Anti-Foreclosure Protesters Block Sheriff's Eviction of Disabled Veteran in West Seattle

Comments

1

Aren't you the same people who would advocate putting multi-unit apodments in that man's same space?

2
I wonder about the facts behind the foreclosure.

(Though for Ansel such facts may not matter: "Socialism Now!")

But it would be interesting to know how the owners got into trouble.
3
1. Fuck the banks
2. Fuck the pigs
3.
4. Anarchy
5
Thank you SAFE! You are the real America.
6
He got a mortgage. He agreed to pay it. He signed his name. Apparently he did not honor his agreement. He is a veteran. So what!

What is the story here? What if this was a note that one of the commenters or their family had written to the guy instead of a bank, and he did not pay. You seek to enforce your rights to take back the property, and a bunch of idiots stand in the way of you. Would that still be OK?

What is this pathetic man and his wife's excuse for their behavior?

Oops, does not matter, cause the man is bad and they therefore must be good.
7
PS - Note to lenders. Stop lending to Veterans or the disabled. They will use it against you when they don't pay.
8
@4 @6 @7 you guys have no idea of the terms of his mortgage. You have no experience with the illegal shit banks will pull if you miss just one. He may have had a jump in his rates, or some unexpected family income situation. Most people trust their bank for rates and what is legal/illegal.
9
@8

He hadn't paid in over 3 years. He serial cash out refinanced up until 2007. He got almost 100K in the foreclosure auction because it sold for more than the loan amount. He could have got more had he just sold it him self.

Feel sorry for him, but it was his bed he made.
10
Park Place states "PS - Note to lenders. Stop lending to Veterans or the disabled. " - which is a total violation of Equal Housing and Equal Lending laws. It's clear Park Place and his ilk have no concern for the real laws or moral law.
11
Evictions are really, really really hard to get. If you're at a point where you can order the sheriff to throw someone out of a property, they are so lost its amazing.

Oh he is a veteran, and its his home? oh nevermind, just forgive all his debt, because reasons.

and keep renting, this guy got his.
12
The City Council has no supervisory powers over huge banks. Huge banks are horrible, and often the Council is horrible, but they don't intersect.
13
@8 You're right, we have no idea of the terms of his mortgage, because the reporter apparently decided these facts weren't important enough to investigate and disclose.
14
This story mixes up paramedics with EMTs. Paramedics have 2 years of training and in Seattle are top-o'the-line professionals. EMTs are hard working fellas and ma'ams that took a course at a community college (and deal with the same BS as Fire fighters and Po-lice for <$15/hr).
15
For all of you saying that he should PAY, let me inform you regarding a lawsuit that is going through the courts right now regarding a wealthy man who DID want to pay, but he wanted to pay the CORRECT OWNER OF HIS NOTE! Here's the story:

The case is, Lemelson v. Northwest Trustee Services, where a wealthy homeowner simply wanted to PAY OFF his mortgage. When he sent the proper question to the bank: who is the owner of my note? The bank would not provide the homeowner any evidence of to whom he was supposed to pay! So, now the homeowner is in litigation. Three Superior Court judges, Judge Linde, Judge Prochnau and Judge Dubuque denied the homeowner DISCOVERY pending the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. The homeowner fought diligently to lift the stay on the discovery ban but to no avail. Rather than serving up a Motion to Dismiss, the defendants (the crooked banks) served a Motion for Summary Judgment, which WAS GRANTED! What this all means is: THE HOMEOWNER’S LITIGATION WAS DISMISSED WITHOUT BEING GRANTED DUE PROCESS! And all this homeowner wanted to do was to pay off his mortgage to the proper party!

The judiciary is not enforcing laws. The trustees in every foreclosure are using forged documents from the banks to begin the foreclosure procedure. So, should the judiciary uphold the rule of law? YOU BETCHA! Are they? NOT IN THE LEAST!

IF the judiciary AND the Attorney General’s office had upheld the rule of law, the Barton’s foreclosure would never have happened. You see, the Barton’s “trustee” on their Deed of Trust is Quality Loan Service Corporation of Washington. The Attorney General Bob Ferguson could have AND SHOULD HAVE shut this gang of crooks down a long time ago. Right now, the AG does have the power to shut them down. There is a court injunction that allows the AG to do so should QLS WA violate their duty of good faith again. Well, QLS WA VIOLATED THEIR DUTY OF GOOD FAITH AGAIN! This time they did so in Snohomish County. Judge George Bowden ruled within the Brevick case that QLS WA violated their duty of good faith. At this time, AG Bob Ferguson has not yet acted. This Brevick ruling came out June 13th. It is HIGH TIME for Ferguson to do the right thing and issue QLS WA some exit papers from our state. But, will he?

We will be protesting the King County Superior Court for this denial of due process on AUGUST 1 at the King County Courthouse at NOON. I hope we can get people who are interested in justice to come and protest this severe injustice with us!
16
Known facts of the house/sale/mortgage (taken from public records):

Bought before 2000 (amount paid not immediately available)
Refi in 2005 - BofA
Refi in 2006 - American Home Mortgage and GMAC. And the kicker: an assignment of rents - meaning it _wasn't owner occupied_ at the time...
Refi'd in 2007 with a $456k 1st and 207.5k 2nd (that's more than $650k debt - waaaaay more than they would have paid pre-2000)
BS fillings in 2011 trying to assert the the mortgage holders could not prove they had the paperwork and therefore the mortgages were invalid (after multiple refis? - don't think so...)
Got an NTS (notice of trustee sale) in 2012, then early 2013, then again in late 2013
Sold at the foreclosure auction for $646k (wow!) in April.

While I genuinely feel for the dispossessed, they should have long-ago sold (retail, short, whatever) the property, moved into an appropriately priced and functional living situation, and dealt with the reality of the economics of a being in way too much, way too old, of a house.

I'm particularly unsettled by the "assignment of rents" (meaning it was a rental property at one point), the disingenuous legal fillings (oh, you didn't respond to my letter so my mortgage I have isn't valid), and the fact that they had 3 years of notices and deferrals never made a reasonable move to more appropriate accommodations.
17
IF @9 is accurate, then there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of injustice. The guy didn't make his payments and could have sold to pay off the loan and taken his cash to live someplace else.

18
Seriously, @GuyFawkes? You are merging so many desperate threads it is almost hopeless.

Is Quality clear as a whistle? Hardly.

Does a "request" to know "who is the owner of my note" have any meaning? No! He had a proper loan servicer (the bank), and known amount to pay off, and someone to pay it to. The BS of "show me some paper trail for the loan I took out in good faith" is crap. He took out the loan and is trying to use legal shenanigans to get out of paying. He isn't denying he took out the loan, he isn't denying he knew who make his monthly payment to, and that he could have made is complete payoff to them as well.

Look, I'm deeply sympathetic to the people that bought in 2006 or 2007 and are so deeply underwater they do a tactical default and start over. I'm not sympathetic to those that used their houses as ATMs or try to use legal shenanigans to try and avoid debts that they knowingly signed up for.
19
@drshort: My math shows the 1st at 478k & 82k in arrears for a total of $561. The 2nd was 207.5k + unknown arrears. The foreclosure sale was $646 so the 2nd didn't get paid in full and there was nothing left for the owners.

Oh, and there was a 2008 filling by the state for deferred taxes - even more debt to pay off...
20
How many apartment dwellers get to go 600k in the hole, and stay?

This is social justice man! Let the mayor know his department of has a job to fix.
21
@Throw it away:
So, you are saying that a purported debtor's rights under the Fair Debt Collection Protection Act isn't a valid request? I am sitting here in amazement! You believe that because YOU know who to pay: the servicer, they are the owner of the debt? OMFG.

These bankers continue to negotiate the debt even AFTER the debt has been paid. When was the last time any of you got your paid off negotiable instrument???

A landowner has a legitimate right to understand who is the owner, who should be paid off. THAT IS WHAT ESCROW IS FOR! And does escrow look into who you should pay off? NO! They simply ask the HOMEOWNER who they should pay. If anyone is foolish enough to provide the servicer CROOK the full amount to pay off a loan without knowing who the hell should be paid.....well, I've got a nice bit of Florida swampland for ya.

Pull your proverbial head out of the netherland.
22
Furthermore, the crooks that bought the dam house are crooks of the lowest sort. Vultures.

The dude that is behind all this: Mohamad Daher.
He is Earnst & Young's "Northwest Entrepreneur of the Year"! This Daher was actually EVICTED from his Gulf War country and sought refuge in the good ol' USA. It was in the US where he learned capitalistic vulture mentality. He learned that eviction can be a good thing! He learned that money can be made by evicting people! He learned that the US is very accommodating to vulture capitalists like himself. Hey where there is an eviction, there's a way!

So, now this Daher wants to kick out a Vietnam vet and bulldoze the property so he can put up TWO view properties and then he can sell these three story god-awful McMansions. Hey, Daher, keep the dam three story monstrosities over on the Eastside. Otherwise, we will be seeing more of your ilk over in Seattle. Stay on the Eastside, K?
23
@16, TIA wrote, "BS fillings in 2011 trying to assert the the mortgage holders could not prove they had the paperwork and therefore the mortgages were invalid"

People's reaction to situations like Barton's often include disdain for those who are seen to have violated a contract in some way. I think losing the contract--misplacing or destroying the paperwork that proves who is owed either money or a house--is a big deal. When that happens and someone jumps through the legal hoops to prove it, it's not "BS filings," it's an attempt to hold the other party to their obligations under the law.
,
Think about it: We have representatives of a business claiming that someone owes money to an unspecified third-party creditor, and that the person should pay them (not the third party who is purportedly owed money) regardless of their ability to prove to whom the debt is owed. When the person says, "put up or shut up," and that business does not put up, and the person stops paying, those representatives, with assistance of armed agents of the state, confiscate the home they believe was purchased with money lent by the still-unspecified third party. Fuck that.

If you lend money, then launder the debt by continually shuffling it around from one institution to another in a process rife with robo-signing and other fraud, and eventually the paperwork that indicates just who is owed the money is lost, tough shit. Going to court to dispute the debt isn't one person reneging on a promise to another; it's an individual availing himself of protections provided by the law in the face of powerful adversaries.

The more we hold lending institutions to their obligations under the law, the less they'll play the game that led to them tanking the economy a few years ago.
24
Hey SAFE, I don't know if I can afford my rental payment this month, can you guys show up in a few weeks and keep me from getting evicted?
25
@24: I know you're trying to be snarky here, but I imagine that SAFE, if it had the capacity, would oblige you. Many of their activists believe housing is a fundamental human right.
26
Huhhuh-yup, good one, 24
27
@Ansel.
Based on the facts as they've been shown here, do you think that the foreclosure/eviction should proceed? And why?
28
@6,7: Thank goodness someone pointed this out. I was worried that nobody was thinking about the poor banks. Can you imagine how they must feel? Won't anybody stick up for the underdog? Thankfully, a poster named after a Monopoly square took the challenge!

On a side note, today's veterans have the federal government guarantee their home loans so that bullshit like this doesn't happen. Foreclosure can still happen, but the VA is a lot more willing than the banks to get payment changes and help out a veteran.
29
" Many of their activists believe housing is a fundamental human right."

You linked to a UN document. Can you link to one that is legally binding in King County?

30
@Ansel-
Where was The Stranger when anti-foreclosure activists protested the "Home Foreclosure Procedures Act," vile new anti-homeowner legislation? The Stranger was given an invitation, which was ignored.

During that rally we presented FACTS like:
Attorney General Ferguson has the power provided to him RIGHT NOW to shut down half of all the foreclosures in our state. This court-ordered injunction signed in the Klem v. WaMu case provides him actionable remedies if the trustee, Quality Loan Service Corporation of Washington, violates their duty of good faith again. Well, Judge George Bowden ruled in the Brevick case that QLS WA violated their duty of good faith AGAIN! Ferguson has refused to act. WHERE THE HELL ARE THE "INVESTIGATIVE" REPORTERS REGARDING THIS FACT???

OR is The Stranger only covering stories where there is a disable vet who can pull at the heart strings of the populace?
31
@15, GuyFawkes, thank you very much, as this has been the basis of so much fraudclosure written about numerous and countless times over the past five years --- so fuck off, @18, you don't know anything about mortgage law/RE law, and your ignorance is displayed for all to witness!

Reading suggestion: A Dream Foreclosed, by Laura Gottesdiener

(plus many other books on this subject and MERS, which, FYI, Hustler Magazine was the first and for many years the only, printed publication which would feature articles on this!)

And again, where is Frank Chopp??????????????????????????

32
@25 I also believe that housing is a fundamental human right, but I do not believe that everybody is entitled to a single family home. Real property ownership is not attainable by everyone and that it is a component of the "American Dream" is unsustainable.

@30 So you want government to shut down all real property repossessions, thereby placing further restraints on the housing market and artificially driving prices even higher? Real help to the working class there. You need to think these things through.
33
@28, actually, there is someone taking up for those poor, beleagured banksters, and his name is Piwowar and this scumbag works at the SEC, and gives talks at wunderbar places like the American Enterprise Institute on how a vast left-wing conspiracy is demonizing those poor, poor, banksters!

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-15…
34
@31 - really? What do you really want to have happen here? They used the house as an ATM repeatedly. They had no reasonable way to pay it off. They didn't short sell. They didn't loan mod. They had more than 180 days notice it was going to sell at auction. Once it sold they had 30 day notice to leave, then got 30 more days, then the sheriff tried to evict and they got 30 more days. When is it enough?

They did sign those loan papers. Bottom line, are you really arguing that "those papers were electronically scanned and since you can't find the original paper I no longer have to pay you" - is that seriously the argument?

If you were the person that lent them the money (rather than a nameless bank) would you just let them keep it for free? Where is the reasonableness standard here?
35
@33, how many Poles does it take to screw up the SEC...

Thanks, that was an interesting story, as were the others it led to. This guy's reminding me of John Bolton at the U.N.

[Piwowar means "brewer" in język polski.]
36
Hey ThrowItAway:
IF I owed you money, then why won't you accept a COPY of my signed check to pay you the debt you claim I owe? Or better yet, I'll just COPY off a few hundred Benjamins and no harm, no foul, right?

If WE have to accept the bank's bullsh*t that they don't have the NOTE (because they continue to negotiate the purported debt on the secondary market) well then I'm sure they don't care if the homeowners send them only a COPY of checks to fully pay off the purported debt they claim we owe.

WHAT ABOUT THE UN-SUBROGATED PAYMENTS MADE TO THE BANKSTERS THAT ARE CONTINUED TO BE HELD OFF BALANCE SHEET??? Huh? Why won't any bank release accounting-level data to prove they actually aren't the crooks everyone is claiming they are? Because they are crooks. Common street thugs. Common street thugs that deserve to sit in 3x9 cells for a very, very long time.
37
@31 SergentDoom:
Thanks for your support.

I hope you will bring yourself and your friends while we protest the King County Superior Court on Friday, August 1st at the King County Courthouse on 3rd Ave at NOON.

DENY OUR HOMEOWNERS DUE PROCESS??? NOT ON OUR WATCH! This nation proclaims it to be a "Nation of Laws." We shall see.

Bring signs using Judge Linde, Judge Prochnau and Judge Dubuque's names. We want to specifically target these three judges for their denial of due process.
38
@GuyFawkes - seriously?

You BORROWED the money. You SIGNED the note. You AGREE you signed the note. But, because there isn't a hard-copy immediately available you can decide to not pay? WTF?

You do not appear to be a member of the real world.
39
Checked with some more reputable media and discovered the following.

They've owned the house for over 60 years.

It was paid off several DECADES ago.

They then pulled out almost half a mil in equity loans, which means they essentially sold their house back to the bank.

They received around 100k from the sale, in addition to the 465k they'd already taken in loans against the house.

So all in all it seems like they sold their house at full market value and then refused to leave.

But I guess that doesn't make for sensational click bait, does it?
40
sgt doom and guyfuckes are complete idiots.

this guy took a loan on a house, and decided to stop making payments = you lose your house.

it really is that simple. Banks are not evil entities, people who decide not to pay their loans are the problem.
41
and how very typical that AnselmybuttHerz cant find the time to actually look up the facts of the case before he "writes"

Ansel, you're a joke.
42
To: ThrowItAway (funny you pick that name, that is exactly what you did with the original notes and now you want to collect!)
I didn't borrow ANY money as in CURRENCY. The NOTE that was signed was shredded. The pretender lenders are selling off this purported debt to MULTIPLE parties. And furthermore......what's really interesting, is YOU FAILED TO ANSWER ANY OF MY QUESTIONS. Why is that?

1) Would it be okay for me (if I owed you a debt) to pay with a copy of a signed check?
2) Would you accept a copy of a signed check as payment?
3) If you will not accept a copy of a check, will you accept copies of $100 bills as payment?
4) If not, why not?
5) Why is the lending industry (common street thugs) reconveying property without the original notes AND at the same time providing the title companies, that conduct the reconveyance, with an INDEMNITY AGREEMENT (for those of you unfamiliar with an indemnity agreement it is a document to hold them harmless for any illegal activity that the banks are conducting in the transaction)?
6) If the NOTES were not DELIVERED per UCC LAWS (yes, LAWS, these are NOT optional) then they have SOLD nothing. If they were not delivered (and they were not), why is it they are unlawfully manufacturing documents saying they were???
5) Why is the Uniform Law Commission right now drafting proposed legislation to sweep all of the above under the rug?

Before you attempt to paint me as "not a member of the real world" again, answer some goddamn questions, BANKER CROOK.
43
Guyfuckes shows what a retard he is AGAIN.

he is probably another user of society that contributes nothing- other than trying to get "free stuff'

bottom line: the guy has not paid his mortgage.period.end of story.
how is that so hard for you to grasp?
44
OMG:

The "Go Fund Me" link to help the Bartons:
http://www.gofundme.com/brsohs
(Look at the comments where you will find a "Shane Renecker listed as the person who put up the link.)

And then this Seattle Times article:
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2…

Is this the same Shane Renecker??? I added this question to the Go Fund Me site comments and someone immediately deleted it. I'm pretty sure that therein lies my answer! Jesus. Vultures attempting to "help" the victim are just thieves too! What is wrong with the USA???
45
Everyone associated with this whole mess seems to be either misrepresenting the truth or an outright con artist.

What sucks is that there are really people who need help. And every media circus like this takes attention away from real victims.

If Sawant, Spear, and others really want to help the unfortunate, they'd better start doing some research before they jump in front of a television camera. This makes them look like uninformed suckers.
46
I can't fucking stand this playing the veterans card shit. Dude, you were almost undoubtedly drafted, exactly like how many tens of thousand of men, 40+ years ago. You served and came back alive and I'm glad for you about that. All of these years since, you have had free VA health care and how many dozens of other benefits including free 4 year college tuition, lower than most people interest rates when buying a home and car, not to mention (at least in the last 30+ years) constant praise and fawning by presidents and politicians. Not a single day passes without the world bowing down to you in praise for your service.

You have been rewarded in various ways for your service in other words. That was part of the deal. What you don't get is a free-er ride than the rest of us when it comes to things as basic as paying your goddamn rent.

I'm sorry that your financial life is so badly fucked up that it came to this. It is the same that would come to any of us had we followed that same path. Try and get past the notion, however, that because you once were drafted, that you somehow deserve a free ride about this. It's obnoxious, bratty behavior. As is making a spectacle of yourself and playing the victim without informing anyone of the facts of your multiple six figure refis - truly treating your home like an ATM machine - and the 6 month + warning regarding your eviction. Seriously. Welcome to the same goddamn boat the rest of us are in.

47
Velvet Babe,
You're a little late into this party, but what the hell......
......since you're late, I direct you to READ post #15.

AND THEN COMMENT.
48
"I can't fucking stand this playing the veterans card shit. Dude, you were almost undoubtedly drafted, exactly like how many tens of thousand of men, 40+ years ago. You served and came back alive and I'm glad for you about that. All of these years since, you have had free VA health care and how many dozens of other benefits including free 4 year college tuition, lower than most people interest rates when buying a home and car, not to mention (at least in the last 30+ years) constant praise and fawning by presidents and politicians. Not a single day passes without the world bowing down to you in praise for your service. "

Don't forget, 'vet' does not = 'saw combat'. Less than 30% of Vietnam Vets saw combat. This moron could have been peeling potatoes for 12 months.
49

Um, Guyfawkes, just so you know I read the entire thread before commenting, but even if I hadn't, I don't need you to 'direct' me to read any particular post before commenting, capiche? You view this one way, and people like me view it another. It's called having an opinion, and people differ in their opinions and views, but we aren't stopped from expressing those views nonetheless.