Probable Cause To Charge Bradley Arant Bout Cummings With Criminal Contempt

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 1 of 13
(Page 1 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 2 of 13
(Page 2 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 3 of 13
(Page 3 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 4 of 13
(Page 4 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 5 of 13
(Page 5 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 6 of 13
(Page 6 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 7 of 13
(Page 7 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 8 of 13
(Page 8 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 9 of 13
(Page 9 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 10 of 13
(Page 10 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 11 of 13
(Page 11 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 12 of 13
(Page 12 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 13 of 13
(Page 13 of Total)
Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 1 of 65

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 1 of 65
(Page 14 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 2 of 65
(Page 15 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 3 of 65
(Page 16 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 4 of 65
(Page 17 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 5 of 65
(Page 18 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 6 of 65
(Page 19 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 7 of 65
(Page 20 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 8 of 65
(Page 21 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 9 of 65
(Page 22 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 10 of 65
(Page 23 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 11 of 65
(Page 24 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 12 of 65
(Page 25 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 13 of 65
(Page 26 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 14 of 65
(Page 27 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 15 of 65
(Page 28 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 16 of 65
(Page 29 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 17 of 65
(Page 30 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 18 of 65
(Page 31 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 19 of 65
(Page 32 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 20 of 65
(Page 33 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 21 of 65
(Page 34 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 22 of 65
(Page 35 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 23 of 65
(Page 36 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 24 of 65
(Page 37 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 25 of 65
(Page 38 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 26 of 65
(Page 39 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 27 of 65
(Page 40 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 28 of 65
(Page 41 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 29 of 65
(Page 42 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 30 of 65
(Page 43 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 31 of 65
(Page 44 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 32 of 65
(Page 45 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 33 of 65
(Page 46 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 34 of 65
(Page 47 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 35 of 65
(Page 48 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 36 of 65
(Page 49 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 37 of 65
(Page 50 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 38 of 65
(Page 51 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 39 of 65
(Page 52 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 40 of 65
(Page 53 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 41 of 65
(Page 54 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 42 of 65
(Page 55 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 43 of 65
(Page 56 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 44 of 65
(Page 57 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 45 of 65
(Page 58 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 46 of 65
(Page 59 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 47 of 65
(Page 60 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 48 of 65
(Page 61 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 49 of 65
(Page 62 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 50 of 65
(Page 63 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 51 of 65
(Page 64 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 52 of 65
(Page 65 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 53 of 65
(Page 66 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 54 of 65
(Page 67 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 55 of 65
(Page 68 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 56 of 65
(Page 69 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 57 of 65
(Page 70 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 58 of 65
(Page 71 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 59 of 65
(Page 72 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 60 of 65
(Page 73 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 61 of 65
(Page 74 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 62 of 65
(Page 75 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 63 of 65
(Page 76 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 64 of 65
(Page 77 of Total)

USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 65 of 65
(Page 78 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 1 of 22
NEW YORK STATE

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
In the Matter of
OCWEN FINANCIAL CORPORATION,
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC
CONSENT ORDER PURSUANT TO NEW YORK BANKING LAW 44

The New York State Department of Financial Services (the Department) and Ocwen
Financial Corporation, the parent company of Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC (together, Ocwen),
(collectively, the Parties) stipulate that:
WHEREAS, Ocwen is the fourth largest mortgage loan servicer and the largest servicer
of subprime loans in the United States, servicing an unpaid principal balance (UPB) of
approximately $430 billion. In New York alone, Ocwen services nearly 130,000 residential
home loans with a total UPB of more than $30 billion.
WHEREAS, Ocwen is a New York State-licensed mortgage banker and mortgage loan
servicer, pursuant to the New York Banking Law, and the Department is responsible for its
supervision and regulation;
WHEREAS, in the last five years, Ocwen has acquired mortgage servicing rights
(MSRs) for hundreds of billions of dollars in UPB from several major servicers, including
Litton Loan Servicing LP (Litton), Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. (Saxon), and Homeward
Residential Holdings, Inc. (Homeward);
WHEREAS, in 2010 and 2011, the multistate examinations of Ocwen, Litton, and
Homeward identified numerous and significant violations of New York State laws and
regulations;
(Page 79 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 2 of 22
WHEREAS, on September 1, 2011, in connection with Ocwens acquisition of Litton

and amid concerns regarding Ocwens rapid growth and capacity to properly acquire and service
a significant portfolio of distressed home loans, Ocwen and the Department entered into an
Agreement on Mortgage Servicing Practices (the 2011 Agreement), which required Ocwen to
adhere to certain servicing practices in the best interest of borrowers and investors;
WHEREAS, a June 2012 targeted examination of Ocwen revealed that Ocwen violated
the 2011 Agreement;
WHEREAS, as a result of Ocwens violation of the 2011 Agreement, Ocwen entered
into a Consent Order with the Department on December 5, 2012, which required Ocwen to retain
an independent compliance monitor (the Compliance Monitor) for two years to conduct a
comprehensive review of Ocwens servicing operations;
WHEREAS, the Department and the Compliance Monitor identified numerous and
significant additional violations of the 2011 Agreement, as well as New York State laws and
regulations;
NOW, THEREFORE, to resolve this matter, the Parties agree to the following:
Facts
1.
Ocwen has grown more than ten-fold in the last several years. Beginning in 2009,
Ocwen significantly expanded its servicing operations through the acquisition of several major
servicers of home loans, as well as the acquisition of MSRs for hundreds of billions of dollars in
UPB. From the end of 2009 to the end of 2013, Ocwens servicing portfolio grew from 351,595
residential loans with an aggregate UPB of $50 billion to 2,861,918 residential loans with an
aggregate UPB of $464.7 billion.
(Page 80 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
2.
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 3 of 22
In 2010 and 2011, the Department participated in a multistate examination of
Ocwen, as well as examinations of Litton and Homeward, the entities ultimately acquired by
Ocwen. The examination of Ocwen identified, among other things, deficiencies in Ocwens
servicing platform and loss mitigation infrastructure, including (a) robo-signing, (b) inaccurate
affidavits and failure to properly validate document execution processes, (c) missing
documentation, (d) wrongful foreclosure, (e) failure to properly maintain books and records, and
(f) initiation of foreclosure actions without proper legal standing.
3.
The examinations of Litton and Homeward identified substantial deficiencies,
weaknesses, and violations of laws and regulations relating to, among other things, foreclosure
governance, implementation of modification programs, record keeping, required notifications,
and the charging of unallowable fees.
4.
The examination of Litton also revealed that, prior to Ocwens acquisition of
Litton, members of Littons information technology staff falsified documents provided to the
Department during the review of Littons information technology infrastructure.
5.
In connection with Ocwens acquisition of Litton in 2011 and in light of the
examination findings for both Ocwen and Litton, the Department sought to ensure that Ocwen
had sufficient capacity to properly acquire and manage a significant portfolio of distressed loans,
including the ability to effectively manage the increased volume and comply with requirements
under the federal Home Affordable Modification Program, internal loss mitigation policies and
procedures, and laws and regulations governing mortgage loan servicing and foreclosure
activities.
6.
To that end, Ocwen and the Department entered into an Agreement on Mortgage
Servicing Practices on September 1, 2011, which required Ocwen to: (a) establish and maintain
(Page 81 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 4 of 22
sufficient capacity to properly acquire and manage its significant portfolio of distressed loans to
ensure a smooth borrower transition; (b) engage in sound document execution and retention
practices to ensure that mortgage files are accurate, complete, and reliable; and (c) implement a
system of robust internal controls and oversight with respect to mortgage servicing practices
performed by its staff and third party vendors to prevent improper foreclosures and maximize
struggling borrowers opportunities to keep their homes.
7.
In June 2012, the Department conducted a targeted examination of Ocwen to
assess its compliance with the 2011 Agreement and Part 419 of the Superintendents
Regulations, which governs business conduct rules for servicers. The examination identified
gaps in the servicing records of certain loans that indicated repeated non-compliance by Ocwen,
including: (a) failing to send borrowers a 90-day notice prior to commencing a foreclosure
action as required under New York Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law (RPAPL)
1304, (b) commencing foreclosure actions on subprime loans without affirmatively alleging in
the complaint that Ocwen had standing to bring the foreclosure action as required by RPAPL
1302, and (c) commencing foreclosure actions without sufficient documentation of its standing
to do so.
8.
The targeted examination also identified instances that indicated widespread non-
compliance with the 2011 Agreement including: (a) failing to provide borrowers with the direct
contact information for their designated single point of contact, a customer care representative
whose role is to understand each assigned borrowers circumstances and history to ensure that
the borrower receives efficient and consistent customer care; (b) dual-tracking; (c) failing to
conduct an independent review of loan modification denials; (d) failing to demonstrate adoption
of policies and procedures to effectively track sanctioned third-party vendors, including local
(Page 82 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 5 of 22
foreclosure counsel; (e) failing to demonstrate implementation of policies and procedures to

verify borrower information on newly boarded accounts to accurately reflect the status and
current balance of the borrowers account; and (f) failing to ensure that trial or permanent
modifications granted to borrowers by a prior servicer are honored upon transfer to Ocwen.
9.
Consequently, on December 5, 2012, Ocwen entered into a Consent Order with
the Department, which required Ocwen to retain an independent compliance monitor for two
years. The Consent Order mandated that the Compliance Monitor, which would report directly
to the Department, would conduct a comprehensive review . . . of Ocwens servicing
operations, including its compliance program and operational policies and procedures. The
review would, at a minimum, consider (a) the adequacy of Ocwens staffing levels, (b) the
robustness of Ocwens established policies and procedures, (c) the fairness of servicing fees and
foreclosure charges, (d) the accuracy of borrower account information, (e) Ocwens compliance
with federal and state law, (f) borrower complaints and recordings of customer service, and (g)
Ocwens compliance with the Agreement.
10.
The Compliance Monitor began work in July 2013.
11.
In the course of the Compliance Monitors review, it identified numerous and
significant violations of the 2011 Agreement, as well as New York State laws and regulations.
12.
For example, a limited review by the Compliance Monitor of 478 New York loans
that Ocwen had foreclosed upon revealed 1,358 violations of Ocwens legal obligations, or about
three violations per foreclosed loan. These violations included:
failing to confirm that it had the right to foreclose before initiating foreclosure
proceedings;
failing to ensure that its statements to the court in foreclosure proceedings were
correct;
(Page 83 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 6 of 22
pursuing foreclosure even while modification applications were pending (dual

tracking);
failing to maintain records confirming that it is not pursuing foreclosure of
servicemembers on active duty; and
failing to assign a designated customer care representative.
13.
The Department and the Compliance Monitor also identified, among other things,
(a) inadequate and ineffective information technology systems and personnel, and (b) widespread
conflicts of interest with related parties.
Inadequate and Ineffective Information Technology Systems and Personnel
14.
In the course of its review, the Compliance Monitor determined that Ocwens
information technology systems are a patchwork of legacy systems and systems inherited from
acquired companies, many of which are incompatible. A frequent occurrence is that a fix to one
system creates unintended consequences in other systems. As a result, Ocwen regularly gives
borrowers incorrect or outdated information, sends borrowers backdated letters, unreliably tracks
data for investors, and maintains inaccurate records. There are insufficient controls in place
either manual or automatedto catch all of these errors and resolve them.
15.
For example, Ocwens systems have been backdating letters for years. In many
cases, borrowers received a letter denying a mortgage loan modification, and the letter was dated
more than 30 days prior to the date that Ocwen mailed the letter. These borrowers were given 30
days from the date of the denial letter to appeal that denial, but those 30 days had already elapsed
by the time they received the backdated letter. In other cases, Ocwens systems show that
borrowers facing foreclosure received letters with a date by which to cure their default and avoid
foreclosureand the cure date was months prior to receipt of the letter. Ocwens processes
failed to identify and remedy these errors.
(Page 84 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
16.
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 7 of 22
Moreover, Ocwen failed to fully investigate and appropriately address the
backdating issue when an employee questioned the accuracy of Ocwens letter dating processes
and alerted the companys Vice President of Compliance. Ocwen ignored the issue for five
months until the same employee raised it again. While Ocwen then began efforts to address the
backdating issue, its investigation was incomplete and Ocwen has not fully resolved the issue to
date, more than a year after its initial discovery.
17.
Ocwens core servicing functions rely on its inadequate systems. Specifically,
Ocwen uses comment codes entered either manually or automatically to service its portfolio;
each code initiates a process, such as sending a delinquency letter to a borrower, or referring a
loan to foreclosure counsel. With Ocwens rapid growth and acquisitions of other servicers, the
number of Ocwens comment codes has ballooned to more than 8,400 such codes. Often, due to
insufficient integration following acquisitions of other servicers, there are duplicate codes that
perform the same function. The result is an unnecessarily complex system of comment codes,
including, for example, 50 different codes for the single function of assigning a struggling
borrower a designated customer care representative.
18.
Despite these issues, Ocwen continues to rely on those systems to service its
portfolio of distressed loans. Ocwens reliance on technology has led it to employ fewer trained
personnel than its competitors. For example, Ocwens Chief Financial Officer recently
acknowledged, in reference to its offshore customer care personnel, that Ocwen is simply
training people to read the scripts and the dialogue engines with feeling. Ocwens policy is to
require customer support staff to follow the scripts closely, and Ocwen penalizes and has
terminated customer support staff who fail to follow the scripts that appear on their computer
screens. In some cases, this policy has frustrated struggling borrowers who have complex issues
(Page 85 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 8 of 22
that exceed the bounds of a script and have issues speaking with representatives at Ocwen
capable of addressing their concerns. Moreover, Ocwens customer care representatives in many
cases provide conflicting responses to a borrowers question. Representatives have also failed in
many cases to record in Ocwens servicing system the nature of the concerns that a borrower has
expressed, leading to inaccurate records of the issues raised by the borrower.
19.
Ocwens inadequate infrastructure and ineffective personnel have resulted in
Ocwens failure to fulfill its legal obligations. Prior to the Departments and the Compliance
Monitors review, Ocwen did not take adequate steps to implement reforms that it was legally
obligated to implement pursuant to the 2011 Agreement.
Widespread Conflicts of Interest with Related Parties
20.
The Departments review of Ocwens mortgage servicing practices also
uncovered a number of conflicts of interest between Ocwen and four other public companies (the
related parties),1 all of which are chaired by Mr. Erbey, who is also the largest individual
shareholder of each and the Executive Chairman of Ocwen. In addition to serving as chairman
of the board for Ocwen and each related company, Mr. Erbeys holdings in these companies total
more than $1 billion. Other Ocwen executives and directors also own significant investments in
both Ocwen and the related parties. Yet, Ocwen does not have a written policy that explicitly
requires potentially conflicted employees, officers, or directors to recuse themselves from
involvement in transactions with the related companies.
The related parties are, as of the date of this Consent Order, Altisource Portfolio Solutions, S.A.
(Altisource Portfolio), Altisource Residential Corporation, Altisource Asset Management Corporation,
and Home Loan Servicing Solutions Ltd., and any of their affiliates, predecessors and successors in
interest, both past and present, and any of their officers, directors, partners, employees, consultants,
representatives, and agents or other persons and entities acting under their control or on their behalf.
(Page 86 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
21.
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 9 of 22
Despite Mr. Erbeys holdings in these companies, Mr. Erbey has not in fact
recused himself from approvals of several transactions with the related parties. Mr. Erbey, who
owns approximately 15% of Ocwens stock, and nearly double that percentage of the stock of
Altisource Portfolio, has participated in the approval of a number of transactions between the
two companies or from which Altisource received some benefit, including the renewal of
Ocwens forced placed insurance program in early 2014.
22.
Ocwens close business relationship with related companies is particularly evident
in its relationship with Altisource Portfolio, which has dozens of subsidiaries that perform feebased services for Ocwen. In one example, Altisource Portfolio subsidiary Hubzu, an online
auction site, hosts nearly all Ocwen auctions. In certain circumstances, Hubzu has charged more
for its services to Ocwen than to other customerscharges which are then passed on to
borrowers and investors. Moreover, Ocwen engages Altisource Portfolio subsidiary REALHome
Services and Solutions, Inc. as its default real estate agency for short sales and investor-owned
properties, even though this agency principally employs out-of-state agents who do not perform
the onsite work that local agents perform, at the same cost to borrowers and investors.
23.
Conflicts of interest are evident at other levels of the Ocwen organization. For
example, during its review, the Monitor discovered that Ocwens Chief Risk Officer
concurrently served as the Chief Risk Officer of Altisource Portfolio. The Chief Risk Officer
reported directly to Mr. Erbey in both capacities. This individual seemed not to appreciate the
potential conflicts of interest posed by this dual role, which was of particular concern given his
role as Chief Risk Officer.
(Page 87 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 10 of 22
Settlement Provisions
Monetary Payment
24.
Ocwen will pay the amount of $150 million as follows:

a. $100 million paid to the Department by December 31, 2014, as a civil monetary
penalty pursuant to New York Banking Law 44, to be used by the State of New
York for housing, foreclosure relief, and community redevelopment programs
supporting New Yorks housing recovery; and
b. $50 million deposited into an interest-bearing escrow account by December 31,
2014, to be paid as restitution to current and former Ocwen-serviced borrowers in
New York, as follows:
i. $10,000 to each borrower whose home was foreclosed upon by Ocwen
between January 1, 2009, and the date of this Consent Order; and
ii. The balance of the $50 million to be distributed equally among borrowers
who had foreclosure actions filed against them by Ocwen between January
1, 2009, and the date of this Consent Order, but in which Ocwen did not
complete such foreclosure.
25.
Ocwen agrees that it will not claim, assert, or apply for a tax deduction or tax
credit with regard to any U.S. federal, state, or local tax, directly or indirectly, for any portion of
the amount paid pursuant to this Consent Order.
Borrower Assistance
26.
For borrowers receiving payments pursuant to Paragraph 24(b)(ii), Ocwen will
evaluate such borrowers for all applicable modifications and other foreclosure alternatives in
light of their improved financial condition resulting from such payment.
10
(Page 88 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
27.
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 11 of 22
Beginning sixty (60) days after the date of execution of the Consent Order, and
for a period of two years thereafter, Ocwen will provide upon request by a New York borrower
that borrowers complete loan file, which includes all information from all systems, including
comment codes, at no cost to the borrower, regardless of whether such borrowers loan is still
serviced by Ocwen.
28.
Beginning sixty (60) days after the date of execution of the Consent Order,
Ocwen will provide every New York borrower who is denied a modification, short sale, or deedin-lieu of foreclosure, a detailed explanation of the reasons for denial.
29.
Beginning sixty (60) days after the date of execution of this Consent Order, for all
New York borrowers who have been reported negatively by Ocwen to credit agencies since
January 1, 2010, Ocwen will provide upon request at no cost a copy of such borrowers credit
report (including credit scores) no more than once a year, regardless of whether such borrowers
loan is still serviced by Ocwen. Ocwen will make sufficient staff available for borrowers to
inquire about their credit reporting and will dedicate the resources necessary to investigate such
inquiries and promptly correct any errors.
30.
The Operations Monitor will oversee Ocwens compliance with these borrower
assistance provisions and will work with Ocwen to develop appropriate procedures for such
compliance.
Operations Monitor
31.
The Department will select in its sole discretion an independent on-site operations
monitor (the Operations Monitor) that will report directly to the Department.
32.
The Operations Monitor will review and assess the adequacy and effectiveness of
Ocwens operations. Such an assessment will include but is not limited to the following areas:
11
(Page 89 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 12 of 22
a. Information technology systems and personnel, including with respect to record

keeping and borrower communications;
b. Number of personnel and the training and expertise of its personnel in all
servicing operations;
c. Onboarding process for newly acquired mortgage servicing rights, including
Ocwens ability to onboard newly acquired MSRs without interruption to
servicing newly acquired loans or its existing loan portfolio;
d. Controls in identifying and correcting errors made by Ocwens personnel or
systems;
e. Risk management functions;
f. Contracts or proposed contracts with third parties, including but not limited to
related parties;
g. Fees charged by Ocwen to borrowers or mortgage investors; and
h. The Ocwen borrower experience.
33.
The Operations Monitor will identify the criteria for determining what constitutes
a related party for purposes of compliance with this Consent Order.

34.
The purview of the Operations Monitor will extend to all matters directly or
indirectly affecting New York borrowers, including matters that affect borrowers in all states or
in multiple states that include New York.
35.
The Operations Monitor will identify needed corrective measures to address
identified weaknesses and deficiencies in Ocwens operations, make recommendations to Ocwen

and to the Superintendent, and oversee implementation of reforms. The Operations Monitor will
12
(Page 90 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 13 of 22
also develop benchmarks against which to assess Ocwens progress in complying with
recommended corrective measures.
36.
The Operations Monitor will review and assess Ocwens current committees of
the Board of Directors. Ocwen Financial Corporations Board of Directors (the Board) will
consult with the Operations Monitor concerning, among other things, the structure, composition,
and reporting lines of such committees, and whether certain committees should be either
disbanded or created.
37.
The Board will consult with the Operations Monitor to determine which decisions
should be committed to the specific oversight of the Boards independent directors, or a

committee comprised of such independent directors, including, but not limited to:
a. Approval of transactions with related parties;
b. Approval of transactions to acquire mortgage servicing rights, sub-servicing
rights, or otherwise to increase the number of loans serviced by Ocwen;
c. Approval of new relationships with third-party vendors;
d. Determinations as to whether Ocwens servicing, compliance, and information
technology functions are adequately staffed;
e. Determinations as to whether Ocwens servicing, compliance, and information
technology personnel are adequately trained;
f. Determinations as to whether Ocwens information technology infrastructure and
ongoing investment in information technology systems are adequate;
g. Determinations as to whether Ocwen is adequately addressing the issues
identified by the Operations Monitor and the Compliance Monitor; and
13
(Page 91 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 14 of 22
h. Determinations as to whether Ocwen is treating borrowers fairly and is

communicating with borrowers appropriately.
38.
The Board will consult with the Operations Monitor to determine whether any
member of senior management should be terminated or whether additional officers should be

retained to achieve the goals of complying with this Consent Order, and all applicable laws,
regulations, and agreements, as well as creating a corporate culture of ethics, integrity,
compliance, and responsiveness to borrowers.
39.
Ocwen may acquire MSRs upon (a) meeting benchmarks developed by the
Operations Monitor concerning the adequacy of Ocwens onboarding process for newly acquired
MSRs and its ability to adequately service both those newly acquired MSRs and its existing loan
portfolio, and (b) the Departments approval, not to be unreasonably withheld. The Operations
Monitor will act with reasonable expedition to develop such benchmarks in consultation with
Ocwen. These benchmarks will address, at a minimum, the following:
a. The development and implementation of a satisfactory compliance plan;
b. The development and implementation of a plan to resolve record-keeping and
borrower communication issues;
c. The reasonableness of fees and expenses charged to borrowers and mortgage
investors, including those charged directly or indirectly by related parties;
d. The development and performance of a risk assessment to identify potential risks
and deficiencies in the onboarding process; and
e. The development of a written onboarding plan that addresses potential risks and
deficiencies, including testing and quality control review periodically during the
onboarding process.
14
(Page 92 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
40.
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 15 of 22
The Operations Monitor will semi-annually review and approve Ocwens
benchmark pricing and performance studies with respect to all fees or expenses charged to New
York borrowers by any related party.
41.
The Operations Monitor will oversee and ensure Ocwens implementation and
adherence to the terms of this Consent Order.

42.
Within one hundred twenty (120) days of the date of the formal engagement of
the Operations Monitor, the Operations Monitor will submit to the Parties a preliminary written
report of findings, including, to the extent the Operations Monitor has had the opportunity to
develop them, any proposed corrective measures and associated benchmarks (the Operations
Report). The Operations Monitor will submit written monthly action progress reports
(Progress Reports) to the Parties. On a quarterly basis, starting ninety (90) days from the date
of the first Operations Report, the Operations Monitor will issue an Operations Report covering
the three-month period immediately preceding.
43.
Ocwen agrees to cooperate fully with the Operations Monitor by, including but
not limited to, providing the Operations Monitor access to all relevant personnel and records
necessary on a real-time basis, including those at any overseas locations, and including
information on business decisions pertinent to the work of the Operations Monitor currently
pending or recently made by Ocwen management or its Board of Directors, to allow the
Operations Monitor to fulfill its duties.
44.
Any dispute as to the scope of the Operations Monitors authority will be resolved
by the Department in the exercise of its sole discretion after appropriate consultation with Ocwen
and/or the Operations Monitor.
45.
Ocwen will pay all reasonable and necessary costs of the Operations Monitor.
15
(Page 93 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
46.
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 16 of 22
The terms of the Operations Monitor will extend for a period of twenty-four (24)
months from the date of formal engagement which shall be no later than May 1, 2015. The
Department may, in its sole discretion, extend the engagement another twelve (12) months if the
Department determines that Ocwen has not sufficiently achieved benchmarks identified by the
Operations Monitor.
Compliance Monitor
47.
The Compliance Monitor will remain engaged for at least three (3) months from
the execution of this Consent Order. The Department may, in its sole discretion, extend the
engagement of the Compliance Monitor for a period not to exceed an additional three (3)
months.
48.
Following completion of the Compliance Monitors engagement, the Operations
Monitor may call upon the Compliance Monitor to perform work that draws on the Compliance
Monitors institutional knowledge of Ocwen.
49.
Prior to the Operations Monitors engagement and for a short transitional period
thereafter not to exceed forty-five (45) days, the Department may in its sole discretion direct the
Compliance Monitor to fill any of the roles of the Operations Monitor described in this Consent
Order.
Board of Directors
50.
Ocwen Financial Corporation will expand its Board of Directors by two
independent board members (the Additional Directors) in consultation with the Compliance
Monitor or the Operations Monitor.
51.
The Additional Directors will not own equity in any related party.
52.
Ocwens Board will contain no more than two executive directors at any time.
16
(Page 94 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 17 of 22
Conflicts of Interest
53.
With respect to mortgage loans serviced by Ocwen, Ocwen will conduct semi-
annual benchmarking studies of pricing and performance standards with respect to all fees or
expenses charged to New York borrowers or to investors on New York property by any related
party, to determine whether the terms offered by the related party are commensurate with market
rates or, if market rates are not available, are reasonably related to actual expenses incurred by
the related party. Maximum rates for services that are established by government-sponsored
enterprises or other investors may not be presumed to be the market rate and may not substitute
for actual assessment of market rates.
54.
Ocwen will not share any common officers or employees with any related party.
55.
Ocwen will not share risk, internal audit, or vendor oversight functions with any
related party.
56.
Any Ocwen employee, officer, or director owning more than $200,000 equity
ownership in any related party will be recused from negotiating, or voting to approve a
transaction with the related party in which the employee, officer, or director has such equity
ownership, or any transaction that indirectly benefits such related party if such transaction
involves revenues or expense to Ocwen or a related party of $120,000 or more.
Management Changes
57.
Effective January 16, 2015, William Erbey will resign from his position as
Executive Chairman of Ocwen, his position as Chairman of the Board of Directors of Altisource
Portfolio, his position of Chairman of the Board of Directors of Altisource Residential
Corporation, his position of Chairman of the Board of Directors of Altisource Asset Management
Corporation, and his position of Chairman of the Board of Directors of Home Loan Servicing
17
(Page 95 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 18 of 22
Solutions Ltd. Mr. Erbey will have no directorial, management, oversight, consulting, or any
other role at Ocwen or any related party, or at any of Ocwens or the related parties affiliates or
subsidiaries as of the date of his resignation. Effective at his resignation, Ocwens Board
members and management will not disclose to Mr. Erbey any non-public information about
Ocwen that is not available to other shareholders. In the event that Ocwen discovers a violation
of the terms of this Paragraph, Ocwen will notify the Department of the violation within three (3)
business days of discovery.
No Indemnification
58.
Neither Ocwen, nor any of its parents or affiliates will, collectively or
individually, seek or accept, directly or indirectly, reimbursement or indemnification, including,

but not limited to, payment made pursuant to any insurance policy, or from any of its parents or
affiliates, with regard to any or all of the amounts payable pursuant to this Consent Order.
Breach of Consent Order
59.
In the event that the Department believes Ocwen to be in material breach of this
Consent Order (Breach), the Department will provide written notice to Ocwen, and Ocwen
must, within ten (10) business days of receiving such notice, or on a later date if so determined in
the Departments sole discretion, appear before the Department to demonstrate that no Breach
has occurred or, to the extent pertinent, that the Breach has been cured.
60.
The parties understand and agree that Ocwens failure to make the required
showing within the designated time period will be presumptive evidence of Ocwens Breach.
Upon a finding of Breach, the Department has all the remedies available to it under the New
York Banking and Financial Services Laws and may use any evidence available to the
Department in any ensuing hearings, notices, or orders.
18
(Page 96 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 19 of 22
Wavier of Rights
61.
The parties understand and agree that no provision of this Consent Order is
subject to review in any court or tribunal outside the Department.

Parties Bound by the Consent Order
62.
This Consent Order is binding on the Department and Ocwen, as well as Ocwens
successors and assigns that are under the Departments supervisory authority. This Consent
Order does not bind any federal or other state agency or any law enforcement authority.
63.
Except as set forth in Paragraphs 64 and 65, no further action will be taken by the
Department against Ocwen for the matters set forth in this Consent Order, provided that Ocwen
complies with the terms of the Consent Order.
64.
Nothing in this Consent Order shall excuse Ocwen from paying required
restitution to any borrowers harmed by its improper or illegal conduct, including the backdating
of letters to borrowers. To the extent a borrower entitled to restitution has received a cash
payment pursuant to this Consent Order, Ocwen may offset such payment against the restitution
owed to such borrower.
65.
Notwithstanding any other provision in this Consent Order, the Department may
undertake additional action against Ocwen for transactions or conduct that: (a) are not set forth
in this Consent Order; (b) Ocwen did not disclose to the Compliance Monitor or the Department
in connection with the Departments investigation into these matters; and (c) that the Department
and Compliance Monitor were not otherwise aware of in connection with the Departments
investigation and the work of the Compliance Monitor.
Notices
66.
All notices or communications regarding this Consent Order will be sent to:
19
(Page 97 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 20 of 22
For the Department:

Daniel Burstein
Executive Deputy Superintendent
Real Estate Finance Division
New York State Department of Financial Services
One State Street
New York, NY 10004
For Ocwen:
Timothy M. Hayes
Executive Vice President and General Counsel
Ocwen Financial Corporation
1661 Worthington Road #100
West Palm Beach, FL 33409
Miscellaneous
67.
Each provision of this Consent Order will remain effective and enforceable until
stayed, modified, suspended, or terminated by the Department.

68.
No promise, assurance, representation, or understanding other than those
contained in this Consent Order has been made to induce any party to agree to the provisions of
the Consent Order.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Consent Order to be signed this 22nd
day of December, 2014.
OCWEN FINANCIAL CORPORATION
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF

FINANCIAL SERVICES
By: _______________________
RONALD FARIS
President and Chief Executive Officer
By: _______________________
BENJAMIN M. LAWSKY
Superintendent of Financial Services

By: _______________________
TIMOTHY M. HAYES
Executive Vice President
20
(Page 98 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 21 of 22
For the Depmtment:

Daniel Burstein
Real Estate Finance Division
One State Street
New York, NY 10004
For Ocwen:
Timothy M. Hayes
Executive Vice President and General Counsel
Oewen Financial Corporation
1661 WOIthington Road #100
West Palm Beach. FL 33409
Miscellaneous
67.
Each provision o[this Consent Order will remain effective and enforceable until
stayed, modified, suspended, or terminated by the Department.

68.
No promise, assurance, representation, or understanding other than those
contained in this Consent Order has been made to induce any pmty to agree to the provisions of
the Consent Order.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Consent Order to be signed this 19th
day of December. 2014.
OCWEN FINANCIAL CORPORATION
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF

FINANCIAL SERVICES
By:
By:
~9-
BENc;cJ;-:A~M;oI:-;N-;:M-;-,-;:L--;A-:CW;-;;S'""'K-:::;Y-;--
RONALD FARIS
President and Chief Executive Officer
Superintendent of Financial Services
By:
TIMO:OccT"'H"'Y=M-;-,coH-;-A:CyC;;EOC,S ,-----
20
(Page 99 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 22 of 22
For the Department:

Daniel Burstei n
Real Estate Finance Divi sion
One State Street
New York, NY 10004
For Oewen:
Timothy M. Hayes
Executi ve Vice President and General Counsel
Ocwen Financial Corporat ion
1661 Worthington Road # 100
We" Palm Beach, FL 33409
Misce ll aneous
67.
Each provision of this Consent Order will remain effective and enforceable unt il
stayed. modified, suspended. or terminated by the Department.

68.
No promi se. assurance . representation, or understanding other than those
conta ined in thi s Consent Order has been made to induce any party to agree to the prov isions of
the Consent Orde r.
IN WITNESS WI-IEREOF, the parties have caused this Consent Order to be signed thi s 19th
day of December. 2014.
OCWEN FINANCIAL CORPORATlON
NEW YORK STATE DEI'ARTMENT OF

FI NANCIAL SE RYICES
By:
RON
~~~~~R
' A L D FA ~I~~-----S
By:
li E N:,eJ'-"
AM
= IN
o,-,-:C"O".--;
M L- A
" '::-Y"'SKY
"'""-;-
Pres id en t ,lnd C hi ef Exec utive Officer
S UJlerintendent of financhll Serv ices
OCWEN LOAN SERV IC ING, LLC
BY
:-r:V 0{ ~
TIMOTHY M. HAYES
20
(Page 100 of Total)
12/27/2014
Ocwen Chairman to Resign Following $150 Settlement with N.Y. Regulator | Reverse Mortgage Daily
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 1 of 6
(http://engine.adzerk.net/r?
e=eyJhdiI6MjQwMywiYXQiOjQsImJ0IjowLCJjbSI6NDIxOSwiY2giOjE3ODQsImNyIjo0MzkzODQsImRpIjoiZjlhMjk4ODhhMTIzNDc1MDkzZmFhZTkzYTk5NWNmOTgiLCJkbSI6MSw
Search
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com)
Home (http://reversemortgagedaily.com)
About (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/about/)
Jobs (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/jobs/)
Contact (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/contact/)
Wholesale Lenders (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/wholesale-lenders/)
Aw ards (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/awards/)
Advertise (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/advertise/)
Content (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/content/)
Calculator (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/calculator/)
Categories
RSS (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/feed/)
Reverse Mortgage Changes Impact Retirement Security, HUD Ups Counseling

Funds (http://reversem ortgagedaily.com /2014/12/22/reverse-m ortgage-changesim pact-retirem ent-security-hud-ups-counseling-funds/)
Daily news on the reverse mortgage industry

delivered to your inbox.
Email Address:
Congress Members Seek More Reverse Mortgage Non-Borrowing Spouse

Protections (http://reversem ortgagedaily.com /2014/12/22/congress-m em bers-seek-
Subscribe
m ore-reverse-m ortgage-non-borrow ing-spouse-protections/)
Follow @rm daily
Ocwen Chairman to Resign

Following $150 Settlement with
N.Y. Regulator
Wholesale Lender Sponsors

AAG Wholesale
e=eyJhdiI6MTg1NSwiYXQiOjIwLCJjbSI6MTA5MTMsImNoIjoxNzg0L
iO1_5yS7sI)
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/ocwenLiberty Home Equity Solutions

chairman-to-resign-following-150e=eyJhdiI6Njk5NiwiYXQiOjIwLCJjbSI6MTA1MTUsImNoIjoxNzg0LC
HighTechLending Inc.
settlement-with-n-y-regulator/)
December 22nd, 2014 | by Jason Oliva Published in News
(http://reversem ortgagedaily.com /category/new s/) , Ocwen
(http://reversem ortgagedaily.com /category/ocw en/) , Reverse Mortgage
(http://reversem ortgagedaily.com /category/reverse-m ortgage/) , Servicers
(http://reversem ortgagedaily.com /category/reverse-m ortgage-servicers/) | 1
Comment (#com m ents)
The drama continues to unfold for Ocwen Financial Corp. (NYSE: OCN), which
today which today announced the resignation of Founder and Chairman William
C. Erbey, following a $150 million settlement
(http://www.dfs.ny.gov/about/ea/ea141222.pdf) with one of its top scrutinizers, the
New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS).
e=eyJhdiI6NjI1NCwiYXQiOjIwLCJjbSI6OTU1NSwiY2giOjE3ODQsIm
)
Nationwide Equities
e=eyJhdiI6MTU0NSwiYXQiOjIwLCJjbSI6MTA1MzYsImNoIjoxNzg0L
6YNwBCK2bfupc )
Urban Financial of America

e=eyJhdiI6MjQwMywiYXQiOjIwLCJidCI6MCwiY20iOjEwNTM3LCJja
C4OojOzrW4m-h-aSJ0psxdo )
Live Well Financial

e=eyJhdiI6ODg0MywiYXQiOjIwLCJjbSI6MTI5OTMsImNoIjoxNzg0L
CxCWGJEvAepFiNmLa067nij-P8 )
Reverse Mortgage Solutions

After nearly 30 years of service with the company, Erbey will step down from his
position as Executive Chairman, effective January 16, 2015. Upon his resignation,
current Ocwen Director Barry Wish will assume the role of Non-Executive
Chairman on that date.
I am grateful to the many associates who have worked alongside me and proud
of what we have accomplished, Erbey said in a written statement. I am
confident about Ocwens future under the experienced leadership of the executive
team.
In agreement with the settlement, Erbey will also step down from his positions as
Board Chairman at each of Ocwens four related companies, including Altisource
Portfolio Solutions S. A.; Altisource Residential Corporation; Altisource Asset
Management Corporation; and Home Loan Servicing Solutions, Ltd.
As of these resignations, Mr. Erbey will have no directorial, management,
oversight, consulting, or any other role at Ocwen or any related party, or at any of
Ocwens or the related parties affiliates or subsidiaries, said the NYDFS in a
http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/ocwen-chairman-to-resign-following-150-settlement-with-n-y-regulator/
e=eyJhdiI6Njk5MywiYXQiOjIwLCJjbSI6MTA0OTksImNoIjoxNzg0LC
)
Reverse Mortgage Funding
e=eyJhdiI6Mzg1NDEsImF0IjoyMCwiYnQiOjAsImNtIjoxOTU5MzYsIm
TuqKV0iCHfVmiQyU )
Sponsors
(Page 101 of Total)

1/6
12/27/2014
statement.
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 2 of 6
Under the terms of the settlement, Ocwen will pay a civil monetary penalty of
$100 million to the NYDFS by December 31, which will be used by the State of
New York for housing, foreclosure relief and community redevelopment programs,
according to a release from the regulator.
The remaining $50 million will be used as restitution to current and former New
York borrowers in the form of $10,000 to each borrower whose home was
foreclosed upon by Ocwen between January 2009 and December 19, 2014. The
balance will then be distributed equally among borrowers who had foreclosure
actions filed, but not completed, by Ocwen between that timeframe.
e=eyJhdiI6Njk5NywiYXQiOjE4LCJidCI6MCwiY20iOjEwNTE4LCJjaC
The settlement, which arrived after the company inadvertently misdated
hundreds of letters (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/10/27/ocwen-woes(http://engine.adzerk.net/r?

continue-as-ceo-pens-apology-to-borrowers/) sent to borrowers regarding loan
e=eyJhdiI6MjQ5MSwiYXQiOjYsImNtIjozODc4LCJjaCI6MTc4NCwiY3IiOjI1NjE2LCJkaSI6ImZjNGQyYTI3YmRhMzQ5NmI5NTU0ZmRjOTNiNGY4MWMxIiwiZG0iOjEsImZjIjozNjU5NCwiZmwiOjkxNjksImlw
modifications and foreclosures, was largely prepared for by Ocwen.
In the third quarter, the company recorded a $100 million charge
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/10/30/ocwen-prepares-for-100-millionservicing-settlement/) in payments in anticipation to settle for servicing charges in
the midst of investigations from the NYDFS. As for the other $50 million, Ocwen
said it will record that amount in its fourth quarter 2014 financial statements.
Also as part of the settlement, Ocwen will not be permitted to acquire additional
mortgage servicing rights, or begin to acquire additional MSRs until an unless it
receives approval from the NYDFS, and meets benchmarks developed by the
independent monitor concerning the adequacy of Ocwens onboarding process for
newly acquired MSRs.
Todays agreement will deliver significant assistance to Ocwen homeowners in
New York and provide a new path for the company to clean up its operations,
said Lawsky in a written statement. We will continue to closely monitor Ocwen
to ensure that it lives up to its obligations under this agreement, and treats
struggling homeowners with the respect and dignity they deserve.
Ocwen has also agreed to several non-monetary provisions under the settlement,
including monitor-led oversight of its operations, in addition to the New York
borrower assistance measures.
e=eyJhdiI6Njk5MywiYXQiOjE4LCJidCI6MCwiY20iOjEwNDk5LCJjaC
e=eyJhdiI6MTU0NSwiYXQiOjE4LCJidCI6MCwiY20iOjI2ODEsImNoIj
1-AZgrO_LTBv24I)
Beginning 60 days after December 19and for two yearsOcwen will provide,
upon request, New York borrowers with complete loan files at no cost, as well as
provide every N.Y. borrower detailed explanations as to why a loan modification,
short sale (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/18/bloomberg-more-troublefor-ocwen/) or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure were denied.
The company will also provide one free credit report per year, at its own expense,
to any N.Y. borrower on request if Ocwen made a negative report to any credit
agency from January 1, 2010, the company will make staff available for borrowers
to inquire about their credit reporting, dedicating resources necessary to
investigate such inquiries and correct any errors.
Another non-monetary provision of the settlement requires the NYDFS to appoint
an independent Operations Monitor to review and assess the adequacy and
effectiveness of Ocwens operations for two years, with the regulator having the
option to extend this engagement for another 12 months.
The year has been a tumultuous oneto say the very leastfor Ocwen, marked
by numerous investigations from regulators, including the NYDFS as well as the
Monitor of the National Mortgage Settlement, which released a report
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/16/ocwen-just-cant-beat-regulator-heat/)
this month examining the companys compliance with NMS standards.

Even with the ongoing federal probes, penned apology letters
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/10/27/ocwen-woes-continue-as-ceo-pensapology-to-borrowers/) from executive leadership and series of servicing
downgrades (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/10/23/ocwen-faces-moredowngrades-following-regulatory-scrutiny/) , Ocwen has reiterated its cooperation

with regulators time and time again. Todays settlement is no exception, though
2015 looks to be a rigid year.
e=eyJhdiI6MzE0MTgsImF0Ijo2LCJjbSI6NDM1NjEsImNoIjoxNzg0LCJjciI6MzM5NjkyLCJkaSI6ImZhM2FkZDAwYzNhYzRiMzg5NGZiNmJjNGM3NDIyNzM2IiwiZG0iOjEsImZjIjo0MTk1NTksImZsIjo3NzMzM
We believe this agreement is in the best interests of our shareholders,

employees, borrowers and mortgage investors, said Ocwen CEO Ronald Faris.
We will continue to cooperate with the DFS in the implementation of the terms of
this settlement which we believe will allow Ocwen to continue to focus on what
we do besthelping homeowners.
(Page 102 of Total)

2/6
12/27/2014
The fourth-largest
mortgage loan servicer
in the U.S., Ocwen services
an unpaid01/15/2015
USCA Case #14-5265
Document
#1532155
Filed:
Page 3 of 6
principal balance of approximately $430 billion. In New York alone, the company
services nearly 130,000 residential home loans with a total UPB of more than $30
billion.
e=eyJhdiI6MTg1NSwiYXQiOjE4LCJidCI6MCwiY20iOjU4ODUsImNo
Written by Jason Oliva (mailto:joliva@reversemortgagedaily.com)
Share this:
Google (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/ocwen-chairman-to-resignfollowing-150-settlement-with-n-y-regulator/?share=google-plus-1)
Facebook (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/ocwen-chairman-toresign-following-150-settlement-with-n-y-regulator/?share=facebook)
Twitter (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/ocwen-chairman-to-resignfollowing-150-settlement-with-n-y-regulator/?share=twitter)
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/ocwen-chairman-to-resignfollowing-150-settlement-with-n-y-regulator/emailpopup/) Email This Post

(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/ocwen-chairman-to-resignfollowing-150-settlement-with-n-y-regulator/emailpopup/)
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/ocwen-chairman-to-
e=eyJhdiI6NTgxMDIsImF0IjoxOCwiY20iOjg5ODE5LCJjaCI6MTc4NC
VijcZ_RSKuT4)
resign-following-150-settlement-with-n-y-regulator/print/) Print This
Post (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/ocwen-chairmanto-resign-following-150-settlement-with-n-y-regulator/print/)
Related Posts
Ocwen Defends Its Business Relationships Under Scrutiny
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/03/05/ocwen-defends-its-businessrelationships-under-scrutiny/)
Ocwen Prepares for $100 Million Servicing Settlement

(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/10/30/ocwen-prepares-for-100million-servicing-settlement/)
Ocwen Freezes Future Mortgage Servicing Deals

(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/04/20/ocwen-freezes-futuremortgage-servicing-deals/)
e=eyJhdiI6MjQ5MiwiYXQiOjYsImNtIjoxODM4NSwiY2giOjE3ODQsImNyIjo0NzE0NCwiZGkiOiI1ZDIyNWY2OGFhZWU0Y2FjOGZmMDZiNzkxMTg2YzEwMCIsImRtIjoxLCJmYyI6NjY5OTAsImZsIjozNDk1NS
Exclusive Training Provider
1 Comment (http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/ocwen-chairman-toresign-following-150-settlement-with-n-y-regulator/) Digg This!
e=eyJhdiI6NzAwMSwiYXQiOjE2OCwiY20iOjEwNTM5LCJjaCI6MTc4
(http://digg.com/submit?
phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Freversemortgagedaily.com%2F2014%2F12%2F22%2Focwenchairman-to-resign-following-150-settlement-with-n-yregulator%2F&title=Ocwen+Chairman+to+Resign+Following+%24150+Settlement+with+N.Y.+Regulator)
Technorati Links
(http://technorati.com/search/http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/ocwenchairman-to-resign-following-150-settlement-with-n-y-regulator/) Save to
del.icio.us (http://del.icio.us/post?
HARP Program
Status 2014
harp.mortgagerefinancerates.org
v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Freversemortgagedaily.com%2F2014%2F12%2F22%2FocwenVerify
chairman-to-resign-following-150-settlement-with-n-y-
Your HARP Eligibility

Status
regulator%2F&title=Ocwen+Chairman+to+Resign+Following+%24150+Settlement+with+N.Y.+Regulator)HARP 2014 Verification
Email this (http://feedburner.google.com/fb/a/emailFlare?
Takes 1 Min
itemTitle=Ocwen%20Chairman%20to%20Resign%20Following%20%24150%20Settlement%20with%20N.Y.%20Regulator&uri=http%3A%2F%2Freversemortgage
chairman-to-resign-following-150-settlement-with-n-y-regulator%2F)
(Page 103 of Total)

3/6
12/27/2014
USCA Case #14-5265

#1532155
Comments Document
Community
Sort by Oldest
Filed:
Login01/15/2015
Share
Page 4 of 6
Favorite
Join the discussion
(http://www.reversemortgagejobsonline.com/rss/feed
Reverse Mortgage Jobs

The_Critic
(http://www.reversemortgagejobsonline.com/index.p
4 days ago
Have the policies and transactions sanctioned by Erbey already

so irreparably harmed the reputation of Ocwen that Liberty will
never again rise above where it is today? Liberty most likely has
not been helped.
Having Ocwen related to this industry is NOT an overall benefit
to the industry at this time.
Underwriter
(http://www.reversemortgagejobsonline.com/index.php?
page=view_job&post_id=643)
Reverse Mortgage Consultant

Reply Share
Experienced/Driven RMLO
WHAT'S THIS?
ALSO ON REVERSE MORTGAGE DAILY
Heres How One Finance

Professor Came Around to
Reverse
8
commentsMortgages
16 days ago
joshstephens Couldn't
Compliance
Regulations
agree more. I have presented

the program and our take on
using it as a financial
Time:planning
Save Your
tool toHome
at least 10
Equity
Until You
Really
Need
advisors
who have
seen
a
It
1 comment
24 days ago by John
live presentation
Dave83049 I believe you
should take out the reverse
mortgage when you don't
need it and place all the
equity into the line of credit
(LOC). The balance in the
line of credit will grow at a
FHA Loses Competitive Edge

For Home Buyers
1 comment 25 days ago
The_Cynic What private
insurer wants to come into

the reverse mortgage
industry when FHA is
Openreporting
Mortgage
Picks
a one
yearUp
actuarial
Reverse
Originations
Arm
determined
loss of $7.7
From
360 17
Mortgage
1
comment
billion
fordays
lastago
fiscal year? Yet
that
John loss
Smaldone
My
congratulations to Scott
Gordon and Joe Morris. They
are good people and I am
looking forward to them
becoming a force in the
industry.John A. Smaldone
Subscribe
Processor - Senior Reverse

Mortgage
Reverse Mortgage Specialists

Call Center Business Analyst

Reverse Mortgage Originators

National Recruiter
unifiedcompliance.com
Compliance
framework with
content & structure.
Reduce
cost/complexity
Add Disqus to your site
Privacy
Popular Posts
RMF REIT Files for $100 Million
IPO, Eyeing 'Unprecedented
Opportunity'
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/rmfreit-files-for-100-million-ipo-eyeingunprecedented-opportunity/)
Senators, Lenders Call on FHA to

.
Reduce Mortgage Insurance

Premiums
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/21/senatorslenders-call-on-fha-to-reducemortgage-insurance-premiums/)

N.Y. Regulator
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/ocwenchairman-to-resign-following-150settlement-with-n-y-regulator/)
Column: Reverse Mortgages Have

Their Place In Retirement
(Page 104 of Total)

4/6
12/27/2014
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Planning
Page 5 of 6
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/18/columnreverse-mortgages-have-their-placein-retirement-planning/)
Congress Members Seek More

Reverse Mortgage Non-Borrowing
Spouse Protections
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/congressmembers-seek-more-reversemortgage-non-borrowing-spouseprotections/)
Recent Articles
Holiday Round-Up: Reverse
Mortgage Funding REIT Files for
$100 Million IPO
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/23/holidayround-up-reverse-mortgage-fundingreit-files-for-100-million-ipo/)
Congress Members Seek More

Reverse Mortgage Non-Borrowing
Spouse Protections
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/congressmembers-seek-more-reversemortgage-non-borrowing-spouseprotections/)

N.Y. Regulator
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/ocwenchairman-to-resign-following-150settlement-with-n-y-regulator/)
Reverse Mortgage Changes

Impact Retirement Security, HUD
Ups Counseling Funds
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/reversemortgage-changes-impactretirement-security-hud-upscounseling-funds/)
RMF REIT Files for $100 Million

IPO, Eyeing Unprecedented
Opportunity
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/22/rmfreit-files-for-100-million-ipo-eyeingunprecedented-opportunity/)
Senators, Lenders Call on FHA to

Reduce Mortgage Insurance
Premiums
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/21/senatorslenders-call-on-fha-to-reducemortgage-insurance-premiums/)
Are Retirees as Unprepared as

Studies Show?
(http://reversemortgagedaily.com/2014/12/21/are-
(Page 105 of Total)

5/6
12/27/2014
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
retirees-as-unprepared-as-studiesFiled: 01/15/2015
Page 6 of 6
show/)
Our Sites
Senior Housing News
(http://seniorhousingnews.com)
Home Health Care News

(http://homehealthcarenews.com)
2014 Reverse Mortgage Daily

Powered by WordPress (http://w ordpress.org/) using the Gridline Lite (http://graphpaperpress.com /2007/12/09/gridline-lite/) theme by Graph Paper Press
(http://graphpaperpress.com ) .
(http://www.xnxxpornoizle.net)
(Page 106 of Total)

6/6
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 1 of 7
(Page 107 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 2 of 7
(Page 108 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 3 of 7
(Page 109 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 4 of 7
(Page 110 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 5 of 7
(Page 111 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 6 of 7
(Page 112 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 7 of 7
(Page 113 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 1 of 2
(Page 114 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 2 of 2
(Page 115 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 1 of 17
Entered 06/11/10 16:04:38 Page

(Page
4 of 28
116 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 2 of 17
Entered 06/11/10 16:04:38 Page

(Page
5 of 28
117 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 3 of 17
Entered 06/11/10 16:04:38 Page

(Page
6 of 28
118 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 4 of 17
Entered 06/11/10 16:04:38 Page

(Page
7 of 28
119 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 5 of 17
Entered 06/11/10 16:04:38 Page

(Page
8 of 28
120 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 6 of 17
Entered 06/11/10 16:04:38 Page

(Page
9 of 28
121 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 7 of 17
Entered 06/11/10 16:04:38 Page(Page

10 of 122
28 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 8 of 17

11 of 123
28 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 9 of 17

12 of 124
28 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 10 of 17

13 of 125
28 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 11 of 17

14 of 126
28 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 12 of 17

15 of 127
28 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 13 of 17

16 of 128
28 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 14 of 17

17 of 129
28 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 15 of 17

18 of 130
28 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 16 of 17

19 of 131
28 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Case 10-11558-j7
Document #1532155
Doc 18
Filed 06/11/10
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 17 of 17

20 of 132
28 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 1 of 5
(Page 133 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 2 of 5
(Page 134 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 3 of 5
(Page 135 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 4 of 5
(Page 136 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 5 of 5
(Page 137 of Total)
1/14/2015
Ocwen, California Regulators Lock Horns - WSJ
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 1 of 3
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers
visit http://www.djreprints.com.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/ocwen-financials-shares-tumble-on-california-concerns-1421178252
MARKETS
Ocwen, California Regulators Lock
Horns
Shares Slide 36% as State Says Mortgage Servicer Hasnt Produced Requested Documents;
Ocwen Says It Has Complied
By JAMES STERNGOLD
Updated Jan. 13, 2015 11:35 p.m. ET
Ocwen Financial Corp. is facing a new front in its long-running battle with regulators.
Already reeling from a lengthy fight with New Yorks top financial regulator, Ocwen on
Tuesday pushed back against charges in California that it had failed to produce
required documents in an examination of its mortgage-servicing practices. Investors
reacted negatively to the latest headache and pushed Ocwens stock down 36%.
RELATED STORIES
Erbeys Exit Ends Heady Era at Ocwen (http://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-financial-regulatorannounces-settlement-with-ocwen-1419257065)
Timeline: Ocwens Regulatory Troubles (http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/12/22/ocwens-regulatorytroubles-a-timeline)
Rules That Aided Ocwen Now Contribute to Woes (http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/12/23/rules-thataided-ocwen-now-contribute-to-woes/?KEYWORDS=ocwen)
Californias Department of Business Oversight began a routine examination of Ocwen

at the beginning of 2013, then engaged in more than a year of confidential disputes
over Ocwens alleged failure to provide all the requested records, according to an
October state court filing.
The state regulator issued a subpoena in March 2014, and then when Ocwen still failed
to respond properly, the state filed civil charges in a state administrative court in
(Page 138 of Total)

1/3
1/14/2015
USCA
Caseto#14-5265
Documentlicense
#1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page
2 of 3
October
seeking
suspend Ocwens
to do business
in California,
its largest
market. Those charges listed more than a dozen occasions when California requested
the records or when Ocwen allegedly provided just a portion.

The bottom line is they have engaged in serial failures to give us the information that
was requested, said Tom Dresslar, an agency spokesman. They came in with dribs
and drabs and repeatedly failed to give us what we need to ensure they are in
compliance.
He said the state was still seeking to suspend Ocwen, but Ocwen countered the
assertions Tuesday, saying it is cooperating fully and had already complied with the
demands.
We have dedicated substantial resources toward satisfying the DBOs requests,
Ronald Faris, Ocwens chief executive officer, said in a statement. We believe we have
provided the requested information in the format requested. We expect that we will
receive follow-up requests or clarifications and that further document and
information exchanges may take place.
He added, We expect our ongoing cooperation will result in a satisfactory outcome for
all parties.
Mr. Dresslar rejected the statement. Wrong, he said when asked if indeed Ocwen had
provided all the records. No.
The requested records relate to Ocwens main business, the servicing of mortgages,
mostly for distressed homeowners. They were sought as part of a routine examination
to make sure the company was complying with a law protecting homeowners going
through foreclosures, loan modifications and other legal procedures, Mr. Dresslar
said.
The problems with California follow a series of investigations and penalties by New
York state regulators over Ocwens practices regarding distressed mortgage
borrowers and relations with its affiliated companies. New York penalized Ocwen $150
million and, in December, forced the companys executive chairman and largest
shareholder, William Erbey, to resign
The stock, which closed at $7.78 Tuesday, has fallen about 86% in the past year.
With Ocwens California issue, reported earlier in the Los Angeles Times, if Ocwen
(Page 139 of Total)

2/3
1/14/2015
USCA
Case #14-5265
Document
#1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
3 ofto
3
ultimately
doesn't
or cannot satisfy
the
regulators demands,
it could bePage
forced
transfer its mortgage servicing rights in the state to other companies, said Mr.
Dresslar. He said the next hearing before the administrative judge is scheduled for
July.
Bose George, an analyst with Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, said that, while burdensome,
he thought Ocwen would eventually resolve the problem with California, though it
could prove costly.
Others weren't so sure. The continued regulatory problems and failure to reform have
undermined market confidence in the company to the point that it is raised concerns
about whether it can continue as an independent operation, said Kevin Barker, an
analyst at Compass Point Research & Trading LLC.
I think were at that point, Mr. Barker said. These accusations are having serious
and far-reaching implications for this company, Mr. Barker said.
Mr. George said the new disclosure raised a potentially serious problem of whether
Ocwen should have reported the subpoena from California earlier, when it was issued.
Companies are normally required to disclose all material matters that can affect
operations or their stocks.
While companies are normally required to disclose important regulatory issues that
can have a material impact on their operations or stock price, Ocwen hasnt made any
disclosures about the demands of California or the threat to suspend its license before
today.
This does look material, said Mr. George.
Ocwen declined to comment specifically on its disclosures.
Write to James Sterngold at james.sterngold@wsj.com
Copyright 2014 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by
copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com.
(Page 140 of Total)

3/3
1/14/2015
Rules That Aided Ocwen Now Contribute to Woes - MoneyBeat - WSJ
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
1 of
3
News, Quotes,Page
Companies,
Videos
SEARCH
Log In
MARKETS & FINANCE
DEALS
MARKETS
HOT TOPICS:
INVERSIONS
4:12 pm ET
Dec 23, 2014
FEDERAL RESERVE
BANKS
VOLATILITY
EUROPE
COMMODITIES
Inv estors Get

Commodities
Super-Slump Jitters
Morning
Money Beat: The
Markets Really
Swinging Now
PRIVATE EQUITY
ARGENTINA
HIGH-FREQUENCY TRADING
BANKRUPTCY
SELECT A REGION:
GLOBAL
ECONOMY & BUSINESS
Rules That Aided Ocwen Now

Contribute to Woes
ARTICLE
HEDGE FUNDS
GO
SEARCH MONEYBEAT
COMMENTS
MORTGAGE-SERVICING
MORTGAGES
NEW YORK
OCWEN
12
REGULATORS
SETTLEMENT
SUBPRIME MORTGAGES
48
By A LA N ZIB E L
WASHINGTONOcwen Financial Corp.s rapid growthand subsequent troublesstem in

part from new rules that have pushed many banks out of the business of collecting
borrowers loan payments.
Big banks have gotten out of the mortgage-servicing business in the face of post-crisis
rules imposed by regulators to prevent the kinds of problems that plagued troubled
borrowers in 2008. The regulations require banks to ensure the proper treatment of
borrowers, including written notices of alternatives to foreclosure, and to hold larger
amounts of capital if they engage in mortgage-servicing.
Recommended
postbusinesses from banks like
x Goldman
Ocwen swooped in to buy mortgage
servicing
Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley MS -2.28% , which sold off their troubled
Fear Gauge Spikes,
subprime mortgage-servicing businesses. In addition, Ocwen and other companies have
Amid Talk of Old
picked up mortgage-servicing assets from banks that remain big mortgage industry
Normal for Stock
players.
Market
The company, which reached a $150 million settlement with a New York regulator this
week over allegations of mistreating homeowners, grew to become the fourth-largest
player in the U.S. mortgage-servicing industry in the third quarter of 2014, from the 16th
largest in 2010, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, a trade publication in Bethesda,
Md. As of the third quarter, Ocwen had $401 billion in mortgage-servicing assets and a
4.1% market share.
The shift of mortgage servicing into nonbanks has prompted some worries among
federal regulators given companies like Ocwen dont have the same financing or
oversight requirements as banks. While state-level regulators and the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau have some power over such non-bank mortgage servicers
many of them are not currently subject to prudential standards such as capital, liquidity,
or risk management oversight, the Financial Stability Oversight Council said in a report
this summer.
Mortgage investors ability to collect on mortgages is dependent on a single mortgage
servicing company, where failure could have significant negative consequences for
market participants, the report said.
New York officials, in their consent agreement with Ocwen, highlighted evidence of the
companys rapid growth. The company used a patchwork of legacy systems and
systems inherited from acquired companies, many of which are incompatible, the order
said. A frequent occurrence is that a fix to one system creates unintended
consequences in other systems.
Popular Now
What's This?
'Facebook At Work'
Hits App Stores
TurboTax's Increased
Cost Has Some
Users Fuming
Why It Might Be Time

To Refinance Your
Mortgage
Robots to Greet
Customers at
Japanese Bank
Why Google Didn't

Sign Obama-Backed
Student Privacy
Pledge
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/12/23/rules-that-aided-ocwen-now-contribute-to-woes/?KEYWORDS=ocwen
Show 5 More
(Page 141 of Total)

1/3
1/14/2015
Ocwen gives
borrowers
or outdated information,
sends#1532155
borrowers backdated
USCA
Caseincorrect
#14-5265
Document
letters, unreliably tracks data for investors, and maintains inaccurate records, the
regulator said.
Isaac Boltansky, a Washington analyst with Compass Point Research and Trading, said
the sale of mortgage-servicing assets to non-bank firms is an example of how some of
the new regulations imposed under the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial law have done little to
reduce financial-system risks.
There are clear instances where the law has simply increased the size of the nonbank
space, he said.
As a non-bank , Ocwen does not have a base of deposits. But unlike banks, mortgage
servicers have been able to operate after filing for bankruptcy protection.
Ally Financial Inc.s former mortgage subsidiary, Residential Capital LLC, filed for
Chapter 11 bankruptcy in May 2012 . Later that year, Ocwen and another non-bank
servicer purchased Residential Capitals mortgage servicing assets for $3 billion.
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 2 of 3
Investment Banking Scorecard

Updated January 14, 2015
The Dealogic and WSJ scorecard breaks down the investment

banking industry by region, product, bank and sector.
Below shows year-on-year global volume and top 10 banks in $
billions and global investment banking revenue and top 10 banks
in $ millions:
Equity Capital Markets
$18.9
25%
Debt Capital Markets
$193.8
-28%
Investment Banking Revenue
$1,486.1
-28%
MONEYBEAT HOME PAGE
ECM
DCM
IB
ECM Bookrunner Ranking

SPONSORED RESULTS
Softspots Supremes
Latest Fashion Trends
Clothing Shopping
Men's Formal Wear
Fashion Accessories
Fashion Designer Job
Top 10 Fashion Magazines
Prom Dresses
Classic Women's Clothing
Party Dresses
Goldman Sachs
Morgan Stanley
JPMorgan
Citi
BofA Merrill Lynch
Deutsche Bank
UBS
Credit Suisse
Barclays
HSBC
In billions $0
$25
$50
$75
$100
Source: Dealogic
The MoneyBeat Team

Stephen
Grocer
Editor
Phillipa
Leighton-Jones
European Editor
Erik Holm
Deputy Editor
Maureen Farrell
Reporter
New York
Paul Vigna
Reporter
New York
David Cottle
Reporter
London
MoneyBeat Columnists
Ronald
Barusch
Dealpolitik
Francesco
Guerrera
Current Account
Alen Mattich
Jason Zweig
The Intelligent
Investor
(Page 142 of Total)

2/3
1/14/2015
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 3 of 3
Michael J.
Casey
Horizons
E.S. Browning
Newsletters
Morning MoneyBeat U.S.
Morning MoneyBeat Europe
Morning MoneyBeat Asia

SIGN UP
Symbols and Alerts
Wall Street
Facebook
Journal
Twitter LinkedInFourSquare
Google+Y ouTube
Podcasts
RSS Feed
AppStore
Manage Email Preferences
Subscribe / Login
Back to Top
Customer Service
Policy
Advertise
Tools & Features
More
Customer Center
Privacy Policy
Advertise
Apps
Why Subscribe
New! Live Help
Cookie Policy
Place a Classified Ad
Emails & Alerts
Register for Free
Contact Us
Data Policy
Sell Your Home
Graphics
Reprints
WSJ Weekend
Copyright Policy
Sell Your Business
Columns
Content Partnerships
Contact Directory
Subscriber Agreement
& Terms of Use
Commercial Real Estate Ads
Topics
Conferences
Recruitment & Career Ads
Guides
News Archive
Franchising
Portfolio
Jobs at WSJ
Advertise Locally
Old Portfolio
Corrections
Your Ad Choices
Copyright 2014 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
(Page 143 of Total)

3/3
1/14/2015
Ocwens Regulatory Troubles: A Timeline - MoneyBeat - WSJ
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
1 of
3
News, Quotes,Page
Companies,
Videos
SEARCH
Log In
MARKETS & FINANCE
DEALS
MARKETS
HOT TOPICS:
INVERSIONS
9:00 am ET
Dec 22, 2014
BANKS
FEDERAL RESERVE
VOLATILITY
EUROPE
COMMODITIES
Inv estors Get

Commodities
Super-Slump Jitters
Morning
Money Beat: The
Markets Really
Swinging Now
PRIVATE EQUITY
ARGENTINA
HEDGE FUNDS
HIGH-FREQUENCY TRADING
BANKRUPTCY
SELECT A REGION:
GLOBAL
REGULATORY
Ocwens Regulatory Troubles: A

Timeline
ARTICLE
GO
SEARCH MONEYBEAT
COMMENTS (9)
BENJAMIN LAWSKY
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
56
20
12
OCWEN
By A LA N ZIB E L
Mortgage servicer Ocwen Financial Corp. OCN -10.03% grew rapidly after the financial
crisis, but ran into trouble with New York officials, state attorneys general and the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau over the treatment of homeowners and other
issues.
A timeline of events:
September 2011: New York states superintendent of financial services, Benjamin M.
Lawsky, reaches a pact with Goldman Sachs Group Inc. approving the sale of its
mortgage servicing business to Ocwen Financial Corp., with new standards to prevent
foreclosure abuses.
November 2011: Mr. Lawsky approves
the sale of Morgan Stanley MS -2.28% s
mortgage servicing business to Ocwen,
imposes similar foreclosure abuse
conditions.
October 2012: Ocwen agrees to pay
$750 million in cash and stock to acquire
Homeward Residential Holdings Inc, a
lender and servicer.
Popular Now
'Facebook At Work'
Hits App Stores
TurboTax's Increased
Cost Has Some
Users Fuming
Why It Might Be Time

To Refinance Your
Mortgage
Robots to Greet
Customers at
Japanese Bank
Why Google Didn't

Sign Obama-Backed
Student Privacy
Pledge
Mr. Law sky Reuters
December 2012: Mr. Lawsky, citing

alleged violations of the 2011 agreement,
refuses to approve Ocwens plans to approve to buy Homeward Residential and the
mortgage-servicing unit of Residential Capital LLC, demanding that Ocwen bring on a
monitor to oversee the companys mortgage operations. Mr. Lawsky later approves to
the Homeward and Residential Capital deals after Ocwen agrees to put the monitor in
place.
What's This?
December 2013: Ocwen reaches a $2.1 billion settlement with the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau and 49 states over alleged homeowner abuses.
February 2014: Mr. Lawsky blocks Ocwens plans to buy the rights to collect
payments on $39 billion of loans from Wells Fargo WFC -1.16% & Co., citing concerns
about the companys rapid growth. Mr. Lawsky also says he is examining Ocwens
relationships with affiliated firms, saying he has uncovered potential conflicts of interest.
August 2014: Mr. Lawsky alleges that Ocwen earned as much as $65 million a year from
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/12/22/ocwens-regulatory-troubles-a-timeline/
Show 5 More
(Page 144 of Total)

1/3
1/14/2015
distressed
homeowners
by routing
home insurance
fees to affiliated
companies; Ocwen
USCA
Case
#14-5265
Document
#1532155
says it will restate earnings due to accounting problems and discloses Securities and
Exchange Commission investigation of dealings with related companies.
October 2014: Mr. Lawsky says Ocwen backdated thousands of letters to borrowers
that prevented them from being able to promptly correct problem loans. Ocwen
apologizes. Ocwen sets aside $100 million for New York settlement.
November 2014: Ocwen, Wells Fargo cancel planned sale of mortgage-servicing
business.
December 2014: Ocwen criticized by mortgage-settlement watchdog over its compliance
with the 2012 mortgage-practices settlement.
December 2014: Ocwen Executive Chairman William Erbey agrees to step down as
part of $150 million settlement with Mr. Lawsky.
MONEYBEAT HOME PAGE
56
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 2 of 3
Investment Banking Scorecard

Updated January 14, 2015
The Dealogic and WSJ scorecard breaks down the investment

banking industry by region, product, bank and sector.
Below shows year-on-year global volume and top 10 banks in $
billions and global investment banking revenue and top 10 banks
in $ millions:
Equity Capital Markets
$18.9
25%
Debt Capital Markets
$193.8
-28%
Investment Banking Revenue
$1,486.1
-28%
12
ECM
DCM
IB
SPONSORED RESULTS
Celebrity Clothing
Carhartt Union Suit
Special Occasion Dresses
Classic Women's Clothing
Top Fashion Magazines
Formal Gowns
ECM Bookrunner Ranking

Goldman Sachs
Morgan Stanley
JPMorgan
Citi
BofA Merrill Lynch
Ethnic Clothing For Women
Top 10 Fashion Magazines
Party Dresses
Cute Plus Size Clothes
Deutsche Bank
UBS
Credit Suisse
Barclays
HSBC
In billions $0
$25
$50
$75
$100
Source: Dealogic
The MoneyBeat Team

Stephen
Grocer
Editor
Phillipa
Leighton-Jones
European Editor
Erik Holm
Deputy Editor
Maureen Farrell
Reporter
New York
Paul Vigna
Reporter
New York
David Cottle
Reporter
London
MoneyBeat Columnists
Ronald
Barusch
Dealpolitik
Francesco
Guerrera
Current Account
Alen Mattich
Jason Zweig
The Intelligent
Investor
(Page 145 of Total)

2/3
1/14/2015
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 3 of 3
Michael J.
Casey
Horizons
E.S. Browning
Newsletters
Morning MoneyBeat U.S.
Morning MoneyBeat Europe
Morning MoneyBeat Asia

SIGN UP
Symbols and Alerts
Wall Street
Facebook
Journal
Twitter LinkedInFourSquare
Google+Y ouTube
Podcasts
RSS Feed
AppStore
Manage Email Preferences
Subscribe / Login
Back to Top
Customer Service
Policy
Advertise
Tools & Features
More
Customer Center
Privacy Policy
Advertise
Apps
Why Subscribe
New! Live Help
Cookie Policy
Place a Classified Ad
Emails & Alerts
Register for Free
Contact Us
Data Policy
Sell Your Home
Graphics
Reprints
WSJ Weekend
Copyright Policy
Sell Your Business
Columns
Content Partnerships
Contact Directory
Subscriber Agreement
& Terms of Use
Commercial Real Estate Ads
Topics
Conferences
Recruitment & Career Ads
Guides
News Archive
Franchising
Portfolio
Jobs at WSJ
Advertise Locally
Old Portfolio
Corrections
Your Ad Choices
Copyright 2014 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
(Page 146 of Total)

3/3
USCA Case #14-5265
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 1 of 6
MARY ANN SMITH

Deputy Commissioner
SEAN ROONEY
Assistant Chief Counsel
ALEX M. CALERO (CA STATE BAR NO. 238389)
Corporations Counsel
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS OVERSIGHT
1350 Front Street, Room 2034
San Diego, California 92101
Telephone: (619) 525-4044
Facsimile: (619) 525-4045
Attorneys for the Complainant
State of California - Department of Business Oversight
8
9
BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS OVERSIGHT
10
OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
13
In the Matter of the Accusation of THE

COMMISSIONER OF BUSINESS
OVERSIGHT,
Complainant,
14
15
16
17
vs.
File No.: 413-0544

ACCUSATION IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE
OF INTENT TO ISSUE AN ORDER
SUSPENDING RESIDENTIAL
MORTGAGE LENDER AND LOAN
SERVICER LICENSE
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC,

Respondent.
18
19
The Commissioner of Business Oversight (Commissioner and Complainant), in her
20
capacity as head of the California Department of Business Oversight, formerly the Department of
21
Corporations (Department), is informed and believes and based upon such information and belief
22
alleges and charges as follows:
23
I.
24
BACKGROUND
25
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC (Ocwen) is a residential mortgage lender and loan servicer
26
licensed by the Commissioner pursuant to the California Residential Mortgage Lending Act
27
("CRMLA") (Cal. Fin. Code 50000 et seq.). Ocwen has its principal place of business located at
28
1661 Worthington Road, Suite 100, West Palm Beach, Florida, 33409. In California, Ocwen has a
-1ACCUSATION IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE AN ORDER SUSPENDING
RESIDENTIAL
(Page
147 of Total)
MORTGAGE LENDER AND LOAN SERVICER LICENSE
USCA Case #14-5265
1
2
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 2 of 6
branch office located at 2255 North Ontario Street, Suite 400, Burbank, California, 91504.
In December 2014, Ocwen reported that it was servicing more than $90 billion in mortgage
loans and had foreclosed on more than 2500 borrowers during the previous year.
II.
REGULATORY EXAMINATION AND ORDER TO DISCONTINUE VIOLATIONS
Pursuant to California Financial Code section 50302, the Commissioner is required to
examine the records, documents and affairs of each licensee under the CRMLA to ensure compliance
with the law. California Financial Code section 50314 requires a licensee to keep records and
documents that will properly enable the Commissioner to determine whether the licensee is in
10
compliance with the law.
11
On or about January 8, 2013, the Commissioner commenced a regulatory examination of
12
Ocwen through her examination staff. On October 15, 2013, the Commissioners examination staff
13
made additional written requests for documents and information to Ocwen, to ensure its compliance
14
with the recently enacted California Homeowners Bill of Rights (HBOR), a package of
15
amendments to the California Civil Code that became law on January 1, 2013. Ocwen failed to
16
produce all of the requested documentation and information.
17
On February 7, 2014, the Department by letter made additional written requests to Ocwen for
18
documentation and information. The February 7, 2014 request, in large part, seeks production of
19
documents which should have been produced in response to the Commissioners January 8, 2013 and
20
October 15, 2013 requests. Ocwen was given a deadline of February 25, 2014 to produce the
21
documentation and information.
22
On February 25, 2014, Ocwen produced a portion of the documentation called for in the
23
February 7, 2014 request. Ocwen informed the Department that it would be producing further
24
documentation and, on March 7, 2014, Ocwen produced additional documentation.
25
The Department contacted Ocwen on March 10, 11 and 12, 2014 to inquire whether the
26
February 25, 2014 and March 7, 2014 productions consist of all of the documentation called for in the
27
Departments February 7, 2014 request. Ocwen did not respond to the Departments inquiries. The
28
documentation produced by Ocwen in response to the Departments February 7, 2014 request is

RESIDENTIAL
(Page
148 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 3 of 6
incomplete.
Based on Ocwens failure to produce all documentation and information called for in the
Departments February 7, 2014 request, on March 12, 2014, the Commissioner issued an
administrative subpoena duces tecum requesting documentation and information from Ocwen. The
documentation requested in the administrative subpoena duces tecum is almost identical to the
documentation called for in the Departments February 7, 2014 request. Ocwen was given a deadline
of March 21, 2014 to produce the documentation and information.
8
9
Document #1532155
On March 22, 2014, Ocwen produced a portion of the documentation called for in the
subpoena duces tecum.
10
On April 22, 2014, representatives of Ocwen and the Commissioner took part in a conference
11
call regarding the deficiencies in Ocwens production of documentation. Ocwen agreed to produce
12
additional documentation and information.
13
14
On April 24, 2014, Ocwen produced a portion of the documentation discussed during the
April 22, 2014 conference call.
15
On May 1, 2014, the Department informed Ocwen that Ocwens latest production is
16
incomplete. The Department requested that Ocwen produce the outstanding documentation and
17
information by May 5, 2014, or the Commissioner may issue administrative orders and file a petition
18
in California Superior Court to compel Ocwen to comply with the ongoing examination and
19
administrative subpoena duces tecum.
20
21
On May 5, 2014, Ocwen produced a portion of the outstanding documentation and

information called for in the subpoena duces tecum.
22
Based on the above, on June 16, 2014, the Commissioner issued an Order to Discontinue
23
Violations, pursuant to California Financial Code section 50321, to Ocwen. The Order to Discontinue
24
Violations was issued as a result of Ocwens failure to produce documentation and information upon
25
request of the Commissioner and within the time period specified that would properly enable the
26
Commissioner to determine whether Ocwen is properly performing residential mortgage loan
27
servicing functions, in violation of California Financial Code section 50314. The Order to
28
Discontinue Violations required Ocwen to immediately cease the violation set forth above and
RESIDENTIAL
(Page
149 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 4 of 6
immediately produce all books and records requested by the Commissioner by June 26, 2014.
On June 16, 2014, Ocwen was served with the Order to Discontinue Violations. Ocwen did
not request a hearing to challenge the Order to Discontinue Violations and the Order to Discontinue
Violations is now final.
5
6
Document #1532155
After service of the Order to Discontinue Violations, Ocwen produced a portion of the
outstanding documentation and information.
On August 4, 2014, representatives of Ocwen and the Commissioner took part in a meeting
regarding Ocwens production of documentation. As a result of discussions during the meeting, it
became apparent that Ocwen had not produced all outstanding documentation by June 26, 2014, as
10
directed in the Order to Discontinue Violations.
11
III.
12
JUNE 16, 2014 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
13
As a part of the Commissioners regulatory examination, on June 16, 2014, the Department by
14
letter requested a loan servicing report and other information from Ocwen. The letter required that the
15
report and information be produced within five (5) days from the date of the letter. Further, the letter
16
informed Ocwen that failure to produce the requested report and information may lead to the
17
Commissioner taking adverse action against Ocwens license.
18
19
On June 26, 2014, ten (10) days after the Departments June 16, 2014 letter, Ocwen produced
a portion of the information requested in the Departments letter.
20
On July 10, 2014, representatives of Ocwen and the Commissioner took part in a conference
21
call to obtain clarification on the documentation and information produced by Ocwen. As confirmed
22
by discussions during the conference call, Ocwen had still not produced all the information called for
23
in the June 16, 2014 letter.
24
On July 11, 2004, the Department by letter notified Ocwen that as a result of Ocwens failure
25
to produce all matters requested in the June 16, 2014 letter, within the five (5) day time frame, Ocwen
26
shall forfeit to the Commissioner a sum of one hundred dollars ($100) for every day, beginning July
27
11, 2014, up to ten (10) days, that date being July 20, 2014, until Ocwen produces all of the matters
28
requested. The letter further informed Ocwen that if it fails to produce all matters requested by 8:00
RESIDENTIAL
(Page
150 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed: 01/15/2015
Page 5 of 6
a.m. on July 21, 2014, this failure shall constitute grounds for the suspension or revocation of
Ocwens license pursuant to California Financial Code section 50327.
On July 21, 2014, Ocwen produced a portion of the outstanding information called for in the
June 16, 2014 letter. On July 22, 2014, Ocwen made a further production of requested information.
To date, Ocwen has not produced a complete report containing all of the information requested.
IV.
JULY 31, 2014 AND AUGUST 5, 2014 REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION
On July 31, 2014 and August 5, 2014, the Department by letters requested loan servicing
reports from Ocwen for a sample of 1200 and 120 loans, respectively. The letters required that the
10
reports be produced by August 15, 2014, in preparation for an on-site examination of Ocwen to
11
commence on August 18, 2014. Both letters informed Ocwen that failure to produce the requested
12
information may lead to the Commissioner taking adverse action against Ocwens license.
13
Ocwen did not produce the requested information by August 15, 2018. Instead, on August 18,
14
2014, Ocwen produced a portion of the information requested in the July 31, 2014 and August 5,
15
2014 letters and informed the Department that the remaining information would be produced at a
16
later date.
17
On August 18, 2014, the Department by letter notified Ocwen that as a result of Ocwens
18
failure to produce all matters requested in the July 31, 2014 and August 5, 2014 letters, by the August
19
15, 2014 deadline, Ocwen shall forfeit to the Commissioner a sum of one hundred dollars ($100) for
20
every day, beginning August 18, 2014, up to ten (10) days, that date being August 27, 2014, until
21
Ocwen produces all of the matters requested. The letter further informed Ocwen that if it fails to
22
produce all matters required by 8:00 a.m. on August 28, 2014, this failure shall constitute ground for
23
the suspension or revocation of Ocwens license pursuant to California Financial Code section 50327.
24
Since August 28, 2014, Ocwen has made some partial productions of the information
25
requested in the July 31, 2014 and August 5, 2014 letters. However, to date, Ocwen has still not
26
produced all matters requested.
27
///
28
///
RESIDENTIAL
(Page
151 of Total)
USCA Case #14-5265
Filed: 01/15/2015
V.
LAW
Page 6 of 6
Section 50326 of the California Financial Code provides, in relevant part, that:
If any licensee fails to do any of the following, the licensee shall forfeit to the people
of the state a sum of up to one hundred dollars ($100) for every day up to the 10th day:
(a) to make any report required by law or by the commissioner within 10 days from
the day designated for the making of the report . . . or (b) fails to include therein any
matter required by law or by the commissioner. Thereafter, any failure shall constitute
grounds for the suspension or revocation of the license held by the residential
mortgage lender or residential mortgage loan servicer.
5
6
7
8
9
Document #1532155
10
11
12
13
14
(Cal. Fin. Code 50326.)

Section 50327 of the California Financial Code provides that:
(a) The commissioner may, after notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard,
deny, decline to renew, suspend, or revoke any license if the commissioner finds that:
(1) The licensee has violated any provision of this division or any rule or order of the
commissioner thereunder; or (2) any fact or condition exists that, if it had existed at
the time of the original application for the license, reasonably would have warranted
the commissioner in refusing to issue the license originally.
(Cal. Fin. Code 50237.)
15
VI.
16
CONCLUSION
17
The Commissioner finds that, by reason of the foregoing, Ocwen has violated Financial Code
18
section 50326 and has violated a prior issued Order to Discontinue Violations and based thereon,
19
grounds exist to suspend the residential mortgage lender and loan servicer license of Ocwen for a
20
period of up to twelve (12) months.
21
WHEREFORE, IT IS PRAYED that the residential mortgage lender and loan servicer license
22
of Ocwen be suspended for a period of up to twelve (12) months.
23
Dated: October 3, 2014

San Diego, CA
24
JAN LYNN OWEN

Commissioner of Business Oversight
25
26
27
28
By: ___________________________
ALEX M. CALERO
Senior Corporations Counsel
Enforcement Division
RESIDENTIAL
(Page
152 of Total)
USCACase
Case2:14-cv-02597-MCE-DAD
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
Document 1 Filed
Page 1
of 431 of 43
1 Daniel Alberstone (SBN 105275)

dalberstone@baronbudd.com
2 Roland Tellis (SBN 186269)
rtellis@baronbudd.com
3 Mark Pifko (SBN 228412)
mpifko@baronbudd.com
4 Michael Isaac Miller (SBN 266459)
5 imiller@baronbudd.com
BARON & BUDD, P.C.
6 15910 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1600
Encino, California 91436
7 Telephone: (818) 839-2333
8 Facsimile: (818) 986-9698
9 Additional Counsel Identified Below
10 Attorneys for Plaintiff
DAVID WEINER, individually, and on
11 behalf of other members of the public
12 similarly situated
13
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
Case Number:
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR:
(1) Violations of Californias Unfair
Competition Law (Cal. Bus. & Prof.
18
Plaintiff,
Code 17200 et seq.);
vs.
(2) Violations of the Racketeer
19
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
20 OCWEN FINANCIAL CORPORATION,
Act (18 U.S.C. 1962(c));
a Florida corporation, and OCWEN LOAN
SERVICING,
LLC,
a
Delaware
limited
21
(3) Violations of the Racketeer
liability company,
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
22
Act (18 U.S.C. 1962(d));
Defendants.
23
(4) Violations of the Rosenthal fair Debt
Collection Practices Act (Cal. Civ.
24
Code 1788, et seq.);
25
(5) Unjust Enrichment
26
(6) Fraud; and
(7) Breach of Contract
27
Jury Trial Demanded
28
16 DAVID WEINER, individually, and on
behalf of other members of the public
17 similarly situated,
28
30
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
(Page 153 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
Document 1 Filed
Page 2
of 432 of 43
For his complaint against Ocwen Financial Corporation (OFC) and Ocwen Loan
2 Servicing, LLC (OLS) (collectively Ocwen or Defendants), Plaintiff David

3 Weiner (Plaintiff), individually, and on behalf of all other members of the public
4 similarly situated, based on information and belief, alleges as follows:
5
6
NATURE OF THE ACTION

1.
This case concerns fraudulent practices committed by Ocwen in connection
7 with its home mortgage loan servicing business. Taking advantage of the economic
8 downturn and the increasing number of loans in default, Ocwen devised a scheme to
9 deceive homeowners who are behind on their mortgage payments into paying, or
10 believing they have to pay, hundreds or thousands of dollars in unlawfully marked-up
11 fees.
12
2.
Ocwen uses an enterprise of affiliated companies, including Altisource
13 Portfolio Solutions S.A. (Altisource) -- a wholly-owned subsidiary of OFC until 2009,

14 when it was spun-off into a separate company -- to engage in its scheme to disguise
15 hidden, marked-up fees so that it could earn additional, undisclosed profits. Through this
16 unlawful enterprise, Ocwen assesses homeowners fees for services performed by vendors,
17 which are unlawfully marked up, often by 100% or more.
18
3.
More specifically, when home mortgage borrowers get behind on their
19 payments and go into default, Ocwen obtains a number of default-related services

20 which purportedly are designed to protect the lenders interest in the property. To obtain
21 these services, Ocwen funnels the work through its affiliated company, Altisource, who
22 then orders these services using a network of third-party vendors. As a matter of practice,
23 Altisource marks up the third-party vendors actual cost for their services, and then,
24 passes along the marked-up charge to Ocwen. Without disclosing the mark-up, Ocwen, in
25 turn, assesses the marked-up fees for these default-related service on homeowners
26 accounts.
27
4.
Ocwen is well-aware that its marked-up fees violate the disclosures made in
28 homeowners mortgage contracts because the fees exceed the actual cost of the default28
30
(Page 154 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
Document 1 Filed
Page 3
of 433 of 43
related services, so when Ocwen collects, or attempts to collect, such fees, it is not merely
being paid back, or collecting amounts disbursed, nor are such fees reasonable and
appropriate to protect the note holders interest in the property and rights under the deed
of trust. Nevertheless, through this fraudulent scheme, Ocwen is able to quietly profit
from default-related service fees at the expense of distressed homeowners -- a particularly
vulnerable class of consumers who are struggling to keep their homes.
5.
Ocwens fraudulent loan servicing practices are designed to avoid detection,
even when examined in bankruptcy proceedings. As one court has explained, [l]enders
have apparently been operating under the assumption that the fees and costs in their
10
proofs of claim are invulnerable to challenge because debtors lack the sophistication, the
11
debtors bar lacks the financial motivation, and bankruptcy courts lack the time. . . .[T]he
12
Court believes that certain members of the mortgage industry are intentionally attempting
13
to game the system by requesting undocumented and potentially excessive fees.1
14
6.
This type of rampant abuse by mortgage servicers like Ocwen has led federal
15
regulators to enter into numerous consent orders, but according to Mark Pearce, Director,
16
Division of Depositor and Consumer Protection, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation:2
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
In re: Prevo, 394 B.R. 847, 848, 851 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 2008) (emphasis added).
28
See Mark Pearce, Director, Division of Depositor and Consumer Protection, Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, Mortgage Servicing: An Examination of the Role of
Federal Regulators in Settlement Negotiations and the Future of Mortgage Servicing
Standards, before the Subcommittees on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit, and
Oversight and Investigations Committee on Financial Services, U.S. House of
Representatives, July 7, 2011, available at
http://financialservices.house.gov/UploadedFiles/070711pearce.pdf (last visited, Feb. 1,
2012).
27
24
25
26
27
28
(Page 155 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
Document 1 Filed
Page 4
of 434 of 43
these consent orders do not fully identify and remedy past errors
in mortgage-servicing operations of large institutions; in fact,
the scope of the interagency review did not include a review of
. . . the fees charged in the servicing process. Much work
remains to identify and correct past errors and to ensure that the
servicing process functions effectively, efficiently, and fairly
going forward.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
7.
In addition to marking up fees for default-related services, Ocwen also has a
policy, practice, and procedure of misapplying homeowners payments, which, in turn,

generates fee income and larger profits for Ocwen and its affiliates.
8.
Plaintiff brings this action, seeking injunctive relief and damages on behalf of
himself and the thousands of other homeowners who have been victimized by Ocwens
uniform scheme.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
JURISDICTION AND VENUE

9.
Jurisdiction is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. 1332(d)(2). The matter
in controversy, exclusive of interest and costs, exceeds the sum or value of $5,000,000
and is a class action in which members of the class of plaintiffs are citizens of states
different from Defendants. Further, greater than two-thirds of the members of the Class
reside in states other than the states in which Defendants are citizens.
10.
This Court also has jurisdiction over this matter under 28 U.S.C. 1331,
1961, 1962 and 1964. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants under 18
U.S.C. 1965. In addition, under 28 U.S.C. 1367, this Court may exercise supplemental
jurisdiction over the state law claims because all of the claims are derived from a common
nucleus of operative facts and are such that Plaintiff ordinarily would expect to try them in
one judicial proceeding.
11.
Venue lies within this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(1) and
(c)(2) because Defendants contacts are sufficient to subject them to personal jurisdiction
in this District, and therefore, Defendants reside in this District for purposes of venue, or
under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2) because certain acts giving rise to the claims at issue in this
Complaint occurred, among other places, in this District.
28
27
28
3
(Page 156 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
Document 1 Filed
Page 5
of 435 of 43
PARTIES
12.
Plaintiff David Weiner is an individual and a citizen of California.
13.
Defendant Ocwen Financial Corporation is a corporation organized under the
4
5
laws of Florida, with its principal place of business in Atlanta, Georgia.

14.
Defendant Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC is Delaware limited liability
company, and an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Ocwen Financial Corporation.
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC maintains operations in this District related to the activities
at issue in this case, including operations concerning the management of loans that are in
default, which are conducted from offices located in Burbank, California. Ocwen Loan
10
Servicing, LLCs headquarters are located in West Palm Beach, Florida. It is licensed to
11
service mortgage loans in all fifty states, including California, the District of Columbia,
12
and two U.S. territories.
13
15.
Whenever, in this Complaint, reference is made to any act, deed, or conduct
14
of Defendants committed in connection with the enterprise, the allegation means that
15
Defendants engaged in the act, deed, or conduct by or through one or more of their
16
officers, directors, agents, employees or representatives, each of whom was actively
17
engaged in the management, direction, control or transaction of the ordinary business and
18
affairs of Defendants and the enterprise.
19
16.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon, alleges that, at all
20
material times herein, each of the Defendants was the agent, servant, or employee of the
21
other Defendants, and acted within the purpose, scope, and course of said agency, service,
22
or employment, and with the express or implied knowledge, permission, and consent of
23
the other Defendants, and ratified and approved the acts of the other Defendants.
24
17.
Defendants are the ultimate recipient of the ill-gotten gains described herein.
25
The fraudulent scheme at issue in this case was organized by executives working at the
26
highest levels of Defendants respective companies, and carried out by both executives
27
and subordinate employees working for Defendants.
28
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
27
28
(Page 157 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
Document 1 Filed
Page 6
of 436 of 43
Americas Lending Industry Has Divorced itself

from the Borrowers it Once Served
1
2
3
4
18.
Ocwens unlawful loan servicing practices exemplify how Americas lending
industry has run off the rails.

19.
Traditionally, when people wanted to borrow money, they went to a bank or
a savings and loan. Banks loaned money and homeowners promised to repay the bank,
with interest, over a specific period of time. The originating bank kept the loan on its
balance sheet, and serviced the loan -- processing payments, and sending out applicable
notices and other information -- until the loan was repaid. The originating bank had a
financial interest in ensuring that the borrower was able to repay the loan.
10
20.
Today, however, the process has changed. Mortgages are now packaged,
11
bundled, and sold to investors on Wall Street through what is referred to in the financial
12
industry as mortgage backed securities or MBS. This process is called securitization.
13
Securitization of mortgage loans provides financial institutions with the benefit of
14
immediately being able to recover the amounts loaned. It also effectively eliminates the
15
financial institutions risk from potential default. But, by eliminating the risk of default,
16
mortgage backed securities have disassociated the lending community from homeowners.
17
21.
Numerous unexpected consequences have resulted from the divide between
18
lenders and homeowners. Among other things, securitization has led to the development
19
of an industry of companies which make money primarily through servicing mortgages
20
for the hedge funds and investment houses who own the loans.
21
22.
Loan servicers do not profit directly from interest payments made by
22
homeowners. Instead, these companies are paid a set fee for their loan administration
23
services. Servicing fees are usually earned as a percentage of the unpaid principal balance
24
of the mortgages that are being serviced. A typical servicing fee is approximately 0.50%
25
per year.
26
23.
Additionally, under pooling and servicing agreements (PSAs) with
27
investors and noteholders, loan servicers assess fees on borrowers accounts for default-
28
related services. These fees include, inter alia, Brokers Price Opinion (BPO) fees,
27
28
5
(Page 158 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
Document 1 Filed
Page 7
of 437 of 43
appraisal fees, and title examination fees.
24.
Under this arrangement, a loan servicers primary concern is not ensuring
that homeowners stay current on their loans. Instead, they are focused on minimizing any
costs that would reduce profit from the set servicing fee, and generating as much revenue
as possible from fees assessed against the mortgage accounts they service. As such, their
business model . . . encourages them to cut costs wherever possible, even if [that]
involves cutting corners on legal requirements, and to lard on junk fees and in-sourced
expenses at inflated prices.3
9
10
25.
As one Member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
has explained:
While an investors financial interests are tied more or less
directly to the performance of a loan, the interests of a thirdparty servicer are tied to it only indirectly, at best. The servicer
makes money, to oversimplify it a bit, by maximizing fees
earned and minimizing expenses while performing the actions
spelled out in its contract with the investor. . . . The broad grant
of delegated authority that servicers enjoy under pooling and
servicing agreements (PSAs), combined with an effective lack
of choice on the part of consumers, creates an environment ripe
for abuse.4
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Ocwens Subprime Mortgage Servicing Business Grows Rapidly, and

Draws the Attention of Regulators
18
26.
19
Seeking to capitalize on these circumstances, Ocwen has positioned itself as
a major player in the residential mortgage servicing industry. In fact, Ocwen was the
20
21
22
23
24
25
See Adam J. Levitin, Robo-Singing, Chain of Title, Loss Mitigation, and Other Issues in
Mortgage Servicing, before the House Financial Services Committee, Subcommittee on
Housing and Community Opportunity, Nov. 18, 2010, available at
http://financialservices.house.gov/Media/file/hearings/111/Levitin111810.pdf (last visited
Feb. 1, 2012).
4
28
See Sarah Bloom Raskin, Member Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System,
Remarks at the National Consumer Law Centers Consumer Rights Litigation Conference,
Boston Massachusetts, Nov. 12, 2010, available at
www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/raskin20101112a.htm (last visited Jan. 23,
2012).
27
26
27
28
(Page 159 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
Document 1 Filed
Page 8
of 438 of 43
fourth largest mortgage servicer in the United States in 2013, collecting payments on
nearly one out of every twenty home loans.5
27.
As larger banks have shifted their attention to servicing the mortgage loans of
their core customers -- i.e., prime loan borrowers who use their lending banks other
services -- Ocwen has focused on servicing loans obtained by non-prime, or credit
impaired, borrowers.
7
8
28.
Elaborating on the tremendous growth in its servicing business in recent
years, Ocwen states:

Our residential servicing portfolio has grown from 351,595
residential loans with an aggregate [unpaid principal balance
(UPB)] of $50.0 billion at December 31, 2009, to 2,861,918
residential loans with an aggregate UPB of $464.7 billion at
December 31, 2013. Through acquisitions, we have substantially
increased the share of our servicing portfolio that is made up of
conventional (loans conforming to the underwriting standards of
the government sponsored entities, the Federal National
Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) or the Federal Home Loan
Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) (collectively, the GSEs
and Agency), government insured (loans insured by the Federal
Housing Authority (FHA) of the Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) or Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) (collectively, government insured)) and prime non-Agency
loans (loans generally conforming to the underwriting standards
of the GSEs whose UPB exceeds the GSE loan limits,
commonly referred to as jumbo loans). At December 31, 2013,
these loans comprise 56.8% of the UPB of our servicing
portfolio, up from 24.4% at December 31, 2012.6
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
29.
21
Ocwen goes on to explain that [t]he mortgaged properties securing the
residential loans that [they] service are geographically dispersed throughout all 50 states,
22
23
24
25
26
See Karen Freifeld, Peter Rudegeair, and Andrew Hay, NY regulator suspects Ocwen
Financial of possible self-dealing, Reuters, Apr. 21, 2014, available at
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/21/ocwen-financial-letteridUSL2N0ND0R120140421 (last visited, Nov. 5, 2014).
6
28
Ocwen Financial Corp, SEC FORM 10-K (Period Ending Dec. 31, 2013), available at
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/873860/000144530514000799/a2013123110k.ht
m (last visited April 1, 2014).
27
27
28
(Page 160 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
Document 1 Filed
Page 9
of 439 of 43
the District of Columbia and two U.S. territories.7 The five largest concentrations of
properties, comprising approximately 39% of the loans serviced by Ocwen as of
December 31, 2013, are located in California, Florida, New York, Texas and New
Jersey.8 California has the largest concentration with 436,374 loans, approximately 15%
of the total number of loans serviced.9
30.
Fueled by these increases in its residential servicing portfolio, Ocwens
revenue has jumped from $360 million in 2010 to a staggering $2 billion in 2013.10
7
8
31.
Ocwens rapid growth and business practices have not gone unnoticed by
state regulators, including Benjamin Lawsky, Superintendent of New Yorks Department
10
of Financial Services (the Department). As a result of a consent order entered into by
11
Lawskys office and Ocwen in late 2012, a compliance monitor was installed at Ocwen in
12
2013.11 Additionally, on or around February 6, 2014, Lawsky halted indefinitely Wells
13
Fargos transfer of approximately $39 billion in servicing rights to Ocwen. 12
14
32.
Speaking at the annual meeting of the New York Bankers Association in
15
February 2014, Lawsky cautioned that Ocwens explosive growth raises red flags, that
16
he sees corners being cut by non-bank servicers like Ocwen, and that Ocwens use of
17
18
19
20
Id.
Id.
21
Id.
22
10
23
24
25
26
27
28
27
28
James Sterngold and Saabira Chaudhuri, Ocwen to Restate Results After Accounting
Change, The Wall Street Journal, August 12, 2014, available at
http://online.wsj.com/articles/ocwen-financial-to-restate-some-results-1407852143 (last
visited, Nov. 5, 2014).
11
Michael Corkery, State Regulator Halts Deal Between Wells Fargo and Loan Servicer,
N.Y. Times, February 6, 2014, available at http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/02/06/newyork-regulator-halts-mortgage-servicing-rights-deal/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0 (last
visited, Nov. 5, 2014).
12
Id.
8
(Page 161 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
10 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 10
of 43
technology to handle distressed loans is too good to be true.13
33.
Such concerns about Ocwens loan servicing practices are well-founded. For
companies like Ocwen, who are determined to maximize the money they earn from
servicing loans, the right to charge default-related service fees has opened the door to a
world of exploitation.
34.
Taking full advantage of this opportunity for such explotation, Ocwen
formed an unlawful enterprise of affiliated companies, including Altisource, in order to
increase mortgage servicing revenues by fraudulently concealing marked-up fees for
default-related services on homeowners accounts.

Ocwens Tangled Web Of Conflicts and Self-Dealing
with Affiliated Company Altisource
10
11
35.
12
13
14
15
millions of loans it services to computer software programs. The software programs are
designed to manage homeowners loan accounts and assess fees, according to protocols
and policies designed by the executives at Ocwen.
36.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
To maximize profits, Ocwen assigns the complex task of administering the
Prior to August 2009, Ocwens technology platforms were provided by the
Ocwen Solutions line of businesses, which consisted primarily of Ocwens former

unsecured collections and its residential fee-based loan processing businesses. These
businesses provided technological services across the full spectrum of the mortgage
lifecycle, from due diligence and underwriting to default processing and property
preservation, all the way up to collections and customer relationship management. OFC
developed this technology platform over a period of more than 20 years at a cost of more
23
24
25
13
28
Kate Berry, Lawsky Bashes Ocwen, Says Servicers Growth Raises Red Flags,
National Mortgage News, February 12, 2014, available at
http://www.nationalmortgagenews.com/mortgage-servicing/lawsky-bashes-ocwen-saysservicers-growth-raises-red-flags-1041092-1.html?zkPrintable=true (last visited, Nov. 5,
2014).
27
26
27
28
(Page 162 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
11 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 11
of 43
than $150 million.14
37.
In order to allow Ocwen to focus on growing its core servicing business, on
August 10, 2009, Ocwen completed the distribution of the Ocwen Solutions line of
businesses via the spin-off of Altisource.15 As part of the separation, William C. Erbey --
Ocwens Chairman of the Board and the owner of 13% of Ocwens common stock -- also
became the Chairman of the Board for Altisource.16
38.
As of June 30, 2014, Mr. Erbey owns approximately 27% of the common
stock of Altisource.17 He also has taken a very active role in the company. As Altisource
explains in its Form 10-K Statement, its success is dependent upon Mr. Erbeys
10
services, and the loss of his services could have a material adverse effect upon business,
11
operating results and financial conditions.18
12
13
39.
its relationship with Ocwen as a potential risk factor to its business:
14
Given this close and continuing relationship with Ocwen, we

may encounter difficulties in obtaining and retaining other
customers who compete with Ocwen. Should these and other
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
27
28
In fact, Ocwen and Altisource are so interconnected, that Altisource points to
14
Ocwen Financial Corp, SEC FORM 10-K (Period Ending Dec. 31, 2012), available at
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/873860/000101905613000314/ocn_10k12a.htm
(last visited Sept. 9, 2013).
15
Altisource was originally incorporated on November 4, 1999 in Luxembourg as Ocwen

Luxembourg S. r.l. See Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A., SEC FORM 10-K (Period
Ending Dec. 31, 2012), available at http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1462418/
000110465913009969/a13-2839_110k.htm (last visited Sept. 9, 2013). The entity was
renamed Altisource Portfolio Solutions S. r.l. on May 12, 2009, and converted into
Altisource on June 5, 2009. Id. Prior to August 10, 2009, Altisource was a wholly-owned
subsidiary of Ocwen. Id.
16
Id.
17
Ocwen Financial Corp., SEC Form 10-Q (Period Ending June 30, 2014), available at
http://www.housingwire.com/ext/resources/files/Editorial/Documents/SEC-ABEA6F4AAO-873860-14-16.pdf (last visited October 23, 2014).
18
See Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A., SEC FORM 10-K (Period Ending Dec. 31,
2012), available at http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1462418/
000110465913009969/a13-2839_110k.htm (last visited Sept. 9, 2013).
10
(Page 163 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
12 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 12
of 43
potential customers continue to view Altisource as part of

Ocwen or as too closely related to or dependent upon Ocwen,
they may be unwilling to utilize [Altisources] services, and
[Altisources] growth could be inhibited as a result.19
1
2
3
4
40.
This close and continuing relationship between Ocwen and Altisource was
the subject of a letter Benjamin Lawsky, New Yorks top bank regulator, sent to Ocwen
on February 26, 2014. In the letter, Lawsky addressed potential conflicts of interest
between Ocwen and Altisource:
14
The Departments ongoing review of Ocwens mortgage

servicing practices has uncovered a number of potential
conflicts of interest between Ocwen and other public companies
with which Ocwen is closely affiliated. Indeed, the facts our
review has uncovered to date cast serious doubts on recent
public statements made by the company that Ocwen has a
strictly arms-length business relationship with those
companies. We are also concerned that this tangled web of
conflicts could create incentives that harm borrowers and push
homeowners unduly into foreclosure.
15
...
16
Pursuant to the December 4, 2012 Consent Order between

Ocwen and the Department, we have engaged an independent
on-site compliance monitor at Ocwen to conduct a
comprehensive review of Ocwens servicing operations. It is in
the course of the monitorship that we uncovered these potential
conflicts between and among Ocwen, Altisource Portfolio
Solutions, S.A. (Altisource Portfolio), Altisource Residential
Corporation, Altisource Asset Management Corporation, and
Home Loan Servicing Solutions Ltd. (together, the affiliated
companies), all of which are chaired by William C. Erbey, who
is also the largest shareholder of each and the Executive
Chairman of Ocwen.20
8
9
10
11
12
13
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
19
26
20
27
28
27
28
Id.
Letter from Benjamin M. Lawsky, Superintendent of Financial Services, New York

State Department of Financial Services, to Timothy Hayes, General Counsel, Ocwen
Financial Corporation (Feb. 26, 2014), available at
http://www.dfs.ny.gov/about/press2014/pr140226-letter.pdf (last visited, Nov. 5, 2014).
11
(Page 164 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
13 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 13
of 43
41.
Lawskys letter noted that Ocwens management owns stock or stock
options in the affiliated companies, which raises the possibility that management has the
opportunity and incentive to make decisions concerning Ocwen that are intended to
benefit the share price of the affiliated companies, resulting in harm to borrowers,
mortgage investors, or Ocwen shareholders as a result.21
42.
Lawskys review of Ocwens operations revealed that the companys Chief
Risk Officer served in the same role for Altisource, and reported directly to Mr. Erbey in
both capacities.22 As Lawsky explained, Ocwen and Altisources joint Chief Risk
Officer seemed not to appreciate the potential conflicts of interest posed by this dual role,
10
which was particularly alarming given his role as Chief Risk Officer.23 Lawskys letter
11
further explains that the Chief Risk Officer told the on-site compliance monitor that
12
Ocwen paid his entire salary, but he did not know and apparently never asked which
13
company paid his risk management staff.24 Lawsky concluded that, while the Chief Risk
14
Officer has since been removed from his role at Altisource, his and Ocwens failure to
15
affirmatively recognize this conflict demonstrates that the relationship between Ocwen
16
and the affiliated companies warrants further examination.25
17
43.
According to Lawsky, the Departments review of Ocwens mortgage
18
servicing practices . . . also found that Ocwen relies extensively on affiliated companies
19
for its information management system (from the programming of comment codes to
20
functioning as Ocwens IT help desk), as well as procurement of third party services,
21
which further demonstrates the interconnected nature of Ocwens relationship with the
22
affiliated companies.26
23
21
24
Id.
22
25
Id.
23
Id.
26
24
Id.
27
25
Id.
28
26
Id.
27
28
12
(Page 165 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
14 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 14
of 43
44.
Indeed, following the separation in 2009, Ocwen is contractually obligated to
purchase mortgage and technology services from Altisource under service agreements that
extend through 2020.27 Ocwen is now Altisources largest customer, accounting for 60%
of Altisources total revenue in 2012.28
45.
As part of the Departments ongoing examination of Ocwens mortgage
servicing practices, in April 2014 Lawsky sent Ocwen another letter addressing
conflicted business relationships and self-dealing between Ocwen and Altisource.29
More specifically, Lawsky stated that:
13
One particularly troubling issue is the relationship between

Ocwen and Altisource Portfolios subsidiary, Hubzu, which
Ocwen uses as its principal online auction site for the sale of its
borrowers homes facing foreclosure, as well as investor-owned
properties following foreclosure. Hubzu appears to be charging
auction fees on Ocwen-serviced properties that are up to three
time times the fees charged to non-Ocwen customers
14
...
15
The relationship between Ocwen, Altisource Portfolio, and

Hubzu raises signficiant concerns regarding self-dealing. In
particular, it creates questions about whether those companies
are charging inflated fees through conflicted business
relationships, and thereby negatively impacting homeowners
and mortgage investors. Alternatively, if the lower fees are
necessary to attract non-Ocwen business on the open market, it
raises concerns about whether Ocwen-serviced properties are
10
11
12
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
27
Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A., SEC FORM 10-K (Period Ending Dec. 31, 2012),
available at http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1462418/
000110465913009969/a13-2839_110k.htm (last visited Sept. 9 2012).
28
Id.
29
28

Financial Corporation (April 21, 2014), available at
http://www.housingwire.com/ext/resources/files/Editorial/Lawsky-Letter-to-Ocwen-REAltisource-Hubzu.pdf (last visited, Nov. 5, 2014).
27
13
26
27
28
(Page 166 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
15 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 15
of 43
being funneled into an uncompetitive platform at inflated

costs.30
1
2
46.
3
4
5
6
7
8
Ocwens use of related companies to provide fee based services.31 As Lawsky explained,
[b]ecause mortgage servicing presents the extraordinary circumstance where there is
effectively no customer to select a vendor for ancillary services, Ocwens use of related
companies to provide such services raises concerns about whether such transactions are
priced fairly and conducted at arms-length.32
47.
9
10
On August 4, 2014, Lawsky sent yet another letter raising concerns about
Once again, Lawskys August 2014 letter was particularly concerned with
transactions between Ocwen and related company Altisource:

[T]he Department has serious concerns about the apparently
conflicted role played by Ocwen Executive Chairman William
Erbey and potentially other Ocwen officers and directors in
directing profits to Altisource, which is related to Ocwen but
is formally a separate, publicly traded company. As you know,
Mr. Erbey is Ocwens largest shareholder and is also the
Chairman of and largest shareholder in Altisource. In fact, Mr.
Erbeys stake in Altisource is nearly double his stake in Ocwen:
29 percent versus 15 percent. Thus, for every dollar Ocwen
makes, Mr. Erbeys share is 15 cents, but for every dollar
Altisource makes, his share is 29 cents.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
The Department and its Monitor have uncovered a growing

body of evidence that Mr. Erbey has approved a number of
transactions with related companies, despite Ocwens and
Altisources public claims -- including in SEC filings -- that he
recuses himself from decisions involving related companies.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
27
28
30
Id.
31

Financial Corporation (Aug. 4, 2014), available at
http://www.dfs.ny.gov/about/press2014/pr140804-ocwen-letter.pdf (last visited, Nov. 5,
2014).
32
Id.
14
(Page 167 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
16 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 16
of 43
Finally, Ocwen and Altisource state in their public filings that

rates charged under agreements with related companies are
market rate, but Ocwen has not been able to provide the Monitor
with any analysis to support this assertion.33
1
2
3
48.
4
5
6
7
8
9
dealings. According to OFCs most recent filing with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC), on June 12, 2014 it received an SEC subpoena, in which the SEC
requested production of various documents relating to [OFCs] business dealings with
Altisource, HLSS, [Altisource Asset Management Corp], and Altisource Residential and
the interests of [OFCs] directors and executive officers in these companies.34
49.
10
11
12
13
16
Ocwen continuously, and systematically, engages in self-dealing transactions with

Altisource.
50.
continuing unit with a common purpose.

Ocwens Scheme to Mark Up Fees for Default-Related Services
51.
18
20
21
22
23
24
Accordingly, although Ocwen and Altisource technically are separate
entities, they are effectively joined together, as affiliated companies, operating as a
17
19
Despite the fact that Lawsky, the SEC, and other financial regulators have
raised significant concerns about the tangled web of conflicts between the entities,
14
15
Lawsky is not the only regulator raising questions about Ocwens business
In its loan servicing operations, Ocwen follows a strategy to generate
fraudulently concealed default-related fee income. Rather than simply obtain defaultrelated services directly from independent third-party vendors, and charge homeowners
for the actual cost of these services, Ocwen has a policy, practice, and procedure of
marking up fees for default-related services on homeowners loan accounts. As a result,
even though the mortgage market has collapsed, and more and more borrowers are falling
into delinquency, Ocwen continues to earn substantial profits.
25
26
27
28
27
28
33
Id. (internal citations omitted).
34
Ocwen Financial Corp., SEC Form 10-Q (Period Ending June 30, 2014), available at
http://www.housingwire.com/ext/resources/files/Editorial/Documents/SEC-ABEA6F4AAO-873860-14-16.pdf (last visited October 23, 2014).
15
(Page 168 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
17 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 17
of 43
52.
Ocwens scheme works as follows: Ocwen directs Altisource to order and
coordinate default-related services, and, in turn, Altisource places orders for such services
with third-party vendors. The third-party vendors charge Altisource for the performance
of the default-related services, Altisource then marks up the price of the vendors services,
in numerous instances by 100% or more, before charging the services to Ocwen. In
turn, Ocwen bills the marked-up fees to homeowners.
53.
Through this complex arrangement with Altisource, which is intended to
disguise the marked-up fees for default-related services, Ocwen effectively side-steps the
borrower protections in the mortgage contract.
10
54.
The mortgage contract between a lender and a homeowner generally consists
11
of two documents: (i) the promissory note (the Note); and (ii) the mortgage/security
12
instrument/deed of trust (the Deed of Trust). The mortgage contacts serviced by Ocwen
13
are substantially similar because they conform to the standard Fannie Mae form contract.
14
The contract contains certain disclosures describing what is supposed to happen if
15
borrowers default on their loans.
16
17
55.
loan servicer will:

pay for whatever is reasonable or appropriate to protect the note
holders interest in the property and rights under the security
instrument, including protecting and/or assessing the value of
the property, and securing and/or repairing the property.
18
19
20
21
22
The Deed of Trust discloses to homeowners that, in the event of default, the
(emphasis added.)
56.
The Deed of Trust further discloses that any such amounts disbursed by the
23
servicer to a third party shall become additional debt of the homeowner secured by the
24
Deed of Trust and shall bear interest at the Note rate from the date of disbursement.
25
(emphasis added.)
26
57.
Additionally, the Note discloses to homeowners that with respect to
27
Payment of the Note Holders Costs and Expenses, if there is a default, the homeowner
28
will have to pay back costs and expenses incurred in enforcing the Note to the extent
27
28
16
(Page 169 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
18 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 18
of 43
not prohibited by applicable law.
58.
Thus, the mortgage contract discloses to homeowners that the servicer will
pay for default-related services when reasonably necessary, and will be reimbursed or
paid back by the homeowner for amounts disbursed. Nowhere is it disclosed to
borrowers that the servicer may engage in self-dealing to mark up the actual cost of those
services to make a profit. Nevertheless, that is exactly what Ocwen does.
59.
BPOs are a significant category of third party default-related services for
which, in furtherance of Ocwens unlawful enterprise, fees are assessed on homeowners
loan accounts with substantial, undisclosed mark-ups, fraudulently generating revenue in
10
the loan servicing business.
11
60.
As discussed above, by charging marked-up fees for BPOs, Ocwen violates
12
the disclosures made to borrowers. Furthermore, the wrongful nature of the marked-up
13
fees is demonstrated by the fact that Ocwen conceals the marked-up profits assessed on
14
homeowners loan accounts.
15
61.
Although Ocwen assesses fees for BPOs on borrowers accounts in the range
16
of $100 to $109, as of December 2010, under Fannie Mae guidelines, the maximum
17
reimbursable rate for an exterior BPO was $80,35 and in practice, the actual cost was much
18
less. According to the National Association of BPO Professionals, the actual cost of a
19
BPO may be as little as $30.36
20
21
62.
less than the marked-up fee it assesses to borrowers.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
27
28
Ocwen indisputably is aware that the actual cost of a BPO is significantly
63.
In fact, Ocwen has a significant amount of experience in the BPO
marketplace. Beginning in mid-2000, Ocwen Federal Bank FSB (Ocwen Bank), a

35
See Fannie Mae, Broker Price Opinion Providers and Pricing Structure, available at
https://efanniemae.com/sf/guides/ssg/annltrs/pdf/2010/ntce121710a.pdf (last visited Feb.
1, 2012).
36
See National Association of BPO Professionals (NABPOP), Broker Price Opinion

BPO Brief, available at http://www.nabpop.org/Advocacy-BPOBrief-2.php (last visited
Feb. 2, 2012).
17
(Page 170 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
19 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 19
of 43
former wholly-owned subsidiary of OFC, began selling marked-up BPOs to Wall Street
firms acquiring large pools of underperforming loans.
64.
Ocwen Banks in-house BPO shop was the subject of the litigation styled
Cartel Asset Management v. Ocwen Financial Corp., Case No. 1:01-cv-01644-REB-CBS
(D. Colo.) (Cartel). In Cartel, Cartel Asset Management, Inc. (CAM), a large
national BPO vendor, sued OFC, Ocwen Technology XChange, Inc., and Ocwen Bank for
theft of CAMs trade secret -- a confidential list of experienced, responsive and competent
realtors who produced high-quality BPOs.37 Ocwen Bank facilitated this theft by secretly
copying the names and contact information of realtors identified on BPOs that it
10
purchased from CAM, and then embedding the stolen information into its own incomplete
11
database of BPO providers.38
12
65.
In 2004, a jury awarded CAM compensatory and punitive damages.39 While
13
the judgment was on appeal, OFC dissolved Ocwen Bank and transferred the database
14
containing the stolen names and contact information to OLS, who continued to use and
15
profit from CAMs trade secret. OLS was added as a defendant in Cartel after the Tenth
16
Circuit remanded for a new trial on damages. In September 2010, a jury returned a
17
verdict in CAMs favor for more than $13.7 million in compensatory and punitive
18
damages based on the theft of the trade secret.40 This jury verdict covered the period up
19
through August 10, 2009, the date when OFC transferred the BPO product line and the
20
database to its affiliated company Altisource. As with OLS before it, Altisource has
21
continued to use and generate profits from CAMs trade secret.
22
23
66.
Notably, in Cartel, William C. Erbey, OFCs Executive Chairman, offered
the following testimony, under penalty of perjury, concerning Ocwen Banks BPO
24
37
25
See Cartel, Case No. 1:01-cv-01644-REB-CBS, Dkt. 438 at 1-4 (D. Colo. Sept. 18,
2007).
26
38
Id. at 13-17.
27
39
Id. at 17-18.
28
40
Id., Dkt. 825.
27
28
18
(Page 171 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
20 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 20
of 43
business:
[A]s of 2004, [Ocwen] Bank would pay an agent or broker
approximately $45 to $50 to provide a BPO and then sell the
BPO for a profit. A reviewed BPO would be sold for
approximately $150 and an unreviewed BPO for approximately
$70.41
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
27
28
67.
Despite knowing the actual cost of a BPO is approximately $50, Ocwen
routinely and repeatedly assesses borrowers BPO fees of $100 or more, representing a
100% mark-up, in clear violation of the mortgage contract.
68.
Ocwen also assesses fees for services related to the examination of the title to
the property securing the loan, all of which are ordered through Altisource. These fees
typically appear as a Title Search fee, a Title Report Fee, or fees for FC Thru Title
Searches on homeowners monthly statements.
69.
Upon information and belief, the title examination fees assessed by Ocwen
are significantly marked-up. For example, a title search fee typically ranges between
$150 and $450. Nevertheless, Ocwen routinely charges homeowners $829 for a Title
Search.
70.
Using its enterprise -- comprised of affiliated companies, like Altisource, and
third party property preservation vendors -- and its automated mortgage loan
management system, Ocwen engaged in a scheme to fraudulently conceal and assess
unlawfully marked-up fees for default-related services on homeowners loan accounts,
cheating hundreds of thousands of borrowers out of hundreds of millions dollars.
Furthermore, to conceal its activities and mislead homeowners about the true nature of its
actions, Ocwen employed a corporate practice that omits the true nature of the fees that
are being assessed on homeowners loan accounts. These practices are common to all of
Ocwens files.
71.
As a result of the practices of Ocwens unlawful enterprise, hundreds of
thousands of unsuspecting borrowers are cheated out of millions of dollars.

41
Id., Dkt. 438 at 25 (emphasis added).

19
(Page 172 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
21 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 21
of 43
Ocwen Misapplies Borrowers Payments
1
2
72.
For subprime servicers such as Ocwen, late fees alone constitute a significant
fraction of its total income and profit. As a result, Ocwen has an incentive to push
homeowners into default and keep them there.
5
6
7
73.
Ocwen accomplishes this objective by, inter alia, misapplying homeowners
payments, and then cascading their loan accounts with illicit late fees.
74.
These unlawful late fees have forced many homeowners into default, opening
the flood gates for additional late fees and significant charges for defaulted-related
services. Over time, these egregious late fees and fees for default-related services can
10
total up to thousands of dollars, making it nearly impossible for homeowners to become
11
current on their loan.
12
13
14
75.
Ocwens method of misapplying payments in order to charge innocent
borrowers thousands of dollars in fees and charges is a widespread practice.

76.
Under the terms of Paragraph 2, Application of Payments or Proceeds, of
15
the Deed of Trust in the Fannie Mae a standard form mortgage contract, there is a
16
hierarchy in which funds from customer payments are to be applied. Specifically, funds
17
are to be applied in the following order: (1) interest due under the promissory note; (2)
18
principal due under the promissory note; (3) amounts due for any escrow items; (4) late
19
charges; and (5) fees for default-related services and other amounts. Escrow items are
20
generally defined as taxes or assessments which may take priority over the lenders
21
interest in the property and premiums for insurance a homeowner is required to have
22
under the terms of the mortgage contract.
23
77.
One way Ocwen misapplies payments is to divert a portion of the interest and
24
principal payments made by homeowners who pay their own property taxes and maintain
25
proper insurance to escrow accounts.
26
78.
An escrow account is an account set up and controlled by a lender on behalf
27
of a homeowner to pay these escrow items. As mentioned above, a homeowners
28
monthly payment cannot be diverted to an escrow account until that payment covers, in
27
28
20
(Page 173 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
22 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 22
of 43
1
2
full, the borrowers interest and principal payment due in that given month.
79.
Ocwen routinely violates the payment hierarchy contained in homeowners
mortgage contracts and diverts customer payments away from principal and interest on
the loan.
80.
As a result of this violation, homeowners who timely pay their own real
estate taxes and insurance premiums are denied the proper interest and principal credits
under the loan agreement. Ocwen instead diverts a portion of the funds (which end up not
being needed to pay escrow items) to an escrow account or flat out rejects the payment.
81.
Ocwens failure to accept or properly credit homeowners payments to cover,
10
in full, their monthly interest and principal obligations forces homeowners into default.
11
Once in default, Ocwen then makes demands that these homeowners make significant
12
payments, which are riddled with unjust late and default-related service fees.
13
82.
Additionally, when Ocwen forces homeowners who pay their own property
14
taxes and maintain their own insurance into default by misapplying their payments to an
15
escrow account, these homeowners are denied the ability to access the surplus in their
16
escrow account.
17
83.
18
19
20
surplus escrow funds only when their loan is paid in full.

84.
Ocwen, in essence, is using the escrow account as one way to justify the late
and default-related fees it charges homeowners.

Homeowners Suffer Harm as a Result of Ocwens Practices
21
22
Under the terms of the loan agreement, Ocwen will refund homeowners their
85.
In addition to the direct monetary damages caused to homeowners, in the
23
form of the difference between the actual cost of the services provided and the marked-up
24
fees assessed on homeowners loan accounts, homeowners suffer other, less obvious
25
injuries as a result of the practices described herein.
26
86.
The assessment of these marked-up fees can make it impossible for
27
homeowners to become current on their loan. Charges for such default-related services
28
can add hundreds or thousands of dollars to homeowners loans over time, driving them
27
28
21
(Page 174 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
23 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 23
of 43
1
2
further into default.

87.
When homeowners get behind on their mortgage, and fees for these default-
related services are stacked on to the past-due principal and interest payments, Ocwens
practices make it increasingly difficult for homeowners to ever bring their loan current.
Even if homeowners pay the delinquent principal and interest payments, the late and
default-related service fees ensure that homeowners stay in default. Although the next
payment comes in on time, often through automatic payment deductions from
homeowners bank accounts, part of the payment is applied to the fees first, so there is not
enough to cover the entire monthly payment. This makes that payment late, creating a
10
cascade of more fees, and more arrears, that keeps homeowners in delinquency. By the
11
time homeowners are aware, Ocwen is threatening to foreclose unless a huge payment is
12
made, and the weight of these marked-up fees drops homeowners into a financial abyss.
13
14
88.
move deeper into default, homeowners are driven into foreclosure.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
27
28
Additionally, as a result of Ocwens practices, which force homeowners to
Plaintiffs Claims Against Ocwen

89.
Plaintiff Weiner is a resident of Amador County, California.
90.
Plaintiff Weiner originated his loan with Mylor Financial on December 10,
2003, for $322,700 at 6.5000%. His monthly interest and principal payment was
$2,039.68.
91.
Prior to late 2012 or early 2013, GMAC serviced Plaintiff Weiners
mortgage. However, on or around late 2012 or early 2013, Ocwen took over the servicing
of Plaintiff Weiners mortgage.
92.
Ocwen misapplied Plaintiff Weiners principal and interest payment to an
escrow account established after GMAC paid Plaintiff Weiners property taxes in 2010.
93.
Plaintiff Weiner fully reimbursed GMAC in early 2011 for the property taxes
it paid. He also paid a $400 escrow fee. Following this incident, Plaintiff Weiner had
telephone conversations with GMAC staff where he arranged that he would pay his own
property taxes going forward. Plaintiff Weiner promised to provide timely proof of said
22
(Page 175 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
24 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 24
of 43
payments.
94.
Since making this arrangement, Plaintiff Weiner has paid in full all property
taxes associated with his property and has maintained the proper insurance required by his
mortgage contract. Plaintiff Weiner also has always provided Ocwen with timely notice
of his property tax payments.
95.
Notwithstanding Plaintiff Weiners timely property tax and insurance
premium payments, Ocwen charges Plaintiff Weiner a fee of $600 per year for
maintaining an escrow account, and it has failed to properly apply his interest and
principal payments to his loan. Instead, Ocwen has diverted funds to his escrow account.
10
Although Ocwen has never once used it to pay property taxes or insurance, and Plaintiff
11
Weiners escrow account has a positive balance of more than $10,000. More recently,
12
Ocwen has flat out rejected Plaintiff Weiners interest and principal payments on the basis
13
that they are not sufficient to satisfy the defaulted amount on the loan, i.e., interest and
14
principal plus escrow fees.
15
16
17
96.
By diverting a portion of Plaintiff Weiners interest and principal payments
to an escrow account, Ocwen has failed to properly credit Plaintiff Weiners account.
97.
Ocwens failure to properly credit Plaintiff Weiners interest and principal
18
payments has burdened his account with unscrupulous fees and has forced his loan into
19
default.
20
98.
Plaintiff Weiner not only has been denied the right to have his payments
21
applied correctly to his loan account, but he has also been unable to claim interest
22
deductions on his federal and state tax returns, refinance his loan, has been subjected to
23
harassing telephone calls, and has been under the constant fear of imminent foreclosure.
24
25
26
27
28
27
28
99.
Because Ocwen has forced his loan into default, Plaintiff Weiner has been
denied access to the surplus in his escrow account.

100. Ocwen also continually assessed marked-up fees for default-related services
on the mortgage account of Plaintiff Weiner, thereby subjecting him to an invalid debt.
101. Ocwen assessed BPO fees of $109 and $100 on the mortgage account of
23
(Page 176 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
25 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 25
of 43
1
2
Plaintiff Weiner on September 4, 2013 and February 27, 2014, respectively.

102. Ocwen also charged Plaintiff Weiner a series of title report, title search, and
other default-related service fees that are either not legally due under the mortgage
contract and applicable law, or that are in excess of amounts legally due.
5
6
7
103. Ocwen assessed a Title Search fee in the amount of $829 on the mortgage
account of Plaintiff Weiner on June 9, 2014.
104. Ocwen alone maintains a complete accounting of all fees assessed and paid,
and the details of each and every fee assessed and paid cannot be alleged with complete
precision without access to Ocwens records. Nevertheless, Plaintiff Weiner is informed
10
and believes, and on that basis alleges, that he paid some or all of the unlawful fees
11
assessed on his account.
12
13
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
105. Any applicable statutes of limitations have been tolled by Ocwens knowing
14
and active concealment, denial, and misleading actions, as alleged herein. Plaintiff and
15
members of the Class, as defined below, were kept ignorant of critical information
16
required for the prosecution of their claims, without any fault or lack of diligence on their
17
part. Plaintiff and members of the Class could not reasonably have discovered the true
18
nature of the Ocwens scheme.
19
106. Ocwen is under a continuous duty to disclose to Plaintiff and members of the
20
classes the true character, quality, and nature of the default-related service fees they assess
21
on borrowers accounts. Ocwen knowingly, affirmatively, and actively concealed, and
22
continues to conceal, the true character, quality, and nature of its assessment of marked-up
23
fees on homeowners loan accounts. Plaintiff and members of the Class reasonably relied
24
upon Ocwens knowing, affirmative, and active concealment. Based on the foregoing,
25
Ocwen is estopped from relying on any statutes of limitation as a defense in this action.
26
107. The causes of action alleged herein did or will only accrue upon discovery of
27
the true nature of the charges assessed against borrowers accounts, as a result of Ocwens
28
continuing fraudulent concealment of material facts. Plaintiff and members of the Class
27
28
24
(Page 177 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
26 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 26
of 43
did not discover, and could not have discovered, through the exercise of reasonable
diligence, the true nature of the unlawful fees assessed against their accounts.
108. Legal scholars have explained that, as a result of these deceptive practices, it
is impossible for borrowers to determine that they are victims of these violations, because
without a true itemization that identifies the nature of each fee, parties cannot verify that
a mortgage claim is correctly calculated . . . the servicer could be overreaching and
charging fees that are not permitted by law or by the terms of the contract. . . . By
obscuring the information needed to determine the alleged basis for the charges, servicers
thwart effective review of mortgage claims. The system can only function as intended if
10
complete and appropriate disclosures are made.42

109. Additionally, judges examining similar conduct have found that, [a]t the
11
12
heart of the problem is [the loan servicers] failure to disclose to its borrowers/debtors, the
13
trustee, or the Court, the nature or amount of fees and charges assessed . . . [l]ack of
14
disclosure facilitates the injury. Naive borrowers/debtors, trustees and creditors rightly
15
assume that [the loan servicer] is complying with the plain meaning of its notes,
16
mortgages, court orders and confirmed plans. Why would anyone assume otherwise? . . .
17
How are they to challenge a practice or demand correction of an error they do not know
18
exists.43
19
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
20
110. Plaintiff brings this action, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
21
situated, as a class action under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
111. The classes Plaintiff seeks to represent (collectively, the Class) are defined
22
23
as follows:
24
25
26
42
27
See Katherine Porter, Misbehavior and Mistake in Bankruptcy Mortgage Claims, 87

Tex. L. Rev. 121, 155 (2008).
28
43
27
28
See In re: Jones, 418 B.R. 687, 699 (E.D. La. 2009).
25
(Page 178 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
27 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 27
of 43
All residents of the United States of America who had a loan

serviced by Ocwen, continuing through the date of final
disposition of this action (the Class).
1
2
3
All residents of the State of California who had a loan serviced

by Ocwen, continuing through the date of final disposition of
this action (the California Subclass).
4
5
112. Plaintiff reserves the right to amend the Class definitions if discovery and
6
7
further investigation reveals that the Class should be expanded or otherwise modified.
113. Plaintiff reserves the right to establish sub-classes as appropriate.
114. This action is brought and properly may be maintained as a class action
9
10
11
12
under the provisions of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a)(1)-(4) and 23(b)(1), (b)(2)
or (b)(3), and satisfies the requirements thereof. As used herein, the term Class
Members shall mean and refer to the members of the Class.
115. Numerosity: While the exact number of members of the Class is unknown to
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Plaintiff at this time and can only be determined by appropriate discovery, membership in
the Class is ascertainable based upon the records maintained by Ocwen. At this time,
Plaintiff is informed and believe that the Class includes hundreds of thousands of
members. Therefore, the Class is sufficiently numerous that joinder of all members of the
Class in a single action is impracticable under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule
23(a)(1), and the resolution of their claims through the procedure of a class action will be
of benefit to the parties and the Court.
116. Ascertainablity: Names and addresses of members of the Class are available
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
27
28
from Ocwen. Notice can be provided to the members of the Class through direct mailing,
publication, or otherwise using techniques and a form of notice similar to those
customarily used in consumer class actions arising under California state law and federal
law.
117. Typicality: Plaintiffs claims are typical of the claims of the other members
of the Class which they seek to represent under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(3)
because each Plaintiff and each member of the Class has been subjected to the same
26
(Page 179 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
28 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 28
of 43
deceptive and improper practices and has been damaged in the same manner thereby.
118. Adequacy: Plaintiff will fairly and adequately represent and protect the
interests of the Class as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 23(a)(4).
Plaintiff is an adequate representative of the Class, because he has no interests which are
adverse to the interests of the members of the Class. Plaintiff is committed to the
vigorous prosecution of this action and, to that end, Plaintiff has retained counsel who are
competent and experienced in handling class action litigation on behalf of consumers.
119. Superiority: A class action is superior to all other available methods of the
fair and efficient adjudication of the claims asserted in this action under Federal Rule of
10
11
Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) because:

(a)
the expense and burden of individual litigation make it economically
12
unfeasible for members of the Class to seek to redress their claims
13
other than through the procedure of a class action;
14
(b)
if separate actions were brought by individual members of the Class,
15
the resulting duplicity of lawsuits would cause members to seek to
16
redress their claims other than through the procedure of a class action;
17
and
18
(c)
19
20
absent a class action, Ocwen likely would retain the benefits of their
wrongdoing, and there would be a failure of justice.
120. Common questions of law and fact exist as to the members of the Class, as
21
required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(2), and predominate over any questions
22
which affect individual members of the Class within the meaning of Federal Rule of Civil
23
Procedure 23(b)(3).
24
25
121. The common questions of fact include, but are not limited to, the following:
(a)
Whether Ocwen engaged in unlawful, unfair, misleading, or deceptive
26
business acts or practices in violation of California Business &
27
Professions Code sections 17200 et seq.;
28
27
28
27
(Page 180 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
29 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 29
of 43
(b)
2
3
as alleged herein, is illegal;

(c)
4
5
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
16
17
Whether Plaintiff and members of the class sustained damages, and if

so, the appropriate measure of damages; and
(h)
Whether Plaintiff and members of the Class are entitled to an award of

reasonable attorneys fees, pre-judgment interest, and costs of this suit.
14
15
Whether documents and statements provided to Plaintiff and members

of the Class concealed material facts;
12
13
Whether Ocwen engaged in a pattern or practice of racketeering, as

alleged herein;
10
11
Whether Ocwen was a member of, or participant in, the conspiracy

alleged herein;
8
9
Whether Ocwens practice of misapplying borrowers payments, as

alleged herein, is illegal;
6
7
Whether Ocwens practice of charging marked-up fees to borrowers,
122. In the alternative, this action is certifiable under the provisions of Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(1) and/or 23(b)(2) because:
(a)
The prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the
18
Class would create a risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications with
19
respect to individual members of the Class which would establish
20
incompatible standards of conduct for Ocwen;
21
(b)
The prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the
22
Class would create a risk of adjudications as to them which would, as a
23
practical matter, be dispositive of the interests of the other members of
24
the Class not parties to the adjudications, or substantially impair or
25
impede their ability to protect their interests; and
26
(c)
Ocwen has acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to
27
the Class, thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief or
28
corresponding declaratory relief with respect to the Class as a whole
27
28
28
(Page 181 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
30 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 30
of 43
and necessitating that any such relief be extended to members of the
Class on a mandatory, class-wide basis.
3
4
123. Plaintiff is not aware of any difficulty which will be encountered in the
management of this litigation which should preclude its maintenance as a class action
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
BROUGHT ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA SUBCLASS

Violation of Californias Unfair Competition Law
(California Business & Professions Code 17200 et seq.)
7
8
9
10
11
12
124. Plaintiff incorporates by reference in this cause of action each and every
allegation of the preceding paragraphs, with the same force and effect as though fully set
forth herein.
125. Plaintiff Weiner brings this cause of action on behalf of himself and the
members of the California Subclass.
13
126. California Business and Professions Code section 17200 prohibits any
14
unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice. For the reasons described above,
15
Ocwen has engaged in unfair, or fraudulent business acts or practices in violation of
16
California Business and Professions Code sections 17200 et seq.
17
127. In the course and conduct of their loan servicing and collection, Ocwen
18
knowingly, affirmatively, and actively concealed the true character, quality, and nature of
19
their assessment of marked-up default-related service fees against borrowers accounts.
20
Relying on Ocwen, Plaintiff Weiner, and members of the California Subclass believe they
21
are obligated to pay the amounts specified in Ocwens communications.
22
128. In truth and in fact, borrowers are not obligated to pay the amounts that have
23
been specified in Ocwens communications concerning default-related services, including
24
BPOs and title searches. Ocwen disguises the fact that the amounts they represent as
25
being owed have been marked-up beyond the actual cost of the services, violating the
26
disclosures in the mortgage contract. Contrary to Ocwens communications, they are not
27
legally authorized to assess and collect these marked-up fees.
28
27
28
129. Ocwens knowing, affirmative, and active concealment, as set forth herein,
29
(Page 182 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
31 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 31
of 43
constitutes an unlawful practice because it violates Title 18 United States Code sections
1341, 1343, and 1962, as well as California Civil Code sections 1572, 1573, 1709, 1710,
and 1711, Californias Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and the common
law.
130. Ocwens practice of misapplying borrowers payment, thereby breaching
borrowers mortgage contracts, also constitutes an unlawful practice in violation of
California Business and Professions Code sections 17200 et seq.
131. Ocwens knowing, affirmative, and active concealment, as set forth herein,
also constitute unfair business acts and practices within the meaning of California
10
Business and Professions Code sections 17200 et seq., in that Ocwens conduct was
11
injurious to consumers, offended public policy, and was unethical and unscrupulous.
12
Plaintiff Weiner also asserts a violation of public policy by concealing material facts from
13
consumers. Ocwens violation of Californias consumer protection and unfair
14
competition laws in California resulted in harm to consumers.
15
16
17
132. There were reasonable alternatives available to Ocwen to further their

legitimate business interests, other than the conduct described herein.
133. California Business and Professions Code section 17200 also prohibits any
18
fraudulent business act or practice. Ocwens concealment of material facts, as set forth
19
above, was false, misleading, or likely to deceive the public within the meaning of
20
California Business and Professions Code section 17200. Ocwens concealment was
21
made with knowledge of its effect, and was done to induce Plaintiff Weiner and members
22
of the California Subclass to pay the marked-up default related service fees.
23
134. Plaintiff Weiner and members of the California Subclass relied on their
24
reasonable expectation that Ocwen would comply with the disclosures set forth in the
25
mortgage agreement, Notes, and Deeds of Trust, and as a result, Plaintiff Weiner and
26
members of the California Subclass relied on Ocwens disclosures about the fees on their
27
statements, reasonably believing the default-related service fees to be valid charges that
28
were not marked-up. Indeed, to lull borrowers into a sense of trust and dissuade them
27
28
30
(Page 183 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
32 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 32
of 43
from challenging Ocwens unlawful fee assessment, Ocwen concealed their scheme from
borrowers by telling them, in statements and other documents, that such fees are in
accordance with the terms of their mortgage. Had the true nature of the fees been
disclosed to Plaintiff Weiner and the members of the California Subclass, they would
have been aware of the mark-ups and Plaintiff Weiner and the members of the California
Subclass would have disputed the charges and not paid them.
135. Plaintiff Weiner and the members of the California Subclass have been
injured in fact and suffered a loss of money or property as a result of Ocwens fraudulent,
unlawful, and unfair business practices. Plaintiff Weiner and the members of the
10
California Subclass would not have paid Ocwens unlawful fees or they would have
11
challenged the assessment of such fees on their accounts had it not been for Ocwens
12
concealment of material facts.
13
136. Ocwen has thus engaged in unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent business acts
14
entitling Plaintiff Weiner and the members of the California Subclass to judgment and
15
equitable relief against Ocwen, as set forth in the Prayer for Relief.
16
137. Additionally, under Business and Professions Code section 17203, Plaintiff
17
Weiner and members of the California Subclass seek an order requiring Ocwen to
18
immediately cease such acts of unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent business practices, and
19
requiring Ocwen to correct its actions.
20
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
21
Violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act

(18 U.S.C. 1962(c))
22
23
24
25
26
27
138.
Plaintiff incorporates by reference in this cause of action each and every
forth herein.
139. Plaintiff brings this cause of action on behalf of himself and the members of
the Class.
28
27
28
31
(Page 184 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
33 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 33
of 43
THE ENTERPRISE
140. Defendants OFC and OLS are persons within the meaning of Title 18
3
4
United States Code section 1961(3).

141. At all relevant times, in violation of Title 18 United States Code section
1962(c), Ocwen, including their directors, employees, and agents, along with Altisource
and Ocwens property preservation vendors conducted the affairs of an associated-in-fact
enterprise, as that term is defined in Title 18 United States Code section 1961(4) (the
Ocwen Enterprise). The affairs of the Ocwen Enterprise affected interstate commerce
through a pattern of racketeering activity.
10
142. The Ocwen Enterprise is an ongoing, continuing group or unit of persons and
11
entities associated together for the common purpose of limiting costs and maximizing
12
profits by fraudulently concealing assessments for unlawfully marked-up fees for default-
13
related services on homeowners loan accounts.
14
143. While the members of the Ocwen Enterprise participate in and are part of the
15
enterprise, they also have an existence separate and distinct from the enterprise. The
16
Ocwen Enterprise has a systematic linkage because there are contractual relationships,
17
agreements, financial ties, and coordination of activities between Ocwen, Altisource, and
18
the vendors that perform the default-related services.
19
144. Operating the Ocwen Enterprise according to policies and procedures
20
developed and established by its executives, Ocwen controls and directs the affairs of the
21
Ocwen Enterprise and uses the other members of the Ocwen Enterprise as
22
instrumentalities to carry out Ocwens fraudulent scheme.
23
145. These policies and procedures established by Ocwens executives include:
24
funneling default-related services through its affiliated company, Altisource, to disguise
25
unlawful mark-ups of services provided by third parties; providing statements that conceal
26
the true nature of the marked-up default related service fees; using mortgage loan
27
management software designed to assess undisclosed marked-up fees on borrowers
28
accounts; and failing to provide borrowers with accurate documentation to support
27
28
32
(Page 185 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
34 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 34
of 43
assessments of fees for BPOs.
146. By developing and implementing policies and procedures leading to the
repeated, and unlawful, assessment of marked-up fees for default-related services, Ocwen
engaged in the conduct of the Ocwen Enterprise distinct from Ocwens own affairs as a
loan servicer.
THE PREDICATE ACTS
6
7
147. The Ocwen Enterprises systematic scheme to fraudulently conceal
unlawfully marked-up third party fees on the mortgage accounts of homeowners who
have mortgage loans administered by Ocwen, as described above, was facilitated by the
10
use of the United States Mail and wire. The Ocwen Enterprises scheme constitutes
11
racketeering activity within the meaning of Title 18 United States Code section 1961(1),
12
as acts of mail and wire fraud, under Title 18 United States Code sections 1341 and 1343.
13
148. In violation of Title 18 United States Code sections 1341 and 1343, the
14
Ocwen Enterprise utilized the mail and wire in furtherance of their scheme to defraud
15
borrowers whose loans are serviced by Ocwen by obtaining money from borrowers using
16
false or fraudulent pretenses.
17
149. Through the mail and wire, the Ocwen Enterprise provided mortgage
18
invoices, loan statements, payoff demands, or proofs of claims to homeowners,
19
affirmatively demanding that homeowners pay marked-up fees for default-related
20
services. Defendants also accepted payments and engaged in other correspondence in
21
furtherance of their scheme through the mail and wire.
22
150. The Ocwen Enterprise fraudulently and unlawfully assessed marked-up
23
default-related service fees in violation of the disclosures made in homeowners mortgage
24
agreements.
25
151. Furthermore, to lull homeowners into a sense of trust and dissuade them from
26
challenging Ocwens unlawful fee assessment, Ocwen concealed their scheme from
27
28
accordance with the terms of their mortgage.
27
28
33
(Page 186 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
35 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 35
of 43
152. The mortgage invoices, loan statements, or proofs of claims provided to
borrowers disguised the fact that the default-related service fees assessed on homeowners
accounts were marked-up. By disguising the true nature of amounts purportedly owed in
communications to borrowers, the Ocwen Enterprise made false statements using the
Internet, telephone, facsimile, United States mail, and other interstate commercial carriers.
153. This fraudulent concealment was material to Plaintiff and the members of the
Class. Had the Ocwen Enterprise disclosed the true nature of the fees for default-related
services, Plaintiff would have been aware of the mark-up, and would have challenged
Ocwens unlawful fee assessments or would not have paid them.
10
11
12
154. Each of these acts constituted an act of mail fraud for purposes of Title 18
United States Code section 1341.
155. Additionally, using the Internet, telephone, and facsimile transmissions to
13
fraudulently communicate false information about these fees to borrowers, to pursue and
14
achieve their fraudulent scheme, the Ocwen Enterprise engaged in repeated acts of wire
15
fraud in violation of Title 18 United States Code section 1343.
16
156. The Ocwen Enterprises knowledge that its activities were fraudulent and
17
unlawful is evidenced by, among other things, the fact that they concealed the marked-up
18
nature of the default-related service fees in their communications to borrowers.
19
157. The predicate acts specified above constitute a pattern of racketeering
20
activity within the meaning of Title 18 United States Code section 1961(5) in which the
21
Ocwen Enterprise have engaged under Title 18 United States Code section 1962(c).
22
158. All of the predicate acts of racketeering activity described herein are part of
23
the nexus of the affairs and functions of the Ocwen Enterprise racketeering enterprise.
24
The racketeering acts committed by the Ocwen Enterprise employed a similar method,
25
were related, with a similar purpose, and they involved similar participants, with a similar
26
impact on the members of the Class. Because this case is brought on behalf of a class of
27
similarly situated borrowers and there are numerous acts of mail and wire fraud that were
28
used to carry out the scheme, it would be impracticable for Plaintiff to plead all of the
27
28
34
(Page 187 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
36 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 36
of 43
details of the scheme with particularity. Plaintiff cannot plead the precise dates of all of
the Ocwen Enterprises uses of the mail and wire because this information cannot be
alleged without access to the Ocwen Enterprises records.
159. The pattern of racketeering activity is currently ongoing and open-ended, and
threatens to continue indefinitely unless this Court enjoins the racketeering activity.
160. Numerous schemes have been completed involving repeated unlawful
7
8
9
conduct that by its nature, projects into the future with a threat of repetition.
161. As a direct and proximate result of these violations of Title 18 United States
Code sections 1962(c) and (d), Plaintiff and members of the class have suffered
10
substantial damages. Members of the Ocwen Enterprise are liable to Plaintiff and
11
members of the Class for treble damages, together with all costs of this action, plus
12
reasonable attorneys fees, as provided under Title 18 United States Code section 1964(c).
13
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
14
15
Violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act,

Conspiracy to Violate Title 18 United States Code section 1962(c)
(18 U.S.C. 1962(d))
16
17
18
forth herein.
19
20
21
the Nationwide Class.
164. As set forth above, in violation of Title 18 United States Code section
22
1962(d), Defendants conspired to violate the provisions of Title 18 United States Code
23
section 1962(c).
24
165. As set forth above, Ocwen, having directed and controlled the affairs of the
25
the Ocwen Enterprise, was aware of the nature and scope of the enterprises unlawful
26
scheme, and they agreed to participate in it.
27
166. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff and the members of the Class have
28
been injured in their business or property by the predicate acts which make up the Ocwen
27
35
28
(Page 188 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
37 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 37
of 43
Enterprises patterns of racketeering activity in that marked-up fees for default-related
services were assessed on their mortgage accounts.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
BROUGHT ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA SUBCLASS

Violations of the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
(California Civil Code 1788, et seq.)
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
forth herein.
168. Defendants are debt collectors within the meaning of California Civil Code
section 1788.2(c), because Defendants sent mortgage bills to Plaintiff and members of the
California Subclass, Plaintiff and members of the California Subclass made their
mortgage payments to Defendants, Defendants accepted those payments, and Defendants
made demands for payment, including the payment of marked-up fees for default-related
services, by sending letters, making telephone calls, and other attempts to collect
mortgage payments and fees.
169. The marked-up fees for default-related services purportedly owed by Plaintiff
and members of the California Subclass are a debt within the meaning of California
Civil Code section 1788.2(d), because they are money, property or their equivalent
which [are] due or owing or alleged to be due or owing from a natural person to another
person.
170. As alleged herein, and as set forth in detail above, Defendants have
committed violations of the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, California Civil
Code section 1788, et seq. (RFDCPA), which incorporates by reference, and requires
compliance with, the provisions of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
(FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. 1692
171. The FDCPA and, therefore, the RFDCPA, prohibits a debt collector from
using any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the
28
27
28
36
(Page 189 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
38 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 38
of 43
collection of any debt. 15 U.S.C. 1692e
172. Defendants knowingly, affirmatively, and actively concealed and suppressed
material facts, namely the fact that Defendants assessed borrowers accounts for marked-
up default-related services. Contrary to Ocwens communications, they are not legally
authorized to assess and collect these marked-up fees.
173. Pursuant to California Civil Code sections 1788.17 and 1788.30, Plaintiff and
members of the California Subclass are entitled to recover actual damages sustained as a
result of Defendants violations of the RFDCPA. Such damages include, without
limitation, monetary losses and damages. Additionally, because Defendants violations of
10
the RFDCPA were committed willingly and knowingly, Plaintiff and members of the
11
California Subclass are entitled to recover penalties of up to $1,000 per violation as
12
provided for in the RFDCPA.
13
174. Pursuant to California Civil Code sections 1788.17 and 1788.30, Plaintiff and
14
the California Subclass are entitled to recover all attorneys fees, costs, and expenses
15
incurred in the bringing of this action.
16
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
17
Unjust Enrichment
18
19
20
forth herein.
21
22
23
24
25
the Class.
177. By their wrongful acts and omissions of material facts, Ocwen was unjustly
enriched at the expense of Plaintiff and members of the Class.
178.
The mortgage contract with borrowers like Plaintiff and the members of the
26
Class discloses that Ocwen will pay for default-related services when necessary, and they
27
will be reimbursed by the homeowner. Nowhere in the mortgage contract is it disclosed
28
that Ocwen may mark-up the actual cost of those services to make a profit.
27
28
37
(Page 190 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
39 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 39
of 43
179. Nevertheless, Ocwen marks-up the prices charged by vendors, often by 100%
or more, and then, assesses borrowers accounts for the higher, marked-up fee so that
Ocwen can earn a profit.
180. Furthermore, to lull homeowners into a sense of trust and dissuade them from
challenging Ocwens unlawful fee assessment, Ocwen further conceals their scheme from
accordance with the terms of their mortgage.
181. Thus, Plaintiff and members of the Class were unjustly deprived.
182. It would be inequitable and unconscionable for Ocwen to retain the profit,
10
benefit and other compensation they obtained from their fraudulent, deceptive, and
11
misleading conduct alleged herein.
12
183. Plaintiff and members of the Class seek restitution from Ocwen, and seek an
13
order of this Court disgorging all profits, benefits, and other compensation obtained by
14
Ocwen from their wrongful conduct.
15
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
16
Fraud
17
18
19
forth herein.
20
21
22
186. Plaintiff reasonably expected that Ocwen would comply with the disclosures
23
set forth in the mortgage agreement, Notes, Deeds of Trust, and as a result, Plaintiff relied
24
on Ocwens disclosures about the fees on their statements, reasonably believing the
25
default-related service fees to be valid charges that were not marked-up.
26
187. To lull homeowners into a sense of trust and dissuade them from challenging
27
Ocwens unlawful fee assessment, Ocwen concealed their scheme from borrowers by
28
telling them, in statements and other documents, that such fees are in accordance with the
27
38
28
(Page 191 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
40 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 40
of 43
1
2
terms of their mortgage.

188. Had the true nature of the fees been disclosed to Plaintiff and members of the
Class, they would have been aware of the mark-up, and Plaintiff would have disputed the
charges and not paid them.
189. As a result of Ocwens fraudulent concealment, Plaintiff and members of the
Class have been injured in fact and suffered a loss of money or property. Plaintiff and
members of the Nationwide Class would have challenged the assessment of such fees on
their accounts had it not been for Ocwens concealment of material facts.
190. Ocwen concealed material facts, as discussed above, with knowledge of the
10
effect of concealing of these material facts. Ocwen knew that by misleading consumers,
11
they would generate higher profits.
12
191. Plaintiff and members of the Nationwide Class justifiably relied upon
13
Ocwens knowing, affirmative, and active concealment. By concealing material
14
information about their scheme to assess marked-up default-related service fees on
15
borrowers accounts, Ocwen intended to induce Plaintiff and members of the Nationwide
16
Class into believing that they owed Ocwen money that it was not actually entitled to.
17
192. Ocwen acted with malice, oppression, or fraud.
18
193. As a direct and proximate result of Ocwens omissions and active
19
concealment of material facts, Plaintiff and each member of the Nationwide Class has
20
been damaged in an amount according to proof at trial.
21
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
22
Breach of Contract
23
24
25
forth herein.
26
27
28
27
28
196. Ocwen assumed the obligations of Plaintiffs mortgage agreement, and the
39
(Page 192 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
41 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 41
of 43
1
2
3
mortgage agreement of all Class members, when it took over the servicing of their loans.
197. Plaintiff satisfied his obligations under the mortgage agreement by making
timely payments of principal and interest.
198. Ocwen is in breach of contract by misapplying payments submitted by
Plaintiff and members of the Class, placing such payments in suspense accounts without
authorization by the mortgage agreements, and assessing late fees not authorized under
the mortgage agreement.
8
9
10
199. Ocwen knew or should have known that misapplying timely payments was
and continues to be a material breach of homeowners mortgage agreements.
200. Ocwen is in further breach of contract by treating Plaintiff and members of
11
the Class as if they were in default due to the misapplied payments, when, in fact, Plaintiff
12
and members of the Class are not delinquent under the mortgage agreement.
13
14
201. As a proximate result of Ocwens breaches, Plaintiff and members of the

Class have suffered compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
27
28
PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Plaintiff, and on behalf of himself and the Class of all others similarly situated,
requests that the Court to enter judgment against Ocwen, as follows:
1.
Certifying the Class, as requested herein, certifying Plaintiff as the
representative of the Class, and appointing Plaintiffs counsel as counsel for the Class;
2.
Ordering that Ocwen is financially responsible for notifying all members of
the Class of the alleged fraudulent concealment discussed herein;

3.
Awarding Plaintiff and the members of the Class compensatory damages in
an amount according to proof at trial;

4.
Awarding restitution and disgorgement of Ocwens revenues or profits to
Plaintiff and members of the Class;

5.
Awarding Plaintiff and the members of the Class treble damages in an
amount according to proof at trial;

6.
Awarding declaratory and injunctive relief as permitted by law or equity,

40
(Page 193 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
42 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 42
of 43
including: enjoining Ocwen from continuing the unlawful practices as set forth herein,
and directing Ocwen to identify, with Court supervision, victims of its conduct and pay
them restitution and disgorgement of all monies acquired by Ocwen by means of any act
or practice declared by this Court to be wrongful;
7.
Ordering Ocwen to engage in corrective advertising;
8.
Awarding interest on the monies wrongfully obtained from the date of
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
27
28
collection through the date of entry of judgment in this action;

9.
Awarding attorneys fees, expenses, and recoverable costs reasonably
incurred in connection with the commencement and prosecution of this action; and
10.
For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Dated: November 5, 2014
BARON & BUDD, P.C.

By: /s/ Mark Pifko
Mark Pifko
Daniel Alberstone (SBN 105275)
Roland Tellis (SBN 186269)
Mark Pifko (SBN 228412)
Michael Isaac Miller (SBN 266459)
BARON & BUDD, P.C.
15910 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1600
Telephone: (818) 839-2333
Facsimile: (818) 986-9698
Philip F. Cossich, Jr. (to be admitted pro hac vice)
David A. Parsiola (to be admitted pro hac vice)
COSSICH, SUMICH, PARSIOLA & TAYLOR, L.L.C.
8397 Highway 23, Suite 100
Belle Chasse, Louisiana 70037
Telephone: (504) 394-9000
Facsimile: (504) 394-9110
Attorneys for Plaintiff
similarly situated
41
(Page 194 of Total)
USCACase
#14-5265
Document #1532155
Filed:11/05/14
01/15/2015
Page
43 of 43
Document 1 Filed
Page 43
of 43
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial of his claims by jury to the extent authorized by
law.
Dated: November 5, 2014
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
BARON & BUDD, P.C.

By: /s/ Mark Pifko
Mark Pifko
Daniel Alberstone (SBN 105275)
Roland Tellis (SBN 186269)
Mark Pifko (SBN 228412)
Michael Isaac Miller (SBN 266459)
BARON & BUDD, P.C.
15910 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1600
Telephone: (818) 839-2333
Facsimile: (818) 986-9698
Philip F. Cossich, Jr. (to be admitted pro hac vice)
David A. Parsiola (to be admitted pro hac vice)
COSSICH, SUMICH, PARSIOLA & TAYLOR, L.L.C.
8397 Highway 23, Suite 100
Belle Chasse, Louisiana 70037
Telephone: (504) 394-9000
Facsimile: (504) 394-9110
Attorneys for Plaintiff
similarly situated
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
27
28
42
(Page 195 of Total)

Probable Cause To Charge Bradley Arant Bout Cummings With Criminal Contempt

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Probable Cause To Charge Bradley Arant Bout Cummings With Criminal Contempt

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

USCA Case #14-5265

USCA Case #14-5265

USCA Case #14-5265

USCA Case #14-5265

USCA Case #14-5265

USCA Case #14-5265

USCA Case #14-5265

USCA Case #14-5265

USCA Case #14-5265

USCA Case #14-5265

USCA Case #14-5265

USCA Case #14-5265

USCA Case #14-5265

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 1 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 2 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 3 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 4 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 5 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 6 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 7 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 8 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 9 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 10 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 11 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 12 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 13 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 14 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 15 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 16 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 17 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 18 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 19 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 20 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 21 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 22 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 23 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 24 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 25 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 26 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 27 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 28 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 29 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 30 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 31 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 32 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 33 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 34 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 35 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 36 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 37 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 38 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 39 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 40 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 41 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 42 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 43 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 44 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 45 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 46 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 47 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 48 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 49 of 65

Case 1:13-cv-02025-RMC Document 12 Filed 02/26/14 Page 50 of 65