MERS Attempting to Get Correct Identity of Investors

Training Bulletin
Number 2010-05
To: All MERS Members
`
May 26, 2010
Re: Identifying Investors on MERS® System

MERS® System Release 19.0 on June 14, 2010, will include Phase II of MERS® InvestorID. Phase I was introduced on June 19, 2009, to help our Members meet the requirements of the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009 by using information entered on the MERS® System to generate a Notice of New Creditor when a Transfer of Beneficial Rights (TOB) transaction was completed.

Besides providing a more robust solution for generating Mortgage Loan Transfer Notices, Phase II provides Investor
contact information to the public in MERS® ServicerID and the telephone Servicer Identification System, and to MERS®
Link Subscribers and MERS® Members in MERS® Link. Investor contact information also is provided to MERS
Members in MERS® OnLine, and in the XML and batch inquiry transactions.

Because of this increased visibility of Investor information, it is even more important that the Investor be represented
correctly for each loan on the MERS® System. As noted in the Draft Procedures Manual for Release 19.0 released on
April 15, 2010, Servicers may not insert their own Org ID as Investor on MINs for which they do not hold the
beneficial rights after June 14, 2010. If the actual investor does not have an Org ID, the Servicer may insert 1000002
(Undisclosed Investor) in the Investor field. Servicers may begin immediately inserting this Org ID in the Investor field
when appropriate, and may create a TOB Option 2 from their own Org ID to 1000002 to insert this Org ID on loans for
which they had previously inserted their own Org ID as Investor because the actual investor did not have an Org ID.

After the release, all MERS® InvestorID-related options will be visible to each Member in MERS® OnLine, including:

Mortgage Loan Transfer Notice (defaults to selected; if you have opted out of InvestorID it is deselected)
If selected, a Mortgage Loan Transfer Notice will be generated when a TOB transaction is completed with your Org
ID as the New Investor. Members cannot update this option. To request it be changed, currently you must email

InvestorID@mersinc.org. After the release, you will email the MERS Product Performance Department at
ppd@mersinc.org to change this option, as for other Member Profile changes.
New information display options that can only be changed by MERS (displayed under Investor Options):
o
Disclose Investor Information– Proprietary (defaults to selected)
If selected, Investor contact information will be included for all loans with your Org ID as Investor:
For non-rightsholder Members on the MIN Summary page in MERS® OnLine
For Members and MERS® Link Subscribers on the MIN Summary page in MERS® Link
In all Status and Summary responses in XML Inquiry and Batch Inquiry
o
Disclose Investor Information– Public (defaults to selected)
If selected, Investor contact information will be displayed for all loans with your Org ID as Investor:
In MERS® ServicerID
In the telephone Servicer Identification System
If you wish to have either option deselected for your Org ID before the release, please email your request to
InvestorID@mersinc.org, including your Org ID and company name, by June 9, 2010. Requests received after June
9 will be processed starting on June 14. After the release, you will email the MERS Product Performance
Department atppd@mersinc.org to change these options, as for other Member Profile changes.
New information display options that can be changed by the Member (on the Name/Address page):
o

Use Investor Alternate Address– Public (defaults to unselected)
If selected, the new Investor Alternate Address is used in MERS® ServicerID and the telephone Servicer
Identification System, and on Mortgage Loan Transfer Notices, for loans with your Org ID as Investor

o

Use Servicer/Subservicer Alternate Address– Public (defaults to unselected)
If selected, the new Servicer/Subservicer Alternate Address is used in MERS® ServicerID and the telephone
Servicer Identification System, and on Mortgage Loan Transfer Notices, for loans with your Org ID as Servicer
or Subservicer.

33 Responses

  1. I have NEVER owned any property in my life. Why did you automaticly deducte $27.08 out of my savings account? I NEVER authorized for this to happen today on 12/19/2012. YOU DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEDUCT ANY MONEY FROM ME. I WANT THAT $27.08 REVERSED AND I DO NOT AUTHORIZE YOU TO EVER DEDUCT AGAIN!!! Connie

  2. Maher Soliman is a FRAUD. It is unbelievable that the owners of this website continue to let him post here.

    He claims to be an ‘expert witness’ that can ‘get your house free & clear’ and banks are ‘scared of him’. I paid him $5k and he produced NOTHING of value; just inconclusive gibberish. Several attorneys and paralegals agreed with me. The cases on his ‘resume’ he gave me were phony. No involvement on his part could be confirmed and the case numbers DID NOT EXIST in these courts. Don’t waste you money or time on this fraudster, scammer & spammer. Maher is the ‘unanswered prayer’… I would love to know his address so we can get him into court as a DEFENDANT in our FRAUD CASE…!!!!

    Complaints about his FRAUD ACTIVITIES can be sent to:
    Calif State Attorney General Foreclosure Fraud Task Force: http://ag.ca.gov/contact/complaint_form.php?cmplt=CL
    The Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law: http://lcintake.serveronline.net/intake-basic-qualify.aspx?source=NW
    The Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force: http://www.stopfraud.gov/report.html
    The Federal Trade Commission: https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/

    Maher Soliman, scam, Foreclosure Fraud; expert witness, fraudclosure, loan expert, fraud expert,

  3. Maher Soliman continues to send me phony expert witness stuff AND his ‘buy my crapp’ network marketing stuff….

    MAHER SOLIMAN IS A FRAUD and PHONY EXPERT WITNESS. I’m amazed you let him post on your website…!

    Complaints can be sent to:

    Calif State Attorney General Foreclosure Fraud Task Force: http://ag.ca.gov/contact/complaint_form.php?cmplt=CL

    The Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law: http://lcintake.serveronline.net/intake-basic-qualify.aspx?source=NW

    The Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force: http://www.stopfraud.gov/report.html

    The Federal Trade Commission: https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/

  4. Deceased Securities and Recoupment of Assets
    By M.Soliman

    The mortgage you received is a receivable and valuable asset. Its coupon kicks off a rate three times the investors anticipated short term return on investment.

    Securitization cannot work without a sale of the loan. Problem is the loan you received was melted into securities offering a dividend to investors holding fractionalized interests.

    The trustee for the indenture is not concerned with your home or payment. You owe the money now pay or don’t it’s your decision.

    The investors are looking for the monthly dividend check in one lump sum every month. Looking to the trust or SEC filing is for description purposes to catalogue the individual components of the collateral used to secure the investment offered to accredited investors.

    If your loan was charged or written down to zero than the lender has that much more they need to cough up each month.

    Registrants did hold tons of underlying value in these pools in senior sub structures and that is what is likely posted to the treasury account and what investors are crying foul about.

    You and your loan are known only to the lender and registrant and servicing agent and default compromises their collateral assets which are passive investments. Problem is they cannot talk to you and those passive investments are likely over leveraged and worthless.

    Now bring in the genius who discovered the lone ranger debt collector concept for recovering your home lost and pleaded and lost and pleaded and lost to SALE!

    Deceased Securities may be a lenders registrants’ way out of a claim of unfair practices and deceptive business dealing in a foreclosure by arguing the am recoupment of assets.

    They may look at the link by way of an interest and cashing in where the interest is secured by another asset, such as cash or a cash equivalent, by the debt-issuing firm.

    I hardly call the efforts of a collections company sufficient capacity that can qualify for a debt-issuing firm. The registrant’s deceased securities, which are typically bonds, will have sufficient cash set aside for retirement of the debt upon maturity.

    That is not the case.

    References FASB and SEC staffs (EITF D-69) have determined that gain (or loss) on sale accounting is not elective in a securitization that is accounted for as a sale.

    Note: Securities professionals employed by the lender and registrant hinted on occasion of the valueless state of the net asset value of the investment and securities PRE CRASH. Concerns were they were often leveraged to add further credit enhancement to these toxic deals.

  5. Fannie and Freddie have been slowly disposing of whole mortgage loans. Servicer must state who the CURRENT Creditor is – not who it was several years ago.

    Again, the government approves the fraud. What are you guys doing about the government?

  6. Msoliman… please explain where to look for the FDIC info… on your loan document…. where.

    Thanks in advance.

    “You Need Help People:
    Look at the FDIC member bank requirements for a loan held to maturity.
    Look at the member bank requirement for funding a loan “uncovered””

  7. The MERS investor lookup feature may be something other than what it appears to be. The investor in my one property mortgage is listed as Encore Credit, which is/was a Bear Stearns entity. However, on the “lender’s” title insurance policy, the beneficiary is listed as EMC mortgage, one of Bear Stearn’s many pedatory lenders.

  8. The MERS investor lookup feature may be something other than what it appears to be. The investor in my one property mortgage is listed as Encore Credit, which is/was a Bear Stearns entity. However, on the “lender’s” title insurance policy, the beneficiary is listed as EMC mortgage, one of Bear Stearn’s many pedatory lenders. Prior to seeing the lender’s policy, I had never heard of them, never saw them on any documents, closing docs, nothing. So who is who? I will try to find out and let everyone here know which one it is.

  9. So, now that MERS publicly admits that our servicers do NOT own our loans, will this be enough to discourage the servicers from naming themselves as plaintiffs? Could the servicers now claim that they are foreclosing on behalf of the true owner? For instance, can Fannie give the servicer written authority to foreclose on their behalf?

    Sheesh. You just never know who’s coming at you.

  10. MERS, POOLING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT, ACCOUNTING….GREAT , NOW WHAT?

    I am really loving this upon closer inspection Raja! The issues of simple accounting rules violations appear narrow, yet the example you cite here could mean A DIFFERENCE AND SWAY IN ADVANTAGE.

    Many more cases can potentially address broader issues of pleading sufficiency with repsect to securities and accounting rules violations prohibiting foreclosures.

    Sale accounting is the alternative to debt or financing arrangements which is what the lender seeks to avoid in this economic downturn. Both approaches to accounting are clearly described and determinable by GAAP. In sale accounting ther is no foreclsure. In debt for GAAP accounting your entitled to foreclose.

    Its when you mix the two you r going to have problems. Big problems.

    Pleading sufficiency is (by this layperson) the need for addressing a subject matter in light of the incurable defects in proper jurisdiction. The subject can be convoluted and difficult, I realize that.

    Where the matter is heard should allow ample time to amend as a plaintiff. This is given to the fact the lender can move quicklly and seek dismissal.

    The question is how far must a consumer plaintiff reach to allege that serverity of the claims, based on adverse event information, as in foreclosure.

    This is significant in order to establish that the lender or a lender defendants’ alleged failure to disclose information. Therein will the court find the claim to be sufficently material.

    In possession hearings the civil courts have granted the plaintiffs summary judgment and in actions brought against the consumer. The courts are often times granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss, finding that these complaints fail to adequately suffice or address the judicial fundamental element of materiality.

    I can tell you the accounting rules omissions from the commencement of the loan origination through a foreclosure is one continual material breach. Counsel is lost to go to court without pleading this fact.

    The next question is will the pleading adequately allege the significance of the vast number of consumer homeowner complaints. One would think yes considering the lower court level is so backlogged and a t a time when budget cuts require one less day of operations.

    These lower courts however are hearing post foreclosure matters of possession. there is the further possibility that the higher Court in deciding matters while failing to see any scienter. Its what my law cohorts often refer to as accountability for their actions. That is what the “Fill in the Dots” letter tells me at first glance.

    I believe it’s only in a rare case or two that a securities matter is heard in the Ninth Circuit. Recently however, there the conclusion was in fact that scienter allegations raised by the opposition were sufficient based on plaintiff’s allegations that the “high level executives …would know the company was being sued in a product liability action,” and in line with the many, customer complaints (I assume that were communicated to the company’s directors…)

    The FASB is where the counterproductive rule changes always seem to take place and where lobbyist and other pro life and pro bank enthusiasts seem to spend their days. No need to fret however as gain on sale accounting is specific and requires the lender to have SOLD your loan in order to securitize it as part of a larger bulk pool.

    The document I am reading, submitted by Raja tells me something is very concerning to the “lender parties” that they believe is downstream and headed their way. I’ll try and analyze each line item for you as to what it says and what they really are trying to do. I think for now though its value is for determining the letter as an admission of “we screwed up!”

    M.Soliman
    expert.witness@live.com
    .

  11. TO
    “Nye Lavalle,
    LOL are you kidding me? Like Brochin and other MERS reps told me. The info is ONLY AS GOOD AS WHAT THE SERVICER INPUTS! DO NOT RELY ON THIS INFO. SEE IF YOU CAN FIND THE NOTE GOING OFF AND ON THE BOOKS; OUT AND IN SOMEONE’S HANDS; CONSIDERATION PAID; INDORSEMENTS ON THE NOTE; ETC…
    As the old adage goes… Garbage In – Garbage Out!”

    You must add to ONLY AS GOOD AS WHAT THE
    SERVICER …INPUTS! DO NOT RELY

    The info you get may if at all, only be good for one day. The next day a whole new claim to successor in Interest shows up!

    I am also in this position, summary judgment. Only like a week to prepare a response. The Judge does not want to hear from me. I am still trying to find an attorney. I never give up.. I am waiting to hear from on I saw here on Livinglies.
    The Judge has not answered many of my cross complaint it seems so obvious this party changes the facts and the investor and has such a trail of false misleading information. No one to speak except the Attorney. He says I have not given any reason to question. I have provided material evidence conflicting evidenced from multiple parties as to ownership Assignment etc I feel like it is all in vein, the Judge sees me as someone trying to leach off of this Party who is not even original but showed up in Assignment recently. They seem to see me as glutenous free hous seeker.

    Has anyone tried to get a succession of documentation from SEC? I guess they probably would not do this. They would have to shut down to handle the demand.

    Why do the Plaintiff’s in foreclosure not have to prove equity interest? Proper procedure? This party could very will walk away wiht a free house. CAn we demand accounting documentation?
    I don’t know how I will make it in time.

  12. @ M. Soliman,

    I just read your last post and it explains much of your earlier post. Thank you for that. I am reading it again right now and trying to make sense of it all.

  13. M Soliman,

    Thanks Maher Soliman.

  14. Mr. Soliman,

    I know you are trying to give us pointers here but after reading your post a few times I still don’t understand what you are saying. Could you please elaborate a little more? I don’t want to miss out and I feel like you are contributing something very important here. I’m embarrassed to have to admit not understanding that but I don’t want to be the only one to NOT”get it.” Thank you.

  15. I WANT A SHOT AT THIS FOOL – WHO WROTE THE MANUSCRIPT FOR SLIPPING AND SLIDING INVESTORS TRUST GRIEVENCES.
    IT IS A GOOD JOB RAJA.

    6. ___________ created a mortgage purchase loan (16 CFR 433.1). This whole process is not about mortgage at all, because
    ITS IS A WHOLE LOAN ASSET TRANSFER AND LOSS OF CONTROLLING INTEREST IUNBDER FAS 140
    —————————————————————————-
    The defendant sold the note and received the funds…
    ————————————————————————–
    THIS IS SUICIDE FOR A SELLER
    And closed the account by assuming ___________ has repaid the originator _____________ on the loan.
    —————————————————————————
    THE FOLLOWING IS A FACT I CAN PROVE WITHOUT THE BOOKS! I USED TO CALL WHERE I FUNDED WITH CITI FIANICIAL AND SOLD TO GMAC.
    7._____________ request the honorable court to subpoena the auditors with two sets of books, to verify the facts about the____________ practice of book keeping (two sets of books) and trying to maintain the allusion that ___________ is still holding the promissory note. _________ asked this information in discovery under civil rule 36, the defendant and its attorney did not answer; they have admitted them on S 3 registration statement that is the form
    —————————————————————————
    HELLO SOUND FAMILIAR
    The defendant has filed that they sold the note.
    —————————————————————————
    AHHH, OKAY….UMMMMMM
    They have also admitted by non response.
    8. The ___________ have the 424(b) (5) prospectus. The defendant ______________ sold the note right after they got ________ loan.

    FORWARD CIMITTMENT AND ADVANCED SALE OF ASSETS
    —————————————————————————-

    As soon as _________ gets the note, they borrow the money from warehouse lender and then they pay off warehouse lender with the ____________ note that they sell to them.
    HAIRCUTT, DERECOGNITION, WHOLE LOAN TRANSFER BY DEFINITION….

    ————————————————————————-
    Then they make derivatives out of this note … Title 5 USC 552(b) (4). _________ is not applying the correct accounting entries under GAAP and not giving the claim to _________who have the possessionary right in the instrument and its proceeds under section 3-306 of theUCC. 9.
    CORRECT – YES…RIGHT!
    —————————————————————————-
    The _________have a claim in recoupment under section 3-305 of the UCC,________ want to see their 1099-OID, statement 95 cash flow statement and balance sheet WOW – THIS IS HUGE AND INCRIMINATING FOR MATERIAL MISREP[S SUBJECT TO BOGUS OVER COLLATERALIZATION. HUGE!
    —————————————————————————

    LOVE IT….IT SHOWS YOU THE REAL ISSUE AND FEARS…ACCOUNTING AND NOT A LEGAL RELIANCE ON CASE LAW.

    MSOLIMAN
    expert.witness@live.com

  16. Comments: I am not an attorney and cannot tell you how to proceed – or how to obtain a full accounting of your loan.
    ——————————————————————-
    MERS, POOLING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT, ACCOUNTING….WHAT?
    What pooling and servicing agreement. Full accounting of the loan? Do you know what you’re saying? Really? Any of You? (SEC registrations report ….and most are delisted by now…ahhh

    LOANS FOR CASH: The lender orginates a loan under a forward contract and a FDIC Member bank delivered the receivable by way of a less than arms secondary and capital markets platform.
    Do you realize therefore the lender sold your loan? How about this….your loan was sold upon its origination….sold. Your loan was transferred to a purchaser under a mortgage backed securities registration. It was none the less sold.
    Why are you tinkering with the nominal interest MERS which is allowed to hold a beneficial interest for a fractionalized investment and pass through securities. What assets do you believe MERS really holds? MERS by its own admission is a recoding method and means for recording transfers and instruments affect the lenders interest.
    But….that has nothing at all to do with your loan which I suspect was categorized for reporting purposes as a “Whole Loan “ asset transfer. Your loan was sold got it….sold!
    See gain on sale accounting and rules for seller restrictions on maintaining a controlling interest in assets sold. .GAAP SFAS 140.3

    You Need Help People:
    Look at the FDIC member bank requirements for a loan held to maturity.
    Look at the member bank requirement for funding a loan “uncovered”
    Where did the haircut come from? Who posted the Gain and what effect does recognition have on the foreclosure they are trying to perfect.
    Why is the sale for GAAP and Sale for Debt where the smart litigants rest their case?

    The origination and sale is the most damaging component to a foreclosure defense. It’s the transfer under MERS that will bury the parties in this fraud your missing…tight under your nose, sort of speak.
    Are you getting it yet….Your loan was sold!

    MSOLIMAN
    expert.witness@live.com

    .

  17. Raja, thanks so much. I know the Trust or pool that our mortgage went into, but it is no longer reporting. All the loans were sold by Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corp to Credit Suisse as an Underwriter. The Trustee of the Trust is/was HSBC National Association.

    I have a feeling our mortgage was written off somewhere and now Wells Fargo is claiming to be the “lender” or “creditor” as they never transferred the Note (which was “stamped over to Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.) or the Deed of Trust (which still is on County Clerk’s records in the original lender’s name). The original lender is no longer in business.

    I think that Wells (on the MERS site) is claiming that the investor does not want to be identified because this would reveal publicly that the pool is no longer reporting…also if they put the name of the Trust…Wells Fargo couldn’t steal my loan back from investors so easily.

  18. Kickboxer

    It is our MISSION. Thanks for the words.God Almighty is GREAT and we are his servants. He created us to help each other.

    The life over here is just like a WHEEL which is moving. Some people are at the top and some are at bottom. It is the duty of those who are at top to pull the people who are at the bottom. Tomorrow the people at the top will be down’

    Thanks and Be Safe

  19. KJP2U

    I sent an email to MERS CEO Mr. R.K. Arnold and asked him to solve this or refer to some one who can answer.I asked him about the difference between the Trustee and the Investor. If i received an answer I will let you know.

  20. That’s great, however Wells FargoBank, N.A. (who never tranferred our Note or Deed of Trust to the Trust that it was in after they bought it from a correspndent lender) reported something like “This investor has chosen not to be identified.” Fricken liars..

  21. Awesome!!! Thank you Raja. You have given us more ammunition.

    Neil, Raja, Anonymous, and others:
    -You guys are awesomeness to the 10th power. I love you guys like family! LOL You guys make me feel like I’m not alone.

  22. For All who want Full Accounting as pointed by Deb wynn,
    I am not an attorney and can not give you advice. I read something and then wrote the following. Please read this and consult some one or Mr. Neil.
    1. Plaintiffs signed the promissory note under UCC Article 3 and after securitization it comes under the Article 8 and plaintiff ___________ failed to record a debt to plaintiffs on their liability side. The _________________ being the alleged creditor in the amount of $______________, has waived its status as a creditor when the ____________ accepted _________ tender of payment (promissory note) under UCC §§ 3-409(a) & (b) and UCC § 3-604(a). _____________ did not adjust their accounting ledger to reflect settlement and closure of the accounts receivable side of the accounting ledger. All ________________ has done are to keep the ledger separate.
    2.__________ have an asset that the ____________ is holding of his’s that ____________ failed to give credit to____________, where the ___________made a mistake, is that _________is likely carrying _________ asset on liability ledger of balance from _______ accounts receivable. ________request the honorable court to instruct the ___________ to produce for the record of this court, asset side (receivable side) and liability side (accounts pay able side) of the accounting ledger and cash flow statement FAS 95.On the corporate liability off balance sheet ledgers, there has been a setoff deposited there and while comparing both sets of books, court will see there is a setoff, which is a claim under civil rule 13, which ________ are timely invoking.

    3. __________also request the honorable court to compel the __________to produce S3 registration statement which will indicate that defendant has sold the note and that is a transfer and defendant is not the real party in interest. The balance sheet, a 2046, 2049, and 2099, have OMB numbers on them which will tell the court that ________ has sold the note. (These balance sheets are subject to disclosure under the privacy act, Title 5 USC 552(b) (4)._________ is required to file balance sheet FR 2046, under USC 248 and 347 with the Federal Reserve Board. The balance sheets show the assets and liability that they use in accounting. The liability would be the _______ promissory note. It is liability because it is an asset to _______ . The ___________ hereby do a defense in recoupment under UCC 3-305 and a claim under 3-306.
    4. UCC 8-102 (12), (15) and (9) that defined what an entitlement holder is. UCC 8-105 that says ___________ are identified as the person with securities and entitlement right on the books of a banking intermediary.
    5. __________calls it intermediaries under Article 8 as this practice is under Article 8 because it involves securities. That is how _______is hiding its practices. ___________is treating these notes as securities (Article 8) and not Article 3 paper. Under Article ________are the holders of the entitlement and possessory rights to the proceeds of the transaction because __________ are the originator of the first funds transfer on the accounts payable side of the ledger. So, ___________ are entitled to the funds.
    6. ___________ created a mortgage purchase loan (16 CFR 433.1). This whole process is not about mortgage at all, because the defendant sold the note and received the funds and closed the account by assuming ___________ has repaid the originator _____________ on the loan.

    7._____________ request the honorable court to subpoena the auditors with two sets of books, to verify the facts about the____________ practice of book keeping (two sets of books) and trying to maintain the allusion that ___________ is still holding the promissory note. _________ asked this information in discovery under civil rule 36, the defendant and its attorney did not answer; they have admitted them on S 3 registration statement that is the form the defendant has filed that they sold the note. They have also admitted by non response.
    8.The ___________ have the 424(b) (5) prospectus. The defendant ______________ sold the note right after they got ________ loan. As soon as _________ gets the note, they borrow the money from warehouse lender and then they pay off warehouse lender with the ____________ note that they sell to them .Then they make derivatives out of this note by a bookkeeping entry. The balance sheet, a 2046, 2049, 2099, has OMB numbers on them that are subject to disclosure under the privacy act, Title 5 USC 552(b) (4). _________ is not applying the correct accounting entries under GAAP and not giving the claim to _________who have the possessionary right in the instrument and its proceeds under section 3-306 of theUCC. 9. The _________have a claim in recoupment under section 3-305 of the UCC,________ want to see their 1099-OID, statement 95 cash flow statement and balance sheet.
    GOD BLESS AMERICA

  23. Nye , how would one find such info… Loan History? I’ve found where at one time 35,000 was taken out of my account “number” and was put back in 3 days later. I don’t Know what the servicer was Juggling but 35,000 is an aweful lot to take from an account and put back in when my monthly house payment was only 721.00. I was never late and I never missed a payment.

  24. Deb and Angelo

    I am not an attorney and cannot tell you how to proceed – or how to obtain a full accounting of your loan.

    Believe the TILA Amendment is very important and should be used – but that is my opinion. The TILA Amendment tells us – who is NOT the creditor.

    To date, the TILA Amendment which, again, was drafted so that borrowers could negotiate directly with their creditor, is the only new piece of legislation that attempts to rectify some of the wrongs promoted over the past decade.

    Prior legislation and precedent law never anticipated the fraud perpetrated upon borrowers. And, the banks knew it.

  25. The MERS servicer ID is a joke. When I look at my info on MERS it states my investor has chosen not to make their info public. EMC is the servicer.

  26. The more we stir the more it stinks . How can we get full accounting for the life of the loan. It will be garbage too the banks book keeping is garbage it’s all am illusion and those who could help us don’t because they cdng get past the illusion.

  27. Anon
    What im having trouble with is, how do we write this up in an opposition to summary judgement. Should it be a counterclaim or an affermative defense?
    Most judges dont have the slightest idea of what that concept is. So how can we present it to them so that we dont look like some desperate Pro-Se wackos trying anything to save his house(get a free One).

  28. ANONYMOUS I AGREE

  29. THE PROBLEM IS WITH THE JUDGES. ANY PARENT OR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHER CAN FIGURE OUT THAT OUR PAYMENTS ARE NOT GOING TO THE CORRECT PLACE.

    PLUS OVER 7 MILLION FORECLOSURES ISNT THAT ENOUGH GROUNDS FOR A RECALL?

  30. Like Nye says, it truly is GIGO. For instance, on an audit I am currently doing, I plugged in the MIN (Mers ID Number) and got back that Chase was both the servicer and the “investor” which is contradictory to the assignment, done by MERS to a Trust!

    In another audit I’m doing, the results page returned “This investor has chosen not to display their information. For assistance, please contact the servicer.”

    So, while this MAY be a useful tool, don’t count on this being any kind of “foreclosure killer”.

  31. Remember – a trustee is not an investor – they are an “agent” for the “investor”. And, security investors in MBS pass-through tranches (certificates) are not a “creditor.”

    MERS needs to disclose their definition of “investor” and “creditor.”

    If MERS refers you to a trustee – this is bogus.

  32. LOL are you kidding me? Like Brochin and other MERS reps told me. The info is ONLY AS GOOD AS WHAT THE SERVICER INPUTS! DO NOT RELY ON THIS INFO. SEE IF YOU CAN FIND THE NOTE GOING OFF AND ON THE BOOKS; OUT AND IN SOMEONE’S HANDS; CONSIDERATION PAID; INDORSEMENTS ON THE NOTE; ETC…

    As the old adage goes… Garbage In – Garbage Out!

  33. Ok, so my servicer is:
    BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP
    Simi Valley, CA

    And my investor is:
    The Bank of New York Mellon, N.A.
    CYPRESS, CA

    What does this tell me? Do i now also sue BoNY inconjunction with BoA/CW? It seems, that CW still has my note, but they don’t have the mortgage, BoA has it, or does BoNY, or is it the other way around?

    Response from CW a couple years ago, to Attorney General inquirery, CW gave the AT copy of my note and fraudulent income verification form.

    BoA in response to QWR gave copy of same note as CW did a year earlier, but gave different TILDS with note, ones they passed around between bank and broker.

    How do i find out what BoNY has, if anything, if they hold the mortgage, doesn’t that mean the loan is bifurcated and thus null and void?

    Any help or thoughts greatly appreciated.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: