It was just a few days ago that Wells Fargo insisted their procedures for foreclosures were just fine and nothing to worry about. Well…
A Wells Fargo executive has acknowledged that he verified only the dates on up to 150 foreclosure documents he signed daily.
The executive made his admission in a May deposition involving a Washington state homeowner. He said he relied on co-workers to ensure that other information in the documents was correct.
Three other lenders, Ally Financial Inc.’s GMAC Mortgage unit, Bank of America Corp. and JPMorgan Chase & Co. have halted tens of thousands of foreclosures after similar practices became public.
Wells Fargo & Co. is confident that foreclosure documents involving the bank are accurate, and it has no plans to halt foreclosures, said Vickee Adams, a spokeswoman for the San Francisco-based bank. She noted that the Washington homeowner’s case was dismissed.
It’s a matter of time before they stop their procedures. It’s simply too dangerous for them, should they have an adversary like Israel Machado:
Israel Machado’s foreclosure started out as a routine affair. In the summer of 2008, as the economy began to soften, Mr. Machado’s pool-cleaning business suffered and like millions of other Americans, he fell behind on his $400,000 mortgage.
But Mr. Machado’s response was unlike most other Americans’. Instead of handing his home over to the lender, IndyMac Bank FSB, he hired Ice Legal LP in nearby Royal Palm Beach to fight the foreclosure. The law firm researched the history of Mr. Machado’s loan and found two interesting facts.
First, the affidavits IndyMac used to file the foreclosure were signed by a so-called robo-signer named Erica A. Johnson-Seck, who routinely signed 6,000 documents a week related to foreclosures and bankruptcy. That volume, the court decided, meant Ms. Johnson-Seck couldn’t possibly have thoroughly reviewed the facts of Mr. Machado’s case, as required by law.
Secondly, IndyMac (now called OneWest Bank) no longer owned the loan—a group of investors in a securitized trust managed by Deutsche Bank did. Determining that IndyMac didn’t really have standing to foreclose, a judge threw out the case and ordered IndyMac to pay Mr. Machado’s $30,000 legal bill.
Mr. Machado and his lawyer, Tom Ice, say they now want to convince the owners of the mortgage to cut Mr. Machado’s loan balance to between $150,000 and $200,000—the current selling price for comparable homes in his community near West Palm Beach. “The whole intent was to get them to come to the negotiating table, to get me in a fixed-rate mortgage that worked,” Mr. Machado said.
Suddenly, foreclosure fraud has become the potential stick that homeowners have long needed to force lenders to the negotiating table. It could theoretically operate in the same fashion as cramdown: instead of lenders wanting to modify the loan before a bankruptcy judge gets to do so, the lender would want to modify and not risk a years-long foreclosure process where they find out they have no standing to foreclose.
It doesn’t mean that everyone will suddenly get a loan modification, but it’s another tool in the shed to try and force compliance. Because this is dangerous territory for the banks.
The flawed practices that GMAC Mortgage, JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America have recently begun investigating are so prevalent, lawyers and legal experts say, that additional lenders and loan servicers are likely to halt foreclosure proceedings and may have to reconsider past evictions.
In some cases, documents have been signed by employees who say they have not verified crucial information like amounts owed by borrowers. Other problems involve questionable legal notarization of documents, in which, for example, the notarizations predate the actual preparation of documents — suggesting that signatures were never actually reviewed by a notary.
Other problems occurred when notarizations took place so far from where the documents were signed that it was highly unlikely that the notaries witnessed the signings, as the law requires.
On still other important documents, a single official’s name is signed in such radically different ways that some appear to be forgeries.
It just takes a few judges to throw down the hammer on some lenders, and call into question their entire practices, for them to put a “Loan Modifications Now!” sign out in front of the door so they don’t have to deal with foreclosures. If borrowers know their rights, they can really put the screws to these banks.
UPDATE: Just for those who think the borrower is still at fault for failing to pay his mortgage, and shouldn’t get out of it on a technicality – the banks are full of big boys and girls. They knew the acceleration of mortgage defaults, and going all the way back to the top of the bubble they knew how many mortgages were circulating through the system. They could have hired the appropriate number of people to track ownership of the title, and perform the due diligence if the mortgage failed. They didn’t want to spend the money to do it correctly. And I could care less if this comes back to bite the lender in the ass now. It’s called bad business practices. And they deserve everything they’re getting.




55 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
I agree with you. Consumer law and bankruptcy has always been about getting some kind of enforced deal. If the shoe were on the other foot, would the banks care at all that the consumer was caught being sloppy, lazy or in some cases out right dishonest? I am always a bit surprised when these things come up. We are constantly being lectured to about business and what it takes. Surely notarizing signatures with all the pages fully filled out and present at the time of the notarization is fundamental. What hypocrites.
How many other people did they foreclose on when they actually had no standing to foreclose?
How many people who were foreclosed on by Indy Mac will now call on this law firm and ask for a forensic backtrack on whether their mortgage was also owned by someone else?
IF Mr. Machado had not fought this foreclosure and if this foreclosure had been successful, who was going to get the proceeds of the foreclosure? IndyMac? What would have happened to the investors who actually owned the note? Could Mr. Machado have been sued by them later down the road as the true owners of the note? Imagine Mr. Machdo multiplied by thousands – he just happened to be the one guy out of a hundred who had the gumption and the money to fight.
I agree with your point that the banks and servicers CHOSE to be incompetent and fraudulent. Everyone knew that a zillion mortgages underwater and rampant unemployment would lead to massive amounts of foreclosure that any thinking person would assume would also result in a huge wave of hiring adequate amounts of people to process those foreclosures. The banks CHOSE to do it incorrectly and without due process. The executives who DECIDED that thousands of mortgage documents could be handled by skeletal crews made a decision that violated their personal fiduciary duties to their own stockholders who are now staring at the bill for huge liabilities and stock losses. Those a!@#@#ole CEO’s deserve civil suits as well as criminal suits from the stockholders as well as their own employees who will now see the value of their 401Ks go into the toilet. See how the chain works? The bad decisions to not hire adequately were made by insanely greedy CEOs whose only concern was their very own personal salaries, bonuses and perks which they collected while they drove their companies and the entire American and possibly world economies into the ditch.
Great rant.
You and Cynthia are both doing great work on this topic… That light at the end of the tunnel no longer looks like a train.
One problem (I think) with what you say here:
If a bank does not have standing to foreclose, then they don’t have standing to modify the loan, either.
Unless, I suppose, both the homeowner and lender agree not to ask if the lender has standing in front of a court. The banks would no doubt push for adding a clause to the modified loan saying “we both agree not to challenge the bank’s ownership of this loan in court.”
Lawyers: would you recommend your homeowner client sign off on a loan modification if that were part of the deal?
Like Mr. Machado, Mr. Cranick needs to acquire aggressive legal representation to put a quick halt to this predatory practice.
Could this incident be a metaphor for the MOTU’s attitude toward the middle class?
This thing just might develop into something very entertaining…even better if a bunch of “executives” end up in the slam. (And none of this “prison resort” crap, either. Hard-core Federal time.)
Nice reporting, D-Day.
The bad decisions to not hire adequately were made by insanely greedy CEOs whose only concern was their very own personal salaries, bonuses and perks which they collected while they drove their companies and the entire American and possibly world economies into the ditch.
On the contrary, what is to you and me criminal conduct, to TMOTU it’s “Too Big To Fail” knowing that their paid for subsidiary, aka The US Congress, will cover the losses. And if the congress bi-critters need cover well their Judicial Brethren will take care of it, or they can ask the country’s CEO to look the other way. How The Village takes care of their own – (Village) Citizen’s United (against the rest of us).
David, your “update” is a brilliant take-down of the “moral hazard” argument being put out there by the Wall Street MOTUs. It ought to be nailed to the desk of every government regulator of the banking industry, and waived in the face of every risk management officer at every bank in the country.
Even if some homeowners manage to escape foreclosure and secure a modified mortgage because of faulty documentation, what happens when the parties can’t even find the note? Who has it. What happens to the note during securitization?
I am wondering why banks foreclose in a depressed market in the first place, the very first thing they should be doing is offering the home at the depressed market value to the borrower since there is no way they even expect to get a market price when auctioning off their foreclosure asset
Yesterday Yves Smith at nakedcapitalism had this bombshell post about the posting on the internet of a price list and promo materials of a firm that in effect is selling document forging services to facilitate forclosure fraud. The company is DocX, a subsidiary of an outfit called Lender Services. Here’s Yves’ assessment of the significance of this revelation:
My apologies if this has already been aired at FDL. Internet surfing was very limited yesterday after I saw this in the early morning.
I can’t see how the regulatory system or the courts sort this out. It requires:
1. Every party must agree to find and provide all the missing documentation, so that each party’s rights can be confirmed.
2. Every one of these parties has to agree not to challenge the process by which all the other parties’ rights are perfected.
3. In the end, this requires government intervention for the purpose of imposing a solution in which there are still large losers — because the mortgage on the property is underwater. How is government to choose who loses? And how will it defends itself politically?
Cynthia Kouril hit that yesterday in a Seminal diary, calling it “the Holy Grail of criminal prosectution.”
She likened it to the tobacco industry insider who blew the whistle on the phony science touted by Big Smoke and their intentional manipulation of nicotine levels to encourage folks to get hooked.
Read somewhere that having properties auctioned off at depressed prices is an acceptable loss. Losing the erotic pleasure of seeing distressed families tossed out on the street is not.
If the Bank do not have standing to foreclose, hence no standing to modify the loan, then it follows they have no standing to collect payments.
The homeowner just needs to ask: To whom do I make my payments, and will that entity please prove they own the loan.
Heh. 60 Million mortgages written off. Can you spell collapse?
Which brings up a whole other question. Throughout this mess, I have always been struck by the numbers of people who were in good faith tryng to work out compromises and renegotiations with these mortgage servicers who were NEVER the actual noteholders. If you could count the times you read the phrase “we sent them the same paperwork 10 times and they always lost it” how rich would you be?
Was that the actual business model? Get the paperwork, throw it in the garbage, make the homeowner job through endless hoops until they just lie down and give up? Yet the servicer made their fees regardless of the “help” provided to the homeowner. I’m not being facetious when I suggest this – I remember when WorldCom went under the horror stories from their own employees about how they never had any intention of reversing bogus charges, giving refunds, etc. They were supposed to tell the consumer everything was solved when it wasn’t and just wait for the consumer to give up after multiple tries to correct the same problem were unsuccessful.
At what point was it incumbent on these servicers who yanked these consumers around to disclose to them “You know what? we don’t hold your note and we have no standing to renegotiate anything with you. Your note is owned by a Norwegian fishing village and is managed by Deutsche Bank. We do have a great deal this month on Rosetta Stone language software, would you like to charge that in 3 convenient monthly payments?”
I suppose it’s too late for the Congressional Democrats to attempt gin up an investigation of this before the elections, and it’s unlikely they’ll do so afterward. Sigh.
There is still a missing link. Yve’s disclosure seems to tell us that there was likely document fraud and/or recklessness all along the process of obtaining foreclosure. But when did this start, and how much did the primary lenders/banks know?
The full circle story would be that this was a know condition of the mortgage industry before the loans were made. The banks would encourage fraud in signing mortgages in the first place, in order to feed the secondary markets and the CDS mills that were making everyone rich. Then after everything tanks, the banks/lenders and all the investors along the way would know that foreclosure could be achieved with relatively little risk, because the foreclosure mills would take care of all the missing legal steps. The entire housing industry was built on fraud and all the insiders knew it, but no one said anything along as the bubble continued.
Because they’re stupid and short-sighted, basically.
3a. And what happens while all of this is being hashed out, set up, and actually gets worked through?
Are the government and the banking industry really going to agree on a plan that says something like “OK, we’re going to require every mortgage issued since (pick a date — 11/12/1999 comes to mind for me [the date Glass-Steagall was repealed]) to be re-certified”?
If so, not a one of those home could be offered for sale until the title is cleared up, unless someone wants to pony up all cash for a house with a dubious title. No banker would lend to finance that sale, and no mortgage title company would vouch for a clear title.
Now that would be a real frozen housing market . . .
It would be the collapse of a lot more than a couple of big banks. As much as I want them held accountable for the damage they have caused (and continue to cause), I’d really like them to be held accountable in such a way that the rest of the economy continues to function.
The institutions themselves are not corrupt, the people running them are. Preserve the banks, throw out the people – anyone in a postion of responsibility who was responsible for creating this situation.
Maybe the White House could stop listening to people who created the crisis. Let’s hire the arsonist to be the firefighter is not a good policy.
Perhaps the Harvard Business School and the Chicago School of Economics can start to do some case studies concerning the end results of deregulation and non-existent oversight combined with systemic rampant personal and corporate avarice and malfeasance.
Exactly. This may have the potential to collapse the economy again if a substantial portion of the housing/lending industry closes down. It’s more than just a nah, nah moment for mortgage lenders. Millions of people are trying to sell their homes at this moment, other millions are trying to buy, and there’s no guarantee that they’ll be able to do so if any of these documentation issues arises anywhere along the chain.
what have we heard from the Administration? and from this year’s candidates?
Crickets
If you check, you might find that most of your arsonists came from the Harvard Business School and the Chicago School of Economics.
Your idea for the case studies is valid, but not sure anyone qualified to do it would perform an impartial analysis.
In truth, the banks were in trouble the minute the real estate bubble burst. That’s why they didn’t want to “mark to market”. The value of their potential assets collapsed. Therefore, loan on any property bought between certain years or any loan made on a property for any other reason (equity loans) between certain years, due to the underlying value of the security being devalued if it went to foreclosure, had the potential for being underwater. Sad, but they caused this and if they went to sell the properties, their worst nightmare is realized in the market. They paid themselves, they paid each other. Time to pay the piper.
This has the potential for slowing down the foreclosure train, but it isn’t going to stop it, to any substantial degree, from rolling down the tracks.
It looks like most of these problems can be corrected with better pleading and well drafted accompanying affidavits.
Now, there are going to be some bankers and lawyers, with their butts in a big and well deserved crack. Also, it may give some people leverage in negotiations.
Jane has a fresh cross-post already in progress: Morning Joe: Either White House Got Played on DADT, or They Lied
That’s exactly the reason I mentioned those 2 schools specifically – They seem to have the largest output of Gordon Gekkos per sq. inch.
Uhhh, yes!
Peterr @5 asked how lawyers should advise their homeowner clients:
Uhhh, NO, I wouldn’t advise signing any agreement with an entity that did not hold my note!
Like Synoia said @16:
Like you said @17, Jane:
Our U.S. economy absorbed the meltdown of thousands of Savings & Loan associations (S&Ls) without massive cost to innocent consumers and without locking up the commercial real estate market. Hundreds of S&L executives went to jail or pleaded guilty to felonies and were barred from the business forever. The junk bond industry was essentially prosecuted out of existence for a decade or so.
Systemic fraud can be effectively prosecuted by the FBI and DOJ, the costs of failure to secure assets assigned to RMBS trusts can be effectively analyzed by the credit rating agencies, writedowns of RMBS “assets” can be forced by the rating agencies and accounting firms, and frauds on investors may (or may not) be prosecuted by the SEC. But pursuit of industrial-scale fraud with industrial-scale investigation & enforcement will probably give no help to individual homeowners in the short run.
Some sub-groups of homeowners could declare a strike against the big five or big eight money-center banks that OCC is investigating for foreclosure fraud. Other homeowners could declare a mortgage strike in states where the AGs have ordered a freeze on foreclosures. Homeowners could just say to the servicer(s), issuer and RMBS trustee(s) “you and them fight it out, let me know when you’re through.” Or homeowners could respond like renters and make their mortgage payments into the registry of their local courts with jurisdiction over real property transactions, and tell the fraudmeisters to fight it out through in rem or interpleader actions.
Whatever homeowners decide to do, THEY won’t be responsible for “hurting the banks” or “damaging the economy.” The criminals are “hurting the banks,” and destruction of the many criminal banking firms will be GOOD for the economy.
IANAL, but I wouldn’t sign that as a homeowner, unless the bank agreed to fully indemnify me against any third-party challenge. If the bank can’t prove they own the loan and have the right to modify it, that leaves open the possibility that there is some third party who can… and they could pop up at any time and assert their rights.
Of course, the Real America Heartland Wingnut response to lal this is that Mr. Machado got off on a technicality, and if he had any morals at all, he wouldn’t have quibbled about who had standing and just vacated his house and let the banks figure it out, which they would have to the benefit of society in general as they always do.
It’s great when the big guy gets whooped by the little guy. Another stick in the machinery is they have to show you the original document of the first mortgage. That document, I believe, must go along with all subsequent sales. If they do not have it, they cannot foreclose. Their only course of action is to negotiate. Please correct me if I am wrong about this. I do not wish to spread inaccurate information. Thank you for your support.
If banks are willing to accept cramdown in order to stay away from any judge asking nosy questions about the paperwork on the loan, they’re going to want a guarantee that the homeowner isn’t going to turn around and take it all in front of a judge even after the mortgage is renegotiated down. If you wouldn’t advise a homeowner to provide that guarantee, then we’re sitting right back at square one.
In essence, then, homeowners using this crisis to force cramdown on the lenders is never going to happen.
What about the foreclosure that the banks have already sold to new owners. If they had no standing in the above issues, how could the sell of the foreclosed home not come into question? Don’t “warranty deeds” come into play here?
Have foreclosures been bundled and bought by Freddie and Fannie who resold them? I can see why Freddie and Fannie would now be calling for these “reviews” so quickly, now that the Gov is tangled up in this too, beyond just the deregulation issues.
Don’t ya’ll worry, now. The govment will fix it all up. A few new laws and we will all be screwed again by the banksters and their pals, the pols.
DDay just concluded an update with this:
I agree completely. I think this a rare opportunity to liquidate the banks for all their thieving. We should seize on this and ride it all the way to the midterms. Let’s demand that Dodd-Frank be applied to “resolve” the banks, they ruined themselves. No more bailouts.
Cynthia Kouril deserves a Pulitzer prize for her year-long investigation of this (topped off by her quick reaction yesterday to Naked Capitalism’s extensive analysis about the latest bombshell on LPS’s forgery factories). The scoop over at 4ClosureFraud needed interpretation, and thanks to Cynthia and Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism, I am convinced all securitized notes in RMBS are unenforceable at foreclosure.
Like Yves Smith said in a response to comments on her posting about the LPS systemic forgeries:
Good point, and it makes the ‘orphaned’ property almost unsalable because of the presence of potential parents.
I didn’t mention cramdown. There may be other pathways to achieve the same benefit as cramdown without stipulating in open court that a non-assigned note was properly assigned. I think achieving the equivalent of cramdown nationwide would probably be the best overall outcome. But how do you do it wihtout forcing homeowners in rightful possession to aid and abet fraud?
I would advise any homeowner to refuse to be a party to a fraud upon the court, i.e., to refuse to “agree” that any entity was a holder in due course or was entitled to payment on a note transferred by a forged assignment.
links for your quotes, please
Here is info from market-ticker on a Kentucky RICO case against MERS/MBS
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=168144
MERS/MBS/Foreclosure Goes RICO
Unbelievable!
Around 30 States, including DC, are Trust Deed, non-judicial foreclosure, states. Are we to assume these fraudulent documents are only related to mortgage States, or is the reporting conflating the problem and the cure?
The big hammer the lenders are afraid of is that just the whiff of fraud by them is going to send the title insurers to the hills.
There’s no way they want to defend and indemnify title under these circumstances.
Without getting a title insurance policy no sale is going to close escrow.
Essentially, the foreclosure market is no longer a market. Homes for sale that are straight sales and not foreclosures are going to experience an increase in value.
If true, one small way in which refusing to tolerate fraud by the criminal banks will NOT hurt the economy but would be GOOD for the economy. The real estate markets may be self-correcting or self-balancing, if it is true that non-foreclosed homes would increase in value.
We could also close the foreclosure “market” by “resolving” the criminal banks doing most of the foreclosures. A bigger sledge hammer, to be sure. But my favorite.
The first one was from the a poster @ #5 in this thread rather than @6. Sorry.
Second was just from: http://homebuying.about.com/cs/realestateglossary/g/generalwarranty.htm
Third from: http://www.rwbpress.com/2010/10/04/top-banks-stop-foreclosures-as-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-call-for-review-of-foreclosures/
Does this generation of corporate execs know of any other way to make money other than committing fraud?
Is this what they teach at all the business schools now?
Steal from your customers, steal from your competitors (how else do they all end up with the same ‘ideas’?), steal from the government (tax fraud), steal from your employees (overtime underpayment, theft from pensions etc).
excellent. very appreciated.
Oh, please keep the paragraphs beginning with the above handy, or if you have time maybe round them out into a seminal posting, because from here on out I suspect we’re going to need many reminders that the hijackers don’t need to be saved along with the rest of us.
As to Peterr’s question on an opening date for the mortgage hijack era, another candidate is July, 2001. I’ve often wondered whether the collapse described at the link wasn’t a dry run of various of the systems and techniques that would be needed to pull off a chain of bustouts. Note that the full-blown securitization market was not necessary for one rather large collapse, though to force through enough cash for a whole industry together with enough fees to keep all the right people quiet might have needed one.
Just trying to think out the full repercussions and ways the banks can get stuck with some huge bills. The fraud on the initial foreclosures and the fraud on tax payers via the first time home owner tax credit. That is all the tax payers money really. No?
Meaning, in my head, the DOJ is responsible for recouping the tax dollars extended for the first-time credit, and the only ones they can recoup that from is the banks, not the people that bought foreclosures based upon fraud in the first place.
Having to repay those tax dollars would indeed stick it to the banks bottom line even if they don’t have financial liability in the initial fraud. Freddie and Fannie would come under some heavy scrutiny too if they knew they were buying foreclosures with title issues.
Let’s see what the DOJ does if anything about this part of it. One or more of those big banks just might have to be nationalized to recoup the tax dollars. Those first time homeowner credits were massive in the bubble. They were a part of growing the bubble.
scribd give you hives? Here’s a direct link to a pdf of the RICO filing:
RICOClassActionComplaint
Scribd was part of the story that I linked to.
But, who cares? I hope people take the time to read that case. I am up to page 50.
It it well-written, easy to understand and really lays it out – A led to B led to C, etc. Whoever wrote that is a genius for clarity without overwriting. It’s like a John Grisham thriller – systems and procedures CREATED in order to defraud with longview from the getgo. Also makes finally makes the point that the interest from the mortgages was the chump change in the deal -the real bucks came from the insurance derivatives. Also that in some cases the investors have already been compensated through credit default swaps, TARP and insurance, so that the servicers are like vultures who stumbled upon a zebra carcass after the lions left for the day.
The avoidance of recording fees is something every single city and town in the US should look at.
Believe me, this brief is the most mesmerizing thing you’ll read all year.
This is unbelievable! Especially that it is being untangled. Sweet baby Jesus. Attorney Generals could move hard and fast now and not even have to wait for the Feds. No? We could really win here, people, if our government will do the right thing. And the pressure for them to do it as more info comes out will be pitch forks in the streets if they drag their feet.
Wells Fargo and its army of attorneys knew it is Category C felony to make mortgage loan and foreclose home based on fraudulent appraisal. However they chose to defraud us by foreclosing our home.
Wells Fargo committed prosecutable crime against us. We lost our home. Something is wrong with this picture.
Here are the facts.
1. it is illegal for Wells Fargo to make mortgage loan to us based on hugely inflated appraisal.
Fact: – Wells Fargo’s fraudulent appraisal valued our home at $718,000
– Wells Fargo’s own review appraisal valued our home at $475,000
– Nevada Attorney General’s office suspended the appraiser’s license for committing appraisal fraud on our home.
– Nevada Appraiser Licensing Board mandated the appraiser to complete appraisal fraud course before regaining his real estate appraiser license.
– Nevada Revised Statue NRS 205.372 states that it’s category C felony to make mortgage loans based on fraudulent appraisal.
– Cases of Attorney General’s indictments against attorneys, loan brokers for teaming up make fraudulent loans to defraud homeowners.
2. it is illegal for Wells Fargo to wrongfully foreclose our home based on fraudulent appraisal and mortgage loan.
You can find all the facts on our website. http://www.wellsfargomortgagefraud.com.
It’s hard to believe the arrogance of Wells Fargo who greedily sucked up taxpayer money and refuse to work with people who need help. I approached the bank last October and was overjoyed to hear that they would consider me for a loan modification. I so desperately wanted to keep my house, and could if they’d agree to a modification. After that, life was a nightmare. They used every trick in the book to make sure that I not only didn’t get a modification (despite paying on time), but charged penalties and late fees and ruined my credit.
My home is in bankruptcy now, and they can have it with my blessing.
I hope Wells Fargo goes to hell for its arrogance. Next year this time, I hope they’re out of business.
Thing is, our government is in bed with the banksters and will NOT do the right thing. The right thing was to regulate the bailout money and to make sure things trickled down. HAMP is a big practical joke.