Friday, July 20, 2012

Banks are claiming "They don't own foreclosed property due to the up keep cost."

This is so classic.  Banks foreclosed on people and judges of course allowed it through the fraud.  Banks have to claim "ownership" and rights to foreclose due to ownership.   Once they foreclose they kick the people out through FRAUD of the foreclosure.

They then leave the properties empty and unattended if they are not able to sell the properties.  Now with so many empty fraudclosure of homes they are claiming "they are not the owners nor are they responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the properties."

So... let's think about this, banks foreclosed then they can't sell the properties in the mean time they threw people out on the street instead of working with them to stay in their homes.... the houses stay abandoned for years and then banks don't want to spend the money of mowing their lawns or maintaining them?!





 Portion from article:

The complaint alleges that U.S. Bank, through foreclosures, has become since 2008 the owner of "thousands of residential properties" in L.A. "which it has completely failed to maintain." The result, it says, is that hundreds of these homes have fallen into disrepair, "causing blight and destabilizing communities."

A city press release says the bank's potential liability is in the "hundreds of millions of dollars."

Tom Joyce, director of corporate public relations for Minneapolis-based U.S. Bancorp (U.S. Bank), says in an email statement to ABC News that the bank, no less than the city attorney, is troubled that properties are not properly maintained and have a corrosive impact on neighborhoods.

He says, however, that the city attorney has chosen the wrong party to sue: U.S. Bank is not the owner of the properties, "nor are we responsible for the servicing" of them.

The homes, says the bank's statement, are owned by trusts and by investors in those trusts. Only the companies to whom homeowners send their mortgage payments are responsible for the homes' upkeep. Says the bank's email: "It is clear from the complaint that the city does not understand our role."

Frank Mateljan, spokesman for the city attorney's office, says he understands U.S. Bank's role just fine.

"They're named on the deed," Mateljan tells ABC News. "Much as the bank would like to blame gardeners and the pool man, it's the bank's responsibility to maintain these properties or to sell them to somebody who can."

Says Mateljan: "We find that funny and disturbing at the same time—a major bank asking, 'Tell us what properties we own and which are in disrepair.' If you're the owner and named on the deed, you have the benefits of being owner and the burden of maintenance."

L.A.'s suit, he says, is very similar to one the city brought last year against Deutsche Bank. These two actions "have lit a fire under both Deutsche Bank and U.S. Bank to get a better inventory of their properties, and do a better job keeping them up to code." The Deutsche Bank case is pending.

Deutsche Bank's position is that the city attorney "has sued the wrong party," for reasons almost identical to those advanced by U.S. Bank.

Now, is this information that can be used in lawsuits against the banks in defense against fraudclosures?   They are denying they are the owners of property after they committed fraudclosure!

Also.... isn't it a shame that they kick families out of homes and then they let them go down.  Look at Detroit.  Thousands of families were kicked out of their homes and the city bulldozed the neighborhoods, about 40 square miles worth.  What would it be like now if the courts had actually adhered to real estate laws in judging if a fraudclosure could happen?  Then those neighborhoods would still have families living there.

Just out - Geithner and the Treasury Department ignored all the Foreclosure Fraud of the Banks.

In response to homeowner complaints about mortgage servicers, Treasury "demonstrated no interest in taking even the most modest steps to punish them," Barofsky writes. "That was unconscionable, given the pain being inflicted on so many home owners."
In a meeting with Geithner -- this one involving fewer f-bombs than others -- Barofsky says he finally realized the root of the Treasury Department's apparent lack of interest in helping homeowners: They apparently had another goal in mind.


5 comments:

  1. Excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me? And when the property is sold, who gets the money? I say, treat the banks like you would treat a regular person who lets their property go to Hell. Fine 'em in the right ditricts, and make 'em pay full out property taxes. They ripped the commoners off enough. Why give them any more than the government has already given them? After all, aren't they the lowest of the low who are responsable for 95% of the problems in the world?

    ReplyDelete
  2. 1. Banks foreclose on properties claiming ownership. 2. Banks claim no responsibility for upkeep due to MERS. 3. Cities bulldoze properties. 4. Banks claim ownership of cleared-out properties. 5. Banks sell properties to foreign interests for profit or properties left vacant.
    Agenda 21 accomplished

    ReplyDelete
  3. I sure do hope that thecity of L.A loose there case with the banks!

    THINK ABOUT IT FOR A TIME

    ReplyDelete
  4. The proper response would be for the city to condemn the property and seize it for a fraction of its before being run down market price though eminent domain.

    The city then would turn around and sell it for whatever it could be sold for and the new owners would be on the hook for restoration, maintenance, and PAYING the property taxes.

    Novel idea of taking the property back at the city level, balancing the cities books, restoring the blight, and punishing banks at a local level through a means never allowed to happen at the federal level.

    The wild card would be when the bank tries to appeal into federal court and the city/county states they are not US citizens and therefore not subject to any legal ruling by the scumbags in the federal judiciary and that this not a federal matter.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The author of 'Cloudedtitles' Dave Krieger speaks on MERS fraud and gives advise on case law.

    Dave. K did allude to some connection to Libor scandal to MERS and how US Attorney Eric Holder has links to major Banks (by being legal counsel)working a legal firm that formulated MERS regulations.

    As head of DoJ, Eric Holder's reluctance to pursue criminal proceedings for LIBOR scandal or MERS Robo-signing is a significant discovery.

    http://nakedempire2.blogspot.com/2012/07/clouded-titles-foreclosure-crisis.html

    ReplyDelete