The OCC Independent Review | Fraudclosure Review Application Tips & Traps

OCC Foreclosure Fraud Review Tips

First check your eligibility.

From the OCC Independent Review site, http://www.independentforeclosurereview.com/

Si usted habla español, tenemos representantes que pueden asistirle en su idioma.

Homeowners whose primary residence was part of a foreclosure action between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2010, and whose home loan was serviced by a participating servicer, may be eligible for an Independent Foreclosure Review.

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (federal bank regulators) have required an Independent Foreclosure Review by an independent consultant to identify eligible customers who may have been financially injured due to errors, misrepresentations or other deficiencies in their foreclosure process. If the review finds that financial injury occurred, the customer may receive compensation or other remedy.

To qualify, your mortgage loan would need to meet the initial eligibility criteria:

  • Your mortgage loan was serviced by one of the participating mortgage servicers.
  • Your mortgage loan was active in the foreclosure process between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2010.
  • The property was your primary residence.

Eligible customers will be mailed a letter by December 31, 2011 that explains the Independent Foreclosure Review process and a Request for Review Form that identifies some examples of situations that may have led to financial injury. The form must be completed and postmarked no later than April 30, 2012.

Julie Williams, First Senior Deputy Comptroller and Chief Counsel Office of the Comptroller of the Currency provided written and verbal testimony to Congress on December 13, 2011. She enumerated the faulty OCC Interdependent Foreclosure Fraud Review Process. Please read her testimony here.

Read all twenty-two items listed on page 13-15. Using the exact language, transcribe each and every item that fits your scenario.

~

Itemized list from testimony

  1. The borrower was not in default pursuant to the terms of the note and mortgage at the time the servicer initiated the foreclosure action.
  2. The servicer initiated foreclosure or conducted a foreclosure sale in advance of the time allowed for foreclosure under the terms of the note and mortgage or applicable state law.
  3. The borrower submitted payment to the servicer sufficient to cure the default pursuant tothe terms of the note and mortgage, but the servicer returned the payment incontravention of the terms of the note or mortgage, state or federal law, or the servicer’s stated policy covering payments when in default.
  4. The servicer misapplied borrower payments, did not timely credit borrower payments(including failure to properly account for funds in suspense), or did not correctly calculate the amount actually due from the borrower, in contravention of the terms of the note and mortgage, state or federal law, investor requirements, or the servicer’s stated policy covering application of payments.
  5. The borrower paid a fee or penalty that was impermissible.
  6. A deficiency judgment was obtained against the borrower that included the assessment of a fee or penalty that was impermissible.
  7. The servicer placed an escrow account on the mortgage and the placement resulted in monies paid by the borrower into escrow in contravention of the terms of the note or mortgage, state or federal law, or the servicer’s stated policy covering escrow accounts.
  8. The servicer placed insurance on the mortgage and the placement resulted in monies paid by the borrower towards insurance in contravention of the terms of the note or mortgage,state or federal law, or the servicer’s stated policy covering placed insurance.9.
  9. The servicer miscalculated the amount due on the mortgage and secured a judgment against the borrower for an amount greater than the borrower owed.
  10. A borrower’s remittance of funds to a third party acting on behalf of the servicer was no tcredited to the borrower’s account.
  11. The borrower was performing under the terms of an approved trial loan modification oran approved permanent loan modification, but the servicer proceeded to foreclosure incontravention of the terms of the modification offered by the servicer to the borrower.
  12. A borrower was denied a modification in contravention of the terms of the governing modification program or the servicer’s stated policy covering modifications.
  13. There is evidence that the borrower provided or made efforts to provide completed documentation necessary to qualify for a modification within the period such documentation was required to be provided by the governing modification program and the servicer denied the loan modification in contravention of the terms of the governing modification program or the servicer’s stated policy covering modifications
  14. The servicer initiated foreclosure or completed a foreclosure sale without providingadequate notice as required under applicable state law
  15. The servicer foreclosed on or sold real property owned by an active military servicemember in violation of SCRA.
  16. The servicer did not lower the interest rate on a mortgage loan entered into by a military servicemember, or by the service member and his or her spouse jointly, in accordance with the requirements of SCRA.
  17. The servicer failed to honor a borrower’s bona fide efforts to redeem a sale under applicable state law during the redemption period.
  18. The borrower was protected by the automatic stay under the bankruptcy code and a courthad not granted a request for relief from the automatic stay or other appropriate exceptionunder the bankruptcy code.
  19. The borrower was making timely pre-petition arrearage payments required under an approved bankruptcy plan and was current with their post-petition payments.
  20. The borrower purchased a payment protection plan; was or should have been receiving benefits under the plan; and those benefits were not applied pursuant to the contract.14
  21. The servicer was not the proper party, or authorized to act on behalf of the proper party,under the applicable state law to foreclose on the borrower’s home, and this resulted in or may result in multiple foreclosure actions or proceedings.22. The servicer failed to comply with applicable legal requirements, including those governing the form and content of affidavits, pleadings, or other foreclosure-related documents, where such failure directly contributed to: (a) the borrower paying fees,charges, or costs, or making other expenditures that otherwise would not have been paid or made; or (b) the initiation of a foreclosure action or proceeding against a borrower who otherwise would not have met the requirements for initiating such an action
  22. The servicer failed to comply with applicable legal requirements, including thosegoverning the form and content of affidavits, pleadings, or other foreclosure-relateddocuments, where such failure directly contributed to: (a) the borrower paying fees,charges, or costs, or making other expenditures that otherwise would not have been paidor made; or (b) the initiation of a foreclosure action or proceeding against a borrowerwho otherwise would not have met the requirements for initiating such an action.

Add details and documents that are specific to your case.

Don’t neglect other issues; escrow manipulation, misapplication of payments, and the recording/use of false/fraudulent/questionable/fabricated documents for the purpose of foreclosing.

Quote any applicable state statutes (ie: notarization procedures, felony recording false property records) that apply.

From the same Congressional hearing is full testimony of Alys Cohen from the National Consumer Law Review which provides more insight and pitfalls of the process here. A warning quote from her testimony may provide guidance on adding written language to the application that states one is explicitly refusing to waive rights in exchange for any available relief.

The consent orders and the foreclosure review process as enunciated to date lack the rigor and breadth to ensure that homeowners are protected during the review process. The process may also be affirmatively harmful. Homeowners could be required to waive their rights in exchange for any available relief. Homeowners may be discouraged from pursuing other avenues of saving their homes by their misplaced reliance on this process. If so, homeowners could ultimately lose their homes in exchange for the uncertain and limited compensation provided under the foreclosure reviews.

From the US Senate Banking Committee site on the December 13, 2011 hearing:

Helping Homeowners Harmed by Foreclosures: Ensuring Accountability and Transparency in Foreclosure Reviews

Housing, Transportation, and Community Development

Tuesday, December 13, 2011
02:30 PM – 04:30 PM
538 Dirksen Senate Office Building

VIDEO OF HEARING [click here to view archive webcast]

COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING, TRANSPORTATION, AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

Met in OPEN SESSION to conduct a hearing entitled “Helping Homeowners Harmed by Foreclosures: Ensuring Accountability and Transparency in Appeals.” The witness on Panel I will be: Ms. Julie Williams, First Senior Deputy Comptroller and Chief Counsel, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. The witnesses on Panel II will be: Ms. Alys Cohen, Staff Attorney, National Consumer Law Center; Mr. David Holland, Executive Vice President, Rust Consulting, Inc.; Mr. Paul Leonard, Vice President of Government Affairs, Housing Policy Council of the Financial Services Roundtable. Additional witnesses may be announced.

Witnesses

Panel 1

  • Honorable Julie Williams [view testimony]
    First Senior Deputy Comptroller and General Counsel
    Office of the Comptroller of the Currency

Panel 2

  • Ms. Alys Cohen [view testimony]
    Staff Attorney
    National Consumer Law Center
  • Mr. David Holland [view testimony]
    Executive Vice President
    Rust Consulting, Inc.
  • Mr. Paul Leonard [view testimony]
    Vice President of Government Affairs
    Housing Policy Council of the Financial Services Roundtable
  • Dr. Anthony B. Sanders [view testimony]
    Professor of Finance
    George Mason University School of Management
  • Ms. Ann M. Kenyon [view testimony]
    Partner
    Deloitte & Touche LLP
  • Mr. Konrad Alt [view testimony]
    Managing Director
    Promontory Financial Group, LLC

The OCC Press Release from Nov 2011 on the Independent Review process with links & phone numbers is here.

Dec 15, 2011 National Consumer Law Center press release demanding the reviews be removed from the OCC and taken over by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau here.

Please keep us updated. We are very interested in tracking and reporting about this process.

~

4closureFraud.org

Comments
13 Responses to “The OCC Independent Review | Fraudclosure Review Application Tips & Traps”
  1. Luis Soberanes says:

    I was doing a loan mod with WAMU then had to start again when it change to Chace , all the time I was dealing with Chace/Wamu a bank called Long Beach Mortgage kelp asking me if I wanted to Refi, thinking it was just junk mail I did not pay attention. then out of no were LBM sent me a letter of foreclosure . my question was and is still why are 2 bank after my house

  2. JUDY BROWN says:

    I HAVE RECENTLY LEARNED HOW THIS REVIEW PROCESS WORKS. I SENT MY DOCS TO RUST CONSULTING AND THEN THEY SEND THEM TO THE LENDER, IN MY CASE BOA. THEN THE BANK PULLS THE DOCS THEY WANT TO REVIEW ON THEIR SITE. THEY HIRED TEMPS FROM A TEMP AGENCY (ADDECCO OUT OF NJ) TO REVIEW THE FILES WITH ONLY 1 YEAR EXPERIENCE. THEY PAY THEM AND TRAIN THEM. THEIR IS NO CONSULTING FIRM ON SITE TO OVERSEE THE REVIEW. LOOKS LIKE THE BANKS ARE STILL SCREWING THE HOMEOWNER. DO YOU REALLY THINK THEY ARE GOING TO ASSIST IN MY MISTAKES THAT THEY DID AND PAY THE HOMEOWNER FOR DAMAGES

  3. Soooooo Many people do not realize they are all a victim of #21. MERS is not even registered in the state it was based out of not alone any other states, so like my sons if the debt collector claims they are foreclosing for MERS, they are unlawfully foreclosing due to MERS, Deutche Bank Nat’. Trust, RECONTRUST ans American Home Mortgage, BOA and BAC and most of them are not registered to do business in your state and have unlawfully foreclosed on most if not all mortgages. When they claim they are not subject to State Law because they are a National Bank, they are violating National Bank Law, There is a letter from the OCC dated January 14, 2005, that states the OCC beleives that neither 12 c.f.r.34.4 nor the National Bank Act preempts State Law. See Washington State V RECONTRUST and State of Delaware V. MERS, (Mers corp was based and incorporated in Delaware) and the same similar laws apply in every state that as a matter of law the foreclosure has unlawfully foreclosed on most if not all foreclosed homes. Read them and The REMIC’S HAVE FAILED THE REMICKS HAVE FAILED and the Oppenheim Report and “Wall street and the Financial Crisis; anatomy of a Financial Collaspe.” Check the state Corporations registered in your state. And the licensed financial , and or lending , and banks registered in your state. I will bet you dont find your foreclosing company listed. They have to pay up all taxes they did not pay and be current inorder to initiate foreclosing and they have to be registered to do business in your state at the initiation of the foreclosing. If not they are illegally foreclosing. I am not an attorney, I have just read for hours since Deutsch Bank and Chase pulled modification fraud on me. I am a Pro Se actually a Propria Persona. Look up Pro Se case law on the web. It is helpful.

    • see says:

      Shelly, as you may well know, MERS was registered as a corp in WA for a few months, from 6-09 to 9-09. So does that mean any assignments made out by VP of MERS and made outside of those dates may not be legal?

  4. notmyhomeyournot says:

    The feds have been throwing around phony money since 1963 and they still are, while we pay heavy prices for the corporations overcharged products. The corporations are running everything from the President down to the child protection agencies that take children from good homes on hearsay in petitions to give them the right to control the families and every aspect of family business. So why would this surprise you that they take homes whit nothing more then the assumption that the homeowners are deadbeats, and when that does not work they take away your job so you fall behind, but one way or other they will just steal everything whenever they want. Meanwhile they rob all the pensions and retirement funds so we have nothing to fight back with, while they take every penny from investors who have no idea they are holding an empty bag of monopoly money not worth anymore then the Federal Reserve Notes that they are printing. The President as being a Lawyer does have the evidence of fraud by the Fed and the Wall street gangsters, but refuses to go against the grain. He doesn’t want to get killed like JFK for closing the Fed down by printing our own money. President Kennedy had signed the bill to start printing our own currency again, and was killed just before it would have started, but Johnson took office and let the bill die, and to this day was not appealed, so I would think that the Federal Reserve could be closed down and made to give back all the value to the new American Dollar as the fraud has been going on for too many years.

  5. lvent says:

    This is a ruse….these crooks could have never been granted these foreclosures without committing fraud…if the FED via the OCC admits their banks that they own committed fraud and took away peoples homes illegally they are opening up a can of worms their cohorts and minions….monetary compensation for having your home stolen is unacceptable….give the stolen homes back and stop the fraudclosures…..!!!!

    • lvent says:

      People in many cases did not stand up for their property rights in court….I have seen it first hand in court….people are not showing up or trusting attorneys who are preying on fraudclosure victims and using what they do not know against them…too many homeowners are believing the lie that if you don’t pay the mortgsge you automatically lose….they signed the contract so they are screwed..that is not true..make them prove they own your loan….they cant…..

      • EM says:

        I filed a suit agains MERS, Everhome and Fannie Mae myself in GA Courts (Per Se). I went through the process and the judge still threw me out of court and they took my house. I just feel that this whole property ownership piece is a scam period. I am completing the review form in hopes of some help.

  6. Eugene Villarreal says:

    Servicer, Servicer, Servicer. We homeowners are Stupid, Stupid, Stupid to let the OCC and the government tells us to drink the Kool-Aid and don’t ask any questions. “The review is considered FINAL.”
    Just fill out the forms and drink.
    Where in the hell are the alleged lenders(true and current creditor, if it exists) to this party ? Ask yourself that question.

  7. leapfrog says:

    I’m going to borrow the words of “scraping_by,” a commenter on the Naked Capitalism site, who had this to say about these programs to “help” homeowners:

    “This puppet dance has the flavor of most anti-poverty and social help programs. It’s got the bureaucratic fire drill, arbitrary means testing, silly hoops for the undeserving benefitees to jump through, and more than a whiff of contempt for anyone who needs it. ”

    Just for fun, let’s throw in a dollop or two of the following: “program run by captured-regulators,” “pre-existing prejudice against applicants,” “nothing-backed ‘mortgage’ securities,” “bankster cronyism,” “REMIC fraud,” and “fraudulant title transfers”.

    • david black says:

      in the faq on the website it clearly states your home like mine can still get a review of your bad bs predatorly loans even though you are not in or have not been foreclosed on. even if you are totally up to date in your mortgage paymennts but you feel that you have been wronged. I called and the op agreed with me and sent me the form

      occ has ordered that the auditor rust consulting and deloitee haskins and sells cant talk to the homeowners and rust consulting testified to the banking committee in the senate and house the they must talk to the homeowners who are wronged or continue to be wronged like me

      this is nothing but a big coverup and deloitte is already being sued by a large company for not finding rampant fraud in their company as they were hired to do. not exactly the best company to hire and who hired them the occ and the fed reserve. same ole story. a big bad bunch of crooks are going to tell everybody is just imagining wrongdoing by these big banks

      best regards
      David
      im gooing to tell them to talk to my lawyer . who has alread y told my lenders attorney to fly a kite when they tried t o allegedly extort more m oney out of me to pay a non existent alleged default on my loan. and I and he proved that in writing. fortunately for me my case is before sechud donovan and president obama. I wrote them both and filed my mortgage discrimination complaint with them. we will see what happens.
      please sign my petitiion to hud for all of us to get restitution with U.S. Housing and Urban Development federal help against these crooke big banks and allegedly jaime dimon as well.

      http://www.change.org/petitions/homeowners-discrimination-petititions-to-us-federal-govt-hud-agency-for-bank-restitution

Leave a Reply