U.S. Is Set to Sue a Dozen Big Banks Over Mortgages

Its not the loans that threatened our national economy, it's the dubious BONDS that were bundled and then sold that really were the problem.

Note that as yet not one bonds rating agency is called on the carpet for screwing up?

If you want some indication of how far the reputations of ratings agencies have fallen, take a look at the price of a treasury in the days following our recent downgrade.

The FED is buying most of the treasuries you idiot. That is they only reason rates are low.
 
Ame®icano;4085321 said:
The federal agency that oversees the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is set to file suits against more than a dozen big banks, accusing them of misrepresenting the quality of mortgage securities they assembled and sold at the height of the housing bubble, and seeking billions of dollars in compensation.

At first, government force banks to give loans to those who couldn't afford it while giving to banks warranties thru Fannie & Freddy. Now they suing them for quality of given mortgages.
Market hasn't opened yet, but premarket doesn't look good at all.

What it appears to me is that the banks are being sued for misrepresenting the quality of the loans, not making the loans.

Don't know if its true or not, but that's what it looks like to me.
 
Robo signing?
Not maintaining a proper trail of mortgage ownership?


Only 20% of subprime mortgages were made by regulated finiancial institutions.

80% of the bad loans were made my non regulated finiancial entities.

So this proves deregulation to be a good thing?

Bullshit!!!

Fact: In 2008, Fannie and Freddie have purchased about 80% of all new home mortgages in the United States.

After the housing market fell apart and the credit markets imploded. It's 90% today.

Freddie and Fannie lost share from 2003 to 2006. It ticked up slightly in 2006, right at the top of the bubble. Most subprime loans were issued outside of the GSEs and the CRA. Their share fell from something like 50% in 2003 to 25% in 2006.
 
FTR, for those who didn't bother to read the OP, the banks are being sued for misrepresenting the quality of loans sold and packaged, not that they made the loans.

Again, I don't know if they are guilty or not, but that is the government's charge.
 
--1991-- ACORN interfered with a House Banking Committee meeting for two days protesting a move to bring CRA reform. "According to the Times, "the same study showed no evidence that nonwhite mortgage applicants were being discriminated against."

--1992-- Enforcement of CRA was "sporadic," as the Washington Times notes, until a Federal Reserve Bank of Boston study asserted that there were "substantially higher denial rates for black and Hispanic applicants than for white applicants."

Lynn Browne was approached by co-author Alicia Munnell to do the study because "community activists were complaining that mortgage loans were not being made in minority communities." According to the Times, however, "the study had mishandled statistics on minority default rates. When the errors were accounted for, the same study showed no evidence that nonwhite mortgage applicants were being discriminated against."

Frank Quaratiello, writing in the Boston Herald, cites Stan Liebowitz: "My guess is that they were interested in finding a particular result." Said Liebowitz, "Richard Syron was head of the Boston Fed at the time. He went on to be the head of Freddie Mac. They were looking for mortgage discrimination, and they found it." According to Quaratiello, Syron became Freddie Mac CEO and chairman in 2003 and "faced increasing pressure to buy up more and more risky mortgages, some of which the Boston Fed's guide had, in effect, served to legitimize." Regarding Syron's total compensation in 2007 of $18.3 million, Liebowitz reportedly quipped, "Nice reward for presiding over unprofessional research behavior, bankrupting Freddie Mac and crippling our financial system, all in the name of politically correct lending."

--September 1992-- The Chicago Tribune described the ACORN agenda as "affirmative action lending." And writes Stanley Kurtz, senior fellow with the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, "ACORN was issuing fact sheets bragging about relaxations of credit standards that it had won on behalf of minorities."

--October 1992-- Congress, enacting the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, It "established HUD-imposed housing goals for financing of affordable housing and housing in central cities and other rural and underserved areas." Washington Post In a brief debate unfolded on the floor of the House of Representatives over a bill to create a new regulator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. On one side stood Jim Leach, an Iowa Republican concerned that Congress was "hamstringing" this new OFHEO regulator at the behest of the companies. He warned that the two companies were changing "from being agencies of the public at large to money machines for the stockholding few." On the other side stood Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat who said the companies served a public purpose. They were in the business of lowering the price of mortgage loans.

--September 1993-- The Chicago Sun-Times reports an initiative led by ACORN's Talbott with five area lenders "participating in a $55 million national pilot program with affordable-housing group ACORN to make mortgages for low- and moderate-income people with troubled credit histories." Kurtz notes that the initiative included two of her former targets, Bell Federal Savings and Avondale Federal Savings, who had apparently capitulated under pressure.

--July 1994-- Represented by Obama and others, plaintiffs filed a class-action lawsuit alleging Citibank had "intentionally discriminated against the plaintiffs on the basis of race with respect to a credit transaction" and calling its action "racial discrimination and discriminatory redlining practices." Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank

--November 1994-- President Clinton addressed the National Association of Realtors Conference Anaheim, California "I think we all agree that more Americans should own their own homes, for reasons that are economic and tangible and reasons that are emotional and intangible but go to the heart of what it means to harbor, to nourish, to expand the American dream"..."I am determined to see that you have the opportunity and together we can make that opportunity for the young families of our country. I am committed to a new and unprecedented partnership between industry leaders and community leaders and government to recommit our nation to the idea of homeownership and to create more homeowners than ever before." "The Clinton administration announced the bold new homeownership strategy, which included monumental loosening of credit standards and imposition of subprime lending quotas."

--May 1995-- The FDIC's Board of Directors approved a final rule implementing the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and the Office of Thrift Supervision have approved parallel regulations for the institutions they supervise. The joint final rule largely retains the principles and structure of the proposals issued in December 1993 and October 1994. The new CRA regulation replaces the 12 assessment factors contained in the old rule with a more performance-based evaluation process to assess whether financial institutions are meeting the credit needs of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. The new rule establishes different tests for large and small institutions, as well as for retail and wholesale or limited purpose banks.

--June 1995-- The Clinton administration, allied with Rep. Frank, Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., and Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., directed HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo to inject GSEs into the subprime mortgage market. "ACORN had come to Congress not only to protect the CRA from GOP reforms but also to expand the reach of quota-based lending to Fannie, Freddie and beyond." What resulted was the broadening of the "acceptability of risky subprime loans throughout the financial system, thus precipitating our current crisis."

The administration announced the bold new homeownership strategy, which included monumental loosening of credit standards and imposition of "SUBPRIME LENDING QUOTAS." HUD reported that President Clinton had committed "to increasing the homeownership rate to 67.5% by the year 2000." The plan was "to reduce the financial, information and systemic barriers to homeownership" which was "amplified by local partnerships at work in over 100 cities."

"Urged on by ACORN, congressional Democrats and the Clinton administration helped push tolerance for high-risk loans through every sector of the banking system — far beyond the sort of banks originally subject to the CRA. So it was the efforts of ACORN and its Democratic allies that first spread the subprime virus from the CRA to Fannie and Freddie and thence to the entire financial system. Soon, Democratic politicians and regulators actually began to take pride in "LOWERED CREDIT STANDARDS" as a sign of "fairness." Attorney General Janet Reno, who had already won a number of bank lending discrimination settlements, sternly announces, "We will tackle lending discrimination wherever it appears." With the new policy in full force, "No loan is exempt; no bank is immune. For those who thumb their nose at us, I promise vigorous enforcement."

--1997-- HUD Secretary Cuomo said, "GSE presence in the subprime market could be of significant benefit to lower-income families, minorities, and families living in underserved areas. "

--April 1998-- HUD announced a $2.1 billion settlement with AccuBanc Mortgage Corp. for alleged discrimination against minority loan applicants. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivmL-lXNy64"]Affirmative Action Lending[/ame] The funds would provide poor families with down payments and low interest mortgages. "Discrimination isn't always that obvious," said Secretary Cuomo in announcing the AccuBanc deal. "Sometimes more subtle but in many ways more insidious, an institutionalized discrimination that's hidden behind a smiling face." Before the camera, Cuomo admitted the mandate amounted to "affirmative action" lending that would result in a "higher default rate."

The institution would "take a greater risk on these mortgages, yes; to give families mortgages who they would not have given otherwise, yes; they would not have qualified but for this affirmative action on the part of the bank, yes. It is by income, and is it also by minorities? Yes. "With the $2.1 billion, lending that amount in mortgages which will be a higher risk, and I'm sure there will be a higher default rate on those mortgages than on the rest of the portfolio." The CRA allowed ACORN "organizations to collect a fee from the banks for their services in marketing the loans. The Senate Banking Committee had estimated that, as a result of CRA, $9.5 billion had gone to pay for services and salaries of the organizers."

--May 1999-- The Los Angeles Times reports that African-American homeownership is increasing three times as fast as that of whites, with Latino homeowners growing five times as fast, attributing the growth to breathing "the first real life into enforcement of the Community Reinvestment Act." Mandateing that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy mortgages with deviant down payments and debt-to-income ratios, which allowed lenders to approve mortgages for lower-income families that would have been denied otherwise. By now, all pretense had disappeared and lending practices were based upon concerns of discrimination in the banking system regardless of the consequences. Clinton threatened to veto a bill passed by the Senate that had "shortsightedly voted to retrench" CRA, as the Times put it. Under pressure, Fannie Mae was resisting increased targeting, arguing that the result would be more loan defaults. Barry Zigas, head of Fannie Mae's low-income efforts, argued, "There is obviously a limit beyond which (we) can't push (the banks) to produce," the Times reported.

--Fall 1999-- Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers issued a warning: "Debates about systemic risk should also now include government-sponsored enterprises, which are large and growing rapidly."

--September 1999-- New York Times "With pressure from the Clinton administration, Fannie Mae eased credit requirements on loans it would purchase from lenders, making it easier for banks to lend to borrowers unqualified for conventional loans. Fannie Mae's Raines explained that "there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market."

With this action, Fannie Mae put itself at substantial risk in the event of an economic downturn. "From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us," warned Peter Wallison, a fellow in financial policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). "If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry." The danger was known.

A study by Freddie Mac, confirming earlier Federal Reserve and FDIC studies, contradicts race discrimination arguments for CRA. The study found that African-Americans with annual incomes of $65,000-$75,000 have on average worse credit records than whites making under $25,000. This showed that the difficulty in qualifying was not because of race but bad credit records. Accordingly, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas entitled a paper "Red Lining or Red Herring?"

"City Journal warned that the Clinton administration had turned CRA into 'a vast extortion scheme against the nation's banks,'committing $1 trillion for mortgages and development projects, most of it funneled through the community organizers."

--November 1999-- President Bill Clinton signed into law S.900 Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 This bill had CRA loan mandates & allowed banks to sell the mandated bad loans to GSEs Fannie, Freddie, pension funds, foreigners & anyone else. This disolved Glass Steagall & made it legal for banks to create bad risky loans with the government backing it allowing it to get a AAA rating. This gave banks a license to steal!!!

--December 2000-- President Bill Clinton signed into law H.R. 4577: Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001. Consolidated in this bill was Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. This law made most over-the-counter derivatives (“OTC derivatives”) transactions between “sophisticated parties” un-regulated as “futures” under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) or as “securities” under the federal securities laws. Instead, banks and securities firms would continue to have their dealings in OTC derivatives supervised by their federal regulators under general “safety and soundness” standards. “Functional regulation”. This was to create an international derivatives market for comodities securities. Clinton & Gore were trying to built the framework for Carbon Cap & Trade Energy Trading Market Scheme with this law. This gave birth to the Enron Loophole. :ahole-1:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFK-UTGH1Zw"]Gore and the Enron Loophole.[/ame]

--April 2001-- The Bush Administrations 2002 Budget Assesment (page 142) "Uncertainties about the Federal Government’s liability have increased in some areas. Consolidation has increased bank size, and deregulation has allowed banks to engage in many risky activities. Thus, the loss to the deposit insurance funds can turn out to be unusually large in some bad years. The potential loss needs to be limited by large insurance reserves and effective regulation. The large size of some GSEs is also a potential problem. Financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity."

"In general, direct subsidies are more efficient than credit programs for the purpose of fulfilling social objectives such as helping low-income people, as opposed to economic objectives such as improving credit allocation. Direct subsidies are less likely to interfere with the efficient allocation of resources."

Bush wanted to cut back on the subprime lending because he knew giving people with BAD CREDIT a loan was much more dangerous than giving someone with good credit a down payment subsidy. This is a MAJOR difference! Even someone making millions like Michael Jackson was hopelessly in debt because they can't be financially responsible enough to pay their debts & live within their means. A study by Freddie Mac, confirming earlier Federal Reserve and FDIC studies, contradicts race discrimination arguments for CRA. The study found that African-Americans with annual incomes of $65,000-$75,000 have on average worse credit records than whites making under $25,000. This showed that the difficulty in qualifying was not because of race but bad credit records. Accordingly, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas entitled a paper "Red Lining or Red Herring?"

--May 2002-- President Bush calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

--September 2003-- Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

The New York Times published on Sept 10th 2003 "The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago. Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry. The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios."

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM"]Bush Tried to Stop This[/ame]

--November 2003-- Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

--February 2004-- The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

--February 2004-- CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." Financial Times

--June 2004-- Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

--Late 2004-- Democrats in congress blocked action to regulate the GSEs Fannie & Freddie.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs&feature=related"]Democrats blocked regulation of Fannie & Freddie.[/ame]

These same Democrats & Obama were paid off by by GSEs Fannie & Freddie!!! :ahole-1: :puke3:

--November 2004-- Here is Barney Franks letter to cut funding for OFHEO because they blew the whistle on Subprime criminal activity at Fannie Mae.

--December 2004-- ACORN used congress to force Trillions in CRA loans & payoffs. They recently hit Bank of America for over $800 Billion. (see page 25) of this congress hearing. That is some serious money. Don't tell me ACORN is not pouring on some serious pressure using the CRA compliance criteria.

--2005-- Fannie Mae CEO Frank Raines affirms partnership with Barack Obama & The Congressional Black Caucus" [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0&feature=related"]Frank Raines[/ame]

--April 2005-- Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)

--August 2007-- President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)

--September 2007-- Obama: "Subprime lending started off as a good idea - helping Americans buy homes who couldn’t previously afford to. Financial institutions created new financial instruments that could securitize these loans, slice them into finer and finer risk categories and spread them out among investors around the country and around the world. In theory, this should have allowed mortgage lending to be less risky and more diversified." These same financial institutions were Top Contributors to Barack Obama's Campaign :wtf: :ahole-1: :puke3:

--December 2007-- President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)

--February 2008-- Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

--March 2008-- President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)

--April 2008-- President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)

--May 2008-- President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.

--June 2008-- President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)

--2008-- Fannie and Freddie have purchased about 80% of all new home mortgages in the United States. Their combined investment portfolios held mortgage assets (loans and MBSs) valued at $1.5 trillion (as of June 30, 2008) - These GSE will never pay back tax payer for losses like all the banks have.

--April 2009-- Obama on his world appology tour in Strasbourg, France "difficult to imagine that the inability of somebody to pay for a house in Florida could contribute to the failure of the banking system in Iceland. Today what's difficult to imagine is that we did not act sooner to shape our future." :eusa_doh: :ahole-1:

--May 2009-- New York Times "But the storm has fallen with a special ferocity on black and Latino homeowners, the analysis shows. Defaults occur three times as often in mostly minority census tracts as in mostly white ones. Eighty-five percent of the worst-hit neighborhoods — where the default rate is at least double the regional average — have a majority of black and Latino homeowners."

PEW Research Study - "From 1995 through the middle of this decade, homeownership rates rose more rapidly among all minorities than among whites. But since the start of the housing bust in 2005, rates have fallen more steeply for two of the nation's largest minority groups -- blacks and native-born Latinos -- than for the rest of the population"

--JULY 2009-- Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released a report on The Role of Government Affordable Housing Policy in Creating the Global Financial Crisis of 2008

--January 2010-- Chairman Barney Frank says House panel to suggest abolishing Fannie, Freddie "The committee will be recommending abolishing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in their current form and coming up with a whole new system of housing finance ... That's the approach, rather than a piecemeal one." :eusa_doh: :puke3:

Finally Barney Frank admits the GSEs were the problem all along. Very little media coverage. The deception continues.

--March 2011-- The average asshole who quit paying their mortgage is now living 600 days rent & mortgage free before they are foreclosed on. This is harming the economy. This is an SEIU scheme to redistribute the wealth.

CAUGHT ON TAPE: Former SEIU Official Reveals Secret Plan To Destroy JP Morgan, Crash The Stock Market, And Redistribute Wealth In America "The plan is to organize a mass, coordinated "strike" on mortgage, student loan, and local government debt payments--thus bringing the banks to the edge of insolvency and forcing them to renegotiate the terms of the loans. This destabilization and turmoil, Lerner hopes, will also crash the stock market, isolating the banking class and allowing for a transfer of power."
 
Last edited:
No federal government office ever forced any bank to give a loan to anyone. Ever.

Not by law but by pressure.

I suggest you listen to cuomo's rant on the topic. He bragged about it. Killing what you are trying to imply.

Have a nice day.............................................

So, please explain how the vast majority of the most toxic subprimes were issued by firms outside the scope of the CRA, The FDIC and the regulatory structure of depository institutions?

I suggest you think before you post.

What types of entities did you have in mind, insurance companies? Investment banks?
 
Its not the loans that threatened our national economy, it's the dubious BONDS that were bundled and then sold that really were the problem.

Note that as yet not one bonds rating agency is called on the carpet for screwing up?

If you want some indication of how far the reputations of ratings agencies have fallen, take a look at the price of a treasury in the days following our recent downgrade.

The FED is buying most of the treasuries you idiot. That is they only reason rates are low.

Without Transparency, how does anyone truly know what the Fed is responsible for, other than burning a candle at both ends.
 
Ame®icano;4085321 said:
The federal agency that oversees the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is set to file suits against more than a dozen big banks, accusing them of misrepresenting the quality of mortgage securities they assembled and sold at the height of the housing bubble, and seeking billions of dollars in compensation.

At first, government force banks to give loans to those who couldn't afford it while giving to banks warranties thru Fannie & Freddy. Now they suing them for quality of given mortgages.
Market hasn't opened yet, but premarket doesn't look good at all.


That should do wonders for the economy.

Obama seems determined not to get reelected.
 
Ame®icano;4085321 said:
U.S. Is Set to Sue a Dozen Big Banks Over Mortgages

Who is going to sue the Fucking government? Fanny and Freddy Anyone? Man these fuckers are raging Hypocrites. The Government Encouraged the very practices they are now suing over. Hell they told Fanny and Freddy how to package the fucking toxic Mortgages into something they could trade.

This is the height of Hypocrisy. The Assholes in the government should be sitting right along side the Banks in the Defense Chair.
 
the same bastard that helped train activist to protest and conduct bank sit inns is now the president!! nice job libbs!!

I always wondered where the mortgage underwriting department was in all of this. As we know you fill out a mortgage loan application--it goes to the underwriting department so they can check that you really are a qualified buyer--WHERE DID THEY GO?

HERE'S A GREAT ARTICLE regarding underwriting and the lack of it.

PERHAPS the greatest scandal of the mortgage crisis is that it is a direct result of an intentional loosening of underwriting standards - done in the name of ending discrimination, despite warnings that it could lead to wide-scale defaults.

At the crisis' core are loans that were made with virtually nonexistent underwriting standards - no verification of income or assets; little consideration of the applicant's ability to make payments; no down payment.

Most people instinctively understand that such loans are likely to be unsound. But how did the heavily-regulated banking industry end up able to engage in such foolishness?

From the current hand-wringing, you'd think that the banks came up with the idea of looser underwriting standards on their own, with regulators just asleep on the job. In fact, it was the regulators who relaxed these standards - at the behest of community groups and "progressive" political forces.

In the 1980s, groups such as the activists at ACORN began pushing charges of "redlining" - claims that banks discriminated against minorities in mortgage lending. In 1989, sympathetic members of Congress got the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act amended to force banks to collect racial data on mortgage applicants; this allowed various studies to be ginned up that seemed to validate the original accusation.

In fact, minority mortgage applications were rejected more frequently than other applications - but the overwhelming reason wasn't racial discrimination, but simply that minorities tended to have weaker finances.
--more
THE REAL SCANDAL - NYPOST.com

I have had several mortgage loans in my life--and my application was ALWAYS sent over to underwriting to make certain that I could qualify for the loan I applied for. They do income verification--income tax returns--credit checks the whole nine yards. And if they see anything they don't like--you don't get the loan.
 
Last edited:
Ame®icano;4085321 said:
The federal agency that oversees the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is set to file suits against more than a dozen big banks, accusing them of misrepresenting the quality of mortgage securities they assembled and sold at the height of the housing bubble, and seeking billions of dollars in compensation.

At first, government force banks to give loans to those who couldn't afford it while giving to banks warranties thru Fannie & Freddy. Now they suing them for quality of given mortgages.
Market hasn't opened yet, but premarket doesn't look good at all.


That should do wonders for the economy.

Obama seems determined not to get reelected.

I don't think he care. He did what he had planned. If he got reelected, he'll just finish us up sooner.
 
--November 1999-- President Bill Clinton signed into law S.900 Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 This bill had CRA loan mandates & allowed banks to sell the mandated bad loans to GSEs Fannie, Freddie, pension funds, foreigners & anyone else. This disolved Glass Steagall & made it legal for banks to create bad risky loans with the government backing it allowing it to get a AAA rating. This gave banks a license to steal!!!


a pivitol point, in your page KM*

you just know those banksters were lovin' those acorn people for warmin' up legislation to their plans

makes me wonder how much wall street greased them....

~S~
 
For those of you who think STATES RIGHTS is the key to a sensible form of governance?

Know that it isn't JUST Fanny and Freddie that are suing these banksters for their conspiracy to DEFRAUD the public


50 state attorneys general are in the final stages of negotiating a settlement to address abuses by the largest mortgage servicers, including Bank of America, JPMorgan and Citigroup. The attorneys general, as well as federal officials, are pressing the banks to pay at least $20 billion in that case, with much of the money earmarked to reduce mortgages of homeowners facing foreclosure.
 
Bankers are supposed to verify applicants' income claims. If they just approve a loan without verifying the information, whose fault is that?

Being one of the most heavily regulated industries in the nation, they do.

Except the mortgage origination business is one of the least regulated industries in the country.

Bullshit. You obviously have never bought a house and gone to the two hour closing where you do nothing but have forms explained to you and then sign on the dotted line 5,000 times. Have any idea what drives the majority of that process? Regulations.
 
Ame®icano;4086254 said:
So then, you can't dispute the facts? So you turn to an edited youtube video?

You can't dispute that the GSE's repackaged loans were less likely to default?
That the CRA-regulated banks were pushed out of the subprime market by the unregulated ones?

OK then.

I don't need to dispute the truth. GSE repackaged loans were less likely to default.

Only thing is CRA was forcing banks to give bad loans while using GSE's to buy them out, covering up for it, then they were cooking books and lying that everything is OK.

Except....Loans issued by CRA-regulated institutions account for less than 20% of the defaulting subprimes.

The CRA can't force Ameriquest or nondepository branches of Countrywide to even comply with basic lending standards (nevermind the fact that no bank was ever forced to make a loan - in fact, the banks were begging the GSE's to allow them to make loans.)

You keep saying that banks were never forced into giving loans, when you know that's not true. In the post #67 KissMy provided a YouTube clip of Andrew Cuomo, Clinton's HUD Secretary talking about loan affirmative action, based on Clinton's CRA law changes. With that law government was forcing banks into giving loans and that IS a fact.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top