SCAM PREVENTION PODCAST: What Isn’t Working for Homeowners Facing Foreclosure Today?

Foreclosure defense attorneys Matt Weidner and Tom Cox tell Mandelman what’s working and what’s not for homeowners in foreclosure courts. 

If you’re following someone’s advice in an effort to save your home from foreclosure, how do you know the advice your getting is correct?  If you’re planning to sue your bank in court, how do you know what your chances are based on the type of case you’re planning to bring?  I know the answer to that question… you don’t.

Okay, so I’ve had enough of watching people get ripped off two, three, four times by “helpers” offering advice that they know has never worked for anyone else.  And I’m shocked at the number of people who obviously don’t know very much about the financial or foreclosure crisis throwing around buzz words they can’t even define… and sometimres can’t even pronounce properly.

If you only knew a little bit about dentistry, would you offer to take care of someone’s filling or bridge work?  Of course not.  No one would.

But, for whatever reason, I now see a enormous number of people offering to help homeowners and providing information to homeowners when they have no clue what they are doing.  It’s embarrassing for them, but even more importantly, how are they going to slink away in the night after the person they were helping loses their home to foreclosure?

I get letters every week from homeowners saying that they’ve been following some crazy scheme and now realize how nutty the whole thing was… can I help them?  It’s heartbreaking.

So, now I’m going to do something about it.  Introducing my new SCAM Prevention Podcast.  Join me as I ask the lawyers who are actually in the courts all the time what’s working and what’s not for homeowners facing foreclosure today.

Click to play PART 1 and then to play PART 2…

Part 1 - Featuring 20 minutes with Flroida foreclosure defense attoreney Matt Weidner.  After sever years, Matt knows what’s real and what’s not. and he pulls no punches straightening things out.

Part 2 - The second part of this first program features Maine attorney, Tom Cox.  Tom was a banking lawyer for 30 years who in 2008 set out to help homeowners.  It was his deposition of a GMAC employee that brought robo-signing onto the headlines.



Mandelmnan out.


  1. Amicusman says

    Great commentary on what doesn't work, I agree with all of it, we've been alerting homeowners of this nonsense for over six years now. The problem is nothing was spoken about was does work, because your guests don't know what works.

    The ONLY methodology that works is to examine the mortgage transaction (contract) for breaches, errors, and/or tortious conduct--PERIOD!

  2. jimbo88 says

    Listened to the lawyer talk about what isn't working which begs the question, WHAT IS WORKING? They say beware of many scams and to hire an attorney. Then go on to say that attorneys are too expensive to hire.
    Sounds like you should just bend over and take it like a man. And this comes just after your "9.9 Earthquake " piece which was a breath of fresh air
    and mentions that lawyers are lining up to take on foreclosures in CA.
    You now have a lot of confused readers. :(

  3. mandelman says

    Well, I hate having to say this, but confused readers are a good thing at the moment because the situation is a true CRISIS and as such is about as screwed up and confusing as I've ever seen in this country and it's time everyone came to terms with that fact.

    But, you see, scammers want to make it sound simple... like they have the solution... like all you need to do is write someone a check for whatever it is that they're selling, and everything will be fine. Meanwhile, there's no money in telling the truth, which is what I do all the time, and so doesn't always make me popular. Even my wife told me recently that she doesn't always read my blog because it's depressing.

    For one thing, it's a state by state battle, with each one being different in some ways, while the same in others. But, as I've said in several past posts, we aren't going to win this in the courts alone, we need to win this in the state legislatures, which is what I pointed out yet again in the "9.9 Earthquake" article.

    And for another, I AM going to come back with what does work or can work and everything else homeowners need to come to terms with related to this crisis. But, it's not all "sexy" and it's not all "easy." The only thing you can count on is that it will all be TRUE.

  4. mandelman says

    Amicusman wrote:
    Great commentary on what doesn't work, I agree with all of it, we've been alerting homeowners of this nonsense for over six years now. The problem is nothing was spoken about was does work, because your guests don't know what works.

    The ONLY methodology that works is to examine the mortgage transaction (contract) for breaches, errors, and/or tortious conduct--PERIOD!

    I read the piece at the link you provided... have Storm Bradford contact me so I can understand the specifics of what he's saying. I'm always interested in what is or can work for a homeowner.

  5. DolleyMadison says

    Tom is nothing but a tool for the is obvious he has nothing but disdain for homeowners.

  6. DolleyMadison says

    Why the steady drum beat of you cannot win so give up - has Mandelman also sold out to the banks? Why would you trust the banks to comply with a loan mod - they NEVER uphold their end of the bargain - loan mods are nothing but an attempt by servicers to become the holder in due course - they know they don'y have standing to modify or foreclose.

  7. mandelman says

    Dear Dolly Madison...

    First of all, Tom Cox is the attorney that uncovered robo-signing through his deposition of Jeffrey Stephan of GMAC. He went on to win case after case and has very probably won more cases in which the borrower no longer owes their mortgage payment... the proverbial "free house," than any other single attorney in the country.

    He has also worked with the Maine state legislature to pass two laws that make it more difficult for banks to foreclose, and has argued 8 appeals before the Maine State Supreme Court on behalf of borrowers.

    In addition, Tom is the only attorney representing consumers that has forced his way onto the committee meetings being held in Washington D.C. to create a national foreclosure law... frankly, without him consumers would be in much worse position for all sorts of reasons.

    He has done all of this over the last five years at his own expense, coming out of retirement to help homeowners stay in their homes and fight the banks attempts to foreclose... and he has never charged a homeowner a nickel.

    His legal strategies have led the foreclosure defense movement, and his success recently led to him being awarded the Purpose Prize.

    Here's what Dave Dayen at had to say about Tom's award...

    Lots of people must be credited with getting to the bottom of this scam, but perhaps nobody is more responsible than Thomas Cox. Cox ended up doing the now-famous deposition of Jeffrey Stephan, the GMAC robo-signer, that exposed this practice of having affidavits filled out by people with no underlying knowledge of the loan data. This was the string that, when pulled, showed the fraud and rot at the heart of the largest consumer market in the world.

    I don’t have a whole lot of good things to say about the settlement. But there’s no question that it doesn’t happen without the diligence of people like Thomas Cox. He deserves this award for exposing the abuse of the legal system by Wall Street. The media-financial complex wants to defame people like Cox because they created a “foreclosure backlog,” always focused on the role of the lawyers rather than the role of the banks and servicers who created the mess in the first place. At least someone understands that those who stood up for the rule of law in this sorry period deserve to be recognized.

    And here's the New York Times coverage of the story... check the last line...

    Mr. Cox, 68, said he plans to use most of his winnings to develop seminars that will train lawyers in Maine to perform consumer protection work. Among other things, he wants to teach lawyers methods for having their legal fees paid by companies that they successfully sue. “A lot of these clients can’t pay much, but their lawyers can recover legal fees from the other side,” Mr. Cox said.

    He hopes to bring national experts to Maine to educate the state’s lawyers in consumer protection law, and set up a corps of retired lawyers from around the state who will mentor new lawyers and work with them in court.

    Asked if he intended to use any of the prize money for himself, Mr. Cox said, he might set a little of it aside for a fishing trip.

    So, calling Tom Cox a "tool for the bankers" demonstrates that you know nothing about the person you are maligning.

    Also, since Matt Weidner said the same things that Tom said, are you also claiming that he is a "tool?" Because Matt's about as far from being that as I can imagine.

    And what will you be saying tomorrow and next week when I post interviews that say the same thing people like with Max Gardner, who has beaten banks more than anyone in the country... or Margery Golant, who was just named Florida Consumer Attorney of the Year. Or all the others from all over country who have years of real life experience in courtrooms from coast to coast?

    What will you say then? They're all "tools for the banks?"

    And then there's me... you think I've said that homeowners should give up? What's the deal, are you a remedial reader? Or, do you just prefer sites where people that are selling something lie about how their solution will be your savior?

    Just so I'm clear about my position here... I don't care what someone does, as long as they are told the true and accurate facts about their situation.

    Loan modifications have kept more people in their homes than anything else... and not just more but MILLIONS more. And when you say that loan mods are nothing but an attempt to make servicers the holder in due course, you are just babbling nonsense.

    The definition of the term "holder in due course," which is found in UCC Section 3-302, is that you gave value and took possession of the instrument, either endorsed to you or in blank, without notice that loan is in default and without anyone else having claims or defenses to the instrument.

    Therefore, if the loan is in default and you know it is in default, then you can't become a holder in due course. So, what are you talking about? You are a perfect example of why I need to do what I do.

    You may tell yourself that you're helping homeowners fight the banks, but with your inadequate and soundbite level of knowledge, you misinform and therefore harm others, which ultimately contributes to confusion that can have no positive outcome for the homeowner.

    I understand you are angry and upset, but if you want to help... learn.

Comment on this post! (Requires free membership in the Implode-Explode forums!)

Page Rank