Government Contracts and Congressional Hearings Confirm the Fraud: Evidence Supporting My Abstract and Garfield’s Affidavit

 

(Note to readers: Due to time restraints, submitted comments / posts to my articles are not moderated or returned. For requests for services or information, please email me at bill.bpia@gmail.com. Thank you!)

 Introduction

In the years since Neil Garfield first introduced his affidavit in the Farina case and the publication of my abstract titled “How Your Mortgage Became a Wall Street Security Without Your Knowledge”, critics have demanded hard evidence to back what many considered controversial claims. That evidence is now indisputable. Two recently re-analyzed documents—a U.S. Treasury HAMP participation agreement with PennyMac Loan Services and the 2010 Congressional Hearing on Robo-Signing—contain explosive admissions and systemic confirmations of the very fraud that Garfield, myself, and others have sought to expose. (Hat tip to followers who brought these archived documents to my attention)(Treasury PennyMacLoanServicesServicerParticipationAgreement CHRG-111hhrg63124.pdf (SECURED).

This article distills and presents the most damning revelations from these documents that validate not only Garfield’s affidavit but also the broader investigative findings of the past decade.

1. Servicers Paid Without Proof of Debt Ownership

“Servicer shall perform the loan modification and other foreclosure prevention services… whether it services such mortgage loans for its own account or for the account of another party, including any holders of mortgage-backed securities (each such other party, an ‘Investor’).”
— Treasury–PennyMac HAMP Agreement, p. 2

Servicers do not need to prove they own the debt or even know who does. They are incentivized to process modifications and foreclosures on behalf of faceless “investors.” This confirms the core fraud exposed in securitization: enforcement without ownership.

2. No Liability for Errors or Lack of Standing

“Fannie Mae shall have no liability to Servicer with respect to the payment of the Purchase Price… unless and until the Treasury has provided funds to Fannie Mae for remittance to Servicer.”
— Treasury–PennyMac HAMP Agreement, Sec. 4B

This means servicers are not responsible for proving loss, accuracy, or harm. They are simply paid middlemen, executing a script regardless of borrower injury or evidentiary truth.

3. Congressional Acknowledgment of Mass Fraud and Present-Day Examples

“There was [a servicer] who signed 10,000 affidavits a month, but he never read a single one. These affidavits were used to foreclose on American families.”
— Rep. Elijah Cummings

“The affidavits were signed by persons who swore they had personal knowledge of the facts, but they didn’t… They didn’t even review the documents.”
— Rep. John Conyers

Congress acknowledged that perjury and fraud were standard operating procedures in foreclosure cases. This corroborates Garfield’s central claim that false documents were used to fabricate standing.

Based on my ongoing experience as an investigator and expert witness, this fraudulent behavior has not disappeared—it persists to this day. Robo-witnesses continue to testify without firsthand knowledge, and fabricated documents are routinely produced in foreclosure litigation. The same systemic issues identified in 2010 have not been remedied—they have simply evolved and been obscured under a more sophisticated pretense of legitimacy.

A recent deposition from a corporate representative in a current foreclosure case, who shall not yet be named, exemplifies the continuation of this problem. When questioned under oath, the witness conceded that he had not personally reviewed the underlying loan documents, had no knowledge of who actually owned the debt, and relied entirely on data entries provided by others. Statements such as:

“I don’t know who owns the loan.” “I did not personally review any of the documents.” “I’m just reading what the system tells me.”

underscore the ongoing use of witnesses with no firsthand knowledge, repeating the very same fraudulent testimonial practices exposed during the 2010 robo-signing scandal. These admissions reveal that the machinery of false foreclosure remains fully operational—only rebranded and repackaged.

“The affidavits were signed by persons who swore they had personal knowledge of the facts, but they didn’t… They didn’t even review the documents.”
— Rep. John Conyers

Congress acknowledged that perjury and fraud were standard operating procedures in foreclosure cases.

4. Systemic Chaos in Loan Ownership

“We have a system where we can’t figure out who owns what… That’s what makes this fraud systemic.”
— Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Congressional Hearing, Nov. 2010

This is a powerful admission from a federal legislator: securitization has obliterated clarity of ownership. My Abstract expands on this by documenting how REMIC timelines were violated and how notes were traded, not transferred.

5. “Financial Instruments” – Not Mortgages – Are Traded

“Servicer agrees to sell to Fannie Mae, in such capacity, the Financial Instrument… in consideration for the payment… under the Program.”
— Treasury–PennyMac HAMP Agreement, Sec. 4A

These “financial instruments” are derivatives of the original obligation, often detached from any legal enforcement right. It confirms that what is being monetized in the market has no legal nexus to the borrower’s original mortgage.

Corroborating My Abstract

Abstract Claim	Supporting Evidence
Notes are not transferred but rehypothecated	HAMP servicer terms & congressional concern
Servicers lack standing and legal authority	Treasury contract explicitly allows servicing for unnamed “investors”
No proof of loss is ever provided	GAAP accounting absent, not required
Documents used in court are fraudulent	Admitted by members of Congress
Courts rely on presumptions, not fact	Programmatic participation replaces verification

Conclusion

What Neil Garfield alleged more than a decade ago, and what the abstract has crystallized in forensic terms, is no longer theoretical. It is confirmed in the very contracts and public hearings conducted by the institutions responsible for oversight.

The evidence is clear: the system is rigged to permit unlawful enforcement of non-existent debts through actors incentivized to ignore the truth. These documents, taken together, reveal that the fraud is not accidental or marginal—it is engineered and institutional.

And now, the record speaks for itself.

William Paatalo – Private Investigator OR PSID# 49411

Bill.bpia@gmail.com