Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
35Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Investors suing Chase -includes list of mortgage backed securities - various originators like New Century, WAMU, Wells Fargo, ResMae, Greenpoint, Countrywide, Ownit, Accredited Home Lenders etc.

Investors suing Chase -includes list of mortgage backed securities - various originators like New Century, WAMU, Wells Fargo, ResMae, Greenpoint, Countrywide, Ownit, Accredited Home Lenders etc.

Ratings: (0)|Views: 849|Likes:
Published by 83jjmack
My advice, I'd contact attorneys who represent the investors and tell them what happened to you as the borrower. Such as, how some New Century underwriters fictiously created salary levels for some of us to 'force' us through their underwriting systems to 'make' us be qualified!! This can be found in other class action lawsuits against New Century on the Stanford Law Securities Class Action Lawsuits website. The 'CW" listed in the New Century cases are the former employees who are now 'confidential witnesses'!!

If you have forged document recordings, get certified copies and send those to them. Let them know this is NOT the homeowner/borrower's fault...and it may give them more ammunition to win!


J.P. MORGAN MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH LITIGATION
Court: United States District Court, Eastern District of New York
Case Number: 2:08-cv-01713
Judge: Hon. Edward Korman
Case Contacts: David R. Stickney, Timothy A. DeLange, Matthew P. Jubenville

This case alleges violation of the Securities Act arising from JP Morgan's sale of mortgage pass-through certificates using false and misleading offering documents. The offering documents failed to disclose, inter alia, that (i) the underwriting standards used by the loan originators had systematically ignored their stated standards; (ii) JP Morgan ignored its standards and guidelines when evaluating and acquiring the loans; (iii) the stated appraisal standards were not followed when valuing the properties collateralizing the loans and the corresponding loan-to-value ratios; and (iv) the pre-established ratings assigned to each tranche of Certificates did not reflect the true quality of the loans.
On March 26, 2008, a complaint was filed against J.P. Morgan and its related entities in New York State Court, Nassau County, captioned Plumbers' & Pipefitters' Local #562 Supplemental Plan & Trust and Plumbers' & Pipefitters' Local #562 Pension Fund v. JP Morgan Acceptance Corporation I, et al., 08-cv-1713 (the "J.P. Morgan Action"). On January 8, 2009, following a stipulation to removal to federal court, the plaintiffs in the J.P. Morgan Action issued a PSLRA notice. MissPERS filed its motion for appointment as lead plaintiff on March 23, 2009. Iron Workers Mid-America Pension Plan and the Structural Ironworkers Local Union No. 1 Pension Trust Fund filed a competing motion for appointment as lead plaintiff.
On November 24, 2009, Judge Edward R. Korman entered an order adopting Magistrate Judge William Wall's Report and Recommendation that MissPERS be appointed sole Lead Plaintiff. On March 8, 2010, Lead Plaintiff filed the Consolidated Class Action Complaint and on May 7, 2010, Defendants filed motions to dismiss. Lead Plaintiff's oppositions are due June 21, 2010.

My advice, I'd contact attorneys who represent the investors and tell them what happened to you as the borrower. Such as, how some New Century underwriters fictiously created salary levels for some of us to 'force' us through their underwriting systems to 'make' us be qualified!! This can be found in other class action lawsuits against New Century on the Stanford Law Securities Class Action Lawsuits website. The 'CW" listed in the New Century cases are the former employees who are now 'confidential witnesses'!!

If you have forged document recordings, get certified copies and send those to them. Let them know this is NOT the homeowner/borrower's fault...and it may give them more ammunition to win!


J.P. MORGAN MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH LITIGATION
Court: United States District Court, Eastern District of New York
Case Number: 2:08-cv-01713
Judge: Hon. Edward Korman
Case Contacts: David R. Stickney, Timothy A. DeLange, Matthew P. Jubenville

This case alleges violation of the Securities Act arising from JP Morgan's sale of mortgage pass-through certificates using false and misleading offering documents. The offering documents failed to disclose, inter alia, that (i) the underwriting standards used by the loan originators had systematically ignored their stated standards; (ii) JP Morgan ignored its standards and guidelines when evaluating and acquiring the loans; (iii) the stated appraisal standards were not followed when valuing the properties collateralizing the loans and the corresponding loan-to-value ratios; and (iv) the pre-established ratings assigned to each tranche of Certificates did not reflect the true quality of the loans.
On March 26, 2008, a complaint was filed against J.P. Morgan and its related entities in New York State Court, Nassau County, captioned Plumbers' & Pipefitters' Local #562 Supplemental Plan & Trust and Plumbers' & Pipefitters' Local #562 Pension Fund v. JP Morgan Acceptance Corporation I, et al., 08-cv-1713 (the "J.P. Morgan Action"). On January 8, 2009, following a stipulation to removal to federal court, the plaintiffs in the J.P. Morgan Action issued a PSLRA notice. MissPERS filed its motion for appointment as lead plaintiff on March 23, 2009. Iron Workers Mid-America Pension Plan and the Structural Ironworkers Local Union No. 1 Pension Trust Fund filed a competing motion for appointment as lead plaintiff.
On November 24, 2009, Judge Edward R. Korman entered an order adopting Magistrate Judge William Wall's Report and Recommendation that MissPERS be appointed sole Lead Plaintiff. On March 8, 2010, Lead Plaintiff filed the Consolidated Class Action Complaint and on May 7, 2010, Defendants filed motions to dismiss. Lead Plaintiff's oppositions are due June 21, 2010.

More info:

Published by: 83jjmack on Jun 09, 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

08/04/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 
i
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORKPLUMBERS’ & PIPEFITTERS’ LOCAL#562 SUPPLEMENTAL PLAN & TRUST,et al., On Behalf of Themselves and AllOthers Similarly Situated,Plaintiffs,v.J.P. MORGAN ACCEPTANCECORPORATION I, et al.,Defendants.Civil Action No. 08-cv-1713 (ERK) (WDW)(Consolidated with 09-cv-3209)
ECF Case
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case 2:08-cv-01713-ERK-WDW Document 47 Filed 03/08/10 Page 1 of 100
 
 
ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
PageI. SUMMARY OF THE ACTION.........................................................................................1II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE.........................................................................................5III. PARTIES............................................................................................................................5IV. BACKGROUND..............................................................................................................10A. The Structuring Of Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates.....................................10B. Assessing The Quality Of Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates..........................15C. The Depositor’s Certificate Offerings..................................................................17D. The Rating Agencies’ Role In The Securitization Process...................................18V. THE OFFERING DOCUMENTS CONTAINED MATERIALMISSTATEMENTS AND OMISSIONS REGARDING STATEDUNDERWRITING STANDARDS..................................................................................27A. The Chase Originators..........................................................................................31B. Countrywide Home Loans....................................................................................38C. ResMAE Mortgage Corp......................................................................................45D. New Century Mortgage Corp................................................................................49E. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.........................................................................................51F. Additional Originators..........................................................................................56VI. THE OFFERING DOCUMENTS CONTAINED MATERIALMISSTATEMENTS AND OMISSIONS REGARDING APPRAISALSTANDARDS AND LTV RATIOS.................................................................................62VII. THE OFFERING DOCUMENTS CONTAINED MATERIALMISSTATEMENTS AND OMISSIONS REGARDING CREDITENHANCEMENT............................................................................................................70VIII. THE OFFERING DOCUMENTS CONTAINED MATERIALMISSTATEMENTS AND OMISSIONS REGARDING THECERTIFICATES’ RATINGS...........................................................................................71A. The Ratings Were Based On Inaccurate Mortgage Loan Data.............................73B. The Rating Agencies Relied On Outdated Models...............................................74
Case 2:08-cv-01713-ERK-WDW Document 47 Filed 03/08/10 Page 2 of 100
 
 
iii
IX. EACH OFFERING DOCUMENT CONTAINED COMMONMATERIAL MISSTATEMENTS AND OMISSIONS....................................................82X. THE COLLAPSE OF THE CERTIFICATES’ PERFORMANCE ANDVALUE.............................................................................................................................84XI. CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS.................................................................................88XII. STANDING......................................................................................................................89FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION.......................................................................................................90SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION..................................................................................................92THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION......................................................................................................94RELIEF REQUESTED.................................................................................................................96JURY DEMAND..........................................................................................................................96
Case 2:08-cv-01713-ERK-WDW Document 47 Filed 03/08/10 Page 3 of 100

Activity (35)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Ren liked this
Hereford Johnson liked this
Ren liked this
Ren liked this
Ren liked this
monbarrs liked this
Steve Dibert liked this

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)//-->