- Joined
- Jun 24, 2020
What feels like a lifetime ago, Rekieta covered a guy named Chandler Halderson who murdered his parents when they found out he wasn't going to college or getting his whatever-bullshit dream job. Hopefully Nick isn't too inspired.
Nicholas Robert Rekieta / Rekieta "Law" / Actually Criminal / @NickRekieta - Polysubstance enthusiast, "Lawtuber" turned Dabbleverse streamer, swinger, "whitebread ass nigga", snuffs animals for fun, visits 🇯🇲 BBC resorts. Legally a cuckold who lost his license to practice law. Wife's bod worth $50. The normies even know.
- Thread starter Himedall All-seeing Waifu
- Start date
-
🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2023
A "pasture of shame" so to speak. A place for legendary lolcows that are just too dumb for even the LOTY contest. Population: Chris Chan and Nick Rekieta.
I might be voting for Erriot Dong-Long-Gone, but none of our favorites are going to have a chance unless Rekieta is removed from the running.
Also, Null might be retarded. I'm 99% sure this isn't a reverse mortgage, just a regular mortgage. A reverse mortgage basically never gets to foreclosure when the loan value is less than the value of the house and the borrower is alive and still lives in the house - there's no monthly payment on a reverse mortgage that can be missed (the bank pays you every month out of your home equity) so the only time a foreclosure can happen is if you break a contract term.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2019
I wanted to take a stab at this since it seems like this didn't get answered.
When you borrow money to buy a house, it's called a "mortgage." It's a fancy word for "a loan for a lot of money, secured by the piece of property that money paid for." Along with that mortgage (or "bank note") comes a lien -- the lender has first (legal) dibs on any cash transaction involving the property. They don't own it -- you do (title's in your name and everything) -- but you can't transfer title (i.e. sell it or give it away) until the lien is satisfied. Paying off the mortgage/bank note satisfies that lien automatically.
In fact all that lien and title stuff is done semi-automatically by local government and pushed along by whatever "title company" facilitated your purchase of the home in the first place.
The bottom line is when your property has a mortgage (or more than one), you owe the lender the amount you agreed to pay, and they have several rights related to your property even though you legally own it. If you sell the house because you want to, someone (you or the buyer) has to pay the remainder of the mortgage to satisfy the lien. The other major right you grant the lender is that of "foreclosure." If you stop paying the mortgage, the lender has the right to foreclose -- declare the bank note immediately due and payable in full (instead of going through the agreed-upon 30 years of payments).
Note that it takes awhile to reach this stage. It usually takes at least a couple of months of STRONGLY WORDED LETTERS before the lender actually forecloses (because it's expensive and a pain in the ass for them -- it really is the action of last resort). Also note missing one payment (or paying a few days late) does not generally allow the lender to foreclose so long as you don't fall too far behind. It can royally fuck up your credit though.
Eventually though the lender gets sick of waiting and really does foreclose. At this point, your credit is in the toilet (congrats!) and they've decided it's time to fire the main cannon.
There are three resolutions to this situation. Generally speaking, even up to the date of the auction, if you pony up the cash (in full) and give it to the bank, they'll say "aight, we're good" and everything cleans up nicely. You keep the house (you paid it off, after all) and no auction happens.
Secondly, you could negotiate with the lender. "Some money" is almost always better than "no money," so despite the portrayal of dustbowl era banks and their predatory managers literally burning people out of their homes, modern lenders are much more eager to find an alternative to foreclosure even if it means extending the length of the mortgage or even just refinancing completely to achieve lower payments or whatever. Telling a bank "I'm almost broke but here's what I have" is less of a hail Mary than it might sound. You might end up with a lower mortgage payment, a ten minute struggle session while the lender lectures you, and more debt on your shoulders, but you'll still be in your house.
The final option is what it looks like the Rekietas are going with -- throw up your hands, stop paying anything, and let the legal process grind away at it.
'member I mentioned what a foreclosure technically is -- "calling the bank note due in full"? That's the lender (bank) pulling their final, ultimate lever of power against the borrower. "Payment of $350,000 in cash or wire is due by February 15, 2025. If payment in full is not received by that date, we have (and are exercising) the right to sell the property as-is for whatever we can get for it, and if that doesn't cover the payment, you're still on the hook for the rest."
At some point along this process (it involves filing for foreclosure -- i.e. suing you in court) the property's title is transferred to the lienholder (the lender) because you're in default, haven't made it right, and the court thinks you're not going to be salvaging things. At the time the auction itself happens, the lender (or its agent) is usually the owner of record and it's not your property anymore.
That's the part where the sheriff gets involved. They can't really auction your house if you're still wandering around inside. Your stuff can happily go along with the property in the sale, so the sheriff isn't there to empty the house or clear the property; he's just there to drag your asses out so the auction can proceed in peace. After all, you're not the lawful owner anymore and the landlord has effectively "evicted" you -- the sheriff is there to enforce it.
You're politely escorted off the property (unless you want to make an entertaining show of it for the neighbors) and the sheriff's office then conducts a property auction. It's done differently everywhere. Usually it's done on some shady clearinghouse which only certain people are privy to. It's "technically" public, but it's a very scummy business and it takes a lot of effort and chutzpah to gain reliable access to foreclosure auctions.
If a property actually reaches the auction stage, whoever winds up buying it stands a good chance of getting it for a steal. "Auction" means "the bank wants what it can get for it and just wants it gone" so when you hear someone bragging about buying a property for well under its fair market value, this is probably how they did it. At auction, "borrowers" need not apply. It's cash on the barrelhead or fuck off.
The auction winner pays (in cash) the winning bid, and the property's title is transferred to the winner once the funds have moved to wherever the original lender wants them to go. As far as "your" property is concerned, it's over and done. Sold to someone else and unburdened by a lien. If the house sold for less than the mortgage amount (say you owed $300k but the house only sold for $200k), you still owe the difference to the lender (i.e. you're still on the hook for $100k). Of course, it's on them to come and collect it. Amusingly this can require them to sue you again to enforce the judgment.
As viciously harsh as this sounds for the borrower, there are a couple bits of silver lining. First, if all of the above happens but the house is sold for more than you owed, you generally get the difference (less legal and attorney fees, of course) back. Second, it takes months even for an expedited and defaulted foreclosure to go through. If you actually show up to fight it or even just to drag your feet on it, you can stretch a foreclosure out a long time. The bank will eventually win and your credit will be in tatters, but that's to be expected after foreclosure anyway, so some people reason "fuck it, I'll just stop paying the mortgage and spend the next year or so looking for a solution while I drag them through foreclosure."
Then there's the fun situation where the in-default (foreclosed-upon) owner shows up at the auction and buys back his own house at a steep discount by outbidding everyone else. I think that's prohibited by law in some places but don't know for sure. It's still really funny though.
In fact all that lien and title stuff is done semi-automatically by local government and pushed along by whatever "title company" facilitated your purchase of the home in the first place.
The bottom line is when your property has a mortgage (or more than one), you owe the lender the amount you agreed to pay, and they have several rights related to your property even though you legally own it. If you sell the house because you want to, someone (you or the buyer) has to pay the remainder of the mortgage to satisfy the lien. The other major right you grant the lender is that of "foreclosure." If you stop paying the mortgage, the lender has the right to foreclose -- declare the bank note immediately due and payable in full (instead of going through the agreed-upon 30 years of payments).
Note that it takes awhile to reach this stage. It usually takes at least a couple of months of STRONGLY WORDED LETTERS before the lender actually forecloses (because it's expensive and a pain in the ass for them -- it really is the action of last resort). Also note missing one payment (or paying a few days late) does not generally allow the lender to foreclose so long as you don't fall too far behind. It can royally fuck up your credit though.
Eventually though the lender gets sick of waiting and really does foreclose. At this point, your credit is in the toilet (congrats!) and they've decided it's time to fire the main cannon.
There are three resolutions to this situation. Generally speaking, even up to the date of the auction, if you pony up the cash (in full) and give it to the bank, they'll say "aight, we're good" and everything cleans up nicely. You keep the house (you paid it off, after all) and no auction happens.
Secondly, you could negotiate with the lender. "Some money" is almost always better than "no money," so despite the portrayal of dustbowl era banks and their predatory managers literally burning people out of their homes, modern lenders are much more eager to find an alternative to foreclosure even if it means extending the length of the mortgage or even just refinancing completely to achieve lower payments or whatever. Telling a bank "I'm almost broke but here's what I have" is less of a hail Mary than it might sound. You might end up with a lower mortgage payment, a ten minute struggle session while the lender lectures you, and more debt on your shoulders, but you'll still be in your house.
The final option is what it looks like the Rekietas are going with -- throw up your hands, stop paying anything, and let the legal process grind away at it.
'member I mentioned what a foreclosure technically is -- "calling the bank note due in full"? That's the lender (bank) pulling their final, ultimate lever of power against the borrower. "Payment of $350,000 in cash or wire is due by February 15, 2025. If payment in full is not received by that date, we have (and are exercising) the right to sell the property as-is for whatever we can get for it, and if that doesn't cover the payment, you're still on the hook for the rest."
At some point along this process (it involves filing for foreclosure -- i.e. suing you in court) the property's title is transferred to the lienholder (the lender) because you're in default, haven't made it right, and the court thinks you're not going to be salvaging things. At the time the auction itself happens, the lender (or its agent) is usually the owner of record and it's not your property anymore.
That's the part where the sheriff gets involved. They can't really auction your house if you're still wandering around inside. Your stuff can happily go along with the property in the sale, so the sheriff isn't there to empty the house or clear the property; he's just there to drag your asses out so the auction can proceed in peace. After all, you're not the lawful owner anymore and the landlord has effectively "evicted" you -- the sheriff is there to enforce it.
You're politely escorted off the property (unless you want to make an entertaining show of it for the neighbors) and the sheriff's office then conducts a property auction. It's done differently everywhere. Usually it's done on some shady clearinghouse which only certain people are privy to. It's "technically" public, but it's a very scummy business and it takes a lot of effort and chutzpah to gain reliable access to foreclosure auctions.
If a property actually reaches the auction stage, whoever winds up buying it stands a good chance of getting it for a steal. "Auction" means "the bank wants what it can get for it and just wants it gone" so when you hear someone bragging about buying a property for well under its fair market value, this is probably how they did it. At auction, "borrowers" need not apply. It's cash on the barrelhead or fuck off.
The auction winner pays (in cash) the winning bid, and the property's title is transferred to the winner once the funds have moved to wherever the original lender wants them to go. As far as "your" property is concerned, it's over and done. Sold to someone else and unburdened by a lien. If the house sold for less than the mortgage amount (say you owed $300k but the house only sold for $200k), you still owe the difference to the lender (i.e. you're still on the hook for $100k). Of course, it's on them to come and collect it. Amusingly this can require them to sue you again to enforce the judgment.
As viciously harsh as this sounds for the borrower, there are a couple bits of silver lining. First, if all of the above happens but the house is sold for more than you owed, you generally get the difference (less legal and attorney fees, of course) back. Second, it takes months even for an expedited and defaulted foreclosure to go through. If you actually show up to fight it or even just to drag your feet on it, you can stretch a foreclosure out a long time. The bank will eventually win and your credit will be in tatters, but that's to be expected after foreclosure anyway, so some people reason "fuck it, I'll just stop paying the mortgage and spend the next year or so looking for a solution while I drag them through foreclosure."
Then there's the fun situation where the in-default (foreclosed-upon) owner shows up at the auction and buys back his own house at a steep discount by outbidding everyone else. I think that's prohibited by law in some places but don't know for sure. It's still really funny though.
.ETA:
Ah, is this like how they avoid giving Game of the Year awards to anything decent by making sure all the shoe-ins get snubbed?
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2016
I resemble that remark!
There are two and a half (more details below) types of bankruptcy Rekieta could request. Any of these forms would halt all collection actions, including the foreclosure, until the stay is lifted. This happens automatically when the bankruptcy is concluded and could happen earlier if whoever is responsible for the foreclosure files a motion for the court. At least in DSP's bankruptcy the motion came from the bank rather than the county sheriff because in Connecticut (where Phil defaulted on his mortgage) foreclosure is filed by the bank while the sheriff's office is responsible for executing the foreclosure and selling the property. Additionally creditors can object to the discharge either in whole (i.e. have the bankruptcy dismissed) or in part (i.e. making sure their claim is not discharged). Given that malicious injury is exempt from discharge, Montagraph could file an objection here (I know there has not been a verdict in his libel claim against Nick yet but contingent/anticipated debts like this do get included in bankruptcy filings).
In Chapter 7 he would have to surrender anything that is not protected by a specific exemption in exchange for nearly all his unsecured debts being discharged. The big two exceptions from Nick's perspective are taxes and (potentially) any money he ends up owing Montagraph. He would have the choice of reaffirming secured loans (i.e. keep the property and commit to paying the mortgage/loan) or rejecting them (surrendering the collateral and discharging the debt). Note that surrendering property which secures an underwater loan discharges the loan in full, not just the value of the collateral. There are limits on income but between Nick's large family size (kids count here) and dwindling superchats he would most likely qualify unless there are undisclosed income streams (which would raise the question why he defaulted on the mortgage in the first place).
One other important aspect is how a home is treated - there is a 'homestead exemption' for a principal residence. If the equity in the debtor's homestead is over the exemption s/he must sell in exchange for a check for the home equity. There is no allowance for extenuating circumstances. Minnesota's homestead exemption is a flat $450k while this post suggests the outstanding balance on the mortgage was $307k and this Zillow listing estimates the value at $845k. This works out to equity of about $538k . . . but Zillow is notorious for getting these values wrong. My gut says Nick is more likely than not to lose the house in Chapter 7 but it's not a given.
This is the kind of bankruptcy Phil got - he got around income limits by writing off losses from a WWE gacha he played on his own time as business expenses, and used what can only be called creative math to keep his home equity under the limit.
In Chapter 13 Nick would have to put a fixed amount of money a month, equal to his disposable income at the time he filed, towards a payment plan. Once he completes the payment plan, most likely lasting five years, his debts will be considered settled. This comes with laxer limits on income and greater ability to keep property compared to Chapter 7. That said there is an upper limit on debt for Chapter 13 and courts have very little tolerance for missed or partial payments in Chapter 13. Unless Nick artificially deflates his disposable income this is probably a bad idea in his situation given his erratic but overall declining income.
If Nick's income exceeds the Chapter 7 limit and his debt exceeds the Chapter 13 cutoff he could file for Chapter 11 instead. This is mostly used by businesses because individuals can file for Chapter 13 unless their debts exceed $2.75 million - the only individual Chapter 11s I can name off the top of my head are Marc Randazza and Rudy Giuliani, and those two fucked around and found out in ways Nick can only dream of. Think of Chapter 11 like Chapter 13's bigger, meaner brother - the overall principles + framework (debtor keeps most of his property in exchange for committing to a payment plan) is still there but a Chapter 11 payment plan is subject to review and approval by creditors. Just like above, his income is not stable enough to make Chapter 11 a smart move unless he does some creative and borderline fraudulent accounting.
In Chapter 7 he would have to surrender anything that is not protected by a specific exemption in exchange for nearly all his unsecured debts being discharged. The big two exceptions from Nick's perspective are taxes and (potentially) any money he ends up owing Montagraph. He would have the choice of reaffirming secured loans (i.e. keep the property and commit to paying the mortgage/loan) or rejecting them (surrendering the collateral and discharging the debt). Note that surrendering property which secures an underwater loan discharges the loan in full, not just the value of the collateral. There are limits on income but between Nick's large family size (kids count here) and dwindling superchats he would most likely qualify unless there are undisclosed income streams (which would raise the question why he defaulted on the mortgage in the first place).
One other important aspect is how a home is treated - there is a 'homestead exemption' for a principal residence. If the equity in the debtor's homestead is over the exemption s/he must sell in exchange for a check for the home equity. There is no allowance for extenuating circumstances. Minnesota's homestead exemption is a flat $450k while this post suggests the outstanding balance on the mortgage was $307k and this Zillow listing estimates the value at $845k. This works out to equity of about $538k . . . but Zillow is notorious for getting these values wrong. My gut says Nick is more likely than not to lose the house in Chapter 7 but it's not a given.
This is the kind of bankruptcy Phil got - he got around income limits by writing off losses from a WWE gacha he played on his own time as business expenses, and used what can only be called creative math to keep his home equity under the limit.
In Chapter 13 Nick would have to put a fixed amount of money a month, equal to his disposable income at the time he filed, towards a payment plan. Once he completes the payment plan, most likely lasting five years, his debts will be considered settled. This comes with laxer limits on income and greater ability to keep property compared to Chapter 7. That said there is an upper limit on debt for Chapter 13 and courts have very little tolerance for missed or partial payments in Chapter 13. Unless Nick artificially deflates his disposable income this is probably a bad idea in his situation given his erratic but overall declining income.
If Nick's income exceeds the Chapter 7 limit and his debt exceeds the Chapter 13 cutoff he could file for Chapter 11 instead. This is mostly used by businesses because individuals can file for Chapter 13 unless their debts exceed $2.75 million - the only individual Chapter 11s I can name off the top of my head are Marc Randazza and Rudy Giuliani, and those two fucked around and found out in ways Nick can only dream of. Think of Chapter 11 like Chapter 13's bigger, meaner brother - the overall principles + framework (debtor keeps most of his property in exchange for committing to a payment plan) is still there but a Chapter 11 payment plan is subject to review and approval by creditors. Just like above, his income is not stable enough to make Chapter 11 a smart move unless he does some creative and borderline fraudulent accounting.
ETA
Link to Bankruptcy FAQ from the DSP Board
Link to Foreclosure Thread on DSP Board
Link to Lolcow & Lolcow LLP Thread on Phil's Bankruptcy
Link to CourtListener Docket for Phil's Bankruptcy
ETA x2: If Nick wants he could drag out a bankruptcy for months, maybe even a solid year-plus, with a combination of obstinacy and malicious compliance. This could very well last into 2026 and I would not rule out things spilling into 2027.
Last edited:
Mike Stoklasas Spock Ears
Resident white trash tattoo + vag wash expert
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2021
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2019
And this nigger still pretends he has a Rumble deal.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2024
That's eerily familiar to Grant Amato, the man who attempted to pin a murder suicide of his parents on his brother in a triple murder, but failed in the pinning portion of the plan. His family was cutting him off from paypigging some foreign cam girl.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2020
Jim didn't lose his own home though.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2019
>Reverse mortgage
If it was a reverse mortgage the bank would be PAYING HIM every month.
It's just a normal mortgage or home equity loan. He put his home up for collateral for a lump some of cash. And he was supposed to have been paying it back every month. But he is a crackhead so he didnt.
Reverse mortgage is a thing old boomers get. They get a payment FROM THE BANK every month to maintain their boomer lifestyle and when they die the bank just owns the house. The sooner you die the better it is for the bank. If you get a reverse mortgage your accepting the bank will own the home in the end, and fuck handing down anything your kids.
If it was a reverse mortgage the bank would be PAYING HIM every month.
It's just a normal mortgage or home equity loan. He put his home up for collateral for a lump some of cash. And he was supposed to have been paying it back every month. But he is a crackhead so he didnt.
Reverse mortgage is a thing old boomers get. They get a payment FROM THE BANK every month to maintain their boomer lifestyle and when they die the bank just owns the house. The sooner you die the better it is for the bank. If you get a reverse mortgage your accepting the bank will own the home in the end, and fuck handing down anything your kids.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2024
True, but he didn't have one to lose at the time. I will concur that this still gives Rackets a L that is several orders of magnitude bigger than Jim's.
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2016
You also need an exorcist and various African Wizards to expel the demons.
I'm voting for skelly or anyone but BMJ. Fuent would be a good pick.
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2024
His entire life was pretend until he had "his own" money. Turns out nothing was ever what it seemed with Ricky Rackets the Rail Queer.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2021
People often mistake acting erratic for being "quirky" and "charming", Kayla is such a case.
1. Buy the Balldo Bunker
2. Felt Nick
3. Play up the urban legend/mythos of the insanity that occured there, since now even the normies know about this whole deal
4. Turn it into B&B/AirBnB as a getaway spot
5. Hire Nick as groundskeeper, he can live in the small house and have steady work
6. Profit from AirBnB
7. Use money for site
8. Every day is Pizza Day
I would still say the lifetime award is still in CWC's grasp, but fuck, Chris is acting relatively normal rn, Nick might just clinch it
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
Remember, this retard is still smugposting while desperately trying to sell his Silent Hill hell house and having his actual home foreclosed upon. That's literally what a faggot loser he is.
What a joke of a man!
What a joke of a man!
Cheese Balls
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2024
There should be a "2 term limit" for LOTY, just like the president. My boy BMJ can win in 2025 when he gets out of prison.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2024
You are missing step 1.5 . Step 1.5 is invest hundreds of thousands in code compliance and drug damage cleanup.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2019
Another more recent one (2021) is Chandler Halderson - lied to his family about being in college, working etc.
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2019
I wonder if Mommy Moneybags knows about this yet. Seems she would have to since it was in the paper and you can’t keep shit secret in a small town.
Honored guest
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2019
Has anyone figured out a timeline with him getting the reverse mortgage and making any big purchases/major life events? Its possible that it all went up his nose, but taking out a loan against your house for nose candy is end of the line junkie behavior, and he wasn't that fucked(from what we saw on streams) when the loan was taken out.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2022
Tommy Tooter dabs on Rekieta in guntchat:
Aaron Imholte (@ItsAaronIgnoreMe) and Dan Mullen dab on Rekieta on twitter:
(Archive)
Aaron Imholte (@ItsAaronIgnoreMe) and Dan Mullen dab on Rekieta on twitter:
(Archive)