WEISS vs BANK OF AMERICA | PA: Homeowners file RICO class action against Bank of America

Categorized | STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD

WEISS vs BANK OF AMERICA | PA: Homeowners file RICO class action against Bank of America

WEISS vs BANK OF AMERICA | PA: Homeowners file RICO class action against Bank of America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WILLIAM WEISS and ROBERT LESSMAN, and
ANN HARRELL and EDDIE HARRELL,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated,
Plaintiffs,

v.

BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION, BANK
OF AMERICA, N.A., and BANK OF AMERICA
REINSURANCE CORPORATION,
Defendants.

INTRODUCTION

1. Defendants Bank of America Corporation (“BAC”), Bank of America, N.A, (“BoA
N.A.”), and their affiliated reinsurer, Bank of America Reinsurance Corporation (“BoA RE”)
(collectively, “Bank of America”), have engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of
the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) by effectuating a captive
reinsurance scheme which defrauded Plaintiffs William Weiss, Robert Lessman, Ann Harrell and
Eddie Harrell (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) and the Class (defined below) and compelled them to fund
illegal kickbacks and referral payments in the form of purported reinsurance premiums that were
paid by United Guaranty Residential Insurance Company, Triad Guaranty Insurance Corporation,
Republic Mortgage Insurance Company, Mortgage Guaranty Insurance Corporation, Radian
Guaranty Inc., Genworth Mortgage Insurance Corporation, and PMI Mortgage Insurance Company
(collectively, the “Private Mortgage Insurers”) to BoA RE.

2. This is a proposed nationwide action brought by Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and
a class of all other similarly situated persons who obtained residential mortgage loans originated,
funded and/or originated through correspondent lending by BAC and/or BoA N.A. and their mortgage
lending subsidiaries and/or affiliates between January 1, 2004, and the present (the “Class Period”)
and, in connection therewith, purchased private mortgage insurance and whose residential mortgage
loans were included within Bank of America’s captive mortgage reinsurance arrangements
(hereinafter, the “Class”).

3. Captive reinsurance schemes, such as the scheme involving Defendants described
herein, have been widespread throughout the mortgage lending industry. As American Banker
magazine reported in connection with an investigation by the Inspector General of the Department of
Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), “beginning in the late 1990s major U.S. banks began
coercing [private mortgage] insurers into cutting them in on what would ultimately amount to $6
billion of insurance premiums in exchange for assuming little or no risk.” See Jeff Horwitz, Bank
Mortgage Kickback Scheme Thrived Amid Regulatory Inaction, American Banker (Sept. 16, 2011,
7:45 PM), http://www.americanbanker.com/issues/176_181/mortgages-reinsurance-deals-kickbacks-
HUD-1042277-1.html, attached as Exhibit 1 (hereinafter referred to as “Mortgage Kickback
Scheme”); see also Jeff Horwitz, Banks Took $6B in Reinsurance Kickbacks, Investigators Say,
American Banker (Sept. 6, 2011, 4:55 PM), http://www.americanbanker.com/issues/176_173/mortgage-reinsurance-respa-kickbacks-hudinvestigation-doj-1041928-1.html, attached as Exhibit 2 (hereinafter referred to as “Reinsurance
Kickbacks”).

[…]

Down Load PDF of This Case

 

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



Comments

comments

This post was written by:

- who has written 8710 posts on FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA.

CONTROL FRAUD | ‘If you don’t look; you don’t find, Wherever you look; you will find’ -William Black

Contact the author

Leave a Reply

GARY DUBIN LAW OFFICES FORECLOSURE DEFENSE HAWAII and CALIFORNIA
Advertise your business on StopForeclosureFraud.com

Archives