Know When To Hold 'Em

RE: S&Ls in FDIC Conservatorship

Dear Officers,

Why do the S&Ls offer loan modifications to borrowers only after they are in default? The reality is that once a borrower misses one payment, they will miss several. Contrarily, if a borrower who is current on their payments wants to maintain their good credit, the benefit of a loan modification will KEEP them from defaulting in the first place. The bean counters need to realize that they will prevent greater losses by working with borrowers BEFORE they default on their mortgages.

Nona Green
6128 Chesebro Rd.
Agoura Hills, CA 91301
818 426-2292

p.s. I am about to lose the above property to foreclosure while I wait for my bank to discuss a loan modification. My bank said they wouldn't speak to me about a modification until I was in default - now I am 6 months behind in payments, my credit is destroyed, and the bank has still not responded to my requests.

Just how many times are the complacent American taxpayer going to allow this to happen? Just how big of a loss do you need to acquire before you get fed up and demand change?

The very EXACT same thing just happen 20 years ago. Exactly the same thing.

Deregulation of the mortgage loan industry, within 4 short years the taxpayers were out over $500 B and now here we are going thru the same thing, only their greed is going to be felt for generations.

When the banks and S/L's failed in the 1980's your Congress stepped in bought up ALL the bad banks and S/L's the taxpayers absorbed the BAD debt and the good assests were sold off to good friends of the parties.

It is simply deja vu all over again, only this time... well...it's going to be felt for quite some time.

You have seen it in the papers and watched it on the news, now is your chance to lead the bailout and save the economy.

The Bailout Game puts you in the drivers seat. Help the Bailout Boys as they drive down Wall St. with unchecked power and a truck full of cash.

http://www.thebailoutgame.us

Good luck, you???re going to need it!

Blue Earth Interactive

The letter below was written by Lisa Marshall (creator of www.indymacdepositors.com) for all indymac depositors to send to their respective congress representatives
January 7, 2008

Dear Member of Congress/House Financial Services Staff:
Re: Pending sale of IndyMac

I request that the proposed sale of IndyMac Federal Bank, FSB (IndyMac) which was announced by the Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) on Wednesday December 31, 2008 be postponed until complete and transparent details are fully disclosed to all parties who will be affected by the decision made.
I have documented financial losses as a result of the failure of IndyMac bank. I represent one of the 10,000 IndyMac depositors who have either not received insured deposits due per the FDIC regulations, or who have been inadequately protected against uninsured losses. Both the FDIC press release and accompanying fact sheet referencing a signed a letter of intent to sell the banking operations of IndyMac Federal Bank, FSB, to a thrift holding company controlled by IMB Management Holdings LP, fail to adequately account for depositors??? interest and lacks sufficient accounting detail. Because of this, we respectfully request that congressional representatives intervene on behalf of these constituents and suspend the sale of IndyMac by the FDIC until all depositors??? interests are adequately disclosed in accordance with FDIC regulatory obligations, and the agencies??? stated mission, vision, and values statement.
The history of the IndyMac demise has been well documented since the initial run on the bank last July. In response to this incident, as well as many subsequent others that have spiraled through the United States banking structure, actions have been implemented to correct perceived ???deficiencies???. However, the original IndyMac customers have not been recipients of these pivotal enhancements implemented to protect the consumers financial assets deposited in FDIC insured accounts. Coupled with additional governance concerns, the current situation has resulted in deleterious outcomes for the majority of these individuals. ...www.indymacdepositors.com (please see for further info.)

Nothing has been stabllized. By doing this the government has made it clear that if you are a big financial institute you can fail and the government will bail you out. The government has made it clear that poorly managed companies will always be rewarded for their incompetance. Keep it up guys! Run the country completely into the ground.

During the savins and loan crisis the same thing happened when the government stepped in, many times at the behest of large well connected banks and declared some S&L's insolvent before the facts were clear. So many small S&L's were bought at bargain basement prices when waiting for them to tmake a trun around would have been more costly to the big institutions that wanted them at a bargain. It would be nieve to believe that this same pattern is not happening again

FDIC is not in the business of running a business. You can't have it both ways. The govt's job is to provide a stable atmosphere to operate, while FDIC is suppose to ensure liquidity and legitimacy of financial accounting. None of those translate to management. If Indy is to be sold at a loss, then take a loss and sell. It is better than getting zero. It is also better than continued bleeding. If a private group can do a better job then go at it. If it operate at a profit, then govt has done its job of stabilizing the atmpsphere and collecting tax from the profit... Got to look long on certain cases while minimizing risk.

I would not want my govt and FDIC to gamble. Remember that is how we got to where we are today. We gambled and lost!

There goes another 9 billion of our tax dollars that should have gone to 'bail-out' social security!!! - Criminals~

The difference between the RTC and IndyMac is that one is an on-going business, that I would gues continues to operate at a quarterly loss especially since the FDIC is not in the business of running banks and is not likely out trying to drum up new business. The RTC dealt with individual assets after a bank failed and did not need to fund the purchase of those assets - it took them and paid out existing insured deposits. It is much easier to value individual assets or even a small group of loans than a failed bank in its entirety. Add into that the cost to pay people with the necessary expertise to run the bank and deal with the assets (should it be the same people that ran it into the ground?) and they are probably smart to cut their losses and move on. Why in the world do you think the FDIC could manage the combined assets of IndyMac as well as group hired by private equity investors is beyond me.

The federal government is all about handing out taxpayer dollars to rich people to make them richer. It does not surprise me that the FDIC would do this at this time. IndyMac was baiiled out with billions of hard earned taxpayer dollars and then sold to a hedge fund at a firesale price at the wrong time in order to enrich those investors who stand to make billions simply because they had billions to start with. But what does the federal government care, it is only taxpayer dollars it is giving away.