Bank of America Lawyers Demand Names in Mortgage-Bond Fight With Investors

Editor’s Note: We’d like to know the names of the investors too. Let’s see if we can dig up the actual wording of the request and follow along to see what the answers are.

Categorized | STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD

Bank of America Lawyers Demand Names in Mortgage-Bond Fight With Investors

Posted on07 November 2010. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Bank of America Lawyers Demand Names in Mortgage-Bond Fight With Investors

By Jody Shenn and David Mildenberg – Nov 5, 2010 4:21 PM ET

Bank of America Corp., responding to the attorney for a bondholder group that’s pushing the bank to repurchase soured home loans, demanded proof the lawyer is authorized to mount an attack on behalf of investors including units of BlackRock Inc. and MetLife Inc.

Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz’s Theodore N. Mirvis is among lawyers for Bank of America who said in a letter yesterday to Houston-based Gibbs & Bruns LLP’s Kathy Patrick that they want the names of individuals who approved signatures on a letter Patrick sent the Charlotte, North Carolina-based lender last month. They also want to know whether the board of directors for the bondholders Patrick said she represents approved signing of her correspondence.

“Troubling aspects of your letter strongly suggest that it was written for an improper purpose, or in furtherance of an ulterior agenda,” Bank of America’s attorneys wrote, saying they see no need to take action in response to Patrick’s letter.

Investors are stepping up efforts to recoup losses on mortgage bonds, which plummeted in value amid the worst slump in home prices since the 1930s. Bank of America Chief Executive Officer Brian T. Moynihan said Oct. 19 the lender will “defend our shareholders” by disputing any unjustified demands for mortgage buybacks.

Bank of America’s lawyers said they couldn’t determine “whether any investigation of your allegations is warranted” unless Patrick proves her clients own as much of the bonds created by the bank’s Countrywide Financial Corp. unit as they claim. Patrick also needs to show on a deal-by-deal basis how the bank is falling short of its responsibilities in servicing the home loans in the 115 securitizations at issue, they said.

Moynihan’s Surprise

Moynihan, 51, said yesterday that he was surprised by the Oct. 19 letter from investors, which included the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Moynihan’s company has resolved other debt disputes with the investors, and he has called BlackRock CEO Larry Fink to discuss the mortgage buyback issue, he said.

Patrick declined to comment.

Jerry Dubrowski, a spokesman for Bank of America, confirmed the letter’s authenticity and declined to comment further.

Lawyers Brian E. Pastuszenski of Goodwin Procter LLP and Marc T.G. Dworsky of Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP also signed the yesterday’s letter to Patrick, which was reported earlier today by the New York Times.

19 Responses

  1. Concerned,
    I beg to differ. Call iit a hunch or gut feeling, but a while back I remember reading about the sherriff’s dept. in my county having difficulties (but never disclosing what the problem was) with all the deputies coming to and signing some major retirement/pension agreement involving CalPERS (all this was not too long after the our previous sherriff was indicted for corruption). But for some reason it WAS a big deal, and they never said why, when you think about who throws you out of the house after you’ve been fraudclosed on and why everyone involved in the whole process just let it happen when the fraud was so obvious and you showed it to them (even the cops and the DA said they couldn’t do anything), and how their all connected, then combine all that with how banks are out there just pillaging America and wonder what makes them so confident that someone won’t stop them…..

  2. It is really interesting to see that BOA and the rest of the blood sucking leaches demand to see who is behind the clamis of these bond holders, and they are challenging their authority to enforce a cintract, but in ciurt or in our QWR’S tbey just do the opposite, they want to keep the whole cake for themselves.

    what a bunch of S.O.B.’S

  3. I also sent the same email to EVERY Ranking member on the banking and commerece commitee, including Chriatopher Dodd, hearing 10 am tomorrow. I’ll be watching and looking to see if the discuss any of the proof I sent them i’m also looking for the phrase, Too Big to Fail, Too Big to Proscute…. Then I will know that they are talking about me.

  4. Ms. Brewer,

    Thank you for contacting us with concerns about irregularities surrounding the documentation of your mortgage loan. The housing market has been reeling across the country right now due to concerns about these irregularities, as investors, servicers, and homeowners try to sort out the technical issues, and government agencies launch investigations into allegations of fraud.

    The Panel is currently working on the foreclosure documentation crisis, with a focus on its effect on TARP investments and initiatives, as the topic for our upcoming November report that is due to come out in just a few weeks. Because of the high degree of relevance of your comments to our work on that report, I will be sure to pass along your e-mail to staff members here, and we’ll be sure to take your thoughts into account in our ongoing oversight work.

    The Panel is not empowered to assist individuals directly or intervene in disputes with servicers or banks, so if you are looking for assistance in pursuing an investigation into this issue, I would encourage you to call either your state’s Attorney General (AGs in all 50 states have opened investigations into the irregularities as you may know), or to your Representatives in Congress.

    Thanks again for your e-mail, and please let me know if you have any further questions.

    ———————

    Adam A Berkland

    Staff Assistant / Director of Correspondence

    Congressional Oversight Panel

    Office: 202-224-9925

  5. DyingTruth,

    I believe the list of investors (bond owners) involved at this point are all institutional investors. For each such investor, there would be a designated signing authority. That is the ‘name’ they may be able to get here, not the actual full-blown list of groups and the individuals in the groups who participated in some retirement plan that bought some of the bonds.

    I really do not expect this to show any list that goes down to listing any person, unless they are a billionaire. Billionaires tend to have companies or trusts listed instead of their name.

  6. I’ve just read Mark Taibi’s excellent Rolling Stone Article, soon to hit the shelves. It’s incredibly sad that such criminal behavior is allowed to continue.

    Anyone know of any class action lawsuits against the banks in Florida?

    Anyone hear of anyone winning reconveyance of title by taking the bank to court to prove it possesses title?

    Please email me at pamlinc@msn.com

  7. ANONYMOUS,
    This is one of the defining moments I’ve been talking about. If such a list is produced it will be used to expose judges, sheriffs and other public officials/employees with the desired intention of the citizenry turning (possibly violently) against them. But it’s too early for that to occur, the ‘investors’ and the banks will go back and forth for a while with every action taken by the ‘investors’ seeking whatever recourse and trying to avoid any and all public attention, being counteracted by the banks using their PR resources to gradually but effectively bringing out the skeletons in the ‘investors” closet for all to see thereby damaging them badly and implicating their involvement in all the fraud. But the banks will not play all their cards at once, they’ll be smart and play them 1 by 1 while saving the most damning ones for the end game when all the judges, sheriffs and other public officials/employees (‘investors’) either go all out as plaintiffs named in a class action or try to make peace with us and seek our support and forgiveness.

    Am I really the only one who recognizes the horrible conflict of interests here and sees how this was all part of the bankikes plan to get the government to go along with selling the American People into slavery and then using that fact to get rid of all those government employees with misplaced loyalties and eventual disapointing expectations to get a bite out of that carrot (pension investments) used to bait them into betraying their countrymen?

    I know that judges know exactly what I’m talking about (except for maybe not the last part…. yet), but doesn’t anyone see longtime moral to this story.
    THERE’S NO HONOR AMOUNG THEIVES.

    Man, where’s Soliman…. he’d probably know what I’m talking about

  8. FRCP 17 (a) Ratification of Commencement

    BoA Bar-fly is attempting to see if the bond holder investor Bar-fly has agency to re-present his clients. That is my understanding of what this is about.

  9. Lucy

    Thanks for the great post!!!

    By the way, heard Friday that Bank of America – which has huge investment in and affiliation with Blackrock – wants to pull out. Congress questioned Bank of America about Blackrock during TARP hearings. Nothing came of it.

    For those that are interested – check out 2007 article about Third Point hedge fund – distressed debt buyers – and subprime mortgages
    http://tickerforum.org/akcs-www?post=106659

    Many many many more like this – including Blackrock. – manager for US Government’s Maiden Lane
    See 2008 article on Blackrock

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aOmly3NUtYh4

    Point is this – these distressed debt hedge funds (debt buyers) have proprietary relationships with hedge fund and distressed debt buyers. This was also an issue during TARP hearing. Nothing came of it.

    The SPVs only questionably held securities because they were not properly conveyed. The trust DID NOT hold derivatives – derivatives are not securities and are only contracts derived from securities. Therefore, the derivative holders have their issue with the security underwriters that manufactured the derived contracts – – and the trustee to trust cannot foreclose on behalf of unnamed derivative contract holders – that are not part of the trust.

    This is a high court issue – and nearly every court across America has prevented path to highest court – by either denying discovery, summary judgment, or toss out on technicalities.

    This is why the assignments/endorsements/affidavits are all bogus – they are manufactured. But, equally important – the derivative contracts are never disclosed as part of the chain. The derivative contract holders ACCOUNT for foreclosure proceeds – not income pass-through security holders.

    Every foreclosure case should be tossed out of court with restitution provided for those cases that have already proceeded.

  10. Change their name to Bank of Amerifraud

  11. Karen Pooley rocks! I am suing their ass too! Why not join us?

  12. What they what transparency??? Kidding right, now how does that feel???Close them up.

  13. The bank should be forced to change it’s name.

    Take America out ! Name it Bank of Thieves.

  14. I have at least 4 versions of Qualified Written Request that have been sent over the last 2 years almost (at least 10 times).

    Bank of America’s answers

    Go F#$@#@ck yourself.

  15. Take head everyone fighting the pretender lenders,. challenge everything! Just like BOA did, challenge the others side to produce the evidence they represent the bank who is trying to foreclose..

  16. http://foreclosureblues.wordpress.com/2010/11/14/abc-news-banks-face-twin-lawmaker-hearings-and-wrath-over-foreclosures/

    ABC NEWS…Banks Face Twin Lawmaker Hearings and Wrath Over Foreclosures
    Posted on November 14, 2010 by Foreclosureblues
    WASHINGTON/CHARLOTTE, North Carolina (Reuters) –
    Banks under fire over their foreclosure practices face
    twin hearings in Congress this week, at which they
    will come under renewed pressure to find ways to
    keep borrowers in their homes.

    The hearings on Tuesday and Thursday will include
    the first appearances by executives from major
    lenders like Bank of America and
    JPMorgan Chase since the furor over
    sloppy foreclosure paperwork erupted in September.

    Banks are accused of having used “robo-signers” to
    sign hundreds of foreclosure documents a day, a
    fiasco that has reignited public anger with banks that
    received billions of dollars in taxpayer aid during the
    financial crisis.

    Lenders will be pressed on whether the paperwork
    problems are further evidence that modifying loans is
    a better alternative to eviction.

    “Foreclosure should be the last option and we need to
    examine barriers to mortgage modifications,”
    Democratic Senator Tim Johnson, expected to lead the
    Banking Committee next year, said in an emailed
    response to Reuters.

    Other witnesses at Tuesday’s Senate Banking
    Committee hearing include Iowa Attorney General
    Tom Miller, who is leading a 50-state probe of
    foreclosure practices.

    Miller’s testimony will be closely watched. A
    settlement with lenders could include fines or
    commitments to loan modifications.

    Bank of America and JPMorgan were among banks that
    temporarily suspended foreclosures pending internal
    reviews of their practices, but have since begun to
    resume sales of foreclosed properties.

    Some lawmakers and consumer activists called in
    October for all lenders to institute a national
    moratorium on foreclosures, but they failed to gain
    traction due to fears it would further depress home
    sales and crimp economic growth.

    Real estate data company RealtyTrac said the
    temporary suspensions by banks led to a 9 percent
    drop in U.S. foreclosures in October from the month
    prior.

    Republican Representative Spencer Bachus, the front-
    runner to be chairman of the House Financial Services
    Committee next year, said the paperwork problems
    are “disturbing,” but singled out federal regulators for
    criticism.

    “It is disappointing that the regulators didn’t catch
    this before the media since most of the problems in
    the contested foreclosure proceedings occurred at
    the nation’s largest banks,” Bachus told Reuters in an
    email.

    The House panel’s foreclosure hearing is set for
    Thursday.

    * Share this:

  17. These high-up bankers like Moynihan belong with Mr. Madoff for their own good, and the good of our country!

  18. Dear Mr. Moynihan,
    What we, the borrowers would like to know is if BOA have any shares that are left to hold. We demand a full accounting of our loans including opening up the vault to see if these investors were given the right to receive those streams of funds……

    So, if you continue to stall, so will we.

    Sincerely,
    One homeowner who’s suing your ASS

  19. Tip of the day to Moynihan. You are better off going to jail than having the investors deal with you. Madoff is still alive.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: