Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ajtj99 who wrote (71449)	11/20/2007 1:28:09 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 116555

NY Times had a story on this. It said : A spokesman for Deutsche Bank declined to comment on the ruling. But the inability of Deutsche Bank, as trustee for the pools, to produce proof of ownership at the time of the foreclosures will fuel borrowers’ concerns that they are being forced out of their homes by entities that may not even hold the underlying loans. “This is the miracle of not having securities mapped to the underlying loans,” said Josh Rosner, a specialist in mortgage securities at Graham-Fisher, an independent research firm in New York. “There is no industry repository for mortgage loans. I have heard of instances where the same loan is in two or three pools.” I am intrigued by the last sentence - what the hell does it mean??!! Is this a much much much much bigger mess than we think it is?

To: ajtj99 who wrote (71449)	11/20/2007 2:10:19 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

Fannie & Freddie Clobbered Over Need to Raise Capital globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were both clobbered when Freddie admitted a need to raise capital.Freddie is considering slashing its dividend. The GSE's ability to buy back loans and to raise loan amounts are now officially DOA. Oh, they can raise loan amounts alright, they just won't be able to act on it no matter how much politician scream. Mish

To: ajtj99 who wrote (71449)	11/20/2007 4:59:38 PM
From: benwood	Respond to of 116555

It sounds like if you are in such a home, you can stop making payments and live there for years provided perhaps that you pay your property tax so you don't get foreclosed on by the county. I wouldn't mind living in my own house rent free for a few years.

To: ajtj99 who wrote (71449)	11/20/2007 7:04:14 PM
From: Dan3	Respond to of 116555

Re: A Federal Court Judge rejected 14 foreclosure claims by Deutsche Bank AG, which was trying to collect on securitized subprime-mortgage loans it acquired. I asked my wife about this (she's an attorney who does a lot of title insurance litigation work) and here's what she wrote (also note the last 3 words - I'm not following instructions!): The article says the court held that the bank "did not really own" the loans "because it acquired them after defaults had already occurred"; that he will dismiss the claims unless the bank can prove "it held the mortgages at the time of the foreclosure notices," and that "only the entity that held the mortgage at the time of default can collect." That doesn't make sense; there must be additional facts. Anyone can own the mortgage, hold the lien, at any time; unless the judgment of foreclosure has been entered and the property sold, and the sale confirmed, the lien still exists as a (good or bad) asset, as something of value. A party acquiring the mortgage after a foreclosure suit is filed -- if there is no contractual right to reject the mortgage, to force the seller to take it back as a defective or "bad" loan -- need only show the court a valid assignment of the lien--show that it is the proper party plaintiff because it currently owns the loan. Also, such a party would have to depend on the assignor (the seller) to provide the factual evidence on what payments were made in what amount, when the default occurred, etc. -- only the seller at that time would have personal knowledge regarding the status of the debt. But there's no reason a party acquiring the mortgage after a foreclosure suit is filed cannot pursue the cause of action (foreclosure due to default on the debt) (unless it cannot prove ownership)(and it lacks personal knowledge regarding the facts of the default, which means simply that it must confer with some accountant type at the seller and have him or her sign an affidavit setting out the financial calculations: principal balance unpaid, interest calculations). Also -- there may be particular facts not reported in the article that explain the result -- everything is so fact-specific -- the writer may be generalizing inaccurately or improperly. Don't quote me!

To: ajtj99 who wrote (71449)	11/20/2007 7:30:22 PM
From: rich evans	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

I think this is a bad analysis. The notice of foreclosure commences the foreclosure process. The Judge is saying that at that time someone else held the paper. OK. Just stop the foreclosure process by filing another notice. Then start it all over again by the new holder of the paper. Frankly you should be able to assign your loan/mortgage at any time. What is this doing in Fed Court anyway? These laws vary by state and are usually a state court proceeding. Rich