Posted on 09/21/2008 8:10:24 AM PDT by milwguy
While earning a salary of $21,000 a year, Leesa Robinson landed on top of the real estate world in 2006, overseeing nearly $1 million in property.
The 45-year-old single mom started buying houses after watching late-night infomercials and their tales of fast wealth.
Lenders from across the country wrote more than $800,000 in home loans in 2005 and 2006 so Robinson could buy eight north side rental properties, half of which she purchased with no money down. All but one of the loans came with high-interest, adjustable rates.
Today, her credit is shot. She lost all eight houses. She went bankrupt.
(Excerpt) Read more at jsonline.com ...
If you go to this story from the YEAR 2000, you will see everything in today's Journal Sentinal story was predicted with almost 100% accuracy 8 years ago.....
From the JS story...........•
1.Many of the house loans unraveled in a matter of months, a signal that they probably were doomed from the outset. The median length of time from the date of the loan to the filing of the foreclosure suit was 427 days.
2. A majority of borrowers had a troubled financial past before they received mortgages, with more than half being on the losing end of civil court cases involving repossessions, evictions, foreclosures or other financial matters. Nearly a quarter had filed for bankruptcy before receiving a mortgage.
3. Twelve borrowers had a criminal record before they received a mortgage. Half of those convictions were for financial crimes such as theft, food stamp fraud or forgery.
4 Absentee landlords snapped up many of the subprime loans that later went into default. About 40% of the loans were held by people who were sued for foreclosure involving other properties during the last two years. Some were hit with as many as a dozen foreclosures elsewhere in Milwaukee County.
From the story tillion $ shakedown.........http://www.city-journal.org/html/10_1_the_trillion_dollar.html
1.Bruce Marks says that he would consider a low foreclosure rate to be a problem. "If we had a foreclosure rate of 1 percent, that would just prove we were skimming," he says. Accordingly, in mid-1999, 8.2 percent of the mortgages NACA had arranged with the Fleet Bank were delinquent, compared with the national average of 1.9 percent. "Considering our clientele," Marks asserts, "nine out of ten would have to be considered a success."
2.This policy—"America's best mortgage program for working people," NACA calls it—is an experiment with extraordinarily high risks. There is no surer way to destabilize a neighborhood than for its new generation of home buyers to lack the means to pay their mortgages—which is likely to be the case for a significant percentage of those granted a no-down-payment mortgage based on their low-income classification rather than their good credit history. Even if such buyers do not lose their homes, they are a group more likely to defer maintenance on their properties, creating the problems that lead to streets going bad and neighborhoods going downhill. Stable or increasing property values grow out of the efforts of many; one unpainted house, one sagging porch, one abandoned property is a threat to the work of dozens, because such signs of neglect discourage prospective buyers.
Please read the entire lengthy article in city journal from the year 2000. The mortgage crisis we are facing right now is the direct result of liberal politics, race politics, and the use of the CRA to force banks to lend to unworthy buyers as a way of funneling money to liberal activist groups like ACORN/
Just another form of affirmative action.
1. I bet her credit was never that hot.
2. It is nuts that she had 1 house on $21,000 a year, let alone 8!.
3. She had a good ride and I bet she pocketed some money. There will be another program, bet on it.
Bankers went along with the Community Reinvestment Act, priming it greedy practices knowing that it was sure to fail. Lots of room for Republicans to stand up and share the blame here.
TANSTAAFL!
Great article. Thanks for posting...
I agree. Anthony Sanders of Arizona State University has a paper on his website that blames the debacle on the CRA and Democratic Congress’ unwillingness to stop the growth of the subprime market in the face of evidence of a pending collapse.
He pulled the copy from his website as of Friday evening. I emailed him asking where it was. He responded that he had to add some information about ACORN’s role in the subprime crisis. And that it would be reposed on Monday.
I thought the Community Reinvestment Act was established in 1977?
He made about $9 an hour as a strawberry picker and after the sub-prime negative amortization period ended and his loan suddenly went from hiving to pay $500 a month to having to pay $4000 a month, he couldn't make the payment and his house was about to be forclosed on.
The newspaper wrote the story giving it a spin of how unfair it was that this poor itinerant crop picker was losing his chance at the American Dream.
About the only saving grace is that when the dollar falls into the tank and we have runaway inflation, I should be able to pay off my mortgage pretty quickly when the minimum wage is raised to $100,000 an hour.
Read the WHOLE community journal article I linked. It was the CLINTON ADMIN that used the CRA to force banks to change their lending standards. You are correct it was passed in ‘77, but the radical change came about in 1999.
thank you for that info
Why didn't Bush restore sanity in 2001?
It was, by Carter. But it was strengthened by Clinton (looser credit standards, more oversight to “community organizer” groups like ACORN who had to “certify” that banks were giving enough loans to inner city borrowers. This, of course was just the ticket they needed to extort money from banks in order to guarentee a good compliance record.)
Carter started it in 1977. Clinton put it on steroids in the late 90’s.
The CRA was the club to extort banks in lending to losers in the name of equality and fairness.
The Husock article is the most damning piece I have ever read.
There should be a march on Washington.
Liberal government and gutless Republican oversight has led to this mess.
McCain has been talking about greed on Wall Street. I note in this article that the CEO of now ruined Washington Mutual (WaMU) was earning around $12 million, then he was cut to ONLY $5 million, now he is out on his butt. WaMu was selling at $40 a share, then dropped to $5. Greed has its own penalties.
This article was written in 2000 about Clinton’s CRA’s. It’s truly an unbelievable story complete with ACORN’s finger prints all over it.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/10_1_the_trillion_dollar.html
“a poor Mexican immigrant ...bought a 3500 square foot home.”
With that much space, why didn’t he rent out rooms to pay the increased mortgage?
Wanna buy a house in my old neighborhood? cheap?
This reverse red lining frove up the prices of slum type houses.
Banks were forced to lend in these areas and to weak applicants. The result is big mortgages on bad properties.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.