PDA

View Full Version : Matt Taibbi: bankruptcy rocket docket, Jacksonville FLA



Winehole23
11-11-2010, 05:20 PM
In the old days, when you took out a mortgage, it was probably through a local bank or a credit union, and whoever gave you your loan held on to it for life. If you lost your job or got too sick to work and suddenly had trouble making your payments, you could call a human being and work things out. It was in the banker's interest, as well as yours, to make a modified payment schedule. From his point of view, it was better that you pay something than nothing at all.


But that all changed about a decade ago, thanks to the invention of new financial instruments that magically turned all these mortgages into high-grade investments. Now when you took out a mortgage, your original lender — which might well have been a big mortgage mill like Countrywide or New Century — immediately sold off your loan to big banks like Deutsche and Goldman and JP Morgan. The banks then dumped hundreds or thousands of home loans at a time into tax-exempt real estate trusts, where the loans were diced up into securities, examined and graded by the ratings agencies, and sold off to big pension funds and other institutional suckers.


Even at this stage of the game, the banks generally knew that the loans they were buying and reselling to investors were shady. A company called Clayton Holdings, which analyzed nearly 1 million loans being prepared for sale in 2006 and 2007 by 23 banks, found that nearly half of the mortgages failed to meet the underwriting standards being promised to investors. CitiLuck_The_Fakers_group, for instance, had 29 percent of its loans come up short, but it still sold a third of those mortgages to investors. Goldman Sachs had 19 percent of its mortgages flunk the test, yet it knowingly hawked 34 percent of the risky deals to investors.


D. Keith Johnson, the head of Clayton Holdings, was so alarmed by the findings that he went to officials at three of the main ratings agencies — Moody's, Standard and Poor's, and Fitch's — and tried to get them to properly evaluate the loans. "Wouldn't this information be great for you to have as you assign risk levels?" he asked them. (Translation: Don't you ratings agencies want to know that half these loans are crap before you give them a thumbs-up?) But all three agencies rejected his advice, fearing they would lose business if they adopted tougher standards. In the end, the agencies gave large chunks of these mortgage-backed securities AAA ratings — which means "credit risk almost zero."


Since these mortgage-backed securities paid much higher returns than other AAA investments like treasury notes or corporate bonds, the banks had no trouble attracting investors, foreign and domestic, from pension funds to insurance companies to trade unions. The demand was so great, in fact, that they often sold mortgages they didn't even have yet, prompting big warehouse lenders like Countrywide and New Century to rush out into the world to find more warm bodies to lend to.


In their extreme haste to get thousands and thousands of mortgages they could resell to the banks, the lenders committed an astonishing variety of fraud, from falsifying income statements to making grossly inflated appraisals to misrepresenting properties to home buyers. Most crucially, they gave tons and tons of credit to people who probably didn't deserve it, and why not? These fly-by-night mortgage companies weren't going to hold on to these loans, not even for 10 minutes. They were issuing this credit specifically to sell the loans off to the big banks right away, in furtherance of the larger scheme to dump fraudulent AAA-rated mortgage-backed securities on investors. If you had a pulse, they had a house to sell you.
As bad as Countrywide and all those lenders were, the banks that had sent them out to collect these crap loans were a hundred times worse. To sell the loans, the banks often dumped them into big tax-exempt buckets called REMICs, or Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduits. Each one of these Enron-ish, offshore-like real estate trusts spelled out exactly what kinds of loans were supposed to be in the pool, when they were to be collected, and how they were to be managed. In order to both preserve their tax-exempt status and deserve their AAA ratings, each of the loans in the pool had to have certain characteristics. The loans couldn't already be in default or foreclosure at the time they were sold to investors. If they were advertised as nice, safe, fixed-rate mortgages, they couldn't turn out to be high-interest junk loans. And, on the most basic level, the loans had to actually exist. In other words, if the trust stipulated that all the loans had to be collected by August 2005, the bank couldn't still be sticking in mortgages months later.


Yet that's exactly what the banks did. In one case handled by Jacksonville Area Legal Aid, a homeowner refinanced her house in 2005 but almost immediately got into trouble, going into default in December of that year. Yet somehow, this woman's loan was placed into a trust called Home Equity Loan Trust Series AE 2005-HE5 in January 2006 — five months after the deadline for that particular trust. The loan was not only late, it was already in foreclosure — which means that, by definition, whoever the investors were in AE 2005-HE5 were getting shafted.


Why does stuff like this matter? Because when the banks put these pools together, they were telling their investors that they were putting their money into tidy collections of real, performing home loans. But frequently, the loans in the trust were complete shit. Or sometimes, the banks didn't even have all the loans they said they had. But the banks sold the securities based on these pools of mortgages as AAA-rated gold anyway.
In short, all of this was a scam — and that's why so many of these mortgages lack a true paper trail. Had these transfers been done legally, the actual mortgage note and detailed information about all of these transactions would have been passed from entity to entity each time the mortgage was sold. But in actual practice, the banks were often committing securities fraud (because many of the mortgages did not match the information in the prospectuses given to investors) and tax fraud (because the way the mortgages were collected and serviced often violated the strict procedures governing such investments). Having unloaded this diseased cargo onto their unsuspecting customers, the banks had no incentive to waste money keeping "proper" documentation of all these dubious transactions.


"You've already committed fraud once," says April Charney, an attorney with Jacksonville Area Legal Aid. "What do you have to lose?"
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/232611?RS_show_page=4

Winehole23
11-11-2010, 05:23 PM
Sitting in the rocket docket, James Kowalski considers himself lucky to have won his first motion of the morning. To get the usually intractable Judge Soud to forestall a foreclosure is considered a real victory, and I later hear Kowalski getting props and attaboys from other foreclosure lawyers. In a great deal of these cases, in fact, the homeowners would have a pretty good chance of beating the rap, at least temporarily, if only they had lawyers fighting for them in court. But most of them don't. In fact, more than 90 percent of the cases that go through Florida foreclosure courts are unopposed. Either homeowners don't know they can fight their foreclosures, or they simply can't afford an attorney. These unopposed cases are the ones the banks know they'll win — which is why they don't sweat it if they take the occasional whipping.
That's why all these colorful descriptions of cases where foreclosure lawyers like Kowalski score in court are really just that — a little color. The meat of the foreclosure crisis is the unopposed cases; that's where the banks make their money. They almost always win those cases, no matter what's in the files.


This becomes evident after Kowalski leaves the room.


"Who's next?" Judge Soud says. He turns to Mark Kessler, the counsel for the big foreclosure mills. "Mark, you still got some?"


"I've got about three more, Judge," says Kessler.


Kessler then drops three greenish-brown files in front of Judge Soud, who spends no more than a minute or two glancing through each one. Then he closes the files and puts an end to the process by putting his official stamp on each foreclosure with an authoritative finality:


Kerchunk!
Kerchunk!
Kerchunk!

Each one of those kerchunks means another family on the street. There are no faces involved here, just beat-the-clock legal machinery.



Watching Judge Soud plow through each foreclosure reminds me of the scene in Fargo where the villain played by Swedish character actor Peter Stormare pushes his victim's leg through a wood chipper with that trademark bored look on his face. Mechanized misery and brainless bureaucracy on the one hand, cash for the banks on the other.
What's sad is that most Americans who have an opinion about the foreclosure crisis don't give a shit about all the fraud involved. They don't care that these mortgages wouldn't have been available in the first place if the banks hadn't found a way to sell oregano as weed to pension funds and insurance companies. They don't care that the Countrywides of the world pushed borrowers who qualified for safer fixed-Luck_The_Fakers_income loans into far more dangerous adjustable-rate loans, because their brokers got bigger commissions for doing so. They don't care that in the rush to produce loans, people were sold houses that turned out to have flood damage or worse, and they certainly don't care that people were sold houses with inflated appraisals, which left them almost immediately underwater once housing prices started falling.


The way the banks tell it, it doesn't matter if they defrauded homeowners and investors and taxpayers alike to get these loans. All that matters is that a bunch of deadbeats aren't paying their fucking bills. "If you didn't pay your mortgage, you shouldn't be in your house — period," is how Walter Todd, portfolio manager at Greenwood Capital Associates, puts it. "People are getting upset about something that's just procedural."


Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JP Morgan, is even more succinct in dismissing the struggling homeowners that he and the other megabanks scammed before tossing out into the street. "We're not evicting people who deserve to stay in their house," Dimon says.


There are two things wrong with this argument. (Well, more than two, actually, but let's just stick to the two big ones.)


The first reason is: It simply isn't true. Many people who are being foreclosed on have actually paid their bills and followed all the instructions laid down by their banks. In some cases, a homeowner contacts the bank to say that he's having trouble paying his bill, and the bank offers him loan modification. But the bank tells him that in order to qualify for modification, he must first be delinquent on his mortgage.



"They actually tell people to stop paying their bills for three months," says Parker.


The authorization gets recorded in what's known as the bank's "contact dataLuck_The_Fakers_base," which records every phone call or other communication with a homeLuck_The_Fakers_owner. But no mention of it is entered into the bank's "number history," which records only the payment record. When the number history notes that the homeLuck_The_Fakers_owner has missed three payments in a row, it has no way of knowing that the homeowner was given permission to stop making payments. "One computer generates a default letter," says Kowalski. "Another computer contacts the credit bureaus." At no time is there a human being looking at the entire picture.


Which means that homeowners can be foreclosed on for all sorts of faulty reasons: misplaced checks, address errors, you name it. This inability of one limb of the foreclosure beast to know what the other limb is doing is responsible for many of the horrific stories befalling homeowners across the country. Patti Parker, a local attorney in Jacksonville, tells of a woman whose home was seized by Deutsche Bank two days before Christmas. Months later, Deutsche came back and admitted that they had made a mistake: They had repossessed the wrong property. In another case that made headlines in Orlando, an agent for JP Morgan mistakenly broke into a woman's house that wasn't even in foreclosure and tried to change the locks. Terrified, the woman locked herself in her bathroom and called 911. But in a profound expression of the state's reflexive willingness to side with the bad guys, the police made no arrest in the case. Breaking and entering is not a crime, apparently, when it's authorized by a bank.

coyotes_geek
11-11-2010, 06:15 PM
Good read. The perfect justification to break up the TBTF's, but no..............

SnakeBoy
11-11-2010, 11:22 PM
Why spend time reading stuff like this. TARP worked, prevented the second great depression. The risky derivatives are no longer an issue, banks are in great shape and have paid back the TARP funds...it's all good. No harm no foul, water under the bridge.

Th'Pusher
11-12-2010, 12:30 AM
Why spend time reading stuff like this. TARP worked, prevented the second great depression. The risky derivatives are no longer an issue, banks are in great shape and have paid back the TARP funds...it's all good. No harm no foul, water under the bridge.

Yeah. Sorry about that little hole we blew in the world economy. We're not going to pay back what we stole in the name of free market, but we will pay you back what the tax payer ponied up to ensure we didn't fail, and with interest. That is, after all, what we do.

Now if you don't mind, can you go back to looking the other way so we can get back to lobbying for policy that continues the upward redistribution of wealth?

boutons_deux
11-12-2010, 02:43 AM
banks are in great shape

So you are for TARP and for the next TARP?

You are so fucking stupid. The banks are not in great shape. Another TARP is almost certain.

Bank of America Is in Deep Trouble, and There May Be Financial Disaster on the Horizon

“The problem for anyone trying to analyze Bank of America’s $2.3 trillion balance sheet,” wrote Bloomberg columnist Jonathan Weil, “is that it’s largely impenetrable.” Nobody really knows the true values of the assets these companies are holding, which has been the case ever since the collapse. But according to Weil, some of BofA’s financial statements “are so delusional that they invite laughter.”

http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/148817

========

The big banks ARE ALL BANKRUPT if their accounting frauds were denied.

America knows how to do capitalism.

Winehole23
11-12-2010, 02:56 AM
I'm pretty sure SnakeBoy was being facetious.

boutons_deux
11-12-2010, 09:55 AM
Fannie and Freddie are due to ask for another $300B. They should get the banks to take/back eat the toxic mortgages they sold F&F.

Winehole23
11-12-2010, 10:01 AM
They already are, b_d.

SnakeBoy
11-12-2010, 10:12 AM
So you are for TARP and for the next TARP?

You are so fucking stupid. The banks are not in great shape. Another TARP is almost certain.


Relax boutons, I was just being facetious. I don't buy the "TARP worked wonderfully" mantra at all. At the time I thought the best option was to nationalize the failed TBTF's, break them up and sell off the pieces. I still think that would have been a better approach. Unfortunately republicans were scared of the word nationalize and democrats were just scared so it wasn't to be.

Wild Cobra
11-12-2010, 11:48 AM
My take is if there is no solid understanding how to fix such a problem, let the natural economic forces make or break the corporations. Start fresh if they fail. Nobody is too big to fail. That is sheer arrogance, stupidity, or cronyism.

Winehole23
12-10-2010, 11:34 AM
SARASOTA - The ACLU of Florida filed a motion today appealing Sarasota Judge Rick DeFuria's decision not to allow a law firm to put depositions of so-called “foreclusure robo-signers” on its web site.

The motion in Florida's Second District Court of Appeal asked the court to reverse an injunction directing Christopher Forrest and The Forrest Law Firm, of Tampa, to remove video depositions of mortgage robo-signers from YouTube, and barring Forrest and others from distributing the depositions, according to a statement from the ACLU.Forrest represents Sarasota homeowners Peter and Barbara Morlon in a foreclosure proceeding.

“Putting the videotaped depositions of “robo-signers” on YouTube gives the world an opportunity to see how the practices of banks and title companies are affecting homeowners facing serious financial problems,” Howard Simon, ACLU of Florida Executive Director, said in the statement. “This is a public service that shouldn't be subject to a court-imposed gag order.”

The gag order comes just days after Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice Canady ordered all foreclosure courts to be completely transparent and allow proceedings to be accessible, the statement said. Canady's statement was released after the ACLU sent a letter demanding more transparency in Florida's Foreclosure Courts. The letter was co-signed by the Florida Association of Broadcasters, the Florida Society of News Editors, the Florida Press Association, the Florida Times-Union newspaper and the First Amendment Foundation, the ACLU said.http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20101209/BREAKING/101209788/-1/news?p=all&tc=pgall