Judge Erases $525G Mortgage for N.Y. Couple, Citing 'Repulsive' Acts by Bank

[anuta]

I am a refugee from a communist country and my friends, THIS ruling is not Communism, not by a long shot, trust me.

No truer words were spoken.

[DownNotOut]

We are OneWest/IndyMac customers and I can attest to their crap tactics. They filed foreclosure on us in a trial modification period. They claimed that they never guaranteed that foreclosure proceedings would stop in a modification even though all the paperwork I have from them says that it will. I had to hire a foreclosure attorney to answer the summons and she filed a motion to dismiss for many things, this being one of them - that they are trying to obtain money twice, once by taking taxpayer dollars and again by foreclosing on us. They are also extremely rude and unknowledgeable. I, for one, am glad they were smacked down - maybe we might actually get a real modification now because of it. I'll say this - I'm going to start recording my conversations with them from now on!

[nc73]

We are OneWest/IndyMac customers and I can attest to their crap tactics. They filed foreclosure on us in a trial modification period. They claimed that they never guaranteed that foreclosure proceedings would stop in a modification even though all the paperwork I have from them says that it will. I had to hire a foreclosure attorney to answer the summons and she filed a motion to dismiss for many things, this being one of them - that they are trying to obtain money twice, once by taking taxpayer dollars and again by foreclosing on us. They are also extremely rude and unknowledgeable. I, for one, am glad they were smacked down - maybe we might actually get a real modification now because of it. I'll say this - I'm going to start recording my conversations with them from now on!

I noticed your 34k unsecure debt. That's just a decent car payment. No need to cry over it.

[DownNotOut]

I noticed your 34k unsecure debt. That's just a decent car payment. No need to cry over it.

Except that right now we are a family of 7 making just over $40K a year. We used to make more than twice that before everything tanked. So, yeah, I'm crying. I'm crying because what caused all this debt was the loss of a child. I have a right to cry.

[SweetGeorgia]

DownNotOut, I'm so sorry for your loss.

[SweetGeorgia]

Oh, and on topic - IndyMac got smacked because they lied to the judge, among other things. If you bring a case to court expecting the protection of the law and enforcement of your contract, then don't start treating the judge like he's your borrower.

He's not.

IndyMac screwed this pooch on their own; the defendants didn't even have a lawyer. If they don't like judicial foreclosure, they don't have to do business in New York. I'm just amazed to think how many times they've gotten away with this already - such that lying to a judge and acting the way they did is just standard operating procedure.

Glad to see one judge standing up for himself, at least. I don't expect them to stand up for anyone else, but it's a start.

[music12]

sweet georgia, can you be more specific as to what they lied to the judge about?

[SweetGeorgia]

Well, the judge appeared to be really cranked about the bank rep's insistence that the defendant had been offered a "forbearance agreement" and had defaulted on it. After "substantial prodding by the Court," it turns out that this agreement hadn't been sent out until after the first due date.

And the bank apparently couldn't show the math on the $527,000 figure claimed. The judge's own math showed a balance of $80,000 less (and he could be wrong, but the bank brought the case, after all).

Of course, I am wondering exactly what they said to this judge! Because it sounds like he was pissed.

[anuta]

Spinner excoriated OneWest for repeatedly refusing to work out a deal, for misleading him about the dollar amounts at stake in the case, and for its treatment of the couple over months of hearings.


This reads as if the judge was misled by the atty. for OneWest.

[banca rotta]

If the bankers actually lied then those that lied should be brought up on perjury charges. That I would love to see.

[music12]

problem is, lawyers lie in court all the time and never get prosecuted for perjury. most judges used to be lawyers and the line between truth and lies is very blurred for them. they are simply used to it and are even trained to "stretch" the truth in favor of a client. the whole system needs a tune-up. prosecuting one lawyer for perjury won't' do it.
jmho.

[Lajazz947]

Except that right now we are a family of 7 making just over $40K a year. We used to make more than twice that before everything tanked. So, yeah, I'm crying. I'm crying because what caused all this debt was the loss of a child. I have a right to cry.

I have 3 and I cannot IMAGINE such a loss.

Puts everythng in perspective.

God bless you and good luck.

[sisterfunkhaus]

The line has to be drawn somewhere. If you or I get sick and the bank acts like the scumbags they are, I am still not entitled to my home for free.

I agree 100%. The judge should have forced a restructuring, not given the home to the people. Sick or not, it is our responsibility to pay for our home or sell it. They took out a second mortgage for more than they paid for the house. I would have rather have seen the man not pay his medical bills and just keep paying on the smaller loan he had originally taken out and not gotten himself into this mess.

[music12]

i think the judge was not thinking about giving the home to these people. he was thinking about punishing the bank for their behavior. i guess an option for the judge would have been to order the bank to pay monetary sanctions. then the question would be how much and to whom. i think there is some justice in having the bank pay the very amount they were hoping to get by their unconscionable tactics. and then, you could have the bank pay the sanction to the court from proceeds of selling the home and kicking out the owners, or you could just have the owners stay in the home and it's a wash with one less family on the streets.

and you also have to realize that fighting the bank just to get the restructuring cost these owners in stress and health and time, which they are entitled to be compensated for.

so this is not a ruling that gives everyone a free home. it's a ruling that says that if the bank makes your life a living hell by refusing to work with a reasonable offer of paying the bank, then they have to pay for it and you get compensated for your trouble.

[SweetGeorgia]

When the financial-industrial complex (and the media) have consumers convinced that (1) borrowers should pay whatever amount the bank wants, nevermind the contract, and (2) banks don't need to play by any legal rules, much less show respect for the justice system itself -

then I think they've won more than this case could ever lose for them.