Rawley
Diamond Member
- Sep 8, 2014
- 40,081
- 24,866
- 3,645
LOL So why did they give it a 50% haircut.No, they didn’t. The bank told the judge that they accepted the SFC as accurate.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LOL So why did they give it a 50% haircut.No, they didn’t. The bank told the judge that they accepted the SFC as accurate.
They said it was standard operating procedure. My guess is they knew he was lying.LOL So why did they give it a 50% haircut.
Hanging in there shamelessly and cluelessly about banks being required to take a “home appraisal” that the buyer obtains and provides to a bankNo, they didn’t. The bank told the judge that they accepted the SFC as accurate.
Which is what they should think since it’s the law.
It’s absurd to think you can just write whatever you want in financial documents.
It’s up to the borrower to be honest about their finances. That’s the law.Again, it's not up to the borrower, it's up to the BANK to determine the risk. Do you think that banks just go by what a borrower tells them what their property is worth? Apparently you do to make such ludicrous statements as you do. 'Honest assessments' of actual worth are done by licensed, objective appraisers not borrowers.
That being said, if your property is worth say $1 million dollars and you apply for a $5,000 equity loan you will most likely get it without even an appraisal based on your verifiable income records. It's up to the BANK to verify that as well. You are going nowhere in this discussion and are becoming a huge waste of time an energy as I try to school you.
They aren’t required to take anything.Hanging in there shamelessly and cluelessly about banks being required to take a “home appraisal” that the buyer obtains and provides to a bank
Your guess huh? They did their own diligence and came up with their own valuation. The Banker testified they were paid back in full and were not defrauded. As Kelly points out, this bullshit is going to be reversed on appealThey said it was standard operating procedure. My guess is they knew he was lying.
The funny thing is the bank has incentives to let this stuff slide.
What made her 'change her tune' on pos trump.and alpha woman Megyn Kelly savaged him mercilessly.
It matters not what appraisals Trump had done or what fantasy value he put on one of his properties. A property owner submitting inflated valuations of their property to a bank is not ILLEGAL which I have already told you. You seem to have cognitive problems.Trump had independent appraisals of his properties, which he kept from his accountants and the banks. Instead he submitted valuations several times higher, using assumptions that were not accurate.
For example, he owned a piece of property which he was forbidden from developing for residential purposes. Yet he valued the property as if he had built a dozen mansions read to sell to people. Not only did the mansions not exist, they couldn’t legally be built anyway. It’s fantasy.
The bank did not do their own diligence and come up with their own valuation.You're guess huh? They did their own diligence and came up with their own valuation. The Banker testified they were paid back in full and were not defrauded. As Kelly points out, this bullshit is going to be reversed on appeal
Know nothing fools claim the buyers can force banks to accept the buyers feelings about the value of their property(s)You're guess huh? They did their own diligence and came up with their own valuation. The Banker testified they were paid back in full and were not defrauded. As Kelly points out, this bullshit is going to be reversed on appeal
She got over her snit about Trump vaguely referencing being on her period.What made her 'change her tune' on pos trump.
She stood up to him in the past, now she is just cowering down and licking his boots.......Why?
What changed?
Of course it matters what you tell a bank.It matters not what appraisals Trump had done or what fantasy value he put on one of his properties. A property owner submitting inflated valuations of their property to a bank is not ILLEGAL which I have already told you. You seem to have cognitive problems.
You don't know that.The bank did not do their own diligence and come up with their own valuation.
Under what grounds is it going to be reversed?
No it does not matter what you tell a bank as to what you THINK the value of your property is worth. They did not really prove Trump lied. Their proof was a tax assessment which has 0 to do with actual Market value.Of course it matters what you tell a bank.
It is illegal to lie in financial statements when applying for a loan.
That’s a fact. I thought everyone knew this but apparently some do not.
But that’s not true. They did indeed prove that he lied.No it does not matter what you tell a bank as to what you THINK the value of your property is worth. They did not really prove Trump lied. Their proof was a tax assessment which has 0 to do with actual Market value.
Your 'but he had appraisals done for himself that were lower' is nothing but bullshit as those appraisals would not be used anyway because they were not ordered by the bank. You have very little understanding of bank loans obviously.
Engoron claims Trump lied about the value of his property using a TAX ASSESSMENT which NO ONE in the lending industry would trust as an accurate opinion of value.
Trump’s 2011 financial statement listed his net worth as $4.3 billion, though Deutsche Bank pegged it around $2.4 billion in an internal credit report as he sought the Doral loan. The bank knocked 75% off the worth he’d given for planned developments, with the internal document citing “the uncertainty in valuing undeveloped land,” for example. The bankers halved the value he’d listed for his golf courses and had a $94 million difference of opinion over how to account for golf membership deposits among his liquid assets.The bank did not do their own diligence and come up with their own valuation.
Knock yourself outUnder what grounds is it going to be reversed?
Looks and sounds like she's "bleeding from everywhere" to me.
She has always been an exceptionally nasty little twat. A perfect role model of behavior for crazy ex-wives throughout the country.
I feel badly for her that she's been forced, in order to make a living, to spew the MAGAist lies about the trials to morons. She said all 5 jurisdictions bringing charges against him were conspiracies to do so. A view that itself is a batshyte crazy, conspiracy theory.
What’s impressive is that she doesn’t actually ever explain his behavior.
January 6th cases don’t count because he has immunity. Okay. It’s not entirely true that the case is over, but it still doesn’t address what he did.
Same with the documents case. The court changes the rules on special counsel, but doesn’t address he behavior.
Same with the loan fraud. She says no one cares but it still doesn’t address what he did.
All she’s saying is that she has come up with a list of excuses to ignore the issue.
Like trump got dressed down by Harris?
Because repeating right wing bs is not repeating facts.
She’s the female Joe Rogan...saying anything for mouse clicks.
“How dare she be white and speak like that”What made her 'change her tune' on pos trump.
She stood up to him in the past, now she is just cowering down and licking his boots.......Why?
What changed?
Again, for the slow here, the bank does not rely on borrower justification of equity. That would be stupid but then, you're too stupid to figure it out I guess.But that’s not true. They did indeed prove that he lied.
Trump’s justification for the inflated valuations were based on facts of the properties that were not true. It wasn’t based on tax assessments. It was based on testimony.
That is a lie.
His ignorance of NYC real estate lending process is legendary.Know nothing fools claim the buyers can force banks to accept the buyers feelings about the value of their property(s)
The properties we are talking about were not being used for equity.Again, for the slow here, the bank does not rely on borrower justification of equity. That would be stupid but then, you're too stupid to figure it out I guess.