STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD

Archive | STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD

TFH 9/23 | Foreclosure Workshop #67: How To Draft Discovery Requests That Will Defeat Foreclosure

TFH 9/23 | Foreclosure Workshop #67: How To Draft Discovery Requests That Will Defeat Foreclosure

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 – September 23, 2018

Foreclosure Workshop #67: How To Draft Discovery Requests That Will Defeat Foreclosure

.

 ———————

 

Too often foreclosure defense attorneys and pro se homeowners alike serve discovery requests in foreclosure cases that in boilerplate fashion rarely seek the kind of evidence crucial to defeating foreclosures.

On today’s show, John Waihee and I will suggest advance techniques for cheaply securing evidence capable of stopping a foreclosing plaintiff’s summary judgment attempts as well as producing a victory at trial.

To begin with, discovery requests in foreclosure cases should concentrate on gathering evidence to disprove a foreclosing plaintiff’s four bedrock contractual burdens of proving four essential elements of every foreclosure case: (1) a loan agreement, (2) a default, (3) a notice of default, and (4) standing to foreclose.

For each such set of discovery requests, the format is basically the same, beginning with a series of questions followed by individual requests for the documents and the witnesses supporting each intended answer.

This is known as a combined discovery request, consisting of an “interrogatory” numbered one through as many interrogatories as your jurisdiction allows to be served at one time (consider otherwise serving more than one set sequentially), combined with a “request for the production of documents” upon which the answer to each interrogatory is based.

The first evidentiary requirement (a loan agreement) might be simply considered a given in most cases, it being conceded that there was a signed loan agreement usually during an escrow closing, yet that is not always the case.

For example, occasionally English is not the first language of borrowers, yet no attempt is made to translate the contract terms into English, resulting in what is called a “contract of adhesion” where there was no meeting of the minds, hence no agreement, also potentially occurring where the terms generally technical in nature were as usual not explained to the borrowers, or where the borrowers as usual were not given time to read the documents they signed, or where promises were made to induce the signing that were relied on to the borrower’s detriment, but turned out to be false when made.

Your interrogatories therefore should ask about such specific circumstances surrounding the signing and who the witnesses were, where applicable, to determine if there was in fact an agreement.

The defense of contract of adhesion, although often prominent in contract cases generally, tends to be ignored in foreclosure cases except in instances deemed unconscionable, but can be expected to gain wider acceptance in future foreclosure cases if more borrowers raised the issue.

The second evidentiary requirement (a default) is often overlooked. Foreclosing plaintiffs are required to prove that a payment default occurred (or some other, non-monetary contractual requirement was violated by the borrower, with a different cure requirement and not usually the subject of a foreclosure action).

In securitized trust cases, due to the number of loan servicers involved, often each using a different incompatible software program, mistakes are frequently made, in some cases perhaps on purpose, resulting in unreliable data entries.

In other cases, the requirement of contemporary accounting is violated, foreclosing plaintiffs impermissibly offering as its general ledger proof of either ledgers prepared especially for the foreclosure litigation or incomplete or unreadable or lacking explanatory codes and so forth.

Your discovery requests should therefore ask for copies and when and where and by whom was the proffered general ledger prepared, the rules of evidence requiring personal firsthand evidence of same absent the application of stringent business record exceptions.

Retaining an accountant or CPA as an expert to review the accuracy of the loan general ledger is recommended, and could cost you as little as $500, yet that expert report might stop a foreclosure summary judgment on its own.

The third evidentiary requirement (a notice of default), discussed on several past shows, is often overlooked by borrowers, despite the fact that if a proper notice of default is not placed in evidence there can be no summary judgment and no foreclosure.

Foreclosing plaintiffs must prove that a proper notice of monthly payment default was served on a borrower defendant in a foreclosure action.

Such proof, often by more than more presumption, requires actual evidence that a proper default notice was sent on a given date, that it was received, and that its contents was consistent with the contractual requirements of the mortgage not including more than monthly payment arrearages and late fees, and including a properly timed right to cure, and accurate, usually such contractual requirements being found in Paragraphs 22 or 23 of the standard Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac universally utilized mortgage forms.

Interrogatories should therefore be served asking when, where, and by whom and on whose behalf were default notices prepared and sent and received, and what the content of those default notices was, whereas a borrower’s declaration of non-receipt is generally sufficient to prevent summary judgment as well as to prevail at trial.

And again, combined with such interrogatories should be a request for production of all documents that support the answer.

The fact that rarely are such purported notices sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, increases a foreclosing plaintiff’s burden of proof, disadvantaged also by the lack of adequate records as well as contradictory default notices available from prior loan servicers, who may for instance have sent a default notice moreover to the wrong address or on behalf of the wrong noteholder.

The fourth evidentiary requirement (standing to foreclosure), also discussed on past shows, has become the most lethal evidentiary weapon presently to defeat foreclosures today brought by securitized trustees whose paperwork is normally shoddy.

Such interrogatories should ask for a full description of the chain of ownership and possession of each promissory note and each mortgage and each note transfer and each mortgage assignment, when, where, and by whom, and the production of copies of each, identified by date and preparer, and documentary evidence of proof of each monetary payment for each transaction including the form of payment, the amount of payment, the payor and the payee, and where the transaction occurred. Follow the money!

In the case of securitized trusts, requests for date and time of deposit of notes and mortgages into the securitized trust by who whom specifically should be questioned, together with the production of transfer and receipt documents proving that such a deposit actually occurred, for otherwise the trustee has no standing to foreclose.

It is essential moreover that a borrower specifically request the production and inspection of the original “wet ink” promissory note, which most securitized trusts do not have and will recreate for a foreclosure case.

Due to the advances in photoshop technology, handwriting analysis has become an outmoded expertise. Consider hiring someone with the computer analyst credentials of a Dr. Kelley who has been on several of our past shows.

On today’s show we will explore in detail, time permitting, each such combined discovery request based on personal case experiences, as well as the timing strategies of when and when not to serve such discovery requests.

Finally, listeners are reminded that you still need to examine the evidentiary likes and dislikes of your individual jurisdiction and your individual judge, notwithstanding the law or common sense, as lawyering today, in the foreclosure field especially, takes place in state and federal judicial systems that too often resemble individual feudal fiefdoms.

There is no better research tool than using Lexis or Westlaw to review the foreclosure decisions if available of your individual judge.

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

NEVADA SANDCASTLES, LLC v. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Nev: Supreme Court | QUITE TITLE – Here, it is undisputed that respondent had actual knowledge of the foreclosure sale because it received the notice of sale.

NEVADA SANDCASTLES, LLC v. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Nev: Supreme Court | QUITE TITLE – Here, it is undisputed that respondent had actual knowledge of the foreclosure sale because it received the notice of sale.

 

NEVADA SANDCASTLES, LLC, Appellant,
v.
THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, F/K/A THE BANK OF NEW YORK AS TRUSTEE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF THE CWALT TRUST, INC. ALTERNATIVE LOAN TRUST 2004-18CB MORTGAGE PASS THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2004-18CB, Respondent.

No. 74522.
Supreme Court of Nevada.
Filed September 13, 2018.
Before: Cherry, Parraguirre and Stiglich, JJ.

ORDER OF REVERSAL AND REMAND

This is an appeal from a district court summary judgment, certified as final under NRCP 54(b), in an action to quiet title to real property.[1] Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Stefany Miley, Judge. Reviewing the summary judgment de novo, Wood v. Safeway, Inc., 121 Nev. 724, 729, 121 P.3d 1026, 1029 (2005), we reverse and remand.

The district court set aside the foreclosure sale after concluding that the sale did not substantially comply with the foreclosure statutes in light of respondent not being mailed the notice of default. However, this court has held that substantial compliance requires only that a party (1) have actual knowledge, and (2) not suffer prejudice. Hardy Cos., Inc. v. SNMARK, LLC, 126 Nev. 528, 536, 245 P.3d 1149, 1155 (2010). Here, it is undisputed that respondent had actual knowledge of the foreclosure sale because it received the notice of sale. And although there was some discussion at the summary judgment hearing regarding respondent being prejudiced by not receiving the notice of default, there is no evidence in the record that respondent was actually prejudiced. See Nev. Ass’n Servs., Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 130 Nev. 949, 957, 338 P.3d 1250, 1255 (2014) (recognizing that “[a]rguments of counsel are not evidence and do not establish the facts of the case” (internal quotation and alteration omitted)). Accordingly, based on the record before it, the district court erred in setting aside the foreclosure sale.[2] See W. Sunset 2050 Tr. v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC, 134 Nev., Adv. Op. 47, 420 P.3d 1032, 1035 (2018) (concluding that failure to mail the notice of default did not warrant setting aside a foreclosure sale when the deed of trust beneficiary failed to show prejudice).

Because reversal is warranted on this ground alone, we decline to address respondent’s alternative arguments on appeal that, if the sale was valid, it was a subpriority-only sale. We note, however, that this court has recently addressed similar arguments. See Nationstar Mortg., LLC v. Saticoy Bay LLC Series 2227 Shadow Canyon, 133 Nev., Adv. Op. 91, 405 P.3d 641, 650 (2017); First Horizon Home Loans v. The Entrust Grp., Inc., Docket No. 72995 (July 20, 2018, Order of Affirmance); Nationstar Mortg., LLC v. Melvin Grp., LLC, Docket No. 71028 (July 20, 2018, Order of Affirmance); HSBC Bank, USA, N.A. v. SFR Invs. Pool 1, LLC,Docket No. 71211 (December 14, 2017, Order of Affirmance). Consistent with the foregoing, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court REVERSED AND REMAND this matter to the district court for proceedings consistent with this order.

[1] Pursuant to NRAP 34(f)(1), we have determined that oral argument is not warranted in this appeal.

[2] In the absence of prejudice, respondent likewise would not have been entitled to equitable relief if the district court had analyzed the sale under the “fraud, unfairness, or oppression” standard. See Nationstar Mortg., LLC v. Saticoy Bay LLC Series 2227 Shadow Canyon, 133 Nev., Adv. Op. 91, 405 P.3d 641, 647-49 (2017) (discussing cases and reaffirming that inadequate price alone is insufficient to set aside a foreclosure sale absent “fraud, unfairness, or oppression”).

 

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

‘Zombie Homes’ Lawsuit Targets Citi and Wells Fargo as Neighbors Decry Sex, Drugs and Squatters

‘Zombie Homes’ Lawsuit Targets Citi and Wells Fargo as Neighbors Decry Sex, Drugs and Squatters

New York State’s 2016 “Zombie Home” law requires banks and their subcontractors to periodically inspect houses going through foreclosure — and if residents have bailed out — take over the cost of property maintenance

NBC-

The de Blasio administration is taking big banks to court over their failure to clean up a cluster of abandoned houses as the distressed properties wind their way through snails-pace foreclosure proceedings.

The city’s Department of Housing Preservation and Development filed lawsuits Wednesday against two lenders and three mortgage servicing companies, alleging the financial firms have persistently shirked their responsibility to secure five abandoned homes in Brooklyn.

New York State’s 2016 “Zombie Home” law requires banks and their subcontractors to periodically inspect houses going through foreclosure — and if residents have bailed out — take over the cost of property maintenance.

[NBC]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Judge Rules ICOs May Be Covered by Securities Law, but the Status of Utility Tokens Remains Unclear

Judge Rules ICOs May Be Covered by Securities Law, but the Status of Utility Tokens Remains Unclear

So why is a securitized trust real estate loan contract defrauding homeowners not also a securitized transaction in relation to borrowers?

Lexology-

A federal district court has—for the first time—agreed with the SEC that initial coin offerings (ICOs) could be considered securities offerings and has allowed a criminal case alleging violations of securities laws arising from an ICO to proceed to trial. The case, U.S. v. Zaslavskiy, 17 cr 0647, involves Maksim Zaslavskiy’s offering of two purportedly asset-backed tokens, REcoin (backed by real estate) and Diamond tokens (backed by diamonds).

According to its white paper, REcoin was backed by domestic and international real estate investments and led by an experienced team of brokers, lawyers, and developers. Meanwhile, Diamond was promoted as a virtual ecosystem that offered members cryptocurrency tokens hedged by physical diamonds stored in secure locations and fully insured for their value.

Prosecutors alleged these were all misrepresentations, as Zaslavskiy did not purchase any real estate or diamonds, did not hire a team, and never developed any REcoin or Diamond tokens. These allegations, among other alleged misrepresentations, formed the basis for the indictment charging Zaslavskiy with conspiracy and securities fraud.

[LEXOLOGY]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

The National Mortgage Settlement is officially over – Monitor’s office to shut down by end of 2018

The National Mortgage Settlement is officially over – Monitor’s office to shut down by end of 2018

HW-

The National Mortgage Settlement, the massive mortgage servicing settlement between the federal government, 49 states (all excluding Oklahoma), and five of the nation’s biggest banks and mortgage servicers, is now done and complete.

The National Mortgage Settlement is no more. RIP.

The settlement, which was originally announced on Feb. 9, 2012, required Bank of AmericaCitigroupJPMorgan ChaseWells Fargo, and ResCap (Ally Financial) to provide $20 billion in consumer relief and $5 billion in other payments.

The settlement stemmed from allegations that those companies were “robo-signing” mortgage documents, including allegedly signing swaths of foreclosure documents without properly reviewing them, evicting homeowners who were still in the modification process, and other abuses.

[HW]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

CFTC Orders Bank of America, N.A. to Pay $30 Million Penalty for Attempted Manipulation and False Reporting of U.S. Dollar ISDAFIX Benchmark Swap Rates

CFTC Orders Bank of America, N.A. to Pay $30 Million Penalty for Attempted Manipulation and False Reporting of U.S. Dollar ISDAFIX Benchmark Swap Rates

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC or Commission) today issued an Order filing and settling charges against Bank of America, N.A. (Bank of America or the Bank) for attempted manipulation of the ISDAFIX benchmark and requiring Bank of America to pay a $30 million civil monetary penalty.

The CFTC Order finds that, beginning in January 2007 and continuing through December 2012 (the Relevant Period), Bank of America made false reports and attempted to manipulate the U.S. Dollar International Swaps and Derivatives Association Fix (USD ISDAFIX), a leading global benchmark referenced in a range of interest rate products, to benefit its derivatives positions, including positions involving cash-settled options on interest rate swaps and interest rate swap futures.

CFTC’s Director of Enforcement Comments

James McDonald, CFTC Director of Enforcement, commented:  “This marks the ninth CFTC enforcement action involving manipulative conduct in connection with the USD ISDAFIX benchmark.  As this case shows, the Commission will continue to work vigilantly to ensure the integrity of critical financial benchmarks and hold all wrongdoers accountable, no matter how widespread the misconduct.”

During the Relevant Period, USD ISDAFIX was set each day in a process that began at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time with the capture and recording of swap rates and spreads from a U.S. based unit of a leading interest rate swaps brokering firm (Swaps Broker).

ISDAFIX rates and spreads were published daily and were meant to indicate the prevailing mid-market rate, at a specific time of day, for the fixed leg of a standard fixed-for-floating interest rate swap.  They were issued in several currencies and were published for various maturities of U.S. Dollar-denominated swaps.  The most widely used USD ISDAFIX rates and spreads, and the ones at issue in this Order, were those that were intended to indicate the prevailing market rate as of 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time.  The 11:00 a.m. USD ISDAFIX rate was used for the cash settlement of options on interest rate swaps, or swaptions, and as a valuation tool for certain other interest rate products.

The Order finds that certain Bank of America traders understood and employed two primary means in their attempts to manipulate USD ISDAFIX rates, each with the goal of moving USD ISDAFIX in the direction that favored Bank of America on specific trading positions at the expense of its counterparties.  The Bank attempted to manipulate USD ISDAFIX by bidding, offering, or trading swap spreads and U.S. Treasuries at and around 11:00 a.m. to affect rates and thereby increase or decrease the Swaps Broker’s reference rates and spreads and influence the final published USD ISDAFIX; and by making false, misleading, or knowingly inaccurate submissions to Swaps Broker concerning swap rates and spreads.

Attempts to Manipulate Through Trading

According to the Order, on occasion, certain traders at Bank of America attempted to manipulate USD ISDAFIX by bidding, offering, and executing transactions in targeted interest rate products, including swap spreads and U.S. Treasuries, at or near the critical 11:00 a.m. fixing time, with the intent to affect the reference rates and spreads captured by Swaps Broker that Swaps Broker disseminated to panel banks, and thereby to affect the published USD ISDAFIX.  Bank of America traders placed these bids or offers or executed trades in the moments leading into 11:00 a.m. designed in a manner, including timing and pricing, to increase or decrease the price level of swap spreads and/or U.S. Treasuries, with the intent to affect levels reported  on the electronic screen known as the “19901 screen” and USDAFIX fixings.  As one Bank of America trader explained to another in an electronic communication, “pushing the rate higher basically means we rcv a higher rate at the fixing.”

Attempts to Manipulate Through False Reporting

The Order also finds that certain Bank of America traders directed the relevant Bank of America Swaps Desk middle office employee responsible for making USD ISDAFIX submissions (the Submitter) to submit rates and spreads higher or lower than the Submitter otherwise would submit to attempt to affect the final published USD ISDAFIX rates and spreads to benefit the Bank’s positions.  On these occasions, Bank of America’s USD ISDAFIX submissions constituted false, misleading, or knowingly inaccurate reports because they purported to reflect the Bank’s honest view of the true costs of entering into an interest rate swap in particular tenors, but in fact reflected traders’ desire to move USD ISDAFIX higher or lower in order to benefit Bank of America’s positions.  For example, on one quarterly expiration date for swap futures contracts, a Bank of America trader told the Submitter that he was “gonna need 5y7y10y and 30y rates and spreads at 11am,” noting that he “want[ed] them low.”  The trader later instructed the Submitter to “put each of them lower by like 2/10,” and the Submitter complied with the trader’s request.

*  *  *  *  *  *

In accepting the Bank’s offer, the Commission recognizes Bank of America’s cooperation during the investigation of this matter by the CFTC’s Division of Enforcement (Division), which helped the Division undertake its investigation efficiently and effectively.  The Order also states that Bank of America commenced significant remedial action to strengthen the internal controls and policies relating to all benchmarks, including ISDAFIX.

The following CFTC staff members assisted in this case: Candice Aloisi, Jason Fairbanks, Jordon Grimm, David MacGregor, K. Brent Tomer and James Wheaton.

CFTC Division of Enforcement staff members responsible for this case are Lara Turcik, David C. Newman, Trevor Kokal, Steven I. Ringer, Lenel Hickson, Jr., and Manal M. Sultan.

 

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Florida Courts Are Prepared For A New Wave Of Foreclosures

Florida Courts Are Prepared For A New Wave Of Foreclosures

Law360-

ATTOM Data Solutions, a national property database that aggregates data for over 150 million U.S. properties, recently published its July 2018 U.S. Foreclosure Market Report, leaving many in South Florida with an unsettling sense of deja vu. Its July report indicated Miami experienced a third consecutive month of year-over-year increases in foreclosure starts, with foreclosure starts up 29 percent over the previous year in Miami.[1] The year-over-year increase in foreclosure starts in July for the state of Florida as a whole was up 35 percent.[2] For…

[LAW 360]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Judge deals Wells Fargo another blow in mortgage scandal

Judge deals Wells Fargo another blow in mortgage scandal

NY POST-

Wells Fargo has not yet earned back the trust of New York Federal Judge Robert Drain.

The US Southern District Court judge ruled this week that a New York homeowner The Post profiled in August who fought back against the denial of a mortgage modification request by Wells Fargo — had the right to have a new loan-modification request reviewed.

Nyack, NY homeowner Mia Derosa argued that the bank’s August admission that a computer glitch wrongly denied hundreds of customers home-loan help meant that Wells Fargo might have made a similar mistake in January 2018 on her rejected loan-modification request on her existing $650,000 mortgage.

[NY POST]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

TFH 9/16 | What Every Homeowner Needs To Know To Survive a Foreclosure Auction: How To Challenge Ten Major Foreclosure Auction Abuses, Including as Fiduciary and Due Process Violations.

TFH 9/16 | What Every Homeowner Needs To Know To Survive a Foreclosure Auction: How To Challenge Ten Major Foreclosure Auction Abuses, Including as Fiduciary and Due Process Violations.

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 – September 16, 2018

What Every Homeowner Needs To Know To Survive a Foreclosure Auction: How To Challenge Ten Major Foreclosure Auction Abuses, Including as Fiduciary and Due Process Violations.

.

 ———————

 

John Waihee and I have spent months on the Foreclosure Hour discussing “standing issues,” explaining how to challenge a pretender lender’s right to foreclose.

Yet despite new, stringent requirements for proving standing in many jurisdictions, still a majority of state and federal trial and appellate courts in the United States, who we might term the “Deep Judiciary,” grant foreclosure summary judgments, ignoring factual breaks in the chain of ownership of mortgage loans and the applicable otherwise co trolling rules of evidence.

For those homeowners in foreclosure losing standing issues, they are then forcibly escorted into a new legal maze called a foreclosure auction and the many abusive procedures it triggers.

On today’s show we explore, time permitting, what every homeowner needs to know about the auction process and how to survive while caught involuntarily within it.

The ten major auction abuses, applicable in most instances to judicial and nonjudicial foreclosures alike, admitted as unfair and inequitable in most if not all jurisdictions, but nevertheless nothing is often done about them, are as follows, to be discussed on today’s show:

1. Escrow Unauthorized Withholding of Escrow Proceeds.

2. Rigged Credit Bidding.

3. Lack of Qualified Commissioners.

4. Forced Sale Marketing Pretenses.

5. Sweetheart Insider Trading of Mortgage Loans.

6. Fraudulently Procured Deficiency Judgments.

7. Timing Inconsistencies.

8. Unjust Enrichment Flipping.

9. Vague Conscious-Shocking Test.

10. Sham Third-Party Purchasers.

Please join John and me as we explore yet another often otherwise invisible aspect of government-sponsored theft on the Foreclosure Hour, heard in Hawaii on Sunday at KHVH-AM at 3:00 p.m. Hawaii Time (and simultaneously on the iHeart Radio Internet App at 6:00 p.m. Pacific Time and 9:00 p.m. Eastern Time, which broadcast repeats the following hour).

Gary

.
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

U.S. households are still scarred by the financial crisis, new report suggests

U.S. households are still scarred by the financial crisis, new report suggests

MarketWatch-

Even a decade removed from the housing bubble, with the unemployment rate at 20-year lows, the U.S. household is still scarred by the financial crisis.

That’s the contention of a new report from Deutsche Bank economists Matthew Luzzetti, Brett Ryan and Justin Weidner, who talk of a household “savings glut.”

The economists say there’s a large disconnect between household savings and wealth.

Given the typical wealth-to-income ratio, the household savings rate should be closer to 1%. It’s remained about 6%, the economists point out.

[MARKETWATCH]

© 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 Florence

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

Pete Bakel

202-752-2034

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

  • Homeowners impacted by Hurricane Florence 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.

“We want to ensure those in the path of Hurricane Florence have peace of mind and time to focus on their safety,” 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 continue to work 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

Freddie Mac Confirms Disaster Relief Policies as Hurricane Florence Approaches

Freddie Mac Confirms Disaster Relief Policies as Hurricane Florence Approaches

MCLEAN, Va., Sept. 12, 2018 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Freddie Mac(OTCQB: FMCC) today reminded Servicers of its disaster relief policies for borrowers who have been affected by Hurricane Florence. 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 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.

“It is important for those in the Carolinas and nearby states to focus on their safety as Hurricane Florence approaches,” said Yvette Gilmore, Freddie Mac’s Vice President of Single-Family Servicer Performance Management. “Once out of harm’s way, we strongly encourage homeowners whose homes or places of employment have been impacted by Hurricane Florence 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

California’s housing crisis is so bad people are living in cars

California’s housing crisis is so bad people are living in cars

Vice-

There is a shortage of affordable housing in every state in the country, but it’s especially bad in California, where more and more people are discovering the only place they can afford to live is inside a car.

There’s only one affordable housing unit for every five extremely low-income households in the state, and the gap isn’t just pushing more and more people out onto the streets — it’s also creating a new, fast-growing, and hidden class of homelessness.

Danielle Williams is one of them. She’s a single working mother who has been living in her van with her daughter for five years. At first, it meant sleeping in dark, scarcely populated areas, and being hassled by the police on a regular basis.

[VICE]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Calif. Gov. Signs Law to Circumvent Mortgage Settlement Fund Usage

Calif. Gov. Signs Law to Circumvent Mortgage Settlement Fund Usage

NMP-

California Gov. Jerry Brown has signed into law a bill authored by the Democrat-controlled legislature that voids a court order mandating the repayment of $331 million to a special fundcreated to help victims of foreclosure abuse during the mortgage crisis.
The Associated Press reports that California received $410 million in the 2012 mortgage settlement between the states and the nation’s major mortgage companies. However, the state legislature passed a law to divert that money into paying off the deficits of agencies responsible for state housing bonds and consumer programs. Three non-profits sued California in 2014, and a state appeals court in Sacramento ruled in July that the money should be spent on programs directly assisting foreclosed homeowners.
The new law includes a statement that the Department of Finance followed legislative guidelines in the allocation of the settlement funds, adding that legislators were “aware of, and approved, the allocations and expenditures in question.” Faith Bautista, President of the National Asian American Coalition, one of the non-profits that sued the state, denounced the new law.
[NMP]
© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

TFH 9/9 | Special Robo-Signer Exclusive Expose (January 12, 2014 Rebroadcast)

TFH 9/9 | Special Robo-Signer Exclusive Expose (January 12, 2014 Rebroadcast)

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 – September 9, 2018

TFH 9/9 | Special Robo-Signer Exclusive Expose (January 12, 2014 Rebroadcast)

.

 ———————

 

This Sunday’s live broadcast first aired on The Foreclosure Hour when the nationwide fraudulent signing of mortgage assignments/notarizations and note allonges was first exposed due to the superior lawyering of several Florida attorneys.
>
> Nevertheless, although at first drawing the attention of some astute judges, such as the late Judge Arthur Schack in New York, judicial attention to such outright forgeries and the falsely recorded and the falsely sworn and falsely notarized documents in court rapidly decreased as judges are said to have erroneously concluded that the infamous AG Settlement years ago had somehow compensated borrowers for such false loan documentation, which it obviously however did not.
>
> While I am on the U.S. Mainland this weekend, it is once again time to remind everyone, especially the judiciary, lest we forget, of the incredibly blatant fraud perpetrated through robo-signing not only upon America’s mortgage borrowers, but also upon our Courts, which has been instrumental in covering up what we and others have called “The Great Deception”.
>
> And there is no better way of doing so than revisiting the startling video-taped admissions, exclusively broadcast by The Foreclosure Hour despite constant threats of lawsuits, of some of America’s most prolific robos, as I like to call them, employed by one of America’s leading past false document manufacturers.
>
> You may also view these exclusive videos on our website at www.foreclosurehour.com.

> The next time your foreclosure Judge says he or she does not understand the significance of robo-signing as fraud and as perjury waged against borrowers and courts and recording offices, ask your foreclosure Judge to view these videos.
>
> Gary

.
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

Judge OKs $480-million settlement with Wells Fargo shareholders over unauthorized-accounts scandal

Judge OKs $480-million settlement with Wells Fargo shareholders over unauthorized-accounts scandal

LA TIMES-

A federal judge in San Francisco has signed off on a $480-million settlement in a class-action shareholder lawsuit over Wells Fargo’s unauthorized-accounts scandal.

The deal, granted preliminary approval late Tuesday, would compensate Wells Fargo & Co. shareholders for losses they suffered after the bank in 2016 acknowledged it had created perhaps millions of accounts without customers’ authorization.

Shareholders, including lead plaintiff Union Asset Management, sued for securities fraud, arguing that executives had inflated the bank’s stock price by claiming for years that Wells Fargo was a leader in so-called cross-selling — getting customers to sign up for numerous accounts and services.

[LA TIMES]

 

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Wells Fargo Said to Face DOJ Probe of Wholesale-Banking Unit

Wells Fargo Said to Face DOJ Probe of Wholesale-Banking Unit

Bloomberg-

Wells Fargo & Co. is facing a Department of Justice investigation into whether employees in the company’s wholesale-banking business improperly altered customer data, a person familiar with the matter said.

The changes were made to meet a regulatory deadline, the Wall Street Journal reported earlier Thursday.

 “This particular situation involved a new process and a new required document called Certification of Beneficial Owners that our team members have to complete to help ensure we know our customers,” said Alan Elias, a spokesman for the San Francisco-based bank. “We’ve recognized that in certain circumstances additional training and new procedures were needed and have now been applied.”
© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

The story of a house: how private equity swooped in after the subprime crisis

The story of a house: how private equity swooped in after the subprime crisis

Blackstone has bought thousands of properties that were caught up in the mortgage meltdown

FT-

For personal trainer Trevor Pace, the house at 418 Homeplace Drive in Stockbridge was more than just a mansion-style home with a fireplace in the bedroom and a jacuzzi en suite.

“It was everything we had dreamt,” says Mr Pace, who moved into the house in 2001 together with his wife, Colleen, and their two children. It was the first place they had called their own.

Yet five years later, a French bank bought a financial security that was, in effect, a bet that the Paces would default on their mortgage and be forced to leave their comfortable suburban home.

[FT]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Pittman v. Experian Information Solutions | 6th Circuit holds that failing to report a trial modification plan can constitute incomplete reporting under FCRA

Pittman v. Experian Information Solutions | 6th Circuit holds that failing to report a trial modification plan can constitute incomplete reporting under FCRA

Lexology-

6th Circuit holds that failing to report a trial modification plan can constitute incomplete reporting under FCRA

On August 23, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit held that a borrower met the requirements necessary for a Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) claim to proceed when two mortgage servicers failed to report the existence of a trial modification plan when reporting the borrower was delinquent to reporting agencies. In 2014, a borrower brought an action against three credit reporting agencies and two mortgage servicers alleging, among other claims, violations of the FCRA due to payments being reported as past due while successfully making payments under a trial modification plan (also referred to as a Trial Period Plan, or “TPP”) and working towards a permanent modification. Regarding the FCRA claim, the 6th Circuit reversed the lower court’s decision granting the servicers’ motion for summary judgment, finding that the borrower met the statutory requirements for an FCRA claim because failing to report the existence of a TPP can constitute “incomplete reporting” in violation of the statute. The 6th Circuit rejected the servicers’ argument that the Home Affordable Modification Program guidelines “encouraged, but did not require” that they report a TPP. The court acknowledged this distinction but noted that “[r]eporting that [a borrower] was delinquent on his loan payments without reporting the TPP implies a much greater degree of financial irresponsibility than was present here.” The court remanded the case to the district court to determine whether the servicers conducted a reasonable investigation after the borrower disputed the reporting

Buckley Sandler InfoBytes- Pittman v. Experian, Et Al 6th Circuit Opinion 2018.08.23 by DinSFLA on Scribd

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

Residential Mortgage. Loan Trust 2013-TT2, BY U.S. Bank N.A. v Fiorita | Young Law Group Beats Another Mortgage Lender With Statute of Limitations Dismissal!

Residential Mortgage. Loan Trust 2013-TT2, BY U.S. Bank N.A. v Fiorita | Young Law Group Beats Another Mortgage Lender With Statute of Limitations Dismissal!

Residential Mtge. Loan Trust 2013-TT2, By U.S. Bank N.a. v Fiorita (2018 NY Slip Op 51240(U))- Sup Ct Suff… by DinSFLA on Scribd

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD0 Comments

TFH 9/2 | Foreclosure Workshop #66: Blackrock v. U.S. Bank; and the Florida Bar and Grievance Committee v. Stopa — The National War Against Foreclosure Defense Attorneys Continues To Suppress Exposure of Massive Foreclosure Securities Fraud

TFH 9/2 | Foreclosure Workshop #66: Blackrock v. U.S. Bank; and the Florida Bar and Grievance Committee v. Stopa — The National War Against Foreclosure Defense Attorneys Continues To Suppress Exposure of Massive Foreclosure Securities Fraud

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 – September 2, 2018

Foreclosure Workshop #66: Blackrock v. U.S. Bank; and the Florida Bar and Grievance Committee v. Stopa — The National War Against Foreclosure Defense Attorneys Continues To Suppress Exposure of Massive Foreclosure Securities Fraud

.

 ———————

 

Recently there have been two major developments in the foreclosure field, seemingly completely unrelated to one another, yet in reality highly interrelated.

The first major development is the ongoing 2015 Blackrock class action lawsuit in New York County Supreme Court, brought by hundreds of securitized trust major investors, including insurance companies and investment trusts, against U.S. Bank serving as Trustee for 770 securitized trusts, each with its own pooling and servicing agreement, which class action, surviving motions to dismiss just this year, has now been allowed to go forward in 2018 on its breach of contract claims.

These breach of contract claims by investors address deficiencies by U.S. Bank in the management of its securitized trusts, including “failure to ensure delivery of mortgage loan files” into the trusts, which of course is of special importance to individual mortgage borrowers challenging the pretender lender standing of securitized trustees suing for foreclosure while alleging possession and ownership of those loan files.

The second major development is the emergency interim suspension by the Florida Supreme Court of well known and highly successful Florida trial and appellate foreclosure defense attorney Mark Stopa for supposedly posing “great harm to the public” after one County Judge sitting as referee recommended his suspension, despite reportedly that ten other Florida judges had “testified glowingly of [Stopa’s] superior legal abilities and ethical behavior” in hearings this spring concerning a relatively few client complaints against him, and at the end of August agents of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement even raided Stopa’s Law Office, removing boxes of client files.

After all, the majority view still seems to be that borrowers are deadbeats and having no real defenses, attorneys representing borrowers are unethically merely preying on vulnerable deadbeats.

What do these two seeming separate developments in Blackrock and Stopa have in common?

Together they highlight the interrelated nature of the indefensible double standard being applied both to the ethical supervision of foreclosure defense attorneys in the United States compared to their foreclosing attorney counterparts, and to the judicial supervision of securitized trustees in foreclosure litigation compared to lawsuits by investors against securitized trustees.

And the interconnection between the two developments is the national war against foreclosure defense attorneys by Bar regulators, encouraged by foreclosure attorneys, which is the major reason that borrowers, lacking in defense resources, continue to be disadvantaged in foreclosure litigation.

Even emergency interim suspension was matter-of-factly recently sought against the undersigned by Hawaii Bar regulators claiming, for instance, that The Foreclosure Hour was “a menace to the general public,” supposedly the show guaranteeing clients favorable outcomes, which is not only untrue as everyone of our listeners knows, but absurd, and fortunately the Hawaii Supreme Court recently denied that emergency petition so we are still on the air.

Meanwhile, while foreclosure defense has become more and more a low paying and truly hazardous occupation, pretender lenders and their foreclosure attorneys, both richly compensated, continue to go ethically unsupervised by Bar Regulators, who like the legendary Mr. Magoo prefer to overlook outright forgery, perjury, dishonesty, and theft of homes, dozens of examples of which committed in court have been exposed on previous Foreclosure Hour shows and will be summarized today, time permitting, for any legislators, judges, and Bar regulators who may be listening and genuinely interested in stopping such dishonest practices.

Those practices, being indirectly exposed in the Blackstone class action having to do with covering up the widespread failure, for instance, of having delivered loan documents into the securitized trusts, are: false swearing by robo-signing documents recorded and filed in court, authenticating so-called original promissory notes by false testimony, assigning of mortgages to trusts that at the time did not even exist, loan servicers falsely claiming ownership of loans ordered blatantly to do so by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Servicing Guidelines, unethical control of foreclosure cases and counsel compensation by third parties hidden owners Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, foreclosure attorney representation of non-existing clients, conflicts of interest of foreclosing attorneys representing both sides, use of manufacturing plants creating false “original” loan documentation, false appraisals, false loan applications, and false underwriting, and more.

And in closing, perhaps the final irony and double standard of them all is when courts treat mortgage transactions in aptly named securitized trusts as securities transactions from the enforcement perspective of trust investors, but merely as traditional mortgage loan transactions from the enforcement perspective of foreclosure courts.

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

Investment Firms Sue US Bank Over RMBS Trust Losses

Investment Firms Sue US Bank Over RMBS Trust Losses

LAW 360-

BlackRock, Prudential and other investment firms have sued US Bank in New York state court, alleging it ignored “pervasive and systemic” issues in the underlying loan pools of 21 residential mortgage-backed securities trusts it administers, which were secured by more than $18.3 billion at the time of securitization.

The proposed class action filed Monday alleges the bank — described as the nation’s largest corporate trustee, with nearly one-third of all structured financial trust business — has a fiduciary duty and a contractual obligation to enforce their…

[LAW 360]

© 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