OCC REVIEW PROCESS UNDERWAY: MANDELMAN OFFERS OPINION AND FACTS

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

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

NOTE: CHECK WITH LICENSED LAWYER BEFORE YOU DO OR DON’T DO ANYTHING.

by Mandelman

See entire article at MANDELMAN ON OCC AUDIT OR REVIEW

Requirements and Guidelines for Homeowners filing a Request for Review…

Okay, so here are some of the things you need to know before you get started filing your “Request for Review” form with the OCC, in order to be considered as part of their Independent Foreclosure Review process.

  • You have to have been part of a “foreclosure action” on your PRIMARY RESIDENCE between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2010.
  • What is a “foreclosure action?”  It’s one of the following four situations:
  • You lost your home to foreclosure, and its been sold by the trustee.
  • You were in foreclosure, but either because you brought the payments current, entered some sort of payment/forbearance plan, applied for a loan modification, or filed bankruptcy, it was pulled out of foreclosure.
  • You were in foreclosure, but were able to sell the home via short sale, or chose to deed-in-lieu to avoid actually losing home to foreclosure.
  • You’re in foreclosure now and you’re still delinquent, but no foreclosure sale has happened yet.
  • Here’s the list of participating servicers:
  • America’s Servicing Co.
  • Aurora Loan Services
  • Bank of America
  • Beneficial
  • Chase
  • Citibank
  • CitiFinancial
  • CitiMortgage
  • Countrywide
  • EMC
  • EverBank/EverHome Mortgage Company
  • GMAC Mortgage
  • HFC
  • HSBC
  • IndyMac Mortgage Services
  • MetLife Bank
  • National City Mortgage
  • PNC Mortgage
  • Sovereign Bank
  • SunTrust Mortgage
  • U.S. Bank
  • Wachovia Mortgage
  • Washington Mutual (WaMu)
  • Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Examples of financial injury…

The OCC lists examples of financial injury as a result of “errors, misrepresentations, or other deficiencies in the foreclosure process,” but they also state clearly that IT IS BY NO MEANS MEANT TO BE A COMPLETE LIST.  It’s really more like general guidance or a starter list of examples than anything else.

Also, it seems clear that the OCC only put things on this list that were fairly shallow or easy to come up with… things like dual tracking, which is when a servicer forecloses on a borrower while that borrower is in the middle of applying for a modification or making trial payments… along with accounting discrepancies, or violations of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act.

It makes sense, if you think about it.  After all the OCC isn’t really here to help homeowners prevail… they’re only facilitating the independent review process.   It’s up to the homeowners who file to present their cases properly.

So, in point of fact, there could exist any number of other “errors, misrepresentations, or other deficiencies in the foreclosure process,” that could have caused homeowners to be financially damaged.

Here’s what’s on the OCC’s list…

  • The mortgage balance amount at the time of the foreclosure action was more than you actually owed.

This one is kind of weird, in my mind, because I’m not sure how homeowners will know if this was the case, but if you do think this was the case then you obviously have the information… well, fair enough.

  • You were doing everything the modification agreement required, but the foreclosure sale still happened.

This should be on the Servicer’s Greatest Hits CD, if they ever do one… it’s the hit single, “Dual Tracking.”  If you were foreclosed on while making your trial payments, this one’s for you.

  • The foreclosure action occurred while you were protected by bankruptcy.

Also very straightforward… if this happened to you, you’re on.

  • You requested a modification, submitted complete documents on time, and were waiting for a decision when the foreclosure sale occurred.

More dual tracking, and this happened to many, many people.

  • Fees charged or mortgage payments were inaccurately calculated, processed, or applied.

If you have evidence of this, it’s really a yes or no sort of thing.

  • The foreclosure action occurred on a mortgage that was obtained before active duty military service began and while on active duty, or within 9 months after the active duty ended and the servicemember did not waive his/her rights under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act.

Again, very straight forward… and you know if it applies to you.

A few words about financial injury…

Okay, everyone who reads me knows that I’m definitely NOT A LAWYER… I mean… you’re reading this right now.  Does it read like a lawyer wrote it?  Exactly.  And, thank you for saying so.

But, I do know what sometimes seems like about a zillion of them and I pay attention.  And I can read like the dickens.  I’m not kidding, ask my parents, they’ll tell you.  So, listen to what I’m going to tell you here… it’s about financial injury or in other words, “damages.”

Determining how you were damaged or financially injured is not going to be nearly as easy as you might think.  It’s not “Common Sense Court,” we’re talking about here… we’re talking about lawyers at the OCC… banking lawyers… the worst kind.

The idea is that damages are supposed to measure in monetary terms, the extent of the harm that a plaintiff (as in, you the homeowner) has suffered because of a defendant’s (as in, your servicer’s) actions, and their purpose is to restore the injured party to the position they were in before the harm happened.

In general, you should think about damages as being restoring what you lost… as opposed to being punitive, because although punitive damages may be awarded in certain situations, this is not one of them.  In fact, remember… this isn’t like you’re going to court… you’ll be submitting your Request for Review to the OCC.

There are three basic categories of damages.  The first is termed compensatory damages, which are awarded to restore what the plaintiff lost as a result of the defendant’s wrongful conduct.  Next, there are nominal damages… a small sum awarded when someone has not suffered any substantial loss, but has been wronged nonetheless.  And then there are punitive damages, which are awarded under certain circumstances to punish a defendant for particularly egregious, wrongful conduct.

But, for the purposes of filing your Request for Review with the OCC, you need to think about how your servicer’s acts directly caused you harm… and by harm, I mean financial harm.

Whenever the topic of “damages” comes up, I often hear homeowners mention the idea of mental pain and suffering.  Now, there’s no question that this type of suffering is involved here, as it includes fright, nervousness, grief, emotional trauma, anxiety, humiliation, and indignity… and I think it’s safe to say that homeowners in foreclosures have all those things, and probably a few more.

On the Website, Law.com, they talk about “emotional distress damages,” as follows:

 

Evidentiary problems include the fact that such distress is easily feigned or exaggerated, and professional testimony by a therapist or psychiatrist may be required to validate the existence and depth of the distress and place a dollar value upon it.

But, you have to remember, we’re not talking about a court of law here, we’re talking about the OCC, so you need to concentrate primarily on how you were damaged tangibly, like in dollars and sense, which may be hard to do when the home you lost to foreclosure, or may lose to foreclosure, has no equity.

You see, as far as damages for losses to real property goes, it looks to me like they could measure financial injury related to real property by assessing the difference in the fair market value of the property before and after the injury.  Not only that, but it also seems that diminished fair market value is not used as the measure of recovery, if the financial injury to real property is temporary in nature.

Now, I have no idea whether any of this makes any difference to the OCC, but I do know this: damages or financial injuries are subject to numerous limitations and legal definitions, so it seems to me that most people are going to need a lawyer to help them figure “financially injury” component out.

I’m not saying that it’s an insurmountable issue, but since the OCC has not provided any real guidance in this area, and since the OCC’s process does not offer any sort of appeals process should you be denied, you probably want to at least consult with an experienced attorney before filing.

All hung up on titles…

Within the OCC’s consent orders, which you’ll find links to below, are listed the “bad acts” of which the respective mortgage servicers stand accused, and by reading through them you’ll find many of the things that have made the news this past year having to do with improper foreclosures, including “robo-signing (although it’s not called “robo-signing in the consent orders, it’s called something like “unauthorized signing of affidavits, or something close), improper notarization, dual tracking, and a whole host of other things that fall under the umbrella of “unsafe and unsound banking practices.”

The general idea is to find out which things appear on your servicer’s consent decree, and match up the things that happened to you, and how you were damaged by those things.  And it may be that in order to do that, you’ll need to look at your Chain of Title documents.

I’m looking into this issue to find out exactly what you’ll need, if anything, so as I said just stand by… like I said in the beginning, there’s nothing gained by rushing.

In Conclusion…

The OCC says that, as it relates to borrowers, it’s driving this Independent Foreclosure Process for the following reasons:

  • Weaknesses in foreclosure processes and controls present the risk of foreclosing with inaccurate documentation, or foreclosing when another intervening circumstance should intercede.
  • Even if a foreclosure action can be completed properly, deficiencies can result (and have resulted) in violations of state foreclosure laws designed to protect consumers.
  • Such weaknesses may also result in inaccurate fees and charges assessed against the borrower or property, which may make it more difficult for borrowers to bring their loans current.
  • In addition, borrowers can find their loss-mitigation options curtailed because of dual-track processes that result in foreclosures even when a borrower has been approved for a loan modification.
  • The risks presented by weaknesses in foreclosure processes are more acute when those processes are aimed at speed and quantity instead of quality and accuracy.

Here are links to the various OCC Consent Orders, but check with the OCC if yours isn’t on this list, as it may not have been updated.

Homeowners can also visit www.IndependentForeclosureReview.com for more information, and the OCC says that assistance with forms and answers to questions about the process are available at 1-888-952-9105, Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. (ET) and on Saturday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (ET).  And here’s a link to the FAQ about the new review process.

To be entirely candid, they don’t really have much information… they can answer 49 questions, but after that, forget it.  I wasn’t surprised though, the whole thing is new, and I’ve never learned much of anything by calling a government phone number.

So, stay tuned… I’m going to be providing a lot more information on what you need to know and do related to filing a Request for Review to the OCC as part of the Independent Foreclosure process in the days and weeks to come.  I’ll even be offering a Webinar for those looking to drill down deeper into how to package your complaint.

So, hang on… don’t buy anything from anyone you don’t know… it’s still early, and much too early to get scammed into buying some hokey report or forensic loan audit… those things are giant scams for the most part… and you don’t need them to file your OCC complaint.  Whatever tools you do need, I’ll find them and make available.

And, please… be careful out there…

28 Responses

  1. It’s in reality a nice and useful piece of information. I am glad that you just shared this useful info with us. Please keep us informed like this. Thanks for sharing.

  2. @ ALL INTERESTED PERSONS

    I filed review applications for hundreds of tax cases over decades. The “form” issue may be a red herring in this OCC deal. A non-govt bunch like these “independent” reviewers cannot be delegated authority from OCC to mandate forms. OCC can–but not john does.

    This aspect of the admin law is called “rule-making” –with notice to public and so forth. There should be info in Federal Register–if there is a binding rule re what format info must meet. Otherwise, Iv got to look aat the official OCC site and meet that requirement.

    If I do that–I list the bases for review–eg in the OTHER BOX–I say see attachment incorporated by reference–or insert it into the body. So if im a vet who was foreclosed while on active duty–I simply state BASIS FOR CLAIM: I was a vet foreclosed while on active duty in violation of the particular fed statute.

    Then I put in salient facts as if in a pleading–eg i was on active duty from ___ to ___ —my name rank and serial #—–and attach any docx that on teir face support that allegation. The OCC form states you can add attachments.
    My home was purchased in ____, a loan was taken out with_____, and note/mortgage signed _____. The INITIAL LOAN NUMBER WAS______ I was served [maybe no service was had if overseas–could be a defense right there] on _____ with complaint in foreclosure in _________court county/ case # _____. The Plaintiff was _____, the purported loan servicer per court filings was __________. attach complaint or equivalent]

    COMMENT: Often once default occurs the loan number was tossed and the collection agency/servicer used a new ACCOUNT # [as in collection acct] expect confusion on this—-expect denials on the basis you did not state the correct requested #–use both.

    Then new section inserted:

    MY DAMAGES ARE DESCRIBED WITH SPECIFICITY AS FOLLOWS:
    MY HOME WAS WAS SOLD _____, THE LOCKS WERE CHANGED AND PERSONAL PROPERTY REMOVED ON OR ABOUT ______. [attach anything supporting these events]

    My downpayment on the house was _____
    My payments were ______ in total
    The principal paid amt in total was ______

    I had substantial furniture, appliances, furnishings, heirlooms, collectbiles, articles of clothing, and household goods not otherwise enumerated specified as follows:
    List large items and best recollection of cost [if invoices, or appraisals etc, lists with insurance companes, or police reports about the theft–attach]

    IMPORTANT___althought the info you place on the OCC form is sworn –under penalty of perjury –basically an affidavit–what anybody else adds is not–so either use business records such as copies of invoices —or attach an affidavit of an appraiser. This stuff is not a per se evidence hearsay rule but goes to crdibility.

    Thus attach a list that matches what you wrote in the OCC form—-add a “condition” for the items–in case you must defend FMV vs replacement cost.
    summarize smaller items –a case of toilet paper–misc supplies:
    FOR FURNITURE AND APPLIANCES GO TAKE YOUR LIST TO A LOCAL FURNITURE DEALER ETC AND HAVE THEM ASSIGN A REPLACEMENT COST NEW for similar items that matches your list —–2nd column –estimated FMV–relying on your assessment of condition to which you have sworn–its all got to be sworn–

    the dealer must swear also–as if or in same format as affidavit—and if he was paid or volunteered–ans state that hes unrelated INDEPENDENT REVIEWER of your paper relying on the truth of what you told him.

    as you can see this stuff is doable–but in order to be CREDIBLE must be sworn—this is where the attorneys add value–to make sure your work is credible—-and laid out to be organized and coherent–make sure columns add –use excell etc—–REMEMBER__THIS STUFF IS EVENTUALLY GOING TO BE APPEALED AND LOOKED AT BY SOMEBODY NOT PAID BY COLLECTION AGENCIES—treat it as if it were to go to a DISTRICT COURT—clean coherent—supported by documentation wherever possible to reinforce your statement

    get an atty

  3. They lost 14 K furniture—-I wonder how they will fill in the loan #—–oh I guess they just cant have a form! That is why the damn forms cant control the federal right. Not yet.

    Bank admits error after couple claims home was illegally taken

    Posted: 08 Nov 2011 06:57 PM PST

    Conway Daily Sun- EFFINGHAM — A major Wall Street bank is apologizing to a Maine couple who allege that the bank wrongfully claimed ownership of their second home on Green Mountain Road in Effingham. But the apology rings hollow for the Drew family. Apparently, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. confused a little red house, owned […]

  4. EB

  5. The Request For Foreclosure Review forms and legal analysis by a lawyer can be found at http://www.consentorderwatch.wordpress.com.

  6. DCB,

    Thanks — I saw this — my error. And, I absolutely agree.

  7. I like Mandelman. My comment is independent of this post. If you’ve been damaged, don’t let anyone tell you how you’ve been damaged. You tell them how you’ve been damaged and the things that can have a monetary value attached, then so be it and if they have to figure out a monetary value then so be it.
    Also, this is a one shot deal. You tell everything and let them review. This ain’t no. Let me tell you a little and see if you agree and then I’ll tell you The Rest of The Story. No. You tell them everything that was wrong. Don’t try to figure out their process. Don’t try to figure out what they already know. Don’t try to use the fact that I am filing a review and others are filing for a review and that all of them together gives yours more clarity. It’s individual. Stand on your own as if you are the only one getting the review for what happened to you.

    There was a lot of money made in the foreclosure process. We lost money on the front end and the back end as taxpayers and in our retirement accounts and for not getting decent interest rates when we try to purchase things.

    But ‘intangibles’ are just as important. The reason some people purchase their home is for the neighborhood, the school system, the proximity to work, the way they felt when they bought the home, the location to shopping and other events. There’s the intangible of all the sweat equity put into planting and landscaping, putting solar screens on the windows, painting walls, decorating, replacing carpet or installing floors. There’s the intangibles of friendship and safety and security. People had to sell things they owned for a long time because they had no money to pay someone to store it for an undetermined length of time.
    If someone else has your home due to this fraud, there’s the issues of the energy they place there by their presence. (Not talking about haunted houses or nothing), but there’s a reason we were there and our energy merged with the home.
    There’s the issue of them not abiding by TILA. If they made money off your signature that they would not have made had they had your signature, then where is your portion of the proceeds from their actions as they robbed you on the back side of the deal.

    Just realize that like any contract, this is a big deal. When it all boils down to it, a signature is required on the document (so you are entering into another contract). Know what you’ve signed because by placing your signature (like the finger of the Creator putting images in stone tablets), you are creating the commandments of what happened to you and how you expect to be made whole.
    If you half report and are made half whole then you have, you to blame. Your signature, your deal. If their contract is missing things that you need to say, then do one of those see the attached document and provide what you can to help them describe your injury and your compensation.
    Just reading Mandelman’s list is just not inclusive (They have a maxim, if it’s not included it’s excluded…but they have another…if it’s not excluded it’s included)…reading the post it seems that if it’s not included it’s excluded…in my case there are some things that were done that needs to be included….I mean filing documents that were created by them but adding the name on the Deed of Trust as the Grantor of those documents is an injury to me, because it lead to more injury for anyone relying on those documents. The title company washing the title and allowing the home to be purchased by another when they were the same title company for both purchases is an injury to me. I rely on them to know that the home was stolen by an entity that had no assignment; not rely on backroom deals and friendships to move money for them because times are tight and the money supply has shrunk. My offspring was injured by the things that happened. Whether they want to recognize it or not. I have room to tell them about that injury too. A evil or wrong done cannot be undone, but no one knows until you say so.

    No one has heard us until now. You owe it to yourself to have the audience who will hear you to know everything you want to tell them about the harm or injury.

    I spent time and money I cannot get back. The CEOs, CFO’s and even their customer service reps and the attorneys they hired are paid by the hour for the things they did to rob me. Well my time has value to.

    You can bet that I will not cheat myself the opportunity to mention the judge and the clerk of the court and if this info expands to other investigations…good. If it’s swept under a rug…well I did stay in Light and Love tell them the full extent of the financial injury.

    Who’s being billed for this? Definitely not the CEO of the company, nor the CFO…it will ripple back to the stockholders and I have a retirement account so it ripples back to me…yet again.

    Everything is interconnected.
    Take your time and reveal. This is revelations…no one can tell you what you experienced and what you should say about how you were trespassed against.

    Internet had an example of a $500,000 mortgage being sold and insured and sold and bet against so many times, it netted $91 million dollars. Imagine that homeowner asking for $500,000 and didn’t even include the cost to move and the deposit it had to lay out for a new residence. What about broken cell phone, satellite, health club contracts for moving.

    RICO penalties are much nicer to people who had to deal with extortion of money or theft of their property from organized criminal activity.

    Was the mortgage situation organized. Were the acts criminal? Things to think about as we ‘grow up’ and become the ‘adults’ we need to be to handle this business of our ‘right to property and peaceful enjoyment thereof’

    Light and Love,
    Trespass Unwanted, corporeal, life, free, live born, allodial, in proprio persona, in jure proprio, jure divino

  8. I got servicing ledger in discovery, Most harmful information to them, has been redacted. But, They failed to redact a part where it is noted in those records,
    “Ownership belongs to “named person”.

    This named person was an individual I had been speaking with from the loan servicing company.

    Anon’s post below seems to fit within such scheme.

    So you signed with a servicer??? Servicer for WHO??? You do not know who you REALLY signed with. But, signing reaffirmed the “debt” — likely unsecured debt if it was a originally a subprime refinance. This was the problem of the subprime refinances to begin with — nothing more than reaffirmation of (false) charged-off, non-compliant, GSEs former loan.

    What a scam.

    Does not look like you are entitled to a review. What can you do??? Am not an attorney, but since the loan was apparently “sold” by the modification (to the servicer — which is false) — and the true creditor was never divulged by your “contract” signing —- (actually — a modification is a modification of the original contract — so, in effect your “creditor” remains the same by the original contract for a modification) —- then this is a violation of the TILA Amendment 15 USC 1601 (g) — supported by the Federal Reserve Opinion to the Amendment –which defines a “Creditor” — and is now codified as RULE to the law (12 CFR Part 226). Thus, IF the “servicer” is not the creditor — and TILA Amendment says they are not —- then you have fraud and breach of contract —- Either they set the record straight —- or modification (and “contract”) is invalid. What will that mean??? Put you back in foreclosure????

    Go for punitive damages —– to cover.

    Modifications — fraud upon fraud upon fraud. BECAUSE — the real creditor is NEVER identified.

    MODIFY — is exactly what it means — modify an “original” — it cannot CHANGE the current creditor.

    After the housing crisis finally recovers — if it does — we will then have the “loan modification” crisis. And, it goes round and round.

    President Obama?? —- possibly the worst President we have had – and likely to be historically documented as such. IF — that is any consolation.

  9. Wrongful Foreclosure Compensation Claim Program
    The following is not intended as legal advice, it is a speculative preliminary/tentative assessment based on sparse information. It suggests that the PRESS and defense bar needs to move quickly to alert victims of foreclosure of possible rights –and file protective claims. There is much analysis needed to grasp all the ramifications. OCC is not cooperating at this point and refuses to provide even copies of the form for analysis. This refusal in itself should provide a basis for demanded extension of the filing time period. Is this another HAMP-like setup?
    The U.S. Office of Comptroller of Currency (“OCC”) announced on November 1, 2011 that it has reached a Consent Agreement with the below-listed mortgage loan servicers—some of which are well-known large banks and investment banks–referred to as, “Independent Foreclosure Review” which allows foreclosure victims to make a “Request for Review”. You’ve got until April 30th, 2012 to file your Request for Review with the OCC. See FAQ about the new review process posted on OCC website.
    Other consenting servicers are not banks but are basically collection agencies that have purchased collection rights from lenders-including purported “securitization trusts” that were used to pool loans and resell interests in the pooled loans to investors such as pension funds. The primary drivers that for the servicers agreeing to the Consent Order were: use of defective documentation to support foreclosure complaints in county courts [e.g. improperly notarized “Assignments of Mortgage”, statements of amounts due], and foreclosure evictions carried out on homeowners who were attempting to work out loan modifications under the Obama HAMP program. The Consent Agreement requires that consenting servicers send letters to their victims and fixes a deadline for making the claims of April 30, 2012. Per the OCC FAQ,
    “Borrowers may also visit http://www.IndependentForeclosureReview.com for more information about the review and claim process. Assistance with the form and answers to questions about the process are available at 1-888-952-9105, Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. (ET) and Saturday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (ET).
    Requests for review must be received by April 30, 2012.”
    Unfortunately not all servicers entered into the consent agreement. For those servicers, victimized homeowners either can use the same guidelines as the OCC consent to request compensation voluntarily by the servicers, and file a copy of the same claim information with the Federal Trade Commission and the Ohio Attorney General Consumer Protection Division— or use more complex judicial remedies in county courts—including complaints to set aside the foreclosures and restore ownership in the seized homes by “Quiet Title” actions. Any of these actions can be undertaken by the homeowners themselves individually or in groups, through legal aid, or through attorneys.
    It appears that non-consents should be subjected to the same claim processes—through the Federal Trade Commission and state Attorneys general Consumer protection. Implicitly there is denial of equal protection absent a state right growing out of the same facts. Thus if a servicer used LPS/DOCX –MERS contrivances and was regulated by Federal Reserve and OCC, then a victim is afforded rights. But under this consent enforcement program, if an unregulated servicer [the worst kind] used the exact same procedure to abuse homeowners and the judicial system—that homeowner MUST have equal rights –but under a different venue. The claims should now be part of state law as if the consenters—particularly MERS/LPS/DOCX –have effectively confessed their actions and damages remains the only issue.
    Justice demands equal treatment: arguably, a state court judge should look to the OCC action and ORDER the servicer to apply the same process, by settlement, as if it had consented where the facts are the same. ALL foreclosures should be re-opened in the state court systems unless claims are filed and accepted by OCC.

    Because all of these remedies are new and untried it is impossible to assess the degree of success that any of the claimants or approaches will experience—including the claims with consenting servicers. Already consumer advocates assert that the servicer-hired claim reviewers are likely to be biased and/or poorly trained. Consumer advocates suggest that claims agreed may be arbitrarily low and may require appeals within the framework of the Consent process. In any case, well documented and coherent claims will be be necessary for justice to be done. Per Mandelman, “(A NOTE ABOUT BANKRUPTCY: If you’re in bankruptcy, however, be sure to take the servicer claim to your attorney, DO NOT FILE your “Request for Review” on your own.)”
    The consent requires that the victims fall under the following classes:
    You have to have been part of a “foreclosure action” on your PRIMARY RESIDENCE between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2010. What is a “foreclosure action?” It’s one of the following four situations:
    1. You lost your home to foreclosure, and its been sold by the trustee.
    2. You were in foreclosure, but either because you brought the payments current, entered some sort of payment/forbearance plan, applied for a loan modification, or filed bankruptcy, it was pulled out of foreclosure.
    3. You were in foreclosure, but were able to sell the home via short sale, or chose to deed-in-lieu to avoid actually losing home to foreclosure.
    4. You’re in foreclosure now and you’re still delinquent, but no foreclosure sale has happened yet.
    Below is THE list of the 24 consenting servicers—which is a fraction of the total servicer population but a larger percentage of actual abusive foreclosures.
    1. America’s Servicing Co.
    2. Aurora Loan Services
    3. Bank of America
    4. Beneficial
    5. Chase
    6. Citibank
    7. CitiFinancial
    8. CitiMortgage
    9. Countrywide
    10. EMC
    11. EverBank/EverHome Mortgage Company
    12. GMAC Mortgage
    13. HFC
    14. HSBC
    15. IndyMac Mortgage Services
    16. MetLife Bank
    17. National City Mortgage
    18. PNC Mortgage
    19. Sovereign Bank
    20. SunTrust Mortgage
    21. U.S. Bank
    22. Wachovia Mortgage
    23. Washington Mutual (WaMu)
    24. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
    25. De facto MERS
    26. De facto LPS/DOCX
    Also signing consent orders including damage liabilities to homeowners are commonly used document creators Lenders Processing Services (“LPS”) and its DOCX subsidiary and Mortgage Electronic Services (“MERS”). Damages apparently can be claimed if these were involved—most times they were—especially MERS. The issue is the amount of financial damages—however if a homeowner was victimized by a servicer that is not named –not subject to OCC jurisdiction—nevertheless if the servicer used MERS or LPS/DOCX, then the liability is in effect joint and MERS/LPS seem to be able to be named parties in the claim.
    Examples of financial injury…
    EXAMPLES OF COMPENSABLE DAMAGES
    The OCC FAQ lists “softball” or limited value examples of financial injury as a result of “errors, misrepresentations, or other deficiencies in the foreclosure process,” but they also state clearly that IT IS BY NO MEANS MEANT TO BE A COMPLETE LIST. It’s really more like general guidance or a starter list of examples than anything else. So, in point of fact, there could exist any number of other “errors, misrepresentations, or other deficiencies in the foreclosure process,” that could have caused homeowners to be financially damaged. http://mandelman.ml-implode.com/2011/11/occ%E2%80%99s-independent-foreclosure-review-for-homeowners-is-ready-%E2%80%93-but-so-are-the-scammers/ They ignored robosigning which accelerated fraudulent evictions—probably the largest effect. Also the robo-signing caused many to resist because it was obvious that the documentation was bogus and that the servicer may well have NO RIGHT at all to the homeowner promissory note or the foreclosed property—exposing homeowners to double recoveries. The robo-signing should be assumed generally known because it was exposed on the front page of the New York Times in October 2010—ergo subject of judicial knowledge. And public outrage. LPS/DOCX and MERS signed consents—no proof issues there but for HOW MUCH DAMAGE.
    The following is a non-exhaustive list of events that give rise to claims for damages:
    • ◦The mortgage balance amount at the time of the foreclosure action was more than you actually owed.
    • ◦You were doing everything the modification agreement required, but the foreclosure sale still happened. If you were foreclosed on while making your trial payments, this one’s for you.
    • ◦The foreclosure action occurred while you were protected by bankruptcy.
    • ◦You requested a modification, submitted complete documents on time, and were waiting for a decision when the foreclosure sale occurred.
    • ◦Fees charged or mortgage payments were inaccurately calculated, processed, or applied.
    • ◦The foreclosure action occurred on a mortgage that was obtained before active duty military service began and while on active duty, or within 9 months after the active duty ended and the service-member did not waive his/her rights under the Service-members Civil Relief Act.
    • improperly notarized “Assignments of Mortgage” or other legal documents that speeded up wrongful eviction creating excessive rental payments and/or attorney fees, or lost/damaged furnishings
    • erroneous seizure of the wrong property that resulted in loss of furnishings and the greater of the reduced value of the home or repair costs if you got it back, or the greater of cost or value if you did not get it back plus emotional distress
    • more more more

    Per Mandelman,
    “A few words about financial injury…
    Determining how you were damaged or financially injured is not going to be nearly as easy as you might think. It’s not “Common Sense Court,” we’re talking about here… we’re talking about lawyers at the OCC… banking lawyers… the worst kind.
    The idea is that damages are supposed to measure in monetary terms, the extent of the harm that a plaintiff (as in, you the homeowner) has suffered because of a defendant’s (as in, your servicer’s) actions, and their purpose is to restore the injured party to the position they were in before the harm happened.
    In general, you should think about damages as being restoring what you lost… as opposed to being punitive, because although punitive damages may be awarded in certain situations, this is not one of them. In fact, remember… this isn’t like you’re going to court… you’ll be submitting your Request for Review to the OCC.
    There are three basic categories of damages. The first is termed compensatory damages, which are awarded to restore what the plaintiff lost as a result of the defendant’s wrongful conduct. Next, there are nominal damages… a small sum awarded when someone has not suffered any substantial loss, but has been wronged nonetheless. And then there are punitive damages, which are awarded under certain circumstances to punish a defendant for particularly egregious, wrongful conduct.
    But, for the purposes of filing your Request for Review with the OCC, you need to think about how your servicer’s acts directly caused you harm… and by harm, I mean financial harm.
    Whenever the topic of “damages” comes up, I often hear homeowners mention the idea of mental pain and suffering. Now, there’s no question that this type of suffering is involved here, as it includes fright, nervousness, grief, emotional trauma, anxiety, humiliation, and indignity… and I think it’s safe to say that homeowners in foreclosures have all those things, and probably a few more.
    On the Website, Law.com, they talk about as follows:
    Evidentiary problems include the fact that such distress is easily feigned or exaggerated, and professional testimony by a therapist or psychiatrist may be required to validate the existence and depth of the distress and place a dollar value upon it.
    But, you have to remember, we’re not talking about a court of law here, we’re talking about the OCC, so you need to concentrate primarily on how you were damaged tangibly, like in dollars and sense, which may be hard to do when the home you lost to foreclosure, or may lose to foreclosure, has no equity.
    You see, as far as damages for losses to real property goes, it looks to me like they could measure financial injury related to real property by assessing the difference in the fair market value of the property before and after the injury. Not only that, but it also seems that diminished fair market value is not used as the measure of recovery, if the financial injury to real property is temporary in nature.
    Now, I have no idea whether any of this makes any difference to the OCC, but I do know this: damages or financial injuries are subject to numerous limitations and legal definitions, so it seems to me that most people are going to need a lawyer to help them figure “financially injury” component out.
    I’m not saying that it’s an insurmountable issue, but since the OCC has not provided any real guidance in this area, and since the OCC’s process does not offer any sort of appeals process should you be denied, you probably want to at least consult with an experienced attorney before filing.
    Here are links to the various OCC Consent Orders, but check with the OCC if yours isn’t on this list, as it may not have been updated.” Mandelman ibid

    ◦Consent Order for Aurora Bank, FSB (PDF) http://www.ots.treas.gov/_files/enforcement/97661.pdf
    ◦Consent Order for Bank of America (PDF) http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-47b.pdf
    ◦Consent Order for Citibank (PDF) http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-47c.pdf
    ◦Consent Orders for EverBank and EverBank Financial Corp. (PDF) http://www.ots.treas.gov/_files/enforcement/97664.pdf
    ◦Consent Order for HSBC Bank (PDF) http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-47d.pdf
    ◦Consent Order for JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (PDF) http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-47e.pdf
    ◦Consent Order for LPS; DocX, LLC; and LPD Default Solutions, Inc. (PDF) http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-47f.pdf
    ◦Consent Order for MetLife Bank, N.A. (PDF) http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-47g.pdf
    ◦Consent Order for MERSCORP and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) (PDF) http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-47h.pdf
    ◦Consent Orders for OneWest Bank, FSB and IMB HoldCo LLC (PDF) http://www.ots.treas.gov/_files/enforcement/97665.pdf
    ◦Consent Order for PNC Bank, N.A. (PDF) http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-47i.pdf
    ◦Consent Order for Sovereign Bank (PDF) http://www.ots.treas.gov/_files/enforcement/97662.pdf
    ◦Consent Order for U.S. Bank National Association, U.S. Bank National Association ND (PDF) http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-47j.pdf
    ◦Consent Order for Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (PDF) http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-47k.pdf
    Entities involved in the process
    Financial Services Roundtable Housing Policy Council http://www.fsround.org/housing/index.html http://www.fsround.org/fsr/pdfs/press_releases/HARPProgram10.24.11.pdf
    Hope Now Alliance
    John Walsh, the acting Comptroller of the Currency http://www.occ.treas.gov/ http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-91.html
    Interagency Review of Foreclosure Policies and Practices, http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-47a.pdf
    FAQ
    Frequently Asked Questions Regarding the Interagency Foreclosure Enforcement Actions
    On April 13, 2010, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System announced enforcement actions against 14 large residential mortgage servicers and two third-party vendors for unsafe and unsound practices related to residential mortgage loan servicing and foreclosure processing.
    Below are answers to common questions regarding the enforcement actions.
    Q. Who can I talk to now about my situation in light of your consent orders?
    A. Customers may also visit http://www.IndependentForeclosureReview.com for more information. Assistance with the form and answers to questions about the process are available at 1-888-952-9105, Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. (ET) and on Saturday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (ET).
    Q. How can I request that my foreclosure be reviewed?
    A. Information about the process is being provided in mailings to eligible borrowers that began November 1, 2010. The mailings should be completed by the end of the year. Customers may also visit http://www.IndependentForeclosureReview.com for more information. Assistance with the form and answers to questions about the process are available at 1-888-952-9105, Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. (ET) and on Saturday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (ET).
    Q. My house will be sold through foreclosure proceedings in the next few weeks. Will your enforcement order prevent that action?
    A. The orders are intended to ensure that borrowers are treated fairly, especially those subject to foreclosure, but they are not intended to keep lawful foreclosures from proceeding. The independent consultants and servicers have identified loans that have been scheduled for foreclosure sale. Requests for review from eligible borrowers whose loan is scheduled for foreclosure sale will receive highest priority for review, and the foreclosure sale will be suspended while the review is being performed. If you believe you were improperly foreclosed upon or have been unfairly denied a modification and you are facing imminent foreclosure, you should contact your servicer if you have not done so already; or you can also contact our Customer Assistance Group at helpwithmybank.gov if you wish to file a complaint against a national bank servicer.
    Q. I’m still working with my servicer to prevent a foreclosure sale. Will I still be able to work with them?
    A.Yes, continue to work with your servicer. Participating in the review will not impact any effort to prevent a foreclosure sale. The review is not intended to replace current active efforts with your servicer.
    Q. Do I need an attorney to request or submit the request for review form?
    A. No. The independent foreclosure review is free. Beware of anyone who asks you to pay a fee in exchange for a service to complete the Request for Review Form. However, if your mortgage loan meets the initial eligibility criteria and you are currently represented by an attorney with respect to a foreclosure or bankruptcy case regarding your mortgage; please refer to your attorney.
    Q. If I request an independent foreclosure review, is there a cost or will there be a negative impact to my credit?
    A. The Independent Foreclosure Review is a free program. Beware of anyone who asks you to pay a fee in exchange for a service to complete the Request for Review Form. The review will not have an impact on your credit report or any other options you may pursue related to your foreclosure.
    Q. How did the OCC ensure independence of the consultants and law firms hired by the servicers to conduct and support the independent reviews?
    A. The OCC and the Federal Reserve Board reviewed consultants and law firms proposed by the servicers, their existing and previous relationships with the servicers and roles in foreclosure issues to prevent conflicts of interests and situations that could result in undue influence over their independent judgment.
    Q. What is the OCC’s role in the independent foreclosure review?
    A. The OCC and the Federal Reserve Board required corrective action to address unsafe and unsound mortgage servicing and foreclosure processing among 14 large mortgage servicers. The federal regulators’ role is to ensure compliance with those consent orders through oversight and direction. As required by the consent orders, independent consultants will conduct the reviews of foreclosures, and determine whether errors, misrepresentations, or other deficiencies resulted in financial injury. Where a borrower suffered financial injury as a result of such practices, the consent orders require that remediation be provided. The regulators have spent significant amount of time to ensure a integrated claims process is simple, clear and fair and that the reviews are conducted consistently across servicers in an independent manner.
    Q. My foreclosure sale was in 2011 but the process began in 2010, am I still eligible to have my foreclosure reviewed?
    A. Yes, if the foreclosure activity was in process at any point in 2009 or 2010, if it involved your primary residence, and if the mortgage was serviced by one of the participating servicers.
    Q. What mortgage servicers were involved in the independent look back review of foreclosures?
    A. Foreclosure activities on a borrower’s primary residence conducted between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2010 by the following mortgage servicers are eligible for review:
    •America’s Servicing Company
    •Aurora Loan Services
    •Bank of America
    •Beneficial
    •Chase
    •Citibank
    •CitiFinancial
    •CitiMortgage
    •Countrywide
    •EMC
    •Everbank/Everhome
    •GMAC Mortgage
    •HFC
    •HSBC
    •IndyMac Mortgage Services
    •Metlife Bank
    •National City
    •PNC
    •Sovereign Bank
    •SunTrust Mortgage
    •U.S. Bank
    •Wachovia
    •Washington Mutual
    •Wells Fargo
    Q. When will I know the results of the review?
    A. Individuals will be sent an acknowledgement letter within one week after the request is received. A review could take several months, because the review process will be a thorough and complete examination of many details and documents. Individuals will be notified in writing of the results of their review.
    Q. I filed for bankruptcy. Am I to assume my foreclosure should not have proceeded?
    A. Not necessarily, as filing bankruptcy does not prevent foreclosure proceedings in all cases. If you suspect you were improperly foreclosed upon while under protection from U.S. bankruptcy law, you may want to consider requesting a review through the independent review process required by federal regulators’ consent orders. You may also want consult your personal bankruptcy lawyer.
    Q. Are your actions against servicers aimed at foreclosure prevention?
    A. The orders are intended to ensure that borrowers facing foreclosure are treated fairly, but they are not intended to keep lawful foreclosures from being initiated or proceeding. The enforcement actions, which were announced in April by the OCC, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System specifically address mortgage servicing standards for loan modifications. The orders specifically require a single point of contact for borrowers, eliminate dual tracking in cases where a trial or permanent modification has been approved, and require adequate staffing of servicer loss mitigation programs. While not all foreclosures can be prevented, these changes are expected to eliminate confusion and frustration for homeowners trying to save their homes, and ensure that they are treated fairly and afforded every protection available under law
    Q. I understand there will also be sample loan files pulled for review as part of a “look-back” by the third-party consultants for each of the servicers under the Consent Orders. What if the sampling method used by the third-party consultants conducting the “look back” misses me?
    A. Sampling is only one of the methods that will be employed in the review. You can ask that your case be reviewed as part of the look back process if you think you suffered financial injury as a result of errors, misrepresentations, or other deficiencies in a foreclosure action on your primary residence that occurred in 2009 or 2010. Mailings to eligible borrowers explaining that request process began November 1, 2011 and will be completed by the end of the year. Borrowers may also visit http://www.IndependentForeclosureReview.com for more information. Assistance with the form and answers to questions about the process are available at 1-888-952-9105, Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. (ET) and Saturday 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (ET). Requests must be completed and submitted by April 30, 2012.
    Q. I was more than six months delinquent on my mortgage. Can people like me expect remediation?
    A. Remediation will be based on documented financial harm stemming from improper foreclosure practices by the servicer. If a foreclosure activity on your primary residence was in process at any point in 2009 or 2010, your mortgage was serviced by one of the participating servicers, and if you believe you have been financially harmed by improper foreclosure practices involving errors, misrepresentations, or other deficiencies, you should consider requesting a review through the third-party review process required by the enforcement actions.
    Q. How do you repair my ruined credit?
    A. Remediation may include the correction of information reported to credit bureaus. Eligible borrowers who think they have been financially harmed by errors, misrepresentations, or other deficiencies in a foreclosure process on their primary residence during 2009 and 2010 should consider requesting a review through the third-party review process required by the enforcement actions taken by the OCC and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
    Q. Can I contest the remedy I am given?
    A. The enforcement orders provide additional rights to borrowers who may have been harmed by inappropriate or unfair practices by bank servicers, but they do not take any rights away from borrowers. If you are not satisfied with the remediation offered through the process the agencies have set up, you may still avail yourself of any legal remedies you now have.
    Q. What kind of remedy can you provide for people who unfairly lost their homes as a result of illegal or inappropriate servicing practices?
    A. The primary goal of remediation is to identify and compensate individuals who were financially injured by improper foreclosure actions. Compensation or remediation must be based on the individual facts of each case, and recommendations will all be made by the independent consultant. Final remediation plans will be subject to review by the OCC and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
    Q. Are you going to mandate principal reductions? Might the AG settlement do that?
    A. OCC supports principal reduction as part of a servicer’s tool kit to provide sustainable modifications provided they generate a higher net present value for mortgage investors. However, the OCC is not imposing mandatory principal reductions.
    Q. My foreclosure action occurred before January 1, 2009. Am I out of luck?
    A. As long as foreclosure action involved your primary residence and was active during any part of January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2010 and the mortgage was serviced by one of the participating servicers; you may be eligible for a review. The heavy foreclosure activity during those years exacerbated the deficiencies found in the examinations that were conducted in the fourth quarter of 2010, which is why we focused on that period of time. However, if you believe your servicer engaged in inappropriate or unfair practices with respect to your foreclosure, you still have all of your rights to seek civil remedies outside of the requirements of the enforcement action.
    Q. What information will people need to provide to request a review?
    A. The form will require information on the borrower and responses to questions about how the borrower believes he or she may have been financially injured. There is no charge to customers for a review. The review will not be reported to any of the credit bureaus and will not affect a customer’s efforts to pursue options related to a foreclosure.
    Q. What constitutes financial injury?
    A. Listed below are examples of situations that may have led to financial injury. This list does not include all situations.
    •The mortgage balance at the time of the foreclosure action was more than you actually owed.
    •You were doing everything the modification agreement required, but the foreclosure sale still happened.
    •The foreclosure action occurred while you were protected by bankruptcy.
    •Fees charged or mortgage payments were inaccurately calculated, processed, or applied.
    •The foreclosure action occurred on a mortgage that was obtained before active duty military service began and while on active duty, or within 9 months after the active duty ended and the service member did not waive his or her rights under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act.

  10. the list in the occ piece and mandelman toatals 24—-3 columns of 7–plus the consents include mers and lps–and mention damages

    any info people please–this will be a horserace to get the the claims filed by 4/30

    already occ is dragging feet–making you struggle just to get the form–trying to screen out claimants–

    i worked for govt –it is absolutely impossible for them to have data base of potential claimants–but they are demanding names and loan numbers just to send a form

    this is a charade–more feel good stuff like hamp–if this is what the game is we must get this to the banking committee asap

    any others doing this please let me knoe

    dcbreidenbach@aol.com

  11. DCB,

    Know of another attorney who is onto this too — also called. As I stated elsewhere — there are levels of servicing — after 90 days of default — almost always goes to a default processing servicer. Thus, even for those servicers on the list — they have to get the records from the default servicer — which is, of course, hearsay. Have not seen the list of 24 — only the 14 — but, but bet the default servicers are those that have not consented.

  12. OCC review is pure BS just designed to say, “see, we are looking, we are helping”,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    It’s not going to amount to anything………once again.

  13. @carrie good point–you are at risk another will come along and nail you to a cross——–no defense –you lost your home without proof yet –you are incurring damages in rent –relocation—and anguish—–your cost of defense——

    what we need is to list every conceivable form of injury and damage and generate checklists for the reviews and get ready for appeals–they may not yet have them but due process requires reviews under basic agency law–their consents cannot deprive my basic conlaw rights–if i am damaged i have a right –this is no gift they give us but an alternative dispute resolution vs upending the foreclosures en masse

  14. How about me requesting proof of my payments being conveyed to some “loan” that they said is in some “trust”? And proof that some “note” was transferred to some “trust”? And proof that they are in possession of original note?
    If they ignore me and then foreclose—am I damaged?
    Heck yeah.

  15. Question for the smart people out there—the OCC lists 24 servicers as to which claims can be raised. I have attempted to obtain a copy of the “claim” form from the OCC via the phone so I can see what is required etc—to get the ball rolling—-they REFUSED to send it to me because I was not a victim of a named claimee. OUCH! This is who is going to administer this? This denial was today.

    I am an attorney and am working with a crew of OWLs to help the victims–and OCC is already blocking me.

    I do not understand why there are 24 on the list–but only 14 consented–and the non-consents were handled in our cases by LPS/DOCX and MERS of course—–they consented or confessed howver you want to look at it–but OCC is blocking ability to get the form much less take claims on non-consents

  16. linda,

    And, for $178.00 — the CA AG — just took away your right to sue — and prevent your own (true) real case of fraud.??

    Nice. Can we all scream loud enough???

    Linda — there is salvation — Wachovia/Wells Fargo — never kept your so-called “mortgage” — they sold it off —before you signed the dotted line — just need to ascertain to WHO. And, where it is CURRENTLY buried.

  17. Ok, sounds like we need an attorney to file a complaint with the OCC. May as well file a law suit instead if you are going to put that much time into it. I already filed a complaint over a year ago and just sent in an appeal right before this review process was announced. I don’t see where it hurts to include a loan audit, so I included my securitization audit and also proof of phony signatures, notaries, and so on. I’ll keep my fingers crossed.

    When I complained to AG Harris of CA, I got back a response and urged to join the Pick-a-Pay Settlement she had reached with World-Wachovia-Wells Fargo. Well, well, well, as a Class A member, I just got my check a few days ago.

    $178.00. That’s right. One hundred and seventy-eight dollars!
    It’s so insulting I don’t know what to do with the check. Burn it or what?
    Any suggestions?

  18. Looks like annonymous has great info for us both. Some I should have known already. Thanks.

  19. Dan-0 I would certainly believe so. It was done in fraud. However agreeing with them reopened a can of worms for you and reupped the contract and made you owe someone you did not owe by law, however I would think cause of the fraud involved and the pretense of being in compliance with state law, your best thing is to look up the foreclosers name and see if they are a registered corporation with a local agent with a contact address and phone and registered as a trustee, lender, financial institution including MERS if MERS is involved and see if they were in compliance at all to collect a debt in the state of where ever you are. If they are not in compliance with the state laws and the state deed of trust law See Washington State V. RECONTRUST USE IT AS A GUIDE. Also see The Bevilaqua case V. Rodriguez. Important! Feel free to correct me I am not an attorney.

  20. dan-o,

    So you signed with a servicer??? Servicer for WHO??? You do not know who you REALLY signed with. But, signing reaffirmed the “debt” — likely unsecured debt if it was a originally a subprime refinance. This was the problem of the subprime refinances to begin with — nothing more than reaffirmation of (false) charged-off, non-compliant, GSEs former loan.

    What a scam.

    Does not look like you are entitled to a review. What can you do??? Am not an attorney, but since the loan was apparently “sold” by the modification (to the servicer — which is false) — and the true creditor was never divulged by your “contract” signing —- (actually — a modification is a modification of the original contract — so, in effect your “creditor” remains the same by the original contract for a modification) —- then this is a violation of the TILA Amendment 15 USC 1601 (g) — supported by the Federal Reserve Opinion to the Amendment –which defines a “Creditor” — and is now codified as RULE to the law (12 CFR Part 226). Thus, IF the “servicer” is not the creditor — and TILA Amendment says they are not —- then you have fraud and breach of contract —- Either they set the record straight —- or modification (and “contract”) is invalid. What will that mean??? Put you back in foreclosure????

    Go for punitive damages —– to cover.

    Modifications — fraud upon fraud upon fraud. BECAUSE — the real creditor is NEVER identified.

    MODIFY — is exactly what it means — modify an “original” — it cannot CHANGE the current creditor.

    After the housing crisis finally recovers — if it does — we will then have the “loan modification” crisis. And, it goes round and round.

    President Obama?? —- possibly the worst President we have had – and likely to be historically documented as such. IF — that is any consolation.

  21. I was not done but I could not make it take more comment. I wanted to say correct me if I am wrong here. Am I seeing the picture correctly or what?
    The debt is discharged and not a collectable debt.
    The debt is unsecured and timebarred by 2-3 maybe four years in each state,
    The promissory mortgage note and deed of trust written contracts debt are void in 5-7 years and timebarred from collection in most all states. Because the contracts were breached at the signing no disclosures to the borrower to whom the real lender was and the pretender lender pretending to be the lender when it was a strawman.
    The PSA’s to Chase from WAMU/ FDIC are Void .
    The PSA’s are blank and empty in most cases.
    THe titles are all slandered and clouded in most cases if not all cases.
    Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust is not in compliance all states but New York and I have not pulled up New York, I just know you have to serve them at 60 Wall Street New York NY.
    I am not sure RECONTRUST CAN BE SERVED ANYWHERE. Chase can be served in Ohio I beleive. Not most states only one state.
    MERS IS not registered or incorporated in all states but California and Delaware I believe look it up. And are not in complaince with the state laws for lenders, financial institutions, or trustees nor a corporation with a physical location and a phone and a one on one contact available. None of the above are in compliance with the law anywhere.
    And this is the MERS’s only problem as you know. Why arent people seeing MERS is not registered to do business in any state but maybe two. Restin Virgina and Delaware and maybe California. Look it up!
    Sorry but I have to much going on to go back and look it up. Good luck. THere are laws in place and our civil rights state when can not be denied our due process and we can not be denied laws in place. Our forefathers must be spinning in their graves.
    With the debt collectors making claims it is very important you send a letter of objection that they are the lender without proof and that you object to and deni oweing this alleged debt everytime you get a letter claiming they are the debt collector or they are assigning the debt to someoneelse. YOU DO NOT OWE THIS ALLEGED DEBT. In most states there is a castle law, that you have the right to defend your home even with arms. Dont recommend the arms you may meet our sensitive swat team that likes to target practice on homes. Or rubber bullets at best. Probably real ones.

  22. Where is Lender’s Processing Servicing on this list??? And — other default processing servicers? Where is Ocwen??? (formerly Homeq) — where is AHMSI??? Where is Litton (now also Ocwen)???

    And, why does this “audit” stop at 12/10???

    Do they really think all fraud stopped in the year 2010??? .

    There are layers of servicers —and subservicers — and, after 90 days in default the loan is sent elsewhere. Above servicers likely no longer have the ORIGINAL records. So — they will have to go to default servicing processor to get them —- Yeah — that’s real reliable.

  23. BIG QUESTION HERE FOR NEIL OR ANYONE ELSE WHO KNOWS WHATS GOING ON WITH THIS: what about folks like me who were approached by their servicer to modify their loan (through an “in-house” not hamp) and did so, only to find out the servicer slipped language into the modification contract that made them the lender and holder of your mortgage even though there is no evidence, aside from the modification, that they ever were? they ( the servicer) tricked us into agreeing we owed them the money then promplty assigned it to a securitized trust who began foreclosure. this securitized trust also had a cut of and closing 4 years prior to this assignment, and as we all know they couldnt have been assigned the mortgage at this time. am i entitled to a review? modification fraud? is that reviewable?

  24. THey all evade scrutiny! Duetsche Bank Nat’.l Trust has a law suit against the FDIC [Deutsche bank v FDIC] where Deutsche attorneys claim the FDIC did not transfer the PSA’s in a timely manner therefore they received void PSA’s , when Deutsche claims to the homeowners and the courts out of the other side of their mouth and lips, that they are the parties of interest for the PSA’s and the note. But see they claim as trustee for the PSA and debt collector for the mortgage debt. Theyare debt collectors not mortgage holders or owners or should I say asummers , or is it assumptioners? [I am not an attorney obviously]. Now at the same time Deutsche is suing the FDIC for letting them assume void and faulty PSA’s. In the mean time Chase is claiming a law suit by their attorneys hands that Chase did not assume the mortgages and are not parties of interest (I believe to be suied by the opposing party) I believe a part of the gov. I have to look it up I have not read it for a while. It may be Fannie or the SEC, but guessing for right now without looking it up. Chase is also complaining in a case that the FDIC did not transfer the PSA’s within the required time. By New York law all PSA’s go by NY Law! The PSA’s must be transfered within 180 days. or they are void and all PSA’s in default for over 120 or 180 [have to look that up also] have to be discharged.
    Now read the assumption Chase/WAMU assumption agreement you can pull right off the web. Chase did not assume the mortgages on any WAMU loans [therefore are not parties of interest] just debt collectors. Now look at the Chase Assumption extention agreement. It was not assumed by Sept 25th like it was suppose to be but extended until sometime in October and well after the 180 days allowed for assumption or the PSA is void. WHy are we in court or foreclosuer with Chase? and or Deutsche Bank? and furhermore look up Deutsche bank in your corporations listed in your state for their agent and or license in your state. Deutsche is not li nor have an agent in your state unless you live in New York,NY. They are not registered or in compliance with your state laws to legally foreclose and never have been. Look it up.. Your state Corporations Like State of Washington Corporations, type in RECONTRUST, OR DEUTCHE BANK NAT’L TRUST. See Washington V. RECONTRUST filed by our AG Rob McKenna. Duetsche is the exact same senerio, with only one exception Chase does not own Deutsche like BOA owns RECONTRUST, WHICH IS ALSO ILLEGAL.

    ONLY DEBT COLLECTORS CAN GO AFTER YOUR ALLEGED DEBT. Once the pretender lenders allegedly turned the not into securities then stock, they had to shred the note I believe to hide the PSA pools fraud, [they just pretended to do this the PSA are empty] they had to by law shred the note [check] to avoid securities fraud and double dipping. Only it was all fabricated by con artist. Once the PSA’s are supposedly in default for over 120 or 180days [have to look it up again] the PSA is supposed to be a discharged [charged off item], the lender can not claim to the be onwner or it is securities fraud. So the debt collector has the legal right to claim they are a debt collector and you owe them the debt. They can even take you to court. But if you object and tell them you are wise to their schemes of this alleged debt you do not owe and to quit calling you, and object to their claims of a party of interest, they can not collect a charged of debt starting from the day it was charged off. But if you say verbally or written yes this is my debt, you have reupped a contract you owe by law even though the fairtale allleged debt was not owed by you.
    Also once the note was put into stock and the note was not lost, but shredded it became separated from the deed of trust and became unsecured and it timebarred by a three year statute or limitations from collection in WA state and a year less or more in other states. You can pull up your state by statutes of limitations for a promissory, mortgage note. Pull up your state.

  25. Why does deutsche bank always escape scrutiny

  26. Wells Fargo is using Rust Consulting, a Minneapolis based firm in the same location as Wells’ legal offices. Watch out for anything which appears to be in Wells’ beas interests rather than the homeowners’. Any info of the relationship between Wells and Rust, please send to jordanalipscomb@gmail.com

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: