Anonymous To Release Document Proving BOA Committed Fraud on Monday?

[yllus]

I didn't click the links because I think I've seen them already. In any case, the documents are supposed to be available at http://bankofamericasuck.com/ , but that's down. Bank of America has already made a statement (here) that it's a non-issue. We shall see. They should have released these as torrents to ensure it'd circulate.

 

[Phokus]

I didn't click the links because I think I've seen them already. In any case, the documents are supposed to be available at http://bankofamericasuck.com/ , but that's down. Bank of America has already made a statement (here) that it's a non-issue. We shall see. They should have released these as torrents to ensure it'd circulate.

I remember in those HBGary emails that they were discussing helping BOA DDOS (among other cyberattacks) on wikileaks. I wonder if that's the reason the website is down... i find it hard to believe they have so many legit HTTP requests that their server went down.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Looks like the server is overloaded or under a DoS attack.

 

[yllus]

Hmm, initial reports on the contents of the e-mails are confirming it to be all bluster and no substance (see Business Insider).

 

[Darwin333]

Before getting into a long drawn out argument... we need to see the numbers. Of all the BoA foreclosed homes.... how many deserved to be foreclosed on?

If they had a huge back log of homes needing foreclosure and had to take short cuts...you can't blame them. If they were trying to kick people out of homes who were 1-2 months behind on their payments... maybe I would have some fraud concerns.

Who was fucking over who? If there was someone who could not afford a house they bought with an interest only loan reset and they are pissed because BoA threw them out after 6 months on non-payment... how long should BoA let them stay in the house?

A better question would be "If BOA intentionally lied about the content of financial products they sold to investors as well as the US Government (the taxpayers) isn't that called fraud? If so, should they not be criminally prosecuted, made to pay reparations to those harmed, and the companies themselves fined more than the gains of said illegal activity?"

Hell, we have sworn testimony to Congress from a CEO of a large bank stating he knew that 70% of the loans his bank was making were bad loans. Yet they still bundled em up and sold em off as AAA investments. Wanna guess what he was charged with?

 

[child of wonder]

Wanna guess what he was charged with?

 

[Phokus]

Hmm, initial reports on the contents of the e-mails are confirming it to be all bluster and no substance (see Business Insider).

Yves Smith has a different take with a lot more detail.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011...nce-scheme-with-cooperation-of-servicers.html

Edit: More info from zerohedge:

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/op...dicating-premeditated-intent-deceive-governme

 

[Phokus]

Wait... what? The Pirate bay takes down the BOA documents... that's unusual for even them.

http://sven-slootweg.nl/blog/2011/03/14/the-pirate-bay-blocking-the-recent-boa-bank-of-america-leak/

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

It's not a choice between BofA and and Wikileaks. That's a false dichotomy. Again it's like a vigilante mob saying that someone who's against them prefers that criminals not be punished for their crimes. Keep thinking in black and white though, I wouldn't expect anything different from a hardcore partisan hack.

Bad analogy.

Exposing alleged information is not the same as punishing for said alleged information.

I too am somewhat uncomfortable with the whole 2 wrongs don't make a right, but considering this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower_Protection_Act I am not surprised (nor should anyone be) that we will see more and more of this.

Heck, if my privacy rights have gone to hell, why shouldn't a corporation's?

 

[Gooberlx2]

Can someone explain what this all means, assuming worst case accusations are true?

Seems like loan servicer (BoA or subsidiaries in this case) and insurer (Balboa in this case) get in cahoots to set an inflated force-placed insurance on failing mortgages. The hit in escrow possibly gives the property owner no chance of ever meeting their monthly obligation, ensuring foreclosure. Meanwhile the servicer gets a kickback from the insurer and the insurer still gets paid by the tax payers or investors who bought the toxic asset, or whatever they're called (insert Southpark Margaritaville reference).

Erasing those DTNs erases the record trail, allowing them to essentially "shrug" and claim ignorance as to why the forced policy was so expensive during an audit?

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

So...has anything happened?

 

[LegendKiller]

So...has anything happened?

No.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...s-debt-as-investors-seek-financial-bonds.html

 

[Craig234]

So, was the hype about these documents an attack by 'anonymous' enemies to discredit them?

I haven't followed it too closely.

But that would be an expected tactic - we've already seen the exposed plans to discredit Wikileaks that included planting phony 'leaked' documents with them.

 

[Doppel]

Sh*t seems to not have hit the fan. Anyway, emails from one guy are really meaningless unless he's very high up. Worse case he just gets the book thrown at him. The only way to take down BoA is to have a large amount of correspondence between high level execs from multiple departments, showing a true culture of crime. Otherwise, no.