Wednesday, April 23, 2008

The Future of Mortgage Servicing

(Housing Slips) In my prior post on mortgage servicing, I talked about the potential of mortgage servicers to be harmful barriers between homeowners and investors, both of whom may want to negotiate a loan modification. Recognizing such a problem raises the question of a solution. U.S. Representative Maxine Waters recently introduced legislation that would profoundly alter the duties of mortgage servicers. The bill, HR 5679, The Foreclosure Prevention and Sound Mortgage Servicing Act of 2008, would prohibit the initiation of a foreclosure if the mortagee or servicer has failed to engage in "reasonable loss mitigation activities." The bill lays out exactly what counts as loss mitigation and offers up non-binding guidance on standards of affordability for loss mitigation. Servicers would have to report data on their loss mitigation activities, disaggregated by the type of mitigation activity (separately accounting for things like modifications, deeds in lieu of foreclosure, or repayment plans).

The bill also takes aim at the communication problems between servicers and homeowners. The bill requires services to provide a toll-free number that provides borrowers with direct access to a person with the information and authority to fully resolve issues related to loss mitigation and specifies that such a person must be physically located in the United States. Servicers are also required to forward borrower's information to HUD-certified housing counselors whenever a borrower is 60 days or more overdue.

In the hearing last week on the bill (which you can watch as an archived webcast), Chairwoman Waters kept returning to a fundamental point--mortgage servicing is an unregulated industry. The witness testimony was essentially unanimous that mortgage servicing has a tremendous impact on American families and on the resolution of the current crisis. Of course, the debate was over whether this regulation was the right approach. The bill hasn't gotten much publicity yet, but I encourage readers who are interested in the foreclosure crisis to take a look and post their feedback.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Richard Pollak Alvin Texas 77511 Born 09/17 Constitution Day, “We Hold These Truths to Be Self Evident!” Justice Denied because Damage, simply relates, International Commerce’s permission that Payments, Deserve Credit, Affronted Authority Squanders Laws Subservient by emboldening forsakenly.

Standard 6.5% 180 Month Fixed 5/01 Loan $77,000.00 No Second, $60,000.00 Available Credit Card Credit “0” Due, all 2001 Coupon on-time Payments then Lender Transferred, 1/02 2/02 3/02 Timely Payments then 4/2002 to 4/2003 Escrow Shortage $103.34, equivalently 60 Month Deprived Life-time earned Accountability.

Ignored DEED Preemption Clause Precedent Complicated Loan Transfer, “Proof of Payment” Investigation Team’s attempt at Principal Misapplication reversal Deducted Escrow to avoid Contractual Damage, but misapplied all Funds Erroneously, that became evident a week later when Escrow lacked Funds for County Tax Payment, assuming Faults Blame elsewhere Team was simply Forced to Claim Escrow reductions Funds 1098 Taxable. Concealment became Anti-Trust {Tying} by omitting 29 Day’s from the after Transfer available Loan History {Lender admitted “Principal Curtailment” and erroneously Misapplied Escrow} 48 Months Concealment of both equates “Escrow Curtailment.”
Escrow Reduction Applied November, 2001 Paid by both Lender’s and December, 2001 on all Loan History’s was absent of Payment itemization, then and now.
In 2002 In-House Forth Credit Report Agency {Named in Testimony} held Loan Hostage by omitting 12/2001 Payment History accreditation {Void/Blank = Shaded Box} blocking outside Refinance Forcing Bankruptcy and Bankruptcy Trustee Paid in Full to Close account Years Ago, Reopened Three Times only to refund Amounts.

Demanding Credit for Payments at Bankruptcy Conformation Hearing, Judge Ordered’ Attorney File “Proof of Claim” {Judge Demanded Signature} Staying Conformation for 60 Day’s, Allowing Time to expire resulted in DEED Preemption Clause Sequestering to safe Harbor Possible Lead Plaintiff’ Class Action’ effect on Market Stability, Attorney was Forced to relocate Case-Load outside Houston.

New Attorney Payment History R.E.S.P.A. Request was Ignored, then Better Business Bureau expelled Lender for Ignoring My R.E.S.P.A. Request that intentionally allowed release of Bankruptcy Stay’s Advancement, “But” Lender Archive’ Department, Unlocked by E-Mailing 48 Month Coveted Loan History on same Day Showing, November, 2001 Escrow Reduction & “Principal Curtailment.”

Lender Formal Statement of Accountability was forced for both of the Misapplications in 2001, then Core Adversary’s Hearing. Judgment Ignored Admittance Statement accepting instead “Common Practice” Defense of Breach of DEED Contract and Escrow Anti-Trust, then Revised DEED Precedent Clause by Cropping Top half off Plagiarizing relative Paragraph, Awarding meager Damage for Ignored RESPA Request. CASE NO. 02-44178-H3-13

October, 2005 Trial’s 02/23/2006 favor Judgment Award, hired Appellate Attorney Day after Case Denial with Referral by Co-Council, from Bar Association recommended Office Appointment, {10 Day Appeal Time-frame was Coveted by Judge} “on Time by RULE # 2005” Appeal Denied for Time expired {15th Day of 11 Day Home Mailbox Served, -5 Day RULE = 6 Day Allowed – Sunday’s?} Excusable Neglect Appeal Denied by ENRON Judge, Fifth Circuit Denied overruling same, Appellate Attorney failed to explore Merits or Post Case to Printer for U.S. Supreme Court Cert. Petition, then December, 2007 Lender Returns $7,515.25 Loan Payments, Mooting Judgment, Self Selecting Damages, Threatening Foreclosure 05/06/2008 to “Case Law” Theft “Common Practice,” Blanketing Breach of DEED Commitment and Escrow Anti-trust Defendable for Corporate Megalomania.

1. Sued Washington Mutual for Damage, after forcing Formal Admittance Statement that through Loan Transfer Principal and Escrow were reduced. Equating {2001 “Principal Curtailment” Breach of DEED 180 Month Term Commitment $778.34} and {2001 “Escrow Curtailment” Anti-trust $637.22} Loan Manager Coveted the Pertaining Loan History, holding Loan Hostage for Lender Arrear Error of Twelve Escrow Shortage Payments amounting $103.34 that Started April, 2002 Ten Months Old Loan, all Payments Current Paid-up on-time before April, 2002 Credit Report Damage Blocked outside Refinance September, 2002.

1A. Refinance Block’ forced Bankruptcy, Loan History was Coveted from Attorneys until released Stay {$1,415.56 missing for 48 Month’s, now Located without Credit!}
By release of Stay, Loan Closed, Loan Histories Transferred to Archive’ Department and Teller unlocked by E-Mailing, revealing both the Coveted Bank One “Principal Curtailment” Abandonment of December, 2001 and Homeside Lending Erroneous attempt at “Curtailment” reversal that Admitted Erroneous Misapplication of Escrow, in November, 2001, The “Escrow Curtailment!”
All Proof Relates Both Lenders Credited November 2001 and Abandoned December 2001 to create the Twelve $103.34 Escrow Shortage Demand. Bank One and Homeside Lending Refused Bank One Loan History, and Loan Manager’s Protection of Loan History was accomplished by Lender receiving Loan on 11/01/2001, Dating All Loan History’s after “Escrow Curtailment” Reduction.

1B. Bank One N.A. or Homeside Lending F.A. needed to Write-off and Pay Back the Escrow’s $778.34 “Principal Curtailment” or Originate Principal Term Commitment financed. Problem was Failure to Communicate, reversing the 2001 Damage. Instead Loan Manager sent $336.00 Check from Escrow already in Shortage, Credited Wrong Month, Coveted the first 29 Days of Loan History to Protect both “Curtailments,” reported Escrow Reduction on Form 1098 Taxable and Falsified Credit Report by Shading Box Void/Blank. Fearing Credit Reporting exposure, Loan History was protected until release of Stay Day, when Archive responded by E-Mail supplying Loan History, their Fault Admittance Statement followed. The Audacity was Damage Admitted and shortly later Disputed on Court.
The Extreme Audacity is Damage amounted to Theft Concealed, with all Dispute’s Dispelled, Judge picked O-well’ to Plagiarize Damage Commitment!

1C. Foremost’ Credit Report must Notate Bankruptcy’s “Faults Blame” on Loan’s Credit Report to equate Real Damage reversals Fair Non-monetary Justified repair.

1D. ({“Point Counter Point”}) Loan History Abandoned December of all Credit and November “Escrow Curtailment” needed Additional $131.12 if it was intended to Reverse “Principal Curtailment” Damage, Lender Statement, Detailed “Erroneous” Escrow “Misapplication.” Escrow Shortage Increased Payment Demand for Twelve Months by $103.34, but Lender Attorney Claims 11/10/2001 Escrow Reduction was accomplished on 11/28/2001 to Pay December, Loan Histories started 11/29/2001?

1E. Curtailment Accountability by Lender! Loan Forced Insolvency by Escrow Curtailments = Bank One “Principal Curtailment” $813.48 Payment $-34.14 P.M.I. = Damage $-779.34
Bank One Transferred Escrow on 11/01/2001 $1,289.85, Lender Paid 12/10/01 County Tax $1,168.26, Escrow $336.23 Returned 12/12/2001 {Interest 11/28/2001 Paid $383.88, Principal 11/28/2001 Paid $253.34} = $-851.86
Bank One Damage $-779.34 + 4 Escrow Payouts $-851.86 = $-1,631.20
Loan Escrow Balance acquired in 2002 before 4/2002 accounted by Subtracting from the 2/22/2002 Statement’s, Escrow Shortage Demand.
1/2002, 2/2002, 3/2002, Escrow Payment’s of $175.27 x3 Months is $525.81, 1/2002 & 2/2002 P.M.I. is $-68.28. Escrow Paid 02/22/2002 $525.81 $-68.28 = $457.53.
TOTAL ESCROW SHORTAGE $1,189.35 + $457.53 = $1,646.88.
Escrow Balance from Damages and Pay-outs on 12/12/2001 $1,631.20
Escrow Shortage Demand and Adjustment related to 2002 Demand = $1.646.88
$15.68 Unaccounted but that’s Quoting Step (2) Escrow Analysis Statement “$1,189.35 divided by 12 Month’s = $99.11.”
Step (3) Actual Demand is $1,240.08 divided by 12 Month’s = $103.34 Accounting $1,240.08 + $457.53 = $1,697.61 - $1,631.20 = $66.41 expecting P.M.I Pay 3/2002 $-34.14 = $32.27 Unaccounted.
The above 17 Lines details every Lender Action’s Activity, every 2001 Payment was Prompt on-time and every 2002 Payment related above was Prompt on-time, Loan was 10 Months old on 01/04/2002, December 2001 is absent of History, and the Direct Source of the 12 x $103.34 Escrow Shortage Demand that Forced Insolvency by Curtailments and Attempted Curtailment.
Brief General review not Actual; trade Tax Payment for Transferred Escrow = 0
Bank One “Principal Curtailment” Damage $-779.34 Damage!
Escrow Reduction Paid November, 2001 $383.88 + 253.34 = $637.22 Damage!
Escrow Return $336.23 Damage! $779.34 + $637.22 +$336.23 = $1,752.79
Damage’s $1,752.79 Divide by 12 Month’s = Shortage of $146.06 not the $103.34. Both 2002 Loan Histories Received, Loan Statements Received, and Credit Report would have Itemized December 2001 Action, Loan was Coveted 48 Month’s.
General Review; skip $637.22 Escrows! $779.34 + $336.23 = $1,115.57 = $92.96 not $103.34 “Curtailment” is Damage, Overall Principal needed Pay-back = $779.34.

1F. Day Rate damages was Substance of Lawsuit, now over 2,345 Day’s Deficiency {Asked to Testify sought after Damage’s reply was Unqualified allowing Self-Prejudice equating $1,000.00 Day-Rate without happenstances President understanding or Doubling’s Practicality} $1,000.00 Award was Appealed.
Bankruptcy Attorney received expense Judgment, December, 2007 Washington Mutual used the Courts to return $7,515.98 Loan Payment, Muting Judgment with Fault Admittance, skirting Commitment Damages keeping Curtailments, picking Damage with willingness, forfeiting Accountability and Address.
Then in 2008 Served Trial Damage Award, belated 24 Months, without requested % Interest, Lender Intends to Foreclosure 05/06/2008 seeking Out of Hand Dismissal, if Federal Anti-Trust Statue of Limitations carries Four Year’s, early 2012 allowed to Include First Attorney if/or Defended Trustee’ Charge.

1G. Demanding Credit for Payments made at Bankruptcy Conformation Hearing, Judge Ordered Attorney to File “Proof of Claim” on the recorded record. Judge Required and Accepted My’ Signature to Conform Bankruptcy but held Paperwork for 60 Days to Stay Conformation, Ignoring Judge’s 60 Day’s Attorney Quit all Houston Caseload recommending, Bar Association Attorney Hired to Defend.

1H. Meager $1,000.00 Award for ignored R.E.S.P.A. request was Timely Appealed, because Attorney’s Proof of Claim” was ignored, Attorney R.E.S.P.A. request was ignored {ruled inadmissible} and ignoring My Lay-person R.E.S.P.A. request that included ignoring the Better Business Bureau { Washington Mutual Chair expelled} Release of Stay was achieved, Archive’ Department halted Progression, 28 Months of Homestead Squatting. Insolvency’s Destitute.
Denied funds lost, damage award and costs, Appeal was to Fund’ Preparation for related Substance seeking Constitutional Justice of and including, First Attorney’s Systematic Drain of Both Bankruptcy Trustee Account Charges and Rav4 Bankruptcy Account Charges that began by advancement of Principal Term Commitment with New Coupon Book that Drained Rav4 San Antonio Credit Union Auto Loan Account, including Second Attorney protecting First to Vengeance.

2. Defendant was colluded from Washington Mutual to former entity Homeside Lending under Seal’ later reversed for Damage Award Payment.
Attorney’s Loan History request was Ignored, Certified Mail, R.E.S.P.A. “qualified written request” was Inadmissible.
Attorney’s Filing of Core Adversary allowed first release of Stay Action.
At Pretrial Hearing unknown Surrogate Attorney appeared to Defend stating Case was just dropped in Lap without Time for review, or Proper Court paperwork. Judge threatened Dismissal, Ordering Attorney’s Appearance to Defend Three Day Core Adversary Hearing.
Washington Mutual Halfheartedly offered Arbitration if Costs were split, before Second Pretrial Hearing, wanting preferred Arbitrator, not being a College consideration passed.

3. Washington Mutual Trial Arguments related to Line-item Challenge of Washington Mutual Fault Admittance Statement that was evidenced, countering self by newfound Date Augmentation, excusing Accountable reasoning with Assorted Derelict Avoidances of Law.

3A. Credit Report received, detailed Itemization 12 Months back only, the December, 2001 was generalized by combining all the past. Exact penny for December, 2001 Dollar Proof was missing, as was Loan History Attorney’s requested, Twelve $103.34 Escrow Payment’s Increase Demanded 04/01/2002 was the Damage’s result, if December, 2001 was Paid Action would be recorded with Attribute, not Concealed from Attorney’s or retrospect implied, 11/10/2001 Statement was Itemized Curtailment, not Curtailment anticipation for 11/28/2001, all Homeside Lending History Concealed from 11/01/2001 to 11/28/2001 starting 11/29/2001, Anti-Trust Merit was explored by Loan Manager every History request.

3B. Judgment accepted Lender Defense of “Principal Curtailment” claiming “Common Practice” relating to Breach of DEED Commitments, highlighted damage, Precedent, Ironically, Separate the Lender’s Damage of “Principal Curtailment” “No Contest I Win” then Washington Mutual Pay’s Ten-fold for “Escrow Curtailment” or the like of C.E.O. Stock Option Award Pay, but Fighting both, at the same Time’ the 14 Day Loan Damage, Confounds Justice.

3C. Judgment accepted Lender Defense of Erroneous Escrow reduction claiming “Common Practice” Argued Funds reduced in November for December Payment, Argued Taxes increased Loan Payments, Argued “Principal Curtailment” reduced Loans overall Interest despite reduction of 180 Term Commitment, Argued {48 Month} “Concealed Prepayment” was not a “Curtailment” but was a Prepayment, Argued Escrow was reduced on 11/28 not 11/10, Argued April ISF Check corrected in May, Paid, April {belittlement} In Attorney Cross Lender Admitted “Curtailments” created the Escrow Shortage Demand that started in April, Admitted Large May Payment made Loan with “Curtailments” 100% Current including Late Fee’s, before 06/01/2002 {a Day or Two} and Admitted before April 2002 all Payments were respectfully Paid before Due.

3D. Judgment accepted Lender Testimony that Escrow Surplus return from Escrow already in arrears was unexplainable, root stem relates to Choice of intentional Damage Doubling, relative to Loan Payment Investigation Teams requirement of Canceled Check Front and Back sent in November, 2001, Damage’s Stemmed from Closed Faulty Investigation Report that resulted in week later, unknown Tax Payment responsibility Escrow Damage, Teams final Conclusion Dated Escrow reduction of 11/10 suspended to 11/28 but missed the Fact that it was Erroneous.
Simply forcing Escrow reduction to be reported on 1098 Tax Form as received Funds, and forcing December 2001 Payment History’s Shading/Blank Void report to Credit Agency, Second Time Simple Penny for Penny Swap opportunity missed.

4. Judgment ignored Core of Core Adversary Hearing Primary responsibility of Damage Awarding the DEED Stipulation Paragraph Verbatim and then Assessing Day-rate Damages for forced Bankruptcy and somehow skewed to ignore Published Guilt Admittance evidenced.
Precedent Clause clearly defines Prepayments requirement of Signed Authorization, forbidding Concealment that intentionally, Contractually Itemizes abuse Damage Award Amount to Protect Paperwork of DEED, separating Escrow Damage’s independently is the best Road to Travel.
Importance of Paragraph Commanded notation on Judgment, but Judgment edited Substance Plagiarizing Importance, without Authority Cropped-Off Top-Half of Paragraph, in effort to revise intended meaning, by omitting forward Substance, “Quoting” only bottom half of Paragraph their Collusion Supported Curtailments, Defendant was changed under Seal, amounting Special Prosecutor.

4A. Just Eleven of the Coveted Ten Day Timeframe allowance was actually Served, to review, itemize, find, hire and Convince Appellate Attorney Versed in “Bankruptcy Appeals!” *1. Attorney that wanted Case, Questioning, own Personal Expertise, Denied Case Days before Appeal was filed. *2. Bar Association recommended Appellate Attorney’s often Co-Counsel, Case Denial Office meetings Referral, resulted in next Day Appeal. *3. Appeal Arguments were E-Mailed / Spammed to numerous {over 50} Appellate Bar Attorneys. *4. Trial concluded 100 Day’s later Home Mailbox Served Delivery, if Box received Inspection on that Day, that’s Eleven Day’s from Served to Appeal minus the 5 Day RULE, Trial Attorney called many Days Later without Interest.

4B. Fifteen Day after Judge Signed, Attorney Appealed but foolishly, Persistently, Ignored Merit’s arguing only Excusable Neglect in every Appeal.
Draft for Supreme Court Petitioned attempted to Argue, that Judge Denied the actual meager Award {counterproductively suggesting compliance.} Judgment accused Predisposed to Bankruptcy aspirating Peasant’ or Premonition or Intent. Judge ignored Federal Bankruptcy RULE #2005 Precedent extension of 5 Day Appeal Timeframe Law without excuse or reasoning.

4C. Core Adversary used for DEED Precedent, and Escrow Anti-Trust review, outranged allowed Importance extended, whereas simple U.S. SUPREME COURT DEED Paragraph Deciphering is needed to allow Case Law, Foreclosure reform, until/forcing only DEED found Borrower Protection, achieves Lender revision, without Creative Control effort, Industry’s destined to Flounder.
Coveted 10 Day’s Appeal Allowance was misunderstood beforehand by Trusting Attorney assurance that 30 Day’s and not 90 Day’s was the allotted Appeal Timeframe. Conveyed in Confidence, waiting for the minute Courtroom doors opened Pretrial.

4D. Trial ended October, 2005 Memorandum Judgment 2/23/2006, 2/25/2006 BNC Mailing, 2/27/2006 Appeal Served U.S. Mail Standard Mail-box Delivery if Mailbox was inspected on that Day, Appeal to extend Filed 3/10/2006, 15 Day count, 11 Day Served Count, Federal Appeal RULE #2005 regulates 5 extra Days, allowing Count 6 Day Received to Appeal and Sunday’s might Not Count, Rush to Dismiss failed Arithmetic Prudence or Constitutionality, Imagination offers Collusion to Covet Attorney Theft Protection or Justice’s Blind Permanence, for same, or Protecting Wall Street assumption.

4E. Bankruptcy Judge Chaired from Conformation to Award Appeal is famed for Worlds largest Historic Billions of Dollars Bankruptcy Case Dismissal, Schlumberger oilfield Russia claimed 10 day appeal time-frame expired, without exposing Time-frames exactness beforehand, Clerk of Court recorded holding Judgment Two Days before Posting, Mail Delivery took Two Days, Attorney called Two Days after Home Mail-Box Delivery stating not willing to pursue further.
Appeal being Denied, Mimicked Trial Merits Ignored. Lender Mooted Judge then Judgment, only Arguing to Moot Guilt Admittance Lender Statement.

4F. Justice Circumvented the Federal Bankruptcy Court “RULE” that extends all Judge Appeal Timeframe for Five Additional Days RULE #2005. Famed Houston ENRON Judge received, and Denied Second Appeal, Appeal waited for ENRON Trials Conclusion. Fifth Circuit refused to overrule ENRON Judge, Printer never received Desired U.S. SUPREME COURT Appeal and Time expired, Merits were never exacted or explored.

4G. Thousands of Bankruptcy’s relate and Hundreds of Bankruptcy’s have resulted since, because Proved Damages were Denied, Lender Accountability Reforming Day-rate Damages was Award sought, if 05/06/2008 Foreclosure receive Action, Theft becomes allowed, Case Law results that Lender Defense of DEED restricted Curtailments, Errant Escrow Reductions and Misapplications are “Common Practice” Defendable, opening the floodgate of Attorney exploitation, Theft Defended as “Common Practice” allowable, Loan Abuse put NOTE ahead of DEED {even NOTE Preemption Clause front Page allowance for the Courts to respect Lender Loan Accountability or Discipline the lack-of, by enforcing Verbatim respectfully} and the Anti-Trust was simple Escrow abuse by Date Manipulation.

5. Priority became Credit Card over Home Loan seeking outside Refinance of $100,000.00 for 25 Years to install Rental Home on Lot was Goal, Original Planned Goal of Home Reconstruction inside Work was achieved 9/02 ready to extend Longer Terms by Refinancing for Rental Trailer house and Outside Reconstruction Goal remained. Numerous Refinance attempts achieved sudden Quick Denial, November, 2002 after Home Inspection Citi-Bank Reported Incomplete Loan Payment History before April 2002 needed addressed, Forced into Bankruptcy with $8,000.00 at hand, Work on-call Oilfield Casing/Pipe unlimited Hours/Day’s, States/Land/Offshore, Paid-off many Credit Cards but included 2 Auto Loan Payments, expecting resolve with Attorney Assistance, needing only Loan History.

5A. On April 2002 Loan Damages created insurmountable Escrow Shortage Arrears increasing the next Twelve Monthly Payment Demand from $813.49 / $812.28 to $915.83 effecting accountability, $8,000.00 new Credit Card Home Improvement Balance reached around 30% Interest exactly and instantly relating.

5B. Credit Report Damage of December, 2001 Shaded Box Void/Blank entry Blocked outside Refinance to force Bankruptcy, then Bankruptcy Attorney was denied “Proof of Claim” {Judge ordered at Conformation Hearing, Staying Conformation 60 Day’s} included Bankruptcy Attorney’s R.E.S.P.A. “qualified written request” that was also being ignored, again Payments were halted for Court appearance to Demand Credit for Check Payments, Judge and Attorney missed Attending Release of Stay Hearing 09/02or04/2004.

5C. 9/02or04/04 Bankruptcy Trustee was Chairing / Ruling all Proceedings and Release’s of Stay for absent Judge that Busy Day {related need for Core Adversary option} Trustee Delayed Home’s Release of Stay for 30 Days Ordering Attorney’s Presence on 10/02or04/2004.

5D. Trustee on 10/02or04/2004 Conversed or Ordered, Attorney File Core Adversary Hearing, at that same timeframe, My Lay-person R.E.S.P.A. “Qualified Written Request” crafted was being ignored. The Better Business Bureau assisted and Expelled Washington Mutual’s Chief Arbitrator Chair, including Three Year Suspension for being ignored.
R.E.S.P.A. “qualified written request” is simply a request to open Loan Discovery by itemization of Questions. Constructing request follows a formula, Lender’s Time-line required to first admit receiving, second form reply and Third reach resolve.

5E. Attorney Formally Back-dated R.E.S.P.A. Request to expire the Time-line allowance when Posting and it Predated our first meeting, understanding’, relates to Judge’s refusal to allow into evidence, confusion relates to Attorney Award and Justice denied, compounded Damage is, Justice Denied harbors Protecting Attorney Malpractice’s of the First Attorney’s Theft that Second Attorney was Protecting.
Yes; Attorney Deserves Pay for Work, Independently of Malpractice Goal against Attorney’s Insurance/Bonds that assuredly relates Out-of Court Settlement Awards and License’s, but Judge’s Judgment and Appeal refusal Stands restrictive of Jurisprudence, Prejudices sometimes avoid defined Identifiable reasoning’s.

6. Trustee at Hearing on 10/02or04/2004 Conversed or Ordered Attorney to File Core Adversary, and later Attorney repeatedly related, Intent to File Core Adversary Hearing was Progressing up to the 12/15/2004 Release of Stay.
Lender Executive Response Center Letter 11/01/2004 Promised Response.
Core Adversary received no Action before 12/17/2004. Payment Arrears were not sent awaiting Judicator notice of filing, expecting Loan History exam, Discovery, Proof of Forced Bankruptcy exposure.

6A. Homeside Lending Loan Manager became’ Washington Mutual Loan Manager.
Loan Manager protected Loan History until the release of Stay 12/15/2004.

6B. Loan Manager’s 48 Months of Loan History Protection was Unlocked to Washington Mutual Archive’ Department after Released Stay, on a whim and Prayer Archive’ was called.
Washington Mutual Loan Archive’ Department E-Mailed History on 12/15/2004.
Washington Mutual was Informed to explain, discrepancies on 12/16/2004.
Bank One “Principal Curtailment” and Loan Manager’s Escrow reduction became Evidence.

6C. Washington Mutual claimed My Ignored R.E.S.P.A. request was on File.
Washington Mutual claimed to have Never received Attorney R.E.S.P.A. Request, Faxed Attorney R.E.S.P.A. Request to Washington Mutual Archive’ 12/16/2004.

6D. Attorney Office Meeting after 12/17/2004 for Legal Process, Core Adversary intent with Court unfiled, Loan History was reviewed with Attorney Lender Telephone Communications.
Washington Mutual Admitted Both Lenders Damaged Loan, with Formal Written Document of Lender Damage Itemization.

6E. Received in Mail Court’s Core Adversary notice of Filing, Dated Filed on 12/15/2004.

7. 48 Months of Loan History Protection forced Loan Manager to rush release of Stay on 12/15/2004 to avoid “Suspended” Core Adversary Hearings Filing, but on the same Day, Washington Mutual Archive’ Department E-mailed Coveted Loan History that Self Evidenced Missing Payment direction Detail, inherently revealing Escrow and Loan Damage.

7A. Washington Mutual was forced into written admittance, Loan Damage Assessment Statement that exacted, Bank One Misapplied Payment calling it “Principal Curtailment” {Curtailment = Lop-off liken-to Horse’s Tail!} Revealing Lender Despising Lender that Compromise’s All Accountability’s, explaining the Spite My Words “Escrow Curtailment” Draw’s.

7B. Washington Mutual written admittance exacted Loan Manager Errantly Misapplied Escrow attempting to reverse “Principal Curtailment” then Argued in Court opposition claiming November, 2001 Escrow reduction was Intended anticipating needed December, 2001 Payment, all Payment Date Augmentation and Conflicts in History were Dispelled’ with Evidenced Proof, Lender was restricted to Defend “Principal Curtailment” and “Escrow Misapplication” offering only “Common Practice’s” and a don’t know why, Escrow Surplus Check sent.

7C. Coveting was preformed to protect Lender from Contractual Damage expenses of $10,286.25 in trade falsified Credit Report to force Bankruptcy, ignorant of simple Penny for Penny exchange in 2001 to reverse Damage.

8. 80 Month’s Ago’ Loan Transferred 11/01/2001, Lender Denied Payment Credit of $778.34 for “Principal Curtailment” and Lender Denied Payment Credit of $637.22 for “Escrow Curtailment” recorded on First real-time Payment Breakdown Statement of 11/10/2001 {Lender Investigation Team required Canceled Check Front/Back Proof of Payment early 11/2001 and incorrectly reported resolve around 11/28/2001} equaling Loan Payments of $1,415.56 missing Credit to Date.

8A. Loan History that was Coveted to Protect Breach of DEED Contractual Damage expenses of $10.286.25, was followed by Errant Escrow reduction, that forced False Credit Report to Protect Lender from Both “Curtailments” forcing Voluntary Bankruptcy, now 80 Months without Payment Credit. 11/28 to 12/12 = Damage Time-frame!

8B. Bank One N.A. Breach of DEED for $10,286.25 Damage became contractually Transferred on 11/01/2001 to Homeside Lending, with the $1,289.85 Escrow Funds.
On 11/10/2001 Lender Statement detailed Escrow reduction, Lender Investigation.
On 11/28/2001 Loan Manager erroneously reduced Escrow, attempting Damage reversal.
On 12/10/2001 County Tax Payment $1,168.26 created Escrow Shortage, amounting to $-515.63, Second simple Penny for Penny exchange reversal opportunity missed.
On 12/12/2001 Escrow Surplus of $336.23 increased Shortage amounting to $-851.86.
Escrow Reduction of 11/28/2001 was Reported received funds on 1098 Tax Form.
On or after 01/01/2002 Homeside Lending received first, after Transfer Loan Payment.

9. December 2001 was Void of Payment on all received Loan Histories “Then and Now.”
December 2001 is recorded as Shaded Window {Void/Blank}. Void reported on real-time Loan Statements also was reported to Fourth Independent’ in-House’ Credit Report Agency {Named in Testimony} that Supply’s the Three respected Credit Reporting Agency’s.

9A. Both Bank One and Loan Manager, repeatedly refused Production of Loan Payment History’s, relating to Escrow Shortage in 2001 and Histories received in 2002 hid the Curtailments, Denying Attorney’s the Loan History up to 12/16/2004.
Denying Bank One History accomplished, “Principal Curtailment” Protection.
Denied Homeside Lending Loan History was accomplished by Lender receiving Loan on 11/01/2001, Dating Loan History to start 11/29/2001 absent of the Escrow Reduction.

9B. Bank One’ sent Account Closed Statement related to Loan Transfer, claiming $812.48 Payments were $920.78.
New Lender Posted Escrow Reduction Statement on 11/10/2001.

9C. Homeside Lending early November 2001, Investigated Bank One Payment by Requiring Front/Back Canceled Cheek Proof for their Investigation Team {2001 was “Paid in Full”} 11/28 relate Date Investigation Concluded?

9D. Requested received Payment History early 2002 began Loan History on 11/29/2001 omitting Escrow Misapplication “Escrow Curtailment.”
Requested received Payment History April 15, 2002, began Loan History on 11/29/2001 omitting Escrow Misapplication “Escrow Curtailment.”

9E. Lender Demanded that All Escrow Shortage’s be made Current, before further Account Review or Payment History updating, around April 2002.
Twelve Escrow Shortage Payments of $103.34 increased Payment Demand from $813.49 / $812.48 to $915.83, Started on April 2002 and Check did ISF.

10. Bank One accepts Payment then Mails Statement with one Tear-off Coupon, December Coupon was Paid, Lender Paid $34.14 December PMI, then Breached DEED Commitment Contracted, Applying then Reversing December 2001 Payment to Pay Principal only, before Transferring Loan, called “Principal Curtailment” Homeside Lending received $1,289.85 Escrow with Loan on 11/1/2001. Absent of Loan Commitment Information Requiring Escrow to Pay 2001 County Tax .

10A. Loan Originator “Principal Curtailment” was a Breach of DEED Cover Page Lender Signed, Bold Print requirement of Signed Authorization Clause as it relates to Prepayment specifying instead of Damage Arbitration, all Loan Originator received Funds and earnest Funds returned, separating a Prepayment from Coveted Curtailment to Contractually support the 180 Month Term Commitment DEED Paperwork, $12,291.54 – Outside Costs = $10,286.25 Commitment Damage.
Fourteen Day Damage from 11/28/2001 to 12/12/2001 intentionally Concealed for 48 Months, “Principal Curtailment” Damage of $10,286.25 Justifying Interest Due Today.

10B. Loan Manager’s “Escrow Curtailment” Relates from Day Loan Transferred, forced Bankruptcy and Rushed Release of Stay, Damage Justifies Tenfold Accountability counting Interest and Damages to Allow Attorney Theft Suit, Attorney Malpractice Suit {assure Out of Court Settlement’s} and San Antonio Credit Union Damage is simply New Rav4 Settlement.

11. Attempting to reverse “Principal Curtailment,” Lender inadvertently reduced Escrow from $1,289.85 to $652.63 according to Real-time Loan Statements Itemization on 11/10/2001 not on 11/28/2001 as Argued.

11A. Requested Proof of Canceled Check Payment was sent to Lender early 11/2001, Pretrial Discovery Question relating to that Investigations’ Timeframe, and it’s results both repeated and ignored, Argument that Escrow reduction was on 11/28/2001 Flounders, Argument it Paid December Flounders, and Stands Disputing Washington Mutual Admittance Statement, but that requires Diligent Securitization of Verbatim the avoided Discovery Question’s intended to simplify everyone’s understanding of exact Day Escrow was Reduced and Investigation Ended, nonetheless Escrow reduction is Abuse and Misapplication Damaged .

11B. Washington Mutual’s Loan Damage Acknowledgement Report exacted Bank One Action a “Principal Curtailment” and exacted Homeside Lending Errant Escrow reduction a Misapplication, reducing Escrow is damage, Errant is a wrong, Misapplication is a mistake.

11C. Errant “Principal Curtailment reversal attempt, applied funds to Month Bank One already Credited, allowing 11/2001 to be Credited by Both Lenders, because December is absent of Documented Credit, Repeatedly! Applications Location Discovery required Accountability! Reduced Escrow Concealed’ from Loan History’ for 48 Month’s’, by Definition is “Escrow Curtailment.”

11D. County Tax payment of $1,168.26 on 12/10/2001 created Escrow Shortage, amounting to $-515.63 so Loan Manager Posted Escrow Surplus return 12/12/2001 of $336.23 to increase Escrow arrears, amounting to $-851.86.

12. Homeside Lending Loan Manager’s Coveting of the Bank One 2001 “Principal Curtailment” was complicated by the Erroneous Escrow Reduction that became intent to deceive lasting for 48 Months to protected Contractual Damage expenses of $10,286.25 in trade for forcing My Bankruptcy, now 80 Months without Payment Credit.

12A. Homeside Lending’s failed attempt at Damage reversal’s deduction of Funds from Escrow was admitted by Washington Mutual, Erroneously Misapplied.
Washington Mutual acquired Homeside Lending and the Loan Manager that Testified for Washington Mutual’s Attorney being Sued, Loan Manager was reduced to Arguing’ the ”Bank One N.A. “Principal Curtailment” was “Common Practice” Defendable.

12B. Loan Manager was reduced to Arguing’ the Homeside Lending inadvertent Escrow Reduction was “Common Practice” Defendable, despite ruining Credit Report, Falsifying 1098 Tax Form, Forcing Bankruptcy, Releasing Stay, Arguments were all Moot because Washington Mutual accepted Faults Blame in Written Statement of Bank One “Principal Curtailment” and Homeside Lending Erroneous “Escrow Reduction.”

12C. Loan Manager was reduced to Arguing’ the Escrow Surplus return from Account in Shortage was beyond Testimony Explanation, actuality it was Damage Doubling in Nature.

12D. Bank One did Report 2001 Tax Form 1098! Homeside Lending Reported 2001 Tax Form 1098, claiming Escrow Reduction Funds as Received Funds, following Loan Transfer, First Payment was in 2002, Exampling boundless Dismissing mindset forsaking Bankruptcy.

13. December 2001 was Void of Payment on all received Loan Histories “Then and Now” December 2001 is recorded as Shaded Window {Void/Blank.} Void reported on real-time Loan Statements also were reported to fourth Independent in-House Credit Report Agency {Named in Testimony} that Supplies the Three respected Credit Reporting Agency’s.

13A. Demanding on the Recorded Record, Credit for Payments made, Judge at Bankruptcy Conformation Hearing, Ordered Attorney to File “Proof of Claim” Trustee and Lender were Chaired {Judge Required Paperwork Signed or Foreclosure} Sixty Day “Stay” of Conformation Resulted for Canceled Check Dispute resolution.

13B. Lender Chaired Hearing to expect History request and either refused to reply or Attorney Ignored Judge Order requirement of “Proof of Claim” but Time Expired, Attorney said on Phone that he was/is Quitting, Rav4, Home Loan Payments halted, Months Later Large Credit Union Check Posted to make Account Current, Auto Loan {Rav4} Arrears Paid in Full before New Attorney Hired.
Later Attorney sent New Letter-headed San Antonio Credit Union Payment Coupon Book that had Additional Principal and Coupons, Stating he Quit and Suggested Attorney.

13C. March 15, 2004 “I am Referring all My Clients Letter” from Attorney, Notating enclosed New Payment Coupon Book for Rav4 Auto Loan. New Attorney R.E.S.P.A. Request Date’s 2/12/2004 before our First Meeting. Substitution of Council Order 04/23/2004 R.E.S.P.A. Request Date related Lender Damages for being ignored, from backdating Action, if ever Posted, Attorney Claims sent Certified Mail.

13D. Attorney Quit, including sending bulk of Houston Bankruptcy Case-load to Board Certified Attorney I hired, Charged an additional $1,200.00 to My Bankruptcy Trustee as a Wanton Disregarding parting Gift.

14. Instantly New Attorney sent Homeside Lending Certified mail R.E.S.P.A. “qualified written request” with Guidance Attorney’s Legal Secretary Helped with Rav4 Credit Union Communication about New Term Commitment additional Principal, Payment Coupon Book former Attorney Devised.

14A. San Antonio Credit Union Denied to Attorney’s Legal Secretary the Adjusting of Terms Principal or sending New Coupon Book with Three acquired Additional Month’s, Despite Coupon Books at Hand, unresolved from Credit Union Denying books Existence, Loan Payoff Schedule was requested and received.
Two Additional Months were Added to the Attorneys’ Three Months creating Loans Demand of Principal without Accounting Interest, that was Larger than Original Loan’s Principal Financed, again resolve was Denied, Current on Rav4 Loan, Fighting Home Loan, anticipating R.E.S.P.A. Response, told Credit Union to expect No more Payments, will properly clean before Repossession Day, awaiting R.E.S.P.A. Response lasted past Rav4 Repossession, Attorney was being indifferent about Rav4 and Ignored R.E.S.P.A.

14B. After Repossession Trustee reported itemized Deficiency Amendment of $2,526.87 to Rav4 without Accountability, Charged by First or Second Attorney before Repossessed and of course again After Repossession about $2,500.00 Amendment Charged. Trustee Clerk, Stated all Amendment Charges Paid without Question, again “Common Practice.”

14C. Seven Months later with Loan History Denied {E-Mailed to Federal Regulators & Assumed Regulators that Lender fails to respond to Attorneys R.E.S.P.A. Request, fair assumption’s Review was Forced and Privileged ignored by Lender} Payments were Suspended for Audience with Bankruptcy Court resolution, 09/02or04/2004 Attorney and Judge failed to attend release of Stay hearing, Bankruptcy Trustee was Ruling Release of Stays for Judge, Release of Stay was Suspended, Trustee required Attorney attendance 30 days later 10/02or04/2004.

14D. Briefly First Attorney failed Judge “Proof of Claim” Order and overcharged Trustee’s Bankruptcy Fee’s, Raided Rav4 Bankruptcy Account and Raided Rav4 Credit Union Account before Attorney or Credit Union Raided Rav4 Account.
Second Attorney Protected to Malpractice R.E.S.P.A. Failed to Attend Hearing, Claimed intent to file Core Adversary, but allowed release of Stay, sent Substitute replacement Attorney to Pre-Trial Hearing and Misdirected Appellate Attorney with Confusion.

14E. Ignored Attorney R.E.S.P.A. request was used to format “My layperson” R.E.S.P.A. “Qualified Written Request” Posted Certified Mail using California address supplied by Security Exchange Commission relating to Washington Mutual, it was Ignored, request Sent Certified Mail to Bank One, Bankruptcy Trustee and Washington Mutual, was also Posted regular Mail to Homeside Lending, Attorney, former Attorney D.O.J., C.C., O.T.S. and Better Business Bureau and more including California Attorney General that Promised Active Silent Case Review, but Lender moved to Nevada, not Seattle, Request was E-Mailed to R.E.S.P.A, H.U.D, U.S.A.G. Bush and Blair were at Ranch, Sent to Blair, Tony Snow and more.

15. Better Business Bureau was being Ignored and reported no response from Washington Mutual, I challenged their Existence, then Chief Arbitrator Chair with Membership was removed from Washington Mutual for Three Years, understand Loan History was supplied on release of Stay Day 12/15/2004 Pretrial, itemizing the Curtailments, Washington Mutual Admittance of Fault called for Court Action.

16. Sued Washington Mutual Core Adversary under Seal Judge changed Defendant to Homeside Lending allowing Washington Mutual Attorney to call Homeside Lending Loan Manager to Testify, at Pretrial Judge claimed Defendant changed for Simplicity? Reversed for Judgment Award Payment, but Board Certified Attorney Certified Mail R.E.S.P.A. “qualified written request” {sent to Homeside Lending ignored by Washington Mutual} became Inadmissible in Court!

16A. Week before Three Day Core Adversary Hearing was Pretrial Hearing, unknown Surrogate Attorney arrived to Defend stating Case Dropped in Lap without review or required Documentation filed, Judge Stayed Pretrial hearing for 30 Days, Threatening to Dismiss unless Attorney attended to Defend, fear of voicing any Objection Resulted.

16B. Judge Allowed My ignored R.E.S.P.A. request to received the only damage Judgment $1,000.00 {thanks to the B.B.B. support} substance matters related in R.E.S.P.A. request that Judge took under advisement at Trial pertaining, was absent from Judgment and ignored to date, Also recorded in Testimony Ignored {Blank} Discovery Questions.

16C. Houston Bankruptcy Judge Chaired from Conformation to Award Appeal, famed for Worlds largest Historic Bankruptcy, Schlumberger oilfield Russia claimed 10 day appeal time-frame expired, without exposing Time-frames exactness beforehand, Clerk of Court recorded holding Judgment Two Days before Posting in Mail that took Two Days, Attorney called Two Days after Home Mail-Box Delivery stating not willing to pursue further, Ten Days received to Appeal after Judge Signed, Award was Served in Mailbox {Day Ten, Co-Council Denied and Referred} Eleven Days from Served to Appeal and Appeal to extend was filed, and Denied.

16D. “RULE” Rule of Law Circumvented RULE #2005 exacts Bankruptcy Court Appeal Mandate allocation of Five Day extension for Time to Appeal, Judge sets whatever Appeal Timeframe and RULE extends by Five Days to eliminate Weekend, Holiday Working Day Confusions, Deadline was met for Merit Appeal Trumps rush to Dismiss by Judge and Attorney.

17. Both Bankruptcy Attorney’s Reviewed Loan and Payment History Request then New hired Appellate Attorney directed Excusable Neglect Defense, extensive Office hours relating to Line-item Case History reviewed, shared in Office, spent on Phone and E-Mailed, Trial Bankruptcy Attorney Name on Appeal remained.

17A. Real Malpractice Balance awaiting Loan resolve. Trial ended 100 Days later Judgment Signed, despite evidence Clerk delay Posting for Postal Delivery {6 Day received, 4 Day from Attorney} Appeal Denied for expired days.
Second Appeal was Judge famed for ENRON, refused Excusable Neglect Appeal, docketed first following Enron Trial conclusion, Houston we have a Problem reasoning or D.O.J. Broke Problem reasoning!
Fifth Circuit Appeal was asked to Rule over ENRON Judge’s refusal of exploring Excusable Neglect, Imagine that!

17B. Appellate Attorney failed to Post Excusable Neglect Case to Printer for Cert. Petition U.S. Supreme Court, Merits were neglected and contrary then time expired.

17C. Foreclosure offers Different Protections from Justice relating Financial Accountability to the Following; Homeside Lending is/or/and Washington Mutual, First Bankruptcy Attorney, Second Bankruptcy Attorney Protecting first, Bankruptcy Trustee and San Antonio Credit Union all Misdirected Funds, Dismissing Accountability.

17D. Foreclosure Relates to the Following; Bank One Transferred Account with intentional Damage, Judge allowed Theft “Common Practice” Defended, Enron Judge Protected Both Houston Courthouse and D.O.J. Systematic, Fifth Circuit Protected D.O.J. Appellate Attorney ignored Merit of Assured Supreme Court Victory that Promised Numerous Damage Awards, by seeking and Crediting Skewed Trial Attorney Misinformation.

18. Closed Loan with $60,000.00 available on Credit Card, “0” owed, Complete Plumbing Electrical and interior Walls replacement ended September, 2002, Mid 2002 Priority became Credit Card balance over Loan Payment {Loan History omitted to Protect “Curtailments” Escrow Arrears were Demanded when all Payments were Current on-time, Lender Failed Accountability and refused Bank One Loan History, then Credit Report Blocked outside Refinance} $8,000.00 Credit Card % increased from around 5% to 20% to 30% April, May, 2001, Bankrupted! Day Rate damages, was Substance of Lawsuit, $1,000.00 Award was Appealed, Bankruptcy Attorney received expense Judgment.

19. December 2007’ Washington Mutual returned $7,515.98 of Loan Payments, by Trustee Opening and Reclosing Bankruptcy to Transfer Payment, Mooting Judgment with Fault Admittance, skirting Commitment Damages, keeping Curtailments, Foremost Credit Report Notation of Faults Blame notation on Loans Credit Report equates. Theft reaches Tuition by Foreclosure, as does “Common Practice” Case Law Defense.