Bank forecloses on wrong house

[Forever_frost]

You guys are putting the cart before the horse with all this lawyer-up talk. This little problem is nothing that a killdozer won't solve.

That is fleeting and if you want to live, you'll be in prison. You take his job, his house and cost the bank a fortune as well as going after the city for not responding to the burglary of your home? That lasts a lifetime

[jewozzy]

That's a civil issue can't blame the police on this one...

[01vnms4v]

Saw this on the news this morning. I would so lawyer up and I am sure I would own that branch bank when done

[YALE]

That's a civil issue can't blame the police on this one...

Doesn't the local SO or JP serve eviction notices in most states?

[talisman]

That's a civil issue can't blame the police on this one...

Please explain this a little more. I'm not disagreeing per-se, but they broke into her house and took all of her shit. I don't see how that isn't criminal just because "they made a mistake."

[jakesford]

Please explain this a little more. I'm not disagreeing per-se, but they broke into her house and took all of her shit. I don't see how that isn't criminal just because "they made a mistake."

I think it would come down to the fact that there was no criminal intent, it is negligence by the bank/company that performed the foreclosure which would be a civil matter.

[Baron Von Crowder]

Please explain this a little more. I'm not disagreeing per-se, but they broke into her house and took all of her shit. I don't see how that isn't criminal just because "they made a mistake."

maybe lack of criminal intent? They werent knowingly breaking the law, just doing thier jobs. The bank employed contractors to go in and clean out the house, so technically, the contractor is the one in the hot seat.

[EW]

He messed up by not cutting a check for $18K as fast as he could. Next request should be $1,000,000.

[inline 6]

maybe lack of criminal intent? They werent knowingly breaking the law, just doing thier jobs. The bank employed contractors to go in and clean out the house, so technically, the contractor is the one in the hot seat.

Not breaking the law on purpose does not mean that it was not broken. Reguardless the responsibility was on the bank to insure that the right home was being worked. And since when is it ok even in that situation for the bank in the same day sell or trash all of the stuff? It is pure classlessness of the bank to not see an error and EVEN IF IT WAS thr right house to not at least give who ever the home owner is a chance to get some personal items or family heirlooms out. All the bank had to do was change the locks and wait one more day. Its not like it was going to be sold later on that evening anyways.

[talisman]

If I don't see a Stop sign, but still run it, I'm still liable for the ticket the Officer writes me, correct?

[Baron Von Crowder]

Not breaking the law on purpose does not mean that it was not broken. Reguardless the responsibility was on the bank to insure that the right home was being worked. And since when is it ok even in that situation for the bank in the same day sell or trash all of the stuff? It is pure classlessness of the bank to not see an error and EVEN IF IT WAS thr right house to not at least give who ever the home owner is a chance to get some personal items or family heirlooms out. All the bank had to do was change the locks and wait one more day. Its not like it was going to be sold later on that evening anyways.

I dont know everything about how it works, but a friend owns a company that does cleanup and cleanouts on forclosures. They get a list of houses to go clean out, and then bid on yard work and such. These arent houses that people are getting evicted from, these are empty houses.

Dont get me wrong, its complete bullshit that this chick was robbed, but it wasnt like they were accross the street and decided to go change the locks and clean out a house because nobody was home.

[Crownline79]

If I don't see a Stop sign, but still run it, I'm still liable for the ticket the Officer writes me, correct?

correct because it's a strict liability crime, it doesn't require a mens rea

[talisman]

correct because it's a strict liability crime, it doesn't require a mens rea

I hope this guy didn't die in the middle of making this post.



Anyway, I've just playing devil's advocate on this one, I'm really not even sure where I personally stand on it. I know if I was in her position I'd be looking for the most absolute cut throat lawyer I could find.

[jluv]

$1 million seems fair to me. That's crazy that she only asked for $18k, and even crazier that they turned her down.

[bcoop]

I don't think the police really did anything wrong. The police obviously took a report, looked in to it, and closed it after discovering the facts.


Wish the article was more specific on whether the bank gave the wrong address, or the company that hauled everything away had the wrong house. The way it is written is a little confusing. It states GPS lead them to that house, but the lady says her yard wasn't mowed so they just assumed. Either way, the bank President should have stepped up and paid the $18,000 for this to quietly go away. Even if it was their contractor's fault, they could have back billed them. If it was the bank's fault, that's a small price to pay. Now this is going to cost them a minimum of 7 figures, plus lawyer fees and court costs.