The Courts have become nothing more than a one stop shop for Bank crimes to be legitimized

Editor’s Note: As you might imagine I get thousands of these letters, calls and emails. This one caught my attention and I can’t say why but it raised my level of frustration with a system that, as Danielle Kelley (my law partner) says will act on illegal behavior perpetrated against investors but excludes borrowers from the class of investors and excludes them from their scope of investigation.

=========================================

“Admitted No Wrongdoing”

We are officially locked out of our American Dream in Sedona Arizona.

By: Mike Brosnahan

July 31st, 2013, 10am, Sedona Arizona.

Chase Bank CEO, Jamie Dimon, President Obama’s “Favorite Banker” has stolen another home. This time it is my family’s home in Sedona!
I will begin at the end or at least what appears to be the end of the American Dream for my family in Sedona Arizona.
My wife and I have spent the last five days emptying our home of nine years of our personal effects and belongings in red rock country. This is the day that Chase Bank, in collusion with Fannie Mae, through their lawless and reckless banking crimes, may have finalized the stealing of our home. We have engaged in an expensive and time-consuming protracted legal battle with these criminals, looking for an honest judge who will expose the False and Forged Documents used by the Banks to steal out home.
The knock at the door is the Coconino Sheriff; he is here at our home to enforce for the Banksters, under the color of law, what has become a Two Tiered Justice System in Arizona and America. I am forced to relinquish my house “vi et armis”.
The Sheriff, who has sworn an oath to uphold the Arizona constitution, “to serve and protect me” instead he is here now as the enforcement arm of Bank. He is here now to throw me and my family out into the street, my wife Mary, my daughters Isabelle and Bridey, our two cats Tangelo and Junior, our two dogs, Molly a pit-bull, rescued when she was locked in a foreclosed house and Scout, rescued from a shelter in Flagstaff.
The officer is with two women, Kathy and Shea, representing Fannie Mae’s local interests, a real estate company called “Options and Opportunity” (A.K.A. an industry of bottom feeding parasites preying on the foreclose crises). This “Writ of Restitution, Assistance or Possession” for Fannie Mae is the final abuse in a long list of dirty trick the banks use to steal homes with the rubber stamp approval of the Courts. This is happening in communities daily in Arizona and across the country. Chase Bank, keeping their bankers hours, are acting as silent financial terrorists and are waging a quiet dirty war on the unarmed civilians’ in this country.
I notice all who came to steal my home “Legal and Constructive Notice” that they are operating with false and forged documents. In my case the Sheriff’s office was issued the writ by the court on July 5th but was not posted at my door until late Wednesday July 24th. When I inquired of the Sheriff what had taken so long to allegedly serve these documents he answered that was the first time he could get to it in his stack that his schedule would allow. When my wife pushed the short notice issue, the sheriff snapped back that we were lucky to have any notice at all. He could have just come and said get out. This shows the intimidation, manipulations and prejudices of the Courts and Banks use to deprive me of due process.
In the “Knock And Nail” service six days earlier by the Sheriff department late on the 24th and showing up promptly at 10 am July 31st to throw my family out of our home and change the locks, is insufficient and fatally defective service. Yet it was still allowed to move forward by the Judge in Flagstaff, who had been surreptitiously meeting with the Fannie Mea attorney since June 19th, without my knowledge or my Attorney present. This robbed me of my due process in the Arizona Courts.
Even with the short fuse afforded me by the Sheriff’s office and the Court, I submitted two emergency motions, both of which remain pending before the Superior Court. This is not a fair and meaningful speedy trial, but rather a rush to judgment. Justice is blind and swift for the Banks in Arizona. This is a reckless combination, favoring the Banks stealing people’s homes, leaving them homeless.
The False and Forged documents that Fannie Mae use in their daily business model, in collusion with Chase Bank, is a game of “Three Card Monty” where the homeowner always loses. The silent victims of these Banking crimes are afforded no justice.
Let’s look at the historical Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) of Chase Bank Business model – J.P. Morgan circa 1913: “Capital must protect itself in every way… Debts must be collected and loans and mortgages foreclosed as soon as possible. When through a process of law the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and more easily governed by the strong arm of the law applied by the central power of leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. This is well known among our principle men now engaged in forming an imperialism of capitalism to govern the world. By dividing the people we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us except as teachers of the common herd.” This may be the last truly honest statement spoken by any one from J.P. Morgan Chase Bank.
Today, one of the numerous problems with J.P. Morgan Chase SOP is that when they took over the assets of WaMu, the mortgage loans and notes “owned” by WaMu were never transferred to Chase, therefore, Chase never had any right or legal standing to foreclose on any loan or deed of trust that was not transferred to Chase Bank. That is the law.
Here is what Lawrence Nardi discovered in his position as the mortgage loan management/loss mitigation team Manager for WaMu and Chase Bank. Nardi provided valuable information about how Chase deals with mortgages and securitizations, during his deposition taken May 9, 2012. Nardi made the incredible revelation that the WaMu loans and supporting deeds of trust were never transferred to Chase when he admitted there is no schedule of mortgage loans evidencing what JPM allegedly “purchased” from the FDIC in connection with the failure of WaMu.
That being the known truth in this case, then how is it that Jamie Dimon and his Bank are able to destroy my family’s life in Sedona and steal my home with false and forged documents with impunity?
The simple answer to this complex legal question is, they cheat.
While most Americans are trampling each other at Wal-Mart on Black Friday every year for cheap appliances made in China. Chase and the other major Banks have quietly been trampling on the American Dream and they have spared no expense acquiring real power. They have purchased the very best Lawyers, Rating Agencies, Politicians, Judges, Courts, Government Regulating Agencies, Insurance Companies, Media and Law Enforcement, that money can buy.
The facts and the evidence in this matter is that even when Chase breaks the law nothing happens. The Federal Banking Regulators, The Comptroller Of The Currency, The Board Of Governors Of The Federal Reserve System, Independent Foreclosure Review and Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne have all concluded that I was correct all along and was damaged in this matter, that remains currently before the Court. They sent me letters and checks stating that the documents that the Chase Bank and Wa Mu used were “deficient mortgage servicing and foreclosure process”.
Chase took our Taxpayers Tarp Bailout and the Mother Of All Sweetheart Deals “To Big to Fail To Big to Jail” with the government. As part of the agreement, Chase and other Banks “Admitted No Wrongdoing” during the Independent Foreclosure Review and Settlement. They entered into a plea deal that sold out the victims of the crime and protected the criminals at the Banks. This allowed the Banks to, in effect, be bailed out again and pay pennies on the dollar to me and other home owners who were victims of their fraud. Oh yes, and let’s not forget, the Banks still get to keep the stolen property and no jail time, so the Banks, are at this point, quite literally, above the law.
In the last moments before I was forcibly removed from my home, as they were unlawfully changing the locks on my doors, I posed a couple of question to the agents from “Options and Opportunity”. I asked them if they found it difficult to come to work and brutally participate in the foreclosure process, seeing the human suffering up close that illegal foreclosure inflicts on families. I also asked as to how most people react when they are having their home stolen and family uprooted? The agents replied that they actually did not want to come to our home this morning because they knew that we would be there and that hardly ever happens as most of the homeowners have vacated their homes by the time the Sherriff and the Fannie Mae brokers arrive to steal the property.
The officer confirmed that most homes are indeed vacant and I asked him why he thought that most homeowners leave before the Sheriff arrives to enforce the Bank’s crime with a writ. He said that in his job he sees lot of things and he has no earthly idea what makes people do many of the things they do. So the cruel truth is that the various perpetrators and parasites in this industry do not even have to bear witness to the actual devastating human effects of this financial terrorism.
So, now it is brutally obvious to me that there is a huge disconnect between the financial cowards that inflict terrorism from their offices, and the human carnage rendered daily through these unlawful foreclosures. The blood, sweat and tears of their victims go unnoticed as they are crushed by the Banks financial terrorism. It reminded me of the time when my wife and I stood on the Flagstaff Court House steps as the auctioneer called out the foreclosure notices to so many properties, including our home. We were the only people there as witness to the crimes. As with any criminal extortion racket, it only continues to work if the victims remain silent.
The criminals, like in all crimes of this nature, rely on the victims never reporting it and remaining silent, for the Banks, this silence is golden. Criminal Foreclosure exploits human frailty. The victims are your neighbors, families and friends in your community that suddenly and quietly move out of their homes. They endure this humiliation and gut wrenching loss silently wrapped in the shame and stigma and blaming themselves, thinking they could have done something more to prevent losing their home. They hang their heads and walk away meekly without a word or day in Court, to pick up the pieces of a shattered life.
The dirty little secret is that the game was fixed all along. The average home owner was sitting at the table of the American Dream thinking it was an honest game and forgot the first rule from Amarillo Slim, “If you can’t spot the sucker at the table, you are the sucker.” Our Government, the Courts and Banks all knew the fix was in, and we home owners, were the suckers.
Matt Taibbi did an excellent job covering these Banking Crimes in a series of articles for the Rolling Stones Magazine. He summed it up best in his article from April 25th, 2013, “Everything Is Rigged”. “You were right. The players may be a little different, but your basic premise is correct: The world is a rigged game.” I can confirm that it is no secret to any of us in the trenches fighting this battle against Banking Crimes in the Courts, which the Banks always win, in and out of court. The end result of the epic failure of the Obama administration’s banking policy is leaving 4.4 million families, including mine, most illegally thrown out of their homes and into the streets.
To add insult to injury, Chase Bank also prospers on the back end of the deal as they have been chosen by our government to issue Visa cards to provide your unemployment and food stamp benefits when you become homeless.
This failed policy of the Obama Administration is equivalent to a financial drone strike on hard working Americans. Mr. Obama’s’ early and empty promises of “Hope and Change” and “Yes We Can” have been Sold Out to the Banks for “Hopeless and Spare Change” and “Yes We Can Change Your Locks”. These stealth banking crimes, condoned by our government and board rooms across the U.S., are carried out every day in the Bank’s very own Private Court System.
Make no mistake, the Banks, not the Court, are in control. The Banks own and operate the Courts and the Government. Where there was once Life, Liberty and Justice for all in our Courts, you will find pathetic Bureaucrats rubber stamping Banking malfeasance. The new Law is “Yes We Can” let the Banks be Judge, Jury and Executioner of this failed Obama policy. The flimsy false veneer of banking laws, lobbied for and created by the Banks, is now in full force, allowing them to swindle hard working Americans. The Arizona State and Federal Courts should be ashamed for turning their backs on the Law and the American people. The Courts have become nothing more than a one stop shop for Bank crimes to be legitimized.
Mr. Jamie Dimon is apparently morally bankrupt, and like all common criminals and Bullies, a coward. However, everyone involved in the fraud, including his Washington cronies, government regulators, enforcement agencies and the U. S. Courts can no longer remain willfully ignorant of the gore and collateral damage and human suffering inflicted. They certainly can no longer have “Plausible deniability”, as they are stealing homes with false and forged documents and committing fraud upon the Courts and the American people.
Chase and other Bankers now know they can act with impunity. They will endure a little “slap on the wrist and the small fines” that is passing for Banking Justice Today. Because Chase knows this, they will continue to slap the victims of this crime in the face and kick them out of their homes. The Victims of these Banking Crimes get kicked out of their homes for pennies on the dollar. Why wouldn’t Banks continue the fraud they got the “Change They Can Believe In” when Obama was elected, as there is money to be made in stealing homes, the victims very rarely fight back and they have a “Get Out Of Jail Free Card”?
For those of you keeping score at home, the numbers do not lie. To date in 2013, ZERO Bankers in Jail and estimated 4.4 million completed foreclosures since the financial crisis began gutting the American Dream; meanwhile, looming on the horizon it is estimated that an astonishing 2.3 million of all mortgages are seriously delinquent, meaning when mortgage payments are delinquent for 90 days or more.
Enough is enough! Forget Occupy Wall Street, it is time to break the silence, stand up and Occupy Our Homes and force the Banks to stop stealing our property with false and forged documents!
I personally will not stand down and be a silent victim of these financial terrorists, but will continue to fight for what is just and right as a homeowner and an American. However, we as a group must not remain silent victims to the greed and arrogance of these Banks because their crimes are not just are stealing our homes, but also our country.
Just because Bank crimes are being condoned by our Government, under the color of Law, does not make it legal. It is reprehensible for our Government to plea bargain our family’s security and happiness away to unscrupulous Banks and allow them a free ride with, we “Admitted No Wrongdoing”… Translations; if you’re a victim of the Banks Crimes, here is your check, now shut up and move out.
Mr. Jamie Dimon, give us back our homes that you have stolen, then you may “Admit No Wrongdoing”!
My wife and I stand together now at the end of our driveway, we hug. We are locked out of our family home for 10 years in Sedona, with still no response from the Court. The heat of the mid-day Arizona sun beats down on us, however we are not beaten; we have each other and our daughters. We are not locked out of our hearts that made this house a home. We will rebuild our lives from the Lawless Anarchy of the Two Tiered Justice System called U.S. Courts and the Crony Capitalism Banking System that have destroyed my family’s hopes in the American Dream.
All of us need to hold the Banks accountable NOW for their ongoing financial terrorism and crimes. Otherwise, it will be too late to save what is left of your part of the American Dream and it will be business as usual and nothing will change, except the locks on your Home!

also see http://harpers.org/archive/2012/01/stop-payment-a-homeowners-revolt-against-the-banks/

57 Responses

  1. I’m just throwing this legal challenge out there for feedback…

    How about charging the original note loan holder with…”jettisoning the loan” with the expressed intent of escaping all fiduciary responsibilities related to that loan as the economy tanked and homes dropped in value…..” and linking this argument to the change in terms argument mentioned in my prior post.

  2. I’m suggesting that all of these responses create a “too many notes” type of protest. I think it is logical to frame any foreclosure complaint with a “once the mortgage note changed hands, something changed in how the note was serviced by the new entity” meme.

    Whatever your mortgage complaint is, can you show cause that specifically because your note unilaterally changed hands, your “deal” changed in any way to your detriment. Here are some examples…

    Customer service hours are different,
    Customer service help is less effective than before,
    Longer wait time to get help,
    Longer times to process payment,
    Harsher penalties and fees or actions against the note holder when a deadline is missed,
    Location to closest office is increased,
    HAMP policy is different from prior note holder.
    Agenda of new note holder is different from prior note holder.

    The above is just a basic list, more can probably be added to it.

    The list above points to a “Change in Terms” without the homeowners consent. I think it is detrimental to state that payments suddenly don’t have to be made anymore because of a faulty transfer of the mortgage note unless it can be proved that the new note holder is not correctly applying the payment towards the mortgage.

    I wish Neil would corral all the potential arguments into a more cohesive logic that starts with Change in Terms. How did the terms of your deal change when the note changed hands without your permission.

    I don’t think a homeowner has to come up with a huge list. Even one violation could be enough to over turn a foreclosure. However, in my non professional opinion, the judge would need to see ability to pay either the existing agreement or a modified agreement that perhaps the new owner of the note was less capable of achieving.

    Then the judge can state…the new note owner had less capacity to work with the homeowner than the prior note holder, and that constitutes a change in terms.

    I think what people lose sight of is every time the note changes hands, the new owner has less skin in the game and therefore has no choice but to offer less customer service or ability to offer a modification, and that is obviously a negative change in terms that should be challenged in court and one that the judge probably would not ignore.

  3. So, if this is the cost of protecting the National Banks from prosecution for their crimes, ask yourself one question: Is it worth it?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/07/dale-rutherford-father-baby-died-car-no-charges_n_3719782.html

  4. It’s going around. And when the home owner is vigilant they flip it out as quickly as possible with an Internet-only auction.
    http://mortgagemovies.blogspot.com/2013/08/kingcast-and-mortgage-movies-present.html

  5. keepon, on August 8, 2013 at 3:46 am said:
    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/08/calling-all-california-lawyers-and-others-who-want-to-help-abused-homeowners-please-ask-california-court-of-appeal-to-publish-an-important-pro-borrower-chain-of-title-ruling.html#yA2a1YDm1WQKEWI9.99

    08/08/2013 – Yves Smith
    The Examiner (hat tip April Charney)

    !! GET A LETTER IN !!

    Glaski v. Bank of America

    The opinion is unpublished. That means other litigants typically cannot cite it in briefs

    However, interested parties have until August 20, 2013 to submit a request for publication to the court.

    very strict procedure for how to to this

    this post tells you everything you need to do (even names and addresses of everyone who needs to get a letter, a form for the proofs of service) and even provides a sample letter.

    Repost (ALL commentary has been BLOCKED by Mary’s huge posting!)

  6. -CITE- 28 USC CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE -HEAD- CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE -MISC1- Subchapter Sec.(!1) A. Definitions and general provisions 3001 B. Prejudgment remedies 3101 C. Postjudgments (!2) remedies 3201 D. Fraudulent transfers (!2) 3301 -FOOTNOTE- (!1) Editorially supplied. (!2) So in original. Does not conform to subchapter heading. -End- -CITE- 28 USC SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -MISC1- Sec. 3001. Applicability of chapter. 3002. Definitions. 3003. Rules of construction. 3004. Service of process; enforcement; notice. 3005. Application of chapter to judgments. 3006. Affidavit requirements. 3007. Perishable personal property. 3008. Proceedings before United States magistrate judges. 3009. United States marshals’ authority to designate keeper. 3010. Co-owned property. 3011. Assessment of surcharge on a debt. 3012. Joinder of additional defendant. 3013. Modification or protective order; supervision of enforcement. 3014. Exempt property. 3015. Discovery as to debtor’s financial condition. -CHANGE- CHANGE OF NAME “United States magistrate judges” substituted for “United States magistrates” in item 3008 pursuant to section 321 of Pub. L. 101- 650, set out as a note under section 631 of this title. -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3001 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3001. Applicability of chapter -STATUTE- (a) In General. – Except as provided in subsection (b), the (!1) chapter provides the exclusive civil procedures for the United States – (1) to recover a judgment on a debt; or (2) to obtain, before judgment on a claim for a debt, a remedy in connection with such claim. (b) Limitation. – To the extent that another Federal law specifies procedures for recovering on a claim or a judgment for a debt arising under such law, those procedures shall apply to such claim or judgment to the extent those procedures are inconsistent with this chapter. (c) Amounts Owing Other Than Debts. – This chapter shall not apply with respect to an amount owing that is not a debt or to a claim for an amount owing that is not a debt. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4933.) -MISC1- EFFECTIVE DATE Section 3631 of title XXXVI of Pub. L. 101-647 provided that: “(a) Except as provided in subsection (b), this Act [probably should be “title”, meaning title XXXVI of Pub. L. 101-647, which enacted this chapter and section 2044 of this title, amended sections 550, 1962, 1963, and 2410 of this title, section 523 of Title 11, Bankruptcy, and sections 3142 and 3552 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure, and enacted provisions set out as a note under section 1 of this title] and the amendments made by this Act [title] shall take effect 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Nov. 29, 1990]. “(b)(1) The amendments made by title I of this Act [probably should be “subtitle A of this title”, meaning subtitle A (Secs. 3611, 3302 [3612]) of title XXXVI of Pub. L. 101-647, which enacted this chapter] shall apply with respect to actions pending on the effective date of this Act [probably should be title XXXVI of Pub. L. 101-647] in any court on – “(A) a claim for a debt; or “(B) a judgment for a debt. “(2) All notices, writs, orders, and judgments in effect in such actions shall continue in effect until superseded or modified in an action under chapter 176 of title 28 of the United States Code, as added by title I of this Act [subtitle A of this title]. “(3) For purposes of this subsection – “(A) the term ‘court’ means a Federal, State, or local court, and “(B) the term ‘debt’ has the meaning given such term in section and [sic] 3002(3) of such chapter.” -FOOTNOTE- (!1) So in original. Probably should be “this”. -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3002 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3002. Definitions -STATUTE- As used in this chapter: (1) “Counsel for the United States” means – (A) a United States attorney, an assistant United States attorney designated to act on behalf of the United States attorney, or an attorney with the United States Department of Justice or with a Federal agency who has litigation authority; and (B) any private attorney authorized by contract made in accordance with section 3718 of title 31 to conduct litigation for collection of debts on behalf of the United States. (2) “Court” means any court created by the Congress of the United States, excluding the United States Tax Court. (3) “Debt” means – (A) an amount that is owing to the United States on account of a direct loan, or loan insured or guaranteed, by the United States; or (B) an amount that is owing to the United States on account of a fee, duty, lease, rent, service, sale of real or personal property, overpayment, fine, assessment, penalty, restitution, damages, interest, tax, bail bond forfeiture, reimbursement, recovery of a cost incurred by the United States, or other source of indebtedness to the United States, but that is not owing under the terms of a contract originally entered into by only persons other than the United States; and includes any amount owing to the United States for the benefit of an Indian tribe or individual Indian, but excludes any amount to which the United States is entitled under section 3011(a). (4) “Debtor” means a person who is liable for a debt or against whom there is a claim for a debt. (5) “Disposable earnings” means that part of earnings remaining after all deductions required by law have been withheld. (6) “Earnings” means compensation paid or payable for personal services, whether denominated as wages, salary, commission, bonus, or otherwise, and includes periodic payments pursuant to a pension or retirement program. (7) “Garnishee” means a person (other than the debtor) who has, or is reasonably thought to have, possession, custody, or control of any property in which the debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest, including any obligation due the debtor or to become due the debtor, and against whom a garnishment under section 3104 or 3205 is issued by a court. (8) “Judgment” means a judgment, order, or decree entered in favor of the United States in a court and arising from a civil or criminal proceeding regarding a debt. (9) “Nonexempt disposable earnings” means 25 percent of disposable earnings, subject to section 303 of the Consumer Credit Protection Act. (10) “Person” includes a natural person (including an individual Indian), a corporation, a partnership, an unincorporated association, a trust, or an estate, or any other public or private entity, including a State or local government or an Indian tribe. (11) “Prejudgment remedy” means the remedy of attachment, receivership, garnishment, or sequestration authorized by this chapter to be granted before judgment on the merits of a claim for a debt. (12) “Property” includes any present or future interest, whether legal or equitable, in real, personal (including choses in action), or mixed property, tangible or intangible, vested or contingent, wherever located and however held (including community property and property held in trust (including spendthrift and pension trusts)), but excludes – (A) property held in trust by the United States for the benefit of an Indian tribe or individual Indian; and (B) Indian lands subject to restrictions against alienation imposed by the United States. (13) “Security agreement” means an agreement that creates or provides for a lien. (14) “State” means any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession of the United States. (15) “United States” means – (A) a Federal corporation; (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or (C) an instrumentality of the United States. (16) “United States marshal” means a United States marshal, a deputy marshal, or an official of the United States Marshals Service designated under section 564. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4933.) -REFTEXT- REFERENCES IN TEXT Section 303 of the Consumer Credit Protection Act, referred to in par. (9), is classified to section 1673 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade. -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3003 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3003. Rules of construction -STATUTE- (a) Terms. – For purposes of this chapter – (1) the terms “includes” and “including” are not limiting; (2) the term “or” is not exclusive; and (3) the singular includes the plural. (b) Effect on Rights of the United States. – This chapter shall not be construed to curtail or limit the right of the United States under any other Federal law or any State law – (1) to collect taxes or to collect any other amount collectible in the same manner as a tax; (2) to collect any fine, penalty, assessment, restitution, or forfeiture arising in a criminal case; (3) to appoint or seek the appointment of a receiver; or (4) to enforce a security agreement. (c) Effect on Other Laws. – This chapter shall not be construed to supersede or modify the operation of – (1) title 11; (2) admiralty law; (3) section 3713 of title 31; (4) section 303 of the Consumer Credit Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 1673); (5) a statute of limitation applicable to a criminal proceeding; (6) the common law or statutory rights to set-off or recoupment; (7) any Federal law authorizing, or any inherent authority of a court to provide, injunctive relief; (8) the authority of a court – (A) to impose a sanction under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; (B) to appoint a receiver to effectuate its order; or (C) to exercise the power of contempt under any Federal law; (9) any law authorizing the United States to obtain partition, or to recover possession, of property in which the United States holds title; or (10) any provision of any other chapter of this title, except to the extent such provision is inconsistent with this chapter. (d) Preemption. – This chapter shall preempt State law to the extent such law is inconsistent with a provision of this chapter. (e) Effect on Rights of the United States Under Foreign and International Law. – This chapter shall not be construed to curtail or limit the rights of the United States under foreign law, under a treaty or an international agreement, or otherwise under international law. (f) Applicability of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. – Except as provided otherwise in this chapter, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure shall apply with respect to actions and proceedings under this chapter. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4935.) -REFTEXT- REFERENCES IN TEXT The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsecs. (c)(8)(A) and (f), are set out in the Appendix to this title. -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3004 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3004. Service of process; enforcement; notice -STATUTE- (a) Manner of Service. – A complaint, notice, writ, or other process required to be served in an action or proceeding under this chapter shall be served in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure unless otherwise provided in this chapter. (b) Nationwide Enforcement. – (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) – (A) any writ, order, judgment, or other process, including a summons and complaint, filed under this chapter may be served in any State; and (B) such writ, order, or judgment may be enforced by the court issuing the writ, order, or process, regardless of where the person is served with the writ, order, or process. (2) If the debtor so requests, within 20 days after receiving the notice described in section 3101(d) or 3202(b), the action or proceeding in which the writ, order, or judgment was issued shall be transferred to the district court for the district in which the debtor resides. (c) Notice and Other Process. – At such time as counsel for the United States considers appropriate, but not later than the time a prejudgment or postjudgment remedy is put into effect under this chapter, counsel for the United States shall exercise reasonable diligence to serve on the debtor and any person who the United States believes, after exercising due diligence, has possession, custody, or control of the property, a copy of the application for such remedy, the order granting such remedy, and the notice required by section 3101(d) or 3202(b). -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4936.) -REFTEXT- REFERENCES IN TEXT The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsec. (a), are set out in the Appendix to this title. -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3005 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3005. Application of chapter to judgments -STATUTE- This chapter shall not apply with respect to a judgment on a debt if such judgment is entered more than 10 years before the effective date of this chapter. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4936.) -REFTEXT- REFERENCES IN TEXT For effective date of this chapter, referred to in text, see section 3631 of Pub. L. 101-647, set out as an Effective Date note under section 3001 of this title. -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3006 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3006. Affidavit requirements -STATUTE- Any affidavit required of the United States by this chapter may be made on information and belief, if reliable and reasonably necessary, establishing with particularity, to the court’s satisfaction, facts supporting the claim of the United States. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4936.) -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3007 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3007. Perishable personal property -STATUTE- (a) Authority To Sell. – If at any time during any action or proceeding under this chapter the court determines on its own initiative or upon motion of any party, that any seized or detained personal property is likely to perish, waste, or be destroyed, or otherwise substantially depreciate in value during the pendency of the proceeding, the court shall order a commercially reasonable sale of such property. (b) Deposit of Sale Proceeds. – Within 5 days after such sale, the proceeds shall be deposited with the clerk of the court, accompanied by a statement in writing and signed by the United States marshal, to be filed in the action or proceeding, stating the time and place of sale, the name of the purchaser, the amount received, and an itemized account of expenses. (c) Presumption. – For purposes of liability on the part of the United States, there shall be a presumption that the price paid at a sale under subsection (a) is the fair market value of the property or portion. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4937.) -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3008 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3008. Proceedings before United States magistrate judges -STATUTE- A district court of the United States may assign its duties in proceedings under this chapter to a United States magistrate judge to the extent not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4937; amended Pub. L. 101-650, title III, Sec. 321, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5117.) -CHANGE- CHANGE OF NAME “United States magistrate judges” substituted for “United States magistrates” in catchline and “United States magistrate judge” substituted for “United States magistrate” in text pursuant to section 321 of Pub. L. 101-650, set out as a note under section 631 of this title. -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3009 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3009. United States marshals’ authority to designate keeper -STATUTE- Whenever a United States marshal is authorized to seize property pursuant to this chapter, the United States marshal may designate another person or Federal agency to hold for safekeeping such property seized. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4937.) -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3010 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3010. Co-owned property -STATUTE- (a) Limitation. – The remedies available to the United States under this chapter may be enforced against property which is co- owned by a debtor and any other person only to the extent allowed by the law of the State where the property is located. This section shall not be construed to limit any right or interest of a debtor or co-owner in a retirement system for Federal military or civilian personnel established by the United States or any agency thereof or in a qualified retirement arrangement. (b) Definitions. – For purposes of subsection (a) – (1) the term “retirement system for Federal military or civilian personnel” means a pension or annuity system for Federal military or civilian personnel of more than one agency, or for some or all of such personnel of a single agency, established by statute or by regulation pursuant to statutory authority; and (2) the term “qualified retirement arrangement” means a plan qualified under section 401(a), 403(a), or 409 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 or a plan that is subject to the requirements of section 205 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4937.) -REFTEXT- REFERENCES IN TEXT Sections 401(a), 403(a), and 409 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, referred to in subsec. (b)(2), are classified to sections 401(a), 403(a), and 409, respectively, of Title 26, Internal Revenue Code. Section 205 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, referred to in subsec. (b)(2), is classified to section 1055 of Title 29, Labor. -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3011 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3011. Assessment of surcharge on a debt -STATUTE- (a) Surcharge Authorized. – In an action or proceeding under subchapter B or C, and subject to subsection (b), the United States is entitled to recover a surcharge of 10 percent of the amount of the debt in connection with the recovery of the debt, to cover the cost of processing and handling the litigation and enforcement under this chapter of the claim for such debt. (b) Limitation. – Subsection (a) shall not apply if – (1) the United States receives an attorney’s fee in connection with the enforcement of the claim; or (2) the law pursuant to which the action on the claim is based provides any other amount to cover such costs. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4937.) -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3012 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3012. Joinder of additional defendant -STATUTE- The United States or the debtor may join as an additional defendant in an action or proceeding under this chapter any person reasonably believed to owe money (including money owed on account of a requirement to provide goods or services pursuant to a loan or loan guarantee extended under Federal law) to the debtor arising out of the transaction or occurrence giving rise to a debt. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4938.) -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3013 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3013. Modification or protective order; supervision of enforcement -STATUTE- The court may at any time on its own initiative or the motion of any interested person, and after such notice as it may require, make an order denying, limiting, conditioning, regulating, extending, or modifying the use of any enforcement procedure under this chapter. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4938.) -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3014 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3014. Exempt property -STATUTE- (a) Election To Exempt Property. – An individual debtor may, in an action or proceeding under this chapter, elect to exempt property listed in either paragraph (1) or, in the alternative, paragraph (2). If such action or proceeding is against debtors who are husband and wife, one debtor may not elect to exempt property listed in paragraph (1) and the other debtor elect to exempt property listed in paragraph (2). If the debtors cannot agree on the alternative to be elected, they shall be deemed to elect paragraph (1). Such property is either – (1) property that is specified in section 522(d) of title 11, as amended from time to time; or (2)(A) any property that is exempt under Federal law, other than paragraph (1), or State or local law that is applicable on the date of the filing of the application for a remedy under this chapter at the place in which the debtor’s domicile has been located for the 180 days immediately preceding the date of the filing of such application, or for a longer portion of such 180- day period than in any other place; and (B) any interest in property in which the debtor had, immediately before the filing of such application, an interest as a tenant by the entirety or joint tenant, or an interest in a community estate, to the extent that such interest is exempt from process under applicable nonbankruptcy law. (b) Effect on Assertion and Manner of Determination. – (1) Statement. – A court may order the debtor to file a statement with regard to any claimed exemption. A copy of such statement shall be served on counsel for the United States. Such statement shall be under oath and shall describe each item of property for which exemption is claimed, the value and the basis for such valuation, and the nature of the debtor’s ownership interest. (2) Hearing. – The United States or the debtor, by application to the court in which an action or proceeding under this chapter is pending, may request a hearing on the applicability of any exemption claimed by the debtor. The court shall determine the extent (if any) to which the exemption applies. Unless it is reasonably evident that the exemption applies, the debtor shall bear the burden of persuasion. (3) Stay of Disposition. – Assertion of an exemption shall prevent the United States from selling or otherwise disposing of the property for which such exemption is claimed until the court determines whether the debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest in such property. The United States may not take possession of, dispose of, sell, or otherwise interfere with the debtor’s normal use and enjoyment of an interest in property the United States knows or has reason to know is exempt. (c) Debtors in Joint Cases. – Subject to the limitation in subsection (a), this section shall apply separately with respect to each debtor in a joint case. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4938.) -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3015 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER A – DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS -HEAD- Sec. 3015. Discovery as to debtor’s financial condition -STATUTE- (a) In General. – Except as provided in subsection (b), in an action or proceeding under subchapter B or C, the United States may have discovery regarding the financial condition of the debtor in the manner in which discovery is authorized by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in an action on a claim for a debt. (b) Limitation. – Subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to an action or proceeding under subchapter B unless there is a reasonable likelihood that the debt involved exceeds $50,000. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4939.) -REFTEXT- REFERENCES IN TEXT The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsec. (a), are set out in the Appendix to this title. -End- -CITE- 28 USC SUBCHAPTER B – PREJUDGMENT REMEDIES 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER B – PREJUDGMENT REMEDIES -HEAD- SUBCHAPTER B – PREJUDGMENT REMEDIES -MISC1- Sec. 3101. Prejudgment remedies. 3102. Attachment. 3103. Receivership. 3104. Garnishment. 3105. Sequestration. -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3101 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER B – PREJUDGMENT REMEDIES -HEAD- Sec. 3101. Prejudgment remedies -STATUTE- (a) Application. – (1) The United States may, in a proceeding in conjunction with the complaint or at any time after the filing of a civil action on a claim for a debt, make application under oath to a court to issue any prejudgment remedy. (2) Such application shall be filed with the court and shall set forth the factual and legal basis for each prejudgment remedy sought. (3) Such application shall – (A) state that the debtor against whom the prejudgment remedy is sought shall be afforded an opportunity for a hearing; and (B) set forth with particularity that all statutory requirements under this chapter for the issuance of the prejudgment remedy sought have been satisfied. (b) Grounds. – Subject to section 3102, 3103, 3104, or 3105, a prejudgment remedy may be granted by any court if the United States shows reasonable cause to believe that – (1) the debtor – (A) is about to leave the jurisdiction of the United States with the effect of hindering, delaying, or defrauding the United States in its effort to recover a debt; (B) has or is about to assign, dispose, remove, conceal, ill treat, waste, or destroy property with the effect of hindering, delaying, or defrauding the United States; (C) has or is about to convert the debtor’s property into money, securities, or evidence of debt in a manner prejudicial to the United States with the effect of hindering, delaying, or defrauding the United States; or (D) has evaded service of process by concealing himself or has temporarily withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the United States with the effect of hindering, delaying, or defrauding the United States; or (2) a prejudgment remedy is required to obtain jurisdiction within the United States and the prejudgment remedy sought will result in obtaining such jurisdiction. (c) Affidavit. – (1) The application under subsection (a) shall include an affidavit establishing with particularity to the court’s satisfaction facts supporting the probable validity of the claim for a debt and the right of the United States to recover what is demanded in the application. (2) The affidavit shall state – (A) specifically the amount of the debt claimed by the United States and any interest or costs attributable to such debt; (B) one or more of the grounds specified in subsection (b); and (C) the requirements of section 3102(b), 3103(a), 3104(a), or 3105(b), as the case may be. (3) No bond is required of the United States. (d) Notice and Hearing. – (1) On filing an application by the United States as provided in this section, the counsel for the United States shall prepare, and the clerk shall issue, a notice for service on the debtor against whom the prejudgment remedy is sought and on any other person whom the United States reasonably believes, after exercising due diligence, has possession, custody, or control of property affected by such remedy. Three copies of the notice shall be served on each such person. The form and content of such notice shall be approved jointly by a majority of the chief judges of the Federal districts in the State in which the court is located and shall be in substantially the following form: “NOTICE “You are hereby notified that this [property] is being taken by the United States Government (‘the Government’), which says that [name of debtor] owes it a debt of $ [amount] for [reason for debt] and has filed a lawsuit to collect this debt. The Government says it must take this property at this time because [recite the pertinent ground or grounds from section 3101(b)]. The Government wants to make sure [name of debtor] will pay if the court determines that this money is owed. “In addition, you are hereby notified that there are exemptions under the law which may protect some of this property from being taken by the Government if [name of debtor] can show that the exemptions apply. Below is a summary of the major exemptions which apply in most situations in the State of [State where property is located]: “[A statement summarizing in plain and understandable English the election available with respect to such State under section 3014 and the types of property that may be exempted under each of the alternatives specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 3014(a), and a statement that different property may be so exempted with respect to the State in which the debtor resides.] “If you are [name of debtor] and you disagree with the reason the Government gives for taking your property now, or if you think you do not owe the money to the Government that it says you do, or if you think the property the Government is taking qualifies under one of the above exemptions, you have a right to ask the court to return your property to you. “If you want a hearing, you must promptly notify the court. You must make your request in writing, and either mail it or deliver it in person to the clerk of the court at [address]. If you wish, you may use this notice to request the hearing by checking the box below and mailing this notice to the court clerk. You must also send a copy of your request to the Government at [address], so the Government will know you want a hearing. The hearing will take place within 5 days after the clerk receives your request, if you ask for it to take place that quickly, or as soon after that as possible. “At the hearing you may explain to the judge why you think you do not owe the money to the Government, why you disagree with the reason the Government says it must take your property at this time, or why you believe the property the Government has taken is exempt or belongs to someone else. You may make any or all of these explanations as you see fit. “If you think you live outside the Federal judicial district in which the court is located, you may request, not later than 20 days after you receive this notice, that this proceeding to take your property be transferred by the court to the Federal judicial district in which you reside. You must make your request in writing, and either mail it or deliver it in person to the clerk of the court at [address]. You must also send a copy of your request to the Government at [address], so the Government will know you want the proceeding to be transferred. “Be sure to keep a copy of this notice for your own records. If you have any questions about your rights or about this procedure, you should contact a lawyer, an office of public legal assistance, or the clerk of the court. The clerk is not permitted to give legal advice, but can refer you to other sources of information.” (2) By requesting, at any time before judgment on the claim for a debt, the court to hold a hearing, the debtor may move to quash the order granting such remedy. The court shall hold a hearing on such motion as soon as practicable, or, if requested by the debtor, within 5 days after receiving the request for a hearing or as soon thereafter as possible. The issues at such hearing shall be limited to – (A) the probable validity of the claim for the debt for which such remedy was granted and of any defense or claim of exemption asserted by such person; (B) compliance with any statutory requirement for the issuance of the prejudgment remedy granted; (C) the existence of any ground set forth in subsection (b); and (D) the inadequacy of alternative remedies (if any) to protect the interests of the United States. (e) Issuance of Writ. – On the court’s determination that the requirements of subsections (a), (b), and (c) have been met, the court shall issue all process sufficient to put into effect the prejudgment remedy sought. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4939.) -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3102 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER B – PREJUDGMENT REMEDIES -HEAD- Sec. 3102. Attachment -STATUTE- (a) Property Subject to Attachment. – (1) Any property in the possession, custody, or control of the debtor and in which the debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest, except earnings, may be attached pursuant to a writ of attachment in an action or proceeding against a debtor on a claim for a debt and may be held as security to satisfy such judgment, and interest and costs, as the United States may recover on such claim. (2) The value of property attached shall not exceed the amount by which the sum of the amount of the debt claimed by the United States and the amount of interest and costs reasonably likely to be assessed against the debtor by the court exceeds the aggregate value of the nonexempt interest of the debtor in any – (A) property securing the debt; and (B) property garnished or in receivership, or income sequestered, under this subchapter. (b) Availability of Attachment. – If the requirements of section 3101 are satisfied, a court shall issue a writ authorizing the United States to attach property in which the debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest, as security for such judgment (and interest and costs) as the United States may recover on a claim for a debt – (1) in an action on a contract, express or implied, against the debtor for payment of money, only if the United States shows reasonable cause to believe that – (A) the contract is not fully secured by real or personal property; or (B) the value of the original security is substantially diminished, without any act of the United States or the person to whom the security was given, below the amount of the debt; (2) in an action against the debtor for damages in tort; (3) if the debtor resides outside the jurisdiction of the United States; or (4) in an action to recover a fine, penalty, or tax. (c) Issuance of Writ; Contents. – (1) Subject to subsections (a) and (b), a writ of attachment shall be issued by the court directing the United States marshal of the district where property described in subsection (a) is located to attach the property. (2) Several writs of attachment may be issued at the same time, or in succession, and sent to different judicial districts until sufficient property is attached. (3) The writ of attachment shall contain – (A) the date of the issuance of the writ; (B) the identity of the court, the docket number of the action, and the identity of the cause of action; (C) the name and last known address of the debtor; (D) the amount to be secured by the attachment; and (E) a reasonable description of the property to be attached. (d) Levy of Attachment. – (1) The United States marshal receiving the writ shall proceed without delay to levy upon the property specified for attachment if found within the district. The marshal may not sell property unless ordered by the court. (2) In performing the levy, the United States marshal may enter any property owned, occupied, or controlled by the debtor, except that the marshal may not enter a residence or other building unless the writ expressly authorizes the marshal to do so or upon specific order of the court. (3) Levy on real property is made by entering the property and posting the writ and notice of levy in a conspicuous place upon the property. (4) Levy on personal property is made by taking possession of it. Levy on personal property not easily taken into possession or which cannot be taken into possession without great inconvenience or expense may be made by affixing a copy of the writ and notice of levy on it or in a conspicuous place in the vicinity of it describing in the notice of levy the property by quantity and with sufficient detail to identify the property levied on. (5) The United States marshal shall file a copy of the notice of levy in the same manner as provided for judgments in section 3201(a)(1). The United States marshal shall serve a copy of the writ and notice of levy on – (A) the debtor against whom the writ is issued; and (B) the person who has possession of the property subject to the writ; in the same manner that a summons is served in a civil action and make the return thereof. (e) Return of Writ; Duties of Marshal; Further Return. – (1) A United States marshal executing a writ of attachment shall return the writ with the marshal’s action endorsed thereon or attached thereto and signed by the marshal, to the court from which it was issued, within 5 days after the date of the levy. (2) The return shall describe the property attached with sufficient certainty to identify it and shall state the location where it was attached, the date and time it was attached, and the disposition made of the property. If no property was attached, the return shall so state. (3) If the property levied on is claimed, replevied under subsection (j)(2), or sold under section 3007 after the return, the United States marshal shall immediately make a further return to the clerk of the court showing the disposition of the property. (4) If personal property is replevied, the United States marshal shall deliver the replevin bond to the clerk of the court to be filed in the action. (f) Levy of Attachment as Lien on Property; Satisfaction of Lien. – (1) A levy on property under a writ of attachment under this section creates a lien in favor of the United States on the property or, in the case of perishable property sold under section 3007, on the proceeds of the sale. (2) Such lien shall be ranked ahead of any other security interests perfected after the later of the time of levy and the time a copy of the notice of levy is filed under subsection (d)(5). (3) Such lien shall arise from the time of levy and shall continue until a judgment in the action is obtained or denied, or the action is otherwise dismissed. The death of the debtor whose property is attached does not terminate the attachment lien. Upon issuance of a judgment in the action and registration under this chapter, the judgment lien so created relates back to the time of levy. (g) Reduction or Dissolution of Attachment. – (1) If an excessive or unreasonable attachment is made, the debtor may submit a motion to the court for a reduction of the amount of the attachment or its dissolution. Notice of such motion shall be served on the United States. (2) The court shall order a part of the property to be released, if after a hearing the court finds that the amount of the attachment is excessive or unreasonable or if the attachment is for an amount larger than the sum of the liquidated or ascertainable amount of the debt and the amount of interest and costs likely to be taxed. (3) The court shall dissolve the attachment if the amount of the debt is unliquidated and unascertainable by calculation. (4) If any property claimed to be exempt is levied on, the debtor may, at any time after such levy, request that the court vacate such levy. If it appears to the court that the property so levied upon is exempt, the court shall order the levy vacated and the property returned to the debtor. (h) Replevin of Attached Property by Debtor; Bond. – If attached property is not sold before judgment, the debtor may replevy such property or any part thereof by giving a bond approved by counsel for the United States or the court and payable to the United States in double the reasonable value of the property to be replevied or double the value of the claim, whichever is less. (i) Preservation of Personal Property Under Attachment. – If personal property in custody of the United States marshal under a writ of attachment is not replevied, claimed, or sold, the court may make such order for its preservation or use as appears to be in the interest of the parties. (j) Judgment and Disposition of Attached Property. – (1) Judgment for the united states. – On entry of judgment for the United States, the court shall order the proceeds of personal property sold pursuant to section 3007 to be applied to the satisfaction of the judgment, and shall order the sale of any remaining personal property and any real property levied on to the extent necessary to satisfy the judgment. (2) Judgment for the united states when personal property replevied. – With respect to personal property under attachment that is replevied, the judgment which may be entered shall be against the debtor against whom the writ of attachment is issued and also against the sureties on the debtor’s replevin bond for the value of the property. (3) Restoration of property and exoneration of replevin bond. – If the attachment is vacated or if the judgment on the claim for the debt is for the person against whom the writ attachment is issued, the court shall order the property, or proceeds of perishable property sold under section 3007, restored to the debtor and shall exonerate any replevin bond. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4942.) -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3103 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER B – PREJUDGMENT REMEDIES -HEAD- Sec. 3103. Receivership -STATUTE- (a) Appointment of a Receiver. – If the requirements of section 3101 are satisfied, a court may appoint a receiver for property in which the debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest if the United States shows reasonable cause to believe that there is a substantial danger that the property will be removed from the jurisdiction of the court, lost, concealed, materially injured or damaged, or mismanaged. (b) Powers of Receiver. – (1) The appointing court may authorize a receiver – (A) to take possession of real and personal property and sue for, collect, and sell obligations upon such conditions and for such purposes as the court shall direct; and (B) to administer, collect, improve, lease, repair or sell pursuant to section 3007 such real and personal property as the court shall direct. A receiver appointed to manage residential or commercial property shall have demonstrable expertise in the management of these types of property. (2) Unless expressly authorized by order of the court, a receiver shall have no power to employ attorneys, accountants, appraisers, auctioneers, or other professional persons. (c) Duration of Receivership. – A receivership shall not continue past the entry of judgment, or the conclusion of an appeal of such judgment, unless the court orders it continued under section 3203(e) or unless the court otherwise directs its continuation. (d) Accounts; Requirement to Report. – A receiver shall keep written accounts itemizing receipts and expenditures, describing the property and naming the depository of receivership funds. The receiver’s accounts shall be open to inspection by any person having an apparent interest in the property. The receiver shall file reports at regular intervals as directed by the court and shall serve the debtor and the United States with a copy thereof. (e) Modification of Powers; Removal. – On motion of the receiver or on its own initiative, the court which appointed the receiver may remove the receiver or modify the receiver’s powers at any time. (f) Priority. – If more than one court appoints a receiver for particular property, the receiver first qualifying under law shall be entitled to take possession, control, or custody of the property. (g) Compensation of Receivers. – (1) A receiver is entitled to such commissions, not exceeding 5 percent of the sums received and disbursed by him, as the court allows unless the court otherwise directs. (2) If, at the termination of a receivership, there are no funds in the hands of a receiver, the court may fix the compensation of the receiver in accordance with the services rendered and may direct the party who moved for the appointment of the receiver to pay such compensation in addition to the necessary expenditures incurred by the receiver which remain unpaid. (3) At the termination of a receivership, the receiver shall file a final accounting of the receipts and disbursements and apply for compensation setting forth the amount sought and the services rendered by the receiver. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4944.) -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3104 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER B – PREJUDGMENT REMEDIES -HEAD- Sec. 3104. Garnishment -STATUTE- (a) In General. – If the requirements of section 3101 are satisfied, a court may issue a writ of garnishment against property (excluding earnings) in which the debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest and which is in the possession, custody, or control of a person other than the debtor in order to satisfy a claim for a debt. Co-owned property shall be subject to garnishment to the same extent as co-owned property is subject to garnishment under the law of the State in which such property is located. A court may issue simultaneous separate writs of garnishment to several garnishees. A writ of garnishment issued under this subsection shall be continuing and shall terminate only as provided in section 3205(c)(10). (b) Writ. – (1) Subsections (b)(2) and (c) of section 3205 shall apply with respect to garnishment under this section, except that for purposes of this section – (A) earnings of the debtor shall not be subject to garnishment; and (B) a reference in such subsections to a judgment debtor shall be deemed to be a reference to a debtor. (2) The United States shall include in its application for a writ of garnishment – (A) the amount of the claim asserted by the United States for a debt; and (B) the date the writ is issued. (c) Limitation. – The value of property garnished shall not exceed the amount by which the sum of the amount of the debt claimed by the United States and the amount of interest and costs reasonably likely to be assessed against the debtor by the court exceeds the aggregate value of the nonexempt interest of the debtor in any – (1) property securing the debt; and (2) property attached or in receivership, or income sequestered, under this subchapter. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4945.) -End- -CITE- 28 USC Sec. 3105 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER B – PREJUDGMENT REMEDIES -HEAD- Sec. 3105. Sequestration -STATUTE- (a) Property Subject to Sequestration. – (1) Any income from property in which the debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest may be sequestered pursuant to a writ of sequestration in an action or proceeding against a debtor on a claim for a debt and may be held as security to satisfy such judgment, and interest and costs, as the United States may recover on such claim. (2) The amount of income sequestered shall not exceed the amount by which the sum of the amount of the debt claimed by the United States and the amount of interest and costs reasonably likely to be assessed against the debtor by the court exceeds the aggregate value of the nonexempt interest of the debtor in any – (A) property securing the debt; and (B) property attached, garnished, or in receivership under this subchapter. (b) Availability of Sequestration. – If the requirements of section 3101 are satisfied, a court shall issue a writ authorizing the United States to sequester income from property in which the debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest, as security for such judgment (and interest and costs) as the United States may recover on a claim for a debt – (1) in an action on a contract, express or implied, against the debtor for payment of money, only if the United States shows reasonable cause to believe that – (A) the contract is not fully secured by real or personal property; or (B) the value of the original security is substantially diminished, without any act of the United States or the person to whom the security was given, below the amount of the debt; (2) in an action against the debtor for damages in tort; (3) if the debtor resides outside the jurisdiction of the United States; or (4) in an action to recover a fine, penalty, or tax. (c) Issuance of Writ; Contents. – (1) Subject to subsections (a) and (b), a writ of sequestration shall be issued by the court directing the United States marshal of the district where income described in subsection (a) is located to sequester the income. (2) Several writs of sequestration may be issued at the same time, or in succession, and sent to different judicial districts until sufficient income is sequestered. (3) The writ of sequestration shall contain – (A) the date of the issuance of the writ; (B) the identity of the court, the docket number of the action, and the identity of the cause of action; (C) the name and last known address of the debtor; (D) the amount to be secured by the sequestration; and (E) a reasonable description of the income to be sequestered. (d) Execution of Writ. – (1) The United States marshal receiving the writ shall proceed without delay to execute the writ. (2) The United States marshal shall file a copy of the notice of sequestration in the same manner as provided for judgments in section 3201(a)(1). The United States marshal shall serve a copy of the writ and notice of sequestration on – (A) the debtor against whom the writ is issued; and (B) the person who has possession of the income subject to the writ; in the same manner that a summons is served in a civil action and make the return thereof. (e) Deposit of Sequestered Income. – A person who has possession of the income subject to a writ of sequestration shall deposit such income with the clerk of the court, accompanied by a statement in writing stating the person’s name, the name of the debtor, the amount of such income, the property from which such income is produced, and the period during which such income is produced. (f) Return of Writ; Duties of Marshal; Further Return. – (1) A United States marshal executing a writ of sequestration shall return the writ with the marshal’s action endorsed thereon or attached thereto and signed by the marshal, to the court from which it was issued, within 5 days after the date of the execution. (2) The return shall describe the income sequestered with sufficient certainty to identify it and shall state the location where it was sequestered, and the date and time it was sequestered. If no income was sequestered, the return shall so state. (3) If sequestered income is claimed after the return, the United States marshal shall immediately make a further return to the clerk of the court showing the disposition of the income. (g) Reduction or Dissolution of Sequestration. – (1) If an excessive or unreasonable sequestration is made, the debtor may submit a motion to the court for a reduction of the amount of the sequestration or its dissolution. Notice of such motion shall be served on the United States. (2) The court shall order a part of the income to be released, if after a hearing the court finds that the amount of the sequestration is excessive or unreasonable or if the sequestration is for an amount larger than the sum of the liquidated or ascertainable amount of the debt and the amount of interest and costs likely to be taxed. (3) The court shall dissolve the sequestration if the amount of the debt is unliquidated and unascertainable by calculation. (h) Preservation of Income Under Sequester. – If personal property in custody of the United States marshal under a writ of sequestration is not claimed, the court may make such order for its preservation or use as appears to be in the interest of the parties. (i) Judgment and Disposition of Sequestered Income. – (1) Judgment for the united states. – On entry of judgment for the United States, the court shall order the sequestered income to be applied to the satisfaction of the judgment. (2) Restoration of income. – If the sequestration is vacated or if the judgment on the claim for the debt is for the person against whom the writ of sequestration is issued, the court shall order the income restored to the debtor. -SOURCE- (Added Pub. L. 101-647, title XXXVI, Sec. 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4946.) -End- -CITE- 28 USC SUBCHAPTER C – POSTJUDGMENT REMEDIES 01/03/2012 (112-90) -EXPCITE- TITLE 28 – JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART VI – PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE SUBCHAPTER C – POSTJUDGMENT REMEDIES -HEAD-
  7. Fair Debt Collection Practices Act – FDCPA Effective March 1978 – how does cash remittances thru commercial REMIC (Grantee) in name of institutional broker (institutional insurance claims clearing trust funds by conveyance, assignment, assumption) for a consumer fall under FDCP? Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) (15 USC 1692 et seq.), – The Federal Debt Collection Procedure Act (FDCPA) is a United States federal law passed in 1990, affecting money owed to the United States government. FDCPA preempts state remedy laws in most circumstances. [1 ^ a b Della, Mike (January 30, 2013). “Overview of the Federal Debt Collection Procedures Act of 1990”. projectdebtrelief.com. Retrieved April 30, 2013. AND 28 USC Chapter 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE

    15 U.S.C.A. 1692a (6). The act applies only to debts arising out of transactions in which the money, property, insurance or services that are the subject of the transaction are primarily for personal, family or household purposes. 15 U.S.C.A. 1692a (5). It does not apply to commercial generally apply to a creditor who seeks to collect its own debt.

    REMIC becomes Grantee….

    Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) (15 USC 1692 et seq.), Coverage

    Debt That Is Covered

    The FDCPA applies only to the collection of debt incurred by a consumer primarily for personal, family, or household purposes. It does not apply to the collection of corporate debt or debt owed for business or agricultural purposes.

    Debt Collectors That Are Not Covered

    An institution is not considered a debt collector under the FDCPA when it collects

    •Another institution’s debts in isolated instances

    •Its own debts under its own name

    •Debts it originated and then sold but continues to service (for example, mortgage and student loans)

    •Debts that were not in default when they were obtained

    •Debts that were obtained as security for a commercial credit transaction (for example, accounts receivable financing)

    •Debts incidental to a bona fide fiduciary relationship or escrow arrangement (for example, a debt held in the institution’s trust department or mortgage loan escrow for taxes and insurance)

    •Debts, regularly, for other institutions to which it is related by common ownership or corporate control

    Other debt collectors that are not covered by the FDCPA include

    •Officers or employees of an institution who collect debts owed to the institution in the institution’s name

    •Legal-process servers

    FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE
    FDCP – STAFF COMMENTS – AGENCY: FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

    6. Scope. This provision applies to lawsuits brought by a debt collector, including an attorney debt collector, when the debt collector is acting on his own behalf or on behalf of his client

    e.g., Attorney as CLOSER – Stewart Title Guranty Corp Preferred Attorney will be involved in CLOSING and Settlement

    appears Deed-in-Lieu during pre-foreclosure imminient – Broker sells to Fannie Mae – …. replaces name of ‘borrower’ with substituted trustee …..

    SECTION 812 — FURNISHING CERTAIN DECEPTIVE FORMS

    1. Practice prohibited. This section prohibits the practice of selling to creditors dunning letters that falsely imply that a debt collector is participating in collection of the debt, when in fact only the creditor is collecting.

    As the ‘creditor’ is foreclosing on the debt for cash they advanced and taking property through predatory , egregious, deceptive acts …. during pre-collection

    3. Pre-collection letters. A form seller may not furnish a creditor with (1) a letter on a collector’s letterhead to be used when the collector is not involved in collecting the creditor’s debts, or (2) a letter indicating “copy to (the collector)” if the collector is not participating in collecting the creditor’s debt. A form seller may not avoid liability by including a statement in the text of a form letter that the sender has not yet been assigned the account for collection, if the communication as a whole, using the collector’s letterhead, represents otherwise.

    SECTION 813 — CIVIL LIABILITY
    Section 813 (A) imposes civil liability in the form of (1) actual damages, (2) discretionary penalties, and (3) costs and attorney’s fees; (B) discusses relevant factors a court should consider in assessing damages; (C) exculpates a collector who maintains reasonable procedures from liability for an unintentional error; (D) permits actions to be brought in federal or state courts within one year from the violation; and (E) shields a defendant who relies on an advisory opinion of the Commission.

    28 USC Chapter 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE
    The Federal Debt Collection Procedure Act (FDCPA) is a United States federal law passed in 1990, affecting money owed

  8. http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/08/calling-all-california-lawyers-and-others-who-want-to-help-abused-homeowners-please-ask-california-court-of-appeal-to-publish-an-important-pro-borrower-chain-of-title-ruling.html#yA2a1YDm1WQKEWI9.99

    08/08/2013 – Yves Smith
    The Examiner (hat tip April Charney)

    !! GET A LETTER IN !!

    Glaski v. Bank of America

    The opinion is unpublished. That means other litigants typically cannot cite it in briefs

    However, interested parties have until August 20, 2013 to submit a request for publication to the court.

    very strict procedure for how to to this

    this post tells you everything you need to do (even names and addresses of everyone who needs to get a letter, a form for the proofs of service) and even provides a sample letter.

  9. it’s known your note is paid by investors when issued to Ginnie and the issuers relinquish all rights but what is something solid to prove any of that? the blank guarantees/HUD/GNMA contracts the issuer must sign to even have the pools accepted are plain in themselves but rather inadmissible..?..Where is it easy to point out (besides discovery ( laugh laugh) that you can prove a note has been paid when collateral for MBS and there is no debt?

  10. @charles reed;
    I would appreciate if you could stick some case law or something to cite/ read into that holds sold ground to back up this ” Note is that only a lender able to lend my be on the face of the Note, and if that Note is not purchase and it is freely handed over to Ginnie Mae a blank endorse Note, the contract/Note is not longer a Mortgage Note because a Note must have a debt” and this ” in order to place a lien and keep a lien against the properties once who holds the Note must be owned that debt. There is no getting around not owning the debt ” I have digging into these very things you mention and would like all I can get. thank you

  11. Don’t know if anyone has posted this GA case here before, but it’s interesting (regarding “secured creditor”):

    http://dtc-systems.net/2012/03/georgia-rules-secured-creditor-must-be-in-chain-of-title/

  12. @E.Tolle

    …I love the way you WRITE, silly.

    Speaking of that—how DO we start Rev. 2.0?

  13. “Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure… than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat.”

    Theodore Roosevelt

  14. swarmthebanks first what changes the Note is that only a lender able to lend my be on the face of the Note, and if that Note is not purchase and it is freely handed over to Ginnie Mae a blank endorse Note, the contract/Note is not longer a Mortgage Note because a Note must have a debt.

    2nd when bank signed onto the HAMP in Mar 2009, they agreed to modifications so they agreed to alter the interest rates and terms.

    I get it that a loan was made but the loan was made withing term and with into the guidelines of lending, and in order to place a lien and keep a lien against the properties once who holds the Note must be owned that debt. There is no getting around not owning the debt and you cannot have a surrogate go into court and act as if they hold are the “holder in due course” and this is the violation BOA, Wells Fargo and Chase have don’t in foreclosing on Countrywide and Washington Mutual Bank loans!

  15. Glazer v. Chase Home Finance | Appeals Court Rules Foreclosure Lawyers are “Debt Collectors” Under FDCPA

  16. If Mike Brosnahan could read this, my comment would be that some people on this blog believe that he ‘lost’ his home and has no right to complain because he didn’t do the right things to ‘stay in the fight’ and save his home.

    Yet, reality is what it is, and no one is ‘losing’ their homes.
    People are being robbed and it’s rare that someone mentions the judge of thecourt as a party to the theft.

    Can’t wait for the pope’s Motu Proprio to take effect and the rule of law to be in effect and those that don’t abide by it, are punished to the fullest extent there is.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, People, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  17. MERS is Fannie and Freddie. Now the one part of the story they leave out is – yes interest rates will go higher because private investors do not want to invest in a pile of shit over-valued bond. The only thing that will happen is – home values will sink to a level of affordability based on median household income, and correct just a touch further to offset the additional debt service caused by the increased interest premium.

    It will actually help the markets, and also require the banks to raise their reserve requirements through new capital, meaning lower share price, and JD, the wicked, being worth several million less then today.

    I think I am going to take him out…

    for drinks of course.

  18. What a sad story… They should just move right back in and squat. if everyone did that the sheriff could not get to every house every day. It is working in detroit

  19. Sure hopes so also Boots. There are a few courts who have now. Hawii and I believe Georgia. And possibly a recent one I will go back and read right now. And post it.

  20. And while I’m at it… Anybody listened to Change-We-Can-Believe-In in Phoenix? I didn’t but… if Freddie and Fannie disappear, what happens to…

    …MERS? Did “Forward” mention MERS at all? That atrocity was allowed to exist because it neatly tied government and private banking together, right?

    So, what about MERS?

  21. Mortgage Rates Could Rise Should Fannie, Freddie Shut Down

    by The Associated Press Aug 7th 2013 5:39AM
    Updated Aug 7th 2013 2:39PM

    “…Congressional efforts to overhaul the nation’s mortgage finance system got a boost Tuesday from President Barack Obama’s call for changes that are generally in line with the Senate’s bipartisan plan.

    “For too long these companies were allowed to make huge profits buying mortgages, knowing that if their bets went bad, taxpayers would be left holding the bag. It was ‘heads we win, tails you lose,’ and it was wrong,” Obama said. “The good news is right now there’s a bipartisan group of senators working to end Fannie and Freddie as we know them. And I support these kinds of reform efforts.”

    The idea behind both plans is to shift more mortgage financing risk from the government to the private sector to prevent taxpayers from having to pay for future bailouts. But there’s a price homebuyers would likely pay for having private investors shoulder more risk to protect taxpayers…”

    http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/08/07/mortgage-rates-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-shutdown-barack-obama/

    That works for me if we also allow them to go belly up like everybody else in debt. Otherwise, don’t bother…

  22. Where’s my money? “from money pit to cash cow”? Where’s my money?

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/07/us-usa-freddiemac-results-idUSBRE9760LW20130807?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews

    Freddie Mac profit jumps; will pay U.S. Treasury $4.4 billion

    By Margaret Chadbourn

    WASHINGTON | Wed Aug 7, 2013 12:29pm EDT

    (Reuters) – Freddie Mac (FMCC.OB), the U.S.-owned mortgage finance company, on Wednesday said its second-quarter profit surged 65 percent to $5.0 billion, its second largest ever, as rising home prices limited credit losses and it booked big gains on derivatives that benefited from rising interest rates.

    That big profit and another like it expected soon from larger sister Fannie Mae are fast becoming the centerpiece of the debate over housing-finance reform, which has languished since taxpayers stepped in to rescue the pair to the tune of nearly $188 billion during the financial crisis.

    The fact that Freddie and Fannie have turned from taxpayer-financed money pits to cash cows for the federal budget is certain to complicate reform efforts just gaining momentum in Washington. The president weighed in on the issue on Tuesday, calling for a smaller government role in the mortgage market.

  23. Same incident. Matt Levine’s humorist take on it. Worth reading just for the chuckles… I’m only posting the beginning of it.

    Javagold, have you sued B of A yet? Apparently, there’s a line…

    http://dealbreaker.com/2013/08/everybody-will-always-be-suing-bofa-over-mortgages/

    07 Aug 2013 at 9:40 AM

    Everybody Will Always Be Suing BofA Over Mortgages
    By Matt Levine

    These lawsuits against Bank of America are pretty lame, aren’t they? The SEC and Department of Justice each sued BofA yesterday for fraud in a 2008 prime jumbo mortgage securitization but it doesn’t really feel like fraud. The guns are smoke-free. The DoJ gets itself all excited because someone proposed including some bad mortgages in the deal, and a Bank of America trader said of those mortgages that, “like a fat kid in dodgeball, these need to stay on the sidelines,” but they did! The trader thought some of the mortgages were crap, and they were crap, and so they weren’t included in the deal. The system worked! It’s like if Fabulous Fab emailed his girlfriend saying “I am creating monstruosities,” and she told him to stop, and he did.

  24. Wow! Things are really moving! What happened to the 45 billions B of A already paid…? Anybody saw any of it?

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/06/us-bofa-justice-idUSBRE9750ZU20130806

    U.S. accuses Bank of America of mortgage-backed securities fraud

    (Reuters) – The U.S. government on Tuesday filed two civil lawsuits against Bank of America that accuse the bank of investor fraud in its sale of $850 million of residential mortgage-backed securities.

    The lawsuits are the latest legal headache for the second-largest U.S. bank, which has already agreed to pay in excess of $45 billion to settle disputes stemming from the 2008 financial crisis.

    While most of the cases Bank of America has already confronted pertain to its acquisitions of brokerage Merrill Lynch and home lender Countrywide, the lawsuits filed on Tuesday pertain to mortgages the government said were originated, securitized and sold by Bank of America’s legacy businesses.

  25. MS… Trustor file claim to the renter?

  26. To date in 2013, ZERO Bankers in Jail and estimated 4.4 million completed foreclosures since the financial crisis began gutting the American Dream;

    Trusts are insulated from claims …you know this .SO KNOW WHERE TO LAUNCH YOUR ATTACK

  27. The two persons was a mistake TRUST ME you can use this to get back your home
    Fannie and Freddie are Government owned now -DO YOU KNOW WHY?

    Not an attorney and for non legal information and personal views only. Call your state bar for more info

  28. They are not stealing your home ….they developed an iron clad fail SAFE DESIGN THAT LETS US BELIEVE THE SURROGATE SIGNATURES AND MERSCORP assignments are REAL.

    I told people long ago the Robo Mers Corp Bait was just that Bait.

    You said – The officer is with two women, Kathy and Shea, representing Fannie Mae’s local interests, a real estate company called “Options and Opportunity”

    The two persons was a mistake TRUST ME you can use this to get back your home

    Fannie and Freddie are Government owned now -DO YOU KNOW WHY?

    YOU SAY – This “Writ of Restitution, Assistance or Possession” for Fannie Mae is the final abuse in a long list of dirty trick the banks use to steal homes with the rubber stamp approval of the Courts.

    Look in your lack of presence your standing on a winning lottery ticket – read your last paragraph over and over till you get it …..Read it and file claims to renter

    Summary :
    1. They are not stealing your home
    2. Officer is with two women
    3. Fannie and Freddie are Government
    4. Writ of Restitution, Assistance or Possession”

    registerclaims@live.com

  29. “If you want justice, go to a whorehouse. If you want to get screwed go to court”
    I have won “sorta” my trial, And I am mad as hell.
    Matt Weidner a very good attorney in Fl posted this on his website.
    The title is
    “Foreclosure in Florida…There is No “Winning a Foreclosure” For Consumer (The Bank Can Just Refile Over and Over)”

    http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/2013/08/foreclosure-in-florida-there-is-no-winning-a-foreclosure-for-consumer-the-bank-can-just-refile-over-and-over

    “John Andersaon August 6, 2013 at 11:10 am
    Matt,
    Thank you for your work. Your reporting of the truth, is unique in your profession.
    And with all this in mind, the only conclusion I can come up with is if one wants justice, in Florida, they will have to obtain it in Federal Court.
    After defeating Summary Judgment, and having the matter set for trial, I thought I had a chance to win. And I did “sorta”. And I thought that Foreclosure Court was a court of equity, not a court of law. That the baby could not be split in half. That I would win the house, or lose it, but the matter would be settled. That once the foreclosure suit was past Summary Judgment and set for trial, that there would be no second bite of the apple allowed.
    The matter was decided in my favor, on standing, but with out prejudice.
    Now I am learning that it don’t make that much difference.
    The suit damages sought $179,000.00 and the new plaintiffs had offered a selttlement offer of $72,000.00 back in 2011, but the fact that the mortgage taken out in 2003 had not been removed by the mortgage taken out in 2006. So it appears to lenders that I have two mortgages.
    So the fight goes on.
    I am hopeful that lawyers like you will get these new rules overturned. Again Thanks.”

    He has not posted the comment. Maybe it’s because it’s not complimentary to the legal profession, the worlds second oldest
    profession, “And just as honorable.”

    as the first”

  30. Wish you and yours well, Neil. We march on and the fight continues…..As of now what is important is what you said, you have each other.

  31. When you’re claiming the same loan as both an account receivable under GAAP and as an asset under FASB, you need two loan numbers, don’t you? My Fannie Mae loan number is different from the ‘servicer’ loan number according to my discovery.

  32. @boots – As a result of investigating your case I found this gem of knowledge that answers my MERS question of what powers does a nominee for MERS convey to its assignee? The answer came from your court ruling –

    “Here, the DOT expressly provides that the “Borrower understands and agrees that MERS holds only legal title to the interests granted by Borrower in this Security Instrument, but, if necessary to
    comply with law or custom, MERS (as the nominee for Lender and Lender’s successors and assigns) has the right to exercise any or all of those interests, including, but not limited to, the right to foreclose and sell the Property.”

    So if you’re going to claim a MERS invalidation, you better read your DOT first, or you’ll just end up p[ssing off the judge. Now, you might be clever and note that the right to retain borrower’s payments is not stated, hmmmmmm …

  33. Nice SwarmtheBanks! Nice!
    Yes…Comcast fixed our internet connection after weeks of complaining upon completion of the new lines here.

    Interesting call I made to Rust … 1-888-352-3105. My husbands OCC check was lost (per say) .. so I call them and give them the loan # off the certified original note to find out if the check had been cashed. And they said they account was not in their system and ask me if I was certain if I had the right loan#. YES I DID! So they ask for the borrowers name and SS#, I gave them my husbands… they come back to the phone in a few minutes and say .. oh yes, we found it under his name but we can only talk to the borrower and not a third party. ME SAY.. Not only am I his wife of over thirty years, I am a borrower under the terms of the mortgage. They said … not according to info provided by BOA. ME…. I am looking at a certified copy of the mortgage and it clearly says I am a borrower, my name is typed in.. (although I didn’t sign the mortgage and didn’t tell them that). So I ask them… Witch is it? Am I a borrower or not? They said … have your husband call us. Click.. LOL!

  34. BOA changed my original loan number. Now it’s like it never existed. They only changed it after I asked for a modification , while still in good standing. Something ain’t right but I don’t know what it is YET !!!!!!

  35. Is there a way we can help this family?

  36. The title of this post says it all. Great article. We are not going to find the answer in the courts. Or at the ballot box. Or in the Oval Office or the Capitol building.

  37. to swarmthebank,

    there were some changes of the loan origination, i just found out recently of altered loan numbers most of the time. check your original loan number, it was change to different loan numbers by loan servicer.. it could be a big class action lawsuit if lawyers are interested in pursuing this legal issue.

  38. carie,

    i have a pending case to be argued on september 10, 2013 at 9:00, i have a pro bono lawyer provided to me by the 9th circuit court of appeal in sf. check it out titled aniel vs. aurora loan servicer. i am still fighting since 2009. the legal argument is about violation of FDCA, the 9th circuit has not yet decided if foreclosing a real estate property is an act of debt collection. hopefully, we could prevail.

  39. Thanks carie….let’s get a room……

  40. I sincerely wish we could focus on the following…What mortgage terms changed to your original mortgage agreement that caused your foreclosure when the mortgage agreement was transferred to another entity?

    If nothing changed, it is possible you have no case. If however, something changed regarding your mortgage agreement, then you may have a case.

    I wish this site would frame the discussion around this key point, what changed regarding your mortgage agreement once it changed hands?

  41. @boots
    What would you specifically write to the FDIC—thank you.

  42. Very simple get the home addresses of the culprits and demonstrate.
    Regarding Trust. it says on our money. “In G-d we Trust” You can’t even trust yourself.

    NEVER AGAIN

  43. Can’t Trust the President. Can’t trust Congress. Can’t Trust the Judicial system. And Our recourse? Might like to check out some nifty conspiring between Countrywide, Wells Fargo, ReMax Excalibur and National Title. These guys were operating in Maricopa County. There’s another Bank also, but I can’t recall which one- This was in 2006.

  44. One simple question, what terms changed on your mortgage agreement, aka “”change in terms” when Chase Bank took their actions against you? What terms did Chase Bank change to your original mortgage agreement that caused your foreclosure?

  45. Charles Reed – a scam and fraudulent transfer of cash from pension fund trust advance cash as ordered by broker who passes cash through national association depository – real estate transactions all exempt from money laundering regulations – the cash is not from e.g. Wells Fargo rather the cash is from Lehman Brothers and in agreement Wells Fargo Investment Advisor Thirty-Eight Hundred Fund LLC – Wells Fargo Capital enage insurance business udnerwriting future benefits that come back to them not the REMIC … the consumer was sold insurance contracts not real estate

  46. I love you, E.Tolle.😉

  47. Stop feeding them. And get your money out of the banks. In a short time, it won’t be worth jack anyway… 🙂

  48. “Yes We Can!”Be Screwed

    “His stock retort:

    ….”a lot of these programs were put in place before I came in….”

    His stock defense:

    “The department’s investigation is ongoing. It has been, and remains, a top priority.” Translation: Just as soon as the SOL runs out.

    “To ensure prosperity here at home and peace abroad, we all share the belief we have to maintain the strongest military on the planet. (Unfortunately, to be used against those of us here at home when we’ve finally had enough of their bullshit!)

    “I intend to close Guantanamo, and I will follow through on that. I have said repeatedly that America doesn’t torture. And I’m gonna make sure that we don’t torture. Those are part and parcel of an effort to regain America’s moral stature in the world.” This would be hilarious if people weren’t being tortured. And if we had any moral stature left in the world.

    “Change has come to America.” “Yes, Wall Street’s rule is here to stay.”

    “ If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible; who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time; who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer.” Actually, the last five years was the answer, but I’m too hungry to recall the question. And my tent is leaking.

    “ America, this is our moment. This is our time. Our time to turn the page of the policies of the past.” And introduce us all to the future….pages filled with the grand vision of Bankster Rule…

    “ This union may never be perfect, but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected.” Here, he MUST be referring to the union between Wall Street and D.C., as it’s been perfected over the last five years.

    “We are the ones we have been waiting for”. Is he one of the four horsemen?

    “ We have real enemies in the world. These enemies must be found. They must be pursued and they must be defeated.” Okie-Dokie then. How’s about starting by locking up your fav banker Dimon, and then join him in that little cell, will you?

    WWOD? Whatever they tell him to do.

  49. Come to think of it… maybe the time has now come to do that… Isn’t CA freeing something like 10,000 because of cost of house inmates? If the coffers are already empty, people have the ability to speed up public servants’ demise…

  50. The problem is like the Judges the Attorneys including Neil have allow their personal feeling that a loan was made and not paid off, so it does not register that payment were paid. However this entire issue is that the proper parties are involved, and the two easiest cases are Countrywide – BOA, & Washington Mutual Bank – Wells Fargo, Chase where these parties have not purchase the loan and that the end of the story, but because there was a debt to another party that not represented in the case brought it has thrown off intelligent attorney for the last 5yrs, that any other party that not represented in the court does not matter, as they are not asking the court for some ruling.

    As Neil feel that the banks are wrong he equally feel that its weird that the homeowner get the house without that debt attached. If were coach is coaching but in his heart he coaching feeling you should lose, then your going to lose.

    What the contract at issue? It the Note, so by law who can be a party to a home mortgage loan Note? A lender only! So as in government insure loans and some of the Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac that have blank endorsed Notes without a purchase occurring, then it is that holder of the Note burden of proof, to show the money trail.

    When defending a client do you take the side of the opposition, and allow a contract that does not even references the defendant be a part of the case? Does not the defendant need a contract that says that Chase purchase this debt for X dollars? Well Mr. Homeowners who had a contract with WaMu so you now owe Chase….OK how do I owe Chase it Chase never purchase the debt, and where is WaMu? WaMu is a “failed bank” as of Sept 25, 2008!

  51. As long as people pay the salaries of those “public servants”, they will keep their job of throwing homeowners out of their houses.

    Does anyone consider what would have happened if five years ago, even 2 years ago, when that infamous settlement was entered into without any admission of wrong doing whatsoever on the part of the banks, everybody had taken all the money out of the banks and written to his congressman and state rep: “Please be advised that, starting this year, I will no longer file a tax return and indulge this situation any further. Having enough difficulty feeding my family in this economic situation i didn’t create, I no longer intend to feed yours too.”?

    I realize that employees of companies don’t have the choice in whether taxes are taken automatically out of their growth wages but self-employed and business owners who refuse to file, collect from their employees and deal with the IRS, would make a hell of a dent! Why is this country still feeding the problem?

  52. Nearly the same in CA For us

    Sent from my iPhone

  53. BURY THIER HOUSES IN LIENS **** BURY THIER HOUSES IN LIENS **** BURY THIER HOUSES IN LIENS.

  54. Money Laundering secondary market paper via utilization of the IRS 1035 Exchange in conjunction with IRS 1031 Exchange. IRS 1035 Exchange FORMS 1099-R – 1099-MISC – Insurance Contracts, Annuities, Endowments non-qualified plans. These Exceptions, Waivers, and Loopholes enable brokers to use secondary market paper as collateral and through private exchange take property through predatory, egregious deceptive acts, e.g. Lender’s insurance contracts consumer purchase held in name of broker as collateral and during pre-foreclosure aka the period of imminient foreclosure the Assignment of Mortgage Insurance “AOMI” Attorney-in-Fact takes control of estate for broker no one the wiser and the robo firm following what appears to be deed-lieu to servicer process insurance claims through exchanges both 1035 and 1031 since 1989 appears harmful to consumer and economy third element of our national security

    the exchange of existing policies for new ones purchased from different companies without tax consequences, is called a Section 1035 Exchange

    IRS 1031 delayed and like-kind and IRS 1035 insurance contract, annuitiy, endowment Reciprocal exchange no cash? no 1099-MISC?

    Nonqualified plans.Report any reportable distributions from commercial annuities. Report distributions to employee plan participants from section 409A nonqualified deferred compensation plans including nongovernmental section 457(b) plans on Form W-2, not on Form 1099-R; for nonemployees, these payments are generally reportable on Form 1099-MISC. Also, generally report distributions to beneficiaries of deceased plan participants on Form 1099-MISC. However, distributions to beneficiaries of deceased participants from nongovernmental section 457(b) plans are reported on Form 1099-R.

    File Form 1099-R, Distributions From Pensions, Annuities, Retirement or Profit-Sharing Plans, IRAs, Insurance Contracts, etc., for each person to whom you have made a designated distribution or are treated as having made a distribution of $10 or more from profit-sharing or retirement plans, any individual retirement arrangements (IRAs), annuities, pensions, insurance contracts, survivor income benefit plans, permanent and total disability payments under life insurance contracts, charitable gift annuities, etc

    IMMEDIATEAnnuitites.com Info on 1035 Exchange:

    Reasons for Using a 1035 Exchange:

    To avoid current income taxation on the gain in the “old” contract.

    Generally, the surrender of an existing insurance contract is a taxable event since the contract owner must recognize any gain on the “old” contract as current income. However, under IRC Section 1035 when one insurance, endowment, or annuity contract is exchanged for another, the transfer will be nontaxable, provided certain requirements are met. The IRS has indicated through Private Letter Rulings that it will apply a strict interpretation to the rules. For a transaction to qualify as a 1035 Exchange, the “old” contract must actually be exchanged for a “new” contract. It is not sufficient for the policyholder to receive a check and apply the proceeds to the purchase of a new contract. The exchange must take place between the two insurance companies.

    To preserve the adjusted basis of the “old” policy.

    Preserving the adjusted basis is preferable in situations in which the “old” contract currently has a “loss” because its adjusted basis is more than its current cash value. The adjusted basis is essentially the total gross premiums paid less any dividends or partial surrenders received. This basis carryover is important when the owner has a high cost basis in the “old” contract. For example, Jane Smith has a Whole Life policy she purchased 15 years ago. She paid $1,000 annual premium for the last 15 years and has received $5,000 in policy dividends. The policy currently has $6,000 in cash value. Jane’s cost basis is $10,000 (15 x $1,000 less $5,000 dividends.) If Jane did not exchange the “old” policy for the “new” one, but rather surrendered it and purchased the “new” policy with the $6,000 surrender value, she would only have a $6,000 basis in the “new” policy. If, however, she exchanges the “old” policy, she will preserve the $10,000 cost basis.

    link —–>

    http://www.immediateannuities.com/1035-annuity-exchanges/

  55. Yes and explain why – the judges are attorneys who are required to collect debt on behalf of United States per the Federal Debt Collection Procedure – a document not covered in law school apparently. The documents as recorded in the public domain are securitized instruments used by the investors as secondary market paper traded in private exchanges. The auditing done here is for investor not consumer. Consumer’s still have no idea that they are the investor responsible for paying back the principal and interest of insurance contracts placed in the name of the broker. Did you ever notice that the documents in the public domain list first the Lender who per HUD may be a broker who does not have to reveal how paid outside of closing!!!! People like attorney Neil Garfield are investors and look out for investor and had no idea what is done to consumer as reasonable person who is utilized by broker’s as money laundering mules and when cash from pension trust fund passes through depository of national bank the issue is not under oversight of SEC.

  56. To mike,

    i fought this bank for three years and finally through the help of FDIC, I received a recorded reconvenyance from Chase and received tmy deed and promissory note stamped paid in full. this was last year. Wa Mu held a second lien on my property. try to write the FDIC, the one actually foreclosing are debt collectors and foreclosure mills attorneys who has no knowledge of who is the actual beneficiaries of the loan. the foreclosure mills attorneys relied on a fabricated documents provided with them by third party vendors or affiliated company by the loan servicer. good luck.

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: