Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Bank of America begins contacting more than 200,000 customers for possible mortgage reductions


LOS ANGELES — Homeowners with a Bank of America mortgage have good reason to check their mailbox.
The lender said Tuesday it has begun mailing out letters to customers who may qualify to have their home loans reduced as part of a multistate settlement over alleged foreclosure abuses.
The Charlotte, N.C.-based company estimates that more than 200,000 of its customers could potentially be in line for a reduction in the principal balance on their mortgage.
Some customers could receive letters from the bank as early as this week that invite them to provide financial information as part of a review process for the program. The bank plans to have mailed out most of the letters by the end of the third quarter.
Bank of America estimates that customers who end up receiving the loan modificationswill save, on average, 30 percent a month on their mortgage payments.
Among the criteria to qualify, borrowers must owe more on their mortgage than the property is worth, and be at least 60 days behind on payments as of Jan. 31.
Bank of America will reduce the amount owed by the homeowners by as much as $100,000 in some cases. And only mortgages that are currently owned by Bank of America will qualify. Those that are owned by government entities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, or backed by the Federal Housing Administration, will not be eligible.
The lender said it began reducing the principal balance on mortgages in March, focusing initially on homeowners who already had a loan modification bid under review.
Under this initiative, the bank said it has mailed 5,000 trial modification offers, representing potentially more than $700 million in forgiven principal balances.
Bank of America Corp., Wells Fargo & Co., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup Inc. and Ally Financial Inc. agreed to a $25 billion settlement with 49 state attorneys general and federal officials in February.
Most of the settlement is earmarked for reducing loans for about 1 million U.S. households that owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth.
About 11 million American households are “underwater” on their mortgages, meaning they owe more than their homes are worth. The broader settlement is expected reduce loans for only about 1 million of those Americans and send checks to others who were improperly foreclosed upon.
Of the five major lenders, Bank of America’s penalties were the highest: $11.8 billion.
The settlement ended a painful chapter of the financial crisis, when home values sank and millions edged toward foreclosure. Lender abuses exacerbated the crisis. Many companies processed foreclosures without verifying documents. Some employees signed papers they hadn’t read or used fake signatures to speed foreclosures, a practice known as robo-signing.
In the fall of 2010, Bank of America along with other large lenders temporarily halted foreclosures after a furor over robo-signed documents.

Sunday, May 6, 2012

LOUISIANA SUES BANKSTERS UNDER RICO LAWS

 Will the Biggest Banks Finally Go the Way of the Gambinos?

One state has finally found the guts to go after the banks that created the MERS monster, invoking RICO laws. Yes, MERS was part of a vast criminal conspiracy by the biggest banks (including the GSEs) to cheat counties out of property recording fees and to speedforeclosures while destroying the Western property law tradition.

The banks do not have title to the properties they are stealing. Because MERS destroyed the chain of title. But Washington sees foreclosure as the only way out of the mess created by Wall Street.

The banks want to take the homes, quietly package them into bundles, and then sell them to thehedge funds at cents on the dollar. That will allow Wall Street to complete the transformation of our country to the “ownership society” sought by former President Bush...Yes, the plan all along was to transfer all ownership to the top 1%...

http://www.levyinstitute.org/publications/?docid=14)

But the little state of Louisiana is throwing a monkey wrench into that scheme. It recognizes that MERS was at the very center of the criminal conspiracy. The state is invoking the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act alleging wire and mail fraud and a scheme intended to defraud parishes out of recording fees.

http://agbeat.com/real-estate-mortgage-economy/mortgage/louisiana-sues-banks-under-rico-laws-for-mers-scheme/

http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/2012/04/21/louisiana-sues-banksters-under-rico-laws-will-the-biggest-banks-finally-go-the-way-of-the-gambinos/

Saturday, May 5, 2012

Bank wants suit over lending practices transferred


4/30/2012 8:00 AM By Jessica M. Karmasek  -Kanawha Bureau

SZ200_htgnbank.jpg
CHARLESTON - One of West Virginia's largest banks has asked that a lawsuit brought against it for predatory lending be moved to a federal court.

Earlier this month, Huntington National Bank submitted an eight-page notice of removal to have the suit transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.

Plaintiff Gary Miller sued the bank, its mortgage group and three other defendants in Kanawha County Circuit Court in December 2011.

Miller accused them of "flipping," or using inflated appraisals and other unlawful practices to induce "unsophisticated" consumers into a series of unwise and expensive loans.

Flipping maximizes fee income to banks, but strips homeowners of equity in their homes, pushing them into default and, in some cases, foreclosure.

Miller contends he was "flipped" repeatedly by Huntington Bank, resulting in indebtedness that, he says, "ballooned" from $120,000 to $273,500 over five years and has brought him to the brink of foreclosure.

Kara Cunningham Williams, of Charleston law firm Steptoe and Johnson PLLC, points to Miller's filing of a voluntary petition in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of West Virginia in June 2010.

She argues in the bank's April 20 notice that the Southern District has jurisdiction over the Kanawha Circuit Court action because it is a civil proceeding arising under Title 11.

The bank's lawyer also argues that the lawsuit is between citizens of different states and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.

Miller is a West Virginia resident. Huntington Bank's main office is in Columbus, Ohio.

Comments on this article

    SEND US YOUR COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

    Freddie Mac Says Mortgage Refund Demands Hit $3.2 Billion



    Rick Green, Bloomberg
    Freddie Mac, the mortgage-finance company operating under U.S. conservatorship, said its pending requests to lenders for refunds on faulty mortgages rose about 19 percent in the first quarter to $3.2 billion.
    The new total included 38 percent that were outstanding for more than four months, the McLean, Virginia-based company said today in a securities filing. The sum represents the unpaid balance on requests to sellers and servicers of single-family home loans, and the increase is measured from the end of 2011. The total decreased from $3.4 billion in the first quarter of last year.
    Costs tied to faulty mortgages have cost the nation’s biggest banks more than $72 billion since the start of 2007, according to data compiled by Bloomberg, and lenders say the threat of more “putbacks” is deterring them from making new home loans backed by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
    Most banks “are actively exiting the mortgage market and have steep declines in their mortgage portfolio,” Meredith Whitney, head of the self-named advisory firm, said today in a radio interview on “Bloomberg Surveillance” with Tom Keene and Ken Prewitt. “The big issue is, do you want to be in bed with an agency that is going to come back and sue you? No.”
    A Federal Reserve survey released this week asked senior loan officers to explain why they were less likely than in 2006 to originate a conventional home loan that meets standards of the so-called government-sponsored enterprises. More than half the respondents “noted the higher risk of putbacks of delinquent mortgages by the GSEs as an important factor, and that factor was listed as the most important one by the largest number of banks,” the Fed reported.

    Friday, May 4, 2012

    Jamie Dimon: Occupy Wall Street has ‘legitimate complaints

    ’

    May 3, 2012, 3:16 PM
    Jamie Dimon, the outspoken head of one of America’s biggest banks, said Thursday that the Occupy Wall Street protesters have some “legitimate complaints,” but that investment banking has a bright future and will remain a highly paid industry.
    The chairman and CEO of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. made the comments after receiving  the Executive of the Year award presented to him by the University of Rochester’s Simon Graduate School of Business at a hotel ballroom in midtown Manhattan. Dimon stuck around to answer a few questions.
    Asked about the Occupy Wall Street movement against financial greed and economic inequality, Dimon acknowledged that the protesters have some “legitimate complaints.” He argued, however, that it’s unfair to paint all institutions with one brush: “It was everyone guilty. That’s another form of discrimination.”
    He expressed optimism about his industry: “Investment banking is going to have a bright future. [...] It will always be a highly paid industry.”
    “When things go wrong, finance gets blamed,” just like blaming speculators for high oil prices, Dimon said. The remark was an apparent reference to President Barack Obama’s recent call for new measures to prevent manipulation of oil markets.
    The J.P. Morgan CEO discussed a number of other pressing issues such as the euro-zone debt crisis, the U.S. fiscal situation, the potential for recovery in the U.S. housing market and the prospect for more quantitative easing from the Federal Reserve.
    As usual, he was critical of attempts to regulate the financial industry, saying the banks are getting rules from regulators in Washington, Brussels, London, Tokyo and Basel: “Honestly, no one is in charge,” he said, arguing that while J.P. Morgan will figure things out given its fleet of lawyers and other resources at its disposal, the regulations are “going to kill the smaller banks.”
    Dimon’s sense of humor was on display throughout his appearance, eliciting occasional roars of laughter from the audience.
    He took a question from a young man attending Browning, a private prep school for boys in New York City. “I went to Browning,” Dimon said, proceeding to tell a story about an award the school had given him some time ago.
    “I was surprised [to get that award],” he said. “They didn’t like me that much when I was there.”
    – Polya Lesova

    Thursday, May 3, 2012

    Mortgage industry has long way to go to clean up its act


    Nearly two years after the "robo-signing" scandal forced a reboot of the nation's home-foreclosure process, mortgage servicers have begun the hard work of buffing up their industry's tarnished image after years of making life miserable for Americans struggling to hold on to their homes.
    Changing the industry's bad behavior will be a slow and painful process for servicers who collect mortgage payments and manage the accounts on behalf of lenders, however. The inappropriate fees, mishandled accounts, shoddy paperwork and illegal foreclosures that first came to light after the 2007 housing crisis were long-standing problems that had gone largely unnoticed for years.
    Whether it was obtaining loan modifications, arranging short sales, negotiating principal reductions or refinancing homes through the federal Home AffordableRefinance Program, mortgage servicers were more obstacle than facilitator during the housing meltdown, according to many housing advocates and consumer attorneys. And depending on whom you talk to, not much has changed.
    "They're a huge, inefficient, bureaucratic ship that doesn't operate well, and it's not going to turn itself around quickly. Just the day in, day out pulling of teeth you have to do (with servicers) is mind-numbing," said Daniel Lindsey, supervisory attorney at the Legal Assistance Foundation in Chicago, which helps delinquent homeowners avoid foreclosure.
    Jose Rodriguez, a foreclosure intervention counselor with the Mission Economic Development Agency in San Francisco, said it could still take more than a year to complete a loan-modification review.
    "By the time we see clients who've tried it on their own, they're ready to give up," Rodriguez said. "We've witnessed clients that have easily taken at least two to two-and-a-half years to complete a modification request."
    David H. Stevens, the president and CEO of the Mortgage Bankers Association, acknowledged servicers' recent deficiencies but said the industry had changed its business model and that progress couldn't be denied.
    "There are still mistakes being made, but it pales in comparison to what this environment was like in the early part of this housing crisis," Stevens said. "I think we are clearly on the precipice of that changing."
    Early on, servicers admittedly were unprepared to handle the massive failures of unsustainable and exotic mortgages that had originated during the housing bubble. Failed lenders such as Countrywide Mortgage and Washington Mutual added millions more bad loans to servicers' caseloads just as they were trying to ramp up their systems and staffing to handle the crisis, Stevens said.
    But after the problems resulted in federal consent orders against 17 servicers, a near-nationwide moratorium on foreclosures, a $25 billion national settlement to address past improprieties and federal plans for mandatory industry standards, the situation is starting to improve.
    The national settlement negotiated by the federal government and the states has forced the nation's five largest servicers to beef up staffing, improve communication with borrowers, assign one person per account and provide greater accountability when executing foreclosure documents. Stevens called the requirements "extraordinary."
    "I've been in the financial services market for three decades," he said. "There's never been standards like this."
    Many of the settlement terms probably will become mandatory for the entire industry when the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau finalizes new standards for servicers later this year.
    Announced in February, the terms of the $25 billion settlement call for Ally Financial (formerly GMAC), Bank Of America, Citi, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo to provide $17 billion in principal reductions and loan modifications, up to $3 billion in refinancing relief, $1.5 billion to borrowers who lost their homes and another $1.5 billion to participating states.
    While the settlement is a "good first step," said Diane Thompson, an attorney with the National Consumer Law Center, she wonders whether the agreement might cause servicers to relax their consumer-friendly efforts, realizing that their punishment already has been delivered.
    "I think there's a real risk that the pressure on them to behave well has disappeared," she said.
    As for the industry guidelines the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has proposed, Thompson called them "very weak."
    "They don't go much beyond existing law and the clear and explicit literal mandates of Dodd-Frank. So if I was a servicer, I wouldn't be particularly worried," she said, speaking of the 2010 financial overhaul law.
    While most of the financial relief spelled out in the settlement is yet to come, the agreement is bearing some early fruit. Loan counselors and attorneys say they're starting to see more loan modifications and principal reductions than at any time in recent memory.
    "A year ago, I could count on two hands the number of principal reductions I've seen over the last five years. Now I've seen that many in the last six months. And that was before the settlement," said John Groene, a neighborhood director at Neighborhood Housing Services of Chicago Inc., a nonprofit community revitalization agency.
    Burt Hamrol of South San Francisco, Calif., is an early benefactor of the settlement. The 51-year-old carpenter recently received a letter that said he'd been approved for a $297,000 principal reduction by Bank of America, after several years of battling its mortgage servicers.
    "When I opened up the envelope and read the letter, I started crying," Hamrol said. "I'm going, 'No way. Really?' I'm just blown away by this."
    The unexpected turn should provide Hamrol with a happy ending to a near-five-year odyssey that saw him denied loan modifications three times after his mortgage payment with Countrywide doubled from $1,800 to $3,600 per month.
    Hamrol's problems began in 2007, when he tried to refinance his interest-only mortgage to a fixed-rate plan. Countrywide offered the fixed rate for a three-month trial period, Hamrol said, but after that, the payments doubled.
    When Bank of America took over Countrywide, Hamrol said, it tried to get him to pay the same amount, but he refused.
    "They said that's what it is because my house is worth all this money," Hamrol said. "I told them the house is only 890 square feet. They said, 'But you live in San Francisco in a desirable area.' I told 'em I live in South San Francisco and it's a horrible area."
    For 18 months, Hamrol said, he never paid the $3,600 mortgage. After being barraged with collection attempts and threats of foreclosure, he said, he put the home up for sale in 2009 and moved in with a friend for four months.
    "It went from $699,000 to $599,000 to $499,000 to $399,000. I didn't get one offer," he recalled.
    Hamrol eventually moved back home and began working with the Mission Economic Development Agency for a loan modification. The bank initially agreed to a three-month modification trial period at $1,800 per month, Hamrol said, but then he was denied permanent relief. Hamrol said the bank didn't properly credit his payments. He was offered another trial modification, but was denied again after the trial ended.
    At his wits' end, Hamrol said, the nightmare finally ended several weeks ago, when he got a letter "out of the blue" from Bank of America that said it would knock $297,000 off his principal and lower his payments during yet another trial period to $2,200 per month at 2.5 percent interest.
    "If this really happens, I'm gonna go to Ireland and kiss the Blarney stone or something. I can't believe it. I'm going to make my payments in May, but I still don't trust them," Hamrol said.
    Rick Simon, a Bank of America spokesman in California, was unfamiliar with the case but said Hamrol probably was one of several hundred people nationwide who had received similar offers because they already were slated for relief under the settlement, as their paperwork and documentation were in order.
    "These people are being helped in a way that wasn't available two months ago, prior to the settlement," Simon said.
    Similar letters will go out over the next few months to some 200,000 other Bank of America borrowers as their eligibility under the settlement is determined, Simon said. Bank of America has provided more than 1 million loan modifications in the past four years, but Simon acknowledged that the program "hasn't always gone as smoothly as we hoped."
    He said the high default rate on Bank of America trial loan modifications typically resulted from offering the plans without properly documenting borrowers' ability to pay. The large number of borrowers who needed assistance was also a problem for the bank's servicers, "but we've gotten better and better as time has gone along," he said.
    Posted on Thu, May. 03, 2012 02:44 PM