BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED …
(Honolulu, HI) — For those of you looking for ammunition against Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduits (REMICs) and the servicers and subservicers who screw homeowners on their behalf, a new case out of Hawaii has surfaced that should put more securitization and civil procedure into greater detail, courtesy of foreclosure defense attorney Gary Victor Dubin. You can download the .pdf of the Hawaii Supreme Court ruling here:
US Bank NA v Mattos, Sup Ct HI No SCWC-14-0001134 (Jun 6, 2017)
For those of you battling against U.S. Bank, NA as a Trustee of a REMIC, you should know that U.S. Bank has admitted in a 4-page brochure that they do NOT know when a Borrower is in default:
US Bank Brochure – Role of the Corporate Trustee
Further, U. S. Bank (in the same brochure) admits that the Borrower is in fact a part of the securitization chain!
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, long before the Glass-Stegall Act was repealed in 1999, issued a Comptroller’s Handbook on Asset Securitization that also stated the Borrower was a party to the securitization chain (see Page 8 of 92), contemplating in advance of how the chain actually was supposed to work:
OCC Asset Securitization Handbook
Ocwen, as you may recall, admitted to the United States Government (via 6 different federal agencies) in writing that when Borrowers don’t make their payments (to the REMIC), Ocwen, as servicer through the Sales and Servicing Agreement, makes their payment for them, in an article I just posted, see page 2 (bottom) and 3 (top) of EXHIBIT 29
The Hawaii Supreme Court reversed an appellate court ruling, which upheld the district court’s ruling that U.S. Bank, as Trustee of a REMIC, had the right to foreclose on a property belonging to a Hawaii property owner, which other courts across the land have dared to lightly tread upon these same similar issues. Sadly, borrowers seldom ever follow through on getting to the nation’s highest courts (the state Supreme Courts) to achieve finality.
I beg of you to read Gary Dubin’s case, because part of the equation in securitization failure has been examined and ruled upon by a state Supreme Court (Hawaii). I am singularly surprised that other state’s haven’t made the same glaring rulings finitely (Florida’s 4th DCA is close, but NOT THIS CIGAR!).
This case is a rarity that should be examined in more detail because the Pooling and Servicing Agreement (“PSA”) was included in the attack. What’s worse, Ocwen’s “Contract” witness, who tendered an affidavit claiming he was a “know-it-all” about Ocwen’s business records (which 20 states and the District of Columbia are calling a sham), which did nothing for U.S. Bank because U.S. Bank’s attorneys couldn’t prove the relationship between Ocwen and U.S. Bank.
I was truly shocked about the part of robo-signing, which in fact was mentioned in the ruling. No one has yet to challenge this act as part of a civil conspiracy (yet); however, this is to come. I am not going to go into detail for you here, because I know many of you out there like to do your own research into the elements of civil conspiracy in your respective states, as in a Google search, “What constitutes the elements of civil conspiracy in _____ (insert your state here)____?” and see what pops up. The burden of proof is much lower than RICO and easier to prove by attacking the signers, witnesses and notary involved in the assignment.
Oh, darn! This involves spending money doing depositions, huh? Shit! And here you thought you were going to get a “free house”! I don’t know where the bank’s attorneys get off making these snide remarks about homeowners wanting a free house, because they don’t even know what the homeowners are thinking.
The Trustee hasn’t paid a nickel to the investors that it can document; however, EXHIBIT 29 clearly identifies WHO pays the investors. So, taking this to its logical conclusion: If the investors are getting paid, then how can the Trustee, on behalf of the investors, claim the investors have been harmed or prejudiced because the securitization chain failed? I have no contract with the servicer, do I? My contract is the Mortgage and Note. Those contracts are with the Lender. When the Lender goes belly up, as history has shown us, the mortgage servicers use the MERS® System to “keep the lie going” by giving unproven authority to thousands of writer’s cramped individuals who execute assignments in its name, being told by third-party document mill executives that it’s perfectly legal to do what they’re doing.
This is why the entire banking underbelly is corrupt and illegal as hell.
The securitization chain failed because the parties to the trust DID NOT follow the REMIC’s own governing regulations, not because the investors weren’t getting their payments! When push came to shove, Ocwen and other third-party butt plugs had to gum up the chain of title with what I consider falsified documents, Assignments of Mortgages and Assignments of Deeds of Trust. That is my new term for document mill robo-signers who have no knowledge of the facts contained in an assignment they’re claiming they have knowledge of! To even proffer this … and then brag about it like NTC does (the McDonald’s of robo-signing, “over 16-million served”, referring to the number of documents this third-party document mill says it’s recorded as a means to “clear title”) … should have put this entity, its directors and employees, in prison. However, since the banks have virtually paid off the state legislators and executive enforcement arms … no one has gone to prison, yet.
A Court Case Full of Surprises!
I am glowing about the securitization/forensic analysis included as a mention in this Hawaii case as a means to educate a judge … and nothing more. Most judges can’t wrap their heads around this kind of testimony because they are only thinking about their retirement accounts and how those accounts might be affected if they rule against the bank. Unfortunately, what they DON’T GET … it that the entire 424(b)(5) prospectus is in play here, NOT just the PSA portion of it! Let’s take a look, shall we?
SEC Info – Mortgage Asset Securitization Transactions Inc – ‘424B5_ on 1:14:05 re: Mastr Alternative
There are 357 pages in the Prospectus attached above. Yes, the WHOLE enchilada! Why just pick out the PSA? That’s like eating the peas and leaving the steak! It doesn’t contain ALL of the information now, does it? This is the Prospectus for the foregoing Hawaii case!
Look at the portion of the Prospectus that talks about the PSA. If you look under the TABLE OF CONTENTS, the Pooling and Servicing Agreement is found beginning at Page S-95. However, the cut-off and closing dates that are related to the issues expressed within the Pooling and Servicing Agreement are found OUTSIDE OF the section on the PSA, at Page S-5, 90 pages away from the PSA! The Prospectus of this REMIC (and any REMIC for that matter) is the entire “sales pitch” of the REMIC! It’s the entire set of governing relations for the REMIC! Why then are we just focusing on the PSA when the entire 424(b)(5) Prospectus has all the rest of the nuggets that make the PSA make sense? Because judges are lazy and don’t want to read 357 pages of this stuff. If judges figured this out, there wouldn’t be one retirement plan vested in RMBS’s and CMBS’s!
This is the end result of what the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act has caused. This is the lazy man’s excuse for not wanting to read (texting is more funner, sic). This is why Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s reintroduction of the Act cannot go unsupported. The people need relief here.
Text – S.881 – 115th Congress (2017-2018): 21st Century Glass-Steagall Act of 2017 | Congress.gov |
I have talked about securitization failure systematically on this blog prior to the mass deletion of what came before this set of recently-posted articles. It would make no sense to educate a judge that thinks his retirement account will fail if he rules against a bank. This is why I have always told consumers involved in foreclosure litigation to “background their judge” (hire a private investigator if you have to, to dig up the judge’s nasty little political secrets)!
What has happened since the Glass-Steagall Act was repealed has turned into an all-out war involving servicer fraud and this case is a clear example of it. I seriously doubt that U.S. Bank was really involved in this case (more like Ocwen). If the attorneys for the bank were actually forced to admit WHICH aggrieved party they were representing in this case, they probably couldn’t tell you. My guess is, Ocwen retained them because Ocwen wants to steal your house to reimburse itself for all those pesky servicing fees it racked up paying the REMICs off! This is how Ocwen wants to get rich off America … and it uses Altisource and REALServicing (more-than-arm’s-length devices) to pull it off! Any time that you see “corporate layering”, you are going to have to dig deep like many of the readers of this blog do … and pull up the serious stuff that matters.
We have to be smarter than the banks if we want to win. Unlike the banks, we have to expose the truth!
This is my truth: OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION