Rep: Foreclosed owners should squat in their own homes

[Donnachaidh]

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Rep_Foreclosed_owners_should_squat_in_0130.html

If you're poor and the bank is coming for your home, Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur has a plan for you.

Just squat, she says.

Yes, this Ohio Democrat is actually encouraging her financially distressed constituents whose homes have been foreclosed upon, to simply stay put.

:snip:

"During the lending boom, most mortgages were flipped and sold to another lender or servicer or sliced up and sold to investors as securitized packages on Wall Street," explains the Consumer Warning Network. "In the rush to turn these over as fast as possible to make the most money, many of the new lenders did not get the proper paperwork to show they own the note and mortgage. This is the key to the produce the note strategy."


MORE at the link -- including a video.

[terisan]

1. I admire the boldness of Marcy Kaptur. nt

[KatyaR]

2. That's all well and good, but if the cops show up to throw you out,

I don't think you have a choice.

[DBoon]

5. yes you do!

By the fall of 1930, Communist-led Unemployed Councils had begun to experiment with two tactics that had a direct impact on the housing market -- eviction resistance and rent strikes. The first of these, eviction resistance, proved to be one of the most effective weapons in the Party's arsenal. Coming upon instances where tenants had been forcibly evicted, Communist organizers would move the furniture back from the street to the apartment, while appealing to neighbors and passersby to resist marshals and police if the eviction were repeated. Since many marshals and police were reluctant to evict (and since landlords had to pay marshals for evictions), such actions often bought time for beleaguered tenants and gave Communists a new-found respect. Through the fall of 1930 and the spring and summer of 1931, Communists employed this tactic in almost every city neighborhood where they were active, although the bulk seem to have occurred in poor communities where the depression hit early and hard -- Harlem, the Lower East Side, Hell's Kitchen, the South Bronx, Brownsville, and Coney Island. In some of these neighborhoods the Party was relatively weak (the Lower East Side and Brownsville were the only ones where the Party had a mass membership), but eviction resistance did not require active support from the population or even the political sympathy of the victim Given the overextended schedules of marshals and police, a handful of Party cadre could move the furniture back, provided the rest of the neighborhood was sympathetic or indifferent. Hundreds, possibly thousands, of such incidents occurred during the early depression years; some of them led to confrontations with police in which hundreds of people participated, but most of them led to some peaceful resolution, be it retention of the apartment by the tenants or a delay in their departure. "The practice of moving evicted families back into their homes has become frequent of late on the Lower East Side," declared the New York Times in describing the arrest of a group of eviction protesters, "but this was the first time that the police had arrived in time to seize any of the participants in such demonstrations."

from:

http://www.tenant.net/Community/history/hist03c.html

[lonestarnot]

7. Just neighbors helping neighbors!

:evilgrin:

[rangersmith82]

18. Is it smart to use Communist ideas???

We are not a Communist country, so why would we do Communist things??

[Hugabear]

19. Did you actually read the post?

This tactic was used in the United States. And just because it's a "Communist idea", why does that make it a bad idea?

[DBoon]

22. we should use ideas that work

because we are a pragmatic country

[O.M.B.inOhio]

15. Wouldn't the police get involved only if asked to by the property owner?

So if an institution owns lots of bad mortgages, lacks legal documents proving their ownership, or have no prospects for new buyers, then squatting makes sense to me. If this were a common situation, then wouldn't lending institutions have incentive to renegitiate terms? (Unless they expect to get a generous bailout)

[earth mom]

3. Sorry, but who the hell wants to live like that?!

What a dumb ass idea. But what else do we expect from the do nothing Congress? :puke:

[lunatica]

4. Where should they go?

My question is sincere. I've heard the homeless population is growing. People are forced to go to shelters where life can get very dangerous. Where should families with children and elderly people go? Where should an elderly couple go if they don't have family that will take care of them?

In dire circumstances I would think that squatting is a form of survival. Because allowing yourself to be put on the streets sure doesn't seem like a very good idea when it comes to survival. The church and the homeless shelters and the food banks are running out of space and food.

[earth mom]

11. I hear you but this idea only makes vulnerable people more vulnerable.

I want Congress to find a REAL solution to the foreclosure and homelessness issues.

Not some solution that absolves Congress of any real responsibility or action.

[lunatica]

14. Well Congress should do something about it, but while they dicker on the Hill

There are people who are handicapped, senior citizens, small children and struggling families who's big sin is they were laid off or lost their jobs. Honest people who aren't even in great debt except for their mortgages who are becoming homeless now.

[earth mom]

16. Again, I hear you. I'm all for helping those who are struggling so desperately right now.

But eventually those people will be thrown out of the houses they are squatting in because they have no legal protection or rights to the house in the first place.

Don't you see that Congress is in fact brushing their hands off this issue by saying in effect: "No worries, it's cool, go ahead and squat." ?!

That's what is ticking me the hell off and should tick you off too.

[SoCalDem]

24. Banks/mortgage companies need to be FORCED to rent the property

at a FAIR price to the people about to be foreclosed on. They are already there, so is their stuff..their kids are in local schools..

The banks should be required to rent to them UNTIL a qualified buyer has been found..

In many places, there are streets FULL of empty/vandalized houses..(Our street had SIX at one time).,.

It's better to keep them occupied, and have the people move ONLY after they have been sold..

If a family had been making interest only payments of $1k a month, and it's due to rise beyond their ability to pay, then why not just keep collecting that $1K until it sells?..or even reduce it to $500...just to keep it occupied ..

[notesdev]

13. Word has it

that in Detroit a full 2% of the population is homeless.

Scary, huh?

[Kookaburra]

6. But if the alternative is homelessness, why not do it?

...especially if the note can't be produced, and it sounds like there are many that cannot.

I would prefer being able to stay in my own home on the chance that the situation can be resolved in an alternative to foreclosure.

The only way we're going to conquer over the big banks, who have held all the cards for far too long, is to stand our ground. There are many more of us than there are of them.

I'm not saying don't pay. It's a debt and should be paid, but predatory lenders need to be held accountable for their actions as well.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

9. Yeah! If enough of stand up and demand proof of who owns

the debt, these motherfuckers will have no choice but to negotiate.

[notadmblnd]

21. What I wonder, is how do you do that

I'm sure my mortgage has been sold. I face losing my home in April, I plan to approach them next month and tell them that my income is being decreased and if we can't work something out, they will be forced to foreclose.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

26. I would guess a lawyer would be helpful

Although my in my experience dealing with lawyers I've generally found that what they help most is themselves but I think you just refuse to move out and ask them to produce proof that the people who are trying to evict you actually hold the note on your property. Since most of the notes have been sold multiple times, that might not be an easy task for them. If that's the case, you suddenly have much more leverage in forcing them to negotiate new terms for you.

I think most people just fold and the lenders sure are not going to try to help them but if you refuse to just "shut up and sing" it will make them realize that your case will be much more difficult to deal with and it would be to their advantage to try to work something out. Fighting with you is going to cost them time, money and aggravation and they know that. You, on the other hand, have nothing to lose. They know that too and although it is to their advantage to stomp their feet and bluster, you are the one with the advantage.

In many cases dealing with rental units, I am aware that landlords will actually pay a tennant a substantial sum to vacate a property as it actually costs less in the long run than fighting the eviction. We may now be in a time where the same applies to foreclosures, especially if the proletariats educate themselves.

The problem with most homeowners is that they have worked hard and played by the rules all of their lives and have not spent their lives being screwed over by landlords so they don't know how to fight back. I think, now that they are starting to learn just how unscrupulous the greedy bastards really are, they may start learning how to play the system to their advantage for a change.

Good luck and let us know how it goes. If things don't improve, I may not be far behind you.
Peace
Bud

[Taverner]

17. Sometimes just plain ol' fucking with the man is the best thing to do

Just imagined if we formed Unemployment Councils like they did in the 30's, and got behind this?

Imagine if all of the unemployed worked together to protect evictees, moving the families back in right after an eviction?

If the banks can't produce the note - then the homes can become fully owned by the evitees

And the banks get hurt, with, given the bailout, isn't such a bad thing

[blondeatlast]

23. Self-delete. nt

[.... callchet ....]

8. Lets have a march and back that up.

[.... callchet ....]

10. Time again for "Jubilee" abolish all debts.

[shifting_sands]

12. Maybe

That's not a bad idea. During the Savings and Loan crisis (the last Reagan/Bush "let's steal their money mess" in the 80's) that's exactly what happened. No one knew who owned their home, they couldn't get any information and several people just stayed where they were. Some never had to pay, some had their mortgages greatly reduced, and some got money back. There were others that eventually had to leave, but they were going to have to leave anyway. The agency they set up to handle that mess, didn't know what they were doing, their was a lot of malfeasance and just out and out fraud by that government agency

[flvegan]

20. Squat nothing. Motion to Dismiss.

Failure to provide a chain of ownership of the note via public record (mortgage, chain of assignments to back up the stamps on the Note, etc) is grounds for a dismissal of the case (at least in Florida). Also, if the foreclosing atty and their client can't provide the Note, they'll add a Count to the Complaint to to restore the lost/destroyed Note along with a Lost Note Affidavit. This can also be fought (again, at least in Florida).

The law firms USED to just file the Complaint in the name of the last noteholder of record, but we all got wise to that and got cases tossed based on that lender NOT being the client of the law firm.

[blondeatlast]

25. There's already precedent:

Deutsche Bank got socked with this already:
http://iamfacingforeclosure.com/blog/2007/11/12/deutsche-bank-foreclosures-tossed-out-of-ohio-federal-court-they-own-nothing/

This preserves neighborhoods and property values as much as is possible in this market.

I say let them stay anyway as long as they maintain the house; the banks don't even really want them either at this point. Do I, as a traditional mortgage owner, resent it a little? Well, yes--but I resent seeing two homes on my block with walked-away-from mortgages fall to dust way more--and who knows when they will actually be foreclosed upon? It could take a year or more (nearby ones have).

Besides, I liked my next door neighbors.