MOST POPULAR ARTICLES
GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION ANALYSIS – CLICK HERE
EDITOR’S NOTE: Without fraudulently inflated appraisals, Wall Street would have only been able to move about half as much money as it did. That would have resulted in losing over $1 Trillion in hidden yield spread premium that occurred when the loans were purportedly “Sold” to the pools. Without inflated appraisals we would not have people under water, nor would there have been nearly as many foreclosures because selling the home would have been possible.
It was a trap, pure and simple, created by Wall Street and now being relentless enforced by non-creditors who take advantage of the fact that investors want no part of any claim against homeowners. Investors know that there are legitimate counterclaims, affirmative defenses and defenses. They know they can’t answer discovery without giving away the case. So now we have sharks (pretenders) swimming in for a feeding frenzy because nobody else came to the party.
Comptroller of the Currency
Administrator of National Banks
1301 McKinney Street,
Suite 3450.
Houston, Texas
77010-9050
Fax: 713-336-4301
October 3, 2011
Re: Case No. 01615287 and 01406372
WELLS FARGO BANK, NA
BARRY S FAGAN- Complainant/Plaintiff
Los Angeles Superior Court Case SC112044
SUPPLEMENTAL EVIDENCE OF BANK AND APPRAISAL FRAUD
A.VIOLATIONS OF THE OCC CONSENT ORDER DATED APRIL 2011
B. VIOLATIONS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVES $85,000,000 CONSENT DECREE AGAINST WELLS FARGO FOR BANK EMPLOYEES FALSIFYING BORROWERS LOAN APPLICATION INCOME AND INFORMATION.
Dear Mr. Chandler:
I am in receipt of your letter dated September 6, 2011 and wish to further supplement my file with additional evidence of bank and appraisal fraud.
Attached hereto and made a part hereof are Exhibits A through H, all of which have been filed with the Superior Court of Los Angeles CASE NUMBER SC112044, and have now become a public record.
Contained within those exhibits, is evidence of a fraudulent loan application, appraisal fraud and a Declaration of Default (Section 2923.5 violation), perjury and continued violations of your own OCC regulatory rules, regulations and Consent Orders.
Kindly review these exhibits to see that Wells Fargo Bank continues to Verify under penalty that which can be easily proven as untrue.
The evidence to prove that my loan application was indeed falsified is compelling as:
I have already verified under penalty of perjury in my July 15, 2011 First Amended Complaint, that I did not fill out any of the information in my loan application, nor see the loan application that was submitted to the underwriters by Wells Fargo private banker Dalia Warren. I verify that no income information was given to Wells Fargo Bank by me and that the alleged 2007 loan was a Stated Income Loan that did not require any income to be verified. I verify that I have never met Dalia Warren, a private banker at Wells Fargo Bank. I verify that Dalia Warren stated a false income on my loan application, a false marital status on my loan application, a false purchase date and purchase price on my loan application and a false statement concerning that my home was not held in trust at the time of the 2007 loan.
I verify that I signed an IRS form which gave Wells Fargo Bank permission to pull my income tax returns but that Wells Fargo Bank Never in fact did so. I verify that on July 20, 2011, Wells Fargo Bank was fined $85,000,000 by the Board of Governors for the Federal Reserve for having their employees prepare loan applications on behalf of their clients with false and inflated incomes. Even the application itself states that the borrower (me) was given no access to it, nor was I privy to any amendments made to it. The Loan Application itself states that $775,000 was applied for and yet Wells Fargo approved $1,000,000 without any regard to proper underwriting standards or guidelines. See Exhibits C & D.
Moreover, Wells Fargo Bank’s May 11, 2011 Response to the OCC’s own inquiries concerning this subject loan contain false and inconsistent statements concerning income, debt to service ratios, loan to value, and CLTV.
See Exhibit B.
Exhibit A is perhaps the most egregious as that document was used to set in motion this entire illegal non-judicial foreclosure. The Notice of Default Declaration was UNSIGNED by anyone known and in fact was signed by WELLS FARGO BANK. See Exhibit A.
This is an absolute legal impossibility, as an individual is required to sign on behalf of Wells Fargo Bank and this blatant California Civil Code Section 2923.5 violation should have been enough for the alleged Substituted Trustee TD SERVICE COMPANY to conduct further Due Diligence before illegally recording a Notice of Default on my primary residence. Section 2924 cannot possible provide TD Service Company with privilege when they failed to act with impartiality and minimal levels of due diligence. See Exhibit A and also:
1. Kerivan v Title Insurance Insurance and Trust Company (1983) 147 Cal. App. 3d. 225, 229:
2. Bank of Seoul and Trust Company v Marcioni (1988)198 Cal. App 3d 113, 119;
3. Hatch v Collins (1990) 225 Cal. App. d 1104,1113;
4. Woodworth v. Redwood Empire Savings and Loan Association (1971) 22 Cal. App. 3d 347, 366;
THIS IS A CRISIS! In California between 9,000 and 18,000 Foreclosed homes are confiscated EACH MONTH by the banking industry (Information available at http://www.foreclosureradar.com/california- foreclosures). The broadcast news media, newspaper and numerous periodicals have raised public awareness that over ninety-nine percent of these confiscated homes have been and will continue to be acquired by fraudulent means. The small percentage of homeowners who rely upon the California trial courts for protection under express laws are in most cases met with abuse of discretion. This crisis of massive California homeowner exile has been by the hand of the trial courts who are presumed to be under oath to stand as guardians of law, equity and substantial justice to prevent the very travesty of justice they continue to support. The Judicial Council of California/Administrative Office of the Courts drew the line to insure the rights of those who stood on there right to equal protection under the laws would have issues of title, fraud and due process heard by an impartial judiciary. Presently, in any proceeding dealing with foreclosure issues, the trial court merely presides over a bank tribunal. In constructing the non-judicial foreclosure statute(s) Cal. Civil Code 2924, was the intention of the California Legislature to abrogate provisional access to power of sale by private agreement, which abrogation is prohibited under Article 1 Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, in favor of statutory access to power of sale to empower statutory non-judicial foreclosure whereby is created a statutory waiver of due process prohibited under the Fourteenth Amendment?
Exhibits E, F and G all show just how James Ebert of EBERT APPRAISAL SERVICE INC. falsely and fraudulently inflated the value of my residence in 2007 to $2,100,000, when Wells Fargo’s second and third appraisals for my residence reflected $1,150,000 in December 2009 and $1,185,000 in January 2011. These two appraisals estimated the value of Plaintiff’s home to be $1,150,000 and $1,185,000 which was nearly $1,000,000 less than the Defendant Ebert Appraisal Service Inc.’s May 16, 2007 appraised value of $2,100,000. Such a decline in value was not based on market conditions alone but is further compelling evidence of the fraudulent appraisal performed by Ebert Appraisal Service Inc., and knowingly used by Wells Fargo Bank as a means to get me to increase my debt load on the property without having the true market value reflected from which to base my decision upon. But for this fraud and inducement defendant Wells Fargo Bank and Ebert Appraisal Service Inc., I would never have exposed my “Property” to such risk.
Exhibit H is a Court Order dated September 9, 2011 against Wells Fargo Bank for Discovery Abuse with Sanctions which is further evidence that Wells Fargo Bank is continuing to Violate the OCC’s April 2011 Consent Order.
So I continue to write to the regulatory authority that supposedly enforces and promulgates rules for National Banks to follow, and submit both evidence and allegations of fraud.
I believe if my case is reviewed at the highest levels, the OCC can indeed do something to prevent fraud rather than in my opinion harbor it.
Kindly forward this evidence to California Attorney General Kamala Harris’ office so that they too can review these exhibits for possible State prosecution of these fraudulent and criminal acts
OFFICE OF THE REAL ESTATE APPRAISER (OREA) COMPLAINT NUMBER 110322-09 AGAINST JAMES EBERT OF EBERT APPRAISAL SERVICE INC.
OREA TAKES APPROPRIATE ACTION AGAINST JAMES EBERT FOR THE MAY 16, 2007 APPRAISAL OF PLAINTIFF BARRY FAGAN’S MALIBU, CA RESIDENCE.
Barry S. Fagan Esq.
PO Box 1213, Malibu, CA 90265-1213
[T] +1.310.717.1790 – [F] +1.310.456.6447.
Search Our Blog
Categories
Contact Our National Headquarters Phone: 844-583-5339
Connect with us
Contact Our National Headquarters
- 844-583-5339
- Available 24/7
-
200 S. Andrews Ave. Ste. 604
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301