UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
COUNTY OF COOK,
Plaintiff,
vs.
HSBC NORTH AMERICA HOLDINGS
INC., HSBC FINANCE CORPORATION,
HSBC MORTGAGE CORPORATION (USA
HSBC MORTGAGE SERVICES INC.,
HSBC USA INC., HSBC BANK USA,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, BENEFICIAL
COMPANY LLC, DECISION ONE
MORTGAGE COMPANY, LLC,
HFC COMPANY LLC
Defendants.
Table of Contents
Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………..3
Jurisdiction & Venue ……………………………………………………………………………13
Parties ……………….……………………………………………………………………….….14
Facts ………………………………………………………………………………………..…..16
A. Defendants Intended to Engage in Predatory & Discriminatory Lending to
Drive Growth ….……………………………………………………………………….16
B. The Federal Government Has Found That Discrimination Was Pervasive In
Subprime Mortgage Lending During 2003 Through 2007………………………………..18
C. Defendants Discriminated Against FHA Protected Minority Borrowers In
Originating Predatory Mortgage Loan Products ……………………………………….23
i. Defendants Targeted Marketing To Minorities……………….………..27
ii. Defendants Used Discretionary Pricing Policies……………….….……36
iii. Defendants Used Uniform Underwriting Policies…………….………..40
iv. Defendant, Decision One, Used Discriminatory Appraisal &
Override Practices ………………………………………………………………42
v. Defendants Enforced And Incentivized Their Discriminatory Pricing,
And Underwriting Appraisal Policies Through Employees ….………………….44
vi. Empirical Data Evidences Defendants’ Discriminatory Practices …..…..45
D. Defendants’ Fostered, Enabled And Otherwise Encouraged Discrimination
Against FHA Protected Minority Borrowers In Predatory Loan Products
Originated Within Defendants’ Wholesale Channel Of Broker And Correspondent
Lenders…………………………………………………………………..………………..47
E. The Securitization Model, Corporate Structure & MERS: Linchpins To
Defendants’ Predatory & Discriminatory Lending Scheme..……………………..…….58
i. Defendants’ Structure Isolated & Concealed Risk .…………….…….. 60
ii. Defendants Concealed & Obfuscated Liability with MERS…………….65
iii. Defendants Passed Financial Risks to Third Parties With
Securitization……………………………………………………………………68
iv. Defendants’ Subprime & Securitization Caused The Financial Crisis….72
F. Predatory & Discriminatory Lending Caused the Foreclosure Crisis …….……….76
G. The Foreclosure Crisis Disparately Impacts Minorities ………………………….. 83
H. Defendants’ Continuing Mortgage Servicing & Foreclosure Practices Are
Predatory and Discriminatory ……………………………………………….……….. 88
I. Defendants’ Predatory & Discriminatory Mortgage Lending, Servicing &
Foreclosure Practices Have Injured the Plaintiff ……………………..…….………….. 96
Cause of Action (Federal Fair Housing Act) ……………………………………………….…104
Demand for Jury Trial ………………………………………………………………….……. 107
Prayer for Relief ……………………………………………………………………….……. 107
[…]
© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.
These banks systemically discriminated against the upper class entire middle class, the poor and minorities. There should be no discrimination at all. The same interest rate for all. Talk about supression.