Menu
Login
Re: Vicki Kenworthy Wright / MIBOR Ripoff
Vicki Kenworthy Wright is listed as an officer with MIBOR. Recently, I filed a complaint with Vicki and the Metropolitan Indianapolis Board of Realtors regarding Scott Veerkamp. My complaint included documentation of Loan Steering and Predatory Lending.
Unfortunately, Vicki Kenworthy Wright refuses to respond to my complaint regarding Yield Spread Premium. Therefore, I am asking the following question to members of the Metropolitan Indianapolis Board of Realtors: Is it possible for someone from MIBOR to explain how Predatory Lending "protects and promotes the interest of the client?"
Here are the details of my complaint...
In doing some research on the Code of Ethics, I found the following information listed on the Metropolitan Indianapolis Board of Realtors website:
1. "REALTORS shall be careful at all times to present a true picture in their advertising and their representations to the public." 2. "The Code of Ethics is a promise to the public that when dealing with a real estate agent who is a REALTOR, they can expect honest and ethical treatment in all transaction- related matters." 3. "Only REALTORS pledge to abide by the Code of Ethics, and only REALTORS are held accountable for their ethical behavior."
Previously, I provided documentation of Loan Steering on behalf of Scott Veerkamp and his organization. MIBOR was informed that Scott was receiving "kickbacks" on Predatory Loans. To my knowledge, MIBOR did nothing to prevent Scott from preying on the public with Yield Spread Premium. Here are 2 examples of Predatory Lending with YSP and junk fees from Scott Veerkamp...
Loan 1: (Property value $150, 000) A. $4, 799 yield spread premium B. $500 processing fee C. $250 document preparation fee D. $50 courier fee E. $35 electronic filing fee F. $425 administration fee (lender fee)
Loan 2: (Property value $120, 000) A. $1, 440 yield spread premium B. $960 application fee C. $1, 920 in "discount points" (paid to Scott Veerkamp) D. $409 administration fee (lender fee) E. $150 underwriting fee (lender fee)
In addition to the loan documentation, please take time to review items 1-8 in the information listed below. I would appreciate a written response from the Metropolitan Indianapolis Board of Realtors regarding this information.
Items 1-4 in group A: 1. Please explain how a $4, 799 Yield Spread Premium "protects and promotes the interest of the client." 2. Please provide documentation that shows how Scott "protected and promoted the interest of his client" when he attempted to sell a $120, 000 property on a land contract with a "due on sale clause." 3. Please explain how Scott honored his fiduciary responsibility with his client when he made approximately $26, 000 on a $120, 000 property listed with REMAX Central in his own neighborhood. 4. Please provide documentation that shows how Scott "did his very best" when you refused to conduct an open house on a property located "one block down the street" from the house he was living in.
Items 5-8 in group B: 5. Please ask Scott to explain why he removed my property from the multiple listing service after I filed my complaint with MIBOR. A. How was I supposed to sell this property when Scott refused to drive (one block) conduct an open house? B. How was I supposed to sell this property when Scott removed it from the MLS? 6. The National Association of Mortgage Brokers stated it is not necessary to pay an application fee. Please explain how a $960 application fee "protects and promotes the interest of the client." 7. NAMB says processing fees are a violation of their code of ethics because "they're generally not related to any actual service performed by a broker." Please explain how a $500 processing fee "protects and promotes the interest of the client." 8. Scott ran an advertisement in Christian Phone Book with the following statement: "We will do our very best to help you get the lowest possible interest rates at the lowest possible price." A. Please provide documentation that explains how a $4, 799 Yield Spread Premium represents "the lowest possible interest rate." B. Likewise, please explain how a $960 application fee represents "the lowest possible price."
Response: MIBOR knows Predatory Lending represents the extreme opposite of "protecting and promoting the interest of the client." Therefore, they are unable to provide a response that has merit.
Jim Bruggenschmidt
NAR: "How To Avoid Predatory Lending"
http://www.realtor.org/home_buyers_and_sellers/how_to_avoid_predatory_lending
The Center For Responsible Lending:
http://www.responsiblelending.org/mortgage-lending/research-analysis/ib-ysp-110507-final.pdf
CRL and Equity Theft:
http://www.responsiblelending.org/mortgage-lending/tools-resources/ib011-YSP_Equity_Theft-0604.pdf
Jeff Merkley and Yield Spread Premium:
http://merkley.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/?id=A09C6A80-537A-4EB1-83C5-
31925F046B6F
Warning letter to Scott Veerkamp:
http://jmb27.posterous.com/warning-letter-to-scott-veerkamp-from-the-off
Scott refuses to drive (one block) to conduct an open house:
http://jmb27.posterous.com/scott-veerkamp-refuses-to-conduct-an-open-hou
Scott Veerkamp owes money:
http://jmb27.posterous.com/excessive-interest-rates
As always, I have a lot of questions that have not been answered by the Metropolitan Indianapolis Board of Realtors. Here is an important question that has never been answered: Is it possible for the members of MIBOR to provide documentation that explains how Predatory Lending "protects and promotes the interest of the client"?
If Scott Veerkamp did nothing wrong, why did he receive a WARNING letter from the office of the Indiana Attorney General? This letter was sent in November of 2008.
The following information was very clear in my complaint to the office of the Indiana Attorney General: 1. I made no agreements with anyone on a "voluntary" basis. 2. This includes any so- called "voluntary" agreements with MIBOR.
In summary: How could I have an agreement with MIBOR saying Predatory Lending "protects and promotes the interest of the client"?
Warning letter to Scott Veerkamp:
http://jmb27.posterous.com/warning-letter-to-scott-veerkamp-from-the-off
It is too bad Mr. Bruggenschmidt does not have his facts correct. I was not on the Board of Directors of MIBOR at the time of these allegations six years ago, and had nothing to do with this process. I did some investigating and found that Mr. Bruggenschmidt voluntarily withdrew his complaint and all the administrative agency filings are finished, therefore this matter is closed.