LOOK CAREFULLY AT EXHIBITS CONTAINING MERS ADVERTISING TO LENDERS LOOKING TO TRANSFER NOTES AND MORTGAGES
From the attached amended complaint.
That Deed of Trust (”DOT”) contained a false representation on its face when it represented that Defendant MERS was a beneficiary under the DOT. Paragraph (E) States that “MERS is a separate corporation that is acting solely as a Nominee for Lender and Lender’s successors and assigns. MERS is the beneficiary under this Security Instrument.” As will be demonstrated below, MERS is NOT the beneficiary under the DOT, it never had ownership or possession of the Promissory Note which is the obligation which is secured by the DOT, and MERS has never been entitled to receive one cent of remuneration from Mr. Buse’s loan proceeds.The statement that MERS is the nominee is nonsensical language which means nothing in a real estate transaction and most certainly, MERS has never been nor is it now the beneficiary under the DOT. The language is a sham.
From MERS explained by Aurora Lawyers, Bold emphasis are my highlights.
A. The Residential Mortgage Market and Function of MERS
When a mortgage lender loans money to a home buyer, it obtains a promissory note in the form of a negotiable instrument from the borrower, as well as a mortgage instrument in the form of a deed of trust which is recorded in the county official records. The lender often does not continue to hold the note. Instead, the lender sells the note into the secondary mortgage market, most often to one of the government or government-sponsored entities created by statute to purchase residential mortgage loans from banks and other lenders. See 12 U.S.C. §§ 1451-59, 1716-23 et seq. (creating the Government National Mortgage Association (”Ginnie Mae”), Federal National Mortgage Association (”Fannie Mae”), and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (”Freddie Mac”)). In turn, these entities re-sell the notes into a tertiary mortgage backed securities market, usually as part of a bundle of notes held in trust for investors. As a result, the notes are held for the benefit of numerous people simultaneously, whose identities change as these negotiable instruments are sold and resold in these markets, and as the investors sell and re-sell their shares in the mortgage-backed securities.
Because of the secondary and tertiary mortgage markets, the original lender is then able to make the funds from the first sale of the note available to additional home buyers. The availability of these funds is the specific and intended result of the statutes that created the government and government sponsored entities – to increase funds for home ownership in the
United States. See 12 U.S.C. §§ 1451, 1716.
MERSCORP, Inc. and MERS were companies formed to play an integral part in the federally established free-market system created to increase liquidity in the market for home loans. In 1993, the Mortgage Bankers Association, Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and others in the real estate finance industry created an electronic registration and tracking system that is similar to the process used with great success by the Depository Trust Company for the securities industry. MERSCORP, Inc. was formed to track both beneficial ownership interests
in, and servicing rights to, mortgage loans as they change hands throughout the life of the loan.
This tracking assists the mortgage banking industry by reducing questions regarding these contractual interests as they are bundled into mortgage-backed securities. In this manner, MERSCORP, Inc. facilitates liquidity in the secondary mortgage markets. MERS serves as the mortgagee or beneficiary for the MERS member lender.
Upon the purchase of a home, the borrower signs a loan contract that names MERS as the beneficiary (as “nominee” for the lender and its successors and assigns as here). In the loan contract, the borrower assigns his or her right, title, and interest in the property to MERS. The borrower contractually agrees that, in the event of default, MERS is a proper party to foreclose on the home. The mortgage or deed of trust with MERS as a named beneficiary is recorded. When the note is sold by the original lender to others, the sales of the notes are tracked on the MERS® System. As long as the sale of the note involves a member of MERS, MERS remains a named mortgagee or beneficiary of record and continues to act as a nominee for the new holder.
This relationship is memorialized in the original mortgage or deed of trust to which the borrower is a party. If a member is no longer involved upon sale, an assignment from MERS to the non MERS member is made, executed and recorded in the county where the real estate is located, and the loan is “de-activated” from the MERS® System.
Filed under: CDO, CORRUPTION, Eviction, GTC | Honor, Investor, bubble, education, foreclosure, foreign relations, securities fraud | Tagged: borrower, disclosure, foreclosure defense, foreclosure offense, fraud, Lender Liability, MERS, Mortgage, predatory lending, quiet title, rescission, securitization, trustee
Two recent published cases (In Re: Vargas by Judge Samuel Bufford and a Missouri Appellate Court decision published early March 2009) support the position that MERS is NOT a beneficiary under a California Deed of Trust. The law in California dates back to at least 1855 (Peters v. Jamestown Bridge Co., (1855) 5 Cal. 334) If anyone wants the cites or copies of the opinions please email me directly.
Walter Hackett
Diane,
You have many questions, that seem to be un-answerable by ALL the parties at this time. Your situation requires some light on the subject, specifically with regard to discovery, and that can only be forced in a court of law.
I am not a lawyer, and NEVER give any legal advice, I am an experienced Homeowner, offering guidance for those in the same boat.
Allan Hennessey
1-800-552-9313 Ext 111
Diane,
It would be important for you to ask by certified mail who is holding the Note and who is holding the Mortgage or Deed of Trust.
Get them to produce both instruments.
Email me back when they comply.
This is what I’ve been studying all week after carefully reviewing my personal chain of title. This actually would make sense to me if my documents consistently reflected the explanation from Aurora.
With that said, here is my case in nutshell:
As of 4/22/04, the original beneficiary named on my note or “note holder” is Greenpoint Mortgage. The lender named on the deed of trust is Greenpoint Mortgage. The Trustee named on my deed of trust is Marin Conveyancing Corp. and “MERS” is named as the beneficiary under the deed of trust.
As of 7/9/08 as noted on the N.O.D. the name of the “creditor” to whom the debt is owed is Greenpoint Mortgage. The name of the beneficiary is “MERS” and the name of the Trustee is Marin Conveyancing Corporation.
As of 10/27/08 as noted on the N.T.S. the name of the “beneficiary” is “MERS” and the name of the Trustee is Old Republic National Title. (Makes no mention of Greenpoint Mortgage.)
The Substitution of Trustee dated 10/13/08 attached to the N.T.S. states that the name of the Beneficiary is Greenpoint Mortgage Funding and the name of the Trustee is Old Republic National Title Insurance. (Does this imply that “MERS” is no longer the beneficiary even though they are currently listed as such on the NTS?)
As of 12/9/08 the Notice of Transfer of Servicing states that the servicing of my loan is transferred from Greenpoint Mortgage to Countrywide Home Loans. Countrywide states that owner of my loan is CAPITAL ONE. (Does this imply that CAPITAL ONE is the beneficiary even though is makes no mention of this on the N.O.D. or N.T.S.?)
Finally, what happened to MERS? Are they still active or did they “de-activate” themselves? I have no recorded assigment only a substitution of trustee with no reference to MERS.
I called Countrywide yesterday to verify my TS date after already confirming it with Old Republic (trustee). Countrywide swears that since the servicing transfer they have no TS date set and it is stated as “suspended” in their system due to my insistence of the opportunity for a work out plan, reinstatement, payment history, terms of the note, pay off demand, goes on and on. They do not understand why Old Republic is reporting a sale date.
Whenever I refer to Greenpoint when speaking with Countrywide they always say “we have nothing to do with Greenpoint, your loan is governed by us now.
So then I always state “if there were to be a foreclosure sale on my home it would be brought on by Countrywide, not Greenpoint then”. They always agree.
Does this mean that my timeframes should reset themselves under the premise that my loan is governed by Countrywide? Am I technically in foreclosure since I have never received an NOD or NTS from Countrwide? Or does Countrywide have the power to ride on Greenpoint’s coat tails in regards to timeframes implemented prior to their ownership interest in my servicing?
The whole MERS thing is a tool impemented solely to help fascilitate the fraud these lenders have perputrated.
Steve Cisko
San Diego, Calif
99Libra@gmail.com
OOPS!, I guess they all accidentally forgot about this small detail as well.
http://www.mersinc.org/about/shareholders.aspx
This is a list of MERS Shareholders – on mers website it states:
Shareholders played a critical role in the development of MERS. Through their capital support, MERS was able to fund expenses related to development and initial start-up.
Being a shareholder means that you are an owner so since there are title companies on the list, shouldn’t they disclose that they have an interest in MERS?