Payoffs in Refinancing or Sales: Wrong Party and No Return of Note

Brent Bertrim brought to my attention that I forgot to add in yesterday’s post that when the property is refinanced or sold, (even a short-sale), the wrong party is probably being paid or at least they are being overpaid. I have several cases in the pipeline now where the party executing the satisfaction of the prior mortgage has failed to even respond to requests for the canceled note. They probably don’t have it. So there are a number of us who are planning lawsuits to recover the net proceeds of the refinancing or sale proceeds because the wrong party was paid and they are not producing any evidence of passing on the proceeds to the real creditor even when they have admitted the loan was “securitized.”

Practice Hint on Foreclosure Defense: Ask for the instruction sheet prepared by LPS. This is a document that lays out all the possibilities including the fact that more than one party might be foreclosing on the same property. In one of my cases it was accidentally produced in a Wells Fargo case. I don’t think it is subject to privilege because it was prepared by a third party.

117 Responses

  1. US Bank and SN Servicing has submitted Forged documents in our federal bankruptcy case too and we will never stop perusing them in court for damages. We are also asking our Federal judge to prosecute their current attorney out of Jacksonville Florida who continued to defend this case knowing that forged document are before a federal court. All the offending parties at SN Servicing and their attorneys are committing a serious crime against our country. We have filed a formal complaint with the FBI and the US attorney general and many great Judges all across this nation are finally stopping them from this kind of fraud on American families. US Bank and SN servicing and their attorneys are also violating a serious consent order that was to protect the people from these crimes but they could care less. Please feel free to have your clients join a class action suit so that we can end their behavior with a multi billion dollar punitive damage suit. Join us, call Ray Shelton in Florida at 352 274 8467

  2. I sent a copy of the Glaski to James Smith. If he has your e-mail, he will be forwarding you copy. I will be calling the fifth district supreme court to get a certified copy… Will scan it and share it…

  3. I will see if I can find the opinion and complete transcript. The worst case we call the court and request a copy. It has been published and can be cited. Lenore Albert (attorney) has started to cited on Request for Judicial Notice. http://www.interactivecounsel.com/
    In your experience. Shoudl a 99.1 document be located in the SEC for all trusts? This is the pool of all the loans How about the FWP and tape? If this information is not available, is the trust dissolved? I tried finding mine and was not able too (RAMP 2005-RS9)

  4. Beth how would one get it certified?
    Glaski vs BofA … Glaski can challenge the late assignment and transfer of the loan into the trust.
    What happens when a trust gets dissolved? How do you know if the trust has been dissolved?

  5. Re the Glaski case – I’ve only seen the opinion not the complete transcript and evidence. If that is available I hope someone will post that info.

  6. Beth, Im so sorry I did not realize that was you. Can you send me the email again or I will google the co. I think I can find it. If I had known that was you then I would have paid more attention to it. Sorry

  7. Agente777, If I am not mistatken, I think they use it in the court documents in the Glaskin v Bank of America Case. Not sure what that document is called but it basically goes over arguements that were used during the trial.

  8. James we did email you from our business email account for PaCE

  9. @ Agente777 yes I’ve seen the document from US Bank. The problem is first you have to authenticate the document to use in Court and just because US Bank states the homeowner is a party doesn’t make it so. Certainly use the document if the judge will allow it in as evidence. I’d go for the case law that’s already out there wherein the Judges have allowed the homeowner to use the PSA. The attorney needs to use whatever is available in their arsenal to get the PSA in.

  10. Read last page.

    I saved it in my desktop…

  11. @Beth
    I found it. Here is the link directly from US Bank’s website.
    https://www.usbank.com/pdf/community/Role-of-Trustee-Sept2013.pdf

  12. @ Beth
    I thought US Bank has already said that borrowers are party to it.
    http://foreclosuredefensenationwide.com/?p=533

    I am trying to locate the brochure. I k now have seen it and thought I saved it.

  13. BETH, CAN YOU SEND ME AN EMAIL SO WE CAN TALK OR GIVE ME A CALL. I AM IN MARYLAND AND LOOKING TO TRY TO FIND SOMONE TO DO A SECURITIZATION AUDIT FOR A REASONABLE PRICE. ALSO WANT TO START LOOKING FOR AN ATTORNEY THAT GETS IT (I DONT THINK A LOT OF THEM IN THE AREA DO). MY EMAIL IS JSMITH5915@MSN.COM AND MY NUMBER IS 443-677-2799. JAMES SMITH

  14. @ Beth- re: “I testify in Md as an expert in securitization” Let me know cost, fees as I have that detinue complaint in Balto Co. Circuit for return of my note/ DOT from a purported “loan” that was “paid off” on 22 Dec 2006. They are screwed but could help to have detail of approx how much was made off the sale of the note when they determine the actual value they have to return in lieu of the note/DOT (my personal property)- email e.wetzelberger@gmail if available. thx todd

  15. Below is a really bad scan of my Deed of Trust From Citi Mortgage. Have a couple of questions that someone may be able to answer. 1. You can clearly see that MERS is the Assignor. Question I thought that was illegal. 2. You see a stamp on there that says Certified True Copy. Actually you cant see the stamp, on here but its on the document all by itself and nothing else. The notary on here is part of the original deed. Question shouldn’t this be notarized I requested a certified copy through a QWR? 3. Can someone tell me how to find out if this loan was securitized? As you can see some the stuff did not scan very well such as the signature.

    When Recorded Return To:
    CT LIEN SOLUTIONS
    PO BOX 29071
    GLENDALE, CA 91209-9071

    ASSIGNMENT OF DEED OF TRUST
    MERS SIS # 868-679-6377 MIN: 100052550053155353
    Assignor: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. as nominee for New Equity Financial Corp., its
    successors and assigns
    Assignee: CitiMortgage, Inc.
    For Valuable Consideration the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Assignor hereby assigns
    and transfers the following described Deed of Trust unto. the Assignee:
    That certain Deed of Trust executed by James A Smith and Rhonda E Smith, dated
    021:2212005 recorded in the land Records of Baltimore County, Maryland in liber: 0021536 Folio: 333 ,
    securing a note executed of even date therewith in the original principal amount ot $295,000.00, and
    granting a securing interest in the property commonly known as 9411 Lyonswood Drive, Owings Mills,
    MO, 21117, which property is more particularly described on: Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated
    herein by reference.
    Description/Additional information: See Exhibit A
    Original Beneficiary Name: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. as nominee for New Equity
    FinanCial Corp. its successors and assigns
    Original Beneficiary Address: P.O. Box 2026. Flint, MI, 48501-2026
    Current Beneficiary Address: P.O. Box 2026, Flint, MI, 4650′-2026
    Witness my hand this -:–+-’-::-L……:::.~—
    Mortgage Electronic Registr ion Systems, Inc. as nominee for New Equity Financial Corp. its successors
    and assigns

    ~me Geraldine Ann Belinski
    Title: Vice President
    Page. 1 39147374 2~49 MDOO~ 8a~rmo,e County Inlernal

    STATE OF MISSOURI, ST. CHARLES COUNTY
    On 1- Z &-20 t.3 before me, Ihe undersigned, a nolary public in and for said
    state. personally appeared Geraldine Ann Belinskl, Vice PreSident of Mortgage Electronic
    Registration Systems, Inc. as nominee for New Equity Flnilnclal Corp. Its successors and
    assigns personally known 10 me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the
    individual whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she
    executed the same in his/her capacity. and that by his/her signature on the instrument, the individual, or
    the person upon behalf of which the individual acted, executed the instrument

    Page’ 2 391″7374 2«49 1.10005 Banimore COunly Internal

  16. A777. There are many robo signers out there. They are all bad news. Google robo signers, and lists of them will appear. The entire system is rigged, and the banksters and servicers know they are living on borrowed time. The scam has been fully revealed, but remember many of those in the legal system are involved as well. When you know you have been doing criminal stuff, you have to keep going with the cover up. We are in the cover up stage. check out Divinecosmos.com, a little something on the positive side.

  17. My assignment of DOT is signed my Lee Lisa Vang. She works for Indecomm Global Services. I cannot find more signatures on her except mine. It was notarized by Sandra Jean Kinnunen a/k/a Sandy Kinnunen. She also works for Indecomm Global Services and have found she has signed as Vice President, Assistant Secretary, for a number of banks.
    .

  18. The only person I cannot find as a robo signer is Gina Gerwig who used to work for Finance America LLC. My originator…

  19. I am quite confident they are forged. I had asked for a copy of the note with the signatures since February of 2012 They only sent a copy of the note with no endorsements. It was not until about 5 moths ago when GMAC or Ocwen whom ever they have claimed to be that they again sent a copy of my note with the allonge. On the Allonge, the originator is endorsing the NOTE to Residential Funding Corporation and Residential Funding Corporation to JP Morgan/ Chase. it stops there. Here is something else interesting. Both signatures on the endorsements are RUBBER STAMPT literally… On of the endorsers is Judy Faber a know Robbo signer for GMAC, Ally, Residential Funding Company, Residential Funding Corporation and Wells Fargo. Now she works for Wells Fargo. How is it that our court system is allowing this? If I do that, I go to jail… and these people are free?

    I just do not get it

  20. Agente777, The originator was Mortgage Lenders Network.

  21. A777, Wow, the fantaso-assignments! They are forged. They have no other alternative but to forge them. Look at the signatures carefully and look to see if there is room on the original assignment for additional signatures. If there is room, that is one tip off that the allonges are phoney. Noodle on Google and see if the signatures are of robo-signers on other cases.

  22. Beth, I am in Maryland

  23. Jas, please see the LL post from Neil Garfield entitled Show Me the Money. Should give you a lot of answers you want. However, you will also see that the giant fraud machine is like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice, once put in motion it just goes on and on. Actually, we are all renting until the fraud, theft and fraud on the court is put out of its misery and exposed for the giant fraudulent Ponzi scheme that it is.

  24. James, who was your originator?
    My sponsor was supposed to be Residential Funding Corporation. My DOT was assigned to Bank of New Yokr Mellong By MERS (?) and my originator was Finance America LLC

  25. James – the problem is there is no easy answer. What state are you in? Is it judicial or nonjudicial? I testify in Md as an expert in securitization and even armed with all the proof that the loan did not enter the pool as required and the NY law arguments etc. many judges will state – did you borrow the money and have you made the payments. The Bank will waive the supposed original note and state you as the homeowner are not a 3rd party beneficiary to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement and therefore cannot even make these arguments. There is caselaw on both sides of this issue. Many homeowners do this on their own. However, I suggest that you will need an attorney so that you are aware of the rules of procedure for your state. This website has lawyers in some of the states, if you are in Md, DC or VA I can make a recommendation. My only other suggestion is to read all of the great posts on this cite regarding securitization, Notes, Assignments, etc.

  26. My Corporate Assignment of Deed of Trust’s Date of Assignment was September 9, 2011. As you can see below the cutoff date was January 1, 2006. Based on this information Beth says that the document is void. I don’t understand all of this. What does that mean to me? What do I do with this information? Who do I address this with, the Servicer? MERS? the Lender? or the Assignee? Is this enough information that I can negotiate with whomever, without having to hire an attorney?

    @ James Smith – here is the info regarding the claimed trust your loan is supposed to be “pooled” in. If the Assignment you have is after the cut off date 1/2006, then you have an argument that your loan is not in the pool. Also it is the depositor, not MERS, that is to assign the loan to the pool.

    http://www.secinfo.com/dsvrn.vA9.htm#ed0

    Residential Funding Corporation
    (Master Servicer and Sponsor)

    —————————————————————
    |
    | sale of mortgage loans
    |
    |
    —————————————————————

    Residential Asset Securities Corporation
    (Depositor)

    —————————————————————
    |
    | sale of mortgage loans
    |
    |
    —————————————————————
    U.S. Bank National Association
    (Trustee)
    (owner of mortgage loans on behalf of issuing entity
    for the benefit of holders of certificates)

    SUMMARY

    The following summary provides a brief description of material aspects of the offering and does not contain all of the information that you should consider in making your investment decision. To understand the terms of the offeredcertificates, you should read carefully this entire document and the prospectus.

    Issuing Entity……………………………… RASC Series 2006-EMX1 Trust.

    Title of the offered certificates…………….. Home Equity Mortgage Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-EMX1.

    Depositor………………………………….. Residential Asset Securities Corporation, an affiliate of Residential Funding Corporation.

    Master Servicer and Sponsor………………….. Residential Funding Corporation.

    Originator and Subservicer…………………… Mortgage Lenders Network USA, Inc.

    Trustee……………………………………. U.S. Bank National Association.

    Cut-off date……………………………….. January 1, 2006.

    Closing date……………………………….. On or about January 20, 2006.

  27. I got a Forensic Audit that shows my loan was never transferred to the Trust. I acquired the loan in 2005. The loan was supposed to be transferred to the Trust in Nov. 2005. It was not. According to New York Law (from my understanding) the NOTE becomes VOID if it is not transferred on or before the cut-off date. My Deed of Trust was Assigned to Bank of New York Mellon in Jun of 2013. yes 8 years to late. The note was not endorsed either according to the Audit. But to my surprised, an allonge just appeared out of no where with two endorsements that are questionable. This is my trust RAMP 2005-RS 9. I did look for my loan in the trust and did not find anything. but than again, I am not an expert.

  28. Beth the assignment date on the Corporate assignment of deed of trust says date of assignment: September 9, 2011. I have no clue what that means to me. Where do I take this now?

  29. @ James Smith – here is the info regarding the claimed trust your loan is supposed to be “pooled” in. If the Assignment you have is after the cut off date 1/2006, then you have an argument that your loan is not in the pool. Also it is the depositor, not MERS, that is to assign the loan to the pool.

    http://www.secinfo.com/dsvrn.vA9.htm#ed0

    Residential Funding Corporation
    (Master Servicer and Sponsor)

    —————————————————————
    |
    | sale of mortgage loans
    |
    |
    —————————————————————

    Residential Asset Securities Corporation
    (Depositor)

    —————————————————————
    |
    | sale of mortgage loans
    |
    |
    —————————————————————
    U.S. Bank National Association
    (Trustee)
    (owner of mortgage loans on behalf of issuing entity
    for the benefit of holders of certificates)

    SUMMARY

    The following summary provides a brief description of material aspects of the offering and does not contain all of the information that you should consider in making your investment decision. To understand the terms of the offeredcertificates, you should read carefully this entire document and the prospectus.

    Issuing Entity……………………………… RASC Series 2006-EMX1 Trust.

    Title of the offered certificates…………….. Home Equity Mortgage Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-EMX1.

    Depositor………………………………….. Residential Asset Securities Corporation, an affiliate of Residential Funding Corporation.

    Master Servicer and Sponsor………………….. Residential Funding Corporation.

    Originator and Subservicer…………………… Mortgage Lenders Network USA, Inc.

    Trustee……………………………………. U.S. Bank National Association.

    Cut-off date……………………………….. January 1, 2006.

    Closing date……………………………….. On or about January 20, 2006.

  30. My original Lender on the Deed of Trust was Mortgage Lenders Network. I have a Corporate Deed of Assignment that MERS assigned to US Bank, National Association, as trustee for RASC 2006-EMX1 at 4801 Frederica Street, Owensboro, KY 42301. The recording was requested by Wells Fargo and they are also listed as the default assignment. Wells Fargo recently sent me a document which listed Ocwen Loan Servicing as the investor. If that is the case, shouldn’t there be a document assigning the loan to Ocwen Loan Servicing? Im so confused with this stuff. Something is truly wrong with this loan, but I cant afford to hire an attorney to get to the bottom of this. jsmith5915@msn.com. James Smith

  31. Has anyone ever dealt with Ocwen Loan Servicing out of Fort Washington, PA. Wells Fargo is telling me that Ocwen Loan Servicing is the Investor for my 2nd Mortgage which America Servicing Co/Wells Fargo is the servicer. What I need to know is what is the best way to go about finding out if they are the actual investors and if they even have any records of my loan. My guess is that I am going to get the run around and probably will find out that they know nothing about the loan.

  32. Below under “Fighting MERs in CA” someone stated.
    3) Any assignment of the Deed of Trust & Note from MERS to a successor is void and fraudulent.
    I live in Maryland and I have a Deed of Trust that MER’s assigned to successor. Can someone tell me if this is a true statement.? Do I now have a fraudulent document. Would someone be willing to send me their email address so I could scan and send to them, so they can let me know in fact this is a fraudulent document. My email address is jsmith5915@msn.com 443 677 2799. James

  33. sorry, I meant James ; P

  34. @justme
    How are o you doing, the information will help you,. As I mentioned, I am not an expert but if you need to find something, I am here to help as much as possible.

    @ Justine,
    Welcome. to Livinglies.

  35. James, welcome to living lies! In the real sense…not the forum :l
    My humorous suggestion is everyone works for MERS! ….you just kinda sign on the line accordingly and whalaah! MERS verified.
    My servicer was endorsing and encouraging MERS on their website as Mortgage Electronic RESERVATION System.
    Good luck with the C&D

  36. Cease and Desist Order against Citi and Wells Fargo.
    There is currently a Cease and Desist Order against Citi Mortgage. Below is the complaint that I sent to Office of Comptroller and Currency.

    There is currently a Cease and Desist Order by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency against Mortgage Electronic Registration System. I am writing because I want something done about the Banks and MERS, because they continue to perform illegal transactions. I recently had a document that was posted to County Public Records by Citi Mortgage and MERS. It was a Deed of Trust for a transaction that was done back in 2005. Something was not right about them just now posting this document after so many years. I goggled the person that signed the document, Geraldine Ann Belinksi, Vice President. I found another Deed of Trust online that had the same person’s name on it, but this time it stated that she is the Assistant Secretary. I immediately got on the phone and called the office that was listed on the document, Citi Mortgage, 1000 Technology Drive, O’Fallon, Mo. I located the office where this individual worked and discovered that she is a mere processor. This has gotten out of hand and I am very skeptical that any of the transactions and documents that I have through Citi Mortgage are legal and binding. Why are they allowed to continue Robo Signing documents? I can be reached at 443-677-2799. Thanks James A. Smith

    I did not call MERS to verify that she worked there. I call Citi and they stated that she was a processor. This is response that I received from Citi regarding the complaint

    “Our records indicate Geraldine A. Belinski is a Certified Appointed signor for Mortgage Electroic Registration Systems Inc.”

    My question is, does MERS have employees that work in Citi facilities? I do not believe this. I called and verified that she worked there and they stated she was a processor. How can I verify that they are lying, because Im sure that OCC will believe what Citi’s response was.
    James Smith 443-677-2799.

  37. That did not make much sense. A credit report inquiry may provide a different creditors name that your servicer…something like that..

  38. Has anyone looked at their credit reports on this?
    I have noticed the named entity pulling reports is not the servicers name albeit a former name, Allied.
    Oddly enough, I’ve never seen these reports before. They are credit reports the servicer pulled from credstar and they were addressed to my husband regarding his report was accessed but he was never sent them.

  39. Correspondence or statements from the servicer/debt collector should have a notice that they are a debt collector.

  40. Ocwen and The Man with Many Hats … Mr Scott Anderson.
    I am an expert on that poor excuse of a human being! But thee put me on the “Witt List” to keep my gagging.

    Maybe one day soon …..

  41. Bridge v. Ocwen Federal Bank, FSB, __F.3d__, 1470148 (6th Cir. 2012)

    ??

  42. Agente777 I would very much enjoy that if you can find it, thank you. I have seen instances where FDCPA would apply but trying to peg the servicer as a debt collector is not an easy task as far as getting the judge to recognize it.
    justmenwi@gmail.com

  43. that FDCPA case is Bridge v. Ocwen
    http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/12a0112p-06.pdf

    fyi- I am one of those suing for return of my personal property. Will gladly share the detinue complaint as sample. email e.wetzelberger@gmail.com and will send docs.

    Anyone with documentary intangible personal properly laying out there would benefit from claiming their property, just as one would claim a jet ski that was unlawfully detained by person(s) that have no claim to your property. Just sayin’…..

    Todd W.

  44. @ justme
    I have a court case where Ocwen was suit and the judge determined ocwen was a dept collector and had to comply with FDCPA I will look for it and if you like I can e-mail it to you. How did the homeowner do it? I do have to look into it.

  45. RE:Assignments
    How would they explain this?

    Fremont “originates” the loan late 2005.
    The deed is recorded late 2005.
    The only recorded assignment was in 2009 in which MERS assigned loan to a Trust per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated 12/2005!

    Then how STRANGE in 1/2007 in a Forebearance Agreement Fremont states it is the beneficiary of my loan and in a published notice later in 2007 they state my loan was “last sold, assigned transfered and conveyed to Fremont by Assignment” (never saw this assignment it was not recorded).

    So we know Fremont can’t take it out and put it back – but when I sent my certified QWR to Ocwen and also the Trust itself – they both reply in writting that the trust is the beneficiary of my loan?

    Makes Ocwen and HSBC as Trustee sound like liars to me! Of course the assignments are FAKE!

  46. One of the tricks I have noticed is lots of shell corporations, and new mergers with this and that company and name changes (see MERS) and new corporations which is done to confuse who actually owns what and who can actually be sued for their egregious conduct.

  47. Yes. Ocwen has been acquiring lots of loans out there. We need to watch and see if anyone else is unloading these loans. If Ocwen starts unloading them, somebody sees that it is not going to be profitable. I am waiting…

  48. How do you propose they will comply to FDCPA rules? Just curious.

  49. KC

    here some garbage processing:

    PRESS RELEASE
    Nov. 8, 2013, 8:43 a.m. EST
    Fidelity National Financial, Inc. Announces Chief Executive Officer and President Transition

    JACKSONVILLE, Fla., Nov. 8, 2013 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ — Fidelity National Financial, Inc. FNF +0.93% , a leading provider of title insurance, mortgage services and diversified services, today announced that Chief Executive Officer George P. Scanlon will be transitioning from that role effective December 7, 2013. Additionally, current President, Raymond R. (“Randy”) Quirk has been named the company’s new Chief Executive Officer and Brent B. Bickett, Executive Vice President, Corporate Finance has been named the company’s President, both effective December 7, 2013.

    “George has done an excellent job leading the company for the last three years and the company’s profitability and shareholder returns have improved under his leadership,” said Chairman William P. Foley, II. “As we are working towards the closing and integration of Lender Processing Services, Inc. (“LPS”), we have decided to reallocate the CEO responsibilities to Randy and Brent.
    blah blah blah…..

  50. In my county it is just called Records department. Ocwen acquired my loan in default. Therefore, they are debt collectors. They will have to comply with the FDCPA. In California they have ruled this already. and yes they are the SCUM of the EARTH. Cows $h!7 is worth money their word is not… mmmm. As I have mentioned before, I am looking forward to Glaski’s case. and so are many…

  51. If assignments are showing up in the record and it is the scum of the earth Ocwen, watch out. Keep a close eye on the title records at the county level. We call them the Reg. of Deeds, but they have different names in different states. Watch your mortgage statements as well. They use all the tricks to get you to foreclosure, force-placed insurance, extra fees, refusing your payment, telling you the payment does not cover the mortgage pmt, etc.

  52. I strongly believe that if anyone has been foreclosed on by a bank or trust that did not own a valid NOTE should be sued shall pay for every damage they have created. If that is possible, could each individual member of the family file suite for emotional stress?

  53. no Notice of Default, etc.

  54. In my case the theft (that is called foreclosure here) has no assignment and it’s been 4 years and counting.

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

  55. @Louise
    In my case, (I am not in foreclosure, but you never know.) the assignment was done 8 years later. We requested a loan in 2005. the cut-off date was nov. 2005 and an assignment of mortgage was recorded into the County Records office about 5 months ago. I have not even seen the loan been transferred to the trust. I have not seen it in the trust… The assignment was made my MERS (no surprise there) the new servicer is Ocwen Loan servicing a bill collector.

  56. A years late assignment SHOULD NOT hold water. In my own case (first case, and I have had many) they dismissed the FC action because the assignment was five months after the FC. Courts may or may not recognize that there are several entities including the depositor that the endorsement on the note is supposed to indicate as it allegedly goes into the ill-named trust.. We all have good cases, but will the Court recognize it?

    What other incentives does a court have for not finding for the homeowner? It does not really make sense, but there it is. Notwithstanding the fact that the judges and clerks have state pension plans. In my state, the pension plan sued Bk of NY Mellon for selling them rotten MBS, but they still find against the homeowner??? When will they all wake up and smell the coffee and realize their pension plan is in danger, too?

  57. @ Louse
    What if the assignment is recorded 8 years after the cut-off date and no evidence that the loan was ever transferred to the trust -EVER? Assignment by MERS

  58. JG, the PSA’s say that if you assign any note, you must file a real assignment at the county level if that is the law applicable to the state. That law is most states. Only a MERS assignment will not do.

  59. eggsistense,

    Thanks for the link.
    This proves the OCC settlement where they had a list of us who were robbed and they rushed to offer full ‘approved’ settlement only to the military but $300 to the rest of us, that they need to open the accounts and pay the rest plus fines, penalties, and damages.

    When I saw the headlines about the checks bouncing I knew, (it’s their media) that they wanted people to endorse the check to see if it would bounce, and by cashing the check they’d have ‘final settlement’ of their theft.

    There is no statute of limitations on fraud, so anyone settle a claim of fraud by resulting in more fraud to carry out the settlement?

    Easy answer, No.

    Woe be unto you Judges and Lawyers.
    Your system and Master betrayed you. You can’t run from you, and you can’t hide from ‘you’.

    Whose signature is on every paper that lead to the theft of the property of the free people who are endowed by the Creator with unalienable rights?

    Every paper filed and adjudicated to steal One’s shelter, has a lawyer and/or judge’s signature. You stole for a corporate body were even the CEO/CFO/President/Corporate Attorney/nor any other executive holding a position in that corporation would not sign a napkin let alone a contract indicating a loss of right or injury.

    Your soul was bartered for this end. Your court gets God’s truth by getting the people before you to ‘speak’ and take an oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

    o The truth by whomever pronounced is from God.

    A set of Legal Maxims with the word ‘truth’ in them.

    o Where truth is, fiction of law does not exist.
    o He who does not willingly speak the truth, is a betrayer of the truth.
    o He who does not speak the truth, is a traitor to the truth.
    o The truth that is not sufficiently defended is frequently overpowered; and he who does not disapprove, approves.
    o Suppression of the truth is equivalent to the expression of what is false.
    o Truth, by whomever pronounced, is from God.
    o Truth fears nothing but concealment.
    o We can do nothing against truth. [2 Corinthians 13:8]
    o Truth is the mother of justice.
    o To swear is to call God to witness, and is an act of religion.

    Greater is He that is in me, than He that is in the world.

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

  60. Color me daft, but I don’t get what the big deal with that brochure is.
    (I did notice the word “lender” is missing.) Anyone? I do think calling the investors the “beneficial owners” is errant. The investors own the beneficial interest in the payment stream. The reason I think it’s errant is because the investors may not sell the notes, may not pledge them, may not transfer them, and so on and those are rights associated with ownership. But if the investors own the loans, I’m quick to point out they’re not MERS’ members, and by MERS contracts, when the beneficial interest in a note goes to a non-member, an assgt is required to be executed and recorded and the loan 86’d from the MERS’ computer program.

  61. Triple taxation.
    Could the annuity be the third leg on the taxation table?

  62. Neil,
    That was quite a scam getting seniors to take out reverse mortgages and requiring/selling them an annuity.

  63. The discussion is vague …. bits and pieces.
    I’m thinking its a “come into compliance date” due upon title companies to prove (or not) their ability to perform.

  64. eggsistense,

    Thank you!

  65. KC,

    Could that be a cut-off date for claims?

  66. Forthepeople: thanks for brochure link!

    E Tolle: Damn right we need some proceeds! Neil Garfield for Attorney General!

  67. “The Insurers were closely involved in this and maybe Obama gave the Title Companies to much leeway “.

    KC; You don’t say ……..

    What was that about the end of Nov?

  68. That’s all swell, but I don’t have a contract with the MBS investors, the person who sold them any rights does! Dah…Not my problem. I made a contract for a mortgage, not an investment pool…of bond holders.

    This exactly why we cannot get remedies.

  69. I’ve seen it all …

    1. duel HUDs …(one for lender and one for you)

    2. One mortgage for the borrower to sign and another with different terms left in the borrowers packet.

    3. Missing RTCs

    4. Out Right Fraudulent TIL disclosures

    5. Loans describing repayment terms that are different than those in the Mortgage.

    6. NON DISCLOSURE of TILA, Reg Z and RESPA disclosures REQUIRED BY LAW!

    I could go on all day but Doc put me on a Caffeine diet.

    Buh Humbug

  70. I have 1 title securitized thrice.
    1.Previous owners loan that continued into 2012 after closing in 05.
    2.My mortgage.
    3.The modification of my mortgage. They did not repurchase, replace or repool. They just pooled it again after the mod, issuing a second security on the new amount.
    The QWR reply they sent me states “we service the mortgages for the benefit of the investors”

  71. Jan van Eck, not only should you be focusing on the requirement of the return of the Note… but also the return of the TITLE.

    When a family buys a home that has no mortgage attatched from revocable trust.of deceased owner…… One would expect the Sellers Trust to be closed …. Right?

    Imagine finding out 2 years later the Trust remains open with the deceased assets still remaining in trust…..

    Can the title exist in two trusts at the same time?

  72. eggsistense, that’s a game changing find. That brochure needs to be distributed far and wide. Out of the mouths of criminals comes their own demise. I like this quote from Barnes:

    “There is no language in any Note or Mortgage document (DOT, Security Deed, or Mortgage) by which the borrower is put on notice that the entire nature of the mortgage loan contract and the other contracting party may be unilaterally changed from a loan with a regulated mortgage lender to an “investment” contract with a private equity investor. This, in our business, is called “fraud by omission” for purposes of inducing someone to sign a contract, with material nondisclosure of matters which the borrower had to have to make the proper decision as to whether to sign the contract or not.”

    Does sound a little like what Neil Garfield has been going on about for so many years now…..

    Maybe we should get back some if not all of those proceeds from the 41 tranches? Or else?

  73. Big-Time Vindication for Neil Garfield from US Bank (don’t know if this has already been posted, I’ve been ill all week):

    http://foreclosuredefensenationwide.com/?p=533

    “We have been provided with a copy of U.S. Bank Global Corporate Trust Services’ “Role of the Corporate Trustee” brochure which makes certain incredible admissions, several of which squarely disprove and nullify the holdings of various courts around the country which have taken the position that the borrower ‘is not a party to’ the securitization and is thus not entitled to discovery or challenges to the mortgage loan transfer process…The first heading of the brochure is styled “Distinct Party Roles”. The first sentence of this heading states: ‘Parties involved in a MBS transaction include the borrower, the originator, the servicer and the trustee, each with their own distinct roles, responsibilities and limitations.'”

    That’s big enough, but here’s where what Neil has said all along is admitted to by a bank itself:

    “THE FOURTH PAGE OF THE BROCHURE STATES THAT THE INVESTORS ARE ‘THE TRUE BENEFICIAL OWNERS OF THE MORTGAGES’, and the third page of the brochure states ‘Whether the servicer pursues a foreclosure or considers a modification of the loan, the goal is still to maximize the return to investors’ (who, again, are the true beneficial owners of the mortgage loans).”

  74. @CK The courts in California do not care if the NOTE and the Mortgage are separated. Judges will still rule against the homeowner which I think it is disgusting. But things will turn around. I do not which anything bad upon the banks but they should not be to big to fail. Banks’ officers should be put in jail. They know what they are doing is fraud and do not care. Do go to church and claim to be good Christians yet they break many of the commitments; you shall not steal, you shall not lie, shall not raise falls testemony, you shall not desire your neighbors belongings… How much more hypocrites can they be? How about their lawyers? they also know what they are doing is wrong. If they don’t know, they are stupid as they can be educated.
    As you already know, I am waiting with great pleasure the final outcome from Glaski vs BofA case. Since the upper court have ruled that he can challenge the late transfer of the loan to the trust. it give all of us hope to pro veil. I do also hope that it will benefit all those who have been foreclosed upon and evicted. Sue them for every penny they can legally do so for. Robo-Signer should go to jail as well. These banksters are destroying the reputation and integrity of this country.

  75. Here is question I have. I refinance one of my proprieties in 2008. I never got the NOTE returned nor did I get a letter discharging it the dept? What does it mean? Can I do anything about it?

  76. New York Fed Chief Levels Explosive Charge Against Big Banks

    Business News
    .

    The head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York said Thursday that some of America’s largest financial institutions appear to lack respect for the law, a potentially explosive charge against an industry already roiling from numerous government investigations into alleged wrongdoing.

    William Dudley, one of the nation’s top banking regulators whose organization helps oversee Wall Street banks including JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup, made the comment during a speech focused on the problems posed by banks perceived to be “too big to fail,” and possible solutions to correct them.

    But in an abrupt turn, Dudley suggested that regulators may be stymied by “cultural” issues that have negatively affected the nation’s biggest banks.

    “Collectively, these enhancements to our current regime may not solve another important problem evident within some large financial institutions — the apparent lack of respect for law, regulation and the public trust,” he said.

    “There is evidence of deep-seated cultural and ethical failures at many large financial institutions,” he continued. “Whether this is due to size and complexity, bad incentives, or some other issues is difficult to judge, but it is another critical problem that needs to be addressed.”

    Dudley’s comments come as the world’s biggest banks collectively face tens of billions of dollars in potential fines and government-driven settlements arising from alleged lawbreaking in markets ranging from home mortgages to interest rates and currencies.

    Authorities in North America, Europe and Asia have been probing more than a dozen large institutions for allegedly attempting to manipulate benchmark interest rates, the most popular of which is known as Libor, that affect hundreds of trillions of dollars in loans and securities. So far, Barclays, UBS, Rabobank and Royal Bank of Scotland collectively have agreed to pay nearly $4 billion to settle with government authorities. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the giant U.S.-backed mortgage financiers, also have sued many of these banks to recover alleged losses.

    In addition, regulators around the world are investigating whether some big banks attempted to rig the foreign exchange market, where currency prices are set and more than $5 trillion is exchanged daily. Goldman Sachs on Thursday became the latest bank to disclose that it was under investigation, joining Barclays, UBS, Deutsche Bank, Citigroup and JPMorgan, among others.

    JPMorgan is also among a group of banks facing U.S. demands for restitution and penalties for allegedly misleading investors when selling them home loans that had been bundled into securities. The bank recently agreed to pay the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which regulates Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, about $4 billion to settle claims it sold the mortgage financiers faulty home loan securities. A group of government agencies led by the Department of Justice has been negotiating with the bank to settle related claims that would call for billions more in cash and aid for distressed homeowners.

    The FHFA reportedly is pressuring other financial institutions, such as Bank of America, to pay even higher amounts to settle lawsuits the regulator filed in 2011 alleging mass deception by 18 big banks.

    New settlements and fines follow nearly $67 billion in fines and settlements agreed to by the nation’s six largest banks since 2010, according to SNL Financial. That figure swells to $103 billion when including legal costs dating to the start of 2008, according to a report earlier this year by Bloomberg News.

    Recent pacts with the government include settling allegations that banks duped homeowners into taking out expensive mortgages; broke state and federal rules when attempting to seize homes after borrowers fell behind on their payments, a scandal that became known as “robosigning”; and manipulated markets to bolster their trading positions.

    In the aftermath of the financial crisis, regulators and the Justice Department faced criticism from Democratic and Republican lawmakers that they were too soft on banks alleged to have broken the law. Earlier this year, criticism escalated after Attorney General Eric Holder told Congress that some banks were “too large,” thwarting the government’s enforcement efforts.

    Holder attempted to walk back those comments, and some five years after the height of the crisis it appears authorities are intent on erasing that view.

    Dudley linked accountability and enforcement to “too big to fail,” arguing that ending the perception that some banks will forever be rescued from failure will “encourage the needed cultural shift necessary to restore public trust in the industry.”

    “Tough enforcement and high penalties will certainly help focus management’s attention on this issue,” he said.

  77. Java, Christine would say file an appeal, maybe for conversion? Anything to hang in there a while longer.

    Where is Christine?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/07/william-dudley-big-banks_n_4235834.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

  78. I spent over 2 hours at county clerks office today regarding the note and deed and extinguishing the note…..they were very nice and as helpful as I could have expected. But they had no clue/idea what the next step is supposed to be after the THEFT of house at sheriff sale by a debt collecting servicer middleman and their foreclosure mill thugs. They just want to punch in letters on the keyboard and not think or make any decisions, no matter how obvious the question is.

  79. If you think electronic recording is scary JG, lets not talk about electronic signatures and notarizations. You might sh’t yourself.

  80. at sourceoftitle:
    “With the addition of Smyth County, Virginia now has 10 e-recording jurisdictions, joining more than 960 additional counties across the nation that have implemented this service. ”

    I say here we go again with e-recording. I can’t readily frame the objections off the top of my head, but who knew them off the top of his head when MERS raised ITS ugly head?

  81. If you do not make your claim known to the public the Unclaimed property escheats to the state unless a thief gets it first.

  82. State Laws Vary, Notes, Mortgages and DOTs may/do contain different language/terms.

    There is no Silver Bullet for All Cases.

  83. Understood. Thanks.

  84. Must they make their claim in a court action?

  85. Knowing the Truth and Pleading the Truth is the Difference between Success and Failure.

    I Urge You to Seek Legal Advice and Ask Lots of Questions!

  86. Children? Heirs?

  87. KC,

    What if there is no spouse?

  88. Hi John – I am currently in litigation with Wells Fargo regarding my supposed Freddie Mac owned loan. I’m about 60 days away from discovery so that is one of the items that I will request be produced. I’ve called Freddie Mac but I have not been able to get high up the ladder, just a bunch of dim bulbs reading from a script.

  89. If KC should disappear …. Just remember the Duct Tape holds up well and it also comes in Choice of Color. My color is lilac … I hear they have neon green and hot pink for you youngens to…… Gray is so yesterday…..

  90. Carie
    maybe there is something here of interest for you

    San Francisco Real Estate Investor Pleads Guilty to Foreclosure Auction Rig Scheme
    POSTED BY ALEX FERRERAS ON NOVEMBER 5, 2013 IN SCAMS

    (Source: FBI) – A Northern California real estate investor pleaded guilty today for his role in conspiracies to rig bids and commit mail fraud at public real estate foreclosure auctions in Northern California, the Department of Justice announced.

    Kuo Hsuan “Chuck” Chang, of San Francisco, entered his guilty plea in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco. Felony charges were filed against Chang on October 9, 2013.

    Chang is the 37th individual to plead guilty or agree to plead guilty as a result of the department’s ongoing antitrust investigations into bid rigging and fraud at public real estate foreclosure auctions in Northern California

    the FBI want info…

  91. I am not an Attorney, I can not answer legal questions.

    I am KC … Guilty of Thinking Out Loud to Much

  92. KC,

    Good question. Well my credit was all over the documents. I believed it was my credit. However, My HUD one was signed on the 4th but it reads “funding date” of the 12th? WTF? My DOT also has the date of the 4th.

    I got a statement from the broker and it states that “they funded the loan on the 12th & sold it to RFC on the 20th. It reads “Residential Funding paid broker for their interest in the loan, deed of trust & note executed…”

    The wire I received was received on the 12th. I’ve read some of your comments but can not embrace them without further explanation. You have stated to embrace MERS. You are MERS? I guess I just don’t understand. This stuff is complicated. I’ve tried to buy into the 1099 debate but maybe it’s just beyond my comprehension. I mean how would you start to explain this to a judge? Not saying it is not accurate information but unless you are in the know it’s useless.

    Please explain?

  93. What If you hire your own Attorney and Expert Witness …

    What If …..

    If I had only?

  94. What if the spouse sued for the estates assets and afterward the debtor and the creditor borrower filed ch 7 on everybody and nobody at the same time?

    No takers on sending me to QT?

    What If …….

  95. Its on the NNA site. (National Notary Association). I only have a link via email. Membership Articles.

    What If … the debtor was the creditor? What if the creditors account was charged off? What If the household estate received benefit of a payment equal to the amount of the principal? What If?

    What would “What If” mean?

    It must be the caffine …… if I talk to much.. send me to QT (Quiet Time) 🙂

  96. kc – got a link to that OCC deal you referenced?

  97. LLC or LLP … both have been used.

  98. hman..

    Whose Credit did the LLC lender use? Yours or His?

  99. JG….
    Filed? Yes

    Litigated?
    Only if you call settlement outside court ( non published ) being litigated.

    Who is the debtors/creditor?

    If you take good notes, you already have the answer.

  100. Beth – I sure hope you get your answer and if you do that you’ll share it with us. (I take it you’ve hunted for the settlement agreement with no luck?) Is it possible to ‘ask the horse’? Would FHLMC direct you to a copy or provide it? Are citizens entitled to a copy? Settlement agreements are sometimes confidential or sealed, but this is govt business, right? What about ‘freedom of information’ (about which I know zilch)? I’d bet many people would like that information.

  101. Does anybody know about the MERS members list? My “Lender” is not on the current list. The “lender/broker” on my DOT has been defunct since 2007 and I’m wondering if he was removed from the list or if he was ever a member?

    Does anybody know if there is anyway to get a MERS member list from 2006?

    If my “lender” wasn’t a MERS member how could he appoint MERS as his nominee? Please let me know if you can point me in the right direction.

  102. NG:
    “, ….the wrong party is probably being paid”

    Have you considered what it means if the right party is being paid
    even though the claim were (conveniently) brought in the name of the trust?
    “They probably don’t have it. So there are a number of us who are planning lawsuits to recover the net proceeds of the refinancing or sale proceeds because the wrong party was paid and they are not producing any evidence of passing on the proceeds to the real creditor even when they have admitted the loan was “securitized.”

    Really looking forward to those suits! If you set up an escrow account for contributions, tell me where to send mine.

  103. Question re: the recent Freddie Mac settlement, specifically with Wells Fargo. Every article/account I’ve read states that WF settled with Freddie regarding the re-purchase clause. What I can’t find the answer to is whether WF just paid Freddie to settle all re-purchase claims or was WF required to actually re-purchase the loans? Does anyone have any info as the news account had conflicting info.

    As everyone knows if there is a transfer in ownership of the loan, pursuant to TILA, the homeowner must be notified within 30 days of the transfer or face up to a $4000 penalty. If WF now owns the loan then the modification guidelines change.

    If WF just paid to settle the claims was it for loans that are delinquent, in foreclosure or sold at foreclosure? Where did the money go. If I have a Freddie Mac loan and WF paid something on it then I should receive that credit. Ex. let’s say my loan was 200,000, the house was sold at foreclosure sale for $150,000, then WF settles under the re-purchase settlement of which $100,000 is apportioned to my loan. Doesn’t logic then dictate that I’m owned $50,000 as that is the surplus from the foreclosure sale after applying the settlement amount?

    Anyone have any info on this? Anyone have the terms of the settlement?

  104. They do elex…the only problem is the papers are counterfeit….DAH

  105. In CA the statute is Civ Code 2941 –
    Within 30 calendar days after the obligation secured by
    any deed of trust has been satisfied, the beneficiary or the assignee
    of the beneficiary shall execute and deliver to the trustee the
    original note, deed of trust, request for a full reconveyance, and
    other documents as may be necessary to reconvey, or cause to be
    reconveyed, the deed of trust.

  106. In the Latest News …

    The OCC announced that the Banksters would now have to make sure the Title Companies and their Venders were being supervised and playing by the rules.

    HUH? You meant they?… they?…. didn’t have to do that before?

  107. The real question is: how can a judge find against you if nobody can produce the original note so that we do not have two or more debts against the homeowner. Check out the FDCPA.

  108. Wrong TU and Java, stolen is the way I state my claim too, with objections to the court! And financial terrorists are correct designations…regards

  109. TU, I make sure I always say it was stolen..unfortunately you and I are the only ones who care about that terminology.

  110. If someone did not loan money and does not have the note, why do we still, after all these years call it a foreclosure or say someone ‘lost’ their home?

    Do we not know theft when we see it? Just asking.

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

  111. I’m my just concluded sheriff sale foreclosure in NJ, I will be requesting the retired note, especially because the house was sold for MORE than was owed ……Foreclosed by WF who did not lend money and who does not own the note !!!

  112. I recently read a PSA that made me think that theses notes are being re-circulated through the same securitization system that it came out of, so no reason to return the note. And this article by Neil does not surprise me at all.

  113. Neil is accurate in focusing on the requirement to return the “Note” in exchange for payment. I would add that, additional t these circumstances (sale), a foreclosure itself, no matter how conducted, carries with it the requirement to “retire the Note” by taking it “out of commercial circulation.” In a Judicial Foreclosure, the requirement is met by surrender of the Note to the Clerk of the Court in exchange for the issuance of the Certified Judgment. In non-judicial situations, where the ersatz “trustee” up and sells off the property, the protocol is not as clear. However, I submit that the Note must be taken out of commercial circulation in some manner, presumably by surrender to the borrower. Since it seems this is not being done, I would concur with Neil that the foreclosers (no surprise) and not the proper party to foreclose.

    I see the avenue for other (and major) causes of action against all the parties in the foreclosure chain, including a suit to recover the property, plus big-bucks damages. By definition, if you cannot hand over the Note, you were not entitled to foreclose. there is one state that is an exception to this: Minnesota, where they have a bizarre structure that allows the “trustee” to go sell your house anyway, and the court judges think that is just fine. Appalling; yet the case there.

    Moral: do not move to Minnesota.

  114. LPS Attorneys …. Dirty Birdies playing for the Fiddler on the Roof!

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: