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
OUCHY!!!

Judge Slaps Ameriquest Hard For Selling Mortgage, Then Pretending ...

The Consumerist - ý37 minutes agoý
... 201 views Ameriquest originated a mortage, securitized it, and sold it. Then pretended it still owned the mortgage to a US Bankruptcy Court judge.
Quote 0 0
JUDGE DREDD!!

Judge Slaps Ameriquest Hard For Selling Mortgage, Then Pretending To Still Own It

Ameriquest originated a mortage, securitized it, and sold it. Then pretended it still owned the mortgage to a U.S. Bankruptcy Court judge. Whoops.

Unamused, Massachussetts U.S. District Court Judge William Young upheld $275,000 in sanctions against Ameriquest and its lawyers (PDF). This quote from the bankruptcy judge speaks volumes: "It is worth repeating as a warning to lenders and servicers that the rules of this Court apply to them."

Quote 0 0
Judge DREDD!!!
Massachussetts U.S. District Court Judge William Young upheld $275,000 in sanctions against Ameriquest and its lawyers (PDF).

My Not So Favorite Attorneys @ LAW!

BUCHALTER NEMER, A ) NO. 08-40095-WGY

PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION;

Quote 0 0
Karma Rules
Oh poor Ameriquest!  LOL!!! 
 
Now the best is still to come...Another One Bites The Dust!!!
Quote 0 0
Knows About Nosek
The decision described in the article is that shown within Lexis as:

Ameriquest Mortg. Co. v. United States Bankr. Court for the Dist. of Mass. (In re Nosek), CIVIL ACTION NO. 08-40095-WGY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44835, May 26, 2009, Decided.

This was an appeal of a Rule 9011 sanctions decision handed down on April 25, 2008, by U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Massachusetts.  That decision imposed sanctions of  (a) $250,000 against Ameriquest Mortgage Company, the servicer of the loan in question, (b) $25,000 against Ablitt & Charlton, P.C., Ameriquest’s counsel in the bankruptcy proceedings, (c) $100,000 against Buchalter Nemer, P.C., Ameriquest’s national counsel, and (d) $250,000 against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., the trustee of the securitization entity which holds the loan.

In a well reasoned opinion, the District Court upheld the sanctions against Ameriquest Mortgage Company and Ablitt & Charlton, P.C., while setting aside the sanctions against Buchalter Nemer, P.C. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

This is but one of several published decisions in the In re Nosek bankruptcy case.  Other prior opinions include:

Ameriquest Mortg. Co. v. Nosek (In re Nosek), CIVIL ACTION NO. 06-40170-WGY , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS, 354 B.R. 331; 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82416, November 13, 2006, Decided , On remand at Nosek v. Ameriquest Mortg. Co. (In re Nosek), 363 B.R. 643, 2007 Bankr. LEXIS 769 (Bankr. D. Mass., 2007) Vacated by, Remanded by Ameriquest Mortg. Co. v. Nosek (In re Nosek), 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 24293 (1st Cir. Mass., Oct. 3, 2008).

Ameriquest Mortg. Co. v. Nosek (In re Nosek), Nos. 07-2173, 07-2174, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 544 F.3d 34; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 24293; 60 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d (MB) 1578, October 3, 2008, Decided.
 
These cases have been a past subject of discussion within this Forum.  Two if the threads are:

Judge Has Stern Words (But No Fine) for Associates at Sanctioned Firm
http://ssgoldstar.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=2674469

 

1st Circuit Decision in Nosek
http://ssgoldstar.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=3014347


Use the Forum Search feature and keyword "Nosek" to find the other discussion threads.

Hopefully, the site administrators will post this new Nosek decision in the Legal Lounge!
Quote 0 0
FB EYE!

He did send a complaint to the CA BAR, we need to keep an EYE on this.

Quote 0 0
Stephen

We all know lenders are double-selling.  This is why there are so many foreclosures and not workouts.

Quote 0 0
The Equitable One
Stephen,

Double selling? What do you mean.

And how would that relate to the number of foreclosures and the lack of workouts, or modifications.

TEO

Quote 0 0
Aaron
Quote:
We all know lenders are double-selling.  This is why there are so many foreclosures and not workouts.


This is utter nonsense and propagating and clinging to this drivel is a distraction from the real issues which, if believed by web site visitors, will probably cost someone their home.
 
Plaintiffs ARE routinely engaged in evidence fabrication, perjury, and false pleading.  There is a tendency to believe that this must be because of something really sinister.  But at core, this is happening because of laziness, dishonesty and arrogance of the foreclosure mills, not because the promissory note has somehow been sold twice.  And the evidence fabrication, perjury and false pleading are the sinister acts.  Nothing more.
 
Please do not let your delusions distract defendants from the real issues and real defenses readily available to them!  
Quote 0 0
Sara

Aaron wrote:
 
Plaintiffs ARE routinely engaged in evidence fabrication, perjury, and false pleading.  There is a tendency to believe that this must be because of something really sinister.  But at core, this is happening because of laziness, dishonesty and arrogance of the foreclosure mills, not because the promissory note has somehow been sold twice.  And the evidence fabrication, perjury and false pleading are the sinister acts.  Nothing more.
 
 


"Produce the Note" is a great tactic to stall for more time.  It also shows these companies you are willing to put up a fight.  In some cases, you can prove they don't own it.

The real issue is as in the quote above!  We have our own form of terrorism here now.  Stripping us of our homes and the equity we have built up in them (while the justice system looks the other way)  is the new *American Dream*.

The really sic thing about this sham is so many people think there is nothing they can do.  So they don't even try to fight it! 

S
Quote 0 0
Aaron
Quote:
"Produce the Note" is a great tactic to stall for more time.  It also shows these companies you are willing to put up a fight.  In some cases, you can prove they don't own it.


Agreed!
 
But with good discovery, a defendant ought to be able to do even better than that.  With proof of perury and evidence fabrication, the defendant has some pretty good equitable defenses!
Quote 0 0
Sara
Aaron, the thing is people don't know even how to begin.  They don't know what to look for or where.  When they finally do get a statement, they can't even figure it out.  Oh hell, some CPA's have a hard time with them!!!

S

Quote 0 0
Aaron
Quote:
Aaron, the thing is people don't know even how to begin.  They don't know what to look for or where.  When they finally do get a statement, they can't even figure it out.  Oh hell, some CPA's have a hard time with them!!!

All true, but this isn't any easier when paranoid people post bizarre material as fact with little foundation in reality.

 



Quote 0 0
Write a reply...