Complaint Review: Ameriquest Mortgage

William McCloskey worked for Ameriquest from November 2004 till March 2005. William was fired after he reported illegal activity behind the walls of his Ameriquest  branch, which virtually mirrored all of the widespread reports about the company (to local detectives, the PA Attorney General, the S.E.C. and the F.B.I).

William sued Ameriquest Mortgage Company under the whistleblower provision of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002. The act pertained to publicly traded companies and issuers of securities under Section 15(d) and 12h-3 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Ameriquest was the largest issuer of asset-backed securities in the world during the refinance boom.William articulated how Ameriquest originated, processed and loosely underwrote toxic mortgages and then securitized them through their own subsidiary (Ameriquest Mortgage Securities) before the Department of Labor and the S.E.C. in McCloskey vrs Ameriquest Mortgage Company (2005-SOX-093).

Unfortunately, William ultimately lost the suit because of a technicality (he did not file his initial complaint with OSHA within 90-days). However, William thoroughly articulated how Ameriquest perpetrated the largest securities fraud scheme in the history of the United States. The securities fraud scheme was one of the biggest contributors to the collapse of the nation's markets and economy in September 2008. All of the bad paper issued by Ameriquest Mortgage Securities made its way around the world as collateralized debt obligations.

In McCloskey v. Ameriquest Mortgage Co.,ARB No. 08-123, ALJ No. 2005-SOX-93 (ARB Aug. 31, 2010), the Complainant argued that his SOX whistleblower complaint should be equitably construed as timely because the Respondent had a burden to inform him of the existence of the SOX, and failed to do so. The Complainant contended that the Respondent bore this burden based on the requirement to certify financial reports under Section 302 of the SOX. The ARB found that the Respondent did not have a burden to inform the Complainant of the whistleblower provision of the SOX and its filing deadlines, and that Section 302 was inapposite to the Complainant's case.

he Administrative Law Judges got it wrong about Section 302. The is due to the fact that Sarbox was thrown together by Congress in the wake of the Arthur Anderson, Worldcom and Enron scandals. William's opinion (and the opinion of many securities attorneys) is that all Sarbox cases should be brought directly before the S.E.C. and not he Department of Labor because the ALJ's do not have a background in securities law. Further, all initial Sarbox whistleblower complaints are filed with OSHA - a government entity that was not designed to deal with complex financial and securities fraud. Employees of OSHA have as much education about securities fraud as your average United States postal worker.

_____________________________________________________________________

I am the one who typed this message and I stand by what I heard and said. I was trying to Google an old Ameriquest associate and stumbled on this. Bottom line... It was a grimy business that mistreated employees and sucked the life out of people. Managers fired people for sport, many abused drugs and alcohol while at work. People forged appraisals and documents. And this isn't from a weak salesman who couldn't cut it. I was a top earner in both revenue and volume.

Treat people bad and there are repercussions. That said, I have a great education and career and a good life with few complaints. I know for a fact a lot of Ameriquest people ended up in jail or in court. In the end people get what's coming to them but at this point I have no animosity for any previous co workers because I am very happy with how my career has gone. Since then I have racked up a MBA, CPA, and am working on my DBA...

I win...

You are sadly mistaken and what you are doing is just wrong you.I know Bridget Pratt and she dident loose her marriage but you are scum