Explosive | GMAC’s Answer and Counter Claims in David J. Stern v GMAC Mortgage


It says that EVERYTHING we’ve been saying for all these years is true.  Everything; back-dated documents, fake assignments, perjury, lying – I don’t think that any of us could have done a better job.  It’s one thing when we say it, even when we present overwhelming evidence.

But all of you know it’s another when a major bank — one of his clients — says the same thing.

How many people lost their homes while this garbage was going on?  What are they going to do about that?

One question I’ve never seen addressed: GMAC filed a legal malpractice claim.  I haven’t checked but assume other banks have too.  Isn’t the FL Bar the largest legal malpractice provider?  Are they Stern’s provider?  People have raised concerns about the conflicts this brings up but, assuming the FL Bar doesn’t have a few extra billion dollars on hand, is there a chance that FL taxpayers are on the hook — since the Bar is officially part of the FL Supreme Court — for the massive claims against Stern and the rest?

Some of the best excerpts from the complaint…
(much more in there, just to much to pull)






In light of the on-going investigations by the Florida Attorney General, as well as other events and information, GMACM contacted DJSPA and conducted an on-site review of many of GMACM‟s files maintained by DJSPA.

On or about November 16, 2010, GMACM terminated its relationship with DJSPA and sought to recover its files from DJSPA.

DJSPA refused to release any files to GMACM until GMACM placed funds allegedly owed to DJSPA into escrow. In order to obtain its files as quickly as possible, GMACM agreed to this arrangement, without conceding that any amounts were owed to DJSPA.

Since recovering its files from GMACM, GMACM has expended significant time and money transitioning files to other law firms. Upon information and belief, GMACM has expended over $1.5 million in order to recover and transition files previously handled by DJSPA.

Because of its concern over the allegations and evidence of unprofessional practices followed by DJSPA, GMACM directed these newly-assigned law firms to review the recovered files and to take appropriate steps to attempt to remedy errors committed by DJSPA, as well as re-initiating foreclosure proceedings, in whole or part, due to concerns over the documents previously filed by DJSPA.

GMACM has since learned that DJSPA committed gross malpractice in the handling of GMACM matters. For example, in one foreclosure matter assigned to DJSPA for handling, DJSPA failed to communicate to GMACM that counterclaims had been brought. Indeed, DJSPA neglected to put forward any defense to such counterclaims, with the result that a default judgment was entered on or about May 5, 2011 for over $450,000. DJSPA‟s conduct in this and other instances has been wanton or reckless.

By reason of the foregoing, GMACM has incurred, and may continue to incur in the future, substantial costs attributable to the following: (i) costs associated with conducting its review of DJSPA‟s files, policies and practices; (ii) costs associated with the need to seize numerous files previously maintained and handled by DJSPA; and (iii) costs associated with having newly-assigned law firms to conduct a review of the
recovered files seized from DJSPA and to correct errors and re-initiate foreclosure proceedings as appropriate.

By reason of the foregoing, GMACM has also incurred, and may continue to incur in the future, substantial additional costs attributable to the following: (i) the cost of paying duplicative legal fees and court costs to the newly-assigned law firms for handling the files from DJSPA; (ii) the time value cost of money lost due to any additional delays in prosecuting the files from DJSPA; and (iii) the cost of foreclosure-related fees and costs previously incurred and paid on the recovered files when handled by DJSPA.

(Legal Malpractice)

GMACM repeats and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 – 27 of this Counterclaim as if fully set forth herein.

During the relevant period, an attorney-client relationship existed between DJSPA and GMACM.

DJSPA, including its attorneys individually, owed a duty of professional care to GMACM with respect to the legal services provided by DJSPA, including the duty to comply with all applicable Rules Regulating the Florida Bar, including: (1) the duty to control the law firm‟s workload so that each matter can be handled for the client adequately and within the accepted standard of professional care for a law firm in the State of Florida in accordance with Florida Bar Rule 4-1.3; (2) the duty to take reasonable measures to ensure that non-lawyer conduct is compatible with professional obligations of the lawyer in accordance with Florida Bar Rule 4-5.3; (3) the duty to keep a client reasonably informed and to explain a matter to the client to the extent reasonably necessary for the client to make informed decisions about the lawyer‟s professional handling of the client‟s matters in accordance with Florida Bar Rule 4-1.4; (4) the duty to deal honestly with third parties when acting on behalf of the client in accordance with Florida Bar Rule 4-4.1; and (5) the duty not to engage in conduct otherwise involving dishonesty or misrepresentation in accordance with Florida Bar Rule 4-8.4.

DJSPA negligently, recklessly and/or wantonly breached its professional duties owing to GMACM by, among other things:

(i) causing and/or permitting DJSPA‟s employees to execute, witness and/or notarize assignments of mortgage that were back-dated;

(ii) causing and/or permitting DJSPA‟s employees to witness and/or notarize assignments of mortgages, affidavits of indebtedness and/or other affidavits on a daily basis prior to and without actually witnessing execution of the document by the person whose signature was to be witnessed and/or notarized;

(iii) causing and/or permitting DJSPA‟s employees to prepare and execute affidavits of indebtedness for submission to the foreclosure court that failed to follow appropriate professional practices and procedures;

(iv) causing and/or permitting DJSPA‟s employees to sign the name of another person on various foreclosure-related documents without any indication of that fact on the documents;

(v) charging GMACM substantial fees and costs for legal services that DJSPA knew or should have known was not in accordance with the terms and conditions of its agreement with GMACM and that fell below the minimum standard of professional care owed by DJSPA to GMACM;

(vi) providing legal work on behalf of GMACM as to various files assigned to DJSPA that fell below the applicable standard of care; and

(vii) committing acts or omissions that have subjected GMACM to claims, losses and liabilities of third-parties.

Full answer and counter claim below…



h/t Michael


Answer and Counter Claims in David J. Stern v GMAC Mortgage

11 Responses to “Explosive | GMAC’s Answer and Counter Claims in David J. Stern v GMAC Mortgage”
  1. Nancy Drewe says:

    When homeowners insurance pushed on you, I’ve found the policy of HAZARD INSURANCE purchased and forced on you covers additional risks aside from inflating profits of the insurance company the condlomerate owns.

    Do you have an oil tank for example? They will claim the insurance coverage you have is inadequate….
    Was good enough when you were not in default.

    • pamelag says:

      no. i had plenty of coverage. you need 1 year prepaid in order to close on the property. loan was 7 months old when they filed…fraud and thievery. they were after PMI (fannie may). i asked fannie to please do a forensic audit which would have been simple (new loan). i told fannie on the phone and many letters…they won.

  2. lies is all they tell says:

    a little off topic but a much headed warning for everyone switching banks. even the tellers need money are stealing sad. hey i have a little reverse robbery story for everyone as wait for the phone to ring and do a police report. i left wells fargo bank and went to the local credit union. i had to deposit my pay check they do not have direct deposit must cost to much. i had sold some jewelry and had cash to deposit. i had 500$ cashe with me used a 20$ so kept the 80 $ in my purse and filled out the deposit slip filled in the check are and then counted my cash. i had 400$’s in 20’s to deposit. i used the drive through because i was still on shift at the hospital and had to get back. well this credit union has a screen like epcot/skype she said hi to me. what she should have done when she saw the cash was count it in front of me on the screen. no thinking i would be duped she walked away with the deposit and came back and told me there was only 300$ i said no way i sold my moms ring and know what o deposited and i went on about keeping the 80$ and depositing the 400$ i was so upset i went in the lobby and the bank manager was less then friendly . i was wearing my nurses scrubs even my tag fro work was still on my scrub top. i asked what do i have to lie for . i know how to count. something is very wrong here. .they had to count his and that and said an auditor will ocme out. now i have to do a police report to check out if the bank teller has a record. how awfull. maybe as she walked away she new there no cameras in a certain area and slipped the money in her pocket. her word against mine. how awful. i ask the manager why she didnt count the cash in front of me. she says because i used the drive through, i sad there is a screen to count. so lessons learned through this is do not go through the drive through ever with cash unless you can see the entire transaction in front of you. i asked to see the video and she refused to let me see it. this is my money how. upsetting and unsettling. any suggestions all. yes we are fighting foreclosure but there are so many eveils out there fighting against us. please becareful out there. the banks do not like to be robbed but when they do it its ok because they are the bank hmmmmmm sounds familiar

  3. lies is all they tell says:

    correct me if i am wrong. stern was paid “big” bucks by them all to lie for them. he new what he was doing and he would not get jail time for eit. they promised him. they paid him to leave the scene. it was part of their plan. so what is a lawsuit going to do???

  4. bolivershagnasty says:

    Does GMAC really think we don’t know they picked Stern as their attorney because they knew he was corrupt ahd/or corruptible? Did GMAC really not know Stern was manufacturing and forging documents? What a vat of BS. GMAC is equally complicit in the fraud committed by Stern. Hell, GMAC was on Stern’s case all the time, as was Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Chase and all of the other bankster clients, to foreclose more homes faster. The banksters set a quota for Stern and made sure he kept it. GMAC is kidding no one but themselves if they think we don’t know the truth about the fraudclosure — THE BANKS WERE THE “PRIME MOVERS” OF FRAUDCLOSURE. Yes, David Stern is the spawn of pondscum but GMAC is also a similar form of bacterial growth. GMAC should have no equitable interest against Stern since GMAC stands before the court with obviously unclean hands. This lawsuit is a load of effluvia, and how dare the banksters seek redress in the courts they tried to subvert to commit their wholesale fraud. I am so pissed off I feel like running amok and terrorizing a local branch of one of the big five banks. I have already unleashed a diatribe in the lobby of a Bank of America about what greedy, bloodsucking bastards they are, scaring the bank manager and customers. I can feel it coming; the uprising is imminent.

  5. yvonne says:

    I meant to say that Stern is a disposable pawn…another one bites the dust….

  6. yvonne says:

    Believe you me!!! This is all a huge SHAM and another psychological manipulation of those that were and are victims of GMACM…Jeffery Robosigner worked for GMAC…Lets not forget all the exposures to date…document them…they knew exactly what Stern was doing and I believe the temptation for Stern was too enticing….
    GMAC is now trying to see how to go back to those that they could not foreclose on and intimidating those that are at risk..Deutsche is a serious foe…but they will come crashing down big time…Everything they are accusing Stern of…they were in together….guess Stern is not a disposable pawn in this great game of chess…

    They are following closely how the laws that be are dealing with these issues and seeing that they have a chance to redeem themselves…and to become more creative in how they manufacture their new fraudulent docs…BEWARE ALL…

    Stern created some false notes that they recorded long after the law suit was filed and those were not able to be challenged since he stopped the foreclosure procedures so the banks are having attorneys review those docs and capitalizing on those…time will tell…if they do use those docs that are recorded (except for the ones that were ‘caught’) they will simply proceed with the same fraud…Your thoughts…

  7. pamelag says:

    gmac forced homeowners ins on me, altho i had my own ins, filed foreclosure when i was never in default. judge covered his ears and screamed ‘i don wanna hear it’. they won i lost.slow but sure their thievery is coming to the light and they will be punished. God Bless US All.

  8. Litgant says:

    Maybe Mrs Bondi and her new legal staff who are supposed to aggresively pursue foreclosure fraud will take all this information and act on it. But since I think she is a fraud controlling the AG office I predict she will do nothing and her staff will sit like frogs in a hail storm. I do not think her staff is qualified to pursue foreclosure fraud. I know she is not. She has not been in volved in a single foreclosure fraud case, even those of her family. She has avoided giving them any help the same as she has avoided helping anyone else in Florida. It will be interesting to see how this law suit by Sterns will play out. I think he needs to go buy his legal casket and have in gold on it: here lies the biggest lawyer shyster to ever live in Florida. Let GMACI do the graveside benediction.

    • bolivershagnasty says:

      Bondi thinks the Florida “Pill Mills” are far more important than the “Foreclosure Mills”. From the moment she took over from McCollum she has been completely silent about the rampant foreclosure fraud in Florida. There is only one solution: RECALL PAM BONDI. She is nothing but a functionary of the banksters.

  9. housemanrob says:

    What goes on here….thieves on both sides, with soldiers, battling it out?

Leave a Reply