Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ms.smiler

(551 posts)
96. dkf, you asked of Sabrina 1 “was your friend delinquent on her mortgage loan?”
Sun Jan 22, 2012, 03:36 PM
Jan 2012

That’s a very good question. It would require a thorough mortgage loan audit. First, the mortgage loan itself should be checked for fraud. Next, the audit should determine which Trust supposedly owned the mortgage loan. Was the loan properly and legally pledged to the Trust? As you may know, it most likely was not legally pledged to any Trust. Was the mortgage loan illegally pledged to multiple Trusts? This often happened with securitized mortgage loans as part of the securities fraud that took place on Wall Street.

During the time a Trust supposedly owned the loan, what payments were applied to the loan? How did Credit Enhancements and Credit Default Swaps impact the loan balance? How did the Pooling & Servicing Agreement govern the mortgage loan and payments? Was the mortgage servicer obligated to make payments on the loan?

Until a full and complete accounting is made of the mortgage loan and all payments, it is not possible to determine if the loan was in default or not. The accounting that is provided to homeowners on Main Street is only a partial accounting of the loan.

Next, I would want to know what happened to the Trust that supposedly owned the loan. Is it still in operation or did it fail? Was it part of failed MBS that was sold off to the U.S. government or the Federal Reserve?

Was the foreclosure action brought in the name of a party other than a Trust? If so, how did that party supposedly come to own the loan? Was there an Assignment of Mortgage from the loan originator to the foreclosing party? If so, it’s very easy to determine it was a wrongful foreclosure. There would be gaps in the chain of Title. Somewhere in the chain, there should have been a Trust that legally owned the loan.

Did a supposed MERS official sign the Assignment of Mortgage? If so, the document is invalid and fraudulent as MERS has never legally created any Vice Presidents or Assistant Secretaries in accordance with Delaware law where they are incorporated.

dkf, if you remain focused on the debt that was created and the debtor without also examining the mortgage contract and the creditor side of the transaction, you will never fully understand a securitized mortgage loan.

Personally, I’m not wondering if a friend of Sabrina1 was in default on their mortgage. I’m wondering how many times the banks already collected payment on the loan from Swaps, Uncles Ben or Sam, PMI insurance, etc.

are we surprised? hobbit709 Jan 2012 #1
I am not. SammyWinstonJack Jan 2012 #3
No, can't say that I am...but why is this type of information NorthCarolina Jan 2012 #5
It's not on cable news because it's false information. Lies, in other words. TheWraith Jan 2012 #20
The source is HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan as reported in the WSJ. See #26. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #59
Because it's nothing but rumors at this point. National Enquirer type stuff. n/t pnwmom Jan 2012 #74
That many will swallow this hook line and sinker whistler162 Jan 2012 #37
If the past is prologue sulphurdunn Jan 2012 #87
Doing the Bidding of the Banks fascisthunter Jan 2012 #2
Look! Over there! It's Ron Paul & Sarah Palin--KISSING!!!! Karmadillo Jan 2012 #4
Du rec. Nt xchrom Jan 2012 #6
not news, opinion spanone Jan 2012 #7
What? You mean "is drawing closer" and "is poised" is not definitive enough for ya? Number23 Jan 2012 #100
Do you have this from a credible source? n/t Ian David Jan 2012 #8
The source is HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan. His statements were reported in the WSJ. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #26
Donovan says they are reaching a settlement. Kind of a leap to claiming it will be a "pardon." n/t Ian David Jan 2012 #116
Only the President can issue a pardon. Did you just create a strawman? AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #120
No, the OP did. n/t Ian David Jan 2012 #125
The OP doesn't mention "pardon" at all. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #126
I tried to edit my post to say "immunity," but DU glitched and did a double-post. n/t Ian David Jan 2012 #129
Donovan says they are reaching a settlement. Kind of a leap to claiming it will be "immunity." n/t Ian David Jan 2012 #117
A "leap" to claim it will be immunity? Then don't call it immunity. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #121
I didn't. The OP did. n/t Ian David Jan 2012 #124
The OP called it "immunity" is because it is immunity. If you don't want to, don't do so. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #127
The editorial from a non-trusted source called it immunity. Ian David Jan 2012 #128
Yep, the editorial got it right. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #130
Maybe. n/t Ian David Jan 2012 #131
Your FUCKING Kidding me FreakinDJ Jan 2012 #9
What would the flip side be? Free houses for everyone? dkf Jan 2012 #10
This message was self-deleted by its author 2pooped2pop Jan 2012 #14
message self deleted because 2pooped2pop Jan 2012 #15
Banks have foreclosed upon some not in default. Flip side? Prosecute robosigner higher-ups. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #29
Lets say there are 100 of such cases nationwide. Full actual damages x2 should be paid. banned from Kos Jan 2012 #41
Misdemeanor prosecutions? = not enough. Mail fraud is a felony. Organized mail fraud = RICO. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #47
If the wrong property was seized then that looks like a nice $2,000,000+ lawsuit to me. dkf Jan 2012 #90
No lawsuit for a 82-year-old retiree would be a nice lawsuit. The bank will delay and wait him out. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #93
Um. Because so called "robo signing" is FORGERY. PassingFair Jan 2012 #44
Impersonating a notary is a misdemeanor - a small fine. It is NOT forgery. banned from Kos Jan 2012 #56
Do you have any authority for a belief that guilt for a lesser included crime excuses guilt for a AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #60
It's forgery. Impersonation meansrepresentingonesself as... elehhhhna Jan 2012 #103
PassingFair, you may have confused perjury with forgery, but this does involve forgery. ms.smiler Jan 2012 #63
Thank you! PassingFair Jan 2012 #66
Yes. As an example, a Nevada grand jury indicted two robosigners who admitted creating forgeries. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #68
You haven't been illegally foreclosed on obviously. sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #53
Was your friend delinquent on her mortgage loan? dkf Jan 2012 #91
What's the problem? In this country, our citizens are entitled to due process of law. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #94
dkf, you asked of Sabrina 1 “was your friend delinquent on her mortgage loan?” ms.smiler Jan 2012 #96
I'm sure Sabrina's friend knows if she was delinquent or not. dkf Jan 2012 #134
dkf, it simply isn't possible to declare a default based upon a partical accounting of a loan. ms.smiler Jan 2012 #136
First, she and her husband had paid their mortgage on time for ten years. sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #98
Obviously not. I for example don't own a house so I won't be getting one. TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #54
Mortage backed securities should be made illegal eridani Jan 2012 #86
I don't think there would be enough deposits to create the loans if mortgages weren't sold. dkf Jan 2012 #92
What do you mean by "people"? eridani Jan 2012 #104
Anyone with savings makes a decision on depositing it with a bank or dkf Jan 2012 #132
Wrong, the lower the income, the more people prioritize eridani Jan 2012 #133
If true this is good. Robosigning = small fine in each instance. banned from Kos Jan 2012 #11
'"deferred prosecution" that Obama has continued from the Bush era.' K&R (nt) T S Justly Jan 2012 #12
Op Ed Piece by random anonymous author. MineralMan Jan 2012 #13
See # 26. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #30
That does not answer my statement. MineralMan Jan 2012 #35
You either (1) indicated a desire for knowledge or (2) were merely criticizing the OP as being "an AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #38
Yes, I can use Google, and did. MineralMan Jan 2012 #45
Bad dodge, you guys don't even care to be honest any longer uponit7771 Jan 2012 #88
I looked on the White House web site to see if I could find any info on this Autumn Jan 2012 #16
I really can't be against anything that gives millions of home buyers major relief on their loans nanabugg Jan 2012 #18
I really am defiantly against any corporation who breaks the law not being Autumn Jan 2012 #22
Absolutely. I'm also for prosecuting every bank executive who was knowingly involved with this. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #33
So crime is okay long as they're nice to the hostages? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #27
Well, why not ask the people whose mortgage loans are involved? nanabugg Jan 2012 #36
Yes, why not take advantage of those already helpless? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #43
It's on the WSJ website. The source is the HUD Secretary. See # 26. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #31
Now it starts. 99Forever Jan 2012 #17
It's always mentioned that an industry "agrees to reforms" Nevernose Jan 2012 #19
Shocked, shocked I tell ya! TransitJohn Jan 2012 #21
$19 billion is peanuts, chicken-feed, nothing. bemildred Jan 2012 #23
Here we go again. There's a new one every day. woo me with science Jan 2012 #24
Agreed : Occupy FreakinDJ Jan 2012 #67
You have GOT to be fucking kidding me... nt Poll_Blind Jan 2012 #25
This is a chess move. Obama is 10 steps ahead. Cali_Democrat Jan 2012 #28
It would be easier if they would just give us a list as to what we are supposed to trust and believe AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #32
Whoop, There It Is... K & R !!! WillyT Jan 2012 #34
Obama caves. Water is wet. And, bears really do shit in the woods. Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2012 #39
that is true about bears SwampG8r Jan 2012 #79
this is why the Bain stuff can only hurt Rmoney absolutely, but not relatively MisterP Jan 2012 #40
The $19 billion in proposed principal reductions carry a hidden cost Neue Regel Jan 2012 #42
The stench of corruption is becoming overwhelming. Moondog Jan 2012 #46
Obama is so much like FDR I can't stand it! Edweird Jan 2012 #48
Can I borrow that? AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #49
Sure ;) Edweird Jan 2012 #51
Thank you, Kamala Harris, for opting out of this farce. n/t EFerrari Jan 2012 #50
+100000 woo me with science Jan 2012 #122
I've been told that rudycantfail Jan 2012 #52
+1 TransitJohn Jan 2012 #105
Breaking news: Newt Gingrich is getting married!! mfcorey1 Jan 2012 #55
Obama to announce gutting Social Security and Medicare in the 2011 SOTU address!! AtomicKitten Jan 2012 #57
Why would he do that in the SOTU address? Why wouldn't he wait until after the election? AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #95
Hopeychangealicious ...all the doodaaday long. L0oniX Jan 2012 #58
How soon will we be informed that this has been structured to allow the banks to claim tax losses? AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #61
Woohoo! progressoid Jan 2012 #62
Obama becomes complicit in the theft lovuian Jan 2012 #64
Shit Fuzz Jan 2012 #65
WHY?!?!?! He shows signs of greatness and doing something SOMETHING awesome instead he Justice wanted Jan 2012 #69
The surprise is... upi402 Jan 2012 #70
Disgusting. girl gone mad Jan 2012 #71
Torturers and war criminals are all free too just1voice Jan 2012 #72
What's wrong? did you NOT see him sing Al Green? Bonobo Jan 2012 #73
Why is he protecting the banks? Does anyone have a (comprehensive) reason? joshcryer Jan 2012 #75
Isn't it obvious that it could "sink the recovering economy"? Bonobo Jan 2012 #78
That's what Johnathan Alter thinks, but I don't see the connection to clear mortgage fraud... joshcryer Jan 2012 #80
I think the issue would be huge lawsuits resulting in damages... Bonobo Jan 2012 #81
Isn't it quite different to take on systemic illegalities? jsmirman Jan 2012 #82
Yeah, but how much harder is it to go from close to 1000 prosecutions... joshcryer Jan 2012 #83
My point is not to the difficulty of more prosecutions jsmirman Jan 2012 #85
I think you hit on an important point when you said... YvonneCa Jan 2012 #97
I completely agree with you and think you are right, peons shouldn't be crucified. joshcryer Jan 2012 #110
Agreed. Blanket immunity... YvonneCa Jan 2012 #113
I only know what I have read in various... YvonneCa Jan 2012 #99
Thanks for the comprehensive reply! joshcryer Jan 2012 #109
I agree completely. The entire systemic mess was created... YvonneCa Jan 2012 #112
Why it's being done? Because they have a lot of cash to donate. TransitJohn Jan 2012 #106
I might not mind so much, IF Remember Me Jan 2012 #76
before reading any of the replies SwampG8r Jan 2012 #77
Sold out again. pam4water Jan 2012 #84
****THERE'S NO PROOF OF THE OP EDS STATEMENTS ON WHITEHOUSE.GOV***** uponit7771 Jan 2012 #89
You really would expect proof there!? Bonobo Jan 2012 #101
Bank immunity has been going on for the past two years. The anouncement may come tomorrow. joshcryer Jan 2012 #107
Can you explain your position a little better? Bonobo Jan 2012 #108
I'm saying that Obama doing it is not new or controversial. joshcryer Jan 2012 #111
God Vanje Jan 2012 #102
This message was self-deleted by its author AtomicKitten Jan 2012 #114
Hey the banksters need the money Rex Jan 2012 #115
Will this settlement be unconstitutional though? JCMach1 Jan 2012 #118
Kick. nt woo me with science Jan 2012 #119
And over on the Chris Hedges' thread -- Hell Hath No Fury Jan 2012 #123
Where does it say the Attornies General are going to cave? lonestarnot Jan 2012 #135
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Obama to Grant Banks Robo...»Reply #96