Highlights From a Deposition of Jeffrey Stephan GMAC by Lynn Szymoniak

By Lynn E. Szymoniak, Esq. Ed., Fraud Digest (www.frauddigest.com) July 18, 2010

These  are  highlights  from  the  deposition  of  Jeffrey  B.  Stephan,  taken  June  7,  2010,  in a  foreclosure  case  in Maine, Federal National Mortgage Association  v. Nicole M. Bradbury, et al., Maine District Court, District Nine, Division of Northern Cumberland, Docket No. BRI-RE-09-65.   The deposition was  taken by Attorney Thomas Cox of Portland, Maine.

Jeffrey Stephan says his current  title  is  team  leader of  the document execution team  for  GMAC.    He  estimates  that  he  signs  between  8,000  and  12,000 documents monthly.  He supervises a team of 14 employees.

Mortgage Assignments and Affidavits in support of Summary Judgment signed by Stephan  have  been  used  by  GMAC,  FANNIE  &  FREDDIE  in  over  100,000 foreclosure cases.

“LPS” in the last line refers to Lender Processing Services in Jacksonville, Florida.

In  a  previous  deposition,  Stephan  stated  that  the  notaries  who  notarize  his signature  are  often  not  actually  present  in  the  room  with  him  when  he  signs documents.

Despite  all  of  the  mounting  evidence  and  admissions,  Jeffrey  Stephan,  Scott Anderson, Bryan Bly, Linda Green, Erica Johnson-Seck, Christina Trowbridge and the  other  “bank  officers”  employed  by  the  companies  serving  the  securitized mortgage-backed  trust  industry  will  be  back  at  their  desks  Monday  morning, pens (or rubber stamps) in hand.

Page 16-17, Lines 17-25, 2-11

Q: What training have you received?

A:  I  received  side-by-side  training  from another  team  leader  to  instruct me on how to review the documents when they are received from my staff.

Q: Who was that person?

A:  That  person,  at  the  time,  I  believe,  was  a  gentleman  named  Kenneth Ugwuadu. U-G-W-U-A-D-U. He is no longer with GMAC.

Q: How long did that training last?

A: Three days.   2

Q: Were  there  any written  or  printed  training materials  or manuals  used  as  a part of that training?

A: No.

Page 20, Lines 19-24:

Q.: In your capacity as the team leader for the document execution team, do you have any role in the foreclosure process, other than the signing of documents?

A: No.

Page 54, Lines 12-25:

Q: When you sign a summary judgment affidavit, do you check to see if all of the exhibits are attached to it?

A: No.

Q. Does anybody in your department check to see if all the exhibits are attached to it at the time that it is presented to you for your signature?

A: No.

Q: When you sign a summary judgment affidavit, do you inspect any exhibits attached to it?

A: No.

Page 62-63, Lines 23-25, 2-6:

Q: Is it fair to say when you sign a summary judgment affidavit, you don’t know what information it contains, other than the figures that are set forth within it?

A: Other than the borrower’s name, and if I have signing authority for that entity, that is correct.

Page 69, Lines 2-20:

Q: Mr. Stephan, referring you again to the bottom line on Page 1 of Exhibit 1, it states: I have under my custody and control, the records relating to the mortgage transaction referenced below.   3

It’s correct, is it not, that you did not have in your custody any records of GMAC at the time that you signed a summary judgment affidavit?

A: I have the electronic record. I do not have papers.

Q: You have access to a computer, is that what you mean?

A: Yes.

(objections omitted)

Page 45, Lines 2-11:

Q: Mr. Stephan, do you recall testifying in your Florida deposition in December with regard to your employees, and you said, quote, they do not go into the system and verify that the information is accurate?

A: That is correct.

Page 41, Line 19:

Q: Do your employees have any direct communication with outside counsel?

A: Yes, through the LPS System.


Fraud Digest (www.frauddigest.com)


Full Deposition of Jeffrey Stephan – GMAC’s Assignment / Affidavit Slave – 10,000 Documents a Month


2nd Deposition of Jeffrey Stephan – GMAC’s Assignment / Affidavit Slave




Highlights From a Deposition of Jeffrey Stephan
[scribd id=34499035 key=key-ind0eiqqbg0epsrxrs2 mode=list]

5 Responses to “Highlights From a Deposition of Jeffrey Stephan GMAC by Lynn Szymoniak”
  1. Elaine S says:

    Good article. Here are leads for other intertwined investigative stories pertinent to your readers.

    Stephan testified so I got interested in reading Stephan’sfull testimony with this site’s help.
    Page 6 of his deposition of Dec, 2009 (google. It was in a tiny url within your page that opened.) Is perhaps the most important piece of all.

    12 Q. And so what type of documents do you
    13 ordinarily execute?
    14 A. I execute on a daily basis assignments of
    15 mortgage, affidavits of any type that might be needed,
    16 deeds. Any type of the document that would need a
    17 signature of an officer of GMAC.

    about page 14 same document gives his working notary structure describing fraudulent practice. The notary wasn’t in the room, he boxed up stacks and sent them over to the notary in a different place/room.

    It’s not just the affidavits! Notice that, read as a whole, he admits to also signing deeds without a proper notary who witnessed his signature.!!!!!!
    There is a whole other layer of people who have a cloud on title of their real estate if their deeds were signed by him. (or any other similar robo-signor with an absentee-notary.)

    Notary is a serious business, but everyone has routinely assumed they were all good, for example even attorneys and signors of affidavits for foreclosures. Apparently, we can no longer do that as a standard of practice in this country.
    Smart attorneys will start issuing supoenas for notary challenges if they suspect anything. And notary journals must be kept and be available!

    Assignments of mortgages if also signed without a notary present in the room witnessing the signing perhaps means a whole stream of breaks in the established lender-ownership rights needed to foreclose still other properties. ( If they too required a notarized signature I’m not certain of this kind of document needing that, you can easily check. Stephan having a “signing officer” VP position status implies that it also was a document type needing notarization, otherwise no need to send the doc to a special desk, at added time and cost.)

    In other words the affidavits supposedly verified the true note holder who had the right to foreclose. And ironically, the improperly done assignments scramble that valid ownership of record needed for yet other transactions, that a foreclosure affidavit would othewise ignorantly attest to. Compounded errors may be plentiful.

    So if Stephan’s notarized signature is on an assignment of mortgage, anywhere in the midstream changing of ownership of the note papers, even if someone else later signed the affiadavit for foreclosure, I think it too is a tainted foreclosure.

    But think bigger, remember Stephan was signing docs for 5 years. Before the crush of foreclosures were the crush of assignments of mortgages to create those bundles of mortgages sold as derivatives! This could be evidence for derivatives fraud lawsuits in years to come. Lack of due diligence or fraud in bundling? I was reminded of this by the article at Huffington Post/Business with the red flag image titled, “New Proof Wall Street Knew its Mortgage Securities Were Sub-Par” 9/25

    Now, will GMAC be required to re-execute every document signed by Stephan and all their other staff who were similarly robo-signing without a notary in the room? I hope, yes! Title companies will NEED this clarity.

    Who can force this clean up? Otherwise you have an unresolved mess on many thousands of properties. A cloud on title which every one of these appear to be, can tie a property in knots for future sale, or future financing.. So what happens to all these other owners whose clear title have been damaged?

    And if Ally/GMAC LLC say they can’t trace it now, it would be a lie because notaries are required to keep journals with an entry for every document they sign, so the notary stamp can be later verifed. So absent the journal with the proper entry also would seem to be material reason to challenge if a notary is valid as well. And robo-signor signatures will be self evident as they surface in new transfers of title through the years to come once the list of names of those identified are built.

    For a fast short education in notary requirement go to any states’ secretary of state and ask for the appllication and the materials to study. Also get a rules of civil procedure book(a law book so ask your staff attorney to easily get to one of them.) which I believe will spell out which documents require a notarization. Remember a notary is a witness attesting to checking credentials that the person is who they say they are, and eyeball witnessing of the actual signing. You must sign in front of the witnessing notary.

    A court clerk will not even accept many filings and documents into a file until they see the notary affixed to it.

    The bigger story is the eroding of contract law, one of the foundations of our cvilization, and of fundamental real property rights of ownership.
    The foundations of secure wealth are being roughly shaken.

    Yes it is part of why we have been called first world rather than third world. – a functioning system of landholder laws duly upheld.
    That this practice Stephan exposed is systemic per attornies looking into it, is huge huge bad news for our society. And obviously this has the power to mess with forthcoming statistics that can move markets. Or even topple a major bank as the slowdown jams banks books. Remember every month a bad loan sits unresolved costs them more financial loss.

    Also what about prosecution of J. Stephan for lying to multiple judges on those affidavits? How is he to be held accountable?
    Are there any whistleblower offers or amnesty offers for notaries involved or other robo-signors or others close to same to step forward?

    There is also the potential nightmare mess of many buyers of notes who gave over their money, who did not get their lien on the properties purported to be securing their money. Now see a bankruptcy in the middle with court rulings, distributions to debtors, and shareholders involved. Or numerous notes fouled up this way sitting in bundles of mortages that secure credit default swaps on mortgages. Reits that have bought these already discounted bundled mortagages may be in for a rude awakening, as values of these bundles plunge further.

    This is my personal opinion coming from a related background and current interest in these mattters as an investor making offers to purchase, & being a former real estate broker.. I am Not an attorney, so consult an attorney to confirm any legal information before using it. I still haven’t read more than a portion of what is available online.

    Elaine Colorado Springs CO

  2. KT says:

    Thank-you so much for this blog…This depo is priceless to my case here in Maine!


  3. James M says:

    Just attempting to join some dots here. Is the infamous ‘Bethany Hood’ part of the LPS group of companies?

    Does, or did, ‘Bethany Hood’ report to Jeffery Stephan who’s depo appears above?

    Think she is but hard to track down the LPS staff and affiliated companies. I believe they have entities in more than one state. Lots of stuff from a decision of LPS coming out of Minisota.

    Will the full depo be available on line?

Check out what others are saying...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *