By David Dayen
https://theintercept.com/staff/davidd/
Treasury secretary nominee Steven Mnuchin lied in his written responses to the Senate Finance Committee, claiming that “OneWest Bank did not ‘robo-sign’ documents,” when ample evidence proves that they did.
Mnuchin ran OneWest Bank from 2009 to 2015 in a manner so ruthless to mortgage holders that he has been dubbed the “Foreclosure King” by his critics.
The robo-signing scandal involved mortgage companies having their employees falsely sign hundreds of affidavits per week attesting that they had reviewed and verified all the business records associated with a foreclosure — when in fact they never read through the material and just blindly signed off. Those records, in many cases, were prepared improperly, but the foreclosures went ahead anyway because of the fraudulent affidavits.
Mnuchin on the Hill
Scott Applewhite/AP
“Did OneWest ‘robo-sign’ documents relating to foreclosures and evictions?” Sen. Bob Casey, D-Penn., asked Mnuchin as a “question for the record”.Mnuchin replied that “OneWest Bank did not ‘robo-sign’ documents, and as the only bank to successfully complete the Independent Foreclosure Review required by federal banking regulators to investigate allegations of ‘robo-signing,’ I am proud of our institution’s extremely low error rate.”
But even that review – which was not really so “independent,” since the banks hand-picked and paid for their own reviewers – found that nearly 6 percent of the OneWest foreclosures examined were not conducted properly.
And what sparked that review was a 2011 consent order issued by the federal Office of Thrift Supervision, which definitively stated that OneWest filed affidavits in state and federal courts “in which the affiant represented that the assertions in the affidavit were made based on personal knowledge or based on a review by the affiant of the relevant books and records, when, in many cases, they were not.”

This is the very definition of robo-signing. OneWest signed and agreed to the consent order, though it never admitted or denied the activity
However, in a Florida foreclosure case, a OneWest employee plainly admitted to robo-signing. On July 9, 2009 – four months after OneWest took over operations from IndyMac, with Mnuchin as CEO – Erica Johnson-Seck, a vice president with OneWest, gave a deposition in which she admitted to being one of eight employees who signed approximately 750 foreclosure-related documents per week.
“How long do you spend executing each document?” Johnson-Seck was asked. “I have changed my signature considerably,” Johnson-Seck replied. “It’s just an E now. So not more than 30 seconds.”
Johnson-Seck also admitted to not reading the affidavits before signing them, not knowing who inputted the information on the documents, and not being aware of how the records were generated. And she acknowledged not signing in the presence of a notary. This resulted in false affidavits being submitted in court cases that attempted to take borrowers’ homes away.
New York Supreme Court Judge Arthur Schack used the information provided by Johnson-Seck to invalidate OneWest foreclosure cases. He also dismissed a separate foreclosure where Johnson-Seck both assigned a mortgage to Deutsche Bank and executed an affidavit on behalf of Deutsche Bank in the same case.
OneWest continued filing sketchy documents for years, even after Johnson-Seck revealed the robo-signing scheme. According to a Reuters investigation in 2011, OneWest issued “foreclosure documents of questionable validity,” including filing mortgage assignments that establish ownership of the loan months after the foreclosure action, meaning OneWest (by their own evidence) didn’t own the loan at the time they decided to foreclose on the property.
Tara Bradshaw, a spokeswoman for Mnuchin during the transition, said she no longer works on the matter and referred all questions to the Treasury Department. The Treasury Department press office did not respond to a request for comment.
Mnuchin’s definitive – though false — statement about robo-signing stands in contrast to some of his other responses to questions for the record. Those he just ducked.
Responding to Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., who asked how many Nevada homes were in OneWest Bank’s portfolio and how many Nevadans suffered foreclosure at the hands of OneWest, Mnuchin replied, “Because I am no longer employed by or affiliated with CIT Group, I do not have access to this information.” CIT purchased OneWest in 2015, and Mnuchin left the bank’s board in December.
That was the eighth time that Heller has asked these questions of Mnuchin, according to Senate testimony.
Mnuchin used the same excuse to decline to give information about nationwide foreclosures or federal investigations into OneWest to Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio.
Similarly, when Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., asked Mnuchin if he believes that his former employer Goldman Sachs “acted responsibly and ethically when it bet against the same securities it was selling to its customers,” Mnuchin declined to answer, saying “I left Goldman Sachs nearly fifteen years ago” and was not in a position to comment.
Mnuchin was forced to respond to The Intercept’s publication of a leaked memo alleging that OneWest committed numerous violations of California’s foreclosure processes, including routine backdating of documents to speed up foreclosures. Sen. Casey asked about that, but Mnuchin insisted that “OneWest did not engage in ‘backdating.’” He explained that the bank assumed control of foreclosures initiated under IndyMac, its predecessor, and had a power of attorney to “step into those actions effective as of the date they were initiated.”
But that’s not what the investigators in the California Attorney General’s office alleged in their memo. They claimed that the substitutions of trustee documents in OneWest’s name were not created on the effective date written on the document. They argued that was done deliberately to cover up the lack of a substitution of trustee earlier in the foreclosure process.
David Dayen
David Dayen is a contributor to The Intercept, and also writes for Salon, the Fiscal Times, the New Republic, and more. His first book, Chain of Title, about three ordinary Americans who uncover Wall Street’s foreclosure fraud, will be released in May 2016.
5 thoughts on “David Dayen at The Intercept: Mnuchin Lied About His Bank’s History of Robo-Signing Foreclosure Documents”
Reblogged this on California Freelance Paralegal.
Reblogged this on johenrion and commented:
And it all begins. Home prices are already falling in my area.
I’d say it’s time we went to work figuring it out ourselves. I no longer trust this calvary is coming to save me.
Read SIGTARP report from June 2012 Regarding NPV inputs – Note findings in OneWest
terrie
>
One must ask themselves what we are observing in Mr. Mnuchin’s hearing.
Is this really nothing more than a dog and pony show for the benefit of the public?
We know that both Republicans and Democrats in a bipartisan fashion bet the taxpayers wallet on the GSE Business Model, a Model that every creditable scholar on the subject call “fatally flawed” . So the senators on both sides of the isle should own up to this fact which is critical in evaluating Mr. Mnuchin’s creditably. Which is most disturbing to this critic’s ears in this testimony is the following as quoted in National Mortgage News:
“What I’ve committed to is that I will work with both the Democrats and Republicans. We need housing reform, so we shouldn’t just leave Fannie and Freddie as-is for the next four or eight years under government control without a fix,” Mnuchin said.
Mnuchin referred to himself as an “expert” on Fannie and Freddie, but he was careful not to back a specific reform approach.
“I believe we can find a bipartisan fix for these, so on the one hand we don’t end up with a giant bailout, [and] on the other hand we don’t run the risk of completely eliminating housing finance,” he said.
He noted that “for very long periods of time, I think, Fannie and Freddie have been well-run without creating risks to the government.”
“I believe that these are very important entities for creating necessary liquidity for housing finance,” Mnuchin said.
This testimony sounds like Mr. Mnuchin wants to “fix” a business Model that is “fatally flawed”. That sounds like “same ol”. You can’t fix something that is fatally flawed.
Mnuchin, et al wants to kick the can down the street again, meanwhile the taxpayers and borrowers are exposed via the government guarantee of the GSEs MBSs.
This all brings us back to the Senators who will vote on Mr. Mnuchin. How will they be impartial as they are compromised as a result of initially betting the US Treasury on the fatally flawed GSE Business Model? The same Model that has brought the financial system to its knees.
Based on Mr. Mnuchin’s experience nobody knows better how the Model is fatally flawed.
The Question is are both the Senators and Mr. Mnuchin willing to kill the back door subsidy in the form of the guarantee of the GSEs MBSs?
I am old enough to remember 30 year mortgages with absolutely no government guarantees.