Earn Fast Free Money Online to Avoid Foreclosure

Many of my regular readers are having trouble because they are unemployed or suffering otherwise from reduced income. Naturally the lack of jobs can create depression and that can lead to many unpleasant things. I know that you are wondering where your next dollar will come from. What will happen next and how can you solve this problem?


Many of my customers are $100 per month away from bankruptcy! Many of my customers will lose their houses over $100 in additional income! I hope that what I write below will help some of you resolve this problem!

Over time, I plan to write about business’ you can start for free or for only a few dollars from your kitchen table. So far, the only one I have seen worth your time as a system is the one I am about to discuss. The best part is that http://www.neonserpent.com provides you the eliminates the need for you to blog or build a website.


Affiliate commissions have been available for many years longer than the Internet. Vendors have long recognized the benefit from getting independent sales people market their products. In those cases, affiliates are required to see people in person and ask for the sale. The disadvantages to this are obvious, not everybody is comfortable with face to face sales and you require a place to meet people. Some vendors will provide the place but you still need to be face to face.

For the last four years the opportunity to use the Internet with http://www.neonserpent.com to market free trials in products like Free Credit Report .com and Bill My Parents .com as well as auto mobile insurance quotes and others has been available. You may also market trial offers for Direct TV, sign ups for credit cards like Discover and MasterCard. Payment for each enrollment you create may be as much as $20 or more and you will be paid immediately upon complete of your customers enrollment.


You can do this from home in an in person setting if you want but, I think that most of you do not want to sell and prefer to be anonymous. I have done it and have had staff do it at fairs and festivals, in supermarkets and door-to-door. I think this system is easier.

Here is how it works: There are many companies that pay commission for free trials and trial enrollments. For example, if you have ever been given a free newspaper at the supermarket and asked to enroll in a trial, the person providing you the paper may be paid as much as $50 for your $14.95 enrollment!

Whenever you have been to an event like a home show, fair or sporting event that features booths for credit card enrollment, satellite tv/cable/phone/internet service, newspaper/magazine subscriptions or anything that requires application or enrollment, the person in the booth offering the service is not paid hourly. They are instead paid commission for your application. 

The company will pay the salesman commission far in excess of the value of the initial purchase or trial of the product offered because they know on average how long they will keep a customer.

An example is that a person trying telephone service will likely keep the service for many years but probably a minimum of 6 months because changing phone service is a pain in the butt! That makes the enrollment worth $50-$100 dollars.

A newspaper that sells a 2 week subscription knows that the reader will likely keep the paper at least 12 weeks, 10 of which will be at the regular price. During the trial period and any extensions, the news paper will count the subscriber amongst the readership they promise to advertisers. The more readers they have, the more they can charge for advertising. This makes the commission for the subscription sale worth as much as $50.

Credit card companies earn a ton of money so they are willing to pay some times as much as $5 just for the application or $20 for an approved application. This is why they give away nice free gifts at the enrollment counter and why they show up every where with college students willing to work for commission. Bank of America gave me a great Cubs tee shirt with the BOA logo on it when I went to Wrigley Field and they didn’t even know if I would be approved. The shirt is worth $10-15 to me because that is what I would have paid for a similar item at a street vendor.

What has been done in this case on this website is to collect these offers in one location for you so that you may market them on the Internet. I warn you that you will need to enter personal information to enroll in the program.

Full training, assistance as well as direct contact with a supervisor is available any time you need it.

There is not and will never be any cost to you from participation in this marketing. Participation will require you to provide your name and email address as well as information to pay you such as PayPal account or home address for mailing payment checks. You will have direct, personal contact with me should you choose to get involved in the program.

Why are you foreclosing on me?

For some time now, I have been listening to people discuss the relative merits of demanding that a mortgage company produce the actual note.

When I discussed it with an attorney, I realized the problem. Nobody understands what the real argument is!   An attorney specifically said to me that a judge told him that if his client expects the court to strip the mortgage off the property and give the defendant a free house than “he is mistaken”.  This is when I discovered why this attorney, and likely yours, is having difficulty defending this position. The problem is that you do owe somebody money for your house. You must complain that don’t owe money to the company that is suing you.

When you admit that you owe money you change the nature of the argument and are now asking the bank that is suing you to prove something different than they expect. The banks and the judge start by presuming you owe them money and have at least photocopies of documents to prove it. You must then argue why you don’t owe money.  By arguing that you owe money, but not to these people in particular, they must now prove that even though they may have the mortgage paperwork, that you did, at the time they filed foreclosure owe the money to them and not someone else. They must also prove that this has not changed since the suit was filed.


Here is an example: What if Countrywide lent you the money? It is fairly common belief that Bank of America took over the assets of Countrywide and therefore it would be easy to ASSUME that you now owe bank of America. In reality, many companies bought assets from Countrywide.

What if yours is just on the list that Bank of America got but has not actually been transferred to Bank of America and instead belongs to Bank X? Bank X has decided that because of the value of your house, it is better for them to wait a few years for the market to come back before suing you. You are forced into court by BOA and must defend against their seemingly powerful position. If they win, don’t you still owe the money to Bank X? Bank X may now sue you and because they own the loan they may recover and you have no recourse against BOA because your appeal rights have expired.

The bottom line is that you must argue that you owe money but not to the bank that is suing you and you don’t know who you actually owe money!

Republican Gains May Mean Homeowner Losses.

I am back again as I promised! I wanted to alert you to an issue that I am very concerned about. I am afraid that the new Republican congress will be so friendly to banks that more homeowners than ever before will lose their homes.
Two weeks ago, we in the industry were worried about a bill that made it quietly through congress to the President’s desk that would have allowed banks to use all the bogus signature validations (robo signing)they had as proof in foreclosure cases. Homeowners would be affected because banks would be able to lie about signatures and authorizations but still use these as evidence in court.
This would have turned around many laws that protect you against predatory practices from lenders now. It would also have changed the burden of proof over to the defendant foreclosure victim. These laws now are commonly known by the terms, Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) and the Truth in Lending Act of 1968 (TILA). There are also other more obscure federal laws and state laws that would be subverted by this.
While each of the political parties share responsibility for this act, it is the Republican Party that is generally more business friendly. They also have successfully been stopping any legislation that they didn’t like. We have seen over the last two years, whenever a single Republican Senator doesn’t like a bill, they stop it cold. This is an indication that ALL Republican Senators agree and since the bill’s sponsor was a Republican Representative, we may presume that this is a Republican idea.
Regardless of what side of the aisle you walk, I urge you to contact your elected officials and tell them what you think about this issue.  If you want a lot more information on buying and selling, you can leave a reply or look me up on Facebook and become a fan.  You may also contact me via my website http://www.ehousetraders.com

Banks have their backs against the wall

Okay real estate fans! I think this is it. I’m finally back writing my blog. I realize it’s been a long time in coming but I finally placed you on my schedule at 9:45 AM every morning. Okay, now it’s 9:58 AM and I spent the last 13 minutes thinking of a good excuse to tell you why I haven’t been writing the blog all this time. Unfortunately there’s no time for my excuse because I got to be finished by nine o’clock, so I’ll make this quick.
Right now the banks have got their backs against the wall. They’ve already admitted that they haven’t got the first idea as to who owns the loan. Nevertheless, they’re marching into court to sue for foreclosure without correct or proper information. If you or your attorney will merely question them on the right facts, they will be unable to document their rights to sue you.
Don’t forget this; never forget this, only the owner of the loan has the right to recover money from you. If you can’t work it out with your bank. There still may be hope for you. Here’s a big tip: look for a lawyer who will fight! There are many lawyers who will only try and work out a short sale for your property. This provides you with no advantage. If you want to stay in the house as long as possible, you need a lawyer who will fight to keep you in there as long as possible. And if you want to keep the property you need a lawyer will fight to win and not to delay. Check back here often, and I’ll be updating. I’m also going back to article writing, so you can look for me in new articles there.
There’s a lot going on in real estate right now! If you don’t take advantage of it now you will miss it! If you are in a buying mode right now, this may be the best market you’re going to see again in your lifetime. If you want a lot more information on buying and selling, you will can look me up on Facebook and become a fan or contact me via my website http://www.ehousetraders.com

You May Need a Lot of Help to Get the Balance on Your Mortgage Reduced

The change that caught the news media’s attention was the one that talked about principal write downs on mortgages. The revision simply said mortgage companies would write down the balance of a mortgage for people facing foreclosure in those instances where the balance of the mortgage was far greater than the value of the home.

Since the start of this foreclosure crisis in our country, the value of homes has dropped. This drop has been substantial. I believe that the value nationwide has dropped about 20%. In California, Florida and some other areas values may have dropped 50% or more.

Many people owe far more on their mortgages than their homes are worth. In these situations some people facing foreclosure are not motivated to try to save their homes. They feel that they will never be able to recover what they pay for their home. So they walk away and let their mortgage company foreclose.

Members of congress and various consumer advocacy groups in the past saw the problem here. They lobbied to have judges in bankruptcy cases be allowed to lower the balance of the mortgage to what the home was worth. The lobbyists for the mortgage industry are very powerful. Each time this proposal had been made, the lobbyists were successful in getting it defeated.

In the revisions to the Making Home Affordable Program announced March 26 the Obama Administration dealt with this. They announced that mortgage companies would have to consider writing down the principal balance for certain people who have applied for loan modifications. This is supposed to be done if the balance owed on a mortgage is greater than 115% of the current value of the home.

Say the value of a home is $100,000. The amount currently owed is $130,000. The mortgage company is being urged to reduce the balance on the loan to $115,000.

The mortgage company would run a New Present Value Test. As long as that indicated it was worthwhile to reduce the balance of the loan, the company is supposed to do so.

The mortgage company would initially put the amount to be reduced into a separate forbearance account. As long as the person remains current on their loan payments, the mortgage company will forgive the amount reduced in 3 equal payments over 3 years.

Let’s look at our example above. The mortgage company would reduce the amount owed by $15,000 from $130,000 to $115,000. As long as the payments were made on time, the mortgage company would forgive $5,000 a year. The entire $15,000 would be forgiven at the end of the third year.

As you can see, this form of principal reduction is greater than the one that members of congress and consumer advocacy groups had proposed in the past. This covers all people facing foreclosure who applied for loan modifications not only those who filed for bankruptcy.

An Incentive for Mortgage Companies to Write Down Loan Balances

The Obama Administration is giving mortgage companies an incentive to do this. They will pay them $.15 on the dollar for the amount that a mortgage company reduces a mortgage by if the balance is from 115% to 140% of the value of the home. If the balance of the mortgage is greater than 140% of the value of the home, they will pay the mortgage company $.10 on the dollar for the amount reduced.

If the balance of the loan is less than 115% of the value of the home, The Obama Administration is giving the mortgage company an added incentive. They will pay them $.21 on the dollar for the amount reduced.

Going back to our example, the loan balance of $130,000 is 130% of the value of the home ($100,000). The amount that the balance is reduced is $15,000. So the mortgage company would be paid $2,250 (15,000 X $.15).

Sounds great, doesn’t it. If you are facing foreclosure and are in this position,

Don’t Get Your Hopes Up

Certain problems are going to arise. These have not been addressed by the Obama Administration.

The first is that this is voluntary for the mortgage companies. What happens if some elect not to do this?

The second is that there is no time limit for the mortgage companies to put this in place. Are the mortgage companies going to delay implementing this? Will we see the same type of delays that have plagued the Making Home Affordable Program from the start?

The third is that the mortgage company or investor will contact those people who are eligible for this. Do you know who the investor on your mortgage is? Not many people do. By the way, the mortgage company to whom you are sending your monthly payments is normally not the investor.

How will your mortgage company or investor determine who actually qualifies for this? Will anyone monitor them to make sure this is done fairly? What if some mortgage companies do this quickly and others drag their feet?

Fourth – What happens in those instances where there are two loans? It looks like the administration assumed that most people who have a first and second loan got these through the same mortgage company. So the balance on the second loan will be reduced first. If the remaining balance is still over 115%, the balance on the first loan is reduced.

The guidelines indicate that a mortgage company that has to reduce the balance on a second lien to bring the total down to 115% will be paid $.06 on the dollar for the amount reduced. This payment will only be made if the person had not made a payment on that second loan in more than 6 months.

Let’s look at the example we have been using. The balance on both loans totals $130,000. The balance on the first mortgage is $109,000. The balance on the second is $21,000. The value of the home again is $100,000.

115% of $100,000 is $115,000. The balance on the second loan would be reduced to $6,000. The balance of $109,000 on the first loan would remain unchanged.

If there was a different mortgage company for the second loan, they are being asked to forgive $15,000 of their loan. For that the government may pay them $900 ($15,000X$.06). They will get that only if the person facing foreclosure has not made a payment on that loan in the last 6 months.

So the mortgage company here can possibly get $900 at most while in those instances there is only one loan, the mortgage company there would get $2,250 regardless of when the last payment on that loan was made.

Is There Anything Wrong With This Picture?

It sure looks like the mortgage company handling the second loan is getting the shaft. Do you think that most mortgage companies on these second loans are going to willingly participate in this program?

Current estimates are that in about 50% of the cases where people are facing foreclosure first and second loans exist. It is not clear on how many of these two different mortgage companies are involved. Chances are the percentage is high.

One Other Big Challenge Exists . . .

. . . for mortgage companies when it comes to reducing the principal balances on loans. If they start doing this for people facing foreclosure, won’t the people who have made their loan payments on time and are not facing foreclosure complain? Won’t they demand that the balance on their loans be reduced if the value on of their homes has dropped?

Many people facing foreclosure who are expecting the principal balances on their mortgages to be reduced are in for a rude awakening if it does not occur.

What steps can you take if you are in this position?

I suggest that you get in touch with your mortgage company. Tell them that you heard about the revisions that were made at the end of March to the Making Home Affordable Program. Let them know that you believe the balance on your mortgage is greater than 115% of what your home is worth. Ask them what you have to do to be considered for a reduction in the balance of your mortgage.

If you have a first and second mortgage and these are handled by 2 different mortgage companies, call both companies. Explain the situation to them. Ask them for consideration.

Expect the people you talk to tell you that they are not going to reduce the principal balances on any mortgages. Get the name and phone number of the person to who you talk. Make a note of what they tell you. Then call or write your congressman and let them know your situation and what you were told. Ask for their help.

If you are being represented by a lawyer or a housing counselor, discuss this with them. See what they will do.

By the way here is another reason I recommend that anyone facing foreclosure get a lawyer or counselor to represent them. Anyone who represents themselves most likely not won’t follow through on things like this. In the long run they will lose out because they did not.

Always remember that your mortgage company does not have your best interests at heart. Make sure that you know as much about the foreclosure process and the steps you can take to save your home as you can. My EBook has quite a bit of information which I believe that you would find very helpful. Please check it out. You can get more information on it by clicking Stop Foreclosure.

Much Success,

Mark Elkins