Crowd Sourcing on the Chase-WAMU Merger and the Owner of the Loans

LivingLies is crowd-sourcing this one. Send your transcripts, articles, letters to neilfgarfield@hotmail.com. We want to know what you have about the Chase WAMU merger and what effect your information has on the ownership of loans that were originated or acquired by WAMU. Remember there were multiple parties involved in this —

  1. Washington Mutual and subsidiaries, some of which still exist independently,
  2. the ex-OTS (office of thrift supervision),
  3. the FDIC receiver Richard Schoppe,
  4. the US Trustee in WAMU bankruptcy,
  5. Washington Mutual itself apart from the estate created and kept by the receiver and
  6. Washington Mutual itself apart from the estate created and kept by the U.S. Bankruptcy trustee, and of course
  7. Chase Bank whose merger document (on the FDIC website) with WAMU excludes loans and states that the consideration was zero for the merger.

Information about any of these and any cases in which the ownership of loans was at issue would be greatly appreciated. We will publish the list of resources as it grows.

 

 

 

 

 

15 Responses

  1. NEWS on Wamu to Chase Merger….There was (has since expired) a Limited Power of Attorney-Attorney in Fact that set out the rules for claiming any of Wamu’s loans and was required to be filed. If you need a copy of I can provide it to you.

  2. got a guy……
    Homeside/Wisconsin Mortgage/attempted (not a legal opinion, simply conjecture…..) theft by conversion with an estoppel affidavit assigning title and reaffirming the debt with a deed in lieu. WaMu bought Homeside assets in 02. Chase just filed suit against the FDIC for the transaction.
    I think he has a wild deed that should easily be won on quiet title. No note, no collateral file, no foreclosure.

  3. justme thank for the link. What I see that stand out is the audit does recognize that there is no internal way of discovering fraud or other wrong doing at the agency.

    What else in this audit is it does not deal with state laws or federal criminal laws. Just as the FBI does is get someone in the agency to tell them how the agency works, and there a big problem because it talks about Ginnie Mae taking over the securities from “issuers” the deem in trouble and assigning them to another to service. The talk of loan being purchase out of these pools but not where Ginnie Mae originated or purchase these loans.

    The auditor know there no way internally of knowing what going on but the fails to understand the rules of leading. Notice there is not mention of any modification at all, and that because as a non leader Ginnie Mae cannot change a interest rate or term. As in some argument here it almost sound like the auditor is saying Ginnie Mae is handing out monies for origination to the lenders.

    They talk of Ginnie Mae being in title and Ginnie Mae is not in title on a single loan at the state level, and is only in some type of title (which Ginnie Mae denies) is in MERS who not a agency that title loan in state recording offices to Ginnie Mae.

    This late in the game and still we got entities that are saying Ginnie Mae is the owner but Ginnie Mae itself tell by publishing the fact that they are not a lender and they don’t originate, buy or sell a home mortgage loan or any securities.

    Ginnie Mae has made up some rules that are not in any state in the Union as from as lending. The reason there is no mention of modification is this is a program that out of control because one section does not know what the others are doing. They don’t even have a unsecured loan because they did not originate or purchase a single home mortgage loan. They are not register as a lender and not regulated as a lender!

  4. My 1098 (20-1897196) up to 2011 leads to a William Blair Fund. What a load of nonsense.. If we had tried pulling this crap they would have put us in jail and thrown the key away..

  5. (The loan Notes belong to Ginnie Mae) Where you get that from ? As far as I know Fannie is the Investor now of the old Wachovia loans. Or at least mine..

    TY

  6. and whoever cares to take a tiny peek at Bank of America’s ‘significant deficiencies’

  7. disgusted I under the belief that was or in a government insured loan in the Ginnie Mae pool placed by Wachovia, that been foreclosed after the merger of that bank or sell, was done so illegally.

    The loan Notes belong to Ginnie Mae by this weird holding of a blank Note that was not purchase!

  8. neidermeyer the transfer did not include any government insured loans because Wells Fargo Bank was servicing at least 1.3 million of them from Jul 31, 2006 servicing agreement.

    This is the key to why Ginnie Mae makes the lenders sign endorsing the Notes in blank and if the loan are being services by the originator the file are suppose to be in a different local from the originator’s other loans.

    What Ginnie Mae does and did is use this remote bankruptcy procedure in the event the bank go under which WaMu did, and if they would have not had these loan in the hand of Wells Fargo as the servicer and custodian of record, the FDIC would have seized the blank Notes.

    The Notes are not purchase by Ginnie Mae so what claim could they have? NONE! So Ginnie Mae took action and allowed this change of servicer, which risk exposing their entire operation being expose of not actually owning a single home mortgage loan debt and are not list as owner on a single Note…..Houston we got a problem.

    Here how stupid they are as I worked at the originating bank as a mortgage loan office and we worked as a correspondent with all the large bank including WaMu.

    I work next at Wells Fargo and then recruited back to the originating bank, but from the beginning to the end of this mess I know exactly what transpired, from lock to illegal insurance claim.

    What I don’t get with these clowns is its the whistle-blower who have busted these guy, and this is no different!

  9. How about Wells/Wachovia ? Chase is after us now.. We had an original Mortgage through Wachovia..Anybody have the Purchase agreement ?

  10. re: point 7 “no consideration” The consideration for the merger was $1.888 Trillion (lucky 888 there) … but the payment was for demand accounts and other hard assets (see the Purchase and Assumption Agreement on the FDIC website) ,, mortgage loans were not listed in the assets bought , but later in the doc the FDIC Transfers , Assigns etc. the mortgage notes … so they were transferred without payment.. a gift.

  11. Well it seem after all these year the WaMu heist by Wells Fargo is going to get the attention its always needed. Wells Fargo acted like they owned these government insured loans (FHA, VA & USDA) and foreclosed on them as being the owner and in fact they did not as they admitted to me in a Mar 6, 2012 letter about my case and that it was Ginnie Mae was the alleged “lien holder” which is an impossibility and in Ginnie Mae letter to me dated Dec 2, 2012 said they did not purchase my loan or any other loan!

  12. Finally they get it!

  13. Would you like a WaMu credit card case , sued by debt collecting lowlifes on behalf of plaintiff Chase. Defendant as pro Se just mentioned chase was not originator of credit card and has no proof they paid for the debt of WaMu card balance … Ruled in favor of defendant !!… Pretty simple. As it should be.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: