USE OF C-WORD IN PLACE OF SIGNATURE
SEE LINDA GREEN “SIGNATURE” HERE: Match found in Hillsborough County Linda Green C–t
The use of the C-word in place of even a forgery of Linda Green’s signature should ring the bell. For the banks, the bell tolls for thee. If you act like a common crook you will eventually be treated like one. It’s your turn. — NEIL GARFIELD, LIVINGLIES BLOG
The robosigner was obviously male, probably tired of forging documents all day for multiple banks, and maybe a little resentful that this was the best job he could get. Look in the lower left-hand corner of this exhibit from a presentation at the weekend conference demonstrating the new Livinglies Analysis performed by Luminaq.
It’s the kind of thing that doesn’t jump out at you until after it is pointed out, or after you stare at each signature looking for some tell-tale message. You can call this the 23rd recorded forgery of Linda Green’s signature which is why recording offices are (a) reconsidering their rules on what they will record (see above link) and (b) deciding what to do about tens of thousands of documents that were recorded and which the recording office knows is falsified or has enough reason to suspect the document is falsified to reject the recording.
This particular racy example highlights the fact that most documents submitted in support of a foreclosure proceeding or foreclosure sale are simply fake documents. It’s easy to stop there. But if you think about it, why would the banks need to produce false documents? This wasn’t some isolated instance. It was a rampant pattern of conduct that defined the industry. Why?
The plain answer is that ONLY false documents would allow the false forecloser to succeed. It was and is illegal, improper and greedy. They went looking for free houses that would never inure to the benefit of investors (the real creditors). The Banks found that it was easy to steal a house because of the credibility that was given to anything they said or did. It just didn’t make sense to the Judges that Banks would act so malevolently. But they did.
The reason was that the investors have no interest in pursuing collection from homeowners because it would limit their better and larger claim against the investment banks. Investors who bought bogus mortgage bonds want to keep it simple rather than run into a hail of accusations of predatory and fraudulent loan practices. This created a void in “enforcement” of largely non-existent obligations (paid in full by third parties) falsely presented as secured by faked documents using fictional characters as “lenders” on instruments that the borrower was induced to sign under false pretenses.
The use of the C-word in place of even a forgery of Linda Green’s signature should ring the bell. For the banks, the bell tolls for thee. If you act like a common crook you will eventually be treated like one. It’s your turn.
Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, currency, Eviction, foreclosure, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, securities fraud | Tagged: bankruptcy, borrower, countrywide, disclosure, foreclosure, foreclosure defense, foreclosure offense, foreclosures, fraud, linda green, LOAN MODIFICATION, modification, quiet title, rescission, RESPA, securitization, TILA audit, trustee, WEISBAND |