Why Are Bailed-Out Banks Breaking into Struggling Borrowers’ Homes?

[EFerrari]

Last week Florida resident Nancy Jacobini revealed that an agent hired by her bank broke into her home after she fell behind on her mortgage payments. Thinking she was being burglarized, Jacobini called 911. We speak to Jacobini’s lawyer Matthew Weidner and Bruce Marks, the founder and CEO of the Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America, a housing services organization that’s been calling for a national moratorium on foreclosures for years.

Guests:
Matthew Weidner, consumer rights and foreclosure defense attorney and a frequent blogger on foreclosure issues at his website.

Bruce Marks, founder and CEO of the Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America.

No transcript yet, audio, video at link.

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/10/12/why_are_bailed_out_banks_breaking

Marks mentioned that after one of these break ins (where the homeowner isn't even in foreclosure yet) law enforcement often won't even take a report. They say no crime has been committed. How is that possible? Has their DA said, we don't want to bother trying to prosecute these incidents?
:wtf:

[wildbilln864]

1. wtf!?

if the one breaking in had gotten shot then I bet they'd prosecute.

[EFerrari]

3. They played the 911 tape of this poor lady

who thought she was having a home invasion.

She was behind on her payments a few months but not in foreclosure. The police didn't even want to take a report.

:grr:

[wildbilln864]

5. she should have shot the intruder IMHO! nt

[EFerrari]

8. Well, if law enforcement isn't responding to these scenes

what is the alternative? Get a big dog and a gun? I've only ever even seen a gun in a home once and that was my uncle's rifle that he takes to the range.

This societal break down, right here.

[closeupready]

16. This country is really becoming surreal.

Like something out of a Twilight Zone episode.

[Cal Carpenter]

2. Because struggling homeowners don't matter

They are collateral damage in the class war.

[EFerrari]

6. Sure looks like it.

I used to get a little annoyed when people talked about the class war because the claim seemed so exaggerated. Those were the days!

[glitch]

17. One step away from homeless, so the police won't help them either.

Pre-emptive "rousting". Despicable state this country's in.

Shoulda prosecuted instead of bailing out, now the looters have been encouraged to run amuck.

[EFerrari]

21. We paid them to do this to us.

Unreal.

[glitch]

24. We're STILL paying for them to do this to us. And we will continue to pay far into the future.

Unreal doesn't even cover it, we're well into surreal.
(not to quibble :hi:)

[EFerrari]

25. You're right. n/t

[realisticphish]

4. I guess

they claim that if the bank forecloses then they own the house so it's their property? Still pretty thin, and still 100% USDA certified bullshit

[wildbilln864]

7. but they hadn't foreclosed yet! nt

:banghead:

[realisticphish]

9. very true nt

[SammyWinstonJack]

10. We really are on our own,

:argh:

[lonestarnot]

11. So what now, 911 operators have to ask if your home is in foreclosure before they will send

assistance on an active burglary?

[EFerrari]

12. What the hell is this?

This is happening to people who aren't even IN foreclosure.

That means, it can happen to anybody with a mortgage. :wtf:

[lonestarnot]

13. That is what I am asking, WTF. Foreclosure or lack thereof should not allow pds to fail to

send assistance to someone who calls them because a stranger is breaking into their home.

[EFerrari]

14. The only thing I come up with is that municipalities

don't want to go to court against BofA, Chase, Wells Fargo. :shrug:

[lonestarnot]

18. But I will bet you a last dollar, that if a Chase (r) (ambulance) employee is killed by a homeowner

for breaking and entering out of fear for one's life by the homeowner, the Chase employee's family will being suing Chase for some kind of compensation for the death of their loved one as it seems that breaking into a home is outside the scope of employment. :shrug: What do I know, I'm no lawyer.

[EFerrari]

20. That's a good point. And the calculated risk is

that won't happen at every one of these calls, so the municipality is going with what will keep their liability premiums down? :shrug:

[lonestarnot]

22. I'm sure there has been a calculation of the risk at some level.

[SOS]

28. Which begs the question

How many people with mortgages own guns?

[Orsino]

15. Because a mugging is too obvious. n/t

[EFerrari]

19. Grand Theft Home. Barack Obama has an opportunity here

to win the midterms. He could call for a moratorium until the banks straighten up their thievery and at least pretend not to be terrorizing and ripping off borrowers.

[glitch]

27. Especially since moratorium on foreclosures was one of his campaign promises.

Would be a win for him and a win for Democrats running for office this year, which makes it doubly weird that he's saying no to a moratorium now. :shrug:

[EFerrari]

29. I can't think of any reasonable explanation, either.

Is this just self destructive behavior?

Do the midterms not matter?

Are they trying to keep Wall Street on board for 2012?

What?

:shrug:

[xchrom]

23. recommend

[w4rma]

26. And this is why I don't support additional gun control. Homeowners with mortgages should consider

buying a gun if you have been late on recent payments or think you might be late on payments in the future. Remember the Brady campaign was started by a Republican and promoted by DLCers.

[DirkGently]

30. Sounds like a mistaken attempt to "secure" the property. Banks just don't bother to avoid such

such "mistakes," because there are no consequences. Under the mortgage, the lender can take steps to protect the property. The idea is *supposed* to be that when the borrower defaults *and abandons the property,* they can go lock up the place, take moldering food out of the fridge when the power is off, etc.

But the banks don't communicate well. Someone may be in a workout with one department, and the other department doesn't know about it. And nothing happens as a consequence when they screw up, so it keeps happening.

A lot of what's going wrong right now is attributable to the simple fact that those with all the money hold all the cards. It's an organic form of corruption. I doubt any lender is twisting its mustache, plotting to break into occupied homes to intimidate people. It's just that when it happens, there's no cost to the bank.

Unless you can actually afford to hire a lawyer and go to court (and few distressed homeowners can)it's like talking to a brick wall. They just don't care who they hurt, because it costs them nothing.

It's worse than a dark conspiracy. It's a mindless, ongoing process by which corporations have rights and privileges and can get away with all kinds of things, but actual PEOPLE cannot.

[EFerrari]

31. It begins to look purposeful and not like a mistake.

You don't purposely hire people with no knowledge of foreclosures to handle them for no reason.

[DirkGently]

32. Oh, I think you do. Never bet against "cheap and hasty" when discussing lenders.

:)