Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
Great doings taking place out there…
Recently GMAC Mortgage, whose parent Ally Financial is majority-owned by the U.S. government, suspended foreclosures in [states that require judgment foreclosures] after acknowledging that in some cases notaries may not have been present and the signers may have relied upon others to review [foreclosure] documents instead of doing it themselves. Bank of America and J.P. Morgan Chase then halted their own foreclosures in those 23 states to ensure they are following the letter of the law, and yesterday BofA announced its moratorium is now nationwide.
We’re not aware of a single case so far of a substantive error. Out of tens of thousands of potentially affected borrowers, we’re still waiting for the first victim claiming that he was current on his mortgage when the bank seized the home. Even if such victims exist, the proper policy is to make them whole, not to let 100,000 other people keep homes for which they haven’t paid.
I was hoping within about a year, we — she and I — would be sitting on the other side of this equation: put something down, get approved for our new house, sign on the bottom line and move in. I have to wonder, what are our chances of making that happen now? Under what conditions will a bank agree to go into the deal, knowing they won’t have any real claim to the property? What’s my down? What’s my mortgage? What’s my term? I guess I can forget about it ever happening with BofA for the foreseeable future.
We’re being protected so well from anything bad happening to us, that if it keeps on like this we won’t be able to do anything.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I don’t think that is what is going on at all. The facts ares quite the opposite–banks do not wish to foreclose. Everything they have done is to delay foreclosure. If they do foreclose in a sloppy fashion, what do they care? By all means, let us stop and review our policy. One man of my acquaintance just received his foreclosure posting–B of A– 20 months after he stopped payments. That is not atypical.
Were banks to foreclose on all their properties in a timely manner–six to nine months–housing would have crashed to near Las Vegas levels, and their portfolios would reflect a true price to market, which is something they intend to avoid, and you do not.
Hold your powder. California will crash, and crash hard.
- jamzw | 10/09/2010 @ 09:19I suppose you could be right. I’m not pleased having our dreams pinned to the misfortunes of others but I get over it in a big hurry when I see all these protections put in for “homeowners” living in houses way outside what they could reasonably afford. And being kept there.
So I’m looking at single-storey starters for over 400, being told how lucky I am, it’s a “buyer’s market.” Grrr….
- mkfreeberg | 10/09/2010 @ 09:40Well, “the banks” doing the loaning could retain absolute control to foreclose if
they loaned the money in the first place, and weren’t simply buying the markers
of piss poor gamblers from “others” wishing to distance themselves from the actual work.
Why does this all reek of the same sort of welshing outlined in The Merchant of Venice.
Here’s the deal-based on “our” histories”, OK, spit, handshake.
OK, now my camouflaged “agent” will explain why I don’t have to make good on it, and you’re SOL, you dispicable money lender.
Of course, the buying -off of someones bad gambling markers is usually the preamble to extort a “special favor”, or to hold over them as a threat, forever.
- CaptDMO | 10/09/2010 @ 12:01Morgan, the problem is that you’re probably looking around for homes in Folsom, one of the more expensive parts of the greater Sacramento area. You’re right next door to freakin’ Granite Bay, the ritziest neighborhood in Northern California that’s not in the Bay Area. You thought you were going to find cheap housing anywhere in the hills around Folsom Lake? Come on.
I bought one down in Citrus Heights this year for a hair under 180. Four bedroom, immaculate condition. Come down out of those hills and try again, buddy. You also should consider FHA financing if you haven’t already.
- cylarz | 10/09/2010 @ 14:56