Husband and Wife Jailed for Loan Application Misreprentations and Illegal Flipping Scheme

Allison Tussey —  August 27, 2013 — 2 Comments

Aaron Michael Hymas and Tiffany Kim Hymas, both 38, North Salt Lake, Utah, were sentenced in United States District Court in Boise, Idaho, for their roles in a mortgage fraud scheme.

U.S. District Judge Edward J. Lodge sentenced Aaron Hymas to 24 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release and ordered him to pay $1,520,296.77 in restitution. Tiffany Hymas was sentenced to 60 days in prison followed by three years of supervised release, beginning with six months of home detention. She was also ordered to pay $667,505.42 in restitution. The two former Treasure Valley, Idaho, residents each pleaded guilty to one count of wire fraud on October 18, 2012.

According to the plea agreements, the defendants admitted that they schemed to defraud a lender by having Tiffany submit a residential loan application for $295,600, on March 28, 2007, in which she made material misrepresentations. On the application, Tiffany Hymas stated that she was employed by OPM Enterprises with 2.6 years on the job; that she had income and commissions of $72,500 per month; and that she had gross rental income of $14,600 per month from four properties in Meridian, Nampa and Boise. Based on these misrepresentations, Taylor, Bean and Whitaker Mortgage Corporation funded the loan. The defendants admitted they knew Tiffany Hymas’ statements were false and material to the loan application, and that they knew the statements were false at the time she made them.

The cases are part of a long-term investigation of mortgage fraud activity related to Crestwood Homes, which involved multiple defendants, many of them family members, who bought and sold real estate in order to flip it, or gain profits from the sales. The financial institutions and mortgage lenders incurred substantial losses on the loan transactions.

In addition to Aaron and Tiffany Hymas, eleven individuals have been sentenced since November 2010 on charges of wire fraud, bank fraud and making false statements, including Michael J. Hymas, Shane M. Hymas, Laurie K. Hymas, Shauntee K. Ferguson, Christopher R. Georgeson, Stanley J. Ferguson, Brent Bethers, Melody C. Redondo, Paul Redondo, Travis R. Hymas and Season Heather Hymas.

“Integrity and honesty in the financial world are critical to society,” said U.S. District Judge Edward J. Lodge.

U.S. Attorney Wendy J. Olson announced the sentences.

The cases were investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation, with assistance provided by the Office of the United States Trustee and the Idaho Department of Insurance. The case is being prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Idaho and the State of Idaho, Office of the Attorney General.

“False statements to banks and lenders in order to obtain home loans have undermined the integrity of our nation’s housing financing system,” said Olson. “These sentences send the strong message that those who fabricate financial information to deceive lenders will be investigated, prosecuted and punished.”

Be Sociable, Share!

Allison Tussey

Posts Google+

2 responses to Husband and Wife Jailed for Loan Application Misreprentations and Illegal Flipping Scheme

  1. Wow, you don’t understand the banking system at all. Or the concepts of credit or money multipliers. The amount of money in an economic system is not a set and fixed amount. It hasn’t been like that in THOUSANDS of years, literally. Not since people started extending credit. A buy would buy a goat for 10 schekels and pay 5 more each year or whatever.
    So every credit transaction “creates” money as you see it. OF COURSE, lenders take that loan and sell it. Otherwise they hold that debt. They don’t get paid, the holder of the debt does. Original lender might service the loan and collect a fee, but they don’t get the money. That loan is not sold by the originating lender more than once. You just don’t get it. Your signature is not monetized. The home is. This is run-of-the mill nonesense from “soverign citizen” types. You suggest fraud is ok because lenders commit fraud? If you had the slightest understanding of lending, you would know that lenders are regulated heavily. Some lenders have comitted fraud, yes, even well known and large lenders. The process of extending credit isn’t the fraud however.

  2. I don’t believe that fraud is ever a good thing, but the vast majority of mortgage frauds are committed by the “lenders” rather than the “borrowers” The reason that I put the words lender and borrower in quotation marks is simply because what the banks are “loaning” is always created out of thin air, by monetizing the borrower’s signature on the note. It is the borrower’s signature which has value and can be monetized. They take that note and either deposit it, or they sell it. Either way they get paid back almost immediately. They also use 90% of every loan they make, as the basis for new loans. So, they not only get paid when they deposit or sell the promissory note that the “borrower” signed, which actually becomes like a check you write, as soon as it is signed. Then, they can loan 90% out as new loans. And that amounts to the banks getting paid at least 10 times for every loan they make with “money” they created out of thin air using by monetizing someone else’s signature. Most people don’t know that a signature has value and a signed promissory note can be instantly monetized just like a check. But, the Banksters do know it. Then, to top all that off, they can sell the note as many times as they want to, and each time they sell it, they get paid yet again. The whole banking system is a huge scam and fraud. How many times should bankers be allowed to get paid for the same “loan” when the “money” is really nothing more than worthless debt notes, and was created out of thin air by monetizing the borrower’s signature. They are not loaning customer deposits, and they are not loaning money that already existed before that note was signed. They are putting up zero consideration, also. It has been my understanding for a good while, that in order for a contract to be valid and binding,both parties must put up something of equal value as consideration.

Leave a Reply

Text formatting is available via select HTML.

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> 

*