Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

User Poll: What should happen to foreclosure documents approved by 'robo-signers?'

Recent revelations of faked documents and forged signatures have called the nation's foreclosure system in to question and provided borrowers with the opportunity to contest more than 2 million foreclosures.

By Washington Post editors  | September 23, 2010; 12:20 PM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Morning briefing: French workers strike over retirement age hike plan
Next: Economic agenda: Friday, Sept. 24, 2010


People are in default and foreclosure was brought upon them for that reason. Foreclosures aren't being initiated randomly or with malicious intentions. The banks simply tried to take shortcuts. People shouldn't be rewarded with free rent while tax dollars go to pay for the courts to re-try the hundreds of thousands of cases that could be thrown back. What kind of message are we sending to the responsible homeowner who honors their agreements?!

Posted by: GenXer1 | September 23, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, but this country is built on due process. Especially if someone's home is at stake, the foreclosing entity should have its ducks in a row before coming to court. I don't get any short cuts if I go to court, neither does the homeowner. Why should shabby paperwork be allowed of big corporations that have the staff and means to produce the proper evidence that their entitled to foreclose? If they are understaffed, maybe they should hire some more people to service the loans they hold, and maybe some of those people losing their homes will actually find a job and be able to keep them.

Posted by: its1 | September 23, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse


The legal burden falls to the foreclosing entity.

The moral burden falls to the banks and investment houses that packaged the mortgages to obscure their underlying risks.

The humane and spiritual burdens fall to each of us.

Those who make your choice tempt fate. It may not be long before you and your fellows experience the same desperation now shared by those facing foreclosure.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2010 10:43 PM | Report abuse

Even criminals are entitled to due process. Sadly homeowners are not given the same consideration. The mortgage industry abuses on top of Wall Street's meltdown in 2008 says something needs to be done with this industry. Banking can not regulate itself because greed has corrupted at every level. Every ounce of integrity is gone. For punishment banks should be required to renegotiate each and every loan to allow families to stay in those homes. It's a fitting punishment for this disgusting group of criminals in pin stripe suits.

Posted by: Desertdiva1 | September 24, 2010 12:47 AM | Report abuse

Are you looking to file for bankruptcy? Compare your bankruptcy options and information

Posted by: chadwick23 | September 24, 2010 5:55 AM | Report abuse

So, let me see if If I get this right, just because someone is in default, the bank is justified in cutting corners (i.e. committing perjury and forging documents) to collect the money? I truly disagree. How about if we say that a cop can write you a ticket today saying that you were doing 20 mph over the speed limit? I mean, come on, at least once in your life this had to be true. I am sure that you will pay, no questions asked. How about if you do challenge it and some other cop shows up for the hearing and swears that he saw it as well, even though he was two states away (and is blind). Yep, I am sure you are just going to pay that ticket.

We have rules and a process for a reason. If the banks don't want to follow those rules, then this is their penalty. In reality, we should stop bailing them out. Let them fail. Yes, it will hurt for a while, but we will come out of it again. No bank should be too big to fail and one thing this crises has taught me is that we should not allow banks to get this large. Banks should be limited to one state and, even within that state, banks should be limited in size. Otherwise you risk creating huge monopolies or single entities whose failures must be subsidized or we risk the entire U.S. economy.


Posted by: Frank Kautz | September 24, 2010 8:40 AM | Report abuse

I'm taking my case to PEOPLES COURT! At least there, I would get a fair trial! This is mid-evil witch hunts all over again!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2010 8:31 PM | Report abuse

Question for GenXer1: What should happen when bank that really doesn't own the mortgage forecloses, and the real owner later shows up and demands the collateral? Must the borrower pay twice?

Minor detail, but please respond.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 25, 2010 9:16 AM | Report abuse

The problem comes in when people who paid cash get foreclosed due to fabricated evidence. The problem comes when people are paying another mortgage company on time every month and get foreclosed by another bank who proves up their entitlement to foreclose with created evidence. The problem come in with satisfied mortgages to one company but a foreclosure by another who made up the debt that does not exist. Judges are allowing this because they believe as does the other comment-makers who say there is a debt owed and a foreclosure should occur, no questions asked.

We have a rule of law in America for a reason. Or at least............we used to have one.........our judiciary has been sadly corrupted.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 27, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

I'll say this again because it's worth repeating.

What necessitates the need for all the bogus docs? Perhaps it's because all of these alleged lenders have sliced and diced the mortgage obligations to multiple parties. Using the excess created by the outcome based appraisal by the lenders agent there was plenty of room for "take-out" at origination AND plenty of room to purchase equally bogus Credit Default Swaps from GMAC's bailout bedmate AIG. All the parties have been made whole AT the outcome based appraisal value courtesy of the US taxpayer.

Whether in default or not, submit a Qualified Written Request and/or Debt Validation letter as is your legal right pursuant to TILA, RESPA, etc. and copy in OCC. You will be informed by your alleged lender that is "proprietary information" and told to jump in a lake. Upon alleged lenders failure to comply make your payments to a court escrow account.

Sample QWR letters and Debt Validation Letters are available free for download at excellent Attorney George Gingo's website. We've been screaming something is VERY, VERY WRONG for a long time. This has turned into a judicial burlesque show. See: Foreclosurehamlet and 4closurefraud. Look them up with your favorite search engine.

Posted by: chunga85 | September 27, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

The judges should DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE, maybe then the filing fraud would end, or at least become unprofitable.

Posted by: macahuba | September 28, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

All the foreclosures should be vacated and the banks should be required to renegotiate new loan terms with every homeowner as a penalty for the fraud committed. Otherwise litigation can tie these homes up for years while attorneys grow rich. Who in a jury wouldn't convict the banks and robosigners? The sad part is watching how the judicial system has turned their head and aided in the fraud.

Posted by: Desertdiva1 | September 29, 2010 12:39 AM | Report abuse

These homeowners applied for tax funded bailout entitlements AFTER they were in default - many 3-6 months in arrears.

This was yet another Obama knee jerk reactionary program that turned sour because it was never thought through and coming back to bite him in the butt.

These programs bilk the tax payers (with no end in sight) only to postpone foreclosures and artificially inflate housing prices for people who never should have been given a loan in the first place.

Rather than ripping off the band aid in one quick pull, and allowing the housing market to self-correct naturally, Obama pulled the band aid off slowly, making the recovery even more painful.

Despite what the bleeding heart liberal Democrats say, not everyone should be a homeowner. Renting is not a bad thing.

Posted by: asmith1 | September 29, 2010 5:42 AM | Report abuse

@Anonymous- drop the intelligence act please and remove the rose colored glasses; there are large numbers of people facing foreclosure who should have never taken out a mortgage in the first place. From the sounds of your ramblings, I'm guessing you are one of them. Stop trying to make an unintelligent, emotional plea while attempting to sound like a philosopher.

The problem stems from Wall Street, and for-profit banks greedy appetites. Laws should be enacted that prevent, at a minimum, the selling of mortgages and student loans providing some protection to the consumer. Companies offering loans should be forced to handle the obligation regardless of the duration. The constant selling of loans, and lack of true transparency has made an already horrendous situation worse.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 29, 2010 7:12 AM | Report abuse

Okay, I've read all of your statements and I guess I didn't make myself clear. These cases need to be reviewed but they should NOT be dismissed!!! You also should know that our courts have never been equipped to handle the wave of foreclosures that are coming in and could have put pressure on the firms to speed up the process.

The backlog of foreclosures is hurting the entire nation! We cannot recover until it is cleared! There are fields of lawyers who are also taking shortcuts in the system to keep people living in houses they aren't paying for! I don't have sympathy for the man/woman who bought a house way beyond their means. We have to fix this mess!

I don't think many of you understand the grave consequences of letting these people continue to live in these homes. It is angering Americans who do pay their mortgages and will make them question why they are paying their own mortage when their neighbor doesn't and lives in the same type of house for two years rent-free.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 29, 2010 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Lets see.......get a mortgage from Lending Tree that is serviced by Saxon Mortgage, foreclosed on by Deutsche Bank, and owner put on the street by GMAC Mortgage. And the Al Appellate Court sees nothing wrong with this......even after the bank is bailed out by the American taxpayer to the tune of 12.1 billion dollars.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 29, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

The banks where nearly bankrupt and "we the people" bailed them out so that they can turn around and greedly, proactively foreclose on the "we the people". My idea is, if people are in financial trouble, then banks should be able to take mortgage payments from the equity of the house, but not take the house outright. If the bank has an interest in the "capital" they invested in a home (via the mortgage), shouldn't the same homeowner have the right to protect the capital they invested into the house too. If the home owner has greater capital than the mortgage loan, then the bank has no right to foreclose on the property. It is a constitutional right for protection of property, however, this right is not protected. Governments can tax properties value, do we own it or rent it? If we don't pay the tax, within two years they can take it. We never do own the property. In virginia, they can tax the "ownership" of a car and take it if not paid. We provide "false entities" with superhuman rights, yet real air breathing, bleeding, sleeping, eating, human beings are not provided similar rights. Why should "false entities" be favored over real life living human beings? Capitalism is not a christian concept, but when closely examined, is very anti-christian, anti-human concept. It all came down to a group of 18th Century jackass judges decided to give corporations the same human rights as living, breathing humans. Now we live with the consequences.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 29, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Some of the misguided fools here, who want to give the people being foreclosed upon the benefit of a doubt are forgetting that treating people humanely, and giving them the help they need to stay out of bankruptcy, is rightly limited to people who are corporations, not people who are human. Treating humans humanely is the first step to Nazi Socialism, and killing Grandma.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 29, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Desertdiva1: "Banking can not regulate itself because greed... For punishment banks should be required to renegotiate each and every loan to allow families to stay in those homes."

You want, in other words, to donate equity to people who bought more than they could afford, sometimes exagerating income or betting on price rises. Most mortgages are bundled in securities held by pension funds and other investors, so the gift you recommend either eviscerate investors or need more government assistance. This is also true of FDIC insured banks that hold mortages. To forgive defaults is not any sort of equitalbe "act of justice."

If a bank wrongfully initiates foreclosure against debtors that pay on time, charge the bank a penalty, including legal costs. However, if the loan is chronically past due, it's time for the home to be sold for what it's really worth, to someone who will really pay the installments. If the debtor has the option to pay little or nothing (heads I win, tails the public loses), then our whole economy collapses.


Posted by: Anonymous | September 29, 2010 11:39 AM | Report abuse

Anonymous: "The banks where nearly bankrupt and "we the people" bailed them out so that they can turn around and greedly, proactively foreclose on the 'we the people.'

No, foreclosure is the only way to pay back the taxpayer assistance, unless the borrowers pay. The delinquent borrowers were not the public in general.

Anonymous: "My idea is, if people are in financial trouble, then banks should be able to take mortgage payments from the equity of the house, but not take the house outright."

10% equity is less than two years' payments of mortgage and tax. If the market falls, equity may be negative. If the bank can't have the security of the full property value for the loan, then it could lend only a tiny fraction of the house price. The debt can't count as the borrower's "asset" in the event of default. That's topsy-turvy.

Anonymous: "If the home owner has greater capital than the mortgage loan, then the bank has no right to foreclose on the property."

An owner with major equity in a property seldom defaults, precisely because that owner would not want to lose value through foreclosure sale. It's the borrowers with little or negative equity who default most. However, if a high-equity owner can no longer pay, that owner must simply sell, or face foreclosure too, receiving whatever results net of the sale and closing costs.

Anonymous: "It all came down to a group of 18th Century jackass judges decided to give corporations the same human rights as living, breathing humans."

Some of those JA's authored the Constitution, which does not prohibit commerce, taxes, or lending. Without the ability to mortgage property, all transactions would be cash only or rental. Would that be better? How many young couples have $250k (or even $100k) in the cookie jar to buy a home?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 29, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

I happen to know someone who has been staying just ahead of foreclosure for a couple years now. Their experience with the bank has been frustrating to put it nicely. They applied for a loan modification and received - on the exact same day! - a letter rejecting the application for modification as well as a packet of information letting them know that the modification had been approved. A subsequent call confirmed that the modification had been approved and that they would be receiving a revised monthly statement soon. When they did not receive the statement and called about sending in payment, they were told that their modification had been placed on hold because their spouse had not signed the paperwork. Said spouse has been dead for years and the death certificate has been sent to the bank several times. Clearly, the banks are disorganized and are not taking their responsibilities seriously.

Posted by: SouthernerInDC | September 29, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

IN my opinion, the Judge should consider this a breach of contract by the mortgage holder, grounds for forfeiture, nullify the mortgage, and award clear ownership of the home to the homeowner.

Posted by: mehrenst1 | September 29, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

I just want to say to anonymous, it must be nice to have all the answers.

I put down 20%, made payments on time (until unemployed), tried to work with bank (to no avail: never able to reach anyone in a position to make any kind of decision), got two payments behind at which point the bank decided to refuse to accept any payments. I guess this is all my fault. I must be one of those people to whom you assign all the blame.

Too big to fail banks should have been allowed, no forced, to fail. They failed due to mismanagement, lack of oversight, and intentional malfeasance. The world would be a better place without them. Unfortunately all the pension money invested in them would have evaporated. So in effect, we the middle class and poorer are supporting the upper class through these bailouts. My life savings are gone, but the persons most responsible for this gave themselves huge bonus payments from government bailout money.

I like your logic anonymous. You should run for office.

Posted by: davidjaycrispin_2000 | September 29, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

What is truly egregious about this situation is that GMAC/Ally received billions of tax payer money to survive. Is this appropriate, ethical behavior for a corporation that nearly went bankrupt? I don't think so. GMAC is extraordiarily sloppy in it's management. There needs to be a complete overhaul of it's leadership. I have not defaulted on my GMAC mortgage but I know how terrible their response is to decent, solvent customers. My escrow is all fouled up due to GMAC errors.

Posted by: TeddyRoosevelt | September 29, 2010 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.

characters remaining

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company