An annoyance is that the NYT makes "use" of the internet medium by linking words like "Iraq" to a search of all their articles ever about "Iraq". Which is nearly useless; in all seriousness it would be a lot more useful to link to the wikipedia articles.
So yay! to linking in primary sources. Only a few years behind long-established blog practice.
Mr. Hightower, quoted in the article is brilliant. He said "I wouldn't expect the government to rip me off...Can I get some money back?" I think we should appoint him national ombudsman for we the people.
Judge, a "friend of Angelo," ruled for Countrywide
A California appeals court judge whose mortgage was personally approved by former Countrywide Financial CEO Angelo Mozilo later ruled in favor of Countrywide in a class-action lawsuit, Portfolio magazine reports in its latest issue.
Portfolio's Dan Golden reports that Richard Aldrich, a California appeals court state judge, went to Countrywide in 2004 to refinance his 8,200 square-foot-house in Westlake Village; his application, assigned to loan officer Robert Feinberg, sought a $1 million loan and a $900,000 line of credit, the magazine reports.
Portfolio: "By email, Feinberg alerted Mozilo that the credit line was 'above what guidelines allow.' Mozilo responded, 'Go ahead and approve the loan, and close it as soon as possible. Dont worry about this deal, its golden.' Countrywide further waived half a point, or $5,000 on the million-dollar loan."
More: "That wasnt Aldrichs only contact with Countrywide. At the time he refinanced, a class action lawsuit against Countrywide was pending before the appellate court, brought by borrowers contending that the company offered an inadequate payment to settle allegations that it charged excessive fees for credit reports. That August, Aldrich was part of a three-judge panel that unanimously rejected the borrowers appeal."
Portfolio reports that Aldrich, in a brief telephone exchange with the magazine, denied he had received a below-market rate on the loan and then hung up. The magazine reports he did not disclose his relationship with Countrywide to plaintiffs in the class-action suit.
The entire article is worth a look, it sheds new light on the "Friends of Angelo" program, and names a few more beneficiaries of Mozilo's personal attention, including CNN commentator Paul Begala. In one internal exchange, a Countrywide executive urges special treatment for a congressional staff lawyer on a committee overseeing housing issues. The internal guidance on handling the lawyer's loan includes the phrase, No garbage fees.
I'm amazed this isn't more common. My publication is particularly bad at the internet, but even tech savvy publications like the Guardian make only limited use of links. It seems to be almost all down to the individual journalist - some reliably link to primary sources, others never do.
Looks like those class-action lawyers can get the ruling against them thrown out. Judge fails to disclose material conflict of interest and recuse himself? That is pretty bold...
I'm confused. Did you mean we don't want to get used to you complimenting a WSJ article and journalist or you curtsying on screen? I may be confused but not too worried about either, hell does not freeze over that often.
number2son writes:
Whew, for a second there I thought you were going to offer props to the WSJ editorial board.
I have long thought that the disconnect between the editorial and news room cannot be any greater than it is at the WSJ. While certainly conservative (in the dictionary, as opposed to political, sense of the word: i.e. traditional, staid, establishment-oriented), their news reporting and writing tends to be of extremely high quality and relatively even-handed. They are certainly pro-business, but not myopically so.
Their editorial page, on the other hand, regularly features Peggy Noonan, and other travesties.
The disconnect is enormous, and makes me wonder about things like - can matter and anti-matter really co-exist on different floors of the same lower Manhattan highrise?
...rechecked by a staff of 21 quality-control auditors, who "effectively conducted due diligence" on all incoming loans using a 200-item questionnaire.
Are the quality control auditors looking for deficincies in the credit decision or are they looking for compliance issues that could render the loan un-salable. I wonder how they would define quality. I don't know if this is the case here but a lot of "quality control auditors" don't have an underwriting background and provide little protection against things like a bad appraisal. What they're looking for are blanks signature lines, missing notary seals, etc. It's more than likely a cursory review not a re-underwrite or real credit decision quality check. If this is the case this shouldn't be held up as a defence of the agency's oversight.
I continue to be a big fan of your blog and have much respect for your letting readers, even critical ones, as I am here, post comments. I do wonder over the attacks on Gretchen Morgenson. Give the woman her due...she has broken major stories (e.g. corruption on Nasdaq in the early 90s) and puts her name on each one, exposing herself to criticism from all comers. Anonymity as at this blog is OK but there is something easier about that route that, in this context, should be noted and considered. In terms of your point today, that she oversimplifies things: I would certainly agree that sometimes she makes things simple, but actually, I think that is often useful or needed to get to the heart of a matter. Almost always, my sense, reading her, as I have for years, is that she gets the bigger picture, but is just trying to explain the situation to readers without the background that you or I have in these matters. I just feel that in criticizing her so unrelentingly, you are silencing one of the few voices that has a long track record of being tough on entrenched interests. Even granting for the sake of argument that some of her stories are over-simplified (and I don't really think that), there is so much good in what she does that your criticism is missing the bigger point of her work. All that said: long live the debate; it's a free country. In that spirit, this is the other side.
I attended and worked the 2001 closing of Superior Bank as a FDIC employee about 45 days before 9/11. Thankfully, I was not assigned or involved in the subprime mortgage issues during or after this bank failure. I emailed the author, Mark Maremont, and suggested that he write another article about our class action age discrimination complaint against the FDIC known as Aliotta et al vs. FDIC. Here is a link to the amended complaint below which is pending before Judge Urbina in DC (A Clinton appointee). I have not heard from Mark Maremont as of today but am hopeful he contacts me soon. http://www.roselawyers.com/docs/amendedcomplaint.pdf
@nick: I have long thought that the disconnect between the editorial and news room cannot be any greater than it is at the WSJ. While certainly conservative...their news reporting and writing tends to be of extremely high quality and relatively even-handed.
I had a summer job in 1964 at the WaPo. My boss there, one of the higher-ups, said he believed the WSJ had the best news reporting/writing of any newspaper in the country.
In my experience, they're still among the best. I'm keeping my fingers crossed Murdoch doesn't muck things up.
Their editorial page, on the other hand, regularly features Peggy Noonan, and other travesties.
I don't usually pay much attention to their editorial page, but Noonan's columns on the presidential race and the present state of the GOP have been honest, IMO. (BTW, her columns have been missing in recent weeks.)
Holy cow, Tanta--two posts in ten minutes?
I feel blessed today, I do!
Goodmorning
An annoyance is that the NYT makes "use" of the internet medium by linking words like "Iraq" to a search of all their articles ever about "Iraq". Which is nearly useless; in all seriousness it would be a lot more useful to link to the wikipedia articles.
So yay! to linking in primary sources. Only a few years behind long-established blog practice.
Who are you and what have you done with our beloved Tanta?
Superior bank or sterling bank?
Surprise surprise surprise!
Maybe it IS safe to ask Tanta if this dress makes me look fat. I'd still be terrified to read my employment review though.
A deep curtsy from Tanta! The WSJ should stop publishing today. They have reached the pinnacle of their craft and can accomplish no more.
Go Tanta, and the WSJ.
Good on ya, T!
I don't care what the WSJ writes. I get my news here. Go, go, go, CR and Tanta!
There's no PPT? Let me guess, people just short covering this morning? Right....
WSJ Shill!
Original sources are very nice. I've recently discovered what a treasure trove EDGAR can be, but court filings are also immensely helpful.
To think I recently cancelled all my future payments to the WSJ!
That's the Rupert-Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal, of course.
When you rarely give praise, it becomes more meaningful ... the Simon Cowell effect.
Tanta, I think next April 1st, you need to blog a lovefest to some Gretchen article. Keeping us off-balance makes this blog fun.
Mr. Hightower, quoted in the article is brilliant. He said "I wouldn't expect the government to rip me off...Can I get some money back?" I think we should appoint him national ombudsman for we the people.
Whew, for a second there I thought you were going to offer props to the WSJ editorial board.
Crisis averted.
From the LA Times:
Judge, a "friend of Angelo," ruled for Countrywide
A California appeals court judge whose mortgage was personally approved by former Countrywide Financial CEO Angelo Mozilo later ruled in favor of Countrywide in a class-action lawsuit, Portfolio magazine reports in its latest issue.
Portfolio's Dan Golden reports that Richard Aldrich, a California appeals court state judge, went to Countrywide in 2004 to refinance his 8,200 square-foot-house in Westlake Village; his application, assigned to loan officer Robert Feinberg, sought a $1 million loan and a $900,000 line of credit, the magazine reports.
Portfolio: "By email, Feinberg alerted Mozilo that the credit line was 'above what guidelines allow.' Mozilo responded, 'Go ahead and approve the loan, and close it as soon as possible. Dont worry about this deal, its golden.' Countrywide further waived half a point, or $5,000 on the million-dollar loan."
More: "That wasnt Aldrichs only contact with Countrywide. At the time he refinanced, a class action lawsuit against Countrywide was pending before the appellate court, brought by borrowers contending that the company offered an inadequate payment to settle allegations that it charged excessive fees for credit reports. That August, Aldrich was part of a three-judge panel that unanimously rejected the borrowers appeal."
Portfolio reports that Aldrich, in a brief telephone exchange with the magazine, denied he had received a below-market rate on the loan and then hung up. The magazine reports he did not disclose his relationship with Countrywide to plaintiffs in the class-action suit.
The entire article is worth a look, it sheds new light on the "Friends of Angelo" program, and names a few more beneficiaries of Mozilo's personal attention, including CNN commentator Paul Begala. In one internal exchange, a Countrywide executive urges special treatment for a congressional staff lawyer on a committee overseeing housing issues. The internal guidance on handling the lawyer's loan includes the phrase, No garbage fees.
...
I think the technical term for this is "bribery."
I'm amazed this isn't more common. My publication is particularly bad at the internet, but even tech savvy publications like the Guardian make only limited use of links. It seems to be almost all down to the individual journalist - some reliably link to primary sources, others never do.
Superior Bank, Joe.
Tanta, CR had the WSJ story by 1:00p yesterday... Those bunny slippers must be slowing you down...
Don't you mean "man bites dog?"
Looks like those class-action lawyers can get the ruling against them thrown out. Judge fails to disclose material conflict of interest and recuse himself? That is pretty bold...
I'm confused. Did you mean we don't want to get used to you complimenting a WSJ article and journalist or you curtsying on screen? I may be confused but not too worried about either, hell does not freeze over that often.
I wish more people would drop a deep and graceful curtsy: Re: SubKono | Homepage | 07.22.08 - 4:44 am
I have long thought that the disconnect between the editorial and news room cannot be any greater than it is at the WSJ. While certainly conservative (in the dictionary, as opposed to political, sense of the word: i.e. traditional, staid, establishment-oriented), their news reporting and writing tends to be of extremely high quality and relatively even-handed. They are certainly pro-business, but not myopically so.
Their editorial page, on the other hand, regularly features Peggy Noonan, and other travesties.
The disconnect is enormous, and makes me wonder about things like - can matter and anti-matter really co-exist on different floors of the same lower Manhattan highrise?
i subscribe and will continue to do so. nyt and htfd courant do not appear to be plausible substitutions for me
...rechecked by a staff of 21 quality-control auditors, who "effectively conducted due diligence" on all incoming loans using a 200-item questionnaire.
Are the quality control auditors looking for deficincies in the credit decision or are they looking for compliance issues that could render the loan un-salable. I wonder how they would define quality. I don't know if this is the case here but a lot of "quality control auditors" don't have an underwriting background and provide little protection against things like a bad appraisal. What they're looking for are blanks signature lines, missing notary seals, etc. It's more than likely a cursory review not a re-underwrite or real credit decision quality check. If this is the case this shouldn't be held up as a defence of the agency's oversight.
I continue to be a big fan of your blog and have much respect for your letting readers, even critical ones, as I am here, post comments. I do wonder over the attacks on Gretchen Morgenson. Give the woman her due...she has broken major stories (e.g. corruption on Nasdaq in the early 90s) and puts her name on each one, exposing herself to criticism from all comers. Anonymity as at this blog is OK but there is something easier about that route that, in this context, should be noted and considered. In terms of your point today, that she oversimplifies things: I would certainly agree that sometimes she makes things simple, but actually, I think that is often useful or needed to get to the heart of a matter. Almost always, my sense, reading her, as I have for years, is that she gets the bigger picture, but is just trying to explain the situation to readers without the background that you or I have in these matters. I just feel that in criticizing her so unrelentingly, you are silencing one of the few voices that has a long track record of being tough on entrenched interests. Even granting for the sake of argument that some of her stories are over-simplified (and I don't really think that), there is so much good in what she does that your criticism is missing the bigger point of her work. All that said: long live the debate; it's a free country. In that spirit, this is the other side.
I attended and worked the 2001 closing of Superior Bank as a FDIC employee about 45 days before 9/11. Thankfully, I was not assigned or involved in the subprime mortgage issues during or after this bank failure. I emailed the author, Mark Maremont, and suggested that he write another article about our class action age discrimination complaint against the FDIC known as Aliotta et al vs. FDIC. Here is a link to the amended complaint below which is pending before Judge Urbina in DC (A Clinton appointee). I have not heard from Mark Maremont as of today but am hopeful he contacts me soon.
http://www.roselawyers.com/docs/amendedcomplaint.pdf
"I therefore drop a deep and graceful curtsy." Hat tips and curtsy... some days these manners may wear off on others.
@nick: I have long thought that the disconnect between the editorial and news room cannot be any greater than it is at the WSJ. While certainly conservative...their news reporting and writing tends to be of extremely high quality and relatively even-handed.
I had a summer job in 1964 at the WaPo. My boss there, one of the higher-ups, said he believed the WSJ had the best news reporting/writing of any newspaper in the country.
In my experience, they're still among the best. I'm keeping my fingers crossed Murdoch doesn't muck things up.
Their editorial page, on the other hand, regularly features Peggy Noonan, and other travesties.
I don't usually pay much attention to their editorial page, but Noonan's columns on the presidential race and the present state of the GOP have been honest, IMO. (BTW, her columns have been missing in recent weeks.)
Too bad the article is behind the paywall.