Federal Housing Agency Refers NY AG to DOJ for Potential Mortgage Fraud
The head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency has formally referred New York Attorney General Letitia James to the Department of Justice for potential mortgage fraud, citing evidence that she “appeared to have falsified records” related to real estate transactions. A significant portion of the referral appears to be based on investigative research I originally published on my blog, where I documented discrepancies in James’s mortgage filings, property declarations, and financial disclosures using public records. The criminal referral, dated April 14, 2025, came just one day after President Trump highlighted the allegations on Truth Social.
The Declaration Is in Black and White
Letitia James built her reputation prosecuting Donald Trump for allegedly misleading banks about real estate. But official deed records from Norfolk, Virginia now show that James herself made a legally binding declaration to use a Virginia home as her “principal residence” — while still holding office as New York’s top legal officer.
The New York Times, in its April 16, 2025 coverage, acknowledged the existence of James’s declaration — but minimized its legal significance. The article states:
“Ms. James signed notarized paperwork attesting that she would use [the Virginia residence] as a principal residence.”
That’s true — but vastly understated.
This language — “attesting” — frames the statement as informal or routine. But what James signed was not boilerplate. It was a recorded Specific Power of Attorney, filed August 17, 2023 (Instrument #230015686), which explicitly states:
“I HEREBY DECLARE that I intend to occupy this property as my principal residence.”
— Letitia A. James, August 17, 2023, Norfolk Circuit Court filing (Instrument #230015686)
The phrase “I HEREBY DECLARE” appears in capital letters — a formal, affirmative statement under oath. This wasn’t informal language or internal paperwork. It was a sworn declaration, notarized, and filed in Norfolk land records. It carried legal force — not merely the “attestation” language the Times uses to minimize its significance.
The Mortgage Explicitly Required Primary Residency — for Both Borrowers
The Times went further, falsely claiming:
“Her mortgage agreement did not require her to do so [occupy the home as a primary residence].”
That statement is demonstrably false.
The Deed of Trust (mortgage), filed August 31, 2023 (Instrument #230015689), includes Section 6: Occupancy, which states:
“Borrower shall occupy, establish, and use the Property as Borrower’s principal residence within 60 days after the execution… and shall continue to occupy the Property as Borrower’s principal residence for at least one year.”
On page 1 of the same document, “Borrower” is defined as:
“SHAMICE THOMPSON-HAIRSTON AND LETITIA A. JAMES”
This is not a casual suggestion. The clause binds both co-borrowers — jointly. There is no language allowing one borrower to fulfill the residency requirement on behalf of both.
In fact, Section 8 of the Deed of Trust warns that:
“Borrower shall be in default if… materially false, misleading, or inaccurate information or statements” are made “in connection with the Loan,” including regarding “Borrower’s occupancy of the Property as Borrower’s principal residence.”
There is no ambiguity here. The mortgage explicitly required both James and her co-borrower to occupy the home as their principal residence. This wasn’t a gray area — it was a recorded contractual obligation, plainly stated and legally enforceable.
The Timeline Proves the Declaration Was False
James and her co-borrower were required to establish principal residence by October 30, 2023 — 60 days after the mortgage was executed. But on October 2, James was in Manhattan, launching her civil fraud trial against Donald Trump. Public records, press events, and court filings confirm she remained in New York throughout the fall.
If she never moved, then her sworn declaration — “I intend to occupy this property as my principal residence” — was false at the time she made it. That could violate 18 U.S.C. § 1014, the federal statute that criminalizes knowingly false statements to obtain a mortgage.
The NY Times’ Misleading Defense Collapses
In attempting to defend James, the Times wrote:
“On a separate loan application form provided by the attorney general’s office, Ms. James indicated that she did not intend to occupy the property as a primary residence.“
This defense collapses on two fronts:
- A signed, notarized, and recorded declaration cannot be nullified by an inconsistent internal form. It merely proves James made contradictory representations.
- The Deed of Trust independently requires both borrowers to occupy the property, regardless of what was stated on any ancillary lender forms.
Legal Implications Extend Beyond Mortgage Fraud
If James truly intended to make Virginia her principal residence, she may have automatically vacated her New York office under Public Officers Law § 30(1)(d):
“Every office shall be vacant upon… his ceasing to be an inhabitant of the state.”
Her defense — that she never intended to move — would mean she made a materially false declaration to her lender. Either way, her position is legally compromised.
Concealed from Financial Disclosures
The mortgage, totaling $219,780, does not appear on James’s 2023 New York Financial Disclosure Statement — despite a legal requirement to report all debts over $10,000 unless the property is a solely owned personal residence. It is not: she co-owns it with her niece, a family member who does not qualify for the reporting exemption.
According to the 2023 FDS Guide (see Question 17), primary or secondary residences do not need to be disclosed — unless they are co-owned with someone other than a relative. But in this case, even though James co-owns the property with a relative, the exemption for omitting mortgage debt only applies if the home is her sole personal residence — and it clearly is not, based on her own filings and co-occupant structure.
This omission likely violates Public Officers Law § 73-a — and it follows a familiar pattern: James has failed to disclose other mortgages, misstated unit counts, and omitted rental income from her prior disclosures.
The Evidence Speaks for Itself
The New York Times attempts to dismiss these findings as “claims touted online by Trump allies.” But the facts come directly from:
- Recorded legal documents filed in Norfolk, Virginia
- Letitia James’s own signed, notarized, and recorded declarations
- Her official New York ethics filings
The documents are unambiguous. The requirements are explicit. The inconsistencies are public.
Letitia James prosecuted Donald Trump for misrepresenting property facts to lenders. But in her own filings, we find:
- A sworn declaration she never acted on,
- A residency clause she never fulfilled,
- And a mortgage debt she never disclosed.
The hypocrisy isn’t subtle. The paper trail is clear. And now, federal authorities are investigating.
This is no longer just a paperwork issue — it strikes at the heart of public trust, legal accountability, and the rule of law.
Written by,
Sam Antar
© 2025 Sam Antar. All rights reserved.
Download the full document set:
👉 Power of Attorney, Deed, and Mortgage (PDF)