I don’t think they’ve misjudged anything. I think it is more that they are deliberately dangling this out there in hopes that no one will notice what they’re NOT doing elsewhere.

Also, much of what is listed in the bullet points protects the mortgage servicers as much as it does the borrowers. The servicers don’t want the hassles of trying to correct the problems caused by scammers, so if the DOJ etc can cut down on the scams, it makes the banksters very very happy.

Which, in the end, is what everything about the foreclosure mess seems to boil down to.

[Also, having the government tell people not to strategically default is a plus from the bankster’s POV. Sure, companies strategically default with relative impunity, in order to straighten out a bad balance sheet. Troubled companies walking away from bad loans/debts (“you cut my debt in half and I pay, or I declare bankruptcy and you get pennies down the road sometime.”) is SOP in the business world . . . but shhhhhh: don’t tell the underwater homeowners.]

To be fair, the government targeting these particular scamsters is not a bad idea. (I have a story to relate, below.) But, the worst scamsters are the banks and lenders and their minions. And they continue to get a pass.

Now, to my story. We once had a client come in who made the mistake of dialing the number on one of those signs you see on phone poles at traffic lights, the ones that say “Avoid Foreclosure”. The scheme was that the folks who would remedy his problems would deed the property to a straw person, promise to cover the current owner’s bills and mortgage for 6 months or a year, then deed it back to our hapless pigeon with a new mortgage, come the end of that time, all for a nominal service charge. In reality, what they would do is mine the equity in the property, divvying it up between themselves (about $100k cash out) and their crew and leaving the homeowner with a much higher mortgage and $500, assuming they didn’t just keep the house and kick our hapless pigeon into the street. This bunch was a veritable United Nations of crime: the ringleader was a Jamaican woman most reminiscent of that fortuneteller lady from the 90s (who went to prison for wire fraud), her Ghanaian boyfriend, a Russian woman straw purchaser, a couple of lawyers from an adjacent state (and not admitted in ours) with names one might think were Jewish or Russian, and a couple other folks who played minor roles. Long story short, we threw a suit together alleging these folks were carrying out consumer frauds under our state’s consumer fraud law – by holding themselves out as mortgage brokers and debt relief agents without the appropriate licensing – and that the lawyers (who’d done a closing from the pigeon to the straw purchaser) were engaged in the crime of the unauthorized practice of law (by doing the closing involving realty and deeds in our state), and that these folks were all in a conspiracy (which they were) and therefore were all liable to us and the court should undo it.

Thankfully, we caught the local judge in a good mood that day and when she issued the injunction and hauled the lawyers into court, the crew put their tails between their legs and gave us what we wanted, though I didn’t get what I wanted, which was prosecutions and jail time for some or all of them.

A rare case, in that the pigeon had enough sense to get a lawyer who knew how to address these kind of scams. But it only addressed one case and not the systemic fraud the banks have perpetrated, scot-free, for years now.

David Dayen and Yves Smith had articles yesterday [FDL News and Naked Capitalism, respectively] about how a robosigning whistleblower turned up dead on the day of her sentencing prior to turning state’s evidence. It’s quite clear that the Obama WH thinks they’ll tap into all of that bankster money in the election, but they are stupid to believe Timmeh and Helicopter Ben when these shills tell them this stuff.

I’m not sure what it will take to make Obama’s epiphany occur, but he’d better “get it” soon, since I see a stealth candidate well funded by AFP and Crossroads and those orgs handling the ground game too, with unlimited money clogging up the airwave buys. The only way Obama survives politically is by being a progressive and tapping the OWS.

Has the SEC tried to get out of Rakoff’s court yet?

It’s been a couple of days now.

Massachusetts’ DA Martha Coakley files charges against big banks in Suffolk Superior Court today.
http://masslawyersweekly.com/the-docket-blog/2011/12/01/coakley-files-suit-against-five-banks-and-mers-over-robo-signing/

Sounds like it is only civil lawsuit and not criminal lawsuit to my nonlawyer eyes

Actual Complaint here
http://www.mass.gov/ago/docs/press/ag-complaint-national-banks.pdf

At least MERS is mentioned in the lawsuit.

Form Letter:

________________________, 2011

Loan Servicer Name
Address
City, State Zip

RE: Borrower’s Name
Property Address
Loan Number (from monthly statement)
Originating Bank
Date loan was originated

QUALIFIED WRITTEN REQUEST

Dear Sir/Madam:

Please accept this letter as a Qualified Written Request (“QWR”) pursuant to the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”) at 12 U.S.C. 2605(e) as amended (“RESPA”).
The requests made hereunder are directed to you as my loan servicer. These requests relate directly to the servicing of my loan insofar as you, as the loan servicer, cannot lawfully be servicing a loan that cannot be shown to be legally owned by an identified person or entity.

In the reported news, any banks and mortgage companies have been accused of being involved in predatory lending and servicing schemes. Such matters are currently being investigated by federal and state authorities in all 50 states. As a citizen, I am extremely concerned about such practices by anyone, let alone my own mortgage company or anyone who may hold a beneficial interest in my loan.

I am worried that potential fraudulent and deceptive practices by unscrupulous banks, loan servicers and foreclosure mill attorneys involving the sale and transfer of mortgage servicing rights; deceptive and fraudulent servicing practices to enhance balance sheets; deceptive, abusive and fraudulent accounting tricks which may involve my mortgage account and/or any alleged debt or payments for which I may be legally obligated.

To independently validate my concerns and in accordance with the applicable law stated herein, please respond to the following requests:
1.) Please fully identify the owner of my loan by name, address and phone number.
The “owner” of my loan shall be defined as the person or entity that purports to be lawfully entitled to the payments due under any promissory note that I allegedly signed when the loan was originated. If the “owner” is a so-called “securitized trust”, please identify:
a.) the name of the specific trust in which my loan is supposedly “pooled” (and not simply the name of the Trustee);
b.) the CUSIP number for the trust; and
c.) the specific date my loan was sold into said trust.

2.) Please provide a certified copy of my promissory note in its current condition showing all endorsements and/or allonges that show that the purported “owner” of my loan maintains legal “holder in due course” status under M.G.L. c. 106, s. 3-302 as of today’s date.

3.) Please fully identify the current holder of my mortgage by name, address and phone number.
a. If my mortgage is a MERS-designated mortgage, please identify the principal for whom MERS purports to act and provide written proof of the authorization of MERS to act for the lender with respect to my mortgage;
b. Please send me a MERS Summary Report, also referred to as a MERS Milestone Report showing me all transfers of servicing rights and beneficial interest rights;
c. If my mortgage has been assigned to another person or entity at any time, please provide certified copies of each and every assignment of the mortgage and advise whether or not such assignment was recorded on the public land records;

d. If my mortgage is a MERS designated mortgage, please confirm or deny whether my promissory note was sold separately from my mortgage obligation and identify;

i. Each and every party that purchased my promissory note or any interest;
ii. The date upon which any such purchase(s) took place;
iii. The amount of consideration paid for my promissory note.
As you know, RESPA – as recently amended – requires written acknowledgement of the receipt of this QWR letter within five (5) days and a substantive response to the requested information within thirty (30) days. A failure to comply with this request may result in fines of up to $2,000.00 plus my attorney’s fees and costs.

I hereby reserve any and all rights to make additional requests for information and to bring additional claims against any parties involved with my loan.

You are also advised hereunder that to the extent that you or the “owner” of my loan may allege to be protected by any applicable statute(s) of limitation(s) with regard to any claims I may have for violations of state or federal law under the loan above-referenced, including my ability to rescind the loan transaction under applicable law, that any such claims are alleged to not be fully “discoverable” until full documentation is provided hereunder. I therefore reserve all rights to any and all claims, including rescission, until examination of the documents can be completed.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,

Borrower