Notice of foreclosure isn't the same as seizing assets.
That's a secured loan, the collateral is the property. Same with auto loans. Don't pay the car loan, your car is repo'd.
It's usually in the contract and they do not have to go to court, just follow the state law to repo your car if you are in "default", i.e. haven't made payments for x months.
But to go into someone's bank account is a different process. The bank account is not part of a secured loan.
So, either something is funky with some side contract agreement as well as "automatic monthly debit" or something...
or someone is in seriously violation of the law...or both.
Firstly this isn't freezing an asset for collections. This is notice of foreclosure on a secured asset.
So, if agencies are somehow able to access people's assets and collect money, without the proper court order, winning a judgment and so on...
then these people need to do a massive class action against the courts.
Every state has rules of procedure and people must be served, notified and the court has to perform a judgment against them in order for a collections agency to go in and seize additional assets.
I'm also shocked because no bank will enable access to an individual's accounts without judgment from the court and one must also file with the court that the intent is to seize additional assets.
It's a fairly intense process and I just cannot believe the states courts just "threw up their hands" and ignored the law, including their states rules of civil procedure to just allow creditors to seize people's assets.
I'm wondering if it's in the mortgage contract that the individual agreed to this to bypass the courts...
still that seems illegal as well.
I agree. This report is out of alignment not only with the ISM but also with the private ADP report, which people were actually looking at a worse report from BLS...
It's out of alignment with the Manufacturing reports, Consumer spending, retail....you name it.
Proof of notice is not being properly enforced by courts in these cases. Some states have just posting requirements where notice of filing can be posted on property (oh well, if it gets ripped down).
Sometimes the debt collectors are simply unethical and don't care if they serve the wrong address. The notice could have been sent to the address in question, rather than the legal property owner, and the renters didn't really care.
And then there is this example from the comments at DKos:
I had a building and construction loan with WaMu. It was designed to roll over into a standard home loan on completion of the construction. When Washington Mutal merged with Bank of California they moved all of that kind down to the California offices and they literally lost my paperwork. Three months after I moved into the completed house I received a foreclosure notice. Not even a phone call or anything else prior to that. No court proceedings, nothing. Just f*ck you, see you in court, deadbeat. I fought it and managed to get the situation reversed and later found out they did a similar thing to over 1000 other people in Washington State. So yeah, I believe it could happen.
I suspect that not all the facts are on the table in at least one case. Even the IRS will typically write you again and again before freezing bank accounts. There's a little something in the Constitution called the due process clause, and if the banks have done an end run around it, I suggest these folks get themselves a good lawyer.
Frank T.
Something tells me that the unemployment numbers are going to be revised to a much worse level.
The jobs report showed an expanding service sector, the ISM didn't? Friday’s employment report showed that the Service Sector added 58,000 jobs. This doesn't jive with the Nonmfg ISM data released last Thursday. Nonmfg ISM was expected to show a reading of 51, but came in at 48.7 reflecting a contraction in the Service Sector. The jobs component came in at 41.6 suggesting job losses.
I thought to freeze accounts and collect one had to go to court and obtain a judgment, which requires notification to the defendant, plus the opportunity for a hearing.
How can they just go in and raid people's bank accounts?
Just noticed that Elena Kagan, the Solicitor General, who has done some work in the past for Goldman Sachs, was appointed to her dean's position at Harvard Law by Larry Summers.
You would not have Geithner and Summers to regret. He's have appointed Bernanke to head the Fed and Phil Gramm for Treasury. Then we could see what the difference is between our political parties. Unfortunately, no other political parties have the price of admission in our system, and Ralph Nader doesn't have the political skill to be a serious candidate.
Frank T.
She has also has been huge in labor arbitraging Americans through guest workers, most notoriously H-1B and L-1.
It's unbelievable she even has a job! She writes pure economic fiction, corrupt "reports", clearly making $$$ from global labor arbitrage and yet she manages to get into the Obama team. Unbelievable, but if there is anyone who shows me the massive corruption, it's her.
Great post James! Rated up! I took the liberty of adding a couple of video clips with very good interviews with more information.
Dylan Ratigan has been doing a great job with his show as of late. I wish they would repeat Dylan's show daily instead of lame ass, insult du jour, beyond belief partisan Olbermann!
We've written numerous posts on Rubin's takeover of the Obama administration....
and believe this or not, there were a host of people who didn't want Hillary, believing she would be Rubin's puppet...
guess what! Rubin was playing both fields, he was loosely connected with Hillary but had his son heavily involved in the Obama administration.
I voted for Pres. Obama. I did so because I believed what he SAID during the campaign (besides there was no way in hell I was voting for McCain). I was quickly disappointed when he appointed Larry Summers as chief economic adviser and it got worse from there with Tim Geithner. IMO, the writing was on the wall - it was clear to me that we would not see any change particularly when it came to dealing with Wall Street.
Our times, particularly economically, require change or a transformation but unfortunately for working class Americans this Administration will not deliver on the change that is necessary for its prosperity let alone survival. Much of the problems we see today are a result of globalization and financialization. This administration appears to want to support the status quo regarding both.
I will give this administration a little more time before I declare I regret my vote. I still hope (wishful - maybe) that they will change course and realize the error of their ways but things don't look good.
to embarass lenders?
How about something a little more meaningful.
Create some sort of bridge program to help those who have lost a job and have no more mortgage mod options due to the job loss.
Many people are getting new jobs a few months later giving them income again but they have already lost their home or been turned down on their mod.
You can't shame the shameless.
Global Trade and Conflicting National Interests - Ralph E. Gomory William J. Baumol. is one of my favorite books. The reason is it gets really out of the religion and into the details. I wish the U.S. would implement trade based on some of these book's implications because I don't know about you, but I like to plain win economically, not just give away the farm for nothing.
How about creating an account and being our resident naysayer?
;)
In all seriousness, at least for myself, while I'm very focused on the U.S. middle class, part of this is because when the U.S. middle class is economically strong, the national economy is economically strong....so instead of coming from a socio-cultural view (although that's in there) it's really coming from a "what's the best way to win" viewpoint.
With that, such is the concept of a transaction tax. It could enable much stability, assuredly create a progressive tax, stop some of the naked never take ownership speculation that can cause such havoc as well as deter these "black box" derivatives that are so much a systemic risk....
but examining the details is something few can do because things become so complex and if people are looking at policy, legislation for what actually works and are rational in their discussion, analysis, based on results, stats and so forth....I think that's a very good thing.
I think if the public gets a higher comprehension of policy details, we might be able to beat back the special interests, who usually end up writing these bills (or the ones that get passed at least).
Thanks Robert for the reading suggestion and point about the Smoot-Hawley...it's been a few years since I studied Trade Theory.
Agree also about the systemic risk caused by several of the 'over-the-counter' derivatives that banks create...even putting a valuation on a lot of the exotic products is a fuzzy affair. I'll let the banks speak for themselves here, I'm sure they will present a case that is difficult to argue against!
And having worked at a high frequency trading firm for a short time I do suspect that there may be an even bigger danger. Nothing untoward or unethical is occurring, and I believe that something like 60% of equity volumes derive from high frequency trading, but mistakes do happen. One day our firm sent something like 100,000 instantaneous cancellation orders and brought down an exchange for 30 seconds, it did make you wonder what would have happened if they had been buy/sell orders...all because of some faulty code...as you know the regulators are typically one step behind the curve, it will only be when something really scary happens that sufficient safety checks will be put in place.
There is certainly a lot for the regulators and industry to look at to make sure that the system is a lot more bullet proof and doesn't have the same potential to adversely impact the rest of the economy. But exchange traded derivatives in particular have stood the test of time pretty well...maybe some tinkering could be made with regard to position limits and regulatory aspects, etc..but little systemic risk here, easy to regulate and serve a useful purpose. Clearly I have a vested interest but nevertheless I'll keep my fingers crossed that any transaction taxes stay clear of exchange traded derviatives!
Thank you for your feedback and publishing my comments.
This WSJ has a post, a lost decade for jobs. The U.S. produces less jobs than it did a decade ago, even though the working population has obviously increased.
Notice the post refuses to mention the obvious, that's millions of jobs offshore outsourced or created in other countries by U.S. multinationals...instead of the U.S.. They also refuse to recognize the displacement of U.S. workers with foreign guest workers.
But the total number of jobs and then looking at the total working population is a statistic which never makes the unemployment articles, headlines.
Even worse, per occupation, if you are squeezed out of your career field, the minute you take that Wal-mart job...your career is now "retail sales" instead of PhD biomed researcher or whatever it was previously.
Notice of foreclosure isn't the same as seizing assets.
That's a secured loan, the collateral is the property. Same with auto loans. Don't pay the car loan, your car is repo'd.
It's usually in the contract and they do not have to go to court, just follow the state law to repo your car if you are in "default", i.e. haven't made payments for x months.
But to go into someone's bank account is a different process. The bank account is not part of a secured loan.
So, either something is funky with some side contract agreement as well as "automatic monthly debit" or something...
or someone is in seriously violation of the law...or both.
Firstly this isn't freezing an asset for collections. This is notice of foreclosure on a secured asset.
So, if agencies are somehow able to access people's assets and collect money, without the proper court order, winning a judgment and so on...
then these people need to do a massive class action against the courts.
Every state has rules of procedure and people must be served, notified and the court has to perform a judgment against them in order for a collections agency to go in and seize additional assets.
I'm also shocked because no bank will enable access to an individual's accounts without judgment from the court and one must also file with the court that the intent is to seize additional assets.
It's a fairly intense process and I just cannot believe the states courts just "threw up their hands" and ignored the law, including their states rules of civil procedure to just allow creditors to seize people's assets.
I'm wondering if it's in the mortgage contract that the individual agreed to this to bypass the courts...
still that seems illegal as well.
I agree. This report is out of alignment not only with the ISM but also with the private ADP report, which people were actually looking at a worse report from BLS...
It's out of alignment with the Manufacturing reports, Consumer spending, retail....you name it.
Proof of notice is not being properly enforced by courts in these cases. Some states have just posting requirements where notice of filing can be posted on property (oh well, if it gets ripped down).
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
Did you see this story via WSJ?
Says people are manipulating the free shipping from the U.S. mint to obtain free frequent flier miles via credit cards.
Sometimes the debt collectors are simply unethical and don't care if they serve the wrong address. The notice could have been sent to the address in question, rather than the legal property owner, and the renters didn't really care.
And then there is this example from the comments at DKos:
I suspect that not all the facts are on the table in at least one case. Even the IRS will typically write you again and again before freezing bank accounts. There's a little something in the Constitution called the due process clause, and if the banks have done an end run around it, I suggest these folks get themselves a good lawyer.
Frank T.
Something tells me that the unemployment numbers are going to be revised to a much worse level.
I thought to freeze accounts and collect one had to go to court and obtain a judgment, which requires notification to the defendant, plus the opportunity for a hearing.
How can they just go in and raid people's bank accounts?
Seriously.
I sold because I think it's going down to about $1054 or even $1033....to then turn around and take off.
It seems to be increasingly volatile, correlating more to the interest rates, carry trade and the dollar.
it explains why we see no difference between Clinton-Bush-Bush-Obama. So much for representing the people.
Thanks for the clips, appreciate the additions.
Just noticed that Elena Kagan, the Solicitor General, who has done some work in the past for Goldman Sachs, was appointed to her dean's position at Harvard Law by Larry Summers.
IT is such a small world after all.....
You would not have Geithner and Summers to regret. He's have appointed Bernanke to head the Fed and Phil Gramm for Treasury. Then we could see what the difference is between our political parties. Unfortunately, no other political parties have the price of admission in our system, and Ralph Nader doesn't have the political skill to be a serious candidate.
Frank T.
It's a foreign concept to them. Just like the charade of confirmation hearings for Uncle Ben. Not to worry, nobody takes it seriously.
Frank T.
She has also has been huge in labor arbitraging Americans through guest workers, most notoriously H-1B and L-1.
It's unbelievable she even has a job! She writes pure economic fiction, corrupt "reports", clearly making $$$ from global labor arbitrage and yet she manages to get into the Obama team. Unbelievable, but if there is anyone who shows me the massive corruption, it's her.
Great post James! Rated up! I took the liberty of adding a couple of video clips with very good interviews with more information.
Dylan Ratigan has been doing a great job with his show as of late. I wish they would repeat Dylan's show daily instead of lame ass, insult du jour, beyond belief partisan Olbermann!
We've written numerous posts on Rubin's takeover of the Obama administration....
and believe this or not, there were a host of people who didn't want Hillary, believing she would be Rubin's puppet...
guess what! Rubin was playing both fields, he was loosely connected with Hillary but had his son heavily involved in the Obama administration.
I voted for Pres. Obama. I did so because I believed what he SAID during the campaign (besides there was no way in hell I was voting for McCain). I was quickly disappointed when he appointed Larry Summers as chief economic adviser and it got worse from there with Tim Geithner. IMO, the writing was on the wall - it was clear to me that we would not see any change particularly when it came to dealing with Wall Street.
Our times, particularly economically, require change or a transformation but unfortunately for working class Americans this Administration will not deliver on the change that is necessary for its prosperity let alone survival. Much of the problems we see today are a result of globalization and financialization. This administration appears to want to support the status quo regarding both.
I will give this administration a little more time before I declare I regret my vote. I still hope (wishful - maybe) that they will change course and realize the error of their ways but things don't look good.
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
to embarass lenders?
How about something a little more meaningful.
Create some sort of bridge program to help those who have lost a job and have no more mortgage mod options due to the job loss.
Many people are getting new jobs a few months later giving them income again but they have already lost their home or been turned down on their mod.
You can't shame the shameless.
Global Trade and Conflicting National Interests - Ralph E. Gomory William J. Baumol. is one of my favorite books. The reason is it gets really out of the religion and into the details. I wish the U.S. would implement trade based on some of these book's implications because I don't know about you, but I like to plain win economically, not just give away the farm for nothing.
How about creating an account and being our resident naysayer?
;)
In all seriousness, at least for myself, while I'm very focused on the U.S. middle class, part of this is because when the U.S. middle class is economically strong, the national economy is economically strong....so instead of coming from a socio-cultural view (although that's in there) it's really coming from a "what's the best way to win" viewpoint.
With that, such is the concept of a transaction tax. It could enable much stability, assuredly create a progressive tax, stop some of the naked never take ownership speculation that can cause such havoc as well as deter these "black box" derivatives that are so much a systemic risk....
but examining the details is something few can do because things become so complex and if people are looking at policy, legislation for what actually works and are rational in their discussion, analysis, based on results, stats and so forth....I think that's a very good thing.
I think if the public gets a higher comprehension of policy details, we might be able to beat back the special interests, who usually end up writing these bills (or the ones that get passed at least).
Thanks Robert for the reading suggestion and point about the Smoot-Hawley...it's been a few years since I studied Trade Theory.
Agree also about the systemic risk caused by several of the 'over-the-counter' derivatives that banks create...even putting a valuation on a lot of the exotic products is a fuzzy affair. I'll let the banks speak for themselves here, I'm sure they will present a case that is difficult to argue against!
And having worked at a high frequency trading firm for a short time I do suspect that there may be an even bigger danger. Nothing untoward or unethical is occurring, and I believe that something like 60% of equity volumes derive from high frequency trading, but mistakes do happen. One day our firm sent something like 100,000 instantaneous cancellation orders and brought down an exchange for 30 seconds, it did make you wonder what would have happened if they had been buy/sell orders...all because of some faulty code...as you know the regulators are typically one step behind the curve, it will only be when something really scary happens that sufficient safety checks will be put in place.
There is certainly a lot for the regulators and industry to look at to make sure that the system is a lot more bullet proof and doesn't have the same potential to adversely impact the rest of the economy. But exchange traded derivatives in particular have stood the test of time pretty well...maybe some tinkering could be made with regard to position limits and regulatory aspects, etc..but little systemic risk here, easy to regulate and serve a useful purpose. Clearly I have a vested interest but nevertheless I'll keep my fingers crossed that any transaction taxes stay clear of exchange traded derviatives!
Thank you for your feedback and publishing my comments.
Best regards
Ben W
This WSJ has a post, a lost decade for jobs. The U.S. produces less jobs than it did a decade ago, even though the working population has obviously increased.
Notice the post refuses to mention the obvious, that's millions of jobs offshore outsourced or created in other countries by U.S. multinationals...instead of the U.S.. They also refuse to recognize the displacement of U.S. workers with foreign guest workers.
But the total number of jobs and then looking at the total working population is a statistic which never makes the unemployment articles, headlines.
Even worse, per occupation, if you are squeezed out of your career field, the minute you take that Wal-mart job...your career is now "retail sales" instead of PhD biomed researcher or whatever it was previously.
Pages