As I mentioned in last night’s roundup, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman abruptly cancelled a conference call yesterday 10 minutes before it was to begin. The subject was supposed to be the foreclosure fraud settlement, and there was idle speculation that Schneiderman would announce that he would join the settlement. This would spur other holdouts to join, presumably, and at the very least break the somewhat united front against the settlement. You’d probably be looking at a formal announcement within days. But instead, Schneiderman cancelled, postponing the call “indefinitely.”
It looks like the issue is the lawsuits against MERS and three banks that he filed on Friday. The banks want him to drop it.
One person familiar with the negotiations said several banks wanted Schneiderman to withdraw a suit he filed on Friday against prominent financial firms, saying they had acted deceptively by filing erroneous and fraudulent foreclosure documents through a popular electronic mortgage registry designed to allow firms to save time and money by bypassing local property recording requirements. The person spoke on the condition of anonymity because the talks were ongoing. It was unclear whether Schneiderman had intended on Tuesday to address the status of those lawsuits during the news conference.
Schneiderman is working with bank lawyers to find a way to join the settlement and continue the lawsuit, but the banks see this as Schneiderman having his cake and eating it too. They feel that the lawsuit against the banks’ use of MERS is in an area covered by the settlement.
Tom Miller and the leadership pushing for the settlement insist that they will go forward without Schneiderman, if need be. But they keep pushing back the deadlines; the new one is Thursday. In addition, all four of the “sand” states – California, Florida, Arizona and Nevada – have not signed onto the deal. You cannot have a foreclosure deal where the four states with the most foreclosures have not signed on. These states are either looking for side deals to guarantee a minimum amount of relief for their constituents, or in the case of Nevada and possibly California, are concerned about the liability release and the need to drop investigations and lawsuits. We also have our first official “No,” from a Republican who probably thinks the penalty for foreclosure fraud should be a thank-you note delivered to the banks:
One state, Oklahoma, has officially declined to participate, according to one of the persons who said a national settlement could come as early as Thursday. Representatives of the state’s Republican attorney general, E. Scott Pruitt, did not respond to requests for comment.
Some hard-hit states did make their support public on Tuesday. Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette, for example, said in a statement he was joining the settlement.
Meanwhile the White House is in full-court press mode on this deal, urging outside groups to either support it or remain neutral, in an attempt to defuse attacks and splinter the opposition.
As ongoing administration initiatives to assist distressed homeowners have fallen short and Mr Obama confronts a Congress that has been unwilling to provide for additional aid to troubled borrowers, a settlement that yields fresh relief for the financially strapped represents the White House’s best chance to convince sceptical voters that it is attempting all it can to help the ailing US property market.
Garnering support and minimising criticism from left-leaning organisations sympathetic to borrowers’ plight in advance of the settlement’s announcement will be key, said participants in the White House discussions and separate settlement negotiations.
This isn’t entirely true. It’s hard to follow all the creative accounting, but there is anywhere between $20 billion and $35 billion left in HAMP accounts that has yet to be tapped. That’s potentially as much as, if not a lot more than, the settlement will call for in principal reduction. And if the Administration would replace Ed DeMarco and find a FHFA director who takes the long view on conservatorship, they could do a ton on housing policy with Fannie and Freddie. Clearly the Administration knows this, that’s why they’ve been proposing a host of new housing policies in the hopes that Fannie and Freddie will sign on.
So the settlement isn’t a “last shot.” Unless you look at it from the perspective of the AGs. It’s a last shot for them to get real accountability and justice for these particular fraud incidents, before they release the banks from liability.




42 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
DDay, if the state attorneys general cannot ” …get real accountability and justice for these particular fraud incidents”, then may I ask, who, or “what”, rather specifically, might get such “accountability and justice”? Are not these attorneys general the very best and possibly ONLY hope of “the people”, and this nation, getting accountability and justice?
Again, much appreciation for all of your Pulitzer-level work on this assault upon the Rule of Law.
DW
Why the hell don’t the Republicans jump on this? “Obama abandons rule of law as he panders in hopes of gaining Wall Street support”? Hell they jumped on Obama’s sell out to the insurance companies! They get their bailouts, then blame it on Obama. He really is Charlie Brown!
I hope they roast him for it.
I’m calling my state AG right now. Enough with all the e-mails (with FDL links) I have been sending.
Whatever O-la wants O-la gets.
I did call, had to leave a message, but I did call. I don’t expect to hear back.
“a popular electronic mortgage registry…” Isn’t that special? Popular with whom? Why is it popular? It all seems like very popular creative destruction to me.
It looks very much like Schneiderman realized he was being played and decided to call a halt. Perhaps, even, the administration reneged on its promises and he saw no reason to keep his.
Going to be interesting to see where this goes from here. Does Schneiderman get back on board after concessions? Or…?
Greed is good for “creative destruction”, janetplanet … for real, actual flesh and blood human beings? Not so much.
MERS, see, dotes and little lambs eat ivy … as the old song goeth.
DW
Godot will call you first. :) Any deal is for the Banksters regardless of the terms. They need to limit liability very quickly because Europe is going to cost them big; or at least that is a big worry for them. I think remembering the Banksters are servants to the uber wealthy puts their strategy in a better perspective.
This is most likely, he can and does read and understand the fine print!
I emailed the California AG a few days ago. Among other things, I noted that I had observed Harris to be politically ambitious for higher office – Senator, Governor, etc. I stated in no uncertain terms that were she to sign onto this dogshit settlement, she would never, ever receive a vote from me for any office she might be seeking in the future.
Right after the people in her office had a little chuckle, they undoubtedly shit-canned the note.
I’m sorry, did that sound cynical?
I’d say that Masoninblue’s diary is appropriate to this thread.
http://my.firedoglake.com/mason/2012/02/07/to-the-state-attorneys-general-reject-the-obama-administrations-settlement-proposal/#comment-261246.
Well worth the read, comments, as well.
DW
so, there are some ‘unpopular’ registries, you mean like the local county registrar of deeds?
The one that never looses track of who owns what, how, and when?
You have to admit they have balls, don’t they?
“Cynical” of Harris, or the people in her office, Shoto?
You and I are NOT cynical, just very disgusted and unwilling to put up with, what did you call it? Oh yes, “dogshit”, (which might, possumbly, be unfair to both dogs and their end-product in the odious comparison).
DW
You are so very old-fashioned, Watt4Bob … and I’m with ya, 100%.
DW
Well, the continued negotiations, keep the spotlight on the problem and hopefully continues to expose their fear of liability.
I sure hope that Schneiderman has woke up to the fact he was played. But he’s a sharp fellow, and he should have known the score before he signed on to the whitewash panel.
So I have to assume that he was willing to deal.
Boxturtle (If NY signs on, this Royal Screw is a done deal)
wavpeac, thank you for still hanging in. I know your choices are limited, but I am so glad you have not given up. You should have a medal for your time and stress.
The rest of you, lol on the “MERS,” a (somewhat) popular service.
No. The real hope is in the civil area, where you don’t have to be a prosecutor to file. ObamaLLP will obviously try to kill any government action.
I would have thought Eric Holder had more respect for his reputation than to sit quiet.
Boxturtle (perhaps I underrated his loyalty. Or his avarice)
God, you crack me up DW! (Wiping soup from nose). My mom used to sing that! Thanks, I needed a humor break :)
LOL. Now I understand why they did not actually use the name “MERS” in the text. They knew you were lurking out here, ready to pounce. You vicious old wordsmith,you. In other unsurprising news of the day, have you, or anyone else, made note of the fact that the NY district attorney’s office has decided to NOT bring sexual assault charges against Fox TV reporter and POLICE COMMISSIONER KELLY’S SON for an alleged assault in Manhattan, despite the fact that it was alleged to have happened in the complainant’s own law office? (Keyboard’s Gone Wild lol)
I never liked the “popular” girls in school, either. :-(
Have you noticed the DEADLINES keep passing for this deal and in Greece?
Yes, all those “clear titles,” drowning in the “Sea” of Love. Can’t tell me that criminal bankster conspirators have no sense of humor.
Given the complexity of these cases, plus the Supreme Court’s recent rulings tightening up on the requirements for class action certification, the chances that a lone little guy can get a lawyer to actually mount and win such cases is very open to question. This is a classic case where the govt should do it because they have not only the obligation but, more importantly, the resources. Think David v. Goliath, except that David can’t fight for his whole tribe, but each tribe member must fight Goliath afresh.
Is there a link for the info on the Oklahoma AG not signing on? I tried to google to find more info or even get to his website, but google is not functioning for me this morning.
Back in 2010 when this was breaking, I did my little experiment to see how rampant this was in Oklahoma: I accessed the online land records in one small county, searched for assignments with MERS as a party, pasted those results in Excel and did a new search for sheriff’s deeds, and looked to see if any of those had the same property description. Of course many did, so I searched for all documents with those property descriptions. And found MERS assignments that were filed within a few days of the document/notice that indicated the foreclosure process was starting. I downloaded those assignments and found they were signed by an attorney at the same law firm that was representing the bank/mortgage company…signing as a VP for MERS. I was shocked at how easy it was to find all the elements I’d been reading about here and on the other blogs providing details of foreclosure fraud. (I’m not saying all the ones I found included fraud, but they included the suspicious elements that I thought would warrant a look at the entire foreclosure file.) Just in case I had stumbled across a fluke in the number of these, I did the same in another county.
I called the AG’s office and after a few tries and some research, I found an attorney who knew exactly what I was talking about, was obviously eager to pursue the fraud investigation. We even discussed the possibility of me coming on board as an investigator for this project. (Although they didn’t really need that–I could have written simple instructions and a checklist and anyone could have identified the cases that needed scrutiny.)
The last time I spoke with this attorney, it was a few weeks before the 2010 election and they had to wait and see what the the new AG (the excellent AG at the time wasn’t running for re-election) was going to choose to prioritize; no one knew if the foreclosure fraud investigation would get off the ground. It was up to the new AG. I called the attorney a couple times after the election, but my calls were not returned. I guessed that the investigation was dropped.
So I am very curious as to why he’s the first republican AG to not sign on for the settlement. I know that back in 2010, there were smart, knowledgeable attorneys on staff ready to go at this investigation full tilt. And whether they did or not was entirely up to the AG.
How many average people can afford civil litigation, Box Turtle? Fanny Mae’s whole attitude, a board-approved “attitude”, BTW, regarding fraud and foreclosure is that most cannot …
What do you imagine the “too-big-to … give a damn-crowd” … anticipate?
Our legal “system” is premised upon money and “standing”. If the little people are not thrown “out” on the first, then the second, surely, will be brought to bear … down …
I’m not being cynical, merely observant … as well as increasingly disgusted. It is the civil arena which the fraudulent settlement intends to “clear” …
DW
Excellent analogy, rc.
Everybody wakes up on Groundhog … again and again … everyone has to go through the same damned thing, again and again … there is no “pattern” to the criminal behavior, we will be told, again and again …
DW
Thanks for doing that bgrothus. I googled “New Mexico” foreclosure settlement and got nothing. Will call also.
“Tom Miller and the leadership pushing for the settlement insist that they will go forward without Schneiderman, if need be. But they keep pushing back the deadlines; the new one is Thursday. In addition, all four of the “sand” states – California, Florida, Arizona and Nevada – have not signed onto the deal. You cannot have a foreclosure deal where the four states with the most foreclosures have not signed on. These states are either looking for side deals to guarantee a minimum amount of relief for their constituents, or in the case of Nevada and possibly California, are concerned about the liability release and the need to drop investigations and lawsuits.”
Note to those of you who have been insisting that the proposed settlement agreement does not preclude the state AGs from pursuing criminal charges:
If, as David states, the proposed settlement agreement contains a provision that would require the state AGs to stop investigating the banks, I can assure you that any state AG who signs off on the agreement will not be initiating any criminal prosecutions. How can they, if they cannot investigate?
As I have said elsewhere on this site, there will be no criminal prosecutions by the states against the banks, if this deal goes down.
The AGs in Nevada (Masto) and Missouri (Koster) have indicted robosigners and their bosses. If they play their cards right, those indictments could lead to indictments and prosecutions of the criminal banksters eventually, but I would not expect that to happen, if Masto and Koster sign off on the settlement because those subsequent indictments almost certainly would require additional investigation that would be prohibited by the agreement.
There is more than one way to skin a cat, so to speak, and never doubt for a minute that the banks, with the assistance of the Obama Administration, are doing everything possible to limit bank financial liability and tie the AGs hands to prevent criminal prosecutions.
Obama always has an escape door available to avoid responsibility and blame, if something goes wrong. That is his modus operandi, so I would not expect him to aggressively push for a condition in the settlement agreement that precludes criminal prosecutions. That is too obvious and would leave him open to criticism. Instead, I would expect him to aggressively push for conditions that would, in effect, tie the AG’s hands and prevent them from prosecuting the perpetrators of the most massive financial crime ever committed.
Never doubt that this proposed settlement agreement seeks to protect the criminal banksters to the maximum extent possible while limiting the liability of the banks to chump change, or what is to them nothing more than the cost of doing business.
$25 billion is chump change because the criminal banksters have caused trillions of dollars in damages.
What spotlight? The only place I see covering this with any consistency is David and others here on FDL.
In the mortgage arena alone I have seen the “negative equity” numbers as high as $750 billion.
So if any of us could get a little $25 fine, a promise of no criminal indictments but could steal $750 dollars, that would be a pretty good incentive TO DO IT AGAIN.
So by my liberal arts math, (the calculator on my Iphone), that is a 97% return on illegal and fraudulent behavior.
Obscene. Ridiculous. Obama and Geithner and the rest of those assholes should be tarred and feathered over such a heinous giveaway.
Schneiderman does not appear to be trying to “get real accountability and justice for these particular fraud incidents” – he seems only to want good PR (and good for him if he gets it) and a few fines for the State as he sets up the hedge funds for a theft of shareholder capital.
I do not see him charging any high up in the food chain human with anything – he is determined to treat corporations as people, as if he could put them in jail and thereby change future behavior.
Corporations are not people and corporations do not make decisions. When Schneiderman goes after higher up humans I will cheer him on – until then he is just screwing the homeowners of his state out of the settlements benefits, in hopes that in the future folks will remember the fight and not the result. Then again I may be wrong and the AG may be able to get a massive gift to homeowners in his state from the banks – but based on his actions so far, I do not see that happening or even being pursued. The AG wants a conviction of a corporation and fines and PR – and only that – as he then runs for governor.
Market value changes are not a loss that courts award unless you have some control or influence on the market – so the size of equity loss is not on point.
The hedge funds and investment banks that pushed the MBS fraud under a Greenspan Fed that refused to regulate caused this mess – but we chase the banks that actually made the loans as the ones to punish – and indeed we chase near zero humans.
But then life and indeed science as in quantum physics is not logical, so OK.
The point I have been consistently making is that the proposed settlement amount is chump change and nowhere near sufficient to compensate for the damage caused by the crooks.
I stand on what I have said. The state AGs should reject this proposed settlement agreement and proceed with indictments against the robo-signers and their bosses following the example set by Masto and Koster in Nevada and Missouri respectively. In the parlance of today, the robo-signers and their bosses are the low hanging fruit.
The cases are easy to prove and the strategy is to use the threat of a lengthy prison sentence to get them plead guilty and cooperate by divulging names and everything they know about the schemes in which they were involved. Then the AGs should assign their investigators to follow-up on the information provided.
Next, grand jury the next-level of higher ups whose identities and roles have been provided by the low hanging fruit. Threaten them with prosecution unless they cooperate.
Lather, rinse, and repeat until they reach the highest level. Indict the principles and take them down with all of the witnesses and supporting documentation obtained by working up the chain.
The formula is well known and remarkably effective.
All that remains is for all of the AGs to follow it and share information.
The proposed settlement without an investigation and no successfully completed prosecutions is a cowardly, worthless and pointless sell-out.
You’re doing quite well on your own (as usual), but I’ll second everything you’re saying, anyway, just for effect. ;-)
And, if the AGs, despite their limited resources were to divvy up the targets on the various ascending “levels”, then the state AGs could go all the way to the astute “top” and nail the kings of the fraudulent “mountain” … without ANY help from the federal government and its lap-dog departments or agencies.
Mason, I hope you just keep on laying this out … as often as it takes.
My profound and ever-growing appreciation to you.
DW
I finally got Firefox back on track and answered my own question about the Okla AG. According to the Reuters article, he declined to comment as to why he wouldn’t sign on to the settlement. (He’s on the correct side for once, but for the wrong reason.)
I went to his website and searched for ‘foreclosure’ and the only result was the really excellent statement that the former AG Drew Edmondson wrote back in Oct 2010–when I was talking to the attorney in his office who wanted to do some serious investigating on foreclosure fraud.
Nothing on the website from Pruitt on the subject, and he’s been in office for over a year. I have little doubt that the investigation was shut down when he took office.
MERS also thought that a Kidd’l eat it too, but… HA! and HA!
(I was just searching randomly for a way to wordplay with you, DW, and Googled this case. Someone please tell me if I’ve got it wrong or not, wouldn’t you? It looks to me like US Bank lost.)
Barry Fagan v Wells Fargo Bank re: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Complaint
http://www.fedup99.com/following-barry-fagan/
Information about the company
Wells Fargo Bank NA
United States
Wells Fargo Bank has fraudulently altered Barry Fagan’s Deed of Trust and the attached expert opinion dated 1/12/2012 from Forensic Document Examiner Dr. Laurie Hoeltzel specifically explains that the handwritten page 4 has been altered on two separate versions of that original Deed of Trust. Barry Fagan has recorded all 3 versions of the same deed of trust with the Los Angeles Registrar Recorders Office on November 29, 2011 as instrument no. 2011-1608398. The recorded Notice of Pendency of Action showing three different versions of that same July 9, 2007 Deed of Trust as originally recorded under instrument no. 2007-1622100. Judge Tarle, of The Superior Court of California, West District has taken Judicial Notice of that Recorded Document. Barry Fagan has submitted credible evidence from a forensic document examiner with over 20 years of experience that multiple fraudulent alterations have occurred on the “Handwritten Number page 4” which is located on page 3/4 of the Deed of Trust. All of the Deeds of Trust now reflect an entirely different handwritten NUMBER 4, and one of the exhibits also has a snake like line drawn on it, which is not present on the other two exhibits. C.P.A. Shawn P. Adamo stated: “It is my professional opinion that the altered deed of trust is concealing an irrevocable assignment, and explains why Wells Fargo is unable to produce loan level accounting concerning Mr. Fagan’s loan. Wells Fargo claims that any level of detail relating to Mr. Fagan’s mortgage is non- existent. As a result, CPA Shawn Adamo provided two expert opinions, (one an affidavit signed under penalty of perjury dated January 24, 2012 and the other is a Feb. 6, 2012 complaint letter sent to various regulatory agencies) from C.P.A Shawn Adamo explaining that Wells Fargo Bank has failed to provide a loan level balance sheet accounting and is concealing the fact that they do not own Barry Fagan’s loan. Additionally, forensic document Expert Dr. Laurie Hoeltzel has declared under penalty of perjury on January 2, 2012 that Wells Fargo Bank is robo-signing Discovery Responses by using multiple authors of the name Rhonda Bernard Thomas.(see attached declaration from Dr. Laurie Hoeltzel) I have also attached an affidavit from from forensic loan analyst/expert Javiar Taboas dated July 14, 2011 who is specifically stating that Wells Fargo securitized/sold Barry Fagan’s note and is fraudulently claiming continued ownership without any proof whatsoever.(See attached affidavit of Expert Javiar Taboas) Also attached is an illegally prepared Declaration of Default which is not actually signed by a natural person, but is signed by Wells Fargo Bank NA. This is a blatant California Civil Code Section 2923.5 and 2924 violation in that this illegally prepared document set in motion the entire illegal Non-Judicial Foreclosure. Also attached is a letter from Wells Fargo Bank dated December 5, 2011 and states that Wells Fargo Bank is reviewing Barry Fagan’s file and will respond on December 15, 2016 (THAT’S 5 YEARS FROM NOW!). Barry Fagan claims that this was a form of retaliatory contact. Wells Fargo is a criminal enterprise that is attempting to illegally foreclose on my primary residence by way of fraudulently altered documents, robo-signed discovery responses, invalid Declaration of Default, no loan level accounting and Barry Fagan’s loan file needs to be investigated at the highest level within your organization to see that a crime has actually occurred! The law offices of Kutak Rock LLP located in Irvine, California needs to have Barry Fagan’s NOTE and Deed of Trust subpoenaed so that your own CFPB organization can inspect those documents to see that they have indeed been fraudulently altered and photo-shopped. Please also visit http://www.fedup99.com/following-barry-fagan/ to see that even Barry Fagan loan application was fraudulently prepared by Wells Fargo private banker Dalia Warren.
Complaint history
A Consumer Financial Protection Bureau specialist is reviewing your complaint and may contact you and Wells Fargo Bank NA to collect additional information. This could be a lengthy process, so we ask for your patience.
Thank you,
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
http://www.consumerfinance.gov
(855) 411-CFPB (2372)
NarketWatch tonight described the foreclosure agreement as the Drano which will open up the pipes of foreclosures. And all will be well. More pain of course for the little people, but, hey, that’s what they’re there for, eh?
No mention of the toxic effects of the MERS system and, oh, illegal action by so many players in the Banksters’ systems. No mention of problems proviong ownership, etc., when trying to sell your MERS infected house.
Wow.
Who can we trust? Ain’t our public radio system no more no how.
might be popular with banks but in most states the properties aren’t legally recorded, hence chain of title = broken.
also much of this private corp end run workaround sovereign state law included in many cases destroying the original promissory note (which voids the debt in most jurisdictions) and “digitizing” the file so it could be “traded” back and forth quickly.
Unfortunately for the banks and their frankenchild MERS this calls into serious question the validity of title and or mortgage/deed of trust debts.
eeew….big shitpile can’t just be swept away.