Recent Items

How Chase Ruined Lives of People Who Paid Off Their Mortgages

Posted on by

Matt Taibbi, in giving a well deserved thrashing to the banking industry’s Tokyo Rose, aka New York Fed director Kathryn Wylde, said:

[S]tealing is pretty much the worst thing that a bank can do — and these banks just finished the longest and most orgiastic campaign of stealing in the history of money.

Once you read the allegations in the cases included in this post, I strongly suspect you will agree that the “ruining lives” in the headline is not an exaggeration. And as important, these two cases, with very similar fact sets, also suggest that these abuses are not mere “mistakes”. These are clearly well established practices that Chase can’t be bothered to clean up, since cleaning them up costs money and letting them continue is more profitable.

Both cases took place in Alabama. In both cases, the borrowers had made every mortgage payment on time. One was a couple with three children, the Barnetts. The second is a widow, Besty Barlow, but her husband was still alive when this ugly saga started.

In both cases, the house burned down, The borrowers both had homeowners’ insurance. In the case of the Barnetts, they promptly notified Chase, their servicer, and made one mortgage payment post the fire. Both the homeowners and the insurer, State Farm, called Chase to get a ten day payoff amount. They were told not to make the next payment, since it would be included in the payoff amount. State Farm sent as check as instructed, asked that the mortgage be paid off, and Chase cashed the check.

But Chase did not pay off the mortgage. It put the funds in a suspense account The Barnetts found out the mortgage had not been paid off on their own, and called Chase to get the matter corrected. Chase then proceeded to harass the Barnetts for payment, calling at home and at work. Chase then ‘fessed up that they had the money, and asked the wife, April, to send a fax instructing them to make the payoff. They didn’t, called to pressure her again, and claimed they never got the fax. April repeated the process as instructed a second time (to a different number).

Chase continued to call demanding payment and then sent a letter stating that Fannie had refused the payoff due to “past due” amounts. Chase wanted an additional $8000, which consisted of fees that were not warranted and were due solely to the failure to pay off the mortgage with the money they had.

Around this time, April, who was over four months pregnant, miscarried, and she believes the miscarriage was as a result of the stress created by Chase. And this is far from the end of the mess: the “foreclosure” was reported to the credit bureaus, which meant the Barnetts, who have three children, which has thrown a big wrench into their efforts to get back on a normal footing (more ugly details in the filing).

Barnett v. Chase Home Loan Servicing

The Barlow case is just as ugly. Here, Chase refused to give a payoff amount, both to the adjustor and later to the Barlow’s counsel. Chase instructed the Barlows not to make a June 2010 payment and next month started harassing the Barlows, calling as many as six times a day. They continued to makes these calls even when told to stop, which is a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The Barlows finally got a payoff amount, the insurer sent a check for more than the amount due, and Chase rejected the payment (both via check and via the online payment system). When they finally accepted the payment, they put it in a suspense account and continued their demands for payment and threats to foreclose. A local law firm initiated foreclosure proceedings, which included running an ad in the local papers, which was humiliating. Chase reported the foreclosure to credit bureaus, which led banks to close nearly all of Mrs. Barlow’s credit cards. Mr. Barlow died of a heart attack. Even though the widow retained counsel and the local law firm said the foreclosure had been cancelled, the debt collectors continued to call Mrs. Barlow about her mortgage even though Chase knew she was represented by counsel. And to add insult to injury, Chase has force-place insurance of $2,317 on her vacant lot and wants to be paid for it too.

Barlow v. Chase Home Finance

In Alabama, wrongful foreclosure, by statute, is treble damages. Recent cases have awarded much bigger multiples. Both cases allege grounds for damages in addition to wrongful foreclosures. Alabama also recognizes emotional distress as a cause for damages when a home is at stake.

These are not “mistakes”. This conduct can only be described as evil.

Chase was given multiple opportunities to correct the error and couldn’t be bothered. And the fact that this happened in two cases in a relative short time proximity (one house burned down in May 2010, the other in June) and in both cases, the funds were put in suspense account, suggests that this is policy (houses burning down and insurers making payoffs are hardly extraordinary events).

In other words, this is the banking version of exploding Pintos. Ford did not fix the defect in its fuel tank design because they figured it would cost less to pay out the damages on claims for death and dismemberment than fix the design flaw. Similarly, Chase evidently figures it can bulldoze people, extract more fees from them by engaging in conduct that is unquestionably against the law (see the cases for details), and maybe once in a while it gets caught and has to write a big check.

It is also revealing that the only time Chase has bowed and scraped before authority and moved quickly to clean up its act in the mortgage servicing arena is in the case of wrongful military foreclosures. The banking lobby apparently has not made serious inroads into the military-industrial complex.

Where, pray tell, is the OCC? Clearly, that’s a rhetorical question, since the OCC seems to regard regulation as unwarranted interference with the banks’ right to loot. But the persistent and willful nature of Chase’s misconduct reveals that the OCC is effectively a criminal co-conspirator of the banks. The OCC is responsible for operational supervision, and the failure to see and correct this (at best) gross incompetence is prima facie evidence of a “see no evil” policy.

Print Friendly
Twitter119DiggReddit151StumbleUpon1Facebook612LinkedIn9Google+14bufferEmail

137 comments

    1. Jim

      As long as O is president they will never go to jail.
      Everything that Chase is doing has the OK from Geithner.

      1. required

        good heavens, think of the children! have you no heart?

        i’m sure obama has only the little people in mind while ritually servicing the banksters…after all, if the banksters go down they’ll take the entire edifice down with them and then what will become of the little people who have next to nothing? why they’ll lose the near nothingness they have which would be the most unthinkable crime of all.

        see, obama is always thinking of the little people

  1. bob

    Saw this on wikipedia, it sums things up nicely with regard to the OCC-

    Headquartered in Washington, D.C., it has four district offices located in New York City, Chicago, Dallas and Denver. It has an additional 48 field offices throughout the United States, and a London office to supervise the international activities of national banks. It is an independent bureau of the United States Department of the Treasury and is headed by the Comptroller of the Currency. The OCC fulfills a number of main objectives:

    ensures the safety and soundness of the national banking system;

    fosters competition by allowing banks to offer new products and services;

    improves the efficiency and effectiveness of OCC supervision especially to reduce the regulatory burden;

    ensure fair and equal access to financial services to all Americans;

    enforces anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism finance laws that apply to national banks and federally-licensed branches and agencies of international banks; and

    is the agency responsible for investigating and prosecuting acts of misconduct committed by institution-affiliated parties of national banks, including officers, directors, employees, agents and independent contractors (including appraisers, attorneys and accountants).

    The second two should be moved to the top and the rest should be deleted. I wouldn’t brag about any of those “achievements”, especially the last.

    1. The iTod

      Someone needs to get serious and use RICO on the banks. They are almost all engaged in large scale criminal conspiracy. This is the best example of organized crime. Better than the mafia ever was.

      1. Middle Seaman

        Couldn’t agree more. We have to remember that the White House is occupied by banking forces.

      2. i

        Oh! I get it. You’re implying that there’s a difference between the mafia and the federal government. Funny! I just didn’t get it for a few seconds.

      3. readerOfTeaLeaves

        Ah, this might be the spot for a link to a post by Marcy Wheeler, aka Emptywheel. Per the RICO and criminal charges bantered about here, she wrote about JPMC fined $88 million for trading with Cuba, Sudan, Iran, and Liberia.

        http://www.emptywheel.net/2011/08/25/jamie-dimons-company-fined-88-3-million-for-trading-with-the-enemy/

        Much more of this stuff, and Yves, Taibbi, Emptywheel, and Nick Shaxson are going to become viewed as the world’s greatest True Crime writers.

  2. vlade

    I’d like someone to tell me why, in so famously litigious country, the ambulance lawyers aren’t on this left right and centre.
    Surely, if they can chase malpractice, and any industry you can think of with far less proveable and obvious claims, they should be able to do in the banks for this?

    I’d have thought the whole bank system fiasco (for the whole foreclosure and related issues is nothing but crap systems and total unwilingness to invest in a proper solution, “saving money” and “creating efficiencies”) would be a golden mine for them…

    1. gs_runsthiscountry

      “I’d like someone to tell me why, in so famously litigious country, the ambulance lawyers aren’t on this left right and centre.”

      Well, maybe, because those lawyers feel the same way Jamie Dimon feels. Understand? [emphasis sarcasm].

      ——-

      Maybe this excerpt from a May 13, 2010 NYT article with Ace Greenberg will explain things a bit more clearly.


      http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/16/magazine/16fob-q4-t.html?dbk

      “” How do you feel about the Democrats’ push to regulate derivatives?
      I feel about it the same way that Jamie Dimon does.

      And how is that?
      I don’t know how he feels, but I feel the same way. Understand?

      Not really.
      I don’t want to say anything that might be contrary to how JP Morgan Chase feels. This is a very sensitive topic.

      You’re 82 years old, and you’ve led a very full life. Why do you care what Jamie Dimon thinks of you?
      I’m in the noon of my career. I’m not going to mess it up. “”

      1. vlade

        I could understand that from the big partnerships, but I’d still expect some ambitious and ruthless small-scale unknown lawyer taking this on to make his/her name (regardless of the result). It’s a prime material to get a good PR, settle out of court (banks should be willing to pay just to stop this making to the court and running any investigation), and move to higher places.

        1. Middle Seaman

          A possible explanation is that such lawyers know their judges and know that the judges will side with the banks. It does happen a lot.

          1. dearieme

            I’m baffled. I can see that the man in the street might find many aspects of bank misbehaviour rather too abstract to understand easily, but I’m puzzled that simple, concrete misbehaviour like this doesn’t stir up widespread populat anger. Is everyone fast asleep? Drugged? Boozed? Sunk in a well of self-absorption?

          2. vlade

            That’s a possibility too. But not knowing US legal sysetm that well, I’d have though that if this was the case, you’d do two things:
            - find a friendly judge (and there must be some, there were anti-bank rulings)
            - appeal and push it up the PR chain to get media coverage. Surely someone (and that someone doesn’t have to be a current incumbent, or in one of the two partie) in the US must believe there’s political mileage to be made out of this?

            Historically, taking these things in front of a court, run the appeals and milking them for what it was worth was one of the ways to get things done in the US political system.

          3. Alice

            I had hope too that the lawyers would look to this as an opportunity to right this wrong. What I have been reading, however, is that the lawyers that ‘get it’ are being bullied by thier bar associations. I also get the distinct impression that the judges are as ignorant of securitizaion as are most attorneys. They are still ‘old school’ and don’t have the time or desire to research this subject to realize they are condoning fraud on the court every time they approve a foreclosure based on fraudulent docs with chain of title issues. I don’t understand what makes them immune to being sued for being a party to this fraud. I am sure we will read stories that will reveal that the judges will one day become victims of this scam as I believe what goes around comes around. Perhaps that is the day they will finally start paying attention.

          4. Nathanael

            The biggest problem is that most of these crimes are, well, *crimes*. While your average ambulance chaser can file *civil suits*, there is no way for a private lawyer to file a criminal lawsuit in the United States.

        2. Madoff_This

          We are trying. It has been a tough argument to make even with stories like this on our side. Most people want to believe that the system cannot be this corrupt or the money this pretend. Even homeowners want to feel like George Bailey writes them a personal check and hangs onto their note in a safe-deposit box down at the Bank.

          But, the tide is turning. Small victories are being made, and hopefully, with the cannibalism going on in cases like AHMSI vs. LPS, we can get valuable discovery that we couldn’t get otherwise.

    2. JamesW

      It’s called thirty years of predatory jurisprudence (US Supreme Court decisions and Fed. court level decisions) coupled with predatory legilation from congress.

      Go back and read the Private Securities Legal Reform Act of 1996, etc., and then study the great public service attorney, Thomas Linzey, whom you’ll learn a lot from.

      1. JamesW

        Sorry, that was the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1996, which stemmed from the Supreme Court decision, Central Bank of Denver v. First Interstate Bank of Denver (1994), plus a bunch of other financial fraud decriminalization legislation (Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000), etc., going back many, many years.

        And when that doesn’t work, they simply buy the judge….

    3. matt weidner

      All I do is fight the banks all day long every single day and have done it for years. The problem is (SURPRISE) they have written the laws to protect themselves and there are almost no avenues for relief….and that’s even before you get to a bank tilted judge….forget what you think you know about the law…it does not apply to banking criminals….

    4. David

      If you’re a lawyer in private practice, with a family to feed, a house of your own to make payments on, and law school debt to pay off, you are hardly going to want to take on the banking industry.

      David vs. Goliath makes a nice story, but lawyers are not more brave than your average person. Less brave, extremely conservative and calculating, in my experience.

  3. attempter

    Well now, surely they can be reformed.

    After all, not only is the reform of an entity like this possible, but it’s also desirable, since a big bank does so many socially useful things.

    We definitely need for banks to own land. Look at how well that’s working out, how productive and moral it is.

    And most of all, we need such elites to run the economy, since it’s just not possible that the people could do a better job ruling themselves.

    Conservatives and liberals agree 100% on those propositions, so they must be true, no?

    1. JamesW

      And while you are being sarcastic, of course,

      “..We definitely need for banks to own land.”

      With the takeover by JPMorgan Chase of WaMu and Bear Stearns, JPMC effectively became the largest land-holder in America (picked up majority ownership of Plum Creek Corp./REIT).

      Must be the game plan, huh?

  4. Jules

    Chase used to have their call center in India (and may still), where the ‘customer service’ reps would read from a script in response to customer requests such as payoff statements. If your question involved anything ‘outside the box’ of the script you were not going to get it resolved because the reps would not vary from the script. Instead they would repeat the same phrases over and over. This is what outsourcing brought to the mortgage industry. A complete lack of knowledge and training.

  5. Woodrow Wilson

    Maybe when bankers, and the politicians that enable this crap, are found hanging from lampposts, this looting and pillaging stop.

    Either that, Americans have become so pacified drooling over whatever they see & hear on MSM, status quo will remain.

    You know when CNBC mentions NC AND Zero Hedge in the same sentence, and trying to dismiss NC & ZH, you know you’re getting to them. Keep it up.

    1. Foppe

      Hiya Woodrow,

      Remember 1919, when you said the following?

      Since trade ignores national boundaries and the manufacturer insists on having the world as a market, the flag of his nation must follow him, and the doors of the nations which are closed against him must be battered down. Concessions obtained by financiers must be safeguarded by ministers of state, even if the sovereignty of unwilling nations be outraged in the process. Colonies must be obtained or planted, in order that no useful corner of the world may be overlooked or left unused.

        1. ambrit

          My Dear Foppe;
          I’m certain our American Cousins remember the Navigation Acts and all the disquietitude they engendered.
          Oh yes, and the Battle of Medway…

    2. nonclassical

      ..reading “Free Speech In Its Forgotten Years” one can see
      it was ever thus..

      ..does anyone believe banks were not out to burden Americans
      with credit card and other sorts of debt leading up to economic destruction? Does anyone believe lobbyists writing
      bankruptcy legislation had no idea economy was about to “crash”?

      Americans burdened with debt are not “free” to protest such,
      even if they can ascertain what has happened-which is NOT in evidence in mainstream media…

      ..there has been a total lack of transparency, oversight, accountability…

  6. Billy Bob

    The general populace is not infuriated by this kind of behavior because it doesn’t know about it. There are thousands of such cases of evil by bankers occurring every day in every part of the country (although these must be near the top of the list), yet they are only reported by a few media outlets episodically and sparingly and are ignored or avoided the rest of the time. The few cases that are reported thus seem like accidental outliers by one bank in one place, rather than as more examples among many of patterns of intentional criminal conduct by many big banks. Of course, this is just one more place where Obama’s bully pulpit would be more than enough to highlight and shame criminal conduct by those doing God’s work if he were to use it.

    The ugly truth is that the men and women at Chase who decide that policies like this should be implemented and sustained attended the same schools and belong to the same clubs as the media stars, judges, top regulators, plaintiffs’ attorneys and politicians who have the power to call them to heel. They consider what they have done and continue to do to people like the Barlows and Barnetts as proof of their superior intelligence, not evidence of biblical-level evil. This kind of conduct should be punished in the strongest possible fashion, by the certainty of physical abuse in prison and life long poverty once they get out. As if …

    1. Stump Jethro

      “The general populace is not infuriated by this kind of behavior” I disagree with that, all walks of life are starting to discover what terrorism is.

    2. Linus Huber

      Yes, I do think too that people are waking up
      I will not be happy until those thieves are in jail and the enablers (mainly politicians) too, if possible.

    3. JamesW

      “Of course, this is just one more place where Obama’s bully pulpit would be more than enough to highlight and shame criminal conduct by those doing God’s work if he were to use it.”

      Well, if you’re being serious and still are unaware of Obama of Wall Street being in the banksters’ pocket, then count yourself among the group you are espousing about!

      True, there is no difference between the hard propaganda of Fox and the soft propaganda of NPR — both scream “conspiracy theory” whenever the Fed or IMF or status quo is criticized, but more so the facts of the matter and that it simply breaks down to the dual strategy of the banksters’ OPM (Other People’s Money) and their leveraged buyout pump-and-dump of America: taking out colossal debt against the American economy and government via their private equity leveraged buyouts, hedge funds, jobs offshoring, and all of the aforesaid ultra-leveraged by structured finance securitizations and layer upon layer of credit derivatives.

  7. craazyman

    I’m actually at a point where I would not take out a mortgage — from any large systemically dangerous institution — for fear the bank would find some way to ensnare me and financially murder me, even through gross negligence as much as intent.

    And for fear that, if they did, the U.S. court system would be so bought-and-paid-for by the banks that it would not give me a chance at justice.

    Congratulations, banking industry. Congratulations Obama administration. You all deserve each other. But we don’t deserve either of you.

    My point of view may be a little eccentric, but given the news of the past few years, I think it’s defensible and possibly even prudent. I wonder how many other people feel this way. Probably enough to put a big dent in the business plans of the too-big-to-control banks.

    1. monday1929

      No, not eccentric at all. By the extremity of their actions the criminal Elites have justified taking the law into ones own hands, in the minds of those radicalized by those crimes. Jamie Dimon now has the blood of Mr. Barlow and that Baby on HIS hands, and as I have expressed here before, I fear that those with the correct training and skills, ie. ex-miitary will, seeing the loss of the Rule of Law, begin systematic executions of leading bankers and “regulators”. It would be far better to restore the Rule of Law than to see street justice dispensed to the likes of Jamie Dimon and his family.

    2. CaitlinO

      We’ve come to the exact same conclusion. We’ll be looking for a retirement home in another decade or so and are saving for it now with the intention of paying cash. We also intend to have a full forensic title audit done before we close. Sadly, this seems to be the route a prudent person has to take today.

    3. razer

      Craazyman is 100% sane here. Housing finance is a playground full of child molesters and the consumer is a little blond kid. Nothing justifies the danger of consumer finance when a predatory mafia rules the government like this.

    4. Alice

      You are hardly the crazy one here. You are the smart one and this is coming from someone who made a career in the mortage business. The ‘biggest investment in your life’ is what we told our loan applicants. I would never advise anyone to buy a home today. I have read the docs they are having people sign at closing and the only thing the pretender lenders have left out are the requirement that you turn your fist born over to them.

    5. JamesW

      While your point is correct, it simply demonstrates how limited the usual POV is given when one is viewing the situation from their own personal vantage point — it’s not about the infantilized American consumer (not being offensive here, but that is how they’ve gamed it from birth) — to view EVERYTHING on how we are affected, not bothering to look at the big picture — which would lay bare their overall game strategy.

      When 2017 rolls around, and the government is dissolved through lack of funds and overburdening debt, and the military is completely privatized, i.e., given away to the properly designated bankster or corporation, and the regions have balkanized into their individual state configurations, their end strategy will have come to fruition. The dump of their pump-and-dump will have come to be.

    6. Nathanael

      You’re quite sensible. I bought my house in cash, and I’ve told all my friends to only consider mortgages which are (1) not resaleable and (2) from local credit unions or local banks.

  8. Deb Schultz

    I rarely, if ever, read of such things in the regular media. Are they being regularly reported on television media? I think this lack of coverage explains the lack of outrage and public outcry. The apparent media take on these events is that they are one-offs. When they are reported, the focus is on the individuals’ distress rather than on the systemic criminalism of the banks involved.

    It seems to me that the supposed liberal media shows, such as Ed Schultz and Rachel Maddow, could be doing a weekly feature on these sorts of events, perhaps even a daily feature. They could be doing in-depth analysis of the banks’ tactics and the ways these behaviors profit the banks. But these programs seem to me to be hampered by their political focus. This is truly unfortunate because clearly red and blue Americans are being screwed by the banks and the financiers.

    1. Alice

      I really wonder if Ed or Rachel even understand securitization and how this affects them personally. I don’t this the american people fully grasp what has happened. They will eventually begin to understand as they are faced with buying and selling r.e. and are hit hard with clouded title issues. All this short sale, modification, principal reduction talk is just that, talk. Every homeowner has to experience this personally to even begin to understand the complexity and enormity of this mess. The majority of the american people don’t think it affects them…they will find out that is does. Ed or Rachel would do well to begin a series starting at the beginning, when the borrower begins the loan process and how it was rigged against them the minute they walked into an office to apply for financing.

      1. David

        But what does this story have to do with securitization? Is it that expensive for a servicer to note that a particular loan is paid off, and to file whatever paperwork is needed to update the records of whatever CDOs it’s a part of?

        It seems to me that these cases are the least likely to cause problems with payoff, so I am surprised by them. The collateral is down to the value of the land because the house burned down. So the bank has less to gain by foreclosure. I’d expect this sort of shenanigans more with houses that didn’t burn down, especially those whose value has held up.

    2. JamesW

      “…supposed liberal media shows…”

      You may be falling for the oil company people’s propaganda (such as those effectively timed reports from the so-called “non-partisan” Pew Reseaarch Center — funded by the major oil corps.) about any such “liberal” media — the only liberal media I’m aware is tucradio.org and Bonnie Faulkner’s Guns and Butter program from Berkeley.

      And Rachel — who has gotten better, but has wasted time interviewing Council on Foreign Relations types in the past — and Ed aren’t really particulary progressive, but far more status quoy and relatively limited in both outlook and knowledge, having little understanding of anything but the often-repeated “bad mortgage” memes, not cognizant that securitized mortgages were but a drop in the huge lake of faulty securitizations: student loans securitizations, student charges & fees, auto loans, health securitizations, commercial real estate securitizations, corporate securitizations, etc., etc., all leading to ultra-leveraged debt speculation.

  9. F. Beard

    Why do we even need banks? We don’t. So-called “credit” is just a means to steal purchasing power from each other for the benefit of the banks.

  10. niat holder

    As a novice (who has read Taibbi’s pieces for years) I only know that some of the victims are elderly. I keep asking myself where are their family to protest these outrages? Who represents the most egrious confiscations of property?

    1. Alice

      The elderly are such easy pickings and many own their homes free and clear. They are of the same mindframe that believe that there primary physician is God. One good thing about the baby boomer generation is that we are now past that and are beginning to question everything. To get our parents to that point is an overwhelming task. The people that bought in the last few years don’t understand the way a home loan was supposed to work so don’t know how they were used by the mortgage industry to fill the coffers of the investors of MBS. They don’t understand the ramifications of clouded titles and the fact that this problem will haunt them for decades.

      1. JamesW

        To augment Alice’s wonderful remarks, here is how it went:

        Corporate investors bought many lots of houses, buildings, etc., then flipped them back and forth to each other, artificially driving up their price, then sold the mortgages, then began the process of securitizing said mortgages, generating layer upon layer upon layer of credit derivatives, thus one facet of the shadow banking system.

        And such layers of structured finance leveraged loans, or layers of securitized financial instruments, allowed for, and still does, ultra-leveraging of oil, energy, and commodities, but the senior-most level of ultra-leveraging is on debt speculation.

        And so it goes……

    1. monday1929

      Because they are not People in THAT sense. Only in the sense that they can buy the political process with impunity.

  11. Michael Olenick

    Both cases dance around the one player in the foreclosure fraud fiasco that has, up to now, escaped notice, vilification, and investigation: Forced Placed Insurance, one of the drivers behind the scam.

    In short, crooked insurance companies place insanely overpriced policies — not only too expensive, but also for vastly more than the value of the house — and collect when Fannie, Freddie, some other mortgage insurer, the homeowner, whoever — pay it off.

    Just like LPS is the lead company that enables the crooked lawyers they have an evil twin that enables the FPI scam. I won’t say who they are but they’re enormous, they know that they’re enabling overt fraud, they profit from the fraud: they’re rotten to the CORE.

    Soon enough they’ll join LPS in the corporate doghouse — and eventually maybe their executes can hang out together in the very real Big House — which also makes their already under-performing stock a really good short.

    As for the OCC, the SEC, or anybody else in government forget about it; they’re worthless. But the market itself delivers a more punishing thrashing to corporate wrongdoers. You see, even though they consider crime “good business,” and even though their cronies in DC agree, there are a whole lot of investors, competitors, and others who just strongly disagree, and who vote w/ actions, not words.

    1. monday1929

      I see Assurant (AIZ) is a big player. A quick Google shows a “big” AG investigation of the Forced Place insurers in March of 2010, I assume the bad players are in jail by now :-). Assurant has some of the characteristics for a short for me, and blatant criminality COULD become a liability as the Crash deepens.
      Humorously, it looks like this “industry”, among other evil acts, would RETROACTIVELY insure against,say, a hurricane, AFTER there had been none in the time period covered. It seems the “regulators” are beginning to “frown upon this practice.”
      I will research other miscreants in the business, thanks for the tip.

      1. monday1929

        I see too that the servicers, like Chase, allow the policies to lapse, then require the Forced Place at vastly higher rates at their in-house units, or get kick-backs from outside insurers. All this is done rather openly it seems; The Bold, Boot on you Neck of Fascism at its naked worst. A good, free-market loving, pro-American Way lawyer can load up on Puts and sue the Hell out of these guys. There is no conflict of interest if you wear your lapel USA Flag pin, right?

        1. Chase Sandwich

          From the FBI’s mortgage fraud report from 2010:

          “Mortgage fraud perpetrators include licensed/registered and non-licensed/registered mortgage brokers, lenders, appraisers, underwriters, accountants, real estate agents, settlement attorneys, land developers, investors, builders, bank account representatives, and trust account representatives. ”

          Jamie Dimon:
          “We have an outstanding strategic position, a great brand, strong character, fantastic employees and a remarkable future. Welcome.”

        2. Mildred Wilkins

          Had to chime in here.

          Force-placed insurance is allowed by ALL mortgages. It is included in the contract which all borrowers sign at closing so that the lenders can be sure that their interests are covered in the event the consumer fails to keep the insurance covered.

          Would you be surprised to learn the ALMOST ALWAYS the forced placed insurance carrier is an affiliate, business partner or subsidiary of the lender? Coverage will ALWAYS be at an excessive rate, for less protection for the homeowner. This is alluded to in the disclosure which is in the closing documents but who reads it, understands it or even knows that it is there?

          I am absolutely agreeing that it is yet another part of the grand scheme to stack the deck against the common man.

          The more you understand this mess the sicker it makes you.

          I feel really bad for anyone who is purchasing a home today. A-N-Y-O-N-E. The cards are so stacked against you that you are screwed no matter what you do . . . . .

          unless . . . .

          You realize and accept that your title is hopelessly scrambled if MERS was involved and/or your loan was securitized. In either of those cases if you have the mental strength to plant your feet and decide to fight to REQUIRE documentation of who is the rightful holder of your note, not just the mortgage and you ain’t paying nobody until you have such documentation, THEN you can amass quite a savings account while they try to find the documentation–which DOES NOT EXIST.

    2. LucyLulu

      I’ll name another big insurer — Balboa. They also coincidentally happen to be a subsidiary of Bank of America.

  12. Hair Blankfine

    Miscarriages and heart attacks happen all the time. It’s a result of American’s poor eating habits and sheer laziness.

    Chase was acting within its rights. Everything Chase did here was honorable and in accord with accepted business practices. These deadbeat homeowners deserved everything they got.

    All you conspiracy nuts with your tin foil hats had better understand this.

    1. Sleeper

      Sorry Mr. Hair, but the banks are clearly criminal enterprises.

      For example here in North Carolina according to annecdotal remarks an attorney who works around a large military base tells a mutual friend that when the banks are caught red handed, the banks simply stall and move on to the next prospect. The banks very much relY on folks without the means to support a leagal fight.

      At no time do the banks consider quitting their criminal behavior.

      This is criminal behavior which is openly supported at the highest level of our government.

    2. CaitlinO

      You obviously didn’t read the court filings.

      From the Urban Dictionary:

      willful ignorance

      (noun)
      The practice or act of intentional and blatant avoidance, disregard or disagreement with facts, empirical evidence and well-founded arguements because they oppose or contradict your own existing personal beliefs.

    3. Alice

      Thank you Mr. Hair, I can forgive ignornace..lack of kowledge…hopefully you will do some more research before posting ignorant statements on this blog. Your post indicates that you know little to nothing about what has transpired in the last decade. The good thing is that you are here and should you stay, you will be enlightened. The deadbeat homeowner meme is a dead argument. The posters here are far ahead of you in understanding and it would behoove you to read and learn.

      1. Johnny Clamboat

        Look at the nickname of the original poster again and determine if it was a serious post.

        1. Alice

          Guess I missed the snark. As you can tell from my posts I take this very seriously and sometimes miss the absurd. I really had no idea why Hair would post such an ignorant statement..

  13. jm

    All I can say is that I’m certainly glad our Democratic president has as his current Chief of Staff a former JP Morgan Chase Vice Chair and head of the Office of Corporate Responsibility. I’m sure Bill Daley will have this practice ended in no time.

  14. Intentional Deception

    We need to foreclose on Jamie Dimon. A national take down / peace movement. If enough people demand Dimon and his cronies symbolic removal from their homes (that we’ve actually paid for) – we can turn the tide on vicious financial confidence games. Impeaching Obama, demanding an end to destructive confidence games from the elite. An eye for an eye; this is the mode of operation for JP Morgan. We’ve tried remediation, modification and the animal has shown it’s aggressive disdain for anything other then punitive violence.

    1. decora

      Surely you know that Jamie Dimon is a nice old grandfatherly figure, after all Bill Pullman played him in the HBO version of Too Big To Fail

      And after reading Fool’s Gold, don’t you understand that Jamie is the maverick bank CEO, who cared about the back-office people? Not a sparrow fell (or, well, I mean not a telephone servicing contract went overpayed) that Mr Dimon did not know about it!

      Pay no attention to Taibbi and Smith. This is supposed to be a happy recession. Let’s not bicker and argue about who did Magnetar Trades with who.

  15. Fraud Guy

    The laws related to call recording need to be changed, as they facilitate this type of behavior by businesses. When you call Chase or almost any big business, you get the standard message that the call is being recorded. In order for you to record the call too, in many states you need to get the other party’s permission. If you seek it, many call center operators are trained to immediately hang up.

    The law should clearly give a consumer a right to record any call that a business is also recording. If that were the case, services like Google Voice could take on the role of trusted intermediary, in effect offering a “notarized call” service, where they would retain custody of the recording but allow the caller to access it online and to share it with the call center to back up claims or to post publicly so that the world could see how they were ripped off.

    Back in the days of letter correspondence, people had a record of these type of interactions. The law needs to catch up with the technological and social reality of how the interactions now occur.

    1. Alice

      I have been reading correspondence that a friend has allegedly been receving from their servicer/debt collector. Every letter received by them is lacking a name or signature. I find it quite interesting that the company involved is afraid to put a name on any correspondence. A professional company does not act in the manner. To me this is an admission of quilt and clear evidence that the fraud is pervasive. Further, who knows if they are even coming from the servicer/debt collector…they appear to have no ‘real person’ employees.

      1. Mildred Wilkins

        Unsigned letters from the lender…

        I have not seen this addressed very often on any thread but it is a widespread practice… across the country.. so it appears to be a standard practice by most of the lenders/servicers.

        We want to help you, get in touch with us…. with no name and frequently either no number or a number which leads to no-where.

        I taught foreclosure intervention to real estate professionals for several years (REALTORS, attorneys and housing counselors. A major part of what I taught included
        an understanding of what I called ‘the bank GAME’. The GAME includes a requirement from the insurers/investors that the lender/servicer be in touch with the borrower at certain points. They must complete a checklist which says that they sent out e-number of letters, made phone contact, etc.

        There is NO requirement that there be a sincere attempt to resolve anything. Only the paper trail which shows they did certain things, at certain times.

        No matter what banksters say to the contrary, they do not want to resolve the issue with borrowers. It is more financially beneficial for the bank to foreclose.

        Before you start yelling let me respectively tell you that as a professional for many years in this field I am better qualified than most to make such a statement

        Banks benefit, SIGNIFICANTLY, from foreclosures. (
        Insurers, Investors do NOT.

        If banks didn’t benefit they would

      2. Mildred Wilkins

        Unsigned letters from the lender…

        I have not seen this addressed very often on any thread but it is a widespread practice… across the country.. so it appears to be a standard practice by most of the lenders/servicers.

        We want to help you, get in touch with us…. with no name and frequently either no number or a number which leads to no-where.

        I taught foreclosure intervention to real estate professionals for several years (REALTORS, attorneys and housing counselors. A major part of what I taught included
        an understanding of what I called ‘the bank GAME’. The GAME includes a requirement from the insurers/investors that the lender/servicer be in touch with the borrower at certain points. They must complete a checklist which says that they sent out e-number of letters, made phone contact, etc.

        There is NO requirement that there be a sincere attempt to resolve anything. Only the paper trail which shows they did certain things, at certain times.

        No matter what banksters say to the contrary, they do not want to resolve the issue with borrowers. It is more financially beneficial for the bank to foreclose.

        Before you start yelling let me respectively tell you that as a professional for many years in this field I am better qualified than most to make such a statement

        Banks benefit, SIGNIFICANTLY, from foreclosures.
        Investors/Insurers DO NOT.

        (I can explain but it would take 200+ words and that is not the point I was addressing)

        If banks didn’t benefit they would get serious about loss mitigation, including modifications.

        Question everyone needs to ponder…

        Where, oh where do all the BILLIONS for bonuses and company jets and country clubs come from????

    2. JamesW

      “The laws related to call recording need to be changed, as they facilitate this type of behavior by businesses.”

      But see, this commenter, Fraud Guy, sadly appears to be serious, as if a legal change really has anything to do with all the predatory jurisprudence put in place over many years, along with the complementary predatory legislation.

      This is a perfect example of people falling for one of those thousand points of confusion, and why that strategy is always successful.

      Really, either we have an almost universally autistic population, or Peter G. Peterson’s Sesame Street project has been successful, and few citizens have an attention and memory span beyond 10 seconds!

      It isn’t a coincidence that JPMorgan Chase has paid out over $7 billion in fraud lawsuits and legal settlements over the past 10 years; nor when they colluded with Enron back in the lat ’90s to hide loans to Enron as commodity trades.

      All those criminal penalties levied against Eli Lilly, HCA, Merck, Pfizer, etc., weren’t a fluke, but a long pattern.

      When the banksters gather at their Wolfsberg Group to write anti-money laundering laws, then all end up paying paltry penalties for flagrant money laundering practics, it isn’t about “anti-money laundering” but controlling the money laundering market.

      When the IMF, through their Egmont Group, establishes Financial Intelligence Units at the world’s offshore finance centers (some 95 at last count), it isn’t about defeating money laundering, but about controlling it.

      Please, stop focusing on one of those thousand points of confusion and start looking at the BIG PICTURE!

    1. Sleeper

      Has any one noticed -

      NC seems to be getting more comments

      NC seems to be getting more media coverge

      And the post are turning much more blood thirsty

      1. monday1929

        And only Socionomics could have anticipated this turn for the worse in the Shared Social Mood of the Herd. If the intepretation of the Fractal is correct, things will be getting much worse.

      2. Yves Smith Post author

        More bad facts are coming to light. I’m disgusted, as readers are, that nothing has been done and criminal or simply fraudulent behavior is being coddled.

  16. Fred

    I’m calling a friend with a Chase account, asking him to read this story and am going to suggest a small local bank as an alternate. Every good American should do the
    same.

  17. Paul Jurczak

    Yves, please keep us posted on how these lawsuits develop. These being such a clear cut cases, I would be surprised if plaintiffs would not prevail.

  18. Jim3981

    Wells Fargo pulled a cute little trick on me, at the last second, and foreclosed.

    I was in default, but in communication with Wells Fargo. They said on the phone they would consider a short sale or a deed in Lue. I brought Wells a solid offer and called them on the phone to verify. The offer would have paid off the entire loan, paid the Real Estate Agent, and I would have come out with my credit.

    Soon as Wells noticed the purchase contract was worth more than the payoff amount, they immediately foreclosed. ALmost like they thought they could make a few extra bucks or be better off by avoiding a good sale.

    Seems like very strange behavior, or maybe just complete incompetence. Either is good reason to let them fail and go find another lower paying job for a start-up bank like every other industry that isn’t bailed out by the fed and government.

    1. Fraud Guy

      If it had been legal for you to record the call, you would have had evidence that you had a contract with the bank to accept the short sale and that they subsequently broke it.

      1. Nathanael

        Thank God I haven’t had to deal with banksters for a while, but I routinely record phone conversations with health insurers.

  19. Jean

    Step 1) Anyone who reads this piece needs and still carries a Chase credit card needs to today, take the appropriate steps to cancel that account. Job #1, start now.

    Do not do it over the phone or by email. Initiate the action using certified mail, receipt requested, for this and any subsequent communication. Accept written responses only. Perhaps include a copy of this piece to explain your action.

    Step 2) Copy your certified letter to Chase, along with this article, to friends and family, and plead with them to do the same, first of all, for their own protection, and secondly, to make Chase fully aware of what has gone on.

    Step 3) Treat your dealings with the rest of TBTF in similar fashion, certified mail, receipt requested.

    1. Alice

      This is excellent advice. I totally agree that all correspondence with these companies must be in writing. I have read too many horror stories about phone calls and he said, she said. No one at these companies appear to document anything regarding a phone conversation and as one never gets the same person twice it is quite hard to get a clear answer. The answers appear to be read from scripts as someone else mentioned. By writing them one has a record of correspondence to them even if they respond with an unsigned form letter. We really don’t know who are corresponding with as they won’t give out names to protect their identity. Why are they so intent on keeping everything a secret if everything is so honest and legal. I sense a great deal of fear at play here. When I was in the business it would be pretty weird if I didn’t give my name to my customer..yes, I work here but I won’t give you my name..lol.

      1. Fraud Guy

        Again, notice the fact that if it were legal for you to record the call, which the bank is already doing to you, it wouldn’t be a “he said, she said” situation. The laws that supposedly protect our privacy are being used to defeat us.

      2. Jean

        I have personally had the experience of taking notes on a conversation with one of the big phone companies, recording a name and date, and later being told that the person I spoke with was simply wrong, their advice was wrong, and despite having a name of that rep, the next level person felt no need to stand by an earlier telephone representation of the company. That’s when I stopped doing anything, of any substance, over the phone with any large company, and most certainly a bank.

        1. Fraud Guy

          It’s easier for a business to repudiate its agents’ statements when the consumer has nothing but notes. If you had a recording, it would be much tougher, particularly if the recording were created by a service like Google Voice and was clearly authentic. You’d then be able to post a link to it online to embarrass the company too.

          1. Jean

            Fraud Guy,
            Another very big plus to my new method is the marked reduction in the associated aggravation and stress involved with making phone contact with a very large firm. I bypass the annoyances of choosing among the “options” being transferred, talking to the wrong person.

            I organize my thoughts, commit it to paper, send it, and wait for the response. My burden in the transaction is far less.

  20. Stay Classy San Bernadino

    “The banking lobby apparently has not made serious inroads into the military-industrial complex. ” The soldier foreclosure incident was another PR correction. (Gavel slamming, patriot arousal, press distribution, etc)

    Can’t have wars without Bankers.

  21. Joe

    This statement is false:

    “They continued to makes these calls even when told to stop, which is a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.”

    The FDCPA only applies to third party debt collectors and not to original creditors. In addition, even when they knew the Barlows were represented by counsel, it was not illegal for them to contact them. Again, original creditors are not covered by the Act.

    1. Yves Smith Post author

      You didn’t read the case and you don’t know securitizations either.

      The securitized trust is NEVER the original creditor. The original creditor is the first lender, the loan always goes through multiple transfer (all designed to be true sales) before it gets to the securitization.

      Honestly, do the basics before piping up. You really don’t know what you are talking about.

      And the servicer who did the harassing is not the lender but an agent of the investors, so you are wrong on two counts.

  22. david

    Its about rule of law. The banksters have subverted rule of law wholesale so that they can steal. When someone says that this must stop, a gaggle of silly geese say that a person who is in favor of rule of law and against bankster theft is obviously a jew hater. I’ll tell you this that I know for sure as a bankruptcy attorney who has helped many people cancel their debts, and many jewish people; the banks don’t give jewish people any break or preference, the banks take their houses too, the banks fabrication documentation and present it to the court to defraud jewish people too. You are either in favor of rule of law, or you believe that the banks are exempt from the law. It has nothing to do with nationality, or ethnicity, or religion. It is a question of freedom and rule of law, or fuedalism and corruption.

    So I put bankster bailout buddies on toilet paper, commisioned some art and wrote a song. Let me know if you think its too much.

    http://youtu.be/C1p2Tyj2mqk

    1. Linus Huber

      You are absolutely correct. The rule of law has been violated repeatedly over the past few years. Might is right at the moment. It is unbelievable that the basis of western society is demolished for the sake of saving those bastard’s benefits (I mean bankers here and only those that make 500k plus)

  23. timotheus

    I meant to read both, but my stomach didn’t hold out after I finished the first one. And this is what Geithner-Obama want Schneiderman to assist in covering up.

  24. Helen

    More Chase evil-ness, but not directly mortgage related: just basic banking strategic incompetence.

    This guy spent a weekend IN JAIL, lost his job and his car, all because Chase refused to deposit a check that it wrote to him and instead had him arrested for fraud. Best of all? they held the check for five weeks after they realized it was not actually fraudulent.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Business/washington-man-wrongfully-arrested-check-fraud-chase-bank/story?id=14027856

  25. Terri

    These same tactics have been used for years by the IRS. The banks got schooling apparently because they do this garbage very well. You make all the efforts and jump through all the hoops they absolutely do nothing but drop the ball.

    My beautiful sister-in-law died 5/8/08 of brain, bone, liver & breast cancer. She was 49 years old. Her home went to the bank during the cancer battle of 4 years until her death. Cancer took everything she had.

    My other sister in law in CA is unable to get the State of California to change their records and mark the debt, that of a deceased person. Nope. Phone calls and letters keep coming for money that doesn’t exist. Will not stop.

    Me, well I have the pleasure of exactly the very same tactics with the IRS pertaining to 42K they want from 2007. Death certificates have been sent time after time after time. In the last two days alone I have received, from IRS, Wage Garnishment action and that any Savings accounts could be levied. Interesting, that a company who deals with this very issue, came in another envelope the same day. I called IRS to try yet again to clear the record. (on hold 27 minutes).
    Ms. Turner-a true charming person, from the IRS impatiently told me told me to just ignore any mail pertaining to this debt. I hung up in her ear finally, only, after I told her this is exactly why Washington is a complete mess. CLICK!

    They are all so special, aren’t they? I wish them all 10 fold the pain and suffering they are continueing to cause and have caused.

  26. sgt_doom

    <strong.JUST HOW RIGGED IS IT ???

    JPMorgan Chase (this applies to Goldman Sachs & Morgan Stanley, but more so to top rat JPM) was responsible for lobbying congress for the overturning of Glass-Steagall, while it created the credit default swap, and countless variants of CDOs. It has enjoyed the strongest derivatives position since that time.

    JPMorgan was responsible for structuring the securitized-mortgage-foreclosure profit cycle:

    they profit from lending the mortgage, then profit from its securitization, then profit from its foreclosure (especially the FHA loans, where they automatically are reimbursed almost all of the original amount), then profit from its reselling, then profit when it’s securitized again.

    And JPMorgan Chase has been involved, both directly and indirectly, in offshoring jobs and promoting massive offshoring of jobs — when then leads to economic problems and unemployment, thus leading to default on mortgages, resulting in foreclosures, further profiting JPMorgan Chase.

    And if those unfortunate souls then must put in for food stamps, JPMorgan Chase profits from that program, as it is routinely, nationally and locally, handled by them and their banks.

    And it doesn’t end there, as those jobs are offshored to countless foreign factories, and foreign production facilities, and state-of-the-art research & development laboratories and training centers of which normally are financed — over the past three to four decades — by US foreign aid (USAID, OPIC, various and sundry other programs, etc.). [And people thought all those executives doing stints at those former government agencies -- they've now all since been privatized -- were actually performing public serivice?]

    That’s correct, you the taxpayer and your descendants, have paid for the multinationals’ foreign enterprises — while they pay almost no taxes, or usually none at all (over 70% of American-based multinationals and corporations at last count paid no federal taxes).

    Just how rigged is it??? It’s completely rigged.

  27. Pwelder

    And yet: Here’s from today’s editorial page of the WSJ:

    “Former White House consumer-financial czar Elizabeth Warren and a pack of state attorneys general have ignored the fact that investigations into “robo-signing” and other foreclosure paperwork problems failed to uncover actual victims of harm.”

    That’s from the item about Stress-testing BAC.

    Based on 50 – odd years reading the WSJ I’m pretty sure that most days they’re not evil or stupid. So how to account for this? A real puzzle.

    1. Yves Smith Post author

      The editorial page IS evil and stupid. The rest of the paper has some decent journalists.

      We discussed at length that there were NO state AG investigations and the Federal investigations were a complete joke (they reviewed ONLY 100 foreclosure files and 2800 files in total across ~15 servicers, I kid you not). And we have also not been told how those 2800 files were selected

      1. Nathanael

        The editorial page was allowed to subvert the formerly-excellent reporting side of the WSJ starting about 5-10 years before the Murdoch purchase. The process was accelerated after the Murdoch purchase, quite openly.

        The whole newspaper isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on now. My family switched to the FT several years back.

  28. Francois T

    “Where, pray tell, is the OCC?”

    Like you wrote in another post, they’re busy giving blow jobs to the banks.

  29. FDCPA

    This is evil.Truly.I’ve read a lot of ordeals faced by consumers through chase.They take money directly through the bank accounts, give out fraudulent charges and how!Eventually, its the consumer in the trap with the debt collection agencies.

  30. AgreeToDisagree

    When in doubt, vote only for Joe Publics who are worth no more than 200K, also see the pledge/questionairre below and ask your Mayor, Representative, Congresman, Governor, Senator candidate, current Mayor, Representative, Congresman, Governor, Senator candidate to sign with a cam taking down the signing in the presence of as many media reporters or people as possible :

    http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1914864390044&set=o.318515515322&type=1&theater

    Have the money? You don’t need the power.
    Have the power? You don’t need the money.
    Have BOTH money and power? Society doesn’t need you.

    The quickiest way to remove the plutocrats, nepotists and oligarchs, is to vote POOR.

  31. Lucille

    Fifth Third Bank here in Ohio did the same thing to some people that I know. I wonder how many people they’re doing these things to that we don’t hear about.

  32. Jake

    Banks who hold mortgages, and they do that to people.. should be destroyed inside and out. Totally destroyed by computer systems, etc, in any way possible.

    Pissing the wrong people off, there will be war on the streets/internet/ etc.. once again. Thats what people in high positions such as bank owners, etc, should be afraid of.

    If the law doesnt hold up, a renegade group will take over the law regardless what any court would say about it.

    Just dont piss people off…. a sincere warning. That’s what I’ve been reading on the internet.. Its a warning that keeps cropping up- i.e wikileaks, hackers, etc, anyone?

    Hmmm it will be interesting to see how this case turns out.

  33. matt weidner

    These stories are just one example. I am actively litigating cases where the banks have kicked down the doors, changed locks and engaged in all manner of improper behavior. I would like to call it criminal behavior, but technically, they lack criminal intent and therefore no crime. The most disturbing part is the fact that the banks have steadily exempted most of their most egregious behavior from the only laws that might provide some protection like Fair Debt Collecting and Unfair and Deceptive Practices. The well placed anger in these comments is quite disturbing, but a natural reaction to this world gone mad. There will be no happy endings here. Only violence and the world as we know it spinning out of control.

    1. Nathanael

      A lot of this bankster activity is crime which can be proven criminal without requiring explicit criminal intent, because it shows reckless disregard for the law, etc.

      The real problem is simply: who’s gonna prosecute? I would hope for local DAs. Let me guess (pure hypothesis here): the few who recognize that there’s a problem have watched the banks take their jurisdiction away by removing the cases to a different court? Am I right?

      1. David

        Not a lawyer but seen a few lawsuits …

        I have seen cases removed from state court to Federal court because a party made the argument that Federal jurisdiction was proper. But can you remove from say one state to another that way? Will another state judge really let you do it without a very good reason?

  34. Frank

    Obama, Bush, its all the same thing. Now its Rick Perry who is suppposedly different. But he ain’t. He’s no different. Its time Americans agreed to term limits for these lawyer b’stards, and better yet elect a mechanic or a fireman. Or, hey, how about voting for Ron Paul?

    1. David

      I agree with you generally about lawyers.

      Bush wasn’t a lawyer, but he wasn’t better. Yes, Ron Paul has more “real job, normal life” cred than the other guys, and that’s worth something.

      I just hate his insane idea of a strong dollar when we’re so deeply in dollar debt.

  35. Sue

    Its Marie Antoinette time for the government/gangster banksers, everybody!!! Its BYOP on Capital Hill! (Bring Your Own Pitchfork)

  36. Vox

    Well, if they had been jews this never would have had to happen. There’s something to be said for being a member of the Master Race. I mean you can start wars and profit from them, loot the masses, take other people’s nations….. there’s endless benefits. And if you don’t have one you can always have comestic surgery to make your nose large and hooked at the end.

  37. Aristotle lives

    Maybe this will stop if people sue the bank AND THE PERSONS carrying out the harassing as co-conspirators in the fraud.

    Just like in war where the soldiers are not obliged to follow orders which violate humanitarian laws… so the bank employees have a duty to know when they are doing something illegal.

    Fraud is not a matter of paying fine nor is racketeering, so the employees will put the pressure on the greedy executives.

    1. David

      Good idea. I believe in these situations it’s hard to get the names or email addresses of the bank functionaries one is dealing with, even when there is some level of personal contact. But even then, a John Doe suit might work.

      I’m not sure if bank employees have any legal duties to customers directly, beyond the normal duties between any two adults, though.

  38. JKJames

    To those of you who believe in the “Rule of Law”, really take a moment and think about that phrase. As you do, consider this, most laws in our country used to be to protect the individual from corporate oppression. That is no longer the case. Now we have exemptions for corporations and entire industries. Since the SCOTUS determined that big pharma cannot be held liable for false marketing, etc. they (big pharma) have actually admitted publicly that they make up disease in order to sell drugs. Mortgage companies cannot produce a deed or contract, but that doesn’t stop them from evicting us with the help of law enforcement.

    No we do not have the Rule of Law, what we have is the “Law of the Ruled”. Laws no longer protect US, they Oppress us and protect the ruling class.

  39. BJ

    I have Chase and I hate them(if you knew me you would know I don’t use the word hate). When I was hit head on by a drunk driver in October 2009 follwed by the death of my Mother-in-law, my spouse and I tried to do a mortgage remodification. We sent our paperwork in at least 5 times and they continued to deny receiving it (even after sending it certified and faxing it via a service that made copies for an onsite file). They are vile in their scare tactics. If we were not as informed as we are we would have lost our home. After 9 months of trying we gave up and paid our mortgage current. At the point we became current, Chase sent us a notice that we were being taken out of loan modification process due to a time lapse in paperwork. However, when I called them to confirm they told me we would only be taken out of the process upon written request. The only thing we can think is that government is giving them a tax credit based on how many people are currently in modification. They’re crooks and liars that should be called loan sharks not bankers!

  40. balsa

    You know it’s this kind of criminality that makes me just run to buy a house in the United States…LOL!

    Let the bitches choke to death on all their stolen property.

    1. David

      If you’re Chinese and the prices are 5 times cheaper than anything available in your area in China, and you can get the residency, you won’t worry about such things.

      Or if you’re South American and you need a pied-a-terre in Miami in case your country’s regime goes nuts, you won’t worry either.

      What other foreigners are buying houses in the USA these days?

Comments are closed.