We have a victory!!

Judge Rules in Favor of Eminent Domain Over Wells Fargo

Tue, 2013-09-17 17:59 — Robert Ottone

"Isn't this, as we say in the trade, a no-brainer?" said U.S. District Court Senior Judge Charles Breyer in court. In an effort to seize underwater mortgages through the use of eminent domain, the city of Richmond, Calif. has scored an early victory over Wells Fargo. Wells Fargo, who has staunchly opposed the use of eminent domain for economic recovery, saw their suit thrown out by a Federal judge because the case wasn’t far enough along. The city of Richmond has yet to determine how it will go about acting on the potential eminent domain seizure.
"Ripeness of these claims does not rest on contingent future events certain to occur but rather on future events that may never occur," said Breyer. "Plaintiffs are not, for example, challenging a proposal of the City Council that may or may not raise constitutional concerns depending on the contours of the final version—put simply, there may never be a 'final version.'"
The lawsuit filed by Wells Fargo on behalf of their investors against the city of Richmond, as well as Mortgage Resolution Partners, the group aiding the city with enacting change and stamping out the Bay Area housing crisis. Perhaps fearing a “domino effect” of sorts, Wells Fargo had been hoping to nip the eminent domain seizure in the bud, however; there are rumblings of the city of San Francisco looking to the Richmond eminent domain method in order to cure some of its own housing woes.
“Our strategies have been, let's be honest, ‘Let’s see what the federal government or the banking industry will do to help these folks,’” said San Francisco District Supervisor David Campos on the steps of City Hall in San Francisco last week. “We’ve waited long enough.”
Last week, the eminent domain plan began going into effect, with Richmond councilmembers voting in favor 4-3 of the motion. “Our residents have been badly harmed by this housing crisis,” Mayor Gayle McLaughlin reportedly said at the time. “The banks have been unwilling or unable to fix this situation, so the city is stepping in to provide a fix.”
The “fix” in question would essentially bring the principal amount closer to the current property’s value, allowing homeowners to more easily make payments on their mortgages. Mortgage Resolution Partners receives around $4,500 per loan as an “advisory fee.” The banks are angry because the city is essentially seizing their assets at a lower price than what they believe is fair, regardless of the perceived market value.

After BofA, DOJ Sets MetLife and Chase in its Crosshairs

After BofA, DOJ Sets MetLife and Chase in its Crosshairs

Thu, 2013-08-08 17:21 — Robert Ottone

Not long after Bank of America (BofA) came under fire from three separate entities, one of which being the Department of Justice (DOJ), both MetLife and JPMorgan Chase are finding themselves in the DOJ’s crosshairs. There’s no historical record indicating that the DOJ has gone after three large entities all at once, however; in the case of BofA, the case was built over the course of a few years. Whether or not the cases against JPMorgan Chase and MetLife are similar remains to be seen.
In an SEC filing, it was revealed that MetLife received a subpoena back in May, which reads “requiring production of documents relating to MetLife Bank’s payment of certain foreclosure-related expenses to law firms and business entities affiliated with law firms and relating to MetLife Bank’s supervision of such payments, including expenses submitted to the Federal National Mortgage Association, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. and the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) for reimbursement. It is possible that various state or federal regulatory and law enforcement authorities may seek monetary penalties from MetLife Bank relating to foreclosure practices.”
MetLife may face substantial fines should the governmental probe find anything. “It is possible that various state or federal regulatory and law enforcement authorities may seek monetary penalties from MetLife Bank relating to foreclosure practices,” the insurer said in the filing.
JPMorgan Chase is the third bank under investigation by the DOJ, for charges of criminal practices related to sales of mortgage-backed bonds. “It is unprecedented that the Department of Justice has seriously considered criminal indictment of a major bank and I question whether it truly is,” said Professor John Coffee, of Columbia Law School to Bloomberg. “You can often bring dual investigations, civil and criminal, in order to maximize pressure for a global civil resolution.”
The indication is that the probes into JPMorgan Chase’s loans and mortgage-backed securities are product of JPMorgan, not the ones purchased from Bear Stearns Cos. and Washington Mutual back in 2008. “The Department of Justice is likely to be extremely cautious” in the criminal probe, Coffee said. “If they did anything, they might indict a subsidiary” or individual executives, he added.
With JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and MetLife under fire from the Department of Justice and other government entities, one wonders what big bank is next?

DON'T LEAVE OUT CHASE AND WAMU LOANS AND LONG BEACH LOANS AS WELL.