A bank foreclosure and eviction goes horribly wrong when the former homeowner took four firefighters hostage in a suburban Atlanta, Georgia neighborhood on Wednesday.

The gunman who took four Georgia firefighters hostage Wednesday has been shot and killed, reportedly by SWAT-team members. One police officer was wounded, and all four firefighters have been taken to the hospital for minor injuries. The hostage scene erupted Wednesday afternoon after firefighters responded to a 911 call from a man saying he was having a heart attack at a home near Atlanta, police said. The gunman reportedly was holding the firefighters hostage over demands his utilities and cable be turned back on.

Initially five firefighters were held, but the gunman released one in order to move the fire truck.

NBC Atlanta 11 Alive:

According to authorities, police used a "flash bang grenade" to distract the suspect when they felt their officers were in "immediate danger" on the scene.

All four of the firefighters taken hostage are safe and sustained superficial wounds during their recovery effort and one Gwinnett County officer was injured. According to authorities, the officers injuries are non-life threatening.

A sheriff's deputy said the gunman is upset that the house is in foreclosure, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported.

According to property tax records, the home where the firefighters were being held was foreclosed on in November 2012 by Wells Fargo, and the mortgage then sold to Fannie Mae.

Gwinnett County Police Cpl. Edwin Ritter said the unidentified gunman was facing eviction and wanted the power turned back on.

The identity of the deceased has not yet been released pending notification of next of kin.

Via OccupyWallSt.:

After a public pressure campaign through the Eviction Free Zone of Occupy Homes MN, Gayle Lindsey, a nursing assistant and grandmother in South Minneapolis, who was facing imminent eviction, has won a modification of her mortgage from M&T Bank. Her victory marks the seventh for Occupy Homes MN and the first in the Eviction Free Zone, a project that brings neighbors in the Central and Powderhorn neighborhoods together to refuse to leave their homes without a fair negotiation.

Lindsey, whose renegotiation came a month after her redemption period ended, is the first victory in “the Zone.” With the help of Occupy Homes MN, she organized a series of actions, community potlucks, and press appearances. Lindsey received a call, while sitting at her kitchen table, from an executive at M&T Bank. The bank offered to write her a new and affordable mortgage.

“It shows that Occupy Homes MN works,” she says. “I want to move on to more victories for the community.”

Broadly, it is time to embrace what has been set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The right to housing is the right to an adequate standard of living.

Stand up, occupy, and find a local group with which to organize through the Occupy Directory.

MayDay is coming. Are you ready?

Posted to Youtube by Twitter user @SusanB26, she recalls from painful personal experience how she learned about bank fraud. Perhaps her sharing this information can be of help to someone else.

On Thursday, dozens of homeowners and supporters joined Betty Badro in confronting Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf at a banker's conference on the day before her home of 19 years is scheduled to be foreclosed. Ms. Badro, who has worked for the State of California for 22 years, attempted to deliver a personal check to Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf while he was giving a keynote address at the American Banker Retail Lending Conference at a luxury beach resort hotel in Carlsbad, California.

Betty has spent months attempting to get Wells Fargo to consider her for a loan modification. Betty lives with her disabled brother and one of her two children, and suffered recent financial setbacks due to state furloughs and personal health issues. Her finances have now recovered, a HUD-certified housing counselor has reviewed her case, and believes that Ms. Badro qualifies for a loan modification.

Ms. Badro took the stage, shook hands with Mr. Stumpf, and proceeded to explain that his bank was poised to take her home the next day. She told Mr. Stumpf that she can afford the mortgage and had a check in hand that she was asking him to accept. Not saying another word, Mr. Stumpf turned his back on Ms. Badro and left the stage. As presumably other bankers attending the conference attempted to restrain Badro while calling for "security," she bravely stands her ground and insists on telling the crowd her story.

Then the entire group of fifty homeowners took over the stage and made a presentation outlining how Wells Fargo has failed the community and the changes that Wells Fargo should make in their foreclosure practices.

"I've been working hard all my life," says Betty Bardo, member of ACCE. "I have income, I want to pay my mortgage, I just want a modification with principal reduction so that I can stay in my home. It is everything to me. John Stumpf and Wells Fargo are raking in money - they just had their most profitable year ever - but they're profiting off the homes and livelihoods of American families."

The event was organized by the ACCE Home Defenders League; and included the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE), the Home Defenders League, and Occupy Fights Foreclosures.

UPDATE: Betty Badro's foreclosure was notified after the action that today that her foreclosure has been postponed indefinitely.

NYT:

The nation’s biggest banks wrongfully foreclosed on more than 700 military members during the housing crisis and seized homes from roughly two dozen other borrowers who were current on their mortgage payments, findings that eclipse earlier estimates of the improper evictions.

Bank of America, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo uncovered the foreclosures while analyzing mortgages as part of a multibillion-dollar settlement deal with federal authorities, according to people with direct knowledge of the findings. In January, regulators ordered the banks to identify military members and other borrowers who were evicted in violation of federal law.

The analysis, which was turned over to regulators in recent days, provides the first detailed glimpse into the extent of wrongful foreclosures amid the collapse of the housing market. While lenders previously acknowledged that they relied on faulty documents to push through foreclosures, the banks claimed borrowers were rarely evicted by mistake, including military personnel protected by federal law.

“It’s absolutely devastating to be 7,000 miles from your home fighting for this country and get a message that your family is being evicted," says a retired Air Force lawyer who represents troops in foreclosure cases. "We have been sounding the alarms that the banks are illegally evicting the very men and women who are out there fighting for this country. This is a devastating confirmation of that." The big banks say the wrongful foreclosures are only a small fraction of the mortgages being reviewed and they plan to compensate those affected.

Millions of middle-class Americans lost their homes in the mortgage crisis. Among them is Joseph Keller, 58, a former social worker in Columbus, Ohio. Five years ago, he and his wife fell 10 months behind in their house payments and received a foreclosure notice from JP Morgan Chase. They packed up their belongings and moved. Two months later the bank changed its mind and decided not to foreclose after all, but Keller never found out. Keller’s not the only one in this situation. Michelle Conlin, a reporter for Reuters, joins Jennifer Granholm in “The War Room” to discuss.

A report by Conlin recently was the basis for a post I wrote called "Foreclosure Horror: The Zombie Title."

No one is keeping track of exactly how many homes out there that owners have abandoned, thinking that the banks have auctioned them off after receiving the foreclosure notice, and in many cases being locked out of the homes. But just as probably all of us know of someone who lost their home to foreclosure during the economic crisis, we'll soon likely know of someone being stalked by a zombie foreclosure.

Jodie Randolph tells the story of the struggle to keep her home.

Jodie Randolph is a small-business owner in Alameda, California. She is also a breast-cancer survivor, and is in treatment for colon cancer.

Jodie has been fighting to stay in her home for years. Companies affiliated with Morgan
Stanley shuttled the loan around from one subsidiary to the other until they foreclosed on her. Morgan Stanley’s tactics have included:

• Pushing her into a predatory refinance
• Moving her loan around from company to company so she couldn’t get a fix on who to negotiate with
• Removing the lawyer for Morgan Stanley who was actually negotiating with Jodie when they were
close to reaching a mutually acceptable plan.
• Stunningly, breaking in and changing the locks to her house while she was at a chemotherapy
session.

Supported by a delegation of her family, friends, neighbors, the Occupy Oakland Foreclosure Defense Group, the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, and other foreclosure activists, Jodie has staved off eviction from her home since November 2012.

In a terrific initial victory for people’s action and home defense, Jodie was able to meet Monday, with Morgan Stanley. In November, when Jodie came to Occupy Oakland Foreclosure Defense, she had no prospect of a bank meeting, and all negotiations and legal actions seemed over and done.

She and her allies sat down fairly amicably with bank representatives, including a lawyer flown in from Southern California, and presented her proposal for how the foreclosure could be lifted and a fair loan modification could be put in place. Morgan Stanley is ‘considering’ her proposal.

In the meantime, the home defense continues as everyone hopes and waits.

By Paul Kiel, ProPublica

As the sixth year of the foreclosure crisis comes to an end, the percentage of loans in foreclosure remains a staggering eight times higher than it was in 2005. About 5.3 million homeowners — about 11 percent of all borrowers — are behind on their payments.

But 2012 was also the year that home prices hit a bottom and have started to very slowly climb. The number of new homeowners falling behind on their payments has dropped substantially since the peak. The government also took a dramatic step: a $25 billion settlement with the five biggest mortgage servicers.

Earlier this year, ProPublica focused on one homeowner — Sheila Ramos, who lost her home in Florida and ended up living in a tent in Hawaii — to pull together all the threads of the crisis and give readers a single story that explains the causes of the crisis, the bumbling response by the big banks and Washington, and the human toll exacted by the whole debacle. It is also available as a Kindle Single, which includes extra material.

We've also been keeping a close watch on whether the government is keeping its promises about compensating victims of the crisis.

The largest program is a review overseen by federal regulators covering more than 4 million loans. It launched back in 2011, but as of mid-December, no homeowner had received any compensation. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency spokesman Bryan Hubbard said regulators had been "working toward beginning compensation for a limited number of people [this month] with reviews and remediation continuing through 2013."

The program — called the Independent Foreclosure Review — has been beset with questions about its fairness, transparency and integrity since it launched. At least partly due to those problems, many borrowers aren't even bothering to apply for compensation. As of November, only 315,000 borrowers have sent in forms requesting to be reviewed, according to the OCC's Hubbard, about seven percent of people eligible to apply. The final deadline to apply is at the end of this month.

Federal regulators designed the program to work like this: Each of the banks would hire an "independent consultant" (approved by the regulator) to conduct reviews of the bank's foreclosure cases. The bank was supposed to foot the bill, but the consultant, not the bank, was supposed to decide which of the bank's customers deserved compensation and how much.

But ProPublica has revealed evidence that the banks themselves are heavily involved in the reviews, calling their independence and integrity into question. After our story about Bank of America's involvement in its review, the bank and its consultant changed their review process. Bank of America also engineered a de facto appeals process; if the consultant decided a BofA customer deserved compensation, the bank could provide more information that it wasn't at fault. Borrowers have no such ability to appeal.

To lead its role in the review, JPMorgan Chase installed an executive named by the Justice Department for allegedly facilitating a scheme to defraud Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. She declined to comment for our story.

In a telling irony, it seems likely the review will end up steering far more money toward the consulting companies hired by the banks than will go to harmed homeowners.

Finally, some banks have been shockingly slow to begin their reviews. Regulators have ordered Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley to conduct reviews of their former mortgage servicing subsidiaries, for instance, but they still haven't begun. The process covers loans that were in foreclosure in 2009 or 2010, but the review won't get going until at least 2013. That seems likely to further deter harmed borrowers from applying for compensation.

A Federal Reserve spokesperson said a company, Navigant Consulting, had been selected to conduct the review for both servicers, but the contracts had not been finalized. It's unclear when the review would begin.

The government's other big reaction to the foreclosure crisis, the National Mortgage Settlement, has also had its disappointments. The deal involved 49 states, the federal government, and the five largest mortgage servicers. The headline number was $25 billion, but only $5 billion of that is actually cash that the big banks would pay out. The other $20 billion is composed of "credits," awarded when the banks take steps to avoid foreclosures, for instance by offering loan modifications that cut the amount homeowners owe.

Of the cash, half — $2.5 billion — was to go to states to address the foreclosure crisis. But as we've reported, almost $1 billion of that is actually being used to patch state's ailing budgets. (See our state-by-state breakdown here.)

$1.5 billion will be sent to borrowers who lost their homes to foreclosure, with each borrower receiving only about $1,000-$2,000. That process has finally gotten underway, and the deadline for borrowers to make a claim to receive that payment is early next year. (See more info about this in our FAQ.)

As for the $20 billion in credits, the banks appear to be in the process of fulfilling those obligations, but there are plenty of questions about how much good it's doing. Some credits are for actions banks were taking already (like demolishing abandoned homes). And although government officials touted the agreement as a way to boost the number of modifications that reduced borrowers' debts, much of the banks' activity hasn't focused on keeping borrowers in their homes. Rather, the number of short sales — an agreement by the bank to sell the home for less than the amount owed — has been far higher.

As the foreclosure crisis and the government's sputtering response enter their seventh year, ProPublica will be keeping watch.

By Paul Kiel, ProPublica, Dec. 17, 2012

The Independent Foreclosure Review is the government's main effort to compensate homeowners for harm they suffered at the hands of banks — and, as its name indicates, it's supposed to be independent.

But until recently, that was hardly the case with Bank of America. Supposedly independent, third-party reviewers would sit at a computer, analyzing each homeowner's case by going through hundreds of questions, such as whether the bank had properly reviewed a homeowner for a modification or had charged bogus fees. But the reviewers weren't starting from a blank slate. Bank of America employees had already supplied the answers, which the reviewers would have to override if they did not agree.

No evidence has emerged that Bank of America pressured reviewers to accept its answers, and the bank did not supply answers for the final questions: whether the bank should pay compensation and, if so, how much. But those ultimate determinations depended on responses to the preceding questions, and for reviewers the path of least effort was to accept the bank's answers.

This practice only ended a month after ProPublica published a story showing that Bank of America was doing much of the work itself. When that story was published, ProPublica hadn't yet learned that the answers the bank supplied showed up on the reviewers' computer screens as defaults, and Bank of America strenuously denied that it had compromised the integrity of the review. Since November, the reviewers now begin their analysis without the bank's answers.

Bank of America spokesman Dan Frahm confirmed the change: "Steps were taken" so that the independent reviewer, Promontory Financial Group, "could not view answers supplied by the Bank of America Claim Researcher."

Frahm maintained, however, that the change didn't mean the reviews completed under the prior system were tainted. Promontory's employees have always had the ability to "override any answer supplied by the Bank of America Claim Researcher," he said.

Advocates for homeowners aren't convinced. "It's hard to imagine" that Promontory's reviewers weren't influenced by having the bank's answers right in front of them, said Alys Cohen of the National Consumer Law Center. "As a result it seems obvious that the earlier reviews should be re-reviewed."

Potential Conflict of Interest

The Independent Foreclosure Review is the government's largest program to compensate victims of the banks' foreclosure abuses. 4.4 million homeowners are eligible, but homeowners must submit a claim to ensure they're covered by the review. As of the end of November, only 315,000 homeowners had done so, according to regulators, a low response rate of about seven percent.

Victims could receive up to $125,000 in cash compensation or, if possible, get their home back. The review is overseen by the nation's bank regulators, who were spurred to action in 2011 by the robo-signing scandal.

The review has been dogged by criticism since the outset, partly because of how it works. Banks hire and pay consultants to be the independent, third-party reviewers. Bank regulators must approve them, which the regulators say ensures the independence of the review. But critics argue that the consulting firms have other contracts with the banks and so have a conflict of interest: If the consultants anger the banks, they may lose future business.

For its "independent consultant," Bank of America hired Promontory. Promontory is also conducting the review for Wells Fargo, which has the second largest number of loans eligible for review (about 933,000) after Bank of America (1.3 million) of all the banks.

"A Technical Change"

As ProPublica reported in October, all four of the country's largest banks planned to participate heavily in evaluating whether homeowners were harmed, according to their contracts with the consultants. Of course, homeowners claiming their bank abused them were never told the same bank would be integrally involved in the review.

In October, ProPublica uncovered internal Bank of America memos and emails indicating that, while Promontory made the ultimate decision as to a homeowner's compensation, the bank was doing much of the review work itself.

When ProPublica first presented this evidence to Promontory, Bank of America, and the bank's primary regulator, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, all three initially denied that Promontory was using analysis performed by the bank's own employees.

Now, even as Promontory and Bank of America confirmed they had changed their system to make the bank's analysis invisible to Promontory's reviewers, both companies insisted that the independence of the reviews had never been compromised.

"Promontory resources have always reviewed the files, performed all tests, and reached independent conclusions, without input or influence from Bank of America," said Promontory spokeswoman Debra Cope. "A technical change was made in November with respect to the visibility of information uploaded by Bank of America file preparers.... Although these responses were previously visible to Promontory reviewers, they never had any bearing on Promontory's independent testing processes."

OCC spokesman Bryan Hubbard said the OCC has a policy of not commenting on specific institutions, but added, "as we have stressed before, the OCC expects the independent consultants to exercise their independence in reviewing and evaluating each file. Our examiners are ensuring that occurs."

The NCLC's Cohen said the core problem with the Independent Foreclosure Review is that it is largely being handled in secret.

"At the end of the day, if the regulators and servicers want to put this behind them, they need the public to believe this is legitimate. Without transparency, you can't have real accountability."

View more videos at: http://nbclosangeles.com.

For Richard Castaldo, the fight to keep his home out of foreclosure is only the latest in a life that has been full of extraordinary challenges. When he was 17, Castaldo became one of the first students shot during the Columbine High School massacre. Now, he's turned to Occupy Los Angeles to overcome this latest obstacle:

Richard Castaldo has a bullet permanently lodged in his spine from when, at 17 years old, he was shot eight times by two peers at Columbine High School.

Castaldo and his friend, Rachel Scott, were sitting outside during their lunch break on April 20, 1999, when fellow students Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold began shooting. Richard and Rachel were the first students hit.

“They shot us both pretty much at the same time. It was all kind of one big spray,” Castaldo said.

He remembers waiting, bleeding for more than half an hour. Before help could arrive, Klebold and Harris returned.

“During that time I heard Rachel crying, and they came back and shot her in the head and I knew she was dead after that,” Castaldo said.

Confined to a wheelchair for the rest of his life as a result of the shooting, Richard moved to Los Angeles five years ago to pursue a career in music, only to fall behind on mortgage payments for his condo.Now he hopes Occupy Los Angeles can help him find a way to stay in the city he now calls home.

“I feel like they’re really the only group that doesn’t have an ulterior motive,” said Castaldo, who admits he “should have known better” than to believe the value of his condominium would go up. Roughly 36,000 California housing units received a foreclosure filing in October, according to RealtyTrac.

Time may be running out for Castaldo, as the condo is set to be sold at auction on December 6. But given other successes Occupy groups have had saving homeowners threatened by foreclosure, he may still stand a chance. Over the summer, Occupy Our Homes -- an offshoot of the Occupy movement -- saved the home of a Minneapolis woman and helped another resident of that city resist foreclosure in the same month.

There's also The Home Defender's League who are quite successful at what they do, and they also have quite a few partner organizations -- some affiliated with the Occupy movement, some not -- even in California.

Richard won't be alone in this fight, and he's in good hands.

I'll update with any new developments.