Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Said To Their Bank: “Show Me The Note, Motherf-cker!”



October 18, 2010 – Comments (13)

Gonzalo Lira writes another great post here:

Brian and Ilsa tried complaining about the unfairness of the situation, but once again, they were given the runaround.  

Then, they and I both discovered that a lot of the people who were initially said to qualify for HAMP in fact did not qualify—they were added to the program so that banks and servicers could collect Federal government bonuses, then bumped off the program once their three-month “trial mod” was over. 
It didn’t matter if they qualified or not—it was all just some sort of sick game with these people, done so that they could get some of that Federal government bonus money. The proof of this was the undisputed testimony of a whistleblower—whose testimony was of course ignored by the mainstream media. 
After all this heartbreak and frustration—and fear—Brian and Ilsa had reached the end of their tether: Ilsa had said, essentially, F-ckit, and was urging her husband Brian for them to strategically default. Brian was wavering, though he was as equally outraged as his wife. 
The point of my piece was, If and when solid upstanding middle-class people such as Brian and Ilsa ever do throw in the towel and let out a collective F-ckit, then it’s curtains for the American Republic: You cannot have a viable society where the backbone of the country thinks that following the rules and the law is for suckers and chumps.  

With the facts of their story in hand, I went off and wrote up my piece, posted it—and watched as it garnered 50,000 hits in a matter of days—over 70,000 hits as of today, eleven days later—and it’s still going strong.

the rest is here


13 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On October 18, 2010 at 10:34 PM, alstry (< 20) wrote:

How hard was this to is the natural consequence of Zombulation......

Report this comment
#2) On October 18, 2010 at 10:38 PM, angusthermopylae (39.27) wrote:


Crap!  I just finished posting my own, teeny-tiny article about this, then come across I feel like I should have metaphorically (editorially?) tried to rip a bigger piece of the banks assets.

Good article...the next fiew years ought to be pretty a coloseum sort of way.

Report this comment
#3) On October 18, 2010 at 11:26 PM, nuf2bdangrus (< 20) wrote:

The Fed and Treasury, by bailing out repeatedly the banksters, had created a silent rage in the public.  When the public decides obeying the law is indeed  only for chumps, then the ultimate moral hazard has been realised.  I await that golden day, and have done my part. 

Report this comment
#4) On October 18, 2010 at 11:32 PM, sawchain (< 20) wrote:

Strategic default is a crime.  Moral hazard is a crime.

Borrowers who don't repay their debts are tearing our economy to shreds.  Lenders who provide credit to those who cannot pay are tearing our economy to shreds.  They're screwing the world up for honest folks who (apparently naively) believe they're supposed to uphold their end of a bargain.

We see waste-of-skin borrowers destroying perfectly good homes like this.  And we see waste-of-skin lenders destroying a reasonably good legal system like this.

A comeuppance is in order.

Report this comment
#5) On October 19, 2010 at 1:40 AM, BearishKW (< 20) wrote:

I think people who preach strategic defaulting as a great "business decision" are disfunctional and have absolutely no idea of what drives the average American family. 

Somewhere in between the baby boom and this latest bubble burst, a ton of rich people's kids were created.  In an effort to never have to work again they became over leveraged in whatever get-rich-quick scheme (housing, stocks, etc.) they could catch a sniff of.  So when the bubble burst, of course it's anyone else's fault.  "Let's blame the banks, they have all the money in the world and that's just wrong."  What a bunch of infants.

You don't realize that there is an eager line of college educated, success hungry people behind you ready to pick up where you left off.  And most of these people aren't used to being handed things like you.  The price of education is too high and they have school loans to pay for.  They're not walking away, as you wish they would, because they don't jump ship at the first sign of danger like you do.  They're wired different.

Believe me, the next bubble is pessimism.  And as for you strategic defaulters, good luck trying to get a loan in a few years when you're planning to game whatever system again.

I'm sorry you weren't getting what you felt entitled to or were just doing what everyone else was doing...but you got caught plain and simple.  Time to man up, accept it, look your family in the eyes and go back to work. 

Report this comment
#6) On October 19, 2010 at 2:13 AM, ikkyu2 (98.21) wrote:

You cannot have a viable society where the backbone of the country thinks that following the rules and the law is for suckers and chumps.

Sure you can.  In this semi-hypothetical society, a gargantuan, oversized military has to be created, funded with billions of dollars, desensitized to killing and to unethical behavior, equipped with ultramodern technology - ideally using semi-autonomous robots to kill remotely to reduce the probability of mutiny.  Then, this military must be deployed domestically to enforce the wishes of the elite on the 'backbone of the society', under threat of death.

Of course, none of the necessary ingredients for that scenario are present in 2010 America, so we can all rest easy.

Report this comment
#7) On October 19, 2010 at 2:15 AM, whereaminow (< 20) wrote:



David in Qatar 

Report this comment
#8) On October 19, 2010 at 3:41 AM, BillyTG (29.51) wrote:

+1 for ikkyu2's comment


Report this comment
#9) On October 19, 2010 at 5:39 AM, MGDG (32.85) wrote:

ikkyu2, they haven't built Skynet yet. The ultimate irony is once it's complete, the machines will turn on the the elite and the backbone of society will be the only ones left standing.

Report this comment
#10) On October 19, 2010 at 7:24 PM, eldemonio (97.55) wrote:

Strategically defaulting = looting.

I applaud this couple for how they are handling the situation.  It would be very easy to justify not paying for their house, I'm happy to see morality is not dead in the USA.

Report this comment
#11) On October 21, 2010 at 4:20 PM, mtf00l (43.07) wrote:


What the public doesn't know...

Report this comment
#12) On October 22, 2010 at 4:43 PM, jasenj1 (38.75) wrote:

I disagree with most of the commenters here saying strategic defaulting = looting. In the story above, the couple got SHAFTED by the bank. They qualified for a super-low re-fi and then had that re-fi yanked out from under them. The bank did bad - and possibly illegal - by them. They are perfectly justified to say to the bank, "Show me the note or GTFO".

 The banks don't get to play fast and loose with contract law and deeds and all that. If they do, they should pay the consequences. And that consequence is the borrower doesn't pay back the loan. 

Report this comment
#13) On October 25, 2010 at 3:24 PM, jasenj1 (38.75) wrote:

 Relevant to this discussion. NY Times article on mortgage backed securities problems. 

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners