foreclosure list

You've without doubt seen them or study them. Glossy advertisements or four-color propagates in publications and newspapers promising to instruct you all of the juicy details about successful real-estate investing. And all you have to do to learn every one of these real estate investing surface encounters chuck russo secrets is to pay a rather high sum for a one-or two-day seminar.




Often these slick real-estate investing workshops claim that you can make intelligent, profitable property investments with simply no money lower (with the exception of, of program, the large fee you buy the seminar). Now, how interesting is which? Make a profit from real property investments you made out of no cash. Possible? Not probably.




Successful owning a home requires income. That's the nature of any kind of business or investment, especially real-estate investing. You put your money into something that you desire and plan can make you more money.




Unfortunately not enough newbies to the world of real estate investing believe that it's the magical form of business exactly where standard company rules don't apply. Simply put, if you want to stay in property investing for greater than, say, a evening or a couple of, then you will have to create money to make use of and invest.




While it might be true which buying real estate with no money down is easy, anyone who is even made a basic investment (such as buying their very own home) understands there's much more involved in real estate investing that can cost you money. For illustration, what about any essential repairs?




So, the number one rule people a new comer to real estate investing should remember is to have obtainable cash stores. Before you choose to actually carry out any real-estate investing, save some money. Having a little money within the bank when you start real property investing surface encounters chuck russo can help you make more profitable real estate investments in rental properties, for example.




When real-estate investing within rental properties, you'll want to be able to select just qualified tenants. If you might have no income when real-estate investing within rental properties, you might be pressured experience a a smaller amount qualified tenant since you need somebody to pay for you money to be able to take treatment of repairs or attorney fees.




For any kind of real property investing, meaning local rental properties or properties you get to sell, having funds reserved can enable you to ask to get a higher cost. You can require a greater price from your real estate investment because a person surface encounters chuck russo won't feel financially strapped as you wait for an offer. You won't be backed into a corner and forced to accept just any offer because you desperately need the money.




Another downfall of numerous new to property investing is actually, well, greed. Make a profit, yes, but do not become so greedy that you simply ask regarding ridiculous rental or second-hand rates on any of your real property investments.




Those a new comer to real estate investing need to see property investing being a business, NOT a hobby. Don't think that real property investing is going to make you rich overnight. What enterprise does?




It requires about 6 months to figure out if real-estate investing in for you. If you might have decided in which, hey I really like this, then offer yourself a couple of years to actually start earning profits. It usually takes at least five years to become truly prosperous in real estate investing.




Persistence may be the key to be able to success in real estate investing. If you might have decided that property investing is for you, surface encounters chuck russo keep plugging away at it and the rewards will be greater than you imagined.












(h/t Heather at VideoCafe)

It is a truism rarely acknowledged in this country: the single most important infrastructure investment we can make for the future is in education. I'm not talking about retrofitting the buildings or constructing more classrooms. No, we provide for the future by educating our young people, preparing them to become productive members of society. Study after study shows that the higher one's education level is, the higher the median income and the less likely one is to suffer unemployment.

But we're not doing that. No, in these austerity times, politicians clamor to cut services and jobs. Teachers are demonized. Vouchers are touted as the answer, when it's simply a way to privatize profits away from public schools. Hell, some GOP would be happy if we eliminate the Department of Education altogether.

A rare and welcome progressive appearance on the Sunday shows, Rep. Maxine Waters bemoans the disconnect between what politicians say we need to focus on and what they're really doing about it:

To tell you the truth, the plight of education in this country is shameful. Just a few days ago I learned that more cities, more states are reducing the number of education days down to four instead of five. And I could not help but stop and think, "Is this America? Is this the country that said and continues to say that education is a top priority?" Why are we not investing more in education? Why do we have dropouts? Why do we have educational systems that are failing? Why is it that we have a situation where many of our young people will not be able to compete in this high technological society because they're not properly educated? And so, no, we do pay lip service to education. We don't really invest in it, and that's got to change. But let me just say this, Americans want to work. This joblessness is not only hitting the middle class, but it is hitting all classes. It is absolutely unconscionable what is happening in the minority communities. When we look at this no jobs haven't been created in August and we find in the African-American community it has increased from 16 percent, 15.9, 16 percent, up now 16.7 percent, and now we're going to talk about cutting government by $1.5 trillion, this new 12 committee membership that we have after the raising the debt ceiling debate? And that means that we're going to lose more jobs, that means more people are going to be unemployed. The African-American rate will probably go up to about 20 percent. I don't know how our country can sustain that kind of...

Of course, David Gregory interrupts her at this point, because Lord know, the plight of the African American community doesn't concern him. But then again, he has the gall to say that we only play lip service to the importance of education. You know, the same guy who only pays lip service to journalism and who spent the better part of the last two years telling his viewers that Americans cared about the deficit when poll after poll proved him a lying hack with a corporate agenda.

Warren Buffett just announced that he's making a landmark investment, $5 billion, in Bank of America.

Bank of America was facing a free-falling stock price and a number of criticisms, including that it did not have enough capital, and that its assets were not worth what it claimed.

Now thanks to Buffett, that will certainly change.

When similar investments were made in Citi and in Goldman Sachs, by Prince Alwaleed and Warren Buffett, in 1990 and 2008, respectively, the stocks experienced long term gains. 

And get this - he says he dreamt up the idea to invest in Bank of America in the bathtub on Tuesday. He liked it, so he called Moynihan on Wednesday morning. The entire story of how it happened is available in a video embedded below, as told to Becky Quick by Buffett.

The story (and the mental image) is amusing but also important - it suggests that the Obama Administration and/or the Treasury, did not have a hand in the agreement.

And to make it very clear that Treasury or Obama had no hand in the arrangement, which makes the news even better for Bank of America.

So does this - the deal is expensive for Buffett, and a good deal for Bank of America. He says in some ways, it's better than the deal he gave to Goldman Sachs in 2008.

But obviously, it's a great deal for Buffett.

Buffett's investment alone is now worth $700 million more than it was when he bought it.

foreclosure help

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is providing $3 billion to unemployed homeowners facing foreclosure in the nation's toughest job markets.

The Treasury Department said Wednesday it will send $2 billion to 17 states that have unemployment rates higher than the national average for a year. They will use the money for programs to aid unemployed homeowners. Some of those states have already designed such programs.

Another $1 billion will go to a new program being run by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. It will provide homeowners with emergency zero-interest rate loans of up to $50,000 for up to two years.

The administration was required to launch the HUD emergency loan program by the financial regulatory bill signed by President Barack Obama last month.

The Treasury is using money from the $700 billion Wall Street bailout to pay its share of the program. Officials said they won't know until next month how many people are likely to be helped.

California will get the largest share of money for the Treasury program, at $476 million. Florida is in line for nearly $239 million. Illinois will receive $166 million and Ohio will receive $149 million.

The Obama administration has rolled out numerous attempts to tackle the foreclosure crisis but has made only a small dent in the problem. More than 40 percent, or about 530,000 homeowners, have fallen out of the administration's main effort to assist those facing foreclosure.

That program, known as Making Home Affordable, provides lenders with incentives to reduce mortgage payments. So far, it has provided permanent help to about 390,000 homeowners, or 30 percent of the 1.3 million who have enrolled since March 2009.

Also receiving money are Michigan, $129 million; Georgia, $127 million; North Carolina, $121 million; New Jersey, $112 million; Indiana, $83 million and Tennessee, $81 million.

We all understand the impact the foreclosure crisis has had on homeowners. But the crisis has hurt communities, too. Foreclosed and vacant homes have a debilitating effect on neighborhoods and often lead to blight, neighborhood decay and reduced property values.

That’s why the Administration is announcing today another $1 billion to help communities struggling with foreclosures.  Already, HUD has provided $6 billion in two rounds of Neighborhood Stabilization Program funding.  These funds help communities buy and redevelop foreclosed and abandoned homes and residential properties – putting Americans back to work, creating more affordable rental housing and helping the neighborhoods that need it most. 

Today, the $4 billion first round of Neighborhood Stabilization funding is in communities, buying up and renovating homes, and creating jobs.  The $2 billion included as part of President Obama’s Recovery Act is making a difference as well.  This second round of funding differed from the first in that it was competitively awarded – to encourage innovative local partnerships, reward the best ideas for tackling the housing crisis and grow local economies in impactful ways.

You only need look at a city like Minneapolis to understand the impact Neighborhood Stabilization is having. With $5.6 million of Neighborhood Stabilization funds, Minneapolis was able to leverage an additional $30 million in resources from the Twin Cities Community Land Bank and the partnership of for-profit developers.  Already, they’ve bought up nearly 250 properties in targeted neighborhoods, which they are rehabilitating to green standards and selling to responsible homeowners through a local down payment program.

Now, in the most heavily foreclosure impacted neighborhoods in North Minneapolis, home prices are gaining and local experts believe private market recovery is underway. It was that success that led the Administration to award the city another $20 million in the second round of NSP.

And more help is on the way to communities across the country.  The additional $1 billion we announced today was included as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform legislation ,

Building on the first two rounds, we expect the Neighborhood Stabilization Program will impact nearly 100,000 properties in the nation’s hardest-hit markets.  Because this makes up 20 percent of vacant and abandoned homes over the last 18 months in NSP-targeted areas, addressing these properties will have ripple effects that could have a profound impact on our local, regional and national housing markets alike.

Still, the Obama Administration believes government can’t solve this problem alone.  As Minneapolis showed, stabilizing neighborhoods requires private investment and other partners to step up. 

Last week, I announced an important Neighborhood Stabilization innovation that helps make that possible called “First Look.” A historic partnership with the National Community Stabilization Trust and the nation’s leading financial institutions, First Look will gives every grantee an exclusive 12-14 day window to evaluate and bid on properties before others can do so.  First Look will cut the time it takes to sell these properties in half, which is particularly important given that vacant and abandoned homes are more than three times as destructive to home prices as homes that have only begun the foreclosure process.  It will also give grantees access to state of the art mapping and management tools, so they know what properties are available and who owns them. 

Communities struggling with foreclosures and budget cuts rarely have the time or funds to establish individual relationships with financial institutions and negotiate the best price one house at a time.  With the potent combination of Neighborhood Stabilization funds and First Look, they’ll have the resources and partners they need to buy target foreclosed homes strategically – and act quickly.

Obviously, these remain difficult times for every American.  Neighborhood Stabilization is only one tool in our toolbox. And it won’t help every block wracked by foreclosures. 

But with game-changing, market-oriented and cost-effective strategies like these—that bring more stakeholders to the table with a greater sense of shared responsibility—President Obama and I believe we can tackle tough challenges like foreclosures and blight.  We can put Americans back to work.  And we can help our communities recover. 

Shaun Donovan is Secretary of Housing and Urban Development

eric seiger

Arrowheadlines: Chiefs <b>News</b> 9/9 - Arrowhead Pride

It begins tonight, and Kansas City Chiefs fans across the globe will wait. I'm so ready for football, I could run through a wall and rip someone's head off. Anyway, while we wait for our game on Monday, the Saints and Vikings kick ...

The <b>News</b> Corp. Coverup : CJR

The Guardian reports today that former News of the World senior editor Paul McMullan says ex-editor Andy Coulson, now the prime minister's spin doctor, is lying when he says he didn't know about the illegal phone tapping that was ...

BREAKING <b>NEWS</b>: &quot;No.&quot; - Big Cat Country

Your best source for quality Jacksonville Jaguars news, rumors, analysis, stats and scores from the fan perspective.

foreclosure list

The worst of the fallout from the burst housing bubble continues to be highly localized. Metros in California, Nevada, and Florida have the most troubled housing markets, according to our new Housing-Mortgage Stress Index. Nearly half of the metros on the list—nine of the top 20, including all five of the top five—are in California: Stockton, Modesto, Vallejo-Fairfield, Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, and Bakersfield-Delano, along with Fresno, Visalia-Porterville, Sacramento and Salinas. Six Florida metros make the list—Miami, Orlando, Port St. Lucie, Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, Lakeland-Winter Haven, and Palm Bay-Melbourne. Las Vegas and Reno, Nevada, Phoenix,  Provo, Utah, and Greely, Colorado, round out the 20 most stressed housing markets.

At the height of the boom, real estate, housing, and construction-related industries accounted for more than a quarter of the entire economies of Las Vegas, Miami, and Phoenix and 30 percent of Orlando’s, as I note in The Great Reset. It was like a giant Ponzi scheme, fueled entirely by debt. The hardest-hit Sun Belt metros lacked the underlying economic heft to support their skyrocketing housing values; some of them may never recover.

If we look at just large metros—those with more than 1 million people—Tampa, Detroit, Atlanta, San Diego, Jacksonville, Washington, D.C., Virginia Beach, Chicago and L.A., show high levels of housing-mortgage stress, along with the five noted above—Riverside, Las Vegas, Orlando, Phoenix, Sacramento, and Miami.

The Housing-Mortgage Stress Index shows the U.S. metros whose housing markets—and homeowners—face the highest levels of stress and danger of foreclosure and falling prices. The index is based on three variables.

Gallery: Worst Real Estate Cities

Time to add “able to save homes from foreclosure with a single issue” to Superman’s already massive list of superpowers—that’s just what happened to one family in Baltimore who was on the verge of losing their home. While packing up their possessions, the family discovered an issue of Action Comics number one, the first comic to ever feature Superman.



They then contacted an expert from New York’s ComicConnect.com, who told them the issue might fetch up to $250,000, far more than enough to save their home. The company owner called the bank and asked them to postpone the foreclosure to give the family time to sell the book in auction and repay their mortgage. “You couldn’t have asked for a happier ending,” he said, “Superman saved the day.”



[Image courtesy of Flickr user Fonzie's cousin.]

make money from home without stuffing envelopes

foreclosure investing

Hard to say who the worst member of Congress is. But there are few short lists that would exclude narrow-minded and extremist Minnesota religious fanatic Michele Bachmann. However, today isn't about Bachmann. You want Bachmann, you go to DumpBachmann; no one does it better. At the time of the 2008 election, Bachmann was just as odious as she is today. Blue America didn't get involved in that race though because her opponent simply seemed... "better than Bachmann." That standard is too low for us.

And today we're going to meet state Senator Tarryl Clark (below in the comments section), a hard working leader with a proven track record who would be a great candidate whether she were running against Michele Bachmann, or just some garden variety Republican.

People say this suburban/exurban district mostly north of the Twin Cities is too red for a Democrat. But that isn't true. Bush won it in 2004 with 57% and 4 years later McCain took 53% but, the district has also voted to elect Amy Klobuchar to the Senate-- and against Mark Kennedy, the kook who represented the district before Bachmann. And in the 15th senatorial district near St Cloud, the part Tarryl represents-- and which was a GOP bastion before she came along-- the vote totals in that 2006 race were very interesting. Because she knows what it means to work hard and work smart, and with a very committed Wellstone-style of campaigning, Tarryl outpolled everyone on the ballot:

Clark 15581 (56.30%)

Klobuchar 14980 (53.45%)

Pawlenty 14307 (51.1%)

Wetterling 13082 (46.81%)

Bachmann 12542 (44.88%)

MN-06 has the most devastating unemployment rate in Minnesota and the worst foreclosure crisis in the state. But Bachmann has neither understood nor been sympathetic to her constituents finding themselves in a jam because of the vicissitudes of an economy buffeted by disastrous conservative ideological experimentation. She has not only not contributed to finding solutions to these very real problems, she has tried to capitalize of politicizing them.

Tarryl's reaction, as a state legislator, has been the exact opposite. Instead of running around the country and ranting and raving at tea parties, she proven herself an effective leader for the people she represents, working to secure the funds to upgrade the facilities at Saint Cloud State University, working to ensure Central Minnesota’s nursing homes are paid fairly, working to establish a special law enforcement unit to fight gang activities in Central Minnesota.

Tarryl’s been a champion for issues including early childhood and higher education, health care, serving veterans, protecting Minnesotans from predatory lenders, and investing in the local communities that make America strong. Because of that her colleagues elected her to serve as the Senate’s Assistant Majority Leader. Bachmann's colleagues have recognized her as a clown and have tasked her with going on Fox to stir up divisiveness and animosities.

Tarryl’s record of results on reducing unemployment:

• Created 22,000 jobs with last session’s bonding bill

• Helped small businesses add new jobs with Angel Investor Tax Credits

• Authored the Central Minnesota Bioscience Initiative to bring jobs in the biotech industry into the 6th district

• Authored economic development bill that improved workforce development (job training) and expanded the Small Business Growth Acceleration Program, and entrepreneur and small business development grants.

Tarryl’s record of results on reducing foreclosure:

• Authored legislation to protect seniors from predatory lenders and reverse mortgages

• Helped families in keep their homes with the MN Subprime Borrowers Relief Act

• Authored legislation to reduce the burden of property taxes on middle class families

Tarryl is the newest member of the Blue America family. If you can volunteer for her campaign, there's a sign up form here and if you can help the campaign financially, she's on the Blue America endorsed candidates list.

That's so this year. What's that? Silly Bandz? Twilight? As Mark Cuban writes on his blog, "Location check in is so 2010." Cuban explains that he just invested in a company that, through video footage, determines how many people are in a given area at a time, ostensibly for security and traffic-pattern analysis. For now anonymity is given to crowd members, but Cuban wonders if adding facial recognition software would allow locations to forego checkin applications because "we would already know you are there." Sound a little like Minority Report? TechCrunch thinks so. "It sounds like a future we're inevitably headed toward."

Behind the scenes at Gilt Groupe. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Alexis Maybank shares the story of how she and co-founder Alexandra Wilkis Wilson built Gilt Groupe, the online flash sales site for men's and women's luxury fashions. The company, founded in 2007, reported $170 million in revenue last year and now boasts three million members who shop for designer brands at up to 70 percent off retail prices. Maybank talks about the challenges of getting the word out there, signing up initial designers, and raising VC as a woman. She explains to the Journal that "it's an old boy's network, and that's intimidating for a lot of women. So when explaining fashion to a bunch of men in khaki pants and blue button-down shirts, their response was always 'Oh, let me see if my wife thinks if this is a good idea.' But it worked."

Our annual 30 Under 30 list. They're running innovative companies, they're building communities, they're setting trends, they're giving back--and they're all under 30. Here's this year's winners, from Sprouter, to Agile Sports, to The Man Registry. Did we miss anyone? Let us know in the comments.

Foursquare is prowling for a partnership. Yet another 30 Under 30 winner is making headlines this morning as it attempts to snag a whale of a partnership. Foursquare, the game/ social network that recently raised $20 million in Series B funding, claims it is in talks with Google, Yahoo and Microsoft about deals involving their location-based data (via GigaOM). While the novelty of being the mayor of your local mall might gradually wear off it can still be a useful tool to make money for your business. Also, this type of partnership is what catapulted Twitter to profitability.

Facebook's co-founder on the Facebook movie. When you're trying to revolutionize social networking while you're still at Harvard, you're probably not thinking about how Aaron Sorkin might portray your life in a feature film six years hence. In SocialBeat, Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz, gives his take on the silver screen adaptation. In short: it overplays the sex and booze. "It is interesting to see my past rewritten in a way that emphasizes things that didn't matter . . Other than that, it's just cool to see a dramatization of history. A lot of exciting things happened in 2004, but mostly we just worked a lot and stressed out about things; the version in the trailer seems a lot more exciting, so I'm just going to chose to remember that we drank ourselves silly and had a lot of sex with coeds," writes Moskovitz, who is currently working on a productivity startup Asana, backed by Benchmark Capital and Andreessen Horowitz. As for Zuckerberg, he adds, "At the end of the day, they cannot help but portray him as the driven, forward-thinking genius that he is."

What financial reform means for angel investing. In a guest post at VentureBeat, Scott Walker, CEO of a law firm that specializes in entrepreneur representation, breaks down the impact of the financial regulation bill on angel investing. The verdict: it's a mix of good and bad.  

Renting a room to save a home. Today's BusinessWeek explains how San Francisco-based startup AirBnB is helping homeowners escape foreclosure. The site allows people from 142 countries to rent out empty rooms and pull in a little extra income. One New Yorker tells BusinessWeek, "This has been our stimulus package...we were going to lose our house." Founders Brian Chesky and Joe Gebbia say they got the idea for the company when they were cash-strapped, themselves. After renting out space in their own home, they decided to turn the idea into a business, enlisting the help of their friend Nathan Blecharczyk. All three founders made it onto our 30 under 30 list this year, having seen a tremendous amount of growth since the site launched just two years ago.

More from Inc. Magazine:

Get this delivered to your inbox. Or get it on the Kindle

Follow us on Twitter or Tumblr.

Friend us on Facebook.

Apply now for the 2010 Inc. 500|5000.

penis enlargement

Family: NATO Recovered Body of Missing US Sailor Justin McNeley in <b>...</b>

(July 27) -- NATO has recovered the body of one of the two US servicemen who disappeared in Afghanistan last week, the international force said today, and the military pressed the search for his comrade who's believed to have been ...

Fwix Aggregates Hyper-Local <b>News</b> for Nearby and Relevant Stories

Fwix is a news aggregation service focused on dishing the dirt on hyper-local news stories to help you stay on top of what's happening right in your backyard. Fwix is available both in the US and select countries abroad.

Fox <b>News</b> Audience Just 1.38% Black

Fox News may be the undisputed ratings champion in cable news, but not among black viewers. The New York Times' Brian Stelter tweeted that, according to Nielsen Media Research, Fox News has averaged just 29000 black viewers in primetime ...

internet marketing course

Family: NATO Recovered Body of Missing US Sailor Justin McNeley in <b>...</b>

(July 27) -- NATO has recovered the body of one of the two US servicemen who disappeared in Afghanistan last week, the international force said today, and the military pressed the search for his comrade who's believed to have been ...

Fwix Aggregates Hyper-Local <b>News</b> for Nearby and Relevant Stories

Fwix is a news aggregation service focused on dishing the dirt on hyper-local news stories to help you stay on top of what's happening right in your backyard. Fwix is available both in the US and select countries abroad.

Fox <b>News</b> Audience Just 1.38% Black

Fox News may be the undisputed ratings champion in cable news, but not among black viewers. The New York Times' Brian Stelter tweeted that, according to Nielsen Media Research, Fox News has averaged just 29000 black viewers in primetime ...

big white booty

foreclosure help

I’ve been around Firedoglake as long as most of you, and I’m happy to be asked to tell you what matters to me about FDL.

What is most striking to me about the FDL of today is the diversity of subject matter: wingnut-filleting, Palin-watching, bassets, Figs & ferrets, Saturday preaching and Sunday contemplation, arts fine and not-so, food from far and near. And that just the nights and weekends! During the business part of every single day, you can tune to Firedoglake for the best coverage of foreclosure fraud, ongoing torture and wiretapping abuses, America’s galloping corporatism, and Republican pandering to the worst of their base.

If there’s a status quo ante that needs puncturing and exposure, you already know Firedoglake writers have a bead on it. You’ve read about it here, or you will soon.

Can you please help FDL raise $60,000 by day’s end so that we can continue to provide you with such a wide range of topics, views, and perspectives untainted by lobbyist money and untrammeled by corporate leash?

There isn’t a better place on the internet for a wider range of topics. If the subject is elite misperception of our deficit problem, you know it’s covered here. If the topic is ignoring the American people’s views on raising taxes on the rich to recoup this century’s losses, it’ll be front-paged at FDL. If the topic you want is our elite non-profit organizations supposedly dedicated to the issue in their mission statement giving this new Democratic president a free pass or even a ringing endorsement, look no further. If you’ve been away from the ‘tubes all day and want to catch up quickly on the stories missed by the Legacy Media, tune in to the News Desk Roundup. If the intersection of politics and the Left Coast glitterati is your game, LaFiga has you covered.

But, for me, what matters most is Firedoglake’s coverage of Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender (LGBT) issues, and the effort the blog has undertaken to cover the Prop 8 referendum and the subsequent historic efforts to overturn that civil rights rollback in federal court.

The day after the 2008 election, when jubilant progressives elsewhere prematurely celebrated the election of a young, dynamic Democratic president and LGBT Californians sat stunned and demoralized at our civil rights stripped away, Jane Hamsher sent me an email saying, “We will not rest until this injustice is undone, Teddy.”

This isn’t Firedoglake’s issue: we’re not a ‘gay blog’ and most of us aren’t ‘gay bloggers.’

But amidst my tears on Election Day Plus One, Jane’s email presaged the work FDL has done the last 18 months. FDL is not an LGBT blog nor are we LGBT bloggers, many of us. But the expert team assembled to liveblog from Judge Vaughn Walker’s courtroom — David Dayen, Marcy Wheeler, and Emptywheel’s bmaz — lifted me up. They provided me with the will to continue as my fingers cramped and my back cried out. As I wept in the courtroom while brave plaintiffs described the simple human rights they were daily denied as a gay couple and a lesbian couple, I had the power of FDL with me and behind me.

And you knew where to look for this coverage, because FDL’s tremendous backstage crew had provided a Hub where all our coverage lived — and will always live as long as there’s a federal trial underway on our right to marry.

I knew I could not rest until we’d seen that trial through — and there’s plenty more to come, you know very well, no matter the decision Judge Vaughn Walker renders.

There were plenty of LGBT bloggers covering the trial, twitterers and texters too. But if you wanted the core coverage, the word-for-word explication, the sense of the courtroom, the attitude from the bench, the despair and confusion among the Counsel for Defendant-Intervenors — here’s where you tuned in. The activist organizations and LGBT organizers and bloggers provided plenty of fine background, flavor, color, and perspective.

Firedoglake was the model, though — and for that I am very grateful and thankful. Aren’t you?

Please help Firedoglake raise $60,000 by the end of the day so that we can, among many other things, bring you continued Prop 8 Trial coverage: at the full Ninth Circuit, at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and — eventually — at the Supreme Court.

I appreciate all the support you’ve provided me, and my co-livebloggers, throughout the trial in San Francisco. Can you please make that support tangible today in a way that will allow us to continue to provide you the coverage you’ve come to expect from us?

Thank you very much!

Underwater and the Strategic Default PR Campaign, 1: Fannie and a 7-year penalty.

Thursday, 06/24/2010 - 10:52 am by Mike Konczal | One Comment

Wow. Fannie is jumping ahead of Congress in going after Strategic Defaulters without (a) identifying who they are even quasi-rigorously and (b) identifying how big of a problem this is, and how this isn’t just piling on people experiencing deep income shocks in a major recession. Fannie Mae Increases Penalties for Borrowers Who Walk Away: Seven-Year Lockout Policy for Strategic Defaulters:

WASHINGTON, DC — Fannie Mae (FNM/NYSE) announced today policy changes designed to encourage borrowers to work with their servicers and pursue alternatives to foreclosure. Defaulting borrowers who walk-away and had the capacity to pay or did not complete a workout alternative in good faith will be ineligible for a new Fannie Mae-backed mortgage loan for a period of seven years from the date of foreclosure. Borrowers who have extenuating circumstances may be eligible for new loan in a shorter timeframe….

Fannie Mae will also take legal action to recoup the outstanding mortgage debt from borrowers who strategically default on their loans in jurisdictions that allow for deficiency judgments. In an announcement next month, the company will be instructing its servicers to monitor delinquent loans facing foreclosure and put forth recommendations for cases that warrant the pursuit of deficiency judgments.

Troubled borrowers who work with their servicers, and provide information to help the servicer assess their situation, can be considered for foreclosure alternatives, such as a loan modification, a short sale, or a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure. A borrower with extenuating circumstances who works out one of these options with their servicer could be eligible for a new mortgage loan in three years and in as little as two years depending on the circumstances.

A few initial thoughts with lots of graphs.

1) Why don’t they cramdown these mortgages? Why don’t they do a Right-To-Rent process? “Loan modification” has turned out historically to increase the balance of the loan by capitalizing fees and then just spinning out the length of the loan.

We know from HAMP analysis, specifically carried out by Analysis of Mortgage Servicing Performance, that 70% of modified mortgages have a principal increase (data discussed here):

And that a surprising amount of them redefault a year out:

There is no working definition of predatory lending, but a loan that has a negative amort (increases the balance) and a person is unlikely to be able to pay seems like a good working definition of predatory lending. If the GSEs are going to pressure people into modifications, I wonder what their expectations are of how much principal will be reduced and how likely it is people will immediately redefault. We didn’t do this with HAMP, even though we should have, and HAMP is a disaster nobody will stand by.

Reducing principal, especially cramming it down to the market rate, is a plan to save a mortgage and get homeowners back on track. Modifications have a history of kicking a serious problem 10 yards down the road. And don’t be mad Fannie, but the “we’ll just kick the can for now” solution seems right up your alley.

2) Annie Lowrey has a good catch in When Underwater Homeowners Walk Away, with this Federal Reserve paper The Depth of Negative Equity and Mortgage Default Decisions:

After distinguishing between defaults induced by job losses and other income shocks from those induced purely by negative equity, we find that the median borrower does not strategically default until equity falls to -62 percent of their home’s value. This result suggests that borrowers face high default and transaction costs. Our estimates show that about 80 percent of defaults in our sample are the result of income shocks combined with negative equity. However, when equity falls below -50 percent, half of the defaults are driven purely by negative equity. Therefore, our findings lend support to both the “double-trigger” theory of default and the view that mortgage borrowers exercise the implicit put option when it is in their interest.

The median 2006 borrower from the four housing disaster states doesn’t strategically default until LTV is at 162, and even then it is mostly from income shocks (unemployment, health care, etc.). For what it is worth, we ran some numbers here:

And if you are an LTV of 160, it will be, under generic estimates, a range of around 8 to 12 years until you are above water. You “own” (and have to upkeep) a place you are a decade out from owning. So a 7 year penalty has to be taken in context.

That paper has issues that could be extrapolated (we don’t need the median borrower to walk away before we have major problems), but it’s important to us to have a clear sense that there is an actual problem here, as opposed to the income shocks of near 20% underemployment.

3) Fannie is saying homeowners should be working with the servicers here. And they should. But it is worth noting that even when we bribe servicers to “nudge” them, as we have done in HAMP, we still don’t actually get principal cuts. Shahien Nasiripour has just found, “As few as 0.1 percent of mortgage modifications initiated under the Obama administration’s signature foreclosure prevention program involve reductions in principal, according to a federal report released Wednesday…A January report by the State Foreclosure Prevention Working Group noted that principal reduction is the best way to stem the foreclosure crisis.” Usually these involve payment increases, unless they lengthen the period of the loan, which means more time underwater.

HAMP, the Obama adminstration’s foreclosure prevention program, has gone from “look busy” to “not working” to utter, complete disaster. A complete waste of time, resources and energy. And Fannie now wants to replicate it. Let’s see how this goes.

Mike Konczal is a fellow with the Roosevelt Institute. You can follow him on twitter here.

tasty

Brad Friedman and Desi Doyen: Green <b>News</b> Report: July 15, 2010 (Audio)

TWITTER: @GreenNewsReport The 'GNR' is also now available on your cell phone via Stitcher Radio's mobile app!

openSUSE <b>News</b> » openSUSE 11.3 is here!

19 July: Birthday of openSUSE News; 21 July: German Wiki Team Meeting; 24 July: Hadoop Lab with openSUSE in Taiwan; 28 July: German Wiki Team Meeting; 28 July: openSUSE Project Meeting. Categories ...

Small Business <b>News</b>: Social Media and Blogging Basics | Small <b>...</b>

Social media and more specifically blogging have become increasingly important to marketing a small business in today's evolving business world. But probably no.

foreclosure law

In the polarization of politics, parsing words of politicians has become a fine art form by opponents to score points as if the public has a mental scoreboard in their heads.

I’m drawing from memory here as most voters would on criticism tossed at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate

Banking chairman Chris Dodd.

After passage of the health reform legislation, Pelosi said we won’t know what’s in the law until it plays out in real time.

After the joint conference agreement on the pending financial reform package, Dodd said he hoped the new regulations would work.

That’s how I understood what they were trying to say.

The Republican attack machine framed it differently. They suggested Pelosi didn’t bother to read the health legislation. And Dodd was dabbling in some unproven experiment for heavy-handed governmental interference of the capitalist system.

Both pieces of legislation are 1,500 to more than 2,000 pages thick. Not in a million years am I so altruistic that I believe all 535 House and Senate members read every word of both legislative proposals.

Nor do I believe every subsection of each law will work as intended.

Laws are not set in concrete. They can be amended. They can be improved to meet the test of pragmatism. They can be dropped as failures. Awkwardly, it takes Congressional action to do that.

During the 1992 presidential campaign, the one proposal Ross Perot advocated I subscribed to was that each law passed by Congress have a two to five-year sunset clause to determine if it was working.

Now that’s a reasonable concept rather than the Republican battle cry to repeal the health reform law because they don’t like the one section, of hundreds, that mandates purchase of insurance coverage. Some opponents, such as former Alaska half-Gov. Sarah Palin, I presume would not settle for less than a repeal of the entire legislative act.

As for the financial reform legislation, no one other than a cheer-leading President Obama, who does not have a vote, is so bold as to predict passage, especially in the Senate.

What Dodd maybe was referring to as a “hope,” is based on what a battalion of lawyers will write as specific regulatory rules applying to each subsection of the massive legislation overhauling our financial industry how it conducts business.

How that plays out is anyone’s guess. Here are two analysis that may help in determining the prospective winners and losers.

What I object to is that the financial reform package exempted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which were instrumental in creating the housing market collapse.

The Congressional Budget Office says Fannie and Freddie will end up costing taxpayers more money than the historic bailout of the financial industry.

Congress voted in 2008 to effectively place the two mortgage giants in a federal receivership by taking over 80% of its paper holdings.

So far the tab stands at $145.9 billion, and it grows with every foreclosure of a three-bedroom home with a two-car garage. The CBO predicts that the final bill could reach $389 billion.

Rather than being in the lending business, Fannie and Freddie are just as active in the foreclosure end of it.

Every 90 seconds in the first quarter of this year the two giants foreclosed on a home they financed and guaranteed to pay back investors.

By the end of March they owned 163,828 foreclosed homes, about the same number of total households in Seattle.

“Our business is the American dream of home ownership,” Fannie Mae declared in its mission statement, and in 2001 the company set a target of helping to create six million new homeowners by 2014. The New York Times, reporting from Casa Grande, about an hour’s drive from Phoenix:

Fannie and Freddie increased American home ownership over the last half-century by persuading investors to provide money for mortgage loans. The sales pitch amounted to a money-back guarantee: If borrowers defaulted, the companies promised to repay the investors.

Rather than actually making loans, the two companies — Fannie older and larger, Freddie created to provide competition — bought loans from banks and other originators, providing money for more lending and helping to hold down interest rates.

They paid no heed to predator lenders requiring no money down, balloon payments nor financial statements

from new home buyers’ ability to pay.

The result is Fannie and Freddie today are the nation’s largest landlords.

The two companies together accounted for 17% of real estate sales in Arizona during the first four months of the year, almost three times their share of the market during the same period last year, according to an analysis by MDA DataQuick.

It costs the government about $10,000 to sell each foreclosed house and recoup less than 60% of what the homeowner failed to pay after a resale at deflated market values than the original mortgage purchase price.

Some sales are to investors who “flip” the houses for quick profits after the government repaired interior damage and maintained its yards.

As to the maintenance costs, just the cost of contracting mowing an empty foreclosed property costs $80 per month. The Times:

That’s a monthly grass bill of more than $10 million.

All told, the companies spent more than $1 billion on upkeep last year.

To ensure more new homeowners buy the foreclosures, Fannie and Freddie agreed to sell to nonprofits using taxpayer grants from the federal Neighborhood Stabilization Program.

Chicanos por la Causa, which won $137 million under the program in partnership with nonprofits in eight other states, plans to buy more than 200 homes in Phoenix in the next two years. It plans to renovate them to sell to local families.

Another gimmick:

Fannie Mae last summer announced that it would give people seeking homes a “first look” by not accepting offers from investors in the first 15 days that a property is on the market. It also offers to help buyers with closing costs, and prohibits buyers from reselling properties at a profit for 90 days, to discourage speculation. Fannie Mae said that 68.4% of buyers this year had certified that they would use the house as a primary residence.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is our problem because Congress bought them for us without our asking.

Cross posted on

I’m not quite certain how to calibrate journalism American Banker style, but I found this article, “Challenges to Foreclosure Docs Reach a Fever Pitch,” (sadly, subscription only, e-mailed by Chris Whalen), to be both interesting and more than a tad disingenuous.

The spin starts with the headline, it’s a doozy. The “challenge to foreclosure documents” message persists throughout the article, and it’s perilously close to a misrepresentation:

Because the notes were often sold and resold during the boom years, many financial companies lost track of the documents. Now, legal officials are accusing companies of forging the documents needed to reclaim the properties.

On Monday, the Florida Attorney General’s Office said it was investigating the use of “bogus assignment” documents by Lender Processing Services Inc. and its former parent, Fidelity National Financial Inc. And last week a federal judge in Florida ordered a hearing to determine whether M&T Bank Corp. should be charged with fraud after it changed the assignment of a mortgage note for one borrower three separate times…

In many cases, [plaintiff attorney] Kowalski said, it has become impossible to establish when a mortgage was sold, and to whom, so the servicers are trying to recreate the paperwork, right down to the stamps that financial companies use to verify when a note has changed hands…

In a notice on its website, the Florida attorney general said it is examining whether Docx, an Alpharetta, Ga., unit of Lender Processing Services, forged documents so foreclosures could be processed more quickly.

“These documents are used in court cases as ‘real’ documents of assignment and presented to the court as so, when it actually appears that they are fabricated in order to meet the demands of the institution that does not, in fact, have the necessary documentation to foreclose according to law,” the notice said..

Yves here. Let’s parse the two messages:

1. Note how the problem is presented as one of “documentation”, implying it is not substantive.

2. Because everyone knows mortgages were sold a lot, (which is clearly mentioned in the piece) the idea that some somehow went missing (or as the piece suggests, the “documentation” is missing even though the parties are presented as if they know who really owns the mortgage) is presented as something routine and not very alarming.

OK, let’s dig a little deeper. Even though the media refers to “mortgages”, under the law there are two pieces: the note, which is the indebtedness, and the mortgage (in some states, a “deed of trust”), which is the lien against the property. In 45 of 50 states, the mortgage follows the note (it is an “accessory”) and has no independent existence (as in you can’t enforce the mortgage if you don’t hold the note. You need to have both the note and the mortgage. This is a bit approximate, but will do for this discussion).

Now, the note is a bearer instrument if it is endorsed in blank (as in signed by current owner but not specifically made payable to the next owner, which was common for notes that were sold). It isn’t some damned “documentation”. Remember the days of bonds, when you had the real security, or stock certificates? This is paper with a hard monetary value, the face amount of the note (as long as it’s current, anyhow).

So now go back and look at that little extract. This “oh business was so busy we mislaid a lot of paper” isn’t some mere filing error. It’s like saying you left an envelopes full of cash in the subway on a regular basis. In the late 1960s back office crisis on Wall Street, when the volume of stock trading overwhelmed delivery and settlement infrastructure, a LOT of firms went out of business, in the midst of a bull market.

OK, now the second item with the article finesses is the sale of mortgages versus the role of the servicer. For the overwhelming majority of first mortgages, and I believe about 50% of second mortgages and HELOCs, the servicer is working for a trust that holds the notes pursuant to a securitization.

The standard documentation for a RMBS calls for the trust to gave a certification at closing that it has all the notes and it has to recertify that it has all the assets at two additional future dates, usually 90 days out and a full year after closing.

So this “notes were flyin’ around, yeah we lost track” is presumably impossible if we are discussing securitizations. Or put it another way: it means the fraud here is much more extensive than servicers making up documents ex post facto. It means the fraud extended back into how the securitization took place (as in what investors were told v. what actually happened).

And before you say these reports are exaggerated, my limited sample and my discussions with mortgage professional (not merely plaitiff’s attorneys but mortgage industry lifers) suggests the reverse.

But what about the second claim in the headline, that this activity has reached a “fever pitch”? Wellie, that’s a distortion too, perhaps to energize those who would be enraged by visions of deadbeat borrowers staying in houses due to fancy legal footwork. Trust me, there are FAR more overextended borrowers living in “free” housing due to banks slowing up the foreclosure process than due to legal battles.

First, the story is ONLY about Florida, despite the hyperventilating tone. And Florida is way ahead of other jurisdictions. There is a group of lawyers that are sharing G2 on these cases, and there are also a fair number of sympathetic judges. Note some states (Minnesota in particular) have both extremely pro bank laws and a business friendly bar. So it’s misleading to make sweeping generalizations; you need to get a bit more granular, which this article fails to do.

Second, the “fever pitch” headline also conveys the impression that this is an epidemic, ergo, these cases are widespread. While it is hard to be certain (this activity is by nature fragmented), at this point, that looks to be quite an exaggeration. The vast majority of borrowers, when the foreclosure process moves forward, don’t fight. They lack the energy and the resources. And when the borrower prevails, the case is typically dismissed “without prejudice”, meaning if the servicer and trustee get their act together, they can come back to court and try again.

Most of the battles against foreclosure appear to fall into one of two categories:

1. The borrower can afford the mortgage, but has fallen behind due to what he thinks is a servicing snafu. I can give you the long form, but the way servicers charge extra fees is in violation of Federal law and is designed to put the borrower on a treadmill of escalating fees. And they do not typically inform the borrower that fees have compounded until 6 or more months into the mess, and by that time, the arrearage can be $2000 or more. The borrower is unable to fix the servicing error, the fees continue to escalate, and the house goes into foreclosure.

2. The borrower has filed for a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, but the trustee is fighting the bankruptcy stay and trying to seize the house.

So why this alarmist American Banker article? Even if the numbers of successfully contested foreclosures are not (yet) large, the precedents being set are very detrimental to the foreclosure mills, the servicers, and the trustees. Moreover, the costs of fighting these cases can quickly exceed the value of the mortgage. So it would not take much of an increase in this trend to wreak havoc with servicer economics, and ultimately, the losses on the trust, particularly on prime mortgages, where the loss cushions were considerably smaller than on subprime.

I suspect the real reason for alarm isn’t the “fever pitch,” meaning the current level of activity. It’s that a state attorney general is throwing his weight against the servicers, and what he is uncovering is every bit as bad as what the critics have been saying for some time. That may indeed kick up anti-foreclosure efforts in states with open-minded judges to a completely new level.

Mike Fuljenz Mike Fuljenz

foreclosure listings

From a report emailed to me over the weekend:

At the core of the foreclosure-prevention strategy is ignoring delinquencies. The percentage of older delinquent loans not yet in foreclosure is startling: 60% have at least 12 missed payments, and 35% have at least 18 missed payments. Add to this that three-fourths of delinquent loans are not in foreclosure, and we see that hidden losses well exceed those in the open.

Uh, they're not being "ignored" - this is systemic and intentional fraud.

Remember, these loans are either being held by someone or securitized into some sort of package.  When you have a loan that has no chance of "curing" (to cure a loan with 12 missed payments the borrower would have to come up with the 12 payments to bring it current!) that loan should be carried at its recovery value - that is, the value of the collateral that can be seized and sold, LESS the cost of eviction, remediation and resale.

Does anyone recall all the entries I've written about getting competent legal and accounting (tax) advice before proceeding with any sort of action regarding walking away, short sales or foreclosure?  This same report says:

Many homeowners would be better off going into foreclosure, than doing a short sale. Short sales are fraught with potential legal, credit, and complicated tax issues. For example, someone who refinanced could owe capital gains taxes, which are not forgiven under federal and California temporary debt relief acts. In the foreclosure route, borrowers can live in their house mortgage-free for at least one year, maybe two years. Both short sales and foreclosures are reported as “account not paid in full”, and are equally damaging to a credit score. An exception exists if short sellers can negotiate better terms with their lender on recourse liens. The other possible advantage to a short sale is the ability to get a mortgage again in 2 years (Fannie, Freddie), rather than having to wait 3-5 years after a foreclosure.

Homeowners pursue short sales, unaware of the problems they are creating for themselves. Their agents never warned them of deficiencies, ruined credit, taxes due on forgiven debt, or legal consequences. Agents made flowery promises to get listings, and now the lawsuits are starting.

No, really?  You mean that people in the real estate business are less than truthful with their clients?  That would never, ever happen with licensed professionals, right?

Then there's this, which I also have written about:

Another gray area is junior lien holders asking buyers for additional payments. As the market improved, juniors were no longer content with $3k thrown to them from the senior. They now want 10% of the junior note. They argue the additional payment is legal practice because the payment is made to escrow and appears on the HUD-1. However, they are actually hoping the senior lien holder does not read the HUD-1. The California Association of REALTORS® position is that all payments made by the buyer or agent in the purchase of a short sale must be part of the written short sale agreement signed by the senior lien holder. Concealing payments from seniors is loan fraud, and omitting these payments from the HUD-1 closing statement may violate RESPA. Some seniors reinstate their security interests because of the fraud. It’s surprising that the biggest banks are responding, when pressed on the fraud of their request, “just do it if you want the deal done”.

Right.  Big banks saying "just do it"?  Why would they do that?  Is it so they can re-instate their security interests?  No, nobody would ever do anything that hoses the consumer, would they?  Naw.....

Few people understand that the bank that gave them their mortgage turned around and sold it into a mortgage bond, and the “bank” on their mortgage statement is actually a servicer.

Actually, it's a bit more complicated than that.

As I've been working on (and writing on) for a long time, and as a few attorneys are now starting to understand, the entirety of this process was corrupted and is rife with outright fraud from top to bottom.

Let's go through a (partial) list of the problems:

• 
  
  

  From a report emailed to me over the weekend:

  
  

  
  

  At the core of the foreclosure-prevention strategy is ignoring delinquencies. The percentage of older delinquent loans not yet in foreclosure is startling: 60% have at least 12 missed payments, and 35% have at least 18 missed payments. Add to this that three-fourths of delinquent loans are not in foreclosure, and we see that hidden losses well exceed those in the open.

  
  

  Uh, they're not being "ignored" - this is systemic and intentional fraud.

  
  

  Remember, these loans are either being held by someone or securitized into some sort of package.  When you have a loan that has no chance of "curing" (to cure a loan with 12 missed payments the borrower would have to come up with the 12 payments to bring it current!) that loan should be carried at its recovery value - that is, the value of the collateral that can be seized and sold, LESS the cost of eviction, remediation and resale.

  
  

  Does anyone recall all the entries I've written about getting competent legal and accounting (tax) advice before proceeding with any sort of action regarding walking away, short sales or foreclosure?  This same report says:

  
  

  
  

  Many homeowners would be better off going into foreclosure, than doing a short sale. Short sales are fraught with potential legal, credit, and complicated tax issues. For example, someone who refinanced could owe capital gains taxes, which are not forgiven under federal and California temporary debt relief acts. In the foreclosure route, borrowers can live in their house mortgage-free for at least one year, maybe two years. Both short sales and foreclosures are reported as “account not paid in full”, and are equally damaging to a credit score. An exception exists if short sellers can negotiate better terms with their lender on recourse liens. The other possible advantage to a short sale is the ability to get a mortgage again in 2 years (Fannie, Freddie), rather than having to wait 3-5 years after a foreclosure.

  
  

  Homeowners pursue short sales, unaware of the problems they are creating for themselves. Their agents never warned them of deficiencies, ruined credit, taxes due on forgiven debt, or legal consequences. Agents made flowery promises to get listings, and now the lawsuits are starting.

  
  

  No, really?  You mean that people in the real estate business are less than truthful with their clients?  That would never, ever happen with licensed professionals, right?

  
  

  Then there's this, which I also have written about:

  
  

  
  

  Another gray area is junior lien holders asking buyers for additional payments. As the market improved, juniors were no longer content with $3k thrown to them from the senior. They now want 10% of the junior note. They argue the additional payment is legal practice because the payment is made to escrow and appears on the HUD-1. However, they are actually hoping the senior lien holder does not read the HUD-1. The California Association of REALTORS® position is that all payments made by the buyer or agent in the purchase of a short sale must be part of the written short sale agreement signed by the senior lien holder. Concealing payments from seniors is loan fraud, and omitting these payments from the HUD-1 closing statement may violate RESPA. Some seniors reinstate their security interests because of the fraud. It’s surprising that the biggest banks are responding, when pressed on the fraud of their request, “just do it if you want the deal done”.

  
  

  Right.  Big banks saying "just do it"?  Why would they do that?  Is it so they can re-instate their security interests?  No, nobody would ever do anything that hoses the consumer, would they?  Naw.....

  
  

  
  

  Few people understand that the bank that gave them their mortgage turned around and sold it into a mortgage bond, and the “bank” on their mortgage statement is actually a servicer.

  
  

  Actually, it's a bit more complicated than that.

  
  

  As I've been working on (and writing on) for a long time, and as a few attorneys are now starting to understand, the entirety of this process was corrupted and is rife with outright fraud from top to bottom.

  
  

  Let's go through a (partial) list of the problems:

  
  
  • 
    
    penis enlargement products