A Foreclosure Comedy | MERS, JPMORGAN, HOMECOMINGS vs BANK OF AMERICA, FLEET

MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC
REGISTRATION SYSTEMS,
INC., and HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL,
LLC.,
Plaintiffs-Respondents,
v.
AMBOY NATIONAL BANK, n/k/a/
AMBOY BANK, MAGDY OMAR, and
NASER BELOSA,
Defendants,
and
BANK OF AMERICA,
N.A., f/k/a FLEET BANK,
Defendant-Appellant.

In this appeal, we are required to determine whether a payee who rejects and returns a check to the payor has standing to hold a depositor bank liable for thereafter permitting a third party to fraudulently convert the proceeds of the check. Stated differently, we must decide whether the return of the check by the payee constituted an intentional and voluntary surrender of the instrument under N.J.S.A. 12A:3-604(a); and if such action does constitute a surrender, whether it revokes the payee’s standing to enforce payment of the check under N.J.S.A. 12A:3-420(a).

This dispute arose when homeowner Magdy Omar ostensibly sought to refinance an outstanding loan, which was originally issued in 2003 by Metro Center Mortgage, Inc., (Metro) and secured by a first-lien mortgage on real property Omar owned in the City of Bayonne. Metro named as nominee the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS). MERS then assigned the mortgage to JP Morgan, who designated Homecomings Financial Network, Inc. (Homecomings) as the servicer of the loan.

Although Omar defaulted on the Metro loan, he was able to refinance the loan in 2004 through FGC Commercial Mortgage Finance, d/b/a/ Fremont Mortgage (Fremont). Homecomings generated a payoff statement of the 2003 loan that reflected an outstanding balance of $298,219,57, with a per diem rate of interest accrual of $79.95. At the closing for the refinance
loan, Fremont’s agent, Yorktown Title LLC, sent Homecomings a check in the amount of $298,219.57,1 along with a transmittal letter that stated that the check was intended to payoff the
2003 Metro loan. Of particular relevance here, the transmittal letter also indicated that if the funds were insufficient, the check should be applied to the debt and Homecomings should contact the sender.

It is undisputed that Homecomings received the check and that, according to the per diem rate, the payoff amount was short by $559.65 in accrued interest. However, instead of applying the $298,219.57 check to the outstanding loan balance and contacting Yorktown to arrange for the receipt of the additional accrued interest, Homecomings returned the check to Yorktown, insisting that the check was insufficient to discharge the loan. The record also shows that Yorktown sent the payoff check to Homecomings a second time, and that Homecomings again rejected it.

Instead of returning the payoff check to Yorktown, Homecomings returned the check to Omar, the delinquent borrower.

Upon receipt of the check, Omar decided to conspire with a cohort to steal the proceeds of the check. On May 7, 2004, Naser Belosa formed a New Jersey company by the name of Homecomings Financial Service, Inc. On May 10, 2004 Belosa opened a business account at Fleet Bank, now Bank Of America (BOA), in the name of the newly formed company.

On May 24, 2004, working in concert with Omar, Belosa presented the payoff check, made payable to “Homecomings Funding,” to BOA for deposit into the Homecomings Financial Services, Inc., account. The check was endorsed in type with the words, “Homecomings Financial.” Amboy National Bank n/k/a/ Amboy Bank (“Amboy”), debited the Yorktown account and paid the check after it was presented to Amboy for payment from BOA. Omar and Belosa thereafter shared the proceeds of the laundered check by writing checks to themselves and other business entities.

On January 3, 2005, MERS filed a complaint in foreclosure against Omar in the Chancery Division, General Equity Part. It was at this point that plaintiff discovered the fraud perpetrated by Omar and Belosa.

Full opinion below…

haha mouse

~

4closureFraud.org

~

MERS, JPMORGAN, HOMECOMINGS vs BANK OF AMERICA, FLEET

Comments
4 Responses to “A Foreclosure Comedy | MERS, JPMORGAN, HOMECOMINGS vs BANK OF AMERICA, FLEET”
  1. Nancy says:

    Hi,
    I would be interested to know from all who read this if any of you are currently in litigation with Duetsche Bank for saying its bank owns my with a property. My mortgage was securitized five minutes after we signed on the dotted line
    MERS took over. Deutsche Bank cannot prove they own my property, yet Deutsche Bank sold my property to a couple using a quick claim deed.

    I believe if this bank is doing this with my property then chances are they are doing it with yours. Please let me know if you are comfortable sharing!

    Thank you….Nancy

    • Rhiannon says:

      Nancy, I just received a letter from attorneys that BoA hired and it stated the Deutsche Bank was the trustee. My mortgage is also tied up with Mers. I’m going to be sending a validation of debt letter next week asking for proof etc.

      This is crazy.

  2. talktotennessee says:

    Is MERS filing against MERS yet? If not, can we look forward to that. Does anyone know which banks claim MERS as affiliated members or is this an open club?

  3. Pamela Edwards says:

    Thanks for the mouse.Lets see where this really goes or will they wiggle thier way out once again.

Leave a Reply