ProPublica

Journalism in the Public Interest

Cancel

Is BofA’s Foreclosure Review Really Independent? You Be the Judge

Bank of America and federal regulators say the Independent Foreclosure Review is just that — independent. But documents and interviews indicate it’s not.

(File photo, Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty Images)

Late last year, the country's bank regulators launched a massive program to evaluate millions of foreclosure cases and compensate homeowners who fell victim to the banks' flawed or illegal practices. Regulators dubbed it the "Independent Foreclosure Review" to emphasize that the banks would not be making key decisions about loans they had made or serviced.

But a raft of evidence — internal Bank of America memos and emails obtained by ProPublica, interviews with two bank staff members who have worked on the review, and little-noticed documents released late last year by a federal banking regulator — throw the independence of the review into serious doubt. Together, they indicate that Bank of America — the financial giant with the largest number of homeowners eligible for the program — is performing much of the work itself.

The ultimate decision as to whether and how much a homeowner will be compensated is not made by Bank of America, the evidence shows, but is based largely on work that the bank itself performs. One current employee called that crucial judgment "only a matter of double checking" the bank's work.

Moreover, the bank gets a chance to challenge that key decision before it becomes final — an opportunity not given to homeowners.

Bank of America strongly objects to ProPublica's analysis. It insists that the independence of the review has never been compromised. It maintains that its role "has been and remains gathering documents." While it may discover "an error" in the course of that work, the bank says that an independent review conducted by an outside firm "is the sole and final basis" for determining whether homeowners have been harmed and how much compensation they merit.

A bank spokesman questioned ProPublica's fairness, writing that "there are no facts to support your claim. Yet it seems you have made a decision to move forward with a story based on speculation and a preconceived notion of this issue."

Bank of America's regulator, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), also maintained that the review was independent. After seeing the internal bank documents obtained by ProPublica, the OCC investigated, officials said. The OCC concluded that the documents, which include a memo sent by Bank of America executives to the hundreds of bank employees working on the Independent Foreclosure Review, are "incomplete and inaccurate," said Deputy Comptroller for Large Bank Supervision Morris Morgan.

But the documents and interviews tell a sharply different story, and the stakes are high. The maximum cash compensation a homeowner can win through the foreclosure review is $125,000. Regulators set different amounts for the various errors and abuses homeowners endured, and those distinctions can result in widely differing payments — for instance $15,000 instead of $125,000 for homeowners who suffered very similar abuses.

ProPublica provided the internal Bank of America documents to Sen. Robert Menendez, who chaired a congressional hearing overseeing the foreclosure reviews. He said, "Congress was led to believe that the consultants would be analyzing homeowner foreclosures completely independently of the Wall Street banks, but these memos raise serious questions as to whether that's true. If banks are trying to skew the results in their favor, regulators should stop that immediately."

The senator also said that regulators "should ensure that homeowners have the same opportunities banks do to influence and contest the findings of the foreclosure reviews."

The Document Trail

Federal regulators designed the program to work like this: Each of the big banks would hire an "independent consultant" to conduct reviews of the bank's foreclosure cases. To ensure that these consultants really were independent, the regulators had to approve them. In September 2011, Bank of America hired Promontory Financial Group to be its independent consultant.

Two months later, the OCC released the contract between Bank of America and Promontory. The 118-page document received little notice, but it clearly spells out that Promontory will make its decision only after reviewing the bank's own analysis of each homeowner's claim.

When a homeowner sends in a complaint about the way Bank of America handled his or her foreclosure, the contract states, the bank "will process the complaint and provide the complaint, supporting resolution documentation, report of its findings, and proposed resolution to Promontory for independent review and decision concerning the complaint at issue." Promontory, the contract continues, will then review the "complaints and claims, together with [Bank of America's] recommended resolution and supporting documentation, and provide a decision on the complaint."

Job ads posted in the fall of 2011 for "Foreclosure File Reviewer" positions at Bank of America reflect this scope of work. Among the job duties listed in one ad were "Complete Claim Review and perform Harm Evaluation according to Promontory/OCC definitions"; "If there was financial injury, determine the amount"; and "Perform final determination of Harm." The ads were posted by staffing companies, but the bank confirmed to ProPublica it was the ultimate employer.

An internal bank document created to train employees on their role in the reviews also describes a "claim review" process at the bank. Employees would be running tests on the files to see if there was "harm done to the customer as a result of faulty servicing."

Seven months after the review program had been underway, regulators released their plan for how homeowners would be compensated for abuses and errors. The bank's role then changed, the internal documents say.

A June 2012 internal memo from Bank of America executives to its employees working on the review says the bank will perform all analyses except the final determination of how much, if any, compensation the homeowner deserved.

The OCC has specified eight tests to evaluate whether a homeowner was harmed by a bank, ranging from wrongly rejecting attempts to win loan modifications to charging bogus fees. Bank of America would perform seven of these tests, the memo states, but the final test — the decision of what compensation the homeowner would receive — would be performed by Promontory.

The bank executives wrote that moving the final test over to Promontory would make the entire process more efficient. Bank of America would be able to devote more resources to its seven tests and especially "the highly complex and time consuming" test of whether the homeowner was correctly reviewed for a loan modification. The division of labor — with Bank of America analyzing the files for problems and Promontory deciding on the appropriate compensation based on those problems — meant that homeowners who qualified for compensation would get their checks sooner, they wrote.

The executives hailed the move as bolstering the integrity of the reviews. The change "ensures that harm and financial injury determinations are made solely by the Independent Consultant, further underscoring our commitment to the independence of the [Independent Foreclosure Review]."

Employees who have worked on Bank of America's foreclosure review told ProPublica the memo reflects what they've been hired to do: analyze homeowners' claims, not merely fetch documents for Promontory to analyze. Following a procedure set out by Promontory, they perform tests to see if the bank properly handled the loan. Their work, Bank of America training materials and managers told them, is crucial to the final decision of how much if any compensation homeowners will receive.

As for Promontory's role in making the final determination, a Bank of America employee said the widespread understanding among bank staff working on the review was that "it's only a matter of double-checking."

Bank of America appears to have far more employees working on the review than does Promontory. The bank's employees number about 1,750 according to a spokesman, while Promontory's contract for the review estimates it will need 469. Promontory declined to say how many staff are currently working on the review. Its contract estimated that roughly 290,000 files would need to be reviewed over about a year.

OCC deputy comptroller Morris said banks might have more staff for the reviews than the consultants because gathering all necessary documents can be time consuming.

The Bank of America memo also announced another change: the creation of a de facto appeals procedure for the bank. Designed in part "as a response" to Promontory deciding homeowner compensation, the bank would be adding an "Additional Information" unit, the executives wrote. The unit's job, an employee said, is to respond when Promontory finds that a homeowner deserves compensation by producing any evidence that the bank didn't commit the abuse or error.

In contrast, homeowners who file a complaint will have no opportunity to appeal the determination of whether they deserve compensation or not.

ProPublica asked Bank of America and Promontory to provide any additional internal documents that would shed more light on the roles played by the bank and Promontory. They declined to make any available.

The Bank Responds

Bank of America, Promontory, and the OCC all hotly disputed the idea that the bank's analysis plays any role in the final, all-important compensation decision. But their accounts changed over time, and sometimes contradicted each other as to why and whether Bank of America was analyzing the files rather than merely gathering documents and handing them over to Promontory.

Promontory spokeswoman Debra Cope said Bank of America's employees "are responsible only for the clerical work of assembling the documents and files." Promontory employees analyze the material assembled by Bank of America "independently with no involvement from [Bank of America]," she said. "We perform all the tests."

Initially, the OCC claimed Bank of America's reviews were mainly only for its own use. Morgan, the OCC official, said Bank of America "is free to do its own internal analysis of foreclosure files, but that has nothing to do with the Independent Foreclosure Review."

He went on to explain that the two main reasons a bank might run the tests on its own were to help it gather all necessary documents for the consultant's review and "to learn from and address errors it may have made."

Later, the OCC acknowledged that the results of the bank's own reviews are in fact communicated to the independent consultant. "The independent consultant may review the servicer's...findings, but will conduct its own review and draw its own conclusions," said OCC spokesman Bryan Hubbard.

Frahm, the Bank of America spokesman, said, the internal memo gave the wrong impression because it was intended only for bank employees. "Clearly, if this was something to be released externally, there would have been more context setting and even different word choice to ensure greater clarity."

He strenuously objected to the idea that Bank of America employees conduct any analysis of the files at all. "Bank of America employees conduct no file reviews, they only gather documents necessary to stage files for Promontory," he said.

He later acknowledged that as "part of this file staging process, the bank does inform Promontory if it appears an error was made," but that Promontory "performs their own analysis on each file and Promontory's analysis is the sole and final basis for outcomes."

With regard to the bank having a chance to contest the consultant's final determination of compensation, the Bank of America spokesman said the "Additional Information" unit's job is "to ensure all facts and documents were considered in the finding of financial injury and provided to Promontory for consideration."

The OCC said it was wrong to characterize the unit's work as an appeals opportunity for the bank. "[A]ll servicers have some form of additional information teams responsible for locating and providing all necessary information and documents to independent consultants so they can effectively conduct their reviews," said Hubbard. As for homeowners having no chance to contest the review's conclusions, he said homeowners who don't agree with the outcome of the reviews can still sue the bank, since they don't waive any legal rights by accepting whatever compensation is offered.

Government's Biggest Effort

Regulators created the Independent Foreclosure Review in the wake of the fall 2010 robo-signing scandal, in which it was revealed that banks had filed false affidavits in thousands of foreclosure cases. The foreclosure review would cover a range of bank errors and abuses, including botched handling of loan modifications and charging bogus fees. The program currently covers homeowners whose loans were serviced by fourteen U.S. banks and who were in foreclosure at any point during 2009 or 2010. At the end of 2011, about 4.4 million letters were mailed to potentially eligible homeowners inviting them to request a review.

The review is the government's largest effort to compensate victims of the crisis. The separate $25 billion legal settlement reached earlier this year between the federal government, state attorneys general, and five big banks included about $1.5 billion in payments to homeowners who lost their homes to foreclosure, but those payments, likely in the range of $1,500 to $2,000, will be the same for all homeowners who make a claim regardless of the circumstances.

In response to criticism that the payments were too small, federal officials pointed to the Independent Foreclosure Review as the best place for the victims of the worst abuses to be compensated. For example, HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan said at a February press conference announcing the settlement that the small payments were "always designed to sit in parallel" to the foreclosure review, where "a homeowner can come in, have their claims reviewed at the cost of the banks, and full compensation is made for the wrong at the cost of the banks."

But relatively few homeowners have chosen to participate in the Independent Foreclosure Review. As of late September, about 240,000 claims had been sent in, a response rate of about 5.5 percent, according to the OCC. Consumer advocates and the Government Accountability Office have faulted the "Request for Review" letters that regulators sent to homeowners as being confusing and difficult to understand.

From the launch of the Independent Foreclosure Review, critics, other bank regulators among them, have questioned its independence. In a new book, former chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Sheila Bair writes that she doubted the consultants could truly be independent, because they relied on the banks for a large amount of business: "Why would they conduct a thorough review that could end up costing the banks a lot of money to compensate past victims?"

Promontory has worked previously for Bank of America, but the number and nature of engagements are secret. In the company's contract with Bank of America for the foreclosure review, for instance, there's a page and a half of redacted text under the heading, "Promontory's Past Work with [Bank of America Corporation]." Promontory's spokeswoman said she couldn't comment on confidential client work. An article in The New York Times last year detailed one engagement: Promontory consulted on Bank of America's turnaround plan to cut jobs and costs called "Project New BAC."

Shown the internal Bank of America documents, Bair said they make it seem like her fears have been realized. "This raises new issues of whether the independent consultants are really doing the work or whether they're relying on the banks to do it. It's disheartening."

The crooked banks and the crooked politicans ...it just goes on and on… The NY AG… just another jokester, playing the game..
What about all the other banks ?  why just some of them ?
The amount of under water homes in NY far out weighs the rest…
Do not Vote for Obama,... unless you want the same thing for another
4 years….

Ooh, maybe Bank of America is gathering the documents using the same robot they used to fraudulently sign all those foreclosure notices!  It’s poetic and if you can’t trust a robot to be impartial…

Only a few, though.  Like, tens of thousands per day:

mcclatchydc.com/2012/03/14/141752/report-bank-of-america-wells-fargo.html

Incidentally, Bank of America’s response to this?  Well, they might have been delinquent on their bills, given the chance, basically:

reuters.com/article/2010/11/11/us-bankofamerica-robosigning-lawsuit-idUSTRE6AA4N020101111

(And at least they didn’t hire a pizza guy as a VP to expedite things like Wells-Fargo, right?)

And how can we question the OCC?  It’s not like they prevented the state Attorneys General from protecting consumers against the banks…

washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR2008021302783.html

OK, maybe “not” is a strong word, there, since that’s exactly what they did.  But Eliot Spitzer is the source, and he was scandalized long before he talked about this.

Did I say before?  I meant to say a few weeks AFTER.  The prostitution scandal broke on March 10th, and he resigned from office as governor a week later amid cries for impeachment from the New York legislators (but not the people).

But that’s all for a good cause, right?  He was busted with more than enough evidence to convict him, and—

Oh, hang on.  As Wikipedia notes, “...prosecutors in charge of the case announced that Spitzer would not face criminal charges for his involvement in the sex ring citing they found no evidence of misuse of public funds…”

Sounds totally legitimate to me!  Surely not a honeypot.

HENRY A. TURNER, ATTORNEY AT LAW

Oct. 11, 2012, 12:54 p.m.

The Banksters at work again with the able assistance of their reliable ally the OCC.

Peter, don’t blame Obama for this. GW Bush oversaw this fiasco. For the record you should also understand that the economic prosperity everyone associates with the Bush years was fueled by consumer spending on credit cards, repaid by home equity loans, then refinanced into mortgages. Despite economic indicators that wages were dropping and the middle class was shrinking throughout the Bush years,  Consumer/citizens were duped into borrowing against their future and spend their savings; the purchases they made on their credit cards or with the loan proceeds from a cash-out refinance allowed them to buy a new car, refrigerator, snow-mobile or whatnot, which made everyone feel like things were going well. That’s why we can’t ‘just go back’ to that prosperity of four years ago- it wasn’t prosperity and we’ve got nothing left to spend.

Judith McDonald

Oct. 11, 2012, 1:34 p.m.

Oh my God, finally someone gets it. I hung up on customer assistance group and wasted a year of my life waiting for review.  I was belittled as a 18 yr. resident a female said"she not going to give me a free house”, shocked.Bank of America is in bed with OCC.gov and I have the documents to prove this claim I make here.

I think PropUblica is great. However, sometimes your reporters should write sentences that don’t have to be deciphered. I’ll give you an example. The following was stated in the above article:

“The unit’s job, an employee said, is to respond when Promontory finds that a homeowner deserves compensation by producing any evidence that the bank didn’t commit the abuse or error.”

So who’s doing the “producing”, Promontory or BofA?

To make this intelligible, it shoud have been written thusly:

“When Promontory finds that a homeowner deserves compensation, the BofA unit’s job, according to an employee, is to respond by producing any evidence that the bank didn’t commit the abuse or error.”

That’s the way such a sentence should be written so that the average reader can easily grasp what is being written. The way it was written makes it confusing as to whom is producing what.

Well said, Prescott. Everyone would rather look for the scapegoat than the source.

Actually - we are the “source” of our own misery and I’m not talking about the houses or the banks - but the type of smiling, perfectly-coifed richie riches always on parade as “politicians” because the mindlessness ingrained in America is that money makes anyone perfectly qualified for any and everything. For posterity - a portrait of one of the richest countries in the world would reveal a majority that foams at the mouth about its superior education/“intelligence” - yet over and over parrots and elects politicians whose ignorant selfish rhetoric, inbred corruption, arrogance, greed and blatant lies are easily discoverable but excused - because we have somehow become addicted to howling in self-righteousness while cutting off our nose to spite our face. Heaven would be in stitches were the consequences not so despairing for the millions in this country who suffer yet are powerless to stop it. Americans should be ashamed to rant a banner of democracy as the excuse to invade any other country on earth because we are uncivilized and unaccountable for the sins we have championed as the “Amerian Way”.

The U.S. is now a hopeless cesspool of corruption and mindlessness that gets deeper by the day - perhaps it really is true - there’s no fool like an educated fool.

So many people/families ended up on the streets with these bank fraud and corruption. There are so many things that are hidden from general public. Wonder how many more shocking surprises to come in the pipeline. Banks get bailed out but public still pay out and never see a dime in return. Home ownership is never an investment anymore. New trend - Banks are buying real estate and creating competition with ordinary people and trying to raise the house prices. Be-careful!!!

just as some have mentioned here, the banks, the government, etc. rape it’s own people. it’s OK to be crooked IF u have bank/government POWER. but for the rest of us and esp. african americans it’s SO MUCH HARDER.

and for people who refuse to screw other people u hope for the best.

the government from Bush to Obama, REALLY butchered help for homeowners. this continues to haunt and slow the economy.

they can’t be THAT stupid. they’re simply paid off to ACT stupid.

like FOR-PROFIT prisons where the companies actually TELL the states and the feds that they have to provide a MINIMUM amount of prisoners!! one reason why drugs are still illegal.

THEY’VE SOLD US OUT!

Sold us out is right.

The OCC and government “banking regulators” are the handmaidens to the banks and Wall Street. $25 billion “settlement”, of which the people harmed [we ex-homeowners] get a shot at $1.5 billion?

Eric Schneiderman, N.Y. State AG, and Kamala Harris, California State AG were only holding out against the crappy “settlement” to up the ante! California took the whole amount and added it to their General Fund!

Don’t forget to vote on Nov. 6! Throw them ALL out! I’ll vote for a progressive, if I’m able to find one.

The only time the pols acknowledge our existence is at election time; after that, they go back to sucking up to Money.

Paul may want to look into who is one of the managing partners of Promontory Financial.  He just so happens to be an ex- deputy controller at OCC. I always found it funny that Promontory proposal to OCC just happens to be verbatim to the plan we sent to OCC four days after the release of the Consent order.
Promontory also was approved by OCC for two other banks contract under the Consent Order.  Nice to have connections.

It also does not surprise me that BofA a employee (single contact) still did not even know what Dual Tracking is.  The supervisor did not understand it. Even after I supplied my friend who is trying to get a mod with the Doc right out of the Consent Order BofA said that was only for people that are in a trail mod period.  Very sad.

Jordana Lipscomb

Oct. 11, 2012, 7:04 p.m.

I am glad you wrote this piece Paul. Excellent job uncovering the sham of Banksters of America. Next up, a companion piece uncovering of Wells F****o’s sham reviews, also using Promontory as its “independent reviewer.” Check Martin Andelman’s original work on this done back in March I believe on Mandelman Matters, former employee doing Well’s reviews and being told not to delve too deeply, not to find anything and to stop looking for errors. Seriously? Is this what it all comes to?

YUP!  More fraud from the government and the banks.  There will be no restitution provided to homeowner/borrowers.  That’s been made clear in the courts; county, state, federal, and bankruptcy judges all got the word that any assets related to the TARP payoffs will be confiscated regardless of their lack of claim to title for the homes.  This is your Department of the Treasury stealing these home with fraudulent and forged documents.  And the rule of law is now non-existent when it comes to contract and property rights.  We’re screwed.

(My apologies, in advance, to the ‘grammar police’.) 

Way to go Paul!!  Thank God there are people like you in this fight!  As a homeowner who has been going through this for over 7 years, I can’t thank you enough for all the hard work you do to see that the Banksters don’t win. There seems to be no limit to the despicable depths these ‘professionals’ will go to feed their insatiable greed. The regulators, the government, and the ‘Independent review’ company are ALL on the same side!  We have been conned, once again, into believing that our government actually cares about us, and wants to help. 

We send in our complaint, wrongly assuming this to be an ‘independent’ review, only to find that the bank gets the information??  Then, just like idiots, we believe the ‘independent review’ letter assuring us that these matters take time, and to be patient…Really?  It just gives the bank plenty of time to go back and ‘cover its a*#’ with additional fraudulent documents and figures. Then the bank/independent review/OCC can determine that the banks were not at fault for anything.  And, we, the homeowners have no say about any of it.  My, my, my. How conveeeenient!

Paul, your dedication and hard work are the only slivers of hope I have had lo’ these last 2600 + days.  I have begged for help from each and every government agency (Both Administrations) that could possibly do anything.  I have received absolutely NO HELP from any of them because they are all in it together…up to their eyeballs.  These banksters have committed multiple crimes against the citizens of this country for years, and, the government has looked the other way.  When forced by public opinion to punish them for their crimes, that ‘punishment’ amounts to nothing more than a tap on the wrist.  It is a huge insult to the thousands of homeowners who’s very lives have been decimated by these crimes of greed.  The fact that the ‘sheeple’ actually buy into these lies gives me great fear for our future.  When the criminals get to dictate their punishment, and police their own incarceration- how could Justice ever possibly be served?  Reminds me of Pablo Escobar being allowed to build his own ‘prison’, while continuing to run his mega cocaine cartel, and enjoying his palatial estate complete with hippos.

Every one of the homeowners who, like myself, have been duped into believing this to be a genuine offer of relief, need to make some noise- and lots of it. 

Thank you again Paul, for your tenacity and 5 star journalism.  You have renewed my resolve to see this through-no matter how long it takes.

May the good Lord give you strength and protection in your pursuit of the Truth. 

”During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
 George Orwell

“There are few better measures of the concern a society has for its individual members and its own well being than the way it handles criminals”
 Ramsey Clark

dictatorship
noun    (Concise Encyclopedia)
Form of government in which one person or an oligarchy possesses absolute power without effective constitutional checks. With constitutional democracy, it is one of the two chief forms of government in use today. Modern dictators usually use force or fraud to gain power and then keep it through intimidation, terror, suppression of civil liberties, and control of the mass media….

Well, guess the next thing for me to do is go back to working myself to death so I can pay the government up to 40% of what I make, allowing them to pay the banks to illegally steal my property…not..

(My apologies, in advance, to the ‘grammar police’.) 
Way to go Paul!!  Thank God there are people like you in this fight!  As a homeowner who has been going through this for over 7 years, I can’t thank you enough for all the hard work you do to see that the Banksters don’t win. There seems to be no limit to the despicable depths these ‘professionals’ will go to feed their insatiable greed. The regulators, the government, and the ‘Independent review’ company are ALL on the same side!!  We have been conned, once again, into believing that our government actually cares about us, and wants to help.  We send in our complaint, wrongly assuming this to be an ‘independent’ review, only to find that the bank gets the information??  Then, just like idiots, we believe the ‘independent review’ letter assuring us that these matters take time, and to be patient…Really?  It just gives the bank plenty of time to go back and ‘cover its a*#’ with additional fraudulent documents and figures. Then the bank/independent review/OCC can determine that the banks were not at fault for anything.  And, we, the homeowners have no say about any of it.  My, my, my. How conveeeenient!

Paul, your dedication and hard work are the only sliver of hope I have had lo’ these last 2600 + days.  I have begged for help from each and every government agency (Both Administrations) that could possibly do anything.  I have received absolutely NO HELP from any of them because they are all in it together…up to their eyeballs.  These banksters have committed multiple crimes against the citizens of this country for years, and, the government has looked the other way.  When forced by public opinion to punish them for their crimes, that ‘punishment’ amounts to nothing more than a tap on the wrist.  It is a huge insult to the thousands of homeowners who’s very lives have been decimated by these crimes of greed.  The fact that the ‘sheeple’ actually buy into these lies gives me great fear for our future.  When the criminals get to dictate their punishment, and police their own incarceration- how could Justice ever possibly be served?  Reminds me of Pablo Escobar being allowed to build his own ‘prison’, while continuing to run his mega cocaine cartel-enjoying a palatial estate complete with hippos.

Every one of the homeowners who, like myself, have been duped into believing this to be a genuine offer of relief, need to make some noise- and lots of it. 

Thank you again Paul, for your tenacity and 5 star journalism.  You have renewed my resolve to see this through-no matter how long it takes.

May the good Lord give you strength and protection in your pursuit of the Truth. 

”During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
 George Orwell

“There are few better measures of the concern a society has for its individual members and its own well being than the way it handles criminals”
 Ramsey Clark

dictatorship
noun    (Concise Encyclopedia)

Form of government in which one person or an oligarchy possesses absolute power without effective constitutional checks. With constitutional democracy, it is one of the two chief forms of government in use today. Modern dictators usually use force or fraud to gain power and then keep it through intimidation, terror, suppression of civil liberties, and control of the mass media….

Well, guess the next thing for me to do is go back to working myself to death so I can pay the government up to 40% of what I make, allowing them to pay the banks to illegally steal my property…not..

New word of the day PLEONEXIA
Pleonexia, being mentioned in the New Testament in Colossians 3 verses 1–11 and Luke 12 verses 13–21, has been the subject of commentary by Christian theologians.
William Barclay[5] describes pleonexia as an “accursed love of having”, which “will pursue its own interests with complete disregard for the rights of others, and even for the considerations of common humanity”. He labels it an aggressive vice that operates in three spheres of life. In the material sphere involves “grasping at money and goods, regardless of honour and honesty”. In the ethical sphere it is “the ambition which tramples on others to gain something which is not properly meant for it”. In the moral sphere, it is “the unbridled lust which takes its pleasure where it has no right to take”.
Christian belief equates pleonexia with idolatry, because it replaces God with self-interest and material interest in things

HERE COMES THE REVOLUTION.  I HOPE EVERY ONE IS READY.  PEOPLE ARE TIRED OF ALL THE CROOKS IN THE GOVERNMENT AND THE PEOPLE WHOM STEAL.  THERE IS A REVOLUTION COMING.  THE DAY A PERSON WHOM COMES UP FROM THE POOR AND MAKES IT RICH THROUGH HARD, HARD WORK EVERY DAY IS HERE AMERICA WILL NO LONGER BE A TWO PART AMERICA.  AMERICA IS DIVIDED.  IT IS REALLY SIMPLE IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO PAY THE TAXES, THE FEES AND EVERY THING ELSE THAT COMES WITH BEING RICH THEN DO NOT BECOME RICH.  STAY POOR AND YOU WILL NEVER HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE ABOVE ISSUES.  WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO OUR ROOTS THE BIBLE, THE BIBLE, THE BIBLE, WILL HELP US ALL.

The OCC was aware of my situation in July 2010, and closed the case 11/2011. March 2012 BofA failed to appear at the PJR hearing. I filed a complaint recently with the Consumer Financial Protective Bureau, in return a letter form BofA saying ......received my INQUIRY which was FORWARDED on my behalf by the CFPB .

This article is part of an ongoing investigation:
Foreclosure Crisis

Foreclosure Crisis: Banks and Government Fail Homeowners

Banks and the government have fallen short in helping homeowners in danger of foreclosure.

The Story So Far

Systemic failures at the country’s banks and mortgage servicers have exacerbated the most severe foreclosure crisis since the Great Depression, and government efforts to limit the damage have fallen short. ProPublica created an unrivaled database of homeowners who have faced foreclosure, opened a Facebook page to encourage homeowners to share their stories, wrote profiles of some of them, and incorporated their experiences into our reporting. We also provided a comprehensive rundown of the numbers behind the crisis.

More »

Get Updates

Stay on top of what we’re working on by subscribing to our email digest.

optional

Our Hottest Stories

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •