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
bwssr
Like allot of us I have been down the loan mod road and got no where fast. I have seen where the loan mod had gone thru and still the owner was foreclosed on. So what is in it for the band? What makes them want to take a home for a loss instead excepting lower payments. The investors have to be mad about this. What is their angle?  Cutting a loan's interest rate by half and getting something has to be better what they would get if they foreclosed and sold the home isn't it?  Home values have dropped in my area. I have seen where some homes sit for years empty. What advantage is to a bank to have this?
    My sister has a loan from a small bank and she got behind. They bent over backwards to keep in her home. They did not want her house to deal with. So why are the big banks such tight a$$es? Just like in another post says by stillinmyhome. They got a bailout. We get the boot.
They get a bailout and we get the boot.
Quote 0 0
Moose
bwssr - it's common scenario and reflects the fact that the decisions are being made for the benefit of some entity with a fiduciary position that may be impossible to discern.

If only it were as simple as "X" is greater than "Y" therefore the logical/economical thing to do is "A."

In many cases, even admitting to the reason behind such a decision could expose the player in the game to further litigation. Defenses sometimes are a simple as "bona fide errors" unless they are proven to be part of a pattern and practice, so you can see why admissions are never made even if it means seeing a default judgment without prejudice so the mistakes can be corrected.

We also have to realize the loan mod program was nothing more than a political ploy and was never meant to keep people in their homes. Like many political "compromises" it kept the power in the hands of the servicers and their customers, the trustees and their customers, the brokers and their customers the bond holders.

Sometimes, if you stretch out a disaster it seems to sort-of take care of itself, and when you do that in a way that protects the perpetrators of economic/lending crimes, it's especially attractive to the enablers in Washington who have to raise tens of thousands of dollars a week to keep them in their offices.

Moose






Quote 0 0
John Lewis

I, JOHN LEWIS ~'a deadbeat homeowner' ~  absolutely hate the fact that u ~ Moose ~ r absolutely 100% correct "that the decisions are being made for the benefit of some entity with a fiduciary position that may be impossible to discern."  However, I am of the persuasion, that 'they' can be defeated, as long as 'we' remember "WE R ONE" ~ SO MSFRAUD FORUM MEMBERS LETS GET BUSY TO DEFEAT THESE "MOTHERS" OF DESTRUCTION!

 

PS: JUST DON'T FORGET WHENCE THE FIRST POST HERE BEGAN - AND THE BENEFITS OF SUBSEQUENT POST - IT HAS HELP MORE PEOPLE THEN IS POSSIBLE TO IDENTIFY ~ 4 OBVIOUS REASON!

 

LET'S GO 'FORUM SENIORS' TAKE BACK THIS 'BLOG' THIS 'FORUM' AND HELP THOSE WHO WANT TO CHALLENGE THE FREAKING 'GANGSTERS' THE THIEVES! YOU 'FORUM SENIORS' HAVE COME TO FAR TO 'PUNT'!!!

 

What sez u: William A. Roper Jr., Moose, Texas, Bill, Walt, ka, etc What sez u?

 

We Must Overcome!

 

 


Quote 0 0
George Burns
How do we take back something we know nothing about?

We do not know the purpose nor the guidelines of the Forum.
We do not know the duties etc of the unknown Moderator.
We do not know the policies of the Forum.
We have no rights and no means of appealing anything that the Moderator does.

We are at the mercy and whims of unknown persons with unknown agenda and with no way of holding them accountable or responsible for anything.
Quote 0 0
bwssr
That's great moose but what I am wondering is what is the banks angle on this. It seems to me that they are going loose money on this. The more foreclosures there are the more the property values drop. If the bank cannot get  the money they loan out for a home after foreclosing on it then where is the advantage to them? As most of know the when you pay on your mortgage the 1st so many years you are paying mostly interest. It also seems that most of these foreclosures were from loans taken out in the last 5 to 10 years right in the area where you mostly making interest payments.  So if you have a 200k loan taken out in 2005 you have not paid allot on the principle. Now the bank is foreclosing. The housing market is down and your house is not worth as much when you bought it and you know that the bank is not going to get any where near what you paid for it. So again I ask what is the banks angle where do they come out ahead on this?
They get a bailout and we get the boot.
Quote 0 0
texas
George Burns
When one posts, one should be honest and truthful, the forum is provided at no cost to the public.

For a few, when lies are presented we challenge.


Quote 0 0
chunga
Personally, I think the reason why lenders do not "modify" or "correct" balances that may or may not be true is because of default insurance contraptions.

I find it very odd that some of those who run "anti-foreclosure" blogs are in over-drive to dispel this as a myth.

Something I also find very odd is "foreclosure defense" attorneys who've spent large amounts of time ranting about the AG "settlement" on youtube and facebook, yet did nothing else. I reached out to over 400 of them to challenge the settlement in court; only 14 showed any interest at all.

Here is a link to the 315 page BAC "Consent Judgment".

http://www.scribd.com/doc/88275632/BAC-Consent-Judgment

I don't know who is *really* on our team anymore. 
"I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know."

- Some Blogger - Circa 35 BC -
Quote 0 0
    The reason the servicers don't want to modify is because they make alot
more by foreclosing.
    Servicers buy the servicing rights (foreclosure rights) for 2 to 3% of the face amount of the Note. When they foreclose, they get to keep the house
and the proceeds of the sale. The proceeds do not go to the investors who
are the true owners of the obligation, or rather should be.
    In many mortgages, paragraph 20 is the key to the mystery. It gives the
originator the right to sell the Note multiple times. THIS IS WHERE THEY MAKE THEIR PROFIT, not in collecting nickels and dimes from the borrower.
The originator puts about 20% of the proceeds of the Note sales with the
servicer, which then makes monthly payments to the investors out of their
own funds. IT IS ALL A PONZI SCHEME used to defraud the investors. As
long as new investors "buy in" the "system works". It collapsed in Sept. 2008
when investors "stopped buying in". Lehman was the first to collapse. If
not for TARP funds, the whole corrupt system would have collapsed. Instead,
it is now collapsing in "slow motion" as the Fed injects funds to keep the
system from a rapid collapse.
    At foreclosure pro se.com, there is a good article explaining how the
servicers make their profits. Once you understand it, you can see why they
don't want to modify a loan.
Quote 0 0
texas
Mike H has again presented inaccuracies, partially right and more (bad English) more partially wrong.
Quote 0 0
bwssr
If Mike H. is inaccurate then could someone put out some accurate info?
They get a bailout and we get the boot.
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...