Why It Could Be Very Hard for Banks to Avoid Ibanez Mortgage Catastrophes

Why It Could Be Very Hard for Banks to Avoid Ibanez Mortgage Catastrophes

The solution to this seems easy enough. From now on, banks seeking to foreclose should just make sure that whoever is the last recorded assignee grants a new assignment to the foreclosing entity before the bank takes any action. No doubt this is what Goodman has in mind when she says banks will go back and re-document the assignments.

It might not be so easy. Let’s say you are US Bancorp and you find yourself with a mortgage whose chain of title is incomplete. You took the mortgage from a now bankrupt subsidiary of the now bankrupt Lehman Brothers. Getting someone at Lehman to go through the process of executing the assignment is going to be very difficult. It’s not even clear if anyone at Lehman Brothers has the legal authority to execute an assignment now, while Lehman is bankrupt.

In any case, getting the assignment from Lehman wouldn’t really help you. You’d still have a gap in the chain from Option One to Lehman. It’s probably best to skip over Lehman all together and go directly to Option One to ask for the assignment.

But you have a bit of a problem. You didn’t buy the mortgage from Option One. They aren’t under any contractual obligation to you to execute any documents. So when you call, here’s how the conversation goes.

US Bank dude: “Hey, can I speak to whoever it is who is handling the Ibanez mortgage?”

Option One guy (after some delay): “No one handles that mortgage. We sold it five years ago to Lehman and closed the file.”

US Bank: “Right. Okay. Well, I need you to find someone who will execute an assignment of the mortgage to me.”

Option One: “First of all, no one who handled that mortgage still works here. You might have heard about the mortgage meltdown, right? Second, we sold it to Lehman, according to the file.”

US Bank: “Right. But I bought it from Lehman.”

Option One: “So get the assignment from Lehman.”

US Bank: “They’re an empty company that is in bankruptcy.”

Option One: “I’ve heard about that. Thanks for the news.”

US Bank: “So I need you to execute the assignment.”

Option One: “First of all, you’re going to have to show me that you bought the loan from Lehman. Second, I need to talk to legal to make sure I can assign a mortgage to someone we never dealt with. Third, how much are you willing to pay me to do all this?”

US Bank: “Pay you? I already own the mortgage.”

Option One: “The mortgage we sold to Lehman. If Lehman asks for the assignment, we’ll do it as part of that deal. But, as far as I can tell, I don’t owe you anything. If you want an assignment, you’re going to at least be paying the legal bills for the legal opinion that says it’s okay for us to do this.”

US Bank: “You don’t have to be an [expletive deleted] about this.”

Option One: “I also don’t have to give you an assignment.”

By the way, if you do get Option One to assign it to Lehman, you might find yourself trapped. In that case, the mortgage arguably becomes part of the estate of Lehman—subject to the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court. Sure, eventually, you may be able to prove that you are entitled to the assignment from Lehman. But you’ll be fighting the other creditors, who will argue that you are just one more unsecured creditor in a long line of people who say that Lehman owes them something.

While this example might be specific to loans that went through Lehman, these kind of problems are not likely to be confined to the sizable part of the mortgage market that went through Lehman at one time or another. A great many of the companies involved have entered bankruptcy or changed ownership. When these companies appear in the ownership chain, “re-documenting” the assignments may be all but impossible.

Read article in full here…


10 Responses to “Why It Could Be Very Hard for Banks to Avoid Ibanez Mortgage Catastrophes”
  1. l vent says:

    Let’s lay it on the line and say that Foreclosuregate is about ALOT MORE than unsecured mortgages. It is only a piece to the puzzle of the biggest Ponzi scheme in history. I think the BANKSTERS would be getting off on easy street if all they have to do is RESCIND THE LOANS. There is ALOT OF MONEY MISSING AND WHERE DID IT ALL GO IS THE BURNING QUESTION. THE BANKSTERS AND WALL STREET have lead us all to believe that WE bankrupted America. They are liars. They STOLE OUR WEALTH and hid it (The CA– USE of the INTENTIONAL FINANCIAL COLLAPSE) and are trying to make US PAY for their theft of OUR WEALTH (including but not only Pension funds of our Fireman and Policeman and 401K’s and other investments) through HYPER-TAXATION, HYPER-INFLATED GOODS AND SERVICES with HYPER-DEFLATED CURRENCY thanks to QE1&2. AMERICA, This is the Government IMPOSITION OF DEBT SLAVERY and do not think it was not planned this way. From what I understand this plan began in 1776.

  2. LVLawman says:

    The banks whine and moan and complain about deadbeat homeowners’ because they screwed up royally. You read their take in the press on a daily basis.

    The truth is, if they have the note, the homeowner still has a debt to them. They just become an unsecured creditor like their credit card divisions and can persue collections in that manner. Or, they can try to convince their defrauded investors in their MBSs to modify the loan just like a credit card write down. If the issuer has to repurchase the note to do it, so be it.

    That’s the truthful answer.

    • l vent says:

      It is about WAY MORE than just an unsecured debt. The BANKS BROKE THE LAW AND COMMITTED FRAUD IN OUR NAMES. This should force the banks to RESCIND THE LOAN. The mortgages and the deeds were recorded paid in full by US in the amount of $10.00 for the deed and $1.00 for the mortgage note. Then the BANKSTERS proceeded to make TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS OFF OF ALL OF THIS DIRTY LAUNDRY. That is right , THEY HAD THEIR DIRTY LITTLE FINGERS IN EVERYBODIES PIE. DIRTY DEEDS DONE DIRT CHEAP I WOULD SAY, WOULDN’T YOU?

    • l vent says:

      I have uncovered alot more dirt than this if you want to press the issue I WILL BRING IT ON. Wikileaks has nothing on me.

  3. ForensicMortgageExaminers says:

    One small problem with this guy’s article… Option One has gone bye-bye. They were sold to AHMSI. Of course, AHMSI will probably be willing to play ball with US Bank since they are just about as corrupt as anyone can imagine! They’ll charge a price, but, hey, crime has to pay, right?

  4. kravitz says:

    Danielle Gilmore. Remember that name.

    Meet Danielle Gilmore, The Southern California “Super Lawyer” Who Will Make Bank Of America Sweat Tomorrow

    “tomorrow, employees from Bank of America and Countrywide face the MBIA lawyer to give testimony that they didn’t mislead MBIA into buying packages of bad securitized mortgages”

  5. Maureen McGrath says:

    Well, the resolution to the above is very simple – Re-write the history of the note and mortgage as they did in my case – completely re-wrote it, from the date of closing forward (yes, they changed the date of closing, and I was informed that once the Recorder of Deeds accepted the documents (10 years after closing) the documents become self-affirming), eliminating the lawsuit I won against Chase and Fairbanks, and luckily in Pennsylvania, you can foreclose on the Note or the Mortgage – so you foreclose on the Mortgage in rem – problem solved.

  6. J Glenn Lowe says:

    In other words. The only solution is to start over with an agreement of laws that protect the basic rights of all Americans. What a brainstorm I am having. We could call it “The Bill of Rights”, and then add it to larger document to cover the rest of the details of freedom and the right to not have live under a bridge and such. We could name this awesome document “The Constitution of the United States”. I must be a genius, maybe I should run for president.

Leave a Reply