Sending Notice of TILA Rescission: The importance of the procedure

For assistance or further information regarding TILA rescission or related topics please call 954-495-9867 or 520+405+1688
=========================
? CAN YOU RESCIND A PURCHASE LOAN AND/OR ON A RESIDENTIAL AND INVESTMENT PROPERTY??
First let me say you can rescind any deal if you prove fraud or mistake and tender back whatever you got out of the deal — at common law. My comments are limited to TILA rescission which is a specific statutory remedy that works in very specific ways and favors the borrower, not the alleged lender.
I failed to address one specific question (see above) last night when I was on my radio show. There are many conditions and provisions regarding what loans are subject to rescission or the other disclosure requirements of TILA. Whether a specific loan is actually eligible for rescission is a matter of fact, legal argument and conclusions. Some analysis and consultation with a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction is required.  But the way TILA was written if the borrower has reason to believe that the disclosures were not adequate (within the  tolerances specified by TILA) the borrower can send the notice of TILA rescission and make demand for the note, mortgage and money. What the US Supreme Court unanimously ruled about one month ago was that hundreds of judges on trial benches and appellate benches were completely wrong in applying principles of common law rescission to TILA rescission. No lawsuit is required to have the rescission effective. A letter does it all. And no tender is required from the borrower — quite the opposite the creditor must return all money ever paid by the borrower going all the way back to origination.
Those issues are ONLY addressed IF a creditor files a declaratory action against the borrower seeking a judicial determination that the rescission should not be allowed to stand. So the question about whether it was right to send the notice doesn’t stop anyone from sending it. But if the creditor files a challenge in court (not a letter stating its rejection), then and only then a Judge may decide whether the the rescission stands. But in order to do that the creditor must allege and prove the loan disclosures were complete and accurate; they must prove the loan origination, the loan acquisition and the money trail to establish standing (in my opinion). Without that, the burden of proof cannot shift to the borrower without violating the spirit and express wording of TILA.
There is a reason why it works that way. The purpose of allowing a borrower to cancel a deal (TILA rescission) with a simple letter is to take away the power of the “lender” to tie up the borrower and extort the borrower into complying with predatory loan terms or inadequate disclosures. Rescission is “effective” the date of the notice. It’s done. The mortgage and note are gone.
The purpose of TILA rescission is actually pretty specific. The idea is to allow a borrower to completely cancel the old deal especially the note and mortgage by operation of law without a lawsuit or tender so that the borrower can then go to an alternate lender and get a new loan from a new lender and give the new lender an enforceable first mortgage lien on the property without the risk of the prior lender contesting the right of the new lender to be in first position on the chain of title. Without stating that the mortgage and note are gone the borrower would not have the alternative which is what TILA is all about — choice. Stonewalling and “rejection” letters are exactly what TILA does not allow.
So what happens if you send a notice of rescission and you were wrong about whether you or your loan qualifies for rescission? Let me state that you don’t know if you are really wrong until the issues are litigated. And I would state that if you have no arguable right to send the rescission there might be some exposure to a claim of abuse of process and damages for attorneys fees, costs or even sanctions. But it seems very unlikely to me that such a result will occur given the current track record of apparently zero actions filed by creditors within the 20 day window since the the whole securitization myth was propagated. And if they don’t file the action within 20 days it doesn’t appear to matter how wrong the borrower was — the issue is over. This is just like non-judicial foreclosure where the borrower must file for a TRO within a short window or a judicial foreclosure where the borrower must answer within a short time period.
The answer is that you can draft anything and you can send anything. The banks have proven this with their fabricated assignments, endorsements, allonges, powers of attorney etc. The real question is what happens if you send a notice of rescission when there are potentially factors that could have a court rule in favor of the bank if the bank filed the required challenge within 20 days of the notice.

And the answer to THAT question, I think, is mostly based on procedure. TILA is very specific as to what happens and when. Reg Z also helps. A notice of rescission is effective upon notice as stated by TILA (and US Supreme Court) and Reg Z, and under Reg Z that means the note and mortgage are nullified back to the origination. So sending notice of rescission would be effective against virtually any loan, regardless of factors that might allow the bank to reinstate the note and mortgage.

If a creditor does file the lawsuit within 20 days, then there might be a judicial finding that the borrower, or the loan or the property or the circumstances were such that the rescission is not proper and therefore will be set aside. If that happens the note and mortgage would be reinstated (because they were nullified by operation of law at the moment the letter was dropped into a mailbox). That much is very clear from Justice Sclaia’s opinion written for a unanimous Supreme Court.

I think this is a situation where the presumptions are reversed from that of a foreclosing party. In a TILA rescission the rescission is effective from date of notice and is conclusively presumed to be valid unless the creditor files the action within 20 days AND WINS. The problem the bank has is that in this case they must establish standing by alleging and proving that they are a creditor — which in many cases would involve disclosures that the banks have been fighting against for 8 years. So I conclude, for the present, that the odds are against the banks filing these actions within the 20 day window. Hence even a “bad” rescission would apparently nullify the note and mortgage — unless and until a real creditor files a real lawsuit within 20 days and proves that there were adequate disclosures and/or that the loan was not subject to TILA rescission.

108 Responses

  1. @Leah, Texas is a nonjudicial state which means they do not have to file a lawsuit to foreclose. You can make it a lawsuit which they will have to defend. You can also file for bankruptcy to save your house. None of this is new stuff. If Ocwen is selling all its servicing rights, the cash cow is not producing much cash anymore. Wilbur Ross also unloaded Ocwen completely, and he used to be a bigshot at AHMSI which became Homeward Residential and then it allegedly sold its holdings to Ocwen. Ocwen was one of the largest investors in servicing notes and mortgages, but not anymore. Do I smell something burning? Definitely not legal advice. You should try to find a good attorney.

  2. LDTX
    I received this today in the mail and I would like to share because I need some insight from great minds. So Bank of America has listed property for foreclosure April 7 2015. Of course mailbox is now being crammed full of mail from attorney’s. One attorney sent me a copy of the document which is a Notice of Trustee Sale and reads notice sent by Harvey Law Group which at one time was on NG Livinglies Blog as a Texas Foreclosure Mill.

    Bank of America, National Association is mortgage servicer for the mortgagee of the Deed of Trust. Bank of America, National Association and the mortgagee have entered into an agreement granting Bank of America, National Association authority to service the mortgage. Bank of America, National Association as mortgage servicer is representing the Mortgagee under a Service Agreement with the mortgagee (The Servicing Agreement”) The name of the mortgagee is The Bank of New York Mellon FKA the Bank of New York as trustee for certificate holders of CWABS, Inc., Asset Backed Certificates, Series 2007-2. Pursuant to the Servicing Agreement, Bank of America, National Association is granted authority to collect and service the debt associated with the Deed of Trust. Under Section 51.0025 of the Texas Property Code, Bank of America, National Association, as mortgage servicer, is authorized to administer any resulting foreclosure of the property covered by the Deed of Trust on behalf of the Mortgagee. The Mortgagee’s address is c/o the Mortgage Servicer, Bank of America, National Association PO Box 93094, Simi Valley CA 93094-0335.
    If the sale is set aside for any reason, the Purchaser shall have no further Recourse against the Mortgagor, the Mortgagee or the Mortgagee’s attorney.

    This is in my opinions a violation of the Pooling and Service Agreement because the Assignment from MERS to Bank of New York Mellon was not in compliance with the specified time the DOT and promissory note were to meet together before the pool closed. The Pool Closed February 28,2007.Assignment may not have to be filed in land records but it clearly was not done until October 4, 2011. The Service Agreement must be followed. I notice Bank of America does not state Pooling and Service Agreement under New York Trust Law.

    Thanks just looking for moral support.

    Deed of Trust – Grantee Leah Dean
    Grantor -America’s Wholesale Lender
    Trustee – CTC Real Estate
    MERS nominee and beneficiary in a administrative capacity
    for America’s Wholesale Lender successors and assigns.

  3. Yes. I recall some posts about him being charged and tried for criminal acts and being in bed with some other crooks about fraud. He is dangerous, and I am happy to see he is not here now. He does pop up every so often. He is probably on some other blog where they are not on to him.

  4. @ louise

    I BELIEVE SOLIMON WAS IN JAIL AT ONE POINT…CANNOT PROVIDE PROOF, BUT SOURCE IS RELIABLE.

  5. @Leah, two lawsuits, two different notes,and they are all lying. Lawyers not paid to get justice, paid to lie. Very sad. I have worked in the field for over 35 years, and this is so sad. No due process for borrowers/homeowners when they sue.

  6. @Wicho Lacayo: I had American Brokers Conduit on my loan. They did exist and for at least 5 years on Long Island, NY. I knew people here that worked for them. Someone is pulling your leg or the website is not working properly. ABC was even brought up on charges and several of their executes were tried and one went to jail. It was in 2006 around August, I believe, when this happened. They are out of business and my assignments are still saying they exist as well. American Home Mortgage was affiliated with them and went into bankruptcy. Look up AHM bankruptcy. Very interesting reading. It is all rigged, and the trusts do not have anything in them either.

  7. Can you rescind a purchase loan, not refinanced loan, when borrower executed a note and mortgage with a non-existing corporation such as American Brokers Conduit, American Wholesale Lender?

    I would consider this to be FRAUD by misleading the borrowers and directing them to sign a note and mortgage with a non-existing lender

    They were probably trying to hide something. To avoid paying taxes, who knows

    The Mortgage states that the lender is AMERICAN BROKERS CONDUIT, a corporation Organized and Existing under the laws of the State of New York, but I checked with the New York State Department and got a certification that such name has never existed as a corporation, incorporation, LLC, DBA, it never existed

    In addition the real lender that funded the transaction has never been disclosed

    What do you think?

  8. @Louise
    Thank you. I read her deposition and quite frankly, it made me sick to my stomach. She shold have to give testimony in all cases where her artificial stamp appears. I received a copy of my first note from Bank of America November 2011 through a qualified written request. No endorsement. Received another copy in May 2012, from BOA attorney, no endorsement. Exactly 1 week letter from same law firm different attorney, another copy of the note with this added endorsement. Sorry from where I see it, 1st note received and stated in the letter Nov 4, 2011 reads true and correct copy of note. That stamp 6 months later expresses to me BOA and their attorney’s are corrupt and will go before a court of law, lie like dead dog and get away with it. I only correspond through writing to BOA for this reason. One troll doesn’t know what lie the previous troll has told.

  9. Leah, Michelle Sjolander was a known robosigner. Lots of good stuff.

  10. WHO WANTS TO TAKE ON A CLASS ACTION SUIT/////

    McIntosh v. Irwin Union Bank & Trust Co., 215 F.R.D. 26 (D. Mass. 2003)

    Recent Massachusetts Federal Court Case May Spur Truth In Lending Class Actions Seeking Rescission of Mortgage Loans

    A recent court decision may trigger a new wave of Truth in Lending litigation in Massachusetts. McIntosh v. Irwin Union Bank & Trust Co., 215 F.R.D. 26 (D. Mass. 2003), holds that a suit seeking rescission of a mortgage loan due to Truth in Lending Act (TILA) violations can properly be maintained as a class action. The decision, by Chief Judge Young of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, may well be followed by other judges in that jurisdiction, or even further afield (particularly by other jurisdictions within the First Circuit, such as Rhode Island and Maine).

    Prior to this ruling, the weight of legal authority held that – because rescission is an individualized form of relief – only individual borrowers could sue for rescission. Chief Judge Young, however, rejected that authority, and found that a class action is an appropriate mechanism for declaring loans rescindable.

    While we believe the decision is not correct and it is being appealed, the McIntosh ruling is likely to increase the frequency and magnitude of litigation under the Truth in Lending Act and the Massachusetts correlate, M.G.L. c. 140D. Prior to this, it was relatively well-accepted that only TILA actions for actual and statutory damages could be brought as a class action; the law limited statutory damages to $500,000 for the entire class. The ability to seek rescission on behalf of a class, however, makes TILA violations a more inviting target for the plaintiffs’ bar. Rescission remedies include the requirement that the creditor refund all finance charges it collected – including interest over the loan – and apply to any error within the last three years (four years in Massachusetts). When multiplied across a class of borrowers, the potential exposure associated with a rescission class may be quite significant. In the wake of McIntosh, we expect to see a number of demands for rescission and filings of rescission class actions in federal court in Massachusetts. At least one purported class case has already been filed. This disturbing possibility suggests that Massachusetts lenders take at least two important steps. First, as always, mortgage lenders should pay close attention to compliance with TILA and Chapter 140D. Second, all lenders should treat any loan rescission letters – especially if they are from the law firms of Edelman, Combs & Latturner in Chicago or the Law Offices of Claude Lefebvre & Sons in Rhode Island – as a prelude to a possible lawsuit. These letters need to be investigated and responded to with even greater care than usual, in light of the increased stakes.

  11. @ etolle and johngault
    Stamp on note 4-1/2 years after Trust Closed reads
    Pay to the order of without recourse Countrywide Home Loans dba
    America’s Wholesale Lender Michelle Sjolander Executive Vice President. Only time Countrywide is ever mentioned is on that bogus bull crap of a stamp.

  12. e.tolle – if it’s a stamp which identifies awl as a corporation, no chance they could call it a scrivener’s error.

  13. Leah, remember that the “Foreclosing On Everyone’s Home Act of 2009” made it law that you MUST be notified every time your loan is transferred i.e. shuffled between criminals. Otherwise, your loan docs will undoubtedly state that they are going to sell it downstream. Good luck squeezing bucks from them for an infraction like this. But more importantly, do not act on my statements, as I know absolutely nothing about a wide variety of varied subjects.

    JG, yes, it’s a stamp of a clown that left CW many years before the note magically appeared, placed right beside the un-endorsed one that had already magically appeared before the court. Eenie Meanie….

    NPV, no, Land – O – Lakes is further south. Land – O – Slander is just this side of Liableton, closer to Defamerville. But that was a PM between Christine and myself.

    My PM to you is:

    Look to my coming, at first light, on the fifth day. At dawn, look to the East.

    But don’t count on me. I probably won’t show and Lord Sauron will win and you will perish along with all of Middle Earth. Nasty scene all around.

  14. @johngault
    John, Bank of America is calling out Bank of New York Mellon as my Lender In their exact words. We are a debt collector. Me.. Who are you collecting a debt for? BOA: Bank of New York Mellon.. ME: And who is my Lender? BOA: Bank of New York Mellon is your Lender… ME.. No America’s Wholesale Lender is my Lender. On top of these conversations, I receive mail when the house gets put up for auction and all of these attorney’s want you to come see them to stop the foreclosure. Many of the mailings read…. Your Lender Bank of New York Mellon is foreclosing on your property on whatever the date may be. I never closed with Bank of New York Mellon, I have never had a loan with Bank of New York Mellon, Bank of New York Mellon is not a Lender. I have it in writing from Bank of New York Mellon. Bank of America is sticking to their story and now I am wondering where in the hell did America’s Wholesale Lender “A Corporation” fall into this whole thing.

  15. @ Etolle – on to the important stuff… is “Land O Slander” anywhere near Land O Lakes, Florida?

  16. from e.tolle:

    Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
    Doing Business Under The Fictitious
    Business Name Of America’s Wholesale
    Lender, A New York Corporation

    This is part of the same scheme evidenced in Leah’s dot, wherein AWL is identified as a corporation. They will just say that the NY corp on your note refers to CWHL. Bull. This is no accident. Btw, is this a stamp?

  17. Leah, is what you’re actually told that BONY Mellon AS TRUSTEE is your “lender”?

  18. “Foreign corporation” doesn’t mean overseas or abroad. it only means “out of the original state of incorporation”. Since all those mortgage corporations were incorporated either in NY or MD, they are all pretty much “foreign” for the rest of the country but… doing business all over the states and recognized as such. It is such a moot point, harping on it for months on end is a royal waste of time and not ONE state has enforced it in the case of foreclosures initiated by any one of them.

    Except for a few origination lenders… such as Residential Finance Corp.

    Moot point in the big scheme of things and, once again, a defensive argument, and a poor one at that.

  19. David, the whole scam begins with identity theft of the borrower. You were put into a database and sold out to whomever gets the info. (lenders) Then, when you attended the closing a warehouse lender was used that is not in the Note and Mortgage, void transaction not to mention fraud. There were no disclosures as to who or what MERS was, and MERS was in the mortgage. Nobody told you that MERS was going to cause problems with your title. The powers that be are still telling us MERS is perfectly legal. How can it be legal when it messes up hundreds of years of property law and clouds your title? This is an outrageous scam by the government, (Fannie, Freddie, FDIC, FHFA, IRS and big banks, servicers to asset strip us and steal our wealth. The trusts do not have anything in them. The Notes were sold multiple times, so it is my fearless forecast that the multi-notes are going to start coming out of the woodwork. That is when things are going to start to wind down, because criminal fraud will be very visible, and the cockroaches will start scurrying to safety. Please check out Catherine Austin Fitts on Solari Report and YouTuble and ForbiddenKnowledge.

  20. So much but IMO I should rescind to both AWL and BONY Mellon and other parties called out in PSA. I did not close on property with BONY Mellon as my Lender and America’s Wholesale Lender is fictitious, assumed name, DBA.

  21. Db so how many folks get that entered into evidence as proven fact?
    Im just being devils advocate.

  22. JG, what i was pointing out, is , that before you the borrower sign a mortgage/note. your info has been used to get the funding started, and your info was used to get them the best deal they can from a warehouse lender, as there are many warehouse lender, so you as the borrower was never told that they would use your info to secure a line of credit!!!!

    that why, tila was done to give you all info on all party’s to transaction.

    and the warehouse lender would be the FIRST ASSIGNMENT ON ALL LOAN DOC’S , BECAUSE THEY HELD A SECURITY INTEREST IN THE MORTGAGE AND NOTE, PRIOR TO GIVEN UP THE FUNDS.

    SO TILA WOULD SURVIVE. FRAUD ON THE BORROWER. AND THIS WOULD PUT MERS RIGHT OUT OF PICTURE, AS THEY WOULD NOT BE PART OF MERS. I’VE CHECK.

  23. “What may be problematic in the path to securitization is that when a borrower signs a note ultimately funded by a warehouse line, the warehouse lender has an instantaneous lien, a security interest, on that note. That needs to be released before anyone else may acquire a
    real interest in the note or at least that would be the contention if not paid off and the warehouse lender were made to fight about it because it hadn’t been paid off.”
    I can’t recall, would have to look to see what the default law UCC says about security interests. In thinking about a w/h lender’s security interest, I think to protect it, the w/h lender has to take possession of the note. Otherwise, someone else could pay for it, take delivery, and be deemed a hdc (without notice). So let’s say the w/h lender has poss.
    Then the lender wants to sell the note. The lender has to get an agreement with the buyer, get the money, and pay off the w/h lender to get poss of the note to give it to the buyer. That takes time. And that’s just one transaction and takes time, even if the buyer had ready-cash.
    (The buyer could also buy it with an irrevocable – key word – promise to pay in lieu of cash). I really believe these guys agreed to use the registration of the notes into MERS’ operating system as evidence of their interests among each other, if not that the paper note was digitialized and became the “authoritative” note which 86’d the paper note as the bomb. I can’t see how in the world they would’ve have time to do all these transfers / deals otherwise. Plus no one in his right mind wants a thousand notes floating around in the mail or even fed x or couriers. But, once again, when there’s reliance on the hdc status, meaning the holder took it for value and without notice of defects or default, courts aren’t gonna care. All they’re going to do is see a note endorsed in blank, give the bearer the unwarranted presumption, rely on figures provided by the servicer, a third party, and rely on the assgt that was really executed by a servicer employee. So I guess I don’t care if I sound like a broken drum: that presumption or even allegation has to be defeated.

  24. If anyone appropriately notices her rescission and the lender does nothing, then when and if you file suit for quiet title (i think) based on rescission, in addition to the damages cited for failure to rescind, you
    might list an amt they didn’t give you back as required as an
    approximation of that amt. I’d call my number “an approximation with the actual amt to be determined at trial”, but I would have made
    a sheet justifying my approximation if only in case I needed it.) I
    don’t know for certain that citing an amt they should’ve forked over is a good thing to do or not, though. Maybe it would be better to just
    say an amt to be determined at trial. But I don’t like that since it gives
    the court no idea what the number is and it might want to know. And
    it may suggest you have no idea. Don’t like that, either.

    quiet title and
    damages award as recoupment for violations of tila
    amts not paid back plus statutory interest
    award for failure to release or reconvey (failure to rescind)
    this one require actual damages? I don’t know. may be addressed
    in the act and or case law
    attorney fees?
    if you can establish that att fees would be rewarded, you’d sure
    have a better shot (case law?) at getting an attorney esp if you’re the
    plaintiff
    hard costs (cost to file suit with the court, copies, etc.)

    In my opinion, these are the things they’re hanging out for if they
    fail to rescind after a notice of rescission based on one or more violations of tila.

    lay opinions

  25. Leah: “So if I am understanding America’s Wholesale Lender may call out Corporation on the DOT but on the note it only reads America’s Wholesale Lender which allows some sense of validity?”

    So you’re saying that the lender id’d in your dot is AMERICA’S Wholesale Lender Corporation but the note only says America’s
    Wholesale Lender? first of all, my money’s on they’ll prescribe that to a scrivener’s (mol preparer’s) error. You know, normally, a court might
    find that’s what an errors in a doc is, but I don’t know – using that word means something and has ramifications. I don’t think it was an error at all. It’s not like some other ‘nothing’ word or like that is wrong. I wish we knew if other dots with that gang used the word corporation in dots. omgosh. agency. nominee. It would be CW (corporation) who would be claiming mers (you got mers?) is this or that. That sucker might take me awhile. If my hunch is right, it shows intent.
    If they can’t get away with calling it a scrivener’s error, I really don’t know what to make of it, what a defense might be- based on those differences. Because I don’t believe it was an error, I believe it was
    done to bullwink someone else, not even you. One way or another, I don’t know what it means as a matter of law that they id’d AWL as a corp on YOUR dot. The party on the note is not the party named as the lender in your dot and further, the party named as the lender in your
    dot doesn’t exist. And then there’s that mers complication, if you have mers in your dot. MERS can’t be the anything for a non-existant
    corporation, right? (but the dot does make reference to the note, so wth.) I don’t know and not sure I know anyone who does. I do think one thing, though. It’s on the party who wants to enforce to prove the
    identity of the true party if some law or whatever (like the mers deal) doesn’t make mincemeat of your loan. I’d make a note to self, dated, like maybe an email to myself or send myself a note by u.s. mail and not open it about my attempts to determine that matter on my own and only use later it if it helps me (making a record at the time of the event – the event is looking) ‘June 5th, 2014 tried to find an awl corporation at the sec of state. looked at website. nothing. called sec of state. no info on a awl corp, found that awl is a dba for awhl, inc., like that. You never know…..
    You more than anyone else here needs to use a disclaimer if you
    rescind. imo. Don’t forget, if I may, one can’t just rescind because one wants to.

  26. from earlier article: “There are two types of TILA claims: (1) a claim for recoupment of damages for TILA violations; and (2) rescission of the mortgage based on a failure to provide material disclosures at closing. Recoupment is essentially a remedy under TILA for damages asserted to offset any amounts owed to a creditor. Recoupment is available for TILA disclosure violations on a loan used for family or household purposes and secured by real property owned by the debtor.”

    Okay, everyone but one person here can color me thick. “Recoupment”, as used here: This guy is saying imo and mol that first you rescind. The lender does x. Then you’re supposed to tender what I think is, since the lender gave you back (as if) everything of value you gave him, the face amt of the note. But, what this article says is that you may claim damages for the actual tila violations as an offset against that amt. How one does that, got me but it most likely requires a suit to establish the damages and the amt to be awarded as offset to what you must tender. Damages, I think, must be cited with specificity, just like fraud, so some generic assertion isn’t going to get it.
    Way I get “recoupment” is like this (as used here): I owe you 300k, but you owe me 120k for damages from your tila violations, so I only owe you 180k, so take it and eat a rock! No, can’t say that since you have to establish the damages and amt. I see no reason, however, why, when one is staring at tender, one couldn’t offer to settle the matter of damages for the violations (as long as you don’t miss any deadlines for filing suit if you become the one who has to do it to clear title.) So maybe they’d accept 200 or 250? PS – Don’t admit anything in any
    offer to settle, like your obligation to tender. I wouldn’t deny it, but I wouldn’t volunteer it as an admission.

  27. Let me go back and re-read the emails between you and John Galt. I may have misunderstood what was being communicated.

  28. “An assignee is liable for statutory damages for violations of TILA disclosure requirements by its predecessors. An assignee can also be liable for its failure to respond properly to a rescission notice. Palmer v Champion Mortg., 465 F3d 24 (2006).

    I haven’t read this case, but I think the implication is what I’ve said
    if a lender doesn’t do what he must. A suit might not just be for rescission, but also for failure to rescind. So the banksters must rescind and is liable for not doing so.

    The consumer must send a written notice to the creditor to trigger the rescission process. When the notice of rescission has been mailed, the notice is considered given. Reg Z 226.15(a)(2), 226.23(a)(2). When the consumer rescinds, the security interest automatically becomes void. The consumer is relieved of any obligation to pay any charge, including any finance charge. USC 1635(b) Reg Z 226.15(d)(1), 226.23(d)(1). Rescission voids the mortgage and is a complete defense to foreclosure. The creditor has twenty days from receipt of the consumers rescission notice to return any money or property given to anyone and to take appropriate and necessary action to reflect the termination of the security interest. USC 1635(b); Reg Z 226.15(d)(2), 226.23(d)(2). After the creditor has complied with the preceding mandate, the consumer tenders back to the creditor any money or property received. USC 163(b); Reg Z 226.15(d)(3), 226.23(d)(3). ”
    From another online article – gives us the sections of the act we need.
    There are more in the article.

    http://wlgfights.com/?p=361

    But, I got a hint from this article that
    rescission may not be a done deal if the refinance is from the same
    lender that made the purchase money loan, so if anyone’s in that boat, better check it out.
    I wonder if there are defenses to tender after the lender performs. Probably not, but, hey, maybe.

    David, that was interesting info, but again, I’m not sure any of it matters against a hdc unless whatever is alleged to be the issue about who funded the loan is rightfully framed as one of the limited defenses available against a hdc (v holder) (unless one defeats the hdc presumption).
    Further, the loan broker, for instance, has a contract with its “sponsor” who may be a larger company or an institutional lender and theoretically performs pursuant to that contract. NObody funds a loan at the table for another without a contract. And the funding source generally (depends on who the funding source is) has a contract with its own money supplier.
    The broker originates the loan and accepts the table funding in good faith for whatever that’s worth and I think it’s something.
    What may be problematic in the path to securitization is that when a borrower signs a note ultimately funded by a warehouse line, the warehouse lender has an instantaneous lien, a security interest, on that note. That needs to be released before anyone else may acquire a
    real interest in the note or at least that would be the contention if not paid off and the warehouse lender were made to fight about it because it hadn’t been paid off.
    What NG is saying among other things, I think, is that investors’ money may only be used to purchase whole loans, not fund loans as they’re made, but that the funds were in fact used to fund loans as they’re made. What stands out to me is that says the trusts wouldn’t have any money left to buy whole loans. But does using their money to fund loans make the endorsements and or sales and assignments, at least up to the depositor, any less factual? What about anyone along the way took the loan in good faith and paid for it? (I don’t actually believe that happened, but that’s the posture and it might have happened). It might be all bs if the guy (say broker) who made the loan knew s from shortcakes about the source of the funds (the investors’). The biggies might have known, but not brokers or mtg companies imo. THEY made the loans in good faith (to the extent they didn’t do other bs like participate in or orchestrate predatory lending).

    The act of taking the investors’ funds and using it for unintended purposes might be some kind of conversion and or other wrongful act,
    but does that vitiate the transaction such that it’s void? I can’t speak to the assertion that turning the loan into something else like bonds and so on and esp if that happened somehow before the loans were even made means this or that. Not my thing and it could be that I just don’t get what NG says about that.
    The only way imo to get to the guts of what happened is to first defeat any presumption of hdc status or I guess alternatively to frame
    these asserted facts as one of the defenses available against a hdc. imo.
    What I really found horrific was material in that thing you posted that
    I straightened out so I could read the dang thing. That, to me, is something that totally bears scrutiny. I only read it, sort of, once as I was
    re-aligning it, but my reaction was that it was a concerted effort to mess over the investors.

  29. Leah said:

    “So if I am understanding America’s Wholesale Lender may call out Corporation on the DOT but on the note it only reads America’s Wholesale Lender which allows some sense of validity?”

    I’m lost. What are you basing that on? I’m missing what you’re referring to here. I personally see no reason that they should be able to call out corporation at all, if none exists. What am I missing?

  30. LDTX

    So if I am understanding America’s Wholesale Lender may call out Corporation on the DOT but on the note it only reads America’s Wholesale Lender which allows some sense of validity? And although I was never aware of the parties who would later come into play, I have no right to rescind. Is that correct. I have the PSA, the FWP f
    Certified copies from the SEC. My loan number is in there and BOA has already paid. in full the HELOC that is also under America’s Wholesale Lender. North American title did write to me and state they cannot disclose the information regarding the Lender as it is private information. I needed to contact Bank of America. I was and have been told repeatedly that Bank of New York Mellon is the lender. Bank of New York Mellon has denied they are the Lender and shold not be represented as a Lender.

  31. “There are two types of TILA claims: (1) a claim for recoupment of damages for TILA violations; and (2) rescission of the mortgage based on a failure to provide material disclosures at closing. Recoupment is essentially a remedy under TILA for damages asserted to offset any amounts owed to a creditor. Recoupment is available for TILA disclosure violations on a loan used for family or household purposes and secured by real property owned by the debtor. Rescission, on the other hand, is generally only available for a refinance loan on the borrower’s primary residence and it voids the creditor’s lien on the property. Rescission is available up to three years from when the creditor fails to provide material disclosures for the loan.* If successful, a rescission renders the secured credit unsecured and potentially dischargeable in bankruptcy.”

    I would have written that line: Rescission is available up to three years from when the creditor fails to provide material disclosures for the loan or when the information provided is beyond the tolerance for error as
    described in the act or for three years from when a consumer should have known of a 1) failure to disclose or 2) material errors in disclosures made.

    This article is a must read imo:

    http://www.sulaimanlaw.com/Publications/THE-TRUTH-AND-LENDING-ACT-IN-BANKRUPTCY.shtml

  32. so to all my good friends, and to ( Rock,Christine.) I dont know

    any other way to explain THAT THIS IS WHY MR. N.G. AND MYSELF HAVE SAID. THAT ALL AND EVERYONE THAT HAS BEEN
    FORECLOSED ON, HAD TO FILE BK TO SAVE HOME, GET A MOD, AND SO ON AND SO ON.

    THIS GO’S TO HEART OF ALL COMPLAINTS, OR SHOULD BE, FOR TILA,RESPA, AND ANYTHING ELSE YOU CAN PUT IN,

    ALL MORTGAGES/NOTES WERE ASSIGNED PRIOR TO ANY BORROWER SIGNING THE NOTE AND MORTGAGE, TO A
    UNKNOWN PARTY TO TRANSACTION. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, THE REAL MONEY. THEY USED YOUR APPLICATION TO GET
    FUNDING IN PLACE, THEN BROUGHT THE NOTE / MORTGAGE, TO THEM, WHO KNOW WHO? , AND THEY BEFORE
    LETTING OUT THE FUNDS TO PAY CLOSING ATTORNEY, THEY ( PERFECTED ) A LIEN/SECURITY INTEREST IN YOUR MORTGAGE AND NOTE.

    SO WERE , PLEASE SHOW ME ROCK/CHRISTINE, WERE ARE THE ( TILA NOTICES, BECAUSE THE WAREHOUSE LENDER DID
    BEFORE YOU SIGN MORTGAGE AND NOTE, WAS THE TRUE OWNER OF THAT NOTE AND MORTGAGE, AS THEY WERE ASSIGN
    IT BY THE FRAUD LENDER TO SECURE THE MONEY.

    SO ALL SHOULD RESCISSION ALL MORTGAGES FROM 2000 TILL NOW. ON TILA.

    RESCIND ALL
    YOU ALL MUST READ. VERY VERY GOOD STUFF. WHAT I SEE HERE IS THAT AGAIN WHO EVER TOOK YOUR APPLICATION, DID USE IT AS COLLACTERAL WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION,OR CONCENT. I.E USEING YOUR SSN,CREDIT SCORES, AND ALL INFO THAT WAS PROVIDED ON APP. LIKE SAVINGS,IRA,BANK ACCOUNT INFO, ETC,ETC.

    WHAT YOU WANT TO SEE IS THE WORDS, PERFECTED……BEFORE FUNDS ARE GIVIN OUT.
    Warehouse line of credit

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Jump to: navigation, search
    A warehouse line of credit is a credit line used by mortgage bankers. It is a short-term revolving credit facility extended by a financial institution to a mortgage loan originator for the funding of mortgage loans.

    The cycle starts with the mortgage banker taking a loan application from the property buyer.

    Then the loan originator secures an investor (often a large institutional bank) to whom the loan will be sold, whether directly or through a securitization.

    This decision is generally based on an institutional investor’s published rates for various types of mortgage loans, while the selection of a warehouse lender for a particular loan may vary based on the types of loan products allowed by the warehouse provider or investors in the loan approved by the warehouse lender to be on the line of credit.

    After an investor has been selected, the mortgage banker draws on the warehouse line of credit to fund a mortgage and sends the loan documentation to the warehouse credit-providing institution to act as a collateral for the line of credit.

    The warehouse lender, at this stage, perfects a security interest in the mortgage note to serve as collateral.

    When the loan is finally sold to a permanent investor, the line of credit is paid off by wired funds from this permanent investor to the warehouse facility and the cycle starts all over again for the next loan.
    Typical durations that loans are held on the warehouse line, called dwell time, range based on the speed at which investors review mortgage loans for purchase after their submission by mortgage banks. In practice, this length of time is generally between 10-20 days. Warehouse facilities typically limit the amount of dwell time a loan can be on the warehouse line. For loans going over dwell, mortgage bankers are often forced to buy these notes off the line with their own cash in anticipation of a potential problem with the note.
    The International Finance Corporation has set up warehouse lines of credit around the world and has developed a guide on how they work.[1]
    Warehouse lines of credit play an important role in making mortgage loan market more accessible to property buyers since many mortgage bankers would not be able to attract sufficient amount of deposits that are necessary to fund mortgage loans by themselves. Therefore, warehouse funding allows the loan originators to provide mortgages at more competitive rates.[2] Unlike in other types of lending, loan originators earn more profit from origination fees rather than interest rate spread since the closed mortgage loan is sold quickly to an investor.
    The warehouse funding providing institution accepts various types of mortgage collateral, including subprime and equity loans, residential or commercial, including specialty property types. The warehouse lenders in most cases provide the loan for a period of fifteen to sixty days.[3] Warehouse lines of credit are usually priced off 1-month LIBOR plus a spread.[4] Also warehouse lenders typically apply a ‘haircut’ to credit line advances meaning that only 98% – 99% of the face amount of loans are being funded by them; the originating lenders have to provide with the remainder from their own capital.[4]
    Purpose[edit]

    Reasons for using a warehouse line of credit include:
    Permanent Funding: Mortgage lender does not have to draw deposits – the line of credit provides permanent funding for the life of all loans in the program.
    Less Risk: No margin calls – once the asset is funded, there is no additional mark-to-market and posting of collateral.
    Unlimited Loan Volume: Warehouse line of credit program can fund an unlimited loan volume. This enables specialty lenders to enlarge their portfolios for maximum interest income and eliminates the need to manage multiple sources of capital.
    In addition, in this way the warehouse credit institution can manage an exposure to mortgage loans market without building a branch network of its own.
    Other information[edit]

    Warehouse lending can be differentiated between ‘wet funding’ and ‘dry funding’.[5] The difference is related to when the loan originator gets his funds with respect to the time at which the real estate transaction takes place. During ‘wet funding’ the mortgage loan provider gets the funds at the same time as the loan is closed, i.e. before the loan documentation is sent to the warehouse credit provider. ‘Dry funding’ takes place when the warehouse credit provider gets the loan documentation for review before sending the funds.
    An important aspect of the warehouse credit providing business is limiting fraud on warehouse lending. Main risks of fraud include dishonest and collusive mortgage loan originators, title companies, real estate agents and customers themselves, false information in the loan application (especially appraisals), forged signatures on the loan documents, and false documents of title.[6] The ‘Wet funding’ type of warehouse credit is riskier in terms of possible fraud because the credit provider will not be aware of any potential problems until after the funds are sent to the loan originator. Measures that the warehouse lender can take to limit fraud can be a strong screening process for mortgage brokers and mortgage banking companies, making sure the loan originator itself has a strong internal screening process, limiting the amount available for ‘wet funding’, and having separate account for funds coming from sale of loans to investors.[5]
    References[edit]

    Jump up ^ International Finance Corporation – Warehouse Line of Credit
    Jump up ^ Colorado Mortgage Lender’s Association – http://cmla.com/mortgageterms
    Jump up ^ Armstrong, C. L.; McNeill, T. H.; Reynolds, J. E. (2006): “Warehouse Lending Losses Under the Financial Institution Bond”, The Fidelity Law Journal, Vol. 12.
    ^ Jump up to: a b Key Features of Warehouse Lines
    ^ Jump up to: a b Fraud in Warehouse Mortgage lending
    Jump up ^ Schroeder, G. J.; Tomaine, J. J. (2007): Loan Loss Coverage Under Financial Institution Bonds, page 336. Chicago: ABA Publishing.
    Retrieved from “http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Warehouse_line_of_credit&oldid=543893369”
    Categories:
    Mortgage

  33. louise: “Am I to understand that this issue of rescission still only applies to refinances not purchases?”
    That’s the way I get it as to rescission under TILA. NG had a post about this on Nov 17, 2008. He said:

    “1. TILA does not apply to purchase money.” and

    “Combining with a HELOC is generally considered to be a single transaction that removes the exemption.”

    I take the latter to mean that if a purchase money 1st and a purchase money HELOC are done concurrently, both qualify for rescission under TILA. Rescission may be available as a remedy for bad acts in a purchase money loan by way of something other than tila. Maybe NG will address this if he hasn’t. But not the kind where one sends a notice of rescission etc. like with TILA.

    https://livinglies.wordpress.com/2008/11/17/tila-and-purchase-money-first-mortgages-from-faq/

  34. Sean park
    I have a similar argument, as you are probably aware every word in law matters. The ” agent” filing these documents and the ” trustee” this n that need to be properly appointed ( authorized) and if they took your home under power of sale ( deed of trust states) then, they must adhere strictly to its terms, only the beneficiary can substitute a trustee and a robosigner nukes that purported authorization, plus other proof, Of course you have to get this before the court in your pleadings in a timely fashion, in other words from when YOU discovered it as fact.

    Not an attorney just my non legal opinion please research for yourself or talk to your attorney or seek one.

  35. e.tolle – you might want to look at all of 303.03 to ?, esp 333.06.

  36. e.tolle – MN 303.03 re: foreign corporations:

    “Without excluding other activities which may not constitute transacting business in this state, and subject to the provisions of sections 5.25 and 543.19, a foreign corporation shall NOT be considered to be transacting business in this state for the purposes of this chapter solely by reason of carrying on in this state any one or more of the following activities:

    (a) maintaining or defending any action or suit or any administrative or arbitration proceeding, or effecting the settlement thereof or the settlement of claims or disputes;…….

    (e) holding title to and managing real or personal property, or any interest therein, situated in this state, as executor of the will or administrator of the estate of any decedent, as trustee of any trust, or as guardian of any person or conservator of any person’s estate;

    (f) making, participating in, or investing in loans or creating, as borrower or lender, or otherwise acquiring indebtedness or mortgages or other security interests in real or personal property;

    (g) securing or collecting its debts or enforcing any rights in property securing them;

    h) conducting an isolated transaction completed within a period of 30 days and not in the course of a number of repeated transactions of like nature.”

    So I could sit corrected again, at least for MN, which says filing suit, say, is not doing business. If it’s not doing business, and they otherwise don’t meet the def of “doing business” – no reg required, I guess, and may sue and be sued.

  37. Hello:

    My friend wanted me to post:

    Below is what recently happened in the Foreclosure Sale of her home by a Fraudulent Deutsche Bank NON-Entity. Below is the outline of the correct legal Deutsche Bank names versus the ILLEGAL Name. I believe this could be called “BRAIN TWISTING” to disguise the fraud — who would ever notice the difference in the 3 names.
    PROOF OF FRAUD by DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS
    There are TWO Deutsche Bank entities which are REAL LEGAL Companies in the USA:
    Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas DBTCA; and
    Deutsche Bank National Trust Company DBNTC (both have 5 words)
    The alleged Phoney NON-ENTITY Deutsche Bank is:
    Deutsche Bank National Trust Company Americas DBNTCA (6 words)
    NOTE: All USA Secretary of State have been researched and there are NO USA filings of record for DBNTCA Deutsche Bank National Trust Company Americas (6 word name).
    Here is what occurred just prior to the Foreclosure Sale of my home:
    Early 2014 a filing of a Corporate Assignment of DOT from Nationstar to DBTCA (5 word) Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (correct name on my REMIC Securitized Trust).
    Thereafter, there was NO additional Corporate Assignment of DOT assigned BACK to Nationstar.
    However, in late 2014, 3 hours PRIOR to the foreclosure auction sale of my home we have Nationstar now giving ANOTHER Assignment of DOT to a DIFFERENT DBNTCA (6 Word NON-Entity) Deutsche Bank National Trust Company Americas (NOT the name on my REMIC Securitized Trust). NOTE: Even if the name had been a correct name, I don’t believe this could be Legally done without the former Deutsche Bank (5 word name) HAVING THE DOT ASSIGNED back to Nationstar and then Nationstar Assigning it to another DIFFERENT Deutsche entity again because they did NOT take it back from the (5 Word Deutsche Bank) in order to do it again. (Very confusing to say the least).
    Now, later that SAME morning the DIFFERENT 6 WORD DBNTCA Deutsche Bank National Trust Company Americas (that does NOT exist, is allowed to take my home in the wrong name which NOW appears on my Deed Upon Sale which I’ve had Certified. They have also NOW sold it to people that I believe are “strawbuyers” pursuant to all of the UCC forms I have found that they have filed in the same county over the past 9 years.
    Finally, before you think they can simply say it was just a “typographical” error, I was fortunate to have found the following statement in a Pleading signed under Penalty of Perjury in 2014 by the ATTORNEY OF RECORD FOR DEUTSCHE BANK stating that the very same (6 word entity) DBNTCA Deutsche Bank National Trust Company Americas “does not exist” as follows
    “…Respondents acknowledge xxxxxxxxxxxxx attached a letter from xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dated xxxxxxxxxx, which stated ‘Deutsche Bank National Trust Company Americas’ was the trustee and investor on the loan. (xxxxxxxxxxxxx.) However, it should be noted that such statement clearly constituted a typographical error on the part of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, as ‘Deutsche Bank National Trust Company Americas’ does not exist and even xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx acknowledges DBTCA Deutsche Bank Trust Company America (5 word name) is the Trustee for the xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Trust. (xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'”
    Coincidentally, I have the SAME attorney representing the defendants in my current case, and he allowed my home to be taken AFTER he had written the above quote in the other person’s pleading less than 6 months prior to the taking of my home. This Attorney is an officer of the Court, representing Deutsche and allowing this to happen. I believe I can prove Criminal Fraud.
    How does a Non-Entity get a Corporate Bank Account? Can’t!
    What is their purpose? Perhaps to avoid paying Taxes.
    Do a Credit Bid, then sell the property immediately and just move paper?
    When you Google the 6 word DBNTCA you will find a few pleadings with the 6 word name, however, I haven’t found anyone who noticed that the name is a NON-ENTITY and were simple responding to lawsuits filed.
    Any comments would be greatly appreciated!

  38. re: e.tolle at 11:11: Countrywide Home loans, Inc., MN s of s: (as I’m sure you know)

    09/21/1981 Original Filing – Business Corporation (Foreign)

    09/21/1981 Business Corporation (Foreign) Business Name

    01/22/1993 Registered Office and/or Agent – Business Corporation (Foreign)

    03/19/1996 Business Corporation (Foreign) Business Name

    7/26/2005 Registered Office and/or Agent (Global) – Business Corporation (Foreign)

    08/30/2007 Registered Office and/or Agent (Global) – Business Corporation (Foreign)
    07/24/2008 Registered Office and/or Agent – Business Corporation (Foreign)

    e.tolle “CWHL, Inc. was registered with the SOS.
    jg: ok

    e.tolle: “Countrywide, America’s Wholesale Lender, was also registered.

    jg: huh?

    But then there’s a third entity registered, simply as America’s Wholesale Lender, and just like the loan docs having no mention of the parent CW.

    jg: I couldn’t find anything but what’s listed above about CW or AWL. Can you post here or email the stuff from the MN s of s? Maybe I’m doing something wrong – no BAC there, either. I wouldn’t mind seeing the docs above after the first three if you have them. Actually the second, also.
    I could only get back to cwhl if I selected “exclude prior names” (!)

  39. Leah: “I looked on SEC for wholly owned subsidiaries of Bank of America and Countrywide and America’s Wholesale Lender is not listed under neither financial or corporate entities.”

    It wouldn’t be. It’s only a name, words. It’s not even a company, it’s not a subsidiary.
    It’s just a pretend name for an existing corporation or other entity. Like if you decided you wanted to be called Mary, “Mary” wouldn’t be someone else – still you. It’s just another way to identify you, the same person. People may even sign as an “also known as” if they go by another name even if they’ve never made a notarized aka (they have to sign their legal name, also: “Leah also known as Mary”). AWL is another name for CW, but when it’s about business, instead of an “also known as”, it’s a fictitious name certificate / affidavit.

  40. e. tolle: “Yes, but what happens when the assumed name is the only entity mentioned in any of the loan documents? That attorney so screwed the pooch, imo. The way I see it, an assumed name WOULD need to provide a registered agent when it’s the only party named in any of the docs. How else would the borrower know that CW was behind the scenes, which is the real issue underlying the entire debacle. Intuition?”

    Well, I’d say the judge either knew or errantly presumed the corporation and the dba were registered. The attorney should’ve made it his business to know facts if he didn’t. Any attorney giving advice to homeowners should know the tenets surrounding corporations and dba’s, but like a lot of stuff, it’s use it or lose it.
    As hard as this is to believe, it may be that the consumer is charged with knowledge of anything of record with the secretary of state. So I guess whatever else I was told, in order to function as a dba, a foreign
    corporation would HAVE to first domesticate with the SofS (“doing business” or not) in order for the consumer to know that its dba was just that and thus make use of the corp’s registered agent. Because you’re right, of course. How would one effect service, etc. on a dba otherwise? This is just general business law, and unfortunately, we have here just the blind leading the blind sometimes, incl me. This would be 1 + 1 to an attorney who practices business law, or should be.
    I guess for the same reason (if) a borrower is charged with knowledge of public records at the sec of state*, a lender who doesn’t record and thus notice it’s interest may be subordinated to one who does (including a gf purchaser) and also avoided in certain bk’s. Notice really is a big deal.
    *I hate that, of course. if true. I looked for AWL in NY and CA and didn’t find it. I don’t think one should have to make a career of it. If one is to be charged with constructive notice, whatever it is should be easily
    accessible. IF AWL is a trade name in ca, say, I should’ve been able to find it handily. The CA sec of state, for example, now makes you write to them snail mail to make an inquiry (if you don’t find what you’re looking for at their site).
    I said earlier that a foreign corp could file a fict name cert in particular counties if it’s not “doing business” in that state (that’s what I was told), but maybe that’s just not true. Maybe it IS that the foreign corp MUST domesticate and file the fict name cert, else as you say, the other party to the contract knows nada. I doubt I can look at case law for a bit. Maybe someone else will.

  41. @johngault
    I looked on SEC for wholly owned subsidiaries of Bank of America and Countrywide and America’s Wholesale Lender is not listed under neither financial or corporate entities.

  42. for anyone interested: CWHL is registered in CO, as is AWL as its trade name. I don’t think CW had to file a fict name cert in NY, unless they were going to conduct business there in that name.
    I found CW in CA, but not the trade name. Doesn’t mean it’s not there. It might be somewhere I didn’t look.
    I didn’t find the trade name in NY, either. Again, doesn’t mean it’s not there. Michigan doesn’t appear to have a records search; if it does, I didn’t find it.
    Given that I think these guys were all crooks, my money’s on the use of a dba because CW’s warehouse lines were either full or they’d been shut off for cause. The use of a dba shouldn’t make any diff in that regard, but since I think they were ALL crooks, they could collude.
    Having loans payable to CW and also to AWL (or diff endorsements on notes payable to neither) could accomodate the sale of one loan in each name business name, as I heard they did, at least that they got busted for double-selling.
    I haven’t found much useful, x the little info on registrations, so I’m personally giving this up. As to NOR’s for loans with AWL as the payee, I’d send it to the servicer and the beneficiary shown in public record in the manner I indicated the other day. I might also check with the sec of state because apparently whatever is there is also considered “notice”. But I don’t think there’s notice anywhere (any public record) that one may be ‘charged’ with) that BAC took over CW, if it did. Might be, if there’s something at a sec of state showing that,
    say, CW is now known as BAC.

  43. I think corporations may sue and be sued for a time certain, like two years, after dissolution. Not sure of time. fwiw.

  44. NY Division of Corporations:

    Selected Entity Name: COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC.
    Selected Entity Status Information Current Entity Name: COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC.
    DOS ID #: 273940
    Initial DOS Filing Date: MARCH 17, 1969
    County: NEW YORK
    Jurisdiction: NEW YORK
    Entity Type: DOMESTIC BUSINESS CORPORATION
    Current Entity Status: ACTIVE (jg: !

    DOS Process (Address to which DOS will mail process if accepted on behalf of the entity)

    CT CORPORATION SYSTEM
    111 EIGHTH AVENUE
    NEW YORK, NEW YORK, 10011

    Chief Executive Officer

    MICHAEL SCHLOESSMANN
    150 N COLLEGE ST
    NC1-028-17-06
    CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA, 28255

    Principal Executive Office

    COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC.
    4500 PARK GRANADA
    CALABASAS, CALIFORNIA, 91302

    Registered Agent
    C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
    111 EIGHTH AVENUE
    NEW YORK, NEW YORK, 10011

    If this corporation is still active, how is BAC, if it is, “formerly known as Countrywide Home loans, Inc.” ? I see zero indication of a name change.

    * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    Also NY: Certificate of Assumed Name

    Purpose: Corporations, limited partnerships, and limited liability companies are required by statute to conduct activities under their true legal name.
    jg: ok

    “If a corporation, limited partnership, or limited liability company desires to conduct activities under a name other than its true legal name, a certificate complying with Section 130 of the General Business Law must be filed with the New York State Department of State.”

    jg: wait. what about that first sentence? So corps really aren’t required to conduct activities in their true legal names, not if they adhere to the second paragraph?
    I get this right? In NY, the corporation is registered with the dept of corporations, but the fict name certificate gets filed with the dept of state?

    “All other entities such as general partnerships, sole proprietorships, and limited liability partnerships file an Assumed Name Certificate directly with the county clerk in each county in which the entity conducts or transacts business.”

  45. JG, here’s the real rub as I see it. The judge WAS right….here are his words again:

    “But nothing in Minnesota law requires that an assumed name appoint a registered agent.”

    Yes, but what happens when the assumed name is the only entity mentioned in any of the loan documents? That attorney so screwed the pooch, imo. The way I see it, an assumed name WOULD need to provide a registered agent when it’s the only party named in any of the docs. How else would the borrower know that CW was behind the scenes, which is the real issue underlying the entire debacle. Intuition?

    There’s been a lot of conjecture over the years as to exactly why CW hid their presence in all of these loans. Someone with more savvy than me might pipe in here. I’ve heard it was to save a fee. I don’t put that past them. I do know that they eventually started writing loans as CW dba AWL in the docs, with CW in plain sight and no mention of AWL as a corp, but that’s a little late for the millions that went before.

    As to an earlier question you had, and this is another huge deal as I see it….in MN and possibly other states, CWHL, Inc. was registered with the SOS. Countrywide, America’s Wholesale Lender, was also registered. But then there’s a third entity registered, simply as America’s Wholesale Lender, and just like the loan docs having no mention of the parent CW. This is problematic in a couple of ways, from my point of view. First, and this is big, you’re only allowed two entities under one license, which would mean in the case of a dba, the parent corp and an assumed name dba. Total. Period. Just those two would do that. Second, any registered name MUST point to the parent, so that the issue I spoke of a minute ago as to recognizable corp lineage is known. None of that is the case in MN with the stand alone AWL.

    I pulled the rug out from under the AG and Commerce when I confronted them with these facts. The AG simply didn’t want to hear it, or understand the implications. They simply refused to grok the situation. Like all AG’s, they prefer to bust Mexicans filling out apps with false incomes. It’s the American – easy pickings. I was reminded of the saying about the judges not wanting to rule for a borrower not wanting to be the one that opens the flood gates, and they suddenly found themselves uncomfortable with the fact that I was placing their hands firmly on the sluice gates and asking them to pull hard.

    The senior analyst at Commerce said very matter of factly that if the AWL stand alone wrote even one loan in the state, it would be an illegal loan. There were easily tens or hundreds of thousands, as they’ve been foreclosing non-stop as just AWL since the shit hit the fan.

    But here’s the biggest rub, and probably one of the biggest reasons I call for revolution at the drop of a hat….THEY REFUSED TO DO ANYTHING! Even when faced with incontrovertible proof of the transgressions….they still refuse to act. This is, imho, a serious act of treason against the citizens that they swore to protect as the highest law enforcement agents in the state in the case of the AG, and towards the highest bank regulator in the state in the form of Commerce. Or, by not acting, they, again imo, should be called up on misprision of felony charges, for allowing crimes to be committed against the citizenry while doing nothing. From my POV, through their silence, they’ve become the criminals themselves by aiding and abetting with their turned heads.

    Who else will act? No one. We’ve been left all on our own. The obvious stance, from fed to state, is that in order to save the system, THEIR system of finance and order that suits them, WE need to be sacrificed. However many it takes.

    That’s why I always say Fuck Them and Rev 2.0.

  46. you know what, e.tolle? What that judge said is actually true imo. But what’s left out is the reason it’s true. The reg’d agent for the dba would be the same for the domesticated corporation who filed it. But there’s the rub – DID the corporation domesticate TO appoint a registered agent? “Registered” – as to awl, it’s all about registered (and “doing business” or not).

  47. from e.tolle:

    Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
    Doing Business Under The Fictitious
    Business Name Of America’s Wholesale
    Lender, A New York Corporation

    Well, now that’s a weird one (as you know) since it’s CWHL that was the corporation, but this end. seems to read that AWL, the dba, was a corporation. I don’t really have a clue what to make of that except to state the obvious and that’s that a corporation (Inc.) is saying it was dba another corporation, which is my understanding is not allowable.

    I heard some other stuff:
    If a foreign corp (say NY) registered itself in CA with its S o State, a registration of the dba with the CA S of state would cover all of california. If, however, the foreign CORP did not register with CA’s Sec of state **and didn’t “do business” ** – there is a finite def of doing business) in the second state, then that foreign corporation must register the fictitious name in each county where the collateral-property is located. So if CW weren’t domesticated to NB, then CW had to register its fict name in any county where it made home loans – and this is only true if CW weren’t “doing business” in that state.

    What BAC did NOT say – or prove that I know of – in that stuff i read and cited last night is that CW itself was registered as a foreign corp (domesticated) in one or all or any of those alleged 44 states. It merely said
    ” America’s Wholesale Lender name is registered as a fictitious business name by Countrywide Home Loans in 44 states.”

    And that’s how they roll. Imo, it would be of no avail to CW (BAC) to have registered a fict business name with a sec of state if the CW corporation were not itself registered with that sec of state. Further,
    whereever / however the fict name was registered, it would have to identify with precision the CW entity which was the one using the fict name and if a CW corp were registered in CA, the dba would have to relate to the very corp registered. Like say there’s a Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. and a Countrywide Wholesale Home Loans, Inc. Pretty sure the registration has to be relevant to the one of those which has created the fict name.

    “Doing business” is a factual determination. Taking a loan appl on the phone from NY for a loan in CA isn’t considered doing business. Having physical contact, that is, a face to face, or presence is. If a foreign corporation is “doing business” in another state, the registration of a fict business name won’t save them if they haven’t registered the foreign corporation.
    Apparently, suing is “doing business”. If the corp behind the dba in Pagano weren’t itself registered in whatever state that was, imo they’d never get jurisdiction since it’s only the corporation which may invoke jurisdiction. (and if it the corp were reg’d, it still would’ve had to register the fict business name).
    So I guess it’s like this: did (the right) foreign (another state is the state of incorporation) Countrywide corporation register in a state where the property is located? And did that right CW corp file the fict name affidavit with the sec of state? If not, did the right CW corporation register the fict name in the county where the property is located? If the right CW corporation registered the dba in the county where the property is located, but didn’t domesticate the foreign corp with the sec of state, they still can’t sue for lack of jurisdiction.
    If none of these things to be done were done, it might mean that the loan was made by one or more individuals lacking any business structure and that in turn (at least) sure messes up any “corporate” endorsement.

    I ref’d an article earlier from an att who said the fict name had to be recorded before enforcement of the contract. But, what I think I left out which makes a mongo difference is that the corp in that case was a domestic corporation. In other words, the dispute took place in PA between a PA Corp (not a foreign one) and the other party.

    If any one in the act in ca, say, were the agent of CW, CW could be found to have been doing business in CA (just thru its agent). i think case law is split on agency between a title co. and a lender.
    Others might be found to be, think it’s called, CW’s alter ego. Something like that (in other words CW). So anyone interested might hurry thee to your S of S’s online business search and see whaddup.
    DID CW corporation register in your state?

  48. E ToLLe, Rules!

  49. E.Tolle- thanks for the clarification. I was trying to be as succinct as possible!

  50. JG, in reference to something you wrote earlier, AWL never endorsed the notes. CW did, like this:

    Pay To The Order Of

    _______________________________
    Without Recourse

    Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
    Doing Business Under The Fictitious
    Business Name Of America’s Wholesale
    Lender, A New York Corporation

    But, and it’s a big but, their attempt at making it all look kosher by attaching it to a parent company i.e. CW, still calls out the bogus corporate status. And the Pagano case (and a sister case from the same CT. appellate court – Silberstein) that you referenced…even though it was a half decade ago and is plain and simple business law, most unfortunately hasn’t been replicated anywhere in the states that I’ve seen until the recent Florida suit in BofA v. Nash that held to a similar finding. 3.5 million loans and homes that rightfully should be void as a matter of first semester law, instead as a matter of unconscionable illegality- here’s the concrete curb borrower.

    Ian said:

    “ Leah- the law is based on incontrovertible facts- if as I believe, AWL didn’t or doesn’t exist, then you cannot have a nonexistent entity serve in any capacity
    Whatsoever.”

    One would think so, it’s only logical. But that’s not how the courts in my neck of the woods look at it. The judges like to argue the bank’s case for them, as these same judges have all managed to memorize particular cases that the bankster attorneys are too stupid to quote, and then they do it for them. There’s one case in particular, Devary v. CW – AWL et al, where the judge in his order writes:

    “First, AWL is not itself a legal entity, such as a corporation or partnership. Rather, AWL is merely an assumed name under which Countrywide did business. It is a label — a marketing tool.

    Second, a foreign corporation (such as Countrywide) that is doing business in Minnesota under an assumed name must maintain a registered agent in Minnesota. But nothing in Minnesota law requires that an assumed name appoint a registered agent. The Court does not even know what it would mean for an assumed name to appoint a registered agent, given that, again, an assumed name is not a legal entity, but merely a label.”

    It’s hard to imagine that a judge wouldn’t then have to go to the third and most logical stage, that being that since an assumed name i.e. AWL isn’t a legal entity, what in the hell are they doing in his courtroom all dressed up like real entities? What, exactly, does that mean your honor? And where in the hells this borrower’s high dollar attorney? Out validating his parking slip? Jesus man, get with the picture! The only good thing is that the case was solely built upon AWL/CW’s denial of rescission due to the borrower never receiving any TILA documents, and AWL/CW’s corresponding bird flip at the rescission request, so, hopefully the borrower will be able to unzip his tent flap and go find a new attorney with which to fire that suit back up again.

    Ian also said:

    “I think that AWL was where the zombie loans were relegated to.”

    Actually, somewhere in my over-burdened computer I have a file that shows that AWL was only like fifth or sixth in the nation, and therefore the world, in loan originations in the rush to collapse the planet back in the day. They were huge. If not exceedingly grimy.

    Leah’s spot on….AWL wasn’t a MERS member, that’s straight from the whoreses mouth, as I spoke with Ms. MERS on the subject. Yet another reason why these deals should die right out of the gate.

    Now can someone please tell me why Anonymous is going after Kanye for being a dickbrain, instead of Mozilo?

  51. IAN, THE FOLLOWING IS WHAT IT LOOK LIKE, YOU CAN GO TO SITE AND READ WHOLE
    DOC. YES TO THEY SOLD IT FOR 500,000 DOLLARS. AFTER THE SAME DOCS SAY ITS PAY TO DATE IN FULL…
    loan id QRM PRODUCT ORIG PROD ID SERVICING ORIG LOAN AMOUNT LOAN AMOUNT
    589117308 IONCBIG30 004 589117308 350,000.00 348,348,78

    ISSUE DATE BALANCEPAID TO DATE.
    348,348.78 02/01/2006

    GMACM Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-J1 · FWP · GMACM Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-J1 · On 2/9/06

    Filed On 2/9/06, 4:09pm ET · Accession Number 1352221-6-5 · SEC File 333-125485-25

    in Show and
    Help… Wildcards: ? (any letter), * (many). Logic: for Docs: & (and), | (or); for Text: | (anywhere), “(&)” (near).

    As Of Filer Filing For/On/As Docs:Size Issuer

    2/09/06 GMACM Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-J1 FWP 1:391K GMACM Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-J1
    Free Writing Prospectus — Rule 163/433
    Filing Table of Contents

    Document/Exhibit Description Pages Size

    1: FWP 2006 J1 Collateral HTML 939K

    This is an HTML Document rendered as filed. [ Alternative Formats ]

    Prospectus supplement dated February 23, 2006
    (To prospectus dated February 16, 2006)

    $546,153,384

    GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION
    Seller, Servicer and Sponsor

    GMACM MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2006-J1
    Issuing Entity

    Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc.
    Depositor

    GMACM Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-J1

    The trust will hold a pool of one- to four-family residential first mortgage loans.

    The trust will issue these classes of certificates that are offered under this prospectus supplement:

    • 10 classes of senior certificates, designated as Class A-1 Certificates, Class A-2 Certificates, Class A-3 Certificates, Class A-4 Certificates, Class A-5 Certificates, Class A-6 Certificates, Class A-7 Certificates, Class PO Certificates, Class IO Certificates and Class R Certificates; and

    • 3 classes of subordinate certificates, designated as Class M-1, Class M-2 and Class M-3 Certificates.

    Credit enhancement for all of these certificates will be provided by subordination.

    Distributions on the certificates will be on the 25th day of each month, or, if the 25th is not a business day, on the next business day, beginning March 27, 2006.

    You should consider carefully the risk factors beginning on page S-15 in this prospectus supplement.

    Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of the offered certificates or determined that this prospectus supplement or the prospectus is accurate or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

    The Attorney General of the State of New York has not passed on or endorsed the merits of this offering. Any representation to the contrary is unlawful.

    Citigroup Global Markets, Inc. will purchase the Class A and Class R Certificates from the depositor in amounts described in “Method of Distribution” on page S-94 of this prospectus supplement, and will offer these senior underwritten certificates to the public at varying prices to be determined based on the market price at the time of sale. The proceeds to the depositor from the sale of the senior underwritten certificates will be approximately 99.08% of the aggregate certificate principal balance of the senior underwritten certificates plus accrued interest, before deducting expenses payable by the depositor. There is currently no underwriting arrangement for the Class PO and Class IO Certificates.

    Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. will purchase the Class M Certificates from the depositor in amounts described in “Method of Distribution” on page S-94 of this prospectus supplement, and will offer these subordinate underwritten certificates to the public at varying prices to be determined based on the market price at the time of sale. The proceeds to the depositor from the sale of the subordinate underwritten certificates will be approximately 95.93% of the aggregate certificate principal balance of the subordinate underwritten certificates plus accrued interest, before deducting expenses payable by the depositor.

    All of the underwritten certificates will be offered in the United States and Europe. Delivery of these underwritten certificates, except for the Class R Certificates, will be made through the book-entry facilities of The Depository Trust Company, Clearstream Luxembourg and the Euroclear System.

    Citigroup Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc.

    Prospectus supplement dated October 25, 2007
    (To prospectus dated April 17, 2007)

    $6,807,530

    GMAC MORTGAGE, LLC
    Seller, Servicer and Sponsor

    GMACM MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2006-J1
    Issuing Entity

    Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc.
    Depositor

    GMACM Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-J1

    The trust holds a pool of one- to four-family residential first mortgage loans.

    The trust issued the Class PO Certificates that are offered under this prospectus supplement
    on February 27, 2006, as more fully described in the table on page S-7 of this prospectus supplement.

    Credit enhancement for these certificates is provided by subordination.

    Purchasers of the offered certificates will receive distributions on the 25th day of each
    month, or, if the 25th is not a business day, on the next business day, beginning November 26, 2007.

    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    You should consider carefully the risk factors beginning on page S-15 in this prospectus
    supplement.
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or
    disapproved of the offered certificates or determined that this prospectus supplement or the
    accompanying prospectus is accurate or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal
    offense.

    The Attorney General of the State of New York has not passed on or endorsed the merits of this
    offering. Any representation to the contrary is unlawful.

    The certificates represent interests only in the trust, as the issuing entity, and do not represent
    interests in or obligations of Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc., as the depositor, GMAC
    Mortgage, LLC, as the sponsor, or any of their affiliates.

    Citigroup Global Markets Inc. will purchase the Class PO Certificates from the depositor. The Class
    PO Certificates, in book-entry form, are offered by the depositor through Citigroup Global Markets
    Inc. to prospective purchasers from time to time in negotiated transactions at varying prices to be
    determined at the time of sale. The net proceeds to the depositor from the sale of the offered
    certificates will be approximately 62.25% of the certificate principal balance of the offered
    certificates, before deducting expenses.

    Citigroup

  52. Standing ovation, E.Tolle. Most entertaining. Keep up the good work. I am one of the people who actually had a conversation with M. Solimon and figured out after one go round that he is undoubtedly bipolar and to use the vernacular, not playing with a full deck. He also has no known address, and that is a real problem. I feel tremendous sympathy for those who have lost even more money, time and experienced even more emotional distress because of ripoff artists taking advantage of those that are losing their homes or have lost their homes. God help MS if I find out his physical address.

  53. For whatever it might be worth to anyone here, the court in Pagano ruled that no one may sue in the name of a dba. The dba in Pagano
    was America’s Wholesale Lender:

    “The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether a corporation that brings an action solely in its trade name, without the corporation itself being named as a party, has standing so as to confer jurisdiction on the court.   We conclude that, because a trade name is not an entity with legal capacity to sue, the corporation has no standing to litigate the merits of the case.   We, therefore, reverse the judgment of the trial court.”

    Pagano may have been a judicial foreclosure. Looks like it since they’re in court. Could a non-judicial foreclosure be done in the name of a dba?
    Got me. If the answer is no which I believe just now, there may be some invalid if not void foreclosures on the books. Anyone know? If in court, anyone suing as a dba should get dismissed. That, without consideration of the one-action rule, doesn’t stop the bankster from coming back – unless of course the borrower fights or fought like hell and got the initial action dismissed with prejudice. But, actually, what maybe should happen when a court dismisses the dba’s actions is that the claimant should move for reconsideration and to join the corporation it’s a dba for as a named party. If ithe action were dismissed, even without prejudice, the one-action rule may preclude coming back in a new action as, say Countrywide Home loans dba AWL. But even if the one-action rule did prohibit coming back, if that happened and one didn’t protest, prob a done deal.
    If anyone were a victim of a judicial foreclosure where AWL was the one and only named plaintiff, it’s possible that judgment is void for lack of jurisdiction. I don’t know about when it happened 7 years ago, say,
    but void is void. The law says that lack of juris makes a judgment void and that lack of jurisdiction may be raised at anytime. I can’t speak to the “anytime”, i.e., does that mean within the action or literally at any
    time. But these things have answers, so if anyone lost her home to
    AWL in at least judicial f/c, might want to find out more about “void” as well as the one-action rule.
    Theoretically, they’ve buffed up their act and today wouldn’t bring an action by AWL, so they’d bring it as who knows what. Who, if bac is to believed (big ol’ if for me), should be the plaintiff as what? BAC as successor in interest to CW dba AWL? Just bac? I think if AWL is the name on the note, any proponent of that note must prove that the dba was properly registered in the county where the property is located and that bac is now the party to rely on that registration. But I also think fwiw it’s worse for them, because an endorsement or any assgt by “AWL” wouldn’t be worth the paper it’s allegedly written on. I wish I knew for sure this is true, but I don’t. If the other bars are met by bac, imo they still need a note, if that’s their reliance, endorsed by “CW dba AWL”. Unfortunately, I can’t prove it. I also think it may be that in a contract, the other party must know it’s contracting with a corporation, which “AWL” wouldn’t acknowledge. Or that when a contract doesn’t evidence that one party is a corporation, the other patty may pierce the corporate veil (and sue individuals). Can’t prove that, either. If I were or had been messed up with AWL, I sure as heck would get some business law advice, esp on the “void” factor.
    lay opinions

  54. Christine says:

    “I used to begrudge NG for attracting losers and getting them to pay his “anonymous contributers [sic]”, the likes of Nancy Drewe ($5,000), Maher Soliman($2,500) and even Livinglies (choose your screw. Prices vary according to sucker level).”

    Wow’sa Christine. You’ve gone from simple history revision to wandering straight into the Land – O – Slander, a dangerous place to visit. Exactly how and when did Garfield ever get people to pay Drewe or Soliman anything? Examples? I’ll write you a check for $100K for proof. Of course that bet’s contingent on you buying me the six-pack you owe me for when I called you out on your fervent belief that galaxy wandering aliens would be asking for immigration status on earth back in….oh what was it? 2011? Whack job.

    Leah, be very wary of Christine’s law references. Her rolodex has two cards… Google and MSFraud. Her law savvy emanates from her ability to write checks….a condition I’d bet her ex bemoans every day. Poor dude. My condolences.

    The recent post about the El Paso attorney she regards so highly…the guy wrote an editorial in the paper on how the monies coming in from bank settlements shouldn’t be used to aid the indigents of the state of Texas. My, what a wonderful, caring guy. He sounds like another Rick Perry. Got theirs….and I’m sure they’ve both got the brass belt buckle and cowboy hat to prove it…screw those who weren’t smart enough to bilk the system. It must be from drinking the fracked water down that way. There Will Be Graft. Christine’s reference to him being on a crusade is fitting, as the crusades aren’t remembered as being very accommodating to the average Joe.

    If we pro se litigants are parasites, I’d like to believe that Wall Street’s the host, the soon to be former host, that’s always believed in their infallibility and immortality. That is, just before being brought to their knees and splayed wide open. It couldn’t happen to a more deserving bunch.

    Jump you fuckers.

  55. David Belanger- another question, Are we to understand that every mortgage in your PSA was sold for the appraised value, (in your case 500,000), rather than the amount of the mortgage, in your case 350,000?
    That would be 70% LTV. Is that what your loan is listed as in the PSA docs?

  56. David Belanger- you got 2 PSAs? One for the investors and the other for whom? In which ways are they different? Did you get these from Marie McDonnell as part of your securitization audit?
    I wasn’t aware of different PSAs until I read your post. Thanks for bringing this out.

  57. johngault, on March 14, 2015 at 1:02 am said:
    David, did I get this right? Thanks for the info. This was a stinky, stinky job, so if we ever meet, you’re buying. From david earlier (straightened out) and by the way, where’d you get this?

    all must go on sec.org and get all info on your PSA, and read it cover to cover as i did. word for word, line by line. as i did, over 600 pages, in one, the other psa i have is the one they sold the certificates to investor. with all info on all 1127 mortgages in it, there address and appraisels,credits score, etc,etc
    good stuff. as it also show’s all mortgages in this trust as being paid in full. as of offering certificates for sale. and it also show’s , that they sold all mortgages for the fraud appraisels that were used to inflate the worth of all homes.

    like in my case, refi-mortgage, in the amount of 350,000 dollars, but on the day they sold the certificates, it show on the doc’s that were file under the sec,
    that my mortgage was paid in full …the exact wording as follow,. MORTGAGE BALANCEPAID TO DATE . AND GUESS WHAT THAT AMOUNT WAS.
    YUP, 349,349.78 AS OF 2 FEB 2006,

    now think about this for a moment, got a re-fi in nov-2005 , with first payment do on January 1 2006, so after making 1 payment, this doc show all
    1127 mortgages as being paid in full as of offings of the certificates. and then the doc show them as saying we own all in docs and we can sell all the mortgage s, and they did, for the appraisel prices that were on all property. mine was 500,000 dollars.

    SECTION 4. Record Title and Possession of Mortgage Files. The Seller hereby sells, transfers, assigns, sets over and conveys to the Purchaser, without recourse,

    but subject to the terms of this Agreement and the Seller hereby acknowledges that the Purchaser, subject to the terms of this Agreement,

    shall have all the right, title and interest of the Seller in and to the Mortgage Loans. From the Closing Date,

    but as of the Cut-off Date, the ownership of each Mortgage Loan, including the Mortgage Note, the Mortgage, the contents of the related Mortgage File and all rights, benefits, proceeds and obligations arising therefrom or in connection therewith, has been vested in the Purchaser.

    All rights arising out of the Mortgage Loans including, but not limited to, all funds received on or in connection with the Mortgage Loans and all records or documents with respect to the Mortgage Loans prepared by or which come into the possession of the Seller shall be received and held by the Seller in trust for the exclusive benefit of the Purchaser as the owner of the Mortgage Loans.

    On and after the Closing Date, any portion of the related Mortgage Files or servicing files related to the Mortgage Loans (the “Servicing Files”) in Seller’s possession shall be held by Seller in a custodial capacity only for the benefit of the Purchaser. The Seller shall release its custody of any contents of the related Mortgage Files or Servicing Files only in accordance with written instructions of the Purchaser or the Purchaser’s designee

  58. Yes imma sucker Christine, i think at least and its a rough number 60,000 total spent in attorney fees and audits towards ONE GOAL -JUSTICE. And im still batting, quite well. Its not just about the money its about the journey and if thats a bad thing i dont actually care, i chose as i did at the time for my own reasons, i got ridden yes, i paid my money and took my chance , as with life- no guarentees, and crying over ” spilt milk” my mother taught me is an absolute bloody waste of time, in her own words. what i do know is my goal will be reached and only when people give up is when the fat lady sings. Im embarrassed for you Christine that you keep writing mean spirited words, we are trying to find our way that is all. Im not writing here to justify myself, I’m telling you to grow up, let it be.

  59. Well, all this at least explains why AWL isn’t (Leah?) shown as
    awl corp or inc on notes. A corporation can’t do business in a diff fictitious corporate name, i.e., ABC Corp can’t use the fictitious name
    XYZ Corp., way I get it. But even so, at least to enforce, the fict. name has to be registered where it should be.

  60. http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4801:zey4jr.2.1

    This seems to show a registration of awl by Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. but what’s weird – to me- is it now belongs to BAC by assignment, not as an incident of its purchase of CW.
    I know nada about trademarks or like that. Anyone know why it’s been assigned to BAC as opposed to “inherited”?

  61. hey, e.tolle, why don’t you read that article on CW from 2004 and give us your impressions. We could all use a chuckle or two.

  62. @ Chris – Richard Roman presents himself to be less than stellar, at least from what i read on the link.

  63. Bank of america corporation alleges it owns the “federally registered mark” America’s Wholesale Lender® (but not Inc or corporation). It alleges that Countrywide Home Loans conducted “part of its mortgage lending business under the fictitious business name and mark “America’s Wholesale Lender”. It further alleges that America’s Wholesale Lender name is registered as a fictitious business name by Countrywide Home Loans in 44 states.
    I thought fictitious business names were recorded with counties and apply only to activity in those counties (but I don’t know this for a fact – anyone?) But if it’s true, we don’t know which counties were chosen for any of those alleged 44 states (if that’s true).
    BA says America’s Wholesale Lender® is a federally registered trademark, reg. no. 1872784, registered on January 10, 1995 and that as a result of bac’s “acquisition of Countrywide and its family of companies including Countrywide Home Loans, BAC
    owns the federally registered service mark.”

    It claims that “Countrywide Home Loans and its fictitious business name America’s Wholesale Lender and America’s Wholesale Lender®
    are well known” to everyone. I don’t understand why there’s reference right here to awl and then awl®, as if they’re different.

    From Missouri Sec of state:

    1. “What is a “fictitious name?”
    A fictitious name is a name under which any person shall do or transact any business in this state which is other than the true name of such person. A fictitious name is commonly referred to as a “DBA,” an acronym for “doing business as.” Filing a fictitious name registration does not afford or secure any exclusive rights to the name.

    2. Who has to file a fictitious name registration?
    Any person or entity which is doing business under a name other than its true name must register that fictitious name. For instance, if John Doe is doing business under the name “John’s Lemonade Stand,” John Doe must register the fictitious name “John’s Lemonade Stand.” If the corporation known as Missouri Lemonade Manufacturing, Inc., is doing business under the name “Missouri Lemonade,” it must register the fictitious name “Missouri Lemonade.”

    3. Why is a corporation or limited liability company using the fictitious name I have registered?
    Filing or registering a fictitious name for your business does not afford or reserve any exclusive rights to the use of that name. There is no limit to the number of entities which may register the same fictitious name.

    From TX Sec of state:

    http://www.sos.state.tx.us/corp/foreign_outofstate.shtml

    “Registration Under a Fictitious Name

    If the entity’s legal name does not meet the above requirements (other than a similar name for which the entity has obtained consent), the entity must register in Texas under an assumed name (d/b/a). This special type of assumed name is often referred to as a fictitious name.

    A fictitious name is a special type of assumed name because, unlike other assumed names, a fictitious name must meet the above requirements.
    A foreign entity that registers to transact business under a fictitious name is stating that the entity will transact business in Texas under that name. BOC § 9.004.
    A foreign entity registering under a fictitious name must file assumed name certificates with the secretary of state (Form 503 (Word 125kb, PDF 74kb)) AND the appropriate county or counties.”

    An article from an attorney in PA says that if someone using a dba enters into a contract using the dba, it doesn’t void the contract, but the contract may not be enforced until the dba is registered (dang). News to me. But if that’s true and I had a loan with someone like that, I might
    feel like registering the dba myself if it’s not registered.
    Well, even if it didn’t void the contract, I still believe that even if a fictitious name is registered, any note made payable to “America’s Wholesale Lender” must be endorsed by Countrywide whatever dba America’s Wholesale Lender and that this isn’t possible until and unless there’s registration of the fictitious name where it must be registered to enforce the contract (state, county, wherever).

    I have no idea how uniform states’ laws on these matters are or aren’t.

    **a foreign corporation is one which is incorporated in and subject to the laws of another state. If ABC is incorporated in AZ and wants to do business in Kansas, ABC will likely register with Kansas and become
    a ‘registered foreign corporation’. But there are definitions of what comprises “doing business” in a state which may not compel a foreign corp (AZ) to register in another state (Kansas). imo.

  64. Johngault,

    Are you for real? Did you actually read what you posted? 2006-2007 CT case about… what? And purporting to help whom? In 2015?

    Yep. Group Therapy feeding parasites. They’ll find their host and suck them dry.

  65. Connecticut Dept of Banking:

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    IN THE MATTER OF:

    COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS,
    INC.

    COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS,
    INC. d/b/a AMERICA’S WHOLESALE
    LENDER

    (collectively “Countrywide”)

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

    http://www.ct.gov/dob/cwp/view.asp?a=2246&q=378352

  66. The Group Therapy loser-manufacture is still running full speed.

    I used to begrudge NG for attracting losers and getting them to pay his “anonymous contributers”, the likes of Nancy Drewe ($5,000), Maher Soliman($2,500) and even Livinglies (choose your screw. Prices vary according to sucker level).

    Now, I admire him. The supply of suckers is endless. No wonder banks win just by quoting him. And the more they do, the more NG makes out of suckers.

    Parasitism at its best: the host has no clue he is being sucked dry and he wants to keep it that way. Parasite wins every time.

    Meanwhile, this blog remains in the twilight of non accomplishment.

  67. It looks like this article was from 2004, posted here for your
    entertainment:

    “CALABASAS, Calif., June 29 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — As Countrywide, America’s Wholesale Lender celebrates its 20-year anniversary throughout 2004, the division credits its climb to industry leadership in the wholesale mortgage originations channel to its historic commitment to growing and expanding to meet the needs of mortgage brokers.
    “The transformation of Countrywide’s Wholesale Lending Division over two decades is a remarkable and impressive story of the continuous pursuit of new and better ways to build and strengthen relationships with mortgage originators,” said Stan Kurland, president of Countrywide Financial Corporation. (jg: Hey, Stan, how you doing?)
    “When the division launched its efforts in 1984, about 100 brokers signed up to work with us. Currently, our relationships with mortgage brokers number more than 30,000.”

    full article for some more laughs:

    http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/countrywide-celebrates-20-years-as-americas-wholesale-lender-75196042.html

  68. LL had a post about AWL on (at least) 09 11 2010. There may be some good info there.

  69. David, did I get this right? Thanks for the info. This was a stinky, stinky job, so if we ever meet, you’re buying. From david earlier (straightened out) and by the way, where’d you get this?

    “The original mortgages or assignments of mortgage for substantially
    all of the mortgage loans may have been or may be, at the sole
    discretion of the servicer, recorded in the name of Mortgage Electronic
    Registration Systems, Inc, or MERS, solely as nominee for the originator and its successors and assigns, and subsequent assignments of those mortgages will be registered electronically through the MERS® System.

    For each of these mortgage loans, MERS will serve as mortgagee of
    record on the mortgage solely as a nominee in an administrative
    capacity on behalf of the trustee, and does not have any interest in
    the mortgage loan.

    Non-Recordation of Assignments; Possession of Mortgages

    The seller will not be required to record assignments of the mortgages
    to the trustee in the real property records of the states in which the
    related mortgaged properties are located.”

    David: (Other than) with respect to the mortgage loans recorded in the name of MERS, this means they had to record an assignment to the
    trust at all registries / recorders in the country.

    “GMACM will retain record title to the mortgages on behalf of the
    trustee and the certificateholders. Although the recordation of the
    assignments of the mortgages in favor of the trustee is not necessary to effect a transfer of the mortgage loans to the trustee, if GMACM were to sell, assign, pledge, satisfy or discharge any mortgage loan prior to the recording, if any, of the related assignment in favor of the trustee and in some cases even after the recordation of any related assignment, the other parties to the sale, assignment, satisfaction, pledge, or discharge may have rights superior to those of the trustee. In a small number of states, including Florida, in the absence of recordation of the assignments of the mortgages, the transfer to the trustee of the mortgage loans may not be effective against certain creditors or purchasers from the seller or a trustee in bankruptcy thereof. If those other parties, creditors or purchasers have rights to the mortgage loans that are superior to those of the trustee,
    certificate holders could lose the right to future payments of
    principal and interest to the extent that those rights are not
    otherwise enforceable in favor of the trustee under the applicable
    mortgage documents.

    The trustee will not have physical possession of the mortgage notes
    related to the mortgage loans in the trust. Instead, GMAC Bank, in
    its capacity as custodian, will retain possession of the
    mortgage notes, which may be endorsed in blank and not stamped or
    otherwise marked to reflect the assignment to the trustee. If a
    subsequent purchaser were able to take physical possession of the
    mortgage notes without knowledge of that assignment, the interests of
    the trustee in the mortgage loans could be defeated. In that event,
    distributions to certificate holders may be adversely affected.

    Description of the Certificates

    General

    The trust issued the following classes of senior certificates,
    collectively referred to in
    this prospectus supplement as the Senior Certificates:

    o Class A-1 Certificates;
    o Class A-2 Certificates;
    o Class A-3 Certificates;
    o Class A-4 Certificates, or the TAC Certificates;
    o Class A-5 Certificates, or the Companion Certificates;
    o Class A-6 Certificates;
    o Class A-7 Certificates;
    o Class PO Certificates, or the Principal Only Certificates;
    o Class IO Certificates, or the Interest Only Certificates; and
    o Class R Certificates.

    The Class A-1, Class A-2, Class A-3, Class A-4, Class A-5, Class A-6
    and Class A-7 Certificates are collectively referred to in this
    prospectus supplement as the Class A Certificates.

    In addition to the Senior Certificates, the trust also issued six
    classes of subordinate certificates, which are designated as the
    Class M-1, Class M-2, Class M-3, Class B-1, Class B-2 and
    Class B-3 Certificates and which are collectively referred to in
    this prospectus supplement as the Subordinate Certificates. The Class
    M-1, Class M-2 and Class M-3 Certificates are collectively referred
    to in this prospectus supplement as the Class M Certificates. The Class
    B-1, Class B-2 and Class B-3 Certificates are collectively referred to
    in this prospectus supplement as the Class B Certificates.
    Only the Class PO Certificates are offered by this prospectus
    supplement.
    The certificates evidence the entire beneficial ownership interest in
    the trust. The trust consists of:

    o – the mortgage loans;

    o – the assets as from time to time identified as deposited in respect
    of the mortgage loans in the Custodial Account and in the Payment
    Account and belonging to the trust;

    o – property acquired by foreclosure of the mortgage loans or by deed
    in lieu of foreclosure;

    o – any applicable primary insurance policies and primary hazard
    insurance policies; and

    o – all proceeds of any of the foregoing.

    The offered certificates will be available only in book-entry form
    through the facilities of DTC, and are referred to as the DTC
    registered certificates. The DTC registered certificates were
    issued, and will be maintained and transferred on the book-entry
    records of DTC and its participants. The DTC registered certificates
    were issued in minimum denominations of $25,000 (by Certificate
    Principal Balance). The record date with respect to any distribution
    date and the offered certificates will be the last day of the related
    Interest Accrual Period.

    S-40

    The DTC registered certificates are represented by one or more
    certificates registered in the name of the nominee of DTC. The
    depositor has been informed by DTC that DTC’s nominee is Cede &
    Co.
    No beneficial owner will be entitled to receive a certificate of any
    class in fully registered form, or a definitive certificate, except
    as described in this prospectus supplement under “—Book-Entry
    Registration of Certain of the Offered Certificates—Definitive
    Certificates.”
    Unless and until definitive certificates are issued for the DTC
    registered certificates under the limited circumstances described in
    this prospectus supplement:

    o – all references to actions by certificateholders with respect to
    the DTC registered certificates shall refer to actions taken by DTC
    upon instructions from its participants; and

    o – all references in this prospectus supplement to distributions,
    notices, reports and statements to certificateholders with respect
    to the DTC registered certificatesshall refer to distributions,
    notices, reports and statements to DTC or Cede & Co., as the
    registered holder of the DTC registered certificates, for distributionto
    beneficial owners by DTC in accordance with DTC procedures.

    Book-Entry Registration of Certain of the Offered Certificates

    General. Beneficial owners that are not participants or indirect
    participants but desire to purchase, sell or otherwise transfer
    ownership of, or other interests in, the related DTC registered
    certificates may do so only through participants and indirect
    participants. Holders of the book-entry certificates may elect to hold
    their certificates through DTC in the United States, or Clearstream
    Luxembourg or the Euroclear System, referred to as Euroclear, in
    Europe, if they are participants in their systems, or indirectly
    through organizations which are participants in their systems. In
    addition, beneficial owners will receive all distributions of
    principal of and interest on the related DTC registered certificates
    from the paying agent through DTC and participants.

    Accordingly, beneficial owners may experience delays in their receipt
    of payments. Payments on certificates held through Clearstream
    Luxembourg or Euroclear will be credited to the cash accounts
    of Clearstream Luxembourg participants or Euroclear participants in
    accordance with the relevant system’s rules and procedures, to the
    extent received by the relevant depositary. The payments will
    be subject to tax reporting in accordance with the relevant United
    States tax laws and regulations.

    Unless and until definitive certificates are issued for the related
    DTC registered certificates, it is anticipated that the only
    registered certificateholder of the DTC registered certificates will
    be Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. Clearstream Luxembourg and
    Euroclear will hold omnibus positions on behalf of their participants
    through customers’ securities accounts in Clearstream Luxembourg’s and Euroclear’s names on the books of their respective depositaries which in turn will hold the positions in customers’ securities accounts in
    the depositaries’ names on the books of DTC.

    Beneficial owners will not be recognized by the trustee or the
    servicer as certificate holders, as the term is used in the pooling
    and servicing agreement, and beneficial owners will be permitted to
    receive information furnished to certificate holders and to exercise
    the rights of certificate holders only indirectly through DTC, its
    participants and indirect participants.

    Under the rules, regulations and procedures creating and affecting
    DTC and its operations, DTC is required to make book-entry transfers
    of DTC registered certificates among participants and to receive and
    transmit distributions of principal of, and interest on, the DTC
    registered certificates. Participants and indirect participants with
    which beneficial owners have accounts with respect to the DTC
    registered certificates similarly are required to make book-entry
    transfers and receive and transmit distributions on behalf of their
    respective beneficial owners. Accordingly, although beneficial owners
    will not possess physical certificates evidencing their interests in
    the DTC registered certificates, DTC’s rules provide a mechanism by
    which beneficial through their participants and indirect participants,
    will receive distributions and will be able to transfer their
    interests in the DTC registered certificates.

    None of the depositor, the seller, the servicer, or the trustee will
    have any liability for any actions taken by DTC or its nominee,
    including, without limitation, actions for any aspect of the
    records relating to or payments made on account of beneficial
    ownership interests in the DTC registered certificates held by Cede
    & Co., as nominee for DTC, or for maintaining, supervising or
    reviewing any records relating to such beneficial ownership
    interests.

    S-41

    Definitive Certificates. Definitive certificates will be issued to
    beneficial owners or their nominees, respectively, rather than to
    DTC or its nominee, only if:

    o – the depositor advises the trustee in writing that DTC is no longer
    willing or able to properly discharge its responsibilities as a
    depository with respect to book-entry certificates and the depositor
    is unable to locate a qualified successor; or

    o – the depositor notifies DTC of its intent to terminate the
    book-entry system and, upon receipt of a notice of intent from DTC,
    the participants holding beneficial interest in the book-entry
    certificates agree to initiate a termination.

    Upon the occurrence of an event described above, the trustee is
    required to notify, through DTC, participants who have ownership of
    DTC registered certificates as indicated on the records of DTC of
    the availability of definitive certificates for their DTC registered
    certificates. Upon surrender by DTC of the definitive certificates
    representing the DTC registered certificates and upon receipt of
    instructions from DTC for re registration, the trustee will reissue
    the DTC registered certificates as definitive certificates issued in
    the respective principal amounts owned by individual beneficial
    owners, and thereafter the trustee and the servicer will recognize
    the holders of the definitive certificates as certificateholders
    under the pooling and servicing agreement.

    For additional information regarding DTC and the DTC registered
    certificates, see “Description of the Securities—Form of Securities”
    in the accompanying prospectus.

  70. @ johngault ,

    re: EIN or TEIN numbers ,,

    Here’s a link to a few good lookups ,, it’s not 100% but I have used these methods when I had the numbers but not the company names to go along with it , they work both ways…

    You can also get those numbers from many ordinary corporate filings so a stop at the states corp. registry website may be just the ticket..

    https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070119222003AAtBGIP

    As this is tax prep season I would think that a quick phone call to the payroll or accounting department at the company would be easy…

    Hello , this is Susie Morgan with H&R Block in Des Moines… and I’m doing the taxes for one of your employees but the EIN on the W-2 provided is blurry … Can you tell me what the EIN number should be for XXXXXXXXXX ?

  71. Leah- the law is based on incontrovertible facts- if as I believe, AWL didn’t or doesn’t exist, then you cannot have a nonexistent entity serve in any capacity
    Whatsoever.
    I think that AWL was where the zombie loans were relegated to.

  72. LDTX
    One last question and hopefully this will bring me some meaning to all of this and the right to rescind. If America’s Wholesale Lender is written in the Deed of Trust and Promissory Note as “A Corporation” which is untrue, then will MERS under the DOT and Promissory Note have a Lender to successors and assigns? IMO, I feel that if there is no real lender then MERS could not be a nominee and beneficiary for the non-existent entity/assumed name/fictitious name and therefore, all is bogus from the very beginning. Also, America’s Wholesale Lender was never a MERS Member not even as Countrywide dba did they ever list America’s Wholesale Lender. It was my understanding that the Lender has to be a MERS Member. The whole America’s Wholesale Lender “A Corporation” existing under the Laws of New York was deceitful and untrue to begin with. In 2007 there was no America’s Wholesale Lender “A Corporation” existing under New York Law.

  73. JG, I believe you have to contact the IRS. Those numbers are public knowledge because that is how people pay taxes. I have a business and have that number which comes from the IRS. I know you can call them, but you might want to call and send a letter.

  74. David, I would love to see the servicers go into bankruptcy and get rid of them. How I see it is: what happens to the loans/notes? There are 2 notes in my case and 3 forged assignments. Also, I have a notice from MERS that says my loan is inactive. Wow!

  75. Leah Dean,

    Didn’t I ever send you to Richard Roman? That guy is unbelievable and he gets results: he is on a crusade. Here is one of his older filings. And recall that he was a district judge before embarking on his banking witch hunt.

    http://www.msfraud.org/law/lounge/huml_criminal-enterprise_10-12.pdf

  76. The original mortgages or assignments of mortgage for substantially all of the mortgage
    loans may have been or may be, at the sole discretion of the servicer, recorded in the name of
    Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc, or MERS, solely as nominee for the originator and its
    successors and assigns, and subsequent assignments of those mortgages will be registered
    electronically through the MERS® System. For each of these mortgage loans, MERS will serve as
    mortgagee of record on the mortgage solely as a nominee in an administrative capacity on behalf of
    the trustee, and does not have any interest in the mortgage loan.
    Non-Recordation of Assignments; Possession of Mortgages

    The seller will not be required to record assignments of the mortgages to the trustee in the
    real property records of the states in which the related mortgaged properties are locate

    d. ( Other than ) with respect to the mortgage loans recorded in the name of MERS,
    this means they had to record a assignment to trust in the mortgages in the trust name,
    at all registry in country, and county register.
    GMACM will retain record title
    to the mortgages on behalf of the trustee and the certificateholders. Although the recordation of
    the assignments of the mortgages in favor of the trustee is not necessary to effect a transfer of the
    mortgage loans to the trustee, if GMACM were to sell, assign, pledge, satisfy or discharge any
    mortgage loan prior to the recording, if any, of the related assignment in favor of the trustee and
    in some cases even after the recordation of any related assignment, the other parties to the sale,
    assignment, satisfaction, pledge, or discharge may have rights superior to those of the trustee. In
    a small number of states, including Florida, in the absence of recordation of the assignments of the
    mortgages, the transfer to the trustee of the mortgage loans may not be effective against certain
    creditors or purchasers from the seller or a trustee in bankruptcy thereof. If those other parties,
    creditors or purchasers have rights to the mortgage loans that are superior to those of the trustee,
    certificateholders could lose the right to future payments of principal and interest to the extent
    that those rights are not otherwise enforceable in favor of the trustee under the applicable mortgage
    documents.

    The trustee will not have physical possession of the mortgage notes related to the mortgage
    loans in the trust. Instead, GMAC Bank, in its capacity as custodian, will retain possession of the
    mortgage notes, which may be endorsed in blank and not stamped or otherwise marked to reflect the
    assignment to the trustee. If a subsequent purchaser were able to take physical possession of the
    mortgage notes without knowledge of that assignment, the interests of the trustee in the mortgage
    loans could be defeated. In that event, distributions to certificateholders may be adversely
    affected.

    Description of the Certificates

    General

    The trust issued the following classes of senior certificates, collectively referred to in
    this prospectus supplement as the Senior Certificates:

    o Class A-1 Certificates;
    o Class A-2 Certificates;
    o Class A-3 Certificates;
    o Class A-4 Certificates, or the TAC Certificates;
    o Class A-5 Certificates, or the Companion Certificates;
    o Class A-6 Certificates;
    o Class A-7 Certificates;
    o Class PO Certificates, or the Principal Only Certificates;
    o Class IO Certificates, or the Interest Only Certificates; and
    o Class R Certificates.

    The Class A-1, Class A-2, Class A-3, Class A-4, Class A-5, Class A-6 and Class A-7
    Certificates are collectively referred to in this prospectus supplement as the Class A Certificates.

    In addition to the Senior Certificates, the trust also issued six classes of subordinate
    certificates, which are designated as the Class M-1, Class M-2, Class M-3, Class B-1, Class B-2 and
    Class B-3 Certificates and which are collectively referred to in this prospectus supplement as the
    Subordinate Certificates. The Class M-1, Class M-2 and Class M-3 Certificates are collectively
    referred to in this prospectus supplement as the Class M Certificates. The Class B-1, Class B-2 and
    Class B-3 Certificates are collectively referred to in this prospectus supplement as the Class B
    Certificates.

    Only the Class PO Certificates are offered by this prospectus supplement.

    The certificates evidence the entire beneficial ownership interest in the trust. The trust
    consists of:

    o the mortgage loans;
    o the assets as from time to time identified as deposited in respect of the mortgage
    loans in the Custodial Account and in the Payment Account and belonging to the trust;
    o property acquired by foreclosure of the mortgage loans or by deed in lieu of
    foreclosure;
    o any applicable primary insurance policies and primary hazard insurance policies; and
    o all proceeds of any of the foregoing.

    The offered certificates will be available only in book-entry form through the facilities of
    DTC, and are referred to as the DTC registered certificates. The DTC registered certificates were
    issued, and will be maintained and transferred on the book-entry records of DTC and its
    participants. The DTC registered certificates were issued in minimum denominations of $25,000 (by
    Certificate Principal Balance). The record date with respect to any distribution date and the
    offered certificates will be the last day of the related Interest Accrual Period.

    S-40
    The DTC registered certificates are represented by one or more certificates registered in
    the name of the nominee of DTC. The depositor has been informed by DTC that DTC’s nominee is Cede &
    Co. No beneficial owner will be entitled to receive a certificate of any class in fully registered
    form, or a definitive certificate, except as described in this prospectus supplement under
    “—Book-Entry Registration of Certain of the Offered Certificates—Definitive Certificates.” Unless and
    until definitive certificates are issued for the DTC registered certificates under the limited
    circumstances described in this prospectus supplement:

    o all references to actions by certificateholders with respect to the DTC registered
    certificates shall refer to actions taken by DTC upon instructions from its
    participants; and

    o all references in this prospectus supplement to distributions, notices, reports and
    statements to certificateholders with respect to the DTC registered certificates
    shall refer to distributions, notices, reports and statements to DTC or Cede & Co.,
    as the registered holder of the DTC registered certificates, for distribution to
    beneficial owners by DTC in accordance with DTC procedures.

    Book-Entry Registration of Certain of the Offered Certificates

    General. Beneficial owners that are not participants or indirect participants but desire to
    purchase, sell or otherwise transfer ownership of, or other interests in, the related DTC registered
    certificates may do so only through participants and indirect participants. Holders of the
    book-entry certificates may elect to hold their certificates through DTC in the United States, or
    Clearstream Luxembourg or the Euroclear System, referred to as Euroclear, in Europe, if they are
    participants in their systems, or indirectly through organizations which are participants in their
    systems. In addition, beneficial owners will receive all distributions of principal of and interest
    on the related DTC registered certificates from the paying agent through DTC and participants.
    Accordingly, beneficial owners may experience delays in their receipt of payments. Payments on
    certificates held through Clearstream Luxembourg or Euroclear will be credited to the cash accounts
    of Clearstream Luxembourg participants or Euroclear participants in accordance with the relevant
    system’s rules and procedures, to the extent received by the relevant depositary. The payments will
    be subject to tax reporting in accordance with the relevant United States tax laws and regulations.
    Unless and until definitive certificates are issued for the related DTC registered certificates, it
    is anticipated that the only registered certificateholder of the DTC registered certificates will be
    Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. Clearstream Luxembourg and Euroclear will hold omnibus positions on
    behalf of their participants through customers’ securities accounts in Clearstream Luxembourg’s and
    Euroclear’s names on the books of their respective depositaries which in turn will hold the positions
    in customers’ securities accounts in the depositaries’ names on the books of DTC. Beneficial owners
    will not be recognized by the trustee or the servicer as certificateholders, as the term is used in
    the pooling and servicing agreement, and beneficial owners will be permitted to receive information
    furnished to certificateholders and to exercise the rights of certificateholders only indirectly
    through DTC, its participants and indirect participants.

    Under the rules, regulations and procedures creating and affecting DTC and its operations,
    DTC is required to make book-entry transfers of DTC registered certificates among participants and to
    receive and transmit distributions of principal of, and interest on, the DTC registered
    certificates. Participants and indirect participants with which beneficial owners have accounts with
    respect to the DTC registered certificates similarly are required to make book-entry transfers and
    receive and transmit distributions on behalf of their respective beneficial owners. Accordingly,
    although beneficial owners will not possess physical certificates evidencing their interests in the
    DTC registered certificates, DTC’s rules provide a mechanism by which beneficial owners, through
    their participants and indirect participants, will receive distributions and will be able to transfer
    their interests in the DTC registered certificates.

    None of the depositor, the seller, the servicer, or the trustee will have any liability for
    any actions taken by DTC or its nominee, including, without limitation, actions for any aspect of the
    records relating to or payments made on account of beneficial ownership interests in the DTC
    registered certificates held by Cede & Co., as nominee for DTC, or for maintaining, supervising or
    reviewing any records relating to such beneficial ownership interests.

    S-41
    Definitive Certificates. Definitive certificates will be issued to beneficial owners or
    their nominees, respectively, rather than to DTC or its nominee, only if:

    o the depositor advises the trustee in writing that DTC is no longer willing or able
    to properly discharge its responsibilities as a depository with respect to
    book-entry certificates and the depositor is unable to locate a qualified successor;
    or

    o the depositor notifies DTC of its intent to terminate the book-entry system and,
    upon receipt of a notice of intent from DTC, the participants holding beneficial
    interest in the book-entry certificates agree to initiate a termination.

    Upon the occurrence of an event described above, the trustee is required to notify, through
    DTC, participants who have ownership of DTC registered certificates as indicated on the records of
    DTC of the availability of definitive certificates for their DTC registered certificates. Upon
    surrender by DTC of the definitive certificates representing the DTC registered certificates and upon
    receipt of instructions from DTC for re registration, the trustee will reissue the DTC registered
    certificates as definitive certificates issued in the respective principal amounts owned by
    individual beneficial owners, and thereafter the trustee and the servicer will recognize the holders
    of the definitive certificates as certificateholders under the pooling and servicing agreement.

    For additional information regarding DTC and the DTC registered certificates, see
    “Description of the Securities—Form of Securities” in the accompanying prospectus

  77. GMACM Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-J1 · 424B5 · On 10/29/07

    Filed On 10/29/07, 3:23pm ET · Accession Number 1068238-7-1257 · SEC File 333-125485-25

    in Show and
    Help… Wildcards: ? (any letter), * (many). Logic: for Docs: & (and), | (or); for Text: | (anywhere), “(&)” (near).

    As Of Filer Filing For/On/As Docs:Size Issuer Agent

    10/29/07 GMACM Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-J1 424B5 1:1.0M Orrick Herringto..LLP/FA
    Prospectus — Rule 424(b)(5)
    Filing Table of Contents

    Document/Exhibit Description Pages Size

    1: 424B5 Prospectus HTML 1.03M

    POOLING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT

    Dated as of February 27, 2006

    GMACM Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-J1
    Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc.
    GMACM Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-J1

    Assignment: An assignment of the Mortgage, notice of transfer or equivalent instrument, in recordable form, sufficient under the laws of the jurisdiction wherein the related Mortgaged Property is located to reflect of record the sale of the Mortgage Loan to the Trustee for the benefit of Certificateholders,

    which assignment, notice of transfer or equivalent instrument may be in the form of one or more blanket assignments covering Mortgages secured by Mortgaged Properties located in the same county, if permitted by law and accompanied by an Opinion of Counsel to that effect.

    Advances

    For any month, if the servicer does not receive the full scheduled payment on a mortgage loan, the
    servicer will advance funds to cover the amount of the scheduled payment that was not made. However,
    the servicer will advance funds only if it determines that the advance will be recoverable from
    future payments or collections on that mortgage loan.

  78. @johngault – John, I have a copy of the Assumed name certificate that was filed with Texas Land and County Records/Harris County Clerk’s office in 1997. The DBA filed said it was effective up to 10 years.

  79. 4500 park Granada in calabasas CA was a Countrywide address. Not sure if this address is an office building w numerous offices.

  80. Leah Dean: “The DBA that is registered with Harris County Clerk’s office had expired

    and was not any good

    jg: why not? not ever good or just not good after an expiration?

  81. I said: “If you believe that servicers (or someone thru the servicers) advance payments to the trusts when the borrower doesn’t, than you could see how it’s poss for them to posit the trust doesn’t know the loan is in (borrower default)”. That depends on the legal relationship between a servicer and the trust. If the servicer is an agent of the trust, then the servicer’s knowledge of default is knowledge by the trust.
    But I just can’t recall what is generally the alleged relationship between the two. Agency isn’t tho imo the only way the knowledge of the servicer is knowledge of the lender. As to a notice of rescission (think I’ve said this before), I believe that notice is adequate to the servicer and the party shown in public record. If it makes you more comfortable to notice others, than do it. I’d do it with a(nother) caveat: “This notice is intended for the benefit (and possible transmission to?) the party, if any, who may demonstrate its rights and holds the successor interest, if any, in (whatever else I said before).
    In Michigan and other states where people are stuck with that advertizing bs, I might advertize like they do. See how they like it! I don’t know that I would, but I would if I felt like it.
    I’m not so much on board with the ‘who funded this loan’ as NG or others. But even so, in recognition of any impact of that (or who knows what) and its eventually showing up in litigation, I’d make the first disclaimer I ref’d even if an ‘AWL’ weren’t involved.

  82. i give ocwen and the others, a month before they call in the cards and fold away under bankruptcy. any takers??????

  83. louise – I meant do you know how to find those numbers other than on
    say a 1009?

  84. leah – you didn’t tell us what public record shows..

  85. Neidermeyer i agree ive lived through it too,
    And they banked on bluffing up the yazoo thinking i would give up ( bluffing can be substituted for ” stronger” words.)

  86. louise – that sounds like good info. please tell us how to do that. thanks.

  87. david belanger (@revolutionnow1), on March 13, 2015 at 3:40 pm said:
    here is the real and actual mortgage purchase agreement in just one of my psa’s that they sold my mortgage and 1127 others in trust.
    good reading, and the big bold are very good reading. enjoy.
    I know,am at it again, but there is a lot of info, in bold that should be read,
    thank you
    david
    EXECUTION COPY
    MORTGAGE LOAN PURCHASE AGREEMENT
    This is a Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement (the “Agreement”) dated as of February 27, 2006 by and between GMAC Mortgage Corporation, a Pennsylvania corporation, having an office at 100 Witmer Road, Horsham, Pennsylvania 19044 (the “Seller”) and Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and having an office at 8400 Normandale Lake Boulevard, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55437 (the “Purchaser”).
    The Seller agrees to sell to the Purchaser and the Purchaser agrees to purchase from the Seller certain mortgage loans on a servicing-retained basis as described herein (the “Mortgage Loans”). The following terms are defined as follows:
    Aggregate Principal Balance
    (as of the Cut-Off Date):
    $550,003,046.49 (after deduction of scheduled
    principal payments due on or before the Cut-Off
    Date, whether or not collected, but without
    deduction of prepayments that may have been made
    but not reported to the Seller as of the close
    of business on such date). Closing Date:
    February 27, 2006, or such other date as may be
    agreed upon by the parties hereto.
    Cut-Off Date: February 1, 2006.
    Mortgage Loan:
    A fixed rate, fully-amortizing, first lien,
    residential conventional mortgage loan having a
    term of not more than 30 years and secured by
    Mortgaged Property.
    Mortgaged Property:
    A single parcel of real property on which is
    located a detached or attached single-family
    residence, a two-to-four family dwelling,
    manufactured home, a townhouse, an individual
    condominium unit, or an individual unit in a
    planned unit development, or a proprietary lease
    in a unit in a cooperatively-owned apartment
    building and stock in the related cooperative
    corporation.
    Pooling and Servicing Agreement: The pooling and
    servicing agreement, dated as of February 27,
    2006, among Residential Asset Mortgage Products,
    Inc., as company, GMAC Mortgage Corporation, as
    servicer and Wells Fargo Bank, National
    Association, as trustee (the “Trustee”).
    Repurchase Event:
    With respect to any Mortgage Loan as to which
    the Seller delivers an affidavit certifying that
    the original Mortgage Note has been lost or
    destroyed, a subsequent default on such Mortgage
    Loan if the enforcement thereof or of the
    related Mortgage is materially and adversely
    affected by the absence of such original
    Mortgage Note.
    All capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings assigned thereto in the Pooling and Servicing Agreement. The parties intend hereby to set forth the terms and conditions upon which the proposed transactions will be effected and, in consideration of the premises and the mutual agreements set forth herein, agree as follows:
    SECTION 1. Agreement to Sell and Purchase Mortgage Loans. The Seller agrees to sell to the Purchaser and the Purchaser agrees to purchase from the Seller certain Mortgage Loans having an aggregate amount equal to the Aggregate Principal Balance as of the Cut-Off Date.
    SECTION 2. Mortgage Loan Schedule. The Seller has provided to the Purchaser a schedule setting forth all of the Mortgage Loans to be purchased on the Closing Date under this Agreement, which shall be attached hereto as Schedule I (the “Mortgage Loan Schedule”).
    SECTION 3. Purchase Price of Mortgage Loans. The purchase price (the “Purchase Price”) to be paid to the Seller by the Purchaser for the Mortgage Loans shall be the sum of (i) $537,891,820.77, (ii) the Class PO Certificates and Class IO Certificates and (iii) a 0.01% Percentage Interest in the Class R Certificates issued pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement. The cash portion of the purchase price shall be paid by wire transfer of immediately available funds on the Closing Date to the account specified by the Seller.
    The Purchaser and Seller intend that the conveyance by the Seller to the Purchaser of all its right, title and interest in and to the Mortgage Loans pursuant to this Agreement shall be, and be construed as, a sale of the Mortgage Loans by the Seller to the Purchaser.
    It is, further, not intended that such conveyance be deemed to be a grant of a security interest in the Mortgage Loans by the Seller to the Purchaser to secure a debt or other obligation of the Seller. However, in the event that the Mortgage Loans are held to be property of the Seller, or if for any reason this Agreement is held or deemed to create a security interest in the Mortgage Loans, then it is intended that (a) this Agreement shall be and hereby is a security agreement within the meaning of Articles 9 of the Pennsylvania Uniform Commercial Code, the Delaware Uniform Commercial Code and the Uniform Commercial Code of any other applicable jurisdiction; (b) the conveyance provided for in this Section shall be deemed to be, and hereby is, a grant by the Seller to the Purchaser of a security interest in all of the Seller’s right, title and interest, whether now owned or hereafter acquired, in and to the following: (A) the Mortgage Loans, including (i) with respect to each Cooperative Loan, the related Mortgage Note, Security Agreement, Assignment of Proprietary Lease, Cooperative Stock Certificate, Cooperative Lease, (ii) with respect to each Mortgage Loan other than a Cooperative Loan, the related Mortgage Note and Mortgage and (iii) any insurance policies and all other documents in the related Mortgage File, (B) all amounts payable pursuant to the Mortgage Loans in accordance with the terms thereof, (C) all proceeds of the conversion, voluntary or involuntary, of the foregoing into cash, instruments, securities or other property, (D) all accounts, general intangibles, chattel paper, instruments, documents, money, deposit accounts, goods, letters of credit, letter-of-credit rights, oil, gas, and other minerals, and investment property consisting of, arising from or relating to any of the foregoing and (E) all proceeds of the foregoing; (c) the possession by the Trustee, the Custodian or any other agent of the Trustee of any of the foregoing shall be deemed to be possession by the secured party, or possession by a purchaser or a person holding for the benefit of such secured party, for purposes of perfecting the security interest pursuant to the Pennsylvania Uniform Commercial Code, the Delaware Uniform Commercial Code and the Uniform Commercial Code of any other applicable jurisdiction (including, without limitation, Sections 9-313 and 9-314 of each thereof); and (d) notifications to persons holding such property, and acknowledgments, receipts or confirmations from persons holding such property, shall be deemed notifications to, or acknowledgments, receipts or confirmations from, securities intermediaries, bailees or agents of, or persons holding for, the Trustee (as applicable) for the purpose of perfecting such security interest under applicable law.
    The Seller shall, to the extent consistent with this Agreement, take such reasonable actions as may be necessary to ensure that, if this Agreement were determined to create a security interest in the Mortgage Loans and the other property described above, such security interest would be determined to be a perfected security interest of first priority under applicable law and will be maintained as such throughout the term of this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Seller shall prepare and deliver to the Purchaser not less than 15 days prior to any filing date, and the Purchaser shall file, or shall cause to be filed, at the expense of the Seller, all filings necessary to maintain the effectiveness of any original filings necessary under the Uniform Commercial Code as in effect in any jurisdiction to perfect the Purchaser’s security interest in the Mortgage Loans, including without limitation (x) continuation statements, and (y) such other statements as may be occasioned by
    (1) any change of name of the Seller or the Purchaser, (2) any change of type or jurisdiction of organization of the Seller, or (3) any transfer of any interest of the Seller in any Mortgage Loan.
    Notwithstanding the foregoing, (i) the Seller in its capacity as Servicer shall retain all servicing rights (including, without limitation, primary servicing and master servicing) relating to or arising out of the Mortgage Loans, and all rights to receive servicing fees, servicing income and other payments made as compensation for such servicing granted to it under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth therein (collectively, the “Servicing Rights”) and (ii) the Servicing Rights are not included in the collateral in which the Seller grants a security interest pursuant to the immediately preceding paragraph.
    SECTION 4. Record Title and Possession of Mortgage Files. The Seller hereby sells, transfers, assigns, sets over and conveys to the Purchaser, without recourse, but subject to the terms of this Agreement and the Seller hereby acknowledges that the Purchaser, subject to the terms of this Agreement, shall have all the right, title and interest of the Seller in and to the Mortgage Loans. From the Closing Date,
    but as of the Cut-off Date, the ownership of each Mortgage Loan, including the Mortgage Note, the Mortgage, the contents of the related Mortgage File and all rights, benefits, proceeds and obligations arising therefrom or in connection therewith, has been vested in the Purchaser. All rights arising out of the Mortgage Loans including, but not limited to, all funds received on or in connection with the Mortgage Loans and all records or documents with respect to the Mortgage Loans prepared by or which come into the possession of the Seller shall be received and held by the Seller in trust for the exclusive benefit of the Purchaser as the owner of the Mortgage Loans. On and after the Closing Date, any portion of the related Mortgage Files or servicing files related to the Mortgage Loans (the “Servicing Files”) in Seller’s possession shall be held by Seller in a custodial capacity only for the benefit of the Purchaser. The Seller shall release its custody of any contents of the related Mortgage Files or Servicing Files only in accordance with written instructions of the Purchaser or the Purchaser’s designee.
    SECTION 5. Books and Records. The sale of each Mortgage Loan has been reflected on the Seller’s balance sheet and other financial statements as a sale of assets by the Seller. The Seller shall be responsible for maintaining, and shall maintain, a complete set of books and records for the Mortgage Loans which shall be appropriately identified in the Seller’s computer system to clearly reflect the ownership of the Mortgage Loans by the Purchaser.
    SECTION 6. Delivery of Mortgage Notes.
    (a) On or prior to the Closing Date, the Seller shall deliver to the Purchaser or the Custodian, as directed by the Purchaser, the original Mortgage Note, with respect to each Mortgage Loan so assigned, endorsed without recourse in blank, or in the name of the Trustee as trustee, and signed by an authorized officer (which endorsement shall contain either an original signature or a facsimile signature of an authorized officer of the Seller, and if in the form of an allonge, the allonge shall be stapled to the Mortgage Note), with all intervening endorsements showing a complete chain of title from the originator to the Seller. If the Mortgage Loan was acquired by the endorser in a merger, the endorsement must be by “____________, successor by merger to [name of predecessor]”. If the Mortgage Loan was acquired or originated by the endorser while doing business under another name, the endorsement must be by “____________ formerly known as [previous name].” The delivery of each Mortgage Note to the Purchaser or the Custodian is at the expense of the Seller.
    In lieu of delivering the Mortgage Note relating to any Mortgage Loan, the Seller may deliver or cause to be delivered a lost note affidavit from the Seller stating that the original Mortgage Note was lost, misplaced or destroyed, and, if available, a copy of each original Mortgage Note; provided, however, that in the case of Mortgage Loans which have been prepaid in full after the Cut-off Date and prior to the Closing Date, the Seller, in lieu of delivering the above documents, may deliver to the Purchaser a certification to such effect and shall deposit all amounts paid in respect of such Mortgage Loan in the Payment Account on the Closing Date.
    (b) If any Mortgage Note is not delivered to the Purchaser (or the Custodian as directed by the Purchaser) or the Purchaser discovers any defect with respect to a Mortgage Note which materially and adversely affects the interests of the Certificateholders in the related Mortgage Loan, the Purchaser shall give prompt written specification of such defect or omission to the Seller, and the Seller shall cure such defect or omission in all material respects or repurchase such Mortgage Loan or substitute a Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan in the manner set forth in Section 7.03. It is understood and agreed that the obligation of the Seller to cure a material defect in, or substitute for, or purchase any Mortgage Loan as to which a material defect in, or omission of, a Mortgage Note exists, shall constitute the sole remedy respecting such material defect or omission available to the Purchaser, Certificateholders or the Trustee on behalf of Certificateholders.
    (c) All other documents contained in the Mortgage File and any original documents relating to the Mortgage Loans not contained in the Mortgage File or delivered to the Purchaser, are and shall be retained by the Servicer in trust as agent for the Purchaser.
    In the event that in connection with any Mortgage Loan: (a) the original recorded Mortgage (or evidence of submission to the recording office),
    (b) all interim recorded assignments, (c) the original recorded modification agreement, if required, or (d) evidence of title insurance (together with all riders thereto, if any) satisfying the requirements of clause (I)(ii), (iv),
    (vi) or (vii) of the definition of Mortgage File, respectively, is not in the possession of the Servicer concurrently with the execution and delivery hereof because such document or documents have not been returned from the applicable public recording office, or, in the case of each such interim assignment or modification agreement, because the related Mortgage has not been returned by the appropriate recording office, in the case of clause (I)(ii), (iv) or (vi) of the definition of Mortgage File, or because the evidence of title insurance has not been delivered to the Seller by the title insurer in the case of clause
    (I)(vii) of the definition of Mortgage File, the Servicer shall use its best efforts to obtain, (A) in the case of clause (I)(ii), (iv) or (vi) of the definition of Mortgage File, such original Mortgage, such interim assignment, or such modification agreement, with evidence of recording indicated thereon upon receipt thereof from the public recording office, or a copy thereof, certified, if appropriate, by the relevant recording office, or (B) in the case of clause
    (I)(vii) of the definition of Mortgage File, evidence of title insurance.
    (d) If any of the documents held by the Servicer pursuant to clause (c) above are missing or defective in any other respect and such missing document or defect materially and adversely affects the interests of the Certificateholders in the related Mortgage Loan, the Seller shall cure or repurchase such Mortgage Loan or substitute a Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan in the manner set forth in Section 7.03. It is understood and agreed that the obligation of the Seller to cure a material defect in, or substitute for, or purchase any Mortgage Loan as to which a material defect in or omission of a constituent document exists, shall constitute the sole remedy respecting such material defect or omission available to the Purchaser, Certificateholders or the Trustee on behalf of Certificateholders.
    (e) If any assignment is lost or returned unrecorded to the Servicer because of any defect therein, the Seller shall prepare a substitute assignment or cure such defect, as the case may be, and the Servicer shall cause such assignment to be recorded in accordance with this Section.
    SECTION 7. Representations and Warranties.
    SECTION 7.01. Representations and Warranties of Seller. The Seller represents, warrants and covenants to the Purchaser that as of the Closing Date or as of such date specifically provided herein:
    (a) The Seller is a corporation duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and is or will be in compliance with the laws of each state in which any Mortgaged Property is located to the extent necessary to ensure the enforceability of each Mortgage Loan;
    (b) The Seller has the power and authority to make, execute, deliver and perform its obligations under this Agreement and all of the transactions contemplated under this Agreement, and has taken all necessary corporate action to authorize the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement; this Agreement constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation of the Seller, enforceable against the Seller in accordance with its terms, except as enforceability may be limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium or other similar laws now or hereafter in effect affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights in general and except as such enforceability may be limited by general principles of equity (whether considered in a proceeding at law or in equity) or by public policy with respect to indemnification under applicable securities laws;
    (c) The execution and delivery of this Agreement by the Seller and its performance and compliance with the terms of this Agreement will not violate the Seller’s Certificate of Incorporation or Bylaws or constitute a material default (or an event which, with notice or lapse of time, or both, would constitute a material default) under, or result in the material breach of, any material contract, agreement or other instrument to which the Seller is a party or which may be applicable to the Seller or any of its assets;
    (d) No litigation before any court, tribunal or governmental body is currently pending, nor to the knowledge of the Seller is threatened against the Seller, nor is there any such litigation currently pending, nor to the knowledge of the Seller threatened against the Seller with respect to this Agreement that in the opinion of the Seller has a reasonable likelihood of resulting in a material adverse effect on the transactions contemplated by this Agreement;
    (e) No consent, approval, authorization or order of any court or governmental agency or body is required for the execution, delivery and performance by the Seller of or compliance by the Seller with this Agreement, the sale of the Mortgage Loans or the consummation of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement except for consents, approvals, authorizations and orders which have been obtained;
    (f) The consummation of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement is in the ordinary course of business of the Seller, and the transfer, assignment and conveyance of the Mortgage Notes and the Mortgages relating to the Mortgage Loans by the Seller pursuant to this Agreement are not subject to bulk transfer or any similar statutory provisions in effect in any applicable jurisdiction;
    (g) The Seller did not select such Mortgage Loans in a manner that it reasonably believed was adverse to the interests of the Purchaser based on the Seller’s portfolio of conventional non-conforming Mortgage Loans;
    (h) The Seller will treat the sale of the Mortgage Loans to the Purchaser as a sale for reporting and accounting purposes and, to the extent appropriate, for federal income tax purposes;
    (i) The Seller is an approved seller/servicer of residential mortgage loans for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The Seller is in good standing to sell mortgage loans to and service mortgage loans for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and no event has occurred which would make the Seller unable to comply with eligibility requirements or which would require notification to either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac; and
    (j) No written statement, report or other document furnished or to be furnished pursuant to the Agreement contains or will contain any statement that is or will be inaccurate or misleading in any material respect.
    SECTION 7.02. Representations and Warranties as to Individual Mortgage Loans. The Seller hereby represents and warrants to the Purchaser, as to each Mortgage Loan (except as otherwise specified below), as of the Closing Date, as follows:
    (a) The information set forth in the Mortgage Loan Schedule is true, complete and correct in all material respects as of the Cut-Off Date;
    (b) The original mortgage, deed of trust or other evidence of indebtedness (the “Mortgage”) creates a first lien on an estate in fee simple or a leasehold interest in real property securing the related Mortgage Note, free and clear of all adverse claims, liens and encumbrances having priority over the first lien of the Mortgage subject only to (1) the lien of non-delinquent current real property taxes and assessments not yet due and payable, (2) covenants, conditions and restrictions, rights of way, easements and other matters of public record as of the date of recording which are acceptable to mortgage lending institutions generally, and (3) other matters to which like properties are commonly subject which do not materially interfere with the benefits of the security intended to be provided by the Mortgage or the use, enjoyment, value or marketability of the related Mortgaged Property;
    (c) The Mortgage Loan has not been delinquent thirty (30) days or more at any time during the twelve (12) month period prior to the Cut-off Date for such Mortgage Loan. As of the Cut-Off Date, the Mortgage Loan is not delinquent in payment more than 30 days and has not been dishonored; there are no defaults under the terms of the Mortgage Loan; and the Seller has not advanced funds, or induced, solicited or knowingly received any advance of funds from a party other than the owner of the Mortgaged Property subject to the Mortgage, directly or indirectly, for the payment of any amount required by the Mortgage Loan;
    (d) There are no delinquent taxes which are due and payable, ground rents, assessments or other outstanding charges affecting the related Mortgaged Property;
    (e) The Mortgage Note and the Mortgage have not been impaired, waived, altered or modified in any respect, except by written instruments which have been recorded to the extent any such recordation is required by applicable law or is necessary to protect the interests of the Purchaser, and which have been approved by the title insurer and the primary mortgage insurer, as applicable, and copies of which written instruments are included in the Mortgage File
    . No other instrument of waiver, alteration or modification has been executed, and no Mortgagor has been released by the Seller, or to the best of Seller’s knowledge, by any other person, in whole or in part, from the terms thereof except in connection with an assumption agreement, which assumption agreement is part of the Mortgage File and the terms of which are reflected on the Mortgage Loan Schedule;
    (f) The Mortgage Note and the Mortgage are not subject to any right of rescission, set-off, counterclaim or defense, including the defense of usury, nor will the operation of any of the terms of the Mortgage Note and the Mortgage, or the exercise of any right thereunder, render the Mortgage Note or Mortgage unenforceable, in whole or in part, or subject to any right of rescission, set-off, counterclaim or defense, including the defense of usury, and no such right of rescission, set-off, counterclaim or defense has been asserted with respect thereto;
    (g) All buildings upon the Mortgaged Property are insured by a generally acceptable insurer pursuant to standard hazard policies conforming to the requirements of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. All such standard hazard policies are in effect and on the date of origination contained a standard mortgagee clause naming the Seller and its successors in interest as loss payee and such clause is still in effect. If the Mortgaged Property is located in an area identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency as having special flood hazards under the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, as amended, such Mortgaged Property is covered by flood insurance by a generally acceptable insurer in an amount not less than the requirements of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The Mortgage obligates the Mortgagor thereunder to maintain all such insurance at the Mortgagor’s cost and expense, and on the Mortgagor’s failure to do so, authorizes the holder of the Mortgage to maintain such insurance at the Mortgagor’s cost and expense and to seek reimbursement therefor from the Mortgagor;
    (h) Each Mortgage Loan as of the time of its origination complied in all material respects with all applicable local, state and federal laws, including, but not limited to, all applicable predatory lending laws;
    (i) The Mortgage has not been satisfied, canceled or subordinated, in whole or in part, or rescinded, and the Mortgaged Property has not been released from the lien of the Mortgage, in whole or in part nor has any instrument been executed that would effect any such satisfaction, release, cancellation, subordination or rescission;
    (j) The Mortgage Note and the related Mortgage are original and genuine and each is the legal, valid and binding obligation of the maker thereof, enforceable in all respects in accordance with its terms subject to bankruptcy, insolvency and other laws of general application affecting the rights of creditors.
    All parties to the Mortgage Note and the Mortgage had the legal capacity to enter into the Mortgage Loan and to execute and deliver the Mortgage Note and the Mortgage.
    The Mortgage Note and the Mortgage have been duly and properly executed by such parties.
    The proceeds of the Mortgage Note have been fully disbursed and there is no requirement for future advances thereunder;
    (k) With respect to each Mortgage Loan, (A) immediately prior to the transfer and assignment to the Purchaser, the Mortgage Note and the Mortgage were not subject to an assignment or pledge, except for any assignment or pledge that had been satisfied and released,
    (B) the Seller had good and marketable title to and was the sole owner thereof and (C) the Seller had full right to transfer and sell the Mortgage Loan to the Purchaser free and clear of any encumbrance, equity, lien, pledge, charge, claim or security interest;
    (l) The Mortgage Loan is covered by an ALTA lender’s title insurance policy or other generally acceptable form of policy of insurance, with all necessary endorsements, issued by a title insurer qualified to do business in the jurisdiction where the Mortgaged Property is located, insuring (subject to the exceptions contained in clause (b) (1), (2) and (3) above) the Seller, its successors and assigns, as to the first priority lien of the Mortgage in the original principal amount of the Mortgage Loan. Such title insurance policy affirmatively insures ingress and egress and against encroachments by or upon the Mortgaged Property or any interest therein.
    The Seller is the sole insured of such lender’s title insurance policy, such title insurance policy has been duly and validly endorsed to the Purchaser or the assignment to the Purchaser of the Seller’s interest therein does not require the consent of or notification to the insurer and such lender’s title insurance policy is in full force and effect and will be in full force and effect upon the consummation of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.
    No claims have been made under such lender’s title insurance policy, and no prior holder of the related Mortgage has done, by act or omission, anything which would impair the coverage of such lender’s title insurance policy;
    (m) To the Seller’s knowledge, there is no default, breach, violation or event of acceleration existing under the Mortgage or the related Mortgage Note and no event which, with the passage of time or with notice and the expiration of any grace or cure period, would constitute a default, breach, violation or event permitting acceleration; and neither the Seller nor any prior mortgagee has waived any default, breach, violation or event permitting acceleration;
    (n) To the Seller’s knowledge, there are no mechanics, or similar liens or claims which have been filed for work, labor or material affecting the related Mortgaged Property which are or may be liens prior to or equal to the lien of the related Mortgage;
    (o) To the Seller’s knowledge, all improvements lie wholly within the boundaries and building restriction lines of the Mortgaged Property (and wholly with the project with respect to a condominium unit) and no improvements on adjoining properties encroach upon the Mortgaged Property except those which are insured against by the title insurance policy referred to in clause (l) above and all improvements on the property comply with all applicable zoning and subdivision laws and ordinances;
    (p) The Mortgage Loan constitutes a “qualified mortgage” under
    Section 860G(a)(3)(A) of the Code and Treasury Regulation Section 1.860G-2(a)(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7) and (9), without reliance on the provisions of Treasury Regulation Section 1.860G-2(a)(3) or Treasury Regulation
    Section 1.860G-2(f)(2) or any other provision that would allow a Mortgage Loan to be treated as a “qualified mortgage” notwithstanding its failure to meet the requirements of Section 860G(a)(3)(A) of the Code and Treasury Regulation
    Section 1.860G-2(a)(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7) and (9);
    (q) The Mortgage Loan complies in all material respects with all the terms, conditions and requirements of the Seller’s underwriting standards in effect at the time of origination of such Mortgage Loan. The Mortgage Notes and Mortgages are on uniform Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac instruments or are on forms acceptable to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac;
    (r) The Mortgage Loan contains the usual and enforceable provisions of the originator at the time of origination for the acceleration of the payment of the unpaid principal amount if the related Mortgaged Property is sold without the prior consent of the mortgagee thereunder. The Mortgage Loan has an original term to maturity of not more than 30 years, with interest payable in arrears on the first day of each month. Except as otherwise set forth on the Mortgage Loan Schedule, the Mortgage Loan does not contain terms or provisions which would result in negative amortization nor contain “graduated payment” features or “buydown” features;
    (s) To the Seller’s knowledge, the Mortgaged Property at origination of the Mortgage Loan was and currently is free of damage and waste and, to the Seller’s knowledge, at origination of the Mortgage Loan there was, and there currently is, no proceeding pending for the total or partial condemnation thereof;
    (t) The related Mortgage contains enforceable provisions such as to render the rights and remedies of the holder thereof adequate for the realization against the Mortgaged Property of the benefits of the security provided thereby,
    including, (1) in the case of a Mortgage designated as a deed of trust, by trustee’s sale, and (2) otherwise by judicial foreclosure.
    To the Seller’s knowledge, there is no homestead or other exemption available to the Mortgagor which would interfere with the right to sell the Mortgaged Property at a trustee’s sale or the right to foreclose the Mortgage;
    (u) If the Mortgage constitutes a deed of trust, a trustee, duly qualified if required under applicable law to act as such,
    has been properly designated and currently so serves and is named in the Mortgage, and no fees or expenses are or will become payable by the Purchaser to the trustee under the deed of trust, except in connection with a trustees sale or attempted sale after default by the Mortgagor;
    (v) If required by the applicable processing style, the Mortgage File contains an appraisal of the related Mortgaged Property made and signed prior to the final approval of the mortgage loan application by an appraiser that is acceptable to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac and approved by the Seller. The appraisal, if applicable, is in a form generally acceptable to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac;(w) To the Seller’s knowledge, each of the Mortgaged Properties consists of a single parcel of real property with a detached single-family residence erected thereon, or a two- to four-family dwelling, a townhouse, an individual condominium unit in a condominium project, an individual unit in a planned unit development or a proprietary lease on a cooperatively owned apartment and stock in the related cooperative corporation. Any condominium unit or planned unit development either conforms with applicable Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac requirements regarding such dwellings or is covered by a waiver confirming that such condominium unit or planned unit development is acceptable to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac or is otherwise “warrantable” with respect thereto. No such residence is a mobile home or manufactured dwelling;
    (x) The ratio of the original outstanding principal amount of the Mortgage Loan to the lesser of the appraised value (or stated value if an appraisal was not a requirement of the applicable processing style) of the Mortgaged Property at origination or the purchase price of the Mortgaged Property securing each Mortgage Loan (the “Loan-to-Value Ratio”) is not in excess of 95.00%. The original Loan-to-Value Ratio of each Mortgage Loan either was not more than 80.00% or the excess over 80.00% is insured as to payment defaults by a primary mortgage insurance policy issued by a primary mortgage insurer acceptable to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac;
    (y) The Seller is either, and each Mortgage Loan was originated by, a savings and loan association, savings bank, commercial bank, credit union, insurance company or similar institution which is supervised and examined by a federal or State authority, or by a mortgagee approved by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to Section 203 and 211 of the National Housing Act;
    (z) The origination, collection and servicing practices with respect to each Mortgage Note and Mortgage have been in all material respects legal, normal and usual in the Seller’s general mortgage servicing activities. With respect to escrow deposits and payments that the Seller collects, all such payments are in the possession of, or under the control of, the Seller, and there exist no deficiencies in connection therewith for which customary arrangements for repayment thereof have not been made. No escrow deposits or other charges or payments due under the Mortgage Note have been capitalized under any Mortgage or the related Mortgage Note;
    (aa) No fraud or misrepresentation of a material fact with respect to the origination of a Mortgage Loan has taken place on the part of the Seller; and
    (bb) If any of the Mortgage Loans are secured by a leasehold interest, with respect to each leasehold interest: residential property in such area consisting of leasehold estates is readily marketable; the lease is recorded and is in full force and effect and is not subject to any prior lien or encumbrance by which the leasehold could be terminated or subject to any charge or penalty; and the remaining term of the lease does not terminate less than ten years after the maturity date of such Mortgage Loan.
    (cc) None of the Mortgage Loans are subject to the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994 (“HOEPA”);
    (dd) No Mortgage Loan is a “High Cost Loan” or a “Covered Loan,” as applicable (as such terms are defined in the then current Standard & Poor’s LEVELS Glossary which is now Version 5.6c Revised, Appendix E);
    (ee) No Mortgage Loan originated on or after October 1, 2002 through March 6, 2003 is governed by the Georgia Fair Lending Act; and
    (ff) No mortgage loan is a high cost loan under the predatory lending law of any jurisdiction in which a mortgaged property is located.
    SECTION 7.03. Repurchase. It is understood and agreed that the representations and warranties set forth in Sections 7.01 and 7.02 shall survive the sale of the Mortgage Loans to the Purchaser and delivery of the related Mortgage Loan documents to the Purchaser or its designees and shall inure to the benefit of the Purchaser, notwithstanding any restrictive or qualified endorsement on any Mortgage Note or Assignment of Mortgage or the examination of any Mortgage File. Upon discovery by either the Seller or the Purchaser of a breach of representations and warranties made by the Seller, or upon the occurrence of a Repurchase Event, in either case which materially and adversely affects interests of the Purchaser or its assignee in any Mortgage Loan, the party discovering such breach or occurrence shall give prompt written notice to each of the other parties. If the substance of any representation or warranty has been breached, the repurchase obligation set forth in the provisions of this
    Section 7.03 shall apply notwithstanding any qualification as to the knowledge of the Seller. Following discovery or receipt of notice of any such breach of a representation or warranty made by the Seller or the occurrence of a Repurchase Event, the Seller shall either (i) cure such breach in all material respects within 90 days from the date the Seller was notified of such breach or (ii) repurchase such Mortgage Loan at the related Purchase Price within 90 days from the date the Seller was notified of such breach; provided, however, that the Seller shall have the option to substitute a Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan or Loans for such Mortgage Loan if such substitution occurs within two years following the Closing Date; and provided further that if the breach or occurrence would cause the Mortgage Loan to be other than a “qualified mortgage” as defined in Section 860G(a)(3) of the Code, any such cure, repurchase or substitution must occur within 90 days from the earlier of the date the breach was discovered or receipt of notice of any such breach. In the event that any such breach shall involve any representation or warranty set forth in Section 7.01 or those relating to the Mortgage Loans or a portion thereof in the aggregate, and such breach cannot be cured within ninety days of the earlier of either discovery by or notice to the Seller of such breach,
    all Mortgage Loans affected by the breach shall, at the option of the Purchaser, be repurchased by the Seller at the Purchase Price or substituted for in accordance with this
    Section 7.03. If the Seller elects to substitute a Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan or Loans for a Deleted Mortgage Loan pursuant to this Section 7.03, the Seller shall deliver to the Custodian with respect to such Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan or Loans, the original Mortgage Note endorsed as required by
    Section 6, and the Seller shall deliver to the Servicer with respect to such Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan, the Mortgage, an Assignment of the Mortgage in recordable form if required pursuant to Section 6, and such other documents and agreements as are required to be held by the Servicer pursuant to Section 6. No substitution will be made in any calendar month after the Determination Date for such month. Monthly Payments due with respect to Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loans in the month of substitution shall not be part of the Trust Fund and will be retained by the Servicer and remitted by the Servicer to the Seller on the next succeeding Distribution Date. For the month of substitution, distributions to the Certificateholders will include the Monthly Payment due on a Deleted Mortgage Loan for such month and thereafter the Seller shall be entitled to retain all amounts received in respect of such Deleted Mortgage Loan. Upon such substitution, the Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan or Loans shall be subject to the terms of this Agreement in all respects, and the Seller shall be deemed to have made the representations and warranties contained in this Agreement with respect to the Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan or Loans and that such Mortgage Loans so substituted are Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loans as of the date of substitution
    . In furtherance of the foregoing, if the Seller repurchases or substitutes a Mortgage Loan and is no longer a member of MERS and the Mortgage is registered on the MERS(R) System, the Purchaser, at the expense of the Seller and without any right of reimbursement, shall cause MERS to execute and deliver an assignment of the Mortgage in recordable form to transfer the Mortgage from MERS to the Seller and shall cause such Mortgage to be removed from registration on the MERS(R) System in accordance with MERS’ rules and regulations.
    In the event of a repurchase by the Seller pursuant to this Section 7.03, the Purchaser shall (i) forward or cause to be forwarded the Mortgage File for the related Mortgage Loan to the Seller, which shall include the Mortgage Note endorsed without recourse to the Seller or its designee, (ii) cause the Servicer to release to the Seller any remaining documents in the related Mortgage File which are held by the Servicer, and (iii) an assignment in favor of the Seller or its designee of the Mortgage in recordable form and acceptable to the Seller in form and substance and such other documents or instruments of transfer or assignment as may be necessary to vest in the Seller or its respective designee title to any such Mortgage Loan (or with respect to any Mortgage registered on the MERS(R) System, if the Seller is still a member of MERS, the Purchaser shall cause MERS to show the Seller as the owner of record). The Purchaser shall cause the related Mortgage File to be forwarded to Seller immediately after receipt of the related Purchase Price by wire transfer of immediately available funds to an account specified by the Purchaser.
    It is understood and agreed that the obligation of the Seller to cure such breach or purchase (or to substitute for) such Mortgage Loan as to which such a breach has occurred and is continuing shall constitute the sole remedy respecting such breach available to the Purchaser or the Trustee on behalf of the Certificateholders.
    SECTION 8. Notices. All demands, notices and communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when deposited, postage prepaid, in the United States mail, if mailed by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or when received, if delivered by private courier to another party, at the related address shown on the first page hereof, or such other address as may hereafter be furnished to the parties by like notice.
    SECTION 9. Severability of Provisions. Any provision of this Agreement which is prohibited or unenforceable or is held to be void or unenforceable in any jurisdiction shall, as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective to the extent of such prohibition or unenforceability without invalidating the remaining provisions hereof, and any such prohibition or unenforceability in any jurisdiction as to any Mortgage Loan shall not invalidate or render unenforceable such provision in any other jurisdiction. To the extent permitted by applicable law, the parties hereto waive any provision of law which prohibits or renders void or unenforceable any provision hereof.
    SECTION 10. Counterparts; Entire Agreement. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in any number of counterparts. Each counterpart shall be deemed to be an original, and all such counterparts shall constitute one and the same instrument. This Agreement is the entire agreement between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any prior agreement or communications between the parties.
    SECTION 11. Place of Delivery and Governing Law. This Agreement shall be deemed in effect when counterparts hereof have been executed by each of the parties hereto.
    This Agreement shall be deemed to have been made in the State of New York. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York State of New York, without regard to the conflict of law principles thereof, other than Sections 5-1401 and 5-1402 of the New York General Obligations Law, and the obligations, rights and remedies of the parties hereunder shall be determined in accordance with such laws.
    SECTION 12. Successors and Assigns; Assignment of Agreement. This Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns; provided that this Agreement may not be assigned, pledged or hypothecated by the Seller to a third party without the prior written consent of the Purchaser.
    SECTION 13. Waivers; Other Agreements. No term or provision of this Agreement may be waived or modified unless such waiver or modification is in writing and signed by the party against whom such waiver or modification is sought to be enforced.
    SECTION 14. Survival. The provisions of this Agreement shall survive the Closing Date and the delivery of the Mortgage Loans, and for so long thereafter as is necessary (including, subsequent to the assignment of the Mortgage Loans) to permit the parties to exercise their respective rights or perform their respective obligations hereunder.
    [Signature Page Follows]
    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Seller and the Purchaser have caused their names to be signed hereto by their respective officers thereunto duly authorized as of the date first above written.
    GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION
    By:
    Name:
    Title:
    RESIDENTIAL ASSET MORTGAGE PRODUCTS, INC.
    By:
    Name:
    Title:
    SCHEDULE I
    MORTGAGE LOAN SCHEDULE
    (a copy can be obtained from the Trustee)

  88. It never ends with those guys. MERS is named as the beneficiary as the alleged agent of the lender (so they’ve said when it suited them). If mers is the lender’s agent, the lender is the ben, just thru it’s agent. I’ve said in the past that I believe that as such, it isn’t an assignment that is necessary between an agent and its principal to get the agent out of the act. Only if mers isn’t the agent would an assignment be necessary, like maybe if mers were the nominee (but not agent). The alternative to nominee (bifurcation) or agency (no bifurcation) is that the dot names no one as the ben. oops.
    If mers is the ben as agent of the lender, than imo no assgt is necessary and by their own spiel, mers is the common agent for all of them, including the sec’n trustees**. If ithat’s true, than no assgt is necessary from the agent, mers, to the sec’n trust.
    When the trust wants to enforce in its own name, instead of having their alleged agent f/c, because there’s no required notice of the new ben’s (trust) id and interest, something has to occur to give the trust the right to enforce (the borrower and the public record must be noticed).
    I’m not sure what that would be (since it wouldn’t be an assgt from an agent to its principal, at least I think not, while it would be between a nominee and the party it’s nominee for). There’s more to discuss about how an agent relinquishes its status, but what I want to point out is what I think is going on.
    NOW they are acting like MERS is NOT their agent and having mers sell and assign the note (oh please) and coll instrument) as a current event to defeat many defenses to the loan agreement (if not among other things). If you believe that servicers (or someone thru the servicers) advance payments to the trusts when the borrower doesn’t, than you could see how it’s poss for them to posit the trust doesn’t know the loan is in (borrower default). The sales and assignments being done now are trying to pretend the sale to the trust is a current event and for value and without notice (of the maker’s default) to give the trust HDC status (relying on one hand on the holder provisions of the UCC and relying tacitly on the other hand on the current sale and assgt).
    Summed up:
    They are distancing themselves from the servicers, whom of course know the loan is in (maker) default and is in fact subject to all affirmative defenses. This way they try to get and falsely rely on the presumption of hdc, when post-default, there really is no hdc. imo. But it’s not a current event.
    No trust is currently shelling out money to buy these loans.
    I guess what to do about it is play the game. Never minding, if one can or does, that mers is the alleged seller, if you don’t ask for a more definitive statement and get it, then pretend it’s not being postured as a current (post-default) event, and assert all affirmative defenses. Leave it to them to claim (and then support) hdc status. You could just say the trust isn’t a hdc because it’s (allegedly) taken its interest post-default, but it might be easier to make them have to demonstrate why they’re entitled to any such presumption based on a post-default (sale and) assignment.

    **(as if the trustee’s alleged membership is the bar, which I’ve never thought it is because whomever that is has no ben interest in anything. He’s (he = say bony as trustee) a trustee, not an agent and there’s a difference. The trustee could be a member of Foxwood and it wouldn’t mean anything to the trust beneficiaries (unless there’s an agreement among the three (say), not only two of them, that says a trustee’s membership means something as to the beneficiaries) If the secn trustee’s membership in mers means nothing, and if mers is a nominee and not an agent for anybody, than an assgt to the trust should’ve been executed and recorded – right after any other executed but unrecorded assgts) – even by mers’ own rules.

  89. JG, throughout this mess with banksters, mortgages and servicers and loans, they create new or different entities using similar names so that you cannot find who actually owns what or, more to the point, does not own what. The way to discern them is to look at the EIN number or FEIN number assigned by the IRS. This is sometimes helpful in figuring out who is who.

  90. @christine – @ neidermeyer
    Harris County, Pasadena Texas

  91. @ Leah Dean ,

    I like johngaults wording related to notifying AWL without agreeing to or admitting anything … sounds like it covers the bases…

    The address given for AWL in your note goes to a Bank of America building…

    What state are you in?

    ******************
    Bank of America – Banks & Credit Unions – Yelp
    http://www.yelp.com › Financial Services › Banks & Credit Unions
    Yelp
    Rating: 3 – ‎1 review
    Jan 12, 2011 – 4500 Park Granada Calabasas, CA 91302. Get Directions; Phone … Bank of America – Calabasas, CA, United States · Tonya B. Bank of …
    *******************
    I searched Cali ,, and found Americas Wholesale Lender there as a corporation , created in 2011 and apparently since abandoned based on it’s “surrender” status… I would mail to the address here (below) and the one in your note…

    Entity Name: AMERICA’S WHOLESALE LENDER
    Entity Number: C3426718
    Date Filed: 11/09/2011
    Status: SURRENDER
    Jurisdiction: NEVADA
    Entity Address: 17321 IRVINE BLVD STE 206
    Entity City, State, Zip: TUSTIN CA 92780
    Agent for Service of Process: HOWARD BARNES
    Agent Address: 17321 IRVINE BLVD STE 206
    Agent City, State, Zip: TUSTIN CA 92780

  92. Leah Dean,

    What is your state? I believe I have the right guy to help you.

  93. Don’t take my word to mean that the awl at the ny sos is the same one id’d in a note because I don’t know that. I just know it’s the only one that came up on a search of that name – in NY.

  94. This is the only business which showed up at the NY SofS and as you can see, it appears to have been incorporated on 12/16/2008. If so, oops. But Leah says her note id’s “America’s Wholesale Lender a corporation…” (existing in NY blah blah ), so maybe this isn’t even a wholly ineffective cya for the people refd in her docs it looks like to me.
    This isn’t rocket science, either. Anyone who crossed paths with these people needs to see an attorney who does business law, like incorporations. imo. Not necessarily so that attorney can represent you, but to get an understanding of the status, if any, of those who entered loans as AWL and any opinion as to the validity of the agreement and
    any endorsement on a note (etc). As I recall (only), AWL was an alleged dba of X, but there was no registration of the dba even.

    Selected Entity Name: AMERICA’S WHOLESALE LENDER, INC.
    Selected Entity Status Information Current Entity Name: AMERICA’S WHOLESALE LENDER, INC.
    DOS ID #: 3753565
    Initial DOS Filing Date: DECEMBER 16, 2008
    County: NEW YORK
    Jurisdiction: NEW YORK
    Entity Type: DOMESTIC BUSINESS CORPORATION
    Current Entity Status: ACTIVE

    Believing what I do, if I wanted to send a NOR about a loan where the other party to the loan were identified as AWL a corporation (or even if not but said AWL), I would use some words like “Without admission of a legally binding contract / agreement for a loan between me and the party identified in any note and or collateral instrument (mtg, dot) bearing my original signature and properly acknowledged, to the extent the contract or agreement is legally binding or may be found to be legally binding on each party identified therein, I hereby notice my rescission of the loan purported to be evidenced therein for a property located at 124 marlin street, my town, my state (etc).”

    But one really needs an attorney for advice imo. If docs purport the other party, as identified in the docs, exists and is a party which may contract when that’s not true, and therefore there may be no cognizable agreement, rescinding might not be the optimal remedy. I tried to cover, above, how I (me not you) would handle not establishing a contract but rescinding nonetheless if a contract exists or might be found. A consultation with an attorney who does business formations in his sleep would be worth the cost imo and I don’t know if I would actually send such a rescission without that consultation. What you want to know is what is the ramification of a party identifying itself as a corporation in an agreement when not a corporation. If AWL were id’d as the other party but not as a corporation, then what you want to know is if xyy individuals, anybodies held themselves out as “AWL” when AWL has no congnizable status as any kind of organization (no registered dba, say), what does this mean to the agreement? I think that’s what you want to know. And because you’re spending your moolah to be there, might as well ask about the endorsement by a non-existing entity.

  95. @ neidermeyer
    Great information and I appreciate you advising me to keep the Letter to Rescind under Tila not too wordy. I will make sure I send the Letter’s to all of these parties via Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested. Like you said, not a lot of money for such a critical issue.
    Thank you for responding.

  96. @johngault – You are so correct about AWL. However, BOA is doing everything in their power to have me believe BONY Mellon is the actual Lender. Pardon me but I wasn’t at that closing? I have never signed any contracts with BONY Mellon. That is exactly what I said too. That girl started back peddling so fast and then was lost for words. There is no America’s Wholesale Lender a Corporation existing under New York Law that was even existing in 2007. The DBA that is registered with Harris County Clerk’s office had expired and was not any good and the Secretary of State of Texas said Countrywide Home Loans dba America’s Wholesale Lender was Licensed and it was no longer valid in 2008. Thank you for your information. I really appreciate you responding.

  97. @ Leah Dean ,

    I’d shotgun it ,, send a letter to every party you can identify,, it’s only $6 or so for a certified mailing with signature and return card. Don’t make the letter too wordy… just clearly identify yourself , your loan information and state that you are exercising the right of rescission under TILA . I would look up the name and address of the “registered agent” for each party you need to send notice to in your states website which maintains corporate registry info. You send the notice(s) to the registered agents…

    FWIW I had a pretender (Option One) that had a credit line with Bank of America that funded their wire through a BONY-Mellon account number… You’ll never get a straight answer out of any of them… put a gun to their head with rescission.

    The beauty of this is that there is no end to the games they have played and calling their bluff puts them in the impossible position of untangling the web and filing a coherent lawsuit in 20 days time… NOT GONNA HAPPEN. They won’t even be able to coordinate a conference call between all the rats in that amount of time.

  98. Leah Dean:
    “My Lender clearly reads on DOT and Promissory Note America’s Wholesale Lender A Corporation existing under the Laws of New York with a address of 4500 Park Granada, Calabasas, CA. Do I send a notice to rescind to both Bank of New York Mellon and America’s Wholesale Lender? or, do I send it to America’s Wholesale Lender only? or Bank of America the Servicer. Bank of New York Mellon requested that I not include them in any more correspondence as they are not the party I am to deal with.”

    Leah, isn’t it a fact that there was no such corporation as America’s
    Wholesale Lender? If that’s the fact I believe it is, among other
    dispositive facts, an endorsement on the note imo by a non-existant
    corporation is not an endorsement whether the end says its done by so and so as the such and such of AWL or by someone purporting to be its attorney in fact. It’s illegal to claim to be a corporation when not a corporation in the first place. Unfortunately, I don’t know all the ramifications to an agreement when that’s occurred.

    I’m not sure you have a bona fide agreement TO rescind. Not sure what you have. What is shown in public record about your loan?

  99. javagold: “What about a recission on a refinance but the house is already fraud closed and sold at sheriff sale….. QWR was sent to Servicer/ “lender” but never replied to…. ???”

    I think the law would find you failed to, long and short and by any other names, do anything about the lack of response to the QWR, including noticing this fact in public record. lay opinion of course. If there’s a cause of action for this failure which would defeat the foreclosure, I don’t know what it is.

  100. david belanger (@revolutionnow1), on March 13, 2015 at 11:59 am said:

    This is for all our readers, and my friends ,( rock and Christine.,) haha

    i had a foreclosure sales date, as of 20 march, 2015, a auction at my home scheduled for 12 noon time on that day.

    sent out rescission notice on 5 march 2015, to all party’s to the securitization and party i have found that was at the closing table without our knowledge and or permission to be there.and there were at least 18 letter sent out.

    so guess what i just got, in my email from someone helping me with my securitization reports. and she is number one in business for that.
    Marie McDonnell analistic, look her up, Christine,rock . don’t take my UN educated guess at how law is law. as you said am a stupid,crazy, nut job.

    WOW, they said the SALE IS CANCELLED. this came from our good friends< OCWEN LOAN SERVICING. JUST ONE OF THE COMPANY THAT GOT MY RESCISSION LETTER.

    so no matter how long it been people send out rescission letters, that is all ng is saying. it's up to them to agree or not to agree in the rescission, and the only way they have to say we dont agree is . THEY THE ( BANK,LENDER, ) MUST FILE SUIT…

    please people this is so simple.

  101. Javagold as regular home purchase is not a purchase money, so if you purchased a home with a Fannie, Freddie type loan it was not a purchase money loan. You would have chaos if people were allowed to rescind on a purchase, and the seller is usually involved in a purchase themselves!

    But as I mention a few days ago about this situation, the lawyers are still catching up to what go on in the housing area. As Neil does not read these post or he would have already have won some large settlements, however they are running behind the curve and are just understanding what taken place, as they feel they must invent the wheel instead of using information that been put out there by other than them!

  102. What about a recission on a refinance but the house is already fraud closed and sold at sheriff sale….. QWR was sent to Servicer/ “lender” but never replied to…. ???

  103. LDTX – I contacted Bank of America yesterday as I had another Gold Envelope hanging from my door which read Please Call Bank of America @ 1800XXXXXXX. I called and the automated service asked for my loan number. I entered it and it said no such loan number are you sure you have the correct number? Long story short, I entered it several times and we had to go to using my SS#. The automated service then stated. Which loan are you calling about? You have several Loans with Bank of America. I of course now am hot under the collar. This automated system states “We are a Debt Collector” I get in contact with the young girl and she needs my information, such as name, address, SS#. Not last 4 digits but SS#. I told her before you go into your spill, who are you a Debt Collector for? She said mam I am not a debt collector, I am here to reach out to you for a Loan Modification. I told her… Not Interested and she said well OK I need to inform you we are a Debt Collector (WTH)!!! So I asked her who was she collecting a debt for and she said Bank of New York Mellon. My response “No your not” I then asked her who is my Lender and she replied Bank of New York Mellon. I told her no they are not and I have it in writing from Bank of New York Mellon. So here is where I have a question about the Recission, I never closed on my property with Bank of New York Mellon. My Lender clearly reads on DOT and Promissory Note America’s Wholesale Lender A Corporation existing under the Laws of New York with a address of 4500 Park Granada, Calabasas, CA. Do I send a notice to rescind to both Bank of New York Mellon and America’s Wholesale Lender? or, do I send it to America’s Wholesale Lender only? or Bank of America the Servicer. Bank of New York Mellon requested that I not include them in any more correspondence as they are not the party I am to deal with.

  104. J, When I purchased my house in 2006, AHMSI was the servicer and American Brokers Conduit was the alleged original lender. Later on, AHMSI denied that Fannie Mae was involved, however, the mortgage states in the text that the loan went to Fannie Mae. They all lie all the time.

  105. Am I to understand that this issue of rescission still only applies to refinances not purchases?

  106. What if you have a purchase mortgage with Wells Fargo but the mortgage and the note was always owned by Freddie Mac from beginning, unknown to you at the time of closing over 10 years ago…..

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: