Judge, a 'friend of Angelo,' ruled for Countrywide

A California Court of Appeal judge whose mortgage was personally approved by former Countrywide Financial Chief Executive Angelo Mozilo later ruled in favor of Countrywide in a class-action lawsuit, Portfolio magazine reports in its latest issue.

Portfolio's Dan Golden reports that Richard Aldrich, a California Court of Appeal judge, went to Countrywide in 2004 to refinance the loan for his 8,200-square-foot house in Westlake Village; his application, assigned to loan officer Robert Feinberg, sought a $1-million loan and a $900,000 line of credit, the magazine reports.

Portfolio: "By email, Feinberg alerted Mozilo that the credit line was 'above what guidelines allow.' Mozilo responded, 'Go ahead and approve the loan, and close it as soon as possible. Don’t worry about this deal, it’s golden.' Countrywide further waived half a point, or $5,000 on the million-dollar loan."

More: "That wasn’t Aldrich’s only contact with Countrywide. At the time he refinanced, a class-action lawsuit against Countrywide was pending before the appellate court, brought by borrowers contending that the company offered an inadequate payment to settle allegations that it charged excessive fees for credit reports. That August, Aldrich was part of a three-judge panel that unanimously rejected the borrowers’ appeal."

Portfolio reports that Aldrich, in a brief telephone exchange with the magazine, denied that he had received a below-market rate on the loan and then hung up. The magazine reports he did not disclose his relationship with Countrywide to plaintiffs in the class-action suit.

The entire article is worth a look, it sheds new light on the "friends of Angelo" connections, and names a few more beneficiaries of Mozilo's personal attention, including CNN commentator Paul Begala. In one internal exchange, a Countrywide executive urges special treatment for a congressional staff lawyer on a committee overseeing housing issues. The internal guidance on handling the lawyer's loan includes the phrase, "No garbage fees."

Your thoughts? Comments? E-mail story tips to peter.viles@latimes.com.
Hat tip: Patrick.net

Comments

[notafreindofangelo]

when will angelo be held accountable for unethical and illegal behavior and go to jail? How can this judge get away with unethical behavior. How in the world can he preside over a trail which he has a relationship with the defendant?

[ELS]

Even though it certainly doesn't look good, the outcome of the case would not have been different. Taking Justice Aldrich out of the equation, the plaintiffs still would have lost because two of the Justices voted the same way. So long as two out of three agree, those two determine the result.

[TakeFive]

Not suprised.

A judge is just a lawyer in a black mumu.

[Laker]

This is just an example how our justice department is corrupted. This judge should have excused himself from dealing with countrywide as he was doing business with them. Not only that, he essentially was bought by Countrywide (got paid) to favor them over the plaintiffs.
If there is justice, this judge needs to be fired and go to jail for some time. Also, i would foreclosure on his house after he loses the fantasy State job paying him to the tunes of $200,000 or more official money and god know how much under the table.

And "No garbage fees"....I guess plain old Joe 6pack had to pay "garbage fees" to secure his poor $500,000 mortgage...

[Jack]

I'd be curious how sister/defender Lori Mozilo responds to this.

[mike]

its o.k for this to happen. capitalism as we know it would collapse if this kind of stuff was not swept under the matt.

[jag]

Wait a minute........I think I seen this movie before....OH YES! Is the GODFATHER!

I'm really sick of these bastards including the judge getting away with corruption. Hopefully, there'll be justice, served but then again, if this is left to our justice system nothing will be done about it.

[bode]

I read the article, and there is no indication that the judge knew he was getting a deal. Countrywide handled a large fraction of loans in California, so it's not surprising that some judges had loans handled by Countrywide. If the judge asked for or knew that he was getting a special deal, then that's a serious issue. Or, if he was asked by the lawyers if he had a relationship with Countrywide and lied, perhaps there is an issue.

If you look at the list of who got special deal, it really is no different than any other business. The guy who cut Mozillo's hair got a good deal too, as did his maid's daughter. So Countrywide didn't exactly expect a return on the goodwill in all cases, and in many cases appears to have never mentioned the "no junk fees" part to the recipient. Good business? Yes. Nefarious? No.

How is this different than my neighborhood donut shop giving coffee and donuts to the LAPD? I know which business will get prompt service when the burglar alarm goes off, that's for sure, and the cops KNOW they're getting something. Mozillo was nice in an even smoother way -- without telling anyone. That's the genius of it.

[William E. Jones]

People - people who use people,
Are the wealthiest people in the world...

(sorry Barbara...)

[Uncle Billy Loves Naomi Klein]

NotaFOA: And how do we get to the point where they feel so comfortable with their cockroach business behavior that they don't even bother covering their tracks. They don't even care how it looks anymore.

Anyone see Angelo's New York FOA, Frank Langone defending Angelo's honor today on CNBC? That would be good for a laugh or a cry. Frank, ex head of NYSE, is on the board of Trustees at NYU and the fella that seemed to claim he was the one that spitzered Spitzer. A plug from him is probably more like an indictment.

[anonymous]

bode,
Winchels strategy has been around forever. Free coffee and donuts to the police make their shops a frequent stop for the guys on patrol. It's a well known *prevention* tool. They don't get priority emergency services, silly.

[Harry Fisher]

I would like to join any class action of any type against Country Wide as their loan practices have upset my life.

[zbobsuruncle]

"If you look at the list of who got special deal, it really is no different than any other business. The guy who cut Mozillo's hair got a good deal too, as did his maid's daughter. So Countrywide didn't exactly expect a return on the goodwill in all cases, and in many cases appears to have never mentioned the "no junk fees" part to the recipient. "

I would disagree that they did not get a return on the points shaving. They made all that back plus more in their so called garbage fees that the average Joe 6Pack had to pay to get a loan.

[l.a.guy]

"I read the article, and there is no indication that the judge knew he was getting a deal. "

What's upsetting is that the judge, and more importantly the politicians who make policy, don't see the problem with even the appearance of impropriety that doing business with Countrywide presents. It's possible and even likely that the Judge acted sincerely and the outcome wouldn't have been any different, but he should have recused himself from the case so that it wouldn't even be an issue.

As for the politicians, it's inexcusable and it's hard to believe it didn't color their decision making when it came to legislation involving Countrywide. I'm surprised more hasn't been made of the fact that, of the friends revealed so far, the vast majority of the "Friends of Angelo" were democrats. It could have been a coincidence, but when I see all of the benefits going to one party it makes me suspicious of the motivation.

[William Bunch]

Is the spinoff by Countrywide, as I understand happened, of assets used to form IndyMac Bank shortly before the purchase by Wachovia a contributing factor to the downfall of Wachovia? Why would Countrywide divest itself of the assets necessary to fund this spinoff right before being purchased?