Recent Items

Guest Post: Mortgages Were Pledged to Multiple Buyers at the Same Time

Posted on by

By George Washington

Bank of America alleged in a court filing this June:

It appears as though many loans and other mortgage-related assets have been double and even triple-pledged to various constituencies

.

Boa Answer to Freddie Objection in Re Taylor Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp.

April Charney – a consumer lawyer with Jacksonville Area Legal Aid – and CNBC’s Dennis Kneale noted in February 2009 that courts have found that some mortgages have been sold again and again to different trusts, when they should have only been sold once.

Kneale explained that that is the reason that two different banks sometimes try to simultaneously foreclose on the same home:


And today, Chris Whalen told CNBC’s Larry Kudlow that Bear Stearns will be exposed as having sold the same loan to different investors on numerous occasions (see 6:45 into video):


As I have repeatedly pointed out, the failure of the mortgage originators and banks to prepare and record proper documentation has led to an epidemic of fraud. The pledging of the same mortgage again and again to different trusts related to mortgage backed securities is just one result.

And as long-time foreclosure investigator Nye Lavalle writes:

On thousands of occasions I stated to regulators, CEOS, banks, Fannie and Freddie that the practices of the banks were that they were double and multi-pledging assets and pledging paid off and refinance notes to securitizations. This is something April, Max [Gardner] and I have discussed for years now. Now, they come and admit that each of my allegations were true. Without analyzing the deal, as complex as they are, you WILL NEVER KNOW IF THE FORECLOSING PARTY HAS “ANY” RIGHT TO FORECLOSE!!!

Print Friendly
Twitter35DiggReddit72StumbleUpon1Facebook106LinkedIn0Google+0bufferEmail

80 comments

  1. attempter

    So to recap the layers of dubiety:

    1. Whether property in land as such has any validity.

    2. Whether banks can have any valid ownership of land.

    3. Whether we can any longer ascertain which particular bank is the real owner.

    I know I’m an “extremist” on this, but it seems to me that by gratuitously conjuring up question #3, and through their own extremism of recent years reviving the long-moribund #2, it’s like the banks wanted to put #1 into play as well.

    That ought to be the case, if people really want to break free of neo-feudal tyranny.

    1. freepressmyass

      Way to cut to the chase, Attempter.

      We’ve the answers today.
      Everything’s is fine so it’s full speed ahead.

      Private property in the US is now a myth.

  2. tawal

    I keep pinching my arm, but I keep hearing myself say, “Ouch!”

    There may be a run on BAC before Brian gets his bonus; hope he didn’t update his bidet — Guess then they can provide competition to Ally’s CD rates.

    Should’ve just let Citi have Wachovia, Wamu and Merrill and made it the ‘bad bank’ — Never too late; will be GS Investment Bankers’ deal of the New Millenium.

  3. skippy

    Recap re dux:

    No one or group has all the answers….becuase their will never be a full investagation to uncover the TBTF fraud.

    Skippy…the TBTF bulldozer is pushing everyone in pit!

  4. LeeAnne

    That CNBC tape reminds me of why I don’t watch the show.

    They reduce themselves to carney men; making fools of each other and fools of their audience. And, they contribute mightily to the creation of a US country of fools.

  5. SA

    As this scandal unfolds, the securitization trustees (DB, etc), who certified ownership of the trust assets, must be getting very nervous. How many mortgages were sold multiple times into trusts? I suspect the trustees will be sued for the balances of mortgages the trusts do not in fact own. They will look to weasel language in the bond indentures, and the lawyers will get rich.

    Servicers must be nervous too; they will need to write down the capitalized servicing rights for assets their clients do not own, and they will never recover advances made for fictitious assets. They too will want satisfaction from the pool trustees or asset managers.

    This financial crisis results from the greatest counterfeiting scheme in history: securities with fictitious ratings; securities backed by fictitious assets; servicing rights to assets that do not exist. The scope of the fraud is incomprehensible.

    1. Bush Messiah

      What do the trustees care, they got their bonuses a long time ago and are in the clear. Even if they have to settle like Mozilo, it will be for pennies on the dollar.

    1. freepressmyass

      Yeah, if hiring unwitting fools like The Burger King Kids isn’t proof of pre meditated fraud, than I have one question.

      What does the DOJ consider as banksters crossing the line?
      Arresting homeowners sleeping in their beds and charging them with trespassing? Setting homes a blaze to get people out of their homes? Pumping in tear gas? Hiring hitmen to mow down uncooperative homeowners and their families?
      Just wondering.

    2. marblex

      This is NOT something that even the whores and sellouts in Washington can fix for their BFFs the bankers. Legally, ut can’t be done since the fed the landowner of non-federal lands situated in the individual states. That is why real property law, including laws relating to title transfers, Deeds of Trusts (or mortgages in states that have them) is and always will be exclusively state jurisdiction. In order to assert primacy, the federal government would have to “annex” the land belonging to the states as if it were the title owner. Laws relating to criminal and civil fraud in the transfer of real estate are also state laws. Laws requiring writings and other anti-fraud rules are almost as old as the concept of private property ownership itself.

      Should the fed attempt to nationalize laws relating to real property sales, it would first have to claim title to that property. That would change the US from a democratically governed republic to a Feudal State.

      Even so, a “federal” solution would only apply in the USA and do nothing to stem the tide of lawsuits and criminal prosecutions for fraud by foreign investors who were sold the Emperor’s New Assets.

      In fact, this gigantic fraud places into play clear title on EVERY piece of real property transferred in the US from 1999 onward, possibly earlier. Better hope the feds allow individual AGs to prosecute and jail the wrongdoers, state by state. Every transaction will have to be unwound. Without question, this is another tip of the iceberg of the single greatest fraud in recorded history.

      Watch and see…

      1. marblex

        Sorry for the typo… second sentence should read:

        Legally it can’t be done since the fed is not the landowner of non-federal lands situated in the individual states.

  6. Slim

    The frightening thing, that will soon come to pass, is that people who are above-water, paying on time and think they are reducing the principal of the home loan will realize that they may be send a check or electronic payment to a bank/MBS owner that does not have clear title on the loan. Will the bank call them to let them know or will they quietly take the payments and hope the home owners don’t look into the matter… I think you know the answer.

    S**t this is fan, fan say hello to s**t.

    1. freepressmyass

      As long as we have the most corrupt government in US hitory, Wall St. is free to do whatever they want with impunity. The result will always be the same.
      Heads they win, tails we lose.

      It’s like the Wild West. Outlaws threatening the country
      to bend to their will, or else. Frankly, I’ll take the or else or this never ends.

      Get used to it. Just because they wear a suit and tie this is state sanctioned terrorism. Al Queda? Bosh.
      Strictly amateurs.
      These guys kill and destroy hundreds of thousands of lives without getting their hands dirty. Nice, eh?

    2. Billh

      Slim said …”The frightening thing, that will soon come to pass, is that people who are above-water, paying on time and think they are reducing the principal of the home loan will realize that they may be send a check”… That is me. 5 year old loan, originated by Countrywide. I’m starting to think the chances are very good that no one legally owns my note. And if my note was obtained illegally, Am I legally bound to continue paying? Why shouldn’t I learn what my options are?

      1. petridish

        Billh,

        I am in exactly the same situation and have just “requested my note” at seiu.org/page/speakout/wheresthenote which I read about on NC a few days ago. I know it’s an SEIU tool but I don’t care.

        If no one knows who owns my house, I can’t sell it so I’m not going to continue to “buy” it.

        As far as I’m concerned, every homeowner who is current on his payments should IMMEDIATELY be sent crystal clear, verifiable, irrefutable evidence of clear chain of title as a condition of continued payment. If this evidence is not IMMEDIATELY forthcoming it should be taken as evidence that chain of title has been broken and payment can be legally withheld until that chain is reestablished to the unqualified satisfaction of any title insurer in this country.

        1. chris

          Agreed. I just filled it out and sent it to Chase myself. It’ll be interesting to see what their answer is. The hard part is going to be convincing my wife to stop paying them

          We went though a trial plan and in the end we were denied. Now we’re making payments without a contract. If they don’t own the note, then it seems to me hopefully that they can be sued.

        2. noash

          I sent my Where’s the Note letter on 10/14/10. Yesterday, I received a notice saying that my loan was now going to be serviced by a new bank as of 11/1/10. I called my bank to see if this meant I had to request it from the new servicer and they told me they have no record of receiving my letter. Don’t expect anything back is all I’m saying.

          BTW – I called the state Attorney General’s office here in MN. You know what they told me? The bank can’t be forced to show me my original loan note. What?!?! How is that possible? I thought a bank had to respond since it was a “qualified written request under Section 6 of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA).”

          Feeling like the banks won once again.

    3. Tom Betz

      “Soon”? It’s happening now. http://bit.ly/cI79vj :

      [ quote ]

      Their loan originally was with subprime lender Argent Mortgage, then LaSalle Bank, then Wilkshire Financial. The loan was sold to Bank of America in September 2009, although the couple said they weren’t initially notified. They made their September and October payments to Wilkshire.

      “I had no clue. I just made my payment,” Michael Rendes said. “I knew I had a mortgage.” Wilkshire then told him the loan had been sold. He called Bank of America many times, but bank employees couldn’t find the couple in the system. They tried using names, Social Security numbers, the parcel number, dates of birth, everything.

      Their two payments were cashed but apparently not forwarded to Bank of America, or at least not posted to the couple’s account. In November, they received a letter that they were in default.

      The couple had the money to get caught up, but they said Bank of America wouldn’t take it.

      [end quote]

    4. robert green

      and further slim–why exactly should i pay my mortgage if i no longer to whom i should be paying it? because i clearly can no longer take at face value their claim that they are the right place for me to send a check, right? i think the burden of proof is on the bank to show that they aren’t full of shit. of course we are getting into “don’t pay your income tax” territory here, but with the difference that the banks, powerful though they may be, are NOT the government.

      yet.

    5. Lmar

      That is the truly scary thing in all of this — it is not just the foreclosures but all loans that have been sold and refinanced in the last 10 years!!!!

  7. Yankee

    So they took the housing market and made it into a quadrillion dollar ponzi scheme?

    Wait for the government to rush to the bankers aid to cover this crime up with another “tarp”.

    1. John Durham

      Indeed. During the presidential stewardship of Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Clinton & Bush…the way to crime was cleared.

  8. Pearl

    I have an SEC link to a trust that illustrates both of the opportunities for fraud that were described in this post. If you go to the following trust on the sec website,

    SEC Info – IndyMac INDX Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-R1 – FWP – IndyMac INDX Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-R1 – On 8/1/06

    scroll down to page 36, and look for the line that reports loans for the state of Georgia. The line reports “three” homes in Georgia, but I am quite sure that this is actually just one loan–but tripled. (I have copies of the closing docs on this loan which show $412,500, but adding in a few other costs–the amount is almost exactly what is reported as the “average” of “three” loans.) Taking into consideration the LTV ratio of the loans, there is really no way that 3 loans that similar could have been in the Georgia pool at that time. I also have 4 other links that I believe are indicative of this loan having been sold (as three loans, of course) simultaneously into 4 different trusts. (Would be happy to post those links if anyone is interested.)

    The larger point, however, is that we allowed this space for fraud. And where there was a space for fraud-fraud happened.

    1. John Durham

      Indeed. During the presidential stewardship of Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Clinton & Bush…the way to crime was cleared.

      Please yes. Post the links.

      1. Pearl

        Hi John–

        That took some digging! I can give you two that (I am alleging) are the same “3″ (ahem!) loans:

        IndyMac INDX Mortgage 2005-AR17
        (3 loans in GA for $1,222,052.00)

        IndyMac INDX Mortgage 2005-AR-25
        (3 loans in GA for $1,245,386.31)

        The other two are highly suspicious, but I should probably not “allege” that they are the same “3 loans” quite yet. I will probably be more comfortable alleging that they are the same within a few days. I’ll keep you posted.

        I also wanted to note–no one has been able to provide me with a concrete explanation for how this could NOT have happened. It does not appear that we had very many safety valves in the system. It would not have taken very many dishonest/ridiculously incompetent people to have perpetrated this massive sort of fraud.(It only takes a couple of rats to muck something up!)

      1. Pearl

        Hi Faith–

        That question shouldn’t be as difficult to answer as it actually is! A big part of the whole game here was to keep “true” borrowers from discovering “true” lenders, and vice versa.(Heaven forbid the two find each other and strike some sort of mutually beneficial deal!)

        It was really sort of a fluke that I found the loan that I cited–the loan pool was a related loan pool to the one that was referred to on a Notice of Foreclosure. The figure sort of popped out at me because it was so close to the closing figure that I had in the closing folder.

        However, Neil Garfield, on his livinglies website, offers some sort of service/software that I believe helps homeowners to discover this info. (But I have no personal experience with that process.)I believe that some of the people at foreclosurehamlet may also have ideas about how to get this info, so they might worth a try.

        The very fact that it is so difficult to track one’s own mortgage loan as it was and is sold in and out of various loan pools is , in my opinion, a reason to be suspicious about the entire process.

        Good luck finding yours, and if you have enough time on your hands, you can just start looking at Bear Stearns trusts from that year, around that time–on one of the free-access SEC websites. Something might pop out at you. (Go to “underlying mortgages” or “underlying loans” on the actual SEC filings of the Prospectuses for the Bear Stearns Trusts. This is where the very minimal descriptions of the mortgages are provided.) Good luck–let us know if you have any success!

      2. Pearl

        Hi Again, Faith–

        I don’t know if this will be in any way useful, but the following link will take you to an IRS document that lists the Remics from 2006. It is a very long document (150 pgs+), but it does have some cusips for Bear Stearns Mortgage Funding AR trusts from that year. (They are alphabetical.)

        http://www.scribd.com/doc/30009219/Service-Look-Up-Mbs-Cusip-Numbers-by-Trusts

        Perhaps the combination of the IRS info with the SEC info, you might be able to figure something out. (btw, there are several free SEC sites–like secinfo.com and EDGAR.) Good luck!

  9. Slim

    Also… let me get my tinfoil hate here… I wonder if the banks took multiple CDS out on the loans… if you are going to sell it multiple times, why not insure it multiple times? Which raises even more questions… if you are going to insure it multiple times and you know it will default, why not short the insurance company where you have the CDS or CDSs?

    Wonder what assurances were giving over the weekend to the banks? Why did they restart?

  10. Justicia

    The story won’t go away no matter how much the TV biz news clowns try to minimize it.

    Floyd Norris reports on Chris Peterson’s article about the problem with MERS in today’s Times:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/19/business/19norris.html?_r=1&ref=business

    October 18, 2010
    Some Sand in the Gears of Securitizing
    By FLOYD NORRIS
    Was the great securitization machine that made hundreds of billions of dollars in mortgage loans based on a legal foundation of sand?

    That possibility, raised by two law school professors, has begun to scare many jittery investors, causing bank stocks to plummet, although they recovered a little Monday.

  11. Steve Roberts

    Serious question:

    If title companies have walked away from their title insurance because of banking fraud and the banks know they haven’t fixed the fraud, why would banks continue to loan money to mortgages that might continue filtering into the fraud system? Instead of just stopping foreclosures, wouldn’t they also stop lending until this is legally settled? No bank that I know of will generate a mortgage without title insurance but if their own actions are voiding the title insurance, what is the result?

  12. Andy

    What I’d REALLY like to know, is how many times have the US taxpayers paid for the same house?

    We buy MBS.
    We bail out banks with troubled mortgages via TARP.
    We take over banks with troubled mortgages via the FDIC.
    We run programs to keep foreclosing families in their homes.
    We buy the insurance company that insured the mortgages.
    And now this latest news on top of it all.

    Please someone, find an example. How many times has the US government paid out money to cover the same bad mortgage??

    No one is asking this question. We’re being robbed four or five times over.

    1. freepressmyass

      Exactly.
      This is the real bail out. The scheme the US government is pulling on it’s own citizens. We’re being exploited from here to Sunday.
      I’m sure you remember the projected amount of toxic debt was in the double digit trillions. They are incrementally dumping all the debt on us.

  13. pebird

    Someone more sophisticated than I should run the numbers, but I am guessing that due to leveraging of MBS (I read somewhere that the total nominal value is somewhere in the vicinity of $200 trillion?), a VERY small decline in the “monetary base” of MBS (that is, the actual property backing the securities), has a huge effect on the system as a whole.

    So, if say, 0.25% or 0.50 % of mortgages have been double/tripled booked to securities, and we have leverage of 10x or 25x the base, we are looking at a large nominal value that cannot be offset against a real asset.

    At least when the Fed creates money out of thin air, it is transparent on its balance sheet, the banks hide it through the Magic Eight-ball Recording System.

    The best part is the “confidence” factor. Since no one can tell if the securities they hold are backed by real mortgages, the entire edifice of MBS becomes suspect – even with only a very small percentage being “bad” – this is the classic butterfly wing flap in the US creating a monsoon in China.

    The blog item (I assume accurate) that Wells Fargo was suing Wells Fargo to determine who owned a particular mortgage may sound absurd (you wonder who won the case), but when you realize that Wells has mortgages that are held by separate MBS (due to double, triple bookings), and Wells has the responsibility to determine ownership of the mortgage, this kind of craziness is part of the new normal.

  14. pebird

    I also wonder if a CDS can be annulled due to fraud – it is one thing to take out insurance if the credit defaulted, a whole other thing if there was nothing against the credit in the first place.

    Credit Default Insurance does NOT equal Fraud Default Insurance.

    1. micr line

      pebird that is an interesting question..

      what the would happen to all the ‘premiums’ the CDS protection buyer had been sending in to the protection seller for the past x years?

  15. noash

    I wonder if this explains why I am now having my loan transferred to another loan processor from Citibank. I sent them a Where’s The Note letter on 10/14/10 and yesterday I received the letter saying my loan would be transferred, just short of the 20 days in which they must respond in writing that they got my letter.

  16. Wisdom Seeker

    Interesting conundrum for the banks:

    * If we don’t foreclose on this place, someone else might!
    * If we do foreclose, we have to write down the asset value.
    * But at least we generate some cash flow.

    No wonder they are foreclosing as fast as legally possible — and then even faster.

    Sigh.

    1. Charles Tulley

      One way to test whether the chain of title is intact might be to refinance. If you could get title insurance then you might assume the chain of title was clear. We refied about 6-7 years ago when Citibank sent us an offer to lower our rate by about 1.25 % without applying or anything, just go sign the normal documents at a title company. As long as non human entites can influence public policy the criminals will continue to be in charge.

  17. wb turner

    The big fraud is the bank bailout money round (TARP#1) was used speed up foreclosures and now the remaining money will be spent on lawyers and lobbyists to defend the banks (trustees) against the MBS investors.

    The gov’t will open their wallets, yet again (TARP #2)as soon as the Republicans take over.

    The lobbyist are waiting for more money from the banks who will be getting it from DC, I mean “us” the US taxpayers.

    1. Eric

      Not saying it won’t happen, but recall that TARP #1 had much more uniform support from Democrats than Republicans. If you imagine a Republican House majority with enough anti-TARP #1 reps + new Tea Party types + a Democratic minority with as little interest in cooperation as the Republican miniory had in the current Congress, things could be a little different this time.

  18. mario

    the whole buzz about forclosures holted the process for a brief period of time and…voila… improved the financials.

  19. losses are ok?

    The Banks have repeatedly and knowingly undermined the very laws they rely on to protect their property rights. Maybe they need a taste of their own medicine.

    The affidavits that were signed and notarized and delivered to the courts as proof of the Banks’ right to foreclose constituted perjury, which can be a felony. Please see NY Penal Law Section 210. The individuals who committed perjury are employees of the Banks. The Banks at the very least turned a blind eye to the fraud. At worst, they encouraged it, kept metrics on it and monitored the rate of foreclosures in an effort to “clean up the mess.” The Banks were therefore engaged in an organized conspiracy to defraud the courts. That is a felony. In this country we try to preserve the sanctity of the courts to provide justice.

    If a Bank is convicted of a felony, the Bank does not exist anymore. For a Bank, a felony is a death sentence. Please see Bankers Trust.

    Just a thought.

  20. libarbarian

    Who wants to bet on how long it takes for some Bank-shill to say that borrowers have a moral obligation to pay back ALL the parties in full?

    “If you borrowed $10,000 from BofA and BofA sold that debt to 5 parties than it is your moral obligation to pay that $50,000 back”.

  21. makarov

    I foresee a Broadway musical in the works. It will be called ‘The Originators’.

    Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane are locks.

  22. mg

    Ok, if they sold these mortgages multiple times how did each pool generate income? What am I not understanding?

      1. armand eddon

        How is it possible any significant number of loans – that is beyond isolated flukes – have been pledged to multiple trusts without prior discovery? After all, how many forclosures have there already been? This seems like an impossible story, but certainly one this blogs readers want to believe?

        1. micr line

          it is not unreasonable.

          the purpose of the pools was not to generate income, it was to create RMBS, which could then act as a ‘reference entity’ so that gamblers could buy ‘credit default protection’ against the RMBS and then make big bucks when they crashed. that credit protection (CDS) was bundled into Synthetic CDOs

          the size of Synthetic market was much larger than the size of the ‘real’ housing market.

          i.e. the CDO manager of ‘the big short’ is happy that Eisman is shorting subprime… it gives him more CDS to build Synthetic CDOs out of. And Lippman of Deutschebank (‘im short your house t-shirts’) is happy that Eisman knows this.

          now im not saying i have exact proof.. but it is not exactly a crazy idea that alot of people didnt care too much what happened to these loans or their collateral.

        2. micr line

          also the RMBS output the mortgage payments into tranches of course. so even if a bunch of the payments never came in due to, you know, them being ‘phantoms’ of triple-pledged mortgages, that loss might never been seen by the AAA, AA, A, B, etc investors in the RMBS, only the investors in the bottom tranches. so not all the investors would be wondering where their money was coming from just the bottom tranche owners.

          then again, i wonder how much the RMBS investors were able to know about the loan-level detail, considering that the monoline insurance companies and the ratings agencies both are described in various recent books as not having had access to that loan-level information. maybe they were just told ‘xyz percent defaulted this month, so sorry’ and nobody ever went to look why the payments never came in.

          it is an interesting idea… some books (big short? i cant remember.) describe how homeowners missed THEIR FIRST PAYMENT.. now how is that possible? if their loan was actually sold to three different companies, then of course they only send one payment, and the other two declare it delinquent. that would explain how people ‘missed’ their first payment.

          just my theory, i am of course no expert.

  23. Drew

    So what happens if you send a “Where’s the Note?” letter and the mortgage servicer can’t find it.

    My mortgage was sold 3 times before finally ending up at Wells Fargo. I’m current on my loan, and have no problems with it…. today.

    But none of the previous mortgage servicers of my loan are still in business. What happens if I wanted to sell or even paid off the loan?

    1. John Durham

      Where did you get the information that your loan changed hands 3 times? And, does the your county clerk’s records confirm this?

      Just curious.

  24. micr line

    this seems somewhat similar to the situation at Penn Square Bank in 1982 (which was shut down by Mr Bill Isaac of yesterdays’ NC blog links)

    the documentation was so neglected, there were instances where the same collateral (like oil and gas leases) had been pledged against multiple different loans. many of the loans had been ‘upstreamed’ to other banks like SeaFirst and Continental Illinois. the first was bought by… Bank of America, and the second failed.

    one must wonder at how it came to be that the activities of one little bank in oklahoma city in 1982 somehow was repeated in the 2000s as ‘standard operating procedure’ at dozens of the biggest banks in the country.

  25. Lawrence Baker

    Last month, World Banksters snapped their fingers and Congress passed HR3808 in 24 hours without any floor debate (demonstrates Congress total corruption) but Barack Obama (AK. Barry Soros CIA agent) pocket vetoed the legislation and sent it back to Congress. (To obvious and blatant criminality)

    HR3808 would have legalized World Bankster MERS title recordings and fraudulent verification signatures. Congress will take up the mortgage fraud issue after the November elections so the Justice Department will continue to sit on their hands waiting for the bankster criminals to legalize their fraud.

    Is this a great county, or what! Ha. Ha. Proud to be American! USA! USA! USA!

    How about the CNBC commentary by the “brightest in the room” these clowns remind me of carnival barkers who are all talking at the same time. Ha. Ha. They typify the low class people who are in the business.

    1. W. Kiernan

      Lawrence Baker: “Last month, World Banksters snapped their fingers and Congress passed HR3808 in 24 hours without any floor debate (demonstrates Congress total corruption) but Barack Obama (AK. Barry Soros CIA agent) pocket vetoed the legislation and sent it back to Congress. (To obvious and blatant criminality)”

      Can you please make up your mind? Are Congress, lackeys of the diabolical Banksters, eee-vil for passing HR3808, or is “Barry Soros” eee-vil for vetoing it? It’s hard to see how you could have it both ways at once.

  26. Dawn

    Thank you for doing this story and exposing something I have suspected for a long time. Just like COMEX sells every ounce of physical gold hundreds of times over as “paper” the same is being done with mortgages bundled in securities. The lenders through MERS is selling every loan dozens if not hundreds of times simultaneously.
    Something else that is being overlooked is that the Federal Reserve is holding over a TRILLION dollars worth of MBSs and they are about to start QE2 claiming “deflation”. IMO this is a henious conflict of interest bcuz one of the few things actually suffering “deflation” is real estate. Cetainly not food, commdities, energy, healthcare etc. all of which I would argue are experiencing inflation.
    The Federal Reserve cannot be objective regarding QE bcuz they have a TRILLION dollar “investment” in mortgages and their plan is obviously to force real estate to inflate, thereby causing their investment to increase.
    We need a full investigation of MERS, MBSs and most importantly the MBSs being held by the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve must be forced to remove MBSs from their balance sheets before being allowed to manipulate our currency so they recieve a better payout from their TRILLION dollar stake in the mortgage securites.

  27. Stepping Razor

    “Sounds like it is time to shout “Jubilee!””

    I bet 9o% of the readers don’t understand your comment but you ARE RIGHT!

    Only a Jubilee and the complete forgiveness of all debts and resetting the system is the solution. It is too far gone to put a bandaid on it.

  28. rt

    In retrospect it seems obvious that with Citizens United Not Timid style corporate personhood would come human flaws like not bothering to read the fine print, buying deals that are to good to be true and borrowing (leverage) without proper documentation of a stable income (the mortgage).

    Stupid irresponsible limousine driving (corporate) welfare queens ruining it (the world economy) for everyone else.

  29. Lawrence

    Endless financial fraud and the resultant bailouts, yet another violation of our rights. Add it to the list of gov’t violations of our right:
    They violate the 1st Amendment by fencing-in demonstrators at G-20, banning books like “America Deceived II” and trying to take-over the internet.
    They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns.
    They violate the 4th and 5th Amendment by wireless wiretapping.
    They violate the entire Constitution by starting undeclared wars.
    Impeach Obama (and sweep out the Congress, except Ron Paul).
    [Link of Banned Book]:
    http://www.iuniverse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000190526

  30. Sam

    Attempter said (comment number 3, from 2 days ago):

    “So to recap the layers of dubiety: 1. Whether property in land as such has any validity. . . . I know I’m an ‘extremist’ on this . . . .”

    Attempter apparently thinks that the very concept of so-called ‘real estate’ needs to be questioned, “if people really want to break free of neo-feudal tyranny.”

    And I totally agree. ‘Real estate’ is one of the really bad (meaning humanly unworkable, meaning insane) ideas that our current so-called civilization is running on. And then, empowering that bad idea by linking it up with the idea of banking corporations as ‘rightful owners’ of ‘real estate’ guarantees that the whole banker/real-property-owner monster will inevitably operate AS a fraudulent ponzi scheme.

    Could there be any way for banks to own, and turn over for investment profit, massive volumes of ‘real estate’, that would NOT be fraudulent?

    The other truly bad idea prominently featured in this whole situation is: Compound interest.

  31. Riquin

    • There is a bigger problem here. If a bank cannot prove they are the owners of the mortgage how do you know you are paying the proper owner of the mortgage? You may be paying the wrong bank. What a mess. If you buy a house cash how do you know the you are buying it from the right owner?
    This affects the fiber of the capitalistic ownership of things. This is big mess. BIG MESS!!!

  32. Henry

    Mortgage scam and financial fraud, yet another violation of our rights. Add it to the list of gov’t violations of our right:
    They violate the 1st Amendment by fencing-in demonstrators at G-20, banning books like “America Deceived II” and trying to take-over the internet.
    They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns.
    They violate the 4th and 5th Amendment by wireless wiretapping.
    They violate the entire Constitution by starting undeclared wars.
    Impeach Obama (and sweep out the Congress, except Ron Paul).
    [Link of Banned Book]:
    http://www.iuniverse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000190526

Comments are closed.