Mortgage Bankers Association Mockery – INCOMING!!!! Mortgage Servicing Under Fire

Here is an interesting find…

Now they are mocking Congress, Federal Regulators, State Attorneys General, and other Enforcement Officials…

From the presentation…

Check out the full presentation below…


INCOMING!!!! Mortgage Servicing Under Fire

5 Responses to “Mortgage Bankers Association Mockery – INCOMING!!!! Mortgage Servicing Under Fire”
  1. Richard H. Anderson says:

    are there any cases holding that the assignment of mortgage is required to be recorded?

  2. smallz says:

    To me, THE MOST IMPORTANT FACT regarding the Corrupt Mortgage Bankers Association is it’s PRIMARY ROLE as the THINK TANK responsible for for concocting this Labyrinth of fraud.

    Where is Phylis K. Slelinger of the Mortgage Bankers Association? Why has she not EXPLAINED her role in all of this? Why has she not been named or diposed? Who is Phylis K. Slelsinger you ask?

    “Sleslinger is Senior Vice President and General Counsel Mortgage Bankers Association. Phyllis has been with MBA since 1992, starting out in MBA’s government affairs group. She was actively involved in the founding of MERS Inc. ®, an industry-owned electronic registry for mortgage rights, managed several litigation coordination projects, staffed GSE policy committees, and helped restructure the association’s governance.”


    What is a conspiracy? A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal act.

    Is MERS Illegal? Many trained professionals say – Absolutely.

    On July 1, 1993, while working with HUD and the MBA, Ms. Sleslinger wrote an proposal titled: “Mortgage assignments – headed for extinction?” In this proposal, Sleslinger argued that, “It won’t happen tomorrow, and it won’t happen next week or even next year. But in the not too distant future, paper mortgage assignments may become as common as dinosaurs–outside Jurassic Park.” Althought Sleslinger didn’t mention MERS in 1993, it is now clear she was referring to the criminal Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems – A government sponsored racketeering vehicle. The mechanism used soley for supporting and facillitating Mortgage Fraud by generating “fabricated documentation” to stand as legitamate evidence in Thousands of court cases flooding the nations dockets. MERS has been successful in empowering thousands of “assistant secretaries” and “vice presidents” to commit “fraud” and “perjury” by “pretending” to be owners of property and employee’s of MERS when in fact they where neither.

    Sleslinger’s proposal goes on to say:

    The Mortgage Bankers Association of America (MBA) in conjunction with (Now Defunked) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is exploring “New Age Delivery.” The phrase represents a proposal for grounding the mortgage note for the life of the mortgage loan immediately after origination. Subsequent transfers of the loan, as well as transfers of servicing, will be registered in an electronic clearinghouse–essentially a computer. What we will have is a book-entry system for transfers of mortgages and servicing rights sponsored by participating mortgage investors. These will include not only Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and GNMA, but also conduits, portfolio lenders and any other investors in mortgages.

    The proposed system is analogous to the system used to establish ownership of book-entry securities–including Fannie Mae MBS, Freddie Mac PCs and Ginnie Maes. The concept is still in the early stages of development, and we expect that it will be refined as it is discussed and analyzed further. Currently, it provides for the following:

    * Mortgage investors will establish a system for electronically registering ownership of and interests in mortgages. Submitting information to the resulting book-entry data repository (clearinghouse) will be recognized as the official means for establishing constructive notice of title to and interests in the registered mortgages. The repository could be an entity created from scratch, or it could be operated by an existing facility.

    * Lenders will provide closing agents with electronic closing instructions. Upon funding of a mortgage loan and recordation of the security instrument (mortgage or deed of trust) in the public land records with the clearinghouse probably designated as the mortgage of record, the title company, closing agent (independent closing agent/escrow agent/attorney), or lender will transmit electronic data to the clearinghouse to register a loan and have it assigned a permanent identification number (the data could be limited to borrower/original payee/loan amount/date, or could be very extensive to include property description/census tract and so on.

    The book-entry concept is the logical outgrowth of several initiatives undertaken by the Inter-Agency Technology Task Force. This task force, in which MBA assists Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and GNMA, is dedicated to streamlining mortgage banking functions. Activities focus on reducing paper in mortgage loan transactions, eliminating redundant data-entry activities by various industry sectors and establishing uniform formats for agency submissions to the extent feasible.

    The current systems for establishing and tracking mortgage ownership is extremely cumbersome and expensive. The generally accepted rules are that ownership of a mortgage note is established by possession of a note endorsed in blank, either directly or through a custodian holding notes on behalf of a third party, and by execution and delivery of a mortgage assignment, which may or may not need to be recorded. However, even where assignments need not be recorded to establish legal rights, the need for their execution, delivery, verification and storage is very costly. Therefore, the elimination of mortgage assignments has been targeted by the Inter-Agency Technology Task Force as a significant objective.

    Because mortgage assignments are creatures of state law, a logical question is whether registration of a mortgage interest in the book-entry clearinghouse will be sufficient under state law to establish enforceable legal rights. Although the proposed book-entry concept seems a drastic departure from existing practice, there is good reason to believe that the book-entry system will mesh with the existing legal framework. A tangible mortgage note and recorded mortgage will still be executed, and the note will be held by a third party consistent with current practice. What will differ is that an interested party must refer to the book-entry system, rather than an executed assignment, to determine on whose behalf the custodian is holding a note of any given time.

    It appears that to make the concept work without changing state law, mortgage investors will have to impose a contractual requirement for mortgage sellers and servicers to participate in the book-entry system and comply with clearinghouse rules. Investors can easily change mortgage eligibility requirements to condition loan purchases on registration of loans in the clearinghouse and recordation of the mortgage in the public land records in the name of the clearinghouse.”

    Now I’m not perry mason, but if that doesn’t contain “motive”, “intent” and “opportunity” what the hell does?

    Where’s the change? Looks like the same old shit to me.

  3. LOST NOTE??

    Rule 10b-5: Manipulative and Deceptive Practices

    *THE POOLING & SERVICING AGREEMENT in a SECURITIZED LOAN typically states the following:

    Violation of consumer protection laws may result in losses on the mortgage loans and the offered certificates.

    Applicable state laws generally regulate interest rates and other charges, require certain disclosure, and require licensing of the originators. In addition, other state laws, public policy and general principles of equity relating to the protection of consumers, unfair and deceptive practices and debt collection practices may apply to the origination, servicing and collection of the mortgage loans.

    The mortgage loans are also subject to federal laws, including the Federal Truth-in-Lending Act and Regulation Z promulgated thereunder, which require certain disclosures to the mortgagors regarding the terms of the mortgage loans.

    Violations of certain provisions of these federal and state laws may limit the ability of the servicer to collect all or part of the principal of or interest on the mortgage loans and in addition could subject the trust to damages and administrative enforcement. In particular, the failure of the originators to comply with certain requirements of the Federal Truth-in-Lending Act, as implemented by Regulation Z, could subject the trust to monetary penalties, and result in the mortgagors’ rescinding the mortgage loans against the trust.


  4. Great work Jeffrey… BRAVO!

    If you or any one of your bank clients would have told me that you were going to use my credit score, my signature and my collateral to defraud third-party investors and bring down the global economy I would have RAN AWAY AS FAST AS I COULD.


  5. Michael says:

    A couple clauses they missed:

    #4. If lender should suffer businesses losses which would ordinarily force lender to sell this note below face value the US taxpayer will lend unlimited funds, under the terms of section 3, to ensure lender will not be forced to liquidate this note below face value to an arms-length buyer that may elect to voluntarily renegotiate the terms herein with the borrower.

    #5. Any party whatsoever may enforce this note and the existence of the note is implied whether or not such party has the note. In enforcement proceedings the various state rules of civil procedure are suspended and superseded by rules the lender can create and may change at will. Law enforcement is prohibited from investigating any actions on the part of the lender in the origination, collection, or enforcement of this note.

Leave a Reply