If the tenant is paying their rent on time, it would seem to me that bank would want to allow the tenant to stay.

And you know many of the building owners are continuing to pocket rent even though they don't make the mortgage payments.

I alwsy said the tenants shoould be allowed to take over a foreclosed house at the rent amount, And as a right wing nut. I am happy to hear it, I think Banks and Lenders should have to hire "repo" men just like care dealers or their own security and force people out. Police need to catch criminals

Seems as though it would be better for the bank to have someone living in the homes, taking care of the yards, etc.

Don't you hill people know the difference between Police and Sheriff?

This will help more than all the cash infusions to the banking system.

If the Sheriff's would refuse the enforce the evictions that would pressure the mortgage holders to negotiate reduced interest rate terms.

Seems as though it would be better for the bank to have someone living in the homes, taking care of the yards, etc.

Maybe the banks should decide what to do with their proerty. Seeing as they are the legal owners if the house goes into default. How long before the Sheriff is removed for ignoring court ordered evictions?

Help is on the way. McCain's plan has a rescue package for homeowners --- not just for Wall Street.

"McCain's plan has a rescue package for homeowners --- not just for Wall Street."

Yeah....bail out the homeowners at full face value of their mortgages so that banks lose nothing. Of course though the taxpayers will get screwed by that plan but hell he puts rich bankers before America.

Yeah....bail out the homeowners at full face value of their mortgages so that banks lose nothing. Of course though the taxpayers will get screwed by that plan but hell he puts rich bankers before America.

You just posted something about letting them stay in the homes for free. Which is it?

(Seems as though it would be better for the bank to have someone living in the homes, taking care of the yards, etc.)

"You just posted something about letting them stay in the homes for free. Which is it?"

For free??? No, they should continue to pay rent, just not to the defaulting building owner.

"Maybe the banks should decide what to do with their proerty."

Fine until they ask for a federal bailout then sorry they lose the right to determine the future of that property. It just may be that the best thing for taxpayers is to hold on to the property with a renter in the property until values rise and it can be sold for enough to cover the mortgage.

It just may be that the best thing for taxpayers is to hold on to the property with a renter in the property until values rise and it can be sold for enough to cover the mortgage.

So what happens if the renter decides not to pay? You expect banks to got through the courts to legally evict? Someone who has no right being there? Other than to take care of the lawns?

Cook County Sheriff, to banks, mortgage companies, and distressed property investors: you're out of your mind to lend to anyone in my county, from now on.

Cook County Sheriff, to banks, mortgage companies, and distressed property investors: you're out of your mind to lend to anyone in my county, from now on.

Just your typical Illinois liberal policies. I wonder if these homes were part of Obamas community investment money.

CNN televised an interview with the sheriff. His position was that he would often visit a foreclosed home only to find that the occupant was renting and was up to date on the rent. The mortgagee never informed the tenant of the foreclosure so that the only time that the tenant knew there was a problem was when the sheriff showed up with the moving crew. The tenant's belongings were placed on the street and sometimes stolen. More importantly, the tenant had to scramble to find another place to live.

All the sheriff is asking for is that the mortgage banks notify the "occupant" that the property is being foreclosed.

Seems reasonable to me.

As we distinguish WWI and WWII, we may need to distinguish Great Depression I and Great Depression II. During GPI, the mortgage instruments required a judicial foreclosure, and there was a backlog of several years in courts in Detroit, for example, so people continued to live in their homes for years without making payments.

Consequently, the industry devised trust deeds, which provide for non-judicial foreclosures unless the lender wants to secure a deficiency judgment if the amount obtained from the sale of the home is insufficient to satisfy the debt. The lenders generally are anxious to reclaim the property and so generally waive the deficiency balance and reclaim the property using the expedited trust deed procedure.

This refusal of the Sheriff to act is a new twist and he or the government entity he represents as an officer of the court, may find itself financially liable for failure to perform its mandated duties. It'll be interesting to watch. In fact, I suppose that it's a possibility that the Sheriff may be personally liable and it may be a debt not dischargeable in bankruptcy.

I wonder if a writ may be obtained to compel the Sheriff to act or end up in the hoosegow himself and be subject to fines.

This creation of new relationships in a system under stress will be provocative, and certainly "interesting," as the kinks are worked out.

This creation of new relationships in a system under stress will be provocative, and certainly "interesting," as the kinks are worked out.

I thought the law was pretty clear on this subject. If the owner of a property goes to court and a judge rules to evict, what recourse does the Sheriff have other than to follow the ruling? The evicted tenants have every right to sue if they were wronged.

Banking and usury are the enemies of free people the world over.

Banks are not our friends and do not have our best interests at heart, only the profit margin.

Banks prey on us all in one way or another.

Should read - "their profit margin."

Good for the Sheriff--some compassion seen by law enforcement.

Some short day notice--some contacts to help the renter find another place, some understanding.

Now for the lender notice--They are required to Post the Notice on the front door of the house.

In Illinois, the time to foreclosure is 215 days.
---
How long does it take to foreclose a property in Illinois?
Depending on the court schedule, it usually takes approximately 215 days to effectuate an uncontested foreclosure. This process may de delayed if the borrower contests the action, seeks delays and adjournments of hearings, or files forbankruptcy. Property owners have a right to reinstate a defaulted mortgage within ninety (90) days of the personal service of the foreclosure complaint. Property owners have thirty (30) days after the foreclosure sale is confirmed to retain possession and occupancy of the property at the expiration of which they must vacate.

Murphy,
If a judge says it is legal to evict, I don't see how the Sheriff has any choice but to follow the law. Does he really have a choice?

Renters are not without rights. If the banks are not following the law by notifying the occupant, then the Sheriff shouldn't evict people. Sounds reasonable. This is a legal balancing act for the Sheriff. He has to ensure the safety of people and property as well. He is not the private security guard to bankers.

He is not the private security guard to bankers.

What if the new owners are not the bank? What if the property was bought though a foreclosure auction by an individual? Wouldn't the Sheriff be violating their rights?

Crispee, there is property on the account of the tenant which will suffer almost immediate damage from exposure as opposed to the fixed property, the structure, of a new landlord who could possibly be interested in renting to the same people now being thrown out. It's a practical matter, not a matter of the tenants versus the failed landlord or the new owner of the building.

It's a practical matter, not a matter of the tenants versus the failed landlord or the new owner of the building.

but eviction notices are legal documents that give rights to the property owner.

I am saying the Sheriff is showing some compassion.

The owner of the property is entitled under the law to rights--as in eviction.

The sheriff in any situation has the duty to carry out the laws.

The lender is right in these situations and the sheriff is trying to make nice..

Cook County Sheriff, to banks, mortgage companies, and distressed property investors: you're out of your mind to lend to anyone in my county, from now on.

See how the rich like to discriminate, if you don't belong to our rules we won't give you loans even if you qualify.

Hmmm, seems we have been here and RIR still hasn't learned.

but eviction notices are legal documents that give rights to the property owner.

The property owner is the government, since the banks get the bail out they have no say, but I suppose you are not for that.

Again, we see the well measured moral and ethical compass of the republican idiots supporting non-human entities for money sake and trashing upon their fellow man.

It just boggles the mind about when these people will actually learn and get out of their bourgeois ways.

feudalism masked as capitalism.

this would have to be the worst time in history to be a civil deputy - to think it was dangerous before!

Again, we see the well measured moral and ethical compass of the republican idiots supporting non-human entities for money sake and trashing upon their fellow man.

#27 | Posted by moneywar

However, the idiots behind this are mostly democrats! AH - Barney Frank - Hem

feudalism masked as capitalism.

#27 | Posted by moneywar

That much I agree with.

murphy the jeff J of idiocy.

Posted by moneywar at 2008-10-09 09:37 PM

Douchebag: If you are going to take pot-shots at me, at least have the cajones to do so when I am actually logged on so I can properly embarass you, as I do on a daily basis when you are stupid enough to try and match wits with me.

"I do on a daily basis when you are stupid enough to try and match wits with me."

You sure are a bad ass, Jeff, as we all know, but people take shots at me all the time when I'm not around. This is a message board, not a live chat room.

Good point, Null.

But you don't fuck people up in debates like I do, so your point is moot.

But you don't fuck people up in debates like I do, so your point is moot.

#33 | Posted by JeffJ at 2008-10-09 11:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obama's inevitable victory seems to be turning jeff into pinche.

Obama's inevitable victory seems to be turning jeff into pinche.

#34 | Posted by Alexandrite

Not so, Tiny Dancer.

That Communist sack of shit will never be elected president.

Wanna bet?

"will never be elected president."

Hello?

Douchebag: If you are going to take pot-shots at me, at least have the cajones to do so when I am actually logged on so I can properly embarass you, as I do on a daily basis when you are stupid enough to try and match wits with me.

LOL!

See, I did match you up and don't think it was a pot shot.

At least you can pretend to be a little brighter person when going incognito.

I don't pretend, I just am.

Glad you found humor in my post though. It was intentional.

Hello?

Who's there?

MW,

I thought your little jab was funny, hence my reply.

"Who's there?"

President Obama.

How is Hussein Osama doing these days?

I've gotta run, girls.

You all have a nice evening.

It's a regular gaggle o' tards in here tonight.

I hope no one chokes on their own tounge.

"I hope no one chokes on their own tounge."

Or blogs from the crapper.

Jeff, have you finaly came around to my way of thinking?

I take it back, jeff. No bets. Market the way it is...how about...I'll buy ya a beer?

Jeff, have you finaly came around to my way of thinking?

Is that what you call your postings, thinking?

"Is that what you call your postings, thinking?"

Don't worry, Moneywar...we would never accuse you of that.

Dan,

how goes the battle?

Thinking? Me? Never!!

I like you Union boys, just wish you would clean up your act, they are needed back.

"how goes the battle?"

Pretty damn good. It looks like the worst governance of my life is on the way out.

"Market the way it is."

And if you're keeping score at home:

Clinton: DJIA more than tripled, up 225%.

Bush: DJIA down 18.9%.

My prediction the day Bush leaves office: Less Than Zero.

The property owner is the government, since the banks get the bail out they have no say, but I suppose you are not for that.

The govt doesn't own the property asswipe.

Again, we see the well measured moral and ethical compass of the republican idiots supporting non-human entities for money sake and trashing

I didn't say that we should kick these people out. Plenty of good reasons to let them stay but I am looking at this from the perspective of the Sheriff. It is a slippery slope if he intends to enforce the law (whether he agrees with it or not).

He can't choose what he wants to do there. Let say it is my property and some crackhead won't leave.....sounds pretty simply.

a bank owned home that has to toss out a family onto the street because someone lost a job??????

It is a terrible spot to be in.

It just boggles the mind about when these people will actually learn and get out of their bourgeois ways.

keep arguing with the wall bozo. maybe it will talk back some day.

How many threads can you have your ass kicked at once?

What makes no sense to me is evicting renters. The bank should simply become the de-facto landlord. It's cash flow, keep it. No wonder banks fail, they're run by fools.

" I am looking at this from the perspective of the Sheriff. It is a slippery slope if he intends to enforce the law (whether he agrees with it or not)"

YEAH!

Except the part where a Sheriff has within his authority to do just that (inforce or not).
A "sheriff" is an elected official.

Think of it as a signing statement!

Except the part where a Sheriff has within his authority to do just that (inforce or not).

He gets to choose which laws he wants to enforce?

Where does he get discretion like that? An eviction notice is pretty cut and dried isn't it?

The bank should simply become the de-facto landlord. It's cash flow, keep it. No wonder banks fail, they're run by fools.

Well, I think many of them would do what you just said Zat. It is the only common sense solution.

He gets to choose which laws he wants to enforce?

Where does he get discretion like that? An eviction notice is pretty cut and dried isn't it?

#57 | Posted by eberly at 2008-

no he doesnt

HOWEVERE the story I saw had a little different slant to it

this guy talked about all of the RENTERS and leasers who he had to throw out who KNEW NOTHING ABOUT IT until the cops were there to throw them out.......

what sort of protection do they have, if any