Written by Biloxi
This certainly a major bombshell in the banking industry globally as well as in the U.S. This latest bombshell is being dropped by a Swiss whistleblower. Rudolf Elmer, a former chief financial officer in the Cayman Islands and employee of Julius Bär, will hand over offshore banking accounts on a CD of "2,000 'high net worth individuals' and corporations – detailing massive potential tax evasion" to Wikileaks in London before he heads to trial in Switzerland. Mr. Elmer was charged with breaking Swiss bank secrecy laws, forging documents and sending threatening messages to two Julius Bär officials. Mr. Elmer sees the exposure of bad practices by banks as matter of public concern. From the Guardian:
He is also – at a time when the activities of banks are a matter of public concern – one of a small band of employees and executives seeking to blow the whistle on what they see as unprofessional, immoral and even potentially criminal activity by powerful international financial institutions.
Along with the City of London and Wall Street, Switzerland is a fortress of banking and financial services, but famously secretive and expert in the concealment of wealth from all over the world for tax evasion and other extra-legal purposes.
Elmer says he is releasing the information "in order to educate society". The list includes "high net worth individuals", multinational conglomerates and financial institutions – hedge funds". They are said to be "using secrecy as a screen to hide behind in order to avoid paying tax". They come from the US, Britain, Germany, Austria and Asia – "from all over".
In addition, those that are involved according to Mr. Elmer include "approximately 40 politicians". However, Mr. Elmer is no stranger to Wikileaks as Rudolf Elmer collection is featured on Wikileaks.
As Mr. Elmer mentioned that there are small band of employees and executives are seeking to blow the whistle on potential criminal activity by banks, international tax evasion scandal hasn't made enough news in the U.S. In a 2008 article in Der Spiegel, a German newspaper, Mr. Elmer along with another whistleblower, Heinrich Kieber , exposed tax evaders. Mr. Kieber stole confidential information on alleged rich German tax evaders from the Liechtenstein bank LGT Trust Ltd. and sold it to buyers around the world. Mr. Kieber, a Liechtenstein's informant, had been paid almost 5 million euros of the confidential information on the tax evaders and was given a new identity by German intelligence. Read more on Heinrich Kieber's story in Der Spiegel. Click here.
I look for the financial institutions to scramble, water down, and counterattack this latest bombshell and protect their reputation as they brace themselves on the confidence on Wall Street stocks. The problem is not just the corruption of individuals in the banks but the corruption of the entire banking system. As Rudolf Elmer outcries, "What I am objecting to is not one particular bank, but a system of structures."
Monday, January 17, 2011
10,000 GMAC foreclosures stopped in Maryland
Written by Biloxi
What is interesting on this foreclosure case in Maryland is that the case was not filed by attorneys or state Attoney Generals but by law students from the University of Maryland.
Peter Holland of the University of Maryland School of Law, decided to stop lecturing and start doing. Mr. Holland got his class of law students involved in actually suing GMAC for submitting false documents to court in foreclosed homes. With the hardwork from the law students, the law student forced GMAC to dismiss every case in Maryland relying on robo-signing affidavits. Here is the story from Firedoglake website:
In a major ruling Friday, a coalition of nonprofit defense lawyers and consumer protection advocates in Maryland successfully got over 10,000 foreclosure cases managed by GMAC Mortgage tossed out, because affidavits in the cases were signed by Jeffrey Stephan, the infamous GMAC “robo-signer” who attested to the authenticity of foreclosure documents without any knowledge about them, as well as signing other false statements.
The University of Maryland Consumer Protection Clinic and Civil Justice, Inc., a nonprofit, filed the class action lawsuit, arguing that any case using Jeffrey Stephan as a signer was illegitimate and must be dismissed. In court Friday, GMAC agreed to dismiss every case in Maryland relying on a Stephan affidavit. They can refile foreclosure actions on the close to 10,000 homes, but only at their own expense, and subject to new Maryland regulations which require mandatory mediation between borrower and lender before moving to foreclosure. Civil Justice and the Consumer Protection Clinic also want any cases with affidavits from Xee Moua of Wells Fargo, who has also admitted to robo-signing, thrown out, but that case has not yet been settled.
Both Jeffery Stephan and Xee Moua acknowledged in depositions that they signed hundreds of affidavits a day without the legally required "personal knowledge" of that information. Of course, GMAC's loss doesn't mean that GMAC will stop processing foreclosure on homes, but this case put GMAC on notice that any homes in foreclosure that take to court in Maryland with robo-signed affidavits will be challenged and tossed out in court. I will not be surprising to me if other law students in other states take University of Maryland School of Law challenge. If that happens, banks need to worry.
What is interesting on this foreclosure case in Maryland is that the case was not filed by attorneys or state Attoney Generals but by law students from the University of Maryland.
Peter Holland of the University of Maryland School of Law, decided to stop lecturing and start doing. Mr. Holland got his class of law students involved in actually suing GMAC for submitting false documents to court in foreclosed homes. With the hardwork from the law students, the law student forced GMAC to dismiss every case in Maryland relying on robo-signing affidavits. Here is the story from Firedoglake website:
In a major ruling Friday, a coalition of nonprofit defense lawyers and consumer protection advocates in Maryland successfully got over 10,000 foreclosure cases managed by GMAC Mortgage tossed out, because affidavits in the cases were signed by Jeffrey Stephan, the infamous GMAC “robo-signer” who attested to the authenticity of foreclosure documents without any knowledge about them, as well as signing other false statements.
The University of Maryland Consumer Protection Clinic and Civil Justice, Inc., a nonprofit, filed the class action lawsuit, arguing that any case using Jeffrey Stephan as a signer was illegitimate and must be dismissed. In court Friday, GMAC agreed to dismiss every case in Maryland relying on a Stephan affidavit. They can refile foreclosure actions on the close to 10,000 homes, but only at their own expense, and subject to new Maryland regulations which require mandatory mediation between borrower and lender before moving to foreclosure. Civil Justice and the Consumer Protection Clinic also want any cases with affidavits from Xee Moua of Wells Fargo, who has also admitted to robo-signing, thrown out, but that case has not yet been settled.
Both Jeffery Stephan and Xee Moua acknowledged in depositions that they signed hundreds of affidavits a day without the legally required "personal knowledge" of that information. Of course, GMAC's loss doesn't mean that GMAC will stop processing foreclosure on homes, but this case put GMAC on notice that any homes in foreclosure that take to court in Maryland with robo-signed affidavits will be challenged and tossed out in court. I will not be surprising to me if other law students in other states take University of Maryland School of Law challenge. If that happens, banks need to worry.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Open thread for Sunday
JP Morgan CEO: Mortgage crisis has been costly
Written by Biloxi
Should we believe JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon's concerns on how much mortgages have cost banks? From MarketWatch:
J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Jamie Dimon said Friday that the foreclosure process is a “mess” that’s cost the financial-services giant a lot of money.
Dimon also said litigation over troubled mortgage securities is “going to be a long, ugly mess,” but won’t be “life-threatening” for J.P. Morgan….
“It is a big mess, it has cost us a lot of money,” Dimon said Friday during a conference call with analysts.
“Unfortunately, the only way to do it right is name by name by name.”
“We will do as many as we can. There is a lot of paperwork. The paperwork is different in every single state,” Dimon added, according to a transcript of the call.
“There were multiple checks and balances and there may be mistakes made in the foreclosure process, but they are very few and boy, when we find them, we try to make up for them right away,” the CEO said.
Certainly, the mortgage crisis and lawsuits against JP Morgan Chase are costing the bank big time. That is why Mr. Dimon tucked away $1.4 billion and more of his lunch money for litigation costs. On Friday, JP Morgan just released their 4th quarter earnings whicn their earnings continues to grow in the bad economy. JPMorgan Chase's income soared 47 percent as the bank set aside less money to cover bad loans. Mostly, the bank's earning come from the investment banking area. And this doesn't stop the bank from nickeling and diming their customers to make up lost revenue from the mortgage crisis. In February, JP Morgan Chase are hitting small dispositors with higher fees from their checking accounts.
Should we believe JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon's concerns on how much mortgages have cost banks? From MarketWatch:
J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Jamie Dimon said Friday that the foreclosure process is a “mess” that’s cost the financial-services giant a lot of money.
Dimon also said litigation over troubled mortgage securities is “going to be a long, ugly mess,” but won’t be “life-threatening” for J.P. Morgan….
“It is a big mess, it has cost us a lot of money,” Dimon said Friday during a conference call with analysts.
“Unfortunately, the only way to do it right is name by name by name.”
“We will do as many as we can. There is a lot of paperwork. The paperwork is different in every single state,” Dimon added, according to a transcript of the call.
“There were multiple checks and balances and there may be mistakes made in the foreclosure process, but they are very few and boy, when we find them, we try to make up for them right away,” the CEO said.
Certainly, the mortgage crisis and lawsuits against JP Morgan Chase are costing the bank big time. That is why Mr. Dimon tucked away $1.4 billion and more of his lunch money for litigation costs. On Friday, JP Morgan just released their 4th quarter earnings whicn their earnings continues to grow in the bad economy. JPMorgan Chase's income soared 47 percent as the bank set aside less money to cover bad loans. Mostly, the bank's earning come from the investment banking area. And this doesn't stop the bank from nickeling and diming their customers to make up lost revenue from the mortgage crisis. In February, JP Morgan Chase are hitting small dispositors with higher fees from their checking accounts.
According to American Banker, the bank blames the higher fees on regulators:
“We don’t want to raise fees on our customers,” a company spokesman said. “But unfortunately, regulation is forcing us to do it. And as a result, some customers may end up unbanked.”
And we know that is not true as the banks can raise fees on customers at anytime. Regulation has nothing to do with forcing the banks to increase fees. Although the incresed fees with hurt the poorest customers, I look for those customers to sign on the U.S. Treasury new program to give tax refund on a debit card. Those debit cards will be issued by the Treasury to the low income individuals who has no bank account and cashing checks at payloan stores.
So, do I believe Mr. Dimon's tears of his concerns on how much the mortgages have cost the banks? No. JP Morgan Chase's bottomline is pleasing the shareholders and profits.
So, do I believe Mr. Dimon's tears of his concerns on how much the mortgages have cost the banks? No. JP Morgan Chase's bottomline is pleasing the shareholders and profits.
Grandma in California Uncovers Major Robo-notary Violations
Written by Biloxi
Another form for robo-signing forgery found by one determined grandmother, Abby Carr that will continue more investigations into the bank practices in the foreclosure mess. A former Director in Information Technology for a Fortune 500 company has put her skills into action in her fight to determine title on her own home. She discovers major robo-notary operation.
Now, in fighting to determine title on her home, she has discovered something even more slimy and with much broader implications. In an attempt to validate a ‘squiggle’ type mark on a recorded document with the Alameda County Recorder’s office, Ms. Carr felt it imperative that she obtain a copy of the page from the notarial journal from the California notary who performed the notarization of the ‘Corporation Deed of Assignment’ related to her property.
Ms. Carr, under California laws, is entitled to purchase a copy of the page in the notarial journal related to her property and so she wrote to the Orange County Recorder’s office and sent a check to cover the copy fees. Orange County is where the notary was registered. Within weeks she received a certified letter back from the Orange County recorder stating that they should have the notarial journal, but they did not have it. See, once a notary is no longer a notary in California, it is the law that they must turn in their notarial journal to the county recorder.
Ms. Carr, in a lawsuit against her home loan originator Home123 Corporation, now in bankruptcy in Delaware, asked recently in informal discovery if they had the notarial journal. The answer came back ‘no’.
Ms. Carr asked if the particular notary, one Andres Rojas, was an employee of Home123 or New Century Mortgage. The answer came back ‘yes’. Home123 Corporation is a subsidiary of New Century Mortgage. Both have been barred from conducting business in California since 2007 by the California Corporations Commissioner. Un-deterred Ms. Carr then proceeded to obtain a copy of the bond paperwork filed with the California Secretary of State by the notary. She saw an address for Andres Rojas on that paperwork.
Keep in mind Andre Rojas was a robo-signer for New Century Mortgage. Here are some examples of forgeries of notarized of illegal stamped signatures by Andres Rojos. Click here.
Though persistence, Ms. Carr located Andre Rojas:
Upon doing further internet research she discovered at least 6 different addresses for the notary. She sent a letter to each address, having no real knowledge of which might be the most current. One was even in Las Vegas. She asked the notary to contact her as she wanted a copy of the page from the notarial journal related to her property. It was a pure long-shot that the notary might still have the notarial journal in his possession.
Incredulously Ms. Carr got a phone call just prior to Thanksgiving and it was the wife of the notary. She indicated that he indeed still had the notarial journal and also stated that he had performed hundreds upon hundreds of the notarizations upon assignments, lost note affidavits and modification agreements while employed at Home123 Corporation & New Century Mortgage. Ms. Carr then emailed information on the date the recorded document had been signed and notarized and the notary sent back scanned copies of the page(s) of his journal. In California there is a requirement for a finger print of the person signing the property related document and Ms. Carr knew that could be very helpful in determining who really put the ‘squiggle’ on the Corporation Deed of Assignment. The assignment went from Home123 Corporation to U.S. Bank, N.A. and Ms. Carr had never done business with U.S. Bank, nor ever had a loan with them. The attorneys for Home123 bankruptcy trustee also indicated to Ms. Carr that her loan had been sold to Chase just days after she closed on it. Indeed Ms. Carr believes she has located her home loan number in a document filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission and it is in REMIC securities trust which Chase created, namely JPMAC2006-NC1.
Ms. Carr sat incredulous, reading and re-reading the scanned page(s) and then she communicated with the notary again. She verified that there were no other pages completed in the notarial journal and none with the date her document was notarized May 22, 2007. Her document also had handwritten ‘effective 4-12-2007’ essentially backdating the assignment. Ms. Carr got validation back from the notary that the ‘effective 4-12-2007’ was NOT on the document when he notarized it. Thus, not only was the document tampered with after notarization BUT it was invalid as this particular notary did NOT do any further journal entries beyond March 6, 2007!
Here is an example of one of the line entries in Andres Rojas notary journal for March 5, 2007: Lost Note Affadavit, Modification Agreement, Corporate Assignments all signed by Steve Nagy (a Home123 Corp. and New Century VP of Records Management).
What is interesting is that on January 2010, according to the Orange County clerk recorder in Santa Ana, CA document, Mr. Rojas notary journal was missing. However, Ms. Carr obatined Mr. Nagy's notarial journal. Ms. Carr is now asking California Secretary of State Debra Bowen and new California Attorney General Kamala Harris to investigate the matter. Ms. Carr's finding is not only because notaries were robo-signed but her findings would be a serious interest to investors:
Because if the assignments are invalid then, according to IRS laws on REMIC trusts (a tax entity and is usually formed as a trust for federal income tax), they were not really in the securities trust by the cutoff date when the investments were sold to the institutional investors. This would allegedly mean that the banks and investment houses were selling vaporware to investors and reaping the benefits of scamming the IRS out of taxes due. This would allegedly mean the banks and investment houses were committing fraud.
This would also mean that many lawyers representing the banks and investment houses, allegedly have been conducting fraud upon the courts in foreclosure actions & in the presentation of lost note affidavits to the courts…..yes even in the homeowner bankruptcy. This may have implications to those who are current on their mortgages, for they may not have clear title when they go to sell their homes, refi or even pay off their mortgage loans due to the defective assignment.
Ms. Carr's clever investigation does open the door to possible similar practices in other states. Certainly, it will be interesting the conclusion of the investigations by the Secretary of State and state Attorney General.
Another form for robo-signing forgery found by one determined grandmother, Abby Carr that will continue more investigations into the bank practices in the foreclosure mess. A former Director in Information Technology for a Fortune 500 company has put her skills into action in her fight to determine title on her own home. She discovers major robo-notary operation.
Now, in fighting to determine title on her home, she has discovered something even more slimy and with much broader implications. In an attempt to validate a ‘squiggle’ type mark on a recorded document with the Alameda County Recorder’s office, Ms. Carr felt it imperative that she obtain a copy of the page from the notarial journal from the California notary who performed the notarization of the ‘Corporation Deed of Assignment’ related to her property.
Ms. Carr, under California laws, is entitled to purchase a copy of the page in the notarial journal related to her property and so she wrote to the Orange County Recorder’s office and sent a check to cover the copy fees. Orange County is where the notary was registered. Within weeks she received a certified letter back from the Orange County recorder stating that they should have the notarial journal, but they did not have it. See, once a notary is no longer a notary in California, it is the law that they must turn in their notarial journal to the county recorder.
Ms. Carr, in a lawsuit against her home loan originator Home123 Corporation, now in bankruptcy in Delaware, asked recently in informal discovery if they had the notarial journal. The answer came back ‘no’.
Ms. Carr asked if the particular notary, one Andres Rojas, was an employee of Home123 or New Century Mortgage. The answer came back ‘yes’. Home123 Corporation is a subsidiary of New Century Mortgage. Both have been barred from conducting business in California since 2007 by the California Corporations Commissioner. Un-deterred Ms. Carr then proceeded to obtain a copy of the bond paperwork filed with the California Secretary of State by the notary. She saw an address for Andres Rojas on that paperwork.
Keep in mind Andre Rojas was a robo-signer for New Century Mortgage. Here are some examples of forgeries of notarized of illegal stamped signatures by Andres Rojos. Click here.
Though persistence, Ms. Carr located Andre Rojas:
Upon doing further internet research she discovered at least 6 different addresses for the notary. She sent a letter to each address, having no real knowledge of which might be the most current. One was even in Las Vegas. She asked the notary to contact her as she wanted a copy of the page from the notarial journal related to her property. It was a pure long-shot that the notary might still have the notarial journal in his possession.
Incredulously Ms. Carr got a phone call just prior to Thanksgiving and it was the wife of the notary. She indicated that he indeed still had the notarial journal and also stated that he had performed hundreds upon hundreds of the notarizations upon assignments, lost note affidavits and modification agreements while employed at Home123 Corporation & New Century Mortgage. Ms. Carr then emailed information on the date the recorded document had been signed and notarized and the notary sent back scanned copies of the page(s) of his journal. In California there is a requirement for a finger print of the person signing the property related document and Ms. Carr knew that could be very helpful in determining who really put the ‘squiggle’ on the Corporation Deed of Assignment. The assignment went from Home123 Corporation to U.S. Bank, N.A. and Ms. Carr had never done business with U.S. Bank, nor ever had a loan with them. The attorneys for Home123 bankruptcy trustee also indicated to Ms. Carr that her loan had been sold to Chase just days after she closed on it. Indeed Ms. Carr believes she has located her home loan number in a document filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission and it is in REMIC securities trust which Chase created, namely JPMAC2006-NC1.
Ms. Carr sat incredulous, reading and re-reading the scanned page(s) and then she communicated with the notary again. She verified that there were no other pages completed in the notarial journal and none with the date her document was notarized May 22, 2007. Her document also had handwritten ‘effective 4-12-2007’ essentially backdating the assignment. Ms. Carr got validation back from the notary that the ‘effective 4-12-2007’ was NOT on the document when he notarized it. Thus, not only was the document tampered with after notarization BUT it was invalid as this particular notary did NOT do any further journal entries beyond March 6, 2007!
Here is an example of one of the line entries in Andres Rojas notary journal for March 5, 2007: Lost Note Affadavit, Modification Agreement, Corporate Assignments all signed by Steve Nagy (a Home123 Corp. and New Century VP of Records Management).
What is interesting is that on January 2010, according to the Orange County clerk recorder in Santa Ana, CA document, Mr. Rojas notary journal was missing. However, Ms. Carr obatined Mr. Nagy's notarial journal. Ms. Carr is now asking California Secretary of State Debra Bowen and new California Attorney General Kamala Harris to investigate the matter. Ms. Carr's finding is not only because notaries were robo-signed but her findings would be a serious interest to investors:
Because if the assignments are invalid then, according to IRS laws on REMIC trusts (a tax entity and is usually formed as a trust for federal income tax), they were not really in the securities trust by the cutoff date when the investments were sold to the institutional investors. This would allegedly mean that the banks and investment houses were selling vaporware to investors and reaping the benefits of scamming the IRS out of taxes due. This would allegedly mean the banks and investment houses were committing fraud.
This would also mean that many lawyers representing the banks and investment houses, allegedly have been conducting fraud upon the courts in foreclosure actions & in the presentation of lost note affidavits to the courts…..yes even in the homeowner bankruptcy. This may have implications to those who are current on their mortgages, for they may not have clear title when they go to sell their homes, refi or even pay off their mortgage loans due to the defective assignment.
Ms. Carr's clever investigation does open the door to possible similar practices in other states. Certainly, it will be interesting the conclusion of the investigations by the Secretary of State and state Attorney General.
Saturday, January 15, 2011
See ya Mikey! Open thread
To be my sunshine after the rain
It's so hard to say goodbye to Mikey Steele
Florida attorney general widens inquiry into foreclosure law firms
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi's office has expanded its investigation of foreclosure law firms beyond false court documents and the so-called "robo-signers" who were producing them in huge volumes.
Spokeswoman Jennifer Davis said, in response to questions from the Sun Sentinel, that the investigation is also focusing on allegations of misconduct by attorneys, in addition to others who worked at the large law firms that formerly handled most of Florida's foreclosure cases.
Among the allegations she said the attorney general's office is examining:
Law firms padding bills in order to get higher final judgments for lenders at foreclosure. The allegation is that bills submitted in court documents contained inflated fees for process serving -- the procedure for delivering legal notices to those involved in court cases -- that were higher than what the firms actually paid for this service.
Attorneys submitting blank bills in court documents that didn't reveal the actual amount of their fees
Lawyers steering business to title companies owned by the principals in their law firms.
Law firms filing foreclosures before the lender or loan servicer shows that it has a legal interest in the mortgage.
Davis did not indicate which firms are facing which allegations. She also said there is no timetable for the investigation to be concluded.
Bondi's predecessor Bill McCollum launched the investigation last year of four large foreclosure law firms – the law offices of David J. Stern, Shapiro & Fishman, Florida Default Law Group and the law offices of Marshall C. Watson.
Click here for full story
Read on.
Spokeswoman Jennifer Davis said, in response to questions from the Sun Sentinel, that the investigation is also focusing on allegations of misconduct by attorneys, in addition to others who worked at the large law firms that formerly handled most of Florida's foreclosure cases.
Among the allegations she said the attorney general's office is examining:
Law firms padding bills in order to get higher final judgments for lenders at foreclosure. The allegation is that bills submitted in court documents contained inflated fees for process serving -- the procedure for delivering legal notices to those involved in court cases -- that were higher than what the firms actually paid for this service.
Attorneys submitting blank bills in court documents that didn't reveal the actual amount of their fees
Lawyers steering business to title companies owned by the principals in their law firms.
Law firms filing foreclosures before the lender or loan servicer shows that it has a legal interest in the mortgage.
Davis did not indicate which firms are facing which allegations. She also said there is no timetable for the investigation to be concluded.
Bondi's predecessor Bill McCollum launched the investigation last year of four large foreclosure law firms – the law offices of David J. Stern, Shapiro & Fishman, Florida Default Law Group and the law offices of Marshall C. Watson.
Click here for full story
Read on.
Biloxi Buzz for Saturday
Reagan Son Claims Dad Had Alzheimer's as President — 2011 is a big year for Ronald Reagan fans, being the centennial of his February 6 birth in Tampico, Ill. But youngest son Ron Reagan is spoiling the good cheer with a new book that suggests the Gipper suffered from Alzheimer's disease
Maine governor says NAACP can ‘kiss my butt’ — (CNN) - Maine Republican Gov. Paul LePage is keeping up his reputation for blunt language, telling an unhappy NAACP chapter that they can “kiss my butt.” — The governor made the comments to CNN affiliate WCSH after being asked about criticism …
Political Gifts From Beyond the Grave: Dead Woman Donates Thousands of Dollars to Tea Party Express — For more than two years, the Tea Party Express' political war chest has been filled with thousands of dollars in donations from a dead woman. — According to the Center
Boehner declines state dinner invite
This week, House Speaker John Boehner raised eyebrows by turning down an offer to ride on Air Force One with President Obama and others headed to a memorial service in Tucson. Instead, he appeared at a reception for Republican operative Maria Cino. Now, on the heels of renewed calls for bipartisanship and toned-down political rhetoric, Boehner is saying “thanks, but no thanks” to another offer to appear at an event with the president – Wednesday’s White House state dinner.
The dinner, honoring the Chinese President Hu Jintao, will pull together leaders on both sides of the aisle, along with celebs, CEOs, Cabinet members, Supreme Court justices and media bigwigs.
Read on.
The dinner, honoring the Chinese President Hu Jintao, will pull together leaders on both sides of the aisle, along with celebs, CEOs, Cabinet members, Supreme Court justices and media bigwigs.
Read on.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Liar Loans – JP Morgan Chase Loan Officer Lied on Borrowers Loan Applications to Make Numbers Work
4closurefraud:
Over and over again, this is how loans were “funded”. It was not the borrower that knew what “numbers” to plug into the loan application to get them to go through. It was the brokers who “massaged the numbers to make it work.
Check out the documents below. They represent a borrower who showed concern for how the “loan officer” filled out the loan application and his response. I have pulled out the key parts due to the fact that it is somewhat difficult to read.
From the exchange…
Concerns from the borrower…
I have the following concerns with the documents you sent me:
(1) I do not make $34,000 per month nor anything close to this figure. I am not
comfortable signing a document with a number I cannot document in some form.
(2) There are repeated mentions that this is an adjustable rate mortgage. I could find
no mention of the frequency and amount of the adjustment. I need this.
(3) I do not wish to escrow insurance or taxes. I will pay these.
(4) Apparently this is a $417,000 first and a $70,000 second. Where are the
documents for the second? What is the rate, how adjustable, what are the costs,
what IS the term’? Why are we doing it this way?
I will need the information and answers requested before I can execute and return the
documents.
Response from the “Loan Officer”
My comments in italics…
I hope all is going well. This email is in response to the fax you had sent me. I’ll’ address each numbered concern:
1. This is a stated income deal. We had to state an amount that will be consistent through each deal. There are certain ratios that have to be met for income to debt… This is the figure that made the ratio fit. Since you have ample equity (from an inflated appraisal) and assets (that are now gone), along with great credit, (not anymore) this is where the luxury of a stated program comes in. It will not need to be documented. There is a form 4506 (request for tax transcript) in the package that needs to be signed, it is only to verify that you FILE your taxes (this is why so many thought they were submitting documented income).
2. Talks about the adjustable rate, see document below…
3. Talks about the escrows, again see document below…
4. The route we took to get the best absolute rate, (biggest commission) was keeping the first mortgage at a “conforming” or “conventional” amount. $417,000 is that maximum amount. Once it went to a “JUMBO” or “Non-Conforming loan amount, the rate jumps .25%. The second mortgage of $70,125 is to avoid mortgage insurance and allow you to put less down. The idea goal would be to pay that one down as use it for future purchases.
I appreciate all of your business (sucker) and want you to be as comfortable with me as possible. I know we’ve had some delays (manipulating the numbers) that seem a bit silly, but I guarantee that I’m laying the foundations fore these deals and several more. Once we get these first few initial closed, it’s smooth sailing from there on out. If you’d prefer a sit down sometime this week please let me know. I know you gentlemen are busy, but I want you to be confident AND comfortable with me.
Respectfully
Marc
Marc S. Bristol
Senior Loan Officer
JP Morgan Chase Home Mortgage
Well, as you can imagine, the home is now in foreclosure…
JP Morgan Chase Smoking Gun
Over and over again, this is how loans were “funded”. It was not the borrower that knew what “numbers” to plug into the loan application to get them to go through. It was the brokers who “massaged the numbers to make it work.
Check out the documents below. They represent a borrower who showed concern for how the “loan officer” filled out the loan application and his response. I have pulled out the key parts due to the fact that it is somewhat difficult to read.
From the exchange…
Concerns from the borrower…
I have the following concerns with the documents you sent me:
(1) I do not make $34,000 per month nor anything close to this figure. I am not
comfortable signing a document with a number I cannot document in some form.
(2) There are repeated mentions that this is an adjustable rate mortgage. I could find
no mention of the frequency and amount of the adjustment. I need this.
(3) I do not wish to escrow insurance or taxes. I will pay these.
(4) Apparently this is a $417,000 first and a $70,000 second. Where are the
documents for the second? What is the rate, how adjustable, what are the costs,
what IS the term’? Why are we doing it this way?
I will need the information and answers requested before I can execute and return the
documents.
Response from the “Loan Officer”
My comments in italics…
I hope all is going well. This email is in response to the fax you had sent me. I’ll’ address each numbered concern:
1. This is a stated income deal. We had to state an amount that will be consistent through each deal. There are certain ratios that have to be met for income to debt… This is the figure that made the ratio fit. Since you have ample equity (from an inflated appraisal) and assets (that are now gone), along with great credit, (not anymore) this is where the luxury of a stated program comes in. It will not need to be documented. There is a form 4506 (request for tax transcript) in the package that needs to be signed, it is only to verify that you FILE your taxes (this is why so many thought they were submitting documented income).
2. Talks about the adjustable rate, see document below…
3. Talks about the escrows, again see document below…
4. The route we took to get the best absolute rate, (biggest commission) was keeping the first mortgage at a “conforming” or “conventional” amount. $417,000 is that maximum amount. Once it went to a “JUMBO” or “Non-Conforming loan amount, the rate jumps .25%. The second mortgage of $70,125 is to avoid mortgage insurance and allow you to put less down. The idea goal would be to pay that one down as use it for future purchases.
I appreciate all of your business (sucker) and want you to be as comfortable with me as possible. I know we’ve had some delays (manipulating the numbers) that seem a bit silly, but I guarantee that I’m laying the foundations fore these deals and several more. Once we get these first few initial closed, it’s smooth sailing from there on out. If you’d prefer a sit down sometime this week please let me know. I know you gentlemen are busy, but I want you to be confident AND comfortable with me.
Respectfully
Marc
Marc S. Bristol
Senior Loan Officer
JP Morgan Chase Home Mortgage
Well, as you can imagine, the home is now in foreclosure…
JP Morgan Chase Smoking Gun
Biloxi Buzz for Friday
Cat Summoned To Jury Duty
An Open Letter to Parents Following the Tragedy in Tucson — Like so many Americans all across the country, Barack and I were shocked and heartbroken by the horrific act of violence committed in Arizona this past weekend. Yesterday, we had the chance to attend a memorial service and meet
An Open Letter to Parents Following the Tragedy in Tucson — Like so many Americans all across the country, Barack and I were shocked and heartbroken by the horrific act of violence committed in Arizona this past weekend. Yesterday, we had the chance to attend a memorial service and meet
U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison won't seek re-election in 2012 — gjeffers@dallasnews.com — Kay Bailey Hutchison will not run for re-election to the U.S. Senate. — In a letter to supporters, Hutchison said she enjoyed serving Texas. — “I am announcing today that I will not be a candidate …
Employee: ‘Foreclosure mill’ force her to work off clock
TAMPA – A former employee of a major foreclosure law firm in Tampa says she and others were forced to work “off the clock” to keep up with a flood of cases over the past three years.
Denise Vasquez has filed a lawsuit against Florida Default Law Group, alleging employees were regularly allowed five hours per week of overtime, but were also routinely required to work extra hours without pay.
This is the latest setback for a firm entrenched in the mortgage foreclosure meltdown involving law firms that handled hundreds of thousands of suits on behalf of lenders. The firm is among four under state investigation for rushing through paperwork and filing misleading documents.
The Florida Attorney General’s Office calls these firms “foreclosure mills” because of the large volume of cases they handle. Critics say the firms got so big that they fostered an atmosphere for sloppiness.
“Thousands of emails from all over the country would come in every day requiring action in the Florida Courts,” Vasquez’ suit says.
However, the law firm says the overtime case is unrelated.
“We treat our employees fairly, and in complete compliance with all standards and regulations,” said Ronald R. Wolfe, managing partner Florida Default. “We are confident that no wrong doing occurred in this case.”
Continue reading here…
Vasquez v. Florida Default Law Group, PL
Denise Vasquez has filed a lawsuit against Florida Default Law Group, alleging employees were regularly allowed five hours per week of overtime, but were also routinely required to work extra hours without pay.
This is the latest setback for a firm entrenched in the mortgage foreclosure meltdown involving law firms that handled hundreds of thousands of suits on behalf of lenders. The firm is among four under state investigation for rushing through paperwork and filing misleading documents.
The Florida Attorney General’s Office calls these firms “foreclosure mills” because of the large volume of cases they handle. Critics say the firms got so big that they fostered an atmosphere for sloppiness.
“Thousands of emails from all over the country would come in every day requiring action in the Florida Courts,” Vasquez’ suit says.
However, the law firm says the overtime case is unrelated.
“We treat our employees fairly, and in complete compliance with all standards and regulations,” said Ronald R. Wolfe, managing partner Florida Default. “We are confident that no wrong doing occurred in this case.”
Continue reading here…
Vasquez v. Florida Default Law Group, PL
Judge holds bankers in contempt, threatens jail
Representatives from six major banks that skipped a hearing in a Miami condo association receivership case could face the wrath of Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Jennifer Bailey today if they fail to show up a second time.
The judge already has declared lenders that own or are foreclosing on units at Bird Grove Condo are on the hook for $105,999 in expenses for the court-appointed receiver for the association. She also held the six in contempt of court.
Bailey last month granted a request by the receiver, Miami attorney Lisa Lehner, to be paid for pulling the building — an asset for the foreclosing banks — back from the brink of condemnation.
When Lehner was appointed in March, garbage hadn’t been collected for weeks, electricity was about to be cut off, the building had no insurance, and an elevator was broken. She turned it around in months.
“They have property and collateral that if I walk away from turn into nothing,” Lehner said. “Here I am, sitting as their property manager, working for free after practicing law for 28 years. It’s just not fair.”
Lehner’s demand for $5,579 in expenses per unit went uncontested at a Dec. 1 show cause hearing where Bank of America was the only lender to send a representative. Missing were Flagstar Bank, GMAC, PNC Bank, SunTrust Bank, U.S. Bank and Wells Fargo.
In November, banks owned two units and were foreclosing on another 17 units in the 39-unit building at 2734 Bird Ave. between a gas station and a gallery. A one-bedroom, one-bath unit is listed for sale for $50,000. Bank of America filed nine foreclosure cases, followed by GMAC with five.
The six lenders were ordered to send non-attorney representatives to today’s hearing, when Bailey will discuss whether the banks also should be required to pay the receiver’s upcoming maintenance fees. Bailey’s order threatened to have bankers arrested if they didn’t show, and she warned, “You may be held in jail up to 48 hours before a hearing is held.”
Continue reading here…
The judge already has declared lenders that own or are foreclosing on units at Bird Grove Condo are on the hook for $105,999 in expenses for the court-appointed receiver for the association. She also held the six in contempt of court.
Bailey last month granted a request by the receiver, Miami attorney Lisa Lehner, to be paid for pulling the building — an asset for the foreclosing banks — back from the brink of condemnation.
When Lehner was appointed in March, garbage hadn’t been collected for weeks, electricity was about to be cut off, the building had no insurance, and an elevator was broken. She turned it around in months.
“They have property and collateral that if I walk away from turn into nothing,” Lehner said. “Here I am, sitting as their property manager, working for free after practicing law for 28 years. It’s just not fair.”
Lehner’s demand for $5,579 in expenses per unit went uncontested at a Dec. 1 show cause hearing where Bank of America was the only lender to send a representative. Missing were Flagstar Bank, GMAC, PNC Bank, SunTrust Bank, U.S. Bank and Wells Fargo.
In November, banks owned two units and were foreclosing on another 17 units in the 39-unit building at 2734 Bird Ave. between a gas station and a gallery. A one-bedroom, one-bath unit is listed for sale for $50,000. Bank of America filed nine foreclosure cases, followed by GMAC with five.
The six lenders were ordered to send non-attorney representatives to today’s hearing, when Bailey will discuss whether the banks also should be required to pay the receiver’s upcoming maintenance fees. Bailey’s order threatened to have bankers arrested if they didn’t show, and she warned, “You may be held in jail up to 48 hours before a hearing is held.”
Continue reading here…
Thursday, January 13, 2011
VA Bill Attempts To Fix Fraudclosure – Banks Go Nuts
§ 55-59.5. Sale by trustee; additional requirements; nominee cannot request sale.
A. On or after July 1, 2011, if a deed of trust or mortgage has been assigned by the original grantee or mortgagee, the trustee, or any substitute trustee, under any deed of trust or mortgage shall not proceed with any sale of the property unless (i) all assignments of the deed of trust or mortgage have been duly recorded with the land records of the locality in which the property is located and (ii) the person who asserts that he is the holder of the obligation secured by the deed of trust or mortgage can directly trace his interest through the duly recorded assignments to the original grantee or mortgagee.§ 55-59.6. Foreclosure; civil penalty for fraud; civil action.
A. Any person who (i) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used a false or fraudulent record, document, or statement or (ii) knowingly swears or affirms falsely to any matter, in support of any foreclosure upon property under this chapter shall be liable for a civil penalty of $5,000 for each violation.
B. If all assignments of the deed of trust or mortgage have not been duly recorded with the land records of the locality in which the property is located, the trustee, or any substitute trustee, may proceed with the sale of the property conveyed to him by the deed of trust or mortgage upon (i) the recordation of any assignments necessary to trace the interest of the person who asserts that he is the holder of the obligation secured by the deed of trust or mortgage to the original grantee or mortgagee or, if an intervening assignment cannot be recorded because the assignee no longer exists, the provision of an affidavit by the party secured to the trustee, or any substitute trustee, attesting under penalty of perjury that the person is the party secured under the deed of trust, and (ii) the payment of all fees, taxes, and other costs applicable to the recording of the assignments. The person who asserts that he is the holder of the obligation secured by the deed of trust or mortgage is solely responsible for paying all fees, taxes, and other costs required in clause (ii).
C. A nominee of a grantee, mortgagee, or beneficiary for a deed of trust or mortgage has no authority to request that the trustee, or any substitute trustee, proceed with any sale of the property and the trustee, or any substitute trustee, shall not proceed with any such sale upon the request of the nominee. As used in this section, “nominee” means a person who is designated in the deed of trust or mortgage, or who is subsequently designated to act on behalf of the grantee, mortgagee, or beneficiary. The term “nominee” does not include an agent or other fiduciary.
Read on.
A. On or after July 1, 2011, if a deed of trust or mortgage has been assigned by the original grantee or mortgagee, the trustee, or any substitute trustee, under any deed of trust or mortgage shall not proceed with any sale of the property unless (i) all assignments of the deed of trust or mortgage have been duly recorded with the land records of the locality in which the property is located and (ii) the person who asserts that he is the holder of the obligation secured by the deed of trust or mortgage can directly trace his interest through the duly recorded assignments to the original grantee or mortgagee.§ 55-59.6. Foreclosure; civil penalty for fraud; civil action.
A. Any person who (i) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used a false or fraudulent record, document, or statement or (ii) knowingly swears or affirms falsely to any matter, in support of any foreclosure upon property under this chapter shall be liable for a civil penalty of $5,000 for each violation.
B. If all assignments of the deed of trust or mortgage have not been duly recorded with the land records of the locality in which the property is located, the trustee, or any substitute trustee, may proceed with the sale of the property conveyed to him by the deed of trust or mortgage upon (i) the recordation of any assignments necessary to trace the interest of the person who asserts that he is the holder of the obligation secured by the deed of trust or mortgage to the original grantee or mortgagee or, if an intervening assignment cannot be recorded because the assignee no longer exists, the provision of an affidavit by the party secured to the trustee, or any substitute trustee, attesting under penalty of perjury that the person is the party secured under the deed of trust, and (ii) the payment of all fees, taxes, and other costs applicable to the recording of the assignments. The person who asserts that he is the holder of the obligation secured by the deed of trust or mortgage is solely responsible for paying all fees, taxes, and other costs required in clause (ii).
C. A nominee of a grantee, mortgagee, or beneficiary for a deed of trust or mortgage has no authority to request that the trustee, or any substitute trustee, proceed with any sale of the property and the trustee, or any substitute trustee, shall not proceed with any such sale upon the request of the nominee. As used in this section, “nominee” means a person who is designated in the deed of trust or mortgage, or who is subsequently designated to act on behalf of the grantee, mortgagee, or beneficiary. The term “nominee” does not include an agent or other fiduciary.
Read on.
ARANGO’S TESTIMONY CONTRADICTS CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY OF MERSCORP PRESIDENT
Y’all remember Cheryl Samons from the now destroyed David Stern Law firm, right?
Well, here we introduce Patricia Arango of Marshall C Watson…
Attached is the Arango deposition and exhibits. To help you all sort through it all, below is a summary of some of the high points:
MS. ARANGO’S TESTIMONY CONTRADICTS CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY OF MERSCORP PRESIDENT:
On the MERS website (as well as a Congressional website), you can find the testimony of MERSCORP, Inc. President and CEO, R.K. Arnold. http://www.mersinc.org/files/filedownload.aspx?id=668&table=ProductFile
In this testimony before the House Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, Mr. Arnold states:
To be a MERS certifying officer, one must be an officer of the member institution who is familiar with the functions to be performed, and who has passed an examination administered by MERS.
First, Ms. Arango is obviously not an officer of the “member institution” which would be the bank:
Q. Okay. Are you now or have you ever been –
17 strike that.
18 Are you now an officer or director of
19 Countrywide Home Loans?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Have you ever been an officer or director
22 of Countrywide Home Loans?
23 A. No.
(p. 6) Note that the corporate resolution she is relying on is signed by Arnold’s underling William Hultman, (Senior Vice President and corporate secretary of MERS, see http://www.mersinc.org/about/exec.aspx) which appoints employees of Marshall C. Watson, P.A. as officers of MERS. (see Corporate Resolution, Exhibit 1 to the deposition, attached). Note also that the appointment was as to loans shown to be registered to Countrywide Financial Corporation. The assignment that Ms. Arango executed, however, was from MERS, as nominee for Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (Exhibits 4 and 7, attached). Second, Ms. Arango never took any examination to become a signing officer for MERS:
Nor is Ms. Arango herself or her law firm a “member” of MERS:
1 Q. All right. Are you a member of MERS?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Is your law firm a member of MERS?
4 A. No.
(p. 8) So her testimony contradicts Arnold’s testimony that a certifying officer must be an officer—or even an employee—of a member institution.
11 Q. Okay. Did you have — did you have to take
12 any training from MERS or some other entity to qualify to
13 be an assistant secretary or agent for them?
14 A. I don’t — no, I didn’t.
15 Q. How about any type of testing or
16 certification, exam, anything along those lines?
17 A. No.
(p. 10)
Clearly this contradicts R.K. Arnold’s testimony—and even though she is the “assistant secretary” of MERS, Arango doesn’t even know who Arnold is and has never even heard of him. (p. 75-76). She was asked about her specifically about Arnold’s testimony:
3 Q. If [Arnold]stated that in order to be a
4 certifying officer and sign an assignment on behalf of
5 MERS somebody needed to pass and complete an examination,
6 is that something that is familiar to you?
7 A. It’s not familiar to me, no. I don’t know.
8 Q. Okay. That was not something that you had
9 to do.
10 A. I did not do that.
So we can only draw two conclusions, either: 1) R.K. Arnold testified falsely to the House Subcommittee (or MERS only recently changed the rules to be a certifying officer, in which case he still misled the committee by implying that that has been the standard all along); or 2) Ms. Arango is not an official certifying officer of MERS—which would invalidate hundreds, if not thousands of assignments.
Read on.
Full Deposition of Patricia Arango of Marshall C Watson
Well, here we introduce Patricia Arango of Marshall C Watson…
Attached is the Arango deposition and exhibits. To help you all sort through it all, below is a summary of some of the high points:
MS. ARANGO’S TESTIMONY CONTRADICTS CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY OF MERSCORP PRESIDENT:
On the MERS website (as well as a Congressional website), you can find the testimony of MERSCORP, Inc. President and CEO, R.K. Arnold. http://www.mersinc.org/files/filedownload.aspx?id=668&table=ProductFile
In this testimony before the House Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, Mr. Arnold states:
To be a MERS certifying officer, one must be an officer of the member institution who is familiar with the functions to be performed, and who has passed an examination administered by MERS.
First, Ms. Arango is obviously not an officer of the “member institution” which would be the bank:
Q. Okay. Are you now or have you ever been –
17 strike that.
18 Are you now an officer or director of
19 Countrywide Home Loans?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Have you ever been an officer or director
22 of Countrywide Home Loans?
23 A. No.
(p. 6) Note that the corporate resolution she is relying on is signed by Arnold’s underling William Hultman, (Senior Vice President and corporate secretary of MERS, see http://www.mersinc.org/about/exec.aspx) which appoints employees of Marshall C. Watson, P.A. as officers of MERS. (see Corporate Resolution, Exhibit 1 to the deposition, attached). Note also that the appointment was as to loans shown to be registered to Countrywide Financial Corporation. The assignment that Ms. Arango executed, however, was from MERS, as nominee for Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (Exhibits 4 and 7, attached). Second, Ms. Arango never took any examination to become a signing officer for MERS:
Nor is Ms. Arango herself or her law firm a “member” of MERS:
1 Q. All right. Are you a member of MERS?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Is your law firm a member of MERS?
4 A. No.
(p. 8) So her testimony contradicts Arnold’s testimony that a certifying officer must be an officer—or even an employee—of a member institution.
11 Q. Okay. Did you have — did you have to take
12 any training from MERS or some other entity to qualify to
13 be an assistant secretary or agent for them?
14 A. I don’t — no, I didn’t.
15 Q. How about any type of testing or
16 certification, exam, anything along those lines?
17 A. No.
(p. 10)
Clearly this contradicts R.K. Arnold’s testimony—and even though she is the “assistant secretary” of MERS, Arango doesn’t even know who Arnold is and has never even heard of him. (p. 75-76). She was asked about her specifically about Arnold’s testimony:
3 Q. If [Arnold]stated that in order to be a
4 certifying officer and sign an assignment on behalf of
5 MERS somebody needed to pass and complete an examination,
6 is that something that is familiar to you?
7 A. It’s not familiar to me, no. I don’t know.
8 Q. Okay. That was not something that you had
9 to do.
10 A. I did not do that.
So we can only draw two conclusions, either: 1) R.K. Arnold testified falsely to the House Subcommittee (or MERS only recently changed the rules to be a certifying officer, in which case he still misled the committee by implying that that has been the standard all along); or 2) Ms. Arango is not an official certifying officer of MERS—which would invalidate hundreds, if not thousands of assignments.
Read on.
Full Deposition of Patricia Arango of Marshall C Watson
FBI Investigating Loughner's Funds
Washington Post reports:
The investigators believe that Loughner, 22, did not have sufficient income of his own to buy the Glock 19 semiautomatic handgun, the four magazines and the knife he allegedly carried to the event in front of a Tucson supermarket, the sources said. They estimated the cost at close to $1,000. Two of the magazines were extended ones capable of holding up to 33 rounds.
The FBI and Pima County Sheriff's Office investigators are examining the Loughner family's financial records, as well as Jared Loughner's telephone, Internet and e-mail records, as they try to ascertain where the money to buy the weapons came from, said the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to talk about an ongoing investigation.
Full story here.
The investigators believe that Loughner, 22, did not have sufficient income of his own to buy the Glock 19 semiautomatic handgun, the four magazines and the knife he allegedly carried to the event in front of a Tucson supermarket, the sources said. They estimated the cost at close to $1,000. Two of the magazines were extended ones capable of holding up to 33 rounds.
The FBI and Pima County Sheriff's Office investigators are examining the Loughner family's financial records, as well as Jared Loughner's telephone, Internet and e-mail records, as they try to ascertain where the money to buy the weapons came from, said the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to talk about an ongoing investigation.
Full story here.
Biloxi Buzz for Thursday
Health Care Reform Contains Major Expansion Of Access To Mental Health Services
Cash-Strapped State Passes 66% Income Tax Hike
Last week's poll had asked:Should Haiti play bigger role in its own reconstruction? JL readers answered yes. This week's poll is now up.
Will Bush's Torture Memo Team Face Justice in Spain?
But perhaps there will be justice in Spain. This past Friday, the Center for Constitutional Rights filed papers urging Judge Eloy Velasco to do what the United States will not: prosecute the "Bush Six," the group of senior Bush-era government lawyers led by then–Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, for violating international law by creating a legal framework that aided and abetted the torture of suspected terrorists. (Full disclosure: I've done consulting work for CCR.)
Specifically, the January 5 filing addresses one of the primary obstacles facing this case: the legal difficulty of bringing charges against government lawyers. Arguably, they were simply "doing their job"—advising their boss, the president, in a legal capacity. In providing Velasco an appropriate legal framework for pursuing the Bush Six, CCR cites the last time this kind of prosecution was brought—during the Nuremberg trials, when Nazi government lawyers who provided cover for the Third Reich's war crimes were found guilty for their complicity.
The comparison is apt. Now as then, the filing argues, "the defendants must be held to account not only because it was a foreseeable consequence that the legal positions taken in their various memoranda would lead to torture and other crimes; but also because enabling these crimes was their very purpose in conspiring to write these opinions."
In short, the Bush Six, like their Nazi counterparts, performed to order for an administration that wanted legal cover to do whatever it wanted with groups it had already deemed non-human—in this case the "enemy combatants" stripped of their personhood and their rights at Guantánamo and other US-run overseas locations. Like the Nazi government's lawyers, the Bush Six consciously distorted the law, knowing that the opinions they wrote justifying these actions would enable torture and other crimes.
Read on.
Specifically, the January 5 filing addresses one of the primary obstacles facing this case: the legal difficulty of bringing charges against government lawyers. Arguably, they were simply "doing their job"—advising their boss, the president, in a legal capacity. In providing Velasco an appropriate legal framework for pursuing the Bush Six, CCR cites the last time this kind of prosecution was brought—during the Nuremberg trials, when Nazi government lawyers who provided cover for the Third Reich's war crimes were found guilty for their complicity.
The comparison is apt. Now as then, the filing argues, "the defendants must be held to account not only because it was a foreseeable consequence that the legal positions taken in their various memoranda would lead to torture and other crimes; but also because enabling these crimes was their very purpose in conspiring to write these opinions."
In short, the Bush Six, like their Nazi counterparts, performed to order for an administration that wanted legal cover to do whatever it wanted with groups it had already deemed non-human—in this case the "enemy combatants" stripped of their personhood and their rights at Guantánamo and other US-run overseas locations. Like the Nazi government's lawyers, the Bush Six consciously distorted the law, knowing that the opinions they wrote justifying these actions would enable torture and other crimes.
Read on.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Washington Class Action Complaint Filed Against EMC Mortgage Corp. and The Bear Stearns Companies LLC
PACHECO v. EMC Mortgage Corp & The Bear Stearns Companies LLC [Read Complaint Below]
SEATTLE, January 10, 2011 (GlobeNewswire) – Attorney Advertising. Keller Rohrback L.L.P. (www.krclassaction.com) announces that a class action has been filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington on behalf of all mortgagors in the State of Washington whose home mortgage loans are serviced by EMC Mortgage Corporation and who (a) have attempted to obtain modifications of their loan terms from EMC; and (b) have made payments pursuant to a “Repayment Agreement,” a Home Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP”) trial modification plan, or any other temporary modification plan.
The complaint alleges, among other things that the Defendants: engaged in bad faith as to home mortgage loan modification negotiations; led mortgagors to reasonably believe and rely on Defendants’ representations that they would permanently modify their mortgage loans upon successful completion of “Repayment Agreements” or other trial programs; charged unreasonable, unlawful, or excessive fees; failed to properly disclose and/or concealed fees and other charges; failed to provide to mortgagors a proper or comprehensible accounting of fees, payments, credits, arrearages, and amounts owed; improperly or under-applied mortgage payments to accounts; and breached “Repayment Agreements” or other trial modification program contracts or promises. The complaint has been filed pursuant to the Washington Consumer Protection Act and contains additional claims for breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, promissory estoppel, and unjust enrichment.
Keller Rohrback is also investigating the following mortgage loan servicers regarding mortgage loan modifications in Washington and elsewhere:
• American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.
• Aurora Loan Services, LLC
• Citimortgage, Inc.
• GMAC Mortgage, Inc.
• JPMorgan Chase Bank NA
• Litton Loan Servicing LP
• Nationstar Mortgage LLC
• OneWest Bank
• SunTrust Mortgage, Inc.
Read on and read complaint.
SEATTLE, January 10, 2011 (GlobeNewswire) – Attorney Advertising. Keller Rohrback L.L.P. (www.krclassaction.com) announces that a class action has been filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington on behalf of all mortgagors in the State of Washington whose home mortgage loans are serviced by EMC Mortgage Corporation and who (a) have attempted to obtain modifications of their loan terms from EMC; and (b) have made payments pursuant to a “Repayment Agreement,” a Home Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP”) trial modification plan, or any other temporary modification plan.
The complaint alleges, among other things that the Defendants: engaged in bad faith as to home mortgage loan modification negotiations; led mortgagors to reasonably believe and rely on Defendants’ representations that they would permanently modify their mortgage loans upon successful completion of “Repayment Agreements” or other trial programs; charged unreasonable, unlawful, or excessive fees; failed to properly disclose and/or concealed fees and other charges; failed to provide to mortgagors a proper or comprehensible accounting of fees, payments, credits, arrearages, and amounts owed; improperly or under-applied mortgage payments to accounts; and breached “Repayment Agreements” or other trial modification program contracts or promises. The complaint has been filed pursuant to the Washington Consumer Protection Act and contains additional claims for breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, promissory estoppel, and unjust enrichment.
Keller Rohrback is also investigating the following mortgage loan servicers regarding mortgage loan modifications in Washington and elsewhere:
• American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.
• Aurora Loan Services, LLC
• Citimortgage, Inc.
• GMAC Mortgage, Inc.
• JPMorgan Chase Bank NA
• Litton Loan Servicing LP
• Nationstar Mortgage LLC
• OneWest Bank
• SunTrust Mortgage, Inc.
Read on and read complaint.
Bank of America Is the Next Target of a WikiLeaks Megaleak--Source
Bank of America is the target of the next "megaleak" from WikiLeaks, according to a person who has close contact with top people at Wikileaks.
Speculation has swirled around for months about which bank might be the target of WikiLeaks. Back in November, Andy Greenberg of Forbes magazine interviewed Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. He was told that Wikileaks had tens of thousands of documents from a big US bank that it would release early this year. Assange refused to identify the bank.
Despite Assange's refusal to name the bank, the consensus has long held that Bank of America is the target. The initial guessing was supported by an interview Assange gave a year earlier, where he mentioned having a hard-drive that once belonged to a Bank of America executive.
Our source has confirmed that Bank of America is indeed the target of the next big leak. The source couldn't elaborate on the materials held by Assange.
Read on.
Speculation has swirled around for months about which bank might be the target of WikiLeaks. Back in November, Andy Greenberg of Forbes magazine interviewed Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. He was told that Wikileaks had tens of thousands of documents from a big US bank that it would release early this year. Assange refused to identify the bank.
Despite Assange's refusal to name the bank, the consensus has long held that Bank of America is the target. The initial guessing was supported by an interview Assange gave a year earlier, where he mentioned having a hard-drive that once belonged to a Bank of America executive.
Our source has confirmed that Bank of America is indeed the target of the next big leak. The source couldn't elaborate on the materials held by Assange.
Read on.
Biloxi Buzz for Wednesday
Nearly 50 Percent Of Mental Health Services Recipients In Giffords' County Were Dropped In 2010
Speaker Boehner says no to new restrictions on firearms — Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) is rejecting gun-control legislation offered by the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee in response to the weekend shootings of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) and 19 others in Arizona.
Chafee to Issue Talk Radio Ban — ABC News' Steven Portnoy reports: — State officials in Rhode Island will soon be ordered to stay off the airways, provided the interviewer happens to be a talk show host. — A spokesman for Gov. Lincoln Chafee tells the Providence Journal that talk radio …
Judges Berate Bank Lawyers in Foreclosures
With judges looking ever more critically at home foreclosures, they are reaching beyond the bankers to heap some of their most scorching criticism on the lawyers.
In numerous opinions, judges have accused lawyers of processing shoddy or even fabricated paperwork in foreclosure actions when representing the banks.
Judge Arthur M. Schack of New York State Supreme Court in Brooklyn has taken aim at an upstate lawyer, Steven J. Baum, referring to one filing as “incredible, outrageous, ludicrous and disingenuous.”
But New York judges are also trying to take the lead in fixing the mortgage mess by leaning on the lawyers. In November, a judge ordered Mr. Baum’s firm to pay nearly $20,000 in fines and costs related to papers that he said contained numerous “falsities.” The judge, Scott Fairgrieve of Nassau County District Court, wrote that “swearing to false statements reflects poorly on the profession as a whole.”
Check out the rest here…
In numerous opinions, judges have accused lawyers of processing shoddy or even fabricated paperwork in foreclosure actions when representing the banks.
Judge Arthur M. Schack of New York State Supreme Court in Brooklyn has taken aim at an upstate lawyer, Steven J. Baum, referring to one filing as “incredible, outrageous, ludicrous and disingenuous.”
But New York judges are also trying to take the lead in fixing the mortgage mess by leaning on the lawyers. In November, a judge ordered Mr. Baum’s firm to pay nearly $20,000 in fines and costs related to papers that he said contained numerous “falsities.” The judge, Scott Fairgrieve of Nassau County District Court, wrote that “swearing to false statements reflects poorly on the profession as a whole.”
Check out the rest here…
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Ohio judge follows JPMorgan Chase’s advice for loan mod, ends up in foreclosure
Written by Biloxi
“The bank advised me that the only way they would consider a loan modification would be if I fell behind on my payments,” said Sikora, 59, a judge since 1989. “I took their advice and put the money aside.”
Who would ever thought that man who abide by the law and is the law would get screwed like some many distressed homeowners by the banks. This tells you that judges are human beings, and they, too, can get behind in mortgage payment. I only hope that the Judge Peter Sikora's case gets media attention since currently we have state and federal judges that are listening to homeowners' case like the Judge Sikora who are weighing into whether banks committed fraud or provided fraudulent documents to the court in foreclosure cases.
According to Cleveland Plain Dealer,
A Cuyahoga County Juvenile Court judge faces foreclosure on his eight-bedroom, lakefront Cleveland home after falling a year behind on a nearly $1 million mortgage and property taxes.
Judge Sikora was seeking a refinance because of the low mortgage interest rates. JP Morgan Chase declined him, and they instead offered him a loan modification. Judge Sikora was told like so many homeowners' stories to fall behind in his payments in order to qualify for a loan modification.
Now the judge only hopes on an upcoming mediation session to keep him in his home, which according to the Cuyahoga County Auditor’s Office, appraised the home at $844,000. Judge Sikora told the Plain Dealer in a telephone interview that he has the money to make his mortgage payments, and that the only reason he is in foreclosure is that he followed the advice of officials at JPMorgan Chase. The judge said that was surprised when back in June of last year while in the middle of his negotiations with the bank, the bank filed a lawsuit against him seeking $999,000 including $6,400 in unpaid property taxes.
According to Judge Sikora,
“It’s unfortunate that it’s gotten to this situation, I’ve been talking with them for more than a year, but the bank hasn’t been responsive.”
Let's just hope that Judge Sikora's case is used in current foreclosure cases in court as an example that judges, too, can fall victims to the banks' scam.
“The bank advised me that the only way they would consider a loan modification would be if I fell behind on my payments,” said Sikora, 59, a judge since 1989. “I took their advice and put the money aside.”
Who would ever thought that man who abide by the law and is the law would get screwed like some many distressed homeowners by the banks. This tells you that judges are human beings, and they, too, can get behind in mortgage payment. I only hope that the Judge Peter Sikora's case gets media attention since currently we have state and federal judges that are listening to homeowners' case like the Judge Sikora who are weighing into whether banks committed fraud or provided fraudulent documents to the court in foreclosure cases.
According to Cleveland Plain Dealer,
A Cuyahoga County Juvenile Court judge faces foreclosure on his eight-bedroom, lakefront Cleveland home after falling a year behind on a nearly $1 million mortgage and property taxes.
Judge Sikora was seeking a refinance because of the low mortgage interest rates. JP Morgan Chase declined him, and they instead offered him a loan modification. Judge Sikora was told like so many homeowners' stories to fall behind in his payments in order to qualify for a loan modification.
Now the judge only hopes on an upcoming mediation session to keep him in his home, which according to the Cuyahoga County Auditor’s Office, appraised the home at $844,000. Judge Sikora told the Plain Dealer in a telephone interview that he has the money to make his mortgage payments, and that the only reason he is in foreclosure is that he followed the advice of officials at JPMorgan Chase. The judge said that was surprised when back in June of last year while in the middle of his negotiations with the bank, the bank filed a lawsuit against him seeking $999,000 including $6,400 in unpaid property taxes.
According to Judge Sikora,
“It’s unfortunate that it’s gotten to this situation, I’ve been talking with them for more than a year, but the bank hasn’t been responsive.”
Let's just hope that Judge Sikora's case is used in current foreclosure cases in court as an example that judges, too, can fall victims to the banks' scam.
Letter to the NJ Supreme Court Concerning Fraudulant Docs Filed in Foreclosure Proceedings w/ Exhibits
Superior Court
Chancery Division
General Equity Part
210 South Broad Street
Trenton, New Jersey 08625
In the Matter of Residential Mortgage Foreclosure
Pleading and Document Irregularities Superior Court of
New Jersey, Chancery Division-General Equity Part, No.
F- 59553-10, Mercer County (Trenton)
Honorable Mary C. Jacobson, F.J.Ch
LETTER TO THE NEW JERSEY SUPREME COURT CONCERNING
FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS FILED IN FORECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS
AND RECORDED WITH COUNTRY CLERKS ACROSS AMERICA
Why Foreclosure Document Robo-signing Should Be Defined as
Fabricating Evidence, Fraud Upon American Courts, and Felony
Land Record Fraud
Here are the exhibits. Click here.
Letter to the NJ Supreme Court Re Foreclosure Fraud
Chancery Division
General Equity Part
210 South Broad Street
Trenton, New Jersey 08625
In the Matter of Residential Mortgage Foreclosure
Pleading and Document Irregularities Superior Court of
New Jersey, Chancery Division-General Equity Part, No.
F- 59553-10, Mercer County (Trenton)
Honorable Mary C. Jacobson, F.J.Ch
LETTER TO THE NEW JERSEY SUPREME COURT CONCERNING
FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS FILED IN FORECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS
AND RECORDED WITH COUNTRY CLERKS ACROSS AMERICA
Why Foreclosure Document Robo-signing Should Be Defined as
Fabricating Evidence, Fraud Upon American Courts, and Felony
Land Record Fraud
Here are the exhibits. Click here.
Letter to the NJ Supreme Court Re Foreclosure Fraud
Biloxi Buzz for Tuesday
Massachusetts Homeowner Foreclosure Case to Resume After High Court Ruling
Lenders to talk to borrowers before foreclosing
Judge sentences Tom DeLay to 3 years in prison — AUSTIN, Texas — A judge ordered former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay to serve three years in prison Monday for his role in a scheme to illegally funnel corporate money to Texas candidates in 2002. — The sentence comes after a jury
Lenders to talk to borrowers before foreclosing
Judge sentences Tom DeLay to 3 years in prison — AUSTIN, Texas — A judge ordered former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay to serve three years in prison Monday for his role in a scheme to illegally funnel corporate money to Texas candidates in 2002. — The sentence comes after a jury
Feds arrest person suspected of threatening Sen. Bennet's Denver office — Authorities responded Monday to a threat against Sen. Michael Bennet's (D-Colo.) Denver office, Bennet's spokesman said. — The FBI and U.S. Capitol Police arrested an individual suspected of making a threat …
Ashley Turton, ex-Congressional aide, found dead in burning car — A veteran Congressional aide who worked most recently as a lobbyist and was married to White House legislative affairs senior official was found dead in her car Monday behind the couple's Capitol Hill home following a low-speed car crash and subsequent fire.
Obama to travel to Tucson Wednesday in wake of weekend rampage — By: CNN Senior White House Correspondent Ed Henry — (CNN)-President Barack Obama will travel to Arizona on Wednesday in the wake of the weekend shooting there that left six people dead and 14 wounded, including a member of Congress …Supreme Court Rejects Appeal Filed By Birther Queen Orly Taitz
Monday, January 10, 2011
Wells Fargo Loses Bid to Dismiss Fraud Claims | GUSTAVO REYES, ET AL., Plaintiffs, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Defendant
Homeowners who say Wells Fargo Bank duped them into loan-modification programs to stave off foreclosure survived a legal challenge to their case in San Francisco federal court.
U.S. District Judge Joseph Spero pared the class’s suit on Monday, rejecting claims for breach of contract but upholding allegations that the bank’s debt-collection practices were unfair, deceptive and fraudulent. He also permitted the plaintiffs to seek restitution for an installment payment they made in March 2010, since the bank had already foreclosed upon them by that point.
Lead plaintiffs Gustavo Reyes and Maria Teresa Guerrero claimed that, after they defaulted on their mortgage payments, Wells Fargo offered to freeze foreclosure proceedings against them if they signed a modified loan agreement.
But after they signed the loan and made payments over four consecutive months, the bank still foreclosed on their home.
Wells Fargo asked the district court to throw out the suit, arguing that the homeowners’ breach contract and fraud claims were fatally flawed.
Spero instead found that the homeowners may be entitled to damages under California’s Rosenthal Act, which protects consumers from improper debt-collection practices.
“The court cannot say, as a matter of law, that the statements made in the offer letter would not have been misleading to the least sophisticated buyer in light of: the words ‘good news’ at the beginning of the letter; the language in the letter indicating that the agreement was being offered based on a review of the recipient’s financial information; the statement that foreclosure counsel would be instructed to delay foreclosure proceedings as long as the recipients made timely payments under the agreement; and the use of the words ‘trial period’ to describe the agreement,” the ruling states.
While Spero tossed the homeowners’ contract claims for failure to state a claim, he upheld the homeowners’ claims under state law for unfair, unlawful and fraudulent business practices.
“Because plaintiffs in this case made payments to Wells Fargo as a result of the business practice that is the subject of their unfair competition law claim, the court concludes that they have standing to assert such a claim,” Spero wrote.
Full order below…
Gustavo Reyes, Et Al., Plaintiffs, V. Wells Fargo Bank, n.a., Defendant
U.S. District Judge Joseph Spero pared the class’s suit on Monday, rejecting claims for breach of contract but upholding allegations that the bank’s debt-collection practices were unfair, deceptive and fraudulent. He also permitted the plaintiffs to seek restitution for an installment payment they made in March 2010, since the bank had already foreclosed upon them by that point.
Lead plaintiffs Gustavo Reyes and Maria Teresa Guerrero claimed that, after they defaulted on their mortgage payments, Wells Fargo offered to freeze foreclosure proceedings against them if they signed a modified loan agreement.
But after they signed the loan and made payments over four consecutive months, the bank still foreclosed on their home.
Wells Fargo asked the district court to throw out the suit, arguing that the homeowners’ breach contract and fraud claims were fatally flawed.
Spero instead found that the homeowners may be entitled to damages under California’s Rosenthal Act, which protects consumers from improper debt-collection practices.
“The court cannot say, as a matter of law, that the statements made in the offer letter would not have been misleading to the least sophisticated buyer in light of: the words ‘good news’ at the beginning of the letter; the language in the letter indicating that the agreement was being offered based on a review of the recipient’s financial information; the statement that foreclosure counsel would be instructed to delay foreclosure proceedings as long as the recipients made timely payments under the agreement; and the use of the words ‘trial period’ to describe the agreement,” the ruling states.
While Spero tossed the homeowners’ contract claims for failure to state a claim, he upheld the homeowners’ claims under state law for unfair, unlawful and fraudulent business practices.
“Because plaintiffs in this case made payments to Wells Fargo as a result of the business practice that is the subject of their unfair competition law claim, the court concludes that they have standing to assert such a claim,” Spero wrote.
Full order below…
Gustavo Reyes, Et Al., Plaintiffs, V. Wells Fargo Bank, n.a., Defendant
Biloxi Buzz for Monday
Anti-Gay Church To Protest Funerals Of Arizona Shooting Victims
Pelosi Makes Boehner Cry On 'SNL'
Heroic Intern Rushed To Help Giffords After Shooting
House Dem calls for ‘beefed up’ security, special treatment for members by TSA — A top House Democrat said the attack on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) should change how members of Congress are screened at airports. — “I really believe that that is the place where we feel the most ill at ease
NYC COMPTROLLER LIU: $432 BILLION PENSION FUND COALITION DEMANDS BANK DIRECTORS IMMEDIATELY EXAMINE FORECLOSURE PRACTICES
A coalition of seven major public pension systems called on the boards of directors of Bank of America (NYSE: BAC), Citigroup (NYSE: C), JP Morgan Chase (NYSE: JPM), and Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC) to immediately undertake independent examinations of the banks’ mortgage and foreclosure practices.
John c. Liu Letter
John c. Liu Letter
Sunday, January 09, 2011
Open thread for Sunday
Palin 2010 Quote:
"We’re going to reclaim the power of the people
from those who disregarded the will of the people.
We’re paying particular attention to those House
members who voted in favor of Obamacare and
represent districts that Senator John McCain and
I carried during the 2008 election."
Link
A look at victims in attack on Giffords
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)