This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Meet Danielle And Jim Plus 9: The Squatters Who "Reclaimed" Their Foreclosed Home Over The Weekend
Unfortunately, surreal stories like this will very soon become daily news. As was pointed out yesterday, Simi Valley has just seen the first case of a forced reclamation of a foreclosed home, after Jim and Danielle Earl took their nine (9!) children, ages 9-23, and a locksmith and broke into the six-bedroom house that had been foreclosed upon for lack of payment, and on which the couple owed $880,000! And where would such brilliant advice originate from? Why, the couple's lawyer of course, who will one day be seen as the prophetic visionary who stole the bankers wealth from underneath them and handed it out to America's millions of starving lawyers, one billing sheet at a time: "The move was recommended by their lawyer" as the WSJ suggests. Already in process: millions of cases identical to this one, billions in legal fees, and hundreds of billions in lost market value of associated equity and credit instrument, not to mention very unpleasant days for LPs in "Recovery" funds.
More on the family:
The Earls paid $500,000 for the house in 2001 and then refinanced to pull out cash. They fell behind on their mortgage and at the time of their eviction they owed about $880,000 on a no-interest mortgage.
Investors at Conejo Capital bought the house for $697,000 at a lender’s trustee sale and put $40,000 of work into a remodel, replacing carpeting and appliances, as well as upgrading the kitchen. They flipped it to new buyers for $800,000. Those buyers were supposed to move in this week; those plans are on hold.
The Earls claim that they were working with GRP Financial Services to catch up on payments, but discovered a $25,000 difference between what they believed they owed and what the bank said they owed. They then stopped making payments.
“This is only the beginning of this,” the Earls’ attorney, Michael Pines tells KABC News. “I chose this family because we needed to get back in before the investor and the real-estate broker defrauded a new family by having them move in, which would have created a bigger mess. (The Earls) have done absolutely nothing wrong.”
So there you have it: people who owe $880,000 on their mortgage believe it is their right to reclaim homes. We will avoid any ethical commentary on this, suffice to say that it is the bankers who in the greed and stupidity have managed to dig themselves into what could be a hole so deep not even TARP 2-XXX can dig them out of.
For a clip of this surreal harbinger of things to come, click below.
»
- 26061 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Did "Atlas" just "Shrug?"
No, because "Atlas" refers to all the productive, hardworking people who make capitalism work (in those times when it does work, this not being one of them). None of the parties in this farce fall into that category -- not the bankers, not the hopelessly underwater squatters/thieves, not their lawyer.
Oh, maybe you're referring to the cops who were sitting there shrugging in their police cars. Yeah, could be.
+1 Ayn Rand must be spinning in her grave over that one.
Spin in her grave? This is more like mission accomplished.
This mess was brought to you by one of her closest disciples: Alan Greenspan
He was the editor of her newsletter "Objectivist Periodicals" for many years. The two were very close; in fact, she regularly accompanied the bachelor to formal events.
Road to Roota, Bro. Just sayin.
So? He betrayed her ideals when he became Fed Chairman. He's Judas and Pontius Pilot's bastard son.
That's wishful thinking.
There was no betrayal. His philosophy didn't change after he became fed chairman.
http://www.commondreams.org/views/041800-106.htm
He simply took her ideas and put it in practice.
This guy had his tongue deep in her kooch. He knew the lady well and was one of her disciples.
What else do you need to be convinced that Rand's destructive form of individualism may be the culprit behind the mess that we are in now?
+1 Bingo!
As someone that has actually read Atlas Shrugged I disagree - and we are in it.
-2
WW, you may want to "actually read" the link in DTMBs comment.
Nader (of all people) nailed it... and that was 10 years ago!
I actually read it.
I don't see what point was trying to be made, other than Nader thinks G-span doesn't believe in regulation.
What this has to do with his being a disciple of Rand, I have no idea.
There is IMO a slim possibility he did what he did on purpose, I rather think he's just an incompetent boob, willing to do whatever he needs to do for his masters approval and continuing admission to fancy black-tie parties.
I have read, and admire, Ayn Rand as one of the greatest authors and philosophers of the 20th century. The quote above represents the views of Rand and Greenspan... he was a champion of de-regulation (how did that work out?) and Rand's DNA is all over the push to remove regulation from corporations, as the "incentive to succeed" would protect society from the inherent moral hazard in unfettered corporate power (in fairness to Rand, she could not have predicted the evolution of today's corporate structure, or the capacity to put the world at risk).
to be fair, firstly, our financial institutions are not deregulated 'free markets'. we have centralized money planning where interest rates are left too low for too long allowing for prolonged excessive risk-taking (via the 'Greenspan Put'). secondly, FDIC Insurance (regulation!) created an ongoing moral hazard which allowed for the privatization of profits in times of (artificial) boom, and the socialization of losses in times of (long-overdue) bust.
our 'money' system is so rigged from the start, it can hardly be compared to anything resembling free trade/barter between free people. We are not free. Our 'money' is not free. This is not a free market. In fact, it is a monopoly that was gained through a political process (via the Federal Reserve Act of 1913) that was only possible due to excessive centralization of power in Washington D.C. at the expense of freedom.
...for the record.
In a world of swift justice and unappealable jury awards, there would be no need for most Federal regulations. Of course, no Progressive/Socialist would ever allow such a world to come into existence!
Hmm. Do as I say, not as I do? Nuff said.
How exactly do you think inflationary central banking (forgive the redundancy) and Objectivism are compatible in any way?
You are one ignorant fuck.
Read Atlas Shrugged and get back to me. You have no idea what you are talking about. Greenspan's actions were always diametrically opposed to the proposed reforms clearly laid out in Rand's books.
Show me one fucking place in the entirety of human existance or experience where fucking Ayn Rand said the GOVERNMENT should set interest rates below market values. SHOW ME.
Also, Nadler is a liar through and through. Anything he says is immediately suspect, and not to be believed under any circumstance.
tmosley, you are throwing pearls to swine.
Just what is in it for these guys?
It's scary what passes for harmless talk. And public skool is part of the problem!
...working on one's 'legacy' (only after wealth is created) by promoting big government taxes and solutions, the ultimate final act of selfishness at the expense of freedom for others.
leave me out of this, am just a shill for JPMorhan, paid to lie about gold not real estate, although if the NAR would like to pay me to pump up real estate....he he. Anyway didn't he say Nader not Nadler
for any shill services e-mail me at
shillforhire@Kitco.com
INDIVIDUALISM?!?!?! What is less of a form of individualism than manipulating markets and currencies and circumventing the rule of law for corporations than what has been in practice since before Greenspan was Fed Chairman? Are bailouts for corporations on the backs of taxpayers individualism? Allowing corporations to "regulate" themselves is also not Randian. When honesty is removed from the system and the game is rigged it can no longer be objectivism. Even someone that knows little about Rand can understand that when the system favors only one side and is abusive, oppressive and unjust it is not a system that can be sustained. Rand's protagonists were makers and doers and industrialists not "service sector" employees that made money from fraudulent products and policies; they were not gaming the system nor were they dishonest, unjust, or morally reprehensible. The fraud is more apparent in the government, financial institutions and corporations that pass the buck and are never responsible or accountable and maintain their power.
Maybe. Or maybe this is Rand's Revenge.
+30 pieces of silver (worth $750 as of today)
Judas' pieces were not one ounce piece
Pontius was great.
He went over to the dark side. It is customary to actually read authors before commenting on their philosophies, but that wouldn't be the twitter approach, would it?
Bachelor being the key word. What an ugly fuck. And he sure fucked the rest of us didn't he?
They did more than that together. It's widely known that he was her bottom. You really didn't think she limited her sexual freakiness to her books, did you?
holy shit, really?
that is freaking me out man
So by this line of reasoning Nietzsche is responsible for Hitler, Jesus is responsible Bernardo Gui & the Crusades? I think not. Like them, Rand said what she had to say, and other misinterpreted it. Greenspan thought her teachings were groovy for a while, but then found there was a fortune to be made going down the opposite path, which happened to look the same. It's a shame that people would try to hangthis mess around Rand's neck. This is not capitalism. This is not a free market.
pearls to swine, fellas. pearls to swine.
Greenspan, a bachelor? Ever?
Good thing he was scooped up by Andrea Mitchell of NBC news fame. By that time he was a toss-off of Barbara Walters. No matter, Al and Andy (20 years his junior) stepped into happily ever after when they were married by Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Wonder if all these places they work for are somehow connected and work together? Of course not! They're just bumping into each other and hooking up like everyone else.
Silly to think otherwise.
Oh, and way to set an example for your NINE KIDS, squatter bitch.
Owe $880k in back payments followed by an act of illegal breaking-and-entering just so you can avoid having to tell your kids, for just a few more days/weeks, how horribly you've failed at life ... and eventually see your kids ripped away from you and put in foster care, Elian Gonzales-style.
Don't forget about the part where you grin smugly on TV about the whole matter, as if you've done something admirable!
The Earls may startingly discover that "my lawyer made me do it" is not the best argument in court.
+1
If they couldn't pay their mortgage, how are they going to pay their lawyer?
Who said they couldn't pay?
The mess began, according to Danielle Earl, when she discovered a discrepancy between what she thought she owed in mortgage payments ($10,000) and what the bank claimed was due ($25,000). Earl said she made a $12,500 payment.
"After I made the payment, they said I owed $25,000," she said.
So Earl did some research and learned the note on the property was being assigned from lender to lender with what she believed were falsified documents, so she decided to stop making payments "because they clearly didn't want us to catch up," she said.
I'm sure he's getting his fee in advance.
Besides, think of all the $ they saved on mortgage payments.
This has reality show written all over it. Squatters + Nine, explore the trials and tribulations of Jim and Danielle and their nine kids as they reclaim their homestead.... A new series on HGTV.
Nah. Simi is in Ventura County. Home to law enforcement galore.
They will be escorted out by police. Give it about a week.
~Misstrial
A prudent attorney would have advised the client to place the money in escrow, usually in that attorney's escrow account. When the matter is finally settled out of court, as most of these things are, one of the first checks written against the escrowed amount will be to the attorney.
The parents apparently think they're victims... Assuming they actually believe it, then they probably think they're teaching their kids a valuable lesson about standing up against being victims. I can't help but think there's a couple of roos loose in the top paddock, we can't be dealing with the sharpest tools in the shed here.
And before anyone gets all high and mighty and tells me that they really are victims, save it, you wont convince me. Just because the bankers are scumbag assholes doesn't mean these people aren't deadbeats... Bought it for $500k, refi'ed to turn their house into an ATM with an interest only loan. Wtf did they think was ultimately going to happen.
They fit in well with Obama's vision of America - no fault of their own, the took out 300k in equity and now cant pay it back. Blame the bank.
Truth to told most of the bill for this mess will be the taxpayers - as most of these loans are guaranteed by the GSE's. THey are not screwing the bankers, they are screwing us. If the story is true and they had a legitimate disagreement, they should have continued to pay the freakin mortgage and worked it out.
If you think bankers are scum, just wait and see how scummy these lawyers will be.
"Banksters are OKAY cuz they are not as scummy as Lawyers."
They both suck but the reality is that the bank and GSE's got scammed by scummy mortgage brokers. The banks deserved it because in many cases they turned a blind eye so they got a taste of their own medicine. Never said banks were "okay" but have to point out that it is the tax payers who pay for the GSE losses.
That's true
I've said before that this will likely culminate in a class-action, in which a trillion dollar settlement will yield $950B for the attorneys, a couple million each for the first one or two in the class action door, and the rest of the booty will get split among several million nobodys, at $1000 per nobody.
Banks will then collect bailout funds (taxpayer/obligation money), and on top of that will get to write off the lawsuits as legal expenses, which means tax revenues will fall. The big winners? Banks and attorneys. The big losers? Citizens.
A $1000 per nobody?
No way.
More like each will get a coupon worth $50.00 towards the purchase of a flat-screen at Walmart.
~Misstrial
I was being optimistic :)
The important point is that the banks and the attorneys win, the foreclosed citizens lose, and the productive class picks up the tab for the entire fiasco. We're just trading injustice for Injustice, and not to forget there will be even more regulations (since they worked so well the first time).
Welcome to Obamamerica -where two wrongs make a right.
No no no. Each other member of the class will get a coupon worth $5 off on their next mortgage.
You REALLY don't know how this system works, do you?
+ 100
I must have somehow missed that part of Obama's vision. Perhaps I was listening too much to the speeches he gave the black community about the importance of personal responsibility and hard work. Or the speeches he gave warning that the Iraq war would be a waste of taxpayer money -- a "dumb war" if I recall correctly. In fact, I don't recall him uttering a single word suggesting that Americans should borrow money and never repay it. And his actions in refusing to support a national foreclosure moritorium don't seem to me to support your argument.
So, would be mind providing evidence that such is Obama's vision?
That would have been the line tossed off to joe the plumber about "spreading the wealth."
And they screwed the new family that paid for the house. If I were them I would hire a bunch of gang bangers to go over there and pay them a visit.
Let the games begin, Anarchy Rules Bitchez!
If you were Howard Roark you would go over there and burn down the house
Thanks for picking up on the oft-missed reality, and that is that BOTH parties are likely acting in bad faith. Just because one party is a skunk doesn't mean the other is all roses.
Exactly! Both the banks (who gave risky loans that they knew wouldn't be paid back and then sold them to investors without properly recording the transactions to save money on taxes and fees and/or engaged in robosigning to cover up for destroyed original documents and are foreclosing on loans that they don't necessarily clearly have the right to foreclose) and the borrowers (who lied about their incomes (fraud), "extracted equity" to live beyond their means, and continued to live for years rent-free while failing to pay their mortgages) have unclean hands. Neither should benefit from this fiasco. The bank depositors (responsible savers) who won't be paid back when the banks collapse and the taxpayers who will foot the bill for all of the bank bailouts are the big losers.
WTF did they think was going to happen? That someone else would be on the hook, of course. Looks like it worked out great for them.
What's most maddening here in Canada is the people I talk to who have done the same thing recently - bought overpriced RE and taken out refis on it to go shopping and vacationing - who answer back with a straight face that the government would never let prices fall or that if too many people found themselves underwater that the government would do something about it.
Why did I bother living within my means again? I should have loaded up on a dozen condos somewhere warm when I had the chance...
These people just given' the banks some of their own effing medicine. They think like bankers.
you got the right name asshole. You must be a banker. Check your facts, maybe read the article before you pass judgement. Damn right i junked your dumb ass. You are right in sink with Master bates, johnny Bravo,robo and leo. FU all banksters.
Facts from the article:
The Earls paid $500,000 for the house in 2001 and then refinanced to pull out cash. They fell behind on their mortgage and at the time of their eviction they owed about $880,000 on a no-interest mortgage.
Which bit is hard to understand?
More facts from the fucking article:
http://www.danielleslightshow.com/index.html
That's the SAME FUCKING FAMILY!
How much money do you think this numbskul family wasted on that shit? They rented heavy machinery to get fucking lights up in trees, all the while they're up to their nuts in debt on a mortgage they can't afford.
Unbelievable that people would stick up for these clowns. The banks are assholes, but it doesn't mean everyone they dealt with is some god damn saint.
hahahahah, from that website:
My Thank-you list:
I would like to thank my husband for putting up with all this! His two biggest dislikes in this world are a)clutter in the garage and b)attracting attention.
facepalm
I hope they get eaten by zombies
You forget the all important fucking point here - "at the time of their eviction" the bank foreclosing on them didn't have the fucking title to the property and illegally forced them out of their home? So if the police arrest you for murder maybe they should just skip that whole cumbersome legal process and put a bullet in your head on the side of the road?
Due process is(or was supposed to be) slightly important in this country last time I checked
Where is this FACT mentioned? Nowhere in the article. Nowhere is it stated as FACT that the bank didn't have the title, or that the bank illegaly forced them out of anything. Here's what we do have:
"The Earls say it’s unclear who owns the loan"
So... This couple of human rabbit hybrids, with a penchant for interest only mortgage excess, excessive spending on idiotic christmas decorations and interest only mortgage insanity, are the authorities on who has legal standing over their mortgage?
It's entirely possible the bank got up to some shenanigans, but that doesn't for a second mean I'm going to take these clowns word for it, or give them any sympathy until it's a fact.
Your are 1000% correct but whether or not they are "human rabbit hybrids" is not relevant to your basic argument. Trying to set a good example to my son that when u have a winning argument, dont diminish your position by stooping to others level. :-)
Although it maybe "unclear who owns the loan" its also quite clear who hasn't been paying according to the loan terms and purchase agreement.
They are going to need a criminal defense attorney for breaking and entering as well as trespass along with a family law attorney because IT IS CERTAIN that Child Protective Services is going to get involved with this case.
Each child under the age of 18 is going to get their own court-appointed lawyer and the Earl's are going to be financially liable for ALL of the costs in Family Law and Juvenile Court.
Note to the Earls: Juvenile Court is Preponderance of the Evidence unlike Criminal Court which is Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.
Have fun.
~Misstrial
LOL from the information out there pretty much every mortgage for the last 10 years is completely fucked - your premise is BS because it is completely irrelevant on HOW they spent the money it doesn't change THE LAW which still has that annoying thing in there called due process. Period and end of story, doesn't matter if they have 23 kids, a crack habit and gold grills from their ATM money. Anyway I love any douchebag that would give the benefit of the doubt to the bank, I mean do you live in a cave or just work for the Fed?
For you information this woman made a payment of a twenty five grand and thought she was paid up. Instead of crediting her with that payment they took the money lied and said they never got and then kicked them out. Your making zero hedge look like a neocon outlet. These people are not to blame for this situation its the bank and lenders soul less acts.
Until I see the original proof of that payment, with her signature, and the proof that it didn't bounce, I'll at worst assume that both parties acted in bad faith.
Cuts both ways, eh?
Why is your demand not upon the bank to see the original loan documents?
And you want to see Obama's birth certificate as well, right?
Let me get this straight - you accept a copy of the original to prove eligibility for the most powerful political seat in the country, yet a measly half-a-mil loan to a twobit shopping-addicted nobody requires the original loan doc? LOL.
Yada, yada, yada....
Well, I read something to the effect that there was a difference of opinion as to what was owed. I would be surprised if there weren't savings and dispute resolution clauses to deal with the proper way to proceed. I would be more surprised if the correct course of action was to stop making payments altogether. The fact in evidence is that the Earl's stopped paying, and the remedy is forfeiture of their interest in the property. The fact that the bank might have sloppy chain of title is (I can hear at least a dozen of you disagreeing) little more than a technicality that will be fixed in due course. The reality is, however, that this will be settled out of court. They will lose their house, most likely gladly. They will get a book deal and buy a new house and a matching his 'n her Hummers. They will not lose the kids, but instead will take over the John & Kate + 8 time slot.
Life can truly be unfair, especially in a world that places disproportionate value on the Kardashians over people who actually make the world a better place.
before we all pass judgement, what was the $380K loan for? Did they try to start their own business or invest in the market like ever piece of shit advisor in town would have told them to do? Yeah it was stupid as hell but who says they couldn't have afforded the original $500K loan? Also do we know if mom or dad has been unemployed for 3 years straight now? How are you set to pay your house off if you don't work for 3 years? I'm just saying not every single person is going to fall into the deadbeat category.
With all due respect - what difference does it make? So what if they borrowed the money to start a new business. If they did and the business failed - tough shit - welcome to what was once free market capitalism. The only thing that matters is that they owed money - couldn't pay - and are now basically trying to steal the house and cry that they were somehow screwed - and that it is all someone elses fault. BS -- these people, and other like them need to go live under a bridge somewhere.
ok I'm not absolving them but what you are telling me is that it's ok that the bank screwed everyone and they get made whole? bullshit. so how do you solve this without the bank getting the property?
So, better that the bank should steal it and also screw the people who thought they had just bought the house out of clear title?
+1
I like when the lawyer said "we did this before they defraud ANOTHER family."
No one "Defrauded" your client, you scum.
I would love to kick this woman in the ass.
Before or after you hear her side of the story?
Full Deposition of Tammie Lou Kapusta Law Office of David J Stern
We can't all be hard-working unemployed college kids living in our parents basements like you, link.
It's amazing how much anger people at ZH can work up over a middle-class family who is trying to stick it to a big bank (and may or may not have a legit argument). Yet the same people show very little anger over the big banks who screwed us all.
i must admit it is very disturbing to c how many r repulsed by this family actions as if they're the ones who created money out of thin air which lies at the root of all this shit...
let me repeat, FUCK A BANKER... some of ya'll posting need to get ur enemies straight...
shameful.....
The only people getting phucked over are taxpayers. These squatters are locking in another trillion dollar bailout.
Honest decent people get screwed by everyone in this country.
word.
Yes! The taxpayers and the banks depositors are the ones who are being screwed. The banks need to get the houses back so that they can sell them to make their depositors whole. I guess the people complaining about the banks foreclosing and selling these houses don't have any money in savings/checking accounts to worry about. The banks were wrongdoers, but so were the borrowers. Neither should benefit from their wrongdoing, but the houses need to be foreclosed and sold to make sure people's lifesavings are not completely lost.
I don't think anyone is disputing that. The process must be done properly and legally.
Property law is one of the most important and settled areas of law in this country.
You're a fool if you think the borrowers weren't as much trying to milk the loan from their end as the lender was from the other.
The bank created the money out of nothing, true enough, but the borrower spent it just as well, and never had to pay it back. Now that the second mortgage was written off, they're coming back to try to get the house.
You're a fool if you think the borrowers weren't as much trying to milk the loan from their end as the lender was from the other.
The bank created the money out of nothing, true enough, but the borrower spent it just as well, and never had to pay it back. Now that the second mortgage was written off, they're coming back to try to get the house.
Good for them.
middle class?
rilly?
looks pretty swanky from here
Did you read Atlas Shrugged? In it, hard working capitalists do what the liberals in government told them to do, and stopped producing. The lawyer told the family to do this, and the law upheld it. They shrugged, and did it, just the same as John Galt shrugged and swept the floors in the sub-basement of the Taggart Terminal.
Courts rarely "uphold" these things. They usually enjoin the parties from taking certain actions for a period of time to allow the parties to work it out. Relatively few people want to see their day in court, since most of them would lose on the facts in evidence and the questions of law.
For all you dreamers who think a bunch of free houses will be given out, give it up. A lot of debt will be forgiven when this is all said and done, but those of us who actually pay taxes will be the one's paying for all this, since TPTB have all but said that the banks are Too Important to Fail.
LOL THAT is the point!!! So they get their day in court and the bank gets to provide PROOF that they are the proper party to foreclose on the property - what a fucking concept. I suppose all the people complaining about J6P here preferred the "old" way of doing things - foreclose on properties wether the bank actually has legal right to correct?
Atlas is Shrugging, make no mistake about it.
why would the cops get out of their car if it doesn't involve something that generates revenue for the state?
these people claim they were defrauded by fake papers and a phony $25,000 bill the bank threw in for the hell of it.
looks like the bank will have to start over and foreclose following the law.
Agreed.
I'm an organic vegetable farmer...a producer, a person who risks personal capital, time, effort and skills to create a profit; an employer. An entreprenuer in a pure capitalist sense and context.
When I walk away from that to a subsistence lifestyle adding no value to commerce or society...Atlas shrugs.
@Missing_link
I guess you missed your free house.
In 2008, I stop my early retirement in Europe to buy house like this.
A blind would see this colapse.
"Atlas" was bs, man
And, this is wonderful wealth transfer.
Congratulations Jim and Danielle
"this one is on" bankers
next.......,
I'd say it's like a(nother) dead canary in the coal mine.
+ (next POMO amount)
How about paying the bank the $380k you pulled out of your ATM, and restriking a $500k note??
Commence total breakdown of society where only the law of the jungle is respected.
Government, Corporations and Individuals are openly and without fear looking out for only themselves with no regard for the other guy.
Chaos, confusion and disorder. Anarchy is about to happen by default.
Naw its more like... Spartacus shrugged ...
WOW! America, as we knew it, is fucked up beyond any fix.
My fellow American, as you can see from this video, police will never protect you and/or your family.
It is just a matter for time when an ordinary spark will create an inferno all over the land. Our ruling elite, bankers, and politicians are too stupid to comprehend the reality. So, let them burn in hell. They deserved it.
Waiting for Uncle Sugar to step in, otherwise we are possibly looking at lawyer full employment. Hell I don't think there is anywhere near enough judges to handle the deluge that could come.
And when we are at lawyer full employment, then the law schools fill up causing a horrific cycle that no one want s to see.
The law schools are already full. A hoard of kids still flooding in to duck the economy. I'm a 3rd year law student and the job market is this side of horrific. I went back to my prior profession while I grind out my last year. Good thing for me I liked what I was doing before and have a huge distaste with law, I won't even sit for the bar. 3 years wasted to find out how crazy the legal process can be. But the lawyers have to be doing something, you would not believe the insane level of student loan debt around here.
The law school cycle of terror will not stop till there is student loan reform, aka Uncle Sugar stopping it. And to think could have gotten a worthwile grad degree...
The University of Virginia did a study a couple of years ago, and claimed that there are more students in law school now than there are practicing lawyers in the country. Still have my CPA, but raising pigs on clover back at Mule Creek looks better every day;)
Al Pacino said the same thing in Devil's Advocate. I'll tell you, it sounds true enough. If it was true then, and it is still true now, it then looks more and more likely that some day it will be the case that there will be two occupations: lawyer and mortician. Lawyers will outnumber morticians 10,000 to 1.
Well, yeah, 'cause who'll be able to afford the mortician's insurance to protect against the lawsuits?
Which will make business quite nice for the morticians. Attorneys will become the undertakers bread and butter.
In another life I too was a Car Parking lot Attendant (CPA), but one day I decided to pull a Johnny Paycheck and I sent my toilet paper back to the state and told them to shove it. Before I became one, I was told that it was nothing but a glorified bookkeeper. You know. The people that told me that were right.
Ah the CPA, I eyed that to. Slogged though my undergrad in accounting. I put years into learning about wacky paper systems, and then ended up making my living of what was a hobby, IT. If I could go back in time I would beat my ass and taken computer science instead of the convoluted path that lead me here.
There Is a retarded amount of law schools and the class size can get pretty big. With the massive rise in tutiion and the massive number with no jobs it's going to be a crazy situation. My fear is Uncle Sugar using that cadre as regulatory goons, holding the student loans above their heads.
Apparently your prior profession hires the walking dead? (couldnt resist).
here's one way to pay back law school loans:
Got a new criminal case where a law student claims a hit and run and put's in a claim for "the damage." Two other students claim to see the other driver and get a plate number. Turns out the plate belongs to a university employee who works in the computer department and can prove through fixed IPs and other evidence that they were working away at their terminal at the alleged impact time. There is no damage to the employee's car. The student has already put in a claim to their own insurance.
And the two other students charge $250/hour for their service which is billed back to the insurance company.
Or someone else was working away at his terminal, logged in as him.
yeah, thought of that but he's a total solo in the cancer research arena. He would have had to bring someone in who can talk the talk both medical and computer tech and learn to talk like him
Shameful,
I don't know why you won't sit for the bar. I know lawyers have a bad name, but the one's I've had help me were invaluable. It seems a shame to spend 3 years in law school and who knows how many years paying off your loans and never even cross the finish line.
I know not all lawyers are bad. The reason I won't sit for the bar is I will do my damnedest to avoid practice, and probably leaving the state I'm in. I make good money now and I think IT has a better long term outlook for employment. Turns out the legal degree won't hurt me too bad. Was talking the boss of a consultant firm our man customer uses and he all but offered me a job in front of my boss and project manager, he loved my background. Hell I've got a couple job offers unsolicited from other developers I know, but could not take them because need to grind it out here till May. And to be honest I prefer working in IT as a developer then slogging through legal work. I would have quit in the first year but it was very important to my mom that I finish. It's because of her I really went in the first place. It's hard to say no to mom.
Lucky for me I'm frugal so if I wanted to I could clear my loans now with an asset sale. I hustled for scholarships and saved like a fiend. So I'm not worried about my loans, I'm waiting for the system to break for that to wash them away or provide an avenue to dump assets for fun bux to pay them off. Or if things look to recover I'll sell and clear my debt.
The overall student loan system is criminal. The universities gouge. I was talking to the president of my undergrad and he was quite open that he was raising tuition because everyone else was not because there was a need. Without the Fed in involved in student loans the universities wold be forced to charge something reasonable or go out of business. The model we have now is basically debt slavery.
Everybody loathes lawyers. Until they need one.
And then they really loathe them.
+ 10 dismisseds with prejudice
I spent 1 year in that hell hole they call law school, worst of my life, of the 180 people in my 1st year 177 of them where fucking idiots. I am sure you are probably in the same boat but kudo's for sticking it out, I took my happy ass back to school get an accounting degree after I left that hell hole.
I believe the student debt issues. Student loan defaults are number 2 problem behind mortgages.
Same scenario:
Easy money was made available.
Home prices and 1st time buyers rose quickly
Tuitions and enrollment rose quickly
I will freely admit I only pay sallie mae every other month. It's not because I can't afford my student loans and I do intend to pay them back, but it is my way of protesting the government wasting my tax dollars and bailing out the banks. So every bit of pain I can inflict on them I gladly do. If they want to repossess my degree I would be happy to mail it back, frame and all!
Then we obviously need to do to law what was done to healthcare ... make legal support a right, require everyone to have a legal plan, and regulate the amounts that lawyers can charge for their services. Legicare, anyone?
Outstanding student loan debt has recently passed outstanding credit card debt. What a benevolent system that shackles their youth with debt that can only be repaid if there is employment available and at a time in their lives when they do not understand the future implications of their actions. And I see students using credit cards solely to pay for every purchase they make. If they graduate and find employment of course they will want a mortgage and pile on more debt.
Uncle Sam's new poster should be updated to say "We Want You...To Be Our Debt Slave!"
Or at least locksmith full employment!
Maybe all those Census workers will be called back in and be sworn in as judges - UE problem solved!!!
The Earls paid $500,000 for the house in 2001
and then refinanced to pull out cash.
Refi for $300,000 -
They fell behind on their mortgage
WTF happened to the 300,000.
and at the time of their eviction they owed about $880,000 on a no-interest mortgage.
A (almost) million dollar loan at no interest?
Oh come on, please dont tell me this is your poster child for defrauded homeowners.
WTF happened to the 300,000
Weekend in Vegas, baybeeee.
Dumped all into Chrysler Preferred or 300K in MedPot.
Yeh, these assholes took out a second mortgage and this moron loses his job. Now he thinks that somehow the house is still his , even though he can't make the payments. What a strange world we live in. I certainly am not wishing to defend the blood sucking banks, but please. The aspirations and wants of Americans these days are off the chain. They keep talking about Americans deleveraging. They are not. They are still trying to create the same lives they see on shows like Housewives and Jershey shore. Young people still think they deserve a new car, their own cell phone and daddy's credit card and their parents go along with the program because they too are living in some dream world of their own making. Americans live in their own little self induced worlds of their own making and do not care or pay attention to what is going on around them more or less. It is a sad commentary on us as Americans and just how far we have fallen. This time if we are not careful, we will never recover. I predict the pain will be great and Americans will be dragged kicking and screaming into the new reality.
Fertility treatments?
~Misstrial
yeah; i thought no-interest loans were only available directly from Fanny to Sen Dodd? Perhaps they are related to Dodd?
Pretty sure by the looks of her that is Bawney Fwanks daughter
Refi's shouldn't be available on $500,000 houses. If your house costs that much, then you should be earning some big bucks.
The Earl's and their refi co. must be fockin retarded.
I'm assuming they meant interest-only mortgage, not a no-interest mortgage.
I'd say having 9 kids had a hand in helping that disappear. You'd think they could afford a television in their $500k house, but I'm guessing they couldn't as apparently procreating was all they could think of to keep themselves entertained.
300k is twenty-three thousand more than the price of all the half gallon milk cartons they went through. Are they Catholic or farmers?