So here is my theory. Administrative findings have a presumption of validity. This fine is for continuing false, fraudulent and defective claims, like all the banks did. So it seems to me that the fine and the charges against JPM Chase constitute a finding of fact — the fact being that Chase is continuing to violate the law and is using fraudulent and defective claims against unsuspecting borrowers. Judges seem to be viewing this as a one-off — “You must owe the money to somebody so why not Chase?”
In my opinion this presumption by the Judges needs to be challenged aggressively. But it gets easier as the evidence piles up with administrative agency findings that what the borrowers are saying is true. It seems to me that it is better and more credible to give a presumption of truth to the administrative findings of fact than the presumption of truth on “facially valid” documents that we already know are most likely defective.
Any other approach continues business as usual — homeowners are losing their homes to volunteer intervenors (the banks and servicers) who have no interest in the loans and no documents that are credible which would show otherwise. Why haven’t the real parties (investors) stepped forward? Lots of reasons, not the least of which is that they have no idea what is going on since they do not get reports on individual mortgages and they prohibited from inquiring in the prospectus they signed when they bought certificates from a pass-through trust.
Why doesn’t the Trust step forward directly and why doesn’t the trust have a single witness at foreclosure trials? Simple, the Trusts are creatures of the investment banks, which is why nobody complained when the money from sales of certificates was not given to the Trustee, who did not expect it, nor the Trust which didn’t have a bank account. The Trustees were named as window dressing with no duties to perform.
reuters.com | January 7, 2016
JPMorgan Chase (JPM.N) has been fined $48 million for failing to meet terms of a settlement to resolve mortgage servicing violations, U.S. bank regulators said on Tuesday.
The fine will be on top of another $2 billion that JPMorgan had been ordered to pay to cover remediation costs and foreclosure assistance to borrowers, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency said.
JPMorgan was among a number of banks which participated in a 2013 nationwide settlement with regulators over the practice of robo-signing, in which banks pursued faulty foreclosures by using defective or fraudulent documents.
The OCC also said Tuesday that EverBank (EVER.N) will also pay a $1 million fine for similar violations connected to the mortgage servicing case.
Filed under: foreclosure