Balancing the Scales of Justice for Pro Se Homeowners

Does JP Morgan Chase OWN Washington Mutual Loans?

Posted by on Feb 7, 2013

Depending on who you ask, and when you ask, the answer could be ..yes, no, or…don’t know! Now how is that possible? Either they do or they don’t.  And it is a question that every single Washington Mutual consumer should be asking.

Back in 2008, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) stepped in and took over operations of Washington Mutual Bank; and through that process they sold assets of the bank to JP Morgan Chase.  What JP Morgan expects the general public to believe is that means they took over all loans originated by Washington Mutual Bank, unless they are getting sued by investors and then they claim none were purchased.  So how is it possible that JP Morgan talks out of both sides of its “proverbial” mouth?

 First, Washington Mutual Bank, FSB (Federal Savings Bank) f/k/a Washington Mutual, FA (Federal Association) was ONE of SEVERAL entities owned by Washington Mutual, Inc.   (See  JP Morgan apparently took over Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp as well.

Then on September 25, 2008 the FDIC sold “certain” assets to JP Morgan Chase; one assumes those assets were the deposits, savings, credit cards and servicing contracts held by Washington Mutual Bank.   I say assumes because it is only now coming to light that when the FDIC sold those “certain” assets, they didn’t bother with identifying some of those assets – and this could prove to be a big problem for JP Morgan Chase.  (Time to start those crying violins).

Recently Deutsche Bank National Trust Company sued the FDIC for flawed loans originated by Washington Mutual Bank; through that lawsuit, the FDIC filed a Motion to Dismiss stating the FDIC isn’t responsible for those loans, that JP Morgan Chase assumed liability for those loans.  So of course, Deutsche then joined JP Morgan Chase, who in turn says…… “Whoa there Nelly, we don’t have those loans and we certainly didn’t take on liability for those loans”.  Among other sorts of teeth gnashing and whining, apparently neither the FDIC nor JP Morgan Chase are quite clear just which  loans were actually sold to JP Morgan Chase.  (If you want a copy of the Amended Complaint and Motions to Dismiss as filed, email me and I will send them to you)  Which by the way, the Motions to Dismiss were DENIED.

This confusion is further illustrated by a 330 page deposition of a one Lawrence Nardi.  On May 9, 2012 in the matter  JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as successor in interest to Washington Mutual Bank v. Waisome, Florida 5th Judicial Circuit Case No. 2009-CA-005717, Lawrence Nardi, Operations Unit Manager and mortgage officer for JP Morgan Chase, who was previously employed by Washington Mutual and thereafter by JP Morgan Chase, in sworn deposition testimony under oath and subject to the penalties of perjury, testified that there was NEVER a mortgage loan schedule as to any mortgage loans “purchased” by JP Morgan Chase, NA from the FDIC pursuant to the Purchase and Asset Agreement (PAA) between the FDIC and JPM dated September 25, 2008.  Pertinent testimony from the 330 page deposition is as follows:

Q: (page 57, beginning at line 19): Okay. The — are you aware of any type of schedule of loans that would have been created to represent the — either the loans that were asset loans or the loans that were serviced by WAMU? Are you — was the — do you know if there is a schedule or database of loans like that?

A: (page 58, beginning at line 1): I know that there was a schedule contemplated in certain documents related to the purchase. That schedule has never materialized in any form. We’ve looked for it in countless other cases. We’ve never been able to produce it in any previous cases. It would certainly be a wonderful thing to have, but it’s — as far as I know, it doesn’t exist, although it was — it was contemplated in the documents.

Q: (beginning at page 260, line 18): Have you ever in your duties of being a loan analyst — a loan operations specialist, have you ever seen an FDIC bill of sale or a receiver’s deed or an assignment of mortgage or an allonge?

A: (page 260, beginning at line 23): For loans, I’m assuming you’re talking about the WaMu loan that was subject to the purchase here.

Q: (page 261, line 1): Right.

A: (page 261, beginning at line 2): No there is no assignments of mortgage. There’s no allonges. There’s no — in the thousands of loans that I have come into contact with that were a part of this purchase, I’ve never once seen an assignment of mortgage. There is simply not — they don’t exist. Or allonges or anything transferring ownership from WAMU to Chase, in other words. Specifically, endorsements and things like that.

This claim by Nardi is supported by some of the Free Writing Prospects that Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corporation (who allegedly purchased the loans originated by WaMu) that clearly states –


Possession by a Subsequent   Purchaser or Creditor of the Mortgage Notes and Mortgages Could Defeat the   Interests of the Trust in the Mortgage Notes and Mortgages The trustee will not have   physical possession of the mortgage notes and mortgages related to the mortgage   loans owned by the Trust. In addition, the trustee will not conduct any   independent review or examination of the related mortgage files. Instead, to   facilitate servicing and reduce administrative costs, Washington Mutual Bank   fsb, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Washington Mutual Bank, the servicer of the   mortgage loans, will retain possession of and will review the mortgage notes   and mortgages as custodian for the Trust and financing statements will be   filed evidencing the Trust’s interest in the mortgage loans. The mortgage notes will not be endorsed to the Trust   and no assignment of the mortgages to the Trust will be prepared.   Furthermore, the mortgage notes and mortgages will not   be stamped or otherwise marked to reflect the assignment to Washington Mutual   Mortgage Securities Corp. and then to the Trust. If a   subsequent purchaser or creditor were able to take physical possession of the   mortgage notes and mortgages without knowledge of that assignment, the   interests of the Trust in the mortgage notes and mortgages could be defeated.   In that event, distributions to certificateholders may be adversely affected.

So it is quite understandable that consumers are confused by JP Morgan Chase’s claim as a “party of interest” in their foreclosures.  And every single one should be questioning that claim.  If the loan was sold to Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp back “when”, then how could the FDIC ever sell it to JP Morgan Chase? The fact is ..they did NOT.  They may have sold servicing rights to the loan, but they did NOT sell the loans to JP Morgan Chase.  And everyone should be demanding proof of that purchase.

I have seen numerous “Assignments of Deed of Trust” or “Corporate Assignment of Deed of Trust” in which JP Morgan falsely claims:

             JP Morgan Chase as Success in Interest to Washington Mutual Bank 

            This statement is a flat out lie; JP Morgan Chase purchased assets from the FDIC they purchase NOTHING from Washington Mutual Bank.  Don’t take my word for this; recently the Michigan Supreme Court looked at this issue and THEY declared in their ruling that JP Morgan Chase is not “successor in interest” to Washington Mutual Bank. See Michigan Supreme Court – JP Morgan NOT Successor in Interest to WaMu

             JP Morgan Chase National Association Successor in Interest by purchase from the FDIC as Receiver from Washington Mutual Bank et al

            Okay. That is possible if Washington Mutual retained the loan; but if there is a REMIC on the “assignment” then that is a flat out lie, because the loan was sold years ago to the Washington Mutual Securities Corp who sold it to the REMIC Trust; it was not part of the assets taken over by the FDIC.  If they “purchased” me the schedule. Show me the endorsement (a real one, not a manufactured one please).  Show me the receipt.  My oh my what a web we weave when we first practice to deceive.  Investors SHOULD be all over this mess.

The issue of whether JP Morgan Chase is the “successor in interest” is hearsay.  There is too much evidence in the general public domain and being filed in cases throughout the county demonstrating that Washington Mutual sold those loans long before the FDIC got involved; so the assignment is a sham.  And you might want to look into what constitutes “fraud upon the court” if they come trotting into Court with their manufactured “assignment” as proof.

The other really odd thing about these “assignments” – they claim that the Trustee of the REMIC Trust (Wells Fargo, US Bank, Deutsche), and the FDIC ALL reside at the exact same address and share the exact same phone number.  Really?  Not that it is fatal to the assignment but I think it is evidence that JP Morgan lies.  If I want to call the FDIC and ask them about this assignment, the number rolls to JP Morgan Chase; if I want to call one of the Trustees, the number rolls to JP Morgan Chase.  Why is that?

I also find it fascinating that JP Morgan, who according to financial sites, was hankering to buy Washington Mutual – I can’t help but wonder how attractive those “unendorsed” Notes were to JP Morgan Chase;  does this little bit have anything to do with the OCC’s Cease and Desist Order to JP Morgan Chase on their anti money laundering practices?  The modern day mafia doesn’t deal in drugs and booze, they deal in stolen homes.




Join the conversation and post a comment.

  1. Rob Harrington

    more gas on the WAMU/CHASE/FDIC fire… enjoy —>

    Thank you Simonee for publishing your post above.

Leave a Comment


Forgot Password?

Join Us

Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.