the florida court sanctions gmac for that conduct in 2006, but gmac rewarded its employee, who was the cause of those sanctions with a promotion. she became the supervisor of gmac's document signing department where she is the current -- supervisor of the current robo-signer, jeffrey stephan. it was his dishonest practices that forced gmac to halt sales and evictions on foreclosed homes on september 17 of this year. stephan who signs 8,000 to 10,000 documents a month testified that when his affidavit states he has personal knowledge of the facts stated in them, he does not. when his affidavits state he has custody and control of loan documents at issue, he doesn't. when his affidavit stated that he is attaching true and accurate copies of loan documents to his affidavits, he has know idea if that -- no idea if that is true because he doesn't even look at them. he admitted that when there is a signed affidavit, he doesn't even bother to do that. further more, he testified his practices are fully in accordance with gmac mortgage practice and procedures. when gmac mortgage realized the da

gmac sold the home to another investor. what do you think is going to happen to them? >> they're going to lose their home. >> reporter: you mean if somebody else is offering more than you are there's nothing you can do about it. >> we sometimes will go back and forth with a lender to get to the right price but we don't do anybody any good if we buy above market because from our perspective if a homeowner gets into trouble subsequent to borrowing money from us, we've got the same problem any other lender has, right, which is that we have to figure out how to get value back out of that home. >> reporter: though the outlook may be grim, prudhomme dumerants lawyers have stayed the eviction for the time-being. and given the new evidence that gmac foreclosures are legally suspect, who knows what might happen. >> if there is any way to get the property back we will fight to get it back until the, until the very end. >> reporter: but the fact that bcc has been able to help anyone in the dumerants' position is unique, says lawyer dave grossman. >> they're the only cdfi in the c

six weeks after the gm-ipo, may know better by it's old name gmac. a change that sees how quickly it can sell its stake and get back some of the $17 billion bailout money to keep the company afloat. more people ringing in the new year with an expensive bottle of bubbly. high end champagne coming back with the economy. on that note, happy new year. i'm jane king with the bloomberg business report. >> it's 5:55 now. you may remember the song it's always 6:00 somewhere. today it will always be midnight on new year's eve somewhere. (cheers and applause) >> this was midnight in new zealand where fireworks lit up the sky and hundreds of thousands celebrated the clock striking midnight in new zealand's capital. it happens to be the first large country in the world to celebrate the new year. the first major or big world city to ring in the new year is neighboring sidney, australia. more than a million people gathered along the sidney harbor bridge just about an hour ago to welcome 2011. >> oh! so exciting, so much fun. just ahead at 6 a.m. a may tradition co

. >> let's talk about gmac and an exit plan. the contrast with a lack of clear exit strategy in gmac, they have discussed the idea of a 2011 ipo. given that the company because reporting three consecutive quarters of profit, what is the talk of an ipo? >> as quickly as possible. if you look across the board, we're going to move as quickly as we can. to replace the government's investment, take those public, and access them as quickly as we can. we are working hard with management board of gmac to achieve that outcome. i do not know how quickly, but it will be much sooner than we thought six months ago. talk about executive compensation. when mr. feinberg testified before the panel, he stated if the culture of pay on wall street is not changed in the wake of tarp, the work has not been successful and it's not being followed, at the problem. do you agree? >> i would completely agree with that. >> do you think it is not the case? >> it a good question and a good time to be asking that question. i would say the following. we did two

capital, take the firms public, and exit as quickly as we can, and we're working hard with the board of gmac to achieve that outcome. i don't know how quickly, but it's going to be much sooner than we thought six months ago. >> change subjects again and talk about executive compensation. when mr. feinberg testified before our panel, he stated that is the culture of pay on wall street has not changed in the wake of t.a.r.p., i think our work has not been successful, and it's not -- and if it's not being followed, it is a problem. do you agree with him? >> if that were the case, i would agree with that. >> do you think that's not the case? >> very good question and a good time to be asking that question, and i guess i would say the following. we did two things over the last six months or so, # one in the dodd-frank reform act and another enactment for enforcing to bring about very substantial changes in compensation practice looking forward. first was a requirement for disclosure and give shareholders the right to vote on compensation packages, and the second is a set of standards on the desig

formerly gmac, j.p. morgan, and bank of america employees all admitted to this in depositions. here is the thing. front to back fraud. after fraudulent practices in the origination of loans but the new whiskey products with loan underwriting standards, now the banks, when they want to take people to court to foreclose, are showing up with phony documents. in this country we have laws about recording titles and the transfer of the notes to protect people's property rights. and the banks, it seems, lost their paperwork and instead of admitting that, or instead of finding the paperwork, or showing up in court with phony documents, and yet it seems as if people are being vilified in this country for the mere fact that they owe money. does what? being the language is not a crime. -- being delinquent is not a crime. been foreclosed upon is not a crime. going into bankruptcy in this country is not a crime. foreclosure fraud, showing up in court with phony affidavits and committing perjury, that is a crime. yet we are lionizing bankers and vilifying and debtors. there is something wron

capital, take the firms public, and exit as quickly as we can, and we're working hard with the board of gmac to achieve that outcome. i don't know how quickly, but it's going to be mu sooner than we thought six months ago. >> change subjects again and talk about executive compensation. when mr. feinberg testified before our panel, he stated that is the culture of pay on wall stre has not changed in the wake of t.a.r.p., i think our work has not been successful, and it's not -- and if it's not being followed, it is a problem. do you agree with him? >> if that were t case, i would agree with that. >> do you think that's not the case? >> very good question and a good time to be asking that question, and i guess i would say the following. we did two things over the last six months or so, # one in the dodd-frank reform act and another enactment for enforcing to bring about very substantial changes in compensation practice looking forward. first was a requirement for disclosure and give shareholders the right to vote on compensation packages, and the second is a set of standards on e design of com

capital, take the firms public, and exit as quickly as we can, and we're working hard with the board of gmac to achieve that outcome. i don't know how quickly, but it's going to be much sooner than we thought six months ago. >> change subjects again and talk about executive compensation. when mr. feinberg testified before our panel, he stated that is the culture of pay on wall street has not changed in the wake of t.a.r.p., i think our work has not been successful, and it's not -- and if it's not being followed, it is a problem. do you agree with him? >> if that were the case, i would agree with that. >> do you think that's not the case? >> very good question and a good time to be asking that question, and i guess i would say the following. we did two things over the last six months or so, # one in the dodd-frank reform act and another enactment for enforcing to bring about very substantial changes in compensation practice looking forward. first was a requirement for disclosure and give shareholders the right to vote on compensation packages, and the second is a set of standards on the desig

she is a supervisor of gmac 8's -signer.ent robo gmac was -- stefan, who signs 8000 to 10,000 documents a month, stated that he does not. when his affidavit states steadiest custody and control, he does not. when his affidavit stated that he was attaching true and accurate copies of all documents, he has no idea if that is true because he does not even look at them. he admitted that when the affidavits contain a signature by a notary public, they did not even bother to do that. he testified that his practices are fully in accordance with gmac mortgage practice and procedures. when gmac mortgage realized the admissions made by him in his deposition, rather than immediately moving to correct the problem, gmac sought to cover it up. they saw -- they sought sanctions against me personally for sharing the information with other lawyers around the country. they sought an order from the court that it be used in no other cases and that it be retrieved from lawyers that got it from me. the court denied the motions for sanctions and opposed further sanctions against gmac for its signing practices