The deal essentially transfers the loan modification duties on that particular portfolio to American Home Mortgage Servicing -- a company that has been working to lower the face amount of loans for homeowners so that they do not exceed the value of the house.
Arkygirl says: This means that Citi, who never really owned your note and/or mortgage in the first place, has sold ONLY the servicing rights (and modification duties) to American Home Mortgage.
It is basic that you understand that American Home Mortgage does NOT, NOT, I repeat, NOT own your mortgage; nor does Citi. Some nameless faceless investor somewhere thinks he owns it but has no supporting documentation and there are layers of Trustees, etc. between you and that investor. It was a securities sale. Therefore, AHM cannot legally modify or change anything in your mortgage contract. It has no legal authority to do it.
The entire modification scam is a shell game to let banks turn something they don't own into something that they will own; in other words, turn a void contract into a valid contract by tricking people into signing a new "modification" contract. They gold plate the poop for themselves and the investors that they originally sold the poop to while claiming it was worth something. Be wary about signing anything for the impostors, American Home Mortgage.
Now, if you tell me that MERS is involved somewhere (and I suspect it is) my happiness will be unbounded.
As for Moss Codilis...search this forum for them. Search http://www.ripoffreport.com for them. It is my humble opinion (and I have not found anything to refute it to date) that this "law firm" still does not exist as such. It is a group of lawyers claiming to be a law firm.
That was pretty hard for me to understand at first. Lawyers=law firm, right? WRONG!
As a once dear friend explained it to me..."A group of lawyers may own a garbage collection company. That does not make the garbage collection company a law firm." Unless this bunch of barristers has done the proper paperwork and registrations in...I believe it was Englewood, CO....they are also impostors and should be disregarded. In fact, they should be sued because they break a lot of laws with this scam. They are a bunch of hacks cranking out form letters at so-much a pop.
All these "problems" are smoke and mirrors to distract you from the fact that your mortgage contract and note are most likely void and you don't owe anyone anything unless you can drill down to the investor and see if that person has both your note and your contract (not likely).
We need more precedent in these cases. These banks, in their greed, have shot themselves in the foot because they have rendered their own claims unenforceable.
If there is any way you can get a competent attorney on this one, that would be your best bet. "Demand the note" should work for a start. Sue Gerald Moss and his cohorts at "Moss Codilis". Force them all into Discovery and watch them run for the hills. You may just wind up owning your home free and clear via court decision.
The SEC alleges that former chairman and CEO Michael Strauss and former CFO Stephen Hozie fraudulently understated American Home Mortgage's first quarter 2007 loan loss reserves by tens of millions of dollars, converting the company's loss into a fictional profit. The SEC alleges that Strauss and Hozie also misled investors about the financial condition of the company, including the riskiness of the mortgages originated and held by American Home Mortgage.
The SEC additionally charged Strauss, Hozie and the company's former controller, Robert Bernstein, with misleading American Home Mortgage's auditor among other violations. Strauss has settled the SEC's charges by agreeing to pay more than $2.45 million and consenting to a five-year officer and director bar.
"These senior executives did not just occupy a front row seat to the mortgage meltdown — they were part of the show," said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement. "As the housing market imploded, these executives kept secret that the company's holdings were collapsing like a house of cards."
February 2, 2004
By Brian Collins
Washington -- Suing subprime firms for "predatory" servicing is a growth industry and class-action attorneys appear to have set their sites on a new target: Ocwen Federal FSB of West Palm Beach, Fla.
Several lawsuits have been filed in California accusing the company of abusive and illegal servicing practices. In general, Ocwen is accused of failing to post monthly mortgage payments properly, charging inappropriate late fees, prematurely referring accounts to collections, and forcing homeowners into default as part of a scheme to generate fee income.
The federally chartered thrift disputes all the allegations and says it has taken steps to improve its servicing operation. "We believe the allegations to be baseless and without merit," Ocwen general counsel Paul Koches told Mortgage Servicing News. "And we will be vigorously defending that in court." (Mr. Koches represents the thrift and its parent, Ocwen Financial Corp., which also is based in West Palm Beach.)
The same California attorneys that are after Ocwen also brought claims of abusive servicing practices against Fairbanks Capital Corp., Salt Lakes City, which recently agreed to a $40 million settlement with federal regulators and to pay $15 million to settle several class-action lawsuits.
Once the FTC announced the Fairbanks settlement, it was widely expected that other subprime servicers would face similar scrutiny.
Consumer attorneys believe the incentive system built into subprime servicing encourages companies to generate fees by pushing loans into default, as opposed to arranging workouts when borrowers get into trouble.
"I think Fairbanks took it to the absolute extreme, which is why they got spanked," said Ira Rhinegold, executive director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates. "I don't think Ocwen and some of the others who are engaged in subprime servicing are much better," he added.
Unlike Fairbanks, Ocwen has a federal regulator, the Office of Thrift Supervision, which has been monitoring its servicing operation.
"We have been working for some time very closely with Ocwen to address the number of concerns related to their servicing of subprime loans," OTS spokesman Kevin Petrasic said.
Ocwen's practices are "extremely similar" to Fairbanks', according to Niall McCarthy, an attorney with the Burlingame, Calif., law firm of Cotchett, Pitre, Simon & McCarthy. Mr. McCarthy filed a class-action lawsuit against the Ocwen Federal Bank in the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles on Dec. 29.
Ocwen "engages in a systematic and deliberate unlawful scheme to cheat homeowners out of millions of dollars in bogus and illegal fees and charges," according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit alleges that the plaintiffs, Allie and Jerry Maddox, lost their Bend, Ore., home in foreclosure because of Ocwen's servicing practices. After losing their home, the Maddox's moved to California to restart their life.
Mr. McCarthy noted, however, there are a couple of unique things about the way the federally chartered thrift operates that are different from Fairbanks. For instance, Ocwen assesses late fees prior to the date the payment is due, he said in a telephone interview.
If the monthly payment is due on the 17th of month, Ocwen charges a late fee on the 15th or 16th even if the payment comes in on the 17th. "That is exactly what happened to our client," he said. Fairbanks would get a payment on the 15th and not post it for three days - then charge a late fee.
Ocwen said it uses an independent lockbox provider that is required to process all payments within 24 hours for automatic posting.
Another problem at Ocwen is the failure to respond to their customers, Mr. McCarthy said, particularly for requests for payoffs and efforts to avoid foreclosure. "We get all types of phone calls from people who say there is absolutely no response whatsoever when they are trying to arrange a buyout or some kind of a workout of the foreclosure."
Even if they get in contact with an Ocwen representative - they are not responsive. The response is "we are not going to work with you" or "we don't want the money," Mr. McCarthy said. "That is downright cruel when someone is trying to save their home."
Ocwen said it employs a "consultative approach to customer relations where we seek a mutually satisfactory resolution of the issues."
Ocwen also said it leads the industry with an 80% delinquency resolution rate. "This means that in eight out of 10 severely delinquent loans, we are able to achieve a resolution in which the borrower avoids losing their home to a foreclosure."
Meanwhile, attorney Daniel Mulligan filed a class action against Ocwen in the U.S. District Court in San Francisco on Dec. 11.
The complaint - in Geneva Spires v. Ocwen - alleges that the servicer collects late fees when payments are on time and charges for force-placed homeowners insurance when the property is already insured.
Once a loan goes into default, Ocwen allegedly imposes and collects fees for property inspections, appraisals and broker price
opinions in excess of the costs and for services not performed.
"Specifically, Ocwen has engaged in a pattern and practice of charging unwarranted attorney's fee for properties it has erroneously categorized as being in default," the complaint says.
The partner at Jenkins & Mulligan in San Francisco also was involved in Fairbanks litigation and like Mr. McCarthy, he is one of the four co-lead counsels in the consolidated Fairbanks case. The U.S District Court in Boston is expected to grant final approval to the $55 million Fairbanks settlement in May.
In a separate lawsuit, Mr. Mulligan sued Ocwen in December 2002, alleging the subprime servicer charges unwarranted attorney fees (usually $95) when homeowners reinstate their loans. The case, which is before a state court, is currently in discovery and a hearing on class certification is scheduled for May.
Another San Francisco law firm, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, has file a class-action lawsuit against Ocwen in the state Superior Court (Alameda County).
"To generate revenues for itself, Ocwen has engaged in a scheme by which it levies unwarranted and unlawful late fees on its customers and uses a customer's alleged lateness to improperly assess other fees, up to and including fees associated with the erroneous preparation of default and foreclosure proceedings," according to the complaint in Patricia Antoine, Jon De Kerguelen and Rosalind DeKett v. Ocwen Financial Services Inc. and Ocwen Federal Bank.
Lieff, Cabraser attorneys also are involved in the Fairbanks litigation, but they declined to comment on the Ocwen case.
Ocwen considers the California litigation to be "copycat" suits that are without merit.
"The litigation against Ocwen is misdirected. The litigants should consider the facts - facts that our rating agencies, investment banks and others familiar with Ocwen have found - that our servicing business is federally regulated, legally compliant and industry-leading in terms of mutually beneficial resolutions with borrowers," Ocwen president Ronald Faris said.
General counsel Koches said he is not aware of any investigations by the Federal Trade Commission or the Office of Thrift Supervision involving the company's servicing practices.
OTS had not taken any enforcement actions against Ocwen. But the agency is keenly aware of the consumer complaints about its mortgage servicing operation.
OTS officials attribute these complaints partly to the difficulty of servicing subprime loans and the size of Ocwen's portfolio. The Florida thrift services $37 billion in subprime loans, including formerly Federal Housing Administration-insured loans.
Ocwen recently won a contract from the Department of Veterans Affairs to manage and sell VA-foreclosed single-family properties. VA is currently transferring 12,000 properties to Ocwen.
Back in July 2002, a Connecticut attorney, Kweku Hanson, became so upset about an ongoing dispute with Ocwen that he became the plaintiff in a class-action suit against the servicer. The 123-page lawsuit in Hanson v. Ocwen Federal Bank outlines a six-year running battle over late charges and fees.
"It is clear that this is a pattern and practice of shear piracy," Mr. Hanson said in an interview. He said he has collected hundreds of sworn affidavits from individuals who have been injured by Ocwen. The case is still in discovery. Mr. Hanson does not expect to get a hearing for class certification until after April. The lawsuit seeks $1.5 billion in punitive and exemplary damages. Ocwen claims the Hanson lawsuit is without merit.
PJ,You say above that frivolous pleadings come back to haunt the homeowner. Why is that? I myself have been sold down the river by my own atty. I knew prior to filing bk that my 2nd mortgage servicer didn't own my mortage. They proved this after my atty instead of defending me "BACKED DOWN" to other attys and apparently a very biased and impartial judge. The 1st if you ask me didn't prove STANDING by putting in a copy and saying 10 different entities under their umbrella own my one mortgage note! Like several others I'm a Mortgage Servicing Victim. In Dec 03 I was SOLICITED on my job by a ROGUE Debt Investor. I say ROGUE because she'll sue anyone she can to put deniro in her pocket. But her ways should come to an end soon. She's made another enemy in NY in another scenario besides myself. At any rate the collection agency I worked for NARS lied for 2.5 yrs about having the right to sell mortgage notes for Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corporation now as of 05 known as Chase Home Finance. On the board of directors shown at the Sec of State of MO is none other than TWO OF THE TOP TRUSTEES NATIONALLY. Who've I found other cases showing documentation fraud upon the court as well in various cases. Not to mention have put together the lawfirm by the top two trustees is a subsidary of 1st American Title.Subsequently, after denying me a TRO to protect my home in a Counterclaim for the actions of the bk judge and my own atty. I put in a Motion to Vacate her order. After denying me this again two months later she came back and SUA PONTE RECUSED herself. So from Frivolous to Recusal doesn't ad up. I've been trying for yrs being on the inside of the meltdown to Tell THE TRUTH. But they did remove my attys adversary that I had a copy of that he never filed. Then they also removed a page in my counterclaim telling them exactly who I am. The now third Judge Recused as well. The fourth Dismissed for a Lack of SMJ Jurisdiction. The bk judge orig on receipt of my adversary and my attys copy said TO LET COMPLAINT BE AND IT IS HEREBY DISMISSED FOR A LACK OF JURSIDICTION TO LET ADVERSARY BE AND IT IS HEREBY CLOSED. Hence my COUNTERCLAIM. I did my adversary outlined by one of the top consumer credit attys across the USA. My attys was there as well. It should of never been dismissed but the CORRUPTION IS HIGH IN ST. LOUIS. No one has ever had to answer for their actions at all. I'm now going to OSHA since they may be able to help. Everyone else has refused to. I"m not STUPID. I had bankers to spend $150,000 to $50m per month. But the BANKERS are CORRUPT . For all the AMERICANs put into a situation of not being able to pay I had a way to. Within 5 days or less my bills could of been paid off...But one banker wasn't spending enough to get Citi to deal with him...The other Citi made the buyer not perform. They wanted to make money on something once it was SOLD. How if something is SOLD do you ever make money on it? Especially when its deficiency balance mortgage notes. The worst of the worst.
I'am so confused, I have been in a lawsuit w/ameriquest for 7 yrs, the loan was sold to citi, now american home mtg owns my loan, BUT my loan is in the chicago courts. Please can someone explain what is happening. my case is w/ameriquest but now american home mtg says they have my loan...and in chicago my case is with ameriquest...
Hi guys, i like this bashing of AHM, i share no love for the name sake and any group that associates with them. I recently came across some dealings with AHM servicing. Firstly they are one of the only organizations that charge 1% to the seller for a short sale transaction. In addition when they go to place their REO properties for sale AHM servicing finds Realtors who are in bed with prospect mortgage loan officers. Prospect Mortgage is an off shoot of the old AHM retail, they utilize marketing materials along with have some key staff from AHM retail. I am not too certain of how many transferred over but the tactics in originating and the cut throat mentality are alive there. In a recent transaction i had a client be required by the listing agent on an AHM REO be approved by a Prospect Mortgage loan officer, this is a steering violation per RESPA. As i come to find out the client is offered a below market rate along with 1% for closing cost by Prospect Mortgage. When looking into how this can be i found out that the listing agent had six points on the transaction but only offered 2 to the selling agent so the assumption was that the 1% came from the listing agent to use Prospect Mortgage. I know this string of comments are mostly on the servicing but the back door dealings are everywhere for these groups. I see the issue of steering, the definition of " anytime an individual is directed to an entity for profit of the referring party",this is the short/loose definition, being performed by all the big banks, GMAC, CHASE, BOFA. my understanding is that the new CFPB or The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection is set to oversee any RESPA violations or Steering. I would like to see some action take towards the Banks who are offing these homes and then securing the new purchase business by making it a requirement from buyers to use specific sources for lending. The Game goes on!
I am going through the same thing ! PLEASE read my website and see my story ! I have an attorney on this as we speak !!! http://www.ameriquestlawsuits.com is where you can get ahold of me ! Their is help out their !!! Let me know if you have any questions !
Tried your website. It says it is expired/waiting for renewal. Just FYI.
Tried your website .. would not allow me to engage. I was with Ameriquest.I lost my job 2 months ago.. and I applied for a Loan Modification through my servicer (OCWEN ) .. They tell me that my Servicer does not allow Loan Modifications. That my Lender is Ameriquest. I advised them that Ameriquest is no longer there.. gone .. since 2007-2009 not sure.. I asked them who my investor was. they again stated for me to call Ameriquest??? Can you direct me on what to do. In doing research .. It seems the words fraud, illegal, Ocwen etc... keeps popping up. I told Ocwen, if I can not find out this information, what do I do.. They don't know?? My home for almost 20 years ..and they don't know!!! Something just ain't right. They guy had me holding 17 minutes , the reason was he had to read through 5000( yes thousands) of paper to find out who just my Lender was... again something just ain't right.. I do not want to lose my home
Town and Country is behind all of these companoes. They are thiefs and liars. They force people into a mortgage they cannot afford by inflating their income. Then they are right there to foreclose on a house and refuse to let you talk to them about a payment plan. Check them out. They should be under the microsope not the borrowers. They should not be allowed to operate
Supported videos include:
Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.