Friday, February 24, 2012

16 Year FRAUDclosure warrior (Davet) continues FIGHT

OHIO FRAUDclosure  - Guest Post - by Jack Wright

Mr Jack Wright provides homeowners one of the best and most informative web-sites to research, study, and discuss FRAUDclosure. The web-site (MSFRAUD) even has a forum in which readers can interact and connect with others similarly situated. Along with a "legal lounge" and video links the site has an armament of other tools to assist in the battle against the FRAUDclosure machine.

RELATED UPDATE: 2-29-12  Ohio Supreme Court Denies "Reconsideration" request
In a separate "Pro-Se" brief submitted on 9-1-2011 (HERE) Mr Davet asked the high court justices to review and reconsider the [Dismissal] action of the 8th Appellate court (decision of June 7th 2011). It is from this Appellate Court ruling that Mr Davet asked for an a) en banc consideration, b) reconsideration and to c) certify a conflict (citing exact same circumstances that court accepted to certify a conflict in US Bank v Duvall. Sadly, this ruling seeks to cover-up bad decisions and conflicted case law. This magnifies the injustice suffered by one of America's original FRAUDclosure victims.

Mr Wright shared his "Must Read" article (linked at bottom)  in which he details one of the nations first (if not the original) victims of FRAUDclosure. The in depth story of OHIO "Hero" Richard Davet is linked below. We've excerpted a few salient points.

In 2007 Ohio Judge Christopher Boyko so eloquently stated in his now famous Opinion:
“The {Banks, Loan Servicers, and Predator Drone foreclosure mill} institutions seem to adopt the attitude that since they have been doing this for so long, unchallenged, this practice equates with legal compliance. Finally put to the test, their weak legal arguments compel the Court to stop them at the gate.”

This week, Ohio’s 8th District Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in what must be one of the most disturbing foreclosure cases in the nation’s history.  It is the case of Richard Davet, ...{which} should have been dismissed with the bank’s 1996 filing.  Subsequent Ohio case law agrees. [But}, Instead of dismissing the complaint, the 1996 court somehow granted judgment to Bank of America after it was already established they were not the real party, and therefore the court was without jurisdiction to render judgment.  Since then, {16 years} Davet has been stuck inside a judicial treadmill, and for reasons that many consider highly suspect, the seemingly influenced Ohio courts have vigorously refused to release Davet from the injustice of its own void ab initio {improper horrible} judgment. 

Ohio’s judiciary does not have a highly-regarded history like Massachusetts, which is poised to rule (as soon as this month) on a foreclosure case {Eaton v. Fannie Mae} that could justly lead to a surge in claims from home owners seeking to overturn unlawful seizures. But Ohio has shown promise during Davet’s ordeal with widely-cited foreclosure opinions such as:

-     [A]ll fit squarely within the four corners of Davet’s (and many Ohio litigants}case(s) and support vacating the void ab initio judgment: 
"if plaintiff has offered no evidence that it owned the note and mortgage when the complaint was filed, it would not be entitled to judgment as a matter of law"
“in a foreclosure action, a bank that was not the mortgagee when suit was filed cannot cure its lack of standing by subsequently obtaining an interest in the mortgage.”
The Wells V. Jordan opinion also states:
“Several judges have held that a complaint must be dismissed if the Plaintiff cannot prove that it owned the note and mortgage on the date the complaint was filed.”
These IDENTICAL issue were before the Supreme Court of OHIO in Landmark:
However the tainted result of that decision created an even bigger legal mess - which has been twisted in to a new certified conflict  - in the case now before the High Court captioned:


The case is set for "Oral Argument" before OHIO's highest court on April 4, 2012 and will be handled by outstanding Foreclosure Defense attorney - Andrew Engel
OHIO FRAUDclosure has submitted an Amicus Curiae brief {on behalf of Ohio Homeowners and in support of Schwartzwald} through Attorney Bruce Broyles a brilliant Foreclosure Defense specialist.
How Will Ohio Address Its Wrongful Foreclosure Problem?
bulldozed-home.jpgWhat would the condition of {OHIO and} Cleveland be today if its courts had taken a proactive approach to tainted foreclosures when it first noticed the problem in 1996?  Will the court now take results of recent studies, surveys and audits into consideration?  Or will they continue aiding in the conspiracy {and crime} of concealment?  
OHIO Courts' reluctance to ADMIT FRAUD causes 16 years of foreclosure litigation

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

US Bank V Duvall - Who really paid the mortgage?

You remember OHIO's Landmark Case
U.S. Bank v. Duvall: (Brief Case History below)
First a Cuyahoga County Civil Court (Cleveland) then an Ohio District Appellate court (8th) dismissed this case.... because US Bank (as trustee) hadn’t proved it owned the note and mortgage BEFORE it filed the foreclosure complaint. A third attempt was made by asking the Supreme Court to reconsider the Appellate Courts decision. That too ...was declined. In a final desperate attempt to change existing law, the Predator Drone Foreclosure Mill law firm found some Pro-Se defended cases where the appellate courts had misinterpreted or misapplied Ohio Law. US Bank used these poorly decided cases and requested the Supreme Court of Ohio certify a conflict.... of Ohio Law.

Attorney Gary Cook and Antoine Duvall
 Photo appears courtesy of Ohio Public Radio Station WCPN 90.3, Mhari Saito, NPR (ideastream)

But as the case received more exposure became apparent....the FRAUD was going to be exposed (transfer & assignment of mortgage) ...or worse....have OHIO's highest court..... realise..... the NOTE was never properly or legally transferred to the TRUST. So the easiest and best solution - pay it off and cover up the fraud. Then simply ask the court to dismiss this case ....
So after initially "Certifying a Conflict" as a way to get this case heard by the court ....the ending (DISMISSAL) from Ohio's Supreme Court... was short and simple:

...........Upon consideration of appellees' Notice of Suggestion of Mootness, IT IS ORDERED by the Court, that this case is DISMISSED as MOOT........(Right Click HERE & open in a new tab )

HOW had DUVALL's three year legal battle......suddenly become MOOT ???

How was the "CASE of the CENTURY" .....suddenly and quietly dismissed ???
Well it appears that Wells Fargo and US Bank decided to satisfy (pay in FULL) the Duvall mortgage once they realised that this case would be scrutinized at the highest Level (and all the Fraud Exposed) See a copy of the suddenly satisfied mortgage ! 

This outraged our FL. friend - His commentary & blog on this Landmark Ohio Case

"CASH REGISTER JUSTICE" (by Outstanding Florida Attorney Matt Weidner)
…..”The banks just cannot allow major decisions to be reported. The banks will not allow the probing light of justice and truth to shine on what they are doing….so anytime they get backed into a corner with a bad case, they simply pay the mortgage off and walk away….calculating, cold and swift….like a predator drone strike….at the heart of our Constitutional Rights. And just think about the profound impact of having major cases just disappear from high court dockets”………
(Matt coined the phrase - ROBO-SIGNING - and helped expose this fraudulent practice and raise awareness on this issue a national level)

Exclusive from our friends Lisa (Foreclosure Hamlet) & Mike (4closurefraud) and
Lynn Szymoniak (Fraud Digest)

Mr. Duvall’s case went all the way up to the Ohio Supreme Court, where the fraudclosing entity realized the weakness of their position and the possibility of a state Supreme Court issuing a decision that would prevent fraudclosures across Ohio. The fraudclosing bank {US Bank using Wells Fargo Servicing} and their {Predator Drone}Foreclosure mill attorneys {Thompson - Hine} knew they were caught with fabricated, fraudulent real estate documents. They were concerned that, under the scrutiny of Ohio Supreme Court judges, there would be a little problem with the lack of authentic, valid, legal proof of their right to foreclose. In order to moot the case, US Bank as Trustee and/or their fruadclosure mill offered a settlement that was too good to refuse which included the wiping out of the mortgage with a satisfaction recorded in the public records. Both parties informed the Ohio Supreme Court of their desire to drop the case. The Ohio Justices allowed the case to be dropped.

So just like Florida's Pino case (reported yesterday), banks will go to great lengths to avoid facing a court populated by a majority of judges who may not be bank-puppets. Of course, it’s becoming more and more known (even to judges) that widespread securtization fail (lack of proper, legal, contractual conveyance of mortgages and notes) was one of the stops on the way to millions of fraudclosures (fabrication of real estate documents & fraud upon American courts to cover-up for securitization fail).

The investors were notified in a timely manner of the….ahem…."liquidation” of this “asset” but boy…oh….boy did they take a loss on this one.

Let’s break it down shall we?
Trust: US Bank as Trustee for Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust Inc. Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-WFHE2
Servicer: Wells Fargo
Securitization Fail/Fraudclosure clues: Two Fraudulent assignments of mortgage,
one fabricated in 2008 (South Carolina Wells Fargo document signer Anita Antonelli )
one fabricated in 2011 (Minnesota Wells Fargo document signer Scott Heurkins)
Original mortgage: $90,000
The June 2011 report (page 16) shows Mr. Duvall’s loan (# 0157265091)
as incurring a loss of  $124,595.99. 
Broken down as $88,511.78 in principal losses and $36,084.21 ("delinquent interest")

It shows this loss as a hit to the investors to the tune of 140.768 %. 
Total loss to MBS investors (remember this might be your or your loved ones’ retirement funds or your county’s funds for making payroll to public employees)? $124,463.99

Think a moratorium on fraudclosures is warranted so we can investigate these newly uncovered layers of fraud and come up with sustainable solutions for families and investors while indicting the financial criminals? Maybe if we insist and demand this now we can save both American families and our retirement/pensions/municipality investments from continued harm

READ the rest of the report with exhibits (HERE)

Sunday, February 19, 2012

Ohio 9th Appellate shoot-down of BONY & DRONE FIRM

FAIL - FAIL    Bank of New York Trust    FAIL - FAIL

Repeated failures by Summit County (Ohio) “foreclosure court” judges are being embarrassingly revealed with another published opinion and smack-down coming out of Ohio’s 9th district appellate court. The sad truth; the latest appellate ruling unveils the many inadequacies, failures and improper decisions being reached in this bank-friendly (mentally-challenged?) lower civil court.
The most disturbing aspect of Summit County's repeated poor rulings: judges continue to fumble with the most basic principles of a foreclosure complaint (real party-in-interest, owner of note & mortgage and standing). This despite the fact they have a strict pre-filing requirement - which was instituted to make their decisions simple.  Summit County {Akron/Canton} is one of only three Ohio counties (of 88) that REQUIRE what I call a “Truth Averment.” The county has in place the rare “Certificate of Readiness” requirement. This 4 year old policy (May 2008) was implemented for the express purpose of stopping 3rd party document creation {Fraud} companies from manufacturing evidence .

Unfortunately the phony paper plaintiffs (alphabet soup-Trust, Trustees or Servicers) are created out of thin air by LPS and MERS. The companies use computer driven spread-sheet software to execute millions of foreclosure filings. This FRAUDulent business model - is only as effective as the brain-dead hourly employees {low paid data-entry personal} hired to use it. Worse - the LPS Document Solution Software triggers a predator drone foreclosure mill firm {bench warmer paper filing attorney} into action.
Fortunately, these DRONE attorneys ARE REQUIRED (by Certificate of Readiness) to state...
plaintiff has “in its custody and control the original note and mortgage, and said documents [a]re available for inspection upon order of the Court.”

Excerpts from the Appellate court show (embarrassingly) the inadequacies of our lower courts (and judges). It is also further proof of a legal environment where bad attorneys are openly practicing and arguing…..Out-right FRAUD…. and feel comfortable ….doing it!
{¶13} Here, Bank of New York alleged that it was the “holder” of the note. The purported photocopy attached to its complaint shows the note payable to Bank of New York through the last {created, fabricated and obviously fraudulent} allonge.  Therefore, Bank of New York would have been required to possess the original note {and not some LPS created copy} in order to establish itself as the real party in interest by way of holder status.

{¶33} {Five months later}...the Bank’s {predator drone mill} counsel stated that “they were still ‘looking for’ the original note.”  By November 9, 2010, the Bank {of New York Mellon} presented no evidence that it possessed or had ever possessed the original note.  In addition, the Mihalcas noted that the Bank’s affidavit in support of its own summary judgment motion was improper evidence and as such, there was no proper summary judgment evidence {other than the fraudulent affidavit..and allonge..coming} from the Bank before the trial court

NEW published decision out of OHIO 9th District Court of Appeals
Date: FEBRUARY 15th, 2012
Plaintiff: Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company National
Predator Drone Foreclosure MillReisenfeld & Associates, LPA, LLC
Matthew Charles Gladwell, {pictured above} apparently felt he needn't prove that the phony document(s) submitted either existed or were ever held by the Bank of New York Trust. 
OHIO's totally dysfunctional system is on full display here….the only positive…..our 9th appellate court judges continues to overturn the poorly decided lower courts (especially Summit County).

{¶3} On June 11, 2010, the Mihalcas filed an answer ....{and} demanded to inspect the original note

{¶7} In their first assignment of error, the Mihalcas argue that the Bank [of New York] failed to prove its present possession of the note, which precluded summary judgment in favor of the Bank.  We [9th appellate court] agree.
{¶14} .... [T]he Mihalcas questioned the Bank’s possession of the note beginning with their answer, wherein they made a timely request to inspect the original note.....  The Bank had {not} produced the note as of the date on which the trial court ordered summary judgment, which was over five months after the Mihalcas’ initial request....
{¶33} November 9, 2010, in responding to the Mihalcas’ counsel for production of the note....the letter {from Bank of New York} only allows one to conclude that counsel for the Bank is going to ask {another} Bank for the {original} note and that counsel believes that {another} Bank has possession of the original note.  The letter does not affirmatively state that the Bank has possession of it. The affidavit of the Mihalcas’ counsel avers that the parties again discussed production of the original note on September 27, 2010.  At that time, the Bank’s {predator drone mill} counsel stated that “they were still ‘looking for’ the original note.”  By November 9, 2010, the Bank {of New York Mellon} presented no evidence that it possessed or had ever possessed the original note.  In addition, the Mihalcas noted that the Bank’s affidavit in support of its own summary judgment motion was improper evidence and as such, there was no proper summary judgment evidence {other than the fraudulent affidavit..and allonge..coming} from the Bank before the trial court ...
{¶35} I {judge P.J. Belfance} can only conclude that the Bank has failed to meet its burden, as there was no evidence before the trial court that the Bank at any point in time possessed the original note. The Mihalcas were {also by law} entitled to have summary judgment granted in their favor.
Hello DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL (all 28-members)…..PLEASE WAKE-UP !! Do not allow these “Bench Warmer” lawyers {Matthew C. Gladwell} and PREDATOR DRONE foreclosure mill firms {Reisenfeld & Associates, LPA, LLC } to operate openly in our courts and further demean the legal profession.
Let’s see some sanctions. Let’s see some Disbarments

Hello OHIO SUPREME COURT …the black robes are supposed to show your higher legal status and authority ….not show{and prove} your simply wearing ...“sleeping attire”
We've seen identical bad decisions (from Summit county) before:
Below findings: from Court of Appeals OHIO 9th District
Case: CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Elia, 2011-Ohio-2499 (right click & open in New Tab)
Date: May 25th, 2011
Plaintiff: CitiMortgage
Predator Drone Foreclosure Mill:  ERIN M. LAURITO,  Attorney for plaintiff  {CitiMortgage}

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Ohio Appellate downs DRONE - Lerner Sampson Rothfuss

Attorney{Drone} Fail - Lerner Sampson Rothfuss - NO SHOW
A three (3) JUDGE panel gives BEAT DOWN and ADMONISHMENT
{¶30} "Upon review of the record...Appellants failure to appear at trial cannot be circumvented
{¶30} Appellant's own actions {stupidity} led to trial courts dismissal (of first fraudulent attempt)
{¶30} Appellant {Drone -LSR} was the architect of that {original failed} outcome

Affirm lower court ruling.  "For reasons stated {arrogance} the June 22, 2011 Stark County Court of Common Pleas {decision for homeowner} is affirmed"....

Slipping computer generated, shoddy and manufactured paperwork past lower court judges (old, out-of-touch, too busy) on a “fast track” to foreclosure…used to be easy! The judicial machinery spun out of control when directed by large Predator Drone Foreclosure Mills and their "Bench Warmers"(local counsel used to foreclose) seeking the revered “Green Light” rating (used by LPS Desktop Solutions). Unfortunately thousands of Ohioans lost their homes while these FRAUDclosure factories and drone filing attorneys operated openly in front of Ohio judges which unfortunately were asleep-at-the-wheel. (Link to report).

However, recent attention from the OCCUPY movement, highly regarded foreclosure defense attorneys and bloggers have turned the spotlight on the fraudulent and criminal behavior (of the Foreclosure Mills & Servicers) The robo-signing clearly showed that documents, legally needed to initiate foreclosures, were created and falsely executed. The attention has finally started to drown out the traditional lap dog media trained in "Bank-Speak."

Predator Drone Foreclosure Mills:
The mindless and legally void factory approach used to methodically ram-rod thousands of FRAUDclosures through the judicial machinery of Ohio’s 88 county Civil Court system appears to have finally hit a BUMP. Proof: recent published decisions coming out of some of Ohio's twelve Appellate Courts show that some judges are actually waking-up from a deep legal sleep. The Appellate courts have been routinely overturning and dismissing cases which had improperly awarded Summary Judgment to pretend lenders, bogus trust & trustees, and improper plaintiff parties.

Read full deposition - with admissions - of LSR employee Shellie Hill

NEW published decision out of OHIO 5th District Court of Appeals
Case: BAC, Inc. v. Booth, 2012-Ohio-487 (right click & open in New Tab)
Date: FEBRUARY 6th, 2012
Plaintiff: BAC Home Loan Servicing (FNA Countrywide)
Predator Drone Foreclosure Mill:  Lerner Sampson Rothfus (LSR) - Elizabeth S. Fuller

Elizabeth Fuller, {pictured above} apparently felt she needn't bother showing up for either mediation or even a trial. They{LSR} feel burdened if required to follow any Rules of LAW....especially time consuming mediation or worse...having to actually appear... for a trial! ...Yes - this is too much and "system overload" on the FRAUDclosure programming software. LSR employees {Drones} are used to typing in a couple "fill-in-the-blank" screens which "create" court-ready filings. The {LSR} computers are not programmed for trivial matters ....such as mediation. Additionally{LSR} cheap "bench warmer" attorneys.... don't actually practice law. The goal is to simply file some paperwork and get paid!

AFFIDAVIT FAIL from OHIO 6th District Court of Appeals
Case: Aurora Loan Services LLC v. Louis, 2012-Ohio-384 (right click & open in New Tab)
Date: FEBRUARY 3rd, 2012
Plaintiff: Aurora Loan Services (or Mayflower or Union Mortgage Services or Life Bank or ???)
Predator Drone Foreclosure Mill:  Javitch, Block & Rathbone L.L.P - Darryl Gomley

Similarly in a case highlighted below:
*A Wisconsin appeals court recently reached the relatively unremarkable, predictable, and certainly non-ground-breaking conclusion that {fraudulently created & robo-signed} affidavits filed by a foreclosing lender that are not based on the "personal knowledge" of the affiant are insufficient to establish a basis for summary judgment.

*What does merit note is that, in reaching its ruling, it reversed the decision of Jefferson County Circuit Court Judge Jacqueline R. Erwin, the lower court judge who apparently didn't have a problem with these obviously flawed affidavits in deciding to allow the foreclosure to go forward. Unlike the vast majority of cases, the homeowner/couple here exercised their right to have an appellate court review, a right that most homeowners in foreclosure are unaware of....(Get an Attorney)

 AFFIDAVIT FAIL from WI. Court of Appeals District IV

Case: Bank of New York v. Cano, No. 2010AP477 (right click & open in New Tab)
Date: January 20th, 2011
RE: Appeal of: Cir. Ct. No. 2007CV242
¶ 13 The Bank submitted two {fraudulent} affidavits to support its motion for summary judgment: one by an attorney for the Bank, and one by an agent for BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P., f/k/a Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, L.P

¶ 16 We conclude that the Bank's affidavits do not establish a prima facie case for summary judgment...Nothing in the attorney's affidavit indicates that the attorney's averments as to the Canos' payment history are based on personal knowledge...

¶ 17 As we explained.... an affidavit must establish a prima facie case that attached payment statements are admissible evidence under an exception to the hearsay rule to support a motion for summary judgment.....Thus, for the statement of the Canos' payments to support a motion for summary judgment, the affidavit must establish that the affiant "is qualified to testify that: (1) the records were made at or near the time by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge; and (2) this was done in the course of a regularly conducted activity." Palisades, 324 Wis. 2d 180, ¶ 15. The attorney's affidavit contains no such averments

¶ 18 The BAC agent's affidavit is similarly flawed. The agent {lies and commits fraud by robo-signing and} avers that his knowledge of the Canos' default on their mortgage is based on his access to the financial records for the Canos' mortgage, yet no financial documents are attached to the affidavit...We conclude that the Bank has not established a prima facie case for summary judgment. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

* Write-up from fine blog: The Home Equity Theft Reporter Cases & Articles

The Appellate courts (which are are feed up) are no longer awarding a “Free Home” to the fake lender/servicer/plaintiff. They are making the foreclosing party PROVE UP & SHOW UP. Although I don’t see the Predator Drone (Mill Firms) FRAUDClosure efforts stopping. The good judges, are apparently helping the "blindfolded lady" ...balance....the Scales of Justice. Thank You OHIO Judges! for getting it right!

Thursday, February 9, 2012

Federal Government announces Agreements & Settlements

Federal Government & State Attorneys General Reach $25 Billion Agreement with five Mortgage Servicers to Address Mortgage Loan Servicing & Foreclosure Abuses
WASHINGTON – U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Shaun Donovan, Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller and Colorado Attorney General John W. Suthers announced today that the federal government and 49 state attorneys general (sans Oklahoma)* have reached a landmark $25 billion agreement with the nation’s five largest mortgage servicers (Bank of America Corp., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells Fargo & Company,** Citigroup Inc. and Ally Financial Inc.{formerly GMAC}) to address mortgage loan servicing and foreclosure abuses.  The agreement provides substantial financial relief {cough....cough...} to homeowners and establishes significant new homeowner protections {cough...hack....cough}...for the future. 

The unprecedented joint agreement is the largest federal-state civil settlement ever obtained and is the result of extensive investigations by federal agencies, including the Department of Justice, HUD and the HUD Office of the Inspector General (HUD-OIG), and state attorneys general and state banking regulators across the country.  The joint federal-state group entered into the agreement with the nation’s 5 largest mortgage servicers.

The agreement resolves certain violations of civil law based on mortgage loan servicing activities.  The agreement does not prevent state and federal authorities from pursuing criminal enforcement actions related to this or other conduct by the servicers.  The agreement does not prevent the government from punishing wrongful securitization conduct that will be the focus of the new Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities Working Group.  The United States also retains its full authority to recover losses and penalties caused to the federal government when a bank failed to satisfy underwriting standards on a government-insured or government-guaranteed loan.  The agreement does not prevent any action by individual borrowers who wish to bring their own lawsuits.  State attorneys general also preserved, among other things, all claims against the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS), and all claims brought by borrowers..:....(Read the rest)

For another perspective: The top 12 reasons you should HATE the mortgage settlement
and David Dayen at Firedoglake: 49-State Foreclosure Fraud Settlement - Details*

* Oklahoma AG (Scott Pruitt) felt banks - owed NOTHING - and wouldn't agree to settlement

**Wells Fargo: ...The states and federal prosecutors agreed to relieve Wells Fargo from any claims and allegations on servicing, modification and foreclosure practices, including some claims related to the origination of mortgages (WHAT !!.. Are you serious??)
...(Read Wells FRAUDgo statement)
 Photo courtesy: williambanzai7

And of below link for:
INDEPENDENT Foreclosure Review.***
***For borrowers who lost their home to foreclosure between Jan. 1, 2008 and Dec. 31, 2011,
a settlement administrator designated by the attorneys general will send claim forms to persons eligible for cash restitution. If you believe you are eligible for relief under this settlement but are concerned you will be difficult to locate,{because you are Homeless and were Fraudulently "kicked-out" or "evicted" and/or may be living in your car}...then please contact your Attorney General’s Office. We will collect and forward your information {hopefully you're keeping it all in a paper sack} to the appropriate person {fax machine} to ensure you {can start the whole process - all over again} are contacted if you are eligible

10-page pdf document:
"Return Integrity & Accuracy"{we never had it!} to Foreclosure and Bankruptcy (HERE

For more information about the mortgage servicing settlement, go to:

And simultaneously from the
 OCC Settles Civil Money Penalties Against Large National Bank Mortgage Servicers for $394 Million; Penalty Assessment Coordinated with Servicers' Actions and Payments Under Federal-State Settlement

WASHINGTON — The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) today announced agreements in principle with four large national bank mortgage servicers (Bank of America, Citibank, JPMorgan Chase, and Wells Fargo) to settle civil money penalties in connection with the unsafe and unsound mortgage servicing and foreclosure practices that were the subject of comprehensive cease and desist orders issued by the OCC in April 2011.

Today’s announcement.......{The} OCC agrees to hold in abeyance imposition of such penalties provided the servicers ......take other actions under the federal-state settlement with a value equal to at least the penalty amounts that each servicer acknowledges....
The amounts for each servicer:
$164 million for Bank of America,
$113 million for JPMorgan Chase,
$83 million for Wells Fargo and
$34 million for Citibank,
If after three(3) years, a servicer has not paid an amount equal to its respective penalty, the OCC will assess a penalty against the servicer..... (Read the rest here)