Wells Fargo admits deception in $1.2 billion U.S. mortgage accord

From:  From the Trenches World Report 

Posted on April 17, 2016 by GrayRider

 

Reuters

Wells Fargo & Co (WFC.N) admitted to deceiving the U.S. government into insuring thousands of risky mortgages, as it formally reached a record $1.2 billion settlement of a U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit.

The settlement with Wells Fargo, the largest U.S. mortgage lender and third-largest U.S. bank by assets, was filed on Friday in Manhattan federal court. It also resolves claims against Kurt Lofrano, a former Wells Fargo vice president.  

According to the settlement, Wells Fargo “admits, acknowledges, and accepts responsibility” for having from 2001 to 2008 falsely certified that many of its home loans qualified for Federal Housing Administration insurance. MORE

Arkansas homeowner wins verdict for damages caused by vibrations from nearby oil drilling operations

From:  Haygood, Orr & Pearson

 

Posted October 25, 2014
by John Chapman

The federal Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a jury verdict in favor of a landowner who alleged her home was damages by vibrations from drilling operations. The judgment in favor of the plaintiff was affirmed in Hiser v. XTO Energy. Inc., No. 13–3443 (8th Cir. Oct. 3, 2014).

Ruby Hiser filed a lawsuit against XTO Energy Inc. in Arkansas. Ms. Hiser had lived in her home for six years before XTO began drilling operations nearby. XTO began drilling a gas well on property adjacent to Ms. Hiser’s home in February 2009. According to Ms. Hiser, it was around this time that she started feeling vibrations. Ms. Hiser testified at trial that she feels the vibrations and hears her house “crackle” when XTO’s drill is in use. She testified that people who stayed the night in her home also felt the vibrations. Several witnesses also testified at trial they had felt the vibrations when visiting Ms. Hiser’s property.

Justin Hall, a licensed professional engineer, examined Ms. Hiser’s home on June 5, 2009. Mr. Hall testified that he could hear the nearby drilling during his inspection of Ms. Hiser’s home. Based on his experience, the inspection, and the proximity of the drilling equipment to Ms. Hiser’s home, approximately 150 feet at the time, Mr. Hall concluded that XTO’s drilling was the source of the vibrations. Mr. Hall opined that the damage to Ms. Hiser’s home is consistent with vibrations from drilling, not the result of poor construction.  MORE

 

Posted October 25, 2014
by John Chapman

• About Our Firm
• Meet Our Attorneys
• Contact Us

The federal Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a jury verdict in favor of a landowner who alleged her home was damages by vibrations from drilling operations. The judgment in favor of the plaintiff was affirmed in Hiser v. XTO Energy. Inc., No. 13–3443 (8th Cir. Oct. 3, 2014).
Ruby Hiser filed a lawsuit against XTO Energy Inc. in Arkansas. Ms. Hiser had lived in her home for six years before XTO began drilling operations nearby. XTO began drilling a gas well on property adjacent to Ms. Hiser’s home in February 2009. According to Ms. Hiser, it was around this time that she started feeling vibrations. Ms. Hiser testified at trial that she feels the vibrations and hears her house “crackle” when XTO’s drill is in use. She testified that people who stayed the night in her home also felt the vibrations. Several witnesses also testified at trial they had felt the vibrations when visiting Ms. Hiser’s property
Justin Hall, a licensed professional engineer, examined Ms. Hiser’s home on June 5, 2009. Mr. Hall testified that he could hear the nearby drilling during his inspection of Ms. Hiser’s home. Based on his experience, the inspection, and the proximity of the drilling equipment to Ms. Hiser’s home, approximately 150 feet at the time, Mr. Hall concluded that XTO’s drilling was the source of the vibrations. Mr. Hall opined that the damage to Ms. Hiser’s home is consistent with vibrations from drilling, not the result of poor construction.
Mr. Hall conducted a second inspection in January of 2011. He observed that the drilling area had moved closer to Ms. Hiser’s home. Mr. Hall noted, among other things, excessive shifting of the foundation and numerous nail pops in the sheetrock uncharacteristic of normal foundation settlement. Mr. Hall again attributed the damage to nearby drilling and vibration.
At trial, Ms. Hiser testified that she spent approximately $30,000 repairing her home. Mr. Hall testified that, based on his examination of Ms. Hiser’s home, it would cost $55,000 to repair the damage. Ms. Hiser also testified that she was not able to enjoy her house the same way she did before XTO started drilling and that she experienced noise on and off for approximately two years.
There was also evidence at trial that Ms. Hiser complained early and often about XTO’s drilling. She first complained in February 2009, shortly after XTO began drilling its first well on her neighbor’s property. XTO drilled six gas wells on Ms. Hiser’s neighbor’s property between February 2009 and August 2011. Despite Ms. Hiser’s insistence that the drilling was causing damage to her home, XTO never had a construction expert examine Ms. Hiser’s property. Instead, it relied on the assessment of Jay Jones, one of its landmen. XTO did not offer to test for vibrations until after Ms. Hiser filed her lawsuit and after substantial damage had been done to her home.
The trial resulted in a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff on Ms. Hiser’s claims of negligence, private nuisance, and trespass under Arkansas state law. The jury awarded Ms. Hiser $100,000 in compensatory damages and $200,000 in punitive damages.
XTO appealed the verdict to the Eighth Circuit. On appeal, XTO argued that a new trial was warranted because of evidence the trial had discussed fracking during deliberations but no evidence regarding fracking had been presented at trial.
- See more at: https://www.hop-law.com/arkansas-homeowner-wins-verdict-for-damages-caused-by-vibrations-from-nearby-oil-drilling-operations/#sthash.5yt9iGuC.dpuf

SEC charges former Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac executives with fraud

From:  Washington Post 

By David S. Hilzenrath and Zachary A. Goldfarb December 16, 2011 Follow @Goldfarb

The SEC charged six former executives of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with securities fraud Friday, saying they misled the public about the companies’ exposure to subprime loans during the mortgage meltdown.

The executives charged in the civil suits include Daniel H. Mudd, former chief executive of Fannie Mae, and Richard F. Syron, who was chairman and chief executive at Freddie Mac.

The executives are among the most prominent individuals the Securities and Exchange Commission has accused of wrongdoing related to the financial crisis, and the legal action comes at a time when the SEC and the Justice Department are facing criticism for not doing more to hold executives accountable.  MORE

Yuba jury awards homeowner $16 million in mortgage case

By Dale Kasler       dkasler @sacbee.com
Published: Friday, Jul. 18, 2014 - 2:43 pm

It started out as a simple loan modification for a troubled homeowner. It turned into a $16.2 million jury verdict against a nationwide loan-servicing company.

A Yuba Superior Court jury this week awarded $16.2 million in damages to a homeowner who nearly lost his home to foreclosure after the loan servicer botched his mortgage modification, the homeowner’s lawyers said Friday.

Phillip Linza, a homeowner in Plumas Lake, was awarded the damages after a three-year battle against PHH Mortgage Services, a loan servicer based in Mount Laurel, N.J.

Linza’s attorneys, Andre Chernay and Jon Oldenburg of the United Law Center in Roseville, said the award included $514,000 in compensatory damages and $15.7 million in punitive damages.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/07/18/6566661/yuba-jury-awards-16-million-in.html#storylink=cpy

Secret Inside BofA Office of CEO Stymied Needy Homeowners

From:  Bloomberg 

REQUEST FROM A READER - We are trying to get the world's attention about the fraud.  This article details some of it.  We would like to share it with Bank of America's customers.  Are you on facebook?  If you would like to help please copy/paste onto Bank of America's facebook page on Monday, May 12.  You cannot 'post' but you can 'comment'.  Pick any of their posts and add attached link as a comment.  Masses of people posting will get their attention and more people will understand what is happening to this country.

We are announcing this via email so the posts on Monday, 12th will be a surprise.

Please share with friends.

Many thanks,

Susan...and the million plus victims

by Hugh Son 

Photographer: Phelan M. Ebenhack/Bloomberg

Isabel Santamaria, top right, her husband Abdiel Echeverria, top left, daughter Rebecca, 13, lower left, son... Read More

Isabel Santamaria thought she finally caught a break in her effort to save her Florida home from foreclosure after nine frustrating months: She reached Bank of America Corp.’s Office of the CEO and President. 

What the mother of two autistic children didn’t know is that her case would find its way to contractors, including Urban Lending Solutions in Broomfield, Colorado, far from the bank’s headquarters in Charlotte, North Carolina. Bank of America hired the firm founded by Chuck Sanders, a former Pittsburgh Steelers running back, to clear a backlog of complaints about a federal program designed to prevent foreclosures. 

“It felt like a big deal, reaching the CEO’s office,” Santamaria, 43, said of having her June 2010 call escalated to what she was told was the bank’s top level. “It only happened because I complained to my congressman, the attorney general, television stations. They only put you there if you make a big stink, but once you’re there, they still don’t help you.”  MORE

Two Cent Foreclosure

From:  7News - WSVN

Reported by Carmel Cafiero, Investigative Reporter - email

Produced by Danny Cohen, Special Projects Producer - email

WSVN-TV - 7NEWS Miami Ft. Lauderdale News, Weather, Deco

It's no secret that there have been a lot of abuses in the huge number of foreclosures filed in recent years, but can you imagine a foreclosure over two cents? Hard to believe, but Carmel Cafiero is on just such a case.

WSVN -- This Lighthouse Point condo has been home to Gloria Jacques for eight years, but for the last two of those years, the 80-year-old has been in fear of losing her home to foreclosure despite never having missed a mortgage payment.

Her attorney says Bank of America filed for foreclosure over two payments that were each one penny short, payments that the bank deducted from her account.

Tom Murphy: "Well, Bank of America shortchanged the payment that they were making to themselves for her mortgage."

Carmel Cafiero: "So it was a bill pay type thing?"

MORE

How a Bad-ass California Mayor is Taking on Big Banks

From:  Alternet 

by Ellen Brown 

Mayor Gayle McLaughlin is using eminent domain to help homeowners and challenge Too Big to Fail.

March 3, 2014  |  In a nearly $13 billion settlement with the US Justice Department in November 2013, JPMorgan Chase admitted that it, along with every other large US bank, had engaged in mortgage fraud as a routine business practice, sowing the seeds of the mortgage meltdown. JPMorgan and other megabanks have now been caught in over a dozen major frauds, including LIBOR-rigging and bid-rigging; yet no prominent banker has gone to jail. Meanwhile, nearly a quarter of all mortgages nationally remain underwater (meaning the balance owed exceeds the current value of the home), sapping homeowners’ budgets, the housing market and the economy. Since the banks, the courts and the federal government have failed to give adequate relief to homeowners, some cities are taking matters into their own hands. 

Gayle McLaughlin, the bold mayor of Richmond, California, has gone where no woman dared go before, threatening to take underwater mortgages by eminent domain from Wall Street banks and renegotiate them on behalf of beleaguered homeowners. A member of the Green Party, which takes no corporate campaign money, she proved her mettle standing up to Chevron, which dominates the Richmond landscape. But the banks have signaled that if Richmond or another city tries the eminent domain gambit, they will rush to court seeking an injunction. Their grounds: an unconstitutional taking of private property and breach of contract.

How to refute those charges? There is a way; but to understand it, you first need to grasp the massive fraud perpetrated on homeowners. It is how you were duped into paying more than your house was worth; why you should not just turn in your keys or short-sell your underwater property away; why you should urge Congress not to legalize the MERS scheme; and why you should insist that your local government help you acquire title to your home at a fair price if the banks won’t. That is exactly what Richmond and other city councils are attempting to do through the tool of eminent domain. MORE

Bradburn v. Bank of America N.A., ReconTrust, et al. Court Order Declaring Bank of America's Foreclosure Sale to be Void and Setting it Aside

From: US Supra Business Advisor

2/11/2014  by Barry Fagan

 

 

Superior Court judge George Bowden ruled that Bank of America's actions had been "unfair and deceptive" and voided the foreclosure.

Judge George N. Bowden of the Superior Court in Washington State ruled against Bank of America (BoA) in a foreclosure battle that ended with the nonjudicial foreclosure sale under the Deed of Trust Act (DTA). Bowden acknowledged that this case was like most; “convoluted in the minefield” that is the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) system. Bradburn, the homeowner, was told by BoA “that he should stop making his mortgage payments so that he could qualify for refinancing.”

BoA ensured that this homeowner was in default of the mortgage by promising to refinance; then initiated litigation against the homeowner to retrieve the property for failure by Bradburn to remain current on his payments.

Bowden pointed out that the DTA “seems to contemplate a borrower and a lender with an independent trustee having the power to foreclose on the deed of trust in the event of default by the borrower. The lender would normally hold the underlying note and be the beneficiary of it. Here matters have been complicated by the sale of the underlying note from HomeStar Lending to Countrywide, which was later acquired by [BoA].”

This is another major victory against the unethical and illegal foreclosures industry that has left millions of Americans homeless. It's also a strike against the widespread practice of having companies that have an incentive to foreclose act as the "trustee" on the home—in this case it was ReconTrust, which itself is a subsidiary of Bank of America. They're supposed to be neutral under state law.

MERS GETS ITS ASS KICKED IN CALIFORNIA COURT! NOT A BENEFICIARY!

From:  Justice League 

MERS GETS ITS ASS KICKED IN CALIFORNIA COURT! NOT A BENEFICIARY! 

 First Page, others at link. 

Download Case (PDF)

A Bankruptcy Nightmare – “This story is Just Crazy!”

From:  Deadly Clear 

By Sydney Sullivan

Just when you think you've heard it all - and it just couldn't get any worse than the last case... Well, in all honesty the following shockingly sad story is true - but if you have high blood pressure or a weak stomach for incompetent attorneys, or judicial conspiracy - you may not want to read or listen to it right before you go to bed because it contains facts and rulings that some readers and lawmakers may find disturbing.

Let's start first with the disclaimer that not all attorneys or judges are created equal. And as Honolulu foreclosure defense attorney Gary Dubin puts it - "this story is just crazy" - it is morally bankrupt from top to bottom. This is a saga about a homeowner that was not in default, was sued in a falsified foreclosure action, the bank admitted it made mistakes, the homeowner retained attorneys that filed the homeowner in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy (liquidation) when she had no debt (apparently not the best move?) - (BTW the link to Bar Grievances in on the DC front page right hand sidebar) - and the judges in both the bankruptcy and circuit courts ignored the fraud filed in their courts and ruled against the homeowner.

Read more of this post

Bank of NY Mellon must face lawsuit on Countrywide

From:  Reuters 

 By Jonathan Stempel

 

(Reuters) - A federal judge rejected Bank of New York Mellon Corp's bid to dismiss a lawsuit by investors over its role as trustee for mortgage-backed securities that led to an $8.5 billion settlement by Bank of America Corp.

U.S. District Judge William Pauley in Manhattan said on Tuesday that bondholders who invested in 26 trusts alleged to have contained risky mortgage loans from the former Countrywide Financial Corp may pursue claims against Bank of New York Mellon. He dismissed a variety of other claims.

The decision relates to a lawsuit challenging Bank of New York Mellon's performance of its day-to-day obligations as a trustee, which includes ensuring that underlying home loans are properly documented and that bondholders' rights are protected.

Beth Kaswan, a lawyer for four pension funds in Chicago, Michigan and Pennsylvania that brought the case, said the decision leaves intact claims over securities backed by more than $30 billion of loans, and which have suffered more than $9 billion of losses or delinquencies.

She said she believes the decision is the first to let investors in mortgage-backed securities pursue claims against a trustee under the 1939 federal Trust Indenture Act.

"The decision is a watershed," Kaswan said.

Kevin Heine, a spokesman for Bank of New York Mellon, said the company was pleased that the court narrowed the issues to be considered and removed the vast majority of trusts from the suit. "We respectfully disagree with ruling's application of the Trust Indenture Act to non-indenture securitizations and will continue to defend against those claims," he said.  MORE

Enough Is Enough: Fraud-ridden Banks Are Not California’s Only Option

From:  Global Research 

By Ellen Brown

Global Research, January 30, 2014

Web of Debt

  “Epic in scale, unprecedented in world history.” That is how William K. Black, professor of law and economics and former bank fraud investigator, describes the frauds in which JPMorgan Chase (JPM) has now been implicated. They involve more than a dozen felonies, including bid-rigging on municipal bond debt; colluding to rig interest rates on hundreds of trillions of dollars in mortgages, derivatives and other contracts; exposing investors to excessive risk; failing to disclose known risks, including those in the Bernie Madoff scandal; and engaging in multiple forms of mortgage fraud.
So why, asks Chicago Alderwoman Leslie Hairston, are we still doing business with them? She plans to introduce a city council ordinance deleting JPM from the city’s list of designated municipal depositories. As quoted in the January 14^th Chicago Sun-Times:

The bank has violated the city code by making admissions of dishonesty and deceit in the way they dealt with their investors in the mortgage securities and Bernie Madoff Ponzi scandals. . . . We use this code against city contractors and all the small companies, why wouldn’t we use this against one of the largest banks in the world?

A similar move has been recommended for the City of Los Angeles by L.A. City Councilman Gil Cedillo. But in a January 19th editorial titled “There’s No Profit in L A. Bashing JPMorgan Chase,” the L.A. Times editorial board warned against pulling the city’s money out of JPM and other mega-banks – even though the city attorney is suing them for allegedly causing an epidemic of foreclosures in minority neighborhoods.
 “L.A. relies on these banks,” says The Times, “for long-term financing to build bridges and restore lakes, and for short-term financing to pay the bills.” The editorial noted that a similar proposal brought in the fall of 2011 by then-Councilman Richard Alarcon, backed by Occupy L.A., was abandoned because it would have resulted in termination fees and higher interest payments by the city.
It seems we must bow to our oppressors because we have no viable alternative – or do we? What if there is an alternative that would not only save the city money but would be a safer place to deposit its funds than in Wall Street banks?

The Tiny State That Broke Free

MORE

8th USCCA W. Mo. reinstated $6 million punitive damage arbitration award against servicer

From:  What Lies In Your Debt

 

8th USCCA W. Mo. reinstated $6 million punitive damage arbitration award against servicer (Stark v. Sandperg, Phoenix & von Gontard, et al.) -

 

 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 03-2366

___________

Stanley William Stark; Patricia *

Garnet Stark, *

*

Plaintiffs - Appellants, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Western

* District of Missouri.

Sandberg, Phoenix & von Gontard, *

P.C.; Scott Greenberg; EMC Mortgage *

Corporation; SpvG Trustee, *

*

Defendants - Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: January 15, 2004

Filed: August 26, 2004

Texas jury rules against Ocwen

From:  South Florida Business Journal 

by Jim Freer

A jury in Galveston, Texas, has awarded $11.5 million to a customer of Ocwen Financial Corp. and its former Ocwen Federal Bank subsidiary, after determining they committed fraud in servicing her home equity loan.

The verdict against West Palm Beach-based Ocwen Financial (NYSE: OCN) and Ocwen Federal was issued Tuesday in Texas's 212th District Court. The jury ordered the Ocwen companies to pay Sealy Davis $10 million in actual damages and about $1.5 million for mental anguish and economic damages.

Ocwen Financial had $1.3 billion in assets on Sept. 30, according to its Securities and Exchange Commission filings.

The jury found the Ocwen companies made fraudulent, deceptive and misleading representations to Davis after she missed a loan payment while hospitalized in 2003.

Documents filed in the civil suit assert Ocwen began demanding additional money to make up for the missed payment and then began foreclosure proceedings on Davis's home in Texas City, Texas.

Davis retained the home after filing for Chapter 13 bankruptcy protection, court documents state. MORE

Jury gives woman $1.25M in lawsuit over mortgage

From:  Baltimore Business Journal 

by Eli Segall, Staff

A Baltimore native who defaulted on a subprime loan has been awarded $1.25 million in damages from her lender, Wells Fargo Bank N.A. The case may lead to similar lawsuits nationwide, and also may help Baltimore City's suit against the bank, claiming it targeted minority neighborhoods with subprime loans, legal and banking experts say.

Kimberly L. Thomas was awarded $250,000 in damages and $1 million in punitive damages in Montgomery County Circuit Court July 31. A six-member jury convicted Wells Fargo of fraud, negligence and other charges for inflating Thomas' income and assets on her mortgage application, and locking her into a bigger loan than she had applied for -- one she couldn't afford.

Thomas, 41, said in an interview with the Baltimore Business Journal that her case "destroys the myth" that the subprime mortgage meltdown is fueled by homebuyers taking loans they can't handle.

"They make it seem like it's the person's fault," Thomas said from her Silver Spring townhouse. "But they don't know what's going on behind the scenes."

Brian Maul, her attorney, said Thomas' loan agent pushed through a bigger mortgage to reap a higher commission. Teri Schrettenbrunner, a Wells Fargo spokeswoman, said the bank followed "responsible lending practices" and will appeal the verdict.  MORE

Quicken Loans on losing end of $3 million predatory lending verdict

From:  West Virginia Record

By Kyla Asbury

WHEELING – An Ohio County judge has ruled against Quicken Loans in a $3 million predatory lending case.

Circuit Court Judge Arthur M. Recht concluded an eight-day trial that spanned 17 months by awarding punitive damages, attorney fees and costs to mother and daughter Wheeling residents Lourie Jefferson and Monique Brown.

The award of more than $2.1 million in punitive damages, along with attorney fees and costs, brought the total verdict in the case against Quicken Loans to more than $3 million.

Jefferson and Brown also had previously reached a settlement for a confidential amount with the loan appraiser.

Bordas & Bordas attorneys were representing Jefferson and Brown in foreclosure proceedings initiated by Quicken Loans, their mortgage lender.

They alleged abusive and predatory conduct on Quicken Loans’ part and filed a 12-count complaint on behalf of Jefferson and Brown, detailing predatory lending practices against Quicken Loans and its appraiser in Ohio Circuit Court.

At the first phase of the trial, the Court ruled in favor of Jefferson and Brown on numerous counts. The court found the lending practices of Quicken Loans unconscionable, based in part on Quicken’s utilization of a highly inflated appraisal in making the loan.

The court also found that Quicken Loans defrauded the homeowners by misleading them into paying excessive loan origination fees; falsely promising to favorably refinance the loan in the near future; and concealing an enormous balloon payment from its own borrowers.

As a result, the court ruled the $144,800 loan that grew to $227,000 was unenforceable as a matter of law and would not have to be repaid and that Quicken Loans must return $17,000 in payments to Jefferson.

The second phase of the trial resulted in the punitive damage award and an order that Quicken Loans must pay Jefferson and Brown’s attorney fees and costs.  MORE

Real / NTC Sees Fewer Differences Among Lenders / SLS Expands

From:  Inside Mortgage Finance 

By Paul Muolo

pumuolo@imfpubs.com

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the Treasury Department’s point man on GSE reform, Michael Stegman, doesn’t think all that much about the huge profits Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been generating the past year. As IMFnews reported this week, Stegman noted that $86 billion of GSE profits were tied to “one-time” tax reversals and the recapture of loan loss reserves. Okay, fair enough. But then the question becomes: who at the GSEs (or at the Federal Housing Finance Agency) was responsible for telling the two to set aside so much money for loan losses and were those assumptions way off base? It’s not an unfair question – and maybe it’s time for the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee or Senate Banking Committee to press for an investigation into why Fannie and Freddie’s loan loss reserves were so high. Anyone familiar with the GSEs knows that when they bought non-agency securities most of the product was AAA rated. Also, some of the underlying loans had coverage from mortgage insurance firms. Well, guess what? The MIs made good on their policies. Might someone in government conclude that the two GSEs should never have been taken over in the first place, or is all this Monday morning quarterbacking? Will Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-TX, lead the charge of an investigation into potential government abuse? Will Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky? Don’t hold your breath…

Keep in mind that one of the plaintiff’s in the “takings” case against the government estimated that the GSEs were over-reserved by $109 billion…

Meanwhile, certain investors in Fannie/Freddie junior preferred shares are sitting on huge paper gains on their investments. Fairholme Capital Management, run by Bruce Berkowitz, is one of them. A few weeks ago there were scattered reports that FCM was unloading some of its holdings in the GSE, only to be followed by speculation that the investment firm was doubling down…

Adapt or die – that’s how mortgage firms have always survived light production years. Late this week we were hearing reports that two banks were in the process of rolling out first lien HELOCs as hybrid ARM products “as a way to circumvent” the qualified mortgage rule. We’re not sure what that means exactly, but look for additional coverage in the week ahead…

Fourth quarter earnings are rolling in. Thus far, most banks reporting have earned money on their mortgage operations – but a lot less than in earlier periods. However, some are actually losing money. Cardinal Financial Corp., Tysons Corner, VA, reported that its mortgage banking affiliate, George Mason Mortgage, had a net loss of $1.6 million in the fourth quarter. In the year ago quarter, it earned $3.7 million…

Also, competition for new production will be intense this year. John Hillman, CEO of Nationwide Title Clearing, noted recently that the new ability-to-repay will play a role as well. “The new rules are likely to regiment the industry, so there will be fewer differences between mortgages offered by different lenders, thereby intensifying the competition and making compliance of the utmost importance”…

MORE

History of Mortgage Assignment Fraud

From:  REI Maverick

by Phil Grove 

Much has been made recently on the news about mortgage assignment fraud and the bank’s overall bad behavior during the housing crisis.  The purpose of this article is to give you an understanding about why banks did what they did and how it constitutes mortgage assignment fraud.

Mortgage Assignment Fraud | Background

Mortgage Assignment Fraud

In the past ten years, thousands of residential mortgages were bundled together into securitized trusts, with banks selling shares off to Wall Street investors in a manner similar to selling shares of stock. Since banks were no longer holding onto their mortgages, their motivation was to create mortgages rather than to avoid creating ‘bad mortgages’ because these bad mortgages would be someone else’s problem.

These trusts were given a name, and the name of the trust detailed the bank involved and the year the trust was created.  For example, a trust name may be ”XXX Home Loan Trust 2006 Bank.”  The name indicates information about the particular trust such as the year it was created (2006).  Each securitized trust had a Closing Date. The closing date is the date that the individual mortgages were put into the Trust by its custodian.  The custodian must certify that each mortgage note is endorsed in blank and that the ownership of the note has been transferred.  This proof is most often an Assignment of Mortgage.

Mortgage Assignment Fraud | The foreclosure problem

Once loans began defaulting, Trustees discovered that the laws regarding Mortgage Assignments varied significantly from state to state.  One of the most significant issues was whether Mortgage Assignments could be back-dated or have retroactive effective dates.  This issue arose because Trustees and their lawyers discovered in the foreclosure process that the Assignments could not actually be located, or that certain states did not allow blank Assignments.  Since this issue hadn’t yet been resolved, the assignments were signed and notarized as if the

transfer took place many years after the actual transfer date.

Mortgage Assignment Fraud | The solution

To solve the dilemma of the missing Assignments, new Assignments were created and recorded, and most of these Assignments did not state the actual date that the Assignment took place.  These new Assignments were prepared by specially selected law firms that specialized in providing mortgage default services to lenders. The new Assignments were prepared in the name of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) as “nominee” for the mortgage company.

Mortgage Assignment Fraud | The solution hitting the fan

The new Assignments were prepared to conceal the actual date that the property was acquired by the Trust.  An examination of the Assignments filed showing the grantee as the Trust – such as our earlier example of “XXX Home Loan Trust 2006 Bank” – shows that most of these new Assignments were prepared and filed in 2008 and 2009.  While the exact closing date can only be determined by looking at the trust documents, any Trust that includes the year in 2006 in its title most likely closed in 2006.  These assignments showing dates 2-3 years later obviously didn’t add up.  The reason is that if a Mortgage Assignment is dated, notarized, and filed in a year after the year set forth in the name of the grantee trust on the Assignment, it is actually an Assignment specially, and in many cases, fraudulently, made to facilitate foreclosures. In many cases, some of these new Assignments were created after the foreclosure process had been initiated.  Hence, we have mortgage assignment fraud.

The mortgage industry was so concerned about this type of mortgage assignment fraud that in the Fall of 2010 it took the unbelievably ballsy step of trying to cram through Congress legislation that would have validated foreclosures by rubber stamping the questionable documentation behind securitized mortgages. Thankfullly, President Obama vetoed that legislation that would’ve allowed mortgage assignment fraud. 

MORE

Duck Dynasty and the Secular Theocracy

From:  Independent Institute


by David Theroux

With A&E Network facing an avalanche of public protest and in just over one week of its decision to place family-patriarch Phil Robertson on “indefinite hiatus” from its megahit reality series Duck Dynasty, the network caved.

When the PC outrage industry went into high gear with an angry Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) demanding Robertson’s head regarding his comments on homosexuality in an article by Drew Magery in the January 2014 issue of GQ (the magazine commonly viewed as having branded the concept of “metrosexual”), A&E executives promptly suspended Robertson from the enormously popular, cable-TV program, and support for his suspension echoed throughout the conventional media with cries of his being “homophobic” and “antigay.”

In the article, when asked about his religious faith, Robertson noted that his own youthful debauchery was self-destructive and put his marriage on the rocks, and that these were reversed only by his conversion to Christianity. He added that he now considers sexual relations other than those between a man and woman in wedlock to be sinful. In so doing, Robertson did not support bans on homosexual advocacy or relations but instead paraphrased Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers — they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”

In subsequent comments, he included himself as a “sexual sinner”:

MORE

A Requirement for Every Foreclosure Judge – Watch The Wolf of Wall Street

From:  Deadly Clear

Posted on January 14, 2014

 

By Sydney Sullivan

Without a doubt every foreclosure judge and any judge who has ruled in favor of the banks over duped homeowners should be required to watch The Wolf of Wall Street - not once but several times.

Every time the Courts consider ruling in favor of these decadent Wall Street creatures – they should be shoved into a room with a wide flat screen TV, handed a box of popcorn and ice cold Coca Cola and locked in there for 180 minutes – so they can see exactly what they are sustaining by ruling in favor of the banks.

The Wolf of Wall Street is based on the true story of Jordan Belfort, from his rise to a wealthy stockbroker living the high life to his fall involving crime, corruption and the federal government. Martin Scorcese’s The Wolf of Wall Street with Leonardo DiCaprio in the role of Jordan Belfort opened recently to critical and popular acclaim.  MORE