Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;medoraman, post: 1257364, member: 26302&quot;]Yes sir. Securitization structure is a separate legal entity that holds the mortgages legally. There are even some mortgage originators who sold off their servicing rights as well, so they originated the loan, but now have no contact whatsoever with it. The business model CW and other large servicers followed were to sell off every aspect of the loan, including equity residual, to these separate legal firms, but keep the servicing rights. Servicing is where they make their money. However, they are simply a contracted firm for the securitization structure, with the right to service the loan and keep a fee. CW at that point has no legal recourse, possibility of gain or loss, regarding what happens to the mortgages. Likewise, the securitization structure has no legal recourse back to CW. The only recourse would be on an incomplete loan package, which is found out quickly, and CW would have to substitute in an equal quality loan.</p><p><br /></p><p>CW exposure is if a court found they misled investors as to the quality of the loans they donated into the securitization structure. That is what is being settled and litigated on, hence my statement that the lawsuits are CW only real exposure to housing defaults. People can send in jingle mail all day long, and it is the investors in the securitization structure that takes the losses.</p><p><br /></p><p>Chris[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in