Tag Archives: SunTrust

Foreclosure records reviewed in probe of Travis County deputy’s death

Highlights

Foreclosure proceeding is a thread in multiagency investigation that includes over 150 pieces of evidence.

 

Sgt. Craig Hutchinson was killed with his own gun, officials say; how it happened remains under investigation.

On the same morning hundreds of mourners gathered for the funeral of Travis County sheriff’s Sgt. Craig Hutchinson, his home near Round Rock was set to be publicly sold due to a foreclosure, documents obtained by the American-Statesman and KVUE-TV show.

SunTrust Mortgage Inc. filed a notice at the Williamson County clerk’s office on July 11 announcing that the Hutchinson home was eligible for a foreclosure sale. Fourteen days later, Hutchinson was found dead outside the house.

The foreclosure notice is among information investigators are assembling as they try to learn more about the sergeant, who after 32 years was set to retire later this year, and seek to determine his manner of death. Officials from the Travis County medical examiner’s office, which is conducting the autopsy, and Williamson County Justice of the Peace Bill Gravell haven’t issued a ruling.

Read on.

Revolving door: Kathleen Zadareky, FHA’s head of single-family housing, leaving for SunTrust

Kathleen Zadareky, who currently serves as the deputy assistant secretary for single-family housing for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, will soon leave that position and join the private sectorwith SunTrust Mortgage.

In her role at HUD, Zadareky oversaw all aspects of the Federal Housing Administration’s single-family housing operation, including origination, servicing, property disposition and program compliance.

Read on.

Former SunTrust Mortgage VP, his wife, her brothers sent to jail for mortgage fraud

This conspiracy was all in the family

For Mohsin Raza, his wife, Humaira Iqbal, and her brothers Farukh Iqbal and Mohammad Ali Haider, committing mortgage fraud really was a family affair.

And, as it turns out, the family that plays together also goes to jail together.

According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Easter District of Georgia, Raza, his wife, Humaira, and her brothers will each serve time in federal prison for their roles in a scheme that saw the group falsify loan documents and commit mortgage fraud while all four were employed by SunTrust Mortgage in the 2000’s.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office stated that in 2005, Raza was hired to serve as vice president at SunTrust Mortgage, and the company then tasked him with opening a new office location in Annandale, Virginia.

Raza staffed the office with his wife and her brothers. Farukh Iqbal and Mohammad Ali Haider joined the company and served as loan officers.

From the time they joined the company until they left in 2007, the group falsified loan applications for borrowers and purchased fake tax documents to support the false loan applications.

According to court documents, SunTrust Mortgage underwriters approved the loans, which totaling several million dollars, based in large part upon the fake documents in the files, and ultimately borrowers were given loans to buy homes that they could not afford.

Read on.

Former SunTrust employee, Wells Fargo employee sentenced for $2.8 million tax refund fraud scheme

Jeoffrey Jenkins, a former employee of Wells Fargo Bank, and Vaughn Chambers, a former employee of SunTrust Bank, were sentenced for their roles in a two-year long tax refund fraud scheme that generated hundreds of false tax returns and sought more than $2.8 million in fraudulent tax refunds.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Jenkins and Chambers, both bank employees, stole personally identifying information from bank customers and used that information to open bank accounts to receive the fraudulent tax refunds.

Read on.

Language in the contentious clause in the laid-off IT workers’ severance agreement appears simliar to SunTrust filing with the SEC

Good catch and reporting by Computerworld.

What does SunTrust’s continuing cooperation clause say, exactly?

“For a period of two (2) years following the end of my employment with SunTrust, I agree to provide assistance and to make myself reasonably available to SunTrust regarding matters in which I have been involved in the course my employment with SunTrust and/or about which I have knowledge as a result of my employment with SunTrust. It is understood and agreed that such assistance, to the extent possible, will be requested at such times and in such a manner so as to not unreasonably interfere with my subsequent employment. Such assistance may include, but is not limited to, telephone or in-person meetings with SunTrust employees, attorneys and/or accountants, or the provision of truthful testimony by way of deposition, hearing, trial, interview, subpoena response or affidavit. SunTrust will be responsible for any reasonable and necessary expenses incurred by me and approved by SunTrust in connection with such services. I understand that I will not be entitled to any additional consideration or compensation of any kind from SunTrust in exchange for such assistance.”

In 2009, SunTrust filed with regulators a “noncompete, waiver and release agreement” it had made with an executive who was retiring from the bank. The executive was paid $100,000 to sign it. It included a two-year cooperation agreement. (The IT employee agreement borrows some of its language, but differs in other respects. The full agreement with the former executive is here; scroll down for the cooperation clause.)

And here is Suntrust SEC filing of noncompete, waiver, and release agreement with ex-executive and employee William R. Reed, Jr. Notice the verbiage:

Continuing Cooperation. I understand and agree that, in my role at SunTrust, I have been responsible for and involved in numerous matters and projects of a significant and/or confidential nature and that, in some instances, I possess knowledge regarding those and other matters that is unique to me and of value to SunTrust or any subsidiary, and that SunTrust or any subsidiary may have need of my continuing assistance in the future with respect to investigations, audits, litigation or potential litigation related to these matters. I understand that SunTrust’s willingness to provide me with the Consideration is expressly conditioned upon the promises made and obligations assumed by me in this Paragraph 8. I further understand and agree that my fulfillment of these promises and obligations hereafter is a condition precedent to SunTrust’s obligation to provide me with the Consideration set forth herein. I agree, beginning on September 1, 2009 and continuing for a period of twenty-four (24) months immediately thereafter, to provide assistance and to make myself reasonably available to SunTrust and its employees, attorneys and/or accountants with respect to investigations, audits, litigation or potential litigation regarding matters in which I have been involved in the course of my employment with SunTrust or any subsidiary and/or about which I have knowledge as a result of my employment with SunTrust. It is understood and agreed that such assistance, to the extent possible, will be requested at such times and in such a manner so as to not unreasonably interfere with any subsequent employment. Such assistance may consist of, without limitation, telephone or in-person meetings with SunTrust employees, attorneys and/or accountants, or the provision of truthful testimony by way of deposition, hearing, trial or affidavit. SunTrust will be responsible for any reasonable and necessary expenses incurred by me in connection with such assistance. I understand that I will not be entitled to any additional consideration or compensation of any kind from SunTrust in exchange for such assistance.

Busted! After a media backlash, SunTrust axes rule that laid-off workers be ‘on call for two years’ for no pay

US bank SunTrust has pulled a U-turn on a policy requiring laid-off IT workers to provide the company with assistance for no compensation for two years after they have been let go, the company told the Guardian on Friday.

The “continuing cooperation” clause, first reported on by ComputerWorld magazine, would have required laid-off workers to provide the company with information or assistance for up to two years after they were let go. ComputerWorld described the clause as requiring the workers to be “on call for two years” – a characterization that SunTrust called misleading.

When asked about the clause and the employees being offered no compensation for such continued cooperation, Mike McCoy, the company spokesperson, said: “We understand that a clause in our severance agreement was misconstrued versus its use in actual practice and therefore, we have removed it.”

The clause originally read: “For a period of two (2) years following the end of my employment with SunTrust, I agree to provide assistance and to make myself reasonably available to SunTrust regarding matters in which I have been involved in the course of my employment with SunTrust and/or about which I have knowledge as a result of my employment with SunTrust.”

It went on to say that the “assistance” – which could include phone and in-person meetings, testimonies, interviews, trial or affidavits – would “not unreasonably” interfere with the former employees’ new jobs. While SunTrust would cover expenses incurred by the former employees, it would not compensate them for their time.

Read on.

Feds bust Wells Fargo, SunTrust and PNC bank employees in tax refund scam

Federal investigators have indicted several Atlanta bank employees in a tax refund fraud scheme in which they filed more than 2,000 fraudulent tax returns in an effort to pocket more than $2 million in fraudulent tax refunds.

What’s more, the feds say, the fraudulent tax returns were filed using personally identifying information belonging primarily to elderly retirees and children aged 10 and younger.

Read on.

Casey: Elliston couple files lawsuit against Suntrust, Fannie Mae, Nationstar, and Professional Foreclosure Corp. of Virginia in mortgage mess

Home was sold at auction behind their backs

Timeline of events in Heckman v. Suntrust et al.

The timeline below is based on court documents, interviews and allegations in a March lawsuit by Elliston residents Trinity and Jessica Heckman against Suntrust Mortgage, Fannie Mae, Nationstar Mortgage and Professional Foreclosure Corp. of Virginia.

  • June 2006 — Trinity and Jessica Heckman purchase their home in Elliston for $134,000. They get a mortgage with Flick Mortgage Partners and the payment is about $1,100 per month. The loan is later taken over by Suntrust Mortgage.
  • November 2006 — The Heckmans allow Suntrust to begin automatically withdrawing $550 mortgage payments from an account at BB&T every two weeks.
  • February 2007 — A Suntrust rep phones the Heckmans and warns them they’re behind on their mortgage. Jessica tells him about the automatic withdrawal agreement. He says he’ll check into that, and calls back a week later, apologizing for the inconvenience.
  • November 2007 — Suntrust sends the Heckmans a letter indicating the Heckmans are in default. Jessica checks her bank statements again and realizes Suntrust has been automatically withdrawing the payments from her account, but that in September it had redeposited more than $6,000 to it. She offers them that money but Suntrust wants $12,000 to get current.
  • November 2007 — The Heckmans apply for a mortgage modification through Suntrust and agree to raise their monthly payments to $1,400 while that application is being processed. Suntrust says this will forestall the foreclosure.
  • December 2007 — In The Roanoke Times legal ads on Dec. 20 and Dec. 27, the Heckmans’ home is advertised for a foreclosure auction scheduled for Jan. 4, 2008. Jessica calls Suntrust and they tell her not to worry; they’ve canceled the sale.
  • Jan. 4, 2008 — At Suntrust’s direction, Professional Foreclosure Corp. of Virginia auctions the Heckmans’ home, on Jan. 4, 2008. FannieMae pays $117,500 for it. The Heckmans are unaware of the sale.
  • Jan. 22, 2008 — Professional Foreclosure files a deed in Montgomery County Circuit Court naming the owner of the home as Fannie Mae.
  • February 2008 — Jessica Heckman finds an eviction notice on her door that gives the couple two weeks to get out. She calls Suntrust and they tell her it’s a mistake and not to worry.
  • May 2008 — The Heckmans’ mortgage modification is approved, and the modification is recorded in Montgomery County Circuit Court in October 2008. The Heckmans’ payment climbs to $1,444 per month.
  • December 2010 — Suntrust transfers the mortgaging servicing to Nationstar Mortgage of Texas. The Heckmans continue the $1,444 payments.
  • August 2012 — Nationstar sends the Heckmans a $1,000 check. It tells the Heckmans that was for escrow overpayments, and later the company cuts their monthly payment to $1,333.
  • March 2013 — Nationstar has a title search done on the Heckmans’ home. The title search reveals the house was sold at foreclosure in 2008 and that Fannie Mae is now the deed holder. Nationstar does not inform the Heckmans.
  • March 2014 — The Heckmans apply to Nationstar for a refinance to lower their mortgage interest rate and their monthly payment. Nationstar denies it because the Heckmans lack flood insurance. They discover that’s because Nationstar had stopped paying the flood insurance premiums in 2012; and that’s the reason Nationstar sent them a $1,000 check and then reduced their monthly payment.
  • November 2014 — Nationstar raises the Heckmans’ monthly payment to $1,855 to account for a new flood insurance policy. The Heckmans consult a lawyer, and in looking into that, he discovers their house had been sold at a foreclosure auction in 2008. He advises them to cease all payments.
  • January-February 2015 — Nationstar declares the Heckmans are in default on the mortgage.
  • March 2015 — Attorney Jonathan Rogers files a lawsuit alleging fraud and breach of contract against Suntrust, Nationstar, Professional Foreclosure Corp. of Virginia and seeking the return of the house from Fannie Mae.

Read on.

SunTrust foreclosed on your home? You could get money

RICHMOND, Va. –

People in Virginia who lost their homes because SunTrust Bank foreclosed on them could be eligible for payment, under a $550 million SunTrust national mortgage foreclosure settlement.

There are approximately 3,050 qualified borrowers who lost their homes between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2013.

They’re urged to respond and get a packet from Attorney General Mark Herring that includes a one-page claim form. That form must be returned by June 4th.

The AG’s office says SunTrust agreed to a $550 million national settlement with the federal government, Commonwealth of Virginia, 48 other states, and the District of Columbia after investigations alleging numerous violations in its servicing of mortgages and its foreclosure practices.

Read on.

Family: Suntrust Bank is ‘heartless’ for foreclosing on dead woman’s home

ATLANTA —

The family of a murdered woman is calling a local bank “heartless” after the bank filed foreclosure on the dead woman’s home.

“I’ve had so many things ripped away from me,” said Stacey White.

Her sister, Bridgette Holt, was murdered by her ex-husband, who later took his own life in midtown Atlanta in November 2013. Holt was on her way into work when she was killed.

“We offered to pay, they don’t want it, it is too late,” White said about the home.

White said the family believed Bridgette Holt’s Hampton home was paid off upon her death, but to be sure they told the bank to forward all correspondence to a new address.

“Not saying that they didn’t do their job and send out the paperwork, they sent it to the wrong place,” said White, who added it is not clear how the bank got the wrong address.

“The first thing I knew about the house going into foreclosure was the letter from the attorney, not from SunTrust,” White said.

According to paperwork from the bank’s attorney, they have until Nov. 1 to get out of the home.

“Honestly, I just feel that SunTrust is very coldhearted and heartless. They know the situation, we are not asking them to give us anything, we are willing to pay for it,” White said.

Read on.