This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Foreclosure Fraud Bombshell – Thousands of Pennsylvania Foreclosures Could Be Void
Hmmm, I wonder where else this happens??? /sarcasm
Thousands of Pennsylvania Foreclosures Could Be on Shaky Ground
Two
Pennsylvania cases, one state and one federal, have exposed new types
of document problems in foreclosure cases. One of the cases has
potentially transformative consequences for thousands of troubled
Pennsylvania homeowners. At the center of each is the same law firm:
Goldbeck McCafferty & McKeever (GMM).
A
lawsuit filed by Patrick Loughren against GMM details how the firm
allowed — and perhaps still allows — nonlawyers in its firm to file and
prosecute thousands of foreclosures.
Kimberly A. Robinson v Countrywide Home Loans, BAC
Kimberly a. Robinson v Country Wide Home Loans, BAC
As
long as a lawyer supervises foreclosure filings, and at least reads
them before they’re submitted to the court, that is acceptable. But
Loughren is suing because all three named partners of GMM, Joseph
Goldbeck, Gary McCafferty and Michael McKeever, have admitted
under oath — during depositions last September and in a separate case
in December 2009 — that no attorney ever read the filings. The partners made clear that the practice has gone on for the past several years.
Video – Attorney Signatures – The Next Fraud Battle Ground
Posted by Foreclosure Fraud on October 2, 2010 ·
Foreclosure
Deposition Clip Witness = Goldbeck, McCafferty & McKeever
corporate designee pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
30(b)(6) Date = 9/21/10 Individual sitting as the designee = Gary
McCafferty Trial Lawyer = Patrick J. Loughren Well well well… The
video above is an actual deposition where an attorney just recently
admitted to frauds we … Read more
Foreclosure Deposition Clip
More examples from Matt Weidner’s Blog for a Florida perspective…
Attorney Signatures – The Next Fraud Battle Ground
The Florida Rules of Civil Procedures require that all pleadings filed in a case be signed by a licensed Florida attorney.
I have started to examine files and am becoming increasingly
suspicious that this important rule is not being followed by the foreclosure mills.
I
am therefore starting to examine all my pleadings closely and I
encourage each of you to do the same. Ultimately I would like to
build a database of these signatures to compare, so for those of you
out there that are spending time looking at court filings, please
start examining the signatures and making a cut and past document
similar to the one I attach below.
My first example of gross
irregularities in the signature of an attorney who makes filings in a
court case comes from Ohio. The document was prepared by a reader
of this blog and it comes from an Ohio foreclosure mill attorney.
Please look at the sheet. There really is no commentary necessary
regarding whether these were signed by the same person….
Given
what we know about the foreclosure mills and their operations
(particularly the offshore components of their practice) I cannot
imagine that they are following this rule. (I mean the violate every
other rule)
Foreclosure Fraud – Attorney Signatures – The Next Battle Ground
Foreclosure Fraud - Attorney Signatures - The Next Battle Ground
You can read more about Matt’s excellent work here…
Next up, Patrick J. Loughren’s Complaint in Equity…
Patrick J. Loughren Complaint in Equity
Patrick J. Loughren Complaint in Equity
Far-Reaching Consequences
Loughren declined to talk with DailyFinance
(nor would he even give us the complaint, which is electronically
available from the court), and as of now, GMM hasn’t returned our calls
either. (We learned of the case from Walter Roche’s story in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.) But
Loughren’s complaint is so detailed, and the partners’ admissions so
damning, that if this case is decided on the merits, it’s hard to see
how Loughren could lose.
If Loughren does win, the consequences could be far-reaching: All
current foreclosure actions filed by GMM could be dismissed on the
grounds that lawsuits filed by nonlawyers are a “nullity,” meaning they
don’t count. That’s hundreds, potentially thousands, of cases across Pennsylvania.
All completed foreclosures that were brought using this method could also be called into question for the same reason, and given that the practice has been going on for years, a Loughren win could throw into question the title to thousands of Pennsylvania properties. In addition, any homeowners who paid legal fees to the banks and GMM during their foreclosures could get that money back.
Bank of America Knew
Loughren notes that in both cases involving the partners’ testimony about the practice, Bank of America (BAC)
was the foreclosing bank. It was actually present during the December
2009 trial when the admissions were first made. Loughren points out
that BofA’s representative at that trial, John Smith, is himself a
lawyer, and so presumably understood the legal significance of GMM’s
admission.
Other BofA employees surely learned about the
practice too, given that the December case was an effort by the U.S.
Bankruptcy Trustee to sanction both the bank and GMM for misconduct,
and evidence submitted for it showed the involvement of “high-ranking”
BofA people not normally involved in a foreclosure, such as its
assistant general counsel.
Although the practice of having
nonlawyers file suit wasn’t at issue in that case, learning of it upset
U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Thomas Agresti so much he wrote in his
Oct. 5, 2010 order:
“During the trial the Court
also became aware of some apparently routine practices at GMM that
raise issues that cannot be ignored. McKeever testified to a procedure
at his firm whereby foreclosure complaints are prepared and filed by
non-attorneys and never reviewed by an attorney, even though the
“signature” of an attorney appears on the document. . . . Even though
these actions are not being filed in this Court. . .concern for our
sister courts in this Commonwealth compel the Court to at least make
publicly known what it learned during the trial. Furthermore, often
these fundamentally flawed foreclosure actions, form the basis for
related relief in this Court should the state court defendant
subsequently file a bankruptcy petition. Therefore, the Court is
concerned about the continuation of this practice by GMM.”
Sharon Diane Hill, Roberta a. DeAngelis v Country Wide
Return of “Legal” Fees
In a related Nov. 24, 2010 order, the judge noted that although two of
GMM’s clients temporarily suspended working with the law firm, Bank
of America did not. Even though the bank learned that GMM’s practices
could be jeopardizing many of its foreclosures, the bank continued to
work with the firm and pocket related foreclosure fees, at least as of
Nov. 24.
Sharon Diane Hill, Roberta A. DeAngelis v Countrywide Sanctions Order
Sharon Diane Hill, Roberta a. DeAngelis v Country Wide Sanctions Order
Full article from DailyFinance: http://srph.it/eOevFg
Looks like someone got some splainin to do…
~
4closureFraud.org
»
- advertisements -
"I guess the lure of Free Money and "something for nothing" will cause many to put aside their morals."
No, I didn't junk you. But -
What the hell do morals have to do with this? I think we're well beyond the point where "morals" come into play.
I'm trying to keep a roof over my head, food on my table, power coming out of the outlets, and gas/oil/parts in my vehicle.
Lets step back and take a look at this... the government claims a chunk of my wallet no matter where I go or what I do, simply because I was born here. They'll still take it if I leave, unless I'm living in hiding. I'm not allowed to own land (oh, I hear a bunch of you starting to bitch at that, but stop paying your annual fees and see if the government lets you keep "your" land. It doesn't really matter if they call it a tax - you just rent the land from the government). The government interferes with my contracts - my contracts with them, and my contracts with others - whenever they damn well please, even retroactively, and I have no recourse whatsoever.
You know that that is? Serfdom.
Fuck the government, fuck the banks, and fuck the guys in suits running them. "Morals" my ass.
Wow, you've got 9 flags and counting. Awesome! I aspire to as many.
To your principal detractor I would only reply that all morals belie their math nevermoreso than when a country's leadership debauches their constituencies at noonday. Karma will come in time, but their criminality multiplies the ambulance chasers among us till a season of sanity returns, whether by reason or by revolution. Blessings till then. Mark
So, exactly how is she different from Jamie Demon (no misspelling), or Lloyd Blankfeld? The amount of welfare? Or maybe a Monsanto, Cargill or ADM? They are not receiving huge farm subsidies?
You give the poor entitlements to keep them from rebelling, while encouraging the elimination of jobs through tax policies that favor the corporations and then complain when the poor become accustomed to it?
What is the recent row over the tax bill about? The wealthy don't want to lose their welfare? No moral question there?
This is theatre. You want morality? Rid the country of all laws except those that protect private property. Re-institute a gold standard and sound money and eliminate leverage from markets. Eliminate the FED. The institution of banking is the most immoral institution in the world- bar none. If it that important to you- start there.
Exactly. The poor woman wanting her mortgage paid is a non-issue compared to the rapacious banksters.
this is the kind of thinking and defender that will make such unlawful practices of the past continue.
Cheerleading the crimes does not cure them. Making fun of the victims, is Fox's business.
what is with this fox bashing? you could have just as easily made a point everyone could agree with without going there. instead, more divisiveness. good job supporting the control matrix. are you so blind to not see in this day and age, all of the MSM are in on the spin? you have to take facts where you can find them. filter out the rest.
this fraud is an issue that all Americans can get behind.
Afternoon racist prick,
Just wanted to make a couple corrections to your witty retort here..
Lets see where to start..
Quote: "It looks like that black woman who said "Obama gonna pay my mot-gije" was more right than the doomers would care to admit. "
In this famed clip both you and the original poster in the article you’re referring to are both miss quoting, fox news style I must add...
She actually says "I wont have to worry about putting gas in my car and I wont have to worry about paying my mortgage" meaning that Obama originally promised changed and to help the lower class disenfranchised citizens to become employed by turning around the economy so that they could on their debts easier than it had been during the bush administration.
Coincidentally no significant changes have taken place and in fact, things have only gotten worse I may add because it’s harder to spin economics when your using all the variables that need to be taken into account.
So to vilify the person whom you are referring to as a "Doomer" simply because you don't understand the math involved is actually your folly. Which I may add is a pretty sad state of affairs considering this site puts out enough pretty pie charts and bar graphs with colored pictures to help most (including myself) understand the convoluted abortion which is our current state of economic collapse.
She sounded just like Kelly Marshall. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1318028/As-families-face-benef...
I was probably in agreement up until you shot this load of hot crap out at everyone.
Yeah, but I'm still going to agree with the Original poster. I've got a bucket of Fried Chicken that says she expects to not have to pay her mortgage thanks to some ficticious Gubermint program someone living in the crack-house next-door told her about.
We don't have to pay for our own cell-phone's, cable-TV, food, heating costs, or any of our other living expenses anymore thanks to years of policy here in Foodstampistan, so it's perfectly understandable why someone with less-than-an-econmics-degree might think our Socialist leaders will continue to 'take care of the downtrodden'. No need to start working after all these years. We wouldn't want to put anyone out, just so that they could feed themselves, or have a place to stay and keep their shit. Sheesh! What kind of country do you think this is!!!!
Yes and lets not forget who is paid a healthy sum to administer some of the social welfare programs. The one and only JP Morgan. CNBC had the proud manager of that divison on tape telling the brain dead interviewer that "yes the economy is bad , but boy our business is great. We handle the foodstamps".
The guy looked like he was going to masterbate on TV so he was quickly cut away from. Apparently JP Morgans dress standards are somewhat relaxed for this division because a buy here-pay here used car salesmen makes this guy look bad.
God Forbid people without money or means to earn money, get anything , but by God those tax cuts better pass for the wealthy that are stealing what little they have left and making healthy profits on their misery.Why is it racists find Personal welfare reprehensible while ignoring the corporate welfare that is handed out in additon to the get of jail free cards to the perpatrators of fraud against the poor by the govt as a-ok. The fact the very banks that committed the fraud and are stealing every cent they can are also paid to administer the frayed social saftey nets to the people whose lives they destroyed is nothing short of sickening.
Here's the short form. Fuck you.
last i checked (about 5 minutes ago) the only thing this administration has sucesfully socialised was the overall debt from the private banking industry.
back to the main topic, ive lived and worked in some fairly poor townships here in the US. The one thing i have found contrary to what fox news, glen beck, and rush limpdick say about poorer class society would be that one of the only things they have is their pride. a majority of people i have known through life just want a fair chance to display their talents in a fair marketplace and be judged accordingly. this lady is no different form what i see. she comes across to me as if she voted for a man who could turn the spotlight onto a disenfranchised society who's been overlooked consistently over the decades and to finally get a chance to have the opportunities so many of us here in the Us take for granted.
if you guys honestly think, this lady is looking to elect a president merely based upon giving her free government money, then i would suggest you seriously get outside more often and experience the human condition.
hahahaha..
I grew up poor and you have that white middle-class politically correct view of the poor. Pride without humility is a bad combination. Humility is not equal to humiliation. The poor feel like they are shit on every day, and in most cases they are, but they make ignorant and juvenile choices, which when the consequences befall them they don't want to take the heat because they "didn't know any better". Bullshit. They know better, but they also know no one gives a shit about them and the behavior is expected. They know you politically correct types will help them out, and socialize programs, which they will only use and discard when the tit dries up. Why change when there is no cliff to fall over?
A second observation is the poor for the most part skew their priorities in order to keep up with the Joneses. They never sacrifice to save money. Period. They live paycheck to paycheck and most of the time well over their means. Most of the time it is the children of the poor driving this behavior. They watch TV or live on the Internet believing the promises and lies thrust upon them by the commercial market. With no one at home to educate them to the truth.
Finally, they don't want a fair market place? They would be perfectly happy with a market place where they don't have to work hard and get paid for watching TV or surfing the Internet. Just like most of humanity today.
I watched my mother, the saint that she is, spend money on totally unnecessary and frivolous garbage, just so it would look like we were doing better then the neighbors. If she would have just saved a portion of the money, and invested it they would not be expecting us, or the government, to pay for their declining years. Will I do it? Gladly. Why because for all their mistakes they taught me to be self reliant.
And as to your disenfranchised comment. If you don't know the rules to gambling then don't get up to the roulette table. I don't care how easy the guy in the purple pinstripe velour suit with all the gold chains and teeth says it is. If you do choose to gamble without knowing the odds that is just plain STUPID. But then again politically correct people like yourself would make sure there is a Gamblers Anonymous available where we can eat cookies and blame all our problems on our parents.
+1. I also grew up poor. The bleeding heart libs with the pc worldview have no clue.
Government workers and the super rich vote and participate in politics only based on the amount of goodies the gov. promises them. The same goes for many private businesses and most contractors. Welfare-lifers are actually slightly better than most, but there is a very large portion of that class as well that merely wants to bleed the guvmn't for all its worth. Many of them work while collecting "fraudulently". I put "fraud" in quotes because when fraud is both universal and necessary for survival, it isn't really fraud.
At the very best, the mechanism to pay her mortgage and gas is ambiguous. Although the clip is cut short, my guess is that there was no clarification on her part that it was to be through HER hard work, determination, and sacrifice. Take that for what you will...
I second that..
third
Fourth.
...and I plead the fifth...