Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity





Posted at 9:07 AM ET, 11/18/2010

CitiMortgage admits to foreclosure paperwork problems

By Ariana Eunjung Cha

Citigroup, which for almost two months has claimed its process for preparing foreclosure affidavits was sound, is reviewing about 14,000 documents, including 4,000 that may have been notarized improperly, a company official said in written testimony to Congress to be delivered Thursday.

Unlike other large mortgage servicers it competes with, Citi had not frozen foreclosures and had repeatedly declined to publicly discuss any internal reviews it was conducting.

Harold Lewis, managing director of CitiMortgage, said in the written remarks that 10,000 of the 14,000 documents being reviewed are for judicial foreclosures.

The purpose of the review is "to assure that these affidavits are substantively correct and properly executed. Citi expects that affidavits executed prior to the fall of 2009 will need to be refiled," Lewis said.

The other 4,000 documents that are being reviewed were prepared at its Dallas processing center and "may not have been signed in the presence of a notary, to assure that these affidavits are substantively correct and properly executed." Lewis said these affidavits were also be refiled.

Lewis and other representatives from large mortgage servicers--Bank of America, J.P. Morgan Chase, Ally Financial--will take questions from members of Congress Thursday starting at 10 a.m. at a House Financial Services Committee hearing.

Lewis said that Citibank had been taking steps to improve its foreclosure practices since the fall of 2009.

In responding to questions about the robo-signing problems at other servicers, Citi has previously said that it has "have strong training to ensure that appropriate employees are fully aware of the proper procedures."

More on Thursday's hearing on foreclosures before the House Financial Services Committee subcommittee on housing:

Frank: Homeowners should not have 'false hopes' in foreclosure mess
Bachus, Waters: Why didn't regulators know of problems sooner?
Bank of America outlines reform measures

By Ariana Eunjung Cha  | November 18, 2010; 9:07 AM ET
Categories:  Housing  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Economic agenda: Thursday, Nov. 18, 2010
Next: Bank of America outlines radical foreclosure reform measures to Congress

Comments

You want to read about a CitiMortgage nightmare?

CitiMortgage and its law firm, Brice Vander Linden & Wernick (in Dallas) illegally foreclosed on us.

Then they illegally entered our house, removed our property, changed the locks, made changes to our house and listed it for sale.

It gets better.

Apparently, the person who bought our house may work for the law firm that illegally foreclosed.

They refused to correct title, return the property they removed from the house and refused to give us access to our house - even though they ADMITTED THEY HAD ILLEGALLY FORECLOSED.

CitiMortgage knew about this immediately - we called them and told them what their law firm had done - CitiMortgage did NOTHING and said it was out of their hands.

Huh?

Citi knows that it appears an employee of the law firm that illegally foreclosed bought our house (think they got a sweetheart deal?!) and has done NOTHING.

We also notified Fannie Mae, HUD, the OCC and Texas AG.

NOTHING from any of them.

Oh - and as far as robosigning with Citi? We found instances where the same lawyer signing and submitting documents to courts across Texas had vastly different signatures.

www.ourforeclosurestory.org

Posted by: bluebonnetsandbbq | November 18, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

this sounds like practices a third world country would do...
who is in control of citimortgage...
betcha it's an indian...

Posted by: DwightCollins | November 18, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

CitiMortgage has a well documented history of filing false documents in foreclosure cases, including filing false affidavits in support of motions for relief of stay in U.S. Bankruptcy Courts. This has largely been ignored by the mainstream news media.

Consider the following from published opinions readily available through PACER or LEXIS:

“According to the Third Amended Complaint, these improper filings were symptomatic
of a "common and widespread practice" implemented by CitiMortgage in numerous
bankruptcy proceedings, wherein it submitted "affidavits, declarations and
certifications [that] were improper and fraudulent in that the signature pages were
executed and/or notarized separate and apart from one or more other pages of,
and/or one or more exhibits to, and/or some other part of, these affidavits,
declarations and certifications." [emphasis added]” Tate v. CitiMortgage, Inc. (In re
Tate), Misc. No. 09-0039-WS-M, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22278 (S.D. Ala. March 9, 2010)

In a footnote to this paragraph, the U.S. District Court described some of the evidence already on file in support of the allegations in that case:

“FN 2: Plaintiffs provide specifics to flesh out these amorphous allegations. For
instance, plaintiffs contend that CitiMortgage filed an affidavit in plaintiff Tate’s Chapter 7 case that was purportedly signed and notarized on November 19, 2002, but that verified a payment history exhibit dated two days later. (Id., ¶ 10.) Similarly,
plaintiffs allege that CitiMortgage filed an affidavit in plaintiff Sherry Adams’ Chapter 13 case that was purportedly signed by an employee named Ann Marie Baker, but that
repeatedly identified the affiant on the first page as a non-signatory named Leah Moser. (Id., ¶ 18.) The inference is that both affidavits are fraudulent, the former because it referenced an exhibit that did not exist at the time of execution, and the latter because the affiant could not have reviewed page 1 of her affidavit (which was in the name of someone else) before signing it. [emphasis added]”

Posted by: waroper | November 18, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

In another similar published decision, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court declined to dismiss a suit brought against CitiMortgage as a class action based upon these allegations:

“The Plaintiffs allege the following in their Amended Complaint: Plaintiffs Jacob Holman
and Amye Holman filed their Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition February 8, 2007. On
December 8, 2007, the Defendant, with the active participation and consent of one or
more of its attorneys, filed an improper and fraudulent affidavit in support of a motion
for relief from stay that Defendant had filed in Plaintiffs Jacob and Amye Holman's
bankruptcy case. Defendant’s affidavit was improper and fraudulent in that the
signature page was executed and/or notarized separate and apart from the affidavit.
Defendant’s affidavit purportedly was signed by its employee Monique Bequette on
December 6, 2007, and purportedly was notarized by its employee Jennifer Llamas on
December 3, 2007. The affiant's signature and the notary's signature are on a separate
page from the substantive paragraphs of the affidavit, and that is a common and
widespread practice in numerous other affidavits filed by Defendant in support of
motions for relief from stay. The pages of the affidavit are not numbered, and that is a
common and widespread practice in numerous other affidavits filed by Defendant in
support of motions for relief from stay.

Plaintiffs Gerald Garner and Stacy Garner filed their Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition
August 27, 2004. On February 26, 2005, the Defendant, with the active participation
and consent of one or more of its attorneys, filed an improper and fraudulent affidavit
in support of a motion for relief from stay that Defendant had filed in Plaintiffs Gerald
and Stacy Garner's bankruptcy case. Defendant’s affidavit was improper and
fraudulent in that the signature page was executed and/or notarized separate and
apart from the affidavit. Defendant's affidavit purportedly was signed by its employee Ann Marie Baker on February 21, 2005 and purportedly was notarized by its employee
Christina Crampton on February 21, 2005. Defendant's affidavit states that a mortgage
is attached to Defendants’ motion for relief. However, the mortgage bears a fax
legend dated February 24, 2005 from Hale County Probate Court. The affiant's
signature and the notary’s signature are on a separate page from the substantive
paragraphs of the affidavit, and that is a common and widespread practice in
numerous other affidavits filed by Defendant in support of motions for relief from
stay. The pages of the affidavit are not numbered, and that is a common and
widespread practice in numerous other affidavits filed by Defendant in support of
motions for relief from stay.

-- MORE --

Posted by: waroper | November 18, 2010 3:49 PM | Report abuse

(continued from prior post)

Essentially, the Amended Complaint alleges that Defendant has made an institutional
practice of filing false affidavits in this court, and elsewhere,[1] in support of its
motions for relief from the automatic stay. The Amended Complaint further alleges
that the allegedly false affidavits submitted by the Defendant in the Plaintiffs’ cases are
just two examples of a widespread practice by the Defendant of filing improper
affidavits. It is alleged that this harms not only individual debtors, but also defiles the
court and prevents it from operating properly. [emphasis added]” Holman v.
Citimortgage, Inc. (In re Holman), BK 07-70202-CMS-13, AP 09-70031-CMS, UNITED
STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, WESTERN DIVISION, 2010 Bankr. LEXIS 1518, May 6, 2010.

It will be interesting to see how forgiving U.S. taxpayers will be when they discover that CitiBank requires yet another taxpayer funded bailout and how understanding CitiCorp's institutional equity holders will be when they discover that their common stock equity is completely WIPED OUT!

Isn't it time for the government to step in and begin arresting the criminals? Shouldn't this bank have been broken up BEFORE it became "Too Big Too Fail"?

Has anyone even NOTICED that as the FDIC is closing the SMALL banks the concentration of deposits in "Too Big To Fail" banks continues to INCREASE? In other words, our national government has been making this problem WORSE, not making things better.

The largest banks in the country, which are ALREADY INSOLVENT but for the suspended mark to market GAAP accounting gimmick, and which cannot possibly pay all the claims arising out of ForeclosureGate need to be SEIZED and broken up. NO BANK SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO HAVE DEPOSITS WHICH EXCEED 5% OF THE U.S. MONEY SUPPLY. BANKS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO OPERATE BRANCHES IN MORE THAN A SINGLE STATE AND SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO HAVE A DEPOSIT MARKET SHARE IN EXCESS OF 10% IN THAT STATE.

CitiCorp should be the very first bank broken up, even ahead of Bank of America.

Posted by: waroper | November 18, 2010 3:52 PM | Report abuse

I just wanted to THANK YOU so much for find 3.17% Rate. You were great! The closing went really smoothly on my Mortgage Refinance. As in the past, I'll continue to tell everyone about "123 Mortgage Refinance"

Posted by: Anonymous | November 19, 2010 4:55 AM | Report abuse

"...4,000 that may have been notarized improperly."

As in lied.

Youy honor, I improperly discharged the gun into the man's head. I'll gladly pay a fine and go on my way.

Posted by: grunk | November 19, 2010 8:19 AM | Report abuse

Well, here is a concept. PAY YOUR MORTGAGE ontime every month and all of this will be a non-issue for you.

So you thought defaulting on your mortgage would be OK with the bank? Give me a break. Low class idiots

Posted by: Anonymous | November 25, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company