false statements on bank loan applications

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Meaning Deutsche Bank and other lenders to the project recognized the Chicago luxury condo market had crashed due to the 2008 recession, and the remaining unsold condos (i.e. the primary loan repayment source) would take longer to unload at lower prices than the lenders had anticipated when they originally approved the loans.

Seems a bit far of field for this particular thread, but I sure hope ekky fixes the DB search feature before the end of the year. I will be interested in responding to this after the commercial real estate bubble pops. Sure is a whole lot of over priced commercial real estate sitting idle these days. That is not even counting the funny asset allocations the banks are keeping because of them, i.e. hold versus available to sell asset inversion of the last few years.

[adav8s28]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

.

The value of real property can only ve established with a handshake and an exchange of money. In real estate, there is no credble MSRP.

If the buyer is getting financing from a bank, more than a handshake will be needed to complete the deal. The bank is going to get or request an appraisel on the property to make sure than the the property value is higher than the loan being requested.

For example a seller wants to sell his home for $500,000. The buyer is putting down 10%, or 50,000. The mortgage balance is $450,000. If the appraisel comes back at $375,000 then there is no way the bank will give a mortgage at $450,000. So, in this scenario it's more complex than what you implied.

If the buyer is paying cash, then that's a different story. Only the one percent are buying homes with cash and no financing.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

Go back to your fair and equal treatment statement under the law.

Now you immediately pivot to targeting and abuse. You have no where else to shift to after that. Forget the law, then.

I'm not pivoting at all. I said Mosby's case COULD involve targeting and abuse. You're the OP - give us some details so we can judge for ourselves. Then let's compare and contrast her case with trump's.

There are thousands of varieties or theories of fraud you can be charged with. Some are clear cut, others are blurry. Some involve billions of dollars in losses, others are too petty to prosecute. Some fleece thousands of victims, others appear victimless.

Why don't you want to dig deeper?

[txdot-guy]

Ever hear of the broken windows policy. Stopping low level crime stops larger crimes.

If we make certain that people actually tell the truth on their economic statements then we guarantee a fair playing field. I bet you lots of people would like to have prosecuted Bernie Madoff early into his ponzi scheme.

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

...she unwittingly made false statements on loan applications to buy two Florida vacation homes...

Let's check out "unwittingly" right quick:

unwittingly (adv)
From the Oxford: without being aware of what you are doing or the situation that you are involved in

From Vocabulary:
When you do something unwittingly, you don't do it on purpose. It's completely accidental or unintentional, like when you unwittingly offended the Queen by not curtseying properly.

And now... the smell test:
While earning a $250K salary, she withdrew ~$40K from her retirement account through a loophole in the CARES act, to purchase a rental property on the coast of Florida and claimed it was to be a second home, as opposed to a money making business and falsely claimed she was a first time home buyer to get another loophole benefit of a lower interest rate - all while owing the IRS almost $50K in back taxes - and then, in a rinse and repeat operation, purchased another rental property.

Could just be me, but uhhmm... I ain't seeing that fit the above definitions of "unwittingly". Seems a better fit for words like: calculated, intentional, entitled, corrupt, fraudulent and so on. Hence the guilty verdict.

Additional explanation from Vocabulary: If you know exactly what you're doing, you're not doing it unwittingly; you're doing it intentionally. This adverb comes from unwitting and its Old English root unwitende, "ignorant." Wit means "knowledge," so if you do something unwittingly, you act without knowledge...
Fails the stink test bigly

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

...I sure hope ekky fixes the DB search feature before the end of the year....

Praise all things holy! Ye olde search engine is restored to it's previous luster. Who says miracle don't happen?!? I wonder if they dabbed a bottle of that New DB Smell onto a sponge and stuck it under the driver's seat. Either way - Thank you.

Sorry for the interruption. We can now return to our regular shit-posting festival.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

And now... the smell test:

While earning a $250K salary, she withdrew ~$40K from her retirement account through a loophole in the CARES act, to purchase a rental property on the coast of Florida and claimed it was to be a second home, as opposed to a money making business and falsely claimed she was a first time home buyer to get another loophole benefit of a lower interest rate - all while owing the IRS almost $50K in back taxes - and then, in a rinse and repeat operation, purchased another rental property.

Thanks for looking up the details of what Ms. Mosby was accused of. I have a lot of questions:

1. The CARES Act included a provision allowing "hardship withdrawals" from retirement accounts, I presume without being subject to early-withdrawal penalties. How/why did she not qualify under this provision? And if she didn't, why couldn't she just put the money back into the account or pay the early withdrawal penalties?

2. Lots of people purchase a property initially as a second home, then later decide to rent it out. Did she already have a tenant lined up at the time she was applying for the mortgage?

3. The lender should have easily been able to verify whether or not she 1) is a first-time home buyer and 2) owes any back taxes simply by pulling her credit report. It would show any prior mortgages and outstanding IRS liens.

4. After she closed on the loans, did she keep them current by making all payments on time?

I can't imagine the DOJ would have bothered to go after her for all this picayune shit if she wasn't either delinquent or in default on her loans. Either that, or she pissed off the feds while she was Baltimore DA and this is payback.

[VitaMan]

Returning the focus to Mr. Trump:


Judge Arthur Engoron, who is overseeing Donald Trump’s New York civil fraud case, has questioned whether a key witness, former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg, committed perjury during his testimony at the former president’s trial, The New York Times reported.


Trump, along with his two eldest sons, the Trump Organization as a whole and two company officials are accused of inflating valuations on financial statements.


Weisselberg is a key figure in both of Trump’s New York cases. He abruptly concluded his testimony in October, after a Forbes report suggested that he had lied under oath.


According to Bennett Gershman, a former New York prosecutor and law professor at Pace University, if Weisselberg now agrees to tell the whole truth about Trump’s “fraudulent financial behavior,” Gershman said, that could “further incriminate” Trump and his family in connection with the charges brought.

[lustylad]

Isn't Judge Engoron the guy who thinks Mar-a-Largo is only worth $18 million?

He's about as credible and reliable as trump!

Btw - we already explained why his trial is a joke here:

https://eccie.net/showthread.php?t=2950063

[VitaMan]

Fraud has already been judged.
It is a matter of how much Mr. Trump needs to pay.
Unless Mr. Weisselberg is ready to spill more beans.



Good to see you admit Mr. Trump is not credible.

[Tiny]

Does anybody know whether Mosby defaulted on the mortgage in question?

Originally Posted by lustylad

Any CPA will tell you a balance sheet carries assets at historical cost, not FMV.

Except for real estate in China and Hong Kong, which is marked to FMV, which is perhaps part of the reason they're in the mess they're in.

Originally Posted by lustylad

By the way, has anyone looked up the things they went after Marilyn Mosby for? It's really penny ante stuff! Did she default on those 2 Florida mortgages or has she kept her payments up to date?

I wasn't a fan of hers when she was Baltimore DA, but what did she do to get a DOJ target on her back?

There's more to the story than meets the eye... (not referring to another poster here).

Originally Posted by lustylad

Tell me more about what Mosby did and why she should have been charged by the DOJ with multiple felonies for it.

It could be another example of political targeting and prosecutorial abuse, especially if she kept both mortgages current.

Agreed. Two wrongs don't make a right. Meaning the prosecutors are out of control and shouldn't be going after either Trump or Mosby for loan fraud to the extent they are.

She apparently did some other shady stuff, but the conviction, for which she could spend up to 30 years in jail, was for calling a $5,000 transfer from her ex-husband a loan, when it wasn't really a loan.

No wonder we have the highest incarceration rate in the world. And no wonder no sane person wants to be a politician.

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

The topic is false statements on bank loan applications.


Did Mr. Trump do that ? Per all the documents reviewed, the answer seems to be yes. False statements on bank loan applications is against the law.

No, because you haven't nor can you provide proof that he did.

[VitaMan]

False statements submitted to a federally insured bank, to get the bank to loan you depositors money, is a crime.

The judge already did what you are asking me to do.


America is respected around the world because of our ethics.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Tiny

She apparently did some other shady stuff, but the conviction, for which she could spend up to 30 years in jail, was for calling a $5,000 transfer from her ex-husband a loan, when it wasn't really a loan.

Sorry, I should have written that she called the $5,000 transfer a gift from her ex-husband. She transferred the $5,000 to him, then he transferred it back to her, and she called it a gift.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by Tiny

She apparently did some other shady stuff, but the conviction, for which she could spend up to 30 years in jail, was for calling a $5,000 transfer from her ex-husband a loan, when it wasn't really a loan.

I think she called it a gift, not a loan. Here's what I'm guessing happened - while her loan app was being processed, she needed to show she had sufficient funds to close. Her bank statement balance was short about $5k. So her ex signed a letter saying he was gifting her $5k. That gave her enough to close. After closing, she paid him back. That proved it was a loan, not a real gift.

This stuff is pretty common. How many first-time homebuyers let their parents "gift" them money for a downpayment, which they repay (or "gift" back) later?

I sure hope the feds don't catch me the next time I go through my grocery store express ("8 items or less") checkout line with 9 items!!