“If the Trust doesn’t really own the loans, you see, our deal blows up. If the Trust doesn’t own the loans, the Trust doesn’t have a right to collect and give out the mortgage payments to you. The Trust also doesn’t have the right to foreclose on the homeowners. And any money the Trust pays you becomes subject to more tax and could be taken by my creditors. So really, my promises to give the Trust clear title to the mortgage loans are the most important promises I make to you; that’s why they’re not only in the contract, but we have the Trustee check to make sure I kept my word. With something so important, it’s like President Reagan said: Trust, but verify.”


Securitization Fail, Or, The Depth of Schneiderman’s Betrayal If Signs the Servicer Settlement, Or, Why DE AG Beau Biden Rocks

The criminal securities fraud at the heart of the financial crisis has one very under-reported aspect: “securitization fail.” Once you understand the securitization fail concept, you can instantly, with tremendous clarity, see the scale of the fraud the Bailed Out Banks and Wall Street firms committed and commit every day. Get securitization fail, and the bankers’ crimes stand out like a vast herd of bison on the South Dakota prairie, a herd much bigger than this one.

Perhaps the most critical insight that flows from understanding securitization fail, however, is that the crimes will continue so long as we are processing foreclosures. When you understand securitization fail, you understand the scale of liability the Bailed Out Bankers created for themselves, and why foreclosure fraud is their preferred escape route. In fact, you’ll understand why the banks will continue to commit foreclosure fraud regardless of signing the settlement with law enforcers. Get securitization fail and you understand that a thorough investigation could straightforwardly document it, and create so much leverage for law enforcement that it could essentially dictate terms of settlement.

Caving on Securitization Fail

So that’s the multi-billion dollar question about the servicer “settlement” being foisted on the states by the big banks and the feds: is any attorney general who signs up for it is giving up any claims related to securitization fail and all the leverage that flows from them? Based on Nevada AG Masto’s letter, it sure looks like the AGs are. I only phrase it as a question because the actual settlement language isn’t public yet, and it runs counter to all the messaging that only post-securities conduct is covered by the settlement. Not that I think the messaging on the settlement is remotely credible as a general matter.

Be sure to check out the rest of this one here…