MBS Rating Agency Fined for Misrepresenting Its Surveillance of Mortgage-Backed Securities

http://www.housingwire.com/articles/35455-dbrs-settles-with-sec-over-misrepresenting-mortgage-bond-rating-capabilities

Several things strike me about this event and the reporting on it:

  1. A relatively small rating agency has been thrown under the bus and has agreed to pay a fine for something we have known for nearly 10 years — the ratings of so-called mortgage backed securities were a sham and continued to be a sham.
  2. “the SEC determined that when the surveillance committee convened, it reviewed only a “limited subset” of the outstanding RMBS and Re-REMIC ratings, instead of all of the ratings.” This is of course the only way this mess could have happened — the Rating Company only did enough to justify a fee, not enough to justify the rating.
  3. The acknowledgment that there is a phenomenon that I have been writing about for years “Re-REMIC.” While no details are given, it would appear that this process causes the old alleged REMIC Trust to be liquidated and a new one is created. This of course only compounds the original lie. With no contents in the original trust, the new trust doesn’t have anything either. But even on paper it indicates that in discovery lawyers shoudl ask the question about this process because US Bank  and others often appear as “Trustee on behalf of the certificate holders” of XYZ trust. If that trust doesn’t exist anymore (or never did exist because there was no res) then foreclosures in the name of a trust in name only that doesn’t exist anymore would hardly confer standing on anyone.
  4. “Andrew Ceresney, the director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement, said that not having adequate resources is not a valid reason for failing to fulfill DBRS’ stated methods.”
  5. The resistance of most courts to discovery requests about the trust is all the more problematic since the named Plaintiff or beneficiary might not and in fact probably doesn’t exist.
  6. But the SEC still doesn’t comment on the threshold question of whether the certificates are mortgage securities exempt from most regulation because of legislation at the end of the Clinton Administration. If the certificates were “sold” to investors and the money was turned over to the broker who was selling them for the investment bank who was allegedly representing the trust, why wasn’t the money (the proceeds of sale of certificates) turned over to the “Trustee” of the REMIC Trust? And failing that, why are we saying that the Trust has any assets when it has neither business nor cash to acquire any assets? And since the alleged loans were not acquired by the alleged trust, why are we calling the certificates “mortgage-backed” when they are neither backed nor do they have any interest in mortgages? And finally, if the certificates were not mortgage backed but were sold as mortgage backed then why are they exempt from regulation or prosecution?
  7. Why is everyone pretending that these REMIC Trusts were real and that they have loans as assets even though they have no balance sheet or even a bank account?

68 Responses

  1. a reminder that there is a follow up call to Neil tonite…
    Garfield’s Goose & Friends with your host, greg (episode 7)
    (every Thursday night starting 15 minutes right after Neil’s show)

    Call in at (724) 444-7444 (then use Call ID: 139335) then “0” for guest
    and/or use your computer to blog/type at http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/139335
    6:45 PM Eastern Thursdays (for 60 min)

    please use the phone line to speak and ask questions
    computer access will only allow you to hear and type into the blog…
    all welcome

  2. What is the easiest way for criminals to steal everything from the people? Forced drugging & booze.

    That way people don’t realize the DESTRUCTION of their LEGAL RIGHTS by the crooks who robbed them.

  3. My typos below were because i was rushing & there’s no spell checker on my device. However they’re easy to decipher.

    The point is, the top echelon want to try & make everyone else look bad because they think they’re smarter but they cheat.

  4. Their bailout of themselves was just one more tax break criminal cover up for themselves & their CORPORATE CRONIES.

    Who in the heck said they want them to ADMINSTER something in the first place?

    It sure sounds like we’re being dictated to by CORPORATE WAR CRIMINALS who think they’re ARISTOCRATS of nothing sophisticated whatsover.

    For example, what creates DERIVATIVES because they have no means of production.

    DERVATIVES were born of lies & therefore produce nothing of value because they’re used to subjogate their victims wrongfully in many wsus.

    ALAN GREENSPAN said he didn’t understand DERIVATIVES so that means je did.

  5. They’re so full of their own evil malarkey that they fine their own perps for their own WAR CRIMES.

    The RATINGS AGENCIES AIDED & ABETTED WAR CRIMINALS & so if the shoe fits they’re in CRIMINAL CAHOOTS with their own CORPORATE FRAUD INVESTMENT FIRMS.

    The best part for them is they get to fraudulently re-invest in the same fraud thanks to their CORPORATE CRONY OBAMA & his “ADMINISTRATION.”

  6. What did the depositor deposit is the question.

    With no deposit slips & no legal documentation that would show where the purported money came from & went hides the money trail.

    What did the ISSUER report their CAPITAL GAINS were in regards to those deposits we see no
    evidence of?

    They’re clearly hiding their COCAINE & HOOKERS behind CORPORATE THEORIES based upon BOARD ROOM GOSSIP to hide their own CORPORATE FRAUD BROTHELS thrive off of their own GOSSIP.

    Thriving off of ones own GOSSIP is no ACTIONABLE legal claim but is evidence of DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE by FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT pf the RPII. .

    It must be true because they operate like HYBRIDIZED PIMPS & PROSTITUTES PURVEYORS of their own SECURITIES FRAUD.

  7. They can’t be the NOTE because they cashed it innumerable times. They can’t be the INVESTMENT SECURITY because that’s TITLE FRAUD because of CONFLICT OF INTEREST ISSUES.

    We were never informed the FRAUD FOR PROFIT SCAMMERS would be FRAUD RACKETEERING with our TITLES.

    They can’t be party to nothing they would benefit from because that’s FRAUD FOR PROFIT.

    They think they can ISSUE the FRAUD & then benefit from it exponentially forever.

    FRAUDCLOSURE is UNJUST ENRICHMENT by the ISSUER of their own FRAUD to say the least, & GRAND THEFT LARCENY by TITLE COUNTERFEITING by & large.

  8. I don’t see the difference between one “elite” or the other.

    They’re CORPORATE SPIES, every last one of them.

    I don’t know when politicians became ELITES either.

    That’s fake subjugation to frauds & phonies if there ever was one.

    You realize that if you outline the PSA. I found one of those online & skimmed over it. It’s just one mass CONGLOMERATE of CONGLOMERATION.

    That’s because they’re just there to FRAUD RACKETEER & no one was supposed to notice.

  9. I requested the PSA & the PROSPECTUS & that request was willfully ignored.

    The truth is that’s because both of those were completely ignored by the FRAUD ISSUERS.

    They could never have made $60 TRILLION DOLLARS in 1999 CREDIT BROKERING DERIVATIVES FRAUD had the proper legal requirements been met by the ISSUER.

  10. The proof they’re FRAUD RACKETEERING FOR PROFIT is they got bailed out when they shouldn’t have.

    CNBC reported WALL STREET made $60 TRILLION DOLLARS in 1999 selling MORTGAGE DERIVATIVES.

    That was not coincidentally I’m sure, the year BILL CLINTON repealled GLASS-STEAGALL for the FRAUD BROKERS on WALL STREET.

    Therefore, BANKS were no longer BANKS but FRAUD BROKERAGE HOUSES & it was done in secret.

    .

  11. It’s TORTUOUS FRAUDULENT REPRESENTATION & MISREPRESENTATION by the CORPORATE RAIDERS who think everyone is stupid.

    They unlawfully UTTER their own FRAUD UPON THE COURTS.

    They use CORPORATE BIAS, not legal proof, to FRAUD RACKETEER for PROFIT.

  12. a gentle reminder that there is a follow up call to Neil tonite…

    Garfield’s Goose & Friends with your host, greg

    (every Thursday night starting 15 minutes right after Neil’s show)

    Call in at (724) 444-7444 (then use Call ID: 139335) then “0” for guest
    and/or use your computer to blog/type at http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/139335
    6:45 PM Eastern Thursdays (for 60 min)

    please use the phone line to speak and ask questions
    computer access will only allow you to hear and type into the blog…

  13. MK, I agree w/you. There are certain entities that come here to make money by confusing, obfuscating and/or professing to know what they are talking about but do not. We have had them before. I have been here for at least six years, and I know what I am talking about. Be careful.

  14. SECTION 4. Record Title and Possession of Mortgage Files. The Seller hereby sells, transfers, assigns, sets over and conveys to the Purchaser, without recourse, but subject to the terms of this Agreement and the Seller hereby acknowledges that the Purchaser, subject to the terms of this Agreement, shall have all the right, title and interest of the Seller in and to the Mortgage Loans. From the Closing Date, but as of the Cut-off Date, the ownership of each Mortgage Loan, including the Mortgage Note, the Mortgage, the contents of the related Mortgage File and all rights, benefits, proceeds and obligations arising therefrom or in connection therewith, has been vested in the Purchaser. All rights arising out of the Mortgage Loans including, but not limited to, all funds received on or in connection with the Mortgage Loans and all records or documents with respect to the Mortgage Loans prepared by or which come into the possession of the Seller shall be received and held by the Seller in trust for the exclusive benefit of the Purchaser as the owner of the Mortgage Loans. On and after the Closing Date, any portion of the related Mortgage Files or servicing files related to the Mortgage Loans (the “Servicing Files”) in Seller’s possession shall be held by Seller in a custodial capacity only for the benefit of the Purchaser. The Seller shall release its custody of any contents of the related Mortgage Files or Servicing Files only in accordance with written instructions of the Purchaser or the Purchaser’s designee.

    SECTION 5. Books and Records. The sale of each Mortgage Loan has been reflected on the Seller’s balance sheet and other financial statements as a sale of assets by the Seller. The Seller shall be responsible for maintaining, and shall maintain, a complete set of books and records for the Mortgage Loans which shall be appropriately identified in the Seller’s computer system to clearly reflect the ownership of the Mortgage Loans by the Purchaser.

    SECTION 6. Delivery of Mortgage Notes.
    ————————–

    (a) On or prior to the Closing Date, the Seller shall deliver to the Purchaser or the Custodian, as directed by the Purchaser, the original Mortgage Note, with respect to each Mortgage Loan so assigned, endorsed without recourse in blank, or in the name of the Trustee as trustee, and signed by an authorized officer (which endorsement shall contain either an original signature or a facsimile signature of an authorized officer of the Seller, and if in the form of an allonge, the allonge shall be stapled to the Mortgage Note), with all intervening endorsements showing a complete chain of title from the originator to the Seller. If the Mortgage Loan was acquired by the endorser in a merger, the endorsement must be by “____________, successor by merger to [name of predecessor]”. If the Mortgage Loan was acquired or originated by the endorser while doing business under another name, the endorsement must be by “____________ formerly known as [previous name].” The delivery of each Mortgage Note to the Purchaser or the Custodian is at the expense of the Seller.

    In lieu of delivering the Mortgage Note relating to any Mortgage Loan, the Seller may deliver or cause to be delivered a lost note affidavit from the Seller stating that the original Mortgage Note was lost, misplaced or destroyed, and, if available, a copy of each original Mortgage Note; provided, however, that in the case of Mortgage Loans which have been prepaid in full after the Cut-off Date and prior to the Closing Date, the Seller, in lieu of delivering the above documents, may deliver to the Purchaser a certification to such effect and shall deposit all amounts paid in respect of such Mortgage Loan in the Payment Account on the Closing Date.

  15. (a) this Agreement shall be and hereby is a security agreement within the meaning of Articles 9 of the Pennsylvania Uniform Commercial Code, the Delaware Uniform Commercial Code and the Uniform Commercial Code of any other applicable jurisdiction;

  16. LIKE THE QUESTION, WHAT CAME FIRST THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG. IN THESE PSA’S.

    WHAT COMES FIRST, THE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT of MORTGAGES TO DEPOSITOR, I WOULD SAY IS FIRST, BEFORE THE TRUST INSTRUMENT. RIGHT. NOW WHY I SAY THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT.

    BECAUSE YOU CAN BRING UP THIS, AS I WILL BE BE DOING, AS THE SELLER,SPONSOR,SERVICER, DID SELL THE MORTGAGE LOAN PRIOR TO THE DEPOSITOR. NOW , WHAT DOES THAT MEAN.

    FIRST, THIS HAS TO DO WITH OUR FRIENDS , MERS-MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISRTATION SYSYTEMS ( BY THE WAY THIS IS ONLY A COMPUTER SYSYTEM ) , SO THE COMPUTER SYSTEM HAS A NAME, AND THE NAME OF THE COMPUTER SYSTEM. IS
    MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSYTEMS,INC. ONLY A COMPUTER. I DONT THINK A COMPUTER CAN LEGALLY HOLD REAL PROPERTY, I.E. MORTGAGES OR NOTES. BUT THAT’S ANOTHER STORY.

    WHAT AM SAYING IS, I HAVE LOOKED UNDER ALL OF MERSHOLDINGS,INC – MERS MEMBERS LIST. AS WE ALL KNOW THEY MUST BE MEMBERS OF MERSHOLDINGS TO BE ABLE TO USE THE COMPUTER. AND AS OF EVEN TO. I DO NOT SEE,

    Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc., AS A MEMBER. SO I WOULD SAY ANY TRANSFER IN A COUNTY RECORDERS OFFICE
    OF GMAC MORTGAGE CORP TO A TRUSTEE 6 YRS AFTER CLOSED TRUST. COULD NOT HAPPEN, AS THE MORTGAGE WERE SOLD TO A NON MEMBER OF MERS. MAKING THE ASSIGNMENT VOID. NOT VOIDABLE. IT WOULD BE VOID . PERIOD.

    NOW ALL THIS HAPPENS BEFORE, THE PSA TRUST. SO IN MY CASE , MERS ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSYTEMS INC, PUT A ASSIGNMENT ( FIRST ASSIGNMENT EVER. ) ON MY RECORDS AS OF AUGUST 20 , 2012. SAYING THEY WERE USEING THE AUTHORITY FROM GMAC MORTGAGE CORP. TO ASSIGN IT TO TRUST. ONCE THEY SOLD IT TO, Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc., GMAC MORTGAGE CORP, INC. . IS DONE ALL OVER, FINNIHED, GAPUT, NANA, BYBY. WITH ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE MORTGAGES.

    This is a Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement (the “Agreement”) dated as of February 27, 2006 by and between GMAC Mortgage Corporation, a Pennsylvania corporation, having an office at 100 Witmer Road, Horsham, Pennsylvania 19044 (the “Seller”) and Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and having an office at 8400 Normandale Lake Boulevard, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55437 (the “Purchaser”).

    The Purchaser and Seller intend that the conveyance by the Seller to the Purchaser of all its right, title and interest in and to the Mortgage Loans pursuant to this Agreement shall be, and be construed as, a sale of the Mortgage Loans by the Seller to the Purchaser.

    (a) this Agreement shall be and hereby is a security agreement within the meaning of Articles 9 of the Pennsylvania Uniform Commercial Code, the Delaware Uniform Commercial Code and the Uniform Commercial Code of any other applicable jurisdiction; (b) the conveyance provided for in this Section shall be deemed to be, and hereby is, a grant by the Seller to the Purchaser of a security interest in all of the Seller’s right, title and interest, whether now owned or hereafter acquired, in and to the following: (A) the Mortgage Loans, including (i) with respect to each Cooperative Loan, the related Mortgage Note, Security Agreement, Assignment of Proprietary Lease, Cooperative Stock Certificate, Cooperative Lease, (ii) with respect to each Mortgage Loan other than a Cooperative Loan, the related Mortgage Note and Mortgage and (iii) any insurance policies and all other documents in the related Mortgage File, (B) all amounts payable pursuant to the Mortgage Loans in accordance with the terms thereof, (C) all proceeds of the conversion, voluntary or involuntary, of the foregoing into cash, instruments, securities or other property, (D) all accounts, general intangibles, chattel paper, instruments, documents, money, deposit accounts, goods, letters of credit, letter-of-credit rights, oil, gas, and other minerals, and investment property consisting of, arising from or relating to any of the foregoing and (E) all proceeds of the foregoing; (c) the possession by the Trustee, the Custodian or any other agent of the Trustee of any of the foregoing shall be deemed to be possession by the secured party, or possession by a purchaser or a person holding for the benefit of such secured party, for purposes of perfecting the security interest pursuant to the Pennsylvania Uniform Commercial Code, the Delaware Uniform Commercial Code and the Uniform Commercial Code of any other applicable jurisdiction (including, without limitation, Sections 9-313 and 9-314 of each thereof); and (d) notifications to persons holding such property, and acknowledgments, receipts or confirmations from persons holding such property, shall be deemed notifications to, or acknowledgments, receipts or confirmations from, securities intermediaries, bailees or agents of, or persons holding for, the Trustee (as applicable) for the purpose of perfecting such security interest under applicable law. The Seller shall, to the extent consistent with this Agreement, take such reasonable actions as may be necessary to ensure that, if this Agreement were determined to create a security interest in the Mortgage Loans and the other property described above, such security interest would be determined to be a perfected security interest of first priority under applicable law and will be maintained as such throughout the term of this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Seller shall prepare and deliver to the Purchaser not less than 15 days prior to any filing date, and the Purchaser shall file, or shall cause to be filed, at the expense of the Seller, all filings necessary to maintain the effectiveness of any original filings necessary under the Uniform Commercial Code as in effect in any jurisdiction to perfect the Purchaser’s security interest in the Mortgage Loans, including without limitation (x) continuation statements, and (y) such other statements as may be occasioned by (1) any change of name of the Seller or the Purchaser, (2) any change of type or jurisdiction of organization of the Seller, or (3) any transfer of any interest of the Seller in any Mortgage Loan.

    GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION
    Seller, Servicer and Sponsor

    GMACM MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2006-J1
    Issuing Entity

    Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc.
    Depositor

    GMACM Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-J1

  17. Michael keane- i agree, that securitization fail should be emblazoned across every courtroom in this country and around the world. As well as everything else. I have never seen the ” two true sales” of a note which is mandated by NY trust law in order to remder the Trust “bankruptcy remote”, in any of the court filings i have read. Let alone the age old legal principle of nemo dat- ” one cannot sell or tramsfer that which he does not own. This alone nullifies any standing which the servicer/lemder or whomever claims to have. Absent any backdated, forged, robosigned assignments or allonges. Carry on!

  18. @iwantmynpv,

    And I disagree. Those coming here to turn a dime on the suffering of others are harmful and they are spreading confusion.

  19. iwantmynpv,

    LOL.You wrote;

    @michaelkeane here’s my issue with your post. You are clearly one of the smartest folks visiting LL.

    So… you are mad at me because I’m beautiful?

    Lol.

    Anyway, what makes you think I wanna change my Hanes?

    Insofar as “false hope”- not my intention. Insofar as telling the truth =
    my intention.

    Sanders 2016- the only shot to renounce the banks.

    iwantmynpv, you are 1000% correct on at least the need for a cooperative platform… I think Mr. Garfield is trying to do just that.

    The “Attack the mortgage” crowd are purely mercenary and bent on “containment” to protect their “investments” in the “Market”… that is the sin and the shame of them…

    This mess, securitization fail included, should not be contained, it should be blazened across every courtroom in this country and the world.

  20. Ian, I was protesting Christine getting the boot for.. well er, being Christine.

    The folks that come here and offer other strategies are not the enemy. Most are simply selling a competing product or other services. They add valuable information and provide for robust debate.

    In the very least, they increase the rankings of the site, which benefits the editor, and also makes the site easier to find through search engine results, therefore helping some homeowners to get a basic understanding of the stranglehold the large bond funds have on our branches of government, and the agencies that fall under their watch.

    Somewhere in the middle between securtiization and mortgage review companies and folks getting tossed in the street for foreclosure lies an administrative solution.

    Like capitalism and socialism have a successful middle that has made America what it is today – the solution to this problem lies in between using all these defense tactics to mitigate an amicable resolve and arguing with the Sheriff because you do not like the color on the boxes they are packing your years of acquired shit into as they toss your family to the street.

    Instead of debating who is more right – the really smart folks should release a platform that incorporates all of these defense tactics and share it among the growing network of attorneys signing on to get access to customers.

    Again, this is just one Tinker’s opinion…

  21. @michaelkeane here’s my issue with your post. You are clearly one of the smartest folks visiting LL.

    When you are pointing out that the Trust Entities have not complied with rules and laws governing REMIC’s, you unintentionally create false hope for some that this is something that may be investigated resulting in some type better terms with their lender / investor.

    Attacking the terms of the PSA gets zero traction in Court in 99% of all cases. However, attacking the Affidavits submitted by the lenders attorneys and loan service agent(s) using information gleaned from seller, reseller and flow agreements works almost 50% of the time, and because these agreements sit out before the PSA, the Judges are more willing to deny MSJ to allow discovery.

    Now, wipe your ass, change your Hanes, and go fight the good fight like a true tinker… lol

  22. @iwantmynpv,

    Hello iwantmynpv, as usual you are picking a fight with me over something we both agree on… good to see you are, at least, consistent.

    Isn’t this how we started the last time… lol.

    Anyway, I crapped my pants, I didn’t pee in them.

    Of course the whole thing is rigged. I get it. I have been posting about it for years.

    You wrote:

    “The folks at the IRS, Fannie, Freddie, Ginnie, FDIC, OCC, FRC, FHLB’s etc… are all in on this scam, take down one PLMBS Trust and all the Agency Trusts follow suit.

    Do you think the FED, which owns almost 50% of all MBS issued by the former GSE’s is going to allow some piss-ass like you to ruin a good thing?”.

    You are forgetting the DTC and DTCC – the derivatives registries.

    There are a “Quadrillion Dollars” owed to the system…

    The banks are INSOLVENT as we both know… hi, how are ya?… good to see you again.

  23. NPV- good to see your post yesterday and again today, following your rather lengthy absence. I have bemoaned the dearth of actual firsthand information amd logical reasoning which you provide. Welcome back.

  24. @ michael keane “There is a 100% tax liability for loans that are not in proper, tax-deferred, with lawful “Pass-Through Certificates”entry into “Trust” within the 90 day window.”
    If one “loan” within a given “Trust” is unlawful… I am told the Whole “Trust” must then pay out to the Tax man.

    I filed a whistle blower claim with the IRS back in 2006. The only response my attorney received was “It is in the public record” i was audited the following year.

    All you folks seem to think that it is only PLMBS Trusts involved in this. The folks at the IRS, Fannie, Freddie, Ginnie, FDIC, OCC, FRC, FHLB’s etc… are all in on this scam, take down one PLMBS Trust and all the Agency Trusts follow suit.

    Do you think the FED, which owns almost 50% of all MBS issued by the former GSE’s is going to allow some piss-ass like you to ruin a good thing?

    Why do you think they don’t turn Fannie and Freddie back out to the common shareholders????

  25. It is slander of title
    “Two most important things” when buying a house 1. Appraisal2. Clear title.

  26. Go back to kemp
    Kemp, 440 B.R. 624 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2010) :

    “who demands payment of a negotiable note, or to whom payment is made, is the duly qualified holder. Otherwise, the obligor is exposed to the risk of double payment, or at least to the expense of litigation incurred to prevent duplicative satisfaction of the instrument. These risks provide makers with a recognizable interest in demanding proof of the chain of title.”

  27. Greg,
    What is even more powerful is today they have the technology to compare paper threads from 2004 versus what they bring into court years later…different paper thread and they can detect a cheap scanned version in a heart beat.

  28. if anyone has their original versions of note or mortgage etc. docs and you see ONE THING presented by foreclosure mongers on those documents that has been altered from your original file copy, and they cannot produce the one that is identical to yours… THERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE OF POST AGREEMENT MANIPULATION TO MAKE IT SUSPECT OF FRAUD

  29. Let us not leave out endorsements, assignments and allonges that magically appear as much as twelve years later…not possible.

  30. The banks do it everyday all day long preying on unsuspecting homeowners who do not know how to fight them and their claims they are foreclosing on behalf of a trust…that no longer exists or never did.

  31. @BLD,

    I wonder, if a “loan” never entered FHA, VA, Ginnie, Fannie or Freddie, does that define it as entered into private “Trust”?

    The filth from HSBC and Wells claim one “loan” in question as having “entered” the “Trust” a number of years after the trust closed.

  32. Michael,
    When you demand copy of PSA the attorneys for the bank become very confused and submit multiple PSA’s all in different years. Another way to show a judge how the homeowner was terribly misled. Another weapon to back them into a corner. They start to become a lot less arrogant.

  33. @BLD,

    It turns out I need a “Big Liberating DaddY”!!!

    I am a wonderfully large-boned individual myself.

    Please send me the “guzzintas… first, this thing guzzinta that thing… then the other thing goes into that thing… until voila’ We are hanging bankers all over the country… like obscene, scum-filled pinatas…”.

    mikekeane@optonline.net

  34. Get your Kicks on Route 1066!

  35. Michael,
    Absolutely a 1066 would be helpful if you can get it. What the PSA shows, if in fact your mortgage was securitized, is literally a road map as to what happened to those loans and all,the players involved. It is a powerful tool if a bank is claiming foreclosure on behalf of a trust. It has rules and procedures which must be adhered to. I see what you are saying as anything from the IRS would be crucial but each bank is making different claims and producing massive amounts of fraudulent paperwork and the PSA is a powerful amount of evidence that the bank is hiding something.
    They can also blackout information including tax forms. They just produce the shell of the document and use black marker over pertinent information.
    The longer it takes to get that from them, that’s more legal expenses the homeowner incurs. That’s there goal.
    I can get the PSA without getting it from them first…at no cost.

  36. if all the REMICS have failed and are 100% liable to the IRS, i imagine the tax liability might fund the USA for 100 years….

  37. Google: “Lynn Szymoniak”; FABULOUS PRIZES!

  38. @ BLD, I r not a attorney.

    A little bird has told me an un-redacted, “FORM 1066” will show whether the loans entered REMIC “TRUST” or not.

    In other words,why try to get the PSA on a transaction that never existed in the first place?

    Why not, instead, get the FORM 1066 to discover if the loan ever entered the “TRUST” in the first place?

    The un-redacted Form 1066 will show if the loan ever went there and/or if there was a tax consequence for the loan having arrived late.

    If the loans didn’t enter the “TRUST” and attorneys for the “Trust” claim they did… hmmmm? I’m thinking FRAUD ON THE COURT.

    Also, loans beyond the trust are “VOID”… not “voidable”.

    There is a 100% tax liability for loans that are not in proper, tax-deferred, with lawful “Pass-Through Certificates”entry into “Trust” within the 90 day window.

    If one “loan” within a given “Trust” is unlawful… I am told the Whole “Trust” must then pay out to the Tax man.

  39. Well said BLD

  40. David Belanger discovered “Residential Capital”

    or… “rescap”.

    Rescap bankrupted in 2011.

    Your loan is in there somewhere, I believe. I am not a lawyer.

    However, I can read and count to ten.

    rescap, insofar as I can understand it, is a cobbling together of everybody’s loans under what used to be GMAC.

    So, they took your loans, entered them to rescap and then had the US taxpayers pay them out.

    The better to rob you with my dear.

  41. HSBC BANK USA, N.A., AS INDENTURE TRUSTEE AS THE REGISTERED NOTEHOLDERS OF RENAISSANCE HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST 2007-1

    VS.

    JAMIE W. THOMPSON

    JUDGE STEVEN K. DANKOF
    MAGISTRATE: ROBERT F. COWDREY
    CASE NO. 2007 CV 09439

    MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO

    AFFIDAVIT OF FERNANDO ACEBEDO.

    This mutt, Acebedo, basically admits the “trusts” for HSBC don’t control the loans and the “Servicers” that have possession do.

    Same type of thing in Kemp v Countrywide where the master servicer, Linda DeMartino ‘splains the same thing, Lucy”.

    In other words, the loans never entered any “Trusts” lawfully, as NY law governs those “Trusts”.

    We are being played by an international, drug and terrorist cartel, while they use our mortgages and … eh… ehem… court systems to conceal the truth while these criminal filth suborn the Law.

  42. Deb,

    What more people need to know is that once you get to discovery and demand a copy of the PSA…all they can produce is the first page and the rest is redacted.
    They start to get incredibly nervous.
    They are not named in th PSA…hence no identifiable borrowers loan number nor address…hense no accounting.
    All the bank can do at that point is bring fraud upon the court as well as purjure themselves.

  43. Go to Company search then type in the trust.

  44. BLD
    Think about musical chairs that childhood game
    The parties do that they switch positions right hand selling to the left perhaps very confusing and its intended not to make sense making it difficult to argue about

  45. Type in your trust…the complete trust. After a two year exhaustive search, I have not been able to identify our loan. They are in tranches which hold hundreds of loans. So a bank cannot come into court(discovery) and show a judge ‘here is their loan.’
    What should be noted, as per IRS these trusts were required to be closed in 90 days.
    What you will find is a trust in 2004 is and has been closed in 2004.
    You will also note an Asset Securities Corporation is possibly the organization who bundled the loans, not the creditor whom many are now defunct.
    No current addresses nor working phone number.
    What I did find is another bank is listed as master servicers of the trust.

  46. thanks Deb!

  47. OK Ian & BLD

    i’m on SEC and have ASSET BACKED SECURITIES CORPORATION up with zillions of filings…

    do you know where i would find the specific info on HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST 2004-HE8 and if it will list the loans placed within it?

    thanks
    greg

  48. greg
    I believe Dan Edstrom has a data base of prospectus to numerous trusts and PSA thereto
    He did some great work for me
    I. My loan was unqualifued to be in the trust
    2. Re- remic ??
    3. Doesnt matter at this stage of my case but ifvthe argument gets back on the table – we will see
    Its great info and gave me some reserve bullets should i need them
    In the ongoing battle

  49. Dirt Lawyers and Dirty REMICs
    Volume 27 No. 3

    By Bradley T. Borden, David J. Reiss

    This article describes some of the practices with regard to the establishment of Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduits that invest in mortgage-backed securities, lists possible consequences of those practices, and argues that lawyers have a duty to speak up for better policies and practices to prevent a reoccurrence of such adverse consequences.

    http://www.americanbar.org/publications/probate_property_magazine_2012/2013/may_june_2013/article_borden_reiss_dirt_lawyers_and_dirty_remics.html

    excerpt:
    As the Kemp court notes:

    From the maker’s standpoint, . . . it becomes essential to establish that the person who demands payment of a negotiable note, or to whom payment is made, is the duly qualified holder. Otherwise, the obligor is exposed to the risk of double payment, or at least to the expense of litigation incurred to prevent duplicative satisfaction of the instrument. These risks provide makers with a recognizable interest in demanding proof of the chain of title.

    440 B.R. at 631 (quoting Adams v. Madison Realty & Dev., Inc., 853 F.2d 163, 168 (3d Cir. 1988)). Because the originator did not comply with the legal niceties, the beneficial owner of the debt, the trustee, cannot file its proof of claim, either.

    The Kemp court did not address the third type of consequence (for the trustee) because it was not an issue before the court. Nonetheless, the analysis in Kemp illustrates how courts can reach results that undercut arguments that REMICs were the owners of the mortgage notes and mortgages that were purportedly sold to them for REMIC rules purposes.

    Even if the majority of jurisdictions issue foreclosure and bankruptcy rulings that have favorable consequences for REMICs, the few with negative consequences can destroy the REMIC classification of many mortgage-backed securities that were structured to be—and promoted to investors as—REMICs. This is because rating agencies require that REMICs be geographically diversified to spread the risk of defaults caused by local economic conditions. Most, if not all, REMICs own mortgage notes and mortgages from states governed by laws that the courts may determine do not support REMIC eligibility for the mortgages from those jurisdictions. This diversification requirement makes it very likely that REMICs will have more than a de minimis amount of mortgages that do not come within the definition of a qualified mortgage under the REMIC regulations. Professionals who helped structure these securitizations may face liability if the IRS were to find that a purported REMIC was just purported and not truly a REMIC.

  50. sec.edgar…it’s all there.

  51. There are supposed to be endorsements on the note from and to every entity in the chain of transfers and, of course, those endorsements do not exist.

  52. thanks Ian
    go figure on the PC crash…

    if somebody on this site had access to provide a service to get certified documentation of all mortgages/loans purportedly to be in a particular trust with an accompanying affidavit saying THE LOAN IN QUESTION IS OR IS NOT held within it, THAT WOULD BE A SERVICE WE WOULD PAY FOR…

  53. Greg- a number of the “trusts” ( REMICS) had a list of the loans which were purported to be in the trusts. The loans were listed by number, state, original principal amount etc. the doc is on the hard drive of my last computer which crashed. My loan wasnt listed as being in the trust which filed fc in 2010. But it did list 800 loans which were allegedly in the trust.

  54. Iceland convicts bad bankers and says other nations can act

    http://www.cnbc.com/2015/02/12/iceland-convicts-bad-bankers-and-says-other-nations-can-act.html

    Parliament relaxed bank secrecy laws in Iceland to help the prosecutors investigate bank documents without court orders.

  55. has anyone ever seen a report of the content of the so-called REMIC trust that alleges to have your loan in it and if so, the paper trail of purchases and indorsements which got it there?

  56. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-07-02/hsbc-judge-approves-1-9b-drug-money-laundering-accord
    The case is U.S. v. HSBC Bank USA NA, 12-cr-00763, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn)

  57. mk Dont spin your wheels- GODS GOT THIS
    in the meantime – we stand up for what is right in OUR COURTS our right to due process and to own land and live peacefully in our homes

  58. Anyone who is being foreclosed on by a trust should read the PSA and they will find the bank trying to steamroll them is not even named in the PSA. The bank cannot recreate those documents. They can only do it by creating fraudulent documents.
    As I have said, the bank we have been introduced to, literally, is not listed on a single loan document.

  59. Edward Snowden went to Russia.

    You are not paying attention if you don’t recognize he outed the central bankers to Putin.

    Putin was under assault from his own people. He was failing.

    His incursion into Georgia restored the Russian economy somewhat and now his people think him a hero.

    p=putin+and+georgia&ei=UTF-8&hspart=mozilla&hsimp=yhs-004

    “George Bush ‘looked into his soul’.”.

    George Bush cannot plumb the depth of a soggy cheerio.

    Putin is now *itch-slapping American Presidents. It’s about to get worse.

    The US elites are emasculated and the warmongerers are back in their old playbook…

    How ’bout this, instead, why don’t We The People take it upon ourselves to out the bankers and return the Rule of Law?

    Yeah… I know… makes too much sense… Let’s, instead, send all the yokels in for the big win. That way the bankers can malign the Dollar in the absence of Law and We The People can fight our armies to exhaustion while those bankers take our soldiers houses in fraud closures.

  60. Presently 200 or so families hold the US in servitude.

    They manipulate our own currency despite the Constitution.

    They define who rules US by rigging elections through dark money.

    They define who is protected under the law.

    They define who may be successful and who will lose their property.

    They send our sons and daughters to be maimed or killed while they lie.

    Their sons and daughters never pay the price of their lies.

    The US used to lead. We The People are now an international clown…

    International, Criminal, Murderous Clown.

    Our leaders have chosen to fiddle while Rome Burns.

    Not unlike past empires, We The People are being destroyed from within.

  61. I have a better idea:

    Why don’t We The People force our politicians to return the Rule Of Law; Swear an oath of Loyalty to the nation, not the bankers; put the bankers in jail; repudiate their phony “debts”; turn the intentionally mislabeled “Federal Reserve” into a PUBLIC TRUST THAT ENRICHES PUBLIC COFFERS- NOT PRIVATE POCKETS.

    If the bankers are stripped of their ability to rob us of our own money We can have our country returned to US in the condition it was entrusted to US in 1776.

  62. Even more scary:

    Mortgages across the planet have been targeted by the international, central banking syndicate to clean their drug and terrorist cartel money by creating “derivatives – short-sale bets you are gonna lose your home”…

    In some instances, whether you were paying your mortgage or not.

    http://moneymorning.com/2013/09/18/heres-what-1-2-quadrillion-looks-like/

    The central bankers have created a situation that will PROVE THEY ARE INSOLVENT if anybody from any regulatory agency bothers to look at their books.

    The US government is desperate to keep everyone in the dark because the central bankers have co-opted the US Dollar as the “International Currency Reserve”.

    The reasoning goes like this:

    US government: if we expose the bankers the dollar will fall.
    Us government: so, what do we do?
    Us government: we ignore the Rule of Law…
    Us government: … and allow the bankers to defraud the planet.

    Us government: Well, unfortunately, the rest of the world already knows Wall Street is wholly-corrupted…

    Us government: our own citizens don’t and the ones that do are desperate to protect their nonsense gambling addiction we call “The Stock Market”.

    Us government: what if people become aware and protest?

    Us government: we can start a war in Syria.

  63. 2013-07-02/hsbc-judge-approves-1-9b-drug-money-laundering-accord

  64. In answer to your question: “Why is everyone pretending that these REMIC Trusts were real and that they have loans as assets even though they have no balance sheet or even a bank account?”.

    BECAUSE AMERICAN MORTGAGES ARE BEING USED TO LAUNDER DRUG AND TERRORIST CARTEL MONEY.

    look it up. Google “HSBC Bank”, Google “Wells Fargo”.

  65. Very interesting RE REMIC

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: