SALT LAKE CITY—A detention hearing is set for 11:15 a.m. Wednesday in federal court for John S. Dudley, age 56, of Sandy, charged last week in a 17-count indictment with money laundering and wire and bank fraud in connection with an alleged Ponzi scheme. Wednesday’s hearing will be before U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul Warner.

Dudley had an initial appearance Friday following his arrest on the indictment. He entered a plea of not guilty to the charges. A status conference has been set for Aug. 8, 2011 at 9:15 a.m. The case is being investigated by the special agents of the FBI and IRS Criminal Investigation. Anyone who believes they might be a victim of the scheme alleged in this indictment should call the FBI in Salt Lake City at 801-579-1400.

According to the indictment, Dudley devised a scheme to induce individuals to invest money with him for use in various investment programs, including a foreign exchange trading program, mining speculation, European and domestic stock options and commodity trading, and a human jetpack rocket suit. In January 2007, Dudley began to solicit investors at investment club meetings, sometimes called “bounce nights” or “Tashi group meetings,” in Salt Lake County by representing himself as an experienced and successful investor and describing his investment programs to prospective investors.

The indictment alleges Dudley made a variety of false representations to potential investors, including telling them they could expect monthly returns of 5-10 percent; that he had not suffered a trading loss since 1978; that investors’ funds would be used exclusively for investment purposes; that he had personally done very well in his investments and had never made less than 5 percent per month over the last 30 years; that investors’ money was backed by a “senior life settlement policy” that reduced or eliminated investors’ risk of loss; and that investing with him was an exclusive opportunity with only a limited number of investors allowed to invest with him at one time.

According to the indictment, Dudley advised prospective investors on how to engage in a process he called “equity mining” to borrow money from banks to invest with him. Using this process, he told individuals they could purchase luxury items, such as homes or boats, which would pay for themselves. Using the scheme, individuals would obtain financing from a bank for more than the sale price of the item and then invest the remainder of the loan proceeds in an investment offering that guaranteed a 10 percent return each month.

The indictment alleges Dudley used new investors’ money to pay old investors’ returns in a scheme commonly referred to as a ponzi scheme. Virtually all of the investors’ money was used by Dudley to either pay “returns” to other investors or for his own personal use, including the purchase of two homes—a $1.5 million home in Sandy and a $860,327.63 home in Riverton; a down payment of $28,978.31 for a ski boat; and to pay for meals, airline tickets, and gifts for his family.

Around 75 to 100 investors gave Dudley more than $12 million from about January 2007 to March 2010, the indictment alleges.

The potential penalty for each of the 10 counts of wire fraud in the indictment is 20 years in prison and a fine of $250,000. Bank fraud, charged in two counts, carries a potential penalty of 30 years per count and a $1 million fine. The maximum potential penalty for each of the five money laundering counts is 10 years and a fine of $250,000.

Indictments are not findings of guilt. Individuals charged in indictments are presumed innocent unless or until proven guilty in court.

PREET BHARARA, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, announced that STEVEN BYERS, the former president and chief executive officer of the private equity firm WexTrust Capital, LLC (“WexTrust Capital”), was sentenced today to 160 months in prison on charges stemming from a fraud that raised more than $9 million from investors in private placement real estate offerings. BYERS, 48, was sentenced in Manhattan federal court by U.S. Court of Appeals Judge DENNY CHIN.

Manhattan U.S. Attorney PREET BHARARA said: “Steven Byers used smoke and mirrors to defraud his investors out of millions of dollars. But his scheme was ultimately exposed for the sham that it was, and now he will be punished severely for his crimes.”

According to the indictment and other documents previously filed in Manhattan federal court:

From 2003 to 2008, WexTrust Capital was a globally diversified private equity company specializing in investments in real estate and specialty finance opportunities. It was affiliated with several companies of a similar name, including WexTrust Securities, LLC, a broker-dealer registered with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

Beginning in 2003, BYERS, along with co-defendant JOSEPH SHERESHEVSKY and others, raised money from investors pursuant to private placement offerings, and then used material amounts of that money for other purposes without disclosing the diversion of funds to investors. In one such private placement, BYERS and others raised approximately $9.2 million in investor funds by representing that the funds would be used to purchase and operate seven commercial properties that were leased to the United States General Services Administration (“GSA”). According to the GSA private placement memorandum issued to investors by WexTrust Capital, the $9.2 million raised from investors, together with a mortgage of approximately $21 million, would be used to purchase the seven GSA properties and cover related acquisition expenses. The seven GSA properties, however, were never purchased. Instead, funds raised from investors were diverted for other purposes, none of which was disclosed to investors. BYERS and others later agreed to make up a story that they would then tell the GSA investors regarding what happened to their investment.

* * *

BYERS, of Oakbrook, Illinois, previously pled guilty to conspiracy to commit securities fraud and securities fraud. In addition to his prison term, Judge CHIN sentenced BYERS to three years of supervised release and ordered him to pay $7,700,630.35 in restitution and to forfeit $9.2 million in proceeds from his crimes.

BYERS’ co-defendant, JOSEPH SHERESHEVSKY, 54, of Brooklyn, New York, and Norfolk, Virginia, pled guilty to similar charges on February 3, 2011, and is scheduled to be sentenced on May 13, 2011, at 10:30 a.m., before Judge CHIN.

Mr. BHARARA praised the work of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in this case. Mr. BHARARA also thanked the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for its assistance in the investigation.

This case was brought in coordination with President BARACK OBAMA’s Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force, on which Mr. BHARARA serves as a co-chair of the Securities and Commodities Fraud Working Group. President OBAMA established the interagency Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force to wage an aggressive, coordinated, and proactive effort to investigate and prosecute financial crimes. The task force includes representatives from a broad range of federal agencies, regulatory authorities, inspectors general, and state and local law enforcement who, working together, bring to bear a powerful array of criminal and civil enforcement resources. The task force is working to improve efforts across the federal executive branch, and with state and local partners, to investigate and prosecute significant financial crimes, ensure just and effective punishment for those who perpetrate financial crimes, combat discrimination in the lending and financial markets, and recover proceeds for victims of financial crimes.

Assistant United States Attorneys VIRGINIA CHAVEZ ROMANO and JILLIAN B. BERMAN are in charge of the prosecution.

* Analysis of available law enforcement and industry resources indicates that the top ten mortgage fraud areas are California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Utah. Other areas significantly affected by mortgage fraud include Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia.
* There is a strong correlation between mortgage fraud and loans which result in default and foreclosure.

Emerging Schemes

* Recent statistics suggest that escalating foreclosures provide criminals with the opportunity to exploit and defraud vulnerable homeowners seeking financial guidance.
* Perpetrators are exploiting the home equity line of credit (HELOC) application process to conduct mortgage fraud, check fraud, and potentially money laundering-related activity.

FBI and Industry Respond to Escalating Mortgage Fraud

* The FBI is proactively working with the mortgage industry in an effort to curb mortgage fraud crimes. The FBI signed a memorandum of agreement with the MBA to promote the FBI’s Mortgage Fraud Warning Notice.

Introduction

The Prieston Group, a risk management solutions provider that administers an insurance product covering losses due to fraud and misrepresentation, calculated that losses attributed to mortgage fraud will most likely reach $4.2 billion for 2006. This figure does not take into account another estimated $1.2 billion spent on fraud prevention tools. – The Prieston Group, 2006 Data, 16 February 2007,and 2 April 2007.

Mortgage Fraud is defined as the intentional misstatement, misrepresentation, or omission by an applicant or other interested parties, relied on by a lender or underwriter to provide funding for, to purchase, or to insure a mortgage loan. Although no central repository collects all mortgage fraud complaints, statistics from multiple sources indicate that mortgage fraud is on the rise. Some industry explanations for this increase point to recent high mortgage loan origination volumes that strained quality control efforts, the persistent desire of mortgage lenders to hasten the mortgage loan process, the escalation of home prices in recent years, and the introduction of non-traditional loans which contain fewer quality control restraints such as low documentation and no documentation loans1.

Mortgage loan fraud is divided into two categories: fraud for property and fraud for profit. Fraud for property/housing entails minor misrepresentations by the applicant solely for the purpose of purchasing a property for a primary residence. This scheme usually involves a single loan. Although applicants may embellish income and conceal debt, their intent is to repay the loan. Fraud for profit, however, often involves multiple loans and elaborate schemes perpetrated to gain illicit proceeds from property sales. It is this second category that is of most concern to law enforcement and the mortgage industry. Gross misrepresentations concerning appraisals and loan documents are common in fraud for profit schemes and participants are frequently paid for their participation. Recent events likely resulted in an increase in mortgage fraud as higher housing prices tempted borrowers to commit fraud for property in order to qualify for a mortgage loan. Also, mortgage fraud perpetrators likely seized the opportunity to take advantage of the relaxed lending practices to commit fraud for profit.

The most common form of mortgage fraud is illegal property flipping which entails false appraisals and other fraudulent loan documents (see figure 1). Combating mortgage fraud effectively requires the cooperation of law enforcement and industry entities. No single regulatory agency is charged with monitoring this crime. The FBI, Department of Housing and Urban Development-Office of Inspector General (HUD-OIG), Internal Revenue Service, Postal Inspection Service, and state and local agencies are among those investigating mortgage fraud.

Mortgage fraud is a relatively low-risk, high-yield criminal activity that tempts many. However, according a May 2006 Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) report, finance-related occupations, including accountants, mortgage brokers, and lenders, were the most common suspect occupations associated with reported mortgage fraud2. Perpetrators in these occupations are familiar with the mortgage loan process and therefore know how to exploit vulnerabilities in the system.

Victims of mortgage fraud may include borrowers, mortgage industry entities, and those living in the neighborhoods affected by mortgage fraud. Lenders are plagued with high foreclosure costs, broker commissions, reappraisals, attorney fees, rehabilitation costs, and other related expenses when a mortgage fraud is committed3. As properties affected by mortgage fraud are sold at artificially inflated prices, properties in surrounding neighborhoods also become artificially inflated. When property values increase, property taxes increase as well. Legitimate homeowners also find it difficult to sell their homes as surrounding properties affected by fraud deteriorate.

During boom periods, high mortgage loan volume impacts expedited quality control efforts which often focus on production. Therefore, perpetrators may submit loans based on fraudulent information anticipating that the bogus information will be overlooked. On the other hand, loan officers, brokers, and others in the industry are paid by commission and may be tempted to approve questionable loans when the housing market is down to maintain current levels of income.

Analysis of mortgage originations indicates a decrease in demand. As a result of the declining housing market, mortgage fraud perpetrators may take advantage of eager loan originators attempting to generate loans for commission. Mortgage loan originations, including purchases and refinances declined during 2006 across the United States. The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) estimates that mortgage loan originations will reach $2.28 trillion during 2007 (see figure 2)4. According to an MBA December 2006 report, total home sales during 2006 decreased by approximately 10 percent from 2005 sales. New home sales declined by 17 percent and existing home sales dipped by 8 percent. In response to a decrease in demand for housing, builders reduced single-family starts (through November 2006) which were 14 percent lower than during the same time period in 2005. The MBA estimates that the oversupply of housing will continue to affect new home construction, home sales, and home prices until mid-20075.

Top Areas for Mortgage Fraud

Data was compiled and analyzed from law enforcement and industry sources to determine those areas of the country most affected by mortgage fraud during 2006. Information from the FBI, HUD-OIG, FinCEN, Mortgage Asset Research Institute (MARI), Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), RealtyTrac Inc. (foreclosure statistics), and Radian Guaranty Inc., indicate that the top ten mortgage fraud areas for 2006 were California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Utah. Other areas significantly affected by mortgage fraud include Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia (see figure 3).

Analysis of available information indicates that mortgage fraud is most concentrated in the north central region of the United States. The north central region is followed by the southeast and west regions.

Regional analysis of FBI pending mortgage fraud-related investigations as of FY 2006 reveals that the north central region of the United States led the nation with the most pending investigations. The north central region was followed by the southeast, west, south central, and northeast, respectively (see figure 4).

The aggregate amount of ARM loans containing fraudulent misrepresentations is unknown. However, since mortgage fraud perpetrators hope to inflate the value of their properties and quickly sell them, they would likely gravitate towards mortgage loans that offered low and short-term interest rates such as those offered by ARMs.

Delinquency, Default, and Foreclosure: Potential Fraud Indicators

Mortgage loans based on fraudulent information usually result in delinquency, default, or foreclosure in a bear market. According to the MBA, both delinquency and foreclosures rates increased during 2006 and were largely concentrated in adjustable rate mortgage (ARM) loans, especially sub-prime ARMs. This is partly attributable to the recent rise in interest rates, placing a strain on ARMs borrowers6.

BasePoint Analytics, a fraud analytics company, analyzed more than 3 million loans and found that between 30 and 70 percent of early payment defaults (EPDs) are linked to significant misrepresentations in the original loan applications7. Radian Guaranty, Inc. is a leading provider of mortgage insurance which protects lenders against loan default. Of the top ten states Radian Guaranty Inc. ranked highest for mortgage fraud, seven of them also ranked in the company’s top ten for EPDs. This suggests that EPDs are a good mortgage fraud indicator.

During 2006 there were more than 1.2 million foreclosure filings nationally, which represents a 42 percent increase from 2005 figures. The foreclosure rate for 2006 was one foreclosure filing for every 92 households8. Foreclosures for 2006 surpassed foreclosures for 2005 during every month of the year9.

Foreclosure Fraud

Recent statistics suggest that escalating foreclosures provide criminals with the opportunity to exploit and defraud vulnerable homeowners seeking financial guidance. The perpetrators convince homeowners that they can save their homes from foreclosure through deed transfers and the payment of up-front fees. This “foreclosure rescue” often involves a manipulated deed process that results in the preparation of forged deeds. In extreme instances, perpetrators may sell the home or secure a second loan without the homeowners’ knowledge, stripping the property’s equity for personal enrichment.

While foreclosure scams vary, they may be used in combination with other fraudulent schemes. For instance, perpetrators may view foreclosure-rescue scams as a new method for fraudulently acquiring properties to facilitate illegal property-flipping and equity-skimming.

Home Equity Lines of Credit

According to a DOJ press release, Mi Su Yi and her husband, Paul Amorello, were sentenced in California in July 2006 for operating a $3 million bust-out scheme involving business lines of credit and HELOCs. The couple accessed lines of credit that had been obtained by others and paid the balances with worthless checks. They subsequently withdrew cash from the lines of credit before the checks were returned for insufficient funds. The couple laundered their proceeds through bank accounts opened under three false identities. In an attempt to avoid detection, the couple deposited cash amounts of less than $10,000 into these accounts. -US DOJ, “New Jersey Residents Sentenced to Prison for Running a $3 Million ‘Bust-Out’ Scheme,” Press Release, 25 July 2006, available at http://www.usdoj.gov

Individuals and criminal groups are exploiting the home equity line of credit (HELOC) application process to conduct multiple-funding mortgage fraud schemes, check fraud schemes, and potentially money laundering-related activity. HELOCs differ from standard home equity loans because the homeowner may borrow against the line of credit over a period of time using a checkbook or credit card. HELOCs are aggressively marketed by lenders as an easy, fast, and inexpensive means to obtain funds. HELOC funds are normally withdrawn on an as-needed basis to conduct home repairs or to pay bills, but fraud perpetrators may withdraw the entire amount within a short time period. Lenders typically focus on property equity prior to funding HELOCs. As such, many lenders do not demand a full property appraisal or a full property title search.

Perpetrators apply for multiple HELOCs to different lending institutions for a single property within a short time period. Prior to providing the funding, lenders conduct searches to determine if the property is encumbered by a lien. However, liens on a property may not be recorded for several days or months and thus cannot be immediately verified. Consequently, lenders do not discover that they hold a third, fourth, or fifth lien on a property (rather than the expected second lien) until later. The money obtained from the multiple HELOCs totals more than the original property purchase price, exceeding the out-of-pocket expenses incurred to secure the property.

Perpetrators conducting check fraud schemes may manipulate HELOC accounts and cause lenders to incur losses. For example, a perpetrator secures a HELOC and withdraws the entire allotted amount. A fraudulent check is then used to pay the balance owed on the HELOC. However, the perpetrator quickly withdraws the check amount from the HELOC before the bank realizes the check is worthless. When the check is returned for insufficient funds, the line of credit surpasses its maximum limit and the lender experiences a loss. HELOC accounts have also been used in common check frauds where perpetrators stole HELOC checks, fraudulently completed them, and deposited the funds into their own personal accounts.

HELOCs may also be used as a means of depositing and withdrawing laundered proceeds to further conceal the original funding source. As long as withdrawals from the HELOC do not exceed the line of credit limit, payments deposited into the account may be withdrawn later.

FBI and Industry Respond to Escalating Mortgage Fraud

The FBI is proactively working with the mortgage industry in an effort to curb mortgage fraud crimes. On March 8, 2007, the FBI signed a memorandum of agreement with the MBA to promote the FBI’s Mortgage Fraud Warning Notice. The Notice states that it is illegal to make any false statement regarding income, assets, debt or matters of identification, or to willfully inflate property value to influence the action of a financial institution. Under the agreement, the MBA and the FBI will make the notice available to mortgage lenders to use voluntarily as a means of educating consumers and mortgage professionals of the penalties and consequences of mortgage fraud.10

According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s 2009 Mortgage Fraud Report, released today, mortgage fraud suspicious activity reports referred to law enforcement increased 5 percent to 67,190 during fiscal year (FY) 2009. The total dollar loss attributed to mortgage fraud is unknown. It’s estimated that $14 billion in fraudulent loans originated in 2009.

“Mortgage fraud is an insidious crime that has devastating economic effects on families, communities and the nation,” said FBI Director Robert S. Mueller, III. “The FBI remains committed to working with our law enforcement, regulatory, and industry partners to unravel these complicated fraud schemes driven by greed and bring their perpetrators to justice.”

Other key findings presented in the report include:

* There are more than 2.8 million properties with foreclosure filings, a 120 percent increase from 2007 to 2009. The Las Vegas area reported the most significant rate of foreclosures, with more than 12 percent of housing units there receiving a foreclosure notice.
* The top 10 states ranked by the number of foreclosure filings per housing unit were California, Florida, Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, Georgia, Ohio, Texas, and New Jersey. In April 2010, one in every 386 housing units received a foreclosure filing.
* Prevalent mortgage fraud schemes in fiscal year 2009 include loan origination, foreclosure rescue, builder bailout, equity skimming, short sale, illegal property flipping, reverse mortgage fraud and loan modifications. Emerging trends include fraud involving economic stimulus plans/programs, property theft/fraudulent leasing of foreclosed properties and tax-related fraud.

The entire report is available on the FBI’s website. While there, sign up for e-mail alerts to ensure you receive the latest information about the FBI.

***

Michael Fiorito, 41, was convicted in May, by a federal jury on seven counts of mortgage fraud in connection with an equity-skimming scheme that targeted vulnerable homeowners.

Fiorito had been a mortgage broker at three different Minnesota mortgage companies from 2003 through early 2007. Working with an assistant, he devised a scheme to defraud homeowners who were in foreclosure or behind on their payments.

This sounds all to familiar.  So what’s so different about this episode of mortgage fraud? Homeowners in distress were looking to save money in tough times.  So they refinanced their homes — only to discover they’d been taken in by fraud.

Now they are fighting the government in foreclosure and the loss of their home.

What you probably haven’t heard before is that these victims are being foreclosed on by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., a federal agency that generally pushes to keep people in their homes by reworking loans rather than foreclosing them.

So Glenn and Brenda Clark of Golden Valley are taking another unusual step — they are fighting their foreclosure in federal court.

The Clarks have filed suit in U.S. District Court in Minneapolis, saying their foreclosure is improper. They have asked for a temporary restraining order to allow them to come up with a way to stay in the home where they raised two daughters since 1993.

“It’s been a nightmare,” Brenda Clark said of their three-year battle.  Said the Clarks’ attorney, Jacqueline Williams: “We went through the proper channels, and it didn’t work. No one was listening.”

There is no doubt the Clarks are victims. He and the assistant convinced homeowners to refinance their homes — often after inflated appraisals — and then stole some or all of the equity checks the homeowners were to receive.

In all, Fiorito stripped more than $400,000 in equity from at least 17 victims. He is scheduled to be sentenced in federal court on Dec. 30.

In June of 2006, Fiorito called Glenn Clark after the Clarks’ application to refinance their mortgage through another lender was denied. The Clarks were hoping to cash in some of their equity to cover bills. After all, times were — and still are — not easy. In May 2005, Glenn Clark, a drywall installer, fell out of the back of a pickup truck and suffered a brain injury. Work has been sporadic ever since. Brenda Clark cuts and styles hair. Like many families, they needed the money.

“He promised we could get cash out with basically the same payment I had at the time,” Glenn Clark said.

So they went with Fiorito. They owed $201,000 on their home when Fiorito contacted them. But, using an inflated appraisal that Glenn Clark said he never saw, Fiorito promised the Clarks $23,500 in home equity.

Instead, he handed Glenn Clark a check for $16,000, which the Clarks never cashed. Fiorito pocketed the rest. When they saw they had been victimized, the Clarks contacted their banks and moved to cancel the mortgages.

But the clock never stopped ticking.

Now, the Clarks owe $240,000 for a house worth less than $200,000.  When the bank that held the Clarks’ mortgage went under in July 2008, the FDIC took over, Williams said. But, rather than renegotiating the mortgage, the FDIC continued the foreclosure process.

A real estate agent even showed up to change the locks. Others have offered the Clarks cash to leave before the eviction process is complete, Brenda Clark said.

The Clarks say all they want is to work out lower payments so they can keep their home.

FDIC chairwoman Sheila Bair has championed restructuring mortgages rather than foreclosing. She has even suggested providing financial incentives to banks to rework home loans to help people keep their houses.

Andrew Pizor, a staff attorney with the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC), said that has been the FDIC’s track record — restructuring loans rather than foreclosing.

So why not in the Clark’s case?

A recent report by the NCLC says that programs designed to encourage loan modifications have failed to slow the nation’s foreclosure crisis — in part because mortgage servicers find it cheaper to foreclose than to restructure.

A Jan. 7 hearing has been scheduled to consider the Clarks’ request for a temporary restraining order, as well as a motion by the FDIC to dismiss the case.

Williams, the Clarks’ attorney, said the only thing her clients did wrong was to trust a fraud.

“They were victimized by Fiorito,” she said. “They shouldn’t have to lose their home as well.”