<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: A BIT MORE ON US Mortgage Fraud ( By the Banks not the borrowers)	</title>
	<atom:link href="/2011/06/19/a-bit-more-on-us-mortgage-fraud-by-the-banks-not-the-borrowers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>/2011/06/19/a-bit-more-on-us-mortgage-fraud-by-the-banks-not-the-borrowers/</link>
	<description>Exegesis Hermeneutics Flux Capacitor of Truthiness</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2020 05:28:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: RogerGLewis		</title>
		<link>/2011/06/19/a-bit-more-on-us-mortgage-fraud-by-the-banks-not-the-borrowers/comment-page-1/#comment-13</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[RogerGLewis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2011 02:51:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/2011/06/19/a-bit-more-on-us-mortgage-fraud-by-the-banks-not-the-borrowers#comment-13</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Perhaps the biggest problem has been the packaging and repackaging of rights that go with mortgages. Notes (the loan, meaning the cash flow) can be and often were sold several times before they were sliced and diced into securities, which means identifying the actual lender (in the absence of proper land records) is generally impossible. This structure has necessitated the growth of yet another layer of opacity between the borrower and the “lender” – the servicer. Complicating the matter still further, servicing rights are also sold, often multiple times. These organizations have “bare legal” right to act as agents for the mysterious owners of the note, which in practice they have interpreted broadly as having substantially most of the rights of lenders, particularly in initiating foreclosure. The fact that servicers make more in fees from foreclosing than they do from solvent lenders (they are paid transactionally) completes the picture.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It is, in short, an unholy mess.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Comment from Anchard on my other blog.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Perhaps the biggest problem has been the packaging and repackaging of rights that go with mortgages. Notes (the loan, meaning the cash flow) can be and often were sold several times before they were sliced and diced into securities, which means identifying the actual lender (in the absence of proper land records) is generally impossible. This structure has necessitated the growth of yet another layer of opacity between the borrower and the “lender” – the servicer. Complicating the matter still further, servicing rights are also sold, often multiple times. These organizations have “bare legal” right to act as agents for the mysterious owners of the note, which in practice they have interpreted broadly as having substantially most of the rights of lenders, particularly in initiating foreclosure. The fact that servicers make more in fees from foreclosing than they do from solvent lenders (they are paid transactionally) completes the picture.</p>
<p>It is, in short, an unholy mess.</p>
<p>Comment from Anchard on my other blog.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
