COVER-UP: Whatever Happenned to Those Settlements?

This is for general information only.

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

Consult a lawyer before making any decisions based upon the content of this article or anything else on this blog.

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

see http://www.mpamag.com/news/foreclosure-settlement-funds-misspent-26697.aspx

The media and the Bank lobby keep referring to illegal activity, risky or mismanagement. I call it a cover-up that dwarfs Watergate by comparison. Here are some facts:

  1. Foreclosures are still increasing, despite dozens of articles per day that say otherwise. Those articles are writing about a particular city or county whereas the true numbers can only be measured nationally. Wall Street has creatively used its dominance in the press to get them using the terms that would lead one to believe that the foreclosure crisis in behind us.
  2. This wasn’t negligence. It is intentional, it is fraud, it is illegal and probably criminal. The banks didn’t suddenly wake up one morning with amnesia abut how to make a loan and how to account for it. They also didn’t accidentally destroy the original loan papers. It was intentional. Why did they destroy cash equivalent instruments? Because they had made reports to multiple third parties about the loan that would be readily obvious that (a) the loan did not qualify to be approved (b) that the loan did not qualify for the investment criteria needed by the stable managed funds (pension, for example) and (c) it is much easier on bankers if they admit to negligence than to produce proof of fraud (they obviously had made multiple misrepresentations and sales to multiple third parties).
  3. The foreclosures are for the benefit of the intermediary banks whose self-proclaimed status as agents for unidentified creditors makes a mockery of our marketplace and our judicial system.
  4. The banks were found by administrative and law enforcement agencies to have committed fraud on the courts, to have pushed through foreclosures in which they had no ownership or rights to the alleged loans, that probably was never consummated (in the legal sense) in the first place.
  5. The homeowners whose files were reviewed by investigators and found to have fatal defects were never notified by the investigators or anyone else about the finding and the agreement by the banks. This one example of the wrong-headed policies started by Bush and continued by Obama have been wrong headed and bone-headed.
  6. Hundreds of Billions, approaching $1 Trillion have been paid in settlements by the major banks, many with specific provisions that the settlement was to be to the benefit of homeowners who were illegally foreclosed or who were in foreclosure when the foreclosing party was (a) non existent or (b) a sham naked nominee with no interest in the loan, the note or the mortgage and or (c) a party who has never been disclosed in the courts during foreclosure litigation but who was directing the entire false and fraudulent scheme of “securitization”.
  7. The banks make no bones about it — they admit that the Trusts are and always were empty but have been asserting successfully to Judges who didn’t think through that whether there were actual underlying transcriptions where money exchanged hands or not, is irrelevant because they “hold” the note. So they admit that nobody in the chain of custody upon which they rely ever actually had any financial interest in the alleged “loan” with the homeowner and admit further, upon interrogation that they have no privity of contract with the homeowner.  The banks successfully turned the heads of thousands of judges with the myth of the homeowner getting a free house.
  8. Out of hundreds of billions of dollars in settlements, homeowners have seen virtually nothing — disbursements of less than 1% of the alleged principal or their alleged loan.
  9. It is an inescapable conclusion that the funds for the”Settlements” (a) remain unpaid or (b) resulted in payment of an amount equivalent to a nuisance settlement when the issuer was taking hundreds of thousands of dollars without any right, justification or excuse by proceeding with a foreclosure they have admitted, according to their own audit that the foreclosure was wrongful.

In short what is happening here is that the crimes or illegal activities are ongoing every day and not subject to (a) being barred by the statute of limitations and (b) foreclosure is  a behavior to avoid detection (which is a crime in itself) and (c) each time a Judge enters an order allowing or ordering forced sale, the Court itself is complicit in the cover-up, even if the Court is “unaware” of it.

All of this is presumptively true because of the findings of fact by the investigative and regulatory agencies, whether they are admitted or not by the mega banks. The burden should be placed on the foreclosing party, whose history of fabrication, lying under oath, and forgery SHOULD make the testimony, documents, and representations proffered by counsel for banks presumptively NOT CREDIBLE. Instead Judges have treated them like they are holders in due course where the risk falls entirely on the homeowner who also has the burden of proving defenses against a holder in due course who is not subject to those defenses (but who also doesn’t exist).

In my opinion policy makers, regulators and law enforcement are still functioning under the Wall Street myth that if the mega banks fall so does the economy. It is quite the reverse. If the mega banks fall then banking becomes local again, and there is no such thing as too big to fail. There is not single function performed by a mega bank that couldn’t be done by a small community bank or credit union. The current policy has allowed the mega banks to raise a cloud over everything with their unregulated “Shadow banking” sector which now accounts for around 15-20 times the amount of all the money in the world. That being the case, we are allowing our institutions to be marginalized. When the Fed, or Congress or anyone else attempts to address the problems of economic growth and inequality they are using primitive tools without any real effect.

We have replaced income and currency with debt that is “cash equivalent”. As long as allow that, we will forever be on the brink of the worst depression in history — which history tells us frequently leads to war. As a distraction there are those who point to the National Debt without making any reference to the more important household debt. It is an irrefutable fact that out economy is built on consumption. 70% of our gross domestic product is consumption of goods and services by ordinary consumers. Thus the only rational, practical policy is one that increases consumption. Instead politicians are creating ideological talking points. Where does consumption ordinarily come from? Do those people have the money or credit to make purchases? If they don’t, then what policy will put money in their hands in a manner in which overall consumption increases.

103 Responses

  1. CRIME SYNDICATES get run by those who have no ones best interest in mind but their own selfish, greedy nefarious self interests.

    WALL STREET EXECS conive with the CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE & THE CHICAGO MERCANTILE EXCHANGE EXECS, the CME GROUP of PERPS of CRIME SYNDICATE DRUG LORDS who DICTATE their CRIMINAL FRAUD through many conduits.

    That is how they RULE BY SECRECY unlawfully.

  2. Certainly the conclusion can be made by the inferences drawn from the MIRABELLI FURNITURE STORE MOB HIT in OAK LAWN, ILLINOIS in the mid 70’s to the CHICAGO CRIME SYNDICATE STYLE POLITICS of FRAUDLCOSURE.

    THE CHICAGO SYNDICATE:

    http://www.thechicagosyndicate.com/2009_04_05_archive.html

  3. Moreover, if we were to tour the PEOPLES HOUSE, which would never happen because there is no honesty in politics, we would most certainly find with 100% certainty, U.S. COUNTERINTELLIGENCE MAFIA PIT BOSSES running the country unlawfully for CRIME SYNDICATE MAFIA DONS.

  4. Correct typo: I _haven’t_ watched tv in over one year.

    If I were to categorize what FRAUDCLOSURE is, I would say it is RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION under the guise of POLITICIZING the criminal wrongdoings of CORPORATE DEGENERATES.

    Those criminal wrongdoings operate inconspicuously through the WHITE HOUSE by MAFIA REDNECKS.

  5. Kalifornia, on November 18, 2015 at 9:23 pm said:

    New Link for Wolf v. WELLS FARGO. Other than the Third Amended Petition, the balance should be in the general chronological and procedural order.

    https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0BxiFFqZR7JZ7eWZWWk5BN0cyY0U&usp=sharing

  6. I’m proud to say I have’nt watched tv in over one year Hammertime & I don’t listen to NEWS PROGRAMMING either.

    It’s POLITICAL BRAINWASHING & who needs that left/right paradigm POLITICAL CENTRIST IRREVERANT OPINIONATED boasting from them? Not me, because FREEDOM OF CHOICE is not paying homage to that IMHO.

    Those people get bought & paid to keep people thinking like LEFTIST MARXIST RESOCIALISTS.

    The only thing OBAMA & his ADMINISTRATION has pushed since he took office is ignoring our CONSTITUTIONAL LEGAL RIGHTS & the immorality of that shows in TV & RADIO PROGRAMMING IMHO.

  7. Youre saying the VATICAN CHIEF JUSTICE is lying SHADOWCAT?

    Because in this LAND OF LAWS FREEDOM OF RELIGION is one of them.

    What is the legal claim in tort in FRAUDCLOSURE?

    RELGIOUS PERSECUTION & I can prove it unequivocally.

    It’s s called TORTUOUS FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION by TORTUOUS FRAUDULENT REPRESENTATION of the UNLAWFUL FRAUDCLOSURE CLAIM by the ILLINOIS STATES ATTORNEY & I can prove that too, HANDS DOWN.

  8. Put Religions Aside.
    Think in terms of the Law!

    They thrive on keeping racial and religious wars going.
    EMBRACE DIVERSITY
    TAKE A BITE OUT OF CRIME

  9. Lvent cut out the Fox News and ull b alright.

  10. OBAMA IS WAGING WAR ON CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATIONS SAYS VATICAN CHIEF:

    http://conservativetribune.com/obama-war-on-christians/

  11. Moreover, imagine if POPE FRANCIS said GODDAMN AMERICA during mass in ST. PETERS & the President of that country scapegoated the EPISCOPAL CHURCH for it?

    Imagine the outrage?

    Some politicians think RELIGION should be used for their own POLITICAL GAINS & that’s RELIGIOUS BLASPHEMY by TYRANTS.

  12. OBAMA came out & targeted CATHOLICS by trying to scandalize the CATHOLIC CHURCH by scandalizing CATHOLIC PRIESTS but he didn’t do that to other RELIGIONS or RELIGIOUS GROUPS.

    Reverend Wright, the pastor of OBAMAS CHURCH, preaches hatred for AMERICA & that is my point in regards to RELIGIOUS BLASPHEMY under the guise of RELIGION.

  13. I can be poetic Greg, however, there’s nothing poetic in regards to MORAL INJUSTICE & RELIGIOUS INEPTITUDE.

    My book isn’t even near being finished & the plot is still thickening.

    Therefore, I would not want to try to publish my unfinished works because it could create legal issues that conflict with the outcome of the legal issues I have with TYRANTS GONE WILD.

    COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT upon my legal rights to proceed in my quest for LEGAL JUSTICE could be used to secretly RELIGIOUS PERSECUTE me because I’m CATHOLIC because this UNDECLARED RELIGIOUS WAR is on us quite frankly.

  14. A gentle reminder – please make an appointment for yourself to join us for Episode [9] of “Garfield’s Goose & Friends” on TalkShoe with your host, greg; on Thursday evening at 6:45 PM Eastern.

    This is right after Atty Neil Garfield’s weekly Thursday Night LIVING LIES – FORECLOSURE DEFENSE & ATTACK call which starts at 6:00 PM Eastern, and goes till 6:30 Eastern.

    Our call is a 1+ Hour follow-up Q&A call which allows you to ask and answer questions stimulated by Neil’s show; or your own Foreclosure Defense experience…

    i think we’ll start with the Paatalo case…

    Details follow:

    1) Neil’s Living Lies Call at 6:00PM Eastern (347) 850-1260… on Blogtalk Radio

    2) Our interactive Q&A call, “Garfield’s Goose & Friends” on TalkShoe – begins every Thursday night at 6:45PM Eastern, 15 minutes after the conclusion of Neil’s show

    Call in at (724) 444-7444 (then use Call ID: 139335) then “1#” for guest
    and/or use your computer to blog/type at http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/139335
    6:45 PM Eastern Thursdays (for 60 min)

    [Our Calls and Chat Board are recorded for review and sharing…]

    Please use the phone line TO SPEAK; ASK QUESTIONS AND CONTRIBUTE…
    Note that computer access will ONLY allow you to hear and type into the blog (Not Speak)…

    all are welcome!

    if you; or one of your friends; would like to be added and receive email reminders of the call…
    please email the host at: [lawman@gmx.us]
    with the subject line: “please add me to the goose!”

    If you would like to be REMOVED from the group…
    please email the host at: [lawman@gmx.us]
    with the subject line: “please pluck my goose”

    thank you.

  15. @ greg

    (LVent) using the iVent phone app.

  16. ivent

    we ALL know you are a modern POET… (your feet are Longfellows)

    please provide some meaningful prose written so that we don’t have to wait 3,000 years for pioneers from another planet to dig up your etchings from an archaeological find to understand that “if only we had understood your didactic juxtapositions” we would have been saved…

    are you really a sadist in disguise? you love to see your fellow man/woman in pain?

    if not, then come clean with the answers and methods you allege have worked for you so that the world will know that Queen Isis has returned in the body of IVENT to save her people…

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isis

    otherwise, on behalf of most of us… GO FIND A PUBLISHER FOR YOUR BOOK… this audience has grown tired of waiting for the punch-line…

    (if anyone else disagrees – please “tear me a new one”)

  17. It’s fun for FRAUD RACKETEERS like ANGEL GARCIA from BAYVIEW DU JOUR to be sleazy while pretending they’re not hired hit squads who work for the CREDIT RATE EXCHANGE BUREAU of FEDERATED BUREAUS.

  18. Moreover, the FEDERAL BANK CORP is the STATE IMPOSTER operating on behalf of themselves which is TREASON by PUBLIC OFFICIALS because they’re not ACTING IN THEIR OWN NAME & therefore, cannot show PROOF OF LOSS.

    It’s PROFIT BARGAINING to gain unlawful proceeds by FICTITIOUS PAYEES who GAMBLE ON PROFIT SHARING the LEGAL RIGHTS of WE THE PEOPLE for nefarious purposes.

    The LOAN SHARKS download fragments of their own SECURITIES FRAUD & REGAMBLE on it AKA FRAUDCLOSURE.

  19. @ DwightNJ

    What this is about is creating a judicial record in the court: the foundation for an appeal. If something is not in the record, the court of appeal will generally consider the non-existence of evidence/issue/argument in the record as either a waiver or a forfeiture. There are exceptions, but that is not a position to rely upon.

    Another consideration:

    Included in the ex parte application for an order is a request for certification of the issue(s) for an immediate appeal, e.g., an interlocutory appeal. But NJ is not Kalifornia, so the standards for an interlocutory review may be different. Additionally, consider including in the order that the parties shall maintain the status quo pending the review by the court of appeal.

  20. FRAUDCLOSURE is one vast STATUTORY MOVING VIOLATION upon the LEGAL RIGHTS of the U.S. SOVEREIGN CITIZENRY because FELONY FRAUD IS THE MOVING PARTY in FRAUDCLOSURE.

  21. @ DwightNJ

    It would be smart to file an ex parte application for an order granting a shortening of time to file a motion for judicial notice in support of the motion to vacate the summary judgment, and for supplemental briefing in support of of the recently discovered law.

    This is important: you will have to give the opposition at least 25 hours notice of the forthcoming ex parte application, as early in the a.m. as is reasonably possible that you can reach them, and document the time of contact, the dialogue, and the zombie receiving notice in the declaration under penalty of perjury attached to the ex parte application. That will be evidence in the record.

  22. REPEAT @ DwightNJ:

    Tie together the RJN exhibits and NJ authority with the following language:

    “As the Supreme Court explains,
    [W]hen this Court construes a statute, it is explaining its understanding what the statute has meant continuously since the date when it became law. . . . Thus, it is not accurate to say that the Court’s decision … ‘changed’ the law that previously prevailed . . . when the case was filed. Rather, given the structure of our judicial
    system, [a Supreme Court] opinion [interpreting a statute] finally decide[s] what [the statute] had always meant and explain[s] why the Courts of Appeals ha[ve] misinterpreted the will of the enacting Congress. Rivers v. Roadway Exp., Inc., 511 U.S. 298, 313 n.12 (1994).” (p. 13)

    “Jesinoski revealed the majority of federal courts had “misinterpreted the will of the enacting Congress,” Rivers, 511 U.S. at 313 n.12, in allocating to borrowers the burden to go to court to enforce their statutory rescission rights under TILA.” (p. 18)

  23. @ DwightNJ

    Cite the following for the robe’s authority to take judicial notice:

    https://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/mcs/rules/part2/part201.html

    RULE 201. Judicial Notice of Law and Adjudicative Facts

    (a) Notice of law. –Law which may be judicially noticed includes the decisional, constitutional and public statutory law, rules of court, and private legislative acts and resolutions of the United States, this state, and every other state, territory and jurisdiction of the United States as well as ordinances, regulations and determinations of all governmental subdivisions and agencies thereof. Judicial notice may also be taken of the law of foreign countries.

    (d) When mandatory. –A court shall take judicial notice if requested by a party on notice to all other parties and if supplied with the necessary information.

    (e) Opportunity to be heard. –Each party is entitled upon timely request to an opportunity to be heard as to the propriety of taking judicial notice and the tenor of the matter noticed. In the absence of prior notification, the request may be made after judicial notice has been taken.

    (f) How taken. –In determining the propriety of taking judicial notice of a matter or the tenor thereof, any source of relevant information may be consulted or used, whether or not furnished by a party, and the rules of evidence shall not apply except Rule 403 or a valid claim of privilege.

  24. @ DwightNJ

    First things first, do not call in and/or be late to the new job.

    Because the complete post vanished moments ago, this is going to post in pieces.

    (1) Make the request for judicial notice succinct, like this:

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:GblnasW8UcMJ:blog.fraplantools.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Kaplan-v.-Saint-Peters-Healthcare-System-Doc.-47-Ps-Motion-to-Strike-Ds-MTD.pdf+&cd=15&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

  25. Good night Dwight. The truth is on our side. Live to fight another day.

  26. Thank you everyone … Its been a long day … I edited my reply brief and deleted all of the unkind things I said about the Judge, and added some other things ..but time was flying by quickly …

    I spoke to Michael Keane earlier and then spoke to an attorney who he put me in touch with .. nice people ..everyone is in this fight together, we are all pulling for each other.

    By the time I got done making phone calls and taking calls it was close to 12 noon … I had to submit the reply to the court by 4:00-4:30 ..

    At 3:30 I was still sitting in the library printing out the Brief and the Objection .. then had to drive to staples to make copies .. made it to the court by 4:00 ..

    Then drove to the post office to overnight a copy to the attorneys

    Didn’t eat all day … got home around 5 and remembered that I forgot to create the request for judicial notice ..for the Oregon case and the Jesinoski case ..

    Its almost 8:00 pm and I’m in the library again printing out the cases .. but I cant find a sample of a request for judicial notice in NJ ..

    I’m supposed to be up near New York City at 7:00 in the morning to practice driving a truck through the city to prepare for my CDL road test Friday morning .. now I’m thinking I’m gonna have to go in late so I can hand in this request for judicial notice at 9:00 am at the court

    The clerk told me the Judge would be there in the morning , he was already gone when I went at 4 .. He’s probably going to decide this on the papers before he leaves on Friday … this is a critical point of my case

    I’m a union construction worker who got hurt over a year and a half ago in a demolition job where the wall collapsed and knocked me off the scaffold .. I’m getting screwed by workers comp now , because the insurance carrier deemed me permanently partial disabled , meaning I cant do my construction work anymore … built all the casinos in Atlantic City, NYC High-rises, etc. … my worker comp attorney is asleep at the wheel ..I’m trying to get to a settlement … back when they had me in physical therapy for my injuries from the fall … the insurance company called the therapist and told him to cut my therapy off and put me back into the “back to work conditioning program” which is meant for those who have medical clearance to return to work ..I did not have any … the physical therapist ended up injuring my neck by making me do weight lifting with my head leaning on a table ..my neck went out .. and they didn’t have a prescription from the doctor , it was the insurance company who called and told the physical therapist to place me into a return to work conditioning program .. well they all ended up calling the treating orthopedic doctor and were begging him to fabricate the back-dated prescription …they needed him to cover up what they had done , but he refused to get involved … because just 2 days prior he had determined I would need surgery on my elbow and wrist ..so he would have never been able to explain putting me in a back to work weight lifting program … The attorney I have still hasn’t filed a law suit over it, now he tells me he only does workers comp and that I should talk to his partner … he’s trying to reach a settlement on my injuries under the worker comp payment chart .. but its dragging on with no end in sight

    When they determined I was permanently disabled and would not be able to return to the construction work I did my entire life, the insurance company reduced my weekly benefits from the 800 and change I was getting down to 225 a week … because that’s the law, they are allowed to reduce down to the lowest payment until a settlement is reached .. and now its been dragging on for 6 months .. this is all just like the banks and the mortgages … but its the insurance companies and their doctors .. and there are judges involved ,.. and injustice .. and incompetence at every turn …

    So now I’m trying to get a CDL license to drive a truck .. theres a company in my area who will hire me starting at 25 an hour with benefits and overtime … so that’s where I’m at … when I had more money I did try to hire attorneys .. the one attorney charged me 100 dollars for the consultation ..after he shook my hand and gave the 100 dollars back and said ..”I’m sorry, but your case is so involved it would take up most of my time just working on your one case” … he wished me luck and said he was rooting for me …

    Most attorneys only wanted to try and get a modification or file for a bankruptcy ..

    One big-shot attorney in Atlantic City who has done work with one of the internet foreclosure defense attorneys .. looked at my case and told me that us homeowners need to get realistic , that we will never get the free house .. he told me that we all need to be happy if we get a mod.

    Well … looks like I’ll have to create my own Request for Judicial Notice form … I cant seem to find one on the internet ..

    Does it need to be official and cite the rules of evidence?

    See how every move I make turns into a grind?

    There is nothing easy about acting Pro se … It will break most people.

    I’m just a construction worker with no formal education, I just do the best I can .. and I’ve done pretty well considering all things in this foreclosure battlefield .. I am proud of the fight I’ve given them.

    Still hoping and praying that maybe I can prevail in the end.

    Good Night from the Jersey Shore

  27. Intrusive is the key word that would best describe IMPOSTERS.

    Intrusive best describes the CRIMINAL ELEMENT hiding within the U.S. GOVERNMENT.

    They’re like ROMAN INQUISITORS involving themselves in our private lives & that’s because they’re up to no good.

  28. It’s the same racket Greg, both legal & not, ran by the SPY RING of FRAUD RACKETEERS.

    They just don’t tell people what the so called legal ones really get used for.

    It’s MIND CONTROL & saturated fat is part of their games too.

    They lead lambs to the slaughter under many guises.

    Take the ALAN MASTERS & MICHAEL CORBITT case where his wife DIANNE was too trusting.

    They gain the trust of others under FALSE PRETENSES.

  29. @Dwight no excuse for clerk, judge’s behavior. Keep asserting your rights but keep ur cool. Kali’s giving u the blue print. Of course lawyer would help but we protect ourselves the best. Maybe post a question on a free lawyer site if u don’t have one to confirm procedures. http://www.avvo.com/

  30. @ DwightNJ & david belanger

    DwightNJ: Be sure to insert the following language from the Oregon ruling into both the reply and the separate objection, and don’t forget to submit a request for judicial notice with Jesinoski and the Oregon ruling attached as exhibits. Also, in the reply and the objection make sure to cite to those exhibits. It is probably a good idea to add the Rivers case as an exhibit as well.

    “As the Supreme Court explains,
    [W]hen this Court construes a statute, it is explaining its understanding what the statute has meant continuously since the date when it became law. . . . Thus, it is not accurate to say that the Court’s decision … ‘changed’ the law that previously prevailed . . . when the case was filed. Rather, given the structure of our judicial
    system, [a Supreme Court] opinion [interpreting a statute] finally decide[s] what [the statute] had always meant and explain[s] why the Courts of Appeals ha[ve] misinterpreted the will of the enacting Congress. Rivers v. Roadway Exp., Inc., 511 U.S. 298, 313 n.12 (1994).” (p. 13)

    “Jesinoski revealed the majority of federal courts had “misinterpreted the will of the enacting Congress,” Rivers, 511 U.S. at 313 n.12, in allocating to borrowers the burden to go to court to enforce their statutory rescission rights under TILA.” (p. 18)

  31. @ david belanger

    The Oregon ruling denying a motion to dismiss on the ground of a TILA rescission notice following Jesinoski:

    http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/oregon/ordce/6:2015cv01420/122936/12/

  32. dwight
    Do not get cross at the clerks or judges just keep on putting one foot at a time infrint of the other and look for a remedy to not getting the oral argument and from there go forward, when you walk in truth the path opens up and you will see this as you and your case grow together.

  33. ivent

    if all drugs were legal and commercially available – especially those plants which are natural creations of god – there would be no racket and no war on drugs… (would be cheap too)

    i say let people pick their own poison
    suicide by saturated fat…

  34. They’re U.S. COUNTERINTELLIGENCE SPIES running the PROTECTION RACKET for the DRUG CARTELS.

    You can talk law but it’s FRAUD DUJOUR & they don’t ever say they did something criminal.

    Instead they criminalize the innocent.

    That’s what these COUNTERFEIT NOTE SWAPPERS do, they TITLE SWAP TITLES to swap out IDENTITIES UNLAWFULLY.

  35. Best of Wishes Dwight!
    I know you didn’t want to hear what I had to say..and you thought I was picking on you, but I am really not. People tend to jump the gun and shoot the messenger.

    Dag Gone It …. Get an Attorney!

  36. * Called Wells Fargo Attorney and she did not agree to a continuance.

    * I next called the Judges chambers and spoke to his clerk … told him that I am deeply concerned as to why my hearing was suddenly taken off the calendar after it was already noticed and scheduled.

    * He said that the Judge simply changed his mind and doesn’t feel oral arguments are necessary.

    * I told him that I’m going to have to file an Objection because I feel that I’m being denied my due process .. and that the Courts last minute arbitrary decision to cancel the hearing prevents me from making an adequate and effective record for appeal.

    * The clerk got pissed off and started defending the Judge

    * I also said that I intended to seek a continuance based on newly discovered law that is relevant to my arguments.

    * The clerk was like “whatever”

    * I then said that I am also considering filing a motion to have this Judge removed from this case.

    I ended the conversation by saying “I’ll be down there today to submit all of my papers”.

    Yeah that’s right … I pissed the Judge off , do you really think it makes a difference at this point? He had his mind made up from the start.

  37. ok my fellow friends, what do you feel about this.

    Lender’s Defenses:

    The lender’s can argue today, 1yr from now, 5 years from now, etc… that you have failed to timely exercise the right of rescission and thus, that your notice of rescission does not comply with 15 U.S.C. § 1635(a); accordingly, the lender has no duty to act as directed by 15 U.S.C. § 1635. Again, the 3 yr SOL provided in 15 U.S.C. § 1635 only applies if the borrower did not receive the proper rescission disclosures at closing. Here, W.Marshall signed TILA disclosure forms which the lender can argue limited W.Marshall’s right to rescind to 3 days.

    A close reading of 15 U.S.C. § 1635 reveals that “a rescission” renders the security interest, finance charges, etc. void, not the “notice of rescission.” Your letter to the lender is the “notice of rescission.” Rescission is the result after complete compliance with 15 U.S.C. § 1635 i.e. borrower and lender are placed in their pre-contract position. For example, 15 U.S.C. § 1635(b) says, “[w]ithin 20 days after receipt of a notice of rescission, the creditor shall…” Therefore, the security interest and note remain in place until rescission is complete i.e. the lender and borrow comply with the statutory scheme.

    Given this defense and in light of the acceptance (by email) of your rescission notice, we have concluded that our best course of action is to demand that the lender comply with the rescission statute i.e. that the lender comply with what it claims to have accepted, rescission.

    and do you also feel , that the mortgage and note is voided by operation of law, when the borrower send out his rescission letter?

    as congress and the supreme court say is done. ? As of today, the note and mortgage are not void. “ A rescission” renders the security interest void, not “notice of rescission.”

    by law, only another operation of law ( can over turn a operation of law action, thats has happen ) right? meaning the lender would have to file suit

    within the 20 days, to contest too the courts , that they disagree with the rescission letter they received , and ask the courts to confirm that no violations happen? 15 U.S.C. § 1635 does not require the lender to file suit within 20 days. Rather, the statute directs the lender (after receiving a timely notice of rescission) to return monies, release security interest, etc…Also, if you look at 15 U.S.C. § 1635(b), the reference to “by operation of law” concerns interest that has been incurred by the borrower on its loan by operation of law.

  38. these are the ones that need millions of letters,emails,from us. explaining what all courts are still doing.

    CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU.

    This case concerns the scope of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA). The

    Bureau is the federal agency charged with the responsibility to interpret TILA and

    to promulgate rules to effectuate its purposes. See 12 U.S.C. §§ 5481(12)(O);

    5512(b)(1), (4); 15 U.S.C. § 1604(a); see also 12 C.F.R. part 1026 (interpreting

    and implementing TILA)

    the CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU.

    ( the Bureau ) also has authority to enforce “compliance

    with the requirements” of TILA with respect to any person subject thereto. 15

    U.S.C. § 1607(a)(6). The Bureau accordingly has a substantial interest in the

    Court’s resolution of the issue presented in this case

    Respectfully submitted,

    Dated: April 9, 2015 /s/ Jessica Rank Divine

    Meredith Fuchs

    General Counsel

    To-Quyen Truong

    Deputy General Counsel

    John Coleman

    Assistant General Counsel

    Nandan M. Joshi

    Senior Litigation Counsel

    Jessica Rank Divine

    Litigation Counsel

    Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

    1700 G Street, NW

    Washington, D.C. 20552

    (202) 435-7863 (telephone)

    (202) 435-7024 (facsimile)

    jessica.divine@cfpb.gov

    Counsel for Amicus Curiae

    Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

  39. (tips from Kali)

    If a hearing on a noticed motion was scheduled, then you are being denied due process in the event a robe arbitrarily takes it off calendar and prevents you from making an adequate and effective record for an appeal.

    **Make the objection a separate filing**

    **but it can be filed concurrent with the reply**

    The order of accomplishments:

    (1) First thing in the morning, try to get a stipulation;

    Immediately, try to get a written stipulation from the opposing parties to continue the hearing date (using their own excuse of going away for the holiday), without telling them about the robe’s maneuver. If they’ll agree, then file an ex parte application for a stipulated order to continue the hearing date.

    (2) File the reply on time, within the procedural rules;

    (3) File the objection.

    You must object in writing and enter it into the court record in order to preserve the issue for an appeal. File and serve the objection on the opposing parties, and drop off a courtesy copy at the robe’s chambers.

  40. My reply has not been submitted yet and since it is in a WORD document I can easily delete the parts where I allowed my temper to take over. I can delete the entire opening background section if need be .. what I was attempting to do was to inform the next court how this new Judge took over the case and quickly changed what the original Judge had determined, that it needed to go to trial .. the original judge had set discovery and the trial date … this new judge also dismissed my motion to compel discovery while at the same time he granted the summary judgment. I thought summary judgments only happen after discovery has been accomplished …my hands are tied behind my back

  41. Kalifornia, and the Oregon ruling. what is this case you are saying.

    thank you

  42. @ iwantmynpv & DwightNJ

    It seems that the proposed reply language, as written and posted here, will have the effect of alienating and disgruntling the robe, at minimum.

    I am of the opinion that DwightNJ should seek a stipulation from the opposing parties for a continuance on the hearing, and an extension to file the reply based on newly discovered law, as well as make a good faith offer for the plaintiff to file an amended opposition, followed by his own amended reply.

    The reply, as is written and posted here, will likely tip the scale of injustice further against DwightNJ; sad to say.

  43. Can someone please tell Dwight to get an attorney. Suggesting a Judge does not understand foreclosure law is not going to get you very far. Using more generalized terms such as; “the Court misapprehended the law”, or “the facts gleaned from the MSJ do not support”. Claiming that a Judge is not competent to read your case, apprehend the facts, and apply the laws of the State of NJ, is a loser before the ink drys.

    Every Judge understands the law… how’s it applied by the Court is the true problem.

  44. @ DwightNJ

    Request the court take judicial notice (“RJN”) of Jesinoski and the Oregon ruling, then attach a copy of each one as an exhibit to the RJN.

    Cite the authorities and apply the legal reasoning language from the Oregon ruling, and insert it into your reply.

    Also, on the request from the opposition for a stipulated continuance, consider including a statement of additional time for you to file the reply based upon newly discovered dispositive law requiring a complete restructuring, and offer them the opportunity to amend their opposition to the motion to vacate.

  45. Thought crossed my mind to include OR case. Around p 13 it includes law professor study on hostility frpm courts if u want to go there. Around p18 talks about sale not final if not legal. My thoughts see if u can apply.

  46. (From my reply papers that will be submitted tomorrow, I still need to add my TILA rescission argument, even though I have argued it every step of the way … Should I include the recent case in Oregon?)

    LEGAL ARGUMENT

    Response to Plaintiff’s Point 1 (The motion for reconsideration is untimely).

    In Lombardi v. Masso, 207 N.J. 517, 25 A.3d 1080 (2011), the Supreme Court held although a party who obtained summary judgment may believe he is absolutely free of the litigation. It is a contradiction in terms to say that an interlocutory decree should be a finality; the policy that litigation must have an end is not threatened in such a case, because litigation has not yet terminated. Trial courts have the inherent power, to be exercised in its sound discretion, to review, revise, reconsider, and modify its interlocutory orders at any time prior to the entry of final judgment. Interlocutory orders are always subject to revision in the interests of justice. Furthermore, on November 6, 2015, the Court entered an order allowing Plaintiffs to amend the Complaint.

    Response to Plaintiff’s Point 2 (There is no basis reconsideration).
    The Court erred when it overlooked the Doepp Certification. She says, “Based upon my review of that record, Wells Fargo was in physical possession of the Note on May 9, 2014, the date the Complaint for Foreclosure was filed, and prior thereto.” She also says, Defendants defaulted by failing to make the payment due July 1, 2007, but then says the loan is due the October 1, 2007 payment. And as our Motion to Vacate has already pointed out, Plaintiff has failed to submit a payment history with an accurate accounting to show the payments made up to the point of the alleged default, and to point out exactly when the alleged default occurred. The Doepp certification contradicts its own recitation of this critical issue of payments and alleged default upon which the court relied in granting the Plaintiff summary judgment, which constitutes an error by the court. Doepp did not attach the computer records to her certification that she was referring to, which makes her statements hearsay. Doepp also failed to submit a certification from Fannie Mae’s custodian stating the day it delivered the Note to Plaintiff. The note was endorsed at the origination “Pay to the order of Washington Mutual Bank” and sold to the now defunct bank. Defendants paid their monthly mortgage payments to Washington Mutual Bank from the point of the closing in 2004, up through 2007 when Wells Fargo allegedly took over as “Servicer” of the loan. Washington Mutual Bank went out of business in September of 2008. It’s both interesting and troubling to point out that the Plaintiff and mere Servicer of the loan, Wells Fargo Bank, suddenly recorded a forged, fraudulent, fabricated and back-dated Assignment of Mortgage in October of 2008, one month after Washington Mutual Bank went out of business. Defendants assert that it is undisputed that the last truly known “Holder in Due Course” as evidenced by the note, was Washington Mutual Bank. And it is undisputed that the record reflects that the Plaintiff suddenly recorded the assignment a full month after the last known owner of the subject loan went out of business, but back-dated the assignment to make it appear that it had been created a year earlier and never recorded, which raises serious questions as to credibility.

    Response to Plaintiff’s Point 2A (The Complaint was filed within the statue of limitations.).

    The governing authorities are clear. Under New Jersey law, the enforcement of a promissory note that is secured by a mortgage is governed by the UCC. The Note, at issue here, made payable to Commerce bank, providing for interest and an unconditional promise to pay the lender, is a “negotiable instrument” under the New Jersey UCC, which defines a negotiable instrument as “an unconditional promise or order to pay a fixed amount of money, with or without interest or other charges described in the promise or order, if it: (1) is payable to bearer or to order at the time it is issued or first comes into possession of a holder; (2) is payable on demand or at a definite time.” In re Kemp, 440 B.R. 624, 630 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2010) citing N.J.S.A. 12A:3–104. Also see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Ford, 418 N.J. Super. 592, 597, 15 A.3d 327, 330 (App. Div. 2011) (held: If a debt is evidenced by a negotiable instrument, such as the note executed by the defendant, the answer to this question is governed by Article III of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), N.J.S.A. 12A:3–101 to –605, in particular, N.J.S.A. 12A:3–301. Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co. v. Mitchell, 422 N.J. Super. 214, 222-23, 27 A.3d 1229, 1235 (App. Div. 2011) (held: Article III of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), N.J.S.A. 12A:3–101 to –605, governs the transfer of a negotiable instrument. N.J.S.A. 12A:3–301 is the provision of the UCC that addresses who may enforce negotiable instruments.). Bank of New York v. Raftogianis, 418 N.J. Super. 323, 328, 13 A.3d 435, 438 (Ch. Div. 2010) (held: Negotiable instruments, which include negotiable notes, are governed by Article 3 of the UCC, codified in this state as N.J.S.A. 12A:3–101–605.). Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co. v. Russo, 429 N.J. Super. 91, 57 A.3d 18 (App. Div. 2012) (held: Trustee had a legal right to enforce a promissory note against mortgagors under New Jersey’s version of the section of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) on persons entitled to enforce an instrument; trustee obtained a valid assignment of the mortgage, albeit some months after it filed its foreclosure complaint. N.J.S.A. 12A:3–301.). Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 12A:3-118(a), an action to enforce the obligation of a party to pay a note payable at a definite time must be commenced within six years after the due date or dates stated in the note or if a due date is accelerated, within six years after the accelerated due date. Here, Plaintiff cites N.J.S.A. 2A:50-56.1, which does not govern a promissory note that is secured by a mortgage.

    Response to Plaintiff’s Point 2B (Defendants’ defenses based upon the Assignment of Mortgage were properly dismissed.).

    Here, the Court overlooked the language of the Assignment and the evidence (Fannie Mae’s website). The Assignment misrepresents that a transaction took place; Plaintiff paid a sum of money to obtain the rights in the Note and Mortgage. Plaintiff has no evidence to support such transaction took place. Fannie Mae states it is still the owner of the Note and Mortgage. The servicer cannot be the lender. See US Bank Nat. Ass’n v. Guillaume, 209 N.J. 449, 38 A.3d 570 (2012) (held: Notice of intention to foreclose that substitutes the loan servicer for the lender does not achieve substantial compliance with Fair Foreclosure Act’s requirement that a notice of intention include the name and address of the actual lender. N.J.S.A. 2A:50–56(c)(11).). Plaintiff cannot use a forged Assignment as a bono-side Assignment. Under a forged assignment of a bill, the assignee can acquire no legal right of action. McCausland v. Drake, 3 Stew. 344, 351 (1831). There was no intent to transfer the rights to Plaintiff; therefore, the Assignment is invalid.

    Response to Plaintiff’s Point 2C (Wells Fargo has standing because it holds the Note and has an Assignment of Mortgage that predates the filing of the Complaint.).

    Defendants repeat and affirm all responses set forth hereabove, as if more fully at length herein.

    Response to Plaintiff’s Point 2D (The Court properly found the Doepp Certification was competent and admissible.).

    Defendants repeat and affirm all responses set forth hereabove, as if more fully at length herein.

    Response to Plaintiff’s Point 2E (The Notices of Intention to Foreclose complied with the Fair Foreclosure Act.).

    Defendants repeat and affirm all responses set forth hereabove, as if more fully at length herein.

    Response to Plaintiff’s Point 2F (Defendants are in default.).

    Defendants repeat and affirm all responses set forth hereabove, as if more fully at length herein.

    CONCLUSION
    For the reasons mention hereinabove, Defendants request this Court to grant this motion to vacate the previous orders, as it just recently granted Plaintiffs their motion to file an amended Complaint on November 6, 2015.

  47. (From my reply to the plaintiffs opposition to my motion to vacate)

    Background to what led up to the Courts Errors in Granting of Summary Judgment

    The Court committed multiple errors in its adjudication and decision in granting of the Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, which took place on March 20, 2015. The Court was arbitrary and capricious in how it arrived at its decision granting the Plaintiff Summary Judgment. The Courts decision was clearly unreasonable when it blatantly and defiantly rejected the unanimous Supreme Court of the United States decision in “Jesinoski”, in which the highest Court in the land clearly explained that the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) rescission is effective upon the mailing of the letter by the borrower, and that the rescission happens by operation of Federal law, voiding the note and mortgage, further explaining that the old common law principals of rescission which are normally used by Courts do not apply to the TILA rescission and are not to be used by the lower Courts. Yet the Court here in the instant matter did exactly what the Supreme Court of the United States said not to do, when the Court in the instant matter defiantly ignored the highest Court in the land by applying common law rescission principals anyway, which constitutes an error upon which it granted the Plaintiff an unjust summary judgment, with full knowledge that it was disregarding the law of the case, the law of the land and the highest Court in the land. When a Judge shows such a defiant and blatant disregard towards a unanimous United States Supreme Court decision, it then raises questions about whether this Judge is fit for duty and meets the standards set for his position as a State Superior Court Judge in New Jersey. It is important to point out that this Judge just took over the bench in the Chancery Division when he granted the wrongful summary judgment, after the previous Judge had just retired only 20 days prior to this travesty of justice. This new Judge on the bench was about to hear oral arguments on Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, his very first exposure to the instant matter, and yet he already had a pre-written decision ready before hearing any arguments. It is shocking and troubling that the Court apparently had its mind made up before hearing from the Defendant at the oral arguments hearing regarding a recent United States Supreme Court decision which is controlling authority on one of the issues to be argued.

    The case was being handled from its inception by a different Judge, the original Judge who had sat on the Chancery bench for many years, and who had already determined that this case needed to go to trial due to his being familiar with the issues of the instant matter from a prior litigation. Unfortunately that original Judge, Judge Buczynski, retired from the bench at the end of April 2015. The new Judge , Judge Hodgson, took over the bench on or about March 1, 2015 and 20 days later he quickly disposed of the instant matter by granting summary judgment in favor of the Plaintiff.

    Before retiring, Judge Buczynski had already determined that this case needed to go to trial on the standing issue, among other things, which the record reflects in the Court transcripts of the hearings over which he presided in the instant matter, he had set discovery and a trial date and stated on the record on at least two separate occasions to the Defendant, “Don’t worry because this case is going to trial”, and that’s right on the record. . He was very familiar with all of the issues in this case because he sat on the bench during this Plaintiffs first foreclosure case with the same Defendants when the Plaintiffs accelerated the Note in 2007 and filed their first foreclosure complaint. There were two different notes submitted and certified to in that case, the first note certified to as a true and accurate copy of the note was missing the stamped endorsement in blank by the previous owner of the Note, Washington Mutual Bank, and when Judge Buczynski inquired about it, the same Plaintiff, Wells Fargo, requested an adjournment. The Plaintiffs eventually came back with a second version of the note in late 2010, it suddenly had a stamped endorsement in blank added to the note by the last known holder in due course, Washington Mutual Bank. The problem was that Washington Mutual Bank had already been out of business for two years at that point. Washington Mutual Bank had failed and went out of business in September of 2008. The Plaintiff only produced the note with the stamp added in late 2010, two years after Washington Mutual had already been out of business. It was also troubling that the Plaintiff had only recorded their fraudulent, fabricated, forged assignment in the Ocean County land records office in October of 2008, which was also AFTER Washington Mutual had already went out of business. It raised red flags and gave the appearance that they were attempting to fraudulently create a perfected chain of title after the fact. The new note that they came back into court with had no date on the blank endorsement stamp, no record of when it was transferred or negotiated. The problem was that when Washington Mutual went under, they may not have ever actually sold this note, along with many others, that had gotten caught in limbo when the bank failed. Some of their assets were recovered by Chase Bank, but some went down with the bank and will never be recoverable because those notes were part of Fannie Mae investments, but were never sold to Fannie Mae. Fannie Mae may have only had a computer image of the original note from the closing, but never had the stamped, endorsed in blank note from Washington Mutual Bank. This would explain why Fannie Mae did not file the foreclosure complaint in their own name, and why the servicer Wells Fargo Bank acted as Plaintiff and submitted the computer copy of the note which had no stamped endorsement in blank added by Washington Mutual Bank. The real note doesn’t exist. The Plaintiff is relying on the presumptions of the court to believe their suspect documents and to accept them at face value. This is what caused the State of New Jersey to become involved, because it was a threat to the integrity of the judicial system if it was not addressed and stopped.
    The Defendants reached out to the FDIC who conducted an investigation into their loan, and the FDIC determined that the Defendants loan was not one of the loans that Chase received. The issue of standing is the bedrock foundation to establishing a foreclosure case. While it is true that presumptions have been allowed by the Courts in favor of the banks for many years, it is also true that in 2010 the State of New Jersey addressed the problem of faulty, fabricated mortgage documents being submitted into foreclosure cases, they had become a problem and needed to be addressed. Chief Justice Rabner spoke to the media and assured the citizens that the courts would take all necessary steps to fix the problems in the foreclosure cases. Judge Mary Jacobson issued a Show Cause Order and the state suspended foreclosure cases. The documents in the instant case are the “Poster Child” of what the State of New Jersey was attempting to remove from its court rooms. It constitutes all of what is deemed wrong by the State of New Jersey. Judge Buczynski knew the issues and the problems with the Plaintiffs case, he ordered a Plenary hearing so that he could put a witness on the stand under oath and have them testify about the discrepancies and other issues that raised concern. This same Plaintiff dragged it out for a year requesting adjournments, until finally in November of 2011, Plaintiff Wells Fargo rejected the Courts wishes and instead requested that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice.
    Now when this same Plaintiff came back and filed this new complaint in 2014, the same Judge Buczynski was sitting on the bench. He remembered how they had wasted the time and resources of the court last time, and he looked at me and promised me that “this case is going to trial”.
    And that’s right on the record, at least twice during different hearings the court record reflects him reassuring me that “this case is going to trial, mainly standing, but you’re going to get a full trial”.
    When Judge Buczynski retired late April of 2015, Judge Hodgson took over March of 2015. And 20 days later, on March 20, 2015, the new Judge who took over and who was completely unfamiliar with the issues of this case, and the complex issues that the Defendant was raising in general. Judge Hodgson was just starting to hear foreclosure cases and was not familiar with the complex issues of mortgages, UCC, New Jersey Statutes that govern accelerated notes, TILA rescission under the Federal Truth in Lending Act, the United States Supreme Court decision in Jesinoski which dealt with TILA rescissions, etc. This new Judge on the case, Judge Hodgson, showed a complete lack of competence, a bias against the Defendants, a total disregard for the unanimous Supreme Court of the United States, a total disdain towards the Federal Truth in Lending Act by equating the Federal law which protects consumers to that of “getting a free house”, he disregarded everything in the case relating to the disputed issues of material fact, and just grants the Plaintiff summary judgment as if nothing in his court room matters other than him clearing off his docket of all these foreclosure cases. Judge Hodgson’s attitude was like “what are you going to do about it?”

    The Defendants hereby request that the Summary Judgment be vacated and the complaint be dismissed with prejudice.

    Defendant will reply below to the Plaintiffs opposition, recite some of the reasons for relief and also point out the errors of the Court.

  48. Okay …Will have to do all of this tomorrow …what should I write in my official objection that I will file as a seperate filing (this is not a motion, just an objection written out) …do I object by explaining the phone call I had with the court and attorney ..tell the whole story?

    Kali …thanks , will follow your tips in that order

    Michael.. I will call you tomorrow, thank you brother

  49. @ DwightNJ

    Your reply may be the last opportunity to inject into the record any evidence in support of your case at the trial court level before appeal, so pack in what you must in order to preserve the issue for appeal.

    Also, if you can not get a stipulation from the opposition, then give them notice that you will file an ex parte application for an order continuing the hearing date and include in your declaration in support of the ex parte application that you contacted the opposition (time/date) and they refused to stipulate to continue the hearing.

    Another serious consideration: a noticed motion to disqualify the robe from further involvement on your case. In Kalifornia, the procedure is named a peremptory challenge. NJ should have something similar.

  50. Who would have ever imagined there would be people called ENTITLEMENT PEOPLE who would use CELL PHONES to mask the LONE RANGER is spying unlawfully for U.S. COUNTERINTELLIGENCE?

    Would GEORGE WASHINGTON want to foot the blame for PARASITES GONE WILD?

  51. @DwightNJ,

    Please contact me.

    mikekeane@optonline.net.

    Or call me: 908-489-8496.

    I am in NJ.

  52. Kalifornia. ..Re: Dwight…

    Now you’re cooking! This is how we can really help each other…

  53. Gobble, gobble their turkey triptophaned over its own cooked goose.

    Because contemporaneously, felony fraud does not fly on its own recognizance because it’s tripping on its own counterfeits.

    They’re master super flies honey bunch, & their drones can’t hide that either.

  54. @ DwightNJ

    Make the objection a separate filing, but it can be filed concurrent with the reply.

    The order of accomplishments:

    (1) First thing in the morning, try to get a stipulation;

    (2) File the reply on time, within the procedural rules;

    (3) File the objection.

  55. @ DwightNJ

    (1) If a hearing on a noticed motion was scheduled, then you are being denied due process in the event a robe arbitrarily takes it off calendar and prevents you from making an adequate and effective record for an appeal.

    (2) You must object in writing and enter it into the court record in order to preserve the issue for an appeal. File and serve the objection on the opposing parties, and drop off a courtesy copy at the robe’s chambers.

    (3) Immediately, try to get a written stipulation from the opposing parties to continue the hearing date (using their own excuse of going away for the holiday), without telling them about the robe’s maneuver. If they’ll agree, then file an ex parte application for a stipulated order to continue the hearing date.

  56. So just to be clear …you are saying I should write my objection to how this hearing was cancelled at the last minute and go to the Court house and have it stamped “filed” with the rest of my reply papers?

    And in New Jersey we also have to send a copy of everything to State office of foreclosure in Trenton who enters it into the computer record of the case records.

    Just include a written objection with the rest of my reply papers?

    So that the appeals court can see the travesty of this judges court room

  57. spoken words at oral are typed into the 2 dimensional record and are stripped of their real-world character

    no appeals court listens to the 3D audio recording

  58. still – Dwight may have a legal recovery if he submits an affidavit of mistake (error) – since he is pro se and there is a lower standard

  59. oral is a joke
    its a legal term
    viva voce’ is real

  60. never said this…
    As to shitting in rooms etc don’t know wth Greg is talking about.

  61. But be aware of any specific time frames for objecting etc.

  62. I agree object on the record and review rules for options. Writing’s on the wall they’re in cahoots so judge will probably be dismissive about anything u say about lawyer think of that Detroit mayor who went out for pizza instead of taking time for homeowners losing their homes. IMO Be patient and let them keep hanging themselves but CYA. As to shitting in rooms etc don’t know wth Greg is talking about.

  63. phone calls are 3 dimensional

    the court is 2 dimensional

    get it?

  64. everything in writing Dwight… phone calls never happened…

  65. Dwight – you know what to do – do it

    Machen Sie es!

  66. Should I call the judges chambers tomorrow and tell them about the phone conversation I had with the plaintiffs attorney where she was complaining about having plans to go away?

    Do I let them know that I want to object to this cancellation of my hearing because it is obviously based on that attorney going behind my back and convincing the court to cancel my hearing?

    An investigation would reveal the phone records of which I’m sure would show that she called the court either Friday or early Monday.

    Is this considered a violation of the judges ethics cannon codes?

  67. The Judge had already granted me oral arguments ..and then he got sick and adjourned …and now the week of the hearing he cancels it?

    Obviously because the Wells Fargo attorney called and pitched her vacation plans …

    And this is the girl the judge winked at from the bench as he granted her the summary judgment … And I know he had an ex parte plan with her before that hearing because he already had his decision prepared before the hearing and read it from the bench ..but it included things in it that he would not have known before the hearing..like when she stated during the hearing that they have signed acknowledgments , and he had his decision crafted to defeat my TILA rescission with her help no doubt about it ..

    So I have a major problem here …now I’m going to have to file a formal complaint with the office of judicial ethics … What else can I do?

    This judge is on a mission and vendetta to destroy my case.

  68. I know the Wells Fargo attorney is behind having the oral arguments hearing cancelled …because I spoke to her on the phone Friday and she was complaining to me that she had plans to leave town for the Thanksgiving holidays …she forgot we even had a hearing Friday … I had called the court earlier to let them know that I was submitting reply papers to her opposition papers this week, the clerk told me that was okay …as long as I give a couple days prior to hearing so judge can read them… I called WF to let them know I was sending them my reply ..thats when the nasty woman started kissing and moaning saying she had plans to leave town.

    How do I make a big objection about this bullshit?

  69. and everyone in the room still wants to be dead and not alive….

  70. hammer

    so if you don’t get oral – it will come down to how shitty you wrote your paper

  71. elaine

    we’re already there – glad you found it

    hammer

    by what action and by whom has oral argument been cancelled – object on the record

    my guess is lawyer for bank did an “in chambers” sales pitch and got it without your ability to rebut

  72. As some of you might recall, my oral argument hearing on my motion to vacate the summary judgment and dismiss the complaint is set for this coming Friday morning 9:00 a.m.

    The Clerk from the Judges chambers just called me this morning at 9:00 a.m. .. to inform me that the oral arguments hearing that was scheduled for Friday has been taken off the calendar, the Judge will decide the motion on the papers.

    I was looking so forward to making him bury himself on the record in regards to my TILA rescission that he disregarded while granting Wells Fargo their summary judgment ..

    Now he doesn’t have anything to say on the record , does he?

    He knows I have him in a corner with my foot on his neck.

    He wants none of this on a court transcript anymore. Pisses me off.

  73. Alrightt then. After 10 yrs everybody gets it except thosr covering up as Garfield’s post says and truth is hitting the courts. Those fretting over apocalypse or some secret form or process that solves everything will be left out in the cold.

  74. Dashing through the snow in their one horse open PLOUGH SHARE is the FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD OF GOVERNORS.

  75. The WALL STREET TITLE SWAPPERS figured their TSUNAMI OF FELONY FRAUD would overwhelm us to death.

  76. We still do not get discovery. Discovery the proper way would blow all of this out of the water. It would have blown it out of the water eight years ago.

  77. Oh…They are Waking Up & Realizing they were Robbed.

    I’m not an Attorney….
    Fried Chicken is on the Menu again!!!

    Lies, Deceit and Greed!

    My Cookie Jars

  78. Specific question that should be explained within the thread or could be misleading to others.

  79. hammer

    SC has been talking about this for a long time
    1) Bank
    2) County
    go listen to Thursday’s Talkshoe #139335 – it is explained…

  80. SC what do u mean second party shows up in court room? Isn’t purported debt unsecured if fc failed? After all this are u presuming “receivable” is valid?

  81. There is No Exit Door from MERS! GET IT?

  82. Hence ..when one party with the off record recievqble fails at a Judicial foreclosure for lack of standing …
    The 2nd party with a recieveable shows up as a trust…advances.

    You are facing 2 separate parties in the courtrooms .

  83. OMG wabbits evwy where lol!

  84. Must file conveyances. ….
    Before reconveyance .

    That’s where the Rubber Meets the White Out.
    Just Saying…..

  85. Lien Released….2012
    Its the conveyance and reconvayence that burns my Biskets!

  86. Shadowcat, on November 16, 2015 at 3:16 pm said:

    Complaint for Cancellation Of Written Instrument

    maybe it should say…
    Nature Of Action
    This action is brought seeking a CONFIRMATION OF release of lien(s) AND ESCROW; EFFECTIVE AS OF XX/XX/XXXX; and THE reconveyance AND QUIETING OF TITLE; in addition to any and all damages FOR PLAINTIFF(S); against Defendants .

  87. TARP that!

    Many Blessings to All!

  88. Enforcement of the 1989 FIRREA Act. 12 U.S. C. 1833a

  89. Complaint for Cancellation Of Written Instrument

    Nature Of Action
    This action is brought seeking a release of liens and reconveyance in addition to any and all damages against Defendants .

  90. here is the letter i just sent to cook county Sheriff Tom Dart
    ————————-
    Dear Tom:

    important federal case for you to know
    this, (PAALATO) combined with SCOTUS/Jesinoski, will represent the unwinding of many foreclosure cases in cook county as VOID, not voidable – for judges’ failure to recognize or enforce homeowners’ TILA rescission and plaintiffs’ lawyers pursuing foreclosure cases to the end without informing the court of loss of subject matter jurisdiction, and never filing a motion or case for declaratory judgment challenging the rescission…
    homeowners were never required to file an action in court (including using it as an affirmative defense) – the TILA statute allows the mailing of the letter to cause rescission to occur automatically, as an operation of federal law…
    many titles will be found to have been slandered…
    many homeowners have been wrongly evicted
    many homeowners have standing to sue the plaintiffs and the courts
    cook county judges must stop acting like they have blinders on and pretending that the will of congress and the rendering of the US Supreme Court does not apply to them (treason? rebellion? misprision of felony?)
    SCOTUS determined that on this matter, the courts did not and have no discretion to interpret
    i’m counting on you, as our sheriff and a trained lawyer, to see what this means, enforce the law upon the various court actors, and help with appropriate action/lack of action if you are demanded to do evictions on wrongful foreclosures and sales

    at your service…

    thank you
    greg

  91. i wonder if the STATE OF CALIFORNIA could claim to be a homeowner/borrower/consumer of commercial credit and do a TILA rescission on its loans secured by the land of California, upon which it lives?

  92. In CA court found Gov Brown must replace $300 mil that were used for state budget. Another case of words matter as with TILA. State tried to claim they lawfully used funds since there was an “or” thrown in the requirement to provide relied for harm done or something along those lines. Court basically told state what they were full of and could not ignore purpose of settlements.

  93. @java nailed it!

  94. Can you see me now?
    Not Croaked Yet!

    TIC ROS

  95. Very Good Greg!
    They sold us and them two different contracts.
    Of course the originals must be destroyed.

    Enforce the Unenforceable Contract?

  96. your birth certificate was used to create a decedent estate so that your value/essence could be treated as a dead like other corporations… you never showed up to deny this and prove you are alive – you are literally “the walking dead” in the legal system – that is why they want you to have a lawyer OR admit PRO SE (which is self-lawyering)… the dead cannot speak for themselves and the living cannot be heard in these courts…

  97. A probate action is nothing more than a legal proceeding by which the personal and real property of an individual who has died (the “decedent”) is disposed of between creditors, heirs and/or beneficiaries.
    Ruth Law Firm – Frequent Probate Law Questions
    http://www.ruthlaw.com/probate_ques.htm

  98. Foreclosure is no different than burning the murdered body in a car. To cover all the evidence.
    I can’t believe we are still talking about this fraud 7 years later.

  99. Ok
    Greg I’ll be the first one to ask- what’s a probate action. And how is it different? Thx

  100. welcome back Neil! mend quickly – we need ya!😉

  101. also consider the possibility that each foreclosure action is a probate action not breach of contract action

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: