Multi-party Suit Filed by Borrowers Against Aurora Bank et al

Multi-party Suit Filed by Borrowers Against Aurora Bank et al

United Foreclosure Attorney Network

Roseville, California (PRWEB) November 11, 2011

On Tuesday October 25, 2011, United Foreclosure Attorney Network (UFAN) filed suit in Superior Court in Sacramento (case # 34-2011-00112919) on behalf of borrowers allegedly injured by the lending practices of Aurora Bank and others believed to have misled borrowers.

The complaint alleges that Aurora was one of the major players in a scheme to make fast, easy profits at the expense of proper mortgage underwriting procedures. By packing subprime loans into mortgage backed securities that were sold to investors, a bank could recoup the funds lent immediately. The suit argues that this process encouraged lenders and mortgage brokers to aggressively push high-cost subprime loans on anyone they could convince to sign on the dotted line.

According to court documents, plaintiffs argue that because of the sale of their loans, they did not receive the benefit of the contract for which they bargained. Plaintiffs, believing they would be placed into a traditional Lender/Borrower relationship, later found that they did not have a “lender” with whom they could deal. Servicers are limited in making changes to contracts when circumstances are unforeseeably changed. Furthermore, loan servicers have an incentive to foreclose whereas a lender has the incentive to modify a loan if it would be more profitable in the long run. If many of the homeowners were still in the traditional lender/borrower relationship, they could have restructured the mortgage for a more desirable result for both parties. In the current situation, the only entity profiting is the loan servicer. The complaint details how many Plaintiffs diligently sought modification of their loans but were denied either because the servicer had no authority to grant a modification or because the servicer chose not to grant a modification.    

Court documents show that Aurora is alleged to have used a variety of tactics to generate the highest amount of fees possible without regard to the injury it would cause borrowers. One tactic is “equity stripping,” which refers to making a loan based on home equity without regard to the borrower’s ability to pay. These loans are set up to fail and lead to subsequent foreclosure. Aurora is also accused of “flipping” which refers to encouraging frequent refinances by homeowners. Borrowers receive cash up front but do not realize that the fees added to their existing loan balance often exceed the amount of cash received – gradually increasing the amount owed over time. Unsophisticated borrowers are especially susceptible to these types of loans because lenders and brokers often use aggressive sales tactics and represent that they are the only type of loan available.

The complaint alleges that, in addition to harmful loan types, appraisers used by Aurora were encouraged to inflate property values in order to give borrowers higher loan amounts. The higher the loan amount, the more money Aurora was able to make on the sale of the loan to investors. It is argued that the bank incentivized appraisers to falsify property valuations in order to secure a higher loan to sell to investors. The complaint alleges that Plaintiffs borrowed excessively in reliance on inflated appraisals and other false statements.

The complaint further alleges that the ownership of Plaintiffs’ notes is unknown, thus questioning, among other things, Aurora’s right to enforce the notes. The complaint requests declaratory relief on several matters relating to the parties’ rights and duties under the contract.

UFAN has currently has lawsuits pending against Bank of America (case # 2:11-CV-02413) and Wells Fargo (case # 2:11-CV-02684) in Federal Court for the Eastern District of California, and against JP Morgan Chase (case # C-11-02390) in Superior Court of Contra Costa County on behalf of borrowers alleged to have been injured by these banks. UFAN will continue to fight for the rights of its clients.

ABOUT THE UNITED FORECLOSURE ATTORNEY NETWORK

UFAN Legal Group, PC dba United Foreclosure Attorney Network (UFAN) is a Roseville, California-based law firm providing bonding litigation and other debt related legal services. The dedicated attorneys and staff at UFAN work tirelessly to seek justice and fight for the rights of its clients. For more information call toll free 1-866-400-4242.

This release may am attorney advertisement. The information in this release and on the UFAN website (ufanlaw.com) is for worldwide information purposes but. Nothing in this release or on the UFAN website should be taken as sound advice. Prior successes are no guarantee of future performance. Litigation is inherently unsure and results in litigation are ne’er assured.

# # #

Attachments

©Copyright 1997-

, Vocus PRW Holdings, LLC. Vocus, PRWeb, and Publicity Wire are trademarks or registered trademarks of Vocus, Inc. or Vocus PRW Holdings, LLC.

I want to do a loan modification, would lender need co borrowers information if he is going through bankruptcy?

Question by AnnetteM: I want to do a loan modification, would lender need co borrowers information if he is going through bankruptcy?
I am the sole person on the deed and title. Co-borrower is on loan solely for qualification purposes and never lived in home nor contributed to payments. He is now filing for bankruptcy and is surrendering home in his bankruptcy. I am two months behind because of financial issues. Will the bank need his information as far as income and expenses if he is now in BK situation?

Best answer:

Answer by Toni
Just a note:He may not be able to discharge the home in the bankruptcy since he has a co-borrower.Did he get a book on Bankruptcy and research this???

Give your answer to this question below!

Mortgage Home Loan – Tips For Getting a Mortgage Loan