Moms & Politics

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/77841.html

While I understand that there were a lot of people involved in the collapse of the mortgage market, there seems to be a growing number of complaints in the "Who owns the note" shell game. 

Will the mortgage meltdown end up costing the country billions in court costs?  Is there any way to sort messes, like the one in this story, without taking each individual case to a judge? 

The more I hear about this mortage mess, the more I just have to shake my head.

I hate to admit it but I have no sympathy for the Beckers. They couldn't afford a house in the first place. Lots of people can't, so they don't buy free-standing houses with things like 100% financing or close to that.

It's the other mortgagors who bear the burden of the Beckers' years of playing games, the Beckers pretending they don't have a duplicate Promissory Note in their basement, pretending they need to see the Original Promissory Note. @@ Wouldn't many love to own his/her own [jewelry] [substitute other] business, be one's own boss, answer to no one? But they don't because they know crises like this can easily happen and they'll lose their house. Few small businesses survive.

Goldman Sachs will win in the end. It always does. :)

I don't have a lot of sympathy for "didn't read the fine print" or "sold a product when another could have been more appropriate" or "overstated their earnings". 

I do, however, think that these loans are being passed around like bean bag in a hacky sack circle.   It shouldn't be that hard for a person who borrowed $250K to buy their home to figure out who is holding the mortgage.  I think the whole "Oh, I chopped your mortgage into tiny pieces and sold it off" shouldn't be the standard answer.  Securities aren't mortgages. 

I don't know if I have "sympathy" for the family in the story, but I do have questions about banks saying "No, I don't own that" when, in fact, they do.  It really does feel as if they hiding assets, even if it just a reflection of their own poor accounting and bureaucracy. 

There is a reason why the mortgage servicing firm or the mortgage holder/bank should produce the actual note. The recent decision by the judge of the PHH case explains why the judge discharged the mortgage claim by PHH and wiped out the entire mortgage debt for the borrower. Now, if the real holder of the mortgage comes forth and produces paperwork, s/he would then be able to collect either the real estate or the money from the buyer. Here's the article on the PHH case:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/25/business/economy/25gret.html?_r=4&partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

Wouldn't it have been crazy if PHH took control of the property and then the real mortgage holder sued PHH to recover the property?

Yes, it's very easy for banks to find the Mortgage Documents. So if they're saying they don't know if they own the Mortgage, that would be surprising. You're very smart and I think you mentioned that you know banks have bundled and sold mortages for decades. That's not new.

What's new is how Moodys and Standard&Poors gave such astronomical ratings to subprime mortgage bundles like the one the Beckers hold.

Even then, I have no sympathy for the Beckers exploiting the tragedy of the other mortgagors by claiming they need the Original Note. That's bogus.

[I'm needed at school, to sharpen pencils I think! I'll be back later. ;) Interesting thread, lj!]