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
When there is a mortgage and a note I know that it states that it can and will be sold. So my question is: "How in the end can this mortgage turn into an "ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATE"?

The original lender was Ownit Mortgage Solutions with Litton Loan Servicing as the servicer.

Now a Lis Pendens is filed and it says: Lasalle Bank National Association, As trustee for Ownit Mortgage Loan Trust, Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2006-4.

How does a mortgage turn into an Asset-Backed Certificate?

Can someone shed some light on this for me? I would appreciate it.

Quote 0 0
The mortgage isn't "turned into" an asset-backed certificate. The certificates are "backed" (secured) by the fact that there are mortgages which guarantee payment of the interest and principal on the loans.  They become tied together but are still separate things.

Lasalle Bank NA is the trustee for the trust - namely the "Ownit Mortgage Loan Trust, Mortgage Loan Asset-backed certificates, Series 2006-4."  That long name is a legally-created entity which is registered with the SEC and issues certificates (bonds) to investors.

Hope that helps.


Quote 0 0

I got a lot from what you said. But I am still confused on what you are saying.

I signed for a standard mortgage and now all of a sudden it can be an Asset-Backed Loan.

These mortgages are out on the street.......This company Lasalle is saying that they can't find the note nor can they determine that it has been distroyed. I am fighting them on this.

I thought that I might have a fight against them for the Asset-Backed Loan.....

Has anyone thought about what I am thinking about????

Also, You may need to know that Ownit Mortgage Solutions is currently in bankruptcy.

Moose, Please respond.........
Quote 0 0

“Asset backed” does not apply to you or have any effect on the enforceability of you loan.  “On the street” doesn’t mean a guy had your loan in his back pocket when it fell out and down into storm drain and is not lost.  When your loan was assigned to a third party it is considered by the third party to be “asset”.  When bonds are sold the “asset” is what backs up the value of the bonds.


If your note is indeed lost, which happens all the time, they will file a Lost Note Affidavit. You can challenge the Affidavit, but you will never get a free house simply because the original piece of paper is missing.  The reason is simply – The property is in your name.  This could only have happened one of two ways (1) you wrote a personal check to the seller, or (2) someone lent you the money and they gave it to the seller.  


I am not trying to flip when I say this – but can you produce a canceled check showing you paid the seller?  On the other hand, the lender can show the recorded note, mortgage and deed of trust and can also show where you were paying the lender for a number of years.  It will therefore be difficult for you to deny owing the money.


Judges are dismissing foreclosure cases today when the lender/servicer fails to produce the original note.   The problem is this only slows down the process, for they will find the note or enter a Lost Note Affidavit with the next foreclosure filing.


Hope this helps.  

Quote 0 0
I understand what you are saying about notes being sold.

I am not looking for a free home at all. The only thing I tried to do is negotiate with the servicer. And this is where I end up. Litton didn't even answer my RESPA in a correct manner. I asked them where my money went and they sent me a blank transaction summary. Two of them to be exact.????

I also found the prospectus. It says; "These mortgages do not meet the customary credit standards of Freddic Mac and Fannie Mae."
My mortgage is written on Form 3010 1/01 Florida-Single Ramily-Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac UNIFORM INSTRUMENT-Mers.

If they file a Lost Note Affidavit than they better protect me from a third party knocking at my door later on down the road.

Am I correct or not??
Quote 0 0


Way To Go is on the right track. However, this is my point exactly. Homeowners, are being sold down the river of tears. The produce the note theory has been evaded in my case. So has having the rightful person prosecuted.

I look at it this way. I've lost my home now. And have a much nicer one THANK GOD...Even if its RENTING it BEATS the streets. I know one day I'll get JUSTICE.

No one should be LIED to by an employer. To ME my case is unique. As I wouldn't of lost my job if my employer didn't LIE about having the RIGHT to SELL mortgage notes for Chase. But instead THEY DID. They knew for the 2.5 yrs I worked there they never had it in their contract to do such. Afterwards, I tried to forget about the nightmare they caused in my life. Well NOW I'm ANGRY.

So if it takes me becoming a paralegal so be it. Cause they need CRIMINAL CHARGES. THE collection agency, attorneys and judges in St. Louis. Their all on the GREED TAKE or else I wouldn't of lost my home. I was even willing to not go any further if they'd just verify what I say is TRUE. They've refused and removed pages of complaints and adversaries that've been filed. Since they dimissed me as frivolous it means their on the take to not be trusted. I say none of them because what is one to do if they've done everything possible to make amends within their capability to pay their bills?

I worked for them for years. Even have people ready to do banking transactions of a min of $150k to billions with the people I know. But Bernie Madmoney is just the TIP of the iceberg. If they thoroughly investigated these companies and had attorneys review credit bureaus and records they'd have to many lawsuits. The justice is just that we are alive and may have a roof and food. For those without it they don't care.

There are no worthwhile attorneys, or judges if you ask me. Unless you drink the mortgage modification kool aid. No one should be lied to by a loan originator, or lien holders. Yes the debt is DUE. They don't care to WHOM. Just that you created it. Your not suppose to care who owns it just pay it.

Trust me I did collections for Chase and Citi. Two of the top banks there is. Citi is the worst. Chase did care about breaking the law. When I caught some of the files I knew I shouldn't have and called them on it. They'd pull the file in 5 mins once I called.

So sometimes its just the right person. But there's not many honest banking legal professionals. That's the issue cause then it runs into other things. Mainly that NO ONE CARES ABOUT ANYONE BUT THEMSELF.

I always attempted to CARE and be HONEST. But most don't. I've found this out the hard way. Its a cold day in hell on earth daily if you ask me. Even though I have so many things to be grateful for. The hardest issue is this was my job. Doing HONEST collections. So how could I ever attempt to go back into the business on any level?

Absolutely mindblowing to me. Now I get to see if B of A knows how to do real business. I doubt it but if they do I'll be able to put people in homes for a minimal interst rate and property taxes. No 20-30% down. And they couldn't foreclose for the principal cause its prepaid up front. Maybe even the interest could be prepaid up front. And it works on res or commercial business.

All I can say is BE PREPARED. They know the LAW BETTER and will just try to make your life a living worst nightmare movie ever. Its amazing I know I'm here alive and kicking. Yet they can just seem to make me disappear like I don't know what I know.  I'm not CRAZY...I know this.

They only wish I didn't know what I know. Or else why remove pages of my complaints?

Good Luck and God Bless

Quote 0 0

As far as I know a bond holder does not have standing to go against a borrower.  So I think you are prerry safe there.  The same holds true for borrowers, who generally can’t bring an action against a bond holder. 


The servicing of mortgages is governed by the PSA (Pooling and Servicing Agreement).  The PSA is basically the contract between the trustee and the servicer.  You can think of the trustee as the “investor”.  Many PSA’s specifically exclude loan modifications.  When this happens the hands of the servier are tied with respect to doing loan modifications. 


You need to obtain a copy of the PSA that governs your loan to see what it says about modifications.  If it doesn’t exclude them, then you can maybe use it as ammunition with Litton.

Quote 0 0
Way to go,

I just read the PSA and you are right. The servicer is not allowed to modify the mortgages.

What I don't understand is why does Litton Loan Servicing lie to people?? Why do they string us along for months and months at a time. Keeping us hopeful at first knowing that there is not a damn thing they can do for you.

I have a good mind to go to the State Attorney's Office and give them everything I have in reference to the emails and faxes, certified letters, etc... That shows how they are dirt bags. Then show them the PSA.  

There has to be some kind of a law out there that can hold Litton responsible for what they are doing to people.

On this forum there is a large blog about Litton Loan Servicing. I think I will add this there too...

Way to Go,  Thank You for helping me out here.
Quote 0 0
cmc wrote:
Way to go,

I just read the PSA and you are right. The servicer is not allowed to modify the mortgages.

What I don't understand is why does Litton Loan Servicing lie to people?? Why do they string us along for months and months at a time. Keeping us hopeful at first knowing that there is not a damn thing they can do for you.

I have a good mind to go to the State Attorney's Office and give them everything I have in reference to the emails and faxes, certified letters, etc... That shows how they are dirt bags. Then show them the PSA.  

There has to be some kind of a law out there that can hold Litton responsible for what they are doing to people.

On this forum there is a large blog about Litton Loan Servicing. I think I will add this there too...

Way to Go,  Thank You for helping me out here.

cmc, the reason they lie to you is simply they can. It is in their financial interest to do whatever they can to maximize their profit regardless of whether or not they have to lie to a borrower in order to retain control of the situation. If the property in question is way upside down, foreclosure is a losing proposition. If they can drag the case out long enough for the market to turn back around and the value of the property increases, they face lower losses.

FYI, Prosecuting attorneys won't touch these cases. They view them as civil matters, so your only option is to have competent local counsel, and there are dozens of current lawsuits underway. Sadly, in almost every state, companies get a free pass on lying to consumers.


Quote 0 0

The passage of the cram-down provision for bankruptcies could see the light of day in the next session, although I wouldn’t bet the farm on it.  The Litton’s of the world through millions of dollars to lobbyists to defeat it and so far it has worked.  Nonetheless, bankruptcy may be your only option if you think saving the house is worth the effort.  You might want to speak with a bankruptcy lawyer.


On the other hand, you may want to fully reassess your situation.  Trying to save your house when you are hopelessly behind, and if you owe more then the house is worth, degrades your quality of life to about zero.  A lot of people have decided it is not worth it and go the rental route.


The cram-down provision:


Quote 0 0
I see the pattern here...
Litton and CHASE.
Ask Claudia Nunez.
Remember her????????
I do hope that this bi-lingual chica sleeps well at night.

Quote 0 0
Yes the mortgages are converted into securities. I fail to see the distinction of putting the mortgages into Psa's to "legalize" the scam. The bottom line is Wall street has found a way to convert mortgages which are debt other than the "borrowers" equity into assets. You would think that in light of the economic meltdown every single person with access to the media would understand why it is a fundamentally bad idea to let lending and investment criminals take peoples mortgages convert them into the lenders and investors money and use them as collateral for highly leveraged gambling especially especially when losing the bet is covered by the taxpayers and has a higher payout than "winning".

Don't worry so much about a borrower getting a home for free since they supplied the collateral to support the system that created many, many times the amount of the loan for lenders and investors. Am I saying the borrowers should look for loophole or mistake in the paperwork to get a free home?, not at all I'm just saying the lenders investors and insurance companies have intentionally created hundreds of trillions in derivatives based on our collateral and mortgages. By far the largest crime is the looting of our country using our money. The banks use our money to lend back to us and you would have to be a fool to purposely get loan that you could not pay back and lose your down payment and mortgage payments and have to leave the home.

The true lenders are the so called borrowers (us) who supply the equity, the so-called lenders are really borrowing your equity and brokering it to other lenders and investors. If the source of the money comes from the so-called borrower than how can they get a free house out of the deal? In the case of low or no money down loans then the whole loan is speculative free for all except for the taxpayers bailing out the system that has destroyed our economy and world reputation, in any event at least some where along the line it was the lenders and investors getting a free for all not the borrower. Lets place the blame where it belongs on the crooks that engineered the scam and politicians and enforcement agents that looked the other way or facilitated the biggest scam in the history of the world. Throwing around all the complicated legal and business terms in the world wont change the fact that lending fraud is a government sponsored Ponzi scheme.

These criminals whole defense is to blame the greedy and negligent borrowers when in fact they have made the greatest fortune in the history of the world setting up loans designed to fail.

Our government has been paid off the look the other way from the Ponzi scheme Andrew Fastow originated while at Continental Illinois and Roland Arnall used computerized analytics, advertising and boiler rooms to turn into a nationwide mass production Ponzi scheme.

Will all this info help win an individual lawsuit? well it will certainly complicate the issue and force the parties engaging in fraud to literally fight for their lives,  but at least the victims understand why it is so important to discredit us or any hint of profiting from foreclosures. The reason for all the high risk loans in the first place are:

1) create as many loans as possible to convert into securitizations to create more money to loan and more derivatives.

2) low or no money down loans designed to fail are reverse collateralized by the securities.

3 Fannie and Freddie floated half the entire mortgage market.

Here are a few business definitions.


Business Definition for: asset-backed securities

Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms

asset-backed securities


bonds or notes backed by loan paper or accounts receivable originated by banks, credit card companies, or other providers of credit and often "enhanced" by a bank Letter of Credit or by insurance coverage provided by an institution other than the issuer. Typically, the originator of the loan or accounts receivable paper sells it to a specially created trust, which repackages it as securities with a minimum denomination of $1,000 and a term of five years or less. The securities are then underwritten by brokerage firms who reoffer them to the public. Examples are Certificate for Automobile Receivables (CARs) and so-called plastic bonds, backed by credit card receivables. Because the institution that originated the underlying loans or receivables is neither the obligor nor the guarantor, investors should evaluate the quality of the original paper, the worth of the guarantor or insurer, and the extent of the protection.

See also pass-through security

Dictionary of Banking Terms

asset-backed securities


bonds or debt securities collateralized by the cash flow from a pool of auto loans, credit card receivables, vehicle and equipment leases, consumer loans, insurance policies, and other obligations. The bonds give the holder an undivided interest in the securitized assets, and are funded by the cash flows received by the issuer from regular payments of principal and interest from borrowers.


The process of converting loans into marketable securities is known as securitization . When mortgage loans, consumer loans, commercial loans, and leases are securitized, the pools of assets backing a particular issue are transferred to a grantor trust , a passive entity that issues the securities that are purchased by investors. Virtually any debt obligation with regularly scheduled principal and interest payments can be securitized: auto loans, credit card receivables, home improvement loans, leases, residential mortgages, and second mortgages. Examples are Collateralised Auto Receivable Securities (CARS), Certificates For Amortizing Revolving Debt (CARDS), and mortgage-backed securities , such as Collateralized Mortgage Obligation (CMO) , and Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit (REMIC) . Debt securitizing also gives lenders another source of funds for making new loans, and is a technique actively used in Asset-Liability Management .

See also secondary mortgage market , asset sales

Dictionary of Business Terms

asset-backed securities


bonds or notes backed by loan paper or accounts receivable originated by banks, credit card companies, or other providers of credit and often enhanced by a bank Letter Of Credit or by insurance coverage provided by an institution other than the issuer.

Related Terms:

Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms

pass-through security


security, representing pooled debt obligations repackaged as shares, that passes income from debtors through the intermediary to investors. The most common type of passthrough is a mortgage-backed certificate, usually government guaranteed, where homeowners' principal and interest payments pass from the originating bank or savings and loan through a government agency or investment bank to investors, net of service charges. Pass-throughs representing other types of assets, such as auto loan paper or student loans, are also widely marketed.

Dictionary of Banking Terms

secondary mortgage market


buying, selling, and trading of existing mortgage loans and mortgage-backed securities. Original lenders are thus able to sell loans in their portfolios in order to build liquidity to support additional lending. Mortgages originated by lenders are purchased by government agencies (such as the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation and the Federal National Mortgage Association) and by investment bankers. These agencies and bankers, in turn, create pools of mortgages, which they repackage as mortgage-backed securities, called pass-through securities or participation certificates, which are then sold to investors. The secondary mortgage market thus encompasses all activity beyond the primary market, which is between the homebuyers and the originating mortgage lender.

Dictionary of Banking Terms

asset sales


nonrecourse sale of bank receivables to a third party, either through the sale of whole loans or whole pools of loans, or securitization, that is, issuing securities collateralized by the receivables of bank credits (residential mortgages, auto loans, leases, credit card receivables). Accounting treatment of asset sales is complicated, and determines whether a transaction is a sale of assets. In general terms, the test of an asset sale is whether the seller gives the buyer control over the assets transferred, and also any residual interest, without recourse to the seller. Transfers with recourse-allowing the buyer to resell a portion of the assets back to the seller-are treated by Financial Accounting Standards Board Rule 77 as a financing rather than a sale of assets.


If the agreement requires the seller to take back any bad loans, it is not considered for accounting purposes a true sale of assets and the seller cannot deduct the value of loans sold from its loan portfolio.

Referring Terms:


Certificate for Automobile Receivables (CARS)


asset sales





Copyright © 2006, 2003, 1998, 1995, 1991, 1987, 1985 by Barron's Educational Series, Inc. Reprinted by arrangement with Publisher.

Copyright c 2006, 2000, 1997, 1993, 1990 by Barron's Educational Series, Inc. Reprinted by arrangement with Publisher.

Copyright © 2007, 2000, 1997, 1987, by Barron's Educational Series, Inc. Reprinted by arrangement with Publisher.

Quote 0 0
4 justice now
Thanks Greg! As usual you're spot on!

First of all it's not my intent to direct this at any posters at at this forum.  

I really get piss'd when I continue to hear people talk about: all the over extended, want something for nothing borrowers out there. Which, for some reason they wrongfully seem to think that they were the ones responsible for the destruction of our entire financial system/market. (Of course, that "some reason" is really due to all the work being done at many of our media giants and the ones who own and control it).

The fact is that no borrower will ever get a loan unless someone is willing to give to give it to them. The extremely small number of people out there who just might have been able to tweak the system a bit to their own advantage is simply minuscule compared to the wall street giants (gutter rats) that actually designed and executed this enormous transfer of wealth from the middle class to the top 2% of the population (The most Greedy Bastards)

Really, would it truly have made that much difference even if all the borrowers would have taken the time to conduct a through reading of all their mortgage documents, etc. especially when the majority of these documents were well beyond the average person's comprehension, including many attorneys (or should I say especially attorneys). 

Furthermore, in many cases the services and/or lenders simply choose not to abide by the terms and conditions of their own contacts, and that reason is two fold:

1) It might not be in their best financial interest; and 2) Absolutely nobody is looking out for the rights and/or welfare of the homeowners who have been and continue to be the "victims" of this planned scam in the first place.

The wall street criminals have total control of the store and they're on a major spending spree and we the tax payers are footing the bill. And that's just the beginning. 

Let's make sure that the blame is firmly directed at those responsible, not more of the little guys who happened to get screwed just as the rest of us did.  

It's way past time to hold accountable the wall street criminals and those within our Government that aided and abetted them. Let it be Huntsville, not Whosville, Pelican bay, not Tampa Bay. They should all be executed for Treason as they have all done more to damage this country than any other throughout history. 

My Opinion.


Quote 0 0
I was just on line with the circuit court records and found an Assignment of Mortgage. Guess what??? The Lis Pendens and the Assignment of Mortgage are dated for the same exact day. Dec 2, 2008. The Lis Pendens was recorded on Dec. 4, 2008 and the Assignment was recorded on Dec.15,2008. But as I said they are both dated Dec.2. and both are requested from the foreclosure attorney. The person that notarized the Assignment just signed with her initals not her full signature name????? I am in the process of getting a copy of the notary application with her signature on it. I'll keep you guys posted.

By the way all of you guys helped me out like you would not believe. I can not thank you enough.....

I am not going to give up. I am not giving up my home for anyone. There is so much more to this story. Like the mortgage was represented as a 30 fixed and didn't get a copy of 1st and later found out it is an adjustable, no notary at closing, etc... I just wanted to keep this as short as possible.

I forgot to mention, I am a first time home buyer.....

Again, Thank You.....I am still open for any suggestions.
Quote 0 0

What county and state was your assignment of mortgae executed in, and who prepared the document?  I was am a little confused regarding the dates of commencement of suit, the date of execution of the documents in question, and also the recording date.

Not uncommon for this to be a fabricated document.
Quote 0 0

The assignment was recorded in Indian River County, Florida.
Florida Default Law Group from Tampa, Florida prepared the document.

Both the Lis Pendens and the Assignment was dated Dec 2nd. But the Lis Pendens was recorded on Dec 4th and the Assignment was recorded Dec15th.

If you have any feed back I would greatly appreciate it.
Quote 0 0
Did they claim in the foreclosure complaint that the note was lost? Check the assignments and see if there are full signatures or a simple "squiggle mark" or initial and then check to see if those people work there and where they live and that they actually signed the doc.

make sure in your answer to have your lawyer challenge each fact stated such as the assignments, who owns the note, etc. They lie all the time. Make them prove every claim!
Quote 0 0
Nye Lavalle,

They did claim that the note is lost or destroyed.

There are not full signatures on the assignment. In reference to that I got in touch with Florida's Division of Corporations Certification Section to get a copy of the notary application with the signature.

Also, at the time of closing there wasn't a notary present. I am also checking out that person too. She no longer works for the company.

I think I can get the claim dismissed for a lot of reasons. They also have the description of the property wrong on the complaint.

As I said before. "I am not looking for a free home." I was only trying to negotiate with them from the begining. Since May 2007.
Quote 0 0
Hey Guys;

I have a friend around the corner who received foreclosure papers. Their orignal lender was Universal American Mortgage.

Their papers say Countrywide is the Plaintiff. I looked at the county records and their is no assignment from Universal to Countrywide. And I think that I understand that Bank of America bought out Countrywide.

#1- Shouldn't there be an assignment from Universal to Countrywide before the Lis Pendens?

#2- Shouldn't the complaint say: Bank of America as successor by merger to Countrywide as the Plaintiff?

#3- The complaint says that the note is lost or destroyed.

Any feed back. I would appreciate it......
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...