Jan
04

White Paper | In or Out of Mortgage Trouble? A Study of Bankrupt Homeowners

In or Out of Mortgage Trouble? A Study of Bankrupt Homeowners INTRODUCTION For decades, homeowners have populated the bankruptcy system in significant numbers. Today’s prevalent narrative features a delinquent mortgage, and a race against time to enlist the bankruptcy system in the fight to keep the family home. Yet, many bankrupt homeowners do not see … Read more Related posts:
  1. White Paper | Property Title Trouble in Non-Judicial Foreclosure States: The Ibanez Time Bomb?
  2. White Paper | The Case Against Allowing Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) to Initiate Foreclosure Proceedings
  3. Adam Levitin and Tara Twomey White Paper on Mortgage Servicing
Dec
30

BRYLLAW LITIGATION: First Quiet-Title Order in Virginia Voiding Deed of Trust (by default)

BRYLLAW LITIGATION: First Quiet-Title Order in Virginia Voiding Deed of Trust (by default) On November 21, 2011, a Northern Virginia Circuit Court entered an order granting plaintiff homeowner a default judgment in a quiet title action, voiding the deed of trust. Earlier this year, frustrated by the fact that she could not get to the … Read more Related posts:
  1. California Victory! Court Renders Judgment in Plaintiffs’ Favor Voiding the Deed of Trust Plus Statutory Damages of $16K
  2. Fraudulent Conveyance Quiet Title Packet
  3. TX Quiet Title Appeal VICTORY Against MERS | Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems v. Nancy Groves
Dec
14

Texas | Rusk County Court Approves Legal Action Against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS)

Rusk County court approves legal action against electronic mortgage registry HENDERSON — The Rusk County Commissioners Court approved a contract Monday with the Mann Law Firm for legal action against MERS, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems. MERS is a privately held company that operates an electronic registry designed to track servicing rights and ownership of mortgage … Read more Related posts:
  1. Bexar County Texas to Sue Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) Over Lost Fees
  2. COMPLAINT | JIM FULLER, CLERK OF THE COURT, DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA vs MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, MERS
  3. MERS | Bristol County Board of Commissioners ask AG Martha Coakley About Possible Lawsuit Against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems
Dec
14

MERS: A Twenty First Century Creation Navigating An Eighteenth Century Legal System

MERS: A Twenty First Century Creation Navigating An Eighteenth Century Legal System Introduction One need not be an expert in banking or real estate to have become acutely aware of the 2008 financial crisis and the housing bubble that largely precipitated it. High unemployment, low economic growth, and record government deficits are daily reminders of … Read more Related posts:
  1. Asshat Alert | Ajay Rajadhyaksha, Managing Director of Barclays Capital – Legalizing the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) Will Streamline the Legal Process to Accurately Transfer Loans
  2. Fannie Mae SEC 10-Q Report “MERS System could pose counterparty, operational, reputational and legal risks for us.”
  3. Statement by CEO of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) “The MERS System is not fraudulent, and MERS has not committed any fraud.”
Dec
11

Mortgage Fraud | Bear Stearns, Lender Processing Services, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems

  Mortgage Fraud Bear Stearns Lender Processing Services Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Action Date: December 11, 2011 Location: Jacksonville, FL There is substantial evidence that mortgage servicing companies and their lawyers are continuing to file fraudulent mortgage assignments in county recorders offices throughout the country. In April, 2011, the widespread abuses, including massive forgeries, were … Read more Related posts:
  1. False Statements – R.K. Arnold Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems
  2. False Statements | Lender Processing Services Maiden Lane ABS 2008-1
  3. Mortgage Fraud – Bethany Hood Lender Processing Services, Inc. MERS
Dec
08

Letter | Attorney General Martha Coakley urges Congress to investigate Ally Financial’s GMAC over foreclosure practices

Attorney General Martha Coakley urges Congress to investigate Ally Financial’s GMAC over foreclosure practices Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley today urged US lawmakers to investigate Ally Financial Inc. and its subsidiary, GMAC Mortgage, for allegedly carrying out illegal foreclosures and submitting false documents related to property seizures. Coakley made the request in a letter sent … Read more Related posts:
  1. The Validity of MERS | Letter to Attorney General Martha Coakley from REBA’s President, Edward M. Bloom, RE John O’Brien and MERS
  2. And Then There Was Five – Connecticut Attorney General Investigating Defective GMAC/Ally Foreclosure Docs, Demands Halt To Its CT Foreclosures
  3. MERS | Bristol County Board of Commissioners ask AG Martha Coakley About Possible Lawsuit Against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems
Dec
06

Texas | Squatters Claim more than $8 Million Worth of Tarrant County Properties Using Adverse Possession

Squatters claim more than $8 million worth of Tarrant County properties While county officials were asleep at the wheel, Tarrant County became a magnet this year for an odd assortment of squatters claiming other people’s houses all over the area. The cast of characters includes a homeowner who scooped up a dead neighbor’s house; a … Read more Related posts:
  1. Adverse Possession | Texas Man Files $16 Document With Courthouse, Moves Into $330,000 Foreclosed Home, Cops to Neighbors – It’s a Civil Matter
  2. Bexar County Texas to Sue Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) Over Lost Fees
  3. Don’t Mess With Texas – Attorney General Calls for Statewide Foreclosure Freeze
Dec
01

Adam Levitin | “The Wikipedia of Land Registration Systems”

“The Wikipedia of Land Registration Systems” Pretty amazing opinion in Culhane v Aurora Loan Services of Nebraska byJudge Young of the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Judge Young breaks out a fresh can of whoop-ass on MERS, which wasn’t even a litigant. How are these choice lines: “MERS is the Wikipedia of … Read more Related posts:
  1. Statement by CEO of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) “The MERS System is not fraudulent, and MERS has not committed any fraud.”
  2. MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., Appellant, v. LISA MARIE CHONG, LENARD E. SCHWARTZER, BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE
  3. Adam Levitin | Securitization Chain-of-Title: The US Bank v. Congress Ruling
Nov
30

"The Wikipedia of Land Registration Systems"

Pretty amazing opinion in Culhane v Aurora Loan Services of Nebraska byJudge Young of the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Judge Young breaks out a fresh can of whoop-ass on MERS, which wasn't even a litigant. How are these choice lines:  "MERS is the Wikipedia of Land Registration Systems."  Now I like Wikipedia, but property title isn't do-it-yourself. Or this gem: "a MERS certifying officer is more akin to an Admiral in the Georgia navy or a Kentucky Colonel with benefits than he is to any genuine financial officer." Well, at least he didn't call them an "Admiral in the Great Navy of the State of Nebraska".  You gotta love a landlocked navy. 

That said, for all of his misgivings about MERS supplying "the thinnest possible veneer of formality and legality to the wholesale marketing of home mortgages to large institutional investors," Judge Young still says that it's kosher, if unseemly. 

The issue here was whether there could be a foreclosure by a naked mortgagee--that is a mortgagee who is not the noteholder.  (That's the issue before the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts currently in Eaton v. Fannie Mae.)  Judge Young say no:  the note and mortgage need to be reunited before foreclosure; a naked mortgagee can't foreclose.  In this case, however, Judge Young found that the mortgage and note were reunited before the foreclosure was brought.  

I think Judge Young is right on the law, and wrong on the facts here. I don't know how this case was lawyered, but it seems to me that there are two factual problems that indicate that the mortgage and note were not in fact reunited prior to foreclosure.  Here's Judge Young's explanation of how the reunification happened: 

Aurora, as Deutsche's loan servicer, has an interest in the underlying debt; Aurora also physically possesses the collateral file, including the note. With the assignment of legal title to the mortgage from MERS, Aurora became the mortgagee of record as well, thusperfecting its standing to bring a foreclosure action against Culhane.

Culhane makes much of the fact that the endorsement to Deutsche on the note and attached allonge is undated. While this Court agrees as matter of law that the mortgagee must hold the note or be the servicing agent of the note holder before initiating foreclosure proceedings, here Aurora did. Regardless of the date that Deutsche became the note holder,whether it was before or after the cut-off date for loans to be transferred into the RALI Series 2006–QO5 Trust, as of April 1, 2008, Aurora was servicing Culhane's loan for Deutsche. Aurora caused legal title to the mortgage to be assigned to it over a year after becoming the servicing agent, and it did not send the notice of sale to be published until September 21, 2009.

First, Judge Young seems to assume the note is negotiable. Otherwise it doesn't matter who holds the note. If it's not negotiable, then it's just a plain old contract, and physical possession is irrelevant. Just because I hold the original loan contract between Karl and Soia doesn't mean that I have any right to enforce it if it isn't a negotiable instrument. But it doesn't look like negotiablity was raised by the parties; I would think it is in the purview of judicial notice as it is obvious from the face of the instrument, but if the issue isn't flagged for a judge, it is often missed. 

Second, it isn't clear whether the trust law argument was ever put firmly before the court. If the note was transferred to the trust after the trust's closing date, that transfer is void under New York trust law. That means that the trust doesn't own the note, which means Aurora doesn't have an interest in it, which means that the note and mortgage have not been reunited prior to the foreclosure, so under Judge Young's analysis, then, the foreclosure should not be permitted. The reason the closing date matters is because if the transfer is after the closing date, it cannot happen as a matter of law. The fact that Aurora was servicing the loan for Deutsche as trustee isn't enough if Deutsche as trustee doesn't have an interest in the note. I don't know how this issue was lawyered, but this is a critical point. 

So it seems to me that this is a good opinion, but that it needed to go further into the factual question of whether Deutsche as trustee had any interest in the note. That might be a function of lawyering rather than anything else. I don't think this case presents a clear victory for the mortgage industry--it just focuses the issue on the question of who can enforce the note, and I'm not sure that's where the industry really wants things to go. 

Nov
17

Written Testimony of Adam J. Levitin Before the House Financial Services Committee Joint Hearing on “H.R. 1697: The Communities First Act” November 16, 2011

Written Testimony of Adam J. Levitin Professor of Law Georgetown University Law Center Before the House Financial Services Committee Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit & Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises Joint Hearing on “H.R. 1697: The Communities First Act” November 16, 2011 2:00 pm Ms. Chairman Capito, Mr. Chairman Garret, … Read more Related posts:
  1. Streaming Broadcast – Banking and Financial Services Committee Hearing Testimony from Bill Hultman, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems
  2. Foreclosed Justice House Judiciary Hearing Written Testimony of Thomas A. Cox Esq
  3. Foreclosed Justice House Judiciary Hearing Written Testimony of Christopher L. Peterson
Nov
15

COMPLAINT | Register of Deeds CURTIS HERTEL, of INGHAM COUNTY; and NANCY HUTCHINS, of BRANCH COUNTY vs MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., et al

STATE OF MICHIGAN 30TH CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF INGHAM CURTIS HERTEL, the Register of Deeds and Representative of INGHAM COUNTY; and NANCY HUTCHINS, the Register of Deeds and Representative of BRANCH COUNTY, both as Class Representatives of all 83 counties in the State of Michigan. Plaintiffs, V MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., MERSCORP,INC., … Read more Related posts:
  1. Curtis Hertel Jr., Register of Deeds | FBI Investigating Possible Foreclosure Fraud in Ingham County
  2. Linda Green | Curtis Hertel, Ingham County Register of Deeds Investigating Foreclosure Fraud (Video)
  3. Tweet | Curtis Hertel Ingham County Register of Deeds “I am proud to announce Ingham and Branch counties have filed a class action against MERS for unpaid transfer taxes”
Nov
11

MERS | Mortgage Registry Accused of Owing El Paso County Millions; Will County Sue? (VIDEO)

Click through to view video ~ Mortgage Registry Accused of Owing EP County Millions; Will County Sue? EL PASO – Between record home foreclosures and devastating budget cuts, El Paso County has seen a rough couple of years recently. We usually think of these crises as separate, but some argue there’s a common link between … Read more Related posts:
  1. More “Local” Coverage | El Paso Lawyer Takes on MERS (Video)
  2. NBC Discusses MERS w/ Video | Counties Seek Millions From Mortgage Giant
  3. Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins to Explore Possible Claims against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., to Potentially Recoup Millions for Dallas County
Nov
11

COMPLAINT | JIM FULLER, CLERK OF THE COURT, DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA vs MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, MERS

Got it! Full complaint below… From the report earlier in the week… Some very interesting spin in this one from MERS spokesperson Janis Smith. Her statement… “The MERS System is not a legal system of record or a replacement for public land records. No interests are transferred on the system—they are only tracked,” Smith, Merscorp … Read more Related posts:
  1. Florida Clerk of Court (NOT SHARON BOCK) Sues Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) for Civil Conspiracy, Unjust Enrichment, as well as Fraudulent and Negligent Misrepresentation
  2. MERS Complaint | Marlya Depauw and Sharon & Terrance Lafrance v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.
  3. MERS | Bristol County Board of Commissioners ask AG Martha Coakley About Possible Lawsuit Against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems
Nov
10

Must Read Paper | The MERS Mortgage in Massachusetts: Genius, Shell Game, or Invitation to Fraud?

This comes in from Rockwell P. Ludden, Esq. of LuddenKramerLaw P.C. Although the title says “in Massachusetts,” I think that many of its salient points have broader application. I am halfway through reading it and it is fascinating. There must have been some long and hard hours put into this paper. This was sent to … Read more Related posts:
  1. Statement by CEO of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) “The MERS System is not fraudulent, and MERS has not committed any fraud.”
  2. THE MERS ASSIGNMENT GAME: SEVERAL COURTS GET IT
  3. An Adam Levitin Must Read | The Servicing Fraud Settlement: the Real Game
Nov
10

Clueless | Palm Beach County Clerk of Court Sharon Bock on FL MERS Lawsuit “We had no knowledge of the lawsuit until today”

This is in response to Jim Fuller, the clerk of Duval County, filing suit against Merscorp Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., on Oct. 31, claiming civil conspiracy, unjust enrichment, as well as fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation. Palm Beach County Clerk of Court Sharon Bock said she didn’t know about … Read more Related posts:
  1. PBC Clerk of Court Sharon Bock to County Citizens RE Fraudclosures, It’s Not My Problem
  2. Florida Clerk of Court (NOT SHARON BOCK) Sues Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) for Civil Conspiracy, Unjust Enrichment, as well as Fraudulent and Negligent Misrepresentation
  3. Oakland County Clerk Bill Bullard (Not Sharon Bock) | More Fraudulent Mortgage Documents Discovered WITH VIDEO
Nov
07

NJ Law Revision Commission Agenda Proposal Limiting Foreclosures to Recorded Mortgage Interest Holders, MERS

Proposal Would Limit Foreclosures to Recorded Mortgage Interest Holders Mary Pat Gallagher New Jersey Law Journal Changes afoot to the state’s mortgage recording statute and other laws would clarify who has the right to foreclose on a mortgage when the debt has been assigned by the original lender and the paper trial is incomplete or … Read more Related posts:
  1. M E R S – Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Foreclosure Bankruptcy Decision – This Court is Convinced that MERS had NO Interest it Could Transfer
  2. H.R. 4953 Miller, Ellison Introduce the Mortgage Servicing Conflict of Interest Elimination Act Bill to Address Conflict of Interest in Mortgage Companies
  3. Kenton Kentucky Court Order – Foreclosure Complaints Must be Accompanied by Note and Recorded Mortgage with ALL Allonges, Endorsements, and Assignments
Oct
27

KABOOM | Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) Sued by Delaware Attorney General

MERS Mortgage Registry Sued by Delaware Attorney General Oct. 27 (Bloomberg) — The Delaware attorney general’s office sued Merscorp Inc., which runs a national mortgage registry used by banks, saying its practices are deceptive and hide information from borrowers. The MERS database, which tracks ownership interests in mortgages, obscures information from borrowers and impeded their … Read more Related posts:
  1. D D D Delaware – Attorney General Biden Calls on Three Banks to Halt Delaware Foreclosures
  2. MERS Hit with $400,000,000 Lawsuit | Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Sued Over Michigan Foreclosures
  3. Statement by CEO of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) “The MERS System is not fraudulent, and MERS has not committed any fraud.”
Oct
25

Arkansas | Hot Springs County Clerk Mayme Brown Sues Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) Banks for Tax (Filing Fee) Evasion

Tax evasion, a great way to prosecute criminals… ~ 4closureFraud.org ~ Mayme Brown v MERS, Banks, et al Tweet Related posts:Kentucky | Complaint – Christian & Washington County Clerks v. Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) MERS | Bristol County Board of Commissioners ask AG Martha Coakley About Possible Lawsuit Against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Bexar … Read more Related posts:
  1. Kentucky | Complaint – Christian & Washington County Clerks v. Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS)
  2. MERS | Bristol County Board of Commissioners ask AG Martha Coakley About Possible Lawsuit Against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems
  3. Bexar County Texas to Sue Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) Over Lost Fees
Oct
25

Kentucky | Complaint – Christian & Washington County Clerks v. Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS)

And here is another one… Full complaint below… ~ 4closureFraud.org ~ Christian & Washington County Clerks v. Mortgage Electronic Registration System Tweet Related posts:MERS Class Action | Schare vs Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Complaint and Exhibits MERS Complaint | Marlya Depauw and Sharon & Terrance Lafrance v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. Bexar County Texas … Read more Related posts:
  1. MERS Class Action | Schare vs Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Complaint and Exhibits
  2. MERS Complaint | Marlya Depauw and Sharon & Terrance Lafrance v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.
  3. Bexar County Texas to Sue Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) Over Lost Fees
Oct
25

Cleveland County Commissioners Rod Cleveland and Rusty Sullivan Hire Firm to Investigate MERS Filings

County hires firm to investigate filings NORMAN — Cleveland County commissioners on Monday hired a law firm to investigate whether a banking system systematically failed to pay mortgage filing fees to the county clerk. Commissioners Rod Cleveland and Rusty Sullivan said national banking companies joined the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) Inc., a private enterprise … Read more Related posts:
  1. Letter to AG Martha Coakley | Bristol County Board of Commissioners: MERS Cost Registries MILLIONS of Dollars
  2. MERS | Bristol County Board of Commissioners ask AG Martha Coakley About Possible Lawsuit Against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems
  3. A Man Ahead of the Curve | Former Suffolk County Clerk, Ed Romain, to Revisit MERS
Oct
24

Bexar County Texas to Sue Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) Over Lost Fees

“MERS has jeopardized the clear title of every Texas homeowner with a mortgage and has cheated Texas counties out of millions of dollars in property recording fees,” ~ County Attorney Vince Ryan ~ Bexar to sue over lost fees Bexar County is poised to challenge a private mortgage-tracking system that officials claim has cost it … Read more Related posts:
  1. Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins to Explore Possible Claims against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., to Potentially Recoup Millions for Dallas County
  2. MERS | Bristol County Board of Commissioners ask AG Martha Coakley About Possible Lawsuit Against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems
  3. MERS Complaint | Marlya Depauw and Sharon & Terrance Lafrance v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.
Oct
11

Whitney Cook Chase Home Finance | A Mortgage Dispute with a Twist

In 2010, the mortgage was transferred to Chase by Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, acting for Fleet. Chase both owns and services the mortgage. MERS tracks loan ownership and servicing. The transfer was signed by Whitney Cook, a MERS vice president. Various websites show that her name appears on other mortgage assignments where she holds titles for … Read more Related posts:
  1. Dianna Montez v Chase Home Finance and JPMorgan Chase | Keller Rohrback L.L.P. Announces Class Action Complaint
  2. California Love – Nguyen et.al. v. Chase Bank USA, NA; Chase Home Finance LLC. et.al.
  3. Fraudclosure Fight | The Law Offices of David J. Stern, P.A. Plaintiff, v. Chase Home Finance, LLC, Defendant
Oct
07

Settlement FAIL | Steven J. Baum has NOT Engaged in ANY Unlawful Practice or Wrongdoing of Any Kind

Mortgage Fraud Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Pillar Processing, LLC Steven J. Baum, P.C. Action Date: October 7, 2011 Location: New York, NY On October 6, 2011, a settlement agreement was signed regarding the practices of one of the largest foreclosure mills in the country, Steven J. Baum, P.C., a law firm operating from Amherst, New … Read more Related posts:
  1. Class Action Complaint – Connie Campbell against Steven Baum, MERSCORP, Inc, et al., Case #10CV3800
  2. Steven J. Baum | Firm Dominates Foreclosures, But Faces Growing Criticism
  3. Fraudclosure | New York AG Subpoenas Steven J. Baum, Pillar Processing over Foreclosure Practices
Sep
22

Dallas County v. Merscorp Inc | Merscorp Sued in Dallas With Bank of America Over Mortgage-Tracking System

Merscorp Sued in Dallas With Bank of America Over Mortgage-Tracking System Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc., along with Bank of America Corp. (BAC), was sued by Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins over claims its mortgage-tracking system violates Texas law. Merscorp Inc.’s MERS, which runs an electronic registry of mortgages, cheated Dallas County out of … Read more
Aug
15

BIG WIN IN GA | Morgan v Ocwen, MERS – ONLY A “SECURED CREDITOR” May Conduct A Non-Judicial Foreclosure In Georgia

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION MICHAEL L. MORGAN, Plaintiff, v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., and MERSCORP, INC. Defendants. ~ Wrongful Foreclosure Although the separation of the note and the security deed does not render either instrument void, it does create a … Read more
Aug
09

Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins to Explore Possible Claims against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., to Potentially Recoup Millions for Dallas County

Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins to Explore Possible Claims against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., to Potentially Recoup Millions for Dallas County (DALLAS, TX – August 9, 2011) – Today Dallas County District Attorney (DA) Craig Watkins announced that the DA’s office is considering asserting claims against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) for … Read more
Apr
19

FEDS Announce Enforcement Actions Against 14 Servicers, LPS and MERS… Hot Towels in Washrooms Threatened Once Again

I have to tell you right up front that I’m damn tired of vacillating regulatory initiatives that produce feeble or even flaccid responses to issues that are unnecessarily destroying the lives of millions of Americans and preventing our national economy from any sort of meaningful recovery… all while the administration blathers on about the budget and Libya while playing golf, and our legislature continues to engage in petty politics while shining the shoes of Wall Street’s elite.

Think that was too harsh?  Really?  How so?  That’s precisely what continues to go on… am I missing something?  Is there some aspect of our government where an outbreak of competence is being overlooked?

Still, I’m committed to covering this subject even when doing so means that I have to start drinking at 9:30 in the morning… kidding, I’m just kidding… so, here’s the news on the FEDS and their “enforcement actions,” and I use that term very loosely, because I’m pretty sure that at the end of the proverbial day, comparatively I will have gotten in more trouble back in high school for having a party while my parents were out of town.  Maybe not… there’s more to come and I suppose I could be wrong… but don’t bet on it.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”), the Office of Thrift Supervision (“OTS”), and the Federal Reserve have apparently concluded their investigations into the mortgage servicer and supporting firm practices… including allegations of “robo-signing”, and have announced formal enforcement actions against fourteen servicers and two related servicer providers, Lender Processing Services (“LPS”), and the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems… or MERS, for short.

The list of servicers, in alphabetical order, includes: Ally Financial/GMAC, Aurora Bank, Bank of America, Citigroup, EverBank, HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, MetLife, OneWest Bank, PNC Financial, Sovereign Bank, SunTrust, U.S. Bancorp, and Wells Fargo.

According to a report titled: Interagency Review of Foreclosure Policies and Practices, which lists the Federal Reserve System, OCC and OTS as its sponsors:

“The reviews found critical weaknesses in servicers’ foreclosure governance processes, foreclosure document preparation processes, and oversight and monitoring of third-party vendors, including foreclosure attorneys. While it is important to note that findings varied across institutions, the weaknesses at each servicer, individually or collectively, resulted in unsafe and unsound practices and violations of applicable federal and state law and requirements.  The results elevated the agencies’ concern that widespread risks may be presented—to consumers, communities, various market participants, and the overall mortgage market. The servicers included in this review represent more than two-thirds of the servicing market.  Thus, the agencies consider problems cited within this report to have widespread consequences for the national housing market and borrowers.”

Now, that all sounds pretty toothy, right? Yeah, I thought so too when I first read it, but as has consistently been the case when looking at our government’s actions where bankers are concerned, a stern talking to is about as far as it goes.  After that, it’s pretty much threats on par with eliminating hot towels in bank executive washrooms, and when all is said and done, they don’t even do that.

The federal agencies involved in the investigation used what they refer to as “standardized work programs” to guide their assessment and document their findings. Here they are verbatim, as presented in their final report, followed by my brief commentary in blue type:

1. Policies and procedures - Examiners reviewed the servicers’ policies and procedures to see if they provided adequate controls over the foreclosure process and whether those policies and procedures were sufficient for compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

Well, obviously servicer controls over the foreclosure process have been something less than “adequate” to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations… right?  I mean, that is why we’re even talking about this… right?

2. Organizational structure and staffing - Examiners reviewed the functional unit(s) responsible for foreclosure processes, including their staffing levels, their staff ’s qualifications, and their training programs.

Even the bankers/servicers have been bemoaning how they are inadequately staffed and prepared to handle the unprecedented volume of foreclosures and applications for loan modifications, so obviously there are problems in this area… right?

Of course, they’ve been lamenting this lack of preparedness for the last three years, so it would seem that this rather pedestrian issue could have easily been solved by now… right?  I mean to say… they could have built the damn space shuttle several times over by now, if they wanted to… right?

3. Management of third-party service providers - Examiners reviewed the servicers’ oversight of key third parties used throughout the foreclosure process, with a focus on foreclosure attorneys, MERS, and default-service providers such as LPS.

Obviously this is another problematic area… right?  I mean, I couldn’t even count the number of court decisions that have highlighted the problems with LPS and MERS, so I’d have to think that all of those judges can’t just be flapping their gums, as it were.

4. Quality control and internal audits - Examiners assessed quality-control processes in foreclosures. Examiners also reviewed internal and external audit reports, including government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) and investor audits and reviews of foreclosure activities as well as servicers’ self-assessments.

Personally, I’d be shocked out of my shoes to find out that there even are any meaningful “quality control processes” in place at the major servicers, and I say that because none of them have gotten any better at this over the last three years and that’s no easy feat.  I mean, what if I forced you to play golf every day for two or three years.  Do you think you could be no better at golf after two years of playing every day even if you tried your hardest not to be any better?  I doubt it.

I’m not even gong to comment on the colossal messes that are Fannie and Freddie, what would be the point?  And I happen to know for a fact that investor audits are near meaningless in terms of impacting servicer behavior or performance.  As to servicer “self-assessments,” all I can say is: Bwahahahahahahahaha!  Sell that somewhere else, would you please.

5. Compliance with applicable laws - Examiners checked the adequacy of the governance, audits, and controls that servicers had in place to ensure compliance with applicable laws.

Oh shut up!  If any of the federal regulators involved in this investigation were doing their job in the first place, they wouldn’t need to be conducting this “special” investigation now… right?  I mean, shouldn’t the OCC, OTS and the Fed already KNOW the answers to these questions?

6. Loss mitigation - Examiners determined if servicers were in direct communication with borrowers and whether loss-mitigation actions, including loan modifications, were considered as alternatives to foreclosure.

This one is a no brainer… right?  I mean, it’s only a question of degree… and the hellish torture borrowers must endure to receive such “consideration”… right?

7. Critical documents - Examiners evaluated servicers’ control over critical documents in the foreclosure process, including the safeguarding of original loan documentation. Examiners also determined whether critical foreclosure documents were in the foreclosure files that they reviewed, and whether notes were endorsed and mortgages assigned.

Obviously, this is a problem area, considering court decisions such as the Massachusetts Supreme Court’s “Ibanez” case in which neither Wells Fargo nor US Bank were able to come up with a single piece of paper showing that they were in fact the holders of the mortgages in question.

One bank brought in a blank Pooling and Servicing Agreement that was downloaded from the SEC’s Website, and the other showed up with a blank Private Placement Memorandum… neither could produce a schedule of loans allegedly assigned to the applicable trusts.  And this, after more than two years to prepare.

Look, if the serivcers had the paperwork they needed to foreclose, they wouldn’t have needed “robo-signers” to sign their names to lost note affidavits ten thousand times a month… right?

8. Risk management - Examiners assessed whether servicers appropriately identified financial, reputational, and legal risks and whether these risks were communicated to the board of directors and senior management of the servicer.

Oh, they have to be kidding about this one.  Tell you what… if anyone can find a single bank Board Member or servicer senior manager who will admit that they knew anything about anything in this regard, I’ll carry you piggyback from LA to Wall Street… hopping on one foot… naked… with a smiley face painted on my butt… while whistling a happy tune the whole way… how’s that?

~~~

Okay, so I’m sure you’re all wondering how the investigations came out, as was I after reaching this point in the report.  I mean, obviously something triggered the “enforcement actions,” so what was it?  How did the servicers rate as related to the “standardized work programs,” as described above?  Well, I’m going to tell you… verbatim… again directly from the Fed’s report.

The interagency reviews identified significant weaknesses in several areas.

Well, thank the good Lord for that, wouldn’t you say?

A. Foreclosure process governance - Foreclosure governance processes of the servicers were underdeveloped and insufficient to manage and control operational, compliance, legal, and reputational risk associated with an increasing volume of foreclosures. Weaknesses included:

  • Inadequate policies, procedures, and independent control infrastructure covering all aspects of the foreclosure process.
  • Inadequate monitoring and controls to oversee foreclosure activities conducted on behalf of servicers by external law firms or other third-party vendors.
  • Lack of sufficient audit trails to show how information set out in the affidavits (amount of indebtedness, fees, penalties, etc.) was linked to the servicers’ internal records at the time the affidavits were executed.
  • Inadequate quality control and audit reviews to ensure compliance with legal requirements, policies and procedures, as well as the maintenance of sound operating environments.
  • Inadequate identification of financial, reputational, and legal risks, and absence of internal communication about those risks among boards of directors and senior management.

Okay, so correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the essence of what was said there that NON ONE IS WATCHING THE STORE?  Inadequate policies, procedures and controls covering ALL ASPECTS of the foreclosure process?  I mean… pardon me, but isn’t the foreclosure process what servicers are in business… and entrusted to handle?

Inadequate monitoring of external law firms and third-party vendors?  A lack of sufficient audit trails, AND inadequate quality control and audit reviews to ensure compliance with legal requirements AND inadequate identification of risks combined with the ABSENCE of communication about those risks to Boards and senior managers?  (See, I told you no one at the top would know anything.  Guess I’m pretty safe on that whole piggyback from LA to Wall Street bet.)

So… basically… the servicers are doing nothing right where foreclosures are concerned… right?

B. Organizational structure and availability of staffing - Examiners found inadequate organization and staffing of foreclosure units to address the increased volumes of foreclosures.

And, no surprises there.  As I said, the servicers have been whining about this point for years now… I suppose where they live there’s full employment so they have a dickens of a time hiring and training anyone.  Must be tough…

C. Affidavit and notarization practices - Individuals who signed foreclosure affidavits often did not personally check the documents for accuracy or possess the level of knowledge of the information that they attested to in those affidavits. In addition, some foreclosure documents indicated they were executed under oath, when no oath was administered. Examiners also found that the majority of the servicers had improper notary practices, which failed to conform to state legal requirements.

These determinations were based primarily on servicers’ self-assessments of their foreclosure processes and examiners’ interviews of servicer staff involved in the preparation of foreclosure documents.

Okay, so that says that bank employees did in fact lie on affidavits… fraudulently signing them for use in court, and failing to comply with state laws governing notarization of documents.  Want to know what would happen to any of us if we got caught doing any of that?  We’d very likely find ourselves in jail… or in a lot of trouble, at the very least.

If we got caught doing it tens of thousands of times a month for a couple of years… in order to foreclose on people’s homes… we’d be sharing a cell with Bernie Madoff, sure as shootin’.

And the Feds determined this through servicer self-assessments and interviews with servicer staffers?  That’s a hoot!  Shows you just how willing those employed by servicers are to cover for their employers.  Just imagine what the Feds might find if they actually INVESTIGATED the affidavits for themselves instead of accepting the servicers’ self-assessments.

So, basically… the Feds asked: What up with the robo-signers?

And the servicers replied: Yep, we did it… you caught us… no need to do any further checking.

D. Documentation practices - Examiners found some—but not widespread—errors between actual fees charged and what the servicers’ internal records indicated, with servicers undercharging fees as frequently as overcharging them. The dollar amount of overcharged fees as compared with the servicers’ internal records was generally small.

Oh, who cares?  I have no trouble believing that servicers are entirely incompetent as opposed to being evil… evil organizations are never as obtuse as servicers have proven themselves to be.

E. Third-party vendor management - Examiners generally found adequate evidence of physical control and possession of original notes and mortgages.  Examiners also found, with limited exceptions, that notes appeared to be properly endorsed and mortgages and deeds of trust appeared properly assigned.

The review did find that, in some cases, the third-party law firms hired by the servicers were nonetheless filing mortgage foreclosure complaints or lost-note affidavits even though proper documentation existed.

What a total crock of crap that is… adequate evidence of properly endorsed and assigned, physically possessed original notes and mortgages?  Attorneys including Max Gardner have told me that they’ve never seen a properly assigned or endorsed note or mortgage possessed by a servicer… and they’ve reviewed hundreds or even thousands of case files… but I’ll tell you what…

Fine… since the Feds say servicers have everything in order in this regard… then they shouldn’t object to having to show it to the judge when in court, or providing a signed declaration stating that they have the proper assignments and/or endorsements prior to foreclosing… right?

If they’ve got it… then show it.  Shouldn’t be an issue… okay, so major problem solved right there.

I wonder why it is, however, that the servicers throw such a fit whenever legislation shows up at the state level that would require servicers to either produce such documentation prior to foreclosing… or even just requires them to submit a declaration that they have such documentation… does the banking lobby go into panic mode, making all sorts of thinly veiled threats about how such a law will increase borrowing costs for homeowners and basically destroy our collective economic future?

What I’m describing was recently the case in Arizona where the State Senate passed a bill 28-2 that would have required servicers to produce a declaration that they were in possession of the proper chain of title documentation prior to foreclosure.

I’m going to be writing an article about what happened in the Arizona case later today, but suffice it to say that the bill… while on its way to the Arizona House of Representatives… over a weekend… managed to completely DISSAPPEAR… replaced by a bill using the same alpha-numeric identifier, but now having to do with the funding of firefighters.  And that should scare the hell out of anyone who cares about our democracy in the least… any of the Founding Fathers would turn over in their graves… where are we anyway… Iran?  Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela?

F. Quality control (QC) and audit - Examiners found weaknesses in quality control and internal auditing procedures at all servicers included in the review.

Yeah, yeah, yeah… like I said earlier… I’d be shocked to learn that any quality control or internal auditing procedures existed at any of the servicers.  In light of the rest of the investigation’s findings, for what in the world would it even be used?

~~~

Alrighty then… so what’s the next step, federal regulator people?  What’s involved in the “enforcement actions” you have so proudly announced are being taken against 14 servicers, LPS and MERS?  Whatcha’ gonna do, betches?  Are you going to take away hot towels from their executive washrooms?


Here’s what the report says… VERBATIM, once again.

Based on the deficiencies identified in these reviews and the risks of additional issues as a result of weak controls and processes, the agencies at this time are taking formal enforcement actions against each of the 14 servicers subject to this review to address those weaknesses and risks. The enforcement actions require each servicer, among other things, to conduct a more complete review of certain aspects of foreclosure actions that occurred between January 1, 2009… and December 31, 2010.

OH DEAR GOD… NOOOOOOOOO… you’re not going to make the servicers conduct a more complete review of certain aspects of foreclosure actions… that’s going way too far.  And what about the hot towels… they need hot towels… I’m overcome here… the tears won’t stop… just give me a minute…

I have a quick, if perhaps slightly unrelated question before I wrap this up and provide a few links so you can find the various related documents and press releases for yourself.  I don’t want to offend anyone here, but why do we even need the word “F#@K” if you can’t use it here?  Okay, it’s rhetorical, but I’m serious here… what’s that word for if not for situations such as this one?

Okay, I’m back.  So… there you have it.  Before I sign off, here are a few links you might want to check out… assuming you’re a glutton for punishment that is.  Here’s the press release from the Federal Reserve describing the investigation’s conclusion: For Immediate Release from the Federal Reserve Board of Governors

And here’s the press release from the OCC, which has links to the actual enforcement actions against the eight servicers called out by that agency’s investigation: OCC Takes Enforcement Action Against Eight Servicers for Unsafe and Unsound Foreclosure Practices

In closing…

I should mention that this farce of an investigation by our federal banking regulators is not precluding the state attorneys general from continuing to pursue their own independent… and God willing… more stringent settlement with the mortgage servicers… and reports are that they will continue to do just that.  Not that I have much faith that the 50 AGs are going to do all that much more… but I don’t see how they could accomplish any less.

And those critical of the Fed’s investigation and “enforcement action,” if it can even be called that, are making their voices heard with literally dozens of consumer advocacy organizations speaking out against the wholly insipid outcome, arguing that the consent decrees do not hold servicers accountable for illegal practices or stop avoidable foreclosures.

Numerous agencies signed onto a letter sent to Ben Bernanke, Sheila Bair, John Walsh (OCC) and John Bowman (OTS) asking that the Feds work with the state AGs on a tougher settlement.  Among other things, the letter states:

“Millions of homeowners have been victimized by the fraudulent and abusive practices of mortgage servicers whose staff are trained for collection activities rather than loss mitigation, whose infrastructure cannot handle the volume and intensity of demand, and whose business records are a mess.  Servicers falsify court documents in large part because they have not kept the accurate records of ownership, payments and escrow accounts that would enable them to proceed legally.   The robo-signing allegations are the most obvious evidence that servicers are routinely failing to comply with the requirements of the laws and contractual provisions to which they are subject and the tip of the iceberg of servicer noncompliance.

These proposed consent orders also appear to do nothing to ensure that homeowners will be protected from past and existing abuses in the mortgage servicing process.  The standards and methodology for the third-party review are vague.  The proposed orders also provide no guidelines on loss mitigation or on evaluations for core servicing abuses, including application of payments, assessment of fees, or force placed insurance.  Finally, the servicers may seek to inappropriately use these self-fashioned reviews as shields against other actions against them by homeowners or government enforcement agencies.

The proposed consent orders do not provide the accountability and rigor required to right this foreclosure crisis.   They are clearly not intended to do so.  We request that you withdraw the proposed orders and work with the state Attorneys General and United States Department of Justice on a joint settlement.”

~~~

So… what will happen next? I honestly have no idea.  On one hand, I’d like to believe that my fellow citizens could not possibly abide this kind of flagrant corruption, dereliction of duty and at the utmost best… absolute ineptitude.

On the other hand, are you following American Idol this season?  I just love the guy that plays the stand-up bass, don’t you?  He won’t win, but he has great taste in music, I think.  And what about Obama’s birth certificate… Trump in ‘12?

Mandelman out.

Feb
15

The Automatic Earth

Post from Automatic Earth

Merscorp Inc., operator of the electronic-registration system that contains about half of all U.S. home mortgages, has no right to transfer the mortgages under its membership rules, a judge said.

automatic-earthU.S. Bankruptcy Judge Robert E. Grossman in Central Islip, New York, in a decision he said he knew would have a “significant impact,” wrote that the membership rules of the company’s Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, or MERS, don’t make it an agent of the banks that own the mortgages.

“MERS’s theory that it can act as a ‘common agent’ for undisclosed principals is not supported by the law,” Grossman wrote in a Feb. 10 opinion. “MERS did not have authority, as ‘nominee’ or agent, to assign the mortgage absent a showing that it was given specific written directions by its principal.”

Tweet this!Tweet this! Share and Enjoy: Print Digg del.icio.us Facebook Google Bookmarks email FriendFeed Identi.ca LinkedIn Live MySpace PDF Ping.fm RSS StumbleUpon Technorati Tumblr Yahoo! Buzz Posterous Twitter Yahoo! Bookmarks

Scridb filter
Jan
04

For the first time in the nation’s history, there is no longer an authoritative, public record of who owns land in each county.

That’s a quote from University of Utah law professor Christopher Peterson.

The impact of our failure of property ownership is impossible to predict.  What we do know for certain is that this system is one of the reasons behind the dramatic collapse in real estate we’re suffering all across this country.  What’s most staggering is how this cancer spread all across this country with precious little government or legislative opposition.  How did our leaders just turn their backs on this?

And now for the article….

There is an unbelievable scandal in the making that threatens to subvert our four-century-old method for guaranteeing a fundamental building block of the American republic—property ownership. The biggest reason why you probably haven’t heard much about it is that it involves one of the most generic and boring company names imaginable: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., or MERS. It is a story of deception engineered at the highest level of power for short-term gain, and another epic failure of the private sector to uphold the laws and traditions of American society, even something as fundamental as property rights.

MERS cost local governments billions of dollars in lost revenue, but there is a chance that the cash-strapped counties will be able to claw some of that money back. Lawsuits have been filed against MERS in California, Nevada, Tennessee and 14 other states that accuse the company of functioning as a tax evasion vehicle designed to help banks circumvent filing fee requirements. “In California, the suit against MERS could cost the company somewhere between $60 to $120 billion in damages and penalties. With so much money extracted from California’s municipalities, no wonder the Golden State is facing a $25 billion budget gap,” reported the Associated Press.

Read the full article here

Tweet this!Tweet this! Share and Enjoy: Print Digg del.icio.us Facebook Google Bookmarks email FriendFeed Identi.ca LinkedIn Live MySpace PDF Ping.fm RSS StumbleUpon Technorati Tumblr Yahoo! Buzz Posterous Twitter Yahoo! Bookmarks

Scridb filter
Dec
17

Bloomberg Reports on Foreclosure Hell

Foreclosure-Limbo-BloombergTheir most recent lender, American Brokers Conduit, transferred custody of the loan to Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, a digital database owned by huge lenders such as Bank of America (BAC). When the Hassells defaulted in 2008, MERS kicked the debt to American Home Mortgage Servicing, a company that specializes in handling subprime mortgages. AHMS filed a foreclosure suit against the Hassells—admitting in court papers that the couple’s promissory note had been “lost, stolen, or destroyed.”

Yet Matthew Weidner, the Hassells’ lawyer, is still fighting the claim. “This is a microcosm of the financial crisis,” he says.

Full Report Here

Tweet this!Tweet this! Share and Enjoy: Print Digg del.icio.us Facebook Google Bookmarks email FriendFeed Identi.ca LinkedIn Live MySpace PDF Ping.fm RSS StumbleUpon Technorati Tumblr Yahoo! Buzz Posterous Twitter Yahoo! Bookmarks

Scridb filter
Website Designed and Developed by Tampa Web Designer