FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

For More Information, Contact:

Press inquiries:  Robert Scarola at rlscarola@gmail.com
Tige C. Johnson
JOHNSON LAW, LLC
Barrister Hall
29 South LaSalle Street
Suite 220
Chicago, Illinois 60603

T 312.456.9300 F 312.416.0312

Email: tjohnson@johnsonchicago.com

 November 6, 2014

During Discovery Process, Chicago Attorney Finds WELLS FARGO Made False Statements of Material Fact to FANNIE MAE.

“We aren’t just fighting for a house. We are fighting for a home. What we have found in this case is a continued pattern of fraud and deception. We cannot allow this sort of egregious conduct to continue.” -Tige C. Johnson, Johnson Law, LLC

Chicago Attorney, Tige C. Johnson, filed an Amended Counter Complaint in the 19^th Circuit Lake County Court Waukegan, (Case # 11CH00416) Illinois on behalf of Therese Crowley, Counter Plaintiff vs. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A, d/b/a Wells Fargo Home Mortgage including multiple counts of “Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Fraud by Inducement, Repeated Violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Acts and Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress.”

 After nearly four years of legal maneuvers, delays, and an unsuccessful attempt to conceal the discovery documents under protective orders by Wells, Johnson obtained the documents that reveal the fraud.  In his 34 page, 285 paragraph counter complaint Johnson masterfully reveals with supporting exhibits, an egregious pattern of conduct by Wells Fargo on Crowley’s file that included False Statements of Material Fact as to Wells Fargo’s Submission to Fannie Mae.

The Documents revealed that Fannie Mae, investor on Crowley’s loan, had, in fact, extended an offer for a modification that Wells Fargo never presented to Crowley. In fact, Wells Fargo repeatedly claimed her “investor”(Fannie Mae) denied her Modification application.  What Wells presented to Crowley was a “special forbearance” agreement that was her only pathway to a Loan Modification.  By inducing her into this agreement, seemingly set the stage for Wells to attempt to drive Crowley into foreclosure. With a 52% loan to value – Wells saw the profit potential.

The Discovery documents reveal the False Statements of Material Facts submitted to Fannie Mae (Investor) on behalf of Crowley, which included a false “projected foreclosure date” during the time that Crowley was under a Special Forbearance agreement.  Soon thereafter, Wells Fargo submitted a check request to Fannie Mae for $114,716.64 – Paragraph 164 of complaint “…the evidence of payment from Fannie Mae to Wells Fargo in the amount of $114,716.64, in preparation of foreclosure, suggests that Wells Fargo never intended to offer a permanent loan modification;” Johnson will explore on what basis was Wells entitled to a payout on Crowley’s loan.

A recent study shows that so called service providers like Wells Fargo make more money on a Foreclosure transactions than by offering clients loan modifications.  The documents in Crowley’s complaint substantiate this theory.  In fact Wells Fargo had a financial incentive to ignore the FANNIE MAE guidelines and worked to force a sale of Crowley‘s property.    Given the time of their submission to Fannie Mae –the exhibits in the complaint show the appraisal Wells supplied to Fannie Mae – Crowley’s property was worth $425,222.98 on a $205,000 loan.   With the equity in addition to the $114,716.64 supplied to Wells From Fannie Mae, Wells stood to profit substantially in the case of Crowley.  According to an anonymous source familiar with Wells policies,“ if a property had equity, they were almost always denied.”

The “robo-signing” foreclosure debacle, which cost Wells Fargo millions in settlements and litigation expenses, is the tail end of this process.  The beginning is the cynical approach by the Servicer, which results in the wrongful denials of qualified homeowners for Hamp Loan Modifications.  Homeowners need to see a detailed explanation of their modification denials to ensure that the Consumer is receiving a fair and accurate assessment and determination of their applications.

As Crowley said, “During this 5 year ordeal, I have been haunted about the countless people who have taken their lender at their word and may have needlessly lost their homes because they did not challenge or further investigate their Lender’s refusal to modify their loan; simply accepting they “failed to meet Investor Guidelines” – Taking them at their word – could have been a devastating error in judgment.   I am not just fighting for myself. I want to make sure other people won’t have to endure the same nightmare of harassment, frustration, and relentless stress that I have suffered.  Now we have the evidence that proves what I had sensed during that nightmare.  My hope is that other homeowners demand to see the information in their files and request what was submitted to their “Investor” to insure they were not subjected to the same horrendous conduct.”

To Crowley, it appears now, to have been a business model seeped in fraud and deception not only to her, but the Federal Government agency Fannie Mae.

Comments

comments