PDA

View Full Version : Blondie With Big Ears Goes Down....



DockRat
10-29-2013, 09:19 PM
Countrywide executive Rebecca Mairone BUSTED ...
1st of many hopefully that helped the USA into the path of recession.
Wow, look how many years it took. About as fast as trying to sign up for Obamacare :LOL:
DR

http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee60/troyrsanders/cwuse.gif (http://media.photobucket.com/user/troyrsanders/media/cwuse.gif.html)

Check out her pic at link.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/10/25/banks-midlevel-executive-becomes-a-new-face-of-the-housing-crisis/?_r=0

Bank’s Midlevel Executive Becomes a New Face of the Housing Crisis
BY LANDON THOMAS JR.


More than five years after the housing bust, the roll call of banking executives who have been blamed by the public for the crisis has grown ever longer. But when it comes to top managers who have been hit with a jury verdict for pushing dubious mortgages, the list is small indeed.

The new name added this week was Rebecca S. Mairone, a midlevel executive at Bank of America’s Countrywide mortgage unit, who was held liable by a federal jury in Manhattan for having saddled the housing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with bad mortgages that resulted in over $1 billion in losses.

And while the jury verdict in the civil fraud case on Wednesday was hailed by Preet Bharara, the hard-charging United States attorney who has become the scourge of white-collar criminals on Wall Street, Ms. Mairone seems — on the face of it — the most unlikely of culprits to emerge from the housing debacle.

The government’s lawsuit essentially contends that the ramped-up mortgage initiative that she oversaw put pressure on mortgage underwriters to originate riskier yet more profitable housing loans. Via a program nicknamed the Hustle, derived from the initials for “high speed swim lane,” Countrywide’s mortgage processors were “incentivized to, and repeatedly did, manipulate borrower information” like borrower income and other information so that the loans would qualify for federal mortgage guarantees, prosecutors said in their original lawsuit.

A federal jury in Manhattan found Bank of America’s Countrywide mortgage unit liable for having sold defective mortgages.
Nick Ut/Associated Press
A federal jury in Manhattan found Bank of America’s Countrywide mortgage unit liable for having sold defective mortgages.
Ms. Mairone’s lawyers claim that she had no such ambition and that she has become a prominent scapegoat — paying the price for being a successful, suffer-no-fools female executive trying to effect change in an insular, predominantly male corporate banking culture.

“I think it’s just indefensible that prosecutors are going after the Rebeccas of the world,” said Dennis M. Kelleher, president of Better Markets, a group that supports tougher financial regulation. “There was systematic fraud at these banks and prosecutors are going after the minnow and not the whales.”

As her lawyers tell it, Ms. Mairone, a 46-year-old single mother, regularly worked 12-hour days and was on the road a week out of every month. When she could, she sneaked out of the office to take her now 14-year-old daughter to a Girl Scouts event or her son, now 19, to a karate tournament.

Some executives — especially other women — liked her, depositions show. Others did not. One in particular, Edward O’Donnell, a mortgage executive whom Ms. Mairone passed over for a promotion, stands out in this regard.

It would be Mr. O’Donnell who would bring the case to the government. In the wake of the jury’s decision, he is expected to earn a $1.6 million whistle-blower reward after the case is resolved. It is unclear yet what penalties Ms. Mairone will face, as they will be set by the presiding judge at a later date.

In court depositions, however, female Countrywide employees expressed admiration for Ms. Mairone’s take-charge ways. In their view, Ms. Mairone’s stylish dress and demeanor, along with her business acumen, were just what was needed to shake up the backslapping boys’ club of bankers that sold mortgages nationwide.

But her push to meet revenue targets, which came when the housing market was flagging, raised concerns among some mortgage underwriters that the quality of loans was deteriorating, according to court depositions.

From the court testimony, there is no doubt that Ms. Mairone, during her time overseeing the swim lane program, pushed her executives hard to become speedier and more efficient in approving mortgages.

In late 2007, the housing market was showing its first signs of serious strain and the pressure was intense — especially for the newly hired Ms. Mairone — to “fund more loans” as Countrywide executives described the process.

Matters peaked in March 2008, when Ms. Mairone attended a meeting of mortgage bankers in Richardson, Tex.

A day earlier, Angelo R. Mozilo, the Countrywide chief who was fast on his way to becoming the public face of the mortgage crisis, had defended his bank before Congress, saying that “it just never serves our company to make a bad loan.”

According to court depositions, a mortgage underwriter asked Ms. Mairone at the Texas meeting how her push for higher loan volume squared with what Mr. Mozilo said the previous day about Countrywide’s commitment to sound lending.

“You need to get with the program,” court papers quote Ms. Mairone as saying, using a vulgarity. “We need to keep funding those loans to keep the lights on.”

This anecdote was never introduced during the trial as the precise choice of words was deemed unreliable. But underwriters have said in depositions that Ms. Mairone did use a forceful profanity during the meeting.

The episode sheds light on the case that government prosecutors were making, painting Ms. Mairone — unfairly, her lawyers say — as a near-frantic mortgage executive trying to get the last loans out the door before the market closed down for good.

And it also underscores, legal experts say, one of the government’s main goals in naming Ms. Mairone: linking what she did in the eight or so months she spent overseeing the Hustle program with Mr. Mozilo’s role as founder and guiding force of the Countrywide mortgage-producing machine.

At least in terms of compensation, there was a very big difference between the two. In 2007, Ms. Mairone received a bonus of $1.2 million, according to her deposition. That same year, Mr. Mozilo cashed in $121.5 million via stock sales, on top of the $22 million he was paid in total compensation.

Three years later, without admitting any wrongdoing, Mr. Mozilo paid a fine of $67.5 million to settle fraud charges with the Securities and Exchange Commission, $20 million of which was paid by Countrywide as part of a contractual agreement.

In 2011, prosecutors abandoned their criminal investigation of Mr. Mozilo.

Ms. Mairone’s lawyers say the swim lane program was just one small aspect of her job responsibilities, which included virtually all areas of the business, from technology to human resources.

In a word, she was an operations person and her task was the same as it had been in her previous positions — to ensure that the trains ran on time.

Born in West Virginia and trained as a chemical engineer at Drexel University, Ms. Mairone worked mainly as a furniture procurer for technology companies before she became a senior operations manager at a number of mortgage companies in the New York and New Jersey area.

In early 2006, she accepted an offer from Countrywide and moved her small familyom New Jersey to California, where she began work as chief operating officer of a retail mortgage unit.
om New Jersey to California, where she began work as chief operating officer of a retail mortgage unit.

When Countrywide was acquired by Bank of America in 2008, Ms. Mairone received a series of rapid promotions, culminating in 2011 when she was named to the highly visible job of devising and promoting solutions for homeowners who could no longer afford to pay their mortgages.

When Countrywide was acquired by Bank of America in 2008, Ms. Mairone received a series of rapid promotions, culminating in 2011 when she was named to the highly visible job of devising and promoting solutions for homeowners who could no longer afford to pay their mortgages.

She moved from being an anonymous operations executive to becoming the public face of Bank of America’s effort to convince a skeptical public that it was spending time, effort and money helping homeowners left struggling after the housing bust. Ms. Mairone testified before Congress and went on television to make the case for the bank.

In 2012, she received an offer to work in JPMorgan’s mortgage division in an operational capacity. She now has a senior administrative position checking the many vendors that do business with JPMorgan.

A spokeswoman for the firm said the bank was reviewing the jury decision before deciding its next steps.

As Ms. Mairone’s name has been back in the spotlight because of the lawsuit, she has received an influx of e-mails from distressed homeowners whom she helped during her time at Bank of America.

“The words thank you cannot express the amount of gratitude I have for you and your team in resolving this so quickly,” one person wrote recently. “I believe that blessings come to us but more so to those who facilitate them. Again thank you for being our blessing today.”

HawgZWylde
10-30-2013, 04:23 PM
So when is Obozo going to be charged? He was at it long before blondie was.

With landmark lawsuit, Barack Obama pushed banks to give subprime loans to Chicago’s African-Americans

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices.

As few as 19 of those 186 clients still own homes with clean credit ratings, following a decade in which Obama and other progressives pushed banks to provide mortgages to poor African Americans.

The startling failure rate among Obama’s private sector clients was discovered during The Daily Caller’s review of previously unpublished court information from the lawsuit that a young Obama worked on as an attorney for the lead plaintiff.

Since the mortgage bubble burst, some of his former clients are calling for a policy reversal.

“If you see some people don’t make enough money to afford the mortgage, why would you give them a loan?” asked Obama client John Buchanan. “There should be some type of regulation against giving people loans they can’t afford.”

Banks “were too eager to lend to many who didn’t qualify,” said Don Byas, another client who saw banks lurch from caution to bubble-inflating recklessness. [RELATED: Obama's Citibank plaintiffs hit hard when housing bubble burst]

“I don’t care what race you are. … You need to keep financial wisdom [separate] from trying to help your people,” said Byas, an autoworker.

Nonetheless, Obama has pursued the same top-down mortgage lending policies in the White House.

Obama’s lawsuit was one element of a national “anti-redlining” campaign led by Chicago’s progressive groups, who argued that banks unfairly refused to lend money to people living within so-called “redlines” around African-American communities. The campaign was powered by progressives’ moral claim that their expertise could boost home ownership among the United States’ most disadvantaged minority, African-Americans.

Progressive activists’ ambition instead contributed greatly to a housing bubble that burst in 2007, crashed the nation’s economy in 2008, wiped out at least $4 trillion in equity, kept unemployment above 8 percent for four years, and damaged the intended beneficiaries of looser mortgage lending standards.

In the White House, Obama has continued to intensify regulatory pressure on banks to provide more risky loans to African-Americans and Latinos. He has used lawsuits to fund his allies. And taxpayers are now unwittingly contributing to a re-inflation of housing prices.

Meanwhile, the president has blamed the housing bubble on supposed GOP deregulation, even though President George W. Bush expanded the regulation-expanding, anti-redlining policies established by progressives during Bill Clinton’s presidency.

“Governor Romney’s plan would… roll back regulations on big banks,” Obama says of his Republican challenger Mitt Romney in a 2012 TV ad titled “The Choice.”

“But you know what? We tried that top-down approach. It’s what caused the mess in the first place.”

The Lawsuit

Fay Clayton, a Chicago progressive activist, initiated the discrimination lawsuit in 1994. Obama’s employer, a lawyer named Judson Miner, allied with Clayton to file a class-action lawsuit a year later.

Obama appeared at Clayton’s office “saying he was the new associate on the case,” Clayton said in a statement to The Daily Caller. “I remember Barack arriving — he was industrious, he enjoyed the work, he was clearly smart and dedicated.”

The suit named three African-American plaintiffs, but later added 183 whom Citibank or its subsidiaries had allegedly rejected for mortgages in 1993 and 1994.

Some of the plaintiffs told TheDC about their rejections by Citibank.

Citibank’s lending agent “told me that I needed to put thousands of dollars down [to increase equity]… I was so upset at that, I said ‘’Do I look like I have ‘stupid’ on my forehead?’” said Maudestine McLeary.

Byas said he had a Citibank mortgage on his property in Austin, a West Side Chicago neighborhood, but was rejected when he sought a mortgage to buy a house in the troubled Maywood district.

“Chicago had been redlining people for years and years … [and] you knew this kind of crap happened,” said Dale Freeman, an operations manager at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. He quickly got a loan from another bank to buy a house in the wealthy South Side neighborhood of Hyde Park, where he and his family still live.

Citibank defended the cautious way it loaned out its shareholders’ money, saying that “the underwriting criteria were racially neutral on their face … [and] that each of the named defendants was denied the home loans he or she requested due to his or her lack of financial qualifications,” according to a June 1995 summary by the judge who heard Obama’s discrimination case.

Citibank had a significant amount of data to back up its case.

For example, when the 186 clients submitted their names for compensation in 1998, it turned out that least 19 had bankrupted or received foreclosure notices even before December 1997. Another 18 of the 186 clients would go under within three years because of financial pressures. [RELATED: Plaintiffs in 1995 Obama-led Citibank lawsuit submitted class action claims

Yet Citibank settled the case in December 1997.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/03/with-landmark-lawsuit-barack-obama-pushed-banks-to-give-subprime-loans-to-chicagos-african-americans/#ixzz2jFb18vZ4

Cont...