Fl 2d DCA Says No to Musical Chairs

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

This is for general information only. Get a lawyer.

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

see 2D14-1137-1

The game has been obvious to everyone. Until recently, it seemed that the courts considered it irrelevant. But decisions over the last couple of years have shown that the courts are increasingly disturbed by the”musical chairs” game being played by the banks. Why are they doing this? Why do we have changing trustees, changing plaintiffs, changing servicers? IN private many judges and even Chief Judges have said to me that this is the most disturbing part of the whole foreclosure mess. They understand that this is probably an attempt to avoid detection. They want to know what the banks are hiding.

The second DCA in Florida recently ruled on the issue reversing the trial court who chose to ignore the basic principle underlying lawsuits, assignments and any other kind of legal action — you can’t assert rights that the original party did not have. If the Assignor had nothing, then you have nothing. No more and no less. If the Trustee is a the Trustee of an empty trust, then the trustee has nothing. If the servicer claims to have powers derived from the empty trust then it has nothing. And now if the original Plaintiff in an action had nothing, then the new Plaintiff also has nothing. Nothing plus nothing equals nothing.

Another interesting aspect to the opinion is that the burden shifts to the foreclosing party if the homeowner asserts a lack of standing as a defense. It isn’t up to the homeowner to prove that — it is up to the foreclosing party to prove its right to be in court or to otherwise initiate foreclosure.

Where, as here, the defendant asserts a lack of standing as a defense to foreclosure, it is incumbent upon the plaintiff to prove its standing at trial. Gonzalez v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., 95 So. 3d 251, 253-54 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). This requires the plaintiff to show that it is the “holder” of the note or a person acting on behalf of the holder. Mortg. Elec. Regis. Sys., Inc. v. Azize, 965 So. 2d 151, 153 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). If the plaintiff is not the original lender, it may establish its standing as a holder “by submitting a note with a blank or special endorsement, an assignment of the note, or [with a sworn statement] otherwise proving the plaintiff’s status as the holder of the note.” Focht v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 124 So. 3d 308, 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (citing McLean v. JP Morgan Chase Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 79 So. 3d 170, 173 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)). A plaintiff that is not a holder, such as a mortgage servicer, can establish standing through proof that it is authorized to enforce the note on behalf of the holder. Russell v. Aurora Loan Servs., LLC, 163 So. 3d 639, 642-43 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015).

It does appear that the courts are getting less concerned with a “free house” (a myth) and more concerned with the truth.

51 Responses

  1. There is no way to legitimize their COUNTERFEITS no matter how many contrivences get contrived.

    There is clearly unlawful conflict of issues when more & more things keep being made up.

    How many more things can they dream up before people start suing them for DEFAMATION OF TITLE?

  2. Isolation beyond the Reach of the Transferor and Its Creditors ………………………… 27−28

    Securitizations ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 73−84 Revolving-Period Securitizations…………………………………………………………….. 77−79 Isolation of Transferred Assets in Securitizations………………………………………. 80−84

    83. Still other securitizations use two transfers intended to isolate transferred assets beyond the reach of the transferor and its creditors, even in bankruptcy. In those “two-step” structures: a. First, the corporation transfers financial assets to a special-purpose corporation that, although wholly owned, is so designed that the possibility that the transferor or its creditors could reclaim the assets is remote. This first transfer is designed to be judged to be a true sale at law, in part because the transferor does not provide “excessive” credit or yield protection to the special-purpose corporation, and the Board understands that transferred assets are likely to be judged beyond the reach of the transferor or the transferor’s creditors even in bankruptcy. b. Second, the special-purpose corporation transfers the assets to a trust or other legal vehicle with a sufficient increase in the credit or yield protection on the second transfer (provided by a junior retained beneficial interest or other means) to merit the high credit rating sought by third-party investors who buy senior beneficial interests in the trust. Because of that aspect of its design, that second transfer might not be judged to be a true sale at law and, thus, the transferred assets could at least in theory be reached by a bankruptcy trustee for the special-purpose corporation. c. However, the special-purpose corporation is designed to make remote the possibility that it would enter bankruptcy, either by itself or by substantive consolidation into a bankruptcy of its parent should that occur. For example, its charter forbids it from undertaking any other business or incurring any liabilities, so that there can be no creditors to petition to place it in bankruptcy. Furthermore, its dedication to a single purpose is intended to make it extremely unlikely, even if it somehow entered bankruptcy, that a receiver under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code could reclaim the transferred assets because it has no other assets to substitute for the transferred assets. The Board understands that the “two-step” securitizations described above, taken as a whole, generally would be judged under present U.S. law as having isolated the assets beyond the reach of the transferor and its creditors, even in bankruptcy or other receivership.

  3. Happy Thanksgiving Neil & everyone!

  4. you all need to read all , pages and rules as of 2000. these rules were in affect as all these crap happen, wasn’t changed until 2009

    Statement of
    Financial Accounting
    Standards No. 140
    FAS140 Status Page
    FAS140 Summary
    Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial
    Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities
    (a replacement of FASB Statement No. 125)
    September 2000

  5. so if banks can come into court with copy’s, why not the consumers ,

    I hold a true copy of note, stating that am the holder of the note your honor. and mine is sign and dated, not a stamp and not in blank.

    and oh my friend has the same one, and his friend has the same one, gee how many of these are out there , your honor?

    that’s all we are saying. a copy of a check is fraud, you would go to jail trying to cash it. so this is the same thing.

    so your honor , who has the real blue ink, note. and by the way we will want to test the paper to make sure it was from that year. and not copy of the note and forged in blue ink.

    all note signed in 2004 2005 have a hidden date stamp on them. as to when the paper was made.

  6. OBAMA said maybe we should shutdown WALL STREET.

    That would mean he would be impeaching himself.

    FRAUDCLOSURE is SACRIMONEOUS PLUTOMONY by the PLUTOCRATS who think we should believe DEBT FRAUD is one life long marriage to them.

    I never married that RELIGIOUS PERSECUTOR who thinks “the lie is sacred” & worships VLADIMIR LENIN.

  7. That is the evil endgame plan of SUBJECTIVE THEORY – SUBJECT THE VICTIM BY SUBJORNING PERJURY – then mutilate the remains.

    Moreover, the SUBJECTIVE REASONING PLATFORM they’re using in the COURTROOMS is BEARING FALSE WITNESS by COVETING.

    .

  8. MAX KEISER said “they” will probably GAS THE PEOPLE IN THEIR HOMES if they can’t FRAUDCLOSE.

    To that I say, the SUBJOGATORS would rather make the people have STROKES or HEART ATTACKS from their incessant unlawful HARRASSMENT of us, the ones who they robbed.

    That way, they can mutilate what’s left by their forced SUBJUGATION.

  9. CORPORATE RAIDERS never say what they really want.

    For instance, when CHASE CEO JAMIE DIMON was on one of the financial channels & said – let me tell you what we do do. However, he never said they FINANCE CRIMINAL FRAUD & by doing so, SUBJOGATE the innocent to their crimes.

    Or LLOYD BLANKFEIN saying he does GODS WORK but doesn’t say what that work entails.

    Or MAURICE GREENBURG saying women should lick lots of envelopes.

    That is the type of sqwack that is used to SUBJOGATE the innocent because it’s rhetoric that is immaterial & therefore, immoral.

  10. More thsn likely you won’t ever discover what those factless baseless non-conformists might want to do on your PRIVATE PROPERTY or in your PRIVATE RESIDENCE or both, behind your back.

    They might want to have panty raids with their strip club employees & indulge themselves in their own brand of CORPORATE RAIDING from under your roof.

  11. So when you’re unlawfully served their FRAUDCLOSURE COMPLAINT, the odds makers up on WALL STREET have sent their BOOKIES to SOLICIT the ODDS they can FABRICATE FALSE INNUENDO & use that to evidence they’re FRAUD RACKETEERS of FRAUD IN THE ESSENCE.

  12. What do we make of those REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT CONDUITS of MORTGAGE FRAUD?

    They’re TAX FRAUD by the CORPORATE IDENTITY THIEVES & those land in MERSICOPIA, where CORPORATE FRAUD goes to TAX EVADE, CHEAT & LIE by FRAUDULENT TITLE TRANSFERS.

  13. The ARM scam was false imposition by the TAX EVADERS who like to exaggerate the value of the valueless AKA PRE-PRICED MARKET DEVALUATION.

    They suggested their victims step in the QUICKSAND they poured & named it the ARM.

  14. The end result of their blended ideologies is MAOIST & FRAUDCLOSURE is the nod to it.

    Why do these unknown parties get $60 TRILLION+ in unlawful bailouts & then get to criminally harass the victims of their self imposed victimization of our LEGAL RIGHT to hold our LEGAL TITLES in our own names?

    It’s MAOISM & it’s based upon UNLAWFUL SEARCH & SEIZURE of our PRIVACY RIGHTS with MALICIOUS MALINTENT to DECEIVE.

  15. ARMs. Libor.

  16. Purchase Reverse Mortgage?
    Reverse Mortgage HELOC?

  17. Trespass Unwanted, Very Intreaging case .
    RMHELOCARM

  18. Political CENTRISM is based upon TAOIST, MARXIST, LENINIST ideologies that FABRICATION is how to create TOTALITARIANISM by its own LAWLESSNESS, it intends to create by dictating its own LIES to cause chaos.

    The fake MONARCHS dictate LIES by FABRICATING the truth & the U.S. is no CENTRIST POLITICAL MONARCHY no matter what the OBAMA ADMINISTRATION thinks.

  19. To those who say you can go buy some other property, their SUBJOGATING LIES for the criminal elite.

    They’re the criminals who want to criminalize us for their own unlawful BUY HERE, PAY HERE, PAY TO PLAY GLOBLIST SCAM of our wealth.

    It’s CHICAGO STYLE HOT AIR POLITICS by MAFIA GANGSTERS who want to unlawfully TITLE STRIP everyones LEGAL RIGHTS to their own TITLES.

    You wont ever get TITLE in your name once they steal it. That’s why I sent the DEMAND FOR PAYMENT LETTER to the POLITICAL SURREALISTS & that was woefully & wrongfully ignored by the POLITICAL CENTRISTS who create & control their own crime scenes in these UNITED STATES.

  20. Moreover, because of the ORIGINATION FRAUD, the imposters; fictitious payees have our wealth locked up.

    Therefore, that’s what they’re using AKA “SPREAD THE WEALTH AROUND,” to subjogate us, to be used to try to cover the ORIGINATION FRAUD up by them.

    Gobble, gobble, it’s one big fat unlawful, CRIMINAL SUBJOGATION of WE THE PEOPLE, by the WALL STREET AGENDA 21 GLOBALISTS to unlawfully swap out our U.S. SOVEREIGNTY.

  21. The criminal interest is in dishonor & in default because of the ORIGINATION FRAUD.

    That is the MIND CONTROL part of the coverup they want to hide.

    What did you see in that room?

    You saw imposters, & that’s what they don’t want revealed.

  22. Well done, Dwight. Like the serpent part.

  23. Since Neil blogged and old case,

    http://cases.justia.com/texas/supreme-court/2014-13-0638.pdf?ts=1400249966

    Constitutionality of a loan modification in Texas state

    Sims v. Carrington Mortgage Servs., LLC (Opinion)
    (Texas – 2014)

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

  24. Sorry … Please disregard my last post , I had two cases confused.

    We now return you to to your normally scheduled court rooms …

    Please rise. … The dis-honorable Judge Hoodlum residing …

    Will the party’s for Wells Fargo v. Citizen please come forward…

    Good morning your dis-honor …. Attorney Serpent appearing for plaintiff Wells Fargo … we are holders of the fabricated note with the fake stamped endorsement in blank added to a downloaded copy … And we fabricated a fraudulent assignment ….

    Judge Hoodlum … “Judgement in favor of plaintiff…next case?”

  25. But the yellow highlighted blockkat the end of Neil Garfield’s blog post above is still very troubling in that it shows the low bar that Plaintiffs need for establishing standing in the courts eyes …read it again in the yellow block ….its the same old carp …the courts allow standing based on the “holder” of a note …meaning, all they need is a fabricated copy of a note that has a blank endorsement ..that is all the court looks for.

    And this is the problem in a nutshell.

    The courts do not look for a complete chain of title with “proof” of any perfected transfers of title …they do not look at the fraudulent assignment of mortgage documents that have robo-signers and forged signatures …they Do not look at the false affidavits of employees that are submitted by the banks to determine if they are valid, etc.

    The courts simply accept the note endorsed in blank …period.

    Standing is therefore established …

    Most foreclosures this is the standard to establish Standing …

    The note endorsed in blank

    The assignment of mortgage

    An affidavit by an employee

    This article is misleading because it acts as if the courts are now looking deeper into whether these 3 points of establishing standing are indeed valid and have proof of the entire chain of title, perfected and proven at every transfer. But I just don’t see it … I see This case as one of the borrowers denying that the plaintiff had standing and being forced to file a lawsuit and demand a jury trial to arrive at the final determination.

    This case doesn’t show me that “the courts” are starting to “get it” …on the contrary ..as the yellow highlighted block points out to us, the standard the courts use to determine plaintiffs ‘Standing” is so low that virtually anyone showing up with a fake copy of the note can steal your house …because this is what the standard is , that a mere holder is allowed to foreclose ..they do not have to prove the chain of title.

    When are courts going to get past this low standard ??

    They are still foreclosing using fraudulent assignments and fake notes

    Even if the plaintiff somehow did receive the real note ..the courts are not interested in the broken chain of title arguments …

    The Wolf’s got lucky here … But how do the rest of us force these same issues in our foreclosure cases?

    Was the Wolf case part of a foreclosure counterclaim and affirmative defense answer?

    Or was their case a seperate lawsuit filed apart from the plaintiffs foreclosure case?

  26. again people , please go and read this whole report. examiner’s report from rescap bk.

    examiner’s report or should I say just a few pages of that report, all should get full report . it does explain allot of the fraud. and the report should be used to show all fraud.

    http://www.rmbstrusteesettlement.com/docs/140%20Exhibit%206,%20Part%202.pdf

  27. The subjogators have no morals, & therefore, could only be the devil itself.

  28. If the criminal interest were going to unlawfully try to seize everyones TITLES by FALSE DURESS under FALSE PRETENSES by being outwardly conspicuous, then why did they pick on certain people & not others?

    The economy is no better than it was when this entire fiasco began, & little by little people’s LEGAL RIGHTS have been eroding pretensiously without much protest.

    Clearly those they knew would not cooperate, comply & conform with their crime spree of our TITLES were made the SUBJECT MATTER VICTIMS of them trying to unlawfully usurp our TITLES.

  29. We’re expected to be our own VICTIMS RIGHTS ATTORNEYS while our legal rights get ignored by the very vitimizers who caused it.

    They observe us & spy on their own crime scenes & it’s obscenely criminal.

    They don’t want cell phones in the criminal courthouses but, in the fraudclosure courthouses dictating the fraud of criminals they do.

    The reason for that is, they can criminalize their innocent victims for taping or recording their unlawful pre-judgment hearings.

  30. PROBATE? It’s more like FEDERAL PROBING where their PROBES don’t belong.

    They should be investigating the real culprits & not victimizing us, their victims.

    We’re not children & we’re not wards of these corrupt criminal or no one for that matter.

  31. The plaintiff has no legal way in which to proceed no matter what so the fabricator switches parties or SUBSTITUTES PLAINTIFF like it’s 5th grade English class.

    They use SLEIGHT OF HAND to try & deceive POST FACTUM because they can’t prove up the chain of title lawfully.

    The ok nods by the JUDGES they will ignore the security is missing is COLLUSION to criminally undermine us.

  32. Reality 101
    It is stated in In re Kemp, 440 B.R. 624 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2010) :

    “who demands payment of a negotiable note, or to whom payment is made, is the duly qualified holder. Otherwise, the obligor is exposed to the risk of double payment, or at least to the expense of litigation incurred to prevent duplicative satisfaction of the instrument. These risks provide makers with a recognizable interest in demanding proof of the chain of title.”

  33. Neil, you keep saying no on the side of the trust have no rights because the trusts are empty.  The million dollar questions are, How do we know the trusts are empty?  How do we prove the trust are empty?  It is one thing to say the trusts are empty, and its another thing to prove it.  Where and how does the average homeowner get this proof?

    From: Livinglies’s Weblog To: scot.krueger@yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 7:23 AM Subject: [New post] Fl 2d DCA Says No to Musical Chairs #yiv3407051446 a:hover {color:red;}#yiv3407051446 a {text-decoration:none;color:#0088cc;}#yiv3407051446 a.yiv3407051446primaryactionlink:link, #yiv3407051446 a.yiv3407051446primaryactionlink:visited {background-color:#2585B2;color:#fff;}#yiv3407051446 a.yiv3407051446primaryactionlink:hover, #yiv3407051446 a.yiv3407051446primaryactionlink:active {background-color:#11729E;color:#fff;}#yiv3407051446 WordPress.com | Neil Garfield posted: “For more information please call 954-495-9867 or 520-405-1688.This is for general information only. Get a lawyer.=================see 2D14-1137-1The game has been obvious to everyone. Until recently, it seemed that the courts considered it” | |

  34. Heard of hacking – nothing is safe in this current untrustworthy
    ” lending” environment, they own the place, but hopefully there will be a shift in power after 2016 election.

  35. sC and , never give anyone originals, copy them yourself and issue the copy

  36. When i think about that excuse ” plausible deniability” im sorry but its a case of due diligence, a cause to know, should know, DID know.

  37. Yes SC that would be the ” bird dog”

  38. If I Teach Anyone Anything…..Keep Good Records!!

  39. Dear friends: This is the gospel that Neil has provided in this blog. Proof of ownership of the note and mortgage is critical. Most in pro se borrowers don’t have any idea of how to do this in real world litigation or understand the evidentiary issues. That is where Consumer Rights Defenders can offer powerful assistance with your case from the early stages of filing through discovery and trial preparation in both state and federal venues.
    818.453.3585 for a free consult, ask for Sara or Steve. Assisting the American Homeowner with foreclosure and eviction litigation since 2006.

  40. Louise. Electronic Notorization and Signature have been in the works for awhile now. Think Plausible Deniability !!!!

    New Day .. Same Shit! !!

    But the computer record says so affidavit.

  41. Deb, the bottom feeders started at origination.

  42. Yes L
    I see the signs
    The ” flippers” of RE are out en masse, cheezy hand written signs at the side of the roads
    ” we buy your home for cash”
    Better one
    ” real estate investor requires apprentice no capital required”
    Stool pidgeon.

  43. This link shows that the lending/purchase for mortgages and notes will now get even worse because there will be NO PAPER DOCUMENTS WITH BLUE INK SIGNATURES. http://www.housingwire.com/articles/35683-game-changer-quicken-loans-takes-mortgage-lending-fully-digital?eid=311687353&bid=1242493

  44. The whole mess is moving incrementally towards the truth. Do not move out of your house. Possession is nine tenths of the law. It is going to blow up. Just keep your head above water. I am thankful for being in a nonjudicial state.

  45. Flavor of the Month !!!
    Musical Chairs !!!

    Two of My Favorite Things!

    My Cookie Jars,
    Master of Redirection

  46. oh crying out loud enough already, everyone knows what these banks did, their attorneys, defendants attorneys, all of the judicial systems, county state and federal and the fraud continues. I just got a loan mod from chase that is worse than the judgement. nothing but loan sharks. Chase made the original loan to me and now they are modifying and still claiming to be the lender, yet they assign all their “rights” to fannie mae(more bogus paperwork). all courts are aiding and abeting. when is one of these judges going to have enough balls to say enough of the fraud already. believe me I am sure there is a special place in heaven for the first one who does.

  47. My house was given to Wells Fargo for free. Even though they stopped taking payments. Even though they never loaned a penny. Even though I never missed a payment in 10 years. Even though they had back dated robosign assignments. Even though their made up balance to satisfy was incorrect figures. Even though Fannie Mae whose name was nowhere for life of the mortgage debt me a 1099a after the fraudclosure. That’s who got a fucking free house !!!!!

  48. you mean the courts give the bank a free house every day. and they know this.

  49. Courts give away “Free” houses every day…they just don’t know it.

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: