PUNITIVE DAMAGES UPHELD AGAINST US BANK IN MONTANA CASE

Jeff Barnes, who has previously argued in front of the Montana Supreme Court for homeowners in fraudulent foreclosure cases, explains why banks try to avoid jury trials at all cost.




http://foreclosuredefensenationwide.com/?p=547

Judge upholds $5 Million Punitive Against US BANK, calling behavior 'Abusive"

Judge John Brown of Gallatin County Montana, handed down a stiff order to US BANK this week.
Calling their behavior 'abusive and 'reprehensible in an 22 page brief, the Judge denied US Bank's motion to reduce the punitive damage award to Plaintiff Mary Mcculley. Mcculley filed the lawsuit in 2009, after she was forced to sell her home for $200K less than the appraised value one week prior to foreclosure.  During the litigation, Mcculley claimed US Bank destroyed documents, in addition to the bait and switch she claimed happened at closing.

Although Mcculley applied for a 30-year standard residential loan, she ended up with an 18 month commercial construction loan. Mcculley also accused the lawyers for Defendants of lying to the court and misrepresenting key documents. The jury agreed with her, awarding her $1 million compensatory and $ 5 million in punitive damages after a week long trial in February. US Bank filed motions to reduce the amount of damages, but Montana law states that punitive damages, which are to serve as a deterrent, can be 3% of a company's net worth, or $10 million- which ever is less. Judge Brown explains his decision to uphold the jury's decision:

"This egregious behavior by the Bank constitutes intentional deceit , and supports the conclusion that that the Bank's conduct was reprehensible." Judge brown further cited Seltzer v Morton 2007 MT 62 \stating:

     "Abusive conduct toward and individual which causes the type of harm at issue here
       merits considerable punishment, regardless of the setting in which it takes place.
       However, the fact that [ the Bank] utilized the judicial system as a tool to
      accomplish intimidation and oppression makes this behavior uniquely egregious."

 Mcculley was pro-se until six months before the trial, when Andy Patten and
Patricia Peterman of PPBG, Billings Montana stepped up to the plate. You can read the brief in it's entirety here:
see Judge Brown's order and denial here:http://stopforeclosurefraud.com/2014/04/14/judge-upholds-5-million-punitive-against-us-bank-for-fraud/

http://stopforeclosurefraud.com/2014/04/14/judge-upholds-5-million-punitive-against-us-bank-for-fraud/ Mcculley v American Land Title Company and US BANK MT 2013 89 ( supreme court decision )

CA Judge upholds Plaintiff's case for Fraud against Deutsche Bank

Lynn DiRienzo, a successful business owner, purchased a home in 2005 for $1.6 Million, putting down the usual 20% cash. Deutsche Bank, the trustee of the IndyMac Mortgage Loan Trsut 2006-AR1, entered into an agreement with IndyBank as the servicer. OneWest Bank acquired the assets of IndyMac after the FDIC had taken it into receivership, but continued to service the loan as an 'IndyMac' entity.  Two years later, she is notified that her adjustable rate mortgage had reached it's balance cap limit and her payments would double to $9,000.00 a month. She was current with her payments at the time.

The rest of the story we have heard a thousand times; the banks promise to modify it, the banks tell you to miss a few payments in order to qualify. The banks instruct her that in order to qualify for a HAMP loan, she has to be seriously delinquent. What the bank failed to tell her, was that a HAMP modification was impossible, as the principal was over $750,000.
She continued to rely on the banksters, and her credit score drops when she has stopped making payments as instructed. The loan officers now inform her she can't get a loan modification because of her credit score. In 2011, Deutsche initiated foreclosure proceedings.

In this all too familiar scenario, the good news is she fought back, and filed a lawsuit pro-per for four varieties of fraud ( intentional misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, false promise and concealment).  The trial court found she would likely prevail on at least two of her causes of action,(misrepresentation and concealment) and granted a preliminary injunction preventing Deutsche from foreclosing on her home,  pending the outcome of the trial.

Judge Gregory Lewis upheld the lower courts decision on appeal in case Super. Ct. No. 30-2012-00566906

Cheers for Lynn,- and the law offices of Timothy Lea Joens, and Kirk & Tobery
See the latest opinion here:

http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/nonpub/G047653.PDF

BankBusters use Social Media to target Banksters

      A new group has emerged on Social Media known as the BankBusters. A recent interview with the founders revealed they plan to raise awareness of the  foreclosure and criminal injustice perpetrated on millions of Americans.        After Wells Fargo admitted to employing dozens of people to track their online reputation, the BankBusters decided to give them something to track. Although the group isn's specifying which banks, and the details of their campaign, it appears that all of the major banks who contributed to the failure of the economy, and the foreclosures of over five million homes to date, will be targeted.   According to one of the founding members:

             L. "It's time we stood together to make a statement that we are mad as hell, and
                   we are not going to take it anymore. They created more American refugees
                   in our own Country than most wars do overseas.
                   It's past the time to fight back, and Social Media is our battleground."

What can the banks do to counter this attack? Nothing, according to the rules of the game.
       
             L  " All is fair in love and war, and this is war. This is not about violence, this is about
                    peace of mind, the kind you get from sitting on your own front porch. The      
                    Banksters have robbed us of the American Dream, our pursuit of happiness
                    has gone the way of picket fences. Enough is enough.

Time will tell what the impact of the 'awareness' campaign as they call it, but given the daily headlines regarding the banks, I for one,  would not choose to be a banker in todays market.

The Divide: American Injustice in the Age of the Wealth Gap

There is a new book out today by Matt Taibbi called :

 

The Divide: American Injustice in the Age of the Wealth Gap

Everyday we hear about the '1%' versus the '99%',  thanks to the Occupy movement, but here Matt Taibbi refers to it as the 'Gap'. Be it called a chasm, gap, grand canyon, or a rift- the topic here is the uncrossable barrier between us and them.  The rich don't get punished -the poor do. The banks are untouchable, too big to jail, while someone lies on a loan application and goes to prison.  According to Matt, he taught himself about the financial industry, and has become somewhat of a legend to the thousands of foreclosure warriors in social media. His prior book, Griftopia, about bankers and politicians, was on the New York Times Bestseller list.  In his latest book, The Divide :

          "Matt Taibbi takes readers on a galvanizing journey through both sides of our new system of justice—the fun-house-mirror worlds of the untouchably wealthy and the criminalized poor. He uncovers the startling looting that preceded the financial collapse; a wild conspiracy of billionaire hedge fund managers to destroy a company through dirty tricks; and the story of a whistleblower who gets in the way of the largest banks in America, only to find herself in the crosshairs".

He also delves into another disturbing trend in America ",  Taibbi takes us to the front lines of the immigrant dragnet; into the newly punitive welfare system which treats its beneficiaries as thieves; and deep inside the stop-and-frisk world, where standing in front of your own home has become an arrestable offense. As he narrates these incredible stories, he draws out and analyzes their common source: a perverse new standard of justice, based on a radical, disturbing new vision of civil rights.

“These are the stories that will keep you up at night. . . . The Divide is not just a report from the new America; it is advocacy journalism at its finest.”—Los Angeles Times

I look forward to staying up at night and thank Matt for exposing the corruption at the core of our country. MM   buy the book here : http://www.amazon.com/The-Divide-American-Injustice-Wealth/dp/081299342X

RBS Sale of 93 Branches to US Bank Stalled, Info Withheld !

Update of March 31, 2014

RBS Sale of 93 Branches to US Bank Stalled, Info Withheld, CRA Protests

By Matthew R. Lee http://www.innercitypress.org/usbank.html

SOUTH BRONX, March 26 -- When Royal Bank of Scotland proposed to sell its 93 Chicago-area branches to US Bank, the comment period was set to expire on February 20. Today that was extended to April 25.

The extension or "re-publication of notice" came after Fair Finance Watch and other community advocacy organizations commented to the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, about lending disparities and US Bank's refusal to disclose how many and which of the 93 branches it would close.

FFW commented, back in January, that

While on this disclosure of branches which would be closed the OCC should extend the comment period, for now, to ensure consideration, US Bank NA (Ohio)'s 2012 HMDA data reflect that in the Chicago MSA for home purchase loans both conventional and subsidized, US Bank made a smaller portion of its loans to Latinos than did even the aggregate, including lenders not subject to the Community Reinvestment Act.

For conventional home purchase loans in the Chicago MSA in 2012, US Bank made 1083 such loans to whites, 78 to African Americans and only 77 to Latinos. That is, US Bank made 14 such loans to whites for each loan to a Latino, a bigger disparity than is the case with the aggregate.

For the home purchase loans in Table 4-1 in the Chicago MSA in 2012, US Bank made 268 such loans to whites, 68 to African Americans and only 60 to Latinos. That is, US Bank made 4.47 such loans to whites for each loan to a Latino, a significantly bigger disparity than is the case with the aggregate.

  US Bank replied that it needn't disclose which branches it would close. Fair Finance Watch reiterated its request in Washington DC in mid-March, along with NCRC, and in supplemental comments. And on March 26, the OCC confirmed that the comment period is extended to April 25, and portions of US Bank's response released.

  The problem is that large portions of US Bank's response are withheld, or simply redacted in black Magic Marker, first Tweeted here by @FinanceWatchOrg,click here to view. Fair Finance Watch and Inner City Press immediately filed with the OCC a Freedom of Information Act request

"for all withheld / redacted information from US Bank's March 21, 2014 submission in connection with its application to acquire branches from RBS Charter One. ICP / Fair Finance Watch commented on the application, and earlier today the OCC provided a redacted copy of US Bank's submission. Nearly the entire fair lending response is redacted, as is information about US Bank's claimed support to non-profits. Since such information is presumptively public, it must be unredacted and released. We are challenging each redaction, making this FOIA request for the entire, unredacted submission in this application process we timely challenged."

Now whether these withholdings can stand up must be ruled upon. 

  In terms of commenting of what was released, ICP says "Now that US Bank has admitted to the Federal Reserve that it would eliminate Charter One's Credit Builder and energy efficiency loan programs, and make it more difficult for the customers it would acquire to avoid fees, the Fed should schedule public hearings." 

  Prediction: the document put online yesterday will be reported in the Windy City.http://www.innercitypress.org/usbank.html

Feds chicken out on FIRREA lawsuit against B of A

According to Ben Protess article in Dealbook,  Judge Cayer is recommending to drop the government's lawsuit against Bank of America. In a time where Americans, for the most part, are outraged at the lack of criminal prosecution against the banksters, we have yet another Judge who wants to let them off the hook? Was the $9.3 billion settlement actually a payoff to get out of the criminal charges?

"The lawsuit cites emails from the bank’s employees expressing concern about the quality of the mortgages underling the securities, including one employee who wrote that some mortgages were “like a fat kid in dodge ball, these need to stay on the sidelines."

"Bank of America, which was represented by Skadden Arps, denied the accusations and asked that the case be dismissed. It was assigned to a magistrate judge; holders of that position typically handle scheduling and other procedural matters but occasionally issue rulings as well.

The magistrate judge agreed with Bank of America, concluding that the Justice Department had failed to meet the requirements for a case involving false statements to a government agency. The Federal Home Loan Bank is not an agency. And the Justice Department’s accusations, the magistrate judge ruled, fail to satisfy the requirement that misstatements materially affected the Federal Home Loan Bank’s government regulator"

see the story at DealBook here    http://goo.gl/3AH7lC

Plaintiff wins Reversal against Deutsche , Barclays for Fraud et al.

Congrats to Lenore Albert and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for the
reversal and remand in the wrongful foreclosure of Helen Galope's home.
Lenore Albert successfully pled violations of the Unfair Competition laws,
breach of the covenants of good faith and fair dealing and fraud.

See the decision at http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/memoranda/2014/03/27/12-56892.pdf.



HELEN GALOPE, an individual,
 Plaintiff - Appellant,
 v.
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST
COMPANY, as Trustee under Pooling and
Servicing Agreement dated as of May 1,
2007 Securitized Asset Backed
Receivables LLC Trust 2007-BR4; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/memoranda/2014/03/27/12-56892.pdf.

 Galope adequately alleged that she would not have purchased her loan had
she known that  the Defendants were manipulating the LIBOR rate. Article III standing exists
when a plaintiff purchases a product she would not have otherwise purchased but
for the alleged misconduct of the defendant. Hinojos v. Kohl's Corp., 718 F.3d
1098, 1104 n.3 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing Mazza v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 666 F.3d
581, 595 (9th Cir. 2012)); Maya v. Centex Corp., 658 F.3d 1060, 1069 (9th Cir.
2011). Contrary to the dissent’s assertion, Galope’s standing does not turn on
whether she actually made interest payments that were adjusted in response to the
allegedly manipulated LIBOR rate. Galope’s cognizable injury occurred when she

purchased the loan, not upon payment of LIBOR-affected interest.1 Maya, 658

F.3d at 1069. 

1. We therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings on Galope’s

LIBOR claims against the Barclays Defendants under the Sherman Antitrust Act,

15 U.S.C. §§ 1–2, and her state law claims for breach of the covenant of good faith

and fair dealing, and fraud

2. We reverse the district court’s ruling that Galope lacks statutory standing to

pursue her LIBOR-based Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Cal. Bus. & Prof.

Code § 17200, and False Advertising Law (“FAL”), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §

17500, claims against the Barclays Defendants and remand for further proceedings. 

4. We reverse the district court’s rulings that Galope’s wrongful foreclosure

and UCL claims based on the DBNTC Defendants’ violation of the bankruptcy

court’s automatic stay are not justiciable. Although rescission of the sale—almost

seven months after the violation—mooted Galope’s claims for injunctive and

declaratory relief, it did not affect her claim for damages. See Wilson v. State of

Nev., 666 F.2d 378, 380-81 (9th Cir. 1982). Further, regardless of whether Galope

has equity in the home, 11 U.S.C. § 362(k)(1) provides a statutory basis for

damages.

5. We reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment on Galope’s

claim for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing associated with

violation of the automatic stay. The covenant of good faith and fair dealing “finds

particular application in situations where one party is invested with a discretionary

power affecting the rights of another.” Hicks v. E.T. Legg & Associates, 108 Cal.

Rptr. 2d 10, 19 (Ct. App. 2001). Discretionary power of this kind “must be

exercised in good faith.” Carma Developers (Cal.), Inc. v. Marathon Dev.

California, Inc., 826 P.2d 710, 726 (Cal. 1992). T

Citibank Fails Federal Reserve test- Again

Now, the Fed’s action on Wednesday is already prompting calls for another round of changes at the top of the bank’s management.

“There’s no question in our minds that heads should roll,” Mr. Mayo said.

The Fed said that while Citigroup had made progress in the areas of “risk-management and control practices,” its capital planning process “reflected a number of deficiencies.”

The Fed also said that Citigroup had failed to make “sufficient improvement” in certain areas that supervisors had previously identified as “requiring attention.”

In addition to Citigroup, the Fed rejected the capital plans of the American units of three international banks: HSBC, Santander of Spain and the Royal Bank of Scotland, which operates under the Citizens Bank brand in the United States.    Read the whole story here     http://dealbook.nytimes.com/

Bank of America settles $9+ billion fine with Fannie Mae

The Federal Housing Finance Agency, which regulates Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, announced Wednesday afternoon a settlement with Bank of America for about $9.33 billion. The deal will end litigation over the bad mortgages issued leading up to the financial crisis.

The settlement is "an important step in helping restore stability to our broader mortgage market and moving to bring back the role of private firms in providing mortgage credit," said FHFA Director Melvin Watt, in a statement.

The federal agency still has claims in seven suits related to residential mortgage-backed securities.

"This is a fair and appropriate resolution, and we're pleased to move forward with this matter in the rear-view mirror," said Bradley Lerman, executive vice president and general counsel for Fannie Mae. "Fannie Mae remains focused on helping people to buy a house, rent an apartment or avoid foreclosure as we build a stronger housing finance system for the future."http://www.cnbc.com/id/101528427