Evidence | FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA

Tag Archive | "evidence"

Did Chase (or Chase’s lawyer) fake foreclosure evidence AFTER doing the deal w/ Fed & State law enforcers? You decide:

Did Chase (or Chase’s lawyer) fake foreclosure evidence AFTER doing the deal w/ Fed & State law enforcers? You decide:


Thanks to Abigail Field for the title post and thank you to Joe over at BP Investigative Agency for this submission.

According to a Handwriting Expert… yes, documents were forged and altered.

As if Breaking and Entering weren’t enough, add forgery to the lengths JP Morgan Chase will go to take a home.

When foreclosure proceedings began on William Paatalo’s  Montana property in  January 2010, he, like many homeowners, felt emotionally drained and devastated. “ I couldn’t believe how I got to this place.  I had perfect credit in 2008.  I was making payments on three properties through Washington Mutual, but they began to misapply payments to the wrong accounts and even turned off my ‘auto-pay’ feature in an attempt to sabotage my credit and spin me into default.”

  By the time Paatalo discovered the error, his credit had tanked and things started spiraling downward. “It was brutal. My business lines of credit were shut down, and I couldn’t access any of my lines of credit ; WAMU was slow to acknowledge the problem; the credit agencies ignored me; and then I got the foreclosure notices.  It was a living hell. I spent a lot time being angry. “

In the end, Paatalo did what many home owners  are now doing.  He started pushing back.  “I didn’t want to just roll over.  I figured I still had some rights, so I began the painstaking process of researching my loan in hopes I could modify or delay the action.  The Trustee’s sale wasn’t   scheduled until June, so I figured I had a little bit of time to rectify the situation.”

But unbeknownst to Paatalo, Chase, who had acquired WAMU in 2008, took early action.  In March, they broke into his home, changed all the locks, and stole property, including  personal documents and a handgun.  “I was out of town, and when I found out what they had done I was outraged.” 

Paatalo filed a criminal complaint and took additional action. However, law enforcement sat idle as it was perceived to be a “civil matter.”  Tired of being victimized, he began investigating practices in the mortgage industry and uncovered much of what is now known.  In October of 2010 he filed suit against JP Morgan Chase pro se and has been litigating since then. 

But his case, scheduled for trial in September, took a bizarre turn recently.  “I was reading about the class action suit in California Bakenie v. JPMorgan Chase Bank  and I got to wondering if my note might’ve been forged.  So I got a color copy of the note, and in my office I magnified the signatures 800 fold.”

What he found was astounding.  Even to the layman’s eye, the signatures appeared to have been photo-shopped.  In one instance, even the signature line was colored blue.  “I couldn’t believe what I was seeing.  It looked like something a high school kid did. 

 Paatalo sent the document to Dr. Laurie Hoeltzel  in southern California;  a handwriting / document expert with over 20 years of experience.  Her findings verified what Paatalo suspected, the documents had indeed been forged.  “All along Chase has argued on record they hold the note.  Clearly, they do not.  It’s one thing to claim the note entitles them to foreclose, it’s another to commit a felonious act to illegally take a home they are not entitled to.  It’s absolutely appalling.  This is no longer a civil dispute.”

 Paatalo intends to file a criminal complaint against Chase, along with formal Bar complaints against their attorneys . The expert declaration is now in the hands of Montana’s Federal Magistrate Judge Carolyn  Ostby.   How this new information plays out in court is yet to be determined, but Paatalo is sure of one thing.  “Nothing these banks do surprises me anymore.  I can only hope our judicial system has the backbone to hold these people accountable.”

 Addendum:  Paatalo notified Chase of his discovery last week and was attempting to have the evidence surrendered to the court and sequestered.  After all, attorneys have a duty to uphold justice and refrain from assisting in fraud. He was notified today by Chase’s attorney that the documents had been removed from Butte, Montana and are now in Minneapolis, Minnesota.  Paatalo has objected to the transferring of the documents, and Chase’s attempts to withhold evidence of a crime.


Read the handwriting expert’s affidavit below begin at page 5…

[ipaper docId=86007729 access_key=key-2fuvvomrypzyggrt999p height=600 width=600 /]

 

 

© 2010-15 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (1)

SEC Bans Document Destruction After Whistleblower Cries Foul

SEC Bans Document Destruction After Whistleblower Cries Foul


Massive Collateral Damage has been done and in the age of having files held in electronic data, this is very disturbing.

Executive Gov-

The Securities and Exchange Commission has forbidden its employees from destroying investigative documents, as fallout spreads from a whistleblower’s recent claim that the agency has illegally destroyed thousands of preliminary investigation documents.

An SEC attorney alerted Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) of the possible crimes in August. The whistleblower said the documents in question were “matters under inquiry,” including reviews of AIG, Morgan Stanley, Lehman Brothers and Bernie Madoff.

[EXECUTIVE GOV]

© 2010-15 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (0)

One More Reason to Shut the SEC and Start Over: William D. Cohan

One More Reason to Shut the SEC and Start Over: William D. Cohan


Bloomberg-

Thanks to Darcy Flynn, a longtime attorney at the Securities and Exchange Commission, we now have all the ammunition we need to do what should have been done years ago: terminate the SEC, with extreme prejudice, and in its place construct a new regulatory watchdog for Wall Street free of obvious conflicts of interest.

Flynn’s courage has almost been lost in all the recent apocalyptic talk of earthquakes and hurricanes, but a few weeks back he did something remarkable. After raising concerns internally at the SEC last year — and getting nowhere — Flynn went public and alleged in a formal whistleblower complaint that for at least 17 years the SEC “followed a policy of systematically destroying documents” related to what are known as Matters Under Investigation, or MUIs, most of which were focused on possibly illicit or illegal behavior at Wall Street firms. MUIs are the first step in investigating a case that may lead to a formal SEC inquiry.

[BLOOMBERG]

© 2010-15 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (0)

Document Shredding: Why SEC’s Defense Won’t Fly

Document Shredding: Why SEC’s Defense Won’t Fly


MATT TAIBBI-

Just a quick note about the “Shredded Justice” story, as I’ve had a couple of questions about some of the SEC’s responses to the story.

Several readers pointed to this story in which SEC spokesman John Nester said this:

“We do keep records of our MUI’s and they’re available to our investigators to learn about previous work on matters that have been reviewed.”

[ROLLINGSTONE]

© 2010-15 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (0)

MATT TAIBBI: Is the SEC Covering Up Wall Street Crimes?

MATT TAIBBI: Is the SEC Covering Up Wall Street Crimes?


A whistleblower claims that over the past two decades, the agency has destroyed records of thousands of investigations, whitewashing the files of some of the nation’s worst financial criminals.

Rollingstone-

Imagine a world in which a man who is repeatedly investigated for a string of serious crimes, but never prosecuted, has his slate wiped clean every time the cops fail to make a case. No more Lifetime channel specials where the murderer is unveiled after police stumble upon past intrigues in some old file – “Hey, chief, didja know this guy had two wives die falling down the stairs?” No more burglary sprees cracked when some sharp cop sees the same name pop up in one too many witness statements. This is a different world, one far friendlier to lawbreakers, where even the suspicion of wrongdoing gets wiped from the record.

[ROLLINGSTONE]

© 2010-15 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (1)

LETTER | SEC Destroys Over 9,000 Fraud Documents Involving Goldman Sachs, Madoff, Bank of America, Citigroup, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, Lehman, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo

LETTER | SEC Destroys Over 9,000 Fraud Documents Involving Goldman Sachs, Madoff, Bank of America, Citigroup, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, Lehman, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo


Market Watch-

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — The Securities and Exchange Commission may have destroyed documents and compromised enforcement cases involving activity at large banks and hedge funds during the height of the financial crisis in 2008, according to allegations made by a lawmaker on Wednesday.

[MARKET WATCH]

[ipaper docId=62540112 access_key=key-wotv5tiw8imq9xbpkk9 height=600 width=600 /]

© 2010-15 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (2)

WA STATE Attorney General McKenna calls for mortgage trustees to suspend questionable foreclosures

WA STATE Attorney General McKenna calls for mortgage trustees to suspend questionable foreclosures


Hat tip to ForeclosureBlues

SEATTLE – Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna announced today that his office has uncovered evidence that suggests foreclosure trustees are ignoring consumer protection laws in Washington, adding a new layer to a stack of problems reported in the mortgage-servicing industry. He sent letters today to 52 trustees outlining his concerns and calling on them to suspend any questionable foreclosures in the state.

“As part of our ongoing investigation, we have received complaints and information that indicate the Washington foreclosure process frequently includes inaccurate documents, conflicts-of-interest, faulty chains of title and failures to provide the disclosures and conduct mediations required by law,” McKenna said during a press conference today in Seattle with officials from the Department of Financial Institutions (DFI) and the Washington State Housing Finance Commission. “Some of these practices can deprive homeowners of their legal right to assert legitimate defenses in an action to save their homes.”

“Problems aren’t limited to the national banks and mortgage servicers, however, and appear to extend to foreclosure trustees,” he continued.

The Department of Financial Institutions shares McKenna’s concerns that some foreclosures may not have been processed according to Washington law, said Director Scott Jarvis.

“Such failures potentially injure not just the homeowners denied the protections afforded to them under our laws, but also subsequent purchasers of foreclosed properties, financial institutions who might be inclined to lend on such properties, and the title insurance companies who insure the chain of title to those properties,” Jarvis said. “The last thing we need in these difficult times is to further damage our already struggling real estate industry.”

Washington state government officials are investigating foreclosure servicing problems from three perspectives:

  • McKenna and Jarvis announced today that they have joined the National Association of Attorneys General and banking regulators in forming a multistate group to investigate whether mortgage servicers have improperly submitted affidavits or other documents related to foreclosures in their states. The Washington Attorney General’s Office will serve on the executive committee of the multistate group. Jim Sugarman and David Huey, assistant attorneys general in the Consumer Protection Division, and Deborah Bortner, director of DFI’s Division of Consumer Services, will represent Washington on the new multistate group.
  • The Mortgage Fraud Working Group of The Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force, a joint federal-state initiative co-chaired by McKenna, is also investigating certain aspects of these foreclosure problems.
  • On the local front, the Washington Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Division since May of this year has been investigating reports of lenders and trustee services not properly reviewing foreclosure documents or following other legal procedures.

“Because Washington state law allows foreclosure without court oversight, you are the party most responsible for ensuring that foreclosures are done properly,” McKenna wrote in the letter to trustees. “Consequently, I ask you to suspend all foreclosures in which you have not yet confirmed that all foreclosure-related documents were lawfully signed, that the chain of ownership is clear and has been revealed to you in full, and that state consumer protection requirements have been followed.”

McKenna said that he strongly favors loan modifications and other means of preventing foreclosures when possible and advocates working with lenders to improve communication with borrowers. In addition to its enforcement efforts, the Attorney General’s Office plays a leading role in the multistate Foreclosure Prevention Working Group, which issues regular reports on the status of foreclosure prevention efforts.

“The housing counselors that we fund have told us again and again about the serious communication problems they are having on behalf of families facing foreclosure,” said Kim Herman, executive director of the Washington State Housing Finance Commission, “These families just want to be treated fairly and get a reasonable, timely decision so they can move on with their lives. That is not too much to expect and, hopefully, this process will help that happen.”

Washington residents facing foreclosure should call the Washington State Homeownership Information Hotline at 1-877-894-HOME (4663) for referral to a free, state-approved housing counselor or legal help. Additional resources are on the Attorney General’s Web site at www.atg.wa.gov/foreclosure.aspx.

Specific concerns addressed in McKenna’s letter to foreclosure trustees:

  • Employees of foreclosure trustees are signing documents posing as the corporate officer of multiple banks and mortgage servicers and signatures of some trustees vary widely from document to document. This appears to be happening even though signatures are notarized with a statement that the signer is the actual person standing before the notary.
  • Trustees may be foreclosing on homes when there is no clear chain of ownership for the loan or the security interest. At the national level, there are reports of lenders “reverse-engineering” the chain of title, including back-dating documents to make it appear as though the loan was passed from company to company.
  • Many default notices have gone out without all required information. Since July 26, 2009, Washington trustees have been required to identify the owner of the loan and the company that is acting as servicer. The notices must also include an address and phone number for the servicer. The absence of these details can make it harder for homeowners to contact their mortgage owners.
  • Lenders are not consistently telling homeowners about their right to explore alternatives to foreclosure. Lenders are required to advise borrowers who obtained mortgages between 2003-2007 of their right to meet and confer and, if requested, the loan owner must schedule a meeting to occur within 14 days. It is our understanding that lenders are regularly not telling homeowners about this right, which exists to help homeowners explore alternatives to foreclosure.

Washington is a “non-judicial foreclosure” state, which means that a lender can proceed directly to selling a home at public auction without first filing a lawsuit. This process was created by the state Legislature. Although lenders may foreclose in court in Washington, they almost always choose non-judicial foreclosures.

[ipaper docId=45180956 access_key=key-29drih0blt4ulcno54b height=600 width=600 /]

© 2010-15 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (3)

Max Gardner’s Rules for the Examination Of The Electronic Document Custodian

Max Gardner’s Rules for the Examination Of The Electronic Document Custodian


Written on June 22, 2010 by admin

State your full name and current position.
Provide us with your definition of a document custodian.
What is your exact job title?
What are your responsibilities?
Where are you employed?
Where does your company store original documents?
How are they stored?
If you outsource this storage, who is the outsource provider?
How do you confirm delivery to the outsource provider?
How do you retrieve original documents?
How long do you save original documents?
Do you have a written original document destruction policy?
Please explain it and produce a copy of the policy.
Do you retain images of original of all documents?
How are they retained?
Where are they retained?
How long are they retained?
What type of computer system is used for the image retention?
Do you have a Records Compliance or Management Department?
Explain how it works, who is employed there, and where it is located.
Describe all information that you store electronically.
Do you have an ESI manager?
Who, where does he or she work, what does he or she do?
What is your policy on the retention of electronically stored documents?
Do you have a written policy for ESI documents?
Do you have any automated archiving systems?
If yes, then explain how they work and how documents are achieved.
Where are the archived documents stored?
How do you save data to a file that has already been achieved?
State the name of the director or manager of your document archiving operation.
How do you store data acquired through mergers or acquisitions?
How do you retrieve historical data from the archives?
Explain the process in detail.
Do you have an organizational-wide data map or inventory of all electronically stored data?
Can you produce a copy of that map?
Do you have any litigation ready data files?
Where are they stored?
How are they created?
Who is in charge of creating these files?
Why are they created?
Is there such a file in this case?
Where is the data stored?
Do you have any electronic data stored on tapes?
Describe the data and the type of tapes?
Where are these tapes stored?
Do you maintain a disaster recovery location?
Where is it?
Do you store electronic data at this location?
How is it stored?
How long is it stored?
What types of servers are used to store the data at this location?
How long is the data stored?
Do you have a data destruction policy at the disaster location?
Please explain and produce all written protocols.
Explain how you retrieve data from the disaster location?
Explain the time and expenses involved in securing date from the disaster recovery location?
State if any data related to this case has been destroyed?
Describe the data in detail and when and under what circumstances it was destroyed.
Have you seen any notice in this case to preserve all of the ESI?
When, where and how did you see it?
Has any data related to this case been destroyed since you saw it?
Who is your Media Destruction Manager?
Where is this person located?
What are the responsibilities of this person?
Explain all of the steps your company has taken in this case to preserve ESI evidence?
Have you created a data file of ESI for this case?
When was it created?
Name all parties involved in the creation?
Where is that data filed now?
Explain all of the steps that were taken to create the ESI file for this case.
Are there any ESI that you could not find or include in the file?
If so, please explain.
If any of the data still exists, have you or anyone in your company investigated the restoration of any deleted or damaged data?
When, who did this and what did they do?
If not, then why not?
With respect to the ESI file that has been created for this case, have the documents been scrubbed for metadata?
If yes, then when, who ordered, and why?
Who was involved in the scrubbing?
Was a scrubbed metadata file created?
Who created the file and who has custody of the file?
Do you backup your data every day?
How and where is the backup data?
Who is in charge of your backup operations?
What data is backed up?
Do you back up programs and systems or just the data?
What is the difference between your backup data system and your archived data storage system?
How long is backup data retained?
What is the format for the media in the ESI file created for this case?
Did you ever stop backing up or archiving data in this case in anticipation of litigation?
If so, when, why, and who ordered such actions?
When was a litigation hold placed on the destruction of any of the ESI data related to this case?
Who issued the hold and how was it implemented?
Do you have any type of dormant document liability policy?
If so, then please explain in detail how it works?
Has any of the ESI data in this case been destroyed or deleted pursuant to a dormant document liability policy?
If so, can you identify who took such action, when it was taken, who ordered it taken, and why it was taken?
Name all parties who have access to any of the data related to this case.
Explain all security features employed by your company to prohibit the unauthorized access to any of your ESI data?
Do you keep any type of catalogue of information on tapes or other media related to historical ESI?
If so, please explain how this system works?
Where are the catalogues filed and how are they maintained?
State the names of all of the servers and the location of all such servers that contained any ESI data related to this case.
State your current policy on saving company email.
State your current archiving and backup programs with respect to email.
State all of your email format types, date ranges for retention of email, and the names of all custodians.
Please identify all types of files used by your company, the capacity of such files, the creation dates and how those dates are preserved, the modification dates and how they are recorded, and the maximum size of each file.
Does your company employ a de-duplication policy as to ESI data?
If so, please explain how it works?
Has any data in this case been subject to destruction pursuant to any such policy?
If so, identify all such ESI data.
Do any lawyers representing you in this case have access to any of your data files?
IF so, please explain the extent of such access, how it is tracked, and purpose of the same?
Have you migrated any ESI data in this case from older, disparate media sources into modern managed tools?
If so, explain in detail the older data systems, how the migration occurred, and explain the new storage media used?
Name all of the parties on the data migration team or group.
Do you have a Legal Records Management Team?
Name all of the Team members and the location?
Was the Team involved in this case?
If yes, then explain in detail the extent of their involvement.
Do you use a third-party IT vendor for ESI data capture, storage and archiving?
If so, who and how long have they been used?
Who is the on-site representative for your ESI vendor?
Does your backup vendor use DLT4, LT01 or 4MM tapes?
What type of backup software does the vendor use?
Do they use Backup Exec, NetBackup, Legato Net Worker, Trivoli Storage Manager, ArcServe, CommVault Galaxy or HP Omniback?
Describe all messaging systems used by your company.
Do you use Lotus Notes?
Do you use Novell GroupWise or any others?
How is the messaging data saved, backed up and archived?
Do you convert the messages media to any other type of media for storage?
If so, describe the media and how this is accomplished and by whom?
Explain all due diligence programs and procedures used to verify the integrity of your data?
Explain all due diligence programs and procedures used to secure and safeguard your data.
Do you maintain custody logs on the transfer of any ESI data?
What type of logs?
Who maintains and where are they located?
Do you have a “Best Practices” guide for of the operations described herein?
Can you produce it?

Source: Max Gardner Boot Camp Blog


© 2010-15 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Posted in bifurcate, bogus, chain in title, CONTROL FRAUD, corruption, deed of trust, deposition, foreclosure, foreclosure fraud, foreclosures, forgery, Max Gardner, mortgage, Notary, noteComments (0)

Proving “Originality” and Ownership of Electronic Mortgage Notes

Proving “Originality” and Ownership of Electronic Mortgage Notes


“Testing”- Document Authenticity

READ CAREFULLY…

  • The mortgage market’s continued ability to lend money relies on the liquidity of promissory notes secured by real property.
  • Paper promissory notes are endorsed “in blank”so that whoever has “possession”of the note is considered a holder, holder in due course, or purchaser.

[ipaper docId=35170867 access_key=key-qw5eoqxma51sn7wcqic height=600 width=600 /]

If you on SPERS.org’s site there is also some information to be looked at…like power point presentation and some pdf files. Click below

SPERS.ORG

Posted in foreclosure, foreclosures, MERS, mortgage, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INC., noteComments (1)


GARY DUBIN LAW OFFICES FORECLOSURE DEFENSE HAWAII and CALIFORNIA
Chip Parker, www.jaxlawcenter.com
Kenneth Eric Trent, www.ForeclosureDestroyer.com
Advertise your business on StopForeclosureFraud.com

Archives