I wonder if they mis-used the term, and meant "former". I have seen that happen before.

I just found other stories, that do indeed, say "former", and "ex", rather than retired. I could not find another one that said "retired".

He is back to making decent money and has tried to work it out with the bank but they won't work him.

That's the thing - the article states his income took a hit and he got behind - but then returned to normal levels and they wouldn't take his payments.

actually READ the article you're commenting on and you would know his hours got cut and he tried to get a modification. also, where does it say he's a retired marine?

The article doesn't state that he was a career Marine........only that he was a Marine. As usual.............pissy-poor reporting by MSNBC

If he really is retired [as the article states] ... he looks as if he is a bit young to have spent 20 years minimum in the Marines. We are also talking about California were housing is VERY expensive and has been for quite some time. I spent 20 years in the military, retired, and work a full time job since. The retirement is okay, but it isn't great. I certainly don't live lavishly but it is still a struggle to live making payments on a devaluated modest 3-bed house the Mitten State, much less California!

@HATR_HURTER, you might want to "READ" the article: Second paragraph:

"I'm just a regular guy who gets up each day, takes the kids to school and goes to work," said de los Santos, a retired Marine who is hunkered down in the modest three-bedroom house in Riverside..."

By the way, I confirmed it, he has been out of the Marines for 21 years, so although he is plenty old enough to have spent 20 in, there is no way he retired, short of medically, it does not sound like it from this article:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/21/arturo-de-los-santos-foreclosure-eviction_n_1288424.html

Crystal, you don't appear to have a grasp on retired military pay. I am retired military (27 years) and without my husbands income we could not live on my retirement (We live in MN) NO ENLISTED MILITARY RETIREE could live in CA on retirement pay alone. His retirement pay probably does not even make his mortgage payment for a month. Please research before you post.

Optomyst

The article doesn't state that he was a career Marine........only that he was a Marine.

I’m just a regular guy who gets up each day, takes the kids to school and goes to work," said de los Santos, a retired Marine who is hunkered down in the modest three-bedroom house in Riverside, Calif

Funny. I thought "once a Marine, always a Marine." Now it's "once a Marine, you'll still be one, unless you don't fit in with my views."

Never any sympathy for people, until it happens to you. Pathetic.

did you read the article??? his hours were cut and he was struggling...do you know how much houses and taxes are in California?????

I just retired a few months back it's not that much

Wow, from the way the headline read, I thought there was a fully teed off Marine, that was taking a strong hold of his house, hunkered down on the floor in some room, loaded to the teeth with sidearms and ammo, shotguns, and maybe even grenades, against about 10 deputies and a swat team.

Then I was hoping to read further to see what happened. Maybe, it was still ongoing, and other marines were thinking about going to his house to help out a fellow Marine. Can you imagine seeing that on the news? Twenty red hot Marines against 20 deputies and a full swat team.

Crystal-569996

He lives in California!

You need at least an annual salary of $150,000 to live comfortably AND living expenses have to be less than 33% of your budget.

If you can't satisfy both requirements, you are @!$%#ed

Hay ranman87---Once a Marine always a Marine, But the writer claimed he was a retired Marine. So save the pathetic crap. You have shone you don't know the difference, just like the writer of the articular.

Idiocy. He served his time in the marines -- now he's retired from that (btw it doesn't take twenty years). If you're not going to get a little education then you really don't have any intelligent response to this article. Since when can any company "refuse to take his payments"? My only other remark is what the hell happened to the person writing this article? Can you not read the English language? There are at least two mistakes in this article that are obvious. Get it together. Read your stuff before you hit the send button!

#1

thanks to him and the other posters on here that were or are in the military.

#2 i am suprised people are talking about retired or former.
this is a legit issue i didnt know existed.
so he was trying to do his financial obligations, but needed help, and we all need help sometimes, went to get things fixed so he could continue to pay and wound up losing his house?!!!

i expected the article to be about a dead beat nonpayer also, but was suprised that he was completely the opposite!

this was not fair or right!

the worst part is, and i dont want to get political, this was caused by something that was supposed to prevent this exact thing!!

so was the action the president put out, thought thru?

by this article i guess not!

WOW!

i hope it all works out for him in the end, but this suks out loud!!!

It is time for the federal regulators to step in and take over Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Place them in recievership and begin the process of renegotiating the mortgages. Put people out in the field and do the restructuring. Only foreclose the homes that cannot be worked out. It is not in Fannie and Freddie's interest to stop the foreclosures.

What-the-81 - I live in CA and we don't make anywhere near $150,000. We own our home, live fairly comfortably and live in LA County. House prices, while still high, are much lower in Riverside County where this guy lives.

I think the deal is you are supposed to make your house payments every month. Not just the months you can afford to make them. Does Obama know about this? Barry said he was going to fix this problem. Somebody get Bam Bam on the horn. Get Jami Dimon on the phone too. Occupy? why didn't you say so? Hold Everything!! Occupy is on the move!!!

I don’t care what his former chosen profession/career was. If you sign the dotted line saying you're going to pay for something, pay for it. If you don't or can't and the lender wants the item back, stand aside and give it to them.

It's not like the banks are changing the original terms and conditions. They just want what was mutually agreed upon by both parties.

kevin, the first time i read it i didn't see it, so i skimmed through it again and didn't see it again. that's why i was asking where it said that.

ppctx, should we up hold the same principles on the banks that we bailed out too?

Yes, HATR_HURTER, but I was only quoting you exactly. So before you tell someone else to "read", you should just take your own advice. Maybe they just "skimmed through it" too. In other words, your post was 100% hypocritical.

Freddie Mac motto: Is it: "We provide the path to your dream home" ?

Fannie Mae's motto: “We are in the American Dream business.”

LOL, and how many FORECLOSED homes does these entities hold yet continue to operate IN THE RED and continue to suck $$$ from the American taxpayers but continue their war with homeowners.

On another note, I really like the following banks' recent court settlement concerning "improper foreclosures":

".....recent $25 billion settlement with four major banks over allegations of improper foreclosures.

The settlement, which that includes all but one state, will help lower the principal for about 1 million homeowners who are underwater and behind in their house payments."

Yep, that is really a GREAT SETTLEMENT to help "LOWER THEIR PRINCIPAL" even though a LEGAL contract was signed by these "under the water" homeowners to purchase the home at a price and mortgage payment schedule. I wonder if I could get a reduction in the price of a new vehicle after I sign the "legal" paperwork and drive off the lot since the vehicle will immediately depreciate.

What about the homeowners who have a mortgage "principal" more than the home's assessed/market value and have been paying their mortgage on time ? Nah.

@chris-65

That's what I would think. "been doing everything we should" Except maybe paying the payments? LOL

Uh, reading comprehension, please. From the article:

De los Santos told NBC Los Angeles that in 2009, the bank initially lowered his payment in a modification but then stopped taking his money.

Before the house foreclosure process was complete, de los Santos’ hours and income returned to pre-crash levels, but he says that JP Morgan Chase and loan holder Freddie Mac rejected his efforts to bring the loan up to date. Instead, his home was foreclosed and he and his family were evicted.

And from the comment directly preceding yours from digitalnoise:

That's the thing - the article states his income took a hit and he got behind - but then returned to normal levels and they wouldn't take his payments.

So he WAS making his payments (at least according to him) but the Bank stopped accepting them-- presumably because he didn't qualify for the lower payment initially. What is especially troubling is that his work restored his hours and the bank continued to refuse his payments. What a crock of sh*t.

Sally Lu

What-the-81 - I live in CA and we don't make anywhere near $150,000. We own our home, live fairly comfortably and live in LA County. House prices, while still high, are much lower in Riverside County where this guy lives

When did you buy your house? Don't lie. If it was before 2000, then your case doesn't apply to what I said about California.

To those that think the bank should renegotiate the original deal. NO NO NO. If you can’t afford it, planned poorly, things didn't work out, etc, that is your loss and should be available for me to gain at current market price or what I negotiate for it. Renegotiate, wish I could have a "do over" on some of the choices I have made, but life is life. Take your licks and move on. At the same time, there were calculated choices that I have made that reduced my risk and as such, I’m in a smaller home than I could afford, don’t drive a new car, don’t acquire too many luxury items, generally don’t spend my financial safety net (savings) on vacations, etc.

Why in the world would I want someone who gambled wrong be rewarded with having more than I do because their gamble didn’t work out? The rest of society should have a shot of buying that home at market price or the price they negotiate instead of someone having something they can’t afford.

@thepunisher-2054749, are the banks not paying it back? But yes, they should be held to the same standards. The problem with reposesing a faild bank is the physical structures don't have a significant value and once the real value of a bank is gone, its gone. It would be nice if everyone with a loan from a failed bank got to keep their house.

They need to arrest the banksters not the homeowners.

.

Here's the reality MOST of you are missing:

the bank most likely advised him to stop making payments, because thats they only way they'll consider a modifcation. trusting the professionals, he followed their advice - and got screwed. this is intentional, the banks will have him default - write off the home as a loss, then resell it at a profit - and sometimes, still sue the previous defaulter for the balance between the original loan and the new sale.

FLAT OUT THIEVERY

IF YOU ARE NOT ANGRY ABOUT THIS, YOU ARE NOT HUMAN

anyone who's read the book The Grapes of Wrath, knows exactly whats happening right now...

"The bank is something more than men, I tell you. It's the monster. Men made it, but they can't control it." - Steinbeck, Grapes of Wrath (greed)

that leads to this

"when a majority of the people are hungry and cold they will take by force what they need. And the little screaming fact that sounds through all history: repression works only to strengthen and knit the repressed."

call it class warfare all you want, but we arent the ones who waged it - THEY ARE. we are just fighting back.

ppctx "Why in the world would I want someone who gambled wrong be rewarded"

how is it a gamble to buy a house, based on your current income - THINKING you'll be able to make the payments as long as you keep your job, only to lose your job through no fault of your own?

They didnt gamble wrong...they got screwed by BANKS who gambled wrong, and laid off people en masse which ALWAYS has a domino affect. My company was hit hard in 2008 and 2009, but has since rebounded...our customers have too...it could have turned out way differently, we all could have lost our jobs...

and how would that have resulted in MY bad gamble?

it's folks like you who dont a clue how interconnected everything is, and as such...we have to right the wrongs when they occur. and right now, we've all been majorly wronged by an industry that participated in predatory lending, horrible lending practices and banks and fannie mae/freddie mac that DIRECTLY BET ON AMERICA FAILING.

how are we supposed to win when the deck is always stacked against us?

when it's in the interest of the wealthy for us to fail?

Here is what I find incredible. Before this whole mortgage mess, if you got behind on your house, car, whatever, it was forclosed/repo'd. Now, it seems that if you get behind or fell behind on your payments with anything, you can pull out the "mortgage mess" card and ask for a redo. What about those of us that have struggled and cut expenses and got 2nd jobs to make ends meet? Don't we "deserve" some kind of financial consideration? I use "deserve" because when I read articles like this, it seems that the person the articles refers to feels they "deserve" to be back to where they were. I'm not trying to be inconsiderate, but we all know the consequences if we can't pay.

The article (second paragraph) states that he is a retired Marine (not an officer or petty officer) and (Crystal's comment way up above) therefore does not get a pension (a percentage of your active duty pay at retirement).

He NEVER stopped making payments... After his hours were cut at his metal working position, he negotiated a lower payment with JP Morgan who, after a bit of time (not specified) JP Morgan, not De Los Santos, stopped accepting his payments. JP Morgan then started the foreclosure process on him. Prior to the foreclosure process concluding his hours went back to pre-recession levels which meant that he could manage his original payment but JP Morgan & Freddie REJECTED his efforts to "bring his loan up to date. Typical BS from banks... JPM probably doesn't have legitimate paperwork (due to the BS of CDOs and CDSs that were foisted upon the financial system by these robber baron banks) therefore they are trying to ignore him so that they can foreclose and therefore absolve themselves of the problem of not having proper paperwork.

Is this anyway to treat someone who has served in our military? Someone who has put his life on the line to serve our government (corporate interests) overseas? For those who accuse him of running away from his responsibility of paying... did you serve in the military? How have you served our country?

Poor writing by the author (Kari Huus) but good enough for diligent readers to get the gist.

California is expensive and the retirement pay of a 46 year old marine retiree would not do it, most likely. I haven't yet figured out who all these "loan modification" plans are for, anyway. All i keep hearing about is who is getting rejected. Who actually gets approved? Do you have to show your Democrat primary voting receipt or something?!

As a Democrat, I blame Obama. He took responsibility of TARP, he bailed out the banks, he bailed out Fannie and Freddie AND he is responsible for protecting banks with the federal shielding from state and local Prosecuting Attorneys from harming banks.

Through all of this not one person Democratic nor Republican has done one damn thing to help the HOMEOWNERS. Personally, I would like to see every single American go too their banks and pull ALL savings out, close accounts, then reopen them in another bank. Do this maybe 4 or 5 times and banks will get the message that they aren't quite as special as they thought. Also I'd like to see something done with the Credit Bureaus, because they are just as responsible for the collapse as the banks. Without their bogus triple AAA ratings on the fraudulent derivatives, none of this would have transpired.

@Jessica-1170252

how is it a gamble to buy a house, based on your current income - THINKING you'll be able to make the payments as long as you keep your job, only to lose your job through no fault of your own?

What if I buy a stock based on current trends, then the company goes belly up. Things looked good, I THOUGHT they would stay good, but they didn't. The person who sold me the stock won, I lost. No fault of my own, I don’t know, but at the end of that day, I still lost. Should someone work with me to negate losses incured from decision I made that didn't turn out as I hoped?

Actually. legally, if you are attempting to make payments and the creditor refuses your payment because it's not the "minimum" then the debt is void. A creditor can NOT legally refuse to accept a payment on a debt and still hold the debt. IF he really tried to make payments and the bank/Freddie refused his payments then the foreclosure is improper since the bank and Freddie are in default on THEIR side and they can no longer collect on the debt.

The problem is the banksters own the government, not the people!

Why do you think the Banksters were bailed out with tax payers money (the average joe), and the average "working joe", is losing their home?

It is called "personal responsibility" and the "average joe" trying to live beyond their income, while the to big to fail banksters. own the government, which the average joe can not afford to pay for, either!

The banksters and crooked bought and paid for government. were more than willing to assist the "average joe" in jumping in to that financial trap of easy credit and living beyond ones means.

America, home of the best crooked politicians, money can buy!

Hello folks, as the old time newspaper boy on the corner would say, heary, heary, heary, from Veterans Today read all about it. The biggest financial scam in the history of the world which will imprison former and current top government leaders. This story which is starting to gain a lot of traction around the globe is going to change our country as no other event in history has to this point! Please read the story from Veterans Today. I will post as much as the comment blog can hold. Arturo would be happy to see this as this news may help lift his spirits to see that fraud and corruption are being noticed!

Bush, Fed, Europe Banks in $15 Trillion Fraud, All Documented

Veterans Today

By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor

———————-

Below is one of the strangest stories in financial history, one involving the US government lying about hundreds of thousands of tons of imaginary gold, illegal wire transfers and loans totalling $15 trillion. The video, from the House of Lords, is amazing in itself.

What it doesn’t express is where the money came from though Lord James of Blackheath proves conclusively that an effort was made to say it came from a gold reserve in Brunei that, in fact, never existed.

At surface, it appears we have stumbled upon the largest terrorist organization in the world and have found original documents tracing its funding to the Secretary of the Treasury and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, two of the top financial officers in the US. A cursory review of terrorism statues in the US indicate that all transactions we will learn about are, in fact, to be assumed “terrorist money laundering” and that the only thing preventing the immediate arrest of hundreds of top financial officials is their political connections alone.

YouTube - Veterans Today -

We will be able to offer an alternative, more insights, some hard intelligence and some very valuable background that we hope will offer insightful and realistic perspectives on this amazing story.

On February 16, 2012, Lord James of Blackheath, member of Britain’s House of Lords presented evidence of an illegal scheme begun, he has thus discovered, in 2009. His documents including originals signed by Alan Greenspan and Timothy Geithner, show the illegal “off the books” transfer by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York of $15 trillion to, initially, HSBC (Hong Kong Shanghai Banking Corporation) London and then to the Bank of Scotland.

The Bank of Scotland, under royal charter but restricted from involvement in any such transactions, simply “gave” the money to 20 European banks to use in a highly profitable scheme of co-trading “fresh cut” MTN’s (mid-term notes), generating trillions of dollars in profits over 3 years, none of which is shown on books, none has been taxed or has benefitted shareholders in those banks.

As Blackheath outlines, the “deception and cover” for this transfer is the imaginary seizure of 750,000 tons of gold by agents of an unspoken entity (confirmed by the highest official sources as the Bush family and CIA), the listed “source” of the money.

The government of Indonesia confirms this to be an utter fabrication and that the individual named had 700 tons of gold (about half of what Gaddafi was holding), not 750,000. It is noted that only 1,500 tons of gold have ever been traded in world history, as stated in the House of Lords.

The issues that are initially brought out, issues inconsistent with international convention and starting the reader on what is only the surface discovery of two decades of crimes involving dozens of governments are as follows:

• At no time has the Federal Reserve Bank of New York been authorized to hold the funds indicated
• However, documents held by Lord Blackheath prove, conclusively that they did hold such funds and transfer them in a manner as to obscure their origin by using HSBC and the Bank of Scotland. This process, seemingly involving Alan Greenspan, Timothy Geithner and others would appear to be “money laundering” until some other explanation were found. None has been offered.
• The “collateralization” of these funds, being 750,000 tons of gold, is proven to be fantasy. These funds then, in no way or manner, are related to Brunei. The presentation of this false transaction has been conclusively proven to be a “cover and deception” project such as an intelligence organization would use.
• The transfer of these funds, all done without any authorizations, governmental or otherwise, particularly without agreements, payment of interest to the United States and without knowledge and approval of congress makes every aspect of this criminal in nature, a violation of innumerable statues.
• The receipt and use of these funds by the 20 banks, two of which are Wall Street’s largest, and the use of these funds to generate profits while the funds themselves are held “off the books” and the profits hidden and laundered, themselves the earnings of funds received through criminal acts makes any and all involved part of a criminal enterprise.

WHERE DID THE MONEY COME FROM

There is no record of the Federal Reserve being authorized to “create” $15 trillion, equal to the entire national debt of the United States. There is, however, proof that funds that totalled, at one time, $27 trillion had been earned surreptitiously, disposed of as part of an intelligence operation against the Soviet Union and then later stolen with accusations made against George H. W. Bush as being the perpetrator.

I have spoken with two individuals, one President Reagan’s intelligence coordinator and the other Chief Legal Cousel for the Central Intelligence Agency regarding these funds. Both have indicated that former President Bush had asked that these funds, totalling $27 trillion, be transferred to his control, that threats were made by Bush and that many involved in this operation suffered, issues including murder, illegal arrest, torture and detention among them.

The individuals I am speaking of repreatedly met with President Bush over these funds, disputed his claim to them, and indicate that the majority of the funds are the property of the people of the United States.

These funds are the mysterious “Wanta” funds, monies earned through years of currency trading aimed at collapsing the Soviet Union, a plan originated by President Ronald Reagan, then White House Intelligence Coordinator Lee Wanta and CIA Director William Casey. I have been told that, while this operation went forward under President Reagan, he had ordered that his successor, George H. W. Bush not be “briefed” out of “mistrust” for Bush.

The funds themselves were earned through a scheme of trading Soviet roubles at enormous profit, a practice that eventually collapsed their government. A portion of the profits are subject to current litigation in the Federal Court of the Eastern District of Virginia, Judge Lee presiding. I have over 2,000 pages of documents on this case which shows a remainder of the original funds had been transferred to the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond by the Bank of China, a party to the rouble trading practice, in 2006 and is claimed as totally owned by Ameritrust Corporation. That amount was $4.5 trillion of which we hold the SWIFT transfer documents.

The other monies, which “likely” make up from the unspent portion of the missing $27 trillion, may well constitute all that is recoverable.

Wanta, sole shareholder in Ameritrust, has offered his companies share, valued by the court now at $7.2 trillion, entirely to the American people as intended by President Reagan.

The origin of the additional funds, issued by the Federal Reserve during the 80s and 90s, totalling nearly $8 trillion is unknown. High ranking sources within the US government indicate that this can only be either the remainder of funds Wanta raised or profits made from them after the majority of funds were stolen.

Stories, some quite good actually, and personal interviews plus my own review of documents would place the theft or conversion of these funds initially with:

• The Bush family
• The “P2,” a Masonic lodge operating out of Switzerland involved in dozens of terror bombings tied to “Operation Gladio”
• People around Wanta himself including the CIA

What is lacking is a source for half of these funds. Technically, they don’t exist as there is no record of them being originated by nor transferred to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York though there are clear and discernible records of them being transferred out of that institution which never possessed them, according to their 2010 audit, in the first place.

WANTA MONEY

The transfer of Wanta funds, they can be assumed to have no other origin as they track into the Federal Reserve banking system while in escrow and are currently awaiting payment based on the orders of President Obama in accordance with findings of the federal court, is complicated by the Scottish transfer.

Either Wanta has claim to the entire amount or it is the property of the US government. That no effort has been made to secure the funds or enforce criminal and civil remedies to recover enough money to pay the entire US national debt and more, as with earnings, we are nearing well over $30 trillion by this time, is an indication that a criminal conspiracy with enough influence to overrule our own government is involved. Whether that “conspiracy is, as noted, the Bush family, rouge sections of the CIA or a secret society such as P2, one we can prove or others we only suspect exist, is another story.

The lack of action, here or as requested by Lord James in Britain, is, in itself, proof of both the seriousness and actuality of these events and the powers that can prevent any inquiry when irrefutable documents such as SWIFT transfers are available. In fact, Lord James has offered a wealth of documents which, when combined with the 2000 pages of Wanta “discovery” from the Federal Court, constitutes more than prima facia evidence of money laundering, conversion, terrorism or worse.

Thus, the inaction in the face of overwheming and unquestioned proof is inexplicable.

FLOOD OF WANTA LITIGATION AND INDICTMENTS COMING

Currently, Wanta’s legal status is as technical conservator and owner of $7.2 trillion. However, as nearly half that is owed in taxes and the court settlement required Wanta to purchase $1 trillion in treasury bonds, the federal government should show positive interest other than President Obama and a few others. More are being obstructionist with the payout and exercise of $3 trillion in US debt reduction.

This is, not only illegal but an indication of conspiracy.

In addition, Russian Prime Minister Putin has communicated that he awaits the agreed upon 3% payment of Russian taxes, initially on the $7.2 trillion. Will Putin want to be paid on the entire $15 trillion plus interest and will Russia and/or the US have interest in why the Bank of Scotland transferred these funds to 20 European banks to trade in MTN’s (mid term notes) without any authorization or agreement, any participation or sharing of profits.

As the funds, at least the half which the US government can claim ownership of, combined with the interest and earnings of, would quickly put the US “in the black,” again we look at, not just the press blackout on the Wanta litigation of the last 6 years but the press blackout on Lord James of Blackheath and the wealth of damning documentation he submitted to Parliament.

Nothing has been done since, it is as though the proof submitted was so dangerous that those moments in time have been erased by a mysterious g-dlike power.

What makes Wanta dangerous is that he has begun to distribute funds, some to government entities, counties and states, law enforcement agencies, giving them standing, not just in recovering funds intended for their use but in helping prosecute anyone involved in interfering with or attempting to divert funds.

One grand jury is being formed to investigate diversion of Wanta funds even at this early date. It is likely that Wanta/Ameritrust funds earmarked for border protection could lead to the indictment of high ranking US officials. This is only the beginning.

If the Royal Bank of Scotland doesn’t think it should be expecting the biggest chargeback in the history of the world, they are in for a shock.

This is the problem with big goverment. Fredy Mac & Fannie May are goverment.... if they get tax dollars then you can be asured that they lobby and probably have contacts in the white house and congress... I would deduct $10,000 from the money they get from taxes for every time this happens. Get goverment out of bussness.

It seems the article has been updated:

"I’m just a regular guy who gets up each day, takes the kids to school and goes to work," said de los Santos, an long-time aerospace factory supervisor who served five years in the Marine Corps.

The sad part is that his having been in the Marine Corps has nothing to do with his current situation,so other than so sensationalism why mention it?

what_the_81

Crystal-569996

He lives in California!

You need at least an annual salary of $150,000 to live comfortably AND living expenses have to be less than 33% of your budget.

If you can't satisfy both requirements, you are @!$%#ed

I live in California, don't make anywhere near $150 k a year, just bought a house last year and I live comfortably.

Unfortunately the various programs that were instituted to help the homeowners wast not carried through by the banks because they were not required legally to do so. If the banks and financial institutions had been required to do these loans as a part of the bailout pay back then it is possible many homeowners would not have lost their homes.

Wouldn't be surprised if these financial institutions were not trying to grab and sell as quickly as possible so that there would not be enough time to realize that they really did not have clear deed or title to the home in the first place.

Now with all the AG in the various states suing these banks the extent of the mess that was the housing bubble and implosion, bringing to light the various causes including fraudulent activities etc as the real cause of the housing bubble in the first place.

It is hard to get a modification. The banks do not want to lower the interest rates. Unfortunately the T'pubcon Congress is making problems impossible to solve in this country too. They are the ones putting stumbling blocks regarding requiring the banks to lower interest and modify the loans.

Perhaps for these T'pubcons like McConnell, Boehner, Cantor and the rest of the obstructionists, it was about trying to make things deteriorate to the point where the President would be blamed for a failing or static economy no matter if this hurts the whole country especially the masses, providing they get their way.

Well here we are in year 4, and there seem to be improvement in the economy, even with all the other obstructionist issues that are still in place. A new plan to help homeowners was put out yet again and how many homeowners will be able to access this is anyone's guess, as YET AGAIN THE BANKS who the masses bailed out ARE NOT REQUIRED to actually modify these homeloans. The banks are looking at their pofit margin, not at the reality that if the housing market continue to tank there are going to be a lot more unhappy people with pitchforks outside their banks, businesses and management teams homes.....

As winter fades to spring and then to summer no doubt the protest will continue but more loudly than ever before. There is only so much financial loss a homeowner can take, but to also be reduced to homelessness is the worst.

The masses are no longer ignorant of what is happening in the country. They have heard the solutions for the forclosures from Romney and the other T'publicons in this T'GOP primary. Allowing investors to purchase their homes for pennies on the dollar and turn around and rent the property back to the former homeowner is the sort of adding insult to injury that is the Romney et al solution and no doubt will not sit well with most homeowners trying to starve off a forclosure working hard to get a loan modification.

Who knows there may need to be a lot more occupy protest to protect the homes of those folks who are trying to modify their loans, to keep a bright light on the situation and help keep the nation focused on all those things that are important, housing, not for profit healthcare access, women's health and reproductive choice rights, jobs, collective bargaining rights, education, student loans assistance, voting rights, closing tax loop holes on the rich/corporations, bringing home the troops from Afghanistan and infrastructure repair, upgrade, rebuilding etc in no specific order as all have equal weight imo.

Peace.... research..... investigate.... actively listen....think = wisdom....

Occupy foreclosures!

First - they have changed the article, so it now says he was in the Marines for 5 years and now he's out.

Second - when my mom tried to refinance, Chase kept claiming they didn't get her paperwork. She turned it in 4 different times. Once they did send a letter saying they got it and would get back to her. When they didn't, she called, then had a stupid arguement. They said we didn't get it, she said I have a letter saying you did get it, they said we never sent you any such letter.

My opinion - some people were stupid to get loans they couldn't afford, and some people got royally screwed by the loan people they depended on for understanding their legal options to keep their homes. Hard to know by the news articles who fits which catagory.

Kevin C-752389

@HATR_HURTER, you might want to "READ" the article: Second paragraph:

"I'm just a regular guy who gets up each day, takes the kids to school and goes to work," said de los Santos, a retired Marine who is hunkered down in the modest three-bedroom house in Riverside..."

By the way, I confirmed it, he has been out of the Marines for 21 years, so although he is plenty old enough to have spent 20 in, there is no way he retired, short of medically, it does not sound like it from this article:

You must be reading a different article than I am, that paragraph say he served 5 years, he is not getting a pension. He must have been make a good salary as a supervisor, though. He probably had a $3k house payment because he is in California.

Just to give people a little perspective on the cost of housing in California:

I live in Riverside county not far from Arturo de los Santos and my payments including insurance/property taxes come to a little over 1600/mo for a 3 bedroom 2 bath single family home.

Riverside county is not exactly the jewel of California, but it is a decent area that basically qualifies as a suburb. As with most places the further you get away from a body of water the less expensive it is, and Riverside is pretty far away from the coast, and Riverside county has good parts and bad parts.

I don't know his particular situation, how much he bought the house for etc, but it's definitely not a foregone conclusion that "He probably had a $3k house payment because he is in California".

I'm sure someone has aleady said this but I"m not going back to read all the posts. A Marine who served 5 years is a "former" Marine; you're not Retired unless you serve at least 20 years or are medically retired. So he draws nothing from the government for serving 5 years, unless again, he was medically retired.

On the foreclosure situation, I deal with this all the time as a Real Estate Broker. We must understand the number 1 problem in dealing with foreclosures and human beings; the Banks do not give a rats arze. Trust me, I know I have dealt with every single one of them in this business. It boggles the mind.

@what the

Do YOU live in California??? Your estimate of 150,000 to live comfortably is WAY off! Where are you getting that nonsense from??? Do some research my friend! Sheeesh! I don't even make HALF that and I'm in Cali, an hour from L.A. and I'm doing pretty ok!

It's amazing how people who have no clue love to spew ridiculousness from their mouth

The article says:

"I’m just a regular guy who gets up each day, takes the kids to school and goes to work," said de los Santos, a long-time aerospace factory supervisor who served five years in the Marine Corps."

He is not a retired Marine, and believe me, even if he served 20 years retired pay is not that much unless he was an officer. Even if he was medically retired after 5 years, it wouldn't be huge amounts of money. Military pay of any sort is based on how many years one served.

This is the same Freddie Mac that paid Newt Gingrich millions to develop policies to dispossess homeowners in just this manner in order to generate more income on the same home via closing costs, where the real money comes in when interest rates are almost non-existent. It is not hard to find the motives behind any 1%er scheme if you look beyond the obvious.

Freddie Mac screwed me, and I'm in on a lawsuit referendum.... never talked to me, always diverted to US Bank, and the same with them. Got evicted and foreclosed on. Criminals all the way around, all 'voluntary' programs under the Fed worthless, less than 2% ever get any help, and both Freddie and the bank get to write off the losses to profit...... why work with anyone while there's still blood to get?

BTW, does MSNBC have stock in Facebook? What's with all the Facebook garb? Don't want it, it's a pain, and really prefer the old style posting method.... read the article, go down to discussion page, done. Don't care for this BS whatsoever.

@Man o.c.s., Yes, but the policies to lend to anyone regardless of ability to pay was a Democrat caused problem. Frank, Dodd, Pelosi, and Reid all had a hand in it and your messiah Obama voted for it as a senator. My point is this: It isn't a partisan problem; both sides are on the take. Imagine how much Pelosi probably made flipping properties during the boom. Gingrich lent a helping hand and the a******s sat laughing at the gullible American public behind closed doors; amused that we believe there is a difference between the two parties.

So, if you sign on the dotted line then it's YOUR responsibility to pay or get kicked out. EXCEPT if your Fannie or Freddie, and then you get baled out by .... the US government, the tax payers. So, having your MASSIVE debts and sins forgiven, you grab all the small guys with their puny debts, but legally and technically in default, and you refuse to make any allowance for the mercy you were shown and you push with the full weight of the LAW and have them evicted so you can profit from their technical failings. Why does this sound so much like a Bible story? Hey Fannie and Freddie, better check how that story ends!

raddave

I live in California, don't make anywhere near $150 k a year, just bought a house last year and I live comfortably

Good to hear, but where did you buy your house? If it wasn't in counties along the coast or less than 1 hour from major cities (where most jobs are), then it makes sense why you are living comfortably.

bologna sandwich

@what the

Do YOU live in California??? Your estimate of 150,000 to live comfortably is WAY off! Where are you getting that nonsense from??? Do some research my friend! Sheeesh! I don't even make HALF that and I'm in Cali, an hour from L.A. and I'm doing pretty ok!

It's amazing how people who have no clue love to spew ridiculousness from their mouth

I do know what I'm talking about because I USED to live in California and I don't live there anymore because I like to save money and not have to sit in traffic for + 1 hour each way.

You say that you live an hour from LA and doing ok. The problem there is if you have to live an hour from a major city, one should be doing more than "ok". Property values should have decreased enough so that people could actually be doing "good" and not "ok". But that period ended before the boom in the late 90s. Also, what could be "ok" to you is probably not for other people. For example, not being able to save money at the end of the month isn't "ok" for most.

In conclusion, California sucks. People who have moved there during and after the latest boom have gotten screwed over. Those that were born in Cali and never left don't even know they're getting screwed over until they are able to move to another state.

The execs at Fannie and Freddie committed fraud to get themselves huge bonuses, which were paid by us, the taxpayers. THen they got caught and are being prosecuted, and guess who is picking up their $56 million defense tab? Yep, us the taxpayers again! Where does this insanity ever stop?! How can you POSSIBLY rack up a $56 million legal defense bill?!

Can you say bull crap sensationalist headlines?? "Marine takes stand", Really? Just because this guy was once upon a time in the Marines has absolutely nothing to do with foreclosurel. I would agree if this whacked out administration had the common sense to forbid foreclosure on an active duty military member, especially one in a war zone but this headline was typical of the twisting of facts that the media and this administration are soooooo quilty of.

Fannie and Freddie were totally complicite in causing this mess yet, they all skate while this administration acts like the local gang "protectors" to banks. Forcing payment after payment, concession after concession with no benefit to the tax payer only to those who did not do the right things in the first place. Buying votes is all it is about, the Democrats have taken it to a sickening level.

@trustverify interesting info, unfortunately many have died trying to uncover the illegal activities of the Rea-God, Bushman, Chainey-gang cartel. i fear many more will die trying to expose the most corrupt government family in the history of our nation. government sponsored terrorism is alive and well and we, and our children are like sheep being led to slaughter. they didn't get me with the collapse of the housing market; i'm just waiting for them to tax us out of our land. couldn't help notice no one responded to your comment...it'll get me collapsed, i'm sure, but my favorite quote of all time, we "can't handle the truth". i love my country, my son died for his country, but our political system, i fear, is beyond repair. kick 'em all out, and change the locks...and i ain't talkin bout the homeowners!!!

Please read the article

"I’m just a regular guy who gets up each day, takes the kids to school and goes to work," said de los Santos, a long-time aerospace factory supervisor who served five years in the Marine Corps. Now he is hunkered down in the modest three-bedroom house in Riverside, Calif., surrounded by an encampment of Occupy Riverside protesters and community activists. "We’ve done everything the way we were supposed to. We’re not going to just sit back and let Freddie Mac steal our home."

Nowhere does it state he is a retired Marine. I am a retired GySgt with close to 22 years, I live in NC and if my wife and I had to live on just my retired pay, there would be no way we could make it. It would make the mortgage only because we bought the house over 20 years ago. I can only imagine trying to make ends meet in CA.

I cannot understand why Freddie Mac and Fanne Mae or any other financial institution will not agree to refinance these loans, especially in today's economy. The majority of these home owners are average working folks just trying to make ends meet. Do not the big banks and such realize that by refinancing the note, they will be getting their money just not as much interest as they once where. Gee the banking industry took BILLIONS in taxpayer bailouts and what did they do, gave out bonuses. How about helping the working class of Americans who bailed your butts out instead of screwing them over. It's all about greed, plain and simple, the big shots at the top are only concerned with how much money they are going to make each year.

He's not responsible for the bank's mismanagement of the mortgage modification he applied for.

It would be easy to check if the bank initially lowered his mortgage payment like it was reported in the article. That would mean that the mortgage modification was accepted by the bank and they accepted the reduced payment.

It did not say that he refused to make payments as you stated.

Do you work for JP Morgan Chase?

True, but the government should not give out loans to people who probably can't pay it back, and then wonder why they aren't getting their money. Both parties are at fault. This guy deserves to lose his house and rent a one bedroom hell hole apartment. Freddie and JP Goldman executives and congress derserves to be in jail.

You are an ass hole.

Face the facts... Did you read the article or just skim it thinking that that would be enough?

He NEVER stopped making payments... After his hours were cut at his metal working position, he negotiated a lower payment with JP Morgan who, after a bit of time (not specified) JP Morgan, not De Los Santos, stopped accepting his payments. JP Morgan then started the foreclosure process on him. Prior to the foreclosure process concluding his hours went back to pre-recession levels which meant that he could manage his original payment but JP Morgan & Freddie REJECTED his efforts to "bring his loan up to date. Typical BS from banks... JPM probably doesn't have legitimate paperwork (due to the BS of CDOs and CDSs that were foisted upon the financial system by these robber baron banks) therefore they are trying to ignore him so that they can foreclose and therefore absolve themselves of the problem of not having proper paperwork.

The article (second paragraph) states that he is a retired Marine (not an officer or petty officer) and (Crystal's comment way up above) therefore does not get a pension (a percentage of your active duty pay at retirement).

Is this anyway to treat someone who has served in our military? Someone who has put his life on the line to serve our government (corporate interests) overseas? For those who accuse him of running away from his responsibility of paying... did you serve in the military? How have you served our country?

He bought into something he coundn't afford. Thank you for your service , now suck it up and move on Marine. Thank you again.

Why is it that it's more attractive for banks, etc. to foreclose instead of letting a homeowner catch up on his payments?

Trust me, it is not more attractive for banks to foreclose instead of letting a homeowner catch up on payments. Bank lose a lot of money when the foreclosure goes through. There are always two sides to the story but MSNBC never gets the banks' side of it, nor does most media. That is because the bank is obligated not to report any details on any account over privacy concerns where the individual homeowners will talk freely bad mouthing the banks. In this case, part of the banks' side was stated in that the borrower did not qualify for the loan modificaiotn program that Freddie Mac offered. The modifiaiton program is HAMP and was implemented by the Federal Government. Freddie is using that as a means to decide when to foreclose and when not to foreclose and modify the loan. I won't go into the details of HAMP, but in many cases, borrowers do not qualify because their income is not enought to support even the minimum escrow payments required to pay the homeowner's insurance and taxes. In other cases, the borrower has an affordable mortgage payment but has racked up thousands of dollars of credit card debt and then expects the mortgage company to modify the loan. In other cases, loans are modified and the borrower simply redefaults when another situation comes up and expects the bank to remodify the loan again, and again, and again.

@STLMike, I hear what you are saying and I have always been told the same thing. Problem is, it's just not true anymore. It used to be that if the bank forclosed on a home they could only get out of it what they sold it for. Now, the bank makes the loan, then sell the loan to Freddie and Fannie who chop it up into securities and the bad debt ends up as part of your 401K plan. So there is no longer any real risk to the lender. It used to be that the risk of barrowing was shared by both the barrower and the lender. Not any more. Trust me, if it was more advantageous for the banks to renegotiate with you then they would. As it is, the quicker they can get your loan off their books, the quicker they can turn around and re-lend that money to somebody else.

Here is my proposal: As is already the case, if you as the barrower buy a home and then can't make the payments, just no hope of getting caught up, then you should probably hand over the keys and look for a new place to live. You lose your home because you made a mistake. However, if the mistake is the banks fault, they loaned you money they should not have, or they refused to let you make up the payments, or they just simply went into forclosure for no good reason (happens more than you might think) then the bank loses the home and you get to keep it. Free and clear. This would force us back into responsible lending and reset home prices back down to where a normal family can afford a normal home.

Call it the equality in risk bill.

Well they should have never bailed out the banks in the first place, wall street should have went down as well. There should have been no bailouts for no-one then we would be on a level playing field, the bailouts defaulted in big bonus checks for people who could individually tear down a company and figure out how to rip off the investers. As long as they weren't rich, example ENRON. So all of you out there talking all your BS I'm hoping they do the same to you and see what your filthy mouth will be saying then.

I hope they do it to everyone so we can get this party started, hunt down the rich and cut off their balls. Never let them ever bring forth another of their decrepted young in this society again. OK now that that is over with what were we talking about again.

We'll just have too wait and see where this economic downturn starts to go, hopefully for the best!

This Marine could sure use a 21 GUN salute...while Freddie mac could help by standing on the other end of the muzzles...

Rhino - I like that idea.

@Rhino40 They already have a similar option to what you propose. It's called a Deed in Lieu.

I was reading these comments and waiting for someone who noticed this. It is he says/they say, and it seems to me that a little more digging by MSNBC could have settled this one way or another. But the way it stands, I think I go with the Marine.

My wife and I went through the exact situation. She works in a hospital (28 years) and makes very good money. Her hours were cut at the height of this recession, and we asked for a modification. The reduction in hours lasted a year, and she returned to normal, thankfully. Anyway, our mortgage company agreed (but not in writing where it could be proved) and said to call them in 30 days for the terms. We did. They said we needed to call back in another 30 days because it wasn't done yet. We did. Call back in another 30 (now 3 months, not paying anything until they decided what the amount was going to be). We did. Now comes the good part. Since all phone calls are automated now, we would call their number. We would be asked by a computer to punch in our account number. Then a password, which was the last 4 digits of my SS#. Then normally we would get a menu, then a human if we wanted. This time, after the password was punched in, the computer hung up on us. We called right back and got this 4 or 5 times. I figured they were having trouble with their system, so we'd try the next day. We tried every day for a week and was continually hung up on. Obviously, once we punch in our account number and password, the computer knows who we are, and has been instructed to disconnect. So then we got our lawyer to contact their lawyer. She told my lawyer she'd find out what was going on and get back to him. She never did, and he hasn't been able to contact her again (someone answers, he's put on hold, then he gets disconnected). We later got a letter explaining that our mortgage has now been sold to Chase. I thought "Great, now it's worse!" But now they've lost that judgement, and hopefully will be FORCED to work with us through our State's Attorney. But reading this, doesn't it sound like we're dealing with a fly-by-night scam company? Does this sound to anyone like a respectable company to work with? It is obvious as I sit here and read the (few) comments siding with the banks and mortgage companies that these (few) have absolutely no clue as to what's really going on out here, and are living in a dream world where everything is fair and just, and everyone follows the letter of the law. Sorry to burst your happy little bubbles, but it ain't so! Having gone through it, I tend to believe the Marine, unless some neutral party sees verifiable documentation to the contrary.

Fannie and Freddie were Government mandated programs banks HAD to participate in if they wanted to compete in the mortgage market. Trust me I am not in love with banks but it was the Feds idea that EVERYONE should be able to be a homeowner that caused this. Writing high risk loans. Really what did you expect would happen when the bubble burst? If you can not qualify for a mortgage that just means you have to work on your credit and have a reasonable down payment and not be able to over buy. Give it a try lots of Americans have done that.

The government should not be involved in buying and selling housing at all.

Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae are both controlled and overseen by the Liberal Left Wing Democrats. It should not be a suprise when someone is trying to make a go at it and be a stand up man that he would be punished by those that would rather fabricate dependency. BESIDES, OBAMA NEEDS A BILLION DOLLARS TO GET RE-ELECTED (PRESUMABLY TO BY VOTES WITH as is TYPICAL OF CHICAGO POLITICS), IT HAS TO COME FROM SOMEWHERE.

alan_static: Thank You! You nailed it.

One question, should the same rule apply to those banks we bailed out as well?

Banaschar - maybe if you'd actually read the article, it states he DID pay his bills and that the bank stopped taking his money. I've heard of that happening to others as well.

Criminally Oblivious Occupoops

Johns a bankster, just when you thought the mobster was a thing in the past, BOOOM they just changed their name too bankster.

Yes, our housing system is turning into a giant circus.

Realtors should use common sense? A realtor's job is to get the most they can for a property. That's their fiduciary to the seller. But what about appraisers? What is their responsibility? It's certainly not to tell the bank and purchasers that it's worth whatever the people are asking. It's to tell them that it's worth what the market suggests it is. The whole thing went to pieces because people had access to easy credit and appraisers were all to happy to tell investors the property was worth that much.... and really, as long as buyers were willing to pay, they (the appraisers) were right. There is no one person/group you can pin this on. It's was a multifaceted issue. Hopefully, we all come away from it with some better sense on how to not let it happen again.

Well, maybe he should have kept it in his pants if he can't pay for the kids AND a mortgage. Children are a not mandatory (last time i checked anyway.) ya know.... besides, if he can't afford a mortgage and bought a house its his own fault for not planning ahead and just renting something. People like him make me sick to my stomach.... Everyone wants a free hand out these days in the USA. ..the Bunch of crying babies this country has become is beyond belief.

Sam, although I agree on your statement

"Everyone wants a free hand out these days in the USA. ..the Bunch of crying babies this country has become is beyond belief."

Let's start at the top, shall we. Let's start with all the corporations and banks that we had to bail them out of trouble first.

Sam - that's the silliest and most overused argument out there. No one said his hours were cut at work and then he decided to have kids. Circumstances change.

@ SamSkwirl- No Criminals are people who come to you and tell you you qualify for their mortgagees and lie to you! Then they stop taking your money because they want to take your home!This homeowner did everything right! He should have been given a refinance like everybody else! The bank refused to take his money! It's their fault and their mistake! Who's going to live in the home? No One that's who! The banks are guilty of Usury!

The banksters' profits decline, we do the time.

WOW HOLY CRAP Tarzan7 do wonders ever cease!For once I see a post by you that makes a hell of a lot of sense! Congratulations!

Couldn't Agree With you more!

The problem with logic like Tarzan7 is the bankster own the government, not the people!

Why do you think the Banksters were bailed out and the average working joe is losing their home?

It is called "personal responsibility" and the average joe trying to live beyond their income while the too big too fail banksters own the government, which the average joe can not afford to pay for either!

The banksters and crooked bought and paid for government were more than willing to assist the "average joe" in jumping in to that financial trap of easy credit and living beyond ones means.

America, home of the best crooked politicians, money can buy!

I keep reading comments about the "average joe" being lured into buying more house than they can afford. This may be some of the cases, but in this case and so many others, the "average joe" actually had the income to support the mortgage, but, due to various reasons lost the means to pay for them. A tanking economy being the biggest cause.

We bailed the banks, auto makers and others out trying to prevent the economy from tanking and this exact scenario from happening. We could debate all night long on how much good it did. The real question is how do we handle the aftermath of "average joes" that are losing their homes? The more people lose their homes the deeper the bubble burst gets.

He's obviously not over it and not going to move on. Maybe the Occupiers could teach us all a thing or two.

Here here! A black eye on all TRUE Marines this guy is.

I learned how to poop on a police car. Thank You Occupy.

That's the way to tell them swirlzguy, suck it up and just take that BS from the rich guys. After all didn't your parents teach you to just eat their crap. Whats wrong with this guy? I mean after all it was his fault the economy crash and the real culprits inflamed the cost of housing to make sure it busted. That way they get their monies from the government and from the sale of the foreclosures.

Man what a racket and they said these banksters was dumb. Go figure!!! Swirlzguy let me know when it happens to you too. I want to hear what you have to say then, I'm pretty sure you'll suck it up and move on just like your statement to him. It is coming maybe not now, but, just wait. They can't hit everyone at the same time or we all might just unite then.

@ John, hey did you learn or are you just giving credit where it is not due? How's that wiping with the left hand working out for you. txn for the info.

We have ghettos here in America, no way. I thought we were beyond 3rd world countries. Damn media, only showing highlights from gated communities and Robin Leach's the "Rich and Famous" re-runs.

Foreclosing is good busines for the bank. They make more money on the transaction than the house is worht - usually 50-100% more.

you accidentally put your Caps Lock on.

Article said the bank would not take his payment

I attempted to pay my bills too, and lo and behold, guess what? I got another bill, funny how that works.

It is a scam. Our housing system is a giant scam.

No one is taking my home... you know why?? I PAY MY F@CKING BILLS ON TIME EVERY TIME. If I don't , it's my fault and my fault alone. What Namby pamby whiners this country is fostering.

This is to SamSkwirl - I'm glad that life has not dumped on you so you can't pay your bills on time. As stated in the article, he was paying a reduced rate that he could afford considering his hours at work were cut. The bank wouldn't work with him to let him catch up with his payments. They just foreclosed on him. As to your comments that he shouldn't have kids he couldn't afford. Well maybe at the time he helped create them, he had a job and could afford them. If we all waited till we had a big stock pile of money to afford everything for our children, we would never have children period! Lastly, by your many comments on this blog, you must be one of those compassionate Republicans/TeaPartiers that like to tout Christian Values but have no clue as to what that means. I bet if Jesus came down to earth tomorrow, he would be disgusted with many bankers that took advantage of people through questionable mortgages just to make a quick buck and you for your lack of compassion for anyone who has fallen on hard times. Not everyone who is behind on their bills is lazy or expects something for nothing. Sometimes people lose their jobs through no fault of their own and have a very hard time finding employment again especially if they are in their late 40's, 50's or 60's. GROW A HEART! Jesus will respect you for it.

Ringy Dingy Sammy the Skwirl aka Squirrely,you pay your Bills?Well whoopty Funching Doo!

Here's a News Flash Big Bill Payer! No ones taking your home?Wait if you wind up getting a CATASTROPHIC ILLNESS,and you don't die right away and last for a long long long time and require CONSTANT MEDICAL CARE.

Think that all that bill paying is going to save you?Not on your life.Because you know what? MEDICAL INSURANCE TENDS TO RUN OUT WHEN A PERSON IS SICK FOR A LONG LONG LONG TIME.They don't want to carry you anymore,cause you're a BURDEN AND A MONEY WASTER TO THEM.SO THEY DUMP YOU AFTER A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME. Don't think it can't happen?Oh yes Mr. Skwirl it sure as can!

Then the BIG BIG MEDICAL BILLS START PILING UP! Then Guess who can't pay them? Why you SAMMY!

Then you're SCREWED,BLUED AND TATTOOED! Know what happens next? They start putting liens on that house of yours that they supposedly will never ever take away,because you payed your bills!

Then if the liens keep piling up for your CATASTROPHIC ILLNESS AND YOUR MEDICAL BILLS TO KEEP YOU ALIVE,GUESS WHAT?

THE COUPE DE GRASS! THEY TAKE YOUR HOUSE!

So Sammy I wouldn't go around blabbing about how you pay your bills and down grade others and think your so sanctimonious,because you never ever know when Karma comes around and bites you in the ass.Well Sammy you get the picture!

You can not reason with these people... but nice try. ;-)

Wow, you can pay for a house with cash in 3 years of saving on an middle class income? What's your secret, I like to know. It took me 10 years, to save enought to down 2/3 of a brand new car.

You can reason with us if you actually use reason.... The article mentions nothing about partial payments, merely that the bank lowered the payments and then stopped taking them. Where did you get the info about partial payments from exactly?

It's the omission of the facts from this article - the bank did not all of a sudden stop taking his payments; he clearly fell behind and then tried making partial payments. this was a feature on ProPublica National radio - Chase actually stated "on the phone" to him to stop making payments so he would qualify for a remodification - now, alot of stupid peopel did just that - not realizing it was a ploy from the bank to get them to default so they could foreclose, and so many idiots did just that, stop making payments.

they didn't consult a lawyer, they didn't review their mortgage papers, they justlistened to idiots tell them to default

unfortunately, he tried to make some kind of 'true-faith' payments but was alrady several months behind and the bank didn't want to hear any sob stories about children hungry and shorter hours at work, and there you go -

Same thing happened to a relative. They stopped payments when Chase told them to do that so the loan could be modified. Then when the modification was turned down they refused all payments. Now the kids are 2 years behind and Chase won't talk to them. After consulting TWO different lawyers, and paid over $6000.00 in legal fees they are still in foreclosure. How greedy everyone is, from the lawyers who couldn't help but took their money down to the banks who trick people into foreclosure.

PatseChi - So because he did what the bank told him to do, he is an idiot? Sorry, but that makes it pretty obvious the BANK is the douchebag in this picture, not the guy that was doing what he was told.

FYI, The Democratic Party Consumer Protection law = The Dodd-Frank Financial Services Bill -

did not include lending practices of - (US Government-run) - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - purposefully eliminated - any oversight - regulation and/or an audit of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

This is what members of Congress wanted to have included in ANY legislation - relating to Financial services industry = banking industry, credit card industry, etc.

Obama refused to include the lending practices of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - regardless of the fact that it collapsed - and left the US Taxpayers on the hook for HUNDREDS of BILLION$.

Obama also refused to have Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac AUDITED - after the collapse of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac - or audited before he GAVE F&F a new infusion of BILLION$.

These is the same corrupt machinations - with Barney Frank - and others - (Maxine Waters, Charlie Rangel, etc) - refusing to regulate or audit Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - when the democratic party was operating to conceal F&F was headed toward collapse - and were obstructing an audit.

Here is one such congressional hearing in 2004 - with democrats protecting Franklin Raines - whose "management" skills were being called into question:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

*

Franklin Raines became Obama's Economic Advisor!

*

Now Obama has removed the limit on US taxpayer money - and has granted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac unlimited access to US taxpayer money.

*

FINANCIAL JIHAD

Wow skwirlguys a freaking bankster, I knew it he wants all the money for himself. Are you a teabagger skwirlguy?

Your opinion is one thing, but I think we'd all appreciate if you don't call a Marine a "dirty thieving bum."

I hope there are some Marines out there who know who you are, if you know what I mean.

Ref: VA Loans.

During the housing frenzy many loan people refused or dissuaded people from going VA. The paperwork is staggering and it takes longer for approval and with the instant shake & bake loans forced by congress it was quicker to do fannie/freddie loans collect the commision and move on to the next victim.

In hindsight this man should have demanded a VA loan and shopped around until he found a loan officer that would do a VA loan, but the way they were handing out loans from fannie/freddie who can blame him for taking this route.

Sadly it backfired on him. Like it or not he signed the deal and if he had kept the payments up we would not be reading about him today.

Ref: VA Loans.

It simply says that he was a Marine for 5 years. You have to be a veteran to get a VA loan. To be a veteran, you have to serve in a conflict. All I'm saying is that he may not have qualified for a VA loan.

Mike C. - you are absolutely wrong. A veteran is anyone who served in the military, period. It has nothing to do whatsoever about serving in conflict. I've had 2 VA loans and I served from 92-96 where there were no conflicts. Know what you're talking about.

You are gaming the system somehow then; I personally had to earn my VA loan, it wasn't given to me on enlistment. Why don't you know what you are talking about, REMF. As for a veteran being anyone who served; try getting into the VFW, I guarantee they won't take you. You probably qualified for the loan because of some bureaucratic nonsense relating to the fact we still had troops in S.A. and Kuwait. BTW, you must make great money to pay off one loan in under 20 years and get another, because you are only allowed 1 at a time for a primary residence. I personally think you are fibbing.

These banks are not slugs, they are criminal organizations.

CitiCorp bought my mortgage (a practice which should be illegal - I didn't sign a contract with CitiCorp). They turned out to be one of the worst loans I've ever encountered, they wanted a fee for this, a fee for that, I wanted them to end my PMI and in turn they wanted me to refinance! So I did refinance, with a different company.

Criminals are the ones taking loans on something they can't truly afford and not paying for it, yet insisting they be allowed to keep said property at a much lower purchase price or payment. Those are the criminals.

Sam I'm still waiting for the interest, that I lent to the banks. But guess what, it won't happen. Hey, I'm just like you, I pay my bills, only have two loans, the house and boat. Don't use credit cards, unless I have to and even then I pay it in full in a couple of months. But you know something, if I screw 1 or 2 months up, my world would turn upside down. But if the banks screw up, they take my money, that I earned, so they can survive. Woudn't you call that criminal?