Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

No, They Didn't Sell The Same Thing Twice....

Recommended Posts

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=169631

Oh wait.... they did!

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

There's only one profession where that takes place on a routine basis and doesn't involve ripping someone off - prostitution - where you can sell something and still have it.

In banking and finance, however, selling the same thing to two people is rank fraud. And yet this very event is being alleged by one of the banks that claims Foreclosuregate is just a "technicality" - Bank of America - in the below filing.

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

And here I thought that all the missing paperwork and "re-created" foreclosure documents were all a mistake, and not an attempt to cover up something nefarious that happened earlier?

Gee, you mean I was right three years and change ago, and despite the protests otherwise by bank executives on CNBS and other "mainstream media" outlets they are in fact filing court process agreeing with me, meaning that they're intentionally LYING on national television?

Hattip Washington's blog.

Not quite sure on his prostitution analogy but it's getting very amusing. Selling the same mortgage to investors twice does appear to be complete fraud, still at least this hasn't created a huge property bubble...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=169642

Does it count when statements are made on a conference call, such as this from BOA?

- Customers knew the risks of buying MBS, questions the link between large number of put-back claims and final costs.

- Currently it is impossible for BoA to provide any "reasonable" estimates for eventual mortgage buyback claims.

Ok, how about loans you claim were fraudulently sold more than once?

Yes, that's YOU Bank of America. YOU said:

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

Let me guess - MBS buyers knew that there was a risk that the securities in their alleged MBS were in fact sold more than once, and that in fact they might own nothing?

Was that disclosed fairly in the pooling and servicing agreement and the prospectuses?

Remember, these aren't my arguments, nor someone else's.

They are yours that you are making in an official filing in court!

Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=169631

Not quite sure on his prostitution analogy but it's getting very amusing. Selling the same mortgage to investors twice does appear to be complete fraud, still at least this hasn't created a huge property bubble...

...whole new meaning for double indemnity .......make a good film ...... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

In the olden days they did it with the gold they kept in the vaults so they thought they could get away with it with the mortgage backed securities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that the sound of KABOOM I hear in the distance?! ph34r.gif

mushroom_cloud.gif

Things are getting a bit confusing.

We need cgnao back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Things are getting a bit confusing.

We need cgnao back.

Oh, and it's worth adding that apparently Pimco is back into levered purchases of MBSs... The very stuff they are trying to give back to BofA because it is toxic...

It sounds like the Fed might be about to buy every MBS left in the market to clean up this ginormous mess and help Pimco make a few billions in the process.

Edited by _w_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Banks can sell the same thing twice quite legitimately... its called tranches.

Take £10m of loans. Roll them together into one pile. Now that pile gets split into 3 tranches of £3.3m.

As long as the payments get paid, all 3 tranches get paid. If 1/3rd on the loans default, the bottom tranche doesn't get paid. If 2/3rd default, only the top tranche gets paid.

What it does is turn £10m of crap loads into a group of AAA loans (Top tranche) a group of "AA" loans... (the middle tranche) and a group of "A" loands... the bottom tranche. In reality the magic of paying Moodys £1m dollars means they all got rated AAA or above, as since property values were rising, if you assume the trend will continue, it will always be possible for the banks to get back for the full amount.... as long as prices don't drop. Moodys etc took free money to assume prices would rise forever and stamp everything AAA.

The fact that the bottom 50% of tranches are worthless has yet to become apparent because the banks are holding back on foreclosures.

Edit to add: Of course the problem comes when you sell a debt to 3 different people, a third each, who should have the paperwork and who does the repo...? They always assumes prices would keep on rising, people would keep on paying, and it would never come to this.

Edited by RufflesTheGuineaPig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like this fraudclosure could lead to the zero hour. When a large percent of Americans simply stop paying their mortgage. It would force the collapse of the banking system as we know it.. and in addition free up tens of millions of people's money to spend as disposable income.

A lot of American families have an after tax monthly income of like 4k. And 1800 goes to the mortgage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/20/business/20bond.html?_r=1&ref=business

To the long list of those picking fights with banks over bad mortgages, add the Federal Reserve.

Two years after the Fed bought billions of dollars in mortgage securities as part of the financial bailout, its New York arm is questioning the paperwork — and pressing banks to buy some of the investments back.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York and several giant investment companies, including Pimco and BlackRock, have singled out Bank of America, which assembled more than $2 trillion of mortgage securities from 2004 to 2008.

This just gets even better, how regulates the banks again?

You seriously couldn't make this up and now the Fed is proposing to buy even more MBS in a new round of QE?

Genius.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would force the collapse of the banking system as we know it.. and in addition free up tens of millions of people's money to spend as disposable income.

And erase everyones pensions and savings overnight. :rolleyes:

It's not the banks money, or the banks shareholders money or even the banks employees money, it's the money of pensions funds and depositors. I can assure you that Mr B*****er will have his money in much safer investments. Meanwhile your parents will see their pensions wiped out instantly.

Edited by RufflesTheGuineaPig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No worries, the taxpayer has promised to stump the best part of a trillion pounds to help these poor unfortunate souls out.

We can surely find a few more hundred billion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If This Is True...... KaBOOM

I don't know.

Multiple people have told me this before.

Catherine Austin Fitts has talked about this for a long time. I get "whispers" all the time from people who I know actually are involved in securitization work related to this on occasion - and have for the last three years. We have the story from this morning from FDN talking about their software that has uncovered multiple sales of the same instruments.

But this..... if this is true it's not just systemic, it's not just common, it was the premise and basis of the entire securitization game - and "game" is the correct word for it, as the allegation made here is that the entire thing was a gigantic scam.

The game was to move money under a scheme of deceit and fraud. First sell the bonds and collect the money into a pool. Second take your fees, third take what’s left and get it committed into “loans” (which were in actuality securities) sold to homeowners under the same false pretenses as the bonds were sold to investors. By controlling the flow of funds and documentation, the middlemen were able to sell, pledge and otherwise trade off the flow of receivables several times over — a necessary complexity not only for the profit it generated, but to make it far more difficult for anyone to track the footprints in the sand.

If the loans had actually been securitized, the issue would not arise. They were not securitized. This was a mass illusion or hallucination induced by Wall Street spiking the punch bowl. The gap (second tier yield spread premium) created between the amount of money funded by investors and the amount of money actually deployed into “loans” was so large that it could not be justified as fees. It was profit on sale from the aggregator to the “trust” (special purpose vehicle). It was undisclosed, deceitful and fraudulent.

Truth?

I don't know.

But it does fit with what we know.

True securitization has so many fingers in the pie that I find it difficult - or impossible - to make the argument that it "works" compared to portfolio lending for the investor who is providing the funds.

This sort of scenario also explains why everyone is resisting any attempt to provide the actual background documentation from origination forward to the assignment into the trusts, and all we see are "copies" and "lost note affidavits." True, actual wet-signature notes with the endorsements they all claim they got - but which nobody has yet seen, leading one foreclosure defense attorney to quip that if someone ever does see such a note they should "bronze it" - much as one would bronze their baby's first shoe pair.

So here's my challenge:

If you've got an actual wet-signature note from a foreclosure with all the intervening assignments on the page, I'd like you to fax it to me.

Use the link at the bottom of the page here for my email address and contact me. I'll send you my fax number in reply.

We should be able to quickly disabuse this claim, if in fact there are a sizable number of wet signature notes with endorsements - after all, there are hundreds of thousands of foreclosures, right? Since these are official court records, there's no privacy right implicated here, nor any problem with disclosure.

So if you have 'em, those of you who claim this is all on the up-and-up, you know what to do.

In one week I'll post the results.... if I get anything at all.

If there are no actual original, endorsed notes, well then we need to get that fact into the open - to force it into the open - because if true, this is the biggest fraud ever perpetrated in human history, and it permeates every single large financial institution in the Western World.

Watch this clip again, at 6:39 when Chris Whalen says Bear was selling the same note to multiple investors......

Uh, maybe this isn't tinfoil guys and dolls......

It will be interesting to see what happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 261 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.