Nobody forced him to sign on the dotted line. Always read the fine print and understand the contract which you're entering into. Sorry, but no sympathy from me there.

He got shot when he was only seventeen and never walked again. He doesn't need to be cruzified if he made a poor decision or not. After all, he was not the one who put the story out.

This has nothing to do with Columbine or empathy and everything to do with some dimwit journalist trying to pull heart-strings around the holidays. Since when is not condoning stupidity being non-empathic?? I was AT Columbine as a first responder, and in addition to the students/teacher that were shot or killed, there were thousands of people affected by this tragedy that donated MILLIONS of dollars to help recovery. Being in a wheelchair or NOT being in a wheelchair does not give anyone an excuse to make stupid decisions in life, and one of the major contributors to the housing crisis was people that were too stupid to realize that they might not be able to pay their mortgage or THOUGHT they would eventually get rich off their real estate investments. THAT is what Castaldo apparently thought when he bought his condo. Let him deal with the consequences - it might help him gain some wisdom. Enough said.

I agree, his situation is sad, but he is the one who made the bad decisions, now he's looking for someone else to bail him out. I wouldn't expect handouts if I purchased an over-priced condo and pursued an education in something like badminton or some other iffy career path like music. It's great to dream, but you also have to have a back-up plan based in reality. It's time for him to grow up!

He and a whole lot of other people who have it a lot worse than he does. Not buying this sob story. Times are rough all over.

If I could not empathize with stupid people, I would have no one to empathize with at all.

Five years ago, he came to Los Angeles to attend a sound engineering school with the dream of pursuing a career in music. At the time, the Hollywood condo he bought seemed like a wise investment.

So you are a STUDENT and you think you can AFFORD a CONDO?!?!?!? That was your first mistake, the second was taking an interest only mortgage. INCREDIBLE. Even now, he doesn't realize it is time to let the condo go and move on. Continuing to make mistakes even now doesn't give me a warm fuzzy. Nor does it make me feel sorry for him. Using Columbine as a sympathy move doesn't cut it either. trust_verify is right, this is a NON STORY!

(And if this is a lame attempt to improve the reputation of Occupy LA, that's not going to work either.)

Ha! Truth be told, he made a poor decision listening to the bankers and real estate agents who insisted it was a good invenstment and the rising trend would continue. Fraud! He was looking for a secure home, and they were rolling the dice with gambits to raise the property values another inch, and mortgages that would facilitate the increase.

It's like investing in the ruse called the 401K. The capital institutions that run them will find any way to purloin the money of the fool on the factory floor.

I was a fool too, and am in my 8th year of a 5 year arm with a house that is still 15% upside down. My sense of integrity and 2 jobs have kept me in. The bank will not negotiate a refinance so I can lock in at a low interest rate. I am fine, for now, but if inflation hits, and the prime interest rate goes over 5.5% I'll be on the street along with my family.

But I've quickly learned that it's nobodies concern but my own. In life there are producers, consumers and scammers, victimizers and victims. It will never change.

I suppose if it were up to all of you, there'd be complete destruction of all regulations, no one would have to pay for predatory practices, and screwing the little man in every way in order to generate even the slightest bit more wealth that they can squeeze from anyone. Sadly, folks like him are the country over because the Banks aren't interested in having money, or doing honest business. They're in it to milk as much money as they can, kick someone out before they can make payments, then push someone else in.

First, Castaldo admitted he made a bad investment decision like millions of other home buyers during the housing bubble who thought the values of their homes would only continue to increase and saw no chance of a decline in value. Second, Castaldo never said anything about predatory lending practices. And finally, the last thing a lender wants to do is foreclose on a loan; if the borrower can't sell the property for the balanced owed, what makes you think the lender can? Furthermore, the lender has to bear the costs of foreclosing on the property and acquiring title, pay any back real estate taxes owed as well as current real estate taxes and insurance premiums for insurance coverage until the property is sold. In very, very few instances does a lender generate a profit as the result of foreclosing on a property collateralizing a mortgage loan that is in default.

If one of you emphathizers had borrowed him the money and just wanted your money back and he says no and enlists the help of a group thugs who tell you to blow it out your arse. then what? Oh I see, thats different. Real estate is no different than investing in anything else. You buy a car, it loses value, but you still make payments. The mortgage holders would like to get their investment back, guess what if it aint coming from him, get him out and put someone in there who will.

Good for you Charles! The first step to getting out from under the victim mentality is to take responsibility for whatever you did. I commend you for hanging in there, and for protecting your family from foreclosure.

I hope you try other banks and not just your current lender. We found amazing results with a credit union, which took into account our great credit. We ended up with a 10 year fixed rate loan, and are working hard to pay it off while our health and age lasts! I think that we are so used to letting banks call the shots that we get discouraged. That sense of integrity, and the two jobs should speak volumes to the right lender.

Go for it while interest rates are so low!

I agree with trust_verify on this.

I love this comment from tess-2451608, "He got shot when he was only seventeen and never walked again. He doesn't need to be cruzified if he made a poor decision or not."

My best friends hubby was only 18 years old when he got in trouble for having sex with an underage girlfriend. He is now a registered sex offender for LIFE. The worst part is that the girl he got in trouble from is my best friend and they have been married for almost 20 years and have 3 beautiful children... sorry about the rant, but my point is its unfortunately people get "cruzified" all the time for poor decisions they have made in the past and they just need to learn to live with it and make the best of it.

Your true friends will always have your back regardless of what you did in your past. Everyone else can get bent!

What doesn't kill will make you stronger. I live by these words.

I think trust_verify struck a nerve with people who can't handle the truth. My parents are in their 80s and they remember when they bought the house that they have been in for over fifty years, that they had to prove they could afford the house. This housing crisis was cause by a combination of banks wanting to make a quick buck and people willing to take on mortgages they knew they couldn't afford. My parents had to go through hoops to get their mortgage, before the housing crisis all people had to do is show up at the bank and sign on the dotted line. (being a little sarcastic, I know they had to do more than that...but not much more) If people are willing to help these people out with their own money, then it's fine with me. However, taxpayers shouldn't because it wouldn't be fair for people who do make their mortgage payments on time. I'm sure a lot of these people are struggling to make their payments, but they manage find a way to do it. It wouldn't be fair to them and to the rest of us if the Government bail the people who can't make their payments out.

"I kind of bought into the notion that of course the condo was going to go up in value..." So because it didn't you automatically do not have to make your monthly payments? Market values go up and down like the tide. The buyers set the market at the time; so, you make your bed and lay in it. Banks did not hold a gun to your head to buy a house. They told you how much the monthly payments would be and for how long. You said 'Oh, okay.' Grow up and pay your bills, ME generation.

Hey, if ya can't PAY, don't PLAY! I don't give a @!$%# about his past. He took the stupid loan and he can handle it or get out just like everyone else that made a stupid mistake.

Exactly CommonSense. While I feel for him in what he has had to endure since the Columbine shooting, his situation now has nothing to do with then.

However, I have no compassion at all for people who bought into loans they knew they couldn't afford. You can't rely on the housing market going up. On my first house I tripled my money when I sold it. On the last house I sold, I lost 10K. That's just the way it is. It's a gamble.

I definitely agree that this is a non story! Nobody should crucify him, however, we shouldn't coddle him either! He's an adult and made an adult decision. I am the same age as him and own my own property. I also didn't decide to move to one of the most expensive cities in this nation to go to school and buy a home. To make this story worse the author has to add that person of this article is a Columbine survivor! What a joke and a pathetic attempt to get viewers.

yeah you all have said enough...thats for damn sure...your opinions are what keeps the @!$%# flying....

For that matter, he could have been a Vietnam vet, a nurse, or an aardvark. His status as a survivor is being used to garner added attention to a problem millions of other people are experiencing. Film at 11.

Any normal person would have compassion for his strife from 13 years ago; the choices he makes in his personal life is irrelevant.

If he wants to save his condo, pay the bill, real simple. Maybe Occupy L.A. will pony up the money. Nah, they will make a bunch of noise about how he should get it for free. Make the payments or find a place to rent, even the Occupy people should be able to understand that.

The reason for mentioning the tie to Columbine is enforce NBCNews' anti-gun agenda. They do everything they can to show any relationship at all about guns and any possible follow-ons. the problem with this story is that Richard Castaldo did something very un-American - he accepted personal responsibility for his actions in buying something that he know was a very risky investment. His actions now, looking for help from Occupy LA, is an act of desperation.

I am so sick of these Occupy People. Yeah, there are some people that have gotten jacked with trying to refinance and the bank wont. That's a whole different story. Twice a month Occupy protests outside the building across the street from my building because a bank is in there, and the things they say are crazy. They are protesting the banks becuase they are underwater and the bank won't reduce the principle amount, or the bank made them take a bad loan. Well, 1. The bank loaned you a certain amount of money, and they expect in their LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT to have that amount repaid plus interest, and 2. NOONE HELD A GUN TO YOUR HEAD AND FORCED YOU TO SIGN THE LOAN. It is your responsibility to be an informed consumer, and if you don't understand a contract then don't sign it. It's ignorant and stupid people that caused the housing mess. Had all of them been informed about the details of their loan, then we wouldn't be in this mess.

@McCormickEva,

go19.com? Is that an XXX site that you are working at now?

Let's turn this into a real story.... did all of the students from Columbine make terrible financial decisions?

This is no different when a person falls behind on their car payments. The car company repossess your car and resales it. If you can't make the payments on time, then you never should have tried buying a condo you could not afford.

Stay away from condos. You never know what pos neighbor you might end up with.

I feel bad for the guy, but he should have spent his money much better than on a @!$%#-hole place like Ca imo. I let the state all due to the economy, taxes always going up, and how the state just keeps spending when they are already in 60 billion in debt.

Go back to Colorado.

Yes he found Occupy Los Angeles.....A stand-up group of people...

Another bad decision...Guess he doesn't know how to make good ones....

no personal responsibility in today's society and our government and politicians continue to encourage this behavior. You may not like it but eventually the weight of such thinking will collapse any society that thinks someone else should take responsibility.

No, but millions of Americans apparently did, and the reverberations from that crash are not over yet. I agree with the poster who talks about how his parents had to jump through so many hoops to qualify for a loan fifty years ago; that is what the normal loan application process looked like. You didn't have to ask yourself if you could afford to buy a house, the mortgage company was going to tell you if you did, and since they were a pretty conservative lot, you could bet that they would not be giving you the benefit of any doubt. Well, along came the scammers and loan packagers and sellers and bankers buying and selling securities and blew the whole mess back in our faces. Most average people do not understand the ins and outs of mortgage loans and they trust that if a bank/mortgage company says they qualify, it means they'll be able to make the payments. The pity of the whole foreclosure crisis is that the scammers and bankers stole a generation's worth of homeownership - if those people had been allowed to work and save their way to a fixed-rate 30-yr. mortgage like there used to be, America would be in great shape now. Instead, we have hundreds of thousands of people whose credit has been trashed, savings drained, neighborhoods decimated, jobs lost, and families disrupted because the Big Boys needed to make a Buck.

I was a fool too, and am in my 8th year of a 5 year arm with a house that is still 15% upside down. My sense of integrity and 2 jobs have kept me in. The bank will not negotiate a refinance so I can lock in at a low interest rate.

Why refi with the same bank? I suspect there is a reason?

The fact that he was a victim of the Columbine shooting has nothing to do with his current situation. He is in his current situation because he made a bad decision and bought a property he could not afford. He knew he could not afford it so he got creative with the financing figuring the place would go up in value and he could sell it for a profit before he had to pay the piper. This was his decision and now he has to live with it. I am so tired of hearing people whine that they are losing their homes because they went down in value. This is bull@!$%#!!! They are not losing their homes because the homes went down in value, they are losing them because they can not make the payments. The change in the value of the home did not cause a change in his payments. The only thing a change in value will effect is property taxes, and that can only be downward for him, not upward due to prop 13 in CA. Throwing in the Columbine thing to the story is merely the writers attempt the garner sympathy for someone who does not really deserve any. He bought a condo he could not afford, while he was in school no less, and is now whining and looking for someone else to bail him out of his own mistake. Too bad!!! I had to sell a place because of a job relocation and ended up losing six figures in the deal, but I did not look for anyone else to pay that. I bought a place and the value dropped so I lost the money I put into it, that is no ones fault but my own - I made a bad investment and have to live with it. I am sick of these whiners who always want to keep the money when they make out well but get someone else to pay for it when they lose. Life does not work that way!!!

The Columbine factor is a sideline story, in that it explains why he is a paraplegic. So let me get this straight, a bank/financial institution gave a NO interest loan to a paralyzed STUDENT?? No wonder the banks/financials almost ruined us.
My favorite picture from 2007, when the whole nightmare broke of what Wall Street/financials had done, is a photo of a hand made sign being held up at a Wall Street protest, that said "JUMP YOU F--KERS, JUMP!". A copy still hangs on my bulletin board.
Of course, unlike 1929, Wall Streeters weren't "ruined", rather, bailed out - with billions paid in bonuses for a bunch of failures.

i live in a paid for trailer...he might wan'a... go mobile...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQ5pi3UR5dY

I can see where, at the time, this seemed like a good investment. He was going to go to school. He figured his income would be going up after he graduated so taking an interest only loan on a property that he thought (as we all did) was going up in value made sense. At the end of his schooling he could sell the condo, pay for his school loans with the equity and move on and start his career.

Of course the problem was that the housing bubble blew up and everything went down hill. I think we can give this guy a break. He is going to lose his condo. He may want to look for a subsidized rental somewhere. I would think that he would qualify.

If this guy bought his condo just five years ago, he was a fool. That would have been 2007 and, at that time, there was plenty of warning being sounded that the housing market was headed for a crash.

Then there's this whole meme of "predatory lending". That is just a construct of the media and some politicians. It has always been illegal to lie to someone in a business transaction. The difference is that you used to need PROOF of your allegations. Under this administration, it seems that you only have to SAY that you were told something.

Anyone that believes anything that's not guaranteed in writing is too dumb to be allowed out without a nanny.

It was the GOVERNMENT that forced the reduction of the standards for receiving a mortgage. It was the GOVERNMENT that passed legislation barring "discrimination" against low-income people who wanted a loan that anyone with an iota of common sense would know had not a chance of being repaid. It was the GOVERNMENT that used the "carrot and stick" method to get mortgage providers to issue subprime loans.

Here's a bit of info that the mainstream media won't tell you:

Right now, the Justice Department is suing CitiBank for "knowingly" making subprime loans.

Back in 1995, there was a huge class-action lawsuit brought against CitiBank, under the Community Re-investment Act and the "redlining" laws, to FORCE the bank to make such loans. There were 186 plaintiffs in the suit. When it was settled (for a BIG chunk of money), only 20 of the plaintiffs received anything (around $50,000 on average). The lawyers, naturally, took the lion's share of the money.The rest DID get their subprime mortgages and about 90% were in foreclosure within a couple of years.

The kicker is that one of the LEAD attorneys in the lawsuit was BARACK OBAMA!!

So, now you have the Obama Justice Department suing Citibank for making the same kind of loans that Obama, the Community Organizer, FORCED them to make.

If he was healthy, I'd have no sympathy for him - but people shot early in life and confined to a wheelchair, seldom live beyond 50yo.

You don't have to be in a bad loan to be getting screwed by the current mortgage problems. We bought in January of 2009 - we thought the housing crisis was over - our house has lost $30K since the purchase...major over correction going on. The housing woes come in many forms - only those who have been in the same place for 20 years, have come out unscathed.

So the moral of the story is what? If you've ever been a victim, then you shouldn't face foreclosure?!

JS i hear you. My thoughts exactly. but as i said we are now living in a society that encourages such behavior but it will come full circle. the anarchy approach will bite those that seek to gain by using it, in the rear

The fact that he is a Columbine survivor has nothing to do with financial situations 13 years later. What's the point, NBC?

I think the point of this story is that he has been eating crow for a long time, and he has undoubtedly.Yet many, millions, have been eating crow as well, and tens of thousands were injured at war in Iraq and Afghanistan and are having foreclosure issues and money issues. And those are the lucky ones, because thousands of families have lost a father or a mother forever, and have financial problems.

I think the point of this story is that Americans are eating crow, and what are our leaders doing to lead us out of this hole if they are leaders?

Let's turn this into a real story.... did all of the students from Columbine make terrible financial decisions?

And what was the direct result of their injuries with their bad financial decisions.

If he was healthy, I'd have no sympathy for him - but people shot early in life and confined to a wheelchair, seldom live beyond 50yo.

So you feel sorry for him because he was never going to pay off the loan to begin with? That suggests that he was playing the odds - take an interest only loan hoping to gain by doing a "flip". Nothing down, no equity built over the past five years. He isn't upside down as much as the bank is.

Well Thinker, you forget to mention the thinking about the bank which still own the house. If the current owner screwed up due to all faults on his own, I'm sure the bank can find somebody responsible to buy that house.

The moral of the story is that if you write for NBC then banks are bad and little people are good. Anything you can do to make banks look bad in relating to little people is what you want to do. So if you run across a Columbine shooting victim who is losing his home, then that presents a golden opportunity to show how evil a bank can be. Do you suppose the bank really has ANY idea (or cares) that this guy took a shot at Columbine? No. He's a borrower who defaulted. Period. Treated no worse or better than any other defaulter. But if you are a writer for MSNBC, you somehow believe the evil bank should know the personal history of every borrower and give special concessions to those who have had a bad break (even if it was 13 years ago). This whole story is ridiculous.

...but hes no different than any other homeowner facing foreclosure.

He got SHOT when he went to school one day. He never walked again. That makes him just a little different.

He is 30 years old now..more than old enough to be personally responsible for his own actions.

Maybe there should be a gun ban. That is what the end statement alluded to

I feel for him but he should have been more careful entering into a contract.

Grow up and take responsibility, he signed the papers, no one forced him. I think he needs to be more concerned with finding a place to live.

People need to put on their big boy pants, and accept that they are solely responsible for their actions. I could have accepted the same kind of loan, I didn't though because I know interest rates are always climbing.

He was shot in the spine, not in the head. He's not mentally retarded. He's capable of making his own decisions, and as this story illustrates, taking care of himself (since he lives on his own).

Hello, you agree to and sign a contract with a bank who lends you a sum of money to buy a home and the contract requires you to pay a monthly amount for so many years until the loan is repaid, and the contract further states if you stop making the monthly payments the bank has the right to foreclose on the house that secures the loan and sell it to recover its remaining loan balance, then for whatever reason you stop making the monthly payments. The bank is at fault; the bank is the villain for undertaking the permissible action in the contract that you agreed to and signed off on? Get serious.

Mach, while him being in a wheelchair might make him a bit different than many homeowners, it doesn't change the fact that he is just as liable for the loan he took out for his home as any other homeowner.

Him being in a wheelchair doesn't change that fact.

@ rockmebritney - it will never be 100% the bank's fault. It is not the bank's fault he CHOSE to sign the contract. No one forced him to agree to the terms. He needs to be responsible for his poor decision. We need more people in this country to return to being responsible for their actions, not blame it on someone else, or expect someone else to be responsible for them.

He is different from all the others losing their homes - because he will never walk again - he must be on disability - and if he got a great settlement from the Columbine incident - that's gone now - I don't know - this is an instance where if someone in California wouldn't miss the money - buy the Condo and let him live there - get his degree - and do something worthwhile from his wheel chair - he's not out begging - he did try to reeducate himself to function from the wheelchair - he still wants to accomplish something. Think of it this way - Gabby got a bullet for almost the same reason he got one - and people are still paving the streets with Gold at her feet - doing anything and everything to restore her to as much function as possible.

This guy will never walk - and no one seems to be strapping him into those bionic legs and getting him walking or putting him in the top rehab facility in the US and rehabbing him or really doing much of anything anymore -

The one break he might get now after everything else - is some rich Californian buying his condo and letting sit there while he goes to school - salvaging his credit - and keeping him from being homeless -

He's still never going to walk - run - do what he wants when he wants - they didn't mention this in the article but typically his type of paralysis involves a lot of secondary health problems - people in his position age faster in some ways and lose more a lot faster than someone else - they experience random pain and discomfort - and it is very difficult to treat it - he's going to have a lot of problems that sheer willpower will only enable him to endure it - but not avoid it.

Rockme's quote " i do believe a majority of these foreclosures are 100% the banks fault and they should take responsibility. something needs to be done because people shouldnt have to be forced out of their homes because they can no longer afford the payments they were once able to easily afford"

Sorry Rockme, but what planet do you live on? The banks fault? Did they hold a gun to his head and make him sign? America where it's ALWAYS someone else's fault. How do you know they were "once able to easily afford their payments", do you have a crystal ball? So the banks should subsidize everyone who now can't afford there payments? You live in a fantasy. Sorry to break the news to you but banks are a business. Businesses are in the business of making money for their owners and shareholders, they are not a welfare agency. A bank HATES to foreclose on a home, it costs them big money, it causes them to spend a lot of money which they would love to avoid paying. But my God man someone has to pay for that home. Homes are not FREE, there is no such thing as a "free lunch". Welcome to reality, where your decisions, bad or good, have consequences. And when you add those decisions up over time, that is the blueprint of your life. You do it, you own it.

@ Mandi Grace, you are part of the problem. You are telling him he is a victim and it is OK to make poor decisions because he can't walk. There are millions of jobs out there that do not require one to walk. Nor does it take 13 years to get a sound engineer's degree. Did he take in roommates to help pay the mortgage, did he try for jobs in other fields? Has he done all he can to help himself? Those are the questions we should be asking him, not, "it's OK honey because you can't walk." Attitude makes a big difference in one's ability to live successfully. My Father spent the last 2 years of life in a wheelchair due to an amputation. He didn't become the "victim." He continued to do all the things he did before, and didn't wait for someone to wait on him hand and foot. He lived until the day he died, he didn't stop living before then because he lost a leg.

Excuse me JCB, but didn't tax payers pay billions to banking institutions and AIG to prevent their FAILURE. No one put a gun to their head and said they needed to make greedy trades/money which contributed greatly to the housing crisis.

The ones on top of some of these institutions left with millions.

Yes, homes are not free nor should be poor business practices on Wall Street which the average American paid the bill and are still paying the bill on some financial institutions.

I am completely blown away by the lack of empathy in these posts! Wow!

Why should these posts contain empathy Kenmor? If you take out the purposeful inclusion in the article of him being in a wheel chair and a victim of Columbine, he is exactly just like everyone else in his situation. Using those 2 excuses to encourage us to feel sorry for him is beyond the pale. Besides, he is no longer a victim, he is a survivor. He is just as capable as anyone else to make good decisions, rather than poor ones. He needs to chose to make good decisions now, not wait for someone else to take responsibility for him. He is not mentally challenged. That may sound a bit harsh, but that is what responsible adults do. It is possible this article is so poorly written, that he has been responsible after the purchase and the author left that out. But it still remains a fact that college students should not be buying homes or condos while in school. Most student end up far away from their school, it is more sensible to rent or live in a dorm.

Beyond this specific situation, we have a group of people in the country who are in the same situation as he, and it is their own fault, not ours. Yet many in that same group are crying "woe is me, it is not my fault, it is ______— fault. I should be helped. I deserve to have a house I can't afford." And they expect someone else to give them something they have not earned. Well, when we do that, it is at the expense of all of us who took responsibility for our actions and paid our own way, hard times and all. Those who are responsible are tired of being put upon, against our will by those who think they deserve what the Jones' have regardless of whether they earn it or not.

machspeedemon...

So we should give him special dispensation because he was shot?? In regards to being a homeowner on the brink of forclosure then, yes, he is like a majority of homeowners in trouble...

MCL12's quote "Excuse me JCB, but didn't tax payers pay billions to banking institutions and AIG to prevent their FAILURE. No one put a gun to their head and said they needed to make greedy trades/money which contributed greatly to the housing crisis"

BS MCL, banks were given money to stabilize the system, even banks that didn't need a dime and tried to rufuse it, like several banks in my area. They were forced to take it. They, the banks, PAID ALL the money back with interest. AIG is an international insurance company for your information, not a bank. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac caused the housing crash more than any bank ever did, but thank your leaders in Washington for "a house for everyone, only 3% down", that's why the bubble burst, and because everyone thought this would never end, using their homes as ATM machines. Look in the mirror also, "we" the public bought into a never ending real estate boom. I wonder if you feel the same way about General Motors which will NEVER repay that money they were given. We "the taxpayer" got stock at 54$ a share, the stock is at 22$ a share, and it will NEVER get to 54$ but no one says a word about that 46 billion they still owe "us". All the big banks paid it back, AIG, GM will never pay it back. But that in your pipe, sorry if the truth hurts. Banks don't owe you a damn thing.

JCB is right...I work for a national Wirehouse and we were FORCED to take it even though we were scure liquidity wise....

He's desperate and playing the Columbine card. Not cool. Kinda like Rodney King playing the "they beat me up" card until he drank himself to death.

JCB, would you happen to be working in banking?

no

Where is the fraud in this man’s case????

Okay. Legally, there was probably no fraud. But sucking people into punitive mortgages which are more than likely to be defaulted on is unethical. To forgive the people who did this to so many Americans is simply to say, "Greed and deceit in business are okay by me, buddy. Go for it! After all, it's not illegal."

They're not okay by me. When a bank or other lending institution makes a loan, they should only do so if they believe the borrower will be able to pay the loan back without defaulting. If they do otherwise, especially just to hike up short-term profits, and further, if they sell the potentially bad debt to someone else and then continue the practice, this is just WRONG.

True, this man is just one of many. And also true that you can't get something for nothing and people should've been more careful, but the people that make these loans are high pressure sales people. They make it all seem possible. It's a con, plain and simple. Hence, it's fair to sympathize with anyone in this situation (it could be you next time) and even moreso for someone who is already suffering from the craziness in our society.

I hope the Occupy folks can save this man's home and help him refinance. Everyone deserves this, at the very least.

It is not a lack of sympathy; it is about a lack of reality. We are all adults, I presume, and only adults
can make a loan; therefore, we are responsible for our action. My dreams have not come true, but I have continued on with life. As for you statement; “but the people that make these loans are high pressure sales people”, we are adults based on age, we make decisions based on our wants, needs, dreams, checkbook,and future. When those dreams fall thought, get a new one and make the best of it.
I have had to pay for my failures, and I refuse to pay for others failures.

They're not okay by me. When a bank or other lending institution makes a loan, they should only do so if they believe the borrower will be able to pay the loan back without defaulting. If they do otherwise, especially just to hike up short-term profits, and further, if they sell the potentially bad debt to someone else and then continue the practice, this is just WRONG.

Have you been on another planet the last 10 or 12 years? Any financial institution whose deposit accounts are covered by federal deposit insurance are subject to all federal regulations. The Community Reinvestment Act, the CRA, required these institutions to make a meaningful percentage of their mortgage loans to low to moderate income borrowers or face significant, adverse regulatory action and sanctions. Unfortunately, many of these borrowers would not qualify for a mortgage loan if these institutions applied their traditional loan underwriting standards to their applications. Therefore, in order to not run afoul of the CRA, and only for that purpose, these institutions applied substantially less stringent loan underwriting standards to these borrowers. As a result, these institutions complied with the provisions of the CRA, but experienced rates of default on these loans that were extremely higher than those on the loans they made in accordance with their traditional loan underwriting standards with the foreclosure crisis emanating from the staggering number of these loan defaults.

While I feel bad for him that he got shot as a kid, it is totally irrelevant to the current situation. My wife and I spent most of the night of that event glued to the television. That however was over 13 years ago.

I see so many people saying it is all the bank's faults for giving loans, but when they don't loan someone money you same people are screaming about that too. When it gets down to it, if someone is over 18 years of age and mentally capable, they should be responsible for their own actions. The banks don't corner someone in their home and force them to move into something they can't afford while taking an ill-advised loan. People go to the bank looking for the money to get it done themselves.

Adults are responsible for understanding the terms of a contract before they sign on the dotted line and they and they alone are responsible for deciding whether or not a particular deal is in their best interests or not. No banker or mortgage company has held a gun to anyone's head in this country and forced them to sign a contract for a mortgage.

He made a big mistake and he needs to accept the fact that he and he alone is responsible for that. The fact that he is in a wheelchair or how he got there is absolutely irrelevant to this story and this is just another one of NBC's endless attempts to drum up sympathetic victims in their endless battle against those horrible bankers and the obvious need for even greater regulation in their eyes.

In fact, banks have significantly tightened up their lending practices in response to that whole mess, which was indisputably brought on by our government's huge failure in social engineering, it's the only sane course of action to take - but now people are screaming because they can't refinance and/or buy houses they can't afford.

ElegiaLeung... "But sucking people into punitive mortgages which are more than likely to be defaulted on is unethical" He took an interest only loan in hopes the property would appreciate. There is nothing punitive or unethical about an interest only or variable rate mortgage. They are actually good in various situations. The PEOPLE WHO TOOK INTEREST ONLY OR VARIABLE rate loans in order to purchase more home than they could afford at the time were destined to fail. If you can't pay for it, move out. What is he fighting for.. he never owned that house, he financed almost 100% of the cost. The bank owned it from day one. LIke I always say.. If you didn't pay cash for it you don't own it.

I have one of those punitive mortgages...the evil bank expects me to make a payment EVERY month.

Can you believe that?

Let me see if I got this whole financial thing straight: if a bank lends money that they are asked to lend, in order to make a profit, they are greedy predatory vultures. And when someone buys a place that they cannot afford in the hopes of making piles of cash, THEY are not the greedy ones, the banks are. Ok, I think I got it. It is ok for people to be greedy as long as they win. But if they lose then it is the banks that are greedy. Right. Got it. *facepalm*

E=

now your getting it, LOL. That brought to you by the I want no responsibility, but want all the perks/handouts crowd.

E= that was beautiful. Run for President, please. You got my vote

They don't "deserve" it. It is nice when good luck and help comes, but one must work hard to deserve something. It's good to help someone who is working their butt off, but not someone who just moans about their predicament or lot in life.

I saw an ad before the meltdown offering a high priced condo with initial payments of $700 a month or so with people earning as little as 30K qualifying. After reading the fine print I found the first 2 years payments were at a 1% teaser rate that would reset in 2 years which would then require payments of nearly $2,000 a month. I thought at the time who making 30K would be stupid enough to buy a condo that would require payments of $2,000 a month in 2 years? Apparently a lot of people.

He wouldn't want you stroking his head.

Nobody here is uncompassionate towards his life in a wheelchair. But this story has NOTHING to do with him being a wheelchair.

JG, I haven't seen anyone saying screw him, he deserves to be in a chair, quite the opposite actually. However, everyone has their demons to live with and work around. The journalist made a BS story headline to sell their story. People are commenting more on the comments of those who believe it is all someone else's fault when people go and get bad loans and then can't pay them. Figuring out whether you can afford a loan or not is something we learned in our freshman year of high school business class it isn't trig or bio-chem.

Tracy,

Re-read the posts above. That is basically what they are saying.

Kenmor,

I only saw one where anything negative was directed toward this young man's unfortunate happenings of some 13 1/2 years ago, and it was collapsed. Please provide post #'s so I can understand what you are meaning.

Now, as far as his current situation, yes several have said (including me) that you are responsible for knowing what you are getting yourself into BEFORE you sign on the dotted line. Too many feel like people are taking great advantage of their ability to whine that it was an institutions fault when it was their own. The lending laws were changed back during a two term presidents reign, because he thought that it was advisable for everyone to have a home of their own, even if they had to loosen up the lending laws to include people that didn't qualify as safe risks to make it happen. This president should have stuck to looking for a new humidor on this one. That ill advised move, IMHO, is a bedrock of the greatest financial crash since the great depression. Too many people overbought using the old saying "Real estate always goes up because they will never make any more of it" to justify their over-purchasing.

It is easy for unscrupulous experts to fool naive borrowers.

Or greedy ones. Both the banks and those who bought more than they could afford hoping to flip for big profits are to blame. I had a neighbor who was a security guard making 40K and he flipped 1 home making several hundred thousand which he then rolled over to buy a 1 million dollar property. In the end even his $200,000+ equity wasn't enough to offset the loss. He ended up walking away from it. That's greed.

joemike404 - I like your comments. I hate to see so many hateful, unsympathetic comments. As you say, most people are just a few paychecks away from the same fate. I have worked for the courts and have seen the paperwork for foreclosures. Many times the banks have promised people to work with them and foreclosed anyway, even when the borrowers were trying to give them the money they owed. Also, it's a fact that home prices soared and nobody ever thought property values would decrease, at the worst most felt it would maintain it's value, but not decrease. Now there are so many people who owe more for their homes than they can sell them for and that's tragic. Home ownership has always been the American dream for most and a matter of pride, it's sad to see so many people struggling to hold on to that dream.

What exactly does it mean when you say someone is "taking responsibility" for his decision?

It's a nice phrase. "I take full responsibility." Thing is, it's usually followed immediately by, "BUT..." and then something that indicates it's not really their responsibility.

He's seeking assistance from a group that states they are fighting evictions based on "fraudulent" loans, yet there is nothing at all to indicate that there was any fraud involved. He made a bad investment decision. Hey, I've made some bad ones, too (though not THAT bad). I lost money. I accepted that. Instead, he's seeking to find a way out of paying back the money that he legally owes. How is that taking responsibility?

The personal responsibility relates to his buying a property he probably knew he couldn't afford. He got himself into the situation.

As anng indicated, he is seeking a way to keep from being foreclosed upon when the premise is simple..he didn't make payments..tname me any bank, regardless of loan type ,that will allow you to miss upwards of 8 mortgage payments without redress? This is not a fraudulent foreclosure.

I am sympathetic to the idea he is going to lose his condo but I am not sympathetic to the idea that he is seeking to keep the foreclosure from happening by trying to get help from a group like Occupy LA. Now, if a true lawyer would take him pro bono and work with him I can see it but to go to someone like Occupy LA who by their own premise helps people with fraudulent foreclosures? The time to seek help would have been before he defaulted on payments when he knew he was going to be in trouble..not 8 months later when the pending auction was scheduled.

Lynn - that was what I was thinking as I read the story. You are the first person to point that out. He has not paid on his condo since February. That's pusing a year. Now he wants to keep his place. He did not take any action until he is almost kicked out. It's hard to sympathize with someone who does not take action or plans ahead. What did he expect his outcome would be? I would love to not pay for 8+ months. So, what was he doing with his money? He had to have some kind of income.

Lynn and Lisa, the intermediate steps he may have taken might just simply not be detailed in the article. You don't really know what he may have done to try to work with his mortgage company and are assuming that he did nothing until the very end. That most often is not the case. If you read the article, the Occupy movement put him in touch with an attorney with whom he is working to try to resolve the foreclosure.

Also, you don't know his circumstances. Perhaps when he bought the house he could afford it and something happened to change things. Many, many people who end up in foreclosure end up there as a result of a job loss or medical issues resulting in substantial medical debt. The lack of compassion is believing that you understand anything about this man's circumstances from this very brief article. You then jump to the conclusion that he was trying to game the system and act as though his unfortunate circumstances are some personal affront toward you.

Joemike404

You've made the most sense of all the messages. Most of these posters would lose their own homes if they experience job loss, a disability or some other way they would experience lost of income.

It continues to seem one sided on who has lost the most with the housing crisis and this is homeowners. I believe banks have continued on with tighter rules, however, it appears even Wall Street is seeing jobs contracting in the recent years.

I realize we are all accountable for our finances, but we make mistakes and we are lucky if we can change them. I hope this young man finds a way to have a roof over his head and a job which he enjoys.

Joemike404,

Finally a voice of reason and compassion. I feel bad when anyone loses their home.

1 or 2 things that seem to need to be pointed out here.

First, it doesn't say they fight "fraudulent loans" but "fraudulent foreclosures".

Second, it doesn't say that this man didn't make any payments for 8 months, it simply says he "fell behind". Neither you, nor I, know whether he had made, or tried to arrange, lower payments with the bank.

Some of you seem to be making assumptions based on your own prejudices.

The final point I wanted to make is that at some point all (or at least most) of us will rely on someone who is supposed to be a professional at something for advice at some point. Whether that is an accountant, lawyer, contractor, or a mortgage broker, it doesn't matter, we trust that they are more knowledgeable and we can rely on their experience and the advice they give to us.

California dreaming.........................

Please, cut the b.s. just for a minute if you can stand it. The reality is (and I'm speaking from the perspective of someone who has watched several close friends go through this) that people bought houses they absolutely KNEW AHEAD OF TIME that they couldn't afford. They wanted to by a house and flip it within a year or two to make quick, easy money (Get Rich Quick). Even if you don't understand how the economy and inflation work, you at some point had to wonder: where is all that money coming from? Magic? Now, grown up children who refuse to take responsibility for anything they do in life want to blame "predatory lending." What a joke. How dare someone in the business of making money from loans be efficient at their job. Try this. The next time you go to a casino and bet all your money on the first blackjack hand you see and then lose it, go to the pit boss and ask for your money back and say that the dealer was a predator that took advantage of you. Let me know how that works for you. Personal responsibility will answer every problem America currently faces. It's time for Americans to man up and quit making cowardly excuses every time their greed and laziness backfires on them.

That isn't true. Allowing Freddie and Fannie to buy properly vetted loans didn't require the banks to make them that's why the major banks have paid hundreds of billions in fines to those agencies. Banks were always suppose to verify income and ability to repay. They ceased to do that because they're greedy. And bank CEO making 20 million or more a year should realise selling a multi million dollar home to a McDonalds worker was insane even if he claimed he made 150K. Also the government never dropped the requirement of mortgage insurance lenders did on their own.

Back to the issue here. Cut the B.S. It all boils down to Greeeeeeeddddd. FACT- No one applied for a loan at gunpoint. FACT- Even if it wasn't verified, the applicant did have to state their income. So not only did they get into a house they knew they couldn't afford, they lied their a** off to get it...getting closer and closer to the definition of stealing.... Stop making excuses and just be a man for once. Admit you got greedy and now you're going to have to lie in the bed you stole. PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY

I agree MIke....

10 years ago, I was hunted down by a Ferocious Pack of Predatory Lenders...I fought and battled and managed to fashion a Conventional Loan to repel them..

"Banks were always suppose to verify income and ability to repay" Right... those "Bigoted, Racist Bankers"....that's what they were called..or don't you remember...or didn't you know?

I do feel bad for him or anyone who finds themselves in this kind of predicament.

But, I have to wonder....What about the poor schlub who he was going to Flip that worthless Condo on? Hmmmm?

Mike please get your money back from the casino? One is gambling most rational humans know the odds. The problem was that the banks, institutions, and government let homeowners basically play with no money! You will probably fire off everyone should have known better. Know different than me coming to you and saying four tickets to high-roller suites in Vegas everything compted. Just pay me back when you can no rush three to five years whenever. You do not take the deal, yea right. That is how you tweak and economy my man and tilt the odds in your favor, problem was it was not the spin of a wheel it was a home the American dream. "I feel your Pain" a lot of people bought into that Clinton BS, and here we are today. People who bought their homes twenty years ago are being penalized don't be a fool, wake up. Everyone is responsible you are right and lenders should have safeguarded our money. Do not be fooled we are all paying.

Mike, please see my post at #9 and stop being so hateful. Back in 2004 we bought a house with a 30 year conventional mortgage, the payment on which was about 10% of our monthly gross income. Back then the world described us as idiots who were woefully undermortgaged and missing out on the gravy train. Our house lost 30% of its value and is now worth almost to the penny what we owe on it.

We chose to make a conservative decision and it has proved to be the correct one. Others chose to make riskier decisions and are paying the price. They are accountable for their decisions. If the situations were reversed, I would do everything possible to keep my home as, I suspect, you would do.

It is possible to hold people accountable for their decisions yet still feel sympathy and compassion for their situations. You might give it a try.

Joemike404... My thoughts exactly... I purchased my first home in 1989 for 72,300, financed it for 20 years, paid it off 2 years early. Now, today it is worth 70,000. All I have to say is thank you Mr. Castaldo and all the other idiots that bought into the bs that you could own something for nothing.. Thank you for taking me down the sh!tter with you.

As you as trying to get your lender, the government, etc to reduce the amount you own on your loan so you can make the payments and your house will not be underwater, do me a favor and see it they can cut me a check for the value that my house lost because of your dumb a$$ decisions.

Wow Dot - $2,300 to live for 20 years. Good job. You can't even rent for that.

Wow Dot - $2,300 to live for 20 years. Good job. You can't even rent for that.

======================================================================

Sure, but you do know she probably paid about $140,000 in interest right?

Yeah, but if Mr. Castaldo and all the others who purchased homes they couldn't afford, blamed their mistake on the banks and walked away from their contracts would have had just a wee bit of responsibility as to how much house they could afford my house would be worth at least 120k ( before the real estate bubble they created).

Again, I sarcastically say thank you to everyone who thought they could afford a 250k house while working for $12 an hour, or who thought they could purchase endless consumer goods with home equity loans..... Where's my check for $50,000? Oh wait, I am a responsible home owner that paid my mortgage, I don't qualify for that!

fastz.. no more like 40k in interest.. financed about 62500. ( back in the day when you needed a down payment) for 18 years at approx. 5%... since we are adding it all up.. throw in about 4 years of HIGHLY elevated property taxes thanks to the bubble... at the height of the bubble the house was worth 250k.

Side note.. this house is located on a cul - de - sac street with 15 houses. We purchased the house new, and there were two floor plans to choose from. I kid you not.. at the height of the bubble the house next door to me ( same floor plan, not as well cared for as ours) sold for 249k to a couple with two kids. They both worked for Red lobster, she as a waitress and he as a cook. ... the house went into foreclosure in 2009 because the owners could not keep up with the payments... resold about 9 months later for 58K... I bought it with cash and have been renting it ever since for $1250.00 month.

So again thanks to all who contributed to the real estate bubble.. my original house may be worth crap right now, but on the plus side I did pick up three other houses in the neighborhood to use as rentals/investment property while they were on sale two/three years ago and currently rent the original house.. all for 1250.00 each per month. Was also able to purchase a house in the country on 16 acres with the proceeds of the rentals.

He did actually stop a bullet; it is still lodged in his spine.

Actually, in this country housing is NOT an entitlement, that is why we have homeless people.

He didn't need a job....... he gets SSI, which usually includes State Buy In Medicare Plan, aka free medical. Which also entitles him to a Pell Grant.......... I'm sure his attorney has signed him up for HUD Section 8, just in case he can't get his foreclosure fixed. No worries!

Since when?

Since the Banks bought the Politicians.....

You both make ignorant comments.

Wrong........... Bankruptcy and foreclosure are 2 different things.

I'm pretty sure the term "racist scumbag" was coined for comments exactly like yours, randall-1344214.

Hard to believe people like you walk the streets in 2012. Hard to believe, and depressing as hell.

Exactly right, and thanks for the comment.

That is jut it, he said he made a mistake. We do not know his entire cirucumstances on employment or if it is possible he receives disability.

With this story, some may have sympathy around the holidays and send him a check to help. It is their choice.

Perhaps he will need to find affordable housing and lose the condo.

I also believe "I can afford" a 30 year fixed loan is depended on employment to pay this bill. What execuse are for those who bought within their means and experiences job loss. Let's hope those have learned to save. My point is it could happen to any of us.