American Title and Liberty Title said “There is a lot of stuff in limbo right now.” and having MERS in the chain of title “is a fatal defect.”
American Title said that if banks want title companies to insure home sales that have connections to MERS, they will have to find a way to show they have proper title. “Somebody’s going to pay for this … This isn’t just going to go away. Somebody’s going to pay money.”
Legal case delaying home sales in Jackson
Published: Saturday, July 02, 2011, 9:49 PM Updated: Saturday, July 02, 2011, 9:57 PM
By Chris Gautz | Jackson Citizen Patriot
A family was expecting to close on a house on a Friday. On Thursday night, the sale had to be scuttled.
Fifteen to 20 pending home sales fell apart that one Jackson title company was preparing to handle. Banks started pulling homes for sale off the market.
First, Jackson County’s real estate market suffered from the foreclosure crisis. Lately, it has been going through another convulsion due to a little-known company that has its name all over mortgage documents in Jackson and around the state.
Hundreds of foreclosures that involved the Mortgage Electronic Registration System, or MERS, now are holding up home sales in Jackson and around the state. A legal case over the company that originated in Jackson County may be headed to the state Supreme Court.
“I think it’s just going to be a stalemate for anyone who has MERS in their title,” said Laura Schlecte, broker and owner of Prudential Premier Properties, 761 W. Michigan Ave.
Illegal foreclosures?
MERS, based in Virginia, was created in 1993 by the lending and title insurance industries as a way for banks to quickly buy and sell mortgages without having to physically record the transfers with local register of deeds offices.
In the last decade banks commonly packaged mortages as securities and sold them back and forth. Handling the paperwork electronically sped up the process.
When Summit Township resident Corey Messner defaulted on the mortgage on his home on E. Walmont Road in 2008, MERS acted on behalf of the bank that held the mortgage and began foreclosure.
But when the eviction proceedings began, Messner filed his lawsuit, saying MERS did not have the authority to foreclose because it did not hold the note on his mortgage.
Michigan law states that whoever forecloses on a property must own the debt, and MERS did not. It was simply acting on behalf of the bank that did.
Efforts to reach Messner through his attorney, retired District Court Judge Lysle Hall, now with Jackson Legal, 300 W. Washington Ave., were unsuccessful. A representative at Jackson Legal said Messner did not want to speak publicly.
Jackson’s district and circuit courts ruled against Messner. The case in Jackson was combined with a similar one in Kent County and then taken up by the state Court of Appeals.
In April, the appeals court ruled for the homeowners, finding that MERS did not in fact have the authority under law to execute the foreclosure proceeding.
‘A screeching halt’
Almost immediately after the court’s ruling, nearly every home for sale that had been foreclosed on by MERS became toxic in the eyes of the title insurance industry.
“We’re not insuring any of those,” said Paul Anast, president of Midstate Title Co., 100 S. Jackson St. “We wouldn’t touch one of those with a 10-foot pole.”
In a statement after the appeals ruling, MERS wrote, “Title companies should not have any concerns about closing loans with MERS as the mortgagee.”
But no title company in this area sees it that way.
“I don’t think anyone is going to agree with them on that,” Anast said. “It’s really caused a lot of that stuff to come to a screeching halt. Everyone is taking the ultra-conservative road.”
Thomas Richardson, owner and general counsel of Liberty Title, 110 First St., said having MERS in the chain of title “is a fatal defect.”
He said his office saw 15 to 20 deals fall apart after the appeals ruling, and it will take time before those homes can be sold. “It’s going to gum up the real estate market,” he said.
In the weeks that followed, banks began pulling all of their properties off the market they were attempting to sell that had been foreclosed on by MERS.
“There’s a lot of stuff in limbo right now,” said Ron Ellison, president of American Title Co., 280 W. Cortland St.
Karmela Lejarde, spokeswoman for MERS, said most of the banks her company works with no longer have MERS foreclose for them, and they are in the midst of a rule change at the company to not allow the practice anymore.
While there likely won’t be any new MERS foreclosures, many potential homebuyers and homeowners looking to sell have had their deals stalled.
Jackson County Register of Deeds Mindy Reilly said MERS initiated 744 foreclosure proceedings in the past five years, including 91 last year.
It is not clear how many of those homes have been or still are on the market. Some may have been redeemed by the owner.
What’s next
Ellison said that if banks want title companies to insure home sales that have connections to MERS, they will have to find a way to show they have proper title.
“We don’t want to buy lawsuits,” Ellison said.
The lender will have to either go back and do a new foreclosure, which can take about seven months, or track down the people who were evicted from their homes and get them to sign over their interest in the property.
The latter can be quite difficult because many of those people have left the area.
No one expects those who were evicted after a MERS-initiated foreclosure would get their home back, especially if a new family is living in it after buying it from the bank.
“You can’t undo all these foreclosure sales that went to qualified purchasers,” Ellison said.
Any resolution will be about financial damages, he said.
“Somebody’s going to pay for this,” Ellison said. “This isn’t just going to go away. Somebody’s going to pay money.”
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network Reported…
The increase in loan fraud is forcing Banks to repurchase loans. I predict the number of uncovered fraudulently packaged loans is about to grow exponentially. (by Joe Vera)
VIENNA, Va. – The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) today, in its First Quarter 2011 Mortgage Loan Fraud (MLF) analysis, reported that the number of MLF suspicious activity reports (SARs) rose to 25,485 up 31 percent from 19,420 in the first quarter of 2010. FinCEN attributes the increase to large mortgage lenders conducting additional reviews after receiving demands to repurchase poorly performing mortgage loans. In the first quarter of 2011, 86 percent of MLF SARs reported activities which occurred more than two years prior to the filing of the SARs.
The analysis also found that California dominated the top mortgage fraud rankings.
Saturday, July 2, 2011
“I can assure you that this type of criminal fraud is rampant across the nation.” John O’Brien, Essex S. Dist. Registrar.
Chicago Title’s attorney said if MERS is involved, lenders must ensure mortgage’s chain of ownership is properly recorded before a non-judicial foreclosure. (by Joe Vera)
July 1, 2011
http://www.oregonlive.com/finance/index.ssf/2011/07/what_oregons_foreclosure_mess_means_and_when_itll.html
“I can assure you that this type of criminal fraud is rampant across the nation.” John O’Brien, Essex S. Dist. Registrar.
Martha Flynn, the Vernonia woman who persuaded a judge to block her eviction and void a bank’s foreclosure sale, looms a hero in many distressed homeowners’ minds today.
This even as she’s not sure where she’ll be living next month.
The same uncertainty also applies to Oregon’s housing market. With the status of potentially thousands of foreclosures and past sales up in the air, it’s unclear how long the housing crisis will drag on the broader market.
And there’s not much immediately we can do about it.
“It’s hard to predict where things are going to go,” said Cleve Abbe, state underwriting counsel for Fidelity National Title Group in Portland.
Since 2007, lenders have launched about 100,000 foreclosure actions in Oregon, according to RealtyTrac, one foreclosure data service. That’s resulted in just fewer than 35,000 sales. But sales have slowed this year. Through May, they’re on pace to total just more than 9,000 in 2011, down from 15,500 foreclosure sales last year, RealtyTrac data show.
Signs of life in the broader housing market are sporadic. Portland-area prices were down 9 percent over the past year through May, hovering at levels last seen in the winter of 2004, according to last week’s S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index report.
Yet backlogs are dropping. Lane County’s 12-month inventory in January has fallen to a 5.2-month inventory in June, said Cory T. Neu, a broker with Neu Real Estate in Marcola.
Realtors in Portland report hot micromarkets, with homes going in one day in inner Southeast Portland neighborhoods.
But sales activity around the larger metropolitan Portland has fallen in the first five months of the year, compared with the same period a year ago. New listings, in fact, have fallen 26 percent.
“I always caution people when they ask about ‘What’s the market doing?’” Neu said “Well, which market are we talking about?”
The foreclosure problem in Oregon
For now, we’re focusing on the foreclosure market — and the heart of its legal turmoil in Oregon.
Brian Feulner/ The OregonianA Columbia County judge blocked U.S. Bank from evicting Martha Flynn from her Vernonia home after it was bought by the bank in foreclosure.
For years, lenders have sold and resold mortgages to investors to broaden the market for home loans and make a boatload of money upfront on fees.
Along the way, they tried to avoid the traditional process of recording those transactions in local county recorders offices. But as the housing market collapsed and servicers had to foreclose on delinquent borrowers, the mortgage industry discovered a certain inconvenient truth.
The Mortgage Electronic Registration System — set up to avoid the cost and logistics of recording all of these sales — didn’t jibe with Oregon law.
For a foreclosure to proceed quickly and outside the auspices of a judge, the state requires that the loan’s ownership be properly and clearly documented. But the electronic recording system set up by banks, servicers and title companies took enough shortcuts to compel a number of federal judges to halt foreclosures. Oregon law, they ruled, demanded that all loan sales be recorded to ensure the appropriate party was actually foreclosing.
It’s gotten to the point, in Flynn’s case, that a judge has blocked an eviction and nullified a sale after the fact.
It’s not hard to imagine other homeowners trying the same tack. It’s also not hard to imagine ousted homeowners, unhappy with how their servicer handled their modification request, asking a court to rescind the foreclosure sale of a home where a new family already is living.
You can see where this is going, and it’s not good. Title insurance companies are warning lenders they might not be able to guarantee clean title to a property if a sale is nullified because of missing recordings. Chicago Title Insurance Co. attorney Greg Nelson said it’s telling lenders that if MERS is involved in a mortgage, the lender must ensure the mortgage’s chain of ownership is properly recorded before it can launch a foreclosure outside a courtroom.
“Hopefully the lenders will be as motivated to do things right as we are,” Nelson said.
In court
The one clear route around this mess is one nobody wants to take: judicial foreclosure.
Lenders have the option of getting a judge’s ruling on a foreclosure.
Few do so because it normally takes much longer and costs more, too. Loan servicers or trustees undoubtedly will have to defend the ownership history. It’s not always clear they can.
Even after a judgment and sheriff’s sale, state law gives borrowers six months to come up with enough cash to reclaim the property. This is called the borrower’s right of redemption. So, in reality, lenders are looking at a year or more before a foreclosure process actually finishes cleanly.
Borrowers, on the other hand, can be pursued by lenders for deficiency if they leave the house before the foreclosure sale is completed, Abbe notes. The deficiency is the difference between the amount owed on a mortgage and the amount it was sold for in foreclosure. In nonjudicial foreclosure, the lender eats that difference.
“It’s potentially immobilizing for borrowers who may want to move out and move to some other state and try to find a job somewhere else,” Abbe said.
What else could happen next to resolve all this?
High court ruling: A couple judges have gone against the majority of opinions on the legal standing of MERS. Attorneys and judges alike are trying to agree on a case that can be sent to the Oregon Supreme Court so the matter can be resolved once and for all. Best-case scenario, we’re probably talking a decision that’s six months away. More likely it’ll take at least a year.
New law: An end-run effort by the mortgage industry to get the Legislature to change the law fell flat amid public outcry against the broad-scale move. Now it’ll probably be February before a fix can be obtained this way.
Rerecording: Lenders could go back and try to rerecord mortgage documents. But many lenders have gone out of business, so it’s unlikely trustees could get the appropriate signatures in all cases.
Good faith negotiations: An even cleaner way out would be for banks to negotiate settlements with homeowners. The banks could pay them to give them clean title to the home. They could reduce principal, something servicers and investors have so far been reluctant to do.
“There are common-sense ways of resolving this, and the banks are deer in the headlights right now,” said Phil Querin, a real estate attorney in Portland.
Lawyers will tell you the Columbia County judge’s decision sets no legal precedent. It’s just one judge sitting in St. Helens and her interpretation of events.
But to homeowners asked time and again to resubmit their paperwork for modifications they never receive, or those being foreclosed upon while they await modification, it’s sweet justice.
“Most of these homeowners aren’t looking for a free handout,” said Nancie Koerber, co-founder of Good Grief America, a nonprofit near Central Point that helps homeowners fight foreclosure. “They’re just looking for someone to work with them. Most of the banks are not, unless you hold their feet to the fire.”
For the rest of us, it’s affirmation that Oregon’s housing market is nowhere near recovery.
Might as well find a good seat around the house and get used to it.
July 1, 2011
http://www.oregonlive.com/finance/index.ssf/2011/07/what_oregons_foreclosure_mess_means_and_when_itll.html
“I can assure you that this type of criminal fraud is rampant across the nation.” John O’Brien, Essex S. Dist. Registrar.
Martha Flynn, the Vernonia woman who persuaded a judge to block her eviction and void a bank’s foreclosure sale, looms a hero in many distressed homeowners’ minds today.
This even as she’s not sure where she’ll be living next month.
The same uncertainty also applies to Oregon’s housing market. With the status of potentially thousands of foreclosures and past sales up in the air, it’s unclear how long the housing crisis will drag on the broader market.
And there’s not much immediately we can do about it.
“It’s hard to predict where things are going to go,” said Cleve Abbe, state underwriting counsel for Fidelity National Title Group in Portland.
Since 2007, lenders have launched about 100,000 foreclosure actions in Oregon, according to RealtyTrac, one foreclosure data service. That’s resulted in just fewer than 35,000 sales. But sales have slowed this year. Through May, they’re on pace to total just more than 9,000 in 2011, down from 15,500 foreclosure sales last year, RealtyTrac data show.
Signs of life in the broader housing market are sporadic. Portland-area prices were down 9 percent over the past year through May, hovering at levels last seen in the winter of 2004, according to last week’s S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index report.
Yet backlogs are dropping. Lane County’s 12-month inventory in January has fallen to a 5.2-month inventory in June, said Cory T. Neu, a broker with Neu Real Estate in Marcola.
Realtors in Portland report hot micromarkets, with homes going in one day in inner Southeast Portland neighborhoods.
But sales activity around the larger metropolitan Portland has fallen in the first five months of the year, compared with the same period a year ago. New listings, in fact, have fallen 26 percent.
“I always caution people when they ask about ‘What’s the market doing?’” Neu said “Well, which market are we talking about?”
The foreclosure problem in Oregon
For now, we’re focusing on the foreclosure market — and the heart of its legal turmoil in Oregon.
Brian Feulner/ The OregonianA Columbia County judge blocked U.S. Bank from evicting Martha Flynn from her Vernonia home after it was bought by the bank in foreclosure.
For years, lenders have sold and resold mortgages to investors to broaden the market for home loans and make a boatload of money upfront on fees.
Along the way, they tried to avoid the traditional process of recording those transactions in local county recorders offices. But as the housing market collapsed and servicers had to foreclose on delinquent borrowers, the mortgage industry discovered a certain inconvenient truth.
The Mortgage Electronic Registration System — set up to avoid the cost and logistics of recording all of these sales — didn’t jibe with Oregon law.
For a foreclosure to proceed quickly and outside the auspices of a judge, the state requires that the loan’s ownership be properly and clearly documented. But the electronic recording system set up by banks, servicers and title companies took enough shortcuts to compel a number of federal judges to halt foreclosures. Oregon law, they ruled, demanded that all loan sales be recorded to ensure the appropriate party was actually foreclosing.
It’s gotten to the point, in Flynn’s case, that a judge has blocked an eviction and nullified a sale after the fact.
It’s not hard to imagine other homeowners trying the same tack. It’s also not hard to imagine ousted homeowners, unhappy with how their servicer handled their modification request, asking a court to rescind the foreclosure sale of a home where a new family already is living.
You can see where this is going, and it’s not good. Title insurance companies are warning lenders they might not be able to guarantee clean title to a property if a sale is nullified because of missing recordings. Chicago Title Insurance Co. attorney Greg Nelson said it’s telling lenders that if MERS is involved in a mortgage, the lender must ensure the mortgage’s chain of ownership is properly recorded before it can launch a foreclosure outside a courtroom.
“Hopefully the lenders will be as motivated to do things right as we are,” Nelson said.
In court
The one clear route around this mess is one nobody wants to take: judicial foreclosure.
Lenders have the option of getting a judge’s ruling on a foreclosure.
Few do so because it normally takes much longer and costs more, too. Loan servicers or trustees undoubtedly will have to defend the ownership history. It’s not always clear they can.
Even after a judgment and sheriff’s sale, state law gives borrowers six months to come up with enough cash to reclaim the property. This is called the borrower’s right of redemption. So, in reality, lenders are looking at a year or more before a foreclosure process actually finishes cleanly.
Borrowers, on the other hand, can be pursued by lenders for deficiency if they leave the house before the foreclosure sale is completed, Abbe notes. The deficiency is the difference between the amount owed on a mortgage and the amount it was sold for in foreclosure. In nonjudicial foreclosure, the lender eats that difference.
“It’s potentially immobilizing for borrowers who may want to move out and move to some other state and try to find a job somewhere else,” Abbe said.
What else could happen next to resolve all this?
High court ruling: A couple judges have gone against the majority of opinions on the legal standing of MERS. Attorneys and judges alike are trying to agree on a case that can be sent to the Oregon Supreme Court so the matter can be resolved once and for all. Best-case scenario, we’re probably talking a decision that’s six months away. More likely it’ll take at least a year.
New law: An end-run effort by the mortgage industry to get the Legislature to change the law fell flat amid public outcry against the broad-scale move. Now it’ll probably be February before a fix can be obtained this way.
Rerecording: Lenders could go back and try to rerecord mortgage documents. But many lenders have gone out of business, so it’s unlikely trustees could get the appropriate signatures in all cases.
Good faith negotiations: An even cleaner way out would be for banks to negotiate settlements with homeowners. The banks could pay them to give them clean title to the home. They could reduce principal, something servicers and investors have so far been reluctant to do.
“There are common-sense ways of resolving this, and the banks are deer in the headlights right now,” said Phil Querin, a real estate attorney in Portland.
Lawyers will tell you the Columbia County judge’s decision sets no legal precedent. It’s just one judge sitting in St. Helens and her interpretation of events.
But to homeowners asked time and again to resubmit their paperwork for modifications they never receive, or those being foreclosed upon while they await modification, it’s sweet justice.
“Most of these homeowners aren’t looking for a free handout,” said Nancie Koerber, co-founder of Good Grief America, a nonprofit near Central Point that helps homeowners fight foreclosure. “They’re just looking for someone to work with them. Most of the banks are not, unless you hold their feet to the fire.”
For the rest of us, it’s affirmation that Oregon’s housing market is nowhere near recovery.
Might as well find a good seat around the house and get used to it.
Are You Ready? 6 – 7 Million More Foreclosures. Politicians criticize Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac out of one side of their mouths. Read: Who got the most money from FNMA.
Are You Ready? 6 – 7 Million More Foreclosures. Politicians criticize Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac out of one side of their mouths. Read: Who got the most money from FNMA. (by Joe /vera)
Scott Simon, a managing director and head of global asset-giant Pimco’s mortgage- and asset-backed securities teams, helped his firm avoid losses that hit Wall Street. is credited with foreseeing the housing crash and helping his firm dodge losses that plagued Wall Street.
He was recently asked if more foreclosures are expected to hit the market? He responded that over the next three years it could be as many as 6 -7 million more foreclosures.
Pulled the following from an old report. It was called shot in the Fannie Mae.
1997
Fannie Mae is a GSE (Govt. Sponsored Entity) regulated by Congress.
Fannie Mae buys mortgages from other companies.
It is backed by the taxpayers for all losses, but keeps all profits.
1998
Banks begin making thousands of bad loans,0 down, no documentation, for 120%! (1998 – 2008).
Executives at Fannie receive huge bonuses if loan targets are met.
Franklin Raines and Jamie Garelick from the Clinton Administration are appointed to run Fannie Mae.
2003
President Bush proposes a new oversight committee to clean up Fannie Mae, but Democrats derail the effort.
1999-2004
Raines earns $100 million in bonuses.
Garelick earns $75 million in bonuses.
In 2004, Enron collapses, congress investigates, Executives Skilling & Lay go to jail, for fraudulent bookkeeping.
Congress responds with the Sorbanes-Oxley Act, more heavy regulation of corporations.
2004
An OMB investigation finds massive fraudulent bookkeeping at Fannie Mae.
False numbers triggered executive bonuses every year.
Congress holds no hearings, no one goes to jail, or is punished.
WHY NOT?
1999-2005
Fannie Mae gives millions to Democratic causes, examples: Jesse Jackson & ACORN.
Fannie Mae pays millions to 354 congressmen and senators, from both parties.
Who got the most money?
#1 Sen. Christopher Dodd , (D-CT) Chairman of the Banking, Housing, & Urban Affairs Committee
#2 Sen. Barack Obama , (D-IL) Federal Financial Management Committee
#3 Sen. Chuck Schumer, (D-NY) Chairman of the Finance Committee
#4 Rep. Barney Frank, (D-MA) Chairman of the House Financial Services Committe
2005
Franklin Raines & top execs are forced to resign from Fannie Mae.
They do not go to jail.
There is no media “perp. walk.”
They keeps all of their bonuses
They finally pay $31.4 million in civil fines.
2005
The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act is sponsored by: Sen. John McCain, (R-AZ) Armed Services, & Commerce, Science, & Transportation, “If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.”
None of the top 4 recipients support the legislation.
The reform act is blocked by Democrats, never even making it out of committee.
None of the politicians return any of the money, tainted by fraud.
2008
Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac go bankrupt and the govt. takes them over completely.
Lehman Brothers, goes bankrupt from investing in bad mortgages.
AIG get $85 million in loan guarantees, after insuring bad loans & projects.
Taxpayers will ultimately pay BILLIONS.
2008
Franklin Raines is now an advisor to the Obama Campaign which wants the govt. to take over more of the economy.
Did government involvement in the mortgage market work out?
How will even MORE government involvement make it better? Do you want to be Sweden?
McCain favors revising regulations & loan standards, selling off Fannie & Freddie.
Sources
Congressional Record, 5/25/06
“Hannity & Colmes,” Fox News, 9/16-9/17/08
Herald Tribune, 4/18/08
New York Times, 9/13/03
www. govtrack.com, 9/17/08
This was produced as a Power Point presentation by an Adjunct Instructor a Dennis Jantz in 2008.
Scott Simon, a managing director and head of global asset-giant Pimco’s mortgage- and asset-backed securities teams, helped his firm avoid losses that hit Wall Street. is credited with foreseeing the housing crash and helping his firm dodge losses that plagued Wall Street.
He was recently asked if more foreclosures are expected to hit the market? He responded that over the next three years it could be as many as 6 -7 million more foreclosures.
Pulled the following from an old report. It was called shot in the Fannie Mae.
1997
Fannie Mae is a GSE (Govt. Sponsored Entity) regulated by Congress.
Fannie Mae buys mortgages from other companies.
It is backed by the taxpayers for all losses, but keeps all profits.
1998
Banks begin making thousands of bad loans,0 down, no documentation, for 120%! (1998 – 2008).
Executives at Fannie receive huge bonuses if loan targets are met.
Franklin Raines and Jamie Garelick from the Clinton Administration are appointed to run Fannie Mae.
2003
President Bush proposes a new oversight committee to clean up Fannie Mae, but Democrats derail the effort.
1999-2004
Raines earns $100 million in bonuses.
Garelick earns $75 million in bonuses.
In 2004, Enron collapses, congress investigates, Executives Skilling & Lay go to jail, for fraudulent bookkeeping.
Congress responds with the Sorbanes-Oxley Act, more heavy regulation of corporations.
2004
An OMB investigation finds massive fraudulent bookkeeping at Fannie Mae.
False numbers triggered executive bonuses every year.
Congress holds no hearings, no one goes to jail, or is punished.
WHY NOT?
1999-2005
Fannie Mae gives millions to Democratic causes, examples: Jesse Jackson & ACORN.
Fannie Mae pays millions to 354 congressmen and senators, from both parties.
Who got the most money?
#1 Sen. Christopher Dodd , (D-CT) Chairman of the Banking, Housing, & Urban Affairs Committee
#2 Sen. Barack Obama , (D-IL) Federal Financial Management Committee
#3 Sen. Chuck Schumer, (D-NY) Chairman of the Finance Committee
#4 Rep. Barney Frank, (D-MA) Chairman of the House Financial Services Committe
2005
Franklin Raines & top execs are forced to resign from Fannie Mae.
They do not go to jail.
There is no media “perp. walk.”
They keeps all of their bonuses
They finally pay $31.4 million in civil fines.
2005
The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act is sponsored by: Sen. John McCain, (R-AZ) Armed Services, & Commerce, Science, & Transportation, “If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.”
None of the top 4 recipients support the legislation.
The reform act is blocked by Democrats, never even making it out of committee.
None of the politicians return any of the money, tainted by fraud.
2008
Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac go bankrupt and the govt. takes them over completely.
Lehman Brothers, goes bankrupt from investing in bad mortgages.
AIG get $85 million in loan guarantees, after insuring bad loans & projects.
Taxpayers will ultimately pay BILLIONS.
2008
Franklin Raines is now an advisor to the Obama Campaign which wants the govt. to take over more of the economy.
Did government involvement in the mortgage market work out?
How will even MORE government involvement make it better? Do you want to be Sweden?
McCain favors revising regulations & loan standards, selling off Fannie & Freddie.
Sources
Congressional Record, 5/25/06
“Hannity & Colmes,” Fox News, 9/16-9/17/08
Herald Tribune, 4/18/08
New York Times, 9/13/03
www. govtrack.com, 9/17/08
This was produced as a Power Point presentation by an Adjunct Instructor a Dennis Jantz in 2008.
Friday, July 1, 2011
Pimco’s Simon: There Was Never a Housing Recovery
Are You Ready For 6 to 7 Million More Foreclosures. Politicians criticize Fannie Mar & Freddie Mac out of one side of their mouths. (by Joe Vera)
Pimco’s Simon: There Was Never a Housing Recovery
By Dawn Wotapka
Bearish outlooks on housing aren’t hard to find these days, but one stands out even for this market.
Scott Simon, a managing director and head of global asset-giant Pimco’s mortgage- and asset-backed securities teams, is credited with foreseeing the housing crash and helping his firm dodge losses that plagued Wall Street.
In a lengthy Q&A posted on Pimco’s website today, Mr. Simon discusses everything from foreclosures to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Calling his outlook “dour” would be generous—home prices could fall more and the pain could drag on for a decade or more.
Excerpts are below. (Both the questions and answers are from Pimco.)
Q: Could you begin by framing the current state of the housing market? Do you see a double dip market?
A: We are seeing signs of what we have long suspected: There never was a housing recovery. In fact, I argue the market is in a fragile state that is far easier to break than to fix. If policy makers alter the government’s current approach to housing and unwittingly break the market, they may not be able to repair the damage within the foreseeable future. … We anticipate an average decline from here of about 6% to 8% in prices across the country.
Q: Are more foreclosures expected to hit the market?
A: We see potential for a substantial number of foreclosures over the next three years – as many as 6 million to 7 million additional foreclosures, on top of the roughly 2 million we estimate have already occurred. Foreclosures may peak in about two years, but the numbers could still be high for a few years after that and then likely taper off.
Q: Let’s switch gears to discuss housing finance. Is the home-loan market still reliant on government support?
A: Yes, government is essentially considered the mortgage market today, but this needs to be put in context. Government has been involved in housing for some 70 years with pro-housing subsidies of all sorts, from homebuyer tax credits to guaranteeing loans to mortgage interest tax deductions. … If we ended government support in all forms, mortgage rates could rise significantly, because home loan investors would need to be compensated for greater credit risk, and loan availability could decline. Higher rates and less mortgage availability would put downward pressure on home values, with potentially negative consequences for the market and also for the economy as a result of wealth destruction and consumer confidence declining.
Q: What are politicians and policy makers proposing to do about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Are there serious alternatives being discussed to provide liquidity to the market?
A: From what I have observed in visits to D.C., when the conversation comes around to Fannie and Freddie it is very easy for people to get irrational. Fannie and Freddie seem to draw negativity like giant lightning rods because they lost so much money. But what is often overlooked is that the majority of losses have not come from their core business: 20% down-payment, prime mortgages. They got in trouble because they expanded beyond their core business to maintain market share. …But politicians from both parties look at the losses of Fannie and Freddie and think, “I’d better say Fannie and Freddie stink and we should shut them down and that they are evil.” But the market still relies heavily on Fannie and Freddie. If policymakers err in tinkering with that support while the market is so fragile, the unintended consequences could be extreme.
Q: And when do you expect action on this issue?
A: Despite the heated rhetoric, there appears to be no rush to kill Fannie and Freddie, from what I have observed. Initially, we heard talk of getting the government out of housing in two years, and lately the talk is five to seven years. I think in Washington-speak, five-to-seven years more likely means 10-to-15 years, which is actually a more realistic timeframe in my opinion – by then the housing market should hopefully be on firmer ground.
Pimco’s Simon: There Was Never a Housing Recovery
By Dawn Wotapka
Bearish outlooks on housing aren’t hard to find these days, but one stands out even for this market.
Scott Simon, a managing director and head of global asset-giant Pimco’s mortgage- and asset-backed securities teams, is credited with foreseeing the housing crash and helping his firm dodge losses that plagued Wall Street.
In a lengthy Q&A posted on Pimco’s website today, Mr. Simon discusses everything from foreclosures to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Calling his outlook “dour” would be generous—home prices could fall more and the pain could drag on for a decade or more.
Excerpts are below. (Both the questions and answers are from Pimco.)
Q: Could you begin by framing the current state of the housing market? Do you see a double dip market?
A: We are seeing signs of what we have long suspected: There never was a housing recovery. In fact, I argue the market is in a fragile state that is far easier to break than to fix. If policy makers alter the government’s current approach to housing and unwittingly break the market, they may not be able to repair the damage within the foreseeable future. … We anticipate an average decline from here of about 6% to 8% in prices across the country.
Q: Are more foreclosures expected to hit the market?
A: We see potential for a substantial number of foreclosures over the next three years – as many as 6 million to 7 million additional foreclosures, on top of the roughly 2 million we estimate have already occurred. Foreclosures may peak in about two years, but the numbers could still be high for a few years after that and then likely taper off.
Q: Let’s switch gears to discuss housing finance. Is the home-loan market still reliant on government support?
A: Yes, government is essentially considered the mortgage market today, but this needs to be put in context. Government has been involved in housing for some 70 years with pro-housing subsidies of all sorts, from homebuyer tax credits to guaranteeing loans to mortgage interest tax deductions. … If we ended government support in all forms, mortgage rates could rise significantly, because home loan investors would need to be compensated for greater credit risk, and loan availability could decline. Higher rates and less mortgage availability would put downward pressure on home values, with potentially negative consequences for the market and also for the economy as a result of wealth destruction and consumer confidence declining.
Q: What are politicians and policy makers proposing to do about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Are there serious alternatives being discussed to provide liquidity to the market?
A: From what I have observed in visits to D.C., when the conversation comes around to Fannie and Freddie it is very easy for people to get irrational. Fannie and Freddie seem to draw negativity like giant lightning rods because they lost so much money. But what is often overlooked is that the majority of losses have not come from their core business: 20% down-payment, prime mortgages. They got in trouble because they expanded beyond their core business to maintain market share. …But politicians from both parties look at the losses of Fannie and Freddie and think, “I’d better say Fannie and Freddie stink and we should shut them down and that they are evil.” But the market still relies heavily on Fannie and Freddie. If policymakers err in tinkering with that support while the market is so fragile, the unintended consequences could be extreme.
Q: And when do you expect action on this issue?
A: Despite the heated rhetoric, there appears to be no rush to kill Fannie and Freddie, from what I have observed. Initially, we heard talk of getting the government out of housing in two years, and lately the talk is five to seven years. I think in Washington-speak, five-to-seven years more likely means 10-to-15 years, which is actually a more realistic timeframe in my opinion – by then the housing market should hopefully be on firmer ground.
URGENT NOTICE TO ALL AGENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS
URGENT NOTICE TO ALL AGENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS
If found guilty of breaching your fiduciary duties and exemplary damages are awarded, the plaintiff can come at you personally, your insurance company cannot pay for you and you may not be able discharge the judgement in bankruptcy.
A contractor builds a home and it to John Doe who gets a loan from a major Bank. The Bank bundles the loan with other loans and sells it to an investment pool (a process called securitization). The Bank does not endorse the note for securitization. The note is assigned several times from within the investment pool. John Does’ property is foreclosed. The property is “sold” as an REO. John Doe then demands return of his property from the occupant. The foreclosing entity, trustee, and agents did not have legal capacity to foreclose. The occupant who thinks he is the owner is in possession of property wrongfully taken, “stolen” property. Both John Doe and the occupant of John Does’ property sue the loan originator, bank, investment pool, title, escrow, real estate agent, etc.
THIS STORY IS TAKEN FROM ACTUAL FACTS NOW OCCURING.
Go to www.joeveraseminars.com. Click on Course Descriptions and then on Real Estate Pro L1.
Joe Vera
Read this carefully and to the end if you value your license — or get sued and lose it.
On June 29, 2011, at the Annual Conference of The International Association of Clerks, Recorders, Election Officials and Treasurers (IACREOT), Register John O’Brien released a legal affidavit, an audit that examined assignments of mortgages recorded in Essex Southern District Registry of Deeds issued to and from JPMorgan Chase Bank, Wells Fargo Bank, and Bank of America during 2010. In total, 565 assignments related to 473 unique mortgages were analyzed.
Only 16% of assignments of mortgage are valid
75% of assignments of mortgage are invalid.
9% of assignments of mortgage are questionable
27% of the invalid assignments are fraudulent, 35% are “robo-signed” and 10% violate the Massachusetts Mortgage Fraud Statute.
The identity of financial institutions that are current owners of the mortgages could only be determined for 287 out of 473 (60%)
“,,, [the] standards of commerce by which the banks originated, sold and securitized mortgages are so fatally flawed that the institutions, including many pension funds, that purchased these mortgages don’t actually own them because the assignments of mortgage were never prepared, executed and delivered to them in the normal course of business at the time of the transaction. In a blatant attempt to engineer a ‘fix’ to the problem, the banks set up in-house document execution teams, or outsourced the preparation of their assignments to third parties who manufactured them out of thin air without researching who really owns the mortgage.
… and I can tell you that every single assignment of mortgage that was recorded for the purpose of foreclosing the homeowner is invalid, overtly fraudulent, or criminally fraudulent. My findings … (those) who are not in foreclosure, and have never been delinquent in their payments also have clouds on title due to the recording of defective and invalid discharges and assignments of mortgage.” said the auditor Marie McDonnell.
[If you say this won't happen in CA, consider that I have already been asked to speak to several cities in CA. It will happen. I am involved with such a case at this very moment. Joe Vera]
“… The Audit makes the finding that this was not only a MERS problem, but a scheme also perpetuated by MERS shareholder banks such Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan and others. I am stunned and appalled by the fact that America’s biggest banks have played fast and loose with people’s biggest asset – their homes. This is disgusting, and this is criminal,” said O’Brien.
O’Brien continued “Once again I am asking … state Attorney’s General to follow the lead of New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and stop any settlement talks with the banks. … I can assure you that this type of criminal fraud is rampant across the nation. This leaves me to question why anyone would consider settling with these banks until we know the full extent of the damage that they have caused to the homeowners chain of title across this country and the amount of money they have bilked the taxpayers for their failure to pay recording fees.”
If found guilty of breaching your fiduciary duties and exemplary damages are awarded, the plaintiff can come at you personally, your insurance company cannot pay for you and you may not be able discharge the judgement in bankruptcy.
A contractor builds a home and it to John Doe who gets a loan from a major Bank. The Bank bundles the loan with other loans and sells it to an investment pool (a process called securitization). The Bank does not endorse the note for securitization. The note is assigned several times from within the investment pool. John Does’ property is foreclosed. The property is “sold” as an REO. John Doe then demands return of his property from the occupant. The foreclosing entity, trustee, and agents did not have legal capacity to foreclose. The occupant who thinks he is the owner is in possession of property wrongfully taken, “stolen” property. Both John Doe and the occupant of John Does’ property sue the loan originator, bank, investment pool, title, escrow, real estate agent, etc.
THIS STORY IS TAKEN FROM ACTUAL FACTS NOW OCCURING.
Go to www.joeveraseminars.com. Click on Course Descriptions and then on Real Estate Pro L1.
Joe Vera
Read this carefully and to the end if you value your license — or get sued and lose it.
On June 29, 2011, at the Annual Conference of The International Association of Clerks, Recorders, Election Officials and Treasurers (IACREOT), Register John O’Brien released a legal affidavit, an audit that examined assignments of mortgages recorded in Essex Southern District Registry of Deeds issued to and from JPMorgan Chase Bank, Wells Fargo Bank, and Bank of America during 2010. In total, 565 assignments related to 473 unique mortgages were analyzed.
Only 16% of assignments of mortgage are valid
75% of assignments of mortgage are invalid.
9% of assignments of mortgage are questionable
27% of the invalid assignments are fraudulent, 35% are “robo-signed” and 10% violate the Massachusetts Mortgage Fraud Statute.
The identity of financial institutions that are current owners of the mortgages could only be determined for 287 out of 473 (60%)
“,,, [the] standards of commerce by which the banks originated, sold and securitized mortgages are so fatally flawed that the institutions, including many pension funds, that purchased these mortgages don’t actually own them because the assignments of mortgage were never prepared, executed and delivered to them in the normal course of business at the time of the transaction. In a blatant attempt to engineer a ‘fix’ to the problem, the banks set up in-house document execution teams, or outsourced the preparation of their assignments to third parties who manufactured them out of thin air without researching who really owns the mortgage.
… and I can tell you that every single assignment of mortgage that was recorded for the purpose of foreclosing the homeowner is invalid, overtly fraudulent, or criminally fraudulent. My findings … (those) who are not in foreclosure, and have never been delinquent in their payments also have clouds on title due to the recording of defective and invalid discharges and assignments of mortgage.” said the auditor Marie McDonnell.
[If you say this won't happen in CA, consider that I have already been asked to speak to several cities in CA. It will happen. I am involved with such a case at this very moment. Joe Vera]
“… The Audit makes the finding that this was not only a MERS problem, but a scheme also perpetuated by MERS shareholder banks such Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan and others. I am stunned and appalled by the fact that America’s biggest banks have played fast and loose with people’s biggest asset – their homes. This is disgusting, and this is criminal,” said O’Brien.
O’Brien continued “Once again I am asking … state Attorney’s General to follow the lead of New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and stop any settlement talks with the banks. … I can assure you that this type of criminal fraud is rampant across the nation. This leaves me to question why anyone would consider settling with these banks until we know the full extent of the damage that they have caused to the homeowners chain of title across this country and the amount of money they have bilked the taxpayers for their failure to pay recording fees.”
75% of Massachusetts County Mortgage Assignments in are Invalid
http://thelogosproject.com/?p=417
75% of Massachusetts County mortgage assignments in are invalid. This is a crime. Attorneys General need to investigate a crime not negotiate with criminals.
Three-quarters of mortgage assignments issued to and from JPMorgan Chase (JPM: 40.21 +1.69%), Wells Fargo (WFC: 27.72 +0.84%) and Bank of America (BAC: 11.05 +2.13%) during 2010 in the Southern Essex Registry of Deeds in Massachusetts are invalid, according to an independent review of documents.
An audit revealed 75% of mortgage assignments are invalid, 16% of mortgage assignments in the Southern Essex Registry are valid and 9% of assignments are questionable. About 27% of invalid assignments are fraudulent while 35% are robo-signed and 10% violate the Massachusetts Mortgage Fraud Statue.
“What this means is that the degradation in standards of commerce by which the banks originated, sold and securitized these mortgages are so fatally flawed that the institutions, including many pension funds, that purchased these mortgages don’t actually own them,” “The assignments of mortgage were never prepared, executed and delivered to them in the normal course of business at the time of the transaction.” according to the analysts.
What could make anyone think that the results would be any different in other counties? Why are state and federal governments and policing agencies negotiating with Banks for a miserable settlement?
75% of Massachusetts County mortgage assignments in are invalid. This is a crime. Attorneys General need to investigate a crime not negotiate with criminals.
Three-quarters of mortgage assignments issued to and from JPMorgan Chase (JPM: 40.21 +1.69%), Wells Fargo (WFC: 27.72 +0.84%) and Bank of America (BAC: 11.05 +2.13%) during 2010 in the Southern Essex Registry of Deeds in Massachusetts are invalid, according to an independent review of documents.
An audit revealed 75% of mortgage assignments are invalid, 16% of mortgage assignments in the Southern Essex Registry are valid and 9% of assignments are questionable. About 27% of invalid assignments are fraudulent while 35% are robo-signed and 10% violate the Massachusetts Mortgage Fraud Statue.
“What this means is that the degradation in standards of commerce by which the banks originated, sold and securitized these mortgages are so fatally flawed that the institutions, including many pension funds, that purchased these mortgages don’t actually own them,” “The assignments of mortgage were never prepared, executed and delivered to them in the normal course of business at the time of the transaction.” according to the analysts.
What could make anyone think that the results would be any different in other counties? Why are state and federal governments and policing agencies negotiating with Banks for a miserable settlement?
Oregon Judge Voids Foreclosure Sale, casting Doubt on Others
Judge Jenefer Grant, “I am concluding the recording never occurred, MERS does not become the beneficiary, irrespective of what is stated in the deed of trust.”
Oregon judge voids foreclosure sale, casting doubt on others
Published: Wednesday, June 29, 2011, 7:48 PM Updated: Thursday, June 30, 2011, 11:39 AM
By Brent Hunsberger, The Oregonian
Brian Feulner/The OregonianU.S. Bank says it will cease eviction action against Martha Flynn while it determines its next step. That could include demanding the loan’s previous servicer, a unit of Wells Fargo, take the mortgage back, legal experts say.
A Columbia County judge has blocked U.S. Bank from evicting a Vernonia woman whose home it purchased in foreclosure, concluding in a case with far-reaching implications that her lenders had not properly recorded mortgage documents.
Last week’s action appears to be the first in which an Oregon judge has halted an eviction and declared a foreclosure sale void after the fact. The ruling, if it stands, raises questions about the validity of other recent foreclosures in the state and could create serious problems for lenders and title companies, as well as for buyers of such properties.
“It’s a victory for a lot of people,” said Martha Flynn, 62, who challenged the eviction and whose ability to stay in her home remains in doubt. “I was fighting for the principle of the thing.”
A U.S. Bank spokeswoman said the bank would cease further eviction action and assess its “appropriate next steps.”
Nearly all foreclosures in the state occur without a judge’s involvement under so-called nonjudicial proceedings. But this ruling, legal observers say, could potentially divert more foreclosure actions into courtrooms, a more time-consuming and costly proposition that could exacerbate the state’s housing slump.
“This will certainly be problematic for lenders,” said David Ambrose, a Portland real-estate attorney.
It also casts doubt on the validity of already completed foreclosure sales in which lenders resold mortgages without recording the sales in county recorder offices. Many of those questionable transactions, including Flynn’s, involve the Mortgage Electronic Recording System.
MERS was created by the mortgage industry to rapidly securitize loans without recording them. Federal judges in Oregon have ruled that MERS-involved foreclosure actions violated state recording law. MERS also has been tied to so-called robo-signing scandals that prompted a 50-state investigation of the nation’s largest loan servicers and banks.
“Our hope is the banks will take a much more sincere effort at resolving matters directly with homeowners,” said Thomas H. Cutler, an attorney with Harris Berne Chirstensen in Lake Oswego, who represented Flynn.
A Wells Fargo & Co. unit foreclosed on Flynn after she fell behind in her payments. Wells Fargo sold the mortgage to U.S. Bank, the second lienholder, in December 2010, Cutler said.
Columbia County records show U.S. Bank paid $54,000 for the home, which had been valued at $134,000. Flynn hired Cutler a few months later to try to stop the foreclosure.
U.S. Bank tried to evict Flynn from her Vernonia home during a May 24 court hearing. But on June 23, Columbia County Circuit Judge Jenefer Grant ruled against the bank and awarded legal costs to Flynn.
Grant found that the original lender, Eagle Home Mortgage, held beneficial interest in the property. But while Eagle Home eventually sold the mortgage to other parties, the exchanges were never recorded, or assigned, in the county’s recorder office.
“I am concluding the recording never occurred,” she wrote in a two-page ruling. “MERS does not become the beneficiary, irrespective of what is stated in the deed of trust.”
Flynn discovered on Freddie Mac’s website that the quasi-government loan insurer owned her loan on the date of the foreclosure sale, Cutler said. But Freddie Mac’s ownership had not been recorded in county records, as required by state recording law, Grant ruled. Cutler obtained the services of an expert witness to track the ownership trail of her mortgage.
“We were able to show that Wells Fargo didn’t have the right to bring foreclosure because there were unrecorded assignments of the deed of trust,” said Tim Stephenson of MSA Associates, which audits mortgage loan histories for homeowners and attorneys.
A spokesman for Wells Fargo Home Loans said it was reviewing the judge’s decision to better understand it.
“We work hard to keep our customers in their homes when they encounter difficulties and view foreclosure as a measure of last resort,” spokesman Jim Hines said.
In an interview, Flynn said she’s owned her three-bedroom house for 20 years and had built up significant equity. She fell behind making payments after quitting her job answering customer service calls for credit card companies at her home.
Since then, she’s lived off unemployment, social security and a small business incubating and selling quail eggs. She sought a modification but could not get Wells Fargo to agree, despite repeatedly submitting documents.
“Even though I couldn’t afford an attorney, I thought, ‘What’s the harm?’” Flynn said. “Most people just give up.”
It’s unclear what this all means for Flynn. She says she’s prepared to move out despite the victory, given the uncertainty of who actually owns title to her home and what must be done to foreclose legally.
“Even though this is a great legal win for her, it still leaves her in limbo,” Cutler said. “There’s no clear choice for her. And there’s no big money at the end of this rainbow, either.”
Meanwhile U.S. Bank, which spokesperson Teri Charest noted “played no role in the title documentation process” is currently trying to ascertain its next steps.
That could include demanding her previous loan servicer, a Wells Fargo Bank unit, take the mortgage back, legal experts say.
The path will remain muddled for the mortgage industry until a definitive case reaches the Oregon Supreme Court or lenders decide to take a different strategy and negotiate settlements with distressed homeowners, real estate attorneys say.
“This is significant,” Ambrose said.
Countrywide Must Still Face MBIA Fraud Claim, New York Appeals Court Rules
Another Fraud claim against BoA. This time by “ … a sophisticated counter- party that cannot sustain a fraud claim.” according to BoA. Why, just why not? (by Joe Vera)
Countrywide Must Still Face MBIA Fraud Claim, New York Appeals Court Rules
By Karen Freifeld – Jun 30, 2011
11:42 AM PT
Bank of America Corp. (BAC) and its Countrywide Financial Corp. unit must face a fraud claim brought by bond insurer MBIA Insurance Corp., an appeals court ruled.
The New York court today upheld an April 2010 trial-court denial of Countrywide’s motion to dismiss the claim against it in the 2008 suit. MBIA alleges that Countrywide fraudulently obtained insurance on billions of dollars of mortgage-backed securities.
MBIA claims the lender falsely represented loan-to-value ratios, debt-to-income ratios and borrowers’ FICO scores; provided prospectuses that falsely represented loans were made in compliance with Countrywide’s underwriting standards; and offered false, misleading or inflated ratings for the loans, according to the decision.
“Because MBIA alleges misrepresentations of present fact, and not future intent, made with the intent to induce MBIA to insure the securitizations, the fraud claim survives,” Associate Justice Rosalyn H. Richter wrote.
MBIA contends that if it had known the representations were false, it would never have guaranteed the notes and suffered losses. As a result of defaults, MBIA alleges, it has been forced to make billions of dollars in claims payments on the insurance agreements, according to the decision.
The appeals court also upheld the dismissal of a negligent- misrepresentation claim in the case. It dismissed entirely a claim for breach of implied duty of good faith and fair dealing, which the lower court narrowed.
Bank Statement
“We continue to believe MBIA is a sophisticated counter- party that cannot sustain a fraud claim, and we continue to have the ability to raise that point with the court at the summary- judgment phase,” Shirley Norton, a spokeswoman for Bank of America, said in an e-mailed statement.
Norton added the bank is pleased the appeals court confirmed the dismissal of the negligent-misrepresentation claim and dismissed the good-faith and fair-dealing claim.
MBIA spokesman Kevin Brown said in an e-mailed statement that the insurer was pleased the appeals court “upheld MBIA’s right to pursue fraud claims against Countrywide, particularly in light of the growing public recognition of fraud and misrepresentations perpetrated by Countrywide and other industry participants.”
The MBIA-Countrywide case isn’t part of the $8.5 billion proposed settlement by Charlotte, North Carolina-based Bank of America with investors in Countrywide Financial mortgage debt, according to Kevin Heine, a spokesman for Bank of New York Mellon, the trustee for securities in the proposed deal.
The appeal is MBIA Insurance Corp. v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc., New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department (Manhattan). The lower-court case is MBIA Insurance v. Countrywide, 6028245/2008, New York state Supreme Court (Manhattan).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)