Admin

Citizen's "Wiki Leak": Large Bank causes investor to lose an estimated 40k thru incompetence

By
Real Estate Agent with Isaac Real Estate &TriStar Mortgage
Bellevue WA - Wiki leak's Editor, Julian Assange, recently said he would be releasing documents on a large US Bank. We decided to beat him to it and release some information on how a large US Bank caused their client to lose an estimated 40k because of their incompetence. Discover how other sellers successfully did a short sale to avoid foreclosure by clicking here. This is a house that we drive past every day on my way to work. We noticed that it look abandoned. We looked up the owner to see if they might want to sell the house. That’s when I saw that the home had already been foreclosed. The house was foreclosed on February 4th, 2009. That’s almost a two years ago. Since we didn’t know who the lender was, we forgot about the house. But, it was a great example of why a bank owned house sells for less than a short sale. So, we went out to the house and took some pictures. Normally, after a bank forecloses on a house, they will put it up for sale within 2-3 months. Today, December 1st, 2010, they still haven’t put the home up for sale. We found out that a large US Bank's Loan Servicing Arm was servicing the loan on behalf of the owner. In July 2009, we talked to Ann at this lender's loan servicing office. She told us that they were servicing this loan. She said if I had a buyer, we would need to contact the homeowner. “It’s not owned by us. You need to contact the homeowner if you want to sell the house. The property has not gone to foreclosure sale,” she said. We told her the house had already been foreclosed upon. We asked her if they ever communicated with the foreclosure lawyers. We also made sure we were talking about the same house. She confirmed that we were talking about the same house and confirmed the address and the foreclosed homeowner's name. “That’s interesting,” she replied. “My records show it hasn’t gone to foreclosure. I’ll check in with the foreclosure department and verify whether it has or hasn’t been foreclosed upon,” she said. Today, almost two years later, no one has followed up on this house. The loan servicer has been 100% incompetent with their actions on this house. Here is who it appears owns the house today: The Certificate Holders of the Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc Trust 2005-WMC6 Mortgage Pass Through Certificates, Series 2005-WMC6. That means the owners could range from a pension fund, a large Wall Street Firm, or individual persons. Estimate of Money Lost by the owner: $40,000 to $50,000. This is an estimate of the amount of money lost because the house was no put on the market in the normal 2-3 months after foreclosure. This large US Bank's servicing arm has waited almost two years to put the home up for sale, and it still isn’t on the market as of December 1st, 2010. Here is how I came up with the estimate of loss: We asked another agent what he had thought the house would have sold for previously. We both agreed that if the house had been listed in April 2009, that it would have sold quickly. This is because Spring is the peak selling season. We both agreed that it would have sold for between $140,000 and $150,000. Today homes similar to this one are selling for $90,000 to $100,000, depending on the condition. This home is in pretty bad condition. So, we can conservatively estimate the loss because of a reduced selling price to be: $35,000 to $50,000. That isn't factoring in a estimated $4,000 in property taxes that have accrued during these past two years, nor lost interest if the money had been loaned to someone else. I am going to give the same answer as Mr. Assange for who the bank is. First, it is a large US Bank. If you were to ask, "Is it the largest US Bank?" then our answer would be: "No Comment." Thinking about a short sale? I can help you short sale your property and never pay the bank another penny. Send me an e-mail at jirius@gmail.com. I will contact you for a free consultation. When we talk, I will explain how the process works in detail. If you prefer, then you can call me at 206-841-9976. Discover how other sellers successfully completed a short sale and request a free consultation by clicking here. Thinking about a loan modification? Our Bellevue Loan Modification Kit has the instructions you will need to get a loan modification approved with your lender. Click here to request a copy. Thanks for reading this, Jirius Isaac. Jirius is a Real Estate Broker( no agents) at C21 Real Estate Center. Phone: 206-841-9976. jirius@gmail.com. View My homes for sale at http://kenmorehomesforsale.com/. Jirius Isaac specializes in loan modification assistance and short sales in Bellevue Washington. Bellevue Loan Modification Help, Bellevue Short Sales. Bellevue Short Sale Realtor Short Sale Realtor. Bellevue WA Short Sales. Bellevue Realtor. Copyright 2010 SFI Marketing Institute, LLC. All Rights Reserved. This is not intended as legal, technical, or tax advice. Please speak with a licensed professional before making any decision. Information is deemed reliable but not guaranteed as of the date of writing. The views expressed here are Jirius Isaac's personal views and do not reflect the views of C21 Real Estate Center. This information on Citizen's "Wiki Leak": Large Bank causes investor to lose an estimated 40k thru incompetence is provided as a courtesy to our viewers to help them make informed decisions.
Show All Comments Sort:
Anonymous
odogwa
cEXyH8 aowmdjnvrabn
Apr 22, 2012 03:28 PM
#1
Anonymous
orercetworuch
The Supreme Court of Canada has opened the doorway to allowing international multinational organizations to dodge their Canadian tax liabilities by siding with British drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline in its 20-year tax battle while using the federal government. The great court endorsed an appeals courtroom ruling about "transfer pricing," which permits fioricet overnight multinationals to charge their subsidiaries very high costs for ingredient bills in order to scale back Canadian gains. The Office of Countrywide Revenue had challenged Glaxo Canada's utilization of a licence agreement that allowed it to pay Glaxo Swiss subsidiary Adechsa involving $1,512 and $1,651 for every kilogram for your acquire of ranitidine, the effective ingredient inside the anti-ulcer drug Zantac. Glaxo also compensated parent firm Glaxo Team a 6 for every cent royalty on net sales and profits of Zantac. The price of ranitidine exceeded the $194 to $304 for every kilogram charged to Canadian generic pharmaceutical organizations Apotex Inc. and Novopharm Inc. by arm's-length suppliers. The government effectively argued in Tax Court that implementing the "reasonable" costs to Glaxo Canada would have improved the subsidiary's net salary for 1990 to 1993 by $51 million. http://headachetreatment.net But the Federal Court of Appeal in July 2010 overturned the Tax Court's choice and rejected the department's argument that good markets benefit paid by generics was the suitable measure. It sent the calculation back into the Tax Courtroom to get a redetermination. Creating for that Supreme Courtroom, Justice Marshall Rothstein mentioned inside a ruling unveiled Thursday the Tax Courtroom "erred in refusing to get account with the licence agreement." "The generic comparators never reflect the financial state and business fact of Glaxo Canada and, at the least without having adjustment, do no reveal the value that could be reasonable during the circumstance, had Glaxo Canada and Adechsa been dealing at arm's size." Queen's College tax regulation professional Art Cockfield says the ruling is known as a gain for Glaxo and fioricet could prompt others to adopt state-of-the-art cross-border tax structures to shift earnings to low-tax jurisdictions. "There's gigantic flows going again and forth and enterprises have an incentive to video game the platform by shifting earnings invariably to your lowest-tax place," he says. "It's adverse for Canada merely because it supports aggressive global tax organizing that sends revenues exterior belonging to the region." Canada's lesser corporate tax pace as opposed to U.S. could, but, insulate it from these kinds of revenue shifts somewhere between establishments with functions on both sides with the border, Cockfield extra.
Oct 23, 2012 01:00 PM
#2