Judge Erases $525G Mortgage for N.Y. Couple, Citing 'Repulsive' Acts by Bank

[music12]

sweet georgia, can you be more specific as to what they lied to the judge about?

[SweetGeorgia]

Oh, and on topic - IndyMac got smacked because they lied to the judge, among other things. If you bring a case to court expecting the protection of the law and enforcement of your contract, then don't start treating the judge like he's your borrower.

He's not.

IndyMac screwed this pooch on their own; the defendants didn't even have a lawyer. If they don't like judicial foreclosure, they don't have to do business in New York. I'm just amazed to think how many times they've gotten away with this already - such that lying to a judge and acting the way they did is just standard operating procedure.

Glad to see one judge standing up for himself, at least. I don't expect them to stand up for anyone else, but it's a start.

[SweetGeorgia]

DownNotOut, I'm so sorry for your loss.

[DownNotOut]

I noticed your 34k unsecure debt. That's just a decent car payment. No need to cry over it.

Except that right now we are a family of 7 making just over $40K a year. We used to make more than twice that before everything tanked. So, yeah, I'm crying. I'm crying because what caused all this debt was the loss of a child. I have a right to cry.

[nc73]

We are OneWest/IndyMac customers and I can attest to their crap tactics. They filed foreclosure on us in a trial modification period. They claimed that they never guaranteed that foreclosure proceedings would stop in a modification even though all the paperwork I have from them says that it will. I had to hire a foreclosure attorney to answer the summons and she filed a motion to dismiss for many things, this being one of them - that they are trying to obtain money twice, once by taking taxpayer dollars and again by foreclosing on us. They are also extremely rude and unknowledgeable. I, for one, am glad they were smacked down - maybe we might actually get a real modification now because of it. I'll say this - I'm going to start recording my conversations with them from now on!

I noticed your 34k unsecure debt. That's just a decent car payment. No need to cry over it.

[DownNotOut]

We are OneWest/IndyMac customers and I can attest to their crap tactics. They filed foreclosure on us in a trial modification period. They claimed that they never guaranteed that foreclosure proceedings would stop in a modification even though all the paperwork I have from them says that it will. I had to hire a foreclosure attorney to answer the summons and she filed a motion to dismiss for many things, this being one of them - that they are trying to obtain money twice, once by taking taxpayer dollars and again by foreclosing on us. They are also extremely rude and unknowledgeable. I, for one, am glad they were smacked down - maybe we might actually get a real modification now because of it. I'll say this - I'm going to start recording my conversations with them from now on!

[anuta]

I am a refugee from a communist country and my friends, THIS ruling is not Communism, not by a long shot, trust me.

No truer words were spoken.

[Lajazz947]

I am not looking for a free home (well, I am but I also want to win the lottery) but in my opinion if a bank takes Government money it is incumbemnt upon them to help the borrowers who need help and are willing to pay what they can to stay in the home.

I am a refugee from a communist country and my friends, THIS ruling is not Communism, not by a long shot, trust me.

[BobMango]

They have my simpathy as all good people do that fall on hard times but the judgement was not only wrong, it is dangerous.

Many members here are here because of falling on hard times. They get their debts canceled and either lose or reaffirm their homes via the bk courts and startover.

If everyone that falls on hard times gets this judgement then welcome to the soviet union.

You're missing the point. This is not about everyone getting a free house just because they can't afford to pay for it any more. It's about a bank being punished because they were acting in bad faith. If these people had been dealt with honestly by the bank then they might have had a shot at keeping the house.

I don't believe that most folks think that if they can't afford the house because their circumstances change they should get to keep the house for nothing. I think people see that once they lose a step, most of these financial institutions are pouncing on them with increased rates and penalty fees, instead of working with them to help them get that step back. The presumption by the banks seems to be that people stop paying because they don't want to, not because they can't.

[banca rotta]

Did you even read the article or just the headline? These people did not buy more house than they could afford, their circumstances changed. Happens every day in America. Thy bought the house for less than $200K. I'll admit they weren't very sophisticated borrowers given the loan terms to which they originally agreed.

To label these people as leeches is rather unfair, given the fact that they wanted to pay on their mortgage but their bank was acting in bad faith. The judge did not cancel the mortgage to reward the borrowers or bail them out, but to punish the bank.

They have my simpathy as all good people do that fall on hard times but the judgement was not only wrong, it is dangerous.

Many members here are here because of falling on hard times. They get their debts canceled and either lose or reaffirm their homes via the bk courts and startover.

If everyone that falls on hard times gets this judgement then welcome to the soviet union.

[BobMango]

Sorry to say you are all as wrong as the judge.

I hope the banks appeal as they will and overturn this stupid ruling.

You buy more house then you can afford, you can come here to the forum and other sources to get free bk advice, file for bk then walk away from the house and the debt and let the stupid bank get stuck with it. (This I like)

Having a debtor "win a free house" by court order is nonsense! (This is wrong)

I knew once the stupid govt bailed out the banks all the leaches would want their bailouts too.

We have bk laws for a reason.

Did you even read the article or just the headline? These people did not buy more house than they could afford, their circumstances changed. Happens every day in America. Thy bought the house for less than $200K. I'll admit they weren't very sophisticated borrowers given the loan terms to which they originally agreed.

To label these people as leeches is rather unfair, given the fact that they wanted to pay on their mortgage but their bank was acting in bad faith. The judge did not cancel the mortgage to reward the borrowers or bail them out, but to punish the bank.

[banca rotta]

I read more on it and even the homeowner didn't expect to "win a free house". He isn't really the one I am "dissing" for lack of a better word.

The line has to be drawn somewhere. If you or I get sick and the bank acts like the scumbags they are, I am still not entitled to my home for free.

A judge has no business erasing a mortgage just as the corrupt politicians have no business bailing out the corrupt banks.

I happen to be pretty liberal on honest folks canceling their debts through bk but this story is nonsense and set a very bad precident.

Looks like there really is no end in sight. More bank bailouts, more people playing the victim of their bank until 300 million Americans have free homes.

It won't work for very long.

[music12]

they didn't win a free house. they went through hell with the bank. like bigjohn said, the bank took taxpayer bailout money - paid in part by that very homeowner - then decided to make a profit off of it instead of work with the little people to avoid foreclosures.

[nc73]

The guy bought a house he could afford. The problem is he had health issues later that made him refinance. As far as I can see, the guy was trying his best, it was the bank who didn't jave 'a heart'. The bank took Federal money will the idea they would help such people as this guy.

ditto

[BigJohn]

Sorry to say you are all as wrong as the judge.

I hope the banks appeal as they will and overturn this stupid ruling.

You buy more house then you can afford, you can come here to the forum and other sources to get free bk advice, file for bk then walk away from the house and the debt and let the stupid bank get stuck with it. (This I like)

Having a debtor "win a free house" by court order is nonsense! (This is wrong)

I knew once the stupid govt bailed out the banks all the leaches would want their bailouts too.

We have bk laws for a reason.

The guy bought a house he could afford. The problem is he had health issues later that made him refinance. As far as I can see, the guy was trying his best, it was the bank who didn't jave 'a heart'. The bank took Federal money will the idea they would help such people as this guy.