Excellent! Thank you so much!
Injured by Ocwen? Take Action Now!
1
Category Archives: Uncategorized
David Dayen: A Bank Even a Socialist Could Love
Much better way to go. At least with Credit Unions too, members have a say. If government employees and trade union employees had been asked to vote on where their pension funds were going to be invested – they might have said NO to UNREGULATED derivatives and voted for something less risky and maybe won’t have loss the entire amount gambling on Wall Street.
Surrendering Property: The Consequences of Surrender Are … Take Your Pick
Many bankruptcy attorneys do not explain the meaning of “surrender” to their clients as the attorney files out these bankruptcy petitions. “Surrender Dorothy” means “give it back” to the munchkins…not to the witch. However, “surrender” in bankruptcy means give up your rights to the home and property to the bank…or the bankruptcy trustee is there is equity. And you can bet your bottom dollar if the property isn’t underwater the bankruptcy trustee will figure some way to squeeze the money out of the bank.
Additionally, many bankruptcy attorneys use the surrender tactic to keep from having to oppose a motion for relief from stay by the bank, doing as little work as possible for their fee. Beware. Make sure you clearly state your intention to keep the home.
A note for law makers: since bankruptcy petition paperwork is so complicated and not designed for a pro she in the first place. If an attorney makes a mistake on the filing – make the statute read that the drafter of the petition is held accountable for errors rather than the debtor – and enforce financial sanctions collectible by the court on behalf of the debtor and its creditors.
In re Elkouby, 561 B.R. 551 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2016) –
A chapter 7 debtor filed a statement that he intended to surrender real property securing a loan. After the bankruptcy case was closed, the debtor continued actively opposing a foreclosure action. In response the mortgagee moved to reopen the case and asked the bankruptcy court to compel the debtor to surrender the property. The central issue was the meaning and consequences of “surrender.”
View original post 830 more words
Does SOL Run from Date of Violation or Discovery?
May v Nationstar Mortgage: Reckless Indifference resulting in Mental Anguish results in 500k punitive damages award
“We first evaluate whether the reprehensible nature of Nationstar’s conduct warrants punitive damages. Reprehensibility is the most important guidepost. Gore, 517 U.S. at 575. When assessing reprehensibility, the Supreme Court instructs us to consider whether:
the harm caused was physical as opposed to economic; the tortious conduct evinced an indifference to or a reckless disregard of the health or safety of others; the target of the conduct had financial vulnerability; the conduct involved repeated actions or was an isolated incident; and the harm was the result of intentional malice, trickery, or deceit, or mere accident.
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408, 419 (2003). The presence of just one indicium of reprehensibility is sufficient to render conduct reprehensible and support an award of punitive damages. See Trickey, 705 F.3d at 803.”
Philadelphia looks to drop Wells Fargo’s handling of city’s $2B payroll
Philadelphia City Council has introduced legislation to remove Wells Fargo & Co.as the bank handling the city’s $2 billion payroll.
City Treasurer Rasheia Johnson’s office sent City Council the results of a request for proposal for the upcoming fiscal year that recommended replacing the San Francisco-based bank with Citizens Bank. Wells Fargo will maintain the remaining $1 billion in business with the city outside of payroll, as that work was not scheduled to be up for bid.
What It Means to Cure a Default: Never Take Anything for Granted, the Rules Can Always Change
The debtor proposed a chapter 11 plan that included curing defaults under a mortgage loan. The lender objected because the cure payments were calculated using the pre-default interest rate as opposed to the higher default rate.
View original post 979 more words
CREDIT SLIPS: $45 MILLION FOR STAY VIOLATIONS
“The mirage of promised mortgage modification lured the plaintiff debtors into a kafkaesque nightmare of stay-violating foreclosure and unlawful detainer, tardy foreclosure rescission kept secret for months, home looted while the debtors were dispossessed, emotional distress, lost income, apparent heart attack, suicide attempt, and post-traumatic stress disorder, for all of which Bank of America disclaims responsibility.” All too familiar.
$45 Million for Stay Violations posted by Alan White
How much in punitive damages is enough to punish unlawful conduct and deter its 
repetition? $45 million was one bankruptcy court’s opinion, in the case of a wrongful home foreclosure and eviction in knowing violation of the automatic stay.
The court described the plaintiff-debtors’ treatment by defendant Bank of America as Kafkaesque, and found their deeply emotional testimony (one of them attempted suicide during the ordeal) completely credible, awarding more than $1 million in actual damages for the loss of housing and emotional distress. The court also noted that Bank of America had repeatedly settled cases with federal and state regulators for hundreds of millions, and even billions, of dollars, in recognition of serious and repeated compliance failures, including some related directly Continue reading
The Feds Bag another Small Fish: Georgia Real Estate Investor Pleads Guilty to Bid Rigging and Bank Fraud at Public Foreclosure Auctions
…And off in the distance as they escorted him away in handcuffs he mumbled, “Fannie made me do it” but no one cared, wrote the author of the new screenplay by the same name. [somewhat fiction, maybe]
Trump’s SEC Nominee Has a Major Conflict-of-Interest Problem
I doubt there is a sufficient explanation – but it would still be interesting to hear the logic of this selection.
Jay Clayton is tied to big banks and corporations—and that could hold up fraud enforcement.
The dominant theme of Thursday’s Senate Banking Committee hearing with Jay Clayton, nominee for chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission, was conflict of interest. Not the well-documented conflicts of some of the more notorious members of the Trump administration but the conflicts of Clayton himself.
A partner at the high-powered corporate law firm Sullivan & Cromwell, Clayton represented Wall Street banks throughout his career. He served as Goldman Sachs’s lawyer during the Wall Street bailout, allowing it to emerge from the financial crisis relatively unscathed. He helped deliver failed investment bank Bear Stearns to JPMorgan Chase and other failed investment bank Lehman Brothers to Barclays. Hedefended Ally Financial in its foreclosure fraud settlement with the government and represented Deutsche Bank in its “mirror trade” Russian oligarch money laundering scandal. He was the lawyer…
View original post 65 more words
