Comments on: OCC’s John Walsh Attempts Whitewash of Servicer Abuse

By: stopGOVTwaste

stopGOVTwaste — Sat, 30 Apr 2011 17:03:12 +0000

In reply to stopGOVTwaste.

Hmmm…..

http://www.scribd.com/doc/37604610/OCC-Asset-Securitization-1997

By: stopGOVTwaste

stopGOVTwaste — Sat, 30 Apr 2011 17:01:41 +0000

See here – p. 22

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49199129/Page-22-top-25-Commercial-Banks-W-Derivatives

By: Bill Bookout

Bill Bookout — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 19:32:10 +0000

In reply to Bill Bookout.

From this article I am stepping forward and asking more questions of Pacific Capital Bank through the OCC.

1) Does Pacific Capital Bank have the proper documentation and the legal standing to foreclose with over charging on the Oceano Nursery SBA Loan $182.26 per month since 2007?

2) Does Pacific Capital Bank have the proper documentation and the legal standing to foreclose on the Oceano Nursery SBA loan with PCB having taken $2,471.45 of business working capital in 2007 against a signed loan modification?

3) Does Pacific Capital Bank have the proper documentation and the legal standing to foreclose with over charging Oceano Nursery late fees since 2007 as now seen in their NOD dated January 25, 2011 attached below?

4) Are California Banks required to provide Amortization Schedules to their customers?

5) Does Pacific Capital Bank have the proper documentation and the legal standing to foreclose with ignoring an SBA Form 147 Note stating: “Lender must adjust the payment amount at least annually as needed to amortize principal over the remaining term of the note.”

By: allisun

allisun — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:40:28 +0000

John Walsh is a lackey of the banks. His real salary is probably paid by the Koch brothers.

By: Bill Bookout

Bill Bookout — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:41:33 +0000

In reply to Bill Bookout.

A little more to ad as I am now asking the California Assembly to pass legislation requiring all California Banks to provide Amortization Schedules for their loans! I am asking that California Banks are required to provide Amortization Schedules at any time to their customers when requested!

Pacific Capital Bank has stated in regards to not wanting to provide an amortization schedule for the Oceano Nursery SBA loan since turning Pacific Capital Bank into the OCC!

December 30, 2010 (In the event that you do agree to this request, please let me know exactly what you mean by an “amortization schedule”.)

January 4, 2011 (An amortization schedule is not information the Bank is required to provide you.)

January 10, 2011 “If there happen to be any mistakes by Pacific Capital Bank – I have no knowledge of any mistakes, so this is hypothetical from my point of view – those could be addressed in any cure of the payment defaults.”

January 25, 2011 “With regard to your request for an amortization schedule, an amortization schedule is necessarily based upon assumptions, such as a static interest rate, and assumes strict performance by the borrower as required by the terms of the loan. In the case of your loan, the significant defaults and the agreements that have been made not only make any previously-issued amortization not relevant to the loan’s current status, but they preclude a current amortization, since the defaults are continuing, additional charges are being incurred, and the time to maturity is decreasing, among other things. Should the loan be put in a performing status, we could address amortization schedule issues at that time.”

January 25, 2011 “With regard to the questions you have been propounding which you chose to resolve through complaint to the OCC, this email will advise you that Pacific Capital Bank has responded to the OCC within their prescribed timeframes, and we assume they will follow up with you based upon that response. Any issues you have with the Bank’s response to the OCC, or with the OCC’s response, should be taken up with the OCC.”

February 2, 2011 “Pacific Capital Bank is no longer lending under the SBA program. As a result, a refinance from Pacific Capital is not something that could be done, although another lender might be in a position to make the proposed loan.”

May 12, 2008 “The requests you have made, and the delinquencies in the documentation, have resulted in the Bank incurring additional attorney’s fees. As a result, you are requested to forward to Pacific Capital Bank, c/o Ms. Sheffield, a check in the amount of $750.00 to cover anticipated attorney’s fees incurred in responding to the requests for information. Of course, this amount is only an estimate, and if the fees exceed the amount received, an additional deposit will be required. Please forward the deposit as soon as possible so that the Bank can begin work on the research you have requested.”

By: Bill Bookout

Bill Bookout — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 05:06:59 +0000

I have turned Pacific Capital Bank into the OCC for bank fraud after finding Pacific Capital bank stealing money from me since 2007!

Pacific Capital Bank feels, that they are not required to provide Amortization Schedules for their SBA loans!

By: allisun

allisun — Sat, 19 Feb 2011 04:46:40 +0000

John Walsh is another sycophant of Hedge Fund Managers and Federal Reserve revolving door employees of the Treasury/Big Banks/ Fed….these guys just ride these entities like horses on a carousel.

By: Mary_Cochrane@saveamericaone.com

Mary_Cochrane@saveamericaone.com — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 21:59:39 +0000

In reply to Bust them!.

Notice: Office of Comptroller of Currency vested Oversight of ‘Servicers’ Supervisory Authority.
Per June 11, 2010 Letter to Congressman Rodney Frelinghuysen, in response to Loan Origination Fraud reported 1/20/2009 under Congressional Inquiry #854370, OCC is without authority to adjudicate the alleged unlawful business acts and contract issues.

My Congressman than invited the FBI and Attorney Generals in response to my Petition to Redress Grievances Seeking Injunctive Relief .

Financial Holding Companies-Domestic like Wells Fargo & Co. Oversight of Originators the Federal Reserve Board.

By: Bust them!

Bust them! — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 19:51:11 +0000

If an ‘entity’ claiming an interest to which they do not have an interest, must be prosecuted for fraud, attempted fraud, racketeering, theft of property, and the myriad of crimes that come from their act.
There must be an absolute minimum prison sentence, and monetary cost to these thugs.
Criminals must know that they will pay for their fraud, and that no Congressman will pass law to protect them.
We are missing something!
In this environment, it would seem insane to even consider putting fraudulent lien/deed on a property!
But is seems that those who did not jump on the bandwagon before are doing so now?
What does this say?
That there is a racket that is protecting the title fraudsters? and the word is that the racket will protect them?
even when they commit the fraud now?
If a fraudsters KNEW that the FEDS were aggressively prosecuting mortgage fraudsters to the full extent of the law, then no fraud would continue today,and the fraudsters wold be scared they were going to be caught.
Like tax cheats, they should be given the opportunity to come forward and make a deal for a lesser time in prison, but not skip prison altogether.
It would seem that today, one should not have to fear a fraudulent lien/loan/claim on ones property.

By: Heather

Heather — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 19:32:25 +0000

I listened to the entire hearing. Wow, was that interesting and enlightening! How naive can they be! Well, maybe I’m giving them way too much credit for suggesting that they actually care and took the man-hours, that they claimed to the Senators that they do not have. Maybe they need to review the Florida loans, all of the “servicer-induced-foreclsoures.” Not all of the loans involve the “servicers” either. Lenders with no capacity, no standing, no privity, no assignments, and or assignments recorded after suit was initiated, improperly placing a lis pendens on the home, failing to include indespensible parties like the true owner of the Securitizations and others referenced in the complaint and others providing robo-exhibits, failing to comply with the Fair Credit Consumer Laws by pre-suit requirements for a federally insured home loan; oh, and my personal favorite, failing to have a proper, legal, provable chain of title. And one of Matt’s favs, challenging the Affidavit of Indebtedness and another, where’s the note. And, well so much more, if they only had taken the time to look. Then, you throw into the mix Stern and Cheryl. Maybe they want to look at the postings on this website. Maybe they should go down to Lee County, Florida’s rocket dockets and observe, it will only take 30 seconds ,,,, maybe take names on those cases, where the judiciary are making their own laws and blattenly ignoring others and doing it in writing, where judges are not allowing homeowners constitutional rights to redress, evidentary rules violated left and right. Omgosh, the list is endless, isn’t it. I just decided that I am going to send my loan, all of the litigation documents, all of the things that have been filed in my case, the land records showing that I have two satisfactions on the property, and my motion to dismiss; let them read those grounds. I am going to send this to all of the Senators on the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee and get their feedback. Let’s see if they can pass the buck as many times as they just did at this hearing with the Senators. Maybe everybody else should do so also! I am not a “deadbeat” homeowner. I paid my mortgage and was forced into this crap! And, to hear them talking like its just going to take them time because they “lack modern technology” is horrible. I cannot count how many times my one little computer has crashed in the past year. Now, I know that I’m not the only one in this position. Seriously, everybody should open these Senators eyes with such outrage that is beyond ignoring us. Those questions posed to them were in no way serious enough to warrant everybody’s time. Yes, I am outraged at the Senators “lovey-dovey” approach, but felt some of the questions were on point, but not followed-through with the authority vested in these Senators. One of the Senators even made a date with the head of the SEC! Okay, whose buying! Either way, its us! Let me go and get this done!