The Baltimore decision was written in such a way as to indicate the city’s claim was too broad (vague? this is my interpretation) but that they could come back with more specific charges (that is from the article). 

Tricia Bishop of  The Baltimore Sun covers the story  and goes a bit more in depth regarding the issue of Fair Housing and Redlining. 

Here is a quote from her article on the dismissal ruling:

 The city could restrict its claims to specific damages allegedly suffered because of actual houses made vacant by Wells Fargo’s lending practices, he wrote.

“…He’s asking the city to paint with a less broad brush if it wishes to do that,” City Solicitor George Nilson summarized. Counselors plan to discuss their options, which include appealing or filing a narrowed lawsuit, as early as today, he said…”

Cleveland is supposedly appealing their ruling as well.  There are still other cases being brought by different cities.  It will be interesting to see if any of the strategies work.  The Baltimore ruling seemed to indicate that narrowing the focus of a suit could work.  We’ll see !  Peace out – 3C

As a Cleveland Realtor® this troubles me and I bet it troubles a lot of you. Which is why I used Deutsche Bank as an example. They came into our market a few years ago after never doing business in NE Ohio before, and offered mortgage deals to thousands upon thousands of potential homeowners. Homeowners who probably shouldn’t have bought a home (in many cases) but for sure who wound up with mortgages on homes appraised at higher values than they should have been appraised. Now Deutsche Bank is one of the top owner of foreclosed properties for this very reason.

Since this Bailout is related to the mortgage and foreclosure issue, there is no reason to think that Deutsche wouldn’t be one of the banks trying to get aid from The Bailout.

And since Section 8 of the Bailout proposal says  “Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency” every NE Ohioan could send a letter of protest and it wouldn’t matter.

We know that Britain is working out similar problems and issues with their banks. We know other countries are too. But seriously, there seem to be no checks and balances in this Bailout proposal that would keep our own leaders from assisting the foxes in the chicken coup.

What do you think? What is your opinion on Bailout money going into other economies? Do you have a good rationale as to why I’m wrong? I’m open to hearing your reasons.

Here is a quote from the Politico article:

“….The theory, according to a participant in the negotiations, is that if the goal is to solve a liquidity crisis, it makes no sense to exclude banks that do a lot of lending in the United States….”

And Paulson’s quotes from a CNBC article:

 ”Yes, and they should. Because … if a financial institution has business operations in the United States, hires people in the United States, if they are clogged with illiquid assets, they have the same impact on the American people as any other institution,”

What say you? Peace Out – 3C

Just went back in to find links to Callahan’s Cleveland Diary about all the foreclosed homes owned by Deutsche Bank and other issues surrounding them since this all began. Start here then go here and here.

Sept 22nd Update: according to various media (here is PD link to the bailout story) there is a bit of an agreement between The Admn and The Dems on a need for oversight, and a mortgage/homeowner component.

Secondly, here is the Democratic ‘working paper’ response to the three page proposal/draft Paulson sent out over the weekend.

There are markets in places like California where the average sale price is mucho higher than ours. So one of the key points is: where to set lending limits. The Bill in question, if you remember or have read about it, would allow The Federal Housing Admn (FHA) to make fixed loans to people who really don’t qualify for them under current guidelines……and they are estimating almost a half a million people could qualify for these new loans.  And President Bush is still threatening a veto. Today’s Senate vote was 83 -9, pretty overwhelming support.

We still have to figure out how to pay for this. What does it cost? $300 billion?

You can read about it. Here is the AP story by Julie Herschfeld Davis.  What do you think?

6/26/08  The devil is in the details for sure. Now a Nevada Senator has decided energy credits have something to do with the Mortgage Rescue Plan. Typical senatorial move but exasperating nonetheless.

 If you read the article you will see that the monies for this revitalization program (country wide, not just in NE Ohio) comes in part from Deutsche Bank. I don’t know if that is irony or just amends. What do you think?

Here is what I hope. We continue to get money to help us take care of the abandoned homes issue. But I hope the communities are being consulted as to what the best re-use of that space should be. Maybe they are, and if you know about this I would love it if you could enlighten me further.  I really like NPI’s Strategic Investment Initiative  (that is my post from November ’07) and have some faith that they will always try to do good for a community. I guess I am just hoping that the grand scheme of things is considered, and that people in the communities in which these homes exist are having their voices heard.

Peace out – 3C