If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(McClatchy DC)   Bank says it has no choice but to foreclose on married couple's home because the dead husband isn't living there anymore (pics)   (mcclatchydc.com) divider line 37
    More: Asinine, Center for Responsible Lending, HAMP, primary residence, community banks, Rialto, mortgage modifications, legal settlements  
•       •       •

3390 clicks; posted to Business » on 09 Dec 2013 at 12:08 PM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



37 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-12-09 11:22:21 AM  
That's how you get rich and become a "job creator".  Tricks and traps in how modern capitalism works.
 
2013-12-09 12:21:00 PM  
tl;dr: her husband died with the loan solely in his name, she didn't bother for years to have it corrected after she inherited the house and then when she fell behind in her payments (after previously falling behind on her taxes) she didn't qualify for a modification because it wasn't her loan. There is guidance from Treasury on how to handle such situations but it is not binding and the servicer did nothing wrong.

Sympathy level: "eh...". It's a bummer, but maybe you should have taken care of this paperwork back in 2003, hm?
 
2013-12-09 12:23:49 PM  
Troll headline and article are trolls.

she's losing the house because she didn't pay the real estate taxes.
 
2013-12-09 12:28:56 PM  
Um, Subby, why is it worth mentioning that there are pics with TFA?
 
2013-12-09 12:38:22 PM  

skozlaw: she fell behind in her payments


That seems to be the common element in all of these foreclosure stories. I wonder why.
 
2013-12-09 12:39:22 PM  

skozlaw: It's a bummer, but maybe you should have taken care of this paperwork back in 2003, hm?


Kinda hard to do when the person needing to sign the paperwork is slipping in and out of consciousness. . .

/and even with healthy people, sometimes it's a pain in the arse
//we didn't get my grandfather's house signed over until two months before my grandmother died. If we'd done it sooner, we could have gotten paid by the state to stay at home and take care of her.
///pride is very expensive
 
2013-12-09 12:50:54 PM  
She can't move in with family because then she'd have to get rid of stuff.
 
2013-12-09 12:53:41 PM  

Peki: Kinda hard to do...


No, it's not. When a spouse dies there's a law on the books from the 80s that severely limits a lender's ability to do exactly what they're doing now as long as the mortgage is up to date. If she'd have taken care of this years ago she probably would not have had any trouble. The problem is she didn't, now the mortgage is behind, so she's basically at the mercy of the loan servicer at this point.

There's only so much the law can do to protect people from themselves when they won't avail themselves of their legal options when they're given the chance.
 
2013-12-09 12:54:06 PM  

mcmnky: Troll headline and article are trolls.

she's losing the house because she didn't pay the real estate taxes.


All the more reason she should keep her house. Real estate taxes should be paid, but as a reason to lose a home? No way.
 
2013-12-09 12:55:25 PM  

"It's just a continuing misalignment of incentives: that a (mortgage) servicer doesn't get paid for figuring this stuff out, but they get paid for foreclosure," said Michael Calhoun, the president of the Durham, N.C.-based Center for Responsible Lending, which has fought to hold servicers accountable. "Even today, the servicers are understaffed and overwhelmed. If this were your local community bank, they of course would be working with you."
...

"A little common sense. . . . Why wouldn't you deal with this person?" said Calhoun, who has no involvement in the Biggs case. "It is just a lack of common sense, capacity and incentives. This is not a unique case."


No, it's bullshiat. And why in the fark would a company need an incentive, other than you know not acting like an asshole? An incentive from whom? The government?
 
2013-12-09 12:55:48 PM  

walktoanarcade: mcmnky: Troll headline and article are trolls.

she's losing the house because she didn't pay the real estate taxes.

All the more reason she should keep her house. Real estate taxes should be paid, but as a reason to lose a home? No way.


Right, people should pay their real estate taxes because of warm fuzzy feelings of community.

You could ask Philadelphia how never foreclosing on unpaid real estate taxes goes.
 
2013-12-09 12:56:25 PM  

skozlaw: Peki: Kinda hard to do...

No, it's not. When a spouse dies there's a law on the books from the 80s that severely limits a lender's ability to do exactly what they're doing now as long as the mortgage is up to date. If she'd have taken care of this years ago she probably would not have had any trouble. The problem is she didn't, now the mortgage is behind, so she's basically at the mercy of the loan servicer at this point.

There's only so much the law can do to protect people from themselves when they won't avail themselves of their legal options when they're given the chance.


Actually, the mortgage WAS up to date. It was the taxes she fell behind on. When the servicer found out she wasn't on the loan, they stopped accepting her checks. It's their fault she became delinquent.
 
2013-12-09 12:58:38 PM  

Mike Chewbacca: skozlaw: Peki: Kinda hard to do...

No, it's not. When a spouse dies there's a law on the books from the 80s that severely limits a lender's ability to do exactly what they're doing now as long as the mortgage is up to date. If she'd have taken care of this years ago she probably would not have had any trouble. The problem is she didn't, now the mortgage is behind, so she's basically at the mercy of the loan servicer at this point.

There's only so much the law can do to protect people from themselves when they won't avail themselves of their legal options when they're given the chance.

Actually, the mortgage WAS up to date. It was the taxes she fell behind on. When the servicer found out she wasn't on the loan, they stopped accepting her checks. It's their fault she became delinquent.


But it's not her fault that she gave up on having the loan transferred into her name after her husband passed.
 
2013-12-09 01:05:44 PM  

The My Little Pony Killer: Mike Chewbacca: skozlaw: Peki: Kinda hard to do...

No, it's not. When a spouse dies there's a law on the books from the 80s that severely limits a lender's ability to do exactly what they're doing now as long as the mortgage is up to date. If she'd have taken care of this years ago she probably would not have had any trouble. The problem is she didn't, now the mortgage is behind, so she's basically at the mercy of the loan servicer at this point.

There's only so much the law can do to protect people from themselves when they won't avail themselves of their legal options when they're given the chance.

Actually, the mortgage WAS up to date. It was the taxes she fell behind on. When the servicer found out she wasn't on the loan, they stopped accepting her checks. It's their fault she became delinquent.

But it's not her fault that she gave up on having the loan transferred into her name after her husband passed.


While I agree that's her mistake, there's no excuse for the bank's shiatty behavior.
 
2013-12-09 01:10:42 PM  

Mike Chewbacca: The My Little Pony Killer: Mike Chewbacca: skozlaw: Peki: Kinda hard to do...

No, it's not. When a spouse dies there's a law on the books from the 80s that severely limits a lender's ability to do exactly what they're doing now as long as the mortgage is up to date. If she'd have taken care of this years ago she probably would not have had any trouble. The problem is she didn't, now the mortgage is behind, so she's basically at the mercy of the loan servicer at this point.

There's only so much the law can do to protect people from themselves when they won't avail themselves of their legal options when they're given the chance.

Actually, the mortgage WAS up to date. It was the taxes she fell behind on. When the servicer found out she wasn't on the loan, they stopped accepting her checks. It's their fault she became delinquent.

But it's not her fault that she gave up on having the loan transferred into her name after her husband passed.

While I agree that's her mistake, there's no excuse for the bank's shiatty behavior.


The bank's shiatty behavior basically amounts to not catching their own mistake for about a decade.

Should they have foreclosed on her sooner then?
 
2013-12-09 01:26:02 PM  

The My Little Pony Killer: But it's not her fault that she gave up on having the loan transferred into her name after her husband passed.


You're assuming she knew about her legal options in time. We didn't know about IHSS until literally two months before my grandmother died, and this was after she'd been dealing with an Alzheimer's diagnosis for the last seven years and my mom scouring the internet looking for services we would be eligible for. As it was, the only reason I learned about it was because of Fark. Also, in case you didn't know, most companies and government services make it pretty difficult to even find out about programs, especially in a culture of "fark 'em if they don't have the money," and especially when their profit margin could be affected. There is almost no (and certainly none to us) outreach regarding avenues to help ease any kind of burden like this (btw, we also have a Countrywide mortgage, and have yet to see any kind of relief of any sort, nor have we been able to get into any kind of modification program, so I get this lady's experience too--my dad took out the loan, and as a result of his stupidity, my mother, me and my brother nearly ended up homeless).

Yeesh. . . Just because you wouldn't do it that way, means you automatically know all the nooks and crannies about why she did it the way she did. You don't, so try ASKING first before jumping to a conclusion. You might find that the real story is way more complicated than the little box you stuffed her in.
 
2013-12-09 01:32:22 PM  
Shouldn't the Servicer be estopped from foreclosing on this basis since they've accepted payment for a decade from the same party they are foreclosing on?  Alternatively, should the Servicer be required to refund the payments she's made (less taxes and insurance) for the last ten years since she was not a party to the loan?
 
2013-12-09 01:37:51 PM  

JK47: Shouldn't the Servicer be estopped from foreclosing on this basis since they've accepted payment for a decade from the same party they are foreclosing on?  Alternatively, should the Servicer be required to refund the payments she's made (less taxes and insurance) for the last ten years since she was not a party to the loan?


Whoa, whoa, whoa, there my little ''Merica hating pink commie for asking such questions libtard socialist'. Its not theft when THEY do it.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-12-09 01:41:09 PM  

skozlaw: tl;dr: her husband died with the loan solely in his name, she didn't bother for years to have it corrected after she inherited the house and then when she fell behind in her payments (after previously falling behind on her taxes) she didn't qualify for a modification because it wasn't her loan. There is guidance from Treasury on how to handle such situations but it is not binding and the servicer did nothing wrong.


Maybe nothing illegal, but certainly wrong.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-12-09 01:42:52 PM  

JK47: Shouldn't the Servicer be estopped from foreclosing on this basis since they've accepted payment for a decade from the same party they are foreclosing on?  Alternatively, should the Servicer be required to refund the payments she's made (less taxes and insurance) for the last ten years since she was not a party to the loan?


You would think one or the other, but the laws are made for the people with the money.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-12-09 01:45:52 PM  

YixilTesiphon: skozlaw: she fell behind in her payments

That seems to be the common element in all of these foreclosure stories. I wonder why.


Biggs continued to pay her mortgage month after month but she fell behind again on the property taxes in 2011.

Nice job of Brietbarting there.
 
2013-12-09 01:56:41 PM  

The My Little Pony Killer: Mike Chewbacca: The My Little Pony Killer: Mike Chewbacca: skozlaw: Peki: Kinda hard to do...

No, it's not. When a spouse dies there's a law on the books from the 80s that severely limits a lender's ability to do exactly what they're doing now as long as the mortgage is up to date. If she'd have taken care of this years ago she probably would not have had any trouble. The problem is she didn't, now the mortgage is behind, so she's basically at the mercy of the loan servicer at this point.

There's only so much the law can do to protect people from themselves when they won't avail themselves of their legal options when they're given the chance.

Actually, the mortgage WAS up to date. It was the taxes she fell behind on. When the servicer found out she wasn't on the loan, they stopped accepting her checks. It's their fault she became delinquent.

But it's not her fault that she gave up on having the loan transferred into her name after her husband passed.

While I agree that's her mistake, there's no excuse for the bank's shiatty behavior.

The bank's shiatty behavior basically amounts to not catching their own mistake for about a decade.

Should they have foreclosed on her sooner then?


Actually, there's no legal requirement in California for the wife to get her name on the loan rather than her dead husband's. In California, what she did is perfectly legal and appropriate. The bank is being a dick. Why are you defending them?
 
2013-12-09 01:57:00 PM  
Another foreclosure due to healthcare costs.
 
2013-12-09 02:06:53 PM  

Mike Chewbacca: It's their fault she became delinquent.


Sort of. Sounds to me like they tried to enforce a "due on sale" clause when it occurred to them that the loan's owner was dead, which, normally, would be their right since that's a pretty standard clause in a mortgage agreement. Ultimately, that will probably wind up being unenforceable since she inherited the property from her spouse, but it still doesn't change the fact that all this hassle occurred because nobody, in the prior thirty years, seems to have bothered to made ANY real effort on her side of the contract to make sure ANY of the documents she might need were in order.

I would be surprised if she loses her house, becasue, technically, she seems to be on the right side of this, but this is one of those situations where the whining from the "victim" rings a little hollow in my ears since all this hassle could have been avoided with two damn hours at an attorney at ANY point in the prior decade...

If you don't take care of your shiat, don't be surprised if it comes back to bite you in the ass. Sorry, lady, but I can think both the bank AND you are farknuts and, in this case, I do.
 
2013-12-09 03:09:18 PM  
The only thing that I am having trouble wrapping my head around is that the lady had trouble budgeting for the tax bill so the bank forced her into an escro account until the taxes and insurance was paid in full... then they dropped the escro requirement, presumably at her request, then she found out again that she cannot budget for the taxes yet again.
 
2013-12-09 04:18:40 PM  

walktoanarcade: Real estate taxes should be paid, but as a reason to lose a home? No way.


That's just the way it is, though. Just ask Happy Gilmore's grandma.
 
2013-12-09 04:32:03 PM  

Mike Chewbacca: The My Little Pony Killer: Mike Chewbacca: skozlaw: Peki: Kinda hard to do...

No, it's not. When a spouse dies there's a law on the books from the 80s that severely limits a lender's ability to do exactly what they're doing now as long as the mortgage is up to date. If she'd have taken care of this years ago she probably would not have had any trouble. The problem is she didn't, now the mortgage is behind, so she's basically at the mercy of the loan servicer at this point.

There's only so much the law can do to protect people from themselves when they won't avail themselves of their legal options when they're given the chance.

Actually, the mortgage WAS up to date. It was the taxes she fell behind on. When the servicer found out she wasn't on the loan, they stopped accepting her checks. It's their fault she became delinquent.

But it's not her fault that she gave up on having the loan transferred into her name after her husband passed.

While I agree that's her mistake, there's no excuse for the bank's shiatty behavior.


There's no excuse for ALL banks' shiatty behaviour.

I honestly can't imagine working in finance. The bad karma, juju, vibes etc would cripple my soul.

Jump you farkers, all the way down to the receptionists and even the janitors.
 
2013-12-09 04:49:38 PM  
Seems like the jist of it is she doesn't have enough income to pay both the taxes and the mortgage. The bank might be a jerk about it but the underlying problem is still there.
 
2013-12-09 06:18:56 PM  

inclemency: I honestly can't imagine working in finance. The bad karma, juju, vibes etc would cripple my soul.


I worked property preservation for a bank for a little while. I made a decision as soon as I took the job that I couldn't perform an eviction.

Unfortunately, even working within regs it's still hard. Boss tells me "Get the belongings out of this house in accordance with these laws." I do, shiat hits the fan anyway, 'cause the guy had 3 years to collect his stuff, but he claims he didn't know we'd take it (in my defense, notes on the loan showed we'd talked to him several times, he'd say "I'll be there next week").

That kind of thing is a leadership problem. When you have a wage slave who isn't being paid enough to care, training that's done second hand by fellow co-workers who don't know how to follow regs (not done by the boss or anyone in HR or legal), and bosses who are more interested in metrics than quality? That's the sort of BS you get.

/can you tell I wasn't that upset when my PTSD finally got too much to control at work? I loved my boss--he was actually more concerned with quality and humans than numbers--but the industry and the environment were awful.
 
2013-12-09 08:17:49 PM  
I'm not sure on it, but whoever was servicing the mortgage might be up the creek for refusing the checks for the mortgage.
 
2013-12-09 08:57:46 PM  
If you want to buy a house for people like this through interest payments while you live in their house and pay upkeep and taxes for 30 years, go for it. This whole idea that everyone must use mortgages to pay for their houses, wonder where that came from? Surely not unscrupulous people at the banks. They'd never do anything for profit that was against the interest of their customers!
 
2013-12-09 09:23:28 PM  
Problem #1, she didn't correct the mortgage after her husband's death.  It is usually a straightforward process, although it might have required a refinancing.  And in 2003, she might well have gotten a better deal.

Oh, well.
 
2013-12-09 09:28:03 PM  

skozlaw: Mike Chewbacca:  but this is one of those situations where the whining from the "victim" rings a little hollow in my ears


I have no problem when someone wants to take this to public opinion.  She certainly should have handled this better but grief has a way of shutting down your life.  Yes, she is (partially) at fault but some of us understand it and forgive her for it.  When a company gets read about by the internet (and possibly goes viral) they will have to make a PR decision to find a way to not evict a widow a week before Christmas.  If they take the high road they will try and at least delay it til after xmas (or go one further and find a way to keep her in the home).  But I expect one of those "our hands are tied--we're just following orders and the law" as a pathetic attempt at exoneration while also getting their way--a nearly paid off house they get to resell.
 
2013-12-09 09:49:58 PM  

inclemency: I honestly can't imagine working in finance. The bad karma, juju, vibes etc would cripple my soul.


plus there is math involved. Art majors hate math. No feelings.
 
2013-12-09 10:25:49 PM  
You mean the banks been taking the money in the name of a dead man for all these years.  Isn't that some sort of fraud on their part?
 
2013-12-10 02:16:39 PM  
Another part of the media's push for free housing I guess. Not sure why we should feel sorry about a deadbeat who doesn't pay her bills.
 
2013-12-10 03:48:14 PM  
Skank of America

shiatti Bank

Goldman's Sack

Wells farko.

what a mess.
 
Displayed 37 of 37 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report