Way back when, seems almost a lifetime ago, I remember you saying something about a moratorium on foreclosures and some new program called Making Home Affordable. A program designed to help millions of Americans keep their homes by modifying the existing terms, to an affordable payment.

I could barely contain my excitement since we were facing imminent default on our mortgage. I was able to earn a decent living in a good economy in the real estate market. I also owned a small business that was tied to a flourishing economy.

Fast forward: August, 2010.

Your program is failing. I doubt you even read the "guidelines" of your MHA program. If you did, as an educated man, I am certain you would have seen that there was no way the program would work. I will not pretend that I understand the scope of your job and how difficult it must be. However, I do hold you responsible for not doing something about the housing crisis. I do not understand politics. I am sure it is a complex system where one side disagrees with the other and as a result, legislation that is in favor of the middle class is impossible to pass.

If the government was able to put Fannie into conservatorship, take over the automakers, and bailout banks by forcing them to take billions of dollars (against the populous vote of all Americans), then it was able to let the banks fail and create a Fannie-type entity to buy back the toxic mortgages.

And just so those who can afford the mortgages don't cry when the government helps the struggling homeowner, simply write that blank check to the Department of Sachs (you know it as Treasury), and offer every homeowner in this country the ability to refinance their loan to 2%. If a principal reduction is in order, reduce the principal. Period. No strings attached. If a homeowner defaults after this REAL modification assistance, then follow the same procedure as is customary in the mortgage industry.

If you run the numbers, it might cost about as much as the bailout. (Don't forget to include the $150 billion of OUR taxpayer dollars that we gave you as a result of the losses suffered by Fannie and Freddie.)

Please remember when assessing this novel idea that it is our government who is responsible for the deregulation of the financial industry. I know it did not happen under your watch and you inherited many problems, but that is no excuse for you to turn your head and ignore this crisis. You might balk at the reduction of principal, by all means the banks wouldn't even considering doing it, just remember the home values would have been sustained had the government done it's job and policed the financial industry.

One last thing. Stop the securitization of home loans. Stop the selling of derivatives. No longer will the government aka Wall Street be able to play stock market games with Americans' homes.

Sincerely,
Lori Kelly, founder beingmiddleclass.org

So instead of changing current legislation and in particular Fannie Mae guidelines to MAKE the banks modify a homeowners loan, Fannie has decided to spend it's time deciding how they can beat an already beaten down homeowner.

Makes sense?

We, the American taxpayers own this giant, Fannie and we own her brother, Freddie Mac. In 2008 when these two companies were failing, the government seized ownership-took them over. These two companies backed the predatory lending practices that were rampant over the past several years. Now they get rewarded by given another opportunity to rape the American homeowner.

There would not be strategic defaulters if the housing market was stabilized, you know, remember Obama talking about that wonderful Making Home Affordable Program that was going to sustain the housing market by curbing foreclosures? Wonder what happened to that brilliant idea?

Quite simple: If the banks modified loans, the foreclosures would stop. If the bank modified loans, the value of homes would stop declining. If the bank modified loans, peoples' homes would not be underwater and there would not be a problem of a strategic defaulter.

The government's inability to fix this housing market is deplorable. It is at the crux of the economy as a whole and until something is done to stop the bleeding, and I'm not talking about a band aid here like the failed Home Affordable Modification Program, how about starting with some some real legislation like the cram down law passing for bankruptcy court judges to have the authority to modify a home loan.

The number of homes that are underwater is alarming, to say the least. If positive equity cannot be had for another 5 or 6 years, you think we are in trouble now. Just wait a while. It will get worse.

In February, 2004, the FBI told then President Bush that there was an epidemic of mortgage fraud. He chose to ignore it. After all, we are talking about the banking industry who is so far up the politicians asses a crowbar couldn't get them out. Bush moved 500 FBI agents out of the white collar crime department.Good move asshole.

Madoff is in jail. He perpetrated a notorious ponzi scheme and since it was famous and rich people who fell victim to his scam, he is in jail.The ponzi scheme created courtesy of the banksters by creating MERS to hide the note and the separation of the note from the deed of trust is the biggest ponzi scheme of this century, yet no one is behind bars.

Why is that? Greed.Corruption.

39 states have laws in place to protect the banksters from pursuing deficiency judgments. So is big brother getting another free pass to circumvent state laws and pursue these judgments in non-deficiency states? I do not doubt it.

Walking away from a mortgage is bad for borrowers, communities, the entire US economy. If the government really wanted to deter strategic defaulters, they need to get off their asses and straighten out this mess they created.

The statement that BOA and Citigroup support changing existing law to give federal judges the power to modify mortgages in BK court is BS. They are the very ones who had lobbyists in droves shoving money in the pockets of the corrupt politicians to vote against legislation the last time it was before the House. http://washingtonindependent.com/412...wall-in-senate

"Lenders are unlikely to pursue a deficiency judgment even in recourse states because it is economically inefficient to do so..." So the government in essence is saying pay no attention to the state laws, you all can do whatever the hell you want. We got your backs.

But hey, if you are a huge corporation, like Morgan Stanley, it's okay to walk away.

If you're not mad yet, you should be when you know that your tax paying dollars, and in fact $145,000,000,000 went to Fannie and Freddie. I don't know about you, but I could sure use a small portion of that money right about now.

Thank you President Obama for your perseverance in making sure that your Making Home Affordable program is working.

Thank you former President Bush for ignoring the 2004 FBI report about the future epidemic of mortgage fraud.

Thank you former President Clinton for helping to deregulate the financial industry that allowed fly by night mortgage companies to set up shop and originate loans that never should have been done, and lots of other things that I will not get into.

Thank you Barney Frank for your service to this country by shooting down legislation that would have put a watchdog in place to oversee Fannie and Freddie so now these two giants will continue to steal money from the Americans, and of course you didn't want the Freedom of Information Act to be applied to these two giant blood sucking companies, because without a doubt there are documents that will reveal your big fat hand was in the cookie jar.

Wake up America.

It's time we serve these people with a notice of foreclosure and evict their happy asses right out of office.

Bank of America announced details of a plan to partially forgive debts of homeowners who owe more than their homes are worth, but it is simply not in the best interest of the bank to do this.  So we are going to tell everyone that we are here to help, but we will be able to continue to blame homeowners for missing paperwork, tell people we'll put them on trial programs when we have no intention of making them permanent, and our profits will soar.

It I appear pessimistic.  I am.

Please make sure you keep your bank accounts with us because we use that money to lend back to you at a helluva profit.

Jack Shakett commented from his leer jet on his way to his vacation in Europe that they have not been able to help customers they way they should. And they won't be helping anytime soon either.

We tell you that we cannot help you when you are current because there's no money in that. We have instructed our employees to tell you that when you are current with your payments, we cannot help you. So please stop making your payments because that will put us in a better position to steal your home.

When we put a homeowner on a trial program, we are able to report that to the Treasury. You see, that makes us look good. It is a strategy we use to deceive everyone that we are actually helping homeowners. But please do remember our goal is to take as many homes as we can because there is a lot of money for us when we foreclose.

We are going to hire more employees but not to help distressed homeowners. We are going to need as much manpower as we can get when we start ramping up efforts to steal your homes.

If we do give you a permanent modification, we won't sign that agreement. You will think you are on a permanent program, but after you make several payments to us, we'll keep them, and since they are considered partial payments, we get to put them in what we call a "suspense" account. That way we can charge you up the rear for late fees, made up fees, fees, fees, and more fees. Then after we suck as much money out of you as we can, we'll tell you that mod you have is not valid because we didn't sign it.

And now:  pay up!

If you don't pay all past due amounts, including the junk fees we added, we'll steal your home right out from under you.

Since there is no oversight, okay so you think Freddie Mac as overseer of the Making Home Affordable Program will help? Try it. Call Freddie Mac. They are in cahoots with us. They will tell you to contact your servicer/bank for information. Then give us a call. Call our 800 number so we can put you on hold forever, transfer you, and then ultimately disconnect you.

Sorry folks. We are not here to help.
We are here to steal your homes and take your money.

So if you are thinking strategic default, you can afford the home but chose to walk away because your home has lost a ton of value, please don't do it. If you do, it will slow down our efforts to make as much money as humanly possible.

As far as us writing down principal. Forget about it. We will use the same tactics I stated above. We will tell you we are writing down your principal balance, send you an agreement without our signature, and then tell you that document is not good because we didn't sign it.

So once again, sorry folks, but you are not important to us. The most important thing to us is our bottom line. We own Wall Street. We own the government.

Now keep putting your payroll checks into your checking and savings accounts so we can continue our web of deceit.

Thank you.

Bank of America reports more than 56,000 Permanent Home Affordable Modifications, among more than 600,000 total modifications since January 2008.  

I would like to know how many of those 56,000 permanent modification agreements the bank signed and sent back to the homeowners? What we are seeing now is a disturbing number of homeowners who thought they had a permanent modified loan, but rather, being told that their agreements are not valid. Why?

Because the bank decided not to sign the agreements and send them back. Could it be that this banksta is using this tactic because it can report these numbers to the Treasury as 56,000 permanent modification agreements? Sure makes them look like they are trying though doesn't it?

How about Freddie Mac, as overseer of the Making Home Affordable Program audit the 56,000 modifications and give us the real number of the agreements that have been signed by the bank? Here is a novel idea: bankster must sign permanent modification agreement BEFORE sending it to homeowner. If the agreement is breached, it will be void or voidable. So what is the reason the bank is sending out permanent modification agreements without signing them? To get an "A" on the Treasury Report card, that's why.

BOA goes on to state that they have completed 600,000 modifications through all available programs since January 2008. What does that mean? A completed modification should mean that the bank has actually helped a homeowner keep their house. Forgive me for being pessimistic about this number, but I would venture to guess that this bank has not completed 600,000 modifications of any kind.

Treasury Guidelines are clear that banks offer MHA before they offer some in-house modifications. It is odd that BOA reports it has completed nearly 550,000 modifications outside of HAMP. So let's see: 56,000 alleged permanent HAMP modification versus 550,000 BOA modifications. Wonder where they stand to make the most money?

BOA has loaned $70 billion to 320,000 customers to purchase a new home or refinance their existing first mortgage.

Aw, greed in its finest form.

Congratulations, "Bend Over America."

Lori's remarks: So do tell Mr. KnowItAll, what made the values of the properties decline? Could it be perhaps the deregulation of the financial industry courtesy of the good ol' US of A? Don't mention that part it your blog or provide a comments section because it might weaken your warped theory here.

Some in this situation believe they will be forever chained to a large debt owed when they sell the house. And so, even though they have the ability to keep paying the monthly bill, they have decided to walk away from the property without paying off the loan. An intentional foreclosure, if you will.

Lori's remarks: This doesn't have anything to do with Freddie who is under government conservatorship asking the Fed for a ton of money, does it?

In essence, these borrowers are weighing the costs and benefits of a strategic default, and coming to a conclusion. Now, the costs can be considerable. Once a mortgage goes into default, a borrower's credit rating is severely tarnished, making it more expensive, if not impossible, to qualify for any new form of credit. In certain states, a borrower's personal assets can be subject to a deficiency judgment. And anything that involves a credit review, such as obtaining auto insurance or getting a new job, can be complicated. These detriments can be in effect for several years. The benefit: the borrower avoids paying for the lost equity in the house.

Lori's remarks: How did the equity get lost? I will again mention the reason the housing market collapsed.  Remember the banksters, the ones who own Wall Street and a majority of the politicians? Could it perhaps be that the crisis is directly related to the ponzi scheme involving MERS and the securitization of homeowner loans? Now come on Donnie. If you are going to play the blame game, at least play fair.

Knowing the costs and factoring in the time horizon, some borrowers have made the calculation that it is better to purposely default on the mortgage. While I understand how that might well be a good decision for certain borrowers, that doesn't make it good social policy.

Lori's remarks: You want to talk about social policy? How about government policy? I hope people are smart enough to read between the lines of this ridiculous blog. And hunt their boots out to wade through this crap.

That's because strategic defaults affect many other families and communities. And these costs – or as they are known in economic jargon, externalities – are not factored into the individual borrower's calculations.

Lori's remarks: I agree. This will affect many families and communities. Let say, for example, MHA or HAMP was a success. How affected would these neighborhoods and families be if the government actually modified loans? Maybe, I dunno try to keep homeowners in their homes?

Let's start with the neighbors. When strategic defaults occur, homes go into foreclosure and sit vacant for some period of time. We know from experience that foreclosures and vacancies drive down the property values of everyone else in the neighborhood. Thus, strategic defaulters, in effect, deplete the personal wealth of their neighbors. Get a critical mass of strategic defaults, and broader communities and regions become affected. Indeed, Economy.com , the analytic firm, recently said that more strategic defaults could tip a fragile housing market back into one of further price declines. Even more families harmed.

Lori's remarks: Let's start with the bank bailout. And end with the failed Making Home UNaffordable program. Then we can move on from there.

But that's not all. Should strategic defaults become more common, mortgage guarantors and investors, including Freddie Mac, would need to factor this risk more prominently into their credit policies and prices. The likely impact on future homebuyers: the cost of a mortgage will go up and credit terms will be less flexible. Thus, the impact of strategic defaulters on still more families might be more expensive mortgages and loans that are more difficult to obtain. The strategic defaulter does not usually consider these costs.

Do borrowers considering strategic defaults have other options? They do. For those who have not suffered any disruption in income and have a longer time horizon, simply continuing to pay the bills might be best. Over time, recovering house prices and declining mortgage balances likely will close some, if not all, of the equity gap. According to the Federal Reserve, while the housing bust wiped out $8 trillion in home equity, $1 trillion came back in 2009. The point here: time might be your best ally.

Another alternative: if Freddie Mac owns the loan, a family might be able to refinance up to 125 percent of the current property value. In other words, if a family's home equity has been completely wiped out and the mortgage balance is as much as 25 percent more than the home is worth, we can help.

Lori's remarks: You can help? THEN DO IT!

What about families who need to move? We can help here, too. Freddie Mac has an array of solutions that help certain borrowers avoid the cost and stigma of foreclosure, such as short sales and deeds in lieu of foreclosure. And we continue to work on additional solutions that address would-be strategic defaulters while minimizing the impact on neighbors.

Lori's remarks: Bless your heart. And here I thought you were just as greedy as the banksters.

In the end, borrowers considering a strategic default should recognize the damaging impact their actions can have on others. While a personal financial strategy might argue for a strategic default, entire communities and future homebuyers can be harmed as a result. And that is why our broader social and policy interests will be best served by discouraging strategic defaults.

Lori's remarks: How about encouraging HOME LOAN MODIFICATIONS?
You know, it's called the President's Making Home Affordable Program.
You know, the one that is failing because there is no law subjecting the servicers/banks to actually modify loans?
You know, the one that you "oversee" to ensure the success of the President's program? 
You know, the one that was created as a guise to help people? 
Yeah, that one.

Where's my barf bag? 
Anyone? 
Barf bag please!


Source:  http://www.freddiemac.com/news/featured_perspectives/20100503_bisenius.html?intcmp=1007FPDB