ONE ON ONE WITH NEIL GARFIELD
“I DIDN’T KNOW I COULD DO IT”
“PASSIVITY RECEDING”
AS HOMEOWNERS GET MORE AGGRESSIVE
EDITOR’S NOTE:
It seems that most attorneys are just not getting it. The homeowners, whose lives and homes are at stake seem to be far in front of the lawyers in understanding that this is serious business, that the foreclosure is a fake, and that there is serious money at stake here. Lawyers are for the most part still concentrating on niche strategies that allow them to bring in a volume of retainers even while they harbor the belief that there is little that can be done to stop the foreclosure or challenge the pretender lender.
Homeowners understand what institutional investors understand and they are both aggressively attacking those who caused the problem — i.e, Wall Street and the long string of participants in the illusory securitized chain of receivables. Despite the high profile admissions and news stories, most lawyers are looking at the problem as a correctable paperwork problem when in fact, the defects in the notes and mortgages run much deeper than that, accountoing for a lincreasing number of people who are getting a “free house”.
Homeowners are getting title quieted by a Judge’s order ONLY because the securitizers won’t give up the identity of the creditor, which is all the homeowner was looking for. Just getting that fact straight and getting the real parties in interest together, raises the prospect of equitable settlements and modifications, but servicers and other entities have successfully blocked all efforts by homeowners, borrowers and even government investigations from bring the name of investors together with the homeowners who were funded with the investors money.
The PR spin from the pretender lenders is that homeowners are looking for a free house and they point to the cases where that has happened. What they don’t tell you is that the homeowner was looking for justice in a deal where they were defrauded, resulting in a fair deal in which BOTH the investor and the borrower come out in better shape than the way things are working now. It is the pretender lenders themselves that are creating the “free house” mythology to divert attention from the fact that the ONLY party clearly seeking a free house IS the pretender lender, who is looking to continue the on-going fraud against investors and homeowners using the courts as the vehicle for their fraudulent activities.
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
Foreclosed Homeowners Go to Court on Their Own
By DAVID STREITFELD
NY TIMES
ALBUQUERQUE — Saving your home from foreclosure is increasingly a do-it-yourself project.
Lawyers are scarce and free legal assistance is overwhelmed in New Mexico, so a community center here is offering an hourlong class in how to download the correct forms, decipher the lingo and mount a defense, however tentative and primitive, against a multibillion-dollar bank.
“I don’t see success for someone like me who doesn’t understand the law,” said Skylar Perea, a senior care aide who fell behind on her payments during the eight months she was out of a job. “But it’s better than nothing.”
In New Mexico, New York, Florida and the 20 other states where foreclosures require a judge’s approval, homeowners in default have traditionally surrendered their homes without ever coming to court to defend themselves. (In the 27 other states, including California, Nevada and Arizona, homeowners have a much harder time contesting a foreclosure even if they want to.)
That passivity has begun to recede. While many foreclosures are still unopposed, courts are seeing a sharp rise in cases where defendants show up representing themselves.
One factor driving the increase is the changing nature of foreclosure.
When people went into default in 2008, it was generally because of the exploding cost of a subprime loan. Unable or unwilling to handle sharply higher payments, the homeowner walked away with little protest.
Now many defaults are prompted by stretches of unemployment like Ms. Perea’s. These owners do not have the resources to come up with all their missed payments at once. But if they can persuade their lender to restructure the loan instead of seizing the house, they have a chance of staying put.
In New Mexico, this is where the hourlong workshops come in. “When you cannot pay, this is called ‘a breach of contract,’ ” Angelica Anaya Allen, director of the nonprofit Fair Lending Center, explained to a small but diverse group one recent morning.
Young and old, solo and in couples, the homeowners in Ms. Anaya Allen’s class were all in breach, clutching special-delivery packages from their lenders announcing that the machinery was now engaged to evict them. They took notes, asked questions — is the courthouse the building on Fourth Street with the blue roof? — and were resolute if not quite eager for battle.
“I’m not sure where I stand, but I just don’t want to let the house go,” said Ms. Perea.
The legal challenges that she and the other students will make are slowing the foreclosure process. Over the last year, the average delinquency for a foreclosed loan rose to 499 days from 406 days, according to the data firm LPS Applied Analytics. But they are also straining the courts and often encouraging unreal expectations.
Louis McDonald, the chief judge for New Mexico’s 13th Judicial District, welcomes the influx of homeowners defending themselves, known as pro se defendants.
“They really want to stay in their houses,” he said. “Some of them have fairly legitimate defenses.”
But the law grows more complex as the cases proceed, and foreclosure still looms for those who do not grasp its intricacies. “The system is failing those who can’t afford representation,” Mr. McDonald said.
The 13th District surrounds Albuquerque on three sides and includes Sandoval County, which has the highest foreclosure rate in the state. Nearly half of the 100 new foreclosure defendants flooding the court every month are there on their own. There are so many of these defendants, and they need so much help understanding the law in a small, overburdened court, that last year Mr. McDonald instituted regular meetings overseen by himself and the district’s two other judges. Volunteer lawyers were on hand to advise the defendants, and the bank lawyers were required to attend.
It was, in effect, a court within the court. But the program used a lot of resources for an uncertain result, so it is being replaced by a less comprehensive clinic. The real solution, Mr. McDonald said, would be “more legal aid.”
That is a common refrain in court systems that have been successful in reaching out to the foreclosed. Before 2008 in New York, for instance, about 90 percent of foreclosure defendants never appeared before a judge. It was, a recent report by the court system said, a “paper process” and not a people process.
Then the state legislature directed that the court system hold mandatory settlement conferences to encourage the bank and the homeowner to reach a resolution. More than three-quarters of defendants now come to court, about 32,000 in the first 10 months of last year. But only 12,000 had a lawyer. The rest were in charge of their own fate.
“We’re getting the people in here, getting them to the table with the bank, but I don’t know what happens to these cases long term,” said Paul Lewis, chief of staff to New York’s chief administrative judge. “Many of the homeowners would do much better with an attorney.”
The courts would be better off as well. In Suffolk County, foreclosure cases are 40 percent of the civil caseload. Upstate, in Schenectady and Wyoming counties, they are about half. The New York State Unified Court System is asking for an additional $25 million a year to pay for lawyers to represent the poor in civil cases, including foreclosure. The legislature has yet to approve the request.
In Albuquerque, the three lawyers for the Fair Lending Center — a legal aid group that is paid for by the state — would be happy to see their financing merely remain the same. But even if it does, they will not be able to handle all the demand.
Ms. Anaya Allen started offering the foreclosure workshops last spring, at a point when she and her colleagues simply could not take on any new cases.
“It was the only alternative: give people the tools to help themselves,” she said.
Other legal aid groups across the country have been forced to consider do-it-yourself classes. For the Legal Aid Society of Southwest Ohio, demand for foreclosure help rose 51 percent between May and November last year. “People realized they could fight back,” said Mark Lawson, a senior lawyer with the nonprofit.
Financing has not kept pace. At any moment, Mr. Lawson has a dozen or so files on his desk — people who qualify for help but will not get it from him. When he calls and says his lawyers are too busy to take on another case, some homeowners get angry. Others are grateful that at least someone cared.
Mr. Lawson is skeptical that self-help clinics are a solution. “We have overwhelmed judges and impossible lenders,” he said. “It’s hard enough for lawyers to deal with them.”
In the Albuquerque class, Ms. Anaya Allen does not promise a happy ending. “At the end of the day, unless you have major defenses, it’s likely the court will make a finding of foreclosure,” she said.
Norma Canales and her boyfriend, Saul Valdez, were merely hoping for a little leverage against their lender. They fell into default when Ms. Canales got divorced and her husband stopped making house payments.
“We were working with the bank, trying to work something out, and now suddenly we’re in foreclosure,” said Mr. Valdez, 39. The couple never realized they could represent themselves in court. “It gives you,” he said, “some sort of hope.”
Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, currency, Eviction, foreclosure, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, securities fraud |
I don’t understand how a lender can foreclose when they don’t hold a recorded lien on the property. In a non-judicial state, no trustee, what is required to force foreclosure if there is no recorded deed of trust or note? My servicer wants me to execute a note so it can be recorded. They say it was never done originally back from years ago. They say they are modifying the loan but I must sign a new note so it can be recorded. Now they are telling me if I don’t my modification is denied and they are refusing to accept my payment on the new modification.. Options?
2009…Five yrs later…my Attorneys excluded factual evidence from my case that showed banks admitted they did not own my note (deficient chain of title) and Trial court ruled against me. Attorney had me drive 122mi (round trip)on MLK holiday to pick up the Appeals brief (I am African Amer)so that it can be filed the next day, (something he was to do)& the last day!, or else, I was told, “you will lose!” So, I filed MY direct evidence about the banks fraud (deficient chain of title) that my Attorney refused to give to the court. Days later my Attorney immediately motions court to withdraw as counsel. Couple days later Attorney emails me Sheriff sale notice which is in 3weeks!, and Attorney tells me that a bankruptcy is my only hope! Im thousands of $$in the hole after five years! This has got to be the biggest scam out there: Lawyers failure to represent client in order to conceal banks fraud and prevents due process of the law. (attorney also concealed evidence of forgery)
I was told “you’re not going to get a free house!” (I never said I wanted a free house!)
No! The scam: Attorneys are concealing evidence from cases (aka throwing cases) and the TBTF banks get a “free” house & a get out of jail free card!
What happened to justice? What happened to fighting for the principles of what the Law represents? I’ve been trying to stop this illegal foreclosure five years & its obvious something else far more sinister is going on at the barganing table for the American people & it’s very foul! 🙁
People need to band together, they could end up like us, cheated by the system.
Every pro se litigant need to march on Washington. Since they wont give us our Civil and Constitutional rights, then let us take them. Congress just looks the other way, it’s all about the money. If you or I had it like that, then we could buy “justice” too!!
Google “Zombie Debt Refuse To Die” see heartbreaking youtube video (MidFirst Bank/Handcuffed).
Prince Ella Green
In an effort to assist the non performing legal aid representatives (because they are overwhelmed I guess), we are now attempting to work with the local agency to provide ownership findings and recommendations regarding any payment history audit.
Lone Star originally rejected the idea of a company that could provide the information, but now City Hall may get involved as it helps curtail the cost of the Lone STar Legal Aid and they can help more people possibly save their homes. These agencies are not cut out for the mass work that is required to help homeowners. They may win a few cases, but those are few and far between. they cannot possibly do the job because they get so bogged down and most don’t even know what the client is talking about.
I get them referred to us all the time which we have been doing at no charge. That will now have to change even though we are non profit. We do expect them to pay a small processing fee to cover supplies, time, trips to the Court House, copies, etc.
Dying Truth and Monika:
Dying Truth unfortunately has it exactly right with respect to the judges and what they will do even if you have pursued the best of laid plans. This is an in your face by so many of the judges, not all, that you as a pro se will not get your day in Court. Well, we are still in Court after 4-1/2 years as pro se and now have moved to the Appeals Court. All of this because the Judge does not want to acknowledge the frudulent documentation provided to his court and which clearly shows the bank is not the owner of the note. We are now paying an attorney to represent us in the appeals and as we told him, there are at least five violations which were not considred by the Court and which most certainly presented more than a scintilla of evidence to prove they had no standing.
To Monika – Thank you for this information and I will look into it as homeowners can use all the help they can get. Most assuredly however, attorneys need to be on the helm to represent the pro se because so many will lose because they just did not have enough knowledge to handle what was thrown at them. That is improving of course for many, but still very difficult.
Judges are no longer human. They are hybrid “Robo-Judges” that only recognize and understand people with the title of “Esq. [Name of Attorney], Attorney for [Name of Plaintiff or Defendant]” anyone they see using the title of “Pro Se” or “In Pro Per” to them translates into “Alien” and “Language Uninterpretable”.
Doesn’t matter, even if you have the best Law Firm in the world draft and finalize everything you need for your entire case every step of the way for you to submit yourself, they will refuse to recognize any of it as cognizable within their “Lawful Diction” or “Jurisdiction” and you will lose.
Because they don’t believe that the law provides any such rights for any such persons, NO MATTER WHAT THE CASE.
From personal experience I can recommend “Jurisdictionary®”, a “Complete Case-Winning 24-Hour Self-Help Course” by Dr. Frederick D. Graves, JD ($249). When I was faced with foreclosure in 2008 I had no money for an attorney and no idea how to defend myself pro se. I found Dr. Graves’ website and borrowed the money from a friend to get the course. Thanks to Dr. Graves’ teaching I have been able to defend myself for 2 years (pro se for one year and then with the help of an attorney for the second year). I personally think this course should be taught in schools so that everyone can have an inkling how to win in court, as a plaintiff or as a defendant, with or without a lawyer. The Jurisdictionary® course is available here: http://how-to-win-in-court.pro-se-help.com At the very least I recommend requesting Dr. Graves’ free “Basic Lawsuit Flowchart”.
John Gault:
Thank you, thank you, thank you. What a great piece of information.
Another question. If the lender has been trying to foreclose for four years but has been unsuccessful because the client has held them off at the pass, can the lender abandon the foreclosure action, then file the suit against the note.
In some states, you cannot have it both ways as I understand it. So what do you think the lender’s position will be?. That case is now in appeals after four and one half years of fighting the pro se litigant.
Thank you for your response.
State of Arizona
Senate
Fiftieth Legislature
First Regular Session
2011
SB 1259
Introduced by
Senators Reagan, McComish: Biggs
If SB 1259 does not pass next week, then it defines the chain of corruption within the government / judges who ignore written law and side with the foreclosing bank who has no standing.
Remember, this PONZI scheme stole from the sub prime, fleeced the middle class, deflated your neighborhood, and now they steal your house payments, tax dollars and the homes
that surround your streets ! All for their unjust enrichment ! We shall no longer be enslaved to this scam !
Rabbit Hole, I don’t think lenders who get a judgment on the note are then entitled to foreclose. It’s called the One Action Rule. They chose the judgment on the note as their action. That’s all they get.
A pro se can win if he/she brings along a court
reporter. Corrupt Judges don’t like Court reporters
taking down their corrupt rulings.
Look at the counterfeit and forged Notes being
presented. This is not rocket science! Understand
the original Note was color copied and sold multiple times to multiple investors. It was paid off
several times over. It never made it into any “Trust”
and the original lender was dissolved years ago
without ever lawfully assigning the Note and the
MortgaGE. The pretender lenders are crooks pure
and simple. Without them, the Ponzi scheme falls
apart. Keep up the pressure on them!
leap frog:
Thanks for the heads up on ISSA. I was not aware of his background and had not yet had a chance to weigh in as to whether he was the right person to do what most certainly should be done. Never had any faith in any politician though. Now I know, thanks to you.
I am going to start pressing the attorney general – he owes us an explanation. Can’t say that I will believe him of course. His actions are going to tell the story.
uncle dunc: &
Why doesn’t anyone in discovery or Production ask to see the trust receipts when the Note is transferred to the Custodian? Does that not help as they are supposed to be checking it against their “Mortgage Loan Schedule” which effects the closing date and final loans to be accepted.
Perhaps the trust receipts don’t mean anything either. I used to file those receipts in the vault along with the original Note which according to most PSA was to be shipped to the custodian. Oh well, another fidiciary violation of the Trustee to the Trust.
I went pro se in the 90 s when Fidelity NY FSB a federal bank hid four of my mortgage checks (two each on two condos) The problem is the courts and judges dislike pro so defendants even when you are absolutely right on the law and proceedure.
Fidelity NY FSB went under and Astoria Federal S & L became Successor in interest and continued on with the fraudulent foreclosures.
No state trial judge nor state appelllate Judge would pay attention to the fraud. When I discovered the reason the bank hid my checks was to accelerate, foreclose and demand real money for the bank’s fake money, I filed a Federal Petition in District Court upon Federal Question On May 8, 1997. ( Upon the filing of a copy of the Federal Petition in the county clerks office of NY Supreme , State Court jurisdiction ceases and Federal Jurisdiction attaches).
On June 30 1997 the state court judge without jurisdiction signed the two void ab initio judgments of foreclosure
the Hon Louis L Stanton issued his first orders on June 11 1997 setting conference pursuant to rule 16 B. The order also stated that I make a monetary demand for settlement upon on the bank. Which I did.
. After the corrupt debt collector attorneys Mullooly Jeffrey Rooney and Flynn had signed judgments in their hand they apparently conned the Federal Judge to remand the case The case was remanded on July 29 1997 implying the Federal Court did not have jursdiction of who can make money.
(The federal Court has original jurisdiction of who can create money pursuant to Art 1 Para 10 Cl 1 of the US Constitiution)
Void Judgment ab initio are a nullity and have no latches.
The foreclosure judgments of June 30 1997 being void ab initio, the sales were no good and the deeds forgeries. I told the corrupt referee Penny Stark and the corrupt attorney Timothy Rooney “you cannot do this this is illegal” And corrupt Timothy Rooney said “who is going to stop us?” I was ousted.
In 2008 I went back to NY Supreme and sought two show cause orders to mark vacated two void judgments ab initio for lack of jurisdiction of New York Supreme Court., pursuant to the United States Supreme court case of Elliot v. Piersol.
At the first 2008 hearing in NY Supreme Judge Alice Schlesinger stated in front of Astoria Federal’s new attorney Arthur Walsh “why would the Federal court have sent this case back?
Astoria Federal having got rid of the corrupt attorneys Mullolly Jeffrey Rooney and Flynn that came with Fidelity NY and looking at all the facts Astoria Federal’s new attorney Mr Walsh stated It’s indemnify Indemnify Indemnify. We are stepping aside and the title companys are stepping in.
That should have been the end of this long nightmare.
But title attorneys corrupt Thomas Malone of Fidelity National Title and corrupt David K Fiveson of Coronet Title did not want to indemniy but wanted to be intervenors and be heard and what they told the court is time makes a forged deed good.
The title attorneys, Judge Schlesinger and I all know a forged deed has no equity. The only equity Thomas Malone of Fidelity National Title and David K Fiveson of Coronet Title were speaking of when they stated to Judge Schlesinger “we have equity” was the equity under the table for Judge Schlesinger and Judge Schlesinger ears perked up, she looked at me and said “it doesn’t look good for you” and she ignored Elliot v. Piersol and in her decision stated The judgments might not have been enforceable immediately” and then weaves a tale of hokus pokus how invalid judgments become valid. A JUDGMENT IS EITHER VALID OR INVALID
I timely appealed Judge Schlesinger decision . Also noticably absent from the appelate decision is the case of US Supreme court case of Elliot v. Piersol as they cover up for Judge Schlesinger.
I went straight to the Court of Appeals fpr leave to appeal and Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman decision states “Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
I made a motioin to the appellate court for a final determination within the meaning of the Constitution.
the
appellate Dept decision states “Motion to determine action within the meaning of the Constitiution for purposes of an appeal to the Court of Appeals, denied.
Judge Lippman has worked hard to get a deal going for these judges raises because they work so hard defending the Constitutiion.
That is exactly what I want for me that these judges write their decisions defending the Supremacy Clause and the Laws of the Landv(i.e. Elliot v. Piersol.
I am and always was the owner of these two NYC condos.
If this illegal ruling by Judge Schlesinger stands it destroys The Supremacy Clause of our Constitution and the March 3 1875 Act of Congress which states “It was the duty of the State Court to accept a Petition and proceed no further in such suit. The Record vested the Federal Court with complete jurisdiction.
Borrowers that can not afford there property, can’t afford an attorney, especially when the loan documents state the borrower is liable for all the Lender’s attorney fees during litigation…the deck is stacked against the borrower.
Also, banks/lenders don’t want to work out short sales or deed-in-lieus and now some banks are getting judgments on the notes and NOT foreclosing. WHY- research shows that the banks can report interest payments for nonperforming/defaulted loans until they are foreclosed, even if the borrowers are not making the payments. SOOOOO the banks can make there earnings look stronger. If the banks/lenders reported there nonperforming loans are not being paid by borrowers, there earnings would be awful…and possibly the FDIC would be rolling up and taking over because they would be insolvent, but the banks dragging out foreclosures and not working with borrowers to mitigate in the best interest of both parties.
The Government has helped stack the deck in the favor of the banks….BORROWERS DID NOT CREATE A PROPERTY HAVING A PURCHASE PRICE OF $710,000 in 2005 and now being worth $300,000….
I am not giving up, but that old saying: “you can’t fight city hall” sure rings true…you can’t fight city hall, when the courts, the bankers, and the US Government and FED, and FDIC, and Treasury don;t want the hood looked under to disclose this freaking mess….and “banks are too big to fail’ theory….what a mess.
Get a grip, I’m in 2 foreclosure right now – one pro se, the other with an old friend attorney. But, I’m doing the heavy lifting. I agree – nobody (other than Neil G) gets it and that’s a shame because too many people are getting screwed. My pro se involves blatant and copious fraud from the git-go. I hope to shut this one down on my own – but you can never tell. Judges are a real wild card in the process. This house I bought for my daughter who was in tough straight, but then they had to move to accept a job transfer – ugh! So I’m the one stuck. The other case is in WI where HFC refuses to own up to the fact that they securitized most, if not all, of their residential first mortgages. Problem is in their PSA and Prospectus filing they warn investors of a risk if the loans are not transferred in “true sales” to the trust. Talk about CYA!! Like the other banksters, HFC never intended to indorse anything. What’s more, they named themselves as originator and loan servicer… Pretty cool trick – you’d never know unless you read the SEC filings. But, my hurdle for my attorney and me is PROVING my loan was pooled with thousands of others (or intended to be) to support the next step in my defense – not a beneficiary, not a real party in interest.
Any comments or helpful suggestion to unravel HFC are most welcome.
Martharaysik:
The attorney Generals are at fault for not enforcing the law of the land at the State Level. Does anyone think I am wrong about this or what? No one addresses the attorney generals and I am at a loss as to understand why. The governor of course is next in line – Who is taking them to task?
This is where I will put forth my best effort possible.
They could have prevented this mess and most certainly could have stopped the banks in their tracks. We have a state banking system don’t we?
The Court system is so totally corrupt that they might as well have the “defendants” on the bench, smooth gavel in hand, contempt poking at the corners of downturned mouths.
I give up.
I give up on this hope I had of just being heard. That’s all I wanted.
I am a fair person, I would have been happy to have been restored to the position I was in.
I told the truth though, and this was my mistake!
Long ago I spent two years in pre-legal studies, I studied for the LSAT.
I would have aced it.
My GED score was the top 1% in the nation. I would not have settled for less then the best.
So many nights I tossed and turned, thinking of strategy…of arguments. I saw finally it would eat me alive.
I choose to take a less troubling path.
Now I think I wish I could go back. Is it too late? It might be.
I would go just so I could be a voice for those who can’t speak. Who are refused this right.
Like I was today.
I was on trial, I was the WHORE. I was the person trying to say these words that will hurt THE STOCKS.
Yes, I know.
But I will not lie down to this death quite yet. Not just yet.
I am not afraid!
Do they sense this? I think they do.
I am still a little ant though, in this word of dirty sand between the glass.
Do not delude yourself, you have no voice, this voice in my head speaks!
I only study one rule now.
The rule of the Appellate Court.
Today they might have thought they bested me, and they still might, but I am not down.
I already had a plan for today, and this was just a test.
It served me well.
DO not read to much into these words of a disturbed individual, they may not mean what they say.
Today though, I saw so, so much.
I am astonished that all these lawyers come into this court room to fight me. Why?
They do not need to send the minions, when the Judge is there to shout out Codes of procedure for them to use against me!
Do they need this help so badly..against a dreary middle-aged housewife?
Is she so worried for them that she must assist them in giving them legal strategys to use in their defense.?
That is the best defense.
What more do they need.
A soul perhaps?
Hey Joyce, Here’s the jointer info, however be carefully!
http://k2-law.com/mitchelstein.php
To Gary H, Contact me at 925-413-4584 to get a band together.
Borrowers that can not afford there property, can’t afford an attorney, especially when the loan documents state the borrower is liable for all the Lender’s attorney fees during litigation…the deck is stacked against the borrower.
Also, banks/lenders don;t want to work out short sales or deed-in-lieus and now some banks are getting judgments on the notes and NOT foreclosing. WHY- research shows that the banks can report interest payments for nonperforming/defaulted loans until they are foreclosed. SOOOOO the banks can make there earnings not look bad, but dragging out foreclosures and not working with borrowers to mitigate in the best interest of both parties.
The Government has helped stack the deck in the favor of the banks….BORROWERS DID NOT CREATE A PROPERTY HAVING A PURCHASE PRICE OF $710,000 in 2005 and now being worth $300,000….
I am not giving up, but that old saying: “you can’t fight city hall” sure rings true…you can’t fight city hall, when the courts, the bankers, and the US Government and FED, and FDIC, and Treasury don;t want the hood looked under to disclose this freaking mess….and “banks are too big to fail’ theory….what a mess.
James:
I thought there was a huge “joinder” lawsuit against the five biggest banks in California. Rather than a class action suit, attorneys have put together a different type of lawsuit that would allow individuals the right to claim their actual damages, or something to that effect. You have to pay up to $5000 to get in on that with the attorneys. Oh well.
If this was not correct information, please inform us as such. Thanks.
Joyce: Don’t pin your hopes on Issa. He made sure that JPM Chase was well protected in the recent hearings. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/26/darrell-issa-blocks-elijah-cummings_n_814277.html
The man has a criminal past (and present?) – although it takes one to know one – so that might be beneficial IF ONLY he were working for J6Ps best interests, instead of corporate America’s best interests.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darrell_Issa
Gary: great comments… I would be interested in starting a small group in So. Cal. I have a friend who has a Radio Show maybe we could get some air play, and spread the word!
It is all about the law and the attorney generals, the Congress and the Justice Department doing their job of stopping the banks in their tracks. The Congress is a joke and are no longer needed as they have clearly failed the American people who voted for them and pay their salaries. Have we forgotten that they work for us, we don’t work for th em?
I am sick of seeing the pathetic letters from Senators whereby they answer the homeowner with “thank you ma’m we will keep your ideas in mind with no suggestion of what they will or will not do and only a promise to look into the inquiry. Elections are over for now, they are back in office, but that can change as well.
Rep Issa may be the only man that can do something I don’t know what to believe. But he cannot get it done in time before millions more lose their homes. Why are we still putting money into these banks, and your President has clearly let you down. AS for the Justice Department, there is and has been no Justice for the people.
Everyone needs to rethink who they voted for with respect to the attorney generals in each and every state. I for one made a very grave mistake when I voted for the current attorney general. At the state level, which is where it should count, more could have been done to seize the opportunity to represent the people. What an in your face attitude by the attorney generals.
The idea that innocent people who have been so victimized and who cannot afford an attorney to represent themselves must continue to pay the salaries of these non performers who are supposed to be protecting the consumer. Your battle sir is not with the banks, but the attorney generals who fail to do their job and they too should be put to task for such shananigans. We the people……..what?
I really want to respond to this post, but I feel I would end up writing a book, and yes I do agree with Neils Editors Note…..thanks.
Yes I’m in pro-per now and every night that I sit at this computer I learn more. Never again will I be “taken” by an an Attorney that supposedly understands this mess, for the pure and simple fact that most “don’t understand”……as the ole song says…..”I won’t be fooled again”!
Re: John…..if you want to start a small group in So. Cal. let me know how we can make contact.
Gary