BLOOMBERG: BOA TRYING DIVIDE AND CONQUER STRATEGY

COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary SEE LIVINGLIES LITIGATION SUPPORT AT LUMINAQ.COM

“By keeping the servicers at the head of the line, the illusion of securitization is maintained. That illusion serves as the basis for assuming there is a legitimate debt that the borrower is refusing or can’t pay. Without the illusion, and sticking with the facts we have an obligation owed to the investors or their successors that has been reduced by Federal bailouts that obviously inure to the benefit of someone. At the moment, the illusion of securitization is permitting the investment banks to assert that neither the investor-lender nor the borrower should get any credit for those bailouts and insurance payments, which is of course an absurd conclusion. ” Neil F Garfield

EDITOR’S COMMENT: BOA is not the only one. There exists a broad strategy of getting all of us to argue with each other rather than deal with the financial crisis in a direct, honest manner. The fact remains that the “servicers” are not the people that anyone should be negotiating with, because they don’t own anything and they have no independent right to make any decisions.

The reason why the negotiations are taking place with servicers is that those are the only companies that are stepping up, saying they are have the power, when they don’t. It is the same with the foreclosures. The securitizers are sending in a servicer or other sham entity to initiate foreclosure proceedings (or fake modification processing) and they are getting away with it because the Trustee of the pools neither knows nor has anything to do with the foreclosures in reality, and the investors are kept completely in the dark.

But even if the trustees and investors were given detailed reports and invited to participate they would not because they don’t want any part of the fake mortgage processing that occurred from origination through sale of bogus mortgage bonds. The trustees simply want the fees they were promised for agreeing to be trustees, on condition that they didn’t need to do any work or take any responsibility. The investors simply want their money back from the investment banking houses that brokered the sale of bogus mortgage bonds that had nothing to back up the payment of interest or principal.

Thus a void is created wherein the real parties in interest or even the ones with a colorable claim to being a real party in interest, don’t really have anything to do with foreclosures, modifications or anything else relating to individual mortgages. The illusion of securitization of loans that were never in fact securitized (transferred or pieced out to investors) allows the intermediary parties, like servicers, to claim some sort of agency status without being liable for the counterclaims of borrowers regarding predatory lending practices, deceptive lending practices, and the illegal marketing of bogus loan products as standard residential loans when they were in fact making the homeowner PART of the securitization scheme.

It follows that any “settlement” with servicers is meaningless and also an illusion. And without getting a FULL accounting for all financial transactions relating to each individual loan, regardless of the paperwork that was or was not executed, there can be no settlement, because there can be no knowledge as to the amount due to CREDITORS on these obligations after credits are applied for payments made by servicers, who continue to make payments even after a default is declared, and other third parties who insured or guaranteed payment of interest, principal or both.

By keeping the servicers at the head of the line, the illusion of securitization is maintained. That illusion serves as the basis for assuming there is a legitimate debt that the borrower is refusing or can’t pay. Without the illusion, and sticking with the facts we have an obligation owed to the investors or their successors that has been reduced by Federal bailouts that obviously insure to the benefit of someone. At the moment, the illusion of securitization is permitting the investment banks to assert that neither the investor-lender nor the borrower should get any credit for those bailouts and insurance payments, which is of course an absurd conclusion.

If simple arithmetic were used accounting for all transactions relating to each loan rather just a few of them, the entire housing mess would be cleaned up – but that would  also clean house at the mega banks who are maintaining “assets” reported on their balance sheets that never existed as THEIR assets, and which now are neither secured nor, in many cases, do they even exist. With Tier 3 assets gone, and Tier 1 assets marked down to Tier 3 assets and then extinguished the mega banks would become subject to resolution down to a size that could be regulated. And THAT in turn would release the marketplace from the monopolistic and false hold that these banks have on government and banking, allowing for free market competition and trading, generation of capital for new and existing business and a resurgence in housing, consumer demand the growth of GDP. With the latest GDP report at 1.8%, as opposed to the predicted 4%, we can turn a 50% loss into recovery and real gains.

BLOOMBERG: Bank of America Corp. (BAC) was accused by a top official at the Iowa attorney general’s office of engaging in a divide-and-conquer strategy by undermining support for the settlement of a nationwide probe into foreclosure practices, a person familiar with the matter said.

The bank tried to get attorneys general to break away from those supporting the proposed accord, Iowa Assistant Attorney General Patrick Madigan said during a recent conference call, according to the person. A second person familiar with the settlement talks said the bank sought to sow dissent among the states, eight of which have publicly criticized the proposal’s terms. Both people asked not to be identified because the talks are private. Madigan declined to comment.

“We have held face to face negotiating sessions and our negotiations continue,” Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, a Democrat who leads the 50-state effort, said in a statement. “We believe all the banks are negotiating in good faith.”

Madigan, who was giving an update to state officials, said the largest U.S. lender by assets was taking a “divide-and- conquer” approach in a bid to disrupt negotiations, according to the person on the call. Jumana Bauwens, a spokeswoman for the Charlotte, North Carolina-based bank, declined to comment.

State and federal agencies including the Justice Department last month submitted a 27-page settlement proposal, or term- sheet, to five mortgage servicers, including Bank of America. The document was offered to start negotiations with banks as part of the 50-state investigation.

Six-Month Probe

The six-month probe was triggered by claims of faulty foreclosure practices following the housing collapse, which state officials said may violate their laws. The people said Madigan’s comments were made on a call that took place within the past two months, after the term sheet was made public.

Since the settlement proposal was circulated in early March, at least eight Republican attorneys general have assailed its terms as overreaching. They specifically oppose a proposal that would require the servicers to pay for reducing mortgage balances owed by borrowers.

In addition to Bank of America, the other banks negotiating with state and federal officials are JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC), Citigroup Inc. (C) and Ally Financial Inc. They control more than half of the mortgage servicing market, Miller has said.

Geoff Greenwood, Miller’s spokesman, said state attorneys general would begin talks with other mortgage servicing companies after reaching a final agreement with the five banks.

“We will start looking at servicers beyond the largest five after we finish this phase of our effort,” he said.

Principal Reductions

As of last week, the states had yet to approach banks with a proposed dollar amount that would fund principal reductions for borrowers, Greenwood said at the time.

Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, a Republican, said last week he may negotiate an alternative accord with the banks if the national settlement turns out to be “inconsistent with our conviction.”

Pruitt said in a letter to Miller last month that forcing lenders to reduce mortgage balances would take away incentives for banks to loan money and “destroy an already devastated housing market.”

Besides Oklahoma, state attorneys general who have criticized the proposal to reduce principal balances are Florida, Texas, South Carolina, Virginia, Alabama, Nebraska and Georgia.

Four of them said in a letter to Miller that principal reduction constitutes a “moral hazard.”

No Overt Requests

Lauren Kane, a spokeswoman for Georgia Attorney General Sam Olens, said in an e-mailed statement that “no one has asked” Olens to oppose the settlement proposal. One bank, which Kane declined to identify, discussed with her office a recent settlement with federal regulators over foreclosure practices, she said.

“We have been in contact with numerous industry representatives on the local and national level, who have voiced their concerns throughout the process,” said Diane Clay, a spokeswoman for Pruitt, in an e-mailed statement.

Adam Piper, a spokesman for South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, said “two banking representatives shared research” with his office and “pointed out some concerns with certain provisions.” While not identifying the banks, he added that they didn’t ask Wilson to oppose a potential accord.

In their talks so far, the states agreed on some terms while failing to reach an accord on monetary payments by lenders, a person familiar with the talks said this month.

Mortgage Servicers

In March, mortgage servicers agreed with U.S. banking regulators to a series of reforms, including conducting a review of loans that went into foreclosure in 2009 and 2010 and improving procedures for modifying loans and seizing homes.

The 50 states and the Justice Department seek to set requirements for how banks service loans and conduct home foreclosures.

Any state agreement with banks on principal reductions will depend on the size of the writedowns, the incentives for the servicers built into the settlement and other details which continue to be sorted out, said the person, who declined to be identified because the talks are confidential.

Another person familiar with the talks said last week that a final agreement could take as long as four months to reach.

Pruitt said his plan could be a model for other states.

On April 26, Jennifer Meale, a spokeswoman for Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, said Bondi “looks forward to reviewing” Oklahoma’s plan. Yesterday, Meale said Bondi hasn’t been urged by the banks to oppose the term sheet.

“We have had general discussions with banks about how the matter might be resolved,” Meale said in an e-mailed statement.

To contact the reporter on this story: David McLaughlin in New York at dmclaughlin9@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net

27 Responses

  1. MERS & GMAC MORTGAGE CORP 12/31/2000, originated $16.8 Billion Residential Mortgage representing more than 195,000 Transactions.

    The company’s servicing portfolio of more than $164 Billion represents over 2 Million Customers ThroughOut the NATION! Headquarter in Horsham PA originates first and second lien residential mortgage loans through a nationwide network of retail offices, direct lending centers and internet sites under the brand names gmacmortgage.com,HELLO! ditech.com (DEUTSCHE BANK!!!!), and General Motors’s GM FAMILY FIRST, custom mortgage services program offered to GM employees, retirees and dealers.

    GMAC Mortgage Corporation is related to affiliates, brokers, dealers agents including …

    1996 GMAC-RFC (Parent)
    General Motors Acceptance Corporation (UK) and NASCOR in agreements in 1996 along with Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corp. Norwest Corporation announced in 2000 in Agreements with Norwest Corporation, Microsoft and Freddie Mac joint GMAC-RFC and Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corp.

    GMAC Mortgage Engages MERS for Loan Registration

    Contacts:

    Cecil Stack
    of MERS
    703-761-1270

    Joan C. Dal Farra
    of GMAC Mortgage
    215-682-1931

    McLean, Va., DATE – MERS officials announced today that GMAC Mortgage Corporation is implementing the MERS® System in all its distribution channels. GMAC Mortgage, one of the country’s leading mortgage originators and servicers, opened its retail, direct lending, wholesale and correspondent channels to MERS on Feb 1.

    “We are partnering with MERS to use its process for various originations,” said Joanne Moore, MERS project manager of GMAC Mortgage. In early 2000, GMAC Mortgage’s correspondent lending division began looking at MERS as a competitive edge. “As discussions about MERS evolved, GMAC Mortgage began to see the advantages of MERS in all its channels,” said Doug Danko, MERS Vice President, Marketing and Sales. MERS, the Mortgage Electronic Registration System, is an electronic registry that tracks the ownership of loans and servicing rights with more than 3 million loans registered.

    “We are excited anytime a top mortgage originator completes MERS integration and begins registering loans on the system,” said R.K. Arnold, MERS president and CEO. “The decision will maximize cost savings for the company.”

    “MERS will alleviate the need for the preparation, execution and recording of assignments of security instruments,” stated Barbara Krawczun, vice president of secondary marketing operations. “The decision to implement MERS was based on the opportunity to reduce operating costs. In addition, workflow efficiencies will be achieved in several key areas of the company.”

    The mortgage industry created MERS to streamline the mortgage process. MERS benefits include the elimination of paper assignments by acting as the mortgagee of record in the county land records for the lender and servicer. Ownership interests are then tracked electronically on the MERS® System, a national loan registry. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, VA, FHA, Ginnie Mae, the Federal Home Loan Bank MPF® Program, California and New York housing authorities, and all major Wall Street rating agencies have approved MERS.

    GMAC Mortgage, headquartered in Horsham, Pa., originates first and second lien residential mortgage loans through a nationwide network of retail offices, direct lending centers and internet sites under the brands gmacmortgage.com and ditech.com, and GM Family First, a custom mortgage services program offered to GM employees, retirees and dealers.

    GMAC Mortgage is the nation’s seventh largest residential mortgage servicer. As of Dec. 31, 2000, GMAC Mortgage originated $16.8 billion residential mortgages, representing more than 195,000 transactions. The company’s servicing portfolio of more than $164 billion represents 2 million customers throughout the nation.
    http://www.mersinc.org/newsroom/press_details.aspx?id=120

  2. 1/21/1998:
    NATIONSBANC MONTOGMERY SECURITIES LLC

    RENAMED 6/25/1999
    BANC OF AMERICA SECURITIES LLC
    Opppsssssiiiiiiieeeeeeee
    Termination 12/01/2010 won’t have to file 10K by April 2011!

    New York State
    Division of Corporations
    Enity Information

  3. The date of this prospectus supplement is March 8, 2000
    “TRUSTEE” Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association
    TRUST FUND “The Sequoia Mortgage Trust Fund 4”
    CERTIFICATE ACCOUNT (Maintained in the name of the Trustee PSA 3/1/2000
    MORTGAGE POOL
    PROPERY which initially secured a Mortgage Loan and which is acquired by foreclosure or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure.

    “DISTRIBUTION ACCOUNT” held in name of Trustee Norwest Bank Minnesota NA
    “DEPOSITOR” Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc.,
    “SELLOER” Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corporation
    “SELLOER” Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corporation
    “MASTER SERVICER” Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation (“MLCC”)
    “TRUSTEE” Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association

    “CERTIFICATE INSURER” Ambac Assurance Corporation
    THE CERTIFICATES = THE MORTGAGE POOL
    MORTGAGE LOANS = Promissory Notes – each a Mortgage Note
    MORTGAGE NOTE – Secured by Mortgages or Deeds of Trust

    OR similar security instruments creating 1st liens on 1-4 family residential properties ‘Shares’ issued by private non-profit housing corporations COOPERATIVES

    ASSIGNMENT OF THE MORTGAGE LOANS

    MORTGAGE LOAN PURCHASE AGREEMENT 3/8/2000
    DEPOSITOR” Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc.,
    will purchase the Mortgage Loans from the SELLER RWT HOLDINGS, INC.
    SELLER has to repurchase DEFECTIVE MORTGAGE LOAN(S) affects interest of Certificateholders or the “CERTIFICATEINSURER” Ambac Assurance Corp

    CLOSING DATE DEPOSITOR” Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc.,will sell, transfer, assign, setover and otherwise convey without recourse to TRUSTEE (Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association) in trust for benefit of the HOLDERS of the Certificates and the “CERTIFICATEINSURER” Ambac Assurance Corp.
    Norwest Bank Minnesota NA TRUSTEE for Holders of the Certificates & “CERTIFICATEINSURER” Ambac Assurance Corp, all right, title and interest of DEPOSITOR” Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc.,in and to
    (i) Each Mortgage Loan
    (ii) Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement
    (iii) (iii) certain other assets included in Trust Fund all P&I due and received by the Master Servicer (with respect to Mortgage Loans AFTER CUT-OFF Date) (not applied in computing Cut-off Date Pool Balance).

    DEPOSITOR” Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc.,under Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement, will assign all its right, title and interest in and to the representations, warranties and covenants made by RWT HOLDINGS and “SELLER” Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corporation in the Mortgage Loan Purcahse Agreement (including the REPURCHASE OBLIGATIONS described above) to TRUSTEE Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association for the benefit of Certificateholders and “CERTIFICATEINSURER” Ambac Assurance Corp. “DEPOSITOR” Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc with respect to its ownership of the Mortgage Loans (free of any liens)(except for a representations and warranty), “DEPOSITOR” Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc. will have no obligation to repurchase or substitute for Mortgage Loans with deficient documentation or which are otherwise defective.

    RWT HOLDINGS and “SELLER” Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corporation reselling the Mortgage Loans without recourse and will have no obligation with respect to the Certificates (other than the repurchase or substitution obligations described above and below).

    “SELLER” Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corporation will cause to be delivered to a ‘CUSTODIAN FOR THE “TRUSTEE” Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association, among other things:

    COLLECTIVELY THE MORTGAGE FILE:
    Original Note (and any modification or amendment thereto)
    Endorsed in blank without recoruds
    The Original instrument creating a first lien on the related Mortgage Property (THE MORTGAGE)
    Evidence of recording indicated thereon
    Assignment in recordable form of the Mortgage
    Title policy with respect to the related Mortgage Property
    If applicable, all recorded intervening Assignments of the Mortgage, and any riders or modifications to such Mortgage Note and Mortgage
    (EXCEPT FOR ANY SUCH DOCUMENT NOT RETURED FROM THE PUBLIC RECORDING OFFICE, WHICH WILL BE DELIVERED TO THE CUSTODIAN FOR THE TRUSTEEE NORWEST BANK MINNESOTA NA as soon as the same is available to the SELLER Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corporation

    ASSIGNMENTS of the Mortgage Loans to the TRUSTEE Norwest Bank Minnesota NA (or its nominee) will be recorded in the appropriate public office for real property records promptly following the Closing date, except in states where, in the opinion of counsel acceptable to the TRUSTEE Norwest Bank Minnesota NA, and the “CERTIFICATEINSURER” Ambac Assurance Corp, such recording is not required to protect the TRUSTEE’s NORWEST BANK MINNESOTA’S interest in the Mortgage Loans against the claim of any subsequent transferee or any successor to or creditor of the “SELLER” Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corporation provided, however, notwithstanding the delivery of any legal opinions, each Assignment of a Mortgage shall be recorded upon the earliest to occur of:
    (i) The direction by the “CERTIFICATEINSURER” Ambac Assurance Corp or
    (ii) Any bankruptcy, insolvency or foreclosure with respect to the related MORTGAGOR.

    TRUSTEE Norwesst Bank Minnesota NA will review, or cause to be reviewed, each Mortgage File within 30 days of the CLOSIGN DATE (or prompty after Norwest Bank Minnesota NA receipt of any document permitted to be delivered after the CLOSING DATE and will hold such documents in trsut for the benefit of the Certificateholders and “CERTIFICATEINSURER” Ambac Assurance Corp.

    GENERAL
    The mortgage pool with respect to the Certificates (the “MORTGAGE POOL”)will consist of conventional mortgage loans (the “MORTGAGE LOANS”) evidenced by high balance, adjustable interest rate promissory notes (each, a “MORTGAGE
    NOTE”).

    The Mortgage Notes are secured by mortgages or deeds of trust or other similar security instruments creating first liens on one- to four-family residential properties and shares issued by private non-profit housing corporations (“COOPERATIVES”) and related proprietary leases or occupancy agreements granting exclusive rights to occupy specified units in such Cooperatives’ buildings (the “MORTGAGED PROPERTIES”).

    The Mortgaged Properties will consist of detached individual dwelling units, individual condominiums, townhouses, duplexes, cooperative apartments, individual units in planned unit developments and other attached dwelling units.

    TRUST FUND “The Sequoia Mortgage Trust Fund 4”
    CERTIFICATE ACCOUNT (Maintained in the name of the Trustee PSA 3/1/2000
    MORTGAGE POOL
    PROPERY which initially secured a Mortgage Loan and which is acquired by foreclosure or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure.

    DISTRIBUTION ACCOUNT held in name of Trustee Norwest Bank Minnesota NA
    “DEPOSITOR” Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc.,
    “SELLER” Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corporation
    “MASTER SERVICER” Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation (“MLCC”)
    “TRUSTEE” Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association

    TRUST FUND “The Sequoia Mortgage Trust Fund 4” (the “TRUST FUND”) will include, in addition to the Mortgage Pool, (i) the amounts held from time to time in one or more accounts (collectively, the “CERTIFICATE ACCOUNT”) maintained in the name of the Trustee pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of March1, 2000 (the “AGREEMENT”), by and among
    “DEPOSITOR” Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc., as depositor (the “DEPOSITOR”), “SELLOER” Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corporation, as seller
    (the “SELLER”), “MASTER SERVICER” Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation (“MLCC”), as master servicer (the “MASTER SERVICER”), and
    “TRUSTEE” Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association, as trustee (the “TRUSTEE”),

    Distribution Account will be held in the name of the TRUSTEE ‘Norwest Bank Minnesota National Association.

    (iii) any property which initially secured a
    Mortgage Loan and which is acquired by foreclosure or deed in lieu of
    foreclosure, (iv) all insurance policies and any Insurance Proceeds, (v) all of
    the right, title and interest of the Depositor to the Mortgage Loan Purchase
    Agreement as described under “-Assignment of the Mortgage Loans” below,

    ASSIGNMENT OF THE MORTGAGE LOANS

    The Depositor will purchase the Mortgage Loans from the Seller pursuant
    to a Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement (the “MORTGAGE LOAN PURCHASE AGREEMENT”)
    dated as of March 8, 2000 among RWT Holdings, Inc. (“RWT HOLDINGS”), the Seller
    and the Depositor. Under the Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement, RWT Holdings will
    make certain representations, warranties and covenants to the Seller and the
    Depositor relating to, among other things, certain characteristics of the
    Mortgage Loans and, subject to the limitations described below, will be
    obligated to the same extent as the Seller as herein described to repurchase or
    substitute a similar mortgage loan for any Mortgage Loan as to which there
    exists deficient documentation or as to which there has been an uncured breach
    of any representation or warranty relating to the characteristics of the
    Mortgage Loans that materially and adversely affects the value of such Mortgage
    Loan or the interests of the Certificateholders or the “CERTIFICATEINSURER” Ambac Assurance Corp in
    such Mortgage Loan (each, a “DEFECTIVE MORTGAGE LOAN”).

    Pursuant to the Agreement, on the Closing Date the Depositor will sell,
    transfer, assign, set over and otherwise convey without recourse to the Trustee,
    in trust for the benefit of the holders of the Certificates and the Certificate
    Insurer, all right, title and interest of the Depositor in and to (i) each
    Mortgage Loan, (ii) the Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement and (iii) certain other
    assets included in the Trust Fund, including all principal and interest due and
    received by the Master Servicer with respect to the Mortgage Loans after the
    Cut-off Date (to the extent not applied in computing the Cut-off Date Pool
    Balance). Under the Agreement, the Depositor will assign all its right, title
    and interest in and to the representations, warranties and covenants made by RWT
    Holdings and the Seller in the Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement (including the
    repurchase obligations described above) to the Trustee for the benefit of the
    Certificateholders and the “CERTIFICATEINSURER” Ambac Assurance Corp. Except for a representation and warranty by the Depositor with respect to its ownership of the Mortgage Loans free of any liens, the Depositor will make no representations or warranties with respect to the Mortgage Loans and will have no obligation to repurchase or substitute for Mortgage Loans with deficient documentation or which are
    otherwise defective. RWT Holdings and the Seller are selling the Mortgage Loans
    without recourse and will have no obligation with respect to the Certificates
    other than the repurchase or substitution obligations described above and below.

    In connection with such transfer and assignment of the Mortgage Loans,
    the Seller will deliver or cause to be delivered to a custodian for the Trustee,
    among other things, the original Mortgage Note (and any modification or
    amendment thereto) endorsed in blank without recourse, the original instrument
    creating a first lien on the related Mortgaged Property (the “MORTGAGE”) with
    evidence of recording indicated thereon, an assignment in recordable form of the
    Mortgage, the title policy with respect to the related Mortgaged Property and,
    if applicable, all recorded intervening assignments of the Mortgage and any
    riders or modifications to such Mortgage Note and Mortgage (except for any such
    document not returned from the public recording office, which will be delivered
    to the custodian for the Trustee as soon as the same is available to the Seller)
    (collectively, the “MORTGAGE FILE”). Assignments of the Mortgage Loans to the
    Trustee (or its nominee) will be recorded in the appropriate public office for
    real property records promptly following the Closing Date, except in states
    where, in the opinion of counsel acceptable to the Trustee and the Certificate
    Insurer, such recording is not required to protect the Trustee’s interest in the
    Mortgage Loans against the claim of any subsequent transferee or any successor
    to or creditor of the Seller; provided, however, notwithstanding the delivery of
    any legal opinions, each assignment of a Mortgage shall be recorded upon the
    earliest to occur of (i) the direction by the “CERTIFICATEINSURER” Ambac Assurance Corp, or (ii) any
    bankruptcy, insolvency or foreclosure with respect to the related Mortgagor.

    The Trustee will review, or cause to be reviewed, each Mortgage File
    within 30 days of the Closing Date (or promptly after the Trustee’s receipt of
    any document permitted to be delivered after the Closing Date) and will hold
    such documents in trust for the benefit of the Certificateholders and the

    S-18

  4. The Company “Redwood Trust” owns a non-voting preferred stock interest in RWT Holdings, Inc. (“Holdings”), an unconsolidated, non-REIT, taxable affiliate. Holdings was incorporated and began operations in 1998.
    //PURCHASES AND SALES OF MORTGAGE LOANS. In December 1999, Holdings purchased $390 million of residential Mortgage Loans and subsequently sold a participation interest in the Mortgage Loans to the Company. Pursuant to the terms of the Mortgage Loan Participation Purchase Agreement, the Company purchased a 99% interest in the Mortgage Loans, and assumes all related risks of ownership. Holdings did not recognize any gain or loss on this transaction.

    Is ‘RFC’ ? REDWOOD FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIAAS REDWOOD TRUST FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.
    During the year ended December 31, 1999, the Company sold $50 million of commercial Mortgage Loans to RCF. Pursuant to the Master Forward Commitment Agreement, the Company sold the Mortgage Loans to RCF at the same price for which the Company acquired the Mortgage Loans. There were no such sales during the year ended December 31, 1998. At both December 31, 1999 and 1998, under the terms of the Master Forward Commitment Agreement, the Company had committed to sell $8 million of commercial Mortgage Loans to RCF during the first quarter of 2000 and 1999, respectively.
    During the year ended December 31, 1999, the Company sold $61 million of residential Mortgage Loans to Redwood Residential Funding (“RRF”), a subsidiary of Holdings. Pursuant to the Master Forward Commitment Agreement, the Company sold the Mortgage Loans to RRF at the same price for which the Company acquired the Mortgage Loans. There were no such sales during the year ended December 31, 1998. At December 31, 1999, under the terms of the Master Forward Commitment Agreement, the Company had committed to sell $16 million of residential Mortgage Loans to RRF during the first quarter of 2000. There were no such commitments at December 31, 1998.
    OTHER. Under a revolving credit facility arrangement, the Company may loan funds to Holdings to finance certain Mortgage Loans owned by Holdings. These loans are typically unsecured and are repaid within six months. Such loans bear interest at a rate of 3.50% over LIBOR. At both December 31, 1999 and 1998, the Company had loaned $6.5 million to Holdings in accordance with the provisions of this arrangement. During the
    PURCHASES AND SALES OF MORTGAGE LOANS. In December 1999, Holdings purchased $390 million of residential Mortgage Loans and subsequently sold a participation interest in the Mortgage Loans to the Company REDWOOD TRUST. Pursuant to the terms of the Mortgage Loan Participation Purchase Agreement, the Company purchased a 99% interest in the 61 Years Old

  5. Who is Bank of America? What their role in the diabolical weapon of mass destruction implosion on September 2008? NATONSBANK.

    Annomyous is correct Deutsche Bank as Bankers Trust for example and many other names are an intermediary funder for Redwood Trust (private money) organized in 1994 and some of the smartest money managers in the world?

    How are Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corp a subsidairy of Redwood Trust since 1997 and affilaite RW Holdings Inc. related to ‘Wells Fargo Bank NA’ doing business selling loans at a discount, with Intermediary Funder (Deutsche Bank) for example?

    TRUST FUND The Sequoia Mortgage Trust Fund 4
    CERTIFICATE ACCOUNT (Maintained in the name of the Trustee PSA 3/1/2000
    MORTGAGE POOL
    PROPERY which initially secured a Mortgage Loan and which is acquired by foreclosure or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure.
    “DISTRIBUTION ACCOUNT” held in name of Trustee Norwest Bank Minnesota NA
    “DEPOSITOR” Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc.,
    “SELLER” Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corporation
    “SELLER” Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corporation
    “MASTER SERVICER” Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation (“MLCC”)
    “TRUSTEE” Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association

    TRUST FUND “The Sequoia Mortgage Trust Fund 4”
    CERTIFICATE ACCOUNT (Maintained in the name of the Trustee PSA 3/1/2000
    MORTGAGE POOL
    PROPERY which initially secured a Mortgage Loan and which is acquired by foreclosure or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure.

    DISTRIBUTION ACCOUNT held in name of Trustee Norwest Bank Minnesota NA
    “DEPOSITOR” Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc.,
    “SELLER” Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corporation
    “MASTER SERVICER” Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation (“MLCC”)
    “TRUSTEE” Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association

    TRUST FUND “The Sequoia Mortgage Trust Fund 4” (the “TRUST FUND”) will include, in addition to the Mortgage Pool, (i) the amounts held from time to time in one or more accounts (collectively, the “CERTIFICATE ACCOUNT”) maintained in the name of the Trustee pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of March1, 2000 (the “AGREEMENT”), by and among
    “DEPOSITOR” Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc., as depositor (the “DEPOSITOR”), “SELLOER” Sequoia Mortgage Funding Corporation, as seller
    (the “SELLER”), “MASTER SERVICER” Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation (“MLCC”), as master servicer (the “MASTER SERVICER”), and
    “TRUSTEE” Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association, as trustee (the “TRUSTEE”),

    Distribution Account will be held in the name of the TRUSTEE ‘Norwest Bank Minnesota National Association.

    —————————————

    Distribution Account will be held in the name of the TRUSTEE ‘Norwest Bank Minnesota National Association.

    (iii) any property which initially secured a
    Mortgage Loan and which is acquired by foreclosure or deed in lieu of
    foreclosure, (iv) all insurance policies and any Insurance Proceeds, (v) all of
    the right, title and interest of the Depositor to the Mortgage Loan Purchase
    Agreement as described under “-Assignment of the Mortgage Loans” below,

    ASSIGNMENT OF THE MORTGAGE LOANS

    The Depositor will purchase the Mortgage Loans from the Seller pursuant
    to a Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement (the “MORTGAGE LOAN PURCHASE AGREEMENT”)
    dated as of March 8, 2000 among RWT Holdings, Inc. (“RWT HOLDINGS”), the Seller
    and the Depositor. Under the Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement, RWT Holdings will
    make certain representations, warranties and covenants to the Seller and the
    Depositor relating to, among other things, certain characteristics of the
    Mortgage Loans and, subject to the limitations described below, will be
    obligated to the same extent as the Seller as herein described to repurchase or
    substitute a similar mortgage loan for any Mortgage Loan as to which there
    exists deficient documentation or as to which there has been an uncured breach
    of any representation or warranty relating to the characteristics of the
    Mortgage Loans that materially and adversely affects the value of such Mortgage
    Loan or the interests of the Certificateholders or the “CERTIFICATEINSURER” Ambac Assurance Corp in
    such Mortgage Loan (each, a “DEFECTIVE MORTGAGE LOAN”).

    Pursuant to the Agreement, on the Closing Date the Depositor will sell,
    transfer, assign, set over and otherwise convey without recourse to the Trustee,
    in trust for the benefit of the holders of the Certificates and the Certificate
    Insurer, all right, title and interest of the Depositor in and to (i) each
    Mortgage Loan, (ii) the Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement and (iii) certain other
    assets included in the Trust Fund, including all principal and interest due and
    received by the Master Servicer with respect to the Mortgage Loans after the
    Cut-off Date (to the extent not applied in computing the Cut-off Date Pool
    Balance). Under the Agreement, the Depositor will assign all its right, title
    and interest in and to the representations, warranties and covenants made by RWT
    Holdings and the Seller in the Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement (including the
    repurchase obligations described above) to the Trustee for the benefit of the
    Certificateholders and the “CERTIFICATEINSURER” Ambac Assurance Corp. Except for a representation and warranty by the Depositor with respect to its ownership of the Mortgage Loans free of any liens, the Depositor will make no representations or warranties with respect to the Mortgage Loans and will have no obligation to repurchase or substitute for Mortgage Loans with deficient documentation or which are
    otherwise defective. RWT Holdings and the Seller are selling the Mortgage Loans
    without recourse and will have no obligation with respect to the Certificates
    other than the repurchase or substitution obligations described above and below.

    In connection with such transfer and assignment of the Mortgage Loans,
    the Seller will deliver or cause to be delivered to a custodian for the Trustee,
    among other things, the original Mortgage Note (and any modification or
    amendment thereto) endorsed in blank without recourse, the original instrument
    creating a first lien on the related Mortgaged Property (the “MORTGAGE”) with
    evidence of recording indicated thereon, an assignment in recordable form of the
    Mortgage, the title policy with respect to the related Mortgaged Property and,
    if applicable, all recorded intervening assignments of the Mortgage and any
    riders or modifications to such Mortgage Note and Mortgage (except for any such
    document not returned from the public recording office, which will be delivered
    to the custodian for the Trustee as soon as the same is available to the Seller)
    (collectively, the “MORTGAGE FILE”). Assignments of the Mortgage Loans to the
    Trustee (or its nominee) will be recorded in the appropriate public office for
    real property records promptly following the Closing Date, except in states
    where, in the opinion of counsel acceptable to the Trustee and the Certificate
    Insurer, such recording is not required to protect the Trustee’s interest in the
    Mortgage Loans against the claim of any subsequent transferee or any successor
    to or creditor of the Seller; provided, however, notwithstanding the delivery of
    any legal opinions, each assignment of a Mortgage shall be recorded upon the
    earliest to occur of (i) the direction by the “CERTIFICATEINSURER” Ambac Assurance Corp, or (ii) any
    bankruptcy, insolvency or foreclosure with respect to the related Mortgagor.

    The Trustee will review, or cause to be reviewed, each Mortgage File
    within 30 days of the Closing Date (or promptly after the Trustee’s receipt of
    any document permitted to be delivered after the Closing Date) and will hold
    such documents in trust for the benefit of the Certificateholders and the

    S-18

  6. @ cubed2k,

    I do know that my “trial plan” payments are going into a “suspense” account…to go towards the first mortgage payment that I didn’t pay…so they say…but IndyMac is is now just a debt collector…
    AND it just seems so silly at this point to even try to get a permanent modification—it’s just a fantasy, because the chain of title is so screwed up, and they probably can’t even prove that the note or the loan even exists, and I have 4 different “Trustees” listed on the notice of default, (with MERS as beneficiary on DOT), and all I really want to do is make it all go away with BK!!!
    But, since I’m a “little person”, with no money, I have to figure it all out on my own… just like so many others…such is the way of this unjust crazy world…but I’m not giving up, cause I’ve got 2 beautiful kids that I have to make everything okay for…!

  7. That is a good question Carrie. Send them a QWR. Where does my money go? Specifics.

  8. * Article by: DAN BROWNING , Star Tribune
    * Updated: April 29, 2011 – 9:10 PM

    Countrywide and GMAC both say that Thrivent should have understood the risks of the mortgage-backed securities it bought.

    Thrivent Financial for Lutherans has sued Countrywide Financial Corp. and GMAC Mortgage over what it describes as “massive frauds” in which it says it was duped into buying hundreds of millions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities.

    Thrivent says it wanted conservative, low-risk investments and believed it was buying only those mortgages that carried the highest, AAA investment-grade ratings. But because Countrywide and GMAC failed to follow their underwriting guidelines, Thrivent says, it ended up holding higher-risk mortgages and has suffered huge losses amid the housing market collapse.

    Between 2005 and 2007, the suit says, Minneapolis-based Thrivent and its affiliates paid hundreds of millions of dollars for 20 mortgage-backed securities offerings from Countrywide and for seven offerings from GMAC. The suit says that two firms either knew or recklessly disregarded the fact that the securities failed to meet the criteria for the AAA ratings they carried.

    The firms say Thrivent should have known what it was getting into. “This suit represents an action by a sophisticated investor which had available to them offering materials and associated risks for their consideration,” GMAC Mortgage spokesman James Olecki said. “We intend to vigorously defend ourselves.”

    Countrywide was bought in 2008 by Bank of America, whose spokeswoman, Shirley Norton, said Thrivent is a knowledgeable investor that is “looking to blame someone for investment losses incurred during a period of economic downturn.”

    Mortgage-backed securities are bondlike instruments that trade in capital markets. They are made up of individual mortgages that are packaged together and sold in slices, or tranches, identified by their levels of estimated risk and potential reward.

    The 127-page suit was filed in Hennepin County last month, but the defendants filed a petition this week to remove the case from Hennepin County to federal court.

    Countrywide’s fraudulent marketing practices are well known, the suit says. It cites an $8 billion settlement agreement the company reached with various states, including Minnesota, and the fact that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission reached a settlement in October with three former executives.

    Angelo Mozilo, Countrywide’s former CEO, agreed to pay $67.5 million in penalties and disgorgements. David Sambol, the firm’s chief operating officer, and Eric Sieracki, its chief financial officer, agreed to pay a total of $5.65 million. Mozilo and Sambol are each named as defendants in the Thrivent lawsuit.

    As of January, 29 percent of the mortgage loans underlying Thrivent’s purchases from Countrywide were either in arrears, foreclosure, bankruptcy or repossession, and 23 percent of those purchased from GMAC were in similar straits, the suit says. As a result, the credit ratings of the certificates have been downgraded.

    More than 95 percent of the Countrywide certificates and 85 percent of the GMAC certificates are rated as junk, the suit says. That means they can’t be sold for anything close to what Thrivent paid for them.

    According to Thrivent’s lawsuit, in 2005 some 90 percent of Countrywide’s home loans were considered prime, meaning the borrowers were top credit quality and the mortgages were secured by first-position liens on single-family residences. Most were conforming loans, which have the lowest delinquency rates in the industry.

    But in the rush to increase market share, the suit says, Countrywide disregarded its underwriting guidelines, pressured appraisers to provide inflated valuations, and made more loans to higher-risk borrowers. Thrivent says Countrywide kept the best-quality mortgages for itself and dumped the riskier loans onto Thrivent and others.

    Thrivent made similar allegations against GMAC, citing a number of confidential witnesses who had worked for the company.

    Thrivent seeks unstated compensatory and/or rescissionary damages, punitive damages and costs.

    Dan Browning • 612-673-4493

  9. BOA IS STILL FORECLOSING IN CALIFORNIA SO WHY DO THEY NEED TO DIVIDE AND CONQUER.

    NEVER AGAIN

  10. Nomods,aka, M.Soliman

  11. nomods,

    NOT WORKING FOR THE THIS SITE. But, appreciate all the credit you give me.

    Thanks.

  12. M Soliman sent the site moderator valuable information to expose the truth.pls post and share as it might be the key us homeowners need to open what is the “truth”

  13. From National Mortgage News.
    Friday, April 29, 2011
    By Bonnie Sinnock

    MERS looks like it will prevail when it comes to questions about the validity of assignments where it is involved, but some think it may “lock down” its procedures as a result of the concerns.

    Like what you see? Click here to sign up for a National Mortgage News free trial and daily newsletter to get the latest feature stories, news headlines, data, and in-depth analysis on the issues impacting the mortgage industry.

    “In my opinion, MERS is still and will remain an important part of the industry,” said Mike Wileman, president and chief executive officer of Orion Financial Group. “There are going to be some procedural lockdowns I think are necessary, but think in the long run it’s too much an integral part of the industry [to go away].”

    When asked about questions that have arisen about the validity of assignments where MERS is involved, Wileman said, “I could only weigh in from the standpoint of you’ve got rulings on both sides of the fence.

    “Obviously, I think MERS and their members feel like they have the ability to assign loans and I think there’s probably been some adjustments and there’s been some additional education.

    “They’re taking the steps to make sure people understand and have some basic information on MERS and what their role is as an assignment officer,” he said. MERS is “re-emphasizing to the members their responsibility of maintaining good information in the system,” he said.

    When asked how his company handles situations involving MERS, he said it would vet them to the extent that the company’s own legal counsel was satisfied.

    “We know from experience and certainly from our legal counsel…what needs to be done to have complete chain of title,” Wileman said. “If there are really title chain issues that are unresolved…then we will tell clients, ‘You’re going to need more direct legal counsel.’”

    MERS does have competitors but to date none appear to have been as prominent in the industry. Among these is the Global Debt Registry, which says it has a patent-pending repository for the registry of securitized mortgages.

  14. @ website moderator,

    If ANONYMOUS is not working for this site why are you not posting his valuable information that he just sent you. Readers need to know the truth…

  15. My Question is How come BOA is still foreclosing in California? They are foreclosing on approximately 20 homes a day in Los Angeles County. With MERS.

    How Come the Attorney General is not stopping them at least until this mess is cleared up.

    NEVER AGAIN
    BE STRONG AND COURAGEOUS

  16. So, my question is:

    Why the hell should anybody with a “loan mod” keep paying? They don’t deserve my money! There is NO LOAN! My servicer told me Deutsche Bank owns my loan—it’s all lies!!!!!!!!

    Am I right?

  17. It’s interesting people all the world are waking up to the bank & Wall Street cartel————

    THE SLEEPER HAS AWOKEN – Dune.

    God bless People, please wake up and question everything from Politicans, Bankers, Wall Street, etc.

  18. “Bradbury, who served as the Oregon Secretary of State after many years in the state legislature, said that in the third quarter of 2009, the state put $330 million in taxpayer money into large national banks such as Bank of America, Wells Fargo, US Bank, and Bank of the West. “We sent $330 million to them and didn’t get any benefit in terms of real lending activity with our medium and small businesses.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/03/bill-bradbury-oregon-gube_n_447404.html

    Time for States to Move Their Money

  19. OH this is great, go more into debt—————-

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Bernanke-calls-for-more-apf-903773241.html;_ylt=AlWD7skL.EH95dPuFAQie4y7YWsA;_ylu=X3oDMTE1ZThmdTNnBHBvcwMzBHNlYwN0b3BTdG9yaWVzBHNsawNiZXJuYW5rZWNhbGw-?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=

    ——————/´ ¯/)
    —————–/—-/
    —————-/—-/
    ———–/´¯/’–‘/´¯`•_
    ———-/’/–/—-/—–/¨¯\
    ——–(‘(———- ¯~/’–‘)
    ———\————-‘—–/
    ———-‘\’————_-•´
    ————\———–(

  20. uprootedone –

    9th paragraph down:

    Federal Reserve Governor Tarullo………significant weakness…………

    Listen to this yahoo,,,,,,,, sub weakness with FRAUD and now you see the truth.

  21. Here is a nice summary written in January:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/l-randall-wray/post_1564_b_807877.html

  22. A West Virginia pension fund sued Bank of America Corp. (BAC), Citigroup Inc. (C)’s Citibank unit and UBS AG (UBSN) claiming they manipulated the London Interbank Offered Rate, or Libor, in violation of U.S. antitrust law.

    The Carpenters Pension Fund of West Virginia filed a complaint in federal court in Manhattan yesterday claiming the banks and a group of unnamed co-conspirators deliberately understated their borrowing costs to depress Libor, lowering their interest expenses on products tied to the rate.

    The pension fund seeks to represent a class of all clients of the banks that invested in Libor-based products between 2006 and 2009. The suit seeks unspecified damages, which may be tripled under antitrust law.

    “About $350 trillion worth of financial products globally reference Libor, and the lower Libor rates during the relevant period robbed lenders of significant amounts of interest income,” the pension fund claimed in its complaint.

    “We believe the suit is without merit,” said Danielle Romero-Apsilos, a spokeswoman for New York-based Citigroup.

    Lawrence Grayson, a spokesman for Charlotte, North Carolina-based Bank of America, had no immediate comment on the suit. Torie Pennington von Alt, a spokeswoman for Zurich-based UBS, didn’t immediately return a voice-mail message seeking comment on the suit.

    On April 15, three European asset-management firms sued a group of banks including Bank of America, Citibank, JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Barclays Bank Plc, claiming they manipulated Libor.

    U.S. and U.K. officials are cooperating in a probe of possible Libor manipulation, a person close to the investigation said last month.

    The case is Carpenters Pension Fund of West Virginia v. Bank of America, 11-CV-2883, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).

    To contact the reporter on this story: Bob Van Voris in New York federal court at rvanvoris@bloomberg.net.

    To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net.

  23. Thank you Neil.

    It follows that any “settlement” with servicers is meaningless and also an illusion. And without getting a FULL accounting for all financial transactions relating to each individual loan, regardless of the paperwork that was or was not executed, there can be no settlement, because there can be no knowledge as to the amount due to CREDITORS on these obligations after credits are applied for payments made by servicers, who continue to make payments even after a default is declared, and other third parties who insured or guaranteed payment of interest, principal or both.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: