June, 2013 | FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA

Archive | June, 2013

FLAGSTAR BANK, FSB v. Harvey, 2013 Ohio 2666 – Ohio: Court of Appeals, 9th Appellate Dist. | THE CASE WAS NOT LITIGATED BY THE REAL PARTY IN INTEREST

FLAGSTAR BANK, FSB v. Harvey, 2013 Ohio 2666 – Ohio: Court of Appeals, 9th Appellate Dist. | THE CASE WAS NOT LITIGATED BY THE REAL PARTY IN INTEREST

2013-Ohio-2666

FLAGSTAR BANK, FSB, Appellee,
v.
JIBAU HARVEY, et al., Appellant.

C.A. No. 26594.
Court of Appeals of Ohio, Ninth District, Summit County.
June 26, 2013.
KANI HARVEY HIGHTOWER, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.

AUSTIN B. BARNES, Attorney at Law, for Appellee.

DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

MOORE, Presiding Judge.

{¶1} Defendant-Appellant, Jibau Harvey, appeals from the July 20, 2012 and August 8, 2012 judgment entries of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. This Court reverses.

I.

{¶2} In January of 2011, Flagstar Bank, FSB filed a complaint in foreclosure against Mr. Harvey alleging that he defaulted upon his mortgage note and owed $108,639.63, plus interest at 5.50% per year from January 1, 2010. In addition, Flagstar Bank, FSB attached to its complaint copies of the (1) note, (2) mortgage, (3) December 8, 2010 assignment of the mortgage from Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as nominee for Flagstar Bank, FSB, a Federally Chartered Savings Bank, to Flagstar Bank, FSB, and (4) preliminary judicial report.

{¶3} Mr. Harvey filed a motion to dismiss the bank’s complaint alleging that Flagstar Bank, FSB lacked standing to file this lawsuit, and that Flagstar Bank, FSB failed to join a necessary party. In support of his motion, Mr. Harvey attached copies of three assignments of the mortgage evidencing transfers from: (1) Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as nominee for Flagstar Bank, FSB, A Federally Chartered Savings Bank, to Flagstar Bank, FSB, dated December 8, 2010, (2) Flagstar Bank, FSB to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, dated April 8, 2011, and (3) the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to DKR Mortgage Asset Trust I, dated May 9, 2011.

{¶4} Flagstar Bank, FSB then filed a motion to substitute the party plaintiff from Flagstar Bank, FSB to DKR Mortgage Asset Trust I. In its motion, Flagstar Bank, FSB asserted that, based upon its attached documents, DKR Asset Trust I is the proper party plaintiff in this matter. The attached documents include a copy of the note showing the original “lender” as Flagstar Bank, FSB, A Federally Chartered Savings Bank, endorsed to HUD then to DKR Asset Trust I, and subsequent assignments of the mortgage from Flagstar Bank, FSB, to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and from the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to DKR Mortgage Asset Trust I.

{¶5} The trial court granted Flagstar Bank, FSB’s motion to substitute DKR Mortgage Asset Trust I as the party plaintiff and denied Mr. Harvey’s motion to dismiss. Mr. Harvey then filed an answer generally denying the allegations in Flagstar Bank, FSB’s complaint.

{¶6} DKR Mortgage Asset Trust I filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that there are no genuine issues of material fact for trial because Mr. Harvey’s general denial and undemonstrated defenses alone cannot overcome summary judgment. At the same time, it filed the affidavit of Annette Torres, who is purportedly employed by the “plaintiff” in this matter as servicer of Mr. Harvey’s account.

{¶7} In response, Mr. Harvey jointly filed (1) a reply to DKR Mortgage Asset Trust I’s motion for summary judgment and (2) a renewed motion to dismiss. Mr. Harvey asserted that: (1) all of the pleadings filed on DKR Mortgage Asset Trust I’s behalf continue to be filed under Flagstar Bank, FSB’s name, (2) it is unclear who the real party in interest is because all negotiations and mediations were handled by Kondaur Capital Corporation, (3) DKR Mortgage Asset Trust I did not meet its evidentiary burden entitling it to judgment as a matter of law, and (4) it would be inequitable, under the circumstances, to foreclose upon the property.

{¶8} DKR Mortgage Asset Trust I filed a “sur-reply” stating, among other things, that, in support of its motion for substitution of the party plaintiff, it attached a copy of the note endorsed to DKR Mortgage Asset Trust I, as well as the assignment of the mortgage from the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to DKR Mortgage Asset Trust I. DKR Mortgage Asset Trust I also attached a copy of a limited power of attorney, dated April 28, 2011, naming Kondaur Capital Corporation as its attorney-in-fact.

{¶9} The trial court denied Mr. Harvey’s renewed motion to dismiss, and granted DKR Mortgage Asset Trust I’s motion for summary judgment. The trial court also issued a foreclosure decree and ordered that the property be sold.

{¶10} Mr. Harvey appealed, raising three assignments of error for our consideration. Because it is dispositive of this appeal, we will now address Mr. Harvey’s second assignment of error.

II.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR II

THE TRIAL COURT LACKED JURISDICTION TO ENTER JUDGMENT IN THIS CASE, AS THE CASE WAS NOT LITIGATED BY THE REAL PARTY IN INTEREST[.]

{¶11} In Fed. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald, 134 Ohio St.3d 13, 2012-Ohio-5017, ¶ 3, the Supreme Court of Ohio stated that “receiving an assignment of a promissory note and mortgage from the real party in interest subsequent to the filing of an action but prior to the entry of judgment does not cure a lack of standing to file a foreclosure action.” “The Ohio Constitution provides in Article IV, Section 4(B): `The courts of common pleas and divisions thereof shall have such original jurisdiction over all justiciable matters and such powers of review of proceedings of administrative officers and agencies as may be provided by law.'” (Emphasis sic.) Id. at ¶ 20.

Whether a party has a sufficient stake in an otherwise justiciable controversy to obtain judicial resolution of that controversy is what has traditionally been referred to as the question of standing to sue. Where the party does not rely on any specific statute authorizing invocation of the judicial process, the question of standing depends on whether the party has alleged * * * a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy.

(Internal quotations omitted.) Id. at ¶ 21, quoting Cleveland v. Shaker Hts., 30 Ohio St.3d 49, 51 (1987). Standing is a jurisdictional matter and, therefore, must be established at the time the complaint is filed. Schwartzwald at ¶ 24.

{¶12} At the commencement of an action, if a plaintiff does not have standing to invoke the court’s jurisdiction, the “common pleas court cannot substitute a real party in interest for another party if no party with standing has invoked its jurisdiction in the first instance.” Id. at ¶ 38. “The lack of standing at the commencement of a foreclosure action requires dismissal of the complaint; however, that dismissal is not an adjudication on the merits and is therefore without prejudice.” Id. at ¶ 40.

{¶13} Here, attached to its complaint, Flagstar Bank, FSB provided a copy of the original note wherein Mr. Harvey promised to pay Flagstar Bank, FSB, A Federally Chartered Savings Bank, $109,615.00, plus interest at the rate of 5.50% per year, until the amount is paid. Flagstar Bank, FSB also provided a copy of the original mortgage between Mr. Harvey and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as a nominee for Flagstar Bank, FSB, A Federally Chartered Savings Bank. Further, Flagstar Bank, FSB provided a copy of an assignment of the mortgage from Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as a nominee for Flagstar Bank, FSB, A Federally Chartered Savings Bank, to Flagstar Bank, FSB.

{¶14} It appears from the assignment of the mortgage from Flagstar Bank, FSB, A Federally Chartered Savings Bank, to Flagstar Bank, FSB, that these are two separate and distinct entities. However, the record is devoid of any proof that the note was ever endorsed to Flagstar Bank, FSB, from Flagstar Bank FSB, A Federally Charted Savings Bank. Therefore, a question arises as to whether Flagstar Bank, FSB was actually the holder of the note at the time it filed its complaint.

{¶15} In light of the Supreme Court of Ohio’s recent decision, we reverse and remand this matter so that the trial court may apply Schwartzwald to the facts of this case in order to determine whether Flagstar Bank, FSB had standing when it filed its complaint.

{¶16} Mr. Harvey’s second assignment of error is sustained.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR I

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AS A MATTER OF LAW WHEN IT GRANTED JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF A PLAINTIFF AND SUBSEQUENTLY ORDER[ED] THE PROPERTY TO BE SOLD WHEN [] [IT IS] QUESTIONABLE WHO THE PLAINTIFF IS, WHETHER THE PLAINTIFF IS NOT THE REAL PARTY IN INTEREST, OR WHETHER THE REAL PARTY IN INTEREST EVER [LITIGATED] THE CASE[.]

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR III

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AS A MATTER OF LAW WHEN IT GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF [DKR MORTGAGE ASSET TRUST I] AND ORDERED THAT THE PROPERTY BE SOLD WHEN [DKR MORTGAGE ASSET TRUST I] FAILED TO MEET ITS BURDEN OF PROOF UNDER CIV.R. 56[.]

{¶17} Based upon our resolution of Mr. Harvey’s second assignment of error, his first and third assignments of error are not yet ripe for review.

III.

{¶18} In sustaining Mr. Harvey’s second assignment of error, the judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas is reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings consistent with this decision.

Judgment reversed, cause remanded.

There were reasonable grounds for this appeal.

We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common Pleas, County of Summit, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this journal entry shall constitute the mandate, pursuant to App.R. 27.

Immediately upon the filing hereof, this document shall constitute the journal entry of judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the period for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22(C). The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is instructed to mail a notice of entry of this judgment to the parties and to make a notation of the mailing in the docket, pursuant to App.R. 30.

Costs taxed to Appellee.

BELFANCE, J. and HENSAL, J., CONCUR.

Down Load PDF of This Case

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

L.A. settles for $10 million in Deutsche Bank slumlord lawsuit

L.A. settles for $10 million in Deutsche Bank slumlord lawsuit

LA TIMES-

When lawyers for the city of Los Angeles took Deutsche Bank to court two years ago, they decried the world’s-fourth largest bank as among the city’s worst slumlords and sought hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties and restitution.

But a settlement announced by city officials Friday only delivered $10 million —none of which will be paid directly by the bank. The bank does, however, have to ensure its foreclosed properties are properly maintained in the city, L.A. officials said.

That could be a transformative move for some city neighborhoods because the Frankfurt, Germany-based bank foreclosed on more than 2,000 homes between 2007 and 2011 in areas like the San Fernando Valley, South Los Angeles and northeast Los Angeles, according to the suit.

City lawyers had accused Deutsche Bank of letting hundreds of its properties fall into disrepair which, in turn, bred crime. City officials also said that some tenants were illegally evicted, while others lived in squalor and many properties became graffiti-scarred dens for squatters or criminals.

“This particular bank is … helping to destroy communities,” City Councilman Dennis Zine said in 2011.

[LA TIMES]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

‘Unprecedented’ gag order issued against chalker who faces decade in prison for anti-Bank (of America) free speech

‘Unprecedented’ gag order issued against chalker who faces decade in prison for anti-Bank (of America) free speech

RT-

A California man facing more than a decade in prison for writing with chalk on public sidewalks has been told he’s barred from discussing the details of his controversial case outside of court.

Judge Howard Shore issued a gag-order in a San Diego, California courtroom this week against Jeff Olson, a 40-year-old activist that used washable children’s chalk to scribble anti-bank slogans in public space last year.

According to the San Diego Reader, the gag-order issued on Friday also applies to witnesses, members of the jury and potentially others, a measure that Truth-Out editor Mark Karlin said is “unprecedented” for a misdemeanor trial.

Olson has been charged with 13 misdemeanor counts of vandalism for chalking slogans such as “No Thanks, Big Banks” and “Shame on Bank of America” on the sidewalks outside of branches in the San Diego area throughout 2012. Now as the criminal trial against him wages on in Southern California, the defendant and anyone remotely involved in the case is reportedly muzzled by a ban that could bring media coverage of the case to a grinding halt.

[RT]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD2 Comments

David Dayen: New Bank of America whistle-blower emerges: More customer abuse secrets

David Dayen: New Bank of America whistle-blower emerges: More customer abuse secrets

Bank of America whistle-blower details latest scheme to abuse homeowners, evade settlement rules and pocket cash


Salon-

Last week, I detailed bombshell revelations from Bank of America whistle-blowers, in which former employees of the bank detailed systematic fraud and deceptive practices inside their loan modification department — including bonuses and Target gift cards for staff who racked up foreclosures.

Now, another new lawsuit, featuring a separate whistle-blower, contains additional remarkable revelations – and may shed light on Bank of America’s strategy in getting out from under the mountain of legal exposure and costs in which it now finds itself. Simply put, the bank seeks to pocket quick cash and evade practices set forth in major settlements – by cashing out of the subprime mortgage servicing business. The result would be to leave struggling homeowners back at square one, with even fewer protections to avoid foreclosure.

[SALON]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD4 Comments

Hawaii Foreclosure fight, potential class action lawsuit?

Hawaii Foreclosure fight, potential class action lawsuit?

KHON2-

Everybody knows the rules, skip your mortgage and you could face foreclosure. But what about when the banks themselves are accused of skipping some of their duties?

Thousands of people are thought to be potentially affected by banking practices that appear headed toward class action lawsuits in Hawaii.

A recently settled case could influence the outcome.

A widow, Margery Kekauoha-Alisa, has ended a years-long foreclosure battle that led to bankruptcy. She thought the Hawaii Belt Road home she had owned on the Big Island with her now deceased husband was gone.

The case record shows they had missed their mortgage eight times. The bank had to foreclose.

That was 2005, and she wasn’t alone. Banks were taking homes en masse.

[KHON2]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD1 Comment

Brown v U.S. Bank | FL 4DCA – Bank’s process server placed the wrong date

Brown v U.S. Bank | FL 4DCA – Bank’s process server placed the wrong date

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT

January Term 2013

FRED BROWN and MARGARET CRONEY-BROWN,
Appellants,

v.

U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee for the Structured
Asset Investment Loan Trust, 2005-9; TRAILWOOD HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION, INC.; JOHN DOE and JANE DOE, as unknown tenants
in possession; and ANY AND ALL UNKNOWN PARTIES CLAIMING BY,
THROUGH, UNDER, AND AGAINST THE HEREIN NAMED INDIVIDUAL
DEFENDANT(S) WHO ARE NOT KNOWN TO BE DEAD OR ALIVE,
WHETHER SAID UNKNOWN PARTIES MAY CLAIM AN INTEREST AS
SPOUSES, HEIRS, DEVISEES, GRANTEES OR OTHER CLAIMANTS,
Appellees.

No. 4D12-4612

[June 26, 2013]
PER CURIAM.

This appeal arises from the trial court’s denial of appellant Margaret
Croney-Brown’s motion to quash service of process in the underlying
foreclosure proceedings. In their initial brief, appellants (Mrs. Croney-
Brown a n d her husband) argue that appellee U.S. Bank National
Association (the “Bank”) failed to meet its burden of showing that it
effectuated valid service of process by strictly complying with the service
of process statutes. Section 48.031(5), Florida Statutes (2009), requires
the process server to note the actual date and time of service on the
summons. See also Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.070(e) (requiring that the “date and
hour of service shall be endorsed on the original process and all copies of
it by the person making the service”). When a process server fails to
strictly comply with these rules, service must be quashed. See Kwong v.
Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, L.P., 54 So. 3d 1033, 1034 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2011); Schupak v. Sutton Hill Assocs., 710 So. 2d 707, 708 (Fla. 4th
DCA 1998) (“Strict compliance with the statutes governing service of
process is required.”). In this instance, the Bank’s process server placed
the wrong date on Mrs. Croney-Brown’s summons,1 a fact which the
Bank never disputed.

Appellants further contend that Mrs. Croney-Brown did not waive the
defect in service by making discovery requests and moving for sanctions
(for failure to comply with court order compelling discovery).2 These
motions, which were purely defensive in nature, could not be maintained
“independently of plaintiff’s claim,” and thus, were not requests for
affirmative relief. See Heineken v. Heineken, 683 So. 2d 194, 197 (Fla.
1st DCA 1996) (“‘[A]ffirmative relief’ [is] ‘[r]elief for which defendant might
maintain an action independently of plaintiff’s claim and on which he
might proceed to recovery, although plaintiff abandoned his cause of
action or failed to establish it.’”) (quoting Grange Ins. Ass’n v. State, 757
P.2d 933, 940 (Wash. 1988) (en banc) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 56
(5th ed. 1979))); see also Babcock v. Whatmore, 707 So. 2d 702, 704 (Fla.
1998).

Appellee advises this court that, in lieu of filing an answer brief, it
concedes that the denial of Mrs. Croney-Brown’s motion to quash service
was reversible error. We accept the appellee’s confession of error, and
reverse and remand this cause to the trial court for further proceedings
consistent herewith.

Reversed and Remanded.
STEVENSON, GROSS and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
* * *
Appeal of a non-final order from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth
Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Susan R. Lubitz, Judge; L.T. Case
No. 50 2009 CA 029344 XXXX MB.
Thomas Erskine Ice of Ice Appellate, Royal Palm Beach, for
appellants.

1 When the Bank served Mrs. Croney-Brown, the process server listed the date
and time of service on the Summons as September 1, 2009, at 9:40 p.m.
Contrastingly, the date and time on the return of service indicated not only a
different time, but a different date—September 2, 2009, at 9:40 a.m.2 The Bank has apparently abandoned the waiver argument, which appellants
assert was its only argument below—and the argument upon which the trial
court relied in denying the motion to quash.

Dean A. Morande and Michael K. Winston of Carlton Fields, P.A.,
West Palm Beach, for appellee U.S. Bank National Association.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

Down Load PDF of This Case

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

BofA, Wells Fargo Won’t Face Mortgage Deal Enforcement Case

BofA, Wells Fargo Won’t Face Mortgage Deal Enforcement Case

Bloomberg-

Bank of America Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC) won’t face an enforcement action by state and federal officials over claims the banks violated a $25 billion mortgage-servicing settlement.

The agreement established a process for banks to fix violations and remediate harm to borrowers, a committee of states and federal agencies said in a letter today to the New York Attorney General’s office, which claims Bank of America and Wells Fargo have violated the settlement.

The oversight process “will be the most efficient path to improving services to borrowers — and, we believe, will bring about those reforms more quickly than protracted litigation on these particular issues,” the committee wrote.

[BLOOMBERG]

image: AP

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

ResCap to Pay $230M to End Foreclosure Reviews

ResCap to Pay $230M to End Foreclosure Reviews

American Banker-

Residential Capital has won court permission to set aside $230 million for payments to homeowners whom the company may have foreclosed on improperly.

The former subprime mortgage unit of Ally Financial has received approval to enter into an agreement with the Federal Reserve Board that would end regulatory review of its foreclosure practices, Judge Martin Glenn of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan ruled on Wednesday.

The ruling means that ResCap, which has operated under bankruptcy protection since last year, would join 10 mortgage servicers that agreed in January to pay a combined $8.5 billion to end similar reviews.

[AMERICAN BANKER]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Will The Niday & Brandrup Rulings Change How Foreclosures Are Conducted In Oregon? Not Likely!

Will The Niday & Brandrup Rulings Change How Foreclosures Are Conducted In Oregon? Not Likely!

Q-Law

Background. As mentioned in an earlier post here, the Niday case, which I have previously commented on here and here as it was winding its way up the appellate process, and its companion case, Brandrup, were recently decided by the Oregon Supreme Court.

Brandrup presented to the Court four “certified questions” for the judges, sitting as a full panel “en banc”, regarding MERS and its role as henchman for the Big Banks in the Oregon trust deed foreclosure process. The Brandrup opinion is found here.
Niday, was decided based of the Court’s answers to the certified questions in Brandrup. The Niday opinion is found here.

Before commenting, I have set forth below, the text of the questions and Court’s answers in Brandrup. In an effort to provide a “scorecard”, I have commented in bold text below the questions and answers.

Oregon Supreme Court Decision – Brandrup.

[Q-LAW]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD2 Comments

Partial settlement approved in County lawsuit against MERS

Partial settlement approved in County lawsuit against MERS

Your Houston News-

Harris County Commissioners Court on Tuesday (June 25) agreed to a landmark settlement in a lawsuit that will result in greater accuracy of county real property records.

Harris, along with Brazoria and Dallas Counties, has reached a partial agreement with Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) that will ensure that county records accurately reflect MERS’s relationship to transactions involving real property.

Under Texas law, mortgage transfers, payoffs, and other important matters relating to the ownership of real property are recorded in the county property records. Title companies, lenders, and potential purchasers rely on county records to determine ownership of property.

[YOUR HOUSTON NEWS]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

NWT WHITE PAPER: UNDERSTANDING CURRENT ASSIGNMENT VERIFICATION PRACTICES

NWT WHITE PAPER: UNDERSTANDING CURRENT ASSIGNMENT VERIFICATION PRACTICES

White Paper

UNDERSTANDING CURRENT ASSIGNMENT VERIFICATION PRACTICES

The scrutiny of the completeness of collateral review and valid assignment chains has hit the mortgage industry hard, primarily because the industry went from a securitization process that didn’t require assignments to be recorded to a heavily scrutinized process requiring complete chains to be recorded at the county. This has made compliance extremely difficult for many lenders and others, especially because the industry went for so many years without this level of scrutiny. As a result, most lenders-servicers have actually inherited these problems rather than caused them directly

The result is a new industry-wide focus on assignment verification as part of the mortgage assignment process. This verification is accomplished by conducting a thorough collateral documentation review and mortgage/assignment chain audit in order to verify and execute mortgage assignments.

[…]

Click Image Below

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD4 Comments

Investigation Shows Politicians Profit off Foreclosure Sales

Investigation Shows Politicians Profit off Foreclosure Sales

WNYC-

When New York State Senator John Sampson was arrested last month for allegedly embezzling $440,000 from foreclosure sales, the curtain pulled back on a little known corner of the state’s justice system – the job of foreclosure referee.

These are the private attorneys state court judges appoint to figure out how much is owed on a mortgage and to oversee any sale at a foreclosure auction.

WNYC spent weeks trying to understand how these court appointees operate — reviewing property records, real estate data and hundreds of court files – and found a system with little oversight, rife with irregularities and dominated by political insiders.

While more than 2,500 attorneys have been eligible to act as referees over the past few years, about 3 percent received a third of the cases, according to a WNYC analysis of data from real estate information service PropertyShark.

[WNYC]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Jeff Olson, California Man, Faces 13 Years In Jail For Writing Anti-Big Bank Messages In Chalk

Jeff Olson, California Man, Faces 13 Years In Jail For Writing Anti-Big Bank Messages In Chalk

HuffPO-

Jeff Olson, a 40-year-old man from San Diego, Calif., will face jail time for charges stemming from anti-big bank messages he scrawled in water-soluble chalk outside Bank of America branches last year.

The San Diego Reader reported Tuesday that a judge had decided to prohibit Olson’s attorney from “mentioning the First Amendment, free speech, free expression, public forum, expressive conduct, or political speech during the trial.”

With that ruling, Olson must now stand trial on 13 counts of vandalism, charges that together carry a potential 13-year jail sentence and fines of up to $13,000.

“Oh my gosh,” Olson said on his way out of court on Tuesday. “I can’t believe this is happening.”

[HUFFINGTON POST]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD3 Comments

Senators to Introduce Bill to End Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac

Senators to Introduce Bill to End Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac

Bloomberg-

A bipartisan group of senators is planning to introduce a proposal today for replacing U.S.-owned mortgage financiers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (FMCC) with a newly created government reinsurer.

The bill to be offered by Senators Bob Corker and Mark Warner reflects a prevailing view among lawmakers that the two government-sponsored enterprises should cease to exist while a federal role in backing mortgage lending should remain. Corker, a Tennessee Republican, and Warner, a Virginia Democrat, have set a news conference for 2:15 p.m. to introduce the measure.

The senators have revised the proposal from an earlier version to reduce the losses that lenders would take on bad mortgages during a financial crisis, according to a draft copy of the revised 154-page bill that was obtained yesterday.

“There is a bipartisan effort here that’s thoughtful and it is without question the most thorough Congressional effort to draft a GSE reform legislation to date,” David Stevens, president and chief executive officers of the Mortgage Bankers Association, said in an interview.

[BLOOMBERG]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD1 Comment

The Daily Show: Money Boo Boo Internal e-mails implicate credit rating agencies in the 2008 financial crisis.

The Daily Show: Money Boo Boo Internal e-mails implicate credit rating agencies in the 2008 financial crisis.

courtesy of The Daily Show

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Another Conflicted Foreclosure Review: PricewaterhouseCoopers and Ally/ResCap

Another Conflicted Foreclosure Review: PricewaterhouseCoopers and Ally/ResCap

Everything and everyone tied to these mortgages are a fraud!

Forbes-

One of the fundamental tenets of the “independent” foreclosure reviews of mortgage servicers ordered by the OCC and Federal Reserve Board was the independence and objectivity of the consultants. The ICs for the IFRs were supposed to determine how much harm had been inflicted on borrowers subjected to error-ridden and, in some cases, fraudulent foreclosures.

We know that Allonhill was disqualified after the reviews started. We also know that the OCC looked the other way at the blatant independence conflict when JP Morgan engaged Deloitte to review Deloitte’s former audit clients’ foreclosure failures at Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual – now owned by JPM. There was at least one more serious consultant independence issue than previously reported.

PricewaterhouseCoopers, selected to perform the “independent” foreclosure reviews for Ally/ResCap, approved by the Fed, was the ResCap independent auditor during a portion of the period covered by ResCap’s foreclosure reviews.

[FORBES]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

FORMER LPS EXECUTIVE SENTENCED TO 5 YEARS IN PRISON FOR ROLE IN MORTGAGE-RELATED DOCUMENT FRAUD SCHEME

FORMER LPS EXECUTIVE SENTENCED TO 5 YEARS IN PRISON FOR ROLE IN MORTGAGE-RELATED DOCUMENT FRAUD SCHEME

______________________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                               CRM
TUESDAY, JUNE 25, 2013                                         (202) 514-2007
WWW.JUSTICE.GOV                                                    TTY (866) 544-5309
.
FORMER EXECUTIVE AT FLORIDA-BASED LENDER PROCESSING SERVICES
INC. SENTENCED TO FIVE YEARS IN PRISON FOR ROLE IN
MORTGAGE-RELATED DOCUMENT FRAUD SCHEME
 
Over 1 Million Documents Prepared and Filed with Forged and False Signatures, Fraudulent Notarizations

WASHINGTON – A former executive of Lender Processing Services Inc. (LPS) – a publicly traded company based in Jacksonville, Fla. – was sentenced today to serve five years in prison for her participation in a six-year scheme to prepare and file more than 1 million fraudulently signed and notarized mortgage-related documents with property recorders’ offices throughout the United States, announced Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Florida Robert E. O’Neill, and Special Agent in Charge Michelle S. Klimt of the FBI Jacksonville Division.

Lorraine Brown, 56, of Alpharetta, Ga., was sentenced by Senior U.S. District Judge Henry Lee Adams Jr. in the Middle District of Florida. In addition to her prison term, Brown was sentenced to serve two years of supervised release and ordered to pay a fine of $15,000.  On Nov. 20, 2012, Brown pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud. 

“Lorraine Brown will spend five years in prison for her central role in a scheme to fraudulently execute thousands of mortgage-related documents while our nation’s housing market was at its most vulnerable point in generations,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Raman.  “The documents that were fraudulently produced under Brown’s direction were relied upon in court proceedings, including a significant number of foreclosure and bankruptcy matters. Today’s sentencing represents appropriate punishment for someone who sought to capitalize on the nation’s housing crisis.”

“Floridians were hard hit by the downturn in the real estate market,” said U.S. Attorney O’Neill.  “We will continue to pursue individuals like Brown who took advantage of consumers for personal gain and contributed to the financial crisis.  Prosecuting financial crimes remains a priority for our office.”

“The investigation of sophisticated mortgage and corporate fraud schemes continues to be a priority for the Federal Bureau of Investigation as such criminal activities have a significant economic impact on our community,” said Special Agent in Charge Klimt.

Brown was an executive at LPS and the chief executive of DocX LLC, which was a wholly-owned subsidiary of LPS, until it was closed down in early 2010.  DocX’s main clients were residential mortgage servicers, which typically undertake certain actions for the owners of mortgage-backed promissory notes.  Servicers hired DocX to, among other things, assist in creating and executing mortgage-related documents filed with recorders’ offices.

According to Brown’s plea agreement, employees of DocX, at the direction of Brown and others, began forging and falsifying signatures of authorized personnel on the mortgage-related documents that they had been hired to prepare and file with property recorders’ offices.  Only specific personnel at DocX were authorized by clients to sign the documents, but the documents were fraudulently notarized as if actually executed by authorized DocX employees.

According to plea documents, Brown implemented these signing practices at DocX to enable DocX and Brown to generate greater profit.  Specifically, DocX was able to create, execute and file larger volumes of documents using these signing and notarization practices.  To further increase profits, DocX also hired temporary workers to act as authorized signers.  These temporary employees worked for much lower costs and without the quality control represented by Brown to DocX’s clients.  Some of these temporary workers were able to sign thousands of mortgage-related instruments a day.  Between 2003 and 2009, DocX generated approximately $60 million in gross revenue.        

            After these documents were falsely signed and fraudulently notarized, Brown authorized DocX employees to file and record them with local county property records offices across the country.  Many of these documents were later relied upon in court proceedings, including property foreclosures and federal bankruptcy actions.  Brown admitted she understood that property recorders, courts, title insurers and homeowners relied upon the documents as genuine.

            This case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Ryan Rohlfsen and Assistant Chief Glenn S. Leon of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark B. Devereaux of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Florida.  This case was investigated by the FBI, with assistance from the state of Florida’s Department of Financial Services.  

This case is part of efforts underway by President Obama’s Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force (FFETF), which was created in November 2009 to wage an aggressive, coordinated and proactive effort to investigate and prosecute financial crimes. With more than 20 federal agencies, 94 U.S. Attorneys’ offices and state and local partners, it’s the broadest coalition of law enforcement, investigatory and regulatory agencies ever assembled to combat fraud. Since its formation, the task force has made great strides in facilitating increased investigation and prosecution of financial crimes; enhancing coordination and cooperation among federal, state and local authorities; addressing discrimination in the lending and financial markets and conducting outreach to the public, victims, financial institutions and other organizations. Over the past three fiscal years, the Justice Department has filed more than 10,000 financial fraud cases against nearly 15,000 defendants including more than 2,900 mortgage fraud defendants. For more information on the task force, visit www.stopfraud.gov.

 

# # #

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD4 Comments

FDIC sues Akerman Senterfitt for failing to record the assignment of judgment and failed to take any other steps to secure the bank’s interest

FDIC sues Akerman Senterfitt for failing to record the assignment of judgment and failed to take any other steps to secure the bank’s interest

Daily Business Review-

Akerman Senterfitt and the chair of its banking practice William C. Arnhols have been hit with a $4.6 million malpractice lawsuit. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. filed the suit on behalf of defunct Peninsula Bank.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. is suing the Akerman Senterfitt law firm and the Miami chair of its banking practice, alleging negligence by the firm over its handling of a real estate loan caused the failed Peninsula Bank to lose $4.6 million.

 The lawsuit, filed June 14 in U.S. District Court in Tampa, names as defendants Akerman; Miami partner William C. Arnhols, who chairs the firm’s banking, lending and structured finance practice; and Drake Batchelder, former managing partner of the firm’s Fort Lauderdale office.

 Ben Hill III, an attorney for Akerman with Hill Ward Henderson in Tampa, said, “We completely disagree with the FDIC position and believe Akerman acted properly in all respects.”

 [Daily Business Review] subscription needed

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Lindgren v. DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, Fla 4DCA | A complaint based on “information and belief,” and not personal knowledge, is insufficient.

Lindgren v. DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, Fla 4DCA | A complaint based on “information and belief,” and not personal knowledge, is insufficient.

JANICE RUBBO LINDGREN, Appellant,
v.
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 4D12-2568.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 19, 2013.
Bruce R. Jacobs of Wedderburn & Jacobs, P.A., Hollywood, for appellant.

No brief filed on behalf of appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the final summary judgment of foreclosure as appellant’s affirmative defenses were not conclusively refuted on the record. The trial court relied on the allegations in a verified complaint to refute the defenses. While a verified complaint may serve the same purpose as an affidavit for purposes of a summary judgment, the complaint’s allegations must meet the requirements of the rule governing supporting and opposing affidavits. See Ballinger v. Bay Gulf Credit Union, 51 So. 3d 528, 529 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510(e) requires that affidavits must be based on personal knowledge and shall “show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated therein.” A complaint based on “information and belief,” and not personal knowledge, is insufficient. Id. Here, the complaint was not based upon personal knowledge and was insufficient to meet the requirements of the rule.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

WARNER, DAMOORGIAN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

Down Load PDF of This Case

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Shareholder wants Bank of America to investigate ex-employees’ claims

Shareholder wants Bank of America to investigate ex-employees’ claims

Charlotte Observer-

An institutional investor is calling on Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan and the bank’s board to investigate allegations from former employees that they were encouraged to deny mortgage modifications to homeowners.

In a letter filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the shareholder, Houston-based Finger Interests Number One, blasts the board and the company’s management in light of the employees’ claims, saying “nothing has really changed” under Moynihan and the leadership of Chairman Charles Holliday.

“The case and, more importantly, the affidavits … say volumes about the failures of senior management and the board of directors to materially change the corporate culture that has long existed at Bank of America prior to Brian Moynihan’s ascendance or most of this board of directors’ inauguration,” says the letter, which the SEC posted on its website Monday.

[CHARLOTTE OBSERVER]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Foreclosure settlement a billion-dollar bust

Foreclosure settlement a billion-dollar bust

The payouts, meant to close the books on an economic catastrophe that staggered millions of American households, have instead reignited feelings of anger and frustration.


USA TODAY-

Steven and Joan Bailey say they’re two-time victims of a broken foreclosure system.

In 2010, they lost their North Carolina home to a foreclosure they say shouldn’t have happened because they were seeking a loan modification at the time. This year, they eagerly awaited their check from a big bank settlement engineered by the government to compensate millions of borrowers for past foreclosure abuses. They expected at least $6,000 or even the maximum — $125,000.

Their check arrived in April — for $800. Less than a month’s rent on their apartment.

“Another disappointment,” says Steven Bailey, a land surveyor who has become a foreclosure activist in Colorado.

[USA TODAY]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD1 Comment

Condo association beats bank in million-dollar foreclosure battle, winning argument: The five-year statute of limitations

Condo association beats bank in million-dollar foreclosure battle, winning argument: The five-year statute of limitations

Miami Herald-

It is a condominium association’s version of winning the lotto.

A big bank missed its deadline to file for foreclosure on a million-dollar condo unit by 10 days.

As a result, Peninsula Condominium Association in Aventura will get to keep the condo — a fancy three-bedroom, three-bathroom bayfront pad that it took ownership of three years ago in its own foreclosure over $61,313 in unpaid fees.

“They got a free condo,” said Michael Cotzen, partner at Hollywood law firm Mansfield Bronstein, which represents the condo association. “You don’t get anything free in this world — but they did.’’

The condo association’s winning argument: The five-year statute of limitations for U.S. Bank to file for foreclosure had passed.

Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Peter R. Lopez agreed.

“We are utterly and completely delighted,” said Edward Steinberg, president of the Peninsula Condominium Association. “It’s a profoundly positive impact for the association.’’

[MIAMI HERALD]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD1 Comment

GARY DUBIN LAW OFFICES FORECLOSURE DEFENSE HAWAII and CALIFORNIA
Advertise your business on StopForeclosureFraud.com
Kenneth Eric Trent, www.ForeclosureDestroyer.com

Archives