Ameriquest, Argent Mortgage predatory lending practices caused foreclosure proceedings in just 3 months Orange California

Yes , I do completely understand that I should not have signed if, being the operative word, I knew that I was commiting fraud. Being a person who had never seen such a contract before, I did not know that the income verification forms weren't supposed to be blank and that they werent allowed to go by my past employment records. I was told that since I had remained in the same line of work that it was ok to do so. As for how I thought I would pay for the home just losing my job due to a license suspension, I figured that I would just take whatever job I could find until my license would be reinstated, which was only 60 days. That is what I did, but I still could never catch it up. I ran myself to death , like I stated. working overtime and excessive hours to catch up what I was behind. I sold personal property, borrowed, and did without alot of sometimes neccesary things like power in order to make sure that they knew it was my #1 priority to follow thru with my responsibility. After several unrealistic forebearance plans and filing for reconsolidation bankruptcy, I tried to put the home up for sale to "fix" what I had started and try to wipe the slate clean. Only to find out that the home was not sellable at the price I bought it for , and the amount I owed now was about 15K more than the original price. I eventually ended up in forclosure, and Ameriquest did use the cash for keys program, so I was able to move out. I know I should be greatful that I did not sink more into an obviously no-win situation.

"I had no income when they gave me the loan, and inflated my agi income in order to overlook my less than perfect credit scores and pages of collections."

I am in no way defending Ameriquest but you are also committing fraud by signing loan documents that contain false information. What means did you have to pay for this mortgage you were taking out to buy the house? You had to know you were required to make the loan payment when you did this transaction so if there was no income coming in how were you going to pay for it?

Before I get bashed for asking these questions, I am just trying to point some things out to the consumer.

I understand exactly what you are saying about laying some,if not all,the blame on the borrower.Believe me I feel very un
intelligent for not understanding any terms before I signed the contract. The reason I have a hard time explaining what the problems were, is because there is only so much room to write or time to give a brief description of what happened over the last 4 years,(7if you count the fact that I was in an owner finance previously)I end up not explaining it correctly.That's why it was easier for me to just send the copies to the attorney generals office here in missouri.

I know I am not the only person who has not been given any reply, and I realize that this is a past issue. I suppose it all comes down to what each borrower is hoping to get out of the complaint. I may not recieve any of the 20K I put into the house and lost but maybe I can keep someone else from making the same mistake. I was at least hoping to have some kind of recognition and resolution concerning my credit report. It will be a long time before I ever take a chance and buy another home, and when I do, I will surely know what I am signing and not be pressured into it and beleive all of their promises. Also, I do believe that part of the complaint is that they search out people who cant pay their bills, have bad credit and collections, and are minorities.

We seem to have many people victimized by loan companies whenin the borrower signs up for a loan they do not understand. Where should the line be drawn? Should adults be responsible for their actions or should only the 'loan professionals' be responsible?

This troubles me:

"I am having problems explaining how my loan with argent/ameriquest came about. "

Why sign an agreement if you are confused about the terms, process, or practices that created it?

"I was not the original owner of the home, but the loan was on paper as a refinance, and the remaining cash was given to the seller instead of to me the borrower."

OK- the 'refinance' part sounds at least really hoaky if not simply illegal, but the buyer SHOULD have appreciated this basic reality.

It would SEEM that the 'remaining cash' (equity ?) SHOULD go to the seller.... UNLESS the payment of that 'remaining cash' to the seller effectively increased the OP's purchase price- which may be illegal. We don't know if the purchase price was effectively increased. Does the OP?

"How do I explain terms of my loan to an attorney , if I dont understand them? This is how Argent/ Ameriquest took advantage of me in the first place, ..."

I am not sure that Argent/ Ameriquest are the only ones to blame here- that tired old refrain always recurs- do not sign ANYTHING you do not understand.

30-year fixed rate mortgages and 15-year fixed rate mortgages are straightforward but one should still understand them before proceeding.

So who is at fault here?

The slimey lender and/or a seller who probably understood the buyer's weaknesses and simply wanted to unload the property onto anyone, the buyer OR the bank?

The borrower, who may be looking for a miracle at any cost?

I say both.

But the lender has the deep pockets to sue, so we can guess how the lawsuits will go.

We seem to have many people victimized by loan companies whenin the borrower signs up for a loan they do not understand. Where should the line be drawn? Should adults be responsible for their actions or should only the 'loan professionals' be responsible?

This troubles me:

"I am having problems explaining how my loan with argent/ameriquest came about. "

Why sign an agreement if you are confused about the terms, process, or practices that created it?

"I was not the original owner of the home, but the loan was on paper as a refinance, and the remaining cash was given to the seller instead of to me the borrower."

OK- the 'refinance' part sounds at least really hoaky if not simply illegal, but the buyer SHOULD have appreciated this basic reality.

It would SEEM that the 'remaining cash' (equity ?) SHOULD go to the seller.... UNLESS the payment of that 'remaining cash' to the seller effectively increased the OP's purchase price- which may be illegal. We don't know if the purchase price was effectively increased. Does the OP?

"How do I explain terms of my loan to an attorney , if I dont understand them? This is how Argent/ Ameriquest took advantage of me in the first place, ..."

I am not sure that Argent/ Ameriquest are the only ones to blame here- that tired old refrain always recurs- do not sign ANYTHING you do not understand.

30-year fixed rate mortgages and 15-year fixed rate mortgages are straightforward but one should still understand them before proceeding.

So who is at fault here?

The slimey lender and/or a seller who probably understood the buyer's weaknesses and simply wanted to unload the property onto anyone, the buyer OR the bank?

The borrower, who may be looking for a miracle at any cost?

I say both.

But the lender has the deep pockets to sue, so we can guess how the lawsuits will go.

We seem to have many people victimized by loan companies whenin the borrower signs up for a loan they do not understand. Where should the line be drawn? Should adults be responsible for their actions or should only the 'loan professionals' be responsible?

This troubles me:

"I am having problems explaining how my loan with argent/ameriquest came about. "

Why sign an agreement if you are confused about the terms, process, or practices that created it?

"I was not the original owner of the home, but the loan was on paper as a refinance, and the remaining cash was given to the seller instead of to me the borrower."

OK- the 'refinance' part sounds at least really hoaky if not simply illegal, but the buyer SHOULD have appreciated this basic reality.

It would SEEM that the 'remaining cash' (equity ?) SHOULD go to the seller.... UNLESS the payment of that 'remaining cash' to the seller effectively increased the OP's purchase price- which may be illegal. We don't know if the purchase price was effectively increased. Does the OP?

"How do I explain terms of my loan to an attorney , if I dont understand them? This is how Argent/ Ameriquest took advantage of me in the first place, ..."

I am not sure that Argent/ Ameriquest are the only ones to blame here- that tired old refrain always recurs- do not sign ANYTHING you do not understand.

30-year fixed rate mortgages and 15-year fixed rate mortgages are straightforward but one should still understand them before proceeding.

So who is at fault here?

The slimey lender and/or a seller who probably understood the buyer's weaknesses and simply wanted to unload the property onto anyone, the buyer OR the bank?

The borrower, who may be looking for a miracle at any cost?

I say both.

But the lender has the deep pockets to sue, so we can guess how the lawsuits will go.

We seem to have many people victimized by loan companies whenin the borrower signs up for a loan they do not understand. Where should the line be drawn? Should adults be responsible for their actions or should only the 'loan professionals' be responsible?

This troubles me:

"I am having problems explaining how my loan with argent/ameriquest came about. "

Why sign an agreement if you are confused about the terms, process, or practices that created it?

"I was not the original owner of the home, but the loan was on paper as a refinance, and the remaining cash was given to the seller instead of to me the borrower."

OK- the 'refinance' part sounds at least really hoaky if not simply illegal, but the buyer SHOULD have appreciated this basic reality.

It would SEEM that the 'remaining cash' (equity ?) SHOULD go to the seller.... UNLESS the payment of that 'remaining cash' to the seller effectively increased the OP's purchase price- which may be illegal. We don't know if the purchase price was effectively increased. Does the OP?

"How do I explain terms of my loan to an attorney , if I dont understand them? This is how Argent/ Ameriquest took advantage of me in the first place, ..."

I am not sure that Argent/ Ameriquest are the only ones to blame here- that tired old refrain always recurs- do not sign ANYTHING you do not understand.

30-year fixed rate mortgages and 15-year fixed rate mortgages are straightforward but one should still understand them before proceeding.

So who is at fault here?

The slimey lender and/or a seller who probably understood the buyer's weaknesses and simply wanted to unload the property onto anyone, the buyer OR the bank?

The borrower, who may be looking for a miracle at any cost?

I say both.

But the lender has the deep pockets to sue, so we can guess how the lawsuits will go.

I am having problems explaining how my loan with argent/ameriquest came about. I was not the original owner of the home, but the loan was on paper as a refinance, and the remaining cash was given to the seller instead of to me the borrower.

How do I explain terms of my loan to an attorney , if I dont understand them? This is how Argent/ Ameriquest took advantage of me in the first place, and now I fear that it may keep me from adequately explaining my case. I dont have an attorney to look at these loan documents and give me answers and attorney generals office here in Missouri offers no response.

I am having problems explaining how my loan with argent/ameriquest came about. I was not the original owner of the home, but the loan was on paper as a refinance, and the remaining cash was given to the seller instead of to me the borrower.

How do I explain terms of my loan to an attorney , if I dont understand them? This is how Argent/ Ameriquest took advantage of me in the first place, and now I fear that it may keep me from adequately explaining my case. I dont have an attorney to look at these loan documents and give me answers and attorney generals office here in Missouri offers no response.

I am having problems explaining how my loan with argent/ameriquest came about. I was not the original owner of the home, but the loan was on paper as a refinance, and the remaining cash was given to the seller instead of to me the borrower.

How do I explain terms of my loan to an attorney , if I dont understand them? This is how Argent/ Ameriquest took advantage of me in the first place, and now I fear that it may keep me from adequately explaining my case. I dont have an attorney to look at these loan documents and give me answers and attorney generals office here in Missouri offers no response.

I received an email from Fenwick & West stating that they are only taking cases concerning California residents only. They suggest talking to my attorney general Jay Nixon's office. which I have already done over a year ago. I know that there may be more offices in other states that may find enough complaints to do the same here. I will keep looking.

For all it,s worth Ameriquest is under Federal Investigation,,,,,,They and Washington Mutual will go down,,,,as Enron did,,Take that to the Bank.

I did a Google search using "ameriquest class action" (without the quotation marks) and found that a law firm named Fenwick & West has filed a Pro Bono class action suit challenging Ameriquest's original settlement. There is also an article about this lawsuit in the OC Register that will show up in the Google search.

Read the articles that come up and contact Fenwick & West, and you may still be able to get some satisfaction.

You should also contact [1] the Federal Trade Commission, [2] California's Banking Commission (or whatever they call it there, i.e., the agency that regulates banks in CA), and [3] the California Attorney General's Office. One or more of those may have current information on the class action and/or other information about Ameriquest that will be helpful to you.

Best wishes for a just outcome.

Dan and Marjie in VA