Livinglies “Theory” Again Corroborated by 4th DCA in Florida: Proof of transaction IS required.

For Further information please call 954-495-9867 or 520-405-1688

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

see Murray vs. HSBC – 4D13-4316

Having exhausted all possible explanations for the fraudulent behavior of the banks, the 4th DCA has now come to the conclusion that the reason for robo-signing, fabrication, backdating, forgery etc. is that there was no transaction underlying the paperwork that the banks rely upon — at least in this case. In this case in particular, after all the cynics, critics and ridicule I confess my base instincts when I say “I told you so.” Of course the case is remanded, but there is no way HSBC is going to be able to prove anything required by this decision.

For legal practitioners the take away from this case and others being decided in Florida and around the country, is that you should not accept proclamations from either opposing counsel or the bench that the facial validity of a document is enough. In most cases there is no underlying transaction in which a purchase and sale of the loan was completed. So now, at least in the 4th DCA in Florida, foreclosing parties are being returned to the days when they had to prove the actual loan and prove that actual purchase of the loan through proof of payment for the transaction by the party seeking to enforce the loan. And when they don’t or can’t they should be subjected to sanctions against both the conspirators and their attorneys, plus punitive damages.

CAVEAT: THIS CASE DOES NOT APPLY TO ALL CASES. Check with an attorney licensed in the jurisdiction in which your property is located before you make any decisions or start celebrating. But if you check around you will see an increasing number of Florida and other state and Federal decisions, including bankruptcy court, where they found the original note and mortgage void or the transfers to have eviscerated the right to enforce the mortgage through foreclosure. In short, the tide has turned.

A nonholder in possession, however, cannot rely on possession of the instrument alone as a basis to enforce it. . . . The transferee does not enjoy the statutorily provided assumption of the right to enforce the instrument that accompanies a negotiated instrument, and so the transferee “must account for possession of the unindorsed instrument by proving the transaction through which the transferee acquired it.” Com. Law § 3–203 cmt. 2. If there are multiple prior transfers, the transferee must prove each prior transfer. Once the transferee establishes a successful transfer from a holder, he or she acquires the enforcement rights of that holder. See Com. Law § 3–203 cmt. 2. A transferee’s rights, however, can be no greater than his or her transferor’s because those rights are “purely derivative.”

Id. (emphasis added) (internal citations omitted).
HSBC had to prove the chain of transfers starting with Option One California as the first holder of the note. The only document admitted that purported to transfer the note was the PSA. Although the note was included in the PSA, the parties to the PSA were ACE, Option One Mortgage Corporation, Wells Fargo, and HSBC; not Option One California. The loan analyst testified that Option One California was acquired by AHMS, which rebranded to Homeward Residential, which was ultimately acquired by Ocwen. HSBC argues that since “Option One” is defined under the PSA as “Option One Mortgage Corporation or any successor thereto,” and Option One transferred its interest to HSBC through the PSA, HSBC had the rights of a holder. We disagree.

23 Responses

  1. @ ENDtheFED ,

    I have an undated assignment from “Option One” that was forged by WF in 2012 , endorsed to “blank” ,,, by forging an Option One instead of a Sand Canyon WF is attempting to say that it occurred earlier.

  2. Interesting, effective April 30, 2008 Sand Canyon’s President says that they are out of the loan servicing business and do not own any mortgages.Yet in the Murray v HSBC Assignments were made by Sand Canyon in 2009 & 2010.

  3. Thank you. I guess I did not read far enough. It makes this case very important.

  4. Louise posted yesterday that the “homeowners lost anyway.” That is untrue. Read the enitre, and fairly short opinion. Pay particular attention to the last lines:

    “We therefore reverse the final judgment of foreclosure.

    Reversed and Remanded for entry of judgment in favor of appellants.”

  5. Satanic-based Secret Societies are nothing new. That fraud has been going on in this country since its inception. However, because of all of the fraudulent investment practices by the top institutional investment firms on Wall Street such as, Vanguard, Blackrock, Fidelity, State Street and the like, this
    country and the entire world are in peril.

    It is not just crazy talk. These “freemasonic” crooks are
    demons from hell. .

  6. The History Channel II is airing “Secrets of Founding Fathers,” right now. It talks about “Secret Societies” such as the “Hellfire Club.”

  7. Correct typo in my previous comment, any man with any woman.

  8. RITES OF EVIL, CHAPTER FOUR; page 81 of the book entitled, “EVIL Incarnate Rumors of Demonic Conspiracy and Satanic Abuse In History,” written by, DAVID FRANKFURTER:

    Though the early modern period and into modern times peripheral cultures have likewise been composites of bestial traits-nudity, cannibalism, even beast-like appearances-and fantasies of special freedom and Edenic harmony. Sixteenth-century reports of Brazilian Indians were absorbed into a geographical tradition fascinated since antiquity with images of subhuman culture. Consequently, the methods of cannibalism-were victims hunted or bred?-became the focus of ethnographies of the New World, complemented invariably by woodcuts that arranged nude Indians in photographic tableaux of cannibalistic butchery and cooking. (See figure 2.) As in Strabo and other ancient geographers, cannibalism was paired with sexual excess or inversion in order to depict a culture completely lacking “our” mores, yet cohesive in its own ways. “Ignorant of all forms of civil society and religion,” the literary historian Frank Lestringant summarizes, the savages of sixteenth-century travel literature

    fornicate freely, shamelessly and openly, without respect for the bonds of blood: “they have as many women as they wish [he quotes one text]. Son couples with mother, and sister with brother, any MSN with any woman; any and every time they wish, they divorce from their marriages, and in nothing do they keep order.”
    These peoples, as well as enjoying freedom of divorce and the absence of an incest taboo, are voraciously anthropophagous, and here again they ignore all frontiers and taboos.

    These are the same sorts of evil abominations Wall Street “investors” in their own Securities Fraud fully intend to create by making fraudulent investments and fraudulent re-investments under the guise of TARP. Securities Fraud on a Global scale such as this, is encyclical to causing mass chaos in the civilized world, the world becomes utterly devoid of any moral fortitude.
    Derivatives is the main fraud based equation that makes Fraud In the Obtaining and Issuing of Credit a “financial weapon of mass destruction.”

    Derivatives were meant to cause utter chaos in the world. That would likely cause the worst possible endgame scenario such as what is mentioned above. The full evil intent of this evil fraud based derivatives plan is to bring
    on the fury of Gods wrath by causing such horrors in the world to happen that would cause a worldwide Armageddon. This evil wants all good people to hell with it for all of eternity.

    Therefore, when good people dutifully send in those “on time” mortgage payments, they are paying homage to all of this.

  9. “Foaming the Runway,” Chapter 8, page 138, from the book entitled: “BAILOUT,” written by Former Special Inspector General in Charge of Oversight of TARP:

    On March 14, 2008, the news broke that Treasury had authorized the insurance giant AIG to pay $168 million in “retention bonuses” to employees in its Financial Products division, the very unit whose reckless bets had brought down the company. Taxpayers had put up $170 billion (including $40 billion from TARP) to keep AIG’s collapse from precipitating a meltdown of the global financial system, and now the executives from the division that had caused its ruin were going to be paid lavishly.
    The news triggered an explosion of outrage. While I was getting coffee early that week in the Treasury cafeteria, I looked up at the television to see Senator Grassley calling on the AIG executives to either quit or commit suicide, and that was probably one of the more muted reactions from Congress. For those on the left, the payments represented more evidence of Treasury’s betrayal of the public in administering TARP. While homeowners continued to get pummeled by the foreclosure crisis with no meaningful relief in sight, the executives at AIG at the unit most responsible for requiring a taxpayer bailout in the first place were now getting bonus payments of up to $6.4 million (with twenty-two executives receiving at least $2 million each), all effectively paid for by the taxpayer. For those on the right, the payments encapsulated everything that they saw wrong about the governments policy of “corporate welfare,” which seemed endlessly to reward failure. They were both right.

  10. No Trust
    Nope Nope Nope

  11. Neil, OUTSTANDING RULING … and exceptionally timely for me… Thank You!

    Ivent , Glad to see you on target today… ALLEGED TRUST is 100% correct… just an Excel spreadsheet (or more likely a DB2 database) to determine who divides the spoils…

  12. The “closing attorneys” are the agents whose duty it is to procure the Titles to all U.S. property vis a vis the “Title Companies.” Strict rules apply that must be stringently followed. Procurement requires that a physical task must be performed by the Issuer of the Original Securities Contract. Specific legal requirements must have been met by the Issuer in regards to “secured financial trandactions.”

    “Industry Standards” do not apply here.

    Failure to secure the Original Transaction is fraud in the procurement that is a serious crime as well as a legal travesty.

  13. Good language in the case, but and however, the homeowners lost anyway.

  14. This post is all about what the servicer/bank does NOT WANT TO PRODUCE because he does not have the documents to prove the transfer and purchase. Where is the endorsement to the entity allegedly foreclosing, which nowadays is an alleged trust?

  15. Watch this movie: more and more people are waking up and are willing to stand up for what this country once meant.

  16. The Original Notes never left the possession of the Note Issuers, who were the U.S. taxpayers because the Titles were never procured properly.

    Subsequently, there is not one correction that can be made by the Issuer of the Original “Bills of Credit” that would be legal, moral or ethical by any legal standards.

  17. Dont forget the assigns and successors 1 thru 10.

  18. Next question is hsbc who. Nat assoc? Hsbc for dbalt trust for certificate holders? Hsbc dbalt -d ? Hsbc nat assoc. its just a title any old title claiming to be ? Beny? Agent of Beny? Trustee for? Pick a capacity

  19. The Government has agreed to partner with Non Profits, This is how they will send kids to school for free. You get to pay for that. These ” defective transactions ” were later refinanced by the alleged banks , recreated and businesses which are connected with non profits were named the alleged investors. This was all done to foreclose and I must say , this is not an arms length transaction, These are people you know , neighbors , co employees and employers with listed businesses . I believe they call it community investment. Check and see what company is listed as the government bond purchasers for your State . That is where the problem begins …

  20. That was “stay out of jail free pass”.( Better get that corrected.)

  21. Still have to explain why the lender named on IRS form 1099a is in fact the servicer and why writing WAS the lender on the trustees deed upon sale does not give them what they need – a stay put of jail fee pass. The damage is done.

  22. 7 years and 7 parties with no proof of claim
    Sure did a bang up job on the title though……..
    I will give them a manufactured default ………. Right in the O’le Smoocher.

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: