Chase sued in NYC for denying foreclosure relief - Crain's New York Business

Chase sued in NYC for denying foreclosure relief - Crain's New York Business

This news is a few weeks old, but is anyone surprised that Chase bank is being sued for dragging their home mortgage customers through the mudd?

If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...

info at alexlogic.com

You can also view more

commercial critiques

by Alessandro Machi at

Super Bowl Consulting

How is Jamie Dimon of Chase Bank commemorating Memorial Day for Soldiers on Duty to reduce their debt burden?

What does Wall Street, and bankers such as Jamie Dimon, do on Memorial Day to help our own soldiers pay down their debts? I'm not talking debt forgiveness. However, knowing that an american soldier can't take a second job to pay down a debt, how about a fixed, lower credit card interest rate for veteran families?

Even if the banks want to attach a stipulation that the fixed lower interest rate would apply to any veteran family that is actually paying down their credit card debt, lowering the interest rate to something reasonable, like, 9.99 percent, would actually help stretch a veteran families budget.

It's amazing how disconnected Wall Street is from all of us when they can't even acknowledge the men and women who actually risk their lives in far away countries so bankers like Jamie Dimon can work.

There are some guidelines in place that are supposed to protect veterans and their families from crazy high interest rate charges, but apparently there are ways around it.

Chase Bank's Foreclosure Disgrace as reported by Greg Kaufmann for the Nation.

Read the Entire Article, Chase's Foreclosure Disgrace, by clicking on this sentence.

Is it Time for Wall Street to Jump?

All Aboard the X-Train to Vegas.

All Aboard the X-Train to Vegas. On a sister blog of mine called Wall Street Change, I had just written about the X-Train to Vegas when a day or so later Andy Rooney provided a stinging rebuke of the Gambling Industry and its detrimental role to our economy. I added that video to the article.

However, the X-Train to Vegas article link above takes a pro-active role in suggesting ways Vegas can be helpful to the U.S. economy, and that can help create jobs that keeps people in their homes.

Posted using ShareThis

JP Morgan is Shut down and barred from trying to Foreclose.

I found the above headline, JP Morgan Chase is shut down and barred from trying to foreclose, here. So it can be done. It might be worth considering having your lawyers research the article link and see if they need to contact the company that won their battle against Chase Bank.

Did Loan Safe Cross the recruiting members line by reporting on a foreclosure suicide?

Both myself (Swarm the Banks), and Shame the Banks have visited loan safe forums in the past.

Once I got past the embarrassing amount of ads that proliferate all over loan safe forums, I registered. I then decided to add signature links in my posts via the control panel that every loan safe forum member receives when they sign up. In other words, I used a signature link option that loan safe forums makes available to their members. But when I did this, I was accused of poaching loan safe for "traffic" to my sites.

Since I have no forum of my own, and loan safe is a forum based web site, it is basically impossible to poach members because the services each site offers is different from each other. If I was offering a forum based website about home loans, then loan safe's concerns would have been valid. However, it did not seem to matter to loan safe what type of website I had, if loansafe members went to it, then that made me a poacher! (not their words but close enough)

My concern today is loan safe's use of a news story involving a couple that committed what looks to be foreclosure suicide. The foreclosure suicide story is being used by loan safe to recruit membership.

Besides this being a tacky way to recruit members, isn't loan safe poaching members of other internet sites by using news stories they had nothing to do with, so they can gain members?

Why is it ok for loan safe to use other news agencies stories to drive membership to their site, but if other site owners such as swarm the banks or shame the banks try to get the word out about what they are doing, suddenly we are not welcome at Loan Safe? Especially if we cross link and even do write ups about loan safe on our own blogs!

The answer is, many blog and website owners who are over the age of 35-40 basically don't get the concept that sending traffic elsewhere is just as important as the traffic they receive.

Which brings me to my book, The Cat Who Ate Chase Bank, which I have now postponed twice. The first postponement was because I upgraded to Apple's Snow Leopard (specifically because I was writing the book!) but snow leopard basically rendered my camera worthless for FIVE MONTHS because Apple put no provisions for Canon's Power shot cameras to continue working with Canon's software on the Apple Snow Leopard platform.

Instead of just stewing about Apple's arrogance, I decided to stew and change the focus of my book to internet consumer advocate heroes. However, I ended up postponing that idea because prospective heroes I found appeared to be unwilling to share their spotlight, to share links back and forth with other consumer advocate heroes to create a bigger, stronger consumer advocacy network.

Creating a bigger network of people to fight for logic and fairness is one way to achieve a worthwhile goal, and I'm sticking to that plan.

Chase’s Dimon to Students: You Can ‘Hold Me Accountable’ | ecreditdaily.com

Chase’s Dimon to Students: You Can ‘Hold Me Accountable’ | ecreditdaily.com

I'm reluctant to search for a transcript of what Jamie Dimon said at the 2010 Syracuse University commencement day speech because I might read it, and then probably get really annoyed at the heaping helpings of hypocrisy that probably exist within Dimon's prose.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

Law Offices of John Ribarich YouTube Video Testimonials created by Alan "Best Buys" Mendelson southern california infomercials.

I don't know anything about the southern california law offices of John Ribarich, however infomercial producer and on air talent Alan Mendelson has produced an infomercial featuring the Ribarich Law Group.

If Lawyers can help homeowners keep their homes, then lets help the lawyers get so much business they become experts in fighting back for consumers.

How financial banking headlines tell lies and falsify what the article is actually about!

Click here to read the the above story.

The above headline "Mass usury law a weak weapon vs big lenders" COMPLETELY CHANGES THE CONTENT AND FOCUS of the article. The actual article is an incredibly positive story of the states fighting back against the banksters by taking state money out of too big to fail banks that charge more than 18% interest.

However, the headline "Mass usury law a weak weapon vs big lenders" makes it sound like it is a losing battle even though the battle has just started! I am apoplectic over this.

Shame on Sixty Minutes and their Strategic Default Homeowner Story.

I felt like Sixty Minutes COMPLETELY IGNORED the other side of the home foreclosure discussion with their Strategic Default hit piece against well to do homeowners.

What is the point in staying in ANY home that is upside down if years later the bank will not let you access the home equity line that you may have built up by staying in the home, and making payments until the home was no longer upside down?

The homeownership carrot of a home equity line has been taken away by the same banksters that have also stolen bailout money and kept it for their own bonuses. These same entities may also be using their huge bonuses as seed money on wall street to suck you back into investing!

Sixty Minutes focused their story on "Strategic Defaults" as if these homeowners are thieves, and as if these homeowners are a huge contingent!

If the banks and government banking regulations can take away a homeowner's option to use their own home as their own survival equity bank when times are tough, why should a homeowner keep their word years earlier when the home may be upside down?

NOBODY in the media is talking about the banksters stealing homeowners down payments and their built up equity via foreclosure, instead, the news focuses on strategic defaults and all the "upside down" homes, as if that is the only issue on the table.

Sixty Minutes Story on Strategic Defaults to air May 09, 2010 on CBS

Click here to see 4 closure Fraud Article about Sixty Minutes Story on Strategic Defaults.

I presume the sixty minutes story about Strategic Default, slated for May 09, 2010 on CBS, won't delve into people who don't presently have a job but have plenty of home equity in their home, being denied access to their home equity and even being foreclosed upon as a result.

Should homeowners be foreclosed upon if they have built up equity in their home?

It is a struggle for me to understand how homeowners are being foreclosed upon if they have built up equity in their home. Example, a home is worth $200,000, and the homeowner has either paid either made a healthy down payment of $75,000, or over the years has built up $75,000 dollars worth of home equity. Is it really fair for the banks to foreclose on the home, short sell it for $125,000 dollars, and basically rob the homeowner of the $75,000 dollar down payment or the home equity that they have already built up?

I consider the above scenario insane and until Barack Obama and Congress deal with this issue head on, they are frauds in my book, ALL OF THEM. How dare they give out tax credits to first time home owners while they allow the banks to steal built up wealth from existing homeowners.

I am pretty certain Hillary Clinton would not have allowed this plundering to occur, and that is why her campaign was sabotaged behind the scenes by democratic higher ups during the 2008 democratic primary.

Why Politics and Unions do not Mix Well.

A New Way Forward is a growing grass roots movement that wants to see the too big to fail banks broken up.

I am not sure the real core issue facing beleaguered homeonwers is breaking up the "too big to fail" banks. I think the "big four" (Wells Fargo, Citibank, Chase and Bank of America) might actually be an asset to the country IF intelligent financial rules were put in place.

Perhaps we are facing the irony of the "gift of the magi" because the "too big to fail banks" could instantly be a huge asset to the country, if they would not fight the real financial reform that is needed.

And of course, just who actually knows what the real financial reform is, that is needed?

My personal reservations about A New Way Forward is that it may be seeded too strongly with union groups. On top of that, I am no longer interested in community activism if the primary thing the activists do is figure out how to get their community a bigger cut of the tax pie. Apparently, at the recent rally pictured below in Illinois people were allegedly chanting "Raise our Taxes".

The problem is the Unions are having it both ways. The unions appear to prefer both political parties fight over their union members' vote, but then they also are involved in "grass roots" movements as well.

I would suggest that when the unions forced their members to vote for Barack Obama during the 2008 democratic primary and caucus contests, they created the present problem. Barack Obama was a worthy democratic candidate in 2008, but it is ridiculous to presume he actually beat Hillary Clinton fairly and squarely. If the 2008 democratic primary and caucus races had been fairly conducted, Hillary Clinton would have ended up with between 52-54 percent of the vote, and a similar delegate advantage as well.

Instead, democratic caucus cheating was rampant. I studied the caucus vote counts and basically Barack Obama's entire delegate lead over Hillary Clinton came from tainted caucus contests that never came close to representing what the polling companies were getting.

At one point, the polling companies actually did not want to disclose their results regarding caucus contests because they knew that Hillary Clinton was being shortchanged and they did not want to look so inaccurate in their pre-caucus poll results.

Then we have the strange case of Illinois (Barack Obama's residence state) moving up its 2008 primary date by 7 weeks to early February, while Michigan and Florida (Hillary Clinton states) were penalized for moving their date up. Barack Obama's landslide victory in Illinois gave him an advantage that he trumpeted in the 10 caucus contests that immediately followed that primary.

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton had nothing to show for Michigan other than the mudslinging from Barack Obama to New Hampshire and Iowa voters condemning Michigan for trying to move up their primary date too close to theirs, and condemning Hillary Clinton for keeping her name on the ballot in Michigan as well.

The Michigan and Florida primaries were going to go to Hillary Clinton, Illinois was going to go to Barack Obama. Barack Obama got his bounce, Hillary Clinton was denied hers. the messing with these three states alone stole the democratic nomination from Hillary Clinton.

Factor in the caucus cheating, in which Hillary Clinton was either tied or leading in the polls in virtually all caucus contests but ended up losing the caucus delegate count by a 2-1 MARGIN to Barack Obama and the result was clearly in Hillary Clinton's favor.

I believe the unions paid a deep price for possibly contributing to several unethical maneuvers in 2008 to get Barack Obama selected over Hillary Clinton. (Research 2008 Las Vegas democratic caucus, Iowa caucus vote totals from precincts that border Illinois, and the late voter primary counts in Indiana precincts that also border Illinois).

Now the unions don't like what they see and they want a do over.

Hillary Clinton would not have let the banks walk all over her and that is why Barack Obama started to get large Wall Street donor campaigns.

When a self professed documentary filmmaker such as Michael Moore says nothing about the abuse his own state of Michigan was put through during in the 2008 democratic primary race, and also says nothing about Illinois moving its own primary date up 7 weeks to game the system, we can reasonably assume that SOMETHING WAS GOING ON.

I would suggest that the biggest political problems unions face is the idea that all of their votes are supposed to go to one candidate to maximize their influence. Why treat union workers so miserably by forcing them to go with one candidate? Why should union workers be treated as mindless minions whose vote can only go to the union committee selected candidate?

When politicians try to win the Union Vote, or when they try to win the Chamber of Commerce Vote, and so on down the line, it just contributes to all the political divisiveness that we presently are facing. If the Unions are for breaking up the banks, than for sure republicans will be against it.

If the unions had let the voting public decide who was the stronger candidate in 2008 between Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, then backed that candidate, they probably would be in a better position right now. AND, they would not have set a horrible precedent of prematurely manipulating the selection of the democratic party presidential candidate before the democratic voters of the country had voted.

So what does all of this have to do with the April 29th, 2010 protest march on Wall Street? The unions have created a polarized environment, which means any effort they make, no matter how legitimate, will automatically result in a backlash from those who have dealt with the unions in the past and not gotten the union vote.

How Swarm the Banks works.

Update - November 24, 2010 - With the growth of this website I am hoping that sharing important foreclosure information and ideas will help educate interested homeowners as to the kind of legal activities they can take in regards to their HAMP and Parallel Foreclosure experience.

Update - September 30, 2010 - due to "people power considerations" the idea of swarming the banks via phone calls is being given out freely to anyone who wants to try it in their own city.)

Please note, I am no longer advocating calling the banks en masse as the issue of home foreclosures is now in the mainstream. The information below is simply historical as to why Swarm the Banks was first started, but no longer reflects the direction that Swarm the Banks is now headed.

First view the blog column to your far left and your far right where it says "Shame the Banks". They are both filled with Shame the Banks story links from home owners who feel they are not being treated fairly by their banks.

The banks will be given a certain amount of time to respond to the homeowners letters. If the bank or financial institution does not respond within a certain amount of time, Swarm the Banks volunteers will be asked to call the particular bank or loan institution in question and ask what is going on with the specific loan case.

The phone swarming will continue until the banks figure out a reasonable solution.

Yes, it's that easy. You can start your own phone bank in your own city if you want to try and help your fellow home foreclosure victims.