3 ms·

> I find the story from the landlord really, really hard to believe. I don't. Not for an instant. The landlord's story is the same story as thousands of other

by nknight 15y ago

> I find the story from the landlord really, really hard to believe. I don't. Not for an instant. The landlord's story is the same story as thousands of other homeowners, right down to BofA "losing" paperwork repeatedly. I guess this is easy to miss if your only news source is HN and other tech-focused sites, but for anyone that has paid any attention to the mortgage crisis, you'd see this repeated again and again and again. It's not like the banks deny it, either. Sometimes they get called on a particular case by the press, and their response is one of the generic cop-outs -- "we're investigating", or "we can't discuss specifics due to privacy laws", or "ongoing litigation".

Cieplak 15y ago
"Her fate, an accidental foreclosure, or wrongful lockout, is becoming more common with major banks as foreclosure rates rise, experts say." http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/bank-america-apologized-accidentally-repossessing-home-taking-pet/story?id=10071658 http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/bank-america-apologized-accidental...
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
- nknight 15y ago
  It's not just BofA, that was just the bank specifically mentioned in the article, and of course one of the worst offenders in the general category of being a major pain in the ass. Most of the cases I read about begin either before the owner falls behind, or shortly after the first missed payment. They try to work with the bank on a loan modification, sometimes under the federal program that some qualify for, but paperwork just keeps getting "lost" -- sometimes they claim to have never received it, other times they freely admit that they "lost" it themselves. Edit: I'm not speaking generically here about all foreclosure cases. I'm speaking strictly about cases where loan modifications were sought, and the owners weren't turned down, and followed the bank's instructions, but one day the bank just decided to start the foreclosure process, and after that it was robo-bank time, nothing could be done.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
    - nknight 15y ago
      As far as I could tell, the landlord wasn't claiming to be entirely blindsided, but blindsided by the actual foreclosure and auction when he'd been in communication with the bank seeking a modification. He absolutely should have told the tenant what was going on sooner, but I have no reason to doubt, and plenty of reason to believe, that the landlord was trying to fix it and wasn't expecting an immediate foreclosure when it happened.
steve8918 15y ago
I'm well aware of all the stories of people getting screwed over by banks while trying to renegotiate their mortgages, and I'm also well versed in foreclosures, since a few people that I've known have gone through this process via strategic defaults. I would hazard a guess that I know more about this process than you do. But I still don't believe that the reaction of the landlord makes sense to me, unless the author was missing some key facts. The article says that not only was he renting the house for several years, but the landlord also raised his family in it. So, depending on how long the landlord owned it, there must be considerable equity built up in the house. To let something like this slip away without fighting it would be ridiculous. If the account of the author is accurate, then it sounds like the landlord walked away from the place. It just doesn't make sense that he would be apologetic to the renters, but instead he should be steaming mad, and would be trying to protect his investment. If this were me, and I just lost a house that I put a few 100k into it, and I had good renters, I would tell my renters "Don't move anywhere, I'll handle everything." But it sounds like he hung he renters out to dry. Remember, in order to get a loan mod (which the landlord claims he was in the midst of), the landlord at some point must have stopped paying his mortgage, so he definitely was collecting rent without paying the mortgage. Landlords letting their rental units slip into foreclosure, which collecting rent is even more common than banks screwing up and accidentally foreclosing on homes, so to me this is the more likely scenario.

by nknight 15y ago

Cieplak 15y ago

"Her fate, an accidental foreclosure, or wrongful lockout, is becoming more common with major banks as foreclosure rates rise, experts say." http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/bank-america-apologized-accidentally-repossessing-home-taking-pet/story?id=10071658 http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/bank-america-apologized-accidental...

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

nknight 15y ago
It's not just BofA, that was just the bank specifically mentioned in the article, and of course one of the worst offenders in the general category of being a major pain in the ass. Most of the cases I read about begin either before the owner falls behind, or shortly after the first missed payment. They try to work with the bank on a loan modification, sometimes under the federal program that some qualify for, but paperwork just keeps getting "lost" -- sometimes they claim to have never received it, other times they freely admit that they "lost" it themselves. Edit: I'm not speaking generically here about all foreclosure cases. I'm speaking strictly about cases where loan modifications were sought, and the owners weren't turned down, and followed the bank's instructions, but one day the bank just decided to start the foreclosure process, and after that it was robo-bank time, nothing could be done.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
  - nknight 15y ago
    As far as I could tell, the landlord wasn't claiming to be entirely blindsided, but blindsided by the actual foreclosure and auction when he'd been in communication with the bank seeking a modification. He absolutely should have told the tenant what was going on sooner, but I have no reason to doubt, and plenty of reason to believe, that the landlord was trying to fix it and wasn't expecting an immediate foreclosure when it happened.

steve8918 15y ago

I'm well aware of all the stories of people getting screwed over by banks while trying to renegotiate their mortgages, and I'm also well versed in foreclosures, since a few people that I've known have gone through this process via strategic defaults. I would hazard a guess that I know more about this process than you do. But I still don't believe that the reaction of the landlord makes sense to me, unless the author was missing some key facts. The article says that not only was he renting the house for several years, but the landlord also raised his family in it. So, depending on how long the landlord owned it, there must be considerable equity built up in the house. To let something like this slip away without fighting it would be ridiculous. If the account of the author is accurate, then it sounds like the landlord walked away from the place. It just doesn't make sense that he would be apologetic to the renters, but instead he should be steaming mad, and would be trying to protect his investment. If this were me, and I just lost a house that I put a few 100k into it, and I had good renters, I would tell my renters "Don't move anywhere, I'll handle everything." But it sounds like he hung he renters out to dry. Remember, in order to get a loan mod (which the landlord claims he was in the midst of), the landlord at some point must have stopped paying his mortgage, so he definitely was collecting rent without paying the mortgage. Landlords letting their rental units slip into foreclosure, which collecting rent is even more common than banks screwing up and accidentally foreclosing on homes, so to me this is the more likely scenario.