Posts Tagged ‘crisis’

New Ideas To Fix The Housing Crisis? Nothing to See Here

Monday, September 10th, 2012

Nothing To See HereWith the presidential race entering its final stretch and with the employment figures remaining effectively flat, one would think that the housing crisis would have already been front and center by now.

As I have said numerous times every economic recovery since the Depression has been led by the housing sector.

But only now do we have a fuller picture of both the Republicans’ and Democrats’ agendas on housing.

AND TO SAY THE LEAST I AM UNDERWHELMED.

In the wake of both conventions, each party has made their official party platforms public, and yes, they both at least try to address some aspects of the foreclosure crisis.

With the Democrats, there is a firmer grasp of the housing picture, but I still haven’t heard a solution from them that has the teeth to have a lasting impact.

They recognize the importance of refinancing, which is good, but to date nothing they have done has forced the banks to refinance. So the intent is there, but there is little actual follow through.

Not HARP or any of the alphabet soup programs created during the last four years have done anything to truly encourage refinancing. There’s too much please and thank you in the Democrats programs, when it is time for them to be the stern parent and send the banks to bed without their supper.

You must make refinancing in the banks’ best interest, to me the only way for that to happen would be to reinstate Franklin Roosevelt’s Home Owners Loan Corporation.

It closed up shop in the 1950’s, and mortgage lending hasn’t been the same since.
(more…)

Divided States of America: Judicial vs Non-Judicial Foreclosure

Monday, July 16th, 2012

Roy Oppenheim’s commentary was originally published on Yahoo! Homes and is being redistributed on South Florida Law Blog with their permission.

United States of AmericaAccording to some analysts, whether or not your state is on its way to a housing recovery depends on whether you live in a state that requires judicial foreclosure or one that does not.

What is the difference? In states that require judicial foreclosure, a lender must go through the court system in order to foreclose on a home. A judge must issue a legal judgment against a homeowner in order for that person to be forced out of their home.

That is how it is in Florida, where I practice law, along with 20 other states. But in the rest of the country, in states like California or Georgia, courts are not required to intervene.

With non-judicial foreclosures, banks hold all the cards. If you are deemed by your lender to be in default, the banks can play the role of judge, jury, and executioner.

Your home can be put up for auction, and the court has no or little say in the matter.

It’s like what happens when your car is repossessed by the repo man.

This is why I like to call our country the Divided States of America. There are some states where the rule of law still matters, but there are many that have allowed banks to essentially make up the rules as they go along.

As a lawyer and someone whose job it is to help uphold the law, I think you can guess which side I am on.
(more…)

Obamacare, the Foreclosure Crisis and the Rule of Law

Friday, June 29th, 2012

This commentary was originally published on Yahoo! Homes and is being redistributed on South Florida Law Blog with their permission.

United States Supreme CourtHuh? What do “Obamacare” and the foreclosure crisis have to do with each other?

Simply put, the legal debate over Obamacare largely centered on the individual mandate, a law that would require people to buy health insurance whether they wanted to or not.

A little to my surprise, the Supreme Court did uphold it, although as a tax.

During the passing of the healthcare law, it seemed that the president assumed that the government had the ability to force people to buy a product from a private company that they did not necessarily want.

The mandate’s survival in the Supreme Court on a much narrower standard apparently leaves the question far from settled.

I felt that there was little, if any, constitutional analysis done by the president and his team when they decided to pass the mandate, except for the fact that they perceived a compelling need for it.

And that’s how the debate over the healthcare law reminded me of the legal debate during the foreclosure crisis.

Back when I started defending homeowners, the judges took a simple view: You borrowed the money, therefore you owe the money, so you have to pay it back.

No one stopped to think whether the banks bringing these foreclosures had the constitutional right to do so.

No one.

No one asked whether the banks had fulfilled their legal requirements before filing suit, such as properly assigning notes and knowing who owned the mortgage.

Instead, there was a preference for expediency. Since the homeowner borrowed the money and owed the money, the homeowner had to pay. The banks would be able to sort out who actually owned anything among themselves, and the most important thing was to get the home away from the homeowner.
(more…)

Schneiderman And Mortgage Fraud Task Force: Are We Being Hoodwinked?

Friday, April 20th, 2012

 

Are we being hoodwinked by the mortgage fraud unit?

Courtesy:Cesar Cabrera Photography

When President Obama stood before Congress and the American People three months ago and promised to hold those behind the housing crisis ‘accountable’, I was hopeful.

In the days that followed, his new field general Eric Schneiderman was unveiled and almost immediately action was taken.

When Schneiderman issued subpoenas, just days after the President appointed him to run his new Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities Working Group, I thought that perhaps, FINALLY, a corner had been turned.

But it’s becoming clear to me now that the train that is the RMBS Working Group hasn’t left the station, and depending on who you believe, there may not even me a station built yet!

After those few weeks of full-court press by Schneiderman, there hadn’t been a peep about the status of the Working Group’s investigation. Yes it may have only been three months, yet I fear that the bold vision you and I were sold might turn out to be just another empty promise.

The press only turned its attention back to the Working Group after a brutal Op-Ed in the New York Daily News. The co-directors of the Metro Industrial Areas Foundation, a citizens coalition group, called Schneiderman out and said they had yet to see any footprint of the RMBS Working Group’s investigation.

The 55 staff members promised by Attorney General Eric Holder were nowhere to be found, the pair claimed.

Yet even this Op-Ed could only draw Schneiderman’s mouthpiece out of the woodwork, rather than the Attorney General himself.

Spokesman Danny Kanner refuted their claims, saying that attorneys and other investigators had already been hired, that we shouldn’t draw any conclusions by the lack of public announcements.
(more…)


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

Bad Behavior has blocked 2698 access attempts in the last 7 days.