May 15, 2012 |
Norman and Oriane Rousseau were one more couple pushed by a huge, greedy
bank to the brink of homelessness. On Sunday, desperate and with nowhere to go,
Norman Rousseau shot himself.
This is the story of what happens when an average couple is up against a giant,
wealthy, powerful bank. Unfortunately the result is what the result always is
when people are on their own against the wealthy and powerful: the bank ends up
with all of their money, takes their house to sell and throws them out onto the
street. In this case the bank is Wells Fargo.
The quick version of this terrible story is that Norman and Oriane Rousseau of Newbury
Park, California were
scammed into a predatory mortgage. But they made their payments anyway, always
paying with a cashier’s check in person at the same branch. Then one day the
bank misapplied their payment and said they still owed the money. This started
a long, nasty process that led to the bank evicting the Rousseaus
from their home.
Here’s the shocker: right at the start the Rousseaus
came up with proof that the bank had received the payment and had cashed the
check. But the bank continued to claim it had missed the payment, gave the Rousseaus the runaround, started applying fees, and used it
as an excuse to foreclose on the house anyway.
The Rousseaus fought back, the bank dragged it out
for so long and pulled so many tricks, getting its way every step of the
process, untilthis last Sunday Norman Rousseau finally gave up and shot
himself in despair – two days before the scheduled eviction, Tuesday, May
15.(The Rousseau’s lawyer just said he was able to win a 2-week delay.)
It is a tragic story, but when you dig into the details it becomes much
worse.
See for yourself.The
court case filed by the Rousseausputs on
the record the facts as they state them. The complaint reads as one more story like so many others that we have been hearing about
the abuses by banks and banksters and the tricks they
pulled on people. Never mind the big “National
Mortgage Settlement” – this story shows that the abuses are still going on,
with the same tragic consequences.
The following describes the facts in the lawsuit filed inNorman
Rousseau and Oriane Rousseau vs. Wells Fargo Bankin
the Superior Court of California, County
of Ventura.
In March 2000, Norman and Oriane Rousseau put 30
percent down to buy a house at 580Wilshire Place, Newbury Park, CA. In the following years
they were solicited to refinance their loan. In October 2007 they met with
the loan officer and “stated that they were only interested in obtaining a
conventional 30-year, fixed-rate loan, and explained their desire to have
consistent payments over the life of the loan.”
They were “assured that they could significantly reduce their monthly
payments, by more than $600 per month, with a lower interest refinance loan.”
The bank assured them that the Payment Option ARM was “the new industry
standard” that had “historically low rates that were continuing to decrease”
and in “the worst case scenario [they were] assured that historical data for
the index indicated that changes in interest rate were slight, and if an
increase should occur it would have a negligible effect on their monthly
payments of no more than a few dollars.”
They should “expect to refinance within the next two years to take advantage
of even more favorable interest rates and as the steadily rising housing values
increased the amount their equity in the property.”
There were lots of assurances, smiles, don’t worry, we’re taking care of
you, etc.
In May 2009 the bank claimed the couple had missed their April payment. They
proved they had made a payment in person at the bank, using a cashier’s check
and that the check had been cashed by the bank. The bank then claimed they had
ordered a stop payment on the check, even though a cashier’s check payment
cannot be stopped.
The runaround began. The bank began harassing them for payment, sometimes as
many as six-eight calls per day, sometimes even late at night. On August 3,
2009 the bank claimed the Rousseaus hadn’t paid June
or July’s payments either, demanding $3,406.50. But then on August 8 the bank
assured them they were current on payments. Then the bank again claimed it had
not been paid and that the bank had been trying to contact them without
success, and that they now owed $3,478,25.
The Rousseaus hired a lawyer. From the lawyer the Rousseaus learned that the loan they received was not the
loan they were promised, including, “the 7.2% interest rate for the loan was
actually higher than the 2006 loan and greater than the 6.8% quoted,” had
enormous fees, and the bank had increased the income the Rousseau had stated,
from $76,000 to $136,800.
In other words, the lender had scammed them to get those fees, which was a
widespread practice at the time.
This continues, with the bank scamming, lying, obfuscating, ignoring,
contradicting, even producing signatures it claimed were the Rousseau’s but
were not, every step of the way. And, of course, adding late fees to the amount
it claimed was due.
In September the bank stopped accepting payments at the branch, saying
checks had to be mailed. About the same time the Rousseaus
applied for a loan modification. They were told they were accepted for review
in the loan modification program, were told the “pre-foreclosure” notices were
“routine” and not to worry about them. Their lawyers were handling getting
documents to the bank, the bank kept claiming it never received them,
etc.
On and on this went, with the bank telling them they were in the loan
modification program while demanding money then refusing to accept money and
demanding documents while saying it had received them, and all the while
proceeding with foreclosure notices. Then they were told they were denied their
loan modification, went through a process to reinstate the loan, back and
forth, late fees, loan fees, unspecified additional fees, more fees, then some
fees, then some non-payment fees, and then given ONE HOUR to send payments to
TEXAS and it goes on and on.
Readthe court case the Rousseaus filed.It’s
all there, and is even worse than this summary.
This is a story of what happens when, as Senator Dick Durbinsaid of the Senateduring the effort to pass
legislation to get the banks under control, “Frankly they own the place.”
This last Sunday the bankers claimed one more victim. Norman Rousseau shot
himself at 10 in the morning. Oriane Rousseau doesn’t
even have the money to bury her husband, she is
looking to the VA for help. If you want to help, please contact their attorney,
Chris Gardas:chrisgardas@comcast.net
Yesterday, a group of billionaires, scientists and engineers announced what
could become the most important enterprise in human history since Columbus sailed West: an
asteroid mining company called Planetary Resources. They want to jump start
a completely new industry between the Earth and the Moon, one that will add
trillions of dollars to the world economy and ensure our prosperity for
centuries to come.
Is an amazing and lofty goal. One
that has the potential to change our world forever. One that is risky
and hard, but which they believe can be achieved within a decade. This video
offers a glimpse of how space mining will work.
The tycoons
Planetary Resources is backed by people with deep pockets, like Google's
Larry Page and Eric Schmidt, film maker James Cameron, Microsoft's former Chief
Software Architect Charles Simonyi, and Ross Perot, Jr. among others.
The target
There are 9,000 asteroids near Earth. Of those, about 1,500 are within easy
reach using the same or less power than what was used to go to the moon.
The benefits
These asteroids are loaded with two things. Some of have a high content of
water ice, which could be converted into solid oxygen and solid hydrogen to
provide rocket fuel for exploration; in its un-altered form, it could help
support life in space. Harvesting water from asteroids will make space travel
really inexpensive, allowing for an industry to blossom in space.
Other asteroids are rich in rare metals, like platinum or gold. An abundance
of these metals will enable easier acces to
technology that is currently prohibitively expensive.
One small asteroid of, say, 50 meters in diameter could contain billions of
dollars worth of these metals, pure and ready for easy extraction. Likewise, an
icy asteroid of the same size could contain enough water to power the entire
space shuttle program.
The process
First, within two years, the company will send prospectors to
low-earth orbit. Called the Arkyd 100 series, these
machines will be cheap and networked together. They will track near earth
asteroids (NEA) and asses the possibility to reach them and mine them.
Within a decade, they will launch a swarm of prospectors with propulsion
capabilities. They will be the Arkyd 200 and 300
series. These will approach asteroids and analyze their composition.
After identifying the best candidates in terms of distance, speed, physical
stability, and composition, they will launch the actual mining spacecraft.
Some of them may be swarms that will grab asteroids and bring them closer to
Earth for mining. Others will be large containers that will engulf the
asteroids to move them and process them.
The Ultimate Goal
Eventually, Planetary Resources wants to start a new industry in space, one
that may become the main engine of humanity's future. The company believes many
others will follow its business model. The group of investors
believe that the search for resources is the only way for humans to move
forward and, in a few decades, space mining will be considered a normal
industry. They think that this may save Earth from its own destruction, since
we are quickly consuming our resources.
It sounds like science fiction, but the people behind PR are convinced they
can turn fiction into fact. And they are putting up the means to start it. I
want to believe they will be successful. Even while the road will be hard and
they may not succeed, I think others will end their task.
I look at these people and remember Kennedy's words during his famous Rice University
speech:
We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and
do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard,
because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies
and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we
are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.
A Schofield Middle School teacher was reinstated Monday after being placed on paid administrative leave for about three weeks. The leave was related to supplemental book excerpts he read to his students during a class session.
Australian police are involved in a massive piracy lawsuit. Software company Micro Focus is claiming that the police are making
unauthorized use of its ViewNow software, which they
use to access the COPS criminal intelligence database. In addition, it’s alleged
that the police shared the proprietary software with third parties. Micro Focus
is fighting the case in court and is demanding at least $10 million in damages.
The Aussie
police are clearly not setting the right example when it comes to copyright
infringement. In 2008 computers of the South Australian police force’s IT
branch were
found to contain hundreds of pirated movies.
There is, however, an even ongoing bigger case in which the New South Wales police
are accused of massive software piracy involving its criminal intelligence
database.
The software in question, ViewNow, is developed by
the UK
company Micro Focus. While the company licensed its
software to the police in the past, it discovered nearly two years ago the
police were using thousands of unauthorized copies.
Even worse, the police also shared the software with third parties such as
the Ombudsman’s Office, the Department of Correctives Services and the Police
Integrity Commission. All without permission from the
software company.
In an attempt to get compensated for several years
worth of mass piracy, Micro Focus has filed a lawsuit in which it’s demanding
more than $10 million in damages. Micro Focus’ managing director Bruce Craig
says they saw no other option than to sue, as they can’t go to the police.
“When someone pirates your software you think who am I gonna
call, the police? In this case, they’re the pirates,” Craig
comments on 7.30.
“This is potentially a crime that has to be handled as a civil matter
because everybody’s got their hands dirty,” he added. “The victims can’t go to
police – it’s the police who are doing the stealing.”
At the center of the legal battle is a dispute over the licenses for the ViewNow software. Micro Focus says the police had licenses
to install ViewNow on up to 6,500 computers, but in
fact more than 16,000 copies were installed. In addition, the police shared
copies with other organizations without permission.
“The licenses were for police only. Yet police were out there handing out
our software like confetti,” Craig says. “They did not pay for those extra
licenses. It’s incredible. It shows an organization that’s completely out of
control.”
The police on the other hand claim that they are not aware of any
restrictions. Instead, they claim that they could use as many copies as they
want according to their interpretation of the contract.
To make matters even worse, Micro Focus is now threatening a new lawsuit as
they suspect that the police have replaced the ViewNow
software with an alternative called NetManage Applet.
This application also belongs to Micro Focus, and they have not licensed the
police to use that without restrictions either.
Who’s right and who’s wrong will eventually be decided by the court, but
there is already one losing party – the taxpayer. The police have already spent
hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, and the case has barely begun.
"I say we take off; nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure." - Corporal Hicks, in "Aliens"