FED to End Rescission by dreamtrove

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

FED to End Rescission

POSTED BY: DREAMTROVE
UPDATED: Monday, December 6, 2010 16:06
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 535
PAGE 1 of 1

Sunday, December 5, 2010 5:14 PM

At the risk of having posted too many threads, this:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/12/01/104568/fed-wants-to-strip-a-key-
protection.html

Because it's actually news. The Federal Reserve has decided to remove the provision. In plain English, I believe it works like this:

The law as it has stood:

If you were deceived, lied to, a crime was committed and/or the full actual terms of the contract were not disclosed at the time you signed, you can rescind your involvement in the contract, and abandon the whole deal.

The new law:

If you were deceived, lied to, a crime was committed and/or the full actual terms of the contract were not disclosed at the time you signed, you can only exit the contract if you pay off the balance in full.

Huh? So, the lender lied their ass off, and now you have two options:

1) Stay with the contract under the new terms you didn't know
2) Pay all the money you would pay *anyway* but lose the house

Option 2 appears to suck beyond belief, so that leaves you with option 1.

So, the effective new law, and someone correct me if I'm reading this wrong, is:

If they lie to you, deceive you etc, you're still bound by whatever they say the terms are.

Ergo:

They can lie to you whenever they want and change the contract whenever they want and say it was simply an "undisclosed detail" and you are still bound by the contract. If you lose the home, you are also still bound to pay the full amount of the contract.

Ergo, if you sign, they own your ass.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 5, 2010 5:27 PM

CANTTAKESKY

Good grief!

--Can't Take (my gorram) Sky

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 6, 2010 7:44 AM

DREAMTROVE

I'm trying to figure out if the Financial Reform Act of 2010 which I mentioned earlier in the year as being the big story which I promised to return to, is responsible:

Obama's new law grants the FED absolute authority over derivatives, and mortgages are a derivative because they are not equity, the equity in this case is houses, or property, and so this may mean that the FED can make statutory changes which effect the whole nation and neither the federal or state govts. can do anything about it.

If I understand it correctly, if the FED says it's so, it's so, and then it is law and cannot be contradicted. They appear now to be the only check on their own power, which just can't be good.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 6, 2010 12:45 PM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
If I understand it correctly, if the FED says it's so, it's so, and then it is law and cannot be contradicted.

Yeah, it sounds like they are bypassing both the legislative and executive branches altogether.

Shudder.

--Can't Take (my gorram) Sky

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 6, 2010 4:06 PM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
If I understand it correctly, if the FED says it's so, it's so, and then it is law and cannot be contradicted.
Yeah, it sounds like they are bypassing both the legislative and executive branches altogether.

Shudder.

--Can't Take (my gorram) Sky

My understanding is that they can now actually do that. I wonder if this will become a supreme court case, or if we'll just let it slide.

This is the sort of thing that gets no attention when everyone is distracted by Napolitano's porn that kills you traveller snuff film program.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE