STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD

Archive | STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD

Attorney Mark Stopa’s foreclosure cases are halted but clients’ checks are being cashed

Attorney Mark Stopa’s foreclosure cases are halted but clients’ checks are being cashed

Tampa Bay-

A bankruptcy judge has ordered a temporary halt to all state and appellate court proceedings in which suspended foreclosure defense attorney Mark Stopa and his former law firm are counsel of record.

The emergency order, effective until Nov. 6, could give dozens of Florida homeowners a temporary respite from the threat of foreclosure. But many have been surprised and dismayed to find that the trustee overseeing the law firm’s bankruptcy case has been cashing post-dated checks they wrote to the firm.

“It’s a hot mess,” Tonya McKendree, a former client of Stopa, said Wednesday. She said trustee Stephen Meininger cashed four checks totaling $1,250, causing her account to be overdrawn by about $400 and costing her more than $100 in overdraft fees.

[TAMPA BAY]

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Major Atlanta Foreclosure Attorney Nathan E. Hardwick IV Guilty of Major Fraud and Conspiracy

Major Atlanta Foreclosure Attorney Nathan E. Hardwick IV Guilty of Major Fraud and Conspiracy

Coosa Valley News-

A federal grand jury convicted Nathan E. Hardwick IV of twenty-one counts of wire fraud, one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, and one count of making false statements to a federally insured financial institution on October 12, 2018.

“Hardwick was motivated by unadulterated deceit and greed when he blatantly violated the trust placed in him by embezzling millions of dollars from his clients and partners,” said U.S. Attorney Byung J. “BJay” Pak. “The extravagant lifestyle that Hardwick enjoyed at the expense of others will now be traded for time in prison.”

“This case is especially troubling given the illegal actions were orchestrated by a lawyer who swore an oath to uphold the law and represent his clients with integrity,” said Chris Hacker, Special Agent in Charge of FBI Atlanta. “The magnitude of theft Hardwick is convicted of merits a lengthy sentence, one that will hopefully send a message that the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s Office will not tolerate this type of white-collar crime.”

According to U.S. Attorney Pak, the charges and other information presented in court: Hardwick and Asha Maurya engaged in a scheme to defraud MHSLAW, Inc. and its subsidiaries, Morris Hardwick Schneider, LLC and LandCastle Title, LLC, (collectively referred to as “MHS”). MHS owned and operated a law firm that specialized in residential real estate closings and foreclosures, and it ran a title business. MHS employed approximately 800 people in 16 states. Hardwick was the managing partner of the law firm and the CEO of the title business. He also ran the law firm’s closing division, which was based in Atlanta. Maurya managed MHS’s accounting operations under Hardwick’s supervision and control.

[COOSA VALLEY NEWS]

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Florida judge rejects sanctions against Bank of America

Florida judge rejects sanctions against Bank of America

  • Miami attorney Bruce Jacobs, representing a couple in a foreclosure case, had sought to get his allegations against Bank of America heard in court.
  • The bank argued his claims were baseless.
  • Judge Bronwyn Miller dismissed the attorney’s claims over the bank’s purge of 1.8 billion of bank records.

CNBC-

A Miami-Dade County judge on Tuesday turned down requests by a real estate attorney to punish Bank of America over claims of withholding and destroying records.

Judge Bronwyn Miller also dismissed the attorney’s claims over the bank’s purge of 1.8 billion of bank records. The ruling, handed down after a hearing on Monday, did not explain the legal reason for her decision.

Miami attorney Bruce Jacobs, representing a couple in a foreclosure case, had sought to get his allegations against Bank of America heard in court. The bank argued his claims were baseless.

[CNBC]

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Freddie Mac Offers Assistance to Hurricane Michael Borrowers

Freddie Mac Offers Assistance to Hurricane Michael Borrowers

(GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Freddie Mac(OTCQB: FMCC) today reminded Servicers of its disaster relief policies for borrowers who have been affected by Hurricane Michael. Freddie Mac’s disaster relief options are available to borrowers whose homes or places of employment are located in presidentially-declared Major Disaster Areas where federal individual assistance programs are made available to affected individuals and households.

In areas where the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has not yet made individual assistance available, mortgage servicers may immediately leverage Freddie Mac’s short-term forbearance programs to provide mortgage relief to their borrowers that have been affected by the hurricane.

“Safety is our top priority for those in the Florida panhandle and nearby states as Hurricane Michael approaches,” said Yvette Gilmore, Freddie Mac’s Vice President of Single-Family Servicer Performance Management. “Once safe from this dangerous storm, we strongly encourage homeowners whose homes or places of employment have been impacted by Hurricane Michael to call their mortgage Servicer—the company to which borrowers send their monthly mortgage payments—to learn about available relief options. We stand ready to ensure that mortgage relief is made available.”

News Facts:

  • Freddie Mac disaster relief policies authorize mortgage servicers to help affected borrowers in eligible disaster areas: those federally-declared Major Disaster Areas where federal individual assistance programs have been extended. A list of these areas can be found on the FEMA’s website.
  • Freddie Mac mortgage relief options for affected borrowers in eligible disaster areas include:
    • Suspending foreclosures by providing forbearance for up to 12 months;
    • Waiving assessments of penalties or late fees against borrowers with disaster-damaged homes; and
    • Not reporting forbearance or delinquencies caused by the disaster to the nation’s credit bureaus.
  • Freddie Mac is reminding servicers to consider borrowers who are impacted by the storm, but who live and work outside of an eligible disaster area, for Freddie Mac’s standard relief policies, which include forbearance and mortgage modifications.
  • Affected borrowers should immediately contact their mortgage servicer—the company to which they send their monthly mortgage payment.
  • See http://www.freddiemac.com/singlefamily/service/natural_disasters.html for a description of Freddie Mac disaster relief policies.

Freddie Mac makes home possible for millions of families and individuals by providing mortgage capital to lenders. Since our creation by Congress in 1970, we’ve made housing more accessible and affordable for homebuyers and renters in communities nationwide. We are building a better housing finance system for homebuyers, renters, lenders, investors and taxpayers. Learn more at FreddieMac.com@FreddieMac and Freddie Mac’s blog.

MEDIA CONTACT: Chad Wandler
703-903-2446
Chad_Wandler@FreddieMac.com

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Fannie Mae Reminds Homeowners and Servicers of Mortgage Assistance Options for Areas Affected by Hurricane Michael

Fannie Mae Reminds Homeowners and Servicers of Mortgage Assistance Options for Areas Affected by Hurricane Michael

Pete Bakel

202-752-2034

WASHINGTON, DC – Fannie Mae (FNMA/OTC) is reminding those impacted by Hurricane Michael of the options available for mortgage assistance. Under Fannie Mae’s guidelines for single-family mortgages:

  • Homeowners impacted by Hurricane Michael are eligible to stop making mortgage payments for up to 12 months, during which time they:
    • will not incur late fees during this temporary payment break
    • will not have delinquencies reported to the credit bureaus
  • Servicers are authorized to suspend or reduce a homeowner’s mortgage payments immediately for up to 90 days without any contact with the homeowner if the servicer believes the homeowner has been affected by a disaster. Payment forbearance of up to 12 months is available in many circumstances.
  • Servicers must suspend foreclosure and other legal proceedings if the servicer believes the homeowner has been impacted by a disaster.

“It is important for those in the path of the storm to focus on their safety as they deal with the potential impact of Hurricane Michael,” said Carlos Perez, Senior Vice President and Chief Credit Officer at Fannie Mae. “Fannie Mae and our lending and servicing partners are focused on ensuring assistance is offered to individuals and families in need. We also are focused on working with our Multifamily DUS® lenders and borrowers to determine appropriate actions to assist renters impacted by the storm. We urge everyone in the area to be safe, and we encourage homeowners affected by the storm to contact their mortgage servicer for assistance as soon as possible.”

Homeowners can reach out to Fannie Mae directly by calling 1-800-2FANNIE (1-800-232-6643). For more information, please visit www.knowyouroptions.com/relief.

 

Fannie Mae helps make the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage and affordable rental housing possible for millions of Americans. We partner with lenders to create housing opportunities for families across the country. We are driving positive changes in housing finance to make the home buying process easier, while reducing costs and risk. To learn more, visit fanniemae.com and follow us on twitter.com/fanniemae.

 

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Deposition of Edward Hyne: Nationstar’s witness testifies that Aurora’s policies include forging indorsements

Deposition of Edward Hyne: Nationstar’s witness testifies that Aurora’s policies include forging indorsements

See the attached filing below with deposition transcript, setting out Nationstar Mortgage, LLC’s position that Aurora Bank, FSB policies include forging indorsements to give the appearance the promissory notes are indorsed to blank. Edward Hyne, Nationsatr’s Rule 30(b)(6) witness refers to the practice as “preparing indorsement pages”.

EXCEPTS:

BY MR. RILEY: Q What is your testimony about the Note, Mr. Hyne?

A The Note itself is accurate, but as to the page where the endorsements are, um,
there is, actually, um — the original Note has the endorsements on the backside of the
signature page, and this was an alternate second endorsement sheet that had been
prepared by Aurora Bank, it’s my understanding. That’s why there was a discrepancy
raised relating to the endorsements.

MR. OLIVER: Prepared by?

THE WITNESS: Aurora, the prior servicer.

MR. RILEY: Would you, please, read back his answer, if you would.
BY MR. RILEY: Q Why would there be an alternate endorsement sheet prepared by
Aurora?

A Um, well, I don’t have personal knowledge. I didn’t work for Aurora. It’s my
understanding that the, um — Aurora had an image of the Note that, um, apparently,
when imaging their system, they didn’t have the back page with the endorsements on
it, and someone at Aurora had gone in and created a separate endorsement sheet, um,
for the purposes of having a complete version of the Note with an endorsement, not
knowing that the back of the original Note, um, contained the, um, original
endorsements.

Q So it’s your testimony they prepared an allonge, if you’re familiar with the term
“allonge”?

THE WITNESS: I don’t know if you would call it an allonge, um, but they prepared,
um, a sheet that had new endorsements so that it could be imaged, um, with, um, an
image of the Note that was, um, different from the original Note that already had the
endorsements on the backside of the signature page.

Q Let’s go back to the document you’re referring to and that you’re looking at in front
of you. What is that?

A This page, um, is a page that has three endorsements on it.

Q So is it your testimony this was the endorsement that was prepared by Aurora that
was attached to Claim 1?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

BY MR. RILEY: Q Okay. And how do you have knowledge of how this happened?
A We have — in our imaging system when the loan came across from Aurora to
Nationstar to service. We had images with this Note with this endorsement page, and
a separate image of the Note as it, actually, appears with the other endorsements. Um,
I’ve had discussions with Simon Ward-Brown, who —

Q I’m sorry, who?

A Simon Ward-Brown. He’s an employee of Nationstar now, but was previously
employed by Aurora when this loan — before the loan transferred to Nationstar.

Q And he’s the one that informed you how these signatures came to be on the claim?

THE WITNESS: We discussed as to how there might be two different, um,
endorsement pages.

BY MR. RILEY:Q When would you have had that conversation?

A I think it was last year, late last year

Q Why was an amended Proof of Claim not filed, if that wasn’t the accurate Note?

A I’m not sure why there wasn’t an amended Proof of Claim filed. Certainly
Nationstar wasn’t aware of the issue until, I believe, it was raised later on in the
litigation.

BY MR. OLIVAR: Q Now, I think you testified you spoke with Mr. Ward-Brown about an
alternate second set of — alternate second endorsement sheet. Do I have that right?

A Yes.

Q And the alternate second endorsement sheet, you believe, was prepared by Aurora
Bank?

A Yes.

Q Did he know how that was prepared or why that was prepared when you spoke
with him?

A We had discussed what he believed to have happened, um, to provide an
explanation why there is a second endorsement page.

Q When you say you discussed what he believed to have happened, were the two of
you just speculating as to possibilities, or did anybody know what had happened?

A He didn’t say that he was there when it happened physically at the time that it was
occurring, um, so he was trying — he believed that that is what happened based upon
his, um, knowledge of the servicing policies and processes at Aurora.

Q So based on his knowledge of the general policies at Aurora, he posited some
options as to what might have happened, or was it just one option?

A No. I believe that was the one option.

Q So based on his knowledge of Aurora’s general policy, he said he believed that’s
what had happened?

A Aurora has an imaging system where they image their own documents. An
employee of Aurora had looked at the images of the Note and saw that there was not
an endorsement page image with the Note as part of the Note document. Even
though the original, um, Note has the endorsements on the back page of the signature
page, um, it was Simon’s understanding or belief that, um, an employee of Aurora
then prepared, um, a separate endorsement page, um, for the purposes of completing
the chain of endorsements for the image of the Note that they had in their system.

Q What was the name of the employee at Aurora who saw there was no endorsement
page?

A Um, he didn’t have a name of a person. He believed that’s what would have
triggered an employee looking at the imaging system.

Q When did that unnamed Aurora employee create that second page?

A It’s not dated, so I’m not sure if he could tell but, um, there’s certainly nothing on
the document that would indicate when it occurred.

Q How did the Aurora employee create a second endorsement page?
A I don’t know.

Q Do you know whether the page was photo shopped?

A I don’t know.

Q Do you know whether the page was physically xeroxed with a cut-and-paste
technique?

A I don’t know.

Filed Nationstar Rule 60 by DinSFLA on Scribd

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Bank of America fights court battle over purge of nearly 2 billion bank records

Bank of America fights court battle over purge of nearly 2 billion bank records

  • At the heart of the dispute is the purge of 1.88 billion records. Bank of America, in a court filing, insists the records were copied, returned to the bank and still exist in its system.
  • Miami attorney Bruce Jacobs, a former prosecutor, says the bank got rid of loan records that he claims may have contained evidence of fraud.
  • Bank of America said he has it all wrong.

CNBC-

The nation’s second-largest bank is squaring off in a contentious court battle against a Miami real estate attorney who is accusing it of purging 1.88 billion records to conceal alleged fraud.

Bank of America, in a court filing, insists the records were copied, returned to the bank and still exist in its system.

But Bruce Jacobs, a former Miami-Dade County prosecutor, says the bank got rid of loan records he was seeking that he says may be evidence of fraud because the original records may have been altered by the bank.

“Bank of America thinks they’re untouchable,” Jacobs told CNBC. “They think they have so many zeroes in their bank accounts that they’re above the law.”

[CNBC]

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

TFH 10/14 |  Foreclosure Workshop #70: Bank of America v. Reyes-Toledo (October 9, 2018) (Reyes-Toledo 2) — Hawaii Supreme Court Frees Hawaii Homeowners from Decades of Wrongful Federal Judicial Interference with Their State Court Foreclosure Defense Rights, Which New Published Opinion Should Become a Model for Every State Judiciary

TFH 10/14 | Foreclosure Workshop #70: Bank of America v. Reyes-Toledo (October 9, 2018) (Reyes-Toledo 2) — Hawaii Supreme Court Frees Hawaii Homeowners from Decades of Wrongful Federal Judicial Interference with Their State Court Foreclosure Defense Rights, Which New Published Opinion Should Become a Model for Every State Judiciary

TODAY’S SHOW HAD TO BE CANCELLED DUE TO AN EQUIPMENT MALFUNCTION AT THE AM RADIO STATION THAT SENDS OUT OUR SIGNAL TO THE WORLD.

ALL OF OUR SHOWS ARE BROADCAST LIVE FROM OUR LAW OFFICE TO THE RADIO STATION WHICH TRANSMITS OUR SIGNAL.

AS A RESULT, THIS SUNDAY’S SHOW WILL BE BROADCAST NEXT SUNDAY.

MEANWHILE, ATTACHED IS A COPY OF THE REYES-TOLEDO 2 DECISION THAT WAS INTENDED TO BE AND THAT WILL BE NEXT SUNDAY’S TOPIC. http://stopforeclosurefraud.com/2018/10/09/bank-of-america-n-a-v-reyes-toledo-hawaii-supreme-court-1-wrongful-foreclosure-2-declaratory-relief-3-quiet-title-and-4-unfair-and-deceptive-trade-acts-and-practices-sometimes/

OUR APOLOGIES TO OUR LISTENERS.

GARY DUBIN

COMING TO YOU LIVE DIRECTLY FROM THE DUBIN LAW OFFICES AT HARBOR COURT, DOWNTOWN HONOLULU, HAWAII

LISTEN TO KHVH-AM (830 ON THE AM RADIO DIAL)

ALSO AVAILABLE ON KHVH-AM ON THE iHEART APP ON THE INTERNET

.

Sunday – October 14, 2018

Foreclosure Workshop #70: Bank of America v. Reyes-Toledo (October 9, 2018) (Reyes-Toledo 2) — Hawaii Supreme Court Frees Hawaii Homeowners from Decades of Wrongful Federal Judicial Interference with Their State Court Foreclosure Defense Rights, Which New Published Opinion Should Become a Model for Every State Judiciary

.

 ———————

 

I have mentioned on numerous shows that the federal courts are generally a virtual graveyard for homeowners being foreclosed on, and I meant that as no exaggeration.

For I have been an eye-witness advocate to decades of the mindless arrogant slaughter of homeowners’ rights in federal courts, generally ignoring Truth-in-Lending rescissions, ignoring loan modification abuses, ignoring the lack of good faith and fair dealing in nonjudicial auctions, ignoring the adequacy of notice pleading, and ignoring the many fraudulent and undisclosed low visibility practices within MERS and REMIC securitized trust paper hocus pocus mumbo jumbo.

And those errant federal decisions moreover have corrupted the foreclosure defense jurisprudence of most state court foreclosure defense adjudications as well, including in Hawaii Courts, kowtowing and genuflecting to federal court decisions in the foreclosure field — until now.

The Hawaii Supreme Court in its first, 2017 Reyes-Toledo decision, after earlier handing down numerous welcome published opinions clobbering nonjudicial foreclosure abuses, began an effort to control abuses in an otherwise hidden and unregulated securitized banking system by requiring judicially foreclosing plaintiffs to prove ownership and possession of the promissory note and right to foreclosure at the exact time it filed its foreclosure complaint, which created the equivalent of a “10” on the Richter Scale, sending foreclosure attorneys in Hawaii scampering for proof of note ownership while frequently merely filing to dismiss existing deficient foreclosure complaints.

And now, in its most recent, 2018 Reyes-Toledo decision, it calls Reyes-Toledo 2, the case returning to it on certiorari following its earlier remand to the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals, the Hawaii Supreme Court has now taken the gloves off, as it were, squarely rejecting the federal court “plausibility” dismissal standard as well as allowing wrongful foreclosure counterclaims to be filed in every foreclosure case without a homeowner having to wait until being foreclosed on before suing for wrongful foreclosure.

This 2018 common sense approach, preventing contrary federal court pleading standards in foreclosure cases in Hawaii State Courts from similarly shutting courthouse doors to homeowners in foreclosure in State Court is another example of combatting what our listeners know as The Rule Ritual.

Even more importantly, Reyes-Toledo 2 now creates, at least in Hawaii, a split in case outcome, applying different dismissal standards in the Federal District Court and the State Courts in Hawaii, in Honolulu ironically located across the street from one another.

On today’s show we will highlight the absolutely unfair, discriminatory, and lacking in due process differing result triggered not on the merits but based on which pleading standard of review is used, by exploring a recent Federal District Court dismissal in the Dairy Road Partners case now on appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, our challenging the “plausibility” dismissal standard there, anticipating our asking the United States Supreme Court to accept certiorari and to reconsider that standard of review.

For, if a pleading standard is dispositive of a case, why should not the state dismissal standard be required instead, at least where a state claim based on diversity of citizenship is pled?

Listen this Sunday while John Waihee and I discuss today’s landmark Hawaii Supreme Court Case, Reyes-Toledo 2, a copy of which will be posted on our website, www.foreclosurehour.com, in our “past broadcast” section shortly after the show.

No homeowner or foreclosure defense counsel can afford to miss today’s broadcast introducing the remarkable Reyes-Toledo 2 which has clearly placed Hawaii Courts at the forefront of foreclosure reform.

Gary Dubin

.
Host: Gary Dubin Co-Host: John Waihee

.

CALL IN AT (808) 521-8383

Have your questions answered on the air.

Submit questions to info@foreclosurehour.com

The Foreclosure Hour is a public service of the Dubin Law Offices

Past Broadcasts

EVERY SUNDAY
3:00 PM HAWAII 
6:00 PM PACIFIC
9:00 PM EASTERN
ON KHVH-AM
(830 ON THE DIAL)
AND ON
iHEART RADIO

The Foreclosure Hour 12

 

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

HSBC Agrees To Pay $765 Million In Connection With Its Sale Of Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities

HSBC Agrees To Pay $765 Million In Connection With Its Sale Of Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities

Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney’s Office
District of Colorado
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, October 9, 2018

HSBC Agrees To Pay $765 Million In Connection With Its Sale Of Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities

DENVER – U.S. Attorney Bob Troyer announced today that HSBC will pay $765 million to settle claims related to its packaging, securitization, issuance, marketing and sale of residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) between 2005 and 2007.  During this period, federally-insured financial institutions and others suffered major losses from investing in RMBS issued and underwritten by HSBC.  Under the settlement, HSBC will pay the $765 million as a civil penalty pursuant to the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act (FIRREA).

“HSBC made choices that hurt people and abused their trust,” said Bob Troyer, United States Attorney for the District of Colorado.  “HSBC chose to use a due diligence process it knew from the start didn’t work.  It chose to put lots of defective mortgages into its deals.  When HSBC saw problems, it chose to rush those deals out the door.  When deals went south, investors who trusted HSBC suffered.  And when the mortgages failed, communities across the country were blighted by foreclosure.  If you make choices like this, beware.  You will pay.”

“The actions of HSBC resulted in significant losses to investors, which purchased the HSBC Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities backed by defective loans,” said Associate Inspector General Jennifer Byrne of the Federal Housing Finance Agency-Office of Inspector General (FHFA-OIG). “We are proud to have partnered with the U.S Attorney’s Office for the District of Colorado on this matter.”

FIRREA authorizes the federal government to seek civil penalties against financial institutions that violate various predicate offenses, including wire and mail fraud.  The United States alleged that HSBC violated FIRREA by misrepresenting to investors the quality of its RMBS and the due diligence procedures it claimed it would use to ensure that quality.  The United States’ allegations are described in the settlement agreement at paragraph 3.

The United States alleged that HSBC had a due diligence process for reviewing the loans HSBC planned to securitize as RMBS, but as early as 2005, an HSBC credit risk manager expressed concerns with HSBC’s due diligence process.  HSBC nevertheless touted its due diligence process to potential investors.  It told investors that when it purchased pools of subprime loans, HSBC would review at least 25% of the loans in the pool for credit and compliance.  It told investors that it selected 20% of the loan pool as an “adverse sample” based on “a proprietary model, which will risk-rank the mortgage loans in the pool.”  But on some loan pools, HSBC’s RMBS trading desk influenced how the risk management group selected loans for the adverse portion of the sample, and as a result, the sample was not based on its model.  HSBC also told investors that it selected another 5% of the loan pool as a “random sample.”  But in some instances, HSBC used a random sample that was less than 5% of the pool, or used a sample that was not random at all.

To review the loans HSBC did select for review, HSBC used due diligence vendors, and HSBC saw the results of the vendors’ reviews of the loans before the deals were issued.  Over a one-and-a-half year period, between January 2006 and June 2007, HSBC’s primary due diligence vendor flagged over 7,400 loans as having low grades—more than one out of every four loans the vendor reviewed for HSBC during that time.  When HSBC employees saw loans with low grades, they sometimes “waived” those loans through or recategorized the grades to make the due diligence “percentages look better.”  They also expressed views about the deals they were issuing.  For example, in 2007, an HSBC trader said, in reference to an RMBS that HSBC was about to issue, “it will suck.”

For a loan pool HSBC purchased in 2006, HSBC learned of what employees referred to as an “abnormally large” and “alarmingly” high number of payment defaults.  HSBC had purchased the loan pool but had not securitized it yet.  Early payment defaults (EPDs)—when a borrower fails to make one of the first few payments on a mortgage—could be, in the words of HSBC’s co-head of RMBS, “an indicator of higher expected loss on the pool.”  In an internal email, HSBC’s head of risk management for RMBS wrote that the high EPD rate could be a sign of systemic problems with the pool.  Others within HSBC’s risk management group expressed concern that the pool “may be contaminated” and asked whether “they should hold back on the securitization launch until there is further clarity on all the issues….”  The next day, the head of HSBC’s whole loan trading risk management group stated that he was “comfortable that we need not make any further disclosures to investors….”  HSBC issued the securitization a few days later.  A later post-close quality control review indicated that loans that “appear to have fraud or misrep” went into the securitization.  HSBC went on to buy and securitize more loans from the same originator, even after the head of HSBC’s due diligence team concluded that the originator had offered “bad collateral.”

After purchasing certain loan pools, HSBC ordered a quality control review but did not wait for the final results before issuing the securitization.  On two pools, HSBC received preliminary quality control results before the issuance of the securitization that, according to the quality control vendor, showed indications of fraud in the origination of particular loans, but included those loans in the RMBS anyway.  On a loan pool in 2007, HSBC performed post-close due diligence on a sample of loans from that pool.  HSBC’s due diligence vendor graded approximately 30% of the loans in the post-close due diligence sample as having the lowest grade.  HSBC went on to securitize loans from that same pool without any further credit or compliance review before securitization.

These are allegations only, which HSBC disputes and does not admit.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Kevin Traskos, Jasand Mock, Ian J. Kellogg, Hetal J. Doshi, and Lila M. Bateman of the District of Colorado investigated this matter, with the support of the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s Office of the Inspector General (FHFA-OIG).

To report RMBS fraud, go to: http://www.stopfraud.gov/rmbs.html.

Topic(s):
Mortgage Fraud
Component(s):
© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

AG Ferguson files lawsuit against Wenatchee-based companies for soliciting and collecting on old debts without a license

AG Ferguson files lawsuit against Wenatchee-based companies for soliciting and collecting on old debts without a license

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Sep 21 2018

 

UPDATE: This release was updated to reflect an amended complaint, filed on Oct. 9, 2018, which no longer names The Collection Group as a defendant. The amended complaint is available here.

Companies are still garnishing wages, seizing bank account funds and threatening to foreclose on homes based on thousands of unlawful judgments

OLYMPIA — Attorney General Bob Ferguson today filed a lawsuit against Wenatchee-based collection agencies and their owner for buying millions of dollars of old debt and suing to collect on the debt without being licensed as collection agencies with the state.

The companies bought the debt for pennies on the dollar and collected on it for up to nine years before obtaining licenses. To this day, they continue to collect on the debt based on unlawfully obtained judgments. Their collection efforts include garnishing wages, seizing bank account funds and threatening to foreclose on homes.

“These debt buyers continue to go after consumers’ homes, wages and bank accounts without legal authorization,” Ferguson said. “Washington law requires debt buyers to be licensed for a reason: to protect consumers.”

The lawsuit, filed in King County Superior Court, asserts the companies solicited and arranged to buy portfolios of old debts of Washington consumers without a license, in violation of the state Collection Agency Act. The companies, owned by Brian Fair, then sued to collect the full face amount of the debts, despite not being licensed as collection agencies as required by law. These violations of the Collection Agency Act also violate the state Consumer Protection Act.

Fair owned two debt-collecting companies: EGP Investments, formed in 2009, and JPRD Investments, formed in 2007, neither of which obtained a collection agency license until 2013. Before they were licensed, the companies bought thousands of debt accounts and unlawfully sued and obtained judgments on the debts of at least 2,800 consumers. The companies are still collecting on unlawfully obtained debts.

Companies like Fair’s are known as debt buyers. Unlike a traditional collection agency, which collects debt on behalf of a creditor who owns the debt, debt buyers purchase debts outright from a creditor for a small fraction of the debt owed.

When debt buyers solicit and purchase old debt accounts, as these companies did, they are required under Washington’s Collection Agency Act to be licensed as collection agencies. Buying debt without a license is legal unless the buyer acts as a collection agency, as these defendants did.

Typically, debt buyers pay less than five cents on the dollar, depending on how old the debt is. For example, if a debt buyer paid four cents on the dollar, they paid just $80 for the right to sue on a $2,000 debt. Because they own the debt, they can collect and keep the full face amount of the debt.

The Washington State Legislature passed the Collection Agency Act in 1971. The purpose of the act is to ensure collection agencies deal fairly and honestly with debtors.

As consumer debt has increased, more debt buyers are collecting debt from Washingtonians. The debt accounts are often sold repeatedly from debt buyer to debt buyer, sometimes with little original documentation or evidence of the debt.

After purchasing old debts for a tiny fraction of the face value, Fair’s companies sued consumers to obtain court judgments requiring consumers to pay the debts. These judgments give the companies leverage to seize a consumer’s assets, such as homes, wages and bank account funds. Because Fair’s debt buyer companies were not licensed collection agencies, these collection judgments were unlawful.

Fair’s companies are currently still collecting on the judgments they obtained without licenses, in violation of the Collection Agency Act and Consumer Protection Act. When garnishing consumers’ wages, Fair’s companies seized and continue to seize up to 25 percent of each paycheck.

In addition to garnishing wages, seizing money from bank accounts and other aggressive collection tactics, the companies have threatened to foreclose on consumers’ homes using the judgments. In King County alone, the companies have recorded more than 390 judgments and have used the judgments to foreclose on consumers’ homes.

Across the state, Fair and his companies have used the unlawful judgments to foreclose on consumers’ homes. For example, Fair and EGP Investments wrote to a homeowner in Lynnwood earlier this year and told her they would foreclose on her home unless she immediately contacted them to pay off the judgment, even though they obtained the judgment illegally in the first place.

She responded to the company with a handwritten note, explaining that her only source of income was a monthly Social Security payment. Fair responded that interest continued to accrue on her debt account and advised her to begin the process of applying for a “reverse mortgage” to pay off the debt.

In addition to failing to acquire a license, at least one of Fair’s companies, JPRD, violated the Collection Agency Act by failing to properly notify consumers about the interest that had accrued on their debts.

Ferguson’s lawsuit asks the court to order that Fair and his companies stop collecting on these illegally obtained judgments and update consumers’ credit reports to remedy the harms.

The lawsuit seeks restitution for consumers harmed by Fair’s actions, in addition to civil penalties and reimbursement of legal costs and fees. The state Consumer Protection Act allows for a civil penalty of up to $2,000 per individual violation.

Assistant Attorneys General Matthew Geyman and Amy Teng are handling the case for the Attorney General’s Office.

-30-

The Office of the Attorney General is the chief legal office for the state of Washington with attorneys and staff in 27 divisions across the state providing legal services to roughly 200 state agencies, boards and commissions. Visit www.atg.wa.gov to learn more.

Contacts:

Dan Jackson, Acting Communications Director, (360) 753-2716; DanJ1@atg.wa.gov

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Be Careful About Putting Only One Spouse’s Name on a Reverse Mortgage

Be Careful About Putting Only One Spouse’s Name on a Reverse Mortgage

Elder Law Answers-

A recent case involving basketball star Caldwell Jones demonstrates the danger in having only one spouse’s name on a reverse mortgage. A federal appeals court has ruled that an insurance company may foreclose on a reverse mortgage after the death of the borrower, Mr. Jones, even though Mr. Jones’ widow is still living in the house. While there are protections in place for non-borrowing spouses, many spouses are still facing foreclosure and eviction.

A reverse mortgage allows homeowners to use the equity in their home to take out a loan, but borrowers must be 62 years or older to qualify for this type of mortgage. If one spouse is under age 62, the younger spouse has to be left off the loan in order for the couple to qualify for a reverse mortgage. Some lenders have actually encouraged couples to put only the older spouse on the mortgage because the couple could borrow more money that way. But couples often did this without realizing the potentially catastrophic implications. If only one spouse’s name was on the mortgage and that spouse died, the surviving spouse would be required to either repay the loan in full or face eviction.

[ELDER LAW ANSWERS]

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Bank of America, N.A. v. Reyes-Toledo |  HAWAII SUPREME COURT – (1) wrongful foreclosure; (2) declaratory relief; (3) quiet title; and (4) unfair and deceptive trade acts and practices (sometimes “UDAP”) under HRS § 480-1 et seq.

Bank of America, N.A. v. Reyes-Toledo | HAWAII SUPREME COURT – (1) wrongful foreclosure; (2) declaratory relief; (3) quiet title; and (4) unfair and deceptive trade acts and practices (sometimes “UDAP”) under HRS § 480-1 et seq.

Great Job to DUBIN LAW OFFICES!

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI?I
—oOo—
________________________________
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO BAC HOME LOANS
SERVICING, LP FKA COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING LP,
Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
GRISEL REYES-TOLEDO, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant,
and
WAI KALOI AT MAKAKILO COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION;
MAKAKILO COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION; and
PALEHUA COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
Respondents/Defendants-Appellees.

SCWC-15-0000005 by DinSFLA on Scribd

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

TILA for Business Loans and Purchases of Receivables? Factors, MCAs, Fintechs and Commercial Lenders Subject to New CA TILA-Like Disclosure Rules

TILA for Business Loans and Purchases of Receivables? Factors, MCAs, Fintechs and Commercial Lenders Subject to New CA TILA-Like Disclosure Rules

H/T DUBIN LAW OFFICES

 

Mayor Brown-

California enacts a first-of-its-kind legislation imposing disclosure requirements on commercial purpose loans similar to those that the federal Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”) and Regulation Z impose on consumer purpose loans. And it extends those provisions to factoring, merchant cash advances and other types of arrangements that involve assignments of accounts and receivables.

On September 30, 2018, California Governor Jerry Brown signed S.B. 1235 into law, which will amend the California Financing Law (“CFL”) to require certain providers of “commercial financing” to disclose information to a recipient at the time of extending a commercial financing offer that is $500,000 or less and to obtain the recipient’s signature on the disclosure before consummating the commercial financing transaction. S.B. 1235 does not create new licensing obligations. Rather, it imposes new disclosure requirements on those who fall within S.B. 1235’s coverage, including both those who are licensed under the CFL and those who are not required to obtain a CFL license.

This change will impact a broad range of non-bank fintech companies offering smaller balance commercial loans. In fact, one purpose of the bill was to require disclosures in so-called bank partnership arrangements, when a commercial finance provider works through an online platform.

[MAYOR BROWN]

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

The Estate of Caldwell Jones, Jr. v. Live Well Financial, Inc. | 11th Cir. Holds HUD Regs Did Not Prevent Reverse Mortgage Foreclosure on Non-Borrower Surviving Spouse

The Estate of Caldwell Jones, Jr. v. Live Well Financial, Inc. | 11th Cir. Holds HUD Regs Did Not Prevent Reverse Mortgage Foreclosure on Non-Borrower Surviving Spouse

CFSBLOG-

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that 12 U.S.C. § 1715z-20(j) did not alter or limit the lender’s right to foreclose under the terms of the valid reverse mortgage contract where the non-borrower spouse was still living in the home.

Accordingly, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s petition for injunctive relief to prevent the foreclosure sale.

A copy of the opinion in The Estate of Caldwell Jones, Jr. v. Live Well Financial, Inc. is available at:  Link to Opinion.

A borrower obtained a reverse mortgage that was subsequently assigned to the defendant lender.  The mortgage was secured by the house the borrower shared with his wife and their minor daughter, and was insured by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

[CFSBLOG]

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

NYSE parent company ICE acquires Mortgage Electronic Registrations Systems aka MERS

NYSE parent company ICE acquires Mortgage Electronic Registrations Systems aka MERS

HW-

Intercontinental Exchange, the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange, is now also the parent company of MERSCORP Holdings, as the companies announced Friday that ICE has acquired all of MERS.

The deal comes just over two years after ICE acquired a majority stake in MERSCORP, the owner of Mortgage Electronic Registrations Systems and operator of the MERS System, a national electronic registry that tracks the changes in servicing rights and beneficial ownership interests in U.S.-based mortgages.

Now, ICE owns all of MERS after acquiring the remaining stake in the company for an undisclosed sum.

[HW]

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Top Foreclosure Lawyer, Fantasy Football Columnist, Sees Law Firm Liquidate

Top Foreclosure Lawyer, Fantasy Football Columnist, Sees Law Firm Liquidate

Sedgwick isn’t the only law firm to file for bankruptcy this week.

Stay In My Home, P.A., the St. Petersburg, Florida-based firm of prominent foreclosure lawyer Mark Stopa, took the plunge by beginning Chapter 7 proceedings in Tampa on Oct. 2. Stopa was suspended indefinitely from practicing law this summer by the Florida Supreme Court, which found that he had violated professional conduct rules.

In late August, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement raided the offices of Stopa’s firm. State agents said Stopa was the subject of a criminal investigation into “equity skimming,” or essentially improperly acquiring client assets. The Tampa Bay Times, citing records subpoenaed by law enforcement officials, reported last week that Stopa had earned $4.8 million between Jan. 1, 2011 and April 1, 2018, via payments from individuals at properties controlled by his companies.

[LAW.COM]

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

TFH 10/7 | Foreclosure Workshop #69: Sakal v. AOAO Hawaiian Monarch — The Ten Things That Every Homeowner Needs To Know About Association Foreclosures and How To Combat Them

TFH 10/7 | Foreclosure Workshop #69: Sakal v. AOAO Hawaiian Monarch — The Ten Things That Every Homeowner Needs To Know About Association Foreclosures and How To Combat Them

COMING TO YOU LIVE DIRECTLY FROM THE DUBIN LAW OFFICES AT HARBOR COURT, DOWNTOWN HONOLULU, HAWAII

LISTEN TO KHVH-AM (830 ON THE AM RADIO DIAL)

ALSO AVAILABLE ON KHVH-AM ON THE iHEART APP ON THE INTERNET

.

Sunday – October 7, 2018

Foreclosure Workshop #69: Sakal v. AOAO Hawaiian Monarch — The Ten Things That Every Homeowner Needs To Know About Association Foreclosures and How To Combat Them

.

 ———————

 

Many of our listeners continue to experience difficulties with their Homeowner Associations leading to foreclosure, requesting that we do a show discussing how to deal with Association foreclosures.

That topic, however, is a challenge to discuss with any specificity given the wide variations in the governing rules and judicial decisions among different State jurisdictions.

Responding nevertheless to our listeners’ requests, on today’s show John Waihee and I present an overview intended to foster a better General understanding of the major Homeowner Association foreclosure-related issues today, while encouraging our listeners to research how each such issue is specifically dealt with in their individual jurisdictions.

1. Understanding the different types of Homeowner Associations;

2. Understanding why Homeowner Associations are structured to fail;

3. Understanding why Homeowner Associations foreclose;

4. Understanding Homeowner Association abuses;

5. Understanding Homeowner Association vulnerabilities;

6. Understanding Homeowner defenses to Association foreclosures;

7. Understanding legislative politics regarding Homeowner Associations;

8. Understanding judicial decision making regarding Homeowner Associations;

9. Understanding executive politics regarding Homeowner Associations; and

10. Understanding the future of Homeowner Associations.

Within the above general framework, if you have a specific question regarding a problem with or comment about your Homeowner Association, its Board of Directors, its attorneys, or its management employees or company, please call in during our live broadcast at 808-521-8383 and share your experiences with our listeners nationwide.

Gary Dubin

.
Host: Gary Dubin Co-Host: John Waihee

.

CALL IN AT (808) 521-8383 OR TOLL FREE (888) 565-8383

Have your questions answered on the air.

Submit questions to info@foreclosurehour.com

The Foreclosure Hour is a public service of the Dubin Law Offices

Past Broadcasts

EVERY SUNDAY
3:00 PM HAWAII 
6:00 PM PACIFIC
9:00 PM EASTERN
ON KHVH-AM
(830 ON THE DIAL)
AND ON
iHEART RADIO

The Foreclosure Hour 12

 

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

VITALIY v. WELLS FARGO BANK, NA | FL 5DCA- Appellee failed to provide him with the notice of default letter required by paragraph 22 of the mortgage

VITALIY v. WELLS FARGO BANK, NA | FL 5DCA- Appellee failed to provide him with the notice of default letter required by paragraph 22 of the mortgage

 

RUSH VITALIY, A/K/A RUSH VITALY, Appellant,
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., AS TRUSTEE FOR THE POOLING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT DATED AS OF NOVEMBER 1 2004 ASSET-BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES SERIES 2004-WHQ2, JOULIA VITALIY AND ARGENT MORTGAGE CO, Appellees.

Case No. 5D17-1904.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Opinion filed September 28, 2018.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Heather L. Higbee, Judge.

Latasha Scott, of Lord Scott, Tampa, and Richard J. Mockler, of Stay in My Home, P.A., St. Petersburg, for Appellant.

W. Bard Brockman, and Christian J. Bromley, of Bryan Cave LLP, Atlanta, Georgia, for Appellee, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee for the Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of November 1, 2004 Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates Series 2004-WHQ2.

No Appearance for other Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the final judgment of foreclosure entered in favor of Appellee, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., against Appellant, Rush Vitaliy. In his answer to Appellee’s foreclosure complaint, Appellant alleged that Appellee failed to provide him with the notice of default letter required by paragraph 22 of the mortgage. At trial, Appellee attempted to prove compliance with paragraph 22; however, the court sustained Appellant’s objection that the proffered evidence was hearsay. At the conclusion of Appellee’s case, Appellant moved for an involuntary dismissal based on Appellee’s failure to prove that it actually mailed a default letter to Appellant. The trial court denied Appellant’s motion and entered final judgment in favor of Appellee.

At best, Appellee’s evidence proved only that Appellee prepared a default letter addressed to Appellant; however, there was no proof that the default letter was actually mailed. Thus, Appellee failed to prove that it complied with paragraph 22 of the mortgage. See Madl v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 244 So. 3d 1134, 1137 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). Accordingly, the trial court erred by denying Appellant’s motion for involuntary dismissal and for entering judgment in favor of Appellee. We reverse the final judgment and remand to the trial court with instructions to enter an order involuntarily dismissing the case.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

COHEN, C.J., EDWARDS and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED.

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Intercontinental Exchange Completes Acquisition of Mortgage Electronic Registrations Systems, Inc. (MERS)

Intercontinental Exchange Completes Acquisition of Mortgage Electronic Registrations Systems, Inc. (MERS)

ATLANTA & NEW YORK–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (NYSE:ICE), a leading operator of global exchanges and clearing houses and provider of data and listings services, announced it has acquired the remaining equity of MERSCORP Holding, Inc., owner of Mortgage Electronic Registrations Systems, Inc. (MERS). ICE has owned a majority equity interest in MERS since 2016. Price and terms of the transaction were not disclosed and will not be material to ICE’s earnings or have an impact on capital return plans.

“This is a natural evolution for our business and will provide benefits for participants throughout the industry.”

MERSCORP owns and operates the MERS System, a national electronic registry that tracks the changes in servicing rights and beneficial ownership interests in U.S.-based mortgage loans. Earlier this month, ICE successfully moved the MERS System infrastructure to the ICE Mahwah data center, an integral requirement for completing the final acquisition of the business.

“As the U.S. mortgage finance industry transitions from a paper-based process to more digital mortgages and electronic notes, MERS is uniquely positioned to provide a seamless process that will bring greater efficiencies to consumers, lenders and institutional investors,” said ICE Chairman and CEO Jeffrey C. Sprecher.

“ICE has a well-established track record of transitioning traditional analog businesses to digital marketplaces, and MERS represents another important chapter in that record. We’re excited to work with MERS as it embarks on their next stage of development.”

“ICE’s global infrastructure and experience in making markets more transparent and efficient will enhance the access, scalability and effectiveness of MERS for its more than 5,000 member institutions,” said Bill Beckmann, MERSCORP Holdings CEO. “This is a natural evolution for our business and will provide benefits for participants throughout the industry.”

For additional information on MERS, please visit www.mersinc.org. For additional information on ICE, please visit www.theice.com.

About Intercontinental Exchange

Intercontinental Exchange (NYSE: ICE) is a Fortune 500 and Fortune Future 50 company formed in the year 2000 to modernize markets. ICE serves customers by operating the exchangesclearing houses and information services they rely upon to invest, trade and manage risk across global financial and commodity markets. A leader in market data, ICE Data Services serves the information and connectivity needs across virtually all asset classes. As the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange, the company raises more capital than any other exchange in the world, driving economic growth and transforming markets.

Trademarks of ICE and/or its affiliates include Intercontinental Exchange, ICE, ICE block design, NYSE and New York Stock Exchange. Information regarding additional trademarks and intellectual property rights of Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. and/or its affiliates is located at http://www.intercontinentalexchange.com/terms-of-use. Key Information Documents for certain products covered by the EU Packaged Retail and Insurance-based Investment Products Regulation can be accessed on the relevant exchange website under the heading “Key information Documents (KIDS)”.

Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 — Statements in this press release regarding ICE’s business that are not historical facts are “forward-looking statements” that involve risks and uncertainties. For a discussion of additional risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements, see ICE’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings, including, but not limited to, the risk factors in ICE’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, as filed with the SEC on February 7, 2018.

SOURCE: Intercontinental Exchange

ICE- CORP

Contacts

Media Contact:
Damon Leavell
Damon.Leavell@theice.com
212-323-8587
or
Investor Contact:
Warren Gardiner
Warren.Gardiner@theice.com
770-835-0114

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Sanders to launch new plan to break up Wall Street giants, including Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan

Sanders to launch new plan to break up Wall Street giants, including Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan

WAPO-

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Wednesday unveiled legislation that would place a hard cap on the size of financial institutions, a proposal that would splinter Wall Street’s biggest firms in an effort to ward off future taxpayer bailouts.

The measure is dead on arrival with a Republican Congress and President Trump in office. And even if the current Democratic Party were to take control of government, it would face a difficult path to passage, as many of the party’s moderates have opted for answers to the banking crisis that did less to alter the financial system.

Sanders’s bill would bar financial institutions from holding assets, derivatives and other forms of borrowing worth more than 3 percent of the entire U.S. economy. That would cap their size at $584 billion in today’s dollars.

[WAPO]

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Mark Stopa’s former law firm files bankruptcy petition to liquidate its assets

Mark Stopa’s former law firm files bankruptcy petition to liquidate its assets

Tampa Bay-

The former law firm of St. Petersburg attorney Mark Stopa declared bankruptcy Tuesday, marking the end of one of Florida’s biggest and most controversial foreclosure defense firms.

The petition by Stay In My Home P.A., estimates the number of creditors — the people and businesses owed money by the firm — at between 1,000 and 5,000. It includes the names and addresses of hundreds of individuals from all over Florida, apparently homeowners who had hired Stopa’s firm to keep them from foreclosure.

Filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Tampa, the petition estimates the firm’s assets at $50,000 to $100,000 and its liabilities at $100,000 to $500,000 — though those figures could be revised as the case proceeds.

[TAMPA BAY]

image: DOUGLAS R. CLIFFORD | Times

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Regulatory relief for some bigger banks could be on the way, senior Fed official says

Regulatory relief for some bigger banks could be on the way, senior Fed official says

CNBC-

Banks with more than $250 billion in assets could see regulatory relief as the Federal Reserve continues to review regulations, the central bank’s vice chair for supervision of financial institutions said Tuesday.

Speaking to members of the Senate, Fed Governor Randal Quarles said size alone shouldn’t be the determining factor in how banks are governed. Instead, he said, a variety of factors that focus on risk profile and systemic danger should be used.

Those with more than $250 billion but not posing a threat to the system are part of a review into how post-financial crisis regulations should be tailored to fit the current climate.

[CNBC]

© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

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

Archives