Regardless of what policy eventually takes hold, I think it’s clear that, given expected Washington sloth and an inability for the banks to admit wrongdoing, the outcome of the mortgage mess will take years to come to light. In fact, it’s taken years to bring us to this point. Homeowners and their counsel have been on the front lines of this for up to a decade. Obviously the current publicity might lead to a quicker resolution, but if the banks are gaming out their options, they sure aren’t showing it.
Thomas Cox—whose deposition of GMAC robo-signer Jeffrey Stephan brought fresh scrutiny on the foreclosure process—told me that in Maine, where GMAC has resumed foreclosure sales, the fixed and re-filed documents he’s seeing are “more of the same, cheap stuff.”
“There’s a structural mess in their departments that they’re not fixing,” Cox told me. “[Banks] refuse to organize their servicing departments in a way that would produce accurate results. There’s a foreclosure department that doesn’t talk to the department handling modifications.” [...]
“It’s a structural problem that led to these bad affidavits, because they set it up like an assembly line. They won’t structure a servicing department so that one person is the go-to responsible person for a homeowner’s file.” Cox said. “I’ve seen no evidence yet that they’ve changed that structure.”
If the banks are making an assessment, they probably believe that they’re too big to fail and that government will ride to their rescue. They’ve really only taken the 50 state AG investigation seriously.
Two things we should think about here. One, for the banks: contrary to popular belief, it’s not getting any better for you. From a PR standpoint, maybe the dogs have stopped barking a bit. However, your biggest problem is the judicial system, and there’s plenty of evidence that judges aren’t buying your bullshit anymore.
Shack’s opinion, released by the courts Tuesday, is the most detailed picture yet of the shoddy or fraudulent mortgage paperwork too many of those lenders used.
This is not just a matter of minor technicalities, as the banks and their spin masters want us the believe – the same ones who told us the subprime crisis would blow over.
At the heart of the Drayton case is an Austin, Tex., robo-signer named Erica Johnson-Seck. In July, Johnson-Seck admitted in a Florida deposition in another case that she “executes 750 foreclosure documents a week; without a notary present; does not spend more than 30 seconds signing each document; [and] does not read the documents before signing them,” Schack noted.
Johnson-Seck’s signature appears repeatedly in documents connected to Drayton’s mortgage, and in several other foreclosure cases Schack dismissed in the past three years.
At different times, she signed notarized documents assigning the loan, claiming to be a vice president of MERS (a private financial recording service for major banks), a vice president of INDYMAC, a vice president of Deutsche Bank and a vice president of OneWest.
You have to read the decision for the full effect. As Yves said, the very diligent opinion by Judge Shack in this case provides a roadmap for other judges to follow. Across the country, precedent is being built. And it doesn’t look good for the banks. Furthermore, it doesn’t take every judge in America to make this a miserable proposition for them.
The second point I want to make goes to the policymakers. If they think they can ignore this problem and ever see real economic recovery again, they’re wrong. This analysis from Chris Whalen is very plain-spoken, and all you need to know is this:
Because President Barack Obama and the leaders of both political parties are unwilling to address the housing crisis and the wasting effects on the largest banks, there will be no growth and no net job creation in the U.S. for the next several years. And because the Obama White House is content to ignore the crisis facing millions of American homeowners, who are deep underwater and will eventually default on their loans, the efforts by the Fed to reflate the U.S. economy and particularly consumer spending will be futile.
That’s the bottom line. We have a crisis that we can either deal with or allow to fester. So really, it’s up to the lawmakers. You can throw as many tax breaks at businesses as you want and it won’t move the needle. Politicians can continue their careers, or they can ignore this problem. Not both.



46 Comments



Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
sing it Dayen !
I rely on these posts to keep things straight
in the unlikely event you (or the firedogs) haven’t seen this clip of Damon Silvers:
The Foreclosure Crisis in 30 Seconds
Oh, thank you, cbl.
And, while policymakers sit in inaction with this crisis swirling around and wreaking its destruction, transfer of wealth continues apace. The bailouts weren’t enough, and this won’t be enough, either, so Social Security is up next.
As I hinted at in my questions on your earlier diary, which you link in the first sentence above, unless we understand that the banks don’t have standing to foreclose, and therefore they also don’t have standing to modify loans, we can’t get to the point where we understand enough to be able to come up with a way to untangle the mess, much less determine who could step in to legally help people stay in their homes at an affordable payment rate.
I think we need to put the true, complete narrative out there as to what went wrong, so that people can demand solutions that resolve the entire mess. The few loan mods occurring now may not even stand up to a legal test, as long as the issue of the unrecorded/unassigned notes is left unresolved. Just because a servicer modifies a loan doesn’t mean that the servicer had legal standing to do so, since most of us don’t even know if we’re paying the right entity. These mods may simply be PR, in an effort to delay eventual accountability.
Please, David: Write the full narrative. Progress beyond nibbling around the edges. Mortgages can’t be modified by the banks. They don’t have standing. That’s why they can’t foreclose. If they can’t foreclose, how can they be permitted to modify and take our money?
Word!
A servicer who doesn’t own a loan but services it can modify a loan. They’ve done it several million times. This is a trick the servicers claim to get out of modifications, that the investors won’t allow it, but in fact they allow the servicers to operate on their behalf and have said publicly they would prefer modifications. Is a fuller solution needed? Sure. But more data is needed outside of assertion on just how many loans with improper note assignment we’re talking about.
David @ 5
If the investors don’t really own the notes, which were never conveyed into the trusts, then how can the investors ok the modifications? This is why we need to get the full narrative straight. It’s easy to forget that the real reason the servicers mostly don’t want to modify loans is to protect their interest in the 2nd/junior loans which they carry on their own books. Perhaps the ones they have modified didn’t have junior loans, but who can prove who owns the notes on those loans?
I was under the impression that the junior bondholders that want modifications, and the senior bondholders prefer foreclosure or aren’t even aware when loans aren’t performing. See this 10/5 post at ZeroHedge: The Foreclosure Mess MBS Hate Triangle Emerges: Junior Versus Senior Bondholders Versus Servicers, and also this discussion of the various actors in the decision whether to modify or foreclose:
My main point is that since we know the notes weren’t even conveyed into the trusts in the first place, the above is moot, and that’s why it’s pointless to discuss it. Let’s get the full narrative out there. This means explaining the fraud on origination and securitization that caused the bubble and its bursting, followed by defaults and robo-signing to cover up. Until homeowners can be assured of title to their property, and payment to the proper entity, it’s too soon to modify the mortgages.
Rather than a lost decade it may become a 75 year legacy.
There’s still an estimated 8-10 million more mortgages to go by 2014 and this train wreck is keeping the economy in the gutter and thus bankrupting state and local governments. They are responding by selling and longterm leasing(50-100 year) infrastructure to fill budget holes.
Matt Tabbi wrote a recent peice about it… Griftopia. One example was investment bankers trying to sell the PA Turnpike to UAE investors….
The longer this forclosure crisis is permitted to continue, the more our public infrastructure will morph into privatized tollbooths.
The slate needs wiped clean fast. Between greedy fraudster bankers, and idiotic borrowers digging a hole they could never possibly get out of, this needs cleaned up and cleaned up fast in order for any good economics to take hold. At the end of the day, banks will STILL hold mortgages, and borrowers will STILL be in debt larger than their salaries can afford. THAT my friends, is the problem. It needs a major painfull correction.
In one month, I get rid of one gargantuan bank and one large bank and go to a credit union. Yahooooo!
Don’t worry, the looming “crises” over Social Security and the entitlements they’re working diligently to “fix”. /snark.
StewartM
It’s clear they don’t care. At. All.
By “they” I mean our bought political class.
Deal with it or allow it to fester? Please. Don’t we understand that the entire point of our society anymore is to have multi-million-dollar weddings for Sasha and Malia?
This entire country could devolve to 99% of the population living in a tent city (coming soon!) – and half the tent-dwellers would still be happy to curbstomp whoever Rupert Murdoch tells them is a tax-and-spend liberal.
I can’t wait till this faux election is over – we’ll see the real don’t-give-a-fuck-about-you Obama on steroids. Catfood commission, nullify whatever archaic “property law” silliness still stands in the way of the psycho-theft complex .. oh, and war. It’s still a bit much to bomb and destroy Iran at the moment, but I think Yemen is about to be Iraq’d.
Correction: At the end of the day, the banks will be insolvent, and taxpayers will have the choice of (a) bailing out the banks again (and owning the mortgages themselves) and fucking homeowners OR (b) taking over the banks and keeping as many homeowners in their home as possible.
If (a) is chosen, far more than a decade will be lost.
Correction: At the end of the day, taxpayers will have no choice but to bail out the insolvent banks, because we all know Dems and Rethugs alike support that idea. Did you have a personal choice in all the bailouts of the last 2 years?
Final truth. People borrowed money they couldn’t repay, from loansharks who didn’t have it to loan. Without a painfull change in the credit business, it drags out.
Neither economic or political disaster will motivate the White House or congressional leadership to take the necessary steps to fix this mess. Real solutions are not on the agenda, and they will not be until citizens are mobilized the demand them. Members of Congress are not being inundated with demands from the public about this (or about doing something significant for jobs, or protecting / expanding Social Security). Until they are, elite level influences will be the ones that determine what is possible – which will be simply disastrous. The question is – who has the institutional capacity and the will to do this? I wish I knew the answer to that question.
Do you know where your last mortgage payment went? Do you know who will return your note stamped PAID when you make your last payment? Now is the time to find out, before you make another payment.
Yeah, they’re motivated by astroturf’ed billionaire-funded “grassroots” movements.
This is what we’re up against. Real problems, and the solutions to fix them, are given short shrift in the mainstream press. Meanwhile, the dance continues as faux problems and faux solutions to them, promoted by billionaires, are given all the attention.
StewartM
Agreed. the next 2 years are really going to tell the tale for all to see….I hope.
I mean, I hope everyone will see it…or see through it. The right will still blame the liberals and Obama will probably be impeached to distract US from the theft of our country, but I don’t think the vast majority will remain in the dark once the rainwreck completes itself
What we do not know is what happens when a genuine popular mobilization goes up against an astroturf one. Sadly, we have yet to see that development, so history is no guide.
You go girl! Don’t it feel GOOD?! W00t, W00t!
“. . .Until homeowners can be assured of title to their property, and payment to the proper entity, it’s too soon to modify the mortgages.”
In 2008 did a simple re-fi on my home that I have owned since 1987. The thing was done over the phone and a server came to my house when the papers were signed. Recently (b/c of all of this) I looked at my papers, and they charged me $1000 for “title insurance” but there is no “title insurance” in my packet. I called the people who I pay (loan sold to or serviced by GMAC) and asked for a copy of the policy. This was over a week ago. They said they would send it. So far it has not arrived.
What risk do I have here? I have had the mortgage on this house since 1987, and I am not under water and at low risk of default.
This is a particularly one-sided and inappropriate definition of what happened. Banks and businesses regularly borrow money that “they can’t repay.” ALL the banks involved made loans that “they couldn’t collect,” with other peoples’ money.
Most of the borrowing was in good faith, assuming that real estate prices would continue to rise — or, at least, hold their own. In fact borrowers were reassured by banks and other lenders that this would be the case. The borrowers didn’t crater the economy and real estate market. The banks did.
Summarizing all this with “People borrowed money they couldn’t repay” is something Lloyd Blankenfeld might say.
Foreclose on the OBAMAVILLA at the Casa Blanca buck stop, 1600 Pennsylvania, D.C.
If you read Shahien Nasiripour’s HuffPo piece about Wednesday’s Congressional Oversight Panel hearing You will learn that even HAMP has been paying the wrong servicers to supposedly modify mortgages that they don’t have the legal right to modify, much less accept mortgage payments. The title alone tells us so: Homeowners Get The Boot For Bad Paperwork While Banks Get Millions For Same.
Panelist Damon Silvers’ questioning of Treasury’s ‘housing rescue chief’ Phyllis Caldwell tells the story.
The full narrative of fraud must be acknowledged before it will be possible to even devise some method for assisting ‘worthy’ borrowers to stay in their homes, and to undo egregious foreclosures, many of which were induced intentionally by the servicers upon borrowers who are capable of paying their loans.
There is reason to believe that servicers have been manipulating the defaults or modifications of loans at the behest of junior bondholders. Here is one hint. And another, from which this quote: “Most modifications are a sham done in the servicers’ self-interest, and they do nothing to benefit the homeowner,” In fact, some hedge funds purchase the junior (risky) tranches, and the servicers. See Mortgage Morass.
I agree and want to add the following.
The most reasonable and fair solution is (b), but Obama is opposed to it philosophically since he’s a neoliberal free-market believer and the banks have contributed millions of dollars to him to make sure he doesn’t forget it.
Bill Black is right. Foreclosure Gate is a systemic criminal control fraud and looking forward, but not backward, is a recipe for disaster. But for unacceptable accounting practices deemed acceptable by this administration to save the criminal banksters, the banks would be insolvent and the government would have to do what Bill Black recommended last week — appoint a receiver to take over each one and do what needs to be done. This is really the only solution that makes any sense.
Sorry, Obama. The free market doesn’t work. Never has and never will. Instead of regulating the market in a manner that best serves all of its participants, the invisible hand of greed inevitably destroys it. This shouldn’t surprise anyone. Duh, uncontrolled greed is a major cause of criminal behavior.
Agree 100%.
Isn’t greed the visible hand?
bgrothus @ 21
IANAL
The key question is was your refi securitized? It probably was, given the timeframe. Do you read any of the blogs run by foreclosure defense lawyers or 4closurefraud.org or foreclosurehamlet.org? You might try signing up at the latter and asking your question there. Other blogs:
http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/
http://livinglies.wordpress.com
http://foreclosuredefensenationwide.com
http://www.stayinmyhome.com/blog/
These, and Karl Denninger, and a few other places are what I read daily to try to keep up with developments in the foreclosure fraud saga.
First find out if your mortgage is in MERS. If it is, then you probably have a problem with your title.
Might be the end of the Bank eventually, but the bonus this and next year will flow.
Yes, it certainly is in this case.
Maybe. But how much press was Glenn Beck’s rally given compared to the Oct 2nd rally or yesterday’s rally? How much press was given Brietbart’s ACORN scandal-that-wasn’t and Shirley Sherrod’s scandal-that-wasn’t compared to the foreclosure crises which is getting precious little attention? It seems that we are fast approaching a political state like that of Russia’s, which the WSJ has called a “managed democracy”. (Which begs the question: “managed” by whom??)
I’m not trying to cast doom and gloom, but this is where we stand.
Given the oligarch’s determination to overrule popular opinion even when expressed with no doubt whatsoever (witness: France) the only way I can see to fight back is against their bottom line. We must figure out some scenario where fighting the public is costlier to them than conceding to us. This does have historical precedent; in fact, the US to some degree won its independence because Britain fighting the Revolutionary War hurt British business–the war was unpopular with the nascent capitalists there because they were losing sales to the colonists.
StewartM
Thanks for the tips. I have a high credit score, so maybe the loan is not in a bad tranche. It does not show up on MERS. I’ll check the other sites.
Foreclosure Frauds, the Fox in Charge, and Victimization
Mortgage lenders cannot be trusted to fix its foreclosure wrongdoings, no more than an addict can be trusted to self-reform. Lenders are not required to know laws –attorneys are!
Additionally, people who scowl at ”deadbeats” do not know everyone’s situation. NOT all defaulted homeowners obtained ill-affordable mortgages. Scores of defaults arose from divorce, medical bills outsourced jobs , and so much more. And should ˜deadbeat” borrowers with student loans have known how long it would take to get jobs? Is there any compassion for elderly people who were tricked into usurious ”home repair” refinancing?
Understandably, it seems that defaulted property owners seek to ‘beat the system’ –a small amount of them do. Not even I am willing to assist in such a thing when those types contact me for help. People in my crowd are not seeking to get a ’free’ home, and they are willing to pay rent.
Still, why and how should property owners be blamed for refusing to cooperate with erroneous and fraudulent confiscation of their homes? Who can blame any reasonable person for not wanting to be homeless if there is a LAWFUL method to avoid it?
Also, compare blighted neighborhoods and foreclosure deed conveyances to non-existent mortgage lenders; bankruptcy ”Lift Stay” motions that ”lack standing,” and names on ”proof of claims” different from ’lift stays’ ”movers”; and illegal property deeds. Likewise, foreclosure lawyers’ failure to ”effect service,” and failure at various substantive Civil Procedure requirements made it not lawful to proceed with those cases until those errors are corrected. Too, property owners seeking debt reorganization through Chapter 13 Bankruptcy should not be blamed for contesting lawyers’ falsified ”proof of claim” or false”Lift Stay” motions that are being filed in courts across the country.
Thick-skulled people say ’people ought to move out and let banks decide for themselves’. But what part do such people not understand; banks are unable to decide ownership. Still, scoffers brush aside the fact that fraudulent court pleadings are being filed by lawyers who are required to know better! And scoffers ignore that ‘the bank’ may not even get that property AT ALL! Meanwhile, if homeowners ’move out’, the scoffers will be forced to welcome void and blight –and rats and vagrants eventually will also come and go be coming and going. [neighbors detest neighbors while the white collar elephant hides in plain sight] *read entire article: Foreclosure Frauds, Wells Fargo-the Fox in Charge, and Victimization @ http://newsblaze.com/story/20101028181052lawg.nb/topstory.html/
I voted “Medicare ForAll” in ALL Seattle Federal and State races, so at least when my champion loses, I’ll know why!
I’m 50, I knew republicans were fascists when I was 12 in ’72.
I am DONE checking off the names of fucking sell outs, or, the politically pathetic.
rmm.
I was in yesterday’s Book Salon discussion with Rattner, the guy brought in to deal with the “bailout” of the auto companies. The discussion veered into the general crappiness of the economy and the foreclosure crisis.
He remarked, in response to a suggestion, that “the banks couldn’t go through bankruptcy [or federal take-over] like the auto companies had.” [Cue scary "complete destruction of the financial system" meme.]
I responded that this sort of “thinking” [sic] is just what got us to where we are and will prevent us from getting out.
[Dammit, PLEASE fix the "edit" function].
What disturbed me most about Rattner’s remarks was the indication that he was repeating round-the-table-in-the-WH “wisdom”/justification for TARP and the continued inaction re foreclosure. [I.e., the greatest good/goal is to save the banks.]
So long as these idiots continue to soak in their self-reinforcing mindset, we’ll NEVER get the needed solutions.
The banks only understand one thing and that is profits. Everything they are doing to sc**w the homeowners is in the name of profits; taking HAMP money from the government while piling on fees to the HAMP applicants and then fast-tracking foreclosure, etc. What they would understand is if everyone moved their money to a credit union and moved their credit card to a credit union the impact would be huge and the e-masse statement would send a clear message that these institutions are not indespensible to our economy. Since they are making few new loans, why do really need them anyway? Americans are acting like abuse victums. We need to get up and leave the abuser, which in this case is the giant banks.
parsnip and lawgrace: thank you for your comments and the resources therein.
I agree that we need much more public education on this matter and was glad to see the HuffPo article, although knowing the high percentage of Obamabot readers over there, I wonder how many of them took advantage of it.
But we’ve gotta start somewhere.
What has Matt Taibbi done recently on this?
I agree with you, but one problem I’m having is that here on Maui, to belong to the credit union, you have to be a state, county or federal employee. I’m none of these.
Let me see if I am wrapping my mind around this correctly. Anyone please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.
MERS was set up so banks could auction off mortgage-backed securities to each other, so that investors could place bets on them in the Wall Street Casino, so that banks could claim they had more assets than they actually did in order to drive up the price of their stocks so that their CEOs could reap bigger bonuses. Another reason for the existence of MERS was so banks and real estate investors could transfer title without having to pay fees to local governments to record said transfers, which, BTW, is probably illegal, and it worked so long as the housing bubble kept inflating.
When the bubble inevitably burst, the banks used MERS as a clearing house to process foreclosure claims and to bypass the county recorder system once again, thus making it easier to claim in court that whatever bank left holding the bag actually had the legal right to foreclose. So long as the courts didn’t look at the documents the banks submitted, that worked, too.
This process means that title was not legally transferred since the transfer was never legally recorded, so the bank trying to foreclose actually has no legal right to do so and is also trampling the homeowner’s due process rights all the live long day. Judges are rather big on due process regardless of political party, and I wonder how long it will be before county recorders start suing the big banks for illegally evading their recording fees.
Multiply all of this by 60 million or so. I somehow doubt this whole mess will have an upward effect on the stock market. So, another crash and another desperate plea for a taxpayer-funded bailout, yes? And since the banks own Washington from the President down through at least the leadership of the two corporatist parties, the only sensible thing to do-nationalize the banks-will not even be considered.
Am I in the right ballpark here or should I start smoking something other than tobacco?
As far as I know, title insurance is for loans on which less than a certain percentage of the total was put down. Thirty percent used to be the lower limit on mortgages, but then it went to 20 and 10 and…and…and. So, title insurance for the lower limits down payments. However, the title insurance arrangements I’m familiar with drop off when equity rises to the lower limit. Plain English, after you build up your equity to a specified level, you don’t have to carry title insurance. But neither the bank nor the title insurance company will tell you that and god knows how many people have paid, are paying, title insurance they don’t need. Sounds like you’ve been fraudstered.
I think you are talking about “mortgage insurance” not title insurance.
Mortgage insurance was what you use to be required to get if your down payment was not sufficient. When your equity increased you could drop it.
Instead,now mortgages without 20% were given 2nd mortgages which gave the banks another opportunity to collect interest-most seconds have APR which are higher than the first mortgage.
Title Insurance, as I understand it, is insurance that guarantees that the title to the property that you bought actually belonged to the person or entity that sold it to you and therefore you will not be bit on the ass at a later date by someone else coming along and claiming that your house belongs to them. Everyone has to have title insurance(at least here in California)It is part of the escrow process even if you pay cash for your house. Not everyone needed mortgage insurance– only those with less than 20% down. Depending on the downpayment your first mortgage could be for 80%,85% or even 90%.
We had mortgage insurance on our first house in the 80′s. Within 2 years the house appreciated enough that we could drop it. The payment was around 350/month.
Yes, you’re right. I read MI. Title insurance is required everywhere, as far as I know. $1,000 seems high, tho, and I’m surprised at $350/mo MI. Most insurers and banks will not notify that the insurance is no longer needed and will continue to take payments. I remember the woman who told me that saying she thought it was wrong and had actually talked to the company pres about it, but he, of course, casually swept aside her question. She needed to work and didn’t feel she could pursue it any further, but she really didn’t like it.
A simple solution to getting rid of bad debt: repeal the changes to the bankruptcy laws, and enable bankruptcy Courts to order mortgage cram down. Easy. Fast.
Rework I would say. The bankruptcy laws did need changing but the lobbyists took over, I know, you’re shocked, shocked!, and we got worse rather than better.