Replies

Did the bank have the right to process checks that were forged and had no signatures? There is more to this story than in this article! The bank refused to be responsible for their gross negligence in cashing those checks; making the couple unable to pay their mortgage payments, and other bills.

Then, the bank did not respond to the lawsuit within 30 days, and were actually in default. A Judge, "Gail Nachtigal" signed the Default Judgment, according to the law. But then, a different Judge: Michael J. McElligott, overturned that Default Judgment, and set a court date to hear the case!

Unbelievably, the bank's lawyers did not even bother to show up in the courtroom, on the appointed date! Again, the Reussers were suppose to win their lawsuit by default, but again the judge ruled in favor of the Bank, and gave them an extention...the judge actually called the bank's lawyer, from the bench! Do ya think he had a little conflict of interest?

The Reussers were denied justice by the bank, because they missed a 30 day deadline; then the judge allows the bank to miss 2, TWO deadlines!

Judge McElligott, of course, ruled in favor of Washington Mutual Bank....In effect, ruling that the Bank has no responsibility in detecting forged and unsigned checks--and did not have to live up to legal deadlines---yet they can hold their clients to those deadlines!

What if this was you, or your elderly parents?!

The Reussers then tried to sell the home, but Washington Mutual blocked the sale! Of course, making the Reussers unable to repay the mortgage, and allowing the bank to foreclose, possess and sell it themselves!

His war record counts, because if it weren't for guys like him, we would be banking at the "Hitler Mutual Bank"! That snot nosed kid at the bank wouldn't be here, if not for guys like this who are willing to put their lives on the line to keep this country free. He deserves better treatment than this!