Catch Up on Foreclosure and Mortgage News

“in today’s marketplace, they don’t want to mitigate damages, they want to mitigate liability to all the people from whom they received money, including the investors.” Neil F Garfield,

After a nasty bout of the flu I have returned to the world of the living. Here are some comments and links that you should be reading and thinking about.

When a Foreclosure Sells for Less Than Your Offer

Editor’s Comment: The final sale of foreclosed property is nearly always less than that offered that preceded the sale. So what is the deal here? Why would anyone want to collect less on a loan where it is clear from the record that more was owed? The Banks obviously have a reason for wanting the foreclosure sale more than they want the money to “mitigate” damages.

Half of the the answer is they have no damages to mitigate because they never had any risk of loss, never funded the origination or acquisition of the loan.

The other half is that only through a foreclosure sale do they get cover for their PONZI scheme. Once the foreclosure sale occurs the money received by the Banks (instead of by the investors who put up the money in the first place) the Banks can point to a final  judgment and sale showing the Banks as the owners of the mortgage and note and not the investors, justifying the receipt the insurance proceeds, credit default swaps, guarantee payments from Fannie and Freddie, “sale” of the empty worthless mortgage bonds that were owned by investors but titled in the name of the investment bank under “street name.”

So it isn’t the mitigation of damages from loss on a defaulted note they are after it is the end of potential liability to refund insurance, credit default swaps, guarantees and sales. In the old days there would be no question that the bank would take the route that was most likely to mitigate the damages because going after a borrower for a deficiency judgment is usually not a good option. But in today’s marketplace, they don’t want to mitigate damages, they want to mitigate liability to all the people from whom they received money, including the investors. The more they mitigate damages on the loan the higher the potential liability for refunding money already paid by insurers, CDS, GSE’s, and the Federal Reserve.

Are you thinking about foreclosing on an assessment lien? Think twice

Editor’s Comment: Here is an example of incorrect legal analysis or more probably an article planted by the Banks who are terrified of losing all their mortgages to the one entity that has a superior lien to their alleged mortgage encumbrance — the condominium or homeowner association whose lien is simple, plain, and easily enforceable. The point of the article is that foreclosing on the lien will leave the association as the owner and potentially obligor on the note and mortgage. It ignores of course that the debt, note, mortgage and default were all fabricated.

The thing the Banks don’t ant is a head to head competition on foreclosure between two parties each of whom alleges superior lien rights. The association will have no problem demonstrating its lien rights, the ownership of the lien and the balance due after all offsets. It is a case of you show me yours and I’ll show you mine. After the association presents its case then the bank must present its case meeting the same burden or procedural compliance demonstrated by the association. They can’t. They will lose if the association attorney has been doing any research on securitized loans.

More news coming

13 Responses

  1. US Bank and SN Servicing has submitted Forged documents in our federal bankruptcy case too and we will never stop perusing them in court for damages. We are also asking our Federal judge to prosecute their current attorney out of Jacksonville Florida who continued to defend this case knowing that forged document are before a federal court. All the offending parties at SN Servicing and their attorneys are committing a serious crime against our country. We have filed a formal complaint with the FBI and the US attorney general and many great Judges all across this nation are finally stopping them from this kind of fraud on American families. US Bank and SN servicing and their attorneys are also violating a serious consent order that was to protect the people from these crimes but they could care less. Please feel free to have your clients join a class action suit so that we can end their behavior with a multi billion dollar punitive damage suit. Join us, call Ray Shelton in Florida at 352 274 8467

  2. more fraud being exposed by the LA Times:— REAL ESTATE

    Beware of fraud by closing agents at real estate settlements
    These are cases in which the closing sheet buyers sign and the one sent to the lender are different, and the closing agent keeps the difference.

  3. No court should allow the bank to accept less than the highest offer, and if it happens, it must violate several laws, something you can research more easily than I.

    While you were sick, the Focht v Wells Fargo appeal in Florida’s second district produced two results:

    1. Reverse and remand of the foreclosure order because the plaintiff lacked standing at the time of filing the complaint, even though the plaintiff proved standing before the final order.

    2. Certification of the question to the Florida Supremes as to whether the courts can order the foreclosure in spite of lack of standing (like in New Jersey and other states).

    I wrote an article about that, how to defeat the whole process with the fruit of a comprehensive mortgage examination by a competent professional, and whether foreclosure defense lawyers deserve to be sued for legal malpractice if the client loses the house to foreclosure in the absence of such an examination. See it at It shows how to attack the mortgage and win, instead of attacking the foreclosure only to lose. See related articles at

    For more (free) information on mortgage examinations and their use in defeating foreclosure, call Bob Hurt at 727 669 5511, or click here to email me:

  4. Louise, greed is your answer. These attorneys make a lot of money from the banks. I work in real estate audit and I can’t tell you how many attorneys for landlord’s tell bold face lies. It wont stop until their fellow attorney’s start filing complaints against them which many won’t do but are required to do based on the oath they took.

  5. I may not be an attorney, but I have worked with and for attorneys for many years. It is still very difficult for me to understand why an attorney would take on a client that wanted him to commit crimes in order for the bank/servicer to continue to steal. It is unethical at the very least and a class A felony or felonies more to the point. We have seen more fraud on the court in these cases than I have every seen in over 30 years of work. I do not get it. It seems like the slime runs very far and very deep. Are attorneys getting “fraud on the court” for continuing education?

  6. What would you say to an offer to “forgive” over 90% of the original principal? Seems like an attempt to have borrower acknowledge the complete purported debt of principal + @ 75% of orig principal in late payments etc w remaining bal of @ 75% of orig principal

  7. Neil , you have to take , Me and my wife never was sick in the last 10 years . US and German patent.

  8. I’ll ask her, Deb.

    Check this BS out (response from OneWest):


    dated 09/27/2013


    We have confirmed that the 1099 form was correctly prepared. That field is populated by OneWest Bank as the servicer of your loan. I understand that the form states “Lender” but we have verified that it is accurate in the manner in which it was provided.

    As for the creditor, I am unable to elaborate on the investors of the MBS. An MBS can be owned by many people, both public and private, the names of which are not available. For the purposes of identifying the creditor, your loan’s inclusion in the MBS, along with the Trustee and Servicer information that has been previously provided, sufficiently identifies the responsible parties in accordance with applicable servicing standards.

    Regarding the Independent Foreclosure Review, the results of our review have not yet been released. The third party auditors and responsible regulatory agency continues to finalize the results of the review and will make the information available to the public upon completion. Once completed, eligible parties will be notified of any potential remediation. Since the process is being conducted by third parties, I am unable to provide the individual results until made available for release. We are approaching the end of the process and hope that this will be resolved in the very near future, however, I am unable to confirm when that might be as the decision will not to be made by OneWest Bank directly.

    I apologize that I am unable to provide any additional information related to these requests. Please let me know if there is any other matters of concern that I might assist with at this time.


    Michael T. Albers

    Default Escalations, AVP

    IndyMac Mortgage Services

    Office: 1.512.918.7598

    Fax: 1.866.591.5546

  9. Hello Neil,

    I am a believer of your theories. I have been a mortgage agent for over 22 years. I was a Wall Street executive for 8 years.

    I have a sale date of 10/22. Been here 26 years. World loan from 7/2006. Never received a bill from Wells since they supposedly took over servicing in 2012.

    Wachovia employee told me loan was paid in full by World Savings internal placed mortgage insurance. Co borrower died and loan was paid in full.

    I have called and sent e mails to you and your company. No response ever received.

    Do you have an attorney referral who can help me in Santa Barbara, Ca???

    Thanks Cynthia 805-689-7384

    Sent from my iPhone

  10. But the hammer is coming

    Sent from my iPhone


  11. Yep

    Sent from my iPhone


  12. Carie
    Your on – what would anon say with regards to that deutsche suit link above

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: