Love your passion … yet must respectfully disagree that it can possibly boil down to a single individual or link in the value chain. There’s copability at every link, including homebuyers.

I had all the info I needed to start the discussion. I was asking broad questions, specifically:
1. Can a judge give away an asset
2. If this precedent brings about conditions that will in the long run hurt homebuyers by having them sign away their rights to trial/legal action

I don’t think the story takes the banks side at all. Quite the opposite. But that’s in the eyes of the viewer.

You make several absolute statements here on broad topics. In my opinion, you have a few things wrong.

Your assertion that they were the only ones that showed interest is flat out wrong. It had no prior banking existence prior to the IndyMac failure.

OneWest was created by Wall Street billionaire equity and hedge fund investors J.C. Flowers, John Paulson and George Soros, for the sole purpose to take over IndyMac’s assets and those of subsequent failed banks. This was not a situation where there were no bidders at an auction. This was a joint creation of an institution by Wall Street and the Feds prior to seizing the bank. While they got a sweetheart deal, they were also supposed to adhere to the loan mod model set up by the FDIC. Their adherence to that agreement has been questioned.

Brandie, of course there are entities that can be held 100% responsible. You can start with Mozilo.

I FULLY AGREE!

How in the world did we get to a place that those with no legal rights to something have the audacity and nerve to assume the rights of a holder in due course! OUTRAGEOUS!

OneWest (FKA Indymac) has NO LEGAL RIGHT to that property and should NEVER have even been trying to collect funds or foreclose upon the collateral (aka: basic human need, shelter, aka: a family’s home).

See, good ole’ OneWest done sold that there note down the line, eventually ending up in some mortgage backed security investor’s portfolio. So, have you been to foreclosure court to observe? What is kind of interesting is the fact that these foreclosing servicers sell the properties and neglect to pass on the proceeds to the investors who are the rightful lenders of the funds!

Now, these investors are up in arms starting up lawsuits against these “down-line” banks in the multi-level marketing Wall Street game that ends up with a homeless family.

Happy Holidays!

At the end of the day, my opinion is every situation is quite unique. And not a single entity can be held 100% responsible.

1. I NEVER called the servicer/lender innocent
2 I clearly STATED I don’t know all the facts of this particular case
3. The POINTS I was making were:
A: What kind of precedent this sets for other lawsuits and how that might change or inhibit homeowners rights in the future.
B: Does a judge have a legal right to GIVE AWAY an asset

I have every right to my opinions, just as you do.

The difference between us is I engage in conversation and don’t make comments in a cowardly manner (read: ones that can’t be tracked back to me).