BOA, Urban Lending Sued for Rackateering on Fraudulent “Modification” Program

In a case that may have far-reaching consequences, a lawsuit was filed in federal court in Colorado accusing Bank of America of racketeering, which is what borrowers have been screaming about for years. It was a game to the bank. They intentionally lured people into what they thought was a good faith modification program, encouraged people to get deeper and deeper into “debt”, and then foreclosed when they were sure that the person could not reinstate nor exercise a right of redemption. A key player in this scheme was Urban Lending Solutions.

In a case that I am currently litigating, Bank of America at first denied any knowledge of Urban Lending Solutions. When confronted with correspondence issued from urban lending solutions under the letterhead of Bank of America, they finally conceded that they knew who who the company was.  In a Massachusetts case depositions were taken and it is quite clear that this affiliate of Bank of America had their employees working off of Scripts and that anyone who went off the reservation would be disciplined or fired. Going off the reservation merely meant that they actually tried to help a borrower achieve a modification.

There are at least six whistleblowers who have executed sworn affidavits stating that the modification program was a sham. I think we might be getting closer to the point where whistleblowers tell us that the origination of the loan was a sham and that the so-called sales of loans were also sham transactions. Those employees of Bank of America or their affiliates who were successful in throwing homeowners into foreclosure were rewarded with $500 gift certificates to Target and other stores.

The claims against Bank of America are using laws that were designed to target organized crime. For seven years experts and laymen have been claiming that the banks were engaged in organized crime in the  the sale of mortgage mines, origination of loans, the assignment of loans, the recording of unperfected mortgage liens, wrongful foreclosures, illegal foreclosure sales in which the property was sold without any cash being paid, interference  in the right of the borrower to reinstate, modify, or redeem.

We are just around the corner from the key question, to wit: why would the banks engage in organized crime to create foreclosures when it is painfully obvious to homeowners and local government officials across the country that the banks have no interest in acquiring the property but only causing the sale of the property at a foreclosure auction?  Why would the banks delay the prosecution of their cases for years? Why would the banks argue against expediting discovery against them and against the borrower? Why would the banks argue for less money in foreclosure rather than more money in modification?

The answer to all of those questions is simply that there is more money in this scheme than has been divulged.  In the coming weeks and months the revelations about the true nature of these transactions will shock the conscience of the country and cause voters and politicians to rethink their position regarding the ability of regulators and courts to clawback illegally obtained proceeds that started with the transactions originated with the money of investors and somehow ended up with the banks growing by 30% despite a failing economy and a diving housing market.

We are now at the point where filing RICO charges against the banks is likely to gain traction whereas in prior years it was considered overkill for what appeared to be negligence in paperwork caused by the volume of mortgages and foreclosures. Volume had nothing to do with it. The banks made a ton of money selling those mortgage bonds.  Out the money they made selling the mortgage bonds was dwarfed by the amount they made when they received insurance, credit default swap proceeds, and taxpayer money on investments owned by the investors and not by the banks. So far more than 5 million foreclosures have proceeded illegally which means that 5 million families have been disrupted in some cases beyond repair. Recent estimates suggest that another 5 million foreclosures will be added to the list unless the banks are required to conform with their regulations and the laws of the federal and state government.

BOA and Urban Lending Sued on Racketeering Charges

382 Responses

  1. LOAN MODS, FRAUDCLOSURE, SHORT SALES ARE HEDONISM/UTILITARIANISM …!

    WAKE UP AMERICA….!

  2. CLAIMS CONSIDER THE EXECUTORY CONTRACTS AND UNEXPIRED LEASES OF THE DEBTOR 365
    Re: Irrevocable Transfers of Title Granted or conveyed into Trust

    Commercial Loans brokered or broker dealer transactions are contemporaneous advances of loan funds carried from one to the next advance of proceeds ; This presupposes basis in assets as well as the household claims to a different view of conventional mortgage lending whereby the capital markets The liquidity requirements fulfill certain active and vibrant market conditions such as trading positions

    This further encumbers ones holding of title and or impairs the fee for title with a variety of non conventional thresholds called “trigger events” and maturity dates” .

    The substantive argument attacks the placement of the subject title to land at risk for purposes of leveraging the value of the estate as collateral or for setting positions as in straddles , hedging long and short positions and for underwriting naked option trades deemed high risk wagering

    In each regard the collateral must not avoid the Assignment to the person advancing the funds at settlement in escrow and necessitates full disclosure place of the trade mechanics in Trust or under the dominion of administrative and securities trustee

    These risk are clearly not secondary market transactions and, therefore, a capital market endeavors are not necessarily covered by RESPA., while they fall clearly under Securities and Exchange Commission regulatory guidelines found in 1122 AB

    Avoidable transfers BRA 522(D)(2)
    TRANSFERS OF DEBTORS PROPERTY FOR LESS THAN A REASONABLE EQUIVALENT VALUE UNLESS CAUSED BY SHORT MARKET SELLING
    FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS
    LAW OF AVOIDABLE TRANSFERS

    masterservicer:
    registerclaims@live.com

    not an attorney not to be used as legal advice

  3. But then, as I recall, the secn trustee guaranteed nothing about the loans in the PSA. So even if such duty or fiduciary were not expressed in the PSA, the law would yet find it.

    The PSA is what .?..an investor agreement for the lender who is the trustee and investor who is also creditor and partnered with the seller who is the issuer -Its called a Purchase and Sale -I don’t know what a Pooling and Servicing Agreement really is – not mandated in a private placement so….Chump Bait

    registerclaims@live.com

  4. Christine said:

    “The last point i don’t care for much is the idea that accepting a mod is almost stupid since the title is clouded.”

    That is really a problem out there. Many people believe that, and it will not fly with the Court. Maybe some day it will, but at the present time, it will not. Be brave and consistent and stay the course. Change is coming slow as it is. You do not win if you are living in your car and can’t get work.

  5. But presenting the complete “security audit” which doesn’t come cheap either as the panacea for foreclosure, …. with all those theories and making people believe that they work while admitting to John Wright that they don’t and that even Max Gardner doesn’t use them.

    Right on ….Tell it like it is …finally

    The last point i don’t care for much is the idea that accepting a mod is almost stupid since the title is clouded. Mandelman has allowed many to get mods they are very, very happy with. That “don’t settle for anything but a free house” doesn’t sit right with me: it’s hurt a lot of people.

    can we talk a few ….

  6. Louise,

    I don’t disagree and yet, too many people took everything he said at face value and started using his argument, without any understanding of how courts work and how detrimental to their cases some of those defenses were. I know for a fact that many pro se got thrown out of the court by judges who were irritated beyond belief at the suggestion that they ought to be given the infamous “free house”. As a result, many who could have saved the house and gotten a mod lost everything. As a paralegal, you know how courts are, right? Patience isn’t their strong suit…

    Don’t get me wrong: people still have a duty to use judgment and critical sense but I think he knows by now who reads his site. Granted, Garfield does serve a purpose. But presenting the complete “security audit” which doesn’t come cheap either as the panacea for foreclosure, to subsequently declare that getting one plays in the hands of the banks (and it does) is wrong. And there is that little matter of coming up with all those theories and making people believe that they work while admitting to John Wright that they don’t and that even Max Gardner doesn’t use them.

    The last point i don’t care for much is the idea that accepting a mod is almost stupid since the title is clouded. Mandelman has allowed many to get mods they are very, very happy with. That “don’t settle for anything but a free house” doesn’t sit right with me: it’s hurt a lot of people.

  7. You will recall NG also talked about entertainment value. Again, what should happen is not what will happen or, even, what might happen. I get your drift, but LL is one of the best sources for good info about the financial meltdown which, in large part, is based on fraud and fraudulent foreclosures.

  8. Actually, Louise, I made a typo. I meant to say “my point exactly”. I was running out the door and didn’t reread myself. My case is not on standing but on federal statute violations and conversion. But it is true that the true and tried works better than any exotic theory advanced by Garfield. Not that I disagree with his research and conclusions but i am irritated at the fact that he has spent years talking about the “free house/no loan/no lender” and that he reneged on it during that John Wright interview.

  9. C, the first time around they found for me on lack of standing as well. However, they refiled and filed a new assignment which, essentially, put the loan into a trust that was closed for five years. Unbelievable! Then, I got a settlement agreement which they breached.

  10. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF TOO BIG TO FAIL KORPORATE AMERIKA ARE HEATHENS…..THEY ARE THE INFIDELS…..THEY ARE THE IMMORAL ONES AND NOTHING THEY DO IS LEGAL SO THEY ARE THE LAWLESS ONES….THEY ARE THE ONES THE FOUNDERS FEARED….!

  11. LIAR…LIAR…..Standing is being both openly and secretly used against us by hedonistic tyrants who are prejudice against our Liberty.

    THESE FOREIGNERS TO OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC ARE CONTROL FREAK SATANISTS ……. THEY ARE HEDONISTS….WHORES OF BABYLON AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA AND THEIR UTILTARIAN HEDONISTIC BELIEFS ARE NOT JUST ILLEGAL IN THESE UNITED STATES THEY ARE IMMORAL TO ANYONE WITH MORALS.

    PAY US BACK WHAT YOU STOLE YOU CROOKS….!

  12. Did you get back the money they stole and the property they hijacked on the Standing argument? If not it did not work.

  13. Louise,

    My case exactly. Schwartzwald was strictly argued on standing. And it worked.

  14. Look at Schwartzvald case in Ohio. Lack of standing works.

  15. The synagogue of Satan is a multifaceted evil enterprise that has many components. The main objective is complete control of everyone and everything by mind control. It always seeks to confuse to further its agenda and reach its ultimate goal of totalitarianism…egoism is the main culprit and that controls this evil agenda. There are many modes of transportation to get everyone to reach the one world ruled by Satan objective. The main 1,2 punch is hedonism/utilitarianism disguised as something good and hides who they really worship behind theatrics like wars, elections, disasters, crises they create and use altruism and doing things for the greater good to fix the problems they create all from behind the KORPORATE label or by use of intimidation they use names that are meant to invoke fear like the
    “establishment ” or the “agency” and it’s “agents” of evil.

    It is all satanism disguised as many things with one objective, complete control by egotists who are hedonists who worship evil and all of its evil works and its evil leader.

  16. Why would any American allow these crooks to get that far and slap a deficiency judgement on them for the crimes of KORPORATE Amerika? That is not only the ultimate in greed and gluttony but the judges aren’t going for that scam either. Enough is never enough for these satanists as I have said time and time again they are not operating from this dimension and will never be happy until they destroy us or we send them all packing.

  17. Communism is Racism….
    http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=kery2ZYb1Vk

  18. re: christine at 5:24 – yeah, maybe, but no one may go after a borrower for a deficiency judgement even in states that allow them if that state has a one-action rule, meaning the bankster had to seek the deficiency in one action, a judicial foreclosure action. There may be other reasons, also, which may preclude a dj later. Haven’t looked into it. If a borrower is the plaintiff and the bankster doesn’t get a judgment for the deficiency as the defendant by say, counter-claim, the right to do so is waived. lay opinions of course

  19. S.O.S AMERICA…..KORPORATE America is a proxy for the Synagogue Of Satan…!

  20. Yes everything KORPORATE Amerika does is heinous and egregious and an intent to harm every American of every economic class.

    KORPORATE RACISM does not discriminate….IT IS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY DESTROYER OF THE LIBERTY OF EVERY AMERICAN.

  21. It all makes sense now when you hear KORPORATE Amerika pays no corporate taxes ….the reason being they have no receipts that prove they pay for anything they sell because they don’t pay for anything they sell because WE THE PEOPLE FUND THEIR ENTIRE OPERATIONS AND PAY THEM TO ROB US….THEN THE MATTER OF FICTITIOUS TRUSTS THAT DON’T EXIST TO HIDE RACKETEERING AND CRIMINAL PROFITEERING ARE ANOTHER WEAPON USED BY KORPORATE AMERIKA TO ROB US AND FORCE US TO PAY FOR OUR OWN ROBBERY. IT IS EXTORTION AND IT IS A VERY DECEPTIVE FORM OF ROBBERY.

  22. A RECEIPT IS A LEGAL DOCUMENT ..
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Receipt

  23. EVERYTHING KORPORATE AMERIKA DOES IS A COVER UP FOR THE FIRST PLACE ISSUE….THEY HAVE NO RECEIPTS THAT PROVE THEY PAY FOR ANYTHING BECAUSE WE THE PEOPLE PAY FOR EVERYTHING THEY DO…WE FUND THEIR ENTIRE BLACK OPERATION AND WE PAY THEIR EMPLOYEES AS WELL.

  24. The certificate of origin is the receipt the dealer must have to sell you a new car purchased from the manufacturer……for a used car there must be a title certicate as proof/bill of sale. They are all liars because they don’t want to let us know WE THE PEOPLE PAY FOR EVERYTHING THIS KORP OF CROOKS DOES.

  25. If the repo man comes to take your vehicle for default….tell them you demand to see the paper receipt that proves the person you bought that car from paid for it first….the title means nothing and is merely an opinion without the paper receipt…if he doesn’t have the receipt …the certificate of origin…. tell the repo man he is a felon and a con man and Imposter and get the hell out …..before you shoot his criminal ass full of lead.

  26. Cease & Desist you meathead felons…….!

  27. If there is no LEGAL PROOF A TRUST OR TRUSTEE EXISTS BY PHYSICAL PROOF EVIDENCED BY THE SIGNATURE TRANSFER ON A LEGAL CONTRACT AGREED TO BY US OF THAT TRANSFER THAT IS EVIDENCED BY THAT MEMORIALIZED LEGAL CONTRACT AND MEMORIALIZATION OF THAT TRUSTEES RECEIPT….THAT SECURITY AGREEMENT…IS THE ONLY WAY TO LEGALLY TRANSFER OUR SECURITY…THAT COULD. NEVER HAPPEN BECAUSE KORPORATE AMERIKA ARE A KORP OF FOREIGN IMPOSTERS WHO LEND NO MONEY….

  28. KC,

    Before you lose track of what you want to see accomplished, listen to Garfield himself. It is a genuine interview and he comes clean with a few (important) things. Does and don’ts and what really works. Then you’ll have the proper perspective and distance and you’ll know how to proceed.

    http://piggybankblog.com/2012/06/29/piggybankblog-interviews-the-infamous-neil-garfield-from-the-living-lies-blog/

  29. We are all George Zimmerman as well … fearing strangers and imposters have breached our personal and national security by committing massive securities frauds with our securities.

    I agree with Pastor Manning as a result KORPORATE Amerika are calling every American the N WORD.

  30. THERE ARE NO TRUSTS OR TRUSTEES….AS THE PROTESTORS AGAINST THE VERDICT IN THE ZIMMERMAN TRIAL SAID TODAY…..WE ARE ALL TRAYVON….VICTIMS OF RACIAL & POLITICAL HATRED.

  31. WHY? BECAUSE NOTIFICATION TO THE OWNER OF A PIECE OF REAL PROPERTY……OUR SECURITY…..REPRESENTED BY THE DEED WE POSSESS….. OF A TRANSFER OF THE TITLE TO OUR SECURITY IS REQUIRED BY LAW….. RECORDATION OF A SECURITY MATTERS IN AMERICA. RECORDATION MEMORIALIZES THE AGREEMENT THAT WE AGREED TO THE SECURITIES TRANSFER. WE NEVER AGREED TO ANY TRANSFER OF OUR TITLE THAT REPRESENTS OUR SECURITIES ….NO…NO….NO…..!

  32. What are the duties and responsibilities of a Trustee?

    A trustee – whether an individual or institution – holds legal title to the trust property and is given broad powers over maintenance and investment. To ensure that these duties are properly carried out, the law requires that the trustee act in a certain manner. In general, a trustee must:
    Act in accord with the express terms of the trust instrument;
    Act impartially, administering the trust for the benefit of all trust beneficiaries;
    Administer the trust property with reasonable care and skill, considering both its safety and the amount of income it produces;
    Maintain complete accounts and records; and
    Perform taxpayer duties, such as filing tax returns for the trust and paying required taxes.

    The trustee must administer the trust property only for the designated beneficiaries and may not use trust principal or income for his or her own benefit. In other words, a trustee is usually prohibited from borrowing or buying from the trust, from selling his or her own property to it, and from using the trust assets as collateral for a personal debt.

    In selecting a trustee you should consider the potential trustee’s competence and experience in managing business or financial matters and the potential trustee’s availability and willingness to serve.

    Individuals and certain corporations (or a combination of both) may serve as trustee. Each selection offers distinct advantages and drawbacks that should be considered. For example, an institution, such as a bank, usually offers specially trained managers to provide administrative, counseling and tax services. Other typical advantages include the institution’s continuity and reliability of service, and its ready availability. Most banks charge a fee for trust services, and some may not want to manage small trusts, so you may want to compare options.

    As an alternative, an individual, such as a relative, family friend or business associate, may serve as trustee. An individual, unlike an institution, may be willing to serve for little or no fee. Furthermore, this person could add a more personal touch for special understanding to the needs of the beneficiaries. However, you will want to be certain that any nominated individual has the skill and experience necessary to properly manage the trust property

  33. What is the difference between a Trustor, a Trustee and a Beneficiary?

    There are typically three main parties to a Trust:

    The person who provides property and creates a trust is called a trustor. This person may also be referred to as the “grantor,” “donor” or “settlor.”

    The trustee is the individual, institution or organization that holds legal title to the trust property and is responsible for managing and administering those assets. If not designated by name, a trustee will be appointed by the court. In some cases, a trustor can serve as the trustee. It is also possible for two or more trustees to serve together, or for both an individual and an organization to act as co-trustees. Separate trustees may also be named to manage different parts of a trust estate.

    The beneficiary is the person who is to receive the benefits or advantages (such as income) of a trust. In general, any person or entity may be a beneficiary, including individuals, corporations, associations or units of government.

    The general duties and obligations of the beneficiary, the trustee and the trustor are summarized elsewhere in this pamphlet.

  34. These demons never quit. The only deeds that have any legal standing in court are our deeds for innumerable reasons but mainly because the plaintiffs never registered their own Securities and what they are in possession of are Securities Frauds, UNCERTIFICATED SECURITIES. WE ARE THEREFORE THE LUCKY RECIPIENTS OF BEING THE ONLY LEGAL TITLE HOLDERS OF RECORD BECAUSE IN FACT THE PLAINTIFF DEFRAUDED US AND AS A RESULT OWE WE THE PEOPLE ALL PAYMENTS THEY COLLECTED X 3 Plus SATISFACTIONS TO ALL PROPERTY TITLES.

  35. Lender’s Policy

    This is sometimes called a loan policy and it is issued only to mortgage lenders. Generally speaking, it follows the assignment of the mortgage loan, meaning that the policy benefits the purchaser of the loan if the loan is sold. For this reason, these policies greatly facilitate the sale of mortgages into the secondary market. That market is made up of high volume purchasers such as Fannie Mae and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation as well as private institutions.

    The American Land Title Association (“ALTA”) forms are almost universally used in the country though they have been modified in some states. In general, the basic elements of insurance they provide to the lender cover losses from the following matters:

    1. The title to the property on which the mortgage is being made is either
    – Not in the mortgage loan borrower,
    – Subject to defects, liens or encumbrances, or
    – Unmarketable.
    2. There is no right of access to the land.
    3. The lien created by the mortgage:
    – is invalid or unenforceable,
    – is not prior to any other lien existing on the property on the date the policy is written, or
    – is subject to mechanic’s liens under certain circumstances.
    As with all of the ALTA forms, the policy also covers the cost of defending insured matters against attack.

    Elements 1 and 2 are important to the lender because they cover its expectations of the title it will receive if it must foreclose its mortgage. Element 3 covers matters that will interfere with its foreclosure.

    Of course, all of the policies except or exclude certain matters and are subject to various conditions.

    There are also ALTA mortgage policies covering single or one-to-four family housing mortgages. These cover the elements of loss listed above plus others. Examples of the other coverages are loss from forged releases of the mortgage and loss resulting from encroachments of improvements on adjoining land onto the mortgaged property when the improvements are constructed after the loan is made.

  36. Owner’s Policy

    The owner’s policy insures a purchaser that the title to the property is vested in that purchaser and that it is free from all defects, liens and encumbrances except those which are listed as exceptions in the policy or are excluded from the scope of the policy’s coverage. It also covers losses and damages suffered if the title is unmarketable [2] The policy also provides coverage for loss if there is no right of access to the land. Although these are the basic coverages, expanded forms of residential owner’s policy exist that cover additional items of loss.[3]

  37. Title insurance is insurance against loss from defects in title to real property and from the invalidity or un-enforceability of mortgage liens. It is available in many countries but it is principally a product developed and sold in the United States. It is meant to protect an owner’s or lender’s financial interest in real property against loss due to title defects, liens or other matters. It will defend against a lawsuit attacking the title as it is insured, or reimburse the insured for the actual monetary loss incurred, up to the dollar amount of insurance provided by the policy.
    Typically the real property interests insured are fee simple ownership or a mortgage. However, title insurance can be purchased to insure any interest in real property, including an easement, lease or life estate. Just as lenders require fire insurance and other types of insurance coverage to protect their investment, nearly all institutional lenders also require title insurance to protect their interest in the collateral of loans secured by real estate. Some mortgage lenders, especially non-institutional lenders, may not require title insurance.

    Title insurance differs in several respects from other types of insurance. Where most insurance is a contract where the insurer indemnifies or guarantees another party against a possible specific type of loss (such as an accident or death) at a future date, title insurance generally insures against losses caused by title problems that have their source in past events. This often results in the curing of title defects or the elimination of adverse interests from the title before a transaction takes place. Title insurance companies attempt to achieve this by searching public records to develop and document the chain of title and to detect known claims against or defects in the title to the subject property. If liens or encumbrances are found, the insurer may require that steps be taken to eliminate them (for example, obtaining a release of an old mortgage or deed of trust that has been paid off, or requiring the payoff) before issuing the title policy. In the alternative, it may “except” those items not eliminated from coverage. Title plants are sometimes maintained to index the public records geographically, with the goal of increasing searching efficiency and reducing claims.

  38. What are the Main Protections offered by Title Insurance?
    1. Indemnifications against losses
    2. Payment of legal fees in defense of a claim against the property

  39. What are some examples of Hidden Risks Covered by Title Insurance?
    1. Forged Deeds
    2. Fraud
    3. Voidable Documents
    4. Unknown Heirs
    5. Errors in the Public Record

  40. How may I hold title to real estate in Illinois?
    1. If only one person will be going into title, then title is held in severalty or solely.
    2. If two or more people will be holding title, then:
    a. Tenants in Common. There is no survivorship aspect, i.e., when one tenant in common dies, that share will pass under their will or by law (intestate succession) if there is no will. The surviving tenant(s) in common do NOT receive the deceased’s share of the real estate.
    b. Joint Tenancy. This has survivorship aspects. When one joint tenant dies, the surviving joint tenant receives the deceased joint tenant’s interest in the real estate (by operation of law).
    c. Tenants by the Entirety. This also has survivorship aspects AND limited protection against creditors. This is only available to husband and wife for their homestead property (property they live in). When one dies, the survivor automatically receives the entire property by operation of law. Additionally, while both husband and wife are alive, a judgment creditor of only one of the spouses cannot enforce their judgment lien against the property (except for an IRS federal revenue lien).

  41. Why I brought that up is my daughter could not get a paper receipt from the local Korporate Noodles & Company when she asked for it while out dining with friends. Appalling right?

  42. Curious about the 6 month thing. On the HUD site, if you pull Sherry Hunt’s (whistleblower on Citi fraud) DOJ settlement document – it cites there were lots of defaults in the first 6 months of loans.

    Assuming a default occurs, the collection rights stay in the residual tranche (which is NOT securitized). Typically the GSE would keep these residual tranche rights and sell them to the servicer to collect on. I’m assuming a tax write-down by the Trust would reduce the debt, but not eliminate it? I believe fair debt collection rules only allow the debt collector to collect what he paid for the “debt” plus any legal fees.

    So, the Trust took a write down. The investors got screwed but they are “paid”. The GSE collects the mortgage insurance money (my policy has the GSE as beneficiary and because its an umbrella policy the insurer has no way to see if there was a payout previously made at the loan level), so the GSE gets paid and insurance gets screwed. Servicer buys the debt for pennies on the dollar from the GSE, RE-securitizes the debt collection rights to the GSE for fast cash, and pretends they are owed the full balance of the “loan”. So the servicer gets paid and the borrower gets screwed. victims = Investors, insurance, and borriwers. Sound close?

    Of course, we know the “loan” was our home equity taken by false pretenses and given out as a loan to someone else (we pay on equity line while they earn interest using it), while the collateral (annuity/fake mortgage on real property?) is supposedly placed in the Trust – but never makes it into the Trust in reality per above and is defaulted pretty quickly.

    My state has a suit you can file against the bank for failing to record a discharge within 30 days of a payoff. Penalty is only $100, but imagine the bank having to prove the debt still exists by means of their accounting records and general ledger! Saves you the headache of Discovery by putting them on the defensive.

    (Note: I’m doing a FDCPA class action for failure to identify creditor and other violations as a starting point to get Discovery proving the “loan” was defaulted long ago. It’s easy and lawyers get attorney fees, so they take the cases. I’ve got equity and can afford to pay my “mortgage”, but I’m sick of them trying to manufacture defaults to take my home)

    Also, read this doc from Stewart on foreclosure under power of sale, it may give you some ideas of ways to fight without going to Court:
    http://www.stewart.com/docs/jg04013.doc

    I received my original Note and Mortgage back from Verdugo Trustee after my refi (they were listed on my Release of Mortgage). Note was at CitiMortgage in Missouri, not with Trustee? Original Note is missing necessary endorsements for securitization so delivery to the Trust would have to be proven. Also, Note was endorsed in blank by a Citi employee who claims to be a VP but is really a document manager. Fraudulent endorsement of a de-recognized Note, to go with my robo-signed Release and Assignment.

    Note for stripes – “Verdugo” is “executioner” in Spanish. Kind of grim if you consider the fact that they took your life estate and they will get the land when you die (and the natural resources in it).

    The pile of evidence against them just keeps growing. They got so lazy with their Ponzi scheme, that the proof is everywhere if you know where to look.

  43. Bank of America has abused the hell out of me like many other homeowners……Bank of America files on my credit report every month for 14 months that I am 120 days late….every month for 14 months!….They had served me with foreclosure papers 14 months ago. . This month they file deed in lieu of foreclosure\bank liquidation! I have NOT signed off on a deed in lieu. I was never offered a deed I lieu. I have had a lawsuit going on against Bank of America for 14 months for lying to me about a modification. I completed the trial payment period. I paid them for 18 months on time and then was denied!

  44. THAT MEANS THEY ARE POCKETING YOUR CASH AND NOT CLAIMING IT AS INCOME OR PROFIT….THAT IS CRIMINAL PROFITEERING….A PATTERN OF CRIMINAL PROFITEERING IS A FELONY….

  45. Don’t allow KORPORATE Amerika to tell you they don’t give out paper receipts when you pay cash because that is criminal…..that is EMBEZZLEMENT ….!! A FELONY.

  46. I should add one wonders how anyone would accept something so permanent as OBAMACARE and the microchipped mark of the beast without ever reading or agreeing to it.

  47. One sign….the final warning the demons performed is the wonder of OBAMACARE. That sign is deception because it has evil secrets hidden all through it ajd the reason being is the microchip mark of the Beast is implanted in it and one wonders how stupid people can be to accept something they never read and never agreed to

  48. Beware the second part of the passage they will perform signs and wonders is deception by demons. When you see the signs of the beast or witness the beasts Number 666… you are being told by the Creator to seek the truth and pay attention and watch for more signs of the end of the lies. OBAMACARE is the final warning …. do not accept that mark.

  49. MARK 16:17……And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will drive out the demons and the devil; they will speak in new tongues.

  50. I certainly don’t want anyone to believe me. I want everyone to find out the truth for themselves. I am only alerting the people to seek the truth they need to know. You can’t fight these felons unless you have all of the facts and no one can do that for anyone. Telling others to find the truth out for themselves is not selfish but necessary.

  51. I get it, if I wanted a lecture I’d call my mom, LOL

  52. Having something to hide makes that person or persons insecure poppy.

  53. It’s really not that complex poppy. If they don’t have the Originial Receipts….they owe us a lot of money and satisfactions to all of our properties. A hundred years of living lies is the definition of insanity.

  54. “PEOPLE ONLY SPY ON OTHER PEOPLE WHEN THEY ARE INSECURE”

    Or they too have something to hide!

  55. Maybe the lawyers are just not that good? This can be a very complex battle and most of the lawyers have taken the easy paycheck, rather than fight the foes who will destroy them too…when you make a deal with the devil you eventually pay!

  56. Pope Benedict knew Pope John Paul II was the last Pope before the truth about this evil plan would be revealed to mankind. NO ONE has the power to stop the Creator from telling the truth through the prophetess of our times, the Blessed Mother to his people.

  57. The lawyers have no real wins because if they did there would be no more fraudclosures.

  58. The KORPORATE control freaks are infidels because they deny the power of God and his prophets but fear that power and that is why they hate our Constitution….our Liberty.

    To that I say AVE MARIA.

  59. Please do…very unusual terms, for sure!

  60. poppy – thanks! gonna read it soon

    C – johngault764@yahoo.com

  61. I love anything Pavoratti sang even if it had religious overtones. The truth put to music is a beautiful thing IMHO.

  62. Well, Neil you have been validated by the master.

    To speak with such authority…I guess we have a few lawyers present. reveal yourselves….and disclose your wins!

  63. I am biased only because that is my opinion, even if it is the truth.

  64. AVE MARIA …. Luciano Pavoratti’s version is IMHO the best and should be the New National Anthem. But of course I am biased when it comes to beautiful music sung by gifted people.

  65. The fact of the matter is, the control freaks who don’t own anything and hide behind the KORPORATE labels are the infidels who do not practice they preach and live in fear of the truth….. Hail Mary full of Grace…the Lord is with thee.

    That is who they really fear.

  66. And this is another aspect of that horror show: why even Garfield agitates for loan mods (as evidenced by his statements to John Wright. He even admits on tape that homeowners do not get the house free and clear, except in exceptionally rare cases. Like a handful out of millions):

    http://www.allgov.com/news/top-stories/banks-go-after-homeowners-years-after-foreclosure-130623?news=850369

    Banks Go after Homeowners Years after Foreclosure

    Sunday, June 23, 2013

    Banks have been taking homeowners to court long after they lose their properties in foreclosure, extending the nightmare of mortgages gone bad.

    What’s happening is lenders are pursuing former mortgage holders for old debts, like the “deficiency balance.”

    A deficiency balance, also known as the “underwater amount,” is the difference between the amount of the mortgage and the actual property value. Sometimes, the difference can total hundreds of thousands of dollars, and the homeowner is still on the hook to pay the deficiency balance even after losing the property.

    “Deficiency judgments are absolutely devastating to the foreclosed home buyer both as a matter of immediate financial impact and income tax consequence,” John Mixon, a recently retired professor at the University of Houston Law Center who has studied deficiency judgments for the past 30 years, told The Washington Post.

    Banks are permitted to go after deficiency judgments in 40 states, as well as the District of Columbia. In New Jersey, lenders have up to 56 years to collect debts and in Massachusetts 60 years. In Pennsylvania, there is no time limit at all.

    Part of the nightmare for foreclosed homeowners is that the lenders often wait several years until the homeowner has recovered financially before they go after the debt. By this time, significant interest has been added to the original debt amount.

    In addition to banks going after these costly judgments, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two quasi-governmental lending agencies, are seeking them in order to recoup money lost in the crisis. They claim that they only go after what is known as “strategic defaulters,” people who stopped paying their mortgage loan, but continued to pay other bills.

    -Noel Brinkerhoff, David Wallechinsky

  67. re; the mandate for recording a reconveyance of the dot, as MS would say, I think, any ‘derecognition’ of the debt would require such a reconveyance of the dot.

  68. KORPORATE AMERIKA are in fact hiding behind the KORPORATE logos and are committing hate crimes and political crimes against WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES BY BLAMING THEIR VICTIMS….ALL OF US FROM OBAMA TO BLACKS, CHRISTIANS, MUSLIMS, INFIDELS AND EVERYONE IN GENERAL.

    They are even calling Pope John Paul a Khazar to defame the fact he was a prophet…All khazars aren’t bad either because we all come from the same cradle of civilization. The difference between us and them is they are all secretly and openly members of the SYNAGOGUE OF SATAN AND MOSTLY HIDE BEHIND THE KHAZAR LABEL.

  69. JG,

    Garfield does make one point I’ve been making until I got blue in the face but people will do whatever they will do anyway:

    Choose only one angle and focus your arguments on it. Judges have a very, very short attention span. Homeowners have about 30 seconds to pick the judge’s curiosity and the guy has usually not read the pleadings. The First 30 seconds determine if he will listen further or not. And anyway, people have only a few minutes to present their case. 10, 15 at the most. When homeowner dumps in his lap every possible theory and every possible angle, the judge draws a blank.

    I see it all the time: people who are all the over the place with foreclosure defenses up the yin tag, including violations of the constitution, civil rights violations, discrimination and what not. MERS, robot signing and all this doesn’t work anymore. It’s been litigated to death. It really comes down to: do the parties have standing. Are they the parties of interest and does the bank have the proper accounting, i.e., can the bank account for everything that is allegedly owed and has the bank computed properly everything that had already been paid.

    That’s why “follow the money trail” is so much better: it works. That’s why conversion is such a powerful tool too. Judges can relate to paying for something and being accused of not having paid. All the rest is fluff most solid attorneys don’t use.

  70. I’ve mentioned a 6 mos. seasoning requirement and said I’d heard that a loan has to be seasoned for 6 mos before it qualifies for secn. Maybe the person who told me this (who fwiw has more savvy about that stuff than me, which is easy, since I have next to none) got it wrong and it’s that an AIG couldn’t write insuarnce on an
    unseasoned-loan.

  71. HOWEVER, EVERYTHING THESE FOREIGN IMPOSTERS HAVE RECORDED UPON OUR PROPERTY TITLES SINCE THEIR DEFAULT AKA THE ORIGINATION FRAUD ARE CRIMINAL ACTS BY THESE FELONS.

  72. carie – when a borrower applies for a refi and there’s a good likelihood the refi will go thru, the orig loan is falsely defaulted, they get the whatever money from wherever which they pocket, make a new loan – the refi – and use it to substitute the falsely defaulted loan in that trust or another trust(which substitution may be an option to a guarantee) where there has also been a falsely defaulted loan or even a ‘real’ one. It could happen this way. It could happen another way, but I’m a believer it happened. fwiw.

    I still don’t believe that collection rights exist to a debt, the remedy for which has already been taken in the form of a write-off UNless accounting or IRS laws or both allow for the re-recognition as
    subsequently received.

  73. THERE ARE NO TRUSTS & THERE ARE NO TRUSTEES CHRISTINE THEREFORE THE HOMEOWNERS BORROWED NO MONEY BUT WERE IN FACT DEFRAUDED FROM BEHIND THE KORPORATE LABELS AND AS A RESULT, WE THE PEOPLE ARE THE ONLY LEGAL BENEFICIARIES OF EVERY PAYMENT COLLECTED PLUS INTEREST FOR HARM INTENDED AND PERMANENT HARM DONE PLUS SATISFACTION OF TITLE TO EVERY PROPERTY WE THE PEOPLE PAID FOR UPFRONT AT THE ORIGINATION FRAUD.

    K.C. IS BEING DECEPTIVE….NOTHING WE FILE ON OUR PROPERTY TITLES CAN BE CONSIDERED AN OPERATION OF LAW WITHOUT THAT SATISFACTION OF MORTGAGE BEING RECORDED UPON THE PUBLIC RECORD.

  74. KC,

    Yeah but John Wright raises a few good points too about that “deny, deny, deny”, on the grounds that the loan wasn’t securitized and others of Garfield’s theories:

    Here is what he recently wrote about that:

    “Neil Garfield from Living Lies Blog has been quoted as saying that homeowners can walk into the courthouse in foreclosure and walk back out having foreclosed on their lender and receiving the title to their home free and clear of the mortgage or note.

    However — for the record – please be advised that after this interview the Ohio courts have uniformly rejected Neil Garfield’s theories. The courts have found that the question of whether a note has been securitized and there has been a breach of the PSA is wholly irrelevant. This was on the grounds that the borrower is not a party to that contract and hence has no right to object or squawk about it. The courts in Ohio have also recently ruled that the existence of robosigning is also irrelevant so long as the lender has the note or mortgage in its possession at the time that the foreclosure action is commenced with the courts (Ohio is a judicial state). The Ohio courts have repudiated every single one of Neil’s theories. This means those arguments are guaranteed to lose in states like Ohio. That is based on the fact that two cases were decided by two different courts of appeal on April 23, 2013 and April 25, 2013 that just shredded Mr. Garfield’s theories. The decisions basically blew Garfield’s theories right out of the water. — Decision One (Deutsche Bank v. John Whiteman) and Decision Two (Deutsche Bank v. Mohammed Najar) ”

    http://piggybankblog.com/2012/06/29/piggybankblog-interviews-the-infamous-neil-garfield-from-the-living-lies-blog/

    That’s why playing the game without an attorney is so dangerous.

  75. Paying once for something is enough. Paying twice is tyranny, paying three or more times is totalitarian. Both are control freak mechanisms by evil people. We are living in a nation that secretly and openly allows foreign tyrants, imposters, to steal from their own people from behind the KORPORATE Amerika label.

  76. Courts say there’s a note, there’s an assignment, blah blah. case closed.
    Courts do this imo based on alleged current possession of a note. But, what we and courts may well be overlooking is the non-possession of notes two months ago, say. If, as i posit, non – delivery of the notes gives the secn trusts security interests courtesy of the UCC, it also makes the banksters the owners of the undelivered notes. Any payment to the owners, the banksters, would 1) 99.99999% likely retire the debt and 2) have serious ramifications to the secn trust investor-beneficiaries holding the security interests, also courtesy of the UCC.
    Even if a court of fed juris could find in favor of enforcment of a note by a thief, which I’ve said and say it can’t, it still can’t find in favor of
    a claim on a paid-off note, one that’s toast, against its maker. Well, maybe it could if one were a holder in due course, but these post-default alleged transfers rule that out (no one’s a hdc). I can only say again how important that is.

    Okay, on March 15th 2006, I’m the bankster and I have received your money for the sale of sam’s note, which I own, to you. (Here we aren’t thinking NG’s E or R trust, which if we did, might 86 everything I’m about to say).But i don’t deliver sam’s note to you. This note is not transferred, at least I sure think not. Under my understanding of the UCC, I still own it, but you do have security interests in sam’s note.
    Back at the ranch, as still-note-owner, I enter some deal which eventually sees me the recipient of some dough relevant to sam’s note when sam defaults (or hey, how about if I put the note in false default to get those funds? whoohoo!)

    I didn’t get this far in the UCC, but seems to me, the note is retired dollar for dollar to the extent of the payment to me as a matter of law because I’m its owner AND, also courtesy of the UCC and your security interests, I owe you those funds. I don’t, can’t, owe you the note (thanks, Patrick), because it’s been paid off and is deader than a door nail: the subject of your security interest has been liquidated. (But, is the note still alive with only a partial payment to me? Hmmm…dang)

    *did you know that expression comes from the fact that door nails (or knobs) were once considered expensive tools and once used, were toast? Well, now you do!

    Moving right along, counting on your ignorance and any court’s ignorance of that payment to me and willing to commit fraud, forgery, perjury, felony, maybe even rico, I finally fork over the note to you (or at least what I claim is thee note) giving for all illegal
    iintents and purposes the impression rights of enforcement remain (against sam) under the note. I do this, give you what I allege is the real note because sam quit making payments, and I’ve already moved that other dough ouffshore and or spent it on those mojitas, yachts, and GS’s 4 & 5’s, or maybe a few Lears. I’ve been giving sam’s payments to you, but now i don’t have sam’s payments to give them to you. You don’t know I never gave you the note because someone in the act was supposed to see that I did, and didn’t.
    If I were you, I’d wanna visit some hurt on that guy.

    So then you, or someone allegedly representing you, show up in court with the liquidated, thus non-existant, note and seek enforcement against Sam. (IF that’s the note, it implies whomever paid me didn’t demand it to stand in my shoes) Oh, and I, with the help of my partner-in-crime (witting or otherwise) have now assigned the note’s collateral instrument, which is also toast, to you (courtesy of my own employee being designated a MERS officer by Hultman. “Such a deal i have for you!”

    ftr: If the debt were retired by the payment to me, I had an obligation and mandate to record a reconveyance of the dot to sam by a time certain. Count my sins – I’m a bad kid!

    also ftr: a coll instrument does not survive payment of the debt it secures, which is one reason AZ is off its rocker – Hogan-. Sorry, you justices, because in so far as you allow an alleged dot ben to enforce just the dot without regard to the note, you do so without regard to the only thing that matters – the existence of the debt. The justices focus and reliance was way too narrow, errant, or both. imo.

    I cannot now give you the original object of your security interest, sam’s note, because it’s been liquidated by the payment to me. it’s history. Sam”s note, the note for Pete’s sake, has been paid off. What remains is your claim against me for the funds that I got, to which your security interest in my opinion attaches,and which funds imo, the UCC will find are yours because of your security interest.
    .
    Sam’s claim isn’t that the trust can’t take a post-cut-off transfer of anything, it’s that his note has been liquidated and any battle is between you and me as to the funds I received.

    this still doesn’t help prove what happened or probably happened.
    If one believes for any reason, includiing any and all judicially noticeable material, that the note by what I’ve described or by any theory has been paid off, if one is the defendant, one might start with a motion to quash service for lack of jurisdiction: no injury caused by YOU. Make them show there is injury AND that it was caused by you.

    If one wants to go on the attack, some good minds are going to have to work together to formulate a cognitive complaint that will survive mtd and those for sj. Well, that’s not anything new, but maybe looking at the true (imo) implications of third party payments
    will lead to better arguments.
    I pointed to Rule 56(d) the other day for what a court MAY do when one doesn’t have all the goods one needs to establish the probability of success on the merits of one’s position. The art of the deal is convincing a court it SHOULD do what it may. That makes me sick, of course, that we need or even may need some art of the deal, but apparently we do.

  77. No beneficiary .. goes unclaimed (without notice of public filing) to state your claim and make your wishes known to the world.

    Escheat

    Ezeekeo saw the Will!

  78. Deny Deny Deny

    Grantor says to trustee … without my trust, you do not exist,
    Without trustee existence, …. there is no servicer, no agent, no sec, no vp, no poa, no aif and no nominee, no trust beneficiary.

    Grantor clearly states grantors intentions in grantors will, with regards to beneficiary.

  79. Maher Soliman,

    Listen to the interview Garfield gave to John Wright last year: he explains exactly why he continuously states that investors did not fund the loan.

    And by the way (and i remember seconding him on that at the time he first said it): the idea of doing a securitization search and presenting it to court is tantamount to making the case for the bank. Any homeowner should do just enough research to prove that his loan is NOT in a specific trust and force the bank to prove otherwise. Paying someone else to track down where/in which trust the loan really is is ludicrous since it is equivalent to telling the judge; “I have a loan. The party trying to collect is the wrong one. I can prove to you who the right one is.” All it does is confirm the judge that:
    1) Homeowner borrowed money;
    2) Homeowner knows he owes it
    3) Homeowner must repay. Whatever happens between servicer and trustee are none of homeowner’s business. It’s up to servicer and trustee to sort it out afterwards.

    Dumb idea…

    http://piggybankblog.com/2012/06/29/piggybankblog-interviews-the-infamous-neil-garfield-from-the-living-lies-blog/

  80. Some Americans such as myself, happen to realize this is the open and secret theft of our Liberty by Foreign Imposters and I for one am not going to shut up about it.

  81. ms – what contracts are you calling executory?

  82. stripes, can i make a suggestion? on the chance that you have something to contribute here, is there any way you can get someone else to write your stuff for you at least sometimes? If you do have something to contribute, I’d like to consider it. The problem for me is in your delivery and you putting down everyone you think – as opposed to know – disagrees with you. There are words for that, and none of them are good.
    if people disagree with you, can you stop putting them down? Suck it up, ignore the BAIT. Put a sign on your refrigerator “I will NOT take the bait”? Can you not see you’re baited – for whatever reasons? You’ve unfortunately shown yourself to be easy, which further undermines your credibility about the things you are trying to say.
    Your sentences suffer from rambling and poor structure. Sorry, but they do. Stop shouting, all right? I have taken to just ignoring you mostly, and that’s probably true for the ones you have driven out of here. You aren’t alone, but you are dead-center. I’ll listen to what you have to say if you can either learn to say it well, or find someone to do it for you. I’d volunteer to try, but I have my focus already.

  83. WAKE UP AMERICA AND STOP BUYING FROM AND DOING BUSINESS WITH THE FOREIGN NIHILISTS OF OUR LIBERTY AMERICA….!

  84. WHY…? Because this foreign corp of imposter crooks AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA have hijacked not just our wealth, our Treasury…..WHICH IS OUR LIBERTY but they have in fact hijacked the entire FREE MARKET CAPITALIST SYSTEM BY HIJACKING OUR TREASURY UNDER FALLSE PRETENSES….THAT IS FELONIOUS ON MANY LEVELS AND IS ALSO PROVEN BY THE LEGAL FACT…..THEY HAVE NO ORIGINAL RECEIPTS THAT PROVE THEY PAID FOR ANYTHING IN THE FIRST PLACE.

    THAT IS HOW THEY HAVE THEIR FOREIGN COMMUNIST KORPORATE AMERIKA BOOT ON OUR THROATS….THESE CROOKS MADE SURE YOU WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO WORK YOUR WAY OUT OF THEIR ROBBERY OF WE THE PEOPLE OR BE ABLE TO HIRE A LAWYER TO GET BACK WHAT THEY STOLE FROM US.

    THAT IS TYRANNICAL….AND ILLEGAL UNDER U.S. AND COMMON LAW.

    THAT IS WHY THEY HIJACKED OUR TREASURY UNDER FALSE PRETENSES…LIES….AND THAT IS OUR LIBERTY AND THAT SHOULD BE UNACCEPTABLE TO ANY AMERICAN. WHETHER YOU ARE ON THE TAXPAYERS DOLE OR NOT.

  85. Whether or not the law could go say far as to say the secn trustee had to or was or would be ‘vouching’ for the quality of the loans vrs. the delivery of them, I couldn’t say. fwiw.
    I had a ** in that comment, and it was mean to note, which I forgot,
    that the law about dot trustees imposes at least a standard of good faith and fair dealing by the dot trustee with both the beneficiary and the trustor, like it does to any contract. I have historically posited that the dot trustee has more than that – that he has a fiduciary to both the other parties to the dot. Bur banksters have been hard at work, and some states’ statutes can now be found to disavow the fiduciary part (not all states, but some for sure) Whether or not those states would have to defer to any fed regulation saying otherwise, i don’t know.

    But at any rate, when a dot trustee, whom I begrudgingly but significantly note imo is not likely subject to Rule 17’s injury requirement, doesn’t appropriately satisfy himself by appropriate diligence as to all issues relevant to the asserted default, he is clearly not acting in good faith and fair dealing with one party. He may also, by that lack of diligence, be undermining, for lack of better word,
    the rights of the true beneficiary, the one his lack of dligence has failed to identify.

    Banksters today casually and cavilierly – and dead wrongly – refer to the dot trustee as their agent. I’ve already, tho it’s been awhile, gone into the why-nots of this, so won’t now. But the dot trustee is not the agent of the ben, but if he were, long and short, there is no dot and in fact, imo, acting as the collection-agent-minion of the alleged ben
    could viitiate the deed of trust. I will just say this – the borrower in the deed of trust is the trustOR, the one who reposed his trust in the dot trustee.

    Gwen C went for it, I believe, on that dot fiduciary to the trustor. What happened and if it were well-argued, I don’t know. I just believe that she did. Gwen, if you’re around, please don’t go off on me. For whatever if any effort you made, I’m your biggest fan. fwiw. I wanted to work with you on it, but well, it never happened. And if you did, as to me mentioning it, (and I’m not stating that you did as fact), it’s public record, anyway.

  86. I am talking about TELLING THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH POPPY….NOT MILLIONS OF LITTLE BITS & PIECES OF THE TRUTH.

    I suggest no more than WE THE PEOPLE INVOKE OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT…..OUR LEGAL RIGHT ….AND WE THE PEOPLE PUT KORPORATE AMERIKA ON JUDICIAL NOTICE….THAT WE THE PEOPLE ARE AWARE THAT THEY DEFRAUDED US AND PRECISELY HOW THEY DEFRAUDED US BY SENDING THEM A LETTER….A NOTICE OF DISHONOR & DEFAULT AND A DEMAND LETTER FOR PAYMENT AND BOYCOTT AS MUCH OF KORPORATE AMERIKA AS POSSIBLE UNLESS AND UNTIL THEY PAY BACK WHAT THEY STOLE FROM US AND CEASE AND DESIST THEIR ROBBERY OF US.

  87. stripes, not for anything, but you are NOT the only one giving a shit enough to tell the truth. Right in court I called these bastards treasonous and counterfeiters….care less.

    And I have filed many, many complaints against brokers (predatory right now), bankruptcy courts, (for wanting huge fees to broker a short-sale), insurance companies, the insert here with the Fannie Mae home thefts(waiving all defects cause they don’t have legal title), arguing with lawyers, the sheriffs department, etc….anyone who is complicit in this.

    The scam cannot be perpetrated without the puppets in place. The believers, who carry out the message. So, don’t you think for one minute you are alone screaming. I too have a reputation for being nuts and aggressive with this, because all the pieces have to come together to make it work!

    I just threw my insurer of 20 years off my property, for saying they needed to come and evaluate perils on my home, for my own protection…bull shit, you are here to see if I may have a situation for which you could be liable and this is the second time in 18 months, and you are not qualified to do so. Now, they are going to cancel my insurance, all the while they are trespassing on my land…when they tell me I don’t NEED to be here, shit I don’t!

    All of this behavior is the controls in play, to get us to comply. I have taken the stand, if you work for them, you get your ass handed to you, as much control as I have, leave me alone and stop lying about your intent! Just my observations…

    These a**holes actually have people feeling sorry for them.

  88. PEOPLE ONLY SPY ON OTHER PEOPLE WHEN THEY ARE INSECURE.

  89. FOREIGN IMPOSTER TBTF KORPORATE AMERIKA ARE THE BIGGEST SWINDLE OF OUR WEALTH AND INTENDED THEFT OF OUR LIBERTY UNDER FALSE PRETENSES IN U.S. HISTORY.

    This is not the failure of Capitalism, it is the failure of DAS KAPITALISTS WHO INTENDED TO STEAL EVERYTHING FROM WE THE PEOPLE BY MAKING US BELIEVE A COMPLEX WEB OF LIES THAT CONCEALED THEIR TRUE IDENTIES….TBTF KORPORATE AMERIKA IS A GROUP OF FOREIGN IMPOSTERS WHO HATE OUR LIBERTY.

  90. tbtfnomore……..THERE IS LITERALLY NO NEED TO LOOK ANY FURTHER THAN KORPORATE AMERIKA HAS NO RECEIPTS THAT PROVE THEY PAID FOR ANYTHING…

  91. tbtf: My closing atty did three years in the federal pen for wire fraud related to “flipping houses with dual transactions”. Isn’t that fun?

  92. What I mean by KORPORATE Amerika has committed a QUADRILLION DOLLARS IN SECURITIES FRAUD IS…..KORPORATE AMERIKA HAS STOLEN A QUADRILLION DOLLARS OF OUR WEALTH BY COMMITTING MASSIVE MORTGAGE FRAUD IN OUR NAMES WITHOUT OUR KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT MEANING…..THEY HAVE NO RECEIPTS THAT PROVE THEY PAID FOR ANYTHING AND THIS FRAUD BEGAN IN 1982….NEARLY TWO DECADES BEFORE THE FAKE REPEAL OF GLASS STEAGALL BY CLINTON….9/11 WAS THE ATTEMPT TO COVER UP FOR ALL OF THE SECURITIES FRAUD COMMITTED BY OUR FOREIGN ENEMIES AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA AND THE PRECURSOR TO THE THEFT OF EVERY AMERICANS LIBERTY BY THIS FOREIGN KORP OF IMPOSTER FELONS AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA.

  93. The issue is lack of transparency on every level. See the below article regarding the sealing of records related to Osama bin Laden. Note the reference to the shell game – it is happening everywhere. Americans must work very hard to get to the truth, because it is hidden under so many layers of propaganda. Why the need for cover-ups if things are being done in accordance with the law?

    WASHINGTON — The top U.S. special operations commander, Adm. William McRaven, ordered military files about the Navy SEAL raid on Osama bin Laden’s hideout to be purged from Defense Department computers and sent to the CIA, where they could be more easily shielded from ever being made public.

    “Welcome to the SHELL GAME in place of open government,” said Thomas Blanton, director of the National Security Archive, a private research institute at George Washington University. “Guess which shell the records are under. If you guess the right shell, we might show them to you. It’s ridiculous.”

    http://m.military.com/daily-news/2013/07/08/secret-move-keeps-bin-laden-records-in-the-shadows.html?ESRC=dod.nl

  94. MS: Estopples by Laches-:more like in undisclosed executory contracts versus a separate issue your referring to which falls under the statue of limitations , failing to bring claims and sitting on your rights.
    A lache is more of waiting for a claim to ripen and no can do ….”

    Well, laches is more that the claim is ripe, has been ripe, and there was an inexcuseable delay / failure to assert it. If (estopppel by) laches were asserted by anyone, seems to me it would be the defense of the banksters against those who seek performance under, say, the PSA and I think we agree about whom would be asserting laches – the banksters.
    If the banksters had the cheek to assert laches and it prevailed (taking NG’s theory of an E or R trust as factual – an idea you’re apparently not on-board ), to me, the investors would have a major cause of action against the secn trustee for gross somethings, including negligence. But then, as I recall, the secn trustee guaranteed nothing about the loans in the PSA. But then some more, that wouldn’t survive, i don’t think, because of the statutory imposition of duty if not fiduciary imposed on a trust trustee.** So even if such duty or fiduciary were not expressed in the PSA, the law would yet find it.

    But, the idea of the deals being executory contracts may be interesting. Hmm…. I think if a contract says party A will pay party B for
    goatheads, and party A has paid, but B has not performed, here delivered, not sure that’s an executory contract because of the performance by one party. Not sure, really. In other words, to qualify as an executory contract, I’m thinking maybe it’s that neither party has yet performed, not just one of them. Again, not sure. When it comes to negotiable instruments as the goatheads of those contracts, however, I still posit that party B has security interests having performed its end, i.e., to pay.
    We may not be talking about the same things here at all. I’m just throwing out what it continues to look like to me (disregarding here NG’s theory of an E or T trust) under my theory that the investors, for non-delivery, have UCC imposed security interests. The UCC imo will tell us what is to be made of funds paid to the indentured party
    relevant to the investors’ (anyone’s) security interests. i think the UCC would be far more operative than the fact these may be executory contracts under which one might assert laches as a defense against performance. .

  95. Neil knows this is true or he would not allow me to expose them. This Korp of crooks AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA are here to steal it all from EVERY AMERICAN…ALL OF OUR LIBERTY…..NOT JUST MINE…..AND THIS IS THE FINAL WAKE UP CALL FOR WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES. NO ONE IS SAFE FROM BEING ROBBED OF THEIR LIBERTY BY THESE FOREIGN IMPOSTERS AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA BECAUSE THEY HAVE BREACHED OUR PERSONAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY BY COMMITTING A QUADRILLIIN DOLLARS IN SECURITIES FRAUD WITH OUR SECURITIES WITHOUT OUR KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT.

    THE TRUTH IS KORPORATE AMERIKA HAS NO RECEIPTS TO PROVE THEY PAID FOR ANYTHING AND AS A RESULT EVERY AMERICAN IS IN OPEN & SECRET PERIL AS A RESULT.

  96. The sad part is, I am the only American who gives a shit enough to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth about this scam.

    Exposing just millions of tiny little bits and pieces of this scam to steal our Liberty is not enough.

    The main culprit, the controllers hiding behind the Korporate Logos of this giant foreign imposter fraud entity AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA need to be held to account by EVERY AMERICAN…NOT JUST ONE OR A FEW AMERICANS.

    The reason for that is clear, the fraudulent foreign imposter controllers of KORPORATE AMERIKA have taken it way too far now and are here not solely to steal my Liberty but to steal everyones Liberty, from the top down to low level employees.

    WAKE UP AMERICA….!

  97. Upon my discovery of this fraud by KORPORATE America, I am not angry at these people, I am however, thoroughly disgusted to the point of no return upon my discovery of all of the decades of secrets, fraud, lies and abuse that have been told as truth with the intent to permanently harm and enslave me and my family to imposters… who not only hate everyone and hate our Liberty but are in fact sadomasochistic foreign tyrants.

  98. It is in fact, SECURITIES FRAUD and a BREACH OF OUR PERSONAL/NATIONAL SECURITY by every single one of these KORPORATE Amerika crooks who are imposters to our Constitutional Republic when they seek any personal information from WE THE PEOPLE EITHER SECRETLY OR OPENLY. WHY? THIS IS ALL BEING DONE UNDER FALSE PRETENSES BY OUR FOREIGN ENEMIES AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA WITH INTENT TO DO PERMANENT HARM TO US…..WHILE THEY OPENLY YET SECRETLY STEAL EVERYTHING FROM WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES..

    NOTHING KORPORATE AMERIKA, A FOREIGN KORP OF IMPOSTERS OPERATING BOTH SECRETLY & OPENLY ON & OFF OF U.S. SOIL UNDER FALSE PRETENSES OF DBA AMERICAN BUSINESSES DOES IS LEGAL, MORAL OR ETHICAL IN THESE UNITED STATES OR OUTSIDE OF THESE UNITED STATES.

    KORPORATE AMERIKA IS THE BIGGEST SWINDLE OF OUR WEALTH & PROPERTY IN U.S. HISTORY BY OUR ENEMIES BOTH FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC.

    UPON OUR DISCOVERY OF THEIR TRUE IDENTITIES, THIS FOREIGN KORP OF IMPOSTERS AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA OWES WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES AN INNUMERABLE AMOUNT OF MONEY & PROPERTY.

    I do not feel sorry for their controllers or their agents or agencies because the controllers fully intended to destroy and steal everything I worked my entire life for by accusing me of wrongdoing when I did nothing wrong and had no sympathy for me or my family whatsoever.

  99. Freddie Mac ARE IN FACT, committing SECURITIES FRAUD by tracking any personal information about WE THE PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO RECEIPTS.

  100. KORPORATE AMERIKA IS A FRONT FOR OUR FOREIGN ENEMIES DBA AMERICAN BUSINESSES ON U.S. SOIL WHO ARE HERE SOLELY TO STEAL EVERYTHING FROM WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES AND THEIR MAIN OBJECTIVE IS THE THEFT OF OUR LIBERTY….AKA OUR FREEDOM AND INDEPENDENCE FROM FOREIGN TYRANNY AND OPPRESSION.

    THOSE HIDING BEHIND THE KORPORATE LOGOS ARE PRECISELY THE EVILDOERS THE FOUNDERS FEARED.

    THEY ARE CRONY CAPITALISTS, COMMUNISTS, SATANISTS DISGUISED AS SEPARATE ENTITIES WHO ARE IN FACT ONE GIANT CRIME SYNDICATE CONDUCTING BLACK OPS OPENLY AND SECRETLY ON U.S. SOIL TO STEAL OUR LIBERTY.

    EVERY FORECLOSURE CRIME KORPORATE AMERIKA COMMITTED AGAINST WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES IS THEIR NORMAL BUSINESS OPERATIONS AND HAVE BEEN USED BOTH OPENLY AND SECRETLY TO DESTROY OUR CONSTITUTION….OUR LIBERTY FOR THE PAST 100 YEARS.

    UPON OUR DISCOVERY OF THEIR FRAUD COMMITTED AGAINST WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES THESE KORPORATE AMERIKA CONTROL FREAKS OWE WE THE PEOPLE INNUMERABLE AMOUNTS OF MONEY AND PROPERTY TITLES TO EVERYTHING AND THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE DESPERATELY TRYING TO CONCEAL FROM WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES.

  101. WAKE UP AMERICA…..! Korporate Amerika is a giant shell corporation comprised of many proxies that are a front for the robbery of WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES.

  102. “…obtained proceeds that started with the transactions originated with the money of investors…”

    Wrong, wrong, WRONG, NEIL…why do you keep re-hashing lies?

    “Security investors fund the BANK—NOT the borrowers—­there is NO direct relationsh­ip between security investors and borrowers.”

    “…Fannie and Freddie—-G­SEs—-could not just sell the Note- on performing loans—- this would be securities fraud to the GSE security investors. The Note (and it’s receivable stream) HAD to be falsely placed in default—and charged-of­f (after de-regulation) in order to sell the “Note”—- but, when this happens the Note NO LONGER EXISTS—thu­s, all that is sold is collection rights to a once existing note.

    Security investors fund the BANK—not the borrowers—­there is no direct relationsh­ip between security investors and borrowers. If banks are able to sell their income stream, that is an accounting transactio­n—it is not a “loan” to borrowers. This is why security investors are NEVER the creditor.

    Collection rights transfers are not funded by borrower transactio­ns (ie fabricated refinance)­. Collection rights are transferre­d by assignment­—not NOTES (which is why NOTES are fake). When some people here talk about Non-Deposi­t “trust” non-member­s—they are referring to derivative transactio­ns—that “SWAP” out collection rights—alt­hough the credit enhancers pay cash for collection rights—the­y use insurance for the purchase of the rights.
    This is why the subprime was so profitable­—the bank debt buyers put up NO CASH for transactio­n—but, were then able to profit by the “sale” of the receivable pass-throu­ghs to security investors.­. This is also why MBIA (insurance co.) legal action against BOA and others is hugely important.­”

  103. Cover up and lie is all they do. E title? Ha ..! Where’s the receipt? You are a bunch of sadistic control freaks. There is one cure for your crime spree and it is not signing up for decades more of fraud, lies and abuse.

    The truth is undeniable, fraudclosure and all of the crimes of the last decade are politically and racially motivated hate crimes aimed at WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES by the controllers of their fraud hiding behind the scenes of their crimes.

  104. Another thing – I found a website some time ago. It was how Freddie Mac tracked loan data. What it collected, etc.

    Only later, as I reviewed my research and docs with a fine toothed comb, did I notice the website URL path on the printouts I had made – http://www.ROBOTEST!!! I’ll see if I can find and scan it, but it shows the forgeries were not done to save time, but to give the illusion of a REAL assignment or release of mortgage while they tried to keep the Ponzi scheme afloat.

  105. Now check your closing papers. Mine had a “non-attorney closing settlement agreement” and it listed the closing agent as Electronic Closing Services Inc. – a foreign for profit entity NOT licensed in my state. However, their d/b/a was… E-title. That’s how they do the equity line closing behind your back! They shuffle the closing docs you signed to create a NEW (phone) closing set of docs you had no idea about. The HUD was signed by an employee of the title company who did this “phone closing” with me supposedly. Screw the servicer records, you need the title company file from what I’ve discovered. If there are enough of us with the same docs, there is a class action lawsuit possible too. Many of my neighbors have the same loan originator (coincidence??) and same doc issues as me – they just haven’t been manufactured into default yet. My “default” was caused by my initial escrow deposit being shorted over $4k following my refinance. Checked my OLD loan, and my escrow was shorted repeatedly as well. Reconcile your main accounting and you will realize they hide 2 columns = suspend acct and fees. It’s a good place to start overturning the “bad debtor” perception of the judge by showing their poor accounting. Numbers don’t lie… Neither does the money trail. But you at least have the numbers in your files – the judge has to help with the money trail. PS – The second escrow company on my HUD (Titleserv) was shut down by the FBI and docs were seized 8 months after my refi. So I can’t access those docs now so my money trail may never be shown😦

  106. KC

    I am certain we would all agree here, what that name would be, LOL

  107. Poppy… We have a name for Sylvia and Scott and David … but I am not allowed to say it here. hahaha But St Louis would be a good place to start looking… No Cherries there!

  108. tbtfnomore

    (6) Check who owns E-Title in your state, in mine, it is a foreclosure mill attorney

    You bet Brock & Scott…with Sylvia Jones, signing thousands of the documents for four states, as attorney in fact, for Wells Fargo, BOA, Countrywide, Recon Trust, Deutsche Bank, BONY, she sure gets around, like Scott Anderson of Ocwen, who Judge Shack kicked to the curb.

  109. Here it is for all to read, long but I’ve not ever gotten a contract like this and I have been buying real estate for 20+ years:

    On or before ten (10) calendar days from the Acknowledgement Date, the Purchaser shall inspect the Property or obtain for
    its own use, benefit and reliance, inspections and/or reports on the condition of the Property, or be deemed to have waived
    such inspection and any objections to the condition of the Property and to have accepted the Property. The Purchaser shall
    keep the Property free and clear of liens and indemnify and hold the Seller harmless from all liability claims, demands,
    damages, and costs related to the Purchaser’s inspection and the Purchaser shall repair all damages arising from or caused
    by the inspections. The Purchaser shall not directly or indirectly cause any inspections to be made by any government
    building or zoning inspectors or government employees without the prior written consent of the Seller, unless required by
    law, in which case, the Purchaser shall provide reasonable notice to the Seller prior to any such inspection. If the Seller has
    winterized this Property and the Purchaser desires to have the Property inspected, the Seller’s listing agent will have the
    Property dewinterized prior to inspection and rewinterized after inspection.
    Within five (5) calendar days of receipt of any inspection report prepared by or for the Purchaser, but not later than ten (10)
    calendar days from the Acknowledgment Date, whichever first occurs, the Purchaser will provide written notice to the Seller
    of any items disapproved. The Purchaser’s silence shall be deemed as acceptance of the condition of the Property. The
    Purchaser shall provide to the Seller, at no cost, upon request by the Seller, complete copies of all inspection reports upon
    which the Purchaser’s disapproval of the condition of the property is based. In no event shall the Seller be obligated to make
    any repairs or replacements that may be indicated in the Purchaser’s inspection reports. The Seller may, in its sole discretion,
    10649870-281E
    PURCHASER (Initials) ________________
    SELLER (Initials) ____________________
    FANNIE MAE FORM 001 (12/05/2012)
    3
    make such repairs to the Property under the terms described in Section 6 of this Addendum. If the Seller elects not to repair
    the Property, the Purchaser may cancel this Agreement and receive all earnest money deposited. If the Seller elects to make
    any such repairs to the Property, the Seller shall notify the Purchaser after completion of the repairs and the Purchaser shall
    have five (5) calendar days from the date of notice, to inspect the repairs and notify the Seller of any items disapproved. If
    after inspection the Purchaser is not satisfied with repairs or treatments, Purchaser may terminate the Agreement at any time
    prior to closing.
    In situations that are applicable, a structural, electrical, mechanical, environmental or termite inspection report may have been
    prepared for the benefit of the Seller. Upon request, the Purchaser will be allowed to review the report to obtain the same
    information and knowledge the Seller has about the condition of the Property but the Purchaser acknowledges that the
    inspection reports were prepared for the sole use and benefit of the Seller. The Purchaser will not rely upon any such
    inspection reports obtained by the Seller in making a decision to purchase the Property.
    (b) If the Property is a condominium or planned unit development or co-operative, unless otherwise required by law, the
    Purchaser, at the Purchaser’s own expense, is responsible for obtaining and reviewing the covenants, conditions and
    restrictions and bylaws of the condominium, or planned unit development or cooperative (“Governing Documents”) within
    ten (10) calendar days of the Effective Date. The Seller agrees to use reasonable efforts, as determined in the Seller’s sole
    discretion, to assist the Purchaser in obtaining a copy of the Governing Documents. The Purchaser will be deemed to have
    accepted the Governing Documents if the Purchaser does not provide the Seller notice in writing, within fifteen (15)
    calendar days of the Effective Date, of the Purchaser’s disapproval of the Governing Documents. In the event Purchaser
    disapproves of the Governing Documents, Purchaser has the right to terminate the Agreement provided the Purchaser
    notifies Seller in writing of Purchaser’s disapproval within fifteen (15) calendar days of the Effective Date.
    6. Repairs: All repairs and treatments will be completed by a vendor approved by the Seller, and will be subject to the Seller’s
    satisfaction only. If the Seller has agreed to pay for treatment of wood infesting organisms, the Seller shall treat only active
    infestation. Neither the Purchaser, nor its representatives, shall enter upon the Property to make any repairs and/or
    treatments prior to closing. The Purchaser shall inspect the repairs and/or treatments as set forth in paragraph 5(a) or
    is deemed to have waived such inspection and any objections to the repairs and/or treatments. The Purchaser
    acknowledges that all repairs and treatments are done for the benefit of the Seller and not for the benefit of the Purchaser and
    that the Purchaser has inspected or has been given the opportunity to inspect repairs and treatments. Any repairs or treatments
    made or caused to be made by the Seller shall be completed prior to closing. Under no circumstances shall the Seller be
    required to make any repairs or treatments after the Settlement Date. The Purchaser acknowledges that closing on this
    transaction shall be deemed the Purchaser’s reaffirmation that the Purchaser is satisfied with the condition of the
    Property and with all repairs and treatments to the Property and waives all claims related to such condition and to
    the quality of the repairs or treatments to the Property. Any repairs or treatments shall be performed for functional
    purposes only and exact restoration of appearance or cosmetic items following any repairs or treatments shall not be required.
    The Seller shall not be obligated to obtain or provide to the Purchaser any receipts for repairs, or treatments, written
    statements indicating dates or types of repairs and/ or treatments or copies of such receipts or statements nor any other
    documentation regarding any repairs or treatments to the Property. THE SELLER DOES NOT WARRANT OR
    GUARANTEE ANY WORK, REPAIRS OR TREATMENTS TO THE PROPERTY. THE PURCHASER AGREES TO
    EXECUTE AND DELIVER TO THE SELLER AT CLOSING FANNIE MAE’SWAIVER & RELEASE 2012.
    7. CONDITION OF PROPERTY: THE PURCHASER UNDERSTANDS THAT THE SELLER ACQUIRED THE
    PROPERTY BY FORECLOSURE, DEED-IN-LIEU OF FORECLOSURE, FORFEITURE, TAX SALE, OR SIMILAR
    PROCESS. AS A MATERIAL PART OF THE CONSIDERATION TO BE RECEIVED BY THE SELLER UNDER
    THIS AGREEMENT AS NEGOTIATED AND AGREED TO BY THE PURCHASER AND THE SELLER, THE
    PURCHASER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES TO ACCEPT THE PROPERTY IN “AS IS” CONDITION AT
    THE TIME OF CLOSING, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY DEFECTS OR ENVIRONMENTAL
    CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE PROPERTY, WHETHER KNOWN OR UNKNOWN, WHETHER SUCH
    DEFECTS OR CONDITIONS WERE DISCOVERABLE THROUGH INSPECTION OR NOT. THE PURCHASER
    ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE SELLER, ITS AGENTS AND REPRESENTATIVES HAVE NOT MADE AND THE
    SELLER SPECIFICALLY NEGATES AND DISCLAIMS ANY REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, PROMISES,
    COVENANTS, AGREEMENTS OR GUARANTEES, IMPLIED OR EXPRESS, ORAL OR WRITTEN WITH
    RESPECT TO THE FOLLOWING:
    10649870-281E
    PURCHASER (Initials) ________________
    SELLER (Initials) ____________________
    FANNIE MAE FORM 001 (12/05/2012)
    4
    (A) THE PHYSICAL CONDITION OR ANY OTHER ASPECT OF THE PROPERTY INCLUDING THE
    STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OR THE QUALITY OR CHARACTER OF MATERIALS USED IN
    CONSTRUCTION OF ANY IMPROVEMENTS (E.G. DRYWALL, ASBESTOS, LEAD PAINT, UREA
    FORMALDEHYDE FOAM INSULATION), AVAILABILITY AND QUANTITY OR QUALITY OF
    WATER, STABILITY OF THE SOIL, SUSCEPTIBILITY TO LANDSLIDE OR FLOODING,
    SUFFICIENCY OF DRAINAGE, WATER LEAKS, WATER DAMAGE, MOLD OR ANY OTHER
    MATTER AFFECTING THE STABILITY, INTEGRITY, OR CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY OR
    IMPROVEMENTS;
    (B) THE CONFORMITY OF THE PROPERTY, OR THE IMPROVEMENTS, TO ANY ZONING, LAND USE
    OR BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS OR COMPLIANCE WITH ANY LAWS, RULES, ORDINANCES
    OR REGULATIONS OF ANY FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITY, OR THE
    GRANTING OF ANY REQUIRED PERMITS OR APPROVALS, IF ANY, OF ANY GOVERNMENTAL
    BODIES WHICH HAD JURISDICTION OVER THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ORIGINAL
    STRUCTURE, ANY IMPROVEMENTS AND/OR ANY REMODELING OF THE STRUCTURE; AND
    (C) THE HABITABILITY, MERCHANTABILITY, MARKETABILITY, PROFITABILITY OR FITNESS FOR
    A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF THE PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING REDHIBITORY
    VICES AND DEFECTS, APPARENT, NON APPARENT OR LATENT, WHICH NOW EXIST OR WHICH
    MAY HEREAFTER EXIST AND WHICH, IF KNOWN TO THE PURCHASER, WOULD CAUSE THE
    PURCHASER TO REFUSE TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY.
    Mold, mildew, spores and/or other microscopic organisms and/or allergens (collectively referred to in this Agreement as
    “Mold”) are environmental conditions that are common in residential properties and may affect the Property. Mold, in
    some forms, has been reported to be toxic and to cause serious physical injuries, including but not limited to, allergic
    and/or respiratory reactions or other problems, particularly in persons with immune system problems, young children
    and/or elderly persons. Mold has also been reported to cause extensive damage to personal and real property. Mold may
    have been removed or covered in the course of any cleaning or repairing of the Property. The Purchaser acknowledges
    that, if Seller, or any of Seller’s employees, contractors, or agents cleaned or repaired the Property or remediated Mold
    contamination, that Seller does not in any way warrant the cleaning, repairs or remediation. Purchaser accepts full
    responsibility for all hazards that may result from the presence of Mold in or around the Property. The Purchaser is
    satisfied with the condition of the Property notwithstanding the past or present existence of Mold in or around the
    Property and Purchaser has not, in any way, relied upon any representations of Seller, Seller’s employees, officers,
    directors, contractors, or agents concerning the past or present existence of Mold in or around the Property.
    If at any time the Property conditions result in violations of building code or other laws or regulations, either party shall have the
    right to terminate the Agreement at any time prior to closing. If there is an enforcement proceeding arising from allegations of
    such violations before an enforcement board, special master, court or similar enforcement body, and neither the Purchaser nor
    the Seller terminate this Agreement, the Purchaser agrees (a) to accept the Property subject to the violations, (b) to be
    responsible for compliance with the applicable code and with orders issued in any code enforcement proceeding and (c) to
    resolve the deficiencies as soon as possible after the closing. The Purchaser agrees to execute any and all documents necessary
    or required for closing by any agency with jurisdiction over the Property. The Purchaser further agrees to indemnify the Seller
    from any and all claims or liability arising from the Purchaser’s breach of this Section 7 of this Addendum.
    The closing of this sale shall constitute acknowledgement by the Purchaser that Purchaser had the opportunity to retain
    an independent, qualified professional to inspect the Property and that the condition of the Property is acceptable to the
    Purchaser. The Purchaser agrees that the Seller shall have no liability for any claims or losses the Purchaser or the
    Purchaser’s successors or assigns may incur as a result of construction or other defects which may now or hereafter exist
    with respect to the Property.
    8. Occupancy Status of Property: The Purchaser acknowledges that neither the Seller, nor its representatives, agents or assigns, has
    made any warranties or representations, implied or expressed, relating to the existence of any tenants or occupants at the
    Property unless otherwise noted in Section 38 of this Addendum. Seller represents that the Property may have tenants
    occupying same under an active lease but expressly disclaims any warranties regarding the validity, enforceability, performance
    under or continuation of said lease. The Purchaser acknowledges that closing on this transaction shall be deemed the
    Purchaser’s reaffirmation that neither the Seller, nor its representatives, agents or assigns, has made any warranties or
    representations, implied or expressed, relating to the existence of any tenants or occupants at the Property unless otherwise
    10649870-281E
    PURCHASER (Initials) ________________
    SELLER (Initials) ____________________
    FANNIE MAE FORM 001 (12/05/2012)
    5
    noted in Section 38 of this Addendum. The Seller, its representatives, agents or assigns, shall not be responsible for evicting or
    relocating any tenants, occupants or personal property at the Property prior to or subsequent to closing unless otherwise noted in
    Section 38 of this Addendum. All leases shall be deemed assigned to Purchaser upon closing to the extent permitted under
    applicable laws.
    The Purchaser further acknowledges that, to the best of the Purchaser’s knowledge, the Seller is not holding any security
    deposits from former or current tenants and has no information as to such security deposits as may have been paid by the former
    or current tenants to anyone and agrees that no sums representing such tenant security deposits shall be transferred to the
    Purchaser as part of this transaction. The Purchaser further agrees to assume all responsibility and liability for the refund of such
    security deposits to the tenants pursuant to the provisions of applicable laws and regulations. All rents due and payable and
    collected from tenants for the month in which closing occurs will be prorated according to the provisions of Section 10 of this
    Addendum.
    The Purchaser acknowledges that this Property may be subject to the provisions of local rent control ordinances and
    regulations. The Purchaser agrees that upon the closing, all eviction proceedings and other duties and responsibilities of a
    property owner and landlord, including but not limited to those proceedings required for compliance with such local rent
    control ordinances and regulations, will be the Purchaser’s sole responsibility.
    9. Personal Property: Items of personal property, including but not limited to window coverings, appliances, manufactured homes,
    mobile homes, vehicles, spas, antennas, satellite dishes and garage door openers, now or hereafter located on the Property are
    not included in this sale or the Purchase Price unless the personal property is specifically described and referenced in Section 38
    of this Addendum. Any personal property at or on the Property may be subject to claims by third parties and, therefore, may be
    removed from the Property prior to or after the closing. The Seller makes no representation or warranty as to the condition of
    any personal property, title thereto, or whether any personal property is encumbered by any liens. The Seller assumes no
    responsibility for any personal property remaining on the Property at the time of closing.
    10. Closing Costs and Adjustments:
    (a) The Purchaser and the Seller agree to prorate the following expenses as of the Settlement Date: real estate taxes and
    assessments, common area charges, condominium or planned unit development or similar community assessments, cooperative
    fees, maintenance fees and rents, if any. In determining prorations, the Settlement Date shall be allocated to
    the Purchaser. Payment of special assessment district bonds and assessments, and payment of homeowner’s association
    or special assessments shall be paid current and prorated between the Purchaser and the Seller as of Settlement Date
    with payments not yet due and owing to be assumed by the Purchaser without credit toward Purchase Price. The
    Property taxes shall be prorated based on an estimate or actual taxes from the previous year on the Property. All
    prorations shall be based upon a 30-day month and all such prorations shall be final. The Seller shall not be responsible
    for any amounts due, paid or to be paid after closing, including but not limited to, any taxes, penalties or interest
    assessed or due as a result of retroactive, postponed or additional taxes resulting from any change in use of, or
    construction on, or improvement to the Property, or an adjustment in the appraised value of the Property. In the event
    the Seller has paid any taxes, special assessments or other fees and there is a refund of any such taxes, assessments or
    fees after closing, and the Purchaser as current owner of the Property receives the payment, the Purchaser will
    immediately submit the refund to the Seller.
    (b) Fannie Mae is a congressionally chartered corporation and is exempt from realty transfer taxes pursuant to 12 U.S.C.
    1723a(c)(2) and will not pay realty transfer taxes regardless of local practice . Any realty transfer taxes due on the sale as
    a result of the conveyance of the Property will be the sole responsibility of the Purchaser.
    (c) The Seller shall pay the real estate commission per the listing agreement between the Seller and the Seller’s listing
    broker.
    (d) Purchaser shall release Seller from any and all claims arising from the adjustments or prorations or errors in
    calculating the adjustment or prorations that are or may be discovered after closing. THE PURCHASER AGREES
    TO EXECUTE AND DELIVER TO THE SELLER AT CLOSING FANNIE MAE’S Tax Proration Agreement
    03/2011.
    10649870-281E
    PURCHASER (Initials) ________________
    SELLER (Initials) ____________________
    FANNIE MAE FORM 001 (12/05/2012)
    6
    (e) Regardless of local custom, requirements or practice, the Purchaser shall pay all costs and fees incurred in the transfer
    of the Property, including the cost of any lender required fees and recording costs except as expressly assumed by the
    Seller in this Addendum.
    (f) Title and Closing Services. Purchaser will obtain title and escrow closing services from (Purchaser to select
    option below and initial in the space provided):
    ________ Seller’s escrow closing and title provider and title insurance company used by Seller’s provider. If
    Purchaser selects this option, Seller shall pay for the owner’s and lender’s title insurance. Purchaser and Seller agree
    that Seller’s payment of the title insurance products is limited to the amount that Seller would pay its provider under its
    agreement with the provider for a basic residential owner’s and lender’s title insurance policy or their equivalent.
    ________ Other escrow closing and title provider. If Purchaser selects this option, Purchaser shall bear the expense
    for all title insurance costs associated with the transaction, regardless of local custom, requirements or practice.
    11. Delivery of Funds: Regardless of local custom, requirements, or practice, upon delivery of the deed by the Seller to the Purchaser,
    the Purchaser shall deliver, or cause to be delivered, all funds due the Seller from the sale in the form of cash, bank check, certified
    check or wire transfer. An attorney’s trust fund check shall not be sufficient to satisfy this provision unless the bank holding the
    account on which the trust fund check is drawn certifies the trust fund check.
    12. Certificate of Occupancy: If the Property is located in a jurisdiction that requires a certificate of occupancy, smoke detector
    certification, septic certification or any similar certification or permit (“Certificate of Occupancy”) or any form of improvement
    or repair to the Property to obtain such Certificate of Occupancy necessary for the Property to be occupied, the Purchaser
    understands that the Seller requires the Certificate of Occupancy to be obtained by the Purchaser at the Purchaser’s sole expense.
    The Purchaser shall make application for all Certificates of Occupancy within ten (10) calendar days of the Acknowledgement
    Date. The Purchaser shall not have the right to delay the closing due to the Purchaser’s failure or inability to obtain any required
    Certificate of Occupancy. Failure of the Purchaser to obtain and furnish the Certificate of Occupancy shall be a material breach
    of the Agreement.
    13. Delivery of Possession of Property: The Seller shall deliver possession of the Property to the Purchaser at closing. The delivery
    of possession shall be subject to the rights of any tenants or parties in possession per Section 8 of this Addendum. If the
    Purchaser alters the Property or causes the Property to be altered in any way and/or occupies the Property or allows any other
    person to occupy the Property prior to closing without the prior written consent of the Seller, such event shall constitute a breach
    by the Purchaser under the Agreement and the Seller may terminate the Agreement and the Purchaser shall be liable to the Seller
    for damages caused by any such alteration or occupation of the Property prior to closing and waives any and all claims for
    damages or compensations for alterations made by the Purchaser to the Property including, but not limited to, any claims for
    unjust enrichment.
    14. Deed: Regardless of local practice, the deed to be delivered by Seller at closing shall be a deed that covenants that grantor grants
    only that title which grantor may have and that grantor will only defend title against persons claiming by, through, or under the
    grantor, but not otherwise. Any reference to the term “Deed” or “Special Warranty Deed” herein shall be construed to refer to
    such form of deed. Under no circumstances shall Seller be required to deliver any form of deed which grants a general warranty
    of title.
    __________________ (check if applicable) Seller’s deed shall include the following deed restriction:
    GRANTEE HEREIN SHALL BE PROHIBITED FROM CONVEYING CAPTIONED PROPERTY FOR A SALES PRICE
    OF GREATER THAN $___________________ FOR A PERIOD OF ____ MONTH(S) FROM THE DATE OF THE
    RECORDING OF THIS DEED. GRANTEE SHALL ALSO BE PROHIBITED FROM ENCUMBERING SUBJECT
    PROPERTY WITH A SECURITY INTEREST IN THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF GREATER THAN
    $________________ FOR A PERIOD OF ____ MONTH(S) FROM THE DATE OF THE RECORDING OF THIS DEED.
    THESE RESTRICTIONS SHALL RUN WITH THE LAND AND ARE NOT PERSONAL TO GRANTEE.
    THIS RESTRICTION SHALL TERMINATE IMMEDIATELY UPON CONVEYANCE AT ANY FORECLOSURE SALE
    RELATED TO A MORTGAGE OR DEED OF TRUST.
    10649870-281E
    PURCHASER (Initials) ________________
    SELLER (Initials) ____________________
    FANNIE MAE FORM 001 (12/05/2012)
    7
    15. Defects in Title: If the Purchaser raises an objection to the Seller’s title to the Property, which, if valid, would make title to
    the Property uninsurable, the Seller shall have the right unilaterally to terminate the Agreement by giving written notice of
    the termination to the Purchaser. However, if the Seller is able to correct the problem through reasonable efforts, as the
    Seller determines, at its sole and absolute discretion, prior to the Expiration Date, including any written extensions, or if title
    insurance is available from a reputable title insurance company at regular rates containing affirmative coverage for the title
    objections, then the Agreement shall remain in full force and the Purchaser shall perform pursuant to the terms set in the
    Agreement. The Seller is not obligated to remove any exception or to bring any action or proceeding or bear any expense in
    order to convey title to the Property or to make the title marketable and/or insurable but any attempt by the Seller to remove
    such title exceptions shall not impose an obligation upon the Seller to remove those exceptions. The Purchaser acknowledges
    that the Seller’s title to the Property may be subject to court approval of foreclosure or to mortgagor’s right of redemption. In
    the event the Seller is not able to (a) make the title insurable or correct any problem or (b) obtain title insurance from a
    reputable title insurance company, all as provided herein, the Purchaser may terminate this Agreement and any earnest money
    deposit will be returned to the Purchaser as the Purchaser’s sole remedy at law or equity. If the Purchaser elects to take title
    subject to the title objections, the Purchaser shall so notify the Seller. The Purchaser’s silence as to any title objections shall
    be deemed as acceptance.
    16. Representations and Warranties:
    The Purchaser represents and warrants to the Seller the following:
    (a) The Purchaser is purchasing the Property solely in reliance on its own investigation and inspection of the Property
    and not on any information, representation or warranty provided or to be provided by the Seller, its servicers,
    representatives, brokers, employees, agents or assigns;
    (b) Neither the Seller, nor its servicers, employees, representatives, brokers, agents or assigns, has made any representations
    or warranties, implied or expressed, relating to the condition of the Property or the contents thereof, except as expressly
    set forth in Section 38 of this Addendum;
    (c) The Purchaser has not relied on any representation or warranty from the Seller regarding the nature, quality or
    workmanship of any repairs made by the Seller;
    (d) The Purchaser will not occupy or cause or permit others to occupy the Property prior to closing and, unless and until any
    necessary Certificate of Occupancy has been obtained from the appropriate governmental entity, will not occupy or
    cause or permit others to occupy the Property after closing;
    (e) The undersigned, if executing the Agreement on behalf of the Purchaser that is a corporation, partnership, trust or other
    entity, represents and warrants that he/she is authorized by that entity to enter into the Agreement and bind the entity to
    perform all duties and obligations stated in the Agreement; and
    (f) The Purchaser (check one): ______has ____________ has not previously purchased a Fannie Mae owned property.
    17. WAIVERS:
    AS A MATERIAL PART OF THE CONSIDERATION TO BE RECEIVED BY THE SELLER UNDER THIS
    AGREEMENT AS NEGOTIATED AND AGREED TO BY THE PURCHASER AND THE SELLER, THE
    PURCHASER WAIVES THE FOLLOWING:
    (A) ALL RIGHTS TO FILE AND MAINTAIN AN ACTION AGAINST THE SELLER FOR SPECIFIC
    PERFORMANCE;
    (B) RIGHT TO RECORD A LIS PENDENS AGAINST THE PROPERTY OR TO RECORD THIS
    AGREEMENT OR A MEMORANDUM THEREOF IN THE REAL PROPERTY RECORDS;
    (C) RIGHT TO INVOKE ANY OTHER EQUITABLE REMEDY THAT MAY BE AVAILABLE THAT IF
    INVOKED, WOULD PREVENT THE SELLER FROM CONVEYING THE PROPERTY TO A THIRD
    PARTY PURCHASER;
    10649870-281E
    PURCHASER (Initials) ________________
    SELLER (Initials) ____________________
    FANNIE MAE FORM 001 (12/05/2012)
    8
    (D) ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING FROM THE ADJUSTMENTS OR PRORATIONS OR ERRORS IN
    CALCULATING THE ADJUSTMENTS OR PRORATIONS THAT ARE OR MAY BE DISCOVERED
    AFTER CLOSING;
    (E) ANY CLAIMS FOR FAILURE OF CONSIDERATION AND/OR MISTAKE OF FACT AS SUCH CLAIMS
    RELATE TO THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY OR ENTERING INTO OR EXECUTION OF OR
    CLOSING UNDER THIS AGREEMENT;
    (F) ANY REMEDY OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO RESCISSION OF THIS
    AGREEMENT, OTHER THAN AS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED IN SECTION 19 OF THIS ADDENDUM,
    TO WHICH THE PURCHASER MIGHT OTHERWISE BE ENTITLED AT LAW OR EQUITY
    WHETHER BASED ON MUTUAL MISTAKE OF FACT OR LAW OR OTHERWISE;
    (G) TRIAL BY JURY, EXCEPT AS PROHIBITED BY LAW, IN ANY LITIGATION ARISING FROM OR
    CONNECTED WITH OR RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT;
    (H) ANY CLAIMS OR LOSSES THE PURCHASER MAY INCUR AS A RESULT OF CONSTRUCTION ON,
    REPAIR TO, OR TREATMENT OF THE PROPERTY, OR OTHER DEFECTS, WHICH MAY NOW OR
    HEREAFTER EXIST WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY;
    (I) ANY CLAIMS OR LOSSES RELATED TO ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE
    PROPERTY INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, MOLD, DRYWALL, LEAD PAINT, FUEL OIL,
    ALLERGENS, OR TOXIC SUBSTANCES OF ANY KIND;
    (J) ANY RIGHT TO AVOID THIS SALE OR REDUCE THE PRICE OR HOLD THE SELLER RESPONSIBLE
    FOR DAMAGES ON ACCOUNT OF THE CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY, LACK OF SUITABILITY
    AND FITNESS, OR REDHIBITORY VICES AND DEFECTS, APPARENT, NONAPPARENT OR LATENT,
    DISCOVERABLE OR NONDISCOVERABLE;
    (K) ANY CLAIM ARISING FROM ENCROACHMENTS, EASEMENTS, SHORTAGES IN AREA OR ANY
    OTHER MATTER WHICH WOULD BE DISCLOSED OR REVEALED BY A SURVEY OR INSPECTION
    OF THE PROPERTY OR SEARCH OF PUBLIC RECORDS; AND
    (L) ANY RIGHT TO MEDIATION OR ARBITRATION RELATING TO OR ARISING UNDER OR FROM
    THIS AGREEMENT, EXCEPT AS PROHIBITED BY LAW.
    References to the “Seller” in this Section 17 of this Addendum shall include the Seller and the Seller’s servicers, representatives,
    agents, brokers, employees, and/or assigns.
    In the event that the Purchaser breaches any of the terms described or contemplated under this Section 17 of this Addendum, the
    Purchaser shall pay all reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred by the Seller in defending such action, and the Purchaser shall
    pay Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) as liquidated damages for breach of this Section 17 of the Addendum, which amount shall
    be in addition to any liquidated damages held or covered by the Seller pursuant to Section 19 of this Addendum.
    18. Conditions to the Seller’s Performance: The Seller shall have the right, at the Seller’s sole discretion, to extend the Expiration
    Date or to terminate this Agreement if:
    (a) full payment of any mortgage insurance claim related to the loan previously secured by the Property is not confirmed
    prior to the closing or the mortgage insurance company exercises its right to acquire title to the Property;
    (b) the Seller determines that it is unable to convey title to the Property insurable by a reputable title insurance company at
    regular rates;
    (c) the Seller at any time has requested that the servicing lender, or any other party, repurchase the loan previously secured
    by the Property and/or such lender or other party has elected to repurchase the property;
    10649870-281E
    PURCHASER (Initials) ________________
    SELLER (Initials) ____________________
    FANNIE MAE FORM 001 (12/05/2012)
    9
    (d) a third party with rights related to the sale of the property does not approve the sale terms;
    (e) full payment of any property, fire or hazard insurance claim is not confirmed prior to the closing ;
    (f) any third party, whether tenant, homeowner’s association, or otherwise, exercises rights under a right of first refusal to
    purchase the Property;
    (g) the Purchaser is the former mortgagor of the Property, or is related to or affiliated in any way with the former
    mortgagor, and the Purchaser has not disclosed this fact to the Seller prior to the Seller’s acceptance of this Agreement.
    Such failure to disclose shall constitute default under this Agreement, entitling the Seller to exercise any of its rights
    and remedies, including, without limitation, retaining the earnest money deposit;
    (h) the Seller, at the Seller’s sole discretion, determines that the sale of the Property to the Purchaser or any related
    transactions are in any way associated with illegal activity of any kind;
    (i) the Agreement was accepted and executed by Seller in noncompliance with Fannie Mae procedures or guidelines;
    (j) Seller determines in its sole discretion that the sale of the Property will subject Seller to liability and/or have an impact
    on pending, threatened or potential litigation; or
    (k) material misrepresentation by the Purchaser.
    In the event the Seller elects to terminate this Agreement as a result of (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (i) or (j) above, the Seller shall
    return the Purchaser’s earnest money deposit.
    19. Remedies for Default:
    (a) In the event of the Purchaser’s default, material breach or material misrepresentation of any fact under the terms of this
    Agreement, the Seller, at its option, may retain the earnest money deposit and any other funds then paid by the
    Purchaser as liquidated damages and/or invoke any other remedy available to Seller at law and/or equity and the Seller
    is automatically released from the obligation to sell the Property to the Purchaser and neither the Seller nor its
    representatives, agents, attorneys, successors, or assigns shall be liable to the Purchaser for any damages of any kind as
    a result of the Seller’s failure to sell and convey the Property.
    (b) In the event of the Seller’s default or material breach under the terms of the Agreement or if the Seller terminates the
    Agreement as provided under the provisions of Paragraph 18 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (i) or (j) of this Addendum, the
    Purchaser shall be entitled to the return of the earnest money deposit as Purchaser’s sole and exclusive remedy at
    law and/or equity. The Purchaser waives any rights to file and maintain an action against the Seller for specific
    performance and the Purchaser acknowledges that a return of its earnest money deposit can adequately and fairly
    compensate the Purchaser. Upon return of the earnest money deposit to the Purchaser, this Agreement shall be
    terminated, and the Purchaser and the Seller shall have no further liability or obligation, each to the other in
    connection with this Agreement.
    (c) The Purchaser agrees that the Seller shall not be liable to the Purchaser for any special, consequential or punitive
    damages whatsoever, whether in contract, tort (including negligence and strict liability) or any other legal or equitable
    principle, including but not limited to any cost or expense incurred by the Purchaser in selling or surrendering a lease
    on a prior residence, obtaining other living accommodations, moving, storage or relocation expenses or any other such
    expense or cost arising from or related to this Agreement or a breach of this Agreement.
    (d) Any consent by any party to, or waiver of, a breach by the other, whether express or implied, shall not constitute consent
    to, waiver of, or excuse for any different or subsequent breach.
    (e) In the event either party elects to exercise its remedies as described in this Section 19 of this Addendum and this
    Agreement is terminated, the parties shall have no further obligation under this Agreement except as to any provision
    that survives the termination of this Agreement pursuant to Section 24 of this Addendum.
    10649870-281E
    PURCHASER (Initials) ________________
    SELLER (Initials) ____________________
    FANNIE MAE FORM 001 (12/05/2012)
    10
    20. Indemnification: The Purchaser agrees to indemnify and fully protect, defend, and hold the Seller, its officers, directors,
    employees, shareholders, servicers, representatives, agents, attorneys, tenants, brokers, successors or assigns harmless from and
    against any and all claims, costs, liens, loss, damages, attorney’s fees and expenses of every kind and nature that may be
    sustained by or made against the Seller, its officers, directors, employees, shareholders, servicers, representatives, agents,
    attorneys, tenants, brokers, successors or assigns, resulting from or arising out of:
    (a) inspections or repairs made by the Purchaser or its agents, employees, contractors, successors or assigns;
    (b) claims, liabilities, fines or penalties resulting from the Purchaser’s failure to timely obtain any Certificate of Occupancy
    or to comply with equivalent laws and regulations;
    (c) claims for amounts due and owed by the Seller for taxes, homeowner association dues or assessment or any other items
    prorated under Section 10 of this Addendum, including any penalty or interest and other charges, arising from the
    proration of such amounts for which the Purchaser received a credit at closing under Section 10 of this Addendum; and
    (d) the Purchaser’s or the Purchaser’s tenants, agents or representatives use and /or occupancy of the Property prior to
    closing and/or issuance of required certificates of occupancy.
    21. Risk of Loss: In the event of fire, destruction or other casualty loss to the Property after the Seller’s acceptance of this
    Agreement and prior to closing, the Seller may, at its sole discretion, repair or restore the Property, or the Seller may terminate
    the Agreement. If the Seller elects to repair or restore the Property, then the Seller may, at its sole discretion, limit the amount to
    be expended. Whether or not Seller elects to repair or restore the Property, the Purchaser’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be
    either to acquire the Property in its then condition at the Purchase Price with no reduction thereof by reason of such loss or
    terminate this Agreement and receive a refund of any earnest money deposit.
    22. Eminent Domain: In the event that the Seller’s interest in the Property, or any part thereof, shall have been taken by eminent
    domain or shall be in the process of being taken on or before the closing, either party may terminate the Agreement and the
    earnest money deposit shall be returned to the Purchaser and neither party shall have any further rights or liabilities hereunder
    except as provided in Section 24 of this Addendum.
    23. Keys: The Purchaser understands that the Seller may not be in possession of keys, including but not limited to, mailbox keys,
    recreation area keys, gate cards, or automatic garage remote controls, and any cost of obtaining the same will be the
    responsibility of the Purchaser. The Purchaser also understands that if the Property includes an alarm system, the Seller
    cannot provide the access code and/or key and that the Purchaser is responsible for any costs associated with the alarm and/or
    changing the access code or obtaining keys. If the Property is presently on a Master Key System, the Seller will re-key the
    exterior doors to the Property prior to closing at the Purchaser’s expense. The Purchaser authorizes and instructs escrow
    holder to charge the account of the Purchaser at closing for the rekey.
    24. Survival: Delivery of the deed to the Property to the Purchaser by the Seller shall be deemed to be full performance and
    discharge of all of the Seller’s obligations under this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Agreement,
    any provision which contemplates performance or observance subsequent to any termination or expiration of the Agreement,
    shall survive the closing and/or termination of the Agreement by any party and continue in full force and effect.
    25. Further Assurances: The Purchaser agrees to execute and deliver to the Seller at closing, or otherwise as requested by the Seller,
    documents including Fannie Mae’s Waiver and Release 2012, Tax Proration Agreement 03/2011 or documents that are
    substantially the same, and to take such other action as reasonably may be necessary to further the purpose of this Agreement.
    Copies of referenced documents are available from the Seller’s listing agent upon request by the Purchaser.
    26. Severability: The lack of enforceability of any provision of this Agreement shall not affect the enforceability of any other
    provision of this Agreement, all of which shall remain in full force and effect.
    27. Assignment of Agreement: The Purchaser shall not assign this Agreement without the express written consent of the Seller.
    The Seller may assign this Agreement at its sole discretion without prior notice to, or consent of, the Purchaser.
    10649870-281E
    PURCHASER (Initials) ________________
    SELLER (Initials) ____________________
    FANNIE MAE FORM 001 (12/05/2012)
    11
    28. EFFECT OF ADDENDUM: THIS ADDENDUM AMENDS AND SUPPLEMENTS THE CONTRACT AND, IF
    APPLICABLE, ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS. IN THE EVENT THERE IS ANY CONFLICT BETWEEN THIS
    ADDENDUM AND THE CONTRACT OR ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS OR NOTICE OR OTHER DOCUMENTS
    ATTACHED AND MADE A PART OF THE AGREEMENT, THE TERMS OF THIS ADDENDUM TAKE
    PRECEDENCE AND SHALL PREVAIL EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY LAW.
    29. Entire Agreement: The Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Purchaser and the Seller concerning the subject
    matter hereof and supersedes all previous communications, understandings, representations, warranties, covenants or
    agreements, either written or oral and there are no oral or other written agreements between the Purchaser and the Seller. All
    negotiations are merged into the Agreement. The Seller is not obligated by any other written or oral statements made by the
    Seller, the Seller’s representatives, or any real estate licensee.
    30. Modification: No provision, term or clause of the Agreement shall be revised, modified, amended or waived except by an
    instrument in writing signed by the Purchaser and the Seller.
    31. Rights of Others: This Agreement does not create any rights, claims or benefits inuring to any person or entity, other than
    Seller’s successors and/or assigns, that is not a party to the Agreement, nor does it create or establish any third party beneficiary
    to this Agreement.
    32. Counterparts: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and each such counterpart shall be deemed to
    be an original, but all of which, when taken together, shall constitute one agreement.
    33. Headings: The titles to the sections and headings of various paragraphs of this Agreement are placed for convenience of
    reference only and in case of conflict, the text of this Agreement, rather than such titles or headings shall control.
    34. Electronic Signature: An electronic signature shall be given the same effect as a written signature.
    35. Force Majeure: Except as provided in Section 21 to this Addendum, no party shall be responsible for delays or failure of
    performance resulting from acts of God, riots, acts of war and terrorism, epidemics, power failures, earthquakes or other
    disasters, providing such delay or failure of performance could not have been prevented by reasonable precautions and cannot
    reasonably be circumvented by such party through use of alternate sources, workaround plans or other means.
    36. Attorney Review: The Purchaser acknowledges that Purchaser has had the opportunity to consult with its legal counsel
    regarding the Agreement and that accordingly the terms of the Agreement are not to be construed against any party because
    that party drafted the Agreement or construed in favor of any Party because that Party failed to understand the legal effect of
    the provisions of the Agreement.
    37. Notices: Any notices required to be given under the Agreement shall be deemed to have been delivered when actually
    received in the case of hand or overnight delivery, or five (5) calendar days after mailing by first class mail, postage paid, or
    by fax with confirmation of transmission to the numbers below. All notices to the Seller will be deemed sent or delivered to
    the Seller when sent or delivered to Seller’s listing broker or agent or Seller’s attorney, at the address or fax number shown
    below. All notices to the Purchaser shall be deemed sent or delivered when sent or delivered to the Purchaser or the
    Purchaser’s attorney or agent at the address or fax number shown below.

  110. JG,

    “christine – I’d kill to have a look at tht assgt you ref’d the other day. Can you black out your own info and link it somewhere?” I could e-mail it to you. Give me your address.

  111. can you tell me, do you know, why NG thinks the investor funds funded the loans at closing

    JG I m not sure what NG is saying- I do not believe its him anyway so i bash , but

    The deal structure is such that the banks were taking traditional mortgage backs and converting them to bank notes for balance sheet purposes ‘. Using a bank to bank debt swapping scheme …I see the household funding the cost of each securities offering by an accounting angle …but —–I cant really break it down here … yet . Next week perhaps iin a filing –

  112. Laches: The settlor is not entitled to a resulting trust because they have unnecessarily delayed in bringing the lawsuit”.

    Estopples by Lache-:more like in undisclosed executory contracts versus a separate issue your referring to which falls under the statue of limitations , failing to bring claims and sitting on your rights.

    A lache is more of waiting for a claim to ripen and no can do ….

  113. Patrick – but wait a minute. How do we reconcile the 86ing of paper notes in favor of e-notes, as cited in the letter, with fnma’s edict on the notes? I can’t remember what all it says, but for one, fnma says it doesn’t want the paper notes, so do X with them. Despite the fact that FNMA doesn’t want to take physical poss of the notes, fnma doesn’t tell seller-servicers to destroy them. Now, we could say that whatever fnma says is code for destroy them, but even tho FNMA is on my Major S-list by way of that Butler case,…..

    But gee, if FNMA doesn’t take possession and fnma allegedly sells them to trusts, well, that’s a good trick. Oh, i know – it’s that universal custodian deal. Pick a holder, any holder. It’s all a tad overwhelming sometimes and this is one of them, least for me.

  114. In the article below Sen Rand Paul said we should not be sending aid to Egypt or Lybia when our Treasury is bare…SAY WHAT….? WTF…? This article was written in September of 2012 ….SEN PAUL SAID OUR TREASURY IS BARE ….. BUT OBAMA JUST SAID A FEW MONTHS AGO…..AMERICA IS THE RICHEST NATION ON EARTH….!

    NOW….SOMEBODIES LYIN & I KNOW IT’S NOT OBAMA…..NOW WHY WOULD SEN PAUL LIE TO US…..? HMMMMM LET ME GUESS… ….. SEN PAUL MUST BE A KHAZAR CROOK…..!

  115. READ ABOUT IT HERE…..HOW MUCH ARE TAXPAYERS SPENDING ON EGYPT & LYBIA…..?
    http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/14/13866898-how-much-are-taxpayers-spending-on-egypt-and-libya?lite

    KORPORATE Amerika sure loves to make Obama look really bad to WE THE PEOPLE WHO PAY FOR EVERYTHING THESE KORPORATE CROOKS DO IN OUR COUNTRY AND AROUND THE GLOBE.

  116. I would think that letter is judicially noticeable, but by itself may not support certain arguments. But then again, maybe it would. What do lawyers say? I haven’t seen it in any cases……? I still think, though, that rule 17 rpi does support those certain arguments, ,that it in fact mandates that actions be brought by the real party in interest and that can only be one who has suffered injury. I may have some others like it, mol, which might be helpful if I ever have time to find and look at them again.

  117. Oooops ……I forgot to mention the cure for their addiction that is not of this world but in the spiritual world is eternal damnation.

    I also am begining to wonder if Obama truly is God fearing why is he allowing these crooks to keep on fueling the hatred….?

    Does Obama really believe letting this evil play out is righteous…..or is he also in fear of this evil…?

    I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt but why is he sending aid to Egypt and not aiding the American people who have lost everything to these KORPORATE Amerika crooks…?

    Sorry but that really outright disgusts me.

  118. Patrick, okay – got it. One of the couple things I find confusing, tho,
    is the reference to what happens (which I got mol) to the paper note not created as an e-note if traded as an e-note. I got the math, but
    it’s my understanding, as I said in my orig comment, that such a note traded is no-trade, i.e., no deal. Your comment seems to not agree with that, in favor of different principles. You seem to say the paper note is worthless (and thus can’t be used to collect, long and short, from its maker), but is it that I misunderstood something elsewhere? There is either a sale or there isn’t, and from what I read, I got it there was no sale at all, not just a ramiifcation to the paper note.

    This, which you said, I will kiss your gritz in Times Square about

    “They are not a RPI because they can’t suffer default or economic damages.”

    since even tho you arrive at that conclusion for other reasons than I have, it sitll supports and in fact is the same as my long-held position that it’s injury which invokes jurisdiciton.

    “Given the comment letter, it seems to me plaintiff must prove perfection of paper note ownership by transfer to concurrently prove the borrower received a perfected notice of default, which is a condition precedent.”

    Are you saying that the plaintiff must prove he paid for it, when, etc?
    (It’s my opinion the plaintiff must do this anyway to establish injury)
    I know what a condition precedent is. Are you saying that until the plaintiff can show how he owns the note (“prove perfection of paper note) the NOD is or may be defective, of no consequence, etc? I get it that you’re saying if a note were traded as an e-note, the plaintiff can’t rely on the paper note, but that’s where we’re not in harmony, exactly, because of my impression that a paper note traded electronically is no trade. period.

    As to that comment letter, I just don’t know what to say. I may have seen it awhile back or I may not have. kind of rings a bell, but I don’t know how I could have forgotten such a thing. Well, these days I could. The American Bankers Association (I know your ref was to the FL B A). Boy, I have seen enough of their stuff, which I don’t bring up, to get ‘riled’, in a word. Really riled. Two words.

  119. Geraldo Rivera of FOX talking about the Zimmerman trial not guilty verdict. Rivera said the case should have never been brought and the only reason the case was brought is because it was racially and politically motivated. Obviously the defense claims of self defense by Zimmerman convinced the jury.

    Hmmmm….Wonder if that self defense claim would fly with the judges in these fraudclosures being these fraudclosures definitely are RACIALLY & POLITICALLY MOTIVATED HATE CRIMES AGAINST WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES BUT ARE NOT GETTING ANY MEDIA ATTENTION WHATSOEVER.

    In fact, the media are in complete denial of fraudclosures as if some form of justice is being done by these politically and racially motivated hate crimes against WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES.

    As if this fraudclosure lie is a legal cure or some operation of law for some wrongdoing by WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES YET WE THE PEOPLE DID NOTHING WRONG AND HAVE BEEN LEFT BROKE AND DEFENSELESS BY KORPORATE AMERIKA WITH NO ONE IN THE MEDIA QUESTIONING. #1….WHY THESE FRAUDCLOSURES ARE EVEN OCCURRING AFTER KORPORATE AMERIKA HAS ALREADY RECEIVED $60.4 TRILLION DOLLARS SINCE 2008 REPORTED CNBC IN U.S. TAXPAYER BAILOUTS FOR $12 MILLION IN REAL ESTATE WE THE PEOPLE PAID FOR UPFRONT AT THE ORIGINATION.

    THESE ONGOING TOO BIG TO FAIL(ED) BAILOUT OF KORPORATE AMERIKA IS THE BIGGEST THEFT OF OUR WEALTH IN U.S. HISTORY AND THESE FRAUDCLOSURE CRIMES ARE THE BIGGEST CRIMINAL INJUSTICE THEFT OF OUR PROPERTY IN U.S. HISTORY.

    THE FACT THE MEDIA IS NOT REPORTING ON THESE MASSIVE TBTF KORPORATE AMERIKA CRIMES AGAINST WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES, THE PEOPLE WHO SIGN THEIR CHECKS SPEAKS VOLUMES ABOUT THE LEVEL OF HATRED FOR WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF KORPORATE AMERIKA AND THEIR EMPLOYEES.

  120. christine – I’d kill to have a look at tht assgt you ref’d the other day. Can you black out your own info and link it somewhere?

    Hman – didn’t understand your question the other day about was it assgt? I’d like to.

    I asked someone about a 13 page fnma purchase contract the other day – DW? Still like to see that if I could. Can you also black out what you’d like and link it? (at say scribd?)

    Patrick – just found your comments from the other day. Trying to get thru them – you no doubt know that accounting stuff is not up my alley, so I confess – it’s a struggle. I’m getting there at least as to what you said…..I hope.

    Not done yet!

    kc – did you ref or link a recent MERS’ case? I can’t find it and want to read it. If you did, could you relink or ref it?

    thanks

  121. The horrors these crooks have committed and permanent harm done to this planet and its inhabitants is enough to bring down the wrath of God on the Godless. God help the innocent who are in God’s path when that day comes. They still have time to repent and make things right but they probably won’t and there is a reason for it.

    They are the entitlement people who never think they are wrong and believe they are the makers of everything and therefore they are God and more powerful than God. They confuse being control freaks with doing something good. They mistake kindness for weakness. They think they know what is good for us and what is good for the world. They confuse sacrifice and suffering with redemption. They misconstrue free will….our independence, with a catch phrase and use it as a catchall to declare ownership of everything and everyone.

    They are in denial of any wrongdoing like any addict but their addiction to power by fraudulent control is more addicting than any substance known to man. Therefore they know not what they do because the power they crave can never be satisfied by anything of this world.

    The only cure for their addiction is not of this world but of the spiritual world. From a dimension most do not see but to those who do see it, it is all around us.

  122. Now you’re talking jg…..the entire KORPORATE Amerika scam is a real hummer….but what these crooks will tell us is….. whistle while you work…or offer up your suffering to God while you are working as their KORPORATE slaves…! OH HELL NO…! Who ever said that is what God wants from us? Or what WE want for us…? Is it Disney World and the Jesuits? NO….! IT’S THE KHAZARS…BY PROXY OF KORPORATE AMERIKA….

  123. That’s why there is no such thing as a FREE LUNCH PROGRAM…in America because WE THE PEOPLE ALREADY PAID FOR IT AND KORPORATE AMERIKA ATE IT ALL….AND THAT’S WHAT THEY ARE HIDING FROM WE THE PEOPLE….!

  124. from the case NG posted JPMC v Butler:

    “Defendant’s counsel, as a result of this payment history, moved by an
    order to show cause, dated May 10, 2011, for, among other things: dismissal of the instant action based upon plaintiff’s lack of good faith in that

    “plaintiff had received payment on May 22, 2010 for the amount specified” as owing in the complaint [$434,382.89];

    and, awarding costs and sanctions against plaintiff because “plaintiff withheld material information, including the May 22, 2010 payment……from the Court.” In the May 10, 2011
    order…….I directed plaintiff to provide the Court with detailed
    information

    as to “the entity or third party that made the payment to it on

    May 22, 2010 that is specified in the payment history……….”

    I suppose they’ll come up with quite a performance on this hummer.

  125. Blind Trust by definition from Investopia.com…..

    A trust in which the executors have full discretion over the assets, and the trust beneficiaries have no knowledge of the holdings of the trust.

    The truth is the trusts were never set up so the beneficiaries WE THE PEOPLE would have no knowledge that WE THE PEOPLE ARE THE BENEFICIARIES OF ALL OF THE SECURITIES FRAUD COMMITTED BY TBTF KORPORATE AMERIKA…..BUT THE TRUTH IS TOO BIG TO FAIL FAILED TO PULL THAT BLIND TRUST SCAM OFF AND FOOL EVERY AMERICAN….THEY CERTAINLY DID NOT FOOL ME.

    THAT IS THE PROBLEM WHEN WE THE PEOPLE BLINDLY TRUST THE POLITICIANS AMERICA. WHAT YOU COME TO FIND OUT IS THERE IS NO TRUST…..AND WHAT THE POLITICIANS ARE HIDING FROM US IS…. WE THE PEOPLE ARE THE BENEFICIARIES OF THAT FRAUD…!

  126. WHAT IS A BLIND TRUST….? ANSWER……WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

  127. Am I the only to notice…..?

  128. As a result of the SECURITIES FRAUD to our property titles….by the KHAZARS…..WE ARE SURROUNDED BY IMPOSTERS….EVERYWHERE WE TURN….WE ARE SURROUNDED BY STRANGERS EVERYWHERE WE TURN….WE ARE HAVING AN IDENTITY CRISIS….IN AMERICA…… EVERYWHERE WE TURN…..

  129. FRAUD IN THE ESSENCE…..SAME FRAUD IN FRAUDCLOSURE AS IN OUR TITLES….

  130. The fact there was no attempt to establish a trust is apparent on the face of our titles A-ROUND-ABOUT the Origination Fraud.

    Don’t run and hide poppy..that is what U.S. PATRIOTS NEVER DO…!

    BTW…I do believe Obama is a Christian and a God fearing one at that.

  131. tbtfnomore,

    Check down 7/12 at 9:31 am.

  132. Fraud in the Factum and Fraud in the Inducement.

  133. You are Welcome tbtfnomore,
    Now we find out where our money went… the money trail.

  134. A settlor must show intention of establishing a trust … otherwise .. there is NO Trust!

  135. (1) KC – I want to kiss you for backing me up. *muah* thanks for sharing
    (2) Consider a particular type of lawsuit for rescission due to misrepresentation due to lack of good faith in dealings (requires party to disclose all facts in good faith) or breach of fiduciary duty. *I’m not a lawyer and I won’t even pretend to play one on this blog. Seek professional legal advice*
    (3) Christine – thanks for clearing it up. I will send good thoughts your way for a win🙂
    (5) Poppy – that missing rider is your IRS schedule A. Now google HAMP to learn why they always make you provide your tax returns (or the form). That’s the real collateral. My changed version of the mortgage (recorded in the County) had an UNINITIALLED change from Schedule A to the Legal Description. How about that?
    (5) In the wake of Snowden, did any of you see this whistleblower Karen Hudes of the World Bank? It sounds promising. I believe a Federal Reserve member stepped down this week as well?

    (6) Check who owns E-Title in your state, in mine, it is a foreclosure mill attorney? This company did a secret “phone” closing at my “refinance” to obtain the home equity. No prior loan existed to be paid off (like Poppy found).

  136. Good night kids, play nice, I am going to isolate myself, in my room now…that’s what we American’s do.

  137. WE DON’T PICK JACK SHIT….THAT’S THE PROBLEM WITH THE FRAUD THAT IS DEMOCRACY AND CHRISTINE IS AN IMPOSTER TO OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC BECAUSE, JUST LIKE RT NEWS, ALL SHE DOES IS BLAME WE THE PEOPLE, THE VICTIMS OF THE KHAZARS AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA……

  138. Look… when a settlor/grantor sets up a trust it must be of their own free will and not by fraudulent inducement!!!! … Gains/profits of the trust are for the benefit of the settlor/grantor and their heirs(their beneficiaries) .. not some unknown beneficiary

  139. Gonna cause a stir here, but the PSA is only applicable if the loans went into a trust and had a servicing element for the investors. Otherwise, it’s all a fraud on us and the court. Most of these loans never went into a trust and other’s have been closed for years, hence the PSA has no bearing on debt collectors, attorney’s in sheep’s clothing, coming into the court with counterfeit papers, claiming ownership, holder, substitute trustee status…all bull shit! IMHO

  140. Funny K.C. KNOWS WHO I AM….AND KNOWS I AM CERTAINLY NO BANK SHILL…I NEVER DEFEND WHAT THE BANKSTERS DID….SO WHAT REALLY IS HER EFFING DEAL…?

    K.C. IS A THIEF FOR THE KHAZARS……AND I AM BEING KIND IN JUST CALLING HER THAT.

  141. tbtfnomore

    Just for clarification: I didn’t sign up for this. And i didn’t become an American for this. However, since I am an American, I have the right to state that foreclosures were intentionally created to render a people completely polarized and isolated emotionally from the atrocities committed in its name. I also have the absolute right to render the American people responsible for whatever is done in their name: they picked their leaders and legislators. I picked none of them: not one of them was my guy. I have the right to condemn the choices and resulting results.

    The New American Isolationism

    The cost of turning away from war’s horrific realities.
    William J. Astore
    November 1, 2010

    A new isolationism is metastasizing in the American body politic. At its heart lies not an urge to avoid war, but an urge to avoid contemplating the costs and realities of war. It sees war as having analgesic qualities—as lessening a collective feeling of impotence, a collective sense of fear and terror. Making war in the name of reducing terror serves this state of mind and helps to preserve it. Marked by a calculated estrangement from war’s horrific realities and mercenary purposes, the new isolationism magically turns an historic term on its head, for it keeps us in wars, rather than out of them.

    In the decades since World War II, however, “isolationism” has been turned inside-out and upside-down. Instead of seeking eternal peace, Washington elites have, by now, plunged the country into a state of eternal war, and they’ve done so, in part, by isolating ordinary Americans from war’s brutal realities. With rare exceptions (notably John F. Kennedy’s call for young Americans to pay any price and bear any burden), our elites have not sought to mobilize a new “greatest generation,” but rather to keep a clueless one—clueless, that is, as to war’s fatal costs and bitter reality—unmobilized (if not immobilized).

    It’s important to add that few Americans are debating, or even discussing, our wars in part because our ruling elites haven’t wanted them debated—as if they don’t want us to get the idea that we have any say in war-making at all. [And the people have been all too happy ignoring them and sitting in front of their TV.]

    Think of it this way: the old isolationism was a peaceable urge basic to the American people; the new isolationism is little short of a government program to keep the old isolationism, or opposition of any sort to American wars, in check. [Again, with the blessing and approval of the American people…]

    Read more: The New American Isolationism | The Nation http://www.thenation.com/article/155725/new-american-isolationism#ixzz2Yz8KRYgo

  142. There are settlements that have been paid, but no one here has gotten their house free and clear, not yet. There have been gains and wins depending on what you want. Some of us just want a settlement and the terms of our contract adhered too. Other’s want more, it’s all subjective.

    There have been gains in this…and a couple of the bloggers here, they know who they are, are not telling the truth, they are not in foreclosure, their house was taken…sadly. Why they lie, is anyone’s guess. NO shame there, this is a difficult endeavor for anyone. But there are many lesson to be learned from people loss, if they shared and were honest. IMO

  143. I’m surrounded by IMPOSTERS…everywhere I turn…I’m surrounded by STRANGERS everywhere I turn….I’m having an IDENTITY CRISIS…am I the only one to notice? – MAROON 5

  144. Even if you did know and agree (and you didn’t or wouldn’t had you saw the PSA)…. Trust Law requires the Naming of a beneficiary.

  145. Shut Up Stripes.. Bankshill! Always trying to redirect the conversation! Not this time Buttwipe!!

  146. The verbiage is precisely the problem. It is very shady at best. Let’s be truthful, they were not honest about anything the were planning to do and that dishonestly …AKA FRAUD…AKA NEGLIGENCE was intended to do permanent harm. How do we know this. …? We are fighting fraudclosures pro se that should have never happened and should have never been allowed to be brought let alone entered because the dirty greedy, gluttonous bastards were paid again by WE THE PEOPLE FOR ROBBING US IN THE ONGOING TBTF BAILOUTS OF 2008….THEY HAVE STOLEN $60.4 TRILLION OF OUR WEALTH SINCE 2008 REPORTED CNBC….OUR INITIAL TAXPAYER INVESTMENT $12 TRILLION…..!

  147. Would you enter into a trust agreement with unknown or unnamed beneficiarys to your household/life estate? NO!!!

  148. tbtfnomore,

    Hopefully for you, you will win indeed. You’ll be the first one on this site, as far as I can remember. Then, you’ll be qualified to give advice.
    I’m waiting for UKG’s win and mine as well. I won’t give specifics any more than you do: it’s called prudence and you already know all about that. 🙂

    And whether people agree or not, what’s brewing goes far beyond foreclosures and far outside of this country’s borders. Insularity, protectionism and isolationism are a thing of the past. Time for people to realize it. Or not, at their own peril.

  149. Let me narrow this down.. Were you (the borrower) informed of the creation of a Irrevocable Grantor Trust by the lender or title co at closing? If you were told and understood that you were creating a trust with your signature … would you have done it under the terms of the PSA? Look at your mortgage … does it list the property or legal description of the property to be used as collateral?

  150. At least the mafia is clear about who they are and what your getting into!

  151. kc – at the risk of confirming my ignorance, I have to say that
    business about without recourse is ridiculous (sorry, liz, where ever you are and you, too, kc). It doesn’t invalidate the debt. It does change “assurances” as to the note and is does matter, but invalidate the debt? Nope. But I did like “the mafia we call the bank”!

  152. liz, on November 6, 2012 at 8:33 am said:
    I just had to share this comment from another weblog that we should not ignore.

    I think everyone has missed the boat on assignments and the verbiage the bank uses in the endorsements. The banks always use “without recourse” in their endorsement;.” this type of endorsement negates the banks responsibility to pay for the Note and leaves ONLY the original signer (you) financially responsible. But this is a 2 edged sword. The very act of allowing the bank to add “without recourse” means the 2nd bank has now AGREED they ONLY have the right to collect PAYMENT for the debt but forsakes the right to foreclose because they have become a HOLDER and NOT a HOLDER IN DUE COURSE.
    The liability protection garnered by using “without recourse” is purchased with the powers afforded by the IN DUE COURSE right. The fraud then lies with the trustee who violated their fiduciary responsibility by allowing the Note to be endorsed “without recourse” which stripped parties of their rights. Once the trustee did this they voluntary forsook their position and authority and lost the power to control or oversee any future acts.
    In essence, the trustee is nothing more than the thug that does the wet work for the mafia we call the bank.
    Since the DoT states the “debt evidenced by the Note” and the Note has been invalidated by the bad endorsement there is no evidence of any debt.

  153. And I have different pages too…one from the original recording and the other from the lawyers office in the foreclosure action. Interesting!

    Too, I have yet to fathom how the originator poses as the lender when in my case the loans went unfunded, due to lines of credit issued to the originator being used for other than funding. Per court transcript!

  154. “Why don’t we get the original Note back after a refinance?”

    Only reason I can conjure, there is no refinance, a modification maybe or the note was sold fractionally or converted, where it does not exist as a promissory note any longer. If any of these scenarios exist how can the collection rights, under the original note be collected? They have changed the very existence of the contractual agreement. IMHO, non-lawyer here.

  155. @jg

    Yes, I’m aware. But the recorder should still know if the two documents arrived together (as is required, unless they bifurcated the Note and mortgage), even if the Note was not recorded by the County. If you ask, you will find the Note is NOT sent with mortgage to the County when the mortgage is sent for recording. In fact, the County even stamps the exact number of pages they received on the document. Mine has different stamps with differing page counts, btw. But maybe that has something to do with the bait and switch of the mortgage riders they used being different lengths *hint hint*

    I’ve also done a UCC lien search at my Secretary of State – nothing is there. Makes you scratch your head a bit, doesn’t it?

    So the only lien of record is on the real property, not the personal property. And the rider describes the real property, correct?

  156. Christine –

    Then why are you here? Are you fighting a foreclosure? Helping others
    to fight? Again, I really just want to understand your intentions. Rather than assume anything, I’m asking in a courteous manner (which everyone deserves) because I’m truly curious. Please share, if you are willing.

    And I’ll show you a win very soon, I hope. 🙂 I don’t sit on my hands, nor do I believe that I’m prone to ranting. But you are entitled to your opinions, just as everyone else is.

  157. tbtfnomore,

    This site is, like most of that kind, short on wins and long on diatribe, rants and unqualified advice that lead nowhere. Show me the wins. I’ll listen to the winners. I find it incredible that people have to exchange e-mails and communicate outside of this blog to get serious information.

  158. tbtf – notes have never been recorded because they by themselves aren’t about real property, which is the subject of recordation. It’s actually more complicated, but it would take me (anyone?) quite a bit of time to be able to come up with all the reasons. Notes maybe can be registered with the sec of state – i forget if i ever knew.
    Other notes taken out against personal property generally end up as a UCC Financing Statement., think it’s called, filed I also forget where, (sec of state?), but it acts as a lien on the personal property.These likewise may not be recorded in land records with the county recorder. .

  159. louise – no, FNMA buys loans fron aggregators of loan pools – the old fashioned kind before securitization pools. In order for fnma to buy those loans, the seller has to be an approved fnma “seller-servicer”.
    FNMA issues its underwriting mandates and loans are only supposed to be approved acc to those mandates in order for fnma to buy them.
    FNMA buys loans in aggregated bundles of a min of 5 million (last I knew) which were then repackaged and sold as mortgage backed securties. FNMA guarantees the payments to the investors (ridiculous in my book) and will buy back loans to end their payment guarantee.
    If this happens, FNMA again owns all interests in the loan if everything were done according to Hoyle, that is. Actually, it’s debateable what and who issues the securities on loans fnma bought from the
    aggregators and just what is parted with by fnma as a result of the issuance and sale of those securities.

  160. The Khazars control OPEC…BY PROXY OF THE ARAB NATIONS….

    RECONSTRUCTING THE TOWER OF BABEL….
    http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/bb980304.htm

  161. What the war in Egypt is really over is not as it appears…Egypt is a non OPEC nation…they don’t want to export any oil to Israel.

    TO EXPORT OR NOT EXPORT….
    http://www.egyptoil-gas.com/read_article_issues.php?AID=404

  162. AND I CAN PROVE IT…..! THE COUNTY OF COOK IN ILLINOIS HID THE ORIGINATION FRAUD UNDER THE OLD PROPERTY TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (PIN) AND ISSUED A NEW PIN IN 2000 AND NEVER TOLD US…THEY WROTE IN THE NEW PIN BY HAND AND ALTERED OUR DEEDS WITHOUT NOTIFYING US OF THE ALTERATION THE YEAR AFTER CLINTONS FAKE REPEAL OF GLASS STEAGALL….! THAT ALTERATION WAS CRIMINAL….!

  163. THE MORTGAGES ARE FRAUDS BECAUSE THE BANKSTERS LIED…..THE BORROWERS WERE THE KHAZAR COMMUNISTS BY PROXY OF THE BANKSTERS WHO BORROWED THE ORIGINAL MORTGAGE FROM WE THE PEOPLE FROM THE U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT ….THAT IS THE ORIGINATION FRAUD THE KHAZARS ARE DESPERATELY TRYING TO HIDE FROM WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES….!

  164. The mortgage or deed of trust will also state the:
    •names of the borrowers
    •property address, and
    •legal description of the property

  165. JUST BECAUSE WE THE PEOPLE PAY FOR EVERYTHING WE DO OWN EVERYTHING….HOWEVER THE INVESTORS DO NOT OWN ANYTHING IN AMERICA…….! MAYBE THEY DO IN RUSSIA, CHINA, EUROPE, KHAZAKHSTAN, CYPRUS, EGYPT OR AFRICA BECAUSE THEY DON’T HAVE A CONSTITUTION BUT IN THESE UNITED STATES WE DO….!

  166. THEREFORE WE THE PEOPLE NEED TO START ACTING LIKE WE OWN THIS PLACE AND STOP COWERING TO THE KORPORATE AMERIKA CROOKS WHO ROBBED WE THE PEOPLE BY MANY PROXIES…….!

  167. And it is just my opinion here: but just because you pay for something it doesn’t mean you are the owner, in the literal sense, particularly with this real property situation…BOA, Wells Fargo, CITI, Ocwen, etc…have all tried this scam and it is not correct. Most have gotten servicing rights only! This changes the whole game…

    A true servicer works for the investment pool, guided by the PSA, not debt collection from charged-off debts or completely paid-off debts, bought for pennies (no longer viable debts) and counterfeiting documents to substantiate collection rights. Big difference between the two, IMO only, not a lawyer

    One more piece: BOA has been selling fractional ownership of loans…they is no possible way to have a “party” able to foreclose lawfully, under this guise, as far a I can tell, again, IMH non-lawyer opinion only.

  168. WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES OWN THE SECURITIES BECAUSE WE PAY FOR EVERYTHING UPFRONT AT THE ORIGINATION AND NOT JUST THAT BUT WE THE PEOPLE FUND KORPORATE AMERIKAS ENTIRE OPERATIONS….THEREFORE….WE THE PEOPLE OWN THIS PLACE…..

  169. jg,

    Home Path is the place where you can find the paperwork for resales of stolen homes. These houses are not older homes, some built as of 2012? I will try and get a direct link, but most of the paperwork I have is due to my son trying to buy a short-sale and/or a foreclosure from them. They waive everything, all known and unknown defects…the way they are set up is: buyers have to pay for an appraisal, survey, home inspection and title work, before they can get out of the contract (costs over $1,000 in most cases) and require a bank account, which “I” suspect could result in the seizure of funds in the event you default on the purchase. Very odd to me?

    Been buying real estate for 20 years and never seen these types of contracts, where the onus and cost is on the buyers for every contingency.

  170. DTCC owns the security. That is what holds value. There is a reason the Note isn’t recorded with the Mortgage. If the physical docs must travel together regardless of MERS as mortgagee – why isn’t the Note sent to the recorder’s office with the “mortgage”? Why do we hear Notes are shredded so much of the time? Why don’t we get the original Note back after a refinance?

    For stripes – google the Obama slip in the Russian meeting before his re-election. It should be telling.

  171. JG, my interpretation of some of this is: Fannie Mae purchases the loan/note whether it goes to Fannie Mae directly or through a trust as a mortgage backed security? Am I reading that right? Anyway you cut it, Fannie Mae bought it and owns it?

  172. I agree tbtfnomore….the TBTF khazars tried to destroy our Securities our property trusts in America by committing massive Securities Frauds with our Securities but THEY FAILED & THAT’S WHAT THEY ARE HIDING AND THE FACT THEY OWE WE THE PEOPLE INNUMERABLE AMOUNTS OF MONEY…

    THE SONG WALK LIKE AN EGYPTIAN WAS A WARNING….

  173. His father was not an
    American so he can not be President since both parents of a President must be American citizens for a person to be natural born as prescribed by the constitution.

    any bill he signed is not law

    wake up America

  174. I believe Obamas father may have been Egyptian and not African.

  175. e, Although this may seem to be incredible, viewed in the light of the entire mortgage/fraudclosure nightmare, this makes perfect sense. We have been set up multiple times in multiple ways, and they are all connected together for the fleecing of America. All we need is to be granted full discovery, and this bomb goes off and reveals the Ponzi scheme.

  176. I’m very uncomfortable with this talk by bloggers regarding commentators “being shot” and “short on life span.” Did I miss something? Are we still talking about foreclosures and “mortgage” securities here? Or did someone let their true identity slip? Stripes may be… passionate, but that doesn’t mean she is wrong about everything she writes. Read her posts carefully – those are NOT misspellings – they are hints. Not sure about a word? Look it up.

    Further, be sure to check your REMIC number against the DTCC codes for each bank, should be an eye opener. (DTCC = MERS model) Better yet, ask your mortgage insurance and homeowner insurance companies who the beneficiary is on each policy – then ask yourself why THAT person isn’t bringing the suit.

    Stripes – the question is this: who can anyone trust? The foreclosure isn’t about your house. It’s about the natural resources in your LAND – and the foreign investors who want them. Read the Freddie Mac Act to gain understanding.

    Christine – You are incredibly smart. I’m surprised you don’t value your sovereignty more. I support all races, all religions, all people – so we agree on that point. I’m just surprised by the position you’ve taken on this forum. Consistently I see you attempting to minimize the comments of the same people who have the game figured out (which I know from my own docs and research). Given your superior intellect, I have to assume that you also know that they are correct. Why, then, are you trying to point other readers away from correct information?

    One more thing – research anti-thesis vs thesis = synthesis (collusion). It may help readers to view their information sources on BOTH sides of the political fence with a more critical eye. (Google STRATFOR as well). If you know game theory at all, those players that communicate, collude and cheat reap the greatest rewards in the Prisoner’s Dilemma game. This is exactly what the banks have done.

  177. poppy @2:21 – a legal description of a property is sometimes appropriately in metes and bounds, particularly on older properties not part of a subdivision. Subdivision – that’s when a plot of land is divided into parcels, by the developer generally, and generally how we get a description like “Lot 3, block 1, Joe Hill’s subdivision.

    I’d like to see that document your talking about. Really would. Will you link one please?

  178. John Gault – I do not have time this week, but I will explain Grantor Trusts, and what they actually accomplish for the master servicer.s of the pools. I can’t give any more information here – I see Neil is starting to like the term “not perfected lien”.

  179. You see christine, you are not able to differentiate between defending and tolerance of the condition that exists within many people. Everyone cannot express their frustration and pain in a healthy, productive way. Intent is the key to distinguishing the difference between venomous, virulent personalities like yourself, who wishes harm to other’s, particularly if they do not align with you!

    You, I find to be particularly spiteful and hostile, not only here, but to Americans in general. You have a right to be here, but I do question why you would want to put yourself in a demographic that you clearly despise and wish ill-will upon. Who is the real contagion on here, stripes or you? You are the one who appears to need a “gang” “group” to bolster your position, not stripes. She appears by all accounts to be able to hold her own!

  180. Jg, Fannie Mae and Frauddie Mac have been infiltrated and are being skimmed for all their worth, same as many local and state governmental bodies as well. As they say in Russia, it is a kleptocracy.

  181. ……and it’s citizenry.

  182. We are living in denial in America that the enemies of our Liberty are in fraudulent control of our great nation.

  183. eggs – so glad you mentioned that. I know dang well fnma doesn’t own the notes and rights to payments after they have sold at least the rights to payments (again, that is messed – the bifurcation of a note itself?). But in the Butler case, say, fnma could have repurhased whatever it sold. We just don’t know. But i think what we do know is that by alleging it owns the note, fnma implies it has in fact re-acquired whatever it sold. Whether that’s true or not, because they have shown themselves to be deceitful s-heads, who knows. We’re all about sick of being in that ‘who knows’ position, aren’t we?

    Anyone here recall where the notes go from loans that fnma buys from aggregators? Last I recall, fnma (in its material to aggregators) said it didn’t want custody of no stinking notes. so wth? Now we may have
    the ntoe payee with no possession, fnma with no possession, and secn trusts with no possession. oh wait. some repository is the custodian for all and just puts on a diff hat as required, right?

    I’d like to say again fwiw why I participate in these foreclosure defense efforts. I’ve already acknowledged that some of us used our homes as atm machines. some of us got loans we knew we couldn’t pay, maybe betting on a sale at a higher appraisal. Okay, so we had some sins. Courts et al want us to honor our agreements, our end of a deal. Well, first of all, whether or not there were even a deal, a meeting of the minds to form a contract is highly suspect, succinctly. Clearly many borrowers were suckered into getting default-guarantee loans, which apparently became a shameful and disgusting industry-wide practice.

    There are rules of conduct for the guys on the other end – not just us as parties on one end of this deal, and they are not abiding by them and they never did. Responsibility is a two-way street, not a one-way street with a dead end for just one party. If, to enforce those alleged contracts against us, they had to do this and this and that, then they had to do this and this and that. And they didn’t. They made money making those loans to us. Swell, that was the idea (altho in some cases, well, you know). They made “I got mine, F-you ” (sorry, best way to describe it) loans. The big f-you was to a lot of Americans, not just the borrowers and it truly brought us to our knees and disgraced us on the world stage. For their part, there were those rules to follow to ensure the right to enforce these loans (at least ones that if they saw the light of day could survive rescission) remained, either as to themselves or others. They couldn’t be bothered and further, following those rules of their own conduct and obligations got in the way of their jerkie goals.
    Courts and policy makers are currently putting the onus on only one party to the alleged contract, i.e., only this side has to live with and honor its obligations, with very little and often no consideration of the obligations of the other guys. We could spend all day kicking around why courts and policy makers do this, but imo the fact is, they do it.
    And it’s wrong. Further, while we’re guaranteed the right to equal representation, we don’t have it. We’re by and large no match for
    their endless pockets and organization to defeat our rights and interests.
    They have found salvation for their gross dereliction in the form of provisions of the UCC which they claim are (just about) the whole enchilada. They’re not. That’s our battle and one none of us should have to wage and yes, I maintain it would not have been possible without MERS, the supreme enabler.
    So I look at this disparity in bargaining power, litigation, everything (including the fact that these are contracts of cohesion)
    and I, like most here, don’t want to take it lying down. It’s just
    crap to make one side of a deal act one way and allow the other to shirk all its own responsibilities, especially at this juncture when only eejit-sticks don’t know those responsibilities exist.
    I would guess this is why many of us participate here.

  184. Romney was right the KHAZARS do have to pay back at least the principal to WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES….!

  185. Romney was right the khazars are the entitlement people and their OBAMACARE healthcare law they pinned on Obama is a fraud.

  186. Obamas right the Khazars don’t want to pay their taxes.

  187. Obama is right….Snowden needs to stay in Moscow.

  188. The real problem in America is not Obama, the blacks, or WE THE PEOPLE of OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC WHO ARE DOING NOTHING ILLEGAL….IT IS THE KHAZAR COMMUNIST CONTROLLERS…THE EVIL UNDERLINGS HIDING BEHIND THE SCENES.

  189. That’s right America we are running with the devil….AKA THE KHAZARS… and as a result we are living in a place that steals from WE THE PEOPLE…. called KORPORATE AMERIKA…!

  190. PAY US BACK WHAT YOU STOLE FROM WE THE PEOPLE …! YOUR KHAZAR COMMUNIST EVIL UNDERLINGS CAN’T HIDE YOUR ROBBERY OF WE THE PEOPLE ANY LONGER….!

  191. 9/11 WAS A KHAZAR COMMUNIST JIHAD ON WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA…..!

  192. Pooper with a pack mentality and a hair across,

    The fact that you keep defending stripper tells me all I need to know. Get outraged and keep that hair as much as you please. Some people can’t feel good unless they feel bad anyway. See if I care about what you think.

    What a fucked up country made of fucked up people!

  193. jg,

    If you read the paperwork coming out of the new sales of property from Fannie Mae and Freddie, it is clear they have no paperwork to substantiate any previous ownership in our property. 13 pages of waivers, the new buyer MUST sign to include: metes and bonds checks…what that tells me, only me, they have no legal description, no DOT and no proper note in their possession. When buying one of these properties, which by the way, keep going under contract and coming back, the buyers have to spend upwards of $1,000.00 each and every time they make an offer. Who ever heard of such a thing? And further, why would the potential buyer need to be the one fixing title issues, if these properties legally belonged to Fannie and Freddie? Tell me what the rest of you think? I know this for 100%…Another case of what they say and what is true are two different things.

  194. “One of these days, the imbecile will get shot and it won’t be one minute too early”

    Even though I may agree with some of the comments here, this is okay? Has anyone seen the venom this one spews, about the citizens of this country? All of this is disgraceful….just because one is more articulate doesn’t make the intent any better. Just saying. So, now two wrongs make it right, come on guys!

  195. eggs – good point. I’ll save the article and read it. The only way fnma owns a note AND has a right to payments acc to some fnma info is if fnma had to repurchase (whatever it sold – right to payments, not note? man, that’s messed!) is when it now is the note holder by way of having a negotiated note with the rights to payment. That only happens after fnma is compelled to honor its guarantee and buy out whatever it sold to investors or anyone else. So if fnma is allegedly
    the plaintiff in a f/c suit or action, that tells us that fnma has at least
    allegedly honored its guarantee (any interest by mbs investors is toast).

  196. Has anyone been involved in a case where the note bears the certification of a title company? IMO that’s proof positive the note is a copy of the copy in the servicing file. Okay, it’s at least more probable than not.** That’s exactly what the servicer gets = a copy of the note certified by the title co in the servicing file. That’s where all the stuff in a loan file goes (x the orig note and dot) – to the loan servicer. The title company has sent the original dot for recording and it 99% has sent the original note in the warehouse package off somewhere, that “off somewhere” not being to the guy who’s named as the payee on the note: the payee on the note likely never had possession of the original executed note, as i’ve opined before. I dare any one of them to try to prove, certainly when the originator was a broker, that the payee took possession of an executed note when the closing was done by a title company. Now, if your juris sees a title company the agent of the alleged lender ( the dillweed named on the note) as to the issue of poss of the note *** . it’s possible a court could find that the agent’s possession was that of the dillweed.

    How the broker’s endorsement got on there (IF it did), I don’t know unless the endorsement were done on the back of the note BEFORE the borrower signed the front, but there is no way in the world i believe that the the big players entrusted the orig notes to a lot of those brokers. Or maybe I’m wrong and they did, which could explain why
    there were so many lost notes – though I don’t believe this. It’s just
    a possibility. You can’t believe the lack of structure in some of those mom and pop broker shops. Since I know it, the big players knew it, and that’s why I don’t believe they’d entrust a live one to those guys
    if and when the live one were needed elsewhere by a time certain (which should be all the time).
    .
    There are serious deadlines by which those notes had to get somewhere or the big player would be penalized and other bad for them stuff (the warehouse line loan could be called, for instance).
    If I had another two hours to devote to this, I could probably figure out how that jives with NG’s apparent theory that the investors funds were used to fund the loans at closing.

    Chances are the payee on the note never had possession of the note.
    ** banksters white out the cert by title which would give this away. Now that’s problematic.

    *** some jurisdictions deem a title company the agent of a lender. Others don’t. Even in the ones that do, it’s a limited agency and wouldn’t necessarily encompass possession of the note by agency.

  197. THE GSEs ARE A KHAZAR COMMUNIST FRAUD….!

  198. This is also why the Khazar controlled medical establishment makes us sick with highly curable diseases they refuse to cure….same with the fraudclosures …..it is all theft by the Khazar communists….our foreign enemies.

  199. johngault,
    Read about the Fannie Mae ownership issues here:
    http://libertyroadmedia.wordpress.com/2013/07/11/fannie-mae-by-its-own-admission-owns-nothing/

    Quote from article:
    “Notice the duplicity of Fannie Mae made plain in these documents. In the Fannie Servicing Guide, Fannie’s intended audience is obviously its servicers, so they want the servicers to believe that Fannie Mae is “at all times” both the owner and holder of promissory notes. However, in the other two documents (the “Basics of Fannie Mae MBS” website excerpt and the Amended 2007 Trust Agreement) excerpted above, Fannie’s intended audience is investors and potential investors, both of whom Fannie wants to believe that they (the investors or potential investors)–and not Fannie–are the owners of the promissory notes.”

  200. The FBI told me the GSEs are the problem….however….the real problem is who fraudulently controls the GSES by many proxies…THE KHAZARS.

  201. THIS IS WHY RT NEWS …… RUSSIA TODAY BLAMES THEIR OWN PERPS THEY PUT IN PLACE FOR STEALING OUR LIBERTY…..!

  202. THE TRUTH IS….THE KHAZARS HAVE STOLEN AN INNUMERABLE AMOUNT OF OUR WEALTH HIDING BEHIND GOVERNMENT AND THE KORPORATE AMERIKA LOGOS…..THE KHAZARS OWE WE THE PEOPLE INNUMERABLE AMOUNTS OF MONEY AND PROPERTY TITLES……! THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE HIDING. THEY SENT THE NIHILISTS UPON US IN THE FORM OF THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD AND THE KORPORATE LOGOS TO STEAL OUR LIBERTY….!

  203. THEREFORE DON’T SEND THE KHAZAR GSEs ANOTHER DIME AMERICA…..!

  204. THE KHAZARS ARE STEALING OUR LIBERTY FOR RUSSIA & CHINA FROM BEHIND THE KORPORATE LOGOS……LIKE THE GSEs…!

  205. FEELINGS MUTUAL CHRISTINE…..THE TRUTH HAS COME HOME TO ROOST IN AMERICA AND ALL TRAITORS TO GOD AND OUR GREAT NATION ARE BEING REVEALED.

    DON’T PAY THE GSEs….CHINA & RUSSIA ANOTHER DIME AMERICA…THEY ARE STEALING OUR LIBERTY….?

  206. There was a prophecy from the Blessed Mother who the khazars hate that Russia and China would try and incite a world wide revolution against WE THE PEOPLE OF THESE UNITED STATES TO STEAL OUR LIBERTY….

  207. Well, tell the truth, I don’t trust you guys to read this FNMA stuff. Plus you’re not compelled to (yeah, yeah, I do know) Because I want it out there, here is the judge’s reference to the fraudulent (yes, there’s that word) scam in FNMA’s manual in JPMC natl assn v Butler in NY (talk about take one down, pass it around…..):

    This FANNIE MAE regulation states, in relevant part:

    Fannie Mae is at all times the owner of the mortgage note, whether

    the note is in our portfolio or whether we own it as trustee for an MBS trust.

    In addition, Fannie Mae at all times has possession of and is the holder of the mortgage note, except in the limited circumstances expressly described below.
    We may have direct possession of the note or a custodian may have custody of the note for us. If we possess the note through a document custodian, the document custodian has custody of the note for our exclusive use and benefit.

    In most cases, a servicer will have a copy of the mortgage note that
    it can use to begin the foreclosure process. However, some jurisdictions require that the servicer produce the original note before or shortly after initiating foreclosure proceedings. If our possession of the note is direct because the custody documents are at our document delivery facility, to obtain the note or any other custody documents that are needed, the servicer should submit a request to our Cutody Department . . . the servicer should specify whether the original note is required or whether the request if for a copy.

    In some jurisdictions, only the “holder” of the note may conduct a
    foreclosure. In any jurisdiction in which our servicer must be the holder of the note in order to conduct the foreclosure, we temporarily transfer our possession of the note to our servicer, effective automatically and immediately before commencement of the foreclosure proceeding.

    When we transfer our possession, our servicer becomes the holder of the note during the foreclosure proceedings.

    If the borrower reinstates the loan or the servicer ceases to service the loan for Fannie Mae for any reason, then possession of the note at that time automatically reverts to Fannie Mae and
    the note must be returned to the document custodian.

    At that time, Fannie Mae also resumes being the holder, just as it was before the foreclosure proceedings. The transfer of our possession, and any reversion of possession to us are evidenced and memorialized by our publication of this paragraph.

    This Guide provision may be relied upon by a court to
    establish that the servicer conducting the foreclosure proceeding has possession, and is the holder, of the note during the foreclosure proceeding, [*7] unless the court is otherwise notified by Fannie Mae. [Emphasis added].”

    Thus, it appears to the Court that the delay by CHASE in producing the subject BUTLER Note was to give Baum and/or Cullen & Dykman ample time to temporarily borrow the BUTLER Note from FANNIE MAE for its May 2, 2011 presentation to the Court. Despite its December 2011 admission that FANNIE MAE owned the subject BUTLER mortgage and note, CHASE, prior to this, continuously presented its ownership subterfuge to Special Referee Goldstein and the Court. The Court cannot countenance the deceptive behavior of CHASE, the alleged owner of the subject BUTLER mortgage and note, its counsel, and FANNIE MAE, the real owner of the subject BUTLER mortgage and note. FANNIE MAE’s Servicing Guide, with its deceptive practices to fool courts, does not supercede New York law.”

    I confess I’d seen this fnma bull a long time ago, but didn’t have the benefit of Schack’s brain to help me articulate what was so tweaked about it. I knew those ratb’s were using a copy of the note from the servicing file as alleged evidence of anything they wanted. If they give the dot trustee anything at all for him to carry out his
    impartial duties as a dot trustee, it’s this bs copy of the note in the servicing file. That’s the copy that’s put in the loan file right after closing (the original has generally been sent to the warehouse line
    provider as collateral for the closing funds, or used to be.
    Someone the other day said Deutsche funded a loan from out of the country (using funds meant for a MBS trust?). If that’s true, or if it’s only true that Deutsche funded the loan from out of the country, one can almost take it to the bank that that’s where the original loan went – to Deutsche – UNless, the loan had already been sold to someone else and then that someone else might get the original
    note straight from closing. At any rate, those curmudgeon copies in the servicing file, which re copies of loans straight from closing, have *&^@!*& endorsements on them. Okay, maybe that of the
    guy named as the payee on the note, unless the payee was shown as Americas Wholesale Lender, say, who could only endorse a note as “bunch of guys doing business as Americas Wholesale Lender”,
    lacking any business structure. in my lay opinion, of course

  208. E. ToLLe said: “You’ve earned the title of WORLD’S BIGGEST DICKHEAD.”

    A dickhead might not necessarily know what he/she does. An intentionally malicious vermin is not only well aware of his actions but has a method to them. Because she is so long overdue, we just need to be a little more patient. In time, she will get what’s coming to her. There are enough people with a motive to shut her up. Just a question of time.

  209. RUSSIA AND CHINA THE MAKINGS OF AN ANTI-AMERICAN ALLIANCE…

    http://www.securityaffairs.org/issues/2006/11/nemets.php

  210. AMERICAS NEW COLD WAR AGAINST RUSSIA & CHINA…….

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-new-cold-war-against-russia-and-china/5323716

  211. POLICE FEAR FLASH MOB VIOLENCE IF ZIMMERMAN IS AQUITTED….

    http://www.fourwinds10.net/

  212. The khazars are the enemies of all races and religions.

  213. Same thing they did to O.J. Simpson. Wake up America…!

  214. The khazars set up George Zimmerman and used trayvon Martin as a pawn in their game to incite a race war in America.

  215. THE KHAZARS ARE THE REAL HATERS OF EVERYBODY…THEY HIDE BEHIND RELIGION …GOVERNMENT….. LAW ……..EDUCATION …THE MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENT ….THE JUDICIARY ….AND KORPORATE AMERIKA TO STEAL OUR LIBERTY…..!

  216. THROW THE KHAZARS OUT AMERICA…!

  217. We are also sick of the Fatwa in our courtrooms by the Muslim Brotherhood and their ongoing jihad on Christianity in America.

  218. Christine,
    I have never meet anyone in my life with so much hate inside them. And yes her life span is on the shorts. I hope her shill pay to fill the pool and snack on her leg of lamb this summer was worth it to her. Because we all know … when they outlive their usefulness… they are eaten by their own.

  219. “When our ancestors came here they came here to BUILD AMERICA……..NOT STEAL IT”

    I swear stripper, I can’t believe you can even turn on your computer, much less type anything. You’ve earned the title of WORLD’S BIGGEST DICKHEAD.

    As to not stealing America, why don’t you run your fact-checker by, oh….I don’t know….pick one…any one….let’s say Cherokee….or Sioux….or Nez Perce, just for starters.

    Oh and by the way, I’m glad your dog died. He/she deserved a better fate than living with the likes of you. As a matter of fact, euthanasia would be a better fate than living with you. And no, asshole, Euthanasia isn’t a foreign land, dummkopf.

  220. KC,

    Let it go. She finds a very sick pleasure in doing that. She is completely useless. Don’t give her any attention. That’s what she’s looking for, in her pathetic, sick, self-centered and self-absorbed little way.

  221. Insolvent!

  222. PASTOR MANNING IS CORRECT IN HIS ASSESSMENT…WHITE PEOPLE HAVE HAD ENOUGH…WE ARE SICK OF BEING ROBBED BY THE KHAZARS AND BLACK PEOPLE SHOULD BE SICK OF IT AS WELL….!

  223. FEELINGS MUTUAL K.C……THE FOREIGNER’S HAVE HIJACKED AMERICA VIA THEIR KHAZAR COUNTERPARTS…WHAT I CALL THEIR EVIL UNDERLINGS….AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA…!

  224. Imbecile!

  225. THE FOREIGNER’S ARE THE REAL PROBLEM IN AMERICA. When our ancestors came here they came here to BUILD AMERICA……..NOT STEAL IT…THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OUR ANCESTORS AND THE FOREIGNER’S TODAY …..

  226. FEELINGS MUTUAL CHRISTINE……THE TRUTH IS THE TRUTH….THIS IS OUR COUNTRY. WE THE PEOPLE PAID FOR IT AND BUILT IT ….ALL THE FOREIGNER’S WHO ARE ROBBING US NEED TO BE THROWN OUT OF AMERICA…..THEY ARE STEALING OUR LIBERTY…..!

  227. One of these days, the imbecile will get shot and it won’t be one minute too early… In fact, given that she is fundamentally useless and a drag on the economy and many, many websites she routinely haunts, she is long overdue.

  228. the other day, NG brought up the JPMC v Butler case, which I’ve and tried and failed to find in pdf. (anyone?) A link is back on the page with NG’s post. It’s also at stopforeclosurefraud. I am part way thru it and am horrified (did we think it was still possible for any of us to be horrified?!) by FNMA’s plan, an which to date has mostly by and large successful, to deceive borrowers and courts alike. If you don’t want to read the whole case, okay, but I strongly recommend everyone at least get to the part about the fnma foreclosure m.o. including telling others to allege to hold the notes.

    Here’s the link to it here on LL from July 9th:

    https://livinglies.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/jpm-chase-shell-game-stopped-in-its-tracksny-judge-shack-does-it-again/

    If it won’t open, go back to that post. this info needs to get out there as far as possible.
    I’m having second thoughts about keeping fnma around. They’ve been overrun by crooks and liars imo. Thought we got rid of them in 2008. Guess not.

  229. The truth about the wall to wall khazar media coverage of the Zimmerman trial is they are trying to incite a revolution in America…

  230. For those fighting Chase, this is an excellent website I keep forgetting about.

    http://www.chasechase.org/cases.html

    Great cases to cite.

  231. PASTOR MANNING SAYS BLACK PEOPLE ARE DESCENDENTS FROM SATAN…LUCIFER…MAY I ADD SO ARE THE KHAZARS.

  232. Don’t hang yourself with a celibate rope and sign up for fraudulently induced slavery America….MAKE THE CROOKS PAY BACK WHAT THEY STOLE….SCREW THEIR FRAUDULENTLY INDUCED MUSLIM FATWA ON WE THE PEOPLE. THE FOREIGNERS ARE HYPOCRITES WHO HATE OUR LIBERTY & THEREFORE THEY HATE US…

  233. Pastor Manning says bring back the N word because black people hate white people and that’s the real reason why they want to ban the N word …may I add the Khazars hate Americans completely because they hate our liberty and Christianity that is why they hate our Constitution and the Christian religion esp ROMAN CANON LAW and the Catholic church because they are the only things keeping us free…..

    REVEREND MANNING SAYS BRING BACK THE “N” WORD…
    http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?feature=fvwrel&v=R0zffDTQrT4

  234. Bill Butler got his ass handed to him again in the 8th Circuit. What they are doing to this attorney is exemplary of the govern-by-fiat standard that the Obamster has set. Nothing but bad law being created everywhere to stop the homeowners. They will go to any extreme to keep the lie going.

    http://www.startribune.com/local/minneapolis/215254721.html

  235. http://victoryoverchase.blogspot.com/

    This site is interesting. Stumbled on it looking for something. It has a read-worthy discussion of how the terms of a hamp mod are determined. Lots of interesting stuff there, includiing 9th C case law with summaries.

  236. Is Pastor Manning a racist too? Everyone is wrong but the Khazar communist trolls who have hijacked America pretending to be Americans.

  237. K.C. IS A LIAR….SHE IS A FOREIGN IMPOSTER…..

    PASTOR MANNING SAYS WHITE PEOPLE AINT GONNA TAKE IT NO MORE….

    http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=EOOEo35YLGM

  238. “…the banks need to be nationalized and broken up completely.”

    Louise: can’t have it both ways. And it makes absolutely no sense to nationalize first and break down then. Where did you get your MBA from? Congo?

    Gawd have mercy!

  239. Moron!

  240. All of the foreigner’s need to be thrown out….ASAP.

  241. No Deborah….the facts don’t lie and you foreigner’s are banging your heads for believing WE THE PEOPLE would never figure out your scam to steal our Liberty from U.S….FROM UNDER OUR RADAR…AND UNDER OUR NOSES.

  242. And they hate women in the Muslim word and enslave them. That is why they oppress women in the Muslim world.

  243. This is why they are trying to criminalize everything the Muslim world rejects. WAKE UP AMERICA…!

  244. It’s the same thing that’s going on in Egypt with the Muslim Brotherhood. The khazars sent the nihilists upon every nation in the form of a Muslim fatwa.

  245. Glenn Beck said it and he was correct but he is a hypocrite as well because he defends KORPORATE Amerika and the banks therefore he is a traitor too.

  246. WHY? SIMPLE. THE KHAZARS HATE OUR LIBERTY.

  247. IT IS A SECRET MUSLIM FATWA OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC IN AMERICA.

  248. The media are calling it MORAL HAZARD….NO IT IS A FATWA AGAINST WE THE PEOPLE….WHO CONTROLS CITI THAT WE FUND…? THE SAUDIS….THEY COLLECT USURY BUT DON’T PAY IT BECAUSE THEY ARE HYPOCRITES…THIS IS NOT ROMAN CANON LAW…OUR LAW…THIS IS A MUSLIM FATWAH..

  249. Russia and China joined forces and the khazar communists have sent their nihilist counterparts upon us. What is really going on in our court’s is a FATWA ….A MUSLIM LEGAL JUDGEMENT AGAINST WE THE PEOPLE FOR PAYING USURY.

  250. Ok then that leaves 2, off your trolley
    Im saying this and its unkind but for your own good stripes. Get help.
    You are consumed and banging your head against the walll.
    Answer for exsmple. Jg post below constructively, you cant you havent and every day its same ol. We know ok
    But what we who fight for years in court against huge odds have shared our best efforts with a consciousness of good – with no agenda
    Im just glad there are still a few reasonable people sharing on here case law and helpful tips worth exploring.

  251. The foreigner’s are emboldened by our slacking off and failure to give a shit about our Liberty and are taking Amerika over right in front of our faces in full gear since 9/11…They are coming over here opening up our stolen businesses and being funded by their foreign counterparts. These foreigner’s are KORPORATE AMERIKA EVIL UNDERLINGS and are very deceptive wolves in sheep’s clothes and are stealing our nation and our Liberty right in front of our eyes.

  252. Repaying KORPORATE Amerika once for robbing us is insane. Repaying KORPORATE Amerika multiple times is the definition of insanity and is tyranny. It is totalitarian control freak bullshit. Wake Up America the foreigner’s are stealing your Liberty and your country. Throw them all out…!

  253. Paid…? I wish. This is all out of the kindness of my heart while I fight to get back what these KORPORATE crooks stole and hijacked from me….PRO SE AND INDEPENDENT. I know it is hard for a foreigner to believe someone could love their Liberty this much but I do love my Liberty this much. Because I know Liberty means freedom and independence from Foreigner’s who hate our Liberty and that is why they are stealing it from WE THE PEOPLE IN MANY WAYS…I don’t like anyone who wishes to control me. The reason for 9/11 and all of this fc crap is because KORPORATE Amerika are covering up they robbed WE THE PEOPLE AND STILL ARE.

  254. “There are nothing illegal people about incorporating a Grantor trust, into an installment sale contract and using a nominee to facilitate tax deferred echanging of like mortages of for deferring taxes under a bank to bank buy selll scheme”

    Nothing illegal to incorporate a grantor trust, MS, by WHOM? Non-beneficiaries of that grantor trust? And WHO designated the nominee to allegedly facilitate anything? My ignorance on the topic is frustrating. Still I have to believe if I knew more about it, I’d shoot football size holes in that deal. “bank to bank sell scheme”. Okay, could be happening, could be okay, but looks like apples and oranges to me, at least as far as NG’s theory of E or R trusts. KC made the most interesting comment so far, to me, by saying those trusts could have lost something by their laches, the inexcusable neglect of / delay in asserting their rights. To whom the laches kc referenced applies as a defense, not sure.

  255. Then that leaves 1. You are paid

  256. Just telling it like it is MS…Not sorry if the truth hurts. It needs to be said. This is America not KORPORATE Amerika. We are acting weak as a nation letting these Foreign Stasi entitlement people tell U.S. what to do. What is going on here in this nation is a disgrace.

  257. How about cutting off KORPORATE Amerikas funding from WE THE PEOPLE alltogether and they pay back what they stole from WE THE PEOPLE.

  258. That Deborah Wynn character is wrong on all counts. Thanks again MS….

  259. And two of your contacts on here maher if only listening wAs the only skill needed for you to help us to help you to help others.
    I get team. No i in there – sorry to say people generally dont know how to wotk as a team god knows and you maher know that i sure have tried.
    Best to all and the path your cases are on.

  260. Filing – finally

  261. The unfortunate reality is that if we don’t press the question of the proverbial Wall separating Wall Street from Main Street, or otherwise to mean the Households…then we technically do not own homes anymore.

    There are nothing illegal people about incorporating a Grantor trust, into an installment sale contract and using a nominee to facilitate tax deferred echanging of like mortages of for deferring taxes under a bank to bank buy selll scheme

    So how do we overcome the common law rule written in stone for paying back or at least demonstrating capacity to cure a foreclosure?

    This means you’re able to tender or have the capacity to tender at the time of the purported claim. My response is you think each step of the way.

    Hire an expert if necessary for the attorneys, but make the counsel listen

    Here is my gift or two cents worth:

    One cannot tender that which was canceled, repudiated by the lender, charged or written off the beneficiary’s books. …

    But more importantly, a charge to the APPRAISAL will cause the loan to be written down to maybe five percent of the notes value! I have experienced this as a lender so it does happen – believe it!

    A charge to the LOAN down to 5% however will cause the appraisal to be written down ALSO ? WILL IT ?

    No way, unheard of in any sense the argument. This friends is what is part of the disaster that is happening to you in foreclosure

    Registerclaims@live.com

  262. another fly in the ointment?

  263. and Maher, what are you doing now?

  264. Jg
    This stripes character, i gave benefit of doubt as this person has knowledge, well big wooo, to spend all day every day blogging , i mean ranting and raving is nothing less than 1. Person is psid 2. Person is off their trolley. And ms has to br joking right.

  265. If Stripe ran this and other comparable sites… the world could be a better place ….If strips says ….IT’S SO!

  266. @ MS and “The Spleen”

    I’m sticking to RICO as the Kenyans 2nd term strategy ,,, Sure it seems unlikely if you don’t understand the presdents gameplan , he doesn’t care about the bankers , but he does want to REGAIN control from the banks and expand his fiefdom,, he doesn’t really care if they pretend to be independent or a branch of HIS government … RICO or the threat of RICO does that for him…

    PS. SPLEEN , if you don’t want me to read your rants don’t write them.

  267. WE THE PEOPLE all have one thing in common….WE LOVE OUR LIBERTY….and one enemy….KORPORATE AMERIKA…..THEY SCREWED EVERYBODY…IN BOTH THE PUBLIC & PRIVATE SECTOR.

  268. There is a reason for that …. and there is a reason for everything regarding bijayas comment.

    The reason being fascists hiding in the public sector AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA…are intentionally destroying our wealth to force compliance with fraud…they want to give us the illusion we cannot afford to hire the appropriate legal counsel. However, we should not need to hire legal counsel because of the heinous and egregious crimes that have been committed against us….the DOJ…should be fighting these crooks and should have shut them down and paid us back everything KORPORATE AMERICA STOLE AND CLEARED OUR FRAUD RIDDEN TITLES.

    That cannot happen because the States have joined forces with our foreign enemy….KORPORATE AMERIKA because their “pension funds” are being used as a tool to control them and a weapon against all of us in private sector. The States and the public sector are in fact being duped by their KORPORATE AMERIKA counterparts because more than half of their wealth is being stole from them as private sector citizens.

    This is indeed an awful complicated mess that leaves the private sector with ONE alternative. Everyone needs to educate themselves on how the law and about how this black operation AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA operates and everyone needs to stand up to the KORPORATE Amerika crooks in their own individual way. My way is pro se all the way. That way there is no compromising my morals. I am here to get back MY LIBERTY from the crooks who stole my wealth and hijacked my properties….my life….my life’s work…my life’s savings and my retirement money….those crooks are KORPORATE AMERIKA.

  269. I see this fraudclosure fight as being a lot more complicated than that jg….There is a lot more to this war on tare than filing paper work and showing up to court. The whole enemy thing is real as the nose on your face. Our enemies are close at hand and far away just as J.F.K said they would be in his speech on Secret Societies. The reason being, our enemies have hijacked our Securities…our Liberty.

    I do not pretend to have a simple answer to this complex myriad of problems these people have created and I do not intend to tell anyone how to fight this war on us. The reason being I believe that is personal and up to the individual.

    I do however, feel that a suggestion other than what is in the mainstream of thought can be helpful to some who like to talk about ideas that can change the course of events by certain people who seem to think they are more entitled than others.

    That is my view from mainstreet U.S.A…

  270. Local bar is bought & paid for No one is willing to fight the judges Even Niel Garfield is going for modification I’m in CA Thanks for the advice though

    Sent from my iPhone

  271. It certainly seems like every scam in the last 100 years involves the public sector ….KORPORATE AMERIKA….robbing the private sector.

  272. We, that includes me, have real enemies, stripes. (not saying you don’t or that we don’t have other enemies or factors at play) We have chosen to narrow our efforts to the topic of this blog site – foreclosure defense thru the judicial system generally, to try to unravel a very tangled web of deception in a manner we can articulate to others, the courts which largely determine the course of our lives. I see no point in making an enemy of a mere annoyance, even though I believe your constant ranting is megolamania, your perception that you have some self-ordained right to inject anything you want into this blog, anything and everything which is not about saving our homes through the judicial process, it’s intended purpose. We all have only so much energy and we have to pick our battles carefully. I’ve picked mine and they are consistant with the goals of this particular website.

    So, yeah, you’re an annoyance to me but not enemy-worthy or bickering-worthy – as far as I know – except to the extent that I feel you have undermined the legitimacy of this site, whether as a result of willful intent or just by your endless, ill-mannered, egotistical rants. I don’t know which it is. I’m not that clever. One day maybe the the guy who runs this deal will make the choice most of us root for and there will be peace, at least in this valley. Until then, I’m, as usual, not going there other than what I just said. I’m not going to help prove we, by our behaviors and what not, deserve what’s happening to us because we’re that lame, in a word. You have to play that one by yourself if you want because I, like most here, have bigger fish to fry. And I’m sure you’ve heard of divide and conquer, right?
    And btw, if I’m a shill, God didn’t make little green apples.

    But you didn’t answer my question. You don’t have to, of course. I was just curious why you have chosen a foreclosure – defense site concentrating on the judicial system to vent what you think is your right to vent and vent and vent and vent (even if everything you said were
    100% logical or true) when you could get so much positive feedback (for instance) elsewhere.

  273. Not without a receipt jg….not so fast you dirty bastards……!

  274. “What that means, from the hip, is that a court may take notice, say, that abc executed an endorsement to xyz. It does not mean, and is not evidence, that abc had anything to assign.”

    I meant that a court may take notice that abc executed an Assignment, to xyz, not an Endorsement – in that sentence.

  275. I know you are a comrade of Korporate Amerika but what am I…? I AM YOUR POLAR OPPOSITE…AND YOU DESPISE THAT…I have to hand it to you though…..you are pretty cunning in your evil by your non chalance jg…..you know perfectly well the reason why I’m here….to blow the whistle on you and your KORPORATE AMERIKA comrades….and it’s all coming full circle because evil never wins and The Good Lord Always Delivers.

  276. GOOGLE SEARCH AGENDA 21………ITS ALL ABOUT KORPORATE/STATE CONTROLLED FASCISM…..IT ALL STARTS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL….BUYER BEWARE….! IT’S HELLS BELLS AMERICA…THEIR EVIL EYE IS EVERYWHERE & ANYWHERE….!

  277. stripes, dearest, did you happen to notice this is a foreclosure defense blog by any chance? There are tons of rant and rave or even placid it’s all rigged sites (not knocking them, just not my thang just now) and I suspect you know of many of them. So, I can’t really figure why you keep blessing us here on this foreclosure-defense site. Why, as an audience, may I ask, are we so important to you when you have many comrades elsewhere?

  278. WARNING…..KORPORATE AMERIKA are greedy and gutless and they already said they are going for what they call the “useless eaters” first …and that means all of us ….. in both sectors.

  279. Injury is not expressed in any f/c case I’ve ever seen…just the hearsay (imo) docs i referred to. That’s why I think a mtn to quash the summons may be appropriate: there is no allegation of an injury which would
    invoke jurisdiction. They can’t just say “There’s a note, it’s ours, we’re entitled to relief becaue they have not alleged an injury in so stating (but it’s what they do or i guess, don’t do) They don’t say on April 9th of 2008, we purchased this note for $479,876.17 and we want our money back or the collateral (or both where deficiency judgments are allowed). We have suffered an injury by non-payment from the borrower and will continue to do so if we aren’t granted the relief sought.” Nope, they don’t say that. If they did, imo they would have alleged a jurisdiction-allowing injury and then the court could adjudicate its merits.
    Again, these are lay opinons.

  280. KORPORATE AMERIKA are firmly latched on to the private sectors teet….that’s all Laches really means.

  281. Ah zip it zippee…..come out of the twilight zone you are living in and read the real news at this blog for once..THE JIG IS UP….! THE WAR ON TERROR WAS A BIG HOAX….THESE KORPORATE AMERIKA FARM PAYROLL CROOKS IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR PITTED YOU AGAINST ME….THAT IS THE MEANING OF THE WAR ON TARE….9/11….THE PUBLIC SECTOR V THE PRIVATE SECTOR…The crooks at the top of the KORPORATE AMERIKA FOOD CHAIN WANT US TO ANNIHILATE EACH OTHER…..NOW MAKE THOSE CROOKS PAY BACK WHAT THEY STOLE….STARTING WITH THEIR EVIL UNDERLINGS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL …THEN WE WILL SLOWLY WORK OUR WAY UP TO THE FOOD CHAIN…SOMEHOW I DON’T THINK WE WILL GET TOO FAR UP THE KORPORATE AMERIKA FOOD CHAIN BUT….BOTTOMS UP PRIVATE SECTOR….!

  282. Midnight owls might want to revisit In re Wilhelm, in re Hwang, in re
    Sheridan, etc. for discussions of Rule 9017. Bk cases, yes, but bk rules relevant here come from the federal rules of civil procedure generally. (9017 comes from FRCP 17)

  283. “◾Laches: The settlor is not entitled to a resulting trust because they have unnecessarily delayed in brining the lawsuit”

    Now that’s interesting….got any more?

  284. this theory and that theory….anyone’s, all of them including mine, don’t matter AS LONG AS courts see what they take as a live promissory note, enforceable by its (alleged) bearer and a “MERS” assgt of the dot. To what extent the bearer provisions of the UCC are a friend to the banksters we haven’t really addressed much as of yet. We’re late, late, late. I’ve tried to interpose FRCP 17 (and its state buds), which is more or less actually a defense of sorts against the UCC’s bearer note stuff – in fed juris. No, actually, it’s first and foremost a jurisiction-determining threshold issue (one’s own, one’s injury, one’s OWN INJURY). I’ve tried to show that if the transfer were post-default, which they all are, right? the notes are subject to all affirmative defenses and that would include by way of NG’s theory and even MS’s, I think. That’s why it seems imperative to either posit the claimant is not a hidc or to, as a matter of strategy, ask for a more definitive statement to get the date of the transfer, in which case one wouldn’t argue the prima facie-ness of a MERS’ post-default assgt of the note as the post-default event it is.

    If we don’t assert rule 17 and if we don’t either assert the claimant is a mere holder v hidc (upon doing which – asserting holder status -we may assert all aff defenses – NG’s, MS’s, yours, mine, the man in the moon’s) – or – ask for a more definitive statement, the courts says ‘they have a bearer note, are entitled to enforce it under blah blah of the UCC, and they have an assgt of the dot. Case closed.’
    No, case not closed. Are they alleging their own injury? what is their injury? What is the evidence of that injury of their own since they may not assert anyone else’s and injury is needed as the jurisdictional bar?

    The first line of defense for Defendant-homeowners imo is a mtn to either quash service for lack of jurisdiction (based on lack of injury*) or file a mtn to dismiss for lack of evidence of injury to the CLAIMANT. But be careful – ask a lawyer no kidding – because aff defenses must be raised in the first responsive pleading or they are waived. I don’t know if a mtn to quash service for lack of jurisdiction is considered a
    ‘responsive pleading”. I doubt it, but DON”T know. A mtn to dismiss IS a responsive pleading to a complaint (and thus I think it must have all aff defenses one plans to assert or lose them). Such a dismissal is not res judicata, but the granting of a mtn for sj is seen as an adjudication on the merits and is RJ, generally. If one only files a mtn to dismiss and not a mtn for sj, the banksters may voluntarily dismiss (and come at you again later), as seen in a Weidner case, think it was, not that long ago. As I recall, the homeowner had them, but they just moved to dismiss. They’ll re-load and be back, probably. An obvious problem is how to get a SJ, so motion, so RJ, granted without the evidence which is singularly in the banksters possession.

    *The complaint typically states that a loan was made to you (hearsay really imo), that you defaulted (more hearsay imo)**, that joe blow trust is the guy in possession of a note either bearer or special endorsement to joe blow trust, and they will attach a (generally unauthenticated) copy of the alleged note, a (generally uncertified) copy of the recorded deed of trust, and the good old MERS assignment, also generally uncertified, (sorry have to do this:) NONE OF WHICH ESTABLISHES, even if true, THE INJURY OF THE CLAIMANT.

    **Courts may take judicial notice of recorded docs. Courts can look at docs attached to a complaint (if properly certified or authenticated only – see “who may do this” in say the FRE’s. I’ll tell you right now imo it’s not 1) the lawyer or 2) some data entry level clerk called v.p or ANYone without personal knowledge). Recorded docs are presumed to be authentic. BUT, that does NOT extend to the veracity of what’s IN the document (a common misperception imo). That sounds confusing. What that means, from the hip, is that a court may take notice, say, that abc executed an endorsement to xyz. It does not mean, and is not evidence, that abc had anything to assign.
    All those allegation in the complaint that we 1) got a loan 2) we defaulted etc imo are hearsay. The bankster is free to try to prove it – subject to the rules of evidence and procedure – but as postured in the complaint generally, imo it’s no more than hearsay, possibly making the complaint ripe for at least dismissal on that basis. (dunno, have to think about trying for SJ just then) And, if it’s hearsay, If that’s true, we needn’t necessarily deny the existence of a loan (ask lawyer), just lay the stinking hearsay etc on them without admission.

    This comment discusses some pretty complicated stuff. Don’t take my lay person opinion as fact or advice. Ask a lawyer or 10. Really.

  285. And of course the fascists working at the top of the KORPORATE AMERIKA food chain are looking out for the evil little underlings who made this scam all possible and made them filthy stinking rich…and a select few..”Mark Cuban rich.”…..Ahhhh….”THE ENTITLEMENT PEOPLE” …AKA THE PUBLIC SECTOR AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA……! Hachacha…!

  286. Oh yes my friends in the private sector, don’t mess with your “friends” and family in the public sectors roofs….livelihoods or pension money…because then you will see an uprising in America like never seen before in U.S. history because the proverbial shoe is always different when it is on the other (main culprits) foot. FOR EXAMPLE……I know someone in the public sector who told me on more than one occassion…”if they take my pension I will put a bullet in all of their heads.”……now I’m not sure who this person meant by “their heads” but I’m pretty sure that person meant the evil underlings working in the public sector….AHHHHH….”THE ENTITLEMENT PEOPLE.”

  287. ◾Laches: The settlor is not entitled to a resulting trust because they have unnecessarily delayed in brining the lawsuit

  288. To be valid at common law, a trust instrument must ascertain its beneficiaries, as well as the res, or subject matter of the trust

  289. Property Trust Law Requires An Operation Of Law Must Be Performed By The Trustee For The Trust….That Requires A Physical Task Be Performed By The Issuer Of The Original Contract…..AKA ACCEPTANCE AND CONSIDERATION BY THE ISSUER. PERIOD…IF THAT OPERATION OF LAW DID NOT HAPPEN THE TRUST DOES NOT EXIST. PERIOD.

  290. Amazing Grace how sweet the sound that saved the wretches in the public sector from destroying their victims in the private sector…AKA THE MIDDLE CLASS.

  291. I have just one thing to say to that trust remark…..9/11. That is the attempted crucifixion of our Liberty and I for one am not Standing for it.

  292. Law generally requires only a simple formality to create an express trust. In certain jurisdictions, an express trust may even be established orally. Typically, a settlor would record the disposition, where real property is to be held in trust or the value of property in trust is large. Where legal title to property is being passed to a trustee, a “deed of settlement” or “Trust Instrument” (for jurisdictions that do not recognise Deeds) may be used. Where property is to continue to be held by the person making the trust, a “declaration of trust” will be appropriate.

    Often, a trust corporation or more than one trustee are appointed to allow for uninterrupted administration of the trust in the event of a trustee’s resignation, death, bankruptcy or incapacity. Additionally a Protector may be appointed who, for example, is authorized to appoint new trustees and to review the trustees’ annual accounts.

    To be valid at common law, a trust instrument must ascertain its beneficiaries, as well as the res, or subject matter of the trust, unless it is a charitable trust which does not provide specific beneficiaries

  293. What is a Resulting Trust?

    Usually a trust is created by a settlor, who writes and signs documents which give authority to a trustee who will manage their funds and accounts. The trustee will be in charge of distributing the assets listed to beneficiaries who will receive the property items.

    In contrast, a “resulting trust” is created by a judge in circumstances where the property was transferred to a trustee, but the intended beneficiaries are no longer available. In such instances, a resulting trust is created in order to return the property from the trustee back to the settlor. Thus, the property is said to “result back” or return to the possession of the settlor.

    A resulting trust is used by a judge as an equitable remedy in order to prevent unjust enrichment. They are useful in preventing unwanted distributions of property and to prevent abuses of powers by trustees.

    Under what circumstances are Resulting Trusts created?

    Resulting trusts may be enforced by a judge in the following situations:

    ◾Failure of an express trust: A resulting trust may arise if a previously valid trust has failed because the beneficiaries are missing or deceased, the trust purpose is void or unenforceable, or if other remedies are unavailable. The settlor becomes the beneficiary and the assets will be returned to them
    ◾Semi-Secret Trusts: A “semi-secret trust” is one where a trust has been created but the beneficiaries have not been named in the document. In this case the court will prescribe a resulting trust, which will distribute the assets either to the settlor or to the settlor’s heirs
    ◾Purchase Money Resulting Trust: this arises when the beneficiary provides monetary consideration for purchase of the trust property, but the settlor takes the title in their name. The settlor will be the legal owner of the property

    If the settlor has already become deceased, the court will typically issue a resulting trust in favor of making distributions to the settlor’s estate or heirs. In other words, the trust property becomes part of the deceased settlor’s estate, and the resulting trust operates much like a will.

    Are there any Defenses available if a judge has ordered a Resulting Trust?

    Resulting trusts are equitable remedies which are designed to prevent trustees or beneficiaries from illegally holding property for the settlor. However, in some cases, the settlor may be requesting for the property to be returned, but the trustee or beneficiary is entitled to continue holding the property. In such cases a defense may be available for the trustee and the resulting trust will not be issued.

    Some equitable defenses to a resulting trust order include:

    ◾Laches: The settlor is not entitled to a resulting trust because they have unnecessarily delayed in brining the lawsuit
    ◾Unclean Hands: The settlor is not entitled to a resulting trust because they have performed a similar wrongdoing as the defendant

    A settlor can also implicitly waive their right to a resulting trust in some situations. For example, if the settlor has transferred property for an unlawful purpose and gained a benefit from the transaction, the court will likely deny a request for a resulting trust. Due to their illegal intentions, the settlor is deemed to have waived their right to a resulting trust, and the settlor will not be allowed to retrieve their property.

  294. The “investors” …our friends and neighbors in the public sector funded the ponzi scheme so they could play split the pot with their bankster minions. They knew the real pay out was going to come later when they blew it all up to collect their unlawful insurance proceeds and on these fraudclosures or even more evil..loan mods or short sale frauds. Loan mods were really not where the money was at for these felons. It was all in the big charade of the forced loan mod swindle so they could collect the multimillion dollar insurance money and their criminal friends could buy up our stolen properties in bulk for a song.

  295. Say what? You paid 3 attorney’s retainer fees UKG….? You should have had a better read on that scam UKG..

  296. They went on to become… what are those kind of attorney’s called?…yeah right…..LMAO ..!

  297. forthepeople: interviewed 20 attorneys, paid three of them retainers, landed one extraordinary one in the end. The other 19 all went on to become foreclosure defense attorneys.

  298. Put it this way. If ID CARDS mattered we would not need metal detectors and unlawful searches now would we? Trust is a work of fraud and fiction by some very nefarious people.

  299. THANKS MS….and sorry but you don’t know K.C. like I do. There is real evil lurking in plain sight disguised as our legal system and this is definitely not our legal system because nothing they are doing is legal let alone moral or ethical. These people are not who they appear to be.

    Forget the ID cards. They prove nothing because foreign imposters have hijacked our Constitutional Republic. It’s every person for themselves as a result. When a badge and a uniform mean nothing you can trust then you know you are a people and a nation in peril.

  300. dammit, ms. I’m tired and you’re making me work:

    “:Nominee ….
    allowed on transfers of assets , sales that transfers title to LLC’s
    HELLO”

    well, hello yourself. First of all, I didn’t say a nominee isn’t allowed on a transfer of assets. where’d i say that, huh? where, where?
    Which llc do you think is in play here, pray tell? Are you calling an LLC what NG calls an equitable or resulting trust? Just a yes or no will do for me, thanks.

  301. ms at 6:50: – yes i can see that in a 1031 exchange. But i do have some case law outside a 1031 and will link it when I can. fwiw and I think i’s worth something, obviously.

    ms – without being smarmy or saying rotten things about NG, (say them later if you must, alright already?i know you disagree or sure looks like it) can you tell me, do you know, why NG thinks the investor funds funded the loans at closing? He doesn’t answer me. thought since you two are’so close’, you might know. Or anyone?

    Can anyone say? The investors gave X money for the purpose of 123. To whom did they give those funds – who is X? – and what did X do with it next v the short version please of what X was supposed to do with it?

  302. “voter ID should be the law. period”

    Bingo. ID to drive, ID to travel, ID to vote. Why the big frickin’ fuss! And ID to own a damn gun! Too many loose canons on oxycodone and what not in this country!

  303. master servicer – you crackith me up. Ever since you alleged to have reported me – moi? – for practicing law without a license (and how’s that by the way?), you have been careful to denounce your own comments here as “not legal advice”. I am not looking to argue or be adversarial here, no way, because I generally find you either amusing or informative, either of which to me is tolerable. Just wanted to say you crack me up, my friend.

  304. UKG,
    Hard to find the right attorney?

  305. not that it has anything to do with anything, voter ID should be the law. period. end of story. no ID, no vote. any reasoning against it is strictly to continue voter fraud on an ongoing basis. Read “community organizer” type fraud.

  306. My case filed in Fed Dist ct included RICO & was thrown out for lack of jurisdiction-

    In Rem is the jurisdiction question ….your challenging the state foreclosure policies and law under a Trust formation in NY and assets recorded under a UCC 1 in local country ….

    Baby steps Bubba Baby Steps —go in shouting RICo and your heading to the penalty box …Jurisdiction and have the state foreclosure thrown out – case must bifurcate the claims for 1) judgement or the right to enforce a local order for entry – 2) creditors right to preference allowing FDCPA claims to attach to existing liens ..in I rem for state of NY

    registerclaims@live.com

    Not a lawyer and not intended to be used, construed or taken as legal advice – only a lawyer licensed in the state can represent you and the property rights associated with your home; Call your local bar for more information on how to contact a lawyer in your area!

  307. Thanks for handing me the flashlight and helping me find my way out of the darkness. I feel like I can even breathe easier. Finally.

    Anyone listening? Don’t blink anyone; you may it to be too late then.

  308. Gohn Jault

    … says not only must a transferor transfer, a transferee must accept the transfer…

    terms used in a tax deferred exchange or sub and delete as Mers Corp connects ….

  309. for the people

    God bless you –
    . ..but they will make you pay for that …
    love you anyway !

    registerclaims@live.com

  310. RICO is exactly what is needed and it will happen …

    No way – Governments create the economic policies – no RICO if Gov is allowing the Enron Accounting

  311. I like masterservicer.

  312. Stripes is only sane one alive here ….
    But no call my friend KC a moron…

  313. Leave a Reply

    Gohn Jault ….. that banksters using “MERS”to assign notes and dots to secn trusts is an illegal move to hide a plethora of not only sins and ‘immorality’,

    Nominee ….
    allowed on transfers of assets , sales that transfers title to LLC’s

    HELLO

  314. Editor

    You need whistle blowers telling you the mod program was a scam. You have no clue why , what was the purpose of Mods and why they were subject to trigger a massive taxable gain if one was ever provided.

    There is no note as it is de-recognized at its face value.
    Thee is no mortgage where the asset is held in trust
    Thee are no payments made into irrevocable grantor trust
    Executory contracts are prohibited by all operation of law
    No servicing as your thinking
    Junior liens are senior and senior liens don’t record or count

    Best of all , your the one being charged the phantom income called accretion . Look I ask you this – Go stand in a mirror and say — he’s lying, its not true, oh then watch Cops too.. whistle-blow-horns ….Unreal

    registerclaims@live.com

  315. The time these demons dreaded is long last here. The truth about all of their evil, who they all are and all of their evil plans for mankind are all being revealed. This is why they always feared the apparitions by the Blessed Mother and knew when those stopped their time was short and the day of the lord was at hand. Spiritual people saw the signs.

  316. The bottom line of all this is, I think, that banksters using “MERS”
    to assign notes and dots to secn trusts is an illegal move to hide a plethora of not only sins and ‘immorality’, but issues, which if they saw the light of day, would legally preclude the sec’n trust from being the assignee of anything. Nothing would be ‘discretionary’ (the trusts could decide) for a secn trust, like whether or not a trust could take an interest after a cut-off date. Whether or not a trust may take a post cut-off date assignment is way too narrow a question, is not really even the question at all under NG’s theory. It doesn’t encompass f a c t s, facts which as a matter of law would preclude any finding in the bankster’s or anyone’s favor (the trusts) that any assignment occurred at all.

    Bajaya – was your case thrown out because the court said, at the bankster’s urging no doubt, that you had no private right of action under rico?

  317. NO FREAKING WAY…!

  318. When you insure something the insurance company always inspects the collateral they are insuring. AIG FAILED TO DO THAT? ON $700 TRILLION DOLLARS IN CLAIMS…? GET THE HELL OUT OF HERE…!

  319. HOW MUCH MONEY DID AIG OWE ITS CLAIMANTS IN 2008…? $700 TRILLION DOLLARS …THEY OBVIOUSLY DID NOT INSPECT THE COLLATERAL OF WHO THEY WERE INSURING…THEIR CLAIMANTS HAD WITH NO RECEIPTS…….THEREFORE….NO …I THINK THEY NOT ONLY DON’T HSVE A CLAIM..THEY ALL BELONG IN PRISON…BOTH AIG & THEIR CLAIMANTS.

  320. WANTONED FELONS….! EVERY LAST ONE OF YOU….!

  321. MERS IS ILLEGAL…CASE CLOSED ON MERS…!

  322. There is no hiding your evil identities anymore. It is apparent on your faces and in my innnocent dog buried in my backyard. You lying murderous thugs…!

  323. If AIG, the regulated insurance company, issued insurance for peoples
    with no insurable interest (under your theory, NG), doesn’t AIG have a claim against those peoples but one which it might be “hesitant” to assert lest it be shown AIG exercised no diligence in ascertaining the existence of an insurable interest? If they all settled, that’s if they could, to resolve the issue, wouldn’t that necessarily lead to the notes payments because the investors, the bens of the E or R trust would or could get the moolah in such a settlement? (oh, no, not that! It presents a “moral hazard”!) Is it fraud to assert an insurable interest where none exists and to profit from that assertion – or both?

    As it is, under your theory, NG, seems to me, as I said, certain payments should operate to retire the debt or the beneficiaries of the E or R trusts do in fact have liens on the moolah (but the latter doesn’t retire the borrower’s debt).
    Is there an equitalble or even statutory path to the CDS monies paid the banksters because, if fo no other reason, the banksters were unilaterally responsible for actions which resulted in the imposition of
    E or R trusts? You really sold me on this now that I get what you’re saying – that is, if it can be shown that the investors money was used to fund the loans. (don’t know if you mentioned the E or R trust before; but if you did, I sure missed it).

    Once we get an answer to some of these questons (you may have them), then can’t we really turn our attention to what is being attempted here by “MERS” assignments to secn trusts? Isn’t the argument not so much that we’ve passed a cut-off date as it is
    that the trusts don’t exist? Either way, by my trust-has-“mere”security-interests theory or by your theory of the E or R trust, is the purported assgt of not just the dot but also the note an attempt to change the current interests of a secn trust or actually create a trust which
    doesn’t exist – either way bull? If the secn trusts have security interests and the banksters are on the hook themselves to the secn investors, they are attempting now to 86 that liability / obligation to the secn
    investors on notes that are now in default and subject to a million affirmative defenses, whereas had the notes been transferred to the secn trusts when they ‘should have been’ (pre-default), the investors would have been holders in due course. This alone is a cause of action by the investors against the banksters imo and as i’ve opined, the inclusion of the note in the dot assignments is prima facie evidence the notes were not trasnferred pre-default – or pre-cut-off date if we’re ever back to that). In your E or R trust scenario, there’s no right to transfer anything under any theory I can think of, and that’s notwithstanding that the dots are not in fact perfected (you say so I believe – is this first impression or ?) I suppose the beneficiaries (and no one else) of the equitable or resulting trusts could transfer the loans, but surely not to a non-existant trust or a secn trust with no funds to acquire the notes. The secn trust is a separate and distinct legal entity – for lack of better words (It’s a defined trust), and tho the investors who are the bens of the E or R trusts are the same bens of the secn trust (right – if one existed?), they would have no interest in transferring an asset, the transfer of which would cause them such
    dire ramifactions – the favorable tax treatment. But then, what about the tax rams of an E or R trust? Those don’t as a matter of law get preferred tax status. They’re rather messed either way,right? But then again, the actor who created that liability must bear it.

    If AIG, the regulated insurance company, issued insurance for peoples
    with no insurable interest (under your theory, NG), doesn’t AIG have a claim against those peoples but one which it might be “hesitant” to assert lest it be shown AIG exercised no diligence in ascertaining the existence of an insurable interest? If they all settled, that’s if they could, to resolve the issue, wouldn’t that necessarily lead to the notes payments because the investors, the bens of the E or R trust would or could get the moolah in such a settlement? (oh, no, not that! It presents a “moral hazard”!) Is it fraud to assert an insurable interest where none exists and to profit from that assertion – or both?

    As it is, under your theory, NG, seems to me, as I said, certain payments should operate to retire the debt or the beneficiaries of the E or R trusts do in fact have liens on the moolah (but the latter doesn’t retire the borrower’s debt).
    Is there an equitalble or even statutory path to the CDS monies paid the banksters because, if fo no other reason, the banksters were unilaterally responsible for actions which resulted in the imposition of E or R trusts? You really sold me on this now that I get what you’re saying – that is, if it can be shown that the investors money was used to fund the loans. (don’t know if you mentioned the E or R trust before; but if you did, I sure missed it).

    Once we get an answer to some of these questons (you may have them – will you tell?), then can’t we really turn our attention to what is being attempted here by “MERS” assignments to secn trusts? Isn’t the argument not so much that we’ve passed a cut-off date as it is
    that the trusts don’t exist? Either way, by my trust-has-“mere”security-interests theory or by your theory of the E or R trust, is the purported assgt of not just the dot but also the note an attempt to change the current interests of a secn trust or actually create a trust which doesn’t exist – either way bull? If the secn trusts have security interests and the banksters are on the hook themselves to the secn investors, they are attempting now to 86 that liability / obligation to the secn
    investors on notes that are now in default and subject to a million affirmative defenses, whereas had the notes been transferred to the secn trusts when they ‘should have been’ (pre-default), the investors would have been holders in due course. This alone is a cause of action by the investors against the banksters imo and as i’ve opined, the inclusion of the note in the dot assignments is prima facie evidence the notes were not trasnferred pre-default – or pre-cut-off date if we’re ever back to that).
    In your E or R trust scenario, there’s no right to transfer anything under any theory I can think of, and that’s notwithstanding that the dots are not in fact perfected (you say so I believe – is this first impression or ?) I suppose the beneficiaries (and no one else) of the equitable or resulting trusts could transfer the loans, but surely not to a non-existant trust or a secn trust with no funds to acquire the notes. The secn trust is a separate and distinct legal entity – for lack of better words (It’s a defined trust), and tho the investors who are the bens of the E or R trusts are the same bens of the secn trust (right – if one existed?), they would have no interest in transferring an asset, the transfer of which would cause them such
    dire ramifactions – the favorable tax treatment. But then, what about the tax rams of an E or R trust? Those don’t as a matter of law get preferred tax status. They’re rather messed either way,right? But then again, the actor who created that liability must bear it.

    The law as I’m getting it lately says not only must a transferor transfer, a transferee must accept the transfer. Would there be reasons the investors, if they could and can’t if the secn trust doesn’t exist (!), want the loans to be in the secn trust? Yes, the tax ramifications, seems to me, of the loans not being in the secn trust and they’ve already been on one end of taxable events if the trust doesn’t exist / doesn’t own the loans (but again, far as i can tell the bad actors have to take those hits and pay up because they wrongfully caused the taxable events). The investors, as alleged beneficiaries of the secn trust, could have motivation to try to accept the transfers (the bad actors imo ultimately owe the taxes but the investors would have to sue to get that adjudication no doubt and in the meantime, the IRS might stop looking the other way as imo it does or may now at our expense)

    Even so, taxes or no taxes, this doesn’t overcome the bigger than heck (at least to me) problem of whom my execute a transfer or assgt for the E or R trust. It ain’t “MERS”, which noteworthy here, claims to have a relationship which means anything at all with the sec’n trustee ( i.e. the trustee of the transferEE trust), which is of no
    consequence imo because it’s the beneficiary of a dot who may assign or delegate the assgt of a dot, not a secn trustee. but at any rate has no relationship with any trustee of the transfeOR trust). Mers imo has no relationship of note with the beneficiaries of the secn trust It’s the beneficiary of the dot consequence because the secn trustess is not the beneficiary of the dots, and it’s the ben of the dot which – never minding some other stuff for now – who m). If you, NG, are correct in your E or R trust theory, than someone is attempting to move the asset from one trust to a secn trust, and using “MERS” to do it.

    In my theory of security interests of the secn trust, “MERS” attempts to change the asset of the secn trusts from one of security interest to that of ownership and to do so post cut-off date. Seems to me the cut-off date would be more applicable to a strictly forbidden new form of interest (new ownership by way of the alleged transfer by the “MERS” assignments) than whether or not a trust could accept a post-cut off date assignment of the same kind of interest the trust already has (security interest) if a secn trust may hold but one kind of interest. If a trust takes another loan after a cut – off dates, courts just say well they can if they want (with which we disagree, of course), altho they do so with zero evidence the assignee has accepted the (alleged) assignment. But if a se’cn trust may hold but one kind of asset, and the trust holds only security interests, then the assignment of the ownership of the object of that security interest imo contitutes a new kind of interest.

    I’ve tried to be coherent and stay on point, but its hard. I’m not an attorney well-versed in all these areas nor a lay person well-versed in all these areas. Hopefully you, NG, will share more of what you’ve got and try to answer some of the questions. It’s at least some stuff for other attorneys and the rest of us to chew on….?

  324. We the victims of your crime spree had nothing to gain from your latest felony fraud….that arson fire and subsequent criminal Act of extortion in court in June…….we have no money for repairs and no insurance…therefore you can’t blame your victims this time you murderous lying licentious felons and jealous haters of everyone….you have no one to blame and hate but yourselves. Evil greedy gluttonous bastards…every one of you…! The judgess see what you are doing and want no part of it and I don’t blame them. Everyone is not evil to the core like you agents of evil.

  325. THE HOLDER OF THE INSURANCE THAT BACKS THE FRAUD ARE ALWAYS THE PRIME SUSPECT…..BEING YOU CROOKS HELD THE INSURANCE POLICY AND ARE TRYING TO STEAL THE “EXCESS” INSURANCE MONEY TO POCKET WOULD MAKE YOU THE PRIMO SUSPECTS IN THAT ARSON….

  326. Yeah right moron….I had no insurance and nothing to gain from that arson but you crooks did….and you got caught…hence your murder of my dog. Now pay me back crooks.

  327. You keep bringing up the arson Stripper, guilty conscience?

    My source tells me you are the prime suspect of the arson .. and the motive was ins fraud.

    It sure seems to fit the pattern of your violent nature and desperation for money.

    Just thinking out loud …

    Behave KC? Anyone? Just Say Behave KC.

  328. When the evil little underlings get caught by the spies or the honest Americans and there is no one to blame they kill them or destroy their careers or lives with their fascist tactics or some manufactured scandal and blame those they mentally destroyed and put in power.

  329. Yes it’s the evil underlings. Those who cling to power and commit their heinous and egregious crimes against us by putting their victims in powerful positions so they can control from behind the scenes of their crimes against us.

  330. The American People’s brains at work, from a sitting position. Fascinating and mesmerizing…

  331. They should just pay me what they owe me and pray the judge they blamed dismisses their crime spree with prejudice and clears my title. That is the best they can hope for. Because I know who they all are now…I fingered Freddie & ass. and one false move and I will go right to the proper authorities with proof of extortion and arson on them and worse.

  332. Their recipients at the top are just grateful they did nothing illegal but their perps at the local level did.

  333. Correct typo…..They are all evil bastards from hell…EVERY ONE OF THEM….!

  334. Or if they tell you that you betrayed their trust when you did not, they are not your friends. They also lie ALOT…!

  335. Your neighbor or your best friend or even your local vet, grocer, store clerk or doctor could well be one of their evil underlings. If they betray your trust, you will know who they are.

  336. The locals are the spies and the protection racket…the evil little underlings for what is now pretty well known as the Illuminati…the top dogs of the protection racket…the local underlings are the evil core of the outer lairs of the illuminati onion.

  337. Here is one thing I have learned…..it is always the underlings who are the real criminals.

  338. How do I know this fraud starts at the local level…? By talking to and dealing with the liars at the local level.

  339. This fraud starts at the local level.

  340. I don’t see Obama as the problem or as a Kenyan. I was skeptical of his citizenship at first but he is way too smart to be a foreigner to our Constitutional Republic.

  341. Criminal indictments of every agent of these serial killing fraudclosure factory law firms are needed ASAP.

  342. BTW neidermeyer …. don’t talk to me and don’t read my comments you effing stooge.

  343. Yeah…yeah right neidermeyer …..! TALK TO THE HAND…! To whose advantage? Will these actions benefit the real victims…WE THE PEOPLE….? OR THE PERPS….? ARE THE JUDGES AT THE CIVIL LEVEL GOING TO INVOKE THEIR CIVIL CRIMINAL JURISDICTIONS AND ENFORCE RICO ACTIONS FOR WE THE PEOPLE? NO…BECAUSE THE CRIMINALS HIDING WITHIN THE DOJ WON’T ALLOW THAT.

    WAKE UP..!

  344. Radio show host Michael Savage was correct in his assertions…his book entitled trickle up poverty …..then the book trickle down fascism…all fraud starts at the bottom and ends at the bottom of the well.

  345. @STRIPES

    I try to ignore you ,, don’t ever try to get you started … but I’m making an exception here …

    RICO is exactly what is needed and it will happen … Obama has nationalized health care , is in the process of killing energy so he can take that over and is using Obamacare to gain control of 100% of the businesses in this country he doesn’t already have under his thumb with the IRS or the EPA … The banks “wall street” has grown from 10% or so of the economy (as measured by GDP) to about 40% … that’s bigger than the stated government spending portion of GDP … of course wall street adds absolutely nothing to the real output of the country so the whole GDP thing is a sham … but the bottom line is Obama wants to control IT ALL and nationalizing the banks and forced conversion of 401k’s and IRA’s is how he will do it. He can pay down some of the debt and go on spending… WOOHOO!!

    That’s how I see the Kenyan moving forward….

  346. This small group are in the towns and cities right where you and I live poppy…right outside of your front or back door. The top leaders are pawns in their evil game.

  347. And if I looked not very hard I bet I could find a connection to K.C. and Meghan Welbourne… You crooks aren’t as smart as you think…you are all evil bastards from hell. Ever one of you.

  348. Permit me an impertinent question (or three).

    Suppose a small group of extremely wealthy people sought to systematically destroy the U.S. government by (1) finding and bankrolling new candidates pledged to shrinking and dismembering it; (2) intimidating or bribing many current senators and representatives to block all proposed legislation, prevent the appointment of presidential nominees, eliminate funds to implement and enforce laws, and threaten to default on the nation’s debt; (3) taking over state governments in order to redistrict, gerrymander, require voter IDs, purge voter rolls, and otherwise suppress the votes of the majority in federal elections; (4) running a vast PR campaign designed to convince the American public of certain big lies, such as climate change is a hoax, and (5) buying up the media so the public cannot know the truth.

    Would you call this treason?

    If not, what would you call it?

    And what would you do about it?

    Robert Reich, Huffington Post

  349. K.C. IS OPENLY ADMITTING SHE IS TRYING TO DESTROY ME WITH HER POISON…SHE CALLS MEDICINE…HA … SHE MUST BE A BUDDY OF MEGHAN WELLBORNE OF OAK FOREST ANIMAL CLINIC…THE NAZI BITCH WHO MURDERED MY DOG…..AND THE ARSONIST WHO NEARLY BURNED DOWN MY COMMERCIAL PROPERTY…! SHE CLAIMS SHE DOESN’T KNOW WHO THESE PEOPLE ARE…BUT I DO. THEY ARE ALL HER…COMMIE NAZI WANTONED FELONS AND IMPOSTERS TO OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC…!

  350. Illegitimate little demon bastards…every single one of you are felonious liars…!

  351. NO KC…THAT WOULD BE YOU AND THE IMPOSTER LAW FIRM YOU AND YOUR CRIMINAL FRIENDS HIDE BEHIND. THE TRUTH IS YOU ARE NOT ONLY WANTONED DANGEROUS FELONS BUT YOU ARE NAZI COMMUNIST WANTONED CRIMINAL FELONS….THE WORST OF THE WORST. THE WORST MOST DESPICABLE HEINOUS EGREGIOUS LOW LIFES ON THE PLANET….!

  352. Yo, NG! Please come back here re: those equitable or resulting trusts.
    Assuming here there is an E or R trust, who may enforce the loans?
    Just that E or R trust? Say someone wants to enforce one of the notes in the E or R trust, who would be the proper plaintiff? The investors are the beneficiaries of such a trust, right, so is the proper plaintiff a group of investors? Or would it be necessary to name a trustee of that E or R trust and that trustee is the proper plaintiff? (again, I am disregarding third party payments to get an equation) Is someone in particular seen as a trustee of the E or R trust as a matter of law?

    Then, how do you see the inevitable “MERS” assignment of either the note or dot, which is actually an (alleged) transfer from the E or R trust to a securitization trust which doesn’t (or may not – got me) exist? Assuming here that MERS has authority to make a such a transfer, at least of the dot, what is the legal effect of such a transfer? Hard to formulate some of these questions! Wait….. You are saying, are you not, that because the true ben of the dot’s was an E or R trust, MERS, by any bar was not the nominee or name something for that E or R trust so the dot was never perfected TO transfer? The mtg or dot was never perfected because it failed to show the true beneficiary on the collateral instrument and MERS was no one to the investors? Lordie.

    Neither the note nor the dot show the true party as the note payee or
    the dot beneficiary. I have to believe you that not naming the true
    ben on the dot means that when the dot is recorded, it is yet not
    perfected because I don’t know. A lender, the one who is the payee of a note, may be able to appoint a nominee for a deed of trust, but nonetheless, there is no relationship between MERS and the bens of an E or R trust (the investors) -and- the note does not name the true payee anyway and, significantly (?) the business whose name is on the note is not designated a nominee for anyone on the note. Lordie again. The party with the right to enforce a negotiable instrument is one, as I think KC pointed out again the other day, is one who has possession of a properly negotiated note (have to consider the etcetera’s) and is entitled to receive payments. Do we even care because the E or R trust doesn’t have possession – or is that constructive possession could be found? I hates that one for its rampant abuse.

    I have opined that for lack of delivery,etc., the secn trust doesn’t own the notes, but does have security interests. You find, I think, that no, that’s not the case. You find the secn trusts have no security interests because if the investors money actually funded the loans, an E or R
    trust is imposed and that’s who/what owns the loans (if anyone!) or at last the notes. Right? Can someone even assign the dots to
    the E or R trust? Are they merely unperfected or is it worse for them?

    So if the secn trust had no money in it to do anything, because the investor funds were not deposited there, having been used to fund the loans at closing instead, there was and now can be no negotiation of the notes? Is that one of your positions? So the banksters may not now move the loans from and E or R trust to a secn trust which if it does exist, has no moolah? And it’s the use of the investor funds to fund a loan at closing which gives rise to the E or R trust?

    Under my theory that the secn trusts had security interests but no
    ownership of the loans, AIG could have legitimately written insurance because the insuring parties had the interest to insure – the ownership. But even then, I would think under the UCC, the proceeds from an AIG payout should inure to the ben of the investors (or anyone) holding security interests.
    But under your theory of an E or R trust, doesn’t seem like AIG could have insured the loans for the benefit of the banksters since the true owners were the bens of the E or R trust. My take on AIG’s inability to have subrogation rights was that those rights were stymied by the pre-existing security interests of the secn investors, but if you’re right and an E or R trust was created and the investors are the bens of that trust, the banksters had no insurable interests.
    If AIG insured uninsurable interests, I don’t know its ramifications, other than to think AIG violated its regulatory scheme. Was obtaining the insurance fraudulent? Did AIG have a statutory duty to ascertain the interests of the proposed insured? Do the banksters owe AIG that money? Did the payments by AIG retire the debt under any theory? Should the beneficiaries of the E or R trust have a lien on that money? What a stinking mess!

    Without the discovery of facts solely in the possession of the other guys, we’ll continue to not get true resolution of these issues. We have to paint a picture such that a court can’t avoid the facts and info to make an informed decision. We haven’t done that imo. I have never known, for instance, why you think the investors money was
    used to fund the loans. Don’t doubt they’d have done that, just don’t know what makes you think that, so I give, what does?!

  353. They are all greedy gluttons who secretly commit felonies and blame thair innumerable victims… that is WHO they really are.

  354. I have the cure for what ails the stripper … but she don’t want to take her medicine. She prefers to be mean, nasty and greedy. She chooses her own path, sews her own seeds and reaps what she grows.

    Its a Wonderful thing when a mistake has admitted and forgiveness is rendered.

    Lucky for her, I do not have a lot of ass to kiss.

  355. Here is a clue about WHO these people are…Obamas absolutely not one of them.

  356. Up your lying criminal keister K.C…..I am who you really fear because I know the truth…. THE TRUTH IS….not only DO I know that you are all imposters…and fictitious payees….you are all liars and you are all full of shit felons hiding behind many proxies….but I know WHO YOU ALL ARE….and WHY and HOW you pulled off your MASSIVE crime spree ….your robbery of WE THE PEOPLE WAS FREAKING GINORMOUSLY MASSIVE….!

    Time to pay the pipers…!

    There are only like 3 of us in the entire country…maybe 4 if your lucky.

  357. Beware of those who put up metal detectors and search those who have nothing to hide under the guise of National Security because what they are really hiding is…they are the felons who hijacked OUR SECURITIES……! THEY CALL THEMSEVES COPS BUT ARE IN FACT WANTONED FELONS….!

  358. Breaking News …

    When the traitors are revealed (and they will be) the Stripper will wish she had listened more, poopy dropped less and shown her piers the Respect they deserve.

  359. Funny how everyone else is a liar but the liars! Yeah right! SHOW ME THE GENUINE AND AUTHENTIC TRUSTEES RECEIPT DATED 30 DAYS FROM THE FIRST CLOSING..OR PAY ME BACK WHAT YOU STOLE & HIJACKED YOU LOUSY LYING FELONS…!

    FRAUDCLOSURE IS NOT AN OPERATION OF LAW AMERICA…! NO IT IS A CIVIL CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY AND COVER UP FOR INNUMERABLE FELONIES BUT FIRST AND FOREMOST…THE ORIGINATION FRAUD THAT WAS NOT ONLY NEGLIGENT …IT WAS CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE …FELONIOUS….CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE …

    AND AS AS A RESULT….THESE FELONS AT THE LOCAL…STATE & COUNTY LEVELS….AKA THE PUBLIC SECTOR…FARM PAYROLL EMPLOYEES…WHO ARE PAID BY ALL OF US…OWE WE THE PEOPLE AN INNUMERABLE AMOUNT OF MONEY & SATISFACTIONS TO EVERY EFFED UP PROPERTY TITLE THEY INTENTIONALLY EFFED UP. TO COVER UP FOR THEIR MERS FRAUD…DIRTY DEEDS DONE FOR FREE…!

  360. BREAKING MEWS….FROM FOX….HEAD OF HOMELAND SECURITY JANET NAPOLITANO RESIGNS ….

  361. TAKING THE JUDGES SIDE NOW ARE YA K.C….? YOU ARE TWO FACED LIAR…! HERES WHY….I remember that banner day like it was yesterday….The day the Cook County Judge called YOU A LIAR TO YOUR FACE K.C. AND ASKED YOU WHY IS IT ALL YOU DO IS LIE? THEN OUT IN THE COURTROOM HALLWAY YOU LIED AGAIN AND TOLD ME YOU WERE NOT A LIAR … AND BLAMED THE JUDGE AND CALLED HIM MEAN… HA…! ALL TRAITORS ARE BEING REVEALED JUST AS THE GOOD LORD PROMISED.

  362. You are a lying bitch K.C…and the judge had you pegged. That’s what bugs you.

  363. There is a Judge in Cook County Illinois with two untruthful greedy morons before his court.

    I say he Nail both the Plaintiff and the Defendant with Perjury and Fraud upon the Court …on behalf of the Public.

    Just my opinion … Not a Lawyer

  364. Without cooperation at the local, county and state levels, this ongoing felony theft of our wealth…our Liberty, would not and could not happening at the top.

  365. FUGGETABOUT OBAMA….HE IS A KHAZAR COMMIE DISTRACTION FOR THE THEFT OF OUR WEALTH AND OUR LIBERTY GOING ON AT THE LOCAL…COUNTY….AND STATE LEVELS….THESE ARE WHERE THE KORPORATE AMERIKA FELONS ARE REALLY ROBBING WE THE PEOPLE FROM….!

    WAKE UP AMERICA…!

  366. THE ONGOING TBTF BAILOUTS ARE FOREIGN ESPIONAGE BY COMMUNIST NATIONALISTS AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA…AT THE HIGHEST & LOWEST LEVELS AND EVERYWHERE IN BETWEEN…! THIS FRAUD ALL BEGAN AT THE LOCAL LEVEL AND THAT IS WHERE IT NEEDS TO END…AT THE LOCAL LEVEL…!

  367. BOA IS A FOREIGN KORP AKA KORPORATE AMERIKA…..DBA AN AMERICAN CORP…..THEREFORE….THEY ARE A KORP OF IMPOSTERS; FICTITIOUS PAYEES…..AMERICAN IMPERSONATORS…..FRAUDS & WANTONED FELONS..BOA ARE SECRET COMMUNIST EXPROPRIATORS (COMMUNIST FELONS) WHO EXPROPRIATE (STEAL OUR STOLEN WEALTH) AND SIPHON OUR STOLEN WEALTH OUT OF AMERICA…

    COMMUNISTS OR NOT….NOTHING KORPORATE AMERIKA DOES IS LEGAL IN THE U.S….

    PAY US BACK YOU CROOKS…!

  368. RICO …..? It’s never going to happen.

    The Federal/State prosecutors won’t even go get a lowlife hedgefund manager like Steve Cohen under RICO…!

    WHY? There would be a tsumami of monetary claims…and the monetary settlements would be coming out of the investors pockets that would include the cops, prosecutors, the attorneys, the courts, the mayors, the governors, all the politicians, judges and public sector payrolls pockets…..INSTEAD OF OURS…..INSTEAD OF JUST ROBBING THE PRIVATE SECTOR….THE INVESTORS WOULD BE ROBBING THEMSELVES….! THE REVERBERATIONS WOULD FINALLY HIT HOME…..AT THE PUBLIC SECTOR…. LOCAL, COUNTY AND STATE LEVELS…..!

    THAT’S WHY…!

  369. Who would want to be part of that big club of sadistic serial killers? Morons.

  370. Agreed That is where the problem lies We are not part of the club Can’t let the individual not pay Even though he holds the only rights to the property He must pay his unsecured loan back The debt is owed but we can’t let him or the public know that it is a sham we trade derivatives on

    Sent from my iPhone

  371. Hope so

    Sent from my iPhone

  372. RICO was always what I thought should be charged against these mega banks. RICO or otherwise, the banks need to be nationalized and broken up completely. Give the money back to the people who have been in foreclosure, lost their homes, are about to lose their homes, are underwater, etc. Give the taxpayer money back, too. RICO requires at least two instances of racketeering. The banks cover that requirement easily.

  373. The khazar board of directors are wantoned felons and owe WE THE PEOPLE INNUMERABLE AMOUNTS OF MONEY AND SATISFACTIONS OF TITLES..

    TIME TO PAY THE PIPERS…

    BOOTAY DROP….

    TWERKIN….

  374. Bring it all down……the people owe Nothing !!!!

  375. Keep a close eye on this case, Bijaya K D Brian, discovery should be very interesting, if it gets that far!

  376. Its about dag gone time!

  377. Heads starting to roll… interesting.

    Report: Napolitano to Resign
    10:00 AM, Jul 12, 2013 • By DANIEL HALPER

    Government source says U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano set to resign today (Friday). @Reuters
    9:59 AM – 12 Jul 2013

    Federal Reserve Governor Steps Down Giving No Reason

    Elizabeth A. Duke, a Federal Reserve governor who has helped to overhaul the Fed’s approach to financial regulation, said on Thursday that she would step down at the end of August.

  378. My case filed in Fed Dist ct included RICO & was thrown out for lack of jurisdiction

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: