FAIR ISAAC CORPORATION aka FICO: Now Worthless…

Yep, just another way for bankers to rate our credit worthiness. As we are beginning to see after all this garbage happening with banks these days, why even bother to save your credit? Save your cash and buy in cash. The higher the credit score the more we are worth to them. It makes no sense what so ever now. We are living our lives based on stupid silly numbers. If you want to purchase a home…go at it and be creative, ask for owner financing.

If we eliminate the banks “middle men” we will learn to live free with no strings attached. Don’t get all strung out because your score has gone way down. It’s only a number!

Keep in mind if you are in an illegal foreclosure you are only 3 months late…The non-creditors that are reporting you have nothing to do with your debt. If you care about this “FICO” score then write your bureau and demand that they delete any derogatory findings the non-creditor has filed to them!

Lets take a look at FICO:

Company milestones

  • 1958: Fair Isaac starts building credit scoring systems.
  • 1970: First credit card scoring system delivered.
  • 1975: First behavior scoring system to predict credit risk related to existing customers.
  • 1981: Introduction of Fair Isaac credit bureau try to scores.
  • 1986: IPO, stock listed at NASDAQ.
  • 1991: Introduction of TRIAD, a credit card management system.
  • 1996: Stock moves from NASDAQ to NYSE.
  • 1997: The American Bankers Association honors Bill Fair and Earl Isaac with Distinguished Service Award for their pioneering work in credit scoring. AHA… you see I knew they were involved some how! Right about the time they were planning our future.
  • 2002: Merger with HNC Software, Inc., adding fraud detection to their arsenal with the $100 million Falcon product line and strengthening their analytics offerings in the insurance and telecommunications markets.
  • 2003: Fair, Isaac and Company is renamed Fair Isaac Corporation. Here too …they were on to something.
  • 2004: Acquisition of London Bridge Software, expanding services to credit collections and recovery software. Opens a new analytic consulting and product development center in Bangalore, India targeted primarily at Asia Pacific markets.
  • 2005: Acquisition of RulesPower, bringing Rete III algorithm to Blaze Advisor.
  • 2006: Celebrates 50th anniversary.
  • 2008: Fair Isaac released Debt Manager 7
  • 2009: Company name changed from Fair Isaac, to FICO (FICO means Fair Isaac Corporation). Website changed to fico.com
Advertisements

Shitty Shitty Bank Bank – A Financial Collapse Parody

“Shitty Shitty Bank Bank” – A Financial Collapse Parody From [STANION STUDIOS] Bait and Switch TV: Investigative Satire (Episode/Show 2) GREAT BALLS OF FIRE – THE FEDERAL RESERVE & BANKING IN AMERICA http://www.baitandswitchtv.com A new internet TV channel about CONTROVERSY

Derivatives Warning – Michael Greenberger interview

Pay close attention…We know who should be held accountable for this mess we are in today! How convenient for Greenspan to get out when he did…CRIMINAL!

This is a collection of soundbites from Prof. Michael Greenberger from the University of Maryland School of Law who was interviewed for a PBS FRONTLINE program concerning Brooksley Born, former chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, who attempted to regulate the secretive, multitrillion-dollar derivatives market whose crash helped trigger the 2008 financial collapse.

THE WARNING: Long before the meltdown, one woman tried to warn about a threat to the financial system.

What happened to the global economy and what we can do about it: The Baseline Scenario

Our Pecora Moment

By Simon Johnson

We have waited long and patiently for our Ferdinand Pecora moment – a modern equivalent of the episode when a tough prosecutor from New York seized the imagination of the country in the early 1930s and, over a series of congressional hearings: laid bare the wrong-doings of Wall Street in simple and vivid terms that everyone could understand, and created the groundswell of public support necessary for comprehensive reregulation.  On Friday, that moment finally arrived.

There is fraud at the heart of Wall Street, according to the Securities and Exchange Commission.  Pecora took on National City Bank and J.P. Morgan (the younger); these were the supposedly untouchable titans of their day.  The SEC is taking on Goldman Sachs; no firm is more powerful.

Pecora exposed the ways in which leading banks mistreated their customers – typically, retail investors.  The SEC alleges, with credible detail, that Goldman essentially set up some trusting clients and deliberately misled them – to the tune of effectively transferring $1 billion from them to a particular unscrupulous investor.

Pecora had the drama of the congressional hearing room and used his skills as an interrogator to batter the bastions of Wall Street, day-after-day, with gruesome and convincing detail.  We don’t know where and when, but the SEC action points in one direction only: Lloyd Blankfein (CEO of Goldman) in the witness box, while John Paulson (unindicted co-conspirator) waits in the on-deck circle.

Either Blankfein knew what was going on – and is therefore liable before the law – or he was clueless and therefore incompetent.  Either way, the much vaunted risk management and control systems of Goldman, i.e., what is supposed to prevent this kind of thing from happening, are exposed to be what we have long here claimed: bunk (as I argued with Gerry Corrigan, former head of the NY Fed and long-time Goldman executive, before the Senate Banking Committee when we both testified on the Volcker Rules in February).

 “Too big and complex to manage” is actually the best defense for Goldman’s executives and they should offer to break up the firm into smaller and more transparent pieces as a way to settle the firm’s liability with the SEC.  The current management of Goldman – along with the team that ran the firm under Hank Paulson – have destroyed the value of an illustrious franchise.  Goldman used to stand for something that customers felt they could trust; now it is just a sophisticated way of ripping them off.

John Paulson obviously knew what he was doing in helping to create the “designed to fail” securities – and the consequences this would have.  If he cannot be convicted of conspiracy to commit fraud, then the law in this regard needs to be tightened significantly.  The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, chaired by Phil Angelides, is probably already planning to grill John Paulson about his taxes – the point Pecora made in this regard with J.P. Morgan junior was most telling and gripped the nation; it turned out that Morgan hardly paid any tax.  I would respectfully suggest that the Angelides Commission also pull in Hank Paulson and pursue a similar line of questioning with him – when it focuses on how much money Hank Paulson made, and how little tax he paid, while building and overseeing an extortion scheme of grand proportions, America will scream.

We have something today that Pecora did not have – the pattern of behavior is already established, if not yet widely comprehended.  Senator Levin’s recent grilling of WaMu revealed another layer of deliberate mistreatment of consumers within the mortgage industry.  The Valukas report on the failure of Lehman exposed exactly how investors are misled by balance sheet manipulation in its most modern and insidious form.  And we have learned more than enough about Goldman misleading investors over Greek debt levels.

Brooksley Born was right, a very long time ago, to fear the “dark markets” of over-the-counter derivatives and what those would bring.

Senator Ted Kaufman was right.  Just a few weeks ago, he argued strongly from the Senate floor that there is fraud at the heart of Wall Street.  Even some people who are generally sympathetic to his critique of modern financial practices thought perhaps that this specific notion was pushing the frontier.  But now they get it – and today Ted Kaufman is more than mainstream; he is the public figure who made everything crystal clear.

When you deliberately withhold adverse material information from customers, that is fraud.  When you do this on a grand scale, the full weight of the law will come down on you and the people who supposedly supervised you.  And if the weight of that law is no longer sufficient to deal with – and to prevent going forward – the latest forms of very old and reprehensible crimes, then it is again time to change the law.

DOJ Probing Mortgage Data Processing Firms LPS FKA FIDELITY BK 5-13-09 Part 1

 DOJ Probing Mortgage Data Processing Firms

By Peg Brickley Of DOW JONES DAILY BANKRUPTCY REVIEW

The Department of Justice is conducting a nationwide probe of the company whose automated systems handle half the mortgages in the U.S., looking for evidence Lender Processing Services Inc. (LPS) has “improperly directed” the actions of lawyers in bankruptcy court.

The Jacksonville, Fla., company was spun out last year from Fidelity National Information Services Inc. (FIS), a financial technology giant that is also under scrutiny for its role in court actions, according to documents filed with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Philadelphia.

Although the companies say they are providers of electronic information services, the U.S. trustee believes LPS and Fidelity play a “much greater” role in court actions where thousands of homes are at risk of foreclosure, according to Bankruptcy Judge Diane Weiss Sigmund.

“The thoughtless mechanical employment of computer-driven models and communications to inexpensively traverse the path to foreclosure offends the integrity of our American bankruptcy system,” Sigmund wrote in a decision released Wednesday, April 15.

A spokeswoman for Fidelity did not respond to requests seeking comment on the investigation by the Office of the U.S. Trustee, an arm of the Department of Justice whose mission includes safeguarding the integrity of the bankruptcy courts.

Michelle Kersch, a spokeswoman for LPS, said the U.S. trustee has “advised outside counsel for LPS that it is seeking to better understand LPS’ role.” In an e-mail, Kersch pointed out that the judge held the lawyers, not LPS, responsible for the problems in the case before her.

The probe of the mortgage technology operation surfaced in a Philadelphia case after Sigmund started asking questions about the source of false court filings that came from HSBC Mortgage Corp. In pursuit of homeowners Niles and Angela Taylor, HSBC filed the wrong mortgage, gave incorrect payment amounts and claimed the Taylors had missed monthly payments. This “was simply not true,” Sigmund wrote in a 58-page decision.

Pressed to produce a loan history for the Taylors, HSBC’s lawyer confessed the system simply wouldn’t give it to him.

HSBC, it turns out, had handed off servicing of the troubled loan to Fidelity, which spun out LPS last year. The processes the company uses to crank out court documents for fast, cheap foreclosures were the culprit, the judge found.

By forcing lawyers to talk to computers rather than to their clients – the lenders – LPS makes it hard for lawyers to do right by the court and discharge their ethical obligations, Sigmund said.

Lawyers at one level spot-check a fraction of the documents that are on their way to foreclosure actions, Sigmund found. But the business is built for profitability rather than reliability, and counts on “lower-cost labor,” according to the judge.

Although LPS’s system “has many features that make a volume business process more efficient, the users may not abandon their responsibility for fairness and accuracy to the seduction of electronic communication,”

Sigmund wrote.

She faulted HSBC and some of the lawyers involved in the case for having “sacrificed accuracy and fairness to efficiency and cost-savings,” by relying on LPS’s systems.

Fidelity, later LPS, is the electronic powerhouse behind the foreclosures rolling through much of the country, taking in data and spitting out loan-default notices for 16 of the 20 largest mortgage-loan servicers in the nation. Banks like HSBC and mortgage servicers outsource the handling of their troubled loans to LPS’s default management services business.

Business is booming in the loan default unit, LPS’s financial reports say, with revenue up 68.3% for the fourth quarter of 2008, compared with the same period a year earlier.

Consumer advocates have long complained that Fidelity and LPS are much more than electronic data providers. The companies say which lawyers get the lucrative business of foreclosing on troubled homeowners. Those who move the fastest are rewarded, said O. Max Gardner III, a consumer bankruptcy attorney. Those who pause to ask questions or to investigate whether a loan should be foreclosed, don’t last as LPS network attorneys, Gardner said.

“The Fidelity-LPS system represents a complete outsourcing of the foreclosure and bankruptcy process to a third-party, Fidelity-LPS, who then manages the entire legal process,” Gardner said in an e-mail Thursday, April 16.

Sigmund’s opinion revealed that the Department of Justice is looking at Fidelity, LPS and the law firm that handles HSBC Mortgage Corp.’s troubled loan business nationwide, Moss Codilis LLP.

Moss Codilis did not reply to an e-mail seeking comment on the investigation, which involves a number of bankruptcy cases, according to Philadelphia court documents.

(Dow Jones Daily Bankruptcy Review covers news about distressed companies and those under bankruptcy protection.)

-By Peg Brickley, Dow Jones Daily Bankruptcy Review; 302-521-2266; peg.brickley@dowjones.com

_____________________________________

The article references an epic in-depth 58 page opinion written by Pennsylvania US Bankruptcy Judge Sigmund in which she enlightens the world to the practices of these third-party lender processing services, and calls the legal profession to adhere to higher standards of professional responsibility when engaging them. It’s a good read and most timely. It’s an opinion that will surely be controlling across this nation.

EXTRA! EXTRA! Read All about the misconduct of Lender Processing Services f/k/a FIDELITY a/k/a LPS

U.S. Probing LPS Unit Docx LLC: Report REUTERS

Merrill Lynch Accused of Same Fraud as Goldman Sachs; House of Cards are beginning to fall: Bloomberg

This is going to unleash a domino effect! Come one, Come all! Anyone buying these CDO’s from these fraudsters need to get examined!

Interested to see their stock this week??

 

 

Merrill Used Same Alleged Fraud as Goldman, Bank Says (Update1)

By William McQuillen

April 17 (Bloomberg) — Merrill Lynch & Co. engaged in the same investor fraud that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission accused Goldman Sachs Group Inc. of committing, according to a bank that sued the firm in New York last year.

Cooperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen-Boerenleenbank BA, known as Rabobank, claims Merrill, now a unit of Bank of America Corp., failed to tell it a key fact in advising on a synthetic collateralized debt obligation. Omitted was Merrill’s relationship with another client betting against the investment, which resulted in a loss of $45 million, Rabobank claims.

Merrill’s handling of the CDO, a security tied to the performance of subprime residential mortgage-backed securities, mirrors Goldman Sachs conduct that the SEC details in the civil complaint the agency filed yesterday. It claimed Goldman omitted the same key fact about a financial product tied to subprime mortgages as the U.S. housing market was starting to falter.

“This is the tip of the iceberg in regard to Goldman Sachs and certain other banks who were stacking the deck against CDO investors,” said Jon Pickhardt, an attorney with Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, who is representing Netherlands-based Rabobank.

“The two matters are unrelated and the claims today are not only unfounded but weren’t included in the Rabobank lawsuit filed nearly a year ago,” Bill Halldin, a Merrill spokesman, said yesterday of the Dutch bank’s claims.

Kenneth Lench, head of the SEC’s Structured and New Products unit, said yesterday that the agency “continues to investigate the practices of investment banks and others involved in the securitization of complex financial products tied to the U.S. housing market as it was beginning to show signs of distress.”

Failed to Disclose

In its complaint, the SEC said New York-based Goldman Sachs, which had a record $13.4 billion profit last year, failed to disclose to investors that hedge fund Paulson & Co. was betting against the CDO, known as Abacus, and influenced the selection of securities for the portfolio. Paulson, which oversees $32 billion and didn’t market the CDO, wasn’t accused of wrongdoing by the SEC.

Goldman Sachs, the most profitable securities firm in Wall Street history, created and sold CDOs tied to subprime mortgages in early 2007, as the U.S. housing market faltered, without disclosing that Paulson helped pick the underlying securities and bet against them, the SEC said in a statement yesterday.

The SEC allegations are “unfounded in law and fact, and we will vigorously contest them,” Goldman said in a statement.

Merrill Lynch’s arrangement involved Magnetar, a hedge fund that bet against a CDO known as Norma, Rabobank claimed.

Effort to Replicate

“When one major firm becomes aware of the creative instrument of others, there is historically an effort to replicate them,” said Jacob Frenkel, a former SEC lawyer now in private practice in Potomac, Maryland.

SEC spokesman John Heine declined to comment on whether it is investigating Merrill’s actions.

Norma’s largest investor was investment bank Cohen & Co, with more than $100 million in notes, according to Rabobank’s complaint.

Merrill loaded the Norma CDO with bad assets, Rabobank claims. Rabobank seeks $45 million in damages, according to a complaint filed in state court in June 2009. Rabobank initially provided a secured loan of almost $60 million to Merrill, according to its complaint.

Risks Disclosed

Merrill countered in court papers that Rabobank was aware of the risks, which were disclosed in the transaction documents. The bank should have been responsible for conducting its own due diligence, and shouldn’t have relied on Merrill, it said in a court filing last year seeking to dismiss the case.

Steve Lipin, an outside spokesman for Magnetar, didn’t immediately comment.

The case is Cooperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen- Boerenleenbank, B.A. v. Merrill Lynch & Co, 09-601832, New York State Supreme Court (New York County).

To contact the reporter on this story: William McQuillen in Washington at bmcquillen@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: April 16, 2010 23:03 EDT