Protesters march in county building, demand sheriff cease evictions
»Play Video
PORTLAND, Ore. – Dozens of protesters marched into the Multnomah County Building in Southeast Portland Thursday afternoon to give the sheriff a piece of their collective minds about a couple booted out of their home.
Sheriff Dan Staton did open his door to listen to them but the protesters didn't like what he said.
It's a tactic protesters have been trying in recent months when someone is kicked out their home that's in foreclosure.
On Thursday, dozens filled the foyer chanting, waving signs and walking in circles, calling the sheriff's office a private security force for mortgage broker Fannie Mae.
But the sheriff said his hands are tied.
The demonstrators were rallying around Ron and Debbie Austin. They were recently booted from their Northeast Portland home, which now has a private security guard to keep anyone from returning.
"Last time we were here the sheriff actually locked his door and left the building and wouldn't speak with us," said Kari Koch with We Are Oregon. "And this time he has sent his undersheriff down to offer a meeting with Debbie and some other folks from the Housing Justice Defenders League and so folks are upstairs meeting with him right now. They'll come back down and report what happened with that, but either way our demand remains the same: that we want no more evictions, we want a moratorium on evictions in Multnomah County."
The sheriff said in a press release he sympathizes with people losing their homes but he is the sheriff and he has to enforce the law.
Um. If y'all bothered to actually learn about the situation, you'd know that Debbie did make all her payments. The bank claimed they didn't receive one payment, which Debbie has the paperwork to prove she sent. The judge dismissed their case not because she was in the wrong but because the family couldn't afford a lawyer.
Â
Secondly, as you may recall, a record amount of people lost their jobs when the irresponsible financial sector broke our economy. Many of the folks who were perfectly capable of making their payments prior to losing their jobs in the recession, which they could not have anticipated, suddenly found themselves with payments higher than they could afford. In most cases, attempts to modify the loans were denied by the issuing banks.
Â
Third, at least 2 of the families who have resisted foreclosure ended up in their situation because of unexpected catastrophic illness (cancer in one case and a respiratory illness in the second) that forced them to quit their jobs (the timeline to receive SSI is quite long) or left them with such medical debt that they could not afford the same payment amounts as prior to their illness. Once again, these homeowners attempted to negotiate with the bank in good faith because they wanted to be able to make their payments. Once again, the banks refused.Lastly, regardless of the circumstances, for all those saying "people shouldn't buy houses they can't afford", even were that the case, a situation in which the majority of people in a society cannot purchase a basic home to raise their family in is dysfunctional. A situation in which only a small elite class can afford basiccs like decent housing will inherently be unstable. It's just as much in the interest of those with means for more than just a select few to be able to live comfortably.
It looks like they are still at the Sheriff's office, trying to have a meeting with him. Now would be the perfect time to evict some of the other squatters that have moved back into their foreclosed houses. These "protesters" can't be two places at once.
Execution of civil process is one of the statutory requirements of the Office of the Sheriff.
 @jpk then they should make sure to execute civil process on behalf of the home owners.
 @yankrachel  @jpk  If the court rules against the homeowner, then the Sheriff is required to enforce the ruling.Â
Â
That said, it seems to me the homeowners did have some options prior to foreclosure: Sell the house, rent the house out, bring in housemates to defray mortgage costs, etc. I've had to do it during lean times, and other people could too.
All I can say is...I hope that NO ONE who has made comments about illegal squatters etc is ever forced to lose their own home. It would be a shame if that happened and NO ONE cared about your family. I for one prefer to think that there are people losing their homes because of deals that made a lot of people a GREAT DEAL of money. They didn't care that these people would be unable to pay, they just wanted their quick profits. When it was all over and those who lost their homes are left in the dirt. What then?
So, you're not going to mention that the failure to read a contract or fulfill an agreement ended up costing a lot of people a great deal of money? If nobody cared about your family, maybe your family needs to take a good look at itself and ask why. Sorry that you're not getting the handouts that you were expecting for failing to live up to your end of a contract, while other people are doing just that.
Â
Some people had some unfortunate circumstances come up, but many others simply took the money and ran without seeing the cliff ahead.
Â
Regarding this story, perhaps I should sit outside their homes and call them thieves, too. I'm sure they'd appreciate that. It would be more accurate than what they're suggesting.
Please. It's the biggest land grab in the history of the US since the Great Depression or the American-Indian war! Even with my 135 IQ, decades of experience and M.A., I was very nearly lured into a predatory deal. If I'd had a 10-point lower iq or didn't listen to my gut, I'm not sure even that college degree could have saved me. Sure I could afford the loan -- if nothing went wrong and I did have to replace a roof or hot water heater, severe illness or job loss.... And as we all know, a LOT went wrong with our economy, thanks to the very banks who are now cashing in and gaining new assets through foreclosure. My company downsized 3 time; lots of good folks lost their jobs and those who stayed too pay cuts. I thank my lucky credit points I didn't sign on to that loan! There but for the grace of God and access to the company books!!! Too many of my coworkers didn't see it coming. So excuse me if I root for the home owners, not the banks! Who defends the citizens when the sheriff is too busy protecting the banksters to lift a finger in our defense? Thank you activists for playing Robin Hood!
Tell me, Rachel, what's the difference between "purchasing" a prosecution and using bully tactics/popularity to decide one?
Yeah, that's a pretty useful phrase when it fits the agenda. The thing is, it doesn't fit the agenda of those that want to point the finger at the big, bad banks.
Â
Some people have been the unfortunate victims of unlawful foreclosures, but a heavy majority have defaulted on their loans and admit as much. Just because they don't like the consequences of their actions doesn't make it right.
 @JGalt Innocent until proven guilty....is a law we all rely on, wait till its your turn, and you will see that that whole "proven guilty" verdict is one that you dont want the prosecution to be able to purchase.
It doesn't take a brainiac to figure out basic math. If that were the case, everybody would be driving a new car and half of them would be getting it reposessed every year. So, excuse me if I root for the people that didn't make dumb decisions and tried to pin the blame on somebody else. I'm not falling for the "woe is me" excuse on one of life's major financial decisions. If they don't perform their due diligence, let Darwin sort 'em out.
@Teresa Roberts Agreed!!!
Wahhhh." Â "I don't like what you are saying" - wahhhh. I don't want you to engage in the legal duties that Sheriff Offices all across the nation are required to perform. Wahhhhhhh. We just want Portlanders to keep on keeping on - illegally squatting. Illegally occupying homes.Â
Â
How about this  - instead of protesting against the legally bound sheriff's office of Multnomah County - why don't each of these anarchal protesters,  who most likely all have jobs and mortgages themselves - help these illegal squatters pay up all of the delinquent mortgage costs and ensure they keep on making their legally contracted mortgage payments from here on out ON TIME.  Because that is the only way this couple is legally entitled to continue on living in a mortgaged home. No one is entitled to squat and not pay for a home - just because...
Â
But then this couple could just move out quietly and CHOOSE to rent a house or apartment they can afford. And leave the Sheriff's office out of any of it. That is what people usually do - when the cost of something they have acquired exceeds what they can afford.Â
Â
Get serious Sheriff's office - and secure your spine. And anarchal protesters - shame on each of you. You all know better - than to do this... really.Â
Â
Â
Most of the home foreclosures in my neighborhoods are elderly owners who are losing their homes of 20 & 30 years. It's not so easy to quietly pack up your lifetime and not so easy to find a new place with an eviction on your record.Face it, this is one of the biggest land grabs in the history of the U.S. and the folks who profit are the ones who targeted and preyed upon vulnerable citizens.I'm grateful for activists who make victims of these predatory lenders feel that they are not a loan and they are not alone.Sheriffs and police have plenty of discretionary power and access to our city council members and legislators. The sheriff should serve and protect the citizens, not his job!
I just reflect on the past and thank god we were all able to bail out the banks.
Â
Poor banks who continue to screw all of us.
 @fedupchuck Fedupchuck - so that is the "excuse" these homeowners are being gifted with by you? - they hold no legal responsibility for knowingly signing on the dotted line. For voluntarily CHOOSING to walk into a bank and promise that bank them they would make each and every timely mortgage payment? Come on....Â
Â
No harm no foul - anarchal meritless squatting homeowners today get a free house for as long as they CHOOSE to not pay for one. And the banks deserve to be scr**ed over. Somehow - but really how is that again?Â
Â
Because banks are big bad whatevers - that actually were the chosen pathway these free American "homeowners" chose - in order to secure a home in the first place?Â
Â
Come on, fed up - if anyone doesn't want to deal with a bank or secure legal contracts in order to be able to say they are a "homeowner" they can just rent. Or save up their money until they can pay for a home outright. No one was forced by any bank to do any of this. And no one gets a free pass to walk away from their legal contract with any bank AND STILL EXPECT TO OCCUPY A HOME OWNED BY THE BANK UNTIL THE MORTGAGE IS FULLY PAID UP - just because...Â
 @englishdaisy  @fedupchuck I'm sorry daisy but there were a large number of loan firms who DELIBERATELY allowed applications they knew would fail to go through, then they sold these bad mortgages to other banks etc, and made their money and moved on. Take a good look at what they have done.
It IS the banks' fault. That's why the Feds are suing them for collecting insurance monies on failed loans -- because the loans were DESIGNED to fail. So if even the insurance companies were fooled -- and they're trained in reading contracts -- what hope was there for the guy who got C's in High School. Do he and his family not deserve shelter too? Just google "Feds Sue banks" -- here I'll do it for you. GET IT? THE BANKS ARE IN THE WRONG, but that's whose bidding the Sheriffhttp://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=&oq=feds+sue+ban&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4TSNO_enUS467US468&q=feds+sue+banks&gs_l=hp..2.0l4j41.0.0.0.8064...........0.&pbx=1
Oh, so it's always somebody else's fault. They got a loan they couldn't afford in the long-run, so it is the loaner's fault. Go take out a loan for some kleenex.
I'm a proud native Oregonian, I don't know what part of Oregon that "We are Oregon" thinks they stake claim on, but in the real world, if people don't pay their bills, then they lose the collateral put up for the home. Fall behind on your car payments? The banks take back your car which was used for collateral. Fall behind on your mortgage? The bank takes the collateral in your home. And guess what?! The whole process is in the contract that was signed when taking out the loan.Â
 @pdxd and most people agree with you, which is why no one is demanding the car industry stop taking peoples' cars, but instead is demanding that the banks who just got bailed out, receive a strong and careful scrutiny of what they are doing with that 2nd chance.
please do some research before you trot out your naivety.The banks are CLEARLY crooks. Even the feds are suing them.http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=&oq=feds+sue+ban&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4TSNO_enUS467US468&q=feds+sue+banks&gs_l=hp..2.0l4j41.0.0.0.8064...........0.&pbx=1
The most important thing to know is that the Austins paid their mortgage. They have receipts and bank statements. They could not afford to hire a lawyer to defend their home and lost everything.
 @Jen Come on..... Jen. Come on....
Jen clearly has more information regarding this case than do you Mis Daisy.Why post if you have nothing intelligent to add?There are hundreds of homes being foreclosed on in PDX, and activists (like lawyers) only take on home foreclosure cases that are defensible, not the case of some slackers who want a hand-out. Why don't you read up on this case?
@Teresa Roberts It's a lost cause preaching to the ignorant and naive people who still believe lenders operate and continue to operate legally. A little effort into researching this crisis would change their minds, but it's far easier to argue an uneducated daft point of view. God help them if they ever fall on hard times, or are victims of predatory lenders.
@Jen If this is true, as you stated, then there is an open and shut law suit against the lender that all lawyers in this particular field would gladly take on the condition of "no fee unless the case is won". I've been through this. Also, the court would not have issued a foreclosure warrant if these people had such documentation as they were given a chance to appear during the foreclosure hearing.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Lawyers don't take contingency cases so eassily. You clearly haven't worked in a law office ever!
@Teresa Roberts I've had 4 contingency cases taken up! All attorney's were very eager to take them. Perhaps it's you that doesn't know what you are talking about? You can't even spell an easy word such as "easily". Keep in mind the money that was loaned by the "criminal" banks is the money we put into our savings accounts and the interest we get on these savings accounts comes from the payment on these loans. In closing, you have no idea where I have worked, showing that you have a tendency to jump to conclusions without any knowledge of what it is that you are typing about.
The Sheriff's office is the enforcement branch of the courts. They have to do their jobs. This is unfortunate for anyone involved, especially if you're having your home repo'ed.
Looks like the Sheriff's Dept. needs to grow a pair and use their 2nd Amendment rights and evict the idiots occupying his office.
This mess was not exactly caused by the banks, but they went along with it and exploited it. It was casused by our wonderful Democratic Congress and Senate when they REQUIRED banks to make non documented loans to anyone who wanted one. You could have a $10K a year income and still purchase an $500K home that had payments higher than your income...notice I said REQUIRED! That has changed now, but the banks are still taking advantage of it. Notice also, that the same people that caused the problem (congess/senate) has done NOTHING to aleviate it, typical of them. Years before the no-doc loans, I lost my income...also lost my house...no-one felt sorry for me, and if I had tried to demonstrate I would have been laughed out of town. Best idea I've heard of yet is for these street people demonstrators to donate to the one losing the house...oh! I forgot...they don't have anything to donate, but if they can force this, they might be able to occupy other un-lived in properties.
WTF ?? Where did you ever get that pile of BS ! There is such a law as "fudiciary responsibility" in financial regulation. The banks clearly went around those regs, thats why they have and are being taken to court AND paying huge fines...get a clue before you make yourself look stupid ! Oh too late !
 @flyingtime flying time - good luck applying that ILLOGIC to some defense you are preplanning - in advance of YOU choosing and picking which laws and legal contracts you want to honor on any given day.Â
Â
Bottom line - no one is FORCED to go into any bank. No one is forced to sign and agree to a legal contract with a bank. There is no defense when someone chooses to not uphold the terms of their legal contract - with blaming any bank.Â
Â
Â
 @englishdaisy  @flyingtime Unless the terms of the contract were fraudulent - then there is recourse, as there is with any fraudulent contract.
 @flyingtime Where did you get your notion that banks were required the make $500,000 loans to people with $10,000 incomes. It's totally wrong.
Â
The banks and lending companies made those loans, but not because they forced to. It's because they wanted to - they could immediately sell the loans to Wall Street, where they would be securitized and sold to investors.
I am a home owner/buyer since my mortgage company owns more of the house than I do. I am also a medical wreck. I have had numerous suprise hospital visits costing a lot of dollars which I do not have. I do, however, have insurances that cover most of these. This is what a responsible home owner does. Why should a lending company "give " houses to those who can't seem to manage their finances in a responsible manner? If you can't afford to make your mortgage payment then you do not deserve to own the house! Stop blaming other people for the problems you have caused for yourself by actions you did not think through! In the signing of mortgage contracts there are 5 pages you sign dedicated to mortgage/medical insurances! If selected, these are included in your monthly payments and are very inexpensive, or at least cheaper than losing a house. But cable TV with all the channels and high speed internet is much more important than paying for the actual house...... The insurances I mentioned cost about the same. I don't want my mortgage interest rates to be raised to help pay for these people's house when they can't pay their own mortgage. And that's just what happens! The Sheriff is just doing his job. If he were to stop then he would be violating the oath he swore when he accepted the job WE elected him to do.
Â
And before those of you whom think I don't know these people's plight, write all your retorts and rebuttals, calling me all kinds of names, I have lived under the Ross Island Bridge/McLaughlin viaduct for a year, was technically homeless for 3 years and have several chronic medical conditions inwhich that kind of life should have killed me. I have been bankrupt, pennieless and lost 3 houses I was purchasing because an exgirlfriend cleaned out my bank account. I have woken up on the street in downtown from the police hauling away the man next to me, who had died from the cold. I have never, NEVER!, blamed anyone but myself for these troubles! I corrected my problems and moved on.Â
It's sad, but this is what happens to people who live beyond their means.
Â
Yes, I do understand their situation. They were not prepared. That's not the sheriff's fault.
 @correct That is not the BANKS FAULT EITHER. If a homeowner expects to illegally steal a home nand occupy it and NOT PAY for living in it - they are punishing a bank unduly and indefensibly - they very same bank that contractually gifted them with their home in the first place.Â
Â
Squatting anarchal homeowners - move on. Rent. Quietly get on with your life. And stop blaming anyone and everyone else. Stop stealing houses you do not OWN.Â
Those people look unstable........
So if sheriffs are not going to uphold gun laws, why should they uphold bank laws? Â Seems odd.
 @Benjamin Schniffle Because the money has spoken.
Congratulations!!!!!!!!! You stumbled on one of the biggest problems facing the anti-firearm group, a bunch of idiots want to make a bunch of laws that make guns illegal. But who will enforce said laws when easily 90% of the enforcers are against the law in question / gun owners themselves. What can you do?
 @Jeepers Because law enforcement has small-weenie syndrome, and carrying a big gun makes them feel more like men.
That has nothing to do with what I'm talking about dumb... Stop projecting, just because your lacking in the trouser department doesn't mean everybody is.
An eviction is a court order the Sheriff and deputies are required to enforce, so these fine people are yelling at the wrong person(s). But if they really want to help families facing eviction, perhaps they could help by paying their mortgages for them for a while. My guess is they aren't willing to do that.. They prefer to carry goofy signs and yell about how unfair life is when you don't pay your bills.
 @StealthActivist If you actually spent any kind of time looking into this you would know that in the case of the Austins, they were fraudulently ripped off.  Both residents (married) got cancer, one of them took a paycut at their job, and still managed to make every single mortgage payment on their house and pay taxes. In 2010 they got a loan modification and continued to make payments and pay taxes when suddenly their lender decided to foreclose on their home based on a false and totally fraudulent claim of non-payment. These foreclosures spreading across the nation aren't cases of people who just don't want to pay for what they have. It's a matter of organized criminals deciding they want to take advantage of people in economically vulnerable situations. The strategy is obviously "Well, they're asking for a loan modification so chances are they can't afford lawyers to defend themselves against us." This could very easily happen to you or your family. Imagine paying off a place that is your home and shelter for years and suddenly having it stolen from you.Â
 @K. Trout I doubt we're seeing a pattern of banks stealing homes from cancer patients, but if it happened in this case, perhaps the protesters could better spend their time helping the couple by paying the attorney's fees, etc., necessary to fight the eviction. If this couple actually paid their mortgage as required, it should be easy to prove their case. The answer is definitely NOT a moratorium on all evictions in Multnomah County, which seemed to be the main demand of the protesters.
Somebody should get a group together to march into these morons homes and demand free dinner.