Former Goldman Sachs Partner Donald Mullen Wants To Unclog Your Sink

Author:
Publish date:
Updated on

Former Goldman Sachs executive Donald Mullen, one of the architects of the subprime mortgage trade, is trying to raise at least $500 million for a fund that will buy foreclosed homes with an eye toward renting them out. Mullen, who until January was head of the credit and mortgage business inside Goldman's securities division, began marketing his Fundamental REO Access fund in earnest about a month ago, said seven people familiar with the matter, but who did not want to be identified because they do not work for the upstart fund...The new fund is part of a growing move by former Wall Street traders, hedge funds and private equity shops to profit from acquiring foreclosed homes and turning them into rental properties for their steady stream of cash. Two sources familiar with the foreclosed home market said Mullen has told people the fund could raise as much as $1 billion. [Reuters, related]

Related

Who Wouldn't Want To Sue Bank of America?

August was kind of rough for Bank of America on the legal front, to the point that we once said in Write-Offs "Everybody who hadn’t yet sued BofA did today, or will soon." But that turned out to be wrong! Or at least, it underestimated the continuing appeal of suing Bank of America, because now not only is everyone who is not Bank of America suing Bank of America, but so is Bank of America: [I]n Florida's Palm Beach County alone, Bank of America has sued itself for foreclosure 11 times since late March, according to foreclosure fraud activist Lynn Szymoniak, who forwarded one such foreclosure filing, dated March 29, 2012, to The Huffington Post. ... In the March 29 filing, Bank of America is seeking to foreclose on a condominium and names the condo owner and Bank of America as defendants in the suit. The company is literally seeking damages from itself in order to foreclose on the condo owner. Ha ha ha but why is Bank of America a delinquent condo owner? Because of course it's not; it's the second lien holder: