GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS NEGOTIATING (SELL-OUT!) WITH BANKS AND TAKING POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS SIMULTANEOUSLY

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

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

SELL-OUT!

EDITOR’S COMMENT: WHAT ARE THEY NEGOTIATING ABOUT AND WITH WHOM ARE THEY NEGOTIATING? This is theater in the most absurd. Our government is negotiating with the very people who have demonstrated that they must fabricate and forge documents in order to establish their authority to do anything. Even in hostage negotiations we don’t give as much as we are giving to the servicers. They have no authority.

By definition they don’t own the obligation which means the obligation of the borrower is not owed to them. They are not the authorized agent of the real owner of the obligation until the real owner is identified and says they give authority to the agent to negotiate on their behalf.

Those documents don’t exist because those facts don’t exist. The investors are not going to give the servicers anything. If they were going to do that it would have happened en masse and avoided lots of paperwork problems for the banks. If it were not for political contributions, thousands of people would be headed for jail cells.

Instead we are negotiating away the future of America — for what? All homeowners are affected by these negotiations because when the so called honest Joe Homeowner goes to sell his home he is going to be hopping mad that not only can’t he deliver marketable title, he now has nobody to sue because the government sold him out. AND he still can’t sell his house because there is no way to clear up title.

These negotiations are a farce because down the road, they will be meaningless except that they will have added time to the already corrupted title registries across the country.

Mortgage servicers spend millions on political contributions

Banks under scrutiny as housing crisis festers

Posted Aug 8, 2011, 2:55 pm

Michael Hudson & Aaron Mehta Center for Public Integrity

As the financial markets roil, one of the critical factors weighing down the U.S. economy is the flood of home foreclosures. Thursday’s crash underscores how difficult it will be for the economy to make significant strides while the housing market is still in tatters.

The pace of the housing market recovery may depend in part on the outcome of intense negotiations underway among state and federal authorities and the nation’s five largest mortgage servicers.

Government officials are negotiating with the firms — Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase & Co., Citigroup, Wells Fargo & Co. and Ally Financial Inc. — over allegations of widespread abuses in the foreclosure process. State attorneys general around the country have been investigating evidence that the big banks used falsified documentation to process foreclosures.

Four of the five companies under scrutiny—Bank of America, JP Morgan, Wells Fargo and Citigroup — are major donors for state and federal political campaigns. Between them, they have donated at least $8 million since the start of 2009 to candidates, party committees and other political action committees, according to an iWatch News analysis of campaign finance data.

(Ally Financial hasn’t given money during that period to campaigns under its current name or is previous name, General Motors Acceptance Corp., or GMAC).

The fate of foreclosure negotiations could go a long way toward determining where the housing market will go in the next few years.

Normally, the housing market plays a leading role in any economic recovery. But that hasn’t been the case in the aftermath of the U.S. financial crisis of 2008.

“It’s has been a negative factor in this recovery — or lack of recovery,” housing economist and consultant Michael Carliner said.

Generally, when interest rates go down, that spurs the mortgage and housing markets and helps move the economy in the right direction. But that hasn’t happened this time around, said Carliner, a former economist for the National Association of Home Builders. “We have lowest mortgage rates since the early 1950s and it’s not doing anything,” he said.

Interest rates on 30-year fixed rate mortgages averaged 4.39 percent for the week ending Aug. 4, according to a survey by mortgage giant Freddie Mac.

What’s holding back the housing market, Carliner said, is a glut of available homes for sale, due in part to overbuilding during the housing boom and to continuing foreclosure woes. An “excess inventory” of perhaps 2 million homes is making it hard for the housing market to get going again, he said.

The inventory of foreclosures continues to grow. In June, one out of every 583 housing units in the United States received a foreclosure notice, according to data provider Realty Trac. The numbers are even worse in the hardest hit markets, where housing prices climbed the fastest during the housing boom and fell the most when the housing crash came. In Nevada, one out of every 114 housing units was the subject of a foreclosure filing in June.

Investigations and negotiations over allegations of fraudulent foreclosure practices by big banks have helped slow down the foreclosure process, making it harder for the market to work through defaults and readjust, Carliner said.

He would like to see a deal between government officials and mortgage servicers that would pave the way to swifter foreclosures that would help put the foreclosure problem in the past. “If people haven’t paid their mortgages in two years, they shouldn’t be able to keep their house,” Carliner said.

Not everyone agrees.

Ira Rheingold, executive director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates, a consumer attorneys group, argues that any national settlement should be about keeping people in their homes. He wants a settlement that would require banks to reduce the amount of mortgage debt held by distressed homeowners.

Reducing their payments and overall debts would help keep them in their homes and reduce the number of foreclosures, he said. It would also provide a measure of justice, he said, for homeowners who were defrauded via bait-and-switch salesmanship, falsified documentation and other predatory tactics that were common during the mortgage frenzy of the past decade.

Rheingold acknowledges, though, that extracting large concessions from big banks will be a “tough slog.”

Concerned about keeping quality reporting alive in Tucson?
A metro area of nearly 1 million deserves a vital & sustainable source of news that’s independent and locally run.
The banks have high-powered legal talent and lobbyists on their side, and four of the top five mortgage services have given generously to state and federal political campaigns, according to an iWatch News analysis of election data provided by the subscription-only CQMoneyLine. 

  • Since the start of 2009, Bank of America has donated at least $3.2 million to candidates, party committees and other PACs. Among the top recipients was Rep. Jeb Hensarling (at least $17,500), a Texas Republican who is vice chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. Another Texan Republican, Randy Neugebauer , received at least $16,000 from the financial giant. Neugebauer also serves on the Financial Services Committee, and chairs the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
  • JPMorgan Chase has donated over $ 2.8 million to candidates, party committees and other PACs since the start of 2009. The firm has made donations to the Republican Governors Association (at least $50,000), the National Republican Senatorial Committee (at least $45,000) and the National Republican Congressional Committee (at least $45,000), the Democratic Governors Association (at least $25,000) and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (at least $15,000). The firm also donated at least $15,000 to the Blue Dog PAC, the fundraising arm of the Blue Dog Democrats who were vital to financial corporations when the Democrats controlled the House.
  • and ranking member on the financial services committee’s Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.
  • Wells Fargo gave over $1 million to candidates, party committees and other PACs since the start of 2009. Wells Fargo has given at least $45,000 each to the NRCC and NRSC and at least $30,000 each to the DSCC and DCCC. It also donated at least $17,000 to Rep. Ed Royce , a California Republican who serves on the Financial Services committee. Another top recipient was Democrat Carolyn Maloney of New York, the vice chair of the Joint Economic Committee
  • Citigroup has given $850,000 to candidates, party committees and other PACs since the start of 2009. Among its top individual recipients is Democrat Gregory Meeks of New York. Meeks, who sits on the House Committee on Financial Services, has received at least $10,000 from Citi. Another is Ohio Republican Rep. Pat Tiberi (at least $15,000), a member of the powerful Ways and Means committee. Tiberi is currently the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Select Revenue, which has jurisdiction over federal tax policy.

Related stories

More by Michael Hudson

TITLE AND SECURITIZATION ANALYSIS

I HAD A QUESTION FROM ONE OF OUR BLOG READER-CUSTOMERS AND I REALIZED EVERYONE SHOULD SEE THE ANSWER.

Chris: Your question is a smart one. Here is the deal. We provide the search capacity and if you want a complete analysis and accounting you’ll need to retain someone for that. we have that available if you want us to do it.

But the main point I want to stress hear is that the subject of securitization was the receivables and not the obligation, note or mortgage from the borrower.

  • The receivables consist of the proceeds of payment from MULTIPLE sources as you have no doubt seen on the blog.

    The borrower signs a note that is never actually given to the investor.

  • The investor receives a mortgage bond or actually evidence of a mortgage bond that was never disclosed, seen or signed by the borrower.

  • In practice, the obligation, note and mortgage (Deed of Trust) are never actually transmitted, transferred, assigned or indorsed to the lender.

  • It is all an illusion. Any transfer is from one intermediary pretender lender to another intermediary pretender lender. The actual loan transaction never actually reaches the loan pool — but in every foreclosure it is claimed to be there.

  • The legal issue that ensues is whether the originating lender still is the only lender of record without any money owed to it (which means the loan is unsecured but does NOT mean there is no obligation) OR whether the pretender lender can convince the Judge that despite the lack of legal proof and legal requirements, the loan should be treated as equitably in the pool even if it is not legally in the pool.
  • The problem is of course there is no such thing. And in Missouri when they tried to make the legal argument, it was soundly rejected and they never tried it again.
  • But they don’t have to try again because Judges are still confused by the legal effect of securitization. In their confusion they are treating the loan as part of the pool even though they have no actual evidence (because none exists) that the loan ever made it into the pool through normal assignments, indorsements etc..
  • As far as they are concerned, the borrower signed a note, owes the money, didn’t pay it and the case is closed.
  • The idea that that there are MULTIPLE channels of payment between the borrower and the real lender and that therefore the documents in the middle tell the real story is not one they really want to hear — it raises a complexity they don’t wish to deal with.

    It also raises a political hot potato. Any one of these cases if they were considered alone and not in the context of millions of others would be decided in favor of the borrower (in my opinion). Judges are loathe to issue an order that in essence turns the entire mortgage mess on its head in favor of borrowers — which really only means that the real parties in interest must come forward and the real parties in interests must strike a deal in light of the obvious defects in the securitization and title process.

  • So we are presently stuck between a majority of Judges who don’t want to apply the normal rules of evidence, pleadings and substantive law and the minority of Judges who see all too clearly the coming title cliff we are heading toward.
  • What this means for you is that you must realize that the title part of your search is the ground level search which shows the breaks in the chain and the securitization portion of your search shows the REST of the terms that were not contained in the note, describes but does not name the real lender, and adds co-obligors who are providing cover for the bond the the investor thinks he bought with virtually no risk.
  • Without the liability of third parties, the investor would not have entered the deal. Just as with knowledge that the home appraisal was falsely inflated neither the borrower nor the lender would have entered the deal and all that money, billions in bonuses and billions in “profits” would never have been recorded.
  • THIS IS WHY YOU MUST POUND AND POUND AND POUND ON THE FACT THAT THIS WAS A SINGLE TRANSACTION BETWEEN BORROWER AND ACTUAL LENDER AND THAT THE ORIGINATING LENDER AND EVERYONE ELSE WERE INTERMEDIARIES IN THE DEAL. THE REQUIREMENTS OF LAW IN PERFECTING A LIEN WERE NOT PRESENT.

livinglies-newsletter-provides-more-strategic-info

WE HEAR YOU! YOU NEED THE TITLE ANALYSIS, YOU NEED THE SECURITIZATION ANALYSIS AND YOU NEED TELECONFERENCES WITH A NEWSLETTER WHERE YOU CAN PAY A MONTHLY AMOUNT FOR SIX MONTHS INSTEAD OF ONE BIG FEE. SO HERE IT IS

COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION ANALYSIS PAY MONTHLY

AND AGAIN — HERE IS WHAT WE HEAR YOU ASKING FOR —-

JUST GIVE THE NAME OF THE TRUST, I\’LL DO THE REST

YOU MUST FILL OUT THIS FORM TO GET THE NAME OF THE TRUST

OR YOU CAN ORDER YOUR ITEMS SEPARATELY —->

ORDER LOAN SPECIFIC TITLE REPORT, COPIES OF DOCUMENTATION AND ANALYSIS HERE

ORDER SECURITIZATION REPORT COPIES OF DOCUMENTATION AND ANALYSIS HERE

SUBSCRIBE TO LIVINGLIES FOR DISCOUNTED SERVICES, NEWSLETTER AND FREE TELECONFERENCES

Discovery: references to SEC filings and Edgar should refer to this Final Order

Editor’s Note: This is the securities equivalent of MERS or HERS.

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
17 CFR Part 232
[Release Nos. 33-9077; 34-60875; 39-2468; IC-28984]
Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer Manual
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (the Commission) is adopting revisions to the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval System (EDGAR) Filer Manual to reflect updates to the EDGAR system made in EDGAR Release 9.17. The revisions were made primarily to enforce additional XBRL validation requirements to improve the quality of XBRL exhibits; to allow filers to electronically submit the withdrawal of application for exemptive or other relief from the Investment Companies Act as submission types APP WD and APP WD/A; and, to allow filers to add Subject Company related information for the submission types F-6, F-6/A, F-6EF, and F-6POS. The revisions to the Filer Manual reflect changes within Volume I entitled EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: “General Information,” Version 8 (September 2009) and Volume II entitled EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: “EDGAR Filing,” Version 13 (September 2009). The updated manual will be incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations.
DATES: October 30, 2009. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of October 30, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: In the Office of Interactive Disclosure for questions concerning additional XBRL validation requirements contact Jeffrey Naumann, Assistant Director of the Office of Interactive Disclosure, at (202) 551-5352; in the Division of
2
Corporation Finance, for questions concerning Subject Company related information for the Forms F-6, F-6/A, F-6EF, and F-6POS and Form D contact Cecile Peters, Chief, Office of Information Technology, at (202) 551-3600; in the Division of Investment Management for questions on the electronic filing of submission types APP WD and APP WD/A contact Ruth Armfield Sanders, Senior Special Counsel, Office of Legal and Disclosure, at (202) 551-6989; and in the Office of Information Technology, contact Rick Heroux, at (202) 551-8800.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are adopting an updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I and Volume II. The Filer Manual describes the technical formatting requirements for the preparation and submission of electronic filings through the EDGAR system.1 It also describes the requirements for filing using EDGARLink2 and the Online Forms/XML Web site.
The Filer Manual contains all the technical specifications for filers to submit filings using the EDGAR system. Filers must comply with the applicable provisions of the Filer Manual in order to assure the timely acceptance and processing of filings made in electronic format.3 Filers may consult the Filer Manual in conjunction with our rules governing mandated electronic filing when preparing documents for electronic submission.4
The EDGAR system will be upgraded to Release 9.17 on September 28, 2009 and will introduce the following changes: EDGAR will be upgraded to enforce additional XBRL validation requirements to improve the quality of XBRL exhibits. This change will enhance the validation process the EDGAR system uses to confirm compliance with the requirements in Chapter 6 of the
1 We originally adopted the Filer Manual on April 1, 1993, with an effective date of April 26, 1993. Release No. 33-6986 (April 1, 1993) [58 FR 18638]. We implemented the most recent update to the Filer Manual on August 4, 2009. See Release No. 33–9058 (July 28, 2009) [74 FR 38523].
2 This is the filer assistance software we provide filers filing on the EDGAR system.
3 See Rule 301 of Regulation S-T (17 CFR 232.301).
4 See Release No. 33–9058 (July 28, 2009) [74 FR 38523] in which we implemented EDGAR Release 9.16.
3
EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: “EDGAR Filing”. Minor clarifications were made to the instructions on XBRL/Interactive Data tagging.
EDGAR will allow filers, who previously submitted on EDGAR or in paper an application for exemptive or other relief from the Investment Company Act, to electronically submit the withdrawal of such application as new submission types APP WD or APP WD/A on the EDGARLink Submission Template 3.
EDGAR will allow filers to add Subject Company related information to the submission types F-6, F-6/A, F-6EF, and F-6POS. These submission types are available on EDGARLink Submission Template 1.
A minor change will be made to the online Form D to update the OMB expiration date. Minor backend processing changes are being made to ensure that online and third party Form D filings are validated consistently.
Along with adoption of the Filer Manual, we are amending Rule 301 of Regulation S-T to provide for the incorporation by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations of today’s revisions. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51.
You may obtain paper copies of the updated Filer Manual at the following address: Public Reference Room, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE, Room 1520, Washington DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 am and 3:00 pm. We will post electronic format copies on the Commission’s Web site; the address for the Filer Manual is http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar.shtml.
4
Since the Filer Manual relates solely to agency procedures or practice, publication for notice and comment is not required under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)5. It follows that the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act6 do not apply.
The effective date for the updated Filer Manual and the rule amendments is [Insert date of publication in the Federal Register]. In accordance with the APA7, we find that there is good cause to establish an effective date less than 30 days after publication of these rules. The EDGAR system upgrade to Release 9.17 is scheduled to be available on September 28, 2009. The Commission believes that establishing an effective date less than 30 days after publication of these rules is necessary to coordinate the effectiveness of the updated Filer Manual with the system upgrade.
Statutory Basis
We are adopting the amendments to Regulation S-T under Sections 6, 7, 8, 10, and 19(a) of the Securities Act of 1933,8 Sections 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 23, and 35A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,9 Section 319 of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939,10 and Sections 8, 30, 31, and 38 of the Investment Company Act of 1940.11
5 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
6 5 U.S.C. 601- 612.
7 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
8 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, and 77s(a).
9 15 U.S.C. 78c, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o, 78w, and 78ll.
10 15 U.S.C. 77sss.
11 15 U.S.C. 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, and 80a-37.
5
List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 232
Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.
TEXT OF THE AMENDMENT
In accordance with the foregoing, Title 17, Chapter II of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 232 – REGULATION S-T—GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR ELECTRONIC FILINGS
1. The authority citation for Part 232 continues to read in part as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s(a), 77z–3, 77sss(a), 78c(b), 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o(d), 78w(a), 78ll, 80a–6(c), 80a–8, 80a–29, 80a–30, 80a–37, and 7201 et seq.; and 18 U.S.C. 1350
*****
2.
Section 232.301 is revised to read as follows:
§232.301 EDGAR Filer Manual.
Filers must prepare electronic filings in the manner prescribed by the EDGAR Filer Manual, promulgated by the Commission, which sets out the technical formatting requirements for electronic submissions. The requirements for becoming an EDGAR Filer and updating company data are set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: “General Information,” Version 8 (September 2009). The requirements for filing on EDGAR are set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: “EDGAR Filing,” Version 13(September 2009). Additional provisions applicable to Form N-SAR filers are set forth in the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume III: “N-SAR Supplement,” Version 1 (September 2005). All of these provisions have been incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations, which action was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51. You must
6
comply with these requirements in order for documents to be timely received and accepted. You can obtain paper copies of the EDGAR Filer Manual from the following address: Public Reference Room, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE, Room 1520, Washington, DC 20549, or call (202) 551-5850, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 am and 3:00 pm. Electronic copies are available on the Commission’s Web site. The address for the Filer Manual is http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar.shtml. You can also inspect the document at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go to:
http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy
Secretary
October 26, 2009

%d bloggers like this: