| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Gov't 'Urges' US Banks to Follow Laws on Servicemembers Loans & Mortgages |
| 2011-02-03 |
| Holly Petraeus, the U.S. federal government's new military liaison, Tuesday sent a letter to more than two dozen banks, demanding they review their practices to ensure compliance with laws meant to protect military families from foreclosures. J.P. Morgan Chase overcharged more than 4,000 military personnel in active service and took the homes of 14, possibly violating a law that caps interest rates and stops foreclosures. A U.S. Marine Corps captain had filed a lawsuit alleging that he was overcharged by Chase. In January, after conducting an internal audit, Chase admitted it had wrongly foreclosed on military families and overcharged thousands for mortgages. This crap has been going on far too long. Instead of 'urging' how about some INDICTMENTS? Someone wake up the Attorney General from his drug-induced coma, or replace that ZOMBIE with someone who will act to ENFORCE the laws of this country. |
| Posted by:Anguper Hupomosing9418 |
| #14 dullstones, the privileges extended to service members in the US is commensurate with the degree of commitment (total), freedoms sacrificed (basic liberty, speech, movement, actions, behaviors, and parts of the pursuit of happiness), risk taken on (their very lives), and importance of the work they do (the most vital protectors of the nation), as well as the price they pay in conduct of those duties. Until you have shouldered a rifle, been lead, or (harder yet) lead men under hostile fire, or had to deal with those who have done so (sometimes a harder job, Pappy's guys deal with that and its difficult), you have forfeited your right to speak meaningfully on this topic in that manner. Don't like it? Walk the walk, then talk the talk. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2011-02-03 23:24 |
| #13 I'm against special privileges for government employees especially involving private entities. Considering the way your country is making a joke of your own military, maybe that's a good thing. Can't have the troops cadging reduced-price food, kit, and bullets now, can we? |
| Posted by: Pappy 2011-02-03 21:31 |
| #12 On the other hand, the private financial & real estate industries get all the preferences they demand, and more. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2011-02-03 19:28 |
| #11 non-security government employees shouldn't receive ANY preferences. I have no issues with private entities giving preference for military and security workers, as long as those are publicly transparent and not hidden bribes (see: Mexico) - many times, developers of communities have given preferences to cops and firefighters to encourage a sense of security, increasing sales to others. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2011-02-03 19:18 |
| #10 Exactly, Anguper. Most government employees do not have to put their lives on the line. Most government employees can quit and go home if need be. Military people cannot quit, and many of them put their lives on the line every day. |
| Posted by: Rambler in Virginia 2011-02-03 18:55 |
| #9 I'm against special privileges, &c. I'm not. Military personnel are not just any kind of government employee. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2011-02-03 18:45 |
| #8 I'm against special privileges for government employees especially involving private entities. |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2011-02-03 18:39 |
#7 Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the Executive Branch is firmly acting to protect truth, justice and the American Way of Rent-Seeking: (Reuters, 2 Feb 2011) DOJ, ICE and DHS act together to seize sports piracy websites before Super Bowl. Please note they are NOT acting against financial outlaws stealing billions, millions of illegal immigrants or really carrying out appropriate measures to keep terrorists out of this country. Priorities, men, got to ensure that campaign contributors get what they paid for. This is disgusting. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2011-02-03 15:11 |
| #6 the Act only allows for civil penalties not criminal. Then let Congress amend the Act & provide criminal penalties for financial institutions & their minions who carry this out. Much of our current financial disaster is due to the wink-wink, nudge-nudge treatment of banksters by the Executive & Legislative branches of government. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2011-02-03 14:57 |
| #5 I can't help thinking that service members aren't the only ones being victimized and wondering how this all relates to good old Bawney Fwank, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It's part and parcel of the Greatest Theft in World History™. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2011-02-03 14:55 |
| #4 Holly Petraeus seems to have found herself a worthwhile mission. I hope she continues to pursue it with great zeal. But I can't help thinking that service members aren't the only ones being victimized and wondering how this all relates to good old Bawney Fwank, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. |
| Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2011-02-03 11:59 |
| #3 Instead of 'urging' how about some INDICTMENTS? Maybe because the Act only allows for civil penalties not criminal. The same bankers that got their reelection sock puppets to pass them a bailout also made sure that sock puppets put the onus and cost upon the servicemember who generally lack the financial means to seek redress. The quickest way to remedy this farce is to have Congress declare servicemember to have 'protected group' standing in the judicial system, which would then allow an AG to go after the banks for 'patterns' of behavior like this on the criminal side of the law. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2011-02-03 03:43 |
| #2 You know, there is a citation in the law about this. Have to make a fund, or pass it to landmark. Someone gets them back every penny, and more. |
| Posted by: newc 2011-02-03 00:39 |
| #1 The AG can't be bothered. They are too busy going after Arizona's illegal law and trying to shore up Obamacare. Try again next year. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2011-02-03 00:32 |