The Corner

Questions for WaMu

Remember Rep. Laura Richardson, the California Democrat who stopped making payments on her three-bedroom house in Sacramento so she could loan her congressional campaign $75,000? After her bank, Washington Mutual, foreclosed on the house and sold it at auction for a $187,000 loss, Richardson preposterously announced that the foreclosure had never taken place, that the sale was illegitimate, and that she had, in fact, worked out a deal with WaMu to pay off the loan.

Today, the Daily Breeze reports that WaMu is playing along with Richardson’s defense and is trying to get the house back from the buyer!

The real estate broker who bought Rep. Laura Richardson’s house at a foreclosure sale last month is accusing her of receiving preferential treatment because her lender has issued a notice to rescind the sale.

James York, owner of Red Rock Mortgage, said he would file a lawsuit against Richardson and her lender, Washington Mutual, by the end of the week, and has every intention of keeping the house.

“I’m just amazed they’ve done this,” York said. “They never would have done this for anybody else.”

The financial blog Calculated Risk has some questions for WaMu:

  • How often are modifications or repayment plans offered to owners of vacant investment properties with no or negative equity that have never been listed or rented?
  • How often are modifications offered to borrowers with two other properties currently in foreclosure?
  • How often are modifications arranged in the week before the scheduled trustee’s sale, following nearly a year of no contact?
  • Does WaMu’s policy on modifications make any reference to requiring a “commitment to homeownership” on the borrower’s part? How, normally, is that established?
  • Does WaMu’s policy on modifications make any reference to establishing that the borrower does not display a “disregard for debt obligations”? How, normally, is that established?

Well WaMu, how about it?

Recommended

The Latest