Home > Mortgages > Report: To Foreclose, GMAC Filed Bogus Document

Comments 1 Comment

Courtesy of investigative news site ProPublica, a new chapter in the robo-signing saga unfolds—a report that GMAC, one of the nation’s largest mortgage management companies, filed a bogus document last year to demonstrate its legal standing to foreclose on a house.

The home was originally financed by Ameriquest, one of the largest subprime lenders during the housing boom. According to ProPublica, GMAC needed to prove it had been granted rights to the mortgage from Ameriquest in order to kickstart foreclosure proceedings. The problem was, Ameriquest went out of business in 2007. To work around this obstacle, GMAC produced a document stating the delinquent Ameriquest loan had been assigned to it “effective of” August 2005, ProPublica reports.

That document was filed with New York City’s finance department in July 2010—nearly two years after Ameriquest ceased to exist.

“It’s fraud,” Linda Tirelli, a consumer bankruptcy attorney, told ProPublica. “I want to know who’s going to do a perp walk for recording this.” According to the site, it’s a felony in the state of New York to file a public record with “intent to deceive.”

Regardless, GMAC isn’t backing down. The company says it plans to foreclose anyway.

“We will determine and complete the necessary steps to remediate and proceed with foreclosure,” GMAC spokesperson Gina Proia told ProPublica.

That plan may run into problems. Jeffrey Stephan, who signed the document while serving as head of GMAC’s “Document Execution” team, is the same guy who testified last year that he signed 400 foreclosure-related documents a day. The revelation helped start the robo-signer scandal. Last week the Vermont Supreme Court threw out a foreclosure case brought by US Bank, ordering the bank to start the entire process over because it relied on documents signed by Stephan.

“It is neither irrational nor wasteful to expect the foreclosing party be actually in possession of its claimed interest,” the judges found, “and have the proper supporting documentation in hand when filing suit.”

[Featured Product: Compare prepaid credit cards]

Image: Casey Serin, via Flickr.com

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

  • Pingback: Report: To Foreclose, GMAC Filed Bogus Document – Credit.com News (blog) | Foreclosure News()

  • Gordon Brooks

    I’m really surprised and rather appalled that this is taking so long to get wide press coverage. For those of us who have been through this, and are following the blogs and looking at the actual documents in the county records for our own cases, this is very old news. In my own case, an assignment was filed in February 2009, after Ameriquest was gone, not by GMAC but by Deutsche Bank.

    And then ANOTHER assignment was filed AFTER the foreclosure sale (I like in a state where the “lender,” if Deutsche can be legally called such, can foreclose without court action). Claims to be effective before, but my state’s law says that such ex post facto filing is not valid.

    And both assignments are signed by known, notorious robo-signers: Linda Green, Tywanna Thomas, Bryan Bly, and Crystal Moore. These things are all over the records of every county in the USA. The fraud is rampant, and it’s not just those who are in foreclosure or even behind on their payments who are affected. I strongly suggest that everyone with a mortgage tries to find out who actually owns it.

    Good luck with that.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other sponsored content on Credit.com are Partners with Credit.com. Credit.com receives compensation if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any financial products or cards offered.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team