Click here for assistance facilitating a Short Sale or Foreclosure 

New California Laws Impacting Real Estate

Senate Bill 931. No Short Sale Deficiencies – A seller’s first trust deed lender cannot obtain a deficiency judgment against the seller after a short sale. Providing written consent to a short sale shall obligate the first trust deed lender to accept the sales proceeds as full payment and discharge of the remaining amount owed on the loan. This applies to first trust deeds secured by one-to-four residential units, but it does not limit the lender from seeking damages for fraud or waste by the borrower.

Assembly Bill 1809 and California Civil Code section 2079.10. Energy Audit in Home Inspection Report – A home inspection and inspection report may, upon a client’s request, include an audit of the energy efficiency of a home, according to the standards of the Home Energy Rating Systems (HERS). REALTORs® are encouraged to provide new HERS booklet to residential buyers, and delivery of this booklet will be adequate to inform the buyer about statewide HERS program.

Assembly Bill 1684. Restriction on Adverse Possession Claim – A claim for adverse possession requires, among other things, certified records of the county tax collector showing that all state, county, or municipal taxes have been timely paid for the five-year period the property has been occupied and claimed. Existing law merely requires proof that taxes have been paid for the five-year period, not certified proof of timely payments.

Senate Bill 1137. Enforcement of Mortgage Loan Originator Requirements – Anyone acting as a mortgage loan originator (MLO) without an MLO license endorsement will be guilty of a crime punishable by six months imprisonment plus a $20,000 fine. And a broker cannot employ or compensate a real estate licensee for MLO activities unless that licensee has a license endorsement. This law has also given the Department of Real Estate (DRE) the authority to deny or revoke a MLO license endorsement or take other action. This amends the MLO requirements for finance lenders and residential mortgage lenders under the Department of Corporation.

Senate Bill 1149. Post-Foreclosure Protection for Tenants – A notice to terminate a residential tenant who remains after a foreclosure sale must generally include a statutory notice of the tenant’s rights. This requirement applies to an immediate successor-in-interest for one year after a foreclosure sale. The tenant’s rights must be on a separate cover sheet or, for a 90-day termination, incorporated into the notice to terminate. Another provision of this bill protects a residential tenant’s credit by generally prohibiting the court clerk from revealing unlawful detainer court records unless the plaintiff prevails at trial.

Senate Bill 782. Tenant Protection for Domestic Violence Victims – A residential landlord cannot terminate or fail to renew a tenancy based on domestic violence against the tenant or tenant’s household members as specified. This law applies if the person restrained from contact with the tenant by court order or named in a police report is not also a tenant of the same dwelling unit. If the protected tenant subsequently allows the person restrained to visit the property, or the landlord reasonably believes the person restrained poses a physical threat to others or to quiet possession by other tenants, the landlord may serve a three-day notice to correct or quit.

Assembly Bill 2325. Expanding the foreclosure consultant law to include someone who performs a forensic audit of a residential mortgage loan.

Assembly Bill 1373. Requiring any mailed solicitation that offers to provide a copy of an owner’s grant deed or other title records for a fee to include a prominent statutory disclosure that the copy service is not associated with any governmental agency and that the homeowner can obtain such records from the county recorder.

Assembly Bill 1800. Increasing the criminal punishment for renting out a residential dwelling without the owner’s consent from six months imprisonment plus a $1,000 fine, to one year imprisonment, plus a $2,500 fine.

To view the official text and other new laws, please go to www.leginfo.ca.gov.

TARP Funds Used to Help Banks Rather Than Homeowners Revealed

TARP Funds and Homeowners

If you ever thought the government was on our side – out to help us as homeowners, think again.  Recent information revealed that TARP money requested to be used for homeowner assistance was not allowed to be used to help homeowners.  Basically our treasury barred the use of TARP funds – and we set aside to help only banks out.  If that TARP money had been applied to only helping homeowners, where would we be today?  Probably in a lot better shape. 

It just goes to say we cannot expect the government to help us – we need to help ourselves.  Data shows that you are unlikely to get a loan modification, so your choices are either get out of the house using a short sale, or file a lawsuit against your lender for fraud (almost every loan since 2000 has fraud in it – but that’s another topic).  Many are choosing a class action lawsuit - to sue your lender – rather than an individual lawsuit. 

For assistance with your bad loan, give us a call at (619) 631-4545.

From NakedCapitalism:Thursday, December 9, 2010

Treasury Bars Use of TARP Funds to Help Borrowers Facing Foreclosure

 If you had any doubts about whose side the Administration is on, this story should settle all doubts.

From the Nation:

Consider this: the recent Fed audit revealed over $3.3 trillion in emergency assistance to the banks and other corporate behemoths during the financial crisis–no strings attached…. Then consider the 19 states which are recipients of the Hardest Hit Fund (HHF)–a portion of TARP money set aside to help homeowners in states struggling with the highest unemployment rates and steepest declines in the housing market.

Some of those states, including Ohio, let Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner know as far back as this past spring that they wanted to use some of those funds to assist legal aid groups that help individual homeowners…. Treasury solicited the opinion of an outside law firm, Squire, Sanders & Dempsey. Never mind that the firm’s clients include BB&T Corporation and payday lender CNG Financial Corp. The firm said, in essence–sorry, no can do on the legal aid. Not permitted under the TARP. Huh? Hold on a sec–is this the same TARP that granted the Treasury Secretary all those “extraordinary powers” to protect people’s home values, preserve home ownership, promote economic growth, etc.?

Yves here. The skepticism is well warranted. This isn’t an area in which a law firm would have much (any) liability on an opinion. Ergo, a combination of Treasury body language and selection of the firm would have determined the outcome. Besides, the TARP explicitly put the Treasury secretary above the law. So why is Treasury even getting an opinion? This is clearly an exercise in creating an excuse for an action it wanted to take.

The article also details actions by Rep. Marcy Kaptur and Sen. Sherrod Brown to reverse the Treasury action. Kaptur has introduced a bill (HR 5510) to amend the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to enable nonprofits, both counseling firms and law firms, to receive TARP funds to help single family homeowners to prevent foreclosures. Brown introduced a parallel measure (S 3979) in the Senate. Please contact your Senators and Representative and ask them to cosponsor these measures. And annoy Treasury by calling or e-mailing them (try the Domestic Finance and Economic Policy contacts) to tell them they are on the wrong side of this issue.

Bank of America Being Sued for Fraud by Attorney Generals

 Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase are being investigated for servicing fraud against homeowners looking to modify their loans.  Attorney Generals in Arizona and Nevada have filed a lawsuit against Bank of America in December seeking major fines against Bank of America for lying to, and misleading millions of homeowners.  This is in addition to all the other fraud recently uncovered by mortgage servicers, setting up homeowners to lose their homes.

Mortgage fraud on the servicers and lenders part is rampant.  A forensic loan audit can uncover this fraud.   Many homeowners are seeking their own damages with a Class Action Lawsuit - by suing your lender.  Class Action Lawsuit Video.

Don’t sit back and let the lenders and servicers take away your rights.  Take action today!

SAN FRANCISCO | Fri Dec 17, 2010 5:32pm EST By Dan Levine

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – The states of Arizona and Nevada sued Bank of America Corp on Friday, accusing the largest U.S. bank of routinely misleading consumers about home loan modifications. The two lawsuits, filed by each state attorney general in Arizona and Nevada state courts, seek potentially massive fines against the bank and compensation for customers. Arizona accuses Bank of America of violating a 2009 consent judgment in which it committed to widespread home loan modifications. The bank failed to follow through, leaving borrowers in limbo, according to the suit. The bank is also accused of violating the state’s consumer fraud act.

Arizona is seeking $25,000 per violation of the consent decree, and up to $10,000 for consumer fraud breaches. Both states also ask that Bank of America pay restitution to customers.

The lawsuits could complicate Bank of America’s efforts to quickly resolve inquiries into its mortgage foreclosure practices. The probes include a 50-state investigation that is also looking at JPMorgan Chase & Co, Ally Financial and other major mortgage servicers. Last month Bank of America Chief Executive Brian Moynihan said a quick settlement of the 50-state probe would be the best solution for all involved.

Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, who is on the executive committee of the 50-state investigation, recently lost a run for governor in Arizona. Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto won reelection this past November. “This was an opportunity for the two states which have felt the biggest impact of the foreclosure crisis to stand up and say, ‘This has got to stop,’” Goddard said in a phone interview.

Bank of America Home Loans spokesman Dan Frahm said the company is disappointed Goddard filed the suit during his last days as attorney general, and that the bank would continue to work with the multi-state process. “That is the approach that will best broaden programs for homeowners who need assistance,” Frahm said in an email. Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, who heads the multi-state probe, said the legal activity “neither changes, nor dilutes, the strong and resolute multi-state effort to address serious problems that have been identified with a number of mortgage servicers.”

Mortgage servicers have come under fire in recent months for abuses of the foreclosure process. In another foreclosure probe, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission sent out a fresh round of subpoenas last week to big banks including Bank of America. Bank of America temporarily halted home repossessions in October as it reviewed its internal processes.  James Tierney, director of the National State Attorneys General Program at Columbia Law School, said it would be difficult for incoming Arizona AG Tom Horne to simply withdraw the lawsuit when he takes office. But if Bank of America cuts a deal with the multi-state investigation, Horne could decide to endorse it and argue against continued litigation. “That’s perfectly fine,” Tierney said. “That’s what AGs do.”

According to Goddard, Bank of America representatives contacted Horne in a bid to head off a lawsuit. Goddard called the outreach “highly inappropriate,” and said Horne took the same position.  Frahm said he was not aware of those interactions, and Horne did not respond to requests for comment. In 2009 Bank of America agreed to a consent judgment over home loans made by its Countrywide unit. The bank committed to loan modifications which it valued at roughly $8.4 billion nationally, the Arizona lawsuit says. The company violated the judgment by failing to make decisions on loan modifications, according to the suit. Bank of America also misled consumers by telling them that their modifications were declined because investors in mortgage-backed securities had not approved them, even though in some cases no such permission was necessary, the lawsuit says. Bank of America shares closed up 5 cents at $12.57 on the New York Stock Exchange.

The case in Superior Court of the State of Arizona, County of Maricopa is State of Arizona v. Countrywide Financial Corporation et al, 2010-033580. The case in District Court for Clark County, Nevada is State of Nevada v. Bank of America Corp. et al, 10-631557. (Reporting by Dan Levine; Editing by Steve Orlofsky, John Wallace and Richard Chang)

San Diego Home Foreclosures Up in 3rd Quarter – Failure of HAMP

 San Diego Real Estate and other Real Estate Nationwide has seen an Increase in Foreclosures - Resulting from the Failure of the HAMP Program as well as Lender Fraud.

 According to the report below the banks have “exhaused” their options – more likely they have place insurance policies against the delinquent homeowners, which will result in the lender/servicer getting a bigger paycheck if the house goes to sale rather than modifying the loan.  Most lenders/servicers are stringing homeowners out for 8-12 months only to be denied the loan modification right before the foreclosure sale.  By this time it is too late for the homeowner to do much else with the property.  San Diego foreclosures will continue to increase.

The homeowners have several options:

  1. Short Sale – sell the home
  2. Take legal action – join a Class Action Lawsuit against your lender
  3. Get a Forensic Loan Audit - then determine which course of action is best for you

Our team of experts can help guide you through this program.  Call today: (619) 631-4546.

By Dave Clarke WASHINGTON | Wed Dec 29, 2010 4:44pm EST

 WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. home foreclosures jumped in the third quarter and banks’ efforts to keep borrowers in their homes dropped as the housing market continues to struggle, U.S. bank regulators said on Wednesday.

 The regulators said one reason for the increase in foreclosures is that banks have “exhausted” options for keeping many delinquent borrowers in their homes through programs such as loan modifications.  Newly-initiated foreclosures increased to 382,000 in the third quarter, a 31.2 percent jump over the previous quarter and a 3.7 percent rise from the same quarter a year ago, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) said in a quarterly mortgage report.  The number of foreclosures in process increased to 1.2 million, a 4.5 percent increase from the second quarter and a 10.1 percent increase from a year ago, according to the regulators.   They said during a briefing that the numbers could send “mixed signals” about the health of the U.S. housing market.

 Regulators also said a possible reason for the foreclosure uptick in the quarter was that a large pool of borrowers who were being considered for home retention programs but did not qualify moved through the system.

 ”I think you’ll see more stabilization now,” said Bruce Krueger, a mortgage official at the OCC. Foreclosures have become a hot political topic and mortgage servicers have come under fire in recent months amid accusations they did not properly review documents before attempting to take borrowers’ homes.

 These concerns prompted the country’s 50 state attorneys general to coordinate an investigation of lenders such as Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase & Co and Ally Financial’s GMAC unit.

 Some banks, including BofA, temporarily suspended foreclosure proceedings late in the third quarter to review procedures.  Officials from the OCC and OTS declined to say what type of impact this might have on fourth-quarter foreclosure numbers.

 BANKS LOOK OUTSIDE HAMP

 State attorneys general and regulators have been pushing banks to perform more loan modifications and the report shows these efforts have had mixed results.

 Overall home retention actions taken by banks dropped by 17 percent compared to the second quarter, but most of that was due to decreases in the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), the Obama administration’s leading foreclosure prevention effort.  In the third quarter, HAMP loan modifications slid by almost 46 percent, according to the report.

 Regulators said the drop in HAMP modifications is likely due to a few factors, including that a large pool of borrowers who were being considered for the program turned out not to be eligible once their qualifications were fully reviewed. Treasury launched HAMP to try to find a way to reduce mortgage payments for struggling homeowners who wanted to keep their homes but who were at imminent risk of foreclosure.  But it is widely regarded as a flawed program, and the incoming Republican chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Representative Darrell Issa, has called for it to be ended.   Regulators pointed out that mortgage servicers are pursuing more modifications outside of HAMP and such efforts increased by 10 percent in the third quarter.

 The report, which covers 33 million loans serviced by national banks and federally regulated thrifts, shows that the amount of borrowers making their mortgage payments on time remains steady at 87.4 percent.

 The amount of seriously delinquent loans, those 60 days or more past due, dropped 6.4 percent from the second quarter. The amount of loans that were 30 to 59 days past due, however, increased 4.3 percent.

Foreclosure Forgeries by Banks Exposed – San Diego

Bank of America, GMAC, JP Morgan Chase,  Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae have all been caught forging signatures, creating fake documents, and other illegal activity when trying to foreclose.  The Washington Post’s article below goes into the ugly details.  This goes to prove that the lenders are not playing fair when dealing with your mortgage, and you must be on your guard.  For that reason, we are recommending a forensic loan audit before you approach the lender.  You must have ammunition to fight back!  Whether you choose to remodify the mortgage (and stay in the same fraudulent contract), get out of the contract through a short sale, or decide to pursue an administrative (HUD) remidy or legal remedy, we encourage you to fight fire with fire (but be above board, unlike the banks).  

It’s a tough real estate market for everyone, particularly in San Diego.  Homeowners in San Diego are being invited by the banks to “meet with them”, but unknown to them these lenders and/or services are just stringing them along to eventually take the house.  I say be prepared for battle! 

Amid mountain of paperwork, shortcuts and forgeries mar foreclosure process
 
By Ariana Eunjung Cha and Brady Dennis
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, September 23, 2010; 2:36 AM

The nation’s overburdened foreclosure system is riddled with faked documents, forged signatures and lenders who take shortcuts reviewing borrower’s files, according to court documents and interviews with attorneys, housing advocates and company officials. The problems, which are so widespread that some judges approving the foreclosures ignore them, are coming to light after Ally Financial, the country’s fourth-biggest mortgage lender, halted home evictions in 23 states this week.

During the housing boom, millions of homeowners got easy access to mortgages while providing virtually no proof of their income or background. Now, as millions of Americans are being pushed out of the homes they can no longer afford, the foreclosure process is producing far more paperwork than anyone can read and making it vulnerable to fraud.

Ally Financial is now double-checking to make sure all documents are in order after lawsuits uncovered that a single employee of the company’s GMAC mortgage unit, a 41-year-old named Jeffrey Stephan, signed off on 10,000 foreclosure papers a month without checking whether the information justified an eviction.

Many of the homeowners in fact might have been in default. Some might have been unfairly targeted. But the flawed process is creating an opening for borrowers to contest some of the more than 2 million foreclosures that have taken place since the real estate crisis began.

The company sought to play down the impact of Stephan’s actions, saying this week that what he did amounted to a “technical” error but that the documents themselves were “factually accurate.” Ally said it had no further comment Wednesday.

Forgeries

Ally wasn’t the only major lender that had a foreclosure process dependent on a few corporate bureaucrats.

Beth Ann Cottrell said in a sworn deposition in May that she signed off on thousands of foreclosures a month for JPMorgan Chase even though she did not verify the accuracy of the information.

In one instance in Palm Beach, Fla., Cottrell signed off on two documents that stated conflicting amounts of mortgage, the court testimony states. Cottrell claimed that both were signed by the borrower at closing. But the homeowner recognized that her signature had been forged, her attorney Christopher Immel said. The attorney added that such forgeries are common among the cases he’s seen. JPMorgan Chase declined to comment.

In Georgia, an employee of a document processing company, Linda Green, for years claimed to be executives of Bank of America, Wells Fargo, U.S. Bank and dozens of other lenders while signing off on tens of thousands of foreclosure affidavits. In many cases, her signature appeared to be forged by different employees.

Green worked for a foreclosure document company owned by Lender Processing Services. The company is being investigated by a U.S. attorney in Florida for allegedly using improper documentation to speed foreclosures.

Lenders have already started to withdraw foreclosures that had Green’s name on them. Green also submitted to courts documents that listed “Bogus Assignee” as the owner of a mortgage instead of the real name. In another case, she signed as the vice president of “Bad Bene,” a made-up company Michelle Kersch, a senior vice president for Lender Processing Services, said in an e-mailed statement Wednesday that the names were just “placeholders.”

“Unfortunately, on occasion, incomplete documents were inadvertently recorded before the missing information was obtained,” she said. “LPS regrets these errors and the use of this particular placeholder phrasing.”

The company declined to comment further, citing the pending criminal investigation.

A large chunk of the nation’s foreclosures are being initiated by three companies owned by the federal government: Ally, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Fannie and Freddie have said they are looking at the matter but refuse to reveal the numbers of affected homeowners.

The Obama administration has repeatedly said it would try to help homeowners facing foreclosure. But its principal mortgage-relief effort is faltering. More than half of those who enrolled in the program are have now fallen out of it, the Treasury Department said Wednesday.

This week, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner and the Obama administration’s newly appointed consumer protection adviser, Elizabeth Warren, also vowed to simplify the process for getting a mortgage.

But when asked to respond to problems plaguing foreclosures at the companies controlled by the Treasury, a spokesman repeatedly declined to respond to questions, saying only that the agency does not involve itself in the companies’ day-to-day affairs.

Judges’ oversight

Some of the problems in foreclosure paperwork are being created because mortgage loans were repackaged and resold to investors so often that the physical documents become lost. It’s the job of a document processor to present and vouch for the authenticity and accuracy of these papers, but attorneys for homeowners have unearthed examples where critical records are forged.

In theory, a judge should review the files one more time. But after the crisis produced massive numbers of delinquent homeowners, judges in many cases became overwhelmed.

Some simply took at face value the documents handed over to them by the lenders – who in many cases were not checking the files, either, according to interviews with judges, attorneys and consumer groups.

In some Florida courts, for instance, many judges automatically approve a foreclosure unless a borrower can point to a specific problem. Homeowners are given five minutes for a presentation. Often, they do not bother to show up.

Arthur M. Schack, a Kings County Supreme Court judge in Brooklyn, said it’s clear those involved in the foreclosure process are taking the legal requirements too lightly. They forget, he said, that there’s a bigger picture to think about: People are losing their homes.

“There are ramifications on society and neighborhoods,” he said.

Schack has become infamous among some of the nation’s most powerful banks for rejecting foreclosure motions that come across his courtroom – about half of the hundreds of files that he has reviewed over nearly three years. He said Ally’s document-processing violations shouldn’t be dismissed lightly.

“There are procedures to be followed in order to get a foreclosure, and you either get it right or not. Either you’re pregnant or not. There’s no in-between,” he said.

But Judge Isaac Garb, a retired trial judge in Bucks County, Pa., who has heard many foreclosure cases and still oversees mortgage mediations, had a different view.

He said that because foreclosure files contain standard language, document processors such as Stephan do not need to review every page. He added that the signers are verifying only that the information in the file is “true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge, information and belief.”

Often, homeowners are using minor problems in the documents simply to stall the foreclosure process as long as possible, Garb said.

David Berenbaum, chief program officer for the nonprofit National Community Reinvestment Coalition, said companies eager to get bad loans off their books quickly have given rise to a foreclosure system that is as faulty as the excessive lending that created the problem in the first place.

“What’s happened here is that there are these foreclosure machines that don’t do due diligence and that are profiting at the expense of consumers,” he said.

Dennis reported from Doylestown, Pa. Staff researchers Julie Tate and Magda Jean-Louis contributed to this report. Julie regularly posts at her blog as well. www.JulieFontaine.com.