Faulty Loans Top $72 Billion as Banks Seek Deal With Regulators: Mortgages
Fraudclosure Accord Said to Ensure Same Terms for All 50 States
Bank of America Impeding Investigation of its Loan Mod Practices by Negotiating Secret Settlements with Borrowers Who Must Agree Not to Criticize the Bank
- State of Arizona vs. Countrywide, Bank of America, et al – Office of Attorney General Terry Goddard Charges Bank of America with Mortgage Fraud
- BofA Lawsuit to Stay in State Court | State of Arizona vs. Countrywide, Bank of America, et al
- State of Nevada vs Bank of America – Nevada Attorney General Sues Bank of America for Deceiving Homeowners
American Banker | JPM Chase Quietly Halts Suits Over Consumer Debts
- JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America, Quietly Reducing Principle Balances for Tens of Thousands of Borrowers
- Fraud Anyone? Suits Filed Against Credit Suisse Group AG, Deutsche Bank AG, JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Bank of America Corp
- American Banker | Robo-Signing Redux: Servicers Still Fabricating Foreclosure Documents
Atlanta’s Bank of America Plaza, One of the 10 Tallest Structures in the U.S. Faces Foreclosure
MBIA Insurance Corp. v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc | BofA Loses Ruling Against MBIA in Fight Over Loans
Justice Department Reaches $335 Million Settlement to Resolve Allegations of Lending Discrimination by Countrywide Financial Corporation
- MBIA Insurance Corporation v. Bank of America Corp., Countrywide Financial Corporation, Countrywide Home Loans, et. al.
- Another Settlement Fail | FDIC Reaches $64 Million Settlement with 3 Former Washington Mutual Executives, Kinda…
- BAM | CA Appeals Court REVERSES Countrywide Class Action Suit Dismissal in DAVID H. LUTHER et al. v. COUNTRYWIDE FINANCIAL CORPORATION et al.
BofA Clash With Fannie Mae Escalates Over Loan Buyback Stance
WSJ | NY, Delaware AGs Allowed To Intervene In $8.5B Bank of America Settlement
California, AG Harris, Reportedly Subpoenas BofA Over Toxic Securities
BAM! | US Judge Takes $8.5 Bln BofA Deal from State Court in Bank of New York Mellon vs Walnut Place
MERS Has Trouble, Right There in Ohio, With a Capital ‘T’…
Geauga County’s prosecuting attorney, David P. Joyce has filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of the county “and all other similarly situated counties in Ohio,” against MERS and everybody else who used the MERS “scheme,” alleging that they violated Ohio law requiring that, “each and every mortgage assignment must be recorded in the proper Ohio county recording office,” and that by doing so, they avoided paying the counties the attendant recording fees.
Former Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann says the case does accurately represent what he referred to as “black letter law” in the State of Ohio for the last 200 years. He also described the case as being fairly narrow in that it’s really going after the recording fees that were not paid to each county when the defendants used the MERS system, but in doing so, the case is also going to have to establish the problems with the over all MERS operation.
Attorney Marc Dann
According to Dann, “Ohio law requires that transfers of beneficial interest be recorded in the appropriate county, so either they avoided paying the fees to the counties for what was otherwise a valid transfer, or perhaps the transfers were invalid, in which case many, many foreclosures should not have been allowed to happen.”
Geauga County is a small, rural county near Cleveland, Ohio, and Dann, who has his law office in Cleveland, has been fighting for the rights of Ohio homeowners since serving as the state’s Attorney General in 2007-08. He says that if Geauga County’s prosecutor wins this case, he may be reopening thousands of foreclosures.
“This case asks court very directly whether the MERS system complies with state law. If it doesn’t then I’m going to go back and reopen all of the foreclosures alleging that the transfers were invalid,” says Dann without hesitation.
The class action lawsuit, however, is about damages, and they could be substantial. Dann says that the county recording fees are in the $30-$40 range, so in a state with over 80,000 foreclosures a year, and I have no idea how many mortgages that have been securitized over the last so many years, the amounts of fees avoided by easily reach into the millions.
The complaint alleges that the MERS system is a “scheme” designed to evade the required recording fees and the suit specifically seeks payment of those fees, saying that in the securitization process mortgages are assigned at least twice.
Also included in the complaint is the allegation that the defendants “systematically broke chains of land title throughout Ohio counties’ public land records by creating ‘gaps’ due to missing mortgage assignments they failed to record, or by recoding patently false and/or misleading mortgage assignments. Further the complaint states that the “defendants’ failure to record has eviscerated the accuracy of Ohio’s counties’ public land records, rendering them unreliable and unverifiable.”
I asked renowned consumer bankruptcy attorney Max Gardner what he thought would happen if the case were to be successful and he said it could put MERS out of business, or certainly make it a costly mistake for all involved.
O. Max Gardner III
“MERS INC. is a wholly owned subsidiary of MERSCORP and has no assets to speak of, and MERSCORP has some assets but it looks to me like a multi-million dollar judgment would be beyond their ability to pay,” Max said.
“So, I guess they’d need a bailout,” he quips. “If it even looks like the prosecutor is going to be able to win this case, it’ll definitely be time for MERS to make a call to Houston, you know to say, we’ve got a problem… and it’s a big problem,” Gardner adds.
Max says that, although this case is somewhat similar to a case previously filed in Minnesota, he’s not aware of “any other case alleging this theory filed by a state or county to-date.”
The complaint states that the “defendant’s purposeful failure” to record the mortgage assignments in compliance with state law has caused “far-reaching, devastating consequences for Ohio counties and their public land records.” And further, that those damages “may never be entirely remedied.” (Emphasis added.)
The lawsuit, which was filed on October 13, 2011, names as defendants: MERSCORP, INC. and Mortgage Electronic Registration System, Inc., but also names:
Home Savings and Loan Inc., Bank of America Corp, CCO Mortgage Corp, Chase Home Mortgage Corp, Citimortgage Inc, Corelogic, Corinthian Mortgage Corp, Everhome Mortgage Corp, GMAC, Guaranty Bank, HSBC Bank, MGIC Investors Services, Nationwide Advantage Mortgage, PMI Mortgage Services Company, Suntrust Mortgage, United Guaranty Corp, Wells Fargo Bank, and Doe Corporations – names and addresses unknown.
So, obviously this is one to watch, both for the homeowners in Ohio, and elsewhere. The ramifications, should the case be successful, could very well spread to other states, as the Ohio counties involved could receive hundreds of thousands or millions of much-needed dollars.
Once again, the arrogance of MERS and the industry that created it is astounding. I mean, to simply disregard out of hand, 200 years of Ohio state law, without a second thought, is remarkable. And when I read that it may never be entirely remedied, I can’t help but wonder what the ultimate cost of what was done will be and who will one day be forced to pay it.
From talking with Marc Dann and Max Gardner, it looks like this is a case that will cause great concern back at MERS headquarters, and all I can say is… it’s about time.
You can find a copy of the complaint below…
Mandelman out.
Dallas County v. Merscorp Inc | Merscorp Sued in Dallas With Bank of America Over Mortgage-Tracking System
BofA, JPMorgan Fail to Make Fannie Mae Grade for Loan Servicing
BofA Told to Pay Fired Countrywide Whistleblower $930,000
Banks May Fight Banks as Mortgage Investors Pursue Class Status
WSJ | Bank of America to Exit Correspondent Mortgage Business
Wall Street Aristocracy Got $1.2 Trillion in Secret Fed Loans
WSJ | Foreclosure Talks Snag on Bank Liability
WSJ | Foreclosure Talks Snag on Bank Liability
Fraudclosure | BofA’s Moynihan Said to Press Geithner on Foreclosure Agreement
Federal Regulators to Bring Enforcement Actions Against Banks… May Get Rid of Hot Towels in Washroom
After lawyers deposing bank personnel uncovered “robo-signers” fraudulently signing thousands of lost note affidavits and other documents the serivcers were required to have in order to foreclose on a home, but apparently didn’t, a regulatory review of mortgage servicer practices was initiated by the federal banking agencies.
Well, the magazine, American Banker (“AB”) is now reporting that formal enforcement actions against most, if not all, of the 14 mortgage servicers reviewed are expected soon.
AB says that Bank of America Corp., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells Fargo & Co., and Ally Financial Inc. — are likely to face the toughest requirements, due to the sheer number of issues being addressed. Expectations are that the enforcement actions will include civil monetary penalties.
The regulators are still in discussions over the specific terms and state attorneys general, the Justice Department, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Treasury Department and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau are all involved. According to prepared testimony of Acting Comptroller of the Currency John Walsh, which was obtained by American Banker and scheduled for Thursday in front of the Senate Banking Committee:
“The OCC and the other federal banking agencies with relevant jurisdiction are in the process of finalizing actions that will incorporate appropriate remedial requirements and sanctions with respect to the servicers within their respective jurisdictions. We expect that our actions will comprehensively address servicers’ identified deficiencies and will hold servicers to standards that require effective and proactive risk management of servicing operations, and appropriate remediation for customers who have been financially harmed by defects in servicers’ standards and procedures. We also intend to leverage our findings and lessons learned in this examination of enforcement process to contribute to the development of national servicing standards.”
The federal regulators have said that they hope the enforcement orders have the effect of sending a message to the rest of the servicing industry. I love it when federal banking regulators “hope” stuff will happen.
The details are still being finalized, but are likely to require servicers to increase staffing levels, establish a single point of contact for borrowers, and “conduct a comprehensive look back at their servicing portfolio to detect and correct problems,” whatever the hell that means.
AB says that the FDIC and other government officials are pushing for “servicers to offer enhanced, streamlined modifications to troubled borrowers in exchange for a clearer path to foreclosure if re-default occurs after the workout.”
But the AB story says: “It remains unclear, however, if regulators will take such a step.”
Okay, just wait a damn minute here.
When I started writing this article I thought I was going to be telling people that finally… finally… after being allowed to abuse literally millions of American homeowners in the worst ways and at the worst time imaginable, finally the federal banking regulators were going take steps to punish servicers for their crimes against homeowners, investors, and our society as a whole.
But, that’s not what’s happening here at all is it. What did that last paragraph say?
“… servicers to offer enhanced, streamlined modifications to troubled borrowers in exchange for a clearer path to foreclosure if re-default occurs after the workout.”
You know what… go to hell. How about the servicers offer “enhanced, streamlined modifications to troubled borrowers” just because it’s the right thing to do? How about the servicers do it because although they can never come close to making amends for what they’ve done, under your watchful eye, federal regulators, I might add… they start doing the right thing now because they owe it to the American citizenry? How about they do it because it’s their job… because it’s in the best interests of the nation… how about any of those reasons, you disingenuous pack of regulating clowns?
How about the servicers… and you guys that call yourselves banking regulators, although I would like to point out that clearly you have regulated nothing in the banking industry for perhaps 30 and certainly 20 years… how about if you all start to realize that it’s your bankers that have caused our economy to fall off a cliff and caused the pain that will no doubt be with us for decade or decades, and that if people re-default it’s your fault for not properly modifying the loan, or because of yet another economically induced hardship, and that you don’t get to foreclose quicker next time because you did such a lousy job the first time around?
How about if the servicers are never permitted to punish anyone else for anything because they lost that privilege when they proved themselves capable of being nothing short of sadistic, unfeeling monsters, unfit to socialize with the rest of humanity? How about something like that?
And the story goes on to say that although several banks were expecting the enforcement actions to come out this week, but that “the timeline appears to be slipping.”
Yeah, I’ll be the timeline is slipping. Something in Washington’s slipping, that’s for damn sure.
Now, sources are apparently saying that they hope to issue whatever milquetoast enforcement action orders the traveling sycophants finally agree on sometime in March, and that there’s going to be something called a “global settlement” that comes as part of the package.
“After the orders are released, regulators will follow up with a report on the findings of their review and further recommendations,” the AB story says.
Oh and guess what? “There appear to be differences among the agencies in how tough to make the enforcement orders and how high the monetary penalty should be.”
No kidding? Now that’s hard to believe, don’t you think? Reports say that Elizabeth Warren’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, or CFPB, is “pushing for steep fines to be assessed on servicers, coupled with stringent remedial actions.” Go Liz… you are the bomb.
The FDIC is also supposed to be in favor of tough enforcement measures. (Like what, do you suppose… a stern talking to?) The OCC… or, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, however, is “concerned about taking overly harsh actions.”
Let me guess, the OCC wants to get tough on servicers that have violated whatever it is they’ve violated by offering back rubs, blow jobs and a buck ninety-five as a fine. I can’t take this much longer… why the hell did I start writing about this in the first place?
It seems that this past Monday, the regulators… and I use that term extremely loosely… met with Tim “Transparency” Geithner, along with representatives from the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”), HUD and CFPB in order to consider the pending actions.
The AB story then says the following:
“Although the orders will effectively establish standards for the largest servicers, they are not expected to supplant efforts already underway for regulators to issue their own formal set of rules.”
What in the world does that mean? Why can’t these people talk like… I don’t know… people? I’ll tell you what… I wasn’t in favor of it before, but I’m starting to be pro-torture over here. Let’s waterboard these inconceivable wastes-of-space and then see how bright eyed and bushy tailed they are at work the next day.
Want more? Try this sentence on for size:
“Regulators are still divided on where and how to set such standards, with the FDIC pushing to include them as part of a risk-retention rule while the OCC wants to craft a stand-alone measure.”
Gee, which side of that pressing issue are you on, pray tell? Are you a risk-retention kind of person, or do you favor a stand-alone measure? Don’t answer that, damn it, I’ll have to hurt you.
There’s more and then I’m done with this topic forever… you want to read about crap like this, read someone else’s blog because I’d rather chop off all eight of my fingers than have to write about this kind of drool again. Here goes…
“Regulators have been hinting for weeks that they may take enforcement actions against servicers, and Walsh sought to reassure Congress everyone’s on top of the issue.”
“We are directing banks to take corrective action where we find errors or deficiencies, and we have an array of informal and formal enforcement actions and penalties that we will impose if warranted These range from informal memoranda of understanding to civil money penalties, removals from banking, and criminal referrals.”
Sheila Bair over at FDIC says that any solution “must result in industry-wide standards.” In her January 19th speech to the Mortgage Bankers Association. Bair said:
“In order to remedy failures endemic to the largest mortgage servicers, I hope to see enforceable requirements that will significantly improve opportunities for homeowners to avoid foreclosure.”
Wait a minute… what damn year is this? 2011? Yeah, fine… I was just checking. I’ll bet you anything that if I go back two years, I can find Sheila saying that same sentence.
Then the AB story says that it would have been better if the servicers had taken remedial steps on their own before regulators were forced to take action. Oh for crying out loud… yeah, I suppose it would have been better for Pablo Escobar to check himself into a drug rehabilitation center too, but that wasn’t very likely, now was it?
Then from the AB story:
“It’s unfortunate it had to get this point,” said William Longbrake, an executive-in-residence at the University of Maryland. “It would have been better if the industry had done these things without the federal government.”
What in the Sam Hill is an “executive in residence”? And what kind of distorted perspective looks at what the servicers have done her… these last three years… and says… gee, it would have been better if they wouldn’t have done those things. Mr. Longbrake, are you aware that people have committed suicide because of that these servicers have done to them? Marriages have ended. Entire communities destroyed. Damage to children that is inestimable. How about asking… where the hell has the federal government been for the last three years?
The AB story wraps up with talk about the “global settlement” claptrap, and I don’t know what the hell it means, but I sure don’t like the sound of it. Here’s what the AB story says:
“While the settlement is likely to be bad public relations for the servicers involved, Jaret Seiberg, a policy analyst at MF Global Inc.’s Washington Research Group, said a global settlement may still be positive news for the industry.”
“A global settlement should be extremely positive for banks by putting this issue to rest and letting the industry move past the paperwork snafus,” Seiberg said.
“Bad public relations?” “Paperwork snafus?” Jaret, Jaret, Jaret… my boy… you are such an asshat. And you’re a policy analyst at MF Global Inc.’s Washington Research Group? If there’s a God, someday you or someone you love will lose your home to foreclosure.
Jaret was also quite intrigued by “the potential for streamlined modifications.” It’s true… Jaret says that requiring streamlined modifications could have an impact. Maybe… he’s not sure, but they could… according to Jaret… it’s a possibility… according to Jaret… they might… have an impact… of some kind… who knows, but it’s a distinct possibility… says Jaret.
Here’s Jaret’s big finishing quote… pay attention, he’s a policy analyst remember… at MF Global Inc.’s Washington Research Group. Go Jaret… it’s your birthday… Go Jaret…
“The easier you make the modification the more likely you are to get a modification, so the concept makes a lot of sense. For the industry, where there is an automatic modification and then foreclosure if the borrower goes delinquent a second time, you could end up benefiting the banks because it’s going to eliminate a lot of uncertainty now about the ability of financial firms to foreclose on borrowers behind on payments. Right now there are so many programs out there, it difficult to know when banks can foreclose. This would set up a streamlined model.”
What? Yeah right… like I’m the only one thinking about how much fun it would be to kick the shite out of Jaret in a parking lot after a couple of beers and maybe a shot of Patron. Don’t punish yourself… It’s okay to dream.
And I’m going to have to watch this stupid story develop, you want to know why?
Well, believe it or not, a producer from KNX/KFWB, which are CBS Radio stations out here in Los Angeles, just called me a few minutes ago, as I was writing this unbelievably annoying story, and asked me if I would be on Bob McCormick’s Money Radio Show again this coming Monday morning starting at 9:00 AM.
It seems that they just saw this story come across the wire and want me to come on the show and discuss it. At 9:00 AM Monday morning. And I’m going to be in Las Vegas at the Paris Hotel and Casino attending Max Gardner’s Operation Strike Back attorney training event, so it’s really quite a problem.
I mean, I can do the show from the phone in my room, but how in the world am I going to have time to get drunk enough by 9:00 AM so that after I talk about this insipid drivel I don’t hurl myself from the top of the Vegas version of the Eifel Tower?
Mandelman out.
Investors Suing Banks Are On The Same Side As Homeowners In Foreclosure
It’s next to impossible to get any information while you’re in foreclosure from the servicer or trustee. Reasonable discovery requests for basic information are objected to and almost never complied with. It’s not just homeowners receiving the cold shoulder…the investors are as well….JUST WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s EMC Mortgage, facing homeowner lawsuits over foreclosures, was sued by the trustee of a mortgage portfolio for refusing to turn over documents detailing the quality of loans bought by the trust.
Wells Fargo & Co., the trustee, is seeking access to files for more than 2,000 underlying mortgages in the Bear Stearns Mortgage Funding Trust 2007-AR2, according to the complaint filed today in Delaware Chancery Court in Wilmington.
Tweet this!
Share and Enjoy:
Scridb filter
Notes Never Made It To the Trusts – BIG Problem for the BIG Banks
Editors Comment
Lane Houk
12/2/2010
The article below published on Bloomberg.com a few days ago is focused on the root of a really big problem for the banks. The greed of the big banks is going to ultimately lead to their demise. I mean this seriously, not figuratively. They are going to be consumed by their greed – and their sloppy arrogance.
The big banks own all the major servicers. They are subsidiaries of the banks or the bank holding companies.
The big banks own a number of the major loan originators. They are subsidiaries of the banks or bank holding companies.
The big banks own or operate a number of the largest investment banks and trustee divisions. They are subsidiaries of the banks or bank holding companies.
The players in the Mortgage Backed Securities world are largely controlled by the big banks. A loan/note when being securitized is supposed to pass through several conveyances on its way to being converted to a security. These transactions were supposed to be true purchase and sales from one entity to the next. The Pooling, Trust and/or Servicing Agreeement(s) spell this out in crystal clarity.
The big banks failed to follow their own agreements. The investors that got screwed years ago when big banks were selling shit to them might not get so screwed after all if they all get together and sue shit out of big banks.
Homeowners should find a plethora of ways to use these issues to reveal major issues of fact in their case. Clear title is a huge problem on millions of already foreclosed homes. Some title insurers already changing policies and not writing title insurance on a foreclosed home.
News Flash: Big Banks Swallowed by Their Own Greed – Coming Soon to a city near you… Also coming to every American Citizen… Government-Run or Government-Backed Title Insurance. Mark my words… it’s coming.
BofA Mortgage Morass Deepens After Employee Says Notes Not Sent
By Prashant Gopal and Jody Shenn – Nov 30, 2010
Testimony by a Bank of America Corp. employee in a New Jersey personal bankruptcy case may give more ammunition to homeowners and investors in their legal battles over defaulted mortgages.
Linda DeMartini, a team leader in the company’s mortgage- litigation management division, said during a U.S. Bankruptcy Court hearing in Camden last year that it was routine for the lender to keep mortgage promissory notes even after loans were bundled by the thousands into bonds and sold to investors, according to a transcript. Contracts for such securitizations usually require the documents to be transferred to the trustee for mortgage bondholders.
In the case, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Judith H. Wizmur on Nov. 16 rejected a claim on the home of John T. Kemp, ruling his mortgage company, now owned by Bank of America, had failed to deliver the note to the trustee. That could leave the trustee with no standing to take the property, and raises the question of whether other foreclosures could similarly be blocked.
Following the decision, the bank disavowed the statements by DeMartini, whom it had flown in from California to testify. It was the policy of Countrywide Financial Corp., acquired by Bank of America in July 2008, to deliver notes as called for in its securitization contracts, according to Larry Platt, an attorney at K&L Gates LLP in Washington designated by the bank to answer questions about the case.
“This particular employee was mistaken in what she said,” Platt said in a telephone interview.
Attorney Analysis
Wizmur’s ruling is being scrutinized by lawyers for borrowers seeking to stall repossessions as a way to press lenders to modify their debt. Attorneys for homeowners have already won cases by calling into doubt the legitimacy of affidavits used to take back properties.
“If this is correct, many, many, many foreclosures already occurred in which this plaintiff didn’t have the note,” said Bruce Levitt, the South Orange, New Jersey, attorney representing Kemp. “This could affect thousands or hundreds of thousands of loans.”
Companies that service loans, including Bank of America, temporarily halted home seizures in the wake of disclosures that they relied on employees to sign thousands of affidavits without reading them, a practice that has become known as robo-signing. The attorneys general of all 50 states are jointly investigating foreclosure practices of servicers.
Bank of America, based in Charlotte, North Carolina, is the largest U.S. mortgage servicer, overseeing $2.09 trillion of loans as of Sept. 30, according to industry newsletter Inside Mortgage Finance.
Investor Impact
The Kemp case is also being examined by lawyers for investors in mortgage-backed securities. Owners of the bonds have been cooperating in an effort to force sellers to take back loans, saying they were misled about their quality. The Wizmur ruling may give investors an additional opportunity to push for mortgage buybacks on grounds that the bonds weren’t created in keeping with securitization contracts.
“It may mean investors who think they bought mortgage- backed securities bought securities that aren’t backed by anything,” said Kurt Eggert, a professor at Chapman University School of Law in Orange, California.
The potential impact of DeMartini’s testimony may depend on the outcome of a broader dispute between homeowner and industry lawyers about whether missing or incomplete paperwork subsequently can be fixed, Eggert said.
‘Not Customary’
Wizmur, chief judge of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey, said during hearings that the Countrywide securitization contract covering Kemp’s loan called for a trustee to take possession of the promissory notes, which represent the borrowers’ obligation to repay their loans.
The judge asked DeMartini whether the notes ever move to follow the transfer of ownership, according to the transcript of the August 2009 hearing.
“I can’t say that they’re never moved because, I mean, with this many millions of loans as we have I wouldn’t presume to say that, but it is not customary for them to move,” DeMartini said.
“This is something that would concern investors,” said Talcott Franklin, a Dallas-based lawyer whose firm is helping owners of more than $600 billion of mortgage bonds as they consider ways to limit their losses.
DeMartini held management and training positions since joining Countrywide Home Loans about a decade ago, according to her testimony. She said she has been involved in every aspect of servicing and “had to know about everything in order to do that.”
Beyond DeMartini’s Knowledge
Platt, the lawyer for Bank of America, said DeMartini was wrong, as was the bank’s local attorney in the case, who argued in court that notes weren’t moved in part because of the risk of losing them. The transfer of mortgage notes was outside the scope of DeMartini’s knowledge because she doesn’t deal with the sale of loans, Platt said.
DeMartini, who at one point said she wasn’t “comfortable” testifying about the extent to which notes were transferred before continuing to do so, couldn’t be reached for comment. Jerry Dubrowski, a spokesman for the bank, said that she remains an employee.
Banks including JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Washington Mutual Inc. said in prospectuses for some mortgage-bond deals that they would hold onto notes for the trusts. They were empowered to act in custodial roles on behalf of trustees, according to the pooling and servicing agreements that govern the transactions.
Countrywide Deals
The securitization contracts related to the Kemp loan, and at least two other Countrywide mortgage-bond transactions, didn’t assign the company the additional role of document custodian for the trust. Countrywide, as the servicer, can take back the notes from the trustee when needed to manage foreclosure actions and mortgage payoffs, according to the contracts.
One risk to investors when notes remain with sellers acting as custodian is that an acquirer or creditor of those companies could walk in and take the notes, the banks that disclosed the practice in mortgage-bond prospectuses warned. Typically, trustees or custodians also are charged with checking that either all the necessary documents get delivered or letting sellers know about missing paperwork.
“If Countrywide had a special agreement to act as a stand- in for the trustee, given the inherent conflicts involved, one would have thought that would have been material and disclosed to investors,” said Joshua Rosner, an analyst at New York-based Graham Fisher & Co.
He said that the possibility that Countrywide retained documents raises questions about whether Bank of New York Mellon Corp., which serves as the trustee for the securitization of the Kemp loan, fulfilled its obligation to review loan files.
Stress-Tested System
“We have an established, clearly defined document review process,” said Kevin Heine, a spokesman for New York-based BNY Mellon. “It is a controlled and well-documented system that has been stress-tested and audited. We are comfortable that it works well.”
Heine declined to comment on the Kemp case or Countrywide’s policies.
Mortgage-bond contracts require that loan sellers deliver certain files to trustees, or other companies acting on their behalf, typically within a few months. “Material” missing paperwork can require sellers to take back loans for their full face value, according to the agreements.
“If the notes weren’t properly transferred to the trusts, then investors have the mother of all put-back claims,” Adam J. Levitin, an associate professor at Georgetown University Law Center in Washington, wrote on a blog four days after citing the Wizmur ruling during a hearing by a House Financial Services subcommittee.
Trust Law
Giving notes to the trustees after the fact isn’t a solution because the rules governing trusts, enforced by New York trust law, require that assets are in place by a specified closing date, said O. Max Gardner III, a Shelby, North Carolina, bankruptcy litigator. The notes also can’t be transferred to the trust without first being conveyed through a chain of interim entities, he said.
“If they do an end run and directly deliver it to the trust, that would violate all the documents they filed with the SEC under oath as to what they did,” Gardner said.
Industry lawyers said trust law isn’t relevant in this instance. Based on other legal codes, loans have already been transferred into the mortgage-bond trusts, making a clean-up of paperwork permissible, they said.
Refuted Attack Strategies
“Those who seek to attack the integrity of securitizations have taken a number of approaches that have been refuted, so now they’re focusing on New York trust law,” said Karen B. Gelernt, a lawyer in New York at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP who works for banks.
The part of the law they cite relates to “actions taken by the trustee after the trust is formed; it’s nonsensical to apply this provision to the creation of the trust,” she said. “There doesn’t appear to be any case law that supports their interpretation.”
Platt, the Bank of America lawyer, said that any bank that failed to initially deliver all the documents required in contracts may be required to refund investors only in cases in which foreclosures actually get blocked.
“The judges may decide it’s better for the system to allow everyone to” send missing paperwork to trustees, said Rosner, the Graham Fisher analyst. “It’s too early to really answer question about the implications” if the Bank of America testimony is true.
The case is In the Matter of John T. Kemp, Kemp v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc., 08-02448, U.S. bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey (Camden).
To contact the reporters on this story: Prashant Gopal in New York at pgopal2@bloomberg.net; Jody Shenn in New York at jshenn@bloomberg.net
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Kara Wetzel at kwetzel@bloomberg.net; Alan Goldstein at agoldstein5@bloomberg.net
Bank of America to resume some foreclosures
Bank will lift halt on sales in 23 U.S. states requiring a judge’s approval

The company on Monday said it plans to resubmit documents with new signatures in states that require a judge’s approval to restart the foreclosure process.
It will continue delaying foreclosures in 27 states that do not require a judge’s approval.”
Tweet this!
Share and Enjoy:
Scridb filter
Florida’s 30-Second Foreclosure Dash Hits Wall of Fraud Claims
By David McLaughlin
“Oct. 13 (Bloomberg) — Home to more foreclosures than 47 U.S. states, Florida sought to clear out its backlog with a system of special court hearings that dispensed with cases quickly, sometimes in less than a minute.
Homeowners like Nicole West now threaten to slow that system, Florida’s so-called rocket docket, to a crawl. West, who has been fighting to save her Jensen Beach house from foreclosure, has leveled a new allegation in her three-year battle: the entire process is based on fraud.
West said her case is rife with the kind of flawed mortgage documents that have caused lenders including Bank of America Corp. and JPMorgan Chase & Co. to stop the process of foreclosures and evictions across the country. The banks said they are investigating homeowner charges like West’s that signatures were forged and documents were backdated.
“It’s not right,” said West, 40, who lives about an hour’s drive north of West Palm Beach. “It’s like lying to the judge. It’s like lying about what’s really going on.”
The bank moratoriums are already thwarting the initiative by Florida officials to clear jammed court dockets. Now, efforts by homeowners such as West to bring claims of fraud to the attention of judges are further prolonging evictions, and in turn slowing purchases of foreclosed properties.
Third-Highest Rate
Florida has the third-highest foreclosure rate in the U.S. behind Nevada and Arizona. One in every 34 housing units — double the U.S. average — was in the foreclosure process or bank-owned as of Sept. 1, data vendor RealtyTrac Inc. said.
Florida’s legislature appropriated $9.6 million this year to pay semi-retired judges and case managers to clear the backlog of foreclosures. Some judges have been churning through cases at a rapid clip, such as those last week in Tampa who considered dozens of foreclosures per day, sometimes in as little as 30 seconds.
The goal is to clear 62 percent of the backlog by next July, according to Craig Waters, a spokesman for the Florida Supreme Court. J. Thomas McGrady, chief judge of Florida’s Sixth Judicial Circuit, said he once thought that was achievable. Now that Charlotte, North Carolina-based Bank of America, New York- based JPMorgan and Detroit-based Ally Financial Inc. have put the brakes on foreclosures or evictions to look for irregularities, he said he’s “very doubtful” his courts can resolve that many cases. The circuit, which covers the area around Clearwater and St. Petersburg, has a backlog of 33,000 foreclosure cases, he said.
More Backlog
“All of a sudden all of these issues pop up with the lenders,” McGrady said in an interview at his Clearwater office. “It’s going to slow down the whole process because there will be more backlog. We’re still getting 1,000 cases a month.”
At the Clearwater court, lenders as of yesterday had canceled more than half of the 84 hearings to approve foreclosures that were scheduled for today, according to Ron Stuart, a court spokesman. Half of the 110 hearings originally set to take place tomorrow were canceled as well.
Among the alleged defects the banks are examining are lender affidavits signed by people, often described as “robo signers,” who repeatedly failed to verify the accuracy of the information in the documents.
In December, an employee at Ally’s GMAC Mortgage unit said his team of 13 people signed about 10,000 documents a month without verifying their accuracy, according to a deposition taken in a foreclosure case filed in West Palm Beach.
False Affidavits
Ally has been accused of committing fraud by submitting hundreds of false affidavits in foreclosure cases, according to a lawsuit filed last week by Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray. Ally said in a statement that it “believes there was nothing fraudulent or deceitful about its foreclosure practices.”
“Every homeowner that’s in foreclosure now should be questioning,” said Matthew Weidner, an attorney in St. Petersburg who defends homeowners in foreclosure cases. “Every homeowner that’s already been foreclosed and lost their home should be questioning. Anybody who’s behind in their mortgage should be questioning. This entire system is now a great big question mark.”
Click here to read the full Story on Bloomberg BusinessWeek…
Tweet this!
Share and Enjoy:
Scridb filter
BofA reaches out to troubled homeowners
Bank of America Corp. said Wednesday it has contacted 10,000 of its most troubled mortgage borrowers about its new loan forgiveness program.
Mortgage – Bank of America – Business – United States – Financial Services









