Mortgage Servicing Fraud
occurs post loan origination when mortgage servicers use false statements and book-keeping entries, fabricated assignments, forged signatures and utter counterfeit intangible Notes to take a homeowner's property and equity.
Articles |The FORUM |Law Library |Videos | Fraudsters & Co. |File Complaints |How they STEAL |Search MSFraud |Contact Us
Joe B
Alright folks, bear with me!

     The reason this is important is that the same problem with cable is ONE (no, not all, but bear with me) of the problems with MS Fraud--- the lack of consumer choice!

     Let's face it, if we could vote with our feet, how many of us would still be victims? At the first sign of problems with Fairbanks, I would have run for the exits. If the threat of compeitition, and the loss of any and all revenue, is brought into the market, I think the idea of MS Fraud would exist, but at only the most remote rates.

     If we could all run away with impunity, what chance would these servicers have for even survival, much less abusing us? It would take time, and the spiral of abuse would be like water draining from the tub, but it would end, it would have to!

     I would like to see competition together with VERY strong and severe penalties to abusers, and add a dash of oversight and enforecement, and you might see some real improvements. Imagine if there were extraordinarily severe awards to abuse victims. Do you think they could stand to not fix their problem?

     Competition won't fix all the problems, but it would certainly be a fabulous first step.

IMO

JB

What if the cable guy waited for you?
Federal regulator's free-market move brings fantasy closer to reality
By Jasmin Aline Persch
MSNBC
updated 8:30 p.m. ET, Sun., Nov. 11, 2007

Imagine the cable guy waiting for you at your doorstep rather than surrending to a day of house arrest for your setup. Imagine getting customer support on the line as easily as you could your mama. Better yet, imagine never needing to ring your cable company because your service just worked 24/7.

A new regulation could bring this fantasy cable service closer to reality. The Federal Communications Commission approved a rule last month that opens the door for competition among video services. And the commission plans to go further, with new regulations that will rein in the giant cable companies, according to reports over the weekend. That promises change in an industry that's long had its way with customers.

"The FCC, at least, is taking one step in the right direction," says Claes Fornell, a business professor at the University of Michigan.

The regulation bans exclusive agreements between cable companies and apartment buildings. That could switch up the game for people living in multiunit dwellings, about 25 million households, from a landlord-selected service provider — to let the best video service win. This new competition could push prices down and boost customer care as companies vie for business, experts say.

That could spare some cable customers from unnecessary tantrums. Enter 75-year-old Mona Shaw of Bristow, Va.

She waited all day for a no-show cable guy, who waltzed in two days late and left before finishing the installation. Frustrated, she and her husband, Don, headed to the local Comcast office — and waited two hours for a manager before learning he went home for the day. Enraged, the churchgoing woman returned to the office with a hammer.

"I smashed a keyboard, knocked over a monitor ... and I went to hit the telephone," Shaw said. "I figured, 'Hey, my telephone is screwed up, so is yours.'"

Although an extreme case, she isn't alone in her frustration with cable companies, which have become the poster children for poor customer service. Long waits, puffed-up prices and spotty service combined to give the cable and satellite TV industry the worst customer-satisfaction rating of any industry, according to a May report by the University of Michigan's American Customer Satisfaction Index.

Despite being disgruntled, customers tend to stick with their cable providers because they face slim or no pickings — or they don’t want to deal with switching video services.

“If they don’t have a choice, they have no power,” Fornell says. “They can complain as much as they want to no avail.”

Tony Ciniglio of Torrance, Calif., was locked in with Adelphia Communications Corp. for two and a half years because it was the only available cable provider at the time.

The sports writer lashed out at customer support several times when his favorite channels, CBS and ESPN, started flickering. Adelphia, which has since gone bankrupt, told him they were looking into it. But CBS never worked reliably, he says.

"My daily life is stressful enough," Ciniglio says. "I don’t need to deal with unresponsive customer service from a cable company."

Despite their bad raps, cable companies continue to add subscribers and raise rates, 93 percent over the past decade, because of limited competition, Fornell says. And low satisfaction and high prices apparently pay off: Industry leader Comcast Corp.'s customer-satisfaction score sank from 60 percent to 56 percent this past year — as its revenue soared 12 percent, according to the University of Michigan index. But Fornell warns that cable companies can’t keep this up forever.

"They’re playing a very risky game," says Fornell, who created the customer-satisfaction index.

The FCC ruling could put the ball in consumers' courts. Increased competition allows customers to vote with their feet, says Bob Williams from the Consumers Union.

"You get better customer service when you have the ability to go down the street to get a better deal from somebody else," he says.

But just because the free-market move allows competition, it doesn't guarantee it. The cable companies, which invest heaps in technology, often choose to stay off each other's turf because it's more cost-effective to operate in areas with little or no competition, Williams says.

"They don't choose to compete all that often," he says.

But the cable industry's lobbying group maintains that competition exists between video services. Besides cable companies, consumers can pick among satellite services such as DirecTV Group Inc. — and even phone companies such as Verizon Communications Inc. and AT&T Inc., which are beginning to offer video services. Almost 30 percent of households that subscribe to video services have a provider other than a cable operator, according to statistics by the National Cable and Telecommunications Association.

"Unless they can't install a satellite dish," there's competition, says NCTA senior vice president Dan Brenner.

That's a real obstacle for apartment dwellers. Before Ciniglio moved into a new complex, he had to sweet-talk his new landlord into accommodating a satellite dish.

But since switching to DirecTV, he swears by satellite, which has a slightly higher customer-satisfaction rating than cable. Could better customer service lure him back to cable?

"It would take a huge deal from the cable company for me to go away from DirecTV," he says.

Cable providers say they're always trying to boost customer service.

Comcast plans to add nearly 6,000 more support staff and field technicians, after hiring 6,500 last year. And to cut back your wait for the cable guy, the company employs mobile devices and GPS systems to speed up communication between support centers and technicians. And No. 2 cable operator Time Warner Cable hopes to get you in touch with customer support faster by bringing in staff and using technology.

"We feel that customer service distinguishes us from competitors," says Time Warner Cable spokesman Mark Harrad.

But you might be waiting for the cable guy for a while. The NCTA, the industry's lobbying group, called the FCC ruling "legally suspect" and is considering legal options to fight it.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21654440/

Quote 0 0
The government is protecting the criminals and the regulations rules and legislation only help create a monopoly. If this crime was not being covered up and was being aggressively prosecuted then we would not have as much of a problem as we do.

Basically these criminals operate under a government protected monopoly it is the same reason the the telecoms get away with ripping you off and forcing you to sign absurd mandatory arbitration agreements and clauses where they have the rights to change rates and service at their discretion and they are not liable for anything.

Given a choice no one would pick an insurance company, phone company, utility company etc or any product or service that did not perform in the interests of the consumer.

I believe the fact that they can make a fortune using our money and make a profit from foreclosures gives them such a great incentive and the tools to do it with that they would still be manipulating the financial services industry to steal in one way or another but again that goes back to the same issue of a government backed monopoly the Federal reserve itself.

Many people are begging and screaming for the government to more closely regulate all these industries but that is not a self correcting system and it is very easy to pay off regulators or otherwise and even legislators and judges.

We do need a system where we get what we pay for and rule though a checkbook dictatorship, when you start a small business you trade one boss for many, all your customers. The ms fraud criminals and other big businesses seem to be able to steal and rip people of at will and not get caught for stealing, somehow keep their crimes and bad reputation out of the mainstream media, and then advertise to make up for lost customers.

We had a consumer controlled self correcting economy for most of the nations history but the railroads and steel industry and later the oil and other big industries began to install monopolies with the help of the government and each year gain a little more control. Most of the problems with bad quality goods were because of materials shortages, and bad manufacturing techniques and poor distribution although there were always snake oil salesman out there they would die out after getting exposed.

State run businesses are even worse because the government is not for the most part going to take action against itself. The GSE's Fannie and Freddie have been some of the biggest criminals involved in ms fraud and sub-prime profiteering and money laundering.

Much of the problem is interlocking corporate interests we may think ms fraud has nothing to do with, getting ripped off on our phone bill, or only being able to buy cheap Chinese products at the same price we used to pay for top quality products, but many corporations have shared financial interests, databases and the same political connections. If they can work together to sell us bad products at high prices even steal from us and not get prosecuted or put out of business and they can, why wouldn't they?

I have to agree with the basic premise that we do not have as much free consumer choice we should, and believe the government artificially supports monopolists with interlocking interests. There certainly is no doubt many so called businesses are no more than crime rings.

Quote 0 0
Write a reply...