Bank exec borrows foreclosed estate

[justbroke]

Nothing new here. Conversion for their benefit. If the private community had not filed a complaint they would still be doing it.

I don't doubt that this happens often. I really don't have a problem with foreclosure either.

What I'm wondering is, will the Bank bring some criminal charges upon the employee for doing this. However, I think the was involved, because I don't know of any SVPs that have private yachts docked off Malibu and ferrying passengers. You're talking serious money. Unless, the SVP was renting the house out or private parties. (I personally have a friend who owns a home out "there" and was trying to rent it to me for $10K/week... that was my discounted rate.)

I think there's more to this story. Perhaps, Wells Fargo is being tight lipped, because they instructed the employee to rent the place out for parties and found that the rentals generated more income. Remember this was a commercial properties SVP, so rentals and income producing places would be their specialty.

I need more info, now that I've thought this through.

[justbroke]

I spoke too soon!!!!!


Wells Fargo fires executive accused of using seized Malibu home
By David Sarno and Peter Hong
September 15, 2009

Cheronda Guyton, a senior vice president responsible for commercial foreclosed properties, had been seen by neighbors using the Malibu Colony house lost by victims of Bernard Madoff's Ponzi scheme.

Wells Fargo & Co. said it fired an employee who had been accused of using a bank-owned home in the exclusive Malibu Colony for personal use.

The Times reported last week that Cheronda Guyton, a Wells Fargo senior vice president, had been seen using the beachfront home by neighbors after the bank acquired it from the former owners, Lawrence and Linda Elins.

A real estate agent for the Elins said the couple had been devastated by losses in the Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme, and had been forced to sign over the property to Wells Fargo to help satisfy a larger debt.

Guyton, who was responsible for commercial foreclosed properties for Wells Fargo, could not be reached for comment.

In a statement today, Wells said its internal investigation concluded that "a single team member was responsible for violating our company policies. As a result, employment of this individual has been terminated."

"We deeply regret the activities that have taken place as they do not reflect the conduct we expect of our team members," the statement added.

Although the statement did not mention the fired employee by name, Wells Fargo spokeswoman Jennifer Langan confirmed that it was Guyton.

Neighbors in the Malibu neighborhood, whose residents include actor Tom Hanks, said they saw Guyton's family staying at the house and said Guyton apparently hosted a party in August at which guests were ferried to the beach house from a yacht offshore.

(http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...,3886240.story)

[killinstinct]

I think this is appropriate if circumstances were as they appeared to be. I don't see criminal charges being appropriate or likely. This would most likely be rejected by the DA as a civil matter.

[BigJohn]

Nothing new here. Conversion for their benefit.
If the private community had not filed a complaint they would still be doing it.

As far s I can see, the employee is still living there.


Being the bank knows about this and apparently has done nothing, it would lead me to believe the bank played a role in the part. For the bank to stand by and do nothing now indicates the bank nay have been involved and is now turning their back on the situation.

[banca rotta]

I totally agree on this. It's a bad taste and makes it look like the Bank have gone wild. (Note to self... start video production company called Banks Gone Wild!)

I just want our outrage (the collective "our") to be directed at things that are actually... wrong. Predatory lending, I hate it. Payday Loans, I hate them. Slugs, I hate them too. What I don't get upset about... people who actually want to make a profit on something. I don't get upset that one party in a two-party transaction, defaulted and the other party sued them for breech. I don't get mad when the Walt Disney Company raises their ticket prices. (Interesting argument once with a friend who was like "Disney is all about family and children". I laughed. Disney is all about protecting its Brand, and pleasing its shareholders. Most of its products just happen to be family oriented. However, if you look deeper, Disney owns production companies that makes R rated movies with gore and nudity and language. Friends are shocked when I tell them that TouchStone Pictures, is one of their "off-brand" labels. LOL)

No offense to your friend but it's hard to imagine that folks actually think someone is in business for the sole purpose of their customers. It's about the money!!! Even Mickey has to pay his credit card bills, especially his Chase/Bank One card with his picture on it.

[banca rotta]

As it was mentioned earlier this is an internal problem since it's the banks property.
A real shame the owners put all their eggs in the rats basket.

[holding on]

My take on it is this...If wells fargo/wachovia received bailout funds from us then its not an internal matter in that wells fargo/wachovia was not doing what is was supposed to do. That was make every single effort to immediately sell that property. There were a few reports of agents who had customers ready to bid on that property but wachovia did not return any info.

People are screaming about health care but financial institutions are still laughing in our faces and nobody says a peep even though they have a great part to blame in what's happened to our economy. But hey, they're rich people, so let's cut 'em some slack, right?

[justbroke]

My take on it is this...If wells fargo/wachovia received bailout funds from us then its not an internal matter in that wells fargo/wachovia was not doing what is was supposed to do.

This is exactly the problem with this article. This was NOT a Wells Fargo/Wachovia problem. One of their rogue employees did this. I don't blame the bank at all.

To me, this is the type of response that the L.A. Times wanted with the article. To fuel the fire that the banks received bail outs and were doing bad things. How about if Wells Fargo had already starting paying back their bailout money (like many of the banks have, and some have paid it all back). Would this make you any more or less upset? Or that they generated $14.2billion in new money to make them stronger.

We need to get over equating everything a bank does with "oh, the bailout". First we need to assess the situation to see if it's even related to any bailout. Then we can make statements if we can show that the money was directly related to the bailout. In this case, while it was the Bank's property, it was a rogue employee who did this and was summarily fired.

Remember, this was an individual responsible for commercial properties. When you say "Wells Fargo" was contacted, it was this person.

[holding on]

I can see some merits to your point, but I just have some overall disagreements. It is a wachovia problem in that fact that companies are always responsible for their employees. When the UPS truck runs you over you don't just sue the driver, you sue UPS too. And this most likely is not the first time this has been done.

I'm relating it to bailout because that was all supposed to be under the stipulation of shoring up institutions at the same time admonishing them for fiscal irresponsibility. They take government money, they have a much higher standard to uphold in my opinion.

[nc73]

Who gives a flying fart? Nobody died. Nobody was harmed. Employee was fired. Being fired in this climate is punishment enough.

[banca rotta]

Who gives a flying fart? Nobody died. Nobody was harmed. Employee was fired. Being fired in this climate is punishment enough.

Thanks for clearing this up!

[SobStory]

OK - here's my beef. The employee has no ownership or interest in the house. The shareholders of the bank have ownership. Nothing to do with the employee. Total misuse of assets - using the house without paying rental fees is theft of service. It's the sense of entitlement that really annoys me.

[sansdollar]

Its greed.

I know this is off topic, forgive me...but,the rant lives on...
I am also concerned about retirees who have money invested in drug companies that have profits dependent upon retirees taking their drugs...some of these drugs are not appropriate and some of them require another drug to conteract the side effects of the initial drug!

[oldman]

I decided long ago we are nothing. bk or in my case bla bla bla When I bk I will go in with a old man