Given that I filed what I believe to be the catalytic case, Estate of C. v. Wells Fargo Bank, et al., almost three years ago, I never though so much wreckage would result from the internal practices of lenders trying to be “efficient.”
Concerning Nevada’s response to Robo-signing: I received a copy of a press release from a friend who received same from a Jennifer Lopez of Nevada’s Attorney General office. I presume this is a different Miss Lopez than the one who already seeks attention.
In essence, two persons were indicted by the Nevada Grand Jury of a scheme which alleges that thousands of document were fraudulently notarized and recorded between 2005 and 2008. Press Release includes two perp photos.
My original suit sought to reverse a sale whereby the robo-signer (in CA) purported via an SB 1137 Notice, to have affirmatively contacted the deceased trustor of a reverse mortgage which had been called due to what the industry calls a “maturity event.” That means the borrower died, and they’re calling the loan. I was Special Admin of that probate case. As expected, Wells’ council was arrogant and intransigent.
It was never my intention to start an avalanche of problems for the industry; I merely wished to hold this lender’s feet to the fire long enough for us to resolve the problem, which came to me the 11th hour. In reality, my suit was probably just a sideshow in the big scheme of things.
How do you other investors feel about the pendelum swinging in favor of defaulted homeowners who are yet given still more time?
