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

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/personalfinance/stories/012808dnbusperfiside.2d28556.html

Contact your mortgage loan servicer about troubles.                                                    By law, disputes over mortgage charges or fees must be answered quickly      

01:06 AM CST on Monday, January 28, 2008

By PAMELA YIP / The Dallas Morning News
pyip@dallasnews.com

Under the federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, your mortgage servicer must respond promptly to your written inquiries.

Also Online If your mortgage lender goes bankrupt, don't panic

If you think you've been charged a penalty or a late fee that you don't owe or if you have other problems with the servicing of your loan, continue to make your regular monthly mortgage payment, and contact your servicer in writing in a separate communication.

Send your letter – including your account number and an explanation of why you think your account is incorrect – to the customer service address. Don't write your note on your payment coupon.

Keep copies of all correspondence.

The servicer must acknowledge your inquiry in writing within 20 business days of receiving it, and take action within 60 business days.

The servicer must correct your account or determine that the accounting is accurate, and then send you a written notice of the action it took and why, and the name and phone number of someone to contact for more information or help. Don't subtract the disputed amount from your mortgage payment.

Some mortgage servicers may refuse to accept what they consider a "partial" payment. They could return your check and charge you a late fee, or claim that your mortgage is in default and start foreclosure proceedings.

RESOURCES

·         To file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission call 1-877-382-4357 or go to http://www.ftc.gov

·         To file a complaint with the US Department of Housing and Urban Development call 202-708-0502 or email to hsg-respa@hud.gov    

wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww   January 30, 2008

Submitted by Ed Cage  |  Plano Texas  |  972-596-4363  |  ecagetx@gmail.com

Quote 0 0
noodles
We have ALL done this.
Every single one of us here have written RESPA letters.
They GO UNANSWERED!

WE HAVE REPORTED THE CRIMES TO HUD, AND FTC.
THEY HAVE DONE NOTHING ABOUT IT.

SO NOW WHAT?

Well at leat the article was written for others to see, and hopefully others will call, file complaints, and so forth.
But NO RESULTS ARE EXPECTED FOR THEM EITHER.

THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT DOING THEIR JOB.

Quote 0 0

noodles wrote:

"Well at leat the article was written for others to see, and

hopefully others will call, file complaints, and so forth.
But NO RESULTS ARE EXPECTED FOR THEM EITHER.
THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT DOING THEIR JOB."

 

 

noodles I couldn't agree more.. I had to hold my nose while posting

this article from my local Dallas Morning News.. But I do have a question

regarding something in the article I had not seen before.. Perhaps you

or someone could help me.

 

I was unaware of this caveat in the law: "The servicer must

acknowledge your inquiry in writing within 20 business days

of receiving it, and take action within 60 business days."

 

Have you or anyone highlighted that apparent law?  If so has there been

any response by the servicer?

 

Has anyone reported a servicer to the RESOURCES I posted and listed?

RESOURCES

·         To file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission call 1-877-382-4357 or go to http://www.ftc.gov

·         To file a complaint with the US Department of Housing and Urban Development call 202-708-0502 or email to hsg-respa@hud.gov   

If so, what response if any has been received?

 

wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww   January 30, 2008

Submitted by Ed Cage  |  Plano Texas  |  972-596-4363  |  ecagetx@gmail.com






Quote 0 0
Joe B

Ed-

     I think the requirement is in the underlying RESPA law; it is indeed a requirement. Incidentally, as nearly everyone here knows, it doesn't mean they have to resolve it in any way, or even do anything to make you happy. It only means that within 20 days, you should get a letter saying they got your letter, and will respond with a determination in 60 days. They then have to give you a response in 60 days.

     I have written many of these letters, only rarely get the 20 day response, and occasionally get the 60 day letter, that is essentially a form letter. So, there's what should be done, and what is done. It is clear that many servicers follow the letter of the law, but certainly not the spirit of the law. I am sure that others can corroborate my experience.


JB
Quote 0 0

Joe THANKS for your prompt and savvy response!!
 
I'm going to construct a certified letter to EMC Mortgage Servicing and
direct it to the top two EMC executives that I know of. One of them is
President, COO, and Director John Vella right here in my back yard at
the Lewisville Texas EMC/Bear Stearns office.
 
I will make it clear I'm going to post the letter to him and EMC online and
I'll throw in a couple of attorneys friendly to EMC executives as well. 
Part of my letter will emphasize the fact that I will press a lot harder
than most complainers do when it comes to the AG, DOJ, and primarily
the Federal Trade Commission and the US Department of Housing and

Urban Development.
 
I'll post my proposed letter by week's end and let's see if we can get more

than a routine form letter from EMC this time.

 

wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww   January 30, 2008

Submitted by Ed Cage  |  Plano Texas  |  972-596-4363  |  ecagetx@gmail.com

 


Quote 0 0
Moose
Ed, the only downside to the RESPA process is the penalties for them not responding or fixing the problem are relatively small and have to come through prevailing in a civil suit that you have to bring.

However, as I've mentioned before, he who has the most paper usually prevails, and if you can demonstrate a pattern and practice of failing to follow the act, it can damage the credibility of their evidence.

Moose


Quote 0 0
Moose wrote:
"..if you can demonstrate a pattern and practice of failing

to follow the act, it can damage the credibility of their

evidence."

 

 

Thanks for your help Moose.  Can you please *elaborate*
on your above statement?
 

Thanks again.

MR ;^D


Quote 0 0
noodles
Ed Cage wrote:

I was unaware of this caveat in the law: "The servicer must

acknowledge your inquiry in writing within 20 business days

of receiving it, and take action within 60 business days."

 

Have you or anyone highlighted that apparent law?  If so has there been

any response by the servicer?

 

Has anyone reported a servicer to the RESOURCES I posted and listed?

If so, what response if any has been received?


You asked questions I've got answers.
RESPA, (Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act) which is governed by HUD (Housing of Urban Development) has Laws, Rules, and Regs. That a Servicer Msut follow.

This is where a "Qualified Written Request" comes from aka Q.W.R or QWR.

A QWR is a letter the borrower sends to their SERVICER, in either asking questions about their loan or pointing out errors.

A QWR should ALWAYS, and I do mean ALWAYS, be sent CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT, SIGNATURE REQUIRED.
The cost is $5.17 for every letter sent this way.

Once the Mortgage Servicer Receives Your QWR, they have 20 days to send you an "Acknowledgment" letter.

their letter will read something like; "We have received correspondence from you and be assured we take your concerns seriously, and will get back with you as soon as there are some resolves to the issues at hand."

Do they "ALWAYS" send an "ACKNOWLEDGMENT" letter? NO!
Did they get it? YES they did, you have the signature card with their "stamp" on it. (a person designated as the mail pick up, usually uses a stamp instead of signing their signature constantly). You have the Certified Mail, tracking number. And you printed the U.S. Postal Service, document stating delivery date and time, from http://www.usps.com.

So they have your letter but no "Acknowledgment" letter from them within the 20 day period. Hmmm, what to do? Well.... you still have to wait for the 60 day, "RESPONSE" Letter to arrive. If they have not RESPONDED to you stating they either CAN resolve, the matters, or CANNOT resolve them; then you have right to file a Small Claim against them for "FAILURE to RESPOND" (a process done at your local court house.) You do not need an Attorney for this, but if you choose to get an attorney for the Small Claims, then all Legal Fees, and Attorneys Fees will be paid by the SERVICER, if the ruling is in your favor. (which should be ruled in your favor, since you have the appropriate documentation, to show their Negligence.)

You also have the right to contact RESPA, and inform them of the Negligence of your Mortgage Servicer.

You also have the right to call the FTC, and inform them of your complaints as well.


Will RESPA do anything on your behalf?
They are supposed to aren't they???!
But do they? NO They do not!
they will answer any questions you have, but that's about as far as it goes with RESPA.

What about the FTC? (Federal Trade Commission).
You File a complaint, will they do anything about the matter?
NO THEY WILL NOT.
Will they give you any information as to how many complaints have been filed against your servicer? NO THEY WILL NOT.
What they will tell you is, they are taking your information and adding it to their database, and when enough complaints come in about "A" Servicer, the FTC ATTORNEYS, will begin a review of the complaints, and they may decide to file action against the Servicer. "but that is no guarantee" and it could be years, as no time limit can be given/or was given.


Will the FTC, act on your "sole" behalf over an issue? "NO THEY WILL NOT"

Will the FTC contact you if they have decided to contact your Servicer? "NO THEY WILL NOT"
So, hmmm, the FTC may decide to make a phone call to them, on your behalf if they so choose, and will NOT let you know if they have. But again, THEY WILL NOT.

So have you received any RESOLVE to the over billing, Negligence, Errors, Fraud, illicit collections, Fees, Escrows, or any other matters, FROM THE FTC or your SERVICER? NO YOU HAVE NOT, AND WILL NOT.

NOT until enough people have called FTC, and filed complaints about the SERVICER.

so how many complaints does it take "BEFORE" the FTC will step in and investigate "THEE" Servicer? "NO ANSWER COULD BE GIVEN!" "NO SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF COMPLAINTS".

So when will the FTC get off their _ _ _ and do their job?
When ever they Freaking feel like it.

It's sickening really. 

I echo what the others have said, Paper trail, and documentation is a MUST DO.
Even if they are not responding to your QWR's; when you have a problem, keep sending them.

Every error, or issue should have a separate QWR written.
Never "combine" errors or issues.

Example of the wrong QWR:
Dear Money Sucking Servicer,
You charged me for home owners Insurance on 7/07/2014, and we already had home owners insurance.

You also told me last time we spoke on the phone you have not received my February 14, 2014 payment as of yet.
I'm showing you cashed the check so where is the payment we made?

******* Those are both problems you might have with your account. & Both of those problems should be written in Separate letters.

Writing a QWR is pretty simple really, when you have a billing statement error. but when it is an error you have discovered within, the Account History Pages, it becomes a little more complicated when you have to see what other "affects, or effects" have transpired on your loan because of that ONE erroneous charge they made against your account.

********

If you see 10 other problems relating to the Home owners charge, then include all 10 of those problems in the same QWR.

********
You ALWAYS want to make sure you have your "FACTS" straight, and correct.
Don't "GUESS" at anything.
It's okay to ask questions, but do not ask them in a blatantly accusatory manner.
However, ask in such a manner that they HAVE to answer with a yes or no, and cannot ignore the question.

So how often can a home owner send a QWR? As often as they need to.
They, can send one today, and another tomorrow, but not over the same issue.

I offer a suggestion for each QWR you write (the suggestion for the numbering of the QWR was taken from Dee)

At the top of your QWR, you want it to look Something like this.

"QUALIFIED WRITTEN REQUEST"

NUMBER 15

Note: Corporate Advance Fees of $3,2470.92 charged on 07/07/2023


(That would be your header,)
then make sure to include "I understand that you have 20 days to "Acknowledge" receipt of this QWR, and 60 days to "RESPOND".

Sincerely,
your name.

So what happens if your Servicer does send you a Response, within the 60 days but fails to correct their error?

You can either choose to send them the same, QWR, with failure to "RESOLVE" their error, added to your letter. and wait another 60 days.

or You can file small claims suit against them for their negligence, and account misrepresentations.


Read your QWR before sending it out, READ it again, and Proof Read it one more time, and VERIFY dates, times, names, amounts EACH TIME YOU PROOF READ.

If you discover later that you made an ERROR or have an ERROR on that QWR, then you need to send an "AMENDMENT LETTER"! ASAP!

Also sent Certified mail, return Receipt, Signature Required.

Your "Amendment Letter" should look like this
at the top.

 

AMENDMENT TO QWR NUMBER 15

NOTE:Corporate Advance Fees of $3,247.92 charged on 07/07/2023

 

I have come to the realization there is a correction that must be made to QWR Number 15.

Please take not of the RED BOLD FONT, as this is the correction.

 

On 07/08/2023, you charged our account $3,247.92

Sincerely,

your name

 

(your foot note will say)

Please be sure to add this amendment to QWR sent to you on 12/19/2023, received by you on 12/23/2023 and titled QWR NUMBER 15.

 

It doesn't matter if you spotted the error you made a year later. GET THAT amendment letter out ASAP.

 

Always make sure you keep a copy of every letter you send to them.

Always keep the letters they send back to you and NEVER THROW AWAY THE ENVELOPES!

 

Every time any letter comes from them, even the billing statements, I write in small writing on the back, of the envelope. "Recv'd in mail 09/07/2023"

IF, I have to SEPARATE the letter from the envelope, I then write on the back of the envelope.

"Billing statement, dated 08/30/2023".

I look for the date on their document, so I can later associate the letter, with the correct envelope.

 

if they do NOT have a date on their document, then I flip the document over, and write the date it was received in mail box on the back of that doc.

 

It is extremely important to get some sort of organization going, when pertaining to your Mortgage account.

 

You should have a designated area, to place any and all documents concerning your home, when they come in the mail.

this space should not be used for other mail.

 

Working on the Servicing, of your account and all the erroneous charges, and blatant errors, is time consuming. So you want to save time, by have a designated pile, until you can find the time to work on those documents.

 

as soon as you are done. Get 3 copies made of the documents.

Get the originals to a SAFE, SECURE, LOCKED up place.

 

Now you have 3 copies of every document, what will you do with all?

Send one set of documents with a trusted source, friend neighbor, relative, for them to keep hidden away for you.

 

Send the second set, to yet another source.

 

The third copy keep at home, so you can work on your account, when you are able (time permitting).

 

 

Doing ALL of this is the biggest pain in the a_ _. I have ever experienced, but my BUTT is covered, and I CAN PROVE FRAUD. TIME AND TIME AGAIN, MONTH, AFTER MONTH, WITH EVERY SERVICING COMPANY THAT HAS BEEN INVOLVED WITH OUR SUPPOSED LOAN.

 

THE END: LOL!

Hope that answers questions and helps provide more organization.

 

 

Quote 0 0
Moose
Ed Cage wrote:
Moose wrote:
"..if you can demonstrate a pattern and practice of failing

to follow the act, it can damage the credibility of their

evidence."

 

 

Thanks for your help Moose.  Can you please *elaborate*
on your above statement?
 

Thanks again.

MR ;^D



Ed, businesses and their counsel pretty much get a free pass from the courts based on the theory that they operate in good faith and take reasonable steps to ensure they are doing the right thing in terms of compliance with regulations.

It is difficult to overcome that bias. When confronted, the issue is usually pointed to as something that they have made significant investments in appopriate controls to prevent such issues and of course, most or all of the blame rests with the borrower.

But when they demonstrate repeated failure to follow the terms of the act, they quickly lose credibility; it is their business to know RESPA and have processes that adhere to it.  Non-compliance is one thing; multiple instances means their "appropriate controls" aren't. 

Moose
Quote 0 0
Moose

noodles wrote:
...then you have right to file a Small Claim against them for "FAILURE to RESPOND" (a process done at your local court house.) You do not need an Attorney for this, but if you choose to get an attorney for the Small Claims, then all Legal Fees, and Attorneys Fees will be paid by the SERVICER, if the ruling is in your favor. (which should be ruled in your favor, since you have the appropriate documentation, to show their Negligence.)


Noodles, this isn't legal advice but you can't have an attorney represent you in small claims courts. If you really do have the documentation, almost any attorney with actual trial litigation experience could slam dunk a bona fide RESPA violation and recover his or her fees.

The question becomes, "why don't they?"

Because almost inevitably, the borrower has some significant history of issues with the servicer by the time they find out they need an attorney. And instead of a simple boiler-plate RESPA case, they're faced with a tangled, poorly documented and almost unsupportable assortment of other claims.  And the borrower can't afford to pay them the amounts that they'd have to advance and only perhaps recover in a civil suit.

And if you do file it yourself in a small-claims setting, they will have it removed to Federal court almost instantly on jurisdictional grounds. Although you save the $350 Federal filing fee and you don't, Federal courts are not friendly to pro se litigants and you can be motion-practiced into oblivion rather quickly.

Use RESPA as a chain of legally timely documentation from which a case can be built if need be.

noodles wrote:

You also have the right to contact RESPA, and inform them of the Negligence of your Mortgage Servicer. 


I belive you mean HUD.  RESPA is the act, HUD is the department.

Moose

Quote 0 0
Quote:
 If you really do have the documentation, almost any attorney with actual trial litigation experience could slam dunk a bona fide RESPA violation and recover his or her fees.

Moose,
Please email me.

Ann
Quote 0 0

1-31-08

 

Dear noodles, Joe B., Moose, and Ann:

Sincere thanks to all of you.  I have decided to do something

rather unique in that I intend to send the certified letter directly

to John Vella. Vella appears to be the President, COO, and

Director of EMC. I do know he fits in rather well at EMC. My

experience has been that he will employee the standard

EMC/Bear duck out and delegate strategy and stonewall me

into eternity as quick as anyone at Bear/EMC. Perhaps that’s

how he got to be top gun at EMC but I wouldn’t be bugging

him if I hadn’t been shuffled off to Buffalo multiple times by

every imaginable subordinate all the way up to his door.  

 

Moose you made an excellent point about judges having a

predisposed bias that the businesses and their counsel pretty

much get a free pass from the courts based on the theory

that they operate in good faith and take reasonable steps to

ensure they are doing the right thing in terms of compliance

with regulations.  I'm hoping that efforts like ours and all the

dreadful media coverage the mortgage servicers have received

recently will somewhat be considered. I know that as recently

as three years ago I thought those being evicted were 95%

deadbeats who got in over their head.

 

Boy was I wrong.

 

Moose I have always been a huge advocate of tracking a *pattern*

to document clear and convincing evidence of virtually any point

one is trying to make.. You can say “that's an isolated example” once

or twice but after that the *pattern* that consistently favors the same

side over and over will almost always point to the real truth. 

 

Finally one more thing that one of you pointed out is oh-so-true: Judges

do not like pro se attorneys. .. And with good reason; their job becomes

much harder and if I were a judge I'm certain I'd feel much the same way.

I learned that one in the battlefield.. But I've presented many cases pro

se and won most of them.

 

But boy have I lost a couple I never should have lost!  On the other hand,

I do not recall losing a single lawsuit when represented by counsel at

decision time. 

 

Is this site a good format?

http://www.hud.gov/offices/hsg/sfh/res/reslettr.cfm

 

If so I'll construct and POST my own ultra high profile RESPA letter. This
may be a two edged sword:  On one hand I can offer the highest ranking

mortgage servicing officer a chance to quite publicly do the right thing.

However if egos get involved he may roll out some heavy duty "muddy-

the-water" attorneys specializing in double-speak, stonewalling and

endless stalling.

 

                                          One thing is certain:

If I send my complaint to Bear/EMC research it goes into a

                  black hole never to be heard from again.

 

wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww   January 31, 2008

Submitted by Ed Cage  |  Plano Texas  |  972-596-4363  |  ecagetx@gmail.com

Quote 0 0
Joe B

Ed-

     I am not going to try and talk you out of your strategy. However, I would at least like to offer some thoughts for you to consider. I am making an inference from your posts in general that this is not an acute problem you are facing, i.e. you are not facing an imminent foreclosure. Therefore, with the luxury of time, and the ability to give this issue some proper attention, there might be an alternate approach.

     I am a big fan of trying to get the Company's attention long before I resort to getting a lawyer involved; even if that final involvement is nothing more than my attorney writing a letter. The reason I choose to do this, is generally it is far less of a threat to respond to a consumer, rather than an attorney. It also affords me the opportunity to probe the company's possible response, and plan my next move.

     The one danger implicit in going right to the top, is that you generally are not seen as anything other than a nutcase, and your "issue" gets sent down to some customer service manager to address, with or without the CEO signature. It rarely truly gets the attention of senior management, even though that is the intent. In most cases, the administrative assistant reads the letter, and forwards it straight to that department, and the CEO never even reads it. When you consider the current climate, most of these CEOs are busy fending off the Feds, the SEC, trying to protect their jobs, and their stock price, etc. I am not sure your letter gets past the gatekeepers.

     The thing I would like you to consider is whether or not you should try to keep some powder dry. By that I mean, if you do not get any satisfaction from the CEO, who's left? Essentially, you have used up your powder, and your next shot is going to be litigation. A letter to the Board might be possible, but again, not likely to get much traction.

     However, a strategy I usually try to deploy involves identifying someone in a relatively senior position (i.e. with the authority to solve my problem), but still with a few layers of management above her, in case it is not resolved.

     Then, if it eventually ends up on the CEOs desk, you can point to all the various attempts you have made, and all the people in the organization that have failed to respond to a legitimate consumer problem. This might actually get past the gatekeeper, because you now have named all the people in the CEOs organization that you have tried to work with to solve your problem; you seem reasonable. Imagine if this issue eventually does end up in court; you can point to all the people you reached out to for help that failed to assist you in any way. There is little plausible deniability when you can show this paper trail of failure of the management team to help solve your problem.

     Again Ed, I am not trying to change your mind, because I think your approach has merit. However, if you think about how you might respond (as the CEO) to someone in both these scenarios. As long as the person is being reasonable, I think you would want to help the person who has legitimately tried to solve a problem without the hammer of litigation, and within your management team first, before landing on your desk. I would then see you engaging your management team to understand what has happened, and respond yourself. If it comes straight to your desk, you delegate it to someone else and forget all about it. At least, I think this is how I see it playing out...

     All that being said, I would ensure that they know you are prepared to litigate through inference at first, and then increasingly more obvious as it moves up the food chain.

     I hope I have offered something of value, and you have not perceived this as anything other than something to consider. Good luck with whatever you decide, and let me know if I can help.

JB

    

 
Quote 0 0

JB thanks for your help and input. I’m actually almost halfway paid off on a 30 year note in less than 3 years. I took 30 years when I didn’t need it to get a better rate.

 

The two snafus I’m addressing took place in the 3rd month of a 720 month note. The first one was in April 2005 when I enclosed a regular payment and a $35,000 “principal only” payment in the same envelope and James Brantley of AMC elected to hold the “principal only” payment an extra day while depositing the regular payment the prior day thus costing me about $200+ when compared with depositing the same two checks at once as they simultaneously received them.

 

The next month (May 2005) I sent in a regular payment and included as I often do what I intended to be another “principal only” ($1,000) payment. I made a clerical error however this time and accidentally wrote “interest only” which is/was pure profit for AMC and did nothing to further the payment of my loan. This time AMC (James Brantley) did deposit both checks the same day at the same time and immediately “transferred” my note to EMC.  Although I did get both AMC and EMC to acknowledge it was a clerical error (obviously) my promised reapplication of my $1,000 never took place. When the opportunistic Brantley of AMC spotted the snafu he promptly dumped the remaining $73,000+ note on EMC and represented it to have a balance of $74,000.  EMC didn’t know it at the time but AMC had just snapped them off for $1,000. (Using round numbers)  How ironic.. And I thought there was honor among thieves..

 

In the interim I have made about three dozen calls, three dozen emails, and perhaps 25 letters to AMC and ACC. Obviously many were at lower levels, mid levels, etc. And more than half were to upper management, Assistant to the President James Brantley, Chief Counsel for ACC Eileen Rubens (Honest, very professional, very helpful btw) and then Chief Counsel for AMC and more currently an AMC (defunct) Board of Directors member Diane Tiberend.  

 

As for EMC over the last 32 months I have made an estimated 100 phone calls to EMC customer service, 50 calls to EMC Supervisors and perhaps 25 calls to upper Executive management at EMC. I have also sent perhaps 40 emails and dozens of letters to all levels of EMC including the black hole called the “research department.” I have personally been advised in writing by the second in command at EMC that my $1,000 was correctly reapplied after my “interest only” clerical error to principal. Some dates I was given in writing were first August 31, 2005; the second date I was given was November 8, 2005. (Both were bogus)  In addition to being bogus the point that really burned me up was that they weren’t even applied on the correct date of May, 3 2005!!     

      A huge difference. 

 

Finally I was assured by what appears to be the second in command at EMC that I “had been told numerous times that my $1,000 was correctly reapplied to principal on May 3, 2005.” This was also in writing but again every time I was told that it turned out to be bogus as in false.

 

Fortunately the people in MSF have no trouble believing this astonishingly blatant attempt to defraud.  Unfortunately the mainstream including the judiciary may be inclined to think the story is too incredible to be true.. Hopefully we are helping to change that mindset. Thank God the documented records don’t lie. 

 

I have swamped EMC with letters and emails and calls to all levels for 31 months. I have caught them in whopper after whopper. This week I talked to the executive secretary at EMC/Bear and she told me they have a lengthy file on me. I have sent notices that I intend to sue as well.  They know who I am.

 

More importantly their own records support what I claim. The many victims in MSF and mortgage servicing fraud believe and in fact, KNOW this stuff and more goes on.  JB I think this would be an excellent letter and case to post publicly, blow by blow.  If EMC finally does the right thing, they look good.

wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww   February 1, 2008

Submitted by Ed Cage  |  Plano Texas  |  972-596-4363  |  ecagetx@gmail.com

Quote 0 0
Joe B
Ed-

     Thank you for the detailed response; I now know far more about your situation that before I wrote my thoughts.

     I agree that your direction is spot on, and I wouldn't leave anything out as far as who you contacted and when. Even though this will be voluminous, it also demonstrates that you have exhausted every option before pursuing litigation. Likewise, I wouldn't hesitate to have a well written letter from a lawyer in whom you are confident, that would outline many possible courses of action you are considering should this not be resolved. I would also make this time bound; in other words, if not resolved by x-date. If not, it may take far too long. However, if you tell them that unless it is resolved by whatever date you feel is reasonable, you are going to pursue other remedies, etc.

     Given the realities of the current climate, and the appearance that the judiciary is growing tired of the garbage being promulgated by these companies, I think you will have a better reception than just six months ago.

     Thanks for all the information, and let me know if you think I can help.

JB
Quote 0 0

Thanks JB.

Your vote of confidence and support means a lot to me.  A couple

things I might also add regarding the timing factors:

 

1) I have not yet filed a 2005 income tax return as a result of this.

Even though the AMC 1098 form for 2005 helps my 2005 income

tax in terms of a higher (albeit falsely inflated) amount of interest

paid in 2005, if I had filed a false claim on 2005 it would/could come

back to haunt me. As you know when you get into these things one

wants to bat as close to 1000% as possible.  The slightest snafu

may wind up being a centerpiece issue to discredit me.

 

2) There may or may not be a statute of limitations for fraud in Texas.

While there may exist a broad criminal statute as there often is exempting

a complaint of fraud from time limitations there may also be separate

specific provisions for mortgage fraud. In April 2008 it will be 3 years

but I doubt seriously that's the cut-off date. It's an unknown but pertinent

factor I need to research.

 

3) Obviously there is a time factor related to when you file your 1040

IRS 2005 income tax return.  That would be April 15, 2009.

 

4) We also want to pay off (God willing) our house before Jan. 1, 2011.

We have other plans which may include renting our home and/or

selling it but I'll be damned if I won't change everything even for a small

amount of money to ensure that neither AMC or EMC/Bear cheat us
out of a nickel.

 

Thank God I’m among people who know these wild “yarns” are common

and more often than not true in mortgage servicing.   If I told this story

at a cocktail party they’d ask me to leave because I appeared to have

had too many drinks.

 

MR >;~{ ED  <===Mad version of Mr Ed

wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww   February 1, 2008

Submitted by Ed Cage  |  Plano Texas  |  972-596-4363  |  ecagetx@gmail.com


Quote 0 0
noodles
Ed,

you said you have not filed you 2005 taxes because of the over inflation of your interest paid?

have you thought of calling your local IRS, office to speak with them concerning the issue?

Also did you know that the IRS will do your TAXES  "FREE OF CHARGE"?

you just need to set up an appointment with them, and bring the necessary paperwork.

Imagine that, filing your 2005 taxes with the IRS themselves... That would keep you out of hot water with the IRS!

Just some thoughts to ponder.

One more question to ask here.
Are you sure you have until 4/05/2009 to get the 2005 taxes filed? I remember the filing law changed. Didn't the law change to 3 years?
If thats the case, this might be your last year to collect any money on your 2005 taxes.

You might want to check if you have any questions about the filing period timelines, just to be sure.

I do think I'd be speaking with the IRS, and when and if you do, MAKE SURE TO MENTION the NAME of your servicer.

LOL I'd be asking them questions too such as, so has the IRS ever had problems with complaints of taxes from this company?

Have they been involved in Tax Fraud?
Has the IRS investigated, or fined this company for tax fraud?

You might luck up and get some good info. there.

Good Luck



Quote 0 0
You sure are trusting.

I'd rather walk on razor blades than have interaction with the IRS.

I use a CPA with tons of IRS experience.

If I felt the interest was over reported?  Why not calculate the interest
that should be used instead?  Just run the amortization program to see
how much you should be credited for and request the smaller amount to
be deducted?

Type in your browser:  mortgage calculator.  Select the calculator you want to use.  Enter the information requested.  Hit enter and up pops your info
which will include Principal, interest that you want on a month to month
basis for the entire period of your loan.  If you have an arm that resets
the interest rate, just run it again.  Omit the previous calculations and start with month 1 of the new interest rate. 

Servicers can't produce the correct information or so they say. 

Many people have notified the IRS of the conduct of the servicers relative
to the interest and we don't know whatever comes of these comlaints.

This is just a thought to consider.  I don't like seeing potential trouble
with the IRS.

Maybe a CPA would see something different to do besides not filing.

Dee


Quote 0 0
noodles
I don't view it as a "trust" issue.

What you have said Dee, does make sense.
However, if you have never done anything wrong by way of taxes, and IRS then there would be nothing to worry about.

You are correct a CPA is another Avenue to try, but they are not free, and can be quite costly.

The IRS, already has it documented in their system, that he hasn't filed his 2005 income taxes yet. And if he has not already received a notice from the IRS, he SOON WILL.

Not to worry Ed, it is a friendly notice (if you want to call it that) about your failure to file. Asking you please do so as soon as possible.

When one suffers from Mortgage Servicing Fraud, and they know the tax information reported from the SERVICER is incorrect, it can be a bit of a pinch, and keeping the home owner from filing in a timely manner.

Several of us have been in the same boat.


Take note ED, the IRS will not come after you because you have NOT filed your 2005 taxes yet. "NOT WHILE YOU ARE WITHIN THEIR GRACE PERIOD."

*All of this is based upon the assumption that you will NOT OWE the IRS, and that you are EXPECTED to receive a REFUND of the 2005 income taxes.


**If you owe the IRS money for 2005... THEN YOU HAVE A PROBLEM AND NEED TO RESOLVE IT ASAP.


***Another note: If you WAIT too long, and the Grace period has ended the IRS will send you a NOTICE stating you OWE THEM MONEY, BECAUSE YOU FAILED TO FILE. THE MONEY YOU WILL OWE THE IRS WILL BE BASED UPON THE AMOUNT OF MONEY YOU WERE EXPECTING TO SEE IN A REFUND, AND THEY WILL COMPOUND INTEREST TO THAT TOTAL.

YES.....EVEN IF YOU WERE "DUE" A REFUND.

Please do take care of this matter as soon as possible, to avoid further stress.

Assuming you've always been diligent with taxes, and reported them correctly.... Right now the IRS has nothing against you and no reason to pursue further actions on your 2005 taxes.

Whether you go to the IRS, or a CPA; doesn't really matter; but it should be done soon.
Quote 0 0

noodles wrote:

"You might want to check if you have any questions about the filing period

timelines, just to be sure.

I do think I'd be speaking with the IRS, and when and if you do, MAKE SURE

TO MENTION the NAME of your servicer.

LOL I'd be asking them questions too such as, so has the IRS ever had

problems with complaints of taxes from this company?

Have they been involved in Tax Fraud?
Has the IRS investigated, or fined this company for tax fraud?"

 

 

 

 

Dear noodles: I eat numbers alive and spit them out.

 

* My calculations on municipal and county bonds have been

published and printed in several newspapers.

 

* I was hired by Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones in the mid 90's

to calculate the exit fees and tax implications for the Cowboys

withdrawing from Irving and moving to another venue. Again my

figures were published in several metro newspapers. Again no one

took exception to anything.

 

* I have been on local TV here in Plano debating both the Mayor

and the Plano Chief Financial officer at the same time on the

subject of "Pay as You Go vs. Long Term Financing.”  Again no

mistakes.  (No mistakes ever on my numerous public calculations.)
In fact I got my way and Plano is now proudly a model for other
cities on using "Pay as You Go."  

 

Noodles, no offense but it's hardly an area I need tips on.  

 

The reason I haven't filed my 2005 return yet is because the supporting documentation from AMC/EMC/Bear is incorrect. Although it gives me a $1,000 higher interest paid write-off I'm still not going to back myself in a corner if/when I sue EMC/Bear and have them ask, "So Mr Cage you knowingly filed an incorrect 1040 without supporting documentation for 2005?" if I can help it..

 

The deadline for 2005 is 3 years past the date they were due i.e.; April 15, 2006 which would be April 15, 2009 unless you filed an extension which would make it circa August 17, 2009.

 

Calling an IRS clerk or operative to complain about a bogus 1098 from another company and asking if they’ve ever had “complaints” about them will do you 0.00% good.

 

                                    If it is to be, it is up to me.

 

Those who rely on others to bail them out get left behind.  Those numbers areas are a very strong point with me.. But I know you mean well.  - Ed

 

BACK-ON-TRACK:

 

-------  POST ONE ON: ------- 
 

"JB thanks for your help and input. I’m actually almost halfway paid off on a 30 year note in less than 3 years. I took 30 years when I didn’t need it to get a better rate.

 

The two snafus I’m addressing took place in the 3rd month of a 720 month note. The first one was in April 2005 when I enclosed a regular payment and a $35,000 “principal only” payment in the same envelope and James Brantley of AMC elected to hold the “principal only” payment an extra day while depositing the regular payment the prior day thus costing me about $200+ when compared with depositing the same two checks at once as they simultaneously received them.

 

The next month (May 2005) I sent in a regular payment and included as I often do what I intended to be another “principal only” ($1,000) payment. I made a clerical error however this time and accidentally wrote “interest only” which is/was pure profit for AMC and did nothing to further the payment of my loan. This time AMC (James Brantley) did deposit both checks the same day at the same time and immediately “transferred” my note to EMC.  Although I did get both AMC and EMC to acknowledge it was a clerical error (obviously) my promised reapplication of my $1,000 never took place. When the opportunistic Brantley of AMC spotted the snafu he promptly dumped the remaining $73,000+ note on EMC and represented it to have a balance of $74,000.  EMC didn’t know it at the time but AMC had just snapped them off for $1,000. (Using round numbers)  How ironic.. And I thought there was honor among thieves..

 

In the interim I have made about three dozen calls, three dozen emails, and perhaps 25 letters to AMC and ACC. Obviously many were at lower levels, mid levels, etc. And more than half were to upper management, Assistant to the President James Brantley, Chief Counsel for ACC Eileen Rubens (Honest, very professional, very helpful btw) and then Chief Counsel for AMC and more currently an AMC (defunct) Board of Directors member Diane Tiberend. 

 

As for EMC over the last 32 months I have made an estimated 100 phone calls to EMC customer service, 50 calls to EMC Supervisors and perhaps 25 calls to upper Executive management at EMC. I have also sent perhaps 40 emails and dozens of letters to all levels of EMC including the black hole called the “research department.” I have personally been advised in writing by the second in command at EMC that my $1,000 was correctly reapplied after my “interest only” clerical error to principal. Some dates I was given in writing were first August 31, 2005; the second date I was given was November 8, 2005. (Both were bogus)  In addition to being bogus the point that really burned me up was that they weren’t even applied on the correct date of May, 3 2005!!    

      A huge difference. 

 

Finally I was assured by what appears to be the second in command at EMC that I “had been told numerous times that my $1,000 was correctly reapplied to principal on May 3, 2005.” This was also in writing but again every time I was told that it turned out to be bogus as in false.

 

Fortunately the people in MSF have no trouble believing this astonishingly blatant attempt to defraud.  Unfortunately the mainstream including the judiciary may be inclined to think the story is too incredible to be true.. Hopefully we are helping to change that mindset. Thank God the documented records don’t lie. 

 

I have swamped EMC with letters and emails and calls to all levels for 31 months. I have caught them in whopper after whopper. This week I talked to the executive secretary at EMC/Bear and she told me they have a lengthy file on me. I have sent notices that I intend to sue as well.  They know who I am.

 

More importantly their own records support what I claim. The many victims in MSF and mortgage servicing fraud believe and in fact, KNOW this stuff and more goes on.  JB I think this would be an excellent letter and case to post publicly, blow by blow.  If EMC finally does the right thing, they look good."

-------  POST ONE OFF ------- 

 

-------  POST TWO ON: --------

"Thanks JB.

Your vote of confidence and support means a lot to me.  A couple

things I might also add regarding the timing factors:

 

1) I have not yet filed a 2005 income tax return as a result of this.

Even though the AMC 1098 form for 2005 helps my 2005 income

tax in terms of a higher (albeit falsely inflated) amount of interest

paid in 2005, if I had filed a false claim on 2005 it would/could come

back to haunt me. As you know when you get into these things one

wants to bat as close to 1000% as possible.  The slightest snafu

may wind up being a centerpiece issue to discredit me.

 

2) There may or may not be a statute of limitations for fraud in Texas.

While there may exist a broad criminal statute as there often is exempting

a complaint of fraud from time limitations there may also be separate

specific provisions for mortgage fraud. In April 2008 it will be 3 years

but I doubt seriously that's the cut-off date. It's an unknown but pertinent

factor I need to research.

 

3) Obviously there is a time factor related to when you file your 1040

IRS 2005 income tax return.  That would be April 15, 2009.

 

4) We also want to pay off (God willing) our house before Jan. 1, 2011.

We have other plans which may include renting our home and/or

selling it but I'll be damned if I won't change everything even for a small

amount of money to ensure that neither AMC or EMC/Bear cheat us
out of a nickel.

 

Thank God I’m among people who know these wild “yarns” are common

and more often than not true in mortgage servicing.   If I told this story

at a cocktail party they’d ask me to leave because I appeared to have

had too many drinks.

 

MR >;~{ ED  <===Mad version of Mr Ed

wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww   February 1, 2008

Submitted by Ed Cage  |  Plano Texas  |  972-596-4363  |  ecagetx@gmail.com

 

----- POST TWO OFF ------------

 

I'm constructing a RESPA letter concerning the issues contained in post 1 and 2.

Here I'd like advice.

Thanks,

MR ;^D

PS: Dee your information is dead on correct and quite easy to calculate

but (if possible) I want supporting 1098 documentation by April 2009.

 

Quote 0 0
Write a reply...