Topics
Baltimore City's reverse redlining lawsuit dismissed.
Baltimore Sun confuses the public by trying to define probation before judgment.
Court of Appeals considers whether an arbitration agreement is binding.
How Dixon maintains her innocence by making an Alford Plea.
Lessons from the Redskins suing their fans.
Local print media confuses National Media with their headline regarding Suggs? Protective Order
McNair's death reminds us that everyone needs a Will.
Mega banks take notice: raise consumers interest rate and don?t expect to be paid.
Redskins sue their fans.
Suggs consenting to Protective Order was a wise move.
Recent Updates
Baltimore City's reverse redlining lawsuit dismissed.
On January 6, 2010, the United States District Court, with unkind words, dismissed the City of Baltimore’s lawsuit against Wells Fargo. In the suit, Baltimore alleged that Wells Fargo targeted the City’s minority communities. Specifically, Wells Fargo loaned money to purchase homes to poor African Americans that Wells Fargo knew would ultimately default on the mortgage. Wells Fargo could then foreclose on the property and make money through collections on the loan. If this allegation is not heinous enough, the City alleged that these groups were predatorily targeted based on geography and socioeconomic status. Judge Motz in his Memorandum found that the results of foreclosure were not caused by Wells Fargo’s business practices, but rather by "extensive unemployment, lack of educational opportunity and choice, irresponsible parenting, disrespect for the law, widespread drug use, and violence."
Historically, redlining was a practice used from the 1930’s to 1968. Businesses would map out an area based on either race or economic status, and then grant or deny mortgages based on the map. Ultimately, loans were only provided to wealthy communities. This practice was eventually outlawed by the Fair Housing Act of 1968 because of the negative effects on poor and ethnic minority communities.
Reverse redlining refers to loans and credit cards given to less affluent and racial minorities. Some banks made a business practice out of lending to those less educated and sophisticated. Simply put, the bank would hope to make money when the home owner would default and the bank would foreclose on the property. Not only would the bank regain the property that it could then sell, it would also obtain a judgment against the borrower.
The reality is that during the real estate economic boom, there were individuals preyed on by lenders. While the City of Baltimore is correct to go after lenders that preyed on its citizens, ultimately, the broad strokes that everyone that is in foreclosure was preyed on discredits those individuals that were actually preyed upon.
If you are facing potential foreclosure, please contact Timothy J. Mummert, P.A. today to discuss your options with possible mortgage modification and bankruptcy assistance.
