Foreclosure Issues Pose Risks, Should Be Resolved With Time
Summary
Recently, some issues surrounding foreclosure sale proceedings have come to the forefront, leading several large banks to halt foreclosure sale proceedings in many states. The purpose of this note is twofold: to clear up some confusion on what exactly the issues at hand are and to bring some perspective to those issues. For instance, we note that the “foreclosure issue” that we are addressing here is separate from considerations surrounding potential bank loan repurchases. After the JPMorgan Chase earnings call, in which the company announced increased repurchase reserves, the two issues seem to have been muddied.
With respect to the issues surrounding foreclosure sales, while there are some outstanding risks, we think the issues that can be definitively addressed suggest a resolution could be possible over a matter of months. While that resolution should involve time, effort, and cost, we do not believe it will result in a major long–term disruption to the housing or mortgage markets.
Background
The issues surrounding foreclosure sale proceedings were initially brought to light on September 17, when GMAC/Ally halted evictions and REO sales in 23 judicial foreclosure states. Since that time, GMAC has extended their review to all 50 states, and four other large banks have halted foreclosure sales or launched internal reviews of their foreclosure processes: Bank of America has halted foreclosure sales in 50 states, JPMorgan Chase in 41 states, PNC in 23 states, and Litton is reviewing proceedings. Wells Fargo has stated that they are reviewing all pending foreclosures, but not halting the process and are confident their processes are robust. Attorneys General from all 50 states announced Wednesday that they have formed the Mortgage Foreclosure Multistate Group to review some of the practices around foreclosures proceedings.
The “foreclosure issues” being discussed at this point seem to encompass a few distinct problems, which we think it is useful to break down: robo-signers, MERS, and trust transfers.
The Robo-Signer Issue
While judicial foreclosure proceedings vary from state to state depending on different laws, many involve the presentation of an “affidavit of debt” before the court, which certifies that an employee of the mortgage servicer is familiar with the mortgage and borrower under question. Across several servicers burdened with an increasing number of foreclosures, there were employees who allegedly signed large numbers of affidavits without “personal knowledge” of the stated information. In addition, some affidavits were not notarized at the time of affidavit signing. These deficiencies created became a problem when brought before judges.
Importantly, however, although these deficiencies introduce risk, the issue does not seem to be insurmountable. We believe that the likelihood for widespread outright forgiveness of debt in cases where affidavits were signed or attested improperly is low. The details behind resolving cases such as these are not clear from a legal standpoint, but they seem likely to be, in part, a matter of rectifying the affidavit, issues of time, effort, and cost. Similar issues exist for fixing faulty foreclosure processes from the start; it may be possible to solve the robo-signer issue by staffing up teams or via other efforts. While more costly, and likely to delay foreclosure processes a few to several months, again, in our view, the issues do not seem to be insurmountable.
The MERS Issue
A second issue that has arisen questions the validity of MERS, an electronic registration system for mortgages meant to simplify the process of transferring mortgage ownership. In the past, there have been court rulings in support of the MERS model, e.g. that holding title for the benefit of another party was valid or that foreclosure initiation in the name of MERS was valid. There have also been cases in which the model was not supported (e.g. Landmark v. Kessler in Kansas), but in most instances it seems those efforts have failed or been overturned. In the event the matters challenging MERS succeed, resolution seems to be a practical issue; while the process is unclear at this point, it may simply be a matter of assigning the mortgage from MERS to the foreclosing party in cases where foreclosure in the name of MERS is ruled against or of simply foreclosing in the name of the bank instead of in the name of MERS. There has been at least one case (U.S. Bank v. Ibanez) in Massachusetts, which calls into question the separation of legal and beneficial title holding, similar to that used in the MERS model. That case is currently under appeal.
In addition, there also seems to be some misinformation about the MERS system itself and whether some banks are utilizing it or not. MERS put out a press release yesterday to address some of these concerns, citing the fact that Chase registers their correspondent loans in MERS, but does not register their retail loans.
The Trust Transfer Issue
A third issue that has arisen concerns the validity of the trust as the owner of the mortgage for loans that have been securitized. When the note is transferred to a trust, it is endorsed “in blank”, meaning that the owner of the note is not assigned. The note is only endorsed to the trustee or servicer on behalf of the trust if they need to institute foreclosure proceedings. Our understanding is that this is a common practice when notes are transferred to a trust. With respect to physical documents, those are delivered and held by the designated custodian for the trust. Both the seller and the custodian should have verified the existence and validity of the notes upon transfer. If there were any deficiencies, the custodian should have notified the seller to remedy any deficiencies or if they could not be remedied, put the loan back to the seller. The transfer of the notes is governed by the loan purchase agreement which also provides for evidence of ownership of the loans by the trust. Also, when the notes are transferred, the servicer records the ownership of the loans with MERS.
The Risks
The primary risk in our view is not that the affidavits issue remains unresolved, but how much time and effort the resolution will take and how far the scope of investigations expands beyond this issue. As mentioned, the Attorneys General from each state have formed a task force to look into the affidavit matter to determine if they were processed correctly under state laws. However, given that AGs from non-judicial states have joined the task force, the scope of their investigation may expand beyond this issue and lengthen the timeframe for resolution. Complicating matters is that servicers have to abide by individual state regulations with respect to foreclosure processing.
In the end, we believe that the vast majority of foreclosures will stand assuming that the actions were taken against borrowers who were delinquent. However, the end result will likely be a further extension of foreclosure timelines. We believe that the incremental increase in loss severity should be minimal if these issues can be resolved in the next 3-6 months. For servicers this means additional staffing requirements as well as increased costs. With respect to investors, headline risk will remain the predominant near term concern. Additionally, the allocation of additional costs due to advancing and legal fees will have to worked out. We do believe that the tenets of securitization, MERS, extensive legal foundation that has been established over the last 30 years, and REMIC eligibility will stand.
In other words: all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well.
This morning we've received a lot of questions over MetLife mortgage servicing operations. The below table provided by SNL helps put the issue into perspective -- as of June 30, MetLife currently has $1.5 Bn mortgages that it services for others that are in foreclosure. Given the size of these operations versus other financial institutions, we do not believe it is of sufficient size relative to the total organization to impact the fundamental outlook, although it remains a topic which we will continue to closely monitor. We have also included below the text from the Moody's rating action, which highlights the concerns over the foreclosure actions for your review.
New York, October 14, 2010 -- Moody's has placed on review for possible downgrade MetLife Home Loans' Servicer Quality ("SQ") Rating of SQ2- as a primary servicer of prime residential mortgage loans. Additionally, Moody's has lowered the timeline assessment to average from above average.
The rating action is due to irregularities in MetLife Home Loans' foreclosure processes, specifically that employees signing affidavits did not have full personal knowledge of every item in the affidavit. Additionally, MetLife Home Loans temporarily postponed foreclosure sales in some states. According to MetLife Home Loans, refiling affidavits, if necessary, would be completed by November. The foreclosure process irregularities and postponing of foreclosure sales could result in delayed foreclosures and longer REO timelines. The review for possible downgrade considers that the irregularities in foreclosure processes could result in legal challenges to previously completed foreclosures and reputational risk for the servicing operation. During the review period, Moody's will primarily focus on determining the increase to foreclosure and REO timelines and the effectiveness of any new procedures, if applicable. Furthermore, we will review MetLife Home Loans' quality control processes and the oversight of the foreclosure document execution department.
MetLife Home Loans is a division of MetLife Bank N.A., a wholly owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. MetLife Inc. is rated A3, on negative outlook by Moody's. MetLife Home Loans' servicing operations are located in Irving, Texas.
robert shumake twitter
The openSUSE Build Service 2.1 released - openSUSE <b>News</b>
This iteration has enhanced the web user interface of openSUSE Build Service with features that were previously only in the osc command line client. It now allows submitting of packages to other projects, showing a history of changes ...
Virginia Thomas Leaves Anita Hill a Voicemail Asking for An <b>...</b>
A few days ago, Brandeis University professor Anita Hill received a message on her voice mail at work. Political Punch Blog.
UT <b>News</b> » College of Business and Innovation featured in Princeton <b>...</b>
UT College of Business and Innovation faculty, staff, students and graduates were on top of the world — and on top of the Savage & Associates Complex for Business Learning and Engagement — celebrating the news that the college again was ...
robert shumake twitter
Foreclosure Issues Pose Risks, Should Be Resolved With Time
Summary
Recently, some issues surrounding foreclosure sale proceedings have come to the forefront, leading several large banks to halt foreclosure sale proceedings in many states. The purpose of this note is twofold: to clear up some confusion on what exactly the issues at hand are and to bring some perspective to those issues. For instance, we note that the “foreclosure issue” that we are addressing here is separate from considerations surrounding potential bank loan repurchases. After the JPMorgan Chase earnings call, in which the company announced increased repurchase reserves, the two issues seem to have been muddied.
With respect to the issues surrounding foreclosure sales, while there are some outstanding risks, we think the issues that can be definitively addressed suggest a resolution could be possible over a matter of months. While that resolution should involve time, effort, and cost, we do not believe it will result in a major long–term disruption to the housing or mortgage markets.
Background
The issues surrounding foreclosure sale proceedings were initially brought to light on September 17, when GMAC/Ally halted evictions and REO sales in 23 judicial foreclosure states. Since that time, GMAC has extended their review to all 50 states, and four other large banks have halted foreclosure sales or launched internal reviews of their foreclosure processes: Bank of America has halted foreclosure sales in 50 states, JPMorgan Chase in 41 states, PNC in 23 states, and Litton is reviewing proceedings. Wells Fargo has stated that they are reviewing all pending foreclosures, but not halting the process and are confident their processes are robust. Attorneys General from all 50 states announced Wednesday that they have formed the Mortgage Foreclosure Multistate Group to review some of the practices around foreclosures proceedings.
The “foreclosure issues” being discussed at this point seem to encompass a few distinct problems, which we think it is useful to break down: robo-signers, MERS, and trust transfers.
The Robo-Signer Issue
While judicial foreclosure proceedings vary from state to state depending on different laws, many involve the presentation of an “affidavit of debt” before the court, which certifies that an employee of the mortgage servicer is familiar with the mortgage and borrower under question. Across several servicers burdened with an increasing number of foreclosures, there were employees who allegedly signed large numbers of affidavits without “personal knowledge” of the stated information. In addition, some affidavits were not notarized at the time of affidavit signing. These deficiencies created became a problem when brought before judges.
Importantly, however, although these deficiencies introduce risk, the issue does not seem to be insurmountable. We believe that the likelihood for widespread outright forgiveness of debt in cases where affidavits were signed or attested improperly is low. The details behind resolving cases such as these are not clear from a legal standpoint, but they seem likely to be, in part, a matter of rectifying the affidavit, issues of time, effort, and cost. Similar issues exist for fixing faulty foreclosure processes from the start; it may be possible to solve the robo-signer issue by staffing up teams or via other efforts. While more costly, and likely to delay foreclosure processes a few to several months, again, in our view, the issues do not seem to be insurmountable.
The MERS Issue
A second issue that has arisen questions the validity of MERS, an electronic registration system for mortgages meant to simplify the process of transferring mortgage ownership. In the past, there have been court rulings in support of the MERS model, e.g. that holding title for the benefit of another party was valid or that foreclosure initiation in the name of MERS was valid. There have also been cases in which the model was not supported (e.g. Landmark v. Kessler in Kansas), but in most instances it seems those efforts have failed or been overturned. In the event the matters challenging MERS succeed, resolution seems to be a practical issue; while the process is unclear at this point, it may simply be a matter of assigning the mortgage from MERS to the foreclosing party in cases where foreclosure in the name of MERS is ruled against or of simply foreclosing in the name of the bank instead of in the name of MERS. There has been at least one case (U.S. Bank v. Ibanez) in Massachusetts, which calls into question the separation of legal and beneficial title holding, similar to that used in the MERS model. That case is currently under appeal.
In addition, there also seems to be some misinformation about the MERS system itself and whether some banks are utilizing it or not. MERS put out a press release yesterday to address some of these concerns, citing the fact that Chase registers their correspondent loans in MERS, but does not register their retail loans.
The Trust Transfer Issue
A third issue that has arisen concerns the validity of the trust as the owner of the mortgage for loans that have been securitized. When the note is transferred to a trust, it is endorsed “in blank”, meaning that the owner of the note is not assigned. The note is only endorsed to the trustee or servicer on behalf of the trust if they need to institute foreclosure proceedings. Our understanding is that this is a common practice when notes are transferred to a trust. With respect to physical documents, those are delivered and held by the designated custodian for the trust. Both the seller and the custodian should have verified the existence and validity of the notes upon transfer. If there were any deficiencies, the custodian should have notified the seller to remedy any deficiencies or if they could not be remedied, put the loan back to the seller. The transfer of the notes is governed by the loan purchase agreement which also provides for evidence of ownership of the loans by the trust. Also, when the notes are transferred, the servicer records the ownership of the loans with MERS.
The Risks
The primary risk in our view is not that the affidavits issue remains unresolved, but how much time and effort the resolution will take and how far the scope of investigations expands beyond this issue. As mentioned, the Attorneys General from each state have formed a task force to look into the affidavit matter to determine if they were processed correctly under state laws. However, given that AGs from non-judicial states have joined the task force, the scope of their investigation may expand beyond this issue and lengthen the timeframe for resolution. Complicating matters is that servicers have to abide by individual state regulations with respect to foreclosure processing.
In the end, we believe that the vast majority of foreclosures will stand assuming that the actions were taken against borrowers who were delinquent. However, the end result will likely be a further extension of foreclosure timelines. We believe that the incremental increase in loss severity should be minimal if these issues can be resolved in the next 3-6 months. For servicers this means additional staffing requirements as well as increased costs. With respect to investors, headline risk will remain the predominant near term concern. Additionally, the allocation of additional costs due to advancing and legal fees will have to worked out. We do believe that the tenets of securitization, MERS, extensive legal foundation that has been established over the last 30 years, and REMIC eligibility will stand.
In other words: all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well.
This morning we've received a lot of questions over MetLife mortgage servicing operations. The below table provided by SNL helps put the issue into perspective -- as of June 30, MetLife currently has $1.5 Bn mortgages that it services for others that are in foreclosure. Given the size of these operations versus other financial institutions, we do not believe it is of sufficient size relative to the total organization to impact the fundamental outlook, although it remains a topic which we will continue to closely monitor. We have also included below the text from the Moody's rating action, which highlights the concerns over the foreclosure actions for your review.
New York, October 14, 2010 -- Moody's has placed on review for possible downgrade MetLife Home Loans' Servicer Quality ("SQ") Rating of SQ2- as a primary servicer of prime residential mortgage loans. Additionally, Moody's has lowered the timeline assessment to average from above average.
The rating action is due to irregularities in MetLife Home Loans' foreclosure processes, specifically that employees signing affidavits did not have full personal knowledge of every item in the affidavit. Additionally, MetLife Home Loans temporarily postponed foreclosure sales in some states. According to MetLife Home Loans, refiling affidavits, if necessary, would be completed by November. The foreclosure process irregularities and postponing of foreclosure sales could result in delayed foreclosures and longer REO timelines. The review for possible downgrade considers that the irregularities in foreclosure processes could result in legal challenges to previously completed foreclosures and reputational risk for the servicing operation. During the review period, Moody's will primarily focus on determining the increase to foreclosure and REO timelines and the effectiveness of any new procedures, if applicable. Furthermore, we will review MetLife Home Loans' quality control processes and the oversight of the foreclosure document execution department.
MetLife Home Loans is a division of MetLife Bank N.A., a wholly owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. MetLife Inc. is rated A3, on negative outlook by Moody's. MetLife Home Loans' servicing operations are located in Irving, Texas.
bench craft company reviews
The openSUSE Build Service 2.1 released - openSUSE <b>News</b>
This iteration has enhanced the web user interface of openSUSE Build Service with features that were previously only in the osc command line client. It now allows submitting of packages to other projects, showing a history of changes ...
Virginia Thomas Leaves Anita Hill a Voicemail Asking for An <b>...</b>
A few days ago, Brandeis University professor Anita Hill received a message on her voice mail at work. Political Punch Blog.
UT <b>News</b> » College of Business and Innovation featured in Princeton <b>...</b>
UT College of Business and Innovation faculty, staff, students and graduates were on top of the world — and on top of the Savage & Associates Complex for Business Learning and Engagement — celebrating the news that the college again was ...
robert shumake hall of shame
robert shumake hall of shame
robert shumake detroit
The openSUSE Build Service 2.1 released - openSUSE <b>News</b>
This iteration has enhanced the web user interface of openSUSE Build Service with features that were previously only in the osc command line client. It now allows submitting of packages to other projects, showing a history of changes ...
Virginia Thomas Leaves Anita Hill a Voicemail Asking for An <b>...</b>
A few days ago, Brandeis University professor Anita Hill received a message on her voice mail at work. Political Punch Blog.
UT <b>News</b> » College of Business and Innovation featured in Princeton <b>...</b>
UT College of Business and Innovation faculty, staff, students and graduates were on top of the world — and on top of the Savage & Associates Complex for Business Learning and Engagement — celebrating the news that the college again was ...
robert shumake hall of shame
Foreclosure Issues Pose Risks, Should Be Resolved With Time
Summary
Recently, some issues surrounding foreclosure sale proceedings have come to the forefront, leading several large banks to halt foreclosure sale proceedings in many states. The purpose of this note is twofold: to clear up some confusion on what exactly the issues at hand are and to bring some perspective to those issues. For instance, we note that the “foreclosure issue” that we are addressing here is separate from considerations surrounding potential bank loan repurchases. After the JPMorgan Chase earnings call, in which the company announced increased repurchase reserves, the two issues seem to have been muddied.
With respect to the issues surrounding foreclosure sales, while there are some outstanding risks, we think the issues that can be definitively addressed suggest a resolution could be possible over a matter of months. While that resolution should involve time, effort, and cost, we do not believe it will result in a major long–term disruption to the housing or mortgage markets.
Background
The issues surrounding foreclosure sale proceedings were initially brought to light on September 17, when GMAC/Ally halted evictions and REO sales in 23 judicial foreclosure states. Since that time, GMAC has extended their review to all 50 states, and four other large banks have halted foreclosure sales or launched internal reviews of their foreclosure processes: Bank of America has halted foreclosure sales in 50 states, JPMorgan Chase in 41 states, PNC in 23 states, and Litton is reviewing proceedings. Wells Fargo has stated that they are reviewing all pending foreclosures, but not halting the process and are confident their processes are robust. Attorneys General from all 50 states announced Wednesday that they have formed the Mortgage Foreclosure Multistate Group to review some of the practices around foreclosures proceedings.
The “foreclosure issues” being discussed at this point seem to encompass a few distinct problems, which we think it is useful to break down: robo-signers, MERS, and trust transfers.
The Robo-Signer Issue
While judicial foreclosure proceedings vary from state to state depending on different laws, many involve the presentation of an “affidavit of debt” before the court, which certifies that an employee of the mortgage servicer is familiar with the mortgage and borrower under question. Across several servicers burdened with an increasing number of foreclosures, there were employees who allegedly signed large numbers of affidavits without “personal knowledge” of the stated information. In addition, some affidavits were not notarized at the time of affidavit signing. These deficiencies created became a problem when brought before judges.
Importantly, however, although these deficiencies introduce risk, the issue does not seem to be insurmountable. We believe that the likelihood for widespread outright forgiveness of debt in cases where affidavits were signed or attested improperly is low. The details behind resolving cases such as these are not clear from a legal standpoint, but they seem likely to be, in part, a matter of rectifying the affidavit, issues of time, effort, and cost. Similar issues exist for fixing faulty foreclosure processes from the start; it may be possible to solve the robo-signer issue by staffing up teams or via other efforts. While more costly, and likely to delay foreclosure processes a few to several months, again, in our view, the issues do not seem to be insurmountable.
The MERS Issue
A second issue that has arisen questions the validity of MERS, an electronic registration system for mortgages meant to simplify the process of transferring mortgage ownership. In the past, there have been court rulings in support of the MERS model, e.g. that holding title for the benefit of another party was valid or that foreclosure initiation in the name of MERS was valid. There have also been cases in which the model was not supported (e.g. Landmark v. Kessler in Kansas), but in most instances it seems those efforts have failed or been overturned. In the event the matters challenging MERS succeed, resolution seems to be a practical issue; while the process is unclear at this point, it may simply be a matter of assigning the mortgage from MERS to the foreclosing party in cases where foreclosure in the name of MERS is ruled against or of simply foreclosing in the name of the bank instead of in the name of MERS. There has been at least one case (U.S. Bank v. Ibanez) in Massachusetts, which calls into question the separation of legal and beneficial title holding, similar to that used in the MERS model. That case is currently under appeal.
In addition, there also seems to be some misinformation about the MERS system itself and whether some banks are utilizing it or not. MERS put out a press release yesterday to address some of these concerns, citing the fact that Chase registers their correspondent loans in MERS, but does not register their retail loans.
The Trust Transfer Issue
A third issue that has arisen concerns the validity of the trust as the owner of the mortgage for loans that have been securitized. When the note is transferred to a trust, it is endorsed “in blank”, meaning that the owner of the note is not assigned. The note is only endorsed to the trustee or servicer on behalf of the trust if they need to institute foreclosure proceedings. Our understanding is that this is a common practice when notes are transferred to a trust. With respect to physical documents, those are delivered and held by the designated custodian for the trust. Both the seller and the custodian should have verified the existence and validity of the notes upon transfer. If there were any deficiencies, the custodian should have notified the seller to remedy any deficiencies or if they could not be remedied, put the loan back to the seller. The transfer of the notes is governed by the loan purchase agreement which also provides for evidence of ownership of the loans by the trust. Also, when the notes are transferred, the servicer records the ownership of the loans with MERS.
The Risks
The primary risk in our view is not that the affidavits issue remains unresolved, but how much time and effort the resolution will take and how far the scope of investigations expands beyond this issue. As mentioned, the Attorneys General from each state have formed a task force to look into the affidavit matter to determine if they were processed correctly under state laws. However, given that AGs from non-judicial states have joined the task force, the scope of their investigation may expand beyond this issue and lengthen the timeframe for resolution. Complicating matters is that servicers have to abide by individual state regulations with respect to foreclosure processing.
In the end, we believe that the vast majority of foreclosures will stand assuming that the actions were taken against borrowers who were delinquent. However, the end result will likely be a further extension of foreclosure timelines. We believe that the incremental increase in loss severity should be minimal if these issues can be resolved in the next 3-6 months. For servicers this means additional staffing requirements as well as increased costs. With respect to investors, headline risk will remain the predominant near term concern. Additionally, the allocation of additional costs due to advancing and legal fees will have to worked out. We do believe that the tenets of securitization, MERS, extensive legal foundation that has been established over the last 30 years, and REMIC eligibility will stand.
In other words: all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well.
This morning we've received a lot of questions over MetLife mortgage servicing operations. The below table provided by SNL helps put the issue into perspective -- as of June 30, MetLife currently has $1.5 Bn mortgages that it services for others that are in foreclosure. Given the size of these operations versus other financial institutions, we do not believe it is of sufficient size relative to the total organization to impact the fundamental outlook, although it remains a topic which we will continue to closely monitor. We have also included below the text from the Moody's rating action, which highlights the concerns over the foreclosure actions for your review.
New York, October 14, 2010 -- Moody's has placed on review for possible downgrade MetLife Home Loans' Servicer Quality ("SQ") Rating of SQ2- as a primary servicer of prime residential mortgage loans. Additionally, Moody's has lowered the timeline assessment to average from above average.
The rating action is due to irregularities in MetLife Home Loans' foreclosure processes, specifically that employees signing affidavits did not have full personal knowledge of every item in the affidavit. Additionally, MetLife Home Loans temporarily postponed foreclosure sales in some states. According to MetLife Home Loans, refiling affidavits, if necessary, would be completed by November. The foreclosure process irregularities and postponing of foreclosure sales could result in delayed foreclosures and longer REO timelines. The review for possible downgrade considers that the irregularities in foreclosure processes could result in legal challenges to previously completed foreclosures and reputational risk for the servicing operation. During the review period, Moody's will primarily focus on determining the increase to foreclosure and REO timelines and the effectiveness of any new procedures, if applicable. Furthermore, we will review MetLife Home Loans' quality control processes and the oversight of the foreclosure document execution department.
MetLife Home Loans is a division of MetLife Bank N.A., a wholly owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. MetLife Inc. is rated A3, on negative outlook by Moody's. MetLife Home Loans' servicing operations are located in Irving, Texas.
robert shumake hall of shame
robert shumake detroit
The openSUSE Build Service 2.1 released - openSUSE <b>News</b>
This iteration has enhanced the web user interface of openSUSE Build Service with features that were previously only in the osc command line client. It now allows submitting of packages to other projects, showing a history of changes ...
Virginia Thomas Leaves Anita Hill a Voicemail Asking for An <b>...</b>
A few days ago, Brandeis University professor Anita Hill received a message on her voice mail at work. Political Punch Blog.
UT <b>News</b> » College of Business and Innovation featured in Princeton <b>...</b>
UT College of Business and Innovation faculty, staff, students and graduates were on top of the world — and on top of the Savage & Associates Complex for Business Learning and Engagement — celebrating the news that the college again was ...
robert shumake twitter
robert shumake twitter
The openSUSE Build Service 2.1 released - openSUSE <b>News</b>
This iteration has enhanced the web user interface of openSUSE Build Service with features that were previously only in the osc command line client. It now allows submitting of packages to other projects, showing a history of changes ...
Virginia Thomas Leaves Anita Hill a Voicemail Asking for An <b>...</b>
A few days ago, Brandeis University professor Anita Hill received a message on her voice mail at work. Political Punch Blog.
UT <b>News</b> » College of Business and Innovation featured in Princeton <b>...</b>
UT College of Business and Innovation faculty, staff, students and graduates were on top of the world — and on top of the Savage & Associates Complex for Business Learning and Engagement — celebrating the news that the college again was ...
robert shumake twitter
The openSUSE Build Service 2.1 released - openSUSE <b>News</b>
This iteration has enhanced the web user interface of openSUSE Build Service with features that were previously only in the osc command line client. It now allows submitting of packages to other projects, showing a history of changes ...
Virginia Thomas Leaves Anita Hill a Voicemail Asking for An <b>...</b>
A few days ago, Brandeis University professor Anita Hill received a message on her voice mail at work. Political Punch Blog.
UT <b>News</b> » College of Business and Innovation featured in Princeton <b>...</b>
UT College of Business and Innovation faculty, staff, students and graduates were on top of the world — and on top of the Savage & Associates Complex for Business Learning and Engagement — celebrating the news that the college again was ...
robert shumake hall of shame
The openSUSE Build Service 2.1 released - openSUSE <b>News</b>
This iteration has enhanced the web user interface of openSUSE Build Service with features that were previously only in the osc command line client. It now allows submitting of packages to other projects, showing a history of changes ...
Virginia Thomas Leaves Anita Hill a Voicemail Asking for An <b>...</b>
A few days ago, Brandeis University professor Anita Hill received a message on her voice mail at work. Political Punch Blog.
UT <b>News</b> » College of Business and Innovation featured in Princeton <b>...</b>
UT College of Business and Innovation faculty, staff, students and graduates were on top of the world — and on top of the Savage & Associates Complex for Business Learning and Engagement — celebrating the news that the college again was ...
how to lose weight fast robert shumake twitter
robert shumake detroit
robert shumake hall of shame
robert shumake twitter
The openSUSE Build Service 2.1 released - openSUSE <b>News</b>
This iteration has enhanced the web user interface of openSUSE Build Service with features that were previously only in the osc command line client. It now allows submitting of packages to other projects, showing a history of changes ...
Virginia Thomas Leaves Anita Hill a Voicemail Asking for An <b>...</b>
A few days ago, Brandeis University professor Anita Hill received a message on her voice mail at work. Political Punch Blog.
UT <b>News</b> » College of Business and Innovation featured in Princeton <b>...</b>
UT College of Business and Innovation faculty, staff, students and graduates were on top of the world — and on top of the Savage & Associates Complex for Business Learning and Engagement — celebrating the news that the college again was ...
robert shumake detroit
In this terrible market of foreclosed homes across the world, I have truly experienced this disaster, first hand. It started 4 years ago when my husband and I saw a home we wanted to purchase and the real estate agent saying "I will get you into this home". Boy, he was not lying. After approximately 1 week, we were sitting at the table closing. We had told him upfront what we wanted to pay, before we knew it we had to have two loans taken out on the home. The first was an A.R.M. and the second, a balloon note. All we knew is we would have two years before the first would adjust the interest rate. We were so excited to get the home, we signed away, page, after page, after page. We had four boys so we had to provide them a home.
Two years went by and we were enjoying living in "our home".. We received our first rate increase of $300. WOW! This was going to be hard to make, considering our wages sure didn't increase, but every thing else around us did. We didn't know how we were going to make ends meet, all we knew is, we were going to work as hard as we can as fast as we can and try to make ends meet. Every 6 months thereafter, we received a notice saying our mortgage payment was going up, we were "robbing peter to pay paul", you know what I am talking about. The fourth year our mortgage had increased by $700.00. We knew we no longer could afford our home. I made every attempt, every day, sometimes two times a day to try and contact someone from the mortgage company. We didn't matter to them, we were just an"account number to them"..... They were not willing to work out any deals with us. After all attempts of researching and trying to find help, we were forced to foreclose on our home. We began searching for somewhere else to live with our boys and our pets. We started receiving notices in the mail about the foreclosure process.. We didn't want to stay in the house and be evicted like so many others. We actually were offered a "cash for keys" deal, so basically, if we throw all our trash away and leave the home in "broom swept" clean condition, they would give us some money. We found a place to live and are all happy but still trying to cope with the whirlwind of events that took place in our lives the past year.
I have convinced my husband that it is truly not the house that makes a happy home, it is who is inside the house that makes the house a happy home. I believe when you can make it through hard times, it is not how hard you have fallen, it is how you get up. :0)
robert shumake hall of shame
The openSUSE Build Service 2.1 released - openSUSE <b>News</b>
This iteration has enhanced the web user interface of openSUSE Build Service with features that were previously only in the osc command line client. It now allows submitting of packages to other projects, showing a history of changes ...
Virginia Thomas Leaves Anita Hill a Voicemail Asking for An <b>...</b>
A few days ago, Brandeis University professor Anita Hill received a message on her voice mail at work. Political Punch Blog.
UT <b>News</b> » College of Business and Innovation featured in Princeton <b>...</b>
UT College of Business and Innovation faculty, staff, students and graduates were on top of the world — and on top of the Savage & Associates Complex for Business Learning and Engagement — celebrating the news that the college again was ...
robert shumake detroit
The openSUSE Build Service 2.1 released - openSUSE <b>News</b>
This iteration has enhanced the web user interface of openSUSE Build Service with features that were previously only in the osc command line client. It now allows submitting of packages to other projects, showing a history of changes ...
Virginia Thomas Leaves Anita Hill a Voicemail Asking for An <b>...</b>
A few days ago, Brandeis University professor Anita Hill received a message on her voice mail at work. Political Punch Blog.
UT <b>News</b> » College of Business and Innovation featured in Princeton <b>...</b>
UT College of Business and Innovation faculty, staff, students and graduates were on top of the world — and on top of the Savage & Associates Complex for Business Learning and Engagement — celebrating the news that the college again was ...
No comments:
Post a Comment