If the revenue stream from trustee fees can be packaged for sale, then the next logical step will be the securitization of that package. Investors in such securitization vehicles will be laying for their own screwing. The duties of the trustee, already clouded, will be further diluted into thousands of pieces, effectively eliminating any accountability of the Trustee for an asset backed REMIC trust.
In a final insult to our financial system, our society and our government, the Banks have set new rules: they say that if you appoint a trustee of your trust, the trustee can sell its position to another trustee. It is a natural offshoot of the “successor by merger” strategy they started a couple of years ago. But this one goes a step further. It says that the Trustor and beneficiaries have no choice but to accept the new Trustee who bought its position for some consideration. This is an important challenge to our system.
U.S. BANK has filed documents in some of my cases where it states that it is the successor in interest to Bank of America BY PURCHASE OF THE POSITION OF TRUSTEE. BOFA is a alleged to be successor in interest by merger with LaSalle Bank (a merger that is doubtful because of the prior acquisition of CitiGroup, who reports that it acquired ABN AMRO, the shareholders of which own LaSalle Bank). The purchase involves hundreds of asset backed pools commonly known as trusts. Investors in those pools are beneficiaries of the trust and owners of undivided interests in the loan documents transferred to the trust. The revelation that the loans never made it into the asset pools, that the loans were likely to fail, and that the investors money never made it into a trust account for the trust has put the trustee of the trust at risk for liability to investors. Thus BOA made this friendly deal with U.S. Bank adding another layer of complexity to dissuade regulators, insurers, guarantors, investors and potentially borrowers from bringing claims.
The Federal Reserve stated in its approval of the merger of LaSalle Bank and Bank of America that the merger with LaSalle is the same as a merger with ABN AMRO. CIRCULAR REASONING COMBINED WITH A SHELL GAME COMBINED AS A COVER FOR WHAT IS, IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS, A PONZI SCHEME. And that is why the banks are being sued by investors, insurers and guarantors for fraud — an intentional act of misrepresentation designed to cause damage to those who reasonably rely on these misrepresentations and which does cause damage to them. It was the banks who we’re really controlling the Trustee of the asset pool.
Ultimately banking depends upon trust and relationships based on trust. By commoditizing the job of a trustee, the entire system is undermined and will lead most certainly to chaos and collapse. We now know that when a bank says “trust me” they really mean “your trust means nothing to me. I can sell it anytime I want.” Any argument about a threat to the financial system if we take apart the big banks is undermined by the fact that the banks continue to move the goal posts and continue to present us with questionable deals that destabilize the marketplace. The current policy of the administration continues to look good and be bad. The entire policy is based on an illusion or even a delusion.
But the issue is much larger than that. Trust lies at the heart of our systems of finance, commerce and government. Ultimately people consent to be governed by these systems because they repose confidence in the outcome of transactions, public and private. Imagine that you hire a trusted agent to do something that will have an enormous impact on your life. This trustee, according to the banks, can sell their position of trust to another party. And the more the banks are allowed to shift, switch or substitute parties in litigation, the more judges are going to conclude that the maze is impenatratable. Harried judges will resort to simplistic views of the mortgage, the note and Foreclosures.
Normally if your secretary or administrative assistant quits, you replace them with someone else you trust or someone else you with who you can build a trusted arrangement. Not so with the US Bank purchase from Bank of America. Managers of Pensions who believed in their trustee for the trust that issued them the bonds (that turned out to be worthless) now have no confidence that employee, agent or servant won’t sell their job to someone else whom you don’t know or don’t trust. Trust commodities cannot and should not be allowed by a clueless government and an apathetic public.
The “Bill of sale” essentially provides that for dozens of “trusts” Bank of America will be replaced with the looming bank in control, U.S. Bank. Clearly Bank of America is expecting a heavy legal hit with its failure to protect the beneficiaries of the trusts — the investor lenders. But the agreement is more pernicious than that. If you have a problem with what happened with the funding of the trust, the distributions, or the acquisition of loans, or the Foreclosures or even getting a satisfaction of mortgage, you can go to Bank of America, during whose tenure many illegal and fraudulent acts occurred. Bu they will refer you to U.S. Bank who “now handles” those trusts. And if you go to U.S. Bank to complain, they will tell you that they are new to the trust and that your complaint relates to BofA actions as trustee for the asset backed trust. But it doesn’t stop there either. Each one is agreeing to indemnify each other in a manner than will spin the complainant around until they dizzy with the subterfuge.
Creating a salable commodity out of a trust relationship cuts to the core of confidence in the marketplace. People no longer know the identities of the parties responsible for what the investor lenders placed in trust — money that was supposed to be deposited to the trust account managed by the trustee. Whether we like it not, the banks are shuffling the cards once again. They are testing us, our government and our marketplace — a marketplace where certainty is now eliminated. Between off balance sheet, off record transaction, and now the ability to add, replace or subtract parties with whom you were willing to do business, with parties whom you are unwilling to do business, they have created a Middle East bizarre where everything changes by the minute. Consumers, pensioners, government guarantors, insurance companies are all filing suits that may fail because the same hairsplitting legal analysis that is rejected for borrowers but which is accepted for banks.
Action is needed now. This “sale” of the duties and obligations of the trustee must not and must never be permitted. The unintended or perhaps intended consequence is chaos in the marketplace where the United States won’t even be allowed a seat at the table, except as the military policeman of the world.
Filed under: foreclosure |