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