BOMBSHELL- NEVADA ATTORNEY GENERAL RELEASES MASSIVE INDICTMENT

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

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

The indictment alleges that both defendants directed the fraudulent notarization and filing of documents which were used to initiate foreclosure on local homeowners. The State alleges that these documents, referred to as Notices of Default, or “NODs”, were prepared locally. The State alleges that the defendants directed employees under their supervision, to forge their names on foreclosure documents, then notarize the signatures they just forged, thereby fraudulently attesting that the defendants actually signed the documents, which was untrue and in violation of State law. The defendants then allegedly directed the employees under their supervision to file the fraudulent documents with the Clark County Recorder’s office, to be used to start foreclosures on homes throughout the County.  The indictment alleges that these crimes were done in secret in order to avoid detection.  The fraudulent NODs were allegedly forged locally to allow them to be filed at the Clark County Recorder’s office on the same day they were prepared.

EDITOR’S COMMENT: Weidner has it right. It might seem like this is just two people, but we all know that these practices are a mirror of what has been done throughout the country — thus causing havoc in the lives of homeowners, violating the HAMP regulations and agreements, and corrupting the title chain on perhaps tens of millions of homes.

Fraudulent notarization: Remember that just because the notarization was improper doesn’t mean the document might not be otherwise valid and subject to a corrective instrument signed by the right people in the right way with the right notarization. BUT, that said, it is worthy of note because the notarizations were used to create the appearance of valid documents that were fabricated, forged and signed without the correct chain of authority. And the reason this practice is so widespread is that the Banks are scamming the market using the reluctance of investors to get into the foreclosure game as an excuse to “fill the void” and thus grab homes that were neither financed by them nor purchased by them.

False filing of documents: this is low hanging fruit for prosecutors across the country and no doubt will result in people “flipping” on their employers as prosecutors climb the ladder to the real decision-makers. Everyone was waiting for some attorney general to start the ball rolling. Well, this is it. I think Arizona might the the one to follow.

BOMBSHELL- NEVADA ATTORNEY GENERAL RELEASES MASSIVE INDICTMENT

November 17th, 2011 | Author:

This really is extraordinary. An Attorney General brings a HUGE indictment against two individuals…but here’s why it is so earth-shattering…..read carefully the crimes that are alleged….then understand that these same acts were probably performed all across this country hundreds of thousands of times.

The conundrum created by an announcement such as this is once it’s done once by one Attorney General, what are all the other Attorney’s General and enforcement agencies to do?  Shall they just ignore what their counterpart is alleging? Are they able to just sit on the sidelines and ignore the serious allegations of systemic violations knowing full well that it was/is happening in their states as well?

And what about states like North Carolina and Massachusetts where elected public officials like Jeff Thigpen and John O’Brien have been screaming bloody hell for years, demanding that something be done?

The implications here are mind-blowing…read the indictment carefully and just extrapolate out, all across the country……

Felony Indictment Against Robo-Signers

from Brevardtimes.com

The Office of the Nevada Attorney General announced yesterday that the Clark County grand jury has returned a 606 count indictment against two title officers, Gary Trafford and Gerri Sheppard, who directed and supervised a robo-signing scheme which resulted in the filing of tens of thousands of fraudulent documents with the Clark County Recorder’s Office between 2005 and 2008.

According to the indictment, defendant Gary Trafford, a California resident, is charged with 102 counts of offering false instruments for recording (category C felony); false certification on certain instruments (category D felony); and notarization of the signature of a person not in the presence of a notary public (a gross misdemeanor). The indictment charges defendant Gerri Sheppard, also a California resident, with 100 counts of offering false instruments for recording (category C felony); false certification on certain instruments (category D felony); and notarization of the signature of a person not in the presence of a notary public (a gross misdemeanor).
”The grand jury found probable cause that there was a robo-signing scheme which resulted in the filing of tens of thousands of fraudulent documents with the Clark County Recorder’s Office between 2005 and 2008,”said Chief Deputy Attorney General John Kelleher.
The indictment alleges that both defendants directed the fraudulent notarization and filing of documents which were used to initiate foreclosure on local homeowners. The State alleges that these documents, referred to as Notices of Default, or “NODs”, were prepared locally. The State alleges that the defendants directed employees under their supervision, to forge their names on foreclosure documents, then notarize the signatures they just forged, thereby fraudulently attesting that the defendants actually signed the documents, which was untrue and in violation of State law. The defendants then allegedly directed the employees under their supervision to file the fraudulent documents with the Clark County Recorder’s office, to be used to start foreclosures on homes throughout the County.  The indictment alleges that these crimes were done in secret in order to avoid detection.  The fraudulent NODs were allegedly forged locally to allow them to be filed at the Clark County Recorder’s office on the same day they were prepared.
District Court Judge Jennifer Togliatti has set bail in the amount of $500,000 for Sheppard and $500,000 for Trafford. The case has been assigned to Department 5 District Court Judge Carolyn Ellsworth who will preside over the case.

Anyone who has information regarding this case is asked to contact the Attorney General’s Office at 702-486-3777 in Las Vegas or 775-684-1180 in Carson City.

SIMILAR STORIES:

Apr 16, 2011
Bill Posey (R-FL) will host a foreclosure and short sale forum with the Melbourne Association of Realtors on 1450 Sarno Rd. in Melbourne, Florida on April 28, 2011 from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. despite his pro-bank legislative
Sep 21, 2011
After bailouts, quantitative easing, and no jail sentences for foreclosure fraud, several different groups have taken to Wall Street to protest what many believe is a lack of democracy in current U.S. politics. The financial crisis
Apr 21, 2011

Each property has since gone into foreclosure. This case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Florida Office of Financial Regulation, Bureau of Financial Investigations.

Mar 19, 2011
neighborhoods with abandoned homes with 4-foot-tall dandelions, sitting-water mosquito factories, or rat colonies as the new tenants, the city is powerless to do anything to correct blighted homes facing foreclosure.
 

 

19 Responses

  1. @Nancy Drewe

    I want to thank you for not using capitals anymore. You have no idea how much easier it is to read. Most of it still flies by me but, at least, I can read it.

    I do have a question: do you know of any exhaustive (i.e., complete) list of all the MERS members? I haven’t been able to verify to which extent my original lender was.

    Thanks in advance.

  2. I am shocked at you Neil you want to give credit to a lawyer that has all the evidence to bring this whole thing to a close however ignores it so he can make money shame
    You and I both know that this matter of fake NOD’s is something I brought to your attention last year their whole foreclosure process is a creation from a arts and science published application when they created MERS they created their own debt collections practices to go along with it.
    That’s I am taking my fight to occupy wall Street and other groups in action you sit their and give credit to lawyer who would not even challenege the evidence in a court of law as a lawyer so you say you should that LAWYERS CAN NOT CREATE THEIR OWN EVIDENCE
    Shame on you and him

  3. eSys Secure Data Transfer

    A simple and secure file sharing solution for sending sensitive or confidential information between parties.

    Application Features

    Customer branding
    Secure file transfer between authorized parties
    No installations
    Compatible with all major cross platform web browser clients
    AutoExpiration and deletion of files at Customer specified interval
    Hyperlinked Email notification to recipient on upload
    Hyperlinked Email notification to sender on recipient viewing
    Multiple Recipient per upload
    AutoNotification to Sender and Recipient(s) when file has not been
    viewed and is about to expire (within a Customer specified interval)
    Administration
    Customer manages Companies and Customer users and
    messages
    Customer assigns Company Admins
    Company Admins manage Company users and messages
    Customer Admins have visibility to all files sent from and to
    Customer
    Company Admins have visibility to all files sent from and to
    Company

    Security Features

    Secure Data products provide a secure mechanism for file transfers and backups across the internet. Files are protected using powerful encryption and integrity verification algorithms and techniques throughout transmission storage and retrieval.

    Security Authentication Model

    SSL
    Encrypted File Storage
    Encryption and hashing technologies used are FIPS-approved and 140-2 certified for use by the U.S. Government and others to protect sensitive information
    User Terms of Service Agreement
    User IP Logging
    User IP Restricting
    Detailed Activity Logging
    User
    Administrative
    AutoExpiration of Inactive User Accounts
    Strong Passwords
    Password Expiration
    Account Locking from Failed Login Attempts
    Required Password Change on First Login
    Potential for Integration with Stored User IDs
    Enhanced Privacy/Compliance

    GLB/FTC

    Obligation to protect and not disclose nonpublic personal
    information
    FFIEC

    E-Banking guidelines addressing risk management techniques for
    information security
    HIPAA

    Establishing standards for privacy of individually identifiable health information
    SOX

    Audit review requiring compliance with applicable privacy laws
    eSys®Secure Data Centerware™
    eSys Blue Data Shield

    A simple and secure off site backup solution.

    Application Features

    Customer branding
    Secure file transfer between client and data site
    AutoExpiration and deletion of files at Customer specified interval
    Email notification to recipient on file transfer
    Upload client can run in command line (batch file) or as a service
    Client monitors configured folders
    Resilient to network failure and other unexpected conditions
    Provides configurable compression, concurrent transfers and priority throttling options
    Configuration performed through command line switches, xml configuration file or configuration interface
    Monitoring of configured files with pattern matching
    Provides extensive logging
    Easy installation and configuration Security Features Secure Data products provide a secure mechanism for file transfers and backups across the internet. Files are protected using powerful encryption and integrity verification algorithms and techniques throughout transmission storage and retrieval.
    Security Authentication Model

    SSL
    Encrypted File Storage
    Encryption and hashing technologies used are FIPS-approved and 140-2 certified for use by the U.S. Government and others to protect sensitive information
    User Terms of Service Agreement
    User IP Logging
    User IP Restricting
    Detailed Activity Logging
    User
    Administrative
    AutoExpiration of Inactive User Accounts
    Strong Passwords
    Password Expiration
    Account Locking from Failed Login Attempts
    Required Password Change on First Login
    Potential for Integration with Stored User IDs Enhanced Privacy/Compliance
    GLB/FTC

    Obligation to protect and not disclose nonpublic personal information
    FFIEC

    E-Banking guidelines addressing risk management techniques for information security
    HIPAA

    Establishing standards for privacy of individually identifiable health information
    SOX

    Audit review requiring compliance with applicable privacy laws

  4. Warehouse Lenders and Warehouse Line Lending
    Explore TLC
    Warehouse Line Lending

    Warehouse lines of credit are short‐term lines of credit secured by real estate collateral allowing mortgage bankers to fund loans (in their own name) at closing. The Warehouse Lender establishes a revolving purchase agreement with the mortgage banker that funds the loans at closing and extends interim financing for 15-30 days until the loan is purchased by the final investor. After closing, the loans are shipped to the final investor for review and purchase. When the final investor purchases the loan, the final purchase price nets out escrows, fees and Service Release Premium. The final purchase amount is sent to the warehouse lender to cover the initial funding amount. The Warehouse Lender then reconciles the cost of funds (the interest and fees they charge the mortgage banker for the short term use of said funds) vis a vis the purchase advice and credits the net amount earned to the mortgage banker.

    Risk Mitigation

    Product Risk: A primary reason behind the collapse of the major warehouse lenders over the past two years have been the “toxic” loans with their contingent repurchase demands from low performance, early payment default and fraud. Most of their major lending partners were entirely built on these loans… and when the collapse began went out of business leaving the warehouse lenders with little orno recourse for recovery. Today, the mortgage market is characterized by very limited product offerings of the most traditional and conservative varieties. Most loans are either Agency or Government, and even these have seen dramatically enhanced underwriting standards. For the warehouse lender, the lack of competition has created a market climate that is risk averse, which definitely works in their favor.

    Titan manages warehouse lending for only the most risk adverse loans – Agency, Government and Rural/Bond loans. While we have participated in hard money operations, we will not manage the warehouse lending aspect of such loans.

    Takeout Risk: Warehouse lenders, once permissive of aging loans, can no longer afford the risk of loans not purchased in a timely manner. Takeout risk can be managed in this market through due diligence with regards to compliance, fraud and quality loan production. Titan often requires its correspondent partners to employ our closing and post‐closing services to mitigate takeout loss, ensure swift salability and leverage Titan’s reps and warrants.

    Fraud checks – Interthinx, Corelogic
    Compliance checks – TILA/HOEPA/ROR/STATE CONSUMER/FNMA POINTS & FEES – Compliance Ease – This ensures that loans are not un‐salable due to errors in compliance.
    Closing and Post‐Closing – Titan Fulfillment – Reducing risk of closing errors that might make loans unsalable on the secondary.
    Titan Experience – Should lenders refuse to purchase or fail to honor a commitment to purchase, Titan has a broad base of experience in quickly repackaging loans for sale within the current market or as scratch and dent.
    Fraud: There is no way to entirely insulate against fraud. However, several requirements, including the financials of the originating lender, help to mitigate losses associated with fraud. Titan manages the process flow required by the warehouse lending institution to ensure that every opportunity to mitigate fraud is optimized.

    Borrower fraud – The most insidious form of fraud; it can be mitigated through the application of reasonable fraud checks through national vendors. Titan requires that all loans funded under our reps and warrants evidence some recognized fraud check.
    Settlement fraud – A more subtle fraud that requires the warehouse line to ensure that the Closing Protection Letter, Errors and Omissions and Master CPL are confirmed and verified with a major title underwriter. Titan requires background checks on agent attorney and maintenance of approved settlement agent lists. In escrow states, verification of funding to the title agent (not the escrow agent) is required. Additional due diligence is performed to ensure that there are no illegal affiliations or pre‐existing relationships between the agent performing disbursement and the originator or borrower.
    Experience: Titan offers a broad knowledge of the mortgage market, from escrow states to attorney states to wet funding states. This provides a unique opportunity for the warehouse lender to capitalizeon the safest market opportunities without requiring regional operations to manage the complexity of the market. Titan’s foundation of delivering safe, quality, compliant loans to the secondary provides a unique warehouse lending experience for the originator, allowing common sense flexibility to be weighed against the known risks and hazards of a changing market.

    Projections

    For a full financial review, please request customized Pro Forma excel modified spreadsheets.

    In general, warehouse lenders traditionally earn approximately 250‐375 basis points on their money. Using an outsourced option for their operations, capital requirements for overhead, technology and personnel are very limited. Titan offers a variable cost option of per unit fees to be netted out of disbursement to the correspondent lender. As a direct per file cost to the lender of $125‐155 per unit – depending on volume, the lender and the warehouse lender are able to scale their business model based on opportunity rather than capital requirements.

    Why Titan?

    Titan provides a wide variety of operational expertise for both the primary and secondary mortgage market. As such, we have a very unique perspective on the requirements of investors to purchase loans, how to forestall salability issues, clarify process and procedures necessary to avoid repurchase, fraud and errors in production effecting salability and take corrective measures quickly and efficiently should the worst case scenario happen. We understand the needs of the warehouse lender, the originator, the investor and the regulator.

    Titan has not worked with a single stand‐alone warehouse lender that operates under these specific parameters – with the breadth of experience to understand both the primary and secondary markets. With a variable cost model and embedded technology, banks, credit unions or securities firms can enter the market without huge investment in infrastructure. They can also pilot programs on a smaller scale, taking their capital to market in a very structured, process driven environment. When these processes are refined and perfected, our clients can scale up, down, regionally, nationally, conforming or niche.

  5. MERS® eRegistry
    Partners
    Industry Partners:
    What is TLC?

    Titan Lenders Corp
    Mortgage Fulfillment Specialists

    About Correspondent Lending

    Correspondent Lenders, also known as traditional mortgage bankers, are major players producing origination volume in the market today. They represent the entrepreneurial spirit of lending professionals who are not affiliated with a depository institution such as a bank or credit union. Correspondent lenders represent small business owners and capital in action operating retail lending operations utilizing warehouse lines as their interim funding source while delivering loans to secondary marketing channels for purchase.

    Correspondent lenders typically manage and control all the pieces of a mortgage’s life cycle with the exception of servicing. Origination, processing, underwriting, closing, funding, post closing, and sale of loan to the end investor tend to be the primary focus of 99.9% of correspondent operations.

    Correspondent lenders take on considerable risk and expense associated with packaging and selling “whole” loans in order to gain more control over their business. They use this control to differentiate themselves from their competition. The benefits of control can manifest themselves as improved customer service levels and improved investor pricing generated by file quality and volume. One could also argue that expanded program options are also a benefit to being a correspondent lender considering the recent contraction in wholesale lending.

    All this being said, where does Titan come in?

    Titan allows correspondent lenders to focus on the front-end profit generator of ORIGINATION eliminating the time and cost intensive need for a back-office. The main challenges faced by correspondent lenders are the effective and profitable management of all the different pieces of a mortgage’s life cycle while at the same time keeping their “eye on the ball” with respect to generating origination volume. Without the ability to generate origination volume, all other processes are not needed. Conversely without the effective and profitable execution of mortgage operations, net income from origination can become non-existent or inverted.

    Need a little TLC applied to your P & L?

    Titan can be the answer to plugging the leaks within your correspondent lender’s operation. We offer a comprehensive cost benefit analysis that will help you determine whether or not outsourcing is right for your business.

    Learn more about our services for Correspondent Lenders:

    MERS, Inc.
    Address:
    1595 Spring Hill Road, Suite 310
    Vienna, VA 22182

    Website:
    http://www.mersinc.com

    Phone:
    800.646.MERS

    MERS, owned and operated by the mortgage lending industry, was created to eliminate the need to prepare and record assignments when trading mortgage loans. MERS does this by acting as mortgagee for all MERS members in the county land records. That way, the legal mortgagee interest in the land records never changes when the loan is traded.

    As the mortgage industry’s central electronic registry, MERS tracks ownership interests and servicing rights for residential and commercial loans alike. Loans registered in the MERS® System are protected against future assignments because MERS remains the mortgagee no matter how often servicing is traded between MERS members. Registering loans on MERS saves lenders time, money, and in the case of MERS® Commercial, eliminates the repurchase risk and costs associated with preparing, recording and tracking assignments. MERS products include MERS® Commercial, MERS® OnLine, MERS® 1-2-3. MERS has been approved by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, FHA, VA, Ginnie Mae, and all Wall Street rating agencies to act as original mortgagee and nominee for the lender in all 50 states.

    Most recently, MERS launched the MERS® eRegistry, a system of record that identifies the owner (Controller) and custodian (Location) for registered eNotes. It provides greater liquidity, transferability and security for lenders, making it the first true step toward a complete electronic mortgage system.

    Back to Partners

  6. All ‘MIN’ #’s affixed to mortgages are ‘pre-registered’ by a MERS 1-2-3 MEMBER. Cost around $16.5K per MIN#. The prerequisite to secure a MERS 1-2-3#, subscription to document legal recordation service. You don’t have to be a member of MERS to get a MIN#.

    Local Real Estate Attornye’s may be a MERS 1-2-3 Member and process for local ‘RELS’ mortgage broker an ‘escrow closing’.

    DocMagic® Joins Family of MERS® 1-2-3
    Notice 3/22/2002 – Look at bottom of your eMortgages for ‘DocMagic.

    MERS® 1-2-3 Usage Agreement

    MERSCORP, Inc. and its subsidiary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., (collectively, “MERS”) have contracted with various document preparation providers and their affiliates to provide document preparation services in conjunction with your use of MERS 1-2-3. This version of MERS 1-2-3 enables you to 1) obtain a legal instrument prepared by these document preparation providers or one of their affiliates that (a) creates a security instrument with Mortgage Electronic Registaiton Systems, Inc. as original mortgagee or (b) assigns the mortgage loan originated by you to Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. and 2) generate and affix to the legal instrument a valid Mortgage Identification Number (“MIN”). The MIN will also be reserved on the MERS System for the future registration of that mortgage loan if purchased by a MERS member. By using MERS 1-2-3, you acknowledge and agree that:
    1) MERS is not in the business of providing document preparation services and is not preparing any legal instrument for you,
    2) These document preparation providers. and their affiliates are not agents or representatives of MERS, but are independent companies with no affiliation to MERS,
    3) MERS makes no representations or warranties regarding the compliance of the legal instrument with state laws or local recording requirements.
    4) You have the responsibility to verify the accuracy, currency and completeness of the information you provide to MERS, these document prepartion providers or one of their affiliates through MERS 1-2-3 and that MERS has disclaimed responsibility or liability for errors, omissions and the accuracy, currency and completeness of any information provided by you.
    5) If you record the legal instrument in the applicable local recording office prior to selling the mortgage loan, you must sell and deliver the mortgage loan to a MERS member no later than ten business days after recording, or alternatively, if you sell and deliver the mortgage loan to a MERS member prior to recording the legal instrument, you will promptly record the assignment instrument thereafter. If the legal instrument is recorded and the mortgage loan is sold to an entity that is not a MERS member, you will need to contact the document preparation provider and have them prepare an assignment from Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. to the non-MERS purchaser at your cost.
    6) MERS HEREBY EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL OTHER WARRANTIES (WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED), INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF TITLE OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABLITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, and in no event shall MERS, or its affiliates, partners, officers, employees, directors, agents, contractors, representatives, successors or assigns, as such, be liable to you for any punitive, exemplary, incidental, indirect, consequential or special damages in connection with your use of MERS 1-2-3, including without limitation, damages for loss of profits, interest, revenue, data or use, or interruption of business, incurred by you.
    You will not use MERS1-2-3 for fraudulent purposes and if MERS determines that you are abusing or using MERS 1-2-3 for fraudulent purposes, MERS has the right to discontinue your access to the system.

  7. BARRY FAGAN: WELLS FARGO FRAUD CASE AND ROBO-SIGNED RHONDA BERNARD THOMAS

    Re: Link to Lis Pendens with Evidence of Deed of Trust alteration and fraud by Wells Fargo Bank.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/71080695/Barry-Fagan-v-Wells-Fargo-Bank-LIS-PENDENS-With-Evidence-of-Deed-of-Trust-Alteration-and-Fraud

    And evidence of multiple authors of Wells Fargo Bank employee Rhonda Bernard Thomas

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/71082634/Barry-Fagan-v-Wells-Fargo-Declaration-of-Dr-Laurie-Hoeltzel-Re-Multiple-Authors-of-Rhonda-Bernard-Thomas-Signatures

  8. On a related matter ,, any news yet out of the AHMSI V. LPS suit?

  9. Just wondering – someone weigh in in on this please – if NOD and ADOT were both signed by employees of the trustee company on deed of trust (that’s right the VP on ADOT for servicer-only who is posing as lender and beneficiary with a right to transfer “For Value Received” – this VP is actually an employee of the trustee company on deed of trust not an employee of the servicer who is pretending to be a lender) and both were signed on the same day in a county two- three hours drive away and both were then recorded in the a county two-three hours away at 8:00 am in the morning simultaneously – does this sound like someone locally got paid to forge the names? Recorder opens at 8:30 am. May be a question for the recorder but wonder if maybe documents delivered after a certain time on a given day say 3:00 pm or so don’t actually record until 8:00 am in the morning? This recorder opens to the public at 8:30. Thinking the NOD and the ADOT got farmed out to local contractor to sign and deliver to recorder same day.

  10. Masto for President! Huzzah!

  11. If only the prosecutor in Dallas County would do the same thing!

  12. Good start… but whose orders where they following? They committed part of the crime but they were acting on behalf of someone who paid them.

    Don’t anyone tell me that they did all that on their own. They were commissioned.

    The heads! We want the heads!!!!!!

  13. NV to CA, interstate crime.

  14. the indictment states that they both committed the crimes in Nevada, yet they are both California residents. i suspect this is as much a publicity stunt as a sincere effort to prosecute. the recording may have been done in Nevada and she has them on that, but the execution of the documents and notarization may not be actionable if it happened elsewhere. still very interesting.

  15. “The BOMBSHELL is these are both LPS’s employees”

    Exactly. And just who determined that this was protocol? Seeing as how this is industry wide pattern and practice, who-what-where these patterns were formulated and deemed appropriate is key. RICO?

  16. Never happen in ole virginnie

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: