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
Would appreciate any feedback...

In my foreclosure, the loan servicer transfered the loan four months AFTER the Trustee sale to another loan servicer. The old and new servicer are on my credit report but the new servicer never moved forward with any foreclosure proceedings against me.  The original lender won the Unlawful Detainer judgment and I went to bankruptcy court and filed Chapter 7.

I have two servicers on my report for the same first deed mortgage loan.  The first servicer (the one that held the foreclosure proceedings) applied for "relief from automatic stay" but the new servicer has not made a move to file anything in bankruptcy court yet.

Isn't the new servicer bound by the automatic stay in the bankruptcy as well? So even if the first servicer gets it's relief from stay granted, doesn't the other servicer have to get a "relief from stay" granted as well? 

Or do I just get an Order to impose the automatic stay on the newest servicer? Just to have something on record in case some Sheriff came knocking on the door to evict.

I'm sure it's all a paperwork screwup on their part but it might work in my favor to by me more time to get my complaint heard in Court

This just seems to be an odd situation to be in with all the other cases I've read so I have no comparison

Quote 0 0

This sounds like a case a friend of mine has in OHIO. I'm not an ATTORNEY. But I know more than others and less than others. Usually if you file chp 7 you have the opportunity to keep your home but you must pay the arrears and current payments in order to avoid the lift of stay being granted. Then you wipe out the rest of your debts. Unless you have a 2nd lien to boot. Although, there are some who are able to strip liens in a bk. Possibly only in a chp 13 though.  You don't say what state. But depending  on your state law if their to foreclose and not get enough in some states they can't come after you for a deficiency balance.

That being said you said you have been thru the foreclosure process and they got the unlawful detainer who received the unlawful detainer? Was it the foreclosing entity? Or someone who purchased at the foreclosure sale?

I sure don't understand a transfer after foreclosure. I don't understand an assignment after foreclosure either.  As far as my legalese goes if they already went thru the foreclosure process then you filed a chp 7 then yes they would have to do a lift of stay to proceed. The original lender that is. This could easily be granted w/o payments. As far as the 2nd group coming in can they show the a to b to c to d title transfers? You must be aware after reading here they don't have to o bide by crapola. In order to take place of the original party of the title they may have to request a withdrawal and resubmit w/the proper party info.

They make it such a nightmare....The 1st thing probably to determine is if in the bk the people that came to court are the "real party in interest" to be there which is the original lender after the broker created the fraudulent promissory note. In most cases today the real "beneficiary" is never before the court! They will yell scream and beat you down like a bad wolf for trying to blow their house of cards down.

Don't let them fool you they could give a crapola less....Usually when a homeowner even does a mod they(servicer) aren't suppose to receive fee's on that mod, till they present you with an acceptable offer to both you and the beneficiary, that can be agreed to. That away you don't waste your money on a mod that may not work out because of their shenanigans. But they really do get people over a barrel. The moral thing to everyone is to have the money to pay their bills. No one appreciates being made out to be a liar for no one!

But you need to expect this. You need to expect that we're the lowest of scum because we chose this route to get justice but cases rarely are fought well. This whole nightmare has brought the majority of the financial industry to a halt. Even other industries. This is MAN MADE...This was no ACCIDENT. But you must be prepared...The next step as well is how to verify if indeed when your mortgage was assigned was it done in blank? Did they perfect their lien position with the state in which you live? Do you have an attorney? If you don't have a good one or one who is in the bk atty judge rico cartel network you can be screwed as well. They do have minions to remove court documents. Attorneys who refuse to represent people adequately and everything!

The one's your against are the gov attorneys. They are the one's getting nailed the most...It makes it impossible to win on any level when you have state judge attorneys minions filing false claims and federal judges who refuse to do a job. Pay me what their making! I'll treat people right at least. Its the LAW THEIR TO FOLLOW...They HOLD OUR FEET TO THE FIRE DAILY ALL OUR LIVES....IT'S OUR JOB TO HOLD THEIRS THERE AS WELL... By having our democracy its to prevent such failures. For those that refuse to better watch out there's a lot of new SHERIFFS IN TOWN....ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE...

The info below is from a new post a It PINPOINTS PRECISELY WHAT WE'VE BEEN YELLING!

Very interesting hearing.  But the most-interesting part of it is right here….

The largest and most complex harm that may exist with the loans in default or foreclosure today is that the paperwork for the loans was not transferred correctly. I emphasize that what constitutes a correct transfer is a gray area; we need more direction from courts and legislatures on this subject. But there are plausible legal claims that the transfers of the notes and mortgages were not effective to give the trust full enforcement rights.

Uh, yep.  That’s the short version of where the problem lies…..

And it only gets better….

The implications of problems with transfer are serious. If the trust does not have the loan, homeowners may have been making payments to the wrong party. If the trust does not have the note or mortgage, it may not have standing to foreclose or legal authority to negotiate a loan modification. To the extent that these transfers are being completed retroactively, it raises issues about honesty in creating and dating the assignments/transfers and about what parties can do, if anything, if an entity in the securitization chain, such as Lehman Brothers or New Century, is no longer in existence. Moreover, retroactive transfers may violate the terms of the trust, which often prohibit the addition of new assets, or may cause the trust to lose its REMIC status, a favorable treatment under the Internal Revenue Code. Chain of title problems have the potential to expose the banks to investor lawsuits and to hinder their legal authority to foreclose or even to do loss mitigation.

And you thought that was it?  Oh no….

Another type of lawsuit risk is that consumers are able to sue the current holder of their note for violations that occurred at origination. Normally, these complaints fail because the holder of the note is thought to be a “holder in due course,” a person that receives protection from most of the claims that someone could bring against the originator of the note. However, if the notes do not meet the requirements of negotiable instruments, there cannot be a holder in due course. The person with the note merely is the possessor “bearer paper,” and can be sued for all wrongs associated with that note contract.


Now do you understand why nobody wants to come forward with the paper?  Well gee, what if the Trusts or worse servicers wind up with successor liability for the wrongs committed by the LENDERS? (The trustees tend not to have much money – the servicers, on the other hand, are all the big banks…. oi!)

Finally, I want to share with the Panel that the lawyers that I have met over years of my research on mortgage servicing—both creditor lawyers and debtor lawyers—have nearly universally expressed that they believe a very large number (perhaps virtually all) securitized loans made in the boom period in the mid-2000s contain serious paperwork flaws, did not meet underwriting or other requirements of the trust, and have not been serviced properly as to default and foreclosure.

Oh, it’s not “just some paperwork” eh?  Yeah.

The second type of lawsuit that seems certain to follow the exposure of the flawed foreclosure procedure is a claim by investors that problems at loan origination, including a lack of paperwork to support a valid foreclosure, or mortgage servicing mishaps have increased their losses. These suits most obviously will seek to force the banks to “buy back” or “repurchase” loans that were improperly placed into a particular trust for securitization or were improperly originated. Investors could also argue for money damages for lost revenue stream or breach of fiduciary duty by the trust or the servicer to exercise good judgment in favor of in investors’ interests. These suits could be incredibly expensive for banks, requiring the payments of large claims to make investors whole and to satisfy the plaintiffs’ attorneys who will bring such cases.

Yep.  And those suits are just getting started.

But America does not have to continue in a “crisis.” We do not have to tolerate abuse of the legal system, systematic errors, bloated fees, and chaos in the housing and financial sector.


Now, let’s see the law come in and do the right thing.

We’re well beyond the point where this should have occurred, but all good movements start with one step.

Quote 0 0
Write a reply...