I was going to disagree and say that this woman's problems stemmed from fraud on the part of her loan agent, and that if he hadn't committed fraud, she would have rightly been denied a loan she wasn't qualified for, until I saw this part:
"She signed the contract anyway, at the urging of her attorney at the time, figuring it was an honest mistake and Wells Fargo would correct it."
Why in the world would she do that? If it's an honest mistake, then they can fix it in short order and give you a correct contract, but once you put your name to paper on any sort of agreement, you're on the hook and the lender has no incentive to fix it. It doesn't matter if you wanted to make that payment or not, you signed a binding contract stating that you would, pay up or lose the house.
I can't believe there are people this stupid, and that they're being allowed a pass on this. And what pisses me off the most is, I'll end up paying for some portion of this when they get a federal bailout due to huge losses, like lawsuits that they should have cleaned the plaintiffs' clock in. This precedent does not bode well for the economy in the slightest I'm guessing.
3 comments:
I'm not surprised this happened in DC. I think a Texas jury would have been less sympathetic.
I was going to disagree and say that this woman's problems stemmed from fraud on the part of her loan agent, and that if he hadn't committed fraud, she would have rightly been denied a loan she wasn't qualified for, until I saw this part:
"She signed the contract anyway, at the urging of her attorney at the time, figuring it was an honest mistake and Wells Fargo would correct it."
Why in the world would she do that? If it's an honest mistake, then they can fix it in short order and give you a correct contract, but once you put your name to paper on any sort of agreement, you're on the hook and the lender has no incentive to fix it. It doesn't matter if you wanted to make that payment or not, you signed a binding contract stating that you would, pay up or lose the house.
I can't believe there are people this stupid, and that they're being allowed a pass on this. And what pisses me off the most is, I'll end up paying for some portion of this when they get a federal bailout due to huge losses, like lawsuits that they should have cleaned the plaintiffs' clock in. This precedent does not bode well for the economy in the slightest I'm guessing.
I guess we need a 12 Step Program for compulsive/impulsive house buyers.
I think this woman was a co-conspirator with Wells.
If they falsified papers, then that's a legal issue between Wells, their shareholders, and the regulators.
But in no way, shape, or form does this woman deserve 'damages' for signing documents she knew were false in order to get what she wanted.
Let's hope the appeals process works here. We know Wells will appeal because they don't want thousands of others like her to do the same.
Post a Comment