http://azstarnet.com/article_d385fb20-0a12-11e0-8afb-001cc4c03286.html
Filed suit at the Maricopa County Superior Court?
Now what exactly does that mean?
Criminal charges?
Because anything less makes the AZ Attorney General look inept, since he was the one, that actually termed the banks action as defrauding.
The Arizona Attorney General's Office filed suit today
against Bank of America, accusing it of defrauding its mortgage
customers.
The state contends the bank, the largest servicer of home loans in
Arizona, engaged in practices which led to hundreds of
people being ousted from their homes even as they were being told
their mortgages were being modified. That even included at least
one instance where the homeowner was current on her mortgage and
had never been late with a payment, prosecutors said in a 35-page complaint filed in Maricopa County Superior Court.
Showing posts with label foreclosuregate Bank fraud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label foreclosuregate Bank fraud. Show all posts
Friday, December 17, 2010
Sunday, October 10, 2010
THE SiGNiNG… Or, Pardon me, Mr. Banker, but your REMIC is showing
http://mandelman.ml-implode.com/2010/10/the-signing-or-pardon-me-mr-banker-but-your-remic-is-showing/
This is what Repo 105 was all about?
I didn't understand at the time why it would be seen as a legally acceptable practice.
It's very clear now, why that was just so widely accepted.
It was an additional money maker all the way around.
An industry known accepted practice.
What did the financial commission do when this came out in open testimony?
Absolutely NOTHING
Missing the Assignment…
But none of that, the A to B to C to D stuff, or lets say very little of it, was done. And as a result, the loans were never assigned to the trusts. We know that because that’s what the robo-signers are trying to cover up.
So, the question should be WHY? Why didn’t the bankers go to the trouble of properly assigning the loans to the trusts? I have to believe that the Wall Street crowd knew their alphabet, at least to the letter “D,” even if they did have to sign the song in order to remember it. So, why didn’t they do it right the first time.
There are several opinions about why this wasn’t done; I’ve asked around and heard several theories. Many say the Wall Street bankers were just too busy selling the loans over and over to trouble themselves with the real estate paperwork, but I can’t buy that. Not all of the banks would have been too busy and unconcerned about such paperwork at the same time.
A friend and business associate of mine, who spent more than two decades as a US Attorney, suggested that there had to be a benefit, some reason that they didn’t assign the loans to the trusts, and that led me to one place: the “repo agreements”. Last year, I read the book about what happened at Bear Stearns and the one thing that never resolved itself in my mind were called “repo agreements”. I never totally got what they were all about, but as soon as I heard “there has to be a benefit,” the repo agreements went DING!
In our lives, “repo” means repossession, but I remembered that at Bear Stearns the term “repo” was being used to mean “repurchase”. And I remembered that because I hate it when people play games with the English, unless it’s their second language.
So, I remembered reading about how the guys at Bear were leveraging something in order to juice their returns, and they were using these repo agreements to do it. They worked something like this: Bear would borrow money and pledge assets as collateral in the repo agreements, and the deal was that they’d buy the assets back at a certain date at some fixed or variable interest rate.
I remember thinking… well, that’s pretty much how a pawn shop works, no? Why don’t they just say that… they pawn their assets?
So, why didn’t the bankers assign the loans to the trusts? I don’t know… for sure. But I’m going to go out on a limb here and tell you it’s because they wanted to borrow against them, and once assigned to the trust, they wouldn’t be able to pledge them in a repo agreement and thereby get the cash they needed to invest and juice their returns with borrowed money. They like to call it leverage, but leveraging assets you really don’t own, in order to borrow money and invest it… well, it doesn’t sound like something that’s strictly legal… although again, I’m not entirely sure
This is what Repo 105 was all about?
I didn't understand at the time why it would be seen as a legally acceptable practice.
It's very clear now, why that was just so widely accepted.
It was an additional money maker all the way around.
An industry known accepted practice.
What did the financial commission do when this came out in open testimony?
Absolutely NOTHING
Missing the Assignment…
But none of that, the A to B to C to D stuff, or lets say very little of it, was done. And as a result, the loans were never assigned to the trusts. We know that because that’s what the robo-signers are trying to cover up.
So, the question should be WHY? Why didn’t the bankers go to the trouble of properly assigning the loans to the trusts? I have to believe that the Wall Street crowd knew their alphabet, at least to the letter “D,” even if they did have to sign the song in order to remember it. So, why didn’t they do it right the first time.
There are several opinions about why this wasn’t done; I’ve asked around and heard several theories. Many say the Wall Street bankers were just too busy selling the loans over and over to trouble themselves with the real estate paperwork, but I can’t buy that. Not all of the banks would have been too busy and unconcerned about such paperwork at the same time.
A friend and business associate of mine, who spent more than two decades as a US Attorney, suggested that there had to be a benefit, some reason that they didn’t assign the loans to the trusts, and that led me to one place: the “repo agreements”. Last year, I read the book about what happened at Bear Stearns and the one thing that never resolved itself in my mind were called “repo agreements”. I never totally got what they were all about, but as soon as I heard “there has to be a benefit,” the repo agreements went DING!
In our lives, “repo” means repossession, but I remembered that at Bear Stearns the term “repo” was being used to mean “repurchase”. And I remembered that because I hate it when people play games with the English, unless it’s their second language.
So, I remembered reading about how the guys at Bear were leveraging something in order to juice their returns, and they were using these repo agreements to do it. They worked something like this: Bear would borrow money and pledge assets as collateral in the repo agreements, and the deal was that they’d buy the assets back at a certain date at some fixed or variable interest rate.
I remember thinking… well, that’s pretty much how a pawn shop works, no? Why don’t they just say that… they pawn their assets?
So, why didn’t the bankers assign the loans to the trusts? I don’t know… for sure. But I’m going to go out on a limb here and tell you it’s because they wanted to borrow against them, and once assigned to the trust, they wouldn’t be able to pledge them in a repo agreement and thereby get the cash they needed to invest and juice their returns with borrowed money. They like to call it leverage, but leveraging assets you really don’t own, in order to borrow money and invest it… well, it doesn’t sound like something that’s strictly legal… although again, I’m not entirely sure
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Tickerguy On Dylan Ratigan
http://market-ticker.org/
Oh Damn,
Check out Karl
He nailed the mortgage nighttmare, every damn part
The who, what, when, where and why ,
Bravo Karl!!!!!!!
Oh Damn,
Check out Karl
He nailed the mortgage nighttmare, every damn part
The who, what, when, where and why ,
Bravo Karl!!!!!!!
Standard bank practice, is it still acceptable?
http://market-ticker.org/
Using someone Else's social security number to run a military check?
Oh yeah that's perfectly legal, a notary stamp passed around for community use. Multiple people signing as one person.
Fee charges already on a standard document, whether it's use was used or not.
Attorneys who knew what they were doing was illegal and they were scared shitless about being disbarred and left.
And the list goes on.
Take a few minutes to read this deposition, it will make you vomit.
It's hard to believe that the banks have brought the state of our country down to this....nothing more than a covered up fraud.
Falsifying MILITARY Documents
Yep - that's what we're talking about here.....
22 When it got really sticky there were a lot of us that
23 weren’t here.
24 Q What does really sticky mean?
25 A They wanted us to start changing the documents
33
1 and stuff and doing stuff that we weren’t supposed to be
2 doing as far as service.
....
22 A Not everybody. I personally did not do it
23 because I refused to do it. I wasn’t going to falsify a
24 military document. I was told that that’s fine,
25 somebody else on your team will do it.
It's all ok folks, there's no problem with intentional fraud upon the courts and, by result, stealing people's homes.
REMEMBER FOLKS, THESE ARE THE BIG BANKS - THE ONES YOU BAILED OUT WITH YOUR TAX MONEY - THAT ARE DOING THIS.
AND YOU'RE LETTING THEM DO IT.
Using someone Else's social security number to run a military check?
Oh yeah that's perfectly legal, a notary stamp passed around for community use. Multiple people signing as one person.
Fee charges already on a standard document, whether it's use was used or not.
Attorneys who knew what they were doing was illegal and they were scared shitless about being disbarred and left.
And the list goes on.
Take a few minutes to read this deposition, it will make you vomit.
It's hard to believe that the banks have brought the state of our country down to this....nothing more than a covered up fraud.
Falsifying MILITARY Documents
Yep - that's what we're talking about here.....
22 When it got really sticky there were a lot of us that
23 weren’t here.
24 Q What does really sticky mean?
25 A They wanted us to start changing the documents
33
1 and stuff and doing stuff that we weren’t supposed to be
2 doing as far as service.
....
22 A Not everybody. I personally did not do it
23 because I refused to do it. I wasn’t going to falsify a
24 military document. I was told that that’s fine,
25 somebody else on your team will do it.
It's all ok folks, there's no problem with intentional fraud upon the courts and, by result, stealing people's homes.
REMEMBER FOLKS, THESE ARE THE BIG BANKS - THE ONES YOU BAILED OUT WITH YOUR TAX MONEY - THAT ARE DOING THIS.
AND YOU'RE LETTING THEM DO IT.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Foreclosure Fraud Reveals Structural & Legal Crisis
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/10/foreclosure-fraud-reveals-structural-legal-crisis/
An outstanding read
The woes in the mortgage market are complex, deep and structural. This is more than just a few shortcuts taken by paralegals here and there — there are endemic structural problems within the US real estate and mortgage markets. (Yesterday, we touched upon the problems associated with foreclosure mills).
We are not discussing economic problems of too many homes for sale and falling prices. What is being discussed here is a full blown crisis underlying home titles, foreclosure procedures, and securitized mortgages. The rampant, epidemic and systemic abuse of legal property protections is now reaching a crisis.
Today, we will put that crisis into the greater context of the entire real estate industry, from purchases to the securitization of mortgages to default and foreclosure. What this discussion reveals are a series of short cuts, (il)legal fictions, and an utter disrespect for the mechanisms of legal property transfer that underlies our entire system of Capitalism. As Hernando de Soto discovered, the organized, reliable, functional systemic approach to property rights is the key reason why “Why Capitalism triumphs in the West and fails everywhere else.”
And we will see that at every step along the process, the reckless rush for easy profits has systemically undermined these legal property rights — how mortgages are recorded, the bungled bundling of notes to be securitized, the electronic system that fictionalized the process of assembling transfer documents, and how all the players along the way — The investment firms, banks, law firms, even court system, utterly lost sight of what they were doing.
An outstanding read
The woes in the mortgage market are complex, deep and structural. This is more than just a few shortcuts taken by paralegals here and there — there are endemic structural problems within the US real estate and mortgage markets. (Yesterday, we touched upon the problems associated with foreclosure mills).
We are not discussing economic problems of too many homes for sale and falling prices. What is being discussed here is a full blown crisis underlying home titles, foreclosure procedures, and securitized mortgages. The rampant, epidemic and systemic abuse of legal property protections is now reaching a crisis.
Today, we will put that crisis into the greater context of the entire real estate industry, from purchases to the securitization of mortgages to default and foreclosure. What this discussion reveals are a series of short cuts, (il)legal fictions, and an utter disrespect for the mechanisms of legal property transfer that underlies our entire system of Capitalism. As Hernando de Soto discovered, the organized, reliable, functional systemic approach to property rights is the key reason why “Why Capitalism triumphs in the West and fails everywhere else.”
And we will see that at every step along the process, the reckless rush for easy profits has systemically undermined these legal property rights — how mortgages are recorded, the bungled bundling of notes to be securitized, the electronic system that fictionalized the process of assembling transfer documents, and how all the players along the way — The investment firms, banks, law firms, even court system, utterly lost sight of what they were doing.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Mortgage Meltdown Mess Update
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/mortgage-meltdown-mess-update
With all the excitement over yet another market melt up, some may have forgotten about the biggest story in process of decimating the US economy, and its entire mortgage-credit backbone. Here is a brief summary of all the comings and goings in the Mortgage Meltdown Mess, which may explain why the Fed is getting aggressive about inflating the living feces out of $10+ trillion in mortgage debt.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren and CA Democratic Delegation Asks for Investigations
http://lofgren.house.gov/images/stories/pdf/letter_to_investigate_banks_-_final_10.4.10.pdf
AFL-CIO Reiterates Call for Foreclosure Moratorium
http://blog.aflcio.org/2010/09/30/banks-should-follow-chase-and-declare-moratorium-on-foreclosures/
Freddie Demands Review of Servicer Policy
http://www.freddiemac.com/sell/guide/bulletins/pdf/iltr100110.pdf
Senator Menendez Sends Stern Letters to Banks, Asks for GAO Investigation
•JP Morgan Chase: http://menendez.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/20101005ltr_JPMorgan.pdf
•Bank of America: http://menendez.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/20101005ltr_BoA.pdf
•Ally Financial: http://menendez.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/20101005ltr_Ally.pdf
•Mortgage Servicers (identical letter sent to 117 companies): http://menendez.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/20101005ltr_MortgageServicers.pdf
•GAO: http://menendez.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/20101005ltr_GAOMortgages.pdf
The Next New Century? LPS under investigation by Florida AG
With all the excitement over yet another market melt up, some may have forgotten about the biggest story in process of decimating the US economy, and its entire mortgage-credit backbone. Here is a brief summary of all the comings and goings in the Mortgage Meltdown Mess, which may explain why the Fed is getting aggressive about inflating the living feces out of $10+ trillion in mortgage debt.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren and CA Democratic Delegation Asks for Investigations
http://lofgren.house.gov/images/stories/pdf/letter_to_investigate_banks_-_final_10.4.10.pdf
AFL-CIO Reiterates Call for Foreclosure Moratorium
http://blog.aflcio.org/2010/09/30/banks-should-follow-chase-and-declare-moratorium-on-foreclosures/
Freddie Demands Review of Servicer Policy
http://www.freddiemac.com/sell/guide/bulletins/pdf/iltr100110.pdf
Senator Menendez Sends Stern Letters to Banks, Asks for GAO Investigation
•JP Morgan Chase: http://menendez.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/20101005ltr_JPMorgan.pdf
•Bank of America: http://menendez.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/20101005ltr_BoA.pdf
•Ally Financial: http://menendez.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/20101005ltr_Ally.pdf
•Mortgage Servicers (identical letter sent to 117 companies): http://menendez.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/20101005ltr_MortgageServicers.pdf
•GAO: http://menendez.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/20101005ltr_GAOMortgages.pdf
The Next New Century? LPS under investigation by Florida AG
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)