A site (gone viral) that allows homeowners to request to find out who actually owns their mortgage note:

“When Wall Street banks securitized, packaged, sold, and resold mortgages, they created a system where it is often impossible to figure out who actually owns mortgage notes and therefore has the authority to foreclose on properties. But the big banks are getting tangled up in their own web. Recent events have exposed a handful of banks that are throwing families out of their homes even though they don’t have the mortgage note that proves they actually have a legal right to do so. There have been instances of two banks trying to foreclose on the same home, and in at least two cases, of a bank trying to foreclose on a house where the homeowner had never even taken out a mortgage with anyone in the first place.”

>

click for site

Category: Credit, Legal, Real Estate

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

30 Responses to “Where’s the Note?”

  1. Mannwich says:

    Brilliant! The banks made and soiled in their own beds (many times) and are spawning whole new industries.

  2. VennData says:

    It may be time to begin to question the competence of this industry and its practitioners.

    We need a national dialog on outsourcing the whole bunch of these clowns to foreign lands. …with one of the primary benefits being: that as a completely foreign industry, they will no longer be able to influence elections with political donations.

    Mandated Foreign Outsourcing of the Entire Financial Industry. Who’s with me?

  3. tyaresun says:

    My servicer is not on the list but I copied and pasted the letter in an email. Will see what happens.

    BR, allow me to ask an off topic question that has not been addressed in your postings so far. Say a bank has 100 delinquent loans, 50 of which are on properties that are seriously underwater, and 50 with serious home equity. If the banks go after the 50 with serious equity in it but not the other 50, is it fraud? Can the regulators do anything about it? I am asking this because I believe this is happening in the real world.

  4. Bernie X says:

    seiu.org ??

    Why is this run by Service Employess Intl. Union ?

    What is the connection ?

  5. formerlawyer says:

    The blog posting:

    http://www.seiu.org/2010/10/is-your-mortgage-affected.php

    From the website:

    “SEIU is the fastest-growing union in North America. Focused on uniting workers in three sectors to improve their lives and the services they provide, SEIU is:

    *The largest healthcare union, with more than 1.1 million members in the field, including nurses, LPNs, doctors, lab technicians, nursing home workers, and home care workers
    *The largest property services union, with 225,000 members in the building cleaning and security industries, including janitors, security officers, superintendents, maintenance workers, window cleaners, and doormen and women
    *The second largest public services union, with more than 1 million local and state government workers, public school employees, bus drivers, and child care providers”

  6. contrabandista13 says:

    If you didn’t see this on CNBC….. You may want to see the OH AG interview with Maria B.

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1616345642&play=1

  7. The Window Washer says:

    I

    LOVE

    THIS.

    Bury them in paperwork everybody. RESPA has clearly defined fines for not responding to a request. I presume SEIU did the legal on the response time. That’s the kicker how do you ramp up to get everyones info in less than a month?
    Eveyone fill this out and send it. You create another request that an AG and put on the pile when going after a bank.

  8. TakBak04 says:

    BR..Good to see you All Over This. You saw that “Tan Man Mozilla” got off with a handslap and agreeing not to serve on Boards, etc. His henchman is only off Boards for 3 years. Anyone remember Martha Stewart’s JAIL TIME? Oh…I forgot…she lied about something….

    Anyway….some more about this that you are trying so hard to get some attention to:

    Published on The Nation (http://www.thenation.com)

    The Bank of America Mortgage Settlement Fiasco
    Alex Ulam | October 13, 2010

    Research support for this article was provided by the Investigative Fund at The Nation Institute.

    Just as the American housing market was starting to recover from its worst battering since the Great Depression, a new scandal, an epidemic of flawed or fraudulent mortgage documents, threatens to send not just the housing market but the entire economy back into a tailspin. As we go to press, forty-nine state attorneys general have announced an investigation of the mortgage-servicing industry, in the wake of decisions by Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Ally Financial’s GMAC and other banks to suspend some foreclosures, and amid demands by some lawmakers for a nationwide moratorium on all foreclosures.

    It’s impossible to tell at this early stage how deep the new crisis extends, but as they begin their investigation, the attorneys general would do well to re-examine the deeply flawed 2008 agreement with Bank of America in resolving the Countrywide Financial scandal, the largest anti–predatory lending settlement in US history. If they do, maybe they’ll get it right this time.

    On October 6, 2008, a scant three weeks after Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy, with the financial crisis in full swing, California Attorney General Jerry Brown called a press conference in San Francisco. He announced that day, to great fanfare, “the biggest loan modification in American history.” Brown joined Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan in leading negotiations for eleven states that had sued Countrywide, the largest mortgage lender in the country. He held up Countrywide, which had been acquired by Bank of America some months earlier, as a symbol of all that had gone wrong in the housing bubble.

    “Countrywide exploited the American dream of homeownership,” Brown said in announcing his lawsuit the previous June. He charged the lender with deceiving borrowers by misrepresenting loan terms, hiding scheduled payment increases and persuading people to sign up for loans they couldn’t afford. “Countrywide was, in essence, a mass-production loan factory, producing ever increasing streams of debt without regard for borrowers,” he said. “Californians…were ripped off by Countrywide’s deceptive scheme.”

    When Madigan announced her state’s lawsuit, she took to the stage with a single mother who’d lost her home after refinancing a fixed-rate loan with one from Countrywide featuring a ballooning adjustable rate. “Borrowers were in loans that they didn’t understand, they couldn’t afford and they couldn’t get out of,” Madigan said. “The failure of these loans is what has caused the foreclosure crisis here in Illinois and across our country. And the aim of today’s lawsuit is to hold Countrywide accountable.”

    If all fifty states were to sign on to the settlement, Brown’s office estimates (forty-four have so far), it would provide $8.68 billion in reduced payments and fee waivers to some 400,000 Countrywide borrowers struggling to stay in their homes. And a small Foreclosure Relief Fund of $150 million would provide direct payments to Countrywide borrowers who have already lost their homes to foreclosure. Various media called the settlement a “landmark,” “a win for homeowners” and “the nation’s most comprehensive mortgage-modification program,” reporting that 8,000 homeowners in Ohio, 13,000 in Arizona, 57,000 in Florida and 120,000 in California would all “escape foreclosure” through major loan modifications. Relief Is in Sight, read one headline.

    But two years later, many Countrywide borrowers facing foreclosure have not even been notified that they may qualify for the settlement. It has kept, at best, about 134,000 families in their homes, and most of these only temporarily. Countrywide and its parent company, Bank of America, have blocked many subprime borrowers from access to the best aspect of the deal—principal reduction—in favor of short-term fixes that could easily spell disaster down the road. The settlement is silent on the question of second liens—home equity loans—which have played such a significant part in the foreclosure crisis, jeopardizing the possibility of truly affordable modifications. And the biggest loophole of all? Bank of America has the right to foreclose on the victims of Countrywide’s predation whenever its analysts determine—using an undisclosed formula—that it can recoup more money through foreclosure than by modifying the loan.

  9. TakBak04 says:

    Link to original article…and I believe “The Nation” will not go after this post for Copyright…hehe… Because they would want it seen. But, if too long please have your “Moderator Gremlins” cut it back.

    http://www.thenation.com/article/155380/bank-america-mortgage-settlement-fiasco

  10. tyaresun says:

    Got a reply from my servicer that theyare researching the matter and that RESPA gives them 60 days to come up with a response. I got the loan from them and they have been servicing it for 10+ years. I was certainly surprised by their answer.

  11. contrabandista13 says:

    I CAN’T FUCKING BELIEVE THAT NOBODY IS COVERING THE INTERVIEW BETWEEN MARIA B. AN THE OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL….

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1616345642&play=1

    IF YOU READ BETWEEN THE MUTHER FUCKIIIING LINES THERE IS A HUGE STORY HERE…

    THIS IS SO MUCH FUCKING STATES RIGHTS INVOCATION BIG TIME IT’S NOT BELIEVABLE…… THER ARE 50 STATES IN THIS ACTION…..

    THIS IS BIGGER THATN QE2 AMD MY MOTHER FUCKING DICK…..

  12. The Window Washer says:

    @tyaresun

    Frank-Dodd changed the timeline and penalties for Qualified Written Requests.
    Your servicer just fucked up telling you 60 days.

    http://www.usfn.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=USFN_E_Update&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=16355

  13. Arequipa01 says:

    oye contra suave muchacho te vas a reventar un güevo con tanta mayúscula.

  14. hammerandtong2001 says:

    The Model will be:

    The 1998 Master Settlement Agreement with the 4 major tobacco companies.

    And it won’t be $200 Bil over 25 years. A ton more than that.

    And that’s because the feds could not exert control. Even DOJ got out played by the individual state AG’s. Once you step outside of Yankee Stadium — you are in da Bronx.

    State by state settlements, or a nightmare master agreement that will take years to hammer out. Think state of Florida AG vs Rhode Island AG. Florida has a real estate disaster underway.

    Kiss those bonuses goodbye.

    .

  15. TacomaHighlands says:

    I’ve got $59K left to pay on my mortgage which was, at one time, big and fat. Got the Option ARM in 2000 and paid it down like crazy, never needing those options, but loved the low interest rate. I could pay-off tomorrow but afraid to do so NOW because I’m scared they’d try to foreclose on my AFTER a payoff! I’ve sent the letter to Chase via the site suggestion and logged my action on my calendar for follow up. I’ll let ya know what happens.

  16. barbb says:

    Does the securitization and unaccountability mess apply to credit union notes also? I remember the word “standard” being mentioned @ the signing.

    ~~~

    BR: Dunno. How about doing a little research and reporting back?

  17. tyaresun says:

    Thanks Window Washer. So the new limit is 30 days with a 15 day extension. I will keep the link handy and see what happens. I am not expecting any actual damages for the delay and don’t expect to ask for any.

    I just want to know where the note is. As I said above, I believe that if you have negative home equity the likelihood of you being foreclosed is much lower than if you have positive equity. If you have positive equity and become delinquent, don’t even try to work anything out with the lender, just sell before they come after you.

  18. TakBak04 says:

    contrabandista13 Says:

    For YEARS many of us have been screaming, like you over revelations and investigations……but like with BushII and now……where do they ever go?

    Until we see this go some where…we all need to worry about WHY! But, it’s good to keep at it and raising a rukus….one day maybe we will ONCE AGAIN have LAWS that PROTECT THE PEOPLE from ABUSE…. We really used to have them…but then, only some folks are old enough to remember those days, sadly.

    We have to hope………for the future. But, we also have to WORK to RESTORE what has been lost with De-regulation over a few decades.

  19. The Window Washer says:

    @tyaresun

    ” I am not expecting any actual damages for the delay and don’t expect to ask for any.”

    It doesn’t matter if you want damages they still get the fine. I did some quit math and for every million requests the don’t get done in the 30 day window they get hit for a Billion in fines. That is why everyone needs to send the request.

    Then we get to hammerandtong2001′s settlement

  20. The Window Washer says:

    BTW
    the quick math wasn’t the fine X request. I figuired out how long it would take to complete the request. I think the banks could get out 1 or 2 million of these per bank but not 2+. So with 60mil mortgages in the country if everyone hit’s this site you’re looking at fines that could wipe out bank profits for the year. Or at least bankrupt servicers.

    VERY easy meeting with regulators.

    BANK: ” We never thought everyone would want these documents so……….”
    AG: “Please sign here.”

  21. mathman says:

    Rule of Law – schmool of law:

    http://susiemadrak.com/?p=8425

  22. I preface this with the fact I work for one of the major Lenders (the one who’s name isn’t being dragged through the mud in this mess, in large part because of their zealousness to do things right… which has always been very cumbersome from a salesperson’s perspective, and has often put us at a competitive disadvantage to our competitors who were willing to cut corners in the past).

    Contrabandista’s link above is definitely worth watching.

    I am in full support of people seeking restitution from banks who have tried to cut corners in the legal court process in order to save on costs. This is wrong. They were operating as though they are above the law, and if proven this is what occurred in many cases (as seems to clearly be the case) the actions are criminal. They should and will have to pay.

    That said, I see some things in this that concern me. The comments of “Window Washer” above echo the thoughts of what many of our first thoughts would be… Flood the overburdened system with paperwork, the banks can’t ramp up in time to respond, and thereby millions of homeowners would have a legal claim that they do not have to pay their mortgage. While this may be true, as a nation we have to ask, “would this be good?”.

    Yes, we could “take down” the banks (and there are those that probably should be taken down… I’m not a believer in the support that was given to the “too big to fail” banks). The problem is this approach could take out many smaller banks that cannot ramp up (potentially leaving us is a less competitive environment and being stuck with the big banks that are more likely to survive). It could also further damage an already shaky system, making it more difficult to obtain future mortgages and thereby doing far greater damage to the overall economy going forward.

    Bottom line,many of the banks clearly did something wrong and need to correct and pay for their mistakes. However, for homeowners who signed mortgage papers and loan notes, they accepted an obligation to pay under agreed upon terms. To try to find a loophole to get out of that obligation is morally just as wrong as what many of these banks have done.

    If someone can’t pay there are the paths of modification or bankruptcy. Unfortunately, we leave in a nation that has lost it’s moral compass. To the general public, the modification or short sale process seems way too long. It’s due to the fact that banks have to go through a process of basically determining on a case-by-case basis, “Is this someone who truly cannot afford to repay, or is this someone who is just trying to avoid having to repay?”

    That has always been the process. However, because of the massive scale it is now occurring on, the banks are overwhelmed and cannot handle the paper load.

    We “have ‘em on the ropes” so to speak. Do we let them get up and make right on their wrongs, or do we kill them? (and is that second choice in our long term best interests?).

  23. rktbrkr says:

    The banks will never be able to comply with this time frame and I expect they will send out boilerplate “due to an extraordinary number of requests blahblahblah” – and then it’s anybody’s guess how many months it will take them to find the name & address of the owner and a copy of the actual note.

    What will actually be interesting is the number of requests they’ll never be able to fill – where the name & address and note cannot be located – that will be bad news for both the bank and the borrower.

    What if a homeowners association at a large condo complex in FL that opened during the boom years agreed to consolidate their results? This might be really eye opening if it was one of the big developers with a mortgage subsidiary where they steered their customers and then immediately flipped the mortgages.

    Any homeowner deeply underwater should do this for sure, if the mortgage administrator can’t find the note owner or note copy the borrower has better negotiating position.

  24. rktbrkr says:

    I hope an online site provides for responses to the note search.

  25. number2son says:

    Who wants to start a pool on how long it takes before a rider to some innocuous bill overturns this law?

  26. The Window Washer says:

    @numberson2son

    I’m guessing a rider on some stimulus bill on page 679 within a few months.

  27. The Window Washer says:

    @Mortgage Advisor Says:

    The point is that if you pile on to the banks it gives AG’s firepower. I think RESPA is a pretty good Reg but if you never use it what’s the point. Washington has shown us that they won’t hurt banks bottom lines but could we at least have someone tell them we mean it when we say things have changed.

    By the way I just took my NMLS test and I didn’t think any of the National Reg’s were useless. Now the state test and Regs, that was a joke.

    So here we are with the leftover mess, it’s 2 years post crisis, can we please start enforcing?
    AT LEAST ONE BANKING LAW PLEASE!

    Congress is going to give them a free pass on any fines.

  28. The Window Washer says:

    @Mortgage Advisor Says:

    “Yes, we could “take down” the banks (and there are those that probably should be taken down… I’m not a believer in the support that was given to the “too big to fail” banks). The problem is this approach could take out many smaller banks that cannot ramp up (potentially leaving us is a less competitive environment and being stuck with the big banks that are more likely to survive). It could also further damage an already shaky system, making it more difficult to obtain future mortgages and thereby doing far greater damage to the overall economy going forward.”

    This is a perfect explanation of both the carrot and the stick. We just need to give an ambitious Regulator the means to make a name. Hell William Black is still riding on ass kicking he did over 20 years ago.

  29. The Window Washer says:

    Lastly,
    I’m in the “Pissed off at ignoring the law and courts letting them get away with it.” camp. I don’t care about the forclosures.
    Livid would be a good discription.

    Do we even have a legal system anymore?
    Do these legal mills even understand what a contract is?
    Things like: I would wager that Fannie has gone into breach on over half of the homes it has sold in the last 3 years on the sales contract.

    I bought a couple forclosed homes from the firms on the FNM list. It was literaly surreal, conversations like “You know you did sign this and it’s a contract right?” “Yeah, but we never actually do that. We’re really busy.” New contract sometimes, start over 5 or 6 times, most of the time NO CONTRACT was in place for before the HUD-1. I got my title 8 months later on one.

  30. sue806 says:

    I am highly confused and disturbed that not one person in the media has talked about the abuse of our laws taking place with regard to modifications and its ramifications on the 14th Amendment to the Constitution and the economy being allowed by our government.

    Capitalism is about the ability to manufacture, sell, service or invest in a product for the intent of making a profit that has a risk of not making a profit but also losing some or all of the capital investment.

    The housing industry had a standard operating procedure of if the homeowner didn’t pay their mortgage a foreclosure took place to obtained the investors capital investment back, the homeowner didn’t care who held the mortgage note. the agreement was fair. In some circumstances the homeowner was offered a temporary modification to avoid a foreclosure, but the workout was extremely temporary and up to the discretion of the servicer. The investor or servicer did not have to take a financial loss in capital or profits to modify the homeowner that would financially harm other homeowners by being excluded from the same benefit. The homeowner had the opportunity to refinance or sell if they were unable or didn’t want to continue paying their mortgage avoiding a foreclosure UNTIL negative equity became the issue.

    The financial industry changed the rules with their standard practice of foreclosing to modifying delinquent homeowners attempting to avoid the automatic financial loss of foreclosing on a negative equity property based on the requirement that a positive net present value must be present. Translation of a positive net present value is the investor has the chance to earn their outstanding mortgage balance back at a reduced profit margin by modifying a negative equity homeowner instead of automatically taking a loss if a foreclosure took place. The government has stated modifications reduce the number of foreclosures from occurring that are necessary to stabilize the housing industry and all servicers involved with HAMP must issue a modification if a positive net present value is present. A negative equity modification is a financial incentive that is given to negative equity homeowners to remain negative equity homeowners when it is financially prudent for the negative equity homeowner to default instead.

    The financial loss to the investor and the homeowner is the same based on the negative equity amount. The financial loss does not change because of the homeowners’ income, affordability, financial difficulty including overextending themselves or increased living expenses or who “holds” the mortgage note, it is solely based on negative equity.

    Our laws are based on the right to equal protection for similar like circumstances not to protect the profits of the financial industry by furthering financially harming negative equity homeowners from being excluded or restricted from receiving a negative equity modification that financially entices them to remain a negative equity homeowner when the financial industry has shown that they are prepared to accept earning less profits on 25% of the negative equity homeowners that have already been modified. The exclusion or restriction of NOT receiving a similar financial incentive to remain a negative equity homeowner is financially harming the negative equity homeowner prolonging the housing crisis that will increase the investors overall losses with its delay.

    Please email me at sue806@aol.com for a copy of the proposal that I have mailed to the government and the financial industry. While they do state I have raised some interesting points, they are not ready to commit to correcting the issues. The most important issue corrected is the legal standing for the investor in the chain of title by partnering with the ImNotLeaving Uniform Modification System.

    We must stop the lack of accountability that the financial industry is exhibiting and move forward with logic and common sense. There are improvements to the current process to be made by partnering with the ImNotLeaving Uniform Modification System to modify all negative equity homeowners. For the government to consider going backwards and potentially reopening all foreclosures since 2007 is moving our country in the right direction. Every foreclosed home before it was foreclosed on should have been offered a modification that addresses affordability and negative equity based on the open acknowledgement and participating actions of the financial industry and the government in discriminatorily providing negative equity modifications ONLYto targeted negative equity homeowners, when all negative equity homeowners should have been offered the same opportunity to receive a modification the financial harm of having negative equity was done to all negative equity homeowners. Logic and common sense, after a foreclosure has occurred, if the chain of title was found to be broken in the review process, the financial entity should be penalized for their “clerical errors” aka as fraud but the homeowner should not be compensated for not paying their obligation other than receiving a “free ride” for any deficiency between the outstanding mortgage amount owed and the distressed sales price plus any deficiency will be considered tax free both compensations are the financial entity’s penalties because a standard uniform modification system was not offered prior to foreclosing possibility avoiding the foreclosure itself, the fact remains a foreclosure should not have occurred if the homeowner was paying their obligation. The exception to that statement is the small percentage of homeowners who were truly illegally foreclosed on when they didn’t have a mortgage owed to a particular entity , were paid off or had continue paying their modified payment with the payments not being counted, these homeowners should be made “whole” with a cash settlement for twice the the full value of the home , unless the home is returned to them free and clear then cash settlement is only the value of the home. Make the penalty fit the crime.