ABOUT Neil Garfield and Livinglies
PLEASE SUPPORT THIS SITE !!! Download donation Form
Our mission is to educate lawyers about what is different with these loans and foreclosures impacting our society and keeping with that mission we also encourage you to attend educational workshops offered by other competent legal educators listed below that contemplate the legal consequences involving securitization, predatory lending and servicing and the evolving practice of foreclosure defense and offense:
Click to view: Lawyers – What You Need to Know
PURCHASE GARFIELD LAWYERS WORKSHOP MATERIALS: Request to Purchase Lawyers Workshop Handbook-v4
THE GARFIELD CONTINUUM: THE STRATEGY FOR TOTAL VICTORY AGAINST THE LENDERS IN THE CURRENT FORECLOSURE MARKET INCLUDES EXTENSIVE 600 page WORKBOOK
What Lawyers Are Saying About Neil Garfield’s Seminars
Click link below to Register for Attorneys’ Seminar —-Approved by FL Bar for 9.5 MCLE and CA Bar for 8.0 and other states with reciprocity:
Download here –>Garfield Lawyers Workshop Registration Form – November 2, 2009
Northern California Foreclosure Defense CLE Seminar
Saturday November 14, 2009
Hosted by UC Davis School of Law
Speakers
Michael T. Pines, Esq. (Legal Objective)
Christian McLaughlin, Esq. (Legal Objective)
Donald Rez, Esq. (Sullivan Hill Lewin Rez & Engel)
Register Here: www.legalobjective.com
Max Gardner’s Bankruptcy Bootcamp for Lawyers
November 19-23, 2009 & December 10-14, 2009
Register Here : www.maxbankruptcybootcamp.com
READ THIS: excellent-MERS-analysis-illegal-scheme-to-avoid/evade-state-law-taxes-fees-fines-penalties
Covered-in-the-Garfield Continuum Workshops-you-can-look-this-stuff-up-in-wikopedia
PURCHASE ATTORNEY WORKBOOKS: Request to Purchase Lawyers Workshop Handbook-v4
SECURITIZATION AND MORTGAGE DEFENSE/OFFENSE WORKSHOP
IN 2010, 14 MILLION HOMEOWNERS WILL DEMAND THEIR HOMES FREE AND CLEAR
WILL YOU BE READY TO REPRESENT THEM?
The conspiracy to defraud homeowners will be thrown to its knees, and lenders will be called upon to produce the note or let the property go. This is the best opportunity lawyers have ever had to earn higher fees, do justice for their clients and improve the image and reputation of our profession.
If you know anything about mortgage backed securities, the answer is clear. Precedent setting orders/opinions in New York, New Jersey, Michigan, Florida, Ohio and other states have already decided in favor of the homeowners – with more following every day.
Welcome to the emergence of mortgages interwoven the new world of derivatives, asset backed securities, credit market vehicles, ratings and appraisal practices, issuance of negotiable instruments, and administrative rules and regulations on the state and federal level.
Are your legal skills up to the challenge? Or are you malpracticing, unaware of this legal new world order called securitization?
If your practice has anything to do with bankruptcies, foreclosure, or real estate, be prepared to be sued yourself for not knowing the myriad state and federal laws that protect homeowners from predatory lenders. Further, there is now a proven legal strategy for not only protecting homeowners, but establishing legally that they already own their homes free and clear of all mortgage encumbrances.
WORKSHOPS COMING UP TO 9.5 CLE CREDITS(FL), 8.0 for CA Lawyers attending the upcoming Florida Workshops
• List of Approved Jurisdictions
SNEAK PREVIEW OF WORKBOOK AND SEMINAR TOPICS: introduction-to-attorney-workbook
A California attorney can claim California MCLE credit for education activities attended/taken outside California, provided that:
the attorney is outside California when attending/taking the activity;
the activity is the type of activity that can be approved for California MCLE credit;
the activity is approved by an Approved Jurisdiction.
If the criteria above are met, neither the provider nor the member needs to submit the activity to California for approval. California (and other states) credit can be claimed by the attorney, based on the fact an approved jurisdiction approved the activity.
Florida is an approved jurisdiction
What Lawyers Are Saying About Neil Garfield’s Seminars
WORKSHOP AGENDA
8:30-9:30 Past and Current Status of Mortgages, Notes and Foreclosures
9:30-10:00 Mortgage Meltdown: How Wall Street Wrecked Main Street
10:00-10:30 Securitization Process: Defining the Parties
10:30-11:00 Securitization Parties
11:00-11:30 Securitization Victims: Investors and Homeowners
11:30-12:00 Legal Consequences of Securitization
12:00-1:00p Lunch Provided
1:00-1:30 Overview of Defensive Strategies
1:30-2:00 Overview of Offensive Strategies
2:00-2:30 Ethical and Malpractice Considerations
2:30-3:00 Bankruptcy Errors and Omissions
3:00-3:30 Boots on the Ground: Getting the Word Out
3:30-4:00 Attorney Fees
4:00-5:00 Networking Q and A
5:00-7:00p COCKTAIL RECEPTION WITH NEIL GARFIELD AND ASSOCIATES
Neil F. Garfield, M.B.A., J.D., 61, is the winner of dozens of academic awards, a popular speaker, and author of technical treatises on law and economics. He has come out of retirement with a bang and financial institutions should take note. He knows them from the inside out, who the deciders are, and how they arrived at a catastrophic scheme to defraud people, agencies, institutions and governments all over the world.
For more information on Neil Garfield visit his website at
http://livinglies.wordpress.com
FLORIDA LENDING LAWS: florida-usury
florida-recording-requirements
EXCELLENT ALABAMA CASE ANALYZING SEQUENCE OF INDORSEMENTS AND ASSIGNMENTS
fordham-and-creighton-law-reviews-on-securitization-and-holders-in-due-course
gator-recording-duty-and-the-effect-on-agents-of-securitization
california-statutes-foreclosure
necessary-and-indispensable-parties
ten-reality-questions-answers-sb_1137_faq_rev_3
annoted-example-of-asignment-and-assumption-agreement
standard-and-poor_s-classification-of-home-loans-and-predatory-rating
florida-regulator-resigns-after-letting-bank-robbers-and-other-felons-operate-as-mortgage-brokers
A Case that Could Have been Won and Probably Still can be overturned:
deutsche-bank-national-trust-queens-case
From the Scriptures: Respect and Ownership
CONFLICT OF LAWS:
Most states have adopted the Uniform Commercial Code without making any revisions. The UCC is an outgrowth of the Uniform Code arising from the Hague conventions. Thus the laws concerning indorsement, transfer, accommodation and assignment date back hundreds of years from common law from over 30 countries. Variance in application of these laws carries with it the probability of undermining the confidence that people will have in knowing that contractual obligations will be enforced and that they are protected by legal conventions that are accepted all over the world. In the context of the mortgage meltdown, the ONLY defensive positions that can be taken by those who would enforce securitized notes and mortgages, given the predatory practices employed and the failure to disclose the inflated pricing and valuation on both sides of the transaction — the investor who put up the money for the loan, and the borrower who signed the papers — is to run contrary to established law. An indorsement in blank generally means nothing without more. It does not convert the instrument to a bearer instrument. An accommodation indorsement fails to provide “cover” which is necessary for one to claim being a holder in due course. The following is an old treatise comparing laws from various jurisdictions. The inescapable conclusions are that the laws that were taught in law schools 100 years ago, 50 years ago and even 25 years ago are all the same. The only party capable of claiming the status of holder in due course is the investor who purchased certificates that gave him/her/it a share of a pool of assets which consisted of, in its purest form, a pool of notes and mortgages that were corrupted by the promise (unknown to the borrower or the investor) to apply payments to parties OTHER THAN the holder in due course. This has the obvious effect of separating the stream of revenue from the original obligor (and co-obligors acquired along the way) from the security instrument (the mortgage) which si a recorded document, as should be any assignment thereof. The parties holding the mortgage and the parties to whom the revenue stream is pledged are different, diverse, and in most cases unknown as they are dependent upon conditions subsequent that were undisclosed to either the borrower or the investor (overcollateralization of the asset backed securities, cross guarantees between tranches, insurance against loss, credit default swaps etc.). Hence the obligation was converted from a secured credit transaction to an unsecured unliquidated contingent contract obligation, subject to affirmative defenses and counterclaims, including the quieting of title, from the borrower.
Conflict of Laws as to Bills and Notes
For more information on Neil Garfield visit his website at
This is pretty serious stuff we’re engaged in. It isn’t “life or death”, but it’s the next biggest thing. If you’re new here and just getting your feet wet, PUT THIS IN THE FOREFRONT OF YOUR THINKING: A HOUSE IS A BIG…….LIABILITY. Yes, it’s your home. I love my home. My family loves the house, too. BUT IT’S A ONLY A HOUSE, AND A LIABILITY! If the house was gone tomorrow, there would still be other, more important things in your life…..your wife, your children, your career, your health. With or without the house, your life will go on. It will just go on at a different address. In a different house. This is a fact. Don’t forget it. (Remember how easy life was when we were renters?)
But…hey! That’s easy for me to say! Mr. No Money Down, rough credit, started out with nuthin’ and still has most of it! Yeah, that’s right! SUBPRIME. I only bought because it was cheaper than renting, or at least, I thought it would be BETTER than renting. In other words, no skin in the game. Those of you out there, and you know who you are, have an opportunity. If you got shafted on your mortgage, you fell behind, you found out you got screwed at the closing table like everybody else, WELCOME ABOARD. Get mad, and get even. If getting even means living in your house for FREE for one year, three years, ELEVEN YEARS, SO BE IT! But don’t let this battle cloud your judgment or lead you to make bad decisions. Desperation will get the better of you if you let this take up too big a piece of your life. Your family needs you, too, not just the roof over their heads. Believe me, if they had to choose between you OR the house, they would pick YOU! Love your spouse and kids FIRST, please.
Now many other people, those snobby PRIME customers (just kidding, gotcha!) with all that equity and good credit and 401k’s and platinum cards, now THEY have something worth fighting for, more than you, right? The house was in the family for years, they put in a pool, they put big cash down (only to have the equity evaporate overnight), they have to fight their brains out , and loose their sanity or the house, or both, right? WRONG!
We are all in the same boat. Rich, poor, Prime, subprime, it doesn’t matter. When the LIABILITY or THE BATTLE begins to take away YOUR quality of life, YOUR relationship with YOUR family, or YOUR ability to make a living, then you must make a decision.
My first post was August of last year and I came in here crying with “I can’t pay-waahhhh, I need help-waahhhh, find me a lawyer-waahhh! what do I do-waahhh?” just like everyone else starts out. It’s natural. We start out thinking like victims, and before you know it, we’re all PERRY MASON (or L.A. Law for you younger folks)! Now, we think we know something, and then we learn some more. Now, were HUNGRY. HUNGRY FOR KNOWLEDGE. We seek out new avenues for guidance, look for the magic piece of case law that fits our situation and,,,,,,,,wow, that’s hard!
You know you have a case, it’s plain as day! You go to court a couple of times, the judge busts your balls and pay’s no attention and all of a sudden, you’re DESPERATE! Now, you have lost the ability to think rationally.
Please, take a little time to inventory what you have going.
That’s all. Don’t get tricked into believing that KNOWLEDGE IS THE POWER TO WIN IN COURT! THE LAW IS THE POWER TO WIN IN COURT. And, it’s DIFFERENT in every State of the Union! That’s why attorney’s are licensed to practice State by State.
And when you start paying for knowledge that other people have, knowledge obtained either by training, education, experience, or licensure, do not give of your funds easily! Seek out the referral of a satisfied client or customer. That should be easy to produce if the purveyor of such knowledge is operating in an ethical fashion.
Take the time to learn what causes of action you have, bring those causes of action against the proper party, and find the laws that were broken in the course of your particular situation. Once you have done that, you can approach an attorney and ask for his help. And pay him a fee. If you are indeed CONFIDENT in his abilities and ethics.
Sorry I write so much. Now go to sleep!
WELL, I ACCEPT THE APOLOGY ALLAN. . .and thanks for giving me your number to counsel you…no problem
USE YOUR REAL NAME NEXT TIME AND
BE NICE TO PEOPLE . . . . WE ALL TRY TO HELP.
THERE WAS AN ATTORNEY HERE AND HE ..
DID USE OUR SITE FOR BUSINESS. HE IS
GONE NOW AND THAT IS NOT OUR STYLE.
OUR INFO IS FREEEEEEE -Call Allan Denchfield at 1-617-308-5281 and tell Hi , help anything but NOT to remain mean spirited … Therapy Brother……MSoliman
And, Maher, I know you’re listening!! Maybe you need to be a little quicker to provide evidence of your successes and control the relationships you are trying to foster. —————————sorry comment
Roger ..??? Oh Nooooooo! No way—you sold out brother…no way….chit chatters!!!!!!!!!!!
LIVING LIES – DO NOT DO NOT DO NOT DO NOT DO NOT DO NOT CALL ME – JUST LET ME POST IN PEACE.
No call no calls no spam no no hatred…..I have posted the decisions and that’s enough. About ten new ones since you and I hooked up a year ago.
Neil …your health and wealth brother…hope all is good!
Peace
Thanks, UKG for your responsible CAVEAT EMPTOR. You’ve written a very balanced response to my expressed concern. Feel free to elaborate further on HOW M. Soliman helped you. Details will help the court of public opinion look more favorably on his otherwise unsubstantiated claims.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE A MAN, you ask, “Why are you so obsessed with discredited m. soliman.” You’re the one claims he’s discredited. He’s a fine chap, as all can see. Above reproach, as is patently evident.
Tell me what are the chances that your postings follow by a mere minute the postings of your alter ego M.Soliman, dba ‘EXPERT’? Are you the twin Janus faces of the same mountebank? Or are you the nine-headed Hydra of the poisonous breath, guardian of the Underworld? Hmmmm, how many heads remain to be lopped off? Anybody want to take on such a Herculean labor?
“IT IS ABOUT WINNING” you claim, but we here have yet to see one word of what strategy is employed by this vaunted expert, as if it were a closely held trade secret, available only to those willing to part with their gelt.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
EXPERT, before you invite the discerning folks here to contact me for my interpretation of what is claimed your “winning approach,” come sit here by me, fill me in, spill the beans, give me an outline, strategy or a battle plan to work from. Anything! I’ve been asking for a year now. Anything!
Once you do that, I guarantee you I’ll be “causing more inquiries and MORE business than expert.witness is willing to accept.” Who has the luxury nowadays of turning away business, especially if it is honestly procured?
Can somebody explain what the following means? “B e M o v ed @ A O L . c o m, This type of information you deliver seeks to convolute jurisdiction and arguments to gain some sort of advantage.” What?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You’re 100% right, THE A MAN! “WE CANNOT AFFORD TO BE NEGATIVE WHEN WE ARE FIGHTING AGAINST THE BANKS.” I’m glad you recognize that. Neither can we afford to be opaque, self-serving, or loose with the truth.
“PLEASE WRITE GOOD AND POSITIVE THINGS AND LEAVE THE NEGATIVE OUT,” isn’t that line taken straight out of the current sci fi series ‘V’? Isn’t that what the Queen Bee corruptly ‘requests’ of the journalist covering her stealth takeover of his world?
ALLAN
B e M o v ed @ A O L . c o m
Dear Allan or what ever you name is. Why are you so obsessed with discredited m. soliman. Its not about if you like his style or not. IT IS ABOUT WINNING. USED KAR GUY WROTE A POSITVE CONSTRUSTIVE COMMENT ON HOW M. SOLIMAN HAS HELPED HIM. WHY ARE YO BEING SO NEGATIVE? . PLEASE WRITE GOOD AND POSITIVE THINGS AND LEAVE THE NEGATIVE OUT. WE CANNOT AFFORD TO BE NEGATIVE WHEN WE ARE FIGHTING AGAINST THE BANKS.
B e M o v ed @ A O L . c o m, This type of information you deliver seeks to convolute jurisdiction and arguments to gain some sort of advantage. And maybe its back fireing. It is causing more inquiries and MORE business than expert.witness is willing to accept.
If livinglies.com readers are interested in my thinking soley because it is a winning approach then PLEASE contact “bemoved@AOL.com” for his interpretation of how your needs really can be best satisfied.
Otherwise, do not use my comments as a solicitation. Use them because they ALLOW ATTORNEYS to win cases.
Now, going forward we dont need to address this issue anymore, correct?
Thanks and God Bless
MSoliman
expert.witness@live.com
Hello Allan. Hope this post finds you happy and healthy! I want turkey for Thanksgiving, but I lost the coin toss and this year, it’s gonna be a DUCK! I hope you all know that I consider many here as friends although we have never met. You, Allan, personally shared your discovery documents with me, which I used as a template and to some degree of success. Thanks again for that! I am grateful for the writings and expertise provided by many here on the website. As I have understood it, the site was originated in an effort to share the experience, knowledge, and information that, heretofore, has been unavailable to all of us. Thank GOD for Neil Garfield and his ambition to give of himself so others may survive this “catastrophe”.
That said, the site should not be used to troll for desperate people seeking answers to questions upon which those with a higher level of understanding can easily SCHMOOZE someone out of their money. I may BE a schnook. I may have been “taken”. I don’t know. I am a pretty trusting guy (considering I’m in a business where people lie to me all day long). The “product” I received from Maher had, of course, some grammatical errors. I incorporated it as best I could into my proposed finding of facts. I don’t know if it helped. As I lost my case, (up to this point, with a judgment in favor of Plaintiffs, still not entered into the record, with that Motion for Reconsideration pending) regardless of the evidence presented, I don’t blame anyone other than myself. I will say that Maher spent quite a bit of time with me on the phone, pointed me in directions that led me to greater understanding, and, yeah, he got some money out of me at the end. Is he here on this website giving unconditionally of himself for the greater good? I think not. But, I gotta tell you, I like the guy! We talked like we knew each other for years. Was that just the interaction of two “salesmen” enjoying each others shtick? Well, maybe it was. Who knows? I would, however, caution everyone to let your ATTORNEY contract for his services (if needed) and if he sticks it to the attorney, then the attorney will take recourse where applicable. I will certainly not recommend that people start sending checks to Maher because he seems to know a lot about the topic at hand. As pro-se defendants, we are not equipped to even present the “evidence” provided by outside third party “professionals”, much less determine what is advantageous to our cases as we present those observations to an ill-informed (or willingly complicit) judiciary.
And, Maher, I know you’re listening!! Maybe you need to be a little quicker to provide evidence of your successes and control the relationships you are trying to foster. I know you still have to make a living, but the people here should not be your target market. You should be working your magic through assistance to counsel. I know that is what you profess to be doing. In hindsight, the way you are approaching it here may not be, let’s see, how can I say it, Kosher? I know you can provide some really meaningful background info. You are the JURIS PRO, from what I have seen. You should make sure that you don’t put yourself in an uncomfortable position, especially here.
So remember, everyone: JAUNDICED EYE! REMAIN A SKEPTIC UNTIL SOMEONE PROVES THEIR WORTH! Don’t BUY what you don’t NEED! Got it?
VOID CLAIMS STOP LENDER FORECLOSURES
By MSoliman
The notices we review concerning your files are a reach and difficult to ascertain as to authenticity or integrity for to the dates shown therein.
Can a foreclosure sale have any effect on the defendant subject to a sale having transpired and where proven to be obtained after improper or fraudulent service, or resulting in arguments that lack of jurisdiction over the defendant?
Void judgments (CCP 473(d)).
The court may, on its own motion or the motion of either party, set aside any void judgment or order.
A judgment or order may be void if the issuing court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the action, personal jurisdiction over the defendant, if the judgment or order granted relief that the court had no power to grant, or if the judgment was procured by fraud on the court.
I believe the following pertains to the defendant and is justified for arguing the sale is subject to deceptive practices and unlawful estoppels, misjoinder amongst parties unknown thereby causing the transfer to be categorized as void.
expert.witness@live.com
UKG,
I, for one, hope that you WILL prevail in your Motion to Reconsider. Who among us wouldn’t wish this for a fellow embattled homeowner? Does that mean you lost this round and are asking the court to reconsider?
You consoled Maher, “Sorry to hear about your calamity.” We are all sorry that calamity follows him it seems everywhere. Perhaps he brings it upon himself? The sad history and exhibited pathology we’ve seen seems to confirm this. You’ll probably disagree.
Next, you advise, “I would encourage everyone to look carefully with a “jaundiced eye”, as you can no longer take people at “face value”. That prescription proves very on spot, thank you.
You conclude, “But as I said to you privately, I appreciate your advice, perspective, and the knowledge you have passed on to me. Best Regards! UKG” We can all appreciate his advice, no matter how dysfunctionally garbled, his perspective and his supposed knowledge, were he truthful, forthcoming, not so defensively ready with his ad hominem attacks.
The spirit of LivingLies, to my way of seeing, is that folks are here to help one another and educate those with access to levers of power. Your friend, on the other hand, seems to troll here for newby ‘clients,’ pooh-pooh the open forum and cutting edge ideas that surface here under Neil’s guiding hand, and make claims that simply do not stand up to scrutiny. Who can tolerate or condone such egregious head games?
We can understand why your loyalties may lie with him, if he has privately advanced your case. If he has, care to share? That’s what we do here. He makes many claims, the kind a merchant makes, but opaquely provides few, if any, details. Maybe you can fill us in?
Allan
B e M o v ed @ A O L . c o m
Hey Maher! How are you? I have to give you a call soon. Just to say “Hi!” and “Thanks”. I think you’re right. I go in front of the Judge again on Dec 18 (motion to reconsider). I told you the first lawyer from Litchfield-Cavo QUIT, and now a junior attorney is handling the case. I sent him an e-mail and asked him if he was covered by the firm’s Directors and Officers policy, because, as they proceed, they are INDEED violating Sarbannes/Oxley. No answer as of yet. Hmmmmmm.
I don’t think Wells will want to “win” this case and then have all my pleadings and motions end up in the public record. There is too much there that they want to hide. As always, many thanks. Sorry to hear about your calamity. I would encourage everyone to look carefully with a “jaundiced eye”, as you can no longer take people at “face value”. But as I said to you privately, I appreciate your advice, perspective, and the knowledge you have passed on to me. Best Regards! UKG
Breaking News & Viewpoints:
Fink on Mortgage Securitization
Nov. 10, 2009
In the latest Viewpoints Breakfast series, Laurence Fink, Chairman and CEO of BlackRock Inc. discusses how he made his name with the collateralized mortgage security and how its still a good idea.
“IT WAS NOT STRUCTURE (SECURITIZATION) THAT DID NOT WORK . . . IT WAS THE ACCEPTANCE OR PROGRAMS BEING OFFERED AND PROCESS THAT WAS FLAWED.”
What does that tell you?
MSoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
To: usedkarguy
Fr: MSoliman
Something tells me it’s over soon.
You will prevail!
MSoliman
No one deserves it more.
Mountain View, California
THANKS COUNSEL!
WOW. MOST OF THE PEOPLE ON THIS SITE ARE NOT PAYING THEIR MORTGAGES AND ARE WALKING AWAY FROM LOANS. ARENT WE ALL IN BANKRUPTCY OR NEAR BANKRUPTCY
WALT DISNEY FRANCIS FORD COPOLLA BUFFALO BILL MILTON HERSHEY (ABBY WE CANT EAT HERSHEY CHOCOLATE BARS ) HJ HEINZ (KETCHUP) BURT REYNOLDS AND HENRY FORD WENT BANKRUPT
DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE GONE BANKRUPT.
ABBY ARE YOU CALLING EVERYBODY WHO GETS SUED OR IN BANKRUPTCY A PERSON NOT TO BE TRUSTED?
Abby slander and defamation of carachter are serious crimes.
http://noneca217.web.officelive.com/default.aspx
We are trying to figure this all out.
WOW. I AM NOT MAHER SOLIMAN.
STOP BEING A PLAYER HATER.
Maher-we know you are ‘The A Man’….creating another dba blog name!!
Maher-you are the one selling your services on this website.
When folks, other than myself, ask you to name some of your successes, you post the case info.
Thus, naturally, anyone who is considering using your services is going to go and check.
For some reason(s) some folks are not convinced you offer good, solid services.
There are doubts.
Judicial interference? Lol…..
Hey Abby, Heres my info, id like a word with you when you get a chance, thanks fifita77@att.net
and, ABBY, why don’t you go play on your own website?
I saw an ad for a “foreclosure specialist”. Job description is as follows:
RESPONSIBILITIES:
- Negotiating short sales (and other options) for homes going into foreclosure
- Will work directly with realtors and homeowners
- Must be able to explain every step of the process in detail, follow up regularly and document calls
- Primarily making outbound calls or return calls to customers
Sales/Negotiation:
- You will be the decision maker on each file, you are assessing property values, risk to investors, etc
- Must be able to find a deal that works for the client and the realtor/homeowner
- Must possess very strong skills in communication, sales/negotiation, analytical thinking, organization, attention to detail
- Ability to speak with people from all backgrounds and knowledge levels
- Experience in an industry that is accustomed to closing deals and working towards goals with incentives is helpful: realtors, title companies, insurance, mortgage underwriter/originator etc.
- Cannot be afraid to negotiate
- Analytical thinking
- Organized and detail orientated
- Must be flexible, rules and processes can/do change regularly.
- Willing to do work again as some deals can fall through
**If you are an active realtor, you must be able and willing to suspend your real estate license.
Now, I wonder….. why would you have to give up your license? Could it be that you would be violating the ethical standards of a licensed professional? This is a banking job? The ad is placed through a headhunter. Client confidential. If you have to include the title companies in the negotiation, is that your evidence of tainted title via the fraudulent conveyance of the note and deed of trust? Isn’t that like an anti-trust thing, too? How F__________g blatant. I won’t swear. I just did two hours ago. How do you convey rage and anger on computer without swearing?????? It also sounds like everyone is there to make money on the deal— except the homeowner!! He’s the guy getting his home stolen out from under him while they conduct a sham real estate “transaction”. Isn’t this where the violation of the REMIC tax laws come into play? The investors and banks aren’t making money on the interest streams, they’re pocketing the insurance proceeds AND the HOUSE! Gotta make you feel good at the end of the day, knowing you just torched some family’s credit and made them homeless! Now that’s what I call “job satisfaction”.
ABBY STOP BEING A PLAYER HATER.
MAHER SOLIMAN NEVER SAID HE WAS AN ATTORNEY.
MAHER SOLIMAN NEVER SAID HE DOES LOAN MODIFICATIONS
MAHER GOT EXCITED THAT HIS CLIENT WON A CASE IN CALIFORNIA. SO WHAT?
ABBY ARE YOU AN OWNER OF A HOUSE OR PROPERTY?
ABBY THE PLAYER HATER.
Maher-we are so not impressed! So NOT afraid of you Blah Blah!!
If anyone is doing judicial interference it is you!! By posting to call you that you will play the recording of your happy client from the court house steps.
By you claiming an Aurora victory for Ms. Corbitt in the UD case and posting the case number etc and where to go to locate the case information.
Did you get her permission, since she is your client, but only for your ‘expert’ witness services and NOT any attorney services, to publicly ‘advertise’ her situation??
Did you?
Doubt it.
MAHER SOLIMAN RULES. .HE IS THE #1 EXPERT WITNESS. HAS NEIL GARFIELD BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH ANY WINS IN CALIFORNIA? and if so please share with us. Neil Garfield is a walking Angel and is a riteous man. SOLIMAN WORKS WITH ATTORNEYS THAT GET IT. SOLIMAN TELLS IT LIKE IT IS. HE CALLS THE PRETENDER LENDERS BLUFF.
HE IS NOT AFRAID TO TAKE ON THE BIG BAD WOLF (THE BIG BANKS THAT HAVE COMMITED CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY)
IT IS ONE THING TO TAKE ON AND BLUFF BUSINESS PEOPLE BUT TO TAKE ON UNSOPHISTICATED AND THE WEAK IN SUCH A LARGE SCALE IS LIKE THE NAZIS WHO KILLED (economic murder) INNOCENT WOMAN AND CHILDREN). OR LIKE AL QUAEDA THAT TARGETS INNOCENT WOMAN AND CHILDREN. DISPLACEING PEOPLE IN SUCH A LARGE SCALE CAN BE EQUATED TO ETHNIC CLEANSING (loosing houses retirement investments in such a large scale).
by msoliman
here it is ….a real amazing opportunity to look into the world of a genuine set of trouble makers. This moron actually thinks anyone with an Aurora loan is an automatic winner.
Aurora, counsel Jaime Siedler (a business contact of mine) has got wind of this unfair and unnecessary email considered judicial interference and now we have a name and details for our case pending for defamation and other allegations of tortous interference with an experts testimoney
You’ll love this one – please read!
————————————————————————-
From: bemoved@aol.com
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:28:18 -0500
To:
Subject: CONGRATULATIONS on your Friday the 13th
Good Luck on your UD case
Hi, Syreeta,
I am an active participant, with many embattled homeowners, of a 21st Century foreclosure defense blogsite http://www.LivingLies.WordPress.com (LL).
On LL we learned last Friday through Maher Soliman that you prevailed with a dismissal with prejudice against Aurora. Would you be willing to visit our blogsite, weigh in and tell us just how you did it?
Maher Soliman (a brilliant poster on LL) was ecstatic and claimed your victory was a vindication of arguments he used as an expert witness (supposedly on your case).
I was surprised because I was under the impression Aurora was ‘on the ropes’ in California, and that they just aren’t bothering to show up where homeowners defend their foreclosures (with or without attorneys).Could you share with us or with me how expert testimony helped, and if so, what was it?
(Mr. Garfield , me) we are all keen to learn from Maher Soliman . . . track his announced WINS (while we remain clueless!
————– look at this trash —————————
I understand Abby has contacted you. She mentioned something about the judge in this case.
RSVP
Allan O’Brien Denchfield
Tim/Cal–if you have Judge Beeman in Solano, she felt he was a very fair/good judge.
She’d also heard that about him prior.
Abby, Good Info, I was actually going to call her myself. I will have my 3rd ud trial this thursday at the same courthouse. Ill keep you guys updated. Thank God for this website!!!!!
Deontos-had lengthy conversation with S. Corbitt about the Solano UD case.
She had an attorney not affiliated with M. Soliman.
She felt that there were other factors the judge made his decision on, such as the opposing attorneys not ever showing up in court at all. She felt the judge was
not happy with that.
Maher did ‘write’ a paper as an expert witness.
She did have Maher do an audit, but she had to travel from northern california down to LA to see him & spend a great deal of time with him.
Maher did not make any appearance in the court proceedings.
She is now pro se in her larger mortgage related case.
She said the opposing counsel in the U.D. can still appeal.
Her and I will be meeting for coffee.
Abby regarding:
http://livinglies.wordpress.com/emergency-workshop-in-santa-monica-94/#comment-28816
Thank you! I will be very interested in the Case File
arguments. Will anxiously look forward to reviewing
what you discover. Her WIN in Solano could perhaps
open a door for relief in No. Calif. Superior Courts.
Thanks again.
Deontos-
I’ll try to swing by Solano court house to view the case files on the Corbitt case (UD). She also has another case file FCS033344 filed in the same court.
I’ve also put in a call to this lady.
REPOST ….1ST Attempt never published
Deontos, on November 13th, 2009 at 5:52 pm Said: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Maher,
Congratulations!
I wish I could see the actual Case File so I could read
all the arguments. I did review as best I could the online
information. So what happens, I mean legally from here?
She has WON the UD phase. Does she file for “quiet
title”?
Or does this mean events evolve as you stated:
http://livinglies.wordpress.com/in-trouble-right-now-press-here/#comment-28189
———–
Also You said……..
** We Forgive those out to prove my arguments wrong ……..Deontos…”
Sir,
I am trying to learn from everyone here before my doomsday
overtakes me. I don’t always understand what you’re saying,
I believe that is due to my lack of knowledge in a world in which
you are well apprised. If I ask questions or wish to see
documentation it is because I am making an INTENSE effort to
educate myself. Again I say thank you …this is really good news
to see people making headway.
On just a lighter note:
A couple of sayings and a contortion……
Movie Quote: “Don’t shoot me I’m just the piano player…!”
You said: “Grasshopper; the pebbles are there four you to
snatch from the judges hand.”
I say: “Hey! Don’t shoot me! Master, I’m just a grasshopper
trying to learn what a pebble is.”
===============================================
Report Selection Criteria
Case ID: VCM104344
Docket Start Date:
Docket Ending Date:
Case Description
Case ID: VCM104344 –
AURORA LOAN SERVICES V. CORBITT, SYREETA
Filing Date: Monday , January 05th, 2009
Type: UD – Unlawful Detainer
Status: DISMISSED – CASE DISMISSED
Related Cases
No related cases were found.
13-NOV-2009
08:30 AM CASE DISMISSED
Entry: with prejudice
http://courtconnect.solanocourts.com/courtconnect/ck_public_qry_doct.cp_dktrpt_frames?backto=&case_id=VCM104344&begin_date=&end_date=
Press Release:LOS ANGLES, CA NOVEMBER 13TH 2009
WORD JUST IN – SUPERIOR COURT OF SOLANO
“WE WON WE WON” WITH PRJUDICE
CORBITT VS AURORA VCM104344
EVERYONE JOIN US IN CELEBRATION
** We Forgive those out to prove my arguments wrong**
[Deontos, Abby, AOL fool, Mr. Dan, Rip Off report and Mas ...SJ Attorney ]
WE WON – JUST IN ** WE WON DECISION FINAL
Won with prejudice …..Won in Court – it’s over for Corbitt v Aurora Case Closed ….Over Homeowner will never leave this home again….Over
expert.witness@live.com
Ph 213-627-2324
Calll to hear the recorded message from the court house of Plaintiff screaming out
“We won We won….. its over case wrongful foreclosure We won!expert.witness@live.com
Ph 213-627-2324
God Bless
MSOLIMAN
Maher–re: BeMoved etc.
I thought you provided the court case names for anyone who wanted to inquire?
Are not court records, filings and case dispositions, even eviction writs, in the public domain for all to view?
Why are you threatening folks with defamation and libel?
Maher-regarding your 4:01PM posting which starts with your words “great earlier discussion…’
Could you please cite your source.
This is a very old article.
Thx
Come on people- start writing you leaders and stop complaining….fight damn it
LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD
Member of Congress
Washington, D.C., Office:
2330 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-1766
Fax: (202) 226-0350
Dear Maher:
Knowing you interest in housing issues, I want to take this opportunity to update you with my views on the foreclosure crisis, FHA loan limits and down payment assistance.
I strongly believe that FHA-backing of mortgages is one of the most significant steps we can take to address the current foreclosure crisis. As you are aware, while the Economic Stimulus Act temporarily increased the FHA-insurable loan limit to $729,000, if further action is not taken, the limit will fall to $362,000 at the end of this year. This level is far too low to make a difference in California where the cost of a home greatly exceeds the national average.
I continue to support down payment assistance programs that allow low-income families to afford decent housing without have to sacrifice other essentials like food, clothing, healthcare, or a child’s education. Families should not be forced to choose between these basic needs when budgets are tight.
You will be pleased to know that on May 8, 2008, I voted in support of the Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 (H.R. 3221), which was signed by the President and became public law on July 30, 2008 . This housing stimulus includes an expansion of the FHA program, and also permanently raises the FHA loan limits. You may be assured that as your representative in Congress and as a member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on transportation , Housing and Urban Development with funding jurisdiction over housing programs, I will continue to represent your views as Congress continues to take steps to help homeowners and homebuyers avoid foreclosure.
Once again, thank you for contacting me. I look forward to hearing from you in the future on this and on other issues of importance to our community, our state, and our nation.
Sincerely
LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD
Member of Congress
Sign up for periodic e-mail updates from Congresswoman Roybal-Allard at http://www.house.gov/roybal-allard
——————————————-
SPEAKING ABOUT FRAUD
November 9th 2009 4:55 AM PST
By M.Soliman
First ; Talk about BeMoved, AOL and fraud. All parties will use his public comments to form basis for defamation and a libel suit immediatly in superior court. This is unfair to a borrowers privacy and misleading a court clerk in a disturbing matter. This should be good as the reader caused tortous interference with an attorney client privlidge. Yes…what I (we) have been told would happen and have been waiting for….and waiting for. Mis statement of facts, libelous comments and intent to inflict pain and suffering, . . interference while case is subject to appeal….Caution forewarned and issued cease and desist….ON APPEAL INQUIRY .Superior Court Case
It must stop and it will. Moving on ….(we’ll keep you posted) ….
There is a science to looking at the instruments used for recorded notices…or maybe it’s an art? Anyway. What a roll we are on as fraud is running out of control. Who you ask? You name it.
Hers a bit of advice.
The equipment or software used to print the notices or instruments (CA) is approved for use in banks and popular with mortgage bankers.
The software cannot be altered without the person having clearance. He / she would enter the system in order to alter a document and the revision is there for eternity after making the changes.
Thereafter the person who made the changes is on record as the last to alter a preprinted form. Why would they ever need to change a pre-printed form used for recording?
One more thing. The biggest tips I can give you with respect to recorded instrument used to foreclose are as follows:
See your notices
(1) Default,
(2) Assignment and
(3) Substitution
They are (almost) always printed in a set. Forget MERS here for a second as the documents are printed by the originator or successors and assigns (Depositor).
There is never any need to print any of the three documents separate let alone on a different date.
The foreclosure specialist’s are good, very good [and never the hit of a party...] but they do know what they are doing!
I believe the CA civil code 2923.5 and Obama Plan are causing these opportunists to “back date”. Last minute and when you back date the succession of dates becomes vulnerable.
These foreclosure specialists left over from the crash are lucky to have jobs and do as they are told. I am sure the trustees are telling them “rescind or revise, it’s up to you”?
Remember also, an altered instrument for recording in VOID or VOIDABLE I don’t care what you say about jurisdiction! Trust me on this one as case law is abundant.
———————————-
We have a case right now whereby I will testify (if they don’t come back with a settlement). I opine it’s a “voidable” claim and subject solely to damages as the property sold to a 3rd party animal. Void you win the home back and voidable you lose (right to reclaim your home back).
It should be a monster settlement / claim and its happening to a great guy (plaintiff). We have a document that was technically drawn on 12/18/2009. That is verified. Problem is the document is dated by hand and endorsed the same day by the notary as of 12/08/2009. . . 10 days prior to being printed?
I would move to case precedent and say every foreclosure for this lender as of the date of this claim may be grounds for rescission. Is there an attorney in the house?
MSoliman . . . . .
Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishment of Liabilities, contains criteria that restrict “sale accounting” on transferred financial assets when there is a concurrent purchase agreement.
With so much focus on the overburdened American homeowner suffering in default, little discussion on revamping the mortgage sector of the economy is evident.
This notion presupposes a desperate need to vacate the prospect of the willingness for rouge lenders to exist. Yielding to outrageous synthetic affordability with respect to debt and housing, there now come calls for more serious enforcement against criminal conduct. Such escalated policing of consumers and lenders should isolate the heftiest sentencing scaled to certain criteria for constituting unimaginable access to debt.
Debt leveraged solely to accommodate earnings acquired from the purchase and sale of real property at closing is not compensation at all.
The premise is for fiscal safeguards to be seen as impenetrable ensuring economic survival free of radical shifts and downswings.
My gut tells me not long gone are the days of a criminal mindset culminating with a opportunistic borrower lender cohabitation. Tax payers are equally vigilant in seeking to rid society of the category of excess tariffs due to bail out of a criminal borrower mindset.
If not now then when is it time to bring to the forefront of this dilemma and a willingness to punish the perpetrators?
Malfeasant lending by intoxicated institutions at the expense of shareholder and tax payer bailouts are on target for isolating only one problem piece of this respectable Chinese puzzle. The white collar profile or part time dental assistant that brazenly purchase a fourth or fifth property are equally fit to join bank management in expanding our states correctional holding capacity and prison populations.
A scale for both indecent and vile acts towards the economy will no more safeguard the shank delusions of the attorney. Make accountable the warped and corrosive mind of the dental hygienist and Trump Real Estate grad turned property owner.
No one shall be insulated from the call to justice cause by capital waste and fraud. Let these night lurking intestinal worms be driven out and into the light. Like Megan’s law, habitual criminal offenses will label the mortgage fraud perpetrators, legal buffoons and financial morons of society.
Let this effect on the public be blind to occupation and status. Therefore no professional, union member, trade group or white collar persons may escape the retribution of a societies call for registration after sentencing and time spent incarcerated.
Mortgage debt lawlessness and accountability shall have no regard for race religion and creed.
Today’s culprit shall be the targets and hopefully the last of its kind. Let this state show it’s will for they shall grow weary and we will set by example the call to sanity and a safer economic society
great earlier discussion . . ..
What is now beginning to surface are the losses attributed to the massive amount of fraud that mortgage originators created and passed on to Freddie Mac with two specific types of origination fraud know as “Double-Funding”, “Double Selling” or “Double Warehousing” fraud and Assignment Fraud.
“Double-Funding” involves a mortgage originator sending simultaneous funding requests for the same loan to two different warehouse lenders. Both warehouse lenders, unaware of each other, would send funding for the loan to the title companies specified by the mortgage originator. The mortgage originator then disburses the money from one lender to the borrower, while directing the title company to wire the money received from the other lender to mortgage originator’s bank account.
The mortgage originators then provide fabricated mortgage documents to the warehouse lenders that falsely represented that the lender’s funds had, in fact, been used to finance borrower loans.
Assignment Fraud involves modifications to the original loan where the name of the bank who actually owns the note is changed on execution of the Loan Modification Agreement. The problem with these “modifications” (actually new loans with new “lenders”) is that the old loans remain unaffected. The existing cloud on title to the property, the mortgage deed (or deed of trust), the note, the obligation, the purported assignments etc. is being compounded by attempts to allow impostors to foreclose on the mortgage, collect on the note, modify the loan, or approve a short sale. The time bomb is title where securitized loans were recorded, foreclosed, modified or sold. The parties (other than the borrower and possibly the Trustee on the Deed of Trust) had actual knowledge that the “lender” was not the Lender, the terms of the obligation were already changed at the time of closing, the appraisal was false, the underwriting was negligent or fraudulent, the Good Faith Estimate was by definition rendered neither in good faith nor even close to an accurate estimate, and the list goes on and on.
In determining whether a particular loan is part of a “double-funding” or “double-selling” scheme, examiners and forensic accountants should look for as evidence that a mortgage originator is engaging in this scheme and participating in a pattern of deception, forgery and fraud. Once demonstrated, these indicators inevitably point to fraudulent affidavits and assignments of mortgages filed in the public records.
As you examine your loan documents you should be looking for the following:
1. Loan originators, servicers and their lawyers forge documents with “squiggle marks” that are not the marks, initials or signatures of the actual officer that is notarized to be the signatory.
2. Signature, initials or “squiggle marks” differ for the same signatory from document to document.
3. Squiggle marks and full signatures that are diametrically opposed to the known signature of the signatory.
4. Pre-stamped assignments and notary signatures on assignments, affidavits and proof of claims.
5. Back-dating of dates on assignments and signatures of officers dating years after either a company is no longer in business or the officers are no longer with the company
In the Plaintiffs matter we are pleading the performance or occurrence of conditions precedent, it is sufficient to allege generally that all conditions precedent have been performed or have occurred. A denial of performance or occurrence shall be made specifically and with particularity, and when so made the party pleading the performance or occurrence shall on the trial establish the facts showing such performance or occurrence.
In pleading a judgment or other determination of a court or officer of special jurisdiction, it is not necessary to state the facts conferring jurisdiction, but such judgment or determination may be stated to have been duly given or made. If such allegation is controverter, the party pleading is bound to establish on the trial the facts conferring jurisdiction.
In pleading a private statute, or a right derived there from, it is sufficient to refer to such statute by its title and the day of its passage, and the court shall thereupon take judicial notice thereof.
LIBEL OR SLANDER ACTION.
In an action for libel or slander it shall not be necessary to state in the complaint any extrinsic facts for the purpose of showing the application to the plaintiff of the defamatory matter out of which the cause of action arose; but it shall be sufficient to state generally that the same was published or spoken concerning the plaintiff. If such allegation is controverter, the plaintiff shall be bound to establish on the trial that it was so published or spoken. In the answer, the defendant may allege both the truth of the matter charged as defamatory, and any mitigating circumstances, to reduce the amount of damages, and whether the defendant proves the justification or not, the defendant may give in evidence the mitigating circumstances.
Official document or act. In pleading an official document or official act it is sufficient to allege that the document was issued or the act done in compliance with law.
Recitals and negative pregnants. No allegations in a pleading shall be held insufficient on the grounds that they are pled by way of recital rather than alleged directly. No denial shall be treated as an admission on the ground that it contains a negative pregnant.
Fictitious parties. When a party is ignorant of the name of an opposing party and so alleges in a pleading, the opposing party may be designated by any name, and when such partys true name is discovered, the process and all pleadings and proceedings in the action may be amended by substituting the true name.
Designation of unknown heirs in actions relating to property. When the heirs of any deceased person are proper parties defendant to any action relating to property in this state, and the names and residences of such heirs are unknown, they may be proceeded against under the name and title of the unknown heirs of the deceased.
Designation of unknown persons. In any action to determine any adverse claim, estate, lien, or interest in property, or to quiet title to property, the plaintiff may include as a defendant in such action, and insert in the title thereof, in addition to the names of such persons or parties as appear of record to have, and other persons or parties who are known to have, some title, claim, estate, lien, or interest in the property in controversy, the following: Also all other persons or parties unknown claiming any right, title, lien, or interest in the property described in the complaint herein. [CCP 12/2/78]. The matter will go before a court and unlawful detainer hearing where the jurisdiction is highly limited for arguments regarding the ownership and title. The matter of a UD is confined to jurisdiction with little if any concerns for the causes of action brought in a grievance complaint better suited for another court’s jurisdiction.
Consent judgment, a final, binding judgment in a case in which both parties agree, by stipulation, to a particular outcome.
Declaratory judgment, a judgment of a court in a civil case which declares the rights, duties, or obligations of each party in a dispute
Default judgment, a binding judgment in favor of the plaintiff when the defendant has not responded to a summons.
Summary judgment, a legal term which means that a court has made a determination without a full trial.
Vacated judgment, the result of the judgment of an appellate court which overturns, reverses, or sets aside the judgment of a lower court.
The expert can document various lengthy history of training and working exclusively at an institutional level in subprime lending was mostly spent as a secondary trader. I now work as an Expert.Witness who appraises a case and testifies in court. I jumped ship in 2003 wrongly thinking the market would soon crash. Little did I know what the industry would resort to in order to keep the lies alive? Hundreds of thousands of American homeowners face losing their homes due to unaffordable loans they received.
The breadth and depth of experience allows for a unique perspective for sharing with the public my views certain procedural knowledge that offers insight into the procedural defects seen to exist from one lender to another the parties consistent procedural must be limited to facts as I try to steer way from any bias. In this market that is hard.
My views and experiences on the subject of foreclosure assume you’ll need an attorney. I can merely make a distinction for you case from the presence of unlawful business practices and deceptive acts in a foreclosure. Here’s what is at stake when If you’re facing eviction from a foreclosure.
Filing an action is necessary for keeping your home after determining a wrongful foreclosure claim. Until a court rules on the matter it may be the only way have a way to protect your home. Real Property (e.g. in California) cannot transfer from one party to another where a lien is considered to be defect. The notion is the sale must fail whereby a transfer or conveyance or real property is near impossible. But a closer look at case law will show us the need to seek out a good attorney for determining the grounds for calling a Trustees Sale void or voidable and understanding the remedies where a tort or material violation does exist. Even when a fraud takes place we remind clients the court may not necessarily rule your home is you’re anymore even after determining the deed and transfer was unenforceable.
A predatory loan is something that falls under a theorem of “Mutual Consideration”. It is the shared responsibility by both sides for a willful act offered by one and accepted by the other party. For example, you took the loan under the circumstances as a borrower from a predatory lender and now changed your mind.
The courts say I don’t think so. Courts also are sticking with the notion of equitable consideration. Therefore there is no one to blame according to some courts recent rulings. I don’t know about that where a cause of action can be made by an attorney and claims can be made supporting the deed is potentially defective. Another type of claim is made for circumstances where a forgery or recorded document accomplishes the sale from someone committing an unlawful act.
Where it can be shown there exists fraud or deceptive business practices the deed is considered defect and therefore the sale must fail. If the subject loan originated through unfair business practices, then your deed or mortgage maybe argued to be subject to a defect.
That deed or mortgage will “rest disturbed” if subject to substantive arguments brought in litigation. Therein your claims may make the transfer of the property to anyone impossible. In other words the Power of sale and right to acceleration in a non judicial matter are rendered unenforceable. You challenge the lenders security which allows them to claim your home in a default judgment. It is unenforceable from commencement or discovery and subject to a void or voidable determination by the court.
Here is the catch you need to be aware of. It falls under fraudulent releases, request for reconveyance and forgeries.
Can a bona fide purchaser acquire title to property involved free of the improperly reconvened deed of trust? The answer is yes! The distinction between void and voidable acts and deeds, suggest it’s not the mere presence of forgery but where forgery comes into play that determines the outcome between innocent victims.
Case Law:
A reconveyance of a deed of trust, executed by the trustee in misplaced reliance on a forged request for reconveyance, is voidable but not void. That is according to a California Court of Appeal that held this decision in the case is Schiavon v. Arnaudo Brothers, 100 Cal. Rptr. 2d 801, 2000 WL 1586381 (2000) . The same rules apply to the reconveyance of the property interest under a deed of trust as to the conveyance of property by grant deed. Here, the lawful trustee under the deed of trust executed the reconveyance of the deed by the signature of its Vice President and with full awareness of the effect of the act. The fraudulent misrepresentation occurred in the forgery on the request for reconveyance.
The conveyance was therefore voidable, but not void. The subsequent bona fide purchaser of the property was entitled to rely on it. “The Court then described earlier California cases to illustrate the void vs. voidable distinction.
In Erickson v. Bohne, 130 Cal.App.2d 553 (1955), the plaintiff was mentally and physically incompetent when she executed a deed. She didn’t know she was signing a deed, didn’t intend to convey her property, and received no consideration. The deed was held void, and the plaintiff prevailed over a later bona fide purchaser.
In Wutzke v. Bill Reid Painting Service, Inc., 151 Cal.App.3d 36 (1984), the plaintiff held a deed of trust naming as trustee a corporation that was owned by the trustor/borrower. The trustor/borrower executed and recorded a reconveyance using a fictitious name, purportedly the executive officer of the trustee/corporation.
The reconveyance was found to be a forgery and held void, and the plaintiff prevailed over a later bona fide Lender.
In Fallon v. Triangle Management Services, Inc., 169 Cal.App.3d 1103 (1985), the original owner executed a deed to Tolbert, and Tolbert then mortgaged the property. The deed was found to have been procured by undue influence and held voidable, and the bona fide lender prevailed over the original owner.
Now in Firato v. Tuttle, 48 Cal.2d 136 (1957), plaintiffs held a deed of trust naming a real estate broker as trustee. The trustee/broker executed a reconveyance without authority, falsely stating that the loan was paid off. The reconveyance was found to have been unauthorized and voidable, and a bona fide lender prevailed over the plaintiffs.
You should conclude that the facts in the Schiavon case are more akin to those in Firato than Wutzke, where the Court held that the interest of the “innocent purchaser for value” (Arnaudo Brothers) will prevail over Schiavon et al. This case presents a classic example of the distinction between void and voidable acts and deeds.
This case study is not intended to offer a legal opinion where only a licensed practitioner may do so. It is more for giving the pre-foreclosure victim something to consider where affirmative defense should include acts of fraud but mat not necessarily save their home if it goes to sale. In a trustee sale the lender will take back the home in a trustee’s sale or sell it through a trustee sale to a bonifide purchaser. As an expert who testifies in court I can tell you the problems you have with potential deceptive and unlawful acts such as forgery are likely to get you the courts attention.
But if discovered after the fact you may find your remedy at best may not include getting your home returned to you. It appears it’s not the mere presence of forgery but where forgery comes into play that determines the outcome between innocent victims.
Therefore do evaluate and consider the need to mount a defense against foreclosure before a sale back to the bank or even worse a third party. As an Expert Witness who provides testimony in these matters I know where to evidence fraud if fraud exists in the file. I often see repeated foul play in the transferring of the asset from the parties to a trust and then after the fact.
And know that there is a strong chance the lender and interested parties can be prevented from forcing a borrower out of the home. In the examples you have read an unlawful detainer may not be justified if another court can determine your rights are being violated subject to a court having the proper jurisdiction rule in accordance with remedies and damages subject to the deed having been determined to be void or voidable.
Livinglies site is not only for the skeptics enjoyment and those seeking sources of underground legal entertainment. Damn it people it works.
Posted on February 2, 2009 by livinglies
Comment:
http://www.foreclosureinforsearch.com
By Maher Soliman
Living lies recently posted an outstanding (according to our counsel) well prepared Motion to set aside judgment which we used to file after entry of judgment for a UD hearing that did not end up favorable. We filed six motions total to date and we are five for six when filed.
LA SALLE NATIONAL BANK COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN;
TRACY JUDICIAL DISTRIC V. O. MUNOZ CASE NO 39-2008-00196254-CL-UD-TRA
The most recent effort to bring life back into a wrongful foreclosure was a late filing on Friday January 31th 2009. The trustor now holdover was prepared to meet her fate on the following Monday as the sheriffs order to vacate the subject dwelling was scheduled and likely to occour early in the am. We typically come back to court now no later than one month subsequent to the last court date with the motion. I understand in some circumstances you can file it years after the case has been closed by the courts.
We filed this one after two weeks subsequent to the courts ruling against.
The documents were filed with a half hour to go before the court closed. The trustor called to tell us she got the documents filed as were prepared and signed off by counsel last minute.
While driving home the party was calling to inform us of her apprehensions of moving and concerns for coming to grips the party was over. Brenda Michelson from our office took the livinglies opportunity and chance to the client and was on the phone with the party as she pulled up to the home to find the order to stay the matter was already posted to her door. IT HIT! Needless to say we are going back to court in a few weeks’ and the order to stay is good through February.
Livinglies site is not only for the skeptics enjoyment and those seeking sources of underground legal entertainment.
Damn it people it works.
Respect the courts as lay persons and follow procedures. If this is all new to you get an attorney to just over see you and one like Susan Rabin Esq who is willing to cooperate. That’s all and the rest should fall into place.
Maher Soliman
admin@borrowerhotline.comFiled under: CDO, CORRUPTION, Eviction, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, Obama, community banks, foreclosure, foreign relations, securities fraud | Tagged: disclosure, foreclosure defense, foreclosure offense, fraud, Lender Liability, lost note, mortgage meltdown, predatory lending, securitization
In order to begin to explain the FSP, you need to know that FAS 140, Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishment of Liabilities, contains criteria that restrict “sale accounting” on transferred financial assets when there is a concurrent purchase agreement.
Consequently, “repurchase agreements” (repos) may be subject to “loan accounting” instead of sale accounting.
The difference in accounting treatments is as follows: under sale accounting, the asset comes off the balance sheet and is replaced by the proceeds from sale; under loan accounting, the asset stays on the balance sheet, so the credit offset to recognition of the proceeds is to debt. So most significantly, sale accounting is off-balance sheeting financing, and loan accounting is on-balance sheet financing.
Never mind the judgment exercised by the FASB in publishing what amounts to a user’s manual for yet another off-balance sheet scheme, one must ask whether the FASB is tone deaf or indifferent to the recently inflamed ire of investors and politicians with off-balance sheet accounting.
And, while financial services are the targeted beneficiary of FASB largess, you never know when some Fastow-type CFO is going to apply it by “analogy” to their own nefarious machinations involving power plants, energy contracts, leases or what have you.
So, good luck dear accounting
ACCT ONION
TO MY ONLY LAST HOPE OF CONVEYING THE TRUTH….THEY DON’T UNDERSTAND AND THEREFORE THEY WONT BELIEVE…..MSOLIMAN
AS M.Soliman, on November 9th, 2009 at 10:49 pm Said: Dont make fools out of these people and use this as a toy for your entertainment . . . save homes …don’t destroy lives!”
ALLAN
B e M o v e d @ A O L . c o m
Dear Sir;
You are the reason for giving people no hope. I am proud to have won the home for Donal Spicer.
He said in parting “Thank you” and good bye.
Attorneys, his attorney never ever called me again. NEVER .I never heard from his attorney again. Not one call! The case was dismissed and with that I was relieved of my assignment.
People, if I do as I say and your attorney agrees …we will have a chance. …either you allow me to testify or your attorney will take over with out me.
This attorney is setting himself up like so many others for a malpractice suit. I never was called back again. Why?
And this monstor who writes to dampen your spirits is just that…an ugly side of the human condition.
“…Dont make fools out of these people and use this as a toy for your entertainment . . . save homes …don’t destroy lives!”
MY ARGUMENTS WORK….THE ATTORNEYS AS NG SAID FOR THE MOST PART ….THEY DON’T GET IT!
Thanks Alan for helping all of see the importance of my testimoney.
EXPERT.WITNESS@LIVE.COM
November 11, 2009
A VIEW FROM AN EXPERT PERSPECTIVE
Re: Foreclosure Matters.
Dear Counsel;
The proper foreclosure defenses are anything but common in reference to pleas and repetitive RESPA violations and HUD related jargon. Where this expert and witness sees parties fail is not considering mortgage lender anti-fraud provisions. Those are likely enforced by the SEC due to homeowners and having employed the home as collateral in a registration and accredited Blue Sky.
Consider the other components of investigation such as FIERRA passage by congress, FASB and FAS 140-3 and the Commission’s enforcement of 1122 AB
After nearly eight years as an officer for a member Thrift I saw the switch over to a new authority and call to operating as a FSB under the Office of Thrift Supervision. Thus I left the thrift to join privately held companies who were now jumping into non-agency lending. These companies that were held private soon went public. They also went bust in 1998 when the market tanked and now we have come full circle back to the thrifts. But they are the biggest and best capitalized thrifts in the United States and in the World.
All of this is accomplished and the expense of prior legislation to protect tax payers under FIERRRA. Long gone are Garn St Germain and Taft Hartley.
Now it’s time to go after the homeowners and to punish our lenders with lucrative bail out capital and blinded, rampant foreclosure policies! Under the regulator authority of the OTS the Thrifts still cannot circumvent FIERRA and participate in high cost high risk lending. The Troubled Assets Relief Program adds a certain flavor of non compliance and more pressure into the mix. That will ultimately be their demise if I can get lawyers to listen.
I am also concerned with the delays in the collections effort and the willingness for the lenders to NOT adhere to mandates offered under TARP and Ccc 2923.5. If fact, the claims you’re entitled to are being further circumvented by issues unrelated to trustor personal matters, such as a less than arms servicing agent or need for lenders to maintain distance in every workout.
I opine there is the violation you’re missing. It is a devastating problem for the lender. Lenders and their servicing providers are non-compliant with GAAP and FASB and rules under 140-3 (Controlling assets upon which a sale would otherwise be declared voidable). They fail in their effort and may incur reporting problems.
Therein you also have claims under 1122AB that are enforceable under the Commission’s (SEC) authority and enforcement divisions. There is a multitude of damaging “accountant’s attestation” reports we have discovered to establish these arguments for servicer violations.
Recent news regarding AIG and insured warrants are subject to rumors firms such as Goldman Sachs received the funds (billions) indirectly from the government for relieving AIG of their responsibilities or liabilities. This makes no sense and if proven will further allow Wall Street to circumvent their liability to homeowners in favor of the investors who used their home as collateral for issuing and receiving valueless stock.
This market is about enforcing your arguments and asserting your client’s rights were violated. Certain things remain unexplained in hope and anticipation they can better be revealed (as I am doing). The presupposition here is that the consumer homeowner has nothing to do with high powered Wall Street financial transactions and liabilities.
If your client’s home is collateral used to obtain a loan then you do have a right to make a claim. My belief is their home and neighbors home are collateral provided to a registrant solely to create securities and to provide Wall Street its guarantees. This is the case whereby the collateral is pledged to an indenture and Trustee who is none other than another securitizing partner (Wells, LaSalle, Duetsche etc).
The homes are the collective security for the parties owned by Wall Street or “obligor” to make pledges’ and access liquidity and profits far greater than if they toll an otherwise sick bank public or reassured their stock. But those capital stock issuances and pledges prohibit the obligor from recovering its own collateral (homes) while it must make good on default to borrowers. And those bulk asset pledged are offered from reckless acceptance practices under predatory guidelines.
Now, to stem losses the obligor has a problem – because they sold your client loan. The sale must fail if the terms for a repo are established in advance or must be met under a recourse provision. These repo structured sale backs provide a three journey path to and from and back to the trust with no accounting value or real business purpose upon the initial and subsequent advance. It’s all for recognition purposes.
Preventing this maligned and distorted means of cheating to continue is paramount to your success in fighting for a “work out” and seeking a remedy for a predatory loan made by intentional bad design.
The exposure of deceptive practices and demand for imposing a halt to the sale of your client’s home or to prevent another unlawful foreclosure from proceeding is critical early on. Uncovering the financial madness translates into foreclose with no exceptions over seeking a remedy for a resolution to Corporate America’s problems.
Our research tells us tells only a few Americans will survive this mess with home intact. And the rest will be forced to deal with the fact they lost their home to parties that were not entitled to foreclose on you. There are many questions the lender should at least answer without it appearing as only a stall tactic a trustee cannot see through.
You must offer adequate support for a logical plan. My scholarly view is one should use the Bankruptcy filing for protection or courts to press these arguments for stripping the obligation from the lien or security. I will testify in a matter or adversary that a lender may have no standing for making good on a controlled sale of your clients home as a liquidation and sole means to avoid their own recourse provisions under a repurchase agreement.
What you require is exemplar, evidential material, substance in your arguments and you can demonstrate that from the recovery notices that were filed improperly into county records by (who knows) someone that may not be authorized to represent the holder in due course.
Consumer homeowners are outgunned and way over their heads and most of their arguments to date have failed subject to a toss of a coin and Judges temperament.
This is my observation even though some information you have obtained may actually own more or lack any merit at all.
You have some of the pieces now but the puzzle is far from being assembled into a wining defense. You otherwise are merely prolonging the inevitable….a delayed foreclosure sale.
Regards;
M.Soliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
ABBY – you can file adversary proceedings (so this is like a lawsuit within the bankruptcy) and it can be against the lender/forecloser etc.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE SLIM TO NOTHING ODDS OF AN ADVERSARY ARE? I WORKED SIDE BY SIDE WITH A BK ATTORNEY WHO COULD NOT EVEN GET PASSED THE TRUSTEE AND WHO WAS DISMISSED 33 TIMES IN A ROW. WHAT IS IT YOU KNOW?
DAN, YOUR ONE OF THEM , NO?
MSOLIMAN
ADMIN@BORROWERHOTLINE.COM
RE: CONTRA COSTA U.D. PS08-2028
CLAIMS: “WON HOME”
and
“MATTER: La Salle Bank Vs Spicer TRIAL:
UNLAWFUL DETAINER WON HOME AT $1 MILLION” – M.Soliman
BACK ON NOV 8, I NOTED:
“Case PS08-2028 – Complaints/Parties
Complaint Number: 1
Complaint Type: UD COMPLAINT
Filing Date: 09/10/2008
Complaint Status: DISPOED
Party Number Party Type Party Name Attorney Party Status
1 Plaintiff LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION AS judgment for 04/10/2009
2 Defendant DONAL L. SPICER Pro Per judgment against 04/10/2009
3 Defendant ALL OTHER OCUPANTS judgment against 04/10/2009
THEN ASKED:
So, Maher, given that fraud is ubiquitous, what can we vulnerable souls on the Internet do to counter it? How best can we protect ourselves against it?”
My post was IMMEDIATELY followed by:
“ON SPEAKING ABOUT FRAUD
November 9th 2009 4:55 AM PST
By M.Soliman
“…Talk about fraud. … Anyway. What a roll we are on as fraud is running out of control. Who you ask? You name it… Houston …we have a problem . . . over!”
Deontos, on November 9th, 2009 at 6:05 pm Said:
“Maher,
I am trying to track your successes.
I am interested in the Case Files and Results.”
FROM Bobbie at the Contra Costa County Court, Pittsburg Division at (925) 427-8158, I learned the following:
Donal L. Spice LOST and WAS LOCKED OUT of his Contra Costa house.
FROM Marc Terbeek, Esq., (510) 689-9068, Donal Spice’s attorney (who mostly practices ‘FORECLOSURE ABATEMENT’) I learned that he HAD consulted Maher Soliman, but was able only to buy his client a few months before Donal L. Spice LOST his ‘million dollar house,’ but it was worth only $400,000 then.
THE JURY IS IN ON THE CONTRA COSTA ‘WIN’ CLAIM
THE FACTS HAVE SPOKEN RESOUNDINGLY
ONE HAS TO WONDER HOW MANY OTHER ‘WIN’ CLAIMS WERE ACTUALLY LOSSES
AS M.Soliman, on November 9th, 2009 at 10:49 pm Said:
“…Dont make fools out of these people and use this as a toy for your entertainment . . . save homes …don’t destroy lives!”
ALLAN
B e M o v e d @ A O L . c o m
Tim/Cal
Motion to Quash is probably something I would still file and do ex parte—get it in front of the UD judge asap.
Of course, if you have an attorney, he/she should do this. The service was not good or it was called ‘improper’. Glad you called clerk.
I’m sure clerk told you he/she cannot provide legal advice.
Listen, re: bankrupcty–don’t consider it just a ’skeleton’ to buy time (and never tell the judge that!!).
If you read around on this site, especially some of Neil’s posts, you will learn that much can be done to ’save’ your home from the foreclosure right in the bankruptcy court. However, as I mentioned in many prior posts, the typical bankruptcy attorney likes to do ‘vanilla’ work—the less complicated and plain filings. In a bankruptcy though, and really read info on this blog, you can file adversary proceedings (so this is like a lawsuit within the bankruptcy) and it can be against the lender/forecloser etc. You can do discovery in an AP etc.
The bankruptcy could be a whole new avenue for you in your quest to keep your home!!!
Just think of it as another arena!! David & Goliath!!
Hello, and thank you all for your input, I will definitely pass the info on to others in need.
So, I went ahead and called the courts and asked them if the plaintiff finally filed a proof of service of the summons complaint. Clerk said, so far, not yet. But, we did file an answer weeks ago, are we still able to file a motion to quash because of the answer?
If not, worse case scenerio, ill probably have to file a skeleton bk to buy me more time. At least so I can find a seriously good/affordable attorney to see if there are any violations. Uhhgg,stressful times. What if all homeowners from cali to florida protest to keep our homes, the banks cant stop us all, lol. Its all funny money anyhow. God Bless
Maher,
What’s your PURPOSE in recycling the LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD letter you first posted a year ago under HOMEOWNERS?
That was back in the Bush administration. A lot of water has flowed over the dam since.
Why is its date ellipted?
ALLAN
BeMoved@AOL.com
LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD
Member of Congress
Washington, D.C., Office:
2330 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-1766
Fax: (202) 226-0350
Dear Maher:
Knowing you interest in housing issues, I want to take this opportunity to update you with my views on the foreclosure crisis, FHA loan limits and down payment assistance.
I strongly believe that FHA-backing of mortgages is one of the most significant steps we can take to address the current foreclosure crisis. As you are aware, while the Economic Stimulus Act temporarily increased the FHA-insurable loan limit to $729,000, if further action is not taken, the limit will fall to $362,000 at the end of this year. This level is far too low to make a difference in California where the cost of a home greatly exceeds the national average.
I continue to support down payment assistance programs that allow low-income families to afford decent housing without have to sacrifice other essentials like food, clothing, healthcare, or a child’s education. Families should not be forced to choose between these basic needs when budgets are tight.
You will be pleased to know that on May 8, 2008, I voted in support of the Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 (H.R. 3221), which was signed by the President and became public law on July 30, 2008 . This housing stimulus includes an expansion of the FHA program, and also permanently raises the FHA loan limits. You may be assured that as your representative in Congress and as a member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on transportation , Housing and Urban Development with funding jurisdiction over housing programs, I will continue to represent your views as Congress continues to take steps to help homeowners and homebuyers avoid foreclosure.
Once again, thank you for contacting me. I look forward to hearing from you in the future on this and on other issues of importance to our community, our state, and our nation.
Sincerely
LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD
Member of Congress
Sign up for periodic e-mail updates from Congresswoman Roybal-Allard at http://www.house.gov/roybal-allard
“No one will ever get the house for free!” ——————————
San Jose Attorney
Maher,
Good stuff… to track your successes. I am interested in. . .more about the case in San Jose You blocked a quiet title action? Yes. Did Soliman’s testimony really save these people their home? This is a great story! Is this the attorney who also told you and Mr. Heath . . . No one will ever get the house for free! ——————————–Why are you the only one who calls Soliman “Maher” .
Dont make fools out of these people and use this as a toy for your entertainment . . . save homes …don’t destroy lives!
Thanks Deontos
A quiet title action and case dating back nearly 10 years. Look up the definition Denotos
Let’s see what this mischief maker wants – okay,
Break down the flow of capital /ahhhhhhhhhh….Gain on sale accounting / general ledger
Asset sold to trust (ledger-debit asset)
Cash to depositor (ledger -gain on sale)
—————————————————————————
Cash goes to the trust (debit cash)
Derivatives / assets to depositor (credit assets)
Derivatives liquidate to trust (debit long term assets)
Cash to depositor (credit cash)
Repurchase the loan!
The first transaction has no economic accounting value. The other two cash entries travel under fast 140-3. It’s all motivated by income recognition gibberish and FASB should be ashamed.
Most recent:
* Trustee sale reversed with offer for modification
* Trustee sale held back for month
* Cash for keys offer $25,000.
What your doing is hurting people’s lives.
M.Soliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
Tim/Cal
There’s the ball! Now RUN!!
We need to hear back what happened;
I wish you success.
Your accomplishment will give a TIMELY
BOOST of spirit to Neil.
——————————–
Thank you Abby!!
You just gave me another
“Legal Lesson”.
——————————–
Maher,
I am trying to track your
successes. I am interested
in the Case Files and Results.
I remembered you talking awhile
ago about the Sacramento UD and
one in LA so I thought you could
give “Tim/Cal” some direction.
——————————–
Until I found livinglies I thought I was “on my own” and it was
just gonna be “good luck buddy” and GOODBYE to my property.
I am just so grateful to everybody here, come what may.
Deontos & Tim/Cal
yes…that is one you can easily use and file.
If I had not done that Motion to Quash service….I do not know where I’d be.
It was the ‘miracle’ that kept me in my home long enough to figure what else to do
Also, Tim/Cal it is still not too late to file or have your UD attorney file a fraud, TILA, predatory lending, usury etc. complaint in Calif. Superior Court-unlimited division.
Then you or your UD attorney can file a Motion to Consolidate the UD with the big fraud, TILA etc. complaint and see if the UD judge will do that.
Mine did!
I am still in my home for over 1 year after finding the 3 day notice to quit taped to my front door. Proceeding with my fraud case.
You have to act very quickly on this!! Try not to let UD
court issue a judgment.
I am not an attorney. Always consult an attorney.
The above is my opinion and what I did with my UD.
Tim/Cal.,
Good expereince tells me good advice here so far! …cannot argue. We have won these cases as a defendant and upon a last minute stay against writ of attachment. You have time to mount a defense. Look through the cases herein we have won appearing with counsel under a limited scope engagement and attorney who agrees to speacial appear.
What’s key here is the ability to side step jurisdiction. Critical. There is a way to compel the court to hear the arguments and attacking a note in UD is a zero chance in hell.
That’s all…nothing magic and again….good advice here.
secondarytradedesk@yahoo.com
Hint: Under a deed of trust, the borrower grants the property, irrevocably until the debt is paid, in trust, generally with a power of sale, to the trustee to secure payment of the obligation.(its illegal to give advice).
RE: Tim/Cal
Abby,
I did a “site” search on livinglies and couldn’t
find your file:
site:http://livinglies.wordpress.com/ +ABBY “Motion to Quash”
Just got 3 entries, but no file.
I found this on scribd just now, is the ONE?
*Tim/Cal*
This may be helpful, perhaps your UD attorney can
get this done for you?
Motion to Quash on Pleading Paper Template
http://www.scribd.com/doc/15860204/Motion-to-Quash-on-Pleading-Paper-Template-
Tim/Cal
If the service was bad you can file a Motion to Quash the service. Double check with your civil clerk for your UD to see if opposing ever did file the proof of service.
If not, you might want to consider filing Motion to Quash the service.
I did it in California and won! They had to start all over and serve me again.
I am not an attorney and you should always consult an attorney who is competent.
Since you have some sort of trial to do soon….I’d do an ex parte Motion to Quash…when you go to clerk to file this…you tell her that you need an ex parte date…in other words right away, pronto ..need to be in front of the UD judge.
Or, at the very least….file it right away and hand carry it to court the day of your hearing.
If you have a ‘trial’ date set….have you got your discovery done?
Did you call Tim McCandless, Esq. He is here in California. He travels the state. He has a blog.
Also, I think somewheres on this site is my old template, way old…on the Motion to Quash.
If you search in ScribD, you may also find a Motion to Quash template that you can use.
You have to customize it to fit your facts.
Try to get in touch with Tim McCandless Esq.
The above is my opinion only. I am not providing legal advice.
Tim/Cal
You said,”No proof of service filed by Plaintiff”
Did they actually serve you?
If not, what does your attorney say about
the “lack of service”?
Maher
Dan Edstrom
Abby?
Do you have time to weigh in on this? Or perhaps you already have
and I haven’t seen it come up yet?
I wish I could be of direct help, but I am like you …….never lived in the legal world; but I am trying to intensely learn what I can as quickly as possible.
==============================
Comments I have saved that might assist:
I MAKE NO PERSONAL RECOMMENDATIONS ON THESE:
———————————————————————
Tide is Turning: UNlawful Detainer Action turns Into Battle over Wrongful Foreclosure
Posted on November 19, 2008 by livinglies
The entire matter was set for trial . “…for the most part, this is unheard of in a UD hearing, but hopefully a sign of things to come” according to Maher Soliman, “Expert” speaking on behalf of the defendant and attorney Mark Terbeek. 11.19.2008 /Special thanks to Counsel, MTerbeek, B Michelson, Edwin Heath
———————————————————————
THANKS TO OUR HARD-WORKING LOCAL COUNSEL ACROSS THE UNITED STATES
October 21, 2009
Less than two years ago, FDN had one local counsel in one state. Today, we are affiliated and work with twenty (20) different law Firms representing borrowers across the United States. We wish to extend warm, hearty, and continuing thanks to these attorneys who have and continue to tirelessly provide valuable assistance to our mission to represent borrower victims of foreclosure:
Elizabeth DuPar, Esq. (San Francisco Bay area, northern California)
Hung Nyguen, Esq. (San Francisco Bay area, northern California)
———————————————————————
erlinda, on September 25th, 2009 at 5:46 pm Said:
here’s another name of a lawyer in the bay area “who gets it”
OXZANA KOZLOV
650-814-7708
okzlov@gmail.com
———————————————————————
CALIFORNIA ASSIGNMENTS MUST BE RECORDED
Posted on September 24, 2008 by livinglies
FROM TIM MCLANDLESS
Most all foreclosures in California can be set aside. The power of sale by non judicial means is contained in the civil code 2932. In order to be valid the assignment must be recorded California civil code 2932.5. Most all notices of default recorded by the “Sub-Prime” lenders have not recorded an assignment till just before or just after the Trustee’s sale. They rely on the MERS agency agreement to protect them but under California law they are wrong.
———————————————————————
Judge upholds three-word foreclosure strategy
Friday, May 29, 2009 | 8:00 PM
http://www.bayliving.com/produce-the-note/index.htm
SAN JOSE, CA (KGO) — A Bay Area couple has successfully blocked their lender from taking their home. A federal judge in San Jose brought the foreclosure process to a stop after the couple invoked a three-word strategy first outlined last month by 7 On Your Side’s Michael Finney.
A home could be saved with three words: “produce the note.” Facing foreclosure, owners Isabel and Richard Caporale are using a novel legal strategy to hang on to their home. The couple went to federal court and basically said just three words.
“They claim they have it, but I have no proof that they have this note, and you would think by now it’s been almost three months,” says attorney Marc Voisenat.
———————————————————————
Deontos,
Thanks for the response. Well, its a stressful situation and im sure a lot of homeowners going through forclosure can understand.
Anyhow, we’ve actually lost the house already, but were still living in it. It had a sale date in september and we received a summons for the UD in october. We filed a response with the answer with some bad advice from a relative. Basically stating to produce the note and accepting fault for everything listed in the summons.
We had trial last week, nov. 5th, and our attorney, who only does UD’s by the way, asked the judge for a continuance to find an attorney who specializes in forclosure defense. She granted us 7 more days until nov. 12th, to come back to trial and basically do it all over again. On top of that, the lender did not file a proof of service, so maybe that allowed her to give us more time. Not sure tho.
So, here we are. 3 days away from trial and still looking for an attorney who gets it. I dont know if we have a leg to stand on in court, but being on this site is giving me some kind of hope in at least seeing what options I have for a forclosure defense. Any strategies, lawyers, contacts will be greatly appreciated. Ive been told that I would have to file a seperate law suit against the lender to produce the note along with other strategies that I dont even know about. So, thank you all for reading this and its good to see people out there trying to help eachother out.
I sure wish I was an attorney, there are so many people out there that needs help, but are financially not able to afford one. Dont get me wrong, there are decent attornies out there, but wow, just to talk to one, its like 250-350 an hour. No wonder banks are having there way, especially in non judicial states. All I can say is, God will bless you more than money and the banks will for your good deed. Thanks and God Bless.
——————————————-
SPEAKING ABOUT FRAUD
November 9th 2009 4:55 AM PST
By M.Soliman
Talk about fraud. There is a science to looking at the instruments used for recorded notices…or maybe it’s an art? Anyway. What a roll we are on as fraud is running out of control. Who you ask? You name it.
Hers a bit of advice.
The equipment or software used to print the notices or instruments (CA) is approved for use in banks and popular with mortgage bankers. The software cannot be altered without the person having clearance. He / she would enter the system in order to alter a document and the revision is there for eternity after making the changes.
Thereafter the person who made the changes is on record as the last to alter a preprinted form. Why would they ever need to change a pre-printed form used for recording?
One more thing. The biggest tips I can give you with respect to recorded instrument used to foreclose are as follows:
See your notices
(1) Default,
(2) Assignment and
(3) Substitution
They are (almost) always printed in a set. Forget MERS here for a second as the documents are printed by the originator or successors and assigns (Depositor).
There is never any need to print any of the three documents separate let alone on a different date.
The foreclosure specialist’s are good, very good [and never the hit of a party...] but they do know what they are doing!
I believe the CA civil code 2923.5 and Obama Plan are causing these opportunists to “back date”. Last minute and when you back date the succession of dates becomes vulnerable.
These foreclosure specialists left over from the crash are lucky to have jobs and do as they are told. I am sure the trustees are telling them “rescind or revise, it’s up to you”?
Remember also, an altered instrument for recording in VOID or VOIDABLE I don’t care what you say about jurisdiction! Trust me on this one as case law is abundant.
———————————-
We have a case right now whereby I will testify (if they don’t come back with a settlement). I opine it’s a “voidable” claim and subject solely to damages as the property sold to a 3rd party animal. Void you win the home back and voidable you lose (right to reclaim your home back).
It should be a monster settlement / claim and its happening to a great guy (plaintiff). We have a document that was technically drawn on 12/18/2009. That is verified. Problem is the document is dated by hand and endorsed the same day by the notary as of 12/08/2009. . . 10 days prior to being printed?
I would move to case precedent and say every foreclosure for this lender as of the date of this claim may be grounds for rescission. Is there an attorney in the house?
Houston …we have a problem . . . over!
msoliman
expert.witness@live.com
Dear Maher,
Back on October 30th, 2009 at 11:17 am, in response to Mortgage Auditor’s valid question,
“Is there a single ruling whereby the mortgage was extinguished as a direct result of your theories and related arguments?”
you replied,
“It’s a new day and another challenge.
Ask yourself this, i f an expert who testifies is a threat to the system, many will attack and discoount everything he represents.
If not, there is no threat. Mortgage Auditor – no one ever has a problem with you…..
Case Number: PS08-2028
Matter: La Salle Bank Vs Spicer Trial:
Unlawful Detainer Won Home at $1million < MAHER YOU CLAIM
Court: Superior Court Of Contra Costa
Commissioner: Lowell Richards”
On November 3, Mortgage Auditor suggested to you
“But the best method of defense is to properly source and document your allegations and theories so people can see the substance. That is what I am searching for but so far all I have is a casual reference to a state case.”
Minutes later he produces a hyperlink to the case history:
http://icms.cc-courts.org/tellme/tellme/tellmecasereport.asp?language=ENGLISH&courtcode=P&casenumber=PS08-2028&casetype=CIV
Later that day, Deontos asked,
“Maher or Mortgage Auditor
What is the actual disposition
of the Contra Costa “UD” ? Did
the Homeowner get EVICTED?
I have no legal background; I read
the info posted regarding the case.
It seems to me the guy is OUT?”
Maher, you fired back,
“WE have had great success in Contra Costa county. Not intended to mean WE got it wired. just referring to OUR experiences. These lenders do come back and THE SECOND ROUND IS TOUGH!“ [emphases added]
On November 7, you answer Deontos defensively with what reads like a threat of prosecution,
“Folks….We have the IT info. to document the attorney who represents two or three readers (denotos) who attack me.
They soon will be revealed by prosecuters.
They don’t realize they are offering tortous interference
with cases before state and federal court.”
Again you claim, at the end of what appears as an attempt to rehabilitate your reputation, a hard-to-prove track record of victories, where again you repeat,
"….Case Number Ps08-2028
Matter: La Salle Bank Vs Spicer
Trial: Unlawful Detainer
Won Home < MAHER YOU CLAIM
Court: Superior Court Contra Costa
Commissioner: Lowell Richards"
The next day, Deontos, showing you great deference, states,
“Maher,
I think you referred to my online name as “DE NOTOS”?
If it was me you were addressing; I go by: “Deontos”.
I was actually trying to better understand just the Contra Costa
case. As that is very close to where I live. I am trying to navigate
the legal world without any prior background in this arena. When
things are written by the various contributors here I consider it
my lessons. I am grateful to all. As I have said before I don’t
always understand everything you say but my gut says you are REAL and my ears perk up when I see your comments.
Thanks again for following up on that case.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Maher,
I hope you'll NOT consider this simple request for verification of your oft published win claims an instance of tortious interference with prospective business advantage. Clearly, I would not wish to interfere with any prospects you might hope to troll for here with desperate homeowners such as Tim, who reached out for HELP specifically to YOU (by name) November 6.
Maher, please help Deontos, Mortgage Auditor, me, Tim and the rest of our LL community better understand your claims of victory. I see you cite cases in courts at various levels all over California. The records for those other courts are largely inaccessible. Only in Costa County are case dockets available online for FREE. You must have known that.
Could you help us better understand this particular docket for UD COMPLAINT case PS08-2028? Why is the case marked DISPOED?
When I GO TO THE HYPERLINK ABOVE and examine the docket for Donal L Spicer, I see he acted pro per, neither your appearance nor expert testimony was noted, and it appears the case was decided AGAINST Spicer with JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT on 4/10/2009. There is mention of CONTESTED COURT TRIAL on 4/13/2009, but that appears NOT APPLICABLE.
The LAST entry is “08/05/2009 WRIT OF POSSESSION ISSUED TO CONTRA COSTA (WRIT OF POSSESSION) RETURNED WHOLLY UN SATISFIED.”
I conducted an online search and was unable to locate a Donal S. Spicer anywhere.
Maher, were I to contact
Kiri Torre, Court Executive Officer
649 Main Street
Martinez CA 94553
(voice) (925) 957-5600
ctweb@contracosta.courts.ca.gov at the Superior Court of California at the County of Contra Costa California, do you think maybe she could CONFIRM your October 30th claim that SPICER WON his $1 million house?
I see by entry that on “11/26/2008 ROBERT E. WEISS INCORPORATED CHANGES ATTORNEY FOR LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION AS AND IS REPLACED BY ROBERT E. WEISS INCORPORATED.” Were I to contact Robert Weiss, Inc. would they remember you or your expert testimony?
By the way, why this earlier docket entry, do you suppose? “12/15/2008 CASE IS SEALED”
Any light you can shed on this case and our collective questions would be greatly appreciated. Like President Reagan, before we part with our confidence and well-earned money, we aim to “TRUST BUT VERIFY.”
Was the ‘second round’ with LaSalle Bank N.A. as tough as you suggested?
Case PS08-2028 – Complaints/Parties
Complaint Number: 1
Complaint Type: UD COMPLAINT
Filing Date: 09/10/2008
Complaint Status: DISPOED
Party Number Party Type Party Name Attorney Party Status
1 Plaintiff LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION AS judgment for 04/10/2009
2 Defendant DONAL L. SPICER Pro Per judgment against 04/10/2009
3 Defendant ALL OTHER OCUPANTS judgment against 04/10/2009
So, Maher, given that fraud is ubiquitous, what can we vulnerable souls on the Internet do to counter it? How best can we protect ourselves against it? Do you recommend we place our trust in Better Business Bureau reports?
RSVP
ALLAN
B e M o v e d @ A O L . c o m
USedKarGuy,
Thank you for your response last week. I undestand your position better. I thought maybe you received the info frome the trustee in a QWR. I received the same letter from Wells Fargo.
Jeff
Frivolous Lawsuit. •A baseless lawsuit that is filed with little or no prospect of success.
VEXATIOUS LITIGATION: is legal action which is brought, regardless of its merits, solely to harass or subdue an adversary. It may take the form of a primary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, and unwarranted filing of meritless motions in a matter which is otherwise a meritorious cause of action. Filing vexatious litigation is considered an abuse of the judicial process and may result in sanctions against the offender
It seems to me that the foreclosure mill that filed the suit against me falls into both of these categories.
They filed over 13,000 foreclosure suits in 2008. They continue to lose in NY courts.
Lets not forget Fraud on the Court and the Defendents.
What say you all.
Tim/Cal., on November 6th, 2009 at 11:21 am Said:
….about your request for help…….has anyone
responded yet?
Did you look at the attorney list here?
It’s possible to STOP them here Tim.
Can you post your status as of now?
I am not sure what I can do to help
you out. But if you haven’t found
help yet maybe one more post will stir up
some assistance.
Maher-great! i am glad you have your IT information.
I will be waiting for an online post of an apology to me for the false accusations by you and another, on me for whoever published the court filed judgment online etc,
Maher,
I think you referred to my online name as “DE NOTOS”?
If it was me you were addressing; I go by: “Deontos”.
I was actually trying to better understand just the Contra Costa
case. As that is very close to where I live. I am trying to navigate
the legal world without any prior background in this arena. When
things are written by the various contributors here I consider it
my lessons. I am grateful to all. As I have said before I don’t
always understand everything you say but my gut says you are REAL and my ears perk up when I see your comments.
Thanks again for following up on that case.
Question: I read your definition of a mortgage and or title security which was good; however it doesn’t show the following:
If indeed the bankers, insurance companies, and wall street, did in fact device a way in which to perpetuate a newly created marketing security – which I know they had but did they know that it was fraudulent; I believe they did, but wall street was dying for something new to sell to their investor – and I found a couple of old Robb reports offering securities backed real estate for 13.7% return. So this was actively marketed for years.
Question: How does this mechanism of security or transferring cloud and or make the deed defective.
Response – If a contract is void or voidable it is common practice to render it also unenforceable. If secured by a deed of trust (trust as in trust me?) the deceptive acts or fraud renders the deed defect.
I contend nearly every trustee’s sale as of 2009 is transferred with the deed resting disturbed. But a contract determined to be unenforceable will in fact cause the deed to be defect and also unenforceable.
M.Soliman
http://www.foreclosureinfosearch.com
(getting bombarded with questions and please be patient).
DE NOTOS: (Said)
Maher or Mortgage Auditor -What is the actual dispositionof the Contra Costa “UD” ? Did the Homeowner get EVICTED?I have no legal background;
Latin / DeNotos
“AN ATTORNEY MAY USE DE NOTOS TO RESEARCH AND REVIEW EARLIER TESTIMONEY …AND DISCOUNT AND IMPEACH AN EARLIER WITNESS”.
Folks….We have the IT info. to document the attorney who represents two or three readers (denotos) who attack me.
They soon will be revealed by prosecuters.
They don’t realize they are offering tortous interference
with cases before state and federal court.
—————————————————————————I AM AN EXPERT WHO TESTIFIES AND NOT AN ATTORNEY OR CONSULTANT. WHAT’S YOUR POINT?
Cases Prevailed and Settled
Maher Soliman Expert Witness
testimony and Appearances in Cases
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 8:53 AM
To: admin@borrowerhotline.com
Subject: YESTERDAY
———————————————————————-
Fr: COUNSEL TO DEFENDANT
March 2009
Hello Maher:
First and foremost, thank you for the time on a holiday yesterday in Santa Monica for your deposition. I believe . . . your testimony yesterday should clear up any lingering questions the (courts) may have on whether they have any ownership rights to the Note and Deed of Trust.
I also really appreciate your suggestion that you will be able to travel to Northern California within the next month to complete this.
Keep me updated and we can set a time in June.
Best regards,
Counsel to Homeowner
XYZZ Law Offices
******avenue, Suite 40
xxxxxxx, CA 95008
Telephone: 000-000-0000
Facsimile: 000-000-0000
————————————————————-
Settlement Offers:
Out of Court settlement / Offer
L Lopez: $50,000 /
M Ramirez: $20,000 /Out of Court
E Fanning: $25,000 / 90 Days Stay Eviction
Case Number: MCV202430
matter: HSBC Bank vs. Lewis’
Trial: Judgment for Defendants
Court: Superior Court Napa / Santa Rosa
Judge: Gary Nadler
Case Number: (call us)
Matter: Wells Fargo Vs Goines
Trial: Judgment for Defendants
Court: Superior Court of Ca / LA
Judge: (call us)
Case Number Ps08-2028
Matter: La Salle Bank Vs Spicer
Trial: Unlawful Detainer
Won Home
Court: Superior Court Contra Costa
Commissioner: Lowell Richards
Case Number: UDFS900217
Matter: Bank of New York Vs Medina
Motion: Defendant – Set Aside
Court: County Of San Bernardino
Judge:
Case Number: CV 09-00885 JFW JTLX
Matter: Deutsche Bank vs. K Russell
Trial: Court Trial Unlawful Detainer
Court: Superior Court Of CA
Santa Monica Div
Judge: (call us)
Case Number: 08u17459
Contact: M.Soliman
Expert witness
Telephone 213-627-2324
Telephone 213-880-6288
Msoliman or any Attornies in California,
Like so many out there, were in desperate need to stop a forclosure on our house. We had to show up for trial yesterday for an unlawful detainer. Luckily, the judge noticed that there was no proof of service filed in the courts, so they gave us 1 more week .
So, we are in desperate need of advice/attorney to help us with our case, were in solano county. We dont know much of the legal system, but I do know there is only so much you can do in a unlawful detainer case.
We would like to challenge the lender to show that they are the noteholders and were properly assigned the note at the time the forclosure was filed. Along with any other forclosure defenses. From what I heard, this matter must be brought up in a civil lawsuit. Unfortunetely we have 6 more days until trial for the ud, if that matters.
Weve tried contacting local attornies, but they didnt seem to get it. Any advice or contacts would be a Blessing. Thanks again, Tim and family
fifita77@att.net
WHY MORTGAGES AREN’T MODIFIED AND WHAT A RULING STOPPING FORECLOSURE MEANS
- Edward Harrison
“In August, the Kansas Supreme Court issued a ruling against a mortgage tracking service which may prove very costly to banks in foreclosure, leading to massive writedowns. It could be a life saver for many trapped in the foreclosure process. The case goes to the core of the functioning of massive markets in securitization and derivatives and has wide-ranging importance.
The service, MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration System), is a privately-owned registry set up in 1997 by Fannie Mae (FNM), Freddie Mac (FRE) and several large banks including JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Citigroup (C) and Bank of America (BAC). In foreclosure, MERS is often the party which files on behalf of the lenders behind the mortgage against homeowners. The Kansas ruling effectively blocks MERS from bringing legal action on the lenders’ behalf in certain foreclosure situations, potentially putting the kibosh on MERS’ legal authority on the more than 60 million mortgages it holds and subjecting the lenders to huge losses.
This is a complicated but important case I want to break down for you below.
Securitization at fault
The crux of the case has to do with mortgage-backed securities and the process of securitization. In a bygone era, almost all mortgages were held as loans on the books of the originating banks. In this case, if a mortgage went past due, it was a matter to be worked out between an individual homeowner and an individual mortgage holder.
However, when the mortgage-backed securities (MBS) market took off, mortgages were sliced and diced into tranches and packaged into securities and sold on to investors. These same securities were then sliced and diced and packaged with other securities into collateralized debt obligations (CDOs). CDOs were often then sliced and diced further still into CDOs-squared – that is CDOs of CDOs.
Often times, the underlying mortgages in these instruments were high-risk, sub-prime mortgages. But the ratings agencies could still give them AAA ratings, which made them eligible for investment by risk-averse investors like teachers’ pension funds or municipalities. So, these securities were then sold on to investors around the world into remote places like small towns in Norway and banks in Germany. However, when the housing market fell, the value of these securities plummeted; and they fell much more than the house prices as the securities are derivatives and leveraged against the value of the underlying asset. The result was a financial crisis of epic proportions.
Making matters more complicated for the homeowner, the originating lender is often not the servicing agent of a mortgage. Payment from the homeowner and to investors who are the ultimate owners of the security is handled by a mortgage servicer who collects a fee for its work.
What this has meant is that there is considerable distance between a homeowner and a mortgage holder, such that in the event of foreclosure, it is not a matter of picking up the telephone and calling Mr. Smith at the local Bank. Often times, there is a byzantine web of originating bank, mortgage holder (if loan is sold), mortgage servicer, MBS pooling/securitizing agent, and investors. Needless to say, the average person doesn’t have a clue as to who to call in order to get relief to avoid foreclosure. The obvious port of call is the mortgage servicer, who is the one party with whom a homeowner has ongoing contact.
Mortgage Servicer
Below is a research report written by the National Consumer Law Center just this past month on why consumers in jeopardy of suffering foreclosure cannot get loans modified.
It starts:
The country is in the midst of a foreclosure crisis of unprecedented proportions. Millions of families have lost their homes and millions more are expected to lose their homes in the next few years. With home values plummeting and layoffs common, homeowners are crumbling under the weight of mortgages that were often only marginally affordable when made.
One commonsense solution to the foreclosure crisis is to modify the loan terms. Lenders routinely lament their losses in foreclosure. Foreclosures cost everyone—the homeowner, the lender, the community—money. Yet foreclosures continue to outstrip loan modifications. Why?
Once a mortgage loan is made, in most cases the original lender does not have further ongoing contact with the homeowner. Instead, the original lender, or the investment trust to which the loan is sold, hires a servicer to collect monthly payments. It is the servicer that either answers the borrower’s plea for a modification or launches a foreclosure. Servicers spend millions of dollars advertising their concern for the plight of homeowners and their willingness to make deals. Yet the experience of many homeowners and their advocates is that servicers—not the mortgage owners—are often the barrier to making a loan modification.
See the problem? This is exactly why loan modifications are not happening in large enough numbers. This goes to incentives – mortgage servicers are not incentivized to make modifications. In fact the incentives go the other way – foreclosure.
Servicers have four main sources of income, listed in descending order of importance:
The monthly servicing fee, a fixed percentage of the unpaid principal balance of the loans in the pool;
Fees charged borrowers in default, including late fees and “process management fees”;
Float income, or interest income from the time between when the servicer collects the payment from the borrower and when it turns the payment over to the mortgage owner; and
Income from investment interests in the pool of mortgage loans that the servicer is servicing.
Overall, these sources of income give servicers little incentive to offer sustainable loan modifications, and some incentive to push loans into foreclosure. The monthly fee that the servicer receives based on a percentage of the outstanding principal of the loans in the pool provides some incentive to servicers to keep loans in the pool rather than foreclosing on them, but also provides a significant disincentive to offer principal reductions or other loan modifications that are sustainable on the long term. In fact, this fee gives servicers an incentive to increase the loan principal by adding delinquent amounts and junk fees. Then the servicer receives a higher monthly fee for a while, until the loan finally fails. Fees that servicers charge borrowers in default reward servicers for getting and keeping a borrower in default. As they grow, these fees make a modification less and less feasible. The servicer may have to waive them to make a loan modification feasible but is almost always assured of collecting them if a foreclosure goes through. The other two sources of servicer income are less significant.
If servicers’ income gives no incentive to modify and some incentive to foreclose, through increased fees, what about servicers’ expenditures? Servicers’ largest expenses are the costs of financing the advances they are required to make to investors of the principal and interest payments on nonperforming loans. Once a loan is modified or the home foreclosed on and sold, the requirement to make advances stops. Servicers will only want to modify if doing so stops the clock on advances sooner than a foreclosure would.
Worse, under the rules promulgated by the credit rating agencies and bond insurers, servicers are delayed in recovering the advances when they do a modification, but not when they foreclose. Servicers lose no money from foreclosures because they recover all of their expenses when a loan is foreclosed, before any of the investors get paid. The rules for recovery of expenses in a modification are much less clear and somewhat less generous.
In addition, performing large numbers of loan modifications would cost servicers upfront money in fixed overhead costs, including staffing and physical infrastructure, plus out-of-pocket expenses such as property valuation and credit reports as well as financing costs. On the other hand, servicers lose no money from foreclosures.
This is a very important document for anyone looking to do a loan modification. I strongly suggest you read it, download it and act upon it.
By the way, the largest servicers are:
* Bank of America: $2.1 trillion, up from $530 billion a year earlier (via its acquisition of Countrywide – this is WHY Bank of America bought Countrywide)
* Wells Fargo (WFC): $1.8 trillion, up from $1.5 trillion a year earlier
* JPMorgan Chase: $1.5 trillion, up from $795 billion a year ago (thanks in large part to its acquisition of Washington Mutual)
* CitiMortgage (a division of Citigroup): $792 billion, down from $799 billion a year earlier. Citi is hurting i everywhere)
* ResCap: $391 billion, down from $449 billion in the first quarter of 2008.
As you can see, consolidation has meant the big are getting bigger. Despite a recession, servicing fees are increasing, not decreasing.
You should DEFINITELY read my post “How refinancing helps the likes of Bank of America and Wells Fargo” because this demonstrates why these banks are going to rack up monster fees in mortgage servicing.
Landmark National Bank v. Boyd A. Kessler, Kan 2009, No. 98,489
That brings us to the Kansas case. According to the Kansas City Business Journal, the case can be summarized as follows:
A Ford County man went into bankruptcy in 2006. He had taken out two mortgages on the same property, one to Landmark National Bank and one to Millennia Mortgage Corp. Landmark foreclosed on its mortgage. Millennia had sold its mortgage, which eventually landed at Sovereign Bank, though that transaction never was recorded in Ford County.
Neither MERS nor Sovereign received notice when Landmark filed its foreclosure. That’s because the notice went to Millennia, still registered in Ford County, which is like telling someone that a stranger’s car is about to be towed.
Landmark won a default judgment, essentially wiping out Sovereign’s mortgage. MERS and Sovereign sued to set aside the judgment, arguing that MERS should have received notice. They lost at trial and on appeal.
Supreme Court justices had a difficult time accepting what MERS was and why it would be entitled to receive notice of a foreclosure when it was not a lender and had no stake in the property behind the mortgage. In addition, the court found, the original mortgage required notice only to the lender, not MERS.
This case was decided on 28 August 2009 in favor of the homeowner Boyd Kessler (Document and link below). The issue was predatory lending. But there was more wrong here. MERS does facilitate liquidity in the MBS market, but it does a lot of other things that could harm consumers
* MERS also acts as a “corporate shield,” protecting lenders from legal action in cases of predatory lending.
* MERS can foreclose even though it is not the financial party with interest
* Because MERS is a distant intermediary, foreclosure can proceed without even producing an original mortgage note
* With MERS in control, consumers cannot access publicly available information to adequately determine who the holders of their note are.
If MERS is blocked from filing suit in many cases, there will be large losses accumulating at the holders of these notes. Expect to hear more about this very important case.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HYPERLINK above INCLUDES:
> WHY SERVICERS FORECLOSE WHEN THEY SHOULD MODIFY AND OTHER PUZZLES OF SERVICER BEHAVIOR (Servicer Compensation & Its Consequences) ~ a 40+ page manual published October 2009 by NCLC (National Consumer Law Center)
> LANDMARK BANK v KESSLER (The Court Syllabus)
ALLAN in MA & FL
B e M o v e d @ A O L . c o m
By the way not that there is anything wrong with delay tactics but there is a big difference between delaying the inevitable and suggesting there is a way to defeat foreclosure.
So do you have an example whereby you actually succeeded in saving a home? Or are these all delay tactics that may buy a few months but ultimately end up in eviction?
We have had great success in Contra Costa county. Not intended to mean we got it wired. just referring to our experiences. These lenders do come back and the second round is tough! msoliman
Maher or Mortgage Auditor
What is the actual disposition
of the Contra Costa “UD” ? Did
the Homeowner get EVICTED?
I have no legal background; I read
the info posted regarding the case.
It seems to me the guy is OUT?
Here is the case history:
http://icms.cc-courts.org/tellme/tellme/tellmecasereport.asp?language=ENGLISH&courtcode=P&casenumber=PS08-2028&casetype=CIV
Maher,
What is the significance of this reference to an unpublished case without a link to the relevant text?
And, being attacked by itself is no indication of fear for what you may reveal. People are attacked for a variety of reasons so I am not sure what you are suggesting here.
But the best method of defense is to properly source and document your allegations and theories so people can see the substance. That is what I am searching for but so far all I have is a casual reference to a state case.
It’s a new day and another challenge.
Ask yourself this, i f an expert who testifies is a threat to the system, many will attack and discoount everything he represents.
If not, there is no threat. Mortgage Auditor – no one ever has a problem with you…..
Case Number: PS08-2028
Matter: La Salle Bank Vs Spicer Trial:
Unlawful Detainer Won Home at $1million
Court: Superior Court Of Contra Costa
Commissioner: Lowell Richards
msoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
msoliman,
I am not referring to cases involving other industries. Is there a single ruling whereby the mortgage was extinguished as a direct result of your theories and related arguments? This is not a challenge but merely an attempt to better understand how the courts have reacted to these theories.
TO: “Allan
B e M o v e d @ A O L . c o m
Dear Allan
Well Sir, I do appreciate your comments. The time and effort spent to verify our market leading findings is appreciated. It must take away from the valuable time otherwise spent with family, kicking your dog and loved ones.However, we cannot fulfill your request for assistance at this time. Please contact HUD for additional help or ACORN if your in need of counseling. Have you also considered your county’s mental health ward? We look forward to your submissions in the future and ask you to include a return address and contact information.
You will do fine inyour endeavors. And as a judge said in a matter I attended concerning handing down an eight year sentence . . .
“Good bye and good luck”.
expert witness”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Maher,
It fails me why Neil Garfield doesn’t moderate or block your mean-spirited ad hominem attacks passing as ‘postings.’ Who hurt you, and why are you making everyone here so publicly pay for it? Why so many personae?
As someone who passes himself off as an expert witness, you must be well aware of what is termed PROJECTION, e.g. “Have you also considered your county’s mental health ward?” OR ” It must take away from the valuable time otherwise spent with family, kicking your dog and loved ones.”
Should you be as self-aware as befits the vaunted role you claim to play for others, then you might consider answering your own rhetorical question. I’d gladly find institutional care for you, Maher, as I have extensive experience as a counselor and guardian ‘pink-slipping’ schizophrenics (especially paranoid) and others ‘who’ve lost it.’ Can you believe, one in 25 Americans are sociopaths (have no conscience)? Then, there are psychopaths, who carry their enmity to vile extremes!
This blogsite is a serious place where people are thoughtfully engaged in heroic fights to preserve their homes or get at the truth of what they are experiencing. Why can’t you show some decency and a modicum of respect for this positively engaged and supportive community? Why the slights? Why the ad hominem attacks? Why especially do you attack “Ladies”? Misogyny gone rampant? Forgive the stereotype, is this your cultural heritage?
If you were to re-read my posts, you’d observe I have offered you mostly constructive criticism, though I have been open about my shared annoyance with your defensive hostility and hogging the bully pulpit to pander your unproven services.
Could you furnish a list of and contact info for attorneys who have called upon and successfully implemented your expertise? You can even include those you admitted were wrong to characterize you as a ‘fool.’
Could you provide a list of cases we can view that document your expert testimony? Surely as a businessman out to win more business, you can provide these.
By your irresponsible postings, you invite discord and enmity within a community with little tolerance for either. Why so destructive? This informs how this community perceives your character, and takes away from your possibly worthwhile contributions in the area of securities and accounting expertise.
Is it possible you’re mixing me up with someone else when you state, “However, we cannot fulfill your request for assistance at this time”? Thanks for plugging ACORN and for affirming “You will do fine inyour endeavors.”
Try not to get too close to these criminal cases to which you seem to gravitate. Blurring the lines may come too easily for you. Something might rub off. One may take perverse pleasure in seeing another be punished for transgressions one oneself has committed.
Fittingly, “Good bye and good luck.”
ALLAN
B e M o v e d @ A O L . c o m (in case you missed it when you – assuming the imperial ‘we’ – stated: “We look forward to your submissions in the future and ask you to include a return address and contact information.”)
RIP OFF REPORT – - Nationwide Loan Services – Maher Soliman – NLS – borrowerhotline.com – foreclosureinfosearch.com
MISREPRESENTATION: Promised Me They Help With House Already Foreclosed,
Answer: “Help with house already foreclosed on” – what does that mean and has anyone ever heard me OFFER anything like this?
MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATION: Do Forensic Loan Audits of My Other 3 Houses in Foreclosure,
Answer: We are an Expert Witness and do not employ forensic audits. We are critical of audits as we go after servicing and recovery under GAAP and FAS 140- 3 including SEC charges of 1122AB (Not the origination, Not RESPA, or TILA, Etc.)
MISREPRESENTATION: Plus Get Huge Reduction to Principle-
Answer: Has anyone here ever heard me say . . .
Under FAS 140-3 “controlling interest” a lender cannot reduce the principal whereby they do not own the loan they SOLD. THEY USE THE TRUSTEE SALE TO GET BACK THE HOME UNDER A REPO AGREEMENT.
MISREPRESENTATION: They did nothing and admitted erasing all data I emailed to them to “Audit” Los Angeles California
Answer – As an expert witness we do not do “Audits” as we stated. We question the audits and have made some auditors upset here if anything.
Ms MAs, We attack the servicer who boards a predatory loan and the standing for a foreclosure “Sale” where the Deed is defect -it is voidable and prohibits any conveyance. Now this has gone on long enough and why ?
And Abby – your ot who you say you are , correct Counsel?
admin@borrowerhotline.com
M.Soliman
Mortgage Auditor – I sent them out and it was a long list ???? . I’ll do it again but if this is something your versed in (i am not an attorney ) If so I ask the following:
Your opinion using Enron / Tyco and their illegal use of the SPV – is that qualified as case law? Also any merit in introducing cases outside the mortgage business that mirror securities violations / seciritzation is key and the SEC is loaded with references and at least great secondary authority. Maybe there is merit in following the Civil rules & guidelines for sentencing when establishing a case under a criinal attorney to be brought before the State or Fed Attorney General
I differ to you . .. .
msoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
secondarytradedesk,
I have yet to see any legal authority in support of your theory. Can you cite any primary or secondary authority?
Alina;
(or whatever your name is)….Read this part again
Section 562(a) states that if a trustee (or debtor in possession) rejects a repurchase agreement or other
*** safe harbored financial contract,***
or if a repo participant or other qualified financial contract counterparty liquidates, terminates or accelerates such an agreement, damages shall be measured as of the earlier of the rejection date or the date of such liquidation, termination or acceleration. Section 562(b) applies if there are no “commercially reasonable determinants of value” as of the operative date. Under those conditions, damages are to be measured as of the earliest subsequent date or dates on which there are commercially reasonable determinants of value.3
Comments-
The debtor is a registrant under a Blue Sky , a shelf or private offering. They borrower against a balance sheet that is a bucket of assets they now claim belong to them. This is only true under a “security deed” and there is the violation against a homeowner.
They have an interst in the home which is a security.
THEY DONT OWN THE HOME! GET IT. WORK WITH ME….GET IT! LET’S TRY THIS AGAIN.
IF THEY LOSE LOANS TO A MODIFCATION OR SHORT SALE THEY REDUCE THEIR ASSET BASE AND HAVING NO CAPCITY TO REPLACE THESE ASSETS THEY BREECH THE COVENANTS OF A REPO. FAS 140-3 HOWEVER PROHIBIT A REPO.
I SAID THIS ALL ALONG (I, ME MOI, YOURS TRULEY, MAN IN THE MIRROR, ETC) FAS 140-3 AND SALE OR REPO AND NO SALE
Otherwise what is your point here?
If you do not have an attorney , it is a potential problem as it is the only way an expert can be engaged and work on a case. We do have counsel to refer to you and the contact is subject to an attorney client privilege provided by law.
For the matter and pending claim OR CASE REVIEW CONTACT US :
MSoliman
expert.witness@live.com
http://www.borrowerhotline.com.
Allan
B e M o v e d @ A O L . c o m
Dear Allan
Well Sir, I do appreciate your comments. The time and effort spent to verify our market leading findings is appreciated. It must take away from the valuable time otherwise spent with family, kicking your dog and loved ones.However, we cannot fulfill your request for assistance at this time. Please contact HUD for additional help or ACORN if your in need of counseling. Have you also considered your county’s mental health ward? We look forward to your submissions in the future and ask you to include a return address and contact information.
You will do fine inyour endeavors. And as a judge said in a matter I attended concerning handing down an eight year sentence . . .
“Good bye and good luck”.
expert witness
Don-CA, on October 19th, 2009 at 12:07 pm Said:
Looks like M. Soliman is dead on:
TYING IT TOGETHER: MASSIVE, PERNICIOUS FRAUD – from the Corruption Market Ticke Looters
The above comments were unsolicited but represent everything these people cannot stand. Their prep walk maybe here soon where this is all tied into another civil matter and need to circumvent the courts authority and to discredit my testimoney inthat matter
Soliman is an expert witness and has always focused on providing counsel and clients a road map for filing claims in a wrongful foreclosure. We believe modifications and short sales are impossible based on accounting rules, therefore we are not supporting or denouncing consultant services or audits. Our testimony is influenced by SEC enforcement of guidelines for a registrant, GAAP and FASB authority and interpretations published in accordance with domestic and world accounting rules and regulatory enforcement.
Testimony provided by the witness is submitted with complaint or response and we testify in court when called upon to do so or when challenge in cross examination by the parties.
A prep walk is not a nice way to enter the courts you so often speak of.
Bye Ladies ;
ALLAN IN MA
I STARTED TO SAY THAT I HAD ALERTED ON THIS BLOG MANY MONTHS PRIOR ABOUT CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS WHO PLAGARIZE AND POST AS THEIR OWN MATERIALS HERE ON THIS SITE TO ENHANCE EVERYONE’S VIEW THAT THE PERSON IS HIGHLY KNOWLEDGEABLE. THE INDIVIDUAL IS THE ONLY PERSON ON THIS BLOG WHO PUSHES TO SELL HIS OR HER SERVICES.
IF ANYONE CHALLENGES THIS PERSON, HE OR SHE TRIES TO TELL THEM TO GET OFF THE BLOG AND OR ATTACKS
Allan In MA
IT IS NOT NEW NEWS ABOUT CERTAIN PEOPLE ON THIS WEBSITE WHO POST PLAGARIZE
MONEY, DEBT, GOLDSMITH FRAUDS, MONEY CHANGERS, COUNTERFEITING, PONZI SCHEMES, USES of BUSINESS CYCLES, USURY, FEDERAL RESERVE, FRACTIONAL RESERVE LENDING, WEALTH ERADICATION, INTEREST AS A WEAPON, SDRs & MORE
Could this sub-prime mortgage meltdown be a crisis manufactured to consolidate bankers’ powers? Could the business cycle be exploited to further empower the banking industry? You decide.
The first video tells us how banks can create money, and more.
The second is more a comprehensive piece one might expect from a Libertarian or La Rouche devotee that rails against the money changers and Federal Reserve. It provides an intriguing conspiratorial history of international banking that may speak to what economically we endure in an era when there is a calculated massive transfer of wealth underway.
“Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something they know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.” ~ Woodrow Wilson
MONEY AS DEBT
“This excellent, entertaining and animated feature by graphic artist and videographer, Paul Grignon, explains in careful detail – todays magically perverse debt money system. This 47 minute video presentation makes the perfect accompaniment to THE MONEY MASTERS as it delves into the specific mechanics of private money creation. It is best watched after THE MONEY MASTERS video which introduces the whole subject of modern money manipulation and its history in a broad, 3 ½ hour video presentation. The playlist contains the film in 5 parts with captions, which allows you to use the interesting YT online translation to all languages.”
THE MONEY MASTERS
“THE MONEY MASTERS is a 3 1/2 hour non-fiction, historical documentary that traces the origins of the political power structure that rules our nation and the world today. The modern political power structure has its roots in the hidden manipulation and accumulation of gold and other forms of money. The development of fractional reserve banking practices in the 17th century brought to a cunning sophistication the secret techniques initially used by goldsmiths fraudulently to accumulate wealth. With the formation of the privately-owned Bank of England in 1694, the yoke of economic slavery to a privately-owned “central” bank was first forced upon the backs of an entire nation, not removed but only made heavier with the passing of the three centuries to our day. Nation after nation, including America, has fallen prey to this cabal of international central bankers. Segments: The Problem; The Money Changers; Roman Empire; The Goldsmiths of Medieval England; Tally Sticks; The Bank of England; The Rise of the Rothschilds; The American Revolution; The Bank of North America; The Constitutional Convention; First Bank of the U.S.; Napoleon’s Rise to Power; Death of the First Bank of the U.S. / War of 1812; Waterloo; Second Bank of the U.S.; Andrew Jackson; Fort Knox; World Central Bank; Loose Change, 911 truth, police state globalists NWO New World Order Federal Reserve Alex Jones Aaron Russo America From Freedom To Fascism Zionist IMF BIS John Perkins 911 911 Globalism Bilderberg Rothschild Rockefeller Schiff Warburg Illuminati Bohemian Grove Idi Amin Freemason
Also recommended: “Firewall: In Defense of Nation State” http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=8415519765816415310 Video news on “Federal Reserve”: http://newstree.org/search.jsp?query=Federal+Reserve&hp=10&s=Video&vx=1«”
ENJOY!
Allan
B e M o v e d @ A O L . c o m
Regarding Alina, on October 20th, 2009 at 9:48 am Said: United States: “American Home” Court Denies Bank’s Deficiency Claim By Accepting Discounted Cash Flow Valuation Of Mortgage Loan Portfolio Subject To Repurchase Agreement. Can anyone explain this??? How does it relate to us out here?
IMAGINE my surprise when I Googled the following phrase in MSoliman’s Oct 19 posting:
“S&P apparently feels that before it gets back to business as usual, it needs to know more about how the FDIC plans to treat bond collateral tied in those scenarios.” …………and got the following hyperlinked Securitization.net article!
“FDIC Uncertainty Sends S&P to Sidelines
Asset Backed Alert, Harrison Scott Publications Inc. (September 25, 2009)
S&P is temporarily curtailing the volume of new ratings it assigns to asset-backed bonds issued by banks.
The retreat appears focused on credit-card securities, given their prevalence among bank-issued transactions. However, the agency still plans to grade a few such deals in the near term.
At issue is a longstanding lack of clarity about how bank insolvencies might play out after Jan. 1, when banks must start booking securitized assets on their balance sheets under the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s pending FAS 167 rules. S&P apparently feels that before it gets back to business as usual, it needs to know more about how the FDIC plans to treat bond collateral tied in those scenarios.
The agency, like many other players in the securitization industry, is concerned that the FDIC could seize securitized assets to re-pay other creditors of failed banks.
Such actions are currently blocked by true-sale accounting procedures, in which issuers gain bankruptcy-remote status for their assets by transferring them to special purpose vehicles used in securitizations. But that treatment will vanish for banks with the implementation of FAS 167.
While the concern certainly isn’t limited to S&P, it is the only rating agency that has taken action. An executive at another agency said he believes the FDIC will clarify its intent well before FAS 167 kicks in, and thus doesn’t see the need for a similar move. “I would be surprised if [the FDIC] didn’t put something out,” he said. “They’ve always been pretty supportive of . . . securitization markets in general.”
The American Securitization Forum is working on the issue. Officials from the trade group have met with FDIC representatives to discuss their concerns, and proposed two potential fixes in a Sept. 17 letter. One entails a “sale approach” that would require an FDIC agreement not to “reclaim, recover or recharacterize” securitized assets in a bank insolvency. The other, deemed a “security interest approach,” would allow seizure of securitized assets, but only if bondholders receive compensation equivalent to the principal and interest they are owed. It’s unclear whether the FDIC will adopt either suggestion. Meanwhile, S&P’s pullback has already started. The agency – historically the market leader in rating bonds backed by consumer assets – graded only eight of the 21 new credit-card deals that banks have distributed since the beginning of August. By comparison, it rated all 13 deals fitting that description in June and July, according to Asset-Backed Alert’s ABS Database.
The agency’s official take: “S&P continues to rate credit card ABS transactions in accordance with its published criteria . . . Although the recent accounting rule change has resulted in significant uncertainty about the treatment of these assets in the event of the bank’s insolvency, some issuers have been able to mitigate the risk. We have rated credit card ABS transactions in the past few months that are structured as true sales.”
S&P also noted that it rated some J.P. Morgan deals by tying them to the bank’s unsecured grade. It is still supplying ratings for deals from non-bank institutions as well. However, S&P’s maneuvering means ratings from Moody’s and Fitch are now more appealing options for many issuers. Those that want their deals to qualify for buyer financing via the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility might need to deal with both agencies, as the Federal Reserve requires that consumer-asset securitizations eligible for TALF financing carry triple-A grades from two of the three.
While the narrower field of options could delay some deals, it isn’t expected to cause a major hiccup given the fact that many issuers have already been obtaining ratings from all three agencies for TALF transactions. That said, many banks, including Bank of America, Capital One and J.P. Morgan, were already thinking about scaling back their securitization volumes next year due to pressures created by FAS 167.
In any event, the thought is that securitizations completed this year will remain exempt from FDIC action even after the FASB rules take effect. That has left some people puzzled over why S&P is acting now. “We’re still of the belief that you’re still protected by the grandfather clause,” the rival rating-agency executive said. “We’re not sure what [S&P is] thinking.”
http://www.securitization.net/article.asp?id=1&aid=9255&print=Y”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For those who would appreciate an accounting translation of MSoliman’s pearls:
http://accountingonion.typepad.com/theaccountingonion/2008/03/fsp-140-3.html
FSP FAS 140-3: Plugging a Hole in GAAP — Or Another Off-Balance Sheet Financing Gimmick?
and
http://www.straffordpub.com/products/fasb-statement-167-consolidation-of-variable-interest-entities-2009-09-09
FASB Statement 167: Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I NOW understand why there is a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde quality to otherwise informative postings.
ALLAN
B e M o v e d @ AOL . c o m
THE WARNING
“Amidst the 1990s’ bullmarket, there was one lone regulator who warned about derivatives’ dangers — and suddenly became the enemy of some of the most powerful people in Washington…
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“We didn’t truly know the dangers of the market, because it was a dark market,” says BROOKSLEY BORN, the head of an obscure federal regulatory agency — the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) — who not only warned of the potential for economic meltdown in the late 1990s, but also tried to convince the country’s key economic powerbrokers to take actions that could have helped avert the crisis. “They were totally opposed to it,” Born says. “That puzzled me. What was it that was in this market that had to be hidden?”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In THE WARNING, veteran FRONTLINE producer Michael Kirk unearths the hidden history of the nation’s worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. At the center of it all he finds BROOKSLEY BORN, who speaks for the first time on television about her failed campaign to regulate the secretive, multitrillion-dollar derivatives market whose crash helped trigger the financial collapse in the fall of 2008.
“I didn’t know Brooksley Born,” says former SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt, a member of President Clinton’s powerful Working Group on Financial Markets. “I was told that she was irascible, difficult, stubborn, unreasonable.” Levitt explains how the other principals of the Working Group — former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan and former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin — convinced him that Born’s attempt to regulate the risky derivatives market could lead to financial turmoil, a conclusion he now believes was “clearly a mistake.”
Born’s battle behind closed doors was epic, Kirk finds. The members of the President’s Working Group vehemently opposed regulation — especially when proposed by a Washington outsider like Born.
“I walk into Brooksley’s office one day; the blood has drained from her face,” says Michael Greenberger, a former top official at the CFTC who worked closely with Born. “She’s hanging up the telephone; she says to me: ‘That was [former Assistant Treasury Secretary] Larry Summers. He says, “You’re going to cause the worst financial crisis since the end of World War II.”… [He says he has] 13 bankers in his office who informed him of this. Stop, right away. No more.’”
Greenspan, Rubin and Summers ultimately prevailed on Congress to stop Born and limit future regulation of derivatives. “Born faced a formidable struggle pushing for regulation at a time when the stock market was booming,” Kirk says. “Alan Greenspan was the maestro, and both parties in Washington were united in a belief that the markets would take care of themselves.”
Now, with many of the same men who shut down Born in key positions in the Obama administration, THE WARNING reveals the complicated politics that led to this crisis and what it may say about current attempts to prevent the next one.
“It’ll happen again if we don’t take the appropriate steps,” Born warns. “There will be significant financial downturns and disasters attributed to this regulatory gap over and over until we learn from experience.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Video Timeline: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/cron/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ANALYSIS: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/themes/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“And I sincerely believe, with you, that BANKING ESTABLISHMENTS ARE MORE DANGEROUS THAN STANDING ARMIES; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.”
Source: Memoirs, Correspondence, and Private Papers of THOMAS JEFFERSON, vol. 4, Thomas Jefferson Randolph, ed., 1829, pp. 285-288.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For a Libertarian rebuttal go to: http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2009/10/alert-major-distortion-of-financial.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It all starts out with an homage to the beliefs of Ayn Rand and her devoted Objectivist acolyte Alan Greenspan.
One point of contention that pitted Born against her adversaries Greenspan, Rubin and Summers was her insistence financial FRAUD should NOT be tolerated and should be investigated and prosecuted, wherever found.
Given how recovering banking interests are apparently now successfully attempting to gut a proposed financial regulatory scheme (using taxpayer money to fund the very lobbyists who work against the public’s interest) we are likely to repeat the fiasco we are now enduring, over and over again, until these institutions lose their death grip on the levers of power.
ALLAN
B E M O V E D @ A O L . c o m
Would someone please explain the meaning of the following and opine as to whether or not the “covenant” extends to defending breaks in the chain of title, resulting from a breach of contract and failure to transfer and record a mortgage assignment:
“Borrower covenants that Borrower will warrant and defend generally the title to the Mortgaged Property against all claims and demands, subject to any easements and restrictions listed in the Schedule of Title Exceptions. ”
Thank you.
United States: “American Home” Court Denies Bank’s Deficiency Claim By Accepting Discounted Cash Flow Valuation Of Mortgage Loan Portfolio Subject To Repurchase Agreement
19 October 2009
Article by Mark C Ellenberg , Peter M. Dodson , Leslie W. Chervokas and
Douglas S. Mintz 1
Originally published September 17, 2009
A Delaware bankruptcy court recently delivered the first decision applying section 562 of the Bankruptcy Code to a claim based on the termination of a repurchase agreement. In re American Home Mortgage Corp., Bankr. Case no. 07-1104, Dkt. no. 8021 (Bankr. D. Del. Sept. 8, 2009). The court’s ruling creates additional uncertainty in the calculation of bankruptcy claims, not only with respect to repurchase agreements but also with respect to other safe harbored financial contracts.
Added to the Code in 2005, section 562 provides that claims based on the termination of a safeharbored trading contract, such as a repurchase agreement, must be measured as of the termination date. Section 562 goes on to say that if there are no “commercially reasonable determinants of value” as of the termination date, damages are to be measured as of the earliest subsequent date on which there are commercially reasonable determinants of value. Unable to find a market for the assets on the termination date, the nondefaulting party submitted a claim based on a subsequent market valuation. The Debtor, however, asserted that a discounted cash flow valuation as of the termination date was commercially reasonable. This position was accepted by the Court, resulting in a finding that the nondefaulting party suffered no damages from the termination.
Certain unique aspects of the ruling may limit its applicability. At a minimum, a careful party could avoid some of the questions the decision presents.
Factual Background
On November 21, 2006, certain American Home entities and Calyon New York Branch (“Calyon”) entered into a repurchase agreement pursuant to which Calyon purchased certain mortgage loans from American Home. Pursuant to the terms of the repurchase agreement, Calyon terminated and accelerated the Repurchase Agreement on August 1, 2007 (the “Acceleration Date”), thereby requiring American Home to immediately repurchase the loans for a price of approximately $1.144 billion (the “Repurchase Price”). Five days later, on August 6, 2007, American Home filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Earlier in these cases, the court held that Calyon’s contract with the Debtor was a “repurchase agreement” within the meaning of section 559 of the Bankruptcy Code. Based on the section 559 safe harbor, the acceleration and termination of the repurchase agreement did not violate the automatic stay of section 362. Further, the subsequent sale by Calyon of the mortgage loan portfolio would not violate the automatic stay.2
On January 10, 2008, Calyon filed claims (“Claims”) in the total amount of approximately $1.155 billion. On January 9, 2009, American Home objected to the Claims, seeking either to disallow the Claims, or to reduce them to an amount determined by the court.
Analysis By The Court
At issue were the timing and method of valuation of the mortgage loan portfolio subject to Calyon’s repurchase agreements. Section 562 of the Bankruptcy Code governs these issues. This provision addresses the timing for the measurement of damages resulting from the rejection or termination of repurchase agreements and other financial contracts. Section 562(a) states that if a trustee (or debtor in possession) rejects a repurchase agreement or other safe harbored financial contract, or if a repo participant or other qualified financial contract counterparty liquidates, terminates or accelerates such an agreement, damages shall be measured as of the earlier of the rejection date or the date of such liquidation, termination or acceleration. Section 562(b) applies if there are no “commercially reasonable determinants of value” as of the operative date. Under those conditions, damages are to be measured as of the earliest subsequent date or dates on which there are commercially reasonable determinants of value.3
The Debtors contended that section 562(a) applied because, according to at least two valuation methodologies, a DCF analysis or a market analysis that existed outside the litigation context, damages could be measured on the Acceleration Date. 4 If the Debtors were correct, they would owe no deficiency or damages claim to Calyon, because, according to these methods, the market value of the loan portfolio exceeded the Repurchase Price on that date. Calyon, by contrast, argued that no “commercially reasonable determinants of value” existed on the Acceleration Date, because the assets were unable to be sold due to the instability in the financial marketplace. Therefore, section 562(b) of the Bankruptcy Code should apply, and the court should measure damages on the earliest date on which a commercially reasonable determinant existed — August 15, 2008.5
Judge Sontchi acknowledged the ambiguity of the phrase “commercially reasonable determinants of value” and considered the parties’ competing interpretations of this language.6 Calyon argued that the phrase meant “what one could buy or sell the assets for in the market place” and that the only relevant “determinants” are “those that provide evidence of the asset’s market price, such as the price actually received in a sale, the price available from a generally recognized source, the most recent bid quotation from that source, or expert testimony regarding the market price.”7 The Debtors countered that Calyon’s definition was too narrow in light of the broad language used by Congress. Moreover, by using the plural word “determinants”, Congress clearly intended that “more than one valuation methodology may constitute a ‘commercially reasonable determinant’ of an asset’s value.”8 Further, Congress’ use of the word “value” rather than “market value” suggests that Congress intended for the “use of multiple methodologies to determine value, including those that do not rely on the existence of a functional market.”9
The Court’s Decision
The bankruptcy court, after considering the sparse legislative history behind section 562 of the Bankruptcy Code and its apparent purpose, adopted the Debtor’s view. The court held that section 562’s reference to “commercially reasonable determinants of value” is not limited to the market or sale value of an asset. The court went on to conclude that the DCF method of valuing the loan portfolio, an “income-producing asset,” was commercially reasonable. The court noted that Calyon had failed to demonstrate that the DCF valuation method, which actually had been used internally by the bank itself, was not commercially reasonable. As a result, Calyon’s arguments about why it could not obtain a market value for the loan portfolio on the Acceleration Date – disputes over ownership and loan servicing rights, in addition to frozen markets and uncertain delinquency rates – were irrelevant. Since the portfolio’s DCF value exceeded that of the Repurchase Price, Calyon had no deficiency claim against the debtors’ estates.
Implications
The court’s ruling creates additional uncertainty in the calculation of bankruptcy claims relating to the termination of safe harbored contracts. In this respect, it bears emphasis that section 562 applies to all safe harbored contracts, not just repurchase agreements. There are some possible limitations on the ruling. First, Calyon chose to assert that commercially reasonable determinants of value were not available on the termination date. In most cases, parties liquidating a repurchase agreement for mortgage loans would conduct a commercially reasonable auction of the assets. That auction should constitute a reasonably commercial determinant of value, whatever its results. In addition, standard repurchase agreements generally provide the nondefaulting party with considerable flexibility in valuing the assets. It is not clear to what extent section 562 overrides these contractual provisions, that were freely entered into by sophisticated parties prior to the bankruptcy. Finally, the court’s decision raises a question as to when a commercially reasonable determinant of value would not exist. In most, if not all cases, a DCF or other non-market based valuation could always be calculated. Thus, the Court’s decision seems to render section 562(b) mere surplusage.
Footnotes
1. This memo was written by Mark C. Ellenberg, Leslie W. Chervokas, Douglas S. Mintz and Alicia B. Davis, attorneys in the firm’s Financial Restructuring Department.
2. See M. Ellenberg & L. Chervokas, “American Home Court Excludes Servicing From Safe Harbors” (Client & Friends Memo, January 2008).
3. 11 U.S.C. § 562.
4. Opinion at 5.
5. Opinion at 4 and 17.
6. Opinion at 12.
7. Opinion at 9.
8. Id.
9. Id.
PREEMPTIVE STRIKE FAS 140-3 NEVER SAW THIS HAPPEINING! True sale accounting being phased out…party over soon people. (Might be time to jump ship ….Hmmmmm!)
FAS 167 will take away our absolute biggest defense Judge Judy whoever! Bar none this is a crisis on our hands. . . having to do less with BK insulates and obligor bank line recourse and REAL TRHEATS of receivership. It will eliminate the biggest defense you have people for ALLOWING the controlling aspects of asset survive attack and it eliminates the elements for arguing SEC violations under 1122AB !
Seriously, It is a Killer.
OK, OK, Maher, we notice your DAILY (sometimes more often) advertisements for your EXPERT WITNESS services. “So lender attorneys – I am here – waiting….call me and give me your challenge or response…I am waiting?…”
How is trolling for business on LivingLies working out for you? Under which LivingLies tab do you fare better, ATTORNEYS or HOMEOWNERS (….“Or hire me as I nearly had enough of this consumer angst and emotional dusgust driven rejection!”) ?
If you believe you have anything to contribute here, and partly in response to your ubiquitous self-promotion many of your admirers (including yours truly) are inclined to suspend disbelief and assume YOU DO, could you have somebody PROOFREAD what YOU write BEFORE you post your personal views? The other well-written formatted docs you sometimes post suggest there may be a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde struggle going on here.
“My experience as “one of them” is based on over 20 years prior experience as an institutional investor,” or “You must find a true expert who can guide an attorney and allow them to execute the fraud where it is found. I spent 20 + years playing the game in secondary and capital markets. there is a lot you should know – attorneys too!” you claim.
I, for one, (we all) could learn much from someone who was “one of them,” I assume referring to your possible role or involvement over 20 years in the industry that gave us the Sub Prime Mortgage Meltdown.
For me, and I cannot speak for how others receive you, it appears you have authentic INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE and one assumes INSIGHT into the how the securitized mortgage ’sausages’ were processed, ‘know where the bodies lie’, and can help lawyers and homeowners effectively navigate various routes to foreclosure defense, and maybe, ultimately, rescission or quiet title vindication.
“I am not an attorney but consult counsel as a leading expert in SEC matters and mortgage related lender liability cases” you disclaim. One would think that an expert witness’ viability as such hangs on their credibility in the marketplace, as well court. Any expert witness is likely to be judged not only by the content of their expertise, but by their ability to present their knowledge in a cogent and persuasive manner. How can one have confidence in an expert witness and believe them to be credible if, after one reads their personal posts, one too often has MORE QUESTIONS than answers?
Another key function of an expert witness is their willingness and ability to TRANSLATE nomenclature and industry jargon into common parlance. Could you follow one expert witness’ on spot brilliant advice, “Maybe you can take the concepts and water it down (into plain English) LOL”?
Recognizing that although this is the LAWYERS tab, I have to ask, what does the following mean? Could you translate (perhaps for the benefit even of Mr. Garfield who, though likely not an accountant, appears maligned and disrespectfully dismissed here):
“The civil litigators are IGNORANT of the Indenture Trustee role and responsibilities for classifying assets…THAT IS NOT INSULATED BY CRIMINAL ACTIONS EITHER.
This is gain on sale accounting treatment and the most basic accounting principle there is next to cash (cash versus accrual accounting.) IGNORANT !
The attorneys for the lenders don’t get it and call me a fraud. The servicing supervisors and loss mitigation don’t get it to they call me a fraud. The brass for the lender has no clue either of these complicated accounting measures. GARFIELD, I don’t think you get it either buddy!
So we argue MERS, HERS and lost note gibberish, UCC article 9 junk and nuclear Hot Sauce. These other theories are based on Pretzel Logic and a Royal Scam (Steely) . Are you reeling in the years or stowing away the time?
Really, you’re confusing and pissing off judge’s folks with your Wikipedia and give the real arguments are a “Black” Eyed Pea” with “all that junk up in your trunk”.
Are you suggesting that civil lawsuits (what most of us are involved with in here), which are your bread and butter I assume, are a waste of time, whereas criminal complaints, maybe grand juries, are the way to go? Help walk me through this. How would THAT work?
Allan
B e M o v e d @ A O L . c o m
Looks like MSoliman is dead on:
TYING IT TOGETHER: MASSIVE, PERNICIOUS FRAUD – from the Corruption Market Ticker
Looters **ASKED** To Accept Regulation?
Warning: Mildly rough language contained herein. Don’t gripe, you were warned in advance not to read this if you’ll be offended!
You have to be kidding me…..
From Larry Summers:
“Financial institutions that have benefited from government support can, should and must use this moment to think about what they can do for their country — by accepting the necessary regulation to protect the American people,” Summers said in remarks prepared for delivery at the Economist’s Buttonwood Gathering in New York. “There is no financial institution that exists today that is not the direct or indirect beneficiary of trillions of dollars of taxpayer support for the financial system.”
How about this Larry?
“Financial institutions will be placed under strong regulation and capital controls. We will mark every asset to the market, we will investigate all the fraud, we will force all off-balance sheet “assets” back on balance sheet and we will stop the looting.”
Oh wait. I live in America, where the banks run the Congress, not the other way around. Never mind a President and Chairman of House Financial Services who can’t manage to get up off their knees, and they’re not praying when they genuflect either.
I’ve had it with the knob-polishing behavior of these jackasses in DC, especially when it comes to letters like this:
Banks should be given three years to raise capital for offsetting assets and liabilities that must be brought onto their balance sheets, Citigroup Chief Financial Officer John Gerspach said yesterday in a letter to regulators. Requiring banks to “assume the risk-based capital effects immediately, or even over one year, is an undeniably severe penalty,” he wrote.
What?
FASB has already postponed the implementation of this rule, which it voted on in July of 2008. It was originally to take effect in November of last year; the banks at that time said:
“The risks of too much haste are high,” the securitization forum and Sifma said in a July 16 letter to the FASB. The “abrupt consolidation” of off-balance-sheet structures “is likely to swell the balance sheets of the affected entities.”
So they got a reprieve for one year.
Now the banks are griping that this isn’t good enough, and they want even more time!
An “undeniably severe penalty”?
Citibank, JP Morgan and the rest have all known about this for more than two years. They have had all this time to prepare for this event, they have had all this time to raise capital, they have had buoyant stock prices occasioned by FASB being literally extorted by Congress into allowing banks to lie about asset values, thereby cranking their stock prices up by 300, 400, even 600%. Specifically:
Citibank, $0.97 -> $4.59, 473%
Bank of America, $2.53 -> $17.26, 682%
JP Morgan, $14.96 -> $47.47, 317%
Wells Fargo, $7.80 -> $30.02, 384%
JP Morgan has a market cap of $181 billion dollars as of this afternoon. If they were forced to issue even two hundred billion dollars of equity, it would only erase half of their market price gain in the last six months.
Bank of America has a market cap of $149 billion dollars as of this afternoon. If it was forced to issue three hundred billion dollars in equity that issuance would drive its stock price down to about $6.00, leaving it with more than a clean double from where it was in March.
Citibank has a market cap of $52 billion dollars as of right now. If it was forced to issue one hundred billion dollars in equity, its stock price would be diluted such that it would still have posted more than a fifty percent gain since March.
Wells Fargo has a market cap of $140 billion as of this afternoon. If it was forced to issue two hundred billion dollars in new equity, its stock price would be diluted such that it would still have posted more than a sixty percent gain since March.
Of course the actual required equity issuance is nowhere near this high for any of these firms. Assuming a 10% Tier Capital requirement and two trillion dollars (in total) of off-balance sheet exposures to be brought back on these firms would have to post $200 billion between them all, or about 1/4 of the above amount (in total)
That is, most of the price gains they’ve seen since the March lows would be retained – and this assumes the market does not cheer such issuance, as it did last time. Indeed, in the spring when these banks issued new equity in each case the market rewarded them by bidding up their stock, not selling it off to reflect the dilution!
The truth is that if these firms are truly sound and solvent, going concerns, and are not hiding two trillion dollars in trash off balance sheet they can issue whatever new equity and/or debt that is necessary to meet reserve requirements right now. The market has shown that it will respond favorably to such issuance.
The truth is that the reason we are in this mess is because banks have abused FASB, The Administration and Congress for years, literally threatening them with financial Armageddon unless all of the above kneel down and perform an obscene act upon their CEOs and Boards.
The truth is that these institutions are still engaged in outrageous acts with regards to foreclosures, property (mis)management and other acts that by any reasonable standard can only be considered schemes, artifices or even frauds.
The truth is that I and the rest of America have had it with the obscenities that our elected and appointed officials perform daily while genuflecting in front of these latter-day Al Capones, and we will remember come next Fall should this crap not be stopped.
This far, no further Gentlemen.
THIS COULD BE OUR BIGGEST BREAK TO DATE. FAS 140-3 IS BEING CHALLENGED BY THE HOLDER IN DUE COURSE, YOUR FDIC BANK (I knew it from the Start MSoliman).
…You cannot service collect and try to modify somthing you already sold!
S&P is at issue with is a longstanding lack of clarity about how bank insolvencies might play out after Jan. 1, when banks must start booking securitized assets on their balance sheets under the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s pending FAS 167 rules.
S&P apparently feels that before it gets back to business as usual, it needs to know more about how the FDIC plans to treat bond collateral tied in those scenarios.
The agency, like many other players in the securitization industry, is concerned that the FDIC could seize securitized assets to re-pay other creditors of failed banks.
Such actions are currently blocked by true-sale accounting procedures, in which issuers gain bankruptcy-remote status for their assets by transferring them to special purpose vehicles used in securitizations. But that treatment will vanish for banks with the implementation of FAS 167.
the FDIC will clarify its intent well before FAS 167 kicks in, and thus doesn’t see the need for a similar move. “I would be surprised if [the FDIC] didn’t put something out,” he said. “They’ve always been pretty supportive of . . . securitization markets in general.”
Officials of the FDIC discuss their concerns, and proposed two potential fixes One entails a “sale approach” that would require an FDIC agreement not to “reclaim, recover or recharacterize” securitized assets in a bank insolvency. The other, deemed a “security interest approach,” would allow seizure of securitized assets, but only if bondholders receive compensation equivalent to the principal and interest they are owed. It’s unclear whether the FDIC will adopt either suggestion.
The agency’s official take: “S&P… Although the recent accounting rule change has resulted in significant uncertainty about the treatment of these assets in the event of the bank’s insolvency, some issuers have been able to mitigate the risk. S&P also noted that it rated some J.P. Morgan deals by tying them to the bank’s unsecured grade. It is still supplying ratings for deals from non-bank institutions as well. However, S&P’s maneuvering means ratings from Moody’s and Fitch are now more appealing options for many issuers. Those that want their deals to qualify for buyer financing via the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility might need to deal with both agencies, as the Federal Reserve requires that consumer-asset securitizations eligible for TALF financing carry triple-A grades from two of the three.
While the narrower field of options could delay some deals, it isn’t expected to cause a major hiccup given the fact that many issuers have already been obtaining ratings from all three agencies for TALF transactions. That said, many banks, including Bank of America, Capital One and J.P. Morgan, were already thinking about scaling back their securitization volumes next year due to pressures created by FAS 167.
In any event, the thought is that securitizations completed this year will remain exempt from FDIC action even after the FASB rules take effect. That has left some people puzzled over why S&P is acting now. “We’re still of the belief that you’re still protected by the grandfather clause,” the rival rating-agency executive said. “We’re not sure what [S&P is] thinking.”
msoliiman@borrowerhotline.com
borrowerhotline.com
HOW TO REMOVE THE POWER OF SALE FROM A LENDER.
By MSoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
Look, If a court agrees with the definition of a defect causing a deed to become impaired no sale can occur. It violates the lenders power of sale or alternative “bench trial” and acceleration. The Trustees sale or foreclosure sheriff’s sale must fail also.
Your elements for foundation of arguments and required to allow to fail the obligation ane Beny’s standing non the less strip the lender of the security. The lender has lost its security to a voidable claim from time of dicoverty and you therein can bring action and injunction to the lenders rights to enforce its security in a foreclosure matter.
Also note once again, the successors and assigns carry the same burden of due diligence and duty of care for gross negligence from settlement. The lender is ABSOLUTLY a fiduciary which I have (through counsel ) proven in court (testimony) the argument.
Another key point is the broker is lowest net worth on the totem pole. Should you prevail over him or her so what?
However, brokers savor the chance to be released from litigation and will in exchange talk . Release the broker from the suit upon compelling him or stipulate that he will testify against the Lender. Also remember, lenders have an “agency” agreement with the broker consisting of specific reps and warrants. Agency implicate the lender and all successor. It’s not easy at all to become approved tby a lender and to broker to a big conduit in a national private lable program.
I have a a significant number of other verifiable arguments that offer Counsel at a significant advantage. The support again alleges the notion of mutual culpability between lender and borrower. Judges have made public these comments . However, THE SERVICING AGENTS compounds the the disaster by enforcing what judges already determined to be a predatry loan. Lenders originated loans under deceptive business practice and if not liable for the orgination they must be HELD liable for enforcement of unlawful terms and conditions when collecting from the borrower.
And, remeber a predatory loan caused by deceptive practices may have no effect on the mutual consideration and culpability arguments offered by Judges. However, anything causing the deed to be defect is subject to a voidable claim and makes the transfer of title impossible . Lender recoveries are null and void in a power of sale state ….done!
Contact Information:
M.Soliman
May Day – May Day
Looking for a Southern California attorney who is not going to shy away from Big Mortgage Banks…
Please reply asap
MODIFICATIONS OR SHORT SALES — Attorneys must be willing to use an “insiders” knowledge or mortgage backed securities specilist with some capital markets and servicing experience…SEC guidelines or GAAP / FASB. Its hopeless otherwise where seeking to prevail. Their wilingness to argue the damaging and incriminating information available is KEY to a defense.
if your still looking for an attorney for southern California we have a list of pratitioners we have worked with as an Expert Witness. These lawyers are as good and we can offer you
Who ever you use they should be versed as follows:
*Auditor attestation reports, * specific Material Violations (Servicing),* attack Delayed Repsonses, Lenders that dissappears, * No Servicer contact,, * Stay of a Sheriffs Writ , * Offers in comprmise; * broken promises for Short Sales . Modifcations. .
.A list of cases decided for defendants are available.
expert.witness@live.com
Tel. 213-627-2324
October 15th 2009
GS NOW RECEIVING BILLIONS FROM AIG PAID BY GOVERNEMENT -FOR COVERAGE AND COUNTER PARTIES INVOLVEMENT
More Reporting and Other Administrative Matters.
By MSoliman
The proper defenses are are anything but common to pleas and repetitive RESPA violations jargon.
Where folks fail in their defenses is not considering mortgage lender anti-fraud provisions. Those are likely enforced by the SEC due to homeowners and their homes used as collateral in a registration and in a Blue Sky. Consider the other components of investigation such as FIERRA passage by congress, FASB and FAS 140-3 and the Commission’s enforcement of 1122 AB
After nearly eight years as an officer for a FSLIC member Thrift I saw the switch over to having new authority operating as a FSB and under the Office of Thrift Supervision. Thus I left the thrift to join the privately held companies who were now jumping into private label lending. From there came companies held private and gone public. They went bust when the market tanked and now we have come full circle back to the thrifts. But they are the biggest and best capitalized thrifts in the United States and in the World.
All of this is accomplished d and the expense of prior legislation to protect tax payers under FIERRRA. Now it’s time to go after the homeowners! Under the regulator authority of the OTS the Thrift still cannot circumvent FIERRA and participate in high cost high risk lending. The Troubled Assets Relief Program adds a certain flavor of non compliance and more pressure into the mix. That will ultimately be their demise I I can get anyone to listen.
I am also concerned with the delays in the collections effort and the willingness for the lender to claim you failed under TARP and Cccp 2923.5. If fact, the claims your entitled to are being further circumvented by issues unrelated to your personal matter, such as a less than arms servicing agent maintaining an arm’s length distance, there is a problem for the lender. Lenders and their servicing providers appear compliant with GAAP and FASB or rules for 140-3 (Controlling assets upon which a sale would otherwise be declared voidable) yet fail in the efforts. Therein you have claims under 1122AB that are enforceable under the Commission’s authority and enforcement divisions
There is a multitude of damaging accountants attestation reports we have discovered to establish these arguments for an attorney or yourself pro per. Recent news regarding AIG and insured warrants and representations that are now being clouded by rumors firms such as Goldman Sachs received the funds (billions) indirectly from the government for relieving AIG of their responsibilities or liabilities. This makes no sense and if proven will further allow Wall Street to circumvent their liability to homeowners in favor of the investors who used your home as collateral for issuing and receiving their stock.
Since I am not an attorney I offer you these arguments without any conditions for enforcing your rights or asserting your rights were violated. (See an attorney if violated). Certain things remain unexplained in hope and anticipation they can better be revealed (as I am doing). The presupposition here is that the consumer homeowner has nothing to do with high powered Wall Street financial transactions and liabilities. If your home is the collateral used to obtain a loan then fine. My belief is your home and neighbors home are collateral is provided to a registrant to create securities and to provided Wall Street ties to the Lender its guarantees whereby the collateral is pledged to a indenture and Trustee who is none other than another securitizing partner (Wells, LaSalle, Duetsche Bank, B of A etc). You r home and other homes are the collective security for the parties owned by Wall Street or “Obligor” to make pledges’ and access liquidity and profits far greater than if they toll an otherwise sick bank public or reassured their stock.
But those capital stock issuances and pledges prohibit the obligor from recovering its own collateral (homes) while it must make good on default to borrowers. AND IF THOSE PLEDGES ARE OFFERED FROM RECKLESS ACCEPTANCE PRACTICES UNDER PREDATORY GUIDELINES, THEN THAT OBLIGOR HAS PROBLEMS – BECAUSE THEY SOLD YOUR LOAN OFF. THE SALE MUST FAIL IF THE TERMS FOR A REPO ARE ESTABLISHED IN ADVANACE OR MUST BE MET UNDER A RECOURSE PROVISION
Preventing this maligned and distorted means of cheating to continue is paramount to your success in fighting for a “work out and seeking remedy for a Predatory Loan made by intentional bad by design. I DO NOT OFFER HOMES FOR FREE….JUST EXPOSURE FORTHE DECPTIVE PRACTICES AND DEMAND FOR IMPOSING A HALT OF THE SALE OF YOUR HOME OR TO PREVENT ANOTHER UNLAWFUL FORECLOSURE FROM PROCEDEDING.
(This is where your attorney comes in -Yeah Right!) Uncovering the madness or preemption form bringing an action is this sole remedy for a resolution to Corporate America’s problems. You’re potentially being duped and won’t even know it. Attorneys who want case law can only hold the head high and envy the early authors of our constitution and on through to the Attorney Generals efforts throughout time such as under Robert Kennedy.
They made case law. But better yet, the lawyers (who I do respect) forget that these matters are more in line with the sentencing guidelines issued by the state and Fed versus case law for interpretation of civil code of procedures. No case law is necessary for establishing the rules for a bank robbery – just codes for sentencing.
My gut tells me only a few Americans will survive this mess. And the rest will be forced to deal with the fact they lost their home to parties that were not entitled to foreclose on you.
There are many questions the lender should at least answer and a Chapter proceeding is nothing more than a stall tactic the trustee should see through. That is, unless you offer adequate support for a logical plan. My scholarly view is one should use the Bankruptcy filing for protection and to press these arguments for stripping the obligation from the lien or security. I will testify in an adversary the lender has no standing for making good on a controlled sale of your home as a liquidation and sole means to avoid their own recourse provisions under a repurchase agreement. That occurs in a Chapter proceeding and motion for an adversarial hearing. There you need evidence. Did I not formulate the theories you or an attorney can argue? What you have here is exemplar, evidential material, substance in your arguments and you can demonstrate that from the recovery notices that were filed improperly into county records by (who knows) someone that may not be authorized to represent the holder in due course.
Consumer homeowners are outgunned and way over their heads and most of their arguments to date has failed subject to a toss of a coin and Judges temperament. This is my observation even though the information you have obtained or offered to me to date has substantial has merit. You have some of the pieces now, but the puzzle is far from being assembled into a wining defense. You otherwise are merely prolonging the inevitable….a foreclosure sale.
M.Soliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
Nick,
Yours is an impressive struggle! Congratulations! FIGHT ON!
My experience in the Wild West atmosphere of Miami has been that one takes one’s chances when one picks a lawyer without first thoroughly vetting them. Sadly, too often in America, we get only the justice we can afford. You might check out H.A.L.T. (originally Help Annihilate Legal Tyranny) a group that wants to make changes in how lawyers dominate, shape and run our culture.
I went through five (3 in MA and 2 in FL) and my sister-in-law one (in FL). They’re able to string us along, not do what they professionally ought or promise, then if we grouse, they threaten to withdraw. Unfortunately in Florida, lawyers act with utter impunity. Why? If you report them to the Bar, it is my understanding they can sue you for defamation or libel. Even the Florida Bar cannot make assurances otherwise. Talk about chilling. What’s with that? And what are we to make of lawyers writing laws to regulate their brethren!
Push back. Get tough. Put a contractor’s lien on her property for all the work you did on it, file an unjust enrichment and contract action on her and check out CA’s UDAP provisions as they apply to lawyers. Consider approaching an attorney malpractice attorney. Report her to the bar, and to online consumer and lawyer rating resources.
Find a lawyer you can boast about here. Keep your professional relationship clean. Barter arrangements need to be spelled out so each party respects the other and each the other’s contribution.
Good luck!
Allan
RSVP
B e M o v e d @ A O L . c o m
Esteemed Counsel & others,
MA is a non-judicial state.
With this ruling, I and countless others in MA, just may do a look-back and see if Plaintiffs got it right when they claimed default or initiated foreclosure.
The 27 pages here make a good read, and reinforce the notion that just maybe judges across the nation really are beginning to “get it.” Let’s hear it for the bench!
Assumptions brought us the subprime mortgage meltdown, the Madoff fiasco, and so much more. Here Judge Long hearkens back to the protections afforded homeowners in the law.
Title companies will have their hands full!
Here, the succinct CONCLUSION:
“The issues in this case are not merely problems with paperwork or a matter of dotting i’s and crossing t’s. Instead, they lie at the heart of the protections given to homeowners and borrowers by the Massachusetts legislature. To accept the plaintiffs’ arguments is to allow them to take someone’s home without any demonstrable right to do so, based upon the assumption that they ultimately will be able to show that they have that right and the further assumption that potential bidders will be undeterred by the lack of demonstrable legal foundation for the sale and will nonetheless bid full value in the expectation that that foundation will ultimately be produced, even if it takes a year or more. The law recognizes the troubling nature of these assumptions, the harm caused if those assumptions prove erroneous, and commands otherwise.”
So ordered.
~ Judge Long
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Anyone out there know how (short of issuing subpoenas in a case no longer open) to check back and see if a loan funded back in 1989 was subsequently securitized?
RSVP
Allan
B e M o v e d @ A O L . c o m
The Boston Globe
Ruling upheld on sale of property
Ownership status of foreclosures clouded
By Jenifer B. McKim
Globe Staff / October 15, 2009
The ownership status of hundreds, and possibly thousands, of foreclosed properties in Massachusetts became muddier yesterday after a state Land Court judge reaffirmed his March decision that invalidated the sales of two Springfield homes because of improper paperwork.
In a 27-page ruling, Justice Keith C. Long described a convoluted process in which mortgages for the two homes were transferred multiple times without being properly recorded, as required by state foreclosure law. He said any problems the banks now face to clean up title questions – which could include redoing the foreclosures altogether – are “entirely of their own making.’’
“The issues in this case are not merely problems with paperwork or a matter of dotting i’s and crossing t’s,’’ Long wrote. “Instead, they lie at the heart of the protections given to homeowners and borrowers by the Massachusetts Legislature.’’
The ruling drew praise and criticism from attorneys, individuals, and housing advocates who had been anxiously awaiting word from the court.
Before the March decision, many lenders believed they could complete foreclosure transactions and later file formal proof they held the mortgages. Since then, however, some lenders have stopped selling foreclosed properties out of fear the sales later could be voided, and many title companies have refused to insure homes with ownership issues. That has affected the ability of communities and nonprofits to buy foreclosed homes in some of the state’s hardest hit areas. It has also made it more difficult for individual buyers and sellers of foreclosed properties to close deals.
The attorneys who filed the lawsuit that prompted Long’s original ruling said they are considering an appeal of yesterday’s decision. “He has thrown the entire nature of foreclosure work and thousands of titles back up in the air and doesn’t seem to care,’’ said Lawrence Scofield, an attorney with Ablitt Law Offices in Woburn, which represented the lenders in three consolidated cases ruled on by Long.
The Springfield lawsuit was filed by foreclosing lenders who said they wanted to remove a “cloud’’ from the titles of three properties created because of where they chose to publish foreclosure auction notices. But Long focused on a secondary issue – whether the foreclosures complied with the law because they did not officially name the mortgage holders.
During the housing boom, millions of mortgages were bundled into bonds and sold to investors, a process that often resulted in a twisted paper trail. Long’s decision detailed how mortgages for two of the Springfield homes changed hands as many as three times without any of the information appearing on the public record. The final owners – US Bank National Association and Wells Fargo Bank – did not record that they owned the mortgages until 14 months after the sales, he said.
Those in favor of the ruling said it will help those fighting foreclosures to find a way to remain in their homes and permit some who have already moved on to regain their homes. Long’s decision also bolsters a growing national movement among housing advocates, and some courts, to push lenders to produce accurate documentation before completing a foreclosure.
Nadine Cohen, managing attorney in the consumer rights unit at Greater Boston Legal Services, said the issues brought up in the case support the need for a state law to mandate that foreclosures of owner-occupied homes be overseen by a judge.
“Borrowers have a right to know who owns their mortgage, and they have a right to make sure that the entity that is foreclosing has a legal right to foreclose,’’ Cohen said. “For too long these lenders have been ignoring the foreclosure laws.’’
Boston attorney Paul Collier, who represented one of the defendants in the Springfield case, Antonio Ibanez, said his client never expected to win back the property he purchased for $115,000 and later lost to foreclosure. He said Ibanez overpaid for the home, which he could not afford. He said Ibanez will likely wait until the appeal process is completed before deciding whether to take any action.
Collier said there probably won’t be a flood of former homeowners fighting to get back their properties as a result of Long’s decision, but there could be enough to create problems for new owners, lenders, title companies, auctioneers, and others involved in the sale of foreclosed properties. “You are going to see a ton of payouts here,’’ he said.
Boston City Housing chief Evelyn Friedman said that although the decision protects homeowners trying to ward off foreclosures, it also is delaying the city’s efforts to clean up areas plagued by abandoned homes. Already, the judge’s March ruling stymied the city’s effort to buy 20 bank-owned properties.
“The unfortunate part is that many people already have been foreclosed upon and now their properties can’t be resold,’’ Friedman said. “That holds up quite a bit of our work in revitalizing the neighborhoods that have been most devastated.’’
Because of the ruling, Developer John O’Riordan said he worries he might now lose an investment property in Jamaica Plain he bought from a bank last year for $480,000 and renovated for $200,000. Now he can’t sell the units because of title issues and has run out of money.
“The real estate situation in Massachusetts is on its knees and this does not help the cause at all,’’ O’Riordan said.
© Copyright 2009 Globe Newspaper Company.
© 2009 NY Times Co.
i am still trying to find a texas or austin texas attorney who wil help me in my forclosures mers problems.
please advise
pete wagner 512 921 3053
I would like some advise on what I should do. I filed a complaint against my lender and broker Pro-Per back in October 2007. The basis of my complaint is that my loan documents were forged and was the victim of predatory lending. I filed Pro-Per because I was unable to afford a lawyer. I have been able to survive two different Demurs and Motions to Strike and Motion for Judgement on the Pleadings and have a trial date in March 2010. Over the past two years I was always careful to follow the court’s procedures and comply with all deadlines. In May 2009, I hired a lawyer that read my story that I posted on this website. When I met with her, she was confident that she could help me and was very convincing. I felt she had the same passion that I did to fight against predatory lenders and win my case. I informed her up-front that I did not have much money. I paid her a retainer and she said I could work on her home and also file court papers as she needed me. At the time that I hired her, I was about to attend a deposition by defendant. She attended the depo with me, but she stated that she was unaware of the details of my case, so she was not objecting to anything, so I left the deposition feeling that it did not go well. When I first met with her, I informed her that I needed her to send out discovery and set up depos, She stated that she wanted to Amend the Complaint to add additional defendants and Causes of Actions. None of this has been done as of today. Seven days after I paid her the money, she was threatening to withdraw from my case because she said that I was not complying with her requests for my documents, which was not true. I gave her all the documents that I had. She also said that she was unable to get in touch with me, which was also not true because I had been to her house numerous times to do work. Defendants served a Request for Production of 22 different documents, and the day before they were due, she called and informed us that she was not able to prepare the documents and that we needed to do retrieve the files from her home, which is at least 25 minutes from where we live, put the documents in order and make copies and bring them back to her. She was very verbally abusive toward us and after a confrontation occurred between my girlfriend and her she informed me that I was not to discuss my case with her or she would resign. This made it very hard for me because my girlfriend has helped me from the beginning. She never should have had us doing her job to begin with. We are not attorneys’ and that is why I hired her. She became very negative and said that I was going to lose my case and the judge was going to dismiss it.
After her first CMC (which she filed the statement late), the judge required a status letter to be filed by a certain date with she did not do. Over the next several months, I was at her home at least every other weekend and during the week, filing documents, all over the bay area, never missing any of her deadlines for her other clients, always available when she needed me. I had requested more than once that we discuss the details of my case and our strategy’s and she refused stating that there was no time for that and she was not going to waste time listening to me. As the next court date approached, she did not file a timely CMC statement or a status letter. I sent her a lenghly e-mail with my concerns that she was not properly representing me and did not treat me with respect. After several attempts to contact her, she finally telephoned me and informed me that she wanted to withdraw from my case, and that I needed to sign a Substitution of Attorney and that the judge would most likely be dismissing my case and trying to intimidate me by saying that I was going to lose my home. I refused to sign anything and told her that I would see her in court. This was the third time she had threatened to withdraw and it had only been three months since I hired her. By the day we appeared in court, she had not filed a substitution of attorney or had she filed the CMC statement. She arrived late to court and immediately informed the judge that she would be resigning. The judge wanted us to try to work it out. As soon as I requested to speak, my attorney said that she would be willing to step outside and talk to me. We worked out our differences and informed the court that she no longer was resigning and the judge assigned my case to mediation. Again my attorney stated that she wanted to amend the complaint to add additional defendants. The judge said that she should do this immediately. The judge ordered that we choose a mediator and inform the court within 30 days and set a Compliance hearing. My attorney again did not comply with this request even though I worked for her again and sent her a reminder email to notify the court. She not only didn’t send a status letter, she also failed to appear at the compliance hearing and now is subject to sanctions. The judge has ordered both attorneys to appear to show cause why she should not sanction them further or dismissal of the actions/striking of the pleadings pursuant to CCP 177.5 and 575.2.
This is where I stand now. I sent her an e-mail asking her why she had not complied with the court and that I was very concerned because she had not done anything she said she was going to do. I also asked her what the judge meant by that. She said that she had chosen a mediator and did not know why the court did not receive any documents from the mediator. It is not the mediator’s responsibility to notify the court. It was hers. She then informed me verbally of the mediation date. The OSC hearing is set for 11/05/09 and she is to file a declaration by 10/29/09. She has not filed anything in my case since June 8, 2009 which was one week after she was retained. She has not provided me with the legal representation that I am entitled to, nor has she conducted any discovery or responded to any of my requests. I don’t know what my legal rights are. What happens to my case, if she continues to be noncompliant. Would the judge actually dismiss, and if so, what is my recourse?
I have worked so hard fighting lenders, brokers, and their attorneys. I have gone to the Department of Real Estate, Department of Corporations, District Attorney’s office, Department of Justice, and even appeared on Channel 7 on your side with my story. I have stopped the illegal sale of my home five times, with the last time on the court steps at 12:05 p.m. on the day of the sale. I have never given up and am still in my home and intend to remain here for a long time.
I believe in what I am fighting for and intend to try to help innocent homeowners who are victims of Predatory Lending Practices and against crooked lawyers who are misleading and taking their monies.
This is why I am asking you for your advise as to what I should do. I am posting this on your site because this is where she found me and I don’t want this to happen to anyone else.
I want you especially to become aware that this is happening on your website. I was told that I should not make a complaint with the State Bar while she was still representing me. I do not have money to hire a different lawyer, but can I proceed with a lawyer that I do not trust.
Neil, thank you for taking the time to read my story. I anxiously await your reply and the comments and advise of your readers.
THE TRUTH, ONLY THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT. . .SO HELP ME !
October 14th 2009
By MSoliman
Dateline / Los Angeles, Calif / NLS: A Service released “whole loan” asset is typically marketed at a premium. If impaired (my old line of work) it is sold at a discount. The loan is sold with a GSE releasing its coverage (such as Fannie Mae and MI) Therefore, the coverage is a convoluted and esoteric means of communicating “the receivable is INSURED”. Thus, a whole loan asset is, according to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles” fully TRANSFERRED.
A Service Retained Asset is defined as a loan or receivable that when sold is delivered with servicing rights attached. Therein you have a mortgage loan asset with a shared beneficial interest with mutual parties of interest. Servicing, agent lender, Repo (Repurchase agreements), retained servicing and investor holding the actual asset.
Got it.. .. Good. Now apply this to Private label and the trailing assignments late in the game in while in foreclosure!
The first example is booked entirely different than the second asset. FAS 140-3 is specific concerning treatment and rules of derecognition with no mention of classified assets (lost note , defect title, lost virginity etc).GSE’s are very specific about the accounting treatment and impact on earnings, capital set aside requirements and gain on sale accounting.
I have to endure these Ripp off reports and other foolishness because these Gypsy’s tramps and thieves cher clients who won’t listen, the attorneys won’t listen and the broker bottom feeders won’t listen and etc etc . The civil litigators are IGNORANT of the Indenture Trustee role and responsibilities for classifying assets…that is not insulated by criminal actions either.
This is gain on sale accounting treatment and the most basic accounting principle there is next to cash (cash versus accrual accounting.) IGNORANT !
The attorneys for the lenders don’t get it and call me a fraud. The servicing supervisors and loss mitigation don’t get it to they call me a fraud. The brass for the lender has no clue either of these complicated accounting measures. Garfield, I don’t think you get it either buddy!
So we argue MERS, HERS and lost note gibberish, UCC article 9 junk and nuclear Hot Sauce. These other theories are based on Pretzel Logic and a Royal Scam (Steely) . Are you reeling in the years or stowing away the time?
Really, you’re confusing and pissing off judge’s folks with your Wikipedia and give the real arguments are a “Black” Eyed Pea” with “all that junk up in your trunk”.
But, Enron and Adelphia felt the full wrath of the SEC and US attorney general’s office for failure to comply with FASB. The penalty for misstating income and assets was argued at the WorldCom trial and Bernard Ebhers broke down claiming he was just a high paid idiot who did not know any better. I was with carl Icahn when he made this play for World Com Asset (to the tune of $4 billion in R*E*C*E*V*E*R*S*H*I*P!)
The idiot (Ebhers) is in prison for the rest of his life. So counsel…civil complaint? Go the hell away! No Case law got it! This is a criminal investigation and call to receivership for Blue Sky violations by the biggest clowns in America. And still the Homeowners call me a Ripp Off and call China Town for fee schedules in bankruptcy and X rated excuses. Want my wire information or my advice. If you don’t like y advice your mattress is Freeeeeee!
So homeowners, go to bed tonight nervous, start crying and wanting to get it over. Wow! Attorneys are starting to complicate the mess further looking for case law, case law, Law cases, cases of beer and show times for law and Order. So Stoppppppp!. This is how stupid your arguments are fools! Why?……finally the answer you all have been waiting for….ready mischief-maker’s…..put the coffee down! The moment is here….That is because civil attorneys are not a criminal attorney !
YOU DONT NEED CASE LAW FOR LARCENY.
MSOLIMAN
ADMIN@BORROWERHOTLINE.COM
Bank of America’s letter waiving legal privileges dated oct 12, 2009
http://www.scribd.com/doc/21001565/Bank-of-America-s-Letter-Waiving-Legal-Privileges
Any Attorneys on No Calif willing to step up?
Re:
a federal class-action lawsuit against Indymac
Mortgage brought by attorneys Matthew Callister
and Brooke Bohlke
“Somebody’s got to bite the bullet and say,
‘We’re going to freeze foreclosures on single
family homes,’” Callister says. “If it takes
the court system’s intervention, then so be it.”
ONCE A TROUBLED INDYMAC BORROWER
LEARNS OF THE LAWSUIT, BOHLKE SAYS,
“WE’VE BEEN ABLE TO **STOP**
FORECLOSURES WITH 24 HOURS’ NOTICE.”
With about 1,000 Indymac mortgage loans
heading into default in Southern Nevada
alone, the phones at the law office figure
to keep ringing for some time to come.
——————————————————————————————
Oct. 13, 2009
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal
JOHN L. SMITH: Homeowners whose mortgages fizzled fight back with class-action lawsuit
When Luis Armando Benito purchased the home on Cherry Canyon Avenue in October 2004, the Las Vegas real estate market was still skyrocketing toward the stratosphere.
The four-bedroom, two-bath home’s $475,000 price was high, but Benito was able to secure an adjustable rate mortgage with surprising ease from Indymac Bank. It appeared his dream of home ownership had become a reality.
A few months later, Benito was aroused from his reverie. It’s a story that’s become hauntingly familiar in a state that leads the nation in home foreclosure. When Benito’s ARM came due and his interest rate went up, his mortgage payment doubled.
He didn’t give up without a fight. He swore he hadn’t been made aware of the potential danger of taking out an ARM. He spent hours on the phone attempting to get help from the mortgage company. He wasted money on a company claiming to be able to negotiate with the bank.
Making Benito’s efforts infinitely more difficult was the fact Indymac was closed by the Office of the Thrift Supervision on July 11, 2008. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. was appointed receiver. (Indymac’s loans are now serviced by Indymac Mortgage Services, a division of OneWest Bank.)
His dream became a nightmare, and his home was foreclosed on through a trust deed of sale in November 2008. A month later, the home was re-sold for $265,451. Although Benito tried to fight the foreclosure, he was evicted in late May.
Today, Benito and other locals with Indymac mortgages are fighting back — and making progress. They have joined a federal class-action lawsuit against Indymac Mortgage brought by attorneys Matthew Callister and Brooke Bohlke. Their clients’ homes range in value from $150,000 to more than $1 million.
Among many allegations, the attorneys contend OneWest “breached the loan agreements/contracts by failing to disclose the following: APR, method of determining the finance charge, balance, actual finance charge, total payments, amount financed, number of payments, and due dates. OneWest breached the loan agreements/contracts by doubling Plaintiffs mortgage payments when the mortgage ‘arms’ came due.”
Although they come from vastly different backgrounds, the homeowners share a common story of how creatively they were qualified for their loans. Some of the loan documents contained more fiction than a Stephen King novel.
One homeowner who earned $160,000 a year saw that figure placed in the gross “earnings-per-month” category. Another with a job paying $16 per hour somehow managed to qualify for a $380,000 house.
Most were buried after their ARM doubled their monthly payment.
When they sought to renegotiate their loans, according to the complaint, they were met with a wall of indifference. When the company went into receivership and changed hands, it was nearly impossible to find someone in authority to take a call.
“This explains why no one can get through on the phones,” Callister says.
The multibillion-dollar federal bailout of the mortgage industry compels banks to negotiate with homeowners and modify loans. Callister says, “If you take federal bank bailout funds, you must participate in the mortgage modification program.”
Problem is, those Troubled Asset Relief Program checks cleared long before the banks were prepared to renegotiate thousands of home loans. And no one in authority in Washington stopped the clock as people lost their homes across the country. There simply hasn’t been enough pressure from Washington to ensure a speedy process. The longer mortgage companies delay renegotiating, the more homeowners get buried.
At least in this case, some Southern Nevada homeowners refuse to be steamrolled.
In September, U.S. District Judge Philip Pro signed a stipulation extending the preliminary discovery process another 90 days. Indymac/OneWest will have until Jan. 15 to reply. Meanwhile, all action against the more than two-dozen homeowners battling it out with a mortgage giant is frozen.
The list of homeowners taking action grows as they learn about the lawsuit.
“Somebody’s got to bite the bullet and say, ‘We’re going to freeze foreclosures on single family homes,’” Callister says. “If it takes the court system’s intervention, then so be it.”
Once a troubled Indymac borrower learns of the lawsuit, Bohlke says, “We’ve been able to stop foreclosures with 24 hours’ notice.”
With about 1,000 Indymac mortgage loans heading into default in Southern Nevada alone, the phones at the law office figure to keep ringing for some time to come.
John L. Smith’s column appears Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. E-mail him at Smith@reviewjournal.com or call (702) 383-0295. He also blogs at lvrj.com/blogs/smith.
Find this article at:
http://www.lvrj.com/news/homeowners-whose-mortgages-fizzled-fight-back-with-class-action-lawsuit-64067392.html
M Soliman
What do you mean by the following?
The SEC is coming and this party will soon end!
Well done on your case! It looks amazing!
Ian
….thanks brother…….
thank you! Made my day.
Maher
To MSoliman: your substitution of trustee action was illuminating and to the point. That should send the doubting Thomases packing, and put the boastful yet unknowledgeable attorneys on notice that this is not a venue for those who don’t think outside the box as to what is actually going on with the “foreclosure crisis” the “mortgage crisis” the “housing crisis” ad nauseum. Keep up the good work.
Readers:
If there is a better way to go please enlighten me. The loan sale in question below is on hold and a modification was offered.
A lawyer was hired for $2,500 to now come in and settle the matter.
Any questions about the correspondence below can be addressed to me at :
admin@borrowerhotline.com
Re: Our examination of the Review of the Recorded Notices and other Documents
Dear Counsel;
Pursuant to my discussion on Friday September 25th, with counsel for the Trustee, be advised the subject trustee sale is out of proper compliance with the California civil code of procedures.
(d) A trustee named in a recorded substitution of trustee shall be deemed to be authorized to act as the trustee under the mortgage or deed of trust for all purposes from the date the substitution is executed by the mortgagee, beneficiaries, or by their authorized agents.
Notice of Default was delivered to the trust as follows:
1. The NOD was allegedly prepared on 04/8/2008 by First American Title (no way to verify) as agent for the Trustee DEUTSCHE BANK as the Trustee for FFMLT 2006-FF4, Mortgage Pass through Certificates, Series 2006-FF4.
2. The Notice of default was then recorded on 04/9/2008. In the upper left hand corner of the document you’ll see the name of the trustee, agent or beneficiary that maintains the right to request the notice be filed. The shows the following recording instructions:
3. RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
TD Services Company,
4. TO BE MAILED TO:
TD Services Company at
1820 E First Street,
Suite 210 P.O.Box11988
Santa Ana, CA 92711.
5. The document also gives notice that: Notice is hereby given that TD Service Company is the dully appointed trustee under the following described deed of trust. The document also is signed by Julie White. Ms. White has no title or company name associated with her signature and she presumably signed it on the document date of 04/08/2008.
6. The document also shows that:
a. First American is acting as the Agent for DEUTSCHE BANK as the Trustee for FFMLT 2006-FF4, Mortgage Pass through Certificates, Series 2006-FF4
Conclusion:The document requires critical information for filing purposes and must identify what party is requesting the information. That party is assumed to be the trustee, authorized and appointed agent for the beneficiary or beneficiary. TD service does in fact state in the document they are the duly appointed Agent for the trustee.
A substitution of trustee notice is dated on April 8th 2008 and must be executed (not necessarily recorded) by the original trustee, authorized and appointed agent for the beneficiary or beneficiary in favor of the substitute trustee. TD Services is listed as substitute trustee and shall upon execution of the document thereby allow for them to replaces the original trustee named in the deed. The substitution of trustee was not requested not by the original trustee or beneficiary. It was requested by TD services with no standing to do so and executed by the Servicer “Home Loan Services Inc.” The document requires a signature and notary jurat to be properly executed. The Notice of default was executed on April 11th, 2008 or 48 hours after the Notice of default was recorded. Also note the document was endorsed in the State of Pennsylvania.
A security interest arises when in exchange for a loan a borrower agrees, in a security agreement, that the lender (the secured party) may take specified collateral owned by the borrower if he or she should default on the loan. Under the Cccp 3439.03 value is given for a transfer or an obligation if, in exchange for the transfer or obligation, property is transferred or an antecedent debt is secured or satisfied. Value does not include an unperformed promise made otherwise than in the ordinary course of the promisor’s business to furnish support to the debtor or another person.
I believe with conviction the true beneficiary for the mortgage loan in question is in fact a FSB or member bank FDIC. sharing an interest with the Investment Trust which is duly represented by Duetsche Bank National Trust Company.
The investment and investors have impairedcollatereal subject to subordination of their rights. All this to protect the lenders interests for avoiding a buy back provision.
This may open up the transaction to a criminal investigation by the SEC. I am waiting for a response from the comission.The mortgage is a valuable asset that originated on December 16th 2005 for which no valuable consideration transferred amongst the parties. If the borrower’s obligation was not delivered but only pledged to the Trust no real transfer of the asset was completed, only intended and registered presumably in accordance with a UCC filing.
The guidliens and guidance set forth under GAAAP and in accordance with FASB
3439.09. A cause of action with respect to a fraudulent transfer or obligation under this chapter is extinguished unless action is brought pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 3439.07 or levy made
as provided in subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 3439.07:
(a) Under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 3439.04,within four years after the transfer was made or the obligation wasincurred or, if later, within one year after the transfer orobligation was or could reasonably have been discovered by theclaimant.
(b) Under paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 3439.04 orSection 3439.05, within four years after the transfer was made or theobligation was incurred.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a cause of actionwith respect to a fraudulent transfer or obligation is extinguishedif no action is brought or levy made within seven years after the
transfer was made or the obligation was incurred.
Note under rule 3439.10. Unless displaced by the provisions of this chapter, theprinciples of law and equity, including the law merchant and the lawrelating to principal and agent, estoppel, laches, fraud,misrepresentation, duress, coercion, mistake, insolvency, or othervalidating or invalidating cause, supplement its provisions.
Notwithstanding any provision of this section or any provision in any deed of trust, unless a new notice of sale is given pursuant to Section 2924 after execution of the substitution, any sale conducted by the substituted trustee shall be void.
My take and advisement to the defendant and their counsel is the parties must rescind the sale of the subject property immediately.
From here i only see it fit for you to charge the loan to the “trust” to avoid any derecognition and that you settle your matter there.
Respectfully;
M.Soliman
Examiner
Expert Witness to Counsel
admin@borrowerhotline.com
http://www.borrowerhotline.com
Cc: File
***Ps this is what we do MSoliman
How many more will go to a lawyer and ask . . .
“what is it you can do to help me”
Sukers! Then, only to come back and brag about the fact….they want to find a new lawyer.
Do you know how stupid you look here? Is this a game…..? Fame…what’s your name….My God …what’s happening here? If your lawyer is not an Ivy League graduate with an MBA and or securities attorney then please please send your money to Vegas…I too heard it all …. the legal gibberish like buttered bottomline, nuclear sausages ready to launch, Mortons Laws and Steak house and slick terms like its time to unscrammble the eggroll. Pathological “Legal Story Tellers” CAN ANY ONE OF YOU HERE GET ON A PHONE A STOP A FORECLOSURE DEAD IN ITS TRACKS? Not file a suit or recite Blacks Dictionary….but get your home back! Find an expert…a real expert…. think about what your fighting for…..or call a Wall Street Exec.(you wont understand him….)
M. Soliman / admin@borrowerhotline.com/ http://www.borrowerhotline.com
The SEC is coming and this party will soon end!
Alina
I absolutely agree. I almost want to go and introduce myself to them and see how we all could help each other out, given we’re in the same situation.
However, I am now, officially looking for a new lawyer. My previous lawyer has been granted motion to withdraw. He just didn’t “get it.” I did attempt to contact George Babcock and never heard back from him…may try another time. I am, otherwise, out here pro se and have no idea what to do next. I am looking into whether or not to join a class action against Wells Fargo or to just go it alone. Not sure yet.
Meg in RI,
My understanding is that the Bucci’s attorney is appealing this lower court decision. I had posted this decision on one of the blogs on Livinglies re: MERS yesterday.
It would be great if Neil could assist the Bucci’s attorney.
All,
urbanlotus, on October 6th, 2009 at 2:21 pm Said:
“Oh and I forgot to mention that there IS A LOT OF MENTION OF NEILS WEBSITE here in the Huffington Post under comments in this article:”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/lack-of-legal-help-one-mo_b_310353.html
Linda”
This is what we ALL need to do…
Post in the comments section in every mainstream article/report/blog post that we come across regarding anything related to these frauds. Send emails to all the bloggers/journalists/reporters mentioning the frauds. Facebook it, Twitter it, Reddit, Digg it, and update your blogs DAILY. Contact your circuit JUDGES through their email address and faxes (I send emails directly to my judge and his assistant once or twice a week, if you need help finding your judges email address just let me know. Figured out a 90% success rate on getting them).
The masses still do not understand what has transpired not to mention the judges. They still look at it as a borrower got in over their head and did not live within their means… That is absolute BS! We didn’t create the inflated home values, we weren’t looking for signatures to fill presold notes, we weren’t “investors” trying to flip houses, or Wall Street selling securities, we weren’t looking to get paid out on insurance or bailouts etc. We were homeowners looking to better our families, our lives, our future, and our childrens future, that believed in a system, a government, that was lead by greed and corruption.
There are so many people that read/contribute to this site. If we all start doing this we can help turn the tide. I know I will…
4closureFraud
http://www.courts.ri.gov/superior/publisheddecisions2009.htm
Anthony Bucci and Stephanie Bucci v. Lehman Brothers Bank, FSB, A Federal Savings Bank; Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., (MERS) Aurora Loan Services, LLC, No. 09-3888 (August 25, 2009)
RI court rules in favor of MERS, stating that as nominee, it is not illegal for them to foreclose on properties here. WHY? And how do lawyers and homeowners here prove that it is? Maybe someone can further explain this case to me. Am I missing something?
MERS, as nominee for Rose Mortgage foreclosed on me. I was told this is illegal. First of all, Rose Mortgage is and has been out of business. Second, what about the note? What about the securitization and pooling process? If the courts here are going to deny homeowners like this, what chance do I have? Is there anyone who can tell me whether or not there is a way to get this case overturned and, if so, how to do it?
I need to know more, which is why I hope to attend the workshop in November. Thank you so much for this site.
Ruling by judges rattles mortgage industry
Some foreclosures may at least be slowed
By J. Patrick Coolican (contact)
Saturday, Oct. 3, 2009 | 2 a.m.
Sun Topics
Real Estate in Crisis
Sun business and economy coverage
A bankruptcy judge here, joining judges across the country, is throwing a bit of sand in the gears of the mortgage machine and its ruthless foreclosure blade.
She has raised this issue: In many home foreclosures springing out of bankruptcy proceedings, the foreclosure is being triggered by a representative of the lender — a surrogate that may not have a legal, equity stake in the proceedings.
As a result, it is conceivable — though still something of a legal long shot — that the homeowner who is filing for bankruptcy protection could end up saving his house.
The argument that a lender’s surrogate can’t trigger foreclosure has drawn notice of Nevada homeowners, who are preparing a class action lawsuit. They are seeking a preliminary injunction this month to stop their foreclosures.
First, some background:
Law and custom have long required that property transactions be recorded with a county clerk or “recorder of deeds,” along with information about the person who holds the mortgage, and, if there are multiple mortgages, the place in line of each creditor.
For big lenders, tracking that information in hundreds of jurisdictions across the country was an onerous process, so the biggest, including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, set up a company that would do it all electronically. It is called Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems and is recognized by its acronym.
The MERS name wound up on millions of mortgages, including more than 987,000 in Nevada alone, according to the company.
Once people started defaulting on loans, MERS would announce the default on behalf of its bank clients. Consumer activists and attorneys for homeowners began questioning whether MERS, which represents banks but has no direct financial interest in the loans, could legally trigger foreclosure, but judges were generally not sympathetic to the argument.
Christopher Peterson, a law professor at the University of Utah’s S.J. Quinney College of Law and a former consumer rights attorney, called the emergence of MERS a somewhat dubious development and said it called into question the legitimacy of mortgages recorded in its name:
“MERS has no ownership interest, but they put MERS’ name there instead of the lenders’ name. No legislature said they could do that.”
Peterson has been hired by the Reno law firm Hager & Hearne as an expert witness in a class action lawsuit that will seek to invalidate the right of MERS to trigger foreclosure.
Their case will rely heavily on a recent Kansas Supreme Court ruling. In that complicated foreclosure case, the court decided this month that MERS had “no right to the underlying debt repayment secured by the mortgage …”
Paul Habibi, a real estate expert at UCLA’s Anderson School of Management, said the decision, though not binding on other states, is a potentially important precedent that “renders MERS somewhat ineffective to proceed with foreclosure.”
The New York Times took note of the decision this week, with columnist Gretchen Morgenson saying the ruling called into question MERS’ entire business model.
How the Kansas argument plays out in Nevada remains to be seen.
Nevada is a nonjudicial foreclosure state, meaning foreclosure doesn’t require a judge’s approval. Trustee companies such as Fidelity National Default Solutions hold the title to the loan for the lender, and they are authorized to foreclose, explained Michael Joe, an attorney for the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada.
Still, the judicial backlash has hit MERS in Nevada, and could affect people in bankruptcy proceedings especially.
A person facing foreclosure is not necessarily in bankruptcy. But when the homeowner does file for bankruptcy protection, a lender — or, in this case, MERS — that wants to protect its assets must get permission from the federal bankruptcy judge to foreclose.
And in a Las Vegas case this spring, federal Bankruptcy Judge Linda Riegle ruled that MERS had no standing because the company is not the real party in interest — it doesn’t actually own the loan. In other words, in the course of bankruptcy proceedings, MERS had no claim to the house.
Peterson thinks this could be significant.
“When a court says MERS has no standing, that is a decisive step” in saying the mortgage wasn’t properly recorded, Peterson said. If the mortgage wasn’t properly recorded, it wasn’t legitimate.
Although the homeowner would still owe the lender money, if it wasn’t a legitimate mortgage, then it becomes an unsecured loan, like a credit card.
Bankruptcy proceedings, Peterson said, are all about “who has priority?”
In establishing the priority in which debtors get paid, creditors holding the unsecured debt of the bankrupt, like credit card companies, go to the back of the line, and a bankruptcy judge can give significant relief to the debtor, including reducing the principal of the loan. Or in this case, the judge could refuse to give the house to the lender and arrange new loan terms.
Joe, who has represented scores of Nevadans hit with foreclosure, said, “I like the argument, but I’m not sure it wins.” Lenders merely need to transfer the notes from MERS into the name of a trustee that has the authority to foreclose, he said.
Although that effort would be a major headache because of the nearly one million Nevada mortgages on the MERS system that would have to be transferred, it’s doable, Joe said. He added that there’s evidence it’s happening.
MERS would respond only to written questions submitted by the Sun.
The company will appeal the Kansas case, company spokeswoman Karmela Lejarde wrote.
“The ruling is confusing and goes against long-standing precedent,” she said.
She disputed the assertion that MERS has no financial interest in the loans on which it is listed.
The fact that MERS transfers the proceeds of the loan to the lender doesn’t mean it doesn’t have a “protected property interest.” That property interest, the company alleges, was unfairly and illegally taken by the recent court decisions.
Lejarde noted that several Nevada cases went the other way and bestowed ownership rights to MERS.
“As the mortgagee, MERS possesses all of the rights of the lender,” Lejarde concluded, “including the right to foreclose the mortgage.”
Mr. Garfield and staff know like others how much some struggle here goes on while grasping the magnitude of information provided.
Sometimes the wrong components of an argument create ancillary analysis that I feel is wasted time.
This is especially true when arguments drift away from the central or core issues. It’s what you need to know to STOP a SALE or obtain relief from a lender recovery and EVICTION!
UCC provisions are an example of my concerns. Under Article III and especially Article IX there is substance to quash any technical arguments by a Trustor at the Federal level and in District Courts. It’s a tall and hefty burden arguing substance for claims of invalid UCC filing and limiting protection afforded to the lien holder.
My firms take on clients and attorneys for foreclosure disputes and SEC comission matters as an Expert Witness. We proved guidance and testimony to be added to pleading or introduced subject to local courts rules.
An expert testifies in court and counsels the attorney by providing subtle and often hidden technical issues and missing insider links that can turn a case around in favor of either party.
We are not a RESPA Auditor (I have my issues there) and only an attorney can afford to advise you of your rights and protections for those rights. Use many of the good referrals we find on this site.
Do feel free to allow us to review the audit at no cost for regulatory adherence, authenticity and complete validness in application of the federal and state codes.
We feel (M.Soliman and Associates) the matter is analyzed and presented intelligently as follows–
1. Conduit, Servicing and Beneficiary
2. Perfection (of title)
3. Custodial requirements
4. Obligor & oblige rights
5. Successors and Assigns
6. Transfers and lawful assignments
7. State vs Federal code enforcements
8. Accounting rules and GAAP
9. FDIC / OTS member bank authority
10. SEC Commission/ Blue Sky offereing
CASE NUMBER PS08-2028
MATTER: LA SALLE BANK VS SPICER
COURT: TRIAL: UNLAWFUL DETAINER
COURT: SUPERIOR COURT OF CONTR COSTA
COMISSIONER: LOWELL RICHARDS
Spicer won his home back in this case. lender has yet to file a motion to set aside judgement.
msoliman
msoliman
SETTLEMENT OFFERS:
L LOPEZ $50,000 OUT OF COURT
M RAMIREZ $20,000 OUT OF COURT
E FANNING $25,000 OUT OF COURT
Borrower as setttlement also given a 120 day stay from evicition
CASE NUMBER :MCV202430
MATTER:HSBC BANK VS. LEWIS’
TRIAL:JUDGEMENT FOR PLAINTIFFS
COURT: SUPERIOR COURT NAPA / SANTA ROSA
JUDGE: GARY NADLER
CASE NUMBER: UDFS900217
MATTER: BANK OF NEW YORK VS MEDINA
MOTION: DEFENDANT – SET ASIDE JUDEGEMENT
COURT: COUNTY OF SAN BERNADINO
JUDGE: L. MURAD
MATTER: FIRST FRANKLIN V. H HENDERSON
SETTLEMENT: $500,000 MORTGAGE REDUCED
COURT: SUPERIOR COURT OF CONTR COSTA
CASE NUMBER: WITHDRAWN FOR OUT OF COURT SETTLEMENT
JUDGE: N/A
CASE NUMBER PS08-2028
MATTER: LA SALLE BANK VS SPICER
COURT: TRIAL: UNLAWFUL DETAINER
COURT: SUPERIOR COURT OF CONTR COSTA
COMISSIONER: LOWELL RICHARDS
AABY (Or whomever you are)
I want to know where you were educated and any graduate work in the field?
Do you have any expierience working in house with counsel or perhaps have you testified in court to date?
Have your theories settled a case or matter for counsel?
Have you traded these assets before on the secondary?
Do you have any capital markets experience?
Who do you seek for expert guidence in forming new case law?
What can a consumer experct to get fromyour advice?
I guess I want to know now….Who Are You ?
Thanks
MSoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com.
I have posted over 10 cases as requested. Have they posted?
MSoliman
WELLS FARGO
On one my paralegal list serves, a paralegal in Minnesota advised that in Minnesota Wells Fargo and Wells Fargo Mortgage are in the practice of NOT honoring validly executed DPOA (Durable Power of Attorney). He has complained to the Attorney Generals Office. He also spoke to an attorney who confirms that in fact Wells Fargo is doing this illegal act.
Hello,
My friend raves about you and I was wondering if you may be able to answer a question for me. I purchased my home three years ago and my accountant found that I was charged an undocumented point, aside from other problems. I was told that the undocumented point is HUD-1 Violation. Although I really do not know what a HUD-1 violation means. I lost my job and may be going into foreclosure, hopefully not. Can you tell me if there are any penalties for this undocumented point-HUD 1 violation?
Best Regards,
Dianna D’Elia RN,CLNC
516 804-2959
347 575-9880
Why would the Chase attorneys say that in California it is not important to produce the note?
Other than the fact that they may not have the original note.
What is it about California laws that is different than other states with respect to importance of note production?
I am looking for people who can provide some substantive evidence which ties Countrywide, Wells Fargo and B of A subprime lending practices together. Particularly evidence of the respective CEOs and or other staff communicating with each other.
Please send any info regarding this to litigationlawgroup@gmail.com Attn: CHL et al Class Action
Hello All,
Here is a detailed Paper I stumbled upon regarding MERS, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, that I thought I would share by Christopher Peterson. Click on the download link to view pdf file.
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1469749
Abstract:
At the roots of the worst recession since the Great Depression were unaffordable home mortgages packaged into securities, sold to investors, and used as capital assets by financial institutions. The process of securitization, as well as financial institution over-leveraging associated with it, has been well documented and explored. However, there is one company that was a party to more questionable loans and foreclosures than any other and yet has received virtually no attention in the academic literature. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., commonly referred to as “MERS,” is the recorded owner of over half of the nation’s residential mortgages. MERS operates a computer database designed to track servicing and ownership rights of mortgage loans anywhere in the United States. But, it also acts as a proxy for the real parties in interest in county land title records. Most importantly, MERS is also filing foreclosure lawsuits on behalf of financiers against hundreds of thousands of American families. This Article explores the legal and public policy foundations of this odd, but extremely powerful, company that is so attached to America’s financial destiny. It begins with a brief explanation of the origins of the county real property recording systems and the law governing real property liens. Then, it explains how MERS works, why mortgage bankers created the company, and what MERS has done to transform the underlying assumptions of state real property recording law. Next, it explores controversial doctrinal issues confronting MERS and the companies that have relied on it, including (1) whether MERS actually has standing to bring foreclosure actions; (2) whether MERS should be considered a debt collector under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act; and (3) whether loans recorded in MERS’ name should have priority in various collateral competitions under state law and the federal bankruptcy code. The article culminates in a discussion of MERS’ culpability in fostering the mortgage foreclosure crisis and what the long term effects of privatized land title records will have on our public information infrastructure. The Article concludes by considers whether the mortgage banking industry, in creating and embracing MERS, has subverted the democratic governance of the nation’s real property recording system.
4closureFraud
Follow me on Twitter for updates
Neil,
Can you refer me to lawyers that are willing to talk to my clients about violations that we find in their contract. I have contacted a few off your list but I dont get too many responses. We audit mortgage loans in every state for state, fed and underwriting violations, then try to refer them to lawyers who are willing to explain their options.
Thanks
LIVINGLIES: The conspiracy to defraud homeowners will be thrown to its knees, and lenders will be called upon to produce the note or let the property go.
SOLIMAN: A lost note affidavit always surficed over a decade ago so not sure if thats the argument to ride to the finish line. But , the conspiracy is called the lobbying effort by the MBA and banking industry. $250 million is my guess to keep politicians quite, in fighting alive and divert focus away from homeowners to rouge brokers.
We all need to join together and champion out the removal of con men attorneys who know nothing about addition let alone the art of law and protecting homeowners.
msoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
Please email info. Thnx.
A great lawyer in one who has a client who can direct him. Oregon hurts for attorneys in this field. We are a little swamped and very under staffed. You must find a true expert who can guide an attorney and allow them to execute the fraud where it is found. I spent 20 + years playing the game in secondary and capital markets. there is a lot you should know – attorneys too!
msoliman
http://www.borrowerhotline.com
admin@borrowerhotline.com
Net interest margin is similar in concep0ain on sale of the transferring asset when you deliver into a security and NIM makes it worth the wait. Performance will impact NIM whereby the quality of assets will in large part impact the offering and prepayment speed.
In spring 2005 I met with the head of Countrywide Securities and asked about a private label registration we were proposing. He asked why? Strange response…I said “for generating a bigger balance sheet, more liquidity and other benefits from a retained NIM.”
He said why, 18 months of cash going out and then what? The NIM was a joke. (I assume due t overstatements about the borrowers and earnings). In fact, he would sell to me the strips (NIM) at a dime on the dollar – for paper and NIM seasoned and 18 months aged.
What does that tell you folks.
MSoliman
Admin@borrowerhotline.com
Neil-can you please comment on NIMS?
This is what I found:
NIMS-another barrier as to why mods can’t be made by some banks.
Anyone else heard of NIMS (Net Interest Margin Securities)? I found that the PSA of Chase (multiple Chase entiies) contains NIMS.
Basically, NIMS are what the bank-o-ramas do with excess interest which builds up and does not need to go to the investors!! That would be interest, like from our monthly mortgage payments!!
FROM FDIC.gov
New Structured Finance Products: Net Interest Margin Securities (NIMS)
Many new structured products are introduced in the capital markets every year, but many either do not succeed or take years to gain acceptance in the market. There are a variety of reasons for this, such as lack of credit enhancements, poor transparency, or difficulty in modeling cash flows. This section discusses net interest margin securities (NIMS), which were introduced in the mid-1990s but did not gain wide market acceptance until recently.
NIMS are structured finance products collateralized by the residual cash flows from one or more securitizations (underlying deals). They may be structured within a securitization, but more frequently they are structured as a separate issuance after the inception of the underlying securitization.12 NIMS are a popular option for subprime residential mortgage securitizations because they allow the issuer to securitize the excess spread, which is the difference between the income on the underlying pooled assets and the financing cost, as well as prepayment penalties. If not securitized, the excess spread would remain on the issuers’ balance sheet as a form of credit enhancement used primarily to absorb credit losses on the senior tranches of the deal.
NIMS are either sold in the secondary market, which provides regulatory capital relief to the issuer, or maintained on the issuer’s balance sheets. The recent growth in NIMS issuances is the result of growth in the subprime mortgage market, new structures, and attractive yields that have increased investor demand. Although issuance statistics on NIMS are not widely published, S&P experienced significant growth in its rated NIMS deals. According to S&P, the par value of rated NIMS in 2003 increased more than sevenfold to $3.4 billion, and growth in 2004 was more than fourfold to $14.97 billion.
Dr. Don
A technicality is going to get you a rescission at best. IF YOU WENT TO SALE GREAT! But then what?
add – rescission of the trustee sale!
Dr. Don . . . A technicality is going to get you a rescission at best. IF YOU WENT TO SALE GREAT! But then what?
If your a physician – say a patient with near terminal cancer wants to get cosmetic work for a small scare or body mark on his arm. What surgeon in his right mind would accommodate the patient under this example. Help the patient fight for life! Cure the disease and cite the irregularity down the road as a cause of action.
msoliman@borrowerhotline.com
Abby;
Of course, Times are tough here and for the time I invest . . . well, there is little if anything in the bank when its all said and done. But I am on your side and not against you. I would even like to show you a few up and coming articles and pieces that I intend to submit. Maybe you can take the concepts and water it down (into plain English) LOL
Peace
MSoliman
Great web site. Where do I find a Great lawyer in the state or Oregon that understands all this, and will work with me. I was with Country wide now BOA, my loan Modification is a big mess, it has gone on for 8 months. Thanks
Here’s a non-lawyer view, JUST AN OPINION:
In a non judicial state the Trust of Deed contains a “power of sale” clause. The only person eligible to evoke that power of sale is the firm that has a valid, properly executed deed of trust. The F/C process CAN NOT start until the deed of trust.”
The following is based upon the “original blue inked signed promissory note” (hereinafter called instrument) is to be a negotiable instrument under the UCC for introduction into the secondary market.
Several items are required to execute foreclosure:
1. A clause in a “Valid” Deed of Trust that allows for foreclosure when there has been a default in the debt obligation.
a. The state I reside in is a lien theory state and as such to maintain a “valid lien” recordation in the “public land records office” is required. Reference each states “Property Code” for recordation requirements. Title Theory states have a difference in laws.
i. Lien theory states, the homeowner owns the property and the obligee has only a debt obligation secured with a lien on the property, “Deed of Trust” or other such name.
ii. Title theory states, the obligee owns the property and upon fulfillment of the debt obligation title is assigned to the homeowner.
b. If the lien is invalid it is of no difference if a debt obligation exists as only the lien defines how to execute the foreclosure to recover upon default of the debt obligation.
2. A debt obligation that is valid under the Uniform Commercial Code or each states equivalent.
a. An obligee that is a “holder in due course” with “rights to enforce”
b. The holder of the “Note” may not always have the rights to enforce.
c. Failure to properly negotiate the negotiable instrument does not transfer the “rights to enforce”. Consult the Uniform Commercial Code for proper methods to negotiate an “instrument”.
3. Assigning of the instrument from the originator of the loan up to the securities market requires a number of assignments of the instrument and negotiation of the instrument has to be in accordance with the UCC.
a. Most securities “Pooling and Servicing Agreements” require that the instruments being used as collateral be assigned to the securities trust with all intervening assignments being recorded. Exceptions are made if MERS is involved as MERS records these assignments internally. Verify with state recordation laws and confirm that this meets the legal requirement of maintaining a valid enforceable lien.
b. The “Notice of Assignment” filed in public land records offices reflect the change in ownership of the instrument.
c. If the negotiation of the instrument was not in compliance with the UCC then possibly an invalid “Notice of Assignment” was filed with the “public land records office”.
4. In fact it should be more correctly stated “Produce a valid debt obligation”.
a. It is possible to produce the note but if that note was used as a negotiable instrument and the laws governing the instrument where violated then in such cases it may have rendered the “instrument/note” nullity.
b. Lost Note Affidavits that are created upon loss of the instrument cannot be furthered assigned as there do not meet the definition of a negotiable instrument.
Maher-thank you very much for the sponsoship offer.
I will let you know. Thank you!
Over 20 years spent in mortgage banking and secondary markets here. Over five years spent with member thrifts.
Never heard of a troubled asset in the mortgage side of the business.- – - Stales, impaired, aged receivables, Scratch & Dent, Hospital line assets, Repo’s etc.TROUBLED ASSETS – That’s a Fed Member Bank Term made famous by FIERRA and Charlie
http://www.borrowerhotline.com msoliman
I’ll address again. If paper is securitized subject to the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) there you have the means for ensuring a preference for intangibles or chattels under Article 9
For example such as cash flow PAID BY A DEBTOR used for earnings purposes and the income streams or “WATERFALL” paid out to investors. E.g. a six mo. Strip of 1999 vintage Class AA senior sub preferred in a REMIC or MBO
admin@borrowerhotline.com msoliman
Abby
I will sponsor one person (airfare and hotel) if its for certain. so let me know.
msoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
OK all–we do have a core coalition team going and am seeking somebody to put up a not to complicated website so we can get 1. more Homeowners who will go to DC to testify 2. accept donations to possibly fund the trip(s) to DC (I noticed from TV that the TEA PARTIES have extravagant buses they travel in) and
3. a list of anybody who supports our fight
Abby, Alina and Anonymous are ready to testify before Congress.
Is there anybody who can work with us to put up a website?
We’ll fight for you all, but we need support.
Thanks
carra2009@gmail.com
Attorneys or Maher
Can someone explain, and I think maybe Neil suggested it a while ago, how to go into court to try to get the bank/lender etc to post a bond.
Since Homeowner has all to lose & banks have nothing to lose.
Crazy
Why has an action for Declaratory Relief not been brought or considered by lenders such as Countrywide? If a lender could survive a declaratory judgment preceding it would certainly subject the Lenders to far less legal liability.
The requirements of substantive law or procedural due process are often complex and difficult to understand or to apply correctly. The allegations with respect to your lender, is Countrywide is they wrote an increasing number of intentionally “bad” loans as “exceptions” without benefit of any rationale or what we called in the business “compensating factors.”
They failed to meet its already wide underwriting guidelines even though exception loans had a higher rate of default.
The arguments are proven time and again whereby the law community must agree it is negligent when citizens bring an action while appearing to be left without any of the powers and mechanisms which are available to them normally in courts of law, i.e., subpoena and other powers of discovery, etc., to aid in the identification and protection of legal rights. Why?
First, Countrywide is a problem that will serve as case law for years to come (maybe that’s the bigger problem – stepping away from legal precedent and for establishing case law). The lender acted wrongfully and many Americans are seriously hurt by their negligence. Was it more dependent than many of its competitors on selling loans it originated into the private secondary mortgage market? I believe they were operating a securities company first and mortgage lender second. But management high earnings expectations were for the deteriorating quality of the loans that Countrywide was writing, and the poor performance over time of those loans.
This would ultimately curtail the company’s ability to sell those loans into its own secondary mortgage market. By the end of 2006, Countrywide’s underwriting guidelines were broad and way to expansive. I contend Countrywide was writing a majority of high risk weighted loans. Even these expansive underwriting guidelines were not sufficient to support Countrywide’s desired growth. So, was management unconcerned for the increased risk that Countrywide was assuming?
I believe like the SEC that Countrywide was aware, but failed to disclose, that Countrywide’s current business model was unsustainable. That’s pretty much a fact! Specifically, Countrywide developed what was referred to unique business strategy. It is a known fact it attempted to offer any product that was offered by any competitor. This indicates an anti-trust mentality by management driven by egos. From 2005 through 2007, Management was responsible for Countrywide’s fraudulent disclosures. Senior executives misled the market over and over again by falsely assuring investors that Countrywide was primarily a prime quality mortgage’ lender which had avoided the excesses of its competitors. This is on record and filed with the SEC. Countrywide’s Forms 10-K for 2005, 2006, and 2007 falsely represented that Countrywide “managed credit risk through credit policy, underwriting, quality control and surveillance activities,” and the 2005 and 2006.
This is not true as forms 10-K falsely stated that Countrywide ensured its continuing access to the mortgage backed securities market by “consistently producing quality mortgages.” Countrywide loan products and the risk was cited while they were continuing to offer or hold those loans, while management continued to make public statements obscuring Countrywide’s risk profile and attempting to differentiate it from other lenders. Referring to a particularly profitable subprime product as “toxic,” the Countrywide management had “no way” to predict the performance of its core product, the Pay-Option ARM loan.
According to the SEC, management believed that the risk was so high and that the secondary market had so mispriced Pay-Option ARM loans that certain management is documented to repeatedly urged that Countrywide sell its entire portfolio of those loans.
Despite their awareness and CEO’s severe concerns about the increasing risk Countrywide was undertaking, management hid these risks from the investing public at the expense of the consumer.
Countrywide is now is a Defendant in an SEC action claiming it misled investors by failing to disclose substantial negative information regarding Countrywide’s loan products, including:
• the increasingly lax underwriting guidelines used by the company in originating loans;
• the company’s pursuit of a “matching strategy” in which it matched the terms of any loan being offered in the market, even loans offered by primarily subprime originators;
• the high percentage of loans it originated that were outside its own already widened underwriting guidelines due to loans made as exceptions to guidelines;
Fact – Countrywide’s definition of “prime” loans included loans made to borrowers with FICO scores well below any industry standard definition of prime credit quality; the high percentage of Countrywide’s subprime originations that had a loan to value ratio of 100%, For example: 62% in the second quarter of 2006; and Countrywide’s subprime loans had significant additional risk factors, beyond the subprime credit history of the borrower, associated with increased default rates, including reduced documentation, stated income, piggyback second liens, and LTVs in excess of95%.
So everyone affected should get their loan for free. No you are right! Our attorney general settled this matter with a lawsuit and over $3 billion settlement. My take is “if you owe the money you must find a way to make good on the obligation.”
Therefore maybe these arguments are of little value. But what constitutes a valid lien or mortgage security. An action for Declaratory Relief taken by the lender which cannot survive a declaratory judgment proceeding would certainly subject the Lenders to legal liability. Therefore, avoiding this liability is well worth the minimal delays and costs represented by the declaratory judgment proceeding.
To the extent it frustrates the consensus of the MBA Board, such consensus must be, and should be, frustrated, since it necessarily violates the law.
In a time of shifting social, economic, and political values, of uncertain legal precedents, and of arbitrarily escalated legal liability, the declaratory judgment procedure represents nothing more nor less than the legal implementation of the age old saying “Better safe than sorry.”
Excerpts taken from the SEC filing against Countrywide executives.
MSoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
I agree with Neil taht obtaining a fair settlement for the homeowner is the primary goal. It is unlikely in most cases a court will give a homeowner the house for free and they should not expect that, at least without spending a lot of money in court. We have put together a program that is working very well using a “stick and carrot”.
1. Stop making payments.
2. Have an attorney bring legal pressure.
3. A short sale investment company buys the house.
The homeowner gets:
A clean credit report, a complete broad form general release, time to plan and coordinate a move, and if the lender will allow it, money from the sale.
From the lenders perspective, they either get a lawsuit or cash and solve a problem (they don’t want another empty house.)
E-mail me for more info.
Sorry, realized I missed your question.
Yes, it would be an adversary proceeding in BK court.
Seeking Attorney comments on–
FYI–if your loan originator/lender has filed for Bankruptcy Chpt 11, such as New Century Mortgage or HOME123, you can file an ‘adversary proceeding’ in that BKR court!!
Attorneys–would any of you like to comment on this approach?
ATTENTION VICTIMS OF NEW CENTURY MORTGAGE or HOME123 CORP
Small group seeking others to strategize and share examples of what they have done in court-pro se or not pro se!
Some of us have filed adversary proceedings in Delaware BKR Chpt 11 court. Not going too well.
Our group is not going to give foreclosure prevention assistance or any legal advice.
We just want to share about our efforts and possibly strategize.
Has anyone had any success with an adversary proceeding in Judge Carey’s court in Delaware for NCM Chpt. 11 BKR?
Contact carra2009@gmail.com.
There are some opposing attorneys(for NCM) who are offering settlements of 25K to one person and then 100K to another person in that court. Very Insulting since NCM was one of the largest predatory subprime lenders.
We’ve had several conference calls already.
Abby,
The Chinese have been pushing this idea for several years now. They want a world currency similar to the Euro. However, until recently, no one paid much attention.
Now the Chinese are extremely concerned about the investments they made here in the U.S., so they are back to actively pushing a new currency.
Stiglitz: Dollar Reserve System Falling Apart
Friday, August 21, 2009 9:03 AM
BANGKOK — A new global reserve system is needed after the global financial crisis exposed the U.S. dollar-based system as flawed and risky, Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz said on Friday.
The “dollar now is yielding almost zero return,” Stiglitz said in a speech at the United Nations regional headquarters in Bangkok. “The current global reserve system is fraying. It’s falling apart. The issue isn’t whether we go to a new system. The question is do we do so in an orderly or disorderly way.”
The build up of the U.S. deficit, debt and “the boiling up of the balance sheet” is cause for anxiety, he said.
Stiglitz urged rich nations to provide funds to help poorer countries avoid a steep crash during the financial crisis.
The group has called for global coordination to avoid competition to cut taxes, and for a worldwide increase in tax on high earners. Dubbing itself the “Shadow GN”, the group has urged governments to opt for bank nationalisations rather than bailouts in order to drive the pace of fresh lending.
Stiglitz said a new global reserve system would be good for global aggregate demand, global stability and global equity.
“It’s very hard to have a globally integrated financial system based on a single currency when there’s such uncertainties about the economic fortunes of that particular country,” he said.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Platform-Level Reports
By MSoliman
This is an interesting and most damaging reference to decpetive business practices that we have on file for nearly every securitizing set of business entities.
Regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) require that each Servicing Participant complete a Report on Assessment at a “platform” level, meaning that the transactions covered by the Report on Assessment should include all asset-backed securities transactions involving such Servicing Participant that are backed by the same asset type.
Further guidance from the SEC staff identifies additional parameters which a Servicing Participant may apply to define and further limit its platform.
For example, a Servicing Participant may define its platform to include only transactions that were completed on or after January 1, 2006 and that were registered with the SEC pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933.
Each Servicing Participant is responsible for defining its own platform, and each platform will naturally differ based on various factors, including the Servicing Participant’s business model, the transactions in which it is involved and the range of activities performed in those transactions.
LaSalle Bank National Association:
The Report on Assessment prepared by LaSalle and attached to this Report on Form 10-K describes in Appendix B thereto the following material instance of noncompliance related to investor reporting: ________________________________________
“1122(d)(3)(i)(A) and (B) – During the [r]eporting [p]eriod, certain monthly investor or remittance reports were not prepared in accordance with the terms set forth in the transaction agreements and certain investor reports did not provide the information calculated in accordance with the terms specified in the transaction agreements for which certain individual errors may or may not have been material.”
According to LaSalle, the investor reporting errors identified in its Report on Assessment as material instances of noncompliance included, for example, revised delinquency, REO, foreclosure, repurchase, payoff or modified loan counts, category indicators and/or balances.
LaSalle indicates that the conclusion that these investor reporting errors amounted to a material instance of noncompliance was based primarily on the aggregate number of errors as opposed to the materiality of any one error.
If you think the fraud stops with you it does not. It continues on behind the scenes and coverup after coverup must be addressed.
http://www.borrowerhotline.com
admin@borrowerhotline.com
Abby
Money laundering is not likley ! Outside of the Iran Contra affair under Regan’s administration – I dont see it as an issue in these types of matters.
If anything, there appears to be no collateral basis for all the wiring that occours to and from amongst the parties and from lender to lender.
Each Fed wire appears to originate from a black hole and generate the next and etc etc…
MSoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
Attorneys or Maher–
is there any ‘money laundering’ going on with all these
pretender lenders and others in the securitizatoin chain?
Would like opinion on this.
Thx
Fund to Let the Public Buy Assets in Distress
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/27/business/economy/27fund.html?scp=3&sq=troubled%20assets&st=cse
http://www.americansecuritization.com/uploadedFiles/ASFStreamlinedFramework7.8.08.pdf
American Securitization Forum
Streamlined Foreclosure and Loss Avoidance Framework for
Securitized Subprime Adjustable Rate Mortgage Loans
Executive Summary
July 8, 2008
m soliman..
see… thats what i’m talkin about …some results..thanks.
[not that your wins were small] but even the small wins are enough fuel the fire i grave.
guessing ?? i dont want to be guessing.but dont you dare accuse me of being an attorney.. sheesh da nerve.
but yes i’m scavenging for bits to em-bold myself enough to step into the
firing range… and just maybe get my damn fool head blown clean off. yea.
but i will arrive with plenty of .ah…lets just say dressed for such an occasion & i’ll take as many of em with me as possible…
ya know… come on groooop hug..hehe
thanks again& keep up the fight!
and so what if i’m just angry …..or not ; /
but i will be reading your suggestion
Can both Freddie Mac and the “Pretender Lender” hold the mortgage at the same time?
(A) Freddie insures the GSE from loss. That’s all.
Does this prove that the “Pretender Lender” is not the real party in interest?
(A) ? ? ? ? ? Beneficiary?
That the mortgage and the note are now separated due to improper assignments?
(A) What? Successors and assigns is void if improper. How do you split the deed from the obligation for improper assignments?
Can a mortgage be “un securitized” to allow a single entity foreclose on it?
(A) These questions make no sense
Any insight on this by anyone would be appreciated!
(A) You need to get a better handle brother on what your asking here. You are lost …..I’m sorry!
msoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
Dear Counsel;
My call to the OTS and FDIC will assist YOU in a valuable way as I will include these conversations in my testimony. (Do you care – the AG does).
YOU JUST NEVER CALL? NOW THE AG AND STATE ARE AFTER YOU!
We can corroborate the findings to date and show the banks are the holder in due course and in violation of the capital set aside required for FDIC members under the OTS.
The OTS in Washington was my last misdirected referral by the FDIC Washington Office and head of Compliance and Policies who sent me there. They have not responded with an intelligent answer yet nor has the FDIC taken any accountability.
I have talked with AIG subsidiaries. What are you attorneys doing – all of you
Damn it – listen to me. This is a fraud of monumental proportions. You are being railroaded out of BK and state & District courts throughout America for a reason.
Is this about seminars?
No one can articulate the fraud the way we can . . . why? The testimony is ready now (where it just as strong to date). It is concise and cutting to the bone and at the heart of a fraud in simplest terms.
1) A member bank has funded the loan and will claim it was sold. That member bank however does not transfer the asset until a trigger.
2) The trigger is default. Payments made on the borrower’s behalf are allowed but not meant to be paid in a clandestine manner. The fact this happens is a violation of the commission 1122 AB and considered a serious (criminal?) act.
3) no trustee is ever alerted to the default status until the loan is ready to go to sale. This is a violation of the trust indenture. The member bank is sitting on a verifiable classified asset without proper capital reserves or disclosures. The loan is guaranteed by a bankrupt insulate SPE and Bankrupt investment banker (Hello).
4) Then they liquidate the impairment (not sell it as prescribed) to a trust. No way!
5) the trustee sale is viewed as an open market transaction but that does not alleviate the lender from the fact they violated FAS 140-3 for control of an asset which negates any sale. Its borrowing against held assets and violates FIERREA
4) the open market transaction (trustee or sheriffs sale ) is NOT acceptable under GAAP but also gives way to the quality aspects of the assets it purchase and as to what the trust represents to the shareholders.
5) The trust is a scratch and dent buyer relying on a bank to hose them
How many banks are there in America and only a few CEO Chumps elected to travel down this “path of Al Capone “Banksters” i.e. Countrywide CITI, B OF A, and Lehmann / First Franklin
So lender attorneys – I am here – waiting….call me and give me your challenge or response…I am waiting? (Or hire me as I nearly had enough of this consumer angst and emotional dusgust driven rejection!).
It is a fraud of monumental Wall Street proportions.
Dixie, Cheryl, Jackson, Emmanual, Mr Downes, Christy E, Kevin M, Judy, Mark and Robyn, and others who sought counsel and out testimoney HANG IN THERE!
MSOLIMAN
msoliman@borrowerhotline.com
July 28, 2009
Tool Offers Loan-Level Transparency to Securitization Investors
By Amilda Dymi
Huge article here READ
MSoliman
msoliman@borrowerhotline.com
(Q) Trustee for non judicial state can foreclose using a re conveyance firm
– Of course.
LISTEN. First, when did they receive as successors and assigns their interest in the property? BINGO! NOW YOU GOT IT! STOP THER GO NO FURTHER! Who transferred “Transferor” to them “Transferee” the interest? Is it MERS or an SPV? AND WHEN AND FOR WHAT CONDIERATION DID THE ALLEGED WHOLE LOAN SALE TAKE PLACE? Where is the servicer in this mess? Please -This is huge huge and HUGE
Abby. – You must find out to trap these fools.
msoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
http://www.foreclosureinfosearch.com
Angry or not
We have won with attorneys testifying and contiue to prevail. We just received word of a cancellation of a scheduled trustee sale in Oregon and another Unlawful detainer has been set aside for the next five months.
We contiue to win. Its a fight. It sad but true. Not much else found here to support randon theory .
If your not a seasoned securties attorney, Tax attorney or veteren of the secondary market , capital markets or someone who has ever written a PPM – - — what are you doing on here – guessing?
Attorneys who avoid expert opine and have winged it to date are doomed Pure plain and simple.
Careful….
Please let me know if anyone knows an attorney who gets it in Louisiana. Thanks
When are they going to get an attorney who gets it in Louisiana? Let me know if you know any. Thanks,
Neil, other attorneys…
Can the Trustee for the securities trust be the foreclosing entity in the non-judicial foreclosure state of CA?
I’ve learned that U.S. Bank, N.A. is the ’securities trustee’ which foreclosed on me and then bought the house from themselves at the foreclosure sale.
JPMAC 2006-NC1 asset backed pass-thru certificates.
Aren’t the true beneficiaries still the investors of JPMAC2006-NC1.
(JPMAC2006-NC1 is almost 1 billion dollars of loans originated by New Century and sold to JP Morgan Acquisition)
avid livinglies fans
please…
there appears to be a lack of posts outlining any outcome of homeowner cases
either interm progress or that have concluded from everyone that has looked for help here, there must be something – good, bad or indifferent to report..
these status posts are a key piece to the [ lab rat study ] forclosure process or litigation of we as homeowners are being consumed by.
i am searching for the general sway of the judiciary regarding the pleas,complaints, opinions used = success or defeat.
i might add that it is very possible that AFTER these said battles are concluded homeowners have no reason to return to this site to post results!?.. hell i cant blame anyone for that tho.
we all desperately need the mental vacation NOT HAVING TO THINK OF BATTLE 24/7..its similar to living with sever pain..experienced daily for years… it really does change you , i have experienced both separately – sever physical pain & foreclosure and changes they bring.
Maher-thank you fro the ‘kick’ info. Great!
Tolerances and “kick out” threshold for qualifying the value or variances in credit scores….not often used however.
The appraisal is usually an easy “kick” to recognize by going to the PV and noting the variances. (Predominant Value in he immediate area.)
msoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
Lawyers or others—
Anyone know what an ‘Appraisal Kick’ is?
I’ve just got hold of a document about my loan and it
has a column titled ‘Fallout’ and under that
is Appraisal Kicks at 2.16% and then Credit Kicks at 3.81%.
For a number of loans the total for the ‘appraisal kick’ is over $20 Million!!
Both were under a section titled Investor Review Kicks.
I just am not familiar with the term ‘kicks’ unless it means simply kickbacks!!
July 28, 2009
Tool Offers Loan-Level Transparency to Securitization Investors
By Amilda Dymi
One dangerous loophole in the financial services marketplace is the disconnection of accountability between loan originators and investors in mortgage- and asset-backed securities.
Recently, security market insiders who recognize that lack of loan level data transparency from origination to securitization was one of the factors that helped deepen the mortgage crisis are creating a standardized identification solution.
The American Securitization Forum has partnered with Standard & Poor’s Fixed Income Risk Management Services – an analytics unit that provides investor solutions separately from the S&P’s ratings business – to create a new loan and loan risk identifying system that aims to bring individual loan-level transparency to the MBS and ABS market. FIRMS said it will also create a central loan data repository.
Both systems aim to provide investors “with a means to understanding the risk, collateral and credit of an individual loan that has been securitized or may be repackaged for the secondary market.”
The unique Loan ID is linked to the CUSIP and ISIN number of the security – assigned by Standard & Poor’s at no cost to issuers. It will help investors track down loan data throughout the life of the loan providing a chain of accountability between loan originators and investors.
S&P’s Fixed Income Risk Management Services managing director David Goldstein calls the partnership “a critical turning point toward greater transparency” into the individual loans that make up the MBS and ABS markets and help restore investor confidence in the securitized loan market.
“The creation of unique loan-level identifiers is an enormous step forward in the process of creating a more transparent information on underlying collateral in securitizations,” commented Tom Deutsch, deputy executive director of the American Securitization Forum.
He expects the Loan ID and its accompanying industry mortgage loan database to build up an infrastructure that will open new grounds in the development of commonly accepted and widely used standards for transparency, due diligence and risk retention.
The effort is part of the ASF Project RESTART, designed to help rebuild investor confidence in the MBS and ABS market and most importantly, restore capital flows to the securitization markets.
Both systems are being developed responding to market needs and in compliance with the ASF Project RESTART disclosure and reporting package guidelines.
The goal is to enable investors to perform ongoing analysis of the underlying collateral and portfolio as well as to monitor loans when they change servicers.
In addition, the Loan ID helps create standardization and consistency in connecting and reporting monthly loan performance data along with data from third-party providers like credit bureaus.
The company stressed that Loan ID is not intended to replace the servicers’ primary loan key, instead it will represent “a consistent piece of data that would not change on a loan as it is moved between entities after the loan has been securitized.”
Other MSN – National Mortgage News Bulletin Story stories.
http://mortgageservicingnews.com/newsletter/stories/?story_id=121
http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=83744
Neil is there anything in this ‘The Impact of the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 on The Civil False Claims Act, that might be of benefit to us?
This is related to usage of TARP funds etc.
Conversion loan
: a short-term loan that covers the need for cash, and is repaid when an asset is sold or a receivable comes due.
Is this the same as 80/20, where a down payment becomes the capital used to advance monthly payment via the servicing entity who ‘floats’ the payments?
Thanks
Pending CA legislation (SB 94 & AB 764) looks like they will effectively prohibit attornies from charging fees to the borrower until after the modification is completed (if it is accepted/completed). How many attornies are going to do that? I don’t think many. They have to pay their mortgage too.
Am I reading these bills correctly?
It seems like the only people that will be able to do loan modifications will be the bastards that got us into these horrible loans in the first place.
Please, your take on this.
Scenario…
1. Wholesale lender originates loan.
2. Wholesale lender sells loan and gets paid in full before first payment is made by borrower. Borrower has statement showing original loan paid in full.
3. New servicer collects payments for first 2 years for new “investor”. (Freddie Mac?)
4. Servicer for first two years is acquired by another “Lender”.
5. New “Lender” does an assignment of mortgage from original wholesale lender (3 years after origination) and claims they now hold the mortgage and the note which they acquired from original wholesale lender. (Who was paid in full shortly after origination).
6. New “lender” files foreclosure action.
7. Motion to Dismiss and Discovery submitted by defendant.
8. The “Pretender Lenders” attorneys objected to nearly all requests for admissions.
9. They did admit to the original loan being securitized.
According to Freddie Macs website
“Does Freddie Mac Own Your Mortgage?”
they hold the mortgage as well.
QUESTIONS
Can both Freddie Mac and the “Pretender Lender” hold the mortgage at the same time?
Does this prove that the “Pretender Lender” is not the real party in interest?
That the mortgage and the note are now separated due to improper assignments?
Can a mortgage be “unsecuritized” to allow a single entity foreclose on it?
Any insight on this by anyone would be appreciated!
Fraud in Florida
Hi Neil,
I have been speaking with a very nice pro se person who attended your workshop in Phoenix the past couple of weeks. He has given me some recommendations but I need more than what he is able to offer me. He really wanted to help me, but he said his skills are basic and he recommended that I hire Foreclosure Defense Group in Ohio to start & finish.
Please Neil, if you know of any attorney that has registered with you, that can practice in Tucson or Arizona, to stop the illegal auction of my property, drop me an e-mail so I can get the help I have been crying for. I have less than 5 weeks. I have been taken financially by two attorney’s and now I am more afraid. Surely, you know someone. I want to stop the sale and prosecute. I have learned from your web site that I am entitled to damages and punitive damages, I am organized and prepared to submit everything to an attorney who can help me, on a very low budget, with a guarantee from me of the maximum by law in recovery.
BROKEN PROMISES “in writing” and verbal.
My situation is based on Foreclosure Auction on September 9, 2009 under building me a house.
1. My contract was with Texas Capital Bank, and they sold it to M&I Marshall and Isley Bank at closing who “did not” honor the written or verbal promises made to me by Texas Capital Bank, who is now Colorado Federal Bank. M&I Marshall and Isley bank bought the loan from Texas Capital Bank, “including” all the written promises that went with it. To this regard, Texas Capital Bank through conspiracy is the one that submitted the first two Draw Request to M&I Marshall and Isley Bank (not me, and this is why I was unaware that the first two draw request were submitted “and” disbursed and pocketed by the contractor without my permission, knowledge or signature), and for work not done or started and
Texas Capital Bank submitted both draw request on the same day in January of 2007. Later, and after submitting the draw request, my name and the date
was either forged or copied and pasted onto the documents, “after the draw request were already submitted”. (easy to prove) The first draw disbursement was January 28, 2007 for work not done, and two months later on April third of 2007, the second draw was disbursed for work not done or started. As far as my knowledge there was not a G702 or G703 ever submitted for any draw.
2. I was asked why I signed the contract, Here are some reasons that “are in writing” from Texas Capital Bank.
BROKEN PROMISES (“in writing”):
(a) I was told by Texas Capital Bank I “did not” have to make “ANY” payments on this construction loan.
(b) I was told by Texas Capital Bank “they” were going to make the payments for this loan until the house was built; the house never passed framing, and framing was already paid for.., in full … by me.
(c) I was promised a minimum of $190,000.00 cash back (to my pocket) “or more” if I want it.., at the end of this loan (12 months), which never reached maturity
because M&I Marshall and Isley bank stopped funding after four draws and without notifying me ahead of time, and notifying me with any valid reasons ahead of time or to this current date, even after they extended the loan to July 1, 2008. To this regard, I had $35,000.00 Interest Reserve Account that continued to get used up even though the bank stopped the progress of my construction.
(d) I was promised a much lower rate.
(e) I was promised my partner was going to get her $50,000.00 advancement back from the bank no later than the end of October 2006, then November 2006, then December 2006, then within the 12 draws, then at the end of the loan, and because only 4 draws were disbursed; This is a total of 8 breaches, and 3 breaches before the first draw was disbursed.
(f) Texas Capital Bank agreed with me and promised to take care of my partner, giving her at least $25,000.00 from the first draw and she only got
$10,000.00 in June or July 9 or 10 months later, and the bank illegally stopped funding after the fourth draw.
(g) After the house is built Texas Capital Bank was going to refinance me a lower loan.
(h) M&I Marshall and Isley Bank extended the loan under false pretenses and misrepresentation and deliberately with intent, knowing ahead of time they
were not going to fulfill or honor the extension and deliberately leading me into believing they were going to honor the draw disbursements and give me a house to live in. The draw disbursements never continued after the fourth draw. My contract says I will be living in my house by January 1, 2008. (Breach
within Lender Liability, and Good Faith)
(i) I was promised the loan would close no later than October, then November 2006 (at most). It didn’t close until the end of December 2006.
(j) I was promised a reimbursement of $40,000.00 for putting in the well, I was only reimbursed $10,000.00 in February 2007.
(k) Texas Capital Bank, and the General Contractor were fully aware of my partner and me being victimized by the two previous contractors, who took us for over $400,000.00. To Texas Capital Bank and the G.C., we were easy prey, because our vulnerabilities’ became obvious and desperate for a house to live in, a studio to write in, and a recreation room to teach dance in. A
friendship type trusting bond with several believable and verbal and written promises became the order of the day, and was created by Texas Capital Bank and
the General Contractor, who conspired together, deceiving us so that we could finally trust someone and we were promised they would take care of us, and all of our concerns. To this regard, after I signed the contract, Texas Capital Bank, the General Contractor, and M&I Marshall and Isley Bank conspired together and all three ignored us completely, and ignored all of our demands, our previous attorney’s demands and breached “ALL” promises.
3. Reasons I signed the contract that are not in writing:
(a) I was promised two houses and sale off the second one and be mortgage free. To this regard, through e-mails (I think) this may be in writing by both Texas Capital Bank and the general contractor.
(b) I was told this is my only opportunity to ever finish building my framed house.
(c) I was told I was stupid if I didn’t do this because it is my only way to get a house, a dance studio, and a writing studio, and be mortgage free.
4. The missing contract that I signed and agreed to with Texas Capital Bank is for $250,000.00 after framing and 7.6% fixed and I was promised a copy but never got one. (I can’t prove this).
5. I ended up with several documents or contracts.
(a) one for 9.75 %
(b) one for 10.%
(c) one for 15%
(d) one for 17%.
6. The loan (I think) I ended up with is $500,000.00 but at closing Texas Capital Bank sold my loan to M&I Marshall and Isley Bank for what we believe is between $200,000.00 and $400,000.00. M&I Marshall and Isley bank added their purchase price to the existing contract and that’s why my loan turned out to be over $980,000.00. I did not know this until NOW. August 2, 2009. The most I could ever pay in mortgage would be $600.00 a month, and they set me up to
$6,000.00 a month. My contract says 12 draws, max. one a month, move in by January 1, 2008. Each of the four draws were separated by 2 months, making it
impossible to finish the house. The contractor never showed up to work until June of 2007, 5 months after the bank started paying him and he collected 3 of the four draws before starting. The last draw was in July before the bank abandoned the disbursements.
Note:
(a) The contract admits in writing my income is $1.00 a month, $12.00 a year. This supports predatory lending.
(b) My Tax Returns for 2003, 2004, 2005 each show my income as a negative. This supports predatory lending.
(c) The appraisal was fraudulently increased with items that do not and will not exist and comparisons that were doubled and tripled. The true value of my property after my “two” bedroom house was to be built would be between $300,000.00 and $400,000.00 not one or two million dollars as stated on the contract. To this regard I am on 5 acres in a mobile home neighborhood. The most anything sells out here at the time was well under $175,000.00.
(d) Texas Capital Bank and the General Contractor made us gather up all of our receipts, and they “did not” use the correct or real amounts.., on the cost breakdown. In some cases they added over $100,000.00 to receipts, in some cases they added items that did not exist as pre-paid items. They charged $5,000.00 for a $99.00 bath tub. $10,000.00 for two fire place boxes that cost under $500.00. They paid out $8,400.00 as 100% profit on the same line item taxes/ins. To this regard, the contractor had our $50,000.00 to use for that.
When my previous attorney demanded to know why they paid for items that did not exist, was not built, and was already paid for by us before the loan, the bank came back with a stupid answer, that did not relate to our complaint. The Bank said, they are not responsible for any defects. What does that have to do with my attorney’s demand of advancing all disbursed funds for work not done, or started? Neil, I am not educated to do this or to become pro se. Number one, I am very slow mentally, and I can’t help it. My partner has been an accountant for over 40 years, she told me last night even a pro can not figure out all the documents and their contradicting figures.
What I learned from the guy who went to your seminar is; “Less is More when filing with the courts”. I cut out all of my commentary and stuck with Facts of Events and my list of allegations is well into the 50’s. My complaint is over 150 pages of facts, written like this page. This guy read my complaint and told me, I have gotten it very detailed complex, and the courts are going to have to wade through the forest. My list of demands of documentation is well over 200 items that I (by Law) am entitled to see. Which I know the bank cannot produce even a quarter of my demands.
Neil, I am told by one attorney, I need a construction attorney, when I find one, they say I need a civil litigation attorney, then I am told I need a consumer attorney, after spending thousands of dollars, I keep getting sent to different types of attorney’s. I’ve been sent to bankruptcy attorney’s.
I am so mentally disabled and incompetent to my situation I hope I can finally get some help from you.
What kind of an attorney do I need for my situation and can you find me one, please?
I live in Vail, Arizona, S.E. of Tucson.
drdance@dakotacom.net
Hello. I purchased your workbook and think that it is tremendous. I am using your Qualified Written Requests to attempt to obtain information to leverage against several lenders. I have close to 100 clients in the Chicagoland area with Countrywide/ B of A. B of A started by responding with a small portion of the clients closing package, and now they are sending us letters stating that our QWR is overbroad and that the information that we are requesting is not available under RESPA. I am getting ready to bring suit against them for violating RESPA, but I have heard some of these cases are being thrown out as frivolous. Does anyone have any expereince recenetly with this type of action? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Michael E. Fleck
Meanwhile we must be content to use the opinions written from the trial benches in bankruptcy court, federal civil court and state court.
Federal Civil and State Courts?
admin@borrowerhotline.com
http://www.isda.org/ – The International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA) is a trade organization of participants in the market for over-the-counter derivatives.
Can we file some kind of legal instrument to mandate them to disclosed if the mortgage company who “holds/owns” our mortgages received insurance for our foreclosed mortgage ?
Also, if a servicer/bank does not hold the note and files a foreclosure, aren’t they liable ? They are not the legal person to start the foreclosure. After my husband received the summons, ALL of his credit cards interest rates went to the roof and this started a major financial problem in his life.
John George: You hit the nail on the head. The pretender lenders are getting the homes and the proceeds probably as hush money so they won’t roll over on the titans who came up with this scheme. Once in court they do everything possible to wear down the opposition, but failing that, they stipulate to something that the client can’t refuse because it removes the risk of that particular foreclosure or collection. No appeal on a stipulation. Appeals from interlocutory orders usually fail for a variety of reasons. The only chance we have of getting an early appellate decision that will affect all the foreclosures nationwide is if someone actually gets turned down on a temporary retraining order directed against a forcible detainer, eviction or sale, THEN the urgency of the matter will be assumed and MAYBE the appellate court will hear it. Seems to me that by this time, many appellate judges are waiting for one of these cases to be presented on the merits. Meanwhile we must be content to use the opinions written from the trial benches in bankruptcy court, federal civil court and state court.
Neil:
Love the website!
It seems to me that the attorneys that “get it” are anxiously awaiting for that special “on all fours” case to wind itself through the Courts in order to show that the use of these “new” defenses of mortgage foreclosure is not smoke and mirrors, but, rather, a continuation of basic procedural and ethical law.
I submit that, in order to speed the acceptance of these defenses, Lawyers, as Court Officers, must act as such.
Too many Judges don’t get it. For too many obtuse reasons, they dismiss the otherwise notable case in favor of the fraudulent lender’s attorney. But, that’s ok – the Judges don’t get it! I submit that it is up to our Court Officers that do get it to do something about educating the judiciuary.
From what I have gathered, the Lawyers need to open the Judge’s eyes in their own Courtroom to the fraud that is being milled by the Lender’s attorney. Lawyers are duty bound to know what their ethical requirements are in litigation – and that certainly does not include allowing and/or commiting fraud.
The current and primary example is the Affidavit for the missing/lost/unavailable/misplaced/nevertobefound Note. The foreclosure mills pumping these sham pleadings out should be ashamed of themselves. I look to the NY Bankruptcy Judge with her 58 page decision and the Massachusetts Court with its sanctions against these ilks – and, well, frankly, it pisses me off that the lenders’ attorneys are processors, not Court Officers – and they don’t seem to care.
If the action being adjudicated was a slip and fall and plaintiff’s attorney produced (finally) a picture of the scene of the tumble, but the picture wasn’t accurate, blurry, non-authenticated and a stunt double was used – or – the prosecutor shows a drawing of the murder weapon – because the original weapon is unavailable; promised to be available by some future date (and we’ll post bond if anybody is harmed by its effect); non-certified; non-authenticated; and on the wrong “body” (or property – trust me, it’s happened), how loud and fast would the Judiciary cry foul?
There’s no difference here. The Homeowner’s Lawyers need to point fingers at the other side in front of the Judge and cry foul as loud and as ringing as neccessary to get the Judges’ attention to the fraud in their Courtrooom.
There are, after all, ethics to be adhered to and strived towards.
Neil–could you provide a couple examples of ‘basis’ for filing a complaint against a lender who is in Chpt. 11 BKR. I’d need to file an adversary proceeding.
I just need to be pointed in the right direction for ‘basis’ recognized by BKR law.
This is against the pretender lender New Century Mortgage. I have a document which shows at the exact moment of closing it was Deutsche Bank who wired the money and gave escrow instructions (written) that Deutsche Bank now owns the security interest in the note & deed. Then 11 days later, using an MLSA (mortgage sale and servicing agreement) New Century then sold the note and deed to Chase.
This might even be a ‘double sale’ by New Century. In addition there was fraud, predatory lending , bait and switch from get go.
I just need a couple pointers on how to file the adversary proceeding. I am pro se
Thanks
Neil -can you please comment on UETA Uniform Electronic Transaction Act. Also the Electronic Signature in Global & National Commerce Act (e-sign)
and how these might be used in Homeowners’ defenses? This discusses mortgage recordings, foreclosures etc.
Here is my starting site for reading–
Oklahoma College of Law
http://www.okjolt.org/articles/2009okjoltrev44.cfm
Here is a list of pending class action lawsuits relating to home loans. I hope this helps.
http://www.classadvocate.com/?direct=y&category=product&product_root%5B%5D=110
Hello Neil
I NEED AN ATTORNEY IN THE POCONO AREA, PENNSYLVANIA WHO KNOW STRATEGIES TO WIN IN THE BANKRUPTCY COURT.
Wells Fargo was granted a relief of stay and I presented the Judge with all the documents showing that they did not own the note and mortgage and did not have standing. He basically, said that I need an attorney. They have senT a new writ and a sale date for September 16, 2009.
I have used strategies from your website and I have been able to stay in my home. I need help with this new writ. I did a qualified written request, but they responsed with the COPY of the mortgage and note which of course had the original Lender. The complaint was filed before they received the assignment and the judgment was granted before the assignment was received and recorded.
I have a forensic audit report as well. I provided the QWR and Audit Report to the Bankruptcy Judge, but he said there was a threshold issue and now that it is back in state court, I should pursue it there. Mind you, I did all that in the state court before I filed bankruptcy, but the Judge denied me.
I know I can WIN, but as the Bankruptcy Judge told me today, “I know where you’re going with this, but you are in the wrong direction” I filed a motion for reconsideration and that is not what I should have filed. Motion I should file was not, because I don’t know exactly what should be done. He said it was not too late to do so.
I also want to know if the lender has been sent a QWR/DEMAND FOR VALIDATION OF DEBT via certified service and they respond but states that they already had a default judgment and the request is inappropriate and therefore, only the copy of the note and mortgage is being provided and this completes the QWR, what do I do next. The QWR is the one from this website.
A copy of the Demand for validation of debt is filed in the courthouse and a notice to produce the documents as well, but they never did produce the questions part of the QWR.
Please respond. I need an attorney in the Pocono area of Pennsylvania.
Thank you.
Alice
I need a lawyer in (fairfax) Virginia to assist represent client there.
Who asked . . . .
What’s an Indemnity Agreement?? (Indemnity agreements are worded in such a way that they protect one party against future lawsuits, losses and claims for something another party did)
Try, what you really mean is “What is an estoppel. .. .by Latches, by Representation, by Election, by Contract, by Collateral…….Estoppels!
MSoliman /
Mortgagelies (2008 domain)
msoliman@borrowerhotline.com
Disclaimer – I am not an attorney….I just hired them (in days long gone) to carry out my plan and objectives!
Search in ScribD for MLSA.
There is the acutal Mortgage Loan Sale and Servicing Agreement between New Century Mortgage and Chase from 2006.
Are attorneys in California having success putting an end to foreclosure with your methods, and fully reconvying the note? And does your workshop show them how to end foreclosure if the client out of the 3 year TILA window?
“Abby, read Civil Code 2924 and 47. The recording of documents on behalf of the lender is absolutely privileged. Dismiss now or face serious monetary penalties.” this is from an opposing attorney in my California complaint. He is defending a title company involved in my wrongful foreclosure. ATTORNEYS—how should I respond to his threat? ATTORNEY guidance needed here Please.
NG:
I made reference to an “evidentiary hearing” . . . my mistake this early in a case. Possible sanctions. I not counsel was responding to the defendants unwillingness to extend a deadline to amend.
My comments were third person to our attorneys “cc” email. Anyway, I am thinking “evidentiary” under SarBox Correct? Do agree. Strongly!
Mortgagelies
msoliman@borrowerhotline.com
Neil et al
Now I have an interesting situation again.
I have all 3 major bank players, who became involved with my mortgage after pretender lender New Century Mortgage flipped my loan immediately at closing, being represented by one major law firm in California.
JP Morgan Chase, U.S. Bank, N.A. and now I have been informed today that Deutsche Bank (fka Bankers Trust) are all using the same legal firm.
They mentioned that Deutsche had an ‘indemnity’ agreement with I believe it was Chase.
What’s an Indemnity Agreement??
Indemnity agreements are worded in such a way that they protect one party against future lawsuits, losses and claims for something another party did, or neglected to do. By signing the indemnity agreement one party would agree to pay all judgments, fines or penalties that were made against the other party. Indemnification may work by either reimbursement or through direct compensation to the liable party.
Neil or other attorney’s–I suppose this means that
I could not collect damages from Deutsche due to the indemnity agreement, which I had absolutely no prior knowledge of…since it was between two large banking entities.
Deutsche Bank/Bankers Trust was actually the one who wired the money for closing…directly into the escrow account. This was never disclosed to me. I only knew from the paperwork that New Century Mortgage was the lender!!
I assume I must keep Deutsche named as a separate defendant in my complaint.
It appears there are lots of undisclosed agreements between these banks involving our mortgages.
Any words of advice, now that I am dealing with 3 at one firm?
Help!!!
I am illegally being foreclosed on. Is there anyone in Tucson, Arizona that can help me save my property, and my life? M&I Bank is illegally auctioning off my land September 9, 2009.
Bryan jay Ramsey
drdance@dakotacom.net
520-762-1348 or 520-339-9553
I realized everything happening in my situation has been posted on this site! I plan to assert that the ‘lender’ – by prostituting my loan on wall street – has so encumbered my loan that it is impossible to reinstate, (Promissory estoppel?) and because there are at least 2 known interlopers exerting their “rights” over mine, and also interfered with me & my ‘lender’, the deed agreement has been breached without remedy, all to my detriment.
I don’t think it’s as easy as sending a certified letter to my ‘lender’ who ironically has sought protection of chapter 11, and is now fighting over rights to certain deposits in adversary proceedings at this moment. In fact, the security certificate series my loan supposedly is sitting in has been listed as an asset.
An unliquidated asset, that is. The Trustee who brought motion to lift stay in my Ch13 is a trustee of a Trust for that security certificate, and filed a notice of assignment 2 months after assigning a Substitute trustee who filed the NOD.. I suspect this Trustee lacks authority to act, and will ask for trust certification outlining the trustees responsibilities.
The ’servicer’ who ‘acquired certain assets and deposits’ from a failed bank (my ‘lender’) while my loan was a ‘nonperforming’ loan – filed a claim as my creditor, in CH 13, later joined the motion to lift stay as a ’servicer’. Although this ’servicer’ never serviced nor processed one single transaction, is acting as if it has authority to act as one. .
Interestingly enough, there was a public notice in LA that due to a Florida court ruling, MERS advised that all loans should be assigned to a real person, which occurred on or about 1/9/09- the date that this servicer wrote on assignment to a beneficiary interest – back to the same Trustee that had already been “assigned” this back in Aug 2008!. They are circumventing the chain of title, which is very possible considering the way MERS operates.
I searched my property address on MERSonline.com and found 8 ’servicers’ for this address. Interlopers.
I agree! Interesting… this as we completed an assignment and now wait this morning for word as counsel is trying to set aside writ of possession counting down 5 days in remainder. A lot at stake and stressful.
The whole thing is a mess at this time and so stressful – I admire your patience. It feels less rewarding than ever. Can’t trust the press. People are uninformed and panic stricken! They don’t know what to expect or who to believe anymore. [I know our mutual contributor is very upset - its just a strange way to vent - it has set me back months].
Call if possible regarding big break here (very compelling stuff….material violations are finally beng documented). It’s a significant breakthrough I want to share with you before publishing….I do think this is it Neil.
Maybe we connect in AZ (next)? Call me! MSoliman admin@borrowerhotline.com
MSOlimon: I AM CONSIDERING THIS AND OTHER SIMILAR STRATEGIES RIGHT NOW. It is interesting to note that the class action lawyers are getting TRO’s without bond, without payment and no foreclosures during the pendency of the litigation. The pretender lenders are willing to do or agree to anything to stay out of an evidentiary hearing.
Foreclosures stymie efforts to revive Economy
foreclosurewebpage.com
Attorneys-what can I file to counter this?
What do with the fact that attorney’s for Cal-Western Reconveyance Corp filed ‘Defendant Declaration of Non-Monetary Status) in Fraud complaint. They are using California Civil Code 29241. They are named as trustee in Deed of Trust. They claim they did their job correctly as a Trustee.
I claim they did not. Irregular recordings and even the Substitution of Trustee was done by a bank that did not yet have the right to subsitute anything.
Backdating on recorded documents.
Attorneys–what can I file to counter this?
Thx
I am a pro se plaintiff in a quiet title action against my mortgage company. The defendants (mortgage company) made a MOTION to DISMISS and MOTION to STRIKE comments in my complaint. I first filed in CA state court and they removed it to Federal court. I sent a Motion to REMAND this cas back to state court. Contained in this motion was ALL documentary evidence of this Predatory Loan. Days later, The judge Ordered the hearings for the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike to be VACATED. Is this a good thing?
James,
Thanks;
Judge noted where the claims made in the complaint lacked merit regarding a fiduciary in California. Attorneys for defense were scolded for not picking it up. For plaintiff, I disagreed;
Absent special circumstances, the relationship between a lender and a borrower is merely that of a creditor-debtor, not that of a fiduciary.
However, in certain situations, courts have implicitly recognized imposing fiduciary duties on lenders based on policy grounds. For instance, a lender may be considered a fiduciary when it “takes control” of the borrower, or when “moral, social, personal, or domestic” relationships are shown to exist between the parties. (Cases cited in American Bar Association – Business Tort Litigation (2d Ed.))
Further, when the lender undertakes to perform a task on behalf of the borrower, then it is likely that the lender has made itself a fiduciary for the borrower, based on the law of agency. (Id.)
Motion to dismiss was submitted to by Pro Per and Counsel (just brought in ) and entered with stipulation for counsel to be allowed the right to respond and amend within 10 days.
What’s logical here is the response to their motion, as I understand, it is a chance to amend the complaint anyway. You see the “pro per” took it as far as possible and probably saved a lot to that point (all procedural). But now they needed to bring in the lawyer (who retained us) to enter the case.
What’s also interesting is where the Judge admonished the opposition for failing to recognize the need to strike a specific Plaintiff “cause of action” which cites the lenders duty in not a fiduciary when settling the contract. The court reminded the parties that there is no standing for a fiduciary to fulfill any obligation in the origination and settlement of the loan.
Counsel looked back at me . . . . Follows with – “that’s fine your honor”.
I reminded counsel afterward that the fiduciary’s argument may be sustained in a settlement (origination) if in fact the claim and request for relief cites where a lender in a fiduciary role actedwith malice and or deceptively negotiated terms and withheld from the party information that is cause for breach claim.
Therefore; “Plaintiff alleges defendant’s breach of contract arises in a fiduciary role to actually and proximately cause defendant to no longer be able to make the payments under the contract.
Garfield’s comments here sorely needed before anyone considers acting on this.
MSoliman
msoliman@borrowerhotline.com
Disclaimer – I am an expert witness for the record in matters of a wrongful foreclosure claim and comments are soley made from a scholarly perspective. I am not a lawyer and neither I nor anyone else other than a licensed practitioner can otherwise represent themselves to act as Lawyer. Only a practitioner licensed by the bar and in the state can act as counsel and practice law.
MSoliman.
You said you had a hearing in court on Friday. What happened? Good News I Hope!
This is how pretender lenders secure property interest rights, and usurp ownership and priority rights- by satisfying both county and federal tax ‘liens’. The special vehicles and trusts need ‘charity trust’ standing by prepaying your taxes, liability set-offs, and exemptions for the life of the “loan.”
Californians must claim or request review of property from Co Assessors website and state Controller to investigate which ‘entity’ has status as beneficiary ownership/interest priority rights.
Deadline is July 2 2009.
Thanks for all information on this website.
MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATIONS AND COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS (You be the Judge)
—-10K filings and prospectus offering information—-
Individually Evaluated Loans – On a regular basis, we (Countrywide) individually evaluate loans in our warehouse lending portfolio for impairment based on borrower-provided financial information and our assessments of collateral. STOP – IF YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW TO READ INTO THIS LIVING LIE YOU ARE AT A COMPLETE DISADVANTAGE. (Some clients get it and file an action unique and to a courts interest. ….others call it gibberish and write bad press about me LOL) CONTINUE -
We [Countrywide] have an internally-developed loan rating system for our “warehouse lending loans” that is used to determine when an allowance for loan loss is required for a given loan. STOP – THIS IS ANOTHER LIVING LIE
We [Countrywide] offset (OUCH!) losses in individually evaluated loans when the loss is confirmed. The charge-off is based on our estimate of value of the collateral securing the loan. We develop an allowance for losses on warehouse lending loans for which specific losses have not been identified. This allowance is developed by applying credit loss factors applicable to the individual loan’s assigned ratings.
THIS IS A MATERIAL JOKE! Sensitivity of Estimates-Our allowance estimation process benefits from the extensive history and experience we have developed in our mortgage loan servicing activities. However, this process is subject to risks and uncertainties, including reliance on historical loss information that may not represent current conditions and the proper identification of factors giving rise to credit losses.
MATERIAL – example, new products may have default rates and loss severities which differ from those products we have historically offered and upon which our estimates are based. We address this risk by actively monitoring the delinquency and default experience of our homogenous pools by considering current economic and market conditions. Based on our assessments of current conditions, we make appropriate adjustments to our historically developed assumptions when necessary to adjust historical factors to account for present conditions.
Colleagues – your comments
msoliman
http://WWW.FORCLOSUREINFOSEARCH.COM
“Taquihi v HSBC Financial Services et al.”
We have a hearing in about an hour for “Taquihi v HSBC Financial Services et al.” California Superior courthouse, Orange Country . I will testify briefly in the matter and against the motion to dismiss the case by the defendants.
The defendants have already made two “less than ” meaningful offers to the Plaintiff and ask her to drop the case and accept settlement with prejudice (for the matter).
Should be interesting as this smörgåsbord of credit cards, commercial loans and single family debt gets all rolled up into a security.
Wish her luck and stay tuned. Defendants Counsel Karl Kop. MSoliman
need attorney in Phoenix Arizona–to stop trustee sale–Linda
I was not able to attend your seminar in Orlando, I will purchase your workbook.
I have foreclosure cases in Austin TX and San Diego CA, do you have lawyers you can recommend to refer cases to.
Robert Brooks, Esq.
Good news for more change.
California Superior Court
County of Los Angeles, CA
New York Bank v. Defendant
Judgment in favor of the Defendant for lack of contact and bad faith adherence to California Amended Civil Code 2923.5. Judge cites the plaintiff’s inability to communicate alternatives for a meaningful workout prior to foreclosure for 30 day period prior to notice.
Lender is listed as the successors and assigns yet never attempted to offer a workout solution or even make contact. See FAS 140 for contributions of assets abd what quantifies a true sale.
$83 Million in Lobbying
One reason lawyers are turning on one another and one off horror stories of fraudulant homeowner assistance. Last report, over 10 groups representing the lending industry and other businesses are fighting back fiercely against the efforts found in places such as herein.
Several have engaged portions of their lobbying machines to stop the legislation. The groups spent $83 million in lobbying on multiple issues in 2008, a figure that shows the power of the banking and investing industry and their business supporters.
One Democratic backer of the bankruptcy proposal, Rep. Maxine Waters of California, said the banking industry “has owned this Congress far too long.”
msoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
I realize this is a few months old, but thought it was a good piece on Predatory Lending, this is exactly what. World Savings was making loans just like the ones that WAMU did to me.
This is the link to the actual report that was on 60 min and below it is the report in writing: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4803928n#ccmm
WORLD OF TROUBLE (CBS) How did the mortgage industry destroy itself and set off an economic collapse that ruined the finances of millions of Americans? Executives tend to hold themselves blameless, saying that no one could have seen the disaster coming.
Well, judge for yourself after you hear the story of Paul Bishop, who worked at the nation’s second largest savings and loan. World Savings Bank was among the industry’s most admired mortgage lenders. But Bishop says the kind of lending practices he saw were leading to a world of trouble that would ultimately result in billions in losses and a federal investigation.
What does Paul Bishop say he told executives at World Savings, three years before the crash?
“We’re breaking the law, okay? We’re breaking the law. You know we’re breaking the law. I know we’re breaking the law. What the hell do you think is going on here? You know, you’re granting too many people loans who simply can’t qualify,” Bishop told 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley.
Bishop’s story is a rare inside look at forces that tore the economy apart, as seen by a plain-spoken loan salesman who is now suing World Savings, claiming that he was fired for telling executives what they didn’t want to hear.
“I definitely talked to him about Enron. I said, ‘We’re sitting on an Enron.’ This is…bigger than Enron. I mean, we’re doing four billion a month in loans. If housing drops, housing value drops, people start to default, you know? This is a nightmare. These people will not survive it,” Bishop told Pelley.
Bishop was a mortgage salesman at World Savings San Francisco Loan Origination Center. He’d been a top salesman at IBM and spent years as a stock broker. Most everywhere he went, he had a reputation for speaking his mind and ruffling feathers. He joined World in 2002, in part, because of its history.
Bishop says the owners were Herb and Marion Sandler.
“And their reputation at the time was what?” Pelley asked.
“It was flawless, near as I could tell,” Bishop said.
In fact, Herb and Marion Sandler were legendary. In 1963, they started Golden West Financial and grew to 285 branches under the name World Savings. The Sandlers’ were known for careful, conservative lending. They’ve given away millions of dollars to charity and started an advocacy group for low income borrowers called the Center for Responsible Lending.
In 2006, just before the housing crash, the Sandlers sold their bank to Wachovia and pocketed $2.3 billion.
Trouble is, some of their money came from people like Betty Townes, who is financially ruined after being sold a series of World Savings mortgages she couldn’t afford.
Asked how many times she refinanced, Townes said, “Well we refinanced practically every year.”
World salesmen convinced Betty to refinance her mortgage four times in four years. She got about $20,000 each time. “Well, all I know that they told me this loan was best for me,” she told Pelley.
But how could it be best when Betty’s pension couldn’t qualify her for the loans?
“They told me that they would go by my husband’s payroll,” she said.
“Even though he’d been laid off from the shipyard?” Pelley asked.
“No, he’d passed away,” Townes replied.
Her husband, Ronnie Townes, was dead. World Savings noted that in her papers. But his former income was used to qualify Betty.
Maeve-Elyse Brown, a lawyer for a non-profit group working to save homeowners from foreclosure, says Betty Townes’ actual income was about $1,875, but that the income written on her loan application was over $4,000.
Asked who did that, Brown told Pelley, “The interviewer that’s listed is a staff person for World, for World Savings, according to the loan documents.”
“What does that tell you?” Pelley asked.
“Looks like whoever typed up this document put in the number that they thought was the right number to get the loan approved,” Brown said.
“The term was ‘packaged.’ It had to be packaged correctly when it got to the underwriter,” Bishop told Pelley.
Bishop says a story like Betty’s was common at his former office.
He says facts were manipulated on some loan documents to get past company underwriters who approved the loans. “You know, let’s not say this. Let’s delete these items that they’re probably not gonna check on. Let’s add this. Let’s just move it around.”
“Packaging the loan meant modifying [the loan]…to make sure it would pass the underwriters’ inspection?” Pelley asked.
“Correct. It was one grand wink-wink, nod-nod,” Bishop said.
One person you won’t see in this story is Herb Sandler. For months, 60 Minutes invited him to sit down for an interview. But instead, he sent these letters. He says it is “categorically false to suggest that we trained or permitted employees to falsify a borrower’s income.” Sander called it “totally unacceptable in our culture.”
Read Herb Sandler’s first letter and his second letter to 60 Minutes.
But Paul Bishop says he watched the bank famous for quality begin to emphasize quantity. World relied on outside mortgage brokers to bring in 60 percent of its customers. The more loans that were approved, the more the brokers, and World Savings, made in fees.
“We would have these instant underwriting events in an office where we would assemble five underwriters right there,” Bishop told Pelley.
Asked how many loans would be covered in a single day, Bishop said, “80, 90, we would keep track of it. 80, 90, 100 would be reviewed, yeah. Oh, yeah.”
By 2005, 38% of World’s clients had subprime credit scores. And customers were shown fliers that told them their income would not be checked by the bank.
“So I don’t really need to know what you make. I don’t need proof. You tell me you make $200,000 a year? You make $200,000 a year,” Bishop said.
“No verification?” Pelley asked.
“Not gonna check,” Bishop replied.
Herb Sandler told 60 Minutes if there was no income verification, the bank still checked credit reports and appraisals. But 60 Minutes spoke to two former World salesmen and a former executive who made similar allegations to Bishop’s. One said, “It was all about volume, quantity over quality.”
To understand what was happening in the mortgage industry, 60 Minutes went to Bob Simpson, whose company, IMARC, investigates failed mortgages.
“When one lender dropped standards, another lender felt that they had to do the same,” Simpson told Pelley.
Simpson says World and other lenders were in a ruinous competition for customers. “There are people inside of every institution that have been screaming for years about these terrible loans. Don’t fund these. These are horrible loans. And they were routinely ignored inside of their own institutions.”
Asked why they were ignored, Simpson said, “Because there’s no money in common sense. There’s no money in stopping a loan. There’s only a payday when that loan closes.”
The loan World was selling was potentially risky. It’s called an option ARM, but at World it went by the cheerful name “Pick-A-Payment.” The monthly statement offered four different payment amounts that the homeowner could actually choose from. But, the lowest payment didn’t even cover the interest on the loan. Deferred interest would add up month after month, leaving the homeowner farther and farther behind.
That’s what happened to Betty Townes. World sold her four Pick-A-Payment loans, racking up $40,000 in fees and deferred interest for the bank. Now her full payment is larger than her monthly income.
“Hard to think of Betty without a home,” Pelley noted.
“It’s horrifying to think of her without a home. It’s just unacceptable,” Maeve-Elyse Brown said.
And she’s not alone. Between 2003 and 2006, the total amount of deferred interest from World borrowers, choosing that lowest payment, jumped from $21 million to $1.2 billion.
“That’s the borrower saying to you ‘I can’t make my payment’ or ‘I’m not making my payment.’ Now that was increasing at $100-million a month,” Bishop said.
And that, he says, is when he began complaining to his bosses. “And basically it was characterized as, ‘Look, you’re a malcontent. I mean, you’re not happy here. You don’t like it here. You don’t like the way we do business here.’ I said, ‘You know, it’s all true. You know, it’s all true. But, you know, you can’t continue to do this.’”
Then in the summer of 2005, Bishop saw an article in the Wall Street Journal which Herb Sandler boasted about the soundness of the bank’s loans.
Bishop told Pelley he complained, saying to a senior manager: “I think we have crossed the line. And there’s no question in my mind that the chairman of the board, the founder of this bank, has no clue what’s going on. Or he’s indicating that in the press.”
“Did you use the term ‘predatory lending’ with him?” Pelley asked.
“I’m sure I did. ‘Fraud’ for sure I used,” Bishop said.
“And he said what?” Pelley asked.
“He said, ‘Well, you know, I’m not aware of that,’” Bishop replied.
After that, Bishop got into a heated argument with a fellow employee and the bank threatened to fire him. He says it was retaliation for his complaints. So he talked to Tim Wilson, the corporate head of sales.
Bishop says he told Wilson: “’This is somebody’s home. This is a home they can’t afford. Okay? We are complicit in this, okay? You’re granting too many people loans who simply can’t qualify.’ He said, ‘I don’t have any instance of that.’ I said, ‘Come down to Vicente Street. Pull 100 loans, any 100…down at my office.’ I said, ‘I don’t have the ability to do that or I’d do it. Come down to the office. Pull 100 loans. You’re gonna be stunned at what you see.’”
Asked if Wilson did that, Bishop said “No.”
Wilson did write a memo about their conversation, saying Bishop could not point to “any specific examples of employees or loans that do not conform to company policy” and he noted that “random audits are done weekly all over the country.”
n his letter to 60 Minutes, former bank owner Herb Sandler said there are hundreds of former World employees who would “dispute Mr. Bishop’s claims and speak to the company’s focus on quality lending.” He makes a point of saying his bank kept its loans on its own books rather than selling the risk to Wall Street, which “created a strong incentive to ensure that our loans were based on sound underwriting.” Still, since the market collapsed, World’s portfolio has lost billions.
Bob Simpson asks, “What, in a managerial sense, failed? Your leaders either knew those loans were terrible, or they didn’t know. And either answer is bad for World Savings.”
“And when the Sandlers say ‘We didn’t know?’” Pelley asked.
“Shame on them. They should have,” Simpson replied.
“What went wrong?” Pelley asked Bishop.
“Well we ran out of borrowers,” he replied. “Everybody that could qualify, anybody that could fog a mirror, anybody that could just breathe, you know, and qualify at any level had basically been refinanced once, twice, three, sometimes four times.”
Herb Sandler told 60 Minutes World approved only about 60% of its applications. He says his “high quality loans” wouldn’t have failed “had the economic crisis not caused…housing prices to drop by 50%.”
In May 2006, before the housing crash, Sandler announced he was selling World to Wachovia for $25 billion.
For Bishop it was the last straw. He says he told a manager he planned to warn Wachovia and days later, he was fired. Bishop says a lawyer told him to think twice before getting in the way of the merger.
“Did anyone at World ever specify why you were fired?” Pelley asked.
“To this day they have not,” Bishop said.
Asked why he thinks he was fired, Bishop said, “I think I was right in the middle of $25 and a half billion dollars.”
“Did you call Wachovia?” Pelley asked.
“I did not,” Bishop said.
Asked if he regrets not making that call, Bishop said, “I’ll always regret it. I’ll always regret it.”
The losses from the Pick-A-Payment portfolio are now estimated at $36 billion. Wachovia was so badly wounded, it was acquired by Wells Fargo with the help of a taxpayer bailout.
“We have talked to some former executives of the bank who tell us that they listened to your complaints, they investigated your complaints, and they found that there was nothing to them,” Pelley told Bishop.
“Are they employed today?” Bishop asked.
“No,” Pelley said.
“Surprise. They lost their job. The bank went bust. They took down the fourth largest bank in the country with them. But there was no problem,” Bishop replied.
Kevin Benjamin and I attended your Orlando one-day foreclosure defense event and were told we would be added to your list of attorneys. We are a bankruptcy, foreclosure defense, consumer debt advocate firm in business for 20 years now.
We are located in Chicag:
Benjamin Legal Services, PLC
The John Hancock Center
875 N. Michigan Ave. Ste. 3100
Chicago, IL 60611
Licensed: IL, FL and WI
312-853-3100
Thank you
Defeat doesn’t finish a man, Quit does!
A man is not finished when he’s defeated. He’s finished when he quits.
Richard M. Nixon
sos Save home sheriff sale lock out. qualified buyer to buy home for me and have option to purchase for my family!!! call me today 732-761-1492
Need attorney honest, in monmouth country, NJ. Sheriff sale eviction 5/21/09. I have a qualified buyer to purchase home -short sale from bank need time negiotate sale. S.O. S
Please call me at 732-761-1492
Neil
I agree with your comments as do the lawyers who engage me.
Everyone should be careful about whom they do business with. Even the lawyers on our list that are “Lawyers Who Get It” should be carefully interviewed. The loan mod companies and others use this site as a source for leads. They look at a comment and then contact you. If they say they are working with me or livinglies (a) they probably are not and (b) you should check.
Unless we NLS or attorneys have an existing relationship we wil NEVER contact someone on you site. This is SPAM and violates the integrity of your site.
A recent malicious inquiry into our services has caused more havoc and mayhem than one could ever imagine. The collective threats under “color” are subject to an ongoing investigation with Federal and State authorities (now as we speak).
Cyber terrorism is a waste of time, destructive and an omnipotent means for terrorizing a business and its clients.
MSoliman
NLS
to Counsel,
The matter of material noncompliance sets up a classic “clandestine” effort and torturous act that is committed by the servicer and presumes the lenders involvement as both are typically owned in combination and share the same holding entity.
If in fact the true the opportunity calls for allowing the borrower to wrongfully appear current solely to avoid a lenders call to recourse which violates FAS140.
My discussions with attorneys for the insurers (MI ) tell me they are unaware of these events. They claim it could never happen if the lender did not involve a formal forbearance agreement.
They agreed the act is deceptive and appears intended to defraud the insurers at the borrowers expense for a meaningful and reasonable workout.
It would greatly impair the borrowers ability to deal direct with the original lender who is obligated to cooperate with the borrower under normal “repurchase” requirements and both state and federal mandates. The “booty” or maximum pay-off is available to the lender at trustee sale as much as 12 months after “investing” an amount equal to each months payments on behalf of the borrower.
This occurs whereby the lender is made entitled to receive an insurers payout to offset the less than arms length sale to a questionable third party or back to itself at the courthouse steps.
Soliman
Examiner
Looking for an attorney that”gets it” in Oregon.
URGENT (like everyone).
HI
I need help from a lawer to stop or slow the foreclosure process.
Thanks,
Scott Kamalski.
Admin
Just wondering how many times and in what courts where you were contracted as an Expert Witness?
Vicki M.
EXPERT ADVISEMENT –
Testimony about a scientific, technical, or professional issue given by a person qualified to testify because of familiarity with the subject or special training in the field.
Generally speaking, the law of evidence in both civil and criminal cases confines the testimony of witnesses to statements of concrete facts within their own observation, knowledge, and recollection. Testimony must normally state facts perceived by the witnesses’ use of their own senses, as distinguished from their opinions, inferences, impressions, and conclusions drawn from the facts. Opinion testimony that is based on facts is usually considered incompetent and inadmissible, if the factfinders are as well qualified as the witness to draw conclusions from the facts.
In certain instances, however, the law allows witnesses to provide opinion evidence, and such evidence is divided into two classes, lay opinion and expert opinion. A lay witness may give his or her opinion when that opinion is (1) rationally based on the perception of the witness; (2) helpful to a clear understanding of the witness’ testimony or the determination of a fact in issue; and (3) not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of expert testimony discussed below. Thus, lay witnesses who have had an opportunity to observe a particular vehicle in motion are normally permitted to testify that it was traveling at a great rate of speed or was going pretty fast. Lay witnesses are also normally allowed to give their opinion as to the height, weight, quantity, and dimensions of things, even if their testimony is not precise. By definition, a lay witness is any witness who is not qualified to testify as an expert on a particular subject.
Expert witnesses are persons who are qualified, either by actual experience or by careful study, to form definite opinions with respect to a division of science, a branch of art, or a department of trade. The law deems persons having no such experience or training to be incapable of forming accurate opinions or drawing correct conclusions. Thus, if scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data; (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case. In Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137, 149-152, 119 S.Ct. 1167, 143 L.Ed.2d 238 (1999), the U.S. Supreme Court further observed that the reliability of a scientific technique may turn on whether the technique can be and has been tested; whether it has been subjected to peer review and publication; and whether there is a high rate of error or standards controlling its operation.
Courts do not apply a rigid rule in determining whether a particular witness is qualified to testify as an expert. Instead, an expert’s qualifications are normally evaluated on a witness-by-witness basis, according to the facts and issues of each case. Several courts have stated that the true criterion in determining the qualification of expert witnesses is not whether they employ their knowledge and skill professionally or commercially, but whether the jury can receive appreciable help from them on the particular subject in issue. Many courts also require the witness to exhibit sufficient knowledge of the subject matter before his or her opinion to go to the jury.
The qualifications of an expert witness must be carefully scrutinized by courts to guard against charlatans who may give erroneous testimony without a sound foundation. Most courts will more closely scrutinize the qualifications of witnesses seeking to testify as experts if they have never been found qualified to give expert testimony on a prior occasion. However, primary reliance is not placed on the fact that it may be the expert’s first time on the witness stand. Conversely, the fact that a witness has been previously qualified to give expert testimony on the subject matter in question is typically irrelevant to his or her qualifications for giving such testimony in a subsequent case.
There are two general classes of matters as to which expert testimony is admissible: (1) matters as to which the conclusions to be drawn by the jury depend on the existence of facts that are not common knowledge and that are specifically within the knowledge of persons whose experience or study enables them to testify with authority on the subjects in question; and (2) matters as to which the conclusions to be drawn from the facts stated, as well as knowledge of the facts themselves, depend on professional or scientific knowledge not within the range of ordinary training or intelligence. In the first class, the facts are stated by the experts, and the conclusion is drawn by the jury. In the second class, the expert sets forth the facts and states a conclusion in the form of an opinion which may be accepted or rejected by the jury.
Accident reconstruction experts typically give testimony that falls into the first class of expert testimony. Such experts may testify as to the speed at vehicles were traveling, the distance before impact at which each driver began applying the breaks, and what, if any, accident-avoidance precautions each driver took. But accident reconstruction experts are not allowed to give their opinion as to which driver was responsible for the accident or testify as to the standard of care required to be exercised by the drivers. Both types of questions are ultimate issues that only a jury can determine. By contrast, in Medical Malpractice cases physicians may provide the jury with testimony regarding the underlying facts of the legal dispute and may aid the jury by describing the standard of care for diagnosis and treatment.
The general rule excluding opinion evidence concerning matters of common knowledge or experience, while clear as a matter of principle, is frequently difficult to apply. As a result, courts are given wide latitude in determining whether the opinions of an expert or lay witness are admissible, and appellate courts will not interfere with a lower court’s ruling unless in making that ruling the trial court manifestly abused its discretion to the prejudice of the complaining party. Courtesy WikiPedia / Authors Files
Neil,
Thank you for your reply.
Yes, he did reported to me that you would be visiting his office.
This person has many different websites.
If I do not get my refund by this Wednesday I will begin the posting of complaints in addition to the reporting to proper authorities.
Vicki M
cmysmile00@aol.com
Vivki M: everyone should be careful about whom they do business with. Even the lawyers on our list that are “Lawyers Who Get It” should be carefully interviewed. The loan mod companies and others use this site as a source for leads. They look at a comment and then contact you. If they say they are working with me or livinglies (a) they probably are not and (b) you should check.
Does a defendant has the right to request an attorney retainer contract from the plaintiff attorney?
Thanks
I am beginning to wonder if this site isn’t being taken advantage of by some to lure innocent
homeowners into, unknowing scams involving so called “assistance” with fighting their foreclosure plight and “which requires an upfront fee before any work is started” .
I am a homeowner in foreclosure trouble and I paid for services from an individual/company who posts often on this site. This individual/company has not performed and I am seeking my money back .
I retained and paid this group $2,500 on March 25th and nothing, including that which was promised at the time of contracting, has been done. After all the time I spent scanning and faxing documents for audit, 3 weeks later, the individual that I hired confided in me that he had deleted much of my email and attatchments. Why?!
My sale date is now June 10th.
This individual claims many victories on this site including to have helped an owner save her home and with a huge principle reduction which I later discovered from the homeowner that it was accomplished soley through the efforts of the homeowner’s vigilant action alone.
From this site I have also communicated with 2 different attorneys who failed to follow thru in what they said they would do.
I also got emails from a Southern Calif group soliciting me that they could stop my foreclosure for a fee.I do not know how they would have gotten my email as I don’t subscribe to any other foreclosure blogs. The only information regarding my email address was from the email I’ve sent to purchase the Livinglies book and to the ‘homeowner’ that posted he had QWR’s available to anyone that emailed him for it. I did get an email from him but there was no QWR attatchment and I replied to him asking how
his”foreclosure” was doing and got no reply which makes me wonder.
I have appreciate the knowledge I’ve learned from this site and at the same time unfortunately some
things I wished not to.
Vicki M
Cmysmile00@aol.com
SUPERIOR COURT OF COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CA. HUNTINGTON PARK COURTHOUSE/
BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION VS ARAUJO PRO PER (COUNSEL LIMITED SCOPE ENGAGEMENT)
NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING: CAUSE CALLED FOR HEARING MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF THE SUMMONS. / MOTION GRANTED
NLS acting as the Case developmentand expert to counsel; admin@borrowerhotline.com
Case 08U17459 Washington Mutual v Janice Sutherland Superior Court of County of Los Angeles.
Immediate stay the Writ of execution for possession of and Notice to set aside and vacate judgement. / NLS as Expert and M.Soliman providing case development / Counsel B Guttman
msoliman@borrowerhotline.com
NLS http://www.borrowerhotline.com
Mr. Soliman,
I would love to get a copy of the Powerpoint presentation you mention.
Alina
avirani0203@yahoo.com
M-E-R-S LITIGATION IS TOUGH!
The holder in due course is easy to determine 100 percent of the time – -ask the SEC and IRS if you like.
The pass through scam hit me after a year of mind grind…so simple as I found the answer in a glossary.
Where the deed to the note is recorded in favor of the beneficiary it must follow the note. A note does not follow the deed or mortgage. Therefore the accurate attack is for a clear cut definition of a nominee (Hint okay – think) MERS is hardly a registrations definition of a nominee or even custodian and mere sub recording agent that bypasses the title companies functions.
A nominee in a custodial function is accustomed to conduct itself as MERS has over the course of time. A bundle of securities is in fact an accurate definintion of a pass through and securities need to clear each trade and must be placed in trust. Managing the tracking of those securities as custodian job description suggests and role of a nominee is not the MERS role in a real estate transaction – get it!
An equitable interst therefore would allow MERS the authority to serve the trustee in this definition and specific legal manner- it does not. MERS is a cooperative and that’s deadly when discovered. In my view they are propogating a larger scale deceptive practicethat easily could have been avoided.
REMIC and MBSstructure did not survive so why is the pass through still here. It wont be, not for long.
I am not an attorney but consult counsel as a leading expert in SEC matters and mortgage related lender liability cases. I have figured the MERS deal out and it bores the hell out of me. That’s not a big deal in my opinion.
Wnat drama! It’s the bankrupt insulate structure of the combinations and need to hide the assets (rhetorically and not litereally speaking) that’s concerning. The notes are in fact LOST as we say on the street – - and must be WON effecting a repurchase provsion! (but not physically lost and this is so embarrasssing when introduced by a layman – really).
MERS mangement will talk and even sing if necessary but they are telling the truth. It’s this side bar they wont share wth you.
I would love to be engaged in this case but my public response may be misinterpreted here. There is a lot of detail to support my theory which is really a collection of strighforward facts.
My legal contacts in the State are formidable and very well known and I can refer you to a particular legal authority there if need be.
Stay focused and think it through. I have a Powerpoint Presentation our counsel has approved for distribution for anyone who wants to apply it .
msoliman
admin@borrwerhotline.com
borrowerhotline.com
foreclosureinfosearch.com
Attorney Karl Kop and our staff at NLS tell others about http://www.livinglies.wordpress.com and get them involved….Whistle blowers know about it to – - but time is runnnning out.
Mr. Soliman,
Here is the dilemma I am in regarding the blank allonge. In Florida, it appears to be well established law that a blank instrument converts that instrument into a bearer instrument. Therefore, there is no need to show chain of title. Not only that, but apparently it does not matter how you got the instrument. As long as you are the “holder,” you have the right to enforce. This is actually the basis behind one of the ill-reasoned DCA decision. I have a copy of MERS appellant brief in the Azize case. I am now shepardizing the case cites.
Anyway, I am challenging the assignment from MERS to U.S. Bank. This sort of puts a kink in that. The chain of title argument may not work in Florida.
Alina
Alina,
Pending an answer by Neil… The allonge is used to avoid the mess one use to find on the back of a note. Problem is at least the back of the note evidenced a live signiture.
Challange *** the practice is now to use the notory jurat and attach to the note. Therefore we should have a notory endorsement jurat attachment and book to verify.
The corporate assignment is another interesting attack. Only an officer can be designated.
Challange*** who signed it and do the minutes for the corporation exist that verify the signator and full capacity of that person, an officer, to infact sign.
Challange***an attorneys opinion letter is mandatory for a new issuance and for selling whole loans. Demand to see it if possible.
Whats really intersting to me is the fact a blank endorsement and allonge (verified in prospectus) is even circulating. Your comments really bring back somthing I believe is huge.
One day if time permits I want to share the incredible things I heard from top executives I worked amongst. I could not believe the things i would hear from time to time but I intend to use them as need be for lawyer clients.
But it was over a conversation at lunch I had with a director for a major warehouse bank that I was told the following…
“the blank endorsement was soley for giving the warehouse provider (same as the funding source for a security) a poison pill”. That would be a way out if the allonge were lost or corporate assignment misplaced. Think about it, the warehous lender here is an FSB (FIERREA).
Challange*** the fact, is the mere exisitance of an endorsement attached to a critical instrument and assgnment in blank indicates to me a fatal integrity issue if the blank documents are not numerically coded. Otherwise , you cannot assure the parties to a claim the instruments they are presented are not back dated where endorsements and attachment to the note and deed are mandatory.
Msoliman
admin@borrowerhotline.com
Mr. Garfield,
Can you expound on this statement, “An indorsement in blank generally means nothing without more. It does not convert the instrument to a bearer instrument. An accommodation indorsement fails to provide “cover” which is necessary for one to claim being a holder in due course.”
On my loan, the Trustee filed the “orginal note.” However, the orginal note was payable to the “pretender lender.” There is a blank allonge attached to the note with only the signature of the “pretender lender.” MERS was named nominee on the mortgage. MERS “assigned” the mortgage and note to the Trustee before the foreclosure action was filed.
I am using the Saxon v. Hillery case and also some Florida case law to state that the Trustee is not the holer in due course because MERS had no authority to assign the note.
Also, can I get your take on the use of an allonge? Some states interpret UCC to mean that an allonge should be used only if there is insufficient space on the note and it must be permanently affixed. Do you know of any case law in Florida (I found case law in other states) regarding the use of an allonge?
Thanks,
Alina
The Debt Validation Letter that a borrower can send to a lender is a major factor in the borrowers arsenal. . .
The lender sends the document out on behalf of the borrower (ethical? ) for the borrower to execute in 30 days.
Do you know why?
MSoliman
NLS
http://www.Borrowerhotline.com
I have helped put together a group of over 100 consumer attorneys, most of whom are in California, all dedicated to assisting victims of mortgage fraud committed by mortgage brokers and lenders. The attorneys in our group cover the entire state. We closely follow decisions such as Judge Samuel Bufford’s opinion in In Re: Vargas, so that we can garner ammunition to help California homeowners fight back. If you need to find a California attorney near you to help fight against a wrongful foreclosure odds are we can find someone to help.
Walter Hackett, Esq.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO SPEAK WITH YOU OR SOMEONE FROM YOU OFFICE MY NUMBER IS 310-404-4774
is there an attorney that you can recomend in New Jersey I have a case with fremont investment and loan and wells fargor mers
I’ve emailed and called the attorney listed in Kansas City but no response. Do you know of anyone in St. Louis who gets it? I’m in ch 13 right now and MERS is involved along with National City.
National City was a joke trying to get modified. What a waste of seven months.
Colleen: There is plenty you can do. Go to “In trouble now?” on the livinglies blog, download the intake form, check out the lawyers in our network that are closest to you or go to one that you know “Gets It”, get e forensic review, buy the workbooks from livinglies with forms and letters etc. Become informed. An educated homewoner is the worst nightmare of these thieves!
I am a single mother of 3 boys, bought the home i grew up in. I have been served a unlawful detainer saturday. I have done a lot of research on this and i am going to hit them myself with a discovery and a reply to the courts by Thursday. The lender pulled themselves out of chapter 13 and a day after the relief of stay was awarded the took the house back. Never gave me notice. I also have my nieghbor the whole time working with the bank to buy my property. I need to find a lawyer to see if i even have a case. Bank stated they would look in to modifying or short sale, but sold it wtih no notice. property was sold to Deutsche bank on 12/8/2008 for $222,474.75 i owed
$434,849.81. Please let me know if there is anything
I can do…..
After a brief investigation, I’ve discovered Michigan to be a non-judicial state. In any regard, can you recommend an attorney, located in the Metro Detroit area, who’s familiar with the “Show Me The Promissory Note” concept?
Any and all information made available would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
olzaq@msn.com
I need help saving my home in Houston, TX
johneliasjr@gmail.com
This whole website is a bit confusing… Are there any live workshops coming up for Attorneys? We’d love to attend. Thanks!
Hello Neil and all,
THIS IS ANOTHER IMPORTANT QUESTION.
I want to know if the lender has been sent a DEMAND FOR VALIDATION OF DEBT via certified service and they DO NOT respond within the 21 days, therefore…”technically extinguishing the debt”… HOW DO YOU PROCEED TO ENFORCE THAT AND WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS and what is the wording or paperwork to present to the judge to vacate judgment and the case? It is URGENT since we are going against time here.
Also, a copy of the Demand for validation of debt is filed in the courthouse.
Please inform since I am getting mixed and varied info here in Florida. God Bless
Help! I need an attorney in NC that gets it, and is willing to stand up against the big banks.
Please email me.
delayensmail@gmail.com
QUESTION: Where are the lawyers? I can’t believe they’re nowhere to be found throughout the whole country. So much money is left on the table that they can recoup.
RESPONSE: The lawyer’s just don’t get it. They will learn over time and nothing can be done until that proverbial time and place.
One problem is lawyers work from a case precedent perspective. I met with a high profile lawyer last year to excite some interest in these endeavors.
My experience as “one of them” is based on over 20 years prior experience as an institutional investor) and falls often on legal deaf ears (Kop, Terbeek and Rabin are attorneys who are an exception).” I remarked recently that this type of law is on the cutting edge. What I mean to say is the penchant case law is in the process of being made. I was shut down hard and told the law is established and there is no cutting edge – EVER!
We are losing this fight folks and lenders are making huge gains as time goes on. Attorneys who get it can call us to discuss their clients’ needs. But most of our approach has gone against the grain of counsel and traditional thinking:
EXAMPLES:
• The “Stay” against a Sheriffs writ the day of a lock out.
• Obtained a judgment against the plaintiff in a UD hearing
• Have had a million dollar loan dismissed in a UD hearing
• Reduced a loan amount by $500,000 in lieu of a sale
• Obtained $50,000 cash for keys in lieu of a UD filing.
• Decided a dismissal of the entire mortgage in trial
What the lenders are doing here is willful, interpretive and a knee jerk reaction that is peripheral to the current code and statutes. Recent discussions with attorneys have since said this is without a doubt a cutting edge example of new procedural methods and approach that have yet to be challenged. SEC and HUD are in conflict and markets remain confused. The security is further confused under a UCC filing and the investors interest is fractionalized as are the other interests in the cash flow. The lender is not a lender but an interested third party acting as a counter party and representing it otherwise as the holder in due course. Add this to the fact all collateral is critical to enforce the rights of some other party unknown to the Trustor until time of reversion in a recovery. That party is a highly restricted, a Real Estate investment trust.
Look, most attorneys want to see laws established, set forth and argue where laws are obviously violated (most not all). They will challenge that law as to a ceiling or threshold, but according to existing law. In my opinion, they just do not want to pursue something yet to be established. Lenders are backed by a huge $$$ lobbying effort fighting a-lop sided battle whereby limited case law exists.
Attorneys seek a nice retainer prior to jumping in and will then launch a traditional effort. Too many times, they toss our findings to return to negotiating the same modification offering a borrower little if any value.
THIS IS SUCH A CROCK OF $ # I %. This observation is after we established a breach and fraudulent intent in many cases as an expert. Our expert opinion is in multiple areas of lending and securities practices under a private registration.
The practices and procedures according to the law remain convoluted even to the best attorneys.
We see this happen even after having shown an abundance of evidence. That evidence we assure you will not be brought forth in a RESPA or TILA audit. We will however certify that audit for accuracy and have a past Attorney General or Federal Magistrate.
Don’t stop fighting.
MSoliman
Mortgage and Secondary
Expert Witness
Admin@borrowerhtoline.com
Hello I am in Southern cal. I need atty that will fight for home owners I have about 40 cases i can send to you
here is my email gavin@hargomc.com
please contact me
thank you
In c13 bankruptcy, mortgage company filed proof of claim in the amount of $35,000.00 ask mortgage company to provide proof of loan, mortgage company admits to dept of treasury in letter they can not locate disclosure statement note or deed of trust, but say that I owe more than the proof of claim. what can I do
Mr. Garfield, I happen to also be a 25 yr + bankruptcy practitioner in addition to my many years of mortgage litigation experience. I have a battleplan to resolve virtually all of these issues favorable to the borrower in Chapter 13 and Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases.
Steven K. Kop
Attorney at Law
(818) 917-3370
http://www.newdawnlaw.blogspot.com
Are there any seminars currently scheduled?
To whom It May Concern;
My name is Donn Hart and I reside here in San Diego California. I have two homes (one is a rental) which have been foreclosed upon and went through a NOTS even though my attorney MW Roth filed a law suit and Pendency of Action at the county recorder’s office on both homes. I was issued an Unlawful Detainer on the rental unit which was answered in the allotted time period. I have two court dates. March 10th to answer the Unlawful Detainer in California Superior Court and March 16th where I am to appear in Federal Court in a suit I have filed against the lender Saxon Mortgage. The problem is the Mitchell Roth had a nervous breakdown and is in a mental hospital diagnosed as medically incompetent His team and offices in 5 Southern California Counties have been closed leaving me high and dry. I filed the necessary paperwork in court (Ex-Parte etc.) but I am without legal representation to go forward. I prefer and attorney who has been trained by you or has the knowledge to use your techniques in saving my homes. Would you please recommend one or two competent attorneys in San Diego. Time is my enemy right now and I need help ASAP. I can be reached a 619-817-8888 (office) 619-890-6783 (cell) or my home 619-271-1515. PLEASE HELP ME!
just noticed your site and would love info re upcoming cle
your response disappeared off my screen
We are the kansas couple under foreclosure with Chase and in limbo with a workout loan which is killing us…no help from Ks bar or even the AGs office. Could you respond again..sorry..having computer issues
Our home is in foreclosure with Chase and they are charging us a payback which they call a workout and it is breaking us.
There appears to be no help from the legal community or the state of Kansas where we live. the one atty we spoke to is outrageously expensive and does not even know if he wants the case. We can use Missouri lawyer also probably. Any ideas
I am a single mother of three in need of help. I am have been victimized by abuses in sub-prime lending and securitization. Please check out this site and let me know if you can help me. One of the firms listed is out of Ohio however they do not practice in Michigan Cohen, Rosenthal & Cramer has filed and won against Deutsche Bank class action suit in Ohio. I spoke to the Lawyer however he could not help me because he is not licensed in MI. I explained that I have spoken to several Lawyers however they were no help. Please let me know if anyone knows any Lawyer in Michigan or that is Licensed that can help !! my email is suydam2002@yahoo.com thank you – God bless
is there an attorney in the columbus ohio area that you have worked with and understands your foremat
I’m a single mom, 4 kids in school, $1+mil home, gated neighborhood, $350k in real equity after 11 yrs ownership. Is there a ProBono Attorney in the Santa Cruz, CA area that would take my wrongful foreclosure (JPMorgan Chase/Wamu) case now and get paid during and after? I just don’t have the retainer. I’m avoiding the process server on the UD. Scared to death of being on the street with 4 kids.
I am not a lawyer and I understand this problem very well. Where are the lawyers? I can’t believe they’re nowhere to be found through out the whole country. So much money is left on the table that they can recoup. WHERE ARE THEY?, the federal government and their agencies are useless but they’re quick on giving YOUR MONEY away, especially to the same predators that got us into this mess.
Can you recommend a lawyer in the Butler County, OH area?
Mr Garfield,
Is there any attorney that you could recommend for South Carolina that understands your material?
Thank You
John R
I am so grateful to have found this website. I would like to contact Neil as soon as possible and would appreciate help with email address. Thank you for responding!
I would like to attend your seminar in California. Any set date in January 2009 please. If none in California please email me where I can register to attend anywhere in the West Coast.
Sincerely,
John Mendaros
hi Neil,
My partners and I are interested in any of your upcoming events in California next year in 2009 or anytime December, 2008…
Can you email me so I can register for your event…I could not find any registration page or upcoming events page on your site…do you have contact number?
thanks,
Dillon
I am interested in the SF lawyer seminar. Do you have a date and a sign up link? Thanks
PLEASE RESERVE FOR ONE…THE SEMINAR ON MY CALENDAR IS…10/13 HOW TO…THANKS, MV
please tell me where your 11/11 seminar is being held in Ft. Lauderdale and how to register??? Thanj You
I agree with Tim, we seriously need help in the MD area. We have been trying to locate a MD attorney for over a month.
After speaking with a dozen attorneys – I have noticed their disposition changes when raising questions about the TILA or any other type lending violations. It is as though they automatically take a posture of; well, banks usually do their homework and a few errors in the paperwork does not help the case much because the issue is delinquent payments. They are not willing to fight a Big-Bank or Lending Institution via foreclosure but merely help negotiate a reduced penalty or whatever.
This next question/suggestion may seem a bit naïve but I think could help most folks who do not think like attorneys.
I was hoping someone (attorney) might help layout a generic outline. Create a template (sort-a-speak) so normal-folks could organize their stories and situation, along with the paperwork-documentation, in a more receptive format for attorneys. This is especially for those attorneys not as familiar with the actual details and strengths within some of the statutes as are discussed here. In other words, my experience thus far has been most attorneys practically dismiss the notion of a lending institution leaving itself open to liability that could amount to much. Especially considering loans and settlement transactions are essentially repetitive rituals happening every day.
I think if done properly, this may also encourage more attorneys to participate in the seminars. I would gladly take the time to layout a generic template, if someone knew what to put in it. Just my 2-pence
We must find a MD attorney shortly. We are running out of time.
Neil; please, please, please host a seminar in MD, DC, VA; we need you up here, please come; we will come pro se and are sure lawyers will come; please let us know when and please keep up the gods work you are doing. Tim and Kathleen
can you do another lay person seminar along with the lawyer one in phoenix?
I realize it is late, but is there any space available for the Santa Monica Seminar on 9/4?
Thank you.
great site
we just got news of acceptance of recission letter for 24 months of interest payments and 3.5 pts on a big refinace
what about RICO being used on the big players?
[...] LAWYERS: WIN Cases! MAKE MONEY! HAPPY Clients! EMERGENCY WORKSHOP IN SANTA MONICA 9/4 [...]
[...] EMERGENCY WORKSHOP IN SANTA MONICA 9/4 [...]
How can the lawyers pay for the seminar the pay pal link is gone from the page
[...] EMERGENCY WORKSHOP IN SANTA MONICA 9/4 [...]
[...] EMERGENCY WORKSHOP IN SANTA MONICA 9/4 [...]
[...] EMERGENCY WORKSHOP IN SANTA MONICA 9/4 [...]
[...] EMERGENCY WORKSHOP IN SANTA MONICA 9/4 [...]
[...] EMERGENCY WORKSHOP IN SANTA MONICA 9/4 [...]
[...] EMERGENCY WORKSHOP IN SANTA MONICA 9/4 [...]