I’m testifying before House Financial Services tomorrow regarding the “CHOICE Act,” the Republican Dodd-Frank alternative. My testimony is here. It’s lengthy, but it doesn’t even cover everything in the CHOICE Act–there are just too many bad provisions, starting with the idea of letting megabanks out of Dodd-Frank’s heightened prudential standards in exchange for more capital, then moving on to a total gutting of consumer financial protection, and ending with a very poorly conceived good bank/bad bank resolution system executed through a new bankruptcy subchapter. The only good thing about the Bad CHOICE Act is that it has little chance of becoming law any time soon.
Excerpt: “The CHOICE Act also has numerous provisions that make it difficult for the SEC to pursue enforcement actions and achieve meaningful relief. These provisions reduce the SEC’s deterrence ability and thereby embolden financial fraudsters whose malfeasance can reverberate throughout the financial system. Among other provisions, the CHOICE Act:
requires the SEC to make additional findings before levying civil monetary penalties against issuers.24 Thus, while the CHOICE Act increases financial fraud penalties with the one hand,25 with the other it ensures that those penalties will rarely be imposed.
repeals the SEC’s authority to issue officer and director bans.26 This means that even the worst fraudsters will continue to be able to participate in securities markets.
eliminates automatic bad actor disqualification from securities law exemptions even for firms that have been convicted of felonies. Apparently a convicted felon cannot be trusted with the right to vote, but can be trusted with pension funds and retirees’ savings. [CHOICE Act § 419]”
The GLASKI opinion has made the Wall Street banking industry crazy. There was an outcry for publication of this case as it allowed homeowners to challenge fabricated assignments. The Court agreed to publish the opinion.
The securitization case was briefed and argued as a New York law trust case when in fact it was actually a Delaware trust. While the outcome may have likely been the same, the Court’s opinion was based upon New York Trust Law. Thereafter, the banks (that it appears failed to raise these issues during or after the hearings) wanted the opinion to be de-certified for publication. Continue reading →
Yesterday, Bernard J. Garbutt III (really), a partner with NY firm Morgan Lewis, sent a letter to Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil.Sakauye and the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of California representing Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., following an October 4, 2013 letter from AlvaradoSmith (representing JPMorgan Chase) requesting depublication of Glaski v. Bank of America, N.A.
Apparently, Glaski makes the banksters uncomfortable enough that they want the decision to be removed from publication based on the fact that the “PSA states explicitly that the Trust is a Delaware Statutory Trust, organized under the Delaware Statutory Trusts Statute, 12 Del. Code Ann. §§ 3801 et seq., and governed by Delaware law. See, e.g., PSA § 10.05 (governing law).” So, the Wall Street banks hired high priced firms to pen letters to the appellate court begging to hide the Glaski decision.
Ya think, maybe? MERS alleges to have registered 71 million mortgages. There were likely another 15-20 million “non-MERS” mortgages…
Lynn Szymoniak in Salon:
BY DAVID DAYEN Prepare to be outraged. Newly obtained filings from this Florida woman’s lawsuit uncover horrifying scheme (Update)
If you know about foreclosure fraud, the mass fabrication of mortgage documents in state courts by banks attempting to foreclose on homeowners, you may have one nagging question: Why did banks have to resort to this illegal scheme? Was it just cheaper to Continue reading →
Securitization is a relatively new innovation given the operation of the traditional mortgage loan industry over the last 70 years.
What is routinely overlooked is the fact that this entire new process and product development has been patented in the USTPO extensively by the banks. The loans that were sold at the turn of the century through present day are NOT traditional mortgage loans. This fact is further complicated because there was no meeting of the minds when the contracts were formed. Additionally, there are multiple defects that should literally void documents or cause defective products to be recalled. Continue reading →
“Sneaky” comes to mind to describe the government and the banksters regarding two settlements between US banks and government regulators who alleged that the banks were guilty of widespread abuse of the foreclosure system that allowed banks to seize homes from defaulting borrowers. The banksters agreed to pay out more than $20 billion on Monday to resolve claims arising from the mortgage crisis. Continue reading →
The over-burdened judiciary isn’t always up to speed as quickly as it ought to be and good case law doesn’t always make it to the top of the pile for the clerks to review and digest. Even good attorneys occasionally miss pertinent material.
So, let’s go back to about 2 years ago when Yves Smith, who is an absolutely brilliant author and blogger of “NakedCapitalism” and 4closureFraud, truly a leader in the foreclosure defense blogging pack, wrote about an Alabama securitization case named U.S. BANK v. ERICA CONGRESS.
Of course the case went to appeal and the outcome of the appellate decision was a unanimous decision, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals reversed a lower court decision on a foreclosure case, U.S. Bank v. Congress and remanded the case to trial court. The reasons hinged upon 2 superb expert witnesses. Continue reading →
If Paul Revere were alive today he would be riding through the town warning “The REMICs have failed!” However, the government these days would go, “Shhhhhh!”
Most average homeowners have no idea what a REMIC is – actually most attorneys have no clue …. so, you know many of the Judges are completely in the dark. REMICs are a form of IRS tax shelter sold to investors as part of the mortgage-backed securities package (Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit (“REMIC”) pursuant to I.R.C. §§860A-G).
It was midnight Sunday. I couldn’t sleep. NY Times emails me an alert to Gretchen Morgenson’s article about how the Obama “I only care about the banks” Administration is trying to negatively influence the NY AG (my hero) Eric Schneiderman who is gunning after the Wall Street banks for their foreclosure fraud and Ponzi scheme that collapsed our country. I was angry, tossing and turning all night thinking about how I would blog my emotions. When I awoke there were several other well-respected bloggers that expressed my feelings for the leader of the unemployed, homeless, “free” world better than I ever could. Attorney General of N.Y. Is Said to Face Pressure on Bank Foreclosure Deal
Katie Porter posted an interesting viewpoint on theCredit Slips blog this week called theTheFree House Myth. A synopsis of the column points to the fact that the banks may have bad paper now – but they’ll be back. It almost sounded like Katie had been drinking Kool-Aid with RCO when she stated in her closing line, “[T]he free house is political handwringing, not legal reality.”
Porter came under fire by no less than (my personal favorite) Adam J. Levitin, Professor of Lawat Georgetown University. Professor Levitin has provided significant testimony before Congress and has dissected the Wall Street securitization scheme that collapsed our economy. Professor Levitin posted his comments to politely debunk Porter’s ‘no free house’ viewpoint… Continue reading →