Response to My Inquiry About Homeowner Right of Action for Damages or Offset Against Foreclosure Action

In response to my blog post last week about whether there might be causes of action for royalty or other damages or offset arising from the fact that the loan is actually a small part of a much larger group of transactions in which the borrower is a party but not a participant in profits, I received the following from “Summer Chic” which I found interesting, even if I don’t completely agree with all of her points.

I would remind readers again that pleading such claims including violations of statutes like FDCPA, RESPA and TILA (and state lending or servicing statutes) are subject to various statutes of limitation.

BUT if they are pled not as claims  but as affirmative defenses entitling the homeowner to offset up to the amount claimed by the foreclosing party such allegations are generally not deemed to be subject to any statute of limitations because they are not technically claims, to wit: they seek no damages to be paid by the opposing party.

BUT it may well be that such claims might need to include the investment bank as a necessary party who was controlling all the other parties and who received the bulk of the profits that would be the source of the offset or claim.

Hence a deep understanding of legal procedure is required to even achieve the objective of pleading these allegations. It won’t be easy but the reward could be substantial.  And by including Federal and State statutes the recovery of attorney fees is considerably enhanced.

10 Responses

  1. @ANON…I don’t know the answer to your questions.

  2. BOB G — yes, you are correct — FDCPA is the federal law and damages for violations are small. But, if found that the law is being violated, would the actual creditor have to be disclosed? Or, just small damages awarded? I would think it brings in other avenues.

    For many, who are denied modifications (which I really don’t like anyway because they just extend the fraud), do they have a right then for a new action, once true creditor exposed, by demanding reasons for denial? In foreclosure, once true creditor is disclosed,if FDCPA is applied, is there an action for fraud in the foreclosure?

    In other words, by acknowledging the “loan” was always a debt and not a mortgage, can the FDCPA compliance then become the starting point for new actions?

    Possibly, also, this may apply to bankruptcy fraud. In BK the true creditor must be disclosed. And, if a debt, rather than a mortgage, this would affect whether secured or unsecured as disclosed in BK. .

    The big problem with the FDCPA is the short statute of limitations. However, there is a big difference between collection of a “debt” and a mortgage. If derivatives — it is collection of a debt. And, that is what has been concealed.

    Imagine – if one is paying — finally knowing that you have been paying a “debt” – not a mortgage — for many years — even though you never defaulted. What should one do with that information to benefit others?

  3. Partial list of trading products created by borrowers’ signature on the loan

    MRS’ backed by mortgages aka loans, yet, they are different type of securities. This is absurd since both products are backed by the same asset- a borrower’s house. Then these loans pooled again to create more complex product – Collateralized Mortgage Obligations (CMO) aka REMIC- also different products; Pass-Through Certificate; Callable pass through (aka split Pass through); Planned Amortization Tranches, Targeted Amortization Tranches; Companion Traches; Z-Tranches; Principal-only Securities; Interest only securities; Floating Rate Tranches, Residuals Tranches; Constant Maturity Treasure and so on

  4. Chicago Corruption at its finest: Lone Star Funding (who is a secret party behind millions of fraudulent foreclosures) and owner of Caliber Home Loans (aka Countrywide Financial) got $534 MILLION from our Tax Increment Financing to build luxury condos and shopping malls in Lincoln Yards.

    Racket in Courts is very rewarding!

    http://www.chicagonow.com/getting-real/2019/05/what-exactly-is-the-problem-with-the-lincoln-yards-tif/

  5. Bob G. I agree.

    I’m going with BOA NA or BAC Home Loans, (another shell game I still haven’t got a full grasp on) sold the loan to Freddie Mac 31 days after origination 10 years ago. So judge, Who are these pretenders Specialized Loan Servicing trying to fraudclose as plaintiff with a bunch of copied statements with wrong figures.

    What say you Bob G. ???

  6. @ ANON…”derivatives are CONTRACTS — not securities. Debt buying contracts – and is a multi multi trillion dollar business. However, not disclosing true ‘creditor’ to borrowers is violation of federal law.” The borrower was not a party to the debt buying contract nor an intended third party beneficary. that’s well settled law. moreover, what’s the penalty for not disclosing who the real creditor is? a $1K statutory penalty? and if its a RESPA violation the homeowner would have to prove nonstatutory damages before he could recover the $1K statutory damages. that also is well settled law.

    Nothing is going to change. this only matters now to a very small % of the population, and they have no financial or political clout. in ten years this will have all faded from institutional memory. such is life.

  7. @Terrie and BoB G —

    You are both right. Terrie — I have said for a very long time derivatives are involved. I KNOW that for fact. And those derivatives existed before anyone signed dotted line.

    Problem is derivatives are CONTRACTS — not securities. Debt buying contracts – and is a multi multi trillion dollar business. However, not disclosing true “creditor” to borrowers is violation of federal law. Unfortunately, the statute of limitations is short. And, no one makes it in time under the SOL for federal law. Too late before they know something is wrong. .

    Bob G is correct – “IT WOULD BRING DOWN THE ENTIRE FINANCIAL SYSTEM.” If all exposed – even though that whole system was built upon fraud. No one in authority is going to fix it. No one. Already covered up. Courts are clueless. Players intended it that way.

    Here is the catch – the players in the system are now screwing each other. THAT is not something anticipated and not acceptable to even the players. That is a consequence beyond the borrower victims that is turning, if possible, even dirtier. . .

    The truth will get out there. Too much “playing” around. Ultimately – get caught.

    Wake up Trump. Don’t cover for past administrations. Do something.

    Thanks to all. ..

  8. Terrie…with all due respect, I don’t think that you understand precisely how the derivatives markets work. It’s not the face value or the notional value that matters. It’s the distance between the notional or face value and the market value that matters. it wouldn’t matter if the notional or face value were a septillion dollars. it’s only the difference between the strike value and the market value.

    a foreclosure case will resolve around the note, the mortgage, and the alleged default. period.

    nobody is going to win anything with these wild ass “the investment banker ate my lunch” arguments. you’re giving people false hopes that will only make bad law or enrich pseudo foreclosure defense attys.

    show that the servicer’s affidavits are not affidavits but are merely acknowledgements, or use the request for admissions with a follow up of demand for documents that i recently posted. also, if the original loan was not subprime then it was most likely sold to fannie or freddie. subpoena the originating bank’s records to show that they never sold the loan to the current plaintiff, but rather to fan or fred.

  9. Given the average cds hedge on mortgages are at 20x face value – Therin lies the leverage and why The derivatives market stands at around $1.4 QUADRILLION – there is nothing illegal with hedging – however was there proper disclosure – that the lender may have an adverse position to the homeowner – the average homeowner would have to spend easily $250,000 upwards to hire a team
    Of securities /specialists to prosecute a securities case – in fact the homeowners signed the documents that essentially covered the issue of securitization – the issue was the disclaimer sufficient under SEC guidelines – furthermore – the real issue is the fraud that was perpetrated upon the homeowners by the servicers in foreclosure – modification – etc The discovery should include questions as to how much did or have the servicers collected in default insurance (opaque market) and how much in credit default swaps are held against the pool where the mortgage is held – that may be a good place to start – thus illustrating to the court – how lucrative a foreclosure is – for example a $200,000 mortgage may be worth $4 Million in realized profits on the hedge – it’s simply a matter of by what means did they induce or commit fraud to the homeowner to achieve their profits – ever wonder how the top 5 banks got so big since 2008? Look at their propriety trading of derivatives – oh but wait that’s all A dark market – 😉- watch frontline special The Warning with Brooksley Born-

  10. In my opinion, “Summer Chic” lives in a fantasy world. Try to raise such legal theories and arguments in court and see where it gets you. The judge would look at you like you just fell through the ceiling wearing a suit of armor. This argument is preposterous and I have no idea why NG would even consider posting such nonsense.

    For example, the “landlord,” i.e. the investment banker, DOES NOT make $10,000,000 to $15,000,000 on your mortgage loan. There’s not enough money in the known universe for that to be true, considering the millions upon millions of securitized mortgage loans that were made since the year 2000. And if they did make that much money, it would have shown up on the investment bankers’ financial statements and tax returns, and their stock would have been worth trillions, and we wouldn’t have the national debt that we have today. Does anyone here actually believe this pablum? (If you do, I have a canyon in Arizona and a tower in Paris to sell you, and they are priced to move. [Sorry, but the bridge in Brooklyn is no longer available, because i sold it hundreds of times over already.])

    I am compelled to say this once again, with emphasis for those with a learning disability: THERE IS NO SYSTEM WAY FOR HOMEOWNERS TO WIN MILLIONS OF FORECLOSURE ACTIONS NATIONWIDE, BECAUSE IT WOULD BRING DOWN THE ENTIRE FINANCIAL SYSTEM. And that’s not going to be allowed to happen.You have to win foreclosure actions case by case and be willing to sign a nondisclosure agreement if you want a free house, or unless a court grants you judgment based upon mistakes that the bankster attorneys made in the case. these two ways of getting a free house are as rare as hens’ teeth.

    In my opinion, Summer Chic’s legal theories are less credible than some madcap inventor claiming that he had invented a perpetual motion machine.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: