The OFFICIAL Unofficial Achewood Message Board

Trivial Pursuits => Wild Card => Topic started by: fanta on August 19, 2010, 05:27:59 pm

Title: MERS
Post by: fanta on August 19, 2010, 05:27:59 pm: http://www.truth-out.org/homeowners-rebellion-recent-rulings-could-shield-62-million-homes-from-foreclosure62448
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: littlefallsmets on August 19, 2010, 05:34:40 pm: (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_fAcnUqjqh9Q/S-li7HhFxAI/AAAAAAAASJo/nBSD_8-FpeU/s400/seattle-pug-party-2010+089.jpg)
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: Arachno-capitalist on August 19, 2010, 05:39:08 pm: That seems kind of over-priced. $15 for a pug mug? $8 for a magnet? Come on.
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: Choop on August 19, 2010, 05:46:26 pm: (http://i.imgur.com/lef5N.jpg)
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: littlefallsmets on August 19, 2010, 05:53:11 pm: Quote from: Asherdan on August 19, 2010, 05:50:16 pm
(http://www.saynotocrack.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/darthpuppy.jpg)

Luke, I AM your puppy!
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: AugustWest on August 19, 2010, 05:55:26 pm: Quote from: fanta on August 19, 2010, 05:27:59 pm
http://www.truth-out.org/homeowners-rebellion-recent-rulings-could-shield-62-million-homes-from-foreclosure62448

Very interesting article. Although I don't think in the end it will have the effect of protecting these homes from foreclosure. It'll just make it more complicated and expensive to do. If MERS is only a nominee, then the real party in interest would be the originating bank that first wrote the mortgage. That bank would still have the contractual right to foreclose. What would then happen is MERS would have to track down who that bank was, start a foreclosure action in that bank's name, then forward the proceeds to the bank that purchased the mortgage. Which adds a bunch of administrative costs to the proceeding. Which the bank charges back to the person being foreclosed upon. Which sucks.
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: jay-ell on August 19, 2010, 06:52:09 pm: Pleez dont take mah haus

(http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/3779/pugzebrahouse.jpg) (http://img411.imageshack.us/i/pugzebrahouse.jpg/)

Itz all I haz
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: arkabee on August 19, 2010, 08:24:40 pm: there's an ad on this radio station herebouts that keeps telling me that if i'm in like 20 thousand dollars of credit card debt,

or more,

that there's stuff the credit card companies DON"T WANT ME TO KNOW

and that because of the bailouts i can cash in on my own bail out.

what this is doing is telling to go wrack up DEBT and fuck*ng bail on it.

because that's the american way.

not to wrack up debt and bail on it,
but to do the shit the ADVERTISEMENTS tell me to do.

i still gotta RESTRAIN MYSELF PHYSICALLY from buying stupid assed GI Joe Figures.
if i'm within 5 YARDS of nerf guns i look like the "hidden" nazi in Dr Strangelove.

good job america.
i'm coming home.
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: greenkoolayd on August 20, 2010, 01:36:59 am: Quote from: arkabee on August 19, 2010, 08:24:40 pm
there's an ad on this radio station herebouts that keeps telling me that if i'm in like 20 thousand dollars of credit card debt,

or more,

that there's stuff the credit card companies DON"T WANT ME TO KNOW

and that because of the bailouts i can cash in on my own bail out.

what this is doing is telling to go wrack up DEBT and fuck*ng bail on it.

because that's the american way.

not to wrack up debt and bail on it,
but to do the shit the ADVERTISEMENTS tell me to do.

i still gotta RESTRAIN MYSELF PHYSICALLY from buying stupid assed GI Joe Figures.
if i'm within 5 YARDS of nerf guns i look like the "hidden" nazi in Dr Strangelove.

good job america.
i'm coming home.

does that ever piss me off. also, local law firms always advertise that theyll help you fight the IRS over back taxes. seriously? you want to brag about how you owed the government 100,000 but you only payed them 7000? those same assholes that bitch about our trillions of dollars worth of debt are cocky because they cornholed the gov't.......
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: fanta on August 20, 2010, 06:08:08 am: Yeah I don't really understand this stuff AW. That article didn't quite bring it down to layperson's terms enough for me or maybe I wasn't trying very hard either. But still let me argue with you.

The notion that the bank which originated the mortgage has an interest seems to me like it might not work. In my mind, what I see is best expressed by an analogy:

I buy a car with a loan from my bank. The bank sells my loan to a finance company. The finance company records a lien on my car in the name of MERS. If I'm able to successfully assert that both MERS and the finance company don't have standing to enforce this lien, then the originating bank really doesn't come into the picture any more than the previous owner of the car comes into the picture. Both of these parties (the bank like the previous owner before it) have sold their interest in the car. The only two parties with a recorded interest in the car are myself (my name is on the title) and MERS (listed as lien holder). If the latter record is not valid... then by default, that leaves just me.

Normally I'd object to the concept of someone screwing a bank or finance company on a mere technicality and getting a house for free out of the deal, but in this case, if the finance company was participating in an illegal scheme to use MERS as a black market stock or securities exchange, I say, screw the finance companies because they should have known what they were doing was wrong and illegal.

But I'm sure there's more to it than that. If you can clarify it for me I'd certainly be interested and would appreciate it!
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: AugustWest on August 20, 2010, 01:33:26 pm: Well, I'm not real familiar with the details either. But it sounded like the Court said that MERS was only a nominee and not the real party in interest. That would mean that there still is a real party in interest -- likely the entity that transferred the mortgage to MERS. Bottom line, it seems to me that there's still a debt secured by a mortgage floating around out there. All this decision said is that MERS isn't the proper entity to enforce that mortgage.

Also, this is surely a looooong way from over. A bankruptcy court is about the lowest level of Federal Court -- lower than the District Court. A decision of this magnitude will almost certainly percolate at least two levels higher, through the District Court and to the 9th Circuit. Bankruptcy Courts are also funny because they have extensive equity powers -- that is, they've got wide authority to void or rewrite contracts in order to achieve justice for debtors and creditors. However, on appeal a higher court could find they've abused that discretion or overreached.

Finally, just from a pragmatic standpoint, I don't see the Courts flat out invalidating huge numbers of mortgages. They'll come up with some way to preserve the status quo. Just watch.
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: jaydub on August 20, 2010, 05:38:45 pm: A FoaF who's a doctor was bragging about how he got all these student loans to pay for his education through med school, then he declared bankruptcy as an intern. I felt like giving him a cockpunch, since now the public is on the hook for his debt. Meaning (in a sense) me.
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: arkabee on August 20, 2010, 06:25:09 pm: Quote from: jaydub on August 20, 2010, 05:38:45 pm
A FoaF who's a doctor was bragging about how he got all these student loans to pay for his education through med school, then he declared bankruptcy as an intern. I felt like giving him a cockpunch, since now the public is on the hook for his debt. Meaning (in a sense) me.

i was under the impression that IRS debt and student loan debt are the only two debts undischargable under bankruptcy.

unless he took out private, non-student loans. in which case, hey, there's another good example of what's gone wrong in our nation.

in a rare positive perspective: i know a couple of really nice, decent human beings who are doctors. our pediatrician appears to be a wallking Saint. i'm generally amazed everytime i deal with her that she didn't end up a veterinarian.

that being said, most doctors i've met are completely self-centerred arrogant shits. it seems that the "make someone a doctor process", much like the "make someone an elected official process", is designed to deter nice, reasonable, socially-capable people.
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: jay-ell on August 20, 2010, 06:51:02 pm: My thoughts perzactly. But then, I wonder if he'd really disagree...with some notable exceptions, of course.
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: fanta on August 20, 2010, 07:00:09 pm: cool thanks for the perspective AW yes I agree the status quo does seem to have a way of preserving it's self. This does seem like the last country in which to expect a communist-style wealth re-distribution doesn't it. Oh well we can always dream. On the plus side thanks for the primmer on bankruptcy court. That's interesting to know it's relative place in the hierarchy of courts.
Title: Re: MERS
Post by: JorgeFabregas on August 20, 2010, 07:08:11 pm: Quote from: arkabee on August 20, 2010, 06:25:09 pm
i was under the impression that IRS debt and student loan debt are the only two debts undischargable under bankruptcy.
I believe that student loans can be discharged in bankruptcy if you can prove that paying them back would impoverish you--as in, paying them back would put you under the poverty line.

The new income-based repayment plan for student loans seems pretty neat, but I am worried that it will drive up ridiculous tuition prices by injecting more funny money into the system.