Courtesy of Ice Legal–
Q. Okay. And the bailee letter, can you describe
19 for me what’s contained in that letter?
20 A. It’s funny that they call it a letter because
21 it really doesn’t look like a letter. It just looks
22 like a cover sheet. It documents the date that the
23 originals were checked out and the signature or
24 acknowledgement for receipt for it.
25 Q. Okay. Do you know who checked that out?
A. I don’t recall the specific name.
2 Q. Do you know where it was checked out from?
3 A. Yeah. It was requested from the document
5 Q. Who is the document custodian?
6 A. The document custodian is Deutsche Bank
7 National Trust.
8 Q. And do you know where?
9 A. It’s located in California. I don’t have the
10 specific address.
11 Q. And you said the bailee letter contained an
12 acknowledgement of receipt?
13 A. Yeah.
14 Q. Who acknowledged that?
15 A. It was the signature. Like I said earlier, I
16 don’t recall the name signed on that.
17 Q. Sure it wasn’t somebody at OneWest?
18 A. No. It was someone at I believe Florida
19 Default was the original firm, if I recall.
20 Q. Okay. So OneWest’s outside counsel?
21 A. At that time OneWest didn’t even exist. This
22 was back in 2008. So it would have been — I can’t
23 even recall. It would be IndyMac or IndyMac Federal.
Q. Okay. So your testimony was that plaintiff
2 held the note before the filing of the lawsuit, right?
3 A. Yes, sir. To my knowledge, based on my
4 business record.
5 Q. Okay. Are you aware that plaintiff alleged in
6 the original complaint that the note was lost?
7 A. I am aware of that. I came across it in some
8 of the business record review. Not really sure why
9 that was the case or why that occurred.
Q. Do you know what date Deutsche Bank bought the
22 A. Not specifically. It was in December. I
23 guess about 30 days after origination. Thirty to
24 45 days if I remember correctly.
25 Q. Do you know what was paid?
A. No, I don’t know that. I know some other
2 facts about the particular pool. Close to 780 loans in
4 Q. Who did plaintiff buy the loan from?
5 A. The actual I guess pool of loans, they were
6 purchased from IndyMac.
7 Q. So plaintiff bought the note and mortgage from
9 A. Plaintiffs bought the asset, yes, as a part of
10 the pool.
Q. Is this a copy of the original note?
12 A. Yes, it appears to be.
13 Q. How do you know?
14 A. Just in terms of the basic fundamental things,
15 the origination the 21st of 2005, the property address,
16 the amount on the promise to pay.
17 Q. But you have already testified you never seen
18 the original note, right?
19 A. Yes, that’s correct.
20 Q. Is there an endorsement on this note?
21 A. No, there is not.
22 Q. Is there an allonge attached to this note?
23 A. No, there is not.
Q. Okay. Do you know who hired Florida Default
24 Law Group for this case?
25 A. Not directly, no, sir.
Q. Is Erica Johnson-Seck in charge of the
2 attorney network for OneWest Bank?
3 A. She is responsible, but I don’t know if she is
4 directly responsible for hiring the firms or assessing
5 their performance.
Q. Who did plaintiff obtain the right to enforce
4 the note and mortgage from?
5 A. As plaintiff you mean Deutsche Bank?
6 Q. Right.
7 A. Well, they hold the original note and the
9 Q. And they obtained the original note and
10 mortgage from whom?
11 A. At the time of transaction or sale, the
12 documents were transferred over to them. That would
13 have been in 2005.
14 Q. So who did they obtain possession from?
15 A. They purchased the asset from IndyMac.
16 Q. So IndyMac was in physical possession of this
17 prior to plaintiff coming in possession?
18 A. I don’t want to draw any conclusions or
19 assumptions. I wasn’t there personally myself, but
20 yes, I would assume so. If Deutsche Bank was in
21 possession of the originals when they were previously
22 checked out and filed with the court, the assumption is
23 that they would have obtained those documents from the
24 FDIC — or not from the FDIC, from IndyMac when they
25 consummated the sale.