COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION ANALYSIS – CLICK HERE

New York AG Schneiderman Comes out Swinging at BofA, BoNY
Posted By igradman On August 5, 2011 (4:28 pm) In Attorneys General

This is big.  Though we’ve seen leading indicators over the last few weeks that New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman might get involved in the proposed Bank of America settlement over Countrywide bonds, few expected a response that might dynamite the entire deal.  But that’s exactly what yesterday’s filing before Judge Kapnick could do.

Stating that he has both a common law and a statutory interest “in protecting the economic health and well-being of all investors who reside or transact business within the State of New York,” Schneiderman’s petition to intervene takes a stance that’s more aggressive than that of any of the other investor groups asking for a seat at the table.

Rather than simply requesting a chance to conduct discovery or questioning the methodology that was used to arrive at the settlement, the AG’s petition seeks to intervene to assert counterclaims against Bank of New York Mellon for persistent fraud, securities fraud and breach of fiduciary duty.

Did you say F-f-f-fraud?  That’s right.  The elephant in the room during the putback debates of the last three years has been the specter of fraud.  Sure, mortgage bonds are performing abysmally and the underlying loans appears largely defective when investors are able to peek under the hood, but did the banks really knowingly mislead investors or willfully obstruct their efforts to remedy these problems?  Schneiderman thinks so.  He accuses BoNY of violating:

Executive Law § 63(12)’s prohibition on persistent fraud or illegality in the conduct of business: the Trustee failed to safeguard the mortgage files entrusted to its care under the Governing Agreements, failed to take any steps to notify affected parties despite its knowledge of violations of representations and warranties, and did so repeatedly across 530 Trusts. (Petition to Intervene at 9)

By calling out BoNY for failing to enforce investors’ repurchase rights or help investors enforce those rights themselves, the AG has turned a spotlight on the most notoriously uncooperative of the four major RMBS Trustees.  Of course, all of the Trustees have engaged in this type of heel-dragging obstructionism to some degree, but many have softened their stance.

since investors started getting more aggressive in threatening legal action against them.  BoNY, in addition to remaining resolute in refusing to aid investors, has now gone further in trying to negotiate a sweetheart deal for Bank of America without allowing all affected investors a chance to participate.  This has drawn the ire of the nation’s most outspoken financial cop.

And lest you think that the NYAG focuses all of his vitriol on BoNY, Schneiderman says that BofA may also be on the hook for its conduct, both before and after the issuance of the relevant securities.  The Petition to Intervene states that:

Countrywide and BoA face liability for persistent illegality in:
(1) repeatedly breaching representations and warranties concerning loan quality;
(2) repeatedly failing to provide complete mortgage files as it was required to do under the Governing Agreements; and
(3) repeatedly acting pursuant to self-interest, rather than
investors’ interests, in servicing, in violation of the Governing Agreements. (Petition to Intervene at 9)

Though Countrywide may have been the culprit for breaching reps and warranties in originating these loans, the failure to provide loan files and the failure to service properly post-origination almost certainly implicates the nation’s largest bank.  And lest any doubts remain in that regard, the AG’s Petition also provides, “given that BoA negotiated the settlement with BNYM despite BNYM’s obvious conflicts of interest, BoA may be liable for aiding and abetting BNYM’s breach of fiduciary duty.” (Petition at 7) So much for Bank of America’s characterization of these problems as simply “pay[ing] for the things that Countrywide did.

As they say on late night infomercials, “but wait, there’s more!”  In a step that is perhaps even more controversial than accusing Countrywide’s favorite Trustee of fraud, the AG has blown the cover off of the issue of improper transfer of mortgage loans into RMBS Trusts.  This has truly been the third rail of RMBS problems, which few plaintiffs have dared touch, and yet the AG has now seized it with a vice grip.

In the AG’s Verified Pleading in Intervention (hereinafter referred to as the “Pleading,” and well worth reading), Schneiderman pulls no punches in calling the participating banks to task over improper mortgage transfers.  First, he notes that the Trustee had a duty to ensure proper transfer of loans from Countrywide to the Trust.  (Pleading ¶23).  Next, he states that, “the ultimate failure of Countrywide to transfer complete mortgage loan documentation to the Trusts hampered the Trusts’ ability to foreclose on delinquent mortgages, thereby impairing the value of the notes secured by those mortgages. These circumstances apparently triggered widespread fraud, including BoA’s fabrication of missing documentation.”  (Id.)  Now that’s calling a spade a spade, in probably the most concise summary of the robosigning crisis that I’ve seen.

The AG goes on to note that, since BoNY issued numerous “exception reports” detailing loan documentation deficiencies, it knew of these problems and yet failed to notify investors that the loans underlying their investments and their rights to foreclose were impaired.  In so doing, the Trustee failed to comply with the “prudent man” standard to which it is subject under New York law.  (Pleading ¶¶28-29)

The AG raises all of this in an effort to show that BoNY was operating under serious conflicts of interest, calling into question the fairness of the proposed settlement.  Namely, while the Trustee had a duty to negotiate the settlement in the best interests of investors, it could not do so because it stood to receive “direct financial benefits” from the deal in the form of indemnification against claims of misconduct.  (Petition ¶¶15-16) And though Countrywide had already agreed to indemnify the Trustee against many such claims, Schneiderman states that, “Countrywide has inadequate resources” to provide such indemnification, leading BoNY to seek and obtain a side-letter agreement from BofA expressly guaranteeing the indemnification obligations of Countrywide and expanding that indemnity to cover BoNY’s conduct in negotiating and implementing the settlement.  (Petition ¶16)  That can’t be good for BofA’s arguments that it is not Countrywide’s successor-in-interest.

I applaud the NYAG for having the courage to call this conflict as he sees it, and not allowing this deal to derail his separate investigations or succumbing to the political pressure to water down his allegations or bypass “third rail” issues.  Whether Judge Kapnick will ultimately permit the AG to intervene is another question, but at the very least, this filing raises some uncomfortable issues for the banks involved and provides the investors seeking to challenge the deal with some much-needed backup.  In addition, Schneiderman has taken pressure off of the investors who have not yet opted to challenge the accord, by purporting to represent their interests and speak on their behalf.  In that regard, he notes that, “[m]any of these investors have not intervened in this litigation and, indeed, may not even be aware of it.” (Pleading ¶12).

As for the investors who are speaking up, many could take a lesson from the no-nonsense language Schneiderman uses in challenging the settlement.  Rather than dancing around the issue of the fairness of the deal and politely asking for more information, the AG has reached a firm conclusion based on the information the Trustee has already made available: “THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT IS UNFAIR AND INADEQUATE.” (Pleading at II.A)  Tell us how you really feel.

[Author’s Note: Though the proposed BofA settlement is certainly a landmark legal proceeding, there is plenty going on in the world of RMBS litigation aside from this case. While I have been repeatedly waylaid in my efforts to turn to these issues by successive major developments in the BofA case, I promise a roundup of recent RMBS legal action in the near future.  Stay tuned…]

Article taken from The Subprime Shakeout – http://www.subprimeshakeout.com


36 Responses

  1. OPPPSSSS – TDSF.com website oddly down? offline ? Hmmmmm. Interesting coincidence

    ian – w ‘anyone’ can file a notice of default – blank form on TD Services website:

    ‘Foreclosure’s Notice of Default’ Foreclosure request screen oddly enough just opens to anyone?

    https : // www . tdsf . com / rqsnod . htm

    TD Services dba TD Escrow Services,

    TD is a partner in a number of networks and a PREMIER provider for several industry providers including MERS.

    Look at cover pages provided in Discovery for “TD ”

    any DISCOVERY DOCUMENTS look for ‘TD’
    All dirty deeds done by the non-judicial state ‘TRUSTEES’ and Sub-stitutue ‘TRUSTEES’ and judicial states robo-firms.

    You are about to launch T.D. Service Company’s on-line request to prepare a notice of default.

    To initiate a foreclosure proceeding, please complete the request form on the following page. You must then forward copies of the applicable documents (as selected on the form) to our office. If you have any questions please contact our office at (800) 843-0260 and ask for a foreclosure specialist.

    By clicking the button below you agree to the following:
    I accept sole responsibility for the information provided to T.D. Service Company via this on-line form for the purpose of preparing foreclosure documents. I understand that this web application is proprietary to T.D. Service Company and is used solely for the purpose of initiating foreclosure proceedings. I have also read and understood T.D. Service Company’s privacy policy regarding on-line transactions.

    Chart of Document Services Outsource Work Flow, click on image, and save document using internet browser, file, save, TD_Doc_Outsource.jpg
    Paste URL and view documents http://www.tdsf.com/graphics/Outsource_flow.jpg

    Web-based Lookups, Electronic Reporting screen can be saved as a document “WEB-STAR” Lien Release Search. Click on the image and browser select ‘File’ save as TD_WEBSTAR_Lien_Release.jpg

    You’ll find in related documents and discovery, ‘Service#’ and ‘Loan#’ and Borrower Name, State, Payoff Date, Property Address. The Nancy Drew investigators will be looking at the screen image integration

    Data inside ‘input screens’ are saved inside databases and those databases used to create checks, wire transfers, falsified DOT’s, DOS,’s, Assignments, Liens, Allonges, Notes, etc

    TD preferred provider of MERS, a transaction partner with LPS, and can accept data for many of TD services INCLUDING LIEN RELEASE, ASSIGNMENT, FORECLOSURE, AND MANY OTHER TRANSACTIONS.

    TD ‘can send’ data ‘back to TD clients in wide variety of formats including:
    XML, hard-copy, txt, csv (spreadsheet default format to import and export data, and others.
    web services,
    many othe rmethods.
    Reports & Billing on-line applications.
    On-line applications can interface (integrate) with customers’ in-house systems.

    TD partner IBM Business Recocvery Services (BRS).
    TD provides hot site aound nation mirror equipment duplicate TD’s operating environment and config.
    TD Data Security, as required by HUD, TD fully complaint with Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (Financial Moderenzation Act) regarding ‘privacy’ of sensitive data. Consumers don’t realize when they sign credit application on-line or on paper, all bank-affiliates and non-bank affiliates globally have access to their data.

    Bruce Gauger, TD’s CIO responsible for TD’s

    ‘Trustee sale information’
    ‘lien releases’
    ‘reconveyance lookup’
    ‘document research inquiryt’
    ‘dedicated FTP’

    TD owners and benefactors constanting develop applications for their commercial clients who engage in commerce in private licensed communication channels or publically licensed communications channels.

    Publishing and posting of Legal Notices, Conducting trustee Sales, Senior Lien bidding

    TAC Trustee Assistance Corporation, a subsidiary of TD Service Financial Corp, weblink changed, Cached google not working, text only

    Publishing and posting of Legal Notices, Conducting trustee Sales, Senior Lien bidding.

    Established in 1985, Trustee’s Assistance Corporation (“TAC”) is a subsidiary of TD Service Financial Corporation. Its primary focus is providing publishing, posting, conducting trustee sales and related support services to the industry.

    TAC is headquartered in Santa Ana, California with a branch office in Phoenix, Arizona. TAC offers a broad range of services in the states of Arizona, California, Nevada, Oregon and Washington including:

    Automated Trustee Sale Hot Line:
    (714) 480-5690 (24 hours) Web-based Trustee Sale Lookup

    Publishing and posting of legal notices.
    Conducting trustee sales.
    Senior lien bidding.
    Connectivity to customer’s servicing systems, electronic transfer of publication data to newspapers.
    Messenger service for pickup and delivery of documents.
    Property inspections.
    Trustee sale/auction information free on web and by telephone (714) 480-5690.

    For more information, contact Renee M. Patrick (714) 480-5550

    This is Google’s cache of http://www.tdsf.com/tac.htm. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Aug 8, 2011 18:36:42 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more

    Full versionThese search terms are highlighted: td services

  2. E. Tolle ,

    The banks can no longer assist lord Obama , they will be thrown under the bus.

  3. @ANN
    Re China debt

    Financial Times is one of the few news sources we see in this country that are not affected by pro-China Murdoch news. FT stated within the last 30 days that China had already begun offloading US bonds. The total was $1.3 Trillion——-about the total of Italy’s debt—-and the rumor was 3rd parties had been used to dump about 1/3. This neither detracts nor confirms your points but perhaps is an indicator if true that the trigger has already been pulled and the Fed reserve must print that much more debt–and hold it–inflation which can be seen in the price rise of gold.

  4. @Ann

    This is also occuring in Ohio. They hire bouncers to go to homes and threaten people who are often just trying to get out of the way. They needed to enter my siezed home though my farm gate–not even on the siezed property. My wife was there to open the gate and let them pass as needed to winterize–she was there by herself. Two of them shoed up–told her they would have cut of the gate locks if she had not opened it. One a black belt Karate fighter–later arrested for drug crimes.

    They did not winterize but instead sought insurance recovery on our policy for damage in December for freezing.

    then they brought in a second out of town preserver—-who seemed to have been declared dead when walked away from military base several years ago——-I asked them to appoint local preservers –that we could trust to use our property to access without risk of wierd out of towners. No way—just let us pass as we please—-the gate is locked, we will not be walked upon and beaten like animals. We will resist. They hire criminals that will strip the properties. i do not understand why local govt authorities just sit there while these people actively destroy tax base. If local authorities will not defend their own tax base then layoffs may help—-and be replaced with local property protection associations–govt is failing all around at all levels.

  5. if he intervenes he can access the info that has been put on the table—this is a short cut to catch up. I reiterate there was interference with prior inquiries.

    If they settle all the information will probably be sealed if not destroyed–the individuals will raise confidentiality.

    The parties may be subject to intervening forces from Feds that adversely affects right to know——there needs to be a check on federal abuses–whether it be Treasury or Fed reserve. As the world meltsdown –having been triggered by these actions we cannot just say ignore it———every rock needs to be turned —–By end of this week, Fed is going to be printing and lending $$$$ to ECB to bail out Italy and Spain to the tune of $1 trillion. Do you know what sort of implications that might have on these original triggerring activities–wouldnt we all like to know why our homes and 401Ks and IRAs are being gutted–if there is connection?

    All this is swept under the rug as soon as possible by these people–they do not want the final results to fall back to them—and in any case the facts bear on the regulatory structure. No I think there is a definite state interest in exposing misdoings.

  6. @David – so let him bring his own charges. he can. he doesn’t need to meddle in the private suit.

    Beware of anyone saying “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”

  7. @ e. tolle – i disagree. the only claims being settled are claims between those parties to that suit, not the bigger picture issues, and not any criminal or quasi-criminal matters. he’s sticking his nose into a private legal action that has no broader impact than on the parties involved. no precedent, no binding effect on others, etc.

    if they want to settle, then that is their right…

  8. @tnharry

    I heartliy disagree. The civil suits –even great discovery lacks the authority in exacting inquiry of a state prosecuter which can compel low level players to testify as to FRAUD facts and persons so engaged. If criminal fraud is identified [is there any other really] the prosecuters can expose it by their power to indict. Civil lawyers are not even close.

    If all this had been done correctly–eg the last NY AG was not taken out–etc, then there could have been facts proved in criminal courts that could have been relied upon by civil attornies. That is how its supposed to work when fraud occurs. If not exactly what is the purpose of a state investigator?

    People must go to prison or this will continue–it continues now–insurance fraud, threatened physical harm to homeowners by bouncers. It is out of control–if state AGs do not intervene then may as well eliminate the departments.and save the money.

  9. @ tnharry,

    The only way one could compare this to a civil suit between citizens is if one of the citizens broke a multitude of laws when transacting business with the other, and got a partner to lie about it as well. I don’t think it’s going to be much of a stretch for the AGs to show that BONY (and B of A) engaged in “repeated fraud and illegality” as they are alleging.

    The bigger question for me is who is going to come out ahead here? Certainly not Countrywide victims, unless the powers that be finally decide to shine the light on the massive fraud in the securitization process, that then trickled down to the equally massive fraud in the foreclosure process.

    If all of these crimes are punished with not just fines, but multiple prosecutions big time, then we’re finally headed in the right direction. More importantly for everyone on the planet, the direction we need to see this investigation steered towards is one in which the borrowers are finally shown as being the true victims of all this criminality. If the AGs are successful in showing how the crime of not perfecting the securities into the trusts is EXACTLY the same as the crime of non-perfected claims on mortgages and the resultant abuses, it’s a major step in the right direction.

  10. E.Tolle everything you ‘clearly state’ absolutely true.

    The AG’s hands are tied.

    Your Letter to AG powerful if attached to letter to your state and federal representatives as a Petition to Redress Grievances seeking releif from harms and both Houses oversteppign their limited powers.

    US Constitution clearly vests all matters related to commerce to CONGRESS.


    OCC MAY NOT adjudicate alleged unlawful business acts and the Attorney General’s MANY NOT SECURE EVIDENCE TO investigate alleged unlawful business acts are prevented discovery. New York’s Martin Act the ‘Black & White Knights’ may declare CHECK MATE

  11. I question his motivation in intervening in a civil suit between citizens. There’s no broader impact really at stake here, nor is there a threat of immunity from prosecution he’s protecting. It frankly strikes me as bizarre. There is no difference in this case or in an automobile accident between two people. If the automobile accident litigants want to voluntarily settle, they can. If the litigants in this case want to voluntarily settle, they should be able to as well. The AG has no state interest in private actions, period.

  12. the morality of paying debt:? Between me and you – yes. Between me and them – well maybe, it’s business and that is all?


  13. The Prosperity of Humankind

    “The unity of humankind…is unity based on justice. One of the most striking examples of injustice in the world today is the grave imbalance in economic and material conditions. A relatively small percentage of humankind has immense wealth, while the majority of the world’s population lives in dire poverty and misery. This imbalance exists both within nations and between nations. Moreover, the gap that separates rich and poor continues to widen, which indicates that existing economic systems are incapable of restoring a just balance.
    A satisfactory solution to the world’s present economic crisis lies in a profound change of heart and mind…the prevailing materialistic assumptions about economic development reflect a profound error of conception about human nature itself.”

    “The fundamentals of the whole economic condition are divine in nature and are associated with the world of the heart and spirit…” “The disease which afflicts the body politic is lack of love and absence of altruism…”

    (writings from from bahai.org)

  14. People, there’s a whole lot of puzzling going on here that folks aren’t finding the pieces to. You may say I’m wearing a tin foil hat, I don’t care. But I don’t trust anything from on high that comes easily these days.

    Biden, the AG from DE is now joining NY’s AG Scneiderman in the CW deal. Now how do these AGs, who up until now have had no issues it would seem, suddenly decide they are going to go after the largest bank in America? Was it in fact an anatomical miracle that these state office holders Scneiderman and Biden suddenly grew, not unlike the Grinch’s heart, a sac that inflated to three times their normal size one day? I hope that’s the case. I applaud them if it is. Here’s hoping.

    But stand on the hill and discern who the battle participants are in this investor/Countrywide deal. Who stands to gain or lose by all of this combat and puffery….the people of NY? DE? Just how often has protecting the public seemed to be of paramount importance to any governmental agencies in this day and age? Just what has changed and why now?

    Ask yourself…who is lined up in opposition to the largest bank in the United States? Oh yeah, Pimco, Blackrock, Met Life, and the Federal Reserve just to name a few. Some of the biggest money giants on the face of the earth. Now, rather than these major players expend any of their own monies or energies going after orphaned CW and the adoptive parent BAC to up the settlement figure, the AGs suddenly feel empowered to do something exceptionally ethical here. I’m not knocking the AGs zeal, we lowlifes will take any extra chum in the water we can get, if in fact any of this translates to any homeowner aid. But on first glance that would appear to be highly doubtful. There is, however, nothing I’d like more than to watch all of the aforementioned entities scratch each others faces off until they all end in the ER on life support. We could only dream to be so fortunate. But how does any of this stand to do anything except more than likely make billionaires even more money? Please tell me, I’m all ears.

    But are they really fighting? Or is it simply really bad kabuki, with the theatrical expenses being billed once again to the public? And why do I doubt that any of the outcomes from a duel to the death by these various sides will ever resolve any foreclosure issues facing the masses? Even if the flagrant loan documentation violations are proven behind the iron curtains and walls of secrecy, will the defective notes be shown the light of day? Will either side to this battle ever admit the fact that the notes are defective and any resulting foreclosures, past, present, and future fraudulent?

    The bigger picture is not about whether or not the trustee violated a fiduciary responsibility to the investors involved. It’s not about whether or not these same investors were bilked out of $10 billion or $100 billion. What it is about is that the entire scheme is nothing but fraud, from top to bottom. What it is about is the fact that every single one of these players, on both sides of this battle, backed up by politicians on both sides of the aisle, have built a system of securitizing the every move of not just Americans, but everyone alive on the planet. Just who agreed to this?

    The true crime here, and both sides of the equation/aisle are fully aware of this little discussed fact, is that for the nearly thousand years that mortgages have existed in our world as legal entities, legal tender, the note and the deed were considered two sides of the same coin. Separate at your peril. Then along comes the pseudo-brilliance of ABS, and it’s suddenly considered old-fashioned to believe in the axiom of bifurcation. I mean, who really cares if the note and deed are separated, as long as it allows the top 1% of the world the capability of earning untold trillions from this new paragon?

    Just like MERS was installed as an industry standard without any beta testing whatsoever, without any input save for the mortgage banker’s associations, the separation of the note and deed became necessary to facilitate the ramp up to a derivatives market that trades upon the sweat of….you guessed it, me and you. Notice how we keep cropping up in the business plans of the elite? Once again there was no discussion. No agreements. No studies. Were you ever told that you and your home, your F-150, your credit card purchase, your school loan, your savings towards your child’s education or your retirement account was going off to the mega-bucks casino that only the uber-wealthy have chips to play at?

    Were you ever informed of even the remote possibility that if and when the massive amounts of leverage being used to securitize our lives were to get a little wonky, if the hinge suddenly became unhinged, that the whole edifice could or would come crashing down destroying the entire world’s now global economy, forcing tens of millions out of work and even more to lose their homes to totally fraudulent actions? And that if in fact the unthinkable were to happen, we’d be forced to pay these same financial institutions trillions of dollars so as to make them all whole again, with the assurance that we’d all get back to work shortly and everything would return to normal? Where in the hell is there any sign of intelligent life in this line of thinking? Does

    Back to the NY and DE AGs deal….everybody agrees that the $8.5 billion settlement should be a far greater number than this. Is this bad summer stock dinner theater, just like we’ve seen over and over again with the 50 state AGs who are heralding a few billion dollars spread among the banks like it’s a deadly wound? Or the recent $108 million dollar FTC/CW settlement that patted itself on the back as being a just and courageous win, even though people here have said that they couldn’t even take their families out to dinner OR a movie (not to confuse going to both on the same tab) from their proceeds from the very same settlement.

    If in fact all of these maneuverings by the AGs and the investors manage to up the figure due by Countrywide to say…$15 billion, or even $100 billion, or say…a trillion dollars…. will this make everyone believe the sins have been expunged? Will everything now be proper and acceptable? Has this theatrical presentation been successful? Wrongs righted? Frauds corrected? AGs satiated?

    What has this accomplished towards fixing the ludicrous nature of the entire shift in reality that we now find ourselves in? Who gives a shit if a bank has to pay a settlement small or large, when our lives are now completely controlled by a system that makes serfdom look like easy country living?

    I’d really like to know how and why when I approached my state’s AG on two separate occasions with briefcases full of papers detailing bank fraud on a massive scale, tens of thousands of instances, they simply shrugged their shoulders like their mom was calling and they were late for an overdue nap. “We can’t prosecute. We have limited means.” I was told. “Talk to Commerce, maybe they can do something.” Oh…OK. Then justify your existence please. Why are any of you even breathing while on the state’s payroll? At least have the decency to punch out on the time clock while you turn your collective backs on these crimes!

    I know better than to believe this impotence at prosecution rhetoric, due to the fact that these same AGs love to get it up long enough to bust multiple small modification firms who get within the crosshairs of the MARS statute, even when the busted group’s hearts were in the right place attempting to defend homeowners against bankster fraud such as repeated lost faxes/notes and such. Having said that, I hope I’m wrong about Scneiderman and Biden. I really do.

    Whereas TPTB have a really easy time hiding nearly everything they do behind iron OCC walls that are further hidden behind titanium SEC walls, it’s very difficult for us lowlifes to pierce into the truth behind their actions. But I find it safer to always err on the side of believing that their every move is all about deep-screwing mere mortals like you and I, all the while preserving their cocktail hours at the gated villa, as well as keeping their casino humming 24/7/365.

    So lean back from the oars and loosen your leg irons, try and wipe your brow long enough to determine what is actually going on in press releases, in court actions, and in real time. I can guarantee you that it’s almost never what you think it is, nor what we’re being told to believe.

  15. “Banks sold to GSEs (freddie/fannie) — but loans were not compliant. These are the loans F/F have put back to banks like BofA (not yet in default — but, will likely be). But, banks knew that most of these loans that were not compliant — would eventually default — and that the collection rights would be sold back to banks (this is different from repurchase – however, repurchase likely includes delinquent loans). Bank servicers starting manufacturing defaults to get the collection rights faster and sooner from F/F. Bank sells collection rights to subsidiary Depositor, Depositor sells certificates to trust to bank’s other subsidiary – the security underwriter. The security underwriter then owns the certificates to the trust — in effect, collection rights have been converted into certificates. Then security underwriter repackages the certificates into CDOs and squared CDOs — that is where the cash flows are passed through to “derivative” security investors (largely institutions — not consumers). All that is passed-through is cash flows — nothing more.
    Trustee role is limited. The title companies were aware of what was going — simultaneously — as refinance “orginations” were going on — the loan was being put into default at GSE — with collection rights being sold to bank debt buyers. But, because the transactions were happening simultaneously — the title company would just ignore that huge piece of flawed chain of title — which was never divulged. Impossible that title companies did not know. Thus, mortgage origination — was false — refinance not a mortgage refinance — and title is flawed from the onset.
    This is why we only hear about loan modifications for interest rate adjustments — and not for principal reduction. In order for principal reduction — must be a whole new contract — and title must be complete and accurate. They know they cannot fix this.
    Whole goal by government is simply “to get rid of this nightmare” — by pushing through foreclosures as quickly as possible.
    The government is aware of everything — they knew at crisis onset — and they know now. They do not know how to fix without causing more international fall-out — and more problems for banks that continue to be in a precarious position. They have allowed homeowners to be scapegoat.
    The reason all of this was allowed to go on is because of deregulation — and that certain people were making tons of money. Cannot get discovery in courts because of deregulation — they claim “privacy”. And, the government is just continuing to cover-up. “

  16. Example of a trustee and their services to commercial clients.

    The TRUSTEE responsible for the recordings of the SEC transactions and documents and forms including the S-3 Registration Statements and S-3/A Registration Statement Amendments, and related prospectus and prospectus supplement governed by PSA documents.

    All transactions relate back to “pre-funding” agreements inside S-3 and S-3/A governing the forward selling.

    Transactions originated by Mortgage Brokers’ Correspondent eLENDER in Agreement with “Trustees'” Corporate Treasury Services of Wells Fargo Bank NA.

    Pre-funding evidence is the escrow funding payable and issued to the individual settlement agent, the mortgage brokers’ closing agent for every real estate transaction related to the retail consumer loans.

    Many related transactions assigned electronically to one ‘Issuing Entity’ c/o Registrant’s pass through agency.

    The “HANDLER” the “Trustee’ responsible for all of the related transactions on behalf of 2 or 100 (INVESTORS).

    ‘Mortgage notes are assets and as collateral are traded and transactions are recorded incorporating the actual ‘remitters’ (ORDERS) in which the TRUSTEE secured an unrelated third party in the CREDIT FACILITY to pre-fund, the commitments, and handle the origination (sales) and (purchases) of the underwriter/lenders, appraisers, insurance agents, mortgage brokers, real estate agents, warehouse lenders, etc.

    Transaction by transaction fully documented by TRUSTEE. So how come the TRUSTEE Wells FArgo Bank NA in all of the great Jeff Barnes Esq. discussions reveals the TRUSTEE purposefully lies to the court and files falsified documents and falsified statements are recorded in court and NO ONE IN THE DOJ can investigate.

    How many times have I heard defendants state we can’t get a copy of the Escrow, or if they have a copy of a check they can’t find the related entries and Wells FArgo claims they are oppsssieeee lost.

    Wells Fargo hides evidence as one of the owners of the eRegistry including TD Services, as an owner of the CREDIT FACILITY, MERS, etc.

    Electronic transactions now we need legislation for to provide what a check use to provde accurate business document is not longer found to be accurate! when the benefit will be to the TRUSTEE.

    Deutsche Bank Trust ‘TRUSTEE’ dba Bankers Trust Co of California, National Association, handling the ‘SASCO’ pass hrough deposits 2002/2003 choosing the more valuable ‘tradename’ Deutsche Bank Trust Company of Americas’

    Read the ‘S-3’ and ‘S-3\A’ Agreements regarding TRUSTEE and PRE-FUNDING.
    PRE-FUNDING is ‘Escrow’ provided by members of credit facility part of the nationwide network of bank attorneys, real estate attorneys, closing agents, settlement agency, title companies, lenders as underwriters of loans and as aggregators.

    Example ‘Collateral’ and’ Remitters’ transactions recorded by Wells Fargo Bank NA TRUSTEE include transactions of ‘Sellers’ of discounted loans ESCROW deposits funded by unrelated third parties c/o individual settlement agent, deposit safe & snug inside of Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corp c/o Wells Fargo Bank NA ‘Trustee’ for (Wilmington Trust Co) Indenture.

    CTS-Link Wells Fargo Bank NA Trustee
    Frederick MD integrated to

    Wells Fargo is a leading (third party) administrative agent of ‘credit facilities’ where it is not a participant in the facility and a provider of successor debt trustee services.

    Wells Fargo developed our services to address liquidity needs of credit markets. Typically engaged when INVESTORS need to find an ALTERNATIVE provider, or when the current provider is in a conflict situation or is not longer a participant in the credit facility.
    Wells Fargo Bank NA TRUSTEE (c/o Wilmington Trust Co?)

    TRUSTEE works proactively with external counsel, advisors and other parties, with both lending participants and investors. Wells Fargo utilizes dedicated INTRALINKS site for each of the loans that we ‘service’ including all communications, documents requiring dissemination to participants and lender calls, posting financials, amendments and supplements., (Filing Agent? 25,837 transactions using dubious fictitious invalid name of Norwest Asset Sec…..Trust 1998-1 (which is terminated) and hiding the real name c/o Norwest Minneapolis Bank National Association dba Wells FArgo Bank NA as ‘Trustee’.

    Wells Fargo Bank NA Trust Professions review Amendments, consents, waivers, and act upon commercial borrower requests to ensure commercial borrowers as clients receive excellent services. Wells Fargo calculates, collects, distributes debt service amounts to participants. To assit in LOAN’s secondary market, Wells Fargo maintains LOAN SYNDICATIONS AND TRADING ASSOCIATION (“LSTA”) standards for processing your TRADE ASSIGNMENTS. Wells FArgo Bank NA serves as collateral agent, depository, control account, and secured party representative if the existing administrative agent is unable to perform stated roles.

    When you work with Wells Fargo Bank NA TRUSTEE, one of the worlds largest banks youll be able to access expertise from within the Wells Fargo groups in addition to our comprehensive suite of corporate trust products including:

    Account bank
    Cash Manager
    Disbursement Agent
    Exchange Agent
    Loan Facility agent
    Security Agent
    Successor Loan Facility Agent
    Successor Security Agent/Trustee

    Corporate Trust Services is a division of Wells Fargo Bank NA and its subsidiaries including Wells Fargo Bank International and Wells Fargo Securities International Ltd, Wells Fargo Bank International is regulated by the Central bank of Ireland and Wells Fargo Securities International Ltd is authorized and regulated by the United Kingdom’s Financial Services Authority. (copyright) 2022 Wells Fargo Bank NA All rights reserved MC-2503 6/11. The TRUSTEE transactions c/o Norwest Minnesota Bank, NA dba Wells Fargo Bank NA, do their commercial business eLENDING when trading real estate.

  17. Now we’re talkin’ ! Go AG Schneiderman! YOU ROCK!

  18. I had thought I need to write our state (GA) AG and here you say those very words. Please give a link of a letter to use as a template, I will gladly get people involved in writing letters. We need to do this for every state and put these crooks behind bars, NO SETTLEMENTS!

  19. Chase Manhattan Corporation – Attention: DOJ! God will bless you for revealing through the Martin Act. – US TRUST CORP – Jurisdiction NY methodical acquistions & processing Chase Manhattan Corporation.

    Clearly the Norwest Corporation announcement revealing agreements surrounding the newly acquired affiliate (largest producer of non-conforming mortgage products) announced by Norwest Corporation then revealing Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corp, and GMAC-RFC and Bank of America’s Trustee US TRUST and TRUSTEE Norwest Minnesota Bank, N.A, dba Wells Fargo Bank NA (for Wilmington Trust Co)., the national associations part of the Credit Facility who acquired and funded merger Lawyers TItle services and related transactions incorporating title and settlemeent agents nationwide 1995/1997.


    The Corporation, a New York corporation, is a bank holding company subject to the federal Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended. The Corporation’s principal executive office is located at 114 West 47th Street, New York, New York 10036 (telephone 212-852 1000).

    The Corporation’s principal subsidiary is United States Trust Companyof New York (the “Trust Company”), a state chartered bank and trust company. The Trust Company provides trust and banking services to individuals and institutions both nationally and internationally, including investment management, estate and trust administration, financial planning, corporate trust and agency, and personal and institutional banking. The Trust Company is a member bank of the Federal Reserve System and an insured bank of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and is one of twelve members of the New York Clearing House Association.

    The Corporation’s other banking subsidiaries are located in California, Florida and Texas. Limited-purpose trust company subsidiaries of the Corporation are located in New Jersey, Connecticut and Oregon.

    The Corporation, a New York corporation, is a bank holding company subject to the federal Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended.acquired processing business of Chase Manhattan Corp and spun off assets through:

    US Trust Corp/NY (S-3) and (S-3/A) Registration Statements related to incorporating 1994-1996 acquistion of Chase Manhattan Corp….

    11/22/96 U.S. Trust Corp (Prospectus 11/22/1996) Offering NASDAQ (Incorporation of Certain Documents by Reference): 10K Annual Report 12/31/1995 Commission File No 0-20469; 10Q 3/31/96, 6/30/96, 9/30/96; Common Shares For 10 2/9/1995
    01/22/97 S-3/A Amendment #1 to Form S-3: US Trust

    08/20/98 S-3; 9/18/98 S-3; 02/10/99 S-3; 10/5/99 S-3;

    1/22/97 S-3/A

    (includes all the prior registrations of all of the entities owned, merged, acquired, survivied)

    Exhibits include:
    2.1 Merger Agreement dated October 11, 1996 between Lilienthal Associates, U.S. Trust Company of California, N.A., UST-LA, Inc., and John G. Lilienthal, Bruce J. McGregor, and Randall B. Matthews. (1)

    2.2 Asset Purchase Agreement dated November 14, 1996 between Florence Fearrington, Inc., United States Trust Company of New York and Florence Fearrington.(1)

    4.1 Rights Agreement dated as of September 1, 1995, between the Registrant and First Chicago Trust Company of New York, as Rights Agent, filed on September 5, 1995 as Exhibit 1 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form 8-A (the “Form 8-A”) for the registration under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act of Rights to Purchase the Registrant’s Series A Participating Cumulative Preferred Shares. (2)

    4.2 Form of Right Certificate (attached as Exhibit A to the Rights
    Agreement listed at Exhibit 4.1 hereto). (2)

    Who is/was US TRUST Corp in 10K 12/31/1995: U.S. Trust Corporation (the “Corporation”) was incorporated in New York in 1977 and became a bank holding company in 1978. United States Trust Company of New York, a New York bank and trust company (the “Trust Company”), the Corporation’s principal subsidiary, was created as a trust company by Special Act of the New York Legislature in 1853. The Corporation, through the Trust Company and its other subsidiaries, provides investment management, private banking, special fiduciary and corporate trust services to individuals and institutions. At December 31, 1995, the Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries had investment management assets of …


    This Asset Acquisition Agreement (“Agreement”), dated November 14, 1996, among United States Trust Company of New York, a banking institution possessing banking and trust powers chartered under the laws of New York (the “Buyer”), Florence Fearrington, Inc., a New York corporation (the “Seller”) and Florence Fearrington (“Fearrington”), being the only shareholder of the Seller.

    WHEREAS, the Seller desires to transfer, sell, convey, assign
    and deliver to the Buyer, and the Buyer desires to acquire from the Seller substantially all of the assets, properties and business and substantially all of the liabilities of the Seller, upon the terms hereinafter set forth (the “Asset Acquisition”);

    US TRUST (TRUSTEE) (State Bank) IRS 13-29227955 ‘New York’ Jurisdiction & ‘Chase Manhattan Mortgage’

    11/18,1994 U.S. Trust Corp & The Chase Manhattan Corp Agreement.

    U.S. Trust will effect sale of Processing Businesses in 2-steps:
    Spin-off of shareholders asset management, private banking, special fiduciary and corporate trsut businesses (Core Businesses) to new holding company named U.S. Trust Corp with a new bank subsidiary United States Trsut Co of NY.

    Immediatley after spin-off, U.S. Trust, then holding only the Processing Businesses will be merged with an into Chase.

    US Trust Corp/NY formerly New USTC Holdings Corp 1/26/95(Sic Codes 6022 State Commercial Banks 11/15/05, and 6712 Offices of Bank Holding Companies 7/14/199)

    My interest in US Trust was to find out who they were as TRUSTEE is Bank of America N.A. Still working on that one.

    Chase will acquire U.S. Trust’s institutional custody, mutual funds servicing and unit trust businesses (collectively, the “Processing Business)


    The Chase Manhattan Corporation, 1 Chase Manhattan Plaza, New York, New York 10081,

    Chase (“Merger”) & US TRUST Corporation (Registrant)
    & USTC Holdings Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of UST (“SPINCO”) (HOLDING COMPANY “SPINCO’ FOR OWNERS of Chase’s merger stock)

    WHO ‘US TRUST’ CORP? and owner of Chase Manhattan Corporation. And Bank of America, N.A. as TRUSTEE, as related to US TRUST CO?

    TRUSTEES PRE-FUNDING of ESCROWS as assets is how the diabolical plot successfully controlled the real estate industry and collapsed the ecomony September 2008.
    CS FIRS BOSTON (CREDIT SUISSE) Opinion of the ‘Fair Deal’ to the TRUSTEE and Stockhlers, the America people hare their own opinion and knowledge how the economy, third element of our national security intentionally harmed.

    DIABOLICAL ‘ACCOUNTING’ PARTICIPATION IN COLLAPSING THE ECONOMY HEARD AROUND THE WORLD SEPTEMBER 2008? You decide. Here is another ‘TRUSTEE’ story in which Chase Manhatten Corporation was acquired and survived the Merger dba Chase c/o US TRUST and Bank of America NA is TRUSTEE for US TRUST. HELLO!

    What is the ‘history’ of acquistions & mergers as related to September 2008?

    Contained in innocuous Exhibit 99.1
    Letterhead of
    U.S. Trust Corporation
    Dated February 9, 1999


    Unitied States Trust COmpany of New York, 114 West 47th Street, New York, New York (3/22/1995)
    114 West 47th St, NY NY

    U.S. Trust Corporation letter 2/9/1995 to its ‘stockholders’ called to a special meeting in addendum to previous announcement
    “UST has agreed, subject to approval by
    UST’s stockholders, to sell UST’s securities processing businesses and related back office operations, including the assets and certain of the liabilities related thereto (collectively, the “Chase Acquired Business”) to The ChaseManhattan Corporation (“Chase”)”

    In exchange for a ‘tax free’ merger of Chase stock, merger between UST and Chase. All of the businesses, assets and liabilities of UST other than the Chase Acquired Business (“Collectively) the ‘Core Business”) which includes UST’s asset management, private banking, special fiduciary, corporate trust and other non-processing businesses, will be transferred to a newly organized holding company, New USTC Holdings Corporation (“SPINCO”)..
    UST stockholders will retail their equity interest in the Core Businesses in the form of stock in SPINCO which will assume the name “U.S. Trust Corporation” at the time of the transactions.

    The special meeting was to consider
    (i) to approve the distribu described in the Agreement and Plan of Distribution to be entered into amount UST, SPINCO, United States Trust Company of New York, and New U.S. Trust Company of New York, whereby UST will spin off to its stockholders on a …share-for-share basis – – in a non-taxable distribution all the shares of SPINCO which will own the Core Businesses

    (ii) authorize and adopt Agreement and Plant of Merger dated 11/18/1994 between UST and Chase, whereby UST (will then hold onth the Chase Acquired Business) will be merged with an into Chase. In the Merger, holders of common stock of UST will receive for each share owned by them the number of shares of Chase COmmon Stock determined as provided in the Merger Agreement.



    US Trust Corp · 10-K405 · For 12/31/94 ·
    EX-21 Filed On 3/15/95 ·
    SEC File 0-08709 ·
    Accession Number 225971-95-3

    EXHIBIT 21

    U. S. Trust Corporation

    List of Subsidiaries
    State or Other Jurisdiction
    Percent of Incorporation Owned

    United States Trust Company
    of New York New York 100.0%

    United States Trust Company
    International Corporation United States 100.0

    United States Trust Company of New York (Grand Cayman) Ltd. Cayman Islands 100.0

    UST Overseas Corporation Delaware 100.0
    Foreign & Colonial Asset Management London, England 50.0

    UST Property Company, Inc. * New York 100.0
    *Incorporated March 3, 1995 (10-K 405A =Restated Amended)

    U.S. Trust Company of California, N.A. California 100.0

    UST Fiduciary Services Ltd. Delaware 100.0
    U.S. Trust Company of Connecticut Connecticut 100.0
    U.S. Trust Company of Florida Savings Bank Florida 100.0
    U.S. Trust Company of New Jersey New Jersey 100.0
    UST Securities Corporation New Jersey 100.0
    U.S. Trust Company Limited New York 100.0
    U.S. Trust Company of Wyoming Wyoming 100.0
    U.S.T. L.P.O. Corp Delaware 100.0
    U.S. Trust Company of Texas, N. A. Texas 100.0
    Denker & Goodwin, Incorporated Texas 100.0
    UST Financial Services Corp. New York 100.0
    Campbell, Cowperthwait & Company Delaware 100.0
    CTMC Holding Company Oregon 100.0
    CTC Consulting, Inc.Oregon 100.0
    U.S. Trust Company of the Pacific Northwest Oregon 100.0
    Mutual Funds Service Company Delaware 100.0
    Mutual Funds Service Company (Canada) Ltd. Ontario,Canada 100.0
    Technologies Holding Corporation Delaware 100.0
    FTI Partner Corporation New York 100.0

    * Incorporated March 3, 1995

    Chase has filed a Registration Statement on Form S-4 (including exhibitsand amendments thereto, the “Chase Registration Statement”) pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), covering shares of Chase Common Stock issuable in the Merger. This Proxy Statement-Prospectus constitutes both the Proxy Statement of UST relating to the solicitation of proxies for use at the Special Meeting and the Prospectus of Chase filed as part of the Chase Registration Statement.

    UST File No. 0-8709) incorporated by reference 10K year 12/31/1993 as amended Form 10-K/A 8/19/1994, portions of U.S. Trust Corp 1993 Annual Report 10K, Quarterly Reprots 10Q 3/31/1994, 6/30/1994, 9/30/1994, Current Reports 8-K 11/17/1994, 11/18/1994, 12/23/1994

    Chase (File No 1-5945)10-K 12/31/1993, portions Chase Manhattan Corp 1993 Annual Report, 10Q, 3/31/1994, 6/30/1994, 9/30/1994, Current Reports 8-K 1/18/1994, 1/20/1994, 4/18/1994, 4/29/1994, 5/18/1994, 7/18/1994, 8/3/1994, 8/3/1994, 8/11/1994, 10/18/1994, 11/18/1994, 12/7/1994, 12/14/1994, 1/17/1995, 1/17/1995, 1/26/1995 (compensation committe report on executive compensation, 1994 Long-Term Incentive Plan, Proxy 3/11/1994,

    Common Stock Chase described Chases’ registration state on Form 10 filed 4/11/1969, as amended by amendments thereto on Form 8 filed on 6/20,1969, 4/8/1988, 5/17/1990, 4/19/1993, including any amendment or report filed for purpose of updating such description prior to Special Meeting described above in this posting …(Chase Form 10) and (f) description of Chase Junior Participating Preferred Stock Purchase Rights contained in Chases’ Form 8-A filed 2/17/1985, including any amendment or reports filed for the purpose of updating such descriptinprior to the Special Meeting (described above in this posting) Chase Form 8-A)

    All documents filed by UST or Chase pursuant to Section 13(a), 13(c), 14 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act subsequent to the date hereof and prior to the Special Meeting shall be deemed to be INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE and to be a part hereof from the date of such filing…..Page 3 Exhibit 99.1.

    Exhibit 99.2
    US Trust Corp · 10-K405 · For 12/31/94 · EX-99
    Filed On 3/15/95 · SEC File 0-08709 · Accession Number 225971-95-3
    Document/Exhibit Description Pages Size

    1: 10-K405 Form 10-K 66 257K
    2: EX-10 Exhibit 10.9 4 23K
    3: EX-10 Exhibit 10.15 2± 11K
    4: EX-10 Exhibit 10.17 2± 10K
    5: EX-10 Exhibit 10.19 1 7K
    6: EX-10 Exhibit 10.22 2± 10K
    7: EX-10 Exhibit 10.23 7± 29K
    8: EX-10 Exhibit 10.27 3± 15K
    9: EX-11 Statement re: Computation of Earnings Per Share
    10: EX-13 Annual or Quarterly Report to Security Holders
    11: EX-21 Subsidiaries of the Registrant 1 9K
    12: EX-23 Consent of Experts or Counsel 1 9K
    13: EX-27 Financial Data Schedule 2± 9K
    14: EX-99 Exhibit 99.1 328 1,861K
    15: EX-99 Exhibit 99.2 11 52K

    EXHIBIT 99.2


    The following unaudited pro forma condensed statement of condition as of December 31, 1994, unaudited pro forma condensed statement of income for the year ended December 31, 1994 and unaudited pro forma condensed statement of average balances for the year ended December 31, 1994 (collectively, the “Pro Forma Statements”), were prepared to present the estimated effects of the pending Disposition and Merger transaction with The Chase Manhattan Corporation, the related restructuring transactions and the effect of the Services Agreement as if such transactions had occurred for statement of condition purposes as of December 31, 1994 and for statement of income purposes as of January 1, 1994.

    The “Disposition Adjustments” column in each of the Pro Forma Statements includes the following:the reduction in assets and liabilities and the elimination from operations of the revenue and expenses related to the merger of the Chase Acquired Business, and the reduction in Securities and Short-Term Investments and Short-Term Borrowings arising from the Corporation’s rebalancing of its asset and liability structure. The “Other Adjustments” column in each of the Pro Forma Statements includes the following:the balance sheet impact of the nonrecurring adjustments as set forth in footnote (k) of the Notes to Pro Forma Condensed FinancialStatements, and the ongoing impact on the Corporation’s results of operations arising from the nonrecurring adjustments and the Services Agreement including the nonrecurring adjustments that have been incurred during the fourth quarter.

    All of the pro forma adjustments are based upon available information and upon certain assumptions that the Corporation believes are appropriate and include only “exit costs” as defined in Emerging Issues Task Force Issue 94-3 (“EITF 94-3″) that are directly related to the transactions.

    2 SEC Files a Issuer

    2/6/98 2/4/00 005-09353 ’34 SC 13G/A [ * ]

    3/11/94 9/7/95 000-08709 ’34 10-K, 10-K/A, 8-K, DEFA14A, 10-K405, DEF 14A, 11-K, 10-Q, 10-Q/A, 15-12G, 10-C

    114 West 47th St
    New York, New York 10036 U.S.A.

    Phone Number Incorporated In IRS Number Fiscal-Year End SEC CIK # 1-212-852-1000 New York, U.S.A. 13-2927955 12/31 225971

    SIC Code Industry Source As Of
    6022 State Commercial Banks SEC 2/4/00

    7/25/01 11/15/05 028-06577 ’34 13F-HR
    2/10/95 6/28/04 000-20469 ’34 10-12G, 8-A12G, 10-C, DEFS14A, 10-Q/A, 8-K, 10-K, 10-K405, DEF 14A, 10-Q, 11-K
    12/9/98 9/3/02 333-68589 ’33 S-8, S-8 POS
    4/13/99 6/28/00 001-14933 ’34 8-A12B, 10-Q/A, 8-A12B/A, 8-K, 10-K, 10-K/A, 8-K/A, DEFA14A, 425, 10-Q, 15-12B, 11-K [ by Schwab Charles Corp ]
    7/14/99 10/14/99 333-82809 ’33 S-4, 424B3
    10/5/99 333-88489 ’33 S-3
    2/10/99 3/12/99 333-72125 ’33 S-3, 424B3
    ’34 PRE 14A, 10-K, DEF 14A
    9/18/98 9/30/98 333-63683 ’33 S-3, 424B3
    8/20/98 9/8/98 333-61903 ’33 S-3, 424B3
    11/22/96 1/28/97 333-16607 ’33 S-3, S-3/A, 424B3
    11/2/95 033-63899 ’33 S-8
    9/6/95 033-62371 ’33 S-8


  20. […] Livinglies’s Weblog Filed Under: Foreclosure Law News, Foreclosure News Tagged With: crisis, foreclosure, […]

  21. ‘Legal Backgrounder’ Vol 18 No 5 by Robert A McTamaney – 2/28/2003 Whos afraid of the Martin Act?

    New York’s Martin Act In 1986, intentional violations were made felonies. Specified per se criminal and civil liability if the designated acts occur. Extraordinarily broad administrative discovery permitted by the prosecutors. Injunction proceeding requires a showing of likely success on the merits.

    What will happen now?

    The TRUSTEE did not do business with either the consumer as borrower when they took the loan asset as collateral into the ‘Issuing Entity’ and used ‘mortgage brokers’ during Originations who are part of the nationwide network TDServices (CLOUD) integrated with Fidelity (Lawyers TItle Co, LandAmerica, Commonwealth, all those subsidiaries including Chicago TItle…. ) and MERS and Brokers, Dealers, Agents, Distributors who are non-bank affiliates and bank-affilaites.

    The TRUSTEE did not do business with the brokers who sold the certificates to the consumers as investors.

    Table funded loans through the ‘credit facility’ of Wells Fargo Bank NA CTS Link c/o Norwest Minnesota Bank NA Frederick MD, were with intent to PRE-FUNDIJNG of loans (ESCROWS) deposited into Trustee c/o SELLER as Depositor, became the collateral of the issuing entity c/o Registrant and TRUSTEE turned over to Master Servicer and Underwriters who turned over to ‘brokers’ third partys to sell again TRUSTEE not part of transactions but with intent.

    The TRUSTEE sold the assets to FREDDIE MAC and FREDDIE Mac now tryint to sell assets back to Bank of America NA (what role? Servicer?)

    So the Martin Act specifies per se criminal and civil liability if the designed acts occur. Provides vas ttactical advantages placing defendnats in impossible quandary of wishing to cooperate so as to gamer favorabl discretion, whie thereby wiaving possible Fifth Amendment objectiosn which might have been virtually automatic had the questions been asked post-Complaint. It also all but guarantees that sufficient evidence is available before the decision is taken formally to initiate the proceedings and guarantees that maxium public relations pressures will be imposed on potential defendants, resulting in settlements which have been secured not only pre-judgment, but prefiling.

  22. Question: How can the ‘Courts’ ignore substantive omissions of material facts including claiming check processed, and cancelled, and they ‘just don’t have warehouse side of transaction or the deposit of the cancelled check that puts consumer into false defaults?)

    The Clearing House Payments Company LLC
    The Clearing House
    450 West 33rd Street
    New York, NY 10001

    Trustee Payments?

    Would that include payments issued in the 25,837 SEC TRANSACTIONS Registered c/o Wells Fargo Bank NA Trustee
    Frederick MD?

    The Clearing House Payments Company provides payment, clearing and settlement services to its member banks and other financial institutions, clearing almost $2 trillion daily and representing nearly half of the automated-clearing-house, funds-transfer and check-image payments made in the U.S.

    •CHIPS is the leading private-sector U.S. dollar, real-time, clearing and settlement payment utility.

    •EPN is the only private-sector ACH operation, clearing and settling nearly half the U.S. volume.

    •SVPCO Image Exchange is the payments utility that provides efficient, secure, and integrated exchange, settlement and reporting of digital images of paper checks.

    Solutions for Image Exchange

    SVPCO is an industry utility that connects financial institutions to each other. Institutions exchange images through our Image Payments Network and share best practices and industry developments through SVPCO customer forums

    SVPCO can get images from any size financial institution to any size financial institution – and only SVPCO directly routes images to and from your major exchange partners – often saving time and money for your entire program.

    Financial institutions of all sizes
    -Correspondent Bank (to/from) Gateway DTA, 3rd Party Processor, Federal Reserve, Standard DTA

    Gateway DTA (to/from Correspondent Bank, 3rd Party Processor, Financial Institution Member, Standard DTA, Federal Reserve

    Standard DTA to/from Financial Institution Member, Gateway DTA Financial Institution Member, Federal Reserve, 3rd Party Processor, Correspondent Bank

    Federal Reserve to/from Correspondent Bank, 3rd Party Processor, Standard DTA Financial Institution Member, Gateway DTA Financial Institution Member

    •Astoria Federal Savings Connects To SVPCO Image Payments Network
    First S&L To Go Live On Nation?s Largest Image Exchange Network
    2/1/08 (41KB)

    Your mix of work is unique–let us show you how SVPCO adds value to your overall image program.

    Please check all that apply:
    My institution is currently image exchange enabled.

    Whether your financial institution is ramping up or refining its image program, the SVPCO Image Payments Network can get your images where they need to go. Getting started with our network is easy. You’ll have your own experienced Relationship Manager to guide you through each step so you’ll be up and running quickly; and they’ll be with you as your volume and needs change. And, there are few, if any, start-up costs when you choose our Gateway Distributed Traffic Agent (DTA) option. SVPCO was instrumental in creating this industry and we are experts at helping you get the most out of your image exchange program. We are an industry utility serving all-sized financial institutions.

    I would like to receive information on connectivity options.

    I would like to receive information about the SVPCO Image Affiliate

    My organization is not a financial institution but is interested in Image Exchange.

    I would like to learn more about Online Adjustments.

    SVPCO Image Payments Network
    The SVPCO Image Payments Network gets your check images anywhere they need to go with speed, security and certainty. Serving institutions of all sizes, we offer several easy-to-use, economical options to move your images.

    The SVPCO Image Payments Network is unique

    SVPCO is different from other image exchange providers because of the way we move images. It is the fastest, most economical way to move images from institution-to-institution for our largest, highest-volume banks because we route the images directly, with no middleman. Importantly, the critical mass of these banks’ volumes allows most any size financial institution to save as well. Image Payments Network allows participants to use a single connection to directly exchange with the largest financial institutions in the country – making it the fastest and cheapest way to get to these large exchange partners.

    Of course, participants get access to everyone else too. If the institution you are sending images to or receiving from is not a member of our network, then your images will travel through our links with the Fed, correspondent banks and third-party processors. Our SVPCO Image Payments Network can reach over 10,000 endpoints so we are connected to the vast majority of institutions.

    Payment Services
    The Clearing House is uniquely positioned to help financial institutions manage the migration of paper to electronic payments. We manage a full line of payment services including check clearing, electronic check presentment and check image exchange, ACH and wire.

    SVPCO is the Check and Electronic Clearing Service of The Clearing House Payments Company.

    paper – to – electronic

    Operational Excellence and Service
    Our systems meet the highest standards for efficiency and reliability with nearly 100% uptime year after year. It’s just one of the reasons customers rate The Clearing House level of service as “excellent” – overall scores are consistently at or above 4.5 (on a 5 point scale)

    Throughout our history, we’ve developed and implemented “the next great idea” to make your payments business successful. Recent innovations:

    •SVPCO Check Image Exchange
    •EPN Universal Payments Identification Code (UPIC)
    •CHIPS Remittance Information with Payments

    Reference Documents
    Documents that offer additional information regarding image exchange

    •Check 21 Resource Document
    •Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act
    •Use of Check Images By Customers of Financial Institutions
    •Federal Reserve – Payments Study
    •Compelling Reasons To Do Image Exchange
    •Universal Companion Document – DSTU X9.37
    •Universal Companion Document – ASC X9.100-187

  23. Schneiderman trashes homeowners in his zeal: the banks behavior jeopardized Foreclosures? I think not. They got my property with a fraudulent assignment and no note and lots of junk fees, misapplied payments, and forced place insurance.

  24. Where are the copies of the checks and transactions that they can’t find?

    The Clearing House Association is a nonpartisan advocacy organization representing – through regulatory comment letters, amicus briefs and white papers – the interests of its owner banks on a variety of systemically important banking issues.

    The Clearing House Payments Company provides payment clearing and settlement services to its member banks and other financial institutions, clearing almost $2 trillion daily and representing nearly half of the automated-clearing-house, funds-transfer and check-image payments made in the U.S.

    The Clearing House Association LLC, new name 11/24/2008,
    formerly known as The New York Clearing House Association LLC 3/16/1998.No information on stock.
    Active as of 8/5/2011 in NY as a foreign LLC.
    A Delaware LLC which is active. DOS Process that maill will be accepted on behalf of this entity:
    The Clearing House Association L.L.C
    100 Broad Street
    New York, NY 10004

    Note: New York had a DE entity now Inactive ‘The Financial Clearing House, Inc. 5/9/1989 – 9/27/1994

    A lobbying group.with offices in New York, Illinois, California and …

    In 1996 during Lawyers Title Corp merger and acquistions, an 11 member Credit Facility which has grown to 20 largest commercial banks including:

    JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., Bank of New York Mellon Corp., Deutsche Bank AG, UBS AG, U.S. Bancorp and Wells Fargo & Co.

    In September 2009, the Clearing House joined a lawsuit in support of the Federal Reserve after a federal court in New York ruled against the Fed.[1] Filed by Bloomberg News under the Freedom of Information Act, the lawsuit sought records showing where the Fed had lent $2 trillion of taxpayer funds during the bank bailout of the financial crisis of 2008. The Clearing House has filed an appeal before the United States Supreme Court on October 26, 2010.[4] As of March 2011[update], the case remains on appeal.[5]

    The Clearing House was also sued by the State of New York in Andrew Cuomo v. the Clearing House Association, LLC to determine whether the U.S. Treasury’s Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) had the authority to preempt a state’s right to enforce its own fair lending laws against national banks.[6] A 5-4 decision by the Supreme Court overturned previous lower court decisions that had ruled in favor of the Clearing House and the OCC.

    See alsoClearing house (finance)
    Bankers’ clearing house
    Clearing House Interbank Payments System
    Automated Clearing House

    Why would you want to be a member?
    They say they don’t monetarily support – hmmmm -named respondent as defendant and one of the banks of the Credit Facility, like MBNA America Bank NA “MBNA’ the Clearing House Association LLC would provide a Statement of Interest

    For example: Parks et al. v. MBNA America Bank, NA
    No. S183703 (CA Sup. Ct., filed May 5, 2011)

    The Clearing House is an association of leading commercial banks that through an affiliate provides payment, clearing, and settlement services to its member banks and other financial institutions. Eight members of the Clearing House are national banks and two are affiliates of national banks.

    (1) Pursuant to Rule 8.520(f)(4) of the California Rules of Court, undersigned counsel certifies that no party or counsel for a party has has authoried the proposed brief in whole or in part, or made a monetary contribution intended to fund the preparation or submission of the brief. Futhermore, no person or entityother than the Clearing House has made a monetary contribution intended to fund the preparation or submission of the brief.

    (2)The members of the Clearing House are:

    Banco Santanuder, S.A.
    Bank of Ameirica, N.A.
    The Bank of New York Mellon
    The Bank of Tokyo-Mitisubishi UFJ Ltd
    Branch Banking and Trust Co (BBT)
    Capital One, N.A.
    Citibank, N.A.
    Comercia Bank
    Deutsche Bank Trust Co Americas (dba Bankers Trust of Ca,N.A.)
    HSBC Bank USA, N.A.
    JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.
    PNC Bank, N.A.
    The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V.
    U.S. Bank N.A.
    Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

    Brief of Amicus Curiae the Clearing House Association LLC

    The Clearing House is dedicated to protecting and promoting the interests of its members and the commercial banking industry. The Clearing House often presents the views of its members on important public policy issues affecting the commerical banking industry by, among other things, appearing as amicus curiae in federal and state courts in cases raising significant questions of banking law.

    The Clearing House member banks have a substantial interest in the questions presented in this case and in upholding the uniform federal regulation of national banks, including national banks’ lending activities. The Clearing House member national banks’ lending activities. The Clearing House member national banks engage in a wide varietyof lending activities in all 50 states, The application of numerous overlapping and potentially inconsistent state and local restrictions would impose substantial costs and burdens on Clearing House member banks and their customers. Because we believe that the view of the Clearing House will contribute to the Court’s understanding of the issues presented in this case, we respectuflly request that this application be granted.

    Submitted by 2 attorneys of Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
    New York and California

    PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ……………………………………………….. 1

    BACKGROUND ………………………………………………………………….. 6


    “BUSINESS OF BANKING” …………………………………………. 6


    BANKS ……………………………………………………………………….. 8

    ARGUMENT ………………………………………………………………… 12


    SECTION 1748.9 TO NATIONAL BANKS ………………….. 13

    A. The NBA Ordinarily Preempts Local
    Restrictions on a National Bank’s Exercise of
    Statutory Powers ……………………………………………….. 13

    B. Because Section 1748.9 Expressly Regulates
    and Impairs the Exercise of Banking Powers
    Under the NBA, Its Application to National
    Banks Is Preempted ……………………………………………. 15

    C. The Court of Appeal Provided No Basis for
    Departing from Settled Precedent Interpreting
    the NBA ……………………………………………………………. 18


    A. The OCC’s Conclusions on Matters of Federal
    Banking Law—Including Preemption of State
    Law—Have Controlling Weight If Reasonable ……… 21

    B. Section 7.4008 Reflects A Reasonable
    Consideration of Policies Subject to the OCC’s
    Authority Under the NBA …………………………………… 24


    (1) The OCC Reasonably Determined That
    Recent Application of State Laws to
    National Banks’ Banking Activities
    Prevented Banks from Fully Operating in
    the Manner Authorized by Federal Law ……… 25

    (2) The Text and Scope of the OCC
    Regulation Reasonably Comported with
    Previous Authority Concerning Banking
    Preemption ……………………………………………… 27

    (3) The OCC’s Application of Federal
    Consumer Protection Standards
    Reasonably Balanced Relevant Policies ……… 28

    C. The Court of Appeal Did Not Consider the
    OCC’s Deliberative Process or Reasoned
    Considerations and Erred in Finding Section

    7.4008 Invalid ……………………………………………………. 29

    (1) Cuomo and Perdue Do Not Control ……………. 30

    (2) No Other Reason Provided by the Court
    of Appeal Justifies Invalidating Section
    7.4008 …………………………………………………….. 32

    D. Disclosure Laws Targeting Banking Activity
    Such As Section 1748.9 Clearly Interfere with
    the Function and Regulation of National Banks …….. 35

    CONCLUSION ……………………………………………………………….37

    Other Clearing House organization Amicus Curiae

    Amicus Curiae

    •TCF National Bank v. Bernanke
    No. 4:10-cv-04149(LLP)(8th Cir., filed May 13, 2011)

    •Parks, et al. v. MBNA America Bank, N.A.
    No. S183703 (CA Sup. Ct., filed May 5, 2011)

    •Eitzen Bulk A/S v. State Bank of India
    No. 10-3352 (2d Cir., filed April 11, 2011)

    •TCF National Bank v. Bernanke
    No. 4:10-cv-04149(LLP)(DSD filed March 11, 2011)

    •The Clearing House Ass’n L.L.C. v. Bloomberg L.P. et al. and The Clearing House Ass’n L.L.C. v. Fox News Network, LLC
    Nos. 10-543, 10-660 (U.S. Sup. Ct., March 2, 2011)

    •Microsoft Corporation v. i4i Limited Partnership and Infrastructures for Information, Inc.
    No. 10-290 (U.S. Sup. Ct., February 2, 2011)

    •Eitzen Bulk A/S v. State Bank of India
    No. 10-3352-cv (2d Cir., filed January 6, 2011)

    •Global-Tech Appliances Inc. v. SEB S.A., Inc.
    No. 10-6 (U.S. Sup. Ct., filed December 6, 2010)

    •Fox News Network, LLC v. Board of Governors
    No. 09-3795-cv (2d Cir., filed November 5, 2010)

    •Kilgore v. KeyBank, N.A.
    No. 10-15934 (9th Cir., filed November 1, 2010)

    •Samsun Logix Corp., v. Bank of China etl al.
    No. 105262/2010 (U.S. Sup. Ct., filed October 29, 2010)

    •Bloomberg L.P. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
    No. 10-543 (U.S. Sup. Ct., filed October 26, 2010)

    •Capital One Financial Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
    No. 10-1788 (5th Cir., filed October 20, 2010)

    •Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Limited Partnership
    No. 10-290 (U.S. Sup. Ct., filed September 29, 2010)

    •Hausler v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al.
    No. 09 Civ. 10289(VM)(SDNY)July 29, 2010

    •Sinoying Logistics Pte Ltd. v. Yi Da Xin Trading Corp.
    No. 09-5368-cv (2d Cir., filed July 2, 2010)

    •US Bank v. Thomas
    No. 09-1161 (U.S. Sup. Ct., filed April 26, 2010)

    •John Hancock Life Insurance Company v. United States of America
    No. 09-31169 (5th Cir., filed March 10, 2010)

    •Shipping Corp of India v. Jaldhi Overseas Pte. Ltd.
    No. 09-849 (U.S. Sup. Ct., filed February 17, 2010)

    •Fox News Network, LLC v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
    No. 09-3795-cv(2d Cir., filed December 10, 2009)

    •DDJ Capital Management, LLC v. Rhone Capital Group L.L.C.
    No. 601832/07 (NY Ct. of Appeals, filed November 25, 2009)

    •Bloomberg L.P. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
    No. 09-4083-cv(L) (2d Cir., filed November 6, 2009)

    •Bilski v. Kappos
    No. 08-964(U.S. Sup. Ct., filed October 2, 2009)

    •Ex-Im Bank v. Asia Pulp & Paper
    No. 09-2254-cv (2d Cir., filed September 2, 2009)

    •In re HealthSouth Corp. Securities Litigation
    No. 09-90012-H (11th Cir., filed April 24, 2009)

    •Capital One Bank v. Commissioner of Revenue of Massachusetts
    No. 08-1169 (U.S. Sup. Ct., filed April 17, 2009)

    •Cuomo v.The Clearing House Association
    No. 08-453 (U.S. Sup. Ct., filed March 25, 2009)

    •Ex-Im Bank v. Asia Pulp & Paper
    No. 03 Civ. 8554 (DCP)(SDNY)March 24, 2009)

    •Koehler v. Bank of Bermuda
    No. 05-2378-cv (2d Cir. Filed March 17, 2009)

    •Shipping Corp of India v. Jaldhi Overseas Pte. Ltd.
    No. 08-3477-cv (L)(2d Cir. Filed February 24, 2009)

    •Brown Family Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
    No. B196258 (Cal Ct. App., filed January 23, 2009)(Request for Depublication)

    •Cuomo v.The Clearing House Association
    No. 08-453 (U.S. filed December 8, 2008)

    •Peterson v. Islamic Republic of Iran
    No. 08-80030 (N.D. Cal., filed June 9, 2008)

    •Brown Family Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
    No. B196258 (Cal. Ct. App., filed May 22, 2008) (Reed Smith brief)

    •Brown Family Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
    No. B196258 (Cal. Ct. App., filed May 22, 2008)(Munger Tolles brief)

    •In re Bilski
    No. 2007-1130 (Fed. Cir. filed April 7, 2008)

    •The Clearing House Association v. Cuomo
    No. 05-5996-cv (L)(2d Cir. filed March 26, 2008)

    •American Isuzu Motors, Inc. v. Ntsebeza
    No. 07-919 (U.S. Sup. Ct. filed February 11, 2008)

    •Stoneridge Investment Partners, L.L.C. v. Scientific-Atlantic, Inc.
    No. 06-43 (U.S. Sup. Ct., filed August 15, 2007

    •Consub Delaware LLC v. Schahin Engenharia Ltda
    No. 07-0833-cv (2d Cir., filed August 2, 2007

    •FIA Card Services, N.A. v. Tax Commissioner of the State of West Virginia
    No. 06-1228 (U.S. Sup. Ct., filed May 8, 2007)

    •Regents of the University of California v. Credit Suisse First Boston (USA), Inc.
    No. 06-20856 (5th Cir., filed December 13, 2006)

    •Zengen, Inc. v. Comerica Bank
    No. S142947 (CA Sup. Ct., filed November 27, 2006)

    •Watters v. Wachovia Bank, N.A.
    No. 05-1342 (U.S. Sup. Ct., filed November 3, 2006)

    •Vamvaship Maritime Ltd. v. Little Rose Trading LLC
    No. 06-2121 (2d Cir., filed October 3, 2006)

    •U.S. Bank National Association v. Kroske
    No. 05-1607 (U.S. Sup. Ct., filed August 7, 2006)

    •In re Enron Corp. Securities, Derivative & “Erisa” Litigation
    No. 06-20856 (5th Cir., filed July 26, 2006)

    •The Clearing House Association v. Spitzer
    No. 05-5996-cv (CON) (2d Cir., filed May 26, 2006)

    •Banco Nacional de Mexico, S.A. v. Societe Generale
    No. 603266/04 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. App. Div. First Dept., dated February 23, 2006)

    •Aqua Stoli Shipping Ltd. v. Gardner Smith Pty Ltd.
    No. 05-5385cv (2d Cir., filed February 22, 2006)

    •Quaak v. Dexia Bank Belgium
    No. 05-2580 (1st Cir., filed January 11, 2006)

    •Wachovia v. Schmidt
    No. 04-1186 (U.S. Sup. Ct., filed August 18, 2005)

    •Regatos v. North Fork Bank
    No. 03-9024 (NY Ct. of Appeals, filed June 1, 2005)

    •NML Capital, Ltd. v. Republic of Argentina
    No. 05-1543-cv(L)(2d Cir., filed April 20, 2005)

    •EM Ltd. v. Republic of Argentina
    No. 05-1525-cv (2d Cir., filed April 20, 2005)

    •In re Owens Corning
    No. 04-4080 (3d Cir., filed December 29, 2004

    •Simpson v. Homestore.com., Inc
    No. 04-55665 (9th Cir., filed December 21, 2004)

    •Agency for Deposit Insurance v. Superintendent of Banks of the State of New York
    No. 04-4997, 4999 (2d Cir., filed December 16, 2004)

    •American Bankers Association v. Lockyer
    No. 04-16334 (9th Cir., filed August 9, 2004)

    •Macrotecnic International Corp. v. Republic of Argentina ,
    No. 02 CV 5932 (TPG) (SDNY); EM Ltd. v. Republic of Argentina, No. 03 CV 2507 (TPG) (S.D.N.Y., filed January 12, 2004)

    •Wachovia Bank, N.A. v. Burke
    No. 303 CV 0738 (MRK) (D. Conn., filed September 25, 2003)

    •TPI v. Winter Storm Shipping
    Ltd., No. 02-1506 (U.S., filed May 16, 2003)

    •Casa De Cambio Comdiv S.A. DE C.V. v. United States
    No. 02-710 (U.S., filed February 12, 2003)

    •Frazier v. O’Neill
    No. 02 CV 7642 (JES); Daliberti v. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., No. 02 CV 9773 (JES) (S.D.N.Y., filed December 30, 2002)

    •Winter Storm Shipping
    Ltd. v. TPI, No. 02-7078 (2nd Cir., filed November 20, 2002)

    •Visa U.S.A., Inc. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc
    No. 01-1464 (U.S., filed May 6, 2002)

    •In re LTV Steel Co
    No. 00-43866 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio)

  25. All Bank “Property Preservation” is Unlicensed Contracting, It’s Time For Our State To Act!

    August 6th, 2011 | Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq. I have had it with the banks hiring jack booted thugs to kick down doors, change locks and remove personal property.This is a dangerous violation of fundamental rights that must not be allowed to continue.

    I am disappointed that law enforcement across this state has bought into the lies and campaign of misinformation conducted by the banks and their shady network of subcontractors. The law is clear, the banks do not have the right to enter any home until they have a lawful order signed by a judge.

    An American’s home is his castle and it must not be subject to search or entry without a lawful order of a court

    and executed with law enforcement present.

    Law enforcement agencies all across this state are being inundated with calls from consumers complaining of unauthorized break ins by the banks, but they take the side of the banks and their thugs. Most recently read the following report issued by the Hernando County Sheriff’s Office about an incident that happened to Chris Boudreau. Now, Boudreau disputes much of what is contained within this report, and there are many other more damming facts that are not included. The point to be made here is the guy’s home was forcibly broken into, his stuff was stolen and law enforcement will not protect him.

    Unfortunately, law enforcement in this country will not begin to act until someone is killed or seriously hurt when one of these incidents occur.

    Until they do wake up and start defending the homes of the people they have sworn an oath to protect, it’s time to pursue another avenue that will provide some means of protection, Florida’s Unlicensed Contracting Law:

    “Contractor” means the person who…for compensation, undertakes to, submits a bid to, or does himself or herself or by others construct, repair, alter, remodel, add to, demolish, subtract from, or improve any building or structure, including related improvements to real estate, for others or for resale to others; and whose job scope is substantially similar to the job scope described in one of the subsequent paragraphs of this subsection.

    “Contracting” means engaging in business as a contractor and includes, but is not limited to, performance of any of the acts as set forth in subsection (3) which define types of contractors. The attempted sale of contracting services and the negotiation or bid for a contract on these services also constitutes contracting. If the services offered require licensure or agent qualification, the offering, negotiation for a bid, or attempted sale of these services requires the corresponding licensure.

    So What’s the Penalty?

    (2)(a) Any unlicensed person who violates any of the provisions of subsection (1) commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

    (b) Any unlicensed person who commits a violation of subsection (1) after having been previously found guilty of such violation commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
    It’s time for Florida’s Construction Industry Licensing Board to really step in here and support the hard working and law abiding licensed contractors who must be hired to perform any of the work currently being performed by the banks and their thugs.

  26. CLOUD accessed via subscribers of
    TD Services dba TD Escrow Services whose members and subscribers include ‘Trustee’s all platforms who access global data integrating FIDELITY, global bank trustees, nationwide trustees. MEMBERS of TDS have access to MERS, FIDELITY, etc.

    FIDELITY parent of LPS/DOCX integrated with TD Services & MERS

    TD Servicers dba TD Escrow Services (via CLOUD) subscribers have access to records of Fidelity and LPS/DOCX,,LLI, transactions traded among MERS MEMBERS, updates via eLynx, SERVICE-Link, and Clearing House Finance LLC, Credit Facility, and if you don’t know who these are you should.

    Wells Fargo Bank NA TRUSTEE 1998 for Wilmington Trust Co.
    Does that mean every transaction or only some? Or is just c/o Wells Fargo Bank NA, who handles the collaterl, remitters, etc. for over 25,837 Commerical Client deals and millions of assets pre-funded by credit facility listed above as related to nationwide network of attorneys in real estate, banking, lending, underwrirint, insurance, etc, and title and settlement agencies dba under private brand label such as Cendant Settlement Services, PHH Settlement Services, and whose real estate related industries agents, dealers, brokers, distributors are connected to Wells Fargo Bank NA Trustee’s ‘mortgage brokers’ in storefronts who sit inside of Correspendent eLENDERS dba Wells FArgo Funding fka Norwest Funding and Norwest Funding II.

    Anyway, the escrow check that comes from the unrelated party referred to as table funding is part of the 11 now 20 bank credit facility listed above. The Wells Fargo Bank NA TRUSTEE tracks the collateral via the remistters for their clients they manage the trusts for.

    The ‘trust funds’ are not the end fo the considerations we need to be concerned with affecting consumers. No based upon Freddie Mac selling back to Bank of America NA TRUSTEE (US TRUST) I had to wonder what.

    What did FREDDIE MAC buy? The COLLATERAL. What is the collateral – for them the assets the receivables of the mortgage notes. Is FREDDIE MAC a SERVICER?

    Robo-firm in David Stern in Agreement with FREDDIE MAC.
    David Stern’s sue FREDDIE MAC for $1.3 Million dollar lawsuit March 2011, involving over 100,000 cases in FLORDIA alone,

    Question: How did this lawsuit affect cases in courts in NJ and other states. And specifically discussed affected the cases of ‘other’ ROBO-Firms including Zucker Goldberg and Ackerman LLC … as documented by Jeff Barnes Esq. another WordPress foreclosure advocate.
    Former David Stern’s — Clients are primarily ‘securitization’ trustee banks and servicers. Reading Corporate Trust Services of Wells Fargo Bank NA, I realize sold to FREDDIE MAC the collateral it Services.

    One must ask “Why would David Stern and FREDDIE MAC affect New Jersey cases in NJ courts handled by REED SMITH and ‘Zucker Goldberg Ackerman LLC’ robo-mill”? for example.

    TheTrustee’s sold to FREDDIE MAC all of the collateral they acquired from the TRUSTESS, and FREDDIE MAC used inside of their deals as collateral and sold ‘something’ to?

    Now FREDDIE MAC, wants to RETURN to Bank of America NA TRUSTEE dba US TRUST the collateral of the assets they used inside of the deals they sold to third parties. Under? REPRESENTATIONS? of ‘mortgage note assets as collateral’

    Is ‘Freddie Mac’ the MASTER SERVICER? of the ‘Collateral’ and Wells FArgo Bank NA the TRUSTEE, Bank of America NA TRUSTEE?

    Common denominator in all Retail Transactions during Origination:
    Mortgae Broker & Trustee of ‘Trust Funds’ (as Seller, Depositor, Securities Admin, Master Servicer, Servicer)

    Trustee responsible for its commercial ‘clients’ PRE-FUNDING.
    Part of the table funding of individual consumers as borrowers – the unrelated third party comes from the ‘credit facility’ stable of the trustee.

    The CREDIT FACILITY funds transactions for its client.

    Forward selling ‘assets’. as collateral, tracking ‘remitters’ evidence of transactions by trustees and evidence of who ‘ordered by’ and evidence of the 10 digit agreement number. The MIN# contains the 10 Digit Agreement Number following the 7 digit prefix and reveal in the MIN# the asset traded under a separate Sales Agreement traded and tracked by a MERS MEMBER.

    All of the ‘Wells Fargo Bank NA transactions as TRUSTEE are many over 25,837 on the SEC alone recording under Filing Agent Wells Fargo Bank NA formerly or still known as Norwest Minnesotta Bank, NA per 1998 ‘Indenture’ and ‘T-1’ AGreement as Trustee for ‘Wilminton Trust Co.’

    Can the TRUSTEE be the Seller, Depositor, Originator, Servicer, Securities Admin, etc? and the Credit Facility forward selling ‘collateral’ to FREDDIE MAC?

    During defaults, now we understand when ‘Wells FArgo Bank NA’ assignes they are the ‘TRUSTEE” and ordered by the ‘Master Servicer’ and ‘Trustee’ to assign a substitute trustee, in my case US Bank – Structured Asset Securities Corp 2006-WF3 Loan Trust, a securitized mortgage loan trust with individual borrower loans contained inside of commercial securitizations.

    Jeff Barnes Esq. discussion NJ robo-mills case delays caused by David Sterns affecting delay in cases in NJ. Curious? David Sterns not turning over the Case Files? What? Or vulnerbility waiting for suit to be vacated? David Stern suing FREDDIE MAC for $1.3M in receivables.

    Jeff Barnes Esw Foreclosure Defense Nationwide you can google

    Jeff Barnes proved 4/12/2011 – Summary Judgement’ against Deutsche Bank as Trustee of a securitized mortgage loan trust over ‘commercial loans’ were securiized and assets of the ‘trust funds’

    Wonder if Jeff Barnes knows in 2002 Bankers Trust of CA began using tradename of Deutche Bank Trust Company ‘a preferred more valuable tradename’ coincidently 2002/2003 time period when MERS connected with SEC to do all ‘commercial transactions’ soup to nuts and proved same 2nd half of 2003 when Wells Fargo ‘won’ OCC approval to not be monitored by State of CA and only under OCC vistorial powers. That’s why all Wells Fargo Bank NA “TRUSTEE’ – is the fair hair child of over 25,837 transactions over SEC related to the ‘credit facility group of banks’ related to Clearing Systems.

    Freddie 100,000 transactions and David Sterns in FL affected nation’s Case File related to ‘Wells FArgo Bank NA Trustee’ sold to FREDDIE MAC and other ‘Trustees like US TRUST for Bank of America NA, and Deutsche Bank Trust Americas for Bankers Trust CA another NA, … preferred private brand label ‘tradenames’

    Same would therefore be true of FANNIE MAE and info revealed – most interesting- in case of 15,000 Case Files and ben Ezra Katz PA -attached.

    Firm: Levine Kellogg Lehman Schneiger + Grossman LLPO
    201 So. Biscayne Blvd, 34th Floor
    Miami FL 3131
    Jeffrey C. Schneider PA
    Forida Bar 933244
    Amanda Star Frazer, Esq.
    Fax 305-403-8789
    Phone 305-403-8788

    Freddie Mac – Fannie MAE sues the ‘agents’ (robo-firms) it hires to get back the 15,000 (accounts called ‘loans’) its ‘assets’ it purchased from the ‘trustee’ Wells Fargo Bank NA who collected and prefunded the loans for Freddie.

    See the terminalogy incorporated into evidence in copy of case attached.

    See languge page 3, second para inside of 9.

    ‘At any time, upon request from Fannie Mae, you must return or transfer any or all files as Fannie Mae may identify to Fannie Mae or its ‘designee.’

    In addition, you acknowledge that any legal files your firm develops relating to a Fannie Mae-owned or Fannie Mae-securitized mortgage or a Fannie Mae REO belong to Fannie Mae and agree that your firm will not assert any lien rights against the files at any time.

    Upon termination of your firm’s Services with Fannie Mae, you will deliver to Fannie Mae or Fannie Mae’s designed legal representative (upon request) all documents, records, and word products created and/or compiled hereunder, in electronic formate and in paper format if avialble.

    2/10/2011 Fannie Mae terminated Agreement with Ben-Ezra.
    Fannie Made demands Case Files

    At present 15,000 cases Ben-Ezra handling on behalf of Fannie Mae.

    Fannie Mae must transfer matters quickly to successor counsel for parties and properties related to 15,000 cases are not prejudiced by any delay.

    Case files contain ‘original’ executed Promissory Notes and Mortgages securing Fannie Mae’s interests.


    Fannie Mae counsel states
    Page 4, 15.
    Without the Case Files, in particular original executed Promissory Notes and Mortgages, Fannie Mae is unable to confirm state of or proceed with cases, transfer the cases… or conclude the cases and will blame this party Ben-Ezra for having loast and altered documents, records work products including applicable-attorney-client privledges until same can be delviered to Fannie Mae.

  27. “(2) repeatedly failing to provide complete mortgage files as it was required to do under the Governing Agreements;”

    When Schneiderman and Biden finally open up those (fake) mortgage files—oh boy—here we go!!!

  28. LOS ANGELES TIMES – 7/14/11

    California may join probe of Wall Street’s role in mortgage meltdown
    New York’s and Delaware’s investigation could lead to criminal charges against financial executives. ‘California was disproportionately harmed by the mortgage crisis, and our homeowners badly need relief,’ the state’s attorney general says.
    Los Angeles TimesPeople close to the investigations said the lawyers are looking at whether the banks misled investors about the risks of the bonds and whether they even had proper title to the underlying mortgages they were selling.

    The moves by Schneiderman and Biden go significantly further than a current effort by all 50 state attorneys general to take banks to task for their work in servicing foreclosures, which became an issue only after the financial crisis began.

    That nationwide effort was expected to have produced a big settlement by now — for more than $20 billion — but negotiations have been slow, and the outlines of the deal have been criticized by consumer advocates and former regulators for letting banks off too lightly.

    One of the sticking points in the negotiations is a request from the banks for immunity from further investigations, such as those being conducted by New York and Delaware.

    In a call with analysts Thursday, JPMorgan Chief Executive Jamie Dimon said his bank wants to come to an agreement but doesn’t want to be open to further prosecution.

    “We’re not going to do it and be subject to double and triple jeopardy,” Dimon said.

    Schneiderman and Biden are still involved in the national settlement negotiations, but Schneiderman has said he is concerned that the other attorneys general will grant the banks immunity.

    Harris is weighing whether she would sign on to the settlement if it gave banks immunity, a person familiar with her thinking said.

    How large the pot of money going to California homeowners is the biggest consideration in any deal, that person said.

    In May, Harris announced the creation of a 25-person task force to look at mortgage fraud, but she recently said that effort could be thrown into limbo by state budget cuts imposed this month.

    “The budget cuts were a real challenge, are a real challenge, but the attorney general is literally working every hour, is literally working right now to mitigate those,” said Michael Troncoso, senior counsel to Harris.

    Schneiderman’s office has requested documents from seven investment banks that sold mortgage-backed bonds to investors; two banks that held the mortgages while they were turned into bonds; four companies that insured the bonds; and two law firms that helped negotiate the process, according to people close to the investigation.

    Delaware has separately subpoenaed MERS, the company that was responsible for registering the mortgages before they were turned into bonds, the people said.

    None of the firms would comment on the investigation.


    Take your State’s AG to task!!! Things are moving in the right direction and now is the time to pound on people whose wages we pay!

  29. It is positive that the alegations have been made. A settlement without an investigation of the liability exposure and victim damages–past and present would fail the public interest. Without this state,ent of allegations and necessary investigation for prosecution –the settlement would have no economic or deterrant effect.

    if the corporation is liable but buys out criminal charges, arguments can be made that it is of little use to criminalize a corp any further than tpo compell restitution etc—-but there should be no settlement inviolving criminal prosecution of the individuals that were creative enough to commit many of the breaches and gain some economic advantage, then those individuals’ conduct must be prosecuted irrespective of this agreement. they should at least have to spend their gains on defense and be deterred immediately from profiting during this second pahase.

    The original footprint in the retail population drove up are prices comparables with unrealistict deals. This manipulated upward the prices paid by all–those not yet in default or who can afford the deals. So far.

    There were realtors–appraisers and developers and brokers on the ground that have profited handsomely and used the tactics–the actual face of the criminal enterprise. This gang remains in operation and is profiting by insurance fraud, closed self-dealing and worse–using strong-arm thugs as needed. Property preservers that instead strip properties at night.
    The criminal enterprise has a temporal dimension–it is not as if it was not thought out. It continues with all the money they got away with on the front end to speculate with.

  30. Finally, someone is coming forward to do something that substantially nails the thieves. Delware’s Biden coming in with Schneiderman is really good news. Let’s hope the Judge in this mess doesn’t wimp out.

  31. WASHINGTON — Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden signaled his intent Friday to intervene in a proposed $8.5 billion settlement over troubled mortgage securities between Bank of America and a group of investors, uniting with his New York counterpart Eric Schneiderman, who argued a day earlier that the deal is unfair and its participants committed fraud.

    Ian McConnell, director of Biden’s consumer protection unit, told a New York state judge that the state of Delaware intends to file paperwork early next week asking to become a full party in the suit. If granted, that status would allow the state to comment on and question virtually every move “from start to finish” as Bank of America and the investors attempt to end their multi-billion dollar spat.

    It would also give Delaware the right to investigate the claims the deal strives to settle, like whether the lender and the other bank involved in the case, Bank of New York Mellon, followed state law when creating these mortgage securities, and when they moved to foreclose on homeowners who defaulted on their obligations.

    The two attorneys general represent states whose laws govern nearly all mortgage securitization trusts, vehicles that bundle home loans and issue notes to investors. Both offices have teamed up to investigate allegations that Wall Street firms failed to properly assemble loan documents in accordance with their states’ laws when creating mortgage securities.

    Schneiderman, New York’s attorney general, argued in court papers Thursday that the bank overseeing the trusts, Bank of New York Mellon, “knowingly, repeatedly, and consistently” misled investors into thinking that the mortgage bonds were created properly. The bank also put its own interests before those of the investors it was supposed to be representing, he said.

    BNY Mellon, one of the largest U.S. banks by assets, engaged in “repeated fraud and illegality,” Schneiderman charged, which occurred “literally hundreds of times.”

    Schneiderman linked the paperwork failures to the foreclosure crisis, arguing that the alleged shortcomings in gathering and processing documents effectively had led to “foreclosure fraud,” like in cases that involved so-called “robo-signing.”

    A BNY Mellon spokesman called Schneiderman’s charges “baseless.” McConnell declined to comment on Schneiderman’s allegations.

    The action by Schneiderman and Biden threaten the proposed accord between BofA and 22 of the world’s most prominent investors. The investors had demanded Bank of America repurchase home loans packaged into 530 mortgage trusts with a original loan balance of $424 billion. The proposed $8.5 billion payout represents less than 4 cents on the dollar of the current unpaid balance, or about $220 billion, according to Bank of America’s most recently quarterly filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

    McConnell said in a phone interview that 527 of the trusts were created per New York law. The remaining three are governed by Delaware law, he said.

    “We have enough information to think we have reasons to be concerned,” McConnell said. “There may be serious issues regarding conflicts and concerns over the general value proposition of the deal for Delaware investors.”

    Bank of America is effectively indemnifying BNY Mellon for costs and liabilities arising from its duties as trustee. Some investors not party to the current deal have charged that BNY Mellon has a conflict of interest. New York’s top law enforcement officer agrees.

    “There’s a paucity of information,” McConnell said of the settlement deal and of how the final dollar figures were derived. “We’d be in a position to gather more information” when Delaware joins the suit, he added.

    Countrywide Financial, the nation’s largest mortgage lender when purchased by BofA in 2008, failed to properly pool loan documents needed for the creation of mortgage securities, and BNY Mellon effectively looked the other way in its role as overseer of these instruments, Schneiderman said in court documents. This “apparently triggered widespread fraud,” he said.

    BNY Mellon should have known the mortgage securities were improperly created because the evidence was “abundant,” Schneiderman said, citing the bank’s own documents, news coverage of the issue and foreclosure actions brought on BNY Mellon’s behalf.

    In addition, Schneiderman accused Bank of America of fabricating the missing documents when it came to foreclosing on homeowners who defaulted on their loans.

    If the settlement is not finalized, Bank of America’s future mortgage-related losses could be “substantially different” than what the lender has set aside and already braced investors for, the bank said in its filing.

    Shares of Bank of America, the largest U.S. bank by assets, touched $8.03 in New York trading on Friday, a 52-week low. They’re down 26 percent over the past month.

    The cost to protect Bank of America’s bonds against default have surged more than 17 percent since last Friday, according to Markit.

    It now costs $207,000 to protect $10 million of BofA’s debt, as of Friday’s close. Last week, it cost just $176,000. The price of credit protection generally increases as investor confidence deteriorates.








    Send us a Link

    Contact us

  32. Erik Schneiderman for President!

  33. This is so good to see happening. I know it is still to soon to dance in the streets, but I do believe everyone fighting this crime in their own way, no matter how small and or in a big way, especially the bloggers and good attorneys out their with morals and conscions, and hearts, need to be thanked for their due diligence and persistant support to fight these criminals and to help the homeowners in every way they could. We have a long fight ahead of us. Keep up the good work! There is a God and he is there for us. God Bless America and all the knowledgable people on this earth guiding us.

  34. Write to your state AG. Demand that he/she takes a public stand to uphold his/her public servant mandate by joining forces with Shneiderman, Coakley, Harris and all the other AGs willing to fight for America and for justice. I did. My letter is posted in the 4 previous posts. Inundate the AGs with letters and e-mails cc’d to your state reps. We need to recover the monies stolen by banks and mortgage servicers if we ever want to get out of this slump. Make them understand that we are watching their every moves.

    Remember: we put them there. We can as well take them down if the don’t earn the salary we pay them.

  35. We are at War – China demands US to reduce social welfare and military spending


    The United States is at war, and we have been for a very long time now. But this war did not start with any discernible military or violent act, its roots are far deeper and more pervasive….the war has been raging in our financial markets and worldwide economic system….and the United States of America has lost this war.

    Things are going to get very, very ugly in this country. In this world. Time for us all to stand together.

    Read the attached article carefully,

    “The U.S. government has to come to terms with the painful fact that the good old days when it could just borrow its way out of messes of its own making are finally gone,”

    “China, the largest creditor of the world’s sole superpower, has every right now to demand the United States address its structural debt problems and ensure the safety of China’s dollar assets.”

    “International supervision over the issue of U.S. dollars should be introduced and a new, stable and secured global reserve currency may also be an option to avert a catastrophe caused by any single country.”

    “It urged the United States to cut military and social welfare expenditure. Further credit downgrades would very likely undermine the world economic recovery and trigger new rounds of financial turmoil, it said.”

    Yahoo News


Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: