Sunday, October 25, 2009

Judge Slams Sloppy Lender Unable To Prove Note Ownership; Voids Debtor's $461K Home Loan; Docs Signed By Multiple Hat-Wearing VP Sinks Servicer, MERS

In White Plains, New York, The New York Times reports:
  • [B]anks and borrowers still do battle over foreclosures on an unlevel playing field that exists in far too many courtrooms. But some judges are starting to scrutinize the rules-don’t-matter methods used by lenders and their lawyers in the recent foreclosure wave. On occasion, lenders are even getting slapped around a bit.

  • One surprising smackdown occurred on Oct. 9 in federal bankruptcy court in the Southern District of New York. Ruling that a lender, PHH Mortgage, hadn’t proved its claim to a delinquent borrower’s home in White Plains, Judge Robert D. Drain wiped out a $461,263 mortgage debt on the property. That’s right: the mortgage debt disappeared, via a court order.(1)

  • So the ruling may put a new dynamic in play in the foreclosure mess: If the lender can’t come forward with proof of ownership, and judges don’t look kindly on that, then borrowers may have a stronger hand to play in court and, apparently, may even be able to stay in their homes mortgage-free.

***

  • [On behalf of his homeowner/client, Manhattan consumer bankruptcy lawyer David B. Shaev] asked for proof that U.S. Bank was indeed the holder of the note.(2) All that was provided, however, was an affidavit from Tracy Johnson, a vice president at PHH Mortgage, saying that PHH was the servicer and U.S. Bank the holder.

  • Among the filings supplied to support Ms. Johnson’s assertion was a copy of the assignment of the mortgage. But this, too, was signed by Ms. Johnson, only this time she was identified as an assistant vice president of MERS, the Mortgage Electronic Registration System.

For more, see If Lenders Say ‘The Dog Ate Your Mortgage’.

For an earlier related New York Times story, see The Mortgage Machine Backfires.

Go here for other posts on multiple corporate hat-wearing vice presidents involved in foreclosure actions.

(1) PHH appealed the judge’s ruling late last week, the story states.

(2) Reportedly, Mr. Shaev said that when he filed the case, he had simply hoped to persuade PHH to modify his client’s loan. But after months of what he described as foot-dragging by PHH and its lawyers, he asked for proof of PHH’s standing in the case. Mr. Shaev reportedly said he was shocked when the judge expunged the mortgage debt. EpsilonMissingDocsMtg