Extreme greed meets stupidity...

[BunsenBurner]

<p>Add poor understanding of English to the mix, and the result is lost money and lawsuits galore! I read and re-read this article, because I could not believe the numbers quotes in there. Barrons will have a blast with this:</p>

<p><a href=“http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008764830_belletowers20m.html[/url]”>http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008764830_belletowers20m.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>

When Uzbek hot-dog vendor Danil Kasimov thought of America, he thought of the place portrayed in movies — a Land of Plenty where anyone’s dreams could come true.</p>

<p>In 2000, he emigrated to the U.S., settled in Redmond and became a limousine driver, earning little more than minimum wage.</p>

<p>Two years ago, a real-estate agent suggested he consider purchasing a condominium at the luxurious Bellevue Towers. To Kasimov, it seemed his vision of America was unfolding with the ease of the touch-screen showing eventual views from his dream condo on the 32nd floor.</p>

<p>Delighted that he prequalified for a $1.5 million condo on his $20,000-a-year income, he put down more than $75,000 in earnest money he borrowed from a friend.</p>

<p>But that money — and nearly $100,000 from five other prospective condo buyers — soon evaporated. The six filed a lawsuit in King County Superior Court this week against Bellevue Towers and JP Morgan Chase Bank, alleging the lender falsified documents, making it possible for them to prequalify for loans they could never actually get.</p>

<p>In one case, the lawsuit says, a Chase broker listed a prospective buyer’s income not at the actual $2,147 a month, but at $12,500. Chase’s underwriter “red flagged” the document as suspicious, the suit alleges, but the applicant still was prequalified for a $724,000 condo.</p>

<p>Jim Robinson, the prospective buyers’ attorney, says the sellers risked nothing because of a 2005 state law that allows property owners to keep earnest money without proving they were damaged.</p>

<p>Robinson, who is working pro bono, says that law allows buyers who should never have been “prequalified” for loans to put earnest money down that they are sure to lose when they fail to qualify for the actual loan.</p>

<p>The Legislature has created a means for developers “to grab their earnest money, and that is shocking. … If you take that law and combine it with a lousy real-estate market, guess what happens? You’ve got developers running around trying to grab people’s earnest money,” Robinson said. “It’s going on all over the state.”

</p>

<p>Read the entire article - it is jaw-dropping!</p>

[sueinphilly]

<p>so he was going to sign a document saying he could afford a 7K monthly payment. I don’t have much sympathy for this person, sorry. I do think that the people pulling off this scam should be punished, but who in their right mind would fall for this???</p>

[Indiana91]

<p>It’s a shame that people who don’t have the knowledge, experience, or communication skills to understand these contracts can’t trust the “experts” who are there to “help” them.</p>

[NJres]

<p>Is this a setup for my hot dog vendor joke? It really fits here… ok, if you insist, here goes:</p>

<p>So I ask the hot dog vendor, “How much for one with sauerkraut and mustard” ?</p>

<p>The hot dog vendor replies, “One million dollars!”</p>

<p>I respond, “What, are you crazy? Who is gonna pay a million bucks for a hot dog?”</p>

<p>His response: “I don’t know, but I only need to sell one!” </p>

<p>(rimshot) </p>

<p>Does seem appropriate doesn’t it? I guess that’s how he qualified.</p>

[cptofthehouse]

<p>Another hot dog vendor joke:</p>

<p>So I ask the hot dog vendor, “How much for one with sauerkraut and mustard”?</p>

<p>The hot dog vendo repiles, “15 bucks”.</p>

<p>I respond, “What, are you crazy? Who is gonna pay 15 bucks for a hot dog? I live here and I know hot dogs don’t go for 15 bucks.”</p>

<p>His response, “Oh sorry. I mean 3 bucks. I thought you were a tourist.”</p>