this one.
Really 18 inspections ??? I don’t think the punitive damages were enough.
It would be very interesting to see the policy payout provisions and mortgage holder notice provisions and compare those to any regulations. It would be interesting to know if fees and penalties commonly degrade payout amounts.