Do I have it now, Maher?

usedkarguy, on December 4th, 2009 at 11:50 am Said: I GOT IT! There is no “investor” or “third party”. It is only the originator dressed up in costume as “the registrant”. That’s why the foreclosure is continually directed by Wells even thought the attorney says the client is “confidential”. There is no client, just the bank! Especially since these “deals” were shelved. There is no investor, only the Bank that holds the “assets”. And that’s another registrant of Wells “WFASC 1999 trust (formerly Norwest Asset Securities Corp.)” shows ownership relationship via the SEC. Do I have it now, Maher? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- mortgagelies, on December 4th, 2009 at 11:13 pm Said: usedkarguy,I am proud of you….very happy. Now show these nay say’ ers and win your case Damn it! msoliman expert.witness@live.com mortgagelies, on December 4th, 2009 at 11:09 pm Said: Roger; It’s all about the Bank…an OTS member Federal Savings Bank Brother. You got it….. When you approached me YOU did not want to hear the message and like others I am then called a Rip Off or nut or one of the two (LOL) When MSNBC asked their top analyst (whom I know) who is to blame he said…FDIC baby for letting the bank allow this crap to happen in the first place! Who do I call of all the parties interested? FDIC (before MSNBC comments). Who do their attorneys pass me off to – top gun in compliance? And what was one thing that stuck out in the phone call. Four times I am told to “Stop! Calling this a bank Securitization platform! Let’s see, Wells is Trustee for Citi and B of A is trustee for Wells and B of A is Barclays and …what boat full of crap!FIERRA was dead maybe 36 months when these Wall Street animals created this alternative to BORING GSE (Fannie and Freddie) lending and used Sub Prime to dupe the regulators . . .Or maybe not? I know when I got out that CWHL “indicted” Chairman is complaining about not owning a Bank . . . it was keeping him out of the game and he could not compete. The same guys who said told me in Boston “Why would we do Sub prime…we shop at Macys while you shop at Marshalls”. Really!Next the biggest and most prestigious institutional and retail banks are going down in a Rat Vessel of mortgage lending waste! Why?What happened friends is that owning a Federal Savings Banks under the OTS suddenly made Subprime lending a MUST HAVE and huge hit. The OTS allows NA’s like WaMu and Indy Crack Bank to open a FSB with its own Depositor base (DEPOSITOR -Get it!) in Provo Utah. What Da Funk.I see everyone operating in this incestuous game of high profit and high margins teenage wasteland as Washington finalizes deregulation of the banking system. Help Lord. . . there’s more…but who listening…It’s Spam, its solicitation its , its SICK AND NO ONE WANTS TO LISTEN! Do I have more….Oh yeah!! ! ! ! M.Soliman Expert.Witness (Be careful . . . the hatred and nasty comments are coming Waaaaaaaaa! – I can feel it!) mortgagelies, on December 4th, 2009 at 2:59 am Said: For those with learning impediments . . . Counsel for the lender! mortgagelies, on December 3rd, 2009 at 11:40 pm Said: CASE STUDY (Actual Case) For those with learning impediments . . . 1) I made a loan….. 2) I sold a loan….. 3) I bought back the home…. Who were you negotiating a deal with when you were talking a modification or short sale during the time from 2) to 3)? Note : To pursue objects for which men were sent into the world, to employ the mind on subjects most noble within the reach of its present powers, is certainly to lay the best claims to the honor of manhood. Comments: Many who pride themselves on being men of honor, deem it manly to neglect religion, and account it weak and womanish to yield to the tendernesses and softnesses of piety.But they turn the tables. With powers capable of manly aims but devoted to childish play, they appear to angels as one would appear to us who at the age of fifty should busy himself in making houses in the sand. If they will not ascend to high and manly objects, it would have been better for them always to have remained children.A child is satisfied with his baubles: but they, possessed of capacities which nothing but God can fill,-which were made to be employed about the kingdom of Christ,-remain restless and uneasy with all their toys about them. If I were always to live on earth, and must be confined to its trifling objects, I solemnly declare that I would rather eternally remain a child.

MORE SO CAL BORROWERS IN DEFAULT AVOID FORECLOSURE

Lender fraud will affect over 5 million more foreclosures while borrowers become displaced. Lenders should none the less feel good about seeing light at the end nearing. New information indicates the opposite as bigger problems lay ahead for lenders

October 14th 2009

By Maher Soliman

Press Release /For Immediate Distribution /9:01 AM PST [Sub- Prime] Los Angeles, Calif. / More homeowners are fighting to make the cut from the next round of foreclosures and while trying to stay afloat financially. That is a monumental task when considering unemployment numbers and reduction in pay and unemployment while looking to survive in a brutal recession. Seeing the recent Forbes billionaire list makes you realize everyone is hurting. It's just some are hurting more than others. The saga of default, foreclosures and a diminished human condition for borrowers especially are something that may not be avoidable for yet another round of lender for closure wars. The chronic levels of default and consistent flow of foreclosures are something Henry Ford could only wish for in terms of an efficient mass production and reliable assembly line.

The number of consumer foreclosure defense cases being filed in courts throughout America is also on the rise. This is the understanding offered by a Los Angeles based financial mortgage sector analyst and expert witness who testifies in these matters. Maher Soliman is a 20 year sub-prime and private label mortgage lending veteran who proclaims to have jumped ship for undisclosed reasons.

His testimony he claims to be is potent when offered in court is something he brazenly admits will scorch the earth the lender walks on. Claims of detailing fraud with laser sharp precession and summiting damaging evidence in court requires a sharp eye and view of strict quality control procedures and risk mitigation practices. These are attributes he relies on that he has developed with a sharp eye over two decades.

Soliman states - "the problem here is these tales of fraud and deception against American homeowners' are fiction and the fraud is verifiable. Claims are supported by testimony the expert witness will offer in a court of law. The testimony and claims made therein subject a lender to liability and exposure from evidence showing verifiable signs of mass lender malfeasance, securities fraud and Wall Street deceptive business practices.

Soliman's theory is as follows: A Service released "whole loan" asset emerges from the loan closing for a consumer. Typically it is a marketable asset in the secondary markets. It may be sold at a premium or if aged longer and found to be impaired it is sold at a discount. The loan is sold either way with a GSE releasing its rights and the coverage (such as Fannie Mae and MI).Coverage is a esoteric wall street term for a takeout commitment subject to sale. The receivable is "insured" in other words Thus, a whole loan asset is, according to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles" fully TRANSFERRED. Compare this example to a Service Retained Asset that is defined as a loan or receivable delivered with servicing rights retained by the seller. Therein you have a mortgage loan asset with a conditional sale or having less than the whole. In this instance the beneficial interest is shared with mutual parties of interest. A counter party, servicing agent or lender, Repo (repurchase) agreement, all comes into play and affect the true sale by definition set by the Federal Accounting Standards Board.

In a retained servicing transfer the investor is holding the actual asset. The first example is booked entirely different than the second asset. FAS 140-3 is specific concerning treatment and rules of derecognition with no mention of classified assets (lost note, defect title, lost virginity etc). GSE's are very specific about the accounting treatment and impact on earnings, capital set aside requirements and gain on sale accounting.

Judges will often than not discount these claims as more problematic than anything with regards to a consumer's defense. They see the allegations as too far out there and of no real consequences to the borrower versus a Wall Street investor who is suing also the lender. Investors or high net worth individuals are the opposite end of the lenders woes and lenders must defend themselves as registrants in mortgage backed securities offerings gone very badly. Soliman disagrees and knows with certainty where the link between Wall Street and Main Street is verifiable for making a wrongful foreclosure claim. Substance of arguments is legal diction for the essence of something as opposed to its mere form. A lawyer needs substance to gain an advantage when arguing for a borrower as a defendant in a court of law. An expert witness is hired to provide the attorneys substance and other evidential material for prevailing in the courtroom.

Wrongful foreclosure cases are not something making the headlines with positive stories of homes having been awarded and won back by consumer in default. Not true says' Soliman, that's just not true.

So, why then the lack of press coverage and unwillingness for these stories to break? According to Soliman it's about the complexity and depth of the situation and vague understanding for what a borrower is winning back in court. Recent cases where he has testified and the consumer won back a home are perhaps more due to the lender conceding the matter. By now you would think I would have had the chance to unleash my Armageddon of arguments through testifying and confident cross examination in court. Soliman continues "consumers being awarded back their home are stumbling onto the fringes of the evidential material and key arguments needed to defeat a foreclosure.

Using this approach he attacks a lenders conduct and not the acceptance. Its after the loan originated where my issues start. He is less concerned for the understanding for the loans origination as much as the willingness of lenders to continue to vehemently collect on the loan and proceed foreclosing. The problem you have is the lawyers inability to argue it is the security and not the obligation that is vulnerable. The deed or mortgage is where the arguments are to be made for consumers who seek to argue a predatory loan in hopes to win back their homes after a foreclosure sale.

Claims of recent court victories will likely cause lenders to share a growing concern for litigious borrowers. With over 5 million more foreclosures heading our way more defaulted borrowers will become displaced. That is not something lenders should feel good about given some new information, new arguments and the recent victories by consumers in court.

October 15th 2009

M Soliman is a seasoned subprime and non agency veteran and analyst who jumped ship to support lawyers and consumer homeowners in class action cases and matters involving a citizen's private right of action claims against lenders. Having spent the last three years in-house and with law firms he now reviews borrower matters for attorneys and testifies in court as an Expert Witness. Maher can be reached for more information at expert.witness@live.com Tel 213 /627-2324

Why a RESPA or TILA Audit Maybe worthless ?

Why is a RESPA or TILA audit worthless ? * This is according to NLS and the audits they have reviewed. They base this information on the fact the audit does not consider a borrowers true income . The disclosures they allege to audit are based on APR tied to the cost of financing the loan. If the loan is calculated using false income figures as evidenced by the form 1008 the entire set of disclosure documents are rendered incorrect. What should I look for in my loan file? · Tough question...even for an attorney. So where do I start? · Ask around. Find a loan examiner with underwriting experience. Ask a lender what they will look for today (versus last year) for qualifying a borrower. What are the most critical documents to review? · The final 1003 form or application and the form 1008 transmittal. Why? · It's funny, but almost every file we see at NLS is absent the final 1003 application and the form 1008 transmittal. Why is it funny to you? · A RESPA Audit cannot be of value if the 1003 is wrong and the 1008 is incorrect. If both are wrong you cannot audit any other disclosure documents where they all are wrong. So what are you auditing? · The 1008 is the lead disclosure document and the 1003 is a federal document that prohibits any type of fraud. Every document we see from a borrower is from the signing of the loan. Those loan docs are considered final documents. But the final 1003 application and 1008 transmittal are the most important documents to an underwriter or examiner. Yet, they are always missing from the borrower's loan file. What is the significance for these documents? · First, a lender will argue equitable distribution of consideration and mutual consent at the time of funding. Both parties signed the documents and both received ample consideration under a fraudulent set of terms and conditions.· Second, the fraud many refer to at signing actually takes place behind the scene long after the loan is signed. I understand, but what is the real significance of the two items you claim I am missing? · You did sign the loan documents and you are the maker of the note. The motivation to sign the documents was in exchange for the funds used to purchase or refinance the home you’re in. And your point? · The final 1003 may be different than the one you’re presented at closing. And the 1008 is a carefully crafted documented used solely to sell loans into the secondary market. In other words, the final 1003 and 1008 must sing out their song in perfect harmony to allow a loan to be sold later. So, if the presumption of equitable distribution is true....what’s the difference? · It's not necessarily true - the rule of equitable distribution. But a lazy lawyer and clueless judge will opt for the arguments and use the rule to fast-forward a decision for their fair haired client or victim defendant, the lender. And? · You must differentiate the fraud from consensual error’s and mutual culpability. Try to further evidence the efforts by the lender to perpetrate fraud that are far beyond closing and long after your endorsement of the loan documents and settlement! Okay, got it. What’s next? MSoliman msoliman@borrowerhotline.comhttp://www.foreclosureinfosearch.com/Informational only. Some material assumed by permission. Post comments in accordance with ethical web protocol www.borrowerhotline.com

Foreclosures Report: 1.5 million homes in foreclosure

Homeowners fell behind on mortgage payments in record numbers during the first six months of 2009. The future doesn't look much better. By Les Christie, CNNMoney.com staff writer Last Updated: July 16, 2009: 4:21 AM ET NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The foreclosure plague is not going away -- it's only getting worse. A record 1.53 million properties were in the foreclosure process -- default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions -- during the first six months of 2009. That was 9% more than the previous six months and 15% more than the same period of 2008, according to a report released Thursday by RealtyTrac. There were a total of 1.91 million filings resulting in 1 out of every 84 U.S. properties receiving at least filing in the first half of the year. Banks repossessed 386,800 properties. "What this means is, despite the intensity of the efforts on the part of government and lenders we don't have a handle on foreclosures yet," said Rick Sharga, a spokesman for RealtyTrac. And, in a bad sign for a housing recovery, there was no recorded improvement in June, the last month of the cycle. More than 336,000 homes reported foreclosure filings, the fourth straight 300,000-plus month. Filings were up 33% over last June and nearly 5% compared with May. "Foreclosure activity continues to increase to record levels," said James J. Saccacio, chief executive officer of RealtyTrac in a prepared statement. "Unemployment-related foreclosures account for much of this increased activity, and the high number of borrowers who find themselves owing more on their mortgages than their homes' are now worth represent a potentially significant future risk." It's the economy The biggest problem affecting foreclosure figures is the recession. As job losses mount, more out-of-work borrowers are falling behind on payments. And home prices are still falling, albeit at a slower rate, which by itself is enough to drive more homeowners into default. The home-price drop means more homeowners are underwater on their mortgages, owing more than their home is worth. That discourages some borrowers from repaying loans because they see it as a poor financial decision to keep paying on a declining asset. Homeowners are apt to walk away from their mortgages once their home values fall 15% below their mortgage balances, according to recent research reported by Paola Sapienza of the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University, and Luigi Zingales of the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. They claim that at least 25% of all mortgage defaults may be "strategic," borrowers walking away from their homes because they've lost so much value. And in many of the areas hardest hit by foreclosure, home prices have fallen by 40% or more. Others, however, are working with their lenders, trying to get the terms of their loans modified so they can stay in their homes. But that process has been slow and infuriating to many borrowers and community activists. The Federal Housing Finance Agency, the government watchdog created to manage Fannie Mae (FNM, Fortune 500) and Freddie Mac (FRE, Fortune 500), reported Wednesday that only 13,800 mortgages had been modified by Fannie/Freddie lenders in April. That is down 12% from March. The stats did not include workouts arranged through the Home Affordable Modification Program, the administration's foreclosure prevention effort that seems to be making very slow progress. One reason for the delay is that the workouts just started happening in the past 90 days, and a borrower must make three months of on-time payments before their restructuring can be recorded as a final modification. Another reason for the slow progress, according to a research paper released by the Federal Reserve of Boston, is that banks may expect many homeowners to "self-cure," that is, start paying again without assistance. In a report issued last week, the Fed found that an estimated 30% of all borrowers who miss two payments start repaying on their own. If the lenders had modified these loans, the would have lost money unnecessarily. A second reason, according to the report, is that so many modified loans re-default, with up to 50% of all modified mortgages succumbing.That costs the banks twice: They bear the expenses of the initial workouts and they pay again to finish the foreclosures, including any additional missed payments. And by postponing foreclosures, lenders absorb any subsequent housing value losses. If the final repossessions are delayed a year, the lenders could be getting houses worth 10%, 20% or even 50% less than they were at the point of the original default. The banks would have been better off foreclosing then. "We think these are very powerful forces [acting against modification]," said Manuel Adelino, one of the authors of the report. Where the pain is The Sun Belt suffered more foreclosures than other region during the last six months. California, with 391,611 filings, one for every 34 households, recorded more than any other state. Nevada had the highest foreclosure rate with one for every 16 households. Arizona, one for every 30, and Florida, one for every 33, were next. Utah had the fifth highest rate at one for every 69. Midwestern industrial states did little better with Michigan recording one foreclosure for every 74 households, seventh among the states. Illinois came in eighth with one for every 76; and Ohio, with one for every 86, was twelfth. Georgia, at one for every 70 households, and Idaho, one for every 79, were sixth and ninth respectively. Colorado, with one for every 80, rounded out the top 10.

PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 214 N. Tryon Street Ste 3600 Charlotte NC 28202 Telephone (704) 344 7500 Facsimile (704) 344 4100 Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm To the Board of Directors of Bank of America, National Association, We have examined Bank of America, National Association's (the "Company") compliance with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the domestic asset-backed securities transactions for which the Company acted as servicer involving residential mortgage loans, other than government sponsored entities, or transactions that do not have scheduled interest and/or scheduled principal remittance schedules as outlined in their respective transaction agreements, with the exception of certain non-registered transactions (the "Platform") described in the accompanying Appendix A of the Certification Regarding Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria, as of December 31, 2008 and for the year then ended, excluding criterion 1122(d)(1)(iii) which the Company has determined is not applicable to the servicing activities they perform with respect to the Platform. As described in Appendix A, for servicing criteria 1122 (d)(2)(ii), 1122(d)(4)(iv), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii) and 1122(d)(4)(xiii), the Company has engaged various vendors to perform the activities required by these servicing criteria. The Company has determined that these vendors are not considered "servicers" as defined in Item 1101(j) of Regulation AB, and the Company has elected to take responsibility for assessing compliance with the servicing criteria applicable to each vendor as permitted by Interpretation 17.06 of the SEC Division of Corporation Finance Manual of Publicly Available Telephone Interpretations ("Interpretation 17.06"). As permitted by Interpretation 17.06, the Company has asserted that it has policies and procedures in place designed to provide reasonable assurance that the vendors' activities comply in all material respects with the servicing criteria applicable to each vendor. The Company is solely responsible for determining that it meets the SEC requirements to apply Interpretation 17.06 for the vendors and related criteria as described in its assertion, and we performed no procedures with respect to the Company's determination of its eligibility to use Interpretation 17.06. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination. Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selected asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria. Our examination disclosed the following material noncompliance with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d)(4)(vii) of Regulation AB applicable to the Company during the year ended December 31. 2008. Certain foreclosures were not initiated in accordance with the timeframes established by the transaction agreements. In our opinion, except for the material noncompliance described in the preceding paragraph, Bank of America, National Association complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2008 for the domestic asset-backed securities transactions for which the Company acted as servicer involving residential mortgage loans, other than government sponsored entities, or transactions that do not have scheduled interest and/or scheduled principal remittance schedules as outlined in their respective transaction agreements, with the exception of certain nonregistered transactions, in all material respects. /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP February 26, 2009

Loan Modifications! Are they are Trap Doors

http://www.borrowerhotline.com /

Beware Those Loan Modifications! They are Trap Doors for “lenders” benefit not yours!!! By Timothymccandless’s Weblog "Beware Those Loan Modifications! They are Trap Doors for “lenders” benefit not yours!!! The “lenders’ are holding nothing but worthless or at best questionable paper. As soon as you sign a modification you are validating a debt that you most likely don’t have anymore or at worsthave substantial offsets against and you are validating a security instrument (mortgage) that was destroyed in the securitization process. Check with your local licensed counsel — but my advice is Don’t Sign Any Modification unless you are getting the terms — all the terms —- you want. And even then EVERY modification must be accompanied by some method to protect the homeowner from later claims on a break in the chain of title caused by securitization. So you either need new title insurance, a quiet title action, or both. REAL ESTATE WEEKLY This week’s Real Estate stories By MarketWatch"

Qualified Written Request

April 16, 2009

Name

Address

City, State Postal

Attention Customer Service:

Subject: [Your loan number] [Names on loan documents] [Property and/or mailing address]

This is a "Qualified Written Request" under Section 6 of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA).

I am writing because:

• Describe the issue or the question you have and/or what action you believe the lender should take.
• Attach copies of any related written materials.
• Describe any conversations with customer service regarding the issue and to whom you spoke.
• Describe any previous steps you have taken or attempts to resolve the issue.
• List a day time telephone number in case a customer service representative wishes to contact you.

I understand that under Section 6 of RESPA you are required to acknowledge my request within 20 business days and must try to resolve the issue within 60 business days.

Sincerely,

[Your name]

-------------------------------------------------------------------

REMEMBER: This letter SHOULD NOT be included with your mortgage payment, but should be sent separately to the customer service address.

You SHOULD continue to make the required mortgage and escrow payment until the request is resolved.

You may bring a private right of action under Section 6, if you suffer damages due to the lender's servicing of the loan. See the RESPA statute and regulations.

John E Doe 1223 Putnam Street Anytown, CA 99879-4509 February 13, 2009 Litton Loan Servicing LP Loss Mitigation 4828 Loop Central Drive Houston Texas, 77081 Re: Loan #100454448100896 Dear Modification Supervisor Your offer to do a modification through Titan is conditional and unacceptable. Please recall I have a expressed to you a number of genuine concerns regarding my current outstanding balance and loan #100454448100896. The subject dwelling is located at 1223 Putnam Street, Anytown, CA . My primary concerns are for 1) How you wrongly qualified me at the time of settlement 2) Told me dont worry the market will appreciate and you will refinaince me

3) Your current role as an affiliate, and successors and assigns 4) My loan exceeds your underwriting guidelines and qualifying criteria. Now comes forward Titan Lending who is a loan sub servicer for a mortgage loan subs servicer working under a Master Servicer and SEC Trust agreement for a lender that never was the lender or holder in due course. That real lender is a federal saving bank your firm is affiliated with and this causes two problems. First is the business combination that isnot disclosed in the public filings nor my file. Second it is not within the capital based equity requirements for FSB to participate in such a high risk and predatory practrice. You are not in compliance either way! Do you know the significance of an SEC investigation into your officers negligent polices and procedures? Naturally, Titan knows little of the history of my loan, is confused and will not comment on any representations or warrent to cure the problems. Furthermore the pass through loan investment trust you represent does not hold the collateral and meerly holds an interest in the asset. You office has not provided me with a transfer validation or sub servicer’s disclosure introduction letter and disclosure goodbye letter. Please understand my concerns in this market environment and for seeking to prevent any further ties to deceptive activities. You are advised to consider the federal debt and procedures act “d813 for furnishing certain deceptive forms”. It is unlawful to design compile and furnish any form knowing that such was intended to create the false belief in a consumer . . . a person other than the creditor is entitled to collect on the debt when in fact they are not participating in the debt and or the collection at all. This attempt to soley remain compliant will not rid your firm of its liability towards 2923.5 code requirements. My concern is documented in my prior response to your letter dated November 12th 2008 and by way of the correspondence you received from my attorney through Nationwide Loan Services (Expert Witness to Counse & Case Development). Please assist me in this urgent matter. Sincerely John Doe 995-785-8187 Attachments Cc: S Attorney A Attorney

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Law school,graduates, jobs, sum servicer, Law school,graduates, jobs, sum servicer, mustang,corvette,Law school,graduates, jobs, sum servicer, mustang,corvette,AMG,Home loans, relief, recession,AMG,Home loans, relief, Law school,Law school,graduates, jobs, sum servicer, mustang,corvette,AMG,Home loans, relief, recession,graduates, jobs, sum servicer, mustang,corvette,AMG,Home loans, relief, recession,recession,mustang,corvette,AMG,Home loans, relief, recession,

Law school,graduates, jobs, sum servicer, mustang,corvette,AMG,Home loans, relief, recession,

NLS is Informational News and Updates

-January 27th 2009 Los Angeles, Calif. - When analyzing foreclosures by state, Georgia presents itself as one of the hardest-hit markets. The mortgage mess shows us no state is insulated from foreclosure and mortgage mess that's getting stronger lately. Georgia's concentration of delinquency is in DeKalb and Fulton counties and in the capital city Atlanta. But whatever the State , this crisis we are in is getting worse. I was asked to start this venture into a non profit(able) business while I was completing an assignment for a law firm in downtown LA. It was supposed to just be a side bar for as long as necessary to assist many homeowners suffering from the horror of losing their home. And What I found over the last last 12 months was even more horrifying. A broken system that worked so well in building itself up. But now that efficiency is running out of control at the expense of innocent homeowners. After 20 years in primary lending and secondary sub prime trading I know what should be the exist strategy for a loan payoff and what you cannot do. And reckless unregulated foreclosures are tearing away at the very center of what a law abiding society stands means to all of us. So I will begin tonight a feature detailing some of the difficult stories that I am encountering and try and give a face to the sad and sadistic world of foreclosure. This one comes to us from Georgia. The borrower whose name is Chris appears to be as honest and nice a person one would ever expect to meet. His genuine demeanor and honesty in communicating his ordeal makes you think nothing is ever going to get this fellow upset. His story would make most of us go postal. Like so many other people who will never again maintain the level of trust they once had for their fellow man, Chris was duped by a good friend. His credit was leveraged to buy an investment home that he was told could not lose. The home was recently purchased and then refinance again in less than a year for upwards of $100,000 cash out. The way it works is like this. Able buys a shack for $70,000 and Smith comes along and agrees to purchase Ables property a few months later. What ever the motivation Able was clever enough to get the lender to refinance a home purchased within one year. Talk about a "Red Flag" to an underwriter. Now Able tells Smith he'll send over the loan documents to have Smith sign and he confirms his own documents were already signed earlier that day. Able never signed any documents because he can't. At least the lender had enough smarts to know better than to allow refinancing for a home in less than 12 months for a sizable amount of cash out proceeds to the original buyer. The criminal act takes place when Able appears to be selling the home to an arms third party and dupes Smith into the purchase as a co signor. There was no co signor. This type of scam happens all the time and especially in hard hit Georgia. According to John Smith (Submitted 2008-06-30 10:13:43 window.google_render_ad(); Due to the presence of a string of problems, such as rising rates and falling prices, several bad credit loans and also a heavy rate of mortgage fraud, the concentration of foreclosure has increased in Atlanta, Georgia. This abysmal trend has begun in 2001. There are a lot of connected problems with foreclosures in Atlanta. It is not just about making someone homeless. With so many foreclosure homes in Atlanta, all occurring in a concentrated form in various parts of the city, they lead to the problems of homelessness, crimes in these empty homes, depreciation of the neighborhood in which the empty homes are present, loss of the tax income the state gets and a general loss of face for the city. Subprime loans may seem to be a good option for people with bad credit to get their homes, but they are turning to be a problem where the overall economy of Atlanta is considered. Due to defaulting subprime loans, the rate of foreclosure houses in Atlanta has increased immensely. According to Maher Soliman an analyst with NLS in Los Angelels, California, stories like Chris are a cause for a significant increase in bankruptcy. People who file for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in Georgia do so thrice faster than people on a nationwide level. A major reason of these bankruptcy filings is a defaulting subprime loan. Another disturbing trend seen in Georgia and notably Atlanta, is the large number of African Americans who are bearing the brunt of increasing foreclosures. In present times, most of the foreclosure homes for sale used to belong to African American people of the state who took the benefit of the riskier loans due to their affluent status and the privileges accorded to minorities. What to do with the lender is the question Chris will no longer ponder. NLS and the client have set aside time this week to get to know the Georgia District Attorney. Stay tuned! By Maher Soliman Author Resource:- John Smith is the writer of http://www.foreclosureconnections.com/. For more information on Atlanta foreclosures visit ForeclosureConnections.com, online foreclosure homes database. [More to come]

Toll Free 877-732-7653 www.borrowerhotline.com

Injunction may start to Haltg Foreclosure for Countrywide Mortgages Courtesy of Moe Bedard on August 7th, 2008 The California Reinvestment Coalition and the Greenlining Institute today sent an urgent letter to California Attorney General Jerry Brown urging him to take immediate action against Countrywide Financial/Bank of America. The community groups are asking Brown to secure a foreclosure moratorium on mortgages that fit the profile of the deceptive loans and practices cited in his recent complaint against Countrywide Financial. As many as 900,000 Californians will face foreclosure in the next two and a half years. Due to Countrywide’s dominance of the subprime market, 200,000 or more of these foreclosures could occur from Countrywide mortgages alone, unless the Attorney General acts swiftly. The enclosed letter requests that the Attorney General – who filed a broad-based and well-researched complaint against Countrywide and its senior executives alleging deceptive patterns and practices – seek an immediate preliminary injunction barring Countrywide/Bank of America from foreclosing on any mortgage that fits the profile of the practices and products cited in his complaint. The groups’ request of Brown is consistent with Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley’s success in reaching a foreclosure moratorium agreement with California-based WMD Capital Markets – the company that holds structurally unfair loans originated by the notorious subprime lender Fremont Investment & Loan. Coakley was also successful in securing a preliminary injunction restricting foreclosures from the company. In seeking a preliminary injunction against Countrywide, consumer groups are asking the attorney general to require Countrywide/Bank of America to send notices to any borrowers who face foreclosure, advising them of the attorney general’s action and informing them of the right to present their case of fraud before an independent special mediator appointed by the court. Alternatively, Bank of America could voluntarily agree to these terms. In a recent letter to Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis, California Assembly Speaker Karen Bass and Assembly member Ted Lieu also requested a voluntary foreclosure moratorium based on Attorney General Brown’s complaint. It is expected that there will be more than five million foreclosures nationwide by 2009. This “tsunami wave” of foreclosures will drastically affect all mortgage borrowers, their neighborhoods and the state’s economy unless this crisis is quickly resolved. Consumer groups have requested a meeting with Jerry Brown within five days and some have previously met with Jerry Brown on this issue. For More Information Contact: http://www.borrowerhotline.com/ admin@borrowerhotline.com Alan Fisher Executive Director, California Reinvestment Coalition (415) 864-3980 office; (415) 710-1741 cell afisher@calreinvest.org Bob Gnaizda General Counsel, Greenlining Institute 510-926-4006 office; 415-307-3320 cell robertg@greenlining.org Categories:

California Foreclosures A foreclosure is the procedure, which is followed in enforcing a creditor's rights on a debt, which is secured by any lien on a property . The lender will attempt to recover its security upon the occourance of a default. In California, lenders can foreclose on deeds of mortgage or trust in default, through either a non-judicial or judicial foreclosure process. Judicial and non-judicial California foreclosures are limiting in that California is a one action State. The process of a judicial foreclosure involves filing a lawsuit to obtain a court order to foreclose. Here, there is no "power of sale" clause present in the mortgage or deed of trust. After the court declares a foreclosure, the house to be foreclosed is auctioned off to the highest bidder. The lender may seek a deficiency judgment. Now where it is not permitted in a non judicial setting, a borrower in some circumstances, has up to one-year time for redeeming the property in a juducal prceeding. A "power of sale" clause in a mortgage or deed of trust is enforced in a non-judicialforeclosure foreclosure. The trustee on behalf of the lender will pursue the "power of sale" using this clause found in the deed of trust or right to accelerate in the note that authorizes the sale of property satisfy any balance on a loan in the event of a default. California foreclosure guidelines In the case of the deed containing the power of sale clause that specifies the time, place and term of sale, the procedure has to be followed at the specified time and place. The notice of default will be filed and run 90 days before a Notice of Sale is filed. The NOD has to be recorded in the county the property is located 1) at least 14 days prior to the sale and, 2) has to be mailed by certified, with a return receipt requested post to the borrower at least 20 days before the sale. 3) It has also got to be posted on the property 20 days before the sale and in one public place in the county it is to be sold in. 4) This notice has to include the time, location and property of the foreclosure sale, the trustee's name, address, phone number and a statement that the property is being sold at an auction. The borrower then has 5 days before the foreclosure to cure the default and thus stop the process. The sale can be held on any business day between 9a.m. and 5p.m. at the location specified in the notice. Anyone can bid at the sale, but the trustee requires proof of the bidders' ability to pay their full bid amount. If necessary, the sale can be postponed by an announcement at the place and time of the original foreclosure.