As we reported, the property at 1479 Quesda Avenue which was picked to be the rally point for yesterday’s “National Day of Action” against unfair foreclosure proceedings in San Francisco was purchased for $215,000 in 1999, refinanced in 2007 with a $590,000 loan, and taken back by the bank earlier this year.
Protest organizers and members of the press have characterized Vivian Richardson, the foreclosed upon ex-owner of 1479 Quesada, as a victim of predatory lending. Or in the words of Ms. Richardson earlier this year:
Families have been ripped off by banks, scammed by brokers and nothing’s done to them. It’s time for the families and the community to stand up and take back what’s theirs.
We are losing families every day…The banks got bailed out, and we are being pushed out. But we’re going to fight, even if we have to do it one home at a time.
Yesterday, we took some heat for showing a perceived lack of concern for Ms. Richardson and for suggesting the “Occupy” movement wasn’t doing itself any favors by associating themselves with this case as an example of economic injustice in San Francisco.
Today, we offer a few more details and wonder if they might change a few minds.
Once again, Ms. Richardson acquired 1479 Quesada in 1999 from John Pereira with a recorded transfer price of $215,000. In 2002, Ms. Richardson refinanced the home with a $281,250 mortgage.
In 2003, Ms. Richardson refinanced the property with a new first mortgage for $318,760. And in 2004, Ms. Richardson refinanced the property with a new first for $381,000.
In early 2005, Ms. Richardson added a second loan to the property in the amount of $39,750, a loan which was paid off later in the year when the property was refinanced with a $500,000 first.
In March 2006, Ms. Richardson refinanced her home with a first mortgage for $556,000 to which another loan for $50,000 was added that October.
In July 2007, Ms. Richardson once again refinanced her home with a $590,000 first mortgage. At the same time, Ms. Richardson also secured a second for $74,000.
By the end of 2008, Ms. Richardson was already $14,695 past due on her first mortgage. And in May of this year, the bank foreclosed on the property with $728,129.33 in principal, fees and accrued interest due on that $590,000 loan alone.
Keep in mind that the foreclosing note from 2007 was fixed for five years with the $2,180,75 monthly payment spelled out in the note Ms. Richardson had signed, promising to pay the bank back in full or give up the property.
And that’s how Ms. Richardson came to be “pushed out” of her home.
∙ Over A Half Million Reasons It’s Just And The “Occupiers” Aren’t [SocketSite]
∙ Bayview Families Refusing to Leave Despite Foreclosures [rebuildthedream.com]