Welcome to LivingLies Blog – Serving Over 6,400,000 Visitors

Your Source for Information, Resources and Help with your Loan Strategy

Free Resources and Information: SERVICE 520-405-1688

Yesterday’s Top 10 Articles & Pages

Top Articles & Pages Last Month

Top Articles & Pages of the Year: 2011

Online Store: Get help for your loan strategy from LivingLies Experts

Title & Securitization Report – Your starting point to get the information you need for your defense. Livinglies subscribers save $200!

Become a Member of LivingLies Blog - FREE access to LivingLies Experts through member only conferences, FREE webinars, get member only discounts on products, and more!

Expert Declaration - Get an expert declaration produced by LivingLies experts to be used in court for YOUR defense.

Attorney Workbook - Are you an attorney for loan & foreclosure defense? Get instant access to the electronic version of our Attorney Workbook and get forms, cases, statutes, commentary, articles, outlines for mortgage analysis, lessons on securitization and MUCH MORE!

Forensic TILA Loan Analysis - Recommended companion service to Title & Search Report. We will get all your loan closing documents together with our proprietary research database and provide a comprehensive review, report and analysis, ready for a qualified written request, debt validation letter or lawsuit.

DVD Attorney CLE Seminar – Full Day Seminar for lawyers covering all aspects of securitization and foreclosure defense.

---

SEND ALL ROBOSIGNING (SURROGATE SIGNING) EXAMPLES AND PLEADINGS TO ROBOSEARCH.LIVINGLIES@GMAIL.COM

Getting the Judges to Listen and Learn

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

by L Dean

Pasadena TX – I believe that we all know the truth and it does not matter. We know the banks do not have the right to foreclose. I say we all share a little something about our States, our County Records since they are all public record. I believe if you have any common sense at all and I am going to say this to Judges in our Court System you need to go back and get a education about Law. You aren’t listening and you really don’t care. Especially if you are getting a nice little kick back from some of these banks to support their illegal, immoral actions. So all of you join me as I have set up a Username and Password for you to review the Texas Land Records and County Records. Please go to this website which is http://www.texasfile.com/search/
and when you get to the website, please type Username Foreclosure2616@gmail.com. Your Password is BankofNewYork.
Search records for Texas. When you get to the search page please type in Bank of New York. Several options of Bank of New York will populate. Click All. Enjoy the view.

Once you have completed that task I would like to share the Recontrust site with you. Please go to Recontrust.com. Go to Texas then select properties sold. This will list the February 7 Bank of America Foreclosures. Please notice that for all homes that were supposed to be sold on the Courthouse Lobby in Downtown Houston TX on that date some how were all sold to the beneficiary. Now last but not least may I take you to the Harris County Appraisal District at http://www.hcad.org and ask you to click Record Search.

Again, you will be able up at the top of the page to search by name.

Please type in Bank of New York and this will give you the houses Bank of New York inherited since January 2012 which appraisal values are still pending but Bank of New York appears to have gained about 585 homes. I say it is time to go to work and check out your Land and County Records, your Banks foreclosure websites and your Appraisal District to see what you find. Folks I think Bank of New York says it all.

These banks Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and others do not have legal right to foreclose on your property and our Courts and Judges are lazy and do not want to do their job. Quite frankly, All of them pay one another to get rich and do not give a damn about the people of the United States of America. Bank of New York is the biggest thief of them all and I assure you the Investors also need to be thrown under the jail and buried 6 feet under.

Oh and please check out the names of the so called Substitute Trustees and I will give you a few names to look at. Please group them together because they are the substitute trustees for the banks. Recontrust Jeff Leva, Audrey Lewis, Patricia Poston, and my favorites are Follis J ETAL, Kesler Rex Etal, Reder T Etal, Sanchez N Etal. Keep in mind while your are checking all of this out, this is just Harris County, TX. Texas is a big state. What about Grimes County, Chambers County, Montgomery County???? I am sure you will get the big picture when you review this information. Bank of America will be foreclosing on my home March 6, 2012. I have been instructed in a written Letter from Bank of America not to send anymore correspondence in writing regarding my property. The home was scheduled for foreclosure on October 2011, and will without fail be foreclosed on March 6, 2011 signed Janette Castillejos, Litigation Specialist II, Mortgage Resolution Team (MRT) Qualified Written Request (QWRS) & Small Claims Servicing with a enclosure from Bank of America’s attorney Blank & Rome which clearly states I owe the debt. Well when I closed on my house I had no idea 14 days later it would be sold on Wall Street under CWABS 2007-2 Asset Backed Certificates and pooled with a bunch of other mortgages with my loan being on page 41 and that one year later this pool would file a form 15d with the Security Exchange Commission stating that they no longer have enough investors in the pool to report to the SEC. Guess the pool was paid off by the Insurance that is described in the PSA (Pooling and Service Agreement) and somehow they managed to dig up assignments to the promissory note. Like I said, we have lost to a bunch of White Collar Criminals but that is OK, they are bankers, investors, Judges, who all pass around a buck to be corrupt and protect each others asses.

Timeline Stretching for Actual Written Multi-State Settlement

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

Editor’s Comment: The bottom line is that the real negotiations are just beginning. While it is not likely, there is a distinct possibility that the settlement will fall apart because of (a) what the Banks want as wording in the settlements and (b) the knowledge on the part of the AG’s that people are actually watching. The method behind their madness was simply to announce the settlement, let it die down after the settlement gets milked for all is political value, and then write down and file in court whatever they wanted.

The Banks think they can dictate the terms and wording of the settlement agreement. The AG’s don’t want to look like fools or be called out for missing obvious glaring amnesty language for the Banks and immunity from lawsuits involving the looming the national title collapse we will be seeing shortly.

With each passing week, more information emerges revealing the and probing the depths of the base acts committed by the banks against taxpayers who paid, homeowners who supposedly are being required to pay the banks instead of the taxpayer fund which already paid the banks, and the pension funds whose money was lost to begin with.

What all of this means for homeowners, past, present and future, is that they need to be very careful about the accounting for their loan. It isn’t just between them and the lender if the loan is claimed as securitized — and if Fannie or Freddie is involved then it is securitized behind the curtain of the GSE guarantee. Get your own information about (1) the title chain, (2) the securitization chain, (3) the money trial and (4) whatever is being represented in or out of court. The odds are none of those four will match up.

ags-weeks-filing-foreclosure-settlement-documents

by Jon Prior, Housing Wire

The state attorneys general and federal prosecutors will likely file the actual $25 billion foreclosure settlement documents in court by the end of the month, according to a source familiar with the deal.

The top five servicers agreed to general terms in the settlement last week, which would include billions in principal reduction, refinances, and even pay outs to homeowners affected by missteps in the process.

Questions arose recently over whether the finalization of the deal would its change the scope.

Rich Andreano, who co-leads the mortgage banking group at law firm Ballard Spahr, said while it will be difficult for analysts and officials to anticipate precisely how much aid each state will get from the deal until the documents are filed, results should not vary too significantly from the announcement made last week.

“I got the sense last week that they weren’t really ready. They weren’t done. It was one of those things where they were moving so fast that they had to announce it because it was getting leaked out,” Andreano said in an interview.

But the wait is centering around the complexity of the deal.

“We just reached a very large and complicated joint state-federal settlement,” said a spokesman for Iowa AG Tom Miller, who led the investigation and talks. “We are now preparing the materials we must file in court to formalize this agreement.”

For every dollar a servicer writes off, it will get around 50 cents of the $17 billion in settlement “credits.”

So, officials were quick to point out last week that the settlement would result in roughly $34 billion in total principal forgiveness, maybe as high as $40 billion in eventual assistance. When the documents are finalized, Andreano expects the impact to be between $30 billion and $35 billion.

“I don’t think there would be any dramatic changes in the numbers,” Andreano said.

Servicers and AGs are working out exactly how much credit will be distributed and for what loans. Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan said last week under the loose agreement struck, servicers would get fewer credits for write downs performed on mortgages backing private-label bonds, sparing investors from the brunt of the settlement.

Also part of the deal includes payouts to borrowers who were either foreclosed on during a modification or were wrongfully foreclosed upon all together. Under the agreement, an estimated 750,000 of these borrowers could get up to $2,000 in reimbursements.

New York and California were a part of a group last to sign onto the deal. California AG Kamala Harris said she expects roughly 250,000 homeowners in the state to get a write down over the next three years because of the deal. Another 140,000 could get the $2,000 restitution.

“This outcome is the result of an insistence that California receive a fair deal commensurate with the harm done here,” Harris said at the time.

With so many borrowers there and in other states applying for the long awaited write downs, servicers will be spending the better part of the year increasing employees and training staff.

“They’re going to need more people to handle this,” Andreano said. “And they are going to need a certain level of expertise and competency. This could take years.”

jprior@housingwire.com

Follow on Twitter @JonAPrior

AGENDA for Today’s Member Conference at 6pm EST, 3pm PST

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

AGENDA FOR MEMBER TELECONFERENCE

1. Missouri Indictment: One County — what About the Rest?
2. What are the final terms of the multi-state AG Settlement? Amnesty? Immunity?
3. Why are we dealing with the banks when they didn’t fund the loans?
4. When will the settlement be effective. Court Approval required
5. What effect does it have on homeowners seeking to recover their homes taken in wrongful foreclosures
6. What effect will it have on new buyers and lenders?
7. Will Fannie and Freddie finally encourage principal corrections?
8. How will it effect future foreclosures in an election year and beyond?
9. New Investigation team starts up to assist Livinglies readers
10. MERS: How will Title Collapse be Averted? Legislation?
11. Arizona moving towards help for certain homeowners and proof of ownership of loan

Dollar Devaluing as Cost of Bad Bank Loans: Who Pays?

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

“The central fact is that there is huge bill waiting to be paid for the losses created by Bank misbehavior. That bill is coming due every month in installments that amount to a devaluation of the dollar, raising prices for all Americans, endangering the dollar’s position as a reserve currency, thus further putting the country and taxpayers at risk of higher taxes and higher expenses, and requiring homeowners, who were deceived no less than the investors by Wall Street to shoulder the bulk of the housing implosion.”

“The fact remains that the values used to justify the loans were wrong, intentionally inflated in order to justify the fees that Wall Street took and bonuses they paid themselves. The balance of the credit derivative market leaves us the choice of either letting the mega banks fail based upon the real values as they currently exist or continuing the pretense which requires the homeowner, the taxpayers, the businesses, and the government budgets and pension funds to accept most of the loss.”

Editor’s Comment and Analysis: While we were sleeping, the Federal reserve, whom virtually nobody understands, is gradually inflating the quantity of dollars as though the economy was booming. But it isn’t booming. So the inflation is simply a gimmick to allow the TBTF banks to continue their existence as though they had any value to the economy as a whole. They don’t have any added value. Not any more.

The reason for all this activity in a realm beyond the understanding of ordinary citizens (whose votes might well be effected by these policies — if they knew what was happening) — is the fact that credit derivatives — cash equivalent proprietary currency — now equals 12 times the amount of public currency.

Although used as private currency they are all legally convertible into public fiat money. True the synthetic derivatives are “nominal” in value collectively because they largely cancel each other out when the net bets on one side are deducted from the net bets on the other side (credit default swaps in particular); but there is always a difference that is currently estimated at around $30 trillion, which is 60% of all public fiat currency.

That means there is a demand for currency, created in the last 30 years, for more money than exists in the world. Just as the Banks falsely inflated real estate values to sell bogus mortgage bonds to investors and sell bogus exotic loan products to homeowners, they now have created a false demand on the dollar. Thus a false inflation in the supply of dollars is required to support what is a unique problem for the mega banks — supporting the credit derivative infrastructure — at the expense of the rest of us.

The inflation is false because the derivative Market is largely based on false asset values —- particularly in real estate. The decision has thus been made that although the credit products were defective in almost every conceivable way, we should all pay the price and the banks who created these defective, fraudulent securities and loans should essentially pay nothing. And that policy is based on a game of chicken — the banks say they are too big to fail, or else the system will come tumbling down if we call their bluff. The rest of us disagree in varying degrees. Simon Johnson and other economists of world repute believe that the only answer to our political and economic gridlock is to break up the large banks into discrete parts that can be managed without jurisdictional challenges caused by cross-border business activities.

This means breaking the bank oligopoly much the way Teddy Roosevelt did when he went after the Trusts 100 years ago. While their are several signs that Obama might do that in a second term where he was not politically vulnerable, it is by no means assured that he will do so.

In the meanwhile, the dollar is getting devalued on a daily basis to support a system in which homeowners are losing homes to satisfy debts that have already been paid in full many times over. Since so much of the credit derivative Market stems from the bad, defective credit deals foisted upon homeowners and sold to investors, the answer to our economic problems keeps coming back to two basic facts: the housing market  is the key to economic recovery and the banking industry’s death grip on American politics must be broken.

federal-reserve-and-big-banks-are-going-to-crush-the-dollar-%E2%80%A6-and-american-savers

The Fed’s EXPLICIT Goal Is to Devalue the Dollar by 33% … and NEGATIVE Yield Bonds Are Coming

The Federal Reserve’s explicit goal is to devalue the dollar by 33%.

As Forbes’ Charles Kadlec notes:

The Federal Reserve Open Market Committee (FOMC) has made it official: After its latest two day meeting, it announced its goal to devalue the dollar by 33% over the next 20 years. The debauch of the dollar will be even greater if the Fed exceeds its goal of a 2 percent per year increase in the price level.

***

The Fed has announced a course of action that will steal — there is no better word for it — nearly 10 percent of the value of American’s hard earned savings over the next 4 years.

While that is stunning, it is actually par for the course for the Fed:

Here’s a chart of the trade weighted US Dollar from 1973-2009.

Throwing the Baby Out With the Bathwater: Competition Decreases as Mega banks Get Stronger

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

Community banks and credit unions brace for end of Fannie, Freddie

By Danielle Douglas, Published: February 12

As the Obama administration forges ahead this spring with plans to wind down mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, community banks and credit unions are bracing for the impact.

The government-sponsored entities are the most active buyers on the secondary market for residential mortgages, where a growing number of small financial institutions sell the home loans they originate. Private investors remain largely inactive in acquiring mortgages, leaving originators to question how the industry will function without government support.

“We’re all preparing to work with whatever private investor structure re-emerges,” said Juli Anne Callis, chief executive of Rockville-based NIH Federal Credit Union, which serves the biomedical industry. “Are those investors starting to percolate up? We’re hearing discussions, but we’re not seeing it yet.”

A year ago, the administration issued a white paper outlining three options for replacing Fannie and Freddie. They include creating a new government agency that would continue to insure mortgages or one that would intervene only during a crisis.

Small financial institutions worried that with Fannie and Freddie out of the picture, a handful of large banks could dominate the secondary market. Those big banks might favor their own mortgage originating divisions and muscle community banks and credit unions out of the market.

“We want some sort of mechanism or entities that would provide equal access to community banks,” said Ann Grochala, vice president of lending and accounting policy at the Independent Community Bankers of America, a trade group. “There’s a variety of possibilities out there . . . but we haven’t seen the solution yet.”

Holding on to their loans

Traditionally, community banks and credit unions kept on their books a majority of the loans they originated. Credit Union National Association, for instance, estimates that its members sold between 25 and 40 percent of their loans before the financial crisis. Those percentages grew as falling interest rates fueled demand for mortgages.

“Credit unions individually are fairly small in this business,” said Bill Hampel, chief economist for the credit union group. “But if there’s no publicly supported vehicle to the secondary markets, each credit union would be so small that they would not get good pricing or access. And that would cost credit union members.”

Hampel said the association is talking with the Treasury Department about the future of McLean-based Freddie Mac and Washington-based Fannie Mae, but he noted that credit unions are working on contingency plans. One solution, he said, could be greater reliance on credit union service organizations. Such entities enable institutions of all asset sizes to make loans by collectively managing the risks.

Grochala said the community bank association is also considering a cooperative structure, modeled after the Federal Home Loan Banks, whereby participating banks would be responsible for capitalizing the entity.

Still, she said, “there must be some sort of continued government ties because that provides the liquidity source you truly need and confidence to the markets,” Grochala said. “There are a variety of ways that could function, whether it be an explicit or implicit fee paid for the guarantee.”

While Cardinal Bank chief executive Bernard Clineburg doesn’t discount the viability of a cooperative model, he stressed there are private investors, such as pension funds, buying mortgages from community banks like his.

Tougher on borrowers

McLean-based Cardinal, he said, holds on to less than 10 percent of the $3 billion to $5 billion in mortgages it originates annually. Clineburg said the bank doesn’t sell directly to Fannie and Freddie but instead moves loans to aggregators that are likely to work with the mortgage giants. Cardinal, he said, should suffer little impact if the agencies are phased out in the next two years. But there would be consequences, especially for consumers.

“When you have private industry purchasing the mortgages, they are going to be tougher on underwriting. And that means larger down payments, higher interest rates to adjust for the risk of no government guarantee,” Clineburg said.

The administration has been taking steps to increase private- sector participation, including scaling back loan limits and raising the guarantee fee, said Frank Donnelly, president of the Mortgage Bankers Association of Metropolitan Washington.

“They’re trying, but they are going to have to make it safer for the investment and more profitable for the private market to come back,” he said.

Defenses Against Claims of Holder in Due Course

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688From this website:

by John Gault

http://www.pstcc.edu/departments/lat/classes/2300/notes/chap23.htm

Real Defenses
Real or universal defenses are valid against all holders, including HDCs. Universal defenses include the following:

(1) Forgery,

(2) Fraud in the execution,

(3) Material alteration (complete defense against a holder, partial defense against an HDC),

(4) Discharge in bankruptcy,

(5) Minority,

(6) Illegality (when statute makes it void),

(7) Adjudicated Mental Incapacity, and

(8) Extreme Duress.

Each of these is pretty much self-explanatory except number two, fraud in the execution.

Fraud in the execution occurs when a person is deceived into signing a negotiable instrument believing that he is signing something other than a negotiable instrument. This defense cannot be raised, however if a reasonable inquiry would have revealed the nature and terms of the instrument. Thus, the signer’s age, experience, and intelligence are relevant.

Personal Defenses

Personal defenses are used to avoid payment to an ordinary holder of a negotiable instrument. Personal defenses are:

(1) Breach of contract or breach of warranty,

(2) Lack or failure of consideration,

(3) Fraud in the inducement,

(4) Illegality (when statute makes it voidable),

(5) Unadjudicated mental incapacity,

(6) Other defenses.

Imo, there are two very important things we need to fully understand to defend our homes: the UCC and the laws of evidence. The UCC may provide avenues of discovery, as well as reasonable argument that without that discovery, adjudication just can’t be made.

The laws of evidence will help us get meaningful discovery, and not allow the use of bs declarations / affidavits. To date, none or most of us have availed ourselves of these avenues I would call bright.

There is something about ‘assumed risk’ as an affirmative defense which I can’t find right now, so the ones listed above must not be inclusive and most of them don’t seem to apply, anyway, except maybe nos. 2 and 4 and whatever 6 is under personal defenses.

More of the UCC at

http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/3/article3.htm

The UCC cited is under article 3 and is relevant to negotiable instruments. But I can’t help remembering those 2 cases I have somewhere wherein the banksters claimed these notes are not negotiable instruments. Fwiw, I’ll link them when I find them.

The UCC imo provides defenses to foreclosure and to my knowledge, no one, including attorneys, is ‘going there’.
If you find a link to better defenses to notes, I would appreciate it since mine are whoknowswhere.

Part of what I’m trying to say is that there are defenses available against a holder v a hidc (I thought there were none available against a hidc, but apparently that’s not true, altho there are many more available against a ‘mere’ holder. In order for a homeowner to properly allege those defenses, one has to know if they’re available and therefore we have a need to know clearance on if the bankster is a holder or a holder in due course. Unfortunately, the UCC has some complicated tenets and one has to keep them all in mind. And btw, I have NO doubt changes to the UCC have been made in recent years which benefit the banksters. No surprise there, right?
Also, it appears to me and I’ve said before that enforcement of a note is either 1) unavailable to one who has paid nothing for it or 2) unavailable except to the extent (dollar amt) one has already paid for it (promise to pay does not cut it for ENFORCEMENT). This is grand, but it’s also a really bum steer if not true, so if anyone knows otherwise, please weigh in. It does seem to conflict with other UCC
rules, so it’s complicated. I’ll bet there’s reconciliation; I just don’t know it. I’m just saying as emphatically as I can it’s past time to quit ignoring what could be fully dispositive issues.

RoboDeal: Mullti State Settlement Neither Signed Nor Drafted When Announced

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

Many hat tips to Yves Smith and others who have pointed out that the grand settlement has neither been drafted nor signed in any form. This leads me to compare the entire securitization scam process with this settlement process and to highlight the “moral hazard” in front of us.

Now that everyone has announced the settlement and talked about it, they are done milking it for the PR value. At this point what actually goes into the settlement document and approved by the Court in North Carolina is as good as — well — any robosigned document. Nobody has released any formal summary or any documents that actually specifies the wording of the settlement.

The opportunity to “define” something that it is not, or to release something that wasn’t announced, or to provide preemptive wording that would enable the banksters to argue in court that the individual cause of action is blocked, at least in part, by this settlement or that there is no private right of action, or that the the AG of a state can’t charge them with crimes is a clear and present moral danger.

The very fact that the settlement is with the banks and excludes the investors and the borrowers is a problem.

The settlement implicitly ratifies the idea that the banks own the mortgages and when it is written down it might say it explicitly thus eliminating the central issue in the corruption of the title registries across the nation. What law enforcement and the media fail to grasp is that the banks did not loan any money to anyone.

They first got the money from investors and then took out huge amounts for fees that were not adequately disclosed to investors and then funded loans as conduits for the investors. At no time did any of those bank conduits possess a loan receivable or reserve for defaults because at no time was the loan ever owed to them.

The banksters kept the wording of documentation with the borrowers and the wording of the documentation with the investors vague and conflicting so that they could claim, when they wished, that the loans were owned by the banks, thus collecting on taxpayer bailouts, insurance, credit default swaps and other credit enhancements — and even claim losses on defaults that were nonexistent on loans they didn’t own. We are now left in the same position where the announcement or representations are one thing, but the wording of the settlement is unknown and could include anything.

The Banks are still running the show. The situation is left vague so they can grift their way through this settlements just the same way they the previous settlements and orders. At some point, it will be nice if someone did some arithmetic on the back of a paper napkin and realized that everything the banksters are saying and doing is wrong — not just from a technical legal standpoint — but from the standpoint of who has the money, who gets the money and who gets credited for payment.

Or, maybe we can all use a page from the playbooks of these giant banks. Each of us can announce we have losses of over a trillion dollars and that we won’t be able to meet our commitments unless the Federal government or the Federal Reserve provide the deficiency we created out of thin air. It doesn’t matter whether we have any actual losses or if we do, whether the losses are in the amount we say or that they were incurred in the way we said or even if the losses were already covered by other bets we made. We just want the money. And when all is said and done, after we get the money from the Federal government and Federal reserve, we will then seek to collect “debts” from consumers who know they have those debts but are completely without information as to whom the debt is owed. If we can get most people to pay, it is  windfall again — all starting from a point where we conducted no business, did no transactions, and suffered no losses.

This reminds me of a scam that is still going on. It seems that if you send an official looking bill for medical or business services of office supplies to tens of thousands of businesses and you keep the amount due low — like $35 or so, you will find that most people would rather pay the bill than contest it. Some people have gone to jail for mail fraud as a result of this — but most of the people out there doing this scam are free as a bird and stuffed with cash like the bankers on Wall Street. The business is simply about sending out false bills and collecting on them — same as Wall Street is doing with mortgages, credit cards, auto loans, student loans (the next big debt crash) and other consumer loans.

Conflicts of Interests — Federal Judges’ Pensions Invested in Toxic MBS

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

Posted by Reader

Yes, and here is something Neil posted on LL

http://livinglies.wordpress.com/2011/02/19/judges-conflict-of-interest-pensions-are-in-mortgage-backed-securities/

and Neil posted this and read down thru blog posts

http://livinglies.wordpress.com/2010/11/24/homeowners-investigating-judges-conflict-of-interest/

and you may want to read this to start research into Blackrock

http://www.scribd.com/doc/35925017/Are-Federal-Judges-Retirement-Plans-invested-in-MBS-ABS-Maiden-Lane-and-Blackrock

and

If you go to http://www.tsp.gov you will see that this is the portal for one of the retirement plans management system for federal judges (reference General Counsel letter also posted by this ScribD poster).

Look around and you will see that http://www.tsp.gov states it uses BlackRock.

BlackRock manages investments in MBS (mortgage backed securities) and ABS (asset based securities) etc.

The Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS) operates a series of mutual funds and other accounts in which government workers can invest their retirement funds. Some of the funds are managed by the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board, a U.S. government body, and other funds are managed under contract by the BlackRock Institutional Trust Company.

Federal employees would include FBI, SEC etc.

more on TSP
Types of TSP Investment Funds

There are a number of funds offered by the 2010 Thrift Savings Plan. The determination of which plan you are eligible to chose from starts with your coverage by the Federal Employees’ Retirement System (FERS), the TSP is one part of a three-part retirement package that also includes your FERS basic annuity and of course, your Social Security. If you are covered by the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) or are a member of the uniformed, the TSP is a supplement to your CSRS annuity or military retired pay. The following are the types of TSP funds that are available:

G Fund – This is a government securities fund. These types of funds are a unique type of government security not available to the general public and are backed by the full faith and credit of the US Government. The G Fund was the initial fund established by the TSP when it began operations on April 1, 1987.

F Fund- This TSP is a Fixed Income Index fund which is invested in the BlackRock’s U.S. Debt Index Fund. It tracks the Barclays Capital Aggregate Bond Index, a market capitalization-weighted index, very closely. The F Fund was made available to Federal employees back in January 1988, but was limited to only a portion of contributions. Starting in January 1991, all restrictions on F Fund contributions were lifted.

C Fund – This fund is a Common Stock Index fund. The C fund is invested in BlackRock’s Equity Index fund. Thus, it replicates the total return version of the S&P 500 index. The C Fund was also opened to federal employees in January 1988 and was subjected to the same restrictions as the F Fund until January 1991.

S Fund – This is a Small Capitalization Stock Index fund. It is invested in BlackRock’s Extended Market Index Fund. This ensures it tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Completion TSM index. The S Fund was opened to federal employees in May of 2001.

I Fund – International Stock Index fund is the final type of TSP. IT is invested in BlackRock’s EAFE Index Fund. Thus, it replicates the net version of the MSCI EAFE index (An index designed to measure the equity market performance of developed markets outside of the U.S. & Canada). The I Fund opened to employees in May 2001.

see http://www.tsp.gov

Fund Management

Summary of the Thrift Savings Plan

G Fund
F,C,S, and I Funds
L Funds

G Fund

The G Fund assets are managed internally by the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board. The G Fund buys a nonmarketable U.S. Treasury security that is guaranteed by the U.S. Government. This means that the G Fund will not lose money.

F,C,S, and I Funds

The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board currently contracts BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A. (BlackRock) to manage the F, C, S, and I Fund assets.

The Board invests the assets of the F, C, S, and I Funds in commingled trust funds managed by BlackRock. These trust funds are comprised of investments by tax-exempt institutions like the TSP, such as pension plans and endowments. Investing collectively in this way can be advantageous because it reduces trading costs. The securities held in these commingled funds are held in trust and they are not assets of BlackRock, nor can they be used to meet the financial obligations of BlackRock.

The F, C, S, and I Funds are index funds, each of which is invested in order to replicate the risk and return characteristics of its appropriate benchmark index. For example, the C Fund is invested in a stock index fund that fully replicates the Standard and Poor’s 500 (S&P 500) Index, a broad market index made up of the stocks of 500 large to medium-sized U.S. companies. The C Fund’s objective is to match the performance of the S&P 500. The F, C, S, and I Funds remain invested in the BlackRock funds regardless of the performance of the securities markets or the overall economy.

BlackRock Funds
Although the BlackRock funds operate in a manner similar to mutual funds, they are not, in fact, mutual funds and are not open to individual investors. Furthermore, they are trust funds that are regulated by the Comptroller of the Currency, not by the Securities and Exchange Commission, and therefore do not have ticker symbols.
L Funds

The L Funds are invested in the five individual TSP funds based on professionally determined asset allocations.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
also see

http://4closurefraud.org/2011/07/20/mark-stopa-to-foreclosure-judge-i-am-concerned-at-your-decision-to-continue-presiding-over-mortgage-foreclosure-cases-given-your-personal-ties-to-the-banking-industry/

see my next post—

Is the Press Our Only Hope?

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

February 10, 2012

by Kelli
I WRITE THIS TO ALL 3 MAJOR NEWS NETWORKS,
WHAT CAUSED THE FORECLOSURE CRISIS??? I implore you to take this story back to the BEGINNING! DIG DEEP and INVESTIGATE the FACTS and tell the WHOLE story.
WHO is the MOST POWERFUL ENTITY IN AMERICA? THE NEWS MEDIA! Whatever story you tell, and HOW you decide to tell it ultimately becomes the way it is in the eyes of Americans.

This 18 billion dollar law suit against the 5 major banks only tells me that you can commit PREMEDITATED MAJOR FRAUD that devastates millions of peoples lives, shove the billions of EXTRA money it makes you in your pockets, then IF you get caught, you’ll have enough money to pay off the law makers, then you’re off the hook! WHO CARES ABOUT THE LITTLE PEOPLE YOU DESTROYED? After all, they’re just the BACKBONE of AMERICA!

THESE MONSTERS SET OUT TO DECEIVE HOMEOWNERS, approving them for loans for the sole purpose that they would fail, foreclose! Scooping thousands of these doomed loans into a servicing pool to be securitized and then bounced around on Wall Street because these corporate criminals that are way smarter then me, devised a way to multiply there return on doomed investments by getting subsidized 10, 20, 30 times over from multiple insurance policies placed in advance. That would be like me insuring my home with 10 homeowner’s policies, each to pay me $200,000 if my house burns down, all the while knowing it IS GOING TO BURN DOWN because I placed a few faulty wires in the walls of my home.

I WOULD BE IN PRISON!!! This is EACTLY WHAT THESE MONSTERS DID TO MILLIONS OF HOMEOWNERS LIKE ME! All of the stories I’ve seen regarding the MORTGAGE FRAUD and FORECLOSURE CRISIS are just FRACTIONS of the complete story! Robo Signers, Docx Company forging thousands of signatures on lost or destroyed loan documents, foreclosed, vacant homes causing vandalism, squatters and the drop in real estate values.

This is the first time in my 47 year life that I have more knowledge on a MAJOR, NATIONAL, ECONOMICAL CRISIS then is being reported by YOU, the NATIONAL NEWS MEDIA! The source ALL AMERICANS rely on to bring them the TRUTH of a story and the WHOLE story. One year ago when I first knew I was going to have a fight on my hands to save what means as much to me as life itself, (my home) I was scared, but eager because I learned that I had rights, as an American, governed by laws long ago put into place.

When I learned that LAWS WERE BROKEN, and my rights as an American were being violated I was confident that with some self education and ALOT of research, surely I would eventually prevail. My facts are evident, right here in black and white. Just show it to the judge and he will make things right, fair!

I didn’t want to ‘WIN’ a free HOME. I just wanted the judge to make the monsters play FAIR! I sit here now, the morning after hearing of the successful suit against the 5 major banks and I am devastated and overwhelmed as it sinks in that the federal lawsuit victory does NOTHING to protect ME or thousands of other people out there in the same boat. In fact,

I’m feeling confident that it put the last nail in my coffin because it set a National precedence, just pay your way out of your crimes with the money you gained off of your victims. I am disheartened with our system, it is disgraceful what people in power have done to destroy EVERYTHING this COUNTRY WAS BUILT ON. No wonder this Great Country is being brought to it’s knees. GREED is selling her out and NO ONE WITH ANY POWER IS BRAVE ENOUGH TO EXPOSE IT!

Like so many Americans, I am! I would lay down my life TODAY if it would somehow magically expose the Beast because one day, soon, it will all be too late! My home hasn’t been sold out from underneath me yet but I have received a “Notice of Default” telling me I have about 30 days left before a “Trustees Sale”.

No court hearing, no judge to make a ruling because I live in California, a Non Judicial State which means Whoever Holds the ORIGINAL “Deed of Trust” on you mortgage has the right to sell your home at public auction if you default on it’s terms.

FIRST PROBLEM, when the mortgage was securitized and pooled into a trust with thousands of other mortgages, the ‘Note’ and ‘Deeds’ HAD to be DESTROYED in order to become asset bearing investments. YOU CANNOT HAVE BOTH AVENUES TO GENERATE PROFITS. Known as DOUBLE DIPPING, it is a major IRS tax violation. So why do I keep hearing loan docs were lost, misfiled, and misplaced? THEY WERE PURPOUSLY DESTROYED!

These bankers, investors just assumed we would all be too stupid to figure it all out, and even IF some of us did uncover their dirty deeds, what could just a few people do?? NOTHING! We HAVE TO RELY ON OUR NATIONAL NEWS MEDIA! THE ONLY VOICE LOUD ENOUGH TO HAVE ANY EFFECT. WE NEED YOUR HELP! If you choose to do nothing, you are allowing these THUGS to abuse and steel from the powerless and then just walk away. WHY WOULD YOU ALLOW THAT?? HOW CAN YOU JUST LET THEM GET AWAY WITH THAT?? You are our only hope!

Barry Fagan Presses Harder On Wells Fargo

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

by Barry Fagan

SERVICE 520-405-1688

Barry Fagan v Wells Fargo Bank re: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Complaint

Information about the company
Wells Fargo Bank NA
United States

Wells Fargo Bank has fraudulently altered Barry Fagan’s Deed of Trust and the attached expert opinion dated 1/12/2012 from Forensic Document Examiner Dr. Laurie Hoeltzel specifically explains that the handwritten page 4 has been altered on two separate versions of that original Deed of Trust. Barry Fagan has recorded all 3 versions of the same deed of trust with the Los Angeles Registrar Recorders Office on November 29, 2011 as instrument no. 2011-1608398.

The recorded Notice of Pendency of Action showing three different versions of that same July 9, 2007 Deed of Trust as originally recorded under instrument no. 2007-1622100. Judge Tarle, of The Superior Court of California, West District has taken Judicial Notice of that Recorded Document. Barry Fagan has submitted credible evidence from a forensic document examiner with over 20 years of experience that multiple fraudulent alterations have occurred on the “Handwritten Number page 4” which is located on page 3/4 of the Deed of Trust. All of the Deeds of Trust now reflect an entirely different handwritten NUMBER 4, and one of the exhibits also has a snake like line drawn on it, which is not present on the other two exhibits.

C.P.A. Shawn P. Adamo stated: “It is my professional opinion that the altered deed of trust is concealing an irrevocable assignment, and explains why Wells Fargo is unable to produce loan level accounting concerning Mr. Fagan’s loan. Wells Fargo claims that any level of detail relating to Mr. Fagan’s mortgage is non- existent. As a result, CPA Shawn Adamo provided two expert opinions, (one an affidavit signed under penalty of perjury dated January 24, 2012 and the other is a Feb. 6, 2012 complaint letter sent to various regulatory agencies) from C.P.A Shawn Adamo explaining that Wells Fargo Bank has failed to provide a loan level balance sheet accounting and is concealing the fact that they do not own Barry Fagan’s loan.

Additionally, forensic document Expert Dr. Laurie Hoeltzel has declared under penalty of perjury on January 2, 2012 that Wells Fargo Bank is robo-signing Discovery Responses by using multiple authors of the name Rhonda Bernard Thomas.(see attached declaration from Dr. Laurie Hoeltzel) I have also attached an affidavit from from forensic loan analyst/expert Javiar Taboas dated July 14, 2011 who is specifically stating that Wells Fargo securitized/sold Barry Fagan’s note and is fraudulently claiming continued ownership without any proof whatsoever.(See attached affidavit of Expert Javiar Taboas) Also attached is an illegally prepared Declaration of Default which is not actually signed by a natural person, but is signed by Wells Fargo Bank NA. This is a blatant California Civil Code Section 2923.5 and 2924 violation in that this illegally prepared document set in motion the entire illegal Non-Judicial Foreclosure.

Also attached is a letter from Wells Fargo Bank dated December 5, 2011 and states that Wells Fargo Bank is reviewing Barry Fagan’s file and will respond on December 15, 2016 (THAT’S 5 YEARS FROM NOW!). Barry Fagan claims that this was a form of retaliatory contact. Wells Fargo is a criminal enterprise that is attempting to illegally foreclose on my primary residence by way of fraudulently altered documents, robo-signed discovery responses, invalid Declaration of Default, no loan level accounting and Barry Fagan’s loan file needs to be investigated at the highest level within your organization to see that a crime has actually occurred! The law offices of Kutak Rock LLP located in Irvine, California needs to have Barry Fagan’s NOTE and Deed of Trust subpoenaed so that your own CFPB organization can inspect those documents to see that they have indeed been fraudulently altered and photo-shopped. Please also visit http://www.fedup99.com/following-barry-fagan/ to see that even Barry Fagan’s loan application was fraudulently prepared by Wells Fargo private banker Dalia Warren.
Complaint history

A Consumer Financial Protection Bureau specialist is reviewing your complaint and may contact you and Wells Fargo Bank NA to collect additional information. This could be a lengthy process, so we ask for your patience.

Thank you,

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
http://www.consumerfinance.gov
(855) 411-CFPB (2372)

Borrowers Don’t Count — But False Claims of Losses Count Multiple Times

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

What Goes to the Banks Stays With the Banks

Even if the Payment was on the Debt owned by Another

There have been dozens of deals with law enforcement and regulatory agencies. There have been thousands of settlements with individual homeowners sealed under confidentiality. Why do they not work for everyone?

The answer is obvious — borrowers don’t count. And the reason they don’t count is the uninformed view that borrowers took the loans and should repay them — even if the loans are NOT in default, are paid off in full to creditors, and the claimants who keep getting money from all sides and from all directions without any demand for accounting.

It is the policy of this country that the full brunt of the cost of the mortgage crisis should be borne by borrowers. We are imposing an ideology over the facts, ignoring the absurdity of the consequences, and compounding both past evil and greasing the tracks for the banks to serve as the collection point for payments covering losses that never occurred (to the banks).

These payments include taxpayer direct bailouts (Bush’s TARP), indirect bailouts (Bush-Obama public-private Maiden Lane deals), direct private payments from  servicers (while declaring non-payment from the borrower), direct private payments from insurers who were bailed out using taxpayer dollars, direct private payments from credit default swap counter parties who were funded by Taxpayer bailouts from the U.S. treasury and foreign treasuries, and indirect credits from other exotic credit enhancements.

THAT MAKES 6 distinct sources of payment received by the banks IN ADDITION TO THE DIRECT PAYMENTS FROM BORROWERS AND INDIRECT PAYMENTS FROM BORROWERS WHO GAVE UP TITLE AND POSSESSION TO HOMES ON WHICH THE CREDITOR WAS PAID IN FULL AND THERE WAS NO DEFAULT.

Even Borrowers can’t get their brains around the possibility that they accepted a loan that was paid off using their tax dollars and financial relationships enabled by the ignorance of both the creditor investor who actually loaned the money and the ignorance of the Buyer.

In all cases the investors are sitting with the alleged loss due to so-called defaulted mortgages. In no case have the banks loaned money in any securitized loan. In no case have the banks paid any money to buy the loans. In all cases the risk of loss was left with the creditor investor. In all cases, the Banks collected the payments, the bailouts, the insurance proceeds, the CDS proceeds etc. In no case have the banks even admitted the receipt of more than $17 trillion on defaults that at most were valued under $3 trillion. In no case have the banks been required to provide a full and fair accounting.

Instead, the banks and servicers have completely controlled the narrative portraying borrowers as deadbeats wanting to get out of a valid debt when what these brewers want is a modification based upon realistic numbers in a fair Market on a fair playing field — one which recognises that the inflated appraisals of yesteryear were the responsibility of the banks that ordered those appraisals with express instructions as to what value must be attached to the property if the apprised ever wanted to work again as an appriser.

What goes to the banks, stays with the banks.

There are rarely payments of more than a pittance paid to the creditors from their agent bankers.

The banks withhold money received because (a) they mean to keep it and (b) they mean to declare a non-existent default in order to create the appearance on an economic reality in which foreclosure is proper.

Add to that the “credit bid” the banks submit in lieu of cash payment at the bogus foreclosure sales, and you end up with the banks taking all of the money from investors and homeowners and all of the property from the homeowners whose debt has long since been paid.

This validation of economic crimes worthy of life sentences on Wall Street. Instead, we continue the attack on the middle class and poor thus defiling our own reputation and undermining the nation’s ability to recover from what could have been a temporary debasement of our currency and prospects.

It is axiomatically true that no nation has survived severe income inequality — because for wealth inequality to get that extreme the freedoms in the marketplace must be replaced by bullies. The nation of laws that keep a society intact is replaced by the law of men. Thus is born both the new Aristocracy and the new seeds of social revolution.

Nancy Drew Digs Into Wells Fargo -Maiden Lane, FDIC, FHLA

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

Editor’s Note: If you are serious about litigation, truth, justice and the American way, then you should be reading Nancy Drewe’s posts very carefully. These are the tracks that will enable you enable to track the money. Tracking the money means tracking the actual transactions — regardless of what the documents say.

A document that says the borrower took a loan from Wells Fargo is either telling the truth or lying. If it’s lying then the note and mortgage are defective and violate Federal and state lending laws. If the real lender is discovered, and if the real lender was actually known by someone in the chain of command in the chain of planned securitization, they violated the law — but more importantly they deprived the borrower of knowing the exorbitant fees being charged to close the loan.

Those fees would have alerted all but the most unsophisticated that something was wrong. Those borrowers would not have entered into these transactions.

And those borrowers were denied choice between lenders that were playing by the rules and “lenders” who weren’t lenders at all, who were intentionally inflated appraised value of the property, just to satisfy their own greed, without any risk of loss on anyone but the investor creditor and the homeowner borrower. That choice is the whole point of the the TILA required disclosures. They are important and violation carries a giant bite in direct penalties and remedies under TILA as well as mail fraud, RICO and common law fraud.

1995 FOOTHILL MERGER DBA NORWEST CORP (SIGNIFICANT)
Subsidiary Norwest Corp Pinnacle relations with Government …
Norwest

Foothill Capital Corp (1558478) Los Angeles CA-Finance Company
Rels Title Services, LLC 2724038 Des Moines Iowa flows to Foothill.

Directors Asset Conduit Corporation acquired
Norwest Asset Acceptance Corp
206 8th St
Des Moines IA 50309
RSSD ID 2608857
Currencies flowed as of 2/23/2004 to and from Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. while a general purpose business entity.

Norwest Asset Acceptance Corp 2608857
Des Moines Iowa feed directly to
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. 1632332 which feeds to from Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (451965) Sioux Falls SD to parent Wells Fargo & Co. 1120754
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. merged out of existence May 2004. All employees assumed to be part of a national bank upon merger.

OCC stated that all ‘Mortgage Corporation’ business had to be done inside of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association in letter to John Stumpf May 2003.

07/29/1997 -Established Domestic Entity other:
Directors Asset Conduit Corp
7485 New Horizon Way
Frederick MD
02/25/1998 Renamed
Norwest Asset Acceptance see address above

02/24/2004 acquired by Wells Fargo Securities Corp. (On FFIEC only) Norwest Asset Securities Corp was renamed to Wells Fargo Securities Corp.

KPMG DEFINED ‘WELLS FARGO SECURITIES LLC’ TO BE A PASS-THRU MEANING FEDEAL INCOME TAXES REPORTED ELSEWHERE HELD BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF ‘WHAT’ CREDIT SWAPS?

Wells Fargo Securities LLC (2983367)
San Francisco CA – Securities Broker/Dealer (a pass through agency) to Wells Fargo Private Client Funding INc. 2971083 San Francisco CA to Violet Asset Management Inc 3051946 Las Vegas NV to Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, Sioux Falls SD 451965 (National Bank) to WFC Holdings Corp 2741679 San Francisco CA – Bank Holding Co to Parent a Financial Holding Company – Wells Fargo & Co. 1120754

REGISTRANT:
IRS# 41-0449260
JURISDICTION DELAWARE
PRIVATE ENTITY AND MEMBER OF SECURITIES & STOCK EXCHANGE ‘SIGNFICANT’ MEMBER ACTUALLY THE LARGEST PRODUCER OF CDO’S IN 2004/2005
Norwest Asset Sec Corp Mort Ps Thr Cert Ser 1998-1 Trust
C/O Norwest Bank Minnesota N A
1100 Broken Land Parkway
Columbai, Maryland 21703

WITH (OVER 25,837 FILINGS STARTING 3/10/1998)

AS INDENTURE TRUSTEE FOR ‘WILMINTON TRUST CO’ …
AS OWNER TRUSTEE FOR WFC HOLDINGS CORP

SIMPLE QUESTION TO ROBERT:
WHAT IS THE ‘REAL NAME’ OF THE SERVICER WHO HANDLES THE STRUCTURED INVESTMENT VEHICLE SETTLEMENT FUNDING AND IS THE SEC PUBLIC SECURITIES ADMINISTRATOR FOR ALL TRANSACTIONS WHERE CASH PASSES TO/FROM THE STRUCTURED INVESTMENT SETTLEMENT FUNDS.

A Structured Investment Vehicle
PUBLIC ‘Entity’ PASSES TO/FROM Private Exchanges with private REIT LLC’s recording distributions of cash exchanges to/from Trustees/Investors.

ROBERT J. KAUKOL SR. COUNSEL & EXPERT 1995 FORWARD
FOOTHILL GROUP DBA NORWEST CORP ‘MERGER’ 1995
robert.j.kaukol@wellsfargo.com (303) 863-2731 Fax (303)863-2750

I spoke to Robert April 2011

SR COUNSEL FOR
Wells Fargo & Co/MN
420 Montgomery St
San Francisco CA 94163

-MAC C7300-126
1740 Broadway
Denver CO 80274

-Robert J. Kaukol
Wells Fargo & Company
1700 Lincoln, Suite 1200
Denver, Colorado 80203
303-863-2731

-James M. Strother
Executive Vice President and General Counsel
Wells Fargo & Company
420 Montgomery Street
San Francisco, California 94163
415-396-1793

2 OWNER RELATIONSHIPS:
Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP ’11,824 SEC Filings 5/3/96 to 12/7/11 Last filing for Norwest Asset Securities Corp
Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft (10/26/93)
100 MAIDEN LANE
New York NY 10038
NO IRS#
SEC CIK 914121

Filings in SEC File 333-21263 —
Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corp
[ formerly Norwest Asset Securities Corp ]
Formerly Assigned On
Norwest Asset Securities Corp 7/17/96
Norwest Asset Securties Corp 6/11/96
7485 New Horizon Way
Frederick, Maryland 21703
JURISDICTION: DELAWARE IRS 52-1972128
2/6/97 2/23/98 333-21263 ’33 S-3, 424B5, S-3/A
1/28/98 10/28/98 333-45021 ’33 S-3, 424B5, S-3/A
10/9/98 12/26/00 333-65481 ’33 S-3, 424B5, S-3/A, 424B3 [ * ] * There were multiple parties involved in these filings.

MAYBE THE ‘ATTORNEY GENERALS’ AND/OR LEGISLATURE WANT TO CALL IN REAL ESTATE LAWYERS – THE SPECIAL KIND – WHO CREATED THE 1% CLASS OF CONSUMER INTO TESTIFY BEFORE THE BANKING, FINANCE, INSURANCE, REAL ESTATE COMMITTES – WHO NEVER SEEM TO BE ‘TOGETHER’ WHEN DEPOSITIONING ‘GUEST SPEAKERS’.

THESE PARTIES KNOW THE ANSWERS TO THE ‘LOOPHOLES’ THEY HELPED DESIGN. LIKE CADWALADER WICHERSHAL & TAFT LLP ABLE TO ‘SELECT’ THE ANNUNITY COMPANY FOR …

NATIONWIDE SALES FORCE SELLS ‘I MEAN’ RESELLS LOANS PURCHASED BY ‘MERCHANT BANKS’ AND INDEPENDENT MORTGAGE BROKERS WHO ARE REAL ESTATE LAWYERS DBA SERVICER ANYBANK NA ‘WELLS FARGO BANK NA’ DBA NORWEST ASSET SECURITIES CORP, OR WELLS FARGO BANK NA DBA NORWEST MORTGAGE, INC.
OR WELLS FARGO BANK NA DBA AMERICA’S SERVICING COMPANY THE FICTITIOUS NAME FOR NORWEST MORTGAGE, INC.

THE ‘SALES FORCE OF EMPLOYEES’ WHO ARE WITHOUT ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE 99% CLASS OF CONSUMER, CONCEAL THAT PROPERTIES ARE SOLD WITH ENCUMBRANCES & RESTRICTIONS TO CLASS OF CONSUMER 99% AND TRANSACTIONS AND LOOPHOLES BENEFIT THE 1% CLASS OF CONSUMERS WHO OWN THE PREFERRED STOCK OF THE PRIVATE REITS LLC & STRUCTURED INVESTMENT SETTLEMENT VEHICLES ‘REMICS’

THE NETWORK OF REAL ESTATE LAWYERS & INDEPENDENT MORTGAGE BROKERS & MERCHANT BANKS DO BUSINESS WITH THE ‘SERVICE’R LARGEST PRODUCER OF NON-CONFORMING PRODUCTS:
‘NASCOR’ NORWEST MORTGAGE, INC. & MORSERV INC. CONDUITS REALLY DO AS ‘SERVICER’ OF SECURITIES INVESTMENTS BOOKED.

ROBERT, AS SR. COUNSEL, DOES UNDERSTAND HOW IMPORTANT A VERBAL AGREEMENT WITH ME PROMISING TO CALL ME WHEN HE GOT THE ANSWER.

Robert has not replied as he promised.
Does Robert really not know the answer to the question?
While Robert and Apollo regroup ….

WHO & What SHOULD THE LEGAL ENTITY NAME ACTUALLY BE FOR THE FILING AGENT WHO PASSES CASH OVER PUBLIC EXCHANNE TO PRIVATE EXCHANGES TRUSTEES’ AND INVESTORS’ FOR EACH PUBLIC ‘REMIC’ RECORDING CASH PASSED TO/FROM EXCHANGE RELATED TO ‘TITLE’ TRANSACTIONS NOT RECORDED IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN.

SIV – STRUCTURED INVESTMENT SETTLEMENT VEHICLE – PASS-THRU AGENCY FUNDS

‘MORSERV INC’ DBA CHASE MANHATTAN RESIDENTIAL CONDUIT ORGANIZED AS A EXCHANGE (MERS) WHERE HOLDING COMPANY ‘CHASE MANHATTAN MORTGAGE’ AND ‘MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. 1997-1998 RSSD ID:

BUT THEY WORD IN TANDEM WITH
NORWEST MORTGAGE INC. CONDUIT THE ‘SERVICER’ AS AN ENTIY

STEPHEN MORRISON ESQ. SOLE INCORPORATOR
NORWEST ASSET SECURITIES CORP ‘NASCOR’

NORWEST CORP
‘HOLDING COMPANY’
INTRODUCED IN 1996 *as a new corporation*
NEW STRATEGIC PARTERNSHIP OF ‘CHASE MANHATTAN MORTGAGE RESIDENTIAL CONDUIT DBA MORSERV INC. ‘PRIVATE EXCHANGE MERS’ & NORWEST MORTGAGE, INC CONDUIT ‘ENTITY’ AS THE LARGEST PRODUCER OF NON-CONFORMING PRODUCTS…OPERATIONS OUT OF 343 THORNALL ST. EDISON NJ.
EXISTING CORPORATION:
DIRECTORS MORTGAGE ACCEPTANCE CORP.

1997 S-4
MERGER MYER & WOODHAVEN INTO ‘NORWEST CORP’
SAM is a successful broker of sale and purchase of banks pursued Norwest’s interest
Norwest Center
Sixth and Marquette
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55479-1000
612-667-123
Rober J. Kaukol Esq.

Norwest is a legal entity separate and distinct from its banking and other subsidiaries. Its principal source of funds to pay dividends on its common and preferred stock and debt service on its debt is dividends from its subsidiaries.

Interest payments received on non-accrual loans are recorded as reductions of principal. Interest that would have been accrued on non-accrual loans.

Management regularly reviews and monitors the loan portfolio
in order to identify borrowers experiencing financial difficulties.
Management believes that as of December 31, 1996, all such loans had been identified and included in the non-accrual or 90 days past due loan totals reflected in the above table.
Management continues to emphasize maintaining a low level of nonperforming assets
and returning nonperforming assets to an earning status as performance and conditions permit.
The Bank had no other real estate at December 31, 1996.
In the past five years other real estate has not constituted a significant balance sheet item for the Bank
as no large foreclosures have occurred nor has any property been held for any extended period of time during the past five years.

Holding Company Structure

FDIC as a receiver will have priority over other general unsecured claims against the institution. If an insured depository institution fails, insured and uninsured depositors, along with the FDIC, will have priority in payment ahead of unsecured, nondeposit creditors, including the institution’s parent holding company.

An insured depository institution is generally liable for any loss incurred, or reasonably expected to be incurred, by the FDIC in connection with (a) the default of a commonly controlled insured depository institution or (b) any assistance provided by the FDIC to a commonly controlled insured depository institution in danger of default. “Default” is defined generally as the appointment of a conservator or receiver and “in danger of default” is defined generally as the existence of certain conditions indicating that a default is likely to occur in the absence of regulatory assistance.

Norwest’s banking subsidiaries are subject to restrictions under federal law that limit the transfer of funds or other items of value from such subsidiaries to Norwest and its nonbanking subsidiaries (including Norwest, “affiliates”) in so-called “covered transactions.”

In general, covered transactions include loans and other extensions of credit, investments and asset purchases, as well as other transactions involving the transfer of value from a banking subsidiary to an affiliate or for the benefit of an affiliate. Unless an exemption applies, covered transactions by a banking subsidiary with a single affiliate are limited to 10% of the banking subsidiary’s capital and surplus and, with respect to covered transactions with all affiliates in the aggregate, to 20% of the banking subsidiary’s capital and surplus. Also, loans and extensions of credit to affiliates generally are required to be secured in specified amounts

Source of Strength Doctrine. The Federal Reserve Board has a policy that a bank holding company is expected to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to each of its subsidiary banks and, under appropriate circumstances, to commit resources to support each such subsidiary bank. This support may be required at times when the bank holding company may not have the resources to provide it. Capital loans by a bank holding company to any of its subsidiary banks are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and certain other indebtedness of the subsidiary bank. In addition, in the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy, any commitment by the bank holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a subsidiary bank will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to a priority of payment.

PLAINTIFF: BENEFICIARY ‘ANYBANK NA’ REMIC NAME

BENEFICIARY without standing during foreclosure complaint.

Why: Beneficiary did not record in public records the owners of the mortgage loan beneficiaries.

WHY DOES THE COURT ALLOW THE BENEFICIARY TO USE NAME OF ‘ANYBANK NA’ INSTEAD OF THEIR REAL NAMES?

Only Real Estate Lawyers as Trustees have authority to represent Owner Trustee. Owner Trustee is Servicer c/o CONDUIT operating as an ENTITY e.g. Norwest Mortgage Inc. dba Americas Servicing Company.

WHEN WILL THE FACTS BE REVEALED ? TODAY HERE IN THIS DISCLOSURE OF RESEARCH…

FACT: ENCUMBRANCES AND RESTRICTIONS ATTACHED TO A PROPERTY INCLUDE ‘RIGHT’ FOR ‘BORROWER’ TO RESELL MORTGAGE LOANS TO THIRD PARTY’S – YOU!

CONCEALED FROM THE 99% CLASS OF CONSUMERS – YOU! THE FACT YOUR RIGHTS REMOVED. YOU ARE SOLD A LOAN THAT IS OWNED BY A UNKNOWN THIRD PARTY.

THE ‘SALES PEOPLE’ IN THE STOREFRONTS NATIONWIDE, WORK IN TANDEM WITH ‘REAL ESTATE LAWYERS’ THE SPECIAL KIND WHO DBA SERVICER ANYBANK NA AND CLOSE RESALES OF ‘MORTGAGE LOANS’.

IN FACT, THE LENDER AGREED SO THERE IS NO HARM NO FOUL BETWEEN THE ‘LENDER’ AND THE REAL BORROWER’ AND AS LONG AS THE REAL BORROWER KEEPS PAYING P&I, THE LENDER DOES NOT CARE WHO THEY RESELL AND GET TO PAY THE REAL BORROWERS’ OBLIGATION.

STEPHEN MORRISON ESQ, SOLE INCORPORATOR
NORWEST ASSET SECURITIES CORP COULD EXPLAIN.
OR ROBERT
NORWEST MORTGAGE, INC. & MORSERV, INC.
CONDUITS FOR:
NORWEST ASSET SECURITIES CORP AKA
DIRECTORS MORTGAGE ACCEPTANCE CORP
ARE THE ‘SERVICER’ FOR THE INSTITUTIONAL INVESTMENT COMPANIES & MERCHANT BANKS STRUCTURED INVESTMENT SETTLEMENT FUNDS, AND PASS-THRU AGENCY
ALL OF THIS MESS ORGANIZED BY ‘CHASE/NORWEST/GENERAL MOTORS ACCEPTANCE CORP – RESIDENTIAL FUNDING CORP CONDUITS

CHASE MANHATTAN MORTGAGE RESIDENTIAL CONDUIT
DIRECTORS MORTGAGE ACCEPTANCE CONDUIT
C/O
NORWEST MORTGAGE, INC & MORSERV, INC.
343 THORNALL ST, EDISON NJ

CONDUITS LIKE ‘NORWEST MORTGAGE, INC. DBA
AMERICAS SERVICING COMPANY
is a bankruptcy remote special purpose vehicle (or entity) related to Commercial Paper

REMIC’S MERELY PUBLIC ‘STRUCTURED INVESTMENT SETTLEMENT FUND’ FOR PRIVATE REIT LLC’S

SERVICER OF REMICS – First American Real Estate Solutions LLC (FARES LLC) dba CORE Logic since 1997 – for example, Master Servicer for REMICS where GUARANTOR’s setup new ‘Corporation’ which is not recognized to be an ‘Affiliate’ under SEC ‘regulations’ and pass cash distributions, liquidations, investments, settlements, etc.

WHO OWNS THE Mortgage Loans? PRIVATE EXCHANGES OF PRIVATE REIT’S

You can’t purchase shares of REMIC’s on Open Exchange per multiple Foreclousre Defense Attorneys’s – who have tried. WHY? PUBLIC REMIC’s are Structured Investment Vehicles setup to be Settlement Funding and pass-thru distribution of dividends, payables, receivables to private REIT LLC’s!

PUBLIC REMICS MERELY ‘SUPER $1 BILLION DOLLAR AT A TIME’ INSURANCE COMPANY STRUCTURED INVESTMENT VEHICLES FOR STRUCTURED SETTLEMENTS

JP WENTWORTH ANYONE?

REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS “REIT’S”

HOW DOES A REAL BORROWER WITH A MORTGAGE LOAN GET SOMEONE ELSE TO PAY THEIR OBLIGATION?
Independnet Mortgage/Banker-Brokers pay ‘Sales employees’ of Americas Servicing Company dba Norwest Mortgage, Inc., a CONDUIT added service of finding consumers and reselling mortgage loans with encumbrances, restrictions. Mortgage Banker/Brokers mortgage loans — the LENDER allows resale of ‘mortgage loans’ and places ‘restrictions’ preventing disclosure of the beneficial interests. All consumer mortgage loans resold in Norwest Asset Securities Corp aka Directors Asset Acceptance Corp c/o Americas Servicing Corp dba Norwest Mortgage, Inc.
do business as ‘Servicer Wells Fargo Bank NA’.

1995 – FAS 1122 – Accounting all about ‘SERVICERS’ and 1989-1995 Fannie/Freddie/RECONTRUST already booked servicers investments, forced real estate industry, and insurance industry and banking industry to work together creating the 1% Consumer Class that exists today – the new billionaires not smarter – just greedier, Dylan Ratigan book sums up ‘GREEDY BASTARDS’.

THE PIPELINE PURPORTED TO BE THE GREEDIEST HARMING THE ECONOMY, YOU AND ME DBA:

AMERICA’S SERVICING INVESTMENT I, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
Taxpayer Services Division
Entity Name: AMERICA’S SERVICING COMPANY
Dept ID #: T00136715
Ack #: 1000131774000000
Locations
AMERICA’S SERVICING COMPANY
7485 NEW HORIZON WAY
FREDERICK, MD 21703

Owners
NORWEST MORTGAGE, INC. (A CONDUIT)
1 HOME CAMPUS
MAC X2406 011
DES MOINES, IA 50328 0001
Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation 1

Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation 1
Taxpayer Services Division
301 West Preston Street Baltimore, Maryland 21201

NORWEST MORTGAGE, INC. A CONDUIT

CONDUIT
POOLS MORTGAGES OF LOANS

A governmental (e.g. Pinnacle) or private entity ‘Americas Servicing Company’ that pools mortgages and other loans.

Americas Servicing Company dba Norwest Mortgage, Inc. will then issue pass- or pay-through securities in its own name, as a private conduit to investors.

Many private conduits are not backed by mortgages, credit card receivables and other loans.

These conduits e.g. Americas Servicing Company dba Norwest Mortgage, Inc. emab;e Trustees/Investors who utilize names of merchant banks and thrifts to more easily sell their loans to investors in secondary market. Smaller Lenders are not restricted on size of pool or limiations on eligibility. GNMA and FHLMC offered the first private conduits. Trustees dba SERVICER ANYBANK NA allow credit enhancement through FDIC backs the insolvency of ANYBANK NA allowing private conduits to ‘dump’ structured investment settlements into institution forcing insurance protection over irresponsible fiduciary lending and investing by investment/merchant bankers at the expense of the 99%.

-Conduit Theory on Investopedia – A theory stating that an investment firm that passes all capital gains, interest and dividends on to …

DEFAULT LOANS SERVICED FOR:

FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORP – FHLMC
C/O ANYBANK NA
3476 STATEVIEW BLVD
FORT MILLS SC

FHLMC: A stockholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) chartered by Congress in 1970 to keep money flowing to mortgage lenders in support of homeownership and rental housing for middle income Americans. The FHLMC purchases, guarantees and securitizes mortgages to form mortgage-backed securities. The mortgage-backed securities that it issues tend to be very liquid and carry a credit rating close to that of U.S. Treasuries.

US TREASURY, FHA, HUD TIES to the U.S. government allows FHLMC to borrow money at interest rates lower than those available to other financial institutions. With this funding advantage, it issues large amounts of debt (known in the market place as agency debt or agencies), and in turn purchases and holds a huge portfolio of mortgages known as its retained portfolio. Many people believe that the size of the retained portfolio poses a great deal of systematic risk to the entire U.S.

PRIVATE CONDUIT
GINNIE MAE – GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, A GOVERNMENT CORPORATION ‘CONDUIT’

A U.S. government corporation within the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Ginnie May aims to:

1. Ensure liquidity for government-insured mortgages, including those insured by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), the Veterans Administration (VA) and the Rural Housing Administration (RHA).
2. Bring investors’ capital into the market for these types of loans, so that the issuers have the means to issue more.

Most of the mortgages securitized as Ginnie Mae mortgage-backed securities (MBSs) are those guaranteed by FHA, which are typically mortgages for first-time home buyers and low-income borrowers. Investopedia explains ‘Ginnie Mae – Government National Mortgage Association – GNMA’

Ginnie Mae neither issues, sells or buys pass-through mortgage-backed securities, nor does it purchase mortgage loans. It simply guarantees (insures) the timely payment of principal and interest from approved issuers (such as mortgage bankers, savings and loans, and commercial banks) of qualifying loans, such as those issued by the FHA and RHA.

Unlike its cousins Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and Sallie Mae, Ginnie Mae is not a publicly-traded company. An investor in a GNMA security will not know who the underlying issuer of the mortgages is, but merely that the security is guaranteed by GNMA, which is backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S government, just like U.S. Treasuries.

STOCKOWNERS KEEP ASSETS INSIDE OF PRIVATE REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS “REIT”
A security that sells like a stock on the major exchanges
and invests in real estate directly, either through properties or mortgages. REIT’s receive ‘special tax considerations’ offer investors high yields, as well as a highly liquid method of investing in real estates. REIT’s invest in and own properties and revenues come principally from their properties rent.
MORTGAGE REIT’s deal in investment and ownership of property
mortgages. These REITS LOAN MONEY FOR MORTGAGES to owners of real estate or PURCHASE EXISTING MORTGAGES or mortgagge-backed securities. Mortgage REIT’s revenues are generated primarily by the interest that they earn on the mortgage loans.

INDIVIDUALS can invest in a REIT either by purchasing their shares directly on OPEN EXCHANGE
OR
by investing in mutual fund that specializes in public real estates.

ADDITIONAL BENEFIT OF REIT’S IS THE FACT MANY ARE ACCOMPANIED BY ‘DIVIDEND REINVESTMENT’ PLANS
(DRIPS).

REIT’S INCORPORATE
ARTICLES OF CORPORATION WILL REVEAL PURPOSE.
SOME INVEST IN COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

INVESTING IN REIT IS A LIQUID, DIVIDEND-PAYING MEANS OF PARTICIPATING IN THE REAL ESTATE MARKET AND WE HAVE BEEN PAYING THE MAINTENANCE, TAXES AND UPKEEP ON THEIR PROPERTIES. WHY? HOW?
STUPID PEOPLE SIGN STUPID CONTRACTS EVERY DAY — K.PETRIDES

Equity REITs invest in and own properties (thus responsible for the equity or value of their real estate assets). Revenues come principally from their properties’ rents. You should find out how your STATE and COUNTY and Municipality do business.

HYBRID REITS combine investment strategies of equity REITs and mortgage REITs by investing in both properties and mortgages.

UPDATE FROM PHONE CALL THAT BEGAN WITH ‘SHELLY’ DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS
WELLS FARGO BANK NA MINNEAPOLIS
651-450-4064
4/27/2011 DOCUMENTED ON LIVING LIES:
Shelly Director of Operations Wells Fargo Bank NA Minneapolis called back 651-450-4064 on speaker with author of Tranfer Agent letter from SEC regarding enforcements and complinace by providing source code of third party’s software.
Had me on speaker. Whispering in the background. K. stated not related to SEC and I said but oh you complied with the SEC and gave them the source code for transfer agents so the SEC would not sanction Wells Fargo.
Silence and then again on speaker one can hear the whispering.
Shelly – Director of Operations does not know. They were not smooth. Wanted then to know who I am. I said I need to get a letter out to the SEC today

ROBERT J. KAUKOL DENVER, CO 11/14/01
REPORT SUMMARY:
NUMBER OF OTHER INCLUDED MANAGERS: 16
LIST OF OTHER MANAGERS
NO. 13F FILE NUMBER NAME
1
2
3 WELLS FARGO BANK ARIZONA, NA
4 WELLS FARGO BANK INDIANA, NA
5 WELLS FARGO BANK IOWA, NA
6 WELLS FARGO BANK MINNESOTA, NA
7 WELLS FARGO BANK MONTANA, NA
8 WELLS FARGO BANK NEBRASKA, NA
9 WELLS FARGO BANK NEVADA, NA
10 WELLS FARGO BANK NEW MEXICO, NA
11 WELLS FARGO BANK NORTHWEST, NA
12 WELLS FARGO BANK SOUTH DAKOTA, NA
13 WELLS FARGO BANK TEXAS, NA
14 WELLS FARGO BANK WEST, NA
15 WELLS FARGO BANK WISCONSIN, NA
16 WELLS FARGO BANK WYOMING, NA
17 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA
18 SCI CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC.
19 PEREGRINE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC.
20 NORWEST LIMITED LP, LLLP
21 WELLS FARGO INVESTMENTS, LLC
22 WELLS CAPITAL MANAGEMENT INCORPORATED
23 WELLS FARGO BANK MICHIGAN, NA
FORM 13F INFORMATION TABLE ENTRY TOTAL: 15978

Ms. Katie J. Sevcik
Vice President, Manager of Operations
Law Department
Wells Fargo & Company
MAC N9305-172
Sixth and Marquette
Minneapolis, MN 55479
Re: No-Action Request With Respect to SEC Rule 17Ad-7(f)(5)(ii) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Dear Ms. Sevcik:
This letter is in response to your letter dated March 23, 2004, where you request that the Division of Market Regulation (“Division”) of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) not recommend enforcement action to the Commission against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) for violating Rule 17Ad-7(f)(5)(ii) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)1 if Wells Fargo were to escrow a copy of its vendor’s software and related materials under the terms outlined in your letter.2
Background
As you know, Rules 17Ad-6 and 17Ad-7 under the Act3 specify the records that registered transfer agents must make and the amount of time and manner in which they must preserve these records. Under Rule 17Ad-7(f)(5)(ii), transfer agents that choose to use electronic storage media to store such records must:
Place in escrow with an independent third party and keep current a copy of the physical and logical format of the electronic storage or micrographic media, the field format of all different information types written on the electronic storage media and source code, and the appropriate documentation and information necessary to access records and indexes.
As explained in the Commission’s release adopting the electronic storage provisions of Rule 17Ad-7, this requirement is designed to assist the Commission or the transfer agent’s appropriate regulatory agency’s (“ARA”) in accessing a transfer agent’s records and indexes during, for example, some type of emergency such as a transfer agent’s insolvency or refusal to cooperate. The rule also requires the escrow agent to file an undertaking with the Commission or ARA that it will make such records management information available to the Commission or ARA promptly upon request.
Your Representations and Proposal
You state that Wells Fargo is a transfer agent registered with the Commission and that Wells Fargo has purchased records management software to archive its records and indexes.4 However, because the software vendor has not agreed to include the software source code and object code as part of the escrow materials, Wells Fargo believes that it is unable to comply with Rule 17Ad-7(f)(5)(ii).
You propose that Wells Fargo satisfy Rule 17Ad-7(f)(5)(ii) by placing into escrow “Escrow Materials.” “Escrow Materials” are defined in your escrow agreement as the following:
“Escrow Materials” shall mean the “as built” programs, physical and logical format of the electronic storage or micrographics media, the field format and all different application executables and appropriate documentation and information necessary, and the appropriate documentation and information necessary to access the records and indexes of Wells Fargo’s electronic records management system as required and set forth in Security (sic) Exchange Commission (SEC) rule 17Ad-7. The actual application software for accessing archived electronic records is described as FileNet Panagon Image Service 3.6 SP2 for Windows, as described in Exhibit A hereto. A copy of source code and object code is not to be a part of the Escrow Material or a part of this agreement.
Our Response
In the Adopting Release, we summarized Rule 17Ad-7(f)(5)(ii) as requiring transfer agents to “[k]eep in escrow an updated copy of the software or other information that is necessary to access and download electronically stored records.” Also in the Adopting Release, we used the words “records management software” to broadly describe the materials that are required to be placed in escrow with an independent third party.
Based on the representations contained in your March 23, 2004, letter, as well as related telephone and e-mail communications with Division staff, the Division will not recommend that the Commission take enforcement action against Wells Fargo for violating Rule 17Ad-7(f)(5)(ii) if it places into escrow with an independent third party the “Escrow Materials,” as that term is defined in your escrow agreement, as set out above in place of the items set forth in Rule 17Ad-7(f)(5)(ii).
This position is based on the facts and representations described above; any different facts or representations may require a different response. In addition, this position address enforcement action only and should not be understood to express any legal conclusions regarding the applicability of statutory or regulatory provisions of the federal securities laws. This position is subject to changes in current law and regulations governing Wells Fargo; any such changes in the law or regulations may supersede these positions or require the Division to reevaluate these positions. The Division may revoke or modify this position in the future as a result of such reevaluation. Finally, this position is subject to modification or revocation at any time the Commission or the Division determines that such modification or revocation is consistent with the public interest or the protection of investors.
Sincerely,
Jerry W. Carpenter
Assistant Director
Office of Trading Practices and Processing
Endnotes
________________________________________
1 17 CFR 240.17Ad-7(f)(5)(ii).
2 We have attached a copy of your letter to this response to avoid reciting all of the facts and circumstances.
3 17 CFR 240.17Ad-6 and 17 CFR 240.17Ad-7.
4 Wells Fargo’s March 23, 2004, letter states that Wells Fargo has contracted with FileNet Corporation to “access” Wells Fargo’s electronic records management system’s records and indexes. Subsequent discussions between Wells Fargo staff and Division staff clarified that Wells Fargo had purchased FileNet document imaging and records management software that Wells Fargo will use itself to maintain its records and indexes.
________________________________________
Incoming Letter:
March 23, 2004
Mr. Jerry Carpenter
Assistant Director
Division of Market Regulation
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549
Re: No-Action Request by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. regarding records retention and software escrow requirements under SEC Rule 17Ad-7
Dear Mr. Carpenter:
This letter is submitted to the Commission by the Law Department of Wells Fargo & Company, the parent corporation of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”), which is a national banking association and a registered transfer agent. Wells Fargo has contracted with FileNet Corporation (“Vendor”), the provider of document imaging software to access the records and indexes of Wells Fargo’s electronic records management system. Wells Fargo is aware that provisions of SEC Rule 17Ad-7, as amended, require certain types of software to be placed into escrow with an independent escrow agent, and that the rule requires a transfer agent to place third party licensed software with an independent escrow agent if access to the source code is not available.
Wells Fargo has discussed the requirements of Rule 17Ad-7 with Vendor, including these specific requirements:
“[T]ransfer agents that use electronic storage media or micrographic media to store their records must: maintain, keep current, and provide promptly upon request by the Commission and their ARA all information necessary to access the records and indexes stored on electronic storage media or micrographic media and place in escrow and keep current a copy of the physical and logical format of the electronic or micrographic storage media, the field format of all different information types written on the electronic storage media and source code, and the appropriate documentation and information necessary to access records and indexes. The escrow agent must file a statement with the Commission that it will make this information available promptly upon request to the Commission’s representatives or the ARA.” [Excerpt from Rule 17Ad-7]
Vendor has agreed to permit Wells Fargo to enter into an escrow agreement under which an independent escrow agent will hold a copy of the Vendor software materials required for the Commission or an ARA, if necessary, to obtain, load, and access Wells Fargo’s database of records required that are to be maintained under Rule 17Ad-6. We are enclosing a copy of the escrow agreement, dated as of March 15, 2004 (the “Escrow Agreement”), by and between Wells Fargo and U.S. Escrow Services, Inc., as escrow agent. (See attached Escrow Agreement.)
The escrowed software and related materials which are to be held by the third party escrow agent are described as follows in the Escrow Agreement, which also refers to a software description attached hereto as Exhibit A.
“Escrow Materials” shall mean the “as built” programs, physical and logical format of the electronic storage or micrographics media, the field format and all different application executables and appropriate documentation and information necessary, and the appropriate documentation and information necessary to access the records and indexes of Wells Fargo’s electronic records management system as required and set forth in Security Exchange Commission (SEC) rule 17Ad-7. The actual application software for accessing archived electronic records is described as FileNet Panagon Image Service 3.6 SP2 for Windows, as described in Exhibit A hereto. The copy of source code and object code is not to be a part of the Escrow Material or a part of this agreement. [Excerpt from Escrow Agreement]
Despite requests by Wells Fargo to do so, Vendor has not agreed to include the software source code and object code as part of the Escrow Agreement. Vendor has noted that software developers have been traditionally reluctant to provide their source code to a customer or an unrelated third party, because they consider the source code the essence of their product.
Since the source code is unavailable from Vendor for escrow, Wells Fargo has executed the Escrow Agreement with an independent escrow agent, which provides for the escrow agent to hold the Escrow Materials as defined above. Accordingly, Wells Fargo is requesting the Commission staff to review the software escrow arrangements as described herein, and that the Commission staff will not recommend that the Commission take enforcement action regarding Wells Fargo’s method of compliance with the escrow requirements of Rule 17Ad-7.
Please contact me at 651-450-4190 or our counsel, Gordon Glaza at 612-667-0628 if you need any additional information, or have questions or comments regarding this request. Thank you very much for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
/s/ Katie J. Sevcik
Vice President, Manager of Operations
cc: Lennie Kaufman
Angela Ponte
Jeffrey Elmquist
Gordon Glaza
David Karasik, SEC
________________________________________
Exhibit A
Software required for retrieving archived data
FileNet Panagon Image Services 3.6 SP2 for Windows
Actual application required for restoring and accessing archived data
Microsoft Windows 2000 with Service Pack 3 or 4
Standard Operating System software – Default installation
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 with Service Pack 3
Backend database software used by Panagon Image Services – Default installation
Hardware required for retrieving archived data
PC or Server with at least 1GB of RAM, 80GB of Hard Drive space and processor speed of 1GHz or higher
Magneto Optical disc drive capable of reading 9.1GB 5.25-inch media
Interface adapter (SCSI) for connecting MO disc drive to computer
________________________________________
ESCROW AGREEMENT
* * *
SECTION I
DEFINITIONS
The defined terms utilized throughout this Agreement shall have the following meanings which shall govern and control the interpretation of this Agreement. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the same meaning as set forth in the Agreement:
* * *
B. “Escrow Materials” shall mean a copy of the “as built” programs, physical and logical format of the electronic storage or micrographic media, the field format and all different application executables and appropriate documentation and information necessary, and the appropriate documentation and information necessary to access the records and indexes of WFSS’s electronic records management system as required and set forth in Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) rule 17Ad-7. The actual application software for accessing archived electronic records is the FileNet Panagon Image Services 3.6 SP2 for Windows, as described in Exhibit A hereto. A copy of the source code and object code is not part of the Escrow Materials or part of this Agreement.
* * *

http://www.sec.gov/divisions/marketreg/mr-noaction/wells072904.htm

Phone# 612-667-0628
INCORPORATOR STEPHEN D. MORRISON
Norwest Integrated Structured Assets, Inc. RSSD ID 2536035
12/10/1996 – Norwest Structured Assets, Inc.
7485 New Horizon Way
Frederick MD – Domestic Entity Other
03/05/1997 – Renamed Norwest Integrated Structured Assets,Inc.
04/07/2000 – Acquired by Norwest Asset Securities Corp
Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corp – 2495208
03/28/1996 – Norwest Asset Securities Corp
405 Southwest 5th St
Des Moines Iowa – Domestic Entity Other
04/17/2000 Norwest Asset Securities Corp Renamed to
Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corp
Active 05/21/2011
Norwest Corp 1985
Parent of Foothill Capital Corp
(a subsidiary of Foothill Group).
Norwest Mortgage Inc., BANCO Mortgage, acquired by NATIONSBANK?
10/19/95 FCC Holdings Ltd established
Foothill Capital Corp 2468015
7/31/2001 FCC Holdings moved
6/2/2003 Renamed Foothill Capital Corp
(RSSD ID 1558478 Wells Fargo Foothill Inc. renamed Wells Fargo Capital Finance Inc.
2450 Colorado Ave, Suite 3000 West,
Santa Monica CA 90404
05/01/1979 – Foothill Capital Corp Los Angeles CA
Finance Co.
10/19/1995 – FCC moved
07/31/2001 – FCC moved to current address above
06/02/2003 – FCC renamed Wells Fargo Foothill Inc
01/15/2010 – Renamed Wells Fargo Capital Finance Inc.
1985: Norwest Corp Parent (1120754) of FCC
Significant Interest: EMC Corp;
The Money Center;
BANCO Mortgage Co of Wisconsin,
Norwest Mortgage Inc.;
Centurion Life Insurance Co.
Peregrine Capital Management, Inc./MN on SEC
800 Lasalle Ave, Ste 1850,
Minneapolis MN 55402
41-6257136 IRS; SEC CIK 764529
FFIEC1121087 Minneapolis MN
On the SEC as both (Filer) (Owner)
29 Closely Related including:
Prudential – First International Advisors – Galliard – Lowry Hill – Golden Capital – Jennison – Kaplan – Metro West – Nelson Capital – Pruco – Wells Capital Management Inc formerly Foothill Capital subsidiary of Foothill Group; Wells Fargo Advisors, Wells Fargo Funds, Wells Fargo Alternative Investments …
See Bottom for 40-APP Filing (Insurance)
Peregrine Capital 2/17/09

They Still Don’t Get It — Robo-crimes are not victimless!

The main problem with resolving the mortgage and housing crisis has emerged as flat-out ignorance and indifference even on the part of the Washington Post which referred to Robo-signing as a “victimless” crime.

This ignorance stems from a rancid combination of laziness and persistent ideology that disregards both known facts and the need to ascertain “unknown facts.”

The conclusion reached by most people is that the banks were wrong in submitting false documents with false declarations of fact and then forging them with unauthorised signatures and then notarizing false signatures — but that doesn’t mean that a borrower should not be foreclosed. This feels like explaining high finance and legal doctrine to a three-year old — except the people receiving the explanation should know better and in fact do know better.

No property transaction can be accepted based upon falsified, forged, fraudulent documents — so it does mean that there cannot be a foreclosure unless true documents reciting true facts are used in a foreclosure. The community bank on the corner has nothing to fear from the fact that they must show ownership of the loan and be able to provide a full and complete accounting on the loan. They never had a problem.

The assumption behind the Washington Posts reckless characterisation of these victimless crimes is that when you boil these “securitized loans” down, they are really no different than the community bank loan, that the documents will be real, and that the accounting for the loan will be full and complete.

That assumption is plainly wrong. And the corollary assumption that the banks were just “cutting corners” is equally wrong. The failure to investigate what the banks are hiding is an egregious failure of responsibility for both the press and law enforcement.

We can all agree that a person who borrows money should pay it back. We should also agree that such a person should be obligated to pay it back once, not multiple times. And we should also agree that the lender should only be paid once, not multiple times. Because so many people wish to gloss over the niceties of proper documentation, the banks are being permitted to claim losses they never endured, claim ownership of loans they never funded or bought, claim lien foreclosure, evict millions from there homes, take title to property, create blighted cities that once thrived, abandon the property they foreclosed, and all without taking an ounce of responsibility for the effect on investors who advanced all the money, the homeowners who advanced their lives and all the property, the taxpayers who have paid the defaulted loans repeatedly to banks that did not own the loans, and the nation’s prospect as the leader of the free world.

If the net effect is that the homeowner is left with full liability to the real creditor, or that the homeowner pays twice on the same loan, or that the creditors received full or partial payment multiple times from multiple sources, and if that is what is being covered up by Robo-signed documents, then how can we assume that these crimes are victimless? the investors are being cheated out of the repayment of the loans they made because the banks took the money and ran. The homeowners are being foreclosed for a debt that has been repaid out of their tax dollars. the cities and counties and states are being deprived of tax revenue for expenses that in large part were the result of planning for services and infrastructure to accommodate the false real estate boom.

Robo-signing is only victimless if these were “White lies”. Without further investigation and discovery how does anyone know that Robo-signing was not as mean-spirited and pernicious as it sounds when put into solid language — the forged signing of fraudulent documents containing false declarations meant to deceive the reader, the public and the recording offices? Hint: Start with the amount of money that is claimed as defaulted from 2006 to the present and apply payments received from all parties, not just the borrower. And remember that if the payment came from the taxpayers, it came from the borrower who pays taxes just like everyone else. If the money came from insurers or counter parties to credit default swaps, and the creditors (investors who advanced the money) are satisfied, why should the borrower pay it again? — especially to banks that were never more than conduits, never had any loss, never funded the loan and never purchased the loan.

Multi-State Settlement Does NOT Bar Your Individual Claims or Defenses

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

by “George”

This Obama agreement will not stop you from filing your individual lawsuit in reference to any of the fraud involved in your particular case. Scroll down to the 16th paragraph, the last 2 sentences about filing individual lawsuits and MERS.
As Neil stated, this agreement between Obama and the banks only makes the banks admit to the fraud and could hurt them and not help them. It will help the banks if you the homeowner accept the agreement. According to my PA Attorneys General office, over the next several months homeowners in trouble will receive letter or notification of this agreement deal. I highly recommend NOT to sign it or accept it, if you plan to file lawsuit against your mortgage servicer. And with all the fraud, you can win. Robo-signing perjury, missing assignments, no ownership of note, quiet title action, etc. You can still file lawsuit for this fraud even with Obama agreement in place as long as you do not accept the agreement plan.
Please review below, letter from the United States Department of Justice:

Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, February 9, 2012
Federal Government and State Attorneys General Reach $25 Billion Agreement with Five Largest Mortgage Servicers to Address Mortgage Loan Servicing and Foreclosure Abuses
$25 Billion Agreement Provides Homeowner Relief & New Protections, Stops Abuses
WASHINGTON – U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Shaun Donovan, Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller and Colorado Attorney General John W. Suthers announced today that the federal government and 49 state attorneys general have reached a landmark $25 billion agreement with the nation’s five largest mortgage servicers to address mortgage loan servicing and foreclosure abuses. The agreement provides substantial financial relief to homeowners and establishes significant new homeowner protections for the future.

The unprecedented joint agreement is the largest federal-state civil settlement ever obtained and is the result of extensive investigations by federal agencies, including the Department of Justice, HUD and the HUD Office of the Inspector General (HUD-OIG), and state attorneys general and state banking regulators across the country. The joint federal-state group entered into the agreement with the nation’s five largest mortgage servicers: Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells Fargo & Company, Citigroup Inc. and Ally Financial Inc. (formerly GMAC).

“This agreement – the largest joint federal-state settlement ever obtained – is the result of unprecedented coordination among enforcement agencies throughout the government,” said Attorney General Holder. “It holds mortgage servicers accountable for abusive practices and requires them to commit more than $20 billion towards financial relief for consumers. As a result, struggling homeowners throughout the country will benefit from reduced principals and refinancing of their loans. The agreement also requires substantial changes in how servicers do business, which will help to ensure the abuses of the past are not repeated.”

“This historic settlement will provide immediate relief to homeowners – forcing banks to reduce the principal balance on many loans, refinance loans for underwater borrowers, and pay billions of dollars to states and consumers,” said HUD Secretary Donovan. “ Banks must follow the laws. Any bank that hasn’t done so should be held accountable and should take prompt action to correct its mistakes. And it will not end with this settlement. One of the most important ways this settlement helps homeowners is that it forces the banks to clean up their acts and fix the problems uncovered during our investigations. And it does that by committing them to major reforms in how they service mortgage loans. These new customer service standards are in keeping with the Homeowners Bill of Rights recently announced by President Obama – a single, straightforward set of commonsense rules that families can count on.”

“This monitored agreement holds the banks accountable, it provides badly needed relief to homeowners, and it transforms the mortgage servicing industry so now homeowners will be protected and treated fairly,” said Iowa Attorney General Miller.

“This settlement has broad bipartisan support from the states because the attorneys general realize that the partnership with the federal agencies made it possible to achieve favorable terms and conditions that would have been difficult for the states or the federal government to achieve on their own,” said Colorado Attorney General Suthers.

The joint federal-state agreement requires servicers to implement comprehensive new mortgage loan servicing standards and to commit $25 billion to resolve violations of state and federal law. These violations include servicers’ use of “robo-signed” affidavits in foreclosure proceedings; deceptive practices in the offering of loan modifications; failures to offer non-foreclosure alternatives before foreclosing on borrowers with federally insured mortgages; and filing improper documentation in federal bankruptcy court.

Under the terms of the agreement, the servicers are required to collectively dedicate $20 billion toward various forms of financial relief to borrowers. At least $10 billion will go toward reducing the principal on loans for borrowers who, as of the date of the settlement, are either delinquent or at imminent risk of default and owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth. At least $3 billion will go toward refinancing loans for borrowers who are current on their mortgages but who owe more on their mortgage than their homes are worth. Borrowers who meet basic criteria will be eligible for the refinancing, which will reduce interest rates for borrowers who are currently paying much higher rates or whose adjustable rate mortgages are due to soon rise to much higher rates. Up to $7 billion will go towards other forms of relief, including forbearance of principal for unemployed borrowers, anti-blight programs, short sales and transitional assistance, benefits for service members who are forced to sell their home at a loss as a result of a Permanent Change in Station order, and other programs. Because servicers will receive only partial credit for every dollar spent on some of the required activities, the settlement will provide direct benefits to borrowers in excess of $20 billion.

Mortgage servicers are required to fulfill these obligations within three years. To encourage servicers to provide relief quickly, there are incentives for relief provided within the first 12 months. Servicers must reach 75 percent of their targets within the first two years. Servicers that miss settlement targets and deadlines will be required to pay substantial additional cash amounts.

In addition to the $20 billion in financial relief for borrowers, the agreement requires the servicers to pay $5 billion in cash to the federal and state governments. $1.5 billion of this payment will be used to establish a Borrower Payment Fund to provide cash payments to borrowers whose homes were sold or taken in foreclosure between Jan. 1, 2008 and Dec. 31, 2011, and who meet other criteria. This program is separate from the restitution program currently being administered by federal banking regulators to compensate those who suffered direct financial harm as a result of wrongful servicer conduct. Borrowers will not release any claims in exchange for a payment. The remaining $3.5 billion of the $5 billion payment will go to state and federal governments to be used to repay public funds lost as a result of servicer misconduct and to fund housing counselors, legal aid and other similar public programs determined by the state attorneys general.

The $5 billion includes a $1 billion resolution of a separate investigation into fraudulent and wrongful conduct by Bank of America and various Countrywide entities related to the origination and underwriting of Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured mortgage loans, and systematic inflation of appraisal values concerning these loans, from Jan. 1, 2003 through April 30, 2009. Payment of $500 million of this $1 billion will be deferred to partially fund a loan modification program for Countrywide borrowers throughout the nation who are underwater on their mortgages. This investigation was conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, with the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch of the Department of Justice, HUD and HUD-OIG. The settlement also resolves an investigation by the Eastern District of New York, the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP) and the Federal Housing Finance Agency-Office of the Inspector General (FHFA-OIG) into allegations that Bank of America defrauded the Home Affordable Modification Program.

The joint federal-state agreement requires the mortgage servicers to implement unprecedented changes in how they service mortgage loans, handle foreclosures, and ensure the accuracy of information provided in federal bankruptcy court. The agreement requires new servicing standards which will prevent foreclosure abuses of the past, such as robo-signing, improper documentation and lost paperwork, and create dozens of new consumer protections. The new standards provide for strict oversight of foreclosure processing, including third-party vendors, and new requirements to undertake pre-filing reviews of certain documents filed in bankruptcy court.

The new servicing standards make foreclosure a last resort by requiring servicers to evaluate homeowners for other loss mitigation options first. In addition, banks will be restricted from foreclosing while the homeowner is being considered for a loan modification. The new standards also include procedures and timelines for reviewing loan modification applications and give homeowners the right to appeal denials. Servicers will also be required to create a single point of contact for borrowers seeking information about their loans and maintain adequate staff to handle calls.

The agreement will also provide enhanced protections for service members that go beyond those required by the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA). In addition, the four servicers that had not previously resolved certain portions of potential SCRA liability have agreed to conduct a full review, overseen by the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, to determine whether any servicemembers were foreclosed on in violation of SCRA since Jan. 1, 2006. The servicers have also agreed to conduct a thorough review, overseen by the Civil Rights Division, to determine whether any servicemember, from Jan. 1, 2008, to the present, was charged interest in excess of 6% on their mortgage, after a valid request to lower the interest rate, in violation of the SCRA. Servicers will be required to make payments to any servicemember who was a victim of a wrongful foreclosure or who was wrongfully charged a higher interest rate. This compensation for servicemembers is in addition to the $25 billion settlement amount.

The agreement will be filed as a consent judgment in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Compliance with the agreement will be overseen by an independent monitor, Joseph A. Smith Jr. Smith has served as the North Carolina Commissioner of Banks since 2002. Smith is also the former Chairman of the Conference of State Banks Supervisors (CSBS). The monitor will oversee implementation of the servicing standards required by the agreement; impose penalties of up to $1 million per violation (or up to $5 million for certain repeat violations); and publish regular public reports that identify any quarter in which a servicer fell short of the standards imposed in the settlement.

The agreement resolves certain violations of civil law based on mortgage loan servicing activities. The agreement does not prevent state and federal authorities from pursuing criminal enforcement actions related to this or other conduct by the servicers. The agreement does not prevent the government from punishing wrongful securitization conduct that will be the focus of the new Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities Working Group. The United States also retains its full authority to recover losses and penalties caused to the federal government when a bank failed to satisfy underwriting standards on a government-insured or government-guaranteed loan. The agreement does not prevent any action by individual borrowers who wish to bring their own lawsuits. State attorneys general also preserved, among other things, all claims against the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS), and all claims brought by borrowers.

Investigations were conducted by the U.S. Trustee Program of the Department of Justice, HUD-OIG, HUD’s FHA, state attorneys general offices and state banking regulators from throughout the country, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Colorado, the Justice Department’s Civil Division, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of North Carolina, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of South Carolina, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, SIGTARP and FHFA-OIG. The Department of Treasury, the Federal Trade Commission, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Department of Veterans Affairs and the U.S. Department of Agriculture made critical contributions.

For more information about the mortgage servicing settlement, go to http://www.NationalMortgageSettlement.com. To find your state attorney general’s website, go to http://www.NAAG.org and click on “The Attorneys General.”

The joint federal-state agreement is part of enforcement efforts by President Barack Obama’s Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force. President Obama established the interagency Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force to wage an aggressive, coordinated and proactive effort to investigate and prosecute financial crimes. The task force includes representatives from a broad range of federal agencies, regulatory authorities, inspectors general and state and local law enforcement who, working together, bring to bear a powerful array of criminal and civil enforcement resources. The task force is working to improve efforts across the federal executive branch, and with state and local partners, to investigate and prosecute significant financial crimes, ensure just and effective punishment for those who perpetrate financial crimes, combat discrimination in the lending and financial markets, and recover proceeds for victims of financial crimes. For more information about the task force, visit: http://www.stopfraud.gov.

British View Explains Banking Crisis

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

Editor’s Comment: Read this joke and think about it because it tells part of the story of American “securitization.” Then realize that the only debt — the one who got the dead donkey was paid in full once while his agent/broker received payment multiple times. THAT is why I say the debt is paid, there was no default and there should be no foreclosure because there is no enforceable mortgage. Nobody gets cheated out of anything by stopping the foreclosures except the brokers who want to become the largest landowners in U.S. History.

The current banking crisis explained  Anonymous

Young Paddy bought a donkey from a farmer for £100. The farmer agreed to deliver the donkey the next day.

The next day he drove up and said, ‘Sorry son, but I have some bad news. The donkey’s died.’

Paddy replied, ‘Well then just give me my money back.’

The farmer said, ‘Can’t do that. I’ve already spent it.’

Paddy said, ‘OK, then, just bring me the dead donkey.’

The farmer asked, ‘What are you going to do with him?’

Paddy said, ‘I’m going to raffle him off.’

The farmer said, ‘You can’t raffle a dead donkey!’

Paddy said, ‘Sure I can. Watch me. I just won’t tell anybody he’s dead.’

A month later, the farmer met up with Paddy and asked, ‘What happened with that dead donkey?’

Paddy said, ‘I raffled him off. I sold 500 tickets at £2 each and made a profit of £898′

The farmer said, ‘Didn’t anyone complain?’

Paddy said, ‘Just the guy who won. So I gave him his £2 back.’

Paddy now works for the Royal Bank of Scotland .

FANNIE MAE SINKS PRINCIPAL REDUCTION PROGRAM ON IDEOLOGICAL GROUNDS

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

EDITOR’S COMMENTS: Who are these people who make judgments about borrowers that are so negative? Do they really think that 20 million people woke up one morning and decided to attack the financial services industry?

Or is it possible that the financial services giants, now indicted for admittedly creating false declarations in false documents that were forged, were the culprits?

And why did anyone at Fannie Mae think they could impose their ideology to cover over the simple fact that the values used by the “lenders” were wrong?

Are you going to blame the borrowers for the appraisal too — or just for not analyzing the more than 400 loan products that proliferated from 1996-2009? And why did they lie about it when questioned by Congress?

So a plan ready to go was pulled back at the last minute in 2010, which would have averted millions of foreclosures.

Fannie Mae Nixed Plan to Reduce Mortgage Debt, Democrats Say

By Lorraine Woellert

Fannie Mae (FNMA) pulled the plug on a 2010 plan to forgive borrowers’ mortgage debt because company executives were “philosophically opposed” to the idea, a former company employee told House investigators.

In a letter today to the Federal Housing Finance Agency, House Democrats challenged a January analysis from Acting Director Edward J. DeMarco that claimed principal writedowns would raise costs and increase taxpayer losses at the government-owned company.

“We have now become aware of new information that calls into serious question the accuracy and completeness of your response, as well as your motivation for continuing to oppose principal reduction programs even when they have the potential to save American taxpayers billions of dollars,” said the letter from representatives Elijah Cummings of Maryland and John F. Teirney of Massachusetts, Democrats on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

FHFA spokeswoman Corinne Russell did not have an immediate comment. The agency oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were taken over by the federal government in 2008 as they neared bankruptcy.

According to the letter, a former Fannie Mae employee told the committee that the mortgage finance company had developed a pilot program for reducing mortgage debt for borrowers who owe more on their house than the property is worth.

The purpose of the plan was to develop “a responsible way to reduce principal balances for underwater mortgage borrowers without creating undue incremental moral hazard,” the employee told the committee.

The pilot had preliminary approvals from officials at Fannie Mae, FHFA, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, a bank regulator, according to the former employee.

In mid-2010, two weeks before its launch, senior Fannie Mae executives cancelled the program because they were “philosophically opposed to writing down principal balances,” according to the former worker, who was quoted in the letter without being identified.

“I believe that we could be saving tens of billions of dollars while also helping stabilize housing prices and stimulating economic growth,” the former employee said, according to the letter.

To contact the reporter on this story: Lorraine Woellert in Washington at lwoellert@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Maura Reynolds at mreynolds34@bloomberg.net

SEC ISSUES WELLS NOTICES TO MAJOR BANKS

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

Sifting Through 25 Million Pages of Documents

EDITOR’S COMMENT: Attorneys for homeowners should watch these investor suits carefully. Contained within them are allegations and discovery relating to the enforceability of the mortgage liens as well as the failure to properly underwrite the loans.

The fact that the SEC is going after the banks on these issues is a good thing, but not unless it is referred for criminal prosecution. If our securities markets are subject to outright criminal fraud and we don’t do anything about the criminal aspect, we are sending the wrong signal out to the rest of the world which already views our mortgage debacle as a virtual attack on the sovereignty of dozens of countries.

If we want to see our credit markets revive and our economy, we will need to make investors feel certain that the regulatory environment and law enforcement are working together to bring criminal masterminds to justice. Anything short of that will result in a slow but rising attrition to anywhere but the U.S. credit markets.

Feb 8 (Reuters) – U.S. securities regulators plan to warn several major banks that they may sue them over the sale of bonds linked to sub-prime mortgages that ignited the financial crisis in 2008, the Wall Street Journal said, citing people familiar with the matter.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is looking at whether the banks misrepresented the poor quality of loan pools they bundled and sold to investors, the people told the Journal.

It was not clear which firms will receive the formal SEC enforcement warnings, known as “Wells notices”, the paper said.

Banks whose activities are being examined in the civil investigation include Ally Financial Inc, Bank of America Corp , Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and Goldman Sachs, the Journal said.

Ally Financial spokeswoman Gina Proia told Reuters that she could comment on the Journal report.

Representatives of the banks and SEC declined to comment, the Journal said.

None of the other parties could immediately be reached for comment by Reuters outside regular U.S. business hours.

Speaking at a news conference in January, SEC enforcement director Robert Khuzami said his agency already reviewed 25 million pages of documents on mortgage-related investigations.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency, which oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, sued 17 large banks last September over losses on about $200 billion of subprime bonds and said the underlying mortgages did not meet investors’ criteria.

Robo-Deal: The Price of Crime

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

” The biggest mistake being made in the settlement is that investors are being insulted. They won’t return to the same marketplace and invest in similar offerings in the future. This puts a permanent damper on credit markets and liquidity. Investors have no reason to trust a society that ratifies criminal fraud. Investors have a high tolerance for risk, but zero tolerance for corruption. The net effect will be investments going anywhere but the credit markets based on Wall Street, which means that fund managers are going to perceive that their only safe move is to go to a more stable environment in which crime is punished and fraud isn’t tolerated.” — Neil F Garfield, livinglies.me

EDITOR’S COMMENT AND ANALYSIS: If you steal a little money you go to jail. If you steal a lot you get to keep it. That seems to be the net impact of the multi-state settlement. Yves Smith (see below) and Adam Levitin are among many who decry this settlement and I agree with their reasons, but I don’t agree that this is the end of this “theater.”

It is probable that world class criminals will escape prosecution and it is certainly a bad precedent to put a price — $2,000 — on committing forgery, where the loss is in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. The driving theme behind the settlement is to get this episode behind us and so, like the tobacco settlement, this new deal is intended to start us on the path of clearing out the foreclosure problem — but unlike the tobacco settlement in which people were successfully encouraged to stop smoking, this settlement is based solidly on continuing false and fraudulent foreclosures on debts that have been paid if you apply the third party payments.

Those foreclosures cannot continue without continuing the fraud. This isn’t a paperwork problem — it is an economic one in which the real parties in interest have been left out.

Yet the theater is far from over because the title issues and the individual causes of action — for those homeowners who want to pursue them — still exist, and criminal prosecutions — for those prosecutors who won’t be stopped will also continue.  There is no avoiding the realization that the very banks who are parties to this settlement are not and never were parties to the loans. They never owned them and they never bought them.

Thus any document signed by these strangers to the transaction is no more than a wild deed that cannot support a chain of title. If this issue is not addressed head-on, who is going to buy anything or lend anything in a market where a growing number of supposedly ex-homeowners successfully overturn foreclosures and regain title and possession of their properties? It isn’t the number of people who succeed in this endeavor that matters — it is that the risk exists that it could happen on any property.

WHY ROBO? Take a step back and look at this picture. The Banks are settling claims for wrongful foreclosure but the wrongful foreclosure is being left intact. The obvious title problems are left intact like a disease on a rotting corpse. The question of why false declarations in false documents were used is being glossed over as though it doesn’t really matter why they did it. Isn’t anyone curious why banks would resort to widespread use of forged documents with false declarations contained in them? 

This issue won’t go away. If there was a cover-up, what were they attempting to cover up? For me the answer is clear — (a) the loans contain numerous fatal defects that eviscerate the debt mortgage securing the debt and (b) that there was no right or reason to foreclose except that the banks and servicers saw an opportunity to make even more money by taking the homes after they had already taken the investors and the homeowners to the cleaners.

The bottom line is (a) that there were fatal defects in both the documentation for the origination of the loan and the documentation for the origination of the sale of mortgage bonds to investors. This was intentional, so that the banks could do exactly what they are now doing, pretending on a grand scale to be the creditors when in fact the real creditors are being left out in the cold. And (b) there remain fatal defects in both the so-called mortgages and the foreclosure process as it has progressed thus far. The only settlement that counts, therefore, is one that stops the false foreclosures by strangers to the deal on loans that are not in default and that are not secured by a perfected mortgage lien.

In the end run, how much more the banks will be required to fork over will depend upon you and others who read this blog. If you call it quits, then the most you will see if in fact anyone sees it, is $2,000 for losing a home you should not have lost and being tricked into a loan that should have been far different in both amount and terms. Those who have not yet been foreclosed are not directly effected by the settlement. So assuming that the banks and servicers persist in pursuing foreclosures in which they have no interest other than greed, nothing we have so far will change anything.

Those who press on will see a benefit from their efforts although I concede that the turmoil of litigation is daunting at the very least. The prospect of overturning foreclosures and evictions that were based upon false declarations in false documents by banks and servicers who had no privity with the homeowner remains a viable and even an enhanced option. How Judges will react to the news of indictment for criminal activity and settlement with law enforcement officials is anyone’s guess. The added factor that has not been addressed is that most of the foreclosed loans were not in actual default.

In the final analysis, the crisis in title chains is not being addressed at all and there is a lot of work to do to clear it up one way or another. But one thing is certain: continued false foreclosures is not the path of recovery.

the-top-twelve-reasons-why-you-should-hate-the-mortgage-settlement.html

by Yves Smith

Here are the top twelve reasons why this deal stinks:

1. We’ve now set a price for forgeries and fabricating documents. It’s $2000 per loan. This is a rounding error compared to the chain of title problem these systematic practices were designed to circumvent. The cost is also trivial in comparison to the average loan, which is roughly $180k, so the settlement represents about 1% of loan balances. It is less than the price of the title insurance that banks failed to get when they transferred the loans to the trust. It is a fraction of the cost of the legal expenses when foreclosures are challenged. It’s a great deal for the banks because no one is at any of the servicers going to jail for forgery and the banks have set the upper bound of the cost of riding roughshod over 300 years of real estate law.

2. That $26 billion is actually $5 billion of bank money and the rest is your money. The mortgage principal writedowns are guaranteed to come almost entirely from securitized loans, which means from investors, which in turn means taxpayers via Fannie and Freddie, pension funds, insurers, and 401 (k)s. Refis of performing loans also reduce income to those very same investors.

3. That $5 billion divided among the big banks wouldn’t even represent a significant quarterly hit. Freddie and Fannie putbacks to the major banks have been running at that level each quarter.

4. That $20 billion actually makes bank second liens sounder, so this deal is a stealth bailout that strengthens bank balance sheets at the expense of the broader public.

5. The enforcement is a joke. The first layer of supervision is the banks reporting on themselves. The framework is similar to that of the OCC consent decrees implemented last year, which Adam Levitin and yours truly, among others, decried as regulatory theater.

6. The past history of servicer consent decrees shows the servicers all fail to comply. Why? Servicer records and systems are terrible in the best of times, and their systems and fee structures aren’t set up to handle much in the way of delinquencies. As Tom Adams has pointed out in earlier posts, servicer behavior is predictable when their portfolios are hit with a high level of delinquencies and defaults: they cheat in all sorts of ways to reduce their losses.

7. The cave-in Nevada and Arizona on the Countrywide settlement suit is a special gift for Bank of America, who is by far the worst offender in the chain of title disaster (since, according to sworn testimony of its own employee in Kemp v. Countrywide, Countrywide failed to comply with trust delivery requirements). This move proves that failing to comply with a consent degree has no consequences but will merely be rolled into a new consent degree which will also fail to be enforced. These cases also alleged HAMP violations as consumer fraud violations and could have gotten costly and emboldened other states to file similar suits not just against Countrywide but other servicers, so it was useful to the other banks as well.

8. If the new Federal task force were intended to be serious, this deal would have not have been settled. You never settle before investigating. It’s a bad idea to settle obvious, widespread wrongdoing on the cheap. You use the stuff that is easy to prove to gather information and secure cooperation on the stuff that is harder to prove. In Missouri and Nevada, the robosigning investigation led to criminal charges against agents of the servicers. But even though these companies were acting at the express direction and approval of the services, no individuals or entities higher up the food chain will face any sort of meaningful charges.

9. There is plenty of evidence of widespread abuses that appear not to be on the attorney generals’ or media’s radar, such as servicer driven foreclosures and looting of investors’ funds via impermissible and inflated charges. While no serious probe was undertaken, even the limited or peripheral investigations show massive failures (60% of documents had errors in AGs/Fed’s pathetically small sample). Similarly, the US Trustee’s office found widespread evidence of significant servicer errors in bankruptcy-related filings, such as inflated and bogus fees, and even substantial, completely made up charges. Yet the services and banks will suffer no real consequences for these abuses.

10. A deal on robo signings serves to cover up the much deeper chain of title problem. And don’t get too excited about the New York, Massachusetts, and Delaware MERS suits. They put pressure on banks to clean up this monstrous mess only if the AGs go through to trial and get tough penalties. The banks will want to settle their way out of that too. And even if these cases do go to trial and produce significant victories for the AGs, they still do not address the problem of failures to transfer notes correctly.

11. Don’t bet on a deus ex machina in terms of the new Federal foreclosure task force to improve this picture much. If you think Schneiderman, as a co-chairman who already has a full time day job in New York, is going to outfox a bunch of DC insiders who are part of the problem, I have a bridge I’d like to sell to you.

12. We’ll now have to listen to banks and their sycophant defenders declaring victory despite being wrong on the law and the facts. They will proceed to marginalize and write off criticisms of the servicing practices that hurt homeowners and investors and are devastating communities. But the problems will fester and the housing market will continue to suffer. Investors in mortgage-backed securities, who know that services have been screwing them for years, will be hung out to dry and will likely never return to a private MBS market, since the problems won’t ever be fixed. This settlement has not only revealed the residential mortgage market to be too big to fail, but puts it on long term, perhaps permanent, government life support.

As we’ve said before, this settlement is yet another raw demonstration of who wields power in America, and it isn’t you and me. It’s bad enough to see these negotiations come to their predictable, sorry outcome. It adds insult to injury to see some try to depict it as a win for long suffering, still abused homeowners.

3 MERS for the Price of One!

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

Editor’s Comment: This reminds me of what we did in the 1980′s for “asset protection” in which we had a limited partnership as the general partner of a limited partnership which was the general partner of a limited partnership — with the general partner of the third limited partnership a corporation with 0.01% of the total. The idea was to make it so that you didn’t know who to sue or what you would get if you won. It wasn’t my idea, but I used it for clients.

Like the cases in which Wells Fargo, US Bank, BOA and others admit at the end of the case that they really had no right to be there and that therefore the court lacked jurisdiction to award fees or sanctions, this structure with MERS is set up for a reason — to confuse the public, the regulatory authorities and the small banks who are now giving loans on property that supposedly had a mortgage on it that was claimed to be securitized. New Lenders beware! You are getting satisfactions of mortgage from a stranger to the transaction.

see deadlyclear.wordpress.com

When you research the trademark docs, and the business registration docs and then you compare the information to the Hultzman and Arnold depositions… and this is what you get:

There were three (3) Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.(s) created = (I), (II), (III).

Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (I) originally formed in about 1995, registered a trademark in 1997 and MERS and conveyed a security interest to Nationsbank, N.A. (Bank of America) on or about June 1998; that was followed by the creation of another Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (II) which was also created on or about June 30, 1998 and per the Hultzman Declaration merged with Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (I);

Then there was a name change of name Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (II) to MERSCORP, Inc. on or about December 1998 which was to become effect as of Jan 1999. See the documents on DeadlyClear:

http://deadlyclear.wordpress.com/2011/10/11/mers-vs-merscorp-looks-like-they-are-one-in-the-same/ ;

This means that the MERS® belongs to MERSCORP, Inc. and it became ‘the system’ that was licensed for members’ use.

Shortly after the name change MERSCORP, Inc. created yet another Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (III) (per Hultzman) which is the “Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.” (strawman) in the mortgage contracts (not MERSCORP, Inc. and the “MERS” reference in the mortgages is just an acronym (not the registered trademark MERS®).

However, MERSCORP, Inc. is in the mortgage contracts but not disclosed to the borrower – the MIN # belongs to MERS® ‘the system’ not the strawman “Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.” (III).

The Trademark Documents (can be found in the Post:
http://deadlyclear.wordpress.com/2011/10/28/complaint-state-of-delaware-v-merscorp-inc-go-go-beau/ it is too large to email) that were used in a lawsuit against a California company help to support the timeline… this scenario wasn’t used by the CA defendant – I think it was so convoluted nobody ever figured it out – it was likely meant to be confusing on purpose.

REGISTRATION NO: 2084831 SERIAL NO: 75/031300 MAILING DATE: 08/29/2007
REGISTRATION DATE: 07/29/1997
MARK: MERS
REGISTRATION OWNER: MERSCORP, Inc.

Bottom-line is that there were 3 Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., 2 were absorbed by MERSCORP, Inc., and the acronym MERS in the mortgages is the strawman Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (no employees or systems, shell) – not MERSCORP, Inc.’s MERS®.

There are no records of agreements, contracts, licensing, or assignments of license that have been filed in any business records in DE, NY, MI or Virginia or the patent office that I have searched or been able to find so far that link the Strawman or any other corporation to the MERS®.

Banks Getting Nervous as Legal Prospects Dim

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT

SERVICE 520-405-1688

Just How Relevant is the Multi-State Settlement?

Editor’s Comment: There are jokes going around about how you can’t fix stupid. We should add that you can’t fix title either unless you throw out hundreds of years of law and  market expectations. No settlement will clear title, nor will it absolve the Banks of criminal responsibility — but the latter can be settled by AG’s too willing to grab for the public relations coup and not willing to stand up for the citizens of their state.

Yves Smith has captured the flavor of the moment in the article below. The Banks seeking a settlement had better be careful what they wish for. As events unfold outside the boundaries of the settlement, they may have put themselves in the position of already admitting to the fraud, without any meaningful protection against liability —- civil or criminal — for screwing up the title registries around the country.

In the end they will either be required to pay far more than this settlement to get signatures that clear up chains of title or they will be forced to fold their tents. The ultimate responsibility for fixing the title problem will come back to the banks who created them because nobody else will do it. Their assumption that they could finesse their way out of this was and remains, well, stupid.

After all this time, it is hard to imagine that we are only half way through this game. It is the second half that will determine the fate of the banks and our nation.

by Yves Smith SEE FULL ARTICLE ON NAKEDCAPITALISM.COM

The Administration, through the nominal head of the bank settlement negotiations, Iowa attorney general Tom Miller, has moved its final deadline for a deal yet again, this time to Thursday.

One event of the day was a non-event. New York AG Eric Schneiderman has scheduled a conference call to the media on the settlement for 6 PM, then postponed it indefinitely 10 minutes before the scheduled time. One can presume that whatever he had intended to say was rendered moot by events…but what events? The only thing one can infer is that he is presumably still negotiating. Per Reuters (hat tip Lambert):

Last Friday New York filed a lawsuit that conflicted with part of the settlement. His office has been in discussions with bank lawyers to move forward with both the lawsuit and the settlement, according to two other sources familiar with the matter.

According to another person familiar with Schneiderman’s thinking, the tenuous nature of the talks caused the postponement. Schneiderman still is a holdout, that person said.

So, reading between the lines, it looks as if Schneiderman saw his MERS lawsuit as not inconsistent with the settlement (remember, Delaware and Massachusetts both have filed MERS suits, and the Massachusetts suit targets the five biggest servicers along with MERS) and the banks begged to differ. This is consistent with the report by Loren Berlin in Huffington Post:

Bank executives argue that New York attorney general Eric Schneiderman is using the lawsuit to go after claims already covered under the settlement, said the source.

But perhaps the biggest news was that Florida is now among the states not yet signed up. This is pretty surprising, given that Republican AG Pam Bondi had the nerve to hector California’s Kamala Harris last week for not joining the settlement. Although some reports indicated that Florida had gotten a sweetened deal, the HuffPo story says she wants a side deal, which is what California would get.

So far, the states that are listed as not yet agreeing to the settlement are California, Florida, New York, Nevada, Delaware, Arizona, and Massachusetts. The bad thing about this list, from the officialdom’s perspective, is that it includes the states that were the epicenters of the housing bust.

But while the claim is that these states will eventually fall into line, it is the banks that now appear to be the serious holdouts, as news reports we highlighted yesterday indicated. From Huffington Post:

Bank concerns reached fever pitch on Friday when the New York State attorney general’s office sued Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo, accusing the banks of deceptive and fraudulent use of a private database used to register mortgages.

“I think it’s fair to say that the banks are becoming an obstacle to completing this settlement now,” said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The banks clearly don’t want to be exposed to MERS litigation. While Schneiderman and Massachusetts’ Coakley face some hurdles in pinning liability on the banks (they have MERS, foreclosure mills, and vendors like LPS as scapegoats liability shields), the bad press and the exposure of document defects would embolden and aid stressed homeowners and thus be damaging to them.

The other interesting tidbit of the day was the report by Shahien Nasiripour of the Financial Times that the Administration is pushing hard to get this deal closed. That could be inferred by the way HUD chief Shaun Donovan has taken a high profile role, including talking to “progressive” media (yours truly is apparently in a special category, “incorrigible”).

But the FT piece reveals that some core constituencies aren’t buying what the Administration is selling:

Aides to President Barack Obama have in recent weeks courted civil rights groups and borrower advocacy organisations, scheduling meetings and calls in an attempt to gain support for the expected settlement and muffle criticism from key political allies…

The meetings have occasionally served as a “gripe session”, as one participant called them, because many of Mr Obama’s most ardent supporters have criticised the pending deal’s terms for the degree of relief provided and the extent of the release from legal claims it provides for banks desperate to minimise mortgage-related liability…

Janis Bowdler, a housing expert at the National Council of La Raza, the largest US Hispanic civil rights group, said the settlement would be a good start for the White House as it seeks to prove it is doing all it can for homeowners.

“Wrapping up the settlement now is the right thing to do, but it’s only going to be a win for them politically if they follow up with the financial crimes task force,” Ms Bowdler said…“Otherwise, if this is it, and they’re satisfied with just $25bn, I don’t think that will be enough to convince voters that they were doing all they could to fix the housing market.”