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
Does this Argent mortgage Corporate Resolution give officer's of BAC to sign assignments of mortgage from Argent to a securitized trust?

Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.
I suspect that you are asking the wrong question in respect of the corporate resolution you posted, though the resolution would appear to me to be suspect.  (I had to stand on my head to read it!)

A better question would be whether this resultion had any validity or efficacy whatsoever after the filing of Argent Mortgage Company, LLC.'s bankruptcy petition.


But confining the assessment to your precise question, I would point out several things that seem to me to make the alleged resolution suspect.

First, a corporate resolution, by definition must be adopted by a corporation's board of directors.  Argent and Ameriquest were separate corporate entities under common ownership by ACC Capital.

The pposted resolution purports to represent that it reflects a corporate resolution adopted by both companies.  This would have required separate votes of Argent and Ameriquest.

Second, typically, a corporate resolution expressly identifies the date of the meeting of the board at which the purported resolution was adopted.  The wording of the document shown seems to only represent that such a resolution was adopted and enacted at some prior date (not given), presumably by the board of each.

This evasiveness is characteristic of fabricated evidence rather than truthful original documents.

Third, typically the person who would certify a corporate resolution would be the corporate secretary of a concern.  The corporate secretary, an officer of the company with express responsibility to keep the minutes of corporate board meetings would be the person with actual custody and control of the board minutes and in the best position to certify that a particular corporate resolution had been passed and WHEN.

A corporate resolution signed by someone other that the corporate secretary would always be suspect.

Fourth, the signer Melissa O'Donnell holds herself out as a Vice President of both Argent and Ameriquest.  Perhaps she held such a position in each concern.  This is certainly possible.  This bears further investigation.

Finally, I would note that the document would appear to be a form of corporate resolution likely to have been prepared and presented by Countrywide.  Countrywide's name is typed within the text of the form document.  The names of Argent and Ameriquest are added.

There is nothing inherently uncommon or unusual about this.  To the contrary, most commercial banks have a form corporate resolution which is required to open corporate bank accounts.  That is, if a company wants to open a new account, it obtains the form resolution required by the bank and adopts the resolution at a board meeting, with the secretary certifying that the resolution was adopted.  A valid resolution is also often characterized by affixing a valid corporate seal to the resolution itself.

If you carefully read the document it does NOT, in fact, purport to be a resolution.  Rather it seems to be a document which memorializes that a resolution was adopted at some time in the past.

I think that a good attorney and a strong expert witness could probably have this document impeached and excluded as evidence.

Even if the document was admitted into evidence, it still may have other problems.  First, the document purports to authorize Countrywide employees to act as officers "in connection with the transfer and sale of mortgage loans from Company to Countrywide".  Is the loan in question one which was negotiated from Argent to Countrywide?  Or is it purported that this was negotiated from Argent to some institutional trust of which Countrywide was merely the servicer?

It would seem to me that the proponent of this resolution would need to prove not only its validity, but also that the subject loan was negotiated from Argent to Countrywide in order for anyone to assert authority to act pursuant to this document.

No doubt, through circular reasoning, the proponent will claim that this document authorized the Countrywide employees to execute the very documents which would be used as proof of the negotiation and sale.  That seems pretty weak to me!

Best of luck!

I certainly HOPE that you are not still trying to litigate as a plaintiff!  This is the sort of document that might be readily defeated where the opposing party has the burden of proof.  But if YOU have assumed the burden of proving irregularities, I seriously doubt that you will prevail.

Your opponents are very unlikely to be able to produce a valid resolution.  And you will similarly be unable to prove the invalidity of this suspect document.  As a defendant you would WIN.  As a plaintiff you will probably LOSE.
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...