Borrowers are Assessed Undisclosed Risk by Most Courts
Self-denial and cascading economic pandemics
The
purpose of this article is to piggy back on the recent articles from
dozens of economists who are yelling at the top of their lungs that we
are deluding ourselves if we think acceptance of the status quo is self
deluding and will lead to economic and societal chaos. The focus of my
writing is on legal, moral, economic and accounting reasons for denying
foreclosure as a remedy BEFORE assessment of the transaction and the
risks that were withheld and with intentional misrepresentation (fraud)
of the risk factors with inflated appraisals, and failure to disclose
the real lenders, the fees earned and the parties involved.
This
continues the discussion about whether we should be saying that
borrowers should pay the debts AS CLAIMED or whether we should be
asserting that borrowers are liable only for the risks they assumed and
accepted. I again remind the reader that this issue has already been
decided under Federal law. The Truth in lending Act and the
State deceptive lending acts spell it out quite clearly --- the borrower is to be informed, with enough time to process the information and seek professional advice about the terms, parties and details of their loan transaction. Most important amongst the disclosures is the requirement of disclosing the true lender; transactions by lenders with a pattern of engaging in such withheld disclosure are branded "predatory per se."
State deceptive lending acts spell it out quite clearly --- the borrower is to be informed, with enough time to process the information and seek professional advice about the terms, parties and details of their loan transaction. Most important amongst the disclosures is the requirement of disclosing the true lender; transactions by lenders with a pattern of engaging in such withheld disclosure are branded "predatory per se."
The
horrid state of self delusion in our society is chronicled in Naked
Capitalism. The basic thrust of a deep and broad analysis of our economy
and the effect of major shocks is presented, documented and proven. The
bottom line is that the deeper the shock and the longer it is allowed
to persist, the harder it is for society to recover. Applying the
principles enunciated in this article which expresses irreversible
damage that occurs over weeks, the seven years of economic collapse
endured thus far presents a high probability that the economy and our
society will never be able to restart without widespread acceptance of
changes in deeply held beliefs and presumptions. Pervasive self-delusion
is clearly documented here as the major impediment of starting to
repair, regroup, and take us from what is actually a continuing net
decline to an actual positive growth curve.
Interpolating
the data, it is obvious is that the state of our society and economy is
improperly reported (self-delusion) in a vain attempt to maintain
consumer confidence while those same consumers are short on cash, short
on income, short on savings, suffering shrinking income, increasing
costs, and are short on available credit. The current model, developed
over 40 years, was to replace earnings with credit. This was a going out
of business strategy. And that is what happened.
We
now live with an unsustainable anomaly --- the financial and data
intermediaries are thriving while the real parties in interest (buyer
and seller of products or services) are not reaching sufficient levels
of income and growth. This has led to an economy which shows that
roughly half (46%) of "economic activity" comes from financial services,
that supposedly intermediates capital and payments but now accounts for
an out-sized share of GDP. If the reported figures are even close to
being truthful from the financial services sector, our GDP should be at
least $50 Trillion, based upon long-trusted ratios in which financial
services typically account for about 16% of GDP, intermediating in
commerce.
Only
two conclusions are possible. One is self-denial in which we act as
though the economy was in fact operating at a $50 Trillion level --- an
obvious run for the edge of a cliff. The other is addressing reality,
which is that the growth of the financial services sector from 16% of
GDP standard to 46% of GDP as reported is fictitious and based upon
false reports based upon fictitious transactions. This would mean that
as a minimum the $17 Trillion in GDP would be adjusted downward removing
30% as mere smoke and mirrors.
With
the real GDP thus set at around $10 Trillion and removing the veil from
fictitious transactions, fictitious assets and fictitious liabilities,
the too big to fail conglomerates would either sink or swim on actual
water rather than the appearance of water.
Nowhere
are these transactions more pandemic actions of self-denial than in the
alleged mortgage bonds that are neither mortgages nor bonds. Nor are
they owned by the intermediaries. The fictitious transactions in which
ownership of those non instruments are booked as sales, commerce and
part of GDP, once removed would necessarily cause compensating
adjustments elsewhere in the economy. Profits reported by companies
providing financial services would be reduced and past reports would be
adjusted downward, resulting in lower stock prices for their stock and
higher rates for them to borrow.
The
corresponding credit entry would fall to homeowners who were punished
by a system that had blamed them for taking on more risk than they could
afford. In fact, the adjustment would recognize that the assumption and
acceptance of excess risk was hidden under deceptive underwriting and
lending processes --- thus created by the Wall Street banks who are the
sole parties against whom the excess risk would be assessed. But first
it must be acknowledged that in cases of widespread systemic fraud that
neither the lender investors nor the homeowner borrowers were given any
reasonable opportunity to assess or accept the excess risk and that
therefore their contracts must be reconstructed from the totality of the
circumstances rather than the recitations in instruments prepared by
the Wall Street banks.
We
do have enough information to know that neither the lenders nor the
borrowers would have signed up for the highly complex deals being
offered to them under the guise owing offered FOR them. Since that is
axiomatically true based upon formal a studies and the 50 states
Attorneys General and the myriad of state and federal agencies that have
concluded that lending and servicing practices were wrong at
origination and continue to be wrong.
Continuation
of Foreclosures based upon an untrue assumption of risk sharing as
expressed by instruments based upon false pretenses will only continue
the pattern of self deception and the resulting pandemic of economic
decay and decline.
No comments:
Post a Comment