Servicers Using US Bank as Shield From Liability in Fraudulent Foreclosures

The conclusion is that US Bank “as trustee” is a sham entity. it does not exist.

The marketplace is flooded with false representations about the role of US Bank. This becomes abundantly clear when you are made privy to decisions made wherein sanctions were levied against US Bank. It underscores the basic premise that there is no formal loan, and hence that there is no creditor and there is no borrower — a very accurate but  counter-intuitive conclusion.

Get a consult! 202-838-6345

https://www.vcita.com/v/lendinglies to schedule CONSULT, leave message or make payments.
 
THIS ARTICLE IS NOT A LEGAL OPINION UPON WHICH YOU CAN RELY IN ANY INDIVIDUAL CASE. HIRE A LAWYER.
—————-

On U.S. Bank I have always had a problem with describing them as a national bank in this context.

While it IS a national bank, it specifically disclaims that it is acting on its own behalf and states that it appears strictly as Trustee for a putative trust. As such it is neither acting as an investment bank nor a commercial bank processing deposits or withdrawals. It COULD perform those services if US Bank received borrower payments on putative loans. But it doesn’t perform those tasks since the records produced in court are ALWAYS those of a third party who claims rights to “service” particular loans including the subject loan.

Further, upon information and belief, US Bank has no knowledge or involvement in the invocation of the name “US Bank.” It uniformly refuses to sign off on any settlement or modification of loans and uniformly avoids sending any employee or officer to any court proceeding involving foreclosure of residential putative loans where it is described as “trustee” of a “trust”.

In addition US Bank has no duties that it is required to perform and no duties that are required by any document or instrument, save the consent to use its name in foreclosure cases. The absence of any duties to perform as Trustee is equivalent to the absence of a Trustee — a basic requirement in the creation of a valid trust.

And the absence of any duties as Trustee is evidence of the absence of any res, another basic requirement for the creation of a trust.

The use of the name “US Bank” is an attempt at “layering” or “laddering” as it is defined in the financial industry, to create a shield from liability on the part of self-proclaimed “servicers” whose authority is entirely dependent upon (1) the existence of a valid trust and (2) the presence of a real trustee.

Thus US Bank is not performing nor required to perform any trustee duties; and the putative trust never entered into any transaction in which the Trust paid for assets. Nor have any third parties contributed assets (owned by such third parties) to the res of the Trust.

Hence the sub rosa third party using the name of US Bank as a shield while the sub rosa third party pursued claims for its own benefit and not the benefit of any trust nor any beneficiaries of the putative trust nor any third party investors. Thus neither the named Trustee (or the named trust) nor the “servicer” had any right, justification or excuse to claim any rights arising out of the receipt of funds or the obligation to repay those funds by the putative borrower.

 

23 Responses

  1. further… the internal document definition of the word “lender” as a legal pronoun within a document to substitute for the full name of the named deal “originator” (effectively the broker or facilitator) is not sufficient in-an-of-itself to defy the historical, common law definition of the role and duty of a real first party “lender”… such party can only be deemed and enshrined with the status of a legal “lender” by confession of a putative “borrower”… and once confessed, it is an admission of fact, even though the putative “lender” (originator) never provided any proof of such status…

    what do you think?
    greg
    lawman@gmx.us

  2. Kelly Edwards please write to me privately
    greg
    lawman@gmx.us

  3. Hi Greg,
    In response to your comment: “Trustees on MBS transactions, while named on the mortgage and on legal foreclosure documents, are not involved in the foreclosure process.”

    It is very confusing in my particular case because “US Bank as trustee for Credit Suisse First Boston MBS 2005-2” (A trust that doesn’t exist from what I can tell – not filed with the SEC or as a Business in NY) is the one that filed the complaint in my particular case, then filed for substitution of Plaintiff to a different trust “US Bank as trustee for MBS Pass-through certificates 2005-2”. In addition, they changed servicers from America’s Servicing Company, a division of Wells Fargo to Wells Fargo Home Mortgage over the last few months (without notifyng me except in their response to my request for admission – first I heard about a change, nothing formal sent to me in the mail, yada, yada, yada) and yet WFB has not been handling the foreclosure, US Bank has.
    WFB is somehow in the picture because the plaintiff’s attorneys have been referring to Wells Fargo Bank, their client, in telephone conversations and yet nowhere in their complaint. With the exception that WFB is trying to keep the $250,000 insurance proceeds for the loss due to a tsunami sweeping the house into the sea they are not involved. Rather than rebuild my property, as is required by Hawaii revised statute 506.7, claiming I “agreed” to let them have the funds during my lawsuit against the insurance co. to get the insurance proceeds distributed. Which I clearly did not agree to, they have nothing anywhere in writing just an open-ended email conversation between WFB attorney and my attorney discussing possible ways to settle and yet the circuit court judge ruled in their favor for the insurance proceeds to go to WFB and the Motion for Summary Judgment for the foreclosure. I can only hope the appellate court will Let both sides be presented, a right that was denied to me in the lower court. My point to you is, in my case, US Bank is the foreclosing party, not the servicer, which seems unusual from everything I have read over the past 8 years since this mess started.

    Thanks for your insightful posts!

  4. It appears that the function of a REMIC/MBS Trustee is similar in character to the Trustee in an Illinois Land Trust.

    In said trust, the Trustee is the Legal and Equitable Owner of the Trust res property (the home), but is void of authority to commence any independent action unless directed to do so by the Beneficiary(ies) or other person(s) named within the trust agreement with the power to direct the Trustee.

    The Grantor ceases to have direct “technical legal ownership” to pledge, mortgage or do anything else with regard to the Trust res upon creation of the Trust and appointment of Trustee.

    Similarly, the Beneficiaries of the Land Trust hold only a beneficial interest in the nature of “personal property” not “real property” and thus also cannot pledge, mortgage, or do anything else directly with regard to the Trust res “real property”.

    Actions are brought in the name of the Land Trust, but it is the Beneficiary(ies) or other person(s) named within the trust agreement with the power to direct the Trustee who are the movers of the actions.

    Failure to secure a mortgage naming the Land Trust Trustee as the borrower and securing authorized signature of same is a fatal error and renders the contract non-consummated and void, as “there remains something yet to do”.

    Again, the Grantor and the Beneficiaries have no power or authority to pledge, mortgage, or do anything else directly in their own names or roles with regard to the Trust res “real property”.

    Further, if a foreclosure action is not brought against the Trustee, or the plaintiffs in such foreclosure fail to serve the proper Trustee, there is no jurisdiction of the court and any judgments are void, not voidable.

    see: http://www.illinoiscourts.gov/R23_Orders/AppellateCourt/2012/4thDistrict/4110588_R23.pdf

    greg
    lawman at gmx dot us

  5. It appears that the function of a REMIC/MBS Trustee is similar in character to the Trustee in an Illinois Land Trust.

    In said trust, the Trustee is the Legal and Equitable Owner of the Trust res property (the home), but is void of authority to commence any independent action unless directed to do so by the Beneficiary(ies) or other person(s) named within the trust agreement with the power to direct the Trustee.

    The Grantor ceases to have direct “technical legal ownership” to pledge, mortgage or do anything else with regard to the Trust res upon creation of the Trust and appointment of Trustee.

    Similarly, the Beneficiaries of the Land Trust hold only a beneficial interest in the nature of “personal property” not “real property” and thus also cannot pledge, mortgage, or do anything else directly with regard to the Trust res “real property”.

    Actions are brought in the name of the Land Trust, but it is the Beneficiary(ies) or other person(s) named within the trust agreement with the power to direct the Trustee who are the movers of the actions.

    Failure to secure a mortgage naming the Land Trust Trustee as the borrower and securing authorized signature of same is a fatal error and renders the contract non-consummated and void, as “there remains something yet to do”.

    Again, the Grantor and the Beneficiaries have no power or authority to pledge, mortgage, or do anything else directly in their own names or roles with regard to the Trust res “real property”.

    Further, if a foreclosure action is not brought against the Trustee, or the plaintiffs in such foreclosure fail to serve the proper Trustee, there is no jurisdiction of the court and any judgments are void, not voidable.

    see: http://www.illinoiscourts.gov/R23_Orders/AppellateCourt/2012/4thDistrict/4110588_R23.pdf

    greg
    lawman@gmx.us

  6. from – https://www.usbank.com/pdf/community/Role-of-Trustee-Sept2013.pdf

    IT IS THE SERVICERS DOING ALL THE DIRTY WORK IN THE NAME OF THE TRUSTEE – THE SERVICERS (e.g. OCWEN, etc.) ARE HIRING THE FORECLOSURE MILL LAWYERS AND RUNNING THE WHOLE CASE.

    SUE THE SERVICERS WITH THE TRUSTEE, NOT JUST THE TRUSTEE

    As Trustee, U.S. Bank Global Corporate Trust
    Services performs the following responsibilities:

    • Holds an interest in the mortgage loans for
    the benefit of investors

    • Maintains investors/securities holder records

    • Collects payments from the Servicer

    • Distributes payments to the investors/
    securities holder

    • Does not initiate, nor has any discretion or
    authority in the foreclosure process

    • Does not have responsibility for overseeing
    mortgage servicers

    • Does not mediate between the servicer(s)
    and investors in securitization deals

    • Does not manage or maintain properties in
    foreclosure

    • Is not responsible for the approval of any loan
    modifications

    All trustees for MBS transactions, including
    U.S. Bank, have no advance knowledge of when
    a mortgage loan has defaulted.

    Trustees on MBS transactions, while named
    on the mortgage and on legal foreclosure
    documents, are not involved in the foreclosure
    process.

  7. Rhonda –
    in re: “I have recently filed my complaint with the Illinois AG to put an end to Wells Fargo’s wrongful pursuit of foreclosure in a Modification process.”

    May i please see a copy of what you sent to Lisa Madigan?

    thanks
    greg
    lawman@gmx.us

  8. Tara. Most of us are being foreclosed on by a bank and it doesn’t matter which one. They are all doing the same thing. It is nationwide and the abuses have been identified in the 2012 Federal Attorney general settlement for $25 billion.

    Every foreclosure fraud case is after the pot of gold which is the FDIC Insurance money that was promised to the banks in a “stop loss agreement” that requires a sale by foreclosure or a modification to cash in on 95 percent of their losses…….all generated by the banks. They inflate the loan amount with their fees and phony costs before they cash in.

    The $25 billion settlement requires that victims of continued mortgage servicing fraud contact their state attorney general and report the abuse. But first google the settlement. The bank fraud was first discovered in bankruptcy claims but the fraud claims by homeowners also applies in foreclosures and other mortgage servicing malpractices where banks are inflating loan amounts with improper practices.

    Let your common sense apply when stating your claim of wrongdoing to the state AG. THEY ARE LAWYERS. They are charged with helping you in this settlement.

    Good luck!! I am not a
    Lawyer just a homeowner fighting back and received a denial of summary judgement innforeclosure court. It is not over. I have recently filed my complaint with the Illinois AG to put an end to Wells Fargo’s wrongful pursuit of foreclosure in a Modification process.

  9. Greg, you clever man. Great riff. I posted the link to the brochure because in it US Bank states unequivocally that it cannot and does not play a part in any foreclosures. I love your logic – like an attorney on ‘shrooms’. Trippy man!

  10. I am currently in foreclosure in California. Rushmore Loan Management Sevices LLC and Aztec Forclosure are doing the “dirty business” of ILLEGALLY Stealing my home on 2/8/2017!! My loan originator was Countrywide Home Loans 2005. Trust CWABS 2005-BC5…. Now, my trust is RMAC 2016-CTT, Us Bank National Association, not solely but in Trust for RMAC 2016-CTT.

    Is anyone else currently being foreclosed on by Rushmore, with U.S. Bank National Association as Trustee???

  11. 2nd ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM…
    *the US government has been bankrupt and in receivership to the Private European Crown banks and their heirs and derivatives via the federal reserve for decades… (go re-read the book “The Creature from Jekyll Island” again)
    *the only way new money gets created in the US is by borrowing (this includes the so-called money earmarked for your so-called mortgage loan)…
    *YOU (and me) are the only “sovereigns” in the US with the ability to extend private credit to the US government…
    *the US government has this handy tool called the 14th amendment…
    *said amendment causes YOU to be the surety and accommodation party for the debt of the US government without the right to question the debt…
    *every time you sign a note or credit application with your NAME, SSN and DOB, your sovereign US citizenship estate is tapped for a lot of money (from the private side converted through the bank into the public side)…
    *it thus appears on the public side records that it shows up from the bank – but it is really a demand deposit account created by the bank to “process” your private estate asset into a public commercial fund and immediately deleted upon transfer… (think of it a a currency exchange from Pounds to Dollars)
    *go re-read the Chicago Federal Reserve publication “Modern Money Mechanics” – they put it right in front of your nose trusting that you’ll never comprehend what is being said!

    Best
    greg

  12. pray tell why is Ian right?

  13. Ian is correct.

  14. SidFicious – ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM – there is no definition anywhere in the article https://www.usbank.com/pdf/community/Role-of-Trustee-Sept2013.pdf showing a definition of a “lender” or any role a “lender” has in the transaction… The closest we get is this: “Originator – The financial institution or mortgage lender who originally initiates the mortgage agreement with the borrower.” THERE IS NO PLACE WHERE IT SAYS THAT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF A DEAL WITH THE BORROWER IS A LENDER!!!

    My take-away… there is no lender OR the homeowner has a dual role of private lender and public borrower! (NET ZERO) except for the fact that the private side bookkeeping is withheld and only the public side bookkeeping is disclosed.

    What say you Garfield fans, are we getting warm?

    greg

  15. U.S. Bank was the bank that foreclosed on my home of 32 years.
    My home was “assigned a half dozen times in a matter of a few months. , I felt it was to cloud what they were doing. I could not find the “Trust” that was supposed to contain my home. The judge could care less. Even after the SALE, The buyer did much the same tactics… Fraud. Is it to late for me to do anything? Anyone have an Idea on how to proceed?

  16. Ian: I am not an attorney however, I think if you inscribed your own name on a record-able document you would be breaking the law – exactly like the banks do! Only, they get away with it. I doubt that you could.

  17. This is exactly the situation with my case involving my vacant land in Hawaii due to a tsunami taking the house. US Bank was nowhere in the picture, America’s Servicing Co., a division of Wells Fargo was the servicer until, what now seems blatantly apparent, they brought in US Bank as a bogus “trustee’. The Plaintiff, US Bank, filed a substitution of Plaintiff 20 months after filing the complaint. I filed an opposition to their motion, which was never ruled on, the Judge ruled in Plaintiff’s favor for MSJ, without so much as letting me finish a sentence. I abruptly and forcefully asked the Judge about my Opposition which he had never ruled on and he said, “I have made my ruling”. Interestingly enough, later that same day, the judges order denying my opposition for Substitution of Plaintiff was recorded in the docket and back-dated by one day, stating the order had been recorded to the wrong case and was now being corrected. Need I say I have a request Igor my case to be heard by the Appellate court. Anyone with the name of a great appellate attorney linterested in a very interesting case in Hawaii, please let me know!

  18. Alternative Facts. Not something that Trump came up with but what is used in our courts every day by the wall street banks. I fear that it is becoming so common we will never know the truth.

  19. Mr. Garfield:

    I have a letter from US Bank Corporate Trust Services that states exactly what your article addresses. I would be happy to send you a copy upon request.

    Plus there is the corporate brochure published by US Bank that confirms the same:

    https://www.usbank.com/pdf/community/Role-of-Trustee-Sept2013.pdf

  20. It appears as though any homeowner/borrower could insert the name of their alleged “trustee” in the above statement and achieve the same effect.
    Pls correct me if I am mistaken.

  21. What should the borrower do in this case? What options are available? How does the law protect the borrower/homeowner?

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: