Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
10 02 02 OCC Case # 00971981 Appeal in Complaint against Bank of America Corporation s

10 02 02 OCC Case # 00971981 Appeal in Complaint against Bank of America Corporation s

Ratings: (0)|Views: 22 |Likes:
RE: Case # 00971981 Appeal in complaint against Bank of America Corporation
Response within 10 days is kindly requested.
To US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, by email and by USPS First Class Mail.

Dear Sir/Madam:

I am writing to appeal the decision of US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to close the complaint referenced above.

It was unreasonable that such complaint was closed, when Bank of America Corporation provided a response that was no response at all.

1) The bank was not requested to provide any records of the loan to the straw buyer - Nivie Samaan, as it falsely claimed in its January 8, 2010 letter. Such records were largely produced and were linked in the complaint as evidence of the fraud. Such records were also opined as fraud by fraud experts.

2) The core of the complaint was regarding the malicious conduct of Countrywide and Bank of America in courts from 2007 and to this date, through fraudulent employment of counsel, which was not Counsel of Record, appearances in court for the past 2.5 years by such counsel, under the false "Non Party" designation, and conduct by such counsel of monetary transaction that were alleged as money laundering.

In its January 8, 2010 response to OCC, the bank never provided a statement by its office of General Counsel that the law-firm of Bryan Cave, LLP was authorized as Counsel of Record for Bank of America Corporation, and Countrywide before it, in case captioned Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, and the date of such authorizations, if any. The statement provided in the January 8, 2010 letter of Bank of America Corporation, was insufficient, since it was not by a person in the Office of the General Counsel. Furthermore, it was an incomplete statement on the matter. It failed to state any case caption. It likewise failed to state the date of such authorization, if any, under the caption of interest.

The underlying issue is of particular concern, since it reflected alleged lack of integrity of Bank of America's current leadership:

Between July 1, 2008 (the date of takeover of Countrywide by Bank of America) and December 10, 2008 (the date of Timothy Mayopoulos ouster as General Counsel), I contacted Bank of America office of the General Counsel a number of times. I was repeatedly informed by senior staff in that office that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear for Bank of America. At least there was an effort on the part of the General Counsel office under Timothy Mayopoulos to stop such fraudulent appearances by Bryan Cave, LLP.

On December 10, 2008 Timothy Mayopoulos was ousted under circumstances that were the subject of hearings by US Congress, and Brian Moynihan was appointed as his replacement. After December 10, 2008, Bank of America office of the General Counsel and likewise - its Audit Committee - refused to respond on the same question - authorization of Bryan Cave, LLP to appear in caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400), while Bryan Cave, LLP, continued its false and malicious appearances.

It is only reasonable that as a response to the complaint in case # 00971981, OCC would ask Bank of America, Office of the General Counsel, to provide a clear statements on the record:

1) Was Bryan Cave, LLP authorized as Counsel of Record for Bank of America Corporation, and before that - for Countrywide Financial Corporation - in caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles?

2) If so, what were the dates of such authorizations by Countrywide Financial Corporation and by Bank of America Corporation?

3) Did office of General Counsel, Bank of America Corporation, authorize of appearances of Bryan Cave, LLP, under party designation of "NON PARTY" in such caption?

4) Were funds, which were collected by Bryan Cave, LLP, from Attorney David Pasternak in such caption, and were alleged as money laundering, collected on behalf of Bank
RE: Case # 00971981 Appeal in complaint against Bank of America Corporation
Response within 10 days is kindly requested.
To US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, by email and by USPS First Class Mail.

Dear Sir/Madam:

I am writing to appeal the decision of US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to close the complaint referenced above.

It was unreasonable that such complaint was closed, when Bank of America Corporation provided a response that was no response at all.

1) The bank was not requested to provide any records of the loan to the straw buyer - Nivie Samaan, as it falsely claimed in its January 8, 2010 letter. Such records were largely produced and were linked in the complaint as evidence of the fraud. Such records were also opined as fraud by fraud experts.

2) The core of the complaint was regarding the malicious conduct of Countrywide and Bank of America in courts from 2007 and to this date, through fraudulent employment of counsel, which was not Counsel of Record, appearances in court for the past 2.5 years by such counsel, under the false "Non Party" designation, and conduct by such counsel of monetary transaction that were alleged as money laundering.

In its January 8, 2010 response to OCC, the bank never provided a statement by its office of General Counsel that the law-firm of Bryan Cave, LLP was authorized as Counsel of Record for Bank of America Corporation, and Countrywide before it, in case captioned Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, and the date of such authorizations, if any. The statement provided in the January 8, 2010 letter of Bank of America Corporation, was insufficient, since it was not by a person in the Office of the General Counsel. Furthermore, it was an incomplete statement on the matter. It failed to state any case caption. It likewise failed to state the date of such authorization, if any, under the caption of interest.

The underlying issue is of particular concern, since it reflected alleged lack of integrity of Bank of America's current leadership:

Between July 1, 2008 (the date of takeover of Countrywide by Bank of America) and December 10, 2008 (the date of Timothy Mayopoulos ouster as General Counsel), I contacted Bank of America office of the General Counsel a number of times. I was repeatedly informed by senior staff in that office that Bryan Cave, LLP was NOT authorized to appear for Bank of America. At least there was an effort on the part of the General Counsel office under Timothy Mayopoulos to stop such fraudulent appearances by Bryan Cave, LLP.

On December 10, 2008 Timothy Mayopoulos was ousted under circumstances that were the subject of hearings by US Congress, and Brian Moynihan was appointed as his replacement. After December 10, 2008, Bank of America office of the General Counsel and likewise - its Audit Committee - refused to respond on the same question - authorization of Bryan Cave, LLP to appear in caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400), while Bryan Cave, LLP, continued its false and malicious appearances.

It is only reasonable that as a response to the complaint in case # 00971981, OCC would ask Bank of America, Office of the General Counsel, to provide a clear statements on the record:

1) Was Bryan Cave, LLP authorized as Counsel of Record for Bank of America Corporation, and before that - for Countrywide Financial Corporation - in caption of Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles?

2) If so, what were the dates of such authorizations by Countrywide Financial Corporation and by Bank of America Corporation?

3) Did office of General Counsel, Bank of America Corporation, authorize of appearances of Bryan Cave, LLP, under party designation of "NON PARTY" in such caption?

4) Were funds, which were collected by Bryan Cave, LLP, from Attorney David Pasternak in such caption, and were alleged as money laundering, collected on behalf of Bank

More info:

Published by: Human Rights Alert, NGO on Feb 02, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/12/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 
Dr ZDr ZDr ZDr Z
Joseph Zernik, PhDPO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750;Fax: 801 998-0917; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net
 
Blog:http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/ Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Free_the_Rampart_FIPs 
10-02-02 Case # 00971981 - Appeal in complaint to the US Office of Comptroller of theCurrency against Bank of America Corporation
X-MSK: CML=2.501000DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net;b=GgBH352C+1i+bPkwWeidji12grZ7JftHxIUoub2dSZ9qVuuKWVtuionz2IkIJKkl;h=Received:Disposition-Notification-To:X-Mailer:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
 Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:45:03 -0800To: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Subject: Appeal in complaint to the US Office of Comptroller of theCurrency against Bank of America Corporation, case # 00971981
Cc: "Basel Committee on International Banking Accords"
X-ELNK-Trace:4747f65194a8dec2d780f4a490ca6956abb457f1b4332f5232c666d5d68412143d29f59822eae3f7350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9cX-Originating-IP: 71.104.189.21X-ELNK-AV: 0X-ELNK-Info: sbv=0; sbrc=.0; sbf=00; sbw=010;
RE: Case # 00971981 Appeal in complaint against Bank of America CorporationResponse within 10 days is kindly requested.
 To US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, by email and by USPS First Class Mail.Dear Sir/Madam:I am writing to appeal the decision of US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to close thecomplaint referenced above.It was unreasonable that such complaint was closed, when Bank of America Corporation provided aresponse that was no response at all.1) The bank was not requested to provide any records of the loan to the straw buyer - Nivie Samaan,as it falsely claimed in its January 8, 2010 letter. Such records were largely produced and were linkedin the complaint as evidence of the fraud. Such records were also opined as fraud by fraud experts.2) The core of the complaint was regarding the malicious conduct of Countrywide and Bank of Americain courts from 2007 and to this date, through fraudulent employment of counsel, which was not Counselof Record, appearances in court for the past 2.5 years by such counsel, under the false "Non Party"designation, and conduct by such counsel of monetary transaction that were alleged as moneylaundering.In its January 8, 2010 response to OCC, the bank never provided a statement by its office of GeneralCounsel that the law-firm of Bryan Cave, LLP was authorized as Counsel of Record for Bank ofAmerica Corporation, and Countrywide before it, in case captioned Samaan v Zernik (SC087400) atthe Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, and the date of such authorizations, if any.The statement provided in the January 8, 2010 letter of Bank of America Corporation, was insufficient,since it was not by a person in the Office of the General Counsel. Furthermore, it was an incompletestatement on the matter. It failed to state any case caption. It likewise failed to state the date of suchauthorization, if any, under the caption of interest.
 
Digitally signed by Joseph H Zernik DN: cn=Joseph H Zernik, o, ou,email=jz12345@earthlink.net, c=USLocation: La Verne, CaliforniaDate: 2010.02.02 07:24:10 -08'00'

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->