In the post-Schwartzwald world, lenders will be very cautious to make sure that they have the right to bring the foreclosure in the first place. As the law currently stands, the plaintiff can bring the foreclosure if the plaintiff either holds the note or was assigned the mortgage. However, a case is now being appealed to the Supreme Court of Ohio to determine whether the plaintiff must hold both the note and the mortgage of record in order to bring the foreclosure case.
The abrupt slowdown came in response to the OCC's April release of minimum standards for foreclosure sales, which are usually the final act in the foreclosure process.
Failure to comply with this guidance may result in unsafe and unsound banking practices, non-compliance with foreclosure related consent orders, as applicable, and/or require rescission of completed foreclosures.
You’ve probably heard the horror stories about unscrupulous mortgage servicing companies charging homeowners excessive fees and, in some cases, taking their homes through illegal foreclosures.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) recently asked two federal agencies for records that might shed light on these practices. Sounds reasonable to us, but these agencies, led by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Comptroller of the Currency Thomas Curry, flat out refused to hand over the documents.
We find it incomprehensible that these federal agencies would refuse to supply documents that detail how mortgage servicing companies broke federal laws.
One memo from 2005 even states the company will have to make costly settlements because, "the simple fact that unauthorized entry into an occupied property makes Safeguard's position difficult to defend."
"The police are being called and they're not taking out criminal reports. The prosecutors are not getting involved,” said Stein.
Force-Placed Insurance Lawsuit
After verifying the gap in coverage, QBE instituted polices that allegedly bore little relation to the premises and instead reflected Wells Fargo's entire portfolio of mortgages in the state.
The arrangement allegedly resulted in homeowners being charged five to six times what they would pay had the policies been priced competitively, according to the lawsuit.
AG alleges that in at least twenty-five (25) cases in New Mexico, Green Tree became the personal representative of a deceased homeowner’s estate in order to quickly complete a foreclosure against the home of the deceased consumer. Green Tree would file documents in court stating that it was unaware of any heirs with legal priority over Green Tree when, in some cases, Green Tree clearly knew that a surviving spouse or children existed and could be located.
MOTION: Due to recent information obtained by Plaintiff(s) regarding the deficiencies, mishandling and possible misconduct by Aurora Loan Services during the foreclosure action taken against Plaintiffs.
There has also been a recent notice of a Class Action Lawsuit against the law firm that processed the foreclosure on above mentioned property.
Plaintiff(s) are requesting a postponement of the Sheriff Sale... until there can be a thorough investigation into the mishandling of Plaintiff(s) mortgage servicing by Aurora Loan Services and Reisenfeld & Associates.
ORDER: After review, the Court finds the motion well taken.
Because Mbaku, a law-school graduate who doesn't practice law, is representing himself, the judge is given wider latitude to read between the lines of a complaint since plaintiffs might not be as sophisticated or well-versed in the complexities of law.
"Plaintiffs could illegally obtain or otherwise steal a promissory note ... from any bank ... and present themselves at a ... hearing and be deemed ... to be the proper party to foreclose," Mbaku wrote.
Judge Brimmer thought that was enough to keep the lawsuit alive.
EMC wrongfully declared that the plaintiff was in default because he did not have hazard insurance on the property. EMC placed insurance on the property at a very high premium and added that premium to the plaintiff’s principal balance. Although the plaintiff provided a proof of insurance, EMC brought a foreclosure action.
The plaintiff tried to make payments under the terms of the previous mortgage, but those payments were not accepted by EMC. EMC then declared the mortgage in default and filed a foreclosure action.
At this point, the plaintiff has not adequately alleged any breach of contract claim. However, this dispute at its heart turns on plaintiff’s assertion that the defendants violated the terms of the mortgage agreement by improperly increasing his balance and refusing to accept his payments. Those claims sound in breach of contract and may be colorable if the plaintiff repleads them in a more viable manner.
More than a dozen lawyers have surfaced with offers to help an Aurora woman in her constitutional challenge of Colorado's foreclosure laws, a case she has battled on her own for about two years.
This is one of the first legal disputes to show the real strength of HBOR and it’s effectiveness in stalling proceedings and increasing expenses for servicers that are accused of violating one of the provisions of HBOR (Homeowner Bill of Rights).
"The biggest problem with the HBOR from the investor standpoint is the litigation risk of having to pay legal fees," Jackson said. "The way the thing breaks down is when you get an injunction, the prevailing borrower gets all of their legal fees paid by the servicer and the investor."
When homeowners discovered that an account that was supposed to compensate them for foreclosure abuses lacked sufficient money to cash their checks, the consulting firm at the center of the mishap promised that the problem was fixed and that the checks were valid.
But three weeks later, that promise fell short.
This time, according to officials briefed on the matter, the consulting firm, Rust, issued a raft of checks with wrong amounts. The mistake, officials said, cheated struggling homeowners out of thousands of dollars.
Federal authorities announced fraud charges against a debt settlement company on Tuesday, in the first criminal case based on work by the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
On behalf of all homeowners harmed by illegal or questionable banking and mortgage lender activities this petition is asking for a complete review of the Independent Foreclosure Review, The Federal Reserve's and the Office of the Comptroller of Currency role in the clearly mishandled
Wells Fargo’s foreclosure practices continue to generate criticism. Last month, ABC News reported that Delores Dingman, an 80-year-old resident of Tualatin, Oregon, fought Wells Fargo for three years to save her home from repossession.
The bank failed to prove Dingman ever missed a payment.
In March, Wells Fargo wrongly foreclosed on Larry Delassus. The bank was supposed to foreclose on his neighbor, but due to a simple typo, Delassus became involved in an over-two-year battle to save his home from the bank. Despite the error, Wells Fargo continued its foreclosure, eventually gaining possession of Delassus’ home, primarily because he was unable to afford the bank’s fees. On December 19, 2012, Delassus died from heart failure in a Torrence courtroom while listening to his attorney argue his case.
The law allows banks to assert their right to follow through on a foreclosure even if they don't have the paperwork to prove they hold the mortgage. Colorado is the only state that allows lawyers to submit unsworn statements attesting that a particular bank has the right to foreclose.
Banksters say the judge was mistaken.
Upon review of the record on appeal, this Court questioned whether EMC had standing to file an action in foreclosure at the time it filed its complaint. Thus, this Court issued an order requiring EMC to respond and demonstrate its standing. EMC failed to do so.
As EMC has not established it had standing to bring this action at the time it filed its complaint in foreclosure, the judgment against Mr. Atkinson cannot stand. In light of the foregoing, we can only conclude that Mr. Atkinson is entitled to have the agreed judgment entry of foreclosure VACATED.
New York AG:
Bank of America said it will "work quickly" to address the 129 "customer servicing problems" that Schneiderman identified. The bank added that it has provided more than 10,000 New York homeowners with more than $1 billion in aid. IT IS NOT AID; YOU ARE RETURNING A MERE PITTANCE OF THE AMOUNT OF MONEY YOU HAVE STOLEN BY COMMITTING STATE JAIL FELONIES!
The Supreme Court was entitled to reject the opinion of the plaintiff's appraiser as without probative value in light of the lack of evidentiary foundation set forth in his affidavit. Especially here, in light of the large discrepancy between the appraised value and the relatively low sale price at the foreclosure sale, the Supreme Court properly declined to accept the appraiser's opinion on its face without evidentiary support.
According to McDonnell's expert analysis, there is no evidence in the record showing the Wolfs' Note and Security Instrument were properly negotiated, delivered, or transferred to all necessary parties in the securitization chain as required.There are fatal breaks in the chain of title which indicate these instruments were never transferred into the Trust. In McDonnell's expert opinion, Defendant Wells Fargo is not the current owner and holder of the Wolfs' Note and Deed of Trust.
It is a basic axiom of American jurisprudence that legal issues are classified as either “jurisdictional” or “nonjurisdictional.” If a rule or requirement is classified as jurisdictional, then “courts will interpret and apply it rigidly, literally, and mercilessly.” Jurisdictional defects are absolutely fatal to a claim. Moreover, parties neither waive jurisdictional requirements nor consent to noncompliance with them. Parties can raise jurisdictional defects at any time in the litigation, including for the first time on appeal, and courts are obliged to raise such defects sua sponte, even after litigation on the merits.
Finally, courts may not consider using equitable doctrines to bend jurisdictional rules under any circumstances.
Bryan and Ileana Russell received eviction notices from a law firm last year, even though they had never missed a mortgage payment. The Russells' attorney discovered that a mistake had been made and that the bank was pursuing foreclosure.
Banks have apparently continued to fabricate documents, rip off customers and illegally kick people out of their homes. Potentially hundreds of thousands of homes could be effectively stolen by the big banks without any sanctions.(And with all the evidence collected, judges continue to bow to the criminal banks and their lawyers.)
Actually, it's more blatant and brazen than ever.
And this one:
Chase continued to take money from Carrillo for five years and even put her through the painful and frustrating process of a loan modification, when the property had already been sold by Wells Fargo, and in the meantime, Carrillo's clothes, furniture, and personal belongings remain locked in the house. What happened to the $20,000 is anybody's guess.
The Vacant and Foreclosing Property Ordinance requires a bank or other company that files a foreclosure petition on any property in Worcester to notify the city and deposit $5,000 for each foreclosure petition in a special account controlled by the city treasurer.
But there’s just one problem.
Banks and other financial institutions increasingly are lumping the $5,000 cost of the property registration bond into what the borrower owes. “Even if the city says the bank doesn’t owe the money any more, it’s still on your loan.”
Smaller Than Regulators Forecasted
Promoting Professionalism Through Criminal Prosecutions and Treble Damages
Unbeknownst to many lawyers, at least twelve jurisdictions — including New York and California — have statutes on the books that single out lawyers who engage in deceit or collusion. In nearly all of these jurisdictions, a lawyer found to have engaged in deceit or collusion faces criminal penalties and/or civil liability in the form of treble damages.
While fishing for bank-related patents this gem surfaced and jumped into the net. At first it wasn’t apparent it was a keeper because the UETA issue has not been in the forefront of foreclosure defense. However, taking the time to dissect the document it became apparent that, as some of us have suspected, there is a mandatory methodology from the origination of the mortgage loan on a trip to the securitized trust that includes the EXPLICIT CONSENT of the obligor (homeowner).
This is a lot to digest – but you need to know and understand this information in order to plead your case correctly before the courts.
MERSCORP, INC. executives claimed that “MERS” was created to avoid the cost of recordation at the state levels while they transferred their securitized documents about… but, it appears, that too was a misrepresentation possibly in order to avoid charges of “Fraud in the Factum.”
Thousands of Bay Area homeowners are fighting in court to save their homes from a foreclosure system rife with mistakes,mismanagement and even fraud, a joint investigation by the Center for Investigative Reporting and NBC Bay Area found.
"I had to go through hell for 5 1/2 years to get my house back," she said. "Those are the steps I had to take to get to where I am today. [But] how many people don't know what to do?" "It took so many years out of my life, and at what cost, when it could have been done simpler," Isabella said in a recent interview, surrounded by years' worth of court filings, tears streaming down her cheeks. "My full-time job was this."
BONY’S MOTION TO DISMISS!
As you read the Opposition you begin to realize the tricks and hazards opposing counsels will throw in the path of Pro Ses. They do this to attorneys too – and some are just not bright enough to catch the fast balls. Even when you realize you have to read and respond to every little twist, you can still be out maneuvered. This was a real victory for Pro Se and mandatory reading for each and every homeowner facing foreclosure and especially for those thinking about going in Pro Se.
A bank representative acknowledged receiving the check two days later, Thomas said. But the payment went missing later that week and was not applied to his mortgage. Bank of America foreclosed on his home and sold it at auction. He moved out April 13.
“If Plaintiff contends that ownership of the note and deed of trust had been severed, that documents may have been improperly signed, or that the notarization process was fraudulent, she should have put into the record admissible evidence supporting such assertions. She did not.
Adding insult to injury, the banks rarely inform the former homeowner of this cynical move. Not only does often find out years later that he’s on the hook for property taxes and in some cases, fines from the local government, but the servicer has made such a mess of title that the owner can’t get rid of the property, unless he takes a quiet title action, which typically can’t commence until five years after the foreclosure was abandoned.
Judgment reversed and vacated for lack of jurisdiction, as are all judgments, orders and decrees issued by the trial court after the April 20, 2010 voluntary dismissal.
The fraud throughout the secondary mortgage market has been pervasive:
1. Promissory notes intended for securitized trusts based on my experience were either intentionally never deposited into the securitized trust in the first place on purpose with full knowledge by everyone involved or were deposited in the trusts only as copies.
2. Based on the testimony of whistleblowers and forthright bank executives, lenders intentionally destroyed most of their original notes and instead before doing so - digitized them, supposedly for convenience — which of course destroyed their status as negotiable instruments, leaving only copies somewhere, and often not with the Trustee.
In RMBS transactions, not only do lenders and upstream transferees of interests in real estate have to conform to the “wet ink” requirements of the recording statutes, they also have to conform to the terms contained in the PSAs that govern the transfer of documents into and out of the trusts. An attack upon the transfer of loan documents based on ultra vires acts of the trust will render those transfers unlawful and void as a matter of law. The result seems potentially catastrophic to secured lenders, and it very well may be. Entities that took title to interests in real estate could possibly lose their status or their position as bona fide purchasers.
Wells Fargo filed foreclosure action and attached a note payable to Option One. The Bohatkas filed a motion to dismiss asserting that the Wells Fargo lacked standing as the note was payable to a different entity. At the hearing on the motion to dismiss, Wells Fargo produced an allonge. Counsel for the Bohatkas urged the trial court to examine the original note and mortgage and determine whether the allonge had ever been "affixed" to the note. The trial court determined that nothing had ever been "affixed" to the note and dismissed the complaint with prejudice. The trial court stated:
This is my ruling; Motion to Dismiss granted. Nothing was attached. There is no endorsement. There is no allonge, and there cannot be any allonge affixed before filing, so dismissal is with prejudice. I also suspect that this document [the allonge] was created to defeat the defendants’ motion. I want to preserve the originals by a separate order ... please draft a separate order that the original documents will remain in the court file and will not be removed without my authorization by anyone. I reserve the right to send them to the attorney general for investigation of this activity by plaintiff and its counsel.
Wells Fargo appealed. The 1st DCA affirms the dismissal, however, it held the dismissal should be without prejudice because Wells Fargo produced evidence at the hearing from which it could amend the complaint.
The 1st DCA goes into a lengthy discussion on allonges and the fact that case law in Florida is lacking on the subject.
[Any person] guilty of falsely preparing any book, paper, record, instrument in writing, or other matter or thing, with intent to produce it, or allow it to be produced as genuine upon any trial, proceeding or inquiry whatever, authorized by law, shall be guilty of a felony.
Recent court rulings may help clarify foreclosure practices
by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Ingham County Register of Deeds Curtis Hertel Jr. hopes that recent court rulings will help stem the tide of what he says are illegal foreclosures in the county.
One woman’s nightmarish odyssey through the system that was supposed to help get her back on her feet.
Like far too many Americans, Debbie Marler of South Point, Ohio has her own foreclosure horror story. It involves one house, seven fraudulent mortgage assignments, three foreclosures, as many states, and five years. It ruined her career prospects, threatened her retirement security, and turned her life into what she calls “a living nightmare.”
A crime wave will steal billions from unsuspecting homeowners this year - maybe some of it from YOU!
Mortgage fraud is on the rise. However, these silently-perpetrated crimes are preventable. The fraudsters can be caught and stopped. You and your home can be protected. Will mortgage fraud take more homes, or will this be the year homeowners win?
Minnesota Supreme Court rules
The state Supreme Court decision could boost homeowners fighting defective sheriff’s sales. Minnesota’s Supreme Court has tightened the screws a bit on home foreclosures. "The decision sets a strict standard that could impact “hundreds” of potentially defective or illegal foreclosure sales in the state."
Uncertainty about the fate of their home translates to continuing mental anguish for many owners. Homeownership is a big part of the American dream, says Duckworth, and distress over foreclosure can be particularly hard-hitting for Americans, promoting what he calls "a sense of feeling trapped for some people who are underwater on their homes." He added that the "loss of one's dream home has great potential to generate shame and humiliation, which raises risks of depression, substance abuse and bad outcomes."
DO NOT WAIVE ANY LEGAL CLAIMS THEY MIGHT HAVE AGAINST THE BANK THAT FORECLOSED ON THEM.
Whether you are still in your home or not you should consider consulting a lawyer in your state who is experienced in consumer, banking and foreclosure issues to determine whether or not you may still have a civil claim against the bank, or even whether the fraud in your case was so egregious that
a court might be persuaded to unwind the foreclosure all together.
Wells Fargo dragged this 80 year old paying customer through 3 years of meritless litigation, and it took a judge to explain to Wells that their 'paying customer' never missed a payment. Three years!
In Latest Setback For Troubled Program
On Tuesday, some of the first people to receive payouts under the $9.2 billion deal between federal regulators and the mortgage industry called into a government hotline to report that their bank would not cash their check, the Federal Reserve announced in a press release.
Banks will have to bring with them the original note and accompanying documents including the original loan application proving their ownership which in most cases, they do not have, and they know it.
Today's Hearing on...
If foreclosure victims get justice, trace it back to a bad decision to stonewall Elizabeth Warren last week.
Despite OCC and the Fed’s best efforts to protect banks from harm, they’ve actually exposed them like never before.
There’s an adage that says “Justice Delayed is Justice Denied.” That is absolutely applicable to defendants in foreclosure courts whose cases are sound based on the rules of law - but who fall victim to the prejudicial belief in society and our courts that the lenders must be right because if borrowers simply would pay their bills they wouldn’t be in foreclosure.
Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Jennifer Bailey is quoted as saying:
“If they believe that an injustice has been done, they can appeal.”
Causing further delay, expense and harm to the VICTIM!
Forced placed insurance is a mechanism by which the banks can force people into foreclosure based on collusive action between the insurer and the bank. If that happens, then they have unilaterally changed the APR and breached the contract. Demanding the payment and declaring a default based upon a false declaration of insurance, or a false declaration of the cost of force-placed insurance could invalidate the notice of default, the foreclosure, the sale and the eviction.
Lawsky also pointed out that the settlement that has now been reached will implement some considerable reforms that will cease that type of practice at Assurant, while offering homeowners who were victims of this practice with some restitution.
MERS Helps Wall Street Steal Your Home
The financial sector created MERS to destroy property records so that it would be easier to steal homes.
In truth, since they screwed up all the property records, even the banksters have no idea who owes who what. So they just start foreclosing on everything. Don’t owe a mortgage? Who cares, they foreclose anyway.
Despite being Outlawed, Illegal and Restricted...
From the homeowner who died fighting a foreclosure based on a typo to the family evicted at gunpoint at 3am, there is no shortage of heartbreaking stories of improper evictions. But while victims of wrongful foreclosures are frequently too small to find justice, the banks perpetuating the crimes against them remain far too big to be held accountable.
In some instances, homeowners who ultimately lost their home are compensated the same as those who did not.
Consumer advocates have criticized the deal, saying the regulators settled for too low a price by letting banks avoid full responsibility for wrongful foreclosures.
Mortgage Electronic Registration System
Start video at 3:50 | 1 CLE Credit Hour
This presentation will discuss the state of the foreclosure crisis and analyze the legal issues and concerns behind the banks efforts to foreclose.
Our Counties are being robbed of billions of dollars in recordation fees through unrecorded MERS assignments and we the people demand that they be paid. From the first MERS loan to the very last one.
Crime, suicide, grand theft, civil rights, lawlessness
How bad is it? This video will tell you.
Of note, at oral argument of this motion to reargue, plaintiff admitted that MERS did not have authority to assign the Note when it assigned the mortgage in 2008 and admitted that the assignment of the mortgage cannot effectuate the assignment of the note.
MERS, which is not itself the owner of the note and mortgage, does not have authority to assign ownership of the note and mortgage to plaintiff. Moreover, it is well established that an action for foreclosure of a mortgage may not be brought by one who has no title to it.
The indorsement in blank did not establish that the Bank had the right to enforce the note when it filed suit, because the indorsement was undated.
Moreover, the Bank’s standing also was not established by its act of filing of the original note. Although the filing of the original blank-indorsed note showed the Bank’s possession of (and thus right to enforce) it at the time of filing the note, that filing occurred more than a year after the Bank filed suit. As for the Purchase and Assumption Agreement, that Agreement was not authenticated for purposes of summary judgment. Finally, the affidavit of amounts due and owing did state that the Bank “holds the Note.” However, like the filing of the original note, the affidavit did not establish that the Bank held the note at the time it filed suit because the affidavit was dated more than two years later.
The note proves the DEBT not the LOSS.
This is an easy case (like personal injury only less paperwork), for lawyers to take on contingency and make a ton of money for themselves and their clients. With standard contingency if the bidder is forced to make a payment in the amount of the bid, then your fee in the above example would be over $100,000.
The regulators were definitely part of the story here, and once you get through the government audit-ese, you can begin to see the picture of how they conspired to ensure the reviews would offer little to no value, and indeed attempt to exonerate the banks. The ensuing calamity only shows how the scheme worked too well, burying any evidence of borrower harm among an avalanche of deliberately cracked design.
He was routinely dispatched by banks or larger field services companies to drill out locks to see whether properties were vacant, only to find that tenants still lived there and had never missed a payment. “Countless times," he said, he received orders to clean out properties that had personal photos on the shelves and fresh food in the refrigerator. "I've even had an order sending me to a property that was never owned by any bank," he said.
“Plaintiff is entitled to a finding that the loan need not be in default to trigger defendants’ obligation to repurchase it,” the court said. “There is simply nothing in the contractual language which limits defendants’ repurchase obligations in such a manner.”
'I can't let this town become Detroit'
Roeser proceeded to buy 69 of the foreclosed condos in the complex himself. Most of the homes he's bought at auction for less than $30,000, then fixed up. Today, he rents out a renovated 800-square-foot, two-bedroom apartment for $675 a month, about $200 below market value.
Our so-called “leaders” would argue that the homeowner has recourse by writing to the credit reporting bureaus, explaining her side of the story. However, the cold, hard reality is that no one reviewing the homeowner’s credit report is going to pay any heed to her protestations of mistreatment. So the bottom line is we, the little guy, are stuck in a system that is able to control our lives by virtue of its sheer size and power. Until those we have elected into office to represent and serve us decide to do so, rather than cater to the banks they’ve deemed “too big to fail”, we will simply have to live with the unfairness, and do the best we can.
In their normal “too big to get slapped down” modus operandi, Northwest Trustee Services filed additional paperwork well beyond the local rule limits…probably thinking the Judge wouldn’t notice. However, Judge Jones did notice.
In order to be entitled to judgment, the Bank must prove its right to enforce the note as of the date of the summary judgment hearing, including how it obtained the Novelle Financial Services note and the circumstances of its loss. The Bank did file a "lost instrument affidavit," but it merely averred that it currently held the note, but could not find it. The Bank does not dispute its burden of proof on this point; it merely argues that by failing to raise this issue in its pleading, Appellants lost their right to complain of the defect.
However, this burden remained with the bank.
for US and UK Depositors
Although few depositors realize it, legally the bank owns the depositor’s funds as soon as they are put in the bank. Our money becomes the bank’s, and we become unsecured creditors holding IOUs or promises to pay. But until now the bank has been obligated to pay the money back on demand in the form of cash.
Over the last two years, state insurance regulators and consumer groups have alleged that banks and insurers have colluded to inflate the price of the insurance. Insurers have allegedly shared profits via multi-million dollar lump sum payments to banks that steer business their way, generous reinsurance arrangements and commissions paid to insurance agencies which employ no insurance agents.
Fannie/Freddie to Homeowners:
Katie Porter encourages Fannie/Freddie homeowners in trouble on their mortgages to open their mail from their banks, even if they would be reluctant to chase a traditional, paperwork-laden modification. Mixed in with those credit card offers from the same bank that is sending you foreclosure notices might be a real opportunity to save your home.
This case presents a particularly difficult issue of first impression: may a debt buyer, suing as the alleged assignee of a claimed consumer debt, be countersued for violating GBL §349 based on allegations that it commenced the lawsuit without any evidence that could prove the claim?
If it commences such an action without having such readily available proof, and if it turns out that such proof is not readily available, the debt buyer may end up not only losing the case, but may also be found liable for substantial compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law. So Ordered:
The foreclosure world has been the subject of some genuinely strange events lately.
“Further, the Court held that a mortgage holder cannot rely on events occurring after the complaint is filed to establish standing,” 11th District Judge Cynthia Westcott Rice stated. “Thus, the plaintiff cannot rely on Civ.R. 17(A) to cure its lack of standing by obtaining an interest in the subject of the litigation after the action is filed and substituting itself as the real party of interest.
Legal Aid Society of Cleveland represented the homeowner.
“They think their loan is going to be modified. They’re told not to worry about the pending foreclosure action,” said Mal Maynard of the Wilmington-based Financial Protection Law Center. “At the last possible minute, they learn that they will not get a modification and are thrown off the cliff into foreclosure."
On the eve of trial, without explanation her bank suddenly dismissed the case, abandoning its nine-year-long effort. Why, after all that time and expense, would the bank get cold feet and reverse course? We will never know for sure, but a good guess is that it didn’t want its evidence exposed to the scrutiny a trial would bring. Keep in mind, that chances are that like Stephanie’s, your mortgage is in a trust bundled with thousands of other loans, and the bank may not want to risk putting all its loans into play should it lose one case.
Foreclosure defense attorneys are becoming increasingly frustrated by the dismal foreclosure statistics and are seeking help from our nation’s criminal prosecutors to investigate the possibility of bringing “foreclosure mills” and banks to justice under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).
Every day, thousands of foreclosures are being illegally filed by foreclosure mills, with the full knowledge that their clients (the plaintiffs) do not have the legal standing to file the case.
Despite all the wrongdoing that caused the financial crisis, prosecutors have been slow to bring charges against individuals who originated bad loans, pooled bad mortgages, and sold bad MBS. Unfortunately, the lack of individual prosecutions signals to participants of the financial industry that wrongdoing not only will go unpunished but will likely even be rewarded financially. Without criminal liability, we risk a repeat of the type of conduct that brought us to the edge of financial ruin.
The judge ruled March 5 that Bank of America had 30 days in which to pay the fine — or the couple's mortgage debt, which totals about $223,000, will be "deemed fully satisfied."
Breach of Settlement Agreement Wells Fargo-Style
Despite the fact that Plaintiff no longer owned the deed or owed any debt to Wells Fargo, Ocwen continued to send Plaintiff monthly bills for another year! Each of the bills listed figures under the headings “Current Amount Due” ($1604) all the way up to $299,068.34.
"...due to the actions of its servicer, Plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment that Wells Fargo breached the March 18, 2011 contract agreement."
This case is scheduled for a jury trial on April 9, 2013
The decision against Dore is the latest stemming from a series of petitions by the Maryland Attorney Grievance Commission against lawyers who, during the height of the foreclosure crisis, cut corners in thousands of foreclosure cases in order to manage overwhelming workloads. So far, one attorney has been reprimanded by the state's highest court for such behavior and several other cases are working their way through the legal system.
For cases with Lost Note claims:
In a decision which could impact foreclosure cases involving missing or lost loan documents, the Appeals Court held that a mortgage is unenforceable and must be discharged where the underlying promissory note securing the mortgage could not be found.
"It truly concerns me, however, that thousands and thousands -- thousands and thousands of mortgage foreclosure actions have been filed with these allegations. I am not certain what remedy, if any, these people would have were it to be determined that MERS was not ever the proper party notwithstanding that these folks [might] have been in default what their recourse, if any, would be. I'm not certain with the satisfaction of mortgages that have been filed on behalf of MERS how good those are and I am not certain how good title to property is that people bought at these foreclosure sales if it turns or becomes established that MERS was indeed not only not the right party but misrepresented by way of their pleadings and affidavits that they held something they didn't own, so I'm not certain of the consequences but it seems vast."
- The Honorable Judge Jon Gordon - September 2005 (Emphasis added)