George W. Mantor Runs for Public Office on “No More Dirty Deeds”

Mantor for Assessor/Recorder/Clerk of San Diego County

Editor’s note: I don’t actually know Mantor so I cannot endorse him personally — but I DO endorse the idea of people running for office on actual issues instead of buzz words and media bullets.

Mantor is aiming straight for his issue by running for the Recorder’s Position. I think his aim is right and he seems to get the nub of some very important issues in the piece I received from him. I’d be interested in feedback on this campaign and if it is favorable, I might give a little juice to his campaign on the blog and my radio show.

His concern is my concern: that within a few years, we will all discover that most of us have defective title, even if we didn’t know there was a loan subject to claims of securitization in our title chain. This is not a phenomenon that affects one transaction at a time. It affects every transaction that took place after the last valid loan closing on every property. It doesn’t matter if it was subject to judicial or non-judicial sale because real property is not to be settled by damages but rather by actual title.

Many investors are buying up property believing they have eliminated the risk of loss by purchasing property either at or after the auction sale of the property. They might not be correct in that assumption. It depends upon the depth and breadth of the fraud. Right now, it seems very deep and very wide.

Here is one quote from Mantor that got my attention:

Despite the fact that everyone knows, despite the fact that they signed consent decrees promising not to steal homes, they go right on doing it.

Where is law enforcement, the Attorneys General, the regulators? They all know but they only prosecute the least significant offenders.

Foreclosures spiked 57% in California last month. How many of those were illegal? Most, if not all.

An audit of San Francisco County revealed one or more irregularities in 99% of the subject loans. In 84% of the loans, there appear to be one or more clear violations of law.

Fortune examined the foreclosures filed in two New York counties (Westchester and the Bronx) between 2006 and 2010.  There were130 cases where the Bank of New York was foreclosing on behalf of a Countrywide mortgage-backed security.  In 104 of those cases, the loan was originally made by Countrywide; the other 26 were made by other banks and sold to Countrywide for securitization.

None of the 104 Countrywide loans were endorsed by Countrywide – they included only the original borrower’s signature.  Two-thirds of the loans made by other banks also lacked bank endorsements.  The other third were endorsed either directly on the note or on an allonge, or a rider, accompanying the note.


Banks stepping on Another Rake —- unless…

Could it be that the banks are ordering their “independent” trustees to alter the wording of the notice of sale and the ensuing deeds or transfers to look as bad as possible so they can get your home for 5 cents on the dollar? see alert-trustees-selling-liens-not-property-and-property-without-title

Unless the bank’s are going to rig the real estate marketplace like they did in the mortgage meltdown,like they did in the foreclosure auctions, like they did in the Libor rates,  like they are doing in the auctions for municipal and other government bonds and notes, they are trying to take advantage of the extremely low prices which their lackeys (“trustees”) are selling properties for “credit bids” to non-creditors and then turning around and coming back in as a “third party to buy the properties at those price levels.

Example: House originally sold for $685,000 with a mortgage of $550,000. Value of house 2 years before was $390,000. Sale at auction proceeds zero because it was a credit bid. Sale to “third party” was at $47,500.

Here is my opinion taking my cue from past behavior. This is part of the continuation of the illusion of the securitization scheme in which it appeared as though loans were sold, traded and sliced up — something that never actually happened. It is also another tool to “attract” (read that “lure”) investors into buying into REITs in which they will make money selling the REIT interests, they will make money if the REIT succeeds (doubtful, once title is addressed and the foreclosures are all overturned), and they will make the MOST money when the REIT fails because they are placing bets that the REIT will fail.

If my opinion is correct, we will suddenly find ourselves on the same side as the banks claiming that the liens are invalid, that the foreclosures were void, and that the REITS got nothing. And suddenly those politicians who march to the drum of the bankers will vote for “relief to homeowners” and provide yet another windfall to Wall Street. BUYER BEWARE!

Take a look at this:

By Stephen Gandel

Your house might be a better investment than you think. At least Wall Street seems to think so.

For a while now the conventional wisdom on real estate has been that while home prices might not fall much more, they aren’t likely to go up anytime soon either. The best personal finance advice, then, when it came to buying a house, was to buy as little as possible.

Apparently, though, on Wall Street that common wisdom about home prices is not held by all, or even many. In the past six months or so, a number of investment firms, hedge funds, private equity partnerships and real estate investors have turned into voracious buyers of single-family homes. And not just any homes, but foreclosures. Investment banks, who also want in on the action, are lining up financing options to keep the purchases going.

Take for instance private equity mega-firm Blackstone Group. About a year ago, when The New York Observer profiled the firm’s head of real estate, Jonathan Gray, there was no mention of single-family homes or even that the firm was looking to profit from a rebound in the residential real estate market.

Last week, Gray said that Blackstone now owns 2,000 single-family homes. At $300 million, that might be small compared to Blackstone’s overall real estate portfolio of about $50 billion. But it’s one of the biggest piles of homes ever intentionally put together by an institutional investor, and it’s likely not the largest portfolio out there these days. (Banks and Fannie and Freddie are sitting on many more foreclosed homes, but that’s a different story.)

Buying up single-family homes as an investment is nothing new. It’s what landlords do all the time. But landlords have always tended to be mom-and-pop outfits often not owning more than a few dozen units confined to one area. Large Real Estate Investment Trusts and private equity funds generally focused on apartment buildings and commercial real estate, like malls and office buildings. That appears to be changing.

Kenneth Rosen, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who has a consulting firm that advises real estate investors, says that he knows of two dozen investment funds in the process of buying up single-family homes, a number of which are hoping to own as much as 10,000 homes around the country. He predicts that there could be as many as a dozen public real estate investment trusts, or REITs, in the next few years that are devoted to single family homes.

see entire story at Wall Street Loading Portfolios with Your Homes

%d bloggers like this: