.jpg)
Judge Kaufman/Lam Motions/Bank of America
ns
are in the afternoon and she requires an appearanceunless the
tentative is to grant the motion. The 9:30 .m. confirmation
calender did not end until approximately 1:45 p.m.I purposely
did not even show up until 10:20 a.m. to check inwith the trustee
orthe waitwould have been a couplehours longer. Regarding
Bank of America and other insureddepository institutions, they
alwaysmust be served pursuant to FRBP 7004(h) for anycontested
matteror adversary proceeding. Judge Kaufman noted several times
the Lam Motion local form proof of service boxrequiring a notation
of where theservice address was obtained. The FDIC website is one
of those options. She reiterated that the Court was
givingeverybodya large hinton the form to ensure proper service.
institution. Brian Monynihan is the C.E.O. of Bank of America, N.A.
and the addresslisted in the tentativeis the address from the FDIC
website for Bank of America, NA. You can also obtain this same
address from the CA Secretary of State website, but sometimes you
cannot find N.A.'s listed there becuase N.A.'s are not required to
register with the Secretary of State. The question however
remains is whether Bank of America, N.A. is actually the
lender/servicer. I suggest you scour the debtor's documentation to
determine which entity is really the lender/servicer to ensure proper
service, not to mention naming the proper party whose lien is to be
avoided. When we are lucky it is still the original lender set forth
in the Deed of Trust. Otherwise it is a hodgepodge of statements and
correspondence that can be highly confusing if
notcontradictoryregarding the identy of entity that is the
lender/servicer. The 1098's provide some definity unless of course
the note and deed of trust were assigned to another entity since the
last 1098 was issued. Obviously, if Merrill Lynch & Co, Inc.is the
lender, servingBank of America, N.A.'s C.E.O. at the FDIC provided
address is not going to be valid service on Merrill Lynch
background:rgb(228,228,228);"> From:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
To:
Cc:
Sent:Wed, 6 Apr 2011 17:52:23 -0700
Subject:[cdcbaa] Judge Kaufman/Lam Motions/Bank of America
The reason was it was a five hour waitppearanceunless the tentative is to grant the motion. The 9:30k inwith the trustee orthe waitwould have been a couple
Regarding Bank of America and other insureddepository institutions, they alwaysmust be served pursuant to FRBP 7004(h) for anycontested matteror adversary proceeding. Judge Kaufman noted several times the Lam Motion local form proof of service boxrequiring a notation of where theservice address was obtained. The FDIC website is one of those options. She reiterated that the Court was givingeverybodya large hinton the form to ensure proper service. This is the address she wants used to serve an insured depository institution. Brian Monynihan is the C.E.O. of Bank of America, N.A. and the addresslisted in the tentativeou can also obtain this same address from the CA Secretary of State website, but sometimes you cannot find N.A.'s listed there becuase N.A.'s are not required to register with the Secretary of State.
The question however remains is whether Bank of America, N.A. is actually the lender/servicer. I suggest you scour the debtor's documentation to determine which entity is really the lender/servicer to ensure proper service, not to mention naming the proper party whose lien is to be avoided. When we are lucky it is still the original lender set forth in the Deed of Trust. Otherwise it is a hodgepodge of statements and correspondence that can be highly confusing if notcontradictoryregarding the identy of entity that is the lender/servicer. The 1098's provide some definity unless of course the note and deed of trust were assigned to another entity since the last 1098 was issued. Obviously, if Merrill Lynch & Co, Inc.is the lender, servingBank of America, N.A.'s C.E.O. at the FDIC provided address is not going to be valid service on Merrill Lynch & Co, Inc., its sister entity under the Bank of America Corporation umbrella. Likewise, if the servicer is BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, that is a separate entity from Bank of America, N.A. It has a different C.E.O.. It hasinsured depository institution. You will not find it on the FDIC website as one of the five insured depository institutions under the Bank of America Corporation parent. Judge Kaufman's wants proof that the lender/servicer is not Bank of America, N.A.. Otherwise she assumes it is Bank of America, N.A. and requires compliance with FRBP 7004(h), which unless one of the three exceptions apply under that rule,means service by certified mail on Bank of America N.A.'s C.E.O. or other officer.
Mark T. Jessee
Law Offices of Mark T. Jessee
"A Debt Relief Agency"
50 W. Hillcrest Drive, Suite 200
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
(805) 497-5868 (805) 497-5864 (Facsimile)
----- Original Message -----
From:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comTo:Cc:Sent:Wed, 6 Apr 2011 17:52:23 -0700Subject:[cdcbaa] Judge Kaufman/Lam Motions/Bank of America
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
charset-ascii
After seeing Mark Jessee's post this morning, I looked at Judge Kaufman's calendar for yesterday, and I have some followup questions for Kenny Schwartz and Bert Kawahara, who I think are the only ones who got Lam motions granted against Bank of America yesterday:
1. Where and who did you serve BofA? (I see that on a car motion, item 34, Judge K provided an address in Charlotte and even the name of an officer, while overruling an objection to claim for insufficient service; I am not sure if that is just for car loans)*.
2. Why did it take 5 hours? Was it because the motions were in the afternoon and the confirmations were in the morning? I have that same schedule on 5/3.
Reminder to us all, be sure to serve the banks by certified mail; be sure to name an officer or address it to attention of "an officer"; and be sure to tab and number your declarations and exhibits on the Judge's copy!
JASON WALLACH
*the address/service instructions that Judge K provided was
"By certified mail to:
Bank of America, N.A.
Attn: Brian Moynihan or other officer
101 S. Tryon St.
Charlotte, NC 28202."
charset-ascii
After seeing Mark Jessee's post this morning, I looked at Judge Kaufman's calendar for yesterday, and I have some followup questions for Kenny Schwartz and Bert Kawahara, who I think are the only ones who got Lam motions granted against Bank of America yesterday:1. Where and who did you serve BofA? (I see that on a car motion, item 34, Judge K provided an address in Charlotte and even the name of an officer, while overruling an objection to claim for insufficient service; I am not sure if that is just for car loans)*.2. Why did it take 5 hours? Was it because the motions were in the afternoon and the confirmations were in the morning? I have that same schedule on 5/3.Reminder to us all, be sure to serve the banks by certified mail; be sure to name an officer or address it to attention of "an officer"; and be sure to tab and number your declarations and exhibits on the Judge's copy!JASON WALLACH*the address/service instructions that Judge K provided was "By certified mail to:Bank of America, N.A. Attn: Brian Moynihan or other officer 101 S. Tryon St. Charlotte, NC 28202."
The post was migrated from Yahoo.