IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA INFORMATION COUNT ONE. At all times material to this information:

Similar documents
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL NO. 05- : v.

Case 3:17-cr HEH Document 12 Filed 07/19/17 Page 1 of 8 PageID# 27

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 1:13-cr CMH Document 12 Filed 09/19/13 Page 1 of 9 PageID# 39

FILED JAN ~ ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA BILLINGS DIVISION

Case 1:10-cr REB Document 5 Filed 06/08/10 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 5:09-cr D Document 1 Filed 04/16/09 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA INDICTMENT COUNT ONE BACKGROUND

Case 3:13-cr AWT Document 2 Filed 05/21/13 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT. Criminal NO. 3:13CR~S (llwrj -'"

Case 2:12-cr WHW Document 1 Filed 01/12/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID: 1

2:11-cr MPM -DGB # 1 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS URBANA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Case 2:13-cr LDD Document 24 Filed 06/19/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Courthouse News Service

Case 3:13-cr KI Document 1 Filed 07/16/13 Page 1 of 9 Page ID#: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

Case 2:16-cr RWS-JCF Document 1 Filed 02/03/16 Page 1 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

Case 2:14-cr RBS Document 1 Filed 09/30/14 Page 1 of 52 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 1:05-cr RWR Document 1 Filed 08/04/2005 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

MORTGAGE FRAUD UPDATE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA MISSOULA DIVISION

Case 2:13-cr ES Document 11 Filed 11/18/13 Page 1 of 35 PageID: 62

Case 3:12-cr HZ Document 25 Filed 04/24/13 Page 1 of 7 Page ID#: 37 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Case 3:06-cr JWS-JDR Document 149 Filed 12/15/2006 Page 1 of 27

Case 1:14-cr PLM Doc #1 Filed 07/24/14 Page 1 of 13 Page ID#1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

COUNT ONE (The Tax Shelter Fraud Conspiracy) Background

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS (Kansas City Docket) Case No. 09- I N D I C T M E N T COUNT ONE THE CONSPIRACY

INTRODUCTION. At all times relevant to this Superseding Indictment: 1. The defendants MATTHEW BURSTEIN, ELIAS COMPRES,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION FRANKFORT V. INDICTMENT NO. * * * * * COUNT 1 18 U.S.C.

Case 4:15-cr WTM-GER Document 1 Filed 05/18/15 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION

Case 3:07-cr RRB Document 366 Filed 12/17/2008 Page 1 of 34

3:06-ar Date Filed 11/01/2006 Entry Number 259 (Court only) Page 1 of 10

Case 1:06-cr Document 3 Filed 04/11/2006 Page 1 of 26. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE at CHATTANOOGA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA EASTERN (WATERLOO) DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 18-CR-2058.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:12-cr RWS Document 1 Filed 08/22/12 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION. No. INDICTMENT UNDER SEAL COUNT ONE

THE GRAND JURY CHARGES THAT:

-v.- : 10 Cr. ( ) Defendant. : COUNT ONE (Bank Fraud) THE DEFENDANT AND HIS ACCOMPLICE, HASSAN NEMAZEE

BANKRUPTCY CHAPTER 7 (aka Discharge or Liquidation )

Case 1:06-cr EWN Document 169 Filed 11/02/2006 Page 1 of 39 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 1:10-cr BEL Document 1 Filed 06/17/10 Page 1 of 16

Hon. Mark Falk. I, Anthony Mangarella, being duly sworn, state the following is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief:

us OJ $TRICT COUR-1 RIO/\

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY : : : : : : : Hon. INDICTMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND * * * * * ****** INDICTMENT. COUNT ONE (Wire Fraud)

Case: 5:12-cv BYP Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/15/12 1 of 10. PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA THE UNITED STATES GRAND JURY CHARGES THAT: INTRODUCTION

Case 1:18-cr LY Document 3 Filed 01/18/18 Page 1 of 9. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS jp PH 1: 21 AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 2:12-cr SD Document 1 Filed 04/10/12 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

FIDUCIARY LIABILITY SOLUTIONS Application for Insurance Renewal Business NOTICE. I. General Information

RECEIVED SEP Case 3:18-cr MAS Document 64 Filed 09/25/18 Page 1 of 18 PageID: 89 WILLAM T. WALSHJ.D STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. WILLIAM JOSEPH BOYLE, Appellant

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA DATE FILED: INDICTMENT COUNT ONE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL NO. v.

Case 2:14-cr CM Document 1 Filed 05/13/14 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS (KANSAS CITY DOCKET)

INTRODUCTION TO ALL COUNTS. At all times relevant to this Indictment, unless otherwise indicated:

Effective Date: 5/31/2007 Reissue Date: 10/08/2018. I. Summary of Policy

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. Plaintiffs Case No. 16-CV-1678 CLASS ACTION AMENDED COMPLAINT

Courthouse News Service

- 1 - IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) Crim. No. 1:09mj 4 1 \

Case 2:13-cr KOB-TMP Document 1 Filed 01/29/13 Page 1 of 8

Case 2:18-cr JS Document 1 Filed 07/10/18 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 1 INTRODUCTION

Real Estate Claims-Made Professional Liability Insurance Application

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION COUNT ONE

Case 1:13-cr RWS-ECS Document 1 Filed 02/19/13 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:14-cr JAR Document 1 Filed 08/06/14 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS (KANSAS CITY DOCKET)

v. INDICTMENT NO. "-;fklt',j ~-- lfr/t

Philadelphia Insurance Companies One Bala Plaza, Suite 100, Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania 19004

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

Defendant. Case 2:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/30/18 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

TAX NEWS & COMMENT MEMORANDUM

ACCOUNTANTS PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY INSURANCE APPLICATION

MANUAL OF TITLE INSURANCE RATING BUREAU OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

PENSION and BENEFIT PLAN FIDUCIARY LIABILITY INSURANCE APPLICATION

INDICTMENT COUNT ONE. The Grand Jury for the District of Maryland charges that: Introduction

Supreme Court of Florida

Case 3:15-cr JO Document 17 Filed 03/15/16 Page 1 of 12

Customer information. About your mortgage. precisemortgages-customers.co.uk

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Case 1:17-cr AT-CMS Document 7 Filed 09/28/17 Page 1 of 18

AVESIS NEW BUSINESS CHECKLIST

FRAUD ALERT! DETECTING AND PREVENTING SCAMS IN REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS

FILLING OUT THE ANSWER

Bankruptcy 1. WHAT IS A DISCHARGE IN BANKRUPTCY?

FILED SEP A. Parties, Relevant Persons, and Entities

240.17a b-5 01; 18 U.S C. 2. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Violations of. Defendant. DAVID G. FRIEHLING, a~5,

IN THE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE STATE OF ALASKA, Plaintiff, vs.

Charging, Coding and Billing Compliance

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINE SVILLE DIVISION

An Attorney s Options for Handling Clients in Trouble with Real Estate. Aka: Forbearance to Bankruptcy and Everything in Between

Case 1:09-cr PAB Document 1 Filed 08/27/2009 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Transcription:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL NO. : v. : DATE FILED: : MARGARET CAROLE FISHER : VIOLATION: : 18 U.S.C. 1341 : (mail fraud -1 count) : 18 U.S.C. 2 : (aiding and abetting) INFORMATION COUNT ONE THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY CHARGES THAT: At all times material to this information: 1. Defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER found mortgages and refinancing opportunities for homeowners, and also handled real estate closings and home refinancing settlements. FISHER worked at 7 Bala Avenue, Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania 19004, and at other locations in the Philadelphia area. 2. At various times, defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER worked on mortgage transactions with United Mortgage Service Company (United Mortgage), a mortgage broker, and Imperial Abstract and Settlement Company (Imperial), a title insurance agency, both of which are owned by Person # 1 known to the United States Attorney (Person # 1). Defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER also worked on mortgage transactions with United Settlement

Services (United Settlement), a title agency owned by the wife of Person #1. All three of these companies are located at 7 Bala Avenue, Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania 19004. 3. Defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER would receive a percentage of settlement fees when she brought in a client who utilized United Settlement, United Mortgage or Imperial. 4. Person # 1 was a mortgage broker, a settlement agent and an agent for title insurance companies Fidelity National Title Insurance Company of New York (Fidelity) and Stewart Title Guarantee Corporation (Stewart). 5. As an agent for these title insurance companies, Person # 1 was obligated to disburse funds from real estate transactions, including home refinancing transactions, as detailed on the HUD form 1. These requirements included, among other things, the obligation to pay off existing mortgages on the property with monies received from the financial company or financial institution from whom the homeowner was obtaining new financing. Any excess funds were to be distributed to the homeowner. 6. Any failure to payoff existing mortgages after a refinancing settlement would impact on the homeowner, the finance companies holding the existing mortgage, the finance companies holding the new mortgage, and the title insurance companies involved in the refinancing. If the original mortgage was not satisfied: (a) the homeowner would be obligated to pay both the existing and new mortgages, in many cases more than doubling the debt on the home; (b) the homeowner s credit rating might be adversely affected, because the homeowner s credit report would reflect both the existing mortgage and the new mortgage; 2

(c) the finance company holding the existing mortgage would be placed at greater risk that the homeowner, now having two mortgages, could not afford to repay the loan; (d) the finance company holding the new mortgage would not be able to obtain any funds from the sale of the property in the event of foreclosure until after the holder of the existing mortgage received all of the money it was owed, despite the fact that the new mortgage company had already paid the money to retire the existing mortgage; (e) both the finance company holding the existing mortgage and the company holding the new mortgage would face an increased risk that the homeowner would default on one or both of the mortgages, because the homeowner would have obligations on two mortgages instead of one; and (f) the title insurance company would be at increased risk that it would be liable for the amount of at least one of the outstanding mortgages, because it was unlikely that a homeowner could afford to pay both mortgages, and because the value of the home would probably not be sufficient to satisfy both the new and the existing mortgage in the event of foreclosure. THE SCHEME 7. From in or about Spring 2002 through in or about December 2004, in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and elsewhere, defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER, together with Person # 1, devised and intended to devise a scheme to defraud homeowners A.D., M.A.M. and P.S., finance companies Wendover Financial Services (Wendover), Fairbanks Capital Corp. (Fairbanks), Countrywide Home Loans (Countrywide) and GMAC, 3

and title insurance companies Fidelity and Stewart, and to obtain money and property by means of false and fraudulent pretenses, representations and promises. MANNER AND MEANS It was part of the scheme that: 8. Defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER assisted Person # 1 in the fraudulent handling of settlements for mortgage refinancing, causing losses to homeowners, finance companies and title insurance companies of approximately $459,864.66. 9. Defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER handled the settlement of home mortgage refinancing for homeowners using United Settlement, knowing that Person # 1, contrary to his fiduciary obligations to Fidelity and Stewart, and to the financial companies and homeowners involved in the refinancing transactions, would not pay off existing mortgages as stated on the HUD 1 form after settlements, but would instead keep those funds for himself or distribute them to defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER in the form of loans to her for which he knew were unlikely to be repaid. 10. On or about April 11, 2002, defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER conducted a settlement for the refinancing of homeowner A.D. s home in Abington, Pennsylvania, during which she fraudulently caused homeowner A.D. to believe that the balance of $108,656.44 on his existing mortgage with Wendover would be paid off shortly after settlement. 11. After settlement, defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER and Person #1, without the knowledge of homeowner A.D. or Fidelity, the title insurance company, did not pay off the existing mortgage held by Wendover on homeowner A.D. s home as reflected on the 4

HUD 1 form for the transaction. Instead, Person # 1 wrongfully kept the approximately $108,656.44 proceeds from the refinancing for himself. 12. Defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER and Person #1 attempted to keep homeowner A.D. from learning that his existing mortgage with Wendover had never been satisfied. Person # 1 directed Wendover to send future correspondence concerning homeowner A.D. s mortgage to P.O. Box 344, Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania, 19004, a post office box controlled by Person # 1, and not known to homeowner A.D. Person # 1 then made several payments on homeowner A.D. s mortgage with Wendover. Defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER assured homeowner A.D., when homeowner A.D. was contacted by Wendover concerning the existing mortgage, that there had been a mistake and that she would handle the problem. 13. On or about February 6, 2004, defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER handled the settlement of homeowner M.A.M. s home in Glenside, Pennsylvania, during which she fraudulently caused homeowner M.A.M., to believe that the balance of $202,293.98 on homeowner M.A.M. s existing mortgage with Fairbanks would be paid off shortly after settlement. FISHER directed homeowner M.A.M. to stop making payments on the existing mortgage at Fairbanks, and begin sending payments to Countrywide, M.A.M. s new mortgage company. 14. After settlement, defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER and Person #1, without the knowledge of M.A.M. or Fidelity, the title insurance company, did not pay off the existing mortgage held by Fairbanks on homeowner M.A.M. s home as reflected on the HUD 1 5

form. Instead, Person # 1 wrongfully kept the approximately $202,293.98 in proceeds from the refinancing for himself. 15. Defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER and Person #1 attempted to keep homeowner M.A.M. from learning that her existing mortgage with Fairbanks had never been satisfied. Person # 1 directed Fairbanks to send future correspondence concerning homeowner M.A.M. s mortgage to P.O. Box 344, Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania, 19004, a post office box controlled by Person # 1, and not known to homeowner M.A.M. Person # 1 then made a few payments on homeowner M.A.M. s mortgage with Fairbanks. Defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER falsely assured homeowner M.A.M., when homeowner M.A.M. s home was put into foreclosure proceedings, that FISHER would provide documents to prove that the Fairbanks mortgage had been satisfied. 16. On or about April 29, 2004, defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER handled the settlement of Homeowner P.S. s home in Abington, Pennsylvania, during which FISHER fraudulently caused homeowner P.S. to believe that the balance of approximately $96,221.07 on her existing mortgage with GMAC would be paid off shortly after settlement. 21. After settlement, defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER and Person #1, without the knowledge of homeowner P.S., Countrywide (the holder of the new mortgage) or Stewart, the title insurance company, did not pay off the existing mortgage held by GMAC on homeowner P.S. s home as reflected on the HUD 1 form. Instead, Person # 1 wrongfully kept the approximately $96,221.07 in proceeds from the refinancing for himself. 22. Defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER and Person #1 attempted to keep homeowner P.S. from learning that her existing mortgage with GMAC had never been 6

satisfied. Person # 1 directed GMAC to send future correspondence concerning homeowner P.S. s mortgage to 7 Bala Ave., Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania, 19004, the address of Person # 1's office, without homeowner P.S. s knowledge or approval. Defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER made one payment to GMAC on homeowner P.S. s mortgage out of an account FISHER controlled, and Person # 1 made a few additional payments on the GMAC mortgage out of accounts controlled by Person # 1. Defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER falsely claimed to homeowner P.S., after Homeowner P.S. learned that her mortgage with GMAC was in arrears, that homeowner P.S. s loan with GMAC could not be closed due to problems with homeowner P.S. s credit card debt. Homeowner P.S. s home was put into foreclosure proceedings. 23. Defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER accepted at least $70,000 in loans from Person # 1 that Person # 1 did not require her to repay. 24. On or about July 15, 2004, in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and elsewhere, defendant MARGARET CAROLE FISHER, for the purpose of executing the scheme described above, and attempting to do so, and aiding and abetting its execution, knowingly caused to be delivered by mail according to the directions thereon, a mortgage statement from Wendover Financial Services, Charlotte, North Carolina, addressed to homeowner A.D., P.O. Box 344, Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania 19004. 7

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1341 and 2. PATRICK L. MEEHAN UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 8