BANK OF AMERICA ASSIGNS SAME NOTE TWICE AND GETS PAID TWICE!

submitted by reader

BANK OF AMERICA ASSIGNS SAME NOTE TWICE AND GETS PAID TWICE!

(To prevent further retribution to our family, I post this information under a pseudonym.)

1) In 2001, I closed on a refinancing loan, with XXXX Mortgage Company “A” (“MCA”).
2) “MCA” immediately thereafter assigned the loan to Bank of America (“BOA”).
3) According to the “journey” of the Note as indicated in the endorsement stamps (the Note was just produced last week, yes last week) and a recorded assignment – “BOA” assigned the NOTE to Residential Funding at some point within the immediate 12 week period following the “MCA” assignment to “BOA”.
4) At the time of the assignment “BOA” was paid by Residential Funding.
5) Residential Funding then assigned the NOTE to Bankers Trust Company, as Trustee, also at some point within the 12 weeks immediately following the “MCA” assignment to “BOA”.
6) Residential Funding was paid by Bankers Trust Company, as Trustee
7) Additionally during the same 12 week time frame, “BOA” also assigned the same aforementioned NOTE to Bankers Trust Company, as Trustee.
8) “BOA” at the time of that assignment, was also paid by Bankers Trust Company, as Trustee for the same NOTE.
9) Four years later, “BOA” returned a payment to me as “Misapplied Funds”.
10) I then received correspondence from Litton Loan Servicing indicating the servicing of the loan had been transferred from “BOA” to Litton Loan Servicing.
11) Litton Loan stated they were servicing the loan for “GMAC- RFC”.
12) I had never heard of either Litton or GMAC-RFC.
13) Two months after “Litton Loan” becoming involved, I received notice our home was going to be foreclosed by “Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas”.

[Confused does not begin to state my concern as to whether our payments were being properly applied.]

14) I was fortunate to obtain a reinstatement of loan after payment of over $28,000 to the law firm representing “Deutsche”.
15) The attempts to obtain clarification were not successful, and the foreclosure advertisements continued.
16) In order to protect our home, I was forced to file a Chapter 13 “pro se”.
17) The case came to be converted to a Chapter 7.
18) Our family came to be evicted (despite our request to pay the first mortgage, which was denied) from our home by a real estate agent reportedly acting with the same power as vested in the Chapter 7 Trustee. The Chapter 7 Trustee sent me an email stating, “A failure to cooperate with her is the equivalent of a failure to cooperate with me.”

Any party interested in reviewing partially redacted copies of the Note and BOA assignment showing the transfers to confirm this story or any other comments or suggestions can contact the writer at alvinessel@gmail.com.

22 Responses

  1. ANONYMOUS…

    Thank you for your observation….The Trustee has already admitted a “gap” exists….the case has been open for almost 4.5 years…and he says he does not know who the lender is…but Litton told them they knew and they paid him $100,000 from the sales proceeds of the house for the stipulation. Trustee has admitted he let the statute of limitations to contest any of the liens over two years ago…but still agrees to take the $100,000 and says I have no standing to object.

  2. Alvin Essell

    That is because Bankruptcy trustee is buying that the stated creditor is accurate — which is false. You have a right to know your CURRENT creditor and this must be divulged in BK— and, past creditor is irrelevant (as some like to falsely recognize).. BK trustee is, like many judges, being too “trusting” — to put it mildly.

  3. SPINFALL….you state….

    “OK……You filed BK-13, then Converted to BK-7. Was there any reason an Objection & Adversarial proceeding to the Proof of Claim…”

    The answer is NO.

    Chapter 7 Trustee negotiated settlement with “pretender lender” and “pretender lender” agreed to pay him $100,000 for stipulating they were the correct lender.

    Go Figure….

  4. SWARM, my EX-99 showed a value of “.35”. I’m thinking 35%. But, 35% of what? 35% of the total payback with interest (notional value)? 35% of the principal? I think it’s the face value of the principal.

  5. Hey Neil, can you clear up whether PMI covers 20% the value of the home, 100% value of the home, 20% value of the mortgage, or 100% value of the mortgage?

    There was an attorney that just testified on Capitol hill that PMI covers 100% value of the mortgage. Do you think that is accurate?

  6. Sipinfall….Good points…The named party on the proof of claim is not the party who began the foreclosure proceedings and tried to collect the full amount of the mortgage. The Chapter 7 bk. trustee says he does not care who holds the first mortgage…Litton Loan say they are the servicer and they know who the holder of the loan is….and that is all he needs to know is Litton said they knew….Trustee said he need go no further and investigate the issue

  7. ANONYMOUS….good points, but when the bankruptcy Trustee asserts you have no standing and therefore no right to the the documents….what then?

  8. I think he stopped paying at one point because he was concerned the payments were not going to the right party.

  9. OK.

    You filed BK-13, then Converted to BK-7. Was there any reason an Objection & Adversarial proceeding to the Proof of Claim for the Fraud Lender was not filed when Fraudster Lender filed for Lift of Stay?

    And the $28 grand to Reinstate WHAT? And IF there was a 2nd Mortgage, it was probably deemed UNSECURED, and could have been “back doored” charged-off ( under 7).

    FOLKS! The whole Idea of BK is to NAIL the Mtg PROOF OF CLAIM as a FRAUDSTER! This strategy is easier to deal with in BK court vs Circuit Court.

  10. Swarm the banks: Insurance companies, and the federal government are paying plus the homeowner. Also, the securitized instruments were created before the loans and sold to some poor sh$%^& investor and more than one time. http://www.challengingforeclosure.com Sirak@challengingforeclosure.com

  11. The numbers have to come from somewhere.

  12. ANON, I don’t get it. It seems to me the loan is being reported as “paid as agreed”, if you will, to SOMEONE. Like you said, trustee ledgers are the key. Thanks, sir.

  13. Once the payments stop, the problems usually start.

    However, its the hidden shenanigans that can’t be swept under the rug either, the mortgage notes passing through so many hands, the parallel foreclosure victimizations of possibly a million homeowners, the unfair predatory loans that may have led to a foreclosure years later, Change in Terms to the original mortgage note as it passed hands and became securitized, that the homeowner never agreed to….

  14. Alvin Essell,

    You write — “I suspected we might have been paying the wrong lender for over 4 years based upon the language in documents” —– I suspect you are right and there are many others like you!!!

    Roger Rinaldi,

    It is just servicer communication to you — means nothing — I have seen communications that say “thank you for being a valued customer” — to a borrower in default. Am also seeing notices (offering bogus mods) sent to borrowers — when the borrower has an attorney and case is in litigation.

    You need the trustee ledger — that shows what has been remitted by the servicer to the trustee — on your behalf.

  15. SWARM THE BANKS…

    The $28,000 was paid to reinstate the loan…I suspected we might have been paying the wrong lender for over 4 years based upon the language in documents sent me by Litton Loan. Witholding payment, was in part strategic, ….(I do not recommend this course of action to anyone, the journey is Hell….I have been in real estate for almost 35 years…my gut told me there was a problem) Based upon the information, only now known, the transactions between, unknown parties lacked transparency, and were not of public record.

  16. Neva, but who is doing the paying to more than one entity? If the homeowner gets one bill per month, it’s not them.

    It would have to tie in to their securitization deals, no?

  17. Follow the money, this is all about fruad, and greed
    i do not believe in justice or the little guy would be winning, they make the laws and run most of the courts today.

  18. Why does the title of the post say nothing about Litton Loan, when it’s obvious they were the main cause of this person’s problems?

  19. Passing the note over and over is called “getting paid more than once”. That is part of the scam. I agree with Jan van Eck–sue the bastards. What an unbelievable scam. Unfortunately, this is not just one person who has been scammed this way–it is literally millions. You have to fight! http://www.challengingforeclosure.com Sirak@challengingforeclosure.com

  20. ANONYMOUS, I have a question for you. They defaulted my loan in Jan 07, started MI claims in Nov 06, but every six months I get the “Notice of intent to change rate”. It shows the payments as current, it shows the note balance, and shows the new rate (4.5%). Is this the second set of books that evidence the “trustee ledgers”? That the note is current, performing, and being paid on is a lie in and of itself. Or, is it? Or, the DEFAULT is the lie.
    What evidence does this provide? I am hunting a Superior Court judge to rule against my “county court” (kangaroo) judge. Of course, the statement contradicts the evidence of indebtedness filed with the court.

  21. So this is where you file the $50,000,000 damages action against the parties involved. You take these scammers to the Jury and you let the jury wreak its wrath on their heads. Since you have no down-side risk at this point, and all the risk is on the others, you will end up quite predictably with a nice chunk of coin. Much more that the house was ever worth.

  22. Its always difficult to follow these stories because something is missing. Otherwise, what was the purpose of paying 28,000 dollars?

    However, why is the note being passed around like a bag of chips at a campfire? There had to be something scammy about the practice of passing the note over and over.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: