Continue to the Link below for Max Gardner’s 65 Tips For Mortgage Documents.
1. The Mortgage or Deed of Trust is assigned from the Originator directly to the Trustee for the Securitized Trust.
2. The Mortgage or Deed of Trust is assigned months and sometimes years after the date of the origination of the underlying mortgage note.
3. The Mortgage or Deed of Trust is assigned from the initial aggregator directly to the Securitized Trust with no assignments to the Depositor or the Sponsor for the Trust.
4. The Mortgage or Deed of Trust is executed, dated or assigned in a manner inconsistent with the mandatory governing rules of Section 2.01 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement.
5. The assignment of the Mortgage or Deed of Trust is executed by a legal entity that was no longer in existence on the date the document was executed.
Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation
For Immediate Release:
June 23, 2011
Mortgage Company fined $290,000 for Incomplete and False Foreclosure Documents
CHICAGO – PHH Mortgage Company has been fined $290,000 for signing foreclosure affidavits that the company knew would later be altered by its attorneys and for signing affidavits using someone else’s name, according to an order released today by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDFPR). The violations were found during an ongoing special investigation of 20 Illinois licensed mortgage servicing companies, which was launched last year after learning of foreclosure improprieties across the country.
“At a time when homeowners are facing the possible loss of their most precious asset, homeowners have a right to expect their loan servicing company to file accurate and honest paperwork,” said Brent E. Adams, Secretary of Financial and Professional Regulation. “Time and again, the Department has sought to emphasize to loan servicing companies that home foreclosure is no time to cut corners.”
The order, signed by Manuel Flores, Director of IDFPR’s Division of Banking says that in at least 19 files, PHH failed to sign affidavits after they had been altered by the company’s attorneys and that PHH’s knowledge of and complicity with this process is evidenced by the fact that the original affidavits were incomplete and contained notations such as “will add” when they were tendered to the law firm of Fisher and Shapiro. The law firm, in turn, under penalty of perjury and acting on behalf of PHH, then attested to the completeness of the altered affidavits although they had not been reviewed or re-executed by PHH.
The Department discovered other evidence of improprieties on the part of PHH employees in 16 of the 19 affidavits. These 16 affidavits were identified as having all been signed and attested to by the same PHH employee in his or her official capacity. Yet, the Department noted no less than five distinctly different signatures attributed to this same PHH employee, leading the Department to conclude that at least four different people used one employee’s name to sign the affidavits. PHH has ten days to request a hearing on the Department’s order.
In December 2010, Department issued a 9-point “affidavit preparation expectations” plan establishing best practices for the handling of foreclosure-related documents. Under the Department’s order, PHH has violated both the Residential Mortgage License Act of 1987 and these best practices established, publicized, and agreed to by several loan servicers late last year.
The 9-point plan:
Affiants who sign affidavits in connection with foreclosure proceedings shall not use signature stamps to sign affidavits.
Affiants signing affidavits stating the amount owed by a borrower (hereinafter “prove-up affidavits”) shall confirm that the numbers accurately reflect the numbers in the licensee’s business records and are totaled correctly.
Affiants shall be individuals, not entities.
Affiants shall have the level of knowledge necessary to submit an affidavit in a judicial proceeding.
Lenders and servicers shall have processes in place to seek to ensure that affidavits used in connection with foreclosure proceedings are true, accurate, and complete, including that prove-up affidavits accurately reflect the amount due to the licensee.
To the extent that an affidavit is notarized, it shall be done in compliance with the law of the state in which the affidavit is being notarized, which generally requires that the affidavit be executed in the presence of the notary after the notary has administered the oath and that the notary appropriately dates the prove-up affidavit.
When using a form affidavit, Affiants shall not leave blanks or incomplete statements in the affidavit. Affiants shall date their signatures by hand on affidavits.
When the Affiant’s signature is not plainly legible, the name of the Affiant shall be printed on the affidavit in order to permit the identity of the Affiant to be known.
Lenders and servicers shall not file unsigned affidavits with the court.
Homeowners facing foreclosure and/or who have concerns or questions about the process may contact IDFPR’s mortgage hotline (800) 532-8785 (800) 532-8785
While the U. S. Department of Justice is actively prosecuting mortgage and foreclosure fraud, a national organization that helps homeowners avoid foreclosure has evidence that certain state judges appear to be protecting lawbreakers. Billions of dollars have been received by corporations in the foreclosure industry since the Great Recession began. Are these vast sums of money finding their way to elected state judges and politicians?
CHOESTOE, GA – June 11, 2011 (Examiner.com) – Amid the splendor of pristine mountains, waterfalls and springtime flowers in one of America’s favorite vacationlands, a passionate lady-with-a-cause, presented evidence yesterday that could shake the judicial system to its foundation. While helping families facing foreclosure, her non-profit organization has recently stumbled upon very questionable judicial actions in several states. The evidence is overwhelming that the powerful foreclosure industry not only has inappropriate influence over state court systems, but is using threats and economic pressure to stymie investigative efforts and legislative regulation.
Mistakes happen, of course. And loan servicers like to contend that if errors occur, they are rare and honestly made. But after sifting through the data produced by this investigation, Mr. White disagreed that problems are rare. “In Senate testimony, an executive from Countrywide said its error rate was 1 percent,” Mr. White recalled. “The mortgage servicer industry error rate might be 10 times higher, based on the number of cases we are looking at.”
“There are continued flaws in the process, and they are not merely technical,” Mr. White continued. “Those flaws undermine the integrity of the bankruptcy system. Many homeowners have been harmed, including where the lender has come in and said ‘we want to lift the stay and go back into foreclosure proceedings,’ even though they lacked a sufficient basis to do it.”
The investigation conducted by the OCC and the Fed included a review of just 100 foreclosure files.
Housing Wire-
When mortgage servicers signed consent orders with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Reserve, these companies were required to hire outside firms to conduct “look back” evaluations of questionable foreclosure practices.
But these reviews will not be made public, according to an OCC spokesman.
The head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. is warning that flaws may have “infected millions of foreclosures” and questioned whether other regulators’ inquiries into problems at the nation’s mortgage-servicing companies have been thorough enough.
“We do not yet really know the full extent of the problem,” FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair said Thursday in written remarks submitted to a hearing of the Senate Banking Committee. “Flawed mortgage-banking processes have potentially infected millions of foreclosures, and the damages to be assessed against these operations could be significant and take years to materialize.”
A Baltimore judge summoned attorneys from a large foreclosure law firm Monday to explain whether signatures on key documents were genuine, part of the fallout from revelations last year that foreclosures nationwide were being processed based on deficient — or fraudulent — paperwork.
West Palm Beach resident Liz Mills learned she was a robo-signer when a friend suggested she search her own name online.
On foreclosure blogs and in at least one newspaper article, the 51-year-old process server was singled out for the numerous and varying styles of her signatures on summons paperwork used to prove her efforts in locating homeowners in foreclosure.
Georgia’s newly elected Attorney General Sam Olens is clearly not part of any 50 state settlement. According to AJC, on Tuesday House Bill 237 is moving closer to passing.
This bill if passed, will criminalize falsifying foreclosure documents, not simply errors or typos. The bill would go into effect on July 1, and will give both the attorney general and district attorneys the power to subpoena. Florida you listening?
Georgians make sure this goes smoothly and do all you can.
Perhaps Mr. Olens should take over Mr. Millers position of leading the pack?
“We’ve found a good deal of fraud in the process, in the foreclosure process itself, most notably with robo-signing,” said head of the Missouri Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Division Doug Ommen, referring to the process where foreclosure documents are signed blindly by people paid to forge the signatures of bank or lending company officials. “We have found fraud and we have found forgery in robo-signing and other areas.”
Gretchen Morgenson’s column in the New York Times yesterday points out a connection we should all be making: the high-speed, no time to think or do things right mindset of the mortgage industry is to blame for a lot of the problems we’re facing today, and that same mindset seems to be controlling the actions of the Attorneys General right now. Tom Miller, the Iowa Attorney General leading the talks, told us just last week, “We’re going to move as fast as we can.”
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A months-long investigation into abusive mortgage practices by the Federal Reserve found no wrongful foreclosures, members of the Fed’s Consumer Advisory Council said Thursday.
During a public meeting attended by Fed chairman Ben Bernanke and other regulators, consumer advocates on the panel criticized federal bank regulators for narrowly defining what constitutes a “wrongful foreclosure.” At least one member of the panel voiced concerns that the public would not take the Fed’s findings of improper practices seriously, since the wide-ranging review did not find a single homeowner who was wrongfully foreclosed upon.
As if the country needed more proof of the outlaw behaviors of banks and their agents, The Baltimore Sun‘s Jamie Smith Hopkins reports that 1,000 or more Maryland deeds are likely forgeries, created by a foreclosure mill. A former notary from law firm Shapiro & Burson filed an affidavit with law enforcement and regulators charging that the attorneys’ signatures on the deeds and other important documents were forgeries signed at the express direction of management. The affidavit attached sample signatures.
If the forgery claims are true — and that’s not much of an “if” — the false deeds cloud the properties’ titles, creating a nightmare for the innocent people who bought the homes after they were foreclosed upon.
This article discusses some of the legal aspects of the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems or “MERS” with regard to its potential legal liabilities and how these liabilities may affect related public companies.
We maintain that the potential legal liabilities faced by these companies are very large and may seriously injure their stock prices. We believe that the affiliates of MERS may be held liable for MERS violations based on various legal theories, including conspiracy, and if the courts pierce the corporate veil of MERS.
A list of some of the companies that may be affected is found at the end of this analysis.
MERS
MERS is a private non-stock Delaware member corporation that operates an electronic registry to track servicing rights and ownership of mortgage loans in the United States. MERS acts as a so-called “straw man.” MERS clouds land records as the purported owner of mortgages transferred by lenders, investors and loan servicers. MERS maintains that it eliminates the need to file assignments in the county land records with the purpose of lowering costs for lenders. This naturally reduces county recording revenues from real estate transfers.
Legal Issues Faced by MERS
Not Qualified to do Business in Most States
MERS is not qualified to business in most of the states in which it operates. The problem here is that MERS has allowed itself to be the plaintiff in many hundreds of thousands of mortgage foreclosures in states where it is not qualified to do business and therefore has no standing to sue. Most, 95% or more of these cases, were uncontested and therefore resulted in the loss of the defendants home after a telephone hearing that lasted a few minutes.
This is what this site is about…”ClOUDED TITLES”! This quote below should have added that it was in 65 Million mortgages not in some. I hope you all read my NO. THERE’S NO LIFE AT MERS…I highly recommend it because it came the heart.
In some cases, mortgages were conveyed using the Reston, Virginia-based Mortgage Electronic Registration System, or MERS, designed to cover transfers among system members. Promissory notes also often were endorsed as payable to the bearer to avoid the need for multiple transfers. Both practices have been challenged in court.
Foreclosure Errors Cloud Homeownership With `Blighted Titles’
By Kathleen M. Howley – Oct 1, 2010 12:00 AM ET
U.S. courts are clogged with a record number of foreclosures. Next, they may be jammed with suits contesting property rights as procedural mistakes in those cases cloud titles establishing ownership.
“Defective documentation has created millions of blighted titles that will plague the nation for the next decade,” said Richard Kessler, an attorney in Sarasota, Florida, who conducted a study that found errors in about three-fourths of court filings related to home repossessions.
Attorneys general in at least six states are investigating borrowers’ claims that some of the nation’s largest home lenders and loan servicers are making misstatements in foreclosures. JPMorgan Chase & Co. is asking judges to postpone foreclosure rulings, while Ally Financial Inc. said Sept. 21 its GMAC Mortgage unit would halt evictions. The companies said employees may have completed affidavits without confirming their accuracy.
Such mistakes may allow former owners to challenge the repossession of homes long after the properties are resold, according to Kessler. Ownership questions may not arise until a home is under contract and the potential purchaser applies for title insurance or even decades later as one deed researcher catches errors overlooked by another. A so-called defective title means the person who paid for and moved into a house may not be the legal owner.
‘Nightmare Scenario’
“It’s a nightmare scenario,” said John Vogel, a professor at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire. “There are lots of land mines related to title issues that may come to light long after we think we’ve solved the housing problem.”
Almost one-fourth of U.S. home sales in the second quarter involved properties in some stage of mortgage distress, RealtyTrac Inc. said yesterday. In August, lenders took possession of record 95,364 homes and issued foreclosure filings to 338,836 homeowners, or one out of every 381 U.S. households, according to the Irvine, California-based data seller.
The biggest deficiency in foreclosure suits is missing or improperly handled documents, Kessler found in his study of court filings in Florida’s Sarasota County. When home loans are granted, borrowers sign a promissory note outlining payment obligations and a separate mortgage that puts an encumbrance on the property in the lender’s name. If mortgages are resold, both documents must be properly conveyed to prevent competing claims.
Mortgage Bonds
Most of the document errors involved mortgages that had been bundled into securities sold to investors, Kessler said. At the end of the U.S. real estate boom in 2005 and 2006, about 70 percent of the $6.1 trillion in mortgage lending was packaged into bonds, according to the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association in New York.
Recent Comments