A LITTLE LARCENY NOW AND THEN

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

PHANTOM LOAN CLOSINGS CONTINUE TO SURFACE

PROBABLY USED TO FAKE “OVER-COLLATERALIZATION” TO INVESTORS

OK, this is an unusual but not unique situation that ought to be thought through in any loan analysis. It includes the possibility that there could be defects in prior or unknown closings might have a significant impact on the results or report that comes out of a COMBO Analysis, forensic analysis or even a review.  First let me remind you that loan originators did some loans with dogs (real dogs, the ones that bark, and some of which were even dead) so this story is by no means the most extreme you’ll hear.CASE IN POINT:


There were TWO closings — one which was real and one that never happened.

The one that was real was a first and second mortgage in December of 2006. He signed the papers and those were securitized (I assume) with the usual progress of events. We EXCLUDED THAT CLOSING BECAUSE OF THE ASSUMPTION THAT THOSE MORTGAGES WERE SATISFIED OR RECONVEYED. THEY WERE NOT. So we need to be careful about the assumptions we make and what is in the actual title record and whether a supposed satisfaction is real.

The one that never happened and where he signed no papers was in July, 2007. THAT was also securitized. And THAT is the one being used for foreclosure. The customer is saying that the paperwork they have that purportedly has his signature on it does not contain a signature that was put there by him. He is saying that is a forgery and fabrication and that the closing was a sham that he knows nothing about.

Two things are possible: he is telling the truth or he is lying and trying to develop a storyline that might work. Or I guess he could be confused but he sure didn’t sound confused to me. Since he wanted to get a document examiner I would assume he wasn’t lying either. That leaves our good friends in the banking industry who literally used robotic signatures that were created from real signatures of his or they did it the old fashioned way of simply cut and paste of the signature with a color printer.  So we want to be especially alert to anything on the copies we get that indicates that there was a cut and paste or any other evidence of fabrication and forgery. The client knows we are not certified document examiners, but if there is anything that jumps out at you, then mention it and he will take it from there.

Nobody knows the number of completely non-existent loan closings that were used in securitization reports to investors, but I have heard estimates as low as 3% and as high as 15%. Certainly the story I reported last week about the appellate Judges reporting on their own during oral argument on appeal that they have now seen many cases of more than one “bank” on the same docket claiming to have the original note from the same borrower on the same house on the same “closing,.” each claiming to have a record of the homeowner’s payments and when the homeowner went into default.

Clearly at least one of them had no closing and no payment history with the borrower. There are also cases (especially with Wells Fargo) where there never was any closing, the house was owned free and clear, there was no application for loan, no loan closing and nothing signed by the homeowner nor any knowledge by the homeowner that Wells Fargo had recorded a Deed of Trust WITH HIS SIGNATURE ON IT and then foreclosed on the property and even sold it. Thus it behooves us to be on the look out for these situations even though we do not and cannot sell our services as forensic document examination.

16 Responses

  1. David C Breidenbach,

    Even if they made the Mortgage Schedule disclosure — they were never updated — antiquated.

  2. The inclusion of “air loans” or other false loans in trusts would be made less easy, if ANYBODY looked at the loan schedules that were described in the securitization dacuments and supposedly filed as part of the securitization filings. The failure to make those schedule filings made it virtually impossible for anyone to “discover” that MERS’ recordations might have been duplicated. Come to think of it, how is it possible that the typical transfers to MERS of a security interest in each and every securitized loan would not cause an alarm bell at MERS? Would not MERS “know” that more than one mortgage was filed on the same property –that is if MERS actually performed the service it is advertised as meeting. MERS justifies its existence as a recordation scheme to replace County offices because of its supposed ability to protect the lender from duplicative recordings.

  3. A Lot of Jewsury More or Less

  4. NO PRIVITY IS REQUIRED.

    A Deceptive act does not have to occur simultaneous with the transaction in question.

    Therefore I believe your single most important evidentiary is a reconstruction of the general ledger. The Bad Bank and Good bank may mean nothing to you. If so…you have lost. Here is WHY your single most important evidentiary is a reconstruction of the general ledger leading you to detailing the bad bank concept. It is the alleged fraud they are using against the public

    What they don’t know YOU must explain to the court as to how and why!

    Citation – Ocwen attempts to assert that it is not responsible for Aames’ actions. However, any privity requirement for claims has long been abolished. As the Supreme Court noted in Flenniken: “Privity be-tween the plaintiff and defendant is not a consideration in deciding the Plaintiff’s status as a consumer under the DTPA.” See Flenniken at 707. Further, the deceptive act does not have to occur simultaneous with the transaction [**23] in question. Id.

    Hundreds upon thousands of complaints are being BLOW OUT! For baseless pleading that complain rhetorical arguments? Consider the following:

    Debtor is never informed of servicers participation in this matter, that
    Servicer made a business practice of losing payments, [**27]
    Servicer fails to credit payments, credit them late,
    Servicer misrepresents helping a customer while proceeding with foreclosure,
    Fraud against the bankruptcy court,
    Servicer would not honor the representations about crediting payments.
    Lender and servicers with other (DOES) orchestrate a confusing tangle of material misrepresentations supporting the Servicing agents acted unconscionably.

    Read a judge’s comments in affirming the decisions in the borrowers favor. See Weiler v. United Sav-ings Asso. of Texas, FSB, 887 S.W.2d 155 (Tex. App.–Texarkana 1994, writ den.).

    . . . . . (RR. 3, p. 144).The evidence factually supports the fact that Ms. Davis was not informed of Ocwen’s participation in this matter, that Ocwen had a business practice of losing payments, [**27] failing to credit payments, credit them late, lying about helping a customer while proceeding with fore-closure, or that once in bankruptcy court, Ocwen would not live up to the representations about credit-ing pay-ments. Had Ms. Davis been informed of this, Ms. Davis would never have become entangled with Ocwen, Deutsche or Aames. The same evidence heard by the jury factually supports the jury’s finding that Ocwen acted unconscionably. See Weiler v. United Savings Asso. of Texas, FSB, 887 S.W.2d 155 (Tex. App.–Texarkana 1994, writ den.).

    Plagiarizing another pleading or decision will not get you the cigar counsel. Pro se’s your pleadings do not get as much as a flinch upon reading it. No substance. What you’re doing here is high stakes and you cannot fail in your ARGUMENT S. No substance and heavy on the hearsay . . MEANING NO ORGINAL ARGUMENTS!

    Why has this turned into a race to discover electricity? I’m not an inventor, just a 20 year veteran who testifies before the courts according to rules for an expert. “To use all five senses to recite having expe-rienced the fraud.” Let’s talk…about ’96, ’99 collapse, ’02 AARP vs. Lehman Bros. settlement, ENRON, Citi buys Associates (prior Ford Motor credit subsidiary) then settles with government for $300 mil-lion. CitiGroup was part of the Associates a deal long time prior to acquisition. Does this sound familiar with regard to BofA and Countrywide?

    Brilliant people, especially attorneys who excel at other careers are humbled by the vast maze and cor-ridors leading you to nowhere this business will lead you in your analysis. So who is it you’re selling….? Litigators argue court procedures and court procedure’s is a losing chess game. Accounting procedures is not a losing game but your only hope. So stop asking for the lost Note!

    NO! Read the Judges comment’s again and again. What the justice recites is what happened to you?
    Correct? SO WHAT? The glove don’t fit you must acquit is not going to work. Hearsay based on how you’re treated by a servicer is not enough.

    Read the analysts comment on Wall Street and IASB in Europe . . . No case law, I’m sorry but No case law. No case law. Are you really ready to refute these brilliant people? If you cannot understand my testimony how will you compete with them? The testimony must destroy the analyst’s defense and crush their basis in arguments that fail for one especially poignant cause of action MISSING FROM EVERY PLEADING I READ…

    Cite the obvious claims for violations of GAAP related to Contribution, qualifying capitalization struc-ture, subrogation , seizure and forfeiture rights of the government that fail, capitation, variable versus fixed charges and isolated write-down’s, avoidance of transparency in the recovery, and dual consider-ation in a securities offering.

    Supporting Case law? Not unless you can break down ENRON, Nigerian Energy platform’s sold by En-ron, Tyco, World Com and Adelphia. Even then the feds had to eventually settle on convicting the Adelphia family on an illegal vacation and Tyco on transporting a Painting across state line! Ebers de-fense was “I’m stupid… MBA or not….I’m stupid” The SEC has to resort to a jury trial to believe they can succeed at trial against BofA. AND YOU ARE GOING TO BRING A FRAUD CLAIM AGAINST WHOM?

    What’s your budgetary consideration for jury trial?

    M.Soliman
    expert.witness@live.com

  5. I am still wanting to know if anyone has used a Qualified written request from the lawyers work book.? Appreciate any help

    vicosmic@hotmail.com

  6. The lawyer who did my closing did three years in the federal pen for wire fraud connected to flipping houses with double closings (two banks). I am sure that did not happen on just my loan. Burmese8@yahoo.com.

  7. Continued from below:

    Here is one example of what I mean about specific press coverage:

    School teachers in one county went on strike and walked out of the school due to layoffs and pay cuts. This would be a prime opportunity for a story all about MERS and the bank’s avoidance of the money they have stolen from that particular community and what the impact was to schools and teachers in those districts. Take every opportunity to get these stories out in every state in every county and you will get the general population enraged over the deceit, dishonesty and theft because it is applicable to their everyday lives. It takes the focus off “deadbeats”, and back on the criminal activities of the banks that have an impact on people’s lives and that of their children. These are the people who will then also get involved with their representatives to go after the banks. We need press coverage everywhere that more specifically draws the attention of the general public.

  8. Exposure, Exposure, Exposure. There is not enough press coverage getting the facts out to the general population. Most coverage was about all the “deadbeats” trying to get a free house. Once this myth was implanted in the “everyday” people’s minds, it became very hard to undo the damage and the perception. Simply put, it was a great marketing campaign by those hiding the truth.

    There needs to be as much effort and focus in the way of well planned publicity campaigns about what the banks have done and are continuing to do as the efforts put forth by so many here on this blog.

    The general public, whether or not they have any personal issues with their mortgages, need to feel the rage that we all are experiencing. However, they are not going to be interested in our personal issues. They need to know the facts that will or could effect them personally. Then they will start placing pressure on their state representatives which is what we all want..

    There are many experts and legal professionals who are giving it their all in an effort to help those who have been screwed by the lenders. I, however, in my teeny tiny humble opinion, thinks we need very good campaign press managers, who are well versed in the orchestration of press coverage campaigns. The focus of the campaign must be to undo the public perception of the “deadbeat” homeowner. The focus needs to be removed, somewhat, from the individual homeowner in trouble to how the deceit and fraud on the part of banks has hurt individuals and the country in general. It need to be portrayed in the most simplist way in an effort that most people will “get it”. The more publicity the more pressure on politicians and the courts…the better the results for us!

  9. Has anyone sent in the QUALIFIED WRITTEN REQUEST, COMPLAINT, DISPUTE OF DEBT AND VALIDATION OF DEBT LETTER, TILA REQUEST, to there lender. What kind of result can I expect ? We are dealing with Wells Fargo and Wachovia. They have played the same game about modifying our loan.

  10. I forgot. Here is a logic/math/puzzle question.
    28 homes were sold in 91387 in July 2007. $585 was the median, so 14 above, and 14 below.
    My brand new homes “value” was $765. as per the appraisal. Only 6 NEW homes sold in July 2007 in 91387 above $585. Of those six, four were “estates over $900, about.
    YET, at least FOUR trusts show a loan on a home with this value of $765 or above and below $850
    I “bought” the only home in this value range, but FOUR trusts show loans? Jesus multipled fish, and maybe he is now helping out the trusts?

  11. Ah, yes, multiple loans. I sent Mr. Bob G. my copies of HAMP solicitations that are dated 3 days apart (lock date/close date), with 2 different MBS numbers in the address block. He didn’t know what to make of it. I think they speak for themselves.

    Went to the county recorder’s office today to check the land title records. As expected, Wells Fargo assigned the mortgage to HSBC Bank, April 5, 2010. The foreclosure was filed Feb 2, 2009 (in the name of HSBC Bank, as Trustee). The loan was closed (the 2nd time, when I was there) on June 10, 2005. The closing date of the trust was Sept 30, 2005.

    Just one problem: the only place this loan appears in the EX-99 of a Wells Fargo 1999 Trust.

    Dropped an e-mail to my State AG, asking her if this was enough fraud for her to take a position.

    I think her position is the one where she sits on her hands.

    Larceny? Yes, grand larceny!

  12. Neil, my friend,
    I do not get it? This is almost exactly like my scenario, of which I know you are aware. I have hired one Forgery expert, who substantiated my claim, though it was so obvious it was a forgery, and I have retained Jim Blanco, (an FBI qualified forensic document examiner)-just retained mind you, not even gotten anything from him yet. $1500 just to be on standby.
    The defendants (part of the slime bag at least) by making a demurrer “admit all facts are true” (the fine print is all “well-pled” facts) but the handwriting expert, the FBI statements, yes, I do think this will stand up to a test of being well-pled and not conclusory.
    My point is that “this scenario” is so on all fours with my case, is there more to the dastardly scheme then I am aware? We were there in 2006, and so I am now wondering?
    I have talked to/begged over four attorneys to come on board. They have declined. They say “I already won, and the jury won’t award me more.” I disagree.
    Sure, the sale was canceled, but what assurance is this to me? They might say … who knows what? The house is not enough! I want punitive damages, and pain and suffering.
    Monday, I have my hearing on MY demurrer to the ANSWER of First American.
    They opposed, yet they have not served me with the papers, and no doubt will ask the judge to rule tomorrow that ”It’s okay to fling the papers on the sidewalk in front of my door, where we have 75 mile per hour winds and cats practically fly down the street weekly.”
    Never mind that I have offered to schedule service, and that I called them and told them I had not gotten anything. “Oh, we left it on the sidewalk, propped against your door, but we will mail you a copy for your records.” Of which they have not. I hired a court reporter, and then called to let the clerk know, and was told I was “not allowed to bring private reporters, but must use the courts. ” Fine, I don’t care what reporter is used, I just want a reporter! The judge keeps saying I need an attorney, and yes I did/ do want one, but if I am not ALLOWED to sue someone for this, then why do I need an attorney?

  13. Gosh, all of the above is simply horrible.

    We are in southern California.

    I want to bring to light that when comparing my UD complaint with a friend’s UD complaint…same agent for Wells Fargo…there is obvious evidence of robotic signatures in both our cases, and the same person signing for LPS and for Ndex, and other things on the NOD.

    What type of action would this be and how would we pursue it? Would it be against the agent for Wells Fargo and also Wells Fargo?
    Why can’t we use this evidence in a UD case?

    I hear repeatedly that you can’t win a UD. My question is, if the agent for Wells Fargo is using robotic signatures to bring a UD action, isn’t that fraud and why can’t the UD judge throw the case out if it were brought to his/her attention?

    Why would we have to file a separate lawsuit in another court? (while they go about evicting us)

    I mean, how can the plaintiff Wells Fargo or its agents evict someone based on bogus UD paperwork (which is also a continuation of their bogus foreclosure paperwork)?

    We were both foreclosed on by Wachovia (old World Savings’ loans) and Wells Fargo took over. I’ll bet you anything there are numerous instances of this identical fraud if you have the same WF agent.

    Any suggestions how to proceed? Thanks.

    email me at: thelariat@att.net

  14. HUFFINGTON POST 2/24/2011

    Washington– Flanked by a crowd of fellow protesters, New York City Councilman Jumaane Williams marched into a Park Avenue Chase bank Wednesday morning to take out his money and voice his disapproval of the bank’s dismal record of helping homeowners avoid foreclosure.

    After denouncing the bank to a cheering crowd and calling its executives “bloodsuckers” for accepting bailout money and refusing to help the suffering homeowners they “preyed on,” Williams was stopped by security guards at the door and told the branch was closed. The mob then chanted “open the door” until Williams was let in, at which point he closed his account.

    Williams told HuffPost that when campaigning in New York City, he met at least two people on every block with mortgage troubles. He said he doesn’t want the bank to use his money to “further deteriorate the community” he represents, especially in light of chief executive Jamie Dimon’s recent $17 million bonus.

    “It’s incredible what these banks are making people go through,” he said. “It’s disgusting. They’re like bloodsuckers, just sucking the lifeblood out of communities and refusing to help out. I understand that people need to get paid to get the best and brightest and these bonuses help with that, but you can’t do that and then not assist the community and then get a taxpayer bailout to the tune of billions of dollars. That’s just greed at its worst.”

    Tom Kelly, a spokesperson for Chase, insisted the bank is doing everything possible to help homeowners. “We have helped avoid 487,294 foreclosures since 2009, avoiding

    foreclosure twice as often as we have had to foreclose,” he said. “We have opened five centers in the New York metro area–in Flushing, Brooklyn and the Bronx as well as Jersey City and Paramus, New Jersey–to provide face-to-face counseling to homeowners, and have met with 9,298 borrowers through the end of 2010.”

    According to a recent study by New York Communities for Change, only six percent of New York homeowners who sought mortgage help from JP Morgan Chase have received a loan modification in the past year. The remaining 96 percent were either denied help or are still in limbo.

    Nearly one in every four U.S. homeowners with mortgages–or 10.8 million people–currently owe more on their home than it’s worth. The Williams incident kicks off a new campaign by the NYCC to convince J.P. Morgan to change its mortgage policies and address the nationwide effects of a prolonged foreclosure crisis.

    Story continues below
    Advertisement

  15. I am working on a case right now where it is alleged that a woman who died in 2007 took out
    a reverse mortgage in Nov. 2005. The problem is
    she had a first mortgage in place from 2004 until
    2007 when it was paid off after her death. The law
    firm filed suit in 2008 but can not produce any Note
    and they never filed the claim in probate where her
    will was filed in 2007.
    A reverse mortgage is a first mortgage and would have paid off the existing first from a year
    earlier. The US has no record of the reverse mortgage of Nov. 2005.
    It seems clear she never took out this reverse
    mortgage and the phony Note was sold on the secondary market to some gullible investor for cash. I am investigating other cases similar to this
    one. The whole thing was fraud involving a defunct
    title company.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: