this is really just stealing

[KTP]

From an article on the foreclosure mess:

One case involved Sunny D. Eng, a former manager of computer systems on Wall Street. He and his wife, who has cancer, stopped paying the mortgage on their Holtsville, N.Y., home after Mr. Eng’s Internet services business foundered. The mortgage was originally held by the HTFC Corporation, but the foreclosure notice came from Wells Fargo, a bank that the Engs had no relationship with. They hired an experienced foreclosure defense lawyer on Long Island, Craig Robins. The court ultimately ruled in favor of Mr. Eng.

“You want to call it God, you can call it God,” Mr. Eng said. “You want to call it luck, you can call it luck. We just followed the system, and thank God the system worked.”


how did the system work??? if someone in your family develops cancer, then you get the right to steal from someone else? God condones this type of action?

[bjl584]

So basically, an error on behalf of the bank resulted in Mr. Eng to beat a foreclosure case against him, which allowed him to keep his house? He did nothing illegal, but something like that would weigh on my conscience.

[EEinNJ]

"Wells Fargo, a bank that the Engs had no relationship with".
There's a lot of details missing here, but perhaps the ruling was not whether the owed the money, but if Wells Fargo actually had the right to foreclose.

Whatever the case, the man's wife has cancer, his business failed, and eventually he'll loose his house. And you call him a thief? Perhaps life will kick you in the junk someday, and you'll develop some compassion. There but for the Grace of God....

[KTP]

If Wells Fargo decided out of compassion to give him the house, that would be one thing, but forced charity by the court system just doesn't seem quite right to me.

Besides, by using a technicality to cheat the bank out of a loan, he could be hurting the next little guy down the road who is applying for a loan for *his* new business. It just seems to me that everyone thinks it is such a great story because only the big evil bank is getting hurt and the little guy is winning.

[jpg7n16]

Link?

[KTP]

Link?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/11/business/11lawyers.html?amp

[jpg7n16]

I agree with one poster above... it just looks like the court put a stop to the foreclosure proceedings, not the outstanding debt.

Such concerns have, in recent months, brought a sharp focus on activities in New York State, and in particular on the practice of Mr. Baum, a lawyer in Amherst, outside Buffalo. Judges have cited his firm for what they call slipshod work that, in some cases, was followed by the dismissal of foreclosure actions.

One case involved Sunny D. Eng...

To me that reads:

"The quality of work by the lawyers prevented Wells Fargo from continuing with foreclosure proceedings."


Mr. Eng was not awarded absolvency of the debt in the court, only a stop to the foreclosure process. So I can't say that it was "stealing." More like 'postponing the inevitable.'

[Like2Plan]

How about this one?

Link to the Wall Street Journal article from DECEMBER 4, 2010 'The 25-Year 'Foreclosure From Hell'

[KTP]

How about this one?

Link to the Wall Street Journal article from DECEMBER 4, 2010 'The 25-Year 'Foreclosure From Hell'

Wow. I hope she appreciates the extra amount I have to pay on my mortgage to cover the loss the bank is taking on hers.

It really makes me wonder if perhaps the court system is now primed for manipulation on the right of the government to tax us. With these judges, it seems like it could be possible to get one to agree that the government does not have the right to levy taxes because of some improper paperwork somewhere (you know there has to be some sloppy paperwork *somewwhere* in the IRS).

Free houses and no taxes. It would be a great country.

[justinblake]

A think a foreclosure notice from the correct bank will still be coming. I don't want to think of Mr. Eng as a thief. Life had been hard on him. For now, he just needs to focus on caring for his wife.

[KTP]

A think a foreclosure notice from the correct bank will still be coming. I don't want to think of Mr. Eng as a thief. Life had been hard on him. For now, he just needs to focus on caring for his wife.

Maybe it will. We do not really know the facts of the case, although I suspect he is at least living rent free for awhile after the court case.

Put this in another perspective. What if you were renting out a house to a tenant and they stopped paying the rent. You gave them an eviction notice after whatever time is required by law and instead of vacating the premises, they sued in court claiming you do not have the right to evict them because of some legal reason their smart lawyer found. They continue to live in your house rent free for a number of years while you continue to pay the mortgage.

It gets a bit more real when it is your money and finances on the line, doesn't it?

[tripods68]

“When the consequence of a lawyer plying his trade is the loss of someone’s home, and it turns out there are documents being given to the courts that have no basis in reality, the profession gets a very big black eye,”

In November, a judge ordered Mr. Baum’s firm to pay nearly $20,000 in fines and costs related to papers that he said contained numerous “falsities.” The judge, Scott Fairgrieve of Nassau County District Court, wrote that “swearing to false statements reflects poorly on the profession as a whole.”

This is really troubling signs for the BIG BANKS and its LAWYERS they represent. I have no PITY on these guys who lies and making false documents to "trick" the public or the Courts that what they are doing are sensible or moral either. It goes both ways. The courts find them disgenenous and should use as EXAMPLE of what banks ought NOT to do and be PUNISHED accordingly.

[KTP]

This is really troubling signs for the BIG BANKS and its LAWYERS they represent. I have no PITY on these guys who lies and making false documents to "trick" the public or the Courts that what they are doing are sensible or moral either. It goes both ways. The courts find them disgenenous and should use as EXAMPLE of what banks ought NOT to do and be PUNISHED accordingly.

Oh I agree, and I would go along with punishing the banks who make false documents.

I would also punish the individuals who made false claims or documents when applying for a mortgage (overstating income, etc.). Lets see...that would be about 2,000,000 people in jail...could be a good work project (building more jails) to stimulate the economy.

[Mr Nice Guy]

Oh I agree, and I would go along with punishing the banks who make false documents.

I would also punish the individuals who made false claims or documents when applying for a mortgage (overstating income, etc.). Lets see...that would be about 2,000,000 people in jail...could be a good work project (building more jails) to stimulate the economy.

Your ROI of this argument is 0%. I mean, there are abuses everywhere! Why does this particular case vex you so? It grinds my gears too, but if you didnt bring it up, I wouldn't have wasted any of my time and neither would have you.

[cicy33]

From an article on the foreclosure mess:

One case involved Sunny D. Eng, a former manager of computer systems on Wall Street. He and his wife, who has cancer, stopped paying the mortgage on their Holtsville, N.Y., home after Mr. Eng’s Internet services business foundered. The mortgage was originally held by the HTFC Corporation, but the foreclosure notice came from Wells Fargo, a bank that the Engs had no relationship with. They hired an experienced foreclosure defense lawyer on Long Island, Craig Robins. The court ultimately ruled in favor of Mr. Eng.

“You want to call it God, you can call it God,” Mr. Eng said. “You want to call it luck, you can call it luck. We just followed the system, and thank God the system worked.”


how did the system work??? if someone in your family develops cancer, then you get the right to steal from someone else? God condones this type of action?

Actually the problem here is not the man who owns the house. It is the bank. They have not proven they own the loan. Surely you don't think they should be able to take this man's house unless they can prove they actually do own the loan. what if they were to win and then 3 years later another bank proved THEY were the ones who actually held the loan.

Now, it actuality they probably do but because people who work at these banks are not doing their jobs right the possibilities are there. If the proper documents were properly signed, notarized and filed this would not be an issue. Would you like it if someone claimed that they owned your house and produced false records to try and prove it? That is what banks are doing. They don't have the right paperwork cuz someone dropped the ball so they are "producing" the paperwork and hoping the owner of the house is not understanding of their rights. That is a serious crime.