December, 2014 - FORECLOSURE FRAUD - Page 2

Archive | December, 2014

Elizabeth Warren was right: The links between Citigroup and government run deep

Elizabeth Warren was right: The links between Citigroup and government run deep

WaPO-

Washington’s version of Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon is much less exciting than everybody else’s. It’s called One Degree of Citigroup, and it’s not much of a game since so many economic policymakers has worked at the banking behemoth. It’s exactly the point Elizabeth Warren made in a big speech last week, expressing anger with Citigroup and other big banks were able to weaken a key Wall Street regulation in the new government spending bill.

[WASHINGTON POST]

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

J.P. Morgan Says It’s More Than Half Done With Mortgage-Settlement Consumer Relief

J.P. Morgan Says It’s More Than Half Done With Mortgage-Settlement Consumer Relief

WSJ-

J.P. Morgan Chase JPM & Co. has told an independent monitor it has provided more than half of the $4 billon in consumer aid mandated under its 2013 mortgage-securities settlement with the Justice Department.

The bank calculates it should receive about $2.25 billion of credit for such actions as cutting mortgage debts for struggling homeowners and lending to low-income home buyers, according to a report released Tuesday by the independent monitor of the bank’s $13 billion settlement.

Joseph Smith, the former North Carolina bank regulator hired to make sure J.P. Morgan follows the consumer-relief terms of the settlement, still needs to validate J.P. Morgan’s calculations before the bank can get credit.

[WALL STREET JOURNAL]

image: Diane Bondare AP

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Billionaire investors at OneWest Bank rec’d $1 billion from FDIC. Expected to receive $1.4 billion more

Billionaire investors at OneWest Bank rec’d $1 billion from FDIC. Expected to receive $1.4 billion more

via: CalReInvest

Fact Sheet: OneWest Bank Expected to Receive Over $2.4 billion from the FDIC

CALIFORNIA
REINVESTMENT
COALITION

Background: When the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) sold IndyMac in 2009 and La Jolla Bank in 2010, it agreed to share losses from bad loans with the billionaire investors who bought the two banks. Under the shared loss agreements, once a certain threshold of loans goes bad, the FDIC agrees to share in the costs of future losses. In July of 2014, OneWest Bank, which has the IndyMac and La Jolla shared loss agreements, announced plans to merge with CIT Group, creating a Systemically Important Financial Institution (SIFI). While executives from the two banks told community leaders they would answer any questions about the proposed merger, they later refused to answer questions about the shared loss agreements. The California Reinvestment Coalition (CRC), a non-profit coalition of over 300 member organizations, was forced to submit a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the FDIC to obtain the information.

Down Load PDF of This Case

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Battisti vs Beaver County Tax Claim Bureau | Pa. court overturns house’s tax sale over $6.30 bill

Battisti vs Beaver County Tax Claim Bureau | Pa. court overturns house’s tax sale over $6.30 bill

H/T CL&P Blog

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In Re: Consolidated Return of The Tax
Claim Bureau of the County of Beaver
From The August 16, 2011 Upset Sale
For Delinquent Taxes

Eileen Battisti

v.

Beaver County Tax Claim Bureau and
S.P. Lewis

Appeal of: Eileen Battisti
BEFORE: HONORABLE DAN PELLEGRINI, President Judge
HONORABLE RENÉE COHN JUBELIRER, Judge
HONORABLE MARY HANNAH LEAVITT, Judge
OPINION
BY JUDGE LEAVITT FILED

December 11, 2014

EXCERPT:

Eileen Battisti (Taxpayer) appeals an order of the Beaver County Court of Common Pleas (trial court) that refused to set aside the sale of her home, which had a market value of approximately $250,000, in order to satisfy a 2009 tax delinquency of $234.72. It is not disputed that in September of 2010 Taxpayer paid $3,990.03, which was the total amount set forth in the Beaver County Tax Claim Bureau’s notice of what she needed to pay to satisfy her 2009 real estate taxes. Likewise, it is not disputed that the Tax Claim Bureau did not advise her that it had applied some of the $3,990.03 payment to an outstanding 2008 shortfall, thereby creating a shortfall on the 2009 tax in the amount of $234.72. In this circumstance, Taxpayer contends that it was the Tax Claim Bureau’s duty under the Real Estate Tax Sale Law1 to offer Taxpayer an installment payment plan on the outstanding 2009 tax amount. We agree and reverse.

[…]

Down Load PDF of This Case

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Judge lets couple back in home while foreclosure case continues

Judge lets couple back in home while foreclosure case continues

Home not secured; refrigerator, stove stolen

 

Jacksonville-

A little more than a month after a lender forced an elderly couple out of their home, a judge ruled the two are allowed back in while a foreclosure case is ongoing.

Jimmie Thompson and Carrie Bell Smith bought their home on West 35th Street in 1995. They paid off the mortgage and wanted to do work on the home.

They got a reverse mortgage — a loan that the couple wouldn’t have to pay back until they died, moved away from the home or violated the contract. After they died, the lender could access the home’s value.

[JACKSONVILLE]

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Remarks by Senator Warren on Citigroup and its bailout provision

Remarks by Senator Warren on Citigroup and its bailout provision

http://warren.senate.gov

Senator Elizabeth Warren spoke on the floor of the Senate on Dec. 12, 2014 about the provision that Citigroup added to the omnibus budget package.

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Elizabeth Warren: Bank giveaway a budget deal breaker

Elizabeth Warren: Bank giveaway a budget deal breaker

Senator Elizabeth Warren talks with Rachel Maddow about her objections to the surprise addition of a measure in the must-pass spending bill that puts taxpayers back on the hook for risky trading by the same financial giants behind the 2008 crash.

 

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Nikooie v. JP Morgan |FL 3rd DCA | “…. when the trial court discovers that the doc taxes have not been paid, the trial court must either dismiss the action without prejudice, or, upon motion, may abate the action to enable the party to purchase and affix the doc stamps.”

Nikooie v. JP Morgan |FL 3rd DCA | “…. when the trial court discovers that the doc taxes have not been paid, the trial court must either dismiss the action without prejudice, or, upon motion, may abate the action to enable the party to purchase and affix the doc stamps.”

Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida

Opinion filed December 10, 2014.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________

No. 3D10 – 3090
Lower Tribunal Nos. 07- 1168, 08-12927
________________

Akbar Nikooie,
Appellant/Cross-Appellee.

vs.

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., General Mortgage Associates, Inc.,
and Attorneys’ Title Insurance Fund, Inc.,
Appellees/Cross-Appellants.

 EXCERPT:

12
Additionally, there is no evidence in the existing record to demonstrate that

Nikooie paid documentary stamp and intangible taxes on the last $189,300 of the

claimed indebtedness. Section 201.08(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2007), specifies that

a mortgage or other instrument “shall not be enforceable in any court of this state

as to any such advance unless and until the tax due thereon upon each advance that

may have been made thereunder has been paid.” This is a statutory limitation on

enforceability applicable to a mortgage lender in a Florida court whether or not the

parties raise it (here, they did not). No payment of tax, no enforcement; thus, on

the present record, Nikooie is only entitled to enforce mortgage liens totaling

$1,160,000 plus interest.10

. . .

11 Solis v. Lacayo,86 So. 3d 1147 , 1148 n.1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (“In an action to
enforce a promissory note, when the trial court discovers that the documentary
taxes have not been paid, the trial court must either dismiss the action without
prejudice, or, upon motion, may abate the action to enable the party to purchase
and affix the documentary stamps.”).

. . .

13
1991). The First District reached the same conclusion in Silber v. Cn’R Industries

of Jacksonville, Inc.,

526 So. 2d 974

(Fla. 1st DCA 1988).

The Fifth District has addressed the particular question presented in the

instant case, holding that “any court,” including an appellate court, should refuse

enforcement of a promissory note under section 201.08(1) if there is no evidence

that the required documentary stamp taxes have been paid:

To this end, section 201.08(1) constitutes an injunction prohibiting
courts from enforcing rights created by instruments upon which
required taxes have not been paid. . . .
….
Unlike an affirmative defense, section 201.08 was not enacted
for the protection of any particular class of defendants, nor was it
enacted to preserve the integrity of the judicial proceedings.
Therefore, a defendant’s failure to plead a plaintiff’s noncompliance
with section 201.08 does not waive the state’s right to receive
payment of the requisite taxes nor does such noncompliance excuse
the court from complying with the prohibition contained in the statute.

[…]

Down Load PDF of This Case

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Amador v. U.S. Bank | FL 4DCA | Because Bank failed to establish when it became the owner of the note, the trial court erred in finding Bank had standing to initiate the foreclosure action

Amador v. U.S. Bank | FL 4DCA | Because Bank failed to establish when it became the owner of the note, the trial court erred in finding Bank had standing to initiate the foreclosure action

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT

SOSA and ALEX AMADOR,
Appellants,

v.

U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
Appellee.
No. 4D13-1657
[December 10, 2014]
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Howard H. Harrison, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502008CA035877.

Andrea H. Duenas of the Law Office of A. Duenas, P.A., Lantana, for appellants.
Marc James Ayers of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, Birmingham, Alabama, for appellee.
STEVENSON, J.

Alva Sosa and Alex Amador (“Homeowners”) appeal from a final judgment of foreclosure. U.S. Bank National Association (“Bank”) is the appellee. Finding the trial court erred in determining Bank had standing to initiate the foreclosure action, we reverse.

Facts
Bank filed its foreclosure complaint in November 2008. It attached to this complaint a copy of the mortgage but not a copy of the note, as Bank was originally seeking to enforce a lost note. Homeowners answered and raised lack of standing as an affirmative defense. The case proceeded to trial where, through the testimony of Bank’s one witness, the original promissory note was submitted into evidence, and final judgment was entered in favor of Bank.

Analysis
“We review the sufficiency of the evidence to prove standing to bring a foreclosure action de novo.” Lacombe v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., 39 Fla. L. Weekly D2156, D2157 (Fla. 1st DCA Oct. 14, 2014) (citing Dixon v. Express Equity Lending Grp., LLLP, 125 So. 3d 965 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)). “[T]he plaintiff must prove that it had standing to foreclose when the complaint was filed.” McLean v. JP Morgan Chase Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 79 So. 3d 170, 173 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). Relevant here, “[w]here the plaintiff contends that its standing to foreclose derives from an endorsement of the note, the plaintiff must show that the endorsement occurred prior to the inception of the lawsuit.” Id. at 174. A plaintiff can establish standing through an affidavit of ownership, wherein standing is established “if the body of the affidavit indicates that the plaintiff was the owner of the note and mortgage before suit was filed.” Id. A witness who testifies at trial as to the date a bank became the owner of the note can serve the same purpose as an affidavit of ownership.

At trial, Bank introduced the original note and the allonge to note through a senior litigation analyst with Bank’s servicer. The original note contained an undated special endorsement in favor of Exam Financial Group, LLC, while the allonge to note contained an undated special endorsement in favor of Bank. Because the original note and the allonge to note were filed after Bank filed its foreclosure complaint, and each contained undated special endorsements, Bank had to establish standing through the testimony of the litigation analyst. It failed to do so.

Here, the analyst never stated when Bank became the owner of the note. He gave the date of the first endorsement found on the allonge to note, but he did not discuss the date of the second endorsement found on the allonge. The second endorsement found on the allonge to note was the pertinent one as it was the one which specially endorsed the note to Bank. See McLean, 79 So. 3d at 174 (reversing summary judgment because the bank filed the original note with a special endorsement after it filed its complaint, the special endorsement was not dated and there was no evidence as to when the special endorsement was made). Although the analyst testified that Ocwen (Bank’s servicer) came into possession of the note prior to filing the foreclosure action, such testimony is not dispositive as it is still unclear when Bank, through the placement of the special endorsement, became the owner of the note.

Because Bank failed to establish when it became the owner of the note, the trial court erred in finding Bank had standing to initiate the foreclosure action. Accordingly, we reverse the final judgment of foreclosure and remand for entry of an order of involuntary dismissal of the action. See Lacombe, 39 Fla. L. Weekly at D2158 (“We decline to remand the case for presentation of additional evidence because ‘appellate courts do not generally provide parties with an opportunity to retry their case upon a failure of proof.’” (quoting Morton’s of Chicago, Inc. v. Lira, 48 So. 3d 76, 80 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010))).
Reversed and Remanded.

DAMOORGIAN, C.J., and GROSS, J., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

Down Load PDF of This Case

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Citigroup Wrote the Wall Street Giveaway Congress Just Snuck Into a Must-Pass Spending Bill

Citigroup Wrote the Wall Street Giveaway Congress Just Snuck Into a Must-Pass Spending Bill

The bill, drafted almost entirely by Citigroup, would allow banks to do more high-risk trading with taxpayer-backed money.


Mother Jones-

A year ago, Mother Jones reported that a House bill that would allow banks like Citigroup to do more high-risk trading with taxpayer-backed money was written almost entirely by Citigroup lobbyists. The bill passed the House in October 2013, but the Senate never voted on it. For months, it was all but dead. Yet on Tuesday night, the Citi-written bill resurfaced. Lawmakers snuck the measure into a massive 11th-hour government funding bill that congressional leaders negotiated in the hopes of averting a government shutdown. President Barack Obama is expected to sign the legislation.

“This is outrageous,” says Marcus Stanley, the financial policy director at the advocacy group Americans for Financial Reform. “This is to benefit big banks, bottom line.”

As I reported last year, the bill eviscerates a section of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform act called the “push-out rule”:

Banks hate the push-out rule… because this provision will forbid them from trading certain derivatives (which are complicated financial instruments with values derived from underlying variables, such as crop prices or interest rates). Under this rule, banks will have to move these risky trades into separate non-bank affiliates that aren’t insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and are less likely to receive government bailouts. The bill would smother the push-out rule in its crib by permitting banks to use government-insured deposits to bet on a wider range of these risky derivatives.

[MOTHER JONES]

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Freddie Mac Announces Holiday Eviction Moratorium Between December 17, 2014 and January 2, 2015

Freddie Mac Announces Holiday Eviction Moratorium Between December 17, 2014 and January 2, 2015

Freddie Mac (OTCQB: FMCC) today announced a nationwide suspension of eviction lockouts between December 17, 2014 and January 2, 2015. The moratorium applies to all foreclosed occupied single family homes and 2-4 unit properties that had Freddie Mac owned-or guaranteed mortgages.

Freddie Mac Quote:

Attribute to Chris Bowden, Senior Vice President of REO at Freddie Mac.

“Today’s announcement will bring some holiday relief to borrowers who went through foreclosure and were preparing to move. We strongly urge homeowners with financial challenges to start the New Year by calling their mortgage servicer to explore one of the Freddie Mac workout options that have prevented over one million foreclosures since 2009.”

News Facts:

  • The holiday suspension will apply to eviction lockouts on Freddie Mac-owned REO homes but will not affect other pre- or post-foreclosure activities.
  • Companies managing local evictions for Freddie Mac may continue to file documentation as needed during the suspension period.
  • Freddie Mac has enabled more than one million financially troubled borrowers avoid foreclosure. For more information on Freddie Mac mortgage relief, visit the Mortgage Help Resource Center at freddiemac.com.

Freddie Mac was established by Congress in 1970 to provide liquidity, stability and affordability to the nation’s residential mortgage markets. Freddie Mac supports communities across the nation by providing mortgage capital to lenders. Today Freddie Mac is making home possible for one in four home borrowers and is one of the largest sources of financing for multifamily housing. Additional information is available at FreddieMac.com, Twitter @FreddieMac and Freddie Mac’s blog FreddieMac.com/blog.

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Fannie Mae Announces Eviction Moratorium for the Holidays Between December 17, 2014 and January 2, 2015

Fannie Mae Announces Eviction Moratorium for the Holidays Between December 17, 2014 and January 2, 2015

Keosha Burns
202-752-4058

WASHINGTON, DC – Fannie Mae (FNMA/OTC) announced today that it will suspend evictions of foreclosed single family properties during the holiday season. From December 17, 2014 through January 2, 2015 families living in foreclosed properties will be allowed to remain in the home, although legal and administrative proceedings for evictions may continue during this period.

“As in previous years, we believe it is important to extend the timeline of help for struggling borrowers during the holidays,” said Joy Cianci, Senior Vice President of Credit Portfolio Management for Fannie Mae. “If you are in trouble or facing foreclosure, reach out to Fannie Mae or your servicer today to get help. There are more options than ever before to avoid foreclosure. We want to help struggling borrowers whenever possible.”

Since 2009, Fannie Mae has completed more than 1.6 million loan workout solutions to help distressed families avoid foreclosure. Anyone with a Fannie Mae-owned loan who is having trouble paying their mortgage can contact Fannie Mae at 1-800-7FANNIE for more information. Homeowners can also visit www.knowyouroptions.com for additional resources on how to prevent foreclosure.

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Lawmakers consider barring foreclosures on Sandy homes

Lawmakers consider barring foreclosures on Sandy homes

A state Senate committee endorses the idea of creating a 3-year moratorium protecting Sandy-damaged residences from being foreclosed on.


My Central Jersey-

Homes damaged by Superstorm Sandy couldn’t be foreclosed on for three years if a plan endorsed Monday by a Senate committee becomes law.

The financial breathing room faces more hurdles in Trenton before it could take effect, but the impact would stretch into 2018 if it’s ultimately enacted.

The bill, S2577, was advanced unanimously by the Senate Community and Urban Affairs Committee, though Sen. Jennifer Beck, R-Monmouth, raised questions about including second homes and possibly delaying local redevelopment.

[MY CENTRAL JERSEY]

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Tampa couple wins $1M from Bank of America in robocall suit

Tampa couple wins $1M from Bank of America in robocall suit

Tampa Bay Business Journal-

A federal judge in Tampa sent a clear message to Bank of America Thursday by ordering it to pay a local couple $1,051,000 for violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act.

Plaintiffs Nelson and Joyce Coniglio of Tampa sued the nation’s second largest bank in July after enduring four years of multiple robocalls per day attempting to collect mortgage debt.

BoA failed to respond to the complaint and in October the court granted a default judgment, thus awarding the Coniglios the seven-figure sum. The bank then asked the court in November to vacate the default, but on Thursday U.S. District Judge Elizabeth A Kovachevich denied that motion.

[TAMPA BAY BUSINESS JOURNAL]

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

U.S. sues Deutsche Bank, other banks for $190 million

U.S. sues Deutsche Bank, other banks for $190 million

Why haven’t these banks been shut down down? Lawsuit after lawsuit… with no end in sight!


LA TIMES-

Federal authorities in New York have sued Deutsche Bank and other financial entities, alleging they dodged more than $100 million in taxes with some fancy financial footwork.

The lawsuit was filed Monday in Manhattan federal court. It seeks to recover more than $190 million in taxes, penalties and interest.

Manhattan U.S. Atty. Preet Bharara said Deutsche Bank used shell companies to make tax liabilities disappear nearly 15 years ago.

[LA TIMES]

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Dan Alter: The legal mastermind behind New York’s record bank fines

Dan Alter: The legal mastermind behind New York’s record bank fines

WOW! Good for him. I supplied him with a ton of info at one point and then it went silent.

I’m glad to hear he was behind this!


Reuters-

Billions of dollars have flowed to New York state coffers thanks to headline-grabbing settlements with global banks announced by Governor Andrew Cuomo and Benjamin Lawsky, New York’s first superintendent of financial services.

But little attention has been focused on Daniel Alter, the 49-year-old legal mastermind behind many of the deals.

Sources close to the settlements describe Alter, general counsel at New York’s Department of Financial Services (DFS), as instrumental to crafting strategies that leverage the three-year-old agency’s unique powers to extract large and sometimes painful penalties from major banks.

[REUTERS]

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

IN RE: Thompson | Wisconsin BK Court orders Wells Fargo, Litton/Ocwen to repay BK Court back mtg payments!

IN RE: Thompson | Wisconsin BK Court orders Wells Fargo, Litton/Ocwen to repay BK Court back mtg payments!

h/t Dave Krieger

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
___________________________________________

In re Chapter 13
Dennis E. Thompson and
Pamela A. Thompson, Case No. 05-28262-svk
Debtors.

MEMORANDUM DECISION ON DEBTORS’ MOTIONS
FOR CERTAIN RELIEF AGAINST WELLS FARGO

Since this case’s inception in 2005, it has been fraught with litigation, failed mediations,
discovery disputes, accusations of attorney misconduct and otherwise tumultuous actions. In
2013, these proceedings eventually culminated in this Court’s disallowance of the proof of claim
filed on behalf of Wells Fargo Bank after it was established that Wells Fargo was not the holder
of the mortgage note underlying the claim. As a result, the pro se debtors filed a flurry of
motions to effectuate the claim disallowance decision. This memorandum decision will
hopefully end the litigation concerning the mortgage note, at least in the bankruptcy court.

[…]

Down Load PDF of This Case

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Homeowner fights double foreclosure smackdown

Homeowner fights double foreclosure smackdown

Palm Beach Post-

The lurking debt left after a foreclosure is hitting Florida residents hard this year as a private firm files to collect on so-called “deficiency judgments”, which are often worth tens of thousands of dollars.

But one homeowner is fighting back in a federal lawsuit seeking class action status on behalf of borrowers whose wages can be garnished and assets seized to pay off the leftover mortgage debt.

In Palm Beach County, about 240 deficiency judgment lawsuits have been filed by the Texas-based firm Dyck O’Neal. The suits often come as a surprise to homeowners who thought their foreclosure battle ended when they saw their home sold at auction.

[PALM BEACH POST]

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Tax extenders bill passed in the House, heading to senate | PoliticoPro tax journalists get it really wrong

Tax extenders bill passed in the House, heading to senate | PoliticoPro tax journalists get it really wrong

So-called capitol hill PoliticoPro tax journalists get it really wrong. If these guys were really tax professionals, they would know that the tax extenders bill passed in the House last week, and pending approval in the Senate next week, does NOTHING to help any of the “2 million borrowers who are either seriously delinquent on their mortgages or already in some state of forecloser.”

Why doesn’t it help us?

Because this bill only helps people who have short sales or deed-in-lieus that settle finally during 2014. Everyone with something still pending at 1/1/2015 is toast, as far as this specific relief is concerned.

If you want to know how many of us that might be, just do an in-the-last-24-hours search on google for “pending short sale,” and you’ll get a sense of the enormous problem our kindly elected representatives are about to dump on us and the entire US housing market:

Great job Politico tax experts! –

“POLITICO’S Patrick Temple-West and Jon Prior report that within these provisions is a tax break that helps some 2 million borrowers who are either seriously delinquent on their mortgages or already in some state of foreclose, according to the Urban Institute. The break was originally created after the housing crisis, and basically forgave those the crisis hit hard by forgiving some of their mortgages. If the tax break had not been extended, the borrowers would have had to pay this forgiven amount.”

POLITICO-

THE EXTENDERS SAGA IS ENDING IN A WHIMPER. Sen. Ron Wyden predicted the Senate will take up the House one-year tax deal, likely next week.

“It’s hard to see a way in which you get a procedural alternative,” he told reporters Thursday. Hard to argue with a bipartisan 378-46 House vote.

The bill was passed by the House on Wednesday, and will extend more than 50 individual and business tax breaks.

POLITICO’S Patrick Temple-West and Jon Prior report that within these provisions is a tax break that helps some 2 million borrowers who are either seriously delinquent on their mortgages or already in some state oft foreclose, according to the Urban Institute. The break was originally created after the housing crisis, and basically forgave those the crisis hit hard by forgiving some of their mortgages. If the tax break had not been extended, the borrowers would have had to pay this forgiven amount.

http://www.politico.com/morningtax/?ml=tp

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

GOVERNOR CUOMO ANNOUNCES NEW REGULATIONS AGAINST ABUSIVE AND DECEPTIVE DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES

GOVERNOR CUOMO ANNOUNCES NEW REGULATIONS AGAINST ABUSIVE AND DECEPTIVE DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES

H/T Consumer Law & Policy Blog

New consumer protections issued through first use of “Gap Authority” under New York Financial Services Law

Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today announced new, nation-leading reforms that will protect consumers against abusive and deceptive debt collection practices. These new, finalized state Department of Financial Services regulations will provide consumers with important disclosures to help combat aggressive and deceptive practices that take advantage of confusion or fear, help stop attempts to sue to collect “zombie debts,” establish a new debt “substantiation” requirement so that consumers can request information to avoid paying what they do not owe, and address other widespread abuses in the debt collection industry.

“Here in New York we will not tolerate debt collectors who wrongfully take advantage of consumers,” Governor Cuomo said. “That’s why we’re rolling out tough new regulations that protect borrowers and help crack down on illegitimate debt collection practices. These new tools and disclosures will protect New Yorkers across the state, and I am pleased that our administration is leading the way on this issue.”

Benjamin M. Lawsky, Superintendent of Financial Services, said, “The debt collection industry is filled with far too many unscrupulous actors willing to deceive and abuse consumers just to make a quick buck. These important reforms will provide significant, new protections for financially struggling New Yorkers from harassment and fraud, and help us root out these predatory practices.”

In 2014 alone, New York consumers have filed more than 20,000 complaints regarding debt collection practices. They report that debt collectors make harassing, aggressive calls to collect debts and sometimes attempt to collect an incorrect amount of money and even contact the incorrect person. Problems are especially frequent in the rapidly growing debt buying industry, where companies purchase defaulted debts for pennies on the dollar. To keep costs down, debt buyers often maintain shoddy records and do little to verify that they are contacting the correct debtor or for the correct amount of money. In addition, the same debt portfolios may be sold to multiple buyers, and without clear records, even consumers who have paid off a debt may be pursued for the same debt by a different collector.

Visit here to learn more about the new regulations being implemented in 2015 and what to do if a debt collector is engaging in improper or abusive collection tactics.

These regulations are the result of more than a year of meetings with consumer advocates, the debt collection industry, and the review of public comments from two earlier published versions of the regulations. The state Department of Financial Services promulgated these regulations through the first use of “gap authority.” This authority, which was included in the 2011 law signed by Governor Cuomo creating the Department of Financial Services, includes the ability to regulate and enforce rules against previously unregulated providers of financial products and services that could otherwise fall through the cracks and harm consumers.

To address these and other serious abuses in the debt collection industry, the new regulations of third-party debt collectors and debt buyers include the following key reforms:

Improved Disclosures and Debt Information 
The regulations require enhanced initial disclosures when a new debt collector first contacts an alleged debtor. The debt collector must provide general information on the rights of debtors and, for charged-off debts, specific information about the debt that they are attempting to collect. These disclosures go beyond current federal requirements, ensuring that collectors have key information about the charged-off debts they collect, such as the amount owed at charge-off, and the total post-charge-off interest, charges, and fees. As consumer debts may be sold and resold, this information will help combat fraud and debtor confusion by showing an alleged debtor where the debt originated and the total debt owed both at charge-off and after years of interest and fees were added.

Protections Against Collection of “Zombie Debts” 
Some debt collectors collect on debts for which the statute of limitations has already expired. If a collector attempts to collect on a debt for which the statute of limitations has expired, prior to accepting payment, the collector must provide notice that they believe the statute of limitations may be expired and that, if the consumer is sued on such a debt, the consumer may be able to prevent a judgment by informing the court that the statute of limitations has expired. Because the vast majority of debtors who are sued are not represented by counsel, debt collectors may take advantage of New York consumers’ lack of awareness of the statute of limitations defense when collecting debts for which the statute of limitations has expired.

“Substantiation” of the Debt Allegedly Owed 
These regulations establish groundbreaking protections that require a debt collector to “substantiate” that a debt is actually owed in response to a consumer’s oral or written dispute of a debt at any point in the collections process. These protections will help ensure that collectors are collecting from the correct parties and that consumers can be confident that they are repaying legitimate debts. Currently, consumers must dispute the debt in writing and request verification within 30 days of the first collection attempt. Under the new regulations, a consumer can request “substantiation” of the debt at any time during the collections process. This will empower the many consumers who do not exercise their right to verification under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act within the short 30-day window. Once a debt collector receives a substantiation request, the debt collector must cease collection and provide documentation proving the validity of the debt and the creditor’s right to collect that debt within 60 days.

Written Confirmation of Settlement Agreements 
To ensure that creditors honor settlement agreements reached with New York consumers, and that consumers and debt collectors agree on material terms of their settlements, consumers will now receive written confirmation of any debt settlement agreement. Consumers will also receive written confirmation once a debt is satisfied. If another creditor attempts to collect that debt, consumers will have written documentation that the debt has been paid off.

Opportunity for Email Contact
Consumers will have the right to communicate with collectors via their personal email if they so choose. This will help reduce harassing phone calls and allow consumers to maintain better records of their interactions with debt collectors.

The regulations represent an ongoing focus on eliminating unfair debt collection practices in New York. Along with enforcing these new regulations, violations of which are punishable by civil monetary penalties, the Department of Financial Services also has the authority to impose civil penalties on collectors that violate the state and federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Acts.

The new regulations will take effect on March 3, 2015, with the exception of Sections 1.2(b) and 1.4, which take effect on August 30, 2015 in order to give debt collectors time to gather the documentation required by those sections. Section 1.2(b) refers to disclosure requirements and 1.4 refers to substantiation of debts.

Chuck Bell, Programs Director for Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports, said, “These new New York State rules are a huge step forward for protecting consumers from abusive and deceptive debt collection practices. We applaud Governor Andrew Cuomo and the New York Department of Financial Services for their sustained efforts to ensure that consumers are fully informed of their rights, and treated fairly in the financial services marketplace.  ”

Claudia Wilner, Senior Staff Attorney at New Economy Project said: “For years, debt collectors — and debt buyers, in particular — have extracted hundreds of millions of dollars from low-income communities and communities of color in New York, aggressively trying to collect on debts they cannot even substantiate. Department of Financial Service’s new rules will address many debt collection abuses head-on. The rules are a great step towards ensuring economic justice for New Yorkers, and we laud Superintendent Lawsky for his leadership.”

Carolyn E. Coffey, Supervising Attorney at MFY Legal Services, Inc., said, “We welcome the new rules, which will go a long way toward cracking down on the prevalent practice of collecting bogus debts, and we commend Governor Cuomo for taking a stand to protect the rights of New Yorkers.”

Robert Martin, Associate Director of DC 37 Municipal Employees Legal Services said, “DFS has taken a huge step toward putting the brakes on debt collectors who act on flimsy and inaccurate records to collect debts that are in many cases not owed or are stale. These rules will help bring fairness to working people and low-income persons and all New Yorkers who have been harmed by bad practices. Governor Cuomo and Superintendent Lawsky are to be commended for this initiative.”

Consumers who believe that they have been the victims of debt collection efforts that violate the new regulations and/or the state or federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Acts are encouraged to file a complaint with the Department of Financial Services at (800) 342-3736 or online at http://www.dfs.ny.gov/consumer/fileacomplaint.htm.

To view a copy the final regulations, please visit here.

###

Additional news available at www.governor.ny.gov
New York State | Executive Chamber | press.office@exec.ny.gov | 518.474.8418

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Wall Street Demands Derivatives Deregulation In Government Shutdown Bill

Wall Street Demands Derivatives Deregulation In Government Shutdown Bill

They own the government …so they will get what they want. Simple. As. That.


Huffington Post-

Wall Street lobbyists are trying to secure taxpayer backing for many derivatives trades as part of budget talks to avert a government shutdown.

According to multiple Democratic sources, banks are pushing hard to include the controversial provision in funding legislation that would keep the government operating after Dec. 11. Top negotiators in the House are taking the derivatives provision seriously, and may include it in the final bill, the sources said.

The bank perks are not a traditional budget item. They would allow financial institutions to trade certain financial derivatives from subsidiaries that are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. — potentially putting taxpayers on the hook for losses caused by the risky contracts. Big Wall Street banks had typically traded derivatives from these FDIC-backed units, but the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law required them to move many of the transactions to other subsidiaries that are not insured by taxpayers.

[HUFFINGTONPOST]

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

New York Regulator Poses Formidable Threat To Mortgage Servicers

New York Regulator Poses Formidable Threat To Mortgage Servicers

Forbes-

Benjamin Lawsky, a relatively unknown New York State regulator, has put the fast-growing non-bank mortgage servicing industry’s business model in jeopardy. Look no further than Ocwen Financial for proof of a servicing segment that remains marred in uncertainty.

Ocwen is reeling following a dispute with Lawsky that killed a promising a $39 billion acquisition of Wells Fargo’s servicing rights. News of the cancelled deal in mid-November sent the company’s shares down as much as 67 percent from their 52-week high. The stock has recovered slightly, but is still off more than 50 percent from a December 2013 high of $58.07.

Now, investors are left wondering whether the servicer – likened to a shark – will be allowed to continue feeding on new mortgages.

[FORBES]

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Advert

Archives