Archive for August, 2012

Moral Hazard Lies On Wall Street, Not Main Street

Thursday, August 30th, 2012

Judge About To Make VerdictIf there is only one thing that I hope to see as an attorney, it is the law applied fairly to all sides of the courtroom.

And there has been no greater sense of frustration for me than to see the banks, time and time again, not be held to the same standards as you or me.

It has become standard practice for banks to wiggle and maneuver and do everything possible to escape accountability.

But perhaps even more maddening is when those in power refuse to dig their heels and go after these banks. The latest example: the Justice Department’s refusal to prosecute Goldman Sachs.

They hedged their bets and sought to make money on the backs of their clients. This is nothing new to any of my readers, nor is the Justice Department’s lack of reprisal.

Both Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone’s excellent political reporter, and the New York Times Opinion Page called Eric Holder on the carpet, and now it is my turn.

No one is suggesting that prosecuting Goldman Sachs would have been a walk in the park. But prosecuting them was necessary, if the climate of Wall Street is ever going to change.

What is absolutely maddening about all this is that by allowing Goldman Sachs to skate, the DOJ is all but announcing that the banks can continue to engage in other unconscionable and illegal activities without the fear of retribution This is called a moral hazard — encouraging certain negative behavior by allowing it to continue.

“Ironically” — we only hear about moral hazard in the media, it’s FROM the banks, or government officials like Edward DeMarco, who are alarmed at the notion that homeowners might participate in moral hazard. They will use that alarmist notion, despite the fact that it has yet to be substantiated, as a reason not to do principal write-downs or provide homeowners the meaningful assistance they need.
(more…)

Is The Housing Market Actually Rebounding? The Shadow (Inventory) Knows!

Monday, August 27th, 2012

It is hard to feel comfortable about housing these days, even though that is what many real estate indexes indicate that is what we should be doing.

That is because the shadow inventory, homes owned by banks but kept off the market, still lingers.

But Housing Secretary Shaun Donovan, says he and the rest of the Obama administration do not fear the the shadow inventory.

But should they? Maybe not.

The housing market is on the rebound. Several indexes show that homes prices are stabilizing, and home sales are rebounding. The signs are optimistic.

But lets take off the rose-colored glasses for a moment. We are not out of the woods just yet. It is foolish to think that the nation’s shadow inventory is going to evaporate overnight.

The fact is the banks are in no rush to eliminate the shadow inventory. In fact it is not in their best interest to do so. They will slowly bleed out their inventory, because if they put too many properties on the market at once, they will push prices down, which would in turn push the value of the homes they still have in their inventory down.

And if they actually dumped all their inventory on the market at once?

If they actually managed to either foreclose or sell off every last home they posses, the banks would have to write down their assets within 90 days of any foreclosure or sale.

Forgetting for a moment the near-statistical impossibility of the banks being able to sell or foreclose on all their outstanding inventory all at once, the banks would become certifiably insolvent if in fact they managed to clear their inventory in one swift swoop.
(more…)

Foreclosure and The Presidential Race: Has Obama Done Enough?

Thursday, August 23rd, 2012

 

President Barack Obama delivers remarks on the economy at Shaker Heights High School,Shaker Heights, Ohio, Jan. 4, 2012. (Official White House Photo by Chuck Kennedy)

The Republican and Democratic conventions are almost upon us, and the housing crisis has finally been inserted into the presidential election.

Maybe the President and his Republican rival see homeowners as nothing more than another campaign issue to be exploited, or maybe they are finally starting to understand how central the need to tackle the foreclosure problem is to the American public.

Some days it is hard to tell. But at least the narrative is starting to move forward. It is a start, if a meager one at best.

The housing market is indestructibly woven into the economy. The whole narrative is actually very simple.

Housing has led the economy out of every recession since the Great Depression.

A refi boom inevitably takes hold as interest rates drop and folks refinance their mortgages for lower interest rates.

The extra money from the lowering of your monthly mortgage payments goes right back into the economy, whether its buying new tires, taking the family out for dinner or going to the shore for the weekend.

Those activities stimulate the economy from the ground up. That unfortunately didn’t happen this time because there wasn’t enough equity in our homes and thus the banks refused to refinance your loan.

But of course you and I have known this for a long time now, long before those in power were paying attention.

A year ago I told you underwater mortgages were the “900 lb. gorilla in the room that could derail President Obama’s re-election campaign.
(more…)

Robo-Motions: The New Robosigning Scandal

Thursday, August 16th, 2012

Robot Hand Recently, Jacquelyn Trask, one of my associate attorneys, won a motion to dismiss with the court reserving determination of our right to receive attorneys’ fees on a case that highlights a growing problem, the filing of “robo-motions.”

The unusual facts of the case demonstrate how dangerous robo-motions are: potentially much more dangerous than the heights scaled by the robo-signing scandal.
She won the motion to dismiss because the bank’s attorney filed a motion to reschedule a foreclosure sale and have an ex parte order entered.
What are ex parte orders, you ask?
Simply put, ex parte orders are an unusual exception to a fundamental rule upon which our legal system is based: notice.

Usually, whenever one side in a case files a motion or requests an order from a judge, the other side has to be notified before the judge rules on the motion so that both sides can present their arguments.

That way, everyone gets a fair hearing.

Seems pretty obvious right?

The General Rules of Ethics even goes so far as to say ex parte motions should be avoided at all costs, and should only be used when giving notice to the other side will seriously harm your client. The foreclosure mill attorney turned the rule sideways.

Why?

Because the judge in the case had previously entered a court order forbidding the foreclosure sale from taking place.


The bank was able to reschedule the foreclosure sale because its attorney filed an ex parte motion with a different judge
who knew nothing of the order. The attorney didn’t communicate with our firm, or as it turned out with the right judge as well, because it would harm the case, not because it would harm the client.
(more…)


PHP/MySQL Components, WordPress Plugins, and Technology Opinions at TravisWeston.com

Bad Behavior has blocked 4250 access attempts in the last 7 days.