the Internet abbreviation dunce strikes again
ing break
United Corporations of America
the Internet abbreviation dunce strikes again
ing break
United Corporations of America
Requiem for MERS (and the Banks That Created the Frankenstein Monster)
It is now widely recognized that MERS facilitated fraud by lenders, servicers, foreclosers and securitizers. Even on the most charitable interpretation it is very difficult to believe that MERS was not fraudulent by design.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/l-rand...tml?view=print
==========
Sure bet:
no one will go to jail,
no one will even be fined,
taxpayers will not regurgitate the toxic Geithner forced them to eat to save the bankrupt financial sector.
Also sure bet: Repugs will defund/emasculate the SEC and CFPA and banking regulations, if they can't actually kill it all.
Yeah well the syntax fairy gave you a beating with her wand of ungrammatical elocution, so it evens out.
History Repeats Itself: Wall St. Wants a Part of Fannie and Freddie’s Gov’t-Guaranteed Deal
banks are suggesting that they be allowed to take over some of Fannie and Freddie’s work of issuing securities backed by a government guarantee. That guarantee can be quite convenient for businesses, which get to keep the profits in good times and—as we saw during the housing market collapse—get to socialize the losses by passing them onto the government. From the Times:
Government data shows Fannie and Freddie didn’t take the same risks that Wall Street’s mortgage-backed securities machine did. Mortgages financed by Wall Street from 2001 to 2008 were 4˝ times more likely to be seriously delinquent than mortgages backed by Fannie and Freddie.
… Fannie and Freddie, Cecala says, didn’t start making a big move into riskier mortgages until the mortgage boom was already under way, and they were fighting to reclaim market share they’d lost to more aggressive Wall Street players. Even then, they were more cautious than Lehman Brothers and other investment banks. For example, just over 15 percent of Fannie- and Freddie-backed loans made in 2007 have been seriously delinquent, compared to nearly 42 percent of mortgages bankrolled by Wall Street, according to the FHFA.
http://www.propublica.org/blog/item/...ddies-business
=========
Barry is now sucking off corps and Wall St, assuring that America stays ed as UCA.
Repug Congress will exonerate retroactively financial sector criminal fraud, and the Dems/Barry will go along "for the good of the economy".
And you right-wing s here, please repeat the lie that CRA and Fannie and Freddie were entirely responsible for the housing crisis.
Have pity on us poor s, o great boutons. The gods did not give us the sagely foresight they gave you, nor the steely self-certainty.
WH, you jerks are so damn lucky I stoop low to participate in this forum.
Troof! You've provided a steady diet of amusement and a couple of absolute laugh out loud moments.
The strain on your back couldn't be any worse than the hurting you put on the English language every day.
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/...zed-fraud.htmlAmerican Banker posted the 27 page term sheet presented by the 50 state attorneys general and Federal banking regulators to banks with major servicing operations.
Nevada on the attack:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/31/bu...cord.html?_r=1The attorney general of Nevada is accusing Bank of America of repeatedly violating a broad loan modification agreement it struck with state officials in October 2008 and is seeking to rip up the deal so that the state can proceed with a suit against the bank over allegations of deceptive lending, marketing and loan servicing practices.
In a complaint filed Tuesday in United States District Court in Reno, Catherine Cortez Masto, the Nevada attorney general, asked a judge for permission to end Nevada’s participation in the settlement agreement. This would allow her to sue the bank over what the complaint says were dubious practices uncovered by her office in an investigation that began in 2009.
In her filing, Ms. Masto contends that Bank of America raised interest rates on troubled borrowers when modifying their loans even though the bank had promised in the settlement to lower them. The bank also failed to provide loan modifications to qualified homeowners as required under the deal, improperly proceeded with foreclosures even as borrowers’ modification requests were pending and failed to meet the settlement’s 60-day requirement on granting new loan terms, instead allowing months and in some cases more than a year to go by with no resolution, the filing says.
FHFA, representing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, sue 17 banks:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/03/bu...are-filed.htmlIn the suit filed against Bank of America, the agency alleges that bank sold securities that “contained materially false or misleading statements and omissions.” The company and several individual bankers named as defendants “falsely represented that the underlying mortgage loans complied with certain underwriting guidelines and standards, including representations that significantly overstated the ability of the borrowers to repay their mortgage loans,” the suit says. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bought $6 billion in securities from the bank between September 2005 and November 2007.
Yes, I heard about this also on today's radio.
My assessment from what I heard is it will not go anywhere. They were warned in 2006 not to keep buying these bulk packages from banks. Their experts should be able to know good from bad. The banks may have been devious, but did nothing illegal to my knowledge.
lawful evil is still following the law.
You mean they did nothing illegal other than sell junk bonds as AAA bonds? You know those mortgages were already rated by the time they arrived to Fannie and Freddie, right?
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/...lous-idea.htmlWhat makes these discussions so utterly absurd, so ridiculous, and farcical, is that robo-signing, an abuse the banks have admitted to and clam they’ve ceased, is still going on. The AP reported this in July; mortgage servicers in Nevada have stopped foreclosing because of a law explicitly criminalizing robo-signing. Yes, the banks are asking for a release of claims on acts, or perhaps crimes, that are ongoing. And these abuses are extensive: lying to investors about the quality of the mortgages; violating their own contracts by failing to convey mortgages properly to securitization trusts; charging fees that are impermissible under Federal law and the contracts; making a mess of property records and engaging in deceptive consumer practices through the use of MERS; and engaging in do ent forgeries and fabrications in foreclosures. All these people trying to give the banks “a settlement” are in fact immunizing banks against acts they are committing and will commit going forward. Only in the future, when a voter complains to his or her state AG, that official will have to explain to that voter that his/her rights have been given away.
We’re talking about an ongoing case of criminal theft of private property by mortgage servicers charging illegal fees and then using fraudulent do ents to foreclose. Now, a settlement implies that this practice is over, and that the banks are remediating past wrongs. It isn’t over, but the AGs and Federal regulators are treating it as if it is. Think about this incentive – why should a bank change its mortgage servicing once it has immunity for robo-signing, origination, pyramiding of fees, etc? The last consent decrees weren’t enforced, why would this one be enforced?
ongoing case of criminal theft of private property by mortgage servicers charging illegal fees and then using fraudulent do ents to foreclose.
Why are you jealous of wealthy people who work hard and earned every penny?
--WC
http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...y-general.htmlOct. 27 (Bloomberg) -- Merscorp Inc., the operator of a national mortgage registry used by banks, was sued by Delaware’s attorney general for allegedly using deceptive practices that hide information from borrowers.
The MERS database, which tracks ownership interests in mortgages, impeded the ability of homeowners to fight foreclosures and obscures its data, Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden said in a complaint filed today.
“MERS engaged and continues to engage in a range of deceptive trade practices that sow confusion among consumers, investors and other stakeholders in the mortgage finance system, damage the integrity of Delaware’s land records, and lead to unlawful foreclosure practices,” Biden said.
Now hiding information does need to be persecuted. However, don't expect me to reward people's bad choices.
If we reward people's bad choices, how about the rest of us? What about bad choices we made? Should be get bailouts too?
Whose bad choices are being rewarded?
I don't know if they are, but I keep hearing advocates pushing for such actions.
What actions? WTF are you talking about?
To bail individuals out.
Red herring. That's not anywhere in this thread. What I just posted isn't a proposed bailout. It's a lawsuit for deceptive trade practices.
If the deception is the the level of a few posts back, I agree. Prosecute.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)