| Author |
Previous Topic | Next Topic |
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
 Posted - 04/18/2008 : 3:35:31 PM
|
Just met with new client. In foreclosure.
The broker has committed fraud, theft and who knows what else to the woman and her brother. Even the RICO act applies in this. There are several properties involved.
I have the number for the local DA, to try and get them involved. The DRE will be contacted Monday morning.
How do I report it to the FBI and whomever else needs to know? This will involve federal statutes as well.
Help!!!!!!! |
|
ML
2201 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 3:37:50 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
Just met with new client. In foreclosure.
The broker has committed fraud, theft and who knows what else to the woman and her brother. Even the RICO act applies in this. There are several properties involved.
I have the number for the local DA, to try and get them involved. The DRE will be contacted Monday morning.
How do I report it to the FBI and whomever else needs to know? This will involve federal statutes as well.
Help!!!!!!!
FBI has a mortgage fraud division in every field
office, even, presumably, in CA. |
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 3:39:17 PM
|
Thank you. Will start writing it up and get to them.
This is the worst thing I have seen. You hear these horror stories, but this is unreal. |
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 3:49:10 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Banker0679
so what happened? did he charge her more than 2 points?
She had a home she was selling. Her mother had died and she was going to move into that property. It had her brother on title at the time. They told her that they would refinance her and put her on title with the brother. Only way to do it.
Her home closed in Nov 06. The lo picked her up and drove her 30 miles to the bank. They waited there for the funds to be wired to the bank. The second the funds were in, they had her do three cashier checks made out to someone, maybe them. The cashier handed her the checks and they immediately took the checks and pocketed them. "The money would be needed to put her on title. It would be like a purchase."
In Jan 06, they refinanced the property into her name and her brothers. Then, in April 06 and refinance, and in Oct 06, another refinance. Each time the balance kept going up, of course.
The clients brother lost three properties to these scammers. Not sure of all of this, but a high powered law firm in San Fran has taken the case. We are going to tie her case into his.
Also there will be criminal charges.
This could hit the big time for news. |
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 3:52:19 PM
|
| California, Bay Area. Of course. |
|
|
rtrefflich
2634 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 3:52:58 PM
|
The saddest part is that there is virtually no way that this lady can get her money back, even if thee guys serve time or get judgements, it is all spent or hidden by now.
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by Banker0679
so what happened? did he charge her more than 2 points?
She had a home she was selling. Her mother had died and she was going to move into that property. It had her brother on title at the time. They told her that they would refinance her and put her on title with the brother. Only way to do it.
Her home closed in Nov 06. The lo picked her up and drove her 30 miles to the bank. They waited there for the funds to be wired to the bank. The second the funds were in, they had her do three cashier checks made out to someone, maybe them. The cashier handed her the checks and they immediately took the checks and pocketed them. "The money would be needed to put her on title. It would be like a purchase."
In Jan 06, they refinanced the property into her name and her brothers. Then, in April 06 and refinance, and in Oct 06, another refinance. Each time the balance kept going up, of course.
The clients brother lost three properties to these scammers. Not sure of all of this, but a high powered law firm in San Fran has taken the case. We are going to tie her case into his.
Also there will be criminal charges.
This could hit the big time for news.
|
|
|
RodneyLO
800 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 3:53:10 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by ML
FBI has a mortgage fraud division in every field
office, even, presumably, in CA.
Line of the day.... |
|
|
hoangad
2839 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 3:54:02 PM
|
that story is not clear.
so whats wrong? they refinacned and refinanced and refinanced...so what? |
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 3:55:49 PM
|
Actually, the perps have properties in their names. The civil lawyer is already trying to get them tied up.
They acted like true confidence men. Getting in on the good side, making goody-good, and then going for it.
The woman is a 62 year old black, from the South, who is not well educated at all.
|
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 3:59:22 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by hoangad
that story is not clear.
so whats wrong? they refinacned and refinanced and refinanced...so what?
The mortgage broker took her to the bank on the close of the home she was selling, and had her turn over all the proceeds of the sale to them, so she could be put on title on the home that her brother had here. She would live in it, but it had to be treated like a purchase they said. Then they refinanced and put her on title, charging her even more money. The $155k that was needed to "put her on the title" disappeared.
And by refinancing in April and then Oct, that is classic flipping on the part of the broker. She never got any money out, and the interest rate decreased very little. |
|
|
Jim Graner
62 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 4:00:51 PM
|
That's right!
Smash the bad apples. |
|
|
mandysmom
237 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 4:12:24 PM
|
| Keep us informed. |
|
|
williamspeaking
4049 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 4:14:40 PM
|
"The woman is a 62 year old black, from the South"
As if that F-ing matters.
you referring to anyone as "a black" is kind of ridiculous.
|
|
|
rtrefflich
2634 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 4:17:25 PM
|
I don't think that was it, but if the feds get involved and the broker is white, and they can substantiate that they didn't screw their white borrowers it will be another charge
quote:
Originally posted by williamspeaking
"The woman is a 62 year old black, from the South"
As if that F-ing matters.
you referring to anyone as "a black" is kind of ridiculous.
|
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 4:48:43 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by williamspeaking
"The woman is a 62 year old black, from the South"
As if that F-ing matters.
you referring to anyone as "a black" is kind of ridiculous.
Okay, then I will reveal that the broker and his partner were admitted Muslims, and they said that it was their religion that made them honest. True words.
That good enough for you?
Screw the pc crap. It made a difference because these people were taken advantage of because of their ethnic and cultural background.
Why try to hide it? |
|
|
financeone
1245 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 4:50:20 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by williamspeaking
"The woman is a 62 year old black, from the South"
As if that F-ing matters.
you referring to anyone as "a black" is kind of ridiculous.
Okay, then I will reveal that the broker and his partner were admitted Muslims, and they said that it was their religion that made them honest. True words.
That good enough for you?
Screw the pc crap. It made a difference because these people were taken advantage of because of their ethnic and cultural background.
Why try to hide it?
I feel much better. Thanks. |
|
|
Scrooge McDuck
7551 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 4:58:57 PM
|
| buyer beware. |
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 5:04:07 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Scrooge McDuck
buyer beware.
No caveat emptor in this case. Outright fraud and theft. |
|
|
jlmandl
142 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 5:16:39 PM
|
This so called "honest Muslim" is going to end up in the same very safe high walled in area patrolled by guys with guns that a lot of other "honest" and "innocent" people go for a long time.
|
|
|
cblaskoski
467 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 5:28:41 PM
|
| it never ceases to amaze me what people think they will get away with. |
|
|
racerx
11088 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 5:43:25 PM
|
| If it's okay to physically and sexually abuse children, why the hell shouldn't it be okay to steal $155k from old ladies? Stealing is okay in some cultures. They've been doing it for years. |
|
|
mortgagemessiah
7904 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 5:50:22 PM
|
| Pat call me tomorrow I'm working on one in MI now. |
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 6:02:33 PM
|
It appears that these guys may also have been active in anothe case in a different city. Following up on that now.
With the woman, it is over $200k total that they have gotten out of her. Her brother, it will approach $1.5m, and that is what I know know. Could be double of that.
Maybe these guys can go to GITMO.
|
|
|
Scrooge McDuck
7551 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 6:05:48 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
It appears that these guys may also have been active in anothe case in a different city. Following up on that now.
With the woman, it is over $200k total that they have gotten out of her. Her brother, it will approach $1.5m, and that is what I know know. Could be double of that.
Maybe these guys can go to GITMO.
where theres smoke theres fire. if they did once, i bet they did it 100 times. |
|
|
mortgagemessiah
7904 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 6:09:23 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Banker0679
I'm surprised you're doing it in FL
quote:
Originally posted by mortgagemessiah
Pat call me tomorrow I'm working on one in MI now.
I started it before I left Michigan |
|
|
Scrooge McDuck
7551 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 6:30:51 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by mortgagemessiah
quote:
Originally posted by Banker0679
I'm surprised you're doing it in FL
quote:
Originally posted by mortgagemessiah
Pat call me tomorrow I'm working on one in MI now.
I started it before I left Michigan
you startes what? a fraud sceme to rip off old ladies? |
|
|
mortgagemessiah
7904 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 6:34:18 PM
|
| No! An investigation into a fraud case with another broker. |
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 6:58:53 PM
|
The more I get into this, the scarier it does get. And not just this case. The frauds that were perpetrated are just incredible.
The sad thing is that no amount of regulation will prevent it. The only solution is better awareness on the part of the borrowers and better vigilence amoung those of us in the business.
|
|
|
Scrooge McDuck
7551 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 7:13:12 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
The more I get into this, the scarier it does get. And not just this case. The frauds that were perpetrated are just incredible.
The sad thing is that no amount of regulation will prevent it. The only solution is better awareness on the part of the borrowers and better vigilence amoung those of us in the business.
usually they find that one source typically commits fraud to the tune of tens of millions. i do have to say, buyer beware. i mean how did this woman find these people and then to trust this much money to them. |
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 7:26:56 PM
|
Their story will start to come out when we do the narratives for the lawyers. So far, we have only scratched the surface. But she was referred to them by her brother, who had been taken in by them.
True confidence men. |
|
|
ML
2201 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 7:28:57 PM
|
| The old gal didn't have a lawyer? No lawyer for the estate? |
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 7:59:29 PM
|
No lawyer. She is 62. As I mentioned earlier, these were not the most sophisticated people you will find. Trusting and easily led. Just the type of person a con man would go after.
|
|
|
seanwright1
135 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 9:56:20 PM
|
"never got any money out and the interest rate decreased very little"
With multiple refinances you can bet your bottom dollar there was a demonstrated net tangible benefit. The lenders made sure of that. You are not an underwriter so do not come on here as the loan Sheriff in town cleaning up. Multiple refinances were the rule, not the exception during the refi boom.
Beat it.
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by hoangad
that story is not clear.
so whats wrong? they refinacned and refinanced and refinanced...so what?
The mortgage broker took her to the bank on the close of the home she was selling, and had her turn over all the proceeds of the sale to them, so she could be put on title on the home that her brother had here. She would live in it, but it had to be treated like a purchase they said. Then they refinanced and put her on title, charging her even more money. The $155k that was needed to "put her on the title" disappeared.
And by refinancing in April and then Oct, that is classic flipping on the part of the broker. She never got any money out, and the interest rate decreased very little.
|
|
|
homebroker@sbcgl
2108 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2008 : 10:11:45 PM
|
Send them to Guantamino, that is very sad thing they did!
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by williamspeaking
"The woman is a 62 year old black, from the South"
As if that F-ing matters.
you referring to anyone as "a black" is kind of ridiculous.
Okay, then I will reveal that the broker and his partner were admitted Muslims, and they said that it was their religion that made them honest. True words.
That good enough for you?
Screw the pc crap. It made a difference because these people were taken advantage of because of their ethnic and cultural background.
Why try to hide it?
|
|
|
terry_g
396 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2008 : 07:46:27 AM
|
Sounds like you could make $1 million a year flipping loans.
Hey Sean. Have you bothered to get a license to do loans in CA yet?
quote:
Originally posted by seanwright1
"never got any money out and the interest rate decreased very little"
With multiple refinances you can bet your bottom dollar there was a demonstrated net tangible benefit. The lenders made sure of that. You are not an underwriter so do not come on here as the loan Sheriff in town cleaning up. Multiple refinances were the rule, not the exception during the refi boom.
Beat it.
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by hoangad
that story is not clear.
so whats wrong? they refinacned and refinanced and refinanced...so what?
The mortgage broker took her to the bank on the close of the home she was selling, and had her turn over all the proceeds of the sale to them, so she could be put on title on the home that her brother had here. She would live in it, but it had to be treated like a purchase they said. Then they refinanced and put her on title, charging her even more money. The $155k that was needed to "put her on the title" disappeared.
And by refinancing in April and then Oct, that is classic flipping on the part of the broker. She never got any money out, and the interest rate decreased very little.
|
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2008 : 07:47:19 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by seanwright1
"never got any money out and the interest rate decreased very little"
With multiple refinances you can bet your bottom dollar there was a demonstrated net tangible benefit. The lenders made sure of that. You are not an underwriter so do not come on here as the loan Sheriff in town cleaning up. Multiple refinances were the rule, not the exception during the refi boom.
Beat it.
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by hoangad
that story is not clear.
so whats wrong? they refinacned and refinanced and refinanced...so what?
The mortgage broker took her to the bank on the close of the home she was selling, and had her turn over all the proceeds of the sale to them, so she could be put on title on the home that her brother had here. She would live in it, but it had to be treated like a purchase they said. Then they refinanced and put her on title, charging her even more money. The $155k that was needed to "put her on the title" disappeared.
And by refinancing in April and then Oct, that is classic flipping on the part of the broker. She never got any money out, and the interest rate decreased very little.
Sean,
You are so full of bs. Most lenders were not looking for net tangible benefit in 2006. They ignored it like everything else. Three refinances in 9 months. Total interest rate decrease of 3/8%. No cash taken out by the broower. And the mortgage increases due solely to the costs. Not to mention the $155k on the house. What else explains it?
Why are you and others so quick to decry anyone that is trying to help homeowners in distress, especially those who were victims of fraud?
BTW, I am recognized in Federal Courts as an expert witness, able to testify in trials, with no longer any need to establish my bon fides. That must suggest something.
|
|
|
seanwright1
135 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2008 : 08:28:25 AM
|
Name a few lenders in 2006 that did not look at benefit to borrower. They all did. This senior citizen was not mentally disabled. There was motivation to obtain a loan. It could be consolidating debt, paying taxes, going from an ARM to a fixed - any number of things.
Even Argent in their full on defraud investor days would not do a loan like you talk about. A RT refinance where the payment is going up with no benefit. Name the lenders you are speaking of in 2006.
Remember Argent AE's telling everyone, "we don't verify job title on stated income loans." They were funding 3rd grade teachers stating $10,000 per month when the 1003 stated they were a Principal at the school. I never did anything like this but I saw plenty of it from other loan officers. I made too much money to ever be tempted to commit fraud.
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by seanwright1
"never got any money out and the interest rate decreased very little"
With multiple refinances you can bet your bottom dollar there was a demonstrated net tangible benefit. The lenders made sure of that. You are not an underwriter so do not come on here as the loan Sheriff in town cleaning up. Multiple refinances were the rule, not the exception during the refi boom.
Beat it.
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by hoangad
that story is not clear.
so whats wrong? they refinacned and refinanced and refinanced...so what?
The mortgage broker took her to the bank on the close of the home she was selling, and had her turn over all the proceeds of the sale to them, so she could be put on title on the home that her brother had here. She would live in it, but it had to be treated like a purchase they said. Then they refinanced and put her on title, charging her even more money. The $155k that was needed to "put her on the title" disappeared.
And by refinancing in April and then Oct, that is classic flipping on the part of the broker. She never got any money out, and the interest rate decreased very little.
Sean,
You are so full of bs. Most lenders were not looking for net tangible benefit in 2006. They ignored it like everything else. Three refinances in 9 months. Total interest rate decrease of 3/8%. No cash taken out by the broower. And the mortgage increases due solely to the costs. Not to mention the $155k on the house. What else explains it?
Why are you and others so quick to decry anyone that is trying to help homeowners in distress, especially those who were victims of fraud?
BTW, I am recognized in Federal Courts as an expert witness, able to testify in trials, with no longer any need to establish my bon fides. That must suggest something.
|
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2008 : 09:52:13 AM
|
What world did you live in during 2006? You know that this happened all the time. And Argent did not care what they did, as long as they brought in the money.
Why don't you climb back into your hole, with the $1.2m that you made last year. You have no credibility here on the BO. You are simply some "big talker" without anything to back you up.
quote:
Originally posted by seanwright1
Name a few lenders in 2006 that did not look at benefit to borrower. They all did. This senior citizen was not mentally disabled. There was motivation to obtain a loan. It could be consolidating debt, paying taxes, going from an ARM to a fixed - any number of things.
Even Argent in their full on defraud investor days would not do a loan like you talk about. A RT refinance where the payment is going up with no benefit. Name the lenders you are speaking of in 2006.
Remember Argent AE's telling everyone, "we don't verify job title on stated income loans." They were funding 3rd grade teachers stating $10,000 per month when the 1003 stated they were a Principal at the school. I never did anything like this but I saw plenty of it from other loan officers. I made too much money to ever be tempted to commit fraud.
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by seanwright1
"never got any money out and the interest rate decreased very little"
With multiple refinances you can bet your bottom dollar there was a demonstrated net tangible benefit. The lenders made sure of that. You are not an underwriter so do not come on here as the loan Sheriff in town cleaning up. Multiple refinances were the rule, not the exception during the refi boom.
Beat it.
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by hoangad
that story is not clear.
so whats wrong? they refinacned and refinanced and refinanced...so what?
The mortgage broker took her to the bank on the close of the home she was selling, and had her turn over all the proceeds of the sale to them, so she could be put on title on the home that her brother had here. She would live in it, but it had to be treated like a purchase they said. Then they refinanced and put her on title, charging her even more money. The $155k that was needed to "put her on the title" disappeared.
And by refinancing in April and then Oct, that is classic flipping on the part of the broker. She never got any money out, and the interest rate decreased very little.
Sean,
You are so full of bs. Most lenders were not looking for net tangible benefit in 2006. They ignored it like everything else. Three refinances in 9 months. Total interest rate decrease of 3/8%. No cash taken out by the broower. And the mortgage increases due solely to the costs. Not to mention the $155k on the house. What else explains it?
Why are you and others so quick to decry anyone that is trying to help homeowners in distress, especially those who were victims of fraud?
BTW, I am recognized in Federal Courts as an expert witness, able to testify in trials, with no longer any need to establish my bon fides. That must suggest something.
|
|
|
terry_g
396 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2008 : 10:07:28 AM
|
Sean, I'm glad you "made too much money to ever be tempted to commit fraud", but here's what's wrong with your assertions...
1. California did not and does not have state law requiring a tangible net benefit test or disclosure. If you were operating with a license, that might be one of the things that you would bother to know or find out. Many other states now have tangible net benefit disclosures and laws enacted and they were enacted at different times.
2. Lenders and underwriters often did not care if the borrower's position was improved by a loan. There are few lenders that want a tangible net benefit form in the file now, but they are few and far between on CA loans. Of course, now lenders are looking at TNB. Perhaps it's just your loans that are being scrutinized because you continually flip your borrowers from loan to loan... benefitting only you.
3. Clearly, you've previously asserted on BO that it's just fine to triple package your loans to 3 different lenders at a time and triple locking... to benefit you. It only stands to reason that you would refi your borrowers multiple times in short periods of time, also not caring that they lost money on the rebates paid to you or your illegal CFL rent-a-broker. The same illegal rent-a-broker who pays you illegal referral fees to your unlicensed llc.
4. Oh, and on the subject of you not committing fraud... you do Sean. Everytime you take a 1003 and quote a rate without a license, and you purport to have a license, you are committing fraud, among other illegal acts.
Now, if I'm wrong about you Sean, I'll be the first one to post on this forum and apologize for my statements about your complete lack of regard for the law. Wanna show us a license with your name on it Sean? You're a hack.
Do you think the BO community is stupid Sean?
quote:
Originally posted by seanwright1
Name a few lenders in 2006 that did not look at benefit to borrower. They all did. This senior citizen was not mentally disabled. There was motivation to obtain a loan. It could be consolidating debt, paying taxes, going from an ARM to a fixed - any number of things.
Even Argent in their full on defraud investor days would not do a loan like you talk about. A RT refinance where the payment is going up with no benefit. Name the lenders you are speaking of in 2006.
Remember Argent AE's telling everyone, "we don't verify job title on stated income loans." They were funding 3rd grade teachers stating $10,000 per month when the 1003 stated they were a Principal at the school. I never did anything like this but I saw plenty of it from other loan officers. I made too much money to ever be tempted to commit fraud.
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by seanwright1
"never got any money out and the interest rate decreased very little"
With multiple refinances you can bet your bottom dollar there was a demonstrated net tangible benefit. The lenders made sure of that. You are not an underwriter so do not come on here as the loan Sheriff in town cleaning up. Multiple refinances were the rule, not the exception during the refi boom.
Beat it.
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by hoangad
that story is not clear.
so whats wrong? they refinacned and refinanced and refinanced...so what?
The mortgage broker took her to the bank on the close of the home she was selling, and had her turn over all the proceeds of the sale to them, so she could be put on title on the home that her brother had here. She would live in it, but it had to be treated like a purchase they said. Then they refinanced and put her on title, charging her even more money. The $155k that was needed to "put her on the title" disappeared.
And by refinancing in April and then Oct, that is classic flipping on the part of the broker. She never got any money out, and the interest rate decreased very little.
Sean,
You are so full of bs. Most lenders were not looking for net tangible benefit in 2006. They ignored it like everything else. Three refinances in 9 months. Total interest rate decrease of 3/8%. No cash taken out by the broower. And the mortgage increases due solely to the costs. Not to mention the $155k on the house. What else explains it?
Why are you and others so quick to decry anyone that is trying to help homeowners in distress, especially those who were victims of fraud?
BTW, I am recognized in Federal Courts as an expert witness, able to testify in trials, with no longer any need to establish my bon fides. That must suggest something.
|
|
|
rtrefflich
2634 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2008 : 10:09:13 AM
|
Sorry, Sean, you could simply put on the 1003 that it was for debt consolidation or something even though there was no debt on the credit report and it would fly. I had 0 loans turned down from 2004 to 2006 due to no net benefit to the borrower, when in reality, the only benefit was to get more in debt. UW didn't care and neither did banks. People were allowed to take up to 100% stated out of their home, with no proof of being able to pay it back, and no reserves because the reserves came from the cash out. Argent was one of those "anything goes" lenders.
Don't know how you made $1.2 without triple submitting all of these and getting 3 approvals, not denials from banks that asked no questions at all. And please, don't tell me you made $1.2 by only doing prime paper for the past year in CA. Over 1/2 of the loans done were not prime, especially in the IE..
quote:
Originally posted by seanwright1
Name a few lenders in 2006 that did not look at benefit to borrower. They all did. This senior citizen was not mentally disabled. There was motivation to obtain a loan. It could be consolidating debt, paying taxes, going from an ARM to a fixed - any number of things.
Even Argent in their full on defraud investor days would not do a loan like you talk about. A RT refinance where the payment is going up with no benefit. Name the lenders you are speaking of in 2006.
Remember Argent AE's telling everyone, "we don't verify job title on stated income loans." They were funding 3rd grade teachers stating $10,000 per month when the 1003 stated they were a Principal at the school. I never did anything like this but I saw plenty of it from other loan officers. I made too much money to ever be tempted to commit fraud.
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by seanwright1
"never got any money out and the interest rate decreased very little"
With multiple refinances you can bet your bottom dollar there was a demonstrated net tangible benefit. The lenders made sure of that. You are not an underwriter so do not come on here as the loan Sheriff in town cleaning up. Multiple refinances were the rule, not the exception during the refi boom.
Beat it.
quote:
Originally posted by ppulatie
quote:
Originally posted by hoangad
that story is not clear.
so whats wrong? they refinacned and refinanced and refinanced...so what?
The mortgage broker took her to the bank on the close of the home she was selling, and had her turn over all the proceeds of the sale to them, so she could be put on title on the home that her brother had here. She would live in it, but it had to be treated like a purchase they said. Then they refinanced and put her on title, charging her even more money. The $155k that was needed to "put her on the title" disappeared.
And by refinancing in April and then Oct, that is classic flipping on the part of the broker. She never got any money out, and the interest rate decreased very little.
Sean,
You are so full of bs. Most lenders were not looking for net tangible benefit in 2006. They ignored it like everything else. Three refinances in 9 months. Total interest rate decrease of 3/8%. No cash taken out by the broower. And the mortgage increases due solely to the costs. Not to mention the $155k on the house. What else explains it?
Why are you and others so quick to decry anyone that is trying to help homeowners in distress, especially those who were victims of fraud?
BTW, I am recognized in Federal Courts as an expert witness, able to testify in trials, with no longer any need to establish my bon fides. That must suggest something.
|
|
|
terry_g
396 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2008 : 10:23:12 AM
|
Well considering that Sean operates on an illegal referral fee basis from a CFL rent-a-broker, and that most A paper lenders don't take loans from CFL's in CA, then wouldn't there only be a limited number of lenders to even take Sean's loans? Maybe all of Sean's loans were CW Fast and Easy's.
quote:
Originally posted by rtrefflich
Sorry, Sean, you could simply put on the 1003 that it was for debt consolidation or something even though there was no debt on the credit report and it would fly. I had 0 loans turned down from 2004 to 2006 due to no net benefit to the borrower, when in reality, the only benefit was to get more in debt. UW didn't care and neither did banks. People were allowed to take up to 100% stated out of their home, with no proof of being able to pay it back, and no reserves because the reserves came from the cash out. Argent was one of those "anything goes" lenders.
Don't know how you made $1.2 without triple submitting all of these and getting 3 approvals, not denials from banks that asked no questions at all. And please, don't tell me you made $1.2 by only doing prime paper for the past year in CA. Over 1/2 of the loans done were not prime, especially in the IE..
[quote]Originally posted by seanwright1
Name a few lenders in 2006 that did not look at benefit to borrower. They all did. This senior citizen was not mentally disabled. There was motivation to obtain a loan. It could be consolidating debt, paying taxes, going from an ARM to a fixed - any number of things.
Even Argent in their full on defraud investor days would not do a loan like you talk about. A RT refinance where the payment is going up with no benefit. Name the lenders you are speaking of in 2006.
Remember Argent AE's telling everyone, "we don't verify job title on stated income loans." They were funding 3rd grade teachers stating $10,000 per month when the 1003 stated they were a Principal at the school. I never did anything like this but I saw plenty of it from other loan officers. I made too much money to ever be tempted to commit fraud.
|
|
|
ppulatie
2209 Posts |
Posted - 04/19/2008 : 11:11:19 AM
|
Thanks guys for watching my back.
Why do we put up with him? Perhaps because we hope he will show us how to make $1.2m in a down market? |
|
|
| |
Previous Topic | Next Topic |
|
|
|
Search for: 
