Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Supreme Court to hear fair housing

Supreme Court to hear fair housing case that could impact mortgage industry

The Supreme Court of the United States
Kerry Curry, Housing Wire
A fair housing case headed to the Supreme Court could have direct and indirect impacts on mortgage lending and regulatory enforcement.
The nation’s highest court will decide whether plaintiffs suing under the Fair Housing Act may bring disparate impact claims and, if so, what the proper test for such claims would be.
The act prohibits housing discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, familial status or national origin. In Magner v. Gallagher, a group of rental property owners in St. Paul, Minn., sued the city and several officials, over aggressive code enforcement.
In 2002, St. Paul got tough on problem rental properties, doing sweeps for housing code violations and requiring code compliance certification on the properties. The city allegedly forced rental owners to make expensive renovations. The enforcement resulted in increased maintenance costs, condemnations and some forced selling of properties, the landlords alleged. They claim the city violated the Fair Housing Act through its get-tough enforcement, which ultimately reduced availability of affordable housing in the city and negatively impacted lower-income and minority residents.
The trial judge dismissed the case on summary judgment, citing insufficient evidence of disparate impact. On appeal, the 8th Circuit Court reversed the case in respect to disparate impact while upholding other parts of the trial court’s summary judgment.

Sunday, November 20, 2011

From the Los Angeles Times

Fewer mortgages going bad but foreclosures expected to increase

The Mortgage Bankers Assn. says it could take three or four years to return to a normal pattern of delinquencies and foreclosures.

November 18, 2011|By E. Scott Reckard, Los Angeles Times
Fewer home loans are in trouble these days, but despite some improvements, the nation is not even halfway through cleaning up the foreclosure mess, industry experts said.
It could take three or four years to return to a typical pattern of delinquencies and foreclosures, the Mortgage Bankers Assn. said in releasing its quarterly delinquency report Thursday.
An economist for the trade group declined to estimate how many households had lost their homes since the mortgage meltdown four years ago, or how many more foreclosures were to come.
But the Center for Responsible Lending, a nonpartisan advocacy group that accurately predicted a foreclosure tidal wave in 2006, issued its own assessment Thursday: 2.7 million American households had lost their homes as of February, with an even greater number to come.
The advocacy group, which analyzed 27 million home loans made from 2004 through 2008, estimated that an additional 3.6 million mortgages were in foreclosure or likely to fail.
"That means the nation is not yet midway through a foreclosure crisis that mires the economy," the Durham, N.C., group said in releasing its study.
The mortgage industry stopped funding high-interest subprime mortgages and other risky loans in 2007, when the meltdown made it impossible to sell them. But the backlog of soured mortgages from that era was enormous and has been compounded by lingering unemployment of about 9% nationally and about 12% in California.
Things are slowly improving, said Mike Fratantoni, the mortgage bankers' economist. The number of borrowers who had missed at least one payment but were not yet in foreclosure dropped below 8% for the first time since the fourth quarter of 2008. Just a year ago, it was 9.13%.
The percentage of home loans mired in the foreclosure process was up slightly from a year earlier at 4.43%, compared with the 1% that once had been considered normal, Fratantoni said.
The backlog remains high in part because lenders eased up on foreclosures for much of 2011 after revelations that they had mishandled legal paperwork and procedures when repossessing homes in the past.
The regulatory pressures on home lenders include a lengthy investigation by a task force of state and federal officials. California Atty. Gen. Kamala D. Harris is also pursuing a separate probe in hopes of forcing more write-downs of principal for troubled California borrowers.
Longtime industry observer Guy Cecala, publisher of Inside Mortgage Finance, said he believes it will take at least two more years to resolve the crisis.

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Federal Government back away from Financial Fraud Prosecutions

Federal Government Backs Away From Financial Fraud Prosecutions
Friday, November 18, 2011
Federal Government Backs Away From Financial Fraud Prosecutions
The U.S. Department of Justice under President Barack Obama is prosecuting fewer banks for fraud than it did under George W. Bush.
 
To date, the Justice Department, during the first eleven months of fiscal year 2011, has reported 1,251 new prosecutions for financial fraud. At this pace federal prosecutors will file 1,365 such cases by the end of FY 2011—a total that would represent a 28.6% drop from five years ago.
 
Prosecutions for bank fraud peaked in 1999 when more than 3,000 cases were filed by the Justice Department of Bill Clinton, and have declined steadily ever since.
 
Jeffrey Connaughton, former chief of staff to U.S. Senator Ted Kaufman (D-Delaware), who chaired the Congressional Oversight Panel of the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) during 2010-2011, told the Huffington Post that “a big part of the reason” for this situation is that “lawyers and accountants are failing in their role as gatekeepers, and the Justice Department is too often deferring to these lawyers and accountants, which is like outsourcing the interpretation of the fraud laws.”
 
On August 28, 2008, the Justice Department issued new guidelines for prosecuting corporate crime that encouraged companies to pursue their own investigations and increased the use of non-prosecution and deferred prosecution agreements.
-Noel Brinkerhoff
 
As Wall St. Polices Itself, Prosecutors Use Softer Approach (by Gretchen Morgenson and Louise Story, New York Times)
Bookmark and Share
 

Sunday, November 13, 2011

BK Ruling Paves Path For Non-Judicial Foreclosure Defense


November 13, 2011
 By  Leave a Comment

Bankruptcy court ruling slows down foreclosure sales in state
Ethan C. Nobles, First Arkansas News
A Chapter 13 bankruptcy case in the Eastern District of Arkansas, Jonesboro Division, has caused title companies in the state to investigate foreclosure sales to determine if the properties were properly taken back by lenders.
In a Sept. 29 decision, the court held that a lender not authorized to do business in the state of Arkansas was not in compliance with the state’s non-judicial foreclosure laws. That case, In Re Johnson, concerned objections filed by J.P. Morgan Chase Bank and the related Chase Home Finance regarding the confirmation of three Chapter 13 plans for debtors who had lost their homes to the lenders through non-judicial foreclosure proceedings.
The non-judicial foreclosure has become the preferred method for taking back homes from debtors who have defaulted on mortgages. It is an abbreviated process that is less expensive than a traditional judicial foreclosure proceeding that is litigated in the courts system.
J.P. Morgan, in the In Re Johnson case, objected to the Chapter 13 plans of which the debtors sought court approval. A Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan is designed to pay creditors at least a percentage of what they are owed by the debtors over a period of years. J.P. Morgan argued that it was owed its the costs and fees it had incurred through the non-judicial foreclosure proceedings and those were not considered in the plans.
The court sided with the debtors, stating J.P. Morgan was not in compliance with Arkansas’ non-judicial foreclosure statutes as it was not authorized to do business in Arkansas. The court ruled the debtors did not owe the foreclosure fees and costs sought by J.P. Morgan. Furthermore, the court ruled J.P. Morgan owed the debtors’ attorneys fees incurred in litigating the issue.
Meanwhile, Little Rock Realtor Allen Trammel said that — in the past week — two of his clients who purchased homes that had been taken back through the state’s non-judicial foreclosure laws were in limbo. He said the explanation given to him in each instance is that title companies are typically refusing to issue title insurance in those transfers until they can determine whether the homes were taken in compliance with state law. Bob Balhorn, another Little Rock Realtor, confirmed that the In Re Johnson case has put the brakes on sales of the foreclosed properties at issue.

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Attack on Michael Moore - From OC Register

Jay Ambrose: Michael Moore's insufferable occupation

Capitalist Moore comes to Denver not just to parade with the occupiers, but to sell a book.
  
By JAY AMBROSE / Scripps Howard News Service
Michael Moore, heavily weighted down with concern for fellow Americans -- his nation harbors "possibly the dumbest people on the planet," he once said -- was tromping around in Denver the other day. And no, even though I was just 25 or so miles west of him in my house, I did not feel the earth quake.
I did catch him in the news being vicious with one of those he thought stupid.
Article Tab: Filmmaker and author Michael Moore addresses Occupy Denver protesters at Civic Center Park in Denver on Nov. 3.
Filmmaker and author Michael Moore addresses Occupy Denver protesters at Civic Center Park in Denver on Nov. 3.
ASSOCIATED PRESS PHOTO
ADVERTISEMENT
"You're just punk media is all you are. You lie. You lie to people," he growled to a TV reporter covering his appearance at a local version of Occupy Wall Street. These occupiers, you may have heard, aren't exactly sure what they believe except that many talk like they are to the left of Lenin. They shudder at anything as free as our markets used to be and appear to believe we are divided between 1 percent who are rich and the other 99 percent who are groveling in misery.
The reporter wanted to know whether Moore was one of the 1 percent. He asked whether reports were true that Moore was worth $50 million, and Moore -- though conceding he did "very well" -- called the question a lie, which is peculiar on several grounds.
For one, it was a question, not an assertion. For another, one of the tricks in his documentary, "Fahrenheit 9/11," was to ask politicians embarrassing, phony questions, though the film was edited in such a way as to leave utterly false impressions about two of his victims. That brings up a third point: Fabricated information is Moore's modus operandi, his way to fame and fortune, his means of capturing an Oscar, the sea in which he swims.
The "Fahrenheit" film made a bigger profit than any documentary in history, but Moore should return all that money to cheated viewers. An overall bash of President George W. Bush, with particular attention to the war in Iraq, it contained 59 deceits, according to research by Dave Kopel that is absolutely convincing. Kopel is research director for a libertarian think tank in Denver, Independence Institute, with which I myself have had an uncompensated association.
All of which brings us back to Occupy Wall Street. It reeks of the same kind of hallucinatory zaniness, not the least of which is this business of the rich getting away with taxpayer murder.
For the genesis of The Big Lie, go back to the Bush tax cuts that did give tax breaks to the rich but also gave plenty to the middle class, even relieving some workers of any federal tax burden at all. The overall result was that the rich paid a higher share of the income tax than they had before, though you would not know it from listening to liberals who have also been sounding the theme that income inequality has been increasing at breakneck speed with the middle class being stomped on mercilessly.
As the economist Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute demonstrates with figures from the Census Bureau, income inequality has increased relatively little over the past 16 years. Perry can also show how all income groups have been advancing over the past three decades.
Another economist, Donald Boudreaux of George Mason University, quotes the IRS as showing that, as of 2005, 57.4 percent of those in the top 1 percent economically in 1996 had dropped to lower income groups. People in lower groups, meanwhile, have been climbing to higher groups.
That's not to say joblessness doesn't haunt us. Here's why: a fiscal crisis brought on by the Federal Reserve and mostly liberals conniving in Congress with Fannie Mae and Wall Street to get mortgages in the hands of people who could not afford them. That gave us a fiscal crisis and a recession made worse by President Obama's mismanagement of deficits and additional regulations scaring businesses out of expansion.
But there are still Americans making money. Capitalist Moore was in Denver not just to parade with the occupiers, but to sell a book to those "dummies." I forget its title.

FOLLOW US @OCRegLetters
WRITE A LETTER TO THE EDITOR Letters to the Editor: E-mail to letters@ocregister.com. Please provide your name, city and telephone number (telephone numbers will not be published). Letters of about 200 words or videos of 30-seconds each will be given preference. Letters will be edited for length, grammar and clarity.

More from National Columnists »
 

COMMENTS | PRINT | EMAIL |   SHARE










By JAY AMBROSE / Scripps Howard News Service

Michael Moore, heavily weighted down with concern for fellow Americans -- his nation harbors "possibly the dumbest people on the planet," he once said -- was tromping around in Denver the other day. And no, even though I was just 25 or so miles west of him in my house, I did not feel the earth quake.
I did catch him in the news being vicious with one of those he thought stupid.

Filmmaker and author Michael Moore addresses Occupy Denver protesters at Civic Center Park in Denver on Nov. 3.
ASSOCIATED PRESS PHOTO
ADVERTISEMENT
"You're just punk media is all you are. You lie. You lie to people," he growled to a TV reporter covering his appearance at a local version of Occupy Wall Street. These occupiers, you may have heard, aren't exactly sure what they believe except that many talk like they are to the left of Lenin. They shudder at anything as free as our markets used to be and appear to believe we are divided between 1 percent who are rich and the other 99 percent who are groveling in misery.
The reporter wanted to know whether Moore was one of the 1 percent. He asked whether reports were true that Moore was worth $50 million, and Moore -- though conceding he did "very well" -- called the question a lie, which is peculiar on several grounds.
For one, it was a question, not an assertion. For another, one of the tricks in his

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Why am I being Ignored by the court system ?

October 18, 2011

As I work on my latest appeal to the court to give me a hearing to show my proof of the violation of law by the Wall Street Banker and their perfidious service agent; Ocwen Federal Bank FSB,I am encouraged by the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Since I will be filing this latest appeal electronically I can now utilize hot links to the prior pleadings and decisions in my informal opening brief. While linking to the 9 years of appeals I am amazed that I have been unable to gain a court hearing. Twelve separate opportunities for just one Judge to say 'give him a hearing, determine the facts, and apply the law'.

It is unbelievable to me that an American citizen can suffer the loss of his home and business by the violation of law by a Wall Street Bank and their agent, and these same banks have kept it out of court,

Of course that is the only way the banks prevail, by keeping me out of court, since my proof of their violation is undeniable.

The latest appeal is to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, challenging the lower bankruptcy courts ability to not follow their own precedential law, which ruled I must be given a hearing.

The bankruptcy judge that refused my hearing, is now a part of the appeals panel, that denied my latest request for a hearing, although not a part of the three judge panel that decided my case.

The OWS protests have struck a nerve with me. This is not the America I want.

A lot of other American citizens agree with me. The mortgage meltdown simply exposed the unbridled greed of Wall Street. That greed filtered down to the loan brokers and lenders.

The players in the Wall Street Casino, bet that US residential real estate would continue to rise. Of course, they did not bet the house, they bet our houses, then sold it, quickly to the world.

Ruthless? you bet they are. When I couldn't refinance my home of 26 years, because of their violation of law - changing the title - instead of fixing their 'mistake', they doubled down their bet, and sold it again, and when that real estate investor had me evicted, the banks cleaned up the title for the buyer of my home.

I have been fighting ever since.

www.banksters.us

The Big Lie

What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral.
November 8, 2011 By Steve Dibert Leave a Comment
Barry Ritholtz, Washington Post


I have a fairly simple approach to investing: Start with data and objective evidence to determine the dominant elements driving the market action right now. Figure out what objective reality is beneath all of the noise. Use that information to try to make intelligent investing decisions.
But then, I’m an investor focused on preserving capital and managing risk. I’m not out to win the next election or drive the debate. For those who are, facts and data matter much less than a narrative that supports their interests.
One group has been especially vocal about shaping a new narrative of the credit crisis and economic collapse: those whose bad judgment and failed philosophy helped cause the crisis.
Rather than admit the error of their ways — Repent! — these people are engaged in an active campaign to rewrite history. They are not, of course, exonerated in doing so. And beyond that, they damage the process of repairing what was broken. They muddy the waters when it comes to holding guilty parties responsible. They prevent measures from being put into place to prevent another crisis.
Here is the surprising takeaway: They are winning. Thanks to the endless repetition of the Big Lie.
A Big Lie is so colossal that no one would believe that someone could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. There are many examples: Claims that Earth is not warming, or that evolution is not the best thesis we have for how humans developed. Those opposed to stimulus spending have gone so far as to claim that the infrastructure of the United States is just fine, Grade A (not D, as the we discussed last month), and needs little repair.
Read more here