According to AP,  the court on Monday issued a high profile-case order in the matter of Pino v. Bank of New York Mellon. One of the issues in the case is whether there was a fraud on the trial court.

And we all now the original work behind this was none other than Law Offices of David J. Stern, who has recently shut down as of March 31, 2011.

On February 2, 2011 the Florida 4th DCA said

We conclude that this is a question of great public importance, as many, many mortgage foreclosures appear tainted with suspect documents. The defendant has requested a denial of the equitable right to foreclose the mortgage at all. If this is an available remedy as a sanction after a voluntary dismissal, it may dramatically affect the mortgage foreclosure crisis in this State. Accordingly we certify the following question to the Florida Supreme Court as of great public importance

Scribd

This is the second column in a series responding to Stephen Moore’s central assaults on regulation and the prosecution of the elite white-collar criminals who cause our recurrent, intensifying financial crises. Last week’s column addressed his claim in a recent Wall Street Journal column that all government employees, including the regulatory cops on the beat, are “takers” destroying America.

The Case Against Allowing Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) to Initiate Foreclosure Proceedings

Nolan Robinson
Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law

March 21, 2011

Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 32, No. 4, p. 101, 2011

Abstract:
Few American homeowners know much about the small, Virginia-based company that has revolutionized the mortgage industry over the past fifteen years. Yet, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) is the named mortgagee on nearly two-thirds of all newly originated residential mortgages in the United States. Industry leaders – including Freddy Mac, Ginnie Mae, and a host of private lenders – created MERS in the mid-1990s to help facilitate a burgeoning market in mortgage-backed securities.

At the time MERS was created, a robust and lightly regulated secondary market for mortgage-backed securities seemed like a good idea. The recent subprime mortgage crisis, which has impacted millions of American homeowners and played a key role in a global recession, has done much to challenge that presumption. One unfortunate byproduct of the subprime mortgage crisis has been a dramatic increase in the number of American homeowners facing foreclosure. For many of these homeowners, the MERS system may compound their hardships by effectively masking the identity of the owner of their loans. One of the benefits of MERS membership, according to MERS, is the legal right to foreclose on a defaulting homeowner in MERS’s name rather than in the name of the entity who actually owns the mortgage. This can mean that homeowners have no way of ascertaining the identity of the party with whom they can negotiate their loans.

Several state courts have considered challenges to MERS’s right to initiate foreclosure actions in its own name. MERS claims to have the legal authority to initiate foreclosure proceedings throughout the United States, but not every court has agreed. Some jurisdictions have expressly upheld MERS’s right to foreclose, while some have questioned or limited MERS’s foreclosure rights. Still other courts have reserved judgment, expressing frustration and confusion regarding MERS’s role in an increasing number of foreclosure and bankruptcy proceedings, and the ostensible connection between MERS and the subprime mortgage crisis.

MERS is currently a plaintiff in as many as forty percent of pending foreclosure actions in some locales. This Note argues that foreclosure actions brought in MERS’s name, without joining the real party in interest, are unlawful. Furthermore, this Note reveals how granting standing to MERS in foreclosure actions threatens to undermine the protections for homeowners that foreclosure law has traditionally provided, and violates important property law doctrines that ensure the proper functioning of the recording system and minimize clouds on title.

Scribd

Kudos to KnoxNews for this tip

I encourage all Tennesseans to go read this article. Thank the Tennessee Bankers Assoc. for backing this hideous bill. You cannot turn your back on those who continue to be against you! NEVER.

From KnoxNews

The banking industry, it must be noted, bears much of the responsibility for the mortgage crisis that led to the recession. Banks and other lenders convinced too many people to guy mortgages they couldn’t afford. Thousands of Tennesseans are now out of work and having difficulties paying their mortgages.

Granting favors to banks seeking to foreclose on those properties is shameful. The foreclosure process is already too easy, and making it even easier would be brutal.

Scribd

Law Offices of David J. Stern, P.A. v. CitiMortgage, Inc.

Scribd

Questions & Answers for Reservists, Guardsmen and Other Military Personnel

The following information is provided regarding mortgage payment relief and protection from foreclosure provided under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA, formerly known as The Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Civil Relief Act of 1940).

Who Is Eligible?

The provisions of the Act apply to active duty military personnel who had a mortgage obligation prior to enlistment or prior to being ordered to active duty. This includes members of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, Coast Guard; commissioned officers of the Public Health Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration who are engaged in active service; reservists ordered to report for military service; persons ordered to report for induction under the Military Selective Service Act; and guardsmen called to active service for more than 30 consecutive days. In limited situations, dependents of servicemembers are also entitled to protections.

Servicemembers Civil Relief Act Notice (Mortgagee Letter 2006-28)

Pursuant to the statutory amendment, HUD has developed, in consultation with the Departments of Defense and Treasury, the form for the required notice of servicemember rights (Attachment 1, SCRA Notice Disclosure). All mortgage loans, including conventional mortgages and mortgages insured by HUD are subject to the notification requirement that became effective June 5, 2006. The notice must:

	Be sent to all homeowners who are in default on a residential mortgage;
	Include the toll-free military one-source number to call if servicemembers or their dependents require further assistance (1-800-342-9647); and
	Be made within 45 days from the date a missed payment was due, unless the homeowner pays the overdue amount before the expiration of the 45-day period.

Am I Entitled To Debt Payment Relief?

The Act limits the interest that may be charged on mortgages incurred by a service member (including debts incurred jointly with a spouse) before he or she entered into active military service. Mortgage lenders must, at your request, reduce the interest rate to no more than six percent per year during the period of active military service and recalculate your payments to reflect the lower rate. This provision applies to both conventional and government-insured mortgages.

Is The Interest Rate Limitation Automatic?

No. To request this temporary interest rate reduction, you must submit a written request to your mortgage lender and include a copy of your military orders. The request may be submitted as soon as the orders are issued but must be provided to a mortgage lender no later than 180 days after the date of your release from active duty military service.

Am I Eligible Even if I Can Afford To Pay My Mortgage At A Higher Interest Rate?

If a mortgage lender believes that military service has not affected your ability to repay your mortgage, they have the right to ask a court to grant relief from the interest rate reduction. This is not very common.

What If I Can’t Afford to Pay My Mortgage Even At the Lower Rate?

Your mortgage lender may allow you to stop paying the principal amount due on your loan during the period of active duty service. Lenders are not required to do this but they generally try to work with service members to keep them in their homes. You will still owe this amount but will not have to repay it until after your complete your active duty service.

Additionally, most lenders have other programs to assist borrowers who cannot make their mortgage payments. If you or your spouse find yourself in this position at any time before or after active duty service, contact your lender immediately and ask about loss mitigation options. Borrowers with FHA insured loans who are having difficulty making mortgage payments may also be eligible for forbearance and/or HUD’s other Loss Mitigation Programs. More information about help for homeowners who are unable to make payments on a mortgage is available on the HUD website.

Am I Protected against Foreclosure?

Mortgage lenders may not foreclose, or seize property for a failure to pay a mortgage debt, while a service member is on active duty for nine (9) months grace period prior to December 31, 2010 unless they have the approval of a court. After December 31, 2010, the grace period for Service member protection will revert back to 3 months. In a court proceeding, the lender would be required to show that the service member’s ability to repay the debt was not affected by his or her military service.

What Information Do I Need To Provide To My Lender?

When you or your representative contact your mortgage lender, you should provide the following information:

	Notice that you have been called to active duty;
	A copy of the orders from the military service notifying you of your activation;
	Your FHA case number; and
	Evidence that the debt precedes your activation date.

HUD has reminded FHA lenders of their obligation to follow the Act. If notified that a borrower is on active military duty, the lender must advise the borrower or representative of the adjusted amount due, provide adjusted coupons or billings, and ensure that the adjusted payments are not returned as insufficient payments.

Will My Payments Change Later? Will I Need To Pay Back The Interest Rate “Subsidy” At A Later Date?

The change in interest rate is not a subsidy. Interest in excess of 6 percent per year that would otherwise have been charged is forgiven. However, the reduction in the interest rate and monthly payment amount only applies during the period of active duty. Once the period of active military service ends, the interest rate will revert back to the original interest rate, and the payment will be recalculated accordingly.

How Long Does The Benefit Last? Does The Period Begin And End With My Tour Of Duty?

Interest rate reductions are only for the period of active military service. Other benefits, such as postponement of monthly principal payments on the loan and restrictions on foreclosure may begin immediately upon assignment to active military service and end on the third month following the term of active duty assignment.

How Can I Learn More About Relief Available To Active Duty Military Personnel?

Read more information about the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, sponsored by the Legal Assistance Policy Division, Office of The Judge Advocate General, U.S. Army.

Servicemembers who have questions about the SCRA or the protections that they may be entitled to may contact their unit judge advocate or installation legal assistance officer. Dependents of servicemembers can also contact or visit local military legal assistance offices where they reside. A military legal assistance office locator for each branch of the armed forces is available at http://legalassistance.law.af.mil/content/locator.php

Source: HUD.GOV

via pacfilm

Segment from an actual call, recorded on October 20, 2008, between a homeowner and a lawyer, Heather Johnson, of the notorious foreclosure mill, Steven J Baum, representing Litton Loan Servicing. Mr.Christopher Wyatt, part of Litton’s “Executive Resolution Team,” begged out of the call when told it would be filmed an recorded. Loan modifications were offered on a take-it-or leave it basis; however requests for follow-up documentation were ignored. This same lawyer then signed off on a foreclosure, nearly ten months later, initiated by the trustee, Wells Fargo, on behalf of the securitized pool holding the homeowner’s mortgage. The “foreclosure mill” law firm, in this case, Steven J Baum, was specifically cited in a New York Times article about NY State Supreme Court Judge Arthur M Shack on August 31st, 2009, and has engendered criticism for its faulty filing practices. The firm has done extensive work for Litton Loan and its host of robo-signers, including Marti Noriega (who also does double duty for MERS). Hedge Fund Tailwind Capital has a hefty investment in this foreclosure mill. Guess they figured that throwing families out of their homes had a financial upside. Now, the Steven J Baum firm believes that any attempt to make them produce evidence is, simply, a “fishing expedition.” Why? Because actually producing evidence would be enough to get them and their clients thrown in the proverbial shitcan (judicial or otherwise). This call will become part of Pacific Street’s upcoming feature documentary, FORECLOSURE DIARIES.

Federal banking regulators have not officially imposed their new rules for the top mortgage servicers, but criticism is already being heard. A wide coalition of consumer and housing groups is denouncing the legal agreements, which are likely to be published within a few days. ?

[...]

The problem, said Alys Cohen of the National Consumer Law Center, is the agreements “do not in any way require the servicers to stop avoidable foreclosures, and that is what we need.”