Crain’s Reports: Fed Indicts 10 For Condo Mortgage Fraud in River North

Crain’s reports that the Feds have indicted 10 people in a mortgage fraud scheme involving purchases of condos at 33 W. Ontario, or Millennium Centre, the River North high rise developed by American Invsco.

Acting together, the investors provided false information about their employment, income and assets to secure the loans to finance seven condos and two townhomes at Millennium Centre, a 59-story tower at 33 W. Ontario St., according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office. The indictment is one of five mortgage-fraud cases involving more than $48 million in loans that the U.S. attorney’s office announced Tuesday.

According to the indictment, Mhde Askar, 23, of Chicago, and Mahmoud Saleh, 35, of Hinsdale, formed a company to buy units in the 363-unit tower and profited by collecting mortgage rebates from the developer and flipping the units for a profit to handpicked buyers.

To obtain the fraudulent loans, the pair enlisted the help of Ahmad Karkukly, 33, of Palatine, a loan officer at Countrywide Home Loans Inc., the indictment says.

Mr. Askar was originally arrested in 2008 and is free on bail, court records show. One of his lawyers, Loop attorney Michael F. Clancy, could not be reached for comment. An attorney representing Messrs. Saleh and Karkukly was unavailable.

Fed: Fraud used to get loans for Streeterville condos [Crain’s, Alby Gallun and Thomas A. Corfman, June 23, 2009]

39 Responses to “Crain’s Reports: Fed Indicts 10 For Condo Mortgage Fraud in River North”

  1. I hope this is the first of many to come. There was so much mortgage fraud this bubble.

    0
    0
  2. I wish they’d just blow this god awful building up and start over.

    0
    0
  3. HD:

    Click the link; this was one of 6 or 7 separate indictments in the press release. And it isn’t the first release I’ve seen about Fed mtg fraud indictments.

    0
    0
  4. Two questions:

    1) Can anyone tell me why this reporter would report this building as being in Streeterville?

    2) As a result of mortgage fraud, does that mean anything for units for sale in the building i.e. lower selling prices? I’m assuming no because it’s transaction based and doesn’t necessarily affect supply & demand in the building/neighborhood, but I could be wrong. That’s why I ask.

    0
    0
  5. Anybody with any sense made their money during the bubble and went back to their home country. Its gonna be touhg for the feds to get these people extradited as these crimes are complicated and allegations hard to prove.

    0
    0
  6. > There was so much mortgage fraud this bubble.

    how much is “so much”?

    0
    0
  7. This case is one of five brought totaling $48,000,000 in mortgages – and the consensus is that this is just a drop in the bucket.

    0
    0
  8. “Talk about Fraud… someone please make HD stop using his clerks for Cribchatter research. He is billing his clients for this crap. ”

    Stevo:

    You (being a lawyer) should realize that: (1) this is libelous, (2) HD could easily seek discovery agst Sabrina, CC’s Host and your ISP (and *would* prevail), and (3) your identity could be revealed. I suggest you retract your statement promptly.

    0
    0
  9. Its not libelous anon(tfo) as HD’s identity is unknown….duh!

    0
    0
  10. “Its not libelous anon(tfo) as HD’s identity is unknown”

    So, you’re offerring to pay Stevo’s defense costs, b/c it is such a slam dunk?

    He’s alleged an ethical breach that could give rise to disciplinary proceedings–indeed, under Illinois law, Stevo, as an attorney, is also subject to discplinary proceedings for failing to report the ethical breach. HD probably has given enough info for an intrepid internet sleuth to determine his identity. I would want no part of it.

    0
    0
  11. ^^^ Further proof that attorneys are a huge drain on society

    0
    0
  12. I don’t think a blanket statement can be used there. I”m engaged to an attorney who is probably the kindest person i’ve ever met and not out to get anyone or their money. That said, i’ve met people at her jobs at big firms before and i’d say some were slimeballs. like anything in life whether its race or occupation or just people walking down the street.. you have good people and bad.

    0
    0
  13. Stevo says a lot of things and no one takes any of it seriously. any credibility he had was destroyed long ago.

    0
    0
  14. Glad we’re staying on point folks.

    0
    0
  15. “Glad we’re staying on point folks.”

    Fine. In answer to your questions:

    1. Some realtor source and/or Invsco called it Streeterville. Didn’t bother to fact check anywhere.

    2. The fraud itself? Not likely, except that the sales *should* be disregarded as comps, which could lead to lower appraisals.

    How’s that, James?

    0
    0
  16. “Stevo says a lot of things and no one takes any of it seriously. any credibility he had was destroyed long ago.”

    His credibility isn’t an element. He’s established a pattern of disparaging you.

    With all the other nonsense that gets deleted here, that should *certainly* be deleted.

    0
    0
  17. I know you’re trying to egg me on anon(tfo) but Steve’s comments are so ridiculous they don’t deserve to be commented on or responded to.

    The other day Councilman Beavers said that Forrest Claypool was a ‘born loser’. Claypool had no comment in response – but quite frankly – what do you say in response to such a absurd allegation?

    Yes, Steve has established a pattern of disparaging me, along with G and a few other people. I try to ignore it as best I can. He’s a troll on the internets and quite frankly, short of outing him (which I would not do), there isnt much I can do about him except ignore him.

    “Steve Heitman on June 24th, 2009 at 11:16 am

    Talk about Fraud… someone please make HD stop using his clerks for Cribchatter research. He is billing his clients for this crap.

    Unreal!”

    0
    0
  18. “The other day Councilman Beavers said that Forrest Claypool was a ‘born loser’.”

    Public figure exception.

    I’m actually trying to get Stevo to stop being so trollish. I’ve got no issue with his presenting his view of the market, where things are going, etc. I even don’t have a problem with his boasting. I think that his repreated derogatory harping on people–especially when it gets to this specific level–is inappropriate.

    0
    0
  19. Perfect – thanks.

    0
    0
  20. Stevo, while being outlandish, isn’t dumb enough to believe he could be held liable for libelous statements towards anonymous people while being anonymous himself on these here intertubes.

    I’m not even a lawyer and even I know that.

    With your litigation threats anon(tfo) you really sound like you’ve been spending some time with Joe Zekass (who is hilarious but I digress).

    0
    0
  21. “With your litigation threats anon(tfo)”

    You really are having a bad day Bob. I ain’t threatening anything, just pointing out that Stevo’s being a stupid bully.

    And, yes, it is possible that he could be held liable in such a circumstance–altho much more likely that he’d just lose his claok of anonymity thru discovery. It’s an “emerging” area of law, so it would probably be a test case, but liability is not an absurd conclusion.

    0
    0
  22. Speaking of the SHill, I posted some data in response to claims he made yesterday here: http://cribchatter.com/?p=7008#comment-40001

    0
    0
  23. It is extremely unlikely in any case, and hence an empty threat. Nobody is going to grant discovery if their anonymous online persona was perceived to be libelled by another anonymous online persona. You’d have half of the World of Warcraft kiddos suing each other.

    Remove the identity and you remove standing to sue for libel, it really is that simple.

    0
    0
  24. “Remove the identity and you remove standing to sue for libel, it really is that simple.”

    So HD offers his name up on the board (need to disclose to file anyway) and asserts Stevo knew who he was when he posted–speculation about identity has happened here. Boy, that was tough.

    0
    0
  25. you know what they say about lawyers – everyone hates them until they need one.

    0
    0
  26. No it would be a completely frivilous lawsuit once Stevo was able to show that HD revealed his identity for the sole purpose of pursuing libel.

    All of the potentially libelous statements have been made so far against an anonymous persona, so no standing. Just because ex-ante someone decides to reveal who they are doesn’t change the fact that at the time the accusations and name calling were made, they were made _against an anonymous persona_.

    0
    0
  27. “Just because ex-ante someone decides to reveal”

    You might want to check what “ex-ante” means, since you keep using it.

    0
    0
  28. I paid good money for that college class and if the prof was misusing the word I don’t care. We’re bringing ex-ante back.

    0
    0
  29. “I paid good money for that college class and if the prof was misusing the word I don’t care. We’re bringing ex-ante back.”

    Seriously? You had a professor who mixed up ex-ante and ex-post on a consistent basis, and used ex-ante frequently? I had some boneheaded instructors, but that’s the tops, really.

    0
    0
  30. Yes, ex-ante was used to describe past events (after the fact).

    0
    0
  31. Certain RE developers, including Invesco, relied upon friends to “purchase” condo units in bulk during the initial presale phase, to demonstrate that building was presold to level required by lender. Intent was that friends won’t necessarily close on units, just bump the construction loan forward. Not necessarily legal, certainly skating on the line of legitimate business practice.

    0
    0
  32. “you know what they say about lawyers – everyone hates them until they need one.”

    No they still hate them.

    The anonymity of the internet gives people the ability to say what they wish without risk of physical harm

    0
    0
  33. Steve Heitman on June 24th, 2009 at 10:02 pm

    Comment deleted by the Editor:

    0
    0
  34. Please try and stay civil to each other. And try and stay on topic.

    Everyone else reading this blog would appreciate it. They’re trying to talk about real estate.

    Thanks,

    Sabrina

    0
    0
  35. But I really like a good Steve Heitman bashing, in fact I think we all do.

    0
    0
  36. This is why I stopped reading the blog. Someone makes an assinine comment not related to real estate and the blog explodes. This time it’s about sueing someone over slander?

    0
    0
  37. “mayday on June 25th, 2009 at 8:08 am
    This is why I stopped reading the blog.”

    And yet you’re still here, reading this blog.

    0
    0
  38. Here’s some free unsolicited internet advice: If you’re looking for a blog where the all the comments relate directly to the threaded topic, that blog doesn’t exist.

    0
    0
  39. “Here’s some free unsolicited internet advice: If you’re looking for a blog where the all the comments relate directly to the threaded topic, that blog doesn’t exist.”

    Well, if the comments (1) require registration and (2) are heavily moderated–which is the case some places–it can be accomplished. But nowhere I’ve seen that doesn’t at least require verified registration even comes close.

    0
    0

Leave a Reply