From testimony in a Chase case, same as dozens of others I have seen —-

Q. So if you didn’t review any books, records, and documents or computerized records, how is it that you had personal knowledge of all the matters contained therein?

A. Well, I have personal knowledge that my staff has personal knowledge. That is our process.

KEEP IN MIND that these admitted facts now are the same facts treated with incredulity and derision from the bench and opposing counsel. The Judges were wrong. The foreclosures were wrong. Now what? How will homeowners and counsel be treated in court now? Will the Judge still think the homeowner is trying to get out of a legitimate debt or will the Courts start to allow these cases to heard on their MERITS instead of improper PRESUMPTIONS? Will the courts start following rules of evidence or will they continue to give the “benefit of the doubt” (i.e., and improper presumption) to the foreclosure mill that fabricated documents with false affidavits?

The tide is turning from defending borrowers to prosecuting damage claims for slander of title, fraud, appraisal fraud, and criminal prosecutions by state, local and federal law enforcement. GMAC is only the first of the pretender lenders to admit the false representations contained in pleadings and affidavits. The methods used to to obtain foreclosure sales were common throughout the industry. The law firms and fabrication mills will provide precious little cover for the culprits whose interests they served. AND now that millions of homes were foreclosed, their position is set and fixed — they can no longer “fix” the problem by manipulating the documents.

The bottom line is that GMAC mortgagors who “lost” their homes still own them, as I have repeatedly opined on these pages. The damages are obvious and the punitive damages available are virtually inevitable. Maybe Judges will change their minds about applying TILA and RESPA, both of which amply cover this situation. Maybe those teeth in those statutes do NOT lead to windfall gains for homeowners but only set things right.

These people can move back into their homes in my opinion and even taken possession from those who allegedly purchased them, since the title was based upon a fatal defect in the chain. Whether these people will end up owing any money and whether they might still be subject to foreclosure from SOMEBODY is not yet known, but we know that GMAC-sponsored foreclosures are now admitted to be defective. There is no reason to suppose that GMAC was any different from any of the other pretender lenders who initiated foreclosure sales either on false pleading or false instructions using the power of sale in non-judicial states.

Those hundreds of millions of dollars earned by the foreclosure mills, those tens of billions of wealth stolen from homeowner are all up for grabs as lawyers start to circle the kill, having discovered that there is more money here than any personal injury or malpractice suit and that anyone can do it with the right information on title and securitization.

With subpoenas coming in from law enforcement agencies around the country, GMAC is the first to crumble, aware that the choice was to either take a massive commercial hit for damages or face criminal charges. Finger pointing will start in earnest as the big boys claim plausible deniability in a scheme they hatched and directed. The little guys will flip on them like pancakes as they testify under oath about the instructions they received which they knew were contrary to law and the rules governing their licenses and charters. Real Estate Brokers, licensed appraisers, licensed mortgage mortgage brokers, notaries, witnesses, title agents and their collective title and liability insurance carriers will soon discover that their licenses, livelihood and reputations are not only at risk but almost certainly headed for a major hit.

There can be no doubt that all GMAC cases will be affected by this action although GMAC has thus far limited the instruction to judicial states. In non-judicial states, most of the foreclosures were done without affidavits because they were uncontested. GMAC will now find small comfort that they didn’t use affidavits but merely false instructions to “Trustees” whose status was acquired through the filing of “Substitution of Trustee” documents executed by the same folks who falsified the affidavits in the judicial states. But the fact is that GMAC was not the creditor and obtained title through a “credit bid.” THEY CAN’T FIX THIS! Thus the transfer of title was void, in my opinion, or certainly voidable.

The denial that the affidavit contained false information is patently false — and, as usual, not under oath (see below). GMAC takes the position that the affidavits were “inadvertently” signed (tens of thousands of them) by persons without knowledge of their truth or falsity and that the action is taken only to assure that the mortgage holder is actually known. So the fight isn’t over and don’t kid yourself. They are not all going to roll over and play dead. Just take this as another large step toward the ultimate remedy — reinstatement of people in their homes, damage awards to people who were defrauded, and thus restoration of hundreds of billions of dollars of wealth back into the economic sector where money is spent and the economy actually works for people who don’t trade false papers at the expense of pensioners and homeowners around the world.

September 20, 2010

GMAC Halts Foreclosures in 23 States for Review


GMAC Mortgage, one of the country’s largest and most troubled home lenders, said on Monday that it was imposing a moratorium on many of its foreclosures as it tried to ensure they were done correctly.

The lender, which specialized in subprime loans during the boom, when it was owned by General Motors, declined in an e-mail to specify how many loans would be affected or the “potential issue” it had identified with them.

GMAC said the suspension might be a few weeks or might last until the end of the year.

States where the moratorium is being carried out include New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Illinois, Florida and 18 others, mostly on the East Coast and in the Midwest. All of the affected states are so-called judicial foreclosure states, where courts control the interactions of defaulting homeowners and their lenders.

Since the real estate collapse began, lawyers for homeowners have sparred with lenders in those states. The lawyers say that in many cases, the lenders are not in possession of the original promissory note, which is necessary for a foreclosure.

GMAC, which has been the recipient of billions of dollars of government aid, declined to provide any details or answer questions, but its actions suggest that it is concerned about potential liability in evicting families and selling houses to which it does not have clear title.

The lender said it was also reviewing completed foreclosures where the same unnamed procedure might have been used.

Matthew Weidner, a real estate lawyer in St. Petersburg, Fla., said he interpreted the lender’s actions as saying, “We have real liability here.”

Mr. Weidner said he recently received notices from the opposing counsel in two GMAC foreclosure cases that it was withdrawing an affidavit. In both cases, the document was signed by a GMAC executive who said in a deposition last year that he had routinely signed thousands of affidavits without verifying the mortgage holder.

“The Florida rules of civil procedure are explicit,” Mr. Weidner said. “If you enter an affidavit, it must be based on personal knowledge.”

The law firm seeking to withdraw the affidavits is Florida Default Law Group, which is based in Tampa. Ronald R. Wolfe, a vice president at the firm, did not return calls. The firm is under investigation by the State of Florida, according to the attorney general’s Web site.

Real estate agents who work with GMAC to sell foreclosed properties were told to halt their activities late last week. The moratorium was first reported by Bloomberg News on Monday. Bloomberg said it had obtained a company memorandum dated Friday in which GMAC Mortgage instructed brokers to immediately stop evictions, cash-for-key transactions and sales.

Nerissa Spannos, a Fort Lauderdale agent, said GMAC represents about half of her business — 15 houses at the moment in various stages of foreclosure.

“It’s all coming to a halt,” she said. “I have so many nice listings and now I can’t sell them.”

The lender’s action, she said, was unprecedented in her experience. “Every once in a while you get a message saying, ‘Take this house off the market. We have to re-foreclose.’ But this is so much bigger,” she said.

Ally Says GMAC Mortgage Mishandled Affidavits on Foreclosures

By Dakin Campbell and Lorraine Woellert – Sep 21, 2010

Ally Financial Inc., whose GMAC Mortgage unit halted evictions in 23 states amid allegations of mishandled affidavits, said its filings contained no false claims about home loans.

The “defect” in affidavits used to support evictions was “technical” and was discovered by the company, Gina Proia, an Ally spokeswoman, said in an e-mailed statement. Employees submitted affidavits containing information they didn’t personally know was true and sometimes signed without a notary present, according to the statement. Most cases will be resolved in the next few weeks and those that can’t be fixed will “require court intervention,” Proia said.

“The entire situation is unfortunate and regrettable and GMAC Mortgage is diligently working to resolve the situation,” Proia said. “There was never any intent on the part of GMAC Mortgage to bypass court rules or procedures. Nor do these failures reflect any disrespect for our courts or the judicial processes.”

State officials are investigating allegations of fraudulent foreclosures at the nation’s largest home lenders and loan servicers. Lawyers defending mortgage borrowers have accused GMAC and other lenders of foreclosing on homeowners without verifying that they own the loans. In foreclosure cases, companies commonly file affidavits to start court proceedings.

“All the banks are the same, GMAC is the only one who’s gotten caught,” said Patricia Parker, an attorney at Jacksonville, Florida-based law firm, Parker & DuFresne. “This could be huge.”

No Misstatements

Aside from signing the affidavits without knowledge or a notary, “the sum and substance of the affidavits and all content were factually accurate,” Proia wrote in the e-mail. “Our internal review has revealed no evidence of any factual misstatements or inaccuracies concerning the details typically contained in these affidavits such as the loan balance, its delinquency, and the accuracy of the note and mortgage on the underlying transaction.”

Affidavits are statements written and sworn to in the presence of someone authorized to administer an oath, such as a notary public.

GMAC told brokers and agents to halt evictions tied to foreclosures on homeowners in 23 states including Florida, Connecticut and New York and said it may have to take “corrective action” on other foreclosures, according to a Sept. 17 memo. Foreclosures won’t be suspended and will continue with “no interruption,” Proia said in a statement yesterday.

10,000 a Week

In December 2009, a GMAC Mortgage employee said in a deposition that his team of 13 people signed “a round number of 10,000” affidavits and other foreclosure documents a month without verifying their accuracy. The employee said he relied on law firms sending him the affidavits to verify their accuracy instead of checking them with GMAC’s records as required. The affidavits were then used to complete the process of repossessing homes and evicting residents.

Florida Attorney General William McCollum is investigating three law firms that represent loan servicers in foreclosures, and are alleged to have submitted fraudulent documents to the courts, according to an Aug. 10 statement. The firms handled about 80 percent of foreclosure cases in the state, according to a letter from Representative Alan Grayson, a Florida Democrat.

“It appears that the actions we have taken and the attention we’ve paid to this issue could have had some impact on the actions that GMAC took today, but we can’t take full credit,” Ryan Wiggins, a spokeswoman for McCollum, said yesterday in a telephone interview.

‘Committed Fraud’

In August, Florida Circuit Court Judge Jean Johnson blocked a Jacksonville foreclosure brought by Washington Mutual Bank N.A. and JPMorgan Chase Bank, which had purchased the failed bank’s assets, and Shapiro & Fishman, the companies’ law firm. Documents eventually showed that the mortgage on the house was in fact owned by Washington-based Fannie Mae.

WaMu and the law firm “committed fraud on this court,” Johnson wrote. JPMorgan had presented a document prepared by Shapiro showing the mortgage was sold directly to WaMu in April 2008.

Tom Ice, founding partner of Ice Legal PA in Royal Palm Beach, Florida, said a fourth law firm representing GMAC in recent weeks has begun withdrawing affidavits signed by the GMAC employee.

“The banks are sitting up and taking notice that they can’t use falsified documents in the courtroom,” Ice said. “There may be others doing the same thing. They’re going to come back and say, ‘We’d better withdraw these,’” Ice said in a telephone interview.

Alejandra Arroyave, a lawyer with Lapin & Leichtling, a law firm in Coral Gables, Florida, who represented the employee at his December 2009 deposition, didn’t respond to a request for comment. A phone call to the employee wasn’t returned.

Mortgage Market

GMAC ranked fourth among U.S. home-loan originators in the first six months of this year, with $26 billion of mortgages, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, an industry newsletter. Wells Fargo & Co. ranked first, with $160 billion, and Citigroup Inc. was fifth, with $25 billion.

Iowa Assistant Attorney General Patrick Madigan said the implications of Ally’s internal review and the GMAC employee’s deposition could be “enormous.”

“It would call into question whether other servicers have engaged in similar practices,” Madigan said in a telephone interview. “It would be a major disruption to the foreclosure pipeline.”

To contact the reporters on this story: Dakin Campbell in San Francisco at; Lorraine Woellert in Washington at

48 Responses

  1. Looking for help with Bank of American FIA card services out of North Carolina. I feel they did a false affidavit in state court (Alabama) to win summary judgement. I feel this because the state of NC office of notary investigations and enforcement did a order of suspension of the notary. The notary is the same name as the one who did the affidavit in my case. How can i find out what the state of NC found out when they did their investagtion. I beleive fraud is major on court level to get judgements for credit cards/other non mortgage loans. I need a lawyer who can help me, 1 get the judgment overturn 2 see to it that this fraud see’s the light of day!!!!!!!! I know of another case just like mine, same bank, same notary.

  2. Hi Neil,

    I am Looking for any information or known signatures of Keo Maney Kue Vang. (He signs for NDEX / Wells). He is on Max Gardner’s list of known Robosigners. I need a copy of his signature if anyone can help. Time is running out.

    Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Thank you

    Steve Vondran, Esq.
    (877) 276-5084.

  3. I was foreclosed on by Plaintiff US Bank National Association, as Trustee. Their legal firm? David J. Stern in Plantation, Florida, one of the “foreclosure mills” under investigation by the State of Florida.
    Does anyone know how I can find the Assignment of Mortgage and all other affadavits etc that were filed in my case? It was in 2007. I found the case and all of the filings at the Clerk of The Court, but couldn’t find the actual documents. Do I have to go to the Records Office in person to get these? I want to see if there has been any hanky panky done with especially the Assignment of Mortgage. Of course, like in most cases, there was a lost note too.

  4. When a judge knows that he lacks jurisdiction, or acts in the face of clearly valid statutes expressly depriving him of jurisdiction, judicial immunity is lost. Rankin v. Howard, (1980) 633 F.2d 844, cert den. Zeller v. Rankin, 101 S.Ct. 2020, 451 U.S. 939, 68 L.Ed 2d 326.

    In Rankin v. Howard, 633 F.2d 844 (1980) the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed an Arizona District Court dismissal based upon absolute judicial immunity, finding that both necessary immunity prongs were absent; later, in Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d 1072 (1986), the Ninth Circuit, en banc , criticized the “judicial nature” analysis it had published in Rankin as unnecessarily restrictive. But Rankin’s ultimate result was not changed, because Judge Howard had been independently divested of absolute judicial immunity by his complete lack of jurisdiction.

    Some Defendants urge that any act “of a judicial nature” entitles the Judge to absolute judicial immunity. But in a jurisdictional vacuum, (that is, absence of all jurisdiction) the second prong necessary to absolute judicial immunity is missing. Stump v. Sparkman, id., 435 U.S. 349.

    “Where there is no jurisdiction, there can be no discretion, for discretion is incident to jurisdiction.” Piper v. Pearson, 2 Gray 120, cited in Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall. 335, 20 L.Ed. 646 (1872)

    A judge must be acting within his jurisdiction as to subject matter and person, to be entitled to immunity from civil action for his acts. Davis v. Burris, 51 Ariz. 220, 75 P.2d 689 (1938)

    Generally, judges are immune from suit for judicial acts within or in excess of their jurisdiction even if those acts have been done maliciously or corruptly; the only exception being for acts done in the clear absence of all jurisdiction. Gregory v. Thompson, 500 F2d 59 (C.A. Ariz. 1974)

    There is a general rule that a ministerial officer who acts wrongfully, although in good faith, is nevertheless liable in a civil action and cannot claim the immunity of the sovereign. Cooper v. O’Conner, 99 F.2d 133

    When a judicial officer acts entirely without jurisdiction or without compliance with jurisdiction requisites he may be held civilly liable for abuse of process even though his act involved a decision made in good faith, that he had jurisdiction. State use of Little v. U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 217 Miss. 576, 64 So. 2d 697.

    “… the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137 (1803).

    “No judicial process, whatever form it may assume, can have any lawful authority outside of the limits of the jurisdiction of the court or judge by whom it is issued; and an attempt to enforce it betond these boundaries is nothing less than lawless violence.” Ableman v. Booth, 21 Howard 506 (1859).

    “The courts are not bound by an officer’s interpretation of the law under which he presumes to act.” Hoffsomer v. Hayes, 92 Okla 32, 227 F 417.

  5. GMAC has been doing the same thing for years even after it was sanctioned for fraud in 2006. In the case below, Margie Kwaitanowski was deposed….interestingly enough, she is now Stephan’s supervisor (according to his 1st Ice Legal depo).

  6. An affidavit materially defective stands as no affidavit. All proceedings founded on a materially defective affidavit are coram non judice. And no appearance, no submission of the garnishee can operate to waive the defect of jurisdiction.
    Wells v American Express

  7. Thursday 23 September 2010

    Not really. An explanaiton of coram non judice is not the same as specific case cites for judge’s liability that you referenced….

  8. you want it you got it.

    Coram non judice proceedings will not divest one of the lawful possession of title to his property, is a very important rule involving procedure and Caveat emptor as well. Purchasers under execution and judicial sales are charged with knowledge of all the mandatory record shows. They must take notice of nullities or void proceedings but not formal defects or mere irregularities. The former are void ab initio,2′ and of this the nullity is wholly judged by the mandatory record.
    The coram non judice proceeding is pregnable to collateral attack. To this it is always vulnerable; time or laches will not cure it.Collateral attack is the last stage of the application of the rule that the general demurrer searches the whole record and attaches to the first substantial fault, likewise of the motion in arrest of judgment. This rule of the general demurrer, the motion in arrest of judgment and of collateral attack is not waivable in character. It involves defects that cannot be waived. It involves grave jurisdictional defects that it is contrary to public policy to waive. The parties named upon the record cannot waive where they cannot contract or stipulate; they cannot dispense with the rule that a court is bound by its record; no court can lawfully proceed unrestrained. A court without a right record and bound thereby is without the pale of the law, and then its proceedings are coram non judice; such proceedings need neither objection nor exception in order to predicate objections thereto in .appellate procedure or elsewhere.1′ The coram non judice proceeding so appearing from the mandatory record is worthless for all purposes. It is a nullity, or a void thing. No title or right can be predicated thereon. It cannot be the basis of any substantive right. But it is otherwise with a merely voidable or erroneous judgment. Rights gained or founded thereon by a third person are substantive rights, and he is viewed as a bona fide purchaser, although the judgment is reversed on a direct attack,on appearance or proceedings in error. In the latter case, however, it is the judgment creditor alone who must account for all benefits and advantages derived from the irregular judgment. After its reversal he is liable upon an action for money had and received; he may be liable in many forms of remedy.
    From the foregoing arise many aspects showing the intimacy of what are often called adjective law and substantive law, and which to many appear Inseparable. If so, then there is no such distinction and therefore the “parol evidence rule” may properly be treated with both evidence and contract discussion.2′
    If property is sequestered and sold under a coram non judice proceeding no rights whatever are vested or pass thereunder. It now seems that the owner of property may defend it against all claiming under a coram non judice proceeding as he might against an ordinary trespasser.

  9. The washington post is following up .. new story here ==> you may have to sign on ..

  10. Wednesday 22 September 2010


    If you have supporting case law, please provide.

  11. Guess what THE JUDGES ARE LIABLE TOO!!!!! It is a ministerial duty to verify the sufficiency and substance of a claim. Without a sufficient affidavit the claim isn’t even colorable!!! It is simply a frivolous statement attached to a sham pleading.

    The judge is a trespasser plain and simple. Collaterally attacking the judgments is the only way to get real justice.

  12. This is great news for all borrowers. It should send a signal to other pretender lenders to be on the lookout of similar illegal practices at banks and law firms. All the more reason that individuals should look at other ways to dispute or reduce their mortgages amounts. I have been starting discussion group and collecting names for other legal action and class action suits. Contact Robert 860-599-5557

  13. Neil,
    I left off the word “all” in the end, and the case number is pc 048289.

  14. Dear FBI, Government, and fellow citizen,
    When my ancestor, Gov. William Bradford arrived on the Mayflower he had dreams. Dreams that the rights of his Grandchildren would be held to a high regard in this great country we call America.
    Now, we the people only find ourselves ravaged at the lawlessness and barbarity of these criminals who aim to deprive us of our Lives, our Property and our Hope. Your Grandchildren will be slaves.
    I can call 911 and tell a dispatcher that a thief is stealing my 94’ Saturn, and I will receive prompt assistance, and I can call and complain that someone broke in and stole all my “Grand Funk Railroad” records, and I might even be allowed to file a report.
    Yet, thieves can steal my home, and I have no recourse?
    I have been to the Sherriff’s station twice, and was told I could not file an “official” report of forgery on the Deeds of Trust on my home, unless they had enough evidence to make an “official” report. I just got a “tag”
    My word was not enough.
    The FBI interviewed me twice, and told me “Yes, it does look like you were defrauded… but they do not intervene in private actions. Why?
    Well, yes I do admit, I want them spending their time putting the molesters and killers behind bars, and so I concede this, but why do you prevent me from finding out who they are?
    I am now on my second amended complaint, and woe to those who know nothing of the law.
    You are doomed my fellow citizen.
    I know a little, but not near enough, and I’m exhausted.
    Tonight I sit here watching (on YouTube) over and over the person who forged my name to the Deeds of Trust, Donna K. Demello.
    I watch her walk free from the courthouse. Oh yes, she posted $50,000 bail. Almost the same the Judge will likely require if I want to prevent the theft of the Property on forged Deeds of Trust that Donna K. Demello did.
    I refuse to pay a dime!
    So, yes they might take it, but they better be prepared to give it back.
    Donna K. Demello is the same person I allege as Donna K. Escamillo, whom I allege completely defrauded me and forged my name, and it seems made many multiple loans, without my knowledge.
    I bet she is singing right now about the Hovnanian/First American Deal she got.
    I bet it’s a pretty song.
    Yet, for me? I get no help. No assistance. I must seek out the indictments myself. I must find out that she was arrested on my own.
    They knew who she is, and they know her name was false when the Deeds of Trust on my home were signed, yet they do not publish that name? Why? It’s a song they don’t want you to hear.
    They will only let you shout a hurrah that the “crooks” got sent to jail… what 18-20 months, and the will then tell of “Corporate Pleas” and of those who have agreed to a PENALTY of 10 -20-30-40-50 millions of dollars. It’s NOTHING!
    These crooks have had the game rigged to give them better odds then Vegas! They are only publishing the crimes of the already long-gone homes, and of the “straw-buyers” who were lured into giving up cash in exchange for a good profit. Yes, a crime too against some that were innocent, naïve, wanna-be-real-estate-moguls.
    They do not publish the crimes of the ones who were enemies on the front lines in this war against us, and who actually forged Deeds of Trusts.
    Such as
    Why? Why is my claim of her forging my name, an admitted guilty criminal, not enough to stop over FIVE defendants from trying to take everything I own?
    They hope you will all just give up. It’s easier too I admit, but I just could not live with myself if I did that. So I say FIGHT! Look at your records. Demand answers! Do not move out. Check the recorded Deeds!! You must! These are CRIMINALS!
    Do not let them take everything you own. Do not let them take the lives of our children, and take away everything we have fought for in the past. Give up your luxuries, give up your possessions, but refuse to give up your rights, and your freedom, and above refuse to give up your property!

    Martha Raysik
    Nali v.K.Hovnanian.
    Los Angeles Superior. PC 042289

  15. tick – tick – tick – tick ….. As a friend of mine coined that word, KABOOM ….. Does this mean the “Ticks” are getting LOUDER?


    Ally Financial Legal Issue With Foreclosures May Affect Other Mortgage Companies

    By Ariana Eunjung Cha
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Wednesday, September 22, 2010; 5:37 AM

    Some of the nation’s largest mortgage companies used a single document processor who said he signed off on foreclosures without having read the paperwork – an admission that may open the door for homeowners across the country to challenge foreclosure proceedings.

    The legal predicament compelled Ally Financial, the nation’s fourth-largest home lender, to halt evictions of homeowners in 23 states this week. NOW IT APPEARS HUNDREDS OF OTHER COMPANIES, INCLUDING MORTGAGE GIANTS **FANNIE MAE** AND **FREDDIE MAC**, MAY ALSO BE AFFECTED BECAUSE THEY USE ALLY TO SERVICE THEIR LOANS.

    As head of Ally’s foreclosure document processing team, 41-year-old Jeffrey Stephan was required to review cases to make sure the proceedings were legally justified and the information was accurate. HE WAS ALSO REQUIRED TO SIGN THE DOCUMENTS IN THE PRESENCE OF A NOTARY.

    In a sworn deposition, he testified that he did neither.

    How the nation’s foreclosure system became reliant on the tedious work of a few corporate bureaucrats is still a matter that mortgage lenders are trying to answer. While the lenders may have had legitimate cause to foreclose, THE MISHANDLING OF THE PAPERWORK has given homeowners ammunition in their fight against foreclosure and HAS DRAWN THE ATTENTION OF STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS.

    Ally spokesman James Olecki called the problem with the documents “an important but technical defect.” He said the papers were “factually accurate” but conceded that “corrective action” may have to be taken in some cases and that others may “require court intervention.”


    Spokesmen for Fannie and Freddie confirmed Tuesday after inquiries from The Washington Post that they use Ally, formerly called GMAC, to oversee some mortgages. THE COMPANIES HAVE LAUNCHED INTERNAL REVIEWS TO ASSESS THE SCOPE OF ANY POTENTIAL ISSUES.

    Ally, Fannie and Freddie – all troubled mortgage companies that received extraordinary bailouts by the federal government during the financial crisis – declined to say how many loans might be affected.

    The Treasury Department, which owns a majority stake in Ally and seized Fannie and Freddie in 2008, also declined to comment.
    Fannie and Freddie, created by Congress to finance mortgages and encourage homeownership, have in recent years been repossessing houses at record numbers. Fannie alone reported recently that 450,000 of its single-family loans were seriously delinquent or in the foreclosure process as of June 30. That’s nearly 5 percent of the loans it guarantees.

    Lawyers defending homeowners have accused some of the nation’s largest lenders of foreclosing on families without verifying all of the information in a case, but it has been hard for them to stop foreclosure proceedings.

    Ally’s moratorium comprises only the 23 states – none in the Washington area – that mandate a court judgment before a lender can take possession of a property. But if Stephan signed documents related to foreclosures in states without this requirement (it’s unclear whether he did), it could help a much broader range of borrowers.


    U N F A I R A N D D E C E P T V E P R A C T I C E.

    “If servicers are submitting court documents that aren’t true or that have not been verified, that is of great concern,” Madigan said.
    Stephan’s job at Ally was arguably one of the least enviable in the mortgage business: formally signing off on foreclosure papers that his company would submit to the courts to get approval to evict delinquent homeowners and resell their homes.

    From his office in suburban Philadelphia, Stephan oversaw a team of 13 employees that brought documents to him for his signature at a rapid clip. Stephan did not respond to messages left at his work and home.

    His official title was team leader of the document execution unit of Ally’s foreclosure department, but consumer advocates call him the company’s “super robot signor” or “affidavit slave.”

    In sworn depositions taken in December and June for two separate court cases involving families trying to keep their homes, Stephan revealed his shortcuts when reviewing the files. He said he would glance at the borrower’s names, the debt owed and a few other numbers but would not read through all the documents as legally required. He would then sign them. The files were packed up in bulk and sent off for notarization several days later.

    Stephan testified he did not know how the “summary judgment” affidavits he signed were used in judicial foreclosure cases.
    At the rate Stephan was reviewing files, if he worked an eight-hour day he would have had an average of only 1.5 minutes for each document.

    “A ridiculous amount of time for something so critically important,” said Thomas Cox, an attorney in Maine who was one of those who deposed Stephan. He added that Maine and Florida law enforcement officials are investigating the matter.


    Olecki said Stephan still works for Ally but added, “We cannot comment further about his position.”

    While several large lenders contacted by The Post declined to talk about the document review process for foreclosures, attorneys working on behalf of homeowners said the setup at Ally was not unusual.

    Christopher Immel, an attorney in Florida who deposed Stephan for a case in Palm Beach County, said he thinks Stephan was not a rogue employee but one that was performing his job responsibilities as the company told him to do.

    “GMAC has a business model to do this, and Stephan was just one small part of it,” Immel said. “He was under the impression it was okay to do this.”

    Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.

  16. Tbrown

    Others here are better than me to answer your question – is your note in hand really an original and with all attached allonges?. Also, as we have been discussing, if note sale was conditional, subject to repurchase due to misrepresentations/warranties – is it even a negotiable note?

  17. […] turning for sure when one of the largest mortgage lenders, stops all its foreclosure proceedings,  GMAC, aka Ally Financial Inc. It seems one of their employees signed affidavits that he had personal knowledge of certain facts […]


  19. * How Serious is the GMAC Problem? Pretty Serious and Not Just GMAC – 09/21/2010 – Yves Smith
    * Steve Keen: Deleveraging With a Twist – 09/21/2010 – Yves Smith

    Monday, September 20, 2010

    Grayson Calls on Florida Supreme Court to Halt Foreclosures

    Representative Alan Grayson of Florida has asked the Florida Supreme Court to halt all foreclosures in the state in light of an investigation by its attorney general into allegations of pervasive foreclosure fraud by so-called “foreclosure mills”.

    Text below:

    September 20, 2010

    Chief Justice Charles T. Canady
    Florida Supreme Court
    500 South Duval Street
    Tallahassee, FL 32399-1900

    Dear Chief Justice Canady,

    I am disturbed by the increasing reports of predatory ‘foreclosure mills’ in Florida. The New York Times and Mother Jones have both recently reported on the rampant and widespread practices of document fraud and forgery involved in mortgage assignments. My staff has spoken with multiple foreclosure specialists and attorneys in Florida who confirm these reports.

    Three foreclosure mills – the Law Offices of Marshall C. Watson, Shapiro & Fishman, and the Law Offices of David J. Stern – constitute roughly 80% of all foreclosure proceedings in the state of Florida. All are under investigation by Attorney General Bill McCollum. If the reports I am hearing are true, the illegal foreclosures taking place represent the largest seizure of private property ever attempted by banks and government entities. This is lawlessness.

    I respectfully request that you abate all foreclosures involving these firms until the Attorney General of the state of Florida has finished his investigations of those firms for document fraud.

    I have included a court order, in which Chase, WAMU, and Shapiro and Fishman are excoriated by a judge for document fraud on the court. In this case, Chase attempted to foreclose on a home, when the mortgage note was actually owned by Fannie Mae.

    Taking someone’s home should not be done lightly. And it should certainly be done in accordance with the law.

    Thank you for your consideration of this request.


    Alan Grayson
    Member of Congress

  20. Pulled from

    More On GMAC/Ally Foreclosures

    Well, it appears that it is finally happening….

    To be specific, it appears that:

    * At least one (and perhaps more) “inside officers” in various law firms filed thousands (and maybe tens of thousands) of affidavits they did not read and thus could not have attested to.

    * This practice appears to not be limited to one law firm. In fact, it may be basically the entire “foreclosure industry” that was involved in this.

    * It is entirely possible that not only did the person filing the affidavit not have the knowledge to make the attestment, but the attestment itself may be false. More on this below.

    * The Mortgage Bankers Association has a conference in process, and apparently (according to NC) they’re “freaking out.” (ed: Good – they should be if their minions have been filing false affidavits by the thousands!)

    * This is likely to derail many foreclosures – at least from a standpoint of time. It may also void some of them and force them to be re-litigated. This will have a SEVERE impact on loss severities – at minimum.

    * Worse, in the case of non-agency notes, some of the notes may have never been conveyed properly into the trust in the first place, as I have repeatedly noted for more than a year now!

    There are some very serious potential problems here folks. As you remember I wrote a Ticker about this in 2009 in which I raised the issue of possible endorsement in blank into some of these trusts – and the fact that there are multiple problems with such a thing, including both state law restrictions that bar “in blank” assignments into trusts as well as possible TEFRA implications (1980s law relating to bearer instruments and tax implications thereof.)

    If the time has passed to be able to make reasonable corrections to these so-called “ministerial errors” (and it probably has) then the impact on MBS holders who happen to have the “hot potato” in non-agency securitizations could be catastrophic.

    In turn you can expect them to come after the institutions (big banks) involved, which could easily wind up in some catastrophic outcomes for them!

    This is particularly true if the “back end” processing was intentionally derailed. A pattern of conduct is entirely different than a “few errors.” If courts and/or prosecutors find that a pattern of conduct was involved in these “errors” to the point that they are deemed intentional then the entire securitization structure collapses on itself as it holds no collateral at all, but rather holds only a naked promise to pay.

    While this doesn’t exactly get the owner a “free house” it’s damn close especially in states with an unlimited bankruptcy exemption for homestead property, as if the note is deemed “naked” (without security interest) the owner of the house could declare bankruptcy out from under it while keeping the house!

    The only thing worse you could add to this might have happened too – we might get a finding that in an attempt to cover up over a trillion dollars in intentional misconduct that these institutions engaged in systemic and intentional forgery.

    Small ball or “insignificant”? I think not – nobody’s going to take a trillion dollar reaming without going after everyone and everything involved in this, up and down the line – and that’s exactly what this is increasingly looking like it will turn into.

    The chuckle factor on this for me is extraordinary, while the pucker factor for those who pulled this garbage ought to be running at about a 9.5.

  21. JPMorgan Brings Foreclosure Case In Mortgage In Which It Was Just A Servicer, Court Finds Bank Committed Fraud
    Tyler Durden’s picture
    Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/16/2010 16:37 -0500

    * Fannie Mae
    * Florida
    * WaMu

    An interesting development out of Jean Johnson, Circuit Judge in Duval Country, Florida, where in a case filed by JPMorgan/WaMu, as Plaintiff, and law firm of Shapiro and Fishman, attempted to evict defendants Hank and Marilyn Pocopanni. As basis for the legal case, WaMu had submitted an assignment of mortgage, which however the court just found never actually belonged to WaMu, and instead was carried on the books of Fannie Mae. Once this was uncovered is where this case gets really interesting: In point 5 of the filing we read that the “plaintiff predecessor counsel made “clerical errors” when it represented to the Court that the plaintiff was the owner and holder of the note and mortgage rather than the servicer for the owner.” Which means that only Fannie had the right to foreclose upon the Pocopannis, yet JPM, as servicer, decided to take that liberty itself. And here the Judge got really angry: “The court finds WAMU, with the assistance of its previous counsel, Shapiro and Fishman, submitted the assignment when [they] knew that only Fannie Mae was entitled to foreclose on the Mortgage, and that WAMU never owned or held the note and Mortgage.” And, oops, “the Court finds by clear and convincing evidence that WAMU, Chase and Shapiro & Fishman committed fraud on this Court” and that these “acts committed by WAMU, Chase and Shapiro amount to a “knowing deception intended to prevent the defendants from discovery essential to defending the claim” and are therefore fraud. While the Judge in this case did not also find declaratory damages against the plaintiff, and while the case of the defendants is unclear (we would expect Fannie to file a foreclosure act on its own soon enough), the question of just how pervasive this form of “fraud” in the judicial system is certainly relevant. Because if JPM takes the liberty of foreclosing on mortgages as merely servicer, when it has no legal ground for such an action, who knows how many such cases the legal system is currently clogged up with. The implications for the REO and foreclosures track for banks could be dire as a result of this ruling, as this could severely impact the ongoing attempt by banks to hide as much excess inventory in their books in the quietest way possible.

    Our advice to any party caught in a foreclosure process is to immediately go to and use the Lookup Tool to see if Fannie is still mortgage owner of record, if a foreclosure suit has been brought up by a plaintiff other than the GSE.

    We are confident quite a few other such cases will promptly appear.

  22. to anonymous: i understand what you are saying but i do have the original note in hand. the original note endorsed in blank by the VP .

  23. Just thought this might be of interest… now here people are in 2010 with once car finance companies that get the last swig from the “rum jug” passed around willy nilly.. car finance companies get to foreclose on homes… last time I looked , o yeah but yet again perhaps GMAC and Cendant have actually have produced a “compelling argument” to Congress and the Senate that people can actually live in their car’s.

  24. Tbrown,

    Servicers conceal what they do. They purchase the residual tranche to (fabricated) trusts – and, at that point – they own the collection rights. They send no payments to any trustee, any trust, or any other party. And, how and why does the servicer purchase the residual tranche? Because that is one of the few tranches for which receivables were not passed-through (securitized). Thus, all defaults, early payment defaults, any loans with missing documents, breach of representation, predatory lending, etc. etc – ie. – initial scratch and dents and subsequent default/foreclosures – are passed to the residual tranche – which the servicer owns. Servicer will then service for any party – that they sell collection rights/property rights to. The Trust is no longer involved – but foreclosure mills will try to claim that the trustee – is the party that the servicer is acting on behalf of – which is simply fraud.

    As far as the missing “Mortgage Schedules” – SEC claims they were not required to file them. So if not there – just tough luck. But, they do not matter anyway, because they were only initial schedules – will tell you nothing more than that your loan was targeted to be included in the Trust. Does not mean it stayed there as security pass-through. And, certainly does not mean it stayed there after any delinquency/default. And, will certainly not tell you it was repurchased.

  25. One question when, what year , did GMAC get into the mortgage lending business. When they got their Bank Charter in 2008. Prior to that it appears that they were in the car lending, hard good’s, appliance and such business.Perhaps I am wrong, but this sure looks like the same monkey business that is going on with the newly resurrected Cendant that was in “fleet management” as in vehicles, that are suddenly foreclosing in every state… were they spreading “pass through receivables” via various bailedout banks to other so called ABS that did not have a “house” as the asset backed security?

    This should get very interesting indeed.

  26. I have found the (PSA) I have found the prospectus I have also found my loan that is in the Master servicer (Wells Fargo)ctslink . My loan # is there. I requested the info from the SEC from the 8K report because the info from the 8K report with held the Mortgage loan schedule and the lost Note loan numbers.. I requested the exibits that was with held (available on request) the SEC just sent to me the same 8k . I’m in foreclosure and I’m in the process of filing for a summary judgement because the (successor Trustee) is not the real party in interest. The trustee is not the real party in interest and the despositer into the certificate series is not the real party in interest… I have a sworwn affidavit from the servicer (Vice President) that says THEY WARRANT AND REPRESENT THAT THEY HAVE NEVER SOLD THE LOAN TO ANYONE AND THAT THEY HAVE ONLY ACTED AS THE SERVICER SINCE 2003… I have the Wet ink Note endorsed in blank in my possession….

  27. Hmmm. And wasn’t GMAC in agreement (cohoots) with MBNA regarding mortgage loan marketing? MBNA – is now Bank of America Corporation.


  29. I so want this to spread to all 50 states , but until everyone and I mean everyone starts demanding action from our government nothing will change. It means nothing until all Banks , Trustees are forced to put up real proof or go away.

    Time to call your local Congress member & US Senator.


  30. In non-judicial states, what about the fraud in the paperwork they submitted to the BK courts to lift the stays? Wouldn’t that be considered fraud on the court?

  31. The way to win is to attack from different front, the legal front, the public opinion front, the political front and the financial front.

    On the legal front the battle lines are drawn, we have our strategies, the enemy has theirs. we base our arguments on the single transaction theorem they base theirs in the fact that we allegedly stop making payments, We present facts as to how the procured documents, signatures and so called evidence via fraud, forgeries and deceit. There are other arguments that jointly with our clear victimization are pushing forward and slowly the trenches are being over run by the roper and smart application of foreclosure defense pro se litigants and smart attorneys.

    On the political side we need to start making sure our voices are heard in unison, Yes, we are all fighting our individual battles, however, we must realize that we all depend on each other for the success of our own survival, if we atomize our struggle, they will. We will be a bunch of uncoordinated trolls. However, if we continue sharing knowledge, experiences, victories and defeats we will in short term have a solid and insurmountable obstacle for the unethical lawyers that have sold out to the other side.

    We must remember to call and write daily to the white house, the congress, and all the state and local legislators to take notice that their inaction borders on complicity, collusion and corruption if not treason of the highest order. Our communities are being robbed blind of taxes, fees, etc. Our neighbors are being evicted and are being emotionally scarred. This is an election season, let us have our voices heard loud enough. TEA party move over, we do need stronger enforcement and regulation. We need stronger protections under the law, While we sit alone to fill out a loan application the other side has spent millions of dollars in designing the system that will make us go broke.
    If 68 million mortgages in danger of foreclosure are not a big number for those who have their money in secret bank account, then the politician who pretend to represent us do not deserve to be in congress regardless of which party the belong.

    The public opinion front, every time news come out about foreclosure defense wins we need to push the local media to report the news fairly and with proper perspective. We are not looking for loopholes we are looking for justice.

    We need to write opinion articles and send them to the news papers every week, every day. send the register mail return receipt requested. That way they will not be able to say their dogs ate the letters.

    Lets get into the news cycle. Protests in from to the steps of the court houses. Putting pressure on the courts and the foreclosure mills by publicizing their activities and lack of judgment will bring our effort to hit home.

    We should make it financially impossible for foreclosure mills to do their evil deed, They should all be confronting ethics complaints. Can you imagine the effect that is going to have that 1,000,000 American families that will be foreclosed this year file grievances and complaints with their local BAR.

    And the financial front, if we patronize the big banks that have stolen our wealth and have inflicted pain on all of us, then we are promoting the same people that are evicting our families and neighbors.

    Lat us chose local banks and promote their business over large national brands. Let us move our IRA’s, our CD’s, etc to those who will better appreciate our efforts. As we have all heard many times MONEY TALKS S*&^T walks.

    this are just thoughts and are not meant to be sermons.

    Let us get organized. Let us hit them hard.

  32. I di understand what unjust enrichment is, however, I never abandoned the property, the abandoned their lien and waived their rights by not showing up. It is not mu unjust enrichment it is their negligence and incompetence. do I have to pay for that as well?

    I am very saddened that the Jefferson’s back yard actually has turned its back to one of the founders of our nation by selling out to the lenders and foreclosure mills.

    If the loans were securitized, they do not care, if the lenders committed fraud, they do not care. If you speed over the limit they put you in jail. there is something definitely wrong with the picture

  33. Tuesday 21 September 2010

    This post is yet another example of how successes are bringing the big ones down. It started with one case that led to another, and another, success feeding on success. First MERS, now GMAC showing cracks.

    The way to win is in the courts, not the streets. All of this rhetoric about how evil the lenders are, while true, gets one in foreclosure nowhere. Use these numerous case examples and factual information in the courtroom against the “plaintiff,” and THAT will make a huge difference.

    Writing effective pleadings is made easier with all of the available examples of real court pleadings. Get into the system with one and put a halt on the proceedings against you.


  34. Can a federal Fudge, sorry, judge overrule a bankruptcy judge?
    meaning that after two years a pretender lender never showed up to file his claims on BK chapter seven, the BK was fully discharged, the loan were rescinded prior to the BK, both loans were placed on the schedules as unsecured debts, all borrowers claims were preserved in the BK filing until now.

    Can a Federal judge order you to pay something you no longer owe and that was fully discharged in BK court.

    What about the TILA statutes. Can a federal judge liberall interpret those statutes and if the pretender lender never showed up at your door steps for over three years and now they want the house after we owe them nothing.

    Is there something I am missing here?

    I will be looking at all their paper work in detail since they went bankrupt as well. I wonder who will sign the affidavits. But being this Virginia who knows. This is the worst state for consumers nation wide.

  35. I wonder what happened behind the scenes over at GMAC to cause this & will other servicers be following suit? And what about all these GMAC accounts in non-judicial states? Heck, they were my servicer until they sold it in 08 to the fraudsters I’m dealing with now.

  36. I need help here. Wikipedia states:

    “Fraud upon the court” has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to “embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication.” Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore’s Federal Practice, 2d ed., p. 512, ¶ 60.23

    In Bulloch v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated “Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. … It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function — thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted.”

    That last part has me wondering….wouldn’t the fact that judges have been steamrolling over pro se’s, and rubber stamping non-contested foreclosures be in itself fraud, by not performing judicial functions?

    And could GMAC have any other reason for NOT curtailing these same practices in non-judicial states, except for the fact that their odds of being contested are worth the risk of fraud? Why else would they continue with what they are confessing is fraud, and a major FU?

  37. ” I PREDICT ” Banks will be NATIONALIZED
    No way in Hell Homeowners will be made whole by this REGIME .
    Obambi’s Wall Street Buddies will not allow it . PERIOD.
    Plus, it would cost TRILLIONS that could have gone to us,but instead went to the Banksters + Wall Street not Main Street .
    The ROOF is blown off the FRAUD. It is Unstoppable now.
    Could have happened years ago if LSM . .Lame Stream Media had done their only JOB .
    BUT, don’t get too excited !

    Dear Leader will simply ” NATIONALIZE ” all BANKSTERS ! !
    We all will get the same SHAFT as Katrina residents and
    people in the GULF are getting now.
    Just ask your PREZ for a Lifetime supply of KY jelly .

  38. Deontos,

    “…well beyond the orbit of Mars.” LOL.

    I think I’ll ask for that in the prayer section of my next pleading.

  39. These are the children of Adam but not of the likeness of Eve. But of a likeness of another evil kind that are not a part of Eve. They are not mentioned in the bible but referenced if you read carefully. They have infiltrated the banks, Wall Street and the Government for many centuries. Let’s get these S.O.B.s !





  41. FROM: The Market Ticker –

    How To Resolve The Foreclosure Mess

    Ok, we now appear to have a pattern of conduct here where organizations trying to foreclose on homeowners are in fact submitting forged (that is, willfully known to be false) affidavits to courts around the nation.

    First we had GMAC, now it appears we have JPM/Chase.

    Everyone’s scrambling on this, of course.

    But as I pointed out, the real panic is likely still to come, because I have reason to believe (but cannot yet prove) that many if not most of the non-agency securitizations were defective at the outset.

    Worse, they’re now trying to cover it up. I am amassing more and more information on the mess, and what I’m seeing is increasingly looking like a pattern of conduct that may well go far beyond “innocent mistakes” or “accidents.”

    So let’s take a close look at this problem, and how we can fix it.

    There’s a real visceral outrage at letting people have a “free house.”

    But is it really a perversity of justice if that’s what happens in point of fact – or effect?

    Maybe not.

    Look, if I want to write you a signature loan for $200,000, I have every right to do it. If you don’t pay I’m screwed in such a case, because I have no security interest. If you go bankrupt I’m really hosed, as that debt will be discharged and I’ll probably get zero (or damn close to it.)

    So why should we care if banks and others stupidly wrote what amount to signature loans?

    We shouldn’t.

    This is how we should resolve this.

    For each and every loan that was not properly conveyed into the MBS trusts and cannot be proved to have been properly conveyed, the purchasers of such MBS have every right to sue the banks that created these MBS for fraud. They received a representation and warranty that the deeds and notes were taken in good recordable form. They were not. This is fraud – period – which entitles them to force the bank involved to either fix the problem (if it can) or buy back the MBS at par. They should immediately do so.

    For each and every loan that was not properly conveyed into the trust the net effect is that the mortgage (deed) and note have been split. This is a permanent deficiency. The buyer of the home therefore has title and he paid with an unsecured loan.

    The net effect here is that the buyers of said homes have a signature loan for the entire mortgage balance. If they do not pay, the holders of those notes (whoever can prove they actually are holding the note) can attempt to collect it. The buyer can in turn declare bankruptcy, discharging the note. In states where there is a 100% homestead exemption for a primary residence (Florida among others) this has the effect of the buyer getting a “free” house.

    Note that the house isn’t really “free”. Yes, it’s free of debt, but the buyer, in order to avoid being hounded for the debt, still has to go through bankruptcy. He still has his credit trashed, and justly so.

    But he doesn’t lose the house. It doesn’t fall into disrepair. It isn’t trashed on the way out, nor by vandals after the fact.

    This is justice folks. It is not “unjust enrichment.”

    The seller of the money had every opportunity and right to properly convey the notes and mortgages into the trusts. They had every right, duty and opportunity to keep the wet signatures, instead of intentionally destroying them. And they had every right and opportunity to only swear in court to that which was actually supported via personal knowledge in an affidavit.

    Instead, the sellers of the money made decisions – business decisions – that they would play fast and loose with the law and, it appears, that they would swear falsely in court.

    These decisions are theirs alone, and they alone MUST bear the consequence of having done so.

    First, there is plenty of emerging evidence that many of the notes and mortgages may have not been properly conveyed into the trusts. This is a fraud upon the MBS buyers, who were sold this paper with the representation and warranty that these notes and deeds were conveyed in good recordable form.

    Second, there is now emerging evidence that when these notes go bad the above deception comes to the fore. Unable to produce an actual note (because it was in many cases intentionally destroyed after not being taken in good recordable form!) we have “foreclosure mills” that are literally making things up and swearing to affidavits that they don’t have actual and personal knowledge of (because they can’t have knowledge of something that isn’t true!) In at least one case they got caught by the judge, who found that they committed fraud upon the court.

    So here’s the resolution folks, and this is what we, the people must demand from our lawmakers in Washington DC:

    Those who bought a house with a note that was not properly conveyed into the MBS trust, irrespective of how that defect took place, must be recognized as having bought the house with a signature loan – that is, an unsecured borrowing. The house is theirs. The holder of the note (if all the finger-pointers can figure out who it is) is welcome to try to collect the unsecured debt. The owner is also welcome to file bankruptcy, throwing off the debt and in some cases, depending on state law, keeping the house. This immediately resolves the foreclosure mess for those who bought with non-agency mortgages where the trusts and paper path are defective (which is a huge percentage of the bubble homes.)

    Those who bought MBS from institutions that improperly securitized this paper can and should sue the securitizers to well beyond the orbit of Mars. They are due full recovery for what was perpetrated upon them. This too is entirely within the law and requires nothing new.

    We must demand an expedited bankruptcy process that citizens can use to deal with this. Everyone should be able to use it once – walk in, leave your assets at the door (ex qualified retirement accounts and, where allowed, your primary residence) and walk out clean. It trashes your credit but it clears the market, it clears the debt overhand, it actually de-levers households and, as the forced deleveraging flows through the banks and business, delevers them too.

    Finally, if this bankrupts one or more large banking institutions, so be it. We now have “resolution authority”, let’s see it used. Sheila Bair, go to work damnit. We need a banking system, but not particular banks. More importantly, it is absolutely critical that those people who did this not get away with it and be able to keep the ill-gotten gains that they “earned” by violating both the law and the covenants they proffered to buyers of this paper.

    I recognize that this will provoke howls of protest from the banksters and probably others. So be it. It will also work, and while it will produce a short-term economic dislocation, especially among the banksters (not to mention a hell of a lot of litigation by MBS holders!) we will have resolved and cleaned up the housing bubble by doing this, instead of continuing to attempt to draw it out.

    It’s time folks – let’s get it done.

  42. Whoa – wait a minute…

    Alex Sanchez, the President of the Florida Bankers Association says in his comments to the Florida Supreme Court that the “original” mortgage notes were destroyed.

    See pdf here;

    But if the originals were destroyed Alex, then what the heck are these people bringing into to court with them as an “original” and why does the ink and paper appear to be brand new, like just off the shelf from Office Depot new?

    This explains quite a lot – thanks Alex!!!


  43. Whoa – wait a minute…

    Alex Sanchez, the President of the Florida Bankers Association says in his comments to the Florida Supreme Court that the “original” mortgage notes were destroyed.

    See pdf here;

    But if the originals were destroyed Alex, then what the heck are these people bringing into to court with them as an “original” and why does the ink and paper appear to be brand new, like just off the shelf from Office Depot new?

    This explains quite a lot – thanks Alex!!!

    *Need help in FL or CA from an Attorney that “gets it”
    click here;

  44. we live in a country of half truths and half measures.

    if the people from GMAC were honest, which they raise a great deal of doubts, they would stop and start doing things right.

    now the question is how do we force them to tell the world who gave them the orders to fake the system and who is particularly making the money.

    who are the real creditors? they resorted to fraud because they had no one to talk to.

    what is going to happen to all those rubber stampers working for the foreclosure mills?

    i guess this is the right time to file all those ethics complaints and have the Bar clean ip their sewers.

    what is the FTC and the other governmeng agencies going to do now that the EMPEROR IS REALLY NAKED and whag we see is very ugly indeed.

    what about states like Virginia where it is legal to steal homes, to fake signatures. to trump federal law because they are yhe banks and we are the one who broke the contract?

    what is going to happen with the home i lost to the thieves at gmac.

    many questions, the answers are forthcoming

    in virginia, maryland and dc the foreclosure fraud is so rampant and ingrained that if you are a lawyer fighting for home owners chances are you will get sactioned.

    thanks for these news, now we fight with greater commitment and determination.

  45. all of those retracted affidavits and documents by debt collectors. The state government might allow them to be retracted, but FDCPA rules indicate an action in federal court for every single one of those false affidavits that also include legal fees and damages. If they were known to be false…..
    GMAC will be declaring bankruptcy soon, real soon.

  46. I particularly like the part where they use the term;
    No Misstatements. Then they go on about how the info was true, but…. they can’t prove it or document it because?
    thanks for the can opener.

  47. Iowa Assistant Attorney General Patrick Madigan said the implications of Ally’s internal review and the GMAC employee’s deposition could be “enormous.”

    “It would call into question whether other servicers have engaged in similar practices,” Madigan said in a telephone interview. “It would be a major disruption to the foreclosure pipeline.

    Duh….ya think?


  48. The ramifications of this spreads across the entire country. But, why the halt only in judicial states??? Is it because they have free reign to use fraud and deception to steal our homes in non-judicial states as long as we don’t catch them?

    Thank God the web of their deceit is starting to unravel.

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: