http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/housing/2011-01-07-banks-lose-foreclosure-case_N.htm?csp=34money&POE=click-refer
Banks lose their foreclosure fight in Massachusetts at first glance makes the 'little guy' say "That's what I'm talking about"!
Let's take a closer look.
If someone is being foreclosed on, it means they have not made their mortgage payments. Trust me, banks do not want to foreclose on people and will work with them at great lengths to help them keep their homes. When everything else fails, the bank has no choice but to foreclose.
So two of the big banks have lost their right to foreclose in Massachusetts because of a technicality in the way the deeds were transferred. What does this mean in the Big Picture? They will go back and re-record the transfers and will eventually foreclose on the homes, but at a considerable expense. Who do you think will ultimately bear the cost of this? The consumer will, of course.
Unless you have cash to purchase a home, it will mean more tightening of lending guidelines, which affects anyone who tries to borrow money.
Bottom line is this: if someone does not make their mortgage payment, they cannot expect to keep their home.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nice thought Frank, but by the same token the lenders need to demonstrate more competency in their asset management and foreclosure practices. I've seen banks do some incredibly bone-headed things in the last few years with regard to foreclosures and REO sales and I can only attribute the ineptitude to cost cutting measures. Once upon a time and not long ago banks conducted their business correctly. Now it's all amateur night. That's why we have these suits and that's the reason for increased expense. Lenders need to get the back office straightened out and take their serious business seriously.
ReplyDelete