Anti-Foreclosure Measures and Lenders Rights - Housing Tracker

Quotes of the Day

“We paid $585,000. It was the peak of the market, but no one told us.We would probably have to spend the next 20 years trying to get right on the mortgage. That's crazy.” - Joan Shaffer, a real-estate agent from Colorado, who bought a Pheonix home in late 2005 for no money down. She’s now turning in the keys to her lender. (AZ Central, Apr. 21st)

"A little bit of breathing room for the borrower is not going to trigger preemption, but if they in fact choke the lender to death by effectively declaring the loan unenforceable with its terms, that will trigger constitutional and preemption issues." - Laurence Platt, a lawyer at Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Preston Gates Ellis LLP, on recourse for lenders in light of government efforts to prevent foreclosure by changing loan terms. (On Wall St., Apt. 21st)

Foreclosure Data

Foreclosure Moves Open Gray Area in Preemption. “A fight is brewing over whether and how much national banks and thrifts must comply with state laws designed to delay or prevent foreclosures. Unlike consumer protection laws, state foreclosure and real estate property laws generally are not preempted. But if such a law affects the substance of a loan — or interferes with the bank's ability to collect a debt… It is likely to start a… war over preemption… Industry representatives said they are largely willing to accept a brief delay in foreclosures, since a limited 30-day stay would be hard to challenge legally, though indefinitely delaying foreclosures or banning them altogether would be unacceptable.” (On Wall St., Apt. 21st)

Recovery 6 Months Off, Says Economist. Tennessee: RealtyTrac: Just as Chattanooga's real estate market has fared better in home building, the area has done the same in foreclosures. Foreclosure filings in the Chattanooga metro area in March were down 7% from a month before… A total of 292 houses in the metro area entered the foreclosure process in March, down from 314 filings in February. One out of every 765 households in the metro area entered the foreclosure process in March.” (Big Builder Online, Apr. 21st)

More Homeowners Mailing Keys To Lenders. “Instead of mailing in their monthly mortgage payment, a growing number of homeowners are sending lenders their keys… These typically are people who can afford their mortgage but don't want to pay on a loan that is more than their house is worth. They'll live with the stigma or credit ding from a foreclosure just to get out from under their loan. The growing trend, called "jingle mail," is pushing up foreclosures and alarming market watchers… One reason is some homeowners think that with all the foreclosures, there will be programs to help them when they buy again. [And the IRS is forgiving taxes.]” (AZ Central, Apr. 21st)

Foreclosures Fallout Bruises Borrowers. “Iowa: Des Moines Register analysis of state court data: One east-side area - the Four Mile neighborhood… has had more foreclosure filings during the past three years than any other neighborhood in Polk County… Danny Wagener, a community organizer for Des Moines Citizens for Community Improvement: “The greatest percentage of foreclosure filings are happening in the lower- to middle-income neighborhoods.” At least 75 homeowners have had foreclosure petitions filed against them between January 2005-February 2008. The median assessed value of the foreclosed homes was $96,000. That's nearly $50,000 less than the 2006 median value of households in Polk County, about $142,000.” (Des Moines Register, Apr. 21st)

How Ohio Is Tackling the Foreclosure Crisis. “In Ohio, where foreclosure filings climbed about 30% from 2005-2007… The state has enlisted more than 1,300 lawyers—from state agencies and the private sector—to help struggling homeowners avoid foreclosure by reaching agreements with lenders or, if need be, through litigation. Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann, one of the architects of the plan: We concluded was that there is a real inequality, because to file a mortgage foreclosure you have to be a lawyer. And homeowners—particularly those that are in default on their mortgage note—don't have lawyers… Both parties in the mediation need to be represented by lawyers.” (US News & World Report, Apr. 21st)

Arson is No Solution for Foreclosure Threat. “The fact that there is little or no financial gain in setting a home on fire may explain why investigators are seeing so few cases of suspected arson involving houses threatened with foreclosure. When a home is destroyed by fire, insurance will cover the replacement cost of the home. However, whether the fire is a result of arson or other means, the lender will be named on the insurance settlement check. In 2007, California recorded 481,392 notices of default. [But] only 14 arsons potentially related to foreclosure were reported in 2007 by the California Department of Insurance.” (Earth Times, Apr. 21st)

State Task Force Lays Out Foreclosure Plan. “The Florida Home Ownership Promotes the Economy (HOPE) task force has completed a list of recommendations that Gov. Charlie Crist says will help reduce the record number of foreclosures… Among the recommendations made to the governor, the task force is asking that loan services and investors be urged to pursue all workout options and dedicate resources to try to make foreclosure as much of a last resort as possible… The group also looks to establish the Home Ownership Preservation Center to provide a centralized location for distribution of foreclosure prevention information.” (Orlando Business Journal, Apr. 21st)

New York Adds Funds To Affordable Housing During Subprime Crisis. “At least nine states including New York are proposing bills that would give homeowners like Collery better access to foreclosure counseling. California lawmakers have introduced at least nine proposals related to foreclosure, including one that would require lenders to help put a homeowner in default in touch with a licensed credit counseling agency. Kentucky, Illinois, Colorado, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island have also considered counseling to combat home foreclosures. The latest New York state budget dedicates $347 million to affordable housing issues -- nearly tripling the amount of assistance offered in each of the past 10 years.” (Staten Island Live, Apr. 21st)

Another Record Low For Bay Area Home Sales. San Francisco: “One-quarter of all homes sold in the nine-county area last month were foreclosures… The more foreclosures that sold in a county, the faster its prices plummeted. For instance, 44.7% of the March sales in Contra Costa County were foreclosures and the median price there fell by about a third to $409,000 from $614,500 a year ago… "Houses in areas dominated by foreclosure resales seemed to suffer a penalty of 5-10% on price." (SF Gate, Apr. 18th)

Dear Readers: Read anything you liked on this subject and didn't see it here? Why not post a link or a quote from the article in our comments section. Share the wealth! - Ed.

Get Seeking Alpha's housing market coverage by email -- it's free and takes only seconds to sign up.

Comments

[vrspace]

From the Sunday NY Times:

CAPE CORAL, Fla. — In a county with one of the nation’s highest foreclosure rates, empty houses have attracted a new type of nonpaying tenant: bees

Tens of thousands of honeybees, building nests in garages, rafters, even furniture left behind.

When a swarm came to the foreclosed ranch house at 3738 Santa Barbara Place in Cape Coral, town officials called B. Keith Councell, a fourth generation beekeeper and licensed bee remover.



www.nytimes.com/2008/0...

[ArnoldCountry]

All this talk about recovery and bottoms is kind of strange. The answer is simply before us all. Now that everyone must prove their income to qualify, one can easily overlay the income demographics and the corresponding mortgage amount they can afford, assume a 20% down payment and you will know where bottom is. In the Sacramento region where I am at, mostly state government and medical field, neither of which is know for paying big money. I would expect entry level homes will have to be in the 160k range, average home in the 250k range and the 3000 sq. ft. bigger homes in the 350k range. With the rare exceptions for some wealthy people, that is about what this market can support. The same can be said for anywhere. It it going to be a painful drive down to those ranges but quite frankly, that is all the population can afford and all they could before all those crazy teaser option arms and liar loans were put in place.

[Signe]

With respect to jingle mail -I have yet to see any hard numbers on this -the editor is in good company, since periodicals such as the WSJ and NYT have published front page articles about the "growing" number of borrowers who, due to negative equity, are mailing keys in lieu of their mortgage payments. Instead of referring to percentages, numbers, cities, MSAs, etc -all of the authors (including the author of this piece) mention "many", "several" "lots" -no information as to whether the borrower's properties are primary residences, second homes or investment properties, no information as to the actual implications of defaulting on a mortgage. Any journalist or analyst who fails to include this information is irresponsible -as these articles do not convey any reliable facts, they are not informative, but alarmist and misleading.

[DCM]

@ArnoldCountry
I basically agree with your premise and conclusion. However, it should be pointed out that credit underwriting standards have reverted back to having "good" credit to qualify. The percentage of people who have good credit is disturbingly low. It is hard to imagine where the buyers are going to come from to buy the existing housing available, regardless of price.

What troubles me is that builders keep building (at least in my area) which adds to our 4 year supply of homes for sale. Construction materials and labor costs have not significantly declined. Therefore, new construction per square foot costs are about the same which by rough calculation is $50 to $75 per square foot higher than our existing house's asking price! I assume that bulders are not going to build and then turnaround and sell for a loss. So, the question is how can builders continue to get construction loans or better yet, what kind of idiot lender would lend money with little hope of ever getting paid in this lifetime? In any case, it is insanity to add more housing to an already multi-year oversupply of houses on the market.

Recovery? Bottom? I will believe we are on the road to a housing recovery when there is a total stop to building new homes. Yes, if construction does stop, it will be hard on the economy - many jobless and the building material industry will be rocked to the core. But someone, please give me an alternative solution because increasing the housing supply can't be the answer.

[[e-mail]]

Does'nt anybody remember 1977 - 1984 ?
How many homebuilders lost everything ? (and even committed suicide)
Banks from Switzerland - to Shanghai have greedily loaned money
to people that had no business borrowing , to purchase houses
with no established value , and no real understanding how to pay
it back !
And now we call this a mortgage-crisis or a housing - crisis ??
How about a COMMON SENSE CRISIS !!!!!
And we bill-paying shleps should bail'em out ?????

[moonscope]

Richard Pollak [e-mail] Alvin Texas 77511 Born 09/17 Constitution Day, “We Hold These Truths to Be Self Evident!” Justice Denied because Damage, simply relates, International Commerce’s permission that Payments, Deserve Credit, Affronted Authority Squanders Laws Subservient by emboldening forsakenly.

Standard 6.5 Fixed 180 Month Loan Closed on May, 2001 for $77,000.00, $60,000.00 Available Credit Card Credit “0” Due, Loan Originator received all 2001 Coupon Payments, then Transferred Loan, and First Three 2002 Payments were Also on-time Current.

Payments Lost in 2001 Created Escrow Shortage, Felonious Credit Report Blocked Outside Refinance, Bankruptcy was Forced, Payment History was Denied, Stay was released and Lender Supplied 48 Month Coveted Loan History same Day, Lender Admitted Faults, Sued Lender, Admittance Ignored, Appealed Judgment Award {10 Day to Appeal was Coveted} “on Time by RULE # 2005” Appeal Denied for Time expired {15th Day of 11 Day Served, -5 Day RULE, 6 Day Allowed – Sunday’s?} Appeal Denied Five Times, Lender Returns $7,515.25 Mooting Judgment, Threatening Foreclosure 05/06/2008 to “Case Law” Theft “Common Practice,” Blanketing Escrow Anti-trust Defendable for Corporate Megalomania.

Foreclosure offers Different Protections from Justice relating Financial Accountability to the Following; Homeside Lending is/or/and Washington Mutual, First Bankruptcy Attorney, Second Bankruptcy Attorney Protecting first, Bankruptcy Trustee and San Antonio Credit Union all Misdirected Funds, Dismissing Accountability.

Foreclosure Relates to the Following; Bank One Transferred Account with intentional Damage, Judge allowed Theft “Common Practice” Defended, Enron Judge Protected Both Houston Courthouse and DOJ Systematic, Fifth Circuit Protected DOJ, Appellate Attorney ignored Merit of Assured Supreme Court Victory that Promised Numerous Damage Awards, by seeking and Crediting Skewed Trial Attorney Misinformation.

1. Sued Washington Mutual for Damage, after forcing Formal Admittance Statement that through Loan Transfer Principal and Escrow were reduced. Equating {2001 “Principal Curtailment” Breach of DEED 180 Month Term Commitment $778.34} and {2001 “Escrow Curtailment” Anti-trust $637.22} Loan Manager Coveted the Pertaining Loan History, holding Loan Hostage for Lender Arrear Error of Twelve Escrow Shortage Payments amounting $103.34 that Started April, 2002 ten Months into Current Paid-up Loan, Credit Report Damage Blocked outside Refinance.

1A. Refinance Block forced Bankruptcy, Loan History was Coveted from Attorneys until released Stay {$1,415.56 missing for 48 Months} By Closing Loan, History Transferred to Archive’ Department Teller unlocked, revealing both the Coveted Bank One “Principal Curtailment” Abandonment of December, 2001 and Homeside Lending Erroneous attempt at “Curtailment” reversal that Admitted Erroneous Misapplication of Escrow November, 2001.

1B. Proof Relates Both Lenders Credited November 2001 and Abandoned December 2001. Bank One and Homeside Lending Refused Bank One Loan History, and Loan Manager Protection of Loan History was accomplished by Lender receiving Loan on 11/01/2001, Dating All Loan History’s to start 11/28/2001 absent of the “Escrow Curtailment” Reduction.

1C. First 27 Days of Loan History Concealed, both “Curtailments” requiring Lender in 2001 to report Escrow Reduction on Form 1098 Taxable and Falsified Credit Report. Fearing exposure Loan History was protected until release of Stay Day when Archive responded by E-Mail supplying Loan History, their Fault Admittance Statement followed.

1D. ({“Point Counter Point”}) Loan History Abandoned December of all Credit and November “Escrow Curtailment” needed Additional $131.12 if it was to Reverse “Principal Curtailment” Damage, Lender Statement Detailed “Erroneous” Escrow “Misapplication” Escrow Shortage Increased Payment Demand for Twelve Months by $103.34, but Lender Attorney Claims November 11/10 not 11/28 Escrow Reduction Paid December?

1E. Meager $1,000.00 Award for ignored RESPA request was Timely Appealed, because Attorney’s Proof of Claim” was ignored, Attorney RESPA request was ignored {ruled inadmissible} and ignoring My Lay-person RESPA request that included ignoring the Better Business Bureau {Washington Mutual Chair expelled} Release of Stay was achieved, Archive’ Department halted Progression.
Funds Lost, Damage Award and Costs Appeal was Preparation for related Substance seeking Constitutional Justice of and including, First Attorney’s Systematic Drain of Both Bankruptcy Trustee Account Charges and Rav4 Bankruptcy Account Charges that began by advancement of Principal Term Commitment to Drain Rav4 San Antonio Credit Union Auto Loan.

1F. Day Rate damages was Substance of Lawsuit, $1,000.00 Award was Appealed, Bankruptcy Attorney received expense Judgment, December 2007’ Washington Mutual returned $7,515.98 Loan Payment, Muting Judgment with Fault Admittance, skirting Commitment Damages keeping Curtailments, picking Damage with willingness, forfeiting Accountability and Address, Rushing Foreclosure 5/6/08 seeks Dismissal out of Hand.

1G.Foremost Credit Report Notation of Bankruptcy’s “Faults Blame” notation on Loans Credit Report, equates.

1H. Demanding Credit for Payments made at Bankruptcy Conformation Hearing, Judge Ordered Attorney to File “Proof of Claim” on the recorded record. Judge required and accepted My Signature but Stayed Conformation for 60 Days, Ignoring Judge, Attorney Quit all Houston Caseload.

2. Defendant was colluded from Washington Mutual to former entity Homeside Lending under Seal, later reversed for Damage Award Payment.

2A. Attorney’s ignored Certified Mail RESPA “qualified written request” was Inadmissible.

2B. At Pretrial Hearing unknown Surrogate Attorney appeared to Defend, stating Case was just dropped in Lap without Time for review, or Proper Court paperwork. Judge threatened Dismissal, Ordering Attorney’s Appearance to Defend Three Day Core Adversary Hearing.

2C. Washington Mutual Halfheartedly offered Arbitration if Costs were split, before Second Pretrial Hearing, wanting preferred Arbitrator, not being a College consideration passed.

3. Washington Mutual Trial Arguments related to Line-item Challenge of Washington Mutual Fault Admittance Statement that was evidenced, countering self by newfound Date Augmentation, excusing Accountable reasoning with Assorted Derelict Avoidances of Law.

3A. Judgment accepted Lender Defense of “Principal Curtailment” claiming “Common Practice” relating to Breach of DEED Commitments, highlighted damage, Precedent.

3B. Judgment accepted Lender Defense of Erroneous Escrow reduction claiming “Common Practice” Argued Funds reduced in November for December Payment, Argued Taxes increased Loan Payments, Argued “Principal Curtailment” reduced Loans overall Interest despite reduction of 180 Term Commitment, Argued {48 Month} “Concealed Prepayment” was not a “Curtailment” but was a Prepayment, Argued Escrow was reduced on 11/28 not 11/10, Argued April ISF Check corrected in May, Paid, April {belittlement} In Attorney Cross Lender Admitted “Curtailments” created the Escrow Shortage Demand that started in April, Admitted Large May Payment made Loan 100% Current including Damages before June 2002 and Admitted before April 2002 all Payments were respectfully Paid before Due.

3C. Judgment accepted Lender Testimony that Escrow Surplus return from Escrow already in arrears was unexplainable, root stem relates to Choice of intentional Damage Doubling, relative to Loan Payment Investigation Teams requirement of Canceled Check Front and Back sent in November 2001, Damages Stemmed from Closed Faulty Investigation Report that resulted in unknown Tax Payment responsibility Escrow Damage, Teams final Conclusion Dated Escrow reduction of 11/10 suspended to 11/28 but missed the Fact that it was Erroneous, forcing Escrow reduction to be reported on 1098 Tax Form as received Funds, and forcing December 2001 Payment History’s Shading/Blank Void report to Credit Agency, Second Time Simple Penny for Penny Swap opportunity missed.

4. Judgment ignored Core of Core Adversary Hearing Primary responsibility of Damage Awarding the DEED Stipulation Paragraph Verbatim, then Assessing Day-rate Damages for forced Bankruptcy and Skewed to ignore Published Guilt Admittance evidenced.
Precedent Clause clearly defines Prepayments requirement of Signed
Authorization, forbidding Concealment that intentionally Contractually Itemizes abuse Damage Award Amount to Protect Paperwork of DEED, independent of Escrow Abuse Damage Damages.
Importance of Paragraph Commanded notation on Judgment, but Judgment edited Substance’s Importance without Authority, by cropping off top-Half of Paragraph, in effort to revise intended meaning, by omitting forward Substance, “Quoting” only bottom half of Paragraph their Collusion Supported Curtailments.

4A. Just Eleven of the Coveted Ten Day Timeframe allowance was actually Served, to review, itemize, find, hire and Convince Appellate Attorney Versed in “Bankruptcy Appeals!” *1. Attorney that wanted Case, Questioning, own Personal Expertise, Denied Case Days before Appeal was filed. *2. Appellate Attorney’s often Co-Counsel, Office meeting Case Denial with Referral resulted in next Day Appeal. *3. Appeal Arguments were E-Mailed/Spammed to Numerous Appellate Bar Attorneys. *4. Trial concluded 100 Day’s later Home Mailbox Served Delivery, if Box was Checked that Day then Eleven Day’s from Served to Appeal minus the 5 Day RULE, Trial Attorney called many Days Later without Interest.
Fifteen Day after Judge Signed, Attorney Appealed but foolishly, Persistently, Ignored Merits Arguing Excusable Neglect. Judgment accused Predisposed to Bankruptcy aspirating Peasant’, Judge ignored Federal Bankruptcy RULE #2005 Precedent extension of 5 Day Appeal Timeframe Law, Simple U.S. SUPREME COURT DEED Paragraph Deciphering needed to Case Law, until/forcing only DEED found Borrower Protection, achieves revision.
Coveted 10 Day’s Appeal Allowance was misunderstood beforehand by Trusting Attorney assurance that 30 Day’s and not 90 Day’s was the allotted Appeal Timeframe. Conveyed in Confidence, waiting for the minute Courtroom doors opened Pretrial.

4B. Trial ended November 2005,100 Days later, 2/23/2005 Memorandum, Judgment, 2/25/2005 BNC Mailing, 2/27/2005 Appeal Served U.S. Mail Standard Mail-box Delivery if Mailbox was Checked on that Day, Appeal to extend Filed 3/10/2005, 15 Day count, 11 Day Served Count, Federal Appeal RULE #2005 regulates 5 extra Days, allowing Count 6 Day Received to Appeal and Sunday might Not Count, Rush to Dismiss failed Arithmetic Prudence or Constitutionality, Imagination offers Collusion to Covet Attorney Theft Protection or Justice’s Blind Permanence, for same or Protecting Wall Street assumption.

4C. Bankruptcy Judge Chaired from Conformation to Award Appeal is famed for Worlds largest Historic Billions of Dollars Bankruptcy Case Dismissal, Schlumberger oilfield Russia claimed 10 day appeal time-frame expired, without exposing Time-frames exactness beforehand, Clerk of Court recorded holding Judgment Two Days before Posting, Mail Delivery took Two Days, Attorney called Two Days after Home Mail-Box Delivery stating not willing to pursue further, Appeal being Denied Mimicked Trial Merits Ignored. Lender Mooted Judge then Judgment, only Arguing to Moot Guilt Admittance Lender Statement.

4D. Justice Circumvented the Federal Bankruptcy Court “RULE” that extends all Judge Appeal Timeframe for Five Additional Days RULE #2005. Famed Houston ENRON Judge received and Denied Second Appeal, Appeal waited for ENRON Trials Conclusion.
Fifth Circuit refused to overrule ENRON Judge, Printer never received Desired U.S. SUPREME COURT Appeal and Time expired, Merits were never exacted or explored.

4E. Thousands of Bankruptcy’s relate and Hundreds of Bankruptcy’s have resulted since because Proved Damages were Denied, Lender Accountability Reforming Day-rate Damages was Award sought, if 5/6/2008 Foreclosure receive Action, Theft becomes allowed, Case Law results that Lender Defense of DEED restricted Curtailments, Errant Escrow Reductions and Misapplications are “Common Practice” Defendable, opening the floodgate of Attorney exploitation, Theft Defended as “Common Practice” allowable.

5. On April 2002 Loan Damages created insurmountable Escrow Shortage Arrears increasing the next Twelve Monthly Payment Demand from $813.49 / $812.28 to $915.83 effecting accountability, $8,000.00 new Credit Card Home Improvement Balance reached 30% interest exactly and instantly relating.

5A. Priority became Credit Card over Home Loan seeking outside Refinance of $100,000.00 for 25 Years to install Rental Home on Lot was Goal, Original Planned Goal of Home Reconstruction inside Work was achieved 9/02 ready to extend Longer Terms by Refinancing for Rental Trailer house and Outside Reconstruction Goal remained. Numerous Refinance attempts achieved sudden Quick Denial, November, 2002 after Home Inspection Citi-Bank Reported Incomplete Loan Payment History before April 2002 needed addressed, Forced into Bankruptcy with $8,000.00 at hand, Work in Oilfield, Paid-off many Credit Cards but included Auto Loan expecting resolve with Attorney Assistance, needing only Loan History.

5B. Credit Report Damage of December, 2001 Shaded Box Void/Blank entry Blocked outside Refinance to force Bankruptcy, then Bankruptcy Attorney was denied “Proof of Claim” {Judge ordered at Conformation Hearing, Staying Conformation 60 Day’s} included Bankruptcy Attorney’s RESPA “qualified written request” that was also being ignored, again Payments were halted for Court appearance to Demand Credit for Check Payments, Judge and Attorney missed Attending Release of Stay Hearing 09/02/2005.

5C. 9/05 Bankruptcy Trustee was Chairing / Ruling all Proceedings and Release’s of Stay for absent Judge that Busy Day {related need for Core Adversary option} Trustee Stayed Release of Stay for 30 Days Ordering Attorney’s Presence on 10/04/2005.
Trustee on 10/05 Conversed or Ordered, Attorney File Core Adversary Hearing, at that same timeframe, My Lay-person RESPA “Qualified Written Request” crafted was being ignored, Better Business Bureau assisted and Expelled Washington Mutual Chief Arbitrator Chair with Three Year Suspension for being ignored.

5D. RESPA “qualified written request” is simply a request to open Loan Discovery by itemization of Questions. Construction of request follows a formula and Lender is Time-line required to first admit receiving, second form reply and Third reach resolve.

5E. Attorney Formally Back-dated RESPA Request to expire the Time-line allowance when Posting and it Predated our first meeting, understanding’, relates to Judge’s refusal to allow into evidence, confusion relates to Attorney Award and Justice denied, compounded Damage is, Justice Denied harbors Protecting Attorney Malpractice’s of the First Attorney’s Theft that Second Attorney Protected, Yes; Attorney Deserves Pay for Work, Independently of Malpractice Goal against Attorney’s Insurance/Bonds that assuredly relates Out-of Court Settlement Awards and License’s but Judge’s Judgment and Appeal refusal Stands restrictive of Jurisprudence, Prejudices sometimes avoid defined Identifiable reasoning’s.

6. Trustee at Hearing on 10/04/2005 Conversed or Ordered Attorney to File Core Adversary, and later Attorney repeatedly related, Intent to File Core Adversary Hearing was Progressing up to the 12/15/2005 Release of Stay and Core Adversary received No Action before 12/17/2005. Payment Arrears were not sent awaiting Judicator notice of filing, expecting Loan History exam, Discovery, Proof of Forced Bankruptcy exposure.

6A. Homeside Lending Loan Manager became’ Washington Mutual Loan Manager.

6B. Loan Manager Protecting Loan History released Bankruptcy Stay, on 12/15/2005.

6C. Loan Manager’s 48 Months of Loan History Protection was Unlocked to Washington Mutual Archive’ Department after Released Stay, on a whim and Prayer Archive’ was called.

6D. Washington Mutual Loan Archive’ Department E-Mailed Loan History on 12/15/2005.
Washington Mutual was Informed to explain, discrepancies on 12/16/2005.
Bank One “Principal Curtailment” and Loan Manager’s Escrow reduction became Evidence.

6E. Washington Mutual claimed My Ignored RESPA request was on File.

6F. Washington Mutual claimed to have Never received Attorney RESPA Request, Faxed Attorney RESPA Request to Washington Mutual Archive’ 12/16/2005.

6G. Attorney Office Meeting after 12/17/2005 for Legal Process, Core Adversary intent with Court unfiled, Loan History was reviewed with Attorney Lender Telephone Communications.

6H. Washington Mutual Admitted Both Lenders Damaged Loan, with Formal Written Document of Lender Damage Itemization.

6I. Received in Mail Court’s Core Adversary notice of Filing, Dated Filed on 12/15/2005.

7. 48 Months of Loan History Protection forced Loan Manager to rush release of Stay on 12/15/2005 to avoid “Suspended” Core Adversary Hearings Filing, but on the same Day, Washington Mutual Archive’ Department E-mailed Coveted Loan History that Self Evidenced Missing Payment direction Detail, inherently revealing Escrow and Loan Damage.

7A. Washington Mutual was forced into written admittance, Loan Damage Assessment Statement that exacted, Bank One Misapplied Payment calling it “Principal Curtailment” {Curtailment = Lop-off liken-to Horse’s Tail!} Revealing Lender Despising Lender that Compromise’s All Accountability’s, explaining the Spite, Words “Escrow Curtailment” Draw’s.

7B. Washington Mutual written admittance exacted Loan Manager Errantly Misapplied Escrow attempting to reverse “Principal Curtailment” then Argued in Court opposition claiming November 2001 Escrow reduction was Intended anticipating needed December, 2001 Payment, all Payment Date Augmentation and Conflicts in History were Dispelled’ with Evidenced Proof, Lender was restricted to Defend “Principal Curtailment” and “Escrow Misapplication” offering only “Common Practice’s” and a don’t know why!

7C. Coveting was preformed to protect Lender from Contractual Damage expenses of $10,286.25 in trade falsified Credit Report to force Bankruptcy, ignorant of simple Penny for Penny exchange in 2001 to reverse Damage.

8. 80 Month’s Ago’ Loan Transferred 11/01/2001, Lender Denied Payment Credit of $778.34 for “Principal Curtailment” and Lender Denied Payment Credit of $637.22 for “Escrow Curtailment” recorded on First real-time Payment Breakdown Statement of 11/10/2001 {Lender Investigation Team required Canceled Check Front/Back Proof of Payment early 11/2001 and incorrectly reported resolve around 11/28/2001} equaling Loan Payments of $1,415.56 missing Credit to Date.

8A. Loan History that was Coveted to Protect Breach of DEED Contractual Damage expenses of $10.286.25, was followed by Errant Escrow reduction, that forced False Credit Report to Protect Lender from Both “Curtailments” forcing Voluntary Bankruptcy, now 80 Months without Payment Credit.

8B. Bank One N.A. Breach of DEED for $10,286.25 Damage became Contractually Transferred on 11/01/2001 to Homeside Lending with $1,289.85 Escrow Funds.
On 11/28/2001 Loan Manager Erroneously reduced Escrow attempting Damage reversal.
On 12/10/2001 County Tax Payment $1,168.26 created Escrow Shortage, amounting to $-515.63, Second simple Penny for Penny exchange reversal opportunity missed.
On 12/12/2001 Escrow Surplus of $336.23 increased Shortage amounting to $-851.86.
Escrow Reduction of 11/28/2001 was Reported received funds on 1098 Tax Form.

8C. December 2001 was Void of Payment on all received Loan Histories “Then and Now.”
On after 1/1/02 Homeside Lending received first Payment, 11/28 to 12/12 = Loan Damage!

9. December 2001 is recorded as Shaded Window {Void/Blank}. Void reported on real-time Loan Statements also was reported to Fourth Independent’ in-House’ Credit Report Agency {Named in Testimony} that Supply’s the Three respected Credit Reporting Agency’s.

9A. Both Bank One and Loan Manager repeatedly refused Production of Loan Payment History’s relating to Escrow Shortage in 2001, 2002. Denying Attorney’s up to 12/16/2005.

9B. Denying Bank One History accomplished, “Principal Curtailment” Protection.

9C. Denied Homeside Lending Loan History was accomplished by Lender receiving Loan on 11/01/2001, Dating Loan History to start 11/28/2001 absent of the Escrow Reduction.

9D. Bank One’ sent Account Closed Statement, claiming $812.48 Payments were $920.78.

9E. Lender Posted Escrow Reduction Statement on 11/10/2001.

9F. Lender Investigated Bank One Payment by Requiring Front/Back Canceled Cheek Proof for Investigation Team {2001 was “Paid in Full”} 11/28 relate Date Investigation Concluded?

9G. Requested received Payment History early 2002 began Loan History on 11/28/2001 omitting Escrow Misapplication “Escrow Curtailment.”

9H. Requested received Payment History April 15, 2002, began Loan History on 11/28/2001 omitting Escrow Misapplication “Escrow Curtailment.”

9I. Lender Demanded All Escrow Shortage, be made Current before further Account Review, or Payment History updating.

9J. Twelve Escrow Shortage Payments of $103.34 increased Payment Demand from $813.49 / $812.48 to $915.83, Started on April 2002 and Check did ISF.

10. Bank One accepts Payment then Mails Statement with one Coupon, December Coupon was Paid, Lender Paid $34.14 December PMI, then Breached DEED Commitment Contracted, Applying then Reversing December 2001 Payment to Pay Principal only, before Transferring Loan, called “Principal Curtailment” Homeside Lending received $1,289.85 Escrow with Loan on 11/1/2001. Absent of Loan Commitment Information Requiring Escrow to Pay 2001 County Tax.

10A. Loan Originator “Principal Curtailment” was a Breach of DEED Cover Page Lender Signed, Bold Print requirement of Signed Authorization Clause as it relates to Prepayment specifying instead of Damage Arbitration, all Loan Originator received Funds and earnest Funds returned, separating a Prepayment from Coveted Curtailment to Contractually support the 180 Month Term Commitment DEED Paperwork, $12,291.54 – Outside Costs = $10,286.25 Commitment Damage.

10B. Fourteen Day Damage from 11/28/2001 to 12/12/2001 resulted from intent to Conceal “Principal Curtailment” Damage of $10,286.25 Justifying Interest Due Today.

10C. Loan Manager’s “Escrow Curtailment” Relates from Day Loan Transferred, forced Bankruptcy and Rushed Release of Stay, Damage Justifies Tenfold Accountability counting Interest and Damages to Allow Attorney Theft Suit, Attorney Malpractice Suit {assure Out of Court Settlement’s} and San Antonio Credit Union Damage is simply New Rav4 Settlement.

11. Attempting to reverse “Principal Curtailment,” Lender inadvertently reduced Escrow from $1,289.85 to $652.63 according to Real-time Loan Statements Itemization on 11/10/2001 not on 11/28/2001 as Argued.

11A. Requested Proof of Canceled Check Payment was sent to Lender before 11/28/2001 Pretrial Discovery Question relating to that Investigations’ Timeframe, and it’s results both repeated and ignored, Argument that Escrow reduction was on 11/28/2001 Flounders, Argument it Paid December Flounders, and Stands Disputing Washington Mutual Admittance Statement, but that requires Diligent Securitization of Verbatim the avoided Discovery Question’s intended to simplify everyone’s understanding, Escrow was Reduced.

11B. Washington Mutual’s Loan Damage Acknowledgement Report exacted Bank One Action a “Principal Curtailment” and exacted Homeside Lending Errant Escrow reduction a Misapplication, reducing Escrow is damage, Errant is a wrong, Misapplication is a mistake.

11C. Errant “Principal Curtailment reversal attempt, applied funds to Month Bank One already Credited allowing 11/2001 to be Credited by Both Lenders, because December is absent of Documented Credit, Repeatedly! Applications Location Discovery required Accountability! Reduced Escrow Concealed’ from Loan History’ for 48 Month’s’, by Definition is “Escrow Curtailment.”

11D. County Tax payment of $1,168.26 on 12/10/2001 created Escrow Shortage, amounting to $-515.63 so Loan Manager Posted Escrow Surplus return 12/12/2001 of $336.23 to increase Escrow arrears, amounting to $-851.86.

12. Homeside Lending Loan Manager’s Coveting of the Bank One 2001 “Principal Curtailment” was complicated by the Erroneous Escrow Reduction that became intent to deceive lasting for 48 Months to protected Contractual Damage expenses of $10,286.25 in trade for forcing My Bankruptcy, now 80 Months without Payment Credit.

12A. Homeside Lending’s failed attempt at Damage reversals deduction of Funds from Escrow was admitted by Washington Mutual, Erroneously Misapplied.

12B. Washington Mutual acquired Homeside Lending and the Loan Manager that Testified for Washington Mutual’s Attorney being Sued, Loan Manager was reduced to Arguing’ the ”Bank One N.A. “Principal Curtailment” was “Common Practice” Defendable.

12C. Loan Manager was reduced to Arguing’ the Homeside Lending inadvertent Escrow Reduction was “Common Practice” Defendable, despite ruining Credit Report, Falsifying 1098 Tax Form, Forcing Bankruptcy, Releasing Stay, Arguments were all Moot because Washington Mutual accepted Faults Blame in Written Statement of Bank One “Principal Curtailment” and Homeside Lending Erroneous “Escrow Reduction.”

12D. Loan Manager was reduced to Arguing’ the Escrow Surplus return from Account in Shortage was beyond Testimony Explanation, actuality it was Damage Doubling in Nature.

12E. Bank One did Report 2001 Tax Form 1098! Homeside Lending Reported 2001 Tax Form 1098 claiming Escrow Reduction Funds as Received Funds, following Loan Transfer First Payment was in 2002, Exampling boundless Dismissing mindset forsaking Bankruptcy.

13. December 2001 was Void of Payment on all received Loan Histories “Then and Now” December 2001 is recorded as Shaded Window {Void/Blank}. Void reported on real-time Loan Statements also were reported to fourth Independent in-House Credit Report Agency {Named in Testimony} that Supplies the Three respected Credit Reporting Agency’s.

13A. Demanding on the Recorded Record, Credit for Payments made, Judge at Bankruptcy Conformation Hearing, Ordered Attorney to File “Proof of Claim” Trustee and Lender were Chaired {Judge Required Paperwork Signed or Foreclosure} Sixty Day “Stay” of Conformation Resulted for Canceled Check Dispute resolution.

13B. Lender Chaired Hearing to expect History request and either refused to reply or Attorney Ignored Judge Order requirement of “Proof of Claim” but Time Expired, Attorney said on Phone that he was/is Quitting, Months Later Large Credit Union Check Posted to make Account Current, Auto Loan {Rav4} Arrears Paid in Full before New Attorney Hired.

13C. Later Attorney sent New Letter-headed San Antonio Credit Union Payment Coupon Book that had Additional Principal and Coupons, Stating he Quit and Suggested Attorney.

13D. March 15, 2004 “I am Referring all My Clients Letter” from Attorney, Notating enclosed New Payment Coupon Book for Rav4. New Attorney, RESPA Request Date 2/12/2005 before our First Meeting, Date on RESPA Request related Lender Damage’s for being ignored from backdating Action, if it was ever Posted, Attorney Claims sent by Certified Mail.

13E. Attorney Quit, including sending bulk of Houston Bankruptcy Case-load to Board Certified Attorney I hired, later found out he Charged an additional $1,200.00 to My Bankruptcy Trustee as a Wanton Disregarding parting Gift.

14. Instantly New Attorney sent Homeside Lending Certified mail RESPA “qualified written request” with Guidance Attorney’s Legal Secretary Helped with Rav4 Credit Union New Term Commitment additional Principal, Payment Coupon Book former Attorney Devised.

14A. San Antonio Credit Union Denied Adjusting Terms Principal or sending New Coupon Book that had acquired Three Additional Months.
Attorney’s Legal Secretary was Arbitrating {I Shut-up and Listen Great but Jump Topics with Excitement when Talking/Arguing} Legal Secretary was used to eliminate that problem beforehand.
Coupon Books at Hand and unresolved because Credit Union was Denying its Existence, Loan Payoff Schedule was requested and received,
Two Additional Months were Added to the Attorneys’ Three Months creating Loans Demand of Principal without Accounting Interest that was Larger than Original Loan’s Principal Financed, again resolve was Denied, Current on Rav4 Loan, Fighting Home Loan, anticipating RESPA Response, told Credit Union to expect No more Payments, will properly clean before Repossession Day, awaiting RESPA Response lasted past Rav4 Repossession, Attorney was being indifferent about Rav4.

14B. Trustee reported itemized Deficiency Amendment of $2,526.87 to Rav4 without Accountability Charged by First or Second Attorney before Repossessed and of course again After Repossession about $2,500.00 Amendment Charged. Trustee Clerk Stated all Amendment Charges Paid without Question, again “Common Practice.”

14C. Seven Months later with Loan History Denied {E-Mailed to Federal Regulators & Assumed Regulators that Lender fails to respond to Attorneys RESPA Request, fair assumption’s Review was Forced and Privileged ignored by Lender} Payments were Suspended for Audience with Bankruptcy Court resolution, Attorney and Judge failed to attend release of Stay hearing, Bankruptcy Trustee was Ruling Release of Stays for Judge, Release of Stay was Suspended, Trustee required Attorney attendance 30 days later.

14D. Briefly First Attorney failed Judge “Proof of Claim” Order and overcharged Trustee’s Bankruptcy Fee’s, Raided Rav4 Bankruptcy Account and Raided Rav4 Credit Union Account before Credit Union Raided Rav4 Account.
Second Attorney Protected to Malpractice RESPA, Failed to Attend Hearing, Claimed intent to file Core Adversary, but allowed release of Stay, sent Substituted Attorney to Court failing to Attend Hearing and Misdirected Appellate Attorney with Confusion.

14E. Ignored Attorney RESPA request was used to format “My layperson” RESPA “Qualified Written Request” Posted Certified Mail using California address supplied by Security Exchange Commission relating to Washington Mutual, it was Ignored, request Sent Certified Mail to Bank One, Bankruptcy Trustee and Washington Mutual, was also Posted regular Mail to Homeside Lending, Attorney, former Attorney, DOJ, CC, OTS and Better Business Bureau and more including California Attorney General that Promised Active Silent Case Review, but Lender moved to Nevada, not Seattle, Request was E-Mailed to RESPA, Hud, U.S.A.G. Bush and Blair were at Ranch, Sent to Blair, Tony Snow and more.

15. Better Business Bureau was being Ignored and reported no response from Washington Mutual, I challenged their Existence, then Chief Arbitrator Chair with Membership was removed from Washington Mutual for Three Years, understand Loan History was supplied on release of Stay Day 12/15/2005 Pretrial, itemizing the Curtailments, Washington Mutual Admittance of Fault called for Court Action.

16. Sued Washington Mutual Core Adversary under Seal Judge changed Defendant to Homeside Lending allowing Washington Mutual Attorney to call Homeside Lending Loan Manager to Testify, reversed for Judgment Award Payment, but Board Certified Attorney Certified Mail RESPA “qualified written request” {sent to Homeside Lending ignored by Washington Mutual} became Inadmissible in Court!

16A. Week before Three Day Core Adversary Hearing was Pretrial Hearing, unknown Surrogate Attorney arrived to Defend stating Case Dropped in Lap without review or required Documentation filed, Judge Stayed Pretrial hearing for 30 Days, Threatening to Dismiss unless Attorney attended to Defend, fear of voicing any Objection Resulted.

16B. Judge Allowed ignored RESPA request to received the only damage Judgment $1,000.00 {thanks to the BBB support} substance matters related in RESPA request that Judge took under advisement at Trial pertaining, was absent from Judgment and ignored to date, Also recorded in Testimony Ignored {Blank} Discovery Questions.

16C. Houston Bankruptcy Judge Chaired from Conformation to Award Appeal, famed for Worlds largest Historic Bankruptcy, Schlumberger oilfield Russia claimed 10 day appeal time-frame expired, without exposing Time-frames exactness beforehand, Clerk of Court recorded holding Judgment Two Days before Posting, Mail took Two Days, Attorney called Two Days after Home Mail-Box Delivery stating not willing to pursue further, Six Days received Twelve Days after Judge Signed Award Judgment Appeal was filed, and Denied.

16D. “RULE” Rule of Law Circumvented RULE #2005 exacts Bankruptcy Court Appeal Mandate allocation of Five Day extension for Time to Appeal, Judge sets whatever Appeal Timeframe and RULE extends by Five Days to eliminate Weekend, Holiday Working Day Confusions, Deadline was met for Merit Appeal Trumps rush to Dismiss by Judge and Attorney.

17 New hired Appellate Attorney directed Excusable Neglect Defense, extensive Office hours relating to Line-item Case History reviewed, shared in Office, spent on Phone and E-Mailed, Trial Bankruptcy Attorney Name on Appeal remained, Real Malpractice Balance awaiting Loan resolve. Trial ended 100 Days later Judgment Signed, despite evidence Clerk delay Posting for Postal Delivery {6 Day received, 4 Day from Attorney} Appeal Denied for expired days.

17A. Second Appeal was Judge famed for ENRON, refused Excusable Neglect Appeal, docketed first following Enron Trial conclusion, Houston we have a Problem reasoning or DOJ Broke Problem reasoning!
Fifth Circuit Appeal was asked to Rule over ENRON Judge’s refusal of exploring Excusable Neglect, Imagine that!

17B. Appellate Attorney failed to Post Excusable Neglect Case to Printer for Cert. Petition U.S. Supreme Court, Merits were neglected and contrary then time expired.

18. Closed Loan with $60,000.00 available on Credit Card, “0” owed, Complete Plumbing Electrical and interior Walls replacement ended September 2002, Mid 2002 Priority became Credit Card balance over Loan Payment {History was Denied to Address Escrow Arrear Demand from Loan with Current on-time Payments, Lender Failed Accountability and refused Bank One Loan History, then Credit Report Blocked outside Refinance} $8,000.00 Credit Card % increased from around 5% to 20% to 30% April May 2001, Bankrupted! Day Rate damages, was Substance of Lawsuit, $1,000.00 Award was Appealed, Bankruptcy Attorney received expense Judgment.

19. December 2007’ Washington Mutual returned $7,515.98 of Loan Payments, by Trustee Opening and Reclosing Bankruptcy to Transfer Payment, Mooting Judgment with Fault Admittance, skirting Commitment Damages, keeping Curtailments, Foremost Credit Report Notation of Faults Blame notation on Loans Credit Report equates. Theft reaches Tuition by Foreclosure, as does “Common Practice” Case Law Defense.