GLOVES OFF? Massive Wave Of Lawsuits To Be Filed By The US Against America’s Biggest Banks

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

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

ANOTHER BANK BAILOUT???

Massive Wave Of Lawsuits To Be Filed By The US Against America’s Biggest Banks As Soon As Tomorrow

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/01/2011 22:30 -0400

FROM www.zerohedge.com

In a move that could either send BAC stock limit down overnight or send it soaring (we are still trying to figure out just what is going on here), the NYT has broken major news that the US is preparing to go nuclear on more than a dozen big banks among which Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank, in an attempt for Fannie and Freddie to recoup $30 billion if not much more. The lawsuit is expected to hit the docket in the next few days: “The suits stem from subpoenas the finance agency issued to banks a year ago. If the case is not filed Friday, they said, it will come Tuesday, shortly before a deadline expires for the housing agency to file claims.” Now, taken at face value, this would mean that Bank of America can kiss its ass goodbye as unlike the Walnut Place litigation, this will take place in Federal Court where Article 77 is not applicable. Yet there is something that gives us pause: namely logic, captured by the following words: “While I believe that F.H.F.A. is acting responsibly in its role as conservator, I am afraid that we risk pushing these guys off of a cliff and we’re going to have to bail out the banks again,” said Tim Rood, who worked at Fannie Mae until 2006 and is now a partner at the Collingwood Group, which advises banks and servicers on housing-related issues.” In other words: if the banks are sued, and if justice prevails, the end of the world is nigh and cue TARP 2 – XXX. Now where have we heard that argument over, and over, and over before.

From the NYT:

The suits will argue the banks, which assembled the mortgages and marketed them as securities to investors, failed to perform the due diligence required under securities law and missed evidence that borrowers’ incomes were inflated or falsified. When many borrowers were unable to pay their mortgages, the securities backed by the mortgages quickly lost value.

Fannie and Freddie lost more than $30 billion, in part as a result of the deals, losses that were borne mostly by taxpayers.

In July, the agency filed suit against UBS, another major mortgage securitizer, seeking to recover at least $900 million, and the individuals with knowledge of the case said the new litigation would be similar in scope.

Private holders of mortgage securities are already trying to force the big banks to buy back tens of billions in soured mortgage-backed bonds, but this federal effort is a new chapter in a huge legal fight that has alarmed investors in bank shares. In this case, rather than demanding that the banks buy back the original loans, the finance agency is seeking reimbursement for losses on the securities held by Fannie and Freddie.

The prestory is by now known by everyone:

Besides the angry investors, 50 state attorneys general are in the final stages of negotiating a settlement to address abuses by the largest mortgage servicers, including Bank of America, JPMorgan and Citigroup. The attorneys general, as well as federal officials, are pressing the banks to pay at least $20 billion in that case, with much of the money earmarked to reduce mortgages of homeowners facing foreclosure.

And last month, the insurance giant American International Group filed a $10 billion suit against Bank of America, accusing the bank and its Countrywide Financial and Merrill Lynch units of misrepresenting the quality of mortgages that backed the securities A.I.G. bought.

Bank of America, Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan all declined to comment. Frank Kelly, a spokesman for Deutsche Bank, said, “We can’t comment on a suit that we haven’t seen and hasn’t been filed yet.”

The response? Why Paulson-esque Mutual Assured Destruction:

But privately, financial service industry executives argue that the losses on the mortgage-backed securities were caused by a broader downturn in the economy and the housing market, not by how the mortgages were originated or packaged into securities. In addition, they contend that investors like A.I.G. as well as Fannie and Freddie were sophisticated and knew the securities were not without risk.

Investors fear that if banks are forced to pay out billions of dollars for mortgages that later defaulted, it could sap earnings for years and contribute to further losses across the financial services industry, which has only recently regained its footing.

The total litigation amount will not be in the trillions… but will certainly be in the tens if not hundreds of billions.

While the banks put together tens of billions of dollars in mortgage securities backed by risky loans, the Federal Housing Finance Agency is not seeking the total amount in compensation because some of the mortgages are still good and the investments still carry some value. In the UBS suit, the agency said it owned $4.5 billion worth of mortgages, with losses totaling $900 million. Negotiations between the agency and UBS have yielded little progress.

Bottom line: the gloves are coming off, and while we want to believe that this is the final nail in BAC’s coffin (Quinn Emanuel is counsel for the FHFA), we do have a nagging feeling that the US will not purposefully do everything in its power to destroy its banking sector.

32 Responses

  1. […] GLOVES OFF? Massive Wave Of Lawsuits To Be Filed By The US Against America’s Biggest Banks Posted on September 2, 2011 by Neil Garfield […]

  2. Anonymous

    Thanx for the info. Terrific as always. But there’s something that I don’t understand. Please help me with this.

    In all the PSA’s that I have read, I’ve never seen any mention that the senior tranches were insured…only the residual interest tranche retained by the deal principals. Typically this is described as the AR-1 tranche, or something similar. All senior tranches are described as “insured” by the waterfall of the lower tranches. Where do you find in the PSA’s that the senior tranche is insured by financial guaranty insurance? I don’t see that.

    Also, when you say that the U.S. Govt bought the certificates, which specific arm of the U.S. Govt are you referring to?

    Thanx
    Bob

  3. Bob G

    First — investors are suing to make up for the difference in “return” they could have earned IF everything was not fraudulent. But, this is ironic — because they could not have earned a grossly higher return without high risk — and likely fraud. Due Diligence — always shoots down investor lawsuits. But, the investors are winning on settlements — banks do not want discovery public.

    As to the tranches — all certificates — and this is in every PSA/Prospectus — are sold to the security underwriter. The security underwriter is an affiliate of the Depositor who purchased the loans from originator. Both are subsidiaries of the parent corp bank.

    In the case of subprime — and only subprime — but likely also Alt-A, the bottom tranches were SOLD first — these bottom tranches were to be paid on the pass-throughs — after the senior tranches were paid. The banks retained the senior tranches — the bottom mezzanine tranches provided credit support to senior tranches — as they would absorb losses first — and provide, via swaps — removal of non-performing loans.

    The senior tranches were also supported by swaps — but, a different kind of swap — guarantee by the likes of AIG — to “pay-out” if losses extended to the upper tranches — -which they did. AIG could not pay — so government bailed them out. The bailout was actually to the banks!!! — They were paid — and they paid any derivative CDO “investments” — the CDOs is where the subprime “certificates” were repackaged.

    Government — by bailout — holds remnants –until all “pools” of collection rights — not securities — are disposed of.

  4. Anon

    “Because the US Government purchased all the remnant lower tranches from banks (those not paid out by swaps) – and reorganized into one big portfolio.”

    But weren’t these tranches owned by investors? How did the banks come to own the lower tranches? I know the deal principals held the residual interests, but those were only one tranche.

    “That was to give banks time to dispose of the “Collection rights” that backed the fraudulent (toxic) securities. And, this is what has been happening. As collection rights pools are sold — remnant security tranche is closed.”

    If a collection right was sold, wasn’t that the right to foreclosure proceeds? Doesn’t quite make sense. What part of the “U.S. Govt” made these purchases? And if this was the case, then why are the investor plaintiffs suing?

    As I see it, most all the REMICs were closed out after 2007. But why would the performing tranche investors go along with that? They would have lost REMIC status with adverse tax consequences, no?

  5. This why this fraud circle continues….. let them all fail….there is always the small town bank and your credit unions, tryed and true, the world will be ok .Bill and Judy say that the fraud has been spoken so many times that they belive what they have told others and themselves.Yea it IS SHOW TIME.get your pocket books out.What no pocketbook? Because you all have no money in the game?Well we will take you as prisoners then.By the way, spam does not just happen, you need to be hacked and weird when your not even on line.I belive that is a federal offense as is all the recent discovery, and just so you know et al means and others, a couple at a time here and there as I promised.

  6. Hi Bob G

    Because the US Government purchased all the remnant lower tranches from banks (those not paid out by swaps) – and reorganized into one big portfolio. That was to give banks time to dispose of the “Collection rights” that backed the fraudulent (toxic) securities. And, this is what has been happening. As collection rights pools are sold — remnant security tranche is closed.

  7. The Feds Sue The Banks- Robosigning Is Powerful Evidence of A System Gone Terribly Wrong

    September 3rd, 2011 | Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.
    First, go back in time and understand exactly where the term, “Robosigning” came from. According to internet archives, the first time it appeared on a blog was right here! Read the History and Here.

    Digging deeper into this you will find the proactively-titled article, Niche Lawyers Spawn Housing Frackas an article in the Wall Street Journal that appropriately gives credit to the passionate and committed lawyers like Tom Ice, Tom Cox, Jim Kowalski for standing up for consumers and fighting for the Rule of Law.

    Mr. Ice mentioned the deposition testimony to a fellow lawyer, Matthew Weidner. “Tom and I were talking, and it was, ‘Jesus, they’re like robots!’” Mr. Weidner says.

    More at http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/2011/09/the-feds-sue-the-banks-robosigning-is-powerful-evidence-of-a-system-gone-terribly-wrong/

  8. If anyone is involved with deutsche bank their is the need to file a corporate disclosure. This allows Judges to review and see if there are any conflicts of interest.

    In my adversary I filed against Deutsche Bank for not disclosing their identity. In the 9th circuit miraculously the provided the disclosure.
    Here it is for all to see and pass around as one may want to add additional parities.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/59162182/Deutsche-Bank-Corporate-Disclosure-06242011-Davies-vs-Deutsche-Bank

    This is apparent when the lawsuit on Deutsche Bank is read.

  9. Anonymous

    Why did all the REMICs disappear from Pub. 938 after 2007?

  10. They need to add SunTrust Mortgage to this list of evil-doers!

  11. The likes of Wells and HSBC not included since they disposed of all loans (collection rights) and only acted in servicer or trustee capacity.

    Note — when Freddie/Fannie did not directly purchase the loan — but only purchased the “securities” “linked” to loans — Freddie/Fannie did not own the loan — but only rights to interest in cash flow pass through derived from the bank-owned loans (collection rights).

    For foreclosures in which any MBS trust (not really MBS) is named — Freddie/Fannie is not the creditor — not the mortgagee. Fannie/Freddie recourse is only against the Sponsor/Depositor/Security Underwriter — who purchased the loans (Collection rights) — and securitized (assigned) Current CASH flows to security investors. In these instances, F/F no right to foreclose — and does not claim that right in courts.

  12. Money Talks

    http://quotes.wsj.com/BAC

    Where did my payments go? Follow the money trail?

    NEVER AGAIN.

  13. Carie ,

    I noticed that glaring omission as well ,, NO Wells Fargo ?? Perhaps because they (as part of Norwest) are connected in a somewhat different way to the securities created? Or maybe because of decisions like VEAL which possibly put WF in a different category of “too much evidence against them to whitewash” …

    I agree with most here that this is just a “shot across the bow” to remind Wall Street who to contribute to.

  14. carie

    I think that what you said is the truth but what proof can we get to back up this truth in court.
    What documents or rules do we present so that the court knows what we are trying to prove.
    Is it even possible to prove that this is what happened? Is it hidden in the banks secret accounting books that they will never give to the court? Is there anything in the PSA or Prospectus that proves that this is what happened?
    Any help you can give me so that I can prove in court that this is what happened will be appreciated.

  15. You know, A man, that’s not a bad question… considering how much money he got during the bailout…

  16. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/02/banks-sued-subprime-mortgage-deals_n_947349.html

    “The federal government late Friday filed lawsuits against 17 financial institutions, including some of the nation’s largest banks, alleging a pattern of fraud in their packaging and selling of roughly $200 billion worth of mortgage-linked securities. The suits amount to one of the most significant legal actions to emerge from the rubble of the financial crisis nearly three years ago.”

    Notice they are now saying “mortgage-linked” securities…not “mortgage-backed” securities…uh huh…and the American people are the MOST damaged…and the LAST to know…

  17. Where did my money go? Where did my payments go? To Freddie Mac or maybe indirectly to Gaddafi’s Bank.

  18. Now they will accelerate foreclosures for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac so they can recoup on our account.

    NEVER AGAIN

  19. What about HSBC??? These people are thieves and seem to always go under the radar?? They are doing the same things!

  20. I need some info.
    New York City.
    Are there any city, state or federal civil and/or criminal penalties for violations of the Protecting Tenants At Foreclosure Act? If so, cite case where violator has been punished.
    Thank-you.

    @ carie – Still got your posts taped throughout my house. Went through this with college math for about 5 months. Just woke up in the middle of one night and there wasn’t a problem I couldn’t solve with my eyes closed – geometry, calculus, trig. Finished with 4.0 gpa. Your posts are putting me through that same grind. I LOVE IT !!!!

  21. Now if I go back to basic corporate law—it seems to me that if the govt gets a recovery against the bank on behalf of the banks’ clients—then the common shareholders have to eat it. The shareholders meantime are entitled to turn around and say”how did that happen?”

    and then they can file shareholders’ derivative suits against the board and the OFFICERS—-to recover damages for negigence. The officers owe a duty not to be so blatant as to do negligent things that runup bonuses—when ultimately the shareholders must pay for the bonuses and the mistakes. seems like the shareholders should be stepping up to the plate here and impleading the officers or something like that—saying “if anybody around here is liable–its this guys’ fault” –like mozillo——–now then the director liability insurance should be kicking in—–but it seems not for benefit of officers? just directors? public policy would be harmed if officers get to be covered by insurance from gross negligence?

  22. Why is HSBC not included? These thieves need to be tarred and feathered. Any one knows where they are hiding?

  23. from the above article:

    “The suits will argue the banks, which assembled the mortgages and marketed them as securities to investors, failed to perform the due diligence required under securities law and missed evidence that borrowers’ incomes were inflated or falsified. When many borrowers were unable to pay their mortgages, the securities backed by the mortgages quickly lost value.”

    WHAT A JOKE—WHEN WILL THEY ADMIT THE TRUTH:

    1) Some people here are partly right about sale of existing “note” —- but, the GSEs could not just sell the Note- on performing loans — this would be securities fraud to the GSE security investors. The Note (and it’s receivable stream) had to be falsely placed in default and charged-off in order to sell the “Note” — but, when this happens the Note no longer exists — thus, all that is sold is collection rights to a once existing note.

    2) Neil and others do not understand that security investors fund the BANK — not the borrowers — there is no direct relationship between security investors and borrowers. If banks are able to sell their income stream, that is an accounting transaction — it is not a “loan” to borrowers. This is why security investors are NEVER NEVER NEVER the CREDITOR.

    3) Collection rights transfers are NOT funded by borrower transactions (ie fabricated refinance). Collection rights are transferred by assignment — not NOTES (which is why NOTES are FAKE). When some people talk about Non-Deposit “trust” non-members — they are referring to derivative transactions — that “SWAP” out collection rights — although the credit enhancers pay cash for collection rights — they use insurance for the purchase of the rights. This is why the subprime was so profitable — the bank debt buyers put up no cash for transaction — but, were then able to profit by the “sale” of the receivable pass-throughs to security investors.. This is also why MBIA (insurance co.) legal action against BOA and others is hugely important.

  24. Kennethe S taylor:

    I AM NOT A LAWYER, BUT THIS IS GOOD STUFF:

    “…The Depositor owns the Trust — and while the Trust was performing – the Depositor, on behalf of the Trust would be the party to bring the action. However, these Trusts have now been brought back on parent corp. (to Depositor) balance sheets because the Trusts as “off-balance sheet” SPVs — have been effectively dissolved. The only tranche holders to remnants of the Trusts is the US Government or the Depositor (parent) itself. You should be preparing to demonstrate that the loan was not validly conveyed to any Trust (which they were not). Do this by requesting the Mortgage Schedule which should accompany the Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement (MLPA) — and the MLPA cannot be an “intent” to sell — it must be validly executed and notarized (we know about those notaries). And, importantly, if MLPA and Mortgage Schedule can be proven, servicer must prove that all default payments have been paid to the trust on borrower’s behalf. If not, loan has been removed from the Trust with collection rights sold/swapped to a Third Party. This is how you may win — they can not prove anything.”

  25. Omission of ‘Wells Fargo & Co’ interesting?

    Norwest Corporation’s Norwest Asset Securities Corp’s TRUST Company dba Wells Fargo Bank NA c/o Wilmington Trust be named?

    “Sale & Servicing Agreements” like Option One just discussed in prior post and Mortgage Loan Sale and Servicing Agreements. You can search in google find one related to entity your interested in and find relationships via SEC, ffiec and public information on Secretary of State documents and public business information recorded on google.

    39) MORTGAGE LOAN SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: MORGAN STANLEY MORTGAGE CAPITAL INC | HSBC MORTGAGE CORPORATION
    Law Firm: Cleary Gottlieb
    Document Date: 9/19/2007
    Governing Law:New York

    50) SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., | LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION | THORNBURG MORTGAGE FUNDING, INC | THORNBURG MORTGAGE HOME LOANS, INC
    Document Date: 5/10/2007
    Governing Law:New York

    NOTICE OF SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEE SALE
    Jul 25, 2011 – WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. is acting as the Mortgage Servicer for … the Mortgagee by virtue of a servicing agreement with the Mortgagee. …

    US Bank v banez
    In July 2007, U.S. Bank NA and Wells Fargo Bank NA, as trustees of two … a flow sale and servicing agreement, which then assigned it to Asset Backed Funding …

    46) SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: Asset Backed Surveillance Group | Bank of New York | Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I LLC | McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc | Moody’s Investors Service, Inc | Nationstar Mortgage LLC | Newcastle Investment Corp | Wells Fargo Bank, NA | Wilmington Trust Company
    Document Date: 8/1/2007
    Governing Law:New York

    45) SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT, DATED AS OF JUNE 29, 2007
    Parties: Administrator, Wells Fargo Bank, NA | CITIBANK, NA | Corporate Trust Services | McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc, 55 Water Street, New York, New York 10041, Fitch, Inc | Moodys Investors Service, Inc | Structured Asset Mortgage Investments II Inc | Wilmington Trust Company | Worldwide Securities Services
    Document Date: 8/9/2007
    Industry: Real Estate Operations
    Sector: Services
    Governing Law:New York

    Bergen County New Jersey – Notice of Sales
    (SALES LISTINGS ARE DEEMED ACCURATE BUT NOT GUARANTEED. ….. AS TRUSTEE UNDER THE POOLING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT DATED AS … HOME LOANS SERVICING LP FOR THE BENEFIT OF HSBC BANK USA, N.A. …. BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR WELLS FARGO

    9) AMENDMENT NO. 8 TO AMENDED AND RESTATED SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES INC | Waterfall Eden Fund, LP | WATERFALL MANAGEMENT, LLC | WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
    Document Date: 3/31/2009
    Industry: Consumer Financial Services
    Sector: Financial
    Governing Law:New York

    10) AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO AMENDED AND RESTATED SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES INC | PAGE FUNDING LLC, CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC | Patriot Group LLC | UBS REAL ESTATE SECURITIES INC | Waterfall Eden Fund, LP | WATERFALL MANAGEMENT, LLC | WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
    Document Date: 3/31/2009
    Industry: Consumer Financial Services
    Sector: Financial
    Governing Law:New York

    16) SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: CHIMERA INVESTMENT CORPORATION | CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON MORTGAGE ACCEPTANCE CORP | HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION | WELLS FARGO BANK, NA
    Document Date: 8/8/2008
    Governing Law:New York

    20) SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: CITIBANK, NA | Deutsche Bank National Trust Company | DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY | FRANKLIN CAPITAL CORPORATION | FRANKLIN RECEIVABLES LLC | Moodys Investors Service, Inc | Standard & Poors Ratings Group | WILMINGTON TRUST COMPANY
    Document Date: 6/18/2008
    Governing Law:New York

    22) SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: CAPITALSOURCE FINANCE LLC | CHARTA, LLC | CITICORP NORTH AMERICA, INC | CS FUNDING VII DEPOSITOR LLC | WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
    Law Firm: Patton Boggs;Kaye Scholer
    Document Date: 5/12/2008
    Industry: Misc. Financial Services
    Sector: Financial
    Governing Law:New York

    29) AMENDED AND RESTATED SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: CAPITALSOURCE INC | BMO CAPITAL MARKETS CORP | CSE MORTGAGE LLC | CSE QRS FUNDING I LLC | DRESDNER BANK AG | FAIRWAY FINANCE COMPANY, LLC | FORTIS BANK SA | Harris Nesbitt Corp | JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | PARK AVENUE RECEIVABLES COMPANY, LLC | SCALDIS CAPITAL LIMITED | SUNTRUST CAPITAL MARKETS, INC | SYMPHONY NO 4, LLC | THREE PILLARS FUNDING LLC | Variable Funding Capital Company LLC | WACHOVIA BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION | WACHOVIA CAPITAL MARKETS, LLC | WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
    Law Firm: Dechert;Patton Boggs
    Document Date: 2/29/2008
    Industry: Misc. Financial Services
    Sector: Financial
    Governing Law:New York

    30) SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED MORTGAGE LOAN SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: MORGAN STANLEY MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2007-14AR | FIFTH THIRD MORTGAGE COMPANY | MORGAN STANLEY MORTGAGE CAPITAL INC
    Law Firm: Cadwalader Wickersham
    Document Date: 12/18/2007
    Governing Law:New York

    31) MORTGAGE LOAN SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: MORGAN STANLEY MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2007-14AR | MORGAN STANLEY MORTGAGE CAPITAL HOLDINGS LLC
    Law Firm: Cadwalader Wickersham
    Document Date: 12/18/2007
    Governing Law:New York

    32) SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED MORTGAGE LOAN SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: MORGAN STANLEY MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2007-15AR | FIFTH THIRD MORTGAGE COMPANY | MORGAN STANLEY MORTGAGE CAPITAL INC
    Law Firm: Cadwalader Wickersham
    Document Date: 12/18/2007
    Governing Law:New York

    33) MORTGAGE LOAN SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Law Firm: Cadwalader Wickersham
    Document Date: 12/18/2007
    Governing Law:New York

    34) SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: GS Mortgage Securities Corp | SunTrust Mortgage, Inc
    Document Date: 10/9/2007
    Governing Law:New York

    49) SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: ABS Surveillance Group | CPS RECEIVABLES TWO CORP | Moody’s Investors Service, Inc | WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION | WILMINGTON TRUST COMPANY | XL Capital Assurance Inc | CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC
    Document Date: 5/14/2007
    Industry: Consumer Financial Services
    Sector: Financial
    Governing Law:New York

    48) AMENDMENT REG AB TO THE MORTGAGE LOAN SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: Acquisition Corp | Amendment Reg AB | National City Mortgage Co
    Document Date: 5/25/2007
    Governing Law:New York

    47) SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT
    Parties: BANK OF NEW YORK | FIRST HORIZON ASSET SECURITIES INC | FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION | Wilmington Trust Company
    Document Date: 7/13/2007
    Governing Law:New York

  26. P.S. This will be Walnut Place’s second attempt to get their cases removed to Fed court.

  27. FYI – The Walnut Place guys tried to get their case moved to Fed District Court. It was remanded back to State court. This is all B.S.

    And furthermore, even in Federal court the case would have to be adjudicated under NY law, the law governing the PSAs. And someone please tell me why NY CPLR Article 77 wouldn’t apply in Fed court?

  28. IS YOUR LOAN ORIGINATOR IN BANKRUPTCY??–DON’T RULE OUT TAKING ACTION UP IN THEIR BANKRUPTCY!!

    EVEN NEW CENTURY MORTGAGE AND HOME123 CORPORATION VICTIMS—THEIR BANKRUPTCY CASE IS STILL OPEN 07-10416 KJC IN DELAWARE.

    THERE ARE NOW 3 MORE PRO SE’S WHO HAVE FILED PROOF OF CLAIMS UP THERE IN COURT IN THE LAST MONTH

    DON’T HESITATE. CONSULT AN ATTORNEY RIGHT AWAY.

    IF YOU BELIEVE YOU HAVE A CLAIM AGAINST THEM, AT THE VERY LEAST DOWNLOAD AND COMPLETE A B10 OR PROOF OF CLAIM FORM. SEE THE COURT WEBSITE FOR THAT. SEND IT CERTIFIED TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT FOR FILING. KEEP COPY FOR YOUR RECORDS.

    SEVERAL PRO SE’S HAVE GOTTEN SETTLEMENTS IN THE RANGE OF 55-85K.

    YOU ALSO SHOULD BE AWARE THAT YOU CAN GET DISCOVERY FROM YOUR LOAN ORIGINATOR EVEN IF THEY ARE STILL IN BANKRUPTCY.

    SO-CONSULT AN ATTORNEY ASAP.

  29. “Bottom line: the gloves are coming off, and while we want to believe that this is the final nail in BAC’s coffin (Quinn Emanuel is counsel for the FHFA), we do have a nagging feeling that the US will not purposefully do everything in its power to destroy its banking sector.”

  30. Obama and his DOJ just trying to bolster campaign contributions from all the fat cat investors, that BOA and the other banksters stuck it too.

    They still don’t care about the American citizens and the 7 to 9 million of us who have had our homes stolen in the past two years. For us, they advocate loan modifications, lol.

  31. help help ! me September 2, 2011

    Kenneth S. Taylor
    8610 Hadden Road
    Twinsburg Ohio 44087
    1-330-425-1542

    Federal Bureau of Investigation
    121 S Main St, Akron Ohio 44308 -1415
    330-535-6156

    Dear Honorable F.B.I. Agents, Intake Officers and Staff,

    I implore you open and investigate the following criminal acts and other matters stated below supported by proof and evidence enclosed:
    The criminal acts are so malicious and deplorable that the damage done to victims the homeowners can never be repaired we ask for nothing less than criminal prosecutions this agency must check the licensing boards of all notaries that appear in any and all documents for all the fraudulent attestation to all these phony fake documents.

    Judge Tom Parker is so corrupt he has defied the Ninth District Court of Appeals Order in which they agreed Judge lied about hearing Defendants counterclaimed they reverse and remanded case back to trial court and has thus far Tom Parker refused to follow mandate and wont set a trial date, he issued a summary judgment without a single witness , and without a signed affidavit with no affiants name on it that has to be a criminal act as he never look at the final decree order ,it against the law to sign without knowing the information your signing the affidavit had no name on it.
    Judge Tom Parker , Attorney Kevin L. Williams and Robin Wilson have given false and material declarations to the trial court violating federal laws under 18 U.S.C.1623 which is a both a criminal and civil act of conspiracy and a crime which carries fines of 100 thousand dollars and or 5 years in prison , they have lied to courts and use the same lies against defendants( Kenneth S. Taylor and Alycia A. Taylor Driggins in an attempt to take their real property ,without perfecting a lien, selling and transferring, assigning property of Option One the original lenders years later after they were out of business and company was defunct, and did use identity theft, and stole homeowners identity as parties are guilty of transferring homeowners private information by United States Postal service , U.S. Mail via Electronic Mail creating False data and accounting, and payment receipts by use of computer via internet and are guilty of Mail and Wire fraud by forwarding private information to other parties without their permission such as their social security numbers names addresses, work history, credit reports, bank statements ect. but not limited to such, trying to evict them unlawfully from a home which they have owned and resided for 23 years by using forgery of Kevin L. Williams name and signature on order of sale as someone tried to force sheriffs sale by signing order with initial only ( K W) using pretender lenders, robo signers, strawman , foreclosure mills , defunct trust, and trustees, fraudulent appraisal , and 14 forgeries of attorney Kevin L. Williams name, fabrication, of surrogate signings , misreprentation, .fake and counterfeit Allonge Notes and negotiable instrumentalities , and fake notaries, fake affidavits, fake title insurance written by Manley Deas Kochaski LLC on national known Chicago Title Papers without their knowledge , using their in house title company Allondian Title located in the same office in Columbus Ohio, without one live witness, this has to be one of the worst cases of fraud before the FBI in its long disguised history.

    Currently there is a fraudulent lawsuit and judgment against them, (Kenneth S. Taylor Alycia A. Taylor), filed by Plaintiffs attorney (Kevin L. Williams of Manley Deas Kochalski LLC. Located in Columbus Ohio, P. O. Box 165028, 43216-5028 for DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE FOR CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 2006-OPT2 ASSETS-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006- OPT2 , who have never proved they had standing to file the lawsuit and has told courts the note is lost missing or stolen and assignment was submitted to court after lawsuit was filed , and produced after allege transfer of property , a fake assignment fraudulent sham , defective, false , and misleading , document which was deemed as such by the United States District Court Judge Sara Lioi on November 8, 2007 See Exhibit ( D) enclosed , that assignment was robo signed and fake and forgery provided to courts used as evidence in courts by and though Kevin L. Williams and Manley Deas Kochalski LLC. As is every document before the court in this case. The fake, forgery, robo, signed , documents have been used to commit civil and criminal conspiracy , mail fraud, forgery, identity thief, nothing is original or authentic its all falsely made by crime lab LPS. And was not produced until the courts needed it to foreclose, the attorney just orders any documents the court needed from the crime lab LPS, Docx, this is a nationally well known fact , the attorney’s just order fake documents from this crime lab and did not get the phony documents and affidavits unless the court required them and the documents don’t reflect the actual transactions that occurred the attorney Kevin L. Williams willingly and knowingly produced and provided Ohio courts both Federal and state with fraudulent documents , which are more fully describe in documents enclosed in this package. Moreover Kevin L. Williams and his law firm has conspired and filed 14 variations of his signatures on sworn legal important documents with state and federal courts in a elaborate scheme to unlawfully take the Taylor’s real property, the signatures contain no power of attorney , the law firm is a national known Foreclosure Mill, That uses robo signatures from foreclosure Counsel of Manley Deas Kochalski and Kevin L. Williams , Thompson Hine and Robin Wilson who violated the following rules regulations statues, an treaties of OHIO and U.S.FEDERAL LAW TITLE 18, 18 U.S.C. § 1343 CHAPTER 6 WIRE FRAUD, MAIL FRAUD; Regulation Z Sec. 226.1 Authority, purpose, coverage, organization, enforcement and liability. Complaints to Akron Bar Associations, Cleveland Bar Associations , Columbus ,Bar Association , and The Supreme Court of Ohio Disciplinary Counsel all yieldeied the same results an occasional admittance of unlawfully practice, but the Bar Associations all stated it was a widely accepted practice for attorney’s to forge, use forge signatures , allow others in office to forge their names, allow some unknown people in there office to sign someone else name to a legal court document especially given the fact this attorney has never made a single appearance to court in 4 years, and has not been able to be reached by phone in 4 years the Akron Bar Association attorneys says Kevin L. Williams does not have to answer my phone call, and can allow other to try to mimic his signatures as long as he has given them permission to do so , this is violation of federal laws that govern forgery , for some one to forge attorney Kevin L. Williams signature on documents to sale the Taylors home in a sheriffs sale is illegal, corruption, criminal conspiracy, and the Bar Associations said this was legal and found no wrongdoing , See Exhibit (H) correspondence from various Bar Associations in Akron, Cleveland, and Columbus who and said attorney’s can break the law and forge each other signatures. For the sake of convenience, Essential saying Kevin L. Williams is above the law. We believe these are jail able offenses crimes of forgery and violates the law and treaties of the United States and carry prison sentences the absolute proof is included the records and complete letters are available in Bar Association files the foreclosure Counsel of Manley Deas Kochalski and Kevin L. Williams , Thompson Hine and Robin Wilson violated the following rules regulations statues, an treaties of OHIO and U.S.FEDERAL LAW TITLE 18, 18 U.S.C. § 1343 CHAPTER 6 WIRE FRAUD, MAIL FRAUD; Regulation Z Sec. 226.1 Authority, purpose, coverage, organization, enforcement and liability.

    The judge Tom Parker while case was in state court conspired with the plaintiff’s attorney Robin Wilson of Thompson Hine LLP in a joint effort to destroy defendants counterclaim. The judge directed her to draft a false and misleading statement in a previous Final decree of foreclosure. Robin Wilson did so knowingly and willingly by inserting false claims of judge that he had considered defendants counterclaim is his motion granting plaintiff summary judgment which is void because of fraud of the courts and judge a lying officer of the court… Robin Wilson drafted and sent a letter dated September 28,2009 to Judge confirming the act of conspiracy and her participation as such. The letter states per verbatim “Enclosed, in response to your telephone request, is a revised Judgment Entry and Decree in Foreclosure so as to include Defendants’ Counterclaim and Plaintiffs’ Reply to Counterclaim”. Signed by Robin Wilson. See Exhibit (A). These representations were false and defendants knew the falsity of these statements at the time they were made. The judge never once mentioned defendants counterclaim, prior to this directive, nor is there any evidence the judge has reviewed the counterclaim. This was a wicked scheme perpetrated against defendants specifically, strategically and systematically, the judge lied in effort to deprive defendants of their rights to homeownership. Judge and Robin Wilson have given false and material declarations to the trial court violating federal laws under 18 U.S.C.1623 which is a both a criminal and civil act of conspiracy against defendants. Moreover COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT C. A. NO. 25281 agreed with the plaintiffs that judge erred essentially confirmed he lied and reversed and remanded case back to trial court. Judge Tom Parker is an Officer of the court THIS VOIDS STATE COURT FINDING OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT, ITS NULL AND VOID FOREVER.

    We now and at last pray by the grace and mercy of almighty God, and ask that this High Federal Bureau of Investigations intervene and look into these matters asap.

    Respectfully, Submitted By,
    Kenneth S. Taylor

    Kst.

    Ps. Exhibit (H) is page (2) two of a two page letter by Heather M. Zirke the Assistance Counsel of Akron Bar Association who says forgery of another signature 14 times is legal and accepted practice in law. Page one is missing just ask her to send you copy of the original letter in which she defended and justified these forgeries of Kevin L. Williams signature.

    Also a letter from Cleveland Bar Association that says other lawyer’s in his office may forge legal documents by signing Kevin L. Williams name as though they are him to unlawful order of sale.

    All other documents are self explanatory , and are excerpts from trial documents from United States Sixth Circuit Appeals Court and the original Complaint filed against these parties in federal District Court the evidence is overwhelming and compelling in which judges had a sworn duty to report under 18USC (4) and have themselves committed Felonies for not reporting to F.B. I.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: