Jump to content

60 minutes piece on mortgage affidavit abuse may apply to CC debt collection


Recommended Posts

I heard on the radio the 60 minutes piece here is the link and then lets talk about how this affects us.

60 Minutes Video - The next housing shock - CBS.com

It shows that people were signing the same name between 20-50 people. and notaries were doing the same.

Let's discuss for possible fraud upon the court.

How can any one person know the contents of these electronically analyzed and stored accounts? The computer does so much that we should be interviewing the software engineers to check the veracity of their calculations on these accounts etc since they write the software etc. My husband and I have had a nightmare with one old OC we paid off, but over the years their system has put out that we owe them money. How does that work when I have proof? These people don't analyze anything and are ill equipped to do so. Unless they have a degree in finance, math or a hard science they likely don't even understand the math that is used in these calculations anyway.

I have seen some affidavits from the same person all from the same lender (Target/Retailers Natl. Bank) there is no way in hell she could have personal knowledge and information on each account she's signing for. YET she is able to rack so many people up on CCP 98 decs in lieu of testimony etc. Time to even the odds...

I recently read an article about how to win these suits and one attorney from Texas really emphasized the itemization of the account and making sure that the balance calculated for which they are suing makes sense. The reason is that over the life of the revolving account the interest rates fluctuate and usually the terms and conditions become so muddled over time that even the OC may not have the each set of modifications to your revolving account and they most certainly may not have a detailed list of how these balances were calculated. If I may be frank, these corporations use what we call VOODOO MATHEMATICS...you know like the kind Barney Madoff used to bilk BILLIONS from his clients? With that said, another area of attack is to look at how their data is structured and how legacy systems are integrated into current systems. My work in the private sector a few years back pointed to these merges with old and new data as a serious problem because the fields may not always align and then you are putting the data in the wrong place! Lastly, deposing person most knowledgeable is useful and hunting down their qualifications for their job is too. If someone was an art history major then became custodian of records, what qualifies them to understand the records they are maintaining? All of these things must be thoroughly considered when crafting discovery.

Edited by rikkivs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disturbing to say the least. The so called fix the regulator suggested would give the banks even more power to arbitrarily kick people out of their homes. Absolutely insane. The truth is the whole system needs to be restructured. Has it occurred to these jerks that a 30 year mortgage is like a 30 year indentured servitude period? It is a sham! If the loans were structured differently, one could pay off their mortgage within five to ten years not 30! Structurally speaking, our system is a mess and needs to be revamped altogether!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can any one person know the contents of these electronically analyzed and stored accounts? The computer does so much that we should be interviewing the software engineers to check the veracity of their calculations on these accounts etc since they write the software etc. My husband and I have had a nightmare with one old OC we paid off, but over the years their system has put out that we owe them money. How does that work when I have proof? These people don't analyze anything and are ill equipped to do so. Unless they have a degree in finance, math or a hard science they likely don't even understand the math that is used in these calculations anyway.

I have seen some affidavits from the same person all from the same lender (Target/Retailers Natl. Bank) there is no way in hell she could have personal knowledge and information on each account she's signing for. YET she is able to rack so many people up on CCP 98 decs in lieu of testimony etc. Time to even the odds...

I recently read an article about how to win these suits and one attorney from Texas really emphasized the itemization of the account and making sure that the balance calculated for which they are suing makes sense. The reason is that over the life of the revolving account the interest rates fluctuate and usually the terms and conditions become so muddled over time that even the OC may not have the each set of modifications to your revolving account and they most certainly may not have a detailed list of how these balances were calculated. If I may be frank, these corporations use what we call VOODOO MATHEMATICS...you know like the kind Barney Madoff used to bilk BILLIONS from his clients? With that said, another area of attack is to look at how their data is structured and how legacy systems are integrated into current systems. My work in the private sector a few years back pointed to these merges with old and new data as a serious problem because the fields may not always align and then you are putting the data in the wrong place! Lastly, deposing person most knowledgeable is useful and hunting down their qualifications for their job is too. If someone was an art history major then became custodian of records, what qualifies them to understand the records they are maintaining? All of these things must be thoroughly considered when crafting discovery.

+1

What the OC is after me for is likely not enough to get one of their "litigation spe******ts" out here for, but there is enough inconsistency within the single account statement for me to start grilling one on their software and databases. If they provide a witness, I hope for their sake that that person has a degree in computer science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They'd better have an expert in computer science to verify their funky math and funky data transfer protocols. I once worked for a private company where they routinely transferred data from a legacy system and CD's to a larger newer database. One time me and another coworker noticed that some data was missing from the master file and that the recent merge deleted a bunch of records and put other records in the wrong place. What was done about it? Absolutely NOTHING. That company still operates and gets paid for putting out screwy nonsensical data and what is even scarier is that local governments use some of their data and have no clue how wrong it is!

The whole 'computers don't lie' bit is just a joke and shows that while the operating system may work well, it is not perfect and it is operated by imperfect people. So we have systemic errors in the system off the bat; not to mention the protocols for moving the data around!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although robo-signing for mortgages has been in the press big time little is said about, fraudulent affidavits, billing statements in reference to credit card that is just as prevelant especially with banks bundling and selling these accounts to debt collectors even without an assignment of debt and especially debt that are created by identity theft. Where the bank should have deleted these accounts but instead choose to sale them.

If banks can do their dirt on mortgages does anybody think they are not doing the samething with credit cards. Be Blessed! S.A.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They'd better have an expert in computer science to verify their funky math and funky data transfer protocols. I once worked for a private company where they routinely transferred data from a legacy system and CD's to a larger newer database. One time me and another coworker noticed that some data was missing from the master file and that the recent merge deleted a bunch of records and put other records in the wrong place. What was done about it? Absolutely NOTHING. That company still operates and gets paid for putting out screwy nonsensical data and what is even scarier is that local governments use some of their data and have no clue how wrong it is!

The whole 'computers don't lie' bit is just a joke and shows that while the operating system may work well, it is not perfect and it is operated by imperfect people. So we have systemic errors in the system off the bat; not to mention the protocols for moving the data around!

Ah, yes, software with "undocumented" features and operators who don't even understand the documented ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mostly in the parent/child files structure. that would be account data and account notes.

Maybe if we troll the sql forums maybe we will hear the JDB sysadmins complaining about database problems. Let me ask my uncle.

Edited by Seadragon
adding
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't fully understand what this would mean in terms of credit cards?

Robosigning affidavits for litigation over credit card debt is not just limited to JDBs. OCs do it to. Look at it this way, there are far more credit card accounts than there are mortgages. This translates to far more defaults on credit cards than mortgages. You really think that they're going to give each account a diligent review before sending it off for litigation when they don't do it for mortgages? Citibank is probably filing 300,000 - 400,000 credit card suits against Americans every year and Crap1 is far worse. (I'm basing that on the per-capita rate at which Citibank files suits against people in my state.) You also have FIA card services, Target National Bank, GE Money Bank, Amex, Discover, and many others. That is going to translate to millions of suits over revolving debt against Americans every year.

The bottom line is that they don't want to spend the money to hire people who can give each account a good review. They get far too many default judgments to make that anywhere near as profitable. The affiant in my case is much better than some of the others. It looks like she actually exists and signs her actual name. 250 or 300 times a day. It would only take 5-7 people at that wage to meet their demands for affidavits every year. She's also in her early 20s and is probably making $9 or $10 per hour. That hourly wage won't go up for her if she doesn't meet a quota on a regular basis.

Edited by usagi555
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we really need to find out is what and when were the affiants paid bonuses based on the number of affidavits signed. Also We can when we have an affiant check and see if any one else has that affiant and check the signatures. if you find disparity the many people can gain evidence and then all those cases become a winner for each person checking. robosigning in CC cases can be thwarted if you subpoena the affiant. another way is for a lawer as private attorney general file UCL cases with an injunction for affidavits on the debt collection companies.

Also maybe it is time to get state legislators involved. the laws in kentucky are very fair. They allow debt collection but in the courts they are only allowed to collect the amount they actually paid for the account. The fdcpa allows them collect legally without false representation, so maybe we need to let the world know that Banks truly are acting to mislead someone when they say that their asset backed securities are worth this much but then sell underperforming assets for that much.

Is it an unfair practice to demand full payment from one person and then lacking that offer a 96% discount to another entity who then demands full payment + attorneys fees. The state courts must force them to show the prima facie evidence and not allow them gather evidence later.

We cannot allow these practices as it amounts to a pyramid scheme. The investors are deceived, the courts are deceived, and lastly defendants are deceived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we really need to find out is what and when were the affiants paid bonuses based on the number of affidavits signed. Also We can when we have an affiant check and see if any one else has that affiant and check the signatures. if you find disparity the many people can gain evidence and then all those cases become a winner for each person checking. robosigning in CC cases can be thwarted if you subpoena the affiant. another way is for a lawer as private attorney general file UCL cases with an injunction for affidavits on the debt collection companies.

There's a reason why I'm going to go to the courthouse tomorrow with a list of 100 CV#s. I'm going to ask the clerk for copies of the affidavits contained in the associated complaints. No single judge gets enough of the cases in a short enough period of time to really notice the robosigning. However, I can get the affidavits from enough of the cases all in one place to indicate robosigning. It will be one thing to help counter the stonewalling that I expect from the OC on the matter. It should, at the very least, be enough to prevent any MSJ from going through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a reason why I'm going to go to the courthouse tomorrow with a list of 100 CV#s. I'm going to ask the clerk for copies of the affidavits contained in the associated complaints. No single judge gets enough of the cases in a short enough period of time to really notice the robosigning. However, I can get the affidavits from enough of the cases all in one place to indicate robosigning. It will be one thing to help counter the stonewalling that I expect from the OC on the matter. It should, at the very least, be enough to prevent any MSJ from going through.

In order to prove robosigning, the dates on the affidavits would not only need to be signed by the same person, they should be signed on the same date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also if one is right handed and the other is left handed that would be proof. also I would get the AG involved as concrete evidence would make them have to act not as a class action but for fraud.

Also it would be very sporting to notify the defendants in those cases that your investigation reveiled the affiant abuse and that they should contact an attorney or come here for discussion of procedures to vacate the judgments.

also filing an injunction with the court. I would appear ex-parte to the presiding judge and show how officers of the court(plaintiff's attorneys) may have possibly committed fraud upon the court. Make sure he knows and then get the media involved fox news likes these kinds of stories.

Edited by Seadragon
adding one more point
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order to prove robosigning, the dates on the affidavits would not only need to be signed by the same person, they should be signed on the same date.

The dates would, at the very least, need to be close, but there is more to it than that. There is a statistical argument to be made based on the number of affiants, tied in with the fact that their affidavits are sent all over the country. I also have other evidence on the matter and I plan on hitting them on this with rogs, admissions and document requests. I know what documents to ask for. The more I discover, the more that the numbers that I have found add up, unlike the numbers on the account statement they included in the complaint.

A simple version of the statistical argument is as follows:

Suppose there are 6 affiants. If I pull 100 affidavits without any consideration for which affiants' signatures are on the affidavits. What is the probability that the set of affidavits would not contain a single affidavit from any one of the affiants? About 0.000000072. In other words, not enough of a chance to even consider it. So if I find only 5 affiants, chances are that I didn't miss any.

In order to make that kind of argument stick, I need to show that there is nothing special about my state with regards to who sends who's affidavits where. The subsidiary that the affiant was employed by has a branch not more than 5 or 6 miles from where I am sitting, yet the affidavit was signed over 1,000 miles away.

[probability is "back of the envelope"]

Edited by usagi555
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks so much for the clarification! I will be following you and wish you the best of luck!

Just keep in mind, understanding the relation is not the same as getting the courts to buy it. I'm going to dig up everything that I can. If I am successful, I'll share it with the world. If I'm not, I'll share that too. A failure can be informative to others too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.