New York Creates New Foreclosure Courts to Clear Backlog Yves Smith

More information on how quickly the courts are moving forward to take advantage of the so called settlement between mortgage lenders and Attorney's General. Clearly we are seeing an attempt by the administration to brush all criminal behavior by banks under the rug. A special court that will take advantage of the banks access to capital and documentation to work against the home owners who will have far less resources and capital to work with to fight the fraud and abuse. The speeding of the process is clearly a win for the banks now that they have the terms of settlement to throw around as defense against their acts of fraud. It is sad to think that now it is legal for banks to take people's property without ever having to prove legal authority to do so.
The following is from Naked Capitalism. the full article can be read at the link after the blurb

The article mentions the fact that a New York court requirement implemented in October 2010, that required lawyers filing for foreclosures to certify that they had taken reasonable steps to verify the accuracy of the information in the filing. That in turn lowered the bar for sanctioning lawyers who failed bogus information or documents signed by parties with no personal knowledge. That led to a near-halt of new foreclosure actions, which speaks volumes as to the accuracy of prior filings. If the problems were mere “paperwork,” you might have seen a hiatus as banks implemented new procedures, but this points to far more basic problems with the banks’ ability to prove they have the right to foreclose on loans they service.
My skepticism relates to the banks’ intent. The assumption is that they want to foreclose and that the various complaints about foreclosure delays reflect their frustration. But this is like Bre’er Rabbit complaining about being thrown in the briar patch. Banks make money on attenuated foreclosures. Georgetown law professor Adam Levitin has written about how servicers put borrowers in a fee sweatbox. If nothing else, they continue to earn servicing fees even when a borrower is hopelessly delinquent, as well as late fees, which they finally recoup when the home is sold. So I’m not confident the banks are going to enter into these talks with an eye to modifying mortgages. As both Adam Levitin and attorney and securitization expert Tom Adams have said, servicers are not set up to do mods. It’s like a new loan underwriting and they don’t have the staff or the fee structures for that to make sense.
Nevertheless, there is one area where this effort could make a big difference, and that is in short sales. I’ve heard complaints from different states that banks won’t even respond to a short sale proposal. In LA, owners have to advertise “no short sale,” otherwise brokers won’t bring buyers to a viewing. This format will make it awfully difficult for a bank to reject a short sale offer that is in line with current market prices. So this new system will probably yield some benefit but I don’t expect it to be the remedy that its sponsors hope it will be.

New York Creates New Foreclosure Courts to Clear Backlog naked capitalism

Larry Platt, Prominent Securitization Lawyer, Made False Statements About BofA Mortgage Transfers « naked capitalism

Here is a follow up article regarding story in Fortune regarding the cover up by the big banks and some of there representatives who have recently been caught in several different lies. 

From Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism (yves is the authority on the housing crisis and how corruption on wall street and within the major banks have screwed the american public)

Among other things, its shows prominent securitization attorney Larry Platt, who accused judges who interfered with the imperial rights of banks to foreclose of engaging in an “assault on the legal system,” to be a liar. Funny how that type is eager to try to say everyone else is engaged in bad conduct.




Contrast Platt’s statements with Field’s findings:

 

To check DeMartini’s testimony, Fortune examined the foreclosures filed in two New York counties (Westchester and the Bronx) between 2006 and 2010. There were 130 cases where the Bank of New York (BK) was foreclosing on behalf of a Countrywide mortgage-backed security. In 104 of those cases, the loan was originally made by Countrywide; the other 26 were made by other banks and sold to Countrywide for securitization.



None of the 104 Countrywide loans were endorsed by Countrywide – they included only the original borrower’s signature. Two-thirds of the loans made by other banks also lacked bank endorsements. The other third were endorsed either directly on the note or on an allonge, or a rider, accompanying the note.



The lack of Countrywide endorsements, combined with the bank’s representation to the court that these documents are accurate copies of the original notes, calls into question the securitization of these loans, as well as Bank of New York’s right, as trustee, to foreclose on them. These notes ostensibly belong to over 100 different Countrywide securities and worse, they were originally made as long ago as 2002. If the lack of endorsement on these notes is typical — and 104 out of 104 suggests it is — the problem occurs across Countrywide securities and for loans that pre-date the peak-bubble mortgage frenzy.



In other words, DeMartini and the supposedly incompetent were truthful, and the damage control team, including outside counsel, lied. I wonder, given the dive that Bank of America stock has taken, whether Bank of Americas’ misstatements on this topic constitute securities fraud. If so, Platt has not only enabled but participated in it directly.



The reason I am harping on this is the American Securitization Forum, SNR Denton, K&L Gates and others went on a full bore campaign to defend their meal tickets last fall, and their rearguard action is looking increasingly to be an utter fabrication. Yet the media took up their line because they were large recognized players. What is offensive is not only is Platt not about to suffer any reputational consequences, but small firm attorneys like Nick Wooten who are targeting banking industry malfeasance get hit with frivolous sanctions motions and industry mouthpieces like Housing Wire trumpet them as if they are serious.



Yes, Virginia, we have a two tier system of justice in this country. And we need to understand all its ugly manifestations if we are to have any hope of rooting it out.

 

Larry Platt, Prominent Securitization Lawyer, Made False Statements About BofA Mortgage Transfers « naked capitalism