[Milton Miteybad]

This is getting zero coverage because the FAKE STREAM NEWS is slavishly loyal to the Democrats.

It sounds like Schultz was asking the debtor to sign a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure conveying the property to the bank. It's not illegal for the bank to ask for that, but it may not be in the debtor's interest to do it, either. The bank probably figured they had nothing to lose asking for it. If the debtor doesn't want to sign the deed-in-lieu, then the bank would have to go ahead with the foreclosure as they normally would.

In other words, there may be less to this matter than meets the eye.

[HotHunt]

I read on an earlier thread, that Schultz was trying to convince the guy to transfer the property to him personally, not to the bank.

Something about him not paying on debts he owed the bank that Schultz owned or controlled.

[Jimmy Valentine]

You are correct about the use of a deed in lieu. Saves time and money. But of interest here is that Schultz wanted the property signed over to him personally.