---
Thanks js.
---
..NO ASSIGNMENTS OF MORTGAGE, NO ALLONGES OR ANY EVIDENCE OF TRANSFERRING
OWNERSHIP OF LOANS FROM WAMU TO CHASE
snip
UPDATE: Friends, I just received this note from our friend and
mortgage fraud expert Vermont Trotter regarding this story:
“The trusts are all empty. The master loan doc contractually allows for the
hypothecation and re-hypothecation of the assets. Hypothecation is a legal term
meaning to pledge, but not deliver an asset. To hypothecate means there is no
true sale of the asset. To re-hypothecate means it can be pledged multiple times
and, again, never have a true sale. No one owns anything.” – V. Trotter
from Foreclosuredefensenationwide:
August 21, 2012
Confirming, under oath and in print what we already suspected: there is no
schedule of mortgage loans evidencing what JPM allegedly “purchased” from the
FDIC in connection with the failure of WaMu. This is from the sworn deposition
testimony of Lawrence Nardi, the operations unit manager and a mortgage officer
for JPM, who was previously with WaMu and was picked up by JPM after WaMu’s
failure. The 330 page deposition was taken by counsel for the homeowner on May
9, 2012 in the matter of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as successor in interest to
Washington Mutual Bank v. Waisome, Florida 5th Judicial Circuit Case No.
2009-CA-005717.
Here is the question and the answer:
Q: (page 57, beginning at line 19): Okay. The — are you aware of any type
of schedule of loans that would have been created to represent the — either the
loans that were asset loans or the loans that were serviced by WAMU? Are you —
was the — do you know if there is a schedule or database of loans like
that?
A: (page 58, beginning at line 1): I know that there was a schedule
contemplated in certain documents related to the purchase. That schedule has
never materialized in any form. We’ve looked for it in countless other cases.
We’ve never been able to produce it in any previous cases. It would certainly be
a wonderful thing to have, but it’s — as far as I know, it doesn’t exist,
although it was — it was contemplated in the documents.
As we all know, JPM has also stated, in a Federal Court filing, that it is
NOT the “successor in interest to WaMu.” However, the deposition testimony gets
even better as the day went on:
No comments:
Post a Comment