October 8th, 2010
07:48 AM ET

Bank breaks into home - over mortgage payments

Nancy Jacobini was home alone in Florida when she heard what she thought was an intruder at the front door. There was no knock. She wasn't expecting anyone, so she grabbed her cell phone and called 911.

As it turns out, the man who broke the lock on her front door was actually a contractor hired by her bank. It is a procedure typically used to secure a foreclosed home. However, Jacobini's home wasn't foreclosed. She tells American Morning's Kiran Chetry how terrifying the experience was for her.

Nancy Jacobini: When the police arrived, of course, they had to search the house to make certain that nobody else was in it. And then one thing led to another, and then we basically found out that the gentleman was there to change the locks on my home.

Kiran Chetry: And who was he sent by?

Jacobini: He was sent by the bank, Chase Bank, to change the locks without my permission.

Chetry: You say that you were about three to four months behind on your mortgage payments but you'd been working diligently with the bank to get a mortgage modification.

Jacobini: Absolutely.

Chetry: And you didn't receive any notification about any impending foreclosure.

Jacobini: I did not. I did not receive any information at all in reference to a foreclosure.

Chetry: Basically you're sitting there and you have no idea if someone's breaking into your home to attack you at this point.

Exactly. I knew the aggressiveness was getting very severe. I was very much afraid, and it was a rainy day at the time. Skip thought the person was taking advantage of the weather. There were going to be no witnesses. This person had a gun, a knife, I had no idea what was going to happen. I didn't know if there was one person, I didn't know if there was two people. All I knew was my life was in danger.

Chetry: Have they apologized to you, Nancy, for what you went through?

No. Actually, I purposely retrieved both of my messages last night to really, really try to decipher every single word, you know, while I was in private just to see if I overlooked something. And no, there was no apology. On either one of those messages.

What'd they say?

Jacobini: It was basically an introduction of who the gentleman was, and he had mentioned that he was calling because he had received an escalation to his office and that he was calling about the mix-up in reference to the work preservation work order ... And then the second message simply stated an introduction, of course, of who he was. And that they were basically, you know, playing phone tag and that he was just calling in reference to, you know, this situation.

Let me ask...

Jacobini: I did not get an apology.

Chetry: Matt, what's your take on what went on here and what should happen moving forward?

Matthew Weidner: This is an absolutely terrifying phenomenon. This is happening all across the country to people just like Nancy. It's so important to emphasize she's not in foreclosure at all. There was absolutely no warning.

I've made contact with them several times and haven't gotten any credible apology at all. In fact, my last phone call yesterday, they were still trying to confirm whether power was in her name, totally irrelevant. But she's been in this house for 20 years and power has been in her name that entire time.

Chetry: That's the unbelievable part. How long you were living in this house and the fact that you were not in foreclosure. Here's what JP Morgan Chase says, they say properties in delinquent payments they can regularly visit to inspect them. And if the property's found to be open, they can work to secure it even if it's not in foreclosure. What do you think of that?

Weidner: I want to take exception to that. That's the big problem happening across this country. These banks are running wild. It's the wild west out there. Here's a house that's perfectly secured, her locks are secure, she's got an alarm system on it and power in. And the banks across the country are using that excuse as a justification for violating fundamental rights. It's got to stop. America's got to wake up and say we're not going to take this anymore.

Are you suing?

We are in negotiations right now. But frankly this is more than suing. This is about getting this issue in front of the American people so that the American people demand it to stop. Ultimately we do want this in front of a jury because we want Americans all across this country to stand up and say what happened to nancy can't happen again, and yet our banks are just bulldozing all across Americans, all across America, bulldozing over them.

Chetry: It's really quite shocking this happened to you, Nancy. And we're certainly sorry. Please keep us posted on any more information you get from the bank and how this turns out.

Jacobini: Thank you very much.

Chetry: Thanks for joining us, as well.

Watch American Morning weekdays 6am to 9am ET. For the latest from American Morning click here.

soundoff (388 Responses)
  1. ray gibbs

    There's a better way. Not much thinking either.

    October 8, 2010 at 8:10 am | Report abuse |
    • what comes around goes around

      2 loyal pittbulls would not have killed the man but would of made him realize that when you play with fire you get burned!

      October 8, 2010 at 11:28 am | Report abuse |
    • greatandtoy

      I actually had this happen to me while we were going through our loan modification and my Great Danes knocked the guy down my front steps and pinned him before I even knew he was here. I had to pull them off of him, they are such good boys. My mortgage co. appologized for the incident.

      October 8, 2010 at 11:48 am | Report abuse |
    • Robb

      Danged lucky the guy didn't get shot. In Florida it's legal to shoot anyone you feel threatened by. They don't have to be in your home – they can even be on the street. He should count himself lucky that he didn't call on another house whose owner had a gun. He'd be dead today.

      October 8, 2010 at 11:57 am | Report abuse |
    • Dr. X

      Intruder in house – Gun – Dead intruder – you are justified- problem solved

      October 8, 2010 at 12:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • WOW!!


      October 8, 2010 at 12:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • Raeann Young

      This same thing happened to my brothers house Chase done this to him and we cant anybody to return phone calls and we would like to talk to attorney. He had everything taken out of his home the stole everything. This happened in Tennessee. If there is help out there please get in touch with us. Thanks.

      October 8, 2010 at 1:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • camel

      id have shot the guy

      October 12, 2010 at 11:31 pm | Report abuse |
  2. concealedcarrymom

    If anyone breaks into my home for whatever reason, they risk an unhealthy dose of lead being administered to them ASAP. Period.

    October 8, 2010 at 8:57 am | Report abuse |
    • cpd5c45

      ...and you would be absolutely in the right. In Colorado, we have a 'make my day' law and anyone intruding into a home can be met with deadly force.

      October 8, 2010 at 9:05 am | Report abuse |
    • John

      Amen on that. People need to be careful about just going into a home. It wouldn't be my fault if a person was shot breaking into my home, no matter the reason.

      October 8, 2010 at 9:08 am | Report abuse |
    • Dogen

      And you would have killed an unarmed man, who was just out doing his job, with no concept of who you are or what your deal is. Like shooting the power man when he comes to read your meter.

      October 8, 2010 at 9:10 am | Report abuse |
    • kevin

      Well the reality is, its not really your home till you paid the mortgage off and have deed in hand, its the banks home. If you dont pay for something they take it back. If you dont pay your car for 3 or 4 months they come and repo it. It is sad when someone loses their home, i lost mine 2 years, Their are alot of people right now just letting their house go into foreclosure just to get out of an upside down loan which is wrong but i know of several people doing then going out and buying a new home.

      October 8, 2010 at 9:13 am | Report abuse |
    • Eddie

      Dogen – Are you saying that I should let someone break in to my home and then give them a chance to describe their intentions, before I shoot them? The house was properly secured and it was clear that people we inside. He did not knock, ring the doorbell, or have a police presence (as required in an eviction).

      Kevin – She was delinquent; however, she had been working with the bank on a mortgage modification. As long as I work with my lender, I can go without payments for up to 24 months. I know, as I discussed it with them, when I had lost my job. Again, this house was NOT in foreclosure. The lenders representative overstepped his authority. By law, he is not allowed to change locks unless there is no one home and the house is in foreclosure. He is not allowed to gain entry, when they are home, without an eviction order and a police presence.

      October 8, 2010 at 9:24 am | Report abuse |
    • Andres

      @ Dogen – If I read this correctly, the intruder was armed with both a gun and a knife. Assuming that's the case, I'd have to elect to take action and protect my family by all measures possible.

      October 8, 2010 at 9:29 am | Report abuse |
    • Angela


      October 8, 2010 at 9:55 am | Report abuse |
    • kym

      Love this comment!

      October 8, 2010 at 10:20 am | Report abuse |
    • DUH

      Dogen, I guess you didn't read the whole interview. The puberb was armed with a gun AND knife. Don't know where you live, but my power meter is outside of my house. And I guess ANYONE can enter your house without knocking. The shooting would have been justified, whether he was doing his job or not!

      October 8, 2010 at 10:21 am | Report abuse |
    • diane

      The same would happen to anyone breaking into my home. What kind of moron would contract with a bank to break and enter anyway? Here in KY he would not last long, our sheriff takes care of evictions so when he KNOCKS on the door the person inside knows who it is.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:26 am | Report abuse |
    • Joseph

      The trouble with that is, most people don't have what it takes to actually kill an intruder. Anyone can talk big (especially on the internet), but few can actually handle "There's a man in my house and I don't know what he wants." without slipping into panic.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:57 am | Report abuse |
    • guest

      What type of person walks around waiting for the chance to shoot someone, anyone!! GOD help us...

      October 8, 2010 at 11:11 am | Report abuse |
    • tuffyturf

      California has the same law, if someone breaks into your home, you can shoot them- because the court has ruled that if someone you do not know is in your house, obviously you are in fear for your life- therefore there is no need to see if that person is armed etc. which you probably would not be able to do anyway because the house would be dark etc.

      And the Calif. Supreme Ct. just included ones garage as a place where deadly force can be used. The law previously applied only to the inside of ones house, they have now extended it to the garage...

      Our country is so screwed up...the taxpayer's bailed out the banks so they could keep their doors open, now the banks want to literally take your door from you...

      October 8, 2010 at 11:22 am | Report abuse |
    • cody_mo

      I know this doesn’t work for the above story, but for the subject on people that have firearms for self-defense. Dead men tell no tales. But then you can start arguing over forensics, blah blah blah. But at least you wouldn’t have the "he said she said."

      October 8, 2010 at 11:41 am | Report abuse |
    • Sam

      "...it was a rainy day at the time. Skip thought the person was taking advantage of the weather. There were going to be no witnesses. This person had a gun, a knife, I had no idea what was going to happen. I didn't know if there was one person, I didn't know if there was two people."

      As I read it, she wasn't saying he was armed, only that she didn't know what the intruder(s) had or their intention. She was simply in fear.

      Which more than justifies an armed reception. But not in the "shoot first, ask questions later" manner. At my house, if he got in, he'd be staring down the barrel of a loaded weapon. Or I'd yell through the door and get him to stop and then throw open the door and get him on the ground 'til the cops showed up. Let them sort out the facts. Something like that.

      But if a person DOES fire on an intruder trying to break in, I don't think you can really fault them, especially if they feel endangered, and in most states, I think the law is on their side.

      October 8, 2010 at 12:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • Chris

      Where do you live. In some place you can be in big trouble for killing, say a small child who walks in by mistake, or a drunk who does the same. Or even un-armed teenage kids looking to steal a iPod.

      And then it could even by far worse. What ifthe guy is a real, full-on thug and he has a buddy with him. That guy will likey shoot back. You'd be dead. OK many you spend a good deal of time at the shooting range every week and know you could get off two clean shots to the head before either of them could return fire. But even so it's a gamble with your life. Bett hope its a 13 year old who is only after the iPod, then he dies and not you.

      October 8, 2010 at 12:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jose

      @Chris – The problem with any home entry is intent. It has been ruled by many states (including Florida where this took place) that any intruder that is willing to enter a home unlawfully while it is occupied is willing to commit violence against the occupants. That is why she would have been justifying shooting a teenager there to steal an ipod. Now as for a child getting through a locked door to wander around the house would be a hard sell as to how they did it.

      October 12, 2010 at 10:40 am | Report abuse |
  3. Wild Bill

    She should have waited for him to actually bust out the locks and open the door. At which point, she should have shot him for home invasion.

    October 8, 2010 at 9:12 am | Report abuse |
    • guest

      What type of person are you that walks around waiting for the chance to shoot someone, anyone!! GOD help us...

      October 8, 2010 at 11:12 am | Report abuse |
    • Wzrd1

      He'd stand at least a 50% chance of being shot by me. It would actually depend on his actions when I confronted him at that open door.
      Because all I'd tell him is to not move, lay on the ground with his arms extended out. Then a standard search of his person while my wife is on the phone with the police.
      But, if he does ANYTHING other than as instructed, he'd suffer high speed lead poisoning.
      And yes, I have no qualms in shooting an intruder. I will simply mention my 27+ years of military service to support that.
      There was NO valid reason to break and enter to change locks, as there was no foreclosure proceedings in progress.
      There was no reasonable assumption for any party in this to expect such actions.
      The locksmith failed to even ascertain if someone was home, which would be a reasonable act on his part.
      Hence, the resident of the home had zero expectation of anyone coming to do ANYTHING with their locks, hence they would have a reasonable fear for their own safety.
      Again, I WOULD at least give him the opportunity to be taken into custody. It certainly is preferable to cleaning up all that blood unnecessarily...

      October 8, 2010 at 11:43 am | Report abuse |
    • Walter

      don't you wish the actual bank representative who sent this guy would have come over to do the job? wait for him to enter and then shoot him... wait for a judge to take a few millions from the bank's pocket so they can realize how wrong this is... Hopefully if this ever happens again and the economy get as bad as it is right now there will be no bailouts and some of this banks would close the damn doors... and this guy should sue the bank also because they sent him knowningly to commit a crime... hopefully she gets her house for free now and a few extra bucks...

      October 8, 2010 at 12:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • Chris

      Waiting for him and then shooting would get you convicted of murder. Shooting is justified in self defence but waiting for a person can't possible be self defence. And then what if the person really was some armed thug? He'd likely shoot back. To all those people who think they can shoot someone who breaks in. I'd say what if your first shot does not kill him instantly? What then? There are only two cases to consider (1) The other guy is unarmed, good change you could win a shotting match with him, but you'll be going to jail OK maybe you get off but you'll pay your life savings to a defence lawyer. or (2) He is armed. Then there is a 50/50 chance of which one of you is killed.

      October 8, 2010 at 1:22 pm | Report abuse |

    I'm just wondering what would of happened if she would of shot and killed him? Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

    October 8, 2010 at 9:12 am | Report abuse |
    • Hugo

      Self defense... The castle law clearly applies here.

      October 8, 2010 at 9:54 am | Report abuse |
    • Texas Pete

      Lucky the guy didn't try breaking in around here or he probably would have got a chest full of 12 gauge.

      October 8, 2010 at 9:58 am | Report abuse |
    • Strake

      The law in Florida is quite simple. The law specifies that you must try and avoid the use of deadly force if possible and therefore retreat is called for (again if safely possible). The caveat here is the law says (Castle Domain or Eminent Domain) when you are in your home you have retreated as far as is earthly possible and deadly force is acceptible for defense. A .223 round travelling at 3297 fps makes a pretty strong argument against trying to enter my home by force regardless of the purpose. Although I hope I never have to take someone's life if someone is trying to break into my house I will not take the time to "chat" with them to understand why they are there. If you do that you run a pretty high risk of being in the obit column the next day. I very strongly belive that I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

      December 23, 2010 at 11:59 am | Report abuse |
  5. Wild Bill


    And you would have killed an unarmed man, who was just out doing his job, with no concept of who you are or what your deal is. Like shooting the power man when he comes to read your meter.
    Did the guy try KNOCKING ON THE DOOR FIRST to see if anyone was at home? Oh, and the power guy doesn't have to break into your home to read the meter....what a dumba$$ response.

    October 8, 2010 at 9:14 am | Report abuse |
    • Hugo

      Ok, so next time somebody is trying to break in my house, I'll ask nicely if they're with the bank first.. NOT!

      October 8, 2010 at 9:55 am | Report abuse |
  6. wed110197

    "If she paid her bills on time, she wouldn't be in this situation". NOT TRUE WITH CHASE!!!!!! My wife and I have ALWAYS paid our mortgage before it was late with Chase and yet every month on the first SATURDAY of the month they have a "collection agency" call us and ask for payement. I have asked them repeatedly to stop calling on the Lords Sabbath day and they still call. Not only do they call, but they harrass us the whole day. They keep calling and if we talk to them they won't listen and they keep us on the phone for an unessesary amount of time. Someone needs to seriously do something about Chase bank, they are out of control!!!!!!

    October 8, 2010 at 9:15 am | Report abuse |
    • jeff

      Are you paying "on time" or before the penalty actually kicks in? By the "due date" or by the date the late payment fee actually kicks in? Those are different constructs, and if you are not paying by the :due date" you are delinquent and a company will treat you as such. If you are paying by the due date, you should contact your state's attorney general and file a complaint. If you are not paying by the due date, even if the penalty hasn't kicked in, you are delinquent and they will treat you as if delinquent. In separation of church and state, a day that is holy to you is not something that is (or should be) a consideration to a secular corporation. If you want to keep your holy day according to your religion, you need to live up to your contractual obligations.

      October 8, 2010 at 9:54 am | Report abuse |
    • JasonB

      Actually, Jeff, there is a distinct difference between late and delinquent.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:28 am | Report abuse |
    • Tracy

      You need to read your mortgage contract...
      Your mortgage payments are due on the 1st of the month & are actually considered "late" as of the 2nd. Your mortgage company gives you a "grace period" until 15 days after the payment is DUE to make your payment.

      October 8, 2010 at 11:08 am | Report abuse |
    • sk

      You need to send them a letter telling them that all communication needs to be in writing and for them not to call you anymore. I had the same issue with GMAC/Homecommings. Their automated phone system would call every hour the day after the due date until you gave them a check number.

      October 8, 2010 at 11:11 am | Report abuse |
    • NM

      Here's the way it works. All residential, standard consumer promissory notes state that the payment is due on the first of the month. That means it IS LATE on the second; however, the bank pretends and makes believe it is the first of the month until after the 15th day. On the 16th day then bank wakes up and goes: "where's my payment". If it does not have it (and that means "has received it"), then the "late charge" as stated in the note applies(usually 3% of the P & I payment amount).

      October 8, 2010 at 11:30 am | Report abuse |
    • Tom

      I had to scroll 3/4 of the way down the page to find someone who got it. She hadn't paid her mortgage in 4 MONTHS, so arguing over the exact day of the month the payment was due is totally irrelevent to this story.

      October 8, 2010 at 12:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • GB

      Chase is the world's worst for distorting facts and trying to bludgeon their "customers".

      October 8, 2010 at 12:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • NM

      If she hadn't made payments in 4 months, then each payment would be "late", AND starting with the first month the payment was not made, the loan would be in "Default". There are significant differences in the procedures to be followed jurisdiction by jurisdiction. In MA, breaking the lock, is an act of possession and can not be carried out without judicial permission and must be carried out by a sheriff. The topic of say an apparently abandoned property and the right of the Bank to protect its collateral by securing it is different from its right to inspect or to force place insurance, etc. which is an actual covenant in the mortgage.

      October 8, 2010 at 1:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • wed110197

      If I have a 15 day "grace period" then it's that GRACE. Not harass me for payment for 15 days. I only bring up this point because I am not responsible for the mail system or the banks timeline in processing my payment. They are not calling me on day 15 they are calling me on day 2... TWO!!!!! I'm not poor and I have the means to pay. I have a good paying job that unfortunetly for me and the bank only pays me every 2 weeks. It's simply timing. So the bank is wasting it's time and money harrasing me for a payment it's going to get anyway, does that make any sense? They will and always have gotten thier payment. This is uncalled for and harrasment and it should be covered by the fair collections act. If your not charging me because it is late then don't harrass me because you think it's late.

      October 10, 2010 at 4:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jody

      gp on the computer to "donotcall.gov". click at the link at the bottom of the page to file a complaint. take note of the phone number they are calling you from. the federal agency will take care of your problem.

      October 12, 2010 at 7:02 am | Report abuse |
  7. Brick


    Be careful, if the bank comes to change the locks on your house, and you shoot them, you'd probably get charged with trespassing and homicide.

    October 8, 2010 at 9:16 am | Report abuse |
    • Chris

      Mr. Brick, I'm not sure if the Castle Doctrine exists in the state this woman resides in, however, if someone enters your home without permission, and especially if they are armed with a knife and gun, you are legally justified in shooting them, even if the Castle Doctrine does not exist in her state, he was still armed, and had she blown his head off, she would likely have been legally justified.
      How does she know if he had good intentions, if he didn't even knock before entering?
      Personally, if this man came through my door without knocking, I would have retrieved my Mossberg, and put a 3" Magnum 00 buck shot to the man's chest the second he came through my door.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:08 am | Report abuse |
    • Will

      Brick, you clearly have no idea what trespassing entails. Fail.

      October 8, 2010 at 12:30 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Boyd

    There is a real difference between a power man reading your meter and someone breaking and entering your home. For one the power man does his work OUTSIDE the house.

    October 8, 2010 at 9:18 am | Report abuse |
  9. Mike

    Wow. That's a good way to get your head blown off Mr. Banker. Note to self... never use JP Chase....

    October 8, 2010 at 9:19 am | Report abuse |
  10. thhhhhhhhhh

    home invasion! charge the man

    October 8, 2010 at 9:20 am | Report abuse |
    • BS

      I am a contractor for many banks. The banks have EVERY right to protect their assets. The banks OWN the homes. You are simply living in them until they are paid in full. It is the same with late payments on a car. If you miss your payment, they come take your car, plain and simple. You could owe a dollar on a 50k car, and if you miss your payments, say good bye. You borrowed the money. The only reason foreclosure rights are in place is so that people have adequate time to prepare to find a place to live, so we dont have people being thrown out on the streets. The locks being changed does not mean you are kicked out. It simply means the bank is now doing inspections of the property to ensure it is being maintained. Oh and all you idiots. We have conceal and carries as well, so if you shoot at me, you will be shot at! We have a right to be there, just as much as you! It is a said situation but my poor little democrat's, please understand investing money takes responsibility to protect your assets. Our housing market would be MUCH worse if the banks were not dilligent at ensuring your neighbors, and grandparents neighbors homes were not turning into health and safety issues, further declining the property values in the neighborhood.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:02 am | Report abuse |
    • Mark

      @BS...yes while the banks have every right to protect their assests, I too have every right to protect my family. How do I know who you are, for all I know you an idiot high on crack looking to make another score. Next thing you know, you're dead

      October 8, 2010 at 10:15 am | Report abuse |
    • Hass

      @BS You don't understand law very well. This is someones home, not their vehicle. There are huge differences when it comes to someones home. You cannot just go in and repo a home like you can a car. To gain any entry to any home...forclosed or not, you must have permission. If you want to gain entry without permission, you must have proper eviction paperwork and the police with you.

      So go ahead and think its like repo'ing a car and just break in to anyone's home....just know that one day you will wind up dead.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:24 am | Report abuse |
    • Lasagna

      Hey BS. You better start entering those homes with your pistol in your hand. I wouldn't give you the chance to draw. The second that someone starts entering my home the lead starts flying. You will not get much time on the job doing what your doing.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:31 am | Report abuse |
    • Scott S

      Actually, property is owned by the individual & not the bank. The property is a security for the loan. When a loan is defaulted then the bank can repo the property. Of course there are also situations and contracts that give the bank rights in trying to protect the property in cases of late pays & impending defaults.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:34 am | Report abuse |
    • Chris

      @BS....So you contractors carry concealed huh?...I do also....However, when in my home, I always have my trusty 12 gauge Mossberg with recoil absorber installed loaded with 3" magnum buck shots sitting next to me. I live in a not so nice part of town, so I'm a little paranoid.
      So, to get to the point, you say that "if I shot at you, you would shoot back."...Well Mr. BS, I think your wrong.
      The first rule in a gunfight is: NEVER BRING A PISTOL TO A SHOTGUN OR RIFLE FIGHT.
      I hit very nice groupings past 25 yards with my 40 cal handgun, but I would really make swiss cheese of an intruder with my shotty.
      The best part is: because I have no idea that you are a contractor if there isn't a knock on my door, I would be legally justified in blowing a hole through you once you come through my door.
      Florida (where this woman lives), adopted the Castle Doctrine, so she would have been just fine in doing this.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:37 am | Report abuse |
    • avos

      @BS – are you really BS? You must be lucky not to be shot-dead after working for bank. better change your job before getting hurt.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:48 am | Report abuse |
    • BS is an idiot

      you obviously don't know the law very well. even if you are hired to enter a house it is your duty as well as the banks to notify the owners of the home what is going on. You can only enter after they have given you permission or the court has deemed it legal repo or foreclosure. this is a US Federal law. applies in all states.

      just keep in mind, you might have a conceal permit, but that does not give you the right to use it in a private residence. It is actually illegal to carry that weapon onto private property that is not yours without permission. if you use that weapon to defend yourself, you most likely will wind up behind bars for premediated murder. You carried the weapon with the intention of using it on private property, that is premediated and you will serve life in prison.

      you might want to get legal counsel on your rights/obligations before you enter another home.

      October 8, 2010 at 11:52 am | Report abuse |
    • Wzrd1

      BS, quite appropriate. You have NO clue as to what you are talking about.
      First, the bank DOES NOT own the home, the homeowner, aka the person who took out the mortgage does. The home is held as security on the loan and in the case of default is then foreclosed on and the resident evicted.
      Eviction is a rather complex process, it isn't just write up an eviction order and kick them out, they have these little things like courts and all that approve an eviction order AND either a sheriff or police officer attends to serve the order.
      Entering a property, even if you are the landlord, without notice CAN result in lethal force being applied. The resident would have NO idea who just entered their domicile, hence would have a reasonable fear for their own safety.
      And frankly, were I to be in that situation, as described in the story, if I saw a weapon, all bets are off and I'll shoot with no warning.
      If I don't see a weapon, I'll warn to not move and lay down, arms extended for search. Any deviation from my instructions would result in my firing.
      And I'll tell you this, I don't miss. The US Government trained me VERY well.
      So, DO act like a cowboy. You'll eventually be justifiably be shot whilst breaking and entering.
      NOW, if the locksmith DID knock, ring the door bell, etc to ascertain if someone was home and THEN proceeded to begin work when there was no answer, there would be no issue, save WHY the bank suddenly chose to change the locks on a home they have no legal claim over at this time. And by legal claim, I mean foreclosure proceedings have begun.

      October 8, 2010 at 11:59 am | Report abuse |
    • JimInTheSwamp

      @Mr. BS:
      "Oh and all you idiots. We have conceal and carries as well, so if you shoot at me, you will be shot at!"

      I think we all know who the idiot is here. Your bellicosity pretty much characterizes your grandiose brand of stupidity. Stand corrected, stupid. If I shoot at you, you will not be returning fire.

      October 8, 2010 at 12:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • BS is full of BS

      @BS – break into my home....PLEASE!! Where I live, we DO have a Castle Doctrine AND a "stand your ground" law which states that if I feel my (or my family's) life is in danger, I can legally shoot to kill, and I don't have to retreat. In fact it was amended recently to state that if you're running away, I can still shoot since you could be putting distance between us to pull a gun on me. So, Mr. Banker, if I don't know you're coming over and you try to break in (I'll see you on my cameras long before you get to my door), the toughest choice I'll have is which gun to use. I promise you – you won't have a chance to pull yours.

      October 8, 2010 at 12:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • epeck

      Now that the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the rights of corporations as "persons," it should be no problem to arrest the bank and put it on trial for home invasion. Then, after serving 5-15 years for this particular felony, the bank can be placed in a work-release program, assigned to a halfway house, or put on parole for a few years to see if it can keep its nose clean.

      And btw, BS: a home is "owned" by whomever is listed on the deed. A mortgage issuer only has a lien on the property and must GO TO COURT FIRST before taking possession of the home. When that happens, the bank is issued a new deed with the bank's name on it. Then and only then does the bank own the home. You, as a contractor, should be requiring the bank to produce a bona fide deed before entering a property they claim to own. If not, the law won't protect you when the homeowner (the one with the deed) shoots you dead.

      October 8, 2010 at 12:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • BS is full of bull shiat

      your car cannot be repo'd if you are within it...much like a house.

      October 8, 2010 at 12:58 pm | Report abuse |
  11. Vetti

    No one knows the situation this woman is going through right now financially to right away assume that she's not being responsible in paying on time. Alot of people in this country are struggling because of the economy. We already know this. They should have at least notified her. They have no excuse for what they did.

    October 8, 2010 at 9:21 am | Report abuse |
    • jeff

      When yu sign a contract, you are agreeing to a legal obligation. If it becomes inconvenient, or even impossible, to live up to that legal obligation, there are legal remedies. Like foreclosure. The reasons for nonpayment don't matter. That may seem harsh, but it is true, and anyone who signs a conract without understanding that is naive at best.

      Yes, corporations have overstepped, and I believe they should be better regulated. But these corporations...including banks...also depend on receiving the money owed them to pay their employees (and not just the top management), their utility bills, their state and local taxes, and all of the other expenses of doing business. If they don't collect their money, the corporation defaults on its obligations, and that affects everyone from their account holders (which could be you...what would you think if you went to get money from your bank and they didn't have your cash?), tellers, even the janitors. And without a bank..how would you ever buy a house in the first place? These "big bad corporations" need to be regulated to protect against excess, but they also need to survive and thrive because they provide a necessary service to individuals and to communities. There needs to be balance...and people who take out loans that they are unlikely to be able to pay are a significant part of the problem. Borrowing money is not a right, it is an obligation and a legal agreement.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:27 am | Report abuse |
    • Canuck

      F you bs, and ur fn banks.

      October 9, 2010 at 12:51 am | Report abuse |
  12. Scott

    The problem doesn't just involve mortgages.Wells Fargo starts harassing you if you are one day late on your car payment.They will Repo it if you miss one payment.They are bullying people and kicking them when they are down.

    October 8, 2010 at 9:22 am | Report abuse |
    • jeff

      what part of signing a contract with required payment dates didn't you understand? Yes, people are in trouble, and bad things have happened beyond their expectations or control. But borrowing beyond one's means is also a serious problem, and that is part of what led to the current economic situation. there is plenty of blame to go around for both lenders and borrowers...but borrowers who had no cushion, no savings, and no understanding of what a contract means, who sign a contract promising payment without understanding that there are penalties for nonpayment regardless of the reason, and then complain when the contract is enforced are part of the problem.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:03 am | Report abuse |
    • Jim

      Come on Jeff, I definitely see your point on contractual obligation...we all get that. Our gripe is that CHASE, WELLS, and a host of others couldn't meet their contractual obligations and were a threat to the US economy, so the government bailed them out, with NO strings attached. US citizens picked up the tab. Now that US citizens that financed the banks bad debt, they are not making honest efforts to make financing available to many of those that would like to re-fi and take advantage of lower rates. it s a catch 22, home value slips, so those that are solvent and want to re-fi, aren't being allowed to by the banks because of the home value, they WANT these foreclosures because they have already gotten their "re_fi" from the government, and now they can take back a home and reap profit, and then pay back FREE bailout money. Sweet deal for them, not so good for me.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:45 am | Report abuse |
    • avos

      @scott – the problem is not about repo – it is about entering the property illegally. Let the bank send a letter saying they are going to change the locks by sending some xyz. Then it is quite right to come to the property and change the locks. Otherwise, even if the guy comes to change the keys shot dead, it is legal.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:55 am | Report abuse |
    • mycatsbreathsmellslikecatfood

      somehow i remember the tax payers fronting a bail out bill for the banks even after it was voted down... the banks need to realize this and start cutting people some slack. had they not made such risky investments and given out bad loans coupled with deregulation...well we wouldnt be in this mess.

      as for me i have taken all my money out of BofA and gone to a local credit union. stability and real people are nice for a change – not just some pushy 800lb gorilla

      October 8, 2010 at 1:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • johngalt

      Hello?The bank loaned you huge wad of money so you could go buy your car. You agreed to a contract of paying them off, with interest, in installments. Should you reneg on your end of the contract, they have every right to repossess their property since you didn't pay for it: you're stealing it. If you fall into hard times it is your responsibility to renegotiate the agreement with the bank or find alternative income. You don't just skip the payment.

      Whatever happened to debter's prison? This credit thing isn't working out because people don't understand it. But a week or month in jail doing labor (to pay off debt) would get people to understand.

      October 8, 2010 at 1:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • greatandtoy

      What Scott is saying is that this is a new thing. I had a car financed through Chrysler. I paid my car note, that was due on the 13th every month on the 15th for 4 years with no problem. towards the end, when they were being bailed out, I would get a call on the 14th threatening me. Yes, I was supposed to pay on the 13th, but the 15th fell within my grace period and was always listed as paying on time. They just got really aggressive with a customer who always paid them. Wells Fargo has never been the best, I paid off my car early by 2 years and never heard a word from them. Then at what would have been the end of my loan period they called me threatening me because apparently I still owed them less than $20. It was very weird.

      October 8, 2010 at 2:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • Zephyrous

      Oh johngalt... you are very confused and an impostor. The REAL John Galt would never have approved of the bank bailouts in the first place. He despised all government charity. You are wrong to defend the banks actions. True that the homeowner is not fully uphholding her end of a contract, but she is going through the proper channels to attempt to remedy the situation. The bank/government complex are the true villians. They are the loathsome leeches in this situation. I hate it when people misread and misunderstand my beloved Ayn Rand!

      October 9, 2010 at 9:53 pm | Report abuse |
  13. jak

    Lets get this right, this person is 4 months in default...would you want a renter in your house who is not paying the monthly rent? I think the banks are right in taking back what is theirs. This person took out a loan and is not paying?? Whats the issue. They should not be occupying that property.

    October 8, 2010 at 9:23 am | Report abuse |
    • Justin

      But she IS working with the bank so the property IS NOT in foreclosure. If the property WERE in a legal state of foreclosure she would have received an eviction notice and this would be a non-story. Here in Nevada we have had a few cases were banks have busted locks and dumped the entire contents of the home at the city dump, only to find out they had the WRONG HOME. This is a trend where banks are overstepping their legal bounds and/or making serious errors in thier foreclosure processes.

      October 8, 2010 at 9:41 am | Report abuse |
    • Hass

      Jak, just because you "think" that people who don't pay their bills deserve the worst, doesn't mean thats what the law says. Just wait and see, you will be there some day more than likely. The thing is, there didn't use to be much punishment for people who didn't pay their bills, because it was much much harder to get loans for things. There still is no debtors prison here in America! So the only way for the banks to get back at these people for bailing them out, is to treat mortgages like items from RENT A CENTER!...one day late and they come a nockin!!!

      October 8, 2010 at 10:30 am | Report abuse |
    • diane

      The issue is that this woman was not in foreclosure!!! She had no warning that an armed man would be breaking into her home. If banks tried working with people with mortgage problems, they would not have to worry about the condition of a house.

      October 8, 2010 at 10:35 am | Report abuse |
    • eli

      to remove a renter from a home you own, they have to be EVICTED. it is a LEGAL PROCESS. you go to COURT. you can't just show up and throw them out. see, things don't work that way. we have LAWS. i thought you guys wrapped yourselves in the flag for all of your arguments? does the law offend you?

      foreclosure is also a legal process. the bank can't break the law. they are not above the same laws that I follow. it is not illegal to miss mortgage payments. it is illegal to break into a home.

      October 8, 2010 at 11:54 am | Report abuse |
    • greatandtoy

      This was a mistake on the banks part, that is what you are not understanding. She was late on her payments, but working on a modification. Now, when I did my modification, I was making smaller payments every month and I never went a month with out paying, however, my payments were technically late because I didn't pay the whole amount. Sometimes the right hand didn't know what the left hand was doing and I would get a foreclosure notice in the mail and freak out and call them, and it was just a paperwork mix-up, nothing to worry about. They also sent an inspector to my home.

      Here is the issue with the inspector, he did not knock. My Great Danes actually attacked him at the door and knocked him down my front steps. I called the mortgage co and they said that he wasn't even supposed to be there. When I talked to the guy he said he was told the property was empty (with my car in the driveway?). It was all a mistake because while I was in a modification, the loan was still late. t happens a lot. I can't imagine this woman suing though, I was just lucky the guy didn't try to sue me for what my dogs did to him.

      October 8, 2010 at 12:15 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Tom Bruckmeyer

    Back in 1978 right out of high school I worked for a company that secured foreclosed homes. We would do drive bys monthly to see if the home was still occupied because the owners would just take off. If it was occupied one month by the next month there might be nothing left of the home due to vandals or pipes would freeze and water would be pouring out the basement windows. I understand why the banks have to be vigilant and catch these homes as soon as the are vacated. Obviously this one went terribly wrong.

    October 8, 2010 at 9:23 am | Report abuse |
  15. Laurie

    I hear in Florida many people faltering on their mortgages are indeed just playing a waiting game with the banks, cause they know the banks have so many delinquent mortgages to deal with, it takes many months to process foreclosures. My guess is that banks are testing the waters in states that require court filings to foreclose, to see if they can force people out of their homes sooner. In Georgia, companies don't need to go through the courts, so people can be forced out of their homes within 60 days or so of falling behind on their payments.

    October 8, 2010 at 9:25 am | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14