This will be one of several posts on the future of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Your thoughts and your owns stories are welcome in the comments section.
Nearly a decade ago, in September 2008, US Treasury Chief Hank Paulson unveiled his historic government takeover of twin mortgage buyers, putting the government in charge of the mortgage giants and the $5 trillion in home loans they back. The plan eliminated the top executives which were out and replaced with Wall Street titans.
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee held a hearing on the financial collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, their takeover by the federal government and their role in the financial crisis. The video below is a 4 hour review of a planned response to the crisis in the housing and mortgage markets at the time of the economic meltdown and crash of 2008.
The titans that replaced Freddie CEO Richard Syron and Fannie CEO Daniel Mudd were two Wall Street finance veterans and were charged with restoring the mortgage magnates to health. Herb Allison formerly served as president of Merrill Lynch was Continue reading →
The Rule Ritual: Revealing for the First Time the Centuries Long Hidden Linguistic Origin of Rule Enterprise Reasoning Misleading Today’s Foreclosure Courts
The Foreclosure Hourthis Sunday turns attention away from individual cases to share with listeners some original basic research.
We will for the first time anywhere reveal new insight into the foreclosure crisis by challenging the basic philosophy behind the traditional legal reasoning of American Courts and hence of the entire legal profession.
On this Sunday’s live show we will explore the deep-seated, heretofore unseen semantic causes of the foreclosure crisis and the even Continue reading →
The Coming Public Pension Meltdown: How Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Were Used To Steal Public Pension Funds, Where Did All the Money Go, Who Has Been Covering Up the Theft, and How Every Homeowner Has Been and
Will Be Further Harmed by One of the Biggest Yet Still
Largely Concealed Financial Ripoffs in American History
We all know the devastating effects that the 2008 mortgage crisis has had on the American economy generally and tens of millions of homeowners personally and their families in the United States, while Pontius Pilate-like, federal and state judges and legislators have mostly looked the other way.
We are now faced with a yet even bigger, approaching financial disaster that this Nation’s local and state governments are equally unprepared for: the coming public pension meltdown that the federal government this time lacks the otherwise needed huge financial resources to adequately deal with. Continue reading →
United States District Court, E.D. California.
GENET HABTEMARIAM, Plaintiff,
VIDA CAPITAL GROUP, LLC; US MORTGAGE RESOLUTION; PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION; and DOES 1 to 50, inclusive, Defendants.
Some three years later, PNC notified Plaintiff by mail that its SDOT was discharged, apparently due to a settlement agreement PNC had reached with various agencies of the United States government. PNC effectuated that cancellation by sending a 1099-C form approved by the Internal Revenue Service for cancelling a debt. Plaintiff received the Form 1099-C on or about June 29, 2010. According to Plaintiff, because the 1099-C cancelled the amount she owed on the second mortgage, she believed it legally released her from any further obligation to pay Continue reading →
As I learned when reviewing an earlier draft, Fraud is meticulously researched and completely fascinating, with plenty of careful attention to law and regulatory structures. The book’s other virtues are well encapsulated by Kirkus:
“Balleisen casts a gimlet eye on the passing parade of hucksters and charlatans, peppering a narrative long on theory with juicy asides that build toward a comprehensive catalog of ‘Old Swindles in New Jargon’. . . . Ranging among the disciplines of history, economics, and psychology, Balleisen constructs a sturdy narrative of the many ways in which we have fallen prey to the swindler, and continue to do so, as well as of how American society and its institutions have tried to build protections against the con. But these protections eventually run up against accusations of violating ‘longstanding principles of due process,’ since the bigger the con, the more lawyers arrayed behind it.“—KirkusContinue reading →
The Plaintiff, like so many others, claimed (and the lower Circuit Court penned in the Findings of Fact) it “is now the Holder of the Note.” Of course, there were the usual series of “after-the-fact” robo-signed assignments trying to establish the right to enforce, and an allonge dated “after-the-fact” signed in blank. Even a witness who was basically a computer jockey viewing screen shots with no personal knowledge of who or how the data was entered. But in this case, there is a bit of a twist which, it appears, the Justices were picking up on as they asked astute questions about the procedure and the original (now bankrupt and liquidated) lender, New Century Mortgage Corporation. Continue reading →
What Every Homeowner Needs To Know About the Latest Foreclosure Trends and Developments in American Law in Order To Survive in an Inconsistent Legal System Largely Out of Service Which Treats Like Cases Differently.
It is a natural law of Justice in virtually every legal system in the history of the world that “like cases should be treated alike,” except it seems in the field of foreclosure defense in America where national inconsistency has become the norm.
Thus, for nearly a tumultuous decade following (the continuation of) the Mortgage Crisis of 2008, American Courts have created a record of contradiction, confusion, and uncertainty, ignoring established rules of evidence and even its own case precedents governing other areas of the law, while often pompously looking the other way in the tradition of Pontius Palate, routinely favoring lenders, often misusing the doctrine of stare decisis to protect previously egregiously mistaken case precedents. Continue reading →
Foreclosure Workshop #19: Bank of America v. Reyes-Toledo, A Case Study on How To Get Appellate Courts To Ask the Correct Questions
For too long homeowners and their counsel have allowed themselves in court to be drawn into and sidetracked by mainly esoteric and artificial, unsuccessful arguments about REMIC tax structures, multi-hat robosigners, and invisible securitized trusts — without getting to the heart of the most important foreclosure defense issues in court.
This Sunday we are airing on The Foreclosure Hour an oral argument that took place on certiorari before the Hawaii Supreme Court on August 18, 2016, heard by five Justices, each intelligent, each free from Big Bank influences, who are beginning to ask the correct questions. Continue reading →
HOUSINGWIRE says: Party platform blasts “corrupt business model” of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac
Okay, think about this – Fannie and Freddie were collaborators, if not the actual architects, and helped set up and patent this corrupt housing scheme. If you haven’t watched THE BIG SHORT yet, the time is NOW (it’s on Netflix). Then watch it again – there were good guys on Wall Street. Not everyone was involved in the corruption, albeit it few and far between. In fact, for many years America had a moral and more ethical financial community. But shortly after President Reagan began deregulating the industry and President Clinton signed off on the whip cream and cherry topping by deregulating Glass-Steagall – Wall Street went to hell in a hand-basket.
According to the Republican Party platform, which can be read in full here, one of the GOP’s goals for 2016 and beyond is to “advance responsible homeownership while guarding against the abuses that led to the housing collapse.” Continue reading →
Attorney James “Randy” Ackley appeared on the Neil Garfield Radio Show. The show was a fascinating discussion about banks creating the illusion of standing when a bank is unable to demonstrate they have the right to foreclose.
Neil and Randy addressed why the courts were allowing loan servicers to present evidence that was hearsay, often fraudulent and did not comply with the rules of evidence. Ackley stated that, “The court is allowing evidence to be introduced that would not be admitted in any other type of case.” The discussion brought up the fact that courts are making erroneous presumptions in favor of the banks despite the fact that there is now a public record of banks fabricating evidence, robosigning documents, false notarizations and bank employees testifying under oath about facts they know nothing about.