Image via WikipediaInternal Doc Reveals GMAC Filed False Document in Bid to Foreclose
by Paul Kiel
ProPublica
And so GMAC, which was bailed out by taxpayers in 2008, began looking for a way to craft a document that would pass legal muster, internal records obtained by ProPublica show.GMAC, one of the nation's largest mortgage servicers, faced a quandary last summer. It wanted to foreclose on a New York City homeowner but lacked the crucial paperwork needed to seize the property.
GMAC has a standard solution to such problems, which arise frequently in the post-bubble economy. Its employees secure permission to create and sign documents in the name of companies that made the original loans. But this case was trickier because the lender, a notorious subprime company named Ameriquest, had gone out of business in 2007.
"The problem is we do not have signing authority—are there any other options?" Jeffrey Stephan, the head of GMAC's "Document Execution" team, wrote to another employee and the law firm pursuing the foreclosure action. No solutions were offered.
Three months later, GMAC had an answer. Itfiled a document with New York City authorities that said the delinquent Ameriquest loan had been assigned to it "effective of" August 2005. The documentwas dated July 7, 2010, three years after Ameriquest had ceased to exist and was signed by Stephan, who was identified as a "Limited Signing Officer" for Ameriquest Mortgage Company. Soon after, GMAC filed for foreclosure.
An examination by ProPublica suggests this transaction was not unique. A review of court records in New York identified hundreds of similar assignment documents filed in the name of Ameriquest after 2008 by GMAC and other mortgage servicers.
Get ProPublica's stories delivered to your inbox
Get ProPublica's stories delivered to your inbox
The issue has attracted growing scrutiny in recent months as bloggers, consumer attorneys and media outlets have identified what appears to be part of a pattern of questionable assignments filed across the country.
GMAC, whose parent company renamed itself last year as Ally Financial, was at the center of what became known as the robo-signing scandal. The uproar began last fall after revelations that mortgage servicing employees had produced flawed documents to speed foreclosures. GMAC and other banks have acknowledged filing false affidavits in which bank officials claimed "personal knowledge" of the facts underlying thousands of mortgages. But GMAC and other servicers say they've since tightened their procedures. They insist that their records were largely accurate and the affidavits amounted to errors of form, not substance.
The issues surrounding the Ameriquest loan and others like it appear to be more serious.
"This assignment of mortgage has all of the markings of GMAC finding that it lacked a needed mortgage assignment in order to foreclose and just making it up," said Thomas Cox, a Maine foreclosure defense attorney.
In New York, it's a felony to file a public record with "intent to deceive."
"It's fraud," said Linda Tirelli, a consumer bankruptcy attorney. "I want to know who's going to do a perp walk for recording this."
No criminal charges have been filed in the robo-signing cases.
Asked by ProPublica about the document, GMAC acknowledged Stephan did not have authority to sign on behalf of Ameriquest. The bank said it is still planning to push ahead with foreclosure on the homeowner, who remains in the property.
Company spokeswoman Gina Proia said an internal review last fall into "suspected documentation execution issues" had flagged the loan as problematic and that GMAC is "determining what needs to be done in order to receive the necessary authorization."
"We will determine and complete the necessary steps to remediate and proceed with foreclosure," Proia said.
GMAC also declined a request from ProPublica to interview Stephan.
Another GMAC document obtained by ProPublica shows that in at least one recent incident, GMAC employees were still discussing the possibility of fabricating evidence needed to facilitate a foreclosure.
The company once again lacked a document that would show it had been assigned the mortgage. Since the lender was defunct and no assignment had ever been made, GMAC again seemed to be stuck. But the employee proposed in June of this year that GMAC file a sworn statement that the assignment had once existed but had been lost. It's unclear if such an affidavit was ultimately provided to a court.
Records also show that GMAC has continued to rely on documents signed by the very employee at the center of the robo-signing scandal—Jeffrey Stephan, the same employee who also signed the Ameriquest document in 2010. Stephan acknowledged in sworn testimony last year that he had been signing 400 documents each day, a revelation that helped kick off the scandal. According to a former employee and a consumer attorney, Stephan still works at GMAC, though he has been transferred to a different unit.
GMAC, which is still majority owned by the government, said it is still pursuing foreclosures based on assignments signed by Stephan.
"There is no reason or requirement to 'withdraw' valid assignments of mortgage that happened to have been signed by Mr. Stephan," said GMAC spokeswoman Proia, because there's "no requirement that [the assignment] be signed by a person with knowledge of any particular facts." All that mattered, she said, was that the signer had received the proper authority.
Banks have little reason to worry about their documents being challenged, since homeowners rarely contest foreclosure actions. In a filing with the New Jersey Supreme Court, GMAC said that of the more than 4,000 foreclosures it has handled in the state only about 4 percent of homeowners had contested the action.
When homeowners do challenge banks' documentation for foreclosures, they can have success. Late last week, the Vermont Supreme Court threw out a foreclosure case handled by GMAC due, in part, to a flawed assignment document signed by Stephan.
"It is neither irrational nor wasteful to expect the foreclosing party be actually in possession of its claimed interest," the court said, "and have the proper supporting documentation in hand when filing suit."
Since last fall, GMAC has added staff, increased training and added new procedures, said Proia. But some of those new hires have come from firms themselves accused of filing false foreclosure documents.
One manager at GMAC, Kevin Crecco, moved there from a position at the Law Offices of David Stern in Florida after the firm drew scrutiny from the state's attorney general for allegedly filing forged documents. Stern's office, once among Florida's biggest foreclosure law firms and labeled a "foreclosure mill" by critics, ceased operations earlier this year.
An internal organization chart from this spring for GMAC's foreclosure department lists Crecco as a manager overseeing roughly two dozen employees. GMAC declined to make Crecco available for an interview. He hasn't been accused of any wrongdoing.
Mortgage servicers like GMAC continue to be set up like assembly lines, with members of its "Document Execution" team responsible for signing documents. The organizational chart shows two "Document Execution" teams of 13 employees each.
The employees are tasked with, among other things, signing affidavits attesting to the accuracy of the basic facts of the loan, such as the mortgage amount, outstanding fees, etc. Affidavits are a necessary step to foreclosure in many states where banks have to go to court to seize a home.
During the robo-signing scandal, GMAC admitted that employees signing affidavits didn't verify the underlying facts. The bank says it has fixed the problems.
But consumer attorneys said that while GMAC's processes have improved, they haven't corrected basic flaws with their process.
Cox, the attorney who questioned Stephan last year as part of a foreclosure case, said employees on the "Document Execution" team still aren't truly checking the accuracy of the underlying information. Rather than digging for the original documents, employees on the team look at the numbers given by a GMAC database and double-check the math.
If the employee "just looks at a computer screen, that's not sufficient in my view," said Cox. He said he would soon be challenging affidavits GMAC recently filed in court.
Consumer attorneys also said the systems that servicers rely on are consistently plagued with inaccuracies, making a more thorough verification of the information necessary. "These days, homeowners are being forced to save every receipt, every letter, every statement, so that one day they can prove that their payment history is accurate and the bank is wrong," said Jim Kowalski, a consumer attorney in Florida.
GMAC's Proia said the company's procedures—which amount to a review of information in the company's computerized databases—were sufficient to file affidavits.
Internal Doc Reveals GMAC Filed False Document in Bid to Foreclose
An internal document obtained by ProPublica shows that when one of the nation’s largest mortgage servicers sought to foreclose on a homeowner last year and lacked a crucial document, they just made one up. The case appears to be part of a larger pattern of deceptive filings to foreclose on homeowners.
116 comments
carie
July 29, 11:51 p.m.
Dale—-your “opinion” is not based on knowledge of the massive fraud that America has been subjected to…WAKE UP PEOPLE…
comment from livinglies.wordpress.com:
ANONYMOUS, on July 21, 2011 at 5:18 am said:
“tony,
The transfer of the “asset” — servicing as it is called — is transfer of collection rights — note/loans charged-off by manufactured default — even though there was no borrower default (many ways this was done including – as discussed here “incorrect accounting” — and false EPDs (early payment default), forced placed insurance (falsely) and on and on. . This is how subprime came to be on GSE rejects/non-compliant loans. The “servicing” is collection rights.
But, okay. Putting that aside. According to law, there can be default on collection rights. However, those collection rights are not to any secured mortgage/note and Marie and Marilyn are correct — not in default if you do not know the entity who claims you owe them — and any corporation, entity, and bank that acts beyond the scope of its power has no right to collection — on anything. If they persist, bring them to BK — force the identity of perpetrator and make them prove they have right to collection rights (will be difficult if not impossible to prove especially since courts/Fed Res have stated servicers are not creditor) — but, if they can somehow prove — then since collection rights are unsecured — get it discharged.
Absolutely agree with your statement — “they should not say they are in default but they stopped making payments because they don’t know who this company is.” No one can be default if they do not know who it is that claims you owe the money.
And, the securitization — pass-through of cash flows — trust/trustee as creditor has worn it’s course — we know security investors are not the creditor. This foreclosure approach will soon die completely.
As to modification — there is none if you do not have all information about the false loan they claim they will “consider” for modification.”
But, okay. Putting that aside. According to law, there can be default on collection rights. However, those collection rights are not to any secured mortgage/note and Marie and Marilyn are correct — not in default if you do not know the entity who claims you owe them — and any corporation, entity, and bank that acts beyond the scope of its power has no right to collection — on anything. If they persist, bring them to BK — force the identity of perpetrator and make them prove they have right to collection rights (will be difficult if not impossible to prove especially since courts/Fed Res have stated servicers are not creditor) — but, if they can somehow prove — then since collection rights are unsecured — get it discharged.
Absolutely agree with your statement — “they should not say they are in default but they stopped making payments because they don’t know who this company is.” No one can be default if they do not know who it is that claims you owe the money.
And, the securitization — pass-through of cash flows — trust/trustee as creditor has worn it’s course — we know security investors are not the creditor. This foreclosure approach will soon die completely.
As to modification — there is none if you do not have all information about the false loan they claim they will “consider” for modification.”
Also google the latest Brian Davies Scribd Docs and EDUCATE YOURSELVES as to the MASSIVE FRAUD that has been COVERED UP, but is slowly coming to light…:
Trubee
July 30, 9 a.m.
Love the Dale Willard comment-What planet is Dale and/or Willard from?
Hey Dale and/or Willard, wake up this is not 1955 anymore-where have you been?
Obviously Dale and Willard are prime examples of people led around by the nose and they are still paying the bank for their fraudulent mortgage. The probably voted for the Tea Party candidate in their neighborhood, whereever that is on Mars.
Dale and/or Willard, you can only cash a check once, even if your a bank. You bank already got paid for you mistake, anything else they get from you until you wake up is the “vig”
Hey Dale and/or Willard take note, Tony Soprano wants you to repay the loan you took from his friend about 5 years ago. He says his buddy loaned you some cash to cover your mortgage payment and he wants it back now.
He said that he’s not going to bring you before his friends to judge you delinqency, he’s just going to send Paulie over to break your leg.
Keep on paying your debt to the bank but save some cash for Paulie, he’s say you owe money. He says you signed a paper but he can’t find it now but that paper isn’t important anyway, your leg is what’s important. Paulie says you gotta pay what yah owe or check into a hospital!
Better be ready.
Maybe you can get Chris Christy the NJ Gov. to help you out. He’s bigger than Paulie, he’s a bully and a mobster, maybe you can get him to speak with Paulie when he shows up at your door. Christy’s a Tea Party dude, call your local Tea Party rep on Mars, he’ll write a letter
to Tony for you.
Dale Willard
July 30, 2:19 p.m.
Trubee, I guess we are talking about two different things. Im talking about mortgages and payments. Your are into some fantasy about TV mobsters coming after people. Get off the couch and stop whining about getting what you bargained for. Don’t know much about the Tea party myself, but you seem pretty obsessed with it - I guess the networks focus on it to get people to pay for the commercials. I think you should stop watching so much television and start becoming acquainted with the real world; making some money and being responsible.
shahislam
July 30, 5:13 p.m.
It now takes hours for me to continue to write on my old PC my experience, opinion and findings in details.
In Canada we have same fraudulent banking, mortgage, insurance practices within the knowledge of our praiseworthy excellently manageable judicial system.
The private US and UK rich individuals as heads of financial institutions here such as Royal Bank of Canada (As per once the News Medias published couple of years ago, it basically had not been paying any tax on it’s massive profits), TD etc. encourage both their brokers and consumers to get involved into doing (at least, in executing ‘No harm fraudulent documentations’ for creating personally profitable economic bubbles that sometimes may eventually become a national trouble for the Public) whimsical humanly things and can get away after doing whatever they wish.
For examples:
# 1. TD bank at the End of 20th Century stole C$ 800.00 from my deposit and when I challenged it’s authority heads it recognized the fact that an immoral and intentional wrongdoing took place and returned the stolen fund. The Royal RBC group did similar things too (including funnily whimsical one regarding Visa/other credit accounts). to it’s Loyal customers for long times.
# 2. In 2005, TD Bank in collaboration with another Bank, Insurance and Mortgage companies named respectively PC, Liberty Mutual Group and Home Trust Company once in a opportunist dishonest manner tried to deceive me of a sum of over $ 1000.00 and when I challenged their unscrupulous plot TD Bank offered me a settlement for only C$ 775.00 which I had no choice but to accept without any condition. I have preserved most of the documents as evidence of wrong doing. US economy inevitably is heading toward a unprecedented decade-long depression (not only a recession) and Canada is the next unless a few wise human heads absolutely honest and without human monetary greed and therefore bloodshed or cruelty, this time take the lead of a united great North-American power by just showing the global Public in a never seen before “NO SECRET INTERNATIONAL OR GLOBAL POLICY” how a group, {of shorter (e.g. Orientals) or taller (e.g. Occidentals) than average or balanced size human individuals in the name of taking care of the Public of a piece of land}, can have imbalanced negative impacts on the future on the global affairs or the world economy. A set of a new global and strict simple financial principles (Not changeable like city by laws at any time) and rules which are now possible and will soon be available upon agreement of acceptance by the global public through cell phones of individual e-mail account holders with good records and not by the out of date or proved as failed “traditional old think tanks of international communities”.
In Canada we have same fraudulent banking, mortgage, insurance practices within the knowledge of our praiseworthy excellently manageable judicial system.
The private US and UK rich individuals as heads of financial institutions here such as Royal Bank of Canada (As per once the News Medias published couple of years ago, it basically had not been paying any tax on it’s massive profits), TD etc. encourage both their brokers and consumers to get involved into doing (at least, in executing ‘No harm fraudulent documentations’ for creating personally profitable economic bubbles that sometimes may eventually become a national trouble for the Public) whimsical humanly things and can get away after doing whatever they wish.
For examples:
# 1. TD bank at the End of 20th Century stole C$ 800.00 from my deposit and when I challenged it’s authority heads it recognized the fact that an immoral and intentional wrongdoing took place and returned the stolen fund. The Royal RBC group did similar things too (including funnily whimsical one regarding Visa/other credit accounts). to it’s Loyal customers for long times.
# 2. In 2005, TD Bank in collaboration with another Bank, Insurance and Mortgage companies named respectively PC, Liberty Mutual Group and Home Trust Company once in a opportunist dishonest manner tried to deceive me of a sum of over $ 1000.00 and when I challenged their unscrupulous plot TD Bank offered me a settlement for only C$ 775.00 which I had no choice but to accept without any condition. I have preserved most of the documents as evidence of wrong doing. US economy inevitably is heading toward a unprecedented decade-long depression (not only a recession) and Canada is the next unless a few wise human heads absolutely honest and without human monetary greed and therefore bloodshed or cruelty, this time take the lead of a united great North-American power by just showing the global Public in a never seen before “NO SECRET INTERNATIONAL OR GLOBAL POLICY” how a group, {of shorter (e.g. Orientals) or taller (e.g. Occidentals) than average or balanced size human individuals in the name of taking care of the Public of a piece of land}, can have imbalanced negative impacts on the future on the global affairs or the world economy. A set of a new global and strict simple financial principles (Not changeable like city by laws at any time) and rules which are now possible and will soon be available upon agreement of acceptance by the global public through cell phones of individual e-mail account holders with good records and not by the out of date or proved as failed “traditional old think tanks of international communities”.
carie
July 30, 7:29 p.m.
DALE—-
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF MANUFACTURED DEFAULT???
When you do, you won’t be talkin’ like you are talkin’...so you just keep on paying that debt collector every month on the unsecured “fake mortgage” debt until you wake up and smell the systemic fraud…
Trubee
July 31, 10:41 a.m.
Dale and Willard:
Stop trying to influence people with your right wing comments.
If you guys were to quit your job at the bank and look around, you’d find that you are paying directly in federal taxes for all of the defaulted mortgages.
What you don’t want to understand is that the Banksters (your bosses)have already collected for those defaulted mortgages from the taxpayers (that would be you guys) and they want to collect again from the people they defrauded a few years back.
The problem is that Wall Street Banksters (your bosses) made the system (UCC) their checkbook when you weren’t paying attention (but neither was Congress and now the courts- for whatever reasons).
Unfortuately, you guys were not in on the big money con jobs that went on where common everyday people working on Wall Street were clearing $300,000 per day bundling already failed loans. Unlike you guys, when the curtain came down, they had already shipped their stolen money the the Caymans and now they are living the good life in Central America, learning to speak Spanish, and paying armed guards to protect their lives and traveling the world on your tax dollars.
If you had read this 5 or 6 years ago, you too could have been in the Caymans or Hondoras or Costa Rica instead of signing forged documents for the Bankster for $12.00 and hour.Whjat a shame!
Pay attention to what’s going on around you and you guys can get in on the next big scam your bosses will be pulling.
shahislam
July 31, 6:52 p.m.
Microsoft Corporation or some faceless party is not allowing me join in ProPublica to post my takes in the form of positive feedback on finding feasible solutions.
shahislam
July 31, 7:01 p.m.
It now takes hours for me to continue to write on my old PC my experience, opinion and findings in details.
In Canada we have same fraudulent banking, mortgage, insurance practices within the knowledge of our praiseworthy excellently manageable judicial system.
The private US and UK rich individuals as heads of financial institutions here such as Royal Bank of Canada (As per once the News Medias published couple of years ago, it basically had not been paying any tax on it’s massive profits), TD etc. encourage both their brokers and consumers to get involved into doing (at least, in executing ‘No harm fraudulent documentations’ for creating personally profitable economic bubbles that sometimes may eventually become a national trouble for the Public) whimsical humanly things and can get away after doing whatever they wish.
For examples:
# 1. TD bank at the End of 20th Century stole C$ 800.00 from my deposit and when I challenged it’s authority heads it recognized the fact that an immoral and intentional wrongdoing took place and returned the stolen fund. The Royal RBC group did similar things too (including funnily whimsical one regarding Visa/other credit accounts). to it’s Loyal customers for long times.
In Canada we have same fraudulent banking, mortgage, insurance practices within the knowledge of our praiseworthy excellently manageable judicial system.
The private US and UK rich individuals as heads of financial institutions here such as Royal Bank of Canada (As per once the News Medias published couple of years ago, it basically had not been paying any tax on it’s massive profits), TD etc. encourage both their brokers and consumers to get involved into doing (at least, in executing ‘No harm fraudulent documentations’ for creating personally profitable economic bubbles that sometimes may eventually become a national trouble for the Public) whimsical humanly things and can get away after doing whatever they wish.
For examples:
# 1. TD bank at the End of 20th Century stole C$ 800.00 from my deposit and when I challenged it’s authority heads it recognized the fact that an immoral and intentional wrongdoing took place and returned the stolen fund. The Royal RBC group did similar things too (including funnily whimsical one regarding Visa/other credit accounts). to it’s Loyal customers for long times.
Dale Willard
Aug. 1, 2:01 p.m.
Trubee, I like your comment - “The problem is that Wall Street Banksters (your bosses) made the system (UCC) their checkbook when you weren’t paying attention (but neither was Congress and now the courts- for whatever reasons).” Maybe the reason is that the congress and courts weren’t and aren’t paying attention is….they didn’t do anything wrong!!! Hello!! Seems that the reality is - the ones that stopped paying their mortgages, as they agreed to do, are the ones that did wrong; and, as the documents provide, there is a price for doing so. Case closed.
Roy
Aug. 1, 9:24 p.m.
@Dale-It is evident that you are very comfortable in your perfect little world where nothing goes awry. You have most likely not been through anything resembling what most people in this thread have been through, i.e. job loss, divorce or debilitating disease or surgery. Pray that you don’t have to choose between putting food on the table and clothes on the backs of your children over a roof over their heads. I suggest you go quietly back to your cubicle at the bank and pay more attention to your job…as karma has some very wicked twists and turns.
Debra
Aug. 1, 9:25 p.m.
After reading all 47 of the posts just since July 27th, we know this is a deeply compelling topic. If each of you could change one or two things about mortgage lendering/servicing default/collection/foreclosure, what would it be?
tutt
Aug. 2, 4:30 a.m.
@Karen: I totally agree - & that is exactly why the investors are suing the banks because the “mortgage-backed securities” - oops didn’t included the mortgage-backed part. And what should be prima facie for a homeowner contesting foreclosure is muddled by the courts as they mainly refuse to look past the shadow of deliquency. An attorney posted on “Mandalman Matters” that foreclosure attorneys are asking the wrong questions in court - in his opinion the homeowner should file breach of contract actions against servicers/banks because of the way the deed is transferred/not transferred in the Pooling & Servicing Agreement. If the argument is narrowed strictly to contract language it changes the standard of review in a court case because the language of the agreement is examined & not whether the bank has ownership of the note/standing to foreclosure = renders those pesky forgeries irrelevant..
John R.
Aug. 2, 9:13 a.m.
If there was one thing I could change?
It would be the Courts… here, where I live, they aren’t upholding the Law. A Pro Se litigant has lost before they start. So what I would change is the Courts. They should be constructed around the fact that the average person 1.can’t afford legal representation and oftentimes the “free” representation is nothing more than a cruel joke and 2. a Pro Se litigant should be allowed a substantial amount of leeway in their pleadings and interpretations of the rules of the Courts. and 3.Upon reviewing a case, should the judge find or know of other torts or criminal actions or fines and penalties that a pro se litigant has missed in their pleadings… then they should be required to bring that item missed to the pro se litigants attention and in some cases include it sua sponte.
The Courts have forgotten that they are there to protect the Citizenry… instead they are protecting the business entities… after all, they’re the one’s contributing the big bucks to the election campaignes and they’re also the ones paying to file all these foreclosure cases… those filing fee’s are part of what pays those judges.
And we need software that will track judicial decisions with probability. For instance, and hypothetically, out of 200 contested foreclosures, how come one judge has not one homeowner winning when the national statistical average (again, hypothetically) is 30%?
This same software could be used across the board to reign in those judges who represent a left hand turn from their sworn duty on the Bench and at the same time add a layer of justice that is sorely missing.
So I’d change the Courts!
Trubee
Aug. 2, 9:29 a.m.
John R.
That’s a very good observation.
The courts that are suppose to be judicial have now been purchased by big business and are advocates for big business or their political
fahter’s that hjave dictated to them exactly what their jobs are.
fahter’s that hjave dictated to them exactly what their jobs are.
The US Supreme is a the perfect example of this situaion. Bush’s appointees (roberts and Alieto) were hand picked by big busines and the political far right.
Each and every deciision by this court since their appointments has been business oriented and against the citizenry of theis country.
The worst was “Citizen’s United” this garbage allowed any monied interest to take over this country’s elective process. Within a few decades, we will have a Chinese President.
michael
Aug. 2, 4:02 p.m.
debra, the one thing that i would change re; modifications is the elimination of the three-month-trial-plan. the documentation required for a modification is greater than the documentation required to originate a mortgage loan. therefore if there is a legitimate reason for a trial period , why is it not required for an origination? i believe that the trial payment plan is nothing more than a deceptive ploy in order to collect partially on a debt. propublica has stopped publishing the results of modifications. if you could get the current figures ( propublica’s latest info goes back to january of 2011) you would find that the banks are making billions of $$ for DENYING modifications ( once the get approved for a trial and then denied a permanent modification ) yet no one seems to question this. I wonder why?
acmodspecialists
Aug. 2, 4:26 p.m.
To all of those that blame the homeowners; If you liked what theBanksters did to the value of your real estate and American jobs, you are going to love what they did to your pension.
And, it’s gone.
Vanished into banksta bonuses just like the credit default swaps (CDS) that paid them a hundred times the value of a defaulted mortgage.
The mortgage bonds are completely worthless and have no value at all. But, when it comes to pension funds, most of those losses have not been accounted for. Extend and pretend.
We know that the mortgage pools themselves were stuffed full of guaranteed to fail loans that were based on vastly inflated values, and loans that did not even exist or were pledged to other pools as well. Because this hasn’t fully imploded yet, the revaluation of the bonds has yet to occur.
The sworn depositions of MERS CEO R. K. Arnold and Bank of America V.P. Linda DeMartini prove that. The former swears they never intended to do the assignments, and the latter swears that the notes and deeds were never sent to the Custodian.
One of MERS correspondence with its members specifically says that MERS and MERS alone will determine the beneficiary after the Trustees sale.
That means that with absolute certainty, the party bringing the foreclosure is not the beneficiary because that is determined after the trustee’s sale. The beneficiary is not the party bringing the foreclosure because MERS has no idea who the Beneficiary is. No assignments, remember? The properties apparently are just distributed to members based on some sort of equity arrangement. This one goes to Chase; this one goes to Wells Fargo, and this one to B of A.
The only purpose for which robo-signed documents are created is to commit fraud upon the court. Ninety-six percent of all fraudclosures go uncontested. Nobody cared about the mortgages and the notes. It was a side show. The mortgages were just a sort of window dressing to create the impression that there really was a good reason to hand over gobs of pensioner’s money to Wall Street. Obviously, there wasn’t.
To understand what was going on, you have to realize that the BONDS and not the mortgages were the end game. You don’t really need actual borrowers to form a pool of mortgages and issue bonds. You only need borrowers if you intend for the loans to be paid off. They did not.
the same assets were used ” over and over again. it was pointless to go seeking real borrowers when all you have to do is fabricate them.
The creation of predatory loans intended to fail, inflated appraisals that would create false equity and ensure future strategic defaults, false representations of lending standards, and the creation of hundreds of thousands of loans without a real borrower.
Yep. As bad as those deadbeats are who only made their payments for three or more years or until their payment doubled and their home value dropped by half—what can possibly explain a borrower who never made any payments? There is an entire category of loans called “First Payment Defaults”.And, it’s gone.
Who does that? Who gets a loan, moves in, and decides not to make the first payment?
Okay, there was a little street level fraud by some local gangs but the easiest place to do it is from the inside. (“Inside Job”) Why make any payments on a loan that was created simply to default?
What is interesting about securitization fraud is the sheer amount of evidence. We have the documents created to establish the relationship between the investor and the Banksters. We have the procedures they outlined to avoid taxation. We have the sullied titles. And now, we have the evidence that they never complied with any of it and never intended to.
There was a time when stuff like this was illegal and it is so easy to prove. The Banksters own documents are all you need.
You might think that the Securities and Exchange Commission, those legal-eagles we pay to keep a self-regulating Wall Street in check, are putting in long nights, cataloging thousands of documents and methodically and painstakingly building their case.
Sadly, they are not. They are quietly biding their time until the statute of limitations runs out.
And, it’s gone.
Vanished into banksta bonuses just like the credit default swaps (CDS) that paid them a hundred times the value of a defaulted mortgage.
The mortgage bonds are completely worthless and have no value at all. But, when it comes to pension funds, most of those losses have not been accounted for. Extend and pretend.
We know that the mortgage pools themselves were stuffed full of guaranteed to fail loans that were based on vastly inflated values, and loans that did not even exist or were pledged to other pools as well. Because this hasn’t fully imploded yet, the revaluation of the bonds has yet to occur.
The sworn depositions of MERS CEO R. K. Arnold and Bank of America V.P. Linda DeMartini prove that. The former swears they never intended to do the assignments, and the latter swears that the notes and deeds were never sent to the Custodian.
One of MERS correspondence with its members specifically says that MERS and MERS alone will determine the beneficiary after the Trustees sale.
That means that with absolute certainty, the party bringing the foreclosure is not the beneficiary because that is determined after the trustee’s sale. The beneficiary is not the party bringing the foreclosure because MERS has no idea who the Beneficiary is. No assignments, remember? The properties apparently are just distributed to members based on some sort of equity arrangement. This one goes to Chase; this one goes to Wells Fargo, and this one to B of A.
The only purpose for which robo-signed documents are created is to commit fraud upon the court. Ninety-six percent of all fraudclosures go uncontested. Nobody cared about the mortgages and the notes. It was a side show. The mortgages were just a sort of window dressing to create the impression that there really was a good reason to hand over gobs of pensioner’s money to Wall Street. Obviously, there wasn’t.
To understand what was going on, you have to realize that the BONDS and not the mortgages were the end game. You don’t really need actual borrowers to form a pool of mortgages and issue bonds. You only need borrowers if you intend for the loans to be paid off. They did not.
the same assets were used ” over and over again. it was pointless to go seeking real borrowers when all you have to do is fabricate them.
The creation of predatory loans intended to fail, inflated appraisals that would create false equity and ensure future strategic defaults, false representations of lending standards, and the creation of hundreds of thousands of loans without a real borrower.
Yep. As bad as those deadbeats are who only made their payments for three or more years or until their payment doubled and their home value dropped by half—what can possibly explain a borrower who never made any payments? There is an entire category of loans called “First Payment Defaults”.And, it’s gone.
Who does that? Who gets a loan, moves in, and decides not to make the first payment?
Okay, there was a little street level fraud by some local gangs but the easiest place to do it is from the inside. (“Inside Job”) Why make any payments on a loan that was created simply to default?
What is interesting about securitization fraud is the sheer amount of evidence. We have the documents created to establish the relationship between the investor and the Banksters. We have the procedures they outlined to avoid taxation. We have the sullied titles. And now, we have the evidence that they never complied with any of it and never intended to.
There was a time when stuff like this was illegal and it is so easy to prove. The Banksters own documents are all you need.
You might think that the Securities and Exchange Commission, those legal-eagles we pay to keep a self-regulating Wall Street in check, are putting in long nights, cataloging thousands of documents and methodically and painstakingly building their case.
Sadly, they are not. They are quietly biding their time until the statute of limitations runs out.
David M
Aug. 2, 4:45 p.m.
I am absolutely not defending banks breaking the law or filing improper documents and they should be held accountable. If they are foreclosing on borrowers that are paying their mortgage, they should also be held accountable. Prosecute people who break the law.
However, I was taught that bad behavior by someone else does not justify bad behavior on my part. I borrow money, I pay it back. No one forced anyone to take money, people apply for it. What happended to personal accountability? Honorable people honor their debts.
acmodspecialists
Aug. 2, 4:52 p.m.
David M, you still don,t get it, The homeowner expect to have to work until they die?. That wasn’t the plan. People had a good plan. Work hard. Build a business and create something that would sustain them and not leave dependent on Social Security.
To that end, they invested in both real estate and the stock market. But they wish they had known that THE GAME WAS RIGGED and THE BOOKS WERE COOKED, but it is what it is.
To that end, they invested in both real estate and the stock market. But they wish they had known that THE GAME WAS RIGGED and THE BOOKS WERE COOKED, but it is what it is.
michael
Aug. 2, 4:55 p.m.
hey acmod, ever find out anything about ” servicers, at their discretion, may pledge any portion of their up front incentive to trusted advisors ect…”?
acmodspecialists
Aug. 2, 7:49 p.m.
Here is a funny video BTW http://www.therundown.tv/videos/misc-videos/south-park-and-its-gone-scene/
acmodspecialists
Aug. 2, 7:50 p.m.
Hi Michael, no all i found was something similar under HAMP
michael
Aug. 2, 9:01 p.m.
hey acmod,i also found under MHA guidelines V 3.0 chapter 2 sec 2.1 the specific guideline. alas, no one knows anything about it. i fear that my fault is the ability to read.
nice to know that you are still in the trenches.
they say “good guy’s finish last” , i say ” at least we are in good company!”
nice to know that you are still in the trenches.
they say “good guy’s finish last” , i say ” at least we are in good company!”
Tutt
Aug. 3, 4:16 p.m.
It seems David is similar to 90% of people in this country - regardless of how outright illegal, fraudulent and evil corporate acts are ordinary people are trained to overlook them if they believe a neighbor might be getting something they won’t benefit from as well, and it becomes an unforgivable monstrous act.. Unbelievable. The same mentality is what what keeps corrupt governments and corporations hinged safely in ivory towers as the most severe repercussions will always be borne by those least able to bear them. Like the poor whose desperate economic transgressions, which mainly only harms themselves severely are considered much much more monstrous than the evil done by the powerful and rich that harms millions. That double-standard allows despotic kings to live in splendor while commoners starve, and why the king’s starving guards, if instructed, will kill even a hungry child who takes a crust of the king’s bread -.I guess that’s the flaw in mankind
carie
Aug. 4, 4:26 p.m.
from “ANONYMOUS”
“I am referring to subprime refinances — that were presented to borrowers as a new “mortgage” — with all the fees, frills, and costs – and with guaranteed mortgage title. We all know about “table funding” — that is the real party funding is not at the “table.” But, these “mortgages” were not funded at all — never mind not by any “lender” not at the table. All that was funded was any cash-out. So, what we do have??? We have a “loan” that is not a mortgage because the prior “mortgage” was not paid off. We have a “modification” of the prior mortgage — but without disclosure — and in violation of the law. We have an unsecured loan to someone — who will likely never divulge the fraud to the borrower. We have a servicer who claims collection rights to a fabricated false mortgage. And, we have a “loan” that can be discharged in BK.
Directing this to the courts is difficult, because for so long fabricated documents have been presented to the courts. Although court acceptance of false documents is changing, courts are still reluctant to grant discovery. This is because the origination of the “mortgage” is not at issue in foreclosure actions.
If the proceeds at “mortgage” refinance were to be traced for prior loan payoff, we will find no payoff. But, this is beyond the ability of borrowers to prove in court. Even if granted discovery, there will be no cooperation.
It is up to the US government to intervene, to investigate, and to prosecute where necessary. This is a big reason as to why I am concerned about the 50 state AG settlement. That is, settlement negotiation, without investigation.
If the proceeds at “mortgage” refinance were to be traced for prior loan payoff, we will find no payoff. But, this is beyond the ability of borrowers to prove in court. Even if granted discovery, there will be no cooperation.
It is up to the US government to intervene, to investigate, and to prosecute where necessary. This is a big reason as to why I am concerned about the 50 state AG settlement. That is, settlement negotiation, without investigation.
“...Certificate purchasers’ are the banks themselves (security underwriters) and they only purchase a “pro-rata” share to a “pool” of cash flows —- that is all — they are NOT the mortgagee/creditor (the trust is assigned the loans from which the pass-through cash flows are derived –it is the DEPOSITOR (subsidiary) that owns the collections rights (they are not mortgage loans) and the Trust itself. The “certificate purchasers” (the bank security underwriters (another subsidiary) themselves) then repackage the certificates to “pro-rata” cash flows into CDOs that are marketed to security investors — who are also never the mortgagee/creditor. According to all PSAs — there must be a documented valid sale of the “loans”, with supporting Mortgage Schedule to the Depositor in order for any Trust to be valid. There was never any valid sale of loans — and the loans were never actually loans — they were collection rights.”…
carie
Aug. 4, 4:30 p.m.
Yes, my friends, MASSIVE, MASSIVE FRAUD…followed by massive cover-up…
carie
Aug. 4, 4:34 p.m.
Oh, and not to mention MASSIVE INSURANCE FRAUD…and all these fake mortgages followed by all the insurance fraud is the MAIN REASON our country is in a free fall…
Thanks to deregulation and all of the sociopathic materialists in power…
Shah Islam
Aug. 5, 12:48 p.m.
I am trying to be back! It was taking hours for me to continue to write on my old PC my experience, opinion and findings in details.
In Canada we have same fraudulent banking, mortgage, insurance practices within the knowledge of our praiseworthy excellently manageable judicial system.
The private US and UK rich individuals as heads of financial institutions here such as Royal Bank of Canada (As per once the News Medias published couple of years ago, it basically had not been paying any tax on it’s massive profits), TD etc. encourage both their brokers and consumers to get involved into doing (at least, in executing ‘No harm fraudulent documentations’ for creating personally profitable economic bubbles that sometimes may eventually become a national trouble for the Public) whimsical humanly things and can get away after doing whatever they wish.
For examples:
# 1. TD bank at the End of 20th Century stole C$ 800.00 from my deposit and when I challenged it’s authority heads it recognized the fact that an immoral and intentional wrongdoing took place and returned the stolen fund. The Royal RBC group did similar things too (including funnily whimsical one regarding Visa/other credit accounts). to it’s Loyal customers for long times.
# 2. In 2005, TD Bank in collaboration with another Bank, Insurance and Mortgage companies named respectively PC, Liberty Mutual Group and Home Trust Company once in a opportunist dishonest manner tried to deceive me of a sum of over $ 1000.00 and when I challenged their unscrupulous plot TD Bank offered me a settlement for only C$ 775.00 which I had no choice but to accept without any condition. I have preserved most of the documents as evidence of wrong doing. US economy inevitably is heading toward an unprecedented decade-long depression (not only a recession) and Canada is the next unless a few wise human heads absolutely honest and without human monetary greed and therefore bloodshed or cruelty, this time take the lead of a united great North-American power by just showing the global Public in a never seen before “NO SECRET INTERNATIONAL OR GLOBAL POLICY” how a group, {of shorter (e.g. Orientals) or taller (e.g. Occidentals) than average or balanced size human individuals in the name of taking care of the Public of a piece of land}, can have imbalanced negative impacts on the future on the global affairs or the world economy. A set of a new global and strict simple financial principles (Not changeable like city by laws at any time) and rules which are now possible and will soon be available upon agreement of acceptance by the global public through cell phones of individual e-mail account holders with good records and not by the out of date or proved as failed “traditional old think tanks of international policy makers”.
In Canada we have same fraudulent banking, mortgage, insurance practices within the knowledge of our praiseworthy excellently manageable judicial system.
The private US and UK rich individuals as heads of financial institutions here such as Royal Bank of Canada (As per once the News Medias published couple of years ago, it basically had not been paying any tax on it’s massive profits), TD etc. encourage both their brokers and consumers to get involved into doing (at least, in executing ‘No harm fraudulent documentations’ for creating personally profitable economic bubbles that sometimes may eventually become a national trouble for the Public) whimsical humanly things and can get away after doing whatever they wish.
For examples:
# 1. TD bank at the End of 20th Century stole C$ 800.00 from my deposit and when I challenged it’s authority heads it recognized the fact that an immoral and intentional wrongdoing took place and returned the stolen fund. The Royal RBC group did similar things too (including funnily whimsical one regarding Visa/other credit accounts). to it’s Loyal customers for long times.
# 2. In 2005, TD Bank in collaboration with another Bank, Insurance and Mortgage companies named respectively PC, Liberty Mutual Group and Home Trust Company once in a opportunist dishonest manner tried to deceive me of a sum of over $ 1000.00 and when I challenged their unscrupulous plot TD Bank offered me a settlement for only C$ 775.00 which I had no choice but to accept without any condition. I have preserved most of the documents as evidence of wrong doing. US economy inevitably is heading toward an unprecedented decade-long depression (not only a recession) and Canada is the next unless a few wise human heads absolutely honest and without human monetary greed and therefore bloodshed or cruelty, this time take the lead of a united great North-American power by just showing the global Public in a never seen before “NO SECRET INTERNATIONAL OR GLOBAL POLICY” how a group, {of shorter (e.g. Orientals) or taller (e.g. Occidentals) than average or balanced size human individuals in the name of taking care of the Public of a piece of land}, can have imbalanced negative impacts on the future on the global affairs or the world economy. A set of a new global and strict simple financial principles (Not changeable like city by laws at any time) and rules which are now possible and will soon be available upon agreement of acceptance by the global public through cell phones of individual e-mail account holders with good records and not by the out of date or proved as failed “traditional old think tanks of international policy makers”.
carie
Aug. 7, 5:11 p.m.
Paul Kiel, you really should be investigating this angle of the truth—-PLEASE—-America needs you to!!!
from ANONYMOUS on livinglies.wordpress.com:
“Banks sold to GSEs (freddie/fannie)—but loans were not compliant. These are the loans F/F have put back to banks like BofA (not yet in default—but, will likely be). But, banks knew that most of these loans that were not complaint—- would eventually default—and that the collection rights would be sold back to banks (this is different from repurchase - however, repurchase likely includes delinquent loans). Bank servicers starting manufacturing defaults to get the collection rights faster and sooner from F/F. Bank sells collection rights to subsidiary Depositor, Depositor sells certificates to trust to bank’s other subsidiary - the security underwriter. The security underwriter then owns the certificates to the trust—in effect, collection rights have been converted into certificates. Then security underwriter repackages the certificates into CDOs and squared CDOs—that is where the cash flows are passed through to “derivative” security investors (largely institutions—not consumers). All that is passed-through is cash flows—nothing more.
Trustee role is limited. What I do agree with Mary—is that the title companies were aware of what was going—- simultaneously—as refinance “orginations” were going on—the loan was being put into default at GSE—- with collection rights being sold to bank debt buyers. But, because the transactions were happening simultaneously—- the title company would just ignore that huge piece of flawed chain of title—which was never divulged. Impossible that title companies did not know. Thus, mortgage origination—was false—refinance not a mortgage refinance—and title is flawed from the onset.
This is why we only hear about loan modifications for interest rate adjustments—and not for principal reduction. In order for principal reduction—must be a whole new contract—- and title must be complete and accurate. They know they cannot fix this.
Whole goal by government is simply “to get rid of this nightmare”—by pushing through foreclosures as quickly as possible.
My NY private equity friend—- her company and direct boss have big political connections—very powerful. She tells me the government is aware of everything—they knew at crisis onset—and they know now. They do not know how to fix without causing more international fall-out—and more problems for banks that continue to be in a precarious position. They have allowed homeowners to be scapegoat—- this is what we fight about.
The reason all of this was allowed to go on is because of deregulation—and that certain people were making tons of money. Cannot get discovery in courts because of deregulation—they claim “privacy”. And, the government is just continuing to cover-up.”
carie
Aug. 11, 4:05 p.m.
Paul Kiel—-this is you opportunity to be a “Woodward and Bernstein”
This is huge, and we have the physical proof that is being covered up—-please email me and I’ll get you in touch with the informer: cariemac9@gmail.com
“Unsecured — name of the game. .
Subprime/alt-a/jumbo — were not mortgages — they were transfers of collection rights (albeit — with escalated balance owed and egregious terms). Once the Note/loan — is charged off — no more mortgage — only collection rights survive.
TARP Inspector General — Footnote 35 again — and again– and again.
“Without the note, a mortgage is unenforceable, while without the mortgage, a note is simply an unsecured debt obligation, no different from credit card debt.”
Securitiztion can be for any cash flows — but the security investors are NEVER the creditor. In the case of subprime/alt-a/jumbo securitization — there were no mortgage liens — the cash flow pass-through was only for pass-through of cash payments to collection rights. No mortgage lien – not mortgage — no pass-through of collection rights itself. Transfer of servicing rights only.
The “investors” were the debt buyers that purchased the collection rights — period. The security investors were duped to believing that the cash pass-through was to valid mortgage liens. But, these security investors never were the lender, never were the creditor, and never were the mortgagee — because there was never any valid mortgages!!!!! And, security investors are NEVER the creditor.
CDOs??? nothing more than derivatives from the false assets that the false securitizations were based upon to begin with!!!”
Dale Willard
Aug. 11, 4:41 p.m.
I dont get it. What are all of you people looking for, a free house? Did you make all the payments you were supposed to make?
Margret
Aug. 11, 6:14 p.m.
Dale,
My husband and I have been paying our bills for 57 years. Ever since we learned that Gmac is not our lender and Ditech, the company that loaned us the money, no longer exists, we have actively persued attempts to find out who is owed the money we borrowed. We even did our own title search. All we received was a Jeffrey Stephen, robosigned title transfer to a securitized trust dated years after the trust had been closed to investors.
My husband and I have been paying our bills for 57 years. Ever since we learned that Gmac is not our lender and Ditech, the company that loaned us the money, no longer exists, we have actively persued attempts to find out who is owed the money we borrowed. We even did our own title search. All we received was a Jeffrey Stephen, robosigned title transfer to a securitized trust dated years after the trust had been closed to investors.
According to the terms of our mortgage, it was not eligible for a trust bundle but there is a bundle of a thousand or more mortgages, said to contain our loan. Other loans by our lender were sold to Fannie Mae and still others were part of a sale of 51% of GMAC to Ceberus Investments, the company made famous as a result of its ties to Bernie Madoff. At one point we were told that our file had been turned over to someone named Raul Rudy De La Hoya, a person we never heard of and who did not represent the firm listed on the notice we received. Simple errors or massive fraud, we are not in a position to judge at this point.
Tell me, who should get our payments Dale, We’d appreciate knowing where our past mortgage payments went and where they should have gone.
If you borrowed $100 from a friend and that friend without telling you, turned around and sold your IOU to a third party in exchange for receiving his $100 right away, would you pay the friend the money you borrowed , even thought he already received his payment? Wouldn’t you feel that the third party was entitled to receive that payment. What if your friend denied that he had received the money or refused to let you know how to find out who the third party is and won’t get his money back if you give it to your friend.
What if you did pay back your friend and then learned that he kept the double payment but you didn’t find out until your friend couldn’t produce the IOU and the third party sued you for the payment you had already made. What if you learned that the friend and the third party had both filed insurance claims for the same $100 and received payment. Should you reinburse the insurnce company? Which company? You firends insurance company or the third party insurance company.
What if you did pay back your friend and then learned that he kept the double payment but you didn’t find out until your friend couldn’t produce the IOU and the third party sued you for the payment you had already made. What if you learned that the friend and the third party had both filed insurance claims for the same $100 and received payment. Should you reinburse the insurnce company? Which company? You firends insurance company or the third party insurance company.
Can they all come after you for the money, since one of them still has your IOU. Now you find out that they also wrote off their “loss” on thier tax returns and received refunds. Should you pay back the government?
Tell me, Dale
John R.
Aug. 11, 9:03 p.m.
Margaret & Dale… Margaret, I’ve also done everything you’ve mentioned AND, when I finally did, through Discovery, find the “track of tears” of my own note and mortgage I found out that not once was the actual documentation necessary and supposedly used to actually and legally transfer the note and/or mortgage to not only the Servicer/Trust, but to the Depositor and before that the securitizing entity, not ONCE mind you, not even one time, was there ever a signature on any of it!
The Assignment used in my own case was dated 2+ years AFTER the closing date of the Trust, Robo Signed by Topaka Love and the Notary’s signature… I found 12 more of those + the signature from his Govt. Notary Certification and NONE of those matched either!
Oh, and did I mention, that “Track of Tears” my mortgage went, from one entity to the other, as shown in the documents THEY provided… the dates of those certified to be right by opposing counsel supposed transfers were on a timeline that cannot exist on this earth! A gives to B… C gives to D who then gives to E ... and THEN B give to C
Stopped everything in my life, months wasted interviewing Atty’s who “knew it all”, but I live where the Courts are computer literate and open to the public over the net so I checked those Attys out and found in each and every case, they filed a boiler place “Answer to foreclosure” and then filed nothing else… in short all they did was fleece the homeowners, so I spent thousands of hours (4 years in all) doing absolutely nothing but research and studying,finding precedents, studying laws and procedures, writing pleadings and the Court still gave my house to the Trustee’s and it’s soooo obvious from the Court’s decisions that they never even read my pleadings.
So Dave, tell me…. just who should I have made my payment to? The Trustee? Who, even though I lost in Court… and I’d love to believe in the Courts wisdom in this matter… but after their legitimizing an illegal deposit into the Trust past the cut-off date…. if I did we’d both be wrong!
And now I am left with 4 other legal(?) entities who have just as much right(?) to foreclose on me, on the same property, as the Courts already allowed!!!
So tell me Dave…. just who’s supposed to get the payment?
Shah Islam
Aug. 12, 3:16 a.m.
I am just feeling impatient! We desperately need to change some old laws (Such as: legalization of official lies and tricks) made by some previledged groups with hidden purposes.
More real life experienced true stories of how unscrupulously a few rich guys’ controlled “our North-american (including our monopolizing Canadian fund managers too without ethical standard or sense of morality) banking sector have become imbalanced” is coming up soon to be posted in ProPublica right after I personally gather direct evidences from the Canadian side.
More real life experienced true stories of how unscrupulously a few rich guys’ controlled “our North-american (including our monopolizing Canadian fund managers too without ethical standard or sense of morality) banking sector have become imbalanced” is coming up soon to be posted in ProPublica right after I personally gather direct evidences from the Canadian side.
carie
Aug. 12, 1:56 p.m.
Right to Know
Definition
Laws that make government or corporate data and records available to the public or to those individuals with a particular interest in the information.
THE PUBLIC HAS THE RIGHT TO KNOW THIS INFORMATION
THAT IS BEING COVERED UP BY BANKS AND GOVERNMENT:
THAT IS BEING COVERED UP BY BANKS AND GOVERNMENT:
“First, ‘certificate purchasers’ are the banks themselves (security underwriters) and they only purchase a “pro-rata” share to a “pool” of cash flows —- that is all — they are NOT the mortgagee/creditor (the trust is assigned the loans from which the pass-through cash flows are derived –it is the DEPOSITOR (subsidiary) that owns the collections rights (they are not mortgage loans) and the Trust itself. The “certificate purchasers” (the bank security underwriters (another subsidiary) themselves) then repackage the certificates to “pro-rata” cash flows into CDOs that are marketed to security investors — who are also never the mortgagee/creditor. According to all PSAs — there must be a documented valid sale of the “loans”, with supporting Mortgage Schedule to the Depositor in order for any Trust to be valid. There was never any valid sale of loans — and the loans were never actually loans — they were collection rights.
Second, since the “loan” refinances (subprime/alt-a) and jumbo new purchases were non-compliant and non-performing manufactured defaults, no ‘funding’ at all was necessary (except for the cash-out for the loans). The warehouse lines of credit never actually transferred any actual cash for funding. These lines of credit were simply “credit lines” that the “Depositor” would provide to their correspondent lenders. Once the “loan” refinance origination was completed the Depositor would then reverse the “credit” owed by the correspondent (originator). This never involved any actual deposit of cash proceeds —- the “funding” payoff check is never “deposited” into any bank account. The check is routed to a security derivative clearing house — who then simply cancels the credit-line transaction.
Third, it is not productive to state that since someone else was actually making payments on the “loan”, “albeit” not the borrower, that the loan is not in default. Courts do not care about this — they only care if the borrower is in default. However, if the actual party does not come forward claiming that the debt is owed to them, and the actual party cannot prove how they came to own the collection rights — borrower does not owe the debt to anyone. That party is never going to able to demonstrate that collection rights belong to them because they would have to divulge the above fraudulent process and that the “mortgage loan” from onset was not a mortgage but, instead, collection rights. This admission would also mean that the “debt” is unsecured and can be discharged in BK.
Do not need to know the “processes” — subprime/alt-a/jumbo refinances (as nearly 100% were refinances) — were and are nothing more than a transfer of servicing rights to false collection rights. And, jumbo new purchases fit in the same category.
This does not preclude QT challenge — all for it — just want most to understand — we are not challenging mortgage title — it never existed in the first place — we are challenging ANY title based on fraudulent loan (collection rights) assumption – and fraudulent mortgage title origination – to begin with.
All is NOT as THEY would like it to appear to be.
Unsecured — name of the game. .
Subprime/alt-a/jumbo — were not mortgages — they were transfers of collection rights (albeit — with escalated balance owed and egregious terms). Once the Note/loan — is charged off — no more mortgage — only collection rights survive.
Second, since the “loan” refinances (subprime/alt-a) and jumbo new purchases were non-compliant and non-performing manufactured defaults, no ‘funding’ at all was necessary (except for the cash-out for the loans). The warehouse lines of credit never actually transferred any actual cash for funding. These lines of credit were simply “credit lines” that the “Depositor” would provide to their correspondent lenders. Once the “loan” refinance origination was completed the Depositor would then reverse the “credit” owed by the correspondent (originator). This never involved any actual deposit of cash proceeds —- the “funding” payoff check is never “deposited” into any bank account. The check is routed to a security derivative clearing house — who then simply cancels the credit-line transaction.
Third, it is not productive to state that since someone else was actually making payments on the “loan”, “albeit” not the borrower, that the loan is not in default. Courts do not care about this — they only care if the borrower is in default. However, if the actual party does not come forward claiming that the debt is owed to them, and the actual party cannot prove how they came to own the collection rights — borrower does not owe the debt to anyone. That party is never going to able to demonstrate that collection rights belong to them because they would have to divulge the above fraudulent process and that the “mortgage loan” from onset was not a mortgage but, instead, collection rights. This admission would also mean that the “debt” is unsecured and can be discharged in BK.
Do not need to know the “processes” — subprime/alt-a/jumbo refinances (as nearly 100% were refinances) — were and are nothing more than a transfer of servicing rights to false collection rights. And, jumbo new purchases fit in the same category.
This does not preclude QT challenge — all for it — just want most to understand — we are not challenging mortgage title — it never existed in the first place — we are challenging ANY title based on fraudulent loan (collection rights) assumption – and fraudulent mortgage title origination – to begin with.
All is NOT as THEY would like it to appear to be.
Unsecured — name of the game. .
Subprime/alt-a/jumbo — were not mortgages — they were transfers of collection rights (albeit — with escalated balance owed and egregious terms). Once the Note/loan — is charged off — no more mortgage — only collection rights survive.
CDOs??? nothing more than derivatives from the false assets that the false securitizations were based upon to begin with!!!”
Dale Willard
Aug. 12, 2:28 p.m.
Margaret,
Are you saying you did not receive monthly statements or invoices for your mortgage? Are you saying that you have paid all mortgage payments when they were due? - You seem to be patting yourself on the back at the start of your comment for “paying your bills for 57 years”, but you haven’t stated that you have lived up to the terms of your mortgage agreement. Why are you dragging Bernie Madoff etc. into the discussion? The analogies and trivia you bring into this discussion aren’t relevant to you paying your mortgage. The issue is, have you made your mortgage payments as you agreed to do when you signed the paperwork? If that is the case and you are current on your payments and you are in foreclosure or lost your house, I think you have a valid beef, and the courts will see things your way - fight on; you will win! If you are not making the payments as you agreed to do, based on some obtuse lender conspiracy theory, or because you think its “not fair” that the property is worth less than the mortgage or you just can’t afford it anymore, you are out of luck. Ask yourself - what is it that you really want, and why? Maybe its just time to acknowledge you made a bad investment, take your lumps, and move on.
Are you saying you did not receive monthly statements or invoices for your mortgage? Are you saying that you have paid all mortgage payments when they were due? - You seem to be patting yourself on the back at the start of your comment for “paying your bills for 57 years”, but you haven’t stated that you have lived up to the terms of your mortgage agreement. Why are you dragging Bernie Madoff etc. into the discussion? The analogies and trivia you bring into this discussion aren’t relevant to you paying your mortgage. The issue is, have you made your mortgage payments as you agreed to do when you signed the paperwork? If that is the case and you are current on your payments and you are in foreclosure or lost your house, I think you have a valid beef, and the courts will see things your way - fight on; you will win! If you are not making the payments as you agreed to do, based on some obtuse lender conspiracy theory, or because you think its “not fair” that the property is worth less than the mortgage or you just can’t afford it anymore, you are out of luck. Ask yourself - what is it that you really want, and why? Maybe its just time to acknowledge you made a bad investment, take your lumps, and move on.
Roy
Aug. 12, 7:21 p.m.
@Dale-You need to read Margaret’s post again as you only derived from what she clearly stated and asked you what you feel she was implying. You should quit feeling as if everyone is scamming to get something that they don’t deserve. To be absolutely sure who you are paying actually owns that which you are paying for is IMO “essential”. You should maybe “move on” yourself and take the “lumps” you are casting at everyone else with you. Oh, and maybe pray that you don’t have to face similar circumstances such as the ones Margaret is now facing. WAIT! I know that your response will most likely entail how you are way too intelligent to be in such a predicament…only to once again display what a self-righteous ...hole you actually are!
Dale Willard
Aug. 13, 7 p.m.
No, Roy, I don’t think I’m so intelligent; just pretty honest. If I get myself into the mess Margaret is in (whatever that is), I will take what I bargained for, and not ask others to pay for my poor investment decision ( oh yes, and I’ve made a few!). You folks always overlook or downplay your side of the bargain; that is, after taking the lenders money, to make the agreed payments. The whiners don’t seem to want to own up to the fact that they aren’t/didn’t make the payments they agreed to. Instead, they are seeking some angle, technicality, or loophole that will enable them to walk out on their commitment, and to get others to feel sorry for them. That just isn’t producing results. Like I say, step up, stop complaining and move on. Maintaining your reputation and keeping your dignity is a beautiful thing.
Joyce Cauthen
Aug. 13, 8:49 p.m.
I am going to respond to Margaret’s, Dale’s and Roy’s comments shortly if I can. This is a critical issue and one that needs to be addressed. Assuring that all borrowers understand what has happened to certain homeowners that really are victims at this point and time is critical and I want to try to provide what I can. This mis understanding would be the reason that other homeowners are not backing to the degree necessary those that have been harmed, not to mention that in doing so, we are losing our right under the rule of law to protect us.
I have handled these portfolios in trust departments of banks together with over 30 years of loan servicing technique and loan origination. Stay tuned!
Trubee
Aug. 14, 10:08 a.m.
Arguing with Willard or Dale is a waste of time.
They are of the same ilk that wanted the congress to default on the national debt.
What these people don’t want to face up to is that they were screwed but can’t admit it.Further, they don’t think its right to fight the chuch, the banks, the courts, the media and all others that defaud the American people.
The Banksters, the bought off politicians and the bought off courts count on the Dale/Willard’s, Tea Partier’s, the other fools to follow the Pied Piper’s music and the crowds to the new Dauchau and Auchwitz.
You can’t argue with idiots. Don’t even try.
Joyce Cauthen
Aug. 14, 3:03 p.m.
Trubee:
Thanks for the comment, but our goal is not to argue with anyone regarding the stance of those homeowners who are fighting to keep their homes - our stance is that we will argue for a PLAN, ONCE AND FOR ALL, THAT WILL ASSIST IN THE RECOVERY STAGE. IT WILL INCORPORATE A LOT MORE THAN THE RIDICULOUS RENTAL SUGGESTION THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED.
Now is the time to take what we have, come up with a plan and a strategy to pull it off and take it to the table without the feds being involved. I think that it can be a win win situation for the banks to a large degree, but most certainly, if the Plan addresses the issue and can be successful, then not only the homeowners who feel they have been harmed will win, but the recovery of our economy will also.
Jobs, jobs, jobs, retail sales, and energy will drive our engines. Let’s get started. I hope to get the Plan I am suggesting finished by late this evening and because I know that not many will comment, that in all probability a few of us will have to go it along. Being a mortgage person all of these years and having what I believe to be a safe route to take to assure success, we can end this nightmare.
The hands of the AG’s are tied simply because the Feds are tied into this thing. Personally, I think they will be thanking us if we can get an acceptable plan on the table that we can agree with.
Roy
Aug. 14, 3:07 p.m.
Trubee-You are correct and I should have known better. It’s not productive to do so. Just upset that he wasn’t getting the point Margaret was making-she needed to know who she “actually” owed. With all the fraud and outright theft going on I would like to know myself once I pay off my obligation will I receive clear title. Dale is not as smart as he would like us to believe-this has or will affect him one day. When that day comes I would hope he worries about more than his dignity and reputation because there will not be anything resembling beauty. Also, his so called “honesty” (his mind you) might get him a cup of coffee, but doubtful if he is working with one of the banksters.
Joyce Cauthen
Aug. 14, 3:10 p.m.
By the way, remember that $150 Billion that was given to Fannie Mae and then the government (the taxpayers) took the GSE’s back under the wings of the government. Well, they can start now by coughing up that $150 billion as the banks begin to repurchase the poor quality loans to Fannie and Freddie. And also, what about that 1 trillion that we understand now that the government purchased Fannie Mae’s securities - Where did that money come from. As the originators sold them to Fannie and FAnnie collateralized them in the market, now all of that is being reversed, but it took years to buy and collateralize and obviously our feds did it in one swoop. If I am wrong, I am sure there are those that can set the record straight.
But for now, give back the $150 billion (only a small percentage of what taxpayers really gave them) and let’s put it into the subsidy pot until the banks repay fannie for those bad loans. Once that money is recovered, the $150 can go back to tarp and the banks contributions can be used to pay the restitution to the homeownrs. Something along these lines would be reasonable.
carie
Aug. 14, 5:14 p.m.
Dale Willard—-DO YOU KNOW HOW TO READ???
NO LENDER—-FRAUD—-NO LENDER—-FRAUD—-NO LENDER—-FRAUD:
FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD
Look at your statement, Dale Willard—-it says DEBT COLLECTOR…NOT LENDER…you are paying a debt collector on unsecured debt every month…NOT A REAL LENDER—-THIS IS THE FRAUD AND THIS IS THE PROBLEM—-WAKE UP AND SHUT UP…
...Because in the subprime world…ALL was presented to borrowers as a NEW NOTE AND LOAN…but it was only collection rights…which do not have to be “funded”...they are simply a right to collection transferred by assignment…
“…According to all PSAs — there must be a documented valid sale of the “loans”, with supporting Mortgage Schedule to the Depositor in order for any Trust to be valid. There was never any valid sale of loans — and the loans were never actually loans — they were collection rights…COLLECTION RIGHTS DO NOT HAVE TO BE “FUNDED”—THEY ARE SIMPLY A RIGHT TO COLLECTION TRANSFERRED BY ASSIGNMENT—NOT A “NOTE”—HOWEVER ALL WAS PRESENTED TO BORROWERS AS A NEW NOTE/LOAN—THIS IS THE TOTAL FRAUD FROM THE BEGINNING. THIS IS WHY NO NOTES WERE VALIDLY SOLD TO TRUSTS—THERE WAS NO NOTE TO A MORTGAGE TO TRANSFER!!!
All is NOT as THEY would like it to appear to be. Far from it. If you call them a “mortgage” — when it is not a mortgage — they will try to find some way to hold accountable —-this is wrong – and it is FRAUD. Just because it looks like a “duck” — does not mean it is a “duck” — no matter how it “quacks.”
Unsecured — name of the game. .
Subprime/alt-a/jumbo — were not mortgages — they were transfers of collection rights (albeit — with escalated balance owed and egregious terms). Once the Note/loan — is charged off — no more mortgage — only collection rights survive.
TARP Inspector General — Footnote 35 again — and again– and again.
“Without the note, a mortgage is unenforceable, while without the mortgage, a note is simply an unsecured debt obligation, no different from credit card debt.”
Securitiztion can be for any cash flows — but the security investors are NEVER the creditor. In the case of subprime/alt-a/jumbo securitization — there were no mortgage liens — the cash flow pass-through was only for pass-through of cash payments to collection rights. No mortgage lien – not mortgage — no pass-through of collection rights itself. Transfer of servicing rights only.
The “investors” were the debt buyers that purchased the collection rights — PERIOD. The security investors were DUPED to believing that the cash pass-through was to valid mortgage liens. But, these security investors NEVER were the lender, NEVER were the creditor, and NEVER were the mortgagee — because there was NEVER any valid mortgages!!!!! And, security investors are NEVER the creditor.
CDOs??? nothing more than derivatives from the FALSE ASSETS that the FALSE SECURITIZATIONS were based upon to begin with!!!”
All is NOT as THEY would like it to appear to be. Far from it. If you call them a “mortgage” — when it is not a mortgage — they will try to find some way to hold accountable —-this is wrong – and it is FRAUD. Just because it looks like a “duck” — does not mean it is a “duck” — no matter how it “quacks.”
Unsecured — name of the game. .
Subprime/alt-a/jumbo — were not mortgages — they were transfers of collection rights (albeit — with escalated balance owed and egregious terms). Once the Note/loan — is charged off — no more mortgage — only collection rights survive.
TARP Inspector General — Footnote 35 again — and again– and again.
“Without the note, a mortgage is unenforceable, while without the mortgage, a note is simply an unsecured debt obligation, no different from credit card debt.”
Securitiztion can be for any cash flows — but the security investors are NEVER the creditor. In the case of subprime/alt-a/jumbo securitization — there were no mortgage liens — the cash flow pass-through was only for pass-through of cash payments to collection rights. No mortgage lien – not mortgage — no pass-through of collection rights itself. Transfer of servicing rights only.
The “investors” were the debt buyers that purchased the collection rights — PERIOD. The security investors were DUPED to believing that the cash pass-through was to valid mortgage liens. But, these security investors NEVER were the lender, NEVER were the creditor, and NEVER were the mortgagee — because there was NEVER any valid mortgages!!!!! And, security investors are NEVER the creditor.
CDOs??? nothing more than derivatives from the FALSE ASSETS that the FALSE SECURITIZATIONS were based upon to begin with!!!”
carie
Aug. 14, 5:19 p.m.
DALE WILLARD IS A SHILL FOR THE BANKS…IGNORE HIM…
carie
Aug. 14, 6:23 p.m.
Paul Kiel you must dig deeper—-email me if you would like to see physical proof of what I have been posting…this is a Woodward and Bernstein moment…the people need your help—-do you have the courage?
Trubee
Aug. 15, 1:02 p.m.
Dear Mr. Keil:
Carie has gracefully laid out the facts for you, now its time for you to pick up the ball and run with it.
Unfortunately, you are going to hit bumps in the road but remember, a road without bumps, is probably a dead end.
If you stand back and look at the forest after you look at Carrie’s trees, you will see that this entire scam was put together to essnetially print money that doesn’t exist, or in other terms, a scam to create and control “the float” and remove it from government hands.
MERS was then designed to hide the same money that doesn’t exist and to rip-off local and state governments for recording fees that have to date cost and continue to cost local property taxpayers billions across this county.
This grand scheme all happened while the 4th Estate was asleep at the switch. This didn’t happen overnight, it started way back in 1986 with Reagan-Rostenkowski Bill that allowed banks to do business across state lines, and went on from there, piece by piece, little by little, chip, chip, chipping away at our monetary system and our courts.
Handled properly by the 4th Estate, this crisis, when uncovered will make Watergate look like a Kindergarten exercise.
If nothing is done and the money interests are allowed to capture the 2012 election as they did in 2010, Third World status for the USA is within our clear and rapidly approaching view. The world as most citizens and residents of this country, is in the rearview mirror.
Dale Willard
Aug. 15, 11:30 p.m.
Wow, these comments are getting kwazier and kwazier! Ah yes, a Woodward and Bernstein moment!! More like an Inspector Gadget moment! But keep it going! I’m sure you will eventually find that Lee Harvey Oswald and Dr. Evil were the masterminds of the whole scam! Just don’t forget to drop your mortgage payment into the mail in the meantime.
carie
Aug. 15, 11:49 p.m.
LIKE I SAID—-DALE WILLARD IS A SHILL FOR THE BANKS ...IGNORE HIM.
carie
Aug. 15, 11:53 p.m.
YEAH, and don’t forget to STOP paying your FAKE mortgage—-which is UNSECURED DEBT because of FRAUD at origination…not real mortgages…NO “FUNDING”...just a line of credit…false default, etc….read my previous posts…it is the TRUTH…that is being covered up…by the banks, the government, and shills like Dale Willard.
carie
Aug. 15, 11:59 p.m.
What we have here is good old insurance fraud — last time I looked — CRIMINAL.
We have fraudulent mortgages and fraudulent notes for which prior mortgage/note was never paid off – and insurance collected. This is the way collection rights are transferred — false default — insurance collected — with bogus note/mortgage refinance.
And, is the debt buyers that are continuing the fraud with bogus documents.
We have fraudulent mortgages and fraudulent notes for which prior mortgage/note was never paid off – and insurance collected. This is the way collection rights are transferred — false default — insurance collected — with bogus note/mortgage refinance.
And, is the debt buyers that are continuing the fraud with bogus documents.
Related articles
- Internal Doc Reveals GMAC Filed False Document in Bid to Foreclose (propublica.org)
- Internal Doc Reveals GMAC Filed False Document in Bid to Foreclose (247wallst.com)
- Foreclosure abuses continue (dailykos.com)
- Morning Smoke: Cuts to Wasteful Spending Key to National Security (pogoblog.typepad.com)
- Internal Doc Reveals GMAC Filed False Document in Bid to Foreclose (politicore.wordpress.com)
- Class Action Filed Against GMAC Alleging Due Process Violations, Abuse of Process, and Unfair and Deceptive Practices (prweb.com)
- Nevada Wallops Bank of America with Sweeping Suit; Nation-wide Foreclosure Settlement in Peril (propublica.org)
- This Week's Top MuckReads: Soldiers' Suicides, Big Bailouts, and More... (propublica.org)
- GMAC Reports 2011 M.B.A. Application Trends (usnews.com)
- PhRMA defends dollars to docs, disses ProPublica :"ultimate goal of these interactions: strengthening patient care" (bipolarsoupkitchen-stephany.blogspot.com)
116 comments
ProPublica
They [GMAC ] WASTED TIME ON OUR LOAN MODIFICATION PAPERS AND HAD SERVED NOTICE TO US FOR FORECLOSE.
FOR CHAPTER 13.
NOW WE ARE IN CHAPTER 13 ,WITH CREDIT RUINED AND WE ,NOW WE DON’T KNOW HOW TO REFINANCE OR GO FOR MODIFICATION.
GMAC IS NOT INTERESTED IN OUR CASE ANYMORE.
IS THERE ANY ONE OUT THERE WHO CAN PERSUE GMAC TO DO MODIFICATION TOUR LOAN.
Paul Kiel is still doing a damn good job calling out these fraudsters!
Keep up the good work!
“While several investigations remain ongoing at the state and federal level, no agency has systematically examined loan-level documents to ensure the creation of mortgage securities complied with state laws or to examine the scope of sloppy paperwork in foreclosure proceedings, like the so-called “robo-signing” fiasco…”
____________________________
the bank fraud demand to see evidence of ownership do your jobs
please
Finally, before our last loan mod pack was rejected, (it happened ever few month) but before they notified us of the rejection, they foreclosed on our house and put it up for auction without us knowing. We ran to an attorney everyone said was great, only to find out that GMAC had moved us out of HAMP & into their own mod program that afforded us no protection, without our permission or knowledge. The only difference between the packets was the GMAC packet did not have the HAMP stamp on the front, otherwise everything was the same.
Default affidavits are a lender’s representation as to the status of a loan. They are routinely accepted in both state and federal courts in lieu of live testimony. They are an accommodation to the lending community based on a belief by the courts that the facts they present are virtually unassailable. The submission of evidence by affidavit allows lenders to save countless hours and expense establishing a borrower’s default without the need for testimony from a lending representative. While they can be refuted by a borrower, too often, a debtor’s offer of alternative and conflicting facts is dismissed by those who believe that a lender’s word is more credible than that of a debtor. The deference afforded the lending community has resulted in an abuse of trust.
The court goes on to call an LPS affidavit - all of them, based on testimony about their practices and procedures - a “sham” and a “farce” and the court states the documents do not meet the requirements for filing.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/52867919/In-Re-Wilson-Memorandum-Opinion-07-Apr-2011 page 21
The banks have nearly bankrupted our court system. LPS was flooding our courts with fraudulent documents to the tune of 200,000/year as early as 2006. http://www.scribd.com/doc/58804906/Lender-Processing-Services-formerly-FIS-newsletter-The-Summit-September-2006 page 16
Our libraries are closing. Our services are being sliced. The courts are clogged with fraud and nearly bankrupt (financially and ethically).
The situation we find ourselves in can be laid directly at the feet of the banks (and several wars halfway around the world). This mortgage/foreclosure fraud debacle is the direct responsibility of the banks.
I personally think the banks need to be busted up. They are no friend to the American consumer.
Indy mac became part of One West and in 2009 a new statement arrived rasing the mortgage to $1,750.00 despite the written agremeent.
In 2009 One West sent foreclosure papers suing not only me but others it has no business doing. Such as the prior family who sold my family the home 15 years earlier. Another individual who never signed off his release so teh refinance should have never taken place.
2010 the illegal lock box was placed on the home.
2011 pending court cases in federal and city court.
when I did nothing wrong. I am no where in the video on purpose because it’s about my topic. I hope by me coming out others gain courge to speak out and tell.
Why are the banks outsourcing the signing of assignments of mortgage and other documents for the banks?
To limit the liability to the banks, in this Wall Street fraud!
LizinSarasota, your learned comment and conclusions are great, and I wish to quote from it one sentence which is a universal truth and is the cause of much injustice, even in situations not riddled by corruption: “…too often, a debtor’s offer of alternative and conflicting facts is dismissed by those who believe that a lender’s word is more credible than that of a debtor.”
I did not intend to comment on this report, as the basics are covered in numerous other reports. Upon reading the ‘comments’ I felt obliged to voice my disagreement with Nick’s comment: This is not about ‘the tens of thousands who lied about their income and are being foreclosed upon.’ It is not about ‘should the companies Just forgive all the debts and give away houses’? It is not about ‘the 90% of the population that has continued to do the right thing.’ It is not about ‘due to whatever legitimate and illegitimate hardships, people have an obligation to pay their debts. If they don’t, they should suffer the consequences.’
What this is fine Kiel report is about is a giant household name corporation forging documents to use against a buyer. Buying a house is the most expensive financial transaction by far for most households. The paper work involved is monstrous in quantity, much of it in perplexing legal lingo. For a mortgage company to resort to falsified documents is absolutely and totally unethical and immoral in any stage of the matter, regardless of supposed responsibilities of the borrower. The mortgage company is responsible to check the buyer’s financial condition and determine if approving the loan is good business practice. There is always the possibility of nonpayment, but the company (the “expert”) shall not resort to illegal practice in pursuing the situation.
Skartishu, Granby MO
And the word is that expert attorneys are few and far between.