Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: abb

“The problem of perjury and forgery by the banks are but isolated incidents, I submit.”

JPMorgan admitted their people did not read the documentation for 56,000 cases. Thats 56,000 individual cases.

One lawyer, who was fired by one of the large banks, has stated they set up assembly lines to process 250 packages a day. Fake notaries, fake signatures, nobody had time to read anything. Just sign and send to the next station.

There are tens of thousands of these cases. Under marxism state approved or connected organizations don’t have to abide by the law. They receive special exemptions which is what has been granted to these big banks.

As a banker you should be aghast at the business practices of these big banks and not defending them. Nobody held a gun to their head and forced them to make ALL of those bad loans. CRA certainly did not apply to all of these loans.


55 posted on 10/08/2010 5:30:57 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]


To: driftdiver

So then the deadbeats should then be allowed to live in the house rent free?

Once again I repeat - the surest way to avoid foreclosure is to stay current with the terms of the loan.

It really is amazing to see here on FRee Republic - arguably the most rock-ribbed conservative/free market/libertarian bastion on the face of planet earth - how readily the populist/Marxist theory is adopted.

“Malefactors of great wealth,” was the term the progressive Theodore Roosevelt used.

“Evil bankers,” “predatory credit card companies,” “loan sharks” and on and on and on.

If you cannot handle debt, then don’t use it. But if someone is willing to lend someone money, he should have the expectation of being repaid.


56 posted on 10/08/2010 5:41:41 AM PDT by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

To: driftdiver

The bill in question does nothing to make such practices legal. It explicitly states that the underlying notary must be a lawful one in order to be accepted in other states.

The law, as someone else kindly posted, simply says that one a document is legally notarized, it can be used in all courts. It is a simple application of why the commerce clause exists, to keep states from erecting barriers to companies in other states from operating in their states. A company who has to get paperwork notarized (in person) in multiple states will be held at a disadvantage to a company based in the individual states.

Most of the time, apparently, notaries from other states have been allowed. When I did my last mortgage refinance, I signed with a notary in Virginia, and the paperwork was filed in another state.

But when a challenge is made, it slows down the process, clogs the courts, and makes it more expensive. That is why clerks of the courts were pushing for this bill back in 2006 — way before the current mortgage crisis.


110 posted on 10/08/2010 7:00:07 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson