From David Briedenbach
In reference to Anonomous;
“Occasionally, there were securitizations in which Depositor was not a a subsidiary of the Wall Street bank – and appeared to be a subsidiary of the originator. These securitizations were simply fronts – for actual party who purchased the loans – since an originator could not sell loans to “itself.” It is possible that these securitizations were directly related to Fannie/Freddie”
One apparent example of this particular comment relates to a securitized trust supposedly sponsored by American Home Mortgage–now in bankruptcy, such that investors ostensibly have little to pursue. In one trust sponsored by the burn company, The trail was as follows: AHM Acceptance Inc, a wholly-owned sub of the AHM REIT group, “originated” home-owner loans of about $3 billion principal in 2004. Acceptance then supposedly transferred the homeowner notes, secured by mortgages, to its sister subsidiary, AHM Securities LLC. “Securities” then is represented to have “deposited” the notes and mortgages securing them to a purported trust American Home Mortgage Investment Trust 2004-4. The trust supposedly issued $3.5 billion in mortgage backed securities [MBS] described as “Notes”. These notes were returned to “Securities” in exchange for the conveyance of the homeowner notes/mortgages. Depositor “Securities” then allegedly “sold” the trust “Notes” to Lehman etc. who as underwriters that resold the notes to investors around the world. The series of steps would was a way for AHM to lend money to homeowners using short-term warehouse borrowings and paying off the warehouse lender with proceeds of sales of MBS to investors. The final speps in the series theoretically took the home-owner loans off the assets side of the AHM group and the proceeds of “sale” to investors of AHMIT 2004-4 IOUs off the liability side of the AHM group. The overall effect of the transactions was an apparent attempt by AHM to take the transactions off its balance sheet. However, as Anonomous rightly points out the entire series of transactions described in the securitization documents appears to have been a smoke-screen for off balance sheet activities by the BIG BANK that actually was “behind” all of this. In this particular case, that was Bank of New York. BNY was the named Indenture Trustee for AHMIT 2004-4. That means, its BNY that is the named plaintiff in a foreclosure action on behalf of the purported trust.
AHM CEO Strauss signed the Sarbannes Oxley certification in the 10K EOY 2004 for that trust. In a curious twist Strauss stated that in making the Sarbannes oxley filing that he relied on representations by BNY. BNY was more than a passive Indenture Trustee. BNY employees signed and presumably filed the 8Ks. These are truly noteworthy. The Prospectus stated that several classes of the off-balance sheet investor notes [MBS] would add to $3.5 as noted above. The amounts of each class was set out in the 8Ks prepared by BNY, there is a column of these amounts in each of 11 filings. The last filing was a delisting of all MBS in the trust as being owned by a single investor? However, the columns of tranche note face amounts of the MBS simply do not add up to the amount inserted by BNY–roughly twice the amount of the numbers being added. The $3.5 seemingly grew to over $7 billion in the BNY-source filings. Strauss caveat in the 10K re reliance on BNY and the BNY filings which seem to mistate the amounts of the tranches, suggest that BNY was at all points involving securitization “in charge”. Further, the trust has no mortgage loan schedule on file with SEC and no list filed with the Delaware UCC although both actions were represented in the securitization documents. For you legal experts out there a question: If BNY was the person in control as Strauss and the 8Ks suggest, who was the real issuer? And if the Indenture Trustee never filed the key documents entrusting the purported trust with assets, does the trust own those assets? Does a disembodied trust lacking a corpus exist? If it was created for the purpose of concealing the interest of the true owner? or other misdeeds? Any caselaw?
Another key element, the trust is stuffed with predatory loans -especially in the group I loans. 4-option ARMS with negative amortization and a teaser rate good until the 1st payment. This fact pattern seems to support all of Anonomous contentions and suggests that the bad loans should be put back to BNY –not a bankrupt AHM.
Filed under: foreclosure |
I live in Oak Park, Michigan I have a loan with American Home Mortgage I put in for loan modifications the balance on my loan was around
$65, 000.00 now I own around $89,000.00 plus in 2032 I will still own $65,000.00 this loan modifications didn’t help me but cost me more money. It took then so long to approve that I only have 3 days to except or reject the modification. They told me that if I didn’t except the modification I would have to come up with $7,000.00 dollars. I have lived in my home for 22 years. Option One Mortgage was the same way ripping people off.
Peter,
If you search Credit Suisse and FASB 166 and 167, you will find that Credit Suisse complied with new accounting rules that demand consolidation of off-balance sheet conduits – on to Credit Suisse’s balance sheet (look for quarterly SEC reports).
Since it is not profitable for Credit Suisse to keep these now on balance sheet non-performing assets – Credit Suisse will dispose of to third parties. Further, Wells Fargo services as Trustee – are no longer necessary.
As others here point out, in order to demonstrate this in court, you need a complete accounting. The PSA demands accounting from servicer to trustee to certificate holders. This includes all payments to Trustee including both current payments and servicer advances to Trustee for delinquent payments. When you start asking for this – you will find there is clear trouble in providing it. But, the trustee, on behalf of Trust – can have no claim unless all collections ledgers are provided that demonstrate the Trustee’s ongoing role with full accounting.
Anonymous, thanks so much for the information. If Credit Suisse dumped the loans, would Wells Fargo be gaining on the sale of a foreclosed home that would not benefit the investors? Do you know where I might be able to find proof of Credit Suisse dumping these loans? Also, wasn’t FASB implemented Nov. 1, 2009? The purchase by Credit Suisse as an Underwriter occured in 2007. Thanks again.
Mark M. Mark,
Cannot answer your questions – but think it is the same AHMSI – now owned by Wilbur Ross.
424B5 1 d410121.htm AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE SECURITIES LLC
Supplement dated December 16, 2005 to supplement dated October 24, 2005, to supplement dated April 22, 2005, to supplement dated March 31, 2005 to prospectus supplement dated December 17, 2004 (to prospectus dated December 17, 2004)
$550,442,000
(Approximate)
American Home Mortgage Investment Trust 2004-4
Issuer
American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.
(formerly known as Columbia National, Incorporated)
Master Servicer
American Home Mortgage Securities LLC
Depositor
American Home Mortgage Investment Trust 2004-4,
Mortgage-Backed Notes, Series 2004-4
Lehman Brothers
Is the AHM above related to American Home Mortgage Services (AHMS, AHMSI), of Irving Texas?
I’m new to this research, and was surprised to see how a small number of law firms were responsible for 80 % of the foreclosures in Florida, from the Grayson blog post. Therefore as I have been investigating the allegedly corrupt group whom American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc (AHMS, AHMSI) was providing debt collection services for, in my case Deutsche Bank and Ameriquest trusts, I was wondering where the Phoenix law firm Routh Castle Cooper Olsen LLC was statistically ranking in collusion with potentially similar rings in Arizona. Does anyone have information on this firm, who repeatedly ignores all my requests for information, which I would like to include in a report for the Attorney’s General of Arizona and other states, the FBI, SEC and others.
I am attempting now to perform some background research on these mutes, Routh Castle Cooper Olsen LLC, specifically Marty G. Baker AZSB(025278) and Ian D. Quinn AZSB(024515), as in suspicious affiliations and practices, outstanding integrity, or harmless mediocrity in their case, what might it be? What percentage of their work was foreclosures for questionable clients? Are there any characteristics about their practice and volume of litigation type that could make them similar to the Florida law firms described by Allan Grayson, Congressional Rep., Florida? The entire ring of clowns surrounding AHMSI is very inactive and secretive when it comes to requests for information, and as I see several state Attorneys General (MA, OH, TX) have filed suit against them, I have taken up the task of investigating the reputation and public information available on some of the participants, so any information is appreciated. techmeaux_at_gmail_dot_com. I would like to help inform the Arizona Attorney General and the US Department of Justice to perhaps have a closer look at AHMSI’s interstate activities in Arizona state. I’ve realized that if a TV station, such as Dallas 10, a “lunatic fringe”, or citizens in general do not blow a whistle on the crooks (the lawless), it seems no one will. Thanks for any attention or advice.
Any info on the California based Default Resolution Network?
Thanks
Peter
Credit Suisse – was the buyer/security underwriter. Credit Suisse did not hold onto these loans for very long. Long gone from Credit Suisse. ( remember trust is only for receivable pass-through). Credit Suisse complied with FASB 166 and 167 – and in process, has long dumped loans.
Same situation with Wells Fargo Alternative Loan 2007-PA3 Trust. Homes in this trust are being foreclosed on like crazy!
fighting mad, mad as hell,
Yeah – BUT – we DO NOT “have to accept the fact that the bankers have screwed us all!”
Fight on.
At some point we have to accept the fact that the bankers have screwed us all!
To believe that the bankers and stockbrokers have PLANNED AND CARRIED OUT the biggest, most devastating robbery of all time and are getting away with it, coast to coast.
They are making us play by their rules but they follow no rules and do what they please!
FRAUD, PERJURY, SCAMS, LIES, DECEIT, DOUBLE DEALING, FORGERY, OUTRIGHT THEFT AND MAIL FRAUD, are being done daily and not one of the major players is stopped or seen as responsible for committing any crimes!
Yet we, the people, are forced to follow the laws they wrote in our efforts to stop the theft of our homes!
AT TIMES IT LOOKS LIKE A LOT OF JUDGES ARE ON THE PAYROLL OF THE BANKS, THEY RULE IN THE BANKS FAVOR DESPITE THE FORGERIES, THE MISSING DOCUMENTS, THE OBVIOUS DEFECTS AND ARGUMENTS THAT ARE PRESENTED!
HOW CAN THAT BE UNLESS THE JUDGES ARE THAT STUPID OR ON THE TAKE?
THE MAJORITY OF THESE CASES SHOULD HAVE BEEN TOSSED OUT BEFORE GOING TO COURT.
PROOF OF TRUE OWNERSHIP SHOULD BE THE PRIORITY TO EVEN BRING A FORECLOSURE TO COURT OR TO BE EXECUTED OUT OF COURT.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
NO MORE LETTING THE BANKS SLIDE BY BECAUSE THEY ARE BIGGER THAN WE ARE, HAVE BETTER LAWYERS, ARE TOO BIG TO FAIL AND ABOVE THE LAW!
THE LAWS ORIGINALLY WERE MADE TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE FROM ABUSE BY THE BANKERS AND THOSE WITH MONEY AND POWER.
THEY HAVE CHANGED THE GAME AND NOW THE LAWS PROTECT THEM FROM US BEING TREATED FAIRLY AND JUSTLY.
THERE HAS BEEN NO GREATER ABUSE THIS CENTURY THAN THE MORTGAGE MELTDOWN FOISTED ON THE AMERICAN PUBLIC.
NO MATTER WHAT WE DO WE CAN’T WIN, THE GAME IS RIGGED AGAINST US!
BUT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE TOO STUPID TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON, TO ROLLOVER AND DIE ON COMMAND.
WE WERE NEVER TO TRACK DOWN ALL THE DEVIOUS LEGAL TWISTINGS OR DETERMINED ENOUGH TO KEEP FIGHTING, DIGGING AND FINDING ALL THE HIDDEN THINGS BEING DONE TO US!
IT WAS DESIGNED TO BE EASY FOR THE BANKS TO SNATCH OUR HOUSES AND LEAVE US DESTITUTE AND DESPERATE TO DO WHATEVER DEMANDED OF US JUST TO HAVE SOMEPLACE TO LIVE.
THE BANKS WOULD OWN IT ALL, AND WE WOULD HAVE NOTHING AT ALL!
WE AREN’T DONE FIGHTING.
WE HAVEN’T BEGUN TO FIGHT.
WE ARE DONE BEING AFRAID OF THE BANKS, IT’S THE BANKS TURN TO BE SCARED
IF THEY THOUGHT THE RIOTS OVER POLICE BRUTALITY WERE BAD, THINK ABOUT MILLIONS OF HOMEOWNERS TAKING TO THE STREETS TO GET JUSTICE BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY!
brian davieS,
Brian – everyone here should be contacting AG – and badgering AG to do something.
Thanks.
Here is a letter to the Attorney General in California by Moses Hall the Attorney who won in Mabry v. Orange County Superior Court for California Code 2923.5.
Please pass around to help in California
http://www.scribd.com/doc/37181558/ATTORNEY-GENERAL-EDMUND-BROWN-FROM-ATTORNEY-MOSES-HALL-RE-MABRY-V-ORANGE-COUNTY-SUPERIOR-COURT-OPEN-LETTER-TO-HELP-VIOLATIONS-OF-CC2923-5-WRONGF
Brian Davies
Any dirt on Tiffany Bosco ?
FKA..
Oh -yeah – and what did Fannie/Freddie do with them? Million dollar question. Lots of associated distressed debt buyers. Hey, that was the purpose of government bail-outs – get those invalid mortgage notes – somewhere – do not question where – just dispose of them – to whomever. Hold the people accountable for those invalid notes.
Nice job – government for the people..
.
I just filed my second amended in LA county.
FRAUD!
My signature was FORGED. I just now see that a person, who worked with THREE people named in my docs plead out. DONNA DEMELLO.
her ALIAIS are at least these, and I bet many many more.
• DONNA KAY DEMILLO
• DONNA DEMELIO MARTIN
• DONNA DEMELLO
• DONNA KAY MARTIN
• DONNA KAY MCDANIEL
Does anyone out there have a signature of hers?
I am STRONGLY suspecting that she is one and the same person as the notary who was involved in the forgery on my docs. DONNA K. ESCAMILLO
I already know she lied to me, but of course she did not forge my name in front of me, but I have a hunch.
I will request info on the notary bond, but if she is the same, but a signature would be gold.
Martha Nali
Form the recent few posts, it is apparent that the investors are going after the Securitization Trust owners (i.e. Wall Street Banks), and don’t benefit directly from foreclosure. The Banks, in turn, are foreclosing as Securitization Trustees and get foreclosure windfalls, which they may end up coughing up to the investors as a result fo the lawsuits.
So most judges not siding with homeowners really follow the common sense that, even if banks get some windfall, it is up to another entity on another day to hold the banks accountable for such windfalls.
Where it gets interesting is that the Banks shouldn’t really be able to foreclose either because the subject note is not (or no longer) part of the trust, the trust intself is defunct, or the trust could not accept the note even if it wanted to (per its charter documents), etc. If such foreclosures are stopped en masse, there will be a large transfer of wealth from bond (MBS) buyers to homeowners, who often end up part of the same social segment (pensioners and homeowners are often the same).
Zinger…Reading the Trust filings…what state does it say it is incorporated in and existing under? Check with the Dept of Corporation for that state. I did this and found that the Trust was never incorporated.
Take the CUSIP # that was issued by your Trust
and start Google searching! I only searched on the first 6 characters. It is my understanding that the 3 letters at the end describe the kind of security issued.
Check out IRS pub 938. This lists deal names by CUSIP #’s. There are thousands of these in 2006…the most recent one shows almost exclusivley Fannie Mae,Freddie Mac ,and Ginnie Mae! I would guess that the Trusts have been dissolved and the GSE’s have re-securitized these “toxic assets”. I think there is a copy of IRS pub 938 on livinglies somewhere. You can also just Google search it. You will see that the Trusts are there in 2006 and POOF they’re gone again by 2009. Need to Foreclose? POOF the Trust is back like it never left, standing in court via counsel to take your house. They need more money to start the process all over again!
I am not a lawyer…just a homeowner in
Foreclosure. Good luck!
THE REASON NOBODY UNDERSTANDS ANYTHING IS BECAUSE OUT OF FRUSTRATION WE SAY THE SAME THINGS IN DIFFERENT WORDS. OR WE START NEW THEORIES WHEN IT ALL BOILS DOWN TOO.
1. COMINGLING OF FUNDS
2. SWITCH AND BAIT (SOFT MONEY LOAN WAS REALLY HARD MONEY LOAN)
3. IN MOST CASES THE BANKS WERE NOT BANKS and they purposely misled us to think they were banks but were really what amounts to be mortgage brokers. (SO THEY GAVE US LOANS WE COULDNT AFFORD, SCREWING US AND THE INVESTOR, while pocketing hidden commisions and now our properties and businesses.)
THE ABOVE THREE IS ENOUGH TO SEND ANYBODY TO JAIL FOR ALONG TIME. From the loan officer all the way up to the CEO’s).
BOTTOM LINE WE NEED JUDGES THAT WANT TO LISTEN.
A MUST READ ARTICLE THERE IS HOPE THE RELEASE OF RICHARD FINE. A 70 YR OLD MAN WHO TOOK ON THE SYSTEM AND SAT 563 YRS IN JAIL FOR ALL OF US.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/Attorney-Richard-I-Fine-R-by-Stephen-Lendman-100919-168.html
THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING.
BUT WE MUST ALL CONTINUE THE FIGHT IN OUR OWN WAYS. NOT ALL OF US CAN SIT IN JAIL BUT WE MUST SPREAD THE WORD (GOSPEL).
I THINK THIS COULD BE WON AT THE CITY COUNSEL LOCAL LEVEL NOT THE FEDERAL LEVEL.
I TRULLY BELIEVE THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA NEEDS OUR GRASSROOTS HELP.
I TRULY BELIEVE THAT RICHARD FINE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RELEASED UNLESS THE CITY OF BELL CASE STUDY. WITH THE HELP OF THE NEW ATTITUDE OF THE NEW ADMINISTRATION.
I AM NOT A BUSH HATER BUT ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
HISTORY TEACHES US THAT RIGHT IS MIGHT AND NOT MIGHT IT RIGHT. I ALSO THINK YOU NEED BOTH.
WE DONT NEED NEW LAWS. WE NEED ETHICAL AND MORAL PEOPLE APPLYING THE LAW.
I ALSO THINK THEY RELEASED RICHARD FINE BECAUSE THE BANKS ARE NOT FUNDING DEVELOPMENTS ANYMORE ND HE IS NOT REALLY AN OBSTACLE ANYMORE. AND THEY ARE HOPING THE THE RETIRED JUDGE WILL TAKE THE FALL. FOR THE YOUNGER JUDGES.
BE STRONG AND COURAGEOUS
This is where all my info gets me hung up.. I have a hard time understanding it but am working on it.
when we were foreclosed and they started suit for eviction I used their informatin to track the SEC trust…. they were suing on behalf of BNY, CWABS -2006-8 so I was able to track that but am not sure if that is the only trust involved since conception or if that is something they switched it to later.
i can find on site the pooling and service agreement but do not understand how to tell if its dead or dormant or whatever. There has been no reports to the SEC since 2007… the latest report was 2007.
SO not sure if I’m doing it right or not. have another property to do too.
How do your tell if you are right on the money or not… I could not find anything by min number or name or address.