Comments on: BAM! | US Judge Takes $8.5 Bln BofA Deal from State Court in Bank of New York Mellon vs Walnut Place

By: eyesoars

eyesoars — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 17:41:54 +0000

A link to the oral arguments before the judge can be found over at NakedCapitalism. The judge was highly skeptical in court of the banks’ position, and clearly on to the idea that this was an attempt by both banks to deny security holders a right to justice.

I probably won’t state this well, but this was an attempt by BofA and Bank of NY Mellon to “settle” investor claims against crap securities. One of them was ostensibly acting on behalf of the investors, but in fact attempting to whitewash its own fiduciary shortcomings in the deal, by settling for a lump-sum $US 8.5B on securities worth > 20 times that, and getting it ratified at an administrative hearing under NY law.

The actual investors were unhappy with this, and attempted to remand to federal court. This judgment is central to their right to seek redress, which they will (presumably) now seek in federal court.

By: Wayne

Wayne — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 17:31:57 +0000

I have read this entire summary (Stupid Me). When reading this my head started spinning and I would have to look away and start over again, only to try and understand what was written. What I have come to the conclusion is this: WTF – How the hell is the average person supposed to understand all of this. Correct me if I am wrong and please write to me and in simple terms and explain it to me at, webnova@aol.com. Here is how I see it, Mortgages were pooled, boxed up and sold in a clump, they rushed them over to MERS who was supposed to record all the Mortgages and Notes then electronically sent them to, let say, BONY who turned them into securities or MERS transferred them into securities and sent them to BONY, which ever. In any case a Note can not be separated from the actual deed and the Note can not exist and must be destroyed once it becomes a Security. Am I correct on this? So if the two items (note and security) can not exist at the same time according to Federal Law, how is it that any contract between the homeowner and the lender can even exist. If I am correct in all of this or even half way correct, doesn’t it show corruption? They have taken a basic transaction that has been in place for Centuries, brought over from Land Transactions Law of England. It was slightly revised for the New Land (USA) but again it was simple. You signed the Note, it was recorded in the County, you pay on the Note and when and if you paid it off you got the Note back Stamped “Paid in Full”. Now the Note has been separated, not recorded in the County, Note (original copy) has been destroyed, transformed into a security, divided up into so many pieces and sold again. How is this Possible? Now no one knows who legally owns what since the Mortgages were stamped AAA by a credit oversight agency, and sold as AAA securities in bundles and bundles and no one had a clue as long as they were making money selling a rotten apple as a Cadilac. What is worse is the BANKS knew this and put Insurance on the rotten apples and would get paid in FULL of the entire amount of the loan if the loan faulted. Yet No One Is Going To Jail.
Now Do I have this RIGHT?
Please take the time and write me: webnova@aol.com

By: lvent

lvent — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:31:50 +0000

In reply to lies is all they tell.

We all realize that the banksters and Wall Street are evil greedy pigs but, who put them up to this? They were just the perps, who were carrying out orders for….the NWO via the U.S Government…See this article..::
How The U.S Government EngineeredThe Current Economic Crisis:
http://techcrunch.com/2008/09/26/the-us-government-engineered-the-current-economic-crisis/

By: CaitlinO

CaitlinO — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:15:11 +0000

Beautiful! The judge is PISSED!!

Love the reference to BNYM’s “torpor.”

By: lies is all they tell

lies is all they tell — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 14:42:34 +0000

First of all ALL the banks did the same thing. They lied on applications with stated income loans some of which slaries were thousands above real salary and even the ones they received pay check stubs new we would not for them like the others so did their due diligence not to go above 1k. They were sneakly how to do a stated income loan but add only about 6 to 700

By: Hell No - No More Bleeping Bankster Bailouts

Hell No - No More Bleeping Bankster Bailouts — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 14:28:21 +0000

Well, aw shucks, you Bast*rds at BOTH BofA and BoNY-Mellon can’t get this sweetheart deal between you two stuffed down everyone’s throats, it seems.

BoNY attempts to foreclose on Countrywide mortgages where the documentation clearly does not support it. These mortgages have many flaws and were never successfully transferred to the trusts. IF BoNY were truly working on behalf of the investors, they would have been requiring CW and later BofA to take the mortgages BACK.

Apparently, exception reports were generated that documented the known defects to each of the mortgages that were purportedly transferred into the trusts for which BoNY was the trustee. Nothing was done by trustee BoNY-Mellon to follow up with these defective attempted transfers.

With that background, this smelly deal, which absolved BoNY of negligence for any of their inaction, deserves to be shredded by the federal judge.

BoNY is only looking to protect it’s relationship with BofA because BofA is their largest source of business. This is just further evidence of what happens when banks become too big to fail or too big to be regulated, or too big to have to follow any laws.