Bank Amnesty: National Foreclosure Statute

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

EDITOR’S COMMENT: The Banks are in a full court press to get amnesty for their illegal actions in defrauding people who invested in bogus mortgage bonds and who invested in bogus mortgage loans, with obscene profits stolen by the Banks tipping the scales of wealth inequality into the most dangerous territory we have seen since the French Revolution.

Like the attempt to get the digital notarizations and digital signatures statute through which Obama pocket vetoed at the last minute this time they want a national foreclosure statute. It is worse the the repeal of the laws banning trading with depository money and other protections for the financial system that were in place until Congress and President Clinton changed it to make legal what was patently illegal and to allow the very same abuses that occurred in the Great Depression.

Once again, the Banks are seeking to write the law and if you don’t stop them, they may well get away with it. But beyond the obvious amnesty they are building into their “study groups” there is a far greater risk.

Property Law has always been administered by each State which not only makes sense, it is necessary for states to have any rights at all. If this effort succeeds to produce a National code that applies in all states the ability of any state to pursue any policy initiative will be restrained by the Federal Government’s ability to to apply the same principles as what this National Foreclosure Statute is intended to do.

States might just as well give up their state sovereignty if this or anything like it ever passes. It is an insult to the people and the states to even consider it and it is another step down the road to abandoning those parts of the constitution that the federal government finds inconvenient because of the Banks’ influence.

Bending the Rule of Law to Help the Banks: Effort to Draft a National Foreclosure Statue Underway

by Yves Smith SEE FULL ARTICLE ON NAKEDCAPITALISM.COM

There is a slow moving but nevertheless troubling effort underway to change foreclosure laws across the US. The Uniform Law Commission, the same body that created the Uniform Commercial Code, a model set of laws that sought to harmonize commercial laws in all 50 states, has had two full day public but not well publicized meeting of a “study group” on mortgage foreclosure. Note that it took over a decade to draft the first version of the UCC and a protracted period for it to be implemented by states (most states have adopted the updated version of the UCC, although certain articles of the new version have not been implemented in any states).

Given its august history, one would think the ULC would be above political influences. That would appear to be a naive assumption these days. The study committee’s public meetings meetings to solicit opinion from “stakeholders” on “problems” with foreclosures. Curiously enough, these “stakeholder” meetings had no representation of investors (Tom Deutsch of the American Securitization Forum would claim he played that role, but everyone in mortgage land knows the ASF is a sell side organization) and effectively no input from homeowners or consumer advocates (none at the first meeting, and only, at the second, in Washington last week).

I got reports from three people who attended the latest session, in Washington, last week, na all were disheartening. Tom Cox, the Maine attorney who broke the robosigning scandal, provided a memorandum that argues that the commission has effectively assumed that the “problems” require a legislative solution:

Before there can be a determination made as to whether there is a need for a new uniform act dealing with foreclosure issues, there must be an clear accounting of (1) what the problems are that cause legislation to be considered, (2) what has caused those problems to occur, and (3) only then, whether the problems lend themselves to a legislative solution that would be offered by a new uniform act. Unfortunately, it appears that the JEBURPA letter of May 30, 2011 and all of the subsequent steps leading to this stakeholders’ meeting have failed to conduct the step 2 analysis. Further, it appears that the assumption has been made that new legislation is the solution to the perceived problems without there having been analysis of whether other non-­‐legislative solutions might be more appropriate.

I suggest you read Cox’s memo in full:

Thomas A. Cox Memo for ULC Study Committee

Tags: bankruptcy, borrower, countrywide, disclosure, foreclosure, foreclosure defense, foreclosure offense, foreclosures, fraud, LOAN MODIFICATION, modification, quiet title, rescission, RESPA, securitization, TILA audit, trustee, WEISBAND
Posted in bubble, Corruption, Eviction, securities fraud |