"SEC sues federal loan executives for fraud; Syron, former Boston Fed chief, is one of six facing civil charges" December 17, 2011|By Jenifer B. McKim and Beth Healy, Globe Staff
Federal regulators yesterday filed civil fraud charges against six former top executives of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, including former Boston Federal Reserve Bank chief Richard F. Syron, alleging that they misled investors about the lenders’ massive exposure to subprime mortgages.
Civil, not criminal.
In one of the most aggressive actions taken against executives of firms involved in the housing crisis, the Securities and Exchange Commission alleged that Syron - who was chief executive of Freddie Mac from 2003 to 2008 - and the others “knew and approved of misleading statements’’ that understated billions of dollars in risky mortgage loans held by their companies. When the housing market collapsed in 2008, the government took control of the mortgage giants to keep them from failing.
That's why Syron was installed; so Wall Street could dump all the bad MBS bundles onto the taxpayers.
“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac executives told the world that their subprime exposure was substantially smaller than it really was,’’ said Robert Khuzami, director of the SEC’s enforcement division, in a statement. During a news conference, he described public comments by Syron that Khuzami said implied Freddie Mac had no meaningful investment in subprime mortgages. In reality, its subprime portfolio grew from $141 billion in 2006 to $244 billion in mid-2008 - 14 percent of its total holdings.
In two lawsuits filed in Manhattan federal court, the SEC does not charge the companies with wrongdoing. Both companies agreed not to dispute the charges and to cooperate with regulators.
Syron declined to comment, but his lawyers, Thomas C. Green and Mark D. Hopson, said he did not mislead anyone.
“There was no shortage of meaningful disclosures, all of which permitted the reader to assess the degree of risk in Freddie Mac’s guaranteed portfolio,’’ they said in a statement.
Syron has long been a revered figure in Boston business circles. He was especially influential between 1989 and 1994, when he served as president of the Boston Fed.
“There was no shortage of meaningful disclosures, all of which permitted the reader to assess the degree of risk in Freddie Mac’s guaranteed portfolio,’’ they said in a statement.
Syron has long been a revered figure in Boston business circles. He was especially influential between 1989 and 1994, when he served as president of the Boston Fed.
Didn't we go through a recession then?
Raised and educated locally, his homegrown ties were augmented by national credentials, such as a stint at the Federal Reserve in Washington, D.C., where he served as an assistant to chairman Paul Volcker.
He also ran the American Stock Exchange, overseeing its merger with Nasdaq, and later was tapped to lead and restructure Thermo Electron Corp. of Waltham, a laboratory equipment supplier.
Syron is currently a trustee at Boston College, where he teaches a class on the financial crisis. The school would not comment on whether the suit might affect his standing as an adjunct professor.
How much does a trustee at BC make?
Who better to teach a class about the crisis than a guy who helped cause it, huh?
The SEC allegation that Syron purposely withheld information from the government while heading Freddie Mac appeared to come as a shock to those in Boston who have known him for years.
How much does a trustee at BC make?
Who better to teach a class about the crisis than a guy who helped cause it, huh?
The SEC allegation that Syron purposely withheld information from the government while heading Freddie Mac appeared to come as a shock to those in Boston who have known him for years.
“He’s an outstanding businessman,’’ said Kevin Kiley, chief operating officer of the Massachusetts Bankers Association. “I’m surprised.’’
Pffft!
The other former Freddie Mac officials named by the SEC are Patricia L. Cook and Donald J. Bisenius. The Fannie Mae defendants include former chief executive Daniel H. Mudd and executives Enrico Dallavecchia and Thomas A. Lund.
Lund’s lawyer, Michael N. Levy, said his client acted properly. “Nobody worked more diligently or honestly to serve the best interests of both investors and homeowners,’’ Levy said of his client. None of the other defendants could be reached for comment.
The SEC is seeking financial penalties and court orders barring the six defendants from serving as directors or officers of public companies. They are charged with making “misleading statements’’ between 2006 and 2008. As an example of a “misleading statement,’’ the SEC said that Freddie Mac officials in June 2006 estimated the company held between $2 billion and $6 billion in subprime mortgage loans. The total at the time actually ranged between $140 billion and $244 billion.
“These material misstatements occurred during a time of acute investor interest in financial institutions’ exposure to subprime loans, and misled the market about the amount of risk on the company’s books,’’ Khuzami said.
Housing activists yesterday praised the action as a much-needed effort to hold individual financial executives accountable for the foreclosure crisis.
“It is a really good thing the SEC is finally taking some action against higher-level people that might be responsible for the mortgage debacle,’’ said Andrew Pizor, a staff lawyer with the National Consumer Law Center, based in Boston.
Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, who earlier this month filed a lawsuit against five major banks that alleges mortgage fraud, also praised the SEC. “We welcome any effort to fully examine the origin and cause of the foreclosure crisis,’’ Coakley said.
Related: Three Cheers For Coakley
Like Kiley, others in Boston who had business dealings with Syron were surprised by yesterday’s news.
Cathy Minehan, who ran the Boston Fed after Syron left, said, “He was a good man, a good economist, a good colleague, and a great person to work for.’’
Pffft!
The other former Freddie Mac officials named by the SEC are Patricia L. Cook and Donald J. Bisenius. The Fannie Mae defendants include former chief executive Daniel H. Mudd and executives Enrico Dallavecchia and Thomas A. Lund.
Lund’s lawyer, Michael N. Levy, said his client acted properly. “Nobody worked more diligently or honestly to serve the best interests of both investors and homeowners,’’ Levy said of his client. None of the other defendants could be reached for comment.
The SEC is seeking financial penalties and court orders barring the six defendants from serving as directors or officers of public companies. They are charged with making “misleading statements’’ between 2006 and 2008. As an example of a “misleading statement,’’ the SEC said that Freddie Mac officials in June 2006 estimated the company held between $2 billion and $6 billion in subprime mortgage loans. The total at the time actually ranged between $140 billion and $244 billion.
“These material misstatements occurred during a time of acute investor interest in financial institutions’ exposure to subprime loans, and misled the market about the amount of risk on the company’s books,’’ Khuzami said.
Housing activists yesterday praised the action as a much-needed effort to hold individual financial executives accountable for the foreclosure crisis.
“It is a really good thing the SEC is finally taking some action against higher-level people that might be responsible for the mortgage debacle,’’ said Andrew Pizor, a staff lawyer with the National Consumer Law Center, based in Boston.
Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, who earlier this month filed a lawsuit against five major banks that alleges mortgage fraud, also praised the SEC. “We welcome any effort to fully examine the origin and cause of the foreclosure crisis,’’ Coakley said.
Related: Three Cheers For Coakley
Like Kiley, others in Boston who had business dealings with Syron were surprised by yesterday’s news.
Cathy Minehan, who ran the Boston Fed after Syron left, said, “He was a good man, a good economist, a good colleague, and a great person to work for.’’
Oh, I'm sure.
Also see: Lying Looters Large and Small: The Fannie-Freddie Family
Yeah, he's a great guy.
Marshall Carter, a former State Street Corp. chief executive who is now chairman of the New York Stock Exchange Group, served on the board of the Boston Fed when Syron was chief.
“He had a real in-depth knowledge of economics and finance,’’ Carter said.
Then why did all the geniuses fail so miserably -- unless none of it has been a failure?
Representative Barney Frank, who has been widely criticized as having played a part in pressing Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to relax lending standards as a way to promote homeownership, also came to Syron’s defense yesterday. The Newton Democrat called him “a man of integrity and a man of principle.’’
Un-flipping-real!
Related: Frank is Finished
Good.
Syron grew up in Watertown, the son of Irish immigrants, and now lives in Chestnut Hill. When he went to Freddie Mac in 2003, it was to clean up an accounting scandal in which executives misstated some $5 billion in earnings.
But the job would ultimately tarnish a resume that was unblemished - Syron was in charge during the subprime lending boom that sparked the global financial crisis. He left Freddie Mac in 2008, after the government took over the company in a bailout that - for the two companies - cost taxpayers more than $130 billion.
Actually, try about $45 TRILLION for the whole thing!
In a 2008 interview with the Globe, Syron defended himself against accusations that in 2004 he ignored warnings from Freddie Mac executives that it was taking too many chances on mortgages. He argued such lending was necessary to meet a government mandate to promote affordable housing....
--more--"
"If Freddie minimized risk, Syron must answer for it" December 20, 2011
WHEN RICHARD F. Syron took on the prestigious job of running Freddie Mac in 2003, his main mission was to clean up an accounting mess. Now he’s in the middle of a bigger mess of his own creation, to judge from a civil suit filed by the federal Securities and Exchange Commission. The commission’s move is a crucial endorsement of the principle that individual executives should be accountable for the kinds of decisions their companies made.
But a great guy!
Syron, a Boston business icon, is the lead defendant in a SEC lawsuit that alleges that he and other top executives at the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation - the government-sponsored corporation commonly referred to as Freddie Mac - misled investors about the scale of its involvement with potentially unsustainable loans. SEC investigators allege that Freddie Mac executives told investors its exposure to risky subprime mortgages ranged from $2 billion to $6 billion. The true exposure added up to a much bigger number: $141 billion by the end of 2006.
None of this fits with Syron’s image in Boston, where he was viewed as an honest broker and local success story - a Watertown kid who made it to the inner circle of Washington economic gurus as assistant to then Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker. He eventually came home to run the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, where he crafted a legacy on two fronts. He used the Fed’s clout and research muscle to help Beacon Hill make tough choices during the 1990 state fiscal crisis, and blew the whistle on racial discrimination in mortgage lending in a study that insiders simply referred to as the Syron Report.
There are political undertones to assessing blame for the financial crisis that dragged down the nation’s housing market. Democrats blame the banks for bundling bad loans that ended up as worthless paper. Republicans would rather blame Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the other government-sponsored mortgage trader.
They are all to blame, and politics has nothing to do with it!
To some degree, Syron may be caught up in the partisan finger-pointing that is part of that conflicting narrative....
What an absolute crock of crap.
--more--"
Related: Freddie seeks aid as its loss widens
Then why did all the geniuses fail so miserably -- unless none of it has been a failure?
Representative Barney Frank, who has been widely criticized as having played a part in pressing Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to relax lending standards as a way to promote homeownership, also came to Syron’s defense yesterday. The Newton Democrat called him “a man of integrity and a man of principle.’’
Un-flipping-real!
Related: Frank is Finished
Good.
Syron grew up in Watertown, the son of Irish immigrants, and now lives in Chestnut Hill. When he went to Freddie Mac in 2003, it was to clean up an accounting scandal in which executives misstated some $5 billion in earnings.
But the job would ultimately tarnish a resume that was unblemished - Syron was in charge during the subprime lending boom that sparked the global financial crisis. He left Freddie Mac in 2008, after the government took over the company in a bailout that - for the two companies - cost taxpayers more than $130 billion.
Actually, try about $45 TRILLION for the whole thing!
In a 2008 interview with the Globe, Syron defended himself against accusations that in 2004 he ignored warnings from Freddie Mac executives that it was taking too many chances on mortgages. He argued such lending was necessary to meet a government mandate to promote affordable housing....
--more--"
"If Freddie minimized risk, Syron must answer for it" December 20, 2011
WHEN RICHARD F. Syron took on the prestigious job of running Freddie Mac in 2003, his main mission was to clean up an accounting mess. Now he’s in the middle of a bigger mess of his own creation, to judge from a civil suit filed by the federal Securities and Exchange Commission. The commission’s move is a crucial endorsement of the principle that individual executives should be accountable for the kinds of decisions their companies made.
But a great guy!
Syron, a Boston business icon, is the lead defendant in a SEC lawsuit that alleges that he and other top executives at the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation - the government-sponsored corporation commonly referred to as Freddie Mac - misled investors about the scale of its involvement with potentially unsustainable loans. SEC investigators allege that Freddie Mac executives told investors its exposure to risky subprime mortgages ranged from $2 billion to $6 billion. The true exposure added up to a much bigger number: $141 billion by the end of 2006.
None of this fits with Syron’s image in Boston, where he was viewed as an honest broker and local success story - a Watertown kid who made it to the inner circle of Washington economic gurus as assistant to then Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker. He eventually came home to run the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, where he crafted a legacy on two fronts. He used the Fed’s clout and research muscle to help Beacon Hill make tough choices during the 1990 state fiscal crisis, and blew the whistle on racial discrimination in mortgage lending in a study that insiders simply referred to as the Syron Report.
There are political undertones to assessing blame for the financial crisis that dragged down the nation’s housing market. Democrats blame the banks for bundling bad loans that ended up as worthless paper. Republicans would rather blame Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the other government-sponsored mortgage trader.
They are all to blame, and politics has nothing to do with it!
To some degree, Syron may be caught up in the partisan finger-pointing that is part of that conflicting narrative....
What an absolute crock of crap.
--more--"
Related: Freddie seeks aid as its loss widens
Ex-Fannie Mae chief to take a leave
And look who will be paying their legal bills, taxpayers:
"Defending 3 executives hits taxpayers hard" January 24, 2011|Gretchen Morgenson, New York Times
NEW YORK — Since the government took over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2008, taxpayers have spent more than $160 million defending the mortgage finance companies and their former top executives in civil lawsuits accusing them of fraud. The cost was a closely guarded secret until last week, when the companies and their regulator produced an accounting at the request of Congress.
About $132 million went to defend Fannie Mae and its officials in various securities suits and government investigations into accounting irregularities that occurred years before the subprime lending crisis.
Documents indicate taxpayers have paid $24.2 million to law firms defending three of Fannie’s former executives: Franklin D. Raines, former chief executive; Timothy Howard, former chief financial officer; and Leanne Spencer, former controller....
Well before the credit crisis, accounting irregularities had engulfed both companies. Shareholders sued to recover stock losses.
Freddie in 2003 disclosed it had understated its income from 2000 to 2002; the company revised its results by an additional $5 billion. In 2004, Fannie was found to have overstated results for the preceding six years; it reduced earnings by $6.3 billion....
The following year, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, then the regulator, accused Fannie’s executives of taking actions to manipulate profits and generate $115 million in improper bonuses....
In addition to the $160 million in taxpayer money, Fannie and Freddie themselves had spent millions to defend former executives and directors.
After the government moved to back Fannie and Freddie, the Federal Housing Finance Agency agreed to continue paying to defend the executives, with taxpayers covering the costs....
If the former executives are found liable, they would be obligated to repay the government. But lawyers said it would be difficult to recoup such sums.
--more--"
"Fannie, Freddie bonuses derided; Congress moves toward a ban" November 16, 2011|By Derek Kravitz, Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Congress is seeking to end the practice of paying million-dollar bonuses to executives at the government-controlled mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Yesterday, the House Financial Services Committee approved a bill that would suspend tens of millions in executive compensation packages, stop future bonuses, and align the salaries with those of other federal employees, who make much less. The vote was 52 to 4, with strong support from both parties.
The Senate is expected to take up a similar measure; legislation limiting pay at the bailed-out companies could be sent to President Obama by year’s end.
Twelve executives got roughly $35.4 million in total salary and bonuses in 2009 and 2010. Fannie’s chief executive, Michael J. Williams, received about $9.3 million for the two years. Freddie’s chief executive, Edward Haldeman Jr., was paid $7.8 million.
The government rescued Fannie and Freddie three years ago after they nearly folded because of big losses on risky mortgages they had purchased. Taxpayers have spent about $170 billion to rescue the two companies, the most expensive bailout of the 2008 financial crisis.
They bought all that bad crap Wall Street sold everyone.
The government estimates the cost of the bailout could reach $220 billion through 2014.
It's in the TRILLIONS!
“These lavish compensation packages and bonuses are unfair, unreasonable, and unjust to the taxpayers, whose assistance is the only thing keeping Fannie and Freddie afloat,’’ said Representative Spencer Bachus, the Alabama Republican who chairs the House committee.
Edward DeMarco, acting director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, said the executives were hired after the companies were taken over by the government in 2008. After the takeover, the salaries for those positions were reduced by an average of 40 percent and some senior positions were eliminated.
DeMarco told the Senate Banking Committee that bonuses are being used to retain talented executives. Without them, taxpayers would incur greater losses, he said.
“The people who are there now did not choose government jobs,’’ he said. “A sudden and sharp change in pay would certainly risk a substantial exodus of talent, the best leaving first, in many instances.’’
Then I'll take the job.
Fannie and Freddie own or guarantee about half of all mortgages in the United States.
This month, Fannie asked for $7.8 billion and Freddie requested $6 billion in extra aid to cover large quarterly losses, mostly caused by low mortgage rates.
--more--"
Meanwhile, look how they are paying for that payroll tax cut.
Yeah, good thing that US government is looking out for you, Amurkn:
"US pressures New York’s AG to back bank deal; Settlement on lending sought" August 22, 2011|New York Times
NEW YORK - Eric T. Schneiderman, New York’s attorney general, is under pressure from the Obama administration to drop his opposition to a wide-ranging state settlement with banks over dubious foreclosure practices, say people briefed on discussions about the deal.
Shaun Donovan, secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and Justice Department officials have been campaigning to persuade the attorney general to support the settlement, the people said. Schneiderman and top prosecutors in other states have said the proposed settlement would restrict their ability to prosecute wrongdoing in a variety of areas, including the bundling of loans in mortgage securities.
The administration has been contacting not only Schneiderman but his allies, including consumer groups and housing advocates, seeking help to secure the attorney general’s participation, the people said.
The large banks, eager to settle, are frustrated with Schneiderman’s stance....
Yes, ONCE AGAIN the GOVERNMENT is DOING the BIDDING of BANKS!!!!
The possible settlement centers on foreclosure improprieties like so-called robo-signing and submitting apparently forged documents to speed evictions....
Sounds CRIMINAL to me!!
--more--"
And since the state AGs (last story of post) won't buckle in the face of the banks:
"Suit says US was misled on mortgages" September 03, 2011|By Eileen AJ Connelly and Pallavi Gogoi, Associated Press
NEW YORK - In a sweeping move, the government yesterday sued 17 financial firms, including the largest US banks, for selling Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac billions of dollars worth of mortgage-backed securities that turned toxic when the housing market collapsed.
Among the 17 targeted by the lawsuits were Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., and Goldman Sachs.
The lawsuits were filed by the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which oversees Fannie and Freddie, the two agencies that buy mortgage loans and mortgage securities issued by the lenders. The total price tag for the securities bought by Fannie and Freddie affected by the lawsuits: $196 billion.
Officially.
So WALL STREET F***ED Fannie and Freddie, 'eh?
And they had their FED MAN at the HELM when they did it!
The lawsuits allege the financial firms broke federal and state laws with the sales.
In the lawsuits that were filed in federal or state court in New York and the federal court in Connecticut, the government said the securities were sold with registration statements and prospectuses that “contained materially false or misleading statements and omissions.’’
The 17 institutions are Ally Financial Inc., formerly known GMAC LLC, Bank of America Corp., Barclays Bank PLC, Citigroup Inc., Countrywide Financial Corp., Credit Suisse Holdings Inc., Deutsche Bank AG, First Horizon National Corp., General Electric Co., Goldman Sachs & Co., HSBC North America Holdings Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Merrill Lynch & Co. and its unit First Franklin Financial Corp., Morgan Stanley, Nomura Holding America Inc., The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC, and Societe Generale.
Forget the horse; EAT a BANKER instead.
--more--"
Now back to BUSINESS as USUAL!
"FDIC may exempt banks from rules for mortgage securities" March 30, 2011|By Marcy Gordon, Associated Press
WASHINGTON — Federal regulators are proposing to exempt certain mortgages from new rules aimed at getting banks to take on more risk when they package and sell mortgage investments....
In other words, the MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES FRAUD that DESTROYED the WORLD ECONOMY will be ALLOWED to START UP AGAIN!
Banks packaged and sold bundles of risky mortgages with teaser rates that increased after only a few years. Many borrowers ended up defaulting on the loans when the interest rates spiked. As a result, the value of the mortgage securities plummeted. Experts say banks had very little of their own money invested in those mortgage securities, and that led them to take greater risks that contributed to the financial crisis.
To understand what really happened find the film "Inside Job" by Charles Ferguson and watch it.
The proposal has been awaited by Wall Street, which is looking to revive the market for mortgage securities....
Back to the SAME BEHAVIOR that MADE THEM ALL RICH and RUINED the ECONOMY!
--more--"
You deaf yet, readers?
And look who will be paying their legal bills, taxpayers:
"Defending 3 executives hits taxpayers hard" January 24, 2011|Gretchen Morgenson, New York Times
NEW YORK — Since the government took over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2008, taxpayers have spent more than $160 million defending the mortgage finance companies and their former top executives in civil lawsuits accusing them of fraud. The cost was a closely guarded secret until last week, when the companies and their regulator produced an accounting at the request of Congress.
About $132 million went to defend Fannie Mae and its officials in various securities suits and government investigations into accounting irregularities that occurred years before the subprime lending crisis.
Documents indicate taxpayers have paid $24.2 million to law firms defending three of Fannie’s former executives: Franklin D. Raines, former chief executive; Timothy Howard, former chief financial officer; and Leanne Spencer, former controller....
Well before the credit crisis, accounting irregularities had engulfed both companies. Shareholders sued to recover stock losses.
Freddie in 2003 disclosed it had understated its income from 2000 to 2002; the company revised its results by an additional $5 billion. In 2004, Fannie was found to have overstated results for the preceding six years; it reduced earnings by $6.3 billion....
The following year, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, then the regulator, accused Fannie’s executives of taking actions to manipulate profits and generate $115 million in improper bonuses....
In addition to the $160 million in taxpayer money, Fannie and Freddie themselves had spent millions to defend former executives and directors.
After the government moved to back Fannie and Freddie, the Federal Housing Finance Agency agreed to continue paying to defend the executives, with taxpayers covering the costs....
If the former executives are found liable, they would be obligated to repay the government. But lawyers said it would be difficult to recoup such sums.
--more--"
"Fannie, Freddie bonuses derided; Congress moves toward a ban" November 16, 2011|By Derek Kravitz, Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Congress is seeking to end the practice of paying million-dollar bonuses to executives at the government-controlled mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Yesterday, the House Financial Services Committee approved a bill that would suspend tens of millions in executive compensation packages, stop future bonuses, and align the salaries with those of other federal employees, who make much less. The vote was 52 to 4, with strong support from both parties.
The Senate is expected to take up a similar measure; legislation limiting pay at the bailed-out companies could be sent to President Obama by year’s end.
Twelve executives got roughly $35.4 million in total salary and bonuses in 2009 and 2010. Fannie’s chief executive, Michael J. Williams, received about $9.3 million for the two years. Freddie’s chief executive, Edward Haldeman Jr., was paid $7.8 million.
The government rescued Fannie and Freddie three years ago after they nearly folded because of big losses on risky mortgages they had purchased. Taxpayers have spent about $170 billion to rescue the two companies, the most expensive bailout of the 2008 financial crisis.
They bought all that bad crap Wall Street sold everyone.
The government estimates the cost of the bailout could reach $220 billion through 2014.
It's in the TRILLIONS!
“These lavish compensation packages and bonuses are unfair, unreasonable, and unjust to the taxpayers, whose assistance is the only thing keeping Fannie and Freddie afloat,’’ said Representative Spencer Bachus, the Alabama Republican who chairs the House committee.
Edward DeMarco, acting director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, said the executives were hired after the companies were taken over by the government in 2008. After the takeover, the salaries for those positions were reduced by an average of 40 percent and some senior positions were eliminated.
DeMarco told the Senate Banking Committee that bonuses are being used to retain talented executives. Without them, taxpayers would incur greater losses, he said.
“The people who are there now did not choose government jobs,’’ he said. “A sudden and sharp change in pay would certainly risk a substantial exodus of talent, the best leaving first, in many instances.’’
Then I'll take the job.
Fannie and Freddie own or guarantee about half of all mortgages in the United States.
This month, Fannie asked for $7.8 billion and Freddie requested $6 billion in extra aid to cover large quarterly losses, mostly caused by low mortgage rates.
--more--"
Meanwhile, look how they are paying for that payroll tax cut.
Yeah, good thing that US government is looking out for you, Amurkn:
"US pressures New York’s AG to back bank deal; Settlement on lending sought" August 22, 2011|New York Times
NEW YORK - Eric T. Schneiderman, New York’s attorney general, is under pressure from the Obama administration to drop his opposition to a wide-ranging state settlement with banks over dubious foreclosure practices, say people briefed on discussions about the deal.
Shaun Donovan, secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and Justice Department officials have been campaigning to persuade the attorney general to support the settlement, the people said. Schneiderman and top prosecutors in other states have said the proposed settlement would restrict their ability to prosecute wrongdoing in a variety of areas, including the bundling of loans in mortgage securities.
The administration has been contacting not only Schneiderman but his allies, including consumer groups and housing advocates, seeking help to secure the attorney general’s participation, the people said.
The large banks, eager to settle, are frustrated with Schneiderman’s stance....
Yes, ONCE AGAIN the GOVERNMENT is DOING the BIDDING of BANKS!!!!
The possible settlement centers on foreclosure improprieties like so-called robo-signing and submitting apparently forged documents to speed evictions....
Sounds CRIMINAL to me!!
--more--"
And since the state AGs (last story of post) won't buckle in the face of the banks:
"Suit says US was misled on mortgages" September 03, 2011|By Eileen AJ Connelly and Pallavi Gogoi, Associated Press
NEW YORK - In a sweeping move, the government yesterday sued 17 financial firms, including the largest US banks, for selling Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac billions of dollars worth of mortgage-backed securities that turned toxic when the housing market collapsed.
Among the 17 targeted by the lawsuits were Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., and Goldman Sachs.
The lawsuits were filed by the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which oversees Fannie and Freddie, the two agencies that buy mortgage loans and mortgage securities issued by the lenders. The total price tag for the securities bought by Fannie and Freddie affected by the lawsuits: $196 billion.
Officially.
So WALL STREET F***ED Fannie and Freddie, 'eh?
And they had their FED MAN at the HELM when they did it!
The lawsuits allege the financial firms broke federal and state laws with the sales.
In the lawsuits that were filed in federal or state court in New York and the federal court in Connecticut, the government said the securities were sold with registration statements and prospectuses that “contained materially false or misleading statements and omissions.’’
The 17 institutions are Ally Financial Inc., formerly known GMAC LLC, Bank of America Corp., Barclays Bank PLC, Citigroup Inc., Countrywide Financial Corp., Credit Suisse Holdings Inc., Deutsche Bank AG, First Horizon National Corp., General Electric Co., Goldman Sachs & Co., HSBC North America Holdings Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Merrill Lynch & Co. and its unit First Franklin Financial Corp., Morgan Stanley, Nomura Holding America Inc., The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC, and Societe Generale.
Forget the horse; EAT a BANKER instead.
--more--"
Now back to BUSINESS as USUAL!
"FDIC may exempt banks from rules for mortgage securities" March 30, 2011|By Marcy Gordon, Associated Press
WASHINGTON — Federal regulators are proposing to exempt certain mortgages from new rules aimed at getting banks to take on more risk when they package and sell mortgage investments....
In other words, the MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES FRAUD that DESTROYED the WORLD ECONOMY will be ALLOWED to START UP AGAIN!
Banks packaged and sold bundles of risky mortgages with teaser rates that increased after only a few years. Many borrowers ended up defaulting on the loans when the interest rates spiked. As a result, the value of the mortgage securities plummeted. Experts say banks had very little of their own money invested in those mortgage securities, and that led them to take greater risks that contributed to the financial crisis.
To understand what really happened find the film "Inside Job" by Charles Ferguson and watch it.
The proposal has been awaited by Wall Street, which is looking to revive the market for mortgage securities....
Back to the SAME BEHAVIOR that MADE THEM ALL RICH and RUINED the ECONOMY!
--more--"
You deaf yet, readers?
