The Bank That Has America In It's Name But Not In It's Heart.

Wall Street Lenders Want Get Out Of Jail Free Card

2011-08-28T02:54:00.000-07:00

Wall Street Lenders Want Get Out Of Jail Free Card
Kris Broughton on August 24, 2011, 9:41 AM

The Obama Administration continues to back our own domestic despots on Wall Street with the kind of zeal we used to use to support Middle Eastern dictators like Muammar Gaddhafi. What most Americans would truly appreciate is a “Wall Street Spring”, where one by one the executive suites of America’s money center banks are purged of their current C-level officers.

Robo-signing is a crime. Filing fraudulent loan documents in foreclosure proceedings is a crime. The settlements being proposed by Wall Street banks to make their mortgage loan problems go away should be problematic, because the crimes they committed were not accidental—they were premeditated. Attorney General Schneiderman is right to refuse to go along with this charade the banking industry and its regulators are trying put over on the American public once again. What makes all of this worse is that even as our money center bankers evince contrition and demand our forgiveness, their staffers are still performing the same illegal shortcuts that got them into this mess.

Some will say “but isn’t the American public complicit?” After all, it is true that they were willing to wink at Wall Street whenever it told them that 2+2=5, so long as it helped them to get what they wanted, even if they didn't have the money for it, or the cash flow to pay it off. It is true that they took every dollar we loaned them, interest rates be damned. But they took the money according to the rules of the game. It's the mortgage lenders who are breaking the law in their haste to get back money they probably shouldn't have loaned out in the first place. To add insult to injury, now that they've been caught red handed, they want full immunity from future claims as a part of any settlement. Immunity would be a corporate "get out of jail free" card for the industry, given that no one really knows how many loans were affected by these lender's illicit practices.

These overdressed weasels on Wall Street masquerading as men of substance should be walking the plank. Instead, they are about to buy their way out of documented loan fraud with another round of shareholder billions. When will the American public get it? When will the people who need to be outraged (this is your cue, Tea Party, but you are too god damned obsessed with your Negro President to care about the men in pinstripes who even now have their hands in your pockets) finally stand up, the way people have been standing up all spring in the Middle East, and run these criminals out of the country?

The obvious conclusion to be drawn from the move to kick the New York Attorney General off the foreclosure investigation committee would seem to be that our banking system is a house of cards. Which brings us to the sixty four thousand dollar question of the week—what do you do when if forcing our banking system to acknowledge the truth means certain financial ruin for much of the nation as we know it?

NY Attorney General’s Dismissal Has “Big Banks’ Dirty Fingerprints All Over It”

2011-08-26T15:49:00.000-07:00

NY Attorney General’s Dismissal Has “Big Banks’ Dirty Fingerprints All Over It”
WASHINGTON - August 25 - The Washington Post reports: “Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, who is leading foreclosure settlement negotiationswith the nation’s largest banks on behalf of all 50 states, abruptly removed New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman from the coalition’s executive committee Tuesday, saying he had “actively worked to undermine” the group’s efforts in recent months.

“Schneiderman, who has undertaken investigations into the way banks bundled and sold pools of mortgages, known as securitization, has said any settlement should not release banks from liability for all their mortgage-related sinscommitted before the financial crisis. Attorneys general from several other states, including Delaware, Nevada and Massachusetts, have expressed similar concerns.”

MARGOT FRIEDMAN, mfriedman at dupontcirclecommunications.com

Friedman is with The New Bottom Line, which released a statement on Schneiderman’s dismissal. It said: “The news that Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller has summarily dismissed New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman from the executive committee of the 50-state attorneys general robo-signing and servicing settlement talks is just the latest example of the Obama administration and their allied attorneys general’s full court press for a settlement — any settlement — at the expense of real accountability for banks and real relief from homeowners.

“The big banks’ dirty fingerprints are all over these latest actions. The Obama administration and the attorneys general cannot cave in to the desire of Wall Street bankers to paper over their massive wrongdoing and throw homeowners under the bus. Homeowners and former homeowners from Iowa, Illinois, Florida, New York and all 50 states must be put first. For years homeowners have been the victims of systemic fraud and they have been waiting years for the banks to be held responsible. As much as there is a need for relief, speed at the expense of quality cannot and will not be accepted.”
###
A nationwide consortium, the Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA) represents an unprecedented effort to bring other voices to the mass-media table often dominated by a few major think tanks. IPA works to broaden public discourse in mainstream media, while building communication with alternative media outlets and grassroots activists.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA) Links:
HomePress Center

Foreclosure Settlement Muddies Outlook for Mortgage Relief

2011-08-16T22:37:00.000-07:00

By Prashant Gopal -
Apr 14, 2011 12:00 AM ET .

Business ExchangeBuzz up!DiggPrint Email ..Enlarge image

U.S. Foreclosure Settlement Muddies Outlook for Mortgages Jacob Kepler/Bloomberg News.
Neighborhoods in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Neighborhoods in Las Vegas, Nevada. Photographer: Jacob Kepler/Bloomberg News.

QApril 13 (Bloomberg) -- William Fitzpatrick, senior equity analyst at Manulife Asset Managemement, talks about JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s first-quarter profit, the outlook for financial stocks and an agreement by the 14 largest U.S. mortgage servicers to pay back homeowners for losses from foreclosures or loans that were mishandled in the wake of the housing collapse. Fitzpatrick speaks with Mark Crumpton on Bloomberg Television's "Bottom Line." (Source: Bloomberg)

U.S. Foreclosure Settlement Muddies Outlook Matthew Staver/Bloomberg
While the attorneys general proposed many similar terms last month, banking regulators didn’t include any requirements for lowering mortgage debt.

While the attorneys general proposed many similar terms last month, banking regulators didn’t include any requirements for lowering mortgage debt. Photographer: Matthew Staver/Bloomberg

The foreclosure-abuse settlements announced yesterday by federal regulators may make it harder for state attorneys general and the Obama administration to force banks to reduce loan balances for more troubled U.S. homeowners.

The 14 largest U.S. mortgage servicers, including JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) and Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC), agreed to review all foreclosed loans from 2009 and 2010, and pay back losses in cases that were mishandled. They also will improve procedures by hiring staff, upgrading document-tracking systems and assigning a single point of contact for each borrower.

While the attorneys general proposed many similar terms last month, banking regulators didn’t include any requirements for lowering mortgage debt. That may hinder Iowa Attorney General Thomas J. Miller as he leads a group of state officials working with the administration to require lenders to evaluate loan cuts for some borrowers whose homes are worth less than their mortgages.

“I have always been pretty skeptical about the ability of principal reductions to get you much,” said Mark A. Calabria, director of financial-regulation studies at the Cato Institute, a public-policy research group in Washington. “I think we will look back and say this was the death knell.”

The settlements, which include yet-to-be determined monetary penalties, also prohibit banks from seizing homes for which borrowers have negotiated a trial or permanent loan modification. The attorneys general proposal goes a step further, freezing the foreclosure process even while borrowers are being evaluated for workouts.

Divided Views
The agreements stem from reviews of the mortgage-servicing industry by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Reserve, the Office of Thrift Supervision and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. The banks didn’t admit or deny regulators’ findings.

The loan-reduction rules are the most divisive part of Miller’s bid to get servicers to settle with all 50 states on allegations of abusive foreclosure practices. In the past month, at least seven state attorneys general rejected the proposal, and Brian T. Moynihan, chief executive officer of Bank of America Corp. (BAC), said widespread principal cuts were bad policy.

Miller has pushed for such relief as one of the best ways to bolster the housing market by reducing foreclosures, which drive down property values for homeowners who continue to pay their mortgages.

HAMP’s Shortcomings
The Treasury Department’s main foreclosure-prevention program, which lowers monthly payments, has resulted in about 600,000 permanent loan modifications, short of its goal of up to 4 million. The Home Affordable Modification Program, also known as HAMP, doesn’t require loan cuts.

Federal regulators said the decision to craft their own deal doesn’t preclude what they call a global settlement with banks that could also include the state attorneys general and Obama administration.

Officials from Justice Department, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and 10 state attorneys general met yesterday for a second time with banks to negotiate a broader settlement, Associate U.S. Attorney General Tom Perrelli told reporters. The group is discussing potential fines and whether servicers should be required to reduce the principal on some home loans.

The agreements “will not limit our pursuit of remedies and reforms,” Iowa’s Miller said yesterday in a statement. HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan said the deals support their broader effort.

Rewarding Default
“The Obama administration and the state attorneys general are committed to ensuring the banks are held accountable in a way that helps to strengthen the housing market and helps American families stay in their homes,” he said yesterday in a statement.

Opponents of mandatory loan writedowns, including the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and dissenting attorneys general, say they reward borrowers for failing to meet their obligations and could cause additional defaults as homeowners stop making payments so they can qualify for help.

“There’s very little incentive for the banks to accept any deal that’s going to require them to forgive significant amounts of principal for underwater borrowers,” said Jaret Seiberg, a financial-policy analyst for Washington Research Group, a Washington-based unit of broker MF Global Holdings Ltd. “It’s one of those slippery slopes where once you start, you don’t know where you’ll end.”

Case Against Writedowns
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the primary overseer of national banks, supports giving lenders the option to cut borrowers’ debt, Bryan Hubbard, a spokesman for the regulator in Washington, said in an e-mail.

Mandatory reductions don’t make sense because contracts with some investors who own bonds backed by mortgages don’t permit them, and it isn’t fair to make servicers or investors absorb losses from declining property values that would ordinarily be borne by homeowners, he said.

“Principal reduction results in immediate and permanent loss to servicers/investors with no potential for recovery if property values rise or the borrower’s financial condition improves,” he wrote.

The federal settlements come as the U.S. housing market remains under pressure from unemployment of almost 9 percent. A record 2.9 million properties received foreclosure filings in 2010, according to RealtyTrac Inc., a data firm in Irvine, California. Sales of existing homes fell 9.6 percent in February, and distressed properties accounted for 39 percent of deals, data from the Chicago-based National Association of Realtors show.

Case for Writedowns
About 27 percent of U.S. mortgage holders were underwater at the end of last year, according to Zillow Inc. of Seattle, a real estate information company.

A targeted program to lower principal for struggling homeowners can help shrink the overhang of foreclosures, said Cristian de Ritis, a director at Moody’s Analytics Inc., an economics-research firm in West Chester, Pennsylvania. Borrowers who have loan balances in line with their home values have an incentive to keep paying and a cushion if they lose a job or face other financial setbacks.

About 200,000 to 500,000 mortgage holders could qualify for a writedown and stay current on payments as long as changes are implemented within the next six months, de Ritis said. Standard & Poor’s, the New York-based ratings company, said in a Feb. 7 report that trimming mortgage balances is the “most effective” and “least frequent” modification. Less than 3 percent of workouts include writedowns.

“If the program is delayed, it will have less of an impact as many distressed borrowers will have already lost their homes,” de Ritis said.

Fixing System
The attorneys general and federal regulators began separate probes of the industry late last year amid allegations of shoddy practices such as robo-signing, or using workers with little or no training to sign thousands of documents filed in support of foreclosures without reading them. The investigations were broadened to include all aspects of the servicing business.

“Our enforcement actions are intended to fix what is broken, identify and compensate borrowers who suffered financial harm and ensure a fair and orderly mortgage-servicing process going forward,” John Walsh, acting comptroller of the currency, said yesterday in a statement.

The regulators deal with servicers is a victory for banks that shows how their political muscle has been strengthened after atrophying during the financial crisis. Servicers may now be less inclined to agree to a deal with the states including mortgage relief.

‘Moral Hazard’
“The regulators’ settlement lets the banks’ defenders say that anything else is piling on,” said Peter Swire, a law professor at Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio, who was an adviser on housing issues to President Barack Obama until August.

Regulators are too cozy with the banks they oversee, said Paul Leonard, director of the California office for the Center for Responsible Lending, which seeks to protect homeownership and family wealth. He said banks are in no position to argue that bailing out troubled borrowers creates a “moral hazard” that will encourage other homeowners to seek handouts.

“Banks are ignoring the hypocrisy of having accepted billions of dollars of federal bailouts when they wouldn’t have survived without such federal largesse,” Leonard said.

More than 1.8 million homes are projected to be taken this year in foreclosures, short sales and voluntary dispossessions known as deeds in lieu, according to Moody’s Analytics. Borrowers lost 1.67 million homes in 2010, the research firm said.

Writedown Challenge
Paul Willen, an economist with the Boston Federal Reserve, said the danger of offering a program for loan cuts is that lenders will be inundated with applications from borrowers, most of whom don’t need them, slowing the already clogged foreclosure pipeline. The inherent challenge with writedowns is identifying which borrowers are sufficiently discouraged by their equity position to stop making payments, Willen said.

“We do not see broad-based principal reduction as a sound policy decision for America,” Bank of America’s Moynihan said April 12 in prepared remarks to state attorneys general in the company’s hometown of Charlotte, North Carolina. “It’s hard to see how we could justify reducing principal for many delinquent customers who represent a small portion of borrowers, but not for the vast majority of our customers who have stayed current on their loans.”

Credit Rating ‘Ding’
Lenders can avoid moral hazard issues by adding “frictions” to the program so that “those who don’t need principal reductions are not envious of those who receive it,” Laurie Goodman, senior managing director at Amherst Securities Group LP in New York, said in a March 24 report. The borrower could be forced to share any future appreciation with the lender or face a credit-rating “ding” by accepting the modification, she wrote.

Miller’s 50-state coalition began to fracture last month when a 27-page list of proposed settlement terms leaked and at least seven Republicans attorneys general, including Florida’s Pam Bondi and Virginia’s Kenneth Cuccinelli, came out against it. New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said April 11 that a settlement shouldn’t preclude individual states from investigating servicers.

“The term sheet’s principal reduction proposals may actually foster an unintended ‘moral hazard’ that rewards those who simply choose not to pay their mortgage -- because they can simply take advantage of lenders’ obligation to honor virtually automatic principal writedowns,” according to a March 22 letter to Miller signed by the attorneys general of Virginia, Texas, Florida and South Carolina.

One Tool
Prentiss Cox, a University of Minnesota law professor and former assistant state attorney general, said the attorneys general don’t need all 50 states onboard to be successful. If a reasonable number of states are represented, banks might see the terms as a de facto national standard, he said.

“When you have federal regulators like the OCC captive to the industry they regulate, it’s critical that the AGs use the law-enforcement function to create rules that are more balanced in favor of consumers,” Cox said.

While Miller hasn’t disclosed the size of the potential penalties servicers may face, the group could seek $20 billion, two people briefed on the talks said in February.

Geoff Greenwood, a spokesman for Miller, said writedowns are just “one tool in the toolbox.”

“He favors doing so only in appropriate circumstances where the homeowner simply cannot afford the payment,” Greenwood said. “And he would want to ensure that it’s structured in a way to prevent strategic default.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Prashant Gopal in New York at pgopal2@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Kara Wetzel at kwetzel@bloomberg.net.

Housing Crisis? Bank of America Takes $533,500 Loss on Exec’s Home

2011-08-04T11:13:00.001-07:00

By Dan Fitzpatrick
Bank of America Corp. is fighting an effort to force U.S. banks to reduce the amount some borrowers owe on their mortgage. But property records show that the bank was willing to take one heck of a hit when mortgage chief Barbara Desoer unloaded her Charlotte N.C., home in 2009 as part of a move to California.

Desoer and her husband Marc sold their 4,455-square-foot house in Charlotte’s exclusive Eastover neighborhood to relocation company Weichert Relocation Resources Inc. for $1.46 million on May 6, 2009, according to county property records.

Bank of America via Bloomberg News
Barbara Desoer Eastover is a highly sought-after address in Charlotte, can be seen from the giant bank’s downtown headquarters and is home to former Bank of America Chief Executive Hugh McColl and other bank executives.

The relocation company’s services were part of a larger benefits package that Desoer got so she could oversee the purchase of troubled mortgage lender Countrywide Financial.

Bank of America also paid out $1.5 million for costs related to the purchase of her new home in California and $1.1 million in tax costs, according to a 2009 securities filing.

The fine print included a promise by Bank of America to eat any losses if Desoer’s house in Charlotte was sold at a lower price.

On Nov. 20, 2009, Weichert sold it for $930,500–a 36% decline in just six months, property records show. Bank of America’s loss: roughly $533,500.

“It’s simply unfair and inaccurate to compare this benefit to principal reduction for delinquent mortgage customers,” Bank of America said in a statement. “Relocation benefits are customary and competitively necessary arrangements for most major companies when executives are asked to relocate with their family to another area of the country to oversee critical businesses.”

The company hasn’t disclosed the size of the bath it took on Desoer’s house. In the 2009 securities filing, Bank of America said the sale happened in December 2008 and was “based on the average of the appraised values of the residence as determined by two independent appraisal services.”

Change to Win, which is affiliated with the Service Employees International Union and owns shares in Bank of America, says Desoer’s perk is a big reason why the company should be forced to ban such home-loss subsidies for executives.

The group is asking shareholders to eliminate the policy at the bank’s annual meeting in May, telling directors that such a payment “insulates a narrow set of executives from the economic facts of life even while Bank of America’s own customers struggle to pay their mortgages as a result of the housing market collapse and broader financial crisis.”

The SEC ruled in a March 4 letter that the proposal can remain on the proxy, despite efforts by the bank to remove it. The proposal, the SEC said, “focuses on a significant policy issue of senior executive compensation.”

HOMEOWNER WARNING TO ALL ATTORNEY GENERALS

2011-07-28T09:11:00.000-07:00

I, Ronni D. Mandell, a loyal citizen of these United States, as well as a taxpayer and registered voter of Connecticut, hereby issues this warning to all officials in the state of Connecticut, that they cannot and will not violate or impede my rights or limit me or any citizen from pursuing justice, as needed,for any and all acts of fraud,including documents, foreclosures or truth in lending violations by mortgage companies, brokers and lending institutions, which directly affect me personally, my family or property. Citizen rights are protected by the Constitution of the United States as follows, regardless of what agreement is reached with the U.S. Attorney Generals and the Wall Street Banks.

SEVENTH AMENDMENT Constitutional Right- In Suits of common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.

FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT Constitutional Right- against any state abridging your privileges or immunities, or depriving you of liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This warning is being issued due to the expected exoneration to be given to the various lenders, who have used fraudulent methods in processing chain of title/deed assignments, truth in lending violatons and foreclosures. This expected blessing by the state Attorney Generals, politicians and judges, in no way, blocks me and my family from exercising our Constitutional Rights. In the event, there are any threats made by state officials, directly to me or my family, they will also be dealt with in the court of public opinion.

Fraud is a crime and punishment should apply to ALL violators. No exceptions, whatsoever, for the mighty and the powerful, who really call the shots.

I urge all citizens and homeowners to protect themselves and call their state Attorney General and lawmakers right away.

Incidentally, U.S. political campaign contributions are up-coincidence or planned?

Ronni D. Mandell
W. Haven, Ct.
(203) 745-1251

In Connecticut, Even Mickey Mouse Can Be Granted The Standing To Foreclose

2011-07-22T09:40:00.000-07:00

In Connecticut, Even Mickey Mouse Can Be Granted The Standing To Foreclose

Mrs. Ronni Mandell, of West Haven, is at this time, attempting to modify her mortgage with Bank of America but has not received a sincere, viable offer that would keep her in her home. With this said, she is livid over the ancient laws on the books in Connecticut that makes it easy for banks to foreclose, only gives the homeowner the impression that mediation will be fair but it doesn’t address faulty or fraudulent releases of mortgages and other assignments the homeowners may wish to address and it even allows anyone at all who presents the document to foreclose, even if they do not have the wet-ink, original promissory note in their possession. The representative also can merely show a simple affidavit prepared with a fraudulent signature showing that the note was lost. Well, if homeowners wish to allow this blatant form of robbery to continue to take place, then true justice will not be served for homeowners facing foreclosure. Homeowners of Connecticut must stand up and demand that the accomplices to these robberies must make changes now.

At this time, fair and balanced homeowner justice Is non-existent
in bank-biased Connecticut courts.

Call your Connecticut Representative, State Senator and Congress Member TODAY!

Many people in Connecticut have certainly heard about the epidemic of fraudulent documents being presented at foreclosures throughout the country. If you haven’t heard about it, you must catch up quickly as your house could be foreclosed upon in Connecticut by your lender and you will find yourself in foreclosure mediation with a judge that will simply accept any and all documents provided by the Plaintiff (Bank) as being sufficient and therefore order the foreclosure if all mediation doesn’t reach a satisfactory solution.

This will happen regardless if you have in your possession, actual fraudulent releases of mortgage or other assignments to the deed that you would like to present. In addition, the foreclosing party doesn’t have to show the original note and just present an affidavit stating that it was lost. The other states in our country have more sense than that, they have stopped this criminal process in it’s tracks and you, the homeowners of Connecticut, regardless if your current on your mortgage or not, must realize that foreclosure could happen any day. All it takes is an unexpected medical crisis, loss of job, divorce, etc. Then, you too, may be thrown out of your home in a heartbeat, while Connecticut legislators debate on more important issues, such as; should they add another dollar tax to a pack of cigarettes.

Call your representatives and state senators and demand that the laws be changed, which will be given a chance to a fair fight, not a biased one, to save your home. What the legislators are doing is comparable to them seeing a thief in the process of robbing a valuable bike and then provide the thief with a hacksaw to complete the theft and help to hide it to boot.

If the legislature had more lawmakers such as State Senator Anthony Musto of Trumbull, your rights as homeowners, would be protected and not disregarded as they are now. Wall Street got it’s bailouts and now, they are growing even bigger, so they can effectively bully homeowners, depositors and taxpayers even more and schmooze and appease lawmakers in order to have them pass legislation written by the banks to suit Wall Street’s needs. The only way you will know if your representative or senator is hiding in someone’s pocket is just ask them for help and see what they do for the people.

Politicians and Superior Court Judges, perhaps, should be appointed and not elected, then and only then, will the system work in a balanced way. This way loyalty to the duties of the masses will circumvent favors to the few. Jurors are expected to put their personal opinions and politics aside to achieve a fair and balanced verdict. So should Judges.

Mrs. Mandell wishes all homeowners going through modification and/or foreclosure all the best as she knows, first hand, what it’s like dealing with the very banks that are largely responsible for bringing down the American economy.

Press Release of July 18, 2011

2011-07-15T18:48:00.000-07:00

Potentially Fraudulent Documents and Modification Denial by Bank of America Could Spell Trouble.West Haven 7/18/2011 11:30 AM GMT (TransWorldNews)

West Haven, Connecticut homeowner, who was recently denied by Bank of America for a HAMP modification discovered potentially fraudulent paperwork pertaining to previously released mortgages. She has asked Bank of New York-Mellon to reach out to BOA to make substantial principal reductions along with a 1 or 2% interest rate as a sincere concession for the questionable paperwork problems. What prompted Mrs. Ronni Mandell to look through the paperwork was a call, 5 weeks ago, from someone who claimed they were from their former lender (New Century) in 2004 and that he was calling on behalf of the investor. Her husband would not give any information to the caller as he was bewildered by the call. This mortgage was documented by Countrywide as being paid and settled. After digging out the document, it was found to have a questionable signature and this creates a possible problem for the homeowner.

“Will the banks help Mrs. Mandell ?” This question can only be answered by the banks, who must act expeditiously, as they should, to show that they are sincerely interested in making amends for the mishandled and potentially damaging documents.

As of late, they are standing firm and not showing any remorse at all for the improper handling of the two “Release of Mortgage” documents, which could cloud the title on the property.

Mrs. Ronni Mandell has reached out to the investor, Bank of New York-Mellon, personally and has requested their intervention and assistance in trying to achieve an appropriate modification, but she hasn’t heard back from them.

She has also requested assistance from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the F.D.I.C., the Federal Trade Commission, members of the Senate Banking Commission, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and both the Connecticut and New York Attorney Generals. Several days ago, Mrs. Mandell received a call from the New York Attorney General’s office requesting a complete account of her recent dealings with both banks from the modification request up to the present time.

To say that Mrs. Mandell is upset about this experience would be down-playing the situation and she firmly believes now, that all homeowners must review and examine all documents in their mortgage files as well as having a title search performed.

“Will this be resolved adequately, or will Bank of America and the Bank of New York-Mellon fall short or ignore it entirely?” Only time will tell.

Media Inquiries:

(203) 745-1251
Ronni or George Mandell
Prepared by: John Reid

Related Photos

Association of Mortgage Investors Press Release-March 31, 2011 "Don't Bail Out Banks Again."

2011-06-24T22:16:00.000-07:00

AMI Urges Attorneys General and CFPB, Don’t Bail Out the Banks Again,

Middle-Class America and the Pensions Must Not Bear the Settlement Costs

Washington, D.C. – This week in Washington, D.C., key parties met for face-to-face settlement negotiations surrounding the mortgage servicing and foreclosure investigation into alleged misconduct, such as robosigning. The Association of Mortgage Investors (AMI) urges all state and federal parties to the ongoing investigation to protect the rights and investments of investors so that the final settlement only penalizes the servicers who have acted irresponsibly, acted to the detriment of borrowers and pension funds, and does not result in another government bank bailout.

Please click the following linl for our most recent press release:

AMI_press_release_3_31_2011

« AMI Statement concerning the Proposed Attorney General RemediesAMI Testifies before U.S. Senate Banking Subcommittee

Association of Mortgage Investors Press Release Novemer 4, 2010

2011-06-24T22:10:00.000-07:00

AMI Congratulates the Newly Elected State Attorneys General
November 4, 2010 | Category: Uncategorized

For immediate release

Contact: 202-327-8100

Thursday, November 4, 2010

AMI Congratulates the Newly Elected State Attorneys General and Offers Support for Effective Loan Modifications and Other Alternatives to Foreclosure

Washington, D.C. – The Association of Mortgage Investors (AMI) congratulates the newly elected State Attorneys General. AMI’s member firms are asset managers and fiduciaries for important constituents of the Attorneys General – state, county and local pension funds and retirement systems. AMI shares many of the same goals in finding effective alternatives to foreclosure and protecting the retirement funds of state citizens. The 50-state investigation into foreclosure practices is another telling sign of the unresolved problems in the U.S. housing market. The timely resolution of the foreclosure crisis is in the best interests of our nation’s economy, banks, homeowners, tax payers and fixed income portfolio investors reliant upon monthly cash flows from mortgage-backed securities. “This election was about the future of the U.S. economy, and a core and significant part of the U.S. economy is the housing industry,” remarked AMI Executive Director Chris Katopis. “Now the newly elected state AGs must continue the hard work of investigating and sorting out the housing finance market in an equitable fashion for responsible borrowers, distressed homeowners, mortgage servicers and the mortgage investors, who include state, county and local pension systems, each having an enormous stake in the settlement,” he continued. “The AG investigation will confirm that mortgage investors did not direct, consent, or agree to mortgage servicers’ improper foreclosure practices. Mortgage investors look forward to participating in the settlements and ensuring the responsible parties are held accountable.” . . .

I Need a Lawyer But It Seems That Justice Comes to Only Those That Can Afford It.

2011-06-19T08:22:00.000-07:00

The rich, mighty and powerful in this country seem to be able to afford justice and get off free from any wrongdoing, while Congess gives them total absolution.

I'm a Connecticut homeowner that needs a lawyer to prevent Bank of America from taking my home,but I can't afford one because, if I could, I would be able to pay my mortgage without having to apply for the President's HAMP program, which I was denied a modification from Bank of America after they fudged the fiqures so I couldn't qualify. I've sent a complaint to the OCC but they will probably give their own form of absolution to the big banks that are the actual leaders of this country.

Many have been rejected by Bank of America, because even if you qualify, they can cherry pick certain ones for the chopping block at will, without any oversight from Congress or the Treasury Department.

Thomas Jefferson warned us about the big banks over 2 hundred years ago and his warning was not heeded and it's now coming to pass as Banks are running the country, not our politicians. The economy is destroyed and the future holds no promise that it ever will be stable again unless the big banks are brought to their knees and we switch our business to the community banks and change this trend of mergers and the gobbling up of other businesses, only to create giants or should I say, monsters.

R. Mandell
203-745-1251

Independent Community Bank Association Press Release

2011-06-15T12:48:00.000-07:00

Media Contact
Aleis Stokes
(202) 821-4457

Media Contact
Ann Chen
(202) 821-4346

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 8, 2011

ICBA: Senate Failure to Pass Tester/Corker Is a Loss for Main Street Consumers
Washington, D.C. (June 8, 2011)-The Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA) released this statement following the Senate's failure to pass an amendment sponsored by Sens. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) that would have protected small debit card issuers and delayed the harmful Federal Reserve proposed rule on debit interchange for one year.

"ICBA is extremely disappointed with the Senate's failure to pass critical debit interchange legislation, which would have protected the pockets of consumers and Main Street America. It's a real kick in the teeth to local customers who rely on community banks that offer the valuable banking services they have come to expect. It is especially harmful to those millions of consumers of modest means who will now see their fees increase and may disenfranchise those who need banking services the most. If implemented without needed changes, the Durbin amendment to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act will have devastating effects on consumers, small banks, small businesses and Main Street America.

"ICBA will continue to work all avenues to address the flawed debit interchange law. We won't give up on Main Street, and we won't give up on a system that works for our millions of customers in small towns and cities across the nation."

For more information about this issue or to speak with an ICBA staff expert, please contact Aleis Stokes at (202) 821-4457 or visit www.icba.org.

Federal Government to Halt Payments to 3 Mortgage Servicers

2011-06-09T06:49:00.000-07:00

By Dina ElBoghdady, Published: June 8
Three of the nation’s largest mortgage servicers will no longer receive payments tied to their participation in the Obama administration’s main foreclosure prevention initiative until they improve their performance in that program, a senior administration official said Wednesday.

Bank of America, J.P. Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo need to make “substantial improvements” to collect fees through the Making Home Affordable Program, which helps struggling borrowers by lowering their monthly mortgage payments.

More on this Story

Federal proposal would toughen debt restrictions on mortgages
Federal payments halted to 3 mortgage servicers
Foreclosure settlements divide states
Home prices hit lowest level since 2009
View all Items in this Story

Average rate on 30-year loan drops
.The companies failed to meet basic program requirements, such as properly contacting borrowers, the official said. The details are scheduled to be released Thursday in a report that will assess the performance of the 10 largest participating servicers.

Through the initiative, servicers can collect at least $1,000 for each loan they permanently modify. The payment is meant to entice servicers to participate in the voluntary program, which has doled out $560 million in payments since its launch in March 2009.

The three targeted servicers — which received $24 million in payments last month — will not receive payments for permanent modifications reported from June onward until they address their weaknesses.

No estimates are available yet for how much will be withheld.

A fourth servicer — Ocwen Loan Servicing — also ranked among the worst performers, but it will continue to receive payments because its poor showing was due primarily to a portfolio of loans it recently acquired from another company, the official said.

The move is the first major action taken against servicers participating in the embattled program, which has been criticized as ineffective and too soft on the servicers.

The House recently approved a Republican-led measure that would kill the initiative in part because of its lackluster results, but the measure has not gained traction in the Senate.

When the program was created, the administration projected it would prevent 3 million to 4 million foreclosures before it expired in December 2012. But it is expected to fall far short of its goal, having permanently modified only about 700,000 loans so far.

The Treasury Department, which oversees the program, does not regulate the institutions that participate and therefore cannot impose fines or penalties, said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the information has not been made public. The only available leverage is to withhold incentive payments, the official said.

Doing so is not likely to discourage lenders from modifying loans, the official said. Instead, the strategy and the in-depth analysis of each lender should shame servicers into shaping up.

“It’s a temporary withholding to get them to fix the problem,” the official said.

Borrowers and the investors who own mortgages also receive incentive payments for participating in the program. Their payments will not be withheld.

Big Banks are Trying to Buy Off Politicians after Mers Ruling by the O.C.C.

2011-06-08T08:07:00.000-07:00

Bankers Trying To Buy Oregon Politicians After Judge Rules Against MERS
May 29, 2011 // by Steve Dibert // Mortgage News // No Comments
Brent Hunsberger, The Oregonian

The foreclosure fight in Oregon jumped to a new level this week after a federal judge in Medford rebuked the industry’s sloppy practices in blocking the seizure of a Jacksonville home, and mortgage issuers turned to the Legislature to find a quick fix to the legal quagmire.

U.S. District Judge Owen Panner questioned whether big banks should be allowed to foreclose without court supervision — as required in 23 states but not Oregon, where one in every 500 homes is in foreclosure, according to Realty Trac Inc. That’s compared with one out of 600 nationwide.

Panner specifically warned of problems in cases involving the Mortgage Electronic Registration System. MERS was set up by the banking industry to rapidly package and sell mortgages as securities without recording each sale in county recorder offices.

The “MERS system raises serious concerns regarding the appropriateness and validity of foreclosure by advertisement and sale outside of any judicial proceeding,” he said Wednesday in a 16-page ruling.

“Given the numerous problems I see in nearly every non-judicial foreclosure case I preside over, a procedure relying on a bank or trustee to self-assess its own authority to foreclose is deeply troubling to me,” he wrote.

Since October, federal judges in six separate Oregon cases have halted foreclosures involving MERS, saying its participation caused lenders to violate the state’s recording law. At least one federal judge has ruled in favor of MERS, industry lobbyists said.

Today, the mortgage and banking industry turned to the Oregon Legislature for help. The House Judiciary Committee entertained a last-minute amendment to an affordable housing bill that would rid the recording requirements holding up MERS foreclosures. Lobbyists for banks, credit unions and title companies said the amendments were needed to lift a cloud over thousands of Oregon homes.

“It’s created a significant issue for the title industry, certainly, and, among others, the people who own these homes,” said Alan Brickley, an attorney for First American Title Insurance Co. in Portland. The Northwest Credit Union Association and Oregon Financial Services Associationalso testified in favor of the amendment.

The amendment was proposed to Senate Bill 519, which is designed to protect affordable housing financing in foreclosures. Its introduction sent the bill’s co-sponsor, Sen. Suzanne Bonamici, D-Beaverton, and a deputy of Oregon Attorney General John Kroger scrambling to defend the state’s existing recording law.

Committee co-chair Wayne Krieger, R-Gold Beach, postponed action on the amendment until Tuesday.

“It’s a gut and stuff and will emasculate the recording requirements,” said Phil Querin, a real-estate attorney in Portland. “It should be strongly opposed.”

2011-06-08T07:43:00.001-07:00

MERS AND MERSCORP AGREE TO A CEASE AND DESIST ORDER--OCC INVOLVED- 4-13-2011

Thomas Jefferson's Keen Perception of Banks

2011-06-06T06:52:00.001-07:00

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." -Thomas Jefferson, 1802.

How Main Street has Destroyed Wall Street???

2011-06-04T15:17:00.000-07:00

Posted by Foreclosure Fraud on May 16, 2010

How Main Street has Destroyed Wall Street

Posted by Capt. Jack

I guess now would be a good time to shoot the greedy homeowners.

It’s crystal clear. From the very beginning the homeowners have gamed the system. They started by tricking the property appraiser (lender’s agent) into submitting an outcome-based appraisal.

Then, millions of homeowners shrewdly conned the “lenders” into dismissing all agency and fiduciary responsibility in the underwriting process….going so far as to force the “lenders” into forging documents.

Then, the greedy homeowners forced the “lenders” to securitize the loan in such a fashion as to bifurcate the mortgage from the note.

On top of that, the homeowners secretly cooked up the concept of “Credit Default Swaps” and forced the “lenders” to insure the collateral at the full (outcome based) value 30X over.

Having successfully pulled the wool over everyone’s eyes – these irresponsible homeowners showered themselves with well deserved bonuses.

Realizing they were too big to fail, these irresponsible, reckless homeowners lined the pockets of legislators and received enormous sums of taxpayer bailouts.

The result of these cunning maneuvers by the fraudulent homeowner scheme has them sitting fat and happy in the cat birds seat. Yup, that’s how they did it. And they’re getting away with it.

Savings drained – check, 401ks all gone – check. Kicked out of their homes – check. “Lenders” made whole many times over via Credit Default Swaps – check. Homeowners foreclosed and “lender” buys back property for pennies on the dollar – check.

Follow the money and you’ll find the culprit. It’s about time we hold these homeowners accountable.

Good call. The websites below are sponsored by a well-healed, politically connected, PR machine of greedy volunteers… and contain detailed information on how the collusion on Main Street has ripped off Wall Street.

Don’t look though… it’s just spam.

http://www.4closurefraud.org

http://www.foreclosurehamlet.org

~

4closureFraud.org

What Recourse do the People Have When the Law is in Contempt of Itself?

2011-06-01T09:14:00.000-07:00

Do the politicians that govern and make laws create such a circumstance, is violent revolution justified as it's happening in other countries, is it time to ask them to step down because big banks and businesses have bought off the law and the politicians?

According to one of our greatest presidents, Thomas Jefferson, it is. Jefferson was the greatest champion of the common man and their relationship to government. To paraphrase one of his thoughts: Government exists for the governed, not for those who govern. Woe be to any government which seeks to preserve itself for its own sake. To Jefferson, elected officials were servants of the people, and when the people determine that the actions of those servants clearly defy their will, they have the right to overthrow them by whatever means they deem necessary, even to the point of violent revolution. So, don't think the U.S. government is safe from upheaval from within the country. It isn't! As long as there are people who adhere to the principles Jefferson espoused, the prospect for violent change in the United States will always exist.I personally believe that the American people have nearly reached their breaking point concerning the too cozy relationship which exists between our so-called "servants" and Corporate America. I am convinced that a champion of the people will emerge soon to help forge a more honest and accountable political system in America which will hold our politicos feet to the fire in their duty to do the will of the people first, and business last.
Here are a few websites you might find interesting:

http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quot…

http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quot…

http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quot…

http://www.quotedb.com/quotes/2074

http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog…

Bank of America's Lawyer Says "Homeowners Have No Rights"

2011-05-28T15:09:00.000-07:00

Bank of America Asks Court to Throw Out Mortgage Modification Litigation
By David McLaughlin - Apr 8, 2011 12:01 AM ET inShare23More
Business Exchange Buzz up! Digg Print Email

Bank of America Corp. signage is displayed above the entrance to a branch in New York. Photographer: Jin Lee/Bloomberg
Bank of America Corp. (BAC), accused in a lawsuit of violating obligations to homeowners seeking to modify mortgage loans and avoid foreclosure, asked a federal judge to throw the case out.

Borrowers say the bank “systematically failed” to comply with a U.S. government program aimed at stemming foreclosures and violated contracts for modifying loans, according to a complaint in federal court in Boston that consolidates cases from across the country.

Bank of America, the biggest U.S. lender by assets, asked U.S. District Judge Rya Zobel at a hearing yesterday to dismiss the complaint. The bank argues that not all homeowners are eligible for inclusion in the government’s Home Affordable Modification Program, or HAMP, and that it isn’t required to permanently modify all loans that are eligible.

“The bank is constantly working on the process, and the Treasury is breathing down its neck to make the process better,” said James McGarry, a lawyer for the bank.

The complaint consolidates 26 lawsuits from around the country with another 10 to be added, Gary Klein, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in an interview. If Zobel dismisses the complaint, all the lawsuits would be thrown out, Klein said after the hearing.

Evaluating Borrowers
Bank of America isn’t complying with obligations for evaluating borrowers and modifying loans, the plaintiffs said in court papers. Citing unidentified former employees as for some of its allegations, the complaint accuses the Charlotte, North Carolina-based bank of breaching HAMP requirements, misleading homeowners and putting processes in place to avoid modifying loans because it has financial incentives to do so.

“They have no rights?” Zobel asked Bank of America’s lawyer during the hearing, referring to homeowners. “How long can the bank decide whether or not to give it to them?” she said about loan modifications.

McGarry declined comment after the hearing about allegations in the complaint. Jumana Bauwens, a Bank of America spokesman, didn’t respond to an e-mail seeking comment.

“There’s more here than a simple breach of contract claim,” Klein told Zobel. “It goes to real malfeasance.”

A majority of the plaintiffs received trial modification plans, known as trial period plans, or TPPs, according to court papers the bank filed. Those are part of the application process and not enforceable contracts, the bank said. They also don’t guarantee a permanent modification unless many conditions are met.

Basic Eligibility Requirements
“Not one of the plaintiffs seeking to recover under the TPPs has alleged that he or she met the basic eligibility requirements and/or qualified for the offer of a permanent modification,” the bank said in court papers.

The plaintiffs say customer service workers regularly tell homeowners that modification documents weren’t received by the bank when in fact they were. The bank also encourages borrowers to default and fails to properly credit payments under trial modifications, treating homeowners as delinquent, according to the plaintiffs. One former employee who isn’t named recalled seeing homeowners’ financial records manipulated in the bank’s computer system, according to the complaint.

“BOA’s general practice and culture is to string homeowners along with no intention of providing actual and permanent modifications,” the complaint says. “Instead, BOA has put processes in place that are designed to foster delay, mislead homeowners and avoid modifying mortgage loans.”

The case is In re Bank of America Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) Contract Litigation, 10-md-02193, U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts (Boston).

To contact the reporter on this story: David McLaughlin in New York at dmclaughlin9@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net

Genworth Financial Article (Printed from Market Watch)

2011-05-28T14:02:00.000-07:00

By Lew Sichelman
Realty Q&A is a weekly column in which Lew Sichelman, a nationally syndicated columnist who has been covering the housing market for more than 40 years, responds to readers’ questions on real estate.

CHICAGO (MarketWatch) — Question: I’m close to defaulting on my mortgage. But I recall something about mortgage insurance, which I was required to buy when I took out my loan. Does that mean I’m covered if something happens to my house, a la homeowners’ insurance, or will it help me make my house payments when I no longer can? Hopefully, I’m not grasping at straws here, because I don’t want to lose my house. —C.B., Dallas.

Most people hate the fact that they have to pay PMI. But as it turns out, if you get behind on your mortgage and need some help, your mortgage insurer just might be your very best friend.

The insurer can’t change the terms of your loan. But it can intercede on your behalf with the lender — or more precisely, the company that services your mortgage on behalf of the investor that now owns it — and help you negotiate your way out of trouble.

“Most borrowers, if you put a gun to their heads, don’t know who their MI company is, or even what mortgage insurance is all about,” said Brian Gould, senior vice president of loss mitigation at United Guaranty in Greensboro, N.C. “But we can be very helpful.”

Teresa Bryce, president of Radian Guaranty in Philadelphia, agrees. “I’m not sure we ever sold [mortgage insurance] that way, and I don’t think anybody ever really thought about the alignment of interest between the borrower and insurer,” she said. “But in case of adversity, we can be the borrower’s best friend.”

Through the first 11 months of 2010, Raleigh, N.C.-based Genworth Financial, another private mortgage insurer, worked with lenders and servicers to help complete more than 37,000 loan workouts or modifications on behalf of borrowers. Through the first nine months of 2010, United Guaranty helped nearly 32,000 borrowers.

Insurers call them “cures.” That’s a euphemism for simply bringing a troubled borrower current. Unfortunately, a good many underwater owners — perhaps as many as half — still can’t make it to shore, and re-default on their loans. So, for some, a “cure” is merely reprieve. But at least it buys you some time.

Helping troubled borrowers isn’t all that altruistic, either. Typically, insurers lose $50,000 to $60,000 for each insured mortgage that is foreclosed upon. So it is in their best interest to do whatever they can to keep people in their homes.

Still, when you’re in deep do-do, who cares where help comes from, as long as it really is help? And when it comes from your mortgage insurer, it really is.

“We spend a lot of time and effort on homeowner assistance,” said Alan Goldberg, director of workout initiatives at Genworth. “You’re definitely in a better position if you have MI.”

The first step, then, for troubled borrowers is to determine if they have mortgage insurance and with which company. To do that, check your original good faith estimate of closing costs, your HUD-1 settlement statement, your annual escrow reconciliation statement or your payment book or notice. You also can call the servicer’s customer-service department.

If you are working with your servicer and experiencing no problems, there may be no need to call in the cavalry. But if you’re among the thousands who complain of difficulties getting through on the phone, spending endless hours on hold, getting dropped in mid-conversation, being tossed from one specialist to another and back again, or having to replace lost documentation, your MI can ride to the rescue.

Again, your insurer doesn’t have the final say so. But it can be your advocate. “If the borrower has the willingness and financial ability to remain in the home,” said United Guaranty’s Gould, “we try to work as a middleman to come up with a viable solution.”
Cash assistance and other help
Even if there’s just no way you can stick it out, your MI can help cushion the blow. Genworth, for example, will give you cash — Goldberg calls it “transition assistance” and “relocation assistance” — to help you move.

And if you attempted to get some help from your loan servicer a while back but failed, your MI can help you try again. “You may have been rejected a year ago but things are vastly different today,” Goldberg said. “So even if you tried before, there maybe a new opportunity now.”

Many mortgage insurers now have staffers sitting at desks at the largest loan servicers, working as liaisons between the servicer and the insurer. They act as “air traffic controllers,” said Gould, so that if a servicer has a question about an insured loan, the MI staffer is right there to provide a quick answer.

Like most servicers, MI companies have staffed up to handle the onslaught of defaults. Radian “has more folks in loss mitigation than anywhere else in the company right now,” said spokeswoman Emily Reilly. And United Guaranty currently has two shifts of dedicated, bilingual workout specialists working from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. Eastern time.

Unlike servicers, though, once you are assigned to a specific MI person, that’s the person (or his backup) you deal with throughout your ordeal. You are not handed off, or around.

Once you make contact, the MI specialist will perform an analysis of your situation to determine what, if any, workout or modification programs you qualify for and to make recommendations. When you decide which option you prefer, the insurer makes what Goldberg calls “a warm handoff” to the servicer.

And perhaps best of all, your MI can throw some money into the deal on your behalf to smooth your way to a loan modification. Say, for example, that you are $10,000 behind and have no cash, but the owner of your mortgage wants you to pay up or no dice.

As long as you can handle the payments of the newly modified loan — at a lower interest rate, perhaps, or an extended term — your insurer can advance what you owe, up to a point, on your behalf. And it doesn’t have to be paid back. Ever.

Insurers look at it as an advance on the investor’s eventual claim, and are glad to pay it. After all, a $10,000 advance now is better than a $50,000 loss later. Said Genworth’s Goldberg: “Any time we can avoid a claim, it is to everyone’s benefit.”

Nationally syndicated columnist Lew Sichelman has been covering the housing market for more than 40 years. Because of the volume of mail he receives, he cannot answer individual questions, nor can all questions be answered in this space. Email lsichelman@aol.com.