please see my new web site with current posts at www.defendmyfloridahome.com

http://www.defendmyfloridahome.com

Advertisements

Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act / Tenants’ Rights in Foreclosure

The Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act was adopted in 2009 to address the problem of the eviction of tenants on short notice following the sale of their home in a foreclosure action.

The Act requires that a tenant under a “bona fide” lease be able to remain in the leased property for the full duration of the lease, or if the tenant is a month-to-month tenant that the tenant be given no less than 90 days notice to vacate the premises.  In the case of a bona fide lease for a specified term, this preserves the tenant’s right to stay in the home for the term of the lease, for the month-to-month tenant the Act increases the notice required to be given from 30 days to 90 days.

The only exception to the above Continue reading “Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act / Tenants’ Rights in Foreclosure”

Authorities and five of the nation’s largest banks have agreed to a $26 billion settlement intended to provide relief to nearly two-million current and former American homeowners harmed by the bursting of the housing bubble.  The parties to the negotiations included the U.S. Attorney General and the Attorneys General of every state except Oklahoma.  The residents of Oklahoma will not benefit from any of the programs developed to distribute the settlement proceeds.  In spite of it being the broadest effort yet to help homeowners is expected to help only a small portion of the borrowers who are delinquent or are facing foreclosure.  One-million homeowners are expected to have their mortgage debt reduced, and 750,000 more, who lost their homes to foreclosure will receive checks for about $2,000.  This is all assuming this effort will be more successful than past efforts that helped fewer people than expected.

Attack the Citadels

image

The US Attorney General and the Attorneys General of 49 states reached a settlement with several banks regarding illegal practices in connection with mortgage foreclosure lawsuits. The settlement requires the banks to pay $26 billion, about half of their profits for last year. The money is to be used to compensate owners who lost their homes in connection with the illegal practices and to help underwater homeowners refinance their loans. Is $26 billion enough when there are $700 billion in underwater mortgages in the US?

http://m.good.is/post/why-are-wall-street-banks-coughing-up-26-billion/

Also see this article from the New York Times discussing the settlement.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/09/business/states-negotiate-25-billion-deal-for-homeowners.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

The allegations of wrong doing generally concern “robo-signing” of bank documents, which includes producing sworn to documents admissible in court without the signer actually having any knowledge of the documents contents. See article discussing robo-signing below.

http://www.helium.com/items/1989991-what-is-robo-signing-foreclosure-mortgage

View original post

“There is much to talk about with the alleged settlement of the big five (BofA, Chase, Wells, Citi, Ally/GMAC) and the Attorneys General (AGs even though it is wrong to say Attorney Generals).  The deal is not final but there are a variety of documents describing the basics of the agreement.  See chart of anticipated money flows here for example. Of course the focus of the inquiry and thus settlement is the servicers’ foreclosure processes.  As a result, the lenders at issue allegedly agreed to some new…”

When businesses default on debt it is considerd part of a business decision even when that default is aimed at avoiding paying benefits owed to loyal workers.  When an individual makes a decision to default on their debt, because throwing good money after bad makes no sense for their future it is viewed not as a business issue but as a moral failing.  This is wrong.  If a person is faced with decisions about their future and their ability to provide for themselves and their family, deciding to default on a debt IS a business decision.

Attack the Citadels

image

As the average taxpayer you didn’t commit fraud and the financial collapse isn’t your fault.  Yet you pay to bail out the financial institutions that did cause the collapse and you are guilted into continuing to pay a mortgage on property you will lose money on.  You are paying twice to ensure the banking industry makes money.  They keep stealing, why should you keep paying?

http://www.dylanratigan.com/2011/02/03/they-keep-stealing-why-keep-paying/#.TuuzUW9dIhc.email

View original post

Motion for Summary Judgment / A Trap for the Pro-Se Homeowner

I posted an article yesterday on my other blog, Attack the Citadels, reporting on a Florida Judge who heard 300 foreclosure cases in three days. You can read that article here.  The following link is to an article explaining how that happens and why the procedure used is a trap for the unrepresented homeowner in foreclosure cases.

via Motion for Summary Judgment / A Trap for the Pro-Se Homeowner.