Daily Archives: May 20, 2014


More on the Ocwen class action lawsuit in Pennsylvania over servicing practices

More on the Ocwen class action lawsuit in Pennsylvania over servicing practices

Ocwen has been sued in Pennsylvania by a group of homeowners whose mortgage loans were serviced by Ocwen. The homeowners, including lead plaintiff Jill Dempsey, say that they paid off their mortgages in full, per a payoff quote from Ocwen, only to have Ocwen take far longer than the legally prescribed amount of time to file the loan satisfaction documents with the county clerk.

In Dempsey’s case, she paid off a home equity line of credit on her house so she could refinance her first mortgage. Pennsylvania law requires the servicer to file a “satisfaction piece” with the county within 60 days of the receipt of payment from the borrower. The satisfaction piece denotes that the loan has been paid off and the lien has been released.

Instead of filing the satisfaction piece with the Chester County Recorder’s Office within 60 days, as required by Pennsylvania’s Mortgage Satisfaction Act, Dempsey’s lawsuit alleges that Ocwen filed the satisfaction piece “approximately 253 days after plaintiff paid her loan in full,” which was 252 days after Dempsey’s first written request for Ocwen to send the satisfaction piece to the county.

Dempsey would subsequently send two other written requests to Ocwen without a response from the company. Ocwen “belatedly filed a satisfaction piece with the Chester County Recorder’s Office on March 21, 2014” which was approximately 198 days after Dempsey’s third written request.

“It’s not just an administrative matter,” says Eric Lechtzin, who is representing Dempsey and the rest of plaintiffs. “She was trying to refinance her home loan but was unable to refinance because records showed there was a second lien on the property. It exposed her to interest rate risk and a variety of things.”

According to the lawsuit, Ocwen reported Dempsey’s mortgage as “open” to credit agencies during the 60-day period following its receipt of her request for Ocwen to send the satisfaction piece to the county.

Dempsey’s suit claims she and the other plaintiffs suffered “economic harm and actual damages including, but not limited to, being unable to refinance the first lien mortgage on her home, being required to pay a greater amount of interest on her existing lien mortgage than she would have been required to pay had she been able to refinance this loan in July 2013, and the costs of bringing this instant lawsuit.”

The class action suit, which can read in full here, also claims that Ocwen violated the federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act by not filing the satisfaction piece with the county within 60 days of its receipt of a “qualified written request” to file the satisfaction piece from the borrower.


North Carolina plans to cut unemployment benefits to a maximum of just 14 weeks, the fewest in the nation

North Carolina plans to cut unemployment benefits to a maximum of just 14 weeks, the fewest in the nation

14 weeks or 3 months and 2 weeks??? Unbelievable.. People pay into unemployment insurance. The question is how much of unemployment insurance will be taking out of North Carolina residents’s paychecks if the unemployment benefits is reduced.

North Carolina is at it again. The state plans to cut unemployment benefits to a maximum of just 14 weeks, the fewest in the nation.

The reduction applies to anyone who files a jobless claim after July 6. They’ll only be able to get unemployment benefits for 14 weeks instead of 19 under the previous law.

No other state offers fewer than 18 weeks of benefits, and most provide 26 weeks.

North Carolina first cut benefits in July 2013 the under the leadership of a new Republican governor and a conservative-dominated legislature. Lawmakers made the move to reduce a growing debt to the federal government and to offer relief to businesses whose taxes rose sharply to fund the unemployment-insurance program. Conservatives also argued that excessively generous benefits allowed people to put off taking another job.



2nd Class Cert. Bid Denied In Row Over JPMorgan Refi Offer

2nd Class Cert. Bid Denied In Row Over JPMorgan Refi Offer

Law360, Los Angeles (May 19, 2014, 10:21 PM ET) — A California federal judge on Monday refused to reconsider a motion to certify the class in a suit that alleges JPMorgan Chase & Co. falsely represented a mortgage refinancing offer that hurt borrowers’ credit scores.

U.S. District Judge George H. King found that named plaintiff Maclovia Duarte’s contention — that the court didn’t properly consider the evidence she presented to show she and other class members suffered actual damages as a result of JPMorgan’s credit checks — didn’t meet her burden under Rule 23 of the…


AIG Using ‘Shopworn’ Ploys To Escape Probe: NY Regulator

AIG Using ‘Shopworn’ Ploys To Escape Probe: NY Regulator

Law360, New York (May 19, 2014, 6:59 PM ET) — New York’s insurance regulator on Friday attacked American International Group Inc.’s lawsuit challenging the watchdog’s investigation into unlicensed activities by former AIG units, claiming that it was a “textbook example” of a suit where a federal court should not step in.

New York Department of Financial Services Superintendent Ben Lawsky told the federal court that the DFS’ investigation of AIG was still ongoing and that the department is unsure of what charges, if any, it will level against the insurer. The potential charges against AIG could…


Ryan & Maniskas, LLP Announces Investigation of Ocwen Financial Corp.

Ryan & Maniskas, LLP Announces Investigation of Ocwen Financial Corp.

WAYNE, Pa., May 19, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — Ryan & Maniskas, LLP has commenced an investigation into potential securities law violations by certain officers of Ocwen Financial Corp. (“Ocwen” or the “Company”) (NYSE: OCN).

Ocwen shareholders should contact Richard A. Maniskas, Esquire at 877-316-3218 or at rmaniskas@rmclasslaw.com to learn more about this investigation or visit: http://www.rmclasslaw.com/cases/ocn.

Ocwen, through its subsidiaries, is engaged in the servicing and origination of mortgage loans in the United States and internationally. The Company’s Servicing segment provides residential and commercial mortgage loan servicing, special servicing, and asset management services to owners of mortgage loans and foreclosed real estate.

Our investigation concerns Ocwen’s mortgage servicing process practices. In December 2013, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) and authorities in 49 states sued Ocwen, accusing it of years of “significant and systemic misconduct that occurred at every stage of the mortgage servicing process.” Ocwen agreed to settle these charges and is required to provide $2 billion in loan modification relief to homeowners and $125 million to consumers who were improperly foreclosed upon. The CFPB action makes clear that, more than three years after agreeing to adhere to mortgage servicing industry standards, the Company has made no significant improvements to its practices. Ocwen’s shares have fallen nearly 30% this year.


Supreme Court refused Deutsche Bank permission to appeal in Libor battle

Supreme Court refused Deutsche Bank permission to appeal in Libor battle

Indian property company Unitech will pursue Libor-based claims against Deutsche Bank after the Supreme Court refused the bank permission to appeal (PTA) a claim amendment accepted by the Court of Appeal.

Last November the CoA said Unitech, which has instructed Stephenson Harwood partner Richard Gwynne, could ammend its counterclaim against the bank to include Libor manipulation arguments (8 November 2013). The bank had sought to quash the ruling at the Supreme Court, instructing Allen & Overy partner Andrew Denny, to take the challenge forward.

Lords Neuberger, Clarke and Sumption have rejected the PTA bid, stating: “It is not normally appropriate for the Supreme Court to entertain appeals on an issue which the Court of Appeal has simply held to be arguable and this is not an exception”

The attempt marks the latest in a complex series of battles waged between the bank and Unitech. The battle will now be set for a High Court outing following the rejection from the final court.

The bank has been pursuing Unitech, India’s second largest real estate company, over a $150m loan it made to the company. In a separate action the bank is attempting to recover $11m as part of an interest rate swap contract. In 2012 Unitech issued a counterclaim alleging that the bank sold it an unsuitable product based on Libor rates. It claims the loan swap and contracts were invalid because of the link to manipulated Libor rates (8 November 2013).


Credit Suisse : New York banking chief says Credit Suisse won’t lose New York license

Credit Suisse : New York banking chief says Credit Suisse won’t lose New York license

New York Superintendent of Financial Services Benjamin Lawsky said on Monday he had decided not to initiate proceedings to revoke Credit Suisse’s New York license over its role in helping Americans evade taxes.

Lawsky said in a statement after Credit Suisse agreed to plead guilty to U.S. criminal charges that the Swiss bank would pay a $715 million penalty as part of an agreement with his agency and be required to install an independent monitor as part of the settlement.

He said an independent monitor would further review the involvement of Credit Suisse employees in the misconduct. Lawsky said Credit Suisse must fire certain individuals who were previously indicted but were still being paid by the bank.