Mortgage Servicing Fraud
occurs post loan origination when mortgage servicers use false statements and book-keeping entries, fabricated assignments, forged signatures and utter counterfeit intangible Notes to take a homeowner's property and equity.
Articles |The FORUM |Law Library |Videos | Fraudsters & Co. |File Complaints |How they STEAL |Search MSFraud |Contact Us
Joe B Show full post »
Tom
Thanks Don, but I know what a Case Management Conference is. I should have been more specific. What I meant to ask is what default judgment? We are being sent to full mediation so what default would the Plaintiff or I assert?

Also what does it mean "any claimant wishing to proceed on his claims must take affirmative steps to prosecute his claims before the CMC"? If we are going to mediation what claims are there to prosecute? Mine? Theirs? And if the case is dismissed do we go to mediation?

Sorry about any confusion but I think they do things like this to purposely confuse us. They still have not proven they own the note to the judge, or the mediator, they just provided a copy of the original naming someone else. Doesn't seem anyone besides me cares if they prove it or not.
Quote 0 0
Hey Tom,

I'm no lawyer but in "guy educating himself" terms, a default judgement is a judgement in favor of the plaintiff when the defendent has failed to respond
to a summons or failed to appear.

I just helped my mom with a scenario where she was being sued and
she was served with a complaint.  If I didn't file an answer to that complaint
& just ignored it the plaintiff's would have won by a "default judgement" and would've been awarded the amount of damages pled in the original complaint.

As for the rest of that stuff, I'm not to sure.  I would try to speak with an
attorney who "gets it" & see if they can point you in the right direction.

Stay strong!

Quote 0 0
Moose wrote:
Don wrote:
Isn't it a law now that they have to work with you? (In California, non-judicial at least):

California Civil Code Section 2923.6

(a) The Legislature finds and declares that any duty
servicers may have to maximize net present value under their pooling
and servicing agreements is owed to all parties in a loan pool, not
to any particular parties, and that a servicer acts in the best
interests of all parties if it agrees to or implements a loan
modification or workout plan for which both of the following apply:
   (1) The loan is in payment default, or payment default is
reasonably foreseeable.
   (2) Anticipated recovery under the loan modification or workout
plan exceeds the anticipated recovery through foreclosure on a net
present value basis.
   (b) It is the intent of the Legislature that the mortgagee,
beneficiary, or authorized agent offer the borrower a loan
modification or workout plan if such a modification or plan is
consistent with its contractual or other authority.
  (c) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2013,
and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute,
that is enacted before January 1, 2013, deletes or extends that date.



That doesn't say they have to work with a borrower - it applies to all parties in a loan pool - as in the trustee/investors. You aren't in the pool - your loan backs the pool of securities.

The other problem is (b), above: "...if such a modification or plan is consistent with its contractual or other authority."

That contractual consistency is, in effect, the PSA and the "other authority" is FASB - the board that writes the tax law accounting rules the parties must follow regarding changes is the value of an asset (a loan) in a REMIC trust.

California can't change existing contracts nor modify FASB and Federal tax rules.

Moose


My mistake, it was California Civil Code Section 2923.5

Quote 0 0
Tommy D
No help with FHA loans...

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-264594
Quote 0 0
BOA 50000 MODS

Bank of America Has Modified 50000 Mortgages

Wall Street Journal - â€ŽMay 22, 2009‎
By RUTH SIMON Bank of America Corp. has so far modified mortgages for more than 50000 borrowers as part of its settlement of predatory lending charges ...
Quote 0 0
Well i am with EMC.They sent me make my home afordable.Bad spelling.Well it did have the goverment seal in front of it.It is suppose to be a 3 month trial period they call it and if i may on time during that period they will modify the loan.But i am far from believing this till it actually happens.My payment's which they based it on the 31% of my income came to be $336.35 a month.I had to send my income and sign the 4606 form.So i am waiting and it is suppose to be Obamas plan.Like i said we'll see what happens and i will let you know.It was suppose to be in yesterday the 31st but fed ex can't pick it up till today.
Mark
Quote 0 0
Modifications are cagey animals. The difficulty is: are you negotiating with the actual "Holder" of the note? In a majority of cases you are not. Obviously this makes the process go extremely slow.
Please do not use a non-attorney firm to modify! Chances are you can get taken for money you don't want to spend. The Attorney Generals in many states, Florida Being one, are actively trying to put these scam artists out of business.
You can go to MERS website and enter the MERS Number or address on your Mortgage Note to see who your actual lender is or who claims to be the holder. More and more attorneys and homeowners are getting Forensic Loan Audits to see if there if Fraud in their mortgage and to use as leverage for either Modification or actionable defenses in foreclosure cases. Let's face it, any advantage is better than none! The lenders hands are dirty (in general) and the servicers, (company you make payments to) are generally on a contract to get paid for collecting your money (pooling/ servicing agreements). They do not (in most cases) control the terms!
We have found that about 85% of the loans we audit to have TILA and RESPA violations. The could mean for you, the homeowner, a significant advantage that the lender does not want to face! I you are the over 1/3 of the population with ARMs, the propensity for errors and fraud substantially goes UP!
Something as small as a $35.00 error can put the lender in jeopardy for violating Federal and some state laws. Read you loan docs, If there was a pre pay, teaser rate, stated income,no-doc,2-3-5 year fixed interest only,pay option arm etc, the chances are you have a good shot at forcing negotiation or possibly getting your money back! Look into a Forensic Loan Audit, it very well can help you, take the time to educate yourself and research, we have a lot of self help links and resources.
I hope this helps in understanding the process a bit, Best wishes to all of you

Quote 0 0
Tom
The long awaited....

Update on what to expect from court appointed mediation in Ohio. In our first meeting for mediation we discovered how easy it was to totally p-off the Plaintiff’s council. Since the last meeting things have made themselves evident and are very supportive of our plight for challenging standing and lack of ownership of the note.

 

When the meeting started the mediator ran down what was discussed last time we met. Then she asked if there had been any contact between us since. The Plaintiffs council proceeded to state that they had written to us many times with no response since last year. I reminded the mediator we last met in Feb.

 

The mediator asked if there had been any offer to modify the loan and the P’s council said yes, twice actually. First was from a prior servicer which they included a copy. I said is your copy signed? Because mine was not and without their signature it was not a legal contract and was never ratified. Wouldn’t ya know he got p-d again! He said I assure you my people said it was accepted, and I replied well, your people told me it was not and no signature from them exists.

 

On to the second offer, in which he explained that he wrote me and told me what would be required for his client to do a modification, and he received nothing in response. I said sir, you never received my package with all the documentation you requested? I’m sure the mediator has her copy that I sent to her… He replied well, there was no check! I said so you received everything you needed besides the check that the judge said would be offset by the prior check for the prior modification that was never ratified but cashed by your client? Is that correct? He said yes. So he got everything he asked for but there was still a problem? Hmmm

 

And then I asked the mediator if she had given them a list of documents required from them. She said yes. I said did that include proof that they owned the note? She said yes. I said did you get that, because it wasn’t in my packet? She said no. The P’s council got p-d again! We provided proof…to which I interjected yes, proof of the assignment of mortgage, not the note. Well, he went off on his back to court tangent again. I told the mediator that there were cases in Ohio where after a modification people were subjected to further proceedings brought by the real owners of the notes and I was doing my best to make sure that didn’t happen to me.

 

I was ready for him this time though. I said could I ask you a hypothetical question on friendly terms? He said no, I’m not in the mood to give you legal advice right now! I said dude…I’m not asking you for it, and I turned to the mediator and said obviously by his stance and attitude he will never agree to any of my stipulations. I demand proof of standing and proof of ownership of the note and since mediation does not involve legal issues, please send us back to court so I can finish this.

 

The mediator said well, once this issue is taken care of, maybe we’ll…and she was cut off by P’s council…no, we won’t be back! I informed him that if the judge ordered it they would. But on second thought, no, we won’t because after we go back to court it will be over.

 

If you know you are right, don’t be intimidated. Do not give in to their idle threats. Do not trust that the mediator or the judge have any idea what you are talking about and have your best interest at heart, they do not. The mediator didn’t get the proof requested of ownership of the note, but was ready to proceed anyway.

 

I’m quite sure when we go back to court P’s council will paint me as such a bad person just trying to swindle my way out of paying. Truth is, I don’t care, I know I’m right, and the truth will set me free, finally. I will by the way post the outcome if I am not placed under a gag order or something. Until then, fight! And good luck.


Quote 0 0
Moose wrote:
Buddy Toth wrote:
Make sure you are Speaking with the Lender and Not the Servicer.


With all due respect, Buddy, the lender is no longer a part of the legal landscape UNLESS they still own the note and/or mortgage, which is rare.
Quote:
Moose is this personal? I don't even know you! The legal landscape is interested in the holder in due course, which is the indirect point I attempted to make, The point being, there will probably be problems negotiating a mod if it is investor owned, does not the owner "holder" have to approve a change in terms? I am not an attorney, just a concerned citizen regarding the fraudulent acts the lenders have gotten away with

Buddy Toth wrote:
You have to understand, It costs less for the holder of the mortgage to modify it than to foreclose. On average there is  40% to 50% loss on a foreclosure and far less on a modification.


Sorry, Buddy, but that's simply not true unless the mortgage is upside down.
Quote:
Moose Are not the majority of loans, especially ones refinanced or purchased between 2002-2006 upside down

Buddy Toth wrote:
These mortgages were sold in huge “mortgage backed securities” to “holders” which employ ” trustees” to administer o the loans

Trustees don't have anything to do with administering loans. They contract that work out through Pooling and Servicing Agreements (PSAs) to mortgage servicing companies.

Quote:
I stand corrected wrong choice of words,

Buddy Toth wrote:
These holders are what are called “holders in due course” who are legally immune to many claims that your may have had against the original lender.  The trustees use this as a way to avoid lawsuits and as the defense against counterclaims that homeowners may have against them.

But many of the things that have happened are so bad that the defenses go through to that holder.

Unfortunately, that's simply not true. If you can point to a case cite that made an investor liable for the acts of a lender we'd love to see it. 

Quote:
The point is... in many cases I have seen, the trustee is filing for the foreclosure, but is not the proven "holder" here is one
LaSalleBankNAvCHARLEUSJudgeKURTZ03Jan2008 At Part 26 of the Supreme Court of the State of
New York, Kings County on the 3rd day of
January, 2008
Index No.: 2273312007

Buddy Toth wrote:
These people actually think that they are safe from lawsuits, they also think that trustees will do the right thing and modify loans where it makes sense.

Getting a trustee to modify a loan is the equivalent of herding cats. There are too many investors with competing agendas for a trustee to attempt to get them all to agree to modifications. That's why so-called modifications being done are little more than re-named forbearance agreements that protect the servicers' interests.

Quote:
One again, if the mortgage is owned by the trust how can the servicer modify it? and are they possibly creating a cloud on title. the cloud of securitization and MERS hes made a mess of tracking any ownership

Buddy Toth wrote:
You have to understand this, in most cases the trustees do not lose money on a foreclosure as they have been paid already. The mortgagor  loses the money and there are too many  that own any mortgage backed security that they are not really capable of changing the trustee’s behavior.


Trustees neither make nor lose money on a foreclosure. They are paid to perform a supervisory/monitoring function on behalf of the investors. The mortgagor is again, out of the picture. The investors in the securities win or lose based on the tranche they bought into and the strip they decided to gamble on.

Buddy Toth wrote:
So make sure you are dealing with The Actual Note Holder, Send Them A Qualified Written Request, Get A Loan Audit to find errors and force them to negotiate.


Buddy, there is no legal requirement for a so-called "Actual Note Holder" to respond to a RESPA QWR even if you could identify one UNLESS they are the same party, as in a lender holding and servicing it's own pool. The only party that has to respond to one is the contracted servicer. RESPA does not apply to trustees.

Quote:
Agreed, the point is if there is fraud in the mortgage, who answers for it? If the servicer is trying to modify and there is fraud found, does it not give the homeowner leverage to force negotiations, moreover we are seeing mostly TILA issues RESPA is secondary issue, if the loan goes to foreclosure then isn't there a cross claim that can be filed? Also a validation of debt can not be a bad thing for a homeowner to do

And in the majority of subprime loans, there is yet another party, the insurer who will have an interest in how the PSA is enforced.
Quote:
Agreed


Buddy Toth wrote:
go to ********* for helpful ideas


Buddy - who do you recommend for "forensic loan audits?" There's lots of click-through ads on your site, but tell us which one you recommend.
Quote:
I do not know what site you are looking at, i have a Forensic Loan Audit/ Order audit link directly on my site. My staff and I do the Audits using both software and physical examinations. I have a Certified Fraud Examiner, Title People, Appraisers, former underwriters and my self with over 18 years of experience in the Mortgage industry. We know what the lenders were asking for, and what to look for in a file.
Truce Moose! and thanks for the comments


Moose

Quote 0 0
Knows About Crooks

mark wrote:
Well i am with EMC.They sent me make my home afordable.Bad spelling.Well it did have the goverment seal in front of it.It is suppose to be a 3 month trial period they call it and if i may on time during that period they will modify the loan.But i am far from believing this till it actually happens.My payment's which they based it on the 31% of my income came to be $336.35 a month.I had to send my income and sign the 4606 form.So i am waiting and it is suppose to be Obamas plan.Like i said we'll see what happens and i will let you know.It was suppose to be in yesterday the 31st but fed ex can't pick it up till today.
Mark


I want to hear about what happens with this!  Keep us informed, please.





Quote 0 0
lr
We have our mortgage through Wells Fargo and it's a nightmare. We refinanced a few years ago and went through Crown Agency in RI. We were to get a fixed rate. When it came time to sign, someone came to our house. They arrived late and rushed us through the signing. Hubby and I were not very experienced in loans and such. We did ask about the rate and such, and the person said it should be exactly what we had discussed with Crown. Well, that very morning we had gotten a fax from Crown showing our fixed rate. So we signed it all. Things went along fine the first three years, but now last summer we got a letter saying our adjustable rate would be going up as of our Oct. 1, 2008 payment. It was going up over $300 more a month. We just could not afford that at all. Since our refinance, taxes have gone up and the water bill has gone up in rates (almost doubled - one more rip-off). And that miserable year or gas and oil outrage didn't help any.

We started contacting Wells Fargo last fall about getting a loan modification. I had talked to an HUG agency and that is what they advised. They said there is no reason at all why Wells can't modify for us. So we've been in the works since then. We had to fill out paperwork on our income and bills, and send up a month's worth of pay stubs, and keep calling them every week. Yet they still send letters and have even come to our house while we are at work and left notes on our door stating we are in danger of foreclosure. This past spring FINALLY we got some news from Loss Mitigation at Wells Fargo. They told us to pay a certain amount (which is very close to our old payment) for three months. They said we'd get papers in the mail showing that, and then a big payment in June, but to ignore that letter because in June they would have our modified payment ready and to contact them. Well, it's June. We paid March, April, and May on time per their new payment schedule they told us over the phone. We ignored the letter they sent showing a large payment due in June. And we've contacted early this month about what our new payment would be.
A few weeks ago the person on the phone said it was still not ready yet, so pay the same we've been paying the past three months. But mail it in. If we call to pay by phone, they will expect the large June payment. We were told to still ignore that because a modified payment is coming. This modification was going to roll-over any late pay fees and such (we were past due on one month's payment, and that too is suppose to be rolled over into our mortgage amount).

Well, today we got a letter in the mail saying we owe the big June payment (over $5000) or they will foreclose. So we just called them. They said yes, we owe that. We told them how we've been told to ignore that payment because our modified payment was suppose to be ready. They told us it is not ready and we are not even sure we qualify. We told them we were also just told a few weeks ago to just send in the payment like we have the past three months. They said - nope.

I then asked for them to send us the notes they have from our phone conversations because we were told this payment agreement. They said they do not send us those notes. I said I guess we need to start recording the phone conversations for OUR records from now on then. She said they will not speak to us if we are recording the conversation. She also said to not trust anything they say on the phone and only trust what we get in writing. I got her name and made note of the time and date. We usually try to remember that when we call, but sometimes do forget. We feel totally helpless.

I did call about getting a free or sliding scale fee kind of lawyer this past winter and was told it would probably not be worth the cost to get a lawyer. But I guess I'll call a few attorneys just to see what they say. If no one will help us, then I guess all there is left to do is make a complaint at OCC. They have a website where you can make a complaint right online. It really stinks being so helpless.

Should we all bombard some news stations about this? How about Fox News? It just seems so many people are getting ripped off and there is no help for us. We are working hard and paying our bills, yet getting screwed. This is as bad as olden days medieval tax time when they would literally take the last crumb out of your hand, just knowing you had that crumb. As if utility bills and property and state and federal taxes aren't bad enough, our mortgage companies are ripping us off too. Do they really want to own all our homes? When no one is buying right now? Or do they just threaten us with foreclosure, and play these games just to add late fees and non-payment rate increases or whatever to our amount due, so in a few years we owe them more than we already do??

Where is there to go for help? Makes me want to just walk out of the house and leave it for them. Let them pay the property taxes and keep a little oil in the tank all winter so the pipes don't freeze, and let the place rot, leaving it on the market for years without it selling (like most houses around here right now). Do they want to make money off our loan over the next 25 years, or lose money if we foreclose or abandon our house? It makes no sense at all.

Sorry for the rant. This phone call tonight with them just pushed me over the edge. I am at wit's end. Can't take it any more. A whole year of piles of paperwork and countless hours on the phone, and make so called arrangements, and all the stress. We finally thought it was coming to a good end. And now this. It's just too much.

Quote 0 0
Our bankruptcy lawyer send us a letter that Moss Codilis, L.L.P. 20 North Main Street Albion, NY 14411
 
Send to him so that they can Modify our Loan this was back in June of 2009.
 
We have send information over and over again like pay stub all income that comes in our tax's all bill's,letter asking for modification letter that we wanted our tax in escrow and a letter from our bankruptcy attorney that they can work with us.
We have send these papers over and over again because they keep saying they didn't not have then. 
 
 Since June noting has happen only that they called us and told us that we did not pay our 2008 tax's in full that we only pay half  and that we did not pay our 2009 tax's.So they ask us what we wanted to do.
 
We told them if they could pay the rest of 2008 tax's for us and for them to put it toward the back of our loan.and to pay 2009 tax's since we had ask for them to be put the tax's in Escrow with the modification so they ask us to put it in writing so my husband did the letter and we both sign it and we fax it to them. I called to see if they got it and they said yes.As of yet no Mordifcation Just two letters billing us.
 
Now they are billing us saying we have to give 907.06 extra with our mortgage payment if not they will charge interest.  We called them again telling them and they said pay what you could so that what we are doing.But what happen with the modifcation I don't know .And I Have to check the Numbers because I think they are charging us more then what they paid for the tax's.
 
Smurf
Quote 0 0
Still Waiting
So, I was told to expect the paperwork (from Litton Loan) to be delivered by Fed Ex in a couple of days.  I guess Fed Ex has to walk the paperwork to my house by way of China. Or maybe Larry has been too busy playing golf or overseeing the newest yacht he's having built off the wonderful business practices he portrays to his victims.

I will be watching to see when my home goes up for bids at the Sheriff's auction in the meantime...


Quote 0 0
The Equitable One
Fed Ex has set up two new and special services to handle Litton Loan deliveries. One is carrier pigeon, the other is pack mule.
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...