Complaint Review: Ameriquest AMQ AMC - Orange California

You are both a couple of unemployed ex-title company mutts. I mean, let's be honest. If either of you had a job you would not be on here arguing semantics. Anyone in the mortgage industry KNOWS that what was described above is NOT A SHORT SALE. To sit here and whine back and forth makes you both look pathetic.

1. The seller DOES NOT HAVE that remaining 40K. So he cannot pay it! And the second lien holder is NOT going to accept an IOU from the seller. 2. IF the buyer, or the seller, DOES pay that remaining 40K at closing, then THERE IS NO SHORT SALE! OK? 3. The buyer, or at least not THIS buyer, is NOT going to pay that remaining 40K if he has any brains. And if the buyer does pay the extra 40K, see (2.) 4. The second lien holder will NOT accept the 40K hit to facilitate the sale. Why SHOULD they? Why SHOULD they? Give us the reasons!! 5. There are NO reasons for the second lien holder to EVER stop "waiting the situation out" and accept the 40K hit because they have NO carrying cost pressures. If they do, tell us what they are! 6. The person working for the second lien holder who DID accept that 40K hit would ALWAYS have his fellow employees pointing out that he COULD HAVE and SHOULD HAVE held out for that 40K, causing his complete career destruction. This is called "competition for the next promotion", and "competition for job survival". Explain to us how this is not employment reality!!

Rather than repeating my prior post, just consider this (and I'll use your example): A seller owes $260K and the house is valued at $220K and he has a buyer. Unless it is sold on a Contract for Deed (aka Land Contract), the closing attorney orders a title search which finds a 1st mortgage for $200K and a 2nd for $60K. The attorney then requests a payoff from both mortgage companies and the total owed is $260,000. To close the sale and issue a new warranty deed, someone has to pay off the total of the two mortgages. The buyer is paying only $220K, which means the seller has to come up with the additional $40K somewhere because the 2nd won't release their lein until they are paid off. The short sale agreement, in effect, releases the balance of the 2nd mortgage lien and allows a buyer to obtain a clear unencumbered title to the property. A short sale can happen pre-foreclosure when the first notice of default (lis pendens) is filed or at any time in the foreclosure process and even 5 minutes before the sheriff's sale on the courthouse steps. A short sale cannot happen without the agreement of both mortgage companies for the property, even though in this example, the first would be completely paid off. In real life, most of these houses have a lot of deferred maintenance because the owner who fell behind in their mortgage also didn't have the money to maintain the property in good condition. That will mean the buyer has to fund repairs to make the property liveable whether they bought it as a residence or purchased it to flip.

I was posting about a private buyer purchasing a house at a market value below the aggregate of all liens. These are two unrelated cases. Once the house is foreclosed it becomes the property of the foreclosing entity, which will dispose of the property in the fashion that yields the greatest return, and sometimes even a profit, to that foreclosing entity. Using my example numbers of a 220K house value, usually the house owner WILL pay on the first 200K lien because the first lien holder WOULD foreclose for non-payment since their 200K first lien can be fully recovered with foreclosure costs also covered by the remaining 20K of house value, causing the second lien holder to be left out in the cold with nada. Therefore, the house owner can continue using the house IF he continues to pay the first lien holder. But if the 60K second lien is 40K more than the house's current 220K market value (above the first 200K lien plus another 20K to reach the 220K house value) the second lien holder will NOT foreclose BECAUSE they will have great negative equity after their foreclosure costs have eaten up the 20K remaining above the 200K first lien balance leaving them in the hole for their entire 60K, PLUS they will have "invested" an additional 200K that they had to pay to the first lien holder, and they then have a house on their books that they must maintain, protect, and pay taxes on- these are very expensive additional carrying costs. Therefore, the second lien holder will simply wait it out rather than foreclose, and the second lien holder must also approve any sale of the house to any private purchaser [assuming the first lien holder is not foreclosing]. This is the gotcha to the buyer. Therefore, the house owner can continue using the house without paying the second lien holder IF the house owner continues to pay the first lien holder who cannot legally foreclose if the first lien holder is being paid. And my comments about internal politics at the second lien holder stand. Those "cash for your house" buyers prey on homeowners with a lot of house equity, small remaining lien balances or no liens at all, and who have no free money to actually live on. Houses are illiquid.

I was posting about a private buyer purchasing a house at a market value below the aggregate of all liens. These are two unrelated cases. Once the house is foreclosed it becomes the property of the foreclosing entity, which will dispose of the property in the fashion that yields the greatest return, and sometimes even a profit, to that foreclosing entity. Using my example numbers of a 220K house value, usually the house owner WILL pay on the first 200K lien because the first lien holder WOULD foreclose for non-payment since their 200K first lien can be fully recovered with foreclosure costs also covered by the remaining 20K of house value, causing the second lien holder to be left out in the cold with nada. Therefore, the house owner can continue using the house IF he continues to pay the first lien holder. But if the 60K second lien is 40K more than the house's current 220K market value (above the first 200K lien plus another 20K to reach the 220K house value) the second lien holder will NOT foreclose BECAUSE they will have great negative equity after their foreclosure costs have eaten up the 20K remaining above the 200K first lien balance leaving them in the hole for their entire 60K, PLUS they will have "invested" an additional 200K that they had to pay to the first lien holder, and they then have a house on their books that they must maintain, protect, and pay taxes on- these are very expensive additional carrying costs. Therefore, the second lien holder will simply wait it out rather than foreclose, and the second lien holder must also approve any sale of the house to any private purchaser [assuming the first lien holder is not foreclosing]. This is the gotcha to the buyer. Therefore, the house owner can continue using the house without paying the second lien holder IF the house owner continues to pay the first lien holder who cannot legally foreclose if the first lien holder is being paid. And my comments about internal politics at the second lien holder stand. Those "cash for your house" buyers prey on homeowners with a lot of house equity, small remaining lien balances or no liens at all, and who have no free money to actually live on. Houses are illiquid.

I was posting about a private buyer purchasing a house at a market value below the aggregate of all liens. These are two unrelated cases. Once the house is foreclosed it becomes the property of the foreclosing entity, which will dispose of the property in the fashion that yields the greatest return, and sometimes even a profit, to that foreclosing entity. Using my example numbers of a 220K house value, usually the house owner WILL pay on the first 200K lien because the first lien holder WOULD foreclose for non-payment since their 200K first lien can be fully recovered with foreclosure costs also covered by the remaining 20K of house value, causing the second lien holder to be left out in the cold with nada. Therefore, the house owner can continue using the house IF he continues to pay the first lien holder. But if the 60K second lien is 40K more than the house's current 220K market value (above the first 200K lien plus another 20K to reach the 220K house value) the second lien holder will NOT foreclose BECAUSE they will have great negative equity after their foreclosure costs have eaten up the 20K remaining above the 200K first lien balance leaving them in the hole for their entire 60K, PLUS they will have "invested" an additional 200K that they had to pay to the first lien holder, and they then have a house on their books that they must maintain, protect, and pay taxes on- these are very expensive additional carrying costs. Therefore, the second lien holder will simply wait it out rather than foreclose, and the second lien holder must also approve any sale of the house to any private purchaser [assuming the first lien holder is not foreclosing]. This is the gotcha to the buyer. Therefore, the house owner can continue using the house without paying the second lien holder IF the house owner continues to pay the first lien holder who cannot legally foreclose if the first lien holder is being paid. And my comments about internal politics at the second lien holder stand. Those "cash for your house" buyers prey on homeowners with a lot of house equity, small remaining lien balances or no liens at all, and who have no free money to actually live on. Houses are illiquid.

I was posting about a private buyer purchasing a house at a market value below the aggregate of all liens. These are two unrelated cases. Once the house is foreclosed it becomes the property of the foreclosing entity, which will dispose of the property in the fashion that yields the greatest return, and sometimes even a profit, to that foreclosing entity. Using my example numbers of a 220K house value, usually the house owner WILL pay on the first 200K lien because the first lien holder WOULD foreclose for non-payment since their 200K first lien can be fully recovered with foreclosure costs also covered by the remaining 20K of house value, causing the second lien holder to be left out in the cold with nada. Therefore, the house owner can continue using the house IF he continues to pay the first lien holder. But if the 60K second lien is 40K more than the house's current 220K market value (above the first 200K lien plus another 20K to reach the 220K house value) the second lien holder will NOT foreclose BECAUSE they will have great negative equity after their foreclosure costs have eaten up the 20K remaining above the 200K first lien balance leaving them in the hole for their entire 60K, PLUS they will have "invested" an additional 200K that they had to pay to the first lien holder, and they then have a house on their books that they must maintain, protect, and pay taxes on- these are very expensive additional carrying costs. Therefore, the second lien holder will simply wait it out rather than foreclose, and the second lien holder must also approve any sale of the house to any private purchaser [assuming the first lien holder is not foreclosing]. This is the gotcha to the buyer. Therefore, the house owner can continue using the house without paying the second lien holder IF the house owner continues to pay the first lien holder who cannot legally foreclose if the first lien holder is being paid. And my comments about internal politics at the second lien holder stand. Those "cash for your house" buyers prey on homeowners with a lot of house equity, small remaining lien balances or no liens at all, and who have no free money to actually live on. Houses are illiquid.

Short sales happen all of the time. What do you think these "We Buy Houses" guys do daily. They try to negotiate short sales with lenders. When there are 2nd's or PMI on a first, they take more time, but they can be done. If the first is in default and the loss can't be mitigated, they will foreclose. If the value of the house is greater than the default judgement, the 2nd will often pay off the first then foreclose on the 2nd. If it sells at the courthouse, the buyer will be responsible for paying off any liens, including 2nd's or MI. The usual practice is for the 1st to order an appraisal (full interior) with notations made of necessary repairs and any deferred maintenance. They place an as-is value and a repaired value on the house. If the as-is value is greater than the judgement, they will offer to sell short contingent on investor approval. That investor is usually the 2nd or the PMI. Sometimes the 2nd will pay off the judgement and sometimes they will take whatever money is left. The negative part of the short sale for the owner is that any shortfall (say $40K as in your example) is considered income for the seller and they generally get a 1099 for the amount of the shortfall the next January. Then the IRS comes looking for income tax on the 1099 amount. Some lenders instead get a personal judgement against the owner and record it, which generally stops any new credit for the seller for years.

Hopefully the good responses will outweigh the bad ones and you, D and the 2 Thomas's have sure helped. Thank you all for your positive comments. David, I hope you find a buyer for your home real soon. It would be horrible for Ameritheft to get it. I sincerely hope all turns out well for you but I'm sure it will. You take care. For the 2 Thomas's ... I had never heard of a "short sell" before and from the sound of it, I don't want to hear it. That's horrible. I bet someone at AMQ invented that one. HA! Thanks again for the info. It's good to learn yet another thing that we all must be aware of when refinancing a home. For Thomas #2, do you have any information regarding prepayment penalties? Like how to get out of one? Yea right, not with AMQ. But I only have 2 and 1/2 months more to suffer. Thanks again for defending and educating!

as a "short sale". This is BS spread by RE agents during a slow RE market to lure a bargain-oriented buyer into a sale that covers less that the total liens owed. The RE agent will say something like "Gosh, this is my first short sale. You are getting such a bargain!". Yea- its their "first" short sale because short sales do not "close". A short sale is when one of the lienholders accepts less money than what is owed them. If the second lienholder is owed $60K and the first lienholder is owed $200K and you try to buy the house for $220K, the first lienholder won't care but the second lienholder will not sign off the transaction at the closing unless somebody (you, the buyer) signs up to pay off that remaining $40K to the second lienholder. The seller will not have an asset to offer, so the buyer becomes the intended "somebody who signs up to pay off that remaining $40K"... effectively raising your price to $260K. If you were the buyer, would you go for this deal?? But the strategy is that you, the buyer, will have told everyone about your fantastic new house and you will have all your moving plans in motion. Then they pounce on you at the closing with an agreement stipulating that YOU agree to pay off that remaining $40K to the second lienholder. Clever, no? The second lienholder will not take the $40K hit because of internal politics- whomever agrees at the second lienholder to the $40K loss would see their career go up in smoke.

I know someone wrote a response saying Ameriquest has the ability to short sale a loan. Would someone please give all that information again maybe some people could save there homes. Thank YOU

I know someone wrote a response saying Ameriquest has the ability to short sale a loan. Would someone please give all that information again maybe some people could save there homes. Thank YOU

I know someone wrote a response saying Ameriquest has the ability to short sale a loan. Would someone please give all that information again maybe some people could save there homes. Thank YOU

Hey Meglio, why don't you give Kathleen and everyone a break!!!!! Why are you, if you are so succesful, doing on this board in the first place????? I am a disabled Vietnam Veteran who is about to be foreclosed upon by Ameriquest if I cannot sell my home soon. Sure, I wentto Ameriquest because I was in a financial squeeze , but I also expected that they would at least be truthful and honest. Is that too much to ask???? And when is the last time you ever did anything for your fellow human beings and country except ridicule and put people down????? So, get off the board and leave Kathleen and everyone alone!!!! David

Your response was so very nice to read. I thank you and I'm so glad I've helped you. At least you know who NOT to refinance with. As for positive criticism, I can take it. I know I have made wrong choices and some very bad mistakes. And you're right, responding to individuals who are only on here to criticize and put others down is just a waste of time and effort. I didn't come to this site for quite awhile because of this. But it's responses like yours that make posting one's mistake on choosing a company that rips you off is worth it. Yes, I am truly a wronged customer and I only protest too much because of what I've been through with this company. This penalty is only half of it. But, soon my penalty period will expire and I can get away from them. I was just very upset because I was going to refinance with a bank with $500 a month lower payments. Now I have to wait a couple of more months because there is no way I'm giving Ameriscum almost $6,000 to get out now. You are so right about the "well known companies" being the best choice. I work with people who have refinanced with little "mom and pop" mortgage companies and have the very best loan anyone could wish for. I was with (((copmetitor's name deleted - see below))) before and they were wonderful. You may want to check them out. I had a fixed interest rate of 4% and a monthly payment of $545. I didn't realize how good I had it. But another bad choice was to marry someone who I thought I knew after 4 years and found I didn't. Anyway, that's a long story. And yes, I'm angry and will remain this way until I get the heck away from Ameritheft and sue them for all they have stolen from me. Again, thank you for responding and being a decent person. I wish you luck when you refinance. Check out (((ROR deleted))). I believe you would be treated fairly and probably get a decent interest rate. They don't charge hidden fees, rape you at closing and lie through their teeth. GOOD LUCK! sorry, allowing you to give a competitors name would instigate others to just file against their competition, to only come back later to suggest their company your comments on this policy are welcome! CLICK here to see why Rip-off Report, as a matter of policy, deleted either a phone number, link or e-mail address from this Report.

Kathleen, This response offers both support and 'hopefully' positive critisism. To explain the positive critisism part, shall I just say that when dealing with an offensive party, you should remember that you "will attract more flies with vinegar than with..." I haven't been able to search individuals' responses on this site. Just can't find the right keys I guess. I don't know if the few responses to this post are warranted or if they are reactions from individuals whose feel that their livlihoods or hobbies are threatened. I don't know whether or not you are a truly wronged consumer or someone who "doth protest too much." The way this site is set up, I really don't know. But, I will tell you this. From my experiences of checking out the "lending industry" and from what I have read about this corporation, you have ever right to be hoppin' mad. I understand anger. I can't hit on every aspect of your report. But, as a consumer who found this site while checking out different mortgage companies and trying to determine who would do the best for ME (Yes, I understand that lenders aren't making loans for free.) I have learned that even the well known names are not the ones to go with. I 'googled' "consumer complaints' mortgage -fill in mortgager name-" This search resulted after a few conversations with a several 'lenders/brokers' that advertised on the web. Never again. Your legitimate complaints and other complaints have shown me that maybe it is worth it to pay around .25% interest (some distant lenders offered slightly less in the interest rate but with points, and all distant lenders asked MUCH higher closing fees) more on my loan that is obtained from my local financer. I will not fall prey to lenders that can only say that they: "are leaders", "close more loans..." "Why should you shop around? I've done the shopping for you?" I wish I could remember all the CRAP that I heard while shopping. Your post may have angered or estranged others. I don't care about their feelings. This is about money. Your money. If someone is trying to take more money than you agreed to pay, BE ANGRY. Thank you for your report. It did much to protect me.

I had noticed their commercials and received information in the mail. I was approved for a loan at my bank but it was going to take more time and I needed to refinance. Also, at the time, interest rates were not that great anyway. So that's why I refinanced with this scumbag company. I sure wish I had gone on with the bank loan because I sure wouldn't have had all this grief but it does no good to "what if".

Even people who lost their home to Ameriquest are making fun of Kathy!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What made you decide to use them? I used a local broker who had been recommended to me by a reliable source. The final interest rate might be 0.1% higher than the best deal that had been quoted on Bankrate, but at least I could stop by and talk to them to get a warm and fuzzy feeling about using them before I proceeded. And the entire process was as smooth as a baby's bottom. The mortgage bank is also in SC and has been really nice, too. The attorney I used had another client who had problems using an e-mortgage company. He summarized it as "that mortgage company doesn't understand this market". I never did use any of the firms on Bankrate.

Yea Ken, I'm very angry. I have been screwed by this company for almost 3 years so I have a right to be angry. I HAVE hired an attorney but the system is very slow so I can't forget about it just yet. When I first came to this site, I did not pick fights. I posted my story to see if others had been treated the same and to learn if other customers could offer advice. I was bombarded with employees/ex-employees slamming me over and over again. So what I did was join the game. You see, it is actually great therapy for me. I vent and take out my frustrations. But you have put me down just as their employees have done in the past so does that make YOU any better than them? If you feel I represent victims in a bad way, that is your opinion. I have attempted to deal with this rotten company in a pleasant way and it didn't work. I tried to speak in a civilized manner to them, and some people on this site, and that didn't work. So I have, yes indeed, resorted to other methods. I want NO fight. I want to see this company go down as they have put their customers. I'm sorry they took your home. They almost got mine also. But if you are not angry about that, well, you must be very timid, vulnerable and have no backbone to fight for what you believe in. If many people, like yourself, don't want to associate with me, that is your and their choice. If this is so, you shouldn't have responded. And I will not stop. Everyday I get yet another surprise regarding my account so no, I will not stop for you or anyone else. If you don't like what I have to say, then don't read my postings and don't respond. As for Craig, the ever negative responding one ... YOU get a grip. If you had read my posting better, you would have noticed I said I knew nothing of this penalty. What I was SAYING was I think it is unreal that a company who tacks on all their crappy fees and continually increases interest rates has already been compensated even if a customer leaves their pitiful company to refinance elsewhere. Your explanation was feeble and lame. Your explanation is also incorrect. I have requested many payoff statements throughout the 3 years I have been screwed and your explanation of paying the same amount the SECOND day of the loan is way out there. I was given NO choice of a higher interest rate or this ignorant penalty as I was not informed of it at all. Again, you only read what you wish to respond with your inconsiderate comments. I have never claimed to be high and mighty as you seem to think. I believe you should save that comment for yourself as you DO act this way. I do not throw out accusations (that word is spelled with TWO C's) without researching them first for your information. Yes, you are correct that I do throw out FACTS. Thank you. I mentioned in my posting that I, hopefully, would get intelligent responses but that sure didn't happen. And Craig, don't try to enlighten me again on what YOU believe is fact because it only makes you look ridiculous and juvenile.

Yea Ken, I'm very angry. I have been screwed by this company for almost 3 years so I have a right to be angry. I HAVE hired an attorney but the system is very slow so I can't forget about it just yet. When I first came to this site, I did not pick fights. I posted my story to see if others had been treated the same and to learn if other customers could offer advice. I was bombarded with employees/ex-employees slamming me over and over again. So what I did was join the game. You see, it is actually great therapy for me. I vent and take out my frustrations. But you have put me down just as their employees have done in the past so does that make YOU any better than them? If you feel I represent victims in a bad way, that is your opinion. I have attempted to deal with this rotten company in a pleasant way and it didn't work. I tried to speak in a civilized manner to them, and some people on this site, and that didn't work. So I have, yes indeed, resorted to other methods. I want NO fight. I want to see this company go down as they have put their customers. I'm sorry they took your home. They almost got mine also. But if you are not angry about that, well, you must be very timid, vulnerable and have no backbone to fight for what you believe in. If many people, like yourself, don't want to associate with me, that is your and their choice. If this is so, you shouldn't have responded. And I will not stop. Everyday I get yet another surprise regarding my account so no, I will not stop for you or anyone else. If you don't like what I have to say, then don't read my postings and don't respond. As for Craig, the ever negative responding one ... YOU get a grip. If you had read my posting better, you would have noticed I said I knew nothing of this penalty. What I was SAYING was I think it is unreal that a company who tacks on all their crappy fees and continually increases interest rates has already been compensated even if a customer leaves their pitiful company to refinance elsewhere. Your explanation was feeble and lame. Your explanation is also incorrect. I have requested many payoff statements throughout the 3 years I have been screwed and your explanation of paying the same amount the SECOND day of the loan is way out there. I was given NO choice of a higher interest rate or this ignorant penalty as I was not informed of it at all. Again, you only read what you wish to respond with your inconsiderate comments. I have never claimed to be high and mighty as you seem to think. I believe you should save that comment for yourself as you DO act this way. I do not throw out accusations (that word is spelled with TWO C's) without researching them first for your information. Yes, you are correct that I do throw out FACTS. Thank you. I mentioned in my posting that I, hopefully, would get intelligent responses but that sure didn't happen. And Craig, don't try to enlighten me again on what YOU believe is fact because it only makes you look ridiculous and juvenile.

Yea Ken, I'm very angry. I have been screwed by this company for almost 3 years so I have a right to be angry. I HAVE hired an attorney but the system is very slow so I can't forget about it just yet. When I first came to this site, I did not pick fights. I posted my story to see if others had been treated the same and to learn if other customers could offer advice. I was bombarded with employees/ex-employees slamming me over and over again. So what I did was join the game. You see, it is actually great therapy for me. I vent and take out my frustrations. But you have put me down just as their employees have done in the past so does that make YOU any better than them? If you feel I represent victims in a bad way, that is your opinion. I have attempted to deal with this rotten company in a pleasant way and it didn't work. I tried to speak in a civilized manner to them, and some people on this site, and that didn't work. So I have, yes indeed, resorted to other methods. I want NO fight. I want to see this company go down as they have put their customers. I'm sorry they took your home. They almost got mine also. But if you are not angry about that, well, you must be very timid, vulnerable and have no backbone to fight for what you believe in. If many people, like yourself, don't want to associate with me, that is your and their choice. If this is so, you shouldn't have responded. And I will not stop. Everyday I get yet another surprise regarding my account so no, I will not stop for you or anyone else. If you don't like what I have to say, then don't read my postings and don't respond. As for Craig, the ever negative responding one ... YOU get a grip. If you had read my posting better, you would have noticed I said I knew nothing of this penalty. What I was SAYING was I think it is unreal that a company who tacks on all their crappy fees and continually increases interest rates has already been compensated even if a customer leaves their pitiful company to refinance elsewhere. Your explanation was feeble and lame. Your explanation is also incorrect. I have requested many payoff statements throughout the 3 years I have been screwed and your explanation of paying the same amount the SECOND day of the loan is way out there. I was given NO choice of a higher interest rate or this ignorant penalty as I was not informed of it at all. Again, you only read what you wish to respond with your inconsiderate comments. I have never claimed to be high and mighty as you seem to think. I believe you should save that comment for yourself as you DO act this way. I do not throw out accusations (that word is spelled with TWO C's) without researching them first for your information. Yes, you are correct that I do throw out FACTS. Thank you. I mentioned in my posting that I, hopefully, would get intelligent responses but that sure didn't happen. And Craig, don't try to enlighten me again on what YOU believe is fact because it only makes you look ridiculous and juvenile.

Yea Ken, I'm very angry. I have been screwed by this company for almost 3 years so I have a right to be angry. I HAVE hired an attorney but the system is very slow so I can't forget about it just yet. When I first came to this site, I did not pick fights. I posted my story to see if others had been treated the same and to learn if other customers could offer advice. I was bombarded with employees/ex-employees slamming me over and over again. So what I did was join the game. You see, it is actually great therapy for me. I vent and take out my frustrations. But you have put me down just as their employees have done in the past so does that make YOU any better than them? If you feel I represent victims in a bad way, that is your opinion. I have attempted to deal with this rotten company in a pleasant way and it didn't work. I tried to speak in a civilized manner to them, and some people on this site, and that didn't work. So I have, yes indeed, resorted to other methods. I want NO fight. I want to see this company go down as they have put their customers. I'm sorry they took your home. They almost got mine also. But if you are not angry about that, well, you must be very timid, vulnerable and have no backbone to fight for what you believe in. If many people, like yourself, don't want to associate with me, that is your and their choice. If this is so, you shouldn't have responded. And I will not stop. Everyday I get yet another surprise regarding my account so no, I will not stop for you or anyone else. If you don't like what I have to say, then don't read my postings and don't respond. As for Craig, the ever negative responding one ... YOU get a grip. If you had read my posting better, you would have noticed I said I knew nothing of this penalty. What I was SAYING was I think it is unreal that a company who tacks on all their crappy fees and continually increases interest rates has already been compensated even if a customer leaves their pitiful company to refinance elsewhere. Your explanation was feeble and lame. Your explanation is also incorrect. I have requested many payoff statements throughout the 3 years I have been screwed and your explanation of paying the same amount the SECOND day of the loan is way out there. I was given NO choice of a higher interest rate or this ignorant penalty as I was not informed of it at all. Again, you only read what you wish to respond with your inconsiderate comments. I have never claimed to be high and mighty as you seem to think. I believe you should save that comment for yourself as you DO act this way. I do not throw out accusations (that word is spelled with TWO C's) without researching them first for your information. Yes, you are correct that I do throw out FACTS. Thank you. I mentioned in my posting that I, hopefully, would get intelligent responses but that sure didn't happen. And Craig, don't try to enlighten me again on what YOU believe is fact because it only makes you look ridiculous and juvenile.

GET A GRIP. What you read about a prepayment is halfway true. they charge one because when the company lends you money they expect to make a certain percent back on their investment. yes, they are investing in you!! No one is lending money from the good of their hearts. SO, with that said this is how a prepayment penalty works. ok, I am going to lend you money. I want to make at least 2-3% of the loan balance on this loan for my own investment purposes...so if you refinance out of my loan early, I don't make the money on it, so I'll charge you x$ of your loan amount if you want to get out early as a penalty. This is because I already calculated that in 3 years, I would make x amount of money. That is how much I am going to make off of lending you money regardless of the fact that you refinance out of my loan. Your prepayment percentage stays the same throughout the prepay period. Therefore it was in your best interest to refinance out of it earlier, because you would have paid the same amount of a prepayment the 2nd day of your loan than in your 2nd year. Basically, your prepayment penalty doesn't automatically decrease over time. It is a fixed percentage. That is usually why you have a choice when you are in the process, either have no prepayment penalty and a higher interest rate, or a prepay with a lower interest rate. There ARE prepay penalties however, that do decrease over time, usually from 3% decreasing 1% every year, but AMC doesn't offer that. So don't get all high and mighty, throwing out all of these acusations and "facts"...

Including myself, as they took my home. But honestly, I can't think of one person that is as angry as you are Kathleen. You should do yourself and your family a favor and hire a lawyer and forget about it. Being angry and bitter and going on websites to pick fights with people is not the way to cope with your situation. I see that people probably don't want to respond with you because they see that what you WANT is an argument or a fight. PLEASE, that is not what this resource is for. This website makes constructive changes in the world of business fraud. You are simply using the bandwidth to pick fights. I have my own problems with Ameriquest but this is not the way to deal with them. Stooping to the level of name-calling and bickering makes you just as bad as Ameriquest. I have read the stories of hundreds of people who have been ripped off by AMQ - just like me. And like me, they got it handed to them pretty bad. But unlike us, you are representing us victims in a very bad way. We can all see you want a fight Kathleen. If you are that angry and bored, please do something else. You make us all look bad. You speak in angry fragments and you don't make any salient points. There are many of us here that don't want to be associated with you, so please stop.