Bank of America settles loan dispute with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac

Washington Post ^ | 1/3/11 | David S. Hilzenrath

[Kartographer]

MERS is a front, but you know that or you should.


On April 7, 2010, in the Superior Court of New Jersey, MERS Treasurer and Secretary William C. Hultman gave an oral sworn video/telephone deposition in the case of Bank Of New York v. Ukpe.:

Q Do the assistant secretaries — first off, are you a salaried employee of MERS?
A No.

Q Are you a salaried employee of MERS Corp, Inc.?
A Yes.

Q Are any of the employees of MERS, Inc. salaried employees?
A I don’t understand your question.

Q Does anyone get a paycheck, if they are an employee of MERS, Inc., do they get a paycheck from Mercer, Inc.?
A There is no MERS, Inc.

Q I thought, sir, there’s a company that was formed January 1, 1999, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. Does it have paid employees?
A No, it does not.

Q Does it have employees?
A No.

Q Does MERS have any employees?
A Did they ever have any? I couldn’t hear you.

Q Does MERS have any employees currently?
A No.

Q In the last five years has MERS had any employees?
A No.

SNIP

Q How many assistant secretaries have you appointed pursuant to the April 9, 1998 resolution; how many assistant secretaries of MERS have you appointed?
A I don’t know that number.

Q Approximately?
A I wouldn’t even begin to be able to tell you right now.

Q Is it in the thousands?
A Yes.

Q Have you been doing this all around the country in every state in the country?
A Yes.

Q And all these officers I understand are unpaid officers of MERS?
A Yes.

Q And there’s no live person who is an employee of MERS that they report to, is that correct, who is an employee?
A There are no employees of MERS. If so, how does anyone have any authority to sign security instruments encumbered by any loan documents, if these certifying officers are not paid employees and never attend corporate meetings in the capacity as Vice President, Assistant Secretary, etc. with Mortgage Electronic Registration System,

[DoughtyOne]

Cast it any way you like. I don’t see the ACLU, ACORN, Congress, or the courts being taken to task on any of this.

Until that happens, you can count me in as not being able to care less what the government has to tell me about bad players.

Our government mismanaged us into this predicament and you should damn well know it.

This has all the earmarks of our failing education system blaming everyone but administrators and teachers for failing our kids. We spend as much as $15k per student per year, and yet, it’s not the education system’s fault. And of course, every five years they implement a new plan to fix things again, with no outside help. And once again, they fail. And once again they come up with a new plan. Why it’s parents, communities, and society’s fault, not the education system itself.

Congress, the courts, the ACLU, ACORN, came up with the plan to create social justice in the real estate sector. How did that work out? And who will set the new rules? Why Congress of course. And of course this time around, it was the banks, the lending institutions, those evil Wall Street players (read that the Jooos)... fault.

Gag me...

[DoughtyOne]

If MERS is a front organization, why did you attempt to link it to banks and the lending industry? If you knew it was a fraud, then it was fraudulent of you to list it as evidence of bad banking and lending institution actions.

Is it owned by a bank? Is it administered by a bank?

Is it owned by a lending industry player? Is it administered by a lending industry player?

[Kartographer]

You may like to read the full deposition of William Hultman Secretary and Treasurer of MERS Corp if you plan to keep defending MERS. Mr. Hultman’s own testimony makes it clear just what a front company MERS is.

http://livinglies.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/36521121-full-deposition-of-william-hultman-secretary-and-treasurer-of-merscorp1.pdf

[DoughtyOne]

Once again, which bank or lending institution owns or operates MERS?

You tossed this out as evidence the banking and lending industry was committing crimes.

Thanks in advance...

[Kartographer]

It’s through MERS that the banks package and and repackage and sell the securitizations. It’s akin to a money laundry.

I am not saying Barney and crew don’t bear a lot of the burden the banks play fash and loose and the chickens are coming home to roost.

As I said its like thieves and fences, yes both commit different crimes yet in the end they are both criminals who need each other.

[DoughtyOne]

I’m not here to say that banks and lending institutions haven’t done some things wrong here. It would be wrong to make such a statement. On the other hand, I don’t like seeing the problems we face now laid at the feet of the ‘big money’ banks and lending institutions, as if evil players there were the total cause for this melt-down.

The idea that GREED played a part in this is just nonsense.

When I see a statement like “(the evil) banks and or lending institutions brought this mess upon us”, I bristle.

This is a bald faced class warfare statement. It feeds the continually suspicious (of big money players) mind, so that we (the little people) must hate the financial institutions as if “THEY” did this to us. No, they didn’t.

If banks would have held on to all their bad (loan) paper, would there have been a melt-down or not? Hell yes there would have been a melt-down. And in my opinion, it would have been concentrated in our bank, lending, and mortgage industries, and would have destroyed them.

It is highly debatable if we would have been better off under that scenario. I think it would have been much worse. Real estate wouldn’t have just had a down-turn, it would have collapsed altogether. Why do I say this? I say it, because if the banks and the home lending institutions went belly up, who would finance home loans? NOBODY! And that being the case, what would property values have done?

If you can’t get financing to buy a home, home values become zero, or as close to zero as cash purchases would prevent.

Then you have to ask yourself, why are Barney Frank and company so angry? Are they angry because banks operated in bad faith, or are they angry because banks found a way to spread the loss around enough to keep the industry from collapsing altogether? IMO, it’s the latter. If it isn’t, it’s due to Frank and company being as ignorant as they can be.

Was MERS the only route of diversification, or was it merely one of the routes of diversification?

[DoughtyOne]

I meant to and didn’t address the money-laundry comment.

Money laundering is utilized when funds are obtained through criminal enterprise. The parcels of loan paper that were sold to securities firms, was for good-faith loans. How can I call them that? I can because the force of the U. S. Government was brought to bear to force them into existence.

How can we call these parcels (for lack of a better more accurate term, perhaps you have it handy), cover for a criminal enterprise? What criminal enterprise would that be?

Do we have a Securities and Exchange Commission or not? Do we have bank inspectors or not? How did trillions in paper get spread around without the government having any clue that it was taking place?

Now all of a sudden, that spreading of paper around is (was) criminal in nature. Not until the proverbial stuff hit the fan was it a problem. Everyone was looking the other way, and happily I might add. You alluded to this loosely in your comments.

[Kartographer]

Well what would you call selling the loans and then taking the money to make the loans you sold?

[DoughtyOne]

I would call it improper. I’m not sure what the reasoning behind it was, or what the total explanation for this could be.

Look, I operate from the premise that our banking, lending, and securities agencies have government oversight. My wife was president of a small credit union. If you think she wasn’t audited by the government from time to time, you’re wrong.

How can these institutions implement a new form of bundled mortgages sold to other financial institutions without the government saying, “Wait just a darned minute here? You can’t do that!”

Why are you and I having to discuss this matter as much as seven years after the fact? The IRS had no questions? The SEC had no questions? The banking regulators had no questions?

Now all of it is found that evil players have been gaming everyone from you and I to the federal government? Sorry, not buying it. I doubt you really are either.

This stinks to high heavens.

[Kartographer]

Clearly you have a lot of research to do and a lot of transcripts to read.

On December 21 the The chief justice of New Jersey’s Supreme Court, Stuart Rabner, announced that the state’s courts would stop foreclosures by big banks if they cannot show they’re following state law when foreclosing. So why is something as simple as showing that you are following the states foreclosure laws be so hard?

I can see you have a lot of research to do and are clearly not aware of the ligation going on in multiple states over this issue. And I some think you realy don’t want to know.

As far as how did the fruad of Bernie Madoff and Eron go on so long and not get uncovered. If the economy hadn’t tank Bernie would most likely still be in business right now.

[Chunga85]

I’m not here to say that banks and lending institutions haven’t done some things wrong here. It would be wrong to make such a statement.

It would be very wrong to make such a statement but it doesn't seem to be stopping you from doing so.

Tell me, please, is Federal Circuit Court Judge Denny Chin another shill for the all-powerful ACLU/ACORN team?

A Lawsuit That Dirty Debt Collectors Should Be Worried About

$nip>

Federal Circuit Court Judge Denny Chin just issued an opinion in a consumer class action case that should send chills down the spines of debt collectors, perhaps including foreclosure-mill law firms and their process servers, nationwide.

Judge Chin decided that plaintiffs alleged enough information about the debt collectors in this case -- a law firm, a process-serving company and a debt-buying company -- to sue them for being a criminal enterprise under the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization (RICO) law. Judge Chin also allowed claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

$nip>

While the article describing the Judge's ruling does not specifically address MERS and it's role in debt collection it does touch on debt collection in general.

You're kidding yourself if you think the players hiding behind MERS are afraid of ACORN and the ACLU. They've already declared they aren't afraid of PIMCO.

From what I can tell MERS was the brainchild of Countrywide's Anthony Mozillo and the Fannie.

On May 23, 2006, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise issued a highly critical report on your MERS. Here are some less then flattering descriptions:

"....an arrogant and unethical corporate culture where Fannie Mae employees manipulated accounting and earnings to trigger bonuses for senior executives from 1998 to 2004".

“The image of Fannie Mae as one of the lowest-risk and ‘best in class’ institutions was a facade,”

“Senior management manipulated accounting; reaped maximum, undeserved bonuses; and prevented the rest of the world from knowing”

“Our examination found an environment where the ends justified the means”.

[DoughtyOne]

Clearly you have a lot of research to do and a lot of transcripts to read.

I asked you which banks or lending institutions owned and operated MERS.  Did you respond to that question?  No.  When you tried to trash banks and lending institutions you mentioned MERS.  So far you still have not revealed which bank or lending institution runs it.  And yet you have the temerity to say that you think some people don't really want to know the truth.  If you've got some truth to offer up, I sure would appreciate it if you would get to it.  Start with answering my question about MERS.

It would help your case when you're flapping your gums around here about evil banks and lending institutions, to explain what your single worse evidence to date concerning banking and lending irregularities was considering that entity isn't even run by banks or lending institutions.

On December 21 the The chief justice of New Jersey’s Supreme Court, Stuart Rabner, announced that the state’s courts would stop foreclosures by big banks if they cannot show they’re following state law when foreclosing. So why is something as simple as showing that you are following the states foreclosure laws be so hard?

Judges say a lot of things.  For instance, in California they say that citizens have no standing to object to illegal immigrants being gifted with their tax dollars.  In California judges say that the citizens of the state have no right to say they don't want homosexuals to be granted the same marriage rights as heterosexuals.  In California they say that a cross on a hill is not permissible, becaused it is government land.  Evidently you think New Jersey is a Conservative state.

I can see you have a lot of research to do and are clearly not aware of the ligation going on in multiple states over this issue. And I some think you realy don’t want to know.

Litigation goes on day in and day out on many different matters.  It still doesn't mean that every industry that has litigation ongoing, is an industry focused on fraudulent pactices.  And that's a fact that it seems some folks don't want to acknowledge either.

As far as how did the fruad of Bernie Madoff and Eron go on so long and not get uncovered. If the economy hadn’t tank Bernie would most likely still be in business right now.

Corporations are under fire constantly concerning what practices they are engaged in.  I still marvel at the idea that Bernie Madoff and Enron could slip under the radar, and do what they did for as long as they did without a regulator agency raising serious questions.

As you stated, as long as Bernie and Enron were making money for people, there wasn't any problem.  When people lost money, it was a big problem.

If what they were doing was wrong, it would have always been wrong.  And at least in the case of Bernie, I believe it was.  So what took so long?  If something is wrong, put an end to it, even when people are making money.

[Kartographer]

You can read all about it here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/19/business/19norris.html

“Nonetheless, some investors are growing worried. Bank stocks fell sharply last week, even while most shares were rising. JPMorgan Chase, which is a part owner of MERS, said it had not used the service since 2008. At least one title insurance company has gotten a bank to agree to indemnify it if the securitization process causes problems for titles. Without title insurance, the real estate market would grind to a halt.”

Schools out. You can now do you own research.

[Kartographer]

I hand you one more piece for you:

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2011/01/more-bank-of-america-putbacks-coming.html

“However, the payments announced Monday don’t eliminate future liability on loans with an unpaid principal balance of $394 billion that Bank of America entities sold to Fannie Mae, according to Chris Gamaitoni and other analysts at Compass Point Research & Trading LLC.

“I’m perplexed by the reaction,” Gamaitoni said in an interview.

Bank of America’s payment to Fannie Mae only resolved claims currently outstanding, he noted.

“To believe this is dealt with, you have to assume that Fannie will suffer no losses on its remaining exposure” to home loans with an unpaid principal balance of $394 billion, Gamaitoni added.”

[Chunga85]

See post 32.

Then a little primer report on Foreclosuregate by ACORN mouthpiece and former FL AG McCollum [R] including colorful and easy to understand graphics and charts.

UNFAIR, DECEPTIVE AND UNCONSCIONABLE ACTS IN FORECLOSURE CASES

[DoughtyOne]

I’m not here to say that banks and lending institutions haven’t done some things wrong here. It would be wrong to make such a statement.

It would be very wrong to make such a statement but it doesn't seem to be stopping you from doing so.

Please link me to where I said that banks and lending institutions had done nothing wrong.  Otherwise I expect you to admit that I never said that and apologize.

Tell me, please, is Federal Circuit Court Judge Denny Chin another shill for the all-powerful ACLU/ACORN team?  LOL

A Lawsuit That Dirty Debt Collectors Should Be Worried About (How does this tie into my stance that the banking and lending industry were not the sole causes of the financial crisis?)

$nip>

Federal Circuit Court Judge Denny Chin just issued an opinion in a consumer class action case that should send chills down the spines of debt collectors, perhaps including foreclosure-mill law firms and their process servers, nationwide.  Judge Chin decided that plaintiffs alleged enough information about the debt collectors in this case -- a law firm, a process-serving company and a debt-buying company -- to sue them for being a criminal enterprise under the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization (RICO) law. Judge Chin also allowed claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Judge Chin should allow such claims if there is cause to believe criminality took place.  However, this "law firm, process-serving company, and debt-buying company" does not an industry make.  I haven't said there are no bad players in debt collections companies.  I have said that the banking and lending industry as a whole was not the evil greedy players the government is trying to make them out to be.

There have always been bad players.  Why would I think there weren't any now?  And thus, why would I say that?  I didn't.

$nip>

While the article describing the Judge's ruling does not specifically address MERS and it's role in debt collection it does touch on debt collection in general. You're kidding yourself if you think the players hiding behind MERS are afraid of ACORN and the ACLU. They've already declared they aren't afraid of PIMCO. From what I can tell MERS was the brainchild of Countrywide's Anthony Mozillo and the Fannie. On May 23, 2006, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise issued a highly critical report on your MERS. Here are some less then flattering descriptions: "....an arrogant and unethical corporate culture where Fannie Mae employees manipulated accounting and earnings to trigger bonuses for senior executives from 1998 to 2004". “The image of Fannie Mae as one of the lowest-risk and ‘best in class’ institutions was a facade,” “Senior management manipulated accounting; reaped maximum, undeserved bonuses; and prevented the rest of the world from knowing” “Our examination found an environment where the ends justified the means”.

Your main flaw is the idea that it's my MERS.  I have not defended MERS.  If you can find a place where you think I did, link me to it.  I said that it was my take that MERS was not owned and operated by banks or lending institutions.  Since the original primise was that (greedy) banks and lending institutions were the cause for this melt-down, I objected.  When MERS was raised, I asked if MERS was owned or operated by any bank or lending institution.  So far I haven't been graced with a direct response.

If MERS was/is a bad player, why does it still exist?  Why does this have to waggle it's way through the courts for us to be rid of it?  Is there a Congressinal Banking Oversight committee?  Is there a banking regulatory agency?  Is there a Securities and Exchange Commission?  Why are these agencies and their players not doing their jobs?

BTW: It was my premise that the ACLU, ACORN, Congress and the courts had pretty much tag-teamed the banks and lending institutions to cause loans to people who had low income and poor credit ratings to get loans they shouldn't have gotten.  It wasn't my premise that MERS was afraid of any of them, or not afraid of any of them.

[Kartographer]

“When MERS was raised, I asked if MERS was owned or operated by any bank or lending institution. So far I haven’t been graced with a direct response.”

See post #34

[DoughtyOne]

LOL, look ace, you could have provided that early on. Instead I asked you four or five times to back up the mention of MERS in relation to bank or lending institution ownership or operation.

You even went so far as to provide testimony that MERS officials made, that said they had no employees at all.

Okay, then JPMorgan Chase is part owner. None the less, it hasn’t used the service in over two years, and it is still ambiguous if it was the managing owner.

Do you even know the answers to questions that are raised by what you don’t provide here.

Frankly, I’d suggest you keep school open long enough to get some facts yourself.

[DoughtyOne]

LOL, so BofA extended loans to people who couldn’t afford them rather than get a hefty fine by the federal government for not doing so. Then BofA passed those loans off to Fannie Mae as it does with a cross section of all it’s loans. Then Fannie Mae lost money on them and BofA is suddently the bad guy for initiating those loans in the first place. And then BofA is blamed for passing them off and has to make restitution.

This really sounds logical to you doesn’t it.