Let’s put aside securities fraud claims the states may have for troubled mortgage-backed securities, since those have nothing to do with the robosigning revelations…

and

The state AGs could also claim that the behavior of mortgage servicers in the foreclosure process amounts to systemic fraud or racketeering. “I’m sure they could come up with a creative theory,” one bank lawyer told me. “I would look forward to kicking their ass if they do.”

~

As to the statement that there is no connection between securities fraud and robo-signing, that is just plain wrong.

Robosigning is to Securities Fraud as Disposal of a Dead Body is to Murder…

The reason the servicers needed several million documents – that were eventually created by robo-signers – is that the securities companies who created and sold these trusts failed to get the documents promised in the prospectuses, the PSAs and in their annual certifications to the SEC.

And we all know why they didn’t…

Too bad the tough guy bank attorney wasn’t identified. I’d bet there would be a lot of people who would like to kick his ass…

What a punk…

~

What happens if AG mortgage deal falls through?

From the report…

With the news Wednesday that Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley has “lost confidence” in the multistate AG talks with five big banks and is revving up to sue, coupled with last week’s announcement by California AG Kamala Harris that she’s also dropping out of talks and launching her own investigation, I’ve been wondering what shape an AG suit against mortgage lenders would take. I reached out to both the New York and Delaware attorneys general offices, since they were the first to start talking about filing their own cases. They didn’t return my calls. But according to the bank lawyers I talked to (caveat emptor), there’s a huge gap between the wrongs the states will be able to show and the relief for troubled homeowners that they say they want.

My apologies for misconstruing Alison; if you perceive so. But this article really regurgitates Bankster tripe.

“There’s a fundamental disconnect between what they want and they claims they might have,” one bank lawyer said.

Let’s put aside securities fraud claims the states may have for troubled mortgage-backed securities, since those have nothing to do with the robosigning revelations that led all 50 states to enter talks with Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, and Ally Financial a year ago. The basis of the talks has been deficiencies in the foreclosure process. Mortgage servicers took all sorts of shortcuts as they pushed an unprecedented surge of homeowners into foreclosure beginning in 2008. It’s pretty much undisputed that foreclosure law firms filed untold numbers of false certifications and deficient affidavits with the courts in states that require foreclosures to be approved by a judge.

The reason the servicers needed several million documents – that were eventually created by robo-signers – is that the securities companies who created and sold these trusts failed to get the documents promised in the prospectuses, the PSAs and in their annual certifications to the SEC.

These are not trivial claims. It’s a big deal to submit a false affidavit to a judge. Most states have criminal or civil laws (or both) barring false certification. State AGs could certainly fashion unfair or deceptive acts cases against mortgage servicers, and they could assert big money demands, based on statutory damages for each robosigned document.

So why no prosecutions?

The state AGs could also claim that the behavior of mortgage servicers in the foreclosure process amounts to systemic fraud or racketeering. “I’m sure they could come up with a creative theory,” one bank lawyer told me. “I would look forward to kicking their ass if they do.”

Now that’s classy…

Here is where it really gets good…

The genius of the multistate AG campaign against the banks was that with the help of the Obama Justice Department, the attorneys general were able to leverage technical deficiencies in the foreclosure process into billions of dollars in loan modifications. (I’ve been told that as much as two-thirds of the settlement money would go to helping homeowners in trouble.) That was a masterstroke by regulators. Banks were on the defensive about robosigning, so even though robosigned documents and even false affidavits didn’t really affect homeowners’ ability to pay their mortgages, the DOJ and AGs managed to conflate the issues.

If, on the other hand, AGs are forced to litigate alleged false certifications one mortgage at a time, bank lawyers said, they’ll be able to tell judges that technical problems in loan files have nothing to do with defaults: If a homeowner isn’t paying the mortgage, it doesn’t matter whether a document was robosigned or not. Banks will also argue that until 2010, robosigning was an industrywide practice and judges knew about it, so the AGs can’t show intent. “It’s hard to obtain damages in the form of penalties or criminal convictions for something widely perceived as the industry norm,” said one lawyer.

So uninformed and naive…

These aren’t “technical deficiencies”!  If I lied to a bankruptcy judge I’d be arrested and JAILED.  Why aren’t these lawyers and Wall Streeters being treated likewise?

If I stood in front of my state AG and said, “See ya in court, I am gonna kick your ass!” EVEN METAPHORICALLY …hmmm I wonder the consequences?

WTF is an “industry norm”?  Is it a “judicial norm”  to have one standard for “corporate persons” and another for humans?

Geez…

You can check out the report in full here…

~

4closureFraud.org

h/t Deontos