I was commenting on the Homeowners actions that led to this, not the actions of the Lender.
My sympathy level goes down when people cause their own problems, in this case by not paying the Mortgage.
As I said, I do not condone the Lender's actions if they were in fact illegal. I have no idea whether the Homeowner was informed of the Foreclosure or not. His irresponsible actions led to the outcome, it's that simple.
If the Lender committed a crime, then the Lender will have to face the consequences. If not, this (former) Homeowner has no one to blame but himself.
I agree.
However, I’m thinking there is more to the story.
However, if these are hardworking folks, non-drug users, not alcoholics, who are working, hit by economic woes, perhaps with cut hours, and whose interest rates are too high because of a credit score determined by a, how to say this delicately... less-than-altruistic measure of honesty known as FICO, if they are doing the best they can and still being crushed to line the pockets of the bank with usurious interest rates paid for no useful work output in return... If that is the case then I do not share your views.
There's usually more than meets the eye, and too much we don't know to jump to any rash conclusions here. It's simplistic and naive to assume that the "bank is always right" or the "borrower is always right".
What is ethical? What most closely comports with God's Law? God gives us plenty of guidance if people would abandon the myth of the disunity of His Word and actually read His words in Deuteronomy, Numbers, and Leviticus. Even if the ceremonial aspects are no longer binding for people today, His words still stand and He does not change.
Just my thoughts...
So all of you bright prognosticators, what would the guy have been legally entitled to do if the thieves hired by the lender had showed up while he was in residence? My guess, irrespective of what he may owe on the property, is that he would have had the right to repel them by force if necessary. After all, it would essentially be a home invasion, particularly if they showed up sans paperwork and perhaps the local sheriff. So how is it any different because they managed to “hit” the place while it was unoccupied. I don’t condone not paying your obligations, but this behavior on the part of the lender is reprehensible and also illegal since the contents are not likely to be covered by the mortgage.
“Although Boudreau had fallen behind a bit in his mortgage, there were no foreclosure proceedings in effect,” Altman says.
“If the Lender committed a crime, then the Lender will have to face the consequences”
That’s just it, the Sheriff will do nothing and the courts will not apply justice equally. Our system is corrupt beyond repair.
“If the Lender committed a crime, then the Lender will have to face the consequences”
That’s just it, the Sheriff will do nothing and the courts will not apply justice equally. Our system is corrupt beyond repair.