The latest foreclosure statistics from RealtyTrac are out, and the news isn’t very good. According to the Q1 2008 U.S. Foreclosure Market Report, which tracks foreclosure filings (including default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions), 649,917 properties were foreclosed upon during the first quarter of the year, a 23% increase from the previous quarter and a 112% increase from the first quarter of 2007. The report also shows that one (1) in every 194 U.S. households received a foreclosure filing during the quarter.

Foreclosure activity in the quarter increased on a year-over-year basis in 46 out of the 50 states and in 90 of the nation’s 100 largest metro areas, demonstrating that most regions of the country are seeing more foreclosures. In some areas there are also some unusual, non-market factors impacting the foreclosure numbers. For example, the city of Philadelphia in late March issued a temporary moratorium on all foreclosure auctions for April, and the city has since adopted a program that will delay foreclosure proceedings on owner-occupied properties until the owners have met face-to-face with lenders to attempt a loan workout plan that would prevent foreclosure.

While programs like those in Philadelphia are certain to have a positive long-term impact, they could be simply deferring another flood of foreclosures, and that could extend the length of time it takes the market to recover from the current downward cycle, in which we’ve already seen seven consecutive quarters of increasing foreclosure activity.

Click on the map to the left for a close up view of exactly where foreclosure-related activity is playing out across the United States. As you’ll see, one (1) in every 54 Nevada households received a foreclosure filing during the first quarter, the highest foreclosure rate in the nation and 3.6 times the national average. Foreclosure filings were reported on 19,595 Nevada properties during the quarter, up 3% from the previous quarter and up 137% from the first quarter of 2007.

Foreclosure filings were reported on 169,831 California properties during the first quarter, the highest total in the nation at a rate of one (1) in every 78 households — the nation’s second highest foreclosure rate. Foreclosure activity in California increased 32% from the previous quarter and was up nearly 213% from the first quarter of 2007.

Arizona documented the nation’s third highest state foreclosure rate, with one (1) in every 95 households receiving a foreclosure filing during the quarter. Foreclosure filings were reported on 27,404 Arizona properties during the quarter, up 45% from the previous quarter and up nearly 245% from the first quarter of 2007.

Foreclosure filings were reported on 87,893 Florida properties during the first quarter, the second highest state total and giving Florida the nation’s 4th highest foreclosure rate — one (1) in every 97 households received a foreclosure filing during the quarter. Foreclosure activity in the state was up 17% from the previous quarter and up 178% from the first quarter of 2007.

Colorado foreclosure activity increased 33% from the previous quarter and 78% from the first quarter of 2007, and the state’s foreclosure rate ranked No. 5 among the states. Foreclosure filings were reported on 18,996 Colorado properties during the quarter, a rate of one in every 110 households.

Other states with foreclosure rates among the top 10 were Georgia, Michigan, Ohio, Massachusetts and Connecticut.

Back at the beginning of February, Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard said the mortgage industry “needed to reach out to more homeowners at risk of foreclosure if the nation’s housing crisis is to be brought under control.” Now, just three months later, Goddard isn’t letting up. Citing a new national report on subprime mortgages, Goddard last week said efforts of servicers and government officials to prevent foreclosures have increased but still fall short of the need to effectively respond to the foreclosure crisis and prevent millions of unnecessary foreclosures. The report, “Analysis of Subprime Mortgage Servicing Performance,” was issued last Tuesday by the State Foreclosure Prevention Working Group, a group of state Attorneys General and banking regulators working to prevent home foreclosures.

Major findings of the report include:

1. Seven out of 10 seriously delinquent borrowers are still not on track for any loss-mitigation outcome. The number of borrowers in loss mitigation has increased, but it has been matched by an increasing number of delinquent loans.
2. Data suggest that servicers’ loss-mitigation departments are severely strained in managing the current workload. The report noted that almost two-thirds of all loss-mitigation efforts started are not completed in the following month.
3. Homeowners who do receive loss-mitigation help are most likely to receive some form of loan modification. The Working Group said such modifications are a solution that seems to offer better long-term prospects for successful resolution of problem loans. Many servicers are replacing their use of repayment plans in favor of loan modifications.

The State Working Group said it believes “more robust approaches to avoid preventable foreclosures are necessary.” The Working Group said servicers, investors and state officials should work together on:

• Developing a more systematic loan work-out system to replace the intensive, individual, “hands-on” loss-mitigation approach. The Group says it continue to work with servicers to promote systematic solutions to modify loans in a more streamlined and efficient manner.
  

• Slowing down the foreclosure process to allow for more work-outs. Targeted efforts to slow down subprime foreclosures may give homeowners and servicers more time to find solutions to avoid foreclosure, the report says. Many states have enacted or are considering such measures, according to the report.

The State Foreclosure Prevention Working Group began as a cooperative dialogue of state officials and mortgage servicers in September of 2007. Since October of 2007, the Working Group has been collecting data from the largest subprime mortgage servicers, with 13 of the largest 20 servicers participating, representing approximately 60% of subprime mortgage loans serviced. The Group is led by representatives of the Attorneys General of 11 states, including Arizona, California, Colorado, Iowa, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas); two state banking departments (New York and North Carolina); and the Conference of State Bank Supervisors.

For more info, read Analysis of Subprime Mortgage Servicing Performance (Warning: clicking on the preceding link will download a 30-page PDF file).

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has charged three people who targeted military families in a multi-million dollar real estate fraud scheme that forced victims into personal bankruptcy and their homes into foreclosure. The scam also targeted other affinity groups, including members of Southern California’s Filipino community and the accused’ fellow church members. James Duncan, Hendrix Montecastro, and Maurice McLeod stand accused of soliciting investors investors in Southern California, Arizona, and elsewhere using sham investment seminars and “referral partners” including a member of the Air Force who solicited his fellow servicemen.

The SEC’s complaint alleges the three men gained control over investors’ finances by offering them securities in the form of real estate investment contracts, and purporting that the money investors earned would help make mortgage payments on investment homes purchased on their behalf. Instead of investing client funds as promised, Duncan, Montecastro, and McLeod operated a Ponzi scheme by using money from new investors to make mortgage payments on previously purchased investment homes. When the scheme unraveled, it cost more than 75 investors an estimated $10 million.

With the type of fraud Duncan, Montecastro, and McLeod operated (commonly referred to as “affinity frauds”), con artists infiltrate tight-knit groups by showcasing a respected member of that community as one of their successful investors, giving the false illusion of a safe and secure investment opportunity and conning new investors into their Ponzi-like schemes.

Between October 2004 and June 2006, Duncan, Montecastro, and McLeod operated through Murrieta, Calif.-based Pacific Wealth Management, LLC (PWM) and Stonewood Consulting, Inc., to defraud investors from several affinity groups. The SEC’s complaint alleges that all three falsely promised investors that their funds would be invested in real estate and various other investments that would subsidize their investment homes. The SEC’s complaint further alleges that Duncan, a recidivist, raised $1.2 million in a separate offering of preferred membership units in Total Return Fund, LLC, to approximately 20 investors. The complaint alleges that the proceeds raised in both offerings were commingled and used to run a Ponzi-like scheme that fell apart and left investors with homes in foreclosure and forced some investors to declare bankruptcy.

According to the SEC’s complaint, Duncan, Montecastro, and McLeod failed to disclose several key facts about the purchase of the investment homes. They charged exorbitant real estate transaction fees financed by the investors, and submitted false mortgage loan applications on behalf of investors. The complaint also alleges that Duncan, who was touted as a financial genius, failed to disclose his prior securities laws violations.

The SEC’s complaint further alleges that Duncan and Total Return Fund misrepresented how investor money would be used. Specifically, while the Total Return Fund offering documents stated that 95 percent of investor funds would go towards the purchase of real estate, business assets, or accounts receivable, in fact, investor funds were used to pay returns to prior investors, and were used as part of the PWM fraud.

The SEC’s complaint charges Duncan, Montecastro, and McLeod with violating the antifraud and registration provisions of the federal securities laws, and seeks permanent injunctions, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and civil penalties. The complaint also names Christopher Oetting, Anthony M. Contreras and Biocybernaut Institute, Inc., as relief defendants, alleging that they received ill-gotten gains from the defendants’ fraudulent conduct.

The mortgage meltdown and resulting foreclosure epidemics are an American crisis that will require the united efforts of all citizens of the United States to come together and resolve. Professionals in the real estate and mortgage lending industries need to stop paying homage to the almighty dollar and limitless profits of those good years and hunker down with homeowners to get through these hard times. As I see it, this is the only hope we have to keep the American Dream of homeownership alive.

Fortunately, a large majority of professionals in the real estate and mortgage industries are trustworthy and dedicated to the long-term health of their businesses and careers. Unfortunately, too many professionals are focused entirely on their own short-term interests.

Recently, one of the true blue professionals in my industry called my attention to a situation in Arizona in which she suspects rampant fraud is taking place. She is an honest, well-informed real estate agent who is dedicated to doing her part to clamp down on fraud in the real estate industry, which she loves. She has witnessed other professionals, driven by greed, become involved in cash back at closing schemes that are designed to stimulate the sales of condos by providing buyers with $18,000 to $40,000 in cash (undisclosed to the lender) following closing.

To further hide what was really going on, the people involved in this alleged scheme adjusted it so the cash back would not be paid as a lump sum but paid out in installments in the form of guaranteed rental payments. This tactic did not fool our whistleblower. She tells her story here.

I am writing this because of my concern regarding all of the mortgage loan fraud that has been in the media specifically in the past year.

You are about to read my experience over the past year and what I believe to be a sophisticated case of loan fraud.

My background

I first started in the industry as a RE/MAX receptionist in 1990, since which time I have acquired over seven years experience in the new home arena, over seven years in the resale arena, and three years in the corporate office of a mortgage company.

January 2007

I interviewed for a position the first business day of the New Year and started the following week. I was excited as this gave me an opportunity to explore a whole new area within the new homes arena.

The community, Sunscape Villas, Scottsdale, AZ consisted of 442 units. Sales of the units began in early 2006, and over 210 units were closed on from May to Dec 2006.

Developer/Seller – Partners:

• Crown - California company
• MCZ Centrum - Chicago company

Sales and Marketing by:

• Urbis Properties, Cheryl King, Owner (Licensed)

We were told to get ready as they were in the process of finalizing a special program for one of their power brokers who worked with a lot of investors. We weren’t given much detail only that it was a program similar to what they were doing Landmark on Central (4750 N Central, Phoenix, AZ) that helped sell and close over 70 units. Landmark was Cheryl’s prior community, in the final stages of close out. The Developer/Seller was Crown (out of California) one of the partners at Sunscape Villas.

March 2007

The details had been ironed out and they were ready to launch the new program. A sales meeting was scheduled to go over this program along with two other similar programs that were going to be offered to different groups.

It was stressed to all of us the importance of these programs not getting out to the general public as they were only being offered to the select groups. Making matters worse, the three groups each had different deals set up and no one could know about the other.

Power Broker No. 1 - Moser & Perry

• Greg Moser, Realty Expert (Licensed)
• Jay Perry, Estate Planner (unlicensed)
• Moser & Perry’s Preferred (only) Lender: House 2 Home (Mike Low, Owner)

The program was set up to allow the investors to cash flow for the first couple of years. Two days after close of escrow an Option to Purchase agreement would be drawn up by Urbis and sent to the office of Moser and Perry for Buyer’s (now owner’s) signature and bank wiring instructions. The office of Moser and Perry returned signed Option and wiring instructions to Urbis who would forward on to Seller (Crown/MCZ Centrum) for a pre-determined amount (8-21% of purchase price) to be wired into the Buyer’s (now owner’s) bank account. All parties knew there was never the intent for the property to be (re)purchased per the agreement.

Editor’s Note: This was just a way to kick back money to the buyer under the guise of paying for an option to purchase the property from the buyer, when nobody had any intent of ever purchasing that property from the buyer.)

Greg Moser was set up on a graduated co-broke: 6% for the first 25 sold, 7% for the second 25 and 8% for everything thereafter. He felt confident that he could sell between 70 and 100 units.

The sales staff was instructed that there would be nothing in the purchase contract nor would there be anything in writing regarding the Option given to the buyer. They were told just to refer any/all questions from the Moser clients back to Greg Moser or Jay Perry, all sales needed to do was show the property and print out the contracts.

We were given strict instructions that this agreement COULD NOT be signed until two days after close of escrow. In addition we were told that since this happened outside of closing, neither the real estate broker nor the title company needed to know, as well as this ‘incentive’ was not to be disclosed to the appraisers coming to the sales office for comps of recent closings.

I recalled reading an article on AZ Central.com about Cash Back at Closing, I began questioning if this could be done. I forwarded a copy of the article to the Urbis team. (I had forwarded a few helpful articles before that). After several discussions around the office, a point was made to let everyone know that this was not the same thing as what was written about on AZ Central. We were assured that the attorney’s had looked at the agreement and said that it was legal. A gal in our office was mid-way through her real estate licensing classes and Cheryl King suggested she asked the instructor, which she did and was told that they couldn’t do that. When told what she had learned, Cheryl King brushed it off as not being explained the right way.

Having been in the industry for a number of years, I understood the mechanics of the Option to Purchase. This was not the way I recalled seeing this used in the past. I started to question my knowledge base, but, I didn’t push the issue. After all, who was I to question the corporate attorney or Cheryl with her MBA and paralegal background?

I wasn’t the point person for Urbis and the Option Agreements, as Cheryl had taken on three new listings, two of which I was in charge of the entire contracts & closings process, so I was very busy with those duties. It was out if sight, but never far from my mind.

Being a reader of all things real estate related, I’ve gained valuable insight through out the years. I always make sure I can back up what I’m saying in writing via various publications, statutes, and disciplinary orders. People in my office have referred to me as “a walking real estate encyclopedia,” and Cheryl gave me the nickname “Sherlock” and would come to me frequently to find out this and confirm that, as she was beginning to trust that I knew what I was talking about.

Summer 2007

MCZ Centrum had bought out Crown, making MCZ/Centrum the sole seller / developer for Sunscape. Roles and responsibilities that had been handled through Crown in California had been moved to various people / departments at MCZ/Centrum in Chicago. Shortly thereafter, Moser was informed that certain heads at Centrum were not comfortable with the Option program currently being offered, and it was just a matter of time before they pulled the plug on it.

Moser threw a fit, he was not happy. The Option program was what he was selling (40+ had already closed). Several contracts had been printed and were out to the buyers, and he believed many more were on the horizon. He didn’t understand why they would go back on their word and not let him continue selling under the program exactly the way it was. He had held many seminars, generated from his (and House 2 Home Lending’s) regular talk radio spot on real estate investing, which aired on Wednesdays at 4:00 p.m. on 1100 KFNX-Phoenix).

Then came all the talk of loan fraud becoming a felony starting in September. The change in events piqued my interest into revisiting my original feeling of this not being legal. Why would they stop something that was obviously selling condos? Why was this program never rolled out at the other Urbis listing? Was it possible it was not as legal as everyone was lead to believe? EQR, new Urbis listing, a publicly traded company would have nothing to do with it.

Would this have anything to do with loan fraud becoming a felony in Arizona?

In mid-August, we were informed that the Option program had ended and we were rolling out a new program — Master Lease, Lease Subsidy, Rent Guarantee — it changed names several times as it was being drawn up. I felt a little bit better about this program at first, because at least the title company knew about it as they’re who connected Cheryl with Noteworld.

When the Rent Guarantee program was rolled out, the only difference was instead of the buyer getting a lump sum payment back from the seller after close of escrow, the lump sum payment was going to Noteworld and they would in turn distribute monthly installments to the buyer for 12 or 18 months depending on the terms.

Sunscape had over 30 resale properties listed for sale on the MLS, some of which had been on the market as long as I had been with Urbis. It was apparent that the developer’s pricing was factored in when setting the resale pricing. The majority priced lower than the sales office advertised price – not a single unit had sold.

The Sales office closed 84 units in 2007 (36 under the Option program, 25 under the Rent Guarantee program, and 23 advertised public program); thelast public deal closed on August 10. Not a single Sunscape re-sale sold despite being priced lower during the same time frame.

Leading me to explore further, I looked at other condo’s in our same zip code. According to MLS data there were 43 comparable condos (non Sunscape) that closed from Oct 1, 2007 – Jan 21, 2008 in zip code 85251. The average price per sq. ft. for a one-bedroom/one-bath/was $168 (ours $244 & $276); the average price per sq. ft. for a two-bedroom/one-bath was $171 (ours $276-$325); and, the average price per sq. ft. for a two-bedroom/two-bath was $163 (ours $289).

Needless to say, Sunscape is showing all of the classic signs outlined in the many articles that I had been reading for the past year. We are the only community in zip code 85251 (probably the entire valley) that didn’t see property values decline over the past year.

The appraisers were not informed that 73% of the 2007 Sunscape closings included a non-disclosed cash back after closing ($18,000 to $40,000) given to the buyer.

I originally thought NONE of the appraisers were aware of the of the program, until I discovered one of the two appraisers sent to Sunscape to do all of the appraisals for House 2 Home Lending purchased a property at Landmark on Central under the program. The Owner of House 2 Home, Mike Low, his son Justin Low, his brother Andy Low purchased several units at Landmark under the program.

The final piece of this horrible puzzle has begun with the foreclosures (three are currently scheduled for trustee sale, which were bought under the original Option program with cash back given back to the buyer after close of escrow).

I understand from everything that I have read that it can sometimes take years for these cases to unfold and difficult to prove. I hope that all of the information that I have compiled over the past year will help in expediting the process and stop this before it goes any further.

Ruth Lamb

When you see rampant mortgage fraud like this being committed by the very professionals that we trust to do the right thing, it becomes very difficult to place faith or trust in our fellow Americans or to trust the systems we have in place to protect us. In this case, the perpetrators are being rewarded, not only with increased commissions from selling properties with inflated values, but we also see the companies they work for rewarding them for their supposed achievements.

Until this stops and we get serious about policing our industry and shutting down the fraud, it will continue to chip away at the very foundation of our industry. It will generate distrust among our clients and potential clients and eventually lead to the demise of the industry on which all of us earn a living and feed our families.

We need to begin to follow this whistleblower’s lead and, like her, have the tenacity to follow through and put the fraudsters out of business for good!

Imagine buying your dream home. Your credit is a bit shaky but you manage to secure a subprime loan with an adjustable rate mortgage. A few years later, interest rates jump and you can no longer afford to pay your mortgage. You see an advertisement in a local newspaper for a business that’s willing to help–the ad states they can pay your mortgage for a modest monthly fee while you take the necessary time to get back on your feet. But here’s the bad part: It’s a scam. The company just takes your money and runs!

This is just one of the real estate and mortgage fraud-related schemes the FBI is concerned about, and according to senior criminal investigators at the Bureau, the problem is only going to worsen over the next 18 months. These scams–which I write about in my latest book, Foreclosure Self-Defense For Dummies–include plenty of shenanigans with mortgages and subprime loans and are costing this great nation of ours tens of billions of dollars a year, if not more.

“Greed is definitely not good for our economy right now,” says Ken Kaiser, the FBI’s top criminal investigative executive. “It’s hurting homeowners. It’s hurting honest businesses. And it’s hurting investors and markets around the world.”

With those thoughts in mind, the FBI says it is now squarely focused on proactive initiatives designed to crack down on the largest of these financial crimes, and is even shifting resources as trends emerge, all the while working hand-in-hand with a host of government and private sector partners.

In particular:

• As we wrote last week, the FBI is now investigating 14 corporations involved in subprime lending as part of its “Subprime Mortgage Industry Fraud Initiative” launched last year. The companies being investigated come from across the financial services and real estate industry, from mortgage lenders to investment banks that bundle loans into securities sold to investors.
• The Bureau now has more than 1,200 open real estate and mortgage fraud cases (that’s up about 40% from last year), mostly involving fraud for profit, where straw buyers and real estate industry insiders rig schemes to buy properties that are illegally flipped or allowed to go into foreclosure.

The FBI also says suspicious activity reports–for potential real estate and mortgage fraud–have increased from 3,000 in 2003 to 48,000 in fiscal year 2007, and are projected to reach more than 60,000 such reports in 2008.

Finally, the FBI’s latest “hotspot list” for real estate and mortgage fraud includes: California, Texas, Arizona, Florida, Ohio, Michigan, and Utah (Utah is new to the list); and, on a somewhat surprising note, the Bureau now says it sees no links whatsoever to organized crime syndicates, street gangs, or terrorist groups in its real estate and mortgage fraud case portfolio.

• Fraud Seen as a Driver In Wave of Foreclosures: Skyrocketing foreclosures are a testament to how easy it was to borrow from mortgage lenders in recent years. It may also have been easy to steal from them, to judge from a multimillion-dollar fraud scheme that federal prosecutors unraveled here in Atlanta. The criminals obtained $6.8 million in mortgages from Bear Stearns Cos., including a $1.8 million mortgage to Calvin Wright, a New Yorker who told the investment bank that he and his wife earned more than $50,000 a month as the top officers of a marketing firm. Mr. Wright submitted statements showing assets of $3 million, a federal indictment alleged. In fact, Mr. Wright was a phone technician earning only $105,000 a year, with assets of only $35,000, and his wife was a homemaker. The palm-tree-lined mansion they purchased with Bear Stearns’s $1.8 million recently sold out of foreclosure for just $1.1 million. Bear Stearns, meanwhile, posted the first quarterly loss in its 84-year history as it wrote down $1.9 billion of mortgage assets yesterday.
• No solutions for borrowers who are ‘upside down’: Martinez said struggling borrowers have flocked to his office asking for help. Martinez started as an insurance adjuster/investigator more than a decade ago, but began investigating real estate fraud two years ago and suddenly found himself bombarded with cases.
• Fraud and bubbles: Like a horse and carriage: Here’s what’s interesting: It seems likely that a big part of the run-up in housing values may also have been a result of fraud. Demand was inflated by fraudsters making bids on homes that they couldn’t afford — and lenders who were lending based on fraudulent misrepresentations. How big of a role did mortgage fraud play in inflating home prices? It’s impossible to know but now that the frauds are being exposed, we’re seeing home prices dropping precipitously. And without mortgage fraud, there are fewer people with the resources to scoop up homes.
• Realtors reassure peninsula buyers: Kenai Peninsula real estate agents reacted Wednesday with strong words and public assurances in the wake of U.S. Grand Jury fraud indictments handed down Dec. 13 against nine individuals and one corporation in the Anchorage real estate market. According to U.S. Attorney Nelson P. Cohen, the accused allegedly engaged in “a widespread, three-year scheme” cheating 13 banks and home loan mortgage companies. In all, 57 different loan transactions netted more than $1.7 million in profits and cost financial institutions over $1 million to date.
• $3 million bond set for Evergreen president: Bond was set at $3 million cash this morning for Evergreen Corporation President David B. Willan. Willan, 37, was among 17 people named on Thursday in a 147-count Summit County indictment in connection with a two-year investigation into Akron-area mortgage fraud.

  

  Willan, who appeared before Common Pleas Magistrate John H. Shoemaker, was charged with a first-degree felony for engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity, aggravated theft, mortgage fraud, money laundering and other alleged offenses. Authorities said Willan was being held at the the county jail this afternoon in lieu of the $3 million cash bond.

• The Real Mortgage Fraud: Nothing is more fun than doing noble deeds with someone else’s money, and right now, Democrats are getting ready for a rollicking good time. Contemplating the subprime mortgage problem, with numerous borrowers unable to pay their debts, the party’s presidential candidates and congressional leaders have a simple solution: Fleece the lenders.
• Realtor gets 20 months in prison for mortgage fraud: A Rockford Realtor was sentenced to 20 months in prison this afternoon for his role in falsifying documents to help Hispanic families qualify for loans backed by the Federal Housing Authority. Cesar Arenas was the fourth person sentenced in the five-person mortgage-fraud ring that operated from 2001 through 2003 and the second to receive prison time. Rhonda Torossian, the loan officer in the scheme, was sentenced Monday to 20 months in federal prison.
• Guest Opinion: More must be spent to stop mortgage fraud: The Arizona Department of Financial Institutions investigates mortgage fraud cases before referring them to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office for prosecution. The department relies on money from a revolving fund to initiate and fund its investigations, but that money has an annual cap of only $50,000. This amount is inadequate and has not been raised in at least 10 years.
• Banks in England crack down on mortgage fraud: Banks are seeking to crack down on mortgage fraud as evidence mounts of a rise in the number of fraudulent borrowers. Abbey and Lloyds TSB are among the banks reporting a surge in the volume of potentially fraudulent mortgage applications. The Council for Mortgage Lenders is also cracking down, working with police to investigate the possibility that organised criminals are operating in the market. “We are identifying two or three times as many cases of possible fraud as we did in the first part of this year,” said Steve Williams, risk director at Abbey.

• Mortgage Fraud Law Goes into Effect in North Carolina: Among the list of new laws taking effect tomorrow in North Carolina–a law making it easier to prosecute residential mortgage fraud by defining the practice and creating tougher punishments for repeat offenders.
• Mortgage Inquiries Swamping Arizona: Arizona’s mortgage regulator has shut down a handful of firms for fraud and other illegal lending practices this year, but at least 40 other investigations are stalled because there is no money to fund them.
• California Real Estate Firm Investigated for Fraud: Federal investigators are looking into Crisp & Cole Real Estate’s operations for possible mortgage fraud after a federal raid of 13 of the now-defunct California company’s offices.
• New Jersey Lawyer-Judge at Center of Land-Flip Investigation: A NJ lawyer who is also his town’s judge may have played a central role in a scheme to defraud lenders by obtaining mortgages based on inflated appraisals of run-down properties.
• Minnesota Mortgage Firm is the Focus of Fraud Probe: Investigators are probing mortgage fraud complaints involving Universal Mortgage and several of its employees that are said to have used straw buyers to buy property at inflated prices.
• Guilty Plea Entered in Missouri Fraud Case: A 30-year-old man from St. Louis is the fifth person implicated in a mortgage fraud ring involving dozens of homes and millions of dollars in real estate transactions dating back to 2005. Daniel Mann pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and now faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison. Mann admitted to arranging a number of fraudulent real estate transactions that were part of a larger fraud ring coordinated by another person who pleaded guilty in September to similar charges and will be sentenced in December.
• Canadian Paralegal Convicted in $30 Million Mortgage Fraud Scam: An Edmonton fraudster has been convicted of supporting a criminal organization by helping to swindle unsuspecting real estate investors out of nearly $30 million. Sixty-one-year-old Terry Ellis was found guilty of 12 counts of fraud and one count of forgery in connection with a massive mortgage fraud believed to be the biggest in Alberta history.
• Editorial Questions Michigan Attorney General’s Record on Real Estate Fraud: In the state hardest hit by real estate and mortgage fraud-related foreclosures, its attorney general, Mike Cox–who has won nationwide notoriety for locking up parents behind in their child support payments–has yet to file a single criminal complaint against any mortgage broker or lending entity.
• Two Sentenced in Connection with $15 Million Mortgage Fraud Case in Ohio: Two people have been sentenced to prison in connection with what prosecutors describe as a mortgage fraud scam in upscale Cleveland suburbs. Builder and developer, Edward Emery received a sentence totaling 34 months and a fine of $10,000. Eloise Anderson will spend nearly a year in prison and has been ordered to pay $35,000 in restitution.

Big lenders and Wall Street investors are going after Arizona mortgage brokers, appraisers, real estate agents, title firms and home buyers for fraud, reports Catherine Reagor of The Arizona Republic:

Dozens of civil lawsuits alleging the gamut of mortgage fraud, from cash-back deals to lying about income on loan documents, have been filed against Valley firms and individuals during the past few months. Fraud experts and regulators say the lawsuits are only the beginning as the fallout from mortgage fraud starts to hit the Valley….

Among the lawsuits:

Phoenix-based Biltmore Bank is suing Security Title of Arizona and a group of others over a cash-back deal. The suit alleges the group worked together to get Biltmore to fund a $1.3 million loan for a home valued at $800,000 and then pocketed the extra cash. Also named in the suit are Valley appraiser Kittelmann & Associates and Tucson resident Frank Padilla, who was indicted and pleaded guilty last year to fraud and money laundering as part of a $13 million property-flipping scheme.

A Lehman Brothers investment trust in New York and Aurora Loan Services in Denver are suing the parent company of First National Bank of Arizona over 38 home loans. They say the bank misrepresented the values of properties, and the income, debt and employment of some of the borrowers. Lehman and Aurora bought the loans as investments and want the bank to buy them back.

San Francisco-based Transnational Financial Network is suing Phoenix-based Lending House Financial and a Scottsdale investor who purchased 22 Valley homes within days of each other last spring. Transnational funded loans worth nearly $2 million on seven of the homes but says it wasn’t notified the investor was buying multiple properties and his real debt level wasn’t disclosed on mortgage documents.

Tucson-based mortgage lender First Magnus is suing its former Valley loan officer, Tyson Rondeau, for fraud and negligence. First Magnus claims bad loans are costing it nearly $1 million. Separately, the lender agreed last fall to pay a $200,000 fine after the Arizona Department of Financial Institutions found several violations, including a branch manager making false promises or concealing facts in 10 fraudulent loan transactions.

Still want to argue with me about the legality of Real Estate deals involving cash back at closing? That’s fine because now I am going to bring the Arizona Department of Financial Institutions’ superintendent, Felecia Rotellini, to the table. Rotellini’s department–which is responsible for the licensing, supervision and regulation of state chartered financial institutions and enterprises–just shut down a Mesa, Arizona, mortgage firm with 75 branch offices for, among other things, promoting cash-back deals. From reporter Catherine Reagor at The Arizona Republic:

Regulators have shut down Mesa-based Eagle First Mortgage and its more than 75 Valley branches, citing illegal lending practices. The Arizona Department of Financial Institutions pulled the license of the mortgage firm and its broker, David Sanchez, last week. Regulators described more than 100 illegal money transactions, loan activities and hiring practices. The firm, one of the largest that Financial Institutions has shut down, has until March 14 to finish any outstanding loans and close its doors.

“Eagle First is surrendering its license as a result of multiple and repeat violations,” said Felecia Rotellini, superintendent of the Department of Financial Institutions, which regulates mortgage firms. A wave of mortgage fraud started spreading across the Valley last year that could cost lenders millions of dollars and erode values and confidence in Arizona’s real estate market and economy.

Most of the fraud is coming from cash-back deals that involve obtaining a mortgage for more than a home is worth and pocketing the extra money. But there are other types of fraud such as faking and forging documents and lying about income and other personal information for loans.

For more on this situation, read Mortgage Company Shut Down.

On the heels of The Arizona Republic’s ground-breaking article on cash back at closing schemes, an Arizona State Senator is attempting to revise a state statute to make it a crime to misrepresent financial information when attempting to purchase a home or obtain a home mortgage. AZ State Senator Jay Tibshraeny (R, 21st Dist.) yesterday introduced Senate Bill 1221, which states:

A. A person commits residential mortgage fraud if, with the intent to defraud, the person does any of the following:

1. Knowingly makes any deliberate misstatement, misrepresentation or omission during the mortgage lending process that is relied on by a mortgage lender, borrower or other party to the mortgage lending process.
2. Knowingly uses or facilitates the use of any deliberate misstatement, misrepresentation or omission during the mortgage lending process that is relied on by a mortgage lender, borrower or other party to the mortgage lending process.
3. Receives any proceeds or other monies in connection with a residential mortgage that the person knows resulted from a violation of paragraph 1 or 2 of this subsection.
4. Files or causes to be filed with the office of the county recorder of any county of this state any residential mortgage loan document that the person knows to contain a deliberate misstatement, misrepresentation or omission.

B. An offense involving residential mortgage fraud shall not be based solely on information that is lawfully disclosed under federal disclosure laws, regulations and interpretations related to the mortgage lending process.

C. A person who violates this section is guilty of a class 4 felony, except that a person who engages or participates in a pattern of residential mortgage fraud or who conspires to engage or participate in a pattern of residential mortgage fraud is guilty of a class 2 felony.

D. For the purposes of this section:

1. “Mortgage lending process” means the process through which a person seeks or obtains a residential mortgage loan including solicitation, application, origination, negotiation of terms, third-party provider services, underwriting, signing, closing and funding of the loan.
2. “Pattern of residential mortgage fraud” means one or more misstatements, misrepresentations or omissions that are made during the mortgage lending process, that involve two or more residential properties and that have the same or similar intents, results, accomplices, victims or methods of commission or are otherwise interrelated by distinguishing characteristics.
3. “Residential mortgage loan” means a loan or agreement to extend credit to a person that is secured by a deed to secure debt, security deed, mortgage, security interest, deed of trust or other document representing a security interest or lien on any interest in one-to-four family residential property and includes the renewal or refinancing of any loan.

So, what does all of this mean? According to the Arizona Daily Star:

Just a single offense could result in a 2 1/2 year prison term. And those who are involved in multiple schemes potentially face five years behind bars.

Felecia Rotellini, superintendent of the state Department of Financial Institutions, acknowledged there already are both criminal and civil laws designed to go after those who commit fraud. And she said her agency already has managed to convict people involved in such schemes. But Rotellini said SB 1221 likely would make prosecutions easier. Potentially more significant, Rotellini said this law spells out that homebuyers involved in these kinds of frauds are equally culpable — and can be equally punished. “It will help to cover the gamut of players,” she said.

Rotellini goes on to tell the Daily Star that while her agency has broad powers over both mortgage bankers and mortgage brokers, she has no authority over home buyers, who in many cases may be the primary perpetrators of real estate fraud:

“In fact the buyer in these cash-back schemes is the primary perpetrator,” Rotellini said. “They’re the one that’s getting the loan that’s been misrepresenting the value of the property or other aspects of it.” If nothing else, Rotellini said she believes having a specific law on the books making mortgage fraud a crime will act as a deterrent. “Maybe that’s wishful thinking,” she said. But Rotellini said a new statute — and the stiff penalties — might convince would-be schemers to reconsider.

Left unchecked, cash back at closing deals cost homeowners and lenders millions of dollars, and according to an in depth article in yesterday’s The Arizona Republic, could erode confidence and values in Arizona’s real estate market. From yesterday’s online edition of the Republic:

A wave of mortgage fraud is rippling through pockets of the Valley, inflating home values through scams called cash-back deals. The fraud involves obtaining a mortgage for more than a home is worth and pocketing the extra money in cash. Neighbors may then discover home values in the area are exaggerated. Homeowners stuck with overpriced mortgages may never recover the difference. And lenders end up with bad loans that, in the long run, could hurt the Arizona real estate market, the largest segment of the state economy.

While the extent of the fraud is unclear, an Arizona Republic investigation into these cash-back deals found organized groups of speculators have bought multiple homes this way, leaving whole neighborhoods with inflated values. Add to these the individual deals done by amateurs who hear others talk about the easy money they made from cash-back sales.

State investigators and real estate industry leaders want more enforcement and greater public awareness to stop the spread of cash-back deals before the damage mounts.

As The Republic correctly points out, under federal law it is illegal to misrepresent the value of a home to a lender. Everyone who is a party to a deal involving inflated valuations is subject to prosecution. Need proof? As I have mentioned before, all you have to do is look at a 1003 (that’s the code name for the Uniform Residential Loan Application) that every homebuyer must sign when applying for a home loan. The 1003, which is authorized by Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001,