U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Martin Glenn denied Wells Fargo's request for permission to foreclose on Tandala Mims's house in the Bronx for a second time on Thursday because he still wasn't satisfied that Wells -- as opposed to some other bank -- had the right to do so.

In its attempts to prove its legal standing to foreclose so far, Wells Fargo (WFC) has submitted two different versions of Mims's note, certifying each as a true and accurate copy of the original. The bank has also submitted a document assigning the mortgage to it that was problematic, as I explained in an article earlier this week. One issue with the assignment was that the company allegedly doing the assigning is defunct. Another is that -- through the magic of MERS -- a Wells Fargo employee was signing on behalf of the assigner. Essentially, that puts Wells Fargo on both sides of the contract, a conflict of interest.

In its court filing after the judge's first rejection of its standing, Wells Fargo didn't specifically address the problems with the note, and instead focused on the assignment, but without facing the real issue. Wells justified that assignment as "merely to take the subject mortgage out of the MERS system."

It's true that members of MERS -- an electronic mortgage registration and tracking system -- agree to have MERS act as their common agent. However, both versions of the note showed the original lender had transferred the note to Washington Mutual, which eventually became part of JPMorgan Chase (JPM). Presumably, then, it should have been Chase that had the right to assign the mortgage out of the MERS system, since the mortgage follows the note. It doesn't make sense for MERS to act as the agent of a defunct company that no longer has an interest in the asset.

Unfortunately, it's possible that the MERS database didn't reflect the transfer to Chase, and the attorneys just didn't make the effort to reconcile either version of the note with reality, but instead relied on the MERS data. It's precisely this failure to track who really owns what that makes people nervous that MERS will ultimately cloud millions of property titles.

Judge Says He's "Deeply Concerned"


In court Thursday, Wells argued that its papers proved it had the right to foreclose, and that Mims didn't have the right to challenge the assignment. That argument was successfully rebutted by consumer bankruptcy attorney David Shaev: Immediately afterward, the judge ruled against Wells, though he gave the bank permission to try again.

Describing himself as "deeply concerned," Judge Glenn noted that, in looking at the documents, questions kept "popping out," and he made the point that Wells Fargo hadn't answered the questions he had raised in his initial order against it. In one of the hearing's more dramatic moments, the judge asked Wells Fargo who the investor in the note was -- the MERS database doesn't say -- and Wells admitted it didn't know.

Let's think about that: A loan servicer is trying to foreclose on a mortgage for a principal whose identity it doesn't know. If Wells doesn't know who the investor is -- who owns the note -- then, who gave the bank the note? We can only hope that whatever part of Wells collected Mims's mortgage payments knows who the investor is, and has been giving that the party the money.

As Linda Tirelli, Shaev's co-counsel notes: "It doesn't mean they can't find out, won't find out in the future, but as of now they don't know." Wells showed up at its second attempt to foreclose without the note owner's information at its fingertips, and given the centrality of the note's ownership to proving standing, that's shocking.

Will Third Time Be a Charm?

Judge Glenn also granted a motion filed by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court to depose Wells Fargo, noting there were "numerous factual issues that the parties are entitled to inquire about and deal with." I'd love to be a fly on the wall during that deposition.

Due to the current status of the case, it will likely be March before Wells tries for a third time to establish that it has the right to foreclose on Mims. Let's hope the bank gets its story straight by then.


Increase your money and finance knowledge from home

Socially Responsible Investing

Invest in companies with a conscience.

View Course »

Basics Of The Stock Market

Stock Market 101 - everything you need to know but were afraid to ask!

View Course »

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

12 Comments

Filter by:
jakob_oram

I personally think that bankruptcy is much better than foreclosure. You seem to bounce back from bankruptcy a lot faster now days. They have secured credit cards and all kinds of ways to rebuild you credit. But foreclosure is more like an event that even with recovered credit, could keep you from buying another home.


http://www.reversemortgagelendersdirect.com/reverse-mortgage-loan/
http://www.reversemortgagelendersdirect.com/reverse-mortgage-calculator/
http://www.reversemortgagelendersdirect.com/reverse-mortgage-information/
http://www.reversemortgagelendersdirect.com/washington-dc-reverse-mortgage/
http://www.reversemortgagelendersdirect.com/reverse-mortgages-how-they-work/
http://www.reversemortgagelendersdirect.com/reverse-mortgages-pros-and-cons/
http://www.reversemortgagelendersdirect.com/advantages-and-disadvantages-reverse-mortgage/

July 19 2013 at 3:36 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
FUCK THAT DUDE

what can people due if they have been a victum of forecloser flaud and forced out of there home is there any way to get it back????

January 21 2011 at 12:08 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
ikey1928

GREAT STORY KEEP THEM COMEING

December 10 2010 at 1:11 PM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply
ddwlsn

You write: It's true that members of MERS -- an electronic mortgage registration and tracking system -- agree to have MERS act as their common agent. However, both versions of the note showed the original lender had transferred the note to Washington Mutual, which eventually became part of JPMorgan Chase (JPM). See full article from DailyFinance: http://srph.it/fUXhiL I am not sure that you are correct if you are saying WM became part of JPM. My understanding is that some (most) of the assets were acquired by JPM; not the corporate entity. The issue of ownership of the note/mortgage may have nothing to do with JPM/Chase.

December 10 2010 at 10:51 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
jkennedy806

I have one of these notes, I too, am in foreclosure, and it stopped cause during one of the conciliatory meetings I begged the question, deed in Lieu? The attorney for Wells, "said my client doesn't do deed in Lieu" I said, "why not?" The attorney's repyl, "cause of chain of title.???"Then my reply, " and speaking of chain of title, you do not have right to it. Wells Fargo's name is not on the mortgage note, not on chain of title and certainly not on Truth of Lending disclosure. Hello out there if the title is screwed up it's not the homeowner'S fault. I had my own title search done and from my end it's okay. From the banks end it's a mess. So I am going for free and clear title. Go Mims!!

December 10 2010 at 10:46 AM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply
6 replies to jkennedy806's comment