Robo-Signer Pretexts

At the center of your being you have the answer; you know who you are and you know what you want
~Lao Tzu

People have objectives, and are very good at rationalizing why these objectives are efficient and just. As Lao Tzu noted, if you know what you want, you know the answer too. [However, Tzu seems to think this is a good thing, as if our authentic, innermost wants are better than those that come after reasoning].

The robo-signer kerfluffle is a pretext to pander to the mob, just like razing kulaks back in the good old days. People like Paul Krugman, who's id leads his superego rather directly, suggest that those signatures affirming that some person owns the mortgage on some property and hasn't paid, may not have had first-hand information to that effect. They may have been using hearsay information. This is the kind of legal breach is hardly a grand problem that must be addressed prior to further foreclosures. How many of you have clicked 'I have read the EULA agreement' when downloading software without actually doing so? Is that a problem?

The main issue is in any foreclosure is: 'When is the last time you made a mortgage payment?' If it was several months ago, the rest doesn't matter. If people paid their mortgage bills, robo-signers would not be problems, and if they don't pay their mortgage bills, there will be a problem. Having the servicer spend a day on their affidavit won't make it any more accurate, the facts are pretty easy to see.

In my litigation experience I remember that it was rather pointless getting indignant about what my adversary was saying, because when dealing with someone who has bad faith, they won't be satisfied when you address their specific points. They would say 'this is about enforcing the law', as if a spreadsheet of the SPY returns since 2000, downloaded from Yahoo!, that I transferred to my home computer, was a violation of my confidentiality agreement. The specifics did not matter, it was the principle, they would say, the sanctity of contracts, the importance of protecting their property rights. Details being complicated, costly litigation commenced, which was the end game. For many people, an indefensible unstated principle is their end game, but because it is self-serving and petty, one can't say it directly. Thus, various pretexts are paraded as principle, and quickly forgotten once their damage has been done.