‘The bottom line is that the notice of substitution of Plaintiff in judicial states, or notice of substitution of Trustee in non-judicial states should be the first line of battle. Neither one of them is valid and in both cases you have a stranger to the transaction being allowed to name itself as creditor, name its own controlled entity or subsidiary as trustee, and then ignore the realities of the money paid to the real creditor. They are claiming damages from the borrower — all for a debt that in the ordinary course of things has already been paid several times over. But it is true that it wasn’t paid to THEM because THEY were never and are not now the creditor fulfilling the definition of a creditor who could bid at the foreclosure auction. It is not that the borrower doesn’t owe money when he borrows it, it is that he doesn’t owe it to any of the people who are claiming it. And that is what gives rise to liability of law firms to borrowers.” Neil F Garfield
According to the indictment and plea agreement, Harrell operated a scheme in which he off ered , in exchange for a fee from a homeowner facing foreclosure , to postpone foreclosure proceedings on the homeowner’s property. Harrell accomplished this by instructing homeowner clients to deed fractional interests in th eir properties to other individu als whom Harrell would pay to file bankruptcy petitions in U.S. Bankruptcy Court. Once the bankruptcy petitions were filed, Harrell would notify creditors — which included multiple TARP banks — seeking to foreclose on his clients’ properties , th at the propert ies were part of an active bankruptcy proceeding .
According to documents filed in this case, Youngheim participated in a large-scale mortgage fraud scheme designed to unjustly enrich himself and his business partner Loveless (among others) to the detriment of neighboring homeowners in Gary, Indiana, and taxpayers generally. Individuals who were recruited to buy most of the houses sold in the scheme were first-time home buyers with little practical experience in the field of real estate and with limited to no familiarity with the Gary, Indiana real estate market.
After reviewing three years of personal financial disclosures, the Center found judges who authored opinions favoring companies in which they owned stock. The Center found judges who ruled on cases even when family members were receiving income from one of the parties. And it found judges who accepted lavish gifts — like a $50,000 trip from a lawyer.
Lillian Marquez, 38, and Michael Keatts, 56, both of Stockton, California, were arrested in their homes for a mortgage fraud scheme. A federal grand jury indictment charged them with conspiring to commit mortgage fraud and with nine counts of mail fraud. The indictment was unsealed upon their arrests. According to the indictment, from February 2006 through at least August 2012, Marquez and Keatts operated Colonial Home and Business Services, Stockton, California. Both defendants were licensed real estate agents who assisted clients in purchasing and selling homes.
The primary payment we are focusing on today is servicer advances which come in different flavors — non-stop, limited and none. Most loans (96%) are subject to claims of securitization regardless of what the current servicer or trustee is telling you. And most of those (my guess is around 75%-90%) come with third party obligors, which is why there is so much confusion. Besides servicer advances, the agents for the trust beneficiaries at the investment bank who sold them the bonds received on behalf of the bond holders, insurance payments and other funds from other contracts designed to limit the risk associated with the terms of the bond repayment of interest and principal.
“When it mattered most, Fifth Third failed to write down the value of loans it held on its books, and as a result, the bank didn’t show its true losses on those loans in the records it used to apply for TARP funds,” said Christy Romero, Special Inspector G eneral for TARP (SIGTARP). “Treasury and federal taxpayers, who funded the TARP bailout and who became investors in Fifth Third and other banks, deserved to know the truth about Fifth Third’s financial condition.”
The first thing is judges are moving cases toward resolution at speeds far greater than has ever before occurred. It’s a tidal wave of foreclosure actions that is ripping across Florida like a wildfire. And as in any great fury, there are mistakes being made…..many of them. But far worse than the outcome for consumers who go into court without an attorney and see first hand that they are losing their homes are the consumers who do not have any notice that they are losing their homes….
Lisa Kay Brumfiel's legal battle to stop the foreclosure of her house took a fatal hit Oct. 2 when U.S. District Judge William J. Martínez ruled that his jurisdiction to handle the case dissolved months ago when U.S. Bank changed how it would pursue the property. Brumfiel challenged the constitutionality of Colorado's most common foreclosure process, known as a Rule 120, which is a streamlined way for lenders to take mortgaged property when homeowners default.
Sale is declared void ab initio; These are the words that Edwin Calle and his attorneys Brian McCaffrey Attorney at Law, P.C. have been waiting to hear for more than six (6) months. On Monday October 21, 2013 Mr. McCaffrey met with his client to explain the ramifications of the long awaited decision. Mr. Calle can now begin the process of trying to save his home by entering into loss mitigation with his servicer Bank of America.
Last December, the California Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal filed by a couple who had accused financial giant Wells Fargo & Co. of predatory lending. One justice, who owned stock in the bank, recused himself from the case. But Justice Kathryn Werdegar, who owned as much as $1 million of Wells Fargo stock, participated — and shouldn’t have. The Center for Public Integrity learned of Werdegar’s financial stake thanks to California’s relatively strong financial reporting requirements for justices. But California’s law is an exception.
A Monday order from Palm Beach County Circuit Judge Richard Oftedal spells out some of the problems in today’s foreclosures, from law firms’ playing hot potato with cases to just plain shoddy handling. Oftedal dismissed the 2010 case after a hearing where the lender’s attorney, who was new to the file, sputtered through explanations as to why it took the bank six months to meet a two-week deadline to comply to one order and why it never complied to another request to file a new complaint.
The answer appears to be a lawsuit to quiet title which really can be met with little opposition. And a second action for slander of credit and identity theft looks promising to clear the negative credit reports and collect damages. For more information on this see my blog posts in 2007 and 2008, where I predicted we would get to exactly this point. While the policy makers were passing laws and enacting draconian rules of procedure to clear the calendar of foreclosure cases caused by what they thought were dilatory defenses, it is now revealed that it is the plaintiffs that have delayed the cases not the homeowners. And while all of that was happening an increasing number of cases were being tried and won by homeowners as lawyers came up to speed on the facts and the law applied to these ridiculous instruments that are treated as though they were true notes and mortgages.
Practice Hint: always check the State Statutes (or the Federal Rules) on evidence, especially here say and hearsay exceptions before you open your mouth or file any discovery. There are some juicy morsels in there. Like how you can use business records as an exception to hearsay and how the fundamental issue is the trustworthiness of the records. Simply stated, if the records are those of a non-party who has no interest in the outcome, then the Court should lean toward allowing the business records into evidence upon the proffer of an appropriate witness and compliance with other rules of procedure requiring notice to the opposing party. Those rules should be carefully reviewed and used against the Bank if they don’t comply.
According to court documents, from at least as early as Feb. 6, 2007 until at least Jan. 3, 2012, Penguin Properties and Lynn conspired with others not to bid against one another, but instead to designate a winning bidder to obtain selected properties at public real estate foreclosure auctions in Fulton County, Ga. Penguin Properties and Lynn were also charged with a conspiracy to use the mail to carry out a scheme to fraudulently acquire title to selected Fulton County properties sold at public auctions, to make and receive payoffs and to divert money to co-conspirators that would have gone to mortgage holders and others by holding second, private auctions open only to members of the conspiracy. The department said that the selected properties were then awarded to the conspirators who submitted the highest bids in the second, private auctions.
The majority of time spent in foreclosure courtrooms is not spent responding to motions or issues raised by defendants, rather the time in foreclosure courtrooms is spent with Plaintiffs trying to correct all the lies and the inaccuracies in their pleadings while courts and judges try to decide just how much wiggle room and flexibility they should grant to the Plaintiffs who have screwed their cases up so badly. In my estimation, courts are bending over far too much to apologize and ignore the mistakes and misdeeds of the banks that have created such chaos and damaged threatened the national security of these United States of America.
Kaye-Eddie and the now-defunct Loan Tech processed and submitted applications for FHA-insured mortgage loans that included false statements, including fraudulent rental agreements falsely stating, unbeknownst to the borrowers, that the borrowers were receiving rental income when they were not. Without the falsely documented rental income, the borrowers would not have qualified for FHA-insured loans. The homes were in the Eastern District of California in Sacramento, West Sacramento, and Williams, California. All but one of the loans have been delinquent at some point, and two of the homes have gone into foreclosure.
The Justices are soliciting amicus briefs. Whether Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems ("MERS") has standing to pursue a foreclosure in its own right as a named "mortgagee" with ability to act limited solely as a "nominee" and without any ownership interest or rights in the promissory note associated with the mortgage; whether the prospective mandate of Eaton v. Federal National Mortgage Association, 462 Mass. 569 (2012), applies to cases that were pending on appeal at the time that case was decided. The case is scheduled for argument in April 2013.
Bill Sloan, Esq., in the 9th Judicial Circuit of Common Pleas in Charleston, South Carolina successfully turned the head of at least one judge, citing the United States Supreme Court case of Carpenter v Longen, 83 U.S. 271, 16 Wall. 271, 21 L. ed. 313 (1872). I might add that in the BP litigation, the Circuit Court of Appeals just issued a ruling on the same topic and said “Absent a loss , a claimant has suffered no injury. Unless a claimant can colorably assert a loss, it lacks standing. See Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S., 560 (1992) (noting that an injury is a required element of constitutional standing))… if a claimant has suffered a loss, but has no colorable claim that the loss was caused by the spill, it also lacks standing and cannot state a claim.” IN RE DEEP WATER HORIZON 5TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FILED OCTOBER 2, 2013 CASE NO 13-30315.
First, in most cases, the securitization process never happened despite the pile of paper generated by the sham securitization scheme. The “mismanaged” money of investors really amounts to intentionally NOT depositing the investor money into the trusts that had issued the bonds. It also represented a whole different world of underwriting that broke every rule in the book for risk management. But that was the point. They wanted the risk to be higher than was advertised so they could bet, on inside information that only the banks had, that the loans and bonds would fail or be substantially diminished roughly in proportion to the drop in real estate prices.
A former top executive at theCredit Suisse Groupsentenced to two and a half years in prison on Friday for inflating the value of mortgage bonds as the housing market collapsed. The prison term makes the executive, Kareem Serageldin, one of the most senior Wall Street officials to serve time for criminal conduct during the financial crisis. Wearing a dark suit and blue tie, Mr. Serageldin remained stoic as Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein of the United States District Court in Manhattan handed down the sentence, which was less than the roughly five-year sentence called for by nonbinding sentencing guidelines. Judge Hellerstein showed mercy on Mr. Serageldin in part because of what he said was a toxic culture at Credit Suisse and its rivals.
As I am litigating directly now I see evidence of the same trends discussed in the New York Times article. I adopted a different stance than most foreclosure defense attorneys whose strategies are not less valid than my own. They just don’t suit me. I am accustomed to being the aggressor. So I enter a cases in which the bank has been delaying prosecution of the foreclosure case and step up the pace. The Judges here in Tallahassee and elsewhere are taking note — that the banks are curiously opposing our attempts to move the case along. The resulting shift in perception is palpable. Judges are looking at the files and realizing that it is not because of borrowers who frankly did nothing in the file, but because of the banks who never prosecuted the case.
As I’ve been carefully examining the judgments that are being entered in the midst of the purge, the thing that is most compelling by far is the vast number of foreclosure cases that go through the system completely undefended. Right now foreclosure cases filed in 2007-2010 are being cleared more quickly than ever before…those cases had the highest levels of real big problems. Fraud, forgery, lies, crimes. But if no defendant and no attorney is there to resist that case, to fight bank perjury, to provide some push back…whatever is there to be done?