Woman, 90, shoots self inside foreclosed home

A 90-year-old Akron, Ohio, woman who shot herself as sheriff’s deputies tried to evict her from her foreclosed home became a symbol of the nation’s home mortgage crisis Friday.

Fannie Mae foreclosed on the Akron, Ohio, home of Addie Polk, 90, after acquiring the mortgage in 2007.

Addie Polk is being treated at Akron General Medical Center after shooting herself at least twice in the upper body Wednesday afternoon, her city councilman said.

In 2004, Polk took out a 30-year, 6.375 percent mortgage for $45,620 with a Countrywide Home Loan office in Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio. The same day, she also took out an $11,380 line of credit.

Over the next couple of years Polk missed payments on the 101-year-old home, which she and her late husband purchased in 1970. In 2007, Fannie Mae assumed the mortgage and later filed for foreclosure.

Deputies had tried to serve Polk’s eviction notice more than 30 times before Wednesday’s incident, Sommerville said. She never came to the door, but the notes the deputies left would always disappear, so they knew she was inside and ambulatory, he said

cnn.com/2008/US/10/03/eviction.suicide.attempt/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Now the question is WHY did she take out a mortgage in 2004 on a home that was bought in 1970 and should of more than likely been paid off? Also HOW did she think she was going to pay off the loan and the line of credit if she used it?

Fannie Mae said it will set aside the loan of a woman who shot herself as sheriff’s deputies tried to evict her from her foreclosed home.

So will they forgive more loans if more folks shoot themselves in the head? Why did they wait till she shot herself to forgive the loan?
Who in the end gets shafted for her lack of paying back this loan?

That was my thought. this doesn’t make a good symbol for the mortgage crisis. This is a big non-story, typical of CNN.

your right it doesn’t but it pulls at the heart strings because she is a senior. If she could not afford the home any longer I am sorry she should of sold it and moved to someplace she could afford instead of taking out a loan and a line of credit that she more than likely had no way of repaying to start of!

I notice her mortgage was with Countrywide. They are in a lot of trouble for fraud - ongoing investigations. I have heard comments from folks who used them who were lied to and/or told to lie on their loan applications. The poor woman is old, it was probably very very easy to confuse her about the particulars of the loan. Clearly, she’d rather die than leave her home. The folks who perpetrated these bad loans - many fraudlent as the borrowers were deliberately confused and/or misled - made a fortune and this old woman, and millions of other families, are being evicted. Meanwhile, we bail out the companies who made fortunes off folks such as this elderly woman - who get the blame for being bamboozeled by slick, fast talking loan agents. IMO, this is true injustice. :mad:

She maybe shouldn’t have gotten the loan in the first place, if it was a case of fraud.

The question being WHY did she need a line of credit & mortgage on a house that was bought in 1970? It should of been paid off already.

There could be any number of reasons, such as perhaps she needed money for some unexpectedly high medical bills.

If she took out the money with full knowledge of the risks and free consent, then I would argue that if she gets foreclosed upon, that is just the way life is.

However, if I am a mortgage broker and I have an 86 year old lady in front of me wanting to borrow money, I would make it very clear what she was getting into. If the broker just pushed some papers in front of her, just so he could get his commission, then I would argue that he bears some of the responsibility as well.

Well I would love to hear what SHE has to say (was she scammed etc.). As it stands now she no longer will loose her home, the shot/graze to her head made the bank write it (loan etc.) off.

Whoever is at fault, it probably was a poor business decision to foreclose on a 90 year old lady over a small loan. They probably will spend more on Public Affairs professionals to spin this situation than what they would gain from a foreclosure. And it is not clear that they would get much from a foreclosure. I was at an auction today and nobody even registered to bid against the bank on the property. So now the bank owns a house that could sit for a year before it sells.

What? 56K made not be HUGE but what are you saying–the bank should just forget about getting its money because she is a senior or because it is not a million dollar loan?

:eek: :eek:

I agree that the bank shouldn’t have made a loan if it wasn’t willing to foreclose.

The situation is very sad. Unfortunately, we don’t know why she took out the mortgage. A reverse mortgage, where the bank pays her rather than she paying the bank , should have been the way to go. But we don’t know if that was offered to her.

she must have been optimistic, assuming she intended to pay her debts, she would have had to live to at least 117 years old. now how she intended to pay i dont know. banks really shouldnt give as many home loans as they do, but as soon as they stop someone cries prejudice. i’m afraid this is the result.

This situation is exactly where a reverse mortgage is ideal. The home owner gets to stay in their home and the bank basically is buying the house from them. They don’t have to pay the bank any money - the bank pays them.

A “reverse” mortgage is a loan against your home that you do not have to pay back for as long as you live there. With a reverse mortgage, you can turn the value of your home into cash without having to move or to repay the loan each month. The cash you get from a reverse mortgage can be paid to you in several ways:

* all at once, in a single lump sum of cash;
* as a regular monthly cash advance;
* as a "creditline" account that lets you decide when and how much of your available cash is paid to you; or
* as a combination of these payment methods.

No matter how this loan is paid out to you, you typically don’t have to pay anything back until you die, sell your home, or permanently move out of your home. To be eligible for most reverse mortgages, you must own your home and be 62 years of age or older.

aarp.org/money/revmort/revmort_basics/a2003-03-21-newloan.html

well as someone who has never bought a home, and doesnt plan to for at least 5 more years i did not know that. thanks for teaching me something new.

Hey, you’re welcome. I’ve learned a lot of things here at CAF, I am glad I could share something too.

I had never heard of them either, until my mother (who is retired) mentioned she was thinking of getting one. That got me looking. :slight_smile:

I am just arguing from a position of prudence. The mortality rate of 90 year olds is quite high, so when she dies the bank will get all of their money plus interest, so they are protected from that angle. Second, if they foreclose there are going to be costs associated with that, which may include holding the house vacant for a year. Finally, there is the negative publicity of evicting a 90 year old lady. I am saying that considering all of these issues, a little forebearance may have been the better route.

Fannie May can probably can avoid feeling much effect from the negative publicity.

I would imagine that Fannie needs to avoid the negative publicity just as much as anyone, after all, one of their main bosses was and now particularly is congress. How many phone calls are they going to have to field from local congressmen over this? How much will this cost them in labor time versus how much they gained from the foreclosure?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.