How Mortgage Fraud affects a Neighborhood-- Part 8

I recently wrote seven posts about Mortgage Fraud:

How Mortgage Fraud Affects a Neighborhood-- Part 1

How Mortgage Fraud Affects a Neighborhood-- Part 2

How Mortgage Fraud Affects a Neighborhood-- Part 3

How Mortgage Fruad Affects a Neighborhood-- Part 4

How Mortgage Fraud Affects a Neighborhood-- Part 5

How Mortgage Fraud Affects a Neighborhood-- Part 6

How Mortgage Fruad Affects a Neighborhood-- Part 7

Again, this is a family that lost three homes in my neighborhood.  Down on their luck?  Not really, if they had not speculated, they would've been fine in the homes they are living in now, which are not in foreclosure.  This was done by a husband and wife, and their son.  Their son held property in his own name, and according to his LinkedIn account, he works in San Francisco in financial services industry!  Further, A google search of his name reveals that he bought 3 condos in Las Vegas at roughly the same time, all with 100% financing.  Those three are long gone, having been sold as bank-owned properties.
Would you trust this guy with your money? 

This was easy to string together, as the father and son have the same name (i.e. William Sr. and William Jr.)

What makes it unusually, and a little off topic of licensees who bought in my neighborhood, is the fact that none are licensees...  However, the agent who is handling the attempted short sales, and eventual ahort sales of those that sold is related to these people, and making a fortune off their lousy speculations!  

Here's how these Fraudsters worked my neighborhood and some other houses they bought:

1) 

Acquired 03/30/2001 -- $924,000

Original loan-- $500,000

Cash out refinanced-- $700,000 on 07/10/2003.

Cash out refinance-- $903,000 on 05/24/2005.

Sold as a Short Sale for $655,000 on 11/10/2011

Loss to Lender <$248,000>

2) 

Acquired 11/26/2002-- $600,000

After numerous cash out refinances:

1^st T.D. – 05/22/2007-- $559,300

2^nd T.D.—07/23/2007-- $67,100

Total Loans: $626,400

Notice of Default filed 06/16/2009

Sold as a short sale on 04/04/2012--$450,000

Loss to Lender <$176,400>

3) 

Loans:  1^st T.D.-- $940,000

             2^nd T.D. --$116,325

Total Loans: $1,056,325  (89.9% Loan-to-Value)

11/19/2010--Sold to a 3^rd Party at Auction for $690,000

Loss to Lender <$366,325>

4) 

Acquired 07/02/2004-- $825,000

Loan:  07/02/2004-- $650,000 (78.787% Loan-to-Value)

Cash out refinance on 03/28/2007:

1^st T.D.-- $900,000

2^nd T.D.--$56,250

Total loans--$956,250  ($131,250 more than acquisition price)

Notice of Default recorded on 06/28/2011

Currently listed as a short sale for $779,000.

Loss to Lender is unknown at this time.

5) 

130 W. 9^th Street,Gilroy,CA95020  (Outside Eagle Ridge)

Acquired 09/02/2004-- $610,000

Loan:  $427,000  (70% Loan-to-Value)

Currently listed for sale for $550,000.

6) 

Acquired 06/07/2007

No loan; it looks like it was passed on to these two through a living trust.

Currently listed as a Pending sale on the MLS for $437,000.

It appears to be rented, but the monthly rental income is unknown.  There is no loan on it, and it appears the wife inherited it from her mother, so why aren't they using this income to pay off the loans on the other houses?

 As I said, the relative, who is an agent, is making a small fortune selling the homes as short sales...