Jeff Carbiener | FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA

Tag Archive | "jeff carbiener"

Hugh Harris returns to challenge at LPS, Replaces Jeff Carbiener as CEO

Hugh Harris returns to challenge at LPS, Replaces Jeff Carbiener as CEO


To no surprise Alltell was part of this, if you dig deep enough you might also find they took some form with MERS.

Jax Daily Record-

After Jeff Carbiener resigned as CEO of Lender Processing Services Inc. in June for health reasons, the Jacksonville-based company promised a comprehensive search for a replacement that would take as long as necessary.

As it turns out, it didn’t have to look very far.

LPS last week named Hugh Harris to replace Carbiener. And it’s not the first time the company has turned to Harris.

LPS provides processing services to mortgage lenders through all phases of the loan process, from origination to foreclosure if the loan goes bad.

It’s a company that traces its roots back nearly half a century to a Jacksonville company called Computing & Statistical Services that was eventually bought out by Alltel Corp. in 1992.

[JAX DAILY RECORD]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (1)

LPS Carbiener to stay on as Sr. Advisor, $880K salary continues through 2012

LPS Carbiener to stay on as Sr. Advisor, $880K salary continues through 2012


According to this 8k filing on Thursday-

Mr. Carbiener will continue to serve as an employee of the Company in the role of Senior Advisor to Mr. Kennedy and the LPS Board of Directors until December 31, 2012. In his capacity as Senior Advisor, Mr. Carbiener will provide advice and counsel to Mr. Kennedy and the Board on an as needed basis. This will enable Mr. Kennedy and the Board to utilize Mr. Carbiener’s deep knowledge of the Company and the industry during this transition period and as they work toward resolving the outstanding legal and regulatory issues facing the Company. Accordingly, effective as of July 7, 2011, LPS entered into a new employment agreement with Mr. Carbiener.

If Mr. Carbiener had terminated his employment with the Company under the current circumstances rather than agreeing to remain with the Company in an advisory capacity, he would have been entitled to receive a lump sum payment equal to the unpaid portion of his current annual base salary of $880,000 through December 31, 2012, the expiration date of his prior employment agreement.

Mr. Carbiener’s new employment agreement terminates his prior employment agreement, and provides that Mr. Carbiener will continue to receive a base salary of $880,000 per year for the term of the agreement, which expires on December 31, 2012. He will not be eligible to participate in the Company’s annual cash bonus incentive plan for 2011 and 2012, and he will not be eligible to participate in future awards under the Company’s equity incentive plans. Under the new employment agreement, Mr. Carbiener is entitled to customary benefits, including medical and other insurance coverage for himself and his eligible dependents, and is subject to customary post-employment restrictive covenants.

Sounds like he’s making out pretty well considering he’s no longer participating in cash bonus, future award incentives.

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (0)

BREAKING: LPS CEO Jeffrey S. Carbiener Resigns, Effective Immediately

BREAKING: LPS CEO Jeffrey S. Carbiener Resigns, Effective Immediately


Lender Processing Services, Inc. today announced that Jeffrey S. Carbiener is stepping down from his positions as chief executive officer, president and director of the company for significant health-related reasons, effective immediately.

LPS’ board of directors has established a committee to search for a replacement. In the interim, Lee A. Kennedy, the executive chairman of the board of LPS and the former chief executive officer of LPS’ prior parent company, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc., will serve in the additional roles of president and chief executive officer.

[…]

From Feb 2011

Is A Major CEO About To Step Down and Announce Their Resignation?

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (3)

Shareholder Claims Against Lender Processing Services Investigated by Goldfarb Branham LLP

Shareholder Claims Against Lender Processing Services Investigated by Goldfarb Branham LLP


DALLAS–(BUSINESS WIRE)– Goldfarb Branham LLP is investigating whether certain officers and directors of Lender Processing Services, Inc. (NYSE: LPS) violated state and federal securities laws due to statements the company made about its home foreclosure procedures. Concerned LPS shareholders are urged to contact securities attorney Hamilton Lindley at 877-583-2855 or hlindley@goldfarbbranham.com about their rights and remedies.

“According to a class action complaint, LPS failed to disclose that its DocX subsidiary used ‘robo signers’ to falsify documents and that LPS engaged in improper fee shifting with foreclosure attorneys to hide these deceptive practices,” said securities lawyer Hamilton Lindley. “After a company press release commented on these allegations, LPS stock price plummeted 13 percent.”

Goldfarb Branham LLP lawyers have significant experience representing shareholders and whistleblowers in securities lawsuits nationwide. The firm may be retained without financial obligation or cost to its clients. Lender Processing Services investors who purchased stock before or between July 29, 2009 and October 4, 2010, and continue to hold their shares, should contact the firm at hlindley@goldfarbbranham.com or 877-583-2855 to learn about their rights.

Goldfarb Branham LLPHamilton Lindley, 214-583-2233877-583-2855 Toll Free214-583-2234 Facsimile hlindley@goldfarbbranham.com

Source: Goldfarb Branham LLP

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (0)

Two Additional Law Firms Announce FL CLASS ACTION: Alleging Lender Processing Service “LPS” Violated Federal Securities Laws

Two Additional Law Firms Announce FL CLASS ACTION: Alleging Lender Processing Service “LPS” Violated Federal Securities Laws


This class action was commenced in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on behalf of purchasers of LPS securities between July 29, 2009 and October 4, 2010 (the “Class Period”).

The following Firms have made announcements on:

12/9

Law Offices of Howard G. Smith.

12/10

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP

The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period the Company and certain of its executive officers violated federal securities laws by issuing material misrepresentations to the market concerning the Company’s business, operations and financial performance, thereby artificially inflating the price of LPS securities.

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (0)

Special report: Legal woes mount for a foreclosure kingpin

Special report: Legal woes mount for a foreclosure kingpin


By Scot J. Paltrow
updated 12/6/2010 2:10:09 PM ET 2010-12-06T19:10:09
.

JACKSONVILLE, Florida — Lender Processing Services is riding the waves of foreclosures sweeping the United States, but in late October its CEO, Jeff Carbiener, found himself needing to reassure investors in the $2.8 billion company.

Although profits were rolling in, LPS’s stock had taken a hit in the wake of revelations that mortgage companies across the country had filed fraudulent documents in foreclosures cases. Earlier in the year, the company, which handles more than half of the nation’s foreclosures, had disclosed that it was under federal criminal investigation and admitted that employees at a small subsidiary had falsely signed foreclosure documents.

Still, Carbiener told the Wall Street analysts in an October 29 conference call that LPS’s legal concerns were overblown, and the stock has jumped 13 percent since its close the day before the call.

But a Reuters investigation shows that LPS’s legal woes are more serious than he let on. Public records reveal that the company’s LPS Default Solutions unit produced documents of dubious authenticity in far larger quantities than it has disclosed, and over a much longer timespan.

Questionable signing and notarization practices weren’t limited to its subsidiary, called DocX, but occurred in at least one of LPS’s own offices, mortgage assignments filed in county recorders’ offices show. And rather than halt such practices after the federal investigation got underway, the company shifted the signing to firms with which it has close business ties. LPS provided personnel to work in the new signing operations, according to information from an LPS spokeswoman and court records including an October 21 ruling by a judge in Brooklyn, New York. Records in county recorders’ offices, and in the judge’s opinion, show that “robosigning” and preparation of apparently false documents went on at these sites on a large scale.

In one instance, it helped set up a massive signing operation at the nearby office of a major client, a spokeswoman for the client, American Home Mortgage Servicing, confirmed. LPS-hired notaries who worked there said in interviews that troves of documents were improperly handled. They said that about 200 affidavits per day were robosigned during the two months the two notaries remained there.

A spokeswoman for LPS confirmed to Reuters that it had helped other firms establish operations that performed the same function. LPS spokeswoman Michelle Kersch didn’t specify which firms. But beginning early in 2010, county recorders’ records show, signing shifted also to law firms under contract with LPS.

Interviews with key players and court records also show that pending investigations and lawsuits pose a bigger threat to the company than Carbiener let on.

The criminal investigation in Jacksonville by federal prosecutors and the Federal Bureau of Investigation is intensifying. The same goes for a separate inquiry by the Florida attorney general’s office. Individuals with direct knowledge of the federal inquiry said that prosecutors have impaneled a grand jury, begun calling witnesses and subpoenaed records from LPS.

The company confirmed to Reuters that it has hired Paul McNulty, former deputy U.S. attorney general in the George W. Bush administration, to represent it in the investigation. A spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney’s office declined to comment on the probe.

The U.S. Comptroller of the Currency’s office, which is responsible for supervising national banks, also announced in November that it had teamed up with the Federal Reserve to conduct an on-site examination of LPS.

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (1)

FL CLASS ACTION: Alleging Lender Processing Service “LPS” Violated Federal Securities Laws

FL CLASS ACTION: Alleging Lender Processing Service “LPS” Violated Federal Securities Laws


City of St. Clair Shores General Employees Retirement System

v

Lender Processing Services, Inc., Jeffrey S. Carbiener, Lee A. Kennedy, and Francis K. Chan

The complaint alleging violations of the federal securities laws by Lender Processing Services, Inc. and certain of its officers and/or directors. The class action was commenced in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on behalf of purchasers of LPS securities between July 29, 2009 and October 4, 2010 (the “Class Period”) by Robbins Geller Rudman and Dowd LLP.

LPS CLASS

[ipaper docId=43794502 access_key=key-1wej89yk64l79dcp7srt height=600 width=600 /]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (6)

TAG YOUR IT! LPS: no defects in related foreclosures, no fee-splitting

TAG YOUR IT! LPS: no defects in related foreclosures, no fee-splitting


Just a few weeks ago Wells Fargo made an announcement that there were no problems at all blah blah blah…and now they have passed the baton to Lender Processing Services…

Wells Fargo has found fraud errors… sigh.

LPS: no defects in related foreclosures, no fee-splitting

by JACOB GAFFNEY
Friday, October 29th, 2010, 7:30 am

Lender Processing Services (LPS: 28.69 +4.33%) began reducing its foreclosure signing services back in 2008 and stands by its mortgage processing services. Further, when the firm caught a manager robo-signing foreclosure documents, the only such case it says it found, that manager was immediately dismissed and documents remediated.

“We believe we have taken appropriate steps and we do not believe it resulted in any wrongful foreclosures,” said LPS CEO Jeff Carbiener in a third-quarter conference call to investors Friday. “We no longer provide foreclosure document services.”

Carbiener also said that his company does not participate in fee-splitting or revenue-sharing with lawyers, another recent charge against the company.

“We are not an equity owner in any law firm,” he said.

LPS, a mortgage and real estate technology and services provider, reported net earnings of $78.7 million or 85 cents per share, in the third quarter of 2010, up from $75.5 million or 78 cents per share, in last year’s quarter.

JPMorgan Chase (JPM: 37.605 +0.25%), Bank of America (BAC: 11.4301 -0.87%) and Wells Fargo (WFC: 25.85 -0.35%) also now use LPS desktop management software for dealing with clerical issues when it comes to mortgages, the CEO said.

.

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (0)

Is It Time to File Quiet Title Actions on Foreclosed Homes?

Is It Time to File Quiet Title Actions on Foreclosed Homes?


[GUEST POST]

Is It Time to File Quiet Title Actions on Foreclosed Homes?

THIS IS NOT Intended to Be Construed or Relied upon as COMPETENT LEGAL ADVICE—it is an academic paper discussing various perceptions of evolving potential facts and law, which may differ state by state and within jurisdictions within states. Readers are urged to obtain competent legal representation to review their facts.

In the past, foreclosed homeowners and their attorneys have discussed the utility of filing quiet title actions where homes have been seized and deficiency judgments entered by various foreclosure claimants that purport to unknowingly rely on faulty documentation. There are dangers. A buyer that has acquired a foreclosed home—or the foreclosing entity itself—may bring an action against a dispossessed person seeking redress. A pro se plaintiff or an attorney that represents the wronged homeowner may be subject to sanctions for raising a spurious or improperly supported claim. Today facts appear to put a defense attorney at risk of malpractice if he does not preserve his clients’ interest—even post foreclosure—unless he apprises the client of the opportunity to regain title to the family home. Courts have notice of these defects by reason of withdrawals of support documents—beyond GMAC.

Recent disclosures and admissions by document creation groups, together with widespread newspaper reported facts open avenues to additional discovery and formulation of academic legal opinion. These will open the door for claims to set aside erroneous judgments and/or pursue damages against those servicers, Indenture Trustees and document preparers that either knowingly, negligently, or acted with willful disregard to perpetrate fraud on the courts and the hapless home-owners. Mortgage-backed securities investors may also find an interest in these activities. Failed documentation may disguise outright fraud. Attestations and sworn affidavits serve a fundamental purpose—prevention of fraud. These are not mere technicalities as propounded by some industry apologists.  Certainly, homeowners with continuing duties of enforced silence may have opportunity to re-open their settlements in light of these possible fraudulent impositions and inducements.

There are at least two sets of circumstances raised to date whereby potentially void or voidable documents have been used to push homeowners into the streets and into bankruptcy;

  • Complaints in foreclosure supported by assignments of mortgage from purported representatives of MERS to various entities
  • Motions for Summary Judgment supported by Affidavits of Claimants—most notably GMAC’s Jeffrey Stephan

On September 23, 2010 the Washington Post added to the furor surrounding the (majority) federal government owned [ALLY] GMAC’s revelations from earlier this week. GMAC used affidavits executed by an employee, Jeffrey Stephan, who admitted in deposition testimony in December 2009 and June 2010, that he did not actually verify the mortgage foreclosure information to which he was testifying in connection with the foreclosures of two families.

In addition, he admitted signing these “affidavits,” and passing them for later notarization in bulk, a violation of proper notary procedure. Mr. Stephan signed off on 10,000 mortgage documents per month according to his June deposition and the Post article. GMAC, in this instance, took the honest and safe course of “temporarily suspending” some foreclosure-related activities in 23 states – as reported by several large newspapers, including the New York Times, Bloomberg and The Washington Post. The “temporary suspension” allows for evaluation of the impacts of this admitted breakdown in the system, rather than blatantly defrauding foreclosure courts in judicial foreclosure states.  The New York Times on the 22nd speculated that: [GMAC] “actions suggest concern about potential liability in evicting families and selling houses to which it does not have clear title.” [Emphasis added]  The same article notes that; “The lender said it was also reviewing completed foreclosures where the same unnamed procedure might have been used.” [Emphasis Added]. The step referred to in these articles, preparation and filing of an affidavit in support of a Motion for Summary Judgment—along with the Motion itself –occur well into the foreclosure process.

However, there is another critical document created and filed by a claimant with the foreclosure court at the beginning of foreclosure. This document, the Assignment of Mortgage, is supposed to support the claimant’s right or legal “standing” to press the Complaint in Foreclosure. The Complaint is the basis for the foreclosure and creation of a “deficiency judgment” – the amount left owing by the homeowner after the claimant sells the house for less than the amount owed and includes added fees and charges. The claimant uses the deficiency judgment to seize the homeowner assets and future paychecks. In most instances the assignment is the only document before the court that associates the claimant with the borrower. The complaint and supporting assignment frequently surprise and confuse the homeowner by naming an entity or sham “trust” that the homeowner has never heard of before.

The Assignment of Mortgage is significantly more important than the affidavit in support of the Motion for Summary Judgment, if for no other reason sheer numbers.  Typically most homeowners have undergone a psychological bruising and beating from the loan servicer by the time the actual Complaint in Foreclosure is filed. Often the family has lost the pay of one, if not both, wage earners and seeks some relief from one of the high cost, predatory loans created 2003-2007. Unfortunately the servicer typically refuses to discuss modification or any relief unless the homeowner has fallen behind in payments. The servicers may rely on terms limiting its authority within the securitization documents in respect of this hard-nose approach.

The hard-nose response gives the servicer cover for actions or abuses that often characterize its subsequent conduct. At that point, the servicer transfers the loan to the default department or outsources to a “default management” operation. This is an aggrandized term for collection agency. The “department” or collection agency often calls the family up to six or more times a day demanding money—rarely the same caller twice. Typically, this will throw the family into confusion and despair. Pleas for relief fall on deaf ears unless the family meets demands to “make up late payments and added fees.”  It’s just the beginning of a process that has the effect, if not the purpose, of destroying the family’s morale. The servicer may follow up with notices tacked on the homeowner’s door, a barrage of ominous if not outright threatening letters and other actions aimed at driving the homeowner to abandon the home and neglect a legal defense.

If the homeowner is either naïve enough to believe that the touted voluntary [for servicers] relief programs actually operate, or desperate to keep a roof over the family’s head, the loan modification dance begins. Under the guise of compliance with HAMP, the collection agency demands an array of homeowner financial and employment information. Irrespective of the use that the homeowner desires for that information, it will be of great help to the collection agency to locate assets and paychecks down the road to collect the looming deficiency. But today the information rarely satisfies the servicer in respect of moving towards a modification. The demanded documents are often purportedly “lost” by the servicer, or deemed inadequate—anything to drag out the nightmare and break the family’s spirits. After submitting and resubmitting documents, explanations, and hours on the telephone day after day, week after week, any false hopes that are raised are destroyed by a denial. Homeowners often will be told to try again-with the same results.

After about 3-4 months, perhaps even while the family thinks that a modification is soon to be forthcoming, the ax falls instead. An assignment is “created” and the Complaint is filed. Usually the family gives up without opposition at this point. The servicer may go so far as to place a note on the door offering to further discuss modification leaving a phone number. When the number is called by the confounded homeowner, the servicer representative may explain: “we didn’t really mean that; we just wanted to see if you have left yet!”

In some cases born of desperation, the struggling family may contact an attorney who demands $1000-$5000 just to open the case. The family has 30 days to raise the money to cause someone to simply look at the demands in the Complaint and the Assignment. In the vast majority of cases still remaining, the family gives up now, abandons the property, and no response is ever filed to the Complaint—a default judgment is entered in favor of the claimant. Most often, the family is not even aware that the demands seek more than just the home. That realization may take years to occur—when another collector knocks on the door demanding the long-forgotten deficiency. The process is aimed at breaking the family’s will, at winnowing out the homeowners. The servicer wants the home!

The articles printed prior to Sep 23, 2010 in connection with GMAC’s “unnamed procedure” did not focus upon the issue of potential forgery or related systemic fraud on the courts in connection with preparation of Assignments of Mortgage. By way of background, by reference to numerous anecdotes, it appears that often a claimant in possession of a list of homeowner loans in default provides superficial information to a default services company in respect of the borrower and property. One of the largest default service providers, by its own admission, is two-year old publicly traded Lender Processing Services (“LPS”), a spin-off from FINS. “Approximately 50 percent of all U.S. mortgages by dollar volume are serviced using LPS’ Mortgage Servicing Package (MSP)” The lender, a servicer or Indenture Trustee contracts with LPS for creation and delivery of an Assignment of Mortgage to the requesting entity. (see exhibit at end) This document is often sent directly by LPS through the mail to County Recorders to be file-stamped and recorded in the county property records.  These steps lend false authenticity to the piece of paper. By the time the targeted family sees the Complaint and attached Assignment, the assignment has been file-stamped by their local County Recorder, the Clerk of Courts and probably was attached to a subpoena “served” upon them by their County Sherriff. The family is thoroughly intimidated by the Assignment of Mortgage, which has been used to convert the family’s local authorities into apparent agents and enforcers of the distant claimant. The assignment is a powerful weapon in the war of intimidation.

The Washington Post, September 23, 2010, correlated the GMAC admitted breakdown in verification of loan files and notarization process with the assignment creation process operated by LPS. LPS’ document creation division in Alpharetta, Georgia operating under LPS’ DOCX trademark, churned out thousands of assignments. The Post identified one prolific signatory, Linda Green. The article set out in its body several examples of Ms. Green’s signature—which differ dramatically one to another. The Post stated the likely observation that the signatures were made by other LPS employees in addition to Ms Green.  She is but one example at one LPS office: there are others with similar handiwork including Tywanna Thomas and Korrel Harp at that office. Mr. Harp has the added dubious distinction of having been jailed for and plead guilty to “Knowingly Possessing False Identification” relating to an arrest in Oklahoma in 2008.   At the age of 24, Mr. Harp was signing as Vice-President of Mortgage Electronic Services Inc., aka MERS. MERS has been nominal owner of 65 million home mortgages—and receives mortgage title to 60% of all new mortgages.

As a VP of MERS the 24 year-old Harp, like Ms. Green and Thomas, purportedly possessed the power to transfer mortgages with questionable oversight to LPS’ clients—perhaps others?  Based on the signatures of Harp, Green, Thomas— and other varied, yet purportedly notarized signatures, Courts across the country have foreclosed on homes and granted deficiency judgments.  One of the in house LPS notaries was only 18 years old at the time she notarized signature for Harp, Thomas and others at DOCX. Michelle Kersch, a senior vice president for Lender Processing Services, made limited explanations by email in the Post article but did not elaborate “due to the pending criminal investigation”.

Like GMACs Stephan, LPS’ stamp and sign department was a high volume operation. Powers of attorney were not consistently attached to the crucial assignments—if at all.

In the case of Linda Green, there was no power of attorney to represent MERS on an original “assignment of mortgage dated October 17, 2008 and filed on October 13, 2009”. This technicality was disclosed in a corrective filing of assignment by Florida foreclosure firm Shapiro and Fishman dated August 11, 2010 in Lee County, Florida in support of a foreclosure by servicer AHMSI. The POA status of other prolific signers such as Harp seems equally uncertain—but as Harp has emphatically stated “I’m sure everything is legal.” There seems to be little observable difference between the conduct of GMAC’s Stephan and the LPS’ high volume signers—but for the possible failure of the LPS signers to have representative capacity to sign at all.

LPS has also made admissions that GMAC seems to echo in terms of problematic “processes”. In the company’s 2009 Annual Report on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, published in March 2010, under “regulatory matters”-Recently, during an internal review of the business processes used by our document solutions subsidiary, we identified a business process that caused an error in the notarization of certain documents, some of which were used in foreclosure proceedings in various jurisdictions around the country.”

Subsequently, April 3, 2010, the Wall St. Journal published an article regarding the issues with LPS and notary deficiencies; “US Probes Foreclosure-Data Provider”.  Foreclosure activists in Florida did not let the admission pass. These persons identified and brought to light signed and notarized Assignments that actually conveyed mortgages to named entities, “Bogus Assignee” and “Bad Bene”. These clearly established undeniable proof that LPS’ internal controls were compromised and virtually any name could be inserted as a claimant in a foreclosure action.

LPS’ CEO Jeffrey Carbiener authored a Letter to the Editor of the Florida Times-Union responding to an article published May 14, 2010 referring to “bad bene” and “bogus assignee”. In his open letter admissions in the press Carbiener asserted that the bogus names were “placeholders” put in the signed and notarized assignment documents “…until the missing information [claimant name] was provided…” Carbiener noted that the forms, as well as the data inserted, were based on instructions from clients with the “placeholders” used until more data is provided.  This amounts to a Nuremberg Defense.

The Carbiener comments attempt to place the onus of error in naming mortgage claimants on his clients—but for the obvious so-called placeholders. However, Carbiener’s comments have great significance beyond LPS role. This explanation is an admission that assignments were prepared in blank based on client information. According to Carbiener, it would appear that the named claimant was subsequently determined by the client and inserted. This process allows substantial opportunity for abuse, suggesting that a servicer determined that a loan was in default, and then someone engaged in a separate process to identify a claimant to whom the proceeds of foreclosure would be awarded.

The difficulties, or opportunities, for a servicer and his client Indenture Trustees to shift the benefits among potential investor beneficiaries are more apparent when one reviews the SEC filings of now bankrupt mortgage note originators such as American Home Mortgage group (“AHM”) and Option One.

Both originated loans that were supposedly stuffed into trusts. On paper the trusts supposedly issued mortgage-backed securities to trusting investors. However, purported trust-sponsors AHM and Option One and the Indenture Trustees were at best haphazard in meeting basic commitments and representations that were plainly stated in the securitization documents they themselves filed. The trust documents clearly state that the lists of loans included in the trusts were filed with the SEC and the appropriate Secretary of State (UCC). The securitization documents provided detailed descriptions of the information to be included in the filed list. This information was sufficient that a homeowner could determine if the trust owned his/her loan and was the proper party to receive his payments. Investors in the trust MBS could look to the list to determine the principal amount of the loans that “backed” the investment, as well as loan to value ratios and other relevant information that would indicate the value of the loans—and provide information adequate to determine if the same loan was placed in multiple trusts. However, for AHM, 7 of the 12 investment trusts filed with SEC lacked the lists.  The schedule stated, “manually filed”, but the manual filing was not made in many instances. The actual manual filings made are identified on the SEC dockets for the trusts as “SE” for “scanned exhibit.” Under the “SE” docket entry, the list would be found in specificity.  One such example of a trust with a proper loan list was American Home Mortgage Investment Trust 2005-2.

In motion practice in connection with a homeowner’s motion to dismiss a naked claim by one of Korrel Harp’s or Linda Green’s appointed mortgage assignment beneficiary trusts, one could note that the trust lacked a loan list and ownership of the loan could not be independently verified by reference to government records as intended. In so doing, it was possible to refer the court to the properly filed loan lists to note the clear distinction and value of the list. It was possible to prove that the lists were not intentionally missing due to some overriding concern for homeowner privacy—a common speculation. It was also useful to prove that missing loan lists were not customary “industry practice”. The filed list was a government record freely accessible to the public online. That changed between July 21, 2010 and September 02, 2010. Loan lists that had been on file and available for investors and homeowners to view online on the SE site were unceremoniously deleted. The lists are no longer freely accessible. A demand is now necessary under Freedom of Information Act—the proper loan lists can no longer be referenced in motions to dismiss. The effect was equivalent to, if not the same as, intentional destruction of evidence by the SEC. It is of interest that on the same day as the Washington Post detailed the LPS similarity to GMAC in terms of uncertain document authenticity, the WSJ also ran a front-page article detailing questionable actions taken in recent months by SEC. Washington Post, September 22, 2010, SEC Blasted on Goldman.

In summary, SEC failed to require actual filing of loan lists by the trust sponsors and the Indenture Trustees. This failing has lead to LPS and GMAC transfers of claims to unverifiable beneficiaries. This the Times suggests, creates a cloud on the title of the new home buyers of foreclosed properties. Then to complete the injury and remove opportunity for homeowners to defend unsupported claims, SEC destroys evidence that could be useful to homeowners being foreclosed and investors seeking to prove fraud. The mortgage fiasco has roots in SEC failure to regulate and its continuation and concealment of potential fraud is an abuse of discretion by SEC, which is supposed to support disclosure of information—not hide it.

Excerpted from: DOCX eAssignTM brochure (no longer found online)

eAssign utilizes the industry’s most robust property records database and data capture capabilities to significantly reduce timelines and costs for lienholders when creating (emphasis added) and recording lien assignment documents.

This article was contributed by an anonymous supporter of StopForeclosureFraud.com

© 2010 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved. www.StopForeclosureFraud.com

Creative Commons License

Related links:

LPS 101

MERS 101

NO. THERE IS NO LIFE AT MERS

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



Posted in bogus, conflict of interest, CONTROL FRAUD, corruption, deed of trust, DOCX, foreclosure, foreclosure fraud, foreclosure mills, foreclosures, forgery, GMAC, investigation, jeff carbiener, jeffrey stephan, Korrel Harp, Lender Processing Services Inc., linda green, MERS, MERSCORP, michelle kersch, mortgage, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INC., notary fraud, note, quiet title, robo signers, S.E.C., securitization, servicers, STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD, stopforeclosurefraud.com, trade secrets, Tywanna ThomasComments (8)

VIDEO: What does LENDER PROCESSING SERVICES (LPS) exactly do: LPS CEO JEFF CARBIENER

VIDEO: What does LENDER PROCESSING SERVICES (LPS) exactly do: LPS CEO JEFF CARBIENER


Date of Video: 7/2/2008

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uddq3NJ3n7Q]

Posted in FIS, foreclosure fraud, Lender Processing Services Inc., LPSComments (0)

LPS CEO Jeff Carbiener: Speaks about Assignment Mortgage Fraud

LPS CEO Jeff Carbiener: Speaks about Assignment Mortgage Fraud


Reply: Mortgage documents: Placeholder items were innocent

Posted: May 20, 2010 – 4:35pm Jacksonville.com

LPS is very involved in the Jacksonville community and highly values its role and reputation as a good corporate citizen.

Therefore, I believe it is vitally important to provide clarification to the May 14 article in The Florida Times-Union, “Florida Investigating ‘Bogus’ Foreclosure Records.”

The article discusses LPS’ subsidiary, Docx LLC, which provided a document preparation service to its customers and/or their attorneys from 2008 to 2009.

When a customer or its attorney requested that Docx prepare a document, Docx downloaded the information provided in the customer or attorney order into a pre-approved form provided by the customer or its attorney.

When preparing the documents, if specific pieces of information were not provided by the customer or attorney, Docx used the phrases “Bogus Assignee” and “Bad Bene” as highly visible placeholders that would then be replaced when the missing information was provided to Docx. 

Unfortunately, on a few occasions, documents containing the placeholder phrases were inadvertently recorded before the field was updated.

While to our knowledge, none of these documents have been used in actual court proceedings, LPS deeply regrets this error.

However, these placeholder phrases had no other meaning other than to indicate that more information was needed. Docx is not a party to any court proceedings and our role ends when the prepared documents are returned to the attorney or customer.

In a separate matter, LPS reported in February that it identified a business process that caused an error in the notarization of certain documents, some of which were used in foreclosure proceedings. LPS immediately corrected the business process and believes it has completed the remedial actions necessary to minimize the impact of the error.

Finally, although LPS has not been contacted by the Florida attorney general regarding this or any other matter, LPS continues to express its willingness to cooperate with any governmental agency that contacts us.

JEFF CARBIENER,

president and CEO,

Lender Processing Services,

Jacksonville

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



Posted in DOCX, foreclosure, foreclosure fraud, foreclosure mills, investigation, Lender Processing Services Inc., LPSComments (0)

CRIST himself visits Lender Processing Services (LPS)!!!

CRIST himself visits Lender Processing Services (LPS)!!!


Nice PR move….NOT!

Bob Self/The Times-Union

Florida Governor Charlie Crist waves to employees at LPS while being introduced by Jeff Carbiener, the CEO of LPS during a visit to the business Wednesday afternoon. Crist made a stop at Lender Processing Services, Inc. on Riverside Avenue Wednesday afternoon as one of several stops in Jacksonville on the theme of jobs.

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



Posted in Lender Processing Services Inc., LPSComments (0)


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