OCC Date | US Lenders Review Thousands of Military Fraudclosures

US lenders review military foreclosures

Ten leading US lenders may have unlawfully foreclosed on the mortgages of nearly 5,000 active-duty members of the US military in recent years, according to data released by a federal regulator.

JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America this year reached legal settlements in which they agreed to pay damages to nearly 200 service members who claimed that their homes had been improperly seized.

Data released last week by the Treasury’s Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which regulates national banks, shows that 10 lenders – including BofA, but not JPMorgan, which was not part of the study – are reviewing nearly 5,000 foreclosures of homes belonging to service members and their families to see if they complied with the law.

Under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act of 2003, mortgage servicers have to follow special procedures when foreclosing on homes belonging to active-duty members of the armed forces and their families. For instance, there are restrictions on so-called default judgments, in which homes are seized after the borrower fails to appear in court.

Check out the rest here…
(Subscription Required)

 

4closureFraud.org

Comments
10 Responses to “OCC Date | US Lenders Review Thousands of Military Fraudclosures”
  1. Christie says:

    HEY everyone, I HOLD A COPY OF MERS MOST RECENT STOCKHOLDERS REPORT. MERS only ADMITS TO EVER TRANSACTING IN AL, DE, MASS, NJ, NY, VA and OHIO! THEY ARE REQUIRED TO LIST ARTICLES OF INC. on their report as well. HERE In Colorado, for example, MERS only registered for a short time July 27, 2009. CHECK YOUR DEEDS OF TRUST! MERS REGISTERED ONLY as a Foreign Entity.On MERS REPORT CT Corporation was removed as their registered agent and replaced by Genpac when RK ARNOLD resigned. Genpac is based out over the waters in Asia and Bahamas. Genpact registered agent is Walgreens! Now GO LOOK AT WHO IS THE TRUE BENEFICIARY OF YOUR DEED OF TRUST. Beneficiary NEVER CHANGED BUT the SERVICERS OF YOUR NOTE CONSTANTLY DID! EVERYONE should go back and REVIEW THE REMIC AND UCC EXPLAINED ONE MORE TIME! AGAIN ONCE THE DEED IS SEPERATED FROM THE NOTE, THEN IT CAN NOT BE REATTCHED! ASK YOUR SELF THIS: Why did MERS ever bother to register here in CO at all? Why did MERS ONLY REGISTER IN 7 STATES? MERS IS WHO SLANDERED YOUR TITLE! Stawiarski’s Minutes of the meetings report from MARCH 17, 2005, clearly shows all involved with MERS and everything was then fully discused at the Secretary Of States Office, on where, when and what counties MERS was going to be placed in. BUT MERS is on my deed of trust since September 17, 1999. SOMETHING IS NOT RIGHT WITH THIS WHOLE PICTURE! STAWIARSKI’S FIRM ONLY REGISTERED THROUGHOUT USA IN ALL THE NON-JUDICIAL STATES. WHY because they are by law not required to produce an orginal wet ink signature! A Bond for lost instrument is all they need to STEAL YOUR HOME! BINGO! Arkansas just reversed a foreclosure because MERS WAS NOT REGISTERED in Arkansas to conduct business. SEE NEIL GARFIELD’S BLOG. I THINK THAT THIS COURT CASE IN ARKANSAS SHOULD BE THE SET STANDARD FOR ALL FUTURE COURT CASES TO BE SET IN PLACE FOR EVERYONE ACROSS THE NATIONTHAT IS DEALING WITH MERS IN ALL THE NON JUDICIAL STATES! THANKS for taking the time to READ MY DISCOVERIES! 🙂

  2. Occupy is about truth~ says:

    I just received mail the other day about my mortgage. They are claiming to be part of an independent review board for the office of the Comptroller of the Currency. I got another one today on my other home as well. One is Chase and the other is GMAC. It says they are reviewing foreclosures from January 1, 2009 through Dec 31st 2010. The deadline for review is April 30th 2012 to return the paperwork. I am NOT in the Military. But from what I have gathered, from the domestic side, there are 14 banks involved in this Independent review. My concern is for the home i am currently in. I don’t want to bring attention to the fact that I am still living here. So that one I may return in April 2012, and the one that has already been foreclosed on, send that one in after I get all my notes together. I think I’ll include a photo of the locks they used to change the locks on my home while my daughter and I were still living there. -.-

    Anyone else get these letters? I’d love to hear some feedback on it.

    • i WOULD BE VERY CAREFUL TO DENIE YOU OWE THE ALLEGED DEBT AND OBJECT TO THEIR CLAIMS OF BEING A PARTY OF INTEREST AND FILL OUT WHAT YOU NEED TO WITH THE DEMANDS TO PROVE THEIR RIGHT REPRESENT. THEN — USE THIS INFO TO HELP YOU.

      The Market Oracle HomeNewsletter
      RSS FeedHelp
      FAQTerms of UsePrivacy PolicySubmit ArticlesAbout
      Custom Search .

      Commodities
      Companies
      Consumer Watch
      Currencies
      Economics
      Elliott Waves
      Election Oracle
      Housing Markets
      Interest Rates
      Investor Education
      Market Oracle TV
      Personal Finance
      Politics & Social
      Portfolio Building
      Stock & Financial Markets

      Authors Archive
      Featured Analysis
      Most Popular
      Best Analysis Archive
      Recommended Reading

      ——————————————————————————–

      Best of the Week
      Most Popular
      1.On the Verge of Huge Stock Market Crash, Implications For Gold and Silver – Willem_Weytjens
      2.The European Bank Run Downward Spiral, Final Phase Of Goldman’s World Domination Plan – PhilStockWorld
      3.UK Government Sells Northern Rock for Approx £20 billion Loss to Virgin Money – Nadeem_Walayat
      4.Is Gold Still the Answer for Investors? – Bud Conrad
      5.Global Balance Sheet Depression Making Second More Dangerous Credit Crisis Inevitable – Simon Hunt
      6.Big Banks, Big Governments, Big Debts, Let the Sucker Go Down – Gary_North
      7.Euro-zone Will Print or Perish – John_Mauldin
      8.Baby Boomer Blindness, Forget Retirement – Gary_North
      9.Hang onto Gold But Brace for Potential Price Volatility Ahead – William_Bancroft
      10.The Electric Car Paradox: Can We Switch To Electric Cars ? – Andrew_McKillop
      Last 5 Days Analysis
      Gold Back above $1700, Investors Pricing In “Euro Endgame” – 28th Nov – 11
      Venezuela Repatriates ‘People’s Gold’ Due to Gold’s ‘Historic’, ‘Symbolic’ & ‘Financial’ Value – 28th Nov – 11
      Eurozone Being Swallowed by Expanding Debt Black Holes, Mega Bond Market Profits and Default Booms – 28th Nov – 11
      Bankers Have Seized Control of Europe, Goldman Sachs Has Taken Over – 28th Nov – 11
      U.S. Foreclosure Fraud in a Nutshell, How Average Joe’s Home Was Stolen – 28th Nov – 11
      Which Fiat Currency Behaves Most Like Gold? – 28th Nov – 11
      Stock Market Wave 3 or Wave 5 Correction? – 28th Nov – 11
      Will Gold and Stocks Christmas Rally Be Like 2007 and 2008? – 27th Nov 11
      American’s Comfortably Numb on the Highway to Economic Collapse – 27th Nov 11
      New Chaos And Old Versailles: Is This Guided History ? – 27th Nov 11
      A Glimpse Into The Future Of The Stock Market And Dollar – 27th Nov 11
      Stock Market Downtrend Continues – 27th Nov 11
      When Even Germany Fails, Europe’s Inverted Yield Curves – 27th Nov 11
      Next Stop The Sustainable Society – 26th Nov 11
      Stock Market Bears Still In Control – 26th Nov 11
      European Banking Exposure to Bankrupt PIIGS Will Weigh on Financial Markets 2012 – 26th Nov 11
      The Hallmark of the Fed is Duplicity, or, What’s Risky is Safe – 26th Nov 11
      Energy And Commodities – The Coming Supply Threat – 26th Nov 11
      How Far Will the Stocks Bear Market Fall During the 2012? – 26th Nov 11
      The Secular Stocks Bear Market and Gold’s A-Wave Trend Forecast – 25th Nov 11
      The Ready Gold Bullion Boys – 25th Nov 11
      Europe’s Red Tape Blues – 25th Nov 11
      Stocks Bear Market Seasonals – 25th Nov 11
      Stock, Gold, and Bond Markets Holiday Observations – 25th Nov 11
      Gold Triple Play – Volatility, Currencies and Europe – 25th Nov 11
      Gold and Currency Wars as Russia Adds 19.5 Tonnes to Reserves in October Alone – 25th Nov 11
      Gold Falls on ‘Black Friday’ – 25th Nov 11
      End Of The Road For Kyoto – 25th Nov 11
      Stock Market End of Year Trading Strategies, Tax Loss Selling, Santa Claus Rally and January Effect – 25th Nov 11
      Could Climate Change Be The Next Catastrophic Tail-Risk-Penny To Drop? – 25th Nov 11
      Beginning of New Credit Crunch, Trouble Ahead for Global Economy – 25th Nov 11
      Low Carbon Sustainable Means a Post Industrial Future – 25th Nov 11
      Stock Market Breaks Support, Heading Lower – 25th Nov 11
      Hang onto Gold But Brace for Potential Price Volatility Ahead – 24th Nov 11
      Run Eurozone Banking System and Debt Markets has Started – 24th Nov 11
      Gold Price Going to Fall to $1,500? – 24th Nov 11
      What is Good for EU is Bad for Germany? Euro-zone Debt Crisis Intermarket Views – 24th Nov 11
      Stock and Financial Markets Thanksgiving Thoughts – 24th Nov 11
      Big Banks, Big Governments, Big Debts, Let the Sucker Go Down – 24th Nov 11
      Silver Margin Requirements: How the CME System Increases Price Volatility – 24th Nov 11
      China Economy Will Collapse By The End Of 2011 – 24th Nov 11
      Gold Stocks Due for a Breakout Soon – 24th Nov 11
      The Money Crisis’ First Blush, The Gold Pool Debate – 24th Nov 11
      Gold, U.S. Dollar, U.S. Treasuries, & China: Contrarian Investor Opportunities? – 24th Nov 11
      Jim Chanos on Chinese Economy and If He Will Cover His Short Positions – 23rd Nov 11
      Gold Slides as Euro Falls after “Disastrous” German Bond Auction – 23rd Nov 11
      Gold Supported as Eurozone Contagion Deepens After Disastrous German Auction – 23rd Nov 11
      Stocks Bear Market Focus Point: The Nasdaq 100 Leaders’ Indices – Weighted Interpretations – 23rd Nov 11
      Gerald Celente Loses Six Figures in MF Global Bankruptcy, Investors Beware – 23rd Nov 11 – GoldSilver
      Gerald Celente Loses Six Figures in MF Global Bankruptcy, Investors Beware – 23rd Nov 11
      An Inside Look at Europe’s Energy Challenges – 23rd Nov 11
      The Coming Global Financial Collapse Quotes That Will Make Your Hair Stand Up – 23rd Nov 11
      Understand Everything Fundamentally, The entropic force is fundamental – 23rd Nov 11
      Stock Market Making Lower Lows – 23rd Nov 11
      Stock Market Set to Start the Strongest Part of the Current Decline – 23rd Nov 11
      We Are All Keynesians Now – Except Me – 23rd Nov 11
      Robert Prechter on the importance of Keeping Your Money Safe in a Stocks Bear Market Environment – 23rd Nov 11
      Horrible Bosses, Pitchforks & Torches – 23rd Nov 11
      U.S. Going into Double Dip Recession, Pimco’s El-Erian Calls U.S. Economy ‘Terrifying’ – 23rd Nov 11
      The Silver Market Lacks Integrity – 23rd Nov 11
      Is Gold Still the Answer for Investors? – 22nd Nov 11
      Gold Falls Again on Options Expiry, Supported by Global Debt Crisis & Iranian Oil Jitters – 22nd Nov 11
      The Super-Committee is Dead, Long Live the Debt! – 22nd Nov 11
      Greece High Flying Drachma – 22nd Nov 11
      Syria, Iran and the Balance of Power in the Middle East – 22nd Nov 11
      China Changing the Global Gold Market – 22nd Nov 11
      Financial System Doomsday, What Happens If the Eurozone Breaks Up? – 22nd Nov 11
      Perfect Storm, European Banks Heading for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy – 22nd Nov 11
      Has the Kiwi Dollar Hit Bottom? – 22nd Nov 11
      Russell Napier on Generational Cycles, Stocks Bear Market Bottoms and West Vs. East – 22nd Nov 11
      Paper Banknotes and the Indebting Of Nations, Banking, War And Bankruptcy – 22nd Nov 11
      MF Global Revelations Keep Getting Worse – 22nd Nov 11
      Global Balance Sheet Depression Making Second More Dangerous Credit Crisis Inevitable – 22nd Nov 11
      Gold and Stock Market Trading Surrounded by European Sovereign Debt Crisis Risk – 21st Nov 11
      Gold Takes Another Step Towards Reserve Currency Status? – 21st Nov 11
      Gold Down along with Stocks on Potential Failure of Congressional Committe – 21st Nov 11
      US $15 Trillion National Debt ‘Supercommittee’ Impasse Supports Gold – 21st Nov 11
      Stock Market Extreme Over Valuation Warning – 21st Nov 11
      U.S. Defense Stocks Under Fire From Super Committee Budget Cuts – 21st Nov 11
      PepsiCo the Perfect Buy-and-Hold Investment – 21st Nov 11
      The Goldman Sachs Rule: Don’t Let This Puppet Master Pull Your Strings – 21st Nov 11
      Currency Markets Start Week on Back Foot – 21st Nov 11
      Baby Boomer Blindness, Forget Retirement – 21st Nov 11
      Global Systemic Crisis: Decimation of the Western Banks – 21st Nov 11
      European ERM 1992 Currency Crisis Replay, Government Bond Interest Rates Come Full Circle – 21st Nov 11
      Gold and Silver Precious Metal Charts Point to Higher Prices – 21st Nov 11
      Stock Market Sitting on Nothing But Air, Dollar About to Breakout? – 21st Nov 11
      What are the Consequences of a Eurozone Break-up? – 21st Nov 11
      Why Silver For A Monetary Collapse? – 21st Nov 11
      Stock Market Still Consolidating? – 21st Nov 11

      Free Instant Analysis

      ——————————————————————————–
      Market Oracle FREE Newsletter
      Subscribe Now

      U.S. Foreclosure Fraud in a Nutshell, How Average Joe’s Home Was Stolen
      Politics / US Housing
      Nov 28, 2011 – 02:11 AM

      By: LewRockwell

      Bill Butler writes: The untold story in the foreclosure crisis unfolding across America is that, following a foreclosure perpetrated by one of the October 2008 Bailout Banks (e.g. Bank of America, Citibank, JPMorgan, Wells Fargo) Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac suddenly appear as the record owner of Average Joe’s home. These federal government sponsored entities then go into local housing court and get a court order authorizing them to evict Joe. If Joe resists, these supposedly charitable institutions obtain a writ ordering the local sheriff to forcibly remove Joe from his home.

      Newt Gingrich recently admitted to accepting $1.8 million from Freddie Mac ($25,0000 to $30,000 a month during one span of time) for advising this proto-fascist entity. Gingrich claims that he supports Fannie and Freddie because he believes the federal government “should have programs to help low income people acquire the ability to buy homes.” But Fannie and Freddie don’t do this and never have. When government “helps” someone by subsidizing the purchase of something (through easy credit or lower-than-market rates), it makes that something more expensive. Helping someone buy something that is overpriced because of your help is not help. Fannie/Freddie subsidies not only hurt the low income people they intend to help, they hurt everyone by subsidizing, and therefore distorting, the entire housing market. Fannie/Freddie’s charity has now taken a dark turn. Like their Depression-era New Deal predecessor the Regional Agricultural Credit Corp., Fannie/Freddie are now repossessing homes at an increasing and alarming rate.

      Mr. Gingrich either does not understand economics – government subsidies make things more expensive, not less expensive, and therefore hurt their intended beneficiaries – or he is a vain, selfish, and cynical man with no interest in actually helping his neighbor.

      You decide.

      THE OCTOBER 2008 BAILOUT PAID OFF THE HOLDERS OF MORTGAGE BACKED SECURITES AND DERIVATIVE INSUREDS

      The facts indicate that the Federal Reserve “printed” at least 16 trillion dollars as part of the 2008 bailouts. The bigger questions, however, who got it, why and what did the Fed get in return? The Fed doesn’t just print money. It prints money to buy stuff. Most often this is U.S. Treasuries. That changed in October of 2008. In and after October 2008 the Fed printed new money to buy mortgage-backed securities (MBS) that were defaulting at a rapid rate. Want proof? Here is a link to the Federal Reserve balance sheet which shows that the Fed is holding over a trillion dollars in mortgage backed securities that it began acquiring in 2008.

      Why is the Federal Reserve holding all these MBS? Because when “the market” collapsed in September of 2008, what really collapsed is the Fannie/Freddie/Wall Street mortgage “daisy chain” securitization scheme. As increasing numbers of MBS went into default, the purchasers of derivatives (naked insurance contracts betting on MBS default) began filing claims against the insurance writers (e.g. AIG) demanding payment. This started in February 2007 when HSBC Bank announced billions in MBS losses, gained momentum in June of 2007 when Bear Stearns announced $3.8 billion in MBS exposure in just one Bear Stearns fund, and further momentum with the actual collapse of Bear Stears in July and August of 2007. By September of 2008, the Bear Stearns collapse proved to be the canary in the coal mine as the claims on off-balance sheet derivatives became the cascading cross defaults that Alan Greenspan warned could collapse the entire Western financial system.

      Part of what happened in October 2008 is that the Federal Reserve paid AIG’s and others’ derivative obligations to the insureds (pension funds, hedge funds, major banks, foreign banks) who held the naked insurance contracts guaranteeing Average Joe’s payments. To understand this, imagine that a cataclysmic event occurred in the U.S. that destroyed nearly every car in the U.S. and further that Allstate insured all of these cars. That is what happened to AIG. When the housing market collapsed and borrowers began defaulting on their securitized loans, AIG’s derivative obligations exceeded its ability (or willingness) to pay. So the Fed stepped in as the insurer of last resort and bailed out AIG (and probably others). When an insurer pays on a personal property claim, it has “subrogation” rights. This means when it pays it has the right to demand possession of the personal property it insured or seek recovery from those responsible for the loss. In Allstate’s case this is wrecked cars. In the case of AIG and the Fed, it is MBS. That is what the trillions of MBS on the Fed’s balance sheet represent: wrecked cars that Fannie and Freddie are now liquidating for scrap value.

      Thank you Mr. Gingrich. Great advice.

      BUT FANNIE/FREDDIE WASN’T MY LENDER AND WASN’T MY MORTGAGEE, SO HOW CAN THEY TAKE MY HO– USE?

      To understand how it came to be that the Fed has paid Average Joe’s original actual lender (the MBS purchaser) and now Fannie and Freddie are trying to take Joe’s home, you first have to understand some mortgage law and securitization basics.

      The Difference Between Notes and Mortgages

      When you close on the purchase of your home, you sign two important documents. You sign a promissory note that represents your legal obligation to pay. You sign ONE promissory note. You sign ONE promissory note because it is a negotiable instrument, payable “to the order of” the “lender” identified in the promissory note. If you signed two promissory notes on a $300,000 loan from Countrywide, you could end up paying Countrywide (or one of its successors) $600,000.

      At closing you also sign a Mortgage (or a Deed of Trust in Deed of Trust States). You may sign more than one Mortgage. You may sign more than one Mortgage because it does not represent a legal obligation to pay anything. You could sign 50 Mortgages relating to your $300,000 Countrywide loan and it would not change your obligation. A Mortgage is a security instrument. It is security and security only. Without a promissory note, a mortgage is nothing. Nothing.

      You “give” or “grant” a mortgage to your original lender as security for the promise to pay as represented by the promissory note. In real estate law parlance, you “give/grant” the “mortgage” to the “holder” of your “promissory note.”

      If you question my bona fides in commenting on the important distinction between notes and mortgages, I know what I am talking about. I tried and won perhaps the first securitized mortgage lawsuit ever in the country in First National Bank of Elk River v. Independent Mortgage Services, 1996 WL 229236 (Minn. Ct. App. No. DX-95-1919).

      In FNBER v. IMS a mortgage assignee (IMS) claimed the ownership of two mortgages relating to loans (promissory notes) held by my client, the First National Bank of Elk River (FNBER). After a three-day trial where IMS was capably represented by a former partner of the international law firm Dorsey & Whitney, my client prevailed and the Court voided the recorded mortgage assignments to IMS. My client prevailed not because of my great skill but because it had actual, physical custody of the original promissory notes (payable to the order of my client) and had been “servicing” (receiving payments on) the loans for years notwithstanding the recorded assignment of mortgage. The facts at trial showed that IMS rejected the loans because they did not conform to their securitization parameters. In short, IMS, as the “record owner” of the mortgages without any provable connection to the underlying notes, had nothing. FNBER, on the other hand, had promissory notes payable to the order of FNBER but did not have “record title” to the mortgages. FNBER was the winner because its possession of and entitlement to enforce the notes made it the “legal owner” of the mortgages.

      The lesson: if you have record title to a mortgage but cannot show that you have possession of and/or entitlement to enforce the promissory notes that the mortgage secures, you lose.

      This is true for 62 million securitized loans.

      Securitization – The Car That Doesn’t Go In Reverse

      There is nothing per se illegitimate about securitization. The law has for a long time recognized the rights of a noteholder to sell off pro-rata interests in the note. So long as the noteholder remains the noteholder he has the right to exercise rights in a mortgage (take the house) when there is a default on the note. Securitization does not run afoul of traditional real estate and foreclosure law when the mortgage holder can prove his connection to the noteholder.

      But modern securitization doesn’t work this way.

      The “securitization” of a “mortgage loan” today involves multiple parties but the most important parties and documents necessary for evaluating whether a bank has a right to foreclose on a mortgage are:

      (1) the Borrower (Average Joe);

      (2) the Original Lender (Mike’s Baitshop and Mortgages or Bailey Savings & Loan – whoever is across the closing table from Joe);

      (3) the Original Mortgagee (could be Mike’s B&M, but could be anyone, including Fannie’s Creature From the Black Lagoon, the mortgagee “nominee” MERS);

      (4) the “Servicer” of the loan as identified in the PSA (usually a Bank or anyone with “servicer” in its name, the entity to whom Joe makes his payments);

      (5) the mortgage loan “pooling and servicing agreement” (PSA) and the PSA Trust created by the PSA;

      (6) the “PSA Trust” is the “special purpose entity” created by the PSA. The PSA Trust is the heart of the PSA. It holds all securitized notes and mortgages and also sells MBS securities to investors; and

      (7) the “Trustee” of the PSA Trust is the entity responsible for safekeeping of Joe’s promissory note and mortgage and the issuer of MBS.

      The PSA Servicer is essentially the Chief Operating Officer and driver of the PSA. Without the Servicer, the securitization car does not go. The Servicer is the entity to which Joe pays his “mortgage” (really his note, but you get it) every month. When Joe’s loan gets “sold” multiple times, the loan is not actually being sold, the servicing rights are. The Servicer has no right, title or interest in either the promissory note or the mortgage. Any right that the Servicer has to receive money is derived from the PSA. The PSA, not Joe’s Note or Joe’s Mortgage, gives the Servicer the right to take droplets of cash out of Joe’s monthly payments before distributing the remainder to MBS purchasers.

      The PSA Trustee and the sanctity of the PSA Trust are vitally important to the validity of the PSA. The PSA promoters (the usual suspects, Goldman Sachs, Lehman Bros., Merrill, Deutchebank, Barclays, etc.) persuaded MBS purchasers to part with trillions of dollars based on the idea that they would ensure that Joe’s Note would be properly endorsed by every person or entity that touched it after Joe signed it, that they would place Joe’s Note and Joe’s Mortgage in the vault-like PSA Trust and the note and mortgage would remain in the PSA Trust with a green-eyeshade, PSA Trustee diligently safekeeping them for 30 years. Further, the PSA promoters hired law firms to persuade the MBS purchasers that the PSA Trust, which is more than100 percent funded (that is, oversold) by the MBS purchasers, was the real owner of Joe’s Note and Joe’s Mortgage and that the PSA Trust, using other people’s money, had purchased or soon would purchase thousands of similar notes and mortgages in a “true sale” in accordance with FASB 140.

      The PSA does not distribute pool proceeds that can be tracked pro rata to identifiable loans. In this respect, in the wrong hands (e.g. Countrywide’s Angelo Mozilo) PSAs have the potential to operate like a modern “daisy chain” fraud whereby the PSA oversells the loans in the PSA Trust, thus defrauding the MBS investors. The PSA organizers also do not inform Joe at the other end of the chain that they have sold his $300,000 loan for $600,000 and that the payout to the MBS purchasers (and other derivative side-bettors) when Joe defaults is potentially multiples of $300,000.

      The PSA organizers can cover the PSA’s obligations to MBS purchasers through derivatives. Derivatives are like homeowners’ fire insurance that anyone can buy. If everyone in the world can bet that Joe’s home is going to burn down and has no interest in preventing it, odds are that Joe’s home will burn down. This is part of the reason Warren Buffet called derivatives a “financial weapon of mass destruction.” They are an off-balance sheet fiat money multiplier (the Fed stopped reporting the explosive expansion of M3 in 2006 most likely because of derivatives and mortgage loan securitization fraud), and create incentive for fraud. On the other end of the chain, Joe has no idea that the “Lender” across the table from him has no skin in the game and is more than likely receiving a commission for dragging Joe to the table.

      A serious problem with modern securitization is that it destroys “privity.” Privity of contract is the traditional notion that there are two parties to a contract and that only a party to the contract can enforce or renegotiate that contract. Put simply, if A and B have a contract, C cannot enforce B’s rights against A (unless A expressly agrees or C otherwise shows a lawful agency relationship with B). The frustration for Joe is that he cannot find the other party to his transaction. When Joe talks to his “bank” (really his Servicer) and tries to renegotiate his loan, his bank tells him that a mysterious “investor” will not approve. He can’t do this because they don’t exist, have been paid or don’t have the authority to negotiate Joe’s loan.

      Joe’s ultimate “investor” is the Fed, as evidenced by the trillion of MBSs on its balance sheet. Although Fannie/Freddie purportedly now “own” 80 percent of all U.S. “mortgage loans,” Fannie/Freddie are really just the Fed’s repo agents. Joe has no privity relationship with Fannie/Freddie. Fannie, Freddie and the Fed know this. So they are using the Bailout Banks to frontrun the process – the Bailout Bank (who also have no cognizable connection to the note and therefore no privity relationship with Joe) conducts a fraudulent foreclosure by creating a “record title” right to foreclose and, when the fraudulent process is over, hands the bag of stolen loot (Joe’s home) to Fannie and Freddie.

      Record Title and Legal Title

      Virtually all 62 million securitized notes define the “Noteholder” as “anyone who takes this Note by transfer and who is entitled to receive payment under this Note…” Very few of the holders of securitized mortgages can establish that they both hold (have physical possession of) the note AND are entitled to receive payments on the notes. For whatever reason, if a Bailout Bank has possession of an original note, it is usually endorsed payable to the order of some other (often bankrupt) entity.

      If you are a Bailout Bank and you have physical possession of an original securitized note, proving that you are “entitled to receive payment” on the note is nearly impossible. First, you have to explain how you obtained the note when it should be in the hands of a PSA Trustee and it is not endorsed by the PSA Trustee. Second, even if you can show how you obtained the note, explaining why you are entitled to receive payments when you paid nothing for it and when the Fed may have satisfied your original creditors is a very difficult proposition. Third, because a mortgage is security for payments due to the noteholder and only the noteholder, if you cannot establish legal right to receive payments on the note but have a recorded mortgage all you have is “record” title to the mortgage. You have the “power” to foreclose (because courts trust recorded documents) but not necessarily the legal “right” to foreclose. Think FNBER v. IMS.

      The “robosigner” controversy, reported by 60 Minutes months ago, is a symptom of the banks’ problem with “legal title” versus “record title.” The 60 Minutes reports shows that Bailout Banks are hiring 16 year old, independent contractors from Backwater, Georgia to pose as vice presidents and sign mortgage assignments which they “record” with local county recorders. This is effective in establishing the Bailout Banks’ “record title” to the “mortgage.” Unlike real bank vice presidents subject to Sarbanes-Oxley, Backwater 16-year olds have no reason to ask: “Where is the note?”; “Is my bank the noteholder?”; or “Is my Bank entitled to receive payments on the note?”

      The Federal Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision agree with this analysis. In April of 2011 the OCC and OTS reprimanded the Bailout Banks for fraudulently foreclosing on millions of Average Joe’s:

      …without always ensuring that the either the promissory note or the mortgage document were properly endorsed or assigned and, if necessary, in the possession of the appropriate party at the appropriate time…

      The OCC and OTS further found that the Bailout Banks “failed to sufficiently oversee outside counsel and other third-party providers handling foreclosure-related services.”

      Finally, Bailout Banks consented to the OCC and OTS spanking by admitting that they have engaged in “unsafe and unsound banking practices.”

      In these “Order and Consent Decrees,” the OCC and the OTS reprimanded all of the usual suspects: Bank of America, Citibank, HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, MetLife, MERSCorp, PNC Bank, US Bank, Wells Fargo, Aurora Bank, Everbank, OneWest Bank, IMB HoldCo LLC, and Sovereign Bank.

      Although the OCC and OTS Orders are essentially wrist slaps for what is a massive fraud, these orders at least expose some truth. In response to the OCC Order, the Fannie/Freddie-created Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS), changed its rules (see Rule 8) to demand that foreclosing lawyers identify the “noteowner” prior to initiating foreclosure proceedings.

      NEWT’S FANNIE/FREDDIE ENDGAME: PLANTATION USA

      Those of us fighting the banks began to see a disturbing trend starting about a year ago. Fannie and Freddie began showing up claiming title and seeking to evict homeowners from their homes.

      The process works like this, using Bank of America as an example. Average Joe had a securitized loan with Countrywide. Countrywide, which might as well have been run by the Gambino family with expertise in “daisy chain” fraud, never followed the PSA, did not care for the original notes and almost never deposited the original notes in the PSA Trust. Countrywide goes belly up. Bank of America (BOA) takes over Countrywide in perhaps the worst deal in the history of corporate America, acquiring more liabilities than assets. Bank of America realizes that it has acquired a big bag of dung (no notes = no mortgages = big problem) and so sets up an entity called “BAC Home Loans LLP” whose general partner is another BOA entity.

      The purpose of these BOA entities is to execute the liquidation the Countrywide portfolio as quickly as possible and, at the same time, isolate the liability to two small BOA subsidiaries. BOA uses BAC Home Loans LLP to conduct the foreclosure on Joe’s home. BAC Home Loans LLP feeds local foreclosure lawyers phony, robosigned documents that establish an “of record” transfer of the Countrywide mortgage to BAC Home Loans LLP. BAC Home Loans LLP, “purchases” Joe’s home at a Sheriff’s sale by bidding Joe’s debt owed to Countrywide. BAC Home Loans LLP does not have and cannot prove any connection to Joe’s note so BAC Home Loans LLP quickly deeds Joe’s property to Fannie and Freddie.

      When it is time to kick Joe out of his home, Fannie Mae shows up in the eviction action. When compelled to show its cards, Fannie will claim title to Joe’s house via a “quit claim deed” or an assignment of the Sheriff’s Certificate of sale. Adding insult to injury, while Joe may have spent years trying to get BOA to “modify” his loan, and may have begged BOA for the right to pay BOA $1000 a month if only BOA will stop the foreclosure, Fannie now claims that BOA deeded Joe’s property to Fannie for nothing. That right, nothing. All county recorders require that a real estate purchaser claim how much they paid for the property to determine the tax value. Fannie claims on these recorded documents that it paid nothing for Joe’s home and, further, falsely claims that it is exempt because it is a US government agency. It isn’t. It is a government sponsored entity that is currently in conservatorship and run by the US government.

      Great advice Newt.

      CONCLUSION

      It is apparent that the US government is so broke that it will do anything to pay its bills, including stealing Average Joe’s home.

      That’s change that both Barack Obama and Newt Gingrich can believe in.

      APPENDIX

      More and more courts are agreeing that the banks “inside” the PSA do not have legal standing (they have no skin in the game and so cannot show the necessary “injury in fact”), are not “real parties in interest” (they cannot show that they followed the terms of the PSA or are otherwise “entitled to enforce” the note) and that there are real questions of whether any securitized mortgage can ever be properly perfected.

      The banks’ weakness is exposed most often in bankruptcy courts because it is there that they have to show their cards and explain how they claim a legal right, rather than the “of record” right, to foreclose the mortgage. More and more courts are recognizing that, without proof of ownership of the underlying note, holding a mortgage means nothing.

      The most recent crack in the Banks’s position is evidenced by the federal Eight Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in In Re Banks, No. 11-6025 (8th Cir., Sept. 13, 2011). In Banks, a bank attempted to execute a foreclosure within a bankruptcy case. The bank had a note payable to the order of another entity; that is, the foreclosing bank was “Bank C” but had a note payable to the order of “Bank B” and endorsed in blank by Bank B. The bank, Bank C, alleged that, because the note was endorsed in blank and “without recourse,” that it had the right to foreclose. The Court held that this was insufficient to show a sufficient chain of title to the note, reversed the lower court’s decision and remanded for findings regarding when and how Bank C acquired the note.

      See also, In Re Aagard, No. 810-77338-reg (Bankr. E.D.N.Y., Feb. 10, 2011) (Judge Grossman slams MERS as lacking standing, working as both principal and agent in same transaction, and exposes MERS’ alleged principal US Bank as unable to produce or provide evidence that it is in fact the holder of the note); In Re Vargas, No. 08-17036SB (Bankr. C.D. Cal., Sept. 30, 2008) (Judge Bufford correctly applied rules of evidence and held that MERS could not establish right to possession of the 83-year old Mr. Vargas’ home through the testimony of a low-level employee who had no foundation to testify about the legal title to the original note); In Re Walker, Bankr. E.D. Cal. No. 10-21656-E-11 (May 20, 2010) (holding that neither MERS nor its alleged principal could show that they were “real parties in interest” because neither could provide any evidence of the whereabouts of, much less legal title to, the original note); Landmark v.Kesler, 216 P.2d 158 (Kan. 2009) (in this case the Kansas Supreme Court provides the most cogent state court analysis of the problem created by securitization – the “splitting” of the note and the mortgage and the real party in interest and standing problems that the holder of the mortgage has when it cannot also show that it has clean and clear legal title to the note); U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n v. Ibanez, 941 NE 40 (Mass. 2011), (the Massachusetts Supreme Court denied two banks’ attempts to “quiet title” following foreclosure because the banks’ proffered evidence did not show ownership of the mortgages – or for that matter, the notes – prior to the Sheriff’s sale); and Jackson v. MERS, 770 N.W.2d 489 (Minn. 2009) (this federal-gun-to-the-head – certified question from federal court asking for state court blessing of its already decided ruling – to the Minnesota Supreme Court is most notable for the courageous dissent of NFL Hall of Fame player and only popularly elected Justice Alan Page who opined that MERS should pound sand and obey state recording standards).

      Bill Butler [send him mail] is a Minneapolis attorney and the owner of Butler Liberty Law.

      http://www.lewrockwell.com

      i AM NOT AN ATTORNEY I AM A PRO SE. IF YOU CAN FIND AN ATTOURNEY WHO GETS IT AND YOU CAN AFFORD ONE PLEASE GET AN ATTORNEY. I HOPE THIS HELPS YOU. NEVER ADMIT TO A IMPOSTER DEBT COLLECTOR AND THEY ALL ARE, THAT YOU IN ANYWAY OWE THIS DEBT. YOU DONT. FILL OUT THE DOC’S WITH THE IDEA YOU ARE TELLING YOUR STORY AND YOU DENIE YOU OWE THIS DEBT AND OBJECT TO ANY CLAIMS BY THEM OR ANYONE THAT THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO COLLECT THIS ALLEGED DEBT. IF THEY TRICK YOU INTO SAYING YOU OWE IT THEY CAN LEGALLY CLAIM YOU DO, WHEN YOU DONT.

      • SORRY I DONT KNOW HOW THE UPPER PART COPIED ON TO THIS. LOOK AT THE PART THAT IS CALLED HOW THEY STOLE JOES HOME.

      • lies is all they tell says:

        question i get debt collectio notices that say by reading this letter and not responding in 30 proves oyu owe the debt what is up with that??? these loans were all securitized

    • lies is all they tell says:

      my sister had a foreclosure 1/29/2009 by citicorp marshal watson foreclosure mill. brian bly the robo signer. she has not got ant letter yet . should she call ya think??? she was involved in a nice mortgage scam in south florida where she thought she was going to the a closing, selling he rhome to a mortgage broker and instead he quick claime dit from her then to 2 othe rpeople. the mortgage stayed in her name. then he got her in her new home in a subprime that adjusted 2 yrs later to her monthly salary that one foreclosed to. what they did should be high crimes and they should all go to jail yet they let scum bags stay free

      • YOU MUST ANSWER THESE DEBT COLLECTOR LETTERS AND TELL THEM YOU OBJECT TO THEIR CLAIMS AND DENIE YOU OWE THEM ANY ALLEGED DEBT, OR THEY CA N COME IN EVEN TO A COURT AND MAKE CLAIM YOU OWE THEM AND STEAL YOUR HO– USE. THEY ARE DEBT COLLECTORS TRYING TO FORM A FOUNDATION TO STEAL YOUR HOME. DONT LET THEM BUILD THAT FOUNDATION. SEND THEM CERTIFIED LETTERS OF YOUR OBJECTIONS TO THEM CLAIMING THEY HAVE ANY LEGAL MEANS TO COLLECT THIS ALLEGED DEBT. DENIE THERE IS ANY DEBT AND READ THE HOW THEY STOLE JOES HOME ABOVE AND — USE THIS FOR HELP TO DISTROY THESE IMPOSTERS. THEY ARE IMPOSTERS,PROBABLY WORKING FOR FANNIE MAE..

    • see says:

      Yes, I got one on Saturday. Not sure what to really do with it. It seems to me the questions they ask are to get info from the homeowner. I am wondering if the company doing the review has the complete file in my case the assignments, NOD–they did not include info the law says is needed, Notice of Trustee Sale–again important info required not included, the request to lift the BK stay with questionable documents signed by robo-signers to the letter from the sick a$$ attorneys that Fannie Mae unleashed to tell us we were ciminals because we were still in the house (we had an agreement with cash for keys). By the way Fannie Mae is not on any assigments, so at what point did they become the owner. They were listed as the investor according to the MERS website. Anyone know???

  3. lvent says:

    What a disgrace!

    • IT IS ALL A DISGRACE!!!! Our government, the banksters, all of it. Fannie and Freddie are a big part of the crime along with our government officials and to steal from our troops while they fight for our freedom is beyond the good humans ability to comprehend. The children and families living in the streets and cars. What kind of people can do this to others and justify their evil greed? There is no justification not ! NONE! They are evil!

Leave a Reply