Log In | Register
If you've ever read Jim Jubak, he's a straight forward investor who provides little bias to his reasoning and take on things. I've been following his articles for years and this time he's commenting on the continuation of the foreclosure mess.
But based on his reasoning skills, he does present the rhetorical...
"Think there might have been something wrong with the due diligence on just a few of these mortgages?"
And adequately points out that banks tried to ram legislation thru the abstractly named Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act. To basically make it easier for banks to "fake" ownership of mortgage and make it more difficult for homeowners to challenge them.
In this case, maybe banks should have been more careful how they structured, sold, and verified mortgage paperwork. Now they are facing +4-5 years of losses from this, in addition to investors who bought the MBS now having an additional tool to go after banks.
If banks can't prove they did due deligence on who owns mortgages, it's equally as likely they can't prove they did the initial due deligence when packaging the MBS for investors. In which case, the investors have a case that banks were misleading about the investments they were selling.
All in all...The Banks would like another bail out from you. Whether that's legislation or money. As Jim points to at the end of the article...
"(For more on the uneven nature of the banking recovery, see my post "A banking recovery for big banks only.")" - That's right, it's a unified banking sector, the position is even more stifling than before, 50+% of all banking assets belong to 5 banks. 5 Banks that are almost the size of the US economy in total assets.
