FannieGate: Obamacare Looting Scheme by diverting Fannie and Freddie Funds

Steve Mnuchin stated Monday on Fox News that President Obama engineered the “Net Worth Sweep” (NWS) in August 2012 to divert funds from the two Government Sponsored Entities (GSEs) to pay for Obamacare, after Congress refused to fund the low-income insurance subsidies critical to keep afloat the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

“There is a Twitter conversation going on, and it has been going on for some time, about how President Obama needed money for Obamacare and he took from Fannie and Freddie. Is that true?” Bartiromo asked Mnuchin.

“It is true,” Mnuchin replied.

“They [the Obama administration] used the profits of Fannie and Freddie to pay for other parts of the government while they kept taxpayers at risk,” Mnuchin answered.

An examination of the Treasury Department’s balance sheet for Fiscal Year 2013 documented how the Obama administration diverted billions of dollars into Obamacare that Treasury confiscated from Freddie and Fannie earnings.

On Aug. 17, 2012, the Obama administration amendment the Treasury Department’s Senior Preferred Stock Agreements with Fannie and Freddie that deprived private and institutional investors of their legally due dividend payments.

This enabled the Obama Treasury Department to confiscate billions of dollars in Fannie and Freddie earnings, in what is known as the “Net Worth Sweep,” or NWS.

The point is Congress never funded any taxpayer funds to pay the low-income insurance subsidies that are at the core of making the ACA work.

Section 1402 of the ACA – is written to provide federal subsidies to insurance companies for insurance purchased on state insurance exchanges to cover the difference between the capped maximum a low-income purchaser could be expected to pay and the amount the insurance cost.

Without funds provided by Congress to pay the low-income insurance subsidies under 1402, Obamacare would have collapsed immediately.

On May 12, 2016, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer, in the case U.S. House of Representatives v. Burwell, ruled against Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Matthews Burwell.

Judge Collyer decided HHS Secretary Burwell had no constitutional authority to divert funds Congress appropriated to one section of the ACA to fund Obamacare subsidy payments to insurers under another section of the ACA, Section 1402 – the clause defining the insurer subsidies – when Congress specifically declined to appropriate any funds to Section 1402 for paying the insurance subsidy.

“Paying out Section 1402 reimbursements without an appropriation thus violates the Constitution,” Judge Collyer concluded.

“Congress authorized reduced cost sharing but did not appropriate monies for it, in the Fiscal Year 2014 budget or since,” she stressed.

The Obama administration appealed the District Court decision in U.S. House of Representatives v. Burwell to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, deciding on its own authority that federal funds could continue to be diverted from other budgetary purposes to continue paying the insurance subsidies as long as the case was under appeal.

If the Trump administration wants to end Obamacare, all that is necessary is to drop the Circuit Court appeal in Burwell, and the result the District Court decision would become established law.

By dropping the appeal, the Trump administration would rule out any further diversion of federal funds to pay the ACA insurance subsidies, and Obama care would implode.

Mnuchin: GSEs Won’t Stay ‘As-is’ for Long

  http://www.themreport.com/daily-dose/05-01-2017/mnuchin-gses-wont-stay-long

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should prepare for change—and sooner rather than later. According to Steven Mnuchin, the Trump administration won’t keep the status quo for long.

Mnuchin discussed the GSEs and housing reform in general as part of an interview with reporter Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business’ “Mornings with Maria” on Monday. Though he didn’t go into too much detail, he did say that privatizing the two Enterprises wasn’t necessarily the plan.

“I haven’t said they’d be privatized,” Mnuchin said. “What I have said is I’m committed to housing reform. We’re committed to not leaving them as-is for the next four years.”

The main goal of reforming the system? Mnuchin said its to keep housing affordable without putting American taxpayers in harm’s way.

“We want to make sure that there is ample credit for housing,” Mnuchin told Bartiromo. “It’s a very, very important part of the economy, but we also want to make sure we don’t put the taxpayers at risk. And as you know, those two companies only exist because we have a giant line from the Treasury that supports them.”

Mnuchin also talked briefly about a recent bill introduced by Kevin McCarthy in the House that aims to eliminate Fannie and Freddie’s exemption from the Freedom of Information Act. This Act, according to Bartiromo, allowed the Obama administration to reallocate GSE funds toward other parts of the government—including the Affordable Care Act—without public knowledge.

“They used the profits of Fannie and Freddie for other parts of the government, while they kept taxpayers at risk,” Mnuchin said.

Bartiromo and Mnuchin also covered the recently proposed tax plan, which aims to lower taxes on middle-income earners and businesses. To see the full interview, visit FoxBusiness.com.

The Trump administration has been making waves in the housing and financial services industries as of late. Two weeks ago, President Trump issued two executive orders, calling for a review of “too big to fail” as well as oversight of these organizations.

Mnuchin also came out in support of the Financial CHOICE Act last week, which is proposed as an alternative to the controversial Dodd-Frank Act.

California investigators wanted to sue Mnuchin bank over foreclosures

http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/04/news/mnuchin-onewest-california-memo/

California investigators wanted to file a lawsuit in 2013 against a bank owned by Steven Mnuchin, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to run the Treasury Department, for misconduct during foreclosures, according to an internal memo obtained by CNN.

The memo and a draft civil complaint accused the bank, OneWest, of backdating thousands of documents, violating rules for waiting periods and tampering with foreclosure auctions beginning in 2009.

A spokesman for Mnuchin told CNN the memo and complaint were meritless and belong “in the garbage.” They were first reported by The Intercept.

The California attorney general at the time, Kamala Harris, never authorized the lawsuit. A senior lawyer familiar with the case told CNN that by the time the recommendation was delivered, most of the potential benefits to consumers had already been achieved through the California Homeowner Bill of Rights, which became law in January 2013. Harris was elected to the U.S. Senate last fall and sworn in this week.

Mnuchin formed OneWest in 2009, just after the financial crisis, to buy the remains of the failed subprime lender IndyMac. Mnuchin, who was CEO, and his partners sold it to CIT Group in 2015 for $3.4 billion.

Related: Trump Treasury pick Steven Mnuchin has a ‘widow foreclosure’ problem

By January 2013, when the memo and complaint were prepared, OneWest had foreclosed on 35,000 California homes and had begun foreclosing on 45,000 more, the complaint said. The draft complaint accused OneWest of “widespread violation” of California foreclosure laws.

The memo said that OneWest backdated documents and caused them to be filed with county recorders. It also said that OneWest made unlawful bids at trustee sales, resulting in “the wrong parties winning auctions,” and failed to comply with state rules for the timing and mailing of foreclosure documents.

“OneWest’s false filings and unauthorized conduct in the course of the foreclosure process harmed homeowners by denying them timely and important information about their foreclosures and potentially shortening the amount of time they had available to find a way to become current on their mortgage obligations,” the memo said.

The memo also said that investigators could not subpoena bank records and had been hampered by OneWest’s “obstruction” of another state investigation.

The California Reinvestment Coalition, which advocates for fair access to financial services for low-income people and people of color, called for a Senate investigation before Mnuchin’s confirmation hearing.

“Where’s there’s smoke, there’s fire, and the American people deserve a full explanation of these serious charges of fraud,” the coalition said in a statement. “Mr. Mnuchin and OneWest Bank need to turn over all of the evidence they previously obstructed so that their banking regulators can conduct a thorough investigation into these serious charges prior to any hearings about Mr. Mnuchin serving as our next Treasury Secretary.”

The Mnuchin spokesman, Barney Keller, told CNN that OneWest was the only bank in the country to complete a grueling foreclosure review by the federal Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and that it received a top rating for compliance.

“Steven Mnuchin and OneWest managed to issue over 100,000 loan modifications including thousands that reduced borrower principal, on loans that he did not even originate,” Keller said. “Memos like this belong in the garbage, not the news.”

Related: As Treasury pick, Steven Mnuchin may get questions about how he ran his own bank

Trump named Mnuchin to the Treasury post in November. His hearing before the Senate Finance Committee has not been scheduled. Democrats have signaled they will make an issue of OneWest’s record during Mnuchin’s tenure.

Federal regulators questioned OneWest’s foreclosure practices, which included so-called robo-signings that pushed homeowners into foreclosure without proper review or due process. OneWest was one of many banks that agreed to pay millions to compensate customers.

A OneWest subsidiary compiled a record of aggressively foreclosing on homeowners who took out so-called reverse mortgages, according to borrowers and fair housing advocates.

And November, two fair housing groups in California filed a complaint with the Department of Housing and Urban Development, accusing the bank of discriminating against minority borrowers during Mnuchin’s tenure. A representative for CIT told CNNMoney at the time that the bank was “committed to fair lending and works hard to meet the credit needs of all communities and neighborhoods we serve.”

Senator Elizabeth Warren, the Massachusetts Democrat, has called Mnuchin “the Forrest Gump of the financial crisis,” there for all of Wall Street’s worst practices during those years.

 

VICTORY for Homeowners: Received Title and 7 Figure Monetary Damages for Wrongful Foreclosure

As a California appellate court decision several years ago noted, “For homeowners struggling to avoid foreclosure, this dual tracking might go by another name: the double-cross.” – See more at: http://calcoastnews.com/2013/09/onewest-bank-pays-7-figures-mortgage-fraud-case/#sthash.xcKP1Tpl.dpuf
As a California appellate court decision several years ago noted, “For homeowners struggling to avoid foreclosure, this dual tracking might go by another name: the double-cross.” – See more at: http://calcoastnews.com/2013/09/onewest-bank-pays-7-figures-mortgage-fraud-case/#sthash.xcKP1Tpl.dpuf

“As a California appellate court decision several years ago noted, ‘For Homeowners struggling to avoid foreclosure, this dual tracking might go by another name: the double-cross.'” Daniel Blackburn, http://www.calcoastnews.com, 9/11/13.

Internet Store Notice: As requested by customer service, this is to explain the use of the COMBO, Consultation and Expert Declaration. The only reason they are separate is that too many people only wanted or could only afford one or the other — all three should be purchased. The Combo is a road map for the attorney to set up his file and start drafting the appropriate pleadings. It reveals defects in the title chain and inferentially in the money chain and provides the facts relative to making specific allegations concerning securitization issues. The consultation looks at your specific case and gives the benefit of litigation support consultation and advice that I can give to lawyers but I cannot give to pro se litigants. The expert declaration is my explanation to the Court of the findings of the forensic analysis. It is rare that I am actually called as a witness apparently because the cases are settled before a hearing at which evidence is taken.
If you are seeking legal representation or other services call our South Florida customer service number at 954-495-9867 and for the West coast the number remains 520-405-1688. In Northern Florida and the Panhandle call 850-765-1236. Customer service for the livinglies store with workbooks, services and analysis remains the same at 520-405-1688. The people who answer the phone are NOT attorneys and NOT permitted to provide any legal advice, but they can guide you toward some of our products and services. Get advice from attorneys licensed in the jurisdiction in which your property is located. We do provide litigation support — but only for licensed attorneys.
Neil Garfield, the author of this article, and Danielle Kelley, Esq. are partners in the law firm of Garfield, Gwaltney, Kelley and White (GGKW) based in Tallahassee with offices opening in Broward County and Dade County.
See LivingLies Store: Reports and Analysis

Neil F Garfield, Esq. http://www.Livinglies.me, 9/13/13

Victory in California, as we have predicted for years. Maria L. Hutkin and Jude J Basile were the attorneys for the homeowners and obviously did a fine job of exposing the truth. Their tenacity and perseverance paid off big time for their clients and themselves. They showed it is not over until the truth comes out. So for all of you who are saying you can’t find a lawyer who “gets it” here are two lawyers that got it and won. And for all those who were screwed by the banks, it isn’t over. Now it is your turn to get the rights and damages you deserve.

Maria L. Hutkin and Jude J. Basile
Maria L. Hutkin and Jude J. Basile

The homeowners won flat out at a trial — something that should have happened in most of the 6.6 million Foreclosures conducted thus far. U.S. Bank showed its ugly head again as the alleged Trustee of a trust that was most probably nonexistent, unfunded and without any assets at all much less the homeowners alleged loan. Still the settlement shows how far Wall Street will go to pay damages rather than admit their liability to investors, insurers, counterparties in credit default swaps, and the Federal Reserve.

When you think of the hundreds of millions of wrongful foreclosures that were the subject of tens of billions of dollars in “settlements” that preserved homeowners rights to pursue further damages and do the math, it is obvious why even the total of all the “settlements” and fines were a tiny fraction of the total liability owed to pension funds and other investors, insurers, CDS parties, the Federal Government and of course the borrowers who never received a single loan from the banks in the first place. If 5 million foreclosures were wrongful, as is widely suspected at a minimum, using this case and some others I know about the damages could well exceed $5 Trillion. Simple math. Maybe that will wake up the good trial lawyers who think there is no case!

Maria L. Hutkin and Jude J. Basile

A fitting announcement on the 5th anniversary of the Lehman Brothers collapse. the economy is still struggling as more than 15 million American PEOPLE were displaced, lost equity and forced into bankruptcy by imperfect mortgages that were a sham, and thus imperfect foreclosures that were also a sham. Another 15 million PEOPLE will be displaced if these wrongful, illegal and morally corrupt sham foreclosures are allowed to continue.

This case, like the recent case won by Danielle Kelley (partner of GGKW) was based upon dual tracking. In Kelley’s case the homeowners had completed the process of getting an approved modification, which meant that underwriting, review, confirmation of data, and approval from the investor had been obtained. In Kelley’s case the homeowner had made the trial payments in full and paid the taxes, insurance, utilities and maintenance of the property.

The Bank argued they were under no obligation to fulfill the final step — permanent modification. Kelley argued that a new contract was formed — offer, acceptance and the consideration of payment that the Bank received, kept and credited to the homeowner’s account. But the bank as Servicer was still accruing the payments due on the unmodified mortgage, which is why I have been harping on the topic of discovery on the money trail at origination, processing, and third party payments. 

 

The accounting records of the subservicer and the Master Servicer should lead you to all actual transactions in which money exchanged hands, although getting to insurance payments and proceeds of credit default swaps might require discovery from the investment banker. So in Kelley’s case, the Judge essentially said that if an agreement was reached and the homeowner met the requirements of a trial period, the deal was done and entered a final order in favor of the homeowner eliminating the the foreclosure with prejudice.

In this One West case the court went a little further. The homeowners were lured into negotiations, expenses and augments under the promise of modification and then summarily without notice to the homeowner sold the property at a Trustee sale under the provisions of the deed of trust. The Judge agreed with counsel for the homeowners that this was dual tracking at its worst, and that the bank did not have the option of proceeding with the sale. 

 

The homeowners were forced to vacate the property and make other housing arrangements and these particular homeowners were enraged and had the resources to do what most homeowners are too fearful to do — go to the mat (go to trial.)
One West made several offers of settlement once the Judge made it clear that the homeowners had stated a cause of action for wrongful foreclosure. Bravely the attorneys and the homeowners rejected settlement and insisted on a complete airing of their grievances so that everyone would know what happened to them. After multiple offers, with trial drawing near, OneWest finally agreed to give clear title back to the homeowners and pay $1 million+ in damages on what was a six figure loan. 

 

We now have cases in both judicial and non-judicial jurisdictions in which the homeowner was awarded the house without encumbrance of a mortgage and even receiving monetary damages in which the attorneys achieved substantial rewards on 7 figure settlements  that probably would be much higher if they ever went to trial — particularly in front of a jury. This is only one of the paths to successful foreclosure defense. I hope attorneys and homeowners take note. Your anger can be channeled into a constructive path if the lawyers know how to understand these loans, and how to litigate them.

“There’s hope. I feel their pain.” — Danielle Kelley, Esq. , partner in Garfield, Gwaltney, Kelley and White.

http://calcoastnews.com/2013/09/onewest-bank-pays-7-figures-mortgage-fraud-case/

%d bloggers like this: