Bombshell lawsuit: GMAC’s stunning accusations against fraudclosure firm David J. Stern

Here are excerpts from the complaint:

causing and/or permitting DJSPA‟s employees to execute, witness and/or notarize assignments of mortgage that were back-dated;
(ii) causing and/or permitting DJSPA‟s employees to witness and/or notarize assignments of mortgages, affidavits of indebtedness and/or other affidavits on a daily basis prior to and without actually witnessing execution of the document by the person whose signature was to be witnessed and/or notarized;Case 0:11-cv-61526-MGC Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2011

(iii) causing and/or permitting DJSPA‟s employees to prepare and execute affidavits of indebtedness for submission to the foreclosure court that failed to follow appropriate professional practices and procedures;
(iv) causing and/or permitting DJSPA‟s employees to sign the name of another person on foreclosure-related documents without any indication of that fact on the documents;
(v) charging clients such as GMACM substantial fees and costs for legal services that DJSPA knew or should have known fell below the minimum standard of professional care owed by DJSPA.
19. Upon information and belief, Stern himself has admitted that allegations made about DJSPA‟s improper procedures are true.
20. In light of the on-going investigations by the Florida Attorney General, as well as other events and information, GMACM contacted DJSPA and conducted an on-site review of many of GMACM‟s files maintained by DJSPA.
21. On or about November 16, 2010, GMACM terminated its relationship with DJSPA and sought to recover its files from DJSPA.
22. DJSPA refused to release any files to GMACM until GMACM placed funds allegedly owed to DJSPA into escrow. In order to obtain its files as quickly as possible, GMACM agreed to this arrangement, without conceding that any amounts were owed to DJSPA.
23. Since recovering its files from GMACM, GMACM has expended significant time and money transitioning files to other law firms. Upon information and belief, GMACM has expended over $1.5 million in order to recover and transition files previously handled by DJSPA.
24. Because of its concern over the allegations and evidence of unprofessional practices followed by DJSPA, GMACM directed these newly-assigned law firms to review the recovered files and to take appropriate steps to attempt to remedy errors committed by DJSPA, as well as re-initiating foreclosure proceedings, in whole or part, due to concerns over the
Case 0:11-cv-61526-MGC Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2011 documents previously filed by DJSPA.
25. GMACM has since learned that DJSPA committed gross malpractice in the handling of GMACM matters. For example, in one foreclosure matter assigned to DJSPA for handling, DJSPA failed to communicate to GMACM that counterclaims had been brought. Indeed, DJSPA neglected to put forward any defense to such counterclaims, with the result that a default judgment was entered on or about May 5, 2011 for over $450,000. DJSPA‟s conduct in this and other instances has been wanton or reckless.

GMAC Stern Counterclaim[1]