Survey: Bad Foreclosure Practices Still Rampant

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

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

CUSTOMER SERVICE 520-405-1688

Either Deal with the Creditor or Don’t Bother Dealing

Editor’s Note: Each time there is a new development in the attempts to get foreclosures settled, modified or mediated the homeowner hits a stone wall. It’s a game. The Banks took the money from investors. That means they were not using their own money. The Banks took out a huge chunk of money as “fees” or “trading profits” by selling loans with inflated values to the investor pools. So before the first loan was funded, the banks were “in the money,” and the investors were out of luck.

Then the Banks used the balance of the funds left after they took they fees. They used it to fund mortgages, buy insurance payable to the banks, buy credit default swaps betting against the investor pools payable to the banks, and in some cases even traded for profit in the mortgage bonds that they had already sold to the investors. Once again, the Banks were in the money.

The point here is that the Banks never owned either the loans nor the mortgage bonds but managed to claim both without objection from the U.S. Government. The Banks own or control (or both) all the trustees, servicers and foreclosure specialist operations giving them some layers of protection against liability for bad acts committed in connection with origination of mortgages and the process of foreclosure, auction, deed upon foreclosure and eviction all in the banks names.

Since the Banks have clearly demonstrated their willingness to use fabricated documents with false declarations of fact contained in those documents and have them forged by unauthorized signatories, it should come as no surprise that the banks have the Obama administration sold on the myth that the banks and servicers are the people with whom we should be doing business. The s-called modifications, satisfactions, settlements and mediation are all a ruse worth no more than a wild deed which is why I keep saying this all comes down to title.

NO! The banks and servicers are the people with whom we should be litigating for committing civil and criminal violations. The people we should be dealing with for modifications, settlements and mediation are the actual people who have an actual interest in preserving their investments — the investors who purchased bogus mortgage bonds.

Using the standards of any reasonable person these investors, if allowed to participate without subjecting themselves to liability, would do some very simple arithmetic: if the homeowner wants a mortgage obligation that equals 125% of the current fair market value and can pay it under favorable terms with low interest and long amortization periods, then the investors clears up all potential title problems and gets far more than the zero, or less than zero they get from the foreclosure process.

The banks and servicers continue to give the misleading impression that they are the ones with whom we should be doing business, but their only economic incentive is to drive the home foreclosure into the ground even if it means literally bull dozing the property into the ground. They “grant” modifications”, “short-sales” and settlements as though they owned the loans when they do not own the loans. But by doing it anyway with the same false documents they use for foreclosures and loan origination, it makes it appear that they are in fact the people to go to as decision-makers. It’s a living lie.

The truth is that there will never be any large-scale change in origination, foreclosures, auction sales or evictions as long as we leave the banks and servicers in charge of the process. They have no interest in doing anything for either the investor or the homeowner.

Like the loan origination, they continue to collect MORE than the fair market value of the property in fees and “trading profits” as the bond market picks up. Each time we negotiate with a bank or servicer without demanding and getting proof that they are in fact the authorized representative of specific investors whose money went into the deal of funding mortgages, we compound the housing crisis, we add to the pile of corrupted titles, and we avoid the real solution to the economic problems that are making the economy sag — we are adding to the money and property that goes to the banks and servicers who at best are conduits or intermediaries with no money nor any other economic interest in the deal.

Survey: Bad Foreclosure Practices Still Rampant

by Meg Handley, http://www.usnews.com

If you thought all of the bad press covering robo-signing and shady foreclosure practices would make big banks think twice about foreclosing on struggling homeowners, think again. According to a new survey, heightened media coverage and lawsuits galore have done little to change questionable practices in the mortgage finance industry.

Banks continue to routinely foreclose on scores of homeowners waiting for a loan modification or while they dispute fees or misapplied payments, according to a survey of consumer attorneys released by the National Association of Consumer Advocates, the National Consumer Law Center, and the National Association of Bankruptcy Attorneys.

[See today’s best photos.]

More than 90 percent of attorneys polled represented homeowners placed in foreclosure while waiting for a loan modification in the past year and more than 80 percent represented homeowners where a foreclosure sale was attempted during the loan modification process. Another 80 percent of attorneys reported instances of bogus property inspection or late fees, which according to the survey, frequently lead to foreclosure.

Having a government-backed loan isn’t much help. Two thirds of attorneys polled represented homeowners facing foreclosure who had loans owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.

“That’s one of the takeaways from this survey,” says Diane Thompson, an attorney with the National Consumer Law Center. “This is still going on and it’s widespread. People are losing their homes even while they have loan modifications pending.”

The main problem is a lack of accountability on the part of banks and mortgage servicers.

“There’s no effective enforcement mechanism,” Thompson says. “There are no penalties for servicers who fail to comply with any of the provisions of a uniform set of national servicing standards.”

In other words, banks and mortgage servicers have been told by the federal government to stop initiating foreclosure practices while loan modifications are underway, but have simply not complied.

[Read: How the Foreclosure Deal Affects Homeowners.]

Thompson is cautiously optimistic about the impact of the recent $25 billion robo-signing settlement—which includes proposed changes to mortgage servicing guidelines—but details about how banks will be held accountable to those standards remain foggy.

“We’re hopeful, but that settlement only applies to five banks and in terms of principal reductions, doesn’t apply to GSE loans at all, so again you have the problem of inconsistent standards,” Thompson says. “And it’s not clear what the enforcement mechanism would be.”

mhandley@usnews.com

Twitter: @mmhandley

 

40 Responses

  1. YOU DON’T HAVE A MORTGAGE LOAN – YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO ADVANCE ESCROW TO THE TRUSTEE’S ‘CUSTODIAN’S CORRESPONDENT .

    YOU HAVE A DEED IN EXCHANGE FOR YOUR INDIVIDUAL VARIABLE RIDER/NOTE AND THEY ARE HOLDING THE PROMISSORY NOTE – A PRECIOUS VALUABLE COMMODITY THAT WILL BE REPRODUCED BIT-BY-BIT IN ITS PIXEL FORM HELD ‘ASSIGNMENT IN BLANK’ UNTIL TIME TO MOVE FORWARD AND EXCHANGE, TRANSFER, CONVEY, ENTITLEMENTS, ENCUMBRANCES, RESTRICTIONS, LIENS.

  2. @hman

    Yes indeed, they LIE about everything. Deutsche (DBNTC) does NOT “own” any loans. They are a TRUSTEE—with NO “beneficial interest” in ANY of the loans purported (not really in there), to be in the trusts…even their official spokesperson said this!!!
    These a**holes just lie because they CAN—the foreclosure mills and servicers LIE and say that Deutsche is creditor/lender—A BLATANT LIE.
    And they will NEVER EVER tell you who is the OWNER of the Promissory Note—just ask them—they won’t say.

    Total BS.

  3. Carrie,

    That’s really weird. My servicer said that Deutsche Bank….is the “owner”. I wrote them back asking again under FDCPA to disclose the “creditor”. I included the FDCPA definition of creditor because many of my question were not answered because they were “unintelliable, and ambigious” They would not answer who the “creditor” is.

    They did tell me my loan was securtized and into what trust. They said the owner of the trust was Deutsche. The PSA states Owner on behalf of certificate holders. Everything they say is lies. Sorry and good luck with everything.

  4. Frustrating. Have you contacted the AG in your state with your complaints about what the servicer is doing in the Deutsch Bank name with a copy to Deutsche’s General Counsel?

  5. Every time I tried to talk to Deutsche they said “talk to the servicer”—they want NOTHING to do with the homeowner, because they are just the “Trustee”—not “owner”.

  6. And you checked the MERS website too? I think you may have to deal with Deutsche even if they don’t truly own the loan. I negotiated with a bank which never showed me a stick of evidence they really owned my loan. However, at least they negotiated. The servicer would not do shit.

  7. @jordana

    I asked over and over who owns my “loan”—all they would tell me is that “your loan was securitized” and the “trustee” of the MBS trust is Deutsche—but, they are not “owner” either…they NEVER directly answered the question of who is the owner of the promissory note…just kept saying they are “duly authorized to act on behalf of the securitization”…

    They send you in circles because NO ONE “owns” the note…

  8. Terri: If you can find out who owns your loan, deal directly with them. I did not listen to my servicer of its hired hack of a lawyer. (She was an idiot anyway). Do you know who owns your loan? Have you checked the MERS website for this info?…. not always there or accurate but a good start. I found out by asking the servicer during early negotiations and it was the same as the plaintiff who filed for foreclosure. It helps if you’re an atty or have an atty friend to talk with the general counsel or legal dept. That’s how it worked for me. I was able to negotiate directly, bypassed the idiot and it worked out. Looking forward to the day they cart the idiot off to jail… hear that Sarah Adam of Reiter ampersand Schiller?!?! Hacks ! All of you!!! Go to hell!! Sorry… I lost my cool for a minute.

  9. I am confused who gets the money from the short sale/foreclosue/deed in lieu/// the servicer acting on behalf of the investor but are the servicers keeping the money I am in a short sale at the moment and after reading this I feel maybe I should have contacted the investor(whomever that maybe) It is really confusing but maybe they are ready now to make a deal like an equity sharing agreement a win win for everyone, Please advise thank you Terri

  10. fwiw… i dont think you have to be nor claim to be a party to the psa if the claim of the conveyance to the trust was “VOID BY LAW” if after the cutoff date.
    I think you have to make the claim & cite controlling law & “each psa” has a section as”statement of the purpose of the trust” any contravention of this “purpose or authority of law” is a violation of PSA & controlling trust law [ law[s] need to be cited in the pleading] to have it properly ruled on.

  11. JOANN
    “The servicer never purchased or owned the mortgage”

    I now kinda have some doubts about your comment..
    The scratch & dent sale of ANY LOAN removed because of ..well lets see… how about a intended default – built into the model of MBS?!
    Private label deals would be even more prone to pulling this off.
    Is anyone aware of the mortgage schedule actually being attached to any of these psa that are filed ? this is suspect if NO loans ever appear until some type of litigation is started.

  12. @Hman:

    “I’m not sure if a judge would consider someone a “party to the contract” if it has the exact loan amount, Originators loan #, and zip code in the PSA. MY DOT loan # matches the loan # in the PSA as well as the servicers loan # at the time.”

    Is the Mortgage Loan Purchase Schedule attached to the PSA? My loan number and description are listed on a “loantape” file in the Free Writing Prospectus. The MLPS is “intentionally omitted” and I believe that is the document along with the Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement that shows the mortgage was actually purchased. The FWP is a prospectus only – it merely shows there was an intent to purchase. Anyone who has knowledge of this please clarify.

    I am not sure but I don’t think a person needs a “certified” copy” especially if the trust is named in a foreclosure proceeding. It is publically available on the SEC site.

    When anyone says homeowner is not party to the PSA – I really don’t get it. It’s banker spin with judges who don’t want to have to deal with a psa buying into the spin. When foreclosure defense attorneys sometimes even say it (not all) I really don’t get it. The homeowner’s signature made the PSA possible. There would be no investor, income stream, trustee bank or servicer without it. The servicer is empowered by the trust. He is nothing without it. All relationships in the PSA relate to the homeowner and their mortgage.

    I would like to tell the judge the psa is critical in determining who the beneficiary is absent a recording, assignment or endorsement when there is a stranger in the chain of title that now sheds doubt on who the beneficiary is. The servicer is not a beneficiary. The servicer never purchased or owned the mortgage and is now making an assignment to the trust. The PSA is the document that links the Trustor with the Beneficiary – purportedly the trust that is now seeking to foreclose by way of (bogus) assignment from the servicer who never purchased or owned the mortgage. The PSA is publically available on the SEC site even if not recorded at the local courthouse. It is evidence that is available to all. There are state and UCC codes and statutes about what to do when a party seeking to foreclose does not have possession of the note or when its interest was never recorded. See UCC 3 and 9 taken together and the “Draft Report of the PEB on the UCC Rules Applicable to the Assignment of Mortgage Notes and to the Ownership and Enforcement of Those Notes and the Mortgages Securing Them”. A “writing” must exist and be produced in court if “ownership” is in question and recorded even in non- judicial states. The late date assignment to the trust from the servicer does not qualify as this.

    I think it is also critical in determining who had a right to the benefit of the homeowner’s payments – without a clear beneficiary the homeowner could be paying the wrong people. There were two or three required prior owners of the mortgage before the trust who is now foreclosing. These were all beneficiaries and none are recorded. None of those were the servicer who is now assigning “For Value Received” all beneficial interest to the trust. The trust did not and cannot now receive ownership from the servicer. The servicer never had ownership. So who received the benefit of payments made for the last several years before this bogus assignment was made? Did the trust receive ownership of the asset or not? Did the trust receive payment or not? Did someone else receive unjust enrichment? The debt exists to the beneficiary even if the wrong party was paid instead.

    In order to establish the identity of the beneficiary and the amount owed the beneficiary, in addition to the PSA, the Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement must be produced if missing and the Mortgage Loan Purchase Schedule (that lists the mortgages I think and I am thinking it is not the same thing as the Free Writing Prospectus “loantape” that can be found in some of the SEC files for trusts – that shows the intent to purchase – but it’s not the bill of sale so to speak) must be produced if missing.

    The accounting and paper trail from Originator to Sponsor to Depositor to the Trust must be verified when there is no proper chain of title recorded or when a “stranger” (the servicer with no beneficial interes) has now clouded the title. In order for the trust to foreclose the “stranger’ must be eliminated. Absent recordings and endorsements the trustee for the trust must also verify with a “writing” that the mortgage was acquired from an entity who themselves had a right to sell it to them (this is not the servicer) and that it is still owned by the trust and the amount of the balance due the trust. The default must be declared by the true beneficiary and no other. All of the state statutes and UCC and federal codes that apply to “lender” and “beneficiary” now apply to the trust not the servicer.

    Trust certificates (sample certificates are in the psa) all say things like: “Evidencing a beneficial interest in a trust that owns a pool of assets…” and language shows an “irrevocable” sale occurred “without recourse” from the Depositor to the trust. The originator sold it to the sponsor who sold it to the Depositor and no longer holds any beneficial interest and becomes a servicer only. There can only be one beneficiary at a time. The beneficiary must be disclosed to the trustor by law. The psa governs when and how the asset was acquired – the homeowner asset that was encumbered. The lien. It identifies the beneficiary (or lack thereof). How is the homeowner not a party to the psa? When a trust is foreclosing it should be required by law. Certain documents are already required by law to be recorded which are not getting recorded at least in non-judicial (See Draft Report).

    Just my thinking – anyone please clarify.

  13. E.Tolle,
    here the link:
    http.// mandelman.ml-implode.com/2010/10/the-signing-or-pardon-me-mr-banker-but-your-remic-is-showing/.
    Its a long article and the info on REPO collateral is towards the end.
    If this is correct even if they became hdic there is no
    way anyone is going to be able to untangle this mess.
    We need to have a homeowners association to negotiate withe the MBS investor group.Not the bank run one but the new one just formed.
    We have got to cut out the middleman banks.
    I am still awaiting an answer from a lawyer out there regarding bringing
    a private prosecution of the banks ?

  14. chas404

    My servicer told me the name of my trust in response to a QWR I wrote. Not sure if all servicers will do this although I believe that they are supposed too under FDCPA regulations, they are according to their own words debt collectors.

    Also, if you can get the servicer to tell you the name of the trust you can write a FOIA request and get a certified copy of the PSA. It is supposed to be admissable in court however I’ve seen a judge deny someone the right stating they were not a party to the PSA.

    Funny thing about that my servicer is Aurora and they are not a party either. I’m not sure if a judge would consider someone a “party to the contract” if it has the exact loan amount, Originators loan #, and zip code in the PSA. MY DOT loan # matches the loan # in the PSA as well as the servicers loan # at the time. If not I would think you could argue nondisclosure. Anyway, again these ideas are just my thoughts and how I’ve gone about being able to gather information.

    I have no idea where this journey will take me. Good luck

  15. @Jordana,

    At the risk of sounding like a broken record… ask Mandelman if you need an attorney.

    Actually, there are a few people to ask for a recommendation.

    Write to 1) Matt Weidner in FL. He knows a lot of people all over the states. Write to 2) Abigail Field, 3) Yves Smith (Naked Capitalism), 4) Max Gardner blog, 5) Jeff Barnes (foreclosure defense nationwide) 6) Marc Dann (dannlaw). There all in that defense circle, they all communicate and devise strategies, there really is a network larger and larger as time goes.

    @E. Toile,

    http://mandelman.ml-implode.com/
    Don’t know exactly which article John was refering to but that’s the link for the site.

    @All,

    I want to share a little trick to stop being intimidated or fearful. I have noticed that, many time I’ll recommend how to find one ot the best attorneys by contacting the above defense players. Even where I live, when I see people in my situation and I give them my own attorney’s name and phone number, if I check with them a few weeks later, usualyy, THEY HAVE NOT CALLED!!! Which is a real puzzlement for me: they’re about to be kicked out. Listening to their situation, it is still salvageable, they could be staying in the house, etc. And yet, THE DON’T CALL!!!

    I’ve come to realize that most people believe, long before they even talk to an attorney, that
    1) They can’t afford one. GUYS, YOU DON’T KNOW UNTIL TO ASK THE QUESTION and it is always negotiable. If attorneys play the defense card, believe me, money is NOT their primary motivation!
    2) They owe the money to the bank; therefore they will lose. Alsmost like God punishes poor people who don’t fulfill their obligations but doesn’t investigate rich people. Makes you wonder what kind of God they believe in… Showing them that it isn’t true any more that they owe anyone anything is challenging. In their mind, they simply don’t have a case!!! This is utterly false! Everyone about to be kicked to the curb has a case.

    Here is my little trick: that’s what we teach kids where I come from. Makes for an entire nation of irreverent rebels but, by golly, we won’t take much flack before blowing our fuse and we sure as hell know how to live!!!

    Everyone, without exception, has to “relieve himself/herself”. Everyone. And usually, people do it the exact same way: pull down the pants, sit on the throne and do whatever (recall how babies makes all those faces and get all red and squirmy? Adults do to). That’s an old trick we were taught in the country where I come from: always visualize the guy who tries to intimidate you sitting on the throne, with his pants around his ankles, pushing and squirming. Amazing how the fear disappears instantaneously!!! Do that in court wirth the judge. Judge yelling at you? Condescending? Listen to him talk to you from the throne, red-faced and pushing. Objecting and bringing up your own arguments becomes so much easier! And you want to bring them up because everything is recorded anyway. You want to be able to prove that, indeed, you brought them up. In case you want to appeal later on. Imagine him pulling the robe up, pulling the pants down, getting all tangled, etc. Do that with the little bastard bank attorney. Picture him seriously constipated (retention is retention. It’s a mindset. Doesn’t matter if it’s money, water or anything else…) Picture him in pain. All of a sudden, the attitude in court becomes laughable and you see exactly what they fear.

    Guys, it is a game. Learn to play it well and learn all the tricks. They have their own.

    And now, for Mandelman,

    Trusted Attorneys
    Attorneys I Trust…
    NO ONE PAYS TO BE LISTED HERE, AND I HAVE NEVER BEEN PAID 10¢ FOR REFERRING ANYONE ANYWHERE. PERIOD.

    I LIST THE ATTORNEYS I KNOW AND TRUST HERE SO THAT HOMEOWNERS CAN KNOW WHO I THINK THEY CAN TURN TO WITHOUT WORRYING THAT THEY ARE BEING SCAMMED.

    I started writing about this mess we seem to now be calling The Great Recession during the summer of 2007 because Wall Street’s bankers destroyed the credit markets by selling garbage derivatives wrapped in Moody’s AAA paper… and then they started blaming American homeowners. Since I started Mandelman Matters in April of 2009 and have written some 370 in-depth articles, spoken at an American Bar Association conference, and even at a judicial conference for 9th Circuit judges.

    I’ve never been in the mortgage industry, or the Real Estate Industry, or anything close. I’ve been a writer and communications strategist for 20+ years. My firm specialized in making complex subjects easy to understand… and people say I’m funny.

    In order to learn about the mortgage and foreclosure crises I’m writing about now, I had to interview a lot of people, many were attorneys, and they were from all over the country. Some became good friends over time. When homeowners call to ask me to recommend a lawyer I trust, I either just refer then while on phone or send them to this page.

    But let me be very clear about one thing: The banks and mortgage servicers in this country are being allowed to torture and abuse American homeowners who are struggling to remain in their homes and there are no magic bullets or perfect answers. In fact, if you’re trying to get your loan modified, you may not even need an attorney to help you… and then again, you very well may. Always speak personally with an attorney you are considering hiring and see how you feel about his or her style and experience. Check with the applicable State Bar to make sure you are dealing with a reputable individual.

    I’m offering the list that follows as a starting place, not a finish line.

    AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, REACH ME AT MANDELMAN@MAC.COM. IF I CAN HELP, I WILL.

  16. hman,

    Legally I have no idea not a lawyer but I like your idea. If fat Fannie would tell me which trust my loan was supposedly in I would write the investors lawyers for sure.

    I would write a firm but very positive letter simply asking that you are sincerely attempting to negotiate in good faith given the circumstances.

    Alot of the investors are suing the servicers and wall streets now to put back the loans. All you are trying to do is reach out and negotiate with SOMEBODY.

    Legally probably means nothing but I think it looks good in front of a judge and heck maybe you get to somebody in authority that you can actually deal with.

    Problem for most of us we have no idea which trust if any the loan is in. In my case I would write them though.

    Good luck and post back.

  17. Carie, too harsh…LOL….you must be a very nice person…..if you think that is Harsh, i would hate to see what you think my words are…….Hanging them is not too harsh

  18. Not harsh at all. I’m sorry to read this much pain but it’s all too true. You are certainly not alone. Join with the rest of us on a makeshift crusade. I guess that’s the best we can do. I investigate and report and urge others to contact me to share my info. I try to help a few people along the way. It’s the best we can do. I love Mandelman’s blog…. so much needed humor on such a sour, sad and frustrating subject. Comfort there.

  19. OK, a “holder” is NOT an “owner”, correct? Who is the OWNER of the promissory note? Who? Only that entity is allowed to foreclose, correct? At least in the “old days”, that’s how they did it…

    I totally lost it today when my servicer (who foreclosed and sold my house without telling me who was owner of note and who was beneficiary), sent me an email stating “the matter is closed”…here’s my email:

    YOU PEOPLE ARE RUINING LIVES AND STEALING HOMES ILLEGALLY—HOW CAN YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT—YOU ARE GETTING AWAY WITH STEALING—PEOPLE ARE LIVING IN TENTS BECAUSE OF LIES FROM SERVICERS AND BANKS AND FORECLOSURE MILLS—YOU CAN’T REPOSSESS A HOME WITH NO OWNERSHIP—ONLY COLLECTION RIGHTS TO FALSE DEFAULT DEBT IS ALL YOU HAVE—YOU ARE KICKING PEOPLE WITH CHILDREN OUT OF THEIR HOMES WITH UNSECURED DEBT BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO GODDAMN OWNERSHIP—YOU HAVE NO OWNERSHIP OF A PROMISSORY NOTE—WHERE THE HELL IS IT??? HOW CAN YOU LIVE WITH YOURSELVES—PEOPLE ARE KILLING THEMSELVES BECAUSE OF THE FAKE MORTGAGE PONZI SCHEMES—YOU ARE ALL A PART OF IT—YOU MAKE ME SICK—

    THE TRUSTS ARE EMPTY—ALWAYS HAVE BEEN–WAKE THE HELL UP—IT’S ALL A LIE AND A GIANT FRAUD FOLLOWED BY A GIANT COVER-UP—YOU WILL ALL PAY FOR YOUR CRIMES—MARK MY WORD—

    …too harsh? I don’t give a crap.

  20. @Joann,

    I googled the name of my trust. Several lawsuits came up. I pulled the name of the investors attorneys. I’ve written their attorneys letters. Thus far I can’t tell you what will happen.

    I do think that the investors and homeowners have similiar goals and both were screwed over by the banks and everyone else in the transaction. If you loose so does the investor. Many of their bonds have lost 70%-80%. So why would they want to loose more.

    I do not think the investors meet the definition of lender under the FDCPA but they’re more owner than the banks or MERs or anyone else in the transaction. So my decession was to side with the lesser of all evils and try and cut a deal with the investors.

    Also, think about what happens when my trustee or servicer comes to foreclose. Once the judge learns that I’m trying to work a deal with the investors. I would have done this sooner your honor but these individuals were not disclosed to me and my “servicer” (who has yet to transfer the loan in their name but claim they own it) refused to give me this information even though I requested it multiple times in writing.

    I could be wrong but I think the judge will be more skeptical of the servicer when they try to prove they own or have a right to service the debt. Anyway these are just my thoughts of how it may play out. Going this route won’t get you a “free house” but I think it may be an option for some. Who knows if it will work. Much of what I’ve seen or read about hasn’t worked in court. I’ll let you know how it works for me.

  21. @ john, do you have a link?

  22. Carrie,
    I see what Neils’ getting at.
    Check out Mandelman theory on why Notes did not get into the trusts.
    If they were being used as he suggests and that makes sense from my own business experience,then the MBS investors did become hidc,
    but not through the trusts, but through the REPO market..

  23. I realize that and appreciate your advice. This case is not as simple as mine. It may just have to be litigated and, again, I am looking for an attorney rec in Il to whom I can refer this client.

  24. jordanna lipscomb- Not to dissuade you, but it may be an exercise in futility, as 99% of the mortgage loan schedules in the Trusts, are unavailable. I for one cannot see how, armed with this evidence, the foreclosing entity, as trustee for the trust, or, the foreclosing entity being the servicer, can make unsubstantiated claims that the loan(your loan) is in said Trust, when the mortgage loan schedule says otherwise. Even in the Massachusetts’ Ibanez/Larace case, all that was proffered to the court was the geographical distribution of loans in the US, with average dollar amounts, and there were a few in Mass, but no names, no loan numbers, nothing at all to definitively tie those loans to that trust.
    My take on this, is that the sponsors (investment banks) of the trusts were loathe to put anything in writing that would trap them, as the loans were definitely sold multiple times to multiple investors. Hence, the changing loan numbers printed on statements, loan docs,etc.

  25. Well, every time I attempted to contact the trustee/plaintiff—they basically said, “Talk to the servicer!”…they want nothing to do with it because they DON’T own any loans…

  26. Just want to contact the “plaintiff” and try to resolve. Am I being naive that this can be done with a trust plaintiff?

  27. There is a difference between “owner of a (mortgage) loan” and “owner of collection rights” to false default debt…

  28. So thankful to you Neil for all the help.
    I really feel we have lost all credibility in our Government and as a Country the power we once had is gone. Directly do to greed and fraudulent activity that is accepted at the highest level. When you screw your own people and get away with why would any other Country trust or want to do anything with us?Cherie Carr
    L.

  29. So much great advice, Joann, thank you. I googled and nothing came up exactly matching. Did a quick SEC check and no record of the trust was found. But I admit, I’m out of my expertise and would like to get this case to a decent defense lawyer out of Illinois. Any recs?

  30. jordana

    I found mine (address for indentured trustee bank for the trust) and did send a certified letter and did got a return receipt along with copy to servicer and copy to DOT trustee. Not that any of them have answered my request for beneficiary statement and payoff demand (actually servicer sent a letter “need more time”). I clearly addressed it to the purported true beneficairy though (the trust). I also demanded a Recission of NOD (addressed to the DOT trustee that recorded the default occurred to a non beneficiary copy to copy to) and got one though it may not necessarily be in response to my demand and they filed another with all the same things I took issue with simultaneously but it bought 110 more days before a sale can be scheduled (non judicial).

    The SEC files are good but the indentured trustee for the trust may now be a successor to the successor and those prior merged or out of business.

    Google the trustee bank name and add things like mbs trust administration or trust administrator or Corporate Trust Services. Then check address in business directories ect.

    I have also wondered how to reach the actual investors – google your trust and lawsuits will come up. Wonder about contacting the attorneys for those lawsuits or the investor company itself as in pension fund ect. They may not want to be bothered by homeowners or they may be very interested in how they got your “poorly underwritten” mortgage or in where your payments have gone or what they are being charged for “default” services. The thing is any or all of the above might backfire in some way too. Investors are not necessarily on the side of homeowners in all of this but they ought to be in their own interest.

  31. For my own case, the plaintiff was a bank. I bypassed the foreclosure mill hired by the servicer and went straight to the bank’s general counsel. Now, for someone else’s case, the plaintiff is a 2004 trust. I don’t know who to contact…. the bank which holds as trustee?

  32. like perhaps Bank of America NA !!!!
    who has switch from Home Services back and forth so many times i cant keep track……and using 2 different account #…..and put me in foreclosure on the old account # …..and where the hell did my $100,000 hard cash deposit go and my 80,000 of payments ?????

  33. carie,
    well then who does own the loans ??

  34. Carie, some investor does own the loan, it’s call (major bank) N.A.

  35. “…specific investors whose money went into the deal of funding mortgages…”

    NEIL—WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO WRITE THIS LIVING LIE—THEY DID NOT “FUND” ANY LOANS…YOU CONFUSE PEOPLE AND PERPETUATE THE FRAUD OF THE SERVICERS SAYING (LYING) THAT SOME INVESTOR “OWNS” THE LOAN…THESE ARE IRRESPONSIBLE AND EXTREMELY MISLEADING STATEMENTS…WHEN WILL YOU STOP??? RIDICULOUS.

  36. The trusts are empty. The “investor” of the trust is NOT the owner, creditor, or lender. It’s all a bunch of BS that the servicers use to send us ’round and ’round in circles, chasing our own tail…

  37. “Either Deal with the Creditor or Don’t Bother Dealing”

    That’s all I ask. AG’s, regulators, congress, modifiers, default declarers, short salers, foreclosers refinancers, reconveyers?

    Just make that the law – already is the law – enforce it. If the “writings” are not evident make them evident – even this is already in real property law even if security hotshots get away with “proprietory” or “confidential”.

    If you can’t do it easily, quickly and now – moratorium.

  38. jordana, go pull the PSA off the SEC website free edgar and get the contact info for the trustee from the registration statement or at the end of the PSA

  39. Should I contact the Bank acting as trustee?

  40. What if your investor is a trust? How do you deal directly with them?

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: