Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022
Page 1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: PART 60 RMBS PUTBACK LITIGATION
_______________________________________
NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE Index No.
CORPORATION ALTERNATIVE LOAN 777000/2015
TRUST, SERIES 2006-S3, by HSBC
BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
in its capacity as Trustee
pursuant to a Pooling and IAS Part 60
Servicing Agreement, dated as
of July 1, 2006,
Plaintiff,
-against-
NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC.,
Defendant.
_______________________________________
NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC.,
Third-Party Plaintiff,
-against-
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC,
Third-Party Defendants.
_______________________________________
VOLUME I
VIDEOTAPED REMOTE DEPOSITION OF
ANDRIA HARRIS
Thursday, March 11, 2021
11:01 a.m. Eastern Standard Time
Reported by:
GRETA H. DUCKETT, CCR, RPR, CRR, CVR-S, RVR-M-S
JOB NO.: SY001378
TransPerfect Legal Solutions
212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022
Page 2 Page 4
1 (Caption continued) 1 (Caption continued)
2 HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL Index No. 2 NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE Index No.
CORPORATION ALTERNATIVE 653390/2012
ASSOCIATION, in its capacity 650337/2013 3 LOAN TRUST, SERIES 2006-S4,
3 as Trustee of Nomura Home Equity by HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL IAS Part 60
Loan, Inc., Asset Backed IAS Part 60 4 ASSOCIATION, solely in its
4 Certificates, Series 2007-2, capacity as Trustee,
by HSBC BANK USA, National 5 Plaintiff,
5 Association, as Trustee, 6 -against-
7 NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC.,
Plaintiff, Defendant.
6 8 _____________________________________
-against- 9 NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC.,
7 Third-Party Plaintiff,
NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., 10
8 Defendant. -against-
11
____________________________________ WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and
9 12 OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC,
NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., Third-Party Defendants.
10 Third-Party Plaintiff, 13 ______________________________________
11 -against- 14 NOMURA HOME EQUITY LOAN, INC., Index No.
SERIES 2006-FM2, pursuant to a
653783/2012
12 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and OCWEN 15 Pooling and Servicing Agreement,
LOAN SERVICING, LLC, dated as of October 1, 2006, by
13 Third-Party Defendants. 16 HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL IAS Part 60
_____________________________________ ASSOCIATION, solely in its
14 17 capacity as the Trustee,
15 (Caption continued next page) Plaintiff,
18 -against-
16 19 NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC.,
17 Third-Party Defendant.
18 20 ____________________________________
19 21 NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC.,
20 Third-Party Plaintiff,
21 22 -against-
23 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and OCWEN
22 LOAN SERVICING, LLC,
23 24 Third-Party Defendant.
24 ____________________________________
25 25 (Caption continued next page)
Page 3 Page 5
1 (Caption continued) 1 (Caption continued)
2 NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE Index No. 2 NOMURA HOME EQUITY LOAN, INC., Index No.
CORPORATION ALTERNATIVE LOAN 652619/2012 SERIES 2007-3, pursuant to a651124/2013
3 TRUST, SERIES 2006-S3, by HSBC 3 Pooling and Servicing Agreement,
BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, dated as of April 1, 2007, by
4 in its capacity as Trustee
IAS Part 60 4 HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL IAS Part 60
pursuant to a Pooling and ASSOCIATION, solely in its
5 Servicing Agreement, dated as 5 capacity as Trustee,
of July 1, 2006, Plaintiff,
6 Plaintiff, 6
-against- -against-
7 7
NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC.,
8 Defendant. 8 Third-Party Defendant.
______________________________________ _____________________________________
9 9
10 NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC.,
Third-Party Plaintiff, 10 Third-Party Plaintiff,
11 -against- 11 -against-
12 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and OCWEN LOAN 12 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and OCWEN
SERVICING, LLC, LOAN SERVICING, LLC,
13 Third-Party Defendants. 13 Third-Party Defendant.
______________________________________ _____________________________________
14 14
15 (Caption continued next page) 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
2 (Pages 2 to 5)
TransPerfect Legal Solutions
212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022
Page 6 Page 8
1 March 11, 2021 1 APPEARANCES
2 11:01 a.m. Eastern Standard Time 2 CONTINUED
3 3
4 Videotaped remote deposition of 4 ON BEHALF OF HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL
5 ANDRIA HARRIS, before Greta H. Duckett, CCR, ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE:
5
6 RPR, CRR, CVR-S, RVR-M-S. 6 HOLWELL SHUSTER & GOLDBERG
7 7 BY: EILEEN MONAGHAN DELUCIA, ESQ.
8 8 425 Lexington Ave
9 9 New York, New York 10017
10 10 PHONE: (646)837-5151
11 11 EMAIL: edelucia@hsgllp.com
12 12
13 13 ON BEHALF OF THE THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT
14 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., AND THE WITNESS:
15 14
16 15 JONES DAY
17 16 BY: SUSAN E. KESSLER, ESQ.
18 17 500 Grant Street, Suite 4500
19
18 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219-2514
19 PHONE: (412)394-7234
20 20 EMAIL: skessler@jonesday.com
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
Page 7 Page 9
1 APPEARANCES 1 APPEARANCES
2 CONTINUED
2 3
3 4 ON BEHALF OF THE THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING:
4 ON BEHALF OF NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC.: 5
5 6
6 CONSTANTINE CANNON LLP CHELNEY LAW GROUP
7
7 BY: JOEL CHERNOV, ESQ. BY: STAN CHELNEY, ESQ.
8 BY: AMIANNA STOVALL, ESQ. 8
BY: PHILIPP SMAYLOVSKY, ESQ.
9 BY: MATTHEW MOORE, ESQ. 9
10 335 Madison Avenue, 9th Floor 28 Liberty Street, 6th Floor
10
11 New York, New York 10017 New York, New York 10005
12 PHONE: (212)350-2757 11
PHONE: (212)653-0022
13 EMAIL: jchernov@constantinecannon.com 12
14 EMAIL: astovall@constantinecannon.com EMAIL: stan@chelneylaw.com
15 EMAIL: mmoore@constantinecannon.com 13
EMAIL: philipp@chelneylaw.com
16 -and- 14
17 SHEARMAN & STERLING 15
ALSO PRESENT:
18 BY: SHICHU "SUZIE" JING, ESQ. 16
19 599 Lexington Avenue 17
Charlie Bowman, videographer
20 New York, New York 10022 18
21 PHONE: (212)848-4000 19
EMAIL: suzie.jing@shearman.com
20
22 21
23 22
24 23
24
25 25
3 (Pages 6 to 9)
TransPerfect Legal Solutions
212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022
Page 86 Page 88
1 timelines for those non-GSE loans to GSE 1 policies or not.
2 timelines, you know, for tracking purposes? 2 Q. Were there informal policies, you
3 A. No. 3 know, for refurbishment, or is it much the same
4 Q. Was there any standard that you 4 as what you told me you did when you were with
5 compared your foreclosure timelines to for the 5 Homecomings and Great Western?
6 non-GSE loans? 6 MR. CHELNEY: Objection.
7 A. We -- just like other companies, I 7 A. I don't recall if I had written
8 would have specified exception reports and 8 policies on it or not, but it would still be an
9 either built them myself or worked with a 9 asset-by-asset decision. I do recall we did
10 business analyst to determine what the report 10 very little refurbishment at The Money Store.
11 should look like, and then it would be created 11 Q. And when you were with The Money
12 by the technology department. And yes, I would 12 Store, were you again using vendors to -- for
13 track timelines, but I'm looking only for 13 the REO properties -- REO sales?
14 exceptions so that I can investigate if it's a 14 A. Yes.
15 legitimate exception or not, having nothing to 15 Q. And did you use the same vendors
16 do with whether or not it's a GSE loan. 16 that you had used when you were with
17 Q. Did you track your foreclosure 17 Homecomings?
18 counsel when you were with The Money Store? 18 A. I don't recall who I used. It's
19 A. Did we -- 19 possible I used some of the same vendors.
20 Q. Did -- did you monitor the 20 Q. Do you know whether there were,
21 foreclosure counsel that you hired? 21 again, any -- whether you set any -- whether
22 A. In what way? I -- 22 there were any policies and procedures for the
23 Q. At all. Was there any method or 23 brokers that those vendors hired?
24 means by which you monitored the foreclosure 24 A. That, I do not know.
25 counsel you used? 25 Q. Do you know whether those brokers
Page 87 Page 89
1 A. Well, our system would have allowed 1 that the vendors hired had local expertise with
2 the foreclose -- foreclosure companies that we 2 respect to the properties they were selling?
3 worked with that had attorney networks across 3 A. I do -- I -- I do not know how they
4 the nation to update our system with data 4 specifically chose their brokers. They -- they
5 points along the way, which is how my exception 5 were judged on overall portfolio performance
6 reports would identify exceptions. 6 that we assigned -- of the portfolio we
7 Q. In paragraph 9, you also reference 7 assigned to them.
8 REO sales. And how big was your team, your REO 8 Q. And were the metrics for the
9 team, when you were with The Money Store? 9 portfolio performance the same that we
10 A. I don't recall specifically how big 10 discussed with Homecomings?
11 my REO team was. I had roughly 500 employees 11 A. It would have been similar.
12 within my default management group. 12 Q. Any differences you recall?
13 Q. Were you involved in any of the 13 A. None that I recall.
14 day-to-day REO decisions? 14 Q. When you were with The Money Store,
15 A. I was involved in decisions that 15 do you recall whether you had any policy or
16 would have been elevated to me. I would have 16 procedure for reviewing loss severities?
17 had managers under me that I held accountable 17 A. In regards to REOs specifically?
18 to -- I don't remember exactly, but what -- 18 Q. In regards to the loans, not
19 whatever I would have held them accountable to. 19 necessarily REO -- in the REO context. More in
20 Q. Did you, when you were with The 20 the default context.
21 Money Store, have any set policies for 21 A. Well, there -- there would have
22 refurbishment? 22 been periodic times when -- when all the loans
23 MR. CHELNEY: Object to the 23 and everything was run through the -- the NPV
24 form. 24 model to determine whether or not we should --
25 A. I don't recall if there were set 25 we should continue to move forward or -- or we
23 (Pages 86 to 89)
TransPerfect Legal Solutions
212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022
Page 134 Page 136
1 thereafter? 1 servicers are set up differently in how they
2 A. Yeah. I mean, typically, once a 2 set up their processes to contact customers.
3 borrower is a month or more delinquent, you are 3 Q. Is there -- in your experience, is
4 going to contact the borrower and start 4 there a time frame when those loans typically
5 discovering what the issue is and how to 5 go to loss mitigation?
6 resolve it. 6 MR. CHELNEY: Objection.
7 Q. And in your experience, is there a 7 Asked and answered.
8 set -- I mean, I know you just said a month or 8 BY MR. CHERNOV:
9 more delinquent. But is there a set time frame 9 Q. I mean, assuming loss mitigation is
10 that you see servicers looking at that? Is it 10 unsuccessful or -- and let's assume -- strike
11 a month or more? I mean, that's -- is it a 11 that.
12 month? two months? three months delinquent 12 Is there a time frame that's
13 where these questions get asked, in your 13 typical, in your experience?
14 experience? Or is it more the borrower's a 14 A. For what?
15 month down; what's going on, and you -- you 15 Q. For loans to go to loss mitigation,
16 know, those inquiries are made? 16 slash -- or the default departments?
17 MR. CHELNEY: Object to the 17 MR. CHELNEY: Objection.
18 form. 18 A. Like I said before, different
19 You can answer. 19 servicers are set up differently as to who
20 A. When a borrower is a month -- or -- 20 reaches out to the borrower. And, I mean,
21 or just past delinquent, you're going to start 21 in -- in -- in the more recent past, single
22 making collection calls. And depending upon 22 point of contact has been a big deal. And so
23 the result of those collection calls, the loan 23 that single point of contact could be someone
24 may roll over into the loss mitigation 24 in a collection department, someone in a loss
25 department. 25 mitigation department, or that person could
Page 135 Page 137
1 Q. And -- 1 have responsibility for both areas. So there's
2 (Simultaneous speakers.) 2 no pat answer.
3 A. I -- I don't consider the 3 Q. In your experience, is there a time
4 collection department part of loss mitigation. 4 frame when -- and here I'm talking about
5 Q. And is -- am I -- is it fair to 5 securitized loans -- a time frame when, as a
6 say, then, based on what -- what I heard, that 6 matter of course, the servicer will run its NPV
7 the loans would roll over to loss mit, 7 model to determine whether to proceed with a
8 dependent on what the collections people 8 charge-off versus foreclosure?
9 learned, as opposed to a specific time frame? 9 MR. CHELNEY: Object to the
10 A. Yes. That's true. 10 form.
11 Q. Is there a set -- is there, 11 A. I want to make sure I understood
12 nevertheless, a set time frame? For example, 12 your question, so can you ask it again?
13 let's say a collections person couldn't be -- 13 Q. Sure. I was trying to get a sense
14 couldn't reach the borrower, and now the 14 of when, as a matter of course -- if there is
15 loan's, for example, two months down. Would 15 one -- servicers will determine whether to
16 that then transfer to loss mitigation as a 16 charge off a loan as opposed to foreclose.
17 matter of course, or would that stay somewhere 17 When will they make that assessment?
18 else? 18 MR. CHELNEY: Objection.
19 MR. CHELNEY: Object to the 19 A. Servicers typically have a -- some
20 form. 20 sort of time period, whether that be monthly or
21 BY MR. CHERNOV: 21 whatever their -- their time period is set at,
22 Q. In your experience. 22 where they will run loans through that model.
23 A. If collections is unsuccessful for 23 But they're only going to run delinquent loans
24 whatever reason, it will typically go to loss 24 through that model.
25 mitigation. That being said, different 25 Q. Do you know how delinquent the
35 (Pages 134 to 137)
TransPerfect Legal Solutions
212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022
Page 138 Page 140
1 loans are -- is there a -- is there an industry 1 A. That depends on what time period,
2 practice as to how delinquent those loans are 2 what circumstances, what -- I mean -- I mean,
3 before they're run through those models? 3 that's -- that's a very difficult question to
4 A. To the best of my knowledge and 4 answer, because loss severities over 100
5 belief, every servicer has their own policies 5 percent are not uncommon at all in certain
6 regarding that. 6 economies and time frames, in my experience
7 Q. So you're saying -- so it'd be fair 7 through the cycles I've lived through with
8 to say that some will run at 30, some at 60, 8 mortgage loan servicing. So the answer to that
9 and some at 90? 9 question is: It depends.
10 A. I guess that -- that's fair to say. 10 Q. In the -- before the 2008 time
11 However, all servicers are going to attempt 11 frame, so before the recession of that -- you
12 loss mitigation before they make any other, 12 know, that recession -- would you look at those
13 more radical, decision. 13 loans for which the loss severities were
14 Q. Understood. In connection with 14 greater than 100 percent to try to figure out
15 overseeing servicing functions as a consultant, 15 why they were 100 percent or why they were over
16 did you ever -- were you ever involved in 16 100 percent?
17 tracking foreclosure timelines? 17 A. I'm going to still say that
18 A. If I have responsibility for a 18 depends, because if it's a first payment
19 particular area as a consultant or an employee 19 default, the loss severity is automatically
20 or I'm advising on that area, I am going to use 20 going to be higher than somebody that defaulted
21 foreclosure timelines just simply as -- as a 21 15 years into a 30-year loan. So, again,
22 metric to help me identify what loans I should 22 you're going to build exception reports to --
23 take a closer look at to see why it may be at 23 to identify what you believe would -- would
24 that stage of a timeline. 24 indicate that you should look at the loan file
25 Q. Do you ever compare, either as a 25 and find out if the -- the circumstances and
Page 139 Page 141
1 consultant or as an employee, the foreclosure 1 situation have a completely valid reason or is
2 timelines to the GSE timelines for non-GSE 2 it something I need to dig deeper into.
3 loans? 3 Q. Let me just follow up on something
4 A. No. 4 you said there. Or maybe make sure we're
5 Q. Were you ever tracking, either as a 5 talking about the same thing. When you're
6 consultant or as an employee, loss 6 measuring loss severities, are you measuring it
7 severities -- or loans with loss severities in 7 for the unpaid principal balance, or are you
8 excess of 100 percent? 8 measuring it against the original principal --
9 MR. CHELNEY: Objection. 9 you know, the original principal balance?
10 A. All servicers run models to look at 10 MR. CHELNEY: Object to the
11 loss severities. 11 form.
12 Can you ask me your question again? 12 Q. If you -- if you follow what I'm
13 Q. Sure. Did you track -- did you 13 saying. Does that make -- does my question
14 track loss severity -- strike that. 14 make sense to you?
15 You told me -- just looking at your 15 Let me try it again. Let me try to
16 answer, you said, All servicers run models and 16 explain it, and maybe I can -- you said that --
17 track loss severities. 17 if I understood, you said that one -- your loss
18 A. Well -- 18 severity on a loan that defaults in one month
19 Q. And those loss severities were 19 is going to be much higher than the loss that
20 greater than 100 percent. Did any of the 20 you'll incur with a borrower who makes 15 years
21 servicers you worked for or when you were 21 of payments.
22 working as a consultant then go look at those 22 A. Right.
23 loans to try to determine why those severities 23 Q. So that makes me think we're
24 ended up being over 100 percent? 24 talk -- how we measure the loss severities,
25 MR. CHELNEY: Object to form. 25 from that answer, what we're looking at for the
36 (Pages 138 to 141)
TransPerfect Legal Solutions
212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022
Page 154 Page 156
1 that's not -- not always possible. 1 matter, results in more bids for the property?
2 Q. Would we want to -- would we need 2 MR. CHELNEY: Objection.
3 to know the expected time to sell the property? 3 A. I don't -- I don't know how to
4 A. That would be helpful. 4 answer that question on an individual-loan
5 Q. Anything else that you can think of 5 basis.
6 that we would want to know to make that 6 Q. Well, if we're trying to determine
7 determination as to whether the servicer's 7 whether the servicer's requirement that a
8 decision to foreclose or charge off was the 8 borrower use an auction website, would we want
9 correct one? 9 to know that, in general, the auction website
10 A. It would be helpful to know what 10 results in quicker sales of the property?
11 your monthly carry costs have been. 11 A. We -- we would want to be under the
12 Q. And anything else you can think of 12 impression that it is likely that sales would
13 that we would want to know? 13 attract more buyers and -- and result in what
14 A. Not without giving it a lot more 14 you said.
15 thought. 15 Q. And would we want to see -- would
16 Q. Okay. Do you know if each of those 16 you expect there to be data to support that
17 factors was accounted for in Ocwen's NPV model 17 impression?
18 that you reference in paragraph 22 of your 18 MR. CHELNEY: Objection.
19 report? 19 A. I would have had a conversation
20 A. I'd like to read what I wrote. 20 with the auction house, and so I would have
21 Q. Sure. 21 relied upon the results of my interview, not
22 A. Ask your question again. 22 necessarily printed data.
23 Q. Sure. Do you know if each of the 23 Q. Do you know whether there were
24 factors we just discussed is accounted for in 24 conversations between Ocwen and any
25 Ocwen's NPV model that you reference in 25 representatives at Hubzu that addressed whether
Page 155 Page 157
1 paragraph 22 of your report? 1 the auction website resulted in more bids or
2 A. Based upon the depositions I read, 2 higher bids for properties --
3 the key factors are mentioned that they are 3 MR. CHELNEY: Objection.
4 included in the depositions. But I do not know 4 BY MR. CHERNOV:
5 every factor. 5 Q. -- than otherwise?
6 Q. And do you know whether the 6 MR. CHELNEY: Objection.
7 individual -- or the information on a loan-by- 7 A. I would have -- I have not had any
8 loan basis is in the files that were produced 8 conversations with people at Ocwen.
9 so that we could do that evaluation on a loan- 9 Q. If we're evaluating a servicer's
10 by-loan basis? 10 requirement that short sales be listed on an
11 MR. CHELNEY: Object to form. 11 auction website, would you want to know that,
12 A. I have no idea. 12 at least as a general matter, the prices that
13 Q. If the servicer performance we're 13 are obtained are higher than when not using the
14 evaluating again involves the requirement that 14 auction website?
15 a servicer use an auction website for short 15 MR. CHELNEY: Objection.
16 sales, and we want to evaluate whether that was 16 A. As a -- as a general matter, I
17 in accordance with accepted servicing 17 would want to believe that an auction would
18 practices, what information would we need to 18 give us a good possibility of achieving a
19 know in order to undertake that examination? 19 higher price because there is likely to be more
20 MR. CHELNEY: Object to form. 20 bidders.
21 A. I think all you need to know is 21 Q. If the servicer performance --
22 that the servicer used prudent judgment, based 22 strike that.
23 upon the circumstances at the time. 23 Would you also want to know that --
24 Q. Well, would we want to know that 24 would you agree with me that using an auction
25 the auction website, at least as a general 25 website results in higher costs than not using
40 (Pages 154 to 157)
TransPerfect Legal Solutions
212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022
Page 297
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: PART 60 RMBS PUTBACK LITIGATION
_______________________________________
NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE Index No.
CORPORATION ALTERNATIVE LOAN 777000/2015
TRUST, SERIES 2006-S3, by HSBC
BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
in its capacity as Trustee
pursuant to a Pooling and IAS Part 60
Servicing Agreement, dated as
of July 1, 2006,
Plaintiff,
-against-
NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC.,
Defendant.
_______________________________________
NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC.,
Third-Party Plaintiff,
-against-
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC,
Third-Party Defendants.
_______________________________________
VOLUME II
VIDEOTAPED REMOTE DEPOSITION OF
ANDRIA HARRIS
Friday, March 12, 2021
11:01 a.m. Eastern Standard Time
Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022 Page 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: PART 60 RMBS PUTBACK LITIGATION _______________________________________ NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE Index No. CORPORATION ALTERNATIVE LOAN 777000/2015 TRUST, SERIES 2006-S3, by HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, in its capacity as Trustee pursuant to a Pooling and IAS Part 60 Servicing Agreement, dated as of July 1, 2006, Plaintiff, -against- NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., Defendant. _______________________________________ NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., Third-Party Plaintiff, -against- WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Third-Party Defendants. _______________________________________ VOLUME I VIDEOTAPED REMOTE DEPOSITION OF ANDRIA HARRIS Thursday, March 11, 2021 11:01 a.m. Eastern Standard Time Reported by: GRETA H. DUCKETT, CCR, RPR, CRR, CVR-S, RVR-M-S JOB NO.: SY001378 TransPerfect Legal Solutions 212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022 Page 2 Page 4 1 (Caption continued) 1 (Caption continued) 2 HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL Index No. 2 NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE Index No. CORPORATION ALTERNATIVE 653390/2012 ASSOCIATION, in its capacity 650337/2013 3 LOAN TRUST, SERIES 2006-S4, 3 as Trustee of Nomura Home Equity by HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL IAS Part 60 Loan, Inc., Asset Backed IAS Part 60 4 ASSOCIATION, solely in its 4 Certificates, Series 2007-2, capacity as Trustee, by HSBC BANK USA, National 5 Plaintiff, 5 Association, as Trustee, 6 -against- 7 NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., Plaintiff, Defendant. 6 8 _____________________________________ -against- 9 NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., 7 Third-Party Plaintiff, NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., 10 8 Defendant. -against- 11 ____________________________________ WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and 9 12 OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., Third-Party Defendants. 10 Third-Party Plaintiff, 13 ______________________________________ 11 -against- 14 NOMURA HOME EQUITY LOAN, INC., Index No. SERIES 2006-FM2, pursuant to a 653783/2012 12 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and OCWEN 15 Pooling and Servicing Agreement, LOAN SERVICING, LLC, dated as of October 1, 2006, by 13 Third-Party Defendants. 16 HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL IAS Part 60 _____________________________________ ASSOCIATION, solely in its 14 17 capacity as the Trustee, 15 (Caption continued next page) Plaintiff, 18 -against- 16 19 NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., 17 Third-Party Defendant. 18 20 ____________________________________ 19 21 NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., 20 Third-Party Plaintiff, 21 22 -against- 23 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and OCWEN 22 LOAN SERVICING, LLC, 23 24 Third-Party Defendant. 24 ____________________________________ 25 25 (Caption continued next page) Page 3 Page 5 1 (Caption continued) 1 (Caption continued) 2 NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE Index No. 2 NOMURA HOME EQUITY LOAN, INC., Index No. CORPORATION ALTERNATIVE LOAN 652619/2012 SERIES 2007-3, pursuant to a651124/2013 3 TRUST, SERIES 2006-S3, by HSBC 3 Pooling and Servicing Agreement, BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, dated as of April 1, 2007, by 4 in its capacity as Trustee IAS Part 60 4 HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL IAS Part 60 pursuant to a Pooling and ASSOCIATION, solely in its 5 Servicing Agreement, dated as 5 capacity as Trustee, of July 1, 2006, Plaintiff, 6 Plaintiff, 6 -against- -against- 7 7 NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., 8 Defendant. 8 Third-Party Defendant. ______________________________________ _____________________________________ 9 9 10 NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., Third-Party Plaintiff, 10 Third-Party Plaintiff, 11 -against- 11 -against- 12 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and OCWEN LOAN 12 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and OCWEN SERVICING, LLC, LOAN SERVICING, LLC, 13 Third-Party Defendants. 13 Third-Party Defendant. ______________________________________ _____________________________________ 14 14 15 (Caption continued next page) 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 19 20 20 21 21 22 22 23 23 24 24 25 25 2 (Pages 2 to 5) TransPerfect Legal Solutions 212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022 Page 6 Page 8 1 March 11, 2021 1 APPEARANCES 2 11:01 a.m. Eastern Standard Time 2 CONTINUED 3 3 4 Videotaped remote deposition of 4 ON BEHALF OF HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL 5 ANDRIA HARRIS, before Greta H. Duckett, CCR, ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE: 5 6 RPR, CRR, CVR-S, RVR-M-S. 6 HOLWELL SHUSTER & GOLDBERG 7 7 BY: EILEEN MONAGHAN DELUCIA, ESQ. 8 8 425 Lexington Ave 9 9 New York, New York 10017 10 10 PHONE: (646)837-5151 11 11 EMAIL: edelucia@hsgllp.com 12 12 13 13 ON BEHALF OF THE THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT 14 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., AND THE WITNESS: 15 14 16 15 JONES DAY 17 16 BY: SUSAN E. KESSLER, ESQ. 18 17 500 Grant Street, Suite 4500 19 18 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219-2514 19 PHONE: (412)394-7234 20 20 EMAIL: skessler@jonesday.com 21 21 22 22 23 23 24 24 25 25 Page 7 Page 9 1 APPEARANCES 1 APPEARANCES 2 CONTINUED 2 3 3 4 ON BEHALF OF THE THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT OCWEN LOAN SERVICING: 4 ON BEHALF OF NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC.: 5 5 6 6 CONSTANTINE CANNON LLP CHELNEY LAW GROUP 7 7 BY: JOEL CHERNOV, ESQ. BY: STAN CHELNEY, ESQ. 8 BY: AMIANNA STOVALL, ESQ. 8 BY: PHILIPP SMAYLOVSKY, ESQ. 9 BY: MATTHEW MOORE, ESQ. 9 10 335 Madison Avenue, 9th Floor 28 Liberty Street, 6th Floor 10 11 New York, New York 10017 New York, New York 10005 12 PHONE: (212)350-2757 11 PHONE: (212)653-0022 13 EMAIL: jchernov@constantinecannon.com 12 14 EMAIL: astovall@constantinecannon.com EMAIL: stan@chelneylaw.com 15 EMAIL: mmoore@constantinecannon.com 13 EMAIL: philipp@chelneylaw.com 16 -and- 14 17 SHEARMAN & STERLING 15 ALSO PRESENT: 18 BY: SHICHU "SUZIE" JING, ESQ. 16 19 599 Lexington Avenue 17 Charlie Bowman, videographer 20 New York, New York 10022 18 21 PHONE: (212)848-4000 19 EMAIL: suzie.jing@shearman.com 20 22 21 23 22 24 23 24 25 25 3 (Pages 6 to 9) TransPerfect Legal Solutions 212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022 Page 86 Page 88 1 timelines for those non-GSE loans to GSE 1 policies or not. 2 timelines, you know, for tracking purposes? 2 Q. Were there informal policies, you 3 A. No. 3 know, for refurbishment, or is it much the same 4 Q. Was there any standard that you 4 as what you told me you did when you were with 5 compared your foreclosure timelines to for the 5 Homecomings and Great Western? 6 non-GSE loans? 6 MR. CHELNEY: Objection. 7 A. We -- just like other companies, I 7 A. I don't recall if I had written 8 would have specified exception reports and 8 policies on it or not, but it would still be an 9 either built them myself or worked with a 9 asset-by-asset decision. I do recall we did 10 business analyst to determine what the report 10 very little refurbishment at The Money Store. 11 should look like, and then it would be created 11 Q. And when you were with The Money 12 by the technology department. And yes, I would 12 Store, were you again using vendors to -- for 13 track timelines, but I'm looking only for 13 the REO properties -- REO sales? 14 exceptions so that I can investigate if it's a 14 A. Yes. 15 legitimate exception or not, having nothing to 15 Q. And did you use the same vendors 16 do with whether or not it's a GSE loan. 16 that you had used when you were with 17 Q. Did you track your foreclosure 17 Homecomings? 18 counsel when you were with The Money Store? 18 A. I don't recall who I used. It's 19 A. Did we -- 19 possible I used some of the same vendors. 20 Q. Did -- did you monitor the 20 Q. Do you know whether there were, 21 foreclosure counsel that you hired? 21 again, any -- whether you set any -- whether 22 A. In what way? I -- 22 there were any policies and procedures for the 23 Q. At all. Was there any method or 23 brokers that those vendors hired? 24 means by which you monitored the foreclosure 24 A. That, I do not know. 25 counsel you used? 25 Q. Do you know whether those brokers Page 87 Page 89 1 A. Well, our system would have allowed 1 that the vendors hired had local expertise with 2 the foreclose -- foreclosure companies that we 2 respect to the properties they were selling? 3 worked with that had attorney networks across 3 A. I do -- I -- I do not know how they 4 the nation to update our system with data 4 specifically chose their brokers. They -- they 5 points along the way, which is how my exception 5 were judged on overall portfolio performance 6 reports would identify exceptions. 6 that we assigned -- of the portfolio we 7 Q. In paragraph 9, you also reference 7 assigned to them. 8 REO sales. And how big was your team, your REO 8 Q. And were the metrics for the 9 team, when you were with The Money Store? 9 portfolio performance the same that we 10 A. I don't recall specifically how big 10 discussed with Homecomings? 11 my REO team was. I had roughly 500 employees 11 A. It would have been similar. 12 within my default management group. 12 Q. Any differences you recall? 13 Q. Were you involved in any of the 13 A. None that I recall. 14 day-to-day REO decisions? 14 Q. When you were with The Money Store, 15 A. I was involved in decisions that 15 do you recall whether you had any policy or 16 would have been elevated to me. I would have 16 procedure for reviewing loss severities? 17 had managers under me that I held accountable 17 A. In regards to REOs specifically? 18 to -- I don't remember exactly, but what -- 18 Q. In regards to the loans, not 19 whatever I would have held them accountable to. 19 necessarily REO -- in the REO context. More in 20 Q. Did you, when you were with The 20 the default context. 21 Money Store, have any set policies for 21 A. Well, there -- there would have 22 refurbishment? 22 been periodic times when -- when all the loans 23 MR. CHELNEY: Object to the 23 and everything was run through the -- the NPV 24 form. 24 model to determine whether or not we should -- 25 A. I don't recall if there were set 25 we should continue to move forward or -- or we 23 (Pages 86 to 89) TransPerfect Legal Solutions 212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022 Page 134 Page 136 1 thereafter? 1 servicers are set up differently in how they 2 A. Yeah. I mean, typically, once a 2 set up their processes to contact customers. 3 borrower is a month or more delinquent, you are 3 Q. Is there -- in your experience, is 4 going to contact the borrower and start 4 there a time frame when those loans typically 5 discovering what the issue is and how to 5 go to loss mitigation? 6 resolve it. 6 MR. CHELNEY: Objection. 7 Q. And in your experience, is there a 7 Asked and answered. 8 set -- I mean, I know you just said a month or 8 BY MR. CHERNOV: 9 more delinquent. But is there a set time frame 9 Q. I mean, assuming loss mitigation is 10 that you see servicers looking at that? Is it 10 unsuccessful or -- and let's assume -- strike 11 a month or more? I mean, that's -- is it a 11 that. 12 month? two months? three months delinquent 12 Is there a time frame that's 13 where these questions get asked, in your 13 typical, in your experience? 14 experience? Or is it more the borrower's a 14 A. For what? 15 month down; what's going on, and you -- you 15 Q. For loans to go to loss mitigation, 16 know, those inquiries are made? 16 slash -- or the default departments? 17 MR. CHELNEY: Object to the 17 MR. CHELNEY: Objection. 18 form. 18 A. Like I said before, different 19 You can answer. 19 servicers are set up differently as to who 20 A. When a borrower is a month -- or -- 20 reaches out to the borrower. And, I mean, 21 or just past delinquent, you're going to start 21 in -- in -- in the more recent past, single 22 making collection calls. And depending upon 22 point of contact has been a big deal. And so 23 the result of those collection calls, the loan 23 that single point of contact could be someone 24 may roll over into the loss mitigation 24 in a collection department, someone in a loss 25 department. 25 mitigation department, or that person could Page 135 Page 137 1 Q. And -- 1 have responsibility for both areas. So there's 2 (Simultaneous speakers.) 2 no pat answer. 3 A. I -- I don't consider the 3 Q. In your experience, is there a time 4 collection department part of loss mitigation. 4 frame when -- and here I'm talking about 5 Q. And is -- am I -- is it fair to 5 securitized loans -- a time frame when, as a 6 say, then, based on what -- what I heard, that 6 matter of course, the servicer will run its NPV 7 the loans would roll over to loss mit, 7 model to determine whether to proceed with a 8 dependent on what the collections people 8 charge-off versus foreclosure? 9 learned, as opposed to a specific time frame? 9 MR. CHELNEY: Object to the 10 A. Yes. That's true. 10 form. 11 Q. Is there a set -- is there, 11 A. I want to make sure I understood 12 nevertheless, a set time frame? For example, 12 your question, so can you ask it again? 13 let's say a collections person couldn't be -- 13 Q. Sure. I was trying to get a sense 14 couldn't reach the borrower, and now the 14 of when, as a matter of course -- if there is 15 loan's, for example, two months down. Would 15 one -- servicers will determine whether to 16 that then transfer to loss mitigation as a 16 charge off a loan as opposed to foreclose. 17 matter of course, or would that stay somewhere 17 When will they make that assessment? 18 else? 18 MR. CHELNEY: Objection. 19 MR. CHELNEY: Object to the 19 A. Servicers typically have a -- some 20 form. 20 sort of time period, whether that be monthly or 21 BY MR. CHERNOV: 21 whatever their -- their time period is set at, 22 Q. In your experience. 22 where they will run loans through that model. 23 A. If collections is unsuccessful for 23 But they're only going to run delinquent loans 24 whatever reason, it will typically go to loss 24 through that model. 25 mitigation. That being said, different 25 Q. Do you know how delinquent the 35 (Pages 134 to 137) TransPerfect Legal Solutions 212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022 Page 138 Page 140 1 loans are -- is there a -- is there an industry 1 A. That depends on what time period, 2 practice as to how delinquent those loans are 2 what circumstances, what -- I mean -- I mean, 3 before they're run through those models? 3 that's -- that's a very difficult question to 4 A. To the best of my knowledge and 4 answer, because loss severities over 100 5 belief, every servicer has their own policies 5 percent are not uncommon at all in certain 6 regarding that. 6 economies and time frames, in my experience 7 Q. So you're saying -- so it'd be fair 7 through the cycles I've lived through with 8 to say that some will run at 30, some at 60, 8 mortgage loan servicing. So the answer to that 9 and some at 90? 9 question is: It depends. 10 A. I guess that -- that's fair to say. 10 Q. In the -- before the 2008 time 11 However, all servicers are going to attempt 11 frame, so before the recession of that -- you 12 loss mitigation before they make any other, 12 know, that recession -- would you look at those 13 more radical, decision. 13 loans for which the loss severities were 14 Q. Understood. In connection with 14 greater than 100 percent to try to figure out 15 overseeing servicing functions as a consultant, 15 why they were 100 percent or why they were over 16 did you ever -- were you ever involved in 16 100 percent? 17 tracking foreclosure timelines? 17 A. I'm going to still say that 18 A. If I have responsibility for a 18 depends, because if it's a first payment 19 particular area as a consultant or an employee 19 default, the loss severity is automatically 20 or I'm advising on that area, I am going to use 20 going to be higher than somebody that defaulted 21 foreclosure timelines just simply as -- as a 21 15 years into a 30-year loan. So, again, 22 metric to help me identify what loans I should 22 you're going to build exception reports to -- 23 take a closer look at to see why it may be at 23 to identify what you believe would -- would 24 that stage of a timeline. 24 indicate that you should look at the loan file 25 Q. Do you ever compare, either as a 25 and find out if the -- the circumstances and Page 139 Page 141 1 consultant or as an employee, the foreclosure 1 situation have a completely valid reason or is 2 timelines to the GSE timelines for non-GSE 2 it something I need to dig deeper into. 3 loans? 3 Q. Let me just follow up on something 4 A. No. 4 you said there. Or maybe make sure we're 5 Q. Were you ever tracking, either as a 5 talking about the same thing. When you're 6 consultant or as an employee, loss 6 measuring loss severities, are you measuring it 7 severities -- or loans with loss severities in 7 for the unpaid principal balance, or are you 8 excess of 100 percent? 8 measuring it against the original principal -- 9 MR. CHELNEY: Objection. 9 you know, the original principal balance? 10 A. All servicers run models to look at 10 MR. CHELNEY: Object to the 11 loss severities. 11 form. 12 Can you ask me your question again? 12 Q. If you -- if you follow what I'm 13 Q. Sure. Did you track -- did you 13 saying. Does that make -- does my question 14 track loss severity -- strike that. 14 make sense to you? 15 You told me -- just looking at your 15 Let me try it again. Let me try to 16 answer, you said, All servicers run models and 16 explain it, and maybe I can -- you said that -- 17 track loss severities. 17 if I understood, you said that one -- your loss 18 A. Well -- 18 severity on a loan that defaults in one month 19 Q. And those loss severities were 19 is going to be much higher than the loss that 20 greater than 100 percent. Did any of the 20 you'll incur with a borrower who makes 15 years 21 servicers you worked for or when you were 21 of payments. 22 working as a consultant then go look at those 22 A. Right. 23 loans to try to determine why those severities 23 Q. So that makes me think we're 24 ended up being over 100 percent? 24 talk -- how we measure the loss severities, 25 MR. CHELNEY: Object to form. 25 from that answer, what we're looking at for the 36 (Pages 138 to 141) TransPerfect Legal Solutions 212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022 Page 154 Page 156 1 that's not -- not always possible. 1 matter, results in more bids for the property? 2 Q. Would we want to -- would we need 2 MR. CHELNEY: Objection. 3 to know the expected time to sell the property? 3 A. I don't -- I don't know how to 4 A. That would be helpful. 4 answer that question on an individual-loan 5 Q. Anything else that you can think of 5 basis. 6 that we would want to know to make that 6 Q. Well, if we're trying to determine 7 determination as to whether the servicer's 7 whether the servicer's requirement that a 8 decision to foreclose or charge off was the 8 borrower use an auction website, would we want 9 correct one? 9 to know that, in general, the auction website 10 A. It would be helpful to know what 10 results in quicker sales of the property? 11 your monthly carry costs have been. 11 A. We -- we would want to be under the 12 Q. And anything else you can think of 12 impression that it is likely that sales would 13 that we would want to know? 13 attract more buyers and -- and result in what 14 A. Not without giving it a lot more 14 you said. 15 thought. 15 Q. And would we want to see -- would 16 Q. Okay. Do you know if each of those 16 you expect there to be data to support that 17 factors was accounted for in Ocwen's NPV model 17 impression? 18 that you reference in paragraph 22 of your 18 MR. CHELNEY: Objection. 19 report? 19 A. I would have had a conversation 20 A. I'd like to read what I wrote. 20 with the auction house, and so I would have 21 Q. Sure. 21 relied upon the results of my interview, not 22 A. Ask your question again. 22 necessarily printed data. 23 Q. Sure. Do you know if each of the 23 Q. Do you know whether there were 24 factors we just discussed is accounted for in 24 conversations between Ocwen and any 25 Ocwen's NPV model that you reference in 25 representatives at Hubzu that addressed whether Page 155 Page 157 1 paragraph 22 of your report? 1 the auction website resulted in more bids or 2 A. Based upon the depositions I read, 2 higher bids for properties -- 3 the key factors are mentioned that they are 3 MR. CHELNEY: Objection. 4 included in the depositions. But I do not know 4 BY MR. CHERNOV: 5 every factor. 5 Q. -- than otherwise? 6 Q. And do you know whether the 6 MR. CHELNEY: Objection. 7 individual -- or the information on a loan-by- 7 A. I would have -- I have not had any 8 loan basis is in the files that were produced 8 conversations with people at Ocwen. 9 so that we could do that evaluation on a loan- 9 Q. If we're evaluating a servicer's 10 by-loan basis? 10 requirement that short sales be listed on an 11 MR. CHELNEY: Object to form. 11 auction website, would you want to know that, 12 A. I have no idea. 12 at least as a general matter, the prices that 13 Q. If the servicer performance we're 13 are obtained are higher than when not using the 14 evaluating again involves the requirement that 14 auction website? 15 a servicer use an auction website for short 15 MR. CHELNEY: Objection. 16 sales, and we want to evaluate whether that was 16 A. As a -- as a general matter, I 17 in accordance with accepted servicing 17 would want to believe that an auction would 18 practices, what information would we need to 18 give us a good possibility of achieving a 19 know in order to undertake that examination? 19 higher price because there is likely to be more 20 MR. CHELNEY: Object to form. 20 bidders. 21 A. I think all you need to know is 21 Q. If the servicer performance -- 22 that the servicer used prudent judgment, based 22 strike that. 23 upon the circumstances at the time. 23 Would you also want to know that -- 24 Q. Well, would we want to know that 24 would you agree with me that using an auction 25 the auction website, at least as a general 25 website results in higher costs than not using 40 (Pages 154 to 157) TransPerfect Legal Solutions 212-400-8845 - Depo@TransPerfect.com FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/2022 07:39 PM INDEX NO. 650337/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2356 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2022 Page 297 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: PART 60 RMBS PUTBACK LITIGATION _______________________________________ NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE Index No. CORPORATION ALTERNATIVE LOAN 777000/2015 TRUST, SERIES 2006-S3, by HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, in its capacity as Trustee pursuant to a Pooling and IAS Part 60 Servicing Agreement, dated as of July 1, 2006, Plaintiff, -against- NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., Defendant. _______________________________________ NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., Third-Party Plaintiff, -against- WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Third-Party Defendants. _______________________________________ VOLUME II VIDEOTAPED REMOTE DEPOSITION OF ANDRIA HARRIS Friday, March 12, 2021 11:01 a.m. Eastern Standard Time