I, Robosigner… A three act play about affidavit fraud in AG Masto’s Nevada

Martin Andelman, ML-Implode

ACT ONE – The shot across all bank bows

As the month of August came to a close, Nevada’s attorney general, Catherine Masto, filed her second amended complaint against Bank of America and friends.  Yves Smith provided the analysis in her post on Naked Capitalism,Nevada Lawsuit Shows Bank of America’s Criminal Incompetence, and all I can tell you is that it reads like a John Grisham or even a Robert Ludlum novel, I don’t know if it quite rises to the level of a John le Carre, but it’s a great read.  Oh, and spoiler alert… there’s going to be a sequel.

She says that the litigation by the attorney general is “significant not merely due to the damages and remedies sought, but because it paves the way for private lawsuits.”  So, that I like the sound of that… private lawsuits are good where Bank of America is concerned.  Here’s what she had to say about the complaint itself…

And make no mistake about it, this filing is a doozy. It shows the Federal/state attorney general mortgage settlement effort to be a complete travesty. The claim describes, in considerable detail, how various Bank of America units engaged in misconduct in virtually every aspect of its residential mortgage business.

The complaint describes abuses from the very outset of the securitization process: how borrowers were mis-sold mortgages (it describes how entire products were effectively predatory), how investors were misled as to their quality, how they were not conveyed properly to securitization trusts, how borrowers were subject to abusive servicing (as in charged improper and impermissible fees), how promises made under the old consent decree regarding mortgage modifications were violated (for instance, even though interest rate reductions were promised, instead modifications often resulted in HIGHER interest rates), and the filing of fraudulent paperwork to execute foreclosures.

Metaphorically, this complaint was a shot across all the bank bows.

ACT TWO – A robo-felony is born

Next, on November 7, 2011, the Wall Street Journal, in its article titled: Nevada Foreclosure Filings Dry Up After ‘Robo-Signing’ Law, described a new felony law that Nevada’s state Assembly passed and that took effect on October 1, 2011, that’s designed to crack down on “robo-signing.”  That’s what we call it when bank employees sign off hundreds of thousands of legal filings, lying about having personally reviewed each case.

The new law holds individuals criminally liable for such false representations and provides for civil penalties of $5,000 for each violation.

Early results say the law is working. In fact, during the first month after the law took effect, notices of default fell from 5,380 to just over 600, a drop of 88 percent, according to data tracked by ForeclosureRadar.com.

The new law also bans trustees from handling foreclosures if a subsidiary of the foreclosing bank, which means that Bank of America’s use of subsidiary, Recon Trust, in Nevada, is no longer allowed.  And ReconTrust didn’t file any NODs in October, about which a Bank of America spokesliar declined to comment.

Of course, the banking lobby is going with the SOP, claiming that the law is going to slow foreclosures, which we all know, hurts everyone.  And then I’m sure there was something about how there’s going to be no lending in Nevada in the future, and stuff like that.

Those behind the bill cleverly, if transparently, say that it’s not about stopping foreclosures, it about guarding against potential title defects that can lead judges to later invalidate foreclosures, as has happened in both Michigan and Massachusetts.  Tisha Black Chernine, a real-estate lawyer in Las Vegas who helped draft the bill, was quoted by the WSJ as having said the following when talking about healing the housing markets…

“This is not at all about preventing foreclosures. It is about helping end users.  We need to make sure foreclosures are done properly.  People taking title pursuant to a bad foreclosure run the risk of having no title at all.”

Okay, so that her story and she’s sticking to it, I suppose.  And if people are buying that, and it’s working with the bank, then I’m in favor of saying it.  Heck, I’d tell BofA scary bedtime stories about all sorts of thing every night all year if I thought it would get them to do a Scrooge-like turnaround as far as the foreclosure crisis is concerned.

So, while Nevada’s NODs dropped by 88 percent, foreclosures picked in the other 49 states.  Looking at loans bundled and sold as mortgage-backed securities without any government guarantees, Fitch ratings attributed the spike in foreclosures to making up for time lost pretending to investigate robo-signing, which started during the fall of 2010, and caused intermittent delays for several months.

Read more here

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share

Grieving Widow Sues BofA After Being Overwhelmed With Payment Requests During Husband’s Wake

Harry Bradford, Huffington Post

Robo-signing practices have wreaked havoc across the housing market for some time now, allegedly even leading to wrongful foreclosures.

In Hawaii, though, a recent bank-related incident could best be described as robo-dialing.

Bank of America reportedly pestered a grieving widow with up to 48 calls per day over a missed mortgage payment after her husband died, according to the Daily Mail.

Deborah Crabtree of Honolulu, Hawaii, is now suing Bank of America for what she says were computer-generated calls from the bank as often as every 15 minutes, including during her husband’s wake, according to the report. That despite her explaining that she would make the payment once she received her husband’s life insurance pay out, according to paperwork filed in the lawsuit.

Crabtree’s complaint is only the most recent automated mess in the financial industry. Take, for instance, the case of one man who was threatened with foreclosure for failing to pay an overdue balance of $0.00. Also common is confusion over the mortgage modification process, with some being foreclosed on even while they were in the process of negotiating one.

Outside of the mortgage industry, banks have gotten themselves into trouble for technical errors, such as when Bank of America sent $30,000 worth of Social Security payments to the wrong person. Or consider that Chase reportedly had a man arrested for a check that they themselves had issued him.

Read more here

Share

Fed sanctions Goldman over Litton foreclosure issues

Jon Prior, Housing Wire

The Federal Reserve sanctioned Goldman Sachs  Thursday, forcing the investment banking giant to conduct a review of foreclosures potentially mishandled by its former Litton Loan Servicing subsidiary.

The review will take place in stride with recent consent orders the central bank and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued against 14 major mortgage servicers in April. Last fall, the servicing industry came under investigation when evidence of forged foreclosure documents surfaced in courthouses around the country.

Litton, which escaped the previous consent orders, is the 23rd largest mortgage servicer in the country. Goldman sold Litton to Ocwen Financial Corp (OCN: 13.28 0.00%) in a deal that closed in the second quarter. Goldman retained liability for possible foreclosure mishaps that occurred before the sale.

Read more here

Share

U.S. Is Set to Sue a Dozen Big Banks Over Mortgages

Nelson D. Schwartz, NY Times

The federal agency that oversees the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is set to file suits against more than a dozen big banks, accusing them of misrepresenting the quality of mortgage securities they assembled and sold at the height of the housing bubble, and seeking billions of dollars in compensation.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency suits, which are expected to be filed in the coming days in federal court, are aimed at Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank, among others, according to three individuals briefed on the matter.

The suits stem from subpoenas the finance agency issued to banks a year ago. If the case is not filed Friday, they said, it will come Tuesday, shortly before a deadline expires for the housing agency to file claims.

The suits will argue the banks, which assembled the mortgages and marketed them as securities to investors, failed to perform the due diligence required under securities law and missed evidence that borrowers’ incomes were inflated or falsified. When many borrowers were unable to pay their mortgages, the securities backed by the mortgages quickly lost value.

Fannie and Freddie lost more than $30 billion, in part as a result of the deals, losses that were borne mostly by taxpayers.

In July, the agency filed suit against UBS, another major mortgage securitizer, seeking to recover at least $900 million, and the individuals with knowledge of the case said the new litigation would be similar in scope.

Private holders of mortgage securities are already trying to force the big banks to buy back tens of billions in soured mortgage-backed bonds, but this federal effort is a new chapter in a huge legal fight that has alarmed investors in bank shares. In this case, rather than demanding that the banks buy back the original loans, the finance agency is seeking reimbursement for losses on the securities held by Fannie and Freddie.

Read more here

Share