Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword or section
Like this
4Activity
P. 1
FHFACreditSuisse

FHFACreditSuisse

Ratings: (0)|Views: 2,397|Likes:
Published by stacyvan
FHFA complaint againt Credit Suisse as conservator of Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae
FHFA complaint againt Credit Suisse as conservator of Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae

More info:

Published by: stacyvan on Mar 17, 2012
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

01/13/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORKFEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY,AS CONSERVATOR FOR THE FEDERALNATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATIONAND THE FEDERAL HOME LOANMORTGAGE CORPORATION,Plaintiff,-against-CREDIT SUISSE HOLDINGS (USA), INC.,CREDIT SUISSE (USA), INC., CREDITSUISSE SECURITIES (USA) LLC, DLJMORTGAGE CAPITAL, INC., CREDITSUISSE FIRST BOSTON MORTGAGESECURITIES CORPORATION, ASSETBACKED SECURITIES CORPORATION,CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTONMORTGAGE ACCEPTANCECORPORATION, ANDREW A. KIMURA,JEFFREY A. ALTABEF, EVELYNECHEVARRIA, MICHAEL A. MARRIOTT,ZEV KINDLER, JOHN P. GRAHAM,THOMAS E. SIEGLER, THOMASZINGALLI, CARLOS ONIS, STEVEN L.KANTOR, JOSEPH M. DONOVAN,JULIANA JOHNSON, and GREG RICHTER,Defendants.
___ CIV. ___ (___)COMPLAINTJURY TRIAL DEMANDED
 
 i
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage
NATURE OF ACTION ...................................................................................................................1
 
PARTIES .........................................................................................................................................9
 
The Plaintiff and the GSEs
...................................................................................................9
 
The Defendants
....................................................................................................................9
 
The Non-Party Originators
................................................................................................13
 
JURISDICTION AND VENUE ....................................................................................................13
 
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS ........................................................................................................14
 
I.
 
THE SECURITIZATIONS ................................................................................................14
 
A.
 
Residential Mortgage-Backed Securitizations In General .....................................14
 
B.
 
The Securitizations At Issue In This Case .............................................................16
 
C.
 
The Securitization Process .....................................................................................20
 
1.
 
DLJ Mortgage Capital Groups Mortgage Loans in Special PurposeTrusts..........................................................................................................20
 
2.
 
The Trusts Issue Securities Backed by the Loans ......................................21
 
II.
 
THE DEFENDANTS’ PARTICIPATION IN THE SECURITIZATIONPROCESS ..........................................................................................................................26
 
A.
 
The Role of Each of the Defendants ......................................................................26
 
1.
 
DLJ Mortgage Capital................................................................................26
 
2.
 
CSFB Mortgage Securities, Asset Backed Securities, and CSFBMortgage Acceptance ................................................................................28
 
3.
 
CS Securities ..............................................................................................28
 
4.
 
CS USA ......................................................................................................29
 
5.
 
CS Holdings ...............................................................................................29
 
6.
 
The Individual Defendants .........................................................................30
 
 
 iiB.
 
The Defendants’ Failure To Conduct Proper Due Diligence .................................32
 
III.
 
THE REGISTRATION STATEMENTS AND THE PROSPECTUSSUPPLEMENTS................................................................................................................34
 
A.
 
Compliance With Underwriting Guidelines ..........................................................34
 
B.
 
Statements Regarding Occupancy Status of Borrower ..........................................37
 
C.
 
Statements Regarding Loan-to-Value Ratios .........................................................40
 
D.
 
Statements Regarding Credit Ratings ....................................................................43
 
IV.
 
FALSITY OF STATEMENTS IN THE REGISTRATION STATEMENTS ANDPROSPECTUS SUPPLEMENTS ......................................................................................45
 
A.
 
The Statistical Data Provided in the Prospectus Supplements ConcerningOwner Occupancy and LTV Ratios Was Materially False ....................................45
 
1.
 
Owner Occupancy Data Was Materially False ..........................................46
 
2.
 
Loan-to-Value Data Was Materially False ................................................48
 
B.
 
The Originators of the Underlying Mortgage Loans SystematicallyDisregarded Their Underwriting Guidelines .........................................................52
 
1.
 
A Forensic Review of Loan Files Has Revealed Pervasive Failureto Adhere to Underwriting Guidelines .......................................................53
 
(a)
 
Stated Income Was Not Reasonable ..............................................55
 
(b)
 
Evidence of Occupancy Misrepresentations ..................................57
 
(c)
 
Debts Incorrectly Calculated..........................................................58
 
(d)
 
Credit Inquiries That Indicated Misrepresentation of Debt ...........59
 
2.
 
Government Investigations and Other Evidence Have ConfirmedThat the Originators of the Loans in the SecuritizationsSystematically Failed to Adhere to Their Underwriting Guidelines .........61
 
3.
 
Credit Suisse Routinely Included in Securitizations MortgageLoans That Failed to Meet Underwriting Standards ..................................70
 
4.
 
Credit Suisse’s Own Insurers Have Found That Loan GroupsSecuritized by Credit Suisse Are Full of Loans Originated inViolation of Underwriting Guidelines .......................................................72
 

Activity (4)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
tarismine added this note
excellent!
stacyvan liked this
stacyvan liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

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