A recent DARE rally in front of the Bank of America in downtown Providence. (Photo courtesy of DARE)
After a protest in front of the downtown Bank of America building this afternoon at 5pm, about 15 Rhode Islanders are heading off to Charlotte North Carolina to join thousands of others from across the United States to protest at the bank’s annual shareholder’s meeting.
Today’s action in downtown Providence in front of the Superman building, said Christopher Rotondo, of DARE or Direct Action for Rights and Equality, “is so Bank of America knows there is a local group here in Rhode Island taking up these demands.”
The demands, according to a DARE press release:
- Principal reduction for all homeowner and full restitution for all those who lost homes. Bank of America has promised principal reduction to current value for 200,000 households. That (verbally) goes much further than any other bank in the recent Attorney General’s settlement. We therefore demand a principal reduction plan byall banks.
- Banks should hand over all their unoccupied, foreclosed housing to community and non-profit ownership that is not subject to foreclosure or speculation
- Reparations to communities of color targeted for predatory lending, including below-market loans to all communities of color
- We Want an end to evictions and for banks to commit to protecting the right of tenants to stay in their homes by healthy and habitable properties
Members of DARE and the Environmental Justice League of RI will then be taking a new-to-the road bio-diesel bus to Boston before making another 16 hour bus trip to Charlotte starting at 11 p.m. tonight.
DARE has been leading or lending to support to direct action against Bank of America id downtown Providence since October.
Here’s more from release from DARE and the Environmental Justice League of RI:
The rally is part of a massive nationwide effort called 99% Power which Will be protesting outside shareholder meetings across the country to hold corporate America accountable. “Because of big banks like Bank of America, many families don’t have basic rights in this country. Because of banks like Bank of America, the gap between the rich and the poor is getting Wider. The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. We the people bailed out the banks and they don’t feel justified or righteous enough to help provide jobs or help people in foreclosure,” explains Theresa, Board Glaixperson of DARE. “That’s why DARE and our alliance called Right to the Gty are going to North Carolina to protest Bank of America, RrtC Wants the people in the city to take back the city and to build cities that are just, democratic, and sustainable. The banks should not have us, we should have the banks.”
“The E] League understands that foreclosure and eviction are environmental justice issues. Bank of America evícts families and decimates whole blocks, attracting litter and rats, which impacts the environment and health of the entire neighborhood. Three of our Youth members are going to Charlotte to tell Bank of America to stop evicting families and stop bank-rolling fossil fuels and climate change,” explains Rodriguez-Drix, organizer with the Environmental Justice League.
The Right to the City Alliance will be converging in Charlotte, North Carolina as part of 99% Power to shed light on the divisions between the 1% and the 99%. Alliance members in attendance include: City Life/ Vida Urbana, Boston., MA, Mothers on the Move and Community Voices Heard, NY, Miami Workers C/enter and Power U, Florida, Direct Action for Rights and Equality, Providence, RI, Springfield No @ne Leaves, Springfield, MA and the Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island.
Principal reduction for all homeowner and full restitution for all those who lost homes.
As a homeowner who’s underwater and planning to pay off what I signed up for, I don’t want ANYONE getting a principal reduction. Why should the bank eat the cost of people participating in the bubble?
Banks should hand over all their unoccupied, foreclosed housing to community and non-profit ownership.
Why? When they foreclose, it means that someone stopped paying. The bank can’t go after the people who stopped paying, so they get the property instead. Considering the loss of value int he market, ‘getting the home’ is already a major loss for the bank. I’m hip to the housing situation in RI right now, there are empty beds in non-profit housing programs already.
Reparations to communities of color targeted for predatory lending, including below-market loans to all communities of color
There are facilities for this in the law already. The bubble wasn’t racist, and nobody was forced to get onboard. I opted-out of participating in the pre-2008 madness.
We Want an end to evictions and for banks to commit to protecting the right of tenants to stay in their homes
So you want landlords to be able to stop paying their mortgages, but you want the bank to have to let them hold onto the properties? Or do you want the property handed over to a local non-profit that will likely take much more money out of the picture than the tenants? I’m confused.
I think what you miss is that the reason many of us are underwater is that the banks were committing outright fraud in issuing loans to unqualified buyers (for instance). When those loans defaulted the rest of us got dragged down along with them. Why should we be left holding the bag when their fraudulent practices caved in? It’s like saying the Ponzi schema victims should keep paying after the fraud is discovered.
“When those loans defaulted the rest of us got dragged down along with them”
Does that mean even those of us who weren’t victims of fraud should get the principal on their mortgages reduced?
Perhaps, that could very well be the best option for restoring confidence (see “FHFA chief DeMarco loosens up a bit on principal reduction“). As is, folks like me can’t sell even if we wanted to (no comps except short sales), a situation where it’s not clear anyone could get a mortgage to purchase a home at any price.
Of course if I were 60 days late, BOA might be sending me a letter. Silly me buying a home I could afford and staying current on my mortgage, eh? Personally, I’d be happy if I could simply refi at the lower rates (again problems with lack of comps for the appraisal).
Not for nothing, but if reducing the principal to keep owners in their homes would save money over the long term, as the article contents, why would the gov’t have to force banks to do that? I’m not up on all the banking accounting that’s in place, but would the banks have to acknowledge the crappy asset, thereby taking a bath? Would that mean they’d ask for more bailouts?
What’s clear is that what’s best for the market in the long term is not always best for a bank in the short term. It’s sort of a prisoner’s dilemma. An individual bank has little incentive to act alone, but if all of them acted in concert?
As for whether this would be a bailout or a haircut depends. For instance, FHA loans could be offered to homeowners with good standing on their loans at appraised values of above market or with less restrictive requirements for comps (the big problem atm for folks like me) at least reducing the interest rates if not the principal and avoiding homeowners walking away from their now underwater properties. Buyers might also be qualified with similarly eased restrictions on comps so long as income/debt ratios checked out.
I’ll give another option: Forget principal reduction. Instead, allow underwater homeowners to convert from ‘non-recourse’ loans to ‘recourse’ loans to refinance the same principal at a lower rate.
This saves the homeowner money AND makes the banks/investors right, on the back of the Fed. The Fed is the right place to put the burden, it’s the only party that has the size to do this, and it helps share the burden between the banks and the people. At the same time, it will lower strategic foreclosures, which look like they’re VERY popular right now.
There are only a dozen or so nonrecourse states. Most home loans are recourse loans (including here in RI). It one of the reasons many homeowners file for bankruptcy even after foreclosure.
“I’m not up on all the banking accounting that’s in place, but would the banks have to acknowledge the crappy asset, thereby taking a bath?”
Yes, I think that’s the case with principal reduction. Although it’s arguable that’s exactly what the banks should be doing. The concern is that this could lead to a liquidity crisis as banks are forced to put up additional collateral (when mortgage-backed securities are devalued).
“fraud in issuing loans to unqualified buyers (for instance). When those loans defaulted the rest of us got dragged down along with them. Why should we be left holding the bag when their fraudulent practices caved in?”
Even in those cases, the blame isn’t entirely on the banks. If a person voluntarily enters into a half-million dollar contract that they don’t understand, it is the guy who’s expecting income from the deal-maker’s fault? Is it even the deal-maker’s fault?
Devil’s advocate: Why should the bondholders (mostly pension plans and 401Ks?) be holding the bag for the army of bozos who stopped paying their mortgages?
In reality, the banks literally do not make anywhere near the kind of profit that would allow them to reasonably ‘eat’ a significant portion of the underwater market. Really. Before you downvote that, understand this:
The negative equity in housing is 2,800 Billion dollars. Bank profits for the megabanks range up to about $10 Billion dollars each. See the problem here? There’s not enough sand at the banks to help at all with this flood. Even if the banks turned into benevolent non-profits, it would take 35 years for them to pay-off the negative equity.
Protesting BofA is a waste of time, particularly in Charlotte. Thousands of North Carolinians lost their jobs because of the economic hit that BofA took. They want BofA to succeed, because it is their local bank!
How about protesting outside of Jack Reed’s office? He’s on the Banking Committee and I sure haven’t heard him calling for hearings on why NO ONE FROM THE FUCKING BANKING INDUSTRY HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP ON CRIMINAL CHARGES.
That, my friends, is the problem, and until we start throwing these assholes in jail, it is only going to get worse.
“NO ONE FROM THE FUCKING BANKING INDUSTRY HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP ON CRIMINAL CHARGES.”
I’m wondering if politicians aren’t a little concerned the target won’t eventually shift towards themselves if they start bringing in banking execs.
Protesting Kilmartin would be a great alternative too.
I’ve heard that Kilmartin is obsessed with how many Facebook friends he has. One great protest would be to reach out to all of his “friends” and get them to defriend him.
It might be enough to scare him into protecting Rhode Islanders.