BofA Scrambling To Dump $1 Billion In Mortgage Paper

Tyler Durden's picture

A report by the Post today discloses that Bank of America, haunted by ongoing pressure in both the robosigning/fraudclosure scandals, and demands by the likes of Pimco and the New York Fed to putback billions of paper to the bank due to misrepresentations, is rapidly trying to dump $1 billion worth of toxic paper. One can only assume that this is merely another tactic by the bank to further confuse forensic tracking of who owns what in the multi-trillion whole loan/RMBS space, in which it has recently been discovered that few actually know and track who is the end owner (as opposed to servicer) of a large amount of mortgage paper. This follows comparable actions by Wells Fargo which recently announced it was spinning off its mortgage business as a separate division, as well as Goldman's announcement it was seeking to distance itself from its Litton Loan mortgage unit. It appears the Plan B in case a broad settlement with the Attorneys General is not reached is to simply offload as much responsibility to someone else before the hammer finally falls. Then again for BofA this may be far too little too late: "As of Sept. 30, BofA owned more than $12 trillion in mortgage-servicing rights, down from $19 trillion last year. The bank owns and services mortgage assets totaling $2.1 trillion."

More from the Post:

The sale of the block of mortgage assets, which includes loans and mortage-servicing rights, seems to signal that Chief Executive Brian Moynihan, who has said he will battle to clean up the mess, thinks the best way out is through a sale.

"This is a big sale," one person familiar with the situation said yesterday.

The asset sale is part of a larger effort by the bank to unwind a trove of assets in the wake of the blockbuster purchases of Countrywide Financial and Merrill Lynch.

The troubled loans have already been written off, so the sale isn't expected to hammer shares, which are down 15 percent year to date.

BofA also wants to improve its public image by not being in the news for foreclosing on homeowners.

"The sale is very small relative to the overall size -- but it is probably the troubled stuff that is the most expensive to service and this is what the hedge fund guys would want to buy," said Paul Miller, bank analyst at FBR Capital Markets.

As the end buyer(s) will likely be distressed hedge funds, and as various performing loans will likely be bundled as part of the transaction, this adds another layer of complexity when the attempt to resolve who owns what finally surfaces. One thing to keep an eye out for is whether these are whole loans or RMBS, because if securitized portfolio are now being unwound in whole or piecemeal it lends more credibility to the theory that due to process irregularities during the robosigning phase of fraudclosure, and associated errors in Pooling and Servicing Agreements, then much more of the RMBS market may be impaired than previously anticipated.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
tmosley's picture

But RnR said these were all worth par, AT LEAST!  Anyone who thinks otherwise must be a crazy Republican.

lizzy36's picture

Wow nothing gives the Chairmen wood like toxic paper.

Pladizow's picture

If this ship sinks, many others will be drawn down.

TexDenim's picture

Yeah, they want the bread before Wiki drops the dime on their corrupt ass.

lilimarlene1's picture

" 'He was among the best in understanding market structure' said John Giesea, chief executive of the SEcurity Traders Association, where Mark Madoff once served as a governor and president of the trade group's New York affiliate." December 13, 2010 lead story on front cover of the Wall Street Journal titled: Suicide of Mark Madoff Won't End Lawsuits.

Yup, among the best.

Seasmoke's picture

truly, the very best, of the best !

lilimarlene1's picture

In other news, Seasmoke, we see that Madoff and the good Doctor in this story are harbingers of a new kind of everyman!


Widowmaker's picture

Quick, call fascist Hank Spank-Paulson, time for another eagle scout project -- privatize profits and socialize the losses. In this free-bailout market price always wins regardless of both buyer and seller aptitudes for discovery.

gwar5's picture

Who would buy it?  Seems a lot like trying to dump a body. 

I guess there's always the taxpayer who will pay interest for the privilege.


atomicwasted's picture

This must be the most toxic of the toxic mortgages, the arsenic jelly donut with hydrazine filling and beryllium powder sprinkles.  Whoever buys it truly is the dumbest person in the room.

Why this pittance of mortgage paper for sale?  Why now?  Why is it even news, from a transaction size standpoint?  This is fishy along several dimensions.

unununium's picture

The signs are everywhere that BAC is circling the drain.

* Asset sales

* Legal settlements

* Garbage-can mergers

* The stock price chart

* Fed transfusions

SheepDog-One's picture

Maybe Ben will buy it? Why not, he's buying everything else thats worthless.

Bastiat's picture

Sure as hell nobody else would (without some side-deal).

bronzie's picture

Only 22 years until the current downtrend in real estate ends according to Martin Armstrong's cycle work ... several hundred trillion dollars worth of real estate related derivatives will be unwound in the process ... the big banks will manage to get rid of this toxic paper so that ultimately, it will be the taxpayers who shoulder the biggest loss

DaveyJones's picture

We will be seeing lots of headlines with the words dump and paper in them

-Michelle-'s picture

Should I be happy or terrified that our mortgage is through BofA?

Widowmaker's picture

You should be terrified you have a mortgage locking you into coming depreciation, market losses and get to pay with higher taxes.   Also that you were a sucker for the fraud-factory.

curbyourrisk's picture

Guilty as fucking charged.  Bought our first home in November 2006.  Will be paying for it for 30 years.  Just in time for it to be worth probably 80% of what I actually paid for it. 

Rogerwilco's picture

A mere $1B, that's a drop in the bucket, why is this news?

Seasmoke's picture

i hope my worthless HELOC is in there......cant get any more toxic than that

bankonzhongguo's picture

I have a friend at a title company in Merced County, CA - ground zero for all of this. 

They claim BOA continues to hold ALL foreclosure activity since the October moratorium.

No other OREO activity either.

Had a friend ask BOA for the whole "wet signature" deal.  After looking at the county records and BOA documents, its pretty clear to even a layperson nobody knows who owns these notes anymore. 

Maybe the sanest thing to do is stop paying?


Ace Ventura's picture

I wrestle with this consideration often. BoA is my current servicer, after taking over the Countrywide mess. Prior to Countrywide, it was Aegis Mortgage who originated the loan. Aegis went bankrupt in 2007, so I doubt any accurate records remain as far as they're concerned. Is there any way to determine if BoA truly owns my mortgage, other than signing up for some online SEIU data-mining operation?


Fearless Rick's picture

Being already in FC, I have stopped wondering who owns the note, which the bank will have to produce (unless my eventual motion to dismiss for lack of standing is granted) in discovery. But they haven't made a peep in 10 months, so I'll just wait another 8 months and file a motion to dismiss on failure to proceed grounds, maybe.

Other than that, I have recision via TILA to use against them should I so choose, and a variety of other defenses (I've done a lot of research). Then there's the very real possibility of suing for gross negligence, in never pushing the foreclosure process forward, keeping me in limbo and without possibility of securing a new loan. And then there's quiet title and adverse possession. Great fun.

So, ownership of the note doesn't really matter to me as long as they leave me alone. If hey do, I'm prepared. Anybody currently paying their mortgage either has more than enough equity to keep it current (a wise policy), or if underwater, isn't in a bad enough situation to do so. Anyone with less than 20% equity or underwater by 20% or more should seriously consider default as the market continues to deteriorate, though local situations vary.

Iam_Silverman's picture

"Anybody currently paying their mortgage either has more than enough equity to keep it current (a wise policy), or if underwater, isn't in a bad enough situation to do so."


Or, they are a man of their word and making good on their signed agreement to repay a debt.

Remember, when you signed that mortgage, your signature indicated that you understood and accepted the conditions at the time of purchase - it was not conditional on market value of your home or overall economic conditions.  You know, sorta like marriage vows?

Whatever happened to people standing up and showing some integrity?  Even if the banks may have acted inappropriately, do you win the lottery and get your house for free (or nearly free)?  To me, all of these deadbeats looking for a loophole to keep their houses reminds me of watching a third grader on recess reneging on his word because he had his fingers crossed behind his back.

And yes - before you ask, I am totally debt-free, and I got there the old-fashioned way, by paying my debts!

Threeggg's picture

"Even if the banks may have acted inappropriately"

So let me get this right.

The banks run up realestate to insane valuations, ship the jobs out of this country and now everyone stuck without the means to pay their underwater mortgage should man up ?

With what ?

Iam_Silverman's picture

"The banks run up realestate to insane valuations, ship the jobs out of this country and now everyone stuck without the means to pay their underwater mortgage should man up ?

With what?"

OK, I'm a dolt, how exactly did the banks run up RE to insane values?  I will allow that they are enablers, by financing anyone with a pulse - the RE values were bubbled up by the greedy ones who thought that RE would never decrease in value, and they can easily flip that house and make a killing.

Banks shipped the jobs overseas?  Really?  I never knew that.  I thought that it was the greedy multi-national corporations that are chasing lower labor rates and less environmental/legal/regulatory oversight.  The banks did it.  Huh, you learn something new every day.  I know that the banks wanted the jobs offshored - that way they wouldn't get the savings from the employed, they didn't want to finance business expansion, and most of all, they wanted to steal your (now) worthless house and sell it into a depressed market so that they can loose their investment.  Those bankers sure are clever!

And if you don't have a job?  Don't pay your mortgage.  It's that simple.  But don't try to find some way to prevent the bank from taking the collateral you offered when you placed your signature on that dotted line!  Move out - it's not your house any more, even if the banks screwed around with the chain of title.


I do have compassion for those who suddenly end up unable to pay.  It happened several times to me while growing up.  That is why I decided to live well within my means and only buy property I could pay off in five years or less.  Sometimes the hard knocks teach the most valuable lessons.

Collateral: [kuh-lat-er-uhl] Noun

security pledged for the payment of a loan: He gave the bank some stocks and bonds as collateral for the money he borrowed.


Fearless Rick's picture

Just in case Iam-Silverman checks back, I probably should have noted (again) that my mortgage is inherited from my deceased father (July 2009), who was hoodwinked by Cuntrywide into a very bad situation. They essentially stole his equity by overvaluing the house and then threw in all of his non-secured debt (they abrogated their fiduciary responsibility). So, upon his death and after researching all the fraud contained within the mortgage, I decided to not make the mortgage payments.

So, maybe Mr. silverwhatever can get down off his high horse for a moment and ask what he would have done. 

Iam_Silverman's picture

"So, maybe Mr. silverwhatever can get down off his high horse for a moment and ask what he would have done. "

Yes I understood that you had apparently acted as the executor for your fathers estate.  I really kind of doubt that you "inherited" the loan.  I could see that your parent may have bequeathed it (the house, or loan collateral) to you, and you felt that you had taken on the "responsibility of the mortgage" as a benefactor, but unless you were a co-signer, I doubt that you truly "inherited" a loan.  The idea of inheritance assumes that the estate will have enough liquidity to settle all outstanding claims, and until such time that the claims are settled, the collateral is still pledged to secure the loan.  In that case the house should have been sold and all other assets remanded to the estate in order to quiet all claims.


Now, was it a good loan?  Apparently your father thought so - he did sign the note, didn't he?  He created a claim against property offered in the mortgage.  Was it wise to consolidate your debts and cash-out equity?  In my opinion, no.  did he consult with you before he assumed this loan?  If not, then you cannot blame yourself for this bad deal.  But, it was a bad deal that has been consummated.  I have had buyers remorse in the past too.  I have paid too much for something before too.  I have felt that I may have been cheated before too.  Did I try to steal the property I agreed to pay for?  No.  But I did learn from my lesson.

Now, what would I have done?  I am in the exact same boat.  My mother and step-father are in debt past their eyeballs.  They have told me that I would inherit this or that.  While the "this and thats" all have a note tied to them, I don't consider them to be items that can be conveyed to another party, unless that receiving party (the one who inherits the stuff) agrees that they are worth paying for the remaining balance on said objects.  Now, what would I have done?  If the house is worth less than the mortgage against it, and I did not have the cash to pay it off?  The bank would be getting some jingle-mail that afternoon.


Simple role playing here.  I buy your used Maserati so that you can get that Silver Shadow you have been pining for all of these years.  I pay a premium of about 10% over what the Kelly Blue Book states as fair value for a car in pristine condition.  Of course, since you are kind enough to tote-the-note on this car, the vehicle itself will act as collateral.  I also include this car in my will.  My son will inherit this car when I die.  You hope that it is in 45 years after the silly thing is fully paid for.  Let's say that instead I croak after only making payments for five years.  My son thinks that I was ripped off by you because I paid higher than blue book for this car and you are just generally considered a bad person anyway (based on bashing from a website discussion board).  He decides that he isn't going to make any more payments for this car, and he is going to drive it around and laugh at you.  After all, you took advantage of an old man in his failing years - and unable to make good financial choices.  Now, does that seem fair?  Even though he has convinced himself he is right and just in his actions?

Again, what would I do in your circumstance - I'm going to be there soon enough! I plan to send the keys in to the bank for my Moms overpriced house to the bank.  I plan to call whomever holds the notes on their vehicle and tell them to come get them.  As for their consumer debt?  I will sell off all unencumbered items and try to make the lenders whole?  Why?  Judging from most folks on this board, because I am stupid.  I have this silly notion of of pride and sticking to the agreements I made, and honoring the commitments I "inherited".  Do I really care that you have somehow justified to yourself that it is OK to steal a house from a secured lender because of some suspected fraud?  No, but as a taxpayer I bet that I will be the one called on to make them (the banks) whole.  Maybe you can also convince yourself that it would be OK to steal from a grocery store too, after all - they are ripping us all off with high food prices.  It's just a part of the slippery slope our society has facing in the past few years.  Screw the (banker, politician, gas station owner, grocer) - if I can steal this from you, I will!  Why? - well because I have convinced myself it is the morally right thing to do.

DaveyJones's picture

it's the sanest thing to do for lots of reasons

Hansel's picture

I know a few people at a foreclosure mill, and they told me that BofA only stopped processing foreclosures in the judicial states.  I specifically asked them about the moratorium announcements from around October, because my understanding was that all foreclosures were halted.  They told me this was not the case, that they never stopped processing foreclosures for non-judicial states.  It's just too easy to keep processing them.  The people I talked to also robo-signed, and they process MERS foreclosures.  It sounded like nothing had changed (when I talked to my contacts).

TooBearish's picture

Brian Sack has a bid ....ready ....hit it!

Hansel's picture

$12 trillion in mortgage servicing rights?  Is that worldwide?  I thought the U.S. mortgage market was around $5-6 trillion total.

ackbar's picture

I'm sorry the card says MOOPS.

Seasmoke's picture

lets see any hedgefund prove ownership of the mortgages before they try and forclose......i honestly do not know why anyone pays their mortgage any longer......if you are willing to live in the same house for the next 50 years or so, seems like that is as good as getting a free house......

SheepDog-One's picture

Exactly what Id be doing, demand 'the bank' show the note, when they cant Id tell them to go to hell and put up a big 'No trespassing private property free fire zone' sign.

Rogerwilco's picture

Brave talk, but BoA has lawyers, lots of them. My daughter got a letter with her mortgage statement earlier this year when the paperwork fiasco made the news. It said for a $15 fee, she could request a "verification" document that lists her mortgage particulars, and she asked me if it was worth it. I told her not to bother. To me it sounded like BoA was drawing a line in the sand and telling its customers "Yeah, pay us $15 and we'll send you "proof", and if you don't like what we send you, well then lawyer-up amigos".

I'm sure it's easy enough to find a lawyer who will take them on and dig deeper -- for a $5K retainer and $400/hour. After work, the lawyers on both sides will get together at their favorite watering holes and laugh about it.

As if.

Biggus Dickus Jr.'s picture

I don't think in the end they are going to be giving away too many free houses. Rulz schmulz...we don't need no stinkin rulz.

dark pools of soros's picture

if no one can prove ownership - would insurance companies ignore paying for a fire loss?


less regulation should fix all this




huckman's picture

Am I (seller and/or buyer) supposed to care if a title policy insures the chain of title.  Time to read the fine print.   

Fearless Rick's picture

Any bad news for BofA, I count as good for me. The tally so far: $81,500 mortgage note (inherited from my father who took out the loan with CW in 2007), unpaid since (his death) August 2009. January will be 18 months. Foreclosure action March 2010, no movement since.

County tax people now looking to beat the bank to the house, but I will begin payments in February, though not pay them up to date, as the county has a superior lien, which the bank all-too-well understands and the tax rate where I live (Monroe Co. NY) is the highest in the nation.

On that account, well, you can't win 'em all, but getting the house I grew up in for nuttin' and paying off the egregious taxes sounds like a square deal to me.

Next on the agenda, St. Margaret Mary school and convent (a little boy's dreams of living where the nuns do, comes true). On the market for 2 years at 1.425 million (too high), I am planning to put together a group and buy it for cash at $700-900K. I will go down in history as the man who bought his grammar school.

hidingfromhelis's picture

Let me guess, the sale is being conducted from the trunk of a Cadillac in a back alley in Charlotte, NC. 

Sorry, already leveraged up to buy that oceanfront property in Arizona and a few bridges in New York.  If I could just sell off the Beanie Baby collection, maybe I'll be able to scrape together enough for a down payment though.  If you need to sell it quickly, I hear there's a guy named Ben who will buy anything, no questions asked.

Problem Is's picture

"Bank of America, haunted by ongoing pressure in both the robosigning/fraudclosure scandals..."

BofA Doing the Tricky Dick Nixon
"The Amerikan people want to know if their government funded, government rescued, government bailed out utility of a bank is a crook..."

"Well, we're not a crook!"

Hey "Empty Suit" Holder...  You awake on this one?

thepigman's picture

It's an all or none game. Once the
Countryfried putbacks begin, even a
trickle, the dam breaks and it's open season. Not even the bernank will save them.

lawgrace's picture


Foreclosure lawyers are officers of the court; knowledge of applicable laws and civil procedure is not required from mortgage lenders, nor loan servicers. In states that require judicial foreclosures, lawyers are the ones who file lawsuits to seize and sell property; and lawyers are responsible for filing and recording foreclosure property deeds.

Inadequate or questionable foreclosure leads to useless property deeds that impede real estate sales; title insurance companies reluctant to cover foreclosed properties; mortgage default claims are being disputed due to defective foreclosures. . .Sample of fraudulent foreclosures by certain foreclosure mills:

–Deliberately utilize defunct lenders or lenders without “standing” to intentionally execute false foreclosure proceedings in civil as well as bankruptcy courtrooms.           
– Create and conceal  malpractice, delaying foreclosures, engineer various litigations to generate billable legal fees.
– Orchestrate sham foreclosure auctions; property never becomes acquired by lenders, but by 'straw buyers’
– Commit wrongs which are actionable (unfair debt collection, fraud, various torts) that give rise to lawsuits from property owners,
– Engage in self-dealing foreclosures by which some lawyers gain for themselves foreclosed properties
–Foreclosures via names of defunct lenders allow ’straw buyers’ illegally convey property deeds, flip real estate, and create blighted communities
– Unconscionably create false deficiency judgments against property owners after straw buyers acquire homes for pennies on the dollar
– Intentionally file Bankruptcy court “Motion to Lift” and “Proof of Claim” on behalf of NON-EXISTENT lenders, concealing fact of “non-secured” mortgage debt.
–Involved in fraudulent collection of property damage and mortgage insurance for illegally foreclosed homes
–Fraudulent foreclosures abet loss of property taxes to city revenue, rodents, vagrants, and blight.  – Thousands of families are being made unlawfully homeless, scores of homes have been fraudulently flipped and communities are blighted from null foreclosure proceedings.
**more:  Request for Congressional Foreclosure Panel to Examine Foreclosure Lawyers