It is FACT not THEORY: Money Trail is a Trail of Facts; Paper Trail is a Trail of Lies

Neil F Garfield, July 1, 2013: Modification “experts” are criticizing what they see on this site. It gives them the willies to think that they are participating in a fraud or enabling a fraud when they modify a loan with someone who doesn’t own it. So lately they are saying that the articles here have been discredited in court decisions (not true) and that the “theories” described here lack credibility.

What we are talking about here is facts, not theory. Either the foreclosing party, modifying party, or party accepting the short sale owns the note or not — and the FACTS lead wherever they bring us, namely, that if they didn’t pay for the funding of the origination of the loan, they didn’t pay for the acquisition of the loan, and that they didn’t acquire servicing rights to the loan, the lack of standing (legal doctrine, not theory) is complete. The non-ability to submit a credit bid at auction is complete (state statutes, not theory). The liability for slander of title, abuse of process, fraud, forgery, and fabrication of documents describing non-existent transactions needs to be proven, and the damages must also be proven. But with a dismissal or judgment for borrower, the liability part of the case is fairly easy.

Whether you are buying, selling, refinancing, short-selling, modifying or in any way settling or resolving issues with a mortgage loan you do so at your own risk. Banks that offer refinancing are either part of the securitization scheme and are kicking the liability can down the road or they are ignorant of the risk elements of title and liability for a loan that is subject to securitization claims.

If you want to criticize, go ahead and do it. But all people need to know is they can ask the questions in litigation and get the answers and the facts are whatever they are — there is either a cancelled check or wire transfer receipt or there is nothing. If you want to know if it is hot outside, just stick your head out a window, if reading the thermometer is too theoretical for you.

It is often true that the borrower admitted the debt, the note, the mortgage and the default. The trial judge had no choice and neither did the appellate court. These cases come from the inexperience of the pro se litigant or the lawyer who has not researched all of the material.

Don’t get caught in a spitting match about my “theories” versus the rulings of some courts. This is all a work in progress and there are going to be conflict in rulings. One state may appear to give one set of rulings another state may seem just the opposite. the point is that if you are doing good lawyering you are following the facts wherever they take you. And what we are saying is that the money trail does not support the paper trail that the banks have fabricated forged or proffered.

For example: Go to eFANNIE site. They are boasting about funding even before allocating your whole loan commitment or MBS pool, so you can maximize your execution. TRANSLATION: we’ll give you the money before you have to come up with it in real time. The investors put up the money,then the loan applications are solicited, then the money is funded with investor money, then the originator reports the loan closing and assigns it without a paper assignment to the next party in the paper train (securitization) usually the aggregator who assigns them without an actual assignment to the CDO manager at the investment bank that created the mortgage bonds and sold them through a “third party” which was owned or controlled by the investment bank. The paper trail neither reflects nor follows the money trail.

Full Deposition of Angela Edwards “Robo-Verifier” as Servicer for the Plaintiff for Verification of Foreclosure Complaint
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-06-28/full-deposition-angela-edwards-“robo-verifier”-servicer-plaintiff-verificatio

 

 

Sales by Insiders AT BOA — RATS JUMPING SHIP? THE MARKET TRADERS ARE TAKING POSITIONS FOR A DEATH SPIRAL BY BOA: Somebody knows something… Rats are jumping ship  http://wallstcheatsheet.com/stocks/bank-of-american-corp-director-sells-580k-shares-and-4-insider-sales-to-note.html/?a=viewall

COURTS CAN RETURN PARTIES TO THEIR ORIGINAL POSITION: this would apply to cases where there is no default – through the “stop payment” script and through those who were actually paying. The Court can return the parties to the original position and wipe out arrears and fees.

INVESTIGATION: BOA TRIES SELLING OFF SERVICING RIGHTS TO AVOID LIABILITY (Remember just because they SAY they sold it doesn’t mean they did. We have seen several instances where BOA announced the loan or servicing rights or both were sold off but they were not and BOA ended up being the one “approving” the short-sale or modification).: GREEN TREE SERVICING AND BANK OF AMERICA

Banks Hedging Their Bets on Wrongful Foreclosures

13 Questions Before You Can Foreclose

foreclosure_standards_42013 — this one works for sure

If you are seeking legal representation or other services call our South Florida customer service number at 954-495-9867 and for the West coast the number remains 520-405-1688. In Northern Florida and the Panhandle call 850-765-1236. Customer service for the livinglies store with workbooks, services and analysis remains the same at 520-405-1688. The people who answer the phone are NOT attorneys and NOT permitted to provide any legal advice, but they can guide you toward some of our products and services.

SEE ALSO: http://WWW.LIVINGLIES-STORE.COM

The selection of an attorney is an important decision  and should only be made after you have interviewed licensed attorneys familiar with investment banking, securities, property law, consumer law, mortgages, foreclosures, and collection procedures. This site is dedicated to providing those services directly or indirectly through attorneys seeking guidance or assistance in representing consumers and homeowners. We are available to any lawyer seeking assistance anywhere in the country, U.S. possessions and territories. Neil Garfield is a licensed member of the Florida Bar and is qualified to appear as an expert witness or litigator in in several states including the district of Columbia. The information on this blog is general information and should NEVER be considered to be advice on one specific case. Consultation with a licensed attorney is required in this highly complex field.

The need for continuing pressure on state and federal legislators who are relentlessly pursued by Bank lobbyists has never been greater.  Anyone who cares about the state of our economy and the state of our justice system needs to be writing and calling state and federal legislators as well as state and federal agencies to oppose these naked attempts to seal the deal against the homeowners.

Anyone who thinks that our falling bridges and decaying infrastructure is going to be fixed without fixing housing is dreaming. Both the tax revenue and the potential for private investment are severely diminished by the failure of this government and governments around the world to take actual control of the situation, return wealth to those from whom wealth was stolen, and recover taxes from those who have failed to report and pay taxes on transactions that were conducted in the United States but never reported in any detail as to the method utilized to create “off balance sheet” and “offshore” transactions.

Michigan homeowners in foreclosure would have less time to save, sell home under new proposal
http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/05/michigan_homeowners_in_foreclo.html

In Michigan the proposal put forth by the banks would extend the time that borrowers could contest an impending foreclosure but shorten the time that borrowers could attack a wrongful foreclosure seeking monetary damages or to overturn the fraudulent auction sale awarded to a party who submitted a credit bid but who was not a creditor.  It is a tacit admission by the banks that they are doing well before a foreclosure judgment is entered but they are afraid of the consequences after the sale.

The fact that they were not a creditor obviously also brings in the issues of jurisdictional standing and whether they have any potential rights to initiate foreclosure. The confusion here is closed by rulings in many states which seem to indicate that almost anyone can initiate a foreclosure proceeding. The mistake made by both pro se litigants and attorneys for homeowners is that they concede the rest of the case once a decision is made that a non-creditor can initiate foreclosure proceedings.

In the initial phase of litigation those early motions will obviously have an effect on the momentum of the case in favor of either the banks or the borrowers. But the fact remains that if the party initiating the foreclosure was doing so in a representative capacity, or if they were doing so in their own name lacking any history or facts supporting their assertions of being a “holder” then the point needs to be made to the court that there is no creditor based upon any evidence in the court record who can submit a credit bid.

The court is presented then with the choice of either dismissing the case because of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter and potentially lack of jurisdiction over the parties or entering a final order or judgment allowing the foreclosure to proceed but stipulating that the party conducting the auction may not accept a credit bid  in the absence of uncontested proof of payment, proof of loss and proof of ownership of the loan receivable. This step has less far been ignored in nearly all cases of foreclosure litigation throughout the country. It is time to invoke it.

The initiative in Michigan reflects the tacit admission of the banks that while they can still easily prevail in pre-judgment motions, they are highly vulnerable to enormous liabilities after the sale of the property at auction or at a closing table. The fact remains that they must show a canceled check, wire transfer receipts, ACH confirmation or check 21 confirmation in order to establish the loss;  in addition, they must show the same facts for each and every predecessor in the alleged securitization chain which we already know has been falsely presented.

 By hammering on the money trail, you will be educating the judge as to the difference between the actual transactions in which money was exchanged or in which consideration was exchanged and the paper  documents that refer to transactions which never actually occurred. Each transaction requires, for enforcement, and offer, acceptance and consideration. If you closely examine the documents used by the banks in the falsely presented securitization chain you might find an offer but you probably won’t find acceptance and you definitely won’t find consideration. The same holds true in the origination of the loan wherein the designated payee and secured party had nothing to do with the funding of the original loan. It is all smoke and mirrors.

The point needs to be made that if the judge is all fired up about whether or not the borrower made payments that the attorney representing the homeowner agrees that payments are an important issue which is why he is requiring the other side to present proof of their payments to creditors and their receipt of payments from parties other than the borrower. Your argument is obviously that either payments matter where they don’t. It should be pointed out to the judge that a double standard is being applied if the borrower’s payments are at issue but the so-called lenders’ payments and receipts are out of bounds. The point should also be made that rather than arguing about it, if there was no defect in the money trail and if there was therefore complete compliance between the money trail in the document trail, the party initiating foreclosure should be more than anxious to display the canceled check and end the debate.

JPMorgan exposed: Company found guilty of masterminding ‘manipulative schemes’
http://www.naturalnews.com/040481_JP_Morgan_Jamie_Dimon_too_big_to_fail.html

Wasted wealth – The ongoing foreclosure crisis that never had to happen – The Hill’s Congress Blog
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/economy-a-budget/301415-wasted-wealth–the-ongoing-foreclosure-crisis-that-never-had-to-happen

Negative Home Equity Still Plagues 13 Million Mortgage Loans
http://247wallst.com/2013/05/23/negative-home-equity-still-plagues-13-million-mortgage-loans/

Jon Stewart Tears Apart Obama, DOJ For Prosecuting Whistleblowers And Potheads But Not Bankers
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewart-tears-apart-obama-doj-for-prosecuting-whistleblowers-and-potheads-but-not-bankers/

How Many People Have Lost Their Homes? US Home Foreclosures are Comparable to the Great Depression
http://www.globalresearch.ca/how-many-people-have-lost-their-homes-us-home-foreclosures-are-comparable-to-the-great-depression/5335430

As Of This Moment Ben Bernanke Own 30.5% Of The US Treasury Market… And Will Own All By 2018
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-23/moment-ben-bernanke-own-305-us-treasury-market-and-will-own-all-2018

%d bloggers like this: