SEC Waking Up: Madoff Conspirators Face Charges — Now About Those Mortgage Bonds

If you are seeking legal representation or other services call our South Florida customer service number at 954-495-9867 and for the West coast the number remains 520-405-1688. In Northern Florida and the Panhandle call 850-765-1236. Customer service for the livinglies store with workbooks, services and analysis remains the same at 520-405-1688. The people who answer the phone are NOT attorneys and NOT permitted to provide any legal advice, but they can guide you toward some of our products and services. Get advice from attorneys licensed in the jurisdiction in which your property is located. We do provide litigation support — but only for licensed attorneys.

 

See LivingLies Store: Reports and Analysis

 

After a long slumber of non-regulation and failure to bring charges for securities fraud the SEC is finally getting into the “game” — the culture of fraud on Wall Street. When the Madoff story broke it was inconceivably large. $60 Billion generated through a PONZI scheme — selling securities or taking money under a prospectus that promised that the flow of money would be invested for the benefit of the investors. The hallmark of such schemes is that they eventually fail when people stop buying the securities or depositing money. At that point the money deposited with the fraudster eventually fails to provide the funds necessary to keep paying investors the return they were promised and fails to cash out investors who want their money back. It fails because the scheme was either not to invest the money at all or to seek cover under investments that clearly were never going to be in compliance with the prospectus or any other standard of investment.

 

So now we ask again, what about the MBS players? Mortgage-backed securities dwarfed the Madoff scheme. $13 trillion-$20 trillion or more was taken from investors under a prospectus that promised funding of mortgages of the highest quality. Like Madoff, the investment bankers took what they wanted before they used the money to pay back investors or fund mortgages. And when they did fund mortgages they intentionally inserted false entities as lenders — entities with no relationship to the investors. The effect was a conversion of the intended investment into an unsecured loan to either the investment bank or the borrower and no claim to bring against the borrower,directly or indirectly. The secured interest was destroyed and then claimed by the Banks. The claim for repayment was also converted to the benefit of the Banks, who then “traded” in their proprietary account in which the gains were kept by the Bank and the losses were tossed over the fence to the investors under a pooling and servicing agreement that was ignored except for laying off the losses on the investors.

 

When investors stopped buying MBS the scheme promptly collapsed. Investment banks still continued to advance money to investors directly or indirectly through the subservicers. They did this for the same reason any PONZI operator pays his “investors” (victims) — to keep them buying into the investment pool and to create the illusion that nothing is wrong. At the same time the Banks were advancing money on alleged mortgage loans, they were declaring loans in default, foreclosing and claiming losses in their “ownership” of the mortgage bonds they had sold to pension funds. Eventually even the taxpayer became an unwitting and unwilling investor to save the world from the brink of economic collapse. It was believed the Banks were in trouble because they had recklessly lost money in risky trades. This was never true.

 

And now the massive deluge of Foreclosures continues the fraud. Just as the investors were not represented at the closing of alleged mortgage loans, they are not represented in Foreclosures. The banks are foreclosing in their own names — cutting off the investors completely when the bank takes title to the property at the foreclosure sale — and cutting off insurers, CDS counter parties, guarantors, and other co-venturers and co-obligors from seeking refunds or forcing the repurchase of the loans that were never subject to any form of underwriting standards of the industry.

 

The money they took off the top, the money they received from third parties who waived rights to collect from the borrower, was converted from a trade on behalf of their principals — the investors (victims) who thought that their money was being deposited with the investment bank to fund a REMIC trust. The investor money became the bank’s money. The investors’ ownership of loans, notes, mortgages, and bonds became the property ofthe banks and so it stays today, except for the settlements with investors who are suing and except for the long list of fines and penalties leveled on the banks for pennies on the dollar. The pending BOA Article 77 hearing in which the insurers are pointing to the incestuous relationship between the “trustees” of the REMIC trusts and the investment banks is starting to come back and haunt both the trustee, who knew there was no funded trust, and the bank that was merely Madoff by another name.

 

So the payments due to investors stopped or were cut back without credit for the money received by the investment banks as agents of the investors. Thus the account receivable of the investor is kept away from the courts because it would show vastly different balances than the balance claimed by the servicer’s and banks. The balance is much lower than what is represented in court. And it probably has been eliminated entirely when the net is cast over principals and agents’ receipt of funds. The Foreclosures are wrong. They simply continue the fraud and ratify by judges’ orders the theft of money, loans and what should have been notes payable to the investors or the REMIC trust that was never funded — and therefore could never have purchased the loans.
If the money was applied properly most of the investors would be covered by the money that still remains in the banks that they are claiming as their own capital. Applied properly in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, this would reduce the account receivable from the loans. It would also by definition reduce the corresponding account payable from the borrowers, making modification and settlement easy —but for the interference of the servicers and investment banks who are trying desperately to hold onto their ill-gotten gains.

58 Responses

  1. Elexquisitor
    Good job. Il get you a scotch

  2. “…although I couldn’t agree with you more about how this country has deteriorated into a non-recognizable image of its former self, don’t blame the downtrodden…”

    Thank you, E.Tolle.

  3. Make some popcorn before you finish reading this tale.

    At a summary judgment filed by banksters judge is presented with title insurance document issued on the date the notice of default was recorded stating both a bank NA, as beneficiary, and a GSE, as investor, hold beneficiary interest, but the gse’s interest is recorded with county. The ersatz ‘trustee’ claims to be agent of “the beneficiary”, and the bankster attorneys avoid naming the beneficiary directly in the pleadings. Many weeks after the NOD date the gse records an assignment to the bank NA, and SHEBAINNNG! a copy of the note appears.

    The trial court is conflicted and declares the bank NA was the beneficiary when the NOD was recorded in order to bless the obvious logic flaw of multiple beneficiaries claiming ownership of the same loan. The trial court then claims ‘no foul’ because the NOD was not a ‘title affecting document’ in its bid to return us to feudal times.
    Underlying these facts is a document showing the gse could not produce a copy of the note because it never received a note. Not even an image was transferred. This would be a possibility if a bailee document pointed to the actual note’s location, but the trial court set a ‘discovery facilitation’ trap for Plaintiff when motion to compel those documents was filed. No documents evidencing bailee ownership were produced and unopposed admissions the documents don’t exist were denied as a result. (OK, I’ll tell you. Contra Costa County in CA)

    So let’s go back to the trial court’s ruling that the bank NA was the beneficiary. Going forward in time, then, the recorded assignment from the GSE to the bank NA is void bacause the gse cannot transfer what it does not own, by the court’s own ruling. Going backward in time, the most recent assignment recorded was to the gse, decades ago. But by the court’s ruling, the gse did not own the note on the date of the NOD. This implies a missing assignment, which is fine in CA due to the recent Calvo decision that deed of trust notes aren’t “other encumbrancers” and don’t need to be recorded before foreclosing. So at what point did the servicer start sending payments to a different beneficiary, and why wasn’t THAT beneficiary listed in the title insurance document as the ‘investor’ or ‘beneficiary’? The fly in the ointment is that the attorneys for the GSE state the GSE held beneficiary interest and could grant it to the bank NA based on a 20-year old assignment when the loan went into a pool that wasn’t securitized according to the GSE attorney. (Bear in mind the source of the jury pool recently passed a $1B property tax bond to ‘refinance’ existing debt into a 40-year obligation.) As it was brought up in the pleading multiple times, would a prudent man think there was felony false filing there SOMEWHERE down the road? That, or PERJURY.

    So for a chuckle, let’s look at the assignment 20-years ago. The assignment had an attachment depicting the subject loan with a different number, as well as a number of other loans, each with differnt numbers. The note, if it is to be believed, has 2 endorsements from the original lender. One is a special endorsement to another lender, and CANCELLED is stamped across it. The remaining ‘blank’ endorsment is also from the original lender. No dates. So did the original lender double-sell the note, then go belly-up (taken over by FDIC and sold to WAMU, who interestingly enough, morphed into bank NA).

    Do you think a jury would have a problem with this yet? How do you think the CA Apellate court will rule? How do you think it should rule?

    And do you think the ruling on ‘non-title affecting’ for the NOD was appropriate? Either the Calvo decision was correct, and deed of trust loans don’t have to be recorded in order to be non-judicially foreclosed, or the CA legislature determined deed of trust loans were ‘other encumbrancers’ that could be conditionally title affecting, and so needed to be recorded before foreclosing. Title affecting is a test of proof of ownership and resulting effects. When a NOD is filed, the underlying loan is ‘dishonored’ under the UCC and notice is given as such. It states an intent to exercise the title affecting power of sale to the beneficiary. It also gives notice that anyone subsequently acquiring the property does so under a cloud of title with no right of defense of holder in due course. That’s why NODs can be rescinded – it removes the stain of dishonored obligation and seizure as a result.

    I wonder if they’ll let me drink scotch during the trial …

  4. That’s about it KC, huh? Sure as the sun, my copy is un notarized, note is not endorsed, ….. – they show up with them on there so you know…’must be real’…. Attorney is twisting trier of fact to his best interest and applying how he wants it…I sooo hope the Judge catches that one.

  5. Just Me, Un notarized mortgage? Oh Boy! Think unenforceable and unsecured. Google your state law on this .. Ours is notarized without my squibbles on it …. Unenforceable! VOID!

  6. Deborah, all your questions are answered in a must read (but highly infuriating) expose from derivatives maven Janet Tavakoli, entitled Why POTUS Allowed Bailouts Without Indictments:

    Two Senators state, “The administration made a bargain, and I’m not sure it was the right decision. The world was teetering on the edge of collapse. There was a crisis of confidence. There would have been unimaginable consequences.” For those of us not sucking on the teat of Wall Street, there have been unimaginable consequences. Rat-bastards.

    Exactly who would those unimaginable consequences most seriously affect? While I have no doubt that there would be (will be shortly) tremendous suffering from a global financial collapse, they, TPTB, were centered on saving the world as they know it, and it’s now painfully obvious that they cared not that we the people went on down in flames while they were propped up in their entirety. Even made a ton-o-bucks.

    This piece speaks volumes as to why and how O did what he did. In my understanding of the events, it’s not only misprision of felony, but high treason on the part of congress and Obama. IMO, they should all be impeached, and then tried for crimes against U.S. citizens.

    I wish the Onion piece was true, and that we came together and decided to send them all to Syria. Let them rot.

  7. what do you do with an un notarized mortgage made to an originator who no longer exists?

  8. How will that affect my HELOC ? can I win a lawsuit ?
    Now is the first time CHASE is wrong !

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/19/jpmorgan-admits-wrongdoing-london-whale_n_3953915.html

  9. Its true like trespass a d ET have stated we are shifting i am shifting
    People i net work with are shifting
    A CPA shared something with me and he talked about TARP from a CFO perspective managing 100 m company
    And the ins and outs and libor rates overnight lending at very low interest rates this n that how banks lend other banks and why TARP was necessary to prevent complete and rapid collapse of Banking empire,
    But why is what we discuss. And why did they HAVE to take our homes the gov bailing banking and not its people who were put on the hook for the banks crooked management- and all i ever heard Diamon say was ” we were stupid” if the gullotine returns ET- then yes they were stupid. did they even share the burden of helping this country i have that word ” shared loss agreement” in mind , why is it ok for the banks to be bailed and not those who suffered as a consequence a direct consequence -one answer GREED- second – corruption. The only place we have is tbe court room i know thats an unlevel playing feild but its the only place i can go- under the Law.

  10. I thought you would find this checklist of interest. I found it on the Net:

    US Federal Bankruptcy Fraud Checklist. Bankruptcy fraud carries a sentence of up to five years in prison, or a fine of up to $250,000, or both. See 18 U.S.C. § 152.

    1. Concealment of assets.
    2. Serial bankruptcy cases.
    3. Failure to keep usual business records.
    4. Incomplete or missing books and records.
    5. Conduct well outside ordinary business or industry standards and practices.
    6. Unusual depletion of assets shortly before the bankruptcy filing.
    7. Recent departure of debtor’s officers, directors or general partners.
    8. Unanswered questions or incomplete information on debtor’s schedules and statement of financial affairs.
    9. Frequent amendments to schedules, statements of financial affairs and monthly operating reports.
    10. Inconsistencies among recent financial statements, tax returns and debtor’s schedules and statements of financial affairs.
    11. Absence of knowledgeable officers to testify at the Section 345 meeting.
    12. Inability to contact principals of debtor at debtor’s stated location
    14. Frequent dealings in cash rather than recorded transactions
    15. Sudden depletion of inventory post-petition without plausible explanation.
    16. Inflated salaries, payments of bonuses or cash withdrawals by officers, directors, shareholders or other insiders.
    17. Transfer of property to insiders, shareholders and relatives shortly before bankruptcy
    18. Payoff of loans to directors, officers, shareholders, relatives or other insiders shortly before filing.
    19. Transactions with non-debtor subsidiaries, parent companies or affiliated corporations owned by the same or related persons or entity.
    20. A history of prior litigation or post-petition litigation involving breech of contracts, fraud misrepresentations, etc.
    21. Complicated corporate structures and relationships.
    22. Creditor confusion concerning corporate structure.
    23. Fire, theft or loss prior to or after filing.
    24. Failure to pay withholding and sales tax.
    25. Startup of a similar business near the time of bankruptcy filing.

  11. What EXACTLY is proof of material issue I want here> I mean exactly. They have a note with these endorsements, but no one who made them those endorsements or was even remotely here to witness them. And I have my note, brand spankin out of closing with nothing but my signature, and it was made out to the originator, who went bk, I mean – that is material fact, yeah? yeah..

  12. Christine said, “It’s been 7 years. No organization of anything. And the culprits are still in power.”

    While that may be true, the sands are shifting, and I don’t mean as in Neil’s headline about the SEC coming around. TBTB love to make it look like they’re getting it when they throw us something, when in reality it’s just more grizzle.

    But what I can tell you has been a sea change from my perception….the comments after any and every article concerning the banks have shifted mightily. Several years ago, these comments were 99 to 01 blaming borrowers acting as ATM’s, and slamming poor lil’ Barney Frank and FM/FM for causing the “mortgage crisis”. Deadbeat syndrome.

    These days, no matter the publication, the comments are 99 to 1 in favor of public lynching’s. I even read a reference to bringing back guillotines the other day. It did my heart proud.

    At some point, the shit will finally hit the fan so bad as to make even the least likely folks revolt, when it becomes way too in everyone’s faces that there are two sets of rules, and two separate sets of law, those that let them escape penalty, and those that tax us, cheat us, or send us to jail.

    A friend of mine applied for food stamps recently. She told me how they attempted to scare her with statements proclaiming that anything false on the application could/would result in a $250K fine, and up to 20 years in the pokey. That’s hilarious. She’s simply trying to feed her family through no fault of their own, and the head hauncho whose bank, JPMC, is actually behind the EBT cards, goes free with multiple Sarbox infractions. Unbelievable! Only in the once good ol’ USA!

  13. Louise, I had done that exactly. E. Tolle- That I will do,thank you. Maybe I should just go with the note is non negotiable.😛
    In their brief, they actually typo’ed my servicer for BANA, same as in this case. He must have been reading it as well and trying to pick the weak links out

  14. @justme, sorry, I forgot to mention that it’s BofA v. George Minkov, located here:

    http://www.wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=100486

  15. Deborah wynn

    True, there are things we have to do.
    I used to start my comments off as
    I know nothing and if I think I know something I know nothing, I do not give legal advice because I don’t know legal things.

    But I have talked to people and work and in the world and said things like, if you don’t know. You don’t know that you don’t know.

    Especially at work when I need to know something and I ask someone and they answer but it’s not enough of what I need to know. I know I don’t know it so I ask the question another way and they answer, that but I still have this incomplete feeling knowing I don’t know what I need to know.

    Then one day I see them do it to someone else and I askl them, ‘why don’t you add this information to that answer too, so they’ll know this much about that?”, but the response is, ‘they didn’t ask the right question, or they didn’t ask the question the right way.’

    Those people are the judges of the world whether they sit on a bench or not, and we live among them.

    So I hear you, and there are many times where I admit I won’t know ‘the’ truth, only a truth based on today and prior experiences. In a few minutes I could experience something that would change my entire perspective and give a different truth, thus happily placing me back in the I know nothing category

    smiles.

    Trespass Unwanted.

  16. Not legal advice, but make a statement about how whoever is filing the affidavit and whether they actually saw you sign the note in their presence.

  17. @justme, it sounds like you need to read the case that usedkarguy posted on a few days ago, it’s right up your alley. It’s Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Appeal No. 2012AP2643. It goes to the heart of what you were just writing about, when it says:

    This case arises out of a foreclosure action initiated by Bank of America, N.A. against George Minkov. The circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of Bank of America. Minkov appeals, arguing that Bank of America’s submissions in support of summary judgment did not establish a prima facie case for summary judgment. We agree and conclude that (1) the uncertified copy of the promissory note attached to the foreclosure complaint was insufficient to establish a prima facie case that Bank of America possessed the original note, and (2) the affidavit of Bank of America employee
    Eileen Thiry did not demonstrate the personal knowledge necessary to render
    admissible documents attached to her affidavit under the hearsay exception for
    records of regularly conducted activity. Accordingly, we reverse and remand the
    case for further proceedings.

  18. I get your post now.  Rigged courts.  We need to occupy the courthouses.   Neva Burmese8@yahoo.com 864-241-8602

    LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This E-mail is protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§2510-2521 and is confidential and may be legally privileged. Any unauthorized or improper disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this E-mail and attached document(s) is prohibited.  The proprietor of this E-mail does not engage in the practice of law.  Any and all information contained therein is not to be used or misconstrued as legal advice. This E-mail transmission, including any documents accompanying it, may contain confidential information belonging to the sender which may be protected by privilege. The information is intended only for use by the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.  In addition, nothing in this communication is to be construed as legal advice.  If you have received this transmission in error, please contact the proprietor..    

    >________________________________ > From: Livinglies’s Weblog >To: burmese8@yahoo.com >Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 11:47 AM >Subject: [New comment] SEC Waking Up: Madoff Conspirators Face Charges — Now About Those Mortgage Bonds > > > > WordPress.com >Deborah Wynn commented: “look at reversing the Ashcroft iqubal twombly on them. ? Possible” >

  19. TRESPASS
    That is pretty monumental statement
    And i agree but in the meantime wegotta eat to move towards our will/ in the conscioudness of good, god and what is right. As for seeing with different eyes the more i see – the less i know. But im of the curious kind. Onward.

  20. Ok I am reaching out for some help here, (not, not legal advise dah dah dah, I want your GOOD lay opinions and thoughts)
    Going into MSJ (again) NEED THEM THOUGHTS PEOPLE
    Is the mortgage note self-authenticating??

    The plaintiff submitted ONLY a note & mortgage that were made payable to the originator – NOT the servicer for SJ—so they bring a note & mtg to foreclose on me and it’s not even in their name. They have an affidavit from servicer lady saying she has personal knowledge etc.
    SHE DOES NOT. The originator is long gone, NO ONE in this case but us the defendants, has personal knowledge of the Mortgage or Note!

    __ AUTHENTICATION __
    Does a note have to be authenticated to be admissible as evidence at trial?
    . WISCONSIN STAT. § 802.08(3) states that affidavits submitted in support of a motion for summary judgment must be “made on personal knowledge and shall set forth such evidentiary facts as would be admissible in evidence.”
    – servicer lady has no personal knowledge.period, her affidavit is moot

    I pleaded it is not admissible, there is no personal knowledge. the certified copy of the promissory note the plaintiff filed for MSJ is insufficient to establish a prima facie case to foreclose on me and I just found this :
    http://www.wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=100486
    going to read round more…
    THIS is roughly what plaintiff has just filed for their supp. brief for MSJ :
    -The note & mtg are not hearsay and admissible;
    ………….’they are not offering the documents for their truth, but rather for their legal effect’………
    They rely on holding and possession.
    -the note & it’s signatures are self self authenticating: backing that:
    WI stat 908.01 – hearsay – note is not hearsay when used for legal effect, and 909.02 – Self-authentication. Extrinsic evidence of authenticity as a condition precedent to admissibility is not required with respect to any of the following:(9) Commercial paper and related documents. Commercial paper, signatures thereon, and documents relating thereto to the extent provided by chs. 401 to 411.

    so……..I just threw this up and I know it’s not much,,, I figure what – no admissible note, no debt – no trial even – they can’t use that note they do not really have much. I have OODLES beyond just this note thing, but would enjoy any thoughts here…..
    a notes truth v. a note’s legal effect, never heard that one before, but 2 cases were cited so it’s there.

  21. Sorry.  I do not understand.   Neva Burmese8@yahoo.com 864-241-8602

    LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This E-mail is protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§2510-2521 and is confidential and may be legally privileged. Any unauthorized or improper disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this E-mail and attached document(s) is prohibited.  The proprietor of this E-mail does not engage in the practice of law.  Any and all information contained therein is not to be used or misconstrued as legal advice. This E-mail transmission, including any documents accompanying it, may contain confidential information belonging to the sender which may be protected by privilege. The information is intended only for use by the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.  In addition, nothing in this communication is to be construed as legal advice.  If you have received this transmission in error, please contact the proprietor..    

    >________________________________ > From: Livinglies’s Weblog >To: burmese8@yahoo.com >Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 11:47 AM >Subject: [New comment] SEC Waking Up: Madoff Conspirators Face Charges — Now About Those Mortgage Bonds > > > > WordPress.com >Deborah Wynn commented: “look at reversing the Ashcroft iqubal twombly on them. ? Possible” >

  22. “Instead, let’s organize.” It’s been 7 years. No organization of anything. And the culprits are still in power.

    An American talking to Americans…

  23. my opinion is you can never state a claim for which relief can be granted financially. No money changed hands and what is called as a debt is created out of thin air. I mentioned the Money as Debt video.

    We run to them to solve a problem they can’t solve.

    Think about this. If you make them pay you a settlement. They will pay the (make it up) $98 million dollars. The victor will cash the check, the bank created the money out of thin air based on the order to pay the judgment, a signed order by a judge, it takes a signature to create money.

    The victor deposits the money. The bank receiving the deposit will save back 10% and monetize the rest. They will make loans, or home equity contracts, or finance cars on that money that was deposited.

    Each new recipient will take it and spend it at their bank, thus the save back 10% and monetize the rest.

    That is not starving the system that caused the harm.
    Every situation has two sides and most of us focus on one side of the situation because we can’t see the other.

    We aren’t shown it, we don’t know people who know it, we don’t know people who see it, so we do what others suggest or help us decide to do.

    Sometimes doing nothing is more powerful than doing what the situation was designed to get us to do.

    I don’t have any answers. I have eyes to see, but even if I had ‘the’ remedy, it would be a trespass to put it out there, when so many people still ‘belong’ to the system that controls them and oppresses them.

    We still have people getting their rights from a piece of paper signed by dead men. Dead men signing papers are usually signing a will. We have people enforcing laws written by dead men. If the men are dead why are we enforcing their will on the people who are living? We still have people making us use notes created by dead men as currency to handle our transactions. Those men went to Jekyll Island and made those decisions, someone else implemented it and they are dead. If they are still alive after all this time, I was not alive when they did it, so how can it be enforced on me when I was not here to say ‘no’ when they did it? I’m living someone else’s will and I want my own living will.

    We have to start seeing with different eyes. The eyes of the heart tells more truth than the eyes of the mind. But most of us have gotten our heart broken so we close it off and don’t know how to access it for things. That’s why we are were we are. If we’d work on our self, and unlock what we can within, we can change what’s going on without.

    We are co-creating this. All the suing and counter suing and dying because we lost a suit, or committing suicide because we are going to lose a suit, or talking down to people for how they handled a suit, it’s all us.

    But by the grace of the Creator, we are allowed to go through this which ever way we want, thus the ‘trespass’ that cannot happen and the trespass unwanted when someone change a path we are on against our free will.

    We can do this, and we will. When it’s time. Our will be done and it won’t take a trespass for it to happen.

    That’s my opinion, in good conscience

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

  24. look at reversing the Ashcroft iqubal twombly on them. ? Possible

  25. so how do we help our children. think of the future.

    I have no credit card I have nothing but my hands and they hurt right now because of my age.i hope they hold up long enough to do something. my favorite saying is
    “the past is the past whats done is done” Old Irish mentor/tutor gave me that during my very early nursing years.

  26. Christine, I have no beef with anyone here, save for the banksters behind the scenes. And I would never consider anyone who went up against such a tilted, illegal-legal system as a loser no matter what….that’s just not possible when the table is so slanted as to roll all the chips in the criminal’s direction 100% of the time.

    Many here, myself included, have had our well constructed cases simply tossed without seeing any light of day whatsoever. The case that changed the landscape, in my non-legal opinion, was Ashcroft v. Iqbal, yes, that same Ashcroft, as in another totally corrupt AG, only this one being the highest in the land. Oh wait….we have a very similar situation as we speak, as Holder personally passes out ‘get out of jail free’ cards to his former and future employers on a daily basis. “You’re most welcome,” he says with a smile, tell your friends that I’ll be leaving public service [sic] soon, and would love to continue this line of work in a gilded office in an ivory tower. I just love privilege! Golf in the Hamptons? Yes please!”

    The story goes that just after 9/11, Javad Iqbal, a cable TeeVee installer in Hicksville, NY, was picked up for having the wrong skin color, and being Pakistani-American descent. Now, just post-9-11 we all knew that any and everyone not born and raised here, who happen to have brown skin and dark hair, and those who didn’t continuously attend a Christian church from birth were suspects, and more than likely guilty of terrorism. A similar concept recently reported by a Fox News anchor about atheists, “they don’t have to live here you know!”

    So Javad was tortured, starved, and denied medical attention for many moons. After he was released, he sued. The US Supremes, in their constant search to be the perfect whores to their corporate masters ruled against Javad, stating, “Iqbal’s complaint failed to plead sufficient facts to state a claim.” And thus, the heaven’s parted and judges everywhere suddenly were handed a kick the shit out of Occupy hippies free cards (and anyone else that they so desire to whoop-ass on). It doesn’t matter that a half dozen FBI agents whooped his ass, “….you didn’t quite get your facts aligned to impress us.”

    This, now combined with Twombly, which you know says (in effect), “It doesn’t matter what the individual before the court claims, his/her complaint is conclusory and not entitled to be assumed as true.” Added to, “….only a complaint that states a plausible claim for relief survives a motion to dismiss,” which now converts to a “context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and common sense”. So in effect, no jury is necessary, for these wizened black robes are on it, don’t you worry. Forget that the seventh amendment to the US Constitution says, “…in suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law”. No longer any need, the judges will decide everyone’s fate.

    How does this affect us all? Myriad ways. Here’s MN’s Bill Butler, Esq on the topic:

    The Federal Judicial Center, a government entity, in March of 2011, performed an analysis of federal court behavior before and after a case called Ashcroft v. Iqbal. The report analyzes how Iqbal has affected federal judges’ employment of a powerful docket-clearing federal procedural rule, Rule 12(b)(6), both before and after the Iqbal decision.

    At page 14 of the report, the FJC found that before Iqbal, in 2006, federal courts dismissed an already very high 47 percent of all “financial instrument” (e.g., promissory note) claims. But after Iqbal, and after the October 2008 bailouts that operated as a back-door satisfaction of $16 trillion of consumer “financial instruments,” the federal courts have dismissed an astonishing 91.2 percent of all financial instruments claims.

    The only real significance of the Iqbal case is that Supreme Court held that an accused terrorist will have a very tough time asserting a claim against Ivory Tower Washington D.C. bureaucrats for the brutal and unlawful actions of their remote minions where the accused terrorist brings an action in federal court asserting violations of federal Constitutional law. Nothing about “financial instruments” or “notes” or “show me the note” in Iqbal.

    In sum, since the Supreme Court decided Iqbal, federal courts have dismissed financial instrument claims at a rate of 92 percent. So for every 100 financial instrument claims (e.g. promissory note and credit card), most brought by professional lawyers after investing significant time and capital in researching the merits of their claims, federal courts deny 92 of these plaintiffs the right to even get to first base in their lawsuit. The judges employ Rule 12(b)(6), Iqbal and simply state that the plaintiff’s complaint “does not state a claim upon which relief may be granted.”

    So, in my mind, there’s no possibility that any citizen can get a fair shake in court with odds such as these, which then leads to the inescapable conclusion that it’s all fixed, and that there’s simply no possibility of anyone being labeled a “loser” in this system. For the time being, we’re all simply bricks in their wall. They have their way with us on their whims. We, by the millions, are being treated just like poor Javad Iqbal, tossed to the curb just like garbage, because they can. It’s the law of the land. We exist because they allow us to.

    But that will change, and soon I believe, as all schemes such as these eventually fail, like Neil said about Ponzi devices, they always run out of steam for locomotion. It’s my belief that any and all who have lost their homes, as well as those now in the pipeline, will eventually have recompense from these illegal actions. I don’t consider myself at all Pollyannaish about this attitude, as I don’t for a minute believe that the plutocrats will get religion, or even that they will suddenly determine that they’re killing the hosts that they derive their ill-gotten gains from. No. They will cough up their power when faced with millions of people who have finally seen the light, and understand that our republic has been captured from within. Overthrown. The terrorists that we all need to be concerned with aren’t brown-skinned Pakistanis or Muslims, they’re the Ascrofts and Rumsfelds and Obamas and Rubins et al.

    I’ve quoted Pogo here numerous times, “We have met the enemy… and he is us.” The only thing is, we’re going to have to setup Nuremburg styled tribunals to deal with the usurpation of our country, to determine who exactly was/is the enemy within. There will be plenty of them. The FEMA camps will prove to be real handy developments after all, albeit not exactly as they intended them.

    Christine, although I couldn’t agree with you more about how this country has deteriorated into a non-recognizable image of its former self, don’t blame the downtrodden. Instead, let’s organize. Only when we bring this boil to a head can we recover our former greatness. But now’s the time to kick some ass. For Frodo!

  27. From one who cares nothing about people dying, trying to preach to One who made a statement of opinion.

    In the real world, and we do live in the real world, opinions are allowed as much as free speech is.

    It offended you somehow.
    It touched you in some way.
    Why did it offend you for me to mention who was the ‘hand’ behind the one who commmitted suicide.

    Your may be lost, and it may be intentional, or maybe you could be some sort of ‘artificial’ intelligence in the form of a computer program that has issue with trespassing.

    I have no beef with you and attack as you might, I still cannot drop that low in vibration to meet you on your level.

    You’ll either raise vibration or stay stuck where you are.

    When you were ‘supposedly’ away, I saw you still here.
    It’s interesting how you ‘needed’ someone to comment to you to bring you back online with the same intensity for when you ‘supposedly’ left.

    I see you, no matter what name you go by.
    Christine is just as anonymous as the other names you use.
    Convenient to keep some of them in your pocket until they are really needed then as some obscure user you’ll surface again because you’ve posted as ‘that one’ before on this blog and people won’t realize how you’ve set yourself up to be here a while under many names.

    Enjoy your work day and my opinion is allowed. It was not given by you, I got it from the Creator. I got it so I could use my conscience to express thoughts and ideas and there are certain forms of control that would limit free thinking and ideas if it could continue to control the mind.

    My mind is mine. My soul is mine. My opinion is mine.
    The home, it was stolen by someone who took control, so it was not mine.

    See the difference? I know what is mine and I don’t have to fight to keep it.

    Laughing out loud as I enjoy you take your journey trying to look forward but you keep looking back at me.

    Wonder why? (No matter what name you post under, I will always see you). Others thought you left. I saw you.

    Could it be the comment?
    I saw what was not seen and see what is seen now.

    It’s all opinions anyway. You post them in the judgments. Pushing modifications and remedy through courts.

    The cases that haven’t gone through court for their final answer are the clouded titles. You haven’t gone that route have you.
    I have another opinion made in good conscience.
    Court decisions are being used clean up the mess made, they want everyone to use their court system, pay them to re-(present) the matter and let the court system to clean up their mess by making decisions that are final and let them keep the home and file documents that clear the title for the next one who will purchase it.

    If the real party is not in the court room, if the evidence is fraud, if the testimony is lies, if the people suing have no standing to sue, if there is no contract, obligation, nor agreement between the people in the court room; the case should not continue but it does.

    Keep posting the judgments you want to ‘persuade’ the readers to ‘think’ a certain way.

    I don’t care because I don’t interfere with you as you work.
    ‘Just doing your job, eh?’

    What’s mine is mine; not yours, in case you didn’t know that.
    That means you can’t have it, you can’t steal it, and I’m not giving it to you.

    Love as you go on your journey

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

  28. @ JUSTME ,

    Securitization has been around for a long time and is a natural outgrowth of always needing the “BBD” (bigger better deal) and the neverending quest for MORE LEVERAGE … it allows banks that aren’t content charging 18% interest on fictional money created at a 9:1 ratio to their real asetts (for a return of almost 200%) on their credit card operations… to create mortgages at INFINITY% as they were constantly taking them off the liability side and selling them off as a “product” … too bad they weren’t happy with 50% of INFINITY which they could have had with REAL UNDERWRITING and DISCLOSURE of the real parties. Now they’re screwed but they found a sucker to feed them while they devour the entire GDP of the planet,, me and you.

    Time to hunker down ,, Bernanke’s FOMC “QE UNLIMITED” disclosure means just one thing … buy up all the medicines and food you can because the banksters and wall street are gonna party til they puke …

  29. E. ToLLe,

    So there you have it.

    A loser who failed to take action and is now lecturing with nothing, other than “in my opinion” giving her philosophical, sitting down opinion about… what again, suicide?

    They pay their taxes. They bank with B of A, Citi and Chase and they will keep doing so for as long as it is convenient. Know why? They like it that way. It’s comfortable.

    This country isn’t falling because they took the wrong action (that can always be corrected). It’s falling because… humans are like fish: they rot from the head down. When everything and everyone is rotten, who’s to complain of the smell?

    This country has one chance left to come out on top. One. Not two. One, just one: release the free energy it’s had since 1947, get out of the warmongering mentality and become a pioneer of cleaning up the earth and changing the course of human history.

    It fritters it away every single day a little more. Sitting on its butt. Throwing around “in my opinion”.

    And congratulations. You still know how how to rile what can still be. Wrong forum. Nothing to rile here.

  30. A suicide is caused by the actions of who?

    My opinion,
    Someone can suffer charge for creating the trespass that caused the emotional state that led to someone taking their own life with their own hand, but that’s going to be difficult to prove that ‘that’ action caused it.

    I remember (so no link) a conversation where someone gave me an example of a man jumping from a building and on his way down someone is able to stab him from one floor, another shot him from another floor, someone made him fall into some glass, he got hit by a bat and when he landed on the ground he was still alive. They told the story that a man walked by, say him laying there, spat on him and he died. Then the question was asked. Who killed him?

    Whatever the answer is, that’s how complex a suicide is.
    The actual action of a CEO banker who has a hold harmless agreement on file for his position in the corporation cannot be proven as the inaction/action that caused someone to take their own life by their on pre-mediation, pre-planning, and their own hand; even as the action of the last customer service rep who said they lost the homeowner’s mod docs, or the sheriff that delivered the lawsuit to steal or posted that writ of possession/unlawful detainer notice on the door.

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

  31. E. ToLLe,

    And since I started advocating it, 2 tax seasons have gone by. People filed and paid. And we’ve had 4 massacres and a near war not yet resolved: apparently, shouting matches are going on at the UN about Syria as we speak.

    Revolution ain’t happening here. And victory ain’t coming from here. People are way too busy sitting on their butts and splitting hairs… while denouncing anyone not in agreement with their antics and asking for John Wayne’s return.

    Oh, and that Cyrus what’s-her-name-kid is Oh! so much more relevant to humanity!

  32. And there’s this:

    “About 5,000 “extra” suicides occurred in 54 countries in 2009, after the Great Recession, researchers from universities in Hong Kong and England say.”

    How’s about homicide/suicide inducing criminal investigations?

    5,000 people dead so that Jamie Dimon can sip Champaign in the Hamptons? With Obama, his favorite president?

  33. E. ToLLe,

    “We need to all determine not to be pawns in their derivative games any longer. Cut them off. Starve them. They cannot do it without us. They are parasites and will whither away given time.”

    Well, it’s been my song for a long, sweet while. “Anything you stop feeding will starve and die”. No need to riot, no need to gun anything down. Just stop channeling money their way. And yet, people still bank at the same places and keep paying taxes. And splitting the MERS hair every which way they can find ad nauseam. And not resolving anything.

    Gandhi proved that rebellion by inertia works. Just stop everything, sit in the middle of the street and do… nothing else. Just stay there. Same with starving government and banks. No need to do anything. just stop the flow of money.

    I guess it still takes too much effort… or courage. Whichever applies.

  34. Doesn’t make sense. Bifurcated, clouded titles, no ownership, no assignment, endorsement in blank, not entered into trust, no proper authority to initiate any action, etc

    and postings of a judge ordering parties to ‘get a modification’.

    Modifications are a NEW contract. New, new, new.

    It creates a new DOT or mortgage and a new promissory note.

    Really.

    How is that an equitable remedy or even a common law remedy is an impossibility if the rule of law was in effect.

    How do I know it’s a new contract?

    Ask yourself.
    Do they want my signature?
    If the answer is yes, then it’s a contract.

    What do you sign? Applications for employment or apartment or agreements to purchase something via financing (car, boat, education, home), something on credit (shirt on sale but after paying interest on credit card you should have just bought it straight up), dinner at a restaurant or fast food place, alcoholic beverages using credit, tickets, fines, bonds if you’ve ever been in jail and wanted to ‘bail’ out.

    All contracts.
    People who jump bail end up with another trip to jail and a higher bond, why? Because the bailbondsman got stuck with the first bail that was jumped and no one wants to pay and get hit the second time, so a ‘new contract’ is signed but by this time the one sitting in jail really don’t have any money to pay to leave.

    It’s all contracts. So a judge ordered them to enter into a contract and it doesn’t even indicate if they had a contract to begin with. What kind of nonsense is that?

    We create our reality. We have no idea how we create our reality. And yes, we have to live with the decisions made and going to court and letting someone decide for you and their decision is ‘final’, is giving away your power.

    Homeowner should have walked away, but some will sell their soul to keep ‘that house’. Now what kind of modification do you really think that bank is going to offer that homeowner? The best one there is with a really good rate and a really low principal? Do you really think they are going to give the best offer they can when they have a guaranteed customer.

    Rhetorical question, don’t answer that.
    wikipedia
    A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question that is asked in order to make a point.[1] The question is used as a rhetorical device, posed for the sake of encouraging its listener to consider a message or viewpoint. Though these are technically questions, they do not always require a question mark. A rhetorical question does not usually require an immediate answer, but is meant to draw attention to and start a meaningful discussion on the matter.

    Love as we journey.
    I saw what was not seen and see what is seen now.

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

  35. It’s about “fixing cases” for campaign donors. it has to be meaningful…

    http://articles.philly.com/2013-09-16/news/42083447_1_fbi-agents-family-court-u-s-subpoenas-records

    U.S. subpoenas records of five Phila. judges

    By Craig R. McCoy, Mark Fazlollah, and Dylan Purcell, Inquirer Staff Writers
    Posted: September 16, 2013

    Federal prosecutors and FBI agents have subpoenaed financial information from five Philadelphia judges, sought campaign-donation records, and interviewed judges and political figures as part of a wide-ranging investigation over the last year, The Inquirer has learned.

    Court officials and lawyers said they were unsure of the investigation’s focus. Two people said the FBI questioned them about what they called possible “fixing cases.” A third said agents asked about “pay-to-play,” the long-standing practice of campaign donors getting favors from public officials.

    In an interview, Municipal Court Judge Joseph C. Waters Jr. said prosecutors subpoenaed his campaign-finance filings in August.

    “My understanding is there’s certainly an investigation,” William Brennan, Waters’ lawyer, said. “My understanding further is that agents have spoken to a number of [Philadelphia court] employees, including judges and administrators. The focus, frankly, is unclear to me at this point.”

    Waters, a Democrat elected to the bench in 2009, said the subpoena sought his campaign-finance data going back to 2006, when he began campaigning for a judgeship. He, too, said he did not know where the FBI was headed, but “it’s very unsettling.”

    Earlier this year, people familiar with the investigation say, prosecutors subpoenaed Waters’ annual financial disclosures, as well as those of Municipal Court Judges Joseph O’Neill, Dawn A. Segal, and Craig M. Washington, and Common Pleas Court Judge Angeles Roca. The disclosures require judges to list sources of outside income and gifts.

  36. Folks, what’s going on here isn’t magic, it’s alchemy pure and simple….only, unlike the fabled and much sought after alchemy of lore, this time the alchemistic formulas work just perfectly. They finally figured it out. Base gross materials such as teachers, plumbers, dentists, mechanics, along with their good credit and hard earned equity mixed in, were in effect turned into gold, silver, energy, and every other known commodity – globally, along with some Harry Potter-like spells conjured up in securitization to appease congress. Remicus Fixius! Mers Defendus! Done!

    And here’s the really magical question….how long will we all continue to be utterly astounded by the hocus – graft and pocus – thievery, especially the fact that there are no good guys rushing to right the situation? Oh wait, there was that mad dash to save us all by the 50 AGs….I remember well feeling all light-headed and dizzy as if the light at the end of the tunnel was finally shining brightly, thanks to those fearless top state law enforcement authorities. “We will put people in jail!” Iowa attorney general Tom Miller exclaimed, which proves what I’ve written here before, that he epitomizes that state’s true meaning – Idiots Outside Walking Around. Only in his case, walking around outside with handfuls-o-cash. The Great Sellout, by 50 traitors. Misprision? You betcha’! I say lock them all up this evening….why wait until tomorrow?

    Listen, the sooner we all get this the better….1) no one is riding in to save us….2) research Gallipoli (or Google those cute little cliff-dwelling lemmings) to see how this is going to end, 3) believing in another election year salvation will be everyone’s undoing, and 4) apply for food stamps now, or get creative with cardboard and old sock recipes, as it’s all downhill from here.

    A class action from three years ago states it quite well….three years ago you say? If they knew this back then, where are our fearless leaders now? Still foaming the runways after all this time? Where’s the IRS, as has been questioned on this very thread today? Where’s BHO? Why hast thou forsaken us….simply for keys to the club and extremely generous book and speech rates, asshole-in-chief?

    When reading some of the bullet points from this 150 page class action entitled, loosely, Foster v. everybody in banking, including MERS, keep in mind that this is way old. Three years old. I haven’t been able or too determined to try and find the results of this action. Probably settled, like everything else.

    Some quickly pasted points:

    Defendant Merscorp, Inc., is a foreign corporation created in or about1998 by conspirators from the largest banks in the United States in order to undermine and eventually eviscerate long-standing principles of real property law, such as the requirement that any person or entity who seeks to foreclose upon a parcel of real property: 1) be in possession of the original note, 2) Have a publicly recorded mortgage in the name of the party for whom the underlying debt is actually owed and who is the holder of the original Promissory Note with legally binding assignments, and 3) possess a written assignment giving he, she or it actual rights to the payments due from the borrower pursuant to both the mortgage and note.

    – MERS never had nor will it ever have standing to enforce the illegal and fraudulent mortgage it filed against the properties in question. MERS never had nor will it ever have the authority to assign the Mortgage to any entity.

    -MERS has never possessed a pecuniary or financial interest in the Notes of the Plaintiffs and the class members.

    – In the case where a foreclosure has been filed, the entity filing the foreclosure has no pecuniary in the mortgage loan. The foreclosing entity is a third party. The entity lacks standing, and most times, the capacity to foreclose. The entity has no first hand knowledge of the loan, no authority to testify or file affidavits as to the validity of the loan documents or the existence of the loan. The entity has no legal authority to draft mortgage assignments relating to the loan. The foreclosing entity and its agents regularly commit perjury in relation to their testimony.

    – The “lender,” on the original Promissory Note was not the lender. The originators of the loan immediately and simultaneously securitized the note. The beneficial interest in the note was never in the lender. MERS, acting as the mortgagee or mortgage assignee, was never intended to be the lender nor did it represent the true lender of the funds for the mortgage. The Servicer, like GMAC Mortgage, or some party has or is about to declare the default, is not in privity with the lender. The true owner or beneficiary of the mortgage loan has not declared a default and usually no longer have an interest in the note. The Servicer is not in privity nor does it have the permission of the beneficial owners of the Note to file suit on their behalf.

    – The obligations reflected by the note allegedly secured by the MERS mortgage have been satisfied in whole or in part because the investors who furnished the funding for these loans have been paid to the degree that extinguishment of the debts has occurred with the result that there exists no obligations on which to base any foreclosure on the property owned by the Class Plaintiffs. Defendants have and will cloud the title and illegally collect payments and attempt to foreclose upon the property of the Plaintiffs when they do not have lawful rights to foreclose, are not holders in due course of the notes.

    – Any mortgage loan with a Mortgage recorded in the name of MERS, isat most, an unsecured debt. The only parties entitled to collect on the unsecured debt would be the holders in due and beneficial owners of the original Promissory Note.

    – The loan agreements were predatory and the Defendants made false representations to the Class Plaintiffs which induced the Class Plaintiffs to enter into the loans and the Defendants knew the representations were false when they were made.

    That’s just the Hors d’oeuvre. There are many, many pages to follow. What’s the take-home from all of this? IT’S ALL OUT THERE! IT’S ALL ALREADY KNOWN! WE’RE BEING TREATED LIKE CANNON FODDER! WE ALL HAVE TO BE DISPENSED WITH, SO THAT THEY CAN GO ON WITH THEIR LIVES. HANK PAULSON SAID IT….THEIR WILL BE TANKS ON THE STREETS OTHERWISE! And as I’ve said on here for years….those tanks won’t be facing Wall Street or the beltway, they’ll be laser-sighted on us. Drones to boot.

    Sorry for shouting, but every once in a while, raised voices are necessary. Let’s all get this and move to the next stage…..deny them of their game pieces – us. We need to all determine not to be pawns in their derivative games any longer. Cut them off. Starve them. They cannot do it without us. They are parasites and will whither away given time.

    http://solari.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/38654717-class-action-vs-mortgage-electronic-registration-systems-gmac-deutsche-bank-nation-star-aurora-bac-citi-us-bank-lps-et-al.pdf

  37. The kids get it. And they get it with humor: this country was conned and they spell it out.

    Because Obama…

    http://deadlyclear.wordpress.com/2013/09/17/because-obama/

    I’m optimistic. John Wayne ain’t ever coming back though…

  38. Problem Solver: Mortgage switch leads to confusion, foreclosure order

    After GMAC sold Lisa Encarnacion’s mortgage to Green Tree Servicing, things went wrong
    September 17, 2013|Jon Yates | What’s Your Problem?

    Lisa Encarnacion’s mortgage was sold to Green Tree Servicing, which kept requesting proof of insurance and later ordered foreclosure proceedings.

    Lisa Encarnacion’s mortgage was sold to Green Tree Servicing, which kept requesting proof of insurance and later ordered foreclosure proceedings. (Michael R. Schmidt, Photo for the Chicago Tribune)

    In the almost two decades GMAC serviced Lisa Encarnacion’s mortgage, the Hoffman Estates resident never had a problem.

    Then her mortgage was sold to Green Tree Servicing in February. Things quickly began to unravel.

    Encarnacion said she sent Green Tree proof of her homeowners insurance and was told not to worry. Green Tree would put her insurance payments in escrow then directly pay her policy with American Family Insurance.

    In April, she received a letter from American Family saying Green Tree hadn’t paid. Encarnacion said she called Green Tree again and was told she had been given the wrong information — she should pay American Family directly for her homeowners insurance.

    Once again, she was asked for proof that her condominium was insured. Once again, her insurance agent faxed it to Green Tree, she said.

    In early July, Green Tree sent her a letter saying her mortgage was in default. The letter said Green Tree was going to initiate foreclosure procedures. Immediately, Encarnacion called Green Tree, she said.

    She was told that her last three mortgage payments were considered partial payments because Green Tree did not have proof that her townhouse was insured. Without proof of insurance, Green Tree began charging an additional $500 per month for a “force-placed policy,” an insurance policy set up through Green Tree to make sure the property was protected.

    Click on the link for the full story.
    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-09-17/business/ct-biz-0917-problem-encarnacion-20130917_1_insurance-agent-homeowners-insurance-proof

    7 years later, nothing has changed…

  39. http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2013/2013_51520.htm

    U.S. Bank N.A. v Thomas
    2013 NY Slip Op 51520(U)
    Decided on July 5, 2013
    Supreme Court, Kings County
    Schmidt, J.

    U.S. Bank National Association, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE STRUCTURED ASSET INVESTMENT LOAN TRUST, 2005-6, Plaintiff(s),

    against

    Lydia R. Thomas, et al., Defendant(s).

    Insofar as the lack of good faith of plaintiff’s servicer resulted in the accumulation of interest during the protracted period of settlement negotiations, the court finds that the cancellation of interest and late fees on the principal balance of the mortgage from August 9, 2009, as recommended by the referee, is the appropriate sanction. In fact, it has been expressed by defendant’s counsel during conferences with this court that such reduction of the indebtedness may result in a feasible modification under recent amendments to HAMP income requirements. Such a result would clearly serve the salutary purpose of CPLR 3408, which is to help defaulting mortgagors remain in their homes.

    Of course, there may be a time when the Appellate Division directly addresses the issue of whether cancellation of interest is an authorized and appropriate under CPLR 3408, or when the Legislature or Chief Administrator of the Courts chooses to specify appropriate sanctions or remedies, which may or may not include the cancellation of interest. If plaintiff so elects, this court will issue an order staying this action until such time as the issue is settled. Otherwise, defendant’s motion is granted to the extent that the report and recommendation of the referee is confirmed and that all interest and late fees on the underlying indebtedness are forfeited from August 6, 2009 until the date the parties agree to a modification.

    The foregoing constitutes the decision and order of the court.

    E N T E R,

  40. Who/what ‘started’ securitization? A brilliant mind(s) with the intention of actually freeing up money to better the housing market, or someone who knew it would bomb from the start, and indeed began the ponzi scheme? I lean back,zone out a bit, and think the little I know over and over, and wait for something to ‘click’ and think “Aahhhhhh, yes! That’s it!” …..Among all the hundreds of quirks and twists of this great scheme (if it was one, was it, really?) that are simple at the core but enveloped in these crackerjack mazes – there is no “Aaahhh” I can think of.
    I don’t buy it.
    We were bent over from the start and then decided on the bailout?
    Who did?.. Who decided we needed TARP, their interest was_____
    We are not reliant on the banks.
    The economy is not all that reliant on big banks….
    The defunct were going to be be paid,… all of a sudden, they all kinda went into debt and all these poor choices were made…..
    I don’t buy it.
    It was that just that easy to put our country into that much more debt- ( I was 19-20’ish then and was not all that keeping track) ?? That easy? We were on the verge as I recall anyways…Assloads of over whelming proof there is now, truckloads of documented proven fraud, whistleblowers = it’s all here, we have it = but it’s faintly just blowing in the wind compared to the gigantic pity it was when the banks went ass up. What did they have? Did they need anything? It does not add up. Like I have said, I’m newer to this game – but the years some of you have been here – do you not ask – no, wait, … I know you do….I don;lt think the question anymore is WHY. The question is WHAT.
    ” As you can see….all this investor money….all our money….it has vanished and we invested in the vanishing vanishments and now all the money has vanished”……..”please do not check out financials”….
    sincerely, Bail me out

    WHAT prompted this in the first place? Who takes the credit? Really…. this took almost a decade to catch onto and master what a PSA or MBS even was? Master of the Ponz`
    or on a whim all these other banks just decided to make bad decisions,too? Bad decisions, in the same areas, the same ways, commmmmmon…….I know I get “out there” but I don’t even think this was even a “money”as in dollar thing…maybe what we now see like the vid Christine posted on the American dollar going kaput – it’s a power control thing – like what was it, Poland selling all their retirements………Going too far,yeah- I’m AWARE, but how aware did we have to be to allow the bailout?? Food for thought, or another bad quote of the night, your choice. gotta ramble sometimes.

  41. http://www.foreclosurelaw.org/foreclosure_news.htm
    Has links to lots of foreclosure articles
    There is a good article titled

    Court decisions set up legal foreclosure showdown in Utah
    Homeowners » Decisions raise questions about which state laws govern in Utah.

    At issue was ReconTrust based in Texas using Texas law to foreclose on Utah homeowners, and winning some suits but having some dismissed (doesn’t say with or without prejudice)

    Couple of quotes from the article.
    The Utah justices were blunt in a decision involving homeowner Loraine Sundquist: “A national bank seeking to foreclose real property in Utah must comply with Utah law.”

    Under Utah law, a foreclosure can only take place legally if conducted by a Utah attorney or title company with operations in the state. The purpose of that statue passed by the Legislature was to provide a homeowner facing foreclosure with someone locally to communicate with.

    If this could have precedence in other states, then servicers like PNC acting as nominee and being located in a different city from the one they took action under could very well face the same violations.
    Explains why so many pretenders have stolen homes so easily if they were able to get judges to allow them to steal according to their own state’s laws while we run around and file answers, counter claims, or appeals based on our state’s laws and aren’t heard by the state Attorney Generals that know what really happened behind the scenes.

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

  42. wasn’t there reference to a suit in the last few days about the box being empty? I meant to hunt it down and forgot.

  43. Well, it looks like it is fraud through and through from first contact with the mortgage broker or bank all the way through to the trusts with nothing in them AND fraud through the IRS because trusts were supposed to be tax remote REMICs through IRS law. Wow, I would love to know who was paid off at the IRS and how much.

  44. One of the biggest issues are going to be the “fractional” selling of notes and or converting the notes value to bonds…fractional selling makes it next to impossible to find the owner and bond holders have no right to foreclosure…that is a revenue stream; hence, payments. The copies of notes surfacing are to “deceive” the courts and everyone in the lineage to THINK they do exist. The fraud is pervasive and everywhere.

    And originators do not loan anything, they borrow on your BEHALF(a third party contract)and N.A.’s cannot loan money, per their “legal” designation.

    At the end of the day anything with an N.A. designation is a servcer of your note…and in companies like New Century the lines of credit they, New Century-ORIGINATORS stole the borrowed money on your behalf, for their company solvency, they did not fund loans at a certain point; so, it would be “impossible for the property to have a proper lien…

    Now, if originators took money they borrowed on your behalf, never used it for its intended purpose, what do you owe and to whom? The contract has NEVER been tied to you and they used the money, you never received it!

    My $.02 here and this is 100% true, paperwork exists to follow every penny.

  45. Agreed I want a lawyer that will fight Anyone out there up to the challenge call me 916 716 2542

    Sent from my iPhone

  46. @ Isabel ,

    Why don’t they see that the MBS trusts are empty?

    Very simple , the investors want their money … they do not want to acknowledge the box is empty as that is a harder fight and will bankrupt the seller of the box before they get their money back and (if the gov’t decides) will result in them owing over 100% of the original value of the box in back taxes and penalties. A suit claiming ignorance and demanding a refund is the logical tack for them at this point.

  47. “Published on Sep 15, 2013

    Canadian billionaire businessman Ned Goodman predicts the end of the U.S. Dollar as the world’s reserve currency. He predicts the transition out of the U.S. Dollar will become, “…quite ugly.” He delivered the lecture at Cambridge House’s Toronto Resource Investment Conference 2013 on Thursday, September 12, 2013.

    Nothing new under the sun. “The first thing China and Russia did on the very first day the new Chinese president came to power was to sign an agreement whereby Russia will provide China will all the oil it needs. 36% of US discretionary spending is the for payment of its debts… In the 30s, everyone wanted to get US dollar. Nowadays, everybody is getting rid of it… I can tell you that, before it really happens, it is going to become very ugly… Investors are not reasonable people… The US cannot pay its debt… Unemployment is understated. it is near 15%… 75% of all news jobs are part-time, seasonal or government induced.” Etc., etc.

    The message is loud and clear. Anyone who denies the obvious is seriously deluding himself.

  48. Cancer is finally cured in Canada but Big Pharma has no interest. [Especially not the US. Big mistake… ]

    The fact that the international drug & medical industry have no interest is because the cure is really cheaper than a chocolate bar and it won’t get them to gain any profits at all. Besides, if people had the cure so easily, how will these medical companies make money out of that? — in Canada.

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=677_1354418535

    Cars running on water and/or compressed air. Big Oil doesn’t want to hear it. Oil-dependent countries with government-back research are pushing for it. Not the US. Big mistake… Live by the sword. Perish by the sword. It is, after all, called “American greed…”

    The world is moving on…

  49. Isabel – thumbs up on your research!

  50. Yep—they were never funded, they were never mortgages, and nothing was ever transferred to any trusts. After deregulation, the original notes were charged off—then collection rights ONLY to all the “false-default debt” were transferred over and over (with a little “cash out” here and there)…to “debt collectors”…who create all kinds of fake paperwork to cover up the Ponzi.

  51. A country with fucked up priorities…

    9/9/13 at 8:10 AM

    Final Tally: Americans Were 12 Times More Interested in Miley Cyrus Than Syria

    By Maureen O’Connor

    That Miley Cyrus captures more attention than escalating war in Syria is, by now, conventional wisdom. But an exhaustive survey of news sources now reveals exactly how much attention Miley steals: Americans viewed twelve times as many pages about Miley Cyrus as they did about Syria — even though the news sources published 2.4 Syria articles for every one about Miley.

  52. “The hallmark of such schemes is that they eventually fail when people stop buying the securities or depositing money.” Which is a moot point since the Feds will continue to waste our money with their insane voodoo economics and prevent the market from doing its thing… How was Krugman putting it again: “Capitalizing the gains and socializing the debts…”

    “Fed Sticks to Stimulus, Worried About Growth Soft Spots
    by Reuters Sep 18th 2013 2:08PM
    Updated Sep 18th 2013 2:48PM

    WASHINGTON — The U.S. Federal Reserve said Wednesday that it would continue buying bonds at an $85 billion monthly pace for now, expressing concerns that a sharp rise in borrowing costs in recent months could weigh on the economy.

    The decision surprised financial markets that were braced for a reduction in the central bank’s economic stimulus.

    Citing strains in the economy from tight fiscal policy and higher mortgage rates, the Fed decided against a tapering of asset purchases that investors had all but priced into stock and bond markets.”

  53. It’s obvious that both the people who bought the fake mortgage bonds and the homeowners are both claiming the “banks” mislead us. Not giving anyone advice just my own 2 cents…but if you could gain support of the “investors” you might be able to persuade a judge or servicer to enter a loan mod.

    I know many people will claim the MOD is bogus and the servicer doesn’t have authority to conduct a MOD etc…but AZ statute reads that if the deed is recorded and unchallenged for 10 years than it is valid.

    I’m in the process of sending letters to over 50 “lenders/attorneys” of my alleged trust. Could you imagine going to your attorney general, loan servicer, or judge with several letters stating that the bond holders want to modify, however the servicer keeps denying us.

  54. Excellent article!

  55. How is the fact that the MBS TRUSTS ARE EMPTY AND ALWAYS WERE EMPTY, escaping the notice of so many investors in their lawsuits in which they complain about the poor quality of the loans, the violations of underwriting standards, etc. when the most glaring and amazing fact is that NONE OF THE LOANS ARE EVEN IN THE TRUSTS???!!! Are they afraid to bring that up? Why? So far, I have only seen ONE case that said anything about this.

    I mean really– how can I complain about the quality and standards used to pack the box of oranges I bought, and not notice that the BOX IS EMPTY? If I was swindled out of my money, thinking I was getting a box of oranges, shouldn’t I mention the fact that the box is empty?

    My investigation of assignments of deeds of trust in my county showed that 100% had been assigned to mortgage backed securities (MBS) trusts years after the loan closings. This equates to YEARS AFTER THE TRUST CUT-OFF DATES for the MBS trusts they entered.

    Sure enough, every PSA I examined for the trusts referenced in the assignments I researched, showed closing and cut-off dates had long passed BEFORE the assignments appeared.

    My research showed that the events triggering assignments into the trust are: the beginning of foreclosure, real estate sale, or refinancing. The changing of ownership from the loan originators to the other players, then into the trusts, SHOULD have triggered the assignments shortly after origination, yet I have never found this.

    Since virtually all of the mortgage loans during the last decade or so were ostensibly securitized, assignments of those loans into the trusts should be highly visible in the recorder’s office records. Instead, I found that the triggering events concerning sale, refinancing, or foreclosure were the only times assignments appeared in the county recorder’s records.

    This can only mean that the mortgages that are supposedly in the trusts, that have not defaulted or been paid off by sale or refinance, DON’T EXIST in the TRUSTS. THE MBS TRUSTS HAVE NO MORTGAGE ASSETS. THEY ARE EMPTY.

    That the loan originators never loaned any money, makes the notes and security instruments for the supposed “mortgage assets” assigned at ANY date, bogus.

    Result: empty trusts, destined to stay that way. Investors should be outraged and crying out for BANKER JAIL TIME for the fraud.

    I saw tens of thousands of retirement fund dollars VANISH in weeks from my pension fund. Many years of payments into the fund disapeared. The wise folks managing the fund invested in Mortgage Backed Security Trusts!

    Now, my home is in danger. I could use that money now. The banks got me, and millions like me, coming and going!

    Add to this the TAX burden in order to bail out the thieves, and the fraud looks like a three mile financial high tsunami. Devastating.

  56. Not only are the mortgages a scam, the foreclosure mills are too. They are “posing” as debt collectors for a trust that does not exists, nor do the parties they claim to represent…the lenders are not in this action, so it is void!

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: