CAT GIBBONS/MIRACLE MORTGAGE FACTS
1. I was one of three (3) black female mortgage brokers in the State of Massachusetts.
2. I filed ethics complaints against Fidelity Guarantee Mortgage, a white-owned firm.
3. In recent history the Attorney General of Maine had issued a Cease and Desist Order against Fidelity and some 30 complaints were filed against it. Appendix A.
4. Further, a Federal Court of Appeals reviewed the situation and affirmed sanctions for a lawsuit that counsel for Fidelity had brought frivolously against the Vermont governing authorities. See generally Fidelity Guarantee Mortgage Corporation v. T Reben, 809 F2d 931 (1987).
5. However, in Massachusetts the Defendant took no legal action against Defendant whatsoever, instead telling me that it was a better benefit “for the many as opposed to the few.”
6. Subsequently the Defendant has engaged in a serious of retaliatory, discriminatory and otherwise unlawful acts, including but not limited to unfairly accusing me of being a criminal, downrating my ranking from a 1 to a 2 and then to a 3, and issuing a Cease and Desist Letter to me because I conducted a handful of stated income deals. The standards I used for my stated income deals fell well within any reasonable range, and were accepted by the Caucasian owned, run and operated banks with whom I had been dealing for years.
7. That is ridiculous. I am aware that DOB received complaints from homebuyers who were scammed by LO’s and Mortgage Houses when they inflated income or did stated deals and the people received higher interest rates (full document deals typically get lower interest rates) or were put into homes they couldn’t really afford. In my case, nobody complained and I got the buyers good interest rates so why are the coming after me??? When did Stated Deals all of a sudden become “Fraud” and what made my deals fraudulent?
8. They also scheduled and conducted a conference for me in late summer at which people were present but their titles and roles were not identified for me despite my initial inquiry and my repeated inquiry six (6) weeks ago. Attachment 1.
9. The Defendant is required by law to keep most of these documents on file, yet they have failed to provide me any Good Faith Cost Estimate despite the fact that I gave them more than ten (10) days as required by Law. G.L.c. 66, sec. 10 (b).
I didn’t receive any documents until after I filed an Open Records Complaint in Superior Court.
10. Superior Court threw my case out because of Rule 30, but that was wrong because the Court did have Jurisdiction to hear my complaint because there was a violation of the Open Records Law. I filed a Motion for Reconsideration but the Court tersely wrote: “The Motion does not have merit” and provided no analysis whatsoever into the 10 day violation. We talked about it on our TOUCH 106.1 FM radio show and the consensus was that the Government just doesn’t care and it will label the infraction de minimis or just ignore it totally as the Court did here.
My Motion read:
Basically I am saying that as in the case of Hartford Acci. & Indem. Co. v. Commissioner of Ins., 407 Mass. 23 (1990) I have no adequate or meaningful administrative remedy because:
a) The Division of Banks does not have Constitutional Authority to rule on this issue
where a violation has already occurred, only a Superior Court can hear this claim,
thus my complaint is not premature and;
b) The violation of Law has already occurred.
To compound matters the Defendant did not provide the documents at the Status Conference 3 days after the Motion Hearing in this Court, even though their lawyer stood right before the Court and said they had documents ready for me. Yet they didn’t even produce copies of their own regulations or of my own file. They continue to make mockery of the legal system and this Court must not allow it.
Furthermore, on the record at the hearing of November 23, 2009 the Department let it be known that they intend to make my Cease and Desist permanent, so they have their minds made up anyway and the whole process is a sham and merely a formality and I will be reopening the case in short order so it wouldn’t be appropriate to assess Attorney Fees in this situation.
11. Meanwhile DOB has provided piecemeal documents to me and I want to ORDER them to provide every document they intend to produce at one time for me to review so I can see which documents they are claiming are privileged and/or confidential.
12. At this point I believe they are even trying to say my own investigative files are privileged and confidential so I can’t share them on the Internet or what have you.
13. At present they have already stated they intend to revoke my license in open court.
14. Please look for the video and relevant links at
I NEED HELP FROM TOP NOTCH LICENSED COUNSEL:
Concerning the ongoing saga of what appears to be patent racism and discrimination by Martha Coakley’s Massachusetts Division of Banks against Cat Gibbons, one of only 3 black female mortgage brokers in Massachusetts:
Mass Division of Banks (DOB) Hearing Officer Neil Tobin actually wrote Cat Gibbons that he would not even ask for -- much less compel the Division to produce her responses to inquiry about the five (5) Stated Income Deals that purportedly provide the basis for the Cease and Desist Order, and for their Declaration at a recent hearing that they intend to fully revoke her Broker’s License.
Mr. Tobin said that he wouldn’t request the documents because he wanted to remain impartial, but that strikes me as patently bogus: Having clerked and lawyered for the AG’s Office I can tell you that Hearing Officers have broad discretion to require production of relevant documents, and if there is one relevant document in this case it surely is that response, and it must be produced in its entirety for chain-of-custody reasons to preserve the integrity of the process to the extent that they care about such matters.
Meanwhile Mr. Tobin has demonstrated that he may be less then impartial anyway by stating that certain of Ms. Gibbons’ request for information about complaints against other brokers are “irrelevant” because such a determination would limit her discovery. But you can’t limit her discovery too much because she is alleging, with substantial force, that the (in)actions of the DOB are both racially discriminatory and Arbitrary and Capricious, such that a wide latitude of Discovery is mandatory on those issues.
Note that Mr. Tobin, in responding to Ms. Gibbons’ request, did however state that these Stated Deals were indeed the reason for the Cease and Desist, and that contradicts what Martha Coakley’s DOB lawyers told the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, whoops. That renders their Position Statement in Ms. Gibbons’ case as suspect as the extra purported legitimate nondiscriminatory rationales are not worthy of credence.
And we know that the main rationale is not worthy of credence either for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the FACT that Ms. Gibbons/Miracle Mortgage Stated Income Deals:
a) did not place anyone in harm’s way
b) were conducted prior to the 2006 DOB revision in guidelines.
Lastly the Division keeps claiming that they don’t have any racial data as requested by Ms. Gibbons, but that’s not likely because brokers and buyers have to submit that information, it’s all part of the CRA and other related legislation designed to eliminate the pernicious effects of discrimination. Ms. Gibbons and I are presenting these facts to local learned counsel and the MCAD is in for a real smack down, they have painted themselves into a corner on this one.
In an absolutely ridiculous civil prosecution and Cease and Desist process, Massachusetts AG Martha Coakley's Division of Banks is attempting to revoke the Real Estate Broker's License of Cat Gibbons/Miracle Mortgage.
They have issued a ton of different reasons at different times, including the material falsity that she was a convicted felon, now they are trying to clean their evidentiary tracks by refusing to provide her original responses to the matter and their responses to her response, which show an arbitrary and capricious -- and we believe racist -- modus operandi. How else can you explain the DOB ignoring her complaint against white-owned Fidelity Guarantee Mortgage even as Vermont had issued a Cease and Desist to them for fraudulent and abusive conduct? Fidelity Guarantee Mortgage Corporation v. T Reben, 809 F2d 931 (1987). How on Earth did they even gain licensure in Massachusetts with that track record?