Kickbacks at Fannie, Freddie Explain a Lot

13 Questions Before You Can Foreclose

foreclosure_standards_42013 — this one works for sure

If you are seeking legal representation or other services call our South Florida customer service number at 954-495-9867 and for the West coast the number remains 520-405-1688. In Northern Florida and the Panhandle call 850-765-1236. Customer service for the livinglies store with workbooks, services and analysis remains the same at 520-405-1688. The people who answer the phone are NOT attorneys and NOT permitted to provide any legal advice, but they can guide you toward some of our products and services.


The selection of an attorney is an important decision  and should only be made after you have interviewed licensed attorneys familiar with investment banking, securities, property law, consumer law, mortgages, foreclosures, and collection procedures. This site is dedicated to providing those services directly or indirectly through attorneys seeking guidance or assistance in representing consumers and homeowners. We are available to any lawyer seeking assistance anywhere in the country, U.S. possessions and territories. Neil Garfield is a licensed member of the Florida Bar and is qualified to appear as an expert witness or litigator in in several states including the district of Columbia. The information on this blog is general information and should NEVER be considered to be advice on one specific case. Consultation with a licensed attorney is required in this highly complex field.

EDITOR’S COMMENT AND ANALYSIS:  The criminality of the Wall Street banks for the last 15 years has been so widespread and pervasive that it is difficult to imagine a scenario under which such behavior could have gone undetected.  The questions are unending. One particular answer to those questions stands out far above all the other possible answers, to wit: the actions of Wall Street did not go undetected.

The banks and Wall Street in general practically invented the process of due diligence, which is an examination of a proposed deal to determine whether the representations of each side are true, exaggerated or just plain false.

The government-sponsored entities of Fannie and Freddie clearly had the resources to perform extensive due diligence before they put their stamp of approval and guarantee on loans and investments that were clearly not originated or issued in accordance with government guidelines or industry standards.

The same thing may be said for the rating agencies that “got it wrong” or the insurers who presumably evaluated the risk that they were undertaking, and of course the counterparties to the hedge products including but not limited to credit default swaps.

The Wall Street Journal published a number of articles about the close relationship and economic pressure existing between the banks that were underwriting the bogus mortgage bonds and the rating agencies, insurance companies, and counterparties to credit default swaps.  these articles in the Wall Street Journal and other periodicals in mainstream media started back in 2007.

Similar articles appeared in the blogosphere  before that time warning of the coming catastrophe. Anyone with a background similar to mine on Wall Street could easily see that the underwriting of loans to consumers (especially mortgage loans) did not and could not conform to any known standards for risk assessment.

Why would a bank loan money in the knowledge (and indeed the hope) that the money would never be repaid? Why did government-sponsored entities, insurance companies, rating agencies, securities regulators, and counterparties to exotic hedge instruments turn their heads the other way, with full knowledge of the impending disaster? The answer is as old and simple as the history of commerce —  kickbacks, payoffs, bribes and promises of lucrative employment.

The Wall Street Journal told the stories where individuals working for rating agencies and insurance companies were taken on fishing trips and other junkets following which they received threats from the Wall Street banks that if the rating and insurance contracts were not to the liking of the Wall Street banks, the banks would go elsewhere.

Considering the creation of such entities as mortgage electronic registration systems (MERS)  and the financial strength of the banks, it was easy to see that if the banks didn’t get what they want from existing rating agencies and insurance companies they would create their own. Thus in addition to direct payoffs to individuals the management of old established institutions was put under pressure to play ball with Wall Street or go out of business.

The same playbook was used with appraisers who were promised higher fees if they continue to raise the stated value of the real property as they were instructed to do. In 2005 8000 appraisers warned Congress that this would happen. They were ignored. All the information that was needed for due diligence was easily accessible to the institutions that ignored red flags and eventually became part of the largest case of criminal fraud in human history.

If you look at the history of organized crime in this country you will see substantial similarities between the crime syndicates and the behavior of Wall Street. Payoffs and kickbacks to law enforcement, agencies, government officials, and legislators in the governing body of states and Congress became the ultimate protection and immunity from prosecution regardless of the severity of the crime or the damage caused to society.

While it is true that most such syndicates and eventually fail we cannot wait for time to run its course. That is why the demonstrations by occupy Wall Street and others are so important to bring pressure on those who are protecting multinational banks and the people who run them. It is not going to be easy because the amount of money is staggering. Trillions of dollars have been siphoned out of our own economy and the economy of dozens of other countries. With that kind of money you can pay off a lot of people with more money than they ever dreamed of having.

So it should come as no surprise that a “foreclosure specialist” at Fannie Mae was caught picking up $11,200 in cash in a sting operation. The problem here is that we are catching the smallest fish in the pond instead of removing those who control the action. It is interesting that the case reported below involved steering foreclosure listings to particular brokers. By focusing attention on activities far from the core of evil emanating from Wall Street many of us are distracted from looking at the real cause and the real problem not only still exists, but is being renewed as we speak in new schemes not very different from the old schemes.

The arrogance of Wall Street is either well-founded or stupid. At the present time it appears to be well founded. It remains to be seen whether we the people force our representatives, regulators and law enforcement to reject the carrot and stick from Wall Street and return to a nation of laws.

Kickbacks as ‘a natural part of business’ at Fannie Mae alleged,0,6280041.story

33 Responses

  1. This is a land grab by imposters who have hijacked the country and they are wantoned felons. They will try anything to steal our securities. These are perilous times. We really can’t trust anyone. Deception is being used as a weapon to steal everything from us.

  2. The property is unsecured until the title gets cleared back to the rightful owners…..ALL OF US. Until then there is a title dispute. It is pretty futile to put a lien on a cloudy title that is wrought with fraud & felonies.

  3. Ian—I found this:

    What Is Ownership Interest in a Property?

    When an individual possesses an ownership interest in a certain property, he has been granted dominion over the property. The dominion or control may not comprise the total portion of the property; the dominion can be considered partial or a certain percentage of the property, and there may be limitations to the ownership interest. Also, an ownership interest in property can be divided into a class of individuals.


    An ownership interest in real estate refers to a claim of title and some right to the property. Possession, which refers to the actual use of the property, is only one such right. Others include the right to remove minerals from the property, the right to receive income earned by the property and the right to transfer the property by sale or will. Depending on how the title is held, the owner of a partial interest might be able to sell their fractional portion of the property or might be entitled to a prorated share at the time the entire property is sold.

  4. They’ll have some carefully worded deceptive “spin”, I’m sure.

  5. when I receive a written response from IRS answering my detailed yet very polite questions, I will have that to show to a judge or an attorney. I can only imagine what their answer will be-after all, what can they possibly say?

  6. “Still hiding” is right—how do we pull back the curtain?!?!?

  7. carie thanks for posting the IRS info. If they ‘aquired an interest’ in my or anyone else’s property, then the note and mortgage have to reflect this But they don’t. Still hiding behind the alleged trust REMIC which is trading in the pink sheets for 7 cents per share, the last post being in 2008.

  8. Ian—have you seen this—from the IRS website:

    Form 1099-A, Acquisition or Abandonment of Secured Property

    File Form 1099-A, Acquisition or Abandonment of Secured Property, for each borrower if you lend money in connection with your trade or business and, in full or partial satisfaction of the debt, you acquire an interest in property that is security for the debt, or you have reason to know that the property has been abandoned. You need not be in the business of lending money to be subject to this reporting requirement.

    If you are required to file Form 1099-A, you must provide a statement to the borrower. Furnish a copy of Form 1099-A or an acceptable substitute statement to each borrower.

  9. carie- we also have the servicer inserting theselves as ‘mortgagee’ or ‘first loss payee’ on my insurance policy. They are not the mortgagee as they lent no money, and used a bogus allonge attempting to assign the mortgage using 2 long-defunct entities to do so. And you cant use an allonge to assign a mortgage-that’s not what they’re for.

  10. stripes- when already foreclosed aka home gone for good, there are certain things that are irrefutable that certain attorneys did and in doing so have a bit of explaining to do, the 1099a matters, in view of how and who foreclosed by and through a foreclosure mill so called law firm, as said, we have a stranger to the loan transaction in the mix, (bought for “legal money” highest bid BS ) and guess what -dates matter. and guess what, its on the record. the 1099a at least gives you a strong point TO RAISE IN COURT (beat their motion to dismiss.) of who is the real slim shady, per se, LENDER, when they try to lift lis pendens, which you hopefully did at the same time as filing your adversary proceeding.
    NOT AN ATTORNEY, not legal advice, just saying think about it.

  11. Interesting, Ian. I am doing some investigating and correspondence with regards to the 1099A “issue”. I’ll let you know what I find out.

  12. carie- re your mention that your servicer inserts themselves as lender on the 1099a. While doinv my tax returns on TurboTax last month, filling in the mortgage interest paid box, the program prompted me “servicer, not lender, correct?” I answered “correct” Yet on the 1099a my servicer also listed themselves as lender. i have to contact IRS and turbotax to investigate.

  13. Allow me to repost that link about Miss Hillary…..

  14. Interesting info about Hillary Rodham Clinton –

  15. Forget FOIA …… Call the Original Issuing bank and ask them for theOriginal note & mortgage stamped paid from the Treasury Dept….or call the Treasury Dept and ask them WHY YOU DON’T HAVE THOSE IN YOUR POSSESSION….? Ask the Issuer for THE LEGAL ASSIGNMENT. If they tell you they have no way of locating the originals, that is BANK FRAUD.

  16. The cancelled check would be the Original note and mortgage stamped paid from the Treasury Department and the receipt would be the Legal Assignment. The only way the Issuer has any legal right to collect any money from you if there were any changes to the originals is they must notify you by U.S. MAIL of the Alterations and have your authority and consent to use your signature as a Security.

  17. Carie
    why do you think getting info under FOIA has to be obtained by judicial review, and even then we know we are in for a ride. Im working on it, don’t know where it will lead but im guessing court.

  18. iwantmynpv, on May 27, 2013 at 4:19 am said:
    @Carie – you are wrong – there is always a cancelled check and it is negotiated as follows:

    “Well Fargo Bank, N.A., for various investors”


    So why does the servicer state it is the lender on the 1099A and claim the loss?

  19. They have 90 days max from the closing of the trust to perfect the lien. In some States 30 days. The PSA says the Issuer must follow the the state recording laws. In Illinois the lien must be recorded in the county where said real estate is situated in 30 days. All transfers of the lien as well. The Secretary of States office must also be notified of the lien and all transfers by UCC 1 filing. The ficture filings are bogus. They secure nothing.

    They will tell you a lot of b.s. like the banks do the transfers from insise the banks…..the title companies don’t need to memorialize the lien….the mortgage lives on for imfamy…..they have 12 years to record a lien & yada …yada….I’ve heard alot of BIG FAT you need to do your own research. It’s a ginormous coverup.

  20. Ginnie Mae wrote me this letter that it is true they don’t purchase home mortgage loans, but they do allow private entities to stay in title. On what planet is Ginnie Mae on think that just then saying that an entity can stay in title is engrained in what type of titling action.

    The clown writing this letter is a senior VP at Ginnie Mae, and while telling what they permit they fail to explain what law give a non-purchaser the right to tell another non-financial interested party its OK that some type of action were the Note & debt have been separated and the state is not aware so that it can properly sort out what whom status is.

    What I am trying to explain to the OCC is that in the case of WaMu, where Wells Fargo is servicing the government pooled loan, where WaMu or someone else is in titled other than Wells Fargo, and is the core of the problem with chain of ownership.

    I having a problem understand that the Nation’s regulator of these banks don’t simply get to the bottom it. In what transaction were it depends at a money transfer yet that documentation up front has not been suggested by the regulator.

    The complaints that are about “No Standing” is a simply fix, and that is that you got some proof of purchase in the form of a cancel check or wire transfer, yet we got BANKS come to this disputes without any proof of purchase, but as part of their business they are required to maintain records of all financial transactions but in the case of some of their larges transaction they don’t have the receipt to purchasing a $200,000 house? Not one but all the the WaMu loans they got no record as they indicted by their court filings.

    Here what I just hit the OCC with is the intend is to defraud the homeowner and trick the court with the filing into thinking that Wells Fargo is the “holder in due course” as the only way a filing for assignment can be granted is that the assignee is the “holder of the debt” and has a Note to back it up!

  21. Why aren’t the major networks reporting what OBAMACARE really is? It is a coup de tat of our infrastructure by these same imposters. Why don’t they tell the people about the 9000 laws associated with OBAMACARE that are not constitutional? Or the MICROCHIP that these morons want to put in all of us ….it’s part of their so called “MEDICAL DEVICE REGISTRY”…like we are their own personal ATM MACHINES? OBAMACARE is the installation of a dictatatorship here in America. That’s why they want to abolish the IRS…and transform it into an OBAMACARE DICTATORSHIP.

  22. Why aren’t the large networks reporting there was a coup de tat of our Treasury by imposters under Obama? That’s the real question.

  23. This is simply an all out robbery javagold, under the guise of some obscene debt that we have been shown no proof even exists. This is fictitious debt going to fictitious payees. They are not zombies. These banksters and their communist cohorts both foreign & domestic are alive & well because they have stolen an innumerable amount of our wealth under the guise of social safety nets, taxation, “money lending” & investing.

  24. This was pointed out by Neil in a previous post. In the early versions around 2002 of the Fannie Sellers Guide it tells the lender to create an assignment to Fannie on the proper form used in their State but to not record it. Every entity had their role into taken our money. Just like it flies into the Cayman Islands, it seems to be flying back and forth to major corporations but never to small individuals. In New Jersey local town meetings are broadcasted on cable TV which a lot of people watch. I think it’s time for people in each community to be seen on TV spreading the word on bank fraud. If the large networks won’t spread the word this is a very big alternative. Every week in every town until we are heard and the fraud is STOPPED.

  25. As with all debt. They need it to continue to expand. To infinity. Not sure if the system blew up for good in 2001 or 2008. But we are dealing with zombies now , for sure. It must end soon. I say no later than 2014.

  26. I never agreed to sponsor these crooks.

  27. “The government-sponsored entities of Fannie and Freddie clearly had the resources to perform extensive due diligence before they put their stamp of approval and guarantee on loans and investments that were clearly not originated or issued in accordance with government guidelines or industry standards.”

    Yes, Neil…and those “loans” weren’t really “loans”…they were put into false default and charged off previously:

    “…People with much debt were targeted. Easy to put GSE (Freddie/Fannie) loan in default — no one would appear to question. Subprime (re-fi’s and new) are loans in which only servicing/collection rights were transferred. They were NOT actual mortgages, because the debt was already charged off. Collection rights do not have to be funded. All you get is a servicer — there is no lender — there is no creditor. Of course, they needed someone to foreclose, and naming servicer largely does not work in court. So they started naming the trusts that pass through cash payments to security investors in collection rights. Problem is — these trusts were never the lender, never the creditor.”


  29. Rolling thunder in Chicago right now. How fitting.

  30. How does $60.4 trillion of our wealth sound for a kickback to these crooks? CNBC reported that is what these communist crooks have stolen from our Treasury and our pockets since 2008.

  31. “It remains to be seen whether we the people force our representatives, regulators and law enforcement to reject the carrot and stick from Wall Street and return to a nation of laws.”

    How do we the people “force” that…specifically?

    E.Tolle’s Rev. 2.0?

  32. Well said
    I had a client who refused to pass off the bad loans while working for Countrywide in Sacramento CA & his superiors would override his veto & he could not believe it & said that went on for a few years, then they were sold & all let go

  33. This was as you said the smallest fish in the pond ,,, and the kickbacks are from the present … just getting some love back from the real estate agents she assigns repop properties to … When I saw the headlines I was thinking this might have something to do with originations or loan approvals… This is interesting but I don’t see how it helps anyone here.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: