CBS 60 Minutes: People paid $10/hr to sign other people's names on mortgage docs

[Rolfe]

The TV presentation suggested that the banks could pay the people they are evicting to accept that they own the mortgage, and save a very convoluted, protracted and expensive process to recreate the documentation legally.

I'm just gobsmacked by all this. And by the wider implications. So many ordinary decent people are affected by this, and so many houses. This is the country's housing stock we're talking about - it doesn't matter how it's owned or how it's paid for, it's a fixed asset. The country requires these houses to be lived in by people who can pay for their occupancy without being bankrupted by the costs, and the houses to be maintained so that they can serve generations in the future.

I don't suppose the US government is likely to take a strategic view of this situation. But if thousands of ordinary people end up on the streets and thousands of houses are unoccupied and left to decay, the country as a whole will suffer.

Rolfe.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Perhaps house prices will sink low enough that even I could buy one!

 

[Aepervius]

Perhaps house prices will sink low enough that even I could buy one!

Good luck to you. In the last 20 years I have seen house price flame higher and higher , that now I don't think I could pay for my *own* carton under a bridge without brankrupting myself into oblivion. And despite the surplus of houses, the prices *still* don't come down.

Apparentely it is much more rentable for people to leave a house to decay than to cut the price.

 

[TragicMonkey]

But I have such great ideas for a house. No doorknob, light switch, or power outlet would look the same as any other, and all would be at different heights. And every window would have colored glass. And ceilings are so underutilized today, I have some ideas about that.

 

[Alt+F4]

But if thousands of ordinary people end up on the streets and thousands of houses are unoccupied and left to decay, the country as a whole will suffer.

Oh that's happening already.

 

[dtugg]

The TV presentation suggested that the banks could pay the people they are evicting to accept that they own the mortgage, and save a very convoluted, protracted and expensive process to recreate the documentation legally.

I'm just gobsmacked by all this. And by the wider implications. So many ordinary decent people are affected by this, and so many houses. This is the country's housing stock we're talking about - it doesn't matter how it's owned or how it's paid for, it's a fixed asset. The country requires these houses to be lived in by people who can pay for their occupancy without being bankrupted by the costs, and the houses to be maintained so that they can serve generations in the future.

I don't suppose the US government is likely to take a strategic view of this situation. But if thousands of ordinary people end up on the streets and thousands of houses are unoccupied and left to decay, the country as a whole will suffer.

Rolfe.

What are they supposed to do? Pay mortgages off for people? Force banks to accept lower payments than was agreed upon? No thank you.

 

[TragicMonkey]

What are they supposed to do? Pay mortgages off for people? Force banks to accept lower payments than was agreed upon? No thank you.

Tell the banks that in exchange for not prosecuting their fraud in the matter of mortgages, the banks in question must relinquish all claim on those houses. All those involved get their houses back and don't owe anybody a dime for them. Any losses anywhere down the line due to resales, whatever will be made good by the banks. That would resolve the crisis, punish the banks for their misdeeds, and provide a suitable lesson to other banks not to do this sort of thing in the future.

 

[ponderingturtle]

What are they supposed to do? Pay mortgages off for people? Force banks to accept lower payments than was agreed upon? No thank you.

Funnily enough judges can do that on any kind of loan but home housing. See if an item other than a house is worth less than the amount owed on it they can reduce the principle and such to its current value if that would permit the person who owns it to continue making payments.

 

[dtugg]

Tell the banks that in exchange for not prosecuting their fraud in the matter of mortgages, the banks in question must relinquish all claim on those houses. All those involved get their houses back and don't owe anybody a dime for them. Any losses anywhere down the line due to resales, whatever will be made good by the banks. That would resolve the crisis, punish the banks for their misdeeds, and provide a suitable lesson to other banks not to do this sort of thing in the future.

Whether that would do anything besides giving people free houses would depend entirely upon the percentage of foreclosures that involved this type of fraud. Do you have any evidence that it is a large percentage? Also, whether or not banks are even prosecutable for this fraud depends on whether or not they were actively involved. Do you have any evidence that this was the case?

 

[Rolfe]

Tell the banks that in exchange for not prosecuting their fraud in the matter of mortgages, the banks in question must relinquish all claim on those houses. All those involved get their houses back and don't owe anybody a dime for them. Any losses anywhere down the line due to resales, whatever will be made good by the banks. That would resolve the crisis, punish the banks for their misdeeds, and provide a suitable lesson to other banks not to do this sort of thing in the future.

That was my gut reaction when I saw the video, I have to say. It's not gonna happen, unfortunately.

Rolfe.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Whether that would do anything besides giving people free houses would depend entirely upon the percentage of foreclosures that involved this type of fraud.

So? Give free houses to those that had the fraud stuff, and come up with other solutions for the others. I don't see the need to acquire a single, perfect solution for all possible cases of foreclosure.

Do you have any evidence that it is a large percentage?

Why would it have to be? I'm suggesting a solution for one problem, not a solution for all problems.

Also, whether or not banks are even prosecutable for this fraud depends on whether or not they were actively involved. Do you have any evidence that this was the case?

If a company loses oversight of its own responsibilities because it farms them out to save or make a buck, that doesn't mean it's not accountable. A bank says it owns a mortgage, it damn well better be taking care of it properly. Those "document signing centers"? Any bank doing business with such should be punished, anyone running such should be punished, anyone working for such should be punished. If that results in prison or the total dissolution of major banks that's fine with me. Bad businesses do not deserve to continue existence.

If I were in charge there would be executions, as they do in China when a business goes criminal.

 

[tesscaline]

So? Give free houses to those that had the fraud stuff, and come up with other solutions for the others. I don't see the need to acquire a single, perfect solution for all possible cases of foreclosure.



Why would it have to be? I'm suggesting a solution for one problem, not a solution for all problems.



If a company loses oversight of its own responsibilities because it farms them out to save or make a buck, that doesn't mean it's not accountable. A bank says it owns a mortgage, it damn well better be taking care of it properly. Those "document signing centers"? Any bank doing business with such should be punished, anyone running such should be punished, anyone working for such should be punished. If that results in prison or the total dissolution of major banks that's fine with me. Bad businesses do not deserve to continue existence.

If I were in charge there would be executions, as they do in China when a business goes criminal.

Thank you! I agree with this entirely. In fact, I was just having a conversation with someone about this exact line of reasoning, and agreeing with you without even having read your posts yet.

 

[dtugg]

So? Give free houses to those that had the fraud stuff, and come up with other solutions for the others. I don't see the need to acquire a single, perfect solution for all possible cases of foreclosure.



Why would it have to be? I'm suggesting a solution for one problem, not a solution for all problems.

I thought you were saying it would solve the problem altogether. Sorry for misunderstanding.

If a company loses oversight of its own responsibilities because it farms them out to save or make a buck, that doesn't mean it's not accountable. A bank says it owns a mortgage, it damn well better be taking care of it properly. Those "document signing centers"? Any bank doing business with such should be punished, anyone running such should be punished, anyone working for such should be punished. If that results in prison or the total dissolution of major banks that's fine with me. Bad businesses do not deserve to continue existence.

If I were in charge there would be executions, as they do in China when a business goes criminal.

Sorry, if you want to punish people for committing a crime, you have to prove that they committed an actual crime. As far as I can tell, hiring somebody to do paperwork for you is not a crime. Maybe the mortgage holders knew people that they hired were doing it illegally. But it has to be proven. If so, punish them. But you can't just assume that they did.

 

[Rolfe]

I don't think it's normal to get out of that sort of thing quite that easily, though I wouldn't die of shock to learn that banks have a special dispensation.

I can't remember the correct technical term, but there's a type of responsibility where it is your responsibility absolutely to get something done right, and while you may delegate, you are responsible for ensuring the delegate does it right, and for his mistakes if he doesn't.

This should be such a case.

Rolfe.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I thought you were saying it would solve the problem altogether. Sorry for misunderstanding.

I worded it badly. I rent an apartment so I tend to resent people who even try to buy houses, even if they wind up losing them. I'm a very petty monkey.

Sorry, if you want to punish people for committing a crime, you have to prove that they committed an actual crime. As far as I can tell, hiring somebody to do paperwork for you is not a crime. Maybe the mortgage holders knew people that they hired were doing it illegally. But it has to be proven. If so, punish them. But you can't just assume that they did.

Forging signatures and pretending to be things you're not on legal documents is a crime. How could a bank outsource signing things? Don't banks know who their vice presidents are? But I'm perfectly willing to allow trials, and evidence. Put the bank executives, the whole chain of them, on the stand and ask them exactly who did what. Businesses love paperwork, I wonder if they could manufacture convincing proof of innocence?

 

[dtugg]

Forging signatures and pretending to be things you're not on legal documents is a crime. How could a bank outsource signing things? Don't banks know who their vice presidents are? But I'm perfectly willing to allow trials, and evidence. Put the bank executives, the whole chain of them, on the stand and ask them exactly who did what. Businesses love paperwork, I wonder if they could manufacture convincing proof of innocence?

From what I could tell from the article, the mortgage holders outsourced locating the correct paperwork to prove that a person in foreclosure owed the money. The firm they outsourced to then just forged the documents because it is easier and cheaper. Maybe banks knew this was happening. If so, punish all those involved if it can be proven.

 

[TragicMonkey]

From what I could tell from the article, the mortgage holders outsourced locating the correct paperwork to prove that a person in foreclosure owed the money. The firm they outsourced to then just forged the documents because it is easier and cheaper. Maybe banks knew this was happening. If so, punish all those involved if it can be proven.

If the mortgage holders don't have the paperwork, they don't have the mortgage. They lost the paperwork? At the very least that's stupidly idiotic and ought to equal "free house" for the "mortgagee". At the worst it's criminal negligence.

Why can't they treat mortgage and financial paperwork like medical records? HIPAA, etc. You know what happens to a healthcare company that "loses" medical records, or makes creative additions or subtractions to them? Bad things. Very bad, business-killing, massive-fine, licences-revoked, even jailtime things. That's why medical paperwork is carefully treated, chain-of-custody controlled and noted. People take care because they are compelled to take care.

 

[dtugg]

If the mortgage holders don't have the paperwork, they don't have the mortgage. They lost the paperwork? At the very least that's stupidly idiotic and ought to equal "free house" for the "mortgagee". At the worst it's criminal negligence.

Why can't they treat mortgage and financial paperwork like medical records? HIPAA, etc. You know what happens to a healthcare company that "loses" medical records, or makes creative additions or subtractions to them? Bad things. Very bad, business-killing, massive-fine, licences-revoked, even jailtime things. That's why medical paperwork is carefully treated, chain-of-custody controlled and noted. People take care because they are compelled to take care.

They were obviously very irresponsible. But that doesn't make it criminal.

 

[TragicMonkey]

They were obviously very irresponsible. But that doesn't make it criminal.

I don't know, it sounds to me like it might be criminal. If you're making claims based on fraudulent legal documents, and are in a position that you ought to know the claims are fraudulent...I hope it comes to trial, and everyone who signed off on all of this gets in severe trouble.

 

[Rolfe]

From what I could tell from the article, the mortgage holders outsourced locating the correct paperwork to prove that a person in foreclosure owed the money. The firm they outsourced to then just forged the documents because it is easier and cheaper. Maybe banks knew this was happening. If so, punish all those involved if it can be proven.

Locating the correct paperwork? How can you locate something that doesn't exist? I think you're putting much too kind a spin on the article.

Rolfe.