People are already catching on to all the fraudulent foreclosures that have have occurred, now that a 2nd court (the 1st being judge Sue Robinson in DE), which has found BofA does not automatically carry successor liability for Countrywide. If they do not carry successor liability, there can be no liability to BofA by the homeowners. Think of how many fraudulent foreclosures have occurred in the last few years, based on the judiciary making false assumptions as to BofA’s successor interests in Countrywide, and allowing foreclosures to occur. This is on top of the robo-signing of false documents in the first place.
If you follow the comments on the attached emails, this is all over the internet now. There will be another wave of foreclosure fraud suits because of the lack of oversight in residential mortgage backed securities. The SEC, as in the Bernie Madoff case, has once again been asleep at the wheel and will cause another financial whirlwind.
My question is, when is somebody in a position of authority going to look into these fraudulent transactions? Obviously, the SEC is totally ill-equipped to do the job. There needs to be a complete overhaul at that commission. They learned nothing from the Madoff case. They are obviously too close to the financial sector to take any meaningful action. Are we going to keep allowing Wall Street to get away with these misdeeds? Much of the fraud has been written right into the Pooling and Servicing agreements submitted to the SEC. I have submitted evidence to Ms. Hsu on numerous occasions. The SEC “doesn’t know what to do”. Well, the government needs to find somebody who does. The SEC helped create this mess, they need to find a way to fix it !!
This is insane, and the federal government needs to protect it’s citizens, not Wall Street and investors who were aware of fraudulent language in RMBSs. If the SEC cannot regulate the industry, the government should cut their entire funding, as they would serve no useful purpose except to Wall Street. Let them pay for them.
I am a victim of this nightmare. I am mad as hell and I am fighting back !!!
Sincerely,
Tim A Bryant
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: “Foreclosure Fraud – Fighting Foreclosure Fraud by Sharing the Knowledge” <no-reply@wordpress.com>
To: tbryant80@comcast.net
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2011 12:22:15 AM
Subject: [New comment] Message Board
Hell NO – No More Bail-Outs or FALSE Modification Programs (Ahem or A-hamp) added a new comment to the post Message Board.
 |
Hell NO – No More Bail-Outs or FALSE Modification Programs (Ahem or A-hamp) said on Message BoardMay 8, 2011 at 11:21 PM
|
In response to BSTL on May 8, 2011 at 5:19 PM:
It should be clear that BOA’s liabilities are not limited to CW. BOA issued scores of RMBS themselves.
And then there are the loans written as “America’s Wholesale Lender – A Corporation”. They also claimed right in the Deed of Trust that it was a NEW YORK corporation. Well, on the dates when most of those loans were recorded, NO SUCH CORPORATION existed as yet in the state of New York. Eventually a corporation WAS formed in New York in that name. However, no connection really exists between the corporation named on those loans and the corporation that someone eventually decided to register at a later date.Do NOT get fooled by the D/B/A status CountryWide filed in many localities claiming AWL to be it’s trade name. If your loan says CountryWide D/B/A America’s Wholesale Lender, only then is it possibly the valid usage of the D/B/A status.If the mortgage asserts that AWL is a CORPORATION, then the D/B/A entity claimed by CountryWide is NOT the same beast.Just like there are dangers for BofA to have claimed it is not the successor to CountryWide, so too are there dangers for a company that tries to assert that a tradename is a corporation without any such proper filings of said corporation.
See all comments on this post here.
~
THis is a DELEWARE decision. The banks attorney will argue the ‘four corners’ rule to disallow it in California courts. Has ANYONE had any success using this case law in their arguments..? PLEASE let me know….
Countrywide’s mortgage Payments were deposited in the Bank of New York Mellon. You will notice that this is brought up on many blogs and sites.
In a decision last week, Los Angeles federal district court judge Mariana Pfaelzer held that BofA does not have successor liability for Countrywide’s activities under Delaware law, and dismissed claims by a purported class that bought mortgage-backed securities from Countrywide.
Does anyone have the case references on these two suits? Which court? If anyone has more on these cases, can you post tracking info so more research can be done on this, particularly if in federal court?
This article only refers to “judiciary making false assumptions as to BofA’s successor interests in Countrywide, ….” The “judiciary” is only involved in judicial foreclosure States. If BofA lacked authority to succeed Countrywide in judicial States, it certainly lacked that same authority in non-judicial States (i.e: CA).
The massive fraud continues. I now find that a mortgage servicer was assigned an allonge to the note on the second lien that was never recorded by the original lender and is claiming to be joining the plaintiff. The mortgage assignment to the first lien is an assignment of leases and rents and not an assignment of mortgage. I also come to find this was an ALTA loan which was also never disclosed to me or my husband. I have a copy of the note that has my signature on it but, my signature is not on the mortgage. Wouldn’t that cancel out the note? The mortgage is the security instrument though that assignment on public record is not an assignment of mortgage, it is an assignment of leases and rents. WTF??? It is commercial property but none the less I think these actions would nullify the note and therefore, the whole transaction. .