An interview on CNBC with IndyMac Bank chief executive Michael Perry about company's option ARM mortgage portfolio and the Federal Reserve's decision to leave interest rates unchanged.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inzm6nwbii0&hl=en

  The Obama administration should take a step back and look at FHA when it comes to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the current economy.  So let’s put this is prospective here, Obama, the Obama adviser’s, Barney Frank nor Andrew Cuomo understand the real issue.  The real issue here is the 4.1 trillion in lost equity.  Until we address the lost equity we are just spinning our wheels! 

  FHA is doing the right thing and that is simply get out of the way and let the free market system fix itself.  There are more than enough laws already in place to deal with all of the problems.  We just need to in force them.   The FHA model has held up pre meltdown, current meltdown and now post meltdown.  Anyone please let me that it does not work.  FHA will show the Obama administration how to make it work.  This reenventing of the wheel here is not the answer.    

  So what has Obama been doing, let’s take a look.  Saxon was given 886 million dollars to help address their 35,000 plus loan modifications.  Only 42 have been done to date at a cost of a little more than 20 million each.  How can this be?  Why is’nt the Media talking about this?

  As bad as the Saxon situation is not the worst.  The former IndyMac Bank, now Bank One aka George Soros, received 814 million to help with loan modifications and they have completed none, zero, donut.  How can this be?  Why is’nt the Media talking about this?   

  Look Bush has been gone now for ten months.  Obama has spent more money that Bush ever did.  The dirty work being done behind Obama is unbelievable and yet my own mother love’s Obama.  I feel Obama is far from our smartest president and his refusal to release his college transcripts or IQ test is just unacceptable.  I have no faith in Obama or his administration in regards to the economy.  Obama likes to blame others for his reckless spending but what is the next president going to be dealing with in 2012.  The lack of accountability with the current spending is unbelievable and Obama himself thinks he is doing a B+ job.  I would give him a D at best.  Obama better find a way to get money back in the people’s hands or he will be a one term president. 

  I understand that a lot of people still like Obama but I feel like he has done some kind of Jedi Mind trick of his supporters.  If Obama calls of George Soros directly and the many other of his campaign supporters then I will reconsider this.  Until then I stand by my statement. 

  Maybe it is time for TMZ to look at the Obama administration.  The hypocrisy here has set a level that I hope I never see matched again in my lifetime.   

You can read much more about this subject at the following link;

http://mandelman.ml-implode.com/2009/12/it%e2%80%99s-not-about-right-and-left-anymore%e2%80%a6-it%e2%80%99s-about-right-and-wrong/

Indy Mac claims $474,936.78 still is owed two weeks after Justice Jeffrey Spinner ordered the mortgage canceled.

Source: Judge orders parties back to court in mortgage case (requires paid subscription to Newsday)

Fri 11 Dec 2009

The state Supreme Court justice who last month lashed out at a bank’s dealings with an East Patchogue family facing foreclosure and canceled the mortgage on the home has ordered the bank and the homeowners back to court, records show.

Justice Jeffrey Spinner wants the parties to return to discuss a recent letter from IndyMac Mortgage Services that says $474,936.78 still is owed, according to legal documents obtained by Newsday.

Spinner’s unusual decision to cancel the mortgage generated much attention. His ruling said the lender – a division of OneWest Bank, FSB – was “harsh, repugnant, shocking and repulsive”" in proceedings where the homeowners attempted to work out a loan modification.

This week, Spinner ordered that a conference be held Dec. 18 in Riverhead to explore “at length” the bank’s letter, which was dated two weeks after his initial ruling…

4closureFraud
http://4closurefraud.wordpress.com/

WhydoesIndyMac/OneWest repeatedly opt for foreclosure over other solutions that benefit all of the parties?  Patrick Pulatie mines its Shared Loss Agreement with the FDIC (similar to the agreements that numerous servicers have with the FDIC) for hidden incentives.   Spoiler:  the taxpayer and the middle class homeowner eat the losses again.   Check out the full article below:

http://iamfacingforeclosure.com/blog/2009/12/01/anatomy-of-a-government-abetteded-fraud-why-indymaconewest-always-forecloses/

NY JUDGES ROCK — IndyMAc Bank FSB. v Yano-Horosky

Indymac Bank F.S.B. v Yano-Horoski
2009 NY Slip Op 52333(U)
Decided on November 19, 2009
Supreme Court, Suffolk County
Spinner, J.
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on November 19, 2009

Supreme Court, Suffolk County

Indymac Bank F.S.B., Plaintiff

against

Diana Yano-Horoski, Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota National Association as Trustee for Soundview Home Equity Loan Trust 2001-1 and Kimberly Horoski, Defendants.

2005-17926

Steven J. Baum P.C.

Attorney for Plaintiff

P.O. Box 1291

Buffalo, New York 14240

Diana Yano-Horoski

Defendant Pro Se

8 Oakland Street

East Patchogue, New York 11772-5767

Jeffrey Arlen Spinner, J.

This is an action wherein the Plaintiff claims foreclosure of a mortgage dated August 4, 2004 in the original principal amount of $ 292,500.00 recorded with the Clerk of Suffolk County, New York in Liber 20826 of Mortgages at Page 285. The mortgage secures an adjustable rate note of the same amount with an initial interest rate of 10.375%. The mortgage encumbers real property commonly known as 8 Oakland Street, East Patchogue, Town of Brookhaven, New York and described as District 0200 Section 979.50 Block 05.00 Lot 001.000 on the Tax Map of Suffolk County. Plaintiff commenced this action by filing a Summons, Verified Complaint and Notice of Pendency on July 27, 2005. The Notice of Pendency was extended by Order dated April 28, 2008 and a Judgment of Foreclosure & Sale was granted on January 12, 2009.

Thereafter and in accordance with the Laws of 2008, Ch. 472, Sec. 3-a and in view of the fact that the loan at issue was deemed to be “sub-prime” or “high cost” in nature, Defendant seasonably requested that the Court convene a settlement conference. That request was granted and a conference was commenced on February 24, 2009 which was continued five times in a series of unsuccessful attempts by the Court to obtain meaningful cooperation from Plaintiff. In view of Plaintiff’s intransigence in its continuing failure and refusal to cooperate, both with the Court and with Defendant’s multiple and reasonable requests, the Court directed that Plaintiff produce an officer of the bank at the adjourned conference scheduled for September 22, 2009.

At the conference held on September 22, 2009, Karen Dickinson, Regional Manager of [*2]Loss Mitigation for IndyMac Mortgage Services, division of OneWest Bank F.S.B. (“IndyMac”) appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. IndyMac purports to be the servicer of the loan for the benefit of Deutsche Bank who, it is claimed, is the owner and holder of the note and mortgage (though the record holder is IndyMac Bank F.S.B., an entity which no longer is in existence). At that conference, it was celeritously made clear to the Court that Plaintiff had no good faith intention whatsoever of resolving this matter in any manner other than a complete and forcible devolution of title from Defendant. Although IndyMac had prepared a two page document entitled “Mediation Yano-Horoski” which contained what purported to be a financial analysis, Ms. Dickinson’s affirmative statements made it abundantly clear that no form of mediation, resolution or settlement would be acceptable to Plaintiff. IndyMac asserts the total amount due it to be in excess of $ 525,000.00 and freely concedes that the property securing the loan is worth no more than $ 275,000.00. Although Ms. Dickinson insisted that Ms. Yano-Horoski had been offered a “Forbearance Agreement” in the recent past upon which she quickly defaulted, it was only after substantial prodding by the Court that Ms. Dickinson conceded, with great reluctance, that it had not been sent to Defendant until after its stated first payment due date and hence, Defendant could not have consummated it under any circumstances (Defendant, through Plaintiff’s duplicity, found herself to be in the unique and uncomfortable position of being placed in default of the “agreement” even before she had received it). Plaintiff flatly rejected an offer by Plaintiff’s daughter to purchase the house for its fair market value (a so-called “short sale”) with third party financing. Plaintiff refused to consider a loan modification utilizing any more than 25% of the income of Plaintiff’s husband and daughter (both of whom reside in the premises with her), the excuse being that “We can’t control what non-obligors do with their money” (the logical follow up to this statement is how does the bank control what the obligor does with her money?). The Court found IndyMac’s position to be deeply troubling, especially since a plethora of sub-prime loans in this County’s Foreclosure Conference Part have been successfully modified with the lender’s reliance upon the income of non-obligors who reside in the premises under foreclosure. The Plaintiff also summarily rejected an offer by both Plaintiff’s husband and daughter to voluntarily obligate themselves for payment upon the full indebtedness, thus committing their individual incomes expressly to the purpose of a loan modification. It should be noted here that Defendant did not even request any waiver or “forgiveness” of the indebtedness aside from some tinkering with the interest rate, just a modification of terms so as to enable her to repay the same. It was evident from Ms. Dickinson’s opprobrious demeanor and condescending attitude that no proffer by Defendant (short of consent to foreclosure and ejectment of Defendant and her family) would be acceptable to Plaintiff. Even a final and desperate offer of a deed in lieu of foreclosure was met with bland equivocation. In short, each and every proposal by Defendant, no matter how reasonable, was soundly rebuffed by Plaintiff. Viewed objectively, it is apparent that Plaintiff’s conduct in this matter falls within the definitions set forth in 22 NYCRR § 130-1.1( c)(2), which might well warrant the imposition of monetary sanctions.

On the Court’s own motion, a hearing was held on November 18, 2009 in order to explore the issues herein. At the hearing, Ms. Dickinson appeared as well as Mr. Horoski. IndyMac claimed a balance due, as of September 22, 2009 of $ 527,437.73 which included an escrow overdraft of $ 46,627.88 for taxes advanced since the date of default but did not include attorney’s fees and costs.. Plaintiff was unable to tell the Court the amount of the principal [*3]balance owed. Mr. Horoski advised the Court that according to two letters received from Plaintiff, the principal balance was said to be $ 285,381.70 as of February 9, 2009 and $ 283,992.48 as of August 10, 2009. Plaintiff stated was that Defendant must have made payments though it was conceded that in fact no payment had been made.Plaintiff insisted that it had remained in regular contact with Defendant in an effort to reach an amicable resolution, that it had extended two modification offers to Defendant which she did not accept and further, that due to her financial status she was not qualified for any modification, even under the Federal HAMP guidelines. Plaintiff denied that it had “singled out” Defendants, simply stating that her status was such that she fell outside applicable guidelines. All of these assertions were disputed by Defendant.

That having been said, the Court is greatly disturbed by Plaintiff’s assertions of the amount claimed to be due from Defendant. The Referee’s Report dated June 30, 2008, which has its genesis in a sworn affidavit by a representative of Plaintiff (presumably one with knowledge of the account), reflects a total amount due and owing of $ 392,983.42. The principal balance is reported to be $ 290,687.85 with interest computed at the rates of 10.375% from November 1, 2005 through August 31, 2006 ($ 25,118.62), 12.50% from September 1, 2006 to February 28, 2007 ($ 18,018.66), 12.375% from March 1, 2007 to March 31, 2008 ($ 39,126.39) and 11.375% from April 1, 2008 to June 24, 2008 ($ 7,700.24) totalling $ 89,963.91. Plaintiff also claims $ 20.00 in non-sufficient funds charges, $ 295.00 in property inspection fees and $ 12,016.66 for tax and insurance advances. The Judgment of Foreclosure & Sale dated January 12, 2009 was granted in the amount of $ 392,983.42 with interest at the contract rate from June 24, 2008 through January 12, 2009 and at the statutory rate thereafter plus attorney’s fees of $ 2,300.00 and a bill of costs in the amount of $ 1,705.00. Even computing the accrual of pre-judgment interest of $ 18,299.18 (using Plaintiff’s per diem rate in the Referee’s Report) together with post-judgment interest at a statutory 9% through November 19, 2009 (an additional $ 31,740.90), the application of simple addition yields a total amount due of $ 447,028.50. This figure is $ 80,409.23 less than the $ 527,437.73 asserted by Plaintiff to be due and owing from Defendant. The Court is astounded that Plaintiff now claims to be owed an escrow advance amount of $ 46,627.88 when, under oath, its officer swore that as of June 24, 2008 that amount was actually $ 34,611.22 less. Moreover, it now appears that the elusive principal balance is either $ 290,687.85, $ 285,381.70 or $ 283,992.48.

It is the province and indeed the obligation of the trial court to assess and to determine issues regarding credibility, Morgan v. McCaffrey 14 AD3d 670 (2nd Dept. 2005). In the matter before the Court, the pendulum of credibility swings heavily in favor of Defendant. When the conduct of Plaintiff in this proceeding is viewed in its entirety, it compels the Court to invoke the ancient and venerable principle of “Falsus in uno, falsus in omni” (Latin; “false in one, false in all”) upon Defendant which, after review, is wholly appropriate in the context presented, Deering v. Metcalf 74 NY 501 (1878). Regrettably, the Court has been unable to find even so much as a scintilla of good faith on the part of Plaintiff. Plaintiff comes before this Court with unclean hands yet has the insufferable temerity to demand equitable relief against Defendant.

The Court, over the course of some six substantive appearances in seven months, has been afforded more than ample opportunity to assess the demeanor, credibility and general state [*4]of relevant affairs of Defendant and Plaintiff. Although not actually relevant to the disposition of this matter, the Court is constrained to note that Defendant is afflicted with multiple health problems which outwardly manifest in her experiencing great difficulty in ambulation, necessitating the use of mechanical supports. Moreover, Defendant’s husband, Mr. Gregory Horoski, suffers from a myriad of serious medical conditions which greatly impede most aspects of his daily existence. Nonetheless, both of these persons, together with their adult daughter who resides with them and who is substantially and gainfully employed, receive income which they are more than willing to commit, in good faith, toward repayment of the debt to Plaintiff and indeed, despite their physical challenges, they have appeared at each and every scheduled conference before this Court. At each appearance, they have assiduously attempted to resolve this controversy in an amicable fashion, only to be callously and arbitrarily turned away by Plaintiff. This has been so even in spite of the Court’s continuing albeit futile endeavors at brokering a settlement.

As a relevant aside, the scenario presented here raises the specter of a much greater social problem, that of housing those persons whose homes are foreclosed and who are thereafter dispossessed. It is certainly no secret that Suffolk County is in the yawning abyss of a deep mortgage and housing crisis with foreclosure filings at a record high rate and a corresponding paucity of emergency housing. While foreclosure and its attendant eviction are clearly the inevitable (and in some cases, proper) result in a number of these situations, the Court is persuaded that this need not be the case here. In this matter, Defendant is plainly willing to make arrangements for repayment and both her husband and daughter are likewise willing to allocate their respective incomes in order to reach the same end. Were Plaintiff amenable, she would presumably continue to maintain the property’s physical plant, pay taxes thereon and the property would retain or perhaps increase its market value. Plaintiff would receive a regular income stream, albeit with a reduced rate of interest and without sustaining a loss of several hundred thousand dollars. In addition, no neighborhood blight would occur from the boarding of the property after foreclosure which would, in turn, avert problems of litter, dumping, vagrancy and vandalism as well as a corresponding decline in the property values in the immediate area. In short, a loan modification would result in a proverbial “win-win” for all parties involved. To do otherwise would result in virtually certain undomiciled status for two physically unhealthy persons and their daughter, leading to an additional level of problems, both for them and for society.

Since an action claiming foreclosure of a mortgage is one sounding in equity, Jamaica Savings Bank v. M.S. Investing Co. 274 NY 215 (1937), the very commencement of the action by Plaintiff invokes the Court’s equity jurisdiction. While it must be noted that the formal distinctions between an action at law and a suit in equity have long since been abolished in New York (see CPLR 103, Field Code Of 1848 §§ 2, 3, 4, 69), the Supreme Court nevertheless has equity jurisdiction and distinct rules regarding equity are still extant, Carroll v. Bullock 207 NY 567, 101 NE 438 (1913). Speaking generally and broadly, it is settled law that “Stability of contract obligations must not be undermined by judicial sympathy…” Graf v. Hope Building Corporation 254 NY 1 (1930). However, it is true with equal force and effect that equity must not and cannot slavishly and blindly follow the law, Hedges v. Dixon County 150 US 182, 192 (1893). Moreover, as succinctly decreed by our Court of Appeals in the matter of Noyes v. [*5]Anderson 124 NY 175 (1890) “A party having a legal right shall not be permitted to avail himself of it for the purposes of injustice or oppression…” 124 NY at 179.

In the matter of Eastman Kodak Co. v. Schwartz 133 NYS2d 908 (Sup. Ct., New York County, 1954), Special Term stated that “The maxim of “clean hands” fundamentally was conceived in equity jurisprudence to refuse to lend its aid in any manner to one seeking its active interposition who has been guilty of unlawful, unconscionable or inequitable conduct in the matter with relation to which he seeks relief.” 133 NYS2d at 925, citing First Trust & Savings Bank v. Iowa-Wisconsin Bridge Co. 98 F 2d 416 (8th Cir. 1938), cert. denied 305 US 650, 59 S. Ct. 243, 83 L. Ed. 240 (1938), reh. denied 305 US 676, 59 S Ct. 356 83 L. Ed. 437 (1939); General Excavator Co. v. Keystone Driller Co. 65 F 2d 39 (6th Cir. 1933), cert. granted 289 US 721, 53 S. Ct. 791, 77 L. Ed. 1472 (1933), aff’d 290 US 240, 54 S. Ct. 146, 78 L. Ed. 793 (1934).

In attempting to arrive at a determination as to whether or not equity should properly intervene in this matter so as to permit foreclosure of the mortgage, the Court is required to look at the situattion in toto, giving due and careful consideration as to whether the remedy sought by Plaintiff would be repugnant to the public interest when seen from the point of view of public morality, see, for example, 55 NY Jur. Equity § 113, Molinas v. Podloff 133 NYS2d 743 (Sup. Ct., New York County, 1954). Equitable relief will not lie in favor of one who acts in a manner which is shocking to the conscience, Duggan v. Platz 238 AD 197, 264 NYS 403 (3rd Dept. 1933), mod. on other grounds 263 NY 505, 189 NE 566 (1934), neither will equity be available to one who acts in a manner that is oppressive or unjust or whose conduct is sufficiently egregious so as to prohibit the party from asserting its legal rights against a defaulting adversary, In Re Foreclosure Of Tax Liens 117 NYS2d 725 (Sup. Ct. Kings County, 1952), aff’d on other grounds 286 AD 1027, 145 NYS2d 97 (2nd Dept. 1955), mod. on other grounds on reargument 1 AD2d 95, 148 NYS2d 173 (2nd Dept. 1955), appeal granted 7 AD2d 784, 149 NYS2d 227 (2nd Dept. 1956). The compass by which the questioned conduct must be measured is a moral one and the acts complained of (those that are sufficient so as to prevent equity’s intervention) need not be criminal nor actionable at law but must merely be willful and unconscionable or be of such a nature that honest and fair minded folk would roundly denounce such actions as being morally and ethically wrong, Pecorella v. Greater Buffalo Press Inc. 107 AD2d 1064, 468 NYS2d 562 (4th Dept. 1985). Thus, where a party acts in a manner that is offensive to good conscience and justice, he will be completely without recourse in a court of equity, regardless of what his legal rights may be, Eastman Kodak Co. v. Schwartz 133 NYS2d 908 (Sup. Ct., New York County, 1954), York v. Searles 97 AD 331, 90 NYS 37 (2nd Dept. 1904), aff’d 189 NY 573, 82 NE 1134 (1907).

An objective and painstaking examination of the totality of the facts and circumstances herein leads this Court to the inescapable conclusion that the affirmative conduct exhibited by Plaintiff at least since since February 24, 2009 (and perhaps earlier) has been and is inequitable, unconscionable, vexatious and opprobrious. The Court is constrained, solely as a result of Plaintiff’s affirmative acts, to conclude that Plaintiff’s conduct is wholly unsupportable at law or in equity, greatly egregious and so completely devoid of good faith that equity cannot be permitted to intervene on its behalf. Indeed, Plaintiff’s actions toward Defendant in this matter have been harsh, repugnant, shocking and repulsive to the extent that it must be appropriately [*6]sanctioned so as to deter it from imposing further mortifying abuse against Defendant. The Court cannot be assured that Plaintiff will not repeat this course of conduct if this action is merely dismissed and hence, dismissal standing alone is not a reasonable option. Likewise, the imposition of monetary sanctions under 22 NYCRR § 130-1.1 et. seq. is not likely to have a salubrious or remedial effect on these proceedings and certainly would not inure to Defendant’s benefit. This Court is of the opinion that cancellation of the indebtedness and discharge of the mortgage, when taken together, constitute the appropriate equitable disposition under the unique facts and circumstances presented herein.

After careful consideration, it is the determination of this Court that the indebtedness evidenced by the Adjustable Rate Note dated August 4, 2004 in the original principal amount of $ 292,500.00 made by Diana J. Yano-Horoski in favor of IndyMac Bank F.S.B. should be cancelled, voided and set aside. In addition, the Mortgage which secures the Adjustable Rate Note, given to Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc. As Nominee For IndyMac Bank F.S.B. dated August 4, 2004 and recorded with the Clerk of Suffolk County on August 16, 2004 in Liber 20826 of Mortgages at Page 285, as assigned by Assignment recorded with the Clerk of Suffolk County in Liber 21273 of Mortgages at Page 808 should be cancelled and discharged of record. Further, Plaintiff, its successors and assigns should be forever barred and prohibited from any action to collect upon the Adjustable Rate Note. In addition, the Judgment of Foreclosure & Sale granted on January 12, 2009 and entered on January 23, 2009 should be vacated and set aside and the Notice of Pendency should be cancelled and discharged of record. For this Court to decree anything less than the foregoing would be for the Court to be wholly derelict in the performance of its obligations.

Upon the Court’s own motion, it is

ORDERED that the Adjustable Rate Note in the amount of $ 292,500.00 dated August 4, 2004 made by Diana J. Yano-Horoski in favor of IndyMac Bank F.S.B. shall be and the same is hereby cancelled, voided, avoided, nullified, set aside and is of no further force and effect; and it is further

ORDERED that the Mortgage in the amount of $ 292,500.00 which secures said Adjustable Rate Note given by Diana J. Yano-Horoski to Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc. As Nominee For IndyMac Bank F.S.B. dated August 4, 2004 and recorded with the Clerk of Suffolk County on August 16, 2004 in Liber 20826 of Mortgages as Page 285, as assigned to IndyMac Bank F.S.B. by Assignment recorded with the Clerk of Suffolk County in Liber 21273 of Mortgages at Page 808 shall be and the same is hereby vacated, cancelled, released and discharged of record; and it is further

ORDERED that the Plaintiff, its successors and assigns are hereby barred, prohibited and foreclosed from attempting, in any manner, directly or indirectly, to enforce any provision of the [*7]aforesaid Adjustable Rate Note and Mortgage or any portion thereof as against Defendant, her heirs or successors; and it is further

ORDERED that the Judgment of Foreclosure & Sale granted under this index number on January 12, 2009 and entered in the Office of the Clerk of Suffolk County on January 23, 2009 shall be and the same is hereby vacated and set aside; and it is further

ORDERED that the Notice of Pendency filed with the Clerk of Suffolk County on July 27, 2005 under sequence no. 172456, which was extended by Order dated September 2, 2008 shall be and the same is hereby cancelled, vacated and set aside; and it is further

ORDERED that the Notice of Pendency filed with the Clerk of Suffolk County on August 29, 2008 under sequence no. 199616, shall be and the same is hereby cancelled, vacated and set aside; and it is further

ORDERED that the Clerk of Suffolk County shall cause a copy of this Order & Judgment to be filed in the Land Records so as to effectuate of record each and every one of the provisions hereinabove set forth with respect to cancellation of the instruments and items of record; and it is further

ORDERED that Plaintiff shall pay to the Clerk of Suffolk County, within ten (10) days from the date of entry hereof, any and all fees and costs required to effect cancellation of record of the Mortgage, Notices of Pendency and any other fees so levied; and it is further

ORDERED that within ten (10) days of the date of entry hereof, Plaintiff’s counsel shall serve a copy of this Order upon the Clerk of Suffolk County and the Defendant.

This shall constitute the Decision, Judgment and Order of this Court.

Dated: November 19, 2009

Riverhead, New York

E N T E R:

______________________________________

JEFFREY ARLEN SPINNER, J.S.C.

Of course this list changes almost on a daily basis along with the bank guidelines on how they will including individuals, pools, regions, price points, etc.  And I might ADD that it’s imperative to have a track record with their internal department heads close the deal.  That’s where “Amber and Scott” come in! 

American Bank of Texas
Arrowhead Bank
BAC Home Loan
Banco Popular
Chase Home Finance
Countrywide
Everhome Mtg
Flagstar Bank
HSBC Bank USA
Indymac
Lehman Holding
LaSalle Bank
Litton Loan Servicing
Midfirst Bank
National City
Nationstar Mortgage
PHH Mtg Corp
Saxon Mtg
Suntrust Mortgage
Wachovia
Wells Fargo Bank
Wells Fargo Financial

http://urlet.com/schedule.anything

http://www.rgemonitor.com/emergingmarkets-monitor/257856/chinas_september_data_suggest_that_the_long-term_overcapacity_problem_is_only_intensifying

By Greg Morcroft, MarketWatch

NEW YORK (MarketWatch) — Seven more banks failed Friday, pushing the 2009 total to 106 and marking the first year since 1992 that at least 100 have gone under

Experts suggest we could be no more than 10% of the way through this cycle of bank collapses, which is sure to be the worst run of closures since the Great Depression.

http://urlet.com/len.man

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bank-failures-hit-100-for-year-2009-10-23

Like all the great merchants of the bubble economy, Bear and Lehman were leveraged to the hilt and vulnerable to collapse. Many of the methods that outsiders used to knock them over were mostly legal: Credit markers were pulled, rumors were spread through the media, and legitimate short-sellers pressured the stock price down. But when Bear and Lehman made their final leap off the cliff of history, both undeniably got a push — especially in the form of a flat-out counterfeiting scheme called naked short-selling.

The new president for whom we all had such high hopes went and hired Michael Froman, a Citigroup executive who accepted a $2.2 million bonus after he joined the White House, to serve on his economic transition team — at the same time the government was giving Citigroup a massive bailout. Then, after promising to curb the influence of lobbyists, Obama hired a former Goldman Sachs lobbyist, Mark Patterson, as chief of staff at the Treasury. He hired another Goldmanite, Gary Gensler, to police the commodities markets. He handed control of the Treasury and Federal Reserve over to Geithner and Bernanke, a pair of stooges who spent their whole careers being bellhops for New York bankers. And on the first anniversary of the collapse of Lehman Brothers, when he finally came to Wall Street to promote “serious financial reform,” his plan proved to be so completely absent of balls that the share prices of the major banks soared at the news.

http://urlet.com/go.caught

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/30481512/wall_streets_naked_swindle

In a nutshell, WE HAVE BEEN LIED TO.

The government took OUR money and gave OUR money to banks and financial institutions to “SAVE the American economy” and keep a few cents in the value of a dollar. Their words, not mine!!

Today is August 26, 2009 and just about a month ago, Bank of (Obama’s) America (B of A)claimed a “rebound” and that they could pay the United States taxpayer back. Banks were quoted as saying “We Made Our Profits In This Quarter” to the tune of billions.

And so on this date, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or FDIC, states that it is rapidly running out of money to cover all of America’s banks. Part of the “reason” for this is that the housing market and the super weak economy is drowning in red ink. Literally!!

If you listen to the “Obama Think Tank”, you would be convinced that the economy and all it’s representations are on the mend.

Just a few days ago, the media in all it’s forms and through government information channels, “BOASTED A SLIGHT RISE IN THE HOUSING MARKET”. A blatant distortion of the truth so that this Obama dictatorship can smile in the face of the American taxpayer and say “see, we are doing it right, your money is working”.

But, smooth sailing we are not!!

Currently, there are 117 banks on the FDIC trouble list. The highest number in 5 years and growing.

You don’t say!!!!

Sean Ryan, a banking analyst with Sterne Agee, said “We’ve only seen the tip of the iceberg”. Now, this might sound good to that drip Al Gore when it comes to his global warming fantasy, but to the American people, it sounds a lot like a “socialist con job” that will enable this Obama womb reject and his cast of idiots a reason to TAKE OVER the entire financial market.

Far fetched?? Not if you learn about common sense and logic.

Even though only nine banks failed this year, Ryan expects that number to quickly climb with more than 100 banks failing by the end of 2009 saying “I would be quite surprised if we didn’t reach triple digits, most of them being relatively small institutions and they will add up”.

The FDIC insurance fund is going to be depleted by the end of the year thus requiring government bailouts of it’s own. Again, the taxpayers footing the bill and the US Treasury will send the bill to the IRS to begin “repayment” by way of “tax deduction”.

Clinton’s former Secretary of Labor, Robert Reich said “it’s obvious to anyone who follows these numbers that our banking system is very weak right now” and saying “while the situation is not a crisis, it is serious”.

If the lights went out during daylight hours, would that be a crisis?

Profits at 8,500 FDIC insured banks fell 86% in the second quarter of this year. So what happened to those billion dollar profits claimed by B of A?

Here is a puzzling yet scary thought. The FDIC will not publicize the names of the banks on it’s watch list because the theory is that if the list was to be made public, bank customers would pull their money out of the troubled banks causing them to fail.

Okay!! Let’s step back for a second.

Banks and financial institutions and greedy and corrupt mortgage lenders got us into this mess, the government BAILS them out with stimulus and TARP money, they are continuing to fail and distort dollar signs with the help of the government false information network and the FDIC WILL NOT tell bank customers that their bank is on the verge of collapse so that they, the taxpayer, can withdraw THEIR HARD EARNED MONEY out of fear that our wanting and taking our money will CAUSE THE BANKS TO FAIL??????

We will cause the banks to fail??

Pettiness is not one of my attributes, but there is a small yet simpleminded assumption here and it says that Americans themselves would be the downfall of America’s financial mess..

Obama, are you and your womb rejects on crack??? What did you really do when you went down to Mexico?

The banks failed on their own before so if we find out the banks are “continuing” to fail and we go get our money, it will be OUR FAULT??

I didn’t vote for this maniac Obama and I certainly grow happier as days go by knowing that I am not one of the STUPID ones who were simpleminded and dumb enough to vote for him. He didn’t blind side me!!!

Obama, you failed, admit it!! Your stimulus, your TARP and your twisted band aids are coming back to haunt you, aren’t they?? You and your idiots knew not of what you were doing yet you continue as if it is “THEE ONLY WAY”.

The FDIC was created in 1933 during the Great Depression to restore the public’s confidence in the banking system, not the opposite, which would ‘restore the banking systems confidence in the public”.

The FDIC gets it’s money through the financial institutions it insures and not the government.

According to the FDIC, it currently has $50 billion set aside to cover bank failures with about 20% of that going to the Indymac Insurance failure.

The FDIC is supposed to pay depositors immediately when a bank fails and to recover that money paid to depositors, it will sell off the failed bank’s assets. To do that, the FDIC will need a loan from the US Treasury.

“FDIC will need a loan from the US Treasury”. Another taxpayer bailout!!

Word is that if you have less than $100,000 in a bank, then you have nothing to worry about….

Or do you? Let’s analyze.

The Veterans Administration is sending out letters to veterans telling them they have Lou Gehrigs disease or ALS when in fact, they don’t; the VA is botching simple surgeries and at the same time giving veterans Hepatitis and other life threatening ailments and the VA calls it an “error” or “mistake”.

Government “errors and mistakes” is a song and dance routine throughout the government that ultimately disables the thought processing of American’s with common sense and who may rely on true government accountability as a source of needed knowledge.

I can only imagine the government taking your money and giving it to banks to help them out and somewhere in the process the taxpayer must yet again bail a bank out while your other money is sitting somewhere getting lost in a failed bank.

What would that be, an Ooops?? We did it for your own good and future prosperity!!

We did it for America!!!!

The economic failure of today along with the hundreds of billions of the American taxpayers hard earned dollars and the distorted “truths or facts” coming from this absent government and the banks, is literally both treasonous and unethical not to mention fraudulent.

Bailout the banks and leave the little American family to not only foot the tab, but suffer at the hands of credit reporting agencies and those bottom feeding debt collectors.

Credit reporting should cease immediately and until the economy picks up, should not be a relevant factor in any transaction based on the governments manipulation and the corrupt handling of fraudulent reporting by the credit reporting agencies themselves especially due to the dwindling income of Americans.

As for those bottom feeding debt collectors?

Factual stories are beginning to grow wings by the hundreds of thousands about these bottom feeding, womb stench, pieces of human inconvenience. Many stories “make me mad” to say the least.

Our friends and families are losing careers and nice incomes and we let these bottom feeders survive?

Wrong answer!! People are struggling big time and has the government or banks helped them?

No!!!

Either you burn these debt collecting trash pits or you put them on a self pre-payed welfare program. They are not worthy of air in fact, bin Laden has a better chance at becoming an American than they do of having any purpose at all. They are illegal, scamming, thieves, criminal and violent both verbally and physically more so than your local street criminal and get away with it. Harassing the American taxpayer is beginning to sound like yet another issue Real and True Americans are going to take care of on their own. They threaten lives, careers and families. People are getting extremely pissed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Those of us who write these blogs, talk to many people on a daily basis, so rest assured, the Real and True American’s are talking………….

A worsening economy, banks, socialist government and bottom feeding leeches are the problem!!!!!

“It’s getting to the point”!!!

Let’s Rock!!!!!!

AND THEN WHAT?  Prolonged Aid to Unemployed Is Running Out

ERIK ECKHOLM

Published: August 1, 2009

Over the coming months, as many as 1.5 million jobless Americans will exhaust their unemployment insurance benefits, ending what for some has been a last bulwark against foreclosures and destitution.

Because of emergency extensions already enacted by Congress, laid-off workers in nearly half the states can collect benefits for up to 79 weeks, the longest period since the unemployment insurance program was created in the 1930s. But unemployment in this recession has proved to be especially tenacious, and a wave of job-seekers is using up even this prolonged aid.

http://urlet.com/strategies.fair

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/02/us/02unemploy.html?hp

US and UK on brink of debt disaster

20 Jan 2009, 0419 hrs
 
 
 
LONDON: The United States and the United Kingdom stand on the brink of the largest debt crisis in history. 
While both governments experiment with quantitative easing, bad banks to absorb non-performing loans, and state guarantees to restart bank lending, the only real way out is some combination of widespread corporate default, debt write-downs and inflation to reduce the burden of debt to more manageable levels. Everything else is window-dressing.
 
The proximate trigger of the debt crisis was the deterioration in lending standards and rise in default rates on subprime mortgage loans. But the widening divergence revealed in the charts suggests a crisis had become inevitable sooner or later. If not subprime lending, there would have been some other trigger.

The charts strongly suggest the necessary condition for resolving the debt crisis is a reduction in the outstanding volume of debt, an increase in nominal GDP, or some combination of the two, to reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio to a more sustainable level.

From this perspective, it is clear many of the existing policies being pursued in the United States and the United Kingdom will not resolve the crisis because they do not lower the debt ratio.

In particular, having governments buy distressed assets from the banks, or provide loan guarantees, is not an effective solution. It does not reduce the volume of debt, or force recognition of losses. It merely re-denominates private sector obligations to be met by households and firms as public ones to be met by the taxpayer.

BANKRUPTCY OR INFLATION

The solution must be some combination of policies to reduce the level of debt or raise nominal GDP. The simplest way to reduce debt is through bankruptcy, in which some or all of debts are deemed unrecoverable and are simply extinguished, ceasing to exist.

Bankruptcy would ensure the cost of resolving the debt crisis falls where it belongs. Investor portfolios and pension funds would take a severe but one-time hit. Healthy businesses would survive, minus the encumbrance of debt.

http://urlet.com/bingo.angels

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/rssarticleshow/msid-4004567,flstry-1.cms

May 29, 2009:

By Sheila Nelson, Minnesota PPEHRC

Another travesty occurred inside Minneapolis City Hall today, as Sheriff Rich Stanek’s staff attempted to conduct the mortgage foreclosure auction of Leslie & Tecora Parks’ southside homes of over 22 years. However, this auction was not what the usual bidders (i.e. greedy banks & speculators) have come to expect!

This particular sale was brought to the attention of the Poor People’s Economic Human Rights Campaign, who drew a sobering number of supporters, neighbors, and fellow victims of the current national foreclosure crisis. PPEHRC members choked back tears as they shared one bank horror story after another with the crowd. Their dreams are being shattered, their community is crumbling, and they’re all spitting mad about it.

After PPEHRC members and supporters began obstructing the entryway and interfering with the “public” auction proceedings they were semi-civilly escorted to the hallway where the protest continued. The angry chants echoing through the halls quickly caught the attention of Minneapolis 8th Ward City Council Member Elizabeth Glidden who couldn’t ignore the intense cries for change. She addressed those in attendance and empathized with the pain residents are going through.

As this battle between the big banks and their borrowers heats up, more and more “Davids” are coming forward demanding to know what all the “Goliaths” have done with the bailout money they received. “Why are good families being tossed inhumanely onto the streets? Everyone knows affordable housing is a theory, not something that actually exists.” shouted one protester, while the Parks family stood by absorbing the enormity of it all and trying to adjust to the reality of what was happening a few yards away behind closed doors.

Amid the tragic stories there was prayer, encouragement, and even some visible compassion on the part of the Sheriff’s Deputies present – several of whom could not remain stoic as the stories and cries continued, proving that even the officials trying to serve “justice” are not immune to the problem!

Stay tuned for further updates, pictures and video footage of the demonstration.

Crude Oil Caps Biggest Monthly Gain Since 1999 on Dollar Drop

May 29 (Bloomberg) — Crude oil rose, capping its biggest monthly gain in a decade, as the dollar weakened against the euro, bolstering the appeal of commodities.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=af0H16dCeM_A&refer=home

Contact
Manuel Levins Holden
612.919.1064
Cheri Honkala
267.439.8419

For Immediate Release

Minneapolis, Minnesota

May 19, 2009 – The Home of MN Poor People’s Economic Human Rights Campaign members Leslie and Tecora Parks was illegally broken into by Indymac Fedaral Bank. The bank changed the locks in an attempt to pre maturely evict the two women who’ve lived at their Park Avenue residence for over twenty years.

MN PPEHRC is planning a demonstration on May 29th at the Sheriff’s office the day the home was scheduled to be sold at a sheriffs’ foreclosure sale.

This crime, ten days before the home is scheduled to be sold has persuaded the women to attempt to obtain a restraining order against the bank to prevent them from re-attempting an illegal violation of their legal and human rights.

Digging a little deeper into little-known Louis Caldera, Director, White House Military Office,  the man responsible for the low flight of Air Force One over Manhattan:

Louis Caldera, director of the White House Military Office, apologizes to the city of New York. Caldera came to the White House from IndyMac, where he served on the board of directors from 2002 until the bank was seized by the feds last year.

IndyMac is under investigation for fraud.

Read the story Here.

Posted: 04.28.09

Found on the Net:

Pink Slips Are The New Black – A Blog for the Unemployed by the Unemployed

About
We’re broke.
We’re angry.
We’re frustrated.
We’re unemployed…

Like you.

There is strength in numbers. Join us.

We created this blog as way to keep you informed, entertained and enlightened.

Have tips or want to contact us? E-mail us at: pinkslipsarethenewblack@gmail.com

http://urlet.com/numbers.managing

http://pinkslipsarethenewblack.com/about/

GM ‘Likely’ to Build in China as U.S. Factories Close – AMERICAN TAXPAYERS AND WORKERS  GET THE FINGER

By Stephanie Wong

April 20 (Bloomberg) — General Motors Corp., shuttering U.S. plants in a bid to avoid bankruptcy, is “likely” to build a new factory in China on surging demand.

“Operations in China are profitable and in the future China can finance its own growth,” Nick Reilly, the company’s Asia-Pacific president, said at the Shanghai auto show today. He didn’t give a timeframe for the new plant.

http://urlet.com/undesirable.payment

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aN4Brm9JM3_8&refer=asia