Posts Tagged ‘Robosigning
INDICTED! LPS Robosigning is Forgery and False Declaration in Missouri
MOST POPULAR ARTICLES
CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT
SERVICE 520-405-1688
136 Count Indictment
EDITOR’S COMMENT: At least one Attorney General has seen the light, bringing in an indictment for forgery against DOCx, LPS, and individuals in management, citing the simple statement from an $ 11 per hour employee that the scope of the employee’s duties was to sign other people’s names to documents. The hour for collapse of “plausible deniability”might be drawing near. But one must question why 49 other State Attorney Generals and our very own Eric Holder U.S. Attorney general have not done the same thing, and what took them so long?
The central questions that are presented at this time include:
- When will other companies and individuals be indicted or will the appearance be maintained that this pattern of forgery and false declaration was limited to DOCX?
- Why was it necessary to create fabricate, forged documents with false declarations? Either the mortgages that were originated were valid, as the industry claims, or they were not, which is what I claim. (If the original documents were valid, no forgeries or false declarations would be required). Note that I am directing attention to the written documents including the security instrument — and not the obligation. The question is whether the written note and mortgage contained declarations that were accurate reflections of the actual monetary transaction or if the obligation was left naked in the wind, without documentation.
- Is the obligation between the homeowner borrower and the investor lender subject to a written agreement? If so, which one? Is it the package of documents given to the investor which contained multiple obligors or the package of documents given to the borrower which contained a false declaration of the identity of the lender and failed to include the conditions of the prospectus and pooling and servicing agreement? Or is it both?
- Does the fabrication and forgery of documents containing false declarations cover up other criminal activity — like theft, criminal fraud, and other violations of lending laws and securities laws?
- What happens to the foreclosures that were rubber stamped across the country? If based upon false, fabricated and forged documentation, how will the obvious title and notice problems be cured for future transactions relating to those properties?
- What happens to the deeds issued in foreclosures based upon “credit bids” from entities who were not creditors and who based their claims upon false declarations contained in fabricated, forged documentation?
- What happens to the individuals or orchestrated the whole mess from Wall Street offices where they deny “actual knowledge” of the wrong-doing?
- What is proper remedy for those who were illegally foreclosed? Under Property Law it could be return of the house. Under Contract Law it would be monetary damages, and if so, how much is enough to compensate such people? Under tort law, it could be both return of the house (constructive or resulting trust) plus monetary damages, plus punitive, treble, or exemplary damages.
- How much of the ill-gotten gains will the multiple fake players in the false securitization claims will they be permitted to keep and why should they keep any?
- Will the inquiry and subsequent indictments be broadened to include title companies, escrow agents, realtors, appraisers, mortgage brokers, and mortgage originators?
- Can anyone rely upon a warranty of clear title in a deed of property that was acquired through illegal means where they and the world are put on notice that there is a cloud on the title chain?
by Yves Smith, SEE FULL ARTICLE ON NAKEDCAPITALISM.COM
“Linda Greene” has become a household word to those on the foreclosure fraud beat. And it turns out, for once, that the work of diligent investigators such as the foreclosure attorneys around Max Gardner, and investigators like Lynn Szymoniak and Lisa Epstein led to press coverage which in turn spurred prosecutors to act.
What is striking about the indictment by a Missouri grand jury is that the Missouri AG Chris Koster has decided to challenge the banks’ party line that robosigning and related abuses were mere “paperwork problems.” He’s called robosiging what it is: forgery. The 136 count indictment is for forgeries and false declarations, and the targets are LPS subsidiary and its founder and past president, Lorraine Brown. From a press release by Koster:
Today’s indictment reflects our firm conviction that when you sign your name to a legal document, it matters,” Koster said. “Mass-producing fraudulent signatures on millions of real estate documents across America constitutes forgery. When you file those documents in our state, you are committing a crime under Missouri law.
The forgery and false declaration counts each allege that the person whose name appears on 68 notarized deeds of release on behalf of the lender is not the person who actually signed the paperwork. The documents were then submitted to the Boone County Recorder of Deeds as though they were genuine…
DOCX’s role in the robo-signing process came to national attention when 60 Minutes reported that Linda Green, an employee of DOCX, purportedly signed thousands of mortgage-related documents on behalf of several different banks and in multiple handwritings. The 68 documents on which the indictments are based were purportedly signed by Linda Green, but were in fact allegedly signed by someone else.
Forgery is a Class C felony and False Declaration is a Class B misdemeanor. If convicted on the most serious count, Brown could face up to seven years in prison for each count. DOCX could be fined up to $ 10,000 for each forgery conviction and $ 2,000 for each false declaration conviction.
The open question is whether Koster intends to stop here or is using the mob prosecution strategy that Catherine Cortez Masto seems to be employing, that of going after LPS, which was the major outsourcing platform for servicers, and seeing where that trail leads.
Additional comments from Gretchen Morgenson of the New York Times:
One of the largest companies that provided home foreclosure services to lenders across the nation, DocX, has been indicted on forgery charges by a Missouri grand jury — one of the few criminal actions to follow reports of widespread improprieties against homeowners…
A grand jury in Boone County, Mo., handed up an indictment Friday accusing DocX of 136 counts of forgery in the preparation of documents used to evict financially strained borrowers from their homes. Lorraine O. Brown, the company’s founder and former president, was indicted on the same charges.
Employees of DocX, a unit of Lender Processing Services of Jacksonville, Fla., executed and notarized millions of mortgage documents for big banks and loan servicers over the years. Lender Processing closed the company in April 2010, after evidence emerged of apparent forgeries in these documents, a practice now called robo-signing.
DocX was a particularly bad actor; we’ve discussed in earlier posts how it had a price sheet for various services, including fabricating documents like mortgage note out of whole cloth. I’m surprised it has taken this long for someone to go after them. While this is clearly good news for borrowers and bad news for LPS, I doubt that anyone at the banks will feel threatened by this action. Unless this action leads to further prosecutions, it only scrapes the surface of bad conduct in the mortgage arena.
Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, currency, Eviction, foreclosure, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, securities fraud Tagged: 60 minutes, AHMSI, appraisal fraud, attorney general, auction fraud, Chris Koster, credit bids, DocX Indictment, foreclosure fraud, FORECLOSURE SETTLEMENT, foreclosures, forgery, housing market, housing prices, investors, linda green, LPS, Missouri, mortgage fruad, mortgages, Robo-Signing, settlement, strategic default 
Livinglies’s Weblog
Debt Collection Robo-signing May Be More Prevalent Than Foreclosure Robo-signing
Debt Collection Robo-signing May Be More Prevalent Than Foreclosure Robo-signing
Last fall, mortgage lenders came under fire for a practice called “robo-signing,” whereby employees signed thousands of affidavits attesting to the accuracy of financial documentation without truly investigating the documentation. This practice led to lenders foreclosing on people’s homes without the proper documentation. It also, understandably, led to public outcry. People were being kicked out of their homes unnecessarily and unfairly, simply because of shoddy documentation.
It turns out that robo-signing may be even more prevalent in the debt collection industry than it is in the mortgage industry. As was recently reported, one of the country’s largest debt buyers has taken consumers to court based on affidavits signed by an employee who had died in 1995. Although the debt collection agency subsequently said that the affidavits were supplied from the company from which they’d purchased the debt, the problem seems rampant.
For example, a New York federal judge has allowed a class action suit against a debt collector and a law firm to move forward. The suit alleges that the debt collector and law firm engaged in racketeering (violating the RICO Act) by robo-signing debt validation affidavits and obtaining judgments against consumers, then threatening to freeze their bank accounts or garnish their wages. The law firm named in the suit apparently filed more than 100,000 lawsuits against consumers, and is being accused of what’s termed “sewer service,” telling the court that it delivered the proper notifications to consumers but never actually doing so.
Why is this a big deal? Because these affidavits are supposed to provide supporting documentation that the consumer being sued actually owes the debt. Judges use this documentation to decide in favor of the debt collection agency. With a judgment in hand, the debt collection agency can then garnish a consumer’s wages or freeze his or her bank account.
All too often, consumers don’t understand the importance of debt validation, or the role that attestations can play in court cases. That’s why some state attorneys general are investigating the robo-signing practice, and why the Federal Trade Commission has urged states to require debt collectors and debt buyers to disclose more information to consumers.
If you’re a consumer who has been served with court papers regarding a debt, it is critically important that you request (in writing) and obtain validation of the debt. The information you receive should include information about when the debt was incurred, the name of the original creditor, and the amount of the debt. If the information you receive doesn’t match your records, you should dispute the debt (again, in writing) within 30 days of being contacted by a debt collection agency. Filing a dispute helps you preserve your rights.
If you’ve receive documents that you are being sued in court regarding a debt, and you think the documentation is inaccurate, it’s crucial that you appear in court and either dispute the debt or the validation process. If you find that your bank accounts are inexplicably frozen or that your wages are being garnished, contact a fair debt attorney immediately. You could be the victim of an all-too-prevalent robo-signing practice.
Sergei Lemberg, Esq. is the Principal of Lemberg & Associates, a law firm specializing in fair debt collection law, CT lemon law, and other consumer law.
Find More Robosigning Articles
Avoid Robosigning that Leads to Foreclosure Mess
Avoid Robosigning that Leads to Foreclosure Mess
Robosigning is the latest buzz in the city. But what is Robosigning and how it can affect the homeowners? A shady financial practice recently gained media attention in the United States. The term Robosigning was first identified by Nye Lavalle, a consumer and investor advocate, in the year 1999. It refers to the automatic generation of legal documents. In the present scenario, these documents include foreclosure notices and mortgage arrears. As a result, many people either have lost their homes or been threatened with foreclosure.
The term Robosigners is used to describe those lenders or bank employees who hardly review the documents before signing them off. At time the real estate buyers do the same mistake that finally leads to a foreclosure mess.
In most cases, real estate buyers opt for a cursory scan and are unaware of the clauses that they are committing to; as a result, they end up paying thousand times more than what they initially calculated. A little precaution from both the parties can actually save a homeowner from losing their homes and lenders from the pain of reselling foreclosure homes. For example, buyers who are opting for mortgage loans for purchasing Columbus condos or homes for sale can end up paying much more than the asking price due to some buried clause in the mortgage.
At times, it is not even possible to blame the home buyers. Mortgage loan documents are usually long and include legalese that many buyers cannot understand. It is almost impossible to scan every line of the document.
This is where the home buyers need the help of the professionals. One can opt for a real estate lawyer, but they usually charge high fees even for checking the clause mentioned in the loan document. Instead, the buyers, while buying the Columbus condos or homes for sale can take the help of the Columbus real estate agents.
In fact, it is a great idea to take the help and advice from the Columbus real estate agents until the deal is closed. It is recommended to opt for an exclusive buyer’s agent who looks upon the best interest of the buyer. The Columbus real estate agent will deal with the lender or the bank employees and will review each clause on behalf of the home buyer, before the document is signed off.
While signing a home mortgage ask the Columbus real estate agent to give special emphasis on the margin rate on adjustable mortgages and prepayment penalty. A prepayment penalty is the fee that the home buyer needs to pay while paying off a mortgage before the scheduled time. It usually ranges from 1 to 3 percent of the total loan amount. Ask the Columbus real estate agent to speak with the lending institution to have the clause removed before the deal is final. Those who are opting for adjustable rate mortgages must be very careful; it may include issues like overly high margins for the lenders. The most common adjustable rate mortgage is 5/1 ARM. In case the figure is higher than 3%, ask your Columbus real estate agent to speak to the lender or look for a second option. Rates between 2.5% and 3% are more reasonable.
Rebekah Whitman is a real estate consultant who advises and counsels real estate investors and helps them through the investment process. To access more information about Ohio real estate visit http://www.revealty.com/.
Foreclosure scandal in the banking industry thanks to robosigning of thousands of faulty documents. Attorneys general are taking a stand and calling for halts to foreclosures. Robosigning term is defined.
Robosigning
Attorney Hugh Fitzpatrick discusses “robosigning” along with a recent opinion issued by a New York judge regarding this process of signing documents without even looking at what they are signing. judge schack issued the opinion in this new york case.
Video Rating: 0 / 5
This is some admittedly not top-notch raw footage shot towards the end of an Occupy Wall St march on Foley Square to tell Pres. Obama not to cut a “backroom deal that would give bankers broad immunity for illegally throwing tens of thousands of Americans out of their homes. The administration is pressuring state Attorneys General to undermine an ongoing investigation into the massive “robosigning” fraud, in exchange for a payoff by the banks”. Taken from the occupywallst.org Agenda for Saturday, November 5. By the time this video was shot, police were making the final push to forcibly move protesters away from the front of the NY County Clerk’s building. During this march, protesters were split by Centre St, and I was among those on the Foley Sq side denouncing Obama’s deal and later, the police’s actions. Using the distraction provided by their forcible removal of the nonviolent protesters on the other side of Centre St, police quietly cuffed and arrested several protesters, some with the aid of plainclothes officers, and some simply from the other end of the protests. These people were taken into custody and put in vans that quietly drove away, down Pearl St (which is right off Foley Sq). Most of the OWS core protesters had returned to Zuccotti Park, but I along with the more incensed of the protesters stayed to lend our support to those being forced off the sidewalk.
Three more notaries charged in Nevada robo-signing scandal: Who Will Flip?
MOST POPULAR ARTICLES
CLICK HERE TO GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION REPORT
EDITOR’S NOTE: It seems only a matter of time — very little time — before some of these notaries and others whose stamps and signatures were used, along with the supposed witnesses strike a deal with prosecutors and allow diligent prosecutors to move up the food chain to the highest players. Whoever they are, wherever they are, they better move fast to strike that deal because in these cases FIRST SING FIRST FREED — LAST TO SIGN GETS THE MOST TIME.
And it looks very much like the much maligned statute of limitations has been overused in quieting these people down. They have been “advised” not to say anything because they cannot be prosecuted. The complaints are quick to point out that while the crimes were committed 5-6 years ago, they were only discovered last year. In cases involving fraud, the statute usually doesn’t start to run until a reasonable person would have known sufficient facts about the fraud to allege the crime.
- Nevada grand jury indicts 2 LPS workers on robo-signing charges
- Las Vegas notary public guilty in robo-signing scheme found dead
- Nevada AG: Criminal actions coming to servicing industry soon
- Two state AGs subpoena LPS, National Title in robo-signing probe
- Maryland removes six notaries from office in foreclosure prob
The Office of the Nevada Attorney General announced Monday that it filed complaints against three more notaries in the state’s continuing massive robo-signing investigation.
Meghan Shaw, Jennifer Bloecker and Joseph Noel were charged with notarization of the signature of a person not in their presence, a gross misdemeanor.
“These complaints are the result of notary practices which did not conform with legal requirements of our state,” said Chief Deputy Attorney General John Kelleher in a statement. “These requirements were enacted to ensure the integrity of public documents and our action today is another step in our attempt to determine those responsible.”
According to the Nevada Attorney General criminal complaint, Shaw’s and Bloecker’s alleged crimes took place in 2005 and were discovered in 2010. Noel’s alleged crimes took place in 2008 and were discovered in 2010.
“These actions were performed in a secretive manner in order that the false documents be given full legal effect and that this criminal activity not be discovered,” the complaint states.
The charges stem from the notaries’ involvement in the scheme to file fraudulent documents with the Clark County Recorder’s office. The documents, referred to as Notices of Default, were used to initiate foreclosure on local homeowners. Through an investigation led by the Attorney General’s office, the notaries charged in the case confirmed that their job duties included signing another person’s name on a document and then notarizing that signature as valid.
Last week, Las Vegas notary public Tracy Lawrence was scheduled to be sentenced for her part in a foreclosure robo-signing scheme, but was found dead in her home after failing to show up for sentencing. The local TV station referred to Lawrence as a whistleblower in a larger robo-signing investigation that resulted in the first criminal charges for the filing of faulty foreclosure documents.
Earlier in November, two employees of Lender Processing Services (LPS: 19.17 +1.48%) were indicted in Nevada on alleged robo-signing charges connected to foreclosure filings. Gary Trafford and Gerri Sheppard, both California residents described as title officers, were indicted on a total of 606 counts by a Clark County grand jury.
Shaw, Noel and Bloecker are set to make an initial appearance in court on Wednesday, December 28.
Write to Justin T. Hilley.
Follow him on Twitter @JustinHilley.
Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, currency, Eviction, foreclosure, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, securities fraud Tagged: attorney general, bankruptcy, borrower, countrywide, disclosure, foreclosure, foreclosure defense, foreclosure offense, foreclosures, fraud, LOAN MODIFICATION, modification, Nevada, quiet title, rescission, RESPA, robosigning, securitization, TILA audit, trustee, WEISBAND 
Livinglies’s Weblog
Robosigning and Paperless Mortgage Technology
Real Estate Attorney Hugh Fitzpatrick from Tewksbury Massachusetts discusses the impact of robosigning and paperless mortgage technology
Video Rating: 5 / 5
2011 11 5 OWS Mortgage Robosigning March.mov
Robosigning, Fraudclosuregate, new jersey foreclosures, matt weidner law Distributed by Tubemogul.
Robosigning Foreclosure Crisis: Part III
www.phillipsgarcia.com Part III of Carlin Phillips Explaining the Robosigning Foreclosure Crisis How do I know if I have been robosigned and what can we do about it? Find the other two parts on our youtube channel www.youtube.com
Video Rating: 0 / 5
Robosigning revisited: Is the foreclosure documentation crisis spreading to bankruptcy courts?
Jonice Gray Tucker, Lauren Randell and Thomas Dowell of BuckleySandler LLP discuss how challenges to mortgage servicers’ practices are arising in bankruptcy cases, as well as in lawsuits concerning foreclosures.
Thomson Reuters News & Insight: Bankruptcy Law – Insight