Homebuyers lose life savings during wire fraud transaction, sue Wells Fargo, realtor & title company

Wouldn’t surprise me if there was a Bankster patent for this type of scam. Folks, if you are reading this – please understand privacy and complete safety on the Internet does not exist.

justiceleague00's avatarJustice League

DENVER –  A Colorado couple, who lost their life savings while trying to buy their dream retirement home, has filed suit against Wells Fargo Bank, Land Title Guarantee Co., Envoy Mortgage Ltd., Kentwood Real Estate Services LLC and realtor Karen Porras, alleging that none of them did enough to protect sensitive financial information.

James and Candace Butcher sold their house in Longmont and were using the proceeds — more than $272,000 — as a down payment on a new home, at 41467 Sunny Farm Circle in Parker.

They said they wanted a place closer to their son and one big enough for grandchildren.

“We were truly excited, when through negotiations, we won the bid,” Candace Butcher said. “Through the entire process, I kept saying, ‘I can’t believe this is going to be our house.’”

Within 24 hours of closing, not only was it not their house, but they lost all…

View original post 4 more words

The Pooling and Servicing Agreement: Why eat just half the enchilada?

Some REMICs do not contain a PSA – they use a Trust Agreement so reading everything is essential. Sad part of these unregulated financial transactions is that many of the controlling and underpinning documents are not required to be filed. Bankruptcy Courts like New Century have ordered files to be destroyed. Why the necessity to destroy a cloud, you might ask? Oh, that’s another good chapter waiting to be written!

9th Circuit: Assignment in Breach of PSA is Voidable not Void. Here is why they are wrong

Assignments are used to hide rehypothecation and other unauthorized actions. Clearly, another episode in unclean hands. KEYSTONE CO. v. EXCAVATOR CO. 290 U.S. 240 (1933):
“The meaning and proper application of the maxim are to be considered. As authoritatively expounded, the words and the reasons upon which it rests extend to the party seeking relief in equity. “It is one of the fundamental principles upon which equity jurisprudence is founded, that before a complainant can have a standing in court he must first show that not only has he a good and meritorious cause of action, but he must come into court with clean hands. He must be frank and fair with the court, nothing about the case under consideration should be guarded, but everything that tends to a full and fair determination of the matters in controversy should be placed before the court.” Story’s Equity Jurisprudence, 14th ed., § 98. 3The governing principle is “that whenever a party who, as actor, seeks to set the judicial machinery in motion and obtain some remedy, has violated conscience, or good faith, or other equitable principle, in his prior conduct, then the doors of the court will be shut against him in limine; the court will refuse to interfere on his behalf, to acknowledge his right, or to award him any remedy.” Pomeroy, Equity Jurisprudence, 4th ed., § 397. This Court has declared: “It is a principle in chancery, that he who asks relief must have acted in good faith. 2The equitable powers of this court can never be exerted in behalf of one who has acted fraudulently or who by deceit or any unfair means has gained an advantage. To aid a party in such a case would make this court the abetter of iniquity.” Bein v. Heath, 6 How. 228, 247. And again: “A court of equity acts only when and as conscience commands, and if the conduct of the plaintiff be offensive to the dictates of natural justice, then, whatever may be the rights he possesses and whatever use he may make of them in a court of law, he will be held remediless in a court of equity.” Deweese v. Reinhard, 165 U.S. 386, 390.

Deutsche Bank reaches $95 million RMBS settlement with Maryland

We’ll probably never know how much Maryland lost in this deal as a result of gambling with Wall Street.

justiceleague00's avatarJustice League

The state of Maryland announced last week that it reached a $95 million settlement with Deutsche Bank over claims that Deutsche Bank misled investors about its securitization and sale of residential mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations during the run-up to the financial crisis.

The settlement, which was announced last week by the office of Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, includes a requirement that Deutsche Bank provide $80 million in relief to consumers in Maryland.

Read on.

View original post