Bank forecloses on wrong house; owners told tough.

[PLATO]

So, we have established that BoA is a huge, soul-sucking morass of bureaucracy populated by workers too mired in mountains of paperwork to care about who's house is getting locked up or why ... and this is supposed to be an argument against it "not having a good heart"?

Actually, I think we were agreeing.

[PLATO]

It got even worse with their "merger" with Nations

The Countrywide aquisition basically sent BoA's mortgage operations into meltdown. That part of their business did not have anywhere near the fallout from the Nations "merger" (excellent use of quotes BTW) as the Countrywide takeover did.

No one really knew how deep Countrywide's rabbit hole was until after they were gone. I was asked to go to Plano and evaluate their underwriting process several years ago. The list of recommended changes was as long as you arm. They politely listened, thanked me for my time, and did basically nothing.

[kentonio]

In your case, we are undoubtedly in agreement.

Shame you skipped the part where you actually had to backup any of your bull****.

[Dinner]

He always misses that part. I'm sure he'll try to make up with it using more name calling though.

[DaShi]

I've been around...just lurking. Honestly I just got pretty fed up with some of the moronic posters. This article caught my attention since it is in my field of expertise. As usual though, some idiot with no knowledge of much of anything chose to post....

Sorry.

[Dinner]

Naw, he was probably making a snide comment about me as he apparently didn't recognize this is an old thread from almost three years ago which got bumped by a bot.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Nobody actually reads original post dates. damn bots.

[MichaeltheGreat]

There is no doubt that there was a breakdown in the system as this is not a common occurance, but it is a little more complicated than that. It is quite likely that there was an incorrect address associated with an existing mortgage account by someone simply doing data entry. It is also quite likely, due to privacy laws, that no one at the bank would even discuss the account with the actual owner's because they were not listed on the account. Once it was referred to the attorney, they should have done some of the verifications that you mention, but likely relied on the information that the bank sent them due to volume.

It would seem to make sense to associate the mortgage account with both situs address and APN, as the situs address can change but APN is essentially permanent. That would also allow for any automated process to flag a mismatch in case of data entry error.

I don't think the volume excuse cuts it - it's not that expensive to add a few paralegals (they're the ones doing the work anyway) and have some cross-checking, when the liability for failure is potentially high. Reality here, which speaks to tort liability (and in many states, punitive damages can be attached to a sufficient degree of negligence) is that the various entities made business process and staffing level decisions to accept a certain error rate that was not unavoidable.

[PLATO]

He always misses that part. I'm sure he'll try to make up with it using more name calling though.

Hey Oredin!

Only to those that have truly earned it. I have no issue with you. Although we rarely agree, I usually enjoy the debate.

[PLATO]

Sorry.

Hi Dashi!

Not your fault, but thank you very much.

[PLATO]

he apparently didn't recognize this is an old thread from almost three years ago which got bumped by a bot.

LOL! Truth in this statement, but still a very relevant topic...sadly.

[Dinner]

I hear Bank of America agreed to pay a $10 billion fine because they routinely bipassed state and Federal laws during foreclosures in a practice so pervasive it was called premeditated by the Judge who ordered the fines.

[PLATO]

It would seem to make sense to associate the mortgage account with both situs address and APN, as the situs address can change but APN is essentially permanent. That would also allow for any automated process to flag a mismatch in case of data entry error.

I don't think the volume excuse cuts it - it's not that expensive to add a few paralegals (they're the ones doing the work anyway) and have some cross-checking, when the liability for failure is potentially high. Reality here, which speaks to tort liability (and in many states, punitive damages can be attached to a sufficient degree of negligence) is that the various entities made business process and staffing level decisions to accept a certain error rate that was not unavoidable.

There can certainly be some upgrades in how the data is handled. In some cases, the platforms being used are still from the 90's and have been "upgraded" instead of replaced. It would be a seriously huge problem getting all the data properly transfered to new platforms...still , it is a project that really needs doing.

You do have a good point on hiring some extra personnel. The banks, however, are still somewhat in denial about foreclosure volumes and are hesitant to create the extra HR expense that would be involved in hiring and laying off workers. In truth, it would take more than a "few" to eliminate the problem. When banks start facing losses like the $8.5 billion hit they just took, then they will take action. A few grand here and there to some borrowers they screwed isn't enough to do it unfortunately. Not sure that I agree with the cost-benefit analysis, but that it is what drives it nonetheless.

[Fake Boris]

Everything here seems perfectly reasonable other than BAML's refusal to pay what had been ordered. The original misake was perfectly understandable given the size of thebank's mortgage business, and so was was the civil judgment against the bank.

[Alexander's Horse]

yes but what happened to the Sardono's case? any update?