The folks at ForeclosureFraud were kind enough to pass along an archival document that I thought readers would enjoy.
This Moody’s report illustrates what the prospect of higher fees for securitization-related ratings did to rating agencies’ quality of analysis.
The arrogance of the MERS position (the Moody’s document is basically MERS dictation) is evident:
The recording system has been set up to provide notice of security interests, but not necessarily the identity of the secured parties…..
There will probably be an adjustment period during which the courts and the foreclosure attorneys will need to get familiar with MERS and learn how to deal with issues concerning foreclosure by a nominee that the foreclosure statues did not contemplate.
This makes for entertaining reading, in a sick sort of way. You’ll see again and again the notion that the law and the courts should give way to MERS. That’s consistent with what Gretchen Morgenson reported over the weekend, namely, that no review was made of the legality of MERS in any of the 50 states. The assumption was that MERS could simply be imposed.
I’d normally go through this document in more detail but it is a fairly short piece and I’d rather have readers read the original. It is a vivid example of the danger of uncritical acceptance of supposedly expert opinion.