If Insurers Are Rejecting Defective Loans Why Don’t the Courts?

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

If Insurers Are Rejecting Defective Loans Why Don’t The Courts?

Editor’s Comment: 

Insurers of all stripes are rejecting claims for failed mortgages at a rate that is becoming troublesome to the Megabanks. Moynihan at BOA thinks that (a) the insurers should pay or (b) the taxpayers should pay for it. He thinks BOA should be absolved of all liability for defective loans. I’m sure that taxpayers would disagree. As for the insurers, they have investigated, considered, analysed the origination of loans and found them wanting in all major respects. In other words the risk they agreed to insure did not produce the loss which is the basis for the BOA claim.
 
What produced the loss for the BOA claim is that the loans were never subjected to any underwriting process that even remotely resembled loan underwriting before the banks began creating the appearance of selling parts of loans to many buyers and pools of loans to many buyers. And the biggest problem is that BOA doesn’t have a loss. The investors have the loss but their asset rights have been hijacked onto megabank balance sheets.
 
In particular, the insurers have found exactly what we have been writing about on this blog for five years. 
 
1. The value of the property was inflated by the “lender”.
2. The lender was really a paid originator — a pretender lender.
3. The borrower’s income was patently false, inflated by the “lender” originator.
4. The satisfaction of the prior loan was obtained from a party who demonstrated no ownership or agency.
5. The terms of the loan frequently guaranteed that the borrower would stop paying — as when the payments reset to a level that exceeds the borrower’s annual income including everyone in his household.
6. The false value used for the property fraudulently inflated the principal due on the loan and fraudulently inflated the payments due on the inflated principal.
7. The true value of the collateral at the time of origination of the loan was less than the stated principal due on the loan— a fact that was withheld from all the players in violation of TILA but more importantly creates two classes of debt on the same loan — one secured and the other unsecured. The unsecured portion is the difference between the true fair Market value and the inflated value that was used at closing (or the deficiency of collateral at the time of closing).
8. The promissory note contains two principal defects in most instances — (1) it contains false declarations as to the identity of the lender and the amount due and (2) it creates an instantaneous liability to the borrower who did not get the benefit of the bargain he or she was promised.
 
So my question is this — if insurers can refuse to pay based upon these defects why is it that the assumption prevails that borrowers must pay based upon these defects? Doesn’t it make more sense to reform the notes and mortgages to name the proper creditor, name the proper secured party, state the proper amount due and then have the insurer pick up the tab if there is a tab? Of course that analysis might mean that we simply accept the conclusions that insurers have arrived at — the loans are defective. And THAT would mean that most of the foreclosures could be overturned.

BofA Clash With Fannie

Intensifies as Insurers Reject

Loans

By Hugh Son – Mar 2, 2012

Bank of America Corp. said it’s facing more demands by Fannie Mae for refunds on flawed home loans because mortgage insurers who cover defaults rejected 25 percent more claims last year.

Unresolved insurance rejections rose to 90,000 at the end of 2011 from 72,000 the year earlier, Bank of America said last week in its annual filing with regulators. Last year’s denials equal $1.2 billion in unpaid loan balances, according to a note yesterday by Compass Point Research and Trading LLC.

A Bank of America Corp. loan negotiator at the Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America (NACA) Save the Dream event in Los Angeles on Feb. 16, 2012.

The rejections heighten tension between Brian T. Moynihan, the bank’s chief executive officer, and U.S.-owned Fannie Mae in their disputes over who must pay for billions of dollars in failed loans made during the housing boom. When mortgage insurers deny claims, the two firms are left to squabble over whether losses will be borne by bank shareholders or the taxpayers who bailed out Fannie Mae.

“It seems like a bit of posturing on the part of Bank of America to push back against all repurchase activities,” said Chris Gamaitoni, a mortgage and banking analyst at Washington- based Compass Point. “I don’t think Bank of America is being treated differently than anyone else, and yet they are pretty alone in saying Fannie is being more aggressive.”

The rift widened last year when Fannie Mae told the Charlotte, North Carolina-based company it must repurchase mortgages if an insurer drops coverage, even if the decision is contested. Bank of America refused to comply, pushing Fannie Mae in January to drop the lender as a partner for the funding of new home loans.

Shorter Deadline

Pressure on Bank of America, the second-biggest U.S. lender by assets, may rise in July when Fannie Mae shrinks the amount of time it gives a bank to appeal an insurer’s denial to 30 days from 90 days before pressing for a refund. Repurchase costs probably would rise if the firm is forced to adhere to Fannie Mae’s policy, Bank of America has said.

The lender ultimately may seek a settlement to resolve the mounting requests, said Gamaitoni, a former senior financial analyst at Fannie Mae. Jerry Dubrowski, a spokesman for Bank of America, said Compass Point has regularly overstated the lender’s housing-related liabilities, and declined to comment further.

Insurance Required

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy mortgages from lenders and package them into securities for sale to investors. Both firms were seized by the U.S. in 2008 to stave off collapse, and have collectively drawn more than $180 billion in taxpayer funds. The bill is likely to rise — Fannie Mae this week requested $4.6 billion more from the U.S. Treasury Department — and the firms’ regulator is pressing banks for refunds on bad loans to limit the bailout’s cost to the public.

Fannie Mae typically requires a borrower to buy mortgage insurance if the loan exceeds 80 percent of the home’s value. The coverage guards against losses when borrowers default and foreclosure fails to recoup costs.

Mortgage guarantors, including MGIC Investment Corp., Radian Group Inc. and American International Group Inc.’s United Guaranty, have voided policies for errors including inflated appraisals or borrower incomes. Those flaws also would entitle Fannie Mae to demand that banks buy back the loans.

Insurance Disputes

Bank of America is involved in legal disputes with mortgage insurers, including MGIC, saying the firms are denying valid claims. In the second half of last year, Bank of America has “materially increased” the percentage of denials it argues are improper, Milwaukee-based MGIC said this week in a filing. AIG’s mortgage guarantor said last week that lenders were devoting more resources to reversing rejections.

Bank of America has committed about $42 billion to deal with flawed mortgages, foreclosures and writedowns since the start of 2007. The lender accounts for half of Fannie Mae’s pending repurchase demands after insurance denials, the Washington-based firm said this week in an annual filing.

Outstanding repurchase claims against Bank of America from all sources jumped 22 percent to a record $14.3 billion as of Dec. 31, the lender said in January. That increase was fueled in part by other demands from Fannie Mae. The mortgage financing firm has started asking for refunds on loans that have performed for 2 years or more before defaulting, requests Bank of America has deemed invalid.

More Public Money

“We enforce our contract with Bank of America in the same manner as we do with other lenders,” said Kelli Parsons, a spokeswoman for Fannie Mae. The firm is working with the bank to resolve their disagreements and “treats lenders consistently with respect to issuance of repurchases and our expectations of collection.”

Fannie Mae faces its own squeeze and asked for more public funds this week after posting a$2.4 billion loss in the fourth quarter. The company said that while Bank of America has failed to “honor repurchase obligations in a timely manner,” it still expects to get reimbursed.

“If we collect less than the amount we expect from Bank of America, we may be required to seek additional funds from Treasury,” the company said in the Feb. 29 filing.

Fannie Mae said this week that Bank of America accounted for about 60 percent of all repurchase requests that haven’t been resolved in more than four months at year-end. The lender made up $5.5 billion of the U.S.-owned firm’s outstanding repurchase requests. Most of those demands stem from loans created by Countrywide Financial Corp., the biggest U.S. mortgage lender before its 2008 takeover by Bank of America.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), the biggest U.S. bank by assets, had $1.1 billion in requests.Citigroup Inc. (C), No. 3 by assets, had $917 million and No. 4 Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC) had $830 million.

Bank of America’s 46 percent rise in New York trading this year has led lenders higher amid signs the U.S. economy is improving. Moynihan, 52, has said that expenses tied to soured mortgages will subside by about $1 billion a quarter, which combined with other cost-cutting plans should help the firm’s pretax revenue rebound.

35 Responses

  1. If Insurers Are Rejecting Defective Loans Why Dont the Courts?
    | Livinglies’s Weblog

  2. […] Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, currency, Eviction, foreclosure, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, securities fraud Tagged: 60 minutes, affidavits • attesting • Daniel Edstrom • DTC-Systems • fabricating • false information • false sworn documents • foreclose • illicit business practices • improper statements • imp, AHMSI, appraisal fraud, attorney general, auction fraud, Chris Koster, credit bids, DocX Indictment, foreclosure fraud, FORECLOSURE SETTLEMENT, foreclosures, forgery, housing market, housing prices, investors, linda green, LPS, Missouri, mortgage fruad, mortgages, Robo-Signing, settlement, strategic default, Wells Fargo Livinglies’s Weblog […]

  3. @ ian

    Yes, actually I have a case in DE against them, as a creditor. That may be a crap shoot, but have to try.

    Also, have quite a few documents to prove, actual evidence of forgery, fraud and void assignment. Precaution…the judges are not always honest. I know that comes as a shock, but I am finding even with documents the bums are getting away with their stealing. Cautiously-optimistic.

    In the process of filing a claim against the title company, QWR’d everyone who touched my papers and to my surprise the lender listed on my HUD sent me a letter, saying they knew nothing of my loan????? It’s heating up! I’m filing things at every person named I find related to my loan process. (actually anyone) You never know where the information will come from.

    Also, considering a lien on my own house, have some idea on how to do it…we’ll see….a maybe at this point.

  4. chris (the real New Century,NO Carolina chris)- just kidding- so the judge told you to go get them, that sounds encouraging. I still hope that at some point, alot of judges who have spent their lives sitting down on a chair in a courtroom, or sitting down at a table studying legal briefs, who have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA what is going on in the real world, will slowly but surely come to the realization that they have been duped, bamboozled, lied to, misled, etc. Your judge sounds like a good one.
    Question: Has any of the documentation which you have come from a third party, with “a true and correct copy of original” New Century Mortgage ” stamped on top, a squiggle signaure with no job description underneath. These stamps were done last month, and the documents are wildly inaccurate. What the…….?
    From what I know, this would not be the new New Century, the old one is in bk in Del., any ideas? Thanks

  5. @ las vegas

    BOA are cheating and stealing left-right. Even if you take consumer laws into account, they should be shut down.

    I was in court for a preliminary hearing with the Magistrate in NC and she said “go get them” I cannot sell my house as it is 30% below market value. They know and if affects them too. Go Figure?

  6. There is No Justice in California and its Government is a complete Failure, merely arresting loan mod attorneys while a San Francisco County Recorders Audit Revealed Maassive Fraud in the majority of Foreclosures is treating the symptoms and letting the disease run its course.

    Found this at the link below, thought it was very interesting..

    “HSBC expects this level of focus will continue and, potentially, intensify, so long as the US real estate markets continue to be distressed. As a result, HSBC Group companies may be subject to additional litigation and governmental and regulatory scrutiny related to its participation in the US mortgage securitisation market, either individually or as a member of a group.”

    http://publicintelligence.net/hsbc-may-face-criminal-charges-for-illegal-transactions-with-iranian-clients/

    More with HSBC and a Whistleblower’s report which it tried to block/remove from the internet.

    “NEW YORK – A former employee of HSBC in New York has 1,000 pages of customer account records he claims are evidence of an international money-laundering scheme involving hundreds of billions of dollars by the global banking giant, which reportedly is under investigation by a U.S. Senate committee.”

    http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/banking-giant-accused-of-laundering-billions/

  7. CALIFORNIA AG KAMALA HARRIS ARRESTS 3 NORTHERN CALIFORNIA ATTORNEYS FOR LOAN MOD SCAM. TODAY.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/84553358/AG-Kamala-Harris-Arrests-3-Attorneys-in-California-for-Loan-Mod-Scam-March-8-2012

  8. Oops! I was going to post a real FL case. Apparently, the site won’t allow me to cut and paste.

    Anyway, It is a reversal by the court of appeals.

    Worth reading. There it is…

    FLORIDA APPEALS COURT REVERSES ANOTHER SUMMARY JUDGMENT; FIRST KNOWN CASE REQUIRING ASSIGNMENTS TO BE AUTHENTICATED BY ATTACHMENT TO AN AFFIDAVIT TO BE CONSIDERED ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT
    March 7, 2012

    March 7, 2012

    The Florida 5th District Court of Appeal has reversed a summary judgment which was entered in favor of Novastar Home Mortgage, which was a nonparty to the suit as it had previously withdrawn from the case. The entry of a judgment in favor of a non-party was found by the appeals court to be “fundamental error”. However, this was only the tip of the iceberg.

    The Court also held that the judgment would have to be reversed even it had been entered in favor of BONY (as trustee of a securitized mortgage loan trust), as BONY failed to show that it was entitled to enforce the “lost” note when it was lost. BONY offered no proof of who lost the note or when it was lost, and no proof of anyone’s right to enforce the note when it was lost. This is the same set of reasons why an Iowa court has repeatedly denied summary judgment to Wells Fargo in a case where Mr. Barnes represents the homeowner, as we previously reported.

    The holding also found that BONY produced no evidence of ownership due to the alleged transfer from Novastar to BONY. The footnote to this part of the opinion is perhaps the most important and significant.

    The Court held that “The record contains a copy of an assignment of the note from Novastar to Mellon [BONY], but the document was never offered into “evidence” by being attached to an affidavit for purposes of authentication. As such, it is not competent evidence of the assignment and cannot be considered in ruling on Mellon’s motion.”

    This is the first decision we have seen where a court has actually required an assignment to be authenticated in order to be considered on a motion for summary judgment. The recent Florida and North Carolina cases we previously reported highlighted the necessity of authenticating endorsements. The Florida courts will now be applying this same authentication requirement to assignments. As such, all of the requirements of personal knowledge, etc. will have to be met before an Assignment will be permitted to be considered in the context of a motion for summary judgment of foreclosure in Florida.

    The case is Beaumont v. Bank of New York Mellon, Case No. 5D10-3471 (Opinion filed February 17, 2012). We thank one of our readers for bringing this very important decision to us.

    Jeff Barnes, Esq., http://www.ForeclosureDefenseNationwide.com

  9. @rabi

    I don’t understand why bofa is allowed to do any mortgage business at all. Since there has been so many instances of fraud, why aren’t they shut down.

    I wonder if this lawsuit can be used in evidence in a hamp lawsuit?

    I wonder if any of the people named here will give testimony to save their neck.

  10. Sidebar
    Translate

    Court Filings
    Complaint for Emergency Injunctive and Declaratory Relief and to Stay Foreclosure Sale (Hawaii)
    Complaint to Vacate Final Judgment of Foreclosure for Fraud, Damages, Injunctive Relief and Other Relief (Massachusetts)
    Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Washington)
    Frivilous Pleading Letter (Florida)
    Legal Memorandum in Opposion to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (New Jersey)
    Memorandum in Support of Motion to Stay Foreclosure Sale (Ohio)
    Motion to Stay Foreclosure (Ohio)
    Motion to Vacate Order Lifting Stay (California Bankruptcy Court)
    Judicial Decisions
    Arkansas Court Adopts Anti-MERS Decision of Kansas Supreme Court
    Motion to Vacate Denied, US Bank v. Ibanez (Massachusetts)
    Order Dismissing Foreclosures on “Real Party in Interest” Ohio
    Archives
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009
    August 2009
    July 2009
    June 2009
    May 2009
    April 2009
    March 2009
    February 2009
    January 2009
    December 2008
    November 2008
    October 2008
    September 2008
    August 2008
    July 2008
    ——————————————————————————–

    Main Contents
    FLORIDA APPEALS COURT REVERSES ANOTHER SUMMARY JUDGMENT; FIRST KNOWN CASE REQUIRING ASSIGNMENTS TO BE AUTHENTICATED BY ATTACHMENT TO AN AFFIDAVIT TO BE CONSIDERED ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT
    March 7, 2012

    March 7, 2012

    The Florida 5th District Court of Appeal has reversed a summary judgment which was entered in favor of Novastar Home Mortgage, which was a nonparty to the suit as it had previously withdrawn from the case. The entry of a judgment in favor of a non-party was found by the appeals court to be “fundamental error”. However, this was only the tip of the iceberg.

    The Court also held that the judgment would have to be reversed even it had been entered in favor of BONY (as trustee of a securitized mortgage loan trust), as BONY failed to show that it was entitled to enforce the “lost” note when it was lost. BONY offered no proof of who lost the note or when it was lost, and no proof of anyone’s right to enforce the note when it was lost. This is the same set of reasons why an Iowa court has repeatedly denied summary judgment to Wells Fargo in a case where Mr. Barnes represents the homeowner, as we previously reported.

    The holding also found that BONY produced no evidence of ownership due to the alleged transfer from Novastar to BONY. The footnote to this part of the opinion is perhaps the most important and significant.

    The Court held that “The record contains a copy of an assignment of the note from Novastar to Mellon [BONY], but the document was never offered into “evidence” by being attached to an affidavit for purposes of authentication. As such, it is not competent evidence of the assignment and cannot be considered in ruling on Mellon’s motion.”

    This is the first decision we have seen where a court has actually required an assignment to be authenticated in order to be considered on a motion for summary judgment. The recent Florida and North Carolina cases we previously reported highlighted the necessity of authenticating endorsements. The Florida courts will now be applying this same authentication requirement to assignments. As such, all of the requirements of personal knowledge, etc. will have to be met before an Assignment will be permitted to be considered in the context of a motion for summary judgment of foreclosure in Florida.

    The case is Beaumont v. Bank of New York Mellon, Case No. 5D10-3471 (Opinion filed February 17, 2012). We thank one of our readers for bringing this very important decision to us.

    Jeff Barnes, Esq., http://www.ForeclosureDefenseNationwide.com

  11. @ las vegas
    When one reads the whistle blower link you posted.. one has to wonder why the judges still won’t believe that the banks are all thieves. Are they all walking with their heads in the sand like the proverbial ostrich.??

  12. @Enraged
    It is interesting.We need to watch out that they don’t show up working at our local credit unions, to initiate a takeover, ( wolves in sheep’s clothing) and spread their poison.

  13. http://www.setyoufreenews.com/2012/03/08/mass-banking-resignations-signal-a-purging-has-begun/

    “In fact, it is the resignations taking place amidst these larger institutions that should be a cause for greater concern in the first place.

    Indeed, the number of resignations taking place amongst large institutions such as CitiBank, Lloyds Banking Group, UBS, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, and JP Morgan alone should be enough to turn some heads.

    But there is also an alarming number of central banks included on this list as well. Perhaps the most surprising is the fact that Phillip Hildebrand, the head of Switzerland’s central bank, recently handed in his resignation. Not only that, but there have been resignations coming from several other central banks including Argentina, Kuwait, Nicaraqua, and Kenya.

    Read Full Article”

    And this article is 17 hours old. It is missing 33 new resignations, among which 7 from Goldman Sachs board.

  14. Gregory Mackler, Whistleblower, Says Bank Of America Defrauded HAMP

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/07/gregory-mackler-whistleblower-bank-of-america_n_1328381.html?ref=business

  15. hman,

    Mortgage payment coupon book. I had first 2 payments or so going to MortgageIT the originator. I googled the address and it was GMAC office in AZ since forever.

    Probably just means GMAC was contracted as subservicer. But it shows that you have no idea who you are dealing with since the beginning.

  16. Anybody know how to get information about insurance payouts? I don’t think this is required to be made public information?

    I have a couple foreclosures and I’d be curious to see if the policies were paid out and to who? Does anybody know if this information can be researched? and if so how?

  17. Chas404

    I agree. I am in the same situation. I think eventually all this information that was/is on the fringe will become more and more main stream. Only thing is I hope I can hold out and make it.

    What do you mean when you say MortgIT coupon? I am not familiar with that term?Also, my trust was sued by fannie mae.

  18. @ anyone

    According to federal rule 12(a)4(a) after a Motion to Dismiss a defendant has 14 days to file a answer to a plaintiff complaint. If the defendant answers were not file timely can the plaintiff file a Motion to Strike their response,

  19. Some of you might want to read this?

    http://www.securitization.net/pdf/acc_fasb140.pdf

  20. 1. yes too big too fail, really means if they fail , all pensions (including judges and FBI) goes with them…….thats the wall we are up against

    2. M. Soliman – so thats why my origination was BAC Home Service with account #1 and along the way was sitched to BAC NA with new account #…..BAC Services would never any questions when i asked them about why they were switching names and account # but i knew even back then it did not make sense and something was fraudulent

    even stranger the NOD they sent me over a year ago , had BAC Services and the OLD account number…..

  21. We are now at 155 bank resignations worlwide. Don’t anyone tell me that nothing is happening… and that it’s business as usual.

    Funny though that the media don’t talk about it. And yet, even though you have to go to the fringe for the information, the sources they use are perfectly legitimate and they publish them.

    http://www.ashtarcommandcrew.net/forum/topics/155-resignations-from-world-banks-investment-houses-money-funds?xg_source=activity

  22. Well–it’s because the judge’s retirement plans are invested in mbs and bank stocks. Look for my other posts on this.

    Why would a judge sabotage his retirement investments when he can sacrifice a measly homeowner.

    Other federal employees, such as FBI, SEC etc. have similar investments in their federal retirement plan offerings.

  23. Fannie Mae. BoA. The banes of my existence. Can’t wait til they both eat out each other’s rotten corpses like the zombies they are.

  24. M Soliman,the FDIC is still the culprit because they also stcik around and collect on claims inside the Trusts at the end of these silo structures / structured sales.

    the FRC pushes cheap money onto the reserve system bank’s balance sheets, free 2% spread used to pay private insurance premiums to the FDIC. Since no money really existed, the FDIC keeps the balance sheet assets in the game, can’t let em get a free house or purchae note from the FDIC on the cheap like the bankers.

  25. One last proof of evidence that the Note never makes it past the SPV, and stays with the NA on the off-balnce – non accrual pot, ust look at the name of the lender on every HAMP or private modification. it is no longer Chase Home Mortgage or Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, who claim to have been the original lender, it is now Well fargo Bank, N.A..

    Ta Dum… and what is this crap about evil-does following folks around and BAR Prosecutions. As long as you are not claiming to be a lawyer or providing legal advice for a fee, doesn’t appear anyone held out a shingle. Moreover, the guys that need to be on this site do not practive law, the work a swap desk and report on the pools for the investment bank, pencil and pad and general ledger.

  26. You guys don’t get it. The guy you sat down with was not the originator, pull any PSA and see if the guy you sat down with is listed as an originator and can sell to the trust, Fannie and Freddie included. these folks acted as an agent of the orignator and made huge mark-ups claiming correspondent / agent.

    Second, “as she rises up to her apology” when will everybody surely know!

    One last thing, there is a major dismiss motion coming on One West for the FDIC fraud next month. Keep your eyes open on this one guys!

  27. M.Soliman i truly enjoy reading your posts, even if i dont understand what a single one of them means……somehow you make feel like it will work out for those who keep fighting for the truth and property law

  28. Because the courts are in on the scam and fraud with the banks. Check out the CRIS, Court Registration Investment System. The banks have paid Billions of dollars into the court’s coffers. That is how they buy off the legal system. The judges are on the Bank’s payroll.

  29. There is no Bank involved in a foreclosure as a party with standing to bring a foreclosure.

    Your offered modifications and other trash talk by counterfeit parties who orchestrate a recovery of charged assets.

    Assets charged to the trust balance sheet are lost to a mortgage claim.

    The Robo Signature and faulty assignment are the equivalent of bringing monopoly money into 7-11 and trying to buy a six pack . No crime no harm n foul.

    But if the monopoly payee is humped over laughing at you while your friend is stealing the safe in back – there you will have to answer to the law.

    AG’s settle on billions and Warren Buffet has to loan BofA $5 billion to keep its doors open – please.

    California and now the Congress pass the bill to foreclosure reform for what ? Assets charged to a dime to the dollar for loss and claim open to abandonment ? Read to dual 1099 language counsel and call the agency yourself.

    What a fool believes …D. Brothers

    If I am a fraud then we will see. Thanks NG for the years of support and letting me publish. March is the month this party comes to an end.

    I thought the FDIC was the culprit here for the longest time. Now I change horses and there i will stay ….call your local DRE and say hi !

    (these fraudster folks who follow me around – your IP addresses are cleverly hidden but are found (wow) and held till further notice. They will be turning up soon for publishing – – this I promise) .

    Peace

    M.Soliman

    Not meant as legal advice and be forewarned – only an attorney can advise you of your rights .Call your local Bar for more information.

  30. Just for the record my information is public knowledge from the sale…stated by BOA!

  31. In the A to B to C to D chain of title, where does FNMA fit in? Why is FNMA not listed in the indorsements?

  32. To everyone

    Be mindful you cannot appear to be practicing law on this site. Only a licensed practitioner is qualified to render a legal opinion. Be aware the state bar has the authority to prosecute these cases. What you read on the internet is not what is necessarily happening to you in foreclosure.

    There are qualifications for an expert.The expert need to have the breadth and depth of experience to testify as fact in a case.

    When hiring an expert ask the following questions:

    Have they ever conducted a bilk acquisition or sale?
    – Can they generate a “tape” for offering a trade?
    – Can they Q/C a closed whole loan and
    – Have they ever underwritten an aged transaction?
    – Can they understand the nuances of accounting rules as applied to subject matter?

    For constructing an argument try to tie the pertinacity of fact together.

    1) What goes into trust can never come out by means and methods of a controlling interest.Why

    2) MERS has standing for the intervening assignments

    3) Accounting rules violations are subject to a fast track under the statute of fraud , Why ?

    Therefore , I attest that a mortgage that is transferred under a joint related assumption agreement is transferred according to the related parties reps and warranties. It is a fact that what transfer’s, goes into trust by way of reporting requirements. The contribution to corpus can not be removed from an isolated and remote qualified non profit; where held in an indenture and corpus of trust .

    Only by open market conditions and never by means and methods of a controlling interest (GAAP FAS 140) will a transfer survive challenge.

    MERS as a nominee to the appropriated party does have standing for the transfer or intervening assignments. This is in part due to compliance with strict accounting rules prohibitions and for violations under 1122AB that are subject to improper or fraudulent reporting as a tax payer.

    Where a defaulted loan is veiled by a transfer by assignment alleging an open market condition versus a withheld controlling interest, the sale is void. Where MERS is a nominee used to feign an open market condition does the NOMINEE lose its standing for recognition purposes and voids the transfer or intervening assignments.

    Look at your notice of default – read it again and again . Remember the QWR and Pooling and Servicing agreements are intended to throw you off!

    If I am a fraud – time will soon tell ….. remember what you read here !

    By: M.Soliman

    Not an attorney and only an attorney can make statements and allegations that will be held as enforceable for protecting your rights. The expert cannot practice law and should never have contact with a party bringing action if represented by an attorney. Contact your local state bar for more information

    .

  33. When BOA bought Countrywide they absorbed the “liabilities” of Countrywide, plain and simple. The repurchase agreement is part of that purchase. Pay up BOA. You have a contact!

  34. Hman

    I had mortgageIT as originator but then later i found that the original mortgIT coupon went to some AZ address that was for GMAC. makes me wonder.

    MortgageIT being sued by Fannie Mae to put back 1000s of loans yet mine not one of them.

    I think we are getting closer to some positive outcome visa vis all this just hope i can hold out long enough.

  35. One may actually think that the “banks” may actually start to work with homeowners if the insurance on the shitty loans were not paid out.

    My servicer actually sued my “lender” claiming fraud and noncompliant underwriting. They had a list of about a dozen loans they were requesting that the “originator” buy them back for misrepresentations.

    It’s funny because when I tell them the same thing they claim no knowledge of fraud or wrongdoing from the originator. We’ll see what the judge thinks. You can’t have it both ways. I’m sure the servicer will claim something along the lines that the originator made thousands of loans and mine wasn’t one of the defective ones.

    O by the way I was actually able to get the name of my original underwriter. It seems like he was using proprietary GMAC-RFC software to underwrite my loan. Weird because it doesn’t say GMAC on my DOT or Note Anywhere? Just the originators name who is long gone.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: