"Morgicide" - The Illegal Destruction of Mortgages by Securitization

If a bank modifies a loan, the modification may result ininstitutionalized constraints, the sorry rate of
injury to certain classes of investors. Such financiallyforeclosures will continue unabated. Unless such a
injured investors may then sue the banks for impropercountervailing force emerges from the private sector
administration of the investment resulting in billions ofor from a need to respond to massive political
dollars of liability. Foreclosure, the measure generallypressure, very little is likely to change.
accepted and prescribed in the investment documentsThe discussion above has shown that the note holder
to cure default of securitized loans, averts risk anddisappears in securitization and the securitization works
liability for lenders.an illegal modification of the Transaction without the
The securitized mortgages are subject to rulesconsent of the debtor. As organized, securitizations
created in the investment documents and rules issuedhave a third major difficulty. Typically a third party to
by the Internal Revenue Service to secure favorablethe Transaction is required to make any monthly
tax treatment for securitized loans. These rulespayment to the certificate holders which is in default. In
constrain the ability of the banks to modify mortgages.other words, if a specific mortgagor fails to make the
Such rules may include the following:January payment, a third party will make the payment
(a) Imposing the restrictions on mortgage modificationfor the mortgagor. Accordingly, the allegation in a
required to be made to qualify for pass through taxforeclosure proceeding that the January payment was
treatment under IRS regulations.not made and is in default is false. The January
(b) Imposing restrictions upon the number ofpayment was paid to the investors. How many times
mortgages in the pool which may be modified.must the investors be paid the January payment?
(c) Providing a procedure and fees to be paid forOnce is enough. Is there any requirement in the
foreclosure but no procedure to modifying the loan asTransaction or anywhere else that only the named
an alternate dispute resolution.mortgagor can make the required January payment to
(d) Creating securities with classes of ownershipthe servicing agent? Absolutely not.
("tranches") with adverse and opposing financialIt may well be that such a third party who has made
interests resulting in so called "tranche warfare" so thatpayments in default is entitled to a legal recovery
a modification which favors one tranche may work aagainst the debtor. However, that party is not a party
detriment upon another.to the mortgage or a successor in interest to the
(e) Restricting the ability to lower interest payments onmortgagee and therefore has no right whatsoever to
the note.foreclose to effect repayment. To use the mechanism
(f) Restricting the ability to increase the number ofof foreclosure to recover the third party debt
payments to be made.perpetrates a fraud and misuse of the foreclosure
(g) Restricting the ability to defer payments.proceedings. The mortgage is not intended to secure
(h) Restricting the ability to extend the term of therepayment of anyone. It is intended only to secure
mortgage.repayment of the mortgagee and the mortgagee's
(i) Restricting the ability to impose a temporarysuccessors in interest. In the case of securitization, the
moratorium on payments.third parties making payments in default are
(j) Restricting the ability to accept "short sales".indisputably not the successors in interest of the original
(k) Creating potential liability to a specific class ofmortgagee.
certificate holders by entering into a modificationIt is but a question of time until Congress and the
agreement required for an alternate dispute resolution.courts are compelled to recognize that securitization,
(l) Requiring the servicing agent to purchase any loanas practiced and without any public regulation, has
which has been modified.resulted in "Morgicide", the illegal and intentional
These restrictions work a modification of thedestruction of mortgages by Wall Street. The upshot
Transaction without the consent of the borrower. Thisof this Morgicide will be the realization that the nation's
constitutes either a breach of contract or a tortiouslargest banks and financial institutions have caused
interference with a contract, or both. Failure to havemillions of illegal foreclosures. Think of it this way. Your
obtained the consent of the borrower to aneighbor purchased a new car with an installment
securitization of the mortgage is a legally fatal flaw.credit loan. Your neighbor has failed to make monthly
Following the rules imposed on securitized mortgagesinstallment payments. The dealer has the right to
constrains and restricts the ability of banks to modifyrepossess. Instead, I come along and take the car. The
loans. Even where the loan is modified only bypolice arrest me and charge me with Grand Theft
extending the term of the loan so that the originalAuto. At trial, I defend myself by arguing that since my
principal and interest rate are unchanged, the cashneighbor was in default, I had the right to repossess
flow generated may not be sufficient to permitthe car. Sorry, this will not work, and I am going to jail.
modification of the loan if the investors hold fixed rateThe judge will rule only the dealer, not me, has the right
bonds. In short, banks make fees when they foreclose;to repossess. I acted as a mere thief in the night.
banks incur actual and potential liability when banksSimilarly the financial institutions acting as plaintiffs in the
modify mortgages.foreclosure of securitized mortgages are acting like
The Administration and the banks have shown nothingthe thief in the night. They are taking the house on
more than a willingness to pay lip service to thebehalf of the secured creditor without being the
achieving loan modifications instead of foreclosure.secured creditor.
Documents issued by federal financial agencies andSo far, just as in the Sherlock Holmes mystery known
Congressional Committees show that the governmentas "Silver Blaze" where the dog did not bark in the
is fully aware of the institutionalized constraints butnight, our judges have been suspiciously silent. This will
loath to discuss such constraints with members of thechange as more and more lawyers become familiar
public. There has been no serious effort by ourwith securitization. Look to see multibillion dollar class
government to address and overcome theactions suits for wrongful foreclosure as part of the
institutionalized constraints to loan modification. Untilshameful legal legacy of unregulated securitization. As
there is a serious countervailing force to compellong as lawyers chase ambulances and sue for
lenders to modify mortgages which overrides themalpractice, Morgicide will not go unpunished.