STERN LAW FIRM MOVING OFF-SHORE

ARTICLE BY MATT WEIDNER

INFORMATION ABOUT FORECLOSURE ATTORNEY IN FLORIDA IS POWERFUL EVIDENCE
OF FORECLOSURE MONEY MOVING OFF-SHORE
Posted on June 27, 2010 by WWW.Foreclosureblues.WORDPRESS.COM
SHOCKING- MIND BLOWING INFORMATION ABOUT FORECLOSURE MILL DAVID J STERN

We have long suspected that much of the mountains of
fraudulent mortgage securitization money, including 3rd party
payments, undisclosed yield spreads, CDS profits, and finally
foreclosure proceeds has been moved STRAIGHT OFFSHORE! Evidence is
starting to come to light…
Today, June 26, 2010, 3 hours ago | Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.
The Law Offices of David Stern is probably the single busiest
foreclosure mill operating in the State of Florida. The information
quoted below comes directly from documents filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission. I encourage everyone who practices in
foreclosure or who cares one bit about the impact foreclosures are
having on our state and our courts to read the document very carefully
and consider the implications of each of the statements.
I wish that every judge and every overworked judicial assistant and
clerk of court and struggling homeowner and reporter and concerned
citizen would read this post and the attached prospectus very
carefully. I don’t know what a “Blank Check Company” is, but I don’t
like the sounds of it. I don’t like a company incorporated in the
British Virgin Islands being responsible for taking the homes of
hundreds of thousands of my neighbors. I especially don’t like the
thought of the profits derived from taking the homes of hundreds of
thousands of my neighbors having anything to do with,
“an unidentified operating business which has its principal business
and/or material operations in China.”

David J Stern Prospectus
And now below are statements taken directly from the prospectus….read
slowly, read carefully, pray that someone in the press or regulatory
agencies or someone in power might wake up and pay attention to all of
this:
The Supreme Court of Florida has recently taken steps to insure that
proper documentation is filed in foreclosure actions, and if DJS does
not comply with the new rules and procedures the foreclosure actions
on which they are working may be dismissed, which may result in DJS
receiving fewer referrals, and, since they are our primary client,
reduced revenues for us. However, DJS may not be successful in
complying with these new rules.
Mr. Stern received a significant amount of cash consideration in
connection with the Transaction, which may reduce his incentive to
devote his full efforts to continue to develop and expand the business
of DJS and our business. Under the terms of the Acquisition Agreement,
Mr. Stern and his affiliates received approximately $58.5 million in
Initial Cash in exchange for contributing their business to DAL, plus
another approximately $88 million in the Stern Note and Post-Closing
Cash.
DJSP Enterprises, Inc. (“DJSP”, “we,” “us” or “our”) is a holding
company whose primary business operations are conducted through three
wholly owned subsidiaries, DJS Processing, LLC (“DJS LLC”),
Professional Title and Abstract Company of Florida, LLC (“PTA LLC”),
and Default Servicing, LLC (“DSI LLC”) of DAL Group LLC (“DAL”), a
company in which DJSP holds a controlling interest. DAL, through its
operating subsidiaries, provides non-legal services supporting
residential real estate foreclosure, other related legal actions and
lender owned real estate (“REO”) services, primarily in Florida.
We were incorporated in the British Virgin Islands on February 19,
2008 under the name “Chardan 2008 China Acquisition Corp.” as a blank
check company for the purpose of acquiring, engaging in a merger or
share exchange with, purchasing all or substantially all of the assets
of, or engaging in a contractual control arrangement or any other
similar transaction with an unidentified operating business which has
its principal business and/or material operations in China. When the
global financial crisis occurred soon after the completion of Chardan
2008’s initial public offering in August 2008, Chardan 2008’s
management believed that US equity markets would be less receptive to
a transaction with a Chinese company.
Revenue from foreclosure fees increased by 9% to $19.6 million during
the three month period ended March 31, 2010 as compared to $17.9
million for the same period in 2009. This increase is primarily due to
an increase in the per file fee we receive for providing such services
that became effective as of the beginning of 2010. Revenue from
closing services increased to $2.6 million during the first quarter of
2010 from $1.7 million during the first quarter of 2009, representing
an increase of 55.5%.
During the three months ended March 31, 2010, our REO liquidation
services business became an increasingly significant source of
revenue, generating approximately 5% of our total revenue during that
period. Our REO liquidation business has a sole customer through which
we generated $3.3 million in revenue for the first quarter of 2010
compared to $1.9 million in the same period last year, primarily due
to an increase in the number of REO liquidation files which grew to
1,728 files in the first quarter of 2010, an increase of 56%, from
1,111 files in the first quarter of 2009.
Net income decreased by $5.4 million, or 40.6%, to $7.9 million in the
three months ended March 31, 2010, as compared to $13.3 million in the
same period of 2009. Adjusted net income, which is a non-GAAP
financial measure discussed in more detail below, decreased by $2.2
million to $8.7 million or 21% in the three months ended March 31,
2010 as compared to $11.0 million in the three months ended March 31,
2009.
From 2006 to 2009, our foreclosure case load increased from 15,332 to 70,382.
Beginning in April, one of DJS’ largest bank clients for which we
provide mortgage foreclosure services initiated a previously
undisclosed foreclosure system conversion that has resulted in a
marked decrease in the number of foreclosure files emanating from it
nationwide. We have been advised by the bank that the system
conversion is quite extensive and affects most loan types other than
those associated with certain government sponsored entities. While DJS
is still receiving new foreclosure files from the bank for loan types
that are not affected by the conversion, the bank has advised DJS that
it does not expect to generate new foreclosure files for the affected
loan types until the conversion is complete. Due to this conversion,
we experienced a decline of approximately 1,500 new foreclosure files
in each of April and May, 2010 from this client.
During calendar years 2007, 2008 and 2009, DJS referred to us case
files totaling 61,480, 96,509 and 98,259, respectively.
The majority of file referrals to DJS come from fewer than a dozen
lenders and loan servicing firms. If DJS were to lose any of these
sources of business, in whole or in part, it would adversely affect
our financial performance.
In 2008, the top ten clients for DJS, on an aggregate basis, accounted
for 94% of its case files referred to DJS for mortgage default and
other processing services; and its largest single customer, accounted
for 21% of DJS’ total foreclosure file volumes for the same period.
Regulation of the legal profession may constrain DJS LLC’s, PTA LLC’s
and DSI LLC’s s operations, and numerous issues arising out of that
regulation, its interpretation or evolution could impair our ability
to provide professional services to customers and reduce revenues and
profitability.
Each state has laws, regulations and codes of professional
responsibility that govern the conduct and obligations of attorneys to
their clients and the courts. Adherence to those codes of professional
responsibility are a requirement to retaining a license to practice
law in the licensing jurisdiction. The boundaries of the “practice of
law,” however, can be indistinct, vary from one state to another and
are the product of complex interactions among state law, bar
association standards and constitutional law as formulated by the U.S.
Supreme Court.
State or local bar associations, state or local prosecutors or other
persons may claim that some portion of the services that DJS LLC
provides constitute the unauthorized practice of law. Any such
challenge could have a disruptive effect on our operations, including
the diversion of significant time and attention of our senior
management in order to respond. DJS LLC, PTA LLC, DSI LLC or DAL may
also incur significant expenses in connection with such a challenge,
including substantial fees for attorneys and other professional
advisors. If a challenge to the legitimacy of DJS LLC’s or another
operating subsidiary’s operations were successful, the service
operations may need to be modified in a manner that could adversely
affect our business and DAL’s revenues and profitability, DJS LLC, PTA
LLC, DSI LLC, and DAL could be subject to a range of penalties and
suffer damage to our reputation.
The Services Agreement to which DJS LLC is a party could be deemed to
be unenforceable, in whole or in part, if a court were to determine
that such agreements constitute an impermissible fee sharing
arrangement between the law firm customer and DJS LLC.
We may, from time to time, be subject to or be named as a party in
legal proceedings in the ordinary course of our mortgage default
processing business. It could incur significant legal expenses and
management’s attention may be diverted from operations in defending
against and resolving lawsuits or claims. An adverse resolution of any
future lawsuits or claims against us could result in a negative
perception of our business and cause the market price of our ordinary
shares to decline or otherwise have an adverse effect on our operating
results and growth prospects.
If “judicial” foreclosure states adopted “non-judicial” procedures for
filing foreclosures, mortgage foreclosure processing firms operating
in “judicial” states would be materially and adversely affected.
“Judicial” foreclosure states require foreclosures to follow a set of
rules, compliance with which is overseen by a judge in a court of law.
The level of processing fees associated with a foreclosure in a
judicial state is significantly greater than would be expected in a
non-judicial state. Should Florida (or another judicial state in which
we choose to operate) choose to adopt a non-judicial mortgage
foreclosure process in order to expedite the processing of
foreclosures, it would result in a substantial reduction in the
revenues derived from that jurisdiction, with an accompanying
reduction in profits.
Because the average cycle time on a foreclosure file, except cases
that are fully litigated, ranges from 220 to 240 days, with
approximately half of the revenue earned within the first month after
the referral, and the remainder near the end of the process, the
number of current referrals is an indicator of revenue levels for the
following year, with high levels of file referrals indicative of
strong revenues.
Revenues increased by $61.1 million, or 30.7%, for 2009, as compared
to 2008 primarily due to revenues from client-reimbursed costs
increasing by $46.8 million to $139.1 million in 2009, as compared to
$92.3 million in 2008 and, to a lesser extent and as discussed further
below, as a result of the increase in mortgage foreclosures related
activities in our principal market, Florida, and as a result of the
expansion of our REO business.
For 2009, we received 70,382 foreclosure files, compared to 70,328
foreclosure files received in 2008.
During 2009, DSI LLC’s REO liquidation business became an increasingly
significant source of revenue, generating approximately 9.4% of our
total revenue excluding client costs during that period, and it was a
leading cause of the increase in revenues during that period. In 2009,
we produced revenues of $11.2 million compared to revenue of $4.1
million for 2008, representing a 175% growth from the previous period.
During 2009, we generated positive operating cash flows of $48.3 million.
THAT ENDS THE QUOTED SECTION….QUESTIONS ANYONE? JUDGES? REGULATORS?
ELECTED OFFICIALS? THE FLORIDA BAR?

43 Responses

  1. PJ

    It is Okay – only here to try to help. Anyone can discard what I write. Sometimes, I am just angry. Sometimes, I just try to focus. Sometimes, I just try to relay what I know. Depends on the day.

    We are all here, I hope, to just learn from each other.

    DinSFLA

    Your focus on this is very important. Thanks!!

  2. Look for GRETCHEN MORGENSON’s article coming soon on
    DJSP aka Law Offices Of David J. Stern PA.

    Trust me will be very interesting!

    I was on a call with WSJ this am! Got a heads up on this.

    DinSFLA

  3. 2 Anonymous…. always agree but at times see things from a different perspective… in closing on this subject.. Mr.Stewart most likely lives in a rent controlled pre-war masionitte in NYC… can smell before I see them…

    Sanctimonious Vitriol!

    Actually when reading this in the WSJ thought it was satire… have to love the disclaimer by the FM spokeswomen about future evaluation of the “hardship cases”… that let’s all know the backbone this directive has… sort of like the DJS crap SEC filing… pay the fine get in line…. NEXT!

  4. PJ – Agree (like it when we agree).

    To others – write Mr. James B. Stewart (don’t these people love middle initials?) – and ask him – what would he do if he owed far more on his home than it is worth?

    Mr. JAMES B. STEWART – you forgot one thing – FRAUD – and NOT by the borrower.

    See below- Hey – the accountants sound like Trespass Unwanted (only kidding Trespass – love your disclaimer – in fact – I borrowed it)

    Posts by Aaron Task
    “A Gigantic Ponzi Scheme, Lies and Fraud”: Howard Davidowitz on Wall Street
    Jul 01, 2010 08:00am EDT by Aaron Task in Newsmakers, Banking
    Related: XLF, AIG, GS, JPM, BAC, C, FNM
    Play Video
    Play VideoNow Playing
    Day one of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission’s two-day hearing on AIG derivatives contracts featured testimony from Joseph Cassano, the former head of AIG’s financial products unit. Goldman Sachs president Gary Cohn was also on the Hill.
    Meanwhile, the Democrats are still trying to salvage the regulatory reform bill, with critical support from Senator Scott Brown (R-Mass.) reportedly still uncertain.
    According to Howard Davidowitz of Davidowitz & Associates, what connects the hearings and the Reg reform debate is the lack of focus on the real underlying cause of the financial crisis: Fraud.
    “It was a massive fraud… a gigantic Ponzi Scheme, a lie and a fraud,” Davidowitz says of Wall Street circa 2007. “The whole thing was a fraud and it gets back to the accountants valuing the assets incorrectly.”
    Because accountants and auditors allowed Wall Street firms to carry assets at “completely fraudulent” valuations, he says the industry looked hugely profitable and was able to use borrowed funds to make leveraged bets on all sorts of esoteric instruments. “Their bonuses were based on profits they never made and the leverage they never could have gotten if the numbers were right – no one would’ve given them the money in their right mind,” Davidowitz says.
    To date, the accounting and audit firms have escaped any serious repercussions from the credit crisis, a stark difference to the corporate “death sentence” that befell Arthur Anderson for its alleged role in the Enron scandal.
    To Davidowitz, that’s perhaps the greatest outrage of all: “Where were the accountants?,” he asks. “They did nothing, checked nothing, agreed to everything” and collected millions in fees while “shaking hands with the CEO.”

  5. “Buying a home is a relatively long-term commitment,”

    Yes Mr. Stewart… we thought so too until our local community bank sold off our mortgage without our permission into the abyss of the “secondary market”.
    Identify the true creditor and perhaps this problem will be solved.

  6. Alina

    You are absolutely right in everything you have just said! And, this is not about liberal or conservatives – it is about an establishment that converted our U.S. industrial economy to an economy focused on American consumption – and the financial means to promote that consumption.

    Financial institutions were/are given everything they want in Washington. After the US gave away manufacturing in this country, they needed to promote all they could to promote consumption. It was a concerted effort to siphon every dime out of the one major household asset – homes. Wall Street knew what they were doing, Americans were targeted and lied to. And, the media, government, and financial institutions, have the audacity to blame the people.

    Incredible. Yes, Alina, we must keep fighting – and help each other – what ever way we can.

    Below is an article by Mr. James B. Stewart – people like this should be exposed –

    By JAMES B. STEWART
    Fannie Mae ignited a chorus of criticism last week when it said it would deny government-backed mortgages for seven years to borrowers who walked away from their existing mortgages, had the ability to pay and didn’t make a good-faith effort to avoid foreclosure by negotiating with their lender. The government-owned mortgage-finance giant also said it will take legal action to recoup the loan balance against borrowers who “strategically default.”
    I say it’s about time. These relatively affluent borrowers should pay a price—even if it is a modest one—for walking away from a contract. As it is, reports have been proliferating about homeowners who simply stop paying their mortgages, stay in their comfortable homes rent-free for the 18 months to two years or more it can take for the lender to foreclose, then get another government-backed loan and buy a new house. Who is to say they won’t do it all over again?
    Nor will encouraging people to default do anything to stem the rising tide of foreclosures and its potentially debilitating effect on housing prices.
    This is a looming crisis, given that an estimated one-quarter of all home mortgages are currently underwater, meaning that the house is worth less than the balance of the mortgage. The serious delinquency rate on mortgages backed by Fannie Mae has already soared to over 5%. Imagine if that leapt to over 20%.
    Since Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac became wards of the federal government, we taxpayers are footing the bill, which the Congressional Budget Office now estimates will reach an astonishing $389 billion. That is likely to be far more than the bank bailouts and dwarfs the cost of rescuing American International Group.
    So I was baffled by critics who equate this new policy to things like debtor’s prison. Asking people to pay their mortgages when they can afford to is hardly locking people in a prison for the rest of their lives.
    These owners chose their homes and presumably liked them. They had no guarantee that housing prices would appreciate indefinitely and never decline.
    As I have argued before, walking away from a mortgage now is like selling at the bottom of the market. Houses that are underwater now may not be for long once housing starts to appreciate. And despite a recent slump in the number of home sales, home prices are rising in most areas and have been for the past year.
    Nor does home ownership convey a right to immediate mobility. Buying a home is a relatively long-term commitment, and most people expecting to move soon opt to rent instead. Even renting typically requires a one-year lease.
    Anyone forced to move may have to sell at a loss, but they can also buy another home at lower market prices, unless they are moving from, say, Las Vegas to Manhattan. But that’s their choice.
    I asked Fannie Mae spokeswoman Janis Smith whether she was surprised by the hostile reactions to the new policy, and sounding somewhat weary, she said, “We’ve seen it all.” She stressed that the new policy doesn’t apply to “hardship cases,” and that when defaulting borrowers reapply, Fannie Mae will consider the circumstances of their earlier default and, if warranted, grant an exemption.
    In my view, “strategic default” is too kind a phrase for breaking a promise and breaching a contract. I recognize that there are plenty of people facing genuine hardship from a housing crisis not of their making. But people who have the means to pay their mortgages and instead opt for a free ride at taxpayer expense aren’t among them.
    —James B. Stewart, a columnist for SmartMoney magazine and SmartMoney.com, writes weekly about his personal-investing strategy. Unlike Dow Jones reporters, he may have positions in the stocks he writes about. For his past columns, see: http://www.smartmoney.com/commonsense

  7. 2 Anonymous… the double standard here with the liberal eleit is outstanding… if laying in state on the senate floor a devout member of the KKK and an outright objector to the civil rights movement is not enough for them to change their stripes then that just clearly defines their true agenda. Destroy America at all cost!

    How the POTUS can even alow this should rock each and every American to the core.

    Which brings to question the one thing grossly overlooked with this whole argument.

    The so called purpose of Fannie & Fredie to begin with “home ownership” for minorities and lower middle income Americans , the GSE’s were nothing more then “sanctioned feel good wealth distributors”.
    Have a strong feeling you get the point… use the assets of the working middle and upper class to support “equal opportunity housing options” for those less fortunate”.

    Except the game today proves otherwise… inflated appraisial’s that hurt many others in communities that watched their “assements’ go through the roof… some forced to move on by “property taxes” they could not afford… liberal local and state goverments who expanded during the “housing bubble” needing more and more taxpayer bailout’s to meet unsustainable budget’s (live in NY) putting more and more financial pressue on those that are stuck… it goes on and on.

    But who was soaked the most… minorities and the working middle class, who now Fannie and their friends on Wall Street want to chase to their grave and after that their children if they can get that legislated in the dark of night.

    Find the silance on this issue remarkable to say the least.

  8. Thanks Beth

  9. Alina and ANONYMOUS:

    Yes, the banks did a great job of crafting the hypocritical narrative of the “irresponsible homeowners” and it has been effective propoganda. Law Professor Brent White released two new articles last month, to buttress his former paper on the “moral shame” factor. Links to SSRN for the full papers below:

    Take This House and Shove It: The Emotional Drivers of Strategic Default

    Brent T. White
    University of Arizona – James E. Rogers College of Law

    May 14, 2010

    Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 10-17

    Abstract:
    An increasingly influential view is that strategic defaulters make a rational choice to default because they have substantial negative equity. This article, which is based upon the personal accounts of over 350 individuals, argues that this depiction of strategic defaulters as rational actors is woefully incomplete. Negative equity alone does not drive many strategic defaulters’ decisions to intentionally stop paying their mortgages. Rather, their decisions to default are driven primarily by emotion – typically anxiety and hopelessness about their financial futures and anger at their lenders’ and the government’s unwillingness to help. If the government and the mortgage industry wish to stem the tide of strategic default, they must address these emotions.
    The Morality of Strategic Default

    Brent T. White
    University of Arizona – James E. Rogers College of Law

    May 22, 2010

    Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 10-15

    Abstract:
    Responding to those who argue that homeowners who strategically default on their mortgages are immoral and socially irresponsible, this article argues that breaching a mortgage contract is not only morally acceptable, it may be the most responsible course of action when necessary to fulfill more important obligations to one’s family.
    Keywords: mortgage, strategic default, contracts, ethics

  10. ANONYMOUS,

    You are very correct that the media, CNBC being at the forefront, have vilified the home borrower. I watch CNBC every single morning just to listen to Santelli’s new rant about how the financial industry is being hurt by the irresponsible, deadbeat home borrower. Funny thing is he does not call Donald Trump a deadbeat even Trump is well known for using strategic defaults in order to reduce the principal on his loans. He has failed to mention the strategic default by the Mortgage Bankers Association – they just simply walked away from their obligation.

    The1% at the top of the totem pole have huddled together in an attempt at their financial preservation. The middle class is simply collateral damage and therefore expendable.

    This is why it extremely important for all us to keep voicing our discontent. All of us need to sit in the courtrooms where we live and witness what happens in a foreclosure hearing. We need to take notes, and if allowed, record the proceedings. We need to post each and every incident of fraud we come across. The internet is viral and extremely powerful – we need to use it to our advantage.

    I am confident that we will win this war but there are many battles ahead and each and every one of us must contribute. We must help each other.

  11. PJ

    You are probably very right on this – and it makes me feel a little better. I just do not like the publicity – it continues the notion that the home borrowers are to blame. CNBC promotes this all the time – they almost come across implying that if home borrowers do not pay – it should be a criminal offense! All the banks were bailed out – but the victim borrowers have been ignored. Occasionally, I will hear a commentator state that it is not fair – but this is rare. As I have stated before, Mr. Henry Paulson was determined to allow the people to take the fall but, I do not know why the people have not publicly fought back. We should have fought back immediately – but I do not think the people really knew what was happened. All came so fast and, sadly, many people just accepted that it was their fault.

    We have learned much since the 2007 crisis hit. However, the media coverage remains sparse and scarce on homeowners behalf. This blog is one of few that publishes important information, and for that we are grateful. But, we need more.

  12. Foreclosure case against two Fla. candidates dropped
    Deutsche Bank files, dismisses suit with Marco Rubio and David Rivera over mortgage

    http://www.fsunews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100628/FSVIEW/100627016/0/FSVIEW01

  13. We provide a russian translation of virgin islands special trusts act, 2003. GSL Translations.

  14. 2 Anonymous… Fannie Mea can make all the idol threats they want… ever the optimist and trust me it gets more difficult every day.. FM’s declaration may actually work for the people in the end… that is if and when they find the “sifting of personal data” offensive, and understand that they all are being set up like “marks” for a thief!

    In the end the mortage is backed by collateral the “house” walking, jingle mail , strategic default what ever you call it end’s the deal as more often then not it is clearly defined in the agreement between lender & borrower.

    In my humble opinion… the real truth is that the so called “monetary obligation’s” to the fathom trust’s , foreign governments and state pension funds is just not out there… in the end it is monopoly money, vapor cash.

    In the end Fannie may huff and puff , but in the end an engaged and enraged American Taxpayer will have to be the one’s to blow the house of Fannie Mae down!

  15. PJ and Lisa D

    Appears the prospectus here – was one of several – just a new offering by the same company that went under the name “Charden China Acquisition.” They changed name because they thought it would get a better reception for offerings.

    Principal reduction is the key. That is why I am so upset about the Fannie Mae policy – it just promotes the fact that principal reductions should not be done.

    Have stated before, I am not in foreclosure, my own story is unique. But I am outraged at what has been done to the people. And, I know from experience that power is way beyond what anyone even expresses here. It is a shame that the economy may have to suffer further before the administration finally realizes what they have done – if they ever do realize this.

    Lisa – very hard to show dissolution. It is costly to find broker/experts that can look up the current status of the SPV tranches. Maybe experts here can do this. Any disruption to the original structure of the trust, meaning A tranches have been paid – means the trust can no longer operate as the intended pass-through structure. Surviving M (mezzanine tranches) are worthless if the A tranches have been paid (by swap protection). This is why investors, particularly in M tranches, are suing.

    Also, look to see if US Government purchased any of these “toxic” tranches via Maiden Lane (there are three). This means the government purchased the toxic securities – that are worthless – and is likely the only “investor” left in many SPV trusts. It means the SPV was technically insolvent and the government took some security tranches until the whole loans could be disposed of to distressed debt buyers/hedge funds.

    Finally, look up the parent corporation of the security underwriter and see what they have done for compliance with FASB 166 and 167. Look at consolidated financial statements for 2009 or quarters posted this year. Will not find detailed information – but perhaps a paragraph that describes the process of SPV off-balance consolidation onto balance sheet.

    Wish it were easier – but they do not want it that way.

  16. Cayman Island Deutsche Bank ‘America’s Foreclosure King’ Disaster for U.S. Real Estate

    Posted on June 30, 2010 by Foreclosureblues

    Editor’s Note…’Offshore’ and ‘Cayman Islands’ is becoming a recurring theme lately. I wonder why the foreclosure gangbangsters aren’t just doing U.S. based business? Probably for the same reason the drug cartels like it better, well, ‘offshore’. Didn’t we go down to Panama and Granada when someone was jacking us around a little? What the f*ck? Are you kidding me, a PR problem? About 65 years ago they had Gen. Eisenhower problem.

    http://foreclosureblues.wordpress.com/

    SPIEGEL ONLINE
    06/10/2010 07:42 AM
    ‘America’s Foreclosure King’
    How the United States Became a PR Disaster for Deutsche Bank
    By Christoph Pauly and Thomas Schulz

    Deutsche Bank is deeply involved in the American real estate crisis. After initially profiting from subprime mortgages, it is now arranging to have many of these homes sold at foreclosure auctions. The damage to the bank’s image in the United States is growing.

    The small city of New Haven, on the Atlantic coast and home to elite Yale University, is only two hours northeast of New York City. It is a particularly beautiful place in the fall, during the warm days of Indian summer.

    But this idyllic image has turned cloudy of late, with a growing number of houses in New Haven looking like the one at 130 Peck Street: vacant for months, the doors nailed shut, the yard derelict and overgrown and the last residents ejected after having lost the house in a foreclosure auction. And like 130 Peck Street, many of these homes are owned by Germany’s Deutsche Bank.

    “In the last few years, Deutsche Bank has been responsible for far and away the most foreclosures here,” says Eva Heintzelman. She is the director of the ROOF Project, which addresses the consequences of the foreclosure crisis in New Haven in collaboration with the city administration. According to Heintzelman, Frankfurt-based Deutsche Bank plays such a significant role in New Haven that the city’s mayor requested a meeting with bank officials last spring.

    The bank complied with his request, to some degree, when, in April 2009, a Deutsche Bank executive flew to New Haven for a question-and-answer session with politicians and aid organizations. But the executive, David Co, came from California, not from Germany. Co manages the Frankfurt bank’s US real estate business at a relatively unknown branch of a relatively unknown subsidiary in Santa Ana.

    How many houses was he responsible for, Co was asked? “Two thousand,” he replied. But then he corrected himself, saying that 2,000 wasn’t the number of individual properties, but the number of securities packages being managed by Deutsche Bank. Each package contains hundreds of mortgages. So how many houses are there, all told, he was asked again? Co could only guess. “Millions,” he said.

    Deutsche Bank Is Considered ‘America’s Foreclosure King’

    Deutsche Bank’s tracks lead through the entire American real estate market. In Chicago, the bank foreclosed upon close to 600 large apartment buildings in 2009, more than any other bank in the city. In Cleveland, almost 5,000 houses foreclosed upon by Deutsche Bank were reported to authorities between 2002 and 2006. In many US cities, the complaints are beginning to pile up from homeowners who lost their properties as a result of a foreclosure action filed by Deutsche Bank. The German bank is berated on the Internet as “America’s Foreclosure King.”

    American homeowners are among the main casualties of the financial crisis that began with the collapse of the US real estate market. For years, banks issued mortgages to homebuyers without paying much attention to whether they could even afford the loans. Then they packaged the mortgage loans into complicated financial products, earning billions in the process — that is, until the bubble burst and the government had to bail out the banks.

    Deutsche Bank has always acted as if it had had very little to do with the whole affair. It survived the crisis relatively unharmed and without government help. Its experts recognized early on that things could not continue as they had been going. This prompted the bank to get out of many deals in time, so that in the end it was not faced with nearly as much toxic debt as other lenders.

    But it is now becoming clear just how deeply involved the institution is in the US real estate market and in the subprime mortgage business. It is quite possible that the bank will not suffer any significant financial losses, but the damage to its image is growing by the day.

    ‘Deutsche Bank Is Now in the Process of Destroying Milwaukee’

    According to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Deutsche Bank now holds loans for American single-family and multi-family houses worth about $3.7 billion (€3.1 billion). The bank, however, claims that much of this debt consists of loans to wealthy private customers.

    More damaging to its image are the roughly 1 million US properties that the bank says it is managing as trustee. “Some 85 to 90 percent of all outstanding mortgages in the USA are ultimately controlled by four banks, either as trustees or owners of a trust company,” says real estate expert Steve Dibert, whose company conducts nationwide investigations into cases of mortgage fraud. “Deutsche Bank is one of the four.”

    In addition, the bank put together more than 25 highly complex real estate securities deals, known as collateralized debt obligations, or CDOs, with a value of about $20 billion, most of which collapsed. These securities were partly responsible for triggering the crisis.

    Last Thursday, Deutsche Bank CEO Josef Ackermann was publicly confronted with the turmoil in US cities. Speaking at the bank’s shareholders’ meeting, political science professor Susan Giaimo said that while Germans were mainly responsible for building the city of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, “Deutsche Bank is now in the process of destroying Milwaukee.”

    As Soon as the Houses Are Vacant, They Quickly Become Derelict

    Then Giaimo, a petite woman with dark curls who has German forefathers, got to the point. Not a single bank, she said, owns more real estate affected by foreclosure in Milwaukee, a city the size of Frankfurt. Many of the houses, she added, have been taken over by drug dealers, while others were burned down by arsonists after it became clear that no one was taking care of them.

    Besides, said Giaimo, who represents the Common Ground action group, homeowners living in the neighborhoods of these properties are forced to accept substantial declines in the value of their property. “In addition, foreclosed houses are sold to speculators for substantially less than the market value of houses in the same neighborhood,” Giaimo said. The speculators, according to Giaimo, have no interest in the individual properties and are merely betting that prices will go up in the future.

    Common Ground has posted photos of many foreclosed properties on the Internet, and some of the signs in front of these houses identify Deutsche Bank as the owner. As soon as the houses are vacant, they quickly become derelict.

    A Victorian house on State Street, painted green with red trim, is now partially burned down. Because it can no longer be sold, Deutsche Bank has “donated” it to the City of Milwaukee, one of the Common Ground activists reports. As a result, the city incurs the costs of demolition, which amount to “at least $25,000.”

    ‘We Can’t Give Away Money that Isn’t Ours’

    During a recent meeting with US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, representatives of the City of Milwaukee complained about the problems that the more than 15,000 foreclosures have caused for the city since the crisis began. In a letter to the US Treasury Department, they wrote that Deutsche Bank is the only bank that has refused to meet with the city’s elected representatives.

    Minneapolis-based US Bank and San Francisco-based Wells Fargo apparently took the complaints more seriously and met with the people from Common Ground. The activists’ demands sound plausible enough. They want Deutsche Bank to at least tear down those houses that can no longer be repaired at a reasonable cost. Besides, Giaimo said at the shareholders’ meeting, Deutsche Bank should contribute a portion of US government subsidies to a renovation fund. According to Giaimo, the bank collected $6 billion from the US government when it used taxpayer money to bail out credit insurer AIG.

    “It’s painful to look at these houses,” Ackermann told the professor. Nevertheless, the CEO refused to accept any responsibility. Deutsche Bank, he said, is “merely a sort of depository for the mortgage documents, and our options to help out are limited.” According to Ackermann, the bank, as a trustee for other investors, is not even the actual owner of the properties, and therefore can do nothing. Besides, Ackermann said, his bank didn’t promote mortgage loans with terms that have now made the payments unaffordable for many families.

    The activists from Wisconsin did, however, manage to take home a small victory. Ackermann instructed members of his staff to meet with Common Ground. He apparently envisions a relatively informal and noncommittal meeting. “We can’t give away money that isn’t ours,” he added.

    Deutsche Bank’s Role in the High-Risk Loans Boom

    Apparently Ackermann also has no intention to part with even a small portion of the profits the bank earned in the real estate business. Deutsche Bank didn’t just act as a trustee that — coincidentally, it seems — manages countless pieces of real estate on behalf of other investors. In the wild years between 2005 and 2007, the bank also played a central role in the profitable boom in high-risk mortgages that were marketed to people in ways that were downright negligent.

    Of course, its bankers didn’t get their hands dirty by going door-to-door to convince people to apply for mortgages they couldn’t afford. But they did provide the distribution organizations with the necessary capital.

    The Countrywide Financial Corporation, which approved risky mortgages for $97.2 billion from 2005 to 2007, was the biggest provider of these mortgages in the United States. According to the study by the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit investigative journalism organization, Deutsche Bank was one of Countrywide’s biggest financiers.

    Ameriquest — which, with $80.7 billion in high-risk loans on its books in the three boom years before the crash, was the second-largest subprime specialist — also had strong ties to Deutsche Bank. The investment bankers placed the mortgages on the international capital market by bundling and structuring them into securities. This enabled them to distribute the risks around the entire globe, some of which ended up with Germany’s state-owned banks.

    ‘Deutsche Bank Has a Real PR Problem Here’

    After the crisis erupted, there were so many mortgages in default in 25 CDOs that most of the investors could no longer be serviced. Some CDOs went bankrupt right away, while others were gradually liquidated, either in full or in part. The securities that had been placed on the market were underwritten by loans worth $20 billion.

    At the end of 2006, for example, Deutsche Bank constructed a particularly complex security known as a hybrid CDO. It was named Barramundi, after the Indo-Pacific hermaphrodite fish that lives in muddy water. And the composition of the deal, which was worth $800 million, was muddy indeed. Many securities that were already arcane enough, like credit default swaps (CDSs) and CDOs, were packaged into an even more complex entity in Barramundi.

    Deutsche Bank’s partner for the Barramundi deal was the New York investment firm C-BASS, which referred to itself as “a leader in purchasing and servicing residential mortgage loans primarily in the Subprime and Alt-A categories.” In plain language, C-BASS specialized in drumming up and marketing subprime mortgages for complex financial vehicles.

    However, C-BASS didn’t just manage abstract securities. It also had a subsidiary to bring in all the loans that were subsequently securitized. By the end of 2005 the subsidiary, Litton Loan, had processed 313,938 loans, most of them low-value mortgages, for a total value of $43 billion.

    One of the First Victims of the Financial Crisis

    Barramundi was already the 19th CDO C-BASS had issued. But the investment firm faltered only a few months after the deal with Deutsche Bank, in the summer of 2007. C-BASS was one of the first casualties of the financial crisis.

    Deutsche Bank’s CDO, Barramundi, suffered a similar fate. Originally given the highest possible rating by the rating agencies, the financial vehicle stuffed with subprime mortgages quickly fell apart. In the spring of 2008, Barramundi was first downgraded to “highly risky” and then, in December, to junk status. Finally, in March 2009, Barramundi failed and had to be liquidated.

    While many investors lost their money and many Americans their houses, Deutsche Bank and Litton Loan remained largely unscathed. Apparently, the Frankfurt bank still has a healthy business relationship with the subprime mortgage manager, because Deutsche Bank does not play a direct role in any of the countless pieces of real estate it holds in trust. Other service providers, including Litton Loan, handle tasks like collecting mortgage payments and evicting delinquent borrowers.

    The exotic financial vehicles are sometimes managed by an equally exotic firm: Deutsche Bank (Cayman) Limited, Boundary Hall, Cricket Square, Grand Cayman. In an e-mail dated Feb. 26, 2010, a Deutsche Bank employee from the Cayman Islands lists 84 CDOs and similar products, for which she identifies herself as the relevant contact person.

    Trouble with US Regulatory Authorities and Many Property Owners

    The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is now investigating Deutsche Bank and a few other investment banks that constructed similar CDOs. The financial regulator is looking into whether investors in these obscure products were deceived. The SEC has been particularly critical of US investment bank Goldman Sachs, which is apparently willing to pay a record fine of $1 billion to avoid criminal prosecution.

    Deutsche Bank has also run into problems with the many property owners. The bank did not issue the mortgages for the many properties it now manages, and yet it accepted, on behalf of investors, the fiduciary function for its own and third-party CDOs. In past years, says mortgage expert Steve Dibert, real estate loans were “traded like football cards” in the United States.

    Amid all the deal-making, the deeds for the actual properties were often lost. In Cleveland and New Jersey, for example, judges invalidated foreclosures ordered by Deutsche Bank, because the bank was unable to come up with the relevant deeds.

    Nevertheless, Deutsche Bank’s service providers repeatedly try to have houses vacated, even when they are already occupied by new owners who are paying their mortgages. This practice has led to nationwide lawsuits against the Frankfurt-based bank. On the Internet, angry Americans fighting to keep their houses have taken to using foul language to berate the German bank.

    “Deutsche Bank now has a real PR problem here in the United States,” says Dibert. “They want to bury their head in the sand, but this is something they are going to have to deal with.”

    Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan

  17. ANONYMOUS,
    Again, how do I prove that my “Trust” was dissolved?
    Thank you~

  18. EXPOSED: David J. Stern’s Image and Assets. I am sure these are just a couple…

    http://stopforeclosurefraud.com/2010/05/20/exposed-david-j-stern-and-the-law-offices-of-david-j-stern-pa/

  19. 2 Anonymous

    Understand day trading… but really when one reads the prospectus it looks like a very shaky deal.. but people can do what they want with their money…

    The problem here is that yes they have been around for some time but there is a trail of violations , fines and SEC sanctions with all involved. Where is the oversight?

    And no do not think the economy is doing well, in fact we are in big trouble and dire straights… like you am wondering when the American people will have had enough! This is effecting each and every individual.

    In fact am on the same page as you with the one solution here is principle reduction on all under water mortgages… something has to be done and done very soon.

  20. also interesting –

    EDGAR Online

    DJSP ENTERPRISES, INC.

    FORM TYPE: F-1/A

    FILING DATE: March 26, 2010

    * * * * * * * * * * COMPANY INFORMATION * * * * * * * * * *
    ADDRESS: PLANTATION, Florida, 33324
    CIK: 0001436612
    TICKER: DJSP
    EXCHANGE: Nasdaq National Mkt

    The following chart shows DJS principal clients for 2008 and the length of relationship that each customer has had with DJS.

    Client Length of Relationship
    (Years)
    Bank of America 12
    Wells Fargo 12
    GMAC 12
    Aurora Loan Services 3
    Citigroup 13
    National City 12
    Amtrust Bank 10
    Litton Loan Servicing 11
    Indy Mac 10
    t

  21. Also for PJ

    To answer your question re – who is David Stern?

    Also – note video time is short – but these guys have been operating for some time – check SEC website.

    PROSPECTUS

    23,733,009 Ordinary Shares
    4,429,166 Warrants

    DJSP Enterprises, Inc.

    DJSP Enterprises, Inc. (“DJSP”, “we,” “us” or “our”) is a holding company whose primary business operations are conducted through three wholly owned subsidiaries, DJS Processing, LLC (“DJS LLC”), Professional Title and Abstract Company of Florida, LLC (“PTA LLC”), and Default Servicing, LLC (“DSI LLC”) of DAL Group LLC (“DAL”), a company in which DJSP holds a controlling interest. DAL, through its operating subsidiaries, provides non-legal services supporting residential real estate foreclosure, other related legal actions and lender owned real estate (“REO”) services, primarily in Florida.

    We were incorporated in the British Virgin Islands on February 19, 2008 under the name “Chardan 2008 China Acquisition Corp.”

    David J. Stern

    David J. Stern is our Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer. He is also the sole shareholder of the Law Offices of David J. Stern, or “DJS”, which is our primary law firm client. Revenues from this relationship account for approximately 94%, 97% and 98% of our total revenues for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Although both DJS and the Company have substantial management teams that are capable and experienced, the majority of the client relationships of DJS and our customer relationships were established and continue to be managed by Mr. Stern. If Mr. Stern becomes unable to perform his duties under his employment agreement for any reason or otherwise chooses not to perform such services, it is possible that the client relationships of DJS, and therefore the volume of referrals that we receive from DJS, would suffer, materially reducing our revenues and profitability. In addition, as a result of this relationship with both us and DJS, Mr. Stern may encounter conflicts of interest in the execution of his duties on behalf of us. These conflicts may not be resolved in a manner favorable us. For example, he may be precluded by his ethical obligations as an attorney or may otherwise be reluctant to take actions on behalf of us that are in its best interests but are not in the best interests of DJS, his law firm, or its clients. Further, as a licensed attorney, he may be obligated to take actions on behalf of DJS or its clients that are not in our best interests. Mr. Stern has other direct and indirect relationships with us that could cause similar conflicts including as our largest creditor.

    In addition to shares he owns in us directly, Mr. Stern owns securities in our subsidiary, DAL Group LLC, which may be exchangeable into up to 6,000,000 of our ordinary shares. In addition, pursuant to the terms of the Voting Agreement dated January 15, 2010 (the “Voting Agreement”) by and among David J. Stern, us and certain shareholders of the Company who are signatories thereto, the parties to the Voting Agreement other than us agree to vote all of the ordinary shares held by them (an aggregate of approximately 35% of our outstanding ordinary shares), in favor of four nominees to the Company’s Board of Directors designated by Mr. Stern (each a “Stern Designee”), two nominees designated by the Principals (each a “Principal Designee”) and Juan V. Ruiz (the “DAL Nominee”). .

  22. Bryan cave is a large law firm that is representing Banks in foreclosures, specially Countrywide and BAC in California

  23. PJ

    Hmmmmmmm. “do not thinks”???
    Did you watch the video?? Guess not – they track the stock “upticks” – short, yes, but to technical analysts – this is what they watch. Day to day. Called – day traders.

    My comment regarding historical trends – is general to the market and economy. Some guys/gals really believe the market is positioned to move higher – days like today – clearly show them wrong. Economy is not good. But, I guess you believe otherwise?? If so, how about sharing your tips??

  24. Again 2 Anoymous… Hummm. have looked at all invested in DJS and do not thinks they are looking at “historical trends” since they never existed before they filed with the SEC.

    Whats up with your reply!

  25. DinSFLA

    Thank you for your post and info (and video) on DJSP stock. As a former securities representative – find very interesting.

    These guys/gals today are looking for any uptick to justify a buy – well, it is just not there.

    We are in new economic territory that has not been seen in the past.- the side-effects of the current crisis are just too severe.

    Cannot believe these guys/gals are still using historical trends to predict the market and stock trends. Have to throw the out the bath with the baby (think that is right saying) – the historical trends are no longer a predictor of the future. Too much damage is done.

    Also, have background in Economics and Finance. Again, hate to sound like broken record – but Mr. Obama has to face reality. He is killing the United States by not helping the people. When will he get it?

  26. Lisa D

    These trusts – and their “waterfall” structure – have been dissolved. The A rated tranches have been PAID by swaps – leaving the mezzanine tranches with nothing – except the government kept them “alive” by purchasing the tranches from the financial institutions that owned them. That is, the government kept TRANCHES alive – while the Trust – itself- died. All is a farce – as to the Trusts being the creditor – and courts are ignoring. The Trusts are never the creditor.

    And, to answer your question – REMIC Trusts (which most were) only had ninety days to record assignments. However, courts are allowing assignments to be “effectuated” to date of inclusion required by the REMIC. (IRS rules and regulations) – but the courts are disregarding.

    Courts know we do not have any power.

  27. Tons of Stern info here…including a video on the DJSP stock.

    http://stopforeclosurefraud.com/tag/law-offices-of-david-j-stern-plantation-florida-33324/

  28. How is this guy still in business or licensed to practice law? I thought he was under investigation.

  29. 2 “expert witness” this David Stern thing is a bit more then parking gains off shore… if you do a search on him his father and other people involved with their various entities you will find a string of law suits, imposed fines and SEC sanctions for securities fraud… that is the problem here… Pay a fine get back in line for filing another SEC prospectus… that is what is seriously wrong here and what is seriously wrong with this whole situation.

  30. Brian Cave firm is one of the largest in the world. I understand that they have some 600 attorneys worldwide.

  31. DOES ANYBODY KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS LAWFIRM IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA?

    http://www.bryancave.com/

  32. ANONYMOUS … Our adversary is US Bank NA as Trustee for the Registered Holders of Home Equity Asset Trust 2005-1 (blah, blah, blah).

    Can the “Trust” move forward with foreclosure if the Assignment into the “trust” was recorded 112 days after the cut-off date?

    Also, with regards to reporting on IRS Form 938 – this trust (CSFB HEAT 2005-1) reported gain on sale for 2006 ONLY. In subsequent years, CSFB HEAT 2005-6 through 2005-9 reported but not 2005-1 series. Can we extrapolate this to mean that HEAT 2005-1 was dissolved after 2006? If so, how do I prove that?

  33. Is this about fraudulent mortgage securitization?

    Not really…….no, I would say not really fraud. That’s a crime and if true these claims fall under the US AG and SEC (who are removed from jurisdicition) under the rules of sentencing.

    So what’s the deal with all the judicial cries for more case law? Turn it over to the Feds?

    The securitization is more lawful than not, considering the courts lack of apathy for a predatory origination.

    What is unlawful?

    1. Antitrust claims and violations of the Sherman act caused by MERS (Look at what MERS does right-there is where you beat MERS)
    2. Registrations and offerings that benefited from manipulated earnings. *H*U*G*E* folks
    3. Controlled Business Arrangements and failure to disclose. CBA is a no no and RESPA is back …
    4. Servicing manipulation for reasons other than traditional arguments of servicer incentives being aligned with the foreclosure. That safe harbour for servicers is now shielding them from the real truth about broken promises and lost fioles for modfications.
    5. Derecognition.
    Here we have issues calling for “recognition” and arguments are seen not so much a securities related criminal or even civil violation. It’s something that can bring down the US economy and bankrupt the major banks if a decision were to stick and calls to restate earnings prevail.

    I am not sure that is what we want either …But there are a few gems here that tend to escape the untrained eye. Find them and use them in your pursuit.

    msoliman
    expert.witness@live.com

    Truth, RaJa, CarDude, Don Big D , Geo and Phil, the Mash, people of Rde Isl and Phily, friend and foe ..don’t stop thinking about tomorrow.. ..it will soon be here!

  34. Hi Colette

    Just posted the same thing about Fannie Mae under the “Without Recourse” post (thank you for that post).

    Please, everyone, unless we get some action by government to help the people – we will continue to struggle in courts.

    Action by Fannie Mae is not good.

  35. MATT WEIDNER

    All these deal were done off shore for providing the indenture its tax free status and haven for reporting purposes. The US government elected to compel the IRS to accomodate these securitizations under a tax free trust.

    The government has done away with the derecognition and tax free staus and have gone back to a mark to market accounting rule. No more goodwill on fixed asset yields. OUCH!

    Talk about world investors crying foul – EVEN MORE , consider the liquidity crunch for the future of mortgage banking and housing. . . ouch!).

    But really, this guy is just doing what was status quo a few years ago…thats all. Caymans etc were the norm till 2003 or later i believe….Nothing there in my opinion.

    MSoliman
    expert.witness@live.com

  36. Recorded assignments, live notes and public records are of no consequence with regards to “perfection” in a recovery. Forgery, back date and fraud claims for bogus instruments . . .

    Judge is going to say “So What”.

    However, UCC Article 9 is not a safeharbour when you breakdown the timining of the instruments recorded. Don’t listen to me or anyone else for that matter…! Just read the information (GAAP & FASB and int’l acccting rules) and see the opportunity being squandered with these suspect endorsements and bogus assignment arguments. …..nothing there yet look further people .

    See the accounting rules and what is deemed excessive under a controlling interest for assets sold and for recognition purposes.

    Please , just do it…..

    msoliman
    expert.witness@live.com

  37. Of interest:
    Taxpayer-Owned Fannie Mae Attacks Struggling Homeowners

    Taxpayer-owned mortgage giant Fannie Mae is targeting families by going after struggling homeowners who strategically default on their mortgage, the firm announced Wednesday.

    A default is considered strategic when homeowners have the capacity to pay, yet choose to walk away from their mortgage. The trigger, researchers say, is negative equity: When the value of a home is less than what the lender is owed on it, borrowers are more likely to strategically default.

    About 11.3 million homeowners with a mortgage, or 24 percent, owe more on their mortgage than the home is worth, according to real estate research firm CoreLogic. Another 2.3 million have less than 5 percent equity in their homes. All told, about 29 percent of all homeowners with a mortgage are either underwater or very close to it. The firm estimates that the typical underwater homeowner won’t return to positive equity until late 2015 or early 2016.

    And Fannie Mae, an arm of the federal government and a big part of the Obama administration’s housing policy, wants to make sure that if struggling families walk away, they suffer for it.
    more below….
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/23/fannie-mae-strategic-default_n_623562.html

  38. Read the Prospectus on DJS & affiliated companies… as vague as vague can get… “Blank Check Company” unidentified “sole clients” providing revenue… etc… yet their listed with the SEC… no surprise when you read that the SEC are listing vague and similar companies in Siberia…

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704638504575318681417658388.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection

    One Question who is David Stern and WHO is invested in this companies….

  39. “investors” know about DJSP. Just came across them, myself, yesterday. An attorney from a debt collection firm is now part of DJSP.

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    PRLog (Press Release) – Jun 01, 2010 – An investigation on behalf of investors in DJSP Enterprises, Inc (NASDAQ:DJSP) securities over possible violations of Federal Securities Laws by DJSP Enterprises was announced.

    If you are an investor in DJSP Enterprises, Inc (NASDAQ:DJSP) securities, you have certain options and you should contact the Shareholders Foundation, Inc by email at mail@shareholdersfoundation.com or call +1 (858) 779 – 1554.

  40. FRUAD ASSIGNMENT- any ideas anyone to beat Stern lawfirm.

    April 2006- Loan closed with lender
    August 2006- Lender says they sold the loan to XYZ bank
    Sept. 2006- Pooling & Service Agreement is dated for Sept 30, 2006

    STERN- filed an assignment of Mortgage to the MBO that says the loan was assigned in June 2006. HOW CAN the loan be assigned to a Trust that does not exist yet…the Pooling & Service Agreement is dated September, Stern filing says the loan was assigned prior to the Pooling & Service Agreements existence. THIS CAN NOT HAPPEN CAN IT?

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: