Mr Cooper Group Inc (COOP)

[Large Green]

WMI Escrow Marker Holders Will Be Recipients - THANKS Goes to Dmdmd1

My view (LG) based on what I have learned - Investors who signed timely releases by year 3/2012 will be rewarded via ALL ROADS to Distributions go through (DSTs) DELAWARE STATUTORY TRUSTs

Asset Backed Securitizations from 2000-2008
« Reply #80 on: Today at 04:35:21 PM »
Quote from: Dmdmd1 on Today at 10:06:21 AM

Post 1 of 2

Per Bill Paatalo's article as of September 03, 2020:

https://bpinvestigativeagency.com/jpmorgan-chases-scheme-to-steal-washington-mutual-mortgages-is-not-conjecture-it-can-be-proven/

"JPMorgan Chase’s Scheme To Steal Washington Mutual Mortgages Is Not Conjecture, It Can Be Proven.

Posted by Bill Paatalo on Sep 3, 2020

After a decade of accumulating evidence involving “loans” originated and securitized by Washington Mutual Bank (WMB), the following points are now supported and can be proven with evidence:

The mortgages, deeds, and notes were never sold and transferred. Rather, there was the intent to have securitized the debts per the certificates without any documentation perfecting any interests in the alleged underlying assets.

No schedule of loans exists, or has ever been produced, identifying any specific WMB loan having been acquired by JPMorgan Chase via the Purchase & Assumption Agreement (PAA).

The FDIC now has its own databases identifying what WMB loans, if any, were in fact acquired and sold through the Receivership and the PAA. These databases have yet to provide any records for any WMB loan, or any responsive documents to show the servicing rights of any WMB loan having been sold to Chase.

The FDIC deemed all securitized loans sold by WMB prior to the Receivership as “isolated assets” outside of its reach. As such, the FDIC could not sell that which it never owned or acquired.

WMB admitted and disclosed as a business practice that no assignments would be prepared or recorded, and no endorsements would be placed upon the notes it was purporting to sell. This was deemed an “Unsafe & Unsound” business practice.

As outlined below, WMB admitted that is was going to “commingle collections on the mortgage loans with its own funds and may use the commingled funds for its own benefit.” (Per the FFIEC, this appears to be a tacit admission of “Mortgage Servicing Fraud.”)

JPMorgan Chase was NOT the “successor in interest” to Washington Mutual Bank. The only successor in interest to Washington Mutual Bank was the FDIC. Because the FDIC did not acquire any WMB “loans” that were sold and securitized, including the servicing rights, WMB died without any successor in interest to the mortgages / deeds, and without any assignees to the same.

The investors sued for countless violations of laws and breaches of representations and warranties regarding the securitization transactions that ultimately resulted in settlements. There does not appear to be any “repurchases” of the loans; a “risk factor” disclosed to investors detailed below. Neither the FDIC or Chase repurchased any of the loans and denied having any successor liabilities for the fraudulent and lawless conduct in the origination of the WMB loans.

Because the FDIC acquired none of the securitized WMB loans, FIRREA does not apply nor does it immunize Chase from the numerous defenses to foreclosure.

Because the FDIC acquired no loans or rights to any loans, it had no authority to grant any sort of power of attorney to Chase to assign and transfer anything.

Most, if not all, WMB securitized “loans” were assigned the “Investor Code – AO1” which belonged to “WaMu Asset Acceptance Corporation” (WMAAC). WMAAC and the subsidiary assets were not included in the PAA. This was stipulated to by JPMorgan Chase.

The trusts and trustees have/had full knowledge of the defects, deficiencies, and fraud related to the collateral that was never assigned and delivered, as well as the fact that the trusts’ payments for the debt were being hidden and concealed from borrowers, courts, and public land records. The sales transactions were only disclosed on a “need to know” basis, and even then, has routinely been denied through well-orchestrated obstruction. The trusts’ claims to payments existed only with the “Seller” – (typically) WMAAC. As shown in the SEC filings below, the trusts and the trustees had no recourse or claims against borrowers for loan payments having been made to the “seller” that were likely never forwarded to the trusts.

THERE IS NO VERIFIABLE ACCOUNTING TRAIL OF ANY PAYMENTS GOING FROM THE BORROWERS TO ANY TRUST. And finally,

CHASE UNEQUIVOCALLY LIES AND COMMITS ROUTINE PERJURY AS WELL AS DOCUMENT FABRICATIONS AND FORGERIES TO CARRY OUT THEIR SCHEME TO STEAL HOMES. CAN I PROVE THIS? YES.

In fact, one of the more egregious cases of this fraud just came to light. I was called in to a case involving a judicial mortgage foreclosure carried out by Chase over a six-year span of contentious litigation. Chase ultimately prevailed on a summary judgment motion and the foreclosure order was entered in its favor prior to my being retained. The case is currently on appeal. Chase’s position for six-years was that the WMB loan was never sold and securitized, and that Chase became the investor / owner via the PAA with the FDIC. I of course opined otherwise.

The subject note has the typical endorsement stamp of Cynthia Riley and the loan was assigned the investor code “AO1” dating back to 2006. Recently, an very unusual motion was filed in the case by an outside law firm who suddenly appeared on behalf of “U.S. Bank, N.A. as Trustee for a Lehman Brothers (LXS 2007-1) trust certifying under penalty of perjury that the trust owned the subject mortgage. When Chase self-incriminates like this, they quickly switch counsel and deny as a simple mistake. They will have a hard time denying this one because upon reviewing this motion, I ran a check of the databases in the Lehman bankruptcy as I noted in the following story, and sure enough, the loan was in fact involved in a repurchase demand.

https://bpinvestigativeagency.com/lehman-brothers-rmbs-claim-protocol-reveals-the-likely-theft-of-89526-homes/

The affidavits and filings for six-years in this case should undoubtedly convince any juror that this was a conspiracy to steal my client’s home. Chase has put my client through a living nightmare, and has exacerbated my client’s time, resources, and mental health having to defend against these now provable and knowingly false claims."

IMO...my conclusions as of September 05, 2020 @ 1535 CST:

Current Scenarios of MBS Trusts created by WMI Subsidiaries

1) The loans were securitized properly through “true sales”, then WMI/WMI Escrow Marker Holders rightfully own the beneficial interests of at least $101.9 billion (from $692 billion in MBS Trusts created by WMI subsidiaries from 2000-2008) and some evidence follows:

a)"The FDIC deemed all securitized loans sold by WMB prior to the Receivership as “isolated assets” outside of its reach. As such, the FDIC could not sell that which it never owned or acquired."

b)"JPMorgan Chase was NOT the “successor in interest” to Washington Mutual Bank. The only successor in interest to Washington Mutual Bank was the FDIC. Because the FDIC did not acquire any WMB “loans” that were sold and securitized, including the servicing rights, WMB died without any successor in interest to the mortgages / deeds, and without any assignees to the same."

c)"Because the FDIC acquired none of the securitized WMB loans, FIRREA does not apply nor does it immunize Chase from the numerous defenses to foreclosure."

d)"Because the FDIC acquired no loans or rights to any loans, it had no authority to grant any sort of power of attorney to Chase to assign and transfer anything."

2) If the securitized loans have defective chains of title (which is evident in a plethora of evidence from many cases throughout the country and have been documented on this and many other message boards) then WMI subsidiaries are the last verifiable link in the chains of title and thus WMI/WMI Escrow Marker Holders are the owners of all the MBS Trusts. Some evidence:

a)"The mortgages, deeds, and notes were never sold and transferred. Rather, there was the intent to have securitized the debts per the certificates without any documentation perfecting any interests in the alleged underlying assets."

b)"No schedule of loans exists, or has ever been produced, identifying any specific WMB loan having been acquired by JPMorgan Chase via the Purchase & Assumption Agreement (PAA)."

c)"WMB admitted and disclosed as a business practice that no assignments would be prepared or recorded, and no endorsements would be placed upon the notes it was purporting to sell. This was deemed an “Unsafe & Unsound” business practice."

d)"The trusts and trustees have/had full knowledge of the defects, deficiencies, and fraud related to the collateral that was never assigned and delivered, as well as the fact that the trusts’ payments for the debt were being hidden and concealed from borrowers, courts, and public land records. The sales transactions were only disclosed on a “need to know” basis, and even then, has routinely been denied through well-orchestrated obstruction. The trusts’ claims to payments existed only with the “Seller” – (typically) WMAAC. As shown in the SEC filings below, the trusts and the trustees had no recourse or claims against borrowers for loan payments having been made to the “seller” that were likely never forwarded to the trusts."


3) Combined evidence that even if there were securitized loans, then it was assigned to WMI subsidiaries such as WaMu Asset Acceptance Corporation (WMAAC), and if there were no "true sales" in the securitization process then there are defective chains in title and the last verifiable owners are WMI subsidiaries and they were not included in the PAA (stipulated by JPM).

a)"Most, if not all, WMB securitized “loans” were assigned the “Investor Code – AO1” which belonged to “WaMu Asset Acceptance Corporation” (WMAAC). WMAAC and the subsidiary assets were not included in the PAA. This was stipulated to by JPMorgan Chase."


IMO...Regardless of the actual scenarios that are listed above, WMI Escrow Marker Holders will benefit from any recoveries from bankruptcy remote MBS Trusts created by WMI subsidiaries. The only ones who benefit are WMI Escrow Marker Holders, and thus the reason why Underwriters are fighting hard to stay in Class 19...because the Underwriters were the same ones who securitized the loans.

Draw your owns conclusions!!!
«Last Edit: Today at 04:44:10 PM by Dmdmd1"