Just got word that TWO exact properties may have been bought at the same exact time for the same exact price for the example below.


HOWEVER, this loan is not the only one doubled up in this trust, and we have seen others.


More to come…

Not quite sure if we are 100% correct on this, so we are going to just put it out there and get some feedback…

We have been working behind the scenes on a little project that, we think, proves loans have been multiple pledged in trusts. We have found enough evidence to confirm our theories  enough to publish this little report. Mind you, we are not securization expects, but we do love digging through records and have become quite adept.

Earlier today, we published IN RE PHILLIPS, US Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Alabama | AURORA LOAN SERVICES Motion to Dismiss GRANTED, Except for Fraud on the Court.

Now, being that Nick Wooten has been in the spotlight on all these cases in Alabama with LPS and Housingwire, we decided to check out the loan that was part of the bankruptcy case above, U.S. BANK, AS TRUSTEE FOR STRUCTURED ADJUSTABLE RATE MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2007-10.

So what we did was pull every investor report that we could get our hands on, and came up with what appears to be the jackpot.

The loan, that was included in the bankruptcy case above, appears to be DOUBLE PLEDGED in the trust.

Again, we may be wrong on this, so any feedback to correct our assumptions would be appreciated. I just can’t see how it can be anything other that that.

From the reports…

This is a screen shot of the first investor report for the trust that the loan was in.

Structured Adjustable Rate Mortgage Loan Trust Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-10

What this report tells us, when we scroll down to Geographic Distribution by State, we learn that TWO loans were “distributed” in Alabama for this trust…

Now, why would that be relevant?

Well, we pulled the loan level data for the entire trust, sorted it by state, and guess what we found?

The only two loans in Alabama.

Here are the details on each loan number…

Loan Number 47520960

Loan Number 47521182

Okay, so they are different…

Here are the pool numbers…

Loan Number 47520960 – Pool Number SARM 2007-10

Loan Number 47521182 – Pool Number SARM 2007-10

Good, same pool…

Loan closing date

Loan Number 47520960 – 9/7/2007

Loan Number 47521182 – 9/7/2007

Deal closing date

Loan Number 47520960 – 10/30/2007

Loan Number 47521182 – 10/30/2007

Nothing too out of place so far. Two loans in Alabama could have the same pool number and closing dates, right?

Credit Score

Loan Number 47520960 – 739

Loan Number 47521182 – 739

Occupancy Type

Loan Number 47520960 – Investor Occupied

Loan Number 47521182 – Investor Occupied

Original interest rate

Loan Number 47520960 – 9.75

Loan Number 47521182 – 9.75

Original loan balance

Loan Number 47520960 – $840,000

Loan Number 47521182 – $840,000

Original securitized balance

Loan Number 47520960 – $840,000

Loan Number 47521182 – $840,000

LTV rate

Loan Number 47520960 – 70

Loan Number 47521182 – 70

Uh oh, I think I am starting to see a pattern here…

The loans go on to have the same pp_flag    prepayment_penalty_term    product_type    property_state    property_type    loan_purpose_type    risk_grade_score    lien_position_type    cltv_rate    cutoff_date    loanage_count    mss_count    interest_rate    beg_prin_bal    loan_status    delq_bucket    prepayment_amount    liquidation_bal    current_gain_loss_amount    end_prin_bal    sched_prin    originator   servicer    intcalctype    ratetype    ioterm    margin    origterm…

EVERYTHING is identical…

Now remember, there were only TWO loans in Alabama, totaling $1,680,000.00 in the distribution report…

Did you take note of the original loan balance on the “TWO” loans that were detailed above?

They were each for $840,000. Do you know what $840,000 + $840,000 is?

Why it is the same amount as reported in the distribution report of $1,680,000.

This is not the only loan in this trust that is doubled up on corresponding reports, and this is the same type of pattern we have been finding in other trusts.

So, if what appears to be a double pledged loan, is actually a double pledged loan, it opens up a few questions…

Such as…

If this is so damn easy for someone who has no background in securitization to find this, where the hell have the “regulators” been? Again, assuming that this is what it appears to be.

Did they actually look at ANYTHING when doing their investigations into the servicers over Fraudclosure-gate?

If this loan was sold multiple times, were there any damages?

How many “insurance” policies were collected on this loan if it is truly double pledged?

Were the investors defrauded TWICE on this loan?

There are many more questions to be answered once we truly verify beyond a doubt that this is what it appears to be.

Like I said before, this isn’t the only trust we are seeing this pattern in and what I have learned from this whole crisis is, if there are two “irregularities” there are thousands…

So, someone please prove us wrong, because if we are right, we haven’t seen anything yet…

Full reports below…




You might have to download the reports to view them


PHILLIPS ROW 257 Copy of SARM 2007-10 – November 2007

Phillips May 09 LLD 47520960 and 47521182