7 ms·

I don't see the problem here. If they so desperately want the content removed, then Google should happily kill all of those links right away!

andrewclunn 10y ago
Agreed, take the site down. If they feed the request was made in error,then there's a process for that.
- ourmandave 10y ago
  If I was a snarky lawyer, I would offer to represent them against themselves, pro bono.
  - __john 10y ago
    You jest, but google "can a company sue itself". You'll see a list of articles about banks suing themselves over foreclosures.
  - actsasbuffoon 10y ago
    As a snarky non-lawyer, I'd offer to defend them from themselves for a literal mountain of cash.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
joekrie 10y ago
Complying and taking down the legitimate links should force WB to properly review their requests. This case is kind of funny, but something similar started happening when banks started automating foreclosures. People who were up to date on their mortgages were getting evicted from exactly the same kind of negligence WB is exhibiting here.
- sonthonax 10y ago
  How does one get evicted due to a computer error? Wouldn't a rather simple court case be able to determine that X amount was being paid to be bank every month?
  - chris_wot 10y ago
    You just used the words "rather simple court case" in the same sentence.
  - joekrie 10y ago
    Banks were signing off on the erroneous foreclosures without properly reviewing them. And, if Matt Taibbi is to believed, the courts weren't of much help to the victims of fraudulent forclosures. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/matt-taibbi-courts-helping-banks-screw-over-homeowners-20101110 http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/matt-taibbi-courts...
- travmatt 10y ago
  In his book 'Bailout', the Special Inspector General of TARP, Neil Barofsky, lists a multitude of reasons as to why so many Americans were wrongly foreclosed on by mortgage servicers. At the top of the list was fraud and lies by the mortgage servicers, many of whom lied to homeowners and convinced them to skip payments on their homes in the hopes of qualifying for a modification, so that they could rack up late fees and then foreclose.

andrewclunn 10y ago

Agreed, take the site down. If they feed the request was made in error,then there's a process for that.

ourmandave 10y ago
If I was a snarky lawyer, I would offer to represent them against themselves, pro bono.
- __john 10y ago
  You jest, but google "can a company sue itself". You'll see a list of articles about banks suing themselves over foreclosures.
- actsasbuffoon 10y ago
  As a snarky non-lawyer, I'd offer to defend them from themselves for a literal mountain of cash.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

joekrie 10y ago

Complying and taking down the legitimate links should force WB to properly review their requests. This case is kind of funny, but something similar started happening when banks started automating foreclosures. People who were up to date on their mortgages were getting evicted from exactly the same kind of negligence WB is exhibiting here.

sonthonax 10y ago
How does one get evicted due to a computer error? Wouldn't a rather simple court case be able to determine that X amount was being paid to be bank every month?
- chris_wot 10y ago
  You just used the words "rather simple court case" in the same sentence.
- joekrie 10y ago
  Banks were signing off on the erroneous foreclosures without properly reviewing them. And, if Matt Taibbi is to believed, the courts weren't of much help to the victims of fraudulent forclosures. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/matt-taibbi-courts-helping-banks-screw-over-homeowners-20101110 http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/matt-taibbi-courts...
travmatt 10y ago
In his book 'Bailout', the Special Inspector General of TARP, Neil Barofsky, lists a multitude of reasons as to why so many Americans were wrongly foreclosed on by mortgage servicers. At the top of the list was fraud and lies by the mortgage servicers, many of whom lied to homeowners and convinced them to skip payments on their homes in the hopes of qualifying for a modification, so that they could rack up late fees and then foreclose.