Professional Documents
Culture Documents
(15-00293 427-6) Paxton Email July 31,2012
(15-00293 427-6) Paxton Email July 31,2012
EXHIBIT
From: Paxton, Chad G
To: Boyle, Patrick M
Sent: 7/31/2012 12:43:24 AM
Subject: RE: Serviced Exit
-----Original Message-----
From: Boyle, Patrick M
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 07:38 PM Eastern Standard Time
To: Paxton, Chad G
Subject: RE : Serviced Exit
The hard part, too, is that if they are going to "own it" , which w e want them to, we need to be able to get o ur needs covered while making them think they are getting what they want My take is that Jamie totally wants her cake and eat it too, which is
not going to work fo r us,,
Mike Boyle / Vice President Recovery Operati ons / Mortgage Banking / Chase
1820 E. Sky Harbo r Ci rcle S
Pho enix, A ri zona , 85034
602-627-2489 (work)
patrick m-boyle@jpmchase cqm
-----Original Message-----
From: Boyle, Patrick M
Sent: Monday, July 30.2012 07:23 PM Eastern Standard Time
To: Paxton, Chad G
Subject: FW : Serviced Exit
Mike
Let's work thru it on the call. There are tons of things to consider here, best we lay the groundwork up front..
Mike
I understand that we don't have a system for these loans today. But we don't need a system to do recovery work- but something more like a database. We are and will not be servicing the securitized charged off loans. We simply are preserving
the ability that in the instance some of these borrowers send in payment we can pass it the trust/trustee or inform the borrowers to send the money to the trustee. We don't expect huge activity from this population. I just want to make sure we are
on the same page about this before the call.
,fa m ie lVfoy I JYf\,loi ·9,u1 Ch:J.)<.: 127U [\irk. A1'-.: 11u,.'. . .nth V:,,,w_ t,l t\\ Y~'> rk. N Y l i'J0 17 2 12-~'!72- !l ii ~; Ir. 9 17-?ic\9--1 6 1~1 E11wil · jamit.mo,·'.ih pm~)n:mn.c:om
Jamie, my concern here is that we have no system today , and no system on any foreseeable future, that is going to allow this. If we are going to tie the success of this initiative on having a recovery-like system that we can build that will allow us to
have single point of view, reporting, et al, then this think will be a lead balloon. Heck, if we had that, we would not be in this position today, we would likely be looking to do this work at a commission to Chase (others do it) and moving it right along.
So, right off the top, a centralized loan management system does not exist today, and I see no scenario where that will be built. Sure, am open to any discussion, but months of looking at systems prioritization is not in our best interest here ...
I only have about½ hour tomorrow for this meeting, even though it is scheduled for an hour I ½ill be represented on that call for the full hour, but wanted to let you know in case you want to consider a reschedule.
Mike
Hi Mike,
Just wanted to share my thoughts before our call on Tuesday .
Clearly define the objective
1. Have a central database for all charged off/lien released loans for the securitized book with data at time of charge off
2. DB to be able to 'communicate' with the main servicing platform
3. Maintain ability to 'recover' or 'pass' proceeds received to the trust or the new primary servicer
4. Establish a policy and procedure to ' service' the post charged off population
What is the desired end state?
At this point. I'm not convinced that the actual activities on these post charged off loans will be high. I think the majority of the effort will lie in the setup of the systems and establishing policies.
Thanks.
,fom it' l\ifo y I JJ 1.f\.for£~111 Ch,1.-::e I ::: 71.J ['Mk A, r:Jtu,;~ _3 7tb J(,.-,ur. t-.fn\ NY li.1017 \V : :::'.C <t72 7 l hX I 1: ~) p _:,q~}-l(rl ~I Em;1.iL jamie.moY i1·jpmor2,m.cum
So here is what I am thinking. Let's schedule an hour early next week (this week is toast). Discussion agenda:
If we can spend our time building base structure on the effort, that gives us a jumping off point we can all agree to. LMK what you think.
LM Kif you will run po int on setting up a meeting next week. Would like to keep this to a small group. From my team, Chad Paxton and myseW. Dennis, let us know if you are solo or if you are bringing a guest.
Mike
Hi There! I figured it would be you. But since we haven't specifically talked about this tentacle in awhile and we (Rebecca and I) hadn't formally checked with Steve - we wanted to do that first.
I agree we do need to discuss. Would we need participation from another area? Do you have some time this Thursday or Friday?
J:ou ie l\!l oy I Jli ~,·1019;111 Ch.JI><.: I ~7 U !\1 1-!.;, ,,\, -.: 11u,.'. . 37th 1::c,n1·_ Nt:w 'r ~• rk. N Y I IJ(/ 17 2 12 -27]- 7 I b X I ~: 9 1?-:'I~\'}-• I(, 1,1 E 1nc1k ja111ie. mo\·) 1:1pmorQan.c0m
Seriously, this is go ing to be a big deal, so we might want to spend some time in a small group setting to talk. I told Steve that between Dennis and I this is probably something that we are both most knowledgeable of, so we should sit down and
high level map the objective. From that can come the housing issues.
LM K if you agree.
Mike
Hi Steve,
We are moving along on the post charged off loan lien release effort on the securitized book. Fortunately we are able to leverage resources and combine processes from the DoJ mandate on lien releases. But of course there are still some
separate processes unique to the nori-GSE securitized loans. Our expectation is that the trustees will be silent and we will be releasing the liens on these loans.
However we will not be forgiving the debt because we need to preserve the ability to be able to pass any proceeds received back to the trust in the event (it's an unlikely event) the borrower sends in payment We had discussed that this function
should sit in the default area. Who should we reach out to in your team to start teeing up this process?
.l:iiu it• Mi,y I J'P ~"10 1g:1 r) ( ' h.:1;-;,: I :=:: n, .,,,,. I' """'' J7 1h )< :i) (W Ne w Y,> rk. N '{ 2 12 -2'7 2-7 1liX Ir · 1J l ~-'- X~l'J .. J ( , 1-1 Etm1 il: j.arnie nHW'ii"·jpmor_<2an .com