BIG BANK HOMEOWNERS
Jan0
Lynn E. Szymoniak, Esq., Ed., Fraud Digest, January 28, 2012
In most counties, the records of the county property appraiser identify the homeowners in the county.
In January, 2012, in Palm Beach County, Florida, for example, 11 banks, FANNIE and FREDDIE and one mortgage servicer were the biggest homeowners, with 2,907 homes owned in total. Palm Beach County is the third largest county, by population, in Florida.
The banks and servicer owned 2,284 homes; FANNIE & FREDDIE owned 623 homes.
Three of the banks, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Deutsche Bank, owned more homes than FANNIE.
Wells Fargo (including Wachovia) was the largest homeowner, owning 551 homes.
Bank of America and Deutsche Bank were close second and third largest, owning 496 homes and 454 homes, respectively. (The Bank of America total represents homes owned by Bank of America, BAC Home Loans Servicing and Countrywide.)
FANNIE owned 441 homes; FREDDIE owned 182 homes.
Bank of New York, the trustee for hundreds of Countrywide trusts, owned 338 homes.
U.S. Bank, the trustee for many Bear Stearns trusts, owned 196 homes
HSBC bank, the trustee for almost all of the Deutsche Bank Securities trusts, owned 175 homes.
JP Morgan Chase, including the homes owned by Chase Mortgage, and the Chase subsidiaries, Homesales, Inc. and Homesales of Delaware, Inc., owned a relatively low 174 homes.
Aurora Loan Services, keeper of most of the Lehman Brothers loans, was in 10th place among the large homeowners, with 149 homes.
Citibank, including Citimortgage, was the only other bank owning over 100 homes, with 111 homes.
Suntrust owned 82 homes; IndyMac/OneWest owned 54 homes; and GMAC owned 31 homes.
Home ownership in Florida’s 33 counties with population of 100,000 or greater as of January 24, 2012, is set forth below. The 34 counties with populations under 100,000 have a combined population of 1,278,080, approximately the population of Hillsborough County. The home ownership of Hillsborough has been used to approximate the ownership in these 34 counties.
FLORIDA HOMES OWNED BY 8 LARGEST BANKS ON 1-24-2012: 22,112
FLORIDA HOMES OWNED BY FANNIE & FREDDIE ON 1-24-2012: 7,170
FL HOMES OWNED BY BANK OF AMERICA ON 1-24-2012: 5,143
FL HOMES OWNED BY WELLS FARGO ON 1-24-2012: 4,727
FL HOMES OWNED BY DEUTSCHE BANK ON 1-24-2012: 3,114
FL HOMES OWNED BY BANK OF NEW YORK ON 1-24-2012: 2,855
1 - MIAMI-DADE COUNTY (pop. 2,496,435)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 650
BANK OF NEW YORK: 367
CHASE: 254
CITIBANK: 222
DEUTSCHE BANK: 676
FANNIE: 515
FREDDIE: 213
HSBC: 324
U.S. BANK: 121
WELLS FARGO: 579
BANKS: 3,193/F & F: 728
2 - BROWARD COUNTY (pop. 1,748,066)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 624
BANK OF NEW YORK: 479
CHASE: 157
CITIBANK: 99
DEUTSCHE BANK: 445
FANNIE: 712
FREDDIE: 188
HSBC: 205
U.S. BANK: 489
WELLS FARGO: 493
BANKS: 2,991/F & F: 900
3 - PALM BEACH COUNTY (pop. 1,320,134)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 497
BANK OF NEW YORK: 338
CHASE: 180
CITIBANK: 111
DEUTSCHE BANK: 454
FANNIE: 441
FREDDIE: 182
HSBC: 175
U.S. BANK: 196
WELLS FARGO: 551
BANKS: 2,502/F & F: 623
4 - HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY (pop: 1,229,226)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 220
BANK OF NEW YORK: 116
CHASE: 40
CITIBANK: 30
DEUTSCHE BANK: 152
FANNIE: 265
FREDDIE: 83
HSBC: 84
U.S. BANK: 138
WELLS FARGO: 197
BANKS: 977/F & F: 348
5 – ORANGE COUNTY (pop. 1,145,956)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 278
BANK OF NEW YORK: 31
CHASE: 102
CITIBANK: 49
DEUTSCHE BANK: 130
FANNIE: 500
FREDDIE: 126
HSBC: 83
U.S. BANK: 120
WELLS FARGO: 216
BANKS: 1,009/F & F: 626
6 – PINELLAS COUNTY (pop. 916,542)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 166
BANK OF NEW YORK: 99
CHASE: 16
CITIBANK: 28
DEUTSCHE BANK: 113
FANNIE: 47
FREDDIE: 0
HSBC: 40
U.S. BANK: 143
WELLS FARGO: 181
BANKS: 786/F & F: 47
7 – DUVAL COUNTY (pop. 864,263)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 208
BANK OF NEW YORK: 116
CHASE: 93
CITIBANK: 30
DEUTSCHE BANK: 93
FANNIE: 204
FREDDIE: 93
HSBC: 40
U.S. BANK: 90
WELLS FARGO: 240
BANKS: 910/F & F: 297
8 – LEE (pop. 618,754)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 357
BANK OF NEW YORK: 208
CHASE: 52
CITIBANK: 48
DEUTSCHE BANK: 112
FANNIE: 411
FREDDIE: 100
HSBC: 52
U.S. BANK: 157
WELLS FARGO: 190
BANKS: 1,176/F & F: 511
9 - POLK (pop. 602,095)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 210
BANK OF NEW YORK: 79
CHASE: 38
CITIBANK: 30
DEUTSCHE BANK: 86
FANNIE: 153
FREDDIE: 58
HSBC: 34
U.S. BANK: 93
WELLS FARGO: 130
BANKS: 697/F& F: 211
10 - BREVARD (pop. 543,376)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 127
BANK OF NEW YORK: 67
CHASE: 25
CITIBANK: 10
DEUTSCHE BANK: 44
FANNIE: 144
FREDDIE: 42
HSBC: 18
U.S. BANK: 53
WELLS FARGO: 108
BANKS: 452/F& F: 186
11 – VOLUSIA (pop. 494,593)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 95
BANK OF NEW YORK: 88
CHASE: 26
CITIBANK: 14
DEUTSCHE BANK: 59
FANNIE: 50
FREDDIE: 43
HSBC: 26
U.S. BANK: 61
WELLS FARGO: 99
BANKS: 468/F& F: 93
12 - SEMINOLE (pop. 422,718)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 107
BANK OF NEW YORK: 81
CHASE: 24
CITIBANK: 11
DEUTSCHE BANK: 48
FANNIE: 146
FREDDIE: 41
HSBC: 23
U.S. BANK: 25
WELLS FARGO: 76
BANKS: 395/F& F: 187
13 - PASCO (pop. 464,697)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 102
BANK OF NEW YORK: 53
CHASE: 21
CITIBANK: 17
DEUTSCHE BANK: 64
FANNIE: 174
FREDDIE: 28
HSBC: 33
U.S. BANK: 74
WELLS FARGO: 95
BANKS: 459/F& F:202
14 - SARASOTA (pop. 379,448)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 110
BANK OF NEW YORK: 81
CHASE: 16
CITIBANK: 13
DEUTSCHE BANK: 51
FANNIE: 157
FREDDIE: 46
HSBC: 23
U.S. BANK: 38
WELLS FARGO: 134
BANKS: 466/F& F: 203
15 - MARION (pop. 331,298)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 90
BANK OF NEW YORK: 18
CHASE: 19
CITIBANK: 9
DEUTSCHE BANK: 31
FANNIE: 87
FREDDIE: 28
HSBC: 16
U.S. BANK: 38
WELLS FARGO: 98
BANKS: 319/F& F: 115
16 - MANATEE (pop. 322,833)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 117
BANK OF NEW YORK: 40
CHASE: 8
CITIBANK: 14
DEUTSCHE BANK: 37
FANNIE: 77
FREDDIE: 18
HSBC: 22
U.S. BANK: 52
WELLS FARGO: 396
BANKS: 686/F& F: 95
17 - COLLIER (pop. 321,520)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 121
BANK OF NEW YORK: 54
CHASE: 18
CITIBANK: 16
DEUTSCHE BANK: 33
FANNIE: 120
FREDDIE: 33
HSBC: 25
U.S. BANK: 28
WELLS FARGO: 79
BANKS: 374/F& F: 153
18 - ESCAMBIA (pop. 297,619)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 30
BANK OF NEW YORK: 27
CHASE: 3
CITIBANK: 10
DEUTSCHE BANK: 26
FANNIE: 62
FREDDIE: 23
HSBC: 17
U.S. BANK: 46
WELLS FARGO: 40
BANKS: 199/F& F: 85
19 – LAKE (pop. 297,052)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 51
BANK OF NEW YORK: 38
CHASE: 12
CITIBANK: 5
DEUTSCHE BANK: 28
FANNIE: 91
FREDDIE: 35
HSBC: 14
U.S. BANK: 40
WELLS FARGO: 75
BANKS: 263/F& F: 126
20 - ST. LUCIE (pop. 277,789)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 110
BANK OF NEW YORK: 47
CHASE: 27
CITIBANK: 9
DEUTSCHE BANK: 59
FANNIE: 132
FREDDIE: 40
HSBC: 33
U.S. BANK: 65
WELLS FARGO: 76
BANKS: 426/F& F: 172
21 - LEON (pop. 275,487)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 23
BANK OF NEW YORK: 12
CHASE: 7
CITIBANK: 2
DEUTSCHE BANK: 9
FANNIE: 44
FREDDIE: 12
HSBC: 4
U.S. BANK: 16
WELLS FARGO: 33
BANKS: 106/F& F: 56
22 – OSCEOLA (pop. 268,685)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 134
BANK OF NEW YORK: 3
CHASE: 30
CITIBANK: 6
DEUTSCHE BANK: 10
FANNIE: 103
FREDDIE: 29
HSBC: 7
U.S. BANK: 10
WELLS FARGO: 55
BANKS: 255/F& F: 132
23 – ALACHUA (pop. 247,336)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 36
BANK OF NEW YORK: 9
CHASE: 6
CITIBANK: 4
DEUTSCHE BANK: 11
FANNIE: 39
FREDDIE: 14
HSBC: 3
U.S. BANK: 19
WELLS FARGO: 40
BANKS: 128/F& F: 53
24 - CLAY (pop. 190,865)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 39
BANK OF NEW YORK: 16
CHASE: 7
CITIBANK: 2
DEUTSCHE BANK: 17
FANNIE: 43
FREDDIE: 7
HSBC: 11
U.S. BANK: 22
WELLS FARGO: 29
BANKS: 143/F& F: 50
25 - ST. JOHNS (pop. 190,039)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 40
BANK OF NEW YORK: 33
CHASE: 6
CITIBANK: 11
DEUTSCHE BANK: 14
FANNIE: 56
FREDDIE: 31
HSBC: 8
U.S. BANK: 29
WELLS FARGO: 58
BANKS: 203/F& F: 87
26 – OKALOOSA (pop. 180,822)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 35
BANK OF NEW YORK: 27
CHASE: 2
CITIBANK: 8
DEUTSCHE BANK: 19
FANNIE: 50
FREDDIE: 12
HSBC: 8
U.S. BANK: 24
WELLS FARGO: 16
BANKS: 139/F& F: 62
27 – HERNANDO (pop. 172,778)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 53
BANK OF NEW YORK: 41
CHASE: 13
CITIBANK: 3
DEUTSCHE BANK: 24
FANNIE: 82
FREDDIE: 26
HSBC: 15
U.S. BANK: 30
WELLS FARGO: 47
BANKS: 226/F& F: 108
28 – BAY (pop. 168,852)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 43
BANK OF NEW YORK: 39
CHASE: 13
CITIBANK: 2
DEUTSCHE BANK: 25
FANNIE: 70
FREDDIE: 18
HSBC: 7
U.S. BANK: 21
WELLS FARGO: 21
BANKS: 171/F& F: 88
29 – CHARLOTTE (pop. 159,978)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 110
BANK OF NEW YORK: 59
CHASE: 15
CITIBANK: 4
DEUTSCHE BANK: 29
FANNIE: 22
FREDDIE: 23
HSBC: 18
U.S. BANK: 41
WELLS FARGO: 56
BANKS: 332/F& F: 45
30 – SANTA ROSA (pop. 151,372)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 30
BANK OF NEW YORK: 13
CHASE: 1
CITIBANK: 5
DEUTSCHE BANK: 8
FANNIE: 34
FREDDIE: 10
HSBC: 3
U.S. BANK: 10
WELLS FARGO: 33
BANKS: 103/F& F: 44
31 – MARTIN (pop. 146,318)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 22
BANK OF NEW YORK: 6
CHASE: 5
CITIBANK: 2
DEUTSCHE BANK: 18
FANNIE: 53
FREDDIE: 9
HSBC: 11
U.S. BANK: 15
WELLS FARGO: 33
BANKS: 112/F& F: 62
32 – CITRUS (pop. 141,236)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 50
BANK OF NEW YORK: 27
CHASE: 6
CITIBANK: 3
DEUTSCHE BANK: 20
FANNIE: 40
FREDDIE: 14
HSBC: 3
U.S. BANK: 18
WELLS FARGO: 19
BANKS: 146/F& F: 54
33 – INDIAN RIVER (pop. 138,028)
HOMES OWNED BY 8 MAJOR BANKS, FANNIE & FREDDIE
BANK OF AMERICA: 38
BANK OF NEW YORK: 27
CHASE: 22
CITIBANK: 6
DEUTSCHE BANK: 17
FANNIE: 55
FREDDIE: 18
HSBC: 9
U.S. BANK: 24
WELLS FARGO: 37
BANKS: 180/F& F: 73
34 – HIGHLANDS (pop. 98,786)
35 – FLAGLER (pop. 95,696)
36 – SUMTER (pop. 93,420)
37 – PUTNAM (pop. 74,364)
38 – NASSAU (pop. 73,314)
39 – MONROE (pop. 73,090)
40 – COLUMBIA (pop. 67,531)
41 – WALTON (pop. 55,043)
42 – JACKSON (pop. 49,726)
43 – GADSDEN (pop. 46,389)
44 – SUWANNEE (pop. 44,551)
45 – LEVY (pop. 40,801)
46 – OKEECHOBEE (pop. 39,996)
47 – HENDRY (pop. 39,140)
48 – DESOTO (pop. 34,862)
49 – WAKULLA (pop. 30,776)
50 – BRADFORD (pop. 28,520)
51 – HARDEE (pop. 27,731)
52 – BAKER (pop. 27,115)
53 – WASHINGTON (pop. 24,896)
54 – TAYLOR (pop. 22,570)
55 – HOLMES (pop. 19,927)
56 – MADISON (pop. 19,224)
57 – GILCHRIST (pop. 16,939)
58 – DIXIE (pop. 16,422)
59 – GULF (pop. 15,863)
60 – UNION (pop. 15,535)
61 – HAMILTON (pop. 14,799)
62 – JEFFERSON (pop. 14,761)
63 – CALHOUN (pop. 14,625)
64 – GLADES (pop. 12,884)
65 – FRANKLIN (pop. 11,549)
66 – LAFAYETTA (pop. 8,870)
67 – LIBERTY (pop. 8,365)
PROSECUTING MORTGAGE DOCUMENT FRAUD
Jan0
Lynn E. Szymoniak, Esq., January 25, 2012
In the State of the Union address on January 24, 2012, President Barack Obama announced the creation of a special unit within the Financial Fraud Enforcement Taskforce to deal with mortgage origination and securitization abuses:
And tonight, I am asking my Attorney General to create a special unit of federal prosecutors and leading state attorneys general to expand our investigations into the abusive lending and packaging of risky mortgages that led to the housing crisis. This new unit will hold accountable those who broke the law, speed assistance to homeowners, and help turn the page on an era of recklessness that hurt so many Americans.
The members of the new Mortgage Securitization Abuses Unit were identified as New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman; Assistant U.S. Attorney General Lanny Breuer, who currently heads the Criminal Division at the Department of Justice; Robert Khuzami, Director of Enforcement at the SEC; John Walsh, U.S. Attorney, District of Colorado; and Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, Department of Justice.
Later in the evening, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman released the following statement:
I would like to thank President Obama for his leadership in the creation of a coordinated investigation that marshals state and federal resources to bring justice for the victims of the misconduct that caused the mortgage crisis.
In coordination with our federal partners, our office will continue its steadfast commitment to holding those responsible for the economic crisis accountable, providing meaningful relief for homeowners commensurate with the scale of the misconduct, and getting our economy moving again.
The American people deserve a robust and comprehensive investigation into the global financial meltdown to ensure nothing like it ever happens again, and today’s announcement is a major step in the right direction.
New York Attorney General Schneiderman and Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden have been among the most outspoken of those in law enforcement regarding the prosecution of crimes relating to mortgage securitization. In May, 2011, Attorney General Schneiderman’s office announced probes of two Florida firms, Lender Processing Services and Nationwide Title Clearing. This office also announced probes into the mortgage securitization practices of major investment banks Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Deutsche Bank and UBS.
Attorneys General Schneiderman and Biden have repeatedly announced their opposition to any grant of immunity from criminal prosecution to those involved in illegal acts involving mortgage securitization.
Fabrication of mortgage documents is one of the major unaddressed crimes involving mortgage securitization. False documents were created to convince homeowners that mortgage-backed trusts owned their homes and had the legal right to foreclose. Based on these documents, hundreds of thousands of homeowners forfeited their homes. Every day, tens of thousands of homeowners lose their battle to get local foreclosure judges to recognize that the documents presented by the banks and mortgage companies are fraudulent.
Those few County Recorders who have conducted in-depth examinations of the documents have found widespread abuses that occurred over at least seven years. County Recorders John O’Brien of Massachusetts and Jeff Thigpen of North Carolina have declared their offices as “crime scenes.”
These documents were created in large part because the mortgage securitizers never obtained the mortgage documents they promised to obtain. Investors and the SEC believed that the securitizers had obtained properly endorsed mortgage notes and mortgage assignments and had recorded every change of ownership on the MERS system as promised.
“Providing meaningful relief for homeowners commensurate with the scale of the misconduct” is a tremendous, but achievable goal. Congratulations to Attorney General Schneiderman for setting this goal.
News Update - Mortgage Fraud
Jan0
- Bank of America
- Citibank
- Countrywide
- Docx, LLC
- JP Morgan Chase
- Lender Processing Services
- MERS
- Nationwide Title Clearing
- Washington Mutual
- Wells Fargo
Action Date: January 18, 2012
Location: Salem, MA
Saying that the time has come for a full scale criminal investigation, Southern Essex District Register of Deeds John O’Brien, today has sent some 31,897 of what he says are fraudulent documents that have been recorded in the Salem Registry to Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz. O’Brien said that he is asking these officials to impanel a Grand Jury to look into the evidence that he has presented. “I am confident that these documents will show a pattern of fraud, uttering and forgery. These documents are signed by known robo or surrogate signers, whose signatures were supposedly witnessed by notary publics. In addition, these documents may contain fraudulent information in the body of the documents. I believe that a criminal investigation is the next step to hold the perpetrators responsible.” O’Brien praised Attorney General Coakley for her aggressive pursuit of wrongdoing in her civil action but noted that other states such as California, Nevada, Illinois and Michigan have launched criminal investigations, and O’Brien is hopeful that Massachusetts will do the same. O’Brien strongly suggests that the Grand Jury should subpoena both the past and present Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) of the Mortgage Electronic Recording Systems, Inc. (“MERS”), Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citibank, Wells Fargo, Countrywide, Washington Mutual among others. In addition, he is asking that the top officials of DOCX, Nationwide Title Clearing, Inc. and LPS also be subpoenaed. “These companies have been retained by MERS and its member-banks to produce the documents that I am alleging contain fraudulent information. It is one thing to go after these institutions with a civil action, but the only way to let them know that you are serious is to call them before a Grand Jury.” O’Brien said, “There is no question in my mind that the officers of these banks and loan processing servicers made a conscious decision to commit fraud and participate in a scheme to deprive the public from knowing the true holder of their mortgage while at the same time avoiding paying billions of dollars in recording fees. It is my opinion that they acted as a criminal enterprise, crossing state lines to commit their crimes and in most cases using the U.S. Postal Service to send these documents to registries of deeds, thereby committing mail fraud. We need to know what they knew and when they knew it. Until the CEOs who allowed these fraudulent activities to happen under their watch are sent to jail for what they did, these types of illegal behaviors will continue.” Just last week, O’Brien’s Registry received 3 documents from Bank of America, all signed by a known robo-signer, Linda Burton. O’Brien said, “If they are sending them to me, of all people, it is safe to assume that they are sending them to registries across the country.” O’Brien refuses to record any documents signed by a robo-signer on his list unless those documents are accompanied by an affidavit attesting to the signature. So far, he has not received one affidavit. “That clearly shows me that those documents were in fact fraudulent.” O’Brien said that if he or anyone else went into one of these major banks and forged a signature on a loan document they would be arrested and sent into jail. So it begs the question, why haven’t these CEO’S been held accountable? O’Brien cited the case of the individual who walked into a Walmart and tried to make a purchase using a fraudulent One Million Dollar bill. He was arrested and charged with attempting to obtain property by false pretence and uttering a forged instrument. O’Brien said, “As far as I am concerned, this is what these banks have been doing for years. Make no mistake, MERS and its member-banks are taking people’s homes using fraudulent documents and that is something we do not do in America.” In addition, O’Brien is zeroing in on the major foreclosure law firms that he believes have acted as a co-conspirator in flooding the registries of deeds with these fraudulent instruments. “These attorneys should know better. They have acted as co-conspirators in perpetrating this fraud. I am sending a letter to the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers asking that they conduct an independent investigation into the activities of these firms. Unlike our Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, I understand that there are other Attorneys General and other public officials across the country who would like nothing better than to sweep this matter under the rug and grant these lenders, loan servicing companies and their foreclosure-mill attorneys immunity for the damage that they have caused, not only to our economy but to people’s property rights. They would be willing to accept pennies on the dollar, a slap on the wrist, and a promise to never do it again. If that should happen, it would be the biggest sellout of the American People that I have ever seen. It would send the wrong message that the big boys can get away with anything. As I have been saying all along, they may think they are too big to fail, but as far as I am concerned, they are not to big to go to jail. The top officials at MERS, its member-banks, servicers and foreclosure-mill attorneys must be prosecuted and held accountable for their fraudulent schemes that brought profits to their institutions by cutting corners, circumventing land recordation systems through fraud, uttering and forgery.”
FORECLOSURE TIMES
Jan0
Lynn E. Szymoniak, Esq., January 15, 2012
Download this Article as a PDF.
How many days does it take to foreclose in Florida? The average number of days for a foreclosure action to be completed is often reported, and usually accompanied by a criticism that the process is too unwieldy. The long foreclosure process has often been blamed for the nation’s slow economic recovery. The discussion often moves quickly from “How long does it take?” to “How long should it take?”
While bank lawyers often argue that the foreclosure system should be changed so that foreclosures can move quickly through the courts, foreclosure defense advocates often point to due process horror stories like the recent story of Chief Circuit Judge Alan Dickey in Seminole County, Florida, who scheduled 300 foreclosure cases for three days, saying, “If everybody shows up, I’ll have about 30 seconds a case.”
Realty Trac provides the statistics in most stories. Realty Trac reported in January, 2012, that in Florida it took an average of 806 days to complete a foreclosure, the third longest time in the nation. New York reportedly took the longest to foreclose – 1,019 days and New Jersey was second at 964 days.
An examination of actual foreclosure cases in Palm Beach County does not support the Realty Trac findings. In this study, all of the cases filed by a major forecloser, Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (“DBNTC”), in December, 2009, were examined. DBNTC filed 170 new cases in December 2009.
Of the 170 cases, 76 cases (43.5%) remained open as of January 15, 2012.
54 of the cases were closed with entry of a final judgment of foreclosure.
40 of the cases were voluntarily dismissed by DBNTC. In many cases, a voluntary dismissal indicates the parties have reached a settlement. In foreclosures, it is also common for a bank to dismiss when the file is being transferred to another firm, a very common occurrence.
Of the cases with voluntary dismissals, the average time from filing to dismissal was 342 days.
Of the cases closed with a final judgment of foreclosure, the average number of days from the initial filing to the closing of the case was 345 days. A few cases continue long after the entry of a final judgment of foreclosure, because of post-judgment motions to re-open or set aside the final judgment. In such cases, the actual sales date was used as the end date.
Of the 94 resolved cases, 58 (62%) were resolved in less than one year.
In many of the open cases, there had been very little effort by the banks to move the case to a final resolution. It was not unusual to find open cases where there had been no docketed activity for over six months, and there were numerous cases where there had been no docketed activity for over one year.
When a foreclosure is completed, and the home sold, it is often sold for less than half of the amount of the original loan. The median sales price for existing homes in Palm Beach County fell from $406,800 in June, 2005 to $183,700 in November, 2011. A trustee may actually benefit, in the short term, from prolonging the foreclosure process because the final realized loss does not have to be reported to investors until the sale, thus allowing the trustee to delay the inevitable bad news to the investors. The servicer certainly benefits as the average servicer fees for servicing a loan in foreclosure are often three to five times the fees for servicing a performing loan.
There were a few hard-fought cases, with discovery disputes appearing regularly on the docket. In such cases, these disputes often involved delays by the banks in responding to discovery requests by the homeowner/defendants, particularly where the banks were asked to produce trust-related documents such as the Pooling and Servicing Agreement from the trust or original loan documents. Many of the cases involved Affidavits of Lost Notes and Lost Mortgages. The delays were caused by the plaintiff/bank.
This study will be expanded to include an entire calendar quarter and the other major foreclosers, Bank of America and Chase. It will include data from Hillsborough and St. Johns counties.
Here are the details of the action on the 170 DBNTC foreclosure cases filed in Palm Beach County in December, 2009:
1. Arundel, Jeanette
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-3-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 6-23-2010
204 DAYS
2. Booth, Jay C., Jr.
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
PENDING
Bank’s Motion to Dismiss on 1-5-2012
3. Dickens, Matthew W.
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
Bank’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal: 5-11-2010
161 DAYS
4. Garza, Abel
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 1-28-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 4-12-2011
5. Girtman, Esperanza
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 1-26-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 5-12-2010
162 DAYS
6. Hendricks, Leon
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 7-15-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 12-8-2011
7. Jecrois, Jean Michelet
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 3-21-2010
8. Louidort, Elza
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 1-25-2010
Bank’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal: 5-11-2010
161 DAYS
9. Powell, Clifford
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 12-15-2009
10. Prince, Eddie
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 8-3-2010
245 DAYS
11. Sanchez, Ivan
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
Bank’s Motion to Dismiss: 6-21-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 6-21-2010
12. Snow, Frederic Gary
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 1-11-2012
13. Torres, Sarah
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 1-25-11
14. Tresness, Melissa
Filing Date: 12-1-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 12-28-2009
15. Harrison, Letitia Monique
Filing Date: 12-2-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 3-22-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 6-14-2010
194 DAYS
16. Hernandez, Angel
Filing Date: 12-2-2009
Bank’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal: 9-30-2010
302 DAYS
17. Joseph, Ana
Filing Date: 12-2-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 3-16-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 10-18-2010
Post-judgment pleadings; sold 5-4-2011
518 DAYS
18. Pell, Amy
Filing Date: 12-2-2009
Bank’s Voluntary Dismissal: 4-27-2011
511 DAYS
19. Sandoval, Carlos
Filing Date: 12-2-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 3-31-2010
20. Wong, Suok Ing
Filing Date: 12-2-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 9-17-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 1-4-2012
21. Badgley, Kenny
Filing Date: 12-3-3009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 6-14-2010
Post-judgment pleadings; sold 3-4-2011
457 DAYS
22. Coicou, Joseph
Filing Date: 12-3-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-12-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 10-14-2011
23. Dieter, Eric A.
Filing Date: 12-3-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 11-5-2010
Dismissed: 12-15-2010
377 DAYS
24. Figueroa, Dora D.
Filing Date: 12-3-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 10-24-2011
25. Flores, Jaime
Filing Date: 12-3-3009
Final Judgment: 7-20-2010
Post judgment Pleadings, Sold: 3-11-2011
463 DAYS
26. Pelaez, Aldo
Filing Date: 12-3-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 1-19-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 10-31-2011
27. Pompey, Sharon
Filing Date: 12-3-3009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 5-10-2010
Post-judgment pleadings; sold on 10-21-2010
322 DAYS
28. Bedasee, Lenford
Filing Date: 12-4-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 5-20-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 7-1-2010
Post-judgment Motions; Sold to Bank on 4-15-2011
497 DAYS
29. Blake, Everal D.
Filing Date: 12-4-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 3-22-2010
PENDING
Last Bank Activity: 2-4-2011
30. Brown, Paul Hugh
Filing Date: 12-4-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 3-22-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 9-28-2010
298 DAYS
31. Narcisse, Anel
Filing Date: 12-4-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-23-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 7-8-2010
218 DAYS
32. Wachocki, Phillip
Filing Date: 12-4-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 6-21-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 11-14-2011
33. Weiss, Stephen
Filing Date: 12-4-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-16-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 9-14-2010
Bankruptcy and Post-Judgment Motions
Sold to Bank/Plaintiff: 9-9-2011
644 DAYS
34. Astorga, Silvia
Filing Date: 12-7-2009
Bank’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal: 3-4-2010
87 DAYS
35. Santiago, Lily
Filing Date: 12-7-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 8-8-2011 Referral to Mediation
36. Herisse, Innocent
Filing Date: 12-7-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 6-2-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 7-16-2010
Post-judgment motions; sold to bank/plaintiff on 6-30-2011
570 DAYS
37. Johnson, Johnny
Filing Date: 12-7-2009
Bank’s Voluntary Dismissal: 11-16-2011
709 DAYS
38. Jules, Wasler
Filing Date: 12-7-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-18-2010
Bank’s Voluntary Dismissal: 10-1-2010
298 DAYS
39. Martin, Rigoberto
Filing Date: 12-7-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 7-29-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 6-13-2011 (Bank’s Motion to Substitute Counsel)
40. Auguste, Enique
Filing Date: 12-8-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-25-2010
Voluntary Dismissal: 11-8-2011
700 DAYS
41. Cook, William
Filing Date: 12-8-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 3-12-2010
Final judgment of foreclosure: 6-18-2010
Bankruptcy and post-judgment motions
PENDING
Last Activity: 12-27-2011
42. Delva, Wislande
Filing Date: 12-8-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-9-2010
Final judgment of foreclosure: 6-17-2010
191 DAYS
43. George, Beryl
Filing Date: 12-8-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 8-11-2010
44. Gonzalez, Juan
Filing Date: 12-8-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 8-12-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 7-7-11
45. Levinger, Jane
Filing Date: 12-8-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 1-7-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 1-6-2012
46. McCarty, Shirlon Dioni
Filing Date: 12-8-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 4-20-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 8-22-2011 (substitution of counsel for bank)
47. Petrone, Anthony
Filing Date: 12-8-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 7-26-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 9-27-2011
301 DAYS
48. Saqib, Sobia M.
Filing Date: 12-8-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-4-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 1-5-2012
49. Spee, Eric
Filing Date: 12-8-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 12-31-2009
Voluntary Dismissal: 11-19-2010
346 DAYS
50. Dennis, Marilyn
Filing Date: 12-9-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 6-3-2011
PENDING
Last Activity: 10-19-2011
51. Jules, Gina
Filing Date: 12-9-2009
Bank’s Motion for Final Judgment: 1-28-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 9-14-2010
Bank’s Motion to Vacate Final Judg. and Vol. Dismissal: 3-7-2011
453 DAYS
52. Lay, Lonnie
Filing Date: 12-9-2009
Voluntary dismissal by bank: 12-7-2010
363 DAYS
53. Winkelman, Janet
Filing Date: 12-9-2009
Bank’s Voluntary Dismissal: 3-4-2010
85 DAYS
54. Yepes, Cesar
Filing Date: 12-9-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-5-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 8-9-2010
Post-judgment Motions
Final Judgment of Foreclosure (#2): 3-31-2011
477 DAYS
55. Basant, Garfield
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 6-11-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 11-8-2010
Bankruptcy and Post-Judgment Motions; Sold to Bank on 4-15-2011
491 DAYS
56. Brewster, Eileen
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-4-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 7-16-2010
218 DAYS
57. Derilus, Jean
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 4-25-2011
58. Dik, Carolyn Adams
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 8-23-2010
Bank’s Motion to Vacate Judgment and Dismiss: 10-24-2011
683 DAYS
59. Drake, Darla
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Final Judgment: 7-22-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 8-24-2010
257 DAYS
60. Faustin, Max
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summery Judgment: 10-4-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 8-3-11 Bank’s Motion to File an Amended Complaint
61. Goffe, Christina
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 4-20-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 5-27-10
168 DAYS
62. Hartl, William
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
Bank’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal: 5-18-2011
524 DAYS
63. Kaplan, Jill
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
Bank’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal: 3-5-2010
85 DAYS
64. Rorabaugh, Patricia
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 4-14-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 7-16-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 1-4-2012 (Granting Bank’s Motion to Sub. Counsel for Stern)
65. Rose, Warren
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 3-10-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 5-12-2010
153 DAYS
66. Tartarkin, Barry
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 2-9-2010
67. Vasquez, Sergio
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 8-31-2011
PENDING
Last Activity: 8-31-2011
68. Williams, Roney
Filing Date: 12-10-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-10-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 6-21-2010
193 DAYS
69. Angel, Alejandro
Filing Date: 12-11-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 1-10-2012
70. Baptiste, Kenol Jean
Filing Date: 12-11-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 3-22-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 6-14-2010
185 DAYS
71. Duff, Jack
Filing Date: 12-11-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-9-2010
Bank’s Motion for Voluntary dismissal: 4-1-2011
477 DAYS
72. Isaac, Emmanuel R.
Filing Date: 12-11-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 8-26-2010
73. Manjaro, Errol*
Filing Date: 12-11-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 11-21-2011
74. New Century Mortgage
Filing Date: 12-11-2009
Final Order of Foreclosure: 4-21-2010
131 DAYS
75. Schapiro, Sarita
Filing Date: 12-11-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 4-14-2011
PENDING
Last Activity: 7-19-2011
76. Thelemaque, Onondieu
Filing Date: 12-11-2009
Bank’s Motion for Final Judgment: 1-28-2010
Renewed: 12-5-2011
PENDING
Last Activity: 12-9-2011
77. Vogal, Lee Scott
Filing Date: 12-11-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 6-3-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 7-19-2010
220 DAYS
78. Walden, Tangela
Filing Date: 12-11-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-16-2010
Bank’s Voluntary Dismissal: 4-1-2011
477 DAYS
79. Wilson, Charles J.
Filing Date: 12-11-2009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 5-9-2011
514 DAYS
80. Zeien, Jason
Filing Date: 12-11-2009
Bank’s Voluntary Dismissal: 12-27-2011
746 DAYS
81. Caballero, Hilda
Filing Date: 12-14-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 3-1-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 6-18-2010
Post-judgment Motions; sold to plaintiff 9-7-2011
514 DAYS
82. Deponte, Eugenia C.
Filing Date: 12-14-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 2-3-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 7-6-2010
182 DAYS
83. Francois, Raphael
Filing Date: 12-14-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 6-10-2011 (bank’s motion to sub. counsel)
84. Gernstadt, Hal
Filing Date: 12-14-2009
Bank’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal: 6-9-2010
177 DAYS
85. Kese, Claudette Witter
Filing Date: 12-14-2009
Bank’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal: 7-30-2010
228 DAYS
86. Licata, Angelo
Filing Date: 12-14-2009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 8-2-2010
231 DAYS
87. Moody, Gary
Filing Date: 12-14-2009
Final judgment of foreclosure: 9-28-2010
298 DAYS
88. Pangilinan, Sonny
Filing Date: 12-14-2009
Bank’s Voluntary Dismissal: 11-2-2011
688 DAYS
89. Sanderford, Charlene
Filing Date: 12-14-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 11-10-2011 (order allowing bank to sub. counsel)
90. Webster, Dena
Filing Date: 12-14-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 4-19-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 5-27-2010
164 DAYS
91. Witt, Gerhardt
Filing Date: 12-14-2009
Bank’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal: 6-9-2010
177 DAYS
92. Avila, Randy
Filing Date: 12-15-2009
Bank’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal: 4-9-2010
115 DAYS
93. Burton, David
Filing Date: 12-15-2009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 8-30-2011
623 DAYS
94. Capp, William, Jr.
Filing Date: 12-15-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 3-22-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 9-1-2010
260 DAYS
95. Perez, Haydee
Filing Date: 12-15-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 11-14-2011 (Bank’s Subst. Counsel)
96. Pinnock, Brian
Filing Date: 12-15-2009
Final judgment of foreclosure: 11-15-2011
700 DAYS
97. Purcell, Joyce
Filing Date: 12-15-2009
Vol. Dismissal by Bank: 7-7-2011
569 DAYS
98. Roblero, Rolfi E.
Filing Date: 12-15-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 10-26-2011
99. Schweizer, Edward
Filing Date: 12-15-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 6-2-2011 (sub. of counsel)
100. Sonntag, Charles
Filing Date: 12-15-2009
Vacate final judgment; voluntary dismissal: 8-30-2011
622 DAYS
101. Summa, Caryn
Filing Date: 12-15-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 1-10-2012
102. Tooch, Charles A. Jr.
Filing Date: 12-15-2009
Final judgment of foreclosure: 6-14-2010
181 DAYS
103. Collins, James
Filing Date: 12-16-09
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 8-2-2010
Dismissed by Bank 5-4-2011
504 DAYS
104. Elias, Alejandro
Filing Date: 12-16-2009
Bank’s Voluntary Dismissal: 10-8-2010
296 DAYS
105. English, Darla
Filing Date: 12-16-2009
Dismissed by Bank: 7-14-2010
210 DAYS
106. Gama, Jose Omar
Filing Date: 12-16-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: Mediation Report 11-16-2010
107. James, Yvonne
Filing Date: 12-16-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 8-10-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure Entered: 8-10-2010
237 DAYS
108. Jeantinoble, Odmar
Filing Date: 12-16-2009
Defendant’s MTD Filed: 1-21-2010
PENDING
109. Lehman, Elizabeth
Filing Date: 12-16-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 1-3-2012
110. Maxwell, Bertha P.
Filing Date: 12-16-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 7-22-2010
111. Muras, Wayne
Filing Date: 12-16-2009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 6-14-2010
180 DAYS
112. Shapiro, Andrea
Filing Date: 12-16-2009
Bank’s Motion for Default Filed: 5-24-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 5-24-2010
113. Shook, Kraig
Filing Date: 12-16-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 8-4-2011
114. Troncone, Monique
Filing Date: 12-16-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 3-2-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure Entered: 5-12-2010
147 DAYS
115. Lormejuste, Clare Rose
Filing Date: 12-17-2009
Vol. Dismissal by Bank: 6-28-2010
193 DAYS
116. Meant, Jean Baptiste
Filing Date: 12-17-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 5-6-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure Entered: 6-21-2010
185 DAYS
117. Rubner, Vaclave
Filing Date: 12-17-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 3-22-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure Entered: 6-14-2010
179 DAYS
118. Travis, Farah
Filing Date: 12-17-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 1-4-2010
Voluntary Dismissal By Bank: 11-19-2010
337 DAYS
119. Zaremba, Jameelia
Filing Date: 12-17-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 3-26-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure Entered: 7-8-2010
Numerous Post Judgment matters; Sold to Bank: 12-30-2011 ($31,100)
743 DAYS
120. Boden, Pio Izabel
Filing Date: 12-18-2009
Voluntary Dismissal By Bank: 4-15-2010
118 DAYS
121. Cullen, Lyn
Filing Date: 12-18-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 3-16-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 3-16-2010
122. Guerrier, Jean
Filing Date: 12-18-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 2-22-2010
Voluntary dismissal by Bank: 2-19-2011
428 DAYS
123. Jestine, Saint Jamais
Filing Date: 12-18-2009
Vol. Dismissal by Bank: 2-16-2010
60 DAYS
124. Kearney, Virginia
Filing Date: 12-18-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 9-29-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 9-29-2010
125. Pierre, Carmel
Filing Date: 12-18-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 5-25-1
126. Reeves, Ilene
Filing Date: 12-18-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 9-10-2010
PENDING
127. Santiago, Ana E.
Filing Date: 12-18-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 1-4-11
Bank’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Filed: 4-13-2011
480 DAYS
128. Wilson, David
Filing Date: 12-18-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 12-22-2011
129. Cash, Cleona
Filing Date: 12-21-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 10-26-2010
PENDING
Last activity: 10-8-2010
130. Duran, Juan
Filing Date: 12-21-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 2-5-10
PENDING
Last activity: 12-29-2010
131. Esposito, Sally
Filing Date: 12-21-2009
PENDING
Last activity: 11-1-2010
132. Garcia, Jorge
Filing Date: 12-21-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 7-16-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure Entered: 8-10-2010
232 DAYS
133. Jean-Pierre, Elvince
Filing Date: 12-21-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 4-13-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 4-27-2011
134. Stenback, Gordon
Filing Date: 12-21-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 7-2-2010
Numerous post-judgment pleadings
Sold to bank for $16,600 on 3-14-2011
448 DAYS
135. Paloni, Chrissa
Filing Date: 12-22-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 7-14-2011
136. Serrano, Joseph
Filing Date: 12-22-2009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure Entered: 6-16-2011
Numerous post-judgment pleadings
Sold to plaintiff for $190,200 on 8-1-2011
587 DAYS
137. Spence, Ida
Filing Date: 12-22-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 7-13-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 11-22-2010
138. Arvisais, Arlettie
Filing Date: 12-23-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 9-10-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure Entered: 12-20-2011 ($149,435)
Sale date 2/13 (5200 Edgecliff Avenue)
362 DAYS
139. Cisterna, Paul
Filing Date: 12-23-2009
Bank’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal: 2-19-2010
58 DAYS
140. Elliott, Paul
Filing Date: 12-23-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 3-16-2011
PENDING
Last Activity: 5-31-2011
141. Jackson, Rickey
Filing Date: 12-23-2009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 9-8-2010
259 DAYS
142. Lloyd, Stephen
Filing Date: 12-23-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 2-23-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure Entered: 7-15-2010 ($829,749.31)
204 DAYS
143. Williams, Kenneth
Filing Date: 12-23-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 12-22-2011
144. Barrett, James
Filing Date: 12-28-2009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 8-23-2011
238 DAYS
145. Benjamin, Aaron
Filing Date: 12-28-2009
Bank’s Voluntary Dismissal Filed: 4-23-2010
116 DAYS
146. Brink, Daniela
Filing Date: 12-28-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 4-5-2010
147. Flatley, Rachel
Filing Date: 12-28-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 7-30-3010
148. Herisca, Marie
Filing Date: 12-28-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 1-9-2012
149. Jacobson, Donald
Filing Date: 12-28-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 11-28-2011
150. Puhl, Douglas
Filing Date: 12-28-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 2-24-2010
PENDING
Last Activity: 4-19-2011
151. Zamir, Elisha
Filing Date: 12-28-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 8-24-2011
152. Albury, Beverly
Filing Date: 12-29-2009
Vol. Dismissal: 3-1-2011
427 DAYS
153. Berlinger, Gary
Filing Date: 12-29-2009
Vol. Dismissal: 12-14-2010
350 DAYS
154. Darling, Melvina R.
Filing Date: 12-29-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 11-21-2011
155. Ellis, Thomas
Filing Date: 12-29-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: Order for Bank to Sub. Counsel: 6-10-2011
156. O’Callaghan, Susanna
Filing Date: 12-29-2011
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment Filed: 3-23-2010
Final Judgment of Foreclosure Entered: 6-14-2010 ($281,906)
167 DAYS
157. Peters, Julian
Filing Date: 12-29-2009
Bank’s Notice of Vol. Dismissal: 7-28-2010
211 DAYS
158. Ulyssee, Kerole
Filing Date: 12-29-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 1-12-2010
159. Cheshire, Denise
Filing Date: 12-30-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 2-4-2011
160. Confessore, Joseph
Filing Date: 12-30-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 8-10-2011
161. Etienne, Sandra
Filing Date: 12-30-2009
Vol. Dismissal by Bank: 9-15-2010
259 DAYS
162. Florez, Andres
Filing Date: 12-30-2009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 8-9-2010
Post-judgment motions; sold to bank 7-8-2011
555 DAYS
163. O’Donnell, Michael
Filing Date: 12-30-2009
Final judgment of foreclosure: 6-9-2011
Post-judgment motions; sold on 12-6-2011
706 DAYS
164. Reyes, Domingo
Filing Date: 12-30-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 12-30-2011
165. Castillo, Biviana
Filing Date: 12-31-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 4-15-2010
166. Cruz, Lorenzo
Filing Date: 12-31-2009
Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment: 1-10-12
PENDING
Last Activity: 1-10-2012
167. Drolet, Peter A.
Filing Date: 12-31-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 12-12-2011
168. Miranda, Rigoberta
Filing Date: 12-31-2009
PENDING
Last Activity: 7-21-2011 (Bank’s sub. Of counsel)
169. O’Neill, Francis T.
Filing Date: 12-31-2009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 8-30-2010
607 DAYS
170. Schwartz, Michael
Filing Date: 12-31-2009
Final Judgment of Foreclosure: 11-22-2011
691 DAYS
News Update - False Statements
Jan0
- Truth-In-Mortgage Documents
Action Date: January 11, 2012
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Legislation needed in every state:
The Truth-In-Mortgage Documents Act
1. On every Mortgage Assignment, and every Missing or Lost Assignment Affidavit, filed in the Official Records of any county in this State, or filed in any Court in this State, each signer, including any witness or notary, must sign his or her own name, regardless of any authorization by any individual or entity to sign any other name.
2. On every Mortgage Assignment, and every Missing or Lost Assignment Affidavit, filed in the Official Records of any county in this State, or filed in any Court in this State, each signer, including any witness or notary, must set forth his or her actual job title, and the name of his or her actual employer, regardless of any authorization by any individual or entity to state any other job title or employer. Any individual signing as an officer of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (”MERS”) must state the name of the Nominee/Lender in addition to setting forth his or her actual job title, and the name of his or her actual employer.
3. On every Mortgage Assignment, and every Missing or Lost Assignment Affidavit filed in the Official Records of any county in this State, or filed in any Court in this State, each signer, including any witness, must set forth his or her actual work address at the time of the signing, regardless of any authorization by any individual or entity to state any other address.
4. On every Mortgage Assignment filed in the Official Records of any county in this State, or filed in any Court in this State, the effective date of the Assignment must be plainly and exactly set forth by day, month and year. Effective dates such as “On or before” are not permitted.
5. On every Mortgage Assignment, and every Missing or Lost Assignment Affidavit, filed in the Official Records of any county in this State, or filed in any Court in this State, each signer, including any witness or notary, must sign his or her own name, using a full signature stating first and last name, and may not use initials or abbreviations or marks, regardless of any authorization by any individual or entity to sign using initials, abbreviations or marks.
News Update - Mortgage Fraud
Jan0
- Law Offices of David J. Stern
- ProVest
- PTA
Action Date: January 4, 2012
Location: FT. Lauderdale, FL
In the lawsuit filed by DJSP Enterprises against David J. Stern and the Law Offices of David J. Stern, there are also allegations involving ProVest, the process server used by Stern and most of the other major foreclosure mills hired by Lender Processing Services in over 20 states.
The allegations regarding ProVest are found in paragraphs 36-38:
36. Prior to the Transaction, the Seller Defendants also knowingly and systematically inflated their process of service costs to the Court. Specifically, Seller Defendants engineered a fraudulent scheme whereby they directed their process servicing work to a process servicing company called ProVest. The Seller Defendants caused each file to generate four or five separate fees for service of process regardless of whether service of process on multiple defendants was necessary or appropriate and regardless of whether service of process for multiple defendants could be achieved at the same address.
37. In exchange for receiving these inflated service of process fees, ProVest, in turn, routinely referred back to PTA servicing requests for “skip tracing” to locate defendants for whom ProVest purportedly did not have accurate street address information to effect service of process. ProVest “hired” and paid fees to PTA for “skip tracing” services despite the fact that ProVest had the ability and resources to perform “skip tracing” itself and routinely did so itself.
38. The Seller Defendants’ arrangement with ProVest amounted to a kickback scheme. DS Law padded and inflated its process servicing costs which were billed to its clients and added to the court costs assessed to foreclosure defendants. In exchange for feeding this work to ProVest, PTA earned manufactured “skip tracing” fees which inflated PTA’s revenues and profits and which represented another way in which the Seller Defendants artificially inflated the revenues of the Target Business prior to the Transaction.
News Update - Mortgage Fraud
Jan0
- DJSP Enterprises
- Law Offices of David J. Stern
Action Date: January 4, 2012
Location: FT. Lauderdale, FL
DJSP Enterprises, the publicly-traded company that was supposed to make millions for investors from the foreclosure services it provided to The Law Offices of David Stern (”the Stern Firm”), sued David J. Stern and the Law Offices of David Stern.
Stern Law mortgage foreclosure caseload rose from 15,000 in 2006 to 70,400 in 2009.
In 2009, Stern Law handled 20% of all foreclosures in Florida.
Stern Law’s clients included all 10 of the top 10, and 17 of the top 20 mortgage servicers in the U.S. including Fannie, Freddie, Citibank, BOA, Goldman Sachs, GMAC and Wells Fargo.
The non-legal, back room servicers related to foreclosures included REO services: property inspection, valuation, eviction, broker assignment - these were performed by DJSP Enterprises - the sole client was Stern Law.
Here are Paragraphs 29 -35:
29. The Seller Defendants fraudulently induced Plaintiffs DAL and DJSP into entering into the Transaction by fraudulently and artificially inflating the Target Business’ actual revenues, by intentionally failing to disclose that the Target Business and DS Law were not, in fact, operating in accordance with all applicable laws, and by concealing that DS Law was in jeopardy of losing its largest clients due to DS Law’s unlawful conduct. Indeed, before entering into the Transaction, the Seller Defendants knew that DS Law and the Target Business had been systematically falsifying and/or back-dating pertinent legal documents, submitting such documents to the courts, routinely misplacing and losing original key documents, filing foreclosures with inaccurate and/or incomplete documents, prosecuting foreclosure cases without obtaining proper service of process, and were in jeopardy of losing the Seller Defendants’ largest foreclosure clients due to such conduct.
30. By cutting corners in the foreclosure process without following the rule of law, the Defendants artificially reduced the expenses of the Target Business which falsely inflated the profitability of the Target Business.
31. To summarize, the Seller Defendants failed to disclose to DJSP and DAL that DS Law and the Target Business were systematically operating in an unlawful manner. In addition, the Seller Defendants failed to disclose to DJSP and DAL that the Target Business’ reported revenues were not accurate, inflated, and improperly calculated and that the expenses of the business were also distorted due to the systematic practices designed to “shorten” the legal process. The Seller Defendants falsely led DAL and DJSP to believe that they were acquiring a long-term profitable business that operated in accordance with all applicable laws to induce DAL and DJSP to enter into the Transaction.
33. Prior to the Transaction, the Seller Defendants were at all times well aware that DS Law and the Target Business were intentionally perpetuating a fraud on the courts by, inter alia, systematically filing forged documents, forging signatures on such documents, fraudulently backdating documents, improperly notarizing and witnessing documents, fabricating documents, signing affidavits without reviewing or verifying the information contained therein, prosecuting foreclosure cases without obtaining proper service of process, and filing foreclosures with inaccurate and/or incomplete documents.
34. Indeed, the Seller Defendants directed employees of DS Law and the Target Business to purposefully overlook glaring inaccuracies in foreclosure pleadings and to essentially rubber stamp computer generated documents without reviewing or verifying the accuracy of the documents. New attorneys at DS Law were not only encouraged, but were even ordered to sign legal filings and pleadings without reading them. As a result, false and inaccurate documents were routinely executed and filed with the courts in an effort to hasten foreclosure proceedings and illegally obtain final judgments of foreclosure for the Seller Defendants’ clients.
35. The Seller Defendants even incentivized these unscrupulous and unlawful practices by giving their employees bonuses and extravagant gifts for churning out the highest number of foreclosure cases in the least amount of time. The Seller Defendants encouraged contests between DS Law attorneys to see who could jam a foreclosure case through the courts the fastest.
News Update - Bank Fraud
Jan0
- America’s Servicing Company
- Anita Antonelli
- SASCO Trust 2005-RF4
- U.S. Bank, N.A.
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Action Date: January 3, 2012
Location: Delaware, OH
The Closing Date for SASCO Trust 2005-RF4 is August 31, 2005.
All of the mortgages in the SASCO 2005-RF4 Trust were required to have been deposited in that trust by August 31, 2005.
This is particularly significant right now because SASCO 2005-RF4 is the trust that is claiming to own the Bayless Family Mortgage in Delaware, Ohio, and trying to remove the Bayless family from their home this week.
SASCO is trust shorthand for Structured Asset Securities Corporation.
In almost every case, SASCO trusts CANNOT PRODUCE THE MORTGAGE ASSIGNMENTS required by the trust documents.
In almost every foreclosure case filed by U.S. Bank as Trustee for a SASCO trust, the mortgage assignment is dated several YEARS after the trust was supposed to have acquired the mortgage.
What mortgage document mill consistently supplies these “years late” Assignments? Consistently, that is America’s Servicing Company (ASC) in Ft. Mill, SC, a subsidiary of Wells Fargo Bank.
Who are the signers of these “years late” Assignments? Anita Antonelli, China Brown, Natasha Clark, Nikli Cureton and Herman John Kennerty - the five most prolific robo-signers at ASC -have signed hundreds of these Assignments.
If the trust is a SASCO trust - STRIKE ONE;
If the Assignment is dated years after the trust closing date - STRIKE TWO; and
If the Assignment is signed by Antonelli, Brown, Clark, Cureton or Kennerty and notarized in York County, SC - STRIKE THREE.
Throw the bank out - not the Bayless Family.
As for Anita Antonelli, who signed the Mortgage Assignment in the Bayless case:
Many times Anita Antonelli is the Vice President of Loan Documentation for Wells Fargo Bank.
But then she is also often the Default Documents Manager for Wells Fargo Bank.
At the same time, Antonelli is often an Assistant Secretary of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.
She is also an Assistant Secretary for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. acting as a Nominee for American Home Mortgage…
…and acting as a Nominee for Hilton Head Mortgage, LLC…
…and acting as a Nominee for DHI Mortgage Co., Ltd….
…and acting as a Nominee for Myers Park Mortgage, Inc…
…and acting as a Nominee for CTX Mortgage Co., LLC…
…and acting as a Nominee for Market Street Mortgage Corp…
…and acting as a Nominee for Loan City…
…and acting as a Nominee for Mortgage Network, Inc.
With this history, why would anyone trust the validity of a mortgage assignment signed by Anita Antonelli - and particularly, why would anyone rely on such a document when produced by a SASCO trust?
News Update - Bank Fraud
Jan1
- American Home Mortgage Servicing
- Sand Canyon Corporation
- Kathy Smith
- Soundview Home Loan Trust, 2007-OPT2
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Action Date: January 1, 2012
Location: Maui, HI
On January 2, 2012, Wells Fargo Bank and American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. (“AHMSI”) will attempt to force the Tehiva/Phillips family from their family home on 5305 Hana Highway in Maui, Hawaii. This has been the family home for over 100 years.
Wells Fargo is acting as the Trustee for an RMBS Trust, Soundview Home Loan Trust 2007-OPT2. AHMSI is acting as the servicer for the trust.
Wells Fargo and AHMSI have relied on a fraudulent Mortgage Assignment in this foreclosure eviction.
The Assignment is dated June 24, 2010 and was signed by Kathy Smith in Duval County, Florida. Smith purports to be a corporate officer (Assistant Secretary) of Sand Canyon Corporation.
Kathy Smith is not and has never been employed by Sand Canyon Corporation; she is actually employed by AHMSI in its Jacksonville, FL (Duval County) office.
On Hillsborough County, FL, document 2010350478, Kathy Smith swore she was an employee of AHMSI on October 1, 2010.
On Hillsborough County, FL document 20100057228, Kathy Smith swore she was Assistant Secretary of AHMSI on February 8, 2010.
In the Memorandum Decision of the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Arizona in the matter of the bankruptcy of Anthony Tarantola, Case No. 4:09-bk-09703-EWH, Kathy Smith is referred to on Page 5, lines 8-9, as the Assistant Secretary of AHMSI.
To aid in foreclosures, Kathy Smith has used all of the following different job titles:
- Assistant Secretary and Vice President, Ameriquest Mortgage Company (February 3, 2010);
- Assistant Secretary and Vice President, Citi Residential, Inc., Attorney-in-Fact for Ameriquest Mortgage Company (April 12, 2010);
- Attorney-in-Fact, Argent Mortgage Corporation (January 13, 2010);
- Assistant Secretary, Citibank, N.A., as Trustee for American Home Mortgage Asset Trust 2006-3 Mortgage-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-3; (January 13, 2010);
- Assistant Secretary, Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Indenture Trustee for American Home Mortgage Investment Trust 2006-3, Mortgage-Backed Notes, Series 2006-3 (January 13, 2010);
- Attorney-in-Fact, New Century Mortgage Corporation (January 19, 2010);
- Assistant Secretary, Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option One Mortgage Corporation (April 12, 2010)
- Assistant Secretary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as Nominee for American Brokers Conduit (February 25, 2010);
- Assistant Secretary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as Nominee for American Home Mortgage (February 18, 2010);
- Assistant Secretary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as Nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance (January 25, 2010);
- Assistant Secretary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as Nominee for Beazer Mortgage Corporation (January 13, 2010);
- Assistant Secretary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as Nominee for HomeBanc Mortgage Corporation (January 11, 2010); and
- Assistant Secretary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as Nominee for Taylor, Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corporation (May 7, 2010).
The President of Sand Canyon Corporation, Dale M. Sugimoto, submitted a sworn Declaration signed on March 18, 2009, stating that Sand Canyon Corporation did not own or service any residential real estate mortgages. Despite this sworn statement of the company president, the Assignment in the Tehiva/Phillips foreclosure has Kathy Smith, purporting to act as an officer of Sand Canyon, to transfer the Tehiva/Phillips mortgage to the Soundview Trust. The Sugimoto Declaration was submitted in bankruptcy court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, New Orleans Division, as document 52-3, in the case of Ron Wilson, Case No. 10-51328.
Kathy Smith is also not listed as an officer of Sand Canyon Corporation in the Florida corporate records, nor did Sand Canyon have offices in Florida, where the Assignment was notarized.
The closing date of the Soundview Trust 2007-OPT2 was July 10, 2007. The trust was not authorized to acquire mortgages after this date; and certainly was not authorized to ever acquire any non-performing mortgages.
For all of the reasons set forth above, Wells Fargo and AHMSI should immediately cease their attempts to seize the Tehiva/Phillips home. Wells Fargo should be required to produce Kathy Smith in court in Hawaii and to produce the records of the trust showing that the trust acquired the Tehiva/Phillips mortgage in 2010 as represented by Smith.
News Update - Mortgage Fraud
Dec0
- Bear Stearns
- Lender Processing Services
- Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems
Action Date: December 11, 2011
Location: Jacksonville, FL
There is substantial evidence that mortgage servicing companies and their lawyers are continuing to file fraudulent mortgage assignments in county recorders offices throughout the country. In April, 2011, the widespread abuses, including massive forgeries, were exposed in a 60 Minutes segment that focused on employees of Docx, a subsidiary of Lender Processing Services, who forged the name “Linda Green” to mortgage assignments used in foreclosures.
Several weeks later, Guilford County, NC County Recorder Jeff Thigpen came forward with a comprehensive study of the “Linda Green” forgeries in his county’s records - finding over 2000 documents signed by Linda Green with 4 - 15 significant signature variations. County Recorder John O’Brien in Massachusetts and Curtis Hertel in Michigan conducted similar comprehensive studies with similar results.
In November, 2011, the Nevada Attorney General’s office filed the first criminal charges against employees of Lender Processing Services for falsifying mortgage documents.
An examination of recent filings by mortgage servicers shows that these companies are exacerbating the problem of fraudulent documents.
Mortgage assignments are now being filed with the following language:
“This Assignment is to supplement and ratify that certain Assignment of Mortgage recorded in Original Records Book 19467 at Page 1710 Original Records Book 19888 at Page 1466 of Hillsborough County, Florida.” (Instrument #2011294512, Hillsborough County, Florida, filed September 12, 2011.)
An examination of the “ratified” Assignment shows that it is one of the Linda Green forged documents. It is very similar to the Linda Green forged signature demonstrated by LPS employee Chris Pendley on the 60 Minutes segment.
Instead of admissions that the documents are forgeries, the mortgage servicers are filing “ratifications.” These ratifications are signed by other employees of mortgage servicing companies, using titles of MERS officers.
The information continues to be false. In the first “Linda Green” Assignment, the mortgage is reported to have been transferred on September 9, 2009. In the “ratified” version, the mortgage is reported to have been transferred on July 13, 2011.
Both Assignments purport to transfer a mortgage made by American Brokers Conduit to a Bear Stearns trust (Bear Stearns ABS, Series 2006-3) that closed in 2006. U.S. Bank is the trustee for this trust. American Home Mortgage Servicing is the servicer. The first assignment was filed on September 16, 2009 - just two weeks before the date on the Lis Pendens (initial foreclosure filing) prepared by the foreclosure mill, Shapiro & Fishman, LLP.
If the 2009 Assignment from MERS to the trust were valid, MERS would have had nothing to transfer in 2011. In Latin, this concept is stated: Nemo dat quod non habet. Translation: one cannot give what one does not have.
The signers on the 2011 Assignment claim to be corporate officers of MERS, though they are not listed as such in the records of the Florida Secretary of State. (The 2011 Assignment was notarized in Duval County, FL.)
These “ratification” filings are a good indication that the Consent Order entered by the FDIC and the OCC on April 13, 2011, are not being adequately monitored.
Why would any trust or mortgage servicer ratify conduct that has been described as criminal conduct by attorneys general?
These filings are a wreck on a wreck.