COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary


see also buyback-game-in-full-swing-bofa-pays-2-6-billion-to-fannie-and-freddie

This is like a matching grant paid to a home invader. First they get money for just entering the yard, then they get everything they want hurting and scaring the residents, then the government gives them a matching grant for the money they made just getting into the yard (from “investors”) and now they are giving them a matching grant for the theft of personal property from the home invasion. The thought that maybe the victims should simply get their stuff back is not in the equation. The idea that taxpayers should fund these home invaders seems to make sense to enough people that it has become policy.



A direct bailout of Wall Street AGAIN is a politically impossible feat. It’s deemed necessary because the megabanks are about to go under, this time for good, if they are required to purchase back the mortgages and mortgage backed securities that investors were bilked out of by direct deception by the investment banks and the rating agencies operating in conjunction with mortgage brokers and appraisers. These “investors” include the Federal Government, including the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury.

The potential liability is quoted very low in the hundreds of billions just like the run-up to the last financial crisis. It’s really in the trillions because the first bailout was not applied to the real liabilities and is largely sitting on Wall Street but the Federal government either does not understand that or is in league with the banks. My guess is it is a little of both. What to do? The interest in savings the banks is clearly a higher priority than saving the citizens, so they are creating a scenario where the taxpayers take another hit for assumption of nearly all the liabilities on bad or non existent Fannie and Freddie guaranteed mortgages and mortgage backed securities.

So rather than let the banks take the hit for worthless mortgages, notes, receivables and mortgage backed security debt, they devised a scheme wherein Fannie and Freddie would settle with bank of America for pennies on the dollar, or even less depending upon which liabilities you are counting. Not only did this let BOA off the hook for hundreds of billions of dollars in liability the highly publicized settlement created an index of value for the claims of investors. So all the other BOA settlements with investors are going to look a lot like the Fannie and Freddie settlement — and so will all the other settlements by all the other banks with Freddie, Fannie and other “investors.”

That leaves Fannie and Freddie sitting with a deficiency on its balance sheet amounting to at least many hundreds of billions and probably trillions of dollars. Who pays for that? The Federal Government, as per law. Where do they get the money? From you and every other taxpayer. So once again the U.S. taxpayer is being secretly assessed approximately $3,000 to be paid out with interest over many years. And somehow that “policy” makes more sense — giving trillions to banks whom you already knew misused the last money you gave them instead forcing the hit on the banks and restoring homeowners to the position they were in before they were hoodwinked by Wall Street.

This is like a matching grant paid to a home invader. First they get money for just entering the yard, then they get everything they want hurting and scaring the residents, then the government gives them a matching grant for the money they made just getting into the yard (from “investors”) and now they are giving them a matching grant for the theft of personal property from the home invasion. The thought that maybe the victims should simply get their stuff back is not in the equation. The idea that taxpayers should fund these home invaders seems to make sense to enough people that it has become policy.

24 Responses

  1. Thank you all for your comments and suggestions on my brother’s “problem”, I appreciate it.

  2. I would call all those attorney’s on the list on this web site and explain it to them. It sounds like a great case. See if they will accept a payment on the back end or work something out with them.

    Maybe there is also class-action suits you could join.

    I had this same problem. No funds!! I had to file some pro per paperwork, but I’m no attorney and it takes all my time and I resent being in this predicament when I’ve tried so hard to work with these dumb banks and they refuse.

    See if you can get a loan from someone, perhaps?

  3. Dying Truth I agree with yo one one thing The Rabbis who preach hatred should be prosecuted and put in Jail. Any Hate monger of any religion should be prosecuted and put in jail.

  4. Charlie,

    Check out Brian Davies’ case filings. He’s located in CA and in BK proceedings, not to mention a real fighter. Those could tell you something that might help.

    Here’s the link >

  5. Charlie,

    All I can honestly say to you and your brother is welcome to the club (sorry that your here) and I’m sorry for your loss. The judge and BK trustee are most likely rejecting the servicers because they wanna make some $$$ off of the house selling it themselves, whether they’d let you or your brother benefit from this the chances are never good but you should always try (but don’t get your hopes up).

  6. Sorry……………I didnt mean BAILOUT. I meant to say SETTLEMENTS.

  7. IF YOUR LOAN WAS PART OF THE BAILOUT, or any of these BAILOUTS then you should be able to WIN your case against the Fake Lenders!

    For the MBS, go to the SEC and find out WHO OWNS YOUR LOAN! Was it ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY???


  8. TO ALL: NEED YOUR HELP TO CLARIFY: this happened in Ca. to my brother.
    so the pretender lender “foreclosed” (a home they didn’t own to begin with) on his home on June 2009, they file to evict him right away and he didn’t want to go through the pain of fighting it, so he moved out and left, however, the sale took place while his home was still protected under BK, which he had filed for the second time, the first time he dismissed it, the second was still ongoing, he called the trustee to let them know about the BK and to ask why his home had been sold, the trustee’s attorney told him that he was playing games and filing for BK for the second time just to delay the completion of the foreclosure process, so they continued with the whole thing, shortly thereafter the home was listed by a local RE agent, and sold within 45 days to a new owner obviously, on or about 12/20/10 my brother received a copy of a document called “suplemental declaration in support of motion for relief from automatic stay” filed in the CRO because apparently the court had on 07/10 “tentatively granted it, contingent upon Movant submitting a supplemental declaration explaining movant’s standing to file the motion. Specifically, the court requested explanation of the execution of two assignments of the Deed of trust for two entities by the same executing officer”, Officer whose name NOT SURPRISINGLY is :yup!! ROGER STOTTS!!!, I’ve seen this name in the list of ROBO SIGNERS posted in this and other websites.
    And just two days ago he received another document, that states the following:

    VERBATIM: QUOTE OPENS :”Movant has filed one previous motion for relief from the automatic stay on 6/2010, as doc # xx, for the real property commonly known as xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (:the property”), the motion was granted tentatively contigent upon Movant submitting a suplemental declaration explaining Movant’s standing to file the Motion. Specifically, the court requested an explanation of the execution of two assignments of the Deed of Trust for two entities by the same executing officer.

    on December XX 2010, the Court entered and Order denying the Motion without prejudice due to the failure of Movant to file a supplemental declaration explaining Movant’s standing and to lodge an order. Subsequently, one day later, on December XX 2010, Movant filed it’s supplemental declaration in support of motion for relief from the automatic stay as doc # xx (“supplemental declaration’). Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Evidence 201, Movant respectfully requests this court take judicial notice of said Supplemental Declaration.
    Based thereon, Movant submits that it has “standing” to bring the within motion for relief. Moreover, Movant qualifies as the note holder with standing to prosecute the instant Motion as Movant is currently in rightful possession of the Note, ENDORSED IN BLANK. (See Cal. Comm. Code 3205 (when endorsed in blank, an instrument becomes payable to bearer and may be negotiated by transfer of possession alone)).” END OF QUOTE

    Here they are talking about the transfer of a “note endorsed in blank”, but who endorsed the note? was that the rightful lender?

    What in the world does all this crap means? my brother doesn’t have an attorney at this point due to the lack of funds; what can he or should he do at this point?

    By the way, ROGER STOTTS’S (the signing “officer”) signature doesn’t match at all in those two documents, totally different:
    in one he signed as “Attorney In Fact for IndyMac” transfering to Deutsche

    in the other one he signs as: “Vice-president for MERS”


  9. Clowns to the left of me, bankstas to the right, here I am stuck in fraudclosure with you…

    Check out the game of “clue”. I think my loan is stuck somewhere in Cousin Barney’s GSE toilet.

  10. THE A MAN,

    I have found a Rabbi for you: Sephardi Chief Rabbi Ovadia Yosef. May God have mercy on you and your Jehovah (G-d).



    DyingTruth does not believe in any type of racial or religious superiority and does not agree with all of David Duke’s personal veiws.

  11. “but how can we get organized and really be heard?”

    One way is for everyone to answer this question they should ask themselves.

    “Do I like the way things are going and think the Government is doing what’s best for me, my family, all other Americans and our country?”

    If the answer is no, then maybe you should decide to change course by getting rid of them.

    Trust me, with more strongly like minded individuals who make the definitive choice to “eliminate” the problem instead of suffer, we’ll likely actually get somewhere.

    It has a blog, so we can get organized there.

  12. Ennis, I just checked out that investor website. Neil’s comments above would blow them out of the water. You have a very good idea.

    Even Borrowers with Good Payment History May Default

    Tuesday, January 4, 2011

    Homeowners with negative equity on non-agency loans are vulnerable to default even in cases where they have a history of making their payments on time, according to a new report from Amherst Securities Group.ASG believes that the market is “underestimating” the housing crisis “and potential losses to bondholders if further policy actions are not taken.”It estimates the non-agency market is $1.3 trillion in size with $414 billion of mortgages in the nonperforming category of 60-days or more late.
    The analytics/investment banking firm is pushing for servicers and the government to take decisive action on reducing the principal amount of underwater mortgages, allowing borrowers more financial breathing room.

    For non-agency loans with a 120% combined loan-to-value ratio and greater, ASG analysts discovered that almost 21% missed two mortgage payments over a recent 12-month period, compared to 5.2% of borrowers with loans where the home still has equity.

    ASG calls its new report a “Facebook” analysis of the non-agency MBS market, and notes that once a mortgage is nonperforming it has a low probability of eventual recovery.

    The firm said its findings argue “strongly for modifications with principal reduction.”
    Amherst analysts say too many housing analysts and investors think that underwater borrowers who are always current will continue to make their payments but these players do not recognize the importance of the borrower’s equity status on loan performance.

  14. Dying Truth I found a Pastor for you. It is time to repent. May G-d Have mercy on your soul.

    Pastor John Hagee


  15. I see…the settlement is just another form of a bank bailout. A wolf in sheep’s clothing. A settlement is lot easier and faster method for the corporations to avoid paying while making it harder for everyone else to unwind all their nonsense. Notice how the word “settlement” has that positive ring to it, as if the banks are stepping up to the plate and taking responsibility for a change. Yet, they will whine “all the way to the bank,” making it seem like they were forced into it. Boohoo. Poor banks..

    Just more money laundering is all I can say. In fact, it’s just plain bilking….Robotheft.

    The Senate does not have to vote on it…because the Republicans wouldn’t pass it this time (they want the WH in 2012)

    The public will think it’s being resolved because the media will continue it’s hype.

    The investors will have no choice (except to sue)

    Congress will move onto another issue.

    The courts will begin to think the worst is behind us and go back to their old ways.

    Homeowners/taxpayers are still left holding the bag.

    Banks buy more time….hoping things will blow over…while they plan their next heist.

  16. I think everybody has overlooked 1 little detail. The auctioneer or auction company have to be bonded with the state as required by business and profession code in order to conduct a auction. IF THEY WEREN’T BONDED THEY CANT SELL YOUR HOUSE. THE FORCLOSURE COMPANY’S AND AUCTIONEERS ARE NOT BONDED. IT’S ALSO A MISDAMEANER ON THEIR PART. YOU CAN STOP THE SALE BY HAVING THE AUCTIONEER CITIZENS ARRESTED.

    FREDDI MAC FANNIE MAE FDIC is behind all this. You think they dont know knew what was happening.

    all you geniuses just figured it out?


  18. What you guys just woke up?
    Only in America do the Taxpayers pay to have their homes foreclosed on.

    Too Big too fail is UnAmerican
    Too Big too Fail is Communism.

  19. This is disgusting. But where, oh, where is the outrage? I’m very concerned that venting on the Internet is diluting our well-justified anger and desire to fight this corruption.

    I think it is good to post, with attribution, good responses like Neil’s on other sites that mention this settlement, but how can we get organized and really be heard? Writing emails or sending letters to our representatives is working very little, if any. Even marches in the streets have become 30-second news clips, then forgotten. We need to CROWD into elected officials’ personal office space and demand to be HEARD, IN PERSON. We should schedule this type of visit across the nation at nearly the same time and date. People in financial hurt don’t have cash enough to travel to Washington for a march, but they might be able to go to their local offices.

  20. Ennis: I barely have time to do what I do. If you would be so kind as to posts the comments I would be appreciative as would the other members of the investment community.

  21. Yes and the media continues to report this story as the “repurchase of ‘soured’ mortgages,” implying that the mortgages were once AAA fresh goodness, but they have since “soured.” All these settlements are VOID because they are based on FRAUD.

    With apologies to William Black,
    Q What’s the best way to rob a government?
    A Own it.

  22. Neil,
    Why don’t you start posting your comments on This is a widely read blog in the investment community. The more people who understand what really is going on and how the banks and “our” government are screwing its citizens, the better.

  23. So basically Fannie Mae is using our money–I.e., the bailout–to fund its efforts to take our property. Ain’t that America for you and me, except they’re taking our little pink houses and using our own money to do it.

  24. The matching grant analogy is spot on. We should post this analysis as a response on every article we find online. Let’s get the word out everywhere.

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: