Skip to main content
Foreclosure Defense Florida

NY Times- The Bank of America Settlement/Boondoggle- Bad For Americans

BankOfAmerica-DealsEvery time we hear news of some grand plan or settlement, I know it’s bad news for my people, my clients, the men and women on the street.

And that’s why I have been paying particular attention to the BANK OF AMERICA $8.5 BILLION SETTLEMENT!   The bank’s gonna write a big fat check, that’s good….right?   Wrong, wrong, wrong.   The 50 state AGs are nearing a settlement, that’s good….right?   Wrong, wrong, wrong.

The problem is there is noone sitting at these big fancy conference tables speaking for the American people, for the homeowners living in homes but unable to get a modification or fair break from the servicers. What these deals do provide is outsized benefits to all the Fat Cats sitting in the big tall buildings in large and opulent rooms.

Read this article carefully.   Bank of America thinks this deal is going to mean quicker foreclosures. They think they’re going to ink this boondoggle then somehow they’re going to press through and throw homeowners out more quickly.   What they forgot about is that there are dedicated and passionate attorneys working in humble offices all across this country who wake every single morning, committed to the challenge of protecting their clients and keeping them in their homes.

Hey BofA, you think you’re going to kick our people around?   Bring it on.   Or better yet, give us a seat at the table.   Let my people pay.   We’re reasonable.   Talk to us.   Mediate in good faith.   Let us be part of the solution.   Or we will be a real big problem.

Read the New York Times Article

2 Comments

  • John Anderson says:

    A few questions about what kind of settlement the 50 state AGs can make.

    How is it possible to mass forgive mass fraud of many different types of fraud in the documents filed in court cases, and in courthouse land records? Is there a president, of this ever being done?
    How can they retro a fix, without violating the ex post facto clause in the constitution?

    In my case I don’t think it make a difference as Mr Korell Harp and Tawana Thomas acting as officers of MERs as a nominee for Quick Loan Funding transferred interest to Liquidation Properties Inc at the courthouse on 07/27/09 with a “assignment effective date” laugh” of 10/01/2008. from the now closed, infamous DOCX of Alpharetta Ga.
    A problem with this beyond the fraud that the 50 states Attorney Generals are trying to coverup while they fill there pockets with campaign donations and then levy small fines, to the very people who pushed this country into depression, is the fact that Quick Loan Funding license was revoked on 05/27/2008, by The Department of Corporations of the State of California, putting them out of business, over 3 months prior to my foreclosure being filed.
    How can some one acting as a nominee transfer interest from a ordered closed business? Is it legal?
    The MERs website still listed my mortgage with Quick Loan on 01/11/2010. Until I notified the plaintiffs and the court of my discovery.

  • spectre says:

    Come on Matt you know better. What ever settlement the banks have with the AG has NOTHING to do with WHO OWNS the loan.
    And it could only apply to the home owners if the banks can get them to renegotiate the loan.

Leave a Reply