Tag Archives: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency

San Francisco resolution includes calling on OCC to explore revoking Wells Fargo’s national banking charter

Oh oh for Wells Fargo…

The resolution directs the city to:
·Create an inventory of all financial dealings with Wells and the feasibility of ending them;
·Directs the City Attorney to investigate if other banks are engaged in similar account practices;
·Consider establishing a Responsible Banking Ordinance to better connect the city’s banking relationships to banks engaged in ethical corporate behavior;
·Calls for a criminal investigation of former CEO John Stumpf; and
·Calls on the OCC (Wells Fargo’s primary bank regulator) to explore whether conditions exist such that the OCC should revoke Wells Fargo’s national banking charter.

Sen. Sanders to OCC and CFPB: Have Any Criminal Inquiries in Wells Fargo Case Been Filed?

Here is Sanders’ letter to the heads of CFPB and OCC. To read the letter, click here

U.S. bank regulator toughens commercial real estate oversight

Credit risks have risen in U.S. commercial real estate as lenders compete more fiercely in a low rate environment, a federal banking regulator said on Monday, adding that it was stepping up its scrutiny of the sector.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) said in its semiannual risk report that while the financial performance of lenders improved in 2015 compared to a year earlier, credit risks were higher across the industry.

The U.S. Federal Reserve has kept interest rates low for more than seven years to help the U.S. economy recover from the 2008 financial crisis. But that policy is also weighing on bank profits and pushing lenders to compete more fiercely for worthy borrowers. That competitive pressure is increasing risk, the OCC said.

“It’s at this stage of the cycle that we also see strong loan growth combined with easing underwriting to result in increased credit risk,” Comptroller of the Currency Thomas Curry said in prepared remarks.

The agency has escalated its oversight of commercial real estate risk from ordinary monitoring to “additional emphasis.” It also flagged risks in commercial and industrial loans, and said concerns remain about indirect auto lending and leveraged lending, which are both issues the OCC has flagged in the past.

Read on.

Congressional watchdog expands probe of lax Wall Street oversight

A U.S. congressional watchdog said on Tuesday it has formally added three agencies to its investigation into whether government regulators are too soft on the banks they are meant to police.

In March, Reuters exclusively reported that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) was preparing a probe of the U.S. Federal Reserve and other to-be-determined regulators, in response to a request by Democratic U.S. Representatives Maxine Waters and Al Green for it to look into “regulatory capture.”

The review, requested last October, is the first by an outside agency into the perception that financial regulators are “captured” by and too deferential toward the bankers they supervise, so that Wall Street benefits at the public’s expense.

Lawrance Evans, director of the GAO’s financial markets and community investment division, said in an email on Tuesday that the probe would include the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA). The GAO will also look back at work by the Office of Thrift Supervision, which merged with the OCC in 2011, and regulates savings and loan institutions.

Read on.

OCC terminates Wells Fargo’s mortgage servicing restrictions

And $70 million is a drop in the bucket for Wells Fargo..

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency on Wednesday finally lifted its mortgage servicing restrictions on Wells Fargo now that the bank is in compliance with the requirements of the Independent Foreclosure Review.

But Wells Fargo didn’t come out of this unscathed and must pay a $70 million civil money penalty for previous violations of the order, according to the OCC.

“We are pleased that the OCC has validated the effectiveness of the significant changes we have made to our mortgage servicing operations and confirmed our release from the Consent Order.  Our team worked very hard to complete the requirements of the original Consent Order and the amendments, and continues to provide the best possible service to our customers,” Tom Goyda, a spokesperson for Wells Fargo said.

While the OCC said it originally issued orders in April 2011 and amended the orders in February 2013, it amended the orders again in June 2015.

The OCC revised Wells Fargo’s restrictions, along with JPMorgan Chase’s and four other banks that also had restrictions placed on them due to their failure to comply with requirements of the Independent Foreclosure Review.

At the time, Wells Fargo and HSBC were dealt the hardest blow by the OCC and were prohibited from:

  • Acquiring of mortgage servicing rights until the consent order is terminated
  • New contracts to perform mortgage servicing prohibited until the consent order is terminated
  • New offshoring of mortgage servicing activity until the consent order is terminated

Click this chart for a more in-depth outline of the restrictions placed on each bank.


Read on.

HSBC: The connection between money-laundering and mortgages

More on chemist Dean Moore’s fight against HSBC and DOJ on the deferred prosecution agreement of HSBC money laundering probe to be released to the public:

The money-laundering/mortgage connection

Moore’s logic for wanting to see the report is explained here:

Moore contends that the report, which says that the bank has operational problems in its mortgage operations, could be relevant to his claim with the CFPB.

“It is my contention that the report would (or will) validate my claims that HSBC is in direct violation of multiple sections of multiple Consent Decrees,” he wrote in a letter to Gleeson.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency agrees with Moore—HSBC has violated at least one consent decree, specifically one from 2011 concerning death-pledges.  Here is a quote from a document styled as “Consent Order Amending The 2011 Consent Order and 2013 Amendment To The 2011 Consent Order”:

(3) The OCC has determined the Bank has failed to comply with forty-five (45) actionable items under Articles III, IV, V, VI, VIII, and IX of the Consent Order, including the Bank’s obligations under the Consent Order with respect to the sub-servicing performed by the third-party servicer on its behalf.

(4) The OCC has determined the Bank is in continuing noncompliance with and in violation of the Consent Order, and continues to engage in unsafe and unsound practices.

So at least two government agencies—the DOJ and the OCC—have determined that HSBC is in violation of multiple legal agreements between the bank and the government, yet HSBC continues to be allowed to operate and no one is being prosecuted or put in jail.  Moore is definitely onto something and apparently the same judge that approved the DPA regarding drug money-laundering is now inclined to honor Moore’s request to have the 2015 compliance report be made public.

It’s not at all surprising, of course, that a bank that engages in money-laundering also tries to scam homeowners looking for help on making their mortgage payments.  But that’s not the only connection between money-laundering and mortgages, in my view.  So-called “securitization” with the use of the MERS system to make ownership of promissory notes completely opaque, is the ultimate form of seemingly legal money-laundering.  Indeed, as we have written here before at LRM, MERS is the “invisibility cloak of the banksters”:

Yes, the banks don’t want you to see what they’re doing–or not doing, as the case may be.  Specifically, they don’t want you to see that they have separated your note from your deed of trust/mortgage.  In my opinion (and I am not an attorney) there are two main, unstated reasons for the existence of MERS: 1) to separate the security document from the note and 2) to purport to rejoin them as if they’d never been separated at the time of foreclosure.

The purpose of point 1 above (the purpose of point 2 is self-explanatory): for banks/financiers to be able to pledge or “sell” the same note multiple times (see this, this, and this)–i.e.,rehypothecate–without having to indicate that the note has been sold multiple times in the county land records (via assignments in said records that used to be required for each sale of the note).

In any event, HSBC is but the tip of the iceberg, and hopefully Moore’s request for the release of the HSBC compliance report will be granted and the rest of the iceberg will be revealed, or at least begin to be revealed.

And here is Moore letter to the judge including a copy of Notice of Sale of his mortgage loan sold from HSBC where he was acquiring a loss mitigation application to Caliber Home Loans on November 2 2015. Letter of the Notice of Sale is dated November 12, 2015, yet Moore received a letter from HSBC of acknowledgement of loss mitigation application dated November 5, 2015. Click here.

On a side note: here is information of Moore’s loan in the MERS registry:

2 records matched your search:

MIN:1001761-0603140944-5 Note Date:03/27/2006 MIN Status:Active
Servicer: Caliber Home Loans, Inc Phone:(405) 608-2530
Oklahoma City, OK
If you are a borrower on this loan, you can click here to enter additional information and display the Investor name.
MIN:1000137-0006558299-9 Note Date:10/30/2001 MIN Status:Inactive
Servicer: JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association (fka Chase) Phone:(800) 848-9136
Monroe, LA
If you are a borrower on this loan, you can click here to enter additional information and display the Investor name.
For more information about Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) please go to www.mersinc.org

OCC lifts mortgage servicing restrictions on U.S. Bank, Santander

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency announced Tuesday that it is terminating mortgage servicing-related consent orders against U.S. Bank National Association and Santander Bank, lifting the mortgage servicing restrictions placed on both banks last year due to failure to comply with requirements of the Independent Foreclosure Review.

The banks were also fined a total of $13.4 million for failing to correct “deficiencies” related to each bank’s compliance with 2011’s Independent Foreclosure Review in a “timely fashion.”

The OCC said Tuesday that it is assessing a $10 million civil money penalty against U.S. Bank for violations of the Independent Foreclosure Review that took place from Oct. 1, 2014 through Aug. 30, 2015.

Santander was also assessed a $3.4 million civil money penalty for violated the 2011 consent order from Oct. 1, 2014 through Dec. 31, 2015.

The banks will pay the assessed penalties to the U.S. Treasury.

Read on.