Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama Administration Pressuring NY AG To Accept Bank Settlement Instead Of Prosecuting

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Purveyor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 11:48 AM
Original message
Obama Administration Pressuring NY AG To Accept Bank Settlement Instead Of Prosecuting
This is really, really infuriating. Scheiderman is maybe the only person in America who's trying to hold banks accountable, and I knew it was just a matter of time before the administration started putting the screws to him for that very reason. I wonder if they're also bringing pressure to bear on the other state AGs who are resisting a broad settlement offering immunity to the banks (including Delaware AG Beau Biden, son of the VP):
Eric T. Schneiderman, the attorney general of New York, has come under increasing pressure from the Obama administration to drop his opposition to a wide-ranging state settlement with banks over dubious foreclosure practices, according to people briefed on discussions about the deal.

In recent weeks, Shaun Donovan, the secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and high-level Justice Department officials have been waging an intensifying campaign to try to persuade the attorney general to support the settlement, said the people briefed on the talks.

Mr. Schneiderman and top prosecutors in some other states have objected to the proposed settlement with major banks, saying it would restrict their ability to investigate and prosecute wrongdoing in a variety of areas, including the bundling of loans in mortgage securities.


MORE...

http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/nyt-obama-admini...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
1. And the BO corporate enablers never fail to come thru for their benefactors
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OHdem10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
2. The same reason they had to find some dirt to get rid of E.Sptizer.
Spitzer was going after Wall St. Wall St was showing
their anger with Spitzer for doing so.

Be assured that as long as Wall St and Business truly
run the country, those who have the courage to stand u<[br />to them(Wall St) will be stopped one way or the other.

It does not matter which administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
3. The Obama administration wants the mortgage debacle to be handle by the rich buying up the houses.
Prosecuting those responsible for this particular issue would get in the way of that agenda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Why not? Ebeneezer Scrooge was awesome towards the tenants of all the houses he owned!
Or not.

Every one of these motherfuckers in this Administration should be forced to read everything written by Dickens and then everything written by Steinbeck.

Rp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
4. That's yesterdays news -- like torture.
Can't look back, only looking forward, thank-you-very-much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-24-11 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #4
18. the Geneva Conventions and the state's prosecution of deceptive trade practices can be so quaint
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
5. From the NYT
article

<...>

In an interview on Friday, Mr. Donovan defended his discussions with the attorney general, saying they were motivated by a desire to speed up help for troubled homeowners. But he said he had not spoken to bank officials or their representatives about trying to persuade Mr. Schneiderman to get on board with the deal.

Eric and I agree on a tremendous amount here, Mr. Donovan said. The disagreement is around whether we should wait to settle and resolve the issues around the servicing practices for him and potentially other A.G.s and other federal agencies to complete investigations on the securitization side. He might argue that he has more leverage that way, but our view is we have the immediate opportunity to help a huge number of borrowers to stay in their homes, to help their neighborhoods and the housing market.

And Alisa Finelli, a spokeswoman for the Justice Department. said: The Justice Department, along with our federal agency partners and state attorneys general, are committed to achieving a resolution that will hold servicers accountable for the harm they have done consumers and bring billions of dollars of relief to struggling homeowners and bring relief swiftly because homeowners continue to suffer more each day that these issues are not resolved.

<...>

Still, it's clear that if the AGs don't agree, there will be no deal.

Foreclosure Talks Snag on Bank Liability

<...>

U.S. and state officials dismissed the push for broad immunity as a "nonstarter," according to a federal official involved in the talks, but they have countered with a narrower offer. It would cover robo-signing and other servicer-related conduct but leave banks open to potential legal action for wrongdoing in fair lending and securitization, according to people familiar with the situation. Attorneys general in California, Delaware, Massachusetts and New York have said they are investigating mortgage-securitization practices.

<...>

Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto said she is "going to be very cautious" about any release that could affect investigations or litigation. Ms. Masto has alleged that Bank of America violated the law in its handling of troubled loans. "A broad release isn't going to do any good (for me) or the people of my state."

Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley recently said she won't let banks escape potential legal liability for claims related to securitization and use of the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems "until we know all the facts and all of the damage." Doing otherwise "is like buying a used car without looking under the hood. There's a good chance you will get a lemon."

<...>

Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden has also begun investigating securitization and other mortgage-industry practices. "We would oppose any settlement that would release claims broader than servicing conduct," says Delaware Deputy Attorney General Ian McConnel."That would include origination, securitization and (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems) claims."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
6. I hate this. Do you suppose it's because he's got some "connected"
people in his administration (like Geithner)? It is just WRONG!

I would really like to hear an explanation as to WHY they are doing this. I can think of no reason other than playing the game.

:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-24-11 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #6
19. They are doing it to gain a $20 billion settlement agreement, to benefit homeowners
...to use the $20 billion toward renegotiating or refinancing home loans.

So far, Schneiderman's end of it (as far as what he has done so far) has been investigating the banks on behalf of large investment funds, who would like to recoup losses from the subprime fiasco.

One doesn't block the other; the administration deal would settle the robo-signing malfeasance and help people right away, while every other thing related to the meltdown would still be open to prosecution by any AG.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-25-11 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. I still think the American public deserves a Mortgage Payment Holiday
A Six to Nine month window in which all residential mortgage loans are either written off or payments are postponed with no interest.

How many months did the Banks get a reprieve from the American taxpayer?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
banned from Kos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
7. Bank lawyers will contest every single one of the robo-foreclosures in 50 different states
it will take 2-4 years. They will say that the foreclosure was justified but the system was at fault. If you were losing your house anyway what are the actual damages of a robo-signature? Punitive damages at the state level will be paltry.



Obama is rigth - take the $20 billion settlement and repay the worst cases and save some teachers jobs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. What a pile of bullshit.
Go Schneiderman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
banned from Kos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. comeon, hotshot. What are the actual damages on a foreclosed home where
the occupant was nine months in arrears but the papers were robo-signed by a contractor (LPS)?

X 50 states x 5000 per state / 20 different banks?

Attorneys will stuff this into state courts for many years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
9. Why the bank-settlement talks are likely to drag on indefinitely
Why the bank-settlement talks are likely to drag on indefinitely

Today brings dueling stories in the NYT and the WSJ on the status of the bank foreclosure-settlement talks. At issue is the question of whether the banks should be given immunity with respect to lawsuits surrounding their securitization shenanigans. Heres the WSJ, saying quite clearly that they wont:

U.S. and state officials dismissed the push for broad immunity as a nonstarter, according to a federal official involved in the talks, but they have countered with a narrower offer. It would cover robo-signing and other servicer-related conduct but leave banks open to potential legal action for wrongdoing in fair lending and securitization, according to people familiar with the situation. Attorneys general in California, Delaware, Massachusetts and New York have said they are investigating mortgage-securitization practices.

In the NYT, by contrast, Gretchen Morgenson says that New Yorks Eric Schneiderman is pushing back against a federal attempt to give banks immunity on such matters:

Mr. Schneiderman and top prosecutors in some other states have objected to the proposed settlement with major banks, saying it would restrict their ability to investigate and prosecute wrongdoing in a variety of areas, including the bundling of loans in mortgage securities.

So, is immunity with respect to mortgage securitization a nonstarter, or is it the whole reason why banks would dream of signing the settlement in the first place? I suspect it might be both. If I was a bank, I wouldnt dream of paying billions of dollars in return for a narrow settlement precluding further prosecution about robo-signing and the like: it just wouldnt make economic sense to do so. At the same time, if I were Schneiderman, in the middle of a detailed investigation into what banks mortgage departments got up to in the run-up to the crisis, I certainly wouldnt want that investigation rendered moot and toothless before it had even been concluded.

more


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
banned from Kos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Interesting - - there are two areas of dispute
1- Robo-foreclosures, which the banks seem to feel they are on safer ground.

2- Securitization, where the wronged party is another bank, pension fund, etc. That is where they feel vulnerable. In an area where consumers would not benefit.

Thus, the Obama Admin is not neglecting the consumer - they are trying to get past the securitization hang-up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xiamiam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. spin...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
banned from Kos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. not spin - it clearly says Shneidermann is holding out due to securitization
it makes sense. New York is a state loaded with other bank, insurance and other funds.

He is not looking out for the "little guy" at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
12. let's hope this guy doesn't have dirt like Spitzer did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
13. Settling legal cases is usually desirable
Why are you infuriated? I doubt you even understand what is going on. I am not going to pass judgment on things like this without taking the time to fully understand them. Where I don't have the time, I trust the Administration will do the most efficient thing for the people.

If some court or jury made a decision you didn't like, then you'd blame the lawyers and the administration anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
16. here's a totally unrelated story
don't anyone dare that this story is in any way related to this other one, because it's totally not:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-24-11 11:53 PM
Response to Original message
20. Unconscionable corruption.
Both parties are working for these thieves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Sep 19th 2014, 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC