ACORN “reclaims” foreclosed home for evicted owner: “This is our house now”

posted at 7:50 pm on February 20, 2009 by Allahpundit

Ah, but it isn’t. The bank’s already resold it, as you’ll shortly see, which makes this publicity stunt worse than useless. Not only will the evictee be back on the street shortly, not only will ACORN be sweating criminal charges, but the moral case they’re trying to make to the public is a tough sell now that it’s known they’re breaking into a person’s home instead of a bank’s. And of course it puts The One on the spot, because as clips like this circulate he’ll eventually be asked about it and will be forced to condemn the practice, however tepidly. But other than that, it’s a PR bonanza. Click the image to watch.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Glock answers.

Coronagold on February 20, 2009 at 9:26 PM

They use a crow-bar, break in to some unsuspecting persons house, I own firearms, guess who the criminal is?
I know the homeowners just bought it at auction, and ACORN will somehow be justified, but if it was my home of fifteen years, and this guy used a crow-bar,to break in, and I shot him, I would still be the criminal.

M-14 2go on February 20, 2009 at 9:28 PM

rockmom on February 20, 2009 at 8:51 PM

Once Acorn accepts stimulus money will their records be subject to FOIA?

Oldnuke on February 20, 2009 at 9:31 PM

Just to inform, ACORN is not getting any porkulus play money.

Q: Does the stimulus bill include a $5.2 billion payoff for ACORN?
I would appreciate having FactCheck.org look into whether ACORN will receive $5.23 billion from the Obama stimulus package under the guise of “stabilizing neighborhoods.” I have been bombarded by e-mails from an acquaintance about this. What can you find about this? Thank you.

A: The bill does include funds for which ACORN would be eligible to compete – against hundreds of other groups. But most is for a housing rehabilitation program ACORN says it never applied for in the past and won’t in the future.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_the_stimulus_bill_include_a_52.html

ACORN may be eligible to compete for something, but they are not specifically named in the bill.

Tuning Spork on February 20, 2009 at 9:31 PM

“Shoot them…..shoot them both!…”

Coronagold on February 20, 2009 at 9:35 PM

I’m reserving judgement on this one. The house was turned around awfully fast, and a $300 increase in monthly mortgage payments when all the bases of mortgage have been falling sounds strange to me.

Maybe this woman really was the victim of a preditory lender, and one of the lenders’ relatives now owns the place. Under those conditions (lender fraud), I’d side with the people trying to help the lady, including ACORN.

Unfortunately, this illegal act will not help the former homeowner — it may well cause her harm. A lawsuit (thus clouding the title and making it improbable that the house would be sold to an honest buyer) would have been a better choice.

Again, I’d like to hear more before judging, but that means waiting for the media to revisit, and we all know how that goes.

unclesmrgol on February 20, 2009 at 9:35 PM

Tuning Spork on February 20, 2009 at 9:31 PM

I wouldn’t take that to the bank just yet. ACORN has a reputation of co-mingling of funds, and if there is a program anywhere of any sort that provides them easy access to funding from the stimulus law, whether they apply for it or not, they will get it.

If caught, they will use the standard defense…oops.

Then they will continue to march as if nothing distracted them at all.

Their history in Chicago, and here in Ohio, for an example closer to home for me, this last election cycle, shows a web of deceit as to the origin of their funding. That you can go take to the bank.

coldwarrior on February 20, 2009 at 9:37 PM

but if it was my home of fifteen years, and this guy used a crow-bar,to break in, and I shot him, I would still be the criminal.

M-14 2go on February 20, 2009 at 9:28 PM

Not if I was on the jury.

Merovign on February 20, 2009 at 9:42 PM

Again, I’d like to hear more before judging, but that means waiting for the media to revisit, and we all know how that goes.

unclesmrgol on February 20, 2009 at 9:35 PM

So you think that maybe this is a singular event, and this was done because of the unique circumstance around this particular house?

Even if that were true, thats beside the point and rationalizing their illegal actions.

Itchee Dryback on February 20, 2009 at 9:46 PM

“homesteading?” I don’t think that word means what you think it means, Mr. Beverly.

cs89 on February 20, 2009 at 9:58 PM

I bet they will only get a slap on the wrist. Then they are on to the next person’s home.

I feel sorry for the people that bought the property. I see trouble coming there way just for buying the house. It’s a shame people are so disrespectful of others.

Brat4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:07 PM

Inconceivable!

coldwarrior on February 20, 2009 at 10:08 PM

ACORN may be eligible to compete for something, but they are not specifically named in the bill.

Tuning Spork on February 20, 2009 at 9:31 PM

Spare me. ACORN is at the front of this line, and you know it.

It is a despicable criminal organization. Living in a relatively safe metropolitan area, I never thought about owning a gun. But the past four weeks, reading that ACORN is targeting my metropolitan area, and seeing this story all have me re-thinking my ownership priorities. Thanks for helping me to clarify that, Tuning Spork.

BuckeyeSam on February 20, 2009 at 10:10 PM

LMAO at the report at the end of the clip

bluejacket on February 20, 2009 at 10:11 PM

***

Maybe this woman really was the victim of a preditory lender, and one of the lenders’ relatives now owns the place. Under those conditions (lender fraud), I’d side with the people trying to help the lady, including ACORN.

***

unclesmrgol on February 20, 2009 at 9:35 PM

Shame on the lender, then.

But who’s at fault if she wasn’t a good credit risk to begin with? I believe predatory lenders (see Senator Dodd’s friends at Countrywide and the big Dem contributors who were bought out by Bank of America) should be crucified. But what’s the problem with booting people from houses they couldn’t afford in the first place? Propping them up for another six months only to see them go down again makes no sense at all.

BuckeyeSam on February 20, 2009 at 10:18 PM

Just like having david dinkins in charge in NY (Korean grocer protest) these people think they can do what ever they want when one of their own is in charge.

ouldbollix on February 20, 2009 at 10:21 PM

Propping them up for another six months only to see them go down again makes no sense at all.

BuckeyeSam on February 20, 2009 at 10:18 PM

But propping them up up until the 2010 elections and saying, “See? Democrats are helping you” does.

Guardian on February 20, 2009 at 10:23 PM

May I Uhhh….Suggest, we uhh…go to DC and do the equivalent to the White House. We will leave when ACORN does….

We need some Counter Demonstrations…..GOE, We need to shift gears from Code Pink, ANSWER, to ACORN….

Lock and Load….FREEPERS…..A call to Arms…..THE SQUIRRELS ARE COMING…
Paul Revere is riding thur the Streets !!!!!

JayTee on February 20, 2009 at 10:30 PM

BuckeyeSam on February 20, 2009 at 10:18 PM

This is long…I’m on a roll, bear with me…

After going through an expensive divorce in ’95, and becoming a single parent of four kids, and taking an early retirement so I could devote time and availability 24/7/365 to my kids and their needs, kids who are, thankfully, now all now young adults, I decided to rent.

A small, comfortable, house on a quiet street in a nice neighborhood in a small college town. My rent is less than a third of what my former mortgage was when I lived in and worked in DC.

My ex got the old house…I got the kids and my Mercedes, my dignity and my self respect. She lost the house within two years, after numerous second mortgages and loans.

Money that would have gone to the bank instead went to the kids, and actually improved our overall quality of life. There is no shame in renting.

I was offered many times over the past dozen or so years a number of “deals” and friendly bank offers to encourage me to buy a house. Being a single guy, now with just myself and two cats to take care of, and a daughter almost ready to move out as she progresses through college…I don’t need a new and bigger house, nor do I need nor desire a huge PITI payment every month. Renting is fine.

The hype, from Carter to Clinton, that every American should own their own home, that every American child should go to college has done what to our economy? Very little good, really.

The costs of home ownership skyrocketed, especially with balloon mortgages and variable rates, and the ancilliary costs for energy, upkeep and maintenance and the costs for college have likewise skyrocketed.

Millions of Americans were led down the path to “home
ownership” when in actuality they became “owned” by the banks. And we are paying for it today…and our grandchildren will be paying for it decades from now.

Pay as you go seems to make sense. Not buying what you cannot afford makes sense as well. I have over the years been in many a fine large home to see that maybe the family room and kitchen were amply furnished, but the rest of the house? Pretty bare. Bone bare, in way way too many homes.

Who is at fault?

A couple Presidents and several Congresses who pushed the notion that is was somehow a Constitutional Right to own a home and all the bling that goes with it.

Hedge Fund operators who made billions on the backs of everyone else buying and selling “notes” because of that “full faith and credit” thing when Freddie and Fannie were made to backstop all those speciuous home loans.

Those credit companies who made billions by telling folks that taking out a second or third mortgage to pay for a trip to Disney World or by an RV and an SUV and a 72-inch plasma was the American Way.

And, of course, the fools who signed their names on the dotted line on mortgage contracts they could not, would not, read nor understand, nor honestly afford.

coldwarrior on February 20, 2009 at 10:39 PM

[unclesmrgol on February 20, 2009 at 9:35 PM]
Did you read this story?

Try looking at the foreclosure summaries, here (type in Donna Hanks and look at the fifth and sixth entries). According to the story here, her last re-mortgage, for $250,000 in 2005, for a home she bought in 2001 for $87k in cash. Yet the foreclosure case began in May of 2006, which for un-noted reasons wasn’t prosecuted. She was in foreclosure again in February 2008 with the foreclosure completed in August 2008.

It seems to me there were monthly payment problems prior to any ballooning of payments from the original $1600 to $1900.

Dusty on February 20, 2009 at 10:50 PM

I’m serious as a heart attack. BUY A GUN NOW, before Herr Obama finds a way to prevent you from protecting yourself.

One year from now will be too late.

Maura O on February 20, 2009 at 11:01 PM

Peoples Justice.

DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE AND THE LAW OF PEOPLES
Samuel Freeman, University of Pennsylvania
Part
I:
Background
A Theory of Justice says that the distribution of income and wealth within a society is just
when laws and economic institutions are designed so as to maximally benefit the least
advantaged members of that same society.
This standard for domestic distributive justice is to
apply worldwide, to determine just distributions in every society in the world. In this regard
Rawls has an account of global distributive justice. But he does not have, and he does not
endorse, a global distribution principle. The difference principle applies globally, within each
society, but it is not global in reach.
Neither
Political Liberalism nor The Law of Peoples retracts or alters this position. The
primary focus of political liberalism is not ideal justice, but liberal legitimacy.
It implies that
laws regulating distributions in a democratic society can be legitimate, hence worthy of respect,
even if they are not wholly just.
1
Unlike the basic liberties and their priority, the difference
principle is not required by liberal legitimacy; for legitimacy it suffices that a liberal society
provide an adequate social minimum (adequate to free and equal persons’ realizing the moral
powers and effectively exercising the equal basic liberties).
The difference principle is one
among several standards that pass the legitimacy test, all of which meet the criterion of
reciprocity and the requirements of public reason. A society which protects the basic liberties
and their priority, and affords equal opportunities and an adequate social minimum is

Comprende?

Speakup on February 20, 2009 at 11:36 PM

Wow, the way that lady talked, I’m not sure she has a GED.

Johnson on February 20, 2009 at 11:44 PM

I’m lovin’ it- people are going out of their minds…and Obama can’t do a thing. The savior messiah with 143 days of experience in office has had one of the most inept first months in recent presidential memory.

They called W dumb, despite his ivy league education and executive experience. Obama has proven he’s probably one of the most ill prepared and naive presidents I can think of, and the people still worship him as the one. Clueless.

These people are doing more damage to this woman than any bank ever could…making her think she has her home back. I sort of wonder about people like this to begin with- if you’re dumb enough to get this idiots to break into your old house, I have a hard time believing she was paying her mortgage to begin with. Dumb people tend to not be very good at things like paying bills.

TheBlueSite on February 20, 2009 at 11:44 PM

Um btw, doesn’t a so-called “predatory” lender need a willing dolt to accomplish any deal? Maybe homeowners need to do their homework and not get these adjustable rate mortgages to begin with? Personal responsibility is a thing of the past.

TheBlueSite on February 20, 2009 at 11:47 PM

Speakup on February 20, 2009 at 11:36 PM

Communist(democrat).

Johan Klaus on February 20, 2009 at 11:48 PM

Maryland has stinky property records, but from what I could decipher….Donna Hanks was divorced several years ago. Must have moved an abusive boyfriend in- hence the restraining order on a unrelated male. Then couldn’t afford the mortgage on her own. Maybe selling the house with the 276K mortgage was in order if she couldn’t afford it on her own (even with the child support.) Just saying…people don’t look at their options.

njpat on February 20, 2009 at 11:52 PM

Ignorant people! Would love to see someone try that in my home. Wouldn’t be pretty. This is not right. If they were a crooked Lender, that still doesn’t give them the right to break the law. That is what the court system is. If she is in the right, in time she would be more than likely better off. But doing a wrong and then to trespass is not cool. Acorn needs to be put out of Business. We need to go to D.C. and raise some he**. This lady could get in more trouble. DUH!

sheebe on February 20, 2009 at 11:53 PM

[sheebe on February 20, 2009 at 11:53 PM]

Just a note, sheebe, Donna Hanks is leader in Baltimore ACORN.

And that should be remembered by all when reading the budgeting and mediation counseling provisions that will be run by ACORN if Obama’s Mortgage Stability Plan is passed.

Dusty on February 21, 2009 at 12:05 AM

Ya know,…
one might think they have something in common with the list of demands from the Black Panther web-site, along with Holder.

christene on February 21, 2009 at 12:06 AM

B&E, yea baby, change we can believe in….

Why pay your bills when you can steal what someone else owns?

Hog Wild on February 21, 2009 at 12:27 AM

There is such contempt for the law. We are living in an ACORN state of nature. Do not conduct yourself as though anyone else feels bound by the social contract.

Ted Torgerson on February 21, 2009 at 12:31 AM

Not the ACORN I knew.

OneGyT on February 21, 2009 at 12:40 AM

I’m sure they were bourgeoisie so it’s all just fine, right?

Sign of the Dollar on February 21, 2009 at 1:01 AM

Hmmm,

Now that’s the difference between Maryland and PA.

In Maryland, if you break into a person’s building by breaking and entering (breaking the lock) you’ve only comitted the misdemeanor of burglary in the fourth degree and on conviction are subject to imprisonment not exceeding 3 years.

If they did this in Pennsylvania, it would constitute Felony 2 Criminal Tresspass Punishable by up to 10 Years imprisonment. (Your first Offense would likely be 24 months Probation, Second Offense would be 3 Months to 4 years Jail, and the third would be 10 Months to 6 Years.)

Jones Zemkophill on February 21, 2009 at 2:33 AM

If these people do not get thrown in jail for this criminal trespass, we face a grave danger of repeating the errors of the Weimar Republic in Germany where strong-arm Nazi Brownshirt tactics garnered public support for their wealth redistribution schemes. Vandalism is not a legitimate political tool.

Stephen L. Hall on February 21, 2009 at 6:25 AM

Another example of O style empowerment at work with our tax dollars.

Done That on February 21, 2009 at 6:29 AM

The best Acorns are crushed Acorns.

pugwriter on February 21, 2009 at 7:32 AM

Put all the addresses on Google and let the frustrated masses make their lives a living HELL!

They do it for Prop 8 supporters – we should identify and publicize these houses on teh interwebz.

Mr Purple on February 21, 2009 at 7:52 AM

“TRESPASSERS WILL BE SHOT”

woodswalking1 on February 21, 2009 at 8:14 AM

This is the Porkulus division of ACORN. And you have Barry to thank for breaking and entering on private property.Creating a law so’s as to break another..

lasertex on February 21, 2009 at 9:04 AM

Will Time Mag have a cover “We Are All Burglars Now”?

eaglewingz08 on February 21, 2009 at 9:05 AM

It’s time for decent citizens to begin showing up at the residences of ACORN representatives and calling them out for the sleazy criminals that they are.

BuckeyeSam on February 21, 2009 at 9:25 AM

This is what happens when you have been brought up in a culture of entitlement. Their motto “What’s mine is mine and what’s yours is mine” and you must give it up NOW! OR ELSE!

MSGTAS on February 21, 2009 at 9:50 AM

Tuning Spork on February 20, 2009 at 9:31 PM

Dude, the Treasury just dumped another $200 billion into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That’s where ACORN will get the money. Fannie has already “contracted” with a first cousin of ACORN, the NACA in Boston, to help with “loan modifications.” Bruce Marks, who heads NACA, is a socialist and they have been shaking down banks for years. Fannie Mae is throwing money around almost as much as it did in the Frank Raines days. It just gave Queen Latifah a million dollars to make a video telling people not to fall for foreclosure prevention scams.

The Porkulus has a provision that allows the new RAT Board to stop any Inspector General investigation of money being spent. While “technically” the money being dumped into Fannie Mae is not coming from the Porkulus, it’s all federal money and the IGs will not be able to separate it.

Rahm Emanuel served on Freddie Mac’s board. He knows exactly how to get big money shoveled out the back door to ACORN.

rockmom on February 21, 2009 at 10:42 AM

Thought you might be interested in some REAL information related to this foreclosure; Donna Hanks initially purchased her home (315 South Ellwood, Baltimore, MD 21224) on 7/06/2001 for $87,000. At some date between 2001 and 2006 she re-financed the original mortgage for the amount of $270,000 with a mortgage payment of $1,662.00. The FIRST foreclosure on this home was filed 5/31/2006. Donna Hanks filed for bankruptcy 6/16/06 during which a payment plan was approved for the $10,500 she was behind in her payments. This action stopped the original foreclosure. When she did not meet the terms of the bankruptcy re-payment, a second foreclosure action was started in January 2008. At the time she had not made her mortgage payments since September 2007. It should be noted that her salary per the bankruptcy paperwork was $1625 per month and she was working a 2nd and 3rd job (supposedly giving her an additional $1,275 in monthly income – the employers were not listed). Over extended? Also, during 2007 she was renting our her basement illegally (she was taken to court) and receiving rent while she was not making her mortgage payments. The mortgage company “raised” her payment $300 a month – right? Well, not exactly it was $340. The amount that she had agreed to pay back in arrears. Not exactly truthful, but what I would expect from a person with her criminal record (theft and assault 2nd degree and possession of a dangerous weapon with intent to injure). Oh and there is the small matter of breaking and entering. The house at 315 South Ellwood had already been sold at auction on 6/26/08 for $192,000. It just took them until September 2008 to get her out. Nothing like public information – it seems Acorn could have found this same information before they helped this “poor” victimized woman…………………

sherryande on February 21, 2009 at 11:36 AM

since when is breaking and entering peaceful civil disobedience?

MLK must be rolling in his grave (several times over)

ace tomato on February 21, 2009 at 11:37 AM

Dusty on February 20, 2009 at 10:50 PM

No, I didn’t read the stories you mentioned. But I will. Processing…

unclesmrgol on February 21, 2009 at 11:48 AM

When do we re-name our country “Detroit?”

ex-Democrat on February 21, 2009 at 11:58 AM

sherryande on February 21, 2009 at 11:36 AM

Post of the day!

Source? CNN? WaDooDoo? The Slimes? /kidding

Seriously though, good stuff.

ex-Democrat on February 21, 2009 at 12:01 PM

Hanks, who works in hotel catering, refinanced the house several times since buying it to pay for renovations. She also had to pay medical bills, because she is uninsured. The last time around, in 2005, she responded to a flyer in the mail, and got a loan of nearly 250-thousand dollars. Wells Fargo, she says, subsequently bought the loan.

This woman just can’t keep her stories straight. In another interview she said she was a union worker, you ever hear of a union worker without health insurance? She did have medical bills to pay – however she didn’t pay them according to public records. Also, the loan was for $270,000 which closed in 2005 (if we can believe that part of her story) and by May 2006 she was already $10,500 behind in her payments. She must have went on one heck of spending spree to blow through the almost $200,000 she netted from the re-fi.

sherryande on February 21, 2009 at 12:03 PM

ex-Democrat on February 21, 2009 at 12:01 PM

Source – public records and about an hour of my time – way too much work for reporters!

sherryande on February 21, 2009 at 12:05 PM

A pity the new owner wasn’t inside with a fully loaded Mossberg.

madne0 on February 21, 2009 at 12:49 PM

They’re only acting out Obama’s ideology.

Black Adam on February 21, 2009 at 3:22 PM

[unclesmrgol on February 21, 2009 at 11:48 AM]

k. I’m interested in your opinion. No hurry, I have a feeling there will be another post on this.

Dusty on February 21, 2009 at 3:53 PM

Well,, wait for the reparations to start.
The crowbars will be flying then!

JellyToast on February 21, 2009 at 7:50 PM

Hey,, and what about all those people that can’t pay their car loans??!

JellyToast on February 21, 2009 at 7:53 PM

k. I’m interested in your opinion. No hurry, I have a feeling there will be another post on this.

Dusty on February 21, 2009 at 3:53 PM

I’m still not yet feeling like I’ve got everything I need to form an opinion.

the mortgagee: Donna Hanks
the bank: Wells Fargo
the trustee: Thomas P. Dore, substitute trustee
the act: Wells Fargo purchases Hank’s loan from third party lender ??? for ????. Hanks defaults, and Wells Fargo appoints Dore to sell house. Wells Fargo buys house (with $260K owed on mortgage) for $192K, and resells house immediately to ?????.

There’s quite a few interesting questions here. Why would Wells Fargo buy back the house for $192K from itself? Why wouldn’t they restructure Hanks’ loan to a lower value greater than $192K, thus enabling her to keep the house? What base rate was Hanks’ variable rate loan pegged to, that its interest rate kept going up even as the economy (and most variable rate loan base rate calculation inputs) were going down? To whom did Wells Fargo sell the house after repurchasing it, what was that person’s relationship to Wells Fargo, and what price did that person pay for the house?

Everything Wells Fargo did was apparently legal, since Hanks was admittedly in default. But the thing stinks like a fish. It’s especially egregious when Wells Fargo has already gulped a few gulps of Stimulus.

unclesmrgol on February 22, 2009 at 12:12 AM

THERE IS A BLACK CRIME WAVE TAKING PLACE IN AMERICA — HERE ARE THE FACTS: while white criminals choose black victims three percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time. Black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, and black-on-white robberies are 139 times more common than the reverse. About this epidemic of black assaults on whites, we hear nothing from SFGATE and the rest of the mainstream media.

searcher484 on February 22, 2009 at 12:18 AM

ACORN may be eligible to compete for something, but they are not specifically named in the bill.

Tuning Spork on February 20, 2009 at 9:31 PM

Firstly, I wouldn’t relay on factcheck.org too much. Its funded by a liberal organization so a conclusion could be made that they have an agenda.

But most is for a housing rehabilitation program ACORN says it never applied for in the past and won’t in the future.

Secondly, ACORN is notoriously involved in this sort of thing. And lets not forget that they have many many subsidiaries and sister organization that do not use the ACORN name but are just surrogates.

JeffVader on February 22, 2009 at 3:35 AM

What makes you think the new owner has a chance in Hell?

This IS the brown-shirts we’re talking about, after all.

{^_^}

herself on February 22, 2009 at 4:06 AM

Why wouldn’t they restructure Hanks’ loan to a lower value greater than $192K…

unclesmrgol on February 22, 2009 at 12:12 AM

Why doesn’t everyone default and renegotiate the price of a house if it goes down in value? This is pure genuis! All mortgage lenders let the banks take half of the loss on any house that goes down in value FROM NOW ON by just offering something above the asking price.

That would in no way become an epidemic if bankers just sold houses back to the owner and split the difference on what the original owner owed.

Duh? You have it all figured out! Who says a card laid is a card played? If the house goes up you own it. If it goes down blackmail the bank to split the loss so they don’t lose more on you defaulting!

Conan on February 22, 2009 at 5:17 PM

Breakng and entering is now considered civil disobedience? I am certain all the illegals will now use it as a defense and it will then be OK for someone to break into YOUR home and set up shop.

No wonder ammunition sales and gun sales are at a all time high.

workingforpigs on February 23, 2009 at 9:04 AM

Comment pages: 1 2