Wells Fargo Sues Self, Hires Different Lawyers To Respond

from the you-can't-make-this-up dept

Mon, Jul 13th 2009 7:16am — Mike Masnick

Ah, the nuttiness of our legal system. Reader Bettawrekonize sends in the news that Wells Fargo has sued itself in a foreclosure dispute:

In this particular case, Wells Fargo holds the first and second mortgages on a condominium, according to Sarasota, Fla., attorney Dan McKillop, who represents the condo owner. As holder of the first, Wells Fargo is suing all other lien holders, including the holder of the second, which is itself.

And, of course, being on the receiving end of a lawsuit, the bank has hired some lawyers (different than the ones it hired to file the lawsuit) to respond:

Wells Fargo hired Florida Default Law Group., P.L., of Tampa, Fla., to file the lawsuit against itself.

And then Wells Fargo hired another Tampa law firm -- Kass, Shuler, Solomon, Spector, Foyle & Singer P.A. -- to defend itself against its own lawsuit, according to court documents.

Wells Fargo's defense lawyers even filed an answer to their client's own complaint.

"Defendant admits that it is the owner and holder of a mortgage encumbering the subject real property," the answer reads. "All other allegations of the complaint are denied."

Isn't it great to know that, post-bailout, banks aren't wasting all that taxpayer money we gave them?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: lawsuits
Companies: wells fargo

44 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

move along, 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:01am

nothing to see here
subsidiaries, creditor rights, tax/corporate formalities. if you knew anything about the law, this would be a non-issue. happens all the time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:07am
  
  Re: nothing to see here
  which just highlights a few of the problems America has, notably within the legal system.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- bwp (profile), 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:22am
  
  Re: nothing to see here
  But it is an issue. It has nothing to do with knowing about subsidiaries, creditor rights, etc. and everything to do with common sense and what's become of America's legal system and the way it does business.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - interval, 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:32am
    
    Re: Re: nothing to see here
    @bwp: "But it is an issue. It has nothing to do with knowing about subsidiaries..."
    
    Yes, it does. "move along" is right, this kind of thing happens a lot. The business relationships in these things are so complex that the matter of en entity suing itself is somewhat immaterial and academic.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Ryan, 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:45am
      
      Re: Re: Re: nothing to see here
      One of two things is happening here:
      
      1) Wells Fargo is completely inane and is wasting time and money suing itself unnecessarily (or is bound by an inane contract), or
      
      2) Wells Fargo is compelled to sue itself as the result of some dynamic in the law that is completely inane and results in waste and inefficiency in the marketplace
      
      Neither is immaterial, because resources are being wasted in a judicial black hole. Better #1 than #2, but if this is commonplace, then it is evidence of a pretty significant problem in the system. That you can think it immaterial that businesses are wasting money on lawyers is pretty odd to me...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - bwp (profile), 13 Jul 2009 @ 9:18am
      
      Re: Re: Re: nothing to see here
      Trust me. I'm in business and I deal with things like this at times so I know it happens. The point though is that it shouldn't happen. We've over-legislated ourselves. Now I can't make a agreement with another party without our lawyers going over the contacts ad nausem. Maybe I'm just being nastalgic today but I do miss the days when business people ran all aspects of their businesses unlike today where lawyers have more say than they should.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dark Helmet (profile), 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:49am
  
  Re: nothing to see here
  "subsidiaries, creditor rights, tax/corporate formalities. if you knew anything about the law, this would be a non-issue. happens all the time."
  
  ....wow, you must be a lawyer. Because to me, it's the fact that it happens all the time that MAKES it an issue.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 13 Jul 2009 @ 10:35am
  
  Re: nothing to see here
  happens all the time.
  
  And you don't see that as an indication of a problem?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2009 @ 1:39pm
  
  Re: nothing to see here
  if you knew anything about the law, this would be a non-issue. happens all the time.
  
  Well then, that just reinforces the point of the article, "the nuttiness of our legal system", doesn't it?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- schwim (profile), 14 Jul 2009 @ 3:04pm
  
  Re: nothing to see here
  Which is precisely why it's as funny as it is. If it wasn't considered standard fare, it wouldn't make quite the same statement in regards to our legal system.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Swiggy (profile), 14 Jul 2009 @ 7:10pm
  
  Re: nothing to see here
  perhaps this is what is wrong with the legal system today?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Paul Brinker, 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:10am

How about just having the letter delivered to the team doing the lawsuit and not spending a dime? That way you can show you notifiyed all partys (including yourself)

Even with Creditor rights you are most likly not required to notify yourself in the event your sueing on a product with 2 loans aginst it. This more sounds like lawyers trying to ensure more lawyers get paid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:28am

Coke vs Coke Zero
Just like the commercial
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A. LEISTAD, 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:33am

WELLS FARGO LAW SUIT
THE REASON IS PROBABLY THIS: THE FIRST MORTGAGE WAS SOLD IN THE SECONDARY MARKET AND UNDER THE AGREEMENT WELLS FARGO IS REQUIRED TO COLLECT THE LOAN. SO THE ATTORNEY FOR THE FIRST MORTGAGE IS REPRESENTING THE PURCHASER OF THE FIRST MORTGAGE. I PRESUME IT CAN NOT REPRESENT WELLS FARGO ON THE SECOND MORTGAGE.

THE SECOND MORTGAGE IS HELD SOLELY BY WELLS FARGO, SO THE ATTORNEY IS REPRESENTING ONLY WELLS FARGO.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dark Helmet (profile), 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:51am
  
  Re: WELLS FARGO LAW SUIT
  GREAT! IT'S AWESOME THAT YOU'RE HERE TO TELL US THESE THINGS! AND IN ALL CAPS TOO, THAT WAY WE KNOW YOU REEEAAAALLLLLY MEAN IT!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - GUY IMPERSONATING A. LEISTAD, 2 Jun 2011 @ 6:49am
    
    Re: Re: WELLS FARGO LAW SUIT
    Sorry, I was on a train.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:40am

I suspect they're just covering their backsides. In order to get around the whole "down payment" anachronism people take out a second mortgage to pay the down payment on their first mortgage. Bank didn't used to do this, and so the foreclosure laws don't reflect it. Hopefully banks will stop doing this, but who knows.

The problem here isn't that the bank is suing itself, but rather that one bank gave two loans at the same time to someone. If banks want to give out mortgages to people for 100% of the sale price then they should just do so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:48am
  
  Second mortgage
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:40am

NOW I UNDERSTAND
IT WAS ALL SO COMPLEX UNTIL SOMEONE EXPLAINED IT CLEARLY IN MY OWN LANGUAGE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tony (profile), 13 Jul 2009 @ 8:47am

Bailout Money
Also, isn't Wells Fargo one of the banks which did not take any bailout money by thier own choice?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Derek Kerton (profile), 13 Jul 2009 @ 9:35am

Right Wing To The eXtreme
Shouldn't we have a right wing extremist come in here and tell us how the government is all messed up, and that's why we shouldn't trust gov't, shouldn't have national health care, etc.

You know; because big business operates so much more efficiently.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ryan, 13 Jul 2009 @ 9:46am
  
  Re: Right Wing To The eXtreme
  Right, because government has nothing to do with setting the laws that resulted in this travesty in the first place. But if Wells Fargo is really just that dumb a business, it will quickly fail and be replaced by more competent businesses anyway.
  
  Except that...well crap, it looks like the government gave them $25 billion to continue to waste on this sort of stuff.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - A. L. Flanagan, 13 Jul 2009 @ 10:01am
    
    Re: Re: Right Wing To The eXtreme
    Problem with that is, they could be incompetent at one part of their business and make up for it in another. Just as a hypothetical they might, oh, I don't know, buy out every competitor they have. But in this case I suspect it's not Wells Fargo that's frakked up, it's the legal system. Unless you're a lawyer, in which case this is just great.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Doe, 13 Jul 2009 @ 9:47am
  
  Re: Right Wing To The eXtreme
  So you think that our leaders, who can't run a government properly and that is their area of expertise, can run our businesses properly when that isn't their area expertise?
  
  More left wing ill-logic.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Big Time, 13 Jul 2009 @ 10:21am
    
    Re: Re: Right Wing To The eXtreme
    The reason that the Big Government is inefficient is not that its the Government, its that its big. Big Business is just as inefficient as Big Government. It has simply to do with the complexity of an organization and the associated bureaucracy that comes along with it.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - John Doe, 13 Jul 2009 @ 10:35am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Right Wing To The eXtreme
      Thanks for adding to my point. A government that can't run the public sector properly cannot be trusted with the private sector. And since the government is to big to run itself, getting bigger in order to take on the public sector isn't going to work either.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - pba, 13 Jul 2009 @ 2:45pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Right Wing To The eXtreme
        Sure they can. All they need is a little more money and little more control and everything will be efficient.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Ryan, 13 Jul 2009 @ 10:46am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Right Wing To The eXtreme
      Along with the fact that is often not accountable(being able to make the rules and often having a self-imposed monopoly) and is subsidized by the taxpayers, which eliminates profit incentives for the most part. Subsidies also ensure that government programs never have to fail and so may continue along as resource drains for as long as they are politically correct.
      
      No doubt big businesses are many times going to be more inefficient than small ones, although there are also advantages(see: Wal-Mart). But the biggest thing is that a business has to convince customers to give it their money; it can't just tax them upon threat of jail. If it can't become efficient enough to make a profit, it will fail. Either way, taxpayers don't take the hit--unless the government decides to give it several billion dollars to prevent the very thing that is so important in a free market.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Derek Kerton (profile), 14 Jul 2009 @ 9:33am
    
    Re: Re: Right Wing To The eXtreme
    No, I think they are equally competent / incompetent.
    
    Each gets some things done right, and gets some fudged-up.
    
    But the talk-radio hosts who purport that one group always screws up and the other group is heaven-sent are wrong. "Big government" has its downsides, but so does "big business".
    
    Here's big business' move for today:
    http://blogs.consumerreports.org/money/2009/07/credit-card-act-companies-tricks-traps-increa se-interest-rate-balance-transfer-fee-fixed-variable-simmon.html
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Doe, 13 Jul 2009 @ 9:46am

Lawyer Double Speak
The party of the first part shall not be held liable by the party of the second part. I forget, which party am I? Did someone say PARTY?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2009 @ 9:48am

Hang the lawyers already. All of them; not just these.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
cseiter (profile), 13 Jul 2009 @ 12:21pm

Case Dismissed?
Perfect ending: head lawyer from firm 1 for case is Mr. Smith, and head lawyer from firm 2 for case is Mrs. Smith. The case gets thrown out because the lawyers are sleeping with each other and might have bias.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Slashdot Reader, 13 Jul 2009 @ 12:42pm

Good Explanation on Slashdot
Basically, Florida law requires the primary lien holder to sue all other lien holders to foreclose. (Yes, it still doesn't make sense to have to sue yourself, but at least you know who is crazy.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2009 @ 4:41pm

Is the National Association Realtors Code of Ethics Bogus?

Home owners may want to know if the National Association of Realtors stands behind their Golden Rule. The question arises because of a landmark case in Texas which began in the late 1990’s involving the Houston address 7255 Sims, Garden Villas.

Ameriquest Mortgage Company, now out of business, surveyed, appraised and took as collateral 29,241 square feet out of customer, Darlene L. Hosea’s 48,842 sq.ft. homestead tract. The remaining 19,601 sq.ft. is still owned by Hosea.

Further, the papers signed by Hosea at that time clearly states in definition that an urban homestead shall not exceed one acre of land. Hosea’s homestead exceeds one acre. Shouldn’t the contract void if the prerequisites, rules or requirements were not followed?

Fast forward 10 years. The Property is foreclosed and up for sale with a Multiple Listing Service # 5359712. Hosea also takes issue with the listing because the real estate broker, David Denenberg retains a copy of Ameriquest’s survey but is not honest with potential customers or buyers about the foreclosed land. This is a violation of the realtors Golden Rule. There is a lien created on the property which bears tax account number 0600020000044.

Adopted in 1913 The Real Estate Code sets high standards for realtors, agent and brokers of real estate. The Code and its’ Articles are based on honesty and integrity in all real estate transactions. It employs social responsibility to those in the industry who have vowed to be stewards of our land.

How do you measure standards in the real estate industry? The Code states that the Articles spell out what the agent must and must not do. Consumer protection is among the highest ethical principles. Maybe it is time for the Board of Directors to review the Standards of Practice in this case or perhaps the Delegate Body or, Legislators may even take a look by stepping up to the base and helping Hosea and like customers.

The answers to the above questions can be found in Principle, The Code and its’ Articles. For now, Hosea seeks to sell her 19,601 sq.ft. of the soured mortgage related asset and move on with her life after the consequences of defending herself five years from bullies in an industry riddled with improprieties.

Whoopie
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jason, 2 Jun 2011 @ 7:07am
  
  Re:
  Inserting the words and phrases: like, as, such, thus, in the same way, similarly, etc. might help us all to understand how your comment is related to the topic at hand.
  
  Probably not, though.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
CleverName, 13 Jul 2009 @ 4:52pm

happens all the time
that must mean it is ok then
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2009 @ 6:20am
  
  Re: happens all the time
  Just like file sharing.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2009 @ 4:55pm

Is the National Association Realtors Code of Ethics Bogus?

Home owners may want to know if the National Association of Realtors stands behind their Golden Rule. The question arises because of a landmark case in Texas which began in the late 1990’s involving the Houston address 7255 Sims, Garden Villas.

Ameriquest Mortgage Company, now out of business, surveyed, appraised and took as collateral 29,241 square feet out of customer, Darlene L. Hosea’s 48,842 sq.ft. homestead tract. The remaining 19,601 sq.ft. is still owned by Hosea.

Further, the papers signed by Hosea at that time clearly states in definition that an urban homestead shall not exceed one acre of land. Hosea’s homestead exceeds one acre. Shouldn’t the contract void if the prerequisites, rules or requirements were not followed?

Fast forward 10 years. The Property is foreclosed and up for sale with a Multiple Listing Service # 5359712. Hosea also takes issue with the listing because the real estate broker, David Denenberg retains a copy of Ameriquest’s survey but is not honest with potential customers or buyers about the foreclosed land. This is a violation of the realtors Golden Rule. There is a lien created on the property which bears tax account number 0600020000044.

Adopted in 1913 The Real Estate Code sets high standards for realtors, agent and brokers of real estate. The Code and its’ Articles are based on honesty and integrity in all real estate transactions. It employs social responsibility to those in the industry who have vowed to be stewards of our land.

How do you measure standards in the real estate industry? The Code states that the Articles spell out what the agent must and must not do. Consumer protection is among the highest ethical principles. Maybe it is time for the Board of Directors to review the Standards of Practice in this case or perhaps the Delegate Body or, Legislators may even take a look by stepping up to the base and helping Hosea and like customers.

The answers to the above questions can be found in Principle, The Code and its’ Articles. For now, Hosea seeks to sell her 19,601 sq.ft. of the soured mortgage related asset and move on with her life after the consequences of defending herself five years from bullies in an industry riddled with improprieties.

Whoopie
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2009 @ 5:06pm

Is the National Association Realtors Code of Ethics Bogus?

Home owners may want to know if the National Association of Realtors stands behind their Golden Rule. The question arises because of a landmark case in Texas which began in the late 1990’s involving the Houston address 7255 Sims, Garden Villas.

Ameriquest Mortgage Company, now out of business, surveyed, appraised and took as collateral 29,241 square feet out of customer, Darlene L. Hosea’s 48,842 sq.ft. homestead tract. The remaining 19,601 sq.ft. is still owned by Hosea.

Further, the papers signed by Hosea at that time clearly states in definition that an urban homestead shall not exceed one acre of land. Hosea’s homestead exceeds one acre. Shouldn’t the contract void if the prerequisites, rules or requirements were not followed?

Fast forward 10 years. The Property is foreclosed and up for sale with a Multiple Listing Service # 5359712. Hosea also takes issue with the listing because the real estate broker, David Denenberg retains a copy of Ameriquest’s survey but is not honest with potential customers or buyers about the foreclosed land. This is a violation of the realtors Golden Rule. There is a lien created on the property which bears tax account number 0600020000044.

Adopted in 1913 The Real Estate Code sets high standards for realtors, agent and brokers of real estate. The Code and its’ Articles are based on honesty and integrity in all real estate transactions. It employs social responsibility to those in the industry who have vowed to be stewards of our land.

How do you measure standards in the real estate industry? The Code states that the Articles spell out what the agent must and must not do. Consumer protection is among the highest ethical principles. Maybe it is time for the Board of Directors to review the Standards of Practice in this case or perhaps the Delegate Body or, Legislators may even take a look by stepping up to the base and helping Hosea and like customers.

The answers to the above questions can be found in Principle, The Code and its’ Articles. For now, Hosea seeks to sell her 19,601 sq.ft. of the soured mortgage related asset and move on with her life after the consequences of defending herself five years from bullies in an industry riddled with improprieties.

Whoopie
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mark, 14 Jul 2009 @ 12:52pm

I don't know that it happens all the time, but Wells Fargo is doing it this way because more than likely the attorney's malpractice carrier won't permit them to represent both claims and quite possibly the local bar will not permit it.

The second mtg is in all liklihood worthless (I've not seen second in line get money very often) but the bank owes a fiduciary duty to the shareholders to protect that second mortgage and a fiduciary duty to pursue the first fully that is in theory a conflict. In rural states, with less malpractice action, calmer judges, a less active bar association and more common sense, one firm handles the whole thing asserting its client holds two interests, admits the first mortage is paramount and asks the judge to be a judge and sort out priority.

Letter of the law, Wells is doing it right and if they were certain no one is looking over their shoulder they could do it the easy way, but that ain't happening.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
doewnskitty, 14 Jul 2009 @ 11:04pm

For some reason, the idea of playing Andrew WK's "Party Hard" seems rather appropriate for this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
victor, 16 Jul 2009 @ 7:58am

something to see here
Your home is your Alamo.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
D. King, 16 Nov 2015 @ 9:53am

Justice denied is a threat to justice everywhere
I lived to see America fall because of the nasty and always ignorant racism associated with the foreclosure at 7255 Sims,77061. The sites, 44&44a, are over 1 acre combined and rightfully belongs to The Rastafarian Hosea-King PAY HER MONEY 2015 or Else America...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
martin martinez, 5 Jun 2018 @ 10:02am

Compensation for Hosea-King-Ford Family
Dont blame the survivors. This is an administrative blunder because the money for compensation went towards defending the wrong people. Yes, I know the system is run by people, like all humans,people make mistakes. The issue here is when impropriety is discovered and citizens are economically injured, the company should pay immediately. Otherwise, white collar criminals, will continue to cause havoc and not pay consequences for their actions. Apply The Golden Rule. We are not too big to sink. I agree with paying the family.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]