Daily Archives: March 17, 2013


Culhane Decision provides Homeowners the ability to Challenge the Invalid Assignment and Wrongful Foreclosure of their homes

Culhane Decision provides Homeowners the ability to Challenge the Invalid Assignment and Wrongful Foreclosure of their homes

On February 15th, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that a borrower has standing to challenge an assignment of their mortgage to a foreclosing bank.  Culhane vs. Aurora Loan Services of Nebraska, C.A.No. 11-11098-WGY

In early January Attorney Babcock argued the Culhane appeal in front of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in front of a panel of three judges that included; Chief Judge, the Hon. Sandra L. Lynch, retired Supreme Court Justice, the Hon. David Souter, and Rhode Island Senior Circuit Judge, the Hon. Bruce M. Selya.

One argument Babcock made centered on the contention that, “The Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, and our nation’s Bill of Rights, provide protection for citizens against the removal of their property without notice or an opportunity to be heard. Thus both the Massachusetts and Federal Constitutions provide citizens the ability and the right to challenge the removal of their property and protect their right of redemption.”

“The Culhane holding has sent MERS a massive blow” said Attorney Babcock.  “MERS put its own spin on the decision but that was all the statement was, spin and nothing more.”

Attorney Babcock was contacted and interviewed by the National Law Journal and appeared WPRO with Buddy Cianci citing the holding as “a gigantic step that gives plaintiffs’ attorneys something to sink their teeth into.”


Yin Wong, Disabled San Francisco Resident, Says She Was Foreclosed On But Never Missed A Payment

Yin Wong, Disabled San Francisco Resident, Says She Was Foreclosed On But Never Missed A Payment

SAN FRANCISCO — What if your home was foreclosed on even if you never missed a payment?

That’s what the two dozen supporters of San Francisco resident Yin Wong, who gathered in front of the Market Street offices of PNG Financial Services Group on Friday afternoon, argue happened to the 64-year-old former lab technician after the banking giant attempted to evict her from her home of ten years.


Wearing Occupy SF buttons and chanting “PNC you know you’re wrong, don’t evict Yin Wong,” the group, organized by a coalition of anti-foreclosure activists from the Alliance of Californians For Community Empowerment (ACCE), handed out flyers listing the home phone number of PNC CEO James Roar and the cell phone number of PNC President William Demchak urging people call and pressure the company to let Wong and her daughter stay in their home.

After spending a few minutes demonstrating on Market Street’s busy sidewalk, the group pushed past a pair of security guards into the building’s recessed plaza, but were stopped at the locked front door.

“We never paid late,” Wong insisted to the assembled media. “We always paid on time.”

For a decade, Yin Wong and her adult daughter had been living in a house in the city’s Bayview district with a home loan held by National City Mortgage. During the 2008 financial meltdown, PNC, the sixth largest bank in the United States, purchased National City Mortgage and acquired Wong’s home loan in the process.

In November of the following year, Wong received notice from the bank that it was no longer accepting her electronic payments. Partially due to her limited English skills, she was unable to determine how to reconfigure her payments so they would be accepted. A few days later, she received notice that the bank had begun foreclosure proceedings.

The next summer, PNC, which had reportedly increased Wong’s monthly mortgage payment from $1,000 to $1,800, attempted to sell the home at auction, but Wong blocked the action by personally going to the sale and urging potential purchasers not to buy.

The company has since offered to sell Wong her house back. However, she can’t afford the price of $222,000, which is more than the $160,000 she still owed on the mortgage.

Dallas Fed Richard Fisher Says Too-Big-To-Fail Banks Need To Be Broken Up

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md., March 16 (Reuters) – The largest U.S. banks are “practitioners of crony capitalism,” need to be broken up to ensure they are no longer considered too big to fail, and continue to threaten financial stability, a top Federal Reserve official said on Saturday.

Richard Fisher, president of the Dallas Fed, has been a critic of Wall Street’s disproportionate influence since the financial crisis. But he was now taking his message to an unusual audience for a central banker: a high-profile Republican political action committee.

Fisher said the existence of banks that are seen as likely to receive government bailouts if they fail gives them an unfair advantage, hurting economic competitiveness.

“These institutions operate under a privileged status that exacts an unfair tax upon the American people,” he said on the last day of the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).

“They represent not only a threat to financial stability but to fair and open competition  (and) are the practitioners of crony capitalism and not the agents of democratic capitalism that makes our country great,” said Fisher, who has also been a vocal opponent of the Fed’s unconventional monetary stimulus policies.

Read on.

Is This The Email That Ended The Career Of JPM’s Chief Risk Officer?

H/T Zerohedge:

On October 2, 2012, news hit that Barry Zubrow, JPM’s Chief Risk Officer from November 2007 to January 2012 (in other words, key supervisor of the risk onboarded by the CIO, aka JPM’s prop trading desk, for the biggest part of its existence), and then briefly head of corporate and regulatory affairs, would retire from JPMorgan. As Bloomberg reported then, “Now is the right time in my life” to retire, Zubrow, 59, wrote to colleagues in a note today. “We have learned from the mistakes of our recent trading losses.”

We wonder, if the time was “right” for Zubrow’s retirement because the firm realized that the Senate was in possession of the following email sent from Zubrow on April 12, a day before the first fateful Q1 earnings preview conference call in which Jamie Dimon, responding to media reports of Iksil’s blow up, said the whole situation was a “tempest in a teapot”, in which the Chief Risk Officer essentially told the firm’s executives: Braunstein and Dimon, to lie to the public and shareholders (in light of the full Senate report which reveals that all three statements “suggested” by Mr. Zubrow were lies)?

If that is the case, we wonder: why is Mr. Zubrow not being prosecuted?