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
Angelo
Here is the key quote of the year by a NY appeallate Judge.....

"The issue presented on this appeal is whether a party has standing to commence a foreclosure action when that party's assignor—in this case, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (hereinafter MERS)—was listed in the underlying mortgage instruments as a nominee and mortgagee for the purpose of recording, but was never the actual holder or assignee of the underlying notes. We answer this question in the negative."

http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2011/2011_05002.htm

Comments are welcomed!!!
Quote 0 0
Angelo
Another great quote.....

"This Court is mindful of the impact that this decision may have on the mortgage industry in New York, and perhaps the nation. Nonetheless, the law must not yield to expediency and the convenience of lending institutions. Proper procedures must be followed to ensure the reliability of the chain of ownership, to secure the dependable transfer of property, and to assure the enforcement of the rules that govern real property."

Sound familiar, AGARD!!

YAHOOOOOOOOOOOOO, the final nail in the coffin, lets see if they appeal this decision to the court of appeals.
Quote 0 0
Cindy
And a Yahoooooo! from me! I am loving this.

Here's another poke in the face for MERS (and sanctions ordered against OneWest, IndyMac) in a recent CA case:

Jessie M. Arizmendi v OneWest Bank FSB,

Bk. No. 09-19263-PB13, RS No. CNR-2.

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. California.



A further evidentiary anomaly arises on account of the Assignment; MERS executed this document as a nominee for the Original Lender. But the allonge to the Endorsed Note makes clear that the Original Lender assigned its interests in the Note more than three years prior to execution of the Assignment. And rights under the Trust Deed follow the Note. Polhemas v. Trainer, 30 Cal. 686, 688 (1866). Thus, MERS’ purported assignment of the Trust Deed and the related note as nominee for the Original Lender and without a reference to either IndyMac Bank, FSB or Freddie Mac APPEARS DESIGNED TO DISGUISE RATHER THAN TO ILLUMINATE THE FACTS.

For a while I thought any MERS defense would be least likely to help a case, but maybe not. GO, NEW YORK!


Quote 0 0

Help Please...

I think most now accept the fact that MERS cannot assign the underlying note. And I think most lenders are trying to come into court with separate endorsements. Of course, these endorsements are worthless if they are forged or the chain of title cannot be established.

I still think there is another issue hanging out there with these MERS assignments. If MERS can assign the mortgage but not the note, then the MERS assignment may be effective as to the mortgage but not the note. Does this create a “split” between the note and mortgage rendering the note unsecured? I think the defendants in the Silverberg case tried to raise that argument but the court didn’t need to address it as it found another ground to rule against the Bank of New York.

 

Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.
I have posted to Scribd a copy of the NY State Supreme Court decision by Justice Denise MOLIA on the motion to dismiss by Stephen Silverberg which was the subject of this appeal:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/57786959/Bank-of-NY-v-Silverberg-Justice-Denise-Molia-Suffolk-NY-24-Sep-2008


Justice MOLIA is a Justice of the New York Supreme Court for Suffolk County, NY.

Of course, the appellate decision is the key holding, but I find it interesting to also read for comparison the holding of the trial court.
Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.
The borrower/defendant and appellant, an attorney, seems to have represented himself in this matter, pro se:
Stephen C. Silverberg, Esq.
STEPHEN C. SILVERBERG, PLLC
626 Rexcorp Plaza
Uniondale, NY 11556
(516) 522-2575
http://www.silverlaw.us/
e-mail:  ssilverberg@silverlaw.us
Mr. Silverberg seems to have a B.A. from City College of the City University of New York as well as a J.D. from Brooklyn Law School.
Quote 0 0
Angelo
Bill

How does the decision on the motion to dismiss have any value to the holding of the appeallate court?  It's just a generic denial stating that the plaintiff had standing at the commencement of the suit.
Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.

Quote:
Angelo said:

How does the decision on the motion to dismiss have any value to the holding of the appeallate court?  It's just a generic denial stating that the plaintiff had standing at the commencement of the suit.


Angelo:

I was merely adding to the thread the prior lower court decision, subject to the appeal.

The appellate decision which you posted is clearly the important link.

You will see that in other threads (e.g. In Re Veal), I have posted underlying motions, responses, documents and other filings from a case.  This is more readily done with Federal cases, because almost everything is available online from PACER.

Sometimes a small detail appearing in an earlier document or decision can be of significant interest.

Here, about the only interesting thing I noted was that Mr. Silverberg had represented himself, together with some contact information, which I elaborated from other sources.

Suffolk records are NOT available for FREE.  If this had been a NYC case, we could have obtained a copy of the assignment from the NYC ACRIS registry.

I do not really know how good a lawyer Mr. Silverberg is, but he BEAT MERS in the appellate court and that certainly seems worthy of celebration!
Quote 0 0
Angelo
Got ya.....

I was also trying to see if court records are available on-line in suffolk county, but I don't think they are.  I might just take a ride out to the courthouse and pull the case, I would also love to see the appeallate brief that was submitted.
Quote 0 0
Sandy
The Silverberg case brought more questions than answers for me. I noticed this:

...[the "party who claims to be the agent of 
another bears the burden of proving the agency relationship by a preponderance of the evidence"];

 HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Yeasmin, 27 Misc 3d 1227...(underlining added).

I seem to recall that MERS tried to pass off the membership agreement as proof of agency, but a court somewhere said it proved nothing.

Does anyone here know of an instance when MERS proved its agency relationship with an original lender? I cannot remember one whit of such evidence, much less a preponderance of it.

If not, then the only signature on the mortgage is that of the borrower, who obviously had no authority to create an agency relationship between two non-signing parties.

Further, wouldn't the "certifying officer" for MERS bear the same burden of preponderance-of-evidence proof before executing the AOM for MERS? (
I would venture to guess that Linda Green's self-description as a vice-president might fall a bit short of the requirement, at least in this judge's court.)

This mess begs the question: what happens to the mortgage? Does MERS just fall into the deep, blue sea, and the mortgage falls into the servicer's sack, albeit unassigned? Somehow the county record must be updated before the house can be sold, but who can do it? The original lender has no interest in the note now either.  Besides, it's too late. The servicer did not own or hold the note and mortgage before the case commenced.

The only answer I can come up with is the mortgage is void, voidable, or invalid; and at best, the note is unsecured.

I would appreciate correction about this if I am missing something.
Quote 0 0
FnDoomed
Quote:
I seem to recall that MERS tried to pass off the membership agreement as proof of agency, but a court somewhere said it proved nothing.


Sandy - it was Grossman's St Valentines Day massacre in Agard where MERS was so famously decimated as to its agency.

Quote:
Further, wouldn't the "certifying officer" for MERS bear the same burden of preponderance-of-evidence proof before executing the AOM for MERS? (I would venture to guess that Linda Green's self-description as a vice-president might fall a bit short of the requirement, at least in this judge's court.)


The certifying officer of MERS is also a joke.  Google "mark malone hultman deposition" to find the info. 

Hultman was never authorized by this version of MERS to appoint anyone.  Hultman relies on a corporate resolution from MERS the first as the basis of his authority.

MERS the first went out of business.  MERS the second never really saw the light of day.  MERS the *third* is the version of MERS that we've all come to know and love.

There's no evidence that the board of MERS the *third* ever even met, let alone adopted resolutions from an out of business company of the same name twice removed.

Quote:
   This mess begs the question: what happens to the mortgage? Does MERS just fall into the deep, blue sea, and the mortgage falls into the servicer's sack, albeit unassigned? Somehow the county record must be updated before the house can be sold, but who can do it?   The only answer I can come up with is the mortgage is void, voidable, or invalid; and at best, the note is unsecured.


Good question.   Let's say your most recent mortgage assignment is void ab initio which means that legally it did not happen, which would seem to have the effect of unwinding your mortgage assignments one step closer to the original lender.  Whoever that is.   Those people would now hold your mortgage but certainly NOT the note and you need both to foreclose.

Then again, it doesn't matter who holds the mortgage if a valid holder of a valid note shows up.  A valid holder takes the mortgage with him as a matter of law.

The only way to clean up the county records is a quiet title action... 

Arguing the validity of the lien is something I hope to do, but am in no rush to do, if you know what I mean...  There are several other fights to win, first...
Quote 0 0
If MERS could no longer assign the mortgages/deeds of trust out of MERS to other entities, what happens to the rights, title, etc. of those mortgages?

FnDoomed - Are you saying that the rights and title of those mortgages would not have to be assigned out of MERS because they would by law, follow through to whomever the notes were indorsed anyway?  I don't want to misinterpret what you're saying. I am just trying to understand how this will change the game.








Quote 0 0
FnDoomed
Susan, there are lots of nuances and whimsical judges out there to consider but essentially, yes, if we tighten up the language to use very specific terms:

A valid holder of a valid note takes the mortgage with him by operation of law.  A mortgage need not be assigned or even recorded in order to maintain an action under the note.

That being said:  Understanding all of the arguments against mortgage assignments is still very important.  

Lacking proper notes, some jurisdictions have allowed banks to foreclose based on the mortgage assignment. 

There is also BK rule 3001(d) to consider which says a valid secured claim must be accompanied by evidence of a perfected secured claim.  In real estate there are only a few ways one can perfect a claim:  recording the assignment being the most commonly used.

Quote 0 0
One more thought -
If MERS could not assign the mortgage, would that mortgage be considered equivalent to an "in-blank" mortgage deeming it void?  Maybe I'm mixing apples and oranges here...don't know. I realize the priority is the note, I'm just curious.

Quote 0 0
FnDoomed
I'm not a judge, but in my opinion a mortgage assignment executed by one without capacity (foreclosure mill attorney) for a purported agent without authority (MERS) is void ab initio.

That means it didn't happen, strip that assignment off and revert the recorded interest to the assignor of the voided assignment.


Quote 0 0
John Lewis
"Angelo:
I might just take a ride out to the courthouse and pull the case, I would also love to see the appeallate brief that was submitted."

I would like to help with the cost to obtain the brief.  How can I contact you off board?

Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.
We can slightly improve the citation of the case to include a LEXIS cite:
Bank of N.Y. v Silverberg, 2011 NY Slip Op 5002, 2011 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4899 (NY App. 2nd Dept. 2011)

I am looking forward to the Google Scholar version!

Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.
While the recent Weisblum decision probably remains in the memory of most regular Forum particpants, it probably makes sense to crosslink the thread on the decision Aurora Loan Services v. Weisblum, Nos. 2010-03065, 2010-05864, 2011 NY Slip Op 4184; 2011 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4108 (NY App. 2nd Dept., 2011):

"Major NY Appellate Decision handed down Aurora Loan Services v. Weisblum"

http://ssgoldstar.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=5267191

 

These MERS decisions are separated only by a couple of weeks and are closely related!

Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.
Forbes Magazine seems to have noticed the Silverberg case this afternoon:

Forbes:  "New York Appeals Court Rejects MERS Foreclosure", by Daniel Fisher (June 14, 2011)
http://blogs.forbes.com/danielfisher/2011/06/14/new-york-appeals-court-rejects-mers-foreclosure/


Quote 0 0
FnDoomed
Which begs the question and a strategy discussion.

Should somebody (words of personal abdication, I know), but should "somebody" be making it their practice to forward the great decisions into the news conduits in an attempt to get wide(r) publication?

Or is it better (for us) to just be aware of them and not be screaming our victories from the roof tops?

One recent judges opinion cited newspaper articles, which is what got me thinking along these lines...

Quote 0 0
George Burns
How do you propose that we "forward" the decisions to the news conduits?

The reason we regular people are seeing these IS because the decisions made it to the news conduits and a few published it, while the majority did not. Bloomberg, NYT, Rolling Stone, WSJ and Forbes get their info through the news conduits.

The problem is not the "news conduits" the problem is getting dissemination to the public of what is in the conduit.

So, it seems that the problem is publication. How do we get local media to publish these decisions?

I think that would need direct contact with editors.
Quote 0 0
Angelo

I've already forwarded this decision to matt taibbi of rolling stone and the ny post, maybe someone can get it to Dylan Ratigan and/or adam levitin that would be great!

Quote 0 0
Douglas
Great idea to get these decisions, in which the courts are following the RULE OF LAW, into the hands of media outlets.

I think this should be a common practice now, as those of us in the trenches can get the stuff to the media.

Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.

You folks have initiated a discussion about a rather important topic in discussing communicating important decisions to members of the news media.

I will tell each of you straight up that I have been continuously in communication with several reporters for several years about key decisions.  Very often, I communicate the FACT of an important decision to news reporters BEFORE putting the information on this message board, in part because if a national reporter is going to do a story, I prefer NOT to get in front of them.

Other times, reporters contact ME about particular cases, including from time to time cases I haven't heard of yet.  In this instance, it is particularly critical that I NOT post the case to the board and betray the trust of the reporter as to the newly discovered decision, as this would interfere with my relationship with the news reporter.

Notwithstanding, I could really use some help in this area, because with the crush of new cases, these interactions can be very time consuming!

*

One of the challenges is that NOT everyone is interested in the foreclosure topic and news editors and publishers must necessarily balance their responsibility to report with the interests and patience of their constituency.

To a certain extent, the major news reporters face the challenge that if they bring their editors a story about a new dimension of the foreclosure fraud crisis every day that the editors eyes glaze over and the cases begin to seem indistinguishable.

Moreover, it can be challenging for reporters to distinguish the significance of various decisions.

*

In thinking about ANY decision, one of the first questions we should be asking ourselves is WHO IS AFFECTED and what constituencies are likely to be interested.

For New York cases, for example, New York media outlets seem to be the logical place to begin.  New York is a large state.  There are not only major newspapers in the New York City area (e.g. NY Times, NY Post), but also smaller papers in other communities around the state in Albany, Buffalo, Erie, Syracuse, Rochester and other such places.

Sometimes, one WELL WRITTEN STORY in a smaller newspaper gets picked up by the wire services and will then appear in many other papers.

In the very smallest communities, there might be only a weekly paper.  In such communities, whether a foreclosure related story is of interest is probably directly related to the extent of foreclosures in their circulation area.

There are legal trade publications.  These are most likely to pick up the story on their own, but can benefit from communications which help to identify both the fact and significance of a decision, along with other related cases.

There are also industry trade publications, in the housing, banking and finance, construction, title and insurance and similar industries.

*

While most stories are foundationed in the print media, broadcast media should NOT be ignored.  Very often, radio and television reporters pick up stories from the print media.  But they might easily overlook or ignore a story.  But if you can ALERT them about a story and show them the print copy already circulating, this can give new life to a story.

The DOCX story first ran in the Spring of 2010 in the print media.  Then the story mistly died.  When the story was resurrected as a 60 Minutes piece, it gave the DOCX fraud new life and reach far beyond anything that had previously appeared in print.

If you can get a story on the evening broadcast news, the foreclosure mills are in trouble, because the number of people resisting the fraud and demanding justice begins to increase exponentially.

*

There is a certain herd instinct in journalism.  If other media outlets are covering a story, very often editors and reporters feel impelled to also write or cover a story.  When coverage reaches a particular threshold, a story become difficult to ignore.

*

Establish contacts and a good relationship with several reporters, particularly reporters who are looking for leads as to stories of this kind.  Cultivate the relationship.  Give them good stories which are of interest to their constituencies.

Take a particular interest in stories that pertain to YOUR jurisdiction.  New appellate decisions are handed down far faster than I could possibly trumpet them working by myself.  For example, there have been a spate of evidentiary decisions coming out of Ohio and Florida.  No one of these is of such earthshattering significance that it merited a national news story.  But taken together, there might be a story there.

And there would almost ALWAYS be a community story about the persons directly involved in the case.  The story about a new pattern of decisions might be a story in a particular state BEFORE it merits attention as a national news story.

*

The MORE PEOPLE understand about the nature and the character of the frauds and the crimes perpetrated by the mortgage servicers and their corrupt foreclosure mill law firms, the better chance we have of resisting immunity and further giveaways to the banksters.  These people belong in JAIL, NOT rewarded with further taxpayer funded bonuses.  Help stir the outrage!

Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.
The New York Law Journal seems to have picked up the Silverberg decision in a story on Monday, June 13, 2010 (subscription only):

New York Law Journal: "Appeals Court Clarifies MERS Role in ForeclosuresAppeals Court Clarifies MERS Role in Foreclosures", by Brendan Pierson (June 13, 2011)
http://www.law.com/jsp/nylj/PubArticleNY.jsp?id=1202496945145&Appeals_Court_Clarifies_MERS_Role_in_Foreclosures&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1

 

This link is furnished as a finding aid for those with a singular interest in the news and reporting of this story and to chronicle the news coverage to date.
Quote 0 0
I have worked in the newspaper industry for the past 15 years and a large part of the problem is that the newsrooms that may have had 80 to 100 journalists 5-10 years ago, may now have only 10-15 reporters, if that, in some cities. In addition, due to the bankruptcies in the industry, the newspaper companies are aggregating, so several papers are repeating the same AP story from the one source. If brief, understandable and correct, press releases covering these cases could be distributed locally, that would be great, but the print media at least, generally only gets those from the larger institutions with marketing departments employing people to write these. We see the disparity in understanding on this board alone, so there are few individuals who could write a press release to be distributed locally and get ALL of the facts straight.

Mr. Roper is exactly right when he says,
"To a certain extent, the major news reporters face the challenge that if they bring their editors a story about a new dimension of the foreclosure fraud crisis every day that the editors eyes glaze over and the cases begin to seem indistinguishable."
Every day at around 2pm, editors and staff are determining what is going to go in tomorrow's paper. If they don't "get it", they have to move on, they are on deadline. If there is breaking news, they rearrange at the last minute.

Additionally, the subject of foreclosure and bankruptcy still carries a stigma and most people don't want their neighbors to know they are going through it, so you end up with stories mostly published in the major publications who can afford to employ finance/law experts who have an understanding, and report on the big stories coming from government, the large institutions or the anomalies that spread like wild fire, i.e., the woman in FL who has been fighting foreclosure for 25 years.  Those 1 in a million stories catch on and go viral.

When local people start publicizing their personal stories, and lawyers or experts who understand the correct and important factors of these cases and can interpret them to an 8th grade level (the level to which most local, home-town newspapers aim to communicate), then, I believe we would have more success in spreading the word locally.

Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.
National Mortgage News weighed in today with its story on the Siverberg decision:

National Mortgage News: "NY Appeals Court Sides with Borrower, Overturns MERS Ruling", by Austin Kilgore (June 15, 2011)
http://www.nationalmortgagenews.com/dailybriefing/2010_368/overturns-mers-ruling-1025244-1.html

 

Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.

I posted the official version of the Silverberg decision from the Second Department at my Scribd site:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/58027156/Bank-of-New-York-v-Silverberg-NY-App-2nd-Dept-2011


This version lacks the hyperlinks from the New York Reporter web site, but is probably a cleaner copy to print and present in Court in support of a brief or argument.

I would use the NY Reporter version or the Google Scholar version for research and use this version to print and use in court.

Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.
HousingWire put a story up on the Silverberg decision this morning:

HousingWire: "New York appeals court invalidates MERS foreclosure", By Kerri Panchuk (June 16, 2011)
http://www.housingwire.com/2011/06/16/new-york-appeals-court-invalidates-mers-foreclosure

 

Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.

MERS put out this news release to explain the Silverberg decision yesterday: 

6/15/2011

New York Appeals Court Ruling is Consistent With Earlier Decision
 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Janis L. Smith
Vice President, Corporate Communications
703-738-0230
janiss@mersinc.org

Reston, Virginia, June 15, 2011— In Bank of New York v. Silverberg, in which Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) was not the foreclosing party, there was an evidentiary defect because the note produced to the court in the foreclosure proceeding didn’t have the proper endorsements to prove that Bank of New York was in fact the holder of the note.

“The Silverberg decision does not undermine MERS’ ability to serve as the mortgagee. This decision is consistent with the same Court’s 2007 decision in Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. Coakley. In Coakley, this same Court held that MERS had standing to foreclose because MERS was mortgagee and holder of the note at the time the foreclosure was commenced, said Janis L. Smith, MERSCORP Vice President of Corporate Communications. “MERS supports the need to have the proper documentation when initiating foreclosure.”

- ### -

http://www.mersinc.com/news/details.aspx?id=281

*

How can you tell if the MERS spokeperson is lying?

Quote 0 0
Angelo
uummmmm....Is this a trick question???

Mers is never the holder of the note, as per MERS' appeallate brief in Nebraska Dept. of Finance v. MERS


Quote 0 0
Nicole
Quote:
How can you tell if the MERS spokeperson is lying?

 
When her lips are moving??
Quote 0 0
John Lewis

naked capitalism : Thursday, June 16, 2011

How the Mortgage Industry Bullies Lawyers Who Sue Them (With the Help of PR Outlet Housing Wire)

One of the striking things, as the mortgage crisis has ground on, is how persistent and to some degree effective the industry incumbents have been in influencing news stories. One can argue they’ve been more successful than the TBTF banks, perhaps because if you can tank the global economy, keep your job, and still continue to pay yourself egregious bonuses, you don’t need to stoop to throttling every bit of negative coverage. The fact that near-urban legends like strategic defaults are trumpeted in the media as if they are a meaningful phenomenon, or that defenses of securitization practices by firms like K&L Gates, which have liability on their legal opinions, dominated the coverage on that issue for quite some time until more and more court decisions showed their analysis to be sorely wanting, illustrates how much spin there is in what purports to be news.

For instance, the website Housing Wire, which appears to aspire to cover the mortgage/housing space comprehensively, nevertheless has had some pretty telling omissions. You saw nary a peep of the bombshell of a story by lawyer Abigail Field in Fortune, which found that all of the mortgages securitized by Countrywide and a large proportion of those that it serviced had not been transferred to the trusts as stipulated in the pooling and servicing agreements that govern then. As we have discussed in this blog at some length, this has devastating consequences. If the borrowers challenge a foreclosure, unless the judge is bank friendly, they will probably prevail. No one wants the party that would be in a position to foreclose (someone earlier in the securitization chain) to do so; that’s an admission the securities are not mortgage backed at least in part if not in full and the investors were defrauded. And there are no retroactive fixes (why do you think document fabrications have become so common?)

Similarly, we have commented on how remarkable it is that foreclosure mills all over the US participated in widespread, systematic frauds on courts (robosigining, forgeries, affidavits being filed without the requisite personal knowledge of the affiant, document fabrication) and yet there has been a failure of state bar associations to sanction the attorneys involved.

But there is a long and proud tradition of small firm attorneys being harassed in various ways when the go up against the big dogs, and attorneys taking on the mortgage-industrial complex are getting their share of it. We know lawyers who do foreclosure defense work who have gotten death threats and had break-ins with the apparent intent to either plant bugs or copy documents (police arrived before a team of six men had gotten very far). Another is to misrepresent the conduct of an attorney in the press, as the Wall Street Journal did in a widely-derided piece on anti-foreclosure attorneys in October of last year (right on the heels of the robosigning scandal becoming national news)

Another common ruse is filing spurious motions for sanction; even if the lawyer being targeted is confident he will prevail, it still takes time and money to beat back these attacks, which diverts his attention from his pending cases. From an April post, “Housing Wire Again Runs PR Masquerading as News on Behalf of Its Big Client, Lender Processing Services“:

We decided to return to an example we highlighted earlier this year because as more facts have come to light, it turns out to have been even more egregious than we thought. From an April post, “Housing Wire Again Runs PR Masquerading as News on Behalf of Its Big Client, Lender Processing Services“:

The very fact that this item “LPS fires back with motion seeking sanctions against Alabama attorney,” was treated as a news story by Housing Wire is further proof that Housing Wire is above all committed to promoting client and mortgage industry interests and only incidentally engages in random acts of journalism.

LPS is desperate to create a shred of positive-looking noise in the face of pending fines under a Federal consent decree, mounting private litigation, and loss of client business under the continued barrage of bad press. Housing Wire, who has LPS as one of its top advertisers, is clearly more than willing to treat a virtual non-event as newsworthy to help an important meal ticket.

The Housing Wire article, which was unusually long and one sided ran two accusations against Alabama attorney Nick Wooten:

LPS’ motion alleges that Wooten took confidential information that he received in the Wood case and then systematically used that confidential information to file multiple “cookie cutter” lawsuits against LPS in Alabama, Mississippi, Florida and Kentucky. LPS also claims he violated a “nondisparagement” addendum multiple times with scandalous allegations, even referring to LPS and its division LPS Default Solutions as the proverbial “devil himself” in court pleadings.

Wooten won the sanctions case. We were surprised that LPS had asked to have the hearing transcript sealed, which the judge tartly nixed in its ruling. We decided to get a copy and it does not reflect well on LPS and Housing Wire:

Wood v. Option One May 9, 2011 Hearing Transcript (Wooten Sanctions Hearing)

Quote 0 0
Moose
The rough and tumble of high-stakes civil cases is nothing new, nor is the carefully-crafted management of "public information" when it comes to such issues. Big law firms are well aware of managing outcomes in terms of public impressions - in fact, many PR firms can't be distinguished from law firms.

The owners of MERS are not about to "go quietly into that good night." They are spending millions of dollars in managing the outcome of this fight and that includes public relations.

Without MERS and entities like LPS and the scheming foreclosure mills the industry is faced with a garbage disposal (foreclosure system) that can only run intermittently and at minimal speed.

The industry knows how to mount public relations campaigns. Entities such as the Financial Services Roundtable have long held-sway in Washington and they aren't about to back down; the revolving door on Capitol Hill has blended former congressional staffers and the lobbyists into one ugly melange of influence.

So don't be surprised when you see so-called "news articles" on an industry mouthpiece like Housingwire or in Default Servicing News.

Legitimate news journalists like Gretchen Morgensen and Kenneth Harney will eventually bring stories to light - albeit late to the game because they're not advocates for either cause - but IMHO, they certainly don't push issues to the forefront on behalf of K-Street.

Moose





Quote 0 0
Write a reply...