Here it is: Nonjudicial Foreclosure Violates Due Process in Complex Structured Finance Transactions

No, there isn’t a case yet. But here is my argument.

The main point is that we are forced to accept the burden of disproving a case that had not been filed — the very essence of nonjudicial foreclosure. In order to comply with due process, a simple denial of the facts and legal authority to foreclosure should be sufficient to force the case into a courtroom where the parties are realigned with the so-called new beneficiary is the Plaintiff and the homeowner is the Defendant — since it is the “beneficiary” who is seeking affirmative relief.

But the way it is done and required to be done, the Plaintiff must file an attack on a case that has never been alleged anywhere in or out of court. The new beneficiary anoints itself, files a fraudulent substitution of trustee because the old one would never go along with it, and then files a notice of default and notice of sale all on the premise that they have the necessary proof and documents to support what could have been an action in foreclosure brought by them in a judicial manner, for which there is adequate provision in California law.

Instead nonjudicial foreclosure is being used to sell property under circumstances where the alleged beneficiary under the deed of trust could never prevail in a court proceeding. Nonjudicial foreclosure was meant to be an expedient method of dealing with the vast majority of foreclosures when the statute was passed. In that vast majority, the usual procedure was complaint, default, judgment and then sale with at least one hearing in between. Nearly all foreclosures were resolved that way and it become more of a ministerial act for Judges than an actual trier of fact or judge of procedural rights and wrongs.

But the situation is changed. The corruption on Wall Street has been systemic resulting in whole sale fraudulent fabricated forged documents together with perjury by affidavit and even live testimony. Contrary to the consensus supported by the banks, these cases are complex because the party seeking affirmative relief — i.e., the new “beneficiary” is following a complex script established long before the homeowner ever applied for a loan or was solicited to finance her property.

The San Francisco study concluded, like dozens of other studies across the country that most of the foreclosures were resolved in favor of “strangers to the transaction.” By definition, the use of several layers of companies and multiple sets of documents defining two separate deals (one with the investor lenders and one with the borrower, with the only party in common being the broker dealer selling mortgage bonds and their controlled entities) has turned the mundane into highly complex litigation that has no venue. In non-judicial foreclosures the Trustee is the party who acts to sell the property under instructions from the beneficiary and does so without inquiry and without paying any attention to the obvious conflict between the title record, the securitization record, the homeowner’s position and the prior record owner of the loan.

The Trustee has no power to conduct a hearing, administrative or judicial, and so the dispute remains unresolved while the Trustee proceeds to sell the property knowing that the homeowner has raised objections. Under normal circumstances under existing common law and statutory authority, the Trustee would simply bring the matter to court in an action for interpleader saying there is a dispute that he doesn’t have the power to resolve. You might think this would clog the court system. That is not the case, although some effort by the banks would be made to do just that. Under existing common law and statutory law, the beneficiary would then need to file a complaint, verified, sworn with real exhibits and that are subject to real scrutiny before any burden of proof would shift to the homeowner. And as complex as these transactions are they all are subject to simple rules concerning financial transactions. If there was no money in the alleged transaction then the allegation of a transaction is false.

It was and remains a mistake to allow such loans to be foreclosed through any means other than strictly judicial where the “beneficiary” must allege and prove ownership and the balance due on the loan owed to THAT beneficiary. Requiring homeowners with zero sophistication in finance and litigation to bear the initial burden of proof in such highly complex structured finance schemes defies logic and common sense as well as being violative of due process in the application of the nonjudicial statutes to these allegedly securitized loans.

By forcing the parties and judges who sit on the bench to treat these complex issues as though they were simple cases, the enabling statutes for nonjudicial foreclosure are being applied unconstitutionally.

266 Responses

  1. Is CA REALLY a non-judicial FC state? READ the STATUTE:
    Unlawful Detainer actions are commenced and prosecuted pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1161a(b) where real property is sold at a trustee sale in accordance with sections 2924 et seq., of the California Civil Code under a power of sale contained in a deed of trust. ( I have capitalized point at issue)

    California Civil Code Section 2924 provides in pertinent parts:
    (a) EVERY TRANSFER OF AN INTEREST IN PROPERTY, other than in trust, made only as a security for the performance of another act, is to be deemed a mortgage, except when in the case of personal property it is accompanied by actual change of possession, in which case it is to be deemed a pledge. Where, by a mortgage created after July 27, 1917, of any estate in real property, other than an estate at will or for years, less than two, or in any transfer in trust made after July 27, 1917, of a like estate to secure the performance of an obligation, a power of sale is conferred upon the mortgagee, trustee, or any other person, to be exercised after a breach of the obligation for which that mortgage or transfer is a security, THE POWER SHALL NOT BE EXERCISED EXCEPT WHERE THE MORTGAGE OR TRANSFER IS MADE PURSUANT TO AN ORDER, JUDGMENT, OR DECREE OF A COURT OF RECORD, or to secure the payment of bonds or other evidences of indebtedness authorized or permitted to be issued by the Commissioner of Corporations, or is made by a public utility subject to the provisions of the Public Utilities Act, UNTIL all of the following apply: …
    ————–
    Plaintiff Deutsche Bank National Trust, as Trustee did not comply with this portion of Civil Code 2924(a). Neither Plaintiff nor any other entity alleging authority to do so has placed on the record of this action any document indicating that this provision of Civil Code 2924 has been complied with. Accordingly, there is no ‘Order, Judgment or decree of a court of record’ that Plaintiff or any other entity acting on Plaintiff’s behalf was granted authority to transfer interest of, and/or sell Defendant _________’s property or that proves a transfer of interest or a power of sale has occurred pursuant to any order or decree of any court of record. Defendant ________ hereby through this motion challenges the Court’s ruling on the issue of Black Letter law requirements presented herein. Plaintiff Deutsche Bank National Trust, as Trustee has absolutely failed to follow the law to get an Order or Decree from a court of record BEFORE it purportedly sold Defendant’s property. The Court’s duty sua sponte is to know the requirements for California law regarding Civil Code 2924(a).
    The statutory situations in which the remedy of unlawful detainer is available are exclusive, and the statutory procedure must be strictly followed. Berry v. Society of Saint Pius X (1999, Cal App 2d Dist) 69 Cal App 4th 354, 81 Cal Rptr 2d 574, 1999 Cal App LEXIS 42, review or rehearing denied (1999, Cal) 1999 Cal LEXIS 2245.
    THE COURT MUST STRICTLY ENFORCE THE TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR A FORECLOSURE.
    The harshness of non-judicial foreclosure has been recognized. “The exercise of the power of sale is a harsh method of foreclosing the rights of the grantor.” Anderson v. Heart Federal Savings (1989) 208 Cal.App.3d 202, 6 215, citing System Inv. Corporation v. Union Bank (1971) 21 Cal.App.3d 137, 153. The statutory requirements are intended to protect the trustor from a wrongful or unfair loss of his property Moeller v. Lien (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 822, 830; accord, Hicks v. E.T. Legg & Associates (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 496, 503; Lo Nguyen v. Calhoun (6th District 2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 428, 440, and a valid foreclosure by the private power of sale requires strict compliance with the requirements of the statute. Miller & Starr, California Real Estate (3d ed.), Deeds of Trust and Mortgages, Chapter 10 §10.179; Anderson v. Heart Federal Sav. & Loan Assn., 208 Cal. App. 3d 202, 211 (3d Dist. 1989), reh’g denied and opinion modified, (Mar. 28, 1989); Miller v. Cote (4th Dist. 1982) 127 Cal. App. 3d 888, 894; System Inv. Corp. v. Union Bank (2d Dist. 1971) 21 Cal. App. 3d 137, 152-153; Bisno v. Sax (2d Dist. 1959) 175 Cal. App. 2d 714, 720.
    U.S. Supreme Court
    “Courts are constituted by authority and they cannot go beyond that power delegated to them. If they act beyond that authority, and certainly in contravention of it, their judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void, and this even prior to reversal.” Old Wayne Mut. I. Assoc.v McDonough, 204 U.S. 8, 27 S.Ct. 236 (1907); Williamson v Berry, 8 How. 495, 540, 12 L.Ed. 1170, 1189 (1850); Rose v Himely, 4 Cranch 241, 269, 2 L.Ed. 608, 617 (1808).
    California Appellate Court
    It is well settled that a judgment or order which is void on its face, and which requires only an inspection of the judgment-roll or record to show its invalidity, may be set aside on motion, at any time after its entry, by the court which rendered the judgment or made the order. [Citations.]’ (Ibid; accord Plotitsa v. Superior Court (1983) 140 Cal.App.3d 755, 761

    In light of Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the statutory requirements of Civil Code 2924(a) the current ruling has highly prejudiced Defendant’s due process and equal protection rights, and in the interest of justice the Court must now vacate its earlier ruling.

  2. CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT JUST DENIED THE DEPUBLICATION REQUEST FOR THE GLASKI CASE!

    http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/dockets.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=2058168&doc_no=S213814

  3. Call 1-800-829-1040. This is the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) toll-free number for customer service questions. When you call this number, you’ll be guided to choose menu options that apply to you. Follow the prompts for questions regarding your tax return.[1]
    You could also call your local IRS office and ask to speak to a tax representative or assistant. Google just call the IRS and ask for the number or call the company and tell them you are doing your taxes, and you need their EIN/FEIN number.

  4. Why doesn’t Kamala Harris arrest a banster? Phooey, this is nothing, nothing to see here.

  5. @Louise
    thanks but nothing at CA secyt of state website which has ein

  6. ARRESTS MADE IN CALIFORNIA MORTGAGE FRAUD SCAM

  7. Christine and Charles, this is James Smith from Maryland. We had a conversation a few days ago Christine gave me the name of a gentleman to get in touch with and I cant seem to find his name. Can you send me the information again. I am in the process of trying to find an attorney that gets it in Maryland. I received a Notice of Intent to Foreclose yesterday, so I need to move forward with the fight. You can email it to me jsmithf5915@msn.com or 443-677-2799. Thanks

  8. Jellybeans, Go the Secretary of State’s website the state where you are located or where the subject is located. Sometimes you will find it there. If not, you can call the IRS and ask for the FEIN number for a specific entity. It is public record. The FEIN number is another excellent way to find out if an entity is using similar or the same names to muddy the waters. The FEIN number is different for every entity. The banksters like to use similar and even the same name for a corp. so that they can fly under the radar.

  9. ANYBODY HAVE THE IRS EIN NUMBER FOR CARRINGTON?
    EIN IS THE TAX ID
    SOMETIMES YOU MIGHT SEE ONE LISTED IN A PSA OR OTHER DOCUMENT FILED WITH SEC

    APPRECIATE YOUR HELP ON THIS ONE

  10. […] But the way it is done and required to be done, the Plaintiff must file an attack on a case that has never been alleged anywhere in or out of court. The new beneficiary anoints itself, files a fraudulent substitution of trustee because the old one would never go along with it, and then files a notice of default and notice of sale all on the premise that they have the necessary proof and documents to support what could have been an action in foreclosure brought by them in a judicial manner, for which there is adequate provision in California law. READ MORE… […]

  11. jg

    Correct, it would be cheaper and less hassle. You know my point about insurance right? And BTW: my aunt is 88, god bless the ole girl!

    And please don’t pick on foghorn leghorn, I love him!

  12. RE: KC….have you ever had a thought that you didn’t immediately post?

    Let me think about that … hmmm ….. Nope!
    I always write everything down and get everything in writing …
    It started with a Diary as a child.

    Now .. lets talk about your Math Skills.
    Good Math Skills are an essential part of Accounting.

    For you my Friend,
    I recommend you go back for your GHD or hire yourself an accountant.

    Good Morning Sunshine!

  13. 249 comments, 9 of which weren’t KC’s. A new world record.

    KC….have you ever had a thought that you didn’t immediately post?

    Just curious.

  14. poppy – maybe your auntie should go get a pedicure instead.

  15. For those of you who don’t know anything about reverse mortgages.. let me say this.

    The accounting scheme works the same….

    The scam below is Exactly what they pulled with the Reverse Mortgages ( & annuities scam). They got only one borrower (usually the oldest or sickest) make them the borrower and FC on the Estate when the borrower dies.

    Somebody had to stand up and defend these elderly folks from being scammed. I do at closings and I learned how to defend from the Lawyers representing the widow/widowers in a RV FC on the Estate where the grantor/trustor reside as Tenants by the Entirety: A special type of joint ownership of property with rights of survivorship only allowed between a husband and wife.

  16. She got the Goldmine and I got the Shaft. 🙂

  17. State Martial Laws

    Estates

    His/Mine/Ours

    If he so chooses to leave his interests IN HIS HALF of ESTATE to a debt collector for his debt, so be it …
    But only I can determine my beneficiaries.

    And quite frankly that dag gone Trustee has a conflict of interest thing going on there.

    Cause … Hey! Here I am! I don’t want the Trustee to FC on ME.

    Hey! Lookie Here at Me HALF THE ESTATE .. a Surety and beneficiary with heirs. …

    OBJECT OBJECT … Bad Bad Trustee representing him or me.

    You got permission from all the benificiaries ya say .. huh mers?

    Really? Are you sure about that?

    Are you willing to put that in writing .. you know… the names of those who said they .. so you could act for me?

  18. Charles, That’s when … the crimes stopped.
    What a coincidence …. right?

    Now all that is left is to clean up the mess.

  19. KC I would file a complaint with the new Consumer Protection because they would require at least some answers form the attorney!

  20. That attorney .. don’t you worry about him … I’ve had him nailed by his lil pecker a long time.. he runs in circles and squawks. 🙂

    You should see the show that last minute NEW broker/lender who came into the picture at closing
    (who is the Grantor on the Warranty Deed)
    Can that Boy Dance!

    I tamed CW,REcontrust, BOA attorney along time ago.
    He didn’t like the idea of jail for a repeat offence I suspect.

  21. Even you KC, who obviously has some type legal background are distracted by the diversion. I voluntarily self assess myself – and I believe I owe nothing. I also cross out the word perjury on the bottom of my tax return – are you going to turn me in for that too.

  22. Charles, I went to the States Attorney a long time ago and reported it.
    She takes care of the criminal end of things while I and only I can carry out my private right of action.

    They didn’t get protection from ME in the settlements …

  23. Full Disclosure – thinking like a chicken hawk.

  24. Think Rooster …

  25. KC it seem if you (your husband) did not have anybody represent you or was the attorney acting for both side in this matter? However I see your problem more clearly now, and I without getting law enforce for the alter document that got whiteout on it. Where is the State Attorney General in this matter.

    You got a purchase agreement and a cashed check, and I would think all the other document from this closing. What there attorney saying who handled this matter? It show as if you should be going after the attorney. Have you contacted the FBI because this sound like thief by deception!

  26. Lookie Here .. Not one but two Mortgage Brokers!

    Let me count the ways …… I turn them in. 🙂

  27. Foghorn Leghorn was a racist cartoon.

  28. iwantmynpv.. you have a nasty Mouth!

    Boy and Girl are NOT racist words! My phrases come from an old cartoon …. buzz off

  29. Now remember this is after I just handed over $25,000 in cash for reinstatement Before I requested a payoff and offer of tender ……..That included $12,000 in unearned fees being charged to the account …

  30. @ Charles Reed – calling someone chick is clearly not a good comeback to Boy! Call her a cracker or a twat or something. Anything but chick. Also, white people do not call southern negro’s boy or charlie – we call them “lookies” i.e. Looky Looky here son. And for the urban negro we simply called them the element.

    Now here’s the best part – the blacks, white and spanish in my neighborhood could care less about names and all the other shit meant to divert attention. We all shared something in common – we were poor, and we looked out for one another from a territorial perspective.

    Meaning, who cares if a few grimy Jew bankers make a couple bucks. I’m not a jew, and when i sold mortgages I never discriminated. I disclosed and charged everyone as much as a possibly could by law, .

    Couldn’t give a rat’s ass if they were the smartest or dumbest people on the planet. Jews, Blacks Whites, it didn’t matter – Every HUD – $500.00 below 5%, and I would show them where i was clubbing them over the head with commission.

  31. And Charles, it was actually $143,000 payoff in exchange for title to complete our mortgage agreement.

  32. Boy, I say Boy …. you are getting on my last nerve!!

    There was NO MORTGAGE on this property when we bought it. It had been paid off for years! Vicky and her sister were the heirs to their parents estate and I saw the check to them for $136,000.
    They did not attend closing.

    I contacted Vicky (because she was the trustee who signed the trustee deed) in 2010 because of Title Problems. 1) the Missing Trustee Agreement 2) the missing Warranty Deed 3) the POA agreement between her and her parents attorney. 4) why was her parents trust not closed 5) why was title still in their trust

    I have never meet Vicky in person, but her growth chart was on the inside garage wall. One family home.

    She and her attorney have been very helpful .. knowing that I don’t want to sue them.. but rather her parents attorney who signed as POA for Trustee without Vickys knowledge or consent. The attorney who used white out on the Trustee Deed where he was granted Deed with my husband.

    Shall I continue?

  33. KC you said you offered the lender the full amount, I thought? But you did not get the signature needed to actual buy the property. Did not everybody want to sell their dear parent property to the highest bidder? Or was the monies not enough for one member so let not get their signature and let try and go around that person?

    Now remember I was in the mortgage loan business and have seen it all! So tell us the entire story Chick!

  34. I see everything you see KC…In the beginning I didn’t know what the heck end was up, took a long time. But since they are trying to enforce the note, like they own it or lent on it and claim losses, well… How can that be, I asked? Then the digging began, the letters, court actions, digging through deed offices and lo and behold….BOA NA is not a “playa”…CW was about to go bankrupt, if memory serves. Nothing was securitized, loans were not funded, lines of credit were not paid back, couldn’t pay their bills, etc…similar to New Century. BOA bought the servicing platform, like Ocwen has done to so many…these loans are dead.

    And if my information is correct, which I hope it is; the people being foreclosed on “do not” owe anything, nada. The loans have either been, written-off or paid-off long ago…and that brings another scenario to the plate. How many times can one collect on a a debt that has been satisfied? And if they cheated investors after they sold them, what is junk bonds…why should they (BOA) be paid anything, when they cheated people with false promises and defaulted streams of revenue? Investors took the loss, not BOA…Layman here

  35. Poppy .. BOA had 24months to clean up CWs mess with the Titles they already screwed up.. they had 24 months to FC on the CW fraud Lis Pendens or get a refi/mod with liability waivers.

    They had 24 months … then the releases begin.

    The End …..

  36. Poppy, in the beginning I didn’t give a rats butt about the Note.
    It was the Title to the Estate that they Liquidated and used as Collateral for their Much Bigger Debt.

  37. I agree KC, but that is why, IMO they kept CWHLS, BACHL to use the ghost entities for what appeared to be legal process, to steal properties. IMHO, none of the f/c are legal with AWL, CWHLS…not a one! Just because BOA bought “rights” does not make them owners with authority to sell anything…under the law, that is it.

    For me, I don’t care what the judges say, they are wrong. AWL is a “trade name” for one, not a lender and CWHLS was merged (have the documents from TX, NY, NC, etc) dead entities, no matter how hard you try to “resurrect” them with CPR, they are not parties to a legal action. Judges NEED to get this.

  38. Listen Up Boy!

    Original Purchase Loan. No Refi and No 2nd!

    Its time for you to be moving on Boy! No Cookies here for You!

  39. See PPM .. Private Placement Memorandum.

  40. KC pie hole mean mouth, you silly rabbit. But I listen to you cry about your case, but are criticizing me because they is an reward for recovering billion for the government, but you had two loans and it sounds as if you got one released from the trust you had but you also had a 2nd mortgage and did not get a subornation of that mortgage so the old 1st mortgage because the 2nd mortgage and called the loan due!

    No lender that think he in 1st and find out they are now in 2nd position is not taking you to court to call that baby due especial when the 2nd is as large as the 1st. Another thing you said does not make sense is that you offered to pay the $140K off and who not taking the $140K if that is whats due?

    We getting part of the story plus we got a tile from an estate where all the family not sign off on? What the real story KC? Anb I am not your boy!

  41. These cats are slick…you sign one contract and they adjust it to convert-sell the long-term value to investors. As far as “I” am concerned….I never agreed to my “promissory note” (different than a mortgage or security instrument, by the way)….being converted and sold multiple times, so as not to be accessible by me, in the event of….

    Again, just a laymen

  42. Poppy, I don’t know what BOA thinks it bought .. Servicing Rights?

    There are No Servicing Rights On Private Placement Securities.

  43. Defendants are held to a savvy set of improprieties and unethical procedures that included creating two wires from one loan as well as the estate using the stripped title as a transfer and sale into trust and by substituting out the original agreements and note with purchaser seller “installment sale contract”

  44. Any guesses where the “installment sale” contract comes in?

  45. And the property reverts back to the heirs. Yep, when trust was finally closed/closes. Most don’t know. so the property escheats to the State.

    My friend Vicky the Grantors Trustee and Heir did ….. tee hee hee… she gives it to me.

  46. The inference of insurance; like Medicare: my aunt goes to the foot doctor….the first time she needs an evaluation, so $85.00 plus, services, supplies $144.00. payment from Medicare and co-pay from B-Cross total of $109.00 bill to client $35.00. IMHO, the actual price for cutting toenails $35.00, the rest inflated and billed up.

    My point: the same crap is going on in real estate, with appraisals, and the collections of defaults in loans…f/c and debt collectors…just my opinion here.

  47. kc – was there a trust involved with your home before you bought it?

    Yes .. came from Revocable Trust ( No debts, no mortgage) after the Grantors passed away.

    Oh Holy Crap .. it then becomes irrevocable and all those taxes due.

    At closing We got a Trustees Deed and a Warranty Deed. They didn’t file the Warranty Deed and I know why…… The kept the sellers trust open for years after closing …. try refinancing or selling.

  48. You bet KC…with BOA, we estimated they paid approximately $450.00 per servicing. Or $450.00 a note, if the math is correct. That’s why it is worth the fight for them. One payment made them whole.

    I mean: who would buy a defaulted note? Answer, no one, which is what Shack said….the money is in the servicing. Trillions in servicing…and the f/c is a win-win with minimal investment.

  49. poppy – I’m sorry – who’s the “they” and btw, insurance cracks me up.
    I wonder if the provider gets to deduct the fees the insurance cos make them eat. Heck of a note. That’s socialized medicine already. How bout I bill you 400 to mow your lawn and I only get paid 40 and get to write off the 360? Oh, wait. Let’s legitimize it with a contract first.

  50. KC

    Going back to Ocwen, in 2009 I found the KPMG report on New Century (linked to Ocwen)…there were excel charts for default analysis for the % of loans they estimated would go belly up or would default. Ironically, that report is now missing in its entirety. Go figure

  51. Poppy… gambling with our Estates Value on WS … with all that profit made off our assets in trusts, how long do you think it took to pay the note down to zero?

    Sumbuddys gonna owe a lot of taxes on the trusts profits. Yikes!

  52. Actually, no. Hundreds of hours of research, some discovery and directions from some very, savvy folks around the country, with a couple of lawyers—professors.

  53. kc – was there a trust involved with your home before you bought it? Did “Mary Ellen” have a life estate in the home? If Mary Ellen had a life estate and then she died, the home reverts to the person who gave her the life estate or that person’s heirs (see will of person granting life estate if that person is also diseased), see doc(s) creating the life estate (if so). I’ve had the impression that someone in the act wanted to skip probate (of the estate of the person who granted Mary Ellen the life estate) when selling the property, but that’s because of your consistant ref to a life estate. Why probate would’ve been necessary, can’t tell – can’t tell much from tidbits! more strictly lay opinions

  54. As a matter of fact … I am betting they were counting on it FAILING!!

  55. Fantastic post. Wish we knew who the author was. This guy really knows what he is talking about. I think we can expect that this scheme was repeated by the other lender/banksters and, of course, it is still going on.

  56. jg

    It would be very interesting to see the books and find out what the value was of the notes? Hmmm… How much did “they” get paid?

    My bet: it works like Medicare…bill them at 400% of the value(appraisal), get the insurance and then send the bill for the balance. Which, in my opinion, in a real world, would be the actual cost of the service (property) @ $100,000.00. Something like that…

  57. KC, on February 23, 2014 at 6:30 pm said:

    JG,

    I didn’t know this …..

    “””” the estate transferred and conveyed irrevocably into trust. “”””””

    How can I get title after I pay off the note?
    How do I get the Estate out of an Irrevocable Trust?

    They knew dag gone well …. they couldn’t give back title because of the Trust .. they stole it before default!!! They knew the mortgage was unenforceable!! At Closing!!

    As a matter of fact … I am betting they were counting on it!!

  58. Poppy.. did Coyle help you nail down the goal posts?

  59. ML said “and what about Fidelity Title facilitating the transfer of so many fraudulent titles in the county records.”
    The foreclosure mill does what they are told ( for a nice fat fee of course – considering the risk) the sub trustee records ” on behalf of ” fidelity title. But the numbers don’t add up do they.
    I’m looking at the originating trustee ( conflict of interest – I know big woo) and then the rest is just as messy.

  60. JG,

    I didn’t know this …..

    “””” the estate transferred and conveyed irrevocably into trust. “”””””

  61. No one tries to snarf a borrower’s ‘estate’ by way of a home loan f/c exactly, except when a def judgment is allowed, in which case they can go after some or all the borrower’s estate, i.e., money, other assets. I could agree that you didn’t put up your entire estate as collateral for a loan – just the particular real property. Your other assets, the rest of your “estate”, are off limits. I know what an estate is and it includes all assets, real and personal. One may have collateralized a home but not the entirety of his “estate” unless there were some hjinx in the agreement (it’s poss to collateralize pers and real property, but it isn’t done in general home lending).
    Hmmm….now that I think about that, just for the hey of it, I’d say if an inflated appraisal were sought and used, only the actual value of the property at that time might be collateralized. The rest may be unsecured. And weren’t some rubes making loans which even exceeded the home’s value?! That has consequences re: enforcement and the UCC. But would have to be able to prove the loan exceeded the then-value, I would think.
    strictly lay opinions

  62. And in NC Senate Bill 954-2009

    General Assembly Of North Carolina Session 2009
    Senate Bill 954-Third Edition Page 5(2)
    A copy of the assignment or other writing establishing that the plaintiff is the owner of the debt. If the debt has been assigned more than once, then each assignment or other writing evidencing transfer of ownership must be attached to establish an unbroken chain of ownership. Each assignment or other writing evidencing transfer of ownership must contain the “original account number” of the debt purchased and must clearly show the debtor’s name associated with that account number.

    § 58-70-155. Prerequisites to entering a default or summary judgment against a debtor under this Part.

    (a) Prior to entry of a default judgment or summary judgment against a debtor in a complaint initiated by a debt buyer, the plaintiff shall file evidence with the court to establish the amount and nature of the debt.

    (b) The only evidence sufficient to establish the amount and nature of the debt shall be properly authenticated business records that
    satisfy the requirements of Rule 803(b) of the North Carolina Rules of Evidence. The authenticated business records shall include at least all
    of the following items:

    (1) The original account number.
    (2) The original creditor.
    (3) The amount of the original debt.
    (4) An itemization of charges and fees claimed to be owed.
    (5) The original charge-off balance, or, if
    the balance has not been charged off, an explanation of how the balance was calculated.
    (6) An itemization of post charge-off additions, where applicable.
    (7) The date of last payment.
    (8) The amount of interest claimed and the basis for the interest charged.

    This is not to say, many of the Judge even read this…one must insist they hear you! IMHO I like the part about the “ORIGINAL” account number….I have 4 with OCWEN.

  63. ….and there was no hearing ( as well as no heating- shut up Christine :-/)

  64. Poppy… 🙂

  65. So non judicial state no action …the house whoosh …under power of sale
    But then they want to throw you onto the curb. They file a unlawful detainer ( they really hate to do that that’s why they offer cash for keys remember that gimmick ) enter Rocket docket.
    Signed honorable judge ( or was it the rocket docket special pen) consider this
    No service of process as far as the complaint goes and served on wrong address and there was no hearing and it was supposed to be in front of a different judge per the docket AND wrong jurisdiction. Wanna talk about due process- I have a judgement against me that I discovered not that long ago, I have a 1099a for 2010 that I will not concede to until this lawsuit is over and it may take the rest if my life but I’ll do it this is bull .,
    How can you give a judgement when clearly docket indicates that proper service of process never happened and I was never there and there was no hearing there was a motion for a judgement curtesy of
    Foreclosure mill at tourney – motioned for a judgement and there was no heating do y’all hear me.

  66. The PPM securities holders who are the registrations securities issuers were allowed to construct a New York indenture holding fractional shares of the estate transferred and conveyed irrevocably into trust. Therefore Plaintiff alleges facts establishing a basis for a claim for facts constituting ground for rescission of underlying transaction making instrument voidable and for exemplary damages,

    “””” the estate transferred and conveyed irrevocably into trust. “”””””

  67. Judge Schack put Ocwen’s Anderson in his place quite nicely, going back…I have soooooo much “falsified” paperwork from Ocwen. As a matter of fact; my paperwork indicates, clearly….no misunderstanding; the note was defaulted on the accounting ledger, long before I had stopped paying. Further, a trust was opened on August 01, 2007 and closed August 31, 2007….whilst, my “supposed” note was defaulted on October 01, 2007….so, in order for the note to be in default it has to go 60-90 days unpaid——–where’s my money bitches ( I was paying)? The opening entry on the ledger ZERO balance……..Ooooops, guess the trust was not an option, He, he, he. And a cursory check will tell most, Ocwen is the last stop for bogus paper.

    james: AZ, OMG! Having checked thousands of satisfactions of instruments, Maricopa had the most from ALL over the USA. It is my opinion, the deed offices there are the worst….and everyone knows about it. No surprise the attorneys are few and far between.

    As far as BOA, they did in fact keep CW, CWHLS on board, distant to act in foreclosure, as BOA only purchased servicing platforms from CW, a payment stream. They “did not” purchase loans, there was no collateral assignment…NADA, hence the reason for keeping CWHLS to do its bidding-illegally! And as a matter of law, closed corporations cannot act in a legal capacity, file suit or defend a f/c action…they are dead, no matter what BOA tries to pull! Just my humble input.

  68. Its a Mortgage! ( Ha!)

    No its not a DOT!

    Its an instrument that creates the ESTATE!

    One contract made with the borrower and another contract with the investors.

  69. JG … there is your answer for “Altered Contracts” …

    different versions of the Mortgage .. with all that robo stuffs

  70. That’s It JG! Thank You!

    One party can not appoint a party as nominee for another ….

  71. kc, dang it. What irrevocable life estate? There’s no such thing involved with loans on homes (well, there could be if Mary is getting a loan based on her life estate – not the norm) Do you know what a life estate is? Irrevocable conveyance in dot? Yes. Life estate? No!

  72. kc, I don’t know where you live or what coll instrument they use. I can only say that in days past, the mortgage, a lien, a two-party instrument, did NOT contain words of conveyance. In my opinion and as far as I know, that bs was a creation of MERS & CO and is a load of worst word you can think of. Honestly, I think it’s unlawful to have words of conveyance in a “mortgage”. One thing which complicates things, esp when courts do it, is the interchange of the words “mortgage” and “dot”. They are NOT the same creatures. There is no mortgagee in a dot, just as there’s no ben in a mortgage.

  73. RE: . Cant fc the Trust/estate on the debt of only one borrower.

    Well you could if all others with an interest in the Estate allowed the Trustee to do it.

    Object Dag Gone It!! Object!!

  74. tnharry – been thinking about your comment at 9:18 on the 21st. First of all, some courts have ruled that a non-j f/c isn’t an action at all, action as defined by the presence of a guy (or gal) in a black robe (which I personally find egregious). Other courts have ruled that when the dot trustee has issued a NOD, the borrower is the true respondent in a court case altho he is postured as the plaintiff (having brought the matter to a court). I’d be interested in reading any cases on due process you have handy, if any. BUT, when the dot trustee is in the pocket of the alleged beneficiary and when the ben is not the ben and when the ben has no interest in the note, then I’d have to say that due process is being violated. The borrower, even and maybe especially, in non-j needs a trustee to be a referee, not one of the other two parties’ minion; when one party to a contract has no venue (because the trustee doesn’t hear the borrower’s side of things or provide the borrower with anything but a NOD) for a defense to the other side’s contention, as is the case just now in non-j foreclosure, there’s neither “due” nor “process” for that party. Even if “due process” were intended to be limited to state actions or court actions, it remains true that a person may not be separated from his property without it. Isn’t that found in the constitution without reference to a specific type of ‘action’? Well, heck, I looked it up in a cursory fashion but didn’t get the exact verbage of the constitutional amendments – looks like there’s two. It appears it originally was based on government action but has been expanded. Given that by the schematics of the deal, a dot trustee is to take the place of a judge in a court (don’t shoot the messenger – I didn’t come up with this deal), that guy has to perform according to the sanctity of that trust, or there is no due process. If I borrow from Joe and his sister is the trustee and to boot, she is paid more for getting my property (which is generally the case), there’s no due process there.
    Joe unilaterally choosing his sister is bad enough. Joe being the only one paying her is sick, too. That fee should be split equally and no extra pay by the lender for “success”. imo.

  75. “”Irrevocable Life Estate”” ..

  76. KC, on February 23, 2014 at 2:59 pm said:

    Farmers Prod. Credit Ass’n of Middletown v. Taub, 121 A.D.2d 681, 682 (2d
    Dep’t 1986) (“The existence of actual intent . . . is generally a question of fact which precludes summary judgment . . . [t]he question of whether the defendants
    acted in good faith, or whether they actually intended to hinder, delay or defraud the plaintiff, presents a triable issue of fact.”).

  77. Remember me pounding my head into the wall trying to enforce a mortgage lien?

    It doesn’t exist and the mortgage is unenforceable!

  78. First .. I’m not a borrower on the note.
    Fraud on the Face … presented as a MORTGAGE
    Fraud in the Inducement … MORTAGE LIEN —

    Its a Big Leap from a mortgage lien to …..

    Title to the Household Estate placed Irrevocably into Life Trust

    I again implore you to look at the meaning of “ESTATE”
    .. its meaning is not just the dam house!.. but the whole kit and caboodle. Cant fc the Trust/estate on the debt of only one borrower.

  79. KC @ 7:01 02/22 – I really don’t know what you mean by that. In so far as the trust created in dot, I guess it’s irrevocable because the borrower may not get back what is conveyed in a dot until he has paid off the loan. I don’t get what you think has been waived by the mtgee.
    I sometimes think you are following whn’s thinking about some stuff, but I rarely can get what you’re saying on that line. What’s bugging me just now is the frequent reference to the “conversion” of notes to MBS’s I see out there. If taken literally, and how else would one take it, it’s disconcerting. But, as I frequently say, none of it means jack until they’re stopped from entering the court room when their entry is based on alleged poss of a neg instrument and a “MERS” assgt.* In other words, as long as most courts singularly rely on those two things, we aren’t getting to first base. And, hate to say it, but if these notes are negotiable, which I think they aren’t, it may be that courts don’t have to consider much else – except a biggie: injury, the key to the jurisdictional door.

    * “In one foreclosure case where a claimant was squarely confronted about “MERS” authority to assign the note, PHH v Anderson, PHH agreed that MERS had no authority to assign the note, but averred the assignment of the note in that instrument was merely “superfluous”.
    I’d have to disagree. The recordation of an instrument carries an obligation to contain only facts and an instrument is recorded, significantly, to provide notice of, and reliance on, those facts. If the assignment of the note is “superflous”, meaning it’s not what it says and is not to be relied on, it shouldn’t be contained in a recorded
    instrument. It seems the party who has executed such an assignment wants it both ways: it wants to make a record for its own purposes “over there”, and yet that same party says it’s not to be factually relied on by the one party it affects most: the homeowner. “

  80. But let get to your case and ask why you were putting your property in that Trust? Was it to protect you from any legal claims so you would not suffer personnel financial losses of either you are your husband business?

    hahahaha!! If I had known about the Trust … Never Mind!!

    And for future reference … Its cookies my boy! Cookies! Not Pie!

    ———-> Careful with your language there Boy …

  81. and what about Fidelity Title facilitating the transfer of so many fraudulent titles in the county records.

  82. Poppy, this is you to!

    Anyone with time to research, could, of course, assist Congresswoman Waters and Superintendent Lawsky by proving them with copies of these Ocwen-made Affidavits, Assignments and Allonges from county records nationwide.

  83. @usedkarguy due process applies because there are forgeries involve, so that the lender is can use this procedures. The only reason that non-judicial is used if you got a valid DOT on file and that why DocX & MERS were creating these bad document so they did not have to present actual evidence of ownership.

    @kc I could not wait for you to open your pie hole about enrichment! The reason your not having any luck is because attorney do see any money to be made. People don’t go to work to not make money and these attorney did not go to school to do charity work.

    But let get to your case and ask why you were putting your property in that Trust? Was it to protect you from any legal claims so you would not suffer personnel financial losses of either you are your husband business?

    Stop with half of the story in your case and lay it out here as enrichment is not your interest here!

  84. After examining these strange Affidavits, it may be that someone with regulatory or congressional authority will examine the Mortgages Assignments and Note Endorsements (Allonges) prepared by Ocwen for Trustees of RMBS trusts. In tens of thousands of cases, Ocwen employees (often the same employees who swear that the loan documents were received, then lost) swear that mortgages were transferred and notes endorsed to RMBS trusts in 2007, 2008 and 2009, when these trusts closed in 2004 – 2006, and when the loans were already in default. Such transfers, if they occurred as Ocwen states, would violate the trust rules which could, in turn, cause serious tax consequences for the trusts. Like the Affidavits, these Assignments and Allonges are used in court cases, in foreclosures and bankruptcies, across the country.

    Anyone with time to research, could, of course, assist Congresswoman Waters and Superintendent Lawsky by proving them with copies of these Ocwen-made Affidavits, Assignments and Allonges from county records nationwide.

  85. A visit (online or in person) to the Recorder of Deeds offices in almost any county in the country, to the Affidavits section in particular, reveals that most of the Lost Note Affidavits and Lost Assignment Affidavits are filed by Ocwen. In these Affidavits, an Ocwen employee always swears that Ocwen received these critical loan documents, the actual note and/or the mortgage assignment, but somehow lost the documents after receiving them. There was no fire or flood or strange theft – the documents were just lost, and yet, so swears the Ocwen employee, Ocwen is sure the originals were received by Ocwen. These Ocwen employees offering their sworn statements must have incredible memories, as Ocwen was responsible for processing hundreds of thousands of mortgage documents.

  86. There are, of course, many reasons for concern when any single entity quickly acquires as much as Ocwen has acquired:

    June 2013– OneWest Bank sold $78 billion in mortgage servicing rights to Ocwen;

    October 2012– Homeward Residential sold $77 billion (about 422,000 mortgage loans) in mortgage servicing rights to Ocwen;

    October 2011– Morgan Stanley sold Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. with $26.6 billion in mortgage servicing rights to Ocwen.

    June 2011– Goldman Sachs Group, the parent of Litton Loan Servicing, LP, sold Litton to Ocwen with $41.2 million in mortgage servicing rights;

    May 2010– Barclays Capital sold HomEq, its U.S. mortgage servicing business, to Ocwen with $28 billion in mortgage servicing rights.

  87. James, the writing is on the wall ..

    RE: ” Laws vary from state to state and a qualified attorney from your jurisdiction should be consulted!”

    This is an open forum to discuss and share information and idea’s, not to seek legal advise. Sorry.

  88. And Aman .. backoff TNharry. Your judgment is to poor in distinguishing between the enemy fire and the friendly fire. He is one of the smartest people here. And he knows Exactly what he talking about.

  89. A-Man, don’t got there. Trust Me, he is not working for anyone except to enrich himself.

  90. Charlie is a friendly term. You are out of control.
    I dont have time for you anymore.
    Send my regards to your Masters the banksters.
    NEVER AGAIN

  91. UKG, I take it you requested that Title Abstract Report and Commitment for Title Ins ?

    Everybody is going to Court.

  92. try finding a Lawyer in Arizona! They all SUCK! they will take your money but NOT tell you about ARS 33-811(c) that gets you thrown out BEFORE you even get to court.. YOU PAY THEIR LAWER FEE’S, your lawyer gets paid! your SCREWED… they got it all WIRED against the HOMEOWNER.

  93. Laws vary from state to state and a qualified attorney should be consulted!

    ROFLMBO

  94. @ E. ToLLe, on February 23, 2014 at 12:12 pm “great story”

    @ A-Man Harry says ” I stand 100% by my statement that due process is not applicable to nonjudicial foreclosure absent state action. it’s simply not even open to debate” He is correct. Non-judicial was devised to eliminate a court case wherein the facts were the facts, the banks were banks, people read newspapers, the borrowers paid their bills because commerce and currency was trade-based and not debt-based, and everything usually worked because criminals did not have control of the system
    The fact that the banks are abusing the process leads to the homeowner needing to file a state action to defend against the trustee sale.
    Will somebody please say laws vary from state to state and a qualified attorney should be consulted?
    OH! Thanks, Gene.

    “and when my wife said she wanted a 12″ pecker, I told her I wasn’t cutting two inches off for anybody!”

  95. Do you want to know another problem I have with you Charles, besides your Entitlement BS and Pipe Dreams?

    You make this out to be “Just what you saw” that’s a problem. Because IF I did that, I would be saying this …

    I know because I .. I .. I only closed loans for middle class. Asian, Black and majority Whites. Lawyers, Teachers, Law Enforcement,… they were all Well Educated and didn’t know crap about what was going on right under there noses!!

    I’m not screaming .. hey Its a racial thing!

    Stop That!!!!!!!

  96. Look The A Man, I know you are being racist when referring to me by using Charlie as I have never referred myself as Charlie is what ole southern white would call 90yr old black males along with son and boy!

    So I worked for this Jewish family who had owned this big furniture store and both the husband and wife spent 5yrs in jail, for running a credit card skimming scam for of their customers.

    Now getting out of jail their had their son be the front to this mortgage company as the owner. Now what they did was hire ever con in the area, including ex-crack dealers and a twice convicted felon of embezzlement who applied for the job while in prison looking for a job for work release.

    Within a couple months the guy was living in a $400,000 house still on parole. So the black Chicago crack deal was ripping off all his customers and you got it the embezzler in now back in prison for embezzling the mortgage customers funds from the refinances and the company was shut down by the state. This was 8yrs after I had left due to this activities.

    While working at the bank across the hall was Roland Arnall AmeriQuest that the FBI came in and raided and shut the place down. AmeriQuest was sued in 48 of the 50 States in the Union. I not saying all Jews or all blacks, because I seen a bunch of whites also commit these crimes, but in the financial sector Jew have leadership roles and have taken advantage of what they are masters at, and that is financing, like a black NFL running back!

    Blacks were hired by these mortgage companies to sell this subprime crack mortgages in the black communities, and it screwed these folks out their properties as these loan were attached to this rigged LIBOR! Racist that!

  97. Farmers Prod. Credit Ass’n of Middletown v. Taub, 121 A.D.2d 681, 682 (2d
    Dep’t 1986) (“The existence of actual intent . . . is generally a question of fact which precludes summary judgment . . . [t]he question of whether the defendants
    acted in good faith, or whether they actually intended to hinder, delay or defraud the plaintiff, presents a triable issue of fact.”).

  98. • Bank of America planned and executed the full “integration” and
    “combination” of Countrywide’s productive assets and business
    operations into its own businesses.
    • As a result, Bank of America de facto merged with Countrywide, leaving
    CFC and CHL behind as “orphans” to act as “filters” for contingent
    liabilities.
    © 2012 DOAR Privileged and Confi1de0n2tial
    • MBIA’s de facto merger claim is governed by New York law: there is no
    genuine conflict between New York law and that of other potential
    jurisdictions, and the parties’ contacts overwhelmingly favor New York.
    • Even if Delaware law did control, Bank of America would be liable under
    the correct Delaware de facto merger standard

  99. And yes E-Tollee .. Taxpayer losses from beginning to End !

    More losses than you can ever imagine!

  100. That’s why they kept CWs bad assets at arm length and didn’t transfer them .. (left behind)

    And threaten to BK CW if they don’t get their way.

  101. MGIC didn’t get Briggs Liabilities because of the BK.
    And because MGIC did not enjoin the Davis’s in the FC (knowing they had surety interest) lost its chance .. Tick Tock

    BOA did get CWs liabilities.

  102. Charlie That is again a racist comment. Or as the late Great Comedian Patrice O’neil would say. You’re a F@cking Racist Mr Reed. Free yourself from the hate and remove the shackles of slavery. You still think like a slave. Regarding Blacks not being good at finance. That is utter bullsh@t.
    NEVER AGAIN.

  103. Davis (as surety) lost any claim they had against Briggs because of settlement and agreement with MGIC.

  104. RE: (unlike Briggs in the Coyle Case)

    Sorry .. Briggs went BK then entered into agreement with MGIC.

    CW didn’t BK .. they did what with BOA?
    So KC (Davis) as Surety still has a liability claim against who?

  105. “CW” it went into partnership with Bank of America (PPM)

    (unlike Briggs in the Coyle Case)

  106. Countrywide began fraudulently charging for expenses that were never incurred, inflating the monthly amounts it was charging borrowers for their impound accounts. Where a borrowers monthly contribution for property taxes may have been $50, Countrywide began charging $100. When the borrower questioned the increase, Countrywide threatened to foreclose. If the threat of foreclosure didn’t work, Countrywide would then threaten to ruin the borrowers credit by reporting late mortgage payments.

    For those unfortunate borrowers with enough backbone to stand up to Countrywide, the result more often than not was that Countrywide filed foreclosure suits against them, ruined their credit by falsely reporting the borrowers had defaulted on their payments,

    KC … So what did these borrowers do about this?

  107. KC
    let me add that Turner is the woman living in my property with her fraudulent title. The crooks have all connected.

  108. kc

    Bank of America is holding the mortgage for their client F Turner even though they know she holds a fraudulent title and they even modified it for her. Fraud begets fraud.

  109. subject mortgage and or mortgage deed of trust is likewise found null and void

  110. It is safe to say that Bank of America will never be able to defraud these borrowers again, nor will it be able to take their homes away.

  111. . To avoid dual consideration the note must be ruled unenforceable and declared void.

  112. The A Man, most blacks are not the smart in financial matters! Is that racist or is that stating a fact!

  113. THE COURT GRANTING JUDGMENT AGAINST defendants as having failed to procure a proper judicial foreclosure,

  114. The A Man, you talking about me being racist is not going to work to let Goldman Sachs or John Paulson off the hook. You have racist in these Jews who has stolen millions of people homes and they are the one who are racist. I did not say all Jewish people where involved, but I know that some are.

    I did not say Jews financed all the slave trade or owned all the ship but they did do both. I not saying that Africans did not participate in the selling of other Africans. So why when mentioning Jews part in this that someone is racist.

    I am black and black are using this same technique to stop people from criticizing Obama for being stupid, by calling everybody racist. This group of RICH Jews have been stealing people’s properties, and call me what you want, but they are as they put all this faulty financial products on the market starting with AmeriQuest and its founded Roland Arnell and next with Countrywide co-founder in David Loeb who also co-founded IndyMac as both business are out of business.

    Do you want me to continue?

  115. Nothing will be fixed until the issue of the IRS has been resolved once and for all.

    “Over the years, the IRS’ fraudulent publications, misapplied tax code and deliberate omissions have trained lawyers and judges to continue this fraud by unwittingly paying taxes for which we are clearly not liable. We allow our liberties and our living to be confiscated and pillaged by the lawless, criminal ruling class to the extent to which we allow lawyers and judges to willfully misapply tax laws. According to the 2013 Tax Advocate Service annual report the taxpayer has just a 2% chance of success if they challenge the IRS.”

    “We Want Our god-Damn Money Back!

    There are now movements afoot to mount a massive new class-action suit against the IRS. We applaud these efforts and would add a clarion call to all patriotic American lawyers who have the courage and fortitude to stand up for American citizens and flood the courts with lawsuits to reveal the illegality of the income tax, expose the IRS for its criminal fraud and force the courts to uphold our U.S. Constitution.The elite have long relied upon our not knowing the truth and not knowing what to do. Now that we know the truth, will we continue to allow them to take our money and ask “but what can I do?”

    At our inception as a country we freed ourselves from tyranny, and we must do it again — monumental change will be achieved by We The People joining together.”

    http://nesaranews.blogspot.com/2014/02/keenan-report-irs-thugs-part-2-of-3.html

    I have my issues with Neil Keenan and Nesara. Don’t have any issue with the illegitimacy of IRS: it’s been established forever. They just report on it.

  116. And now for a little light Sunday reading…..

    I have no idea who the author of this piece is, I’ve had this in my files for quite some time. I’m posting it here to acquaint folks who are not aware of this aspect of the Great Crime Spree we’ve been witnessing for several years now, as well as to alert anyone who has AWL, a NY corp (with no mention of CWHL in the loan docs), as to the facts of their pretend lender. I would, however, add a caveat, a big one….this author makes it sound like this is a pretty cut and dried deal, that it’s now well established that AWL’s bogus mortgages are toast and should be somewhat easily voided, now that this criminality has been shown to be the fraud that it is. Nothing could be further from the truth. BofA is still foreclosing on AWL’s bogus loans with complete impunity, and with total complicity of regulators and the rest of the clowns in DC who are supposed to watch the FIRE for we the people.
    Ps. I had to remove the links at the bottom of this piece, as wordpress usually freaks out when two links are posted in the same comment, also due to the fact that the links weren’t complete from the original piece, rendering them null.
    ___________________________

    Bank of America Fraud (Author unknown)
    (This fraud includes conspirator banks Bank of New York Mellon,
    Deutsche Bank, and U.S. Bank, NT)
    Bank of America (hereafter BOA) is the largest criminal enterprise on earth. Every day, BOA defrauds hundreds of thousands of its customers along with innocent borrowers who have loans that are either originated or serviced through BOA or its predecessor, Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.

    Despite having been fined several billion dollars by various state and federal agencies continuously over the last 4 years, BOA continues to defraud the public and abuse the court system against innocent victims that are unable to fight back. Although BOA was forced to pay billions in fines, those dollars have not trickled down to the victims who have lost their homes, had their credit destroyed, lost their jobs, lost their retirement, and lost their ability to live the American dream.

    One must ask, how and why does BOA continue to defraud people when they ultimately get caught and get fined? The answer is actually quite simple.

    As to how does BOA continue to defraud people, the simple fact is that BOA is trusted with people’s lives, income, retirement, homes and money because they are a bank. Along with that trust comes the ability to abuse and take advantage of that trust. When that happens, BOA knows there will ultimately be a fine, but it also knows that the profit and benefit from its fraud will always be larger than the fine. And they know they will never be criminally prosecuted. So, on a daily basis, BOA uses fraud as a common practice to make income. (Too big to fail? Too big to prosecute?)
    As to why does BOA continue to defraud people, that answer is also sadly simple. It has to continue to use fraud as a daily business principle because it has committed so much fraud in the past, that it must continue to use fraud to cover up the past fraud. It is that unending cycle of deception your parents warned you about when you told your first lie…”if you tell a little lie now, your lies will get bigger and bigger to cover up the previous lies, until you lose the meaning of truth.”

    That is where Bank of America is right now. It has committed so much fraud in the past that it can no longer operate without keeping secrets, breaking laws, and taking what is not theirs to take.
    Because the fraud committed by Bank of America is so extensive, complex, and sophisticated, it would be impossible to outline even a small percentage of the fraud that takes place on a daily basis in this single writing. We can however, expose one small segment of BOA’s fraud that affects 3.5 million homeowners and involves approximately 10B in home loans. If you are one of those 3.5 million borrowers/homeowners, you should continue to read all of this.
    Bank of America, through its predecessor, Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., originated 3.5 million loans between 2003 and 2007 that were neither funded nor owned by CHL or BOA. These loans were derived from credit lines established by the Federal Reserve to Countrywide, which were public funds. Thus, Countrywide was entrusted with approximately 10B in tax payer funds for which it was allowed to make home mortgages to the very tax payers who supplied the money being used.

    Once those loans were funded, Countrywide was then supposed to bundle and transfer those loans as securities to Wall Street Investment Firms as securitized investments, mostly held by trusts involving billions of dollars of American mortgages. Once that was done, the money paid by the Investment Firms then should have been paid back to the Federal Reserve so that the taxpayer’s money was returned. But Countywide never transferred those loans, and they don’t own them.

    This was a fairly simple and straight forward process that allowed Countrywide to reap hundreds of millions of dollars in profits for loan and related fees by using tax payer money to originate loans that it could not otherwise make because it didn’t have sufficient resources.
    That window period of 4 years mentioned earlier, 2003 to 2007 was a very important time for Countrywide. It was at that time that CHL determined it was going to dominate the mortgage business and outpace its competitors by creating a service portfolio in excess of 10 trillion dollars and capture over 40% of the home mortgage business.

    Not only did Countrywide lack the funds to make that many loans, but it lacked the cash flow to pay the expenses required on a daily basis to process that many loans. So, it did 2 things,
    first, it went into partnership with Bank of America and immediately received a 4B credit line, and second, it initiated an aggressive loan servicing program immersed in fraud, which increased its daily cash flow by hundreds of millions of dollars.

    The 4B credit line was public knowledge, so it does not need further discussion at this time. In conjunction with the 4B credit line to Countrywide, Bank of America had also become very involved in Countrywide’s home lending activity.

    The fraudulent servicing program initiated at that time by Countrywide immediately impacted hundreds of thousands of borrowers whose loans were serviced by Countrywide. In fact, it was this fraudulent servicing program concocted by Countrywide that started the foreclosure nightmare that ultimately resulted in the mortgage meltdown. Here is how Countrywide’s fraudulent servicing program worked, and what it did for Countrywide.

    During the aforementioned window period, 2003 to 2007, Countrywide was servicing approximately 20 million loans. Countrywide was entrusted with administering and servicing those loans to protect both the borrowers and the investors who had ultimately funded those loans. While the investors were additionally protected by insurance policies against negligence or loss caused by Countrywide, the borrowers were the sacrificial lambs that Countrywide focused on.

    Each borrower trusted Countrywide to accurately charge and pay out funds for property taxes, insurance and other legitimate expenses connected to their loans. Each borrower, in addition to making their principal and interest payment, paid additional sums within their monthly payment to cover these other expenses. It is often called an impound account.

    Typically, Countrywide, as the loan servicer, would determine the annual amount necessary to pay a borrowers property taxes and insurance, divide those amounts by 12, then add that 1/12th amount to the borrowers monthly payment of principal and interest. As long as the loan servicer is competent, honest and trustworthy this arrangement benefits the borrower.

    But Countrywide turned this borrower-beneficial service into one of the most fraudulent and prolific money makers of all times, which continued for 4 years.

    Countrywide began fraudulently charging for expenses that were never incurred, inflating the monthly amounts it was charging borrowers for their impound accounts. Where a borrowers monthly contribution for property taxes may have been $50, Countrywide began charging $100. When the borrower questioned the increase, Countrywide threatened to foreclose. If the threat of foreclosure didn’t work, Countrywide would then threaten to ruin the borrowers credit by reporting late mortgage payments.

    This process was repeated on borrowers insurance premiums and other impound expenses. Where the monthly premium may have been $25, Countrywide began charging $50. This example would be indicative of a modest mid-west home valued at $80,000. The stakes were much higher on more expensive homes located in California, Florida, New York, etc.

    In many cases, the borrowers just accepted the increase in monthly payments under the belief that their taxes, insurance, or both, had actually increased. With these borrowers, Countrywide had an unobstructed path to hundreds of millions of dollars in fraudulent profits.

    Other borrowers who were on a tighter budget and could not afford the increase, resisted and opposed the inflated charges by demanding an accounting and refusing to pay. Countrywide’s response was to threaten foreclosure if the amounts were not paid. This threat usually worked and vastly reduced the number of borrowers who refused to pay, and left just a small percentage of borrowers who either could not pay, or refused to pay the fraudulent charges. For those unfortunate borrowers with enough backbone to stand up to Countrywide, the result more often than not was that Countrywide filed foreclosure suits against them, ruined their credit by falsely reporting the borrowers had defaulted on their payments, and ultimately steam rolled those borrowers into poverty-riddled-oblivion through an uninterested and uncaring court system.
    Initially, and for the first couple of years, the courts were basically non-existent when it came to recognizing and enforcing a borrower’s rights. Not only were these borrowers being victimized by Countrywide’s enormous fraud, but they were being victimized a second time by disinterested courts who failed and refused protect these borrowers or otherwise enforce the laws and regulations that were in place to prevent such egregious corporate fraud.
    Finally in 2008 and 2009 the Bankruptcy Courts began recognizing the fraud orchestrated by Countrywide (now Bank of America) which started to turn the tides on the tidal wave of fraud then being continued by BOA. As stated earlier, BOA continues to commit fraud everyday to cover up the fraud of yesterday. Since 2008, BOA has been fined billions of dollars for fraud and has been ordered to cease and desist from dozens of fraudulent business practices.
    Once the Bankruptcy Courts began dissecting BOA’s loan servicing procedures, it quickly learned that there many frauds on many levels, which resulted in thousands of claims made by BOA in bankruptcy proceedings being denied. BOA was then forced to either come clean, or devise more sophisticated frauds.

    Unfortunately, they chose the latter. Soon BOA began the process of robo signing loan and foreclosure documents which allowed their fraudulent claims and foreclosures to proceed.
    Again, this more sophisticated fraud, which involved outsourced foreclosure companies working at the direction of BOA was discovered and exposed by the Bankruptcy Courts and some very diligent attorneys. As the Bankruptcy rulings began to permeate the public domain, state courts began to recognize their duty to protect the public from this prolific predator.

    Soon state court rulings against Bank of America and Countrywide began to hit the news stands which provided much needed relief for those lucky borrowers who had their cases heard by courts that actually protected their rights. For some of those monumental rulings, New York, Washington State, Massachusetts, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, and Ohio became leaders in the fight to protect borrowers from the leaner, meaner BOA fraud.

    For anyone with more than a mild interest and access to Google, you can search out the hundreds of cases against Bank of America and Countrywide in the various state and federal courts that have resulted in landmark cases against BOA and protected the rights of borrowers.

    With Bank of America now under significant judicial and public scrutiny, and the effect of the many cease and desist orders currently in effect against it, once again it had the opportunity to either come clean, or to continue to defraud the public and the courts with its scandalous business practices.

    And once again, BOA has chosen the latter where it continues to defraud millions of borrowers and homeowners by fraudulent loan servicing and foreclosure practices.

    To insulate itself from the present scrutiny it is under and the effect of the cease and desist orders now against it, BOA has brought in banking conspirators to assist it with perpetuating its elaborate frauds on borrowers.

    Three of those known conspirators are Bank of New York Mellon, Deutsche Bank, and U.S. Bank, NT. Each of these banks have also been heavily fined for fraudulent practices and are actively participating in defrauding the public and the courts by participating in the fraudulent transfers of loans that do not belong to Bank of America. They make it appear that such a loan was sold by Bank of America to one of the conspirators, then that conspirator completes a foreclosure on a borrower who has been completely victimized by the process. In every case, the borrower is kept in the dark as to the true owner of his loan, which is not any of these conspirators.
    An additional conspirator, Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) is actively participating in this enormous fraud by acting as the party to cause the loan transfer. The inability of MERS to transfer anything of value is well settled by many state and federal courts, but the Kansas Supreme Court was the first to get it right. (See Kansas Supreme Court, Landmark National Bank, MERS, et al)
    As stated earlier in this article, this writer has identified a very extensive and sophisticated fraud that was formed and perfected by Bank of America that is affecting 3.5 million borrowers. And as also previously mentioned, this fraud involves co-conspirators Bank of New York Mellon, Deutsche Bank and U.S. Bank NT. In fact, Bank of New York Mellon and BOA use the same California address as the now defunct Countrywide.

    The plan started out in 2003 under Countrywide direction in anticipation of dominating the home mortgage industry. As every state has strict guidelines for mortgage lending, and requires state licensing, Countrywide sought to circumvent individual state licensing laws and corporation taxes by using a name and entity that would stay under the radar. This was one of the earliest frauds connected to this scheme and was devised to avoid taxes and licensing.

    The plan began to unfold when Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. began registering the trade name Americas Wholesale Lender with the Secretary of State in each state it sought to do business. Accordingly, each respective secretary of state would show “Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. dba Americas Wholesale Lender, under the foreign corporation registration section.
    The plan quickly materialized because most, if not all states, were lax in their corporate law enforcement. The name slid under the radar just as expected. Countrywide began making thousands of loans in every state under the name of Americas Wholesale Lender and successfully avoided licensing requirements and paying taxes on profits that were actually realized by Countrywide.

    Countrywide encountered a major snag when observant county recorders in several states refused to record security documents (mortgages and trust deeds) that were held by a trade name or dba, ie: Americas Wholesale Lender. Trade names have no legal capacity, therefore they cannot own property, file lawsuits, or hold recorded security interests.

    For a full discussion see Pagano v. Americas Wholesale Lender, 87 Conn. App. 474.

    Countrywide quickly addressed the problem by committing yet another fraud, which listed the lender on their mortgages and deeds of trust as follows: “Lender is Americas Wholesale Lender, a Corporation organized and existing under the laws of New York”.
    After making this minor, albeit fraudulent and scandalous change in language, Countrywide resubmitted its mortgages to the previously unwilling county clerks who accepted them without reservation because the mortgage holder was now shown to be a corporation. No one noticed that no such corporation was in existence. But that was to come.

    Although Countrywide had dodged that bullet, the reality was that their fraud would be discovered at some point in the future, however they believed that the savings in corporation tax, licensing fees and recording fees would outweigh the future potential cost. They also believed that the courts would consider their fraud just a clerical error, which for many unfortunate borrowers, became true.
    By 2005, many of the loans made in the name of “Americas Wholesale Lender, a New York Corporation began to default. Adding to that problem, Countrywide was bilking its borrowers with its loan servicing fraud by inflating impound charges which increased the default ratio. Because home prices were at an all-time high in 2005 and 2006, Countrywide gladly foreclosed on any property it could because it created more profit than a current loan would. Countrywide, through its self-owned companies Land Safe Title and CT Services was now a leading foreclosure entity.
    By late 2006, Countrywide was beginning to have some difficulty in foreclosing on the loans that were made in the name of the non-existent corporation, Americas Wholesale Lender, a New York Corporation. The only address listed for this corporation was a P.O. Box in Plano, Texas.

    Borrowers and attorneys alike smelled a rat, but they were confused as to how, and who to file suit against, related to a New York entity that didn’t appear to exist and operated only from a P.O. Box in Texas. And while this confusion persisted, Countrywide continued with their foreclosures like a speeding train on a downhill run. Nobody could stop them because it was impossible to determine who the lender was.

    Finally by late 2007, Countrywide imploded due to their extensive frauds committed in the loan origination and loan servicing areas. With Bank of America standing in the shadows, it quietly stepped into the shoes of Countrywide and continued to run the business as usual. By this time the frauds were so extensive that Bank of America made the decision to continue to use fraud as their means to achieve their goals.

    By this time the foreclosure rate began to soar as the value of homes began to plummet. By 2008, Countrywide was a dirty word and Bank of America was now fully in the foreclosure business. Confusion and speculation was rampant, but determined attorneys were diligent in seeking answers to questions related to lenders, loan documents, procedures in the lending areas, loan servicing, loan transfers and a variety of secrets being kept by Bank of America involving Countrywide loans made in the name of a non-existent corporation.

    It was during this time that the secret was discovered… there were 3.5 million loans made in the name of Americas Wholesale Lender, a New York Corporation, (still no such corporation was in existence) and such loans were funded with taxpayer money, they were never sold to securitized trusts as required by their pooling agreement, they were being controlled by Bank of America, Bank of America was collecting payments on those loans, and Bank of America was foreclosing on those loans despite the fact that BOA did not own or fund those loans.

    In an effort to stop Bank of America’s extensive fraud against innocent borrowers, concerned and responsible individuals formed the New York Corporation named America’s Wholesale Lender, Inc. a New York Corporation. (Hereafter AWLI)

    Once that was done, the matter was brought to the attention to the United States District Court that Bank of America was foreclosing on loans it didn’t own and loans that were made in the name of a corporation that BOA held no interest in. The U.S. District Court dismissed the matter as irrelevant and allowed BOA to continue with its fraud. This shocking revelation can be confirmed by review of the case that was filed against Bank of America. (Currently under seal)
    One immediate result of the newly formed Americas Wholesale Lender, Inc. a New York Corporation was that disgruntled borrowers now had a name, address and entity to file suit against. Based upon court records, it is estimated that over 500 suits were filed against AWLI in the first 6 months. At least another 500 suits were filed in the following 6 months. Additionally, Bankruptcy trustees were serving adversary proceedings on AWLI seeking to void mortgages held in the name of AWLI. In all, more than 2000 lawsuits were filed against AWLI related to the fraudulent loans originated by Countrywide.

    Because the individuals who incorporated AWLI were sensitive to the plight of the borrowers, and they were aware of the extensive frauds being committed by BOA, the officers and directors of AWLI decided to take a non-confrontational approach with borrowers who simply sought to cancel their loans made to AWLI. If those suits did not seek monetary damages against AWLI, and simply sought to cancel the mortgage and remove the lien from their property, then AWLI decided not respond to the lawsuit and allow a default judgment to be entered in the borrowers favor. Likewise, when an adversary proceeding was filed against AWLI in a Bankruptcy Court, and the relief sought was to cancel the mortgage, again AWLI simply failed to respond which allowed the Bankruptcy Court to enter a default judgment in favor of the debtor.

    Based upon court records in 22 states involving lawsuits against AWLI that went to default judgment, including bankruptcy cases, it appears that borrowers were able to cancel approximately 18.5 million dollars worth of the fraudulent loans created by Countrywide with taxpayer money. It is safe to say that Bank of America will never be able to defraud these borrowers again, nor will it be able to take their homes away.

    Currently, the more sophisticated foreclosure fraud designed by BOA which includes Bank of New York Mellon, Deutsche Bank, and U.S. Bank NT is in full operation. Despite a second offer made as late as May 2012 by AWLI corporate counsel to BOA counsel to purchase AWLI and stop the fraudulent foreclosures, BOA once again refused the offer in favor of continuing their enormous fraud. Here is how the fraud is being conducted by BOA on the 3.5 million loans that BOA did not pay a single dime for. Remember these loans were not funded by Countrywide or BOA.

    As the loan servicer, BOA makes its own determination that the loan is in default. It notifies the borrower that it will begin foreclosure proceedings. Because of the foreclosure fraud committed during the last 4 years by many lenders in all 50 states, most states have enacted a requirement that the foreclosing lender produce documents attached to the foreclosure documents that prove they are actually the lender.

    In the case of these 3.5 million loans, the lender stated on the mortgage or deed of trust is America’s Wholesale Lender, a New York Corporation. Because BOA is not affiliated with AWLI, and because AWLI has attempted to stop BOA from committing this fraud in its name, BOA devised a fraudulent scheme where it has MERS execute an assignment that appears to be on behalf of AWLI, which assigns the loan to either Bank of New York Mellon, Deutsche Bank, or U.S. Bank NT. Once that fraudulent assignment is recorded, that conspirator bank then attaches it to the foreclosure proceedings to defraud that court into believing it is the true owner of the loan. If a borrower is unable to afford an attorney to represent him in court, he loses his home.

    When diligent attorneys become aware of this fraud, they are usually required to hire a forensic mortgage examiner to expose the fraudulent assignment falsely made in the name of Americas Wholesale Lender, a New York Corporation to the conspirator bank. In every case where this fraud is exposed before the foreclosure is completed, the fraudulent assignment is declared void. In a landmark case decided in the Massachusetts Supreme Court, in re Eaton, is was stated that “Bank of America cannot foreclose without committing fraud” (see Amicus Brief of Marie McDonnell)
    In every case where this fraud was committed to complete a foreclosure, that foreclosure is subject to being voided through appropriate legal action. Even if a borrower has lost his home to foreclosure, has been removed from that home, and now resides somewhere else, if he can afford an attorney, that attorney can most likely expose the fraud, which would make the defrauding banks and MERS liable for severe damages, including treble damages for wrongful or fraudulent foreclosure.

    The Attorney General for the State of New York has recovered over 400M from Bank of America stemming from these fraudulent foreclosures. Likewise, he has whacked Bank of New York Mellon and Deutsche Bank for their involvement in this fraudulent scheme.
    Under the lending laws of most states, the 3.5 million loans made in the name of Americas Wholesale Lender, a New York corporation, between 2003 and 2007 are not enforceable. The reason behind that is that in each state, a home mortgage lender must have a license to make home loans. There was no license made in the name of Americas Wholesale Lender, Inc. Also, during this time, no such corporation was in existence; therefore no valid loan could be made in the name of a non-existent lender. In all states, if a corporation is not registered with that state, it has no legal capacity to conduct business. That law applies here. Another flaw was that the Mortgage or Deed of Trust named AWLI as the lender, but in some cases the Note named an entirely different party. In those cases, neither the Note or Mortgage was enforceable.

    Additionally, neither BOA or Countrywide ever funded any of the 3.5 million loans made in the name of Americas Wholesale Lender, a New York Corporation. In every case, those loans have now been fully repaid by the TARP bailout and the various insurance companies who insured the securitized trusts where the loans were to have been pooled and transferred, but no transfer was ever made. In every case on these 3.5 million loans where an assignment of that loan was made to Bank of New York Mellon, Deutsche Bank, or U.S. Bank, NT, any such assignment, in addition to being fraudulent, and made without consideration, was made after the expiration date of the pooling agreement and was made strictly as a litigation tool to cause the appearance of a proper foreclosure. It should also be noted that any such assignment will show to be made immediately prior to foreclosure notices being sent to the borrower, but usually years after the expiration date of the pooling agreement. The enforcement and collection of these loans by BOA means they are being paid twice, and of course, at tax payer’s expense.

    As Bank of America escalates this loan and foreclosure fraud against unknowing homeowners, it is putting equal effort in keeping a lid on this enormous fraud. Exposure on a wide scale will not only prevent BOA from continuing to perpetuate this fraud, but it will alert homeowners connected to these 3.5 million loans of their rights to void these loans, to stop fraudulent foreclosures, and provide the ability of already victimized homeowners to seek damages against BOA, Bank of New York Mellon, Deutsche Bank and U.S. Bank, NT. It may even be possible to recover all payments made to Bank of America on these fraudulent loans.

    As a result of its effort to expose this fraud, AWLI was named in a lawsuit filed against it by Bank of America for trademark infringement. Although BOA is falsely using the name of AWLI to commit fraud, BOA alleges that AWLI is the one who is using Countrywide’s trade name.

    Who in their right mind would be stupid enough to align themselves with Countrywide, other than Bank of America?

    Hopefully this article will find its way to the 3.5 million homeowners who are paying on void loans, and will allow many other foreclosed homeowners to be made whole. In the very same court that the Countrywide trademark case is being heard, there was a case filed by the U.S. Attorney General against Bank of America and Countrywide which resulted in a consent order and a 335M fine.

  117. And here is the latest former IRS Commissioner, Stephen Miller admitting, at 4:44-4:49 on the video that “voluntary compliance . . . which under law is our entire tax system . . .”

  118. I just want to add a little something here: the deadbeat homeowner…been fighting that tag for a minute.

    I have been in the midst of trying to alleviate my own situation and in doing so, have found some significant findings.

    Multiple courts to include bankruptcy and actually seen with my own eyes, the average ages: 50-60 (up to 80’s) year old’s with second mortgages, refi’s and significantly under water from inflated values. This lends itself to not being able to sell without taking a hit. And in many circumstances, depending on year of property, condition and servicer/debt collector near impossible the trap you are in…all created.

    Have only met 2 people that have financed 100% of their homes, 2? That is in multiple District courts in 3 states, Federal Court and bankruptcy court (3 of them, multiple hearings)….my own experience was the bankruptcy lawyer never finished schedules…cheated me out of the money and would “never” disclose the proposed payment and what it included.

    Now, have been looking at re-investing for an 88 y/old aunt, who sold her home in FL…purchased a lot, mobile home with a dead body in it from HSBC II….am finding many of the homes available ARE under water and no financing is available. No financing for a duplex, mobile or land, and lest not forget no clear title…the lies are pervasive and if you peek on the back side of this behavior by these thugs, you can clearly see the entire scope of their deception. On all ends “innocent” buyers and sellers are getting screwed….it does not take a rocket scientists to figure this crap out!

    Just my piece on this….

  119. Here is the-then (2003) IRS Commissioner admitting that taxes paid to the Puerto Rican Trusts (IRS) are a voluntary act of US sheeple:

  120. There is NO LAW requiring the average American working in the3 private system to pay income taxes. there is NO LAW.

    http://www.icij.org/blog/2013/04/release-offshore-records-draws-worldwide-response

  121. Charlie Reed the racist. who works for the banksters. Whose sole purpose is to disrupt the conversation on this blog. Taking up expensive real estate on this blog with garbage comments and trying to start a race war. All the signs of the Banksters Propaganda machine. Oh You honor Judge I allege the above.
    NEVER AGAIN
    A comment of a Deadbeat homeowner.

  122. Charles Reed, first of all – you may get a couple jews heading up some financial companies and the central bank from tiem to time – but the real power in America has always been owned by the WASP’s. Which by the way are the folks whom funded the slave trade, the ships and the monies paid to the African Chiefs who sold off members of their tribe.

    These same ships after dropping on the negro slaves, would head North to the merchant bankers with raw goods from the south to the North East, and exchange that cargo for finished products, i.e. clothing , tobacco, tea. The same ship would than make the journey back to England to dump the goods to English wholesalers, who would pay the credit transaction with interest to the Bank of England and it’s member banks.

    They in turn would provide the credit financing to go down to the African Chiefs to pick up the next round of negro’s sold into slavery by their own tribal members, and so on… You may have had a couple Jews here and there making a nickel or two brokering deals – but the buck stops back in England!!!

    Why do you think England declared war on the 13 states. They created their own colonial script, thus removing the credit money from England. American’s need to drop the school delivered history books and see what wars are really about – it truly never has anything to do with the people or our rights – it’s normally the cause of some pasty faced white dude advancing his interest. (Think Dick Cheney).

    Is is racist to state facts?

  123. @ JG – the mortgage passes incidental to the note. That is the reason millions are still in their house.

    The best one to date – I will ask client if I can post it to the site.

    The Plaintiff Trust commences a foreclosure in 2009. They do not include any exhibits with the Complaint. So we go through the Motions, get back some discovery, which shows that banks continue to commit fraud. This one being extra special.

    Although, the Note was without any indorsment in 2010, it its motion for Summary Judgement the plaintiff now includes a note with a “courtesy indorsement direct from the closing bank stating – Pay to the order, and the line has two asterisks (**). On the following page the asterisks apparently refer to a Trustee of a vintage pool. Now setting aside a moment, the party assigning has been closed for six years – the alleged indorsement is dated February 01, 2004. Unfortunately, the PSA did not create the issuing entity until June 25, 2004, thus no Trust or Trustee existed.

    This the original bank was not the originator, had an MLPA with guidelines and credit matrix from the funding intermediary who had the tranche underwriting guidelines from the Sponsor / Seller to the Depositor. The money trail stops there, the money was never given to the Trustee to purchase the loans – the money was given to the Depositor – the use of proceeds for the scheme tells the entire story.

    And Finally – if you measure from the opposite end of a foot long ruler you can claim a 9 inch pecker – and that is what the rating agencies did – created their own internal bar for sampling using a proprietary measuring tool to sample the loans underwritten to be securitized!

    “The Defendant / Plaintiff intended to enter a financial contract – Deny Deny Deny! .

  124. @ E Tolle my wife would require a ride that starts in the morning – not some model T ford with the crank and no windshield, but great reply all the same. I dd not forget you – I have had a lot of life to deal with as of late.

    I am going to say this one last time – ever pleading and motion starts the same way:

    THE PLAINTIFF / DEFENDANT INTENDED TO ENTER A FINACIAL CONTRACT – but not with the Plaintiff.

    There is one obstacle they can never cure on the note. The loan was underwritten to be securitized. The party that provided an office to fund the loan did not provide the funding, underwriting criteria for the loan, or closing instructions. that is why; when you look at any Preliminary Prospectus, Supplemental Prospectus, PSA, MLPA, or SWAP Agreements you will see that the parties immediately preceding the Seller / Sponsor (or other affiliate that sold loans to the Depositor) is always named as the originator.

    Even the reserve banks used subsidiaries to fund loans, this way when shit hit the fan they merge or blow out the subsidiary in BK and have the bank holding company form a new bank (See Ally).

    The key to every pleading – The loan was underwritten to be securitized!

  125. Well isn’t this special? Here’s a list of MERS’ “officers” for JPMC Bank NA from 12 09 2011:

  126. Now this cracks me up. I don’t know its author or when it was posted at scribd (something about CA debt relief attorney – “firm”). It’s a preface to a case which says that MERS can’t assign a dot when the orig lender has filed bk.

    “MERS agency relationship ends when original lender files bankruptcy
    Firm commentary: This office is pursuing litigation wherein we challenge the validity of mortgage loan transfers by MERS to a new entity executed AFTER the original lender files for BANKRUPTCY. The New Jersey case below addresses this issue and adds weight to our arguments.
    **Its simple agency law**

    jg: About which this author appears to know little.

    “Under GOMES, MERS is deemed an agent of any number of original lenders via the borrowers consent as contained in the deed of trust.”

    jg: Holding my sides! MERS is an agent “via the borrower’s consent”?
    I think not.

    “Therefore, MERS can effectuate transfers of loans. ”

    jg: Nah. Anyone with an agency with another ‘could’ do anything, generally. But, the cans and can’ts of an agency, the agent’s authority to act for its principal – the terms and extent of the agency, must be articulated in writing somewhere the heck (part. with real property). First of all, the borrower can’t make anyone anyone else’s agent – take 20. Secondly, an assgt is not an act of f/c, which f/c authority is allegedly given to the alleged agent in a dot (all allegedly, because it isn’t – for lack of the principal’s and agent’s autographs). Another doc between the alleged agent and principal might appt MERS as an agent and that agency might include the auth to transfer interest, but no authority to do anything is lawfully found in the dot – just an allegation mol. (now if MERS is a substituted party and not an agent, that’s a diff story).

    “But when the the originator files BK…it is no longer a party with the power to transfer its assets…the BK Court and Trustees take over. Absent there being express BK authority, MERS cannot transfer loans that are tied up in bankruptcy cases. Read on..”

    Okay, the author’s intro stinks imo, but the case itself might be of some interest:

  127. A while back when I was speaking with a man i knew that worked for the DEA, he said Secret Service should be involved in these foreclosures since the banks are dealing with counterfeit money..

  128. Hey Charlie I am ending this conversation with you. I dont speak to racist. Plus how much do your Slave owner banksters pay you to take up so much real estate on this site?

  129. Charlie continue with your racist self incriminating words.
    NEVER AGAIN.

  130. We Sing and Play … Grandma and Me

    Make New Friends and Keep the Old
    One is Silver and the other is Gold

    What? You think we Trust the banks? Nope!

  131. RE: (your new inheritance, for instance) …

    Did I say that? If I didn’t .. I meant to! 🙂

  132. If your not ready to hire an attorney yet … maybe you should reconsider.

    Not intended as legal advise …

  133. The parties under the PPM form amongst themselves the understanding and contents of the party’s right to claims to the Family Title for the Estate located at ….

  134. The CWHLInc wire amount was moved off balance sheet meaning it was lifted off title to the estate.

    In doing the PPM securities holders who are the registrations securities issuers were allowed to construct a New York indenture holding fractional shares of the estate transferred and conveyed irrevocably into trust.

    Therefore Plaintiff alleges facts establishing a basis for a claim for facts constituting ground for rescission of underlying transaction making instrument voidable and for exemplary damages, whereas the Defendant claims are for a transferred asset the Plaintiffs loan, sold on or about —— for value.

    Defendant knew at the time of making the transfer that the purported mortgages was not enforceable, but he did not disclose this fact to the grantor and Plaintiff.

    Defendant made the transfer with intent to defraud plaintiff.

  135. There is in existence a certain written instrument “PPM” which purports to be the beneficial interest held in a PRIVATE PLCEMENT MEMORANDUM (“PPM”) Said document that is binding amongst the successors parties in the formation of certain Limited Partnerships, formed as a Limited Liability Corporation or “LLC”

  136. Maybe Davis didn’t know time had expired for the Plaintiff to enjoin the Davis’s in the FC action.

    Lucky for the Davis’s they had a Great Attorney!

    I am Surety!

  137. The action arises out of Defendants’ loss of its investment.

  138. The contract is back dated under an illicit and illegal reverse purchase and sale scheme ;
    Whereby the contract was later charged off to a 2008 loss and written off the creditors books;
    Whereby the 2007 contract was not one in the same as what was sold at time of the origination;
    and whereby the timing and dates set forth from origination and up to the time of the charge off include reconstitution and the subsequent 24 months from time of the charges taken by creditors debt collectors are required recognition purposes under the Generally Accepted Accounting Principals found under GAAP FAS 140 and SFAS 140-3

  139. @ E Tolle lol – my wife would throw stones at you!!

  140. You need X from every party that has an interest in the Household Estate .

    What would you do for KCs X? A Klondite Bar?

  141. Defendants are held to a savvy set of improprieties and unethical procedures that included creating two wires from one loan as well as the estate using the stripped title as a transfer and sale into trust and by substituting out the original agreements and note with purchaser seller “installment sale contract”

    ~the estate using the stripped title as a transfer and sale into trust ~

    That’s what happens in a reverse mortgage (no lien.. you own it outright). And the interest accumulates on the loan during the life of the grantors/trustors/settlors. Principal and Interest due upon deaths of the grantor/trustors/settlors.

    EXCEPT! The Grantors/Trustors/Settlors receive benefit of the Wire.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(Equity)

    Ok.. lets presume this is the 2nd Wire …. (The Reverse)

  142. Trespass that is true re signature issue..
    And this is for all to consider since we consider just about everything else today
    …Can sign X – patients do it to consent to a certain treatment or surgery and so on, but it’s only valid if there is a WITNESS who can testify that as their advocate they understood and that the risks the benefits and options were explained ( informed consent) the law around this practice is around the right to rely- being the other party had specialized superior knowledge , sure if there is a conflict of interest say, and it is discovered later –
    Using this concept – my god the parties we would need to sue
    So it’s where you end up placing the blame.

  143. Private!!!

    Purchaser seller “installment sale contract”,

    The State can not …… because its a contract between who and who?

    Unless a who wants to take legal action against who2 of course.

    Did Who authorize MERS on its behalf to FC the Estate if Who2 didn’t perform .. ?

    Anywho .. after all these years, I can live without the 12inches and the non performance.

    But that’s just me ….

  144. using the stripped title as a transfer and sale into trust ..

    What/Who Mortgagee? MERS?

    MERScorp is You!

    Look thru the Mirror!

  145. Security first imo is a ‘deal’ justifying non-judicial foreclosure. Both parties have agreed what the remedy is for breach of the loan agreement: the real property is the first, and in some states, the only recourse (where no deficiency j is allowed). If it weren’t for that agreement / deal, lenders would have to go thru courts, get a judgment, and then foreclose, like some states and we wouldn’t have non-j foreclosure.

  146. Charles, you said:

    “Johngault the Note can be a simply a Note not attached to the property making it a unsecured loan”.

    Yes and no. That’s not generally the statutory scheme of a mortgage loan. Unsecured loans mean the creditor / lender may go after any assets of the note maker’s (your new inheritance, for instance). That’s not true with mortgage loans in general imo, certainly not in states with security first statutes. Yes, one would have an unsecured note without an assgt of the dot. BUT not just an unsecured note. One would have an unenforceable note. imo. No note attaches to property without a collateral instrument. That’s why notes aren’t recorded. They don’t create or reflect an interest in the topic of recorder’s recordations – interests in real property. These are LAND records, not chattel / personal property. They are other statutory schemes for giving notice of interest in chattel.
    The question remaining for me because I haven’t had time is whether or not the dot itself assures the note maker that the lender will seek satisfaction from the collateral first (therefore cutting out the need for a state’s security first statute).

  147. Defendants are held to a savvy set of improprieties and unethical procedures that included creating two wires from one loan as well as the estate using the stripped title as a transfer and sale into trust and by substituting out the original agreements and note with purchaser seller “installment sale contract”

    The Estate is the Depositor!

    A to B

    B to C

    C to D

    Where is the assignment to the depositors account?

  148. Take #2

    Defendants are held to a savvy set of improprieties and unethical procedures, estate using the stripped title as a transfer and sale into trust and by substituting out the original agreements and note with purchaser seller “installment sale contract

  149. Jan Van Eck – since at this point, then, nothing should surprise you, how often do you think a copy of a note has endorsements from another note on it? Just copy tom’s first page and the back of the last page of anyone else’s (the one with endorsements) that has the endorsements needed “just now”…….. Without the original, there’s just no way to tell……. Plus, my money is also on a copy of Tom’s note but with an allonge instead of the true back of Tom’s note.

  150. Maybe its the BOND attached to the Life Estate.

    I get confused sometimes ..

  151. Buttttt … its the note attached to your ESTATE that you didn’t know about .. The Biggie!

    Surprise!! Davis

    Surprise !! KC

  152. The Contract that creates The Estate is the Security Interest, and it is recorded.

    ” Note not attached to the property making it a unsecured loan” YES!

  153. Johngault the Note can be a simply a Note not attached to the property making it a unsecured loan. In most States I am not saying all because I don’t know this for a fact, but you must record the security instrument in order to place a lien against the property, and if you think of it, you would need to do this in all States because of multiple home loan that one could have on the properties.

    You would not be able to determine if there were lien before the one claim the property and wanting to foreclose. One does not have to record the assignment until it want to sale or foreclose on a property, as long as the debt was originated by the hold, or one has purchase the the debt.

    Just talking Ginnie Mae, their problem is that they separated the Notes legally from the debts when they made the lenders relinquish the Notes that were endorsed in blank. The Notes are non-negotiable because they don’t contain any debt that the legal holder has. The Note no longer exist as how it was intended for the purpose of a loan agreement.

    However what you got now is a party that could never accept payments in Ginnie Mae, and that the borrowers not enter into an agreement with. The holder of the Note has no legal way to give back the Notes because they are not listed on the face of the Note.

    I tried to explain this since Oct 2010, and its simply but complex. These blank Note were for rancher Joe who wanted to keep secret that he owned the 100 acres with the lake on it, but he had a bill of sale to show he also purchase the property on a certain date for the amount of X dollars. Ginnie Mae cannot ever provide this information because they never did. In fact they cannot prove when in fact they ever even took possession of the Notes as there are no dates on the endorsements!

    Game over!

  154. Louise,
    The statute that discusses signatures, it in the UCC somewhere and adopted into the states statutes.
    Signatures can be first and last name, and just first or just last.
    I was being specific above, but signatures are non specific, they can be a stamp, a symbol, a picture, scribble, etc. All of that is accepted.
    If you remember the old slave movies like Roots by Alex Haley, the slaves were moved from the ships and a contract was placed before them and not knowing the contract or what was expected of them and not even speaking the language (similar to today), someone took their hand (it had to be by their hand that the signature was made) and the put a pen in their hand and placed an X on the contract and they were contracted into slavery.

    Not directed an Louise, just a general posting.

    Have you noticed how many people show you a line on a contract and they will put an X there and say, sign by the X?
    or on some checks, the X is already there when you sign on the back of it.

    Ever wonder why the X still exists if slavery is supposed to be over?
    If a mark is a signature, who is the first signer of the document by putting that X on it and wanting you to sign beside their mark/signature?

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

    Life is protected by their Constitution.
    Free is either by being born free or emancipated.

    In this current paradigm, I see ‘all seeing eye’ is looking at everything now. It was diverted looking for terrorists or for someone to go to war with, and now it realizes there was a silent weapon for quiet wars right here. There is nothing like an eye and finds out it’s vision was diverted so someone could rob it while it was looking elsewhere.

    There’s an old saying, the eyes have it.

    Well that eye is looking now and in this day and age, all they have to do is start with any complaint that as been raised within it’s organization and move out from there…who didn’t do their job when the complaint came in, who is the reason the complaint was made at the company complained about, and who in that company did something worth complaining and move to the benefits they received from what they did that caused the complaint and move to the assets they accrued doing those complaining kind of things, and then find out what they paid in taxes on their ill gotten gains, and determine the law that was broken and the penalty for breaking that law.

    When you come up with that list, don’t put them in a private prison, there is a camp built to hold them all, and then give them Nuremburg type trials, there is a script and process for trying that many people, and then the rest of society can move forward and if the universe reincarnates them they have another chance to get it right, and if it doesn’t reincarnate them, no loss, no worries.

  155. and JG, when the mortgagee (by its own contract) waived its rights when the Estate was put into an Irrevocable Trust .. they had notice and waived their right to a lien. Hence.. No recorded Liens.

  156. The A Man because Jewish is used as both there race and religion which I don’t care which one as I am not downing their race or religion but just stating a fact of what group is doing the crimes. When people refer to black as being crack dealers, its a fact and the people just happen to be black, as that what their trade of crime is.

    Black on black murder is a fact and its not racist that its mention. Because of historical reason with black in ghetto, we engage in criminal behavior.

    Jews were not allowed to do certain thing but Jew were allowed to do financing and party financed the slave trade and so here I am today. As blacks moved into Jewish ghettos the Jews moved out and ended up charging very bad interest rates and terms, and were the reason for the 1968 Fair Housing Act along with whites redlining.

    Sometimes the truth hurt us all, but I am not saying anything that the world not aware of the abuse we have suffered. Have you every wonder why Jewish slave owner did not convert blacks to Judaism? It was a business decision as a Jew could not own another Jew!

  157. The Title to the Estate includes bank account, other property and assets.

    Security First … and the collateral is ……?

    And yes .. they go for the whole kit and caboodle. Here they are allowed deficiency judgments (and it was requested) …

    Wipe Out the Estate to Hide Your Crimes.

    Get deficiency judgment against their future pay …

    And of course .. that all comes after they embezzled your pension funds and also handed the bill over to you as the taxpayer for “””The Mistake”” they made.

    Just saying … there are three prongs on this stick

  158. Here’s my idea of ‘here it is’: there are (at least) two premises which preclude the note from being a negotiable instrument imo. First have to understand and acknowledge that many notes used in commerce are secured by nada, or even if they are, they may be enforced without regard to the collateral (pretty sure – depends on the contract(s) involved) and of course, that’s not true with these notes.

    1) In any state which adheres to “security first”, the note is unenforceable without an assgt of the deed of trust. With security first, the note itself is not freely enforceable without regard to the coll
    instrument since the first act to enforce the note must be one against the collateral, as opposed to the borrower’s bank account, other property or assets. In other words, one of these promissory notes without the coll instrument is no claim since the payee or transferee can’t collect on the note itself until after barreling thru the collateral.
    Further, some states’ statutes preclude deficiency judgments. The lender gets what it gets from the collateral. Maybe someone will take on whether or not the dot itself spells our security first for the benefit of those with coll instruments in states, if any, which don’t have security first statutes.

    2) The due on sale clause contained in the dot triggers an obligation
    to pay off the note. Therefore, imo, it creates a distinct obligation not contained in the note, but is nonethless incorporated by the note’s reference to the coll instrument. The note maker isn’t just obligated to pay the note by the terms expressed in the note. A ‘condition subsequent’ will make the note due and payable without regard to the payment agreement in the note (the amortization, specifically).

    My lay understanding of negotiable instruments is that they can’t contain any provisions other than repayment as described in the note itself – p and i, basically, on a set schedule. Some people think the late payment recited in the note makes them non-negotiable. Maybe?

    What is the true value of these notes not being negotiable instruments, got me, except that I guess that would 86 alleged holder status (actually a biggie). The lender has a right to sell its interest in mtg loans, but I do believe these two things preclude them from being negotiable instruments by way of Article 3. How transfer / sale should really be done, I don’t know. Maybe look into Gardner’s theories which I think are about article 9….? Or maybe Neil will address it.
    lay opinions as always

  159. Once these buttwipe buddies are out of office and this Country is Ready For Real Economical Recovery

    I have money to pump into the economy. until then” well?

    Yawn.. Wake Me Up when that Happens.

  160. Hey Neil! I Hear You !

    RE” … They had two choices.

    1. To FC

    2. To File a Release/Satisfaction of … Giggles

    THE QUESTION IS … CAN YOU HEAR ME THINKING OUTLOUD?

    kc

  161. DUE PROCESS – a fundamental principle of fairness in all legal matters, both civil and criminal, especially in the courts. All legal procedures set by statute and court practice, including notice of rights, must be followed for each individual so that no prejudicial or unequal treatment will result. While somewhat indefinite, the term can be gauged by its aim to safeguard both private and public rights against unfairness.

  162. Fee Simple … 🙂

  163. Nail them dag gone Goal Posts down!! Do It Now!

    COMPLAINT FOR
    CANCELLATION OF WRITTEN INSTRUMENT

  164. The action arises out of Defendants’ loss of its investment and charging off and writing down the outstanding balance against purchaser and all other defendants and or indispensible parties to claims that include the purchasers and registrant against the titleholder and consumer household .

  165. Charles Reed I did not call you a racist or an anti semite. I dont care what race you are. But your comment and you continue to comment in an anti semetic way. Why would you bring up the issue of religion What does that have to do with the arguement? that is why your comments are anti semetic.

    But I forgive you anyways.

    NEVER AGAIN.

  166. Defendants are held to a savvy set of improprieties and unethical procedures, estate using the stripped title as a transfer and sale into trust and by substituting out the original agreements and note with purchaser seller “installment sale contract”

  167. Would state agents be involved if a claim was made that the property had been abandoned ?

    What about disrepair (lack of maint and ins) water and sewer?
    Are these a county action or state action? Both?

    Oh well, as long as you as the land trustee take care of business..
    it really shouldn’t be an issue.

    Right?

  168. The A Man, I am not saying every Jewish person is involved in banking in a corrupt way, nor every black is involved in selling crack, nor every white is in the Klan. However each of those races/groups do have a large number their people involved in the legally aspects of those bad things.

    So we knew all these firm like Bear Streans, Lehman, Goldman, AIG, with subprime companies leading the way in AmeriQuest, Countrywide and a IndyMac just to name so of the cast of characters, lead the way. Guy like John Paulson and his creating with Goldman the CDO that he demanded that it included WaMu owned Longbeach subprime mortgages and then placed a bet over at AIG with CDS and had Hank Greenberg let it ride.

    You got the old CEO from Goldman just 2yrs removed from the company running the US Treasury, when Goldman had already started selling CDO, so what was Paulson fiduciary duty to Goldman’s client that they sold these CDO too? What did this have to do with Geithner making AIG pay these betters 100% on the dollar for these bet at taxpayer’s expense when imo they should have received zero, but surely less than 100%, as who were they going to take over, if payment was not received? John Paulson made something like $10 billion for the 2 years of 2008 & 2010!

    It not all Jews I have ever talked about, but I am not backing down on that a few Jews had a lot to do with this mess, screwing over everybody, like Bernard Madoff did to mostly Jews in his $65 billion Ponzi.

    Like blacks (I am black) are doing with Obama is to call anyone racist if they question him or his action, is a listen they learned from Jews in every time you bring up Jewish involvement its anti-Semitic, so that people simply stop saying out loud what they are actually thinking.

    Are there no white people in a 72.5% America to run the Fed, but we had Greenspan, Bernanke and now Yellen, plus as a added bonus the Vice Chair is a dual citizen who was just the head of the Bank of Israel??? WTF!

  169. AMan
    Lol. I knew that deborah was in the bible but did not know the story. Thanks. I was almost chsnged my nsme to carie urwin. ( a name my collegues made up for me when i flee to Austrailia- similar weather but bigger)

  170. tnharry, in a nonjudicial action …..
    If the P&I are current but there delinquent( state ) real estate taxes.

    Would it then be a state action .. selling/fcing a tax lien?

  171. Tnharry,

    Group therapy a l’Americaine. Nobody ever wins, nobody ever heals, nobody ever moves on. It goes on forever and ever thanks to the few suckers who pay into it. The alternative is church but church has become so damn expensive, with God begging for money all the time.

    Here, at least, they purport to “sell” something. it’s called bullshit but it is something nonetheless…

  172. The warranty deed was not sufficient to cover the liabilities and the Davis would have to pay far more than the value of the property to clear the title because Briggs had …

    Anywho … Davis or (KC) … Sumbuddy pay me what Brigg ..

    Never Mind!

  173. MERScorp INC.

    MERScorp Funding INC.

    Members include …. INS companies.

    Who is FC on you?

  174. I have rights. If someone surpassed/trespassed on those rights wrongfully, I have a right to intervene …..

    I am Surety!!!

  175. All of the assignments on my case are forged and robosigned. I am beginning to think that the signature of the person signing for MERS does not exist, and they have slightly modified the last name so that it cannot be found. Also, in a previous assignment, I believe that the two witnesses that signed are the same person forging both names and signatures. Also, one signature on an earlier assignment is only the first name and no last name. Finally, the last assignment only transfers the mortgage and not the Note and has squiggles for signatures. There appears to be a “new” company like Docx called Financial Dimensions, Inc. in PA creating documents.

  176. Show me the accounting … ” for value received”.

  177. You keep reading Coyle 50x over until you understand the position that Davis was left in.

  178. Yes I read it Thanx Deborah. Deborah in Hebrew means a “Bee” Deborah in the bible “The only female judge mentioned in the Bible, Deborah led a successful counterattack against the forces of Jabin king of Canaan and his military commander Sisera”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deborah

    You are true to your biblical name and it doesnt matter what religion you follow.
    Keep up the good work

    NEVER AGAIN

  179. That was not what i meant sista. Never mind

  180. Old News?

    1. The Warranty Deed to us from closing remains unfiled, therefore we lack the proof needed for ownership to mortgage, grant or convey nuttin to nobody.

    The so-called mortgage and everything filed there after purchase are more clouds on title,

    Good Title is Not Old News! Its at the Very Core of the Mess!

  181. Kc old news.
    The signature page at closing was loose leAf and in my case when assignment happened – no date, no notary. Just a stamp ” for value received” and its counterfeit – because theres two of em ! Same entity different signature but same person. No date
    Can it be relied upon ??????

  182. TIME FOR Re-COYLE (woke me up at 4:30 this morning)

    It also raises the legal conundrum of the satisfaction of the subject loan with the act of having a notice of default and election to proceed non-judicially recorded and published. By such election no deficiency can be sought unless the notice is rescinded, which did not occur in this case. As such any remaining balance is forgiven and the debt is fully satisfied. Presuming the recorded beneficiary, FNMA, was the note holder when the NOD was published, what, then, was “assigned” to JP Morgan a couple of months later just before the scheduled trustee sale (aka the “vesting assignment”)? Is it any wonder why Appellant sought the accounting records of that assignment? Was the trial court complicit as an accessory after the fact for denying that discovery?
    http://stopforeclosurefraud.com/2014/02/20/wisconsin-coyle-rule-court-barred-foreclosure-based-on-an-1866-case/

  183. AMan
    Did you read Matt Tiabbi latest latest issue of rolling stone on the vampire squid with even further reaching tenticles

  184. Jan. ….. Yep! Yep! Yep!

    That’s what they do …… !!!!!! Except in a copy I have, they copied and pasted my signature from another document onto the second/fraud copy of the mortgage filed with the court in 08. Problem was I got copies of the signed originals at closing and …. WHOOA Horsey!

    In a different matter … they plastered my acknowledgements to things I didn’t witness.

  185. Goes for lying about pekker size too
    For sure

  186. You know there’s s saying that you will never get to the bottom of a liar or a thief, so. Going into court with unclean hands ( lies and concealment of material fact that ypu know had it been discloaed it would affect the outcome ( judges ruling order) – then theres another saying ” that the doors of the court are forever closed”

    https://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/criminal/charges/non2c008.pdf

  187. In a fascinating development in a local case, the client comes to me with a document bearing a notarization of a signature, complete with the notary stamp and signature and the wording, “personally appeared before me, and affixing his signature and affirming that his signing was of his free act and deed,…” usual stuff. And, there is even a line for a “witness” who signs that she witnessed the Obligor signing before the Notary.

    The only problem is: the signature line of the Obligor is blank.

    So you have a Notary signing on a blank non-signature and a witness saying the ghost signed what is a blank line.

    And it gets cuter: then a “second” document surfaces, identical in form, with the same Notary and stamp and the same witness, and this time there is an actual Obligor signature on the blank line – except it is not my man’s signature! Not even close.

  188. The sorry state and very dangerous State of the Union.
    1. Occupy wallstreet and Anonymous are making a comeback. This represents Anarchy which is very very very very bad.
    2. Ted Nugent making the comment “The president is a Subhuman Mongrel” Which is code name for the N word. I am not afraid of Ted Nugent but he represents alot of people.
    3. I just heard in the news that Produce in California is going up 10 to 20% due to the drought. What triggered the Spring Uprising in Eqypt was higher staple food prices. Not to mention utility bills etc…..
    4. The banks are continuing with there bogus fees on checking accounts etc…. People now have to go to Check cashing establishments (which is run by the banksters) getting reamed by fees.
    5. Tnharry and his minion bosses going on this blog hiding behind names giving bogus opinions and not giving his/her real name State bar # etc…. Just like the banksters not telling us the real lenders name.
    6. Charles Reed making comments like the Jews run the Federal reserve etc……. Going after the minorities. I am not calling Charles an anti semite but…… classic anti semite comments. Once these thoughts are brought (letting the Genie of hate out of the bottle) out this is how the Holocaust started and it was only 65 years ago.

    I can go on and on. This is not good This is bringing the economy down. G-d for bid if an Anarchist group like Anonymous takes root.

    Neil Be strong and courageous. and G-d Bless America.

  189. I get your point about saying whatever you want as our speech is protected. However, when I am writing a pleading, I attach exhibits to the pleading proving what I am saying is factual. It has to be true, or I am committing fraud on the court. Those exhibits are there to establish what I am saying is true. I do not believe that Moody’s, S&P, etc. are totally off the hook because of first amendment. I think there are more dark forces moving here. It is just one big cluster F#$k. INMHO.

  190. Poppy is 100% correct in saying never admit the debt. which I agree because any alleged debt holder is not appearing in court or anywhere else. Especially in the cases where it know the lenders no longer exist “Show me the Note”.

    The arrangement is between two entities in the borrower & lender and as the lender has died, we only have the Note which does not indicate another lender purchasing the debt, but only a blank endorsement which is now in the hands of an entity that no got a single drop of evidence it paid one cent for the debt…end of story.

    As Marilyn Lane is talking about printing money, I think the the Secret Service should be in on this mortgage fraud as the house Note is a bank Note, and imo what is an extension of that Note is the security instrument which are filed to attach the debt to the properties. It is that security instrument that is forged that allows the fake “holder in due course” the ability to cash that Note (foreclosure sale).

    These Note as being cash with a blank authorization on the bill, just like a dollar bill has a serial number on it, the house Note needs the name of the authority to be a valid Note to cash.

    What makes no sense is that this national registry is the beneficiary for companies that are shareholder of the MERS and MERS is alleging to act as the owner, so how can this arrangement even not be consider a conflict of interest? The local county register are already establish to record titles and still this recording must be done at the County level in order to be valid, and MERS recording is not recognized by the county as taking the place of their process.

    MERS does not aid the establish system, as it steal from it in recording fees, and screws up the chain of ownership by not having the debt holder inform the counties of the change of ownership. This is a part of this big counterfeiting ring!

  191. Right on Iwantmynpv!

    Sheesh .. give someone an inch (or 12) and they take a mile.

  192. That about sums up that debate, E! I do see how the non-judicial foreclosure is very much like a car. Mentioned that several times here. It occurs to me, the village idiot here, right from the onset you are “coerced” into testimony (which is what it is), in front of a magistrate, to admit the debt! Once you do that, you are heading down the yellow brick road. I have learned from more than one hearing…never admit the existence of the debt, given the paperwork “THEY” present.They have no actual knowledge of that paperwork. At best, they have vaguely reviewed it and the behavior is the same over and over so, to me that IS the weakness and it MUST be moved from that venue to clarify everything behind it….IMHO

  193. And NPV, while all your wife has to lose in your analogy is arguably a better ride, people in my analogy stand to lose their homes. Slightly different outcomes.

    Or, have her contact me. You have my address.

  194. Too much lawyer-ing on this argument. Let me explain both sides in lay terms:

    I can continually tell my wife – i have a 12 inch pecker. When I am standing before her naked ( after a brief chuckle) she can apply basic facts and arithmetic to her memory of a ruler and establish it is not 12 inches.

    Now, with some jewelry, cash and other items paid to her as the only Judge in the room (i.e. campaign contributions, PAC money) I am able to sway her opinion of fact. But the reality will always be that it is not 12 inches, and since we can all post some form of bullshit here – it is actually bigger, and until the court of public appeal demands that I put forth proof – I am allowed (freedom of speech) to say whatever i want.

    If you don’t believe; look at why S&P, Fitch and Moody’s have not been indicted for their role in this scam.

    I think I am going to try this analogy in a Court case soon. Who needs help with their foreclosure?

    LOL.

    TSMIMITW

  195. NPV, of course tnharry’s right on the argument. My point is that the argument is based upon a legal framework that’s been built up by the bad guys in finance, through paying the bad guys in government, who are supposed to be protecting the rights of the good guys, us.

    How come you never sent me anything?

  196. TNharry is correct on this argument, and I love Neil like a Dad.

    TSMIMITW

  197. Tnharry, what I take away from what I believe to be Neil’s point above and in other writings of his is….maybe non-judicial foreclosure was a legitimate act before securitization, but those days are long gone. And to take it a step further, what you’re arguing here are basically legal technicalities, built up over decades of lobbying and bill-authoring by the TBTF assholes behind this scheme….your bosses. You’re describing why and how the mortgagor is screwed given the facts of law as they exist today, but according to the pre-crime spree legal framework. What you’re saying is, “Got’cha!”, in your explanations of why mortgagors are so easily bent over and screwed. It reminds me of when the rapist explains why the girl had it coming, you know, what with the short skirt and low cut blouse and all.

    But, as we all know to be the case and to change metaphors for this squeamish crowd on LL, the goalposts have been moved to center field on the banker’s side, especially given the non-existent referees in the non-judicial arena. You’d have to be a complete idiot not to understand by now that lenders reached an orgasmic state in their rush to originate and bundle mortgages, disregarding myriads of well established procedures along the way, turning the entire planet’s individual home loans into an untenable pile of _______ (fill in your own expletive).

    Even the Mortgage Banker’s Association, in a handout they printed concerning judicial v. non-judicial foreclosure says, “Prior to the sale, if the borrower disagrees with the facts of the case, he or she can try to file a lawsuit to enjoin the trustee’s sale.” It’s really telling there….the use of the word try in that sentence. What an impossible battle for folks who are obviously struggling financially and otherwise, to take on entities that have been funded into the multi-trillions. Bogus is a word I’d use in proper company. Bullshit better serves this conversation.

    But that last paragraph from the ABA about “trying” to file a lawsuit against these well funded behemoths isn’t even half of the dilemma facing down and out mortgagors. The nature of the non-judicial arena turns everything upside down….instead of the bank having to prove its merit on why they should be allowed to take someone’s house, it falls to the lowly borrower to prove up the reasons that they shouldn’t be allowed to do so, and as Neil described above, in this new age of securitization, this is flat out impossible given the complexities that have arisen in mortgages over the last few decades. This is ludicrous. As I’ve alluded to before, what type of so-called civilized people would make it so easy to toss families from their homes over legal technicalities or shape-shifting laws, all written with heavy bucks paid to get them enacted?

    If a defensive tact is taken in court, you and I both know what the odds are. The lowly mortgagor goes to court and finds:

    – Tens of thousands (millions?) of (non) legal documents, filed by lower level employees such as yourself, swearing to the accuracy, authenticity, and truthfulness of the underlying paperwork – when, in fact, you and your brethren never reviewed a fucking thing in the file, and have no knowledge of the facts of matter whatsoever before entering falsified documents to the court.

    – False notarizations by persons who didn’t actually observe the robo-signing clowns paid a whopping $10 an hour to falsely swear, when it’s been proven large that they didn’t even know by whose authority they were acting. This would be amusing if it didn’t introduce children to poverty, hunger, and fear.

    – The filing of these false statements in courts of law by your friends, otherwise known as “false swearing”, “uttering” or as Franken put it, “lying liars and the lies they tell”.

    – False statements by your pals and others representing to courts across the land that the borrowers’ promissory notes were “lost”, when in fact we all know they were never lost. In most states this is known as perjury and can subject the attorney to disbarment and criminal penalties. But we know that these same attorneys are held to a much lower bar and never see the inside of a jail cell. It’s a club.

    – The creation and use of bogus documents for use in court as “originals”, when it’s been shown time and again that they are not.

    – Falsely appointing people to act as official officers of banks, servicers or other institutions, in order to facilitate foreclosures, even though that these folks have no affiliation with the institutions for whose benefit they are purporting to act. More of the lying liars theme. It’s a persistent pattern, you think?

    – And finally, but not by any measure a complete list of the atrocities, a point Neil Garfield’s constantly driving home concerning non-judicial foreclosures…. – pursuing foreclosures even though the lawyers bringing them know that it can’t possibly be proven based upon the underlying loan documents. Not a chance in hell, but in a non-judicial arena it’s a solid 100% chance. Better odds can’t be found.

    So keep on with your constant diatribe, you know the one you relentlessly pursue here, of why the borrower is screwed because of this and that legal catch. You so remind me of a little kid poking a carcass just for the fun of it. I say that with no hesitation due to the fact that contrary to your stance here, you rarely, at least from my perspective, give anyone here any real knowledge of how to be effective against the criminality listed above. Near to nothing is said about what will work, rather, you simply point out, time and time again, how this or that tactic will not work. And KC follows behind your every post shoveling the refuse that remains, like Renfield serving her master.

    In another thread, I explained to you that in MN, there’s simply no defense against having your home taken. None whatsoever. Any lender that has a name that sounds something like a financial entity and is a MERS member can assign your mortgage to itself and foreclose with no need of any of those legal niceties such as standing, hidc, etc. How can it be that the law has ended up this way, other than through graft? Why should a family be tossed to the curb simply because the rich want yet more money?

    You’re right tnharry, you haven’t given anyone here any advice. Far from it. Go pull some wings off of flies. It seems like a pastime that would suit you well.

  198. The Constitution contains only two sections dealing with monetary issues. Section 8 permits Congress to coin money and to regulate its value. Section 10 denies states the right to coin or to print their own money. The framers clearly intended a national monetary system based on coin and for the power to regulate that system to rest only with the federal government. The delegates at the Constitutional convention rejected a clause that would have given Congress the authority to issue paper money. They also rejected a measure that would have specifically denied that ability to the federal government (Hammond, 92). Although the Constitution does not state that the federal government has the power to print paper currency, the Supreme Court in McCulloch vs Maryland (1819) ruled unanimously that the Second Bank of the United States and the banknotes it issued on behalf of the federal government were Constitutional.
    If the federal government only is permitted to issue money, coin or paper, then how could state banks issue money? State banks did not coin money, nor did they print any “official” national currency. However, state banks could print bills of credit in exchange for specie deposits. These notes would bear the issuing bank’s name and entitle the bearer to the note’s face value in gold or silver upon presentation to the bank. State bank notes were a form of representative money; they were not gold or silver, but they represented it. The notes were more convenient for conducting large transactions than their specie counterparts, and, more importantly for the extension of credit, could be produced easily whereas the gold and silver stock of the nation was relatively small and for the most part declining (Hixson, 12-13). The Supreme Court ruled in 1837 in Briscoe vs Bank of Kentucky that state banks and the notes they issued were also constitutional.
    One potential problem with such a system is that banks may issue notes far in excess of their specie deposits. Customers appeared from time to time wanting to exchange their banknotes for specie. The banks, of course, made allowances for this by keeping some of the specie on hand at all times. If the specie/banknote ratio was too low, even a small unexpected increase in the withdrawal rate could force the bank into insolvency. Remaining depositors who had not withdrawn their specie would be left with worthless banknotes.
    The public accounted for this risk of non-redemption bydiscounting the notes of banks that were considered risky. For example, a $20 banknote issued by a bank with a reputation of redemption problems might carry a 5 percent discount off its face value. In other words, a local merchant might only give a customer $19 worth of goods for a $20 note with the difference compensating the merchant for the risk of accepting the banknote. Discounts on notes among functioning banks ranged from about 95 percent for the riskiest banks to zero for banks with a high degree of public confidence. On the advent of the free banking era, there were 712 state banks in operation in the United States, each with its own currency (Kidwell, 59). Imagine the difficulty for a local merchant in tracking the riskiness and value of perhaps dozens of different banknotes in addition to the other concerns of his business.

  199. Steve, … Let me think on it awhile. I do see similarities.

    http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13965152367564914225&q=%E2%80%9C734+F.+2d+774+%E2%80%93+Johnson+v.+United+States+Department+of+Agriculture&hl=en&as_sdt=400006&as_vis=1

    734 F.2d 774 (1984)

    Gabriel JOHNSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
    v.
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

    No. 83-7059.

    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

    June 18, 1984.

  200. the language “no state shall…” which PRECEDES the due process and equal protection clauses, the protections of …

  201. KC….do not know about much about prior postings….

    Maybe I don’t get it all but tnharry and yourself are both being very helpful to Mr. Garfield, and all the supporters/interested parties to this blog.

    This instant argument is one that goes to the central issue which may hold hope for the readers of this blog in a similar fashion to folks who hold the same underlying foundation of hope that civil movements have held to be “self evident”.

    Please put “734 F. 2d 774 – Johnson v. United States Department of Agriculture” in context of your knowledge…I would ask the same of tnharry and Mr. Garfield….my gut tells me there is something there….also….Query….are not trustees in bankruptcy actors of the state, or the Office of the United States Trustee who oversees that effort?

  202. tn
    you continue to refuse to face the truth of the origination fraud.

  203. Tnharry what’s the name of your law firm? Wimps r us.
    Maybe you should change your name to Saint Mother Theresa. You are such a great altruistic person.

    NEVER AGAIN

  204. Ohhhhh! Good Heavens! Knock! Knock!

  205. Thanks tnharry! Let me think on this some more.

    tnharry, on February 21, 2014 at 5:02 pm said:

    and in that example where the court said the foreign corporation was entitled to 14th amendment protection, the context was in a judicial proceeding. that’s the distinction.

    KC, on February 21, 2014 at 4:55 pm said:
    Whether foreign corporations are also within the jurisdiction of a state was also decided by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that a foreign corporation which sued in a state court in which it was not licensed to do business to recover possession of property wrongfully taken from it in another state was within the jurisdiction and could not be subjected to unequal burdens in the maintenance of the suit.[114] When a state has admitted a foreign corporation to do business within its borders, that corporation is entitled to equal protection of the laws but not necessarily to identical treatment with domestic corporations.[114]

    In Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad (1886), the court reporter included a statement by Chief Justice Morrison Waite in the decision’s headnote:

    The court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does.[118]

  206. Thanks Steve, I though I had already posted that. I know its one of my personal favorites. My attorney shared the same last name. 🙂

  207. 1. The right of personal security; which, he says, “Consists in a person’s legal and uninterrupted enjoyment of his life, his limbs, his body, his health, and his reputation.”

    2. The right of personal liberty; and this, he says, “Consists in the power of locomotion, of changing situation, or moving one’s person to whatever place one’s own inclination may direct, without imprisonment or restraint, unless by due course of law.”

    3. The right of personal property; which he defines to be, “The free use, enjoyment, and disposal of all his acquisitions, without any control or diminution, save only by the law of the land.”[37]

    To protect “the principal absolute rights which appertain to every Englishman,” Blackstone explained that there are “auxiliary” rights to “maintain inviolate the three great and primary rights, of personal security, personal liberty, and private property.

  208. see….http://www.civilrighttocounsel.org/pdfs/2010-Jan-Feb-Pollock-state-action.pdf

    Going Public

    The State-Action Requirement of due process in Foreclosure Litigation
    By John Pollock

    “Demonstrating the Involvement of State Officials to Show that the Conduct Is Attributable to the State Under the Fourteenth Amendment”

    ” Note that certain recent developments ….do not take up here may greatly strengthen the argument for state action. For instance, …whether receiving federal bailout money might transform lenders into state actors.”

  209. KC thanks for your input. Sunshine is a compliment. Sunshine is light and light is positive energy that gives life.

  210. I’ve not given you advice. you haven’t solicited any advice from me nor have you provided any relevant factual information upon which I may have considered and given an opinion. i have given my opinion on Neil’s advice and elaborated on my rationale

    probably good stance to take though A Man – attempt to run off anyone

  211. Yes Tnharry I know that it is advice. I have no rage I have high blood pressure from you I hope I dont get a stroke from your bullying.
    NEVER AGAIN

    man up Name license and address. Attorneys giving legal advice mus t give there license and identification.

  212. @marilyn – shhhhh……the sane people are talking now

  213. to tn
    read Americian History from Revolution to reconstruction and beyond= money and the Constitution.

  214. These are National bank that are not govern by the States that are breaking laws. They are not State chartered banks, and until recently the States had no power to governor over them.

    So for these infractions they are Federal as it on that level they are govern under 12 CFR.

    Even a bigger problem is MERS was not govern by anybody!

  215. At least Neil Garfield is man enough to expose himself He is going against the Big Banksters that have the means and are willing to destroy peoples lives etc……

    And you are afraid of me Tnharry? A deadbeat homeowner. A few tough words and you are running to the hills?

    I am not defending Neil. Neil doesnt need my help. Its the Homeowners that you are bullying that need the help.
    Coward.

    NEVER AGAIN

    And you just admitted that you are an attorney lol.

  216. i believe the word you’re searching for is “adviCe”…

    it’s not so much that you don’t know what you’re talking about A Man, it’s that you are completely unaware that you don’t know what you’re talking about. that’s a nasty combination, especially when combined with your obvious rage and tendency toward trying to bully others. sit quietly and let the adults talk and you might learn something

  217. Equal Protection of the Law

    home.ubalt.edu/shapiro/rights…/Chapter6text.htm‎

    University of Baltimore

    As mentioned in an earlier chapter, because of the language “no state shall…” which precedes the due process and equal protection clauses, the protections of …

  218. That is right tnharry you are a coward. Free advise huh.
    Coward advise.

    NEVER AGAIN

  219. tnharry my bag I get what your saying. But I think that the nonjudicial process been hijacked at the state level by National corporations to get around state laws. Maybe or not purposely installed for these securities case were the Notes are relinquished without there being an exchanged of monies.

    The state is barred from seeing the entire picture because the court is under the impression that the Notes are the property of the debt and that party is on title as the “lien holder”!

    When the ownership changed hands the court is supposed to be notified of this changed because the rightful entity is no longer in the position of “holder in due course”.

    I know that this latest case of Onewest Bank v. Dewer as a result of FDIC & IndyMac scam that just like the FDIC & JPMorgan deal of the WaMu loan deal. MERS is creating forgeries as the Szymoniak claim is addressing, coming out of the Federal deal!

  220. State action/State actor doctrine

    Main article: State actor

    Individual liberties guaranteed by the United States Constitution protect, with exception of the Thirteenth Amendment’s ban on slavery, not against actions by private persons or entities, but only against actions by government officials.[155] Regarding the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court ruled in Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948): “[T]he action inhibited by the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment is only such action as may fairly be said to be that of the States. That Amendment erects no shield against merely private conduct, however discriminatory or wrongful.” The court added in Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883): “It is State action of a particular character that is prohibited. Individual invasion of individual rights is not the subject matter of the amendment. It has a deeper and broader scope. It nullifies and makes void all State legislation, and State action of every kind, which impairs the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, or which injures them in life, liberty, or property without due process of law, or which denies to any of them the equal protection of the laws.”

    Vindication of federal constitutional rights are limited to those situations where there is “state action” meaning action of government officials who are exercising their governmental power.[155] In Ex parte Virginia, 100 U.S. 339 (1880), the Supreme Court found that the prohibitions of the Fourteenth Amendment “have reference to actions of the political body denominated by a State, by whatever instruments or in whatever modes that action may be taken. A State acts by its legislative, its executive, or its judicial authorities. It can act in no other way. The constitutional provision, therefore, must mean that no agency of the State, or of the officers or agents by whom its powers are exerted, shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Whoever, by virtue of public position under a State government, deprives another of property, life, or liberty, without due process of law, or denies or takes away the equal protection of the laws, violates the constitutional inhibition; and as he acts in the name and for the State, and is clothed with the State’s power, his act is that of the State.”[156]

    There are however instances where people are the victims of civil-rights violations that occur in circumstances involving both government officials and private actors.[155] In the 1960s, the United States Supreme Court adopted an expansive view of state action opening the door to wide-ranging civil-rights litigation against private actors when they act as state actors[155] (i.e., acts done or otherwise “sanctioned in some way” by the state). The Court found that the state action doctrine is equally applicable to denials of privileges or immunities, due process, and equal protection of the laws.[114]

    The critical factor in determining the existence of state action is not governmental involvement with private persons or private corporations, but “the inquiry must be whether there is a sufficiently close nexus between the State and the challenged action of the regulated entity so that the action of the latter may be fairly treated as that of the State itself.”[156] “Only by sifting facts and weighing circumstances can the nonobvious involvement of the State in private conduct be attributed its true significance.”[157]

    The Supreme Court asserted that plaintiffs must establish not only that a private party “acted under color of the challenged statute, but also that its actions are properly attributable to the State. […]” [158] “And the actions are to be attributable to the State apparently only if the State compelled the actions and not if the State merely established the process through statute or regulation under which the private party acted.”[114]

    The rules developed by the Supreme Court for business regulation are that (1) the “mere fact that a business is subject to state regulation does not by itself convert its action into that of the State for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment,”[a] and (2) “a State normally can be held responsible for a private decision only when it has exercised coercive power or has provided such significant encouragement, either overt or covert, that the choice must be deemed to be that of the State.”[b]

  221. and in that example where the court said the foreign corporation was entitled to 14th amendment protection, the context was in a judicial proceeding. that’s the distinction.

  222. Whether foreign corporations are also within the jurisdiction of a state was also decided by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that a foreign corporation which sued in a state court in which it was not licensed to do business to recover possession of property wrongfully taken from it in another state was within the jurisdiction and could not be subjected to unequal burdens in the maintenance of the suit.[114] When a state has admitted a foreign corporation to do business within its borders, that corporation is entitled to equal protection of the laws but not necessarily to identical treatment with domestic corporations.[114]

    In Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad (1886), the court reporter included a statement by Chief Justice Morrison Waite in the decision’s headnote:

    The court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does.[118]

  223. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies against only the states, but it is otherwise textually identical to the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, which applies against the federal government; both clauses have been interpreted to encompass identical doctrines of procedural due process and substantive due process.[73] Procedural due process is the guarantee of a fair legal process when the government seeks to burden[jargon] a person’s protected interests in life, liberty, or property, and substantive due process is the guarantee that the fundamental rights of citizens will not be encroached on by government.[74] The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment also incorporates most of the provisions in the Bill of Rights, which were originally applied against only the federal government, and applies them against the states.[75]

  224. The Equal Protection Clause was created largely in … amendment which declares that no State shall deny to any …

  225. Charles, I’m not talking about whether you file in state or federal court. I’m talking about whether Neil’s original premise that nonjudicial foreclosure is subject to due process claims is valid. In the case of a true nonjudicial foreclosure, my position is that due process claims have been rejected time and again due to a lack of state action in the taking of the property without due process. Either you’re reading more into my statement or discussing something else. I don’t think that we disagree though.

  226. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process … Privileges and Immunities

  227. NO STATE SHALL ABRIDGE: THE FOURTEENTH ……

  228. tnharry the state band MERS from State court but they are not located or have a Office in these state and are working for a National bank. MERS and these National banks are in violation of Federal Laws and plus we are talking about Contract law, and the citizen have the rule to file in Federal court. Also in the act of government insured loan there is the fact that the Federal Gov is also damaged by the actions of the bank!

  229. A Man i really don’t need you to believe my altruistic motives. I can tell you i have no profit motive on this site. I’m an attorney and no, I’m not going to give you my name and state of licensure. Why would I hand over the keys to destroying my livelihood to you given your attitude of animosity?

    you don’t have to believe me – try google, wikipedia, a law library. i’m not making this stuff up – the words “no state shall” precede the due process clause(s). this is like arguing whether the sky is blue…

  230. A-Man … You have nothing to offer to this Debate but drool … go wash your face and hands. Go to the back of the class and Sit Down … Listen ( a kind way of saying STHU).

    You just might learn something, .. if that’s not your goal here, then you could at least respect those who are here to learn.

  231. If the action is carried out by a in State bank I would agree with a State action only, however we got National Banks that are not located in the State, and here is part of the reason Federal law will apply. Plus what been proven with the conviction of DocX founder Lorraine Brown that 1 million forgeries were created by the now defunct company.

    You got National banks agreeing to this settlement were they purchase this forgeries plus MERS was mention in the same complaint as doing the same. So we got documents being delivered by mail (Mail Fraud) that are forgeries by a DocX or MERS and next we got a foreclosure sale (Theft by Deception) by parties that have absolutely “No Standing”!

    MERS v. Nebraska Dept of Banking & Finance kills MERS. MERS claimed in NE Supreme Court argued that they were not a “mortgage bank” and the court agreed. So MERS never registered to do business in the State and therefore is forbidden to do business in the State and cannot use the State Court system as they are not paying the fee in the State (Statute 21-20,168).

    There is an alleged contract with a national corporation which gives right to bring that claim in a Federal court!

    If you bring a case to State court in NE there is no treble damage, however with the Fed Gov its 3 time the damage!

  232. Me either thharry, … We are a Judicial State, we allow mortgages and Dots… dots are treated as mortgages for the purpose of FC.

    …. but there is a clause in the mortgage that allows a non judicial power of sale.

    One copy of the Mortgage (the original) purports to transfer title to our estate to MERS irrevocably and warrant it free of all liens and enc.

    There is no lien of record.

    The other copy of the Mortgage does not state this language, it grants the lenders interest in the title as a lien recorded in the name of MERS.

    After closing a Trustees Deed was filed without the Trust Agreement
    The Warranty Deed to us was never filed.

    What I am saying is … we only received the Trustees interests … that she held/had to give …. land trust.

    The seller estate was in revocable trust before they passed away. we purchased the property about a year later, but the Revocable Trust was Still Open and reported in the Sellers Estate.

    I couldn’t refi, so I contacted Vicky the Trustee/ (the daughter). She immediately went to her own attorney and all attorneys agreed that the Attorney signing without power of POA and not talking was enriching himself.

    The ironic part was that the 1st mortgage had been paid off in the nineties. The owner took out a HELOC before his elderly wife died of cancer. But he had paid it off in 2002 and closed the account. (or so he thought)

    Anywho … the funding co on his heloc was the same one who granted us the unfiled warranty deed.

  233. Tnharry man up. You claimed I think at some point that you are an attorney. You are not a home owner. So Name License and place of business. I for one a homeowner do not buy your altruistic motives. Defamation of character or whatever legal term you want to use Slander etc… is unacceptable.

    Frankly this is shockingly incorrect and deceptive legal advice worthy of a referral to relevant state board(s).

    If the sentence above is not a threat or defamation I do not know what is?

    NEVER AGAIN.

  234. tnharrry is correct in his analysis. The information being provided is not accurate, and it is done time and again on different subjects.

    The so called San Francisco was a study done by a forensic audit firm. In doing the study, they conveniently ignored CA State Law and major rulings that had occurred. Furthermore, they “created” violations that did not exist.

    The people here practice a Confirmation Bias. If it supports their opinion, it is good. If it is opposite, then it is bad, whether grounded in the law or not.

    Everyone talks about the few attorneys who “get it”. The simple fact is most attorneys who attended the NG seminars years ago quickly realized that most of what was said had no true validity. A case in point:

    In the seminars, NG consistently preached that under TILA, the lender had a fiduciary duty to a borrower. This was stated time and again.

    Either NG did not know or did not care that the specific statute applied only to HOEPA loans, and nothing else. Attorneys heard this and immediately cited it in their complaints. Those allegations were dismissed immediately based it did not apply, and because courts had consistently ruled for years.

    Use the arguments here at your own risk. And when they fail, blame those who cite them, and not the courts.

  235. @KC – I’m not following this : Non Judicial Power of Sale in a Judicial State ( Mortgage)

    if it’s a mortgage, it generally requires judicial foreclosure. if it is a deed of trust, generally they provide for nonjudicial foreclosure via trustee.

    “absent state action”, used in this context, means that an instrumentality of the state (court, clerk, sheriff) are involved in the process. in a nonjudicial carried out by a trustee, there is no state action. you never hear this same argument in a scenario of a repo of a car. before the flaming and name calling begin, a nonjudicial pursuant to the power of sale clause in a deed of trust is not very different legally from a repo. the deed of trust spells out the exact procedure following default.

    did you notice that word default? that can be a key point in defense. you can turn a foreclosure defense into a breach of contract case that is based around the lack of a valid default. no ridiculous due process, show me the note, securitization mumbo jumbo, etc. i’ve said it a hundred times to keep it simple.

    i’m not here to defame Neil, A Man. for some reason a certain group rises to his defense at every opportunity though. i will point out when a commenter makes what I think is a post about terrible advice. and if Neil is going to hold himself out as an expert in the field and an attorney seeking clients here, then yes I will point out when the advice is completely contrary to established law.

    marilyn, go back to sleep…

  236. RE: i stand 100% by my statement that due process is not applicable to nonjudicial foreclosure absent state action. it’s simply not even open to debate.

    Absent State Action.
    Non Judicial Power of Sale in a Judicial State ( Mortgage )

    tnharry,
    Absent state action, … the expressed trust in the instrument that created the estate?

    .

  237. NEEDCASELAW: here is the info you need:
    The San Francisco Report: “Foreclosure in California—A Crisis of Compliance” available at http://aequitasaudit.com/images/aequitas_sf_report.pdf

    Phil Ting, the assessor-recorder of the City and County of San Francisco, received an “audit” report dealing with home foreclosures in San Francisco entitled “Foreclosure in California—A Crisis of Compliance.” Aequitas Compliance Solutions, Inc., Foreclosure in California—A Crisis of Compliance (Feb. 2012), available at http://aequitasaudit.com/images/aequitas_sf_report.pdf (SF Report).

    About the company that created the report for San Francisco:

    Aequitas Compliance Solutions, Inc., Mortgage Regulatory Compliance Audit Products and Services, http://aequitasaudit.com

    Aequitas Compliance Solutions, Inc. (“Aequitas”) is a mortgage regulatory compliance consulting firm specializing in complex litigation, investigation and internal audit issues. We work with the mortgage industry, regulators and enforcement agencies, and attorneys for securities-holders, attorneys for distressed homeowners and other industry stakeholders. We provide our clients accurate, thoughtful and customized analysis, which we present in a clear and persuasive manner. Our experts possess a broad range mortgage and regulatory expertise, which enable us to serve large and small companies, law firms and government agencies.

    The report revealed that New Century Mortgage employees admitted to regularly forging signatures on loan documents and also used a light machine for this.

    If you could get a judge to read it, it might help. Insist on a ruling on the judicial notice issue and the truth of the contents in the report or the court just ignores the request. If you are representing yourself, the court will run over you and ignore your requests for judicial notice unless you ask TWICE in court for a ruling on such issues, with a court reporter recording the hearing. If you only asked once, appeals court ignores the issue.

    You are playing a game in which the judge is against you (yes, the judge is thinking, “You got the money, didn’t you? You are not paying it back are you? No one else is asking for it are they? So stop wasting my time.”) and the loan servicer, bank, and trustee are all against you and THEY know the rules of the game and you do not. If you are not able to pay your mortgage and no foreclosure has been started, lie low and stay quiet for as long as possible. The moment you step out and confront them, the foreclosure and its deadlines will be in started and their goal is to get that house foreclosed ASAP. In fact, a well used auction

    Be certain that you can show that you are prejudiced by foreclosure. In other words, that you would NOT be in the same situation (foreclosure) regardless of the instruments being used.

    What judges are often saying here (California) is that it really does not matter if the instruments are forged or not because you would still be in the same situation. They point out that if the loan had not been assigned to a new beneficiary, you would still be in foreclosure, hence, you are not prejudiced by all the bogus assignments, robo-signed documents, forged instruments, etc. Courts have used this argument against Glaski in California.

    In a nutshell: Who cares if the wrong person is foreclosing. You would still be in foreclosure anyway. Your are not prejudiced by this foreclosure.

  238. Tnharry et al- my reading of Neil’s post gave me the impression that he is simply stating that:
    Nonjudicial foreclosure is the law in those states, and was put in place long before the securitization (supposed) of mortgage loans. The same players in the judicial states are at work in the nonjudicial states, and because this heinous fraud and criminal activity was heretofore nonexistent, the homeowners SHOULD have rights other than what they currently have which is close to zero.
    And then he furthers his argument by describing what should be done and how he would do it.
    As far as that goes, I have wondered but not seen how many mortgages were written in judicial vs nonjudicial states, with the end game in mind. I would have written 99 % of the mortgAges in nonjudicial states, much easier to fabricate, backdate and forge evidence in those states and never once raise an eyebrow in court. Because the homeowner has no defense.
    That’s what I got from his post.

  239. Neil does not read this blog but puts out whats he is slowly discovering which is what other attorney are doing as they want to be credited with inventing the wheel.

    This San Francisco audit was done back in 2012 I read a law review article about the subject and wrote a commit as to Wells Fargo handling of WaMu, and they responded requesting to use my comments. I next contact the County land recorder office as to how in fact Wells Fargo was treating these WaMu government insured loans as their own loan when in fact this was not the situation. SF audit of the almost 400 loans, showed 82% of the loans had a violation of the recorded documented.

    Neil get is now getting to the point, when he does not take these detours into no funding at closing, or investors funding the actual loans or let sue the Notaries. The lenders are acting as all these different groups in owner, mortgage service, master servicer, custodian of record, trust, issuer while having place these loan into the securities by relinquishing the blank Notes without a sale of the Notes to Ginnie Mae.

    The best point Neil make here today is that the process is nonjudicial so it avoids the judicial and is why the judges where not accustom to any defense by the homeowner whom not got a clue as to what has happen, and up until today attorney telling folks “what do you want a house for free” which stop these attorneys from mounting any real defense or offense in these matters!

    I believe this procedure was introduce for exactly this purpose of taking out of the courts hand to determine valid evidence being used to administratively foreclose.

    The Federal Government is bring a $50 billion settlement up and Szymoniak who was part of the $25 billion settlement that recovered $95 million and BOA in a side deal paid HUD $500 million plus another $500 in mortgage help programs were agreed upon. Now upon the announcement of a $50 billion deal, Szymoniak filed a $10 billion complaint, yet yesterday Neil writing about freaking Notaries, yet we wonder why we are no further along in individual cases?

  240. Defaming Neil Tnharry? Your whole purpose on this blog is to defame Neil.
    Neil is exposed. His name license etc…. Why dont you man up and tell the world your real name and where the authorities can find you.

    NEVER AGAIN

  241. That is right Tnharry Debates are not allowed in Totalitarian Fascist regimes.

    Heil Tnharry (take your pick Roman or Nazi)..

  242. Excellent read! This is exactly what should happen or should have happened in our case.

    Regards, Nancy

    >

  243. tn
    read the meaning of ‘_no state shall and why it was incorporated into our constitution when the constitution was written and we dispensed with the Articles of Confederation.

  244. free speech is allowed…to some extent. and since the jack booted thugs haven’t busted down his server’s doors to shut him down, he has exercised his free speech. conversely, he is subject to misconduct is he promotes inaccurate legal advice.

    i’m not saying you have to take a constitutional law course at harvard to have an opinion on the subject. google and wikipedia will get you there. i stand 100% by my statement that due process is not applicable to nonjudicial foreclosure absent state action. it’s simply not even open to debate

  245. ARIZONA GOES A BIG STEP FURTHER. They have A.R.S 33-811(c) which says if you don’t stop the foreclosure 24 hrs. BEFORE it you GIVE UP ALL THE RIGHTS TO CHALLENGE IT EVER! So if you can’t afford a lawyer when you are at your lowest BECAUSE your losing your home, EVEN IF IT’S REALLY WRONG? the court will throw it out BEFORE a judge even see’s it.. you’ll be paying the other lawyers fees before you know it. I think it’s an 12(b) (6) and that means Summery judgment and you will never get to argue that. Now that’s really UNFAIR! I know it happened to me.. ARIZONA HAS THE HOMEOWNER NAILED.

  246. I like the Fascist pig part. In my former case, the judge refused to read my Motion to Compel or read my Summary Judgment or opp. counsel’s Summary judge. WTF is that?

  247. Tnharry getting desperate? Making Desperate accusations. This is still the USA where free speech is still allowed. At least Neil allows your opinions on this site without threats. So if Neil isnt perfect at least he is not a Fascist Pig.

    never again

  248. Neil, you mention “The San Francisco Study” – what is that? Could you attach it or share where it might be downloaded?

  249. RE: “no state shall…” words mean things

    FIRREA

    They have deaf ears ……. I’ve come to the conclusion .. Never Mind!

    Good Morning Sunshine

  250. *at this point…

  251. i’m not sure if this is an information site or a victim support site that this point

  252. Yes we were denied do process because the cts refused to follow their own rules

    Sent from my iPhone

    >

  253. “no state shall…” words mean things. you can sit at your computer and call bullshit or you can go learn something

  254. Really ?? ….bullshit

  255. So far off the mark. Time and time again it has been ruled that you can’t have a due process argument without state action. Nonjudicial foreclosure by its very nature does not involve state action. If there is a required component of a court, a sheriff or even a clerk overseeing or certifying a sale, then you may be able to make it work. In a run of the mill, trustee only nonjudicial there is not the requisite state action for a due process argument.

    Frankly this is shockingly incorrect and deceptive legal advice worthy of a referral to relevant state board(s).

  256. I need help, the firm who is claiming a fraudulent claim upon me is Marchall C Watson and now he goes by John J Bardince P.A. That is how he spells it. There trying to force me in a knew mortgage sit at $464,661. 94 for a home I pay for at $250,+.

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: