What is Digg?66 Comments
- TehUberGeeK, on 03/26/2008, -0/+22In related news. The Riches has began it's second season.
- satori3000, on 03/26/2008, -0/+20This has been happening in Canada for a few years now. It's only recently that the government has put any sort of legislation around protecting the home owner. Our governments need to protect the individuals more than they need to protect the banks, but without a strong lobby group I don't see this happening soon.
- Skooma714, on 03/26/2008, -0/+12Well, at you least you can lie in wait for the ***** and tear out their spine.
Reminds me of one of those lizards that lay eggs in a bird's nest and then the bird takes care of the lizard eggs to end up having the real eggs and maybe the bird itself being eaten. - dbldwn, on 03/26/2008, -1/+12This has been around for awhile. It's called Eminent Domain. ;)
- OneZeroZeroOne, on 03/26/2008, -0/+8And how do the crooks get away with this? Who do they transfer your property to without identifying/incriminating themselves? "Yes, your Honor, I transfered my $200,000 home, free of charge, to someone I've never met before, all while I was out of town in the Bahamas...I thought they deserved it."
- justjoehere, on 03/26/2008, -2/+9Identity thieves should have their physical identities removed.
- lucidguru, on 03/26/2008, -4/+11This ups the ante on the possible profits from identity theft... At what point will the risks of prison be outweighed by the ludicrous profits that a single deal would make. This is nutz!
- cydwatts, on 03/26/2008, -0/+7This is hardly a NEW form of crime. 25 years ago, a house down the street from me was sold three times while the rightful owners were out of town on vacation. By people who had no claim to the house or the mortgage. Those poor people were pretty upset when they got home....
- jololli, on 03/26/2008, -0/+6So someone commits fraud and transfers your house to themselves, then sells the house. You find out. What then? The latest homebuyer gets screwed because they've got proceeds of crime? Would they be forced to give up the home without compensation unless they sue the con artist?
- fokov, on 03/26/2008, -0/+6Our representatives should not need to be bought off to protect us! It is the whole point of their job: to represent us and make our lives better off.
- liquidpele, on 03/26/2008, -0/+6And the new "owners" didn't think it was strange that the house was full of other people's *****? WTF?
- kylere, on 03/26/2008, -1/+6If someone would take over payments on my house, I would hug them and squeeze them and call them George!
- codered1322, on 03/26/2008, -0/+5Eddie Izzard is awesome on that show.
- WoollyMittens, on 03/26/2008, -0/+4The word representative is meaningless. It's the propaganda word for "master".
- liquidpele, on 03/26/2008, -1/+5There is something called "Title insurance", or something like that. We just bought a house and paid it. It repays you in the situation that the person that sold you the house really didn't own the land due to fraud, poor deed record keeping, etc...
let me google it..... ah! here:
http://homebuying.about.com/od/homeshopping/qt/Tit ... - bjs3171, on 03/26/2008, -0/+4The Riches is a hell of a show.
- giid, on 03/26/2008, -0/+4If the person who bought your home bought it from someone who didn't really own it, then yes they would be forced to leave and give it back to the rightful owner. It's the same with any other receiving of stolen goods, why would houses be any different? Buyer beware. Or else I will be forced to defend my home--more and more this defense is becoming legal--read up about castle doctrines.
- morningchai, on 03/26/2008, -0/+4Yep, this recently happened to my parents and the house I grew up in -- the house they are STILL living in. Over 20 yrs since they purchased it, finally making the last mortgage payments, only to get a call from the bank to "confirm" they were selling it. (What!#$&*) They've never expressed any interest in selling, but apparently, a "Remax real estate agent" had faxed the bank with documents, complete with forged signatures. After going to the bank to verify this identity theft, my mom found photos of our house on the agent's website and also in the local newspaper!! Photos taken over a year ago (my mom could tell by gardening and landscaping of the front yard that she herself had done)! They've since taken action, getting a lawyer and police involved. The last I heard, the agent was fired and had his license taken from him, although he denies everything. Apparently, he (and his co-conspirators) have been known to authorities that have been following similar cases.
I can't tell you how pissed off I was when I first about this from my parents. I was just livid at the nerve of these people to put my parents through months of fear and anguish (my mom cried herself to sleep and wouldn't leave the house for weeks, fearing someone would break in and stake their claim on the house). I'm so thankful the ordeal is over and that crimes like this are getting more attention in the press, wherever it may be happening. - nahsrocketeer75, on 03/26/2008, -0/+4Seems that point has already arrived.
- fokov, on 03/26/2008, -0/+4Land stealing is, and it will always be abused.
- freshyill, on 03/26/2008, -0/+4Didn't this happen in Beverly Hills Cop 2?
- Markpdotcom, on 03/26/2008, -0/+3As much as I love Eddie Izzard's standup, I can't belive that got a second season!
- WoollyMittens, on 03/26/2008, -0/+3That's a very good question. If new inhabitants arrived at my home unexpected, they probably would have a hard time removing me. Then again. If they are willing to pay my ridiculous mortgage, I can be packed and shipped out in about 20 minutes.
- WilliamDavis, on 03/26/2008, -0/+3I saw this on the news... and the anchor said everyone is at risk. Sheesh.
- giid, on 03/26/2008, -0/+3I love how the media loves to frighten us with news stories, but offers no advice on how to protect ourselves.
- mikephimikephi, on 03/26/2008, -0/+3Given the state of the mortgage market, I would think people would be happy for their homes to be stolen.
Insurance picks up the tab and you're debt free.
To quote The Fonz...ayyyyyyy - fokov, on 03/26/2008, -0/+3It isn't that they overtake your payments. They become you, transfer the house to someone else, you get stuck with a mortgage and no house.
- MorganaReno, on 12/24/2008, -0/+2Craig’s segue between his Among Us mortgage fraud exposes in Reno BrooWaha, http://reno.broowaha.com/, and his Is Your Lender A Patriot Or Terrorist?, http://reno.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3462, and my article Blame The Greedy Home Loan Lenders for This Frightening Recession, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3352 is seamless. Craig has laid track on which a mighty train is now running. Every home loan borrower should immediately take Craig’s letter, modify it to their particular dollar amount and interest rate, and present it to their lender.
“There are things known, and there are things unknown, and in between are the doors.” Jim Morrison. There is another reason to add to Craig’s argument/doors for Note Modification. That is the millions of Short Sales the lenders have approved through their vigorous efforts. A Short Sale is when a home is sold for less than what is owed on it. It is repugnant how those Short Sales put millions of Americans out of their homes. Just Do The Required Home Loan Modification, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=4070.
Craig’s exposes, http://www.broowaha.com/profile.php?id=1516, and my article, now combined, lay out a basis for our understanding and answers Craig’s two questions of “1) why have lenders not followed them before, and 2) why have lenders instead chosen their senseless fanaticism to foreclosure?” Years ago, I wrote about it. I correctly predicted it. The reason is the loan origination fees. A sale generates them in the buyer’s loan(s). Moreover, they are an enormous amount per loan. A Note Modification does not. That is why the proposal to refinance into a government backed, insured or subsidized loan is untenable. It is swaggering jargon that confirms lender smallness in their thinking. It is more houses of cards and smoke and mirrors.
A Short Sale or a refinance do not benefit the borrower. Neither benefits the American taxpayers. Neither benefits the American economy. A Short Sale and a refinance only benefit the lenders. They are strong evidence for more Bait & Switch loan practices. Are decent people really that easy to manipulate?
The point is that lenders have already approved millions of Short Sales. Lenders used these Short Sales to drive, deliberately, Americans out of their homes knowing they would be future homebuyers with future home loans. Lenders created the problem and created for themselves future profits. It was draconian. A Note Modification would have avoided that. Lenders are already approving a reduction in principal aka loan forgiveness in these Short Sales. They can do as you pointed out, the same allowed for loan forgiveness in a Note Modification. Then the homeowner remains in their home.
In B-school, I learned about the impact of Porter’s Five Forces on Competition. Home loans provide one test of the efficient market hypothesis. Efficient market theory is a theory that all available information is reflected in the current price of an asset. Higher return aka yields mean higher risks. These characteristics are built into the price and hence the returns. Any investor, such as a lender, can only adjust the return to their portfolio by adjusting risk. For a lender, a performing home loan, one being paid back, is an asset on their books. We shall not get to the truth if we prematurely dismiss wrong behavior as merely everyone does it. I have made this argument before and I still stick by it. Lenders are consciously not reflecting all information when they price their product aka loans. My argument is built on four premises. One is that American lenders make decisions based on the short-term rather than the long-term. The other is the cost to lenders of imperfect competition. The third is the role of government in home loans. The fourth is lender greed.
First, American lenders make decisions based on the short-term rather than the long-term. There is a difference in the time-horizon in which American managers, and foreign managers are trained to think in. American managers are trained to think of today’s bottom-line profits. For lenders, this quarter’s profits even at the economic expense and social cost of tomorrow’s foreclosures. European, Japanese, Indian, Canadian and increasingly, Chinese, Middle-Eastern and South American managers, are trained to think of long-range growth. A weakness of short-term thinking is that it does not take into account technology or the employment/unemployment rate. Nor does it look at barriers to entry, government regulation and intervention, or even nationalization. The results of short-term thinking have always been costly to America. The cost to America will continue to grow in the free-for-all of global competition unless we change our managerial and savings habits. That change will free up more money for capital investment.
Lender’s tradeoff is the cost of one option, short-term profits, in relationship to another, future foreclosures resulting from those past short-term profits. Like all of us, lenders must make a tradeoff because resources are scarce. Cost is not just the direct expenditure. It is also opportunity cost. The way we calculate tradeoffs is by comparing the cost of one option to another. If I have already made an expenditure, and I cannot recover it no matter what choice I make, it’s known as a sunk cost. Economists say that a rational person should ignore sunk costs.
Opportunity cost is the benefit lost of my next-best option. The benefit I lose is measured by the value of the next-best, alternative use of my option. It is a sacrificed opportunity or resource. Specifically, it is the foregone probability of my next-highest-valued alternative. I must always give-up the next-highest-valued choice for the opportunity selected. I make a tradeoff. A tradeoff is a choice, and all choices cost an opportunity elsewhere. The opportunity is forever lost.
There are several relationships to make the change to thinking in long-range growth. Some are defining the management change, establishing the process, identification and selection, negotiation, and implementation. There is also the managing the ongoing relationship via the organizational structure, its service delivery process and management controls.
Second, the costs of imperfect competition. Advertising manipulates consumer tastes to a considerable degree. Home loan lenders all have the same investors they sell their products/loans to or have them insured by. The are Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, HUD, VA, Wall Street, or for their HELOCS (Home Equity Lines of Credit) their own Loan Portfolio Credit Committee. Lenders expensive attempts for product differentiation are carried to the point of silliness and substantial economic waste all at the expense of the borrowers. The strength of my argument is in the evaluation of the transaction costs to these inefficiency costs. Implementation difficulties are the reallocation of resources.
Third, the role of government in home loans. I believe the call is way long overdue for a return to American pragmatism in economic policy to use government to represent the interests of the future to the present. The public sector must be actively used to support and strengthen the private sector. Enforce what’s already on the books! To fight and fight again against fraud, and to never stop fighting to keep evil at bay, if not eradicated. Boy, did the FBI, State Attorney Generals, State Real Estate Divisions, State Mortgage Divisions, County District Attorneys, local police and sheriffs, and the National and local Association of Realtors ever drop the mortgage fraud enforcement ball.
Fourth, lender greed. Let us step out and pursue that flighty temptress, fraud, was their mantra. What we have here is an illustration of fate’s penchant for irony. Craig’s exposes show it all too well. These fraudster’s lies, mud, red-herrings, threats, and smoke are the marks of ineptitude not expertise. The fraudsters willfully acted with reckless disregard of the truth or the consequences of their actions.
D.E: "President Bush signs HR 3648, The Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007. It created a three-year exception for debt forgiveness on home loans."
Sir Madmaxx: so correct.
Good Guys Don't Have Degrees of Integrity, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=4247
A Question Of Corporate Executive's Character, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=4173
Corporationism Rules Or The Dog Gets It, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=4265 - vertinox, on 03/26/2008, -0/+2There are two things you can do.
1. Call the FTC fraud alert (the number is on equifax's web page under identity theft or fraud section) every 90 days to lock down your credit.
or
2. Write Equifax, Transunion, and that other credit one (Esperion?) and get a credit freeze
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_freeze - BonnieW, on 12/27/2008, -0/+2Dear Santa, Reno’s Rose Newman, Keith Gledhill & Valerie Mapes of Prudential Nevada Realty Have Been Very Bad Girls & Boys This Year.
Reno, Nevada Rose Newman, Keith Gledhill & Valerie Mapes of Prudential Nevada Realty Have Been Very Bad Girls & Boys This Year. Unethical, arrogant, illegal, doesn’t care attitude, uppity, sloppily dressed, greedy, corrupt, and just plain mean-spirited. Same for the agents working there.
Obama Has The Integity while You Betcha It’s Christmas, Sarah Palin has zero integrity along with the Republicans and other right wing nut jobs. Ah Reno, Nevada Rose Newman, Keith Gledhill & Valerie Mapes of Prudential Nevada Realty Have Been Very Bad Girls & Boys, George “Wanker Bush, Richard “Dick” Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld, they and integrity DO go together like Hot Mature Cheerleaders, http://www.babelation.com/?q=node/1321, Sarah Palin and a moose/caribou/reindeer petting zoo.
The Nevada Real Estate Division has also been very bad girls and boys.
Here are several Realtor stories of Realtors being very bad boys and girls and why we don’t need nor want them:
Bizarre Among Us, Realtor Newman, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3592
Retards Among Us, Realtors, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3545
Cheaters Among Us, Riley, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3526
Heroes Among Us, Broch, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3477
Contempt Among Us, Hopson, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3457
Greedheads Among Us, Gledhill, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3448
Bullies Among Us, Mapes, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3404
Cheaters Among Us, Homier, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3397&do ...
Outlaws Among Us, Zane, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3394
Cheaters Among Us, Kings, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3377
Zeroes Among Us, Scheible, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3372
Cheaters Among Us, Maree, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3351
Cheaters Among Us, Sickler, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3320
Cheaters Among Us, Gledhill, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3300
Good Guys Don't Have Degrees Of Integrity, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=4247
A Question Of Corporate Executive's Character, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=4173
Mrs. Claws - ubuwalker31, on 03/26/2008, -0/+2Of course, its the "someone who really didn't own it" part that is going to bite you in the ass. Whether you own property is determined by whether you have title to the property. If there is a break in title - you failed to file your deed or your grandmother inherited the property and didn't file a new deed - all sorts of mischief can occur. In fact, criminals often set out to find properties that have serious title flaws and attempt to work the system. There have been numerous cases over the years of people filing a deed to property that they don't own and then selling it to an innocent buyer who did a title search and bought title insurance. Of course, the legitimate homeowner who failed to file is ***** out of luck, since the innocent party had no way of knowing that the homeowner was outside the chain of title, and he does have a deed to the property, and you don't.
- liquidjamm, on 03/26/2008, -1/+3What a win for people with crappy mortgages :)
- DeFex, on 03/26/2008, -0/+2The government on the other hand can do it whenever they feel like it, they probably don't care much which of the little people have the land, its theirs whenever they want it.
- brufleth, on 03/26/2008, -0/+2I'm going to go out on a limb here but wouldn't owning a house be somehow connected to risk of this sort of crime? I rent, probably will for a long time yet. I guess it might suck if it happened to my land lord...
- brufleth, on 03/26/2008, -1/+3Have you ever been to court over something seemingly stupid? I've had a judge look me right in the eye and say something to the effect of, "There is no evidence of wrong doing and I do not believe the testimony against you is accurate but I think (based on nothing) you probably still did something wrong."
The legal process is weird. - inactive, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1This is also a problem with reverse mortgages. Kids are reverse mortgaging their parents houses without their consent or knowledge so they can cash the check and have $25K for a new Altima or some stupid material ***** like that. This is reportedly particularly alluring to Jr.'s who have no problem with ID.
- vertinox, on 03/26/2008, -1/+2Well everyone is at risk of dying a car accident, but as you are aware it doesn't seem to happen to yourself. Unless you are dead, but how are you reading Digg?
- DeFex, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1LOL protect the individual? Well it depends if there is any money in it for lawyers.
- LCRev, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1They should really have stricter identity security procedures for large payments like houses. A driver's license is too easily faked, and not enough. They should require like, 2-3 types of identification, such as a passport.
Not to mention if someone's "selling" the house, the bank should at least go to the house and look at it, and verify the "seller" as the person who actually lives there.
These are hundreds of thousands of dollar exchanges, it's no joke. - Linake, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1Everyone except the homeless. Lucky bastards!
- jub0r, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1To be fair, almost all houses that you go and look at are full of other people's *****. They don't actually move out until their house is sold. If you put a move-in date far enough down the road, you might be able to sell it three times before someone tries to move in and discovers the house is still full of furniture.
- ubuwalker31, on 03/26/2008, -1/+2They file something called a quitclaim deed. It basically gives all of your property rights to another person. Curiously, a quitclaim deed neither warrants nor professes that the grantor's claim is actually valid. So the con artist assumes someones identity who has defective title, and then quitclaims the property to someone, for cold hard cash. That person files the deed and they own the property. The real owner turns up and says WTF?! The tricked owner says, I filed the deed and your title is faulty, and therefore, I win. Real owner gets screwed and has to hire a lawyer. Crook is found and cash has long since been spent and so he is sent to jail. The End.
- Travelsonic, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1Broken Record on Aisle 2!
- CosmicJustice, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1No you don't get stuck. Whoever bought the falsified deed gets stuck and you still own your house.
- ventralnet, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1No it isn't
- ElGstr, on 01/18/2009, -0/+1Does mortgage fraudsters Keith W. Gledhill or Jennifer I. Gledhill have a degree in real estate?
How about Reno mortgage fraudster Prudential Nevada Realty’s Valerie Mapes?
How about Nevada Real Estate Division Administrator Ann McDermott or Investigator Kip Steele?
How about mortgage fraudster former Nevada Mortgage Division Administrator Scott Bice?
How about Reno FBI agent Glen Lovedahl?
How about Reno mortgage fraudsters Judge Steven and Mendy Elliott?
How about Reno mortgage fraudsters Allan Zane, Magi Bird and Scott & Feather Dugan?
How about Reno mortgage fraudsters Sue Barry, Jenna Kay Clark, Marlene Kelley, Pat Schweigert, Rick Vaughan or Beverley Stewart?
No.
Then why in the hell did anyone give these fraudsters any credibility in believing their fraud schemes or investigations in the first place?!
Reported First In Reno Broowaha, http://www.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3566
How about just immediately executing these fraudsters? Including executing the small and big fraudsters! Including executing the ones who accepted the bribes to look the other way while all the fraud was going on.
Why Don’t Realtors Support A Real Estate Degree For Realtors? http://www.babelation.com/?q=node/1505. The result of their greed and arrogance in their ignorance has been all this real estate fraud.
I believe the FBI and mortgage division and real estate division investigators were taking bribes from the fraudsters while the fraud was going on. -
Show 51 - 65 of 65 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is