WA AG SUES RECONTRUST (BOA) FOR ILLEGAL FORECLOSURES

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

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

QUESTION FROM NANCY DREW: QUESTION: WHY ARE NOT ALL OF THE US AND STATE ATTORNEY GENERALS DOING THE SAME? AS A MATTER OF FACT, WHY ARE NOT THE FORECLOSURE DEFENSE ATTORNEY’S IN WASHINGTON NOW INSURING ALL ‘TRUSTEES’ ARE DOING THE SAME? THE ONLY REASON THIS IS IN THE NEWS IS BECAUSE OF THE ‘SALE’ REVEALS WHO THE ‘TRUSTEE’ ACTUALLY IS AS SHOWN ON THE ‘AZTEC FORECLOSURE’ POSTING THAT LL THOUGHT WAS IMPORTANT ENOUGH OF A COMMENT TO POST SO THE CONSUMERS HARMED IN CA, OR, WA, UT, ETC. THE STATES LISTED, KNOW THE ‘TRUSTEE’ ACTING AS REO LENDER/BROKER DURING FORECLOSURE DOES HAVE ACCESS TO WHO THE TRUSTEE/LOAN TRUST ACTUALLY IS AND DOES NOT RECORD THE INFORMATION WITH THE COUNTY CLERK AND COUNTY RECORDER UNTIL AFTER THE SALE, THE TAKING OF PROPERTY BY DECEPTIVE PRACTICES AND IN A LARCENOUS MANNER, AND WITH INTENT OF SUBSTANTIVE OMISSIONS OF MATERIAL FACTS – NEGLIGENCE OF ‘TRUSTEES’ WITH FIDUCIARY DUTY AS STATED BY AG OF WASHINGTON

EDITOR’S ANALYSIS: Recontrust (BOA), CalWestern (Wells? US Bank?), and others are essentially products of the Banks. They create these entities to provide some protections to themselves and to create the appearance of propriety. But it is improper. These entities that were created by the Banks to serve as “substitute trustee.”These sham nominee entities of the Banks try to have it both ways.

On the one hand they say they are the trustee qualified and wiling to serve as the independent protector of rights of the trustor and beneficiary, and on the other they say that they are not subject to the rules because they are “Banks.” So they admit they are the Bank and at the same time they claim to be the trustee. That is not possible under the intent and wording of most statutes enabling non-judicial foreclosure under the power of sale in a deed of trust. 

The Bank is essentially appointing itself as the substitute trustee. So the party claiming to be creditor is appointing itself or its own subsidiary, agent or affiliate as the substitute trustee. This violates most state laws allowing non-judicial foreclosure. The trustee is qualified to serve only if it is an independent entity who will serve to protect the interests of the trustor and the beneficiary, not BE the claimed beneficiary or act as agent for the beneficiary. The trustee is expected to exercise due diligence, especially when it is getting instructions from a party who is NOT on the deed of trust.

The Banks want to make sure that the trustee does not perform due diligence. If it did, there would be questions as to who is giving it instructions and why. In short, the true trustee would be asking the same questions that most borrowers ask in litigation, amounting to “Who are you and why are you doing this?” The true trustee would require some evidence. In fact, the original trustee on the deed of trust probably has never legally been substituted, thus invalidating all subsequent actions taken on behalf of the “new” beneficiary. It might even be that the original trustee having notice of the substitution, might have an obligation to intercede and demand proof that the substitution is proper.

Thus the “creditor” has appointed itself and avoided all the requirements of statute regarding the duties of trustees. This is illegal in most states if not al of them. You should check with a licensed attorney who REALLY knows foreclosure law in the state in which your property is located. Investigation will probably reveal that the substitution of trustee was robo-signed which means that it was forged, fabricated, and done without any authority, not within the chain of title and in fact DESPITE the chain of title, which any trustee actually performing its duties would know.

Rob McKenna
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
1125 Washington Street SE · PO Box 40100 · Olympia WA 98504-0100

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Aug. 5, 2011

Washington Attorney General sues ReconTrust for illegal foreclosures

McKenna raps trustee’s claim that it doesn’t have to abide with state law

SEATTLE – Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna today announced that his office is suing ReconTrust Company, a subsidiary of Bank of America, for conducting illegal foreclosures on thousands of Washington homeowners.

“ReconTrust ignored our warnings, repeatedly broke the law and refused to provide information requested during our investigation,” McKenna said. “ReconTrust’s illegal practices make it difficult, if not impossible, for borrowers who might have a shot at saving their homes to stop those foreclosures.”

ReconTrust is a foreclosure trustee that is legally required to act as a neutral party on behalf of both the lender and the borrower while conducting foreclosure proceedings in good faith and in accordance with the law.

The lawsuit filed in King County Superior Court by McKenna and Assistant Attorney General Jim Sugarman, of the office’s Consumer Protection Division, alleges that “ReconTrust has failed to comply with the Washington Deed of Trust Act, RCW 61.24, in each and every foreclosure it has conducted since at least June 12, 2008.” The company is also accused of violating the state’s Consumer Protection Act.

The Attorney General’s Office announced the suit during a news conference held outside a foreclosed home in Seattle. McKenna and Sugarman were joined by two women whose homes were foreclosed by ReconTrust and several private attorneys who are also concerned about ReconTrust’s actions.

“My home is being foreclosed on. The situation has caused great pain for my son and myself,” said Myra Cole, a single mother from Spanaway who struggled to find employment after a layoff. Her loan servicer was reviewing her Spanaway home for a loan modification when ReconTrust sold the house at foreclosure.

“I couldn’t understand how this could have happened,” Cole continued. “I got the run-around. I just can’t believe that the company that’s supposed to be helping me is foreclosing on me. … We are trying to save our homes. We’re doing the steps they tell us. In the end, it’s all for nothing. It’s an injustice.”

Ruby Barrus told a similar story about the home where she and her husband live in Marysville. During a time of financial hardship, their loan servicer promised not to foreclose while they worked out a loan modification.

“Our payments were never late,” Barrus said, adding that they only stopped making payments because the bank indicated they needed to default to qualify for the modification. “We just figured they knew what they were doing because they were our servicer. … Months later, we get a letter from ReconTrust saying they’re our foreclosure attorneys. We had never heard of them.”

Both women are in court battles to keep their homes.

McKenna said an essential requirement of the Deed of Trust statute is that a trustee maintains an office in the state where homeowners can go to ask questions, make last-minute payments and request a foreclosure be postponed for a legitimate reason. But ReconTrust doesn’t have an office in Washington.

“ReconTrust’s claim that the company doesn’t have to follow Washington law and procedures because it is a national bank is wrong,” McKenna added.

The Attorney General’s Office alleges the company:

· Failed to maintain a physical office with telephone service in Washington.

· Failed to identify the actual owner of the promissory notes being foreclosed.

· Provided confusing information regarding how borrowers defaulted and how they can cure that default.

· Failed to conduct foreclosures in a public place, instead holding them at private sites including an office park in Bellevue.

· Created or permitted the use of documents that were improperly executed, notarized or sworn to. Sugarman said notices and agreements contained conflicting dates and improper notarizations and ReconTrust employees sometimes signed as officers of other entities.

· Failed to exercise its duty of good faith toward the borrower by deferring solely to the lender when deciding whether to postpone a foreclosure.

The complaint states that homeowners facing foreclosure are “captive to ReconTrust’s services” and that the company’s failures to abide by the law have concealed material information needed by homeowners to assert rights and defenses, negotiate a loan modification, cure defaults, and postpone or stop a foreclosure sale.

Sugarman said, “It is particularly important right now for trustees to understand and strictly comply with Washington foreclosure law. There have been several changes including a new right for homeowners to request mediation to discuss a possible loan modification or forbearance before the bank pursues foreclosure.”

The complaint asks that the court require ReconTrust to comply with the law and impose civil penalties of up to $2,000 per violation, as well as restitution for consumers.

Based on information obtained during its investigation, the Attorney General’s Office estimates that ReconTrust has issued 9,900 foreclosure notices since January 2008 in King, Pierce and Snohomish counties alone. ReconTrust forecloses across the state. It’s unknown how many of those foreclosures violated homeowner rights, although the Attorney General’s Office believes the problems are systematic and widespread. It’s also unknown how many foreclosures may have been prevented had ReconTrust complied with laws.

In May 2010, the Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Division began investigating reports of lenders and trustee services not properly reviewing foreclosure documents or following other legal procedures. McKenna sent letters in October 2010 and April 2011, outlining concerns and calling on trustees to suspend questionable foreclosures in the state. The office is investigating more than a dozen other trustees for suspected violations.

The office also remains very involved with the multistate investigation into problems in the foreclosure industry.

For more information about these investigations and resources for homeowners, including new mediation rights, visit http://www.atg.wa.gov/foreclosure.aspx.

Private lawsuits against ReconTrust have been filed in Utah, Nevada, California, Oregon and Arizona concerning its role in foreclosures in those states, as well as by private attorneys in Washington. The Attorney General of Utah sent a public letter to Bank of America threatening suit if ReconTrust continued to violate Utah foreclosure law.

DOCUMENTS:

ReconTrust Complaint

This link lists properties that are listed for sale or have been sold by ReconTrust: http://www.recontrustco.com/upcoming_counties.aspx?state=Washington

– 30 –

Media Contact: Kristin Alexander, Media Relations Manager, (206) 464-6432, cell: (206) 437-2654, kalexander@atg.wa.gov

Editor’s Note: AG McKenna is available for interviews until 12:30 today. Please call or e-mail Kristin to schedule.

Subscribe to Attorney General’s Office news releases via our listserv or RSS. You can also follow us on

Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, the All Consuming blog, Unredacted and In General.

%d bloggers like this: