Misrepresentation | FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA

Tag Archive | "misrepresentation"

Judge Schack Outstanding Order To Show Cause “plaintiff and plaintiffs’ counsels made material misrepresentations” | JPMORGAN CHASE v. BUTLER

Judge Schack Outstanding Order To Show Cause “plaintiff and plaintiffs’ counsels made material misrepresentations” | JPMORGAN CHASE v. BUTLER


JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION AS PURCHASER OF THE LOANS AND OTHER ASSETS OF WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, FORMERLY KNOWN AS WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, FA (THE “SAVINGS BANK”) FROM THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, ACTING AS RECEIVER FOR THE SAVINGS BANK AND PURSUANT TO ITS
AUTHORITY UNDER THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE ACT, 12 U.S.C.
9 1821(D),

-versus-

FREDERICK W. BUTLER,

EXCERPTS:

FURTHER, why an Order should not be entered that plaintiff pursued the Prosecution of this foreclosure action, and participated and engaged in actions,Constituting Settlement Conferences Before the Court in this Matter, when plaintiff had full knowledge, and plaintiffs counsel knew or should have known, that plaintiff had received payment on May 22,20 10 for the amount specified in paragraph SIXTH of its complaint dated on or about January 19,2010, as due and owing (that is, $434,382.89);

FURTHER, why an Order should not be entered that plaintiff and plaintiffs’ Counsels made material misrepresentations to the Court, on April 14,201 1 and May 2, 2011, for example, thereby engaging in misconduct before the Court;

[…]

FURTHER, why plaintiffs counsels, the law offices of Steven J. Baum, and their co counsel Cullen & Dykman LLP, should not be sanctioned pursuant to New York Judiciary Law 487 for misstatements and misrepresentations made to the Court on May 2, 2011, to defendant during the course of 11 settlement conferences over 12 months, and to defendant’s counsel and the Court with respect to the fact and procedural history of this case;

FURTHER, why Judgment should not be entered pursuant to CPLR 32111(a)(l), 321 l(a)(3), 321 l(a)(7) and 321 l(a)(8) dismissing this foreclosure action with prejudice;

FURTHER, why judgment should not be entered imposing sanctions against Plaintiff on the basis that plaintiffs affidavit of facts- namely its verified summons and complaint — contained material misrepresentations about its legal capacity to sue, about which plaintiff had full knowledge from commencement of this;

[…]

[ipaper docId=57973278 access_key=key-1sux49su06my9pi4x6pb height=600 width=600 /]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (2)

NV Jury Finds Wells Fargo Committed Fraud, Awards Signature Developers LLC $9.5 Million in Damages

NV Jury Finds Wells Fargo Committed Fraud, Awards Signature Developers LLC $9.5 Million in Damages


Elko Daily-

ELKO — At a time when Nevada is leading the nation in foreclosures for three years running, Signature Developers just avoided adding another piece of property to the list.

In a major victory for the developers of the Riverside Condominiums, an Elko District Court jury found Wednesday that Wells Fargo Bank committed fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of written contract and breach of good faith and fair dealing when trying to foreclose on the property.


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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (0)

Full Complaint | AMBAC v. EMC, JPMORGAN CHASE for “SACK OF SHIT” MBS

Full Complaint | AMBAC v. EMC, JPMORGAN CHASE for “SACK OF SHIT” MBS


NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. In mid-2006, Bear Stearns induced investors to purchase, and Ambac as a financial guarantor to insure, securities that were backed by a pool of mortgage loans that – in the words of the Bear Stearns deal manager – was a “SACK OF SHIT.”1 Within the walls of its sparkling new office tower, Bear Stearns executives knew this derogatory and distasteful characterization aptly described the transaction. Indeed, Bear Stearns had deliberately and secretly altered its policies and neglected its controls to increase the volume of mortgage loans available for its “securitizations” made in patent disregard for the borrowers’ ability to repay those loans. After the market collapse exposed its scheme to sell defective loans to investors through these transactions, JP Morgan executives assumed control over Bear Stearns and implemented an across-the-board strategy to improperly bar EMC from honoring its contractual promises to disclose and repurchase defective loans through a series of deceptive practices. In what amounts to accounting fraud, JP Morgan’s bad-faith strategy was designed to avoid and has avoided recognition of the vast off-balance sheet exposure relating to its contractual repurchase obligations – thereby enabling JPMorgan Chase & Co. to manipulate its accounting reserves and allowing its senior executives to continue to reap tens of millions of dollars in compensation
following the taxpayer-financed acquisition of Bear Stearns.

continue to the complaint below…

[ipaper docId=49597312 access_key=key-1ntbyo6ofse38sd72v9v height=600 width=600 /]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (0)

COMPLAINT | ALLSTATE SUES JPMORGAN CHASE OVER FRAUD & MISREPRESENTATION OF RMBS CERTIFICATES

COMPLAINT | ALLSTATE SUES JPMORGAN CHASE OVER FRAUD & MISREPRESENTATION OF RMBS CERTIFICATES


ALLSTATE BANK, ALLSTATE
INSURANCE COMPANY, ALLSTATE
LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY,
ALLSTATE NEW JERSEY INSURANCE
COMPANY, ALLSTATE LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK,
AGENTS PENSION PLAN, and ALLSTATE
RETIREMENT PLAN,
Plaintiffs,

-against-

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.; J.P.
MORGAN ACQUISITION CORPORATION;
J.P. MORGAN SECURITIES INC.; J.P.
MORGAN ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION
I; WM ASSET HOLDINGS
CORPORATION; WAMU ASSET
ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION; WAMU
CAPITAL CORPORATION;
WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE
SECURITIES CORPORATION; LONG
BEACH SECURITIES CORPORATION;
DAVID BECK; DIANE NOVAK; THOMAS
LEHMANN; EMC MORTGAGE
CORPORATION; STRUCTURED ASSET
MORTGAGE INVESTMENTS II INC.;
BEAR STEARNS ASSET BACKED
SECURITIES I LLC; and SACO I INC.
Defendants.

excerpt:

NATURE OF ACTION

1. This action arises out of Defendants’ fraudulent sale of residential mortgage-backed
securities in the form of pass-through certificates (the “Certificates”) to Allstate.
Whereas Allstate was made to believe it was buying highly-rated, safe securities backed by pools
of loans with specifically-represented risk profiles, in fact, Defendants knew the pool was a toxic
mix of loans given to borrowers that could not afford the properties, and thus were highly likely
to default.

2. Defendants made numerous material misrepresentations and omissions regarding
the riskiness and credit quality of the Certificates in registration statements, prospectuses,
prospectus supplements, and other written materials (the “Offering Materials”).

continue below…

[ipaper docId=49576773 access_key=key-15x133iijedsevu342na height=600 width=600 /]

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (0)

Are Realtor Class Actions Against Servicers Next On The List?

Are Realtor Class Actions Against Servicers Next On The List?


“Even the processor at the lender – Flagstar Bank – she thought, ‘Hey, you got an offer full price, we’ll get the foreclosure stopped; we’ll make it go away; we’ll have a sale.’ She calls me back and says, ‘sorry.’”

Realtor, home seller baffled when bank rejects its own offer

By Dan Tilkin KATU News and KATU.com Staff

Story Published: Feb 5, 2011 at 12:57 AM PST Story Updated: Feb 5, 2011 at 1:21 AM PST

VANCOUVER, Wash. – Stacy Baker fought for two years to sell her father’s house and to keep it from being auctioned off, but lost the fight even after her real estate agent said an offer was made to the bank that met its own conditions.

Baker’s father was 61 when he succumbed to complications from a heart transplant, and she said her father probably realized “it was the wrong decision after he bought it.”

Baker’s real estate agent, Aaron Signor, first tried to sell the house for about what was owed, but at $179,000 it didn’t sell. Over the following months, they lowered the price and got an offer at $134,000.

But Flagstar Bank, which services the mortgage on the house, rejected the offer, saying the house was worth $150,000.

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



Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUDComments (0)


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

Archives