Could not have said it better!

Are you sure you spelled that right, I was thinking "Douche Bank" xD

It just goes to show you where modern day "Corporate America" is, still in the stone age of "help thyself not thy neighbor". Kudos to the officers that left this woman in peace rather than in pieces. I pray her Daughter is alright.

Douch Bank.

Amen.

Thankfully, there are people in this world that have a heart ..! God Bless Ms. Lee and Happy Birthday ma'am ...!

We will now officially rename the bank from Deutsche Bank; to Douche Bank ...!

After seeing and hearing for weeks of police beating the crap out of occupiers, it is good to see them do something positive for a change. I know there are some good cops, but your bad ones seem to far outweigh any good that you do. Remember who you actually work for, the people, not the city, county, state or Federal Agencies. And certainly not the banks!

Deutsche Bank/Chase = poop stains

God bless those officiers for using common sense! What these officiers did or refused to do just amazed me, such a positive thing to do!! Makes me warm all over.

I'm all for people having to pay back what they borrow, but to evict a 104 YO woman just is'nt right. I know it's hard to do but geez Chase show a little compasion.

A 103-year-old woman and her 83-year-old daughter got a last-minute eviction reprieve when sheriff's deputies and movers decided they couldn’t uproot the women from their longtime Atlanta home

The 103 year old woman called her mom to complain about the &*^% Deutsche Bank!

Well it does show that not every Police officer is a mindless robot and have a heart well after all we all had or have a Mom ...

Sad situation but that is 2011. Nevertheless, some deputies are eventually bound to evict the women, unless, people pitch in and pay the bank or the bank will forgo any outstanding debt. All this nonsense about 'Douche Bank' and "... shove it up their fatherland." does not change the legal situation. Proponents of the 'Screw the bank' policy are proponents of anarchism, of lawlessness, and they should carefully evaluate their comments. I do not envy the deputies but, at the end of the day, age will not be a decisive factor, and somebody will have to move, evict or forgo debt. Hardly likely the bank will butch. Banks would open the floodgates for hundreds of other customers if they just looked the other side. We need policy makers (=honest politicians) to change financial regulations. We need a financial paradigm shift. The irresponsible scream "shove it" and "Douche Bank". That certainly will not lead to a solution but just further chaos. Banks must not be allowed to lend irresponsibly. Period.

These lawmen are to be commended. They kept their oath and protected and served those they swore to. Nice to see in this growing age of police militarism.

So...What is the age cut-off when the laws no longer matter? She had a mortgage on the property. Does this mean I am now exempt from payng what I owe on my property? What exactly is the age cut-of, so I can plan my future and stop paying my way through life?

That may have been one of the best things I have read today. Possibly ever. Happy birthday, miss Lee...

Dan, don't be a downer. People are just venting. Nothing in the banking/mortgage industry will change fast enough to help these two women. We can all sit around and contemplate our socio/economic navels later. I'm just glad they have a reprieve.

By the way, have you ever been 83 and tried to find a job that will let you sit down? And I'll bet that when this mortgage was made 50 years ago, it was done responsibly.

Did they have a 30 year mortgage?

Let us not condemn Police and Sheriff officers harshly. They have tough jobs to do and are under a lot of pressure. Sure, there are some bad or harrassing cops, but bad people are in any organization, and you can be sure they are the tiny minority that makes the noise and the news. The deputies did a fine and praiseworthy thing, but they are going to take heat for not carrying out an order. Either the banks can find some solution to help out these two elderly women, or there might be citizens who can help out, because it is true as Dan 962925 said, the law must eventually be carried out, or changed.

@Space oooo

First off, I think that your monikor reflects what is between your ears. Secondly, the new name stands, Jewish owned or not.

Thank you deputies and movers.

After seeing and hearing for weeks of police beating the crap out of occupiers, it is good to see them do something positive for a change.

I would bet that these 2 ladies were, exactly that, ladies. They probably were civil & gracious and I would bet that they didn't throw crap at them or call them names either. They asked only for understanding and mercy, they received just that.

Cops for the most part are fine people with a very difficult job. What I saw of the so called beating of the occupiers was provoked and well deserved.

Thanks again to our law enforcement folks, Job Well Done Deputies!

good cops do their jobs and evict poor old ladies even if they dont pay!! what about the young women who get evicted cause they spent their money or drugs, gambling etc... they need a house too why not just let them not pay their mortgage too LMAO what a bunch of cry babies thinking the banks owe you something cause you agree to take a loan and pay x$'s and you just dont pay for 2 years and now they are the horrible douche bags that evict someone who wont pay just cause shes old? KICK HER OUT!!

The mortgage was taken out by her for a "relative'. It was for $17500. She has paid ZERO on it. The bank foreclosed as is their right, according to the laws of GA. With any luck, the sheriff will be thrown out of office for failing to do his job. All he has done is set a very bad precedent...Ignore the law and let people stay in property they do not own, or have a right to be on.

So nice to see there are some police out there that believe in doing what is right instead of just what they are told to do.

The article says the problem goes back "years", but even if the two old ladies were scammers, the banks should have realized the impact of bad press. The only was the bank could have made it worse was to schedule the eviction 12/24. Hope the officers don't get into any trouble for not carrying through on orders.

Just because you have the right to do something (foreclose on old ladies) doesn't mean you should do it (result - bad press). Another case in point - just because you can build a mosque near the NYC 9/11 site (having legal ownership of property & complying w/ zoning & construction regs) doesn't mean you should do it (result - offense with a Christian majority nation that was attacked).

I seriously doubt anyone at the bank knows this woman is 103. While I support the police not removing her, those of you bashing the bank for it's actions are leaning toward the idiotic. She's nothing more than a name and address on their books, like it or not, and being treated the same as her middle aged white counterpart that bought a house he couldn't afford.

The law is the law and has to be enforced. But the law of common sense and decency trumps the other law always. I am very proud of the deputies who followed this second law. Deutsche Bank will have to do a lot of covering up to repair its reputation.

The real douche bag here is not deutche bank, it's hotpeppa. Must work for a bank in collections and forgot what it's like to be a decent human being

While it makes for a heartwarming story, why does she get a free pass? If you do not pay for something, why should you get to keep it?

@ Robert Cascadden

If you are going to pass along information it would be nice of you to supply the source of that information to the rest of us who don't have your incite so that we can check out your 'facts'. Merely stating something as fact doesn't make it a fact. From where did you get your facts?

All this nonsense about 'Douche Bank' and "... shove it up their fatherland." does not change the legal situation.

And nothing in the bank's thinking (which largely isn't getting a sympathy vote from the people, because the people were left having to bail them out even as they went to foreclose on houses that the banks didn't even have a mortgage on, at the wrong address, and many moves BofA among others have done) changes the situation with the laws of nature.

And it's a given that neither the 104 year old woman, or her 83 year old daughter would have an estate that could be assesed upon the end of a very long life either. And without that, the bank WILL HAVE TO suck it up, because simply put, they physically can't take a deceased person before the judge. None of this crossing over with Jonathan Edwards, or other such mumbo jumbo one sees on Sci-Fi channel, judges wouldn't want to be witnessed holding a kangaroo court of cross examining mediums supposedly conjuring up the deceased mother's spirit. It would go over about the same as the time the RIAA tried to sue an 80 year old deceased granny who didn't even know how to use a computer in life, for file sharing. When people pass on, they're no longer, lets just say under the jurisdiction of any court here on Earth, and if the bank doesn't like that, they can just try screaming at the universerse, or mother nature itself, if they think it will do them any good.

Now in this, physics and biology sort of has the final say; because there are some matters (such as over life and death itself), that we, as humans have no say whatsoever. I'd say, that in doing the write thing, the deputies have pretty much weighed in fairly heavily and the bank will have to sort of suck it up and move on. Because if this individual is as frail as is being suggested, and if the stress of an eviction was enough to send the daughter to the hospital in need of medical attention; it suggests individuals who might not have long left in this world. In truth, moving them in that state, would suggest the mentality of heartless beasts, who perhaps would be very deserving of a harsh end themselves....

But this is where human law comes to an end, because there is one thing humans can't change, and that's the law of nature itself in such regards. We have to accept the natural order of things, which includes birth and death. As it goes, rich or poor, whether your Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, or one of the untouchables in India, considered too lowly to be mentioned in the caste system; when it comes to the end, there is one unescapeable truth. This lifetime will come to an end at some point, and the body will be buried six feet under. The bank can't try to change this, and it likely won't be long before they'll have that house anyway. Unless they'd like to suspend the laws of nature, and try to sue the universe, for what would be defined as an "act of God" because they can't pressure a corpse to pay a bill. In the end, it's mother nature who has her say, and we as humans simply don't have the power to veto or dispose with natural consequences themselves. It's a bit beyond the domain of our own courts. Nor would any sane judge or jury try to hold a trial over the dead, or "naure" because someone is soon to die of natural causes.

At that point, the bank will either end up with another property in it's long line of houses it can't dump in the current real estate market, or they'll be going after the short sale. And the particulars (we're assuming she had a mortgage and didn't pay, but the news item didn't go into that, even while BofA and others had foreclosed on houses not under mortgage before), and why she didn't have the money (was it her own frivalousness, or signs of a larger economic issue), we won't know. Nor would we need to, no judge is going to require someone too frail to be moved, to have to stand trial in his own court. There is a point where a judge will say "they're not long for this world, and what comes after the moment of passing, isn't for me to rule on. I have no jurisdiction over the dead..."

Also keep in mind, that evicting them (and having the issue of responsibility to the health and safety of the public to mind), that under these circumstances, the only place to send them would be either a hospital or nursing home; where invariably they would have to be placed on Medicaid, and get paid by the federal government anyhow. One couldn't ask a 104 year old lady to go to work in her last days; and I seriously doubt the state officials would send her onto the streets, whatever they did in this. It would be leave her there, or make Uncle Sam pay $80,000 for a few months nursing home stay, with no next of kin who could pick up the bill.... That would make it bank of tax payers, and in this the state would probably step in and apply for federal money if they had to place her into nursing care after removing her from the home for what might only be a few weeks or months anyhow....

For those of you who did not know, the family says they have the money and that Chase won't accept payment. That's why its "been in court for years."

So, this is a dirty move by a big bank that knows the house is worth WAAAAY more than the $17,000 loan.

From what I've read, it sounds like there should have been an elder abuse investigation into how a mortgage was taken out in the first place.

So the banks who got bailed out numerous times wants to evict the elderly. I'm glad those gentlemen showed a heart and let her be. Not to many people in this would r that kind. I hope she lived to be 110 to stick it to the banks for another 6 years.

What these elderly ladies need is a good attorney to take on their case pro bono and for the local media to send out a call for help for them from the community. A fund can be set up to receive donations to get them straight with their mortgage. There is no reason that fellow Americans should stand by and let things like this happen to the elderly. Next, we all need to contact our Congress members and let them know that we will not stand for Banks taking advantage of our elderly or our military service personnel. I recently read an article that said thousands of homes were illegally foreclosed on military families while serving overseas. This disgraceful practice must be stopped and laws passed to protect these vulnerable people. It is not a case of being "fair", it is a case of human decency.

I applaud the Sheriff Deputies for refusing to carry out this non-sense.

Yeah, hotpeppa is an employee at DouchebagBank, and should change his/her screen name to douchepeppa. Yeah, let's just throw an 83 and 103(almost 104) year old ladies out on the street, F**K 'Em, they were old enough to know better. And for those of you who really believe that cops "work for you" you are living in a delusional dream world. While it is true that you pay their salary, they do no work for you. Need proof, drive through a really rich neighborhood and stop in front of a big mansion. Need more proof, have you ever got police protection because you were going to be out in public? Maybe because you were giving a speech. If you are not a Politician or very rich, the cops do not work for you, as you are considered guilty until you prove your self innocent. These cops on this day however, did prove to be human, and kudos to them for there excellent judgement in this case.

Showing human decency IS being fair.

You people make me laugh. You whine and cry when banks get federal bailouts, but it doesn't seem to occur to you where that money comes from. You geniuses! When banks lend someone money, they have a legal responsibility to pay it back. If they can't do it, they should not take the money. If you lent someone $100 I bet you'd expect to be paid back. Why shouldn't banks be paid back for lending people tens of thousands of dollars.

While it makes for a heartwarming story, why does she get a free pass? If you do not pay for something, why should you get to keep it?

She won't be keeping it, for long from the sound of it. The article is a little short on details, but from the sound of it, she's in extremely poor health, and they did mention fragile. Going on 104, she might not have long left for this world. The Egyptians tried to "take it with them" in death, it didn't work as such, and instead those tombs met grave robbers who figured they'd find some free loot.

The flip side is if the deputies did evict her, and she has no where else to go (no remaining family who could take her in); they're very unlikely to send a person who is barely able to take care of themself due to advanced age, onto the street. That is the point where the board of human services could step in. So now the choice is, move her, but to where. The likely outcomes is a hospital or a nursing home, with no ability to pay either. Or leave her where she is, for what little time she has left, before death to natural causes occurs. She's at the point where probably all that's left to be done is make one comfortable; because the hope of prolonging life, or making it more productive is since spent.

I imagine, though don't know (because we don't have the details) that she probably did have SOMETHING for retirement; but that beyond the age of 100, her life savings was since spent. They tell people to save for their old age, but with the average life expectancy sitting around 72 for guys, and 83 ladies (and it was shorter a century ago without the advances we since made in medicine), who among us would predict that we're going to outlive most everyone we know by some 20 to 30 years. Or that we have an extra 30 years beyond our contemporaries to plan for?

Now if they do move her, into a nursing home, those places are pricey. At 85 my father had to go to one, my mother couldn't take care of him anymore. This was only 5 months before the end, and the bill came to $80,000. With no next of kin, no family to call on, human resources would have to send this up to Medicaid, and ask the federal government to assist the state. Evicting her, from the police's standpoint, would mean the state takes responsibility. If she's extremely frail (and keeping in mind that police powers does cover matters of public safety), leaving her there for what little time she might seem to have left, could be less honorous, then moving her to a nursing care facility, and then giving the tax payer a massive medical bill to cover her end of days and hospice care.

For those of you who did not know, the family says they have the money and that Chase won't accept payment. That's why its "been in court for years."

So, this is a dirty move by a big bank that knows the house is worth WAAAAY more than the $17,000 loan.

From what I've read, it sounds like there should have been an elder abuse investigation into how a mortgage was taken out in the first place.

If that's the case, they haven't a leg to stand on; and the rest of this becomes harassment. A judge could order them to take payment for what's do, and then order the matter closed. If a creditor refuses to accept the money, it's not the other parties fault. Now, where this account would be comming from however, I know not; so can only provide this on an "if it's so" basis....

Looked like a nice house. I was wondering if the ladies couldn't have gotten a reverse mortgage. Someone here said they had a loan of $17,500 that they took out for a relative and wasn't repaying. Seems a reverse mortgage would be the way to go in this case. That relative doesn't deserve inheriting the house anyways.

BTW, Did Chase sell the note to Deutsche Bank and continue to just act as a collection agency for Deutsche Bank? Did Chase write the original loan knowing they were going to sell the note releasing them of all risk? This is why we need strong regulation back.

As Americans, let's chip in, pay the bank, and let that be the end of it.

If I had the money I will by it and let her live in it free for every (her death). I am should that some one out there have the money to do just that can a locate bank set up an account for her and I will be glad to make donation.

Rednawt's got it right. Whoever expected their 84 and 103 year old elders to take out a loan on their behalf is a poor relative indeed. The 84 year old would be lucky to outlive the reverse mortgage, but then again, if her mother lived to 103, so might she.

I wonder if they have past due taxes as well. At 50 year of ownership, without a second mortgage to consider, the 2-5k per year in taxes in some locations is bad enough.

Maybe someone like George Clooney or Sean Penn can swoop in and help them out, or a wealthy philanthropist from their state. Nobody should lose a house they paid off 20 years ago when they have reached such an advanced age. Who can blame her for wanting to die in her own home....but then there is the daughter, who I hope is in line to inherit it. The bank probably should have checked the mental faculties of 100 year old woman wanting a home equity loan to make sure there was not some kind of elder abuse and neglect going on.

This little lady got behind on her mortgage (refinance). The house went into foreclosure. They scrapped up the money to pay off the loan AND THE BANK REFUSED (said too late). The bank should be ashamed of themselves and I appreciate the cops not evicting this little woman. Shame on the bank.

@ hotpeppa

Evidently the bank approved a loan that they knew that she couldn't pay. Or, most likely, the house is not worth what the bank (and the realtors who work with these banks) say that it WAS worth. Same situation all over the U.S.

People who would normally pay their mortgage have quit paying their mortgage because their home isn't worth what the bank says that it is worth. The bank says that the value of a home is what it is by having approved the loan and holding that house as collateral agiainst the value of the loan.

The banks are the main contributors to the devaluation of these homes. They are dumping their repossessed houses on the market and selling them, in some cases, for pennies on the dollar which is driving down the value of the surrounding houses (homes) in the neighborhood. This is being done all over this country. If the banks are selling their repossessed houses for pennies on the dollar, then they are showing that the mortgage value of these repossessed houses wasn't worth what the owners had been paying. By the actions of the banks it appears that the actions of the mortgage holders who have walked away from their mortgages was justified.

The Sheriff Deputies should get a Great Big Pat On The Back ! Can they do a REV MORTGAGE in that state ? The house as to have some Equity to give the lady and still do the Rev Mortgage. Add the daughters name if it is not on the mortgage so she can have a home for her remaining days. And the family member that is stiffing the mom(lady) should go to jail. It sounds like mom (lady) did somebody a favor and that somebody backed out. Sorry*** Family member!

"If you are going to pass along information it would be nice of you to supply the source of that information to the rest of us who don't have your incite so that we can check out your 'facts'. Merely stating something as fact doesn't make it a fact. From where did you get your facts?"

It's simple to find the info...just use any search engine. But since that seems too hard for some, here you go:http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/103-year-old-woman-1245741.html, and http://systemwars.com/forums/index.php?/topic/85822-cops-refuse-to-evict-103-year-old-woman-and-her-83-year-old-daughter-from-her-home/

There you go. She used her home as collateral for a loan to her deadbeat relative, and failed to repay. At what age can I just decide to stop paying my way through life?

The home is inthe grandson's name, he is the only bad guy in this story

Gee, some of the stuff I'm reading on this is really surprising me. Hopefully somebody reading this is an attorney and help these poor ladies SUE for HARASSMENT !! All $17,500.... Chase is already in trouble. Just add this to the list.

I hope those officers don't get into any trouble for not carrying out the orders. Morally they did the right thing! Good job guys :)

Proponents of the 'Screw the bank' policy are proponents of anarchism, of lawlessness, and they should carefully evaluate their comments.

Really? Lawlessness? Those of us who have sour feelings about the Big Banks just want them to show a little common sense. This is what happens when the mortgages are approved via Robo-Signing.

If what Mitt Romney claims is true, that "corporations are people too" (news flash...they're not!), we'd just like to see them be a little more human when it comes to ridiculous things like this!

Tiredofsilly

While it makes for a heartwarming story, why does she get a free pass? If you do not pay for something, why should you get to keep it?

She is 103. She will die at sometime. She can't take the property with her. Her daughter will then have time to herself, and can make arrangements to move elsewhere. The house belongs to the bank, but I'll bet that there's not a long line of people waiting to buy it, and those that are, can just wait a little longer; it's not like the housing market is hot again.

GOD!

Most likely the cops will return next week and force her out of there with no press coverage. As the papers and news are in the hands of the 1% we will not be told when it happens.

Our stock market just went up 500 points for the 1% because we are going to use our 99% money to bail out other banks and mortgage outfits in other countries. We have no say, we get no opportunity to control our government, we elect people who sell-out to the rich corporate giants as soon as they get into Washington.

As long as the government keeps us under control with welfare, food stamps, disability payments, unemployment etc...we will keep taking it and following orders. The cops will drag her out, they are bound to obey the bankers. They forgot who was in charge for a few minutes...but they will get back in line...we all will.

I just emailed Douche Bank ah I mean Deutsche Bank in Germany - they just got nasty grams in Geman....Usually there are more social than that in Germany - DB has a reputation for being arrogant in Germany - I felt that was the least I could do for the poor lady - If any of you know of a fund that got started for her let me know - I'll pitch in

Seriously?

You are going to hassle a bank, the poor minimum wage workers, when this is completely the grandson's fault?

The women don't even own the home.

Reading the added information from the comments I've come to the conclusion the bank is still Douche Bank.

Soon to be 104! Way to go granny. 99% are behind you.

come on now, we can help that lady and her daughter, I know money is tight. If all of us on here would donate something $10.00 and others would help to they would be okay for awhile. Thank God they didn't evict her.It is still some good people in the world..

If people donate money, then it simply would help out the grandson who actually owns the house and who failed to pay the mortgage and put the women in this situation.

They cant take out a reverse morgage since the house and loan are in the grandsons name.

Thank God for people with a heart. I hope that there will be a charity that can be set up for this lady and her daughter. I am praying that the daughter who was taken to the hospital will be okay because the thought of this women living there by herself is horrible. Perhaps someone from the commumnity can step in to help. Where the hell is social services at when you need those people!!!

Good I hope that she lives another 10 years just to stick it up the banks @$$

Social services would be the people who would have been called to wheel granny away if the cops hadn't decided to not deal with it.

Medicare, and probably Medicaid, will cover the costs of putting these women into assisted living.

It's not like they were going to be turned out on the street.

I want to know where is OPRAH?? Where is any of these RICH movie/singers that spend 17K on a purse? I think its time for these so called music ARTIST and ACTORS to give back in this country instead of other Countries. We need the charity just as much as Africa, Guam, or ANY place else.

Only in the USA would be throw out a 104 yr old and pardon a turkey!!!

Come on Pitt/Jolie or Paris help an old women out!!!!

"As Americans, let's chip in, pay the bank, and let that be the end of it."

Sir Andrew Bruskin, as Americans, how many more times should we bailout these banks? Nothing like giving them our tax money to "bail them out", so they can turn around and "kick us out". Maybe they should be thankful, they even have a business yet.

Well, I went back to reread the article, clicked on the live link. Still no reporting on a deadbeat grandson owning the house but this interesting tid-bit was there and I think someone else commented about it:

"For now, Hall remains in the home. State Senator Vincent Fort told Young on Wednesday that the loan is held by Deustche Bank but is being serviced locally by Chase. Family members said they had enough money to pay the loan, but were having a difficult time getting Chase to accept a payment."

Why won't Chase take the money??? Now I have to support all the comments here against the banks. I hope OWS grows to millions. We need to take back our country from the banks and wall street before it is too late and before there is blood-shed more than what the police are causing now.

Were probably worried that the trauma of moving her forcibly would kill her, or like the daughter send her to the hospital.

I think there ARE situations where you have to say "you know what, the normal rules just don't apply here", and come up with something else. This is one of them.

According to your mortgage contract, at a certain point, you must completely pay back all the back-owed money before you can continue to pay your month-to-month mortgage payment. This is completely normal.

The last date that the grandson could have caught up with the mortgage and continue paying it was in March of 2009, almost two years ago.

Now, their only chance of keeping the house would be to pay the loan in full, not just the back-owed amount. This would also include paying any court costs and foreclosure fees.

The fact remains that this process has been going on for at least two years, and probably more like four years.

At any point up until that March date, they could have made good.

Now, it is simply too late and the bank needs to cut its losses and evict.

It said the family had the full amount but Chase was refusing it! $17,000, while a lot of money fir some of us, it isn't all that much to think they couldn't come up with it.

Above was a comment leaning to, why should she get off? Well the answer lies in the number 104. Do you believe that she attempted not to pay? Wake up. That very attitude is why our society is where we are today. Get the facts, she tried to pay and was told to late. Would anyone want to see her evicted because she responded to late. She again had the money attempted to pay and was refused by Douche Bag Bank.

For all the bank supporters. The woman who blew the whistle on banks illegally foreclosing. Just happens to drop dead before sentencing. But no foul play of course.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/29/9099162-foreclosure-fraud-whistleblower-found-dead

While we can all sympathize with the woman and her daughter, what happens when lenders and landlords refuse to loan or rent houses to elderly people because they can't enforce the contract?

Apparently they have lived there for years without paying - at what point does it become unfair to the lender or the landlord who depends on the rent for their own support?

This is not the full article. In this case, MSNBC has done a really poor job reporting the facts obviously with the underlying intent of stirring up negative sentiments.

The 103 year old woman in question does not actually own the house. The deed is currently under her grandson's name and that's who took out the mortgage. As such, there is no way for the Bank to know who is living there since Banks do not have access to the IRS or social security databases to find out who is listing what as their primary address. As far as they know, the grandson is the owner and hasn't been paying the mortgage since 2008. This is pretty typical of a landlord/tenant foreclosure situation. Now that they know who is living there, Chase Bank is currently working on letting her and her 83 year old daughter stay in their home.

Read the following from ABC news and see for yourself.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/11/police-movers-refuse-to-evict-103-year-old-woman/

It is very wonderful to finally hear that our community servants did what they are paid to do and that is to serve and protect not to let thier ego's get in the way and harrass.

To many are trying to be the hero and has an oppisite effect

Family members said they had enough money to pay the loan, but were having a difficult time getting Chase to accept a payment.

Because the loan in question has been in litigation for several years. It is common for things like asset or liens freeze to occur when it goes to court. Basic legal knowledge.

Lets all of us help these ladies. Pennies and dollars can pay her debt. Does anyone know how to do this.

God Bless the officers and movers for taking the milk of human kindness out of the deep freeze!!!

thats the problem with this country, people are trying to put legality and money before people. yeah, stuff happens like this and they couldnt pay up, but she is over 100 years old, leave her be. when she passes she said you can have it so just take that

We need policy makers (=honest politicians) to change financial regulations.

And I need a pet unicorn. I'll get my unicorn before you get your honest politician.

what about the young women who get evicted cause they spent their money or drugs, gambling etc... they need a house too why not just let them not pay their mortgage too

Let's see... maybe because the young crack-whores are physically capable of WORKING?

If a creditor refuses to accept the money, it's not the other parties fault.

Can't that even negate the debt in some cases?

Because the loan in question has been in litigation for several years. It is common for things like asset or liens freeze to occur when it goes to court. Basic legal knowledge.

Even then, how can they evict for nonpayment when it is the bank that is actually responsible for that nonpayment?

Most people that leave comments here are morons.The bank is just looking for their right and the sheriff didn't do his job.All the people here are heartless.Instead of leaving anarchist comments ,I call onto people on this forum to find out and call the police in that city and find out how can we send some money on her behalf and help the poore old lady out.That is what I gonna do.I'm not rich and I work for living but I can skip a meal or work an extra 2-3 hours and try to send some money.If we all did a little bit together I know we can make a difference for that lady.I know that a lot of people need help but this lady needs it most.She is 104 and can't just go out and get a job. Let's help people.YES WE CAN!!!!

You can rest assured that the chain of security is broken , and the Bank is fraudulently foreclosing ! she , and her daughter , need a good attorney .

anybody who say's:if they're evicted can i have the gift's under her tree...or ...to the dog house with them...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKtwlHV1-O8

I think the officers who let this lady stay in her house should all be commended and given an award for Christ sake !! This lady is gonna be a 104 years old and they are trying to throw her in the street to take possession of her home and I just don't understand. For example the Federal Government says that if a bank has a million dollars in borrowing power based on deposits in their customers (you and I) savings/checking accounts, if they foreclose on a property and they take it back with an unpaid note of $250K that means by federal law they have to reduce their borrowing power down to $750K to cover the note. So you can see if they take back to many homes their borrowing power can go down to zero and that would be bad for the banks because making small simple interest loans is where they make all their money (profit) in the form of interest on loans they made borrowing their customers money (You and I). So I have never heard of a story of a bank in such a hurry to put a home on their books so quick to lower their borrowing power. This is the reason you hear and read more and more stories of people living in theirs homes for 3+ years rent free cause the banks are in no hurry to get them on the books. And whats worse is this poor woman is 104 and obviously not in good health and won't be with much longer. I think everyone should picket out in front of this bank about cruel they are and just boycott them till they go out of business because they obviously are morally bankrupt as a bank and a business and that's the bottom line !!

While the bank is in the right (legally), the smart (PR) thing for them to do is 'make a deal' for the elderly woman and her daughter to stay if they can make the payments. Nobody wins when the bank has to take a house back, and this is now a public relations disaster for the bank.

PS - This woman and her daughter are not the owners, and have no legal right to the property - the house belongs to a relative, and the relative is the one not making payments. These poor people are just caught in the middle.

I suspect the bank can sue the police officers for damages the bank incurs as a result of the failure to enforce the laws. We're supposed to be a nation of laws, not emotions.

Leave the woman to die in peace in the house she has spent most of her life in. At least the officers have a heart.

the bank is only in the right , if the chain of security is NOT broken ..... I think she needs a securitization search .... immediatley ..... and a good lawyer .

the bank is holding unsecured debt , which has most likely already been paid with third party proceeds , FDIC write downs , adjustments for appraisal fraud etc ...... after going through discovery , a judge might just rule that the "unsecured note" has already been satisfied .

Most comments makes you proud your are an American. We can help her more by getting in touch with our Gov. leaders. When I read how much they have taken in donations, it maes me sick. And what they don't spend they get to keep. With all the wealth so many people have, you would think they would come forward

and help these two ladies out. I don't donate to campaigns. Instead, I help people who live in my small town whenever I can. And we have churches who carry food in to those who need it. We also have Senior Citizens that help out where it is needed. Dear God, I hope people in that town do all they can for these two. And bless you all for your heartfelt comments.

Hi Only in America-2604171,

Sir Andrew Bruskin, as Americans, how many more times should we bailout these banks? Nothing like giving them our tax money to "bail them out", so they can turn around and "kick us out". Maybe they should be thankful, they even have a business yet.

Thank you for commenting. It is not about bailing the bank out. That would be using taxpayer funds, which I am not advocating. I am urging community, grassroots action. The fact remains there is still a loan that is outstanding. Someone used their money to give this family a loan. There are plenty of good-hearted people though in this world who will help the two elderly women out. Successful fundraising happens all the time--it just does not make the news.

If you are really interested and want to inquire about if there is a way you can help the women, the regional office is in New York City: 212 250 2500. Another recourse would be to petition the bank to rescind the loan, which they may, or may not do. It's all how much pressure is applied on the bank. If you are a shareholder, write to management or call the headquarters in Germany: Tel.: +49 69 910-00 or the regional office in New York. I'll try calling/writing tomorrow.

You can't push someone if there are 50 people holding that person from being pushed. The same is true here.

Hello all.

It seem to me there are people here that know more about this than the people reporting the story to us. I hope that they get to keep the house. As for the bank, tisk tisk tisk. I hope that they end up in a really bad place. And the people that have their money in their institution take their money elsewhere, I know I would. Greedy corporate America. (Just my opinion)

To Wayne,

Legal and moral are not necessarily the same thing. Ethically, one should go with his moral choice. As a long-time teacher of a Holocaust course, I can say a lot about ethics, morality, and law. At some point in this country, we have to choose. We were once a service country and today, we are driven by profit only. Many foreclosures are driven by profit-driven orders -- but even now, paperwork is under nationally editorial review for errors and eronesous stampings. Lots of words don't make right nor do they make sense.

I skim-read War And Peace faster than the SuperEncyclopedia THE WAY IT IS. I only read 80 paragraphs into it, and then decided to take a bath.

Rex stated: "Most people that leave comments here are morons."

And you just left yours Rex. How does it feel to be something that you called everyone else?

Sir Andrew stated: "Thank you for commenting. It is not about bailing the bank out. That would be using taxpayer funds, which I am not advocating. I am urging community, grassroots action. The fact remains there is still a loan that is outstanding. Someone used their money to give this family a loan"

But remember, it was stated that they HAVE the money to pay it off, but the bank would not take it. So if the bank isn't going to take their money, why would they even think about taking it from someone else? No, I think this goes beyond being wrong, it's more like criminal.

Years ago, about a year after my husband passed away, I was looking into having a house built on one of my lots. I found someone who drew up a plan, and went to the bank to see about a loan. I was going to put most of the money down but take a loan for about $20,000. The bank wouldn't talk to me. I was a widow, didn't have a JOB (tho I had an income) and was over 50 years of age.

That was about 23 years ago. I still have income-- never did lose that. I did go buy a double-wide mobile home-- paid cash for it. I never have done business with that bank since. Gone into the building, since there are other offices on the other two floors, but never gone into the bank itself.

I figured that bank didn't need my business then and doesn't need it now.

This is a GOOD story! One, of compassion and caring for ones fellow man. It comes at a good time too; right-smack-dab in between Thanksgiving and Chruistmas. God Bless those sherrif's deputies, and the moving men who walked away. Good karma is sure to follow them all for the rest of their lives.

I just want to point out as a former resident of atlanta that the APD have always amazed me at how compassionate they are towards the people they serve. This is just one more example of how they deserve levels of trust I wouldn't give officers anywhere else.

The above report is not even close to being complete. There is a link above (ABC I believe) that gives more background. It is the old gals son who took out the loan against the house. It appears that he doesn't give a crap about his mom or sister. He probably took the money and ran, and you want to blame the lender???

It is obvious that MSNBC news doesn't know shlt about telling the truth by telling the whole story, but only about seeking reader sympathy based only upon cherry picked emotions.

The son created this mess and left mom and daughter in the lurch.

I give kudos to the officers who followed their morals as apposed tp the legalities of the law. They will sleep well. To the people who are the naysayers, I hope you never find yourselves in their position. I do believe you would not be as gracious as these two elderly ladies have been.

Although I sympathize with this elderly woman but as some have stated: the woman had a loan that has to be paid back, if she cannot pay it back, whether she is 22 or 102 she owes on a debt. There are so many that cry out that the police did a great job by not enforcing the move but then they may lose their job for not following their orders and the law. I have not heard anyone say that they would hire those police officers when they get fired......nor will they.

Just because she is 104 does not mean anything, she owes on a debt and her family should have cared enough to help her deal with it or pay it off for her. Bottom line is this economy is hurting badly and if there are enough "well she is old" or "she will be dead soon" or "she has had a tough life" or "insert sob story here" then this country will continually keep getting deeper and deeper in debt.

My two cents worth

Guarantee you that these two women have been freeloaders their entire life = always got their hand out and expecting others to pay for them. Especially at the ages they are = no decent person, raised during the time they were raised would ever bring this much shame on themselves or family name. Just goes to show you that they are not and never was worth anything = never had any pride or decency.

I don't understand this line of reasoning. What it is it that you think these women should have done that would have been honorable, Mr. No Excuses. What action should they have made that would display to you that they have pride or decency in themselves?

Disabled Vet, the women no longer own the home and they themselves didn't owe the money, their grandson did. http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/103-year-old-woman-1245741.html

I would be willing to bet money these woman ARE paying to live in that house. I am sorry Mr. Way It Is, this issue has no reflection upon the morality, decency or pride of these two women. They have absolutely NOTHING to be ashamed of.

This article was written poorly and it is very misleading. I feel MORE sorry for people that would condemn these women without knowing the entire story. It say's a great deal about their lack of compassion towards others. It says a great deal about YOUR morality, decency and pride in yourselves. If you felt good about yourself you wouldn't so quick to dishonor others. People need to heal themselves before they can help heal others.

The state is going to have to move these women into a facility so the bank and take back what is rightfully theirs and its all the grandson's fault. How sad.

What exactly is the value of pride at 104? I imagine she just wants to be warm, and a little quiet. She lived there for 50 years, and apparently paid the house off once, and she's a freeloader?

oh lord , won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz

I'm relatively sure that the only reason Chase and Deusche Bank could foreclose .... is because her grandson didn't fight it , just like he didn't make the payments .

That still doesn't mean that the bank has any legal standing to foreclose , these fraudulent foreclosures have to stop !!! the laws in this country should apply to everyone equally . either the bank has legal standing or they don't , I assume it's a non judicial foreclosure state .... might as well assume , that's what some of the contributors here are doing .

they should sue the title company and the Banks for quiet title .

This story reminds of a heart-warming documentary I once saw about an elderly woman in a very similar situation whose grandson took up professional golf to pay off her house . . . . oh wait, that was Happy Gilmore . . . nevermind.

Amen Will!

It took some strong character on the part of each of them to refuse, in favor of showing respect and compassion for someone who has made it to this age. This is especially if they were to receive any type of formal reprimand or other negative consequence. Good job officers!

Ridiculous, how many people on here would be so sympathetic if they loaned a large amount of money to someone and they didn't pay it back. Who cares who loaned it, its a business. This has been going on for years and she has owned the house for 50 years! So she hasn't paid in years! Man it would be great if I just threw all responsibility out the window and some nice police officers let me steal from banks and live for free.

Like you get a freaking pass for being old, give me a break. If I rob a bank when I'm 100 i'm still going to jail.

Poor thing...she already is looking like a mummy. Mark one up for Organize Wall Street and the 98% ! People concerned about people and we are gaining ground by a point.......

thank god there are some kind hearted people left in this world.... This woman has probably seen more grief,heartache,love,death,sorrow and pride than any pencil pushin Douche Bag sitting on their rear-end in that place of corporate greed. May god Bless Her

Realistic: You need to get a life!!!

Amen to that Didi.... Maybe if Realistic was 104 and frail he would understand it better. He is just one of those fools that supports Corporate America...

Ridiculous, how many people on here would be so sympathetic if they loaned a large amount of money to someone and they didn't pay it back. Who cares who loaned it, its a business.

This is the same thought pattern (but not necessarily yours, Realistic - don't take this personally) that I see on here all the time trying to justify the proposals to deny medical care to the sick and the elderly, turning poor people out into the street, and denying 'entitlements' such as SS to the old retirees. What a wonderful, caring nation we're becoming. (Sarc)

These deputies should be applauded. Likely the bank will relent and 'generously' forgoe their action when the public outcry reaches their piglike ears.

Realistic - If I loaned someone a large sum of money and they didn't pay it back I might go bankrupt. Deutche Bank and Chase are two of the largest banks in the world and it doesn't look like the loan on that house could be that much. I hardly think their corporate officers in their 10,000 square foot mansions are going to be out on the street because the Fulton County Sheriff's Department refused to throw a 104 year old woman out on the street. The banks can afford to take a little more time and work out a deal with this woman and her daughter. There is not enough information in the story or the video to support your claims. I suggest if you feel so strongly about this you get a job with a mortgage company so you can live out your fantasy of destroying the lives of poor people.

Sooo Realistic! If that were your old poor mama, I guess you would kick her out in a heartbeat. You ought to be ashamed of yourself. I know what it is, you are one of those collectors.

I couldn't have said that better, Night Breeze!

Good job to the officers that let her and her daughter stay. Happy birthday to you Ms. Lee! If everyone stood up to the mortgage companies and refused to do their dirty work, more people could stay in their homes rather than have all the empty homes all over just sitting.

Banks should try and work out better deals with the people so they can remain in their homes.
If the banks weren't so effen greedy and took some classes in humanity classes and learn to understand compassion and understanding for your fellow humans, then i think the world would be a better place today. Unfortunately for all of us, the 1% are ready to toss you out to the curb as they have already robbed you of everything.

RON PAUL 2012

No Benjoh, Realistic would pay his bills. The fact is would we be having this conversation if she was a 35 year old single mother? If she is not making payments what about back taxes with out Prop 13 to protect her she will have the state comming next to collect back taxes. What a mess to be in!

Lesson here is do not barrow on your home after it is payed off, tust me after 50 years it was paid off at one time.

As bad as it sounds Realistic does have a part of it right. That being said instead of just thanking the police for having a heart (I knew there were still some good ones out there) why not help this woman with a five dollar donation to help get the banks out of her life permanently and give her some much needed stress relief.

The part that Realistic is right about though is responsibility. He may have come across a tad harsh but if I were to suddenly decide not to pay my loans back would you expect the police to have the same compassion for me? I can tell you that they wouldn't and I would be no less broke or responsible for my financial burden then her. I may not be as cool, kind, and good at making good ol' fashioned southern cooking as she is (Ughh I miss it so much up here in Michigan) but does that truly allow the exception?

Ridiculous, how many people on here would be so sympathetic if they loaned a large amount of money to someone and they didn't pay it back.

More than likely - it wasn't a large amount of money - more than likely the house is a very small (run down) house. LOL - she probably had the house pretty much paid off years ago - and the bank more than likely already had the original amount - plus interest.

And - do you really want these )two old women who are making it on their own thrown out of a house worth only a few thousand the bank tries to resale) it thrown out? They obviously are able to take care of themselves and feed themselves. REMEMBER - you as a tax payer will end up supporting these two women who will end up in some state supported home.

Anyone remember the wealthy woman who actually took the state welfare to court to force them to give her more money than others would get - she need a lot more to maintain the lifestyle she was accustomed to. LOL - the Judge ordered welfare to do exactly that.

It doesn't matter if you are old or not, you still have to pay your mortgage. What part am I missing? If you are 104 years old, you have had many, many, many years to amass wealth. Pay the damn bank back the money that they loaned you!

This is a very sad situation. Its terrible that at her age she has to even have the stress of this on her she shuld be able to live the rest of her life they way she wants. There are so many people out there struggling these days maybe those millionare that won the lotto should help her out, if every person took 5 min to look around them they would find someone in need try to make a difference if possible there is reward in feeling good about helping someone else bless them nd everyone tht knows what I am trying to say

I am heartened by so many of these posts supporting a peace officer's right to exercise independent judgment. As many of you apparently do not know, a judge issues the order of eviction and the sheriff must comply with the order. Given the ideological bent of MSNBC and the majority of these posts, I am surprised at the universal support for giving deputies unfettered discretion notwithstanding a court order or the law.

So now how do all of you feel about that little pepper spray incident with the Occupy Whatever crowd?

Just reading over this article it seems that some may be overlooking the background issue. One thing to consider is this. Vita is 103 (almost 104) her daughter is 84. The story shows the two women have not paid their mortgage (or at least were not current on their payments) for years. What do we think these ladies have or had for income?

Back when this house was purchased 50 years ago (based on one poster), Vita would have been 53 and her daughter 34. Retirement age at that time would have been 65 years old, meaning they would have had 12 and 31 working years remaining before retirement. Her daughter would have retired 19 years ago.

All of this would mean that unless they had some really good jobs and a nice pension and retirement from them, they would have been just living on Social Security. I wonder what happened and at what point they started to miss payments. Was it a medical issue? Loss of a family member (husbands)? Simply began running out of funds?

The Bank should take whatever caused this issue into consideration, I am sure this house has some kind of equity. Almost seems like they should be able to peacefully live out the remainder of their lives and have it go back to the bank when their time here is done. Allow them the dignity to live out their lives, don't force them from the only home they know....

This should be a wake up call for anyone that has a Deutsche Bank or Chase account. If they started loosing customers, that would get their attention!!

Ran

Gotta wonder how many of you donated money to the various programs out there designed to help those in need pay their mortgage? I'd wager 5% of you have....maybe??? No love for Deutsche Bank, but...if mortgages don't get paid, the surrounding neighborhood values go down, and our taxes end up paying for it anyway when the bank writes off their loses!!

p.s. Chase is servicing the loan, Deutsche Bank owns it. That means Deutshe Bank makes all the rules here and Chase has not choice but to follow for all of you attacking Chase!!

Why are we on this earth if we can't help those that need the help. At 103 years old do you expect her to go out and get a job? I understand the business side of it, but why not ask local churches for help or the community. Hats off to the local police and movers for having a heart. That's something that many people in the world have lost over the years. It's not all about money, it's about people. Remember...."We the people........"

Realistic, might as well just go to this woman's house and put her out of her misery with any means you think necessary because her chance of finding another place to live in is pretty slim to say the least. Common sense is the key word here. If it was a 35yr old woman, she would be able to survive long enough to find another place to live in. It's your responsibility as a human being, to show some compassion in these situations. Go ahead, try it, if it makes you sick, then I pitty you.

What is piglike about expecting to get paid?

Perhaps any employer who is over age 60 should not give his workers checks. If you do not pay your bills, you should not be given a free pass.

The deputies were wrong. The bank is right. It is not pretty or nice, but it is right.

Here is a thought...just how much is owed on the mortgage? I bet if everyone that has taken the time to post their thoughts made a small contribution we could wipe their debt out. Or how about a zero percent loan from the Federal Reserve...oops, sorry that's just for big banks. Not for the little people. Hmmmmm...OR maybe someone that just got his ridiculous bonus up in Wall Street could decide to "make a difference".

If she's 104 years old, has a daughter, probably has grand kids and great grand kids and great great grand kids. Not one of her blood relatives will take care of her? Why did they let her get into this financial mess at her age? Don't blame the bank, blame her loving family.

Realistic and David Allen: I just have to ask WTF was the bank thinking lending money to people this old. First off these women were definately on a fixed income and with inflation their dollars just don't make ends meet anymore.

Realistic you remind me of the banker Potter on "It's a Wonderful Life". Maybe you should view the movie during this ho.iday season.

David Allen you just make me want to puke. You're obviously one of the younger generation that has no compassion for anyone or anything. You don't understand what or how her generation grew up and the many hardships they had to endure so that persons like you could have a great nation like the USA to ruin with your greed and selfishness. If not for her generation you would probably be speeking German or you would have been sent to a concentration camp as an undesirable where you would have surely died. You and people like you make me sick, and I hope your world completely falls apart someday and you are fed to the dogs, punk.

If I loaned someone a large sum of money to be paid off over 50 years, by the end of 50 years it probably wouldn't matter to me whether they paid off the remainder. Not that I'm stupid enough to do a private mortgage, of course.

Same goes with banks, except it matters even less to them.

THIS WOMAN IS 103 YEARS OLD !! PEOPLE Some compassion wouldn't hurt really. The banks will have the property soon enough.

Wow. I do believe The World has changed. In a small way today. Deputies reFUSE to evict 103-year Old Woman. A conscious choice has been made, my Fellows.

The Deputies have a Heart. God Bless them, this time around.

Douche Bank. Manferd Mann -- "Blinded By The Light... rolled up, like a Douche , another Boner in the Night." Double DumbA$$ on Douche Bank.

OK realistic, one question here. If your own mother borrowed a sum of money from you, and at the time you lent it, there was a reasonable expectation she'd be able to pay it back. She was working at the time, and the amount owed wasn't a stretch. Now she was paying it (keep in mind this lady had the house at least FIFTY YEARS, which means if it was only an issue the past few, either she didn't have a mortgage most of the time, and who knows how it got on there, or she must have had DECADES of good payment history on it), but something unexpected happened.

Either she got hit by a a drunk driver, and was rendered a parapalegic, came down with alzheimers and completely forgot who she was, but in some way became incapacitated or unable to function, and her means to pay dried up. Would you take your own mother, in those circumstances to court, and sue her?

Yes there can be obligations, but there can also be such a thing as mitigating circumstances in life, for which many people would also forgive a debt due. There's a difference between someone who borrows in good faith, before a tragedy strikes, and someone who scams. And when it's all said, not every eventuality in life can be planned for. I'm sure she didn't plan on living to 103. My maternal grandmother, didn't plan on living to 96, where she spent the last 15 or so years of her life with a brain tumor either, which consumed so much of her brain she didn't even know who she was, where she was, or even how to form complete sentences anymore. Life happens, and some things are truly beyond one's control.

So, to your question, if I had a good friend who borrowed a sum of money, yes on the outset I would count on it being payed back. But if in the course of paying it back the unthinkeable happened, I wouldn't necessarily turn so much into the Grinch, or some kind of money miser that I'd be counting all the pannies and forget any sense of the circumstance at hand. Seriously, there does come a point where it isn't unreasonable to forgive a certain matter, when it falls into the unexpected, the tragic, and the realm of what no one could ever have expected, even with the best of intentions. Making an agreement in GOOD FAITH, doesn't always mean that life won't sometimes throw a curve ball for which no rationale or reasonable person would have been able to predict that outcome....

The house isn't in their name its in the grandsons, what the cops should have done is knock some sense into him

"Are there no workhouses? Are there no prisons?" - Ebenezer Scrooge

I'm sure that , back in the day, Douche Bank used to go by Nazi Bank. figgers. Or, KrautBank.

Realistic and others have a good point about responsibility etc, but from other comments (whether true or not) there is probably more here than meets the eye. Most likely they had scraped up at least some of the money but having missed one deadline the bank said no way the house is ours now. Because the system is designed to work in the banks favor and avoid all common sense and compromise. The story is not over since the daughter may live another 20 years.

What was probably supposed to happen is the bank takes over the house, even though it is worthless, and then they fudge the numbers so they get a huge tax break on the deal. Either way the bank (the rich who own stock in the bank) wins and the working class people either lose or if they are lucky as in this RARE case get to break even.

Wow! Just when you thought that the rest of the world had lost the power to extend simple dignity to a human being. My faith in Man has been renewed:)

If you can't even see the difference between this woman's situation, and the one you described involving a 35 yr old woman, well, one wonders if further conversation can have any point.

The world is not black and white, and sometimes the rules need to be bent or broken. We're human beings, not balance sheets. If the corporations want to join us, they need to start acting like they have a heart.

realistic your name is completely ironic to me.... some people may have borrowed more than they should have, and knew it, but during these hard economic times its very hard to predict the future. by that i mean that many people get stuck in 30 year mortgages and lose their job or a family member falls ill etc and they can't pay. i bet you would just say too bad for them though they should have led a more responsble life. listen... we all can't be doctors or lawyers or blah blah. obviously we need to have people that clean the floorns and they work hard! you try doin it for minimum wage! so they don't have the right to decent housing? when you buy a house around a fifth of your payment each month goes to INTEREST! how much money does the banks already make from the consumer! we are talking billions!maybe you will bend over for the billionares that own the banks with their multiple houses and private yachts but i sure won't when the cost is handed down to us, the people!sure everyone should be responsible but life is tough for many people out there. it doesn't always go as planned. you need to grow a heart. i dnt want to hear that the people at the top deserve to be there because of their hard work... how hard does one REALLY have to work to make billions a year? not to mention money breeds money and the rich are given many more opportunities than the average american. i believe the banks owe the people something because it was our money that bailed them out! we gave them that money so that they could negotiate loans with people to manage the economic crisis without more and more losing their homes. in a way it was like a safety blanket.... hmmm. what did they do with it? they gave themselves raises! F*** you! thats what i would say if i ever saw them on the street which will never happen despite my wishfull thinking. My plan is as follows: the money at the top needs to trickle down more efficiently, this means less interest for the consumer, more pay for the employees including increasing benefits such as healthcare and retirement, and lower price for goods meaning better pricing for consumers... are you asking where the money would come from? it would come from the top... meaning yes,,, gasp,,, maybe they can take a couple billion dollar a year paycut so thay the quality of life for their fellow american can improve. but i live in dreamland where people actually care for others around them. so its not about people being irresponsible, it is about how much people at the top make from average folks and how it stays with them, not the people. makes me so sick to see the lavish lifestyles some people lead while more and more lose their jobs and homes everyday. shame on their greed! god will bring justice in the end for the meek shall inherit the earth.so realist, keep believing in the current corrupt system that screws your fellow man. i for one will stand up to the powers that be because this is america! legalize marijuana! legalize freedom of speech! outlaw censorship! make universal healthcare real! f*** the banks! F*** the greed! lets take america back

I agree the world is not black and white and this article obviously don't not detail all the information needed to make a definitive judgement.

The women appears to be in her right mind if she is fully aware of the actions and the reasons the bank is trying to impose. The true fault likely falls on her family for letting the situation get to where it is. I feel bad for the women, but I feel bad for plenty of people who may or may not have made poor decisions in their life for one reason or another.

That being said, per the agreement signed by the women, the home now belongs to the bank. No matter her age or situation, it is still her responsibility to honor that agreement and leave the home.

It would be great if something could be worked out but if this has been going on for years it is likely the bank has extended anything available to the family. It would be great if the bank were to let her stay there for free forever but as soon as they let one person do it, everyone else with throw their pitty party at the bank and expect the same. It is not the banks responsibilty to harbor this women, it is the job of her family.

Banks do plenty of good for all the bad rap they get, sure they make plenty of money, but they also allow plenty of peoples dreams to come true through home ownership. How many of you would have had $100k or $200k to purchase your first home without them? If they began to make concessions to everyone, the dreams of home ownership for many people would never be realized. Sure they contributed to it but again the decision is ultimately that of the person purchasing the home and with the decision comes the responsibility.

Lots of people bashing the banks and talking like the cops are heroes for disobaying a judicial court order.

Probably safe to assume the bank paid for the eviction suit (won) and the writ of possession (being served). The bank won the judgment, paid for the constables and movers to show up and remove anyone living in the property along with their possessions.

However, the cops didn't do what they were charged to do. Cops don't do that - at least shouldn't do that and most of us expect them to do what they are charged to do. If they don't, they should lose their jobs - as any other employee that doesn't do his/her job.

I personally don't want cops running around making legal decisions and overriding decisions made by a judge.

I suspect the bank didn't realize the situation and when they found out, they backed down. To the bank, this was just another number, another house on the ledger that had to be dealt with.

Maybe, just maybe, when notified about the situation, the bank decided to investigate and put off the set out. That would make the bank the hero. Doesn't make for good news and doesn't upset people though.

The people living in the house should have paid what was owed, moved or been removed.

If the cops didn't do their jobs, they should be fired.

Might be possible that the bank or the bank worker in charge of this property is the one deserving of those sympathetic kudos.

We the damn people make an exception in the particular case so get over it Barney Fiffe!

Tiredofsilly

"What is piglike about expecting to get paid?

Perhaps any employer who is over age 60 should not give his workers checks. If you do not pay your bills, you should not be given a free pass.

The deputies were wrong. The bank is right. It is not pretty or nice, but it is right . "

I'll tell you what is piglike about wanting to get paid , since you asked the question , Tiredofsilly ..... #1 the banks never loaned the money #2 they got a taxpayer bailout #3 insurance proceeds paid off the note #4 the "agreement " some of the posters are so adamant about being honored , was broken in the first month or two by the banks who got bailed out . funny how some people think the borrower should take the high road , the honorable road . show me a bankster that will do that ...... bottom line ..... the contract was broken by the bank . period .

It never ceases to amaze me , how willing Banks are to hold untrained , quite often blue collar working people , to a higher financial standard (they bought more than they could afford !!!), than they were willing to adhere to themselves ( we F*cked up ,we need a bailout !!!)

Realistic,

How do you know that the bank isn't in the wrong? As you've admitted there is not enough information in the article or video to determine what the issue is, although the article stated that a legal battle has been underway for some years. Maybe the bank is foreclosing in error, there's certainly precedent for that having happened recently. It may not be an issue of this woman not being responsible, it may be an issue of the bank being incompetent.

Do I think we should be responsible and pay our bills? Absolutely. I haven't failed to pay a bill on time in 40 years. Apparently however, unlike you, I think that we should apply our laws with a sense of honor, civility and compassion instead of cold-hearted disinterest. Justice implies a sense of compassion and mercy, not just blindness.

I think it's just sad that a grandson can put a seventeen thousand dollar mortage on the home of two little old ladies, not pay the loan, and the women not only have to pay the price, but the majority of people don't even look at the whole story before condemning the women. I say hold the grandson responsible, transfer ownership of the house to the bank, but let BOTH women live their for the rest of their lives, and garnish the grandson's wages!

Somewhere - actually the police would be tasked with assessing the situation and making a decision based on the facts at the scene. They have a duty to protect the citizens they police, if the woman's health situation was such that removing her could be detrimental, the officers have every responsibility to delay action. They might have only wanted better equipped medical personnel on the scene first, who knows, but their job is not simply to do what they're told.

That "just do your job" mentality is why so many police departments have decaying relationships with the community. Anyone who showed up that house, saw this woman in bed, and DIDN'T immediately put a hold on the whole shebang until the situation was discussed further, doesn't deserve a badge.

Hummmmmmmmmmmmm

Realistic ....Whats wrong, your momma didn't hug you enough?

The real issue here is in the interest of Fulton County and the state to evict her? ..... I don't think so! .. When this elderly woman is evicted, the cost to the county & state social services will be enormous! Are they going to have her live on the street or jail her?

If they lock either or both of these elderly people up it will cost $40,000 per year minimum to maintain each of them ... $80,000. a year .. and thats without medical cost that could be enormous!

The state & public interest is better served by what happened ... and "Douche" Bank ... saves its public image ... in fact the states & public interest would probably be better served if they paid of the mortgage .... they would save money in the long term ...

Cities more than banks foreclose on and kick more elderly into the streets and nursing homes than banks through tax liens. Many of the elderly were retired and living on fixed incomes before the scammers drove their 15-25k$ property values up into the hundreds of thousands and thus the property taxes skyrocketed out of many of these elderly persons budget and ability to pay.

Everybody here has comments and agrees this is a travesty... However, how about putting your words into action? Why doesn't everyone concerned send just $10.00. It's the holiday spirit. This old woman may be 104 years old; and granted, not long for this earth. However, her 89 year old daughter also lives with her. Do any of you want to see that daughter kicked to the curb as well?

Look people, everyone has problems, everyone has financial woes... However, the balance owing can't be that much... Have we really become so self-absorbed that we can't show a little humanity here? Maybe we can't save everyone... But let's put our "Lip Service" into action and help out this old lady...

I say, let's start a grass roots movement and become our own "Holiday Santa" for this old lady and her daughter. I'm in... how about you? I'm sure the address of the lady or reporter writng the story can come up with the banking information to send $10.00 to...

(Post to your facebook, and let's see what we can accomplished... Just this once people, let's stop the negativity and do something positive here...)

The house is in her SON'S name, so sending money won't help her. He is the bugger in the situation. The mortgage company is going to work something out. Thankfully.

My God, leave that poor old soul alone you Banksters...I am surprised that her church family, assuming she has one, doesn't step and help her out a little..

My God, leave that poor old soul alone you Banksters...I am surprised that her church family, assuming she has one, doesn't step and help her out a little..

I agree Dano, however, the Deputies were hired to do a job and perform his duties. He himself failed in doing his job he's paid to do is now in question.

1: If this were a white family, would he have evicted them?

2: If this was a 35 or 40 year old family member would he have evicted them?

On the 1st question it would fall under racial discrimination, and on the 2nd it would fall under age discrimination.

He was hired to do a job and failed in doing so. I commend him for not evicting them, but the law is the law and you just can't start breaking them. As old as the two women are, I hope they are ok and doing good, but what's going to happen if the mobile one falls and the 104 yo is stuck in bed with no ability to get to a phone ad call for help.

In this case, I think it would be good to know that they have some form of aide assistance coming in and helping them out, if not, then place these two in a nice retirement facility in a room together with some of their belongings.

I feel like this article, is not explaining the entire situation here. From what I gathered, she was behind on mortgage payments. If that was the case, their could have been someway, she could have paid her mortgage. Like social security, or help from her church, family something.

As for the sheriffs, they will probably lose their jobs. Because, they were ordered by a judge, to do their job; and, they didn't follow orders. I do feel sorry for these ladies. I am sure this article will resurfice on the news again. The judge, will order a different group of sheriffs to get her out of the house.

Jim - I have only one question... What did this woman do with the money that she got when she financed the house? Or do you believe that banks should go out and buy housing for everyone?

It strikes me that one of 2 scenarios exist:

1. The old woman refinanced her home to get cash out, and her family stole the money from her; or

2. The old woman financed the house and now is refusing to make the payments.

Either way - this is not the bank's problem. When you borrow money, you have to pay it back regardless of your age. If you don't, the bank takes whatever is collateral for the loan. Her age is not relevent to this discussion, and the sheriff's office is negligent. This has opened up the scenario where the bank can now sue the county for negligence (and if the sheriff's office refuses to execute a legal order - the county is negligent). Or is it OK when an 'evil' bank is getting screwed?

Why don't we just make her house a national monument until they both pass away? How many 100+ yr olds do we still have living at home? I have a great aunt who is 104 and still living at home. Sleeping, mostly, but leave them alone.

Interested observer:

You can speculate as to what happened all you want to, but since the foreclosure crisis occured, it often happens that no one has clear ownership of the house, but it takes someone doing the research to understand what might have happened, since things are often tied up in all sorts of legal mumbo jumbo that the average person doesn't understand. Whil eI appreciate the fact that you are standing up for the bank and the legal system, the fact of the matter is that allowing this woman to remain in a house that would likely lanquish on the market for months anyway, is simply the most humane thing to do.

Bastards! leave the poor woman alone! Thank God there are still some good souls out there.

Lived there over half a century....Someone did refinancing and probably without her knowledge....I don't know a bank around that would redo a loan on a women anywhere near her age. Rat in the woodpile somewhere that we don't know about from this article....Let her stay and when she is gone take it over then and do whatever. I can't think of to many folks over 100 having this problem. In the mean time, find the rat!

Interested Observer: one question... Who you Crappin?

Jeez. I may move to Atlanta. Sure wish all cities had protection from banks.

Does this mean that deputies will ignore all eviction notices now? While I appreciate the fact that they have a heart, it's not fair to the 45 year old who also can't afford his/her payments.

Most likely, she was conned into refinancing the house and the greedy brokers set her up, like happened to a lot of other people. Now it might not be these banks fault that they bought that refinanced mortgage but they must have know the background on this homeowner when they decided to try this eviction.

The sheriff's office is not required to evict anyone, they are simply contracting as legal agents (who happen to have legal authority) and only need to return the fee.

I am sure they will spend a lot more money on some PR firm to try to recover from this, than this mortgage is valued at.

Interested Observer-

How did you come up with these scenarios? Where they in another article? Did you make them up? Let's go on the premise that you made them up. You missed a very viable 3rd scenario.

An unscrupulous mortgage originator cold called her and talked her into refinancing her home. Due to her advanced age she had no idea what she was agreeing to, nor did she have any clue what the 3 inch stack of papers she was signing included or even meant as most people who buy homes have no idea what they are signing at closing and don't even read them! You would be at closing for hours if you read them all. During the Real Estate bubble there were many unscrupulous loan companies/mortgage originators cold calling trying to get people to refinance. This could certainly be a fraud case and elder abuse!

interested observer - Does a body good to see a bank get screwed once in a while. Maybe have to lower those $100,000,000.00 bonuses a little.

The Sheriff's office is hardly negligent as they could easily argue that it would be unsafe to move these elderly ladies. Imagine the lawsuit they would get hammered with if they evicted these two forcefully and one of them died during.

hummmm it appears it doesn't say the home was refinanced and someone stole the money or she doesnt want to pay but apparently you have first hand knowledge of this so i'll leave that alone. Also the County is not negligent for refusing to put the order through if they feel they will be putting them in danger. so yes to answer your question it's ok when the evil bank gets screwed.... also Deutche Bank sounds a lot like Douche Bag so they probably deserve it.

Interested Observer: My friend, please. Dont be a jerk. Show a little compassion and put away your calculator. So in your opinion she should be sitting in her bed out by the curb so our already crappy system and economy can keep rolling on? You should run for office, you sound just like them...

I don't think this is as simple as it sounds, the article says this is the latest move in a legal battle that has been going on for years

Mike yes that's the problem with giving charity to anyone. Everyone else wants "theirs" as well. People never grow up.

@Interested Observer - Your veiled racism is obvious as it would have to be a black woman to have her family steal money from her. Also, was it our problem when the banks needed bailing out? You seem to leave that out of your argument but DB and Chase were both cut checks by the government using...? Yes, you guessed it, the taxpayers money. Now get out of your office and evict her yourself you Deuschebagger...I mean Deutsche Banker.

Rebuttal- How about this- I HAVE paid for someone who cant afford to's house when they couldnt. I had to because that person was very sick and couldnt get help. I say GOOD JOB! At least some people appreciate the elderly!

rebuttal53

All of you handouters yelling leave her alone, why not pay it yourself.

Oh no, you don't care as long as someone else is paying, right?

Give me a paypal account and I'll send her what I can. Rebuttal, you should know what the circumstances are before you assume things. It's people like you who are bringing this country down. Sickening.

Interested Observer,

While I agree that a person, regardless of age, who borrows money is obligated to pay it back, I also think that a lender has an obligation to lend money to persons who are capable of repaying the loan. A lot of facts are missing in the article, but we can assume either (or both) the 104 y/o mother or 83 y/o daughter are the mortgagees. I can only assume that neither of these women have the financial wherewithall to repay the mortgage as they are both probably on a fixed, low income. The lender, too, has certain obligations to insure it is taking a good risk on those to whom it lends money. If it chose to lend money to these people then it made a poor choice and should reconsider its application and approval process to insure that loans like these aren't made again.

interested observer, You are one of those people who like to speculate, yet you have no idea as to what you are talking about. Is it not possible that she got the loan, which couldn't have been much, for an urgent matter that couldn't be postponed. Maybe she and her daughter don't have enough income to keep the mortgage current. The circumstances doesn't matter to you right? Why must you be so negative about this? You come across as an extremely heartless person. May life will be as cold to you as you are to others. I'm sure you think your logic makes sense to the rest of us, but allow me to be the first to tell you that it doesn't. Some of us have something called compassion.

The point is that the bank isn't going to be able to do anything with this house, anyway. There wouldn't be much of a market for it. If the women are evicted, guess who is going to pay for their care--probably the taxpayers. The house will sit on the market, empty. The point is that the bank isn't losing anything if we presume that the house is actually worth what they financed it for (foolishly--that was their own stupidity in financing it in the first place for two elderly ladies who apparently didn't have the income).

The bank can suffer for its own stupidity. They financed a loan they should not have financed. The state has no interest in evicting two old ladies who will just wind up being supported by the state. When the old ladies die (or, at least, the eldest one if the house is in her name), then the bank will still have its house and will still be able to recoup the investment. The only thing the bank will lose is some payments on a loan that they shouldn't have made, and some time in waiting to get the property that secures that loan.

I have no sympathy for a business that would make a loan that had so little chance of being repaid in full. Just the fact that they made it says that someone was planning to just evict the old lady all along--they always intended for her to default and probably will get more money from the eventual sale of the home than the loan was worth. Yes, I would call this elder abuse, and I would suggest that as long as the bank will eventually get the house and its money that this is a no-harm-no-foul situation if the old ladies are left alone until either they pass on or someone has a better situation for them.

Hey "interested observer" - don't lecture us about fiscal responsibility.....not after the Wall Street bailout. The Ultimate Hypocrisy of banking has been exposed, and in case you haven't noticed, the long-overdue backlash is starting to happen.

Just let that bank TRY to sue that sheriff's office for doing the right thing, and see what happens. The PEOPLE will act of behalf of the sheriff - against both that ruthless greedy bank AND the piece-of-sh*t lawyers representing them.

Just you wait you spineless and heartless little turd. The bank is just as guilty for lending money to a someone of that age with a knowingly greater inability to pay back such a loan.

Just you wait worthless mess. When the all the police and military side with their citizens and put these corporations in their place to row with the rest of us. History teaches us that this happened alot during the depression. All of the community would come together and block this crap, and if it did go to an auction, they'd ensure they let only one bid go through and sell it for a buck.

Just because something is currently legal, doesn't mean it will be supported by anyone including the police. You can beat a dog only for so long until it bites back.

But then you are the type of person with you thumb up you bum asking why do we even feed the dog? Isn't it the dog's responsibility to feed itself? Yeah, your type are worthless. I hope you change. If not, you'll be lost in the void, and I hope long enough for you to come out completely recycled.

@ rebuttal53, you give me an address and I'll donate some money. I may be poor, but at least I have morals and a soul, how bout you? Some things are way more important than money, but obviously your godless parents didn't teach you that. (I'm an Atheist and don't believe in God, but at least I wouldn't even pretend to be a heartless prick and take a 100 year olds home.) For the record, I also think that people who do these kinds of acts should be pointed out in public and shamed for being a greedy prick, but that's just how I roll, baby.

Why doesn't the news provide a way for people to donate monies so that they can stay without problem?

Who would evict a 103 years-old woman from her home for whatever reason, unless it was a mistake or full of evil?

interested observer - Here's a scenario for you. My Great Uncle borrowed money every year from the bank to buy seed and paid the note when the money came in from his crop, this was in Buffalo, MO. He had harvested his crop and had the money in the bank to pay his note off, but had not done so as he was going to town the next week end and would do it then. This was 1929, the stock market crashed, the banks closed and took everybody's money. He, then, did not have the money to pay the note, the bank forclosed and took his farm. What do you think my Great Uncle thought of banks? And this is the truth. Thousands of small farmers got the same treatment. And the big banks just keep on going.

@ Interested Observer,

Jim - I have only one question... What did this woman do with the money that she got when she financed the house? Or do you believe that banks should go out and buy housing for everyone?

It strikes me that one of 2 scenarios exist:

1. The old woman refinanced her home to get cash out, and her family stole the money from her; or

2. The old woman financed the house and now is refusing to make the payments.

Actually you are incorrect. There is a third scenario, that the bank is taking a house it does not have a loan on, now or ever.

Yes, that happens, but you do not hear much about it. Hers would not be the first, if that scenario I just presented is correct. American citizens have been evicted from their fully owned home and that property sold. Of course if they can:

1) keep a place to live while fighting the bank

2) have enough of an income to fight the bank (which is highly unlikely considering both her and her daughters ages).

3) still lose their home that had no loan, and finally get compensated after years in the courts, or just lose out.

Besides Deutsche was one of the Banks we bailed, out, plus received billions of unauthorized American dollars from the Federal Reserve.

Plus the banks made iffy loans knowingly to "bundle" and resale, from which the made billions overall.

To the Law Enforcement who did the right thing, Thank You Very Much!

Screw the bank, give them ownership free and clear.

interested observer: If the bank is dumb enough to give a mortgage to someone that old, most likely with little income, they should reap the appropriate rewards. Sounds like predatory lending to me!

Yes the banks messed up and got bailed out.....and guess what they are responsible for paying it back just like she should have been. Thats kinda how it works when you sign an agreement.

It is apparent half the people on here could care less about honoring their word. Thats why our country is in the gutter.

Interested Observer-there's always one in the crowd. This is one of those times you keep your analytical, uninformed speculation to yourself. What a graceless, soulless turd.

I agree with Louie Lou. We need to each chip in whatever we can and pay this thing off! How much can it be. 10,000 people at $10 each = $100,000. What a great way to start the Christmas Season! Great job officers!

Somebody start a link - I'll contribute too.

Let's see...lived there for over half a century, has a mortgage, and is 103 years old.

Assumptions:

• Fixed income..maybe just SS
• Remortgaged, some years ago
• esculating health expenses, maybe a stretch but what the heck 83 y.o. and 103 y.o.
• probably in the "donut" hole part of the year
• property taxes most likely are not the same now as when refinancing occurred.

Therefore:

• Are the medical expenses up to date?
• Are the property taxes paid?
• Is there any equity in the house (probably is if the bank wants it back so much)

So, why doesn't the bank offer to do a reverse mortgage and pay back any equity? They can stay in the house until the demise of the youngster, heck she's only 83.

@Intersted Obsever She 104 in that should be taken into consideration; she has only days left of her life it should be in peace. When she dies they can try to recoup the money lost, but till then they should try to live they life right and kicking out of their home at that age is not right. You can try to be logical all you want, but the world is such a mess now and will continue to go straight to HELL when a person like one self can make excuses for such actions. Regardless what she may have done with a refinance or be taking advantage by some family member does not justify a mulit billion company handle this situation in such a inhumane way! The deputies will not get and legal action against them because if something would havehappen to this woman due they actions it could be also become a legal issue. Missed mortgage payment cause you your livelihood it should not cause you your live. As far as the comment about it not as simple as it sound because they was going through legal issue for a few years, the legal stuff my not be simple but the resolution is very clear.

I'm just curious at what point we as the American people are going to file a class action suit against the banks for accepting bailout funds to cover their losses and than continueing to try to collect on those loses and be paid twice. I think that any mortgage that was held by a bank that recieved TARP funds or the secret Fed bailout should be declared null and void.

Interested Observer-

Observe more, talk less.

Look, no matter how you slice it, this was the right thing to do. Someone who is 45 is not necessarily going to die any day now, are they? This is not an across the board stance, but in this case, it's right. This would be a better world if sometimes people forget the rules and do what's RIGHT. And be fore you run off the the "forget the rules part", remember the "...do what's RIGHT" part. If you live to be 100 years old this country should take care of you in EVERY way they can, you should be treated like a celebrity for the rest of your days. And would I be willing to spend my tax dollars to make that happen? You're damn right! Plus, looks at it this way Douche Bank, one day the lady will die (hopefully not too soon) and you will have the house free and clear... not court costs or anything. It's got to be far cheaper to do nothing and wait her out than paying your over paid lawyers to do it legally. And if this is the case, it's makes you wonder why they even tried to do it in the first place. Banks these day feel like they have free license to take houses for any reason they can come up with...

I KNOW, RIGHT?!!!

How can America ever be able to retain her position as the most blessed, powerful, and wealthiest nations in the world if we have lost the ability to see right from wrong. Something is very wrong with putting struggling families, elderly people out of their homes and out on the streets. That's okay with some people? Is that really what this country has become? Give us a break! The price of living is continuing to rise with no relief in sight, yet those we are debted to are still expecting theirs in full, on time, every month, by any means necessary. Enough is enough. Not everyone is looking for a handout, but a hand up and a system that is fair.

MikeS, I agree totally what you said. Sadly many law enforcement officers have lost their homes too. But it was the fact that this was a 103 year old woman and her 83 year old daughter. We all are going to be old. And just to make this clear, the Sheriff's Deputies are willing to serve eviction papers on their neighbors anymore like they would 5 to 10 years ago. I know that is pretty true for the county I live in. They just don't want to serve papers for anything to do with banks.

The fact that she is 103 and her daugther is 83 means that this home should have been paid for a long time ago. She is probabbly like alot of others that took out cash in refinances and was not able to aford her home with the new principal balance. This home should have been paid for a long time ago with a 30 or even 40 year loan. If she and her daugther had been renting somewhere she would have been evicited a long time ago, the article suggests this has been going on for sometime. When the bank is doing their job of foreclosing on behalf of the investor they are not taking into discrimination factors such as age, they are taking into consideration the bottom line which is she hasnt paid in a long time if its in foreclosure. Although I have empathy for her and her daugther there are however nice retirment communities that she and her daguther can move into that are affordable for them both. It seems like everyone wants to point the fingers at the bank instead of themselves for signing for something they were never able to afford and instead need a reality check.

It doesn't matter if she got another mortgage or not, she's been in the hse. 50 yrs!! There HAS to be equity!! I hope we hear the rest of this sad story when people from the bankk go after her?? I'll give you &100.00 if one even tries, because they're all spineless little thiefs, who would prey on anyone this age, w/ a sick daughter. NO, of course I don't feel any remorse for the banks, they've stiffed us for yrs., and wi;ll continue, THEY have the control, not this little lady!!

Please leave her w/ peace, that's all we all want.

Jim-- Indeed! Why don't creditors avail themselves of "self help" remedies? I doubt these old ladies could stop someone from kicking them out-- even if the CEOs are as lazy and unproductive as you claim.

Fortunately, the law provides a process for a creditor to take an asset pledged as collateral for a loan and provide due process through the court to avoid abuses. Unfortunately, everyone seems to think it was a good idea to ignore the judge's eviction order. If the "law" does not enforce the law and obey court orders, then why should anyone? See, Immigration, illegal.

Rob-

Excellent idea with the reverse mortgage. Problem solved

Alright, the article does NOT SAY any of the background, and the fact is, that based on this story we don't know why, or EVEN IF she had a mortgage on this house. Banks have tried to foreclose on houses that had been paid with by cash, as happened in that one case in Florida where the bank ordered BofA to pay the legal fees, and the sheriff evicted the bank from it's branch till it wrote out the check to cover the person's legal fees. The, was there a mortgage, how had it come to be, did she make payments until a few years ago (incidently when the whole financial system hit meltdown), was it only recently taken out, and if so by whom? It's all conjecture at this point.

But there's a few matters, one of which is that 103 is well beyond the average life expectency. And lets be honest here, how many in planning for their retirement are planning on being alive till the age of 104? So retirement age is 65 unless it gets raised, so we're talking almost 40 years of expenses to set aside, against the backdrop of what will amount to an unknown inflation rate, for which only 10 years ago gas was less then $1 a gal for but one example of then vs now prices.

OK, people want to throw out possible scenarios, if it's come down to what ifs as a stand point for judgeing people for being bad spenders or the like, how about this? She had money for retirement, and was getting by just fine until she hit 100, already well beyond the average life expectancy. After the markets hit meltdown, her investments that perhaps her husband arranged for her, took a nose dive along with all sectors of the market that crapped out following the folding of Leamen Brothers in 2008. Her investments got wiped out, the last of her savings got spent a bit after, and with no ability to work, and now her 84 year old daughter incapeable of working due to medical conditions, they got hit hard up. Started falling behind on bills, went to get money out of investment accounts, but oh wait this and that firm declared bankruptcy, and her investments were dead.

Did this happen? Maybe, maybe not, but not less plausable then all the other conjectures put out based on an article that contains none of the details.

And one other matter; there is a legal recourse in certain extenuating circumstances for a loan to be forgiven, and it's perfectly legal also. As is chapter 11 bankruptcy given, well the same sort of extenuating circumstances.

Who would evict a 103 years-old woman from her home for whatever reason, unless it was a mistake or full of evil?

Full of evil sounds like the right choice. Honestly to me, this story it's not surprising. I remember reading a person got their electric cut off because the amount of his/her bill.............was missing a penny.

How about asking a better question?

What kind of grandson allows his grandma and mother/aunt to go through foreclosure and not arrange for someplace for them to live?

The house was owned by the grandson. It is completely his fault for taking out a mortgage he chose to not pay.

Put the blame where it belongs, not on the banks.

what mortgage ? with a broken chain of security , it's unsecred debt. let's call it what it is people .

That is why the President, US Treasurer, US Attorney General's Offices are fighting with states to force a mandatory settlement to keep banks from getting sued out of existence and collapsing the fake system backed by nothing but a promise, they call the dollar.

Both sides are dirty in this mess and all need to go. We need some new leadership that will strengthen AND enforce equality for all, economic status included.

#3.50 - Thu Dec 1, 2011 10:32 AM EST

Well said Trust 2112 :) ever thought of being president ? thank God for a few judges in this country with the backbone to make the right call ...... Judge Arthur Schack of Brooklyn, N.Y., comes to mind .

either the law governs everyone in this country equally ..... or it governs no one . just my opinion .

Probably some ripoff second mortgage.

and Atlanta is a cheap housing area compared to most of the country. Compare housing prices between there and southern California..........night and day.

Another article clarifies that some relative took out a mortgage without her permission. Presumably, the banks claim that the relative had a right to do so, or that these women agreed to the mortgage.

Tanks for the information JFS. If that's the case, the bank was clearly negligent and these two women shouldn't have to pay the price.

Or the bank should exact their pound of flesh from the relative who took out the loan in the first place, and give these two elderly women some piece. Hopefully someone with some where with all will stand up, and simply pay the mortgage off.

News here in ATL said it was her grandson who supposedly has the 20k owed in an escrow account and is trying to pay the bank..... sounds like BS now that he has a light shining on him..run like a cockroach!

Another article clarifies that some relative took out a mortgage without her permission. Presumably, the banks claim that the relative had a right to do so, or that these women agreed to the mortgage.

Oh, I see. A relative who those women signed over legal-power-of-attorney too, took out a loan using the house as collateral.

Anger at the bank is misplaced. They don't even know that they were dealing with someone over 100 years old. They made a legal loan to the legally responsible party who put up collateral. The anger should only be directed to that realitive who did the deed.

Interesting observer...Are you kidding! ..the banks stole 140 billion dollars from us, with no accounting for where the money went, and for them its business as usual. If you wanna do something, go ask douche bank to give us, the American people our money back. Statements like that tells me that you really don't get it!

Are you kidding! ..the banks stole 140 billion dollars from us,

Exactly how much did any bank steal from you, I am not fond of banks but I keep hearing all these people screaming that the banks have stolen all their money but no one can tell me exactly how much was personally stolen from them.

The banks got bailed out, The banks paid the money back and the government actually made money on the deal, It does not matter what the banks did with the money as long as they paid it back, If those banks would not have been bailed out millions of public and private pensions, College investment funds,Retirement savings accounts and funds would have evaporated, yes they did lose money but these funds are gradually recovering.

Who would you be bitching about if there were no rich people or banks. You would still be in the same situation you are in now .

Now about this 104 year old woman, Her own relatives screwed her over, Be mad at them and not at the bank.

I'm thrilled that they left this lady alone -- but let's not be too swift in offering applause to the officers or to the bank. They didn't back off because of any altruism or concern for her and her daughter -- they left these helpless ladies alone because they're afraid of the bad press they would get from tossing them out! AND -- they can simply wait a bit and Mom will pass on, and daughter as well. So, the Grim Reaper will take over and solve the bank's dilemma. That just shows how despicable the Deutsche Bank can be. How about cancelling her debt, and letting her stay - so her kids can inherit the place! Now, THAT would show some generosity and Holiday Spirit. Fat chance, right?

Exactly how much did any bank steal from you, I am not fond of banks but I keep hearing all these people screaming that the banks have stolen all their money but no one can tell me exactly how much was personally stolen from them.

The banks took it from the tax payers, courtiousy of Uncle Sam. No thanks to our elected officials who crammed the bailouts down the American people's throats, via the bail outs, so the banks (along with AIG) could pad their own pockets with bonuses for what amounted to a crappy job in maneaging fiscal policy which was rather to blame for helping to cause the financial meltdown we were seeing.

Course, if our so-called "representatives" would actually represent we the people, rather then the lobbyists, the political action committees, and the like, we wouldn't be seeing a lot of this. Except that through the Fed we would still be seeing it with quantitative easing, and the twist; all of which helps keep down interest rates on investments and savings (though ironically not on credit card debts) so people see less return on their savings, and also in the form of inflation and higher prices. Which is precisely what printing mass amounts of fiat currency will tend to do, as it can have an effect on devauling the dollar, hence making things cost more. It isn't inaccurate to say the banks are getting money off of us in this (fees is another matter that can be brought up); but the exact explanation would take a delving into fiscal policy and also asking just who our so-called representatives are really working for, time and again.

I think more then a few would have rather the banks were left to fall, and the whole language of "too big to fail" was never coined up; then a bigger sum was added to the national debt, for the Chinese to carry the balance on until they decide to hit we the people with the austerity measures to help pay off these bail outs, that we the people never asked for in the first place.

Oh, and if you're from Jersey also? The tales we could tell, such as the "delights" of Jon Corzine being made CEO of MF Financial? Well back when he was governor of NJ, just how much of Jersey's money did he walk off with? Or what of the money in the pension plans, that when questioned on it on one of the ask the govenors, even Christie came right out and said that yes, both Democrats and Republicans had STOLEN this money over the past, but that because of this it wasn't there anymore. Anyone want to wager that Corzine was one of those peeps who helped himself to some of those funds? Yeah, and they made him CEO at MF Financial also /rofl If that financial institution has a thing for infamous Jersey govenors, perhaps we could give them Florio next to serve is their CFO. If they want him, we don't, haha....

I wouldnt either, lets face it, if the bank lets them get away with this, then its me who ends up paying for it in added fees. You can't have it both ways.

In my opinion the bottom line here is that this woman is nearly 104 years old and been in this house for 50 years. With the housing crisis the way it is do we REALLY need another house on the foreclosure market and 2 additional seniors homeless. The house has obviously been paid for once already, so let them consider the refinance as a reverse mortgage and let the women live out her life in HER house. The bank will stand to get their money back as the economy improves. This also just might turn them from EVIL to caring and good things are worth waiting for.

Eat the poor! :) Just be sure to tenderize their hides first.

.

Corporations don't care. I have worked for three different companies who have had massive lay-offs two days before Thanksgiving (I was one of those let go from one of them...on my 61st birthday!) and one company who had massive layoffs the week before Christmas. The name of the game is the bottom line...and the little guys are always the first to go. I used to love America...not so much anymore.

Tis, the sad thing is we don't really live in America anymore. We live in Corporate Global America, anything for the bottom line because all that matters is profits. Corporations and banks own America, this is vastly different than a couple of generations ago.

I think it is wonderful that these officers had a heart and let these women stay. What a wonderful world we would live in if more people could be compassionate, understanding and helped their fellow man.

Maybe they should change their name to DOUCHE bank!

Someone needs to do some due dillegence in the mean time, and see if Deutsche Bank really down hold the lean on the home, then see if there is a way to take up a collection to pay this off. That way the women can remain in the home, and the bank can be happy as well.

Geeee, that makes sense but not one of these libs will part with a dime to help her. They want it all for free! I found the story very sad BUT, if you can't pay for a mortgage, don't put yourself into that position. I read all this blame thrown at the banks but they did not force you to sign at the dotted line. We DO need to grow up and take responsibility!

Ah, Linda, I'm a "lib," and I totally agree with what was done by the Sheriff's and the movers....please don't lump "libs" into one bunch. Not all of us believe the same. I know some conservatives that agree with me too. As for parting with a dime...if I knew where to send it, I'd send her more than a dime....just another "lib," huh?

I am a proud American right at this moment...reading MOST of these posts...people willing to give up their hard earned cash to help another fellow American. God bless you all...

BTW....If I knew where to send the money, I would send some as well.....its the right thing to do!

Or maybe one of our charitable millionaires will step up to the plate.

wow willing...you have all the answers for SOMEONE ELSE to step up and help out. Why don't you step up???

hey sparkly - lighten up, willya?

Maybe, President Obama should use an executive order to force the bank to forgive the debt?

Willing.Sniper: Unfortunately, those 'social services' agencies that you'd love to see help those women have been bankrupted by budget cuts and a huge jump in the number of people requesting help. As far as those 'private charities' that you think has unlimited resources? They're being stretched past their limits as well.

Sad, but true.

I think Chase was negligent in letting a relative take out a mortgage without their consent. Chase should be forced to just eat the loss and go away. They should be after that relative not these older ladies and their house.

So many negative commentators with no faith. There are PLENTY of city services, PLENTY of Private charities everywhere. They just need to be put in touch with each other.

The "relative" did have permission of theses ladies via a legal power of attorney they signed, to take out the loan.

BUT, Willing, did the ladies actually have the knowledge of what they were signing? Happens all the time...relatives "using" their elderly to get money in roundabout ways!! We don't know the whole story, but I really think that the legal community should find the relative and go after him/her and leave the ladies alone for now. God knows, they aren't probably aren't going to live much longer anyway...certainly not with the continued stress of losing their only home!!

If someone comes in with a LEGAL power-of-attorney, that says that legally that person has a right to make all the legal decisions for a particular impaired person.

Millions of people hold millions of Powers-Of-Attorneys over millions of other individuals for a myriad of reasons.

It's not the banks ( or any companies) place to question it. It's not even legal for them to question it.

All I see are a bunch of commentators making "emotional knee-jerk comments" based on the promotion of victimization by this article.

Sniper you love to dog victims

The grandson is the one that took out the loan, so the grandson is the one getting them evicted not the bank. They only person who they could sue is their own flesh and blood.

Sorry, Willing.Sniper...all those charities that you claim exist? Nope, they don't.

Its a lot more complicated that just find the money, then hook them up with those in need. Only Jesus was able to feel a multitude with a few loaves and fishes. Resources for social service organizations have been steadily cut since the Bush-era, the amount of people needing help/assistance has skyrocketed, donations to charities are way down.

So, where is all this money coming from? How much of your time and money have you personally donated - or are you just good at coming up with 'solutions'?

jet-1017207 You are so right, the social service organzations have been steadily cut since the Bush-era. There are no funds for people that really need them.

What a shame that this is happening to this lady. She deserves to go in peace, not on the streets.

So, in one breath, your point is you can't be hero if you get paid because "it's your job." In the next sentence you say, "you are comparing them to people who die in battle prtecting their country, or people who risk their lives to benefit others".

Soldiers get paid!! So then by YOUR words, soldiers can't be heroes.....because THEY GET PAID....IT'S THEIR JOB. Hmmmmm.....

Fact is, law enforcement officers die protecting people, they "risk their lives to benefit others" every day.....even you. So do firemen/women, and a host of other people who ...."GET PAID", including soldiers. So, what you're saying then is volunteer police and firefighters are heroes but employed police and firefighters aren't???

These police officers/sheriff's deputy's ARE heroes every day, including this day.....for simply doing the humane thing.

I think you don't know what a hero is....being a hero has absolutely NOTHING to do with financial compensation. Being a hero someone who CHOOSES to do a job in which they put their lives on the line, paid or not. A hero is also someone who stands up for those less fortunate than him/her. There are many definintions of a hero.....whether or how much you "get paid" is irrelevant.

Wow Eric- -you need to read the newspapers more often! Heroes come in all shapes and sizes and in all walks of life. That's why police departments, fire departments, etc. give out "hero" awards every year to citizens who step up and help out their neighbors in life-threatening situations or go over-board to help out their neighbors in hard times. These guys in Atlanta have my vote for some of those awards. It figures that Chase would be involved- -next to Bank of America- -most greedy, unscrupulous bank in the country.

They risked their jobs, I'm sure they were aware of the consequences which are their own. A human act of selflessness should never be condemned. I wouldn't call them hero's I would call them SAINTS. Soldiers aren't protecting our freedom. They are protecting a facade of freedom that is growing very thin. They need to follow this deputies example, put THEIR PAYCHECKS on the line and say no to blind allegiance, no to being a tool for repression, and no to aiding sociopathic dominance and greed.

i'm thinking that, with all this publicity, there are some "stiff suits" who are scrambling to recover the bank's image and hope not to lose too many Atlanta-area customers over this horrific display of greed and avarice during the holiday season of all times. Gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling to know that whoever ordered the eviction notice sent to the Sheriff's Department is probably scrambling to try and keep their job right about now (as we know, s--- always runs downhill).

They are probably just trying to get the word out that it was the grandson that was responsible for this

Or, as seems to (at least potentially) be the case, if the banks were willing to lend money to someone claiming to own the home, who didn't actually own the home. Seem unlikely? Well, we've had the robosigning scandal, we've had scandals over loans taken out by unscrupulous "repair" teams, we've had the (substantiated) example of banks foreclosing on the wrong home (one where the bank didn't in fact hold a mortgage) and we've had examples of people being evicted contrary to tenants rights laws (in many areas, buying or foreclosing on a home does not give you a right to evict tenants, so long as they continue to pay rent). Given the very real possibility of fraud by some party other than these two women--either a family member, unrelated third party, or someone inside the bank--the situation should, at minimum, get another look. And nobody of that age, actually, should be put out on the street for the convenience of a bank. What can the mortgage on an old, small, urban atlanta house be worth to a multinational bank, compared to what it is worth to these women? I've bought a foreclosed house. The bank took the house for what they claimed was nonpayment of a $25,000 loan, at usurious rates, after they'd already been paid some $15,000. The bank then failed to winterize the house, so what had been an ~$45,000 house ended up largely destroyed. I bought it for $12,000. The bank basically did themselves (and my city) much more damage than was ever done to them, financially speaking. And it wasn't an isolated incident. The city is reeling under the cost of tearing down houses abandoned by the banks who ousted families who were willing and able to keep the houses in livable condition, and pay some (if not all) of their mortgage payments and tax payments.

The problem is they did not take out the mortgage. Chase let a relative take out the mortgage , which is wrong. READ THE FULL STORY BEFORE YOU CONDEMN THESE OLD LADIES.

People these to ladies are old, one is 103. Most people that age are not aware of whats going on around them. I worked in Nurses homes and know how most of us will get when were old. I was happy to hear someone in this world has a heart. Thats whats wrong with the world, some just don't care. It's always easy for some to give there advice until there in a difficult situation. Don't forget the elderly they worked hard and most paid taxes. The bank can wait for this house thats a home for these two ladies. God Bless both of them

I work in real estate, and this woman's story is sadly all too common. And it doesn't make her a deadbeat. What likely happened is that an unscrupulous lender allowed a relative, probably one with at best iffy authority to do so, to take out a mortgage on this house, which, given the duration of time she'd been there the woman had almost certainly owned clear and outright for years and years. The relative keeps the money, the woman is stuck with a bill, one she doesn't understand and has no income to pay back.

This would seem to be the crux of the matter from the articles I've read on this situation. The lender is at fault for making a stupid, and in my opinion, utterly immoral loan in the first place, and they deserve to be stuck with the loss. If they require compensation, they should take legal recourse against this relative X. Those comments on this board who want to turn this into an example of deadbeats defaulting on their obligations, or society caving in to freeloaders at the expense of banks, or some other such nonsense, have absolutely no concept of the reality of these situations.

These women gave power of attorney to a relative to handle their financial matters.

That relative took out another mortgage, and apparently has not paid it in years.

This is not the banks' fault in any manner. Why exactly should the bank take this loss?

These women have had something like 3 years to take care of this matter. If the relative has the money, they could have sued this relative and recovered the money within that amount of time.

It's not an excuse to say that the women are incompetent to handle their own finances. They chose poorly when they chose the holder of their power of attorney. That still makes it their own problem.

Loans aren't immoral.

People fought for a hundred years for banks to stop discriminating against people based on age, race, creed, national origin, etc.

Now, people are saying, well they shouldn't have loaned money to this person because she was old!

The entire system is set up now to be blind to these factors. The loan looks at income, it looks at collateral, it looks at time of residence, and how long you have had a job. Then they pull your credit reports. That's about it.

Someone with a house paid off, which this woman had to have achieved at some point if this is only the second mortgage, has a lot of collateral. But collateral means exactly this situation: if you don't pay, they take back the house.

I seriously doubt that this mortgage in question was even initiated by Chase or Deutche Bank. Most likely, the mortgage was approved by another bank, and Deutche Bank bought groupings of mortgages blindly. And there have been so few cases of illegal mortgages or evictions where the bank doesn't own the house that it doesn't even warrant mentioning here. People mentioning these things are simply extremely biased.

If you had a 104 year old lady coming into a store you owned every month stealing items, you wouldn't just let her continue stealing because she was old, would you?

These women have been stealing from this bank for years. They've had enough time to make other arrangements.

However, as the woman said, she plans to not do a single thing to remedy her situation and she thinks the bank should just leave her alone because she is old. That is an entitlement problem.

And, guess what? If they aren't paying their mortgage, they probably aren't paying any of the related taxes either.

Here's the truth from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

The house is legally owned by Ms. Lee's grandson. Not a power of attorney thing. It is owned by the grandson.

The house has been in foreclosure since 2009. So, definitely no payments in 2 years. It takes a while of not paying to have a house go into foreclosure as well.

The grandson took out the second mortgage on the property he owned in 2002.

http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/103103-year-old-woman-1245741.html

If the house is the grandson's, it does change matters. Though I'm still glad the sheriff's deputies did what they did.

Bless your heart sweetie. You have probably paid for this house 3 times by now. Banks get bail outs so why can't they wait for you. Happy 104th soon. Chase is one of the better banks with rates that don't change pending their mood. B of A and CITIBANK are heartless and ask for people to stick it to them. Comment as you will people but I have learned from experience since my wife developed cancer again and after 20 years of always making payments ontime and never missing one both these banks awarded me by taking away my credit line and raising my interest rates to 29.9% annually (Citibank) and 25+% (B of A) while I was still in good standing and paying my bills. The customer service reps. said these actions were in the best interest of both of us........Really ???? I understand I owe what I borrowed and want to pay it back but the move the banks made makes it very difficult if not impossible...... 29.99% interest on $ 10,000.00 is $ 250.00 per month interest without paying any principle. Did the government treat you like this when using our tax $$$$$$$$ ????

After using Google to find local sources for this story and get some more details

what i found out is the grandson bought the home in 2002, probably from the grandmother as she and the daughter have lived there for many many years tho that is never stated but is implied. He stopped making payments in 2009 and the bank has been trying to foreclose for a while .. the 2 women scraped up the money and tried to pay the bank the full amount of $17,400 but the bank REFUSED payment saying it was too late.

Now I don't know about all states but I do know in some, if a company refuses to accept payment regardless if its just a monthly payment on a loan or bill or payment in full on the account, most courts will tell the lawyers/ representative for that company, the bill is considered paid in full.

I was in small claims court years ago and a woman was in there fighting with the local cable company to get her service restored (she was on disability due to a motor vehicle accident and was in the middle of a lawsuit with the driver who ran a red light and hit her) because she was getting limited income, she found it easier for her to pay her monthly bills making weekly payments instead of monthly, she divided the total due by 4.3, would get money orders and send them out weekly. After 2 months the cable company started returning her payments stating they couldn't accept them and that she had to pay the total amount due by the due date once a month. After 3 months of them returning her small weekly payments, they shut her service off. She took them to court and won! The judge told the lawyer for the cable company, to consider the past due balance paid in full, based on the 3 months worth of returned money orders made out to the cable company the woman presented as proof they refused her weekly payments and told the lawyer to inform his clients that while they can terminate a customer's services for non payment, they can not refuse to accept payments from customers regardless of when and how often the customer pays.

I agree BlueStar..I surely do agree..and to the moron who said the bank probably didn't know the ages of the women..BULL! They have ALL the records. They just do not give a damn. I take exception to any jerk who would put these women out and wish I could spend just five minutes with one of them. They would get the tongue lashing of their lives! I think that the people on this blog who condone what the bank tried to do (and told them to sue the Sheriff's office and county) needs an attitude adjustment. Oh wait..they are probably high muckamucks in some financial institution, are lawyers (ewww) or just don't give one hoot about old people.

Of course you think this, typical Obama voter. Take, take and take. Why should you have to pay back a loan the bank so graciously gave you and you signed a promise to do so.

The bank didn't care about their ages because the grandson took out the loan.

There are places for the elderly indigent. There are state-run old folks homes required to take them in. Just so you know they would not be on the street.

They don't want to go to the old folks home, they want to live out their days in their own home.

If they wanted to live out their years in their own home, then they should not have gotten additional mortgages once the house was paid off - especially if they were not planning on paying the mortgage payment.

Or, they should have used something like a reverse mortgage.

Cassivella...let's hope you're either wealthy enough to take care of yourself, or that you have children willing to make sure you're taken care of. I doubt you'd be saying the same thing if you were in this woman's shoes.

And just where are these 'old folks homes' that you say exist, Willing.Sniper - or should I say 'Willing.Scrooge'?

Actually, your comment reminds me of the line "Are there no workhouses, are there no prisons?"

Cassivella, you really are a turd... Merry Christmas.. here's your coal.. oh wait.. the government wants to tax that, so heres your bill for the taxes you owe on your Coal. =)

Willing? They KNOW exactly how old these women are. They have all the records. You seem to be a total non-caring jackass..I don't like you and hope you are just young and stupid instead of being old and stupid. You may have the wherewithal to do what you say..they do NOT. At 103 years of age I can tell you for sure nobody is going to give them another mortgage. Grow the hell up!!

@Willing.Sniper

That's part of the problem. When big business is involved it's never personal when maybe, just maybe, there should be a little personal involvement...

personal invovlement? the bank gave her $, she didnt pay it back, the story seems to say they have been tryin for years to resolve this, what did she do with the money? if you give your house payment away to family members or your mortgage is larger than your income or whatever you deserve to get foreclosed on? its not personal its hey we gave you money, you didnt pay, sorry we are rich but it doesnt mean we have to pay for evey persons mortgage cause they cant afford to pay it>?? but i guess im a cold hearted person for thinking the laws still apply even though you lived past 100 years old lol

They don't want to go to the old folks home, they want to live out their days in their own home.

Who does? But when your too old to take care of yourself, thats where you belong.

Once again, the bank did not give this woman a dime. They gave it to a grandson, who did not own the home. The bank is not guilty of being cold-hearted--it is guilty of bad business. It made a poorly researched and incompetent business decision. It is no one else's responsibility, not even the ATL sheriff's deputies, to save this bank's hide because they made a fradulent loan to someone with no collateral except another person's private property.

Grind your political axe on another story; the facts on this one aren't cooperating with you.

Willing-The banks would know their ages, to get a loan you have to use your Social Security number. Or maybe you did not know that information. And by the way maybe you should go visit what you call an old folks home. I would hate to be your mother or father. Get a life

hotpeppa: If you actually READ the article or other articles relating to this, you'd understand that a scrupulous relative got them to allegedly sign a power of attorney, then got the house refinanced, probably took the money and ran, and the poor old ladies were stuck with a mortgage payment that they probably did not understand! Happens all the time and is a case of elder abuse in most states. Trust me, the bank would probably NOT have lent these women the money based on their ages, so we have to assume that they lent it to the relative. Who knows where he/she has disappeared to with the money....and he/she probably didn't even let the poor old ladies know that they have just awarded themselves a mortgage bill that they had NO chance of paying. Have some compassion for a change!!!

People, I pay my rent each month, just as I paid my mortgage each month when I used to own a home.

If I stop paying my rent, I expect that a Sheriff will show up at my door 30 days after my rent is past due giving me an eviction notice, because that is how my lease and the law work around here.

I don't expect that if I am not paying for a place to live that out of the goodness of their hearts the people who own this building are going to forgo making their money and just let me stay rent-free.

If no one is paying rent, then the owner of the building is not able to pay her mortgage. The owner is not able to put food on her table.

If this building were owned by a corporation, it would be the same thing. If we don't pay, then the employees of the corporation (starting with the ones getting paid the minimum wage jobs) are not able to pay the mortgage, the corporation goes under, and hundreds of people are unemployed.

This whole "I don't have to pay because it is an evil bank corporation" is simply childish.

If you are receiving goods or services, you must exchange something of value for this. It has been this way in human society from the time we settled down into what we call civilization.

The Bank would have NO IDEA how old theses ladies are. They didn't deal with them, they delt with the LEGAL Representative of their property.

If someone comes in with a LEGAL power-of-attorney, that says that legally that person has a right to make all the legal decisions for a particular impaired person,that's the only person the bank can legally deal with or ask any questions of.

Millions of people hold millions of Powers-Of-Attorneys over millions of other individuals for a myriad of reasons.

It's not the banks ( or any companies) place to question it. It's not even legal for them to question it.

Here's the truth from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

The house is legally owned by Ms. Lee's grandson. Not a power of attorney thing. It is owned by the grandson.

The house has been in foreclosure since 2009. So, definitely no payments in 2 years. It takes a while of not paying to have a house go into foreclosure as well.

The grandson took out the second mortgage on the property he owned in 2002.

http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/103103-year-old-woman-1245741.html

The reason the bank didnt know about the women is that they are not on the loan they are in thier grandsons house

The bank should be ashamed. They can do somethin to help her out, but instead of trying to help someone out they just say lets kickem out.

yes i agree ,the banks are only out to make a profit ,this women is over a hundrend years old and that GOD has blessed her with , i say everyone that has money in that bank should take their money out and let them see how it feels to lose their homes and their boats and and their money ,the best way to hurt a gready person in to take away their money .from philly ,LEANDER DAVIS

Yeah, god blessed her with a piece of crap grandson who took out a mortgage he chose not to pay and forced his grandmother to get evicted.

The grandson is the greedy person here, not the banks.

What a dope !!!

Interested Observer:

I hope that You and Your all generation does not have to go thru what this lady is going thru.banks have broken this country in half after we bail them out with our money that the goverment manages for us.And do this to a 103 years old ? what in the world hapened to compasion? Iterested observer I think You are the son of hitler.mey the cancer be with you.

Exactly. There's plenty of examples of banks foreclosing on houses they never mortgaged. I even found out about one BoA foreclosure where the person paid for the house in cash and never even involved any bank. In this case though there's more information in articles elsewhere that say one of her relatives took out a second mortgage without the woman's permission - which is exactly the kind of thing I would expect from these leech banks, they don't care if the mortgage is legit all they want is the money.

We do know that the house actually does not belong to this woman, It belongs to the grandson, It is his house and he let her live there, So do not be mad at the bank be mad at the person who did not pay the mortgage.

People who take out mortgages and are not able to pay for them don't deserve to be evicted? In what other scenerio does that work in your world? We all feel compassion for these people, but to say they "don't deserve" to be evicted is false. If everyone who had a mortage decided to stop paying for them, and no one was evicted, what would happen to the bank that hold your checking and savings?

Eric

You have to have to look at with your heart and not the law to understand what he's saying. I'm sure there are hundreds of families who took out loans thinking that they had good job security, and would always be able to make the payments. However, the economy went to @!$%# and suddenly they lost their job and couldn't afford to pay. Should they be evicted? By law, yes. Do they deserve to be evicted? Matter of opinion. I'd say no.

And I say no because I like to think that after years upon years of paying the bank, they'd cut you some slack and maybe give you a year to look for another job or somehow straighten things out. Of course, the world doesn't that way.

I'm sure there are other cases like this one, in which the banks are clearly greedy douchebags with zero compassion. The average mortgage fail comes much sooner than this.

You are right it would be considered a non performing asset, thus making the bank set aside assets for the value. Not being able to use cash to invest for that amount. Believe me they don't want all the house out there. It is still to come.

Really? Billions of foreclosures? That would mean that nearly every house on the planet is in foreclosure. Why is everyone pissed at the bank? All they want is the payment on money they handed to someone. Why not be mad at the relative who took out a loan without the permission of the ladies? That's the real criminal here, or maybe not. Maybe that person is the actual owner of the house and had the right to take out a mortgage. Either way, you liberals can't have it both ways. If you don't want to keep bailing out banks then people need to pay their bills. Personally, I think the only fair thing is to let the banks fail and let people who can't or won't pay their bills do what they promised, which is to pay or move. If, in fact, the relative falsified documents to borrow money without the owner's permission, that person needs to be in jail. Either way, it's not the bank's fault unless they didn't do due diligence on the loan, but I guess since the party line is that it's the bank's fault, you sheep just fall in line.

P.S. Now collapse me and prove I'm right.

One part of what you said is true. About the bank not doing due diligence on the loan--the collateral wasn't there to insure the loan, and that is entirely the bank's fault. Even if this grandson gave this woman a paper to sign, deceiving her what it was about, and she did so, and he handed that to the bank--it is still the bank's fault. There was no interaction with the woman, no vetting her for competency, no research given by a loan officer as to whether this was a smart move for the institution to make. Amateur night all the way. Bad business, incompetent capitalism. That is price of doing business, the risk it entails. No one should be there to bail this bank out because they screwed up, least of all the public employees of the government conservatives claim is the real problem in the first place.

The grandson should be on the tip for the loan, and if he doesn't have it, the bank deserves to be out their money. The woman doesn't deserve to be out of her home.

Jim, again, please stop "bunching" us in one pile. I'm a liberal, and I don't feel the way you describe....as I'm sure others agree. I don't want to keep bailing out banks, I think people should pay their bills, but I KNOW that the economy has caused many problems with a lot of well-meaning people who took out loans when they had stable jobs and continuing income....@!$%# happens. Anyway, please do NOT put one group of people in one pile unless you know FOR A FACT that we ALL think the same way....and we don't. Thank you.

Those deputies should be recognize as " HEROES" !!!!!

DM

The collateral is the house! The bank is doing exactly what the contracts states: if you don't pay the mortgage, they take the house. That is how it works.

Whomever signed the loan had the legal right to do so. If the women signed this power to a relative, it is still their problem, not the bank. They can follow up in the criminal courts.

These women have had years to deal with this problem. The bank gave someone money. The bank is owed that money back.

CHASE! Why am I not surprised.

Sorry Didi,

Sometimes the blather from the morons just blinds me. You're right, not all liberals are morally ambiguous, but the ones who blindly blame banks and big business when most people put themselves where they are just stand further forward (and speak louder) than those of you with integrity. Where I can and do take exception to this is when those of you with integrity allow the ones who don't to be the only voices heard. I fully realize there are morons on the right, but I put forth effort into exposing their idiocies as well. We cannot allow the rabid extremes of either ideology to continue to win influence. Extremism is why we are where we are today, on every front.

Didi: With some people (Jim, Linda, Sniper, ect..) regardless that it's the"grandsons doing & responsibility", still it's, "can't pay / evict 'em". Why do we need MORE regulations on Banks, NOT LESS?.? Why don't these "TEA PARTY" type thinkers act like their "namesakes" take up their "axes" and "AX THE TAX CODE" with its $1.1Trillion in "breaks",exemptions & "loopholes"; Plus allowing 45% of taxpayers to pay NOTHING!.! Hopefully a "Pubic Defender" can be found to right what seems to be a flagrant case of "elder abuse". Go after the real dirtbag relative; plus due diligence on the Banks part!.!

Oh I'm all for axing the tax code. I think we need to eliminate the IRS and charge everyone the same exact percentage with no loopholes at all. That number might be 18 percent or 25 percent, but whatever the appropriate number is, everyone pays it on all income, period.

And if you'll actually read my post instead of assuming, I clearly asked if the family member did it without permission, why he wasn't in jail.

At the end of the day though, if it's a legal loan, then pay or get out. It's what you gave your word to do when you signed the documents. Why is that so hard to understand? The borrower didn't promise to pay as long as they had a job, or as long as things are good. They promised to pay every month no matter what. Bad things happen. Maintaining our integrity when they do is sometimes the only thing we have.

Paul,

Please tell me you're not referring to Ms. Lee's race. The lady is 104 for Christ's sake. She's owned the house for 50 years! Rather than get in the taxpayer's pockets by going into a state home, she has her 83 year old daughter caring for her. You should applaud them for that.

Yeah, and I'll be holding my breath for the day to come when Obama's Uncle who was deported in the 1990's is gone from here. 20 years after that "Court Action" he is driving drunk and STILL in the US. Affirmative Action, etc. Diversity, etc. Remember you are SPECIAL -- just like EVERYONE ELSE!

Paul: Just "Obama bashing"? Leave the "race" card out or mention Cain! !

They haven't paid a mortgage payment in years.

If their income went down, then they need to move to a place they can afford.

If they hadn't re-mortgaged the place at least once, they would have had the house completely paid off.

Why exactly should businesses be in the business of losing money because of other people's stupidity? The bank is already going to lose tens of thousands of dollars simply by going through the eviction process.

There is absolutely no proof or suggestion of wrongdoing by the bank in this case. It is simply a sob story that is being prostituted by the media because these women are so old.

The only criminal here is whomever has the money from the second or third mortgages who didn't pay it back to the bank in the form of mortgage payments. Whomever is the guardian for these women is the one who is really responsible for this mess.

hst123...If their fixed income isn't enough to support them in their current living condition, why is it on the bank to make up the difference? When I can't afford something, I don't get it. When I decided my rent was to much, I moved. That's just called real life. We all deserve what we are able to provide for ourselves.

And you mentioned "us" bailing the banks out. First, Deutsche didn't get bailed out. And the major banks that did, paid the money bank with huge amounts of interest. And please tell me you would have rather us allow them to go belly up. We would already be without power, without clean water... and since you mentioned it, and since they paid the money back, when do you think these women would pay back their debt?

And way to go for congratulating a sherrif for refusing to do his job. I should get a job in his unit...I have always wanted to decide which parts of my job I would do. Thank god most cops and soldiers don't subscribe to that mentality.

Cassivella, again.. wow you are a turd, lol.. can you please post a link to where you are getting your information that shows and proves, this lady has not paid any payments in years?

American greed at its best. Cassivella, I hope you don't have an elderly relative that might sometime get in a financial bind.

Just saw this on the local news. Actually, they have been trying to pay for years. Deutsche Bank owns the mortgage, but JP Morgan-Chase services it and for some reason Chase has refused to accept payment. The family has been fighting this for years. Deutsche Bank's problem is with Chase, not this poor old woman. They need to leave her alone. Good for the sherriff's dept for doing the right thing.

Eric: First of all, Deutsche Bank DID get a bail out. And, although MOST of the major banks did pay it back with interest, there are still several out there who haven't paid back a dime!! You need to do some serious research before you post on this vine because every time you post, you sound like an idiot!! As for the Sheriff's office, they do NOT have to evict someone from a house...it's their decision. If they felt that it was not in the best interest of the women, then they did the right thing. I supposed you would have liked to have seen them out in the street at their frail age. As it was, the daughter was sent to the hospital! Yes, I agree, the relative that screwed them is the one the bank should go after....but have some compassion for the ladies....they probably had NO idea what their relative did to them.

When my grandparents were unable to make payments on their apartments, I paid for them to move into assisted living, and I paid for the money due after Medicare.

My family has planned to take care of its own.

Here's the truth from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

The house is legally owned by Ms. Lee's grandson. Not a power of attorney thing. It is owned by the grandson.

The house has been in foreclosure since 2009. So, definitely no payments in 2 years. It takes a while of not paying to have a house go into foreclosure as well.

http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/103103-year-old-woman-1245741.html

SO... Go after the "GRANDSON". Hang him HIGH! NOT the two women!.!

This story is incomplete. There was more on our local news. She has been trying to make payments for years. DP owns the mortgage and JP Morgan Chase services it, but Chase has refused to accept payment for some reason. The family has been fighting this for quite some time. It is the bank's fault...not hers. This could happen to any of us. She is NO FREELOADER! The banks are inept and the sheriff's dept was right!!

The grandson is the owner of the property.

It has been in foreclosure since 2009. He stopped paying well before that.

It's clearly her grandson's fault.

Sounds like he owes Grandma a place to live out her final days. If family can't take care of family, no wonder everybody else gets stuck with the bill.

Why does she owe money on a place she has "called home for more than half a century"? Get out you freeloader. Why should other people pay for your ineptitude?

Freeloader. Hmm. Do me a grand favor and say that to the greedy bitchin 1% that thinks it's the end of the world if they have to PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE of taxes.

I sincerely hope the rule of three bites you in the ass and bites you hard.