1,200 charged in federal mortgage-fraud probe

[Ed Barrow]

Source: Los Angeles Times

Federal officials said Thursday they had filed criminal charges against more than 1,200 people allegedly responsible for $2.3 billion in mortgage fraud as part of a major nationwide crackdown of abuses stemming from the housing market collapse.

Operation Stolen Dreams, which began March 1, also has resulted in civil charges against 395 people and companies resulting in the recovery of $147 million in improper gains.

"We know that mortgage fraud ruins lives, destroys families and devastates whole communities, so attacking the problem from every possible angle is vital," U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said. "These schemes are despicable; they are dangerous to our economy, and they will not be tolerated."

...

"We have seen cases that have resulted in dozens of foreclosures and millions in losses," he said, "as well as fraudsters who have bankrupted entire companies and national lenders who were not playing by the rules."




Read more: http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_15321568

[Donnachaidh]

1. jeez - can't they come up with better names than *operation blah blah*

It just smacks of the chimpenfuehrer.

[sandnsea]

2. Can't you come up with anything other than bitching

It just smacks of the pumafuehrer.

[Donnachaidh]

23. fishing dear?

sorry -- I don't *do* pompoms. :eyes:

[anigbrowl]

29. More evidence for my theory that some people only live to complain.

I was wondering what the first negative reaction would be about. Impressive.

[msongs]

3. nice move by the feds - massive fraud by the banks oughta be next nt

[boppers]

6. This is the banks, and others.

You can't actually arrest a bank, of course, you have to arrest the people involved...

"Individuals arrested nationwide include lawyers, loan officers, mortgage brokers and real estate agents."
http://www.wnyc.org/news/articles/156195

[girl gone mad]

7. No one is ignoring it.

Do you have to turn every topic into an attack? Those who criticize banksters have very valid grievances and it seems you're twisting yourself into quite a knot trying to insult them.

[boppers]

8. I find excessive hypocrisy upsetting.

I'm willing to bet the vast majority of those who complain about "banksters" actually have checking and/or savings accounts, or some other kind of monetary funds stored or invested on their behalf somewhere... but they're more than willing to point fingers at *others*, rather than themselves.

Don't like financial institutions? STOP GIVING THEM YOUR MONEY.

[laughingliberal]

12. The moral equivalency argument is weak. People who have bank accounts are not the problem.

That said, we moved our accounts out of a big bank and went with a local, community bank.

[boppers]

15. Why are you giving money to banksters?

Are you convinced local banksters are less nefarious than others?

[laughingliberal]

17. The moral equivalency argument does not get stronger by attacking me.

My husband is self employed. Most of our customers pay by check. There is not much way around having a business account under those conditions. It does not make people who have bank accounts equivalent to those who perpetrated the fraud.

[boppers]

21. Perpetuating fraud is a lesser fraud, agreed.

Do you cash out the checks?

[laughingliberal]

24. Most Banks will not cash checks made out to a business.

It has to do with IRS regs. People with checking accounts did not cause the mortgage fraud. Your argument seems to be designed to water down the culpability of the banksters. It makes as much sense as saying because some people have bashed others over the head with baseball bats that everyone who has a baseball bat shares their guilt.

[boppers]

27. Some banksters...

"some banksters have bashed others over the head with baseball bats so everyone who is in banking shares their guilt."

I agree it's absurd.

:evilgrin:

[Hekate]

14. So you store your own savings in your mattress? or have you chosen a coffee can in the back yard?

We "little people" are rather stuck with the system as it exists -- but we have the right to demand that we not be abused, robbed, defrauded, and scammed by said system.

Woody Guthrie sang, "Some will rob you with a 6-gun; some with a fountain pen." In other words: Banksters.

Hekate

[boppers]

16. I have a few locations in my house where I store money.

I'm not joking. I don't have bank accounts anymore.

I used to do general geek work for banks, and after seeing how laughably bad their accountability and security was, I decided that my money was safer in my own hands.

As far as demanding to not be "abused, robbed, defrauded, and scammed by said system", perhaps you could stop volunteering to be in the system....

It's a bit like people complaining that the mafia needs to be more regulated, as if the regulation was the problem, rather than people volunteering to give their money to a criminal enterprise.

[girl gone mad]

19. What does one have to do with the other?

Nothing.

You don't seem to understand. People did stop giving the banks money. What, exactly, did you think the whole solvency crisis was? A dream sequence??

No, dear. There was a literal run on the banks. People had stopped paying their mortgages, stopped paying back their credit cards and were yanking their money out of the ATMs as fast as they could. The worldwide derivatives Ponzi scheme was crashing down on all of those Masters of the Universe. Then our bought off politicians sold us some bullshit lies about the banks being too big to fail and simply bailed their fat asses out with our tax dollars and endless free money from the Fed so the record bonuses could keep on rolling in and the counterparties and bondholders got to earn record returns on their risk capital, sans that pesky risk.

"Laugh about it, shout about it, when you've got to choose - every way you look at it you lose."

(Unless you're a bankster, in which case you can do whatever the fuck you want without obligation or consequence.)

[boppers]

22. What does giving money to banks have to do with banks?

Gamblers always lose, and blame others.

[girl gone mad]

30. You're still not making sense.

People want banks. They want to be able to keep their money in a safe place and earn a little interest. No one here is arguing that these functions of the banking industry are bad (except maybe you?). These operations are reasonable, generally well regulated and safe, thanks to the FDIC. What is upsetting to people is the IB side of the industry and the insane derivatives operations the banks are engaged in.

You do understand that the banks create money out of thin air, right? They don't need our deposits to run their securities casinos. All they need is favorable legislation and access to our printing presses when things go bad. This is what people who "whine about banksters" (I see you edited the actual quote out of your post) are upset about. Whether or not we keep a savings account has literally no bearing on the issue. We are trying to stop them from plundering the public purse and destroying the middle class as they game every last corner of the financial and commodities markets.

[boppers]

31. You know edits are flagged, right?

I tend to explain my edits, so it's not like I'm hiding anything.

That being said, I've been inside the deepest data centers of very large banks. Your money is *not safe* there. I, and you, have watched the latest bank meltdown, and know that our money is *not safe* in a bank. They will gamble with it, in the name of earning interest, and expect the public to bail them out. They did it in 23-28, they did it in 04-08, and they will keep doing it any chance they get.

[Hugin]

20. But, you can fine a bank or institution... on a scale befitting the crime.

No... I don't have any connection to a "bank" any longer.

[Warpy]

10. As far as the mortgage fraud went, the banks just didn't ask questions

The real fraud occurred at the mortgage originator, usually a mill operation that supposedly checked wages, debts, and monthly bills and approved people for amounts they could actually pay. The crooked mortgage mills just approved everybody regardless of ability to pay, knowing that bad loans generated the same fees that good ones did.

Nobody looked at finances, nobody inspected the houses that were being bought, and the banks just assumed everybody was doing his job.

What the banks did wrong was neglect checking up on these creeps while buying suspect "investment vehicles" to goose their profits while placing ridiculous bets elsewhere to try to reduce the risk of losses. The whole thing worked only as long as the bubble kept inflating. Once that stopped, the whole thing collapsed. Banks were left with toxic "investments" based on loans that would never be paid back and all the bettors wanted their money at once.

What the banks were was negligent. The real fraud occurred at the mortgage companies who originated all those loans.

[JDPriestly]

11. Bof A bought Countrywide. Remember.

[laughingliberal]

13. A very good point. And I don't believe for a minute they didn't know what they were buying. nt

[boppers]

4. That's a whole lot of white collar crime being brought down...

Of course, those who complain about "banksters" will ignore this.

[Blue_Tires]

5. kick

[Frustratedlady]

9. This is one active DOJ. Certainly not like GW's incompetents. nt

[newspeak]

25. I believe over a hundred people were arrested in Nevada

some were real estate agents. There's all kinds of scams. How about if you really love a house and want to buy it and the agent comes back and tells you that there are other interested parties. So, the house is listed at 120,000. but the realtor comes back and says that the other interested party bid 130,000.-on and on it goes until you finally get the house for 145,000. There was no other buyer, the agent pocketed the twenty-five thousand. The seller and the buyer, both scammed, both in the dark about the transaction.

[Frustratedlady]

26. They must lie awake at night coming up with their schemes.

I'm glad they are catching them.

[laughingliberal]

18. K & R nt

[fascisthunter]

28. 1,200...hmmm? Any of them Trolls?