• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Good for this judge

hopalong

Well-known member
U.S. Home
SEE MORE - Sept. 11 - Crime - Education - Supreme CourtJudge Erases $525G Mortgage for N.Y. Couple, Citing 'Repulsive' Acts by Bank
Friday, November 27, 2009


A Long Island couple is home free after an outraged judge gave them an amazing Thanksgiving present — canceling their debt to ruthless bankers trying to toss them out on the street.

Suffolk Judge Jeffrey Spinner wiped out $525,000 in mortgage payments demanded by a California bank, blasting its "harsh, repugnant, shocking and repulsive" acts, the New York Post reported.

The bombshell decision leaves Diane Yano-Horoski and her husband, Greg Horoski, owing absolutely no money on their ranch house in East Patchogue.

Spinner pulled no punches as he smacked down the bankers at OneWest — who took an $814.2 million federal bailout but have a record of coldbloodedly foreclosing on any homeowner owing money.

"The bank was so intransigent that he [the judge] decided to punish them," Greg Horoski, 55, said about Spinner's scathing ruling last Thursday against OneWest and its IndyMac mortgage division.

It erased up to $291,000 in principal and $235,000 in interest and penalties.

The Horoskis — who had been paying only interest on their mortgage — had no equity in the home.

Horoski, who had begged the bankers to let him restructure the loan, said, "I think the judge felt it was almost a personal vendetta." Dealing with the bank, he said, was "like dealing with organized crime."

OneWest said, "We respectfully disagree with the lower court's unprecedented ruling and we expect that it will be overturned on appeal."

It claimed it "has been extremely active in working with consumers on home loan modifications through the Obama administration's Home Affordable Modification Program and other loan modification initiatives."

The bank is owned by a private equity group that purchased the failed IndyMac bank.

Yano-Horoski, a college professor of English and cognitive reason, and Horoski, who sells collectible dolls online, bought their 3,400-square-foot, one-level house 15 years ago for less than $200,000.

In 2004, court records show, they refinanced, paying off their original mortgage with part of a $292,500 sub-prime loan from Deutsche Bank. They used what was left for health care and for his business.

The loan carried an initial adjustable interest rate of 10.375 percent, which soared to 12.375 percent.

It eventually ended up being either owned or serviced by IndyMac, and the bank sued the couple in July 2005 when they began having trouble making payments because of Horoski's health problems.

After a foreclosure was approved last January, Yano-Haroski successfully asked for a court settlement conference.

Spinner excoriated OneWest for repeatedly refusing to work out a deal, for misleading him about the dollar amounts at stake in the case, and for its treatment of the couple over months of hearings.

OneWest's conduct was "inequitable, unconscionable, vexatious and opprobrious," Spinner wrote.

He canceled the debt because the bank "must be appropriately sanctioned so as to deter it from imposing further mortifying abuse against [the couple]."

The bank is involved in a similar case in California, where it's trying to foreclose on an 89-year-old woman, despite two court orders telling it to stop.

THe couple seemed to be trying, and what about THe Calif.
Blood suckers thats all banks like this are they are.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Yano-Horoski, a college professor of English and cognitive reason,

cognitive reason is best described as the ability to reconcile the factual reason with the perceived reason.. :? :???: source... Professor Yano-Horoski..

yet the professor can't even explain to her husband or understand that when you borrow money.. you eventually have to pay it back..

interest only loans.. means you are not paying down the debt..

bought their 3,400-square-foot, one-level house 15 years ago for less than $200,000.

so in 1994, they owed say... $160,000 a down payment was likely and the rate was any where from 7% to 8%, so in 2004 they would have owed.,. say,.. . $135,756.82

In 2004, court records show, they refinanced, paying off their original mortgage with part of a $292,500

so they pulled out.. say $156,741 for health care and his business..
so at ( 2007, U.S. health care spending was about $7,421 per resident)

lets just double the number for arguments sake.. heck lets quadruple it.. $29,684 leaving $127,057 for his business..

Horoski, who sells collectible dolls online

yep.. in one year he blew $127,057 on dolls.. :?

one year.. it's 2009 now.. .but wait when did their bank troubles start..
bank sued the couple in July 2005 when they began having trouble making payments

yep.. 2004 they borrowed about $150,000 and by July of 2005 they were already being sued by the bank.. so in one year he blew 156,741 on dolls.. and because of health care issues..
Horoski_650916a.jpg


yep,... that looks like a guy so sick he can't sell dolls online
sarcasm.gif
.. :roll: :roll: :wink: (please excuse the dripping sarcasm)..
sarcasm.gif


link to "his" doll business...
http://www.dollsamerica.com/

The couple seemed to be trying

in less then one year the couple borrowed $292,500 at 10.375%
shows they was stupid..... normal interest rates were under 7% and they could have gotten as low as my 1.5%,..

the fact that they blew the money on a guy so sick he couldn't sell dolls online shows that they had either no reasonable perceptions of reality or.. they were really stupid... and the bank who acted in good faith.. is now being punished because a professor and her sickly husband are to stupid to manage their money..

Greg Horoski Executive Office Consultant

http://www.dollsamerica.com/

sadly had this couple just done nothing... they would only owe $$115,327.63 and could refinance today for a payment of about $765 and it easily could be covered by Greg Horoski's, (age 55), SS disability payment
(any one who is to sick to sell dolls online is surely disabled enough for SS disability
sarcasm.gif
)

BTW indymac failed in 2008. so onewest assumed an already defaulted loan.. this stupid couple is why the banks failed... not the other way around..
 

TSR

Well-known member
I kinda agree with you Steve but did you realize you were talking to Hopalong? You must be, at least in part, an "Independent Conservative". Have a good one. :)
 

Steve

Well-known member
TSR said:
I kinda agree with you Steve but did you realize you were talking to Hopalong? You must be, at least in part, an "Independent Conservative". Have a good one. :)

I knew it was posted by Hopalong and I'm all for the "little guy winning" and emotionally it tugs at you when a bank is taking a home, I grew up in the seventies when alot of farms were seized.. so I am against foreclosures and feel that often a bank could and should work with the folk first... , .. but I can't sit by and nod my head in agreement, if I feel the facts don't support the emotional claims..
 

hopalong

Well-known member
NOT saying they were smart and not to a degree to blame, nor do I know the details of the little old lady in Calif. How ever it seems to me that when TWO separate courts rule against this bank they must have more information than WE have at our finger tips, one court TWICE!!!!!
 

Steve

Well-known member
hopalong said:
NOT saying they were smart and not to a degree to blame, nor do I know the details of the little old lady in Calif. How ever it seems to me that when TWO separate courts rule against this bank they must have more information than WE have at our finger tips, one court TWICE!!!!!

I looked up and researched the facts... while I don't have the background on the judge it wasn't hard to find information on him..

ever wonder how many far left liberal judges there is in democratic strong holds such as New York and California?

ever disagree with OT? more then once... heck even far left liberal Judge OT must have been right at least twice?

so even a judge who touts himself as a conservative, farm laborer in his bio can have a liberal bent a mile long.... I looked at some facts about him... and this stuck out..

Ithaca College History BA - Bachelor of Arts

Law Offices Howard Lee Schiff, PC ... Collection Law • Creditors Rights
Green & Kleinman P.C. (top donater to 1. Christopher Dodd, Democratic and 1. Friends Of Chris Dodd) ... Business Law
• Bankruptcy and Corporate Reorganization

Party Line

* Conservative
* Democrat
* Independence
* Republican
* Working Families

His interests include, bird watching, hiking, travel, rollerblading, bicycling, European History, comparative religion, reading

goes to show you when a judge claims he is a conservative (or independent) a quick look at his back ground and rulings can show a different story..



the judges ruling was a blow to personal responsibility!
 

Steve

Well-known member
hopalong said:
So what is the story about the little old lady in California????

I don't know.. I was responding to the stupid couple who want to sell dolls at our (taxpayers) expense..

here is what your story said..

he bank is involved in a similar case in California, where it's trying to foreclose on an 89-year-old woman, despite two court orders telling it to stop

after a quick check and a few minutes of research

scroll about a third of the way down..
IndyMac Intent On Foreclosing On 89-Year Old Widow, Despite Two Court Orders Telling Them To Stop

Indymac Bank and its successor, One West Bank, keep trying to foreclose on an elderly widow's house despite two court orders telling them to stop, the 89 year-old woman says in Alameda County Court, Oakland

Irene Jones says foreclosure proceedings on her Oakland home were halted twice, first by an order restraining Indymac from foreclosing in February 2008, then by a second order invalidating Indymac's foreclosure proceedings in March 2009. Nonetheless, Jones says Indymac and One West notified her they would begin foreclosing again in October.
http://homeequitytheft.blogspot.com/

to and a bit more of the sad story..
(CN) - Indymac Bank and its successor, One West Bank, keep trying to foreclose on an elderly widow's house despite two court orders telling them to stop, the 89 year-old woman says in Alameda County Court, Oakland.

Jones says the first two court orders came after a mortgage broker took money meant to pay off her mortgage in a refinancing loan and "never recorded or received a deed of full reconveyance or release of lien" on the property.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/11/23/Bank_Won_t_Quit_Demands_on_Elderly_Widow.htm

sounds fishy... so I dug deeper.. and found a PDF of the court document.. and the truth..
I was unable to pull an exact quote.. from the PDF
http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/11/23/ElderHouse.pdf

go to page 6 and item #24..

you will see that the Colemans' of Pacific capital mortgage stole the money ($344,991.40) and used it for their own use.

Kay-Co didn't re-assign the mortgage nor inform the parties of their theft..

in discovery they (Kay-co) admitted they didn't pay off the loans.

so now it is a real mess.. and with some courts ruling on emotion.. and other higher courts ruling on fact of law..

the lower courts.. two rulings.. were in favor of her, but sadly theft of property does not relive a person of loan obligations..

this case is a mess.. and sad.. they are paying off one loan.. but the funds were stolen.

Indy mac.. failed.. and was a mess..
one west is on the lawsuit because it took over indymac.. not because it went after the lady..

emotionally I say screw the bank... but facts are facts..

the lady is a victim.. of KAY-CO..
william and Kay Coleman stole an elderly couples money.. !

Indy Mac is a victim of Kay co
Kay and willaim cloeman stole the money.. intended to pay off the loan.. before it paid the off loan.

One West is trying to clean up indy mac and an emotional judges ruling..

kay-co, Kay M. colmans, Wiliam coleman and waggoner hillery should be crucified on the lady's front lawn.. they are scum..

http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:nWtTBTS6GhwJ:www.dfi.wa.gov/CS%2520Orders/C-05-046-05-SC01.pdf+kay+coleman+william+coleman+kay-co&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

so yes it is a tragically sad story.. but do you want a emotional court ruling or facts of law..

I want those who committed the crime to pay up.. now.. even if we have to sell Kay coleman and her worthless piece of crap husband on a corner or sell their black market organs to get the money... :mad:
 

Steve

Well-known member
hopalong said:
Thanks Steve I had not been able to find the info on the little old lady.

its a real sad tragic story... and I agree she shouldn't lose her home, but Judges can't rule on emotion,. and must rule on law.. no matter how much we as people disagree with the results..
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Steve said:
hopalong said:
Thanks Steve I had not been able to find the info on the little old lady.

its a real sad tragic story... and I agree she shouldn't lose her home, but Judges can't rule on emotion,. and must rule on law.. no matter how much we as people disagree with the results..

wonder what they have based their decision to have rerstraining 2 orders thus far?
 

Steve

Well-known member
hopalong said:
Steve said:
hopalong said:
Thanks Steve I had not been able to find the info on the little old lady.

its a real sad tragic story... and I agree she shouldn't lose her home, but Judges can't rule on emotion,. and must rule on law.. no matter how much we as people disagree with the results..

wonder what they have based their decision to have rerstraining 2 orders thus far?

from the research that i did, I believe it was based on emotion and overturned.

I can understand a company (IndyMac) seeking to recover funds they loaned out. it is not IndyMac's fault the elderly couple was swindled out of the money by another corrupt loan/financial company.

I can also understand that IndyMac didn't follow an order that was not in the correct court, (no jurisdiction) (or overturned as claimed) .

I can easily sympathize with the elderly couple and understand her frustration and feeling of loss.. but IndyMac didn't steal her money.. they loaned the couple the money, and expected it to be paid back.

the courts need to rule on the law, and decide who is the victim of the theft, and once that is done, (because until that point of LAW is decided it will remain a mess with many victims).. the courts need to seek remedy from the criminal who stole the money (Kay-Co)

IndyMac didn't take her over to re-finance the loan with Kay-Co, she and her husband went there on their own.

I see her anger, but One West didn't harm her.. Kay-Co did..

If you sold me a bull and I didn't pay for it.. would you want the Bull back.. even if I claimed the check was stolen by the post office?

and if eventually after you wrote the bull off.. and I didn't maintain my fence, the bull got out, and the bull damaged a neighbors place.. how would you feel when I sued you for the damage your bull did?


now you know how One West feels...

the facts need to be looked at... not the age of the lady..
 
Top