Interagency Independent Foreclosure Review – File Your CLAIM

Interagency Independent Foreclosure Review – File Your CLAIM

By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.

The following regarding the numerous Cease and Desist Consent Orders issued against servicers and others for unsafe or unsound foreclosure policies and practices is available here: http://www.independentforeclosurereview.com/

Independent Foreclosure Review

Looking for information about the Independent Foreclosure Review? Si usted habla español, tenemos representantes que pueden asistirle en su idioma.

Homeowners whose primary residence was part of a foreclosure action between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2010, and whose home loan was serviced by a participating servicer, may be eligible for an Independent Foreclosure Review.

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (federal bank regulators) have required an Independent Foreclosure Review by an independent consultant to identify eligible customers who may have been financially injured due to errors, misrepresentations or other deficiencies in their foreclosure process. If the review finds that financial injury occurred, the customer may receive compensation or other remedy.

To qualify, your mortgage loan would need to meet the initial eligibility criteria: Continue reading “Interagency Independent Foreclosure Review – File Your CLAIM”

Who Are You Fighting?

Who Are You Fighting?

By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.

Midland Funding vs. Tagliafferro.  Who are You?  This judge is making the point that all lawyers should be bringing up.  The documents used to foreclose are full of long ridiculous names that do not make sense and in many instances do not exist and are not identifiable.  Be sure to read ALL of what this judge had to say.

This foreclosure case has it all: The Who, Superman, Donald Duck and backwards masking.

Thank you to STOPForeclosureFraud.com for this one!

Midland Funding vs Tagliafferro

Show me the Note in California

Show me the Note in California

By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.

I have seen this topic of interest many times as well as numerous court cases where lawyers and judges profer that the note does not need to be produced. Whether it needs to be produced or not I will not venture to guess but for my own case I used California Civil Code 2943 and received an alleged “true and correct copy” almost immediately – including the alleged allonges and the alleged endorsements. For legal advice as to your own situation and the applicability of this law to any situation consult an attorney. This is only what I did for my own case.

California Civil Code 2943

(a) As used in this section:
(1) “Beneficiary” means a mortgagee or beneficiary of a mortgage
or deed of trust, or his or her assignees.
(2) “Beneficiary statement” means a written statement showing: Continue reading “Show me the Note in California”

SEC Staff Issues Summary Report of Commission Staff’s Examinations of Each Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization

SEC Staff Issues Summary Report of Commission Staff’s Examinations of Each Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization

By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.

Here is the 2011-199 release by the SEC:

SEC Staff Issues Summary Report of Commission Staff’s Examinations of Each Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2011-199
Washington, D.C., Sept. 30, 2011 — The staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission today issued a report summarizing the staff’s observations and concerns arising from the examinations of ten credit rating agencies registered with the SEC as Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations (“NRSROs”) and subject to Commission oversight.
——————————————————————————–

Additional Materials
2011 Summary Report of Commission Staff’s Examinations of Each Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization

——————————————————————————–

The report notes that despite changes by some of the examined credit rating agencies to improve their operations, Commission staff identified concerns at each of the NRSROs. These concerns included apparent failures in some instances to follow ratings methodologies and procedures, to make timely and accurate disclosures, to establish effective internal control structures for the rating process and to adequately manage conflicts of interest. The report notes that the staff made various recommendations to the NRSROs to address the staff’s concerns and that in some cases the NRSROs have already taken steps to address such concerns. Continue reading “SEC Staff Issues Summary Report of Commission Staff’s Examinations of Each Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization”

Wells Fargo Fined $85,000,000.00 for Falsifying Information on Loan Applications

Wells Fargo Fined $85,000,000.00 for Falsifying Information on Loan Applications

By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.

On July 20, 2011, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System issued an Order to Cease and Desist and Order of Assessment of a Civil Money Penalty Issued Upon Consent to Wells Fargo & Company and Wells Fargo Financial, Inc.

Here is an excerpt from this Order:

WHEREAS, this Order is issued with respect to the following allegations:

A. During the period from at least January 2004 to the Reorganization (the “Relevant Period”), Financial’s business model with respect to home mortgage lending was to sell debt consolidation, cash-out refinance loans at sub-prime rates (“nonprime loans”) to customers principally through a network of more than 800 offices located throughout the United States, called “stores.” The principal marketing method was salespersonnel making outbound, unsolicited telephone calls to individuals who had some existing customer relationship with Financial. Under Financial’s underwriting process, the salespersonnel were responsible for obtaining income-related documents (such as pay stubs and W-2 forms) and forwarding them to Financial’s centralized underwriting centers. Financial typically did not require that borrowers fill out and sign loan applications that included the borrower’s representation of his or her income. Continue reading “Wells Fargo Fined $85,000,000.00 for Falsifying Information on Loan Applications”

LAWYERS WORKSHOP IN FORECLOSURE OFFENSE AND DEFENSE – HONOLULU, HAWAII ON OCTOBER 14, 2011 – EVENT CANCELLED

LAWYERS WORKSHOP IN FORECLOSURE OFFENSE AND DEFENSE – HONOLULU, HAWAII ON OCTOBER 14, 2011

CANCELLED

IN RE WACHOVIA PREFERRED SECURITIES AND BOND/NOTES LITIGATION

IN RE WACHOVIA PREFERRED SECURITIES AND BOND/NOTES LITIGATION
 
 
 

By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.
 
This case discusses the “pick-a-pay” loans, CDO’s and RMBS from World Savings Bank and Wachovia.  Note that in paragraph 3 on page 8 Wachovia reported:

 

 

$120 billion portfolio of option adjustable rate mortgages (“Option ARMs”), known as the “Pick-A-Pay” portfolio, which Wachovia acquired through its May 2006 purchase of Golden West;

By my calculations, the original principal balance of World Savings REMICs that contain “Option ARMs” was $124.9 billion dollars.  What a coincidence.

View this case here: http://dtc-systems.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/in-RE-Wachovia-Preferred-Securities-and-Bond-Notes-Litigation.pdf

The Los Angeles Times discusses a new settlement agreement:  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/08/wells-fargo-kpmg-reach-627-million-settlement-of-lending-lawsuit.html

Wells Fargo Bank 10-Q from quarterly period ended June 30, 2011: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/72971/000095012311073266/f59207e10vq.htm

Notice Must Provide the Name and Address of the Lender

Notice Must Provide the Name and Address of the Lender

By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.

Thanks to StopForeclosureFraud.com for this gem (http://stopforeclosurefraud.com/2011/08/09/bank-of-new-york-vs-laks-nj-appeals-court-reversal-a-notice-of-intention-is-deficient-if-it-does-not-provide-the-name-and-address-of-the-lender/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+ForeclosureFraudByDinsfla+(FORECLOSURE+FRAUD+|+by+DinSFLA))

The Notice of Intention did not contain the name and address of the lender so the New Jersey appeals court reversed and remanded for entry of an order granting relief (the motion to vacate the judgment of foreclosure and dismiss the complaint without prejudice).

View this case here: http://dtc-systems.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/BONY-v-LAKS_Lender_Must_Provide_The_Name_and_Address_of_Lender.pdf

Title Crisis – Part II – The Documents used to Foreclose are Fraudulent

Title Crisis – Part II – The Documents used to Foreclose are Fraudulent

By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.

The following was just posted on Neil Garfield’s blog, livinglies.wordpress.com.  It is reposted here with the following comments.  These are fabricated documents placed into the title record at the county recorders.  In non-judicial states these documents do not need to be recorded to foreclose as those foreclosing can instead file a judicial foreclosure and prove their claim.  Because they have no claim and cannot prove it, they knowingly, willingly and without any regard for the consequences, choose to corrupt the land title records instead.  To read about this choice, read the Hooker vs. BofA ruling from a Federal District Court judge out of Oregon: Hooker-v-BofA_and_MERS – Congratulations to Oregon Attorney James Stout for his work on this case.

From Neil Garfield and Lynn Szymoniak (see Lynn Szymoniak in action on 60 Minutes here: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504803_162-20049744-10391709.html)

EDITOR’S NOTE (Neil Garfield): We know the foreclosures were gross misrepresentations of fact to the Courts, to the Borrowers and to the Investors. This article shows the crossover between the MegaBanks — sharing and diluting the responsibility for these fabrications as they went along. If you are talking about one big bank you are talking about all the megabanks. Continue reading “Title Crisis – Part II – The Documents used to Foreclose are Fraudulent”