Highlights From The Testimony of Adam J. Levitin Before the Senate Banking, Housing Committee

Categorized | STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD

Highlights From The Testimony of Adam J. Levitin Before the Senate Banking, Housing Committee

Highlights From The Testimony of Adam J. Levitin Before the Senate Banking, Housing Committee

Watched the hearing yesterday and Mr. Levitin was extremely impressive!

Please watch the video for explosive info regarding securitization, “Nothing-Backed Securities”…transfers are void!

Sorry for the quality but was the best I could do.

.

———————————————————————–

.

Written Testimony of

Adam J. Levitin

Associate Professor of Law

Georgetown University Law Center
Before the
Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

“Problems in Mortgage Servicing from Modification to Foreclosure”
November 16, 2010
2:30 pm

Excerpts:

A number of events over the past several months have roiled the mortgage world, raising
questions about:


(1) Whether there is widespread fraud in the foreclosure process;

(2) Securitization chain of title, namely whether the transfer of mortgages in the
securitization process was defective, rendering mortgage-backed securities into non-mortgagebacked
securities
;

(3) Whether the use of the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) creates
legal defects in either the secured status of a mortgage loan or in mortgage assignments;

(4) Whether mortgage servicers’ have defaulted on their servicing contracts by charging
predatory fees to borrowers that are ultimately paid by investors;

(5) Whether investors will be able to “putback” to banks securitized mortgages on the
basis of breaches of representations and warranties about the quality of the mortgages.
These issues are seemingly disparate and unconnected, other than that they all involve
mortgages. They are, however, connected by two common threads: the necessity of proving
standing in order to maintain a foreclosure action and the severe conflicts of interests between
mortgage servicers and MBS investors.

It is axiomatic that in order to bring a suit, like a foreclosure action, the plaintiff must
have legal standing, meaning it must have a direct interest in the outcome of the legislation. In
the case of a mortgage foreclosure, only the mortgagee has such an interest and thus standing.
Many of the issues relating to foreclosure fraud by mortgage servicers, ranging from more minor
procedural defects up to outright counterfeiting relate to the need to show standing. Thus
problems like false affidavits of indebtedness, false lost note affidavits, and false lost summons
affidavits, as well as backdated mortgage assignments, and wholly counterfeited notes,
mortgages, and assignments all relate to the evidentiary need to show that the entity bringing the
foreclosure action has standing to foreclose.

Concerns about securitization chain of title also go to the standing question; if the
mortgages were not properly transferred in the securitization process (including through the use
of MERS to record the mortgages), then the party bringing the foreclosure does not in fact own
the mortgage and therefore lacks standing to foreclose. If the mortgage was not properly
transferred, there are profound implications too for investors, as the mortgage-backed securities
they believed they had purchased would, in fact be non-mortgage-backed securities, which
would almost assuredly lead investors to demand that their investment contracts be rescinded,
thereby exacerbating the scale of mortgage putback claims.

[…]

Pay Close Attention To What He Says

[ipaper docId=42884106 access_key=key-4dwbkeca3hxlgeiw15x height=600 width=600 /]

© 2010-17 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Comments

comments

This post was written by:

- who has written 8684 posts on FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA.

CONTROL FRAUD | ‘If you don’t look; you don’t find, Wherever you look; you will find’ -William Black

Contact the author

4 Responses to “Highlights From The Testimony of Adam J. Levitin Before the Senate Banking, Housing Committee”

  1. karen1p says:

    Hurray! He said it, those transfers are VOID! They were not punctilious. I have evidence!

    Can you say, orange jumpsuits and three square meals a day? Watch your behinds, gentlemen.

  2. Lauren says:

    A GREATFUL THANK YOU for this educational website!!!

    I am going after my documentation tomorrow. Because of this site, and help from others I have a better grasp of what to look for!

    THANK YOU AGAIN!!

    I think we will have to build some more prisons to hold ALL those thieves…

  3. Lu says:

    My home went to foreclosure, had a sheriff sale and went back to Fannie Mae. First eviction court date was Oct. 27. It was then postponed until Nov.24. I go to court next week for eviction. Fannie Mae had agreed to a rescission of the foreclosure and BOA was to do a modification. Now BOA is telling me I do not qualify for a modification. It is great to have websites of this nature to help individuals such as myself and the millions of others in similar situations.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. […] over nine trillion dollars worth of homeowner’s value since the economic crisis began. Ongoing investigations and hearings have made clear that this disaster was no accident, but was created by our largest financial institutions with criminal intent. And yet three years […]


Leave a Reply

GARY DUBIN LAW OFFICES FORECLOSURE DEFENSE HAWAII and CALIFORNIA
Advertise your business on StopForeclosureFraud.com

Archives