Michael wrote:Banks' Foreclosure 'Robo-Signers' Were Hair Stylists, Teens, Walmart Workers: Lawsuit

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/13/meet-banks-robosigners-fo_n_761698.html

NEW YORK (AP, Michelle Conlin) -- In an effort to rush through thousands of home foreclosures since 2007, financial institutions and their mortgage servicing departments hired hair stylists, Walmart floor workers and people who had worked on assembly lines and installed them in "foreclosure expert" jobs with no formal training, a Florida lawyer says.

In depositions released Tuesday, many of those workers testified that they barely knew what a mortgage was. Some couldn't define the word "affidavit." Others didn't know what a complaint was, or even what was meant by personal property. Most troubling, several said they knew they were lying when they signed the foreclosure affidavits and that they agreed with the defense lawyers' accusations about document fraud.

Read more at the link

CHARLOTTE COUNTY - Two Canadian tourists returning to their rental home from a day at the beach found evidence burglars had struck -- or so it seemed.

Their laptop computer and MP3 player were missing, as were six bottles of wine. A half-empty beer opened by the intruders was still cold and sitting on the kitchen counter.

But why, then, had the locks on the front door been changed?

It turns out that a Sarasota company working for a lender trying to retake the property through foreclosure sent two men to the Punta Gorda home to break in and change the locks, even though the home was obviously occupied.

It is illegal for any bank representative to enter a property if they have not yet retaken it at a foreclosure sale, especially if there is any sign the home is occupied, foreclosure experts say.

The process of banks hiring people to break into homes, even when occupied, is just the latest oddity of the messy foreclosure crisis in Florida.

Some property owners are reporting the break-ins to law enforcement as burglaries. Yet investigators consider the disputes a civil matter because the contractors do not display criminal intent.

That essentially leaves the property owners without recourse.

The attorney for the owner of the Punta Gorda home where the beer was left on the counter in March says the banks "have become intoxicated with power" because there are no consequences to sending contractors out to break into homes that they do not own.

"It is vastly underreported; it is happening in counties all across the state," said St. Petersburg foreclosure defense attorney Matt Weidner. "The more this occurs, the more prevalent it's going to become."

The break-ins are happening because homeowners can stay in their property, or even rent it out, until completion of the foreclosure sale, which can take months or years after a foreclosure suit is filed.

When contractors break into a home to change the locks, it often leaves residents feeling like crime victims.

In North Port, one family returned home from a weekend vacation and called their attorney in a panic: The front door lock was changed, the alarm system dismantled and family gerbil gone.

Landlord Brenda Perron of Sarasota has been in a three-year battle with Bank of America, which has sent people to change the locks on Perron's rented condo three times because the bank mistakenly believed her condo was in foreclosure.

"When my tenant came home, he was like, 'I can't live here, I can't live like this,'" Perron said. "They felt violated. I was understanding and released them from the lease. I can imagine how that would feel to have someone in your home."

Perron said she got an apology from an official at Bank of America headquarters in Houston. The locks have not been changed since, but her requests to have the bank reimburse her for the four months her condo sat empty have gone unanswered.

Another man went to check on the North Port property his father owned to find his keys no longer worked, magazines moved from where they were in the home, cabinets opened and some tools missing.

The lock-changing strategy can help a lender protect the value of the property, since the lender usually retakes a property at the foreclosure sale and many owners simply leave the house vacant, unsecured and unmaintained.

But locks should never be changed on a property when there are signs it is occupied, such as the power meter turning or a car in the driveway, said Chip Waterman, a Coldwell Banker real estate agent who has specialized in foreclosed properties for 30 years.

Waterman says none of the banks his company works with "would let us step onto the property if it appeared somebody was living there. They should be able to stick their head in the door to see if there's people still living in there. At that juncture they should back right off."

While many reports are from months ago, a Sarasota homeowner says that someone knocked on his door in August and said he would have changed the locks if no one had answered.

The Canadian renters went back home because they did not feel comfortable, and landlord Debra Fischer had to return some of their monthly rent and pay for some of the missing items, Weidner said.

Fischer pushed to get the Charlotte County Sheriff's Office for an investigation into the March 20 break-in at her home, which was well-maintained and obviously had people living in it at the time.

The men who entered acknowledged popping the back sliding door open with a screwdriver and changing the locks, but denied touching anything else.

First Property Preservation sent the detectives several work orders for Fischer's property, and the detectives told Fischer they were sufficient to quell the question of whether the contractors had the legal right to be in the property, a sheriff's record states.

The detectives also did not find the missing electronics and found no pawn transactions for the two contractors who went into the home, one of whom has a burglary on his criminal background. No arrests were made in the case.

The contractors told investigators it is common for them to use a screwdriver to pop the sliding glass door open and leave through the door they change the lock on. They also said a side window was unlocked when they arrived.

"What we're seeing is this rationale is being abused," Weidner said.

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama won't sign into law an overlooked piece of legislation that critics say would make it easier for banks and others to process foreclosure proceedings without human signatures, a person familiar with the matter said.

Mr. Obama hasn't yet issued a veto during his presidency. In this instance, he will send the bill back to Congress using a process known as a "pocket veto."

His decision comes amid growing complaints from lawmakers that the administration and regulators haven't done enough to intervene in a scandal tied to thousands of foreclosures that critics argue were processed with improper documentation.

Ally Bank, Bank of America Corp., and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. have halted foreclosures in 23 states in recent weeks to review how many documents tied to these foreclosures might have been filed improperly. A central issue is the practice of "robo" signing, when documents are signed quickly by computers or people who don't review the documents.

The bill in question, HR 3808, passed the Senate on Sept. 27 by unanimous consent. The House passed the bill by "voice vote" in April. Many bills that aren't considered controversial pass this way, with members of both parties essentially letting it move through Congress without debate.

The bill is called the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2009 and it was authored by Rep. Robert Aderholt (R., Ala.). A spokesman for Mr. Aderholt didn't immediately return a call for comment.

The bill was co-sponsored by Reps. Bruce Braley (D., Iowa), Michael Castle (R., Del.), and Artur Davis (D., Ala.).

The bill would require state and federal courts to "recognize any notarization made by a notary public" licensed in any state. This would include electronic signatures. The bill would have been a big win for businesses who complained it was too easy for people to challenge notarized documents in court when notaries were licensed in different states.

"This legislation will help businesses around the nation by eliminating the confusion which arises when states refuse to acknowledge the integrity of documents notarized out-of-state," Mr. Aderholt said when the bill passed the Senate. "This bill offers a common-sense solution to a problem that is more widespread than is generally recognized."

It is unclear how the bill might have affected the current foreclosure scandal, but liberal groups have insisted in recent days that Mr. Obama veto it. A spokesman for Mr. Aderholt said: "Contrary to some blogs and reports, there is absolutely no connection whatsoever between Congressman Aderholt's legislation and the recent foreclosure documentation problems."

Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner said Tuesday if the bill became law it would make it harder for consumers to challenge foreclosures.

The bill raised difficult policy decisions for government officials. Some argue it should be easier for banks and others to process documents electronically to help reduce the backlog of foreclosures and help the housing market. But there have also been questions about the loan-servicing and foreclosure-processing industry, which is loosely regulated and now faces accusations of fraud.

Attorney General Eric Holder said Wednesday the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force was "looking" at the issue, but it's unclear if prosecutors have opened a formal investigation into the matter.

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama won't sign into law an overlooked piece of legislation that critics say would make it easier for banks and others to process foreclosure proceedings without human signatures, a person familiar with the matter said.

Mr. Obama hasn't yet issued a veto during his presidency. In this instance, he will send the bill back to Congress using a process known as a "pocket veto."

His decision comes amid growing complaints from lawmakers that the administration and regulators haven't done enough to intervene in a scandal tied to thousands of foreclosures that critics argue were processed with improper documentation.

Ally Bank, Bank of America Corp., and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. have halted foreclosures in 23 states in recent weeks to review how many documents tied to these foreclosures might have been filed improperly. A central issue is the practice of "robo" signing, when documents are signed quickly by computers or people who don't review the documents.

The bill in question, HR 3808, passed the Senate on Sept. 27 by unanimous consent. The House passed the bill by "voice vote" in April. Many bills that aren't considered controversial pass this way, with members of both parties essentially letting it move through Congress without debate.

The bill is called the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2009 and it was authored by Rep. Robert Aderholt (R., Ala.). A spokesman for Mr. Aderholt didn't immediately return a call for comment.

The bill was co-sponsored by Reps. Bruce Braley (D., Iowa), Michael Castle (R., Del.), and Artur Davis (D., Ala.).

The bill would require state and federal courts to "recognize any notarization made by a notary public" licensed in any state. This would include electronic signatures. The bill would have been a big win for businesses who complained it was too easy for people to challenge notarized documents in court when notaries were licensed in different states.

"This legislation will help businesses around the nation by eliminating the confusion which arises when states refuse to acknowledge the integrity of documents notarized out-of-state," Mr. Aderholt said when the bill passed the Senate. "This bill offers a common-sense solution to a problem that is more widespread than is generally recognized."

It is unclear how the bill might have affected the current foreclosure scandal, but liberal groups have insisted in recent days that Mr. Obama veto it. A spokesman for Mr. Aderholt said: "Contrary to some blogs and reports, there is absolutely no connection whatsoever between Congressman Aderholt's legislation and the recent foreclosure documentation problems."

Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner said Tuesday if the bill became law it would make it harder for consumers to challenge foreclosures.

The bill raised difficult policy decisions for government officials. Some argue it should be easier for banks and others to process documents electronically to help reduce the backlog of foreclosures and help the housing market. But there have also been questions about the loan-servicing and foreclosure-processing industry, which is loosely regulated and now faces accusations of fraud.

Attorney General Eric Holder said Wednesday the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force was "looking" at the issue, but it's unclear if prosecutors have opened a formal investigation into the matter.

...the politicians will not let the financial stability of the largest bank (Bank of America) in the nation be threatened by contractual rights. Not when there’s an easy fix available that won’t cost taxpayers a dime.

Here’s what is going to happen: Congress will pass a law called something like “The Financial Modernization and Stability Act of 2010” that will retroactively grant mortgage pools the rights in the underlying mortgages that people are worried about. All the screwed up paperwork, lost notes, unassigned security interests will be forgiven by a legislative act.

...The put-back crisis is not driven by economics. It is driven by legal rights. And there’s simply zero probability that the politicians in Washington are going to let Bank of America or Citigroup or JP Morgan Chase fail because of a legal issue.

So here’s what I expect will happen. The lame duck session of Congress will pass a bill that essentially papers over the misdeeds of the banks that originated mortgage securities. Every member of Congress and every Senator who has been voted out of office will cast a vote for the bill. And the President will sign it.

Will the public be outraged? Probably. Financial bloggers will scream from the high heavens against another bailout of the banksters. Congress may try to create some cost for banks in exchange for the forgiveness, perhaps requiring more mortgage modifications.

...the politicians will not let the financial stability of the largest bank (Bank of America) in the nation be threatened by contractual rights. Not when there’s an easy fix available that won’t cost taxpayers a dime.

....

...The put-back crisis is not driven by economics. It is driven by legal rights. And there’s simply zero probability that the politicians in Washington are going to let Bank of America or Citigroup or JP Morgan Chase fail because of a legal issue.

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around (the banks) will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.

- Thomas Jefferson 3rd president of the US (1743 - 1826)

When closing on home mortgages, mortgage lenders now often list MERS as the "mortgagee of record" on the paper mortgage--rather than the lender that is the actual mortgagee. The mortgage is then recorded with the county property recorder's office under MERS, Inc.'s name, rather than the lender' s name--even though MERS does not solicit, fund, service, or actually own any mortgage loans. MERS then purports to remain the mortgagee for the life of a mortgage loan even after the original lender or a subsequent assignee transfers the loan into a pool of loans that are ultimately sold to investors--a process known as securitization. Although MERS is a young company, 60 million mortgage loans are registered on its system. Indeed, today MERS is legally involved in the origination of approximately 60% of all mortgage loans in the United States. In past generations, employees of county recording offices kept records of each individual company that recorded mortgage loans and mortgage loan assignments. But today, recording officials increasingly carry on something of a bizarre puppet show, dutifully filing away records of the name of one company repeated over, and over again: MERS.

CoffeeHawk_0 wrote:actually, what just happened was any further foreclosures or sales of foreclosed homes have been halted. It was getting crazy, some people tried some interesting things to get in some foreclosures before this last move was put into place.

tihZ_hO wrote:

CoffeeHawk_0 wrote:actually, what just happened was any further foreclosures or sales of foreclosed homes have been halted. It was getting crazy, some people tried some interesting things to get in some foreclosures before this last move was put into place.

Are you sure you're back in the US or are you still in China?