By Collete McDonald

Editor’s Note: Ms. McDonald hits the nail on the head with this article. You should incorporate it word for word in any relevant memoranda. Why is this important?

Because most of the “notes” (assuming they were the real notes and were timely indorsed and not back-dated) are presented as having been indorsed “without recourse.” Your opposition is counting on the fact that you don’t know the UCC, and you don’t know anything about indorsements.

This is another case where the instrument could appear valid on its face but for the fact that it is a fake. In this case the words “without recourse” on a note (executed as evidence of an obligation on a home loan) is contradicted by the very instrument that authorizes the indorsement — the PSA (Pooling and Servicing Agreement). The PSA ALWAYS provides for conditions, terms and provisions that are exactly the opposite of “without recourse.” These conditions have a negative effect on the negotiability of the instrument. So not only do we have a case where the “assignment” or indorsement” was merely an offer that was never accepted (and could not be accepted as per the terms of the PSA) but you also have an instrument that could not be negotiated under the terms expressed on it.

WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS EFFECTING THE INDORSEMENT “WITHOUT RECOURSE?”: Well the main one is that the pooling and servicing agreement states that if the loan becomes non-performing, the assignor must replace it with either cash or another performing loan. Nothing could be more clear that the indorsement was WITH RECOURSE.

The bottom Line: Most if not all “assignments” or “indorsements” are without effect, which means that the party having legal title to the instrument is the party named on it. And THAT means that each time the opposition attempts to establish authority under the chain of securitization, they are actually making the case that they have no such authority. You can’t come to court and say I am the Trustee for asset backed Pool XYZ which has ownership of this loan” and then turnaround and say you also have authority (legal authority supporting the power of sale in non-judicial states and the standing to foreclose in judicial states) to represent the “lender.” Not if the “lender” is named on the note as payee and on the mortgage or deed of trust as the lender.

If they want to establish some equitable right to enforce the note, they MUST file a judicial action.


A phrase used by an endorser (a signer other than the original maker) of a negotiable instrument (for example, a check or promissory note) to mean that if payment of the instrument is refused, the endorser will not be responsible.

An individual who endorses a check or promissory note using the phrase without recourse specifically declines to accept any responsibility for payment. By using this phrase, the endorser does not assume any responsibility by virtue of the endorsement alone and, in effect, becomes merely the assignor of the title to the paper.

A without recourse endorsement is governed by the laws of commercial paper, which have been codified in Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). The UCC has been adopted wholly or in part by every state, establishing uniform rights of endorsers under UCC § 3-414(1).

A without recourse endorsement is a qualified endorsement and will be honored by the courts if certain requirements are met. Any words other than “without recourse” should clearly be of similar meaning. Because the payee’s name is on the back of the note, he is presumed to be an unqualified endorser unless there are words that express a different intention. The denial of recourse against a prior endorser must be found in express words. An implied qualification, based on the circumstances surrounding the endorsement to a third party, will not be recognized by the courts. An assignment of a note is generally regarded as constituting an endorsement, and the mere fact that an instrument is assigned by express statement on the back does not make the signer a qualified endorser.

The qualification without recourse, or its equivalent, is limited to the immediate endorsement to which it applies. It may precede or follow the name of the endorser, but its proximity to the name should be such as to give a subsequent purchaser reasonable notice of the endorsement to which it applies.

A person might agree to accept a check without recourse if the person believes she could collect the money in question. Often the purchaser of such a note will acquire it at a substantial discount from the face value of the note, in recognition that the purchaser can only seek to collect the money from the original maker of note.

An example of a without recourse note is a personal check written by A, the maker, to B, the payee. B, in turn pays off a debt to C by endorsing the check and adding the without recourse phrase. If A’s bank refuses to pay C the check amount because A has insufficient funds in his checking account, C cannot demand payment from B. C will have to attempt to collect the money from A.

44 Responses

  1. WalterP and DyingTruth – I have Fremont Doug Pollock in my loan docs,would like comparisons to authenticate. Anyone with signature data/samples please contact me using MsSmithhomeowner1@gmail.com

  2. DyingTruth or others… Anyone have signatures by Doug Pollock? I have two different signatures. One from and assignment of mortgage and the other from an endorsement in blank. My Handwriting expert has determined that they were not signed by the same person. I’m looking to help my case by showing that the signature is a forgery.


  3. LDTX
    Question about “Pay to the Order without Recourse” I have received 3 copies of promissory note 1 from Bank of America and their Attorney’s have sent 2 of the 3. First copy of Promissory Note no indorsement November 4, 2011; 2nd Note received by attorney May 22, 2012 which has a image of a stamp “Pay to the Order of” Without Recourse CountrywideHomeLoans,Inc,ANewYorkCorporationDoingBusinessAsAmerica’sWholesaleLender By: Michelle Sjolander Executive Vice President and then a 3rd Copy by Bank of America Attorney’s October 9, 2013 which has no endorsement. In the light of things, what does this possibly mean? Does this affect the note in any way or do they have loopholes to cover themselves for 2 notes with no indorsement? Property up for foreclosure in Harris County TX Jan 1 2014.

  4. Non Judicial State- lost property 4 years ago. finally got a copy of promissory note (negotiable instrument) it shows originator stamped pay to the order servicer w/o recourse, then servicer pay to the order, then another bank pay to the order w/o recourse. Does this discharge the obligation and also does it forsake the right to foreclose.. their is no date, no notary.

    While you are right a lot more depends on Congress, but Resident Obama and Congress have the same ungodly fatal problem, being controlled by mass Zionist Jewish Supremist ideology and influence. Now I’m not racist and when I am when I do get mad I’m only racist against the human race, but if you read some of the translations out of the Talmud you might be frightened to find out how jews (not all jews – mostly all jewish members of Congress) practice thier religeous faith. The Talmud says it’s okay to molest 3year old little girls, permits jews to not be bound swear under oath in court and lie lie lie if it’s to deceive a gentile (any nonJew), prohibits jews from treating gentiles fairly and requires that gentiles be “cheated” financially or even for their last meal and clothes off their back, religeously preaches that the only reasons why gentiles exist is for slavery, sick tourture and entertainment, to live off of, spare organs if necessary to save a jew’s life and finally human sacrifice. Obama’s like Netinyahu’s chiuawa and Congress like a guild of rats, I mean they could switch over every member of the Democratic party’s constituency to J-Israel, change the Republican party’s name to the RepugnantCons, destroy our sovereignty by adding the USA as Israel’s second state effectively becoming the Jewnited States of Israel, all without so much as a squeak from Congress Obama or the Media and in fact they’d probably immediately try to force us to kill the rest of the Palestinians (who are almost nearly extinct and will be same as we if we don’t do something). I have nothing wrong with jews or other people who act normal it’s the ones who try to hold themselves superior over those who are less fortunate and I never in my life have seen any group treat another group of people as horrific as the jews treat the Palestinians. Oh and Congress isn’t scared of Wall st. they pimp and whore on it all day long who do you think their Number #1 investors are? They use Wall st. as an imaginary scapegoat enemy just like the war on “Terror” which only diverts attention away from the real threat which is the people in charge letting all the crooks get away with all this, that being Congress which has done nothing but create a full box of Alphabet cereal agencies that We the People have to support but effectively do nothing. The way I figure we have to organize catch them off guard by starting up a special election of our own, have contracts binding those elected to their constituents and get rid of the mold that is growing on the north side of the Hill.

  6. So if I was provided with a copy of one of these from Fremont Inv. & Loan stating “Pay to the Order of [blank area] Without Recourse” signed by some Doug Pollock guy VP for Fremont, should I include it with my request for judicial notice in my reply Appellant brief?

  7. Sunday 4 July 2010


    Not to rain on the sentiments of your “parade,” but is flies in the face of reality. This country was formed as a Republic with an organic Constitution, a government formed to protect the rights of one against the will of many.

    [When is the last time anyone heard that or saw the federal goverment exercise it? The Republic has been replaced by the worst form of government known, a democracy. Do a Google comparison between the two and begin to see the light of day.]

    What has happened is that the moneychangers have taken over, usung the Federal Reserve Bank, part of the world-wide Central Banking system, and diametrically opposed to the Constitution.

    Meyer Amschel Rothschold wrote: “Give me control of a nation’s money, and I care not who makes the laws.”
    Had he not dies of natural causes in 1812, he would die from laughter seeing how his vision for controlling nations has succeeded beyond imagination.

    The Federal Reserve is a private corporation, owned mostly by European bankers. A private corporation has had control of the United States money supply since the Federal Reserve act “passed” on 23 December 1913. The Constitution MANDATES that Congress coin Money and regulate the value thereof.
    See Article 1, section 8. Congress has abdicated that responsibility, and this country has been gutted by international forces with total control over the US.

    The organic Constitution and Common Law has been replaced with the anit-Christian Roman law, aka statutory law, adminstrative procedures, government agencies that are outside the law and not subject to the Constitution. These agencies are stautorily created without being subject to any public scrutiny.

    If you do not know what it means to be a US citizen, it is an example of how successfully the corporate federal government has replaced the organic constitutional government. I was born in this country and lived here all of my life, but I deny being a US citizen, which is a juristic, [artificial] person.]

    Prior to the 14th Amendment, such a category, “US citizen” did not exist. The Bill of Rights, aka the first
    10 Amendments, comprise the organic Constitution.
    All of the subsequent “Amendments” are nothing more than statutory law.

    What you wrote is akin to telling the German Jews during the Nazi occupation to “have faith.”

    All of the information mentioned above is available for anyone who eants to do their due dilegence. Most of it is found in case law.

    No cheers, here.

  8. When your craft has been studied all your working life , mine being nursing theirs being sciasterting to build wealth of the mo itary kind it makes fir excellence. And so we must be do hard on ourselves we are up against tbe wirkd best and some how i believe i surely believe if thry get enough rope tbey WILL hang themselves and no way would i want the karmic debt but then again i fear slavery and tbats what im fighting agsinst this battle of ours is to stop tbe banks enslaving tbe population and we must fight so it reprezents far more thsn bricks and morter. Stay strong pray fot divine intervention which i have witnessed in my life and believe you can do it there is an almighty power behind all thst is good true and just. Justice will be prevail that must be the collective mindset and THEN tbe tide will turn a collective cinciousness and the more
    inds that meet and spread the message tbe quicker the change will come. People have become seperated from theur neighbors we all need each other times may get very tough. Its all so aggreugious i cannot find a word that means saddder than sad. I relate to that ferling of being served a plate if injustice when you know you did nothing wrong and signed in good faith and the intention of paying when the banks intention was to steal regardkess if the consequences look what they did and the sorrow its caused i hope tbey are proud these over stuffed “suits ” calling themselves ” intellectual masturbators” well perhaps tbey can continue with that practice in jail, and their attorneys and the government official who sat idly by looking the other way. Please dont give up mr no tresspass

  9. Thursday 1 July 2010


    A little help, if you do not mind. I have looked on the SEC website, but to no avail, trying to locate the Pooling and Servicing Agreement.

    Morgan Stanley Capital Holdings LLC, FV-1, A02 Trust is the Trustee.

    What can I do with that information to locate the PSA, please?

    Many thanks.

  10. M Soliman,

    You stated earlier that the trust never sees any loans or physical assets. Can you explain that? The PSA for three of my properties state:

    The depositor will acquire all of the Subsequent Mortgage Loans to be included in the Mortgage Pool pursuant to a subsequent mortgage loan purchase agreement, the (“Subsequent Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement” and together with the Initial Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement, the “Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreements”), which is expected to be dated as of August 17, 2007, between the sponsor and the depositor. The Subsequent Mortgage Loans will have been purchased by the sponsor either directly or indirectly from the originators.

    In addition, the depositor will make representations and warranties regarding the Mortgage Loans in the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, but its assignment of the Mortgage Loans to the trustee will be without recourse and the depositor’s obligations relating to the Mortgage Loans will be limited to the representations and warranties made by it under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement.

    So the depositor purchases the loans, then assigns them to the trustee without recourse. How does this fit with the post here on the assignment w/o recourse? Or does it?


  11. 2 All… lets not forget his little tale from 2006 ” Accounting Fraud @ Fannie Mae”


  12. I keep posting again and again. The only way to win is to gather people and have everybody take money out of the banks. It would create a caos, but I bet they would learn a lesson.

    Please Livinglies !!!! open a facebook page.
    The Boycott BP page gather 800.000 in 2 months it is amazing how much faster the information arrives to people on facebook .

  13. WITHOUT RECOURSE- The lender provided the NOTE through a RESPA QWR and it is stamped “without recourse” and signed in blank by the lender.

    The lender represented it sold the loan to an investor, but NOW in court the orginal lender is saying it never sold the loan and owns the note.

    Any thoughts on the fact this “WITHOUT RECOURSE” STAMP appeared on the NOTE after closing? is the note null and void?

  14. experiencedprey,
    I know nothing, and if I think I know something I know nothing. I don’t give legal advice because I don’t know legal things.

    I feel you. I really do. I will ask questions and hopefully they will help with how you handle your case. What are you quoting law for? Are you indicating a ‘breach of contract’/ ‘breach of trust’? Are you verifying their right to demand payments? If there are papers filed in the public claiming that right, do you know what they are?
    See in my case, my mortgage company filed a Deed of Trust, that was their right to collect payments. I agreed with that right, but they left me high and dry now other people I don’t know are claiming that right. So I would never go to court to order the merits of whether my original “lender” had notes or deeds and stuff, because I sat across them and created that document and handed it to them, but I would want to know if other people have that document or if they are just looking online and claiming a right to something filed in the public.
    A judge will hear you and not acknowledge you, and if you are arguing whether that Deed is legit, he can’t enter into your private contract, but if you argue they failed to perform so you failed to pay, or they breached the trust, then he hears you (still not acknowledging you).
    You should step back, and pretend you are the judge hearing this case from two strangers. Figure what you are telling him about that stranger and if your statement is enough for him to dissolve the trust document he knows is on file in their real estate records in the county.
    There are so many cases won, but what was wrong that made them win their case. Something was wrong, that’s why they quoted law and won. All of these questions are for you to re-think your case. You can always abort one argument and introduce another but you have to be careful how you argue a case because you can miss an opportunity to state it another way and get your point across better.
    If I heard this case, I would listen to both sides, that’s what ‘equity’ court is supposed to do, and since I don’t know either side, whoever presents their case best wins. Now if you called this to court, what is your claim, and how many claims are you making. Did they sign your name fraudulently? When did you discover the fraud? What did you do to notice the public of the fraud? I know you are presenting papers in court, but a lot of what they have is in the real estate records in your county under your name. Have you looked at those records looking at your name as Grantor and as Grantee and see what they have filed in your name. Those public filings are like ‘affidavits’. A maxim of law states, and unrebutted affidavit stands as truth in commerce. What have you filed to rebut their affidavit. Do you know the real estate records has Deeds, Trust Deeds, Notices, Trusts, Affidavits, DBA’s, Misc, etc.. and you probably have nothing filed to indicate your position for everything they have. Do they have a Trustee Deed filed? Is the name in the Deed/Mortgage the name of the company you did business with?
    Their world is paper. They shuffle paper to do everything. What papers have you shuffled in the public to help you out? These people have set up their case under your name. You must know what they have set up.
    Someone referred me to a document and told me to learn how one state does it, and then use that information to search my own state to figure out how my state is similar or dissimilar to what was stated. One thing I got out of it was:

    Texas law is relevant only where the deed of trust is silent
    on an issue or where the deed of trust conflicts with Texas law.

    So think about your case and your state, if you put your state name in that sentence, how strong is your case? Does this explain how the judge is reacting when you quote law?

    This document was really good, read it. I’ll include the link, but like I said, just see what works for your state, or like I did, that sentence helped me so much with what i was dealing with.


    In my case, the deed of trust conflicts with law, it was violated so much it had no trustee and no beneficiary. I was astute enough to know when the trust was beached and called it out in the public.

    This statement also helped me out it said:
    Did the deed records show a chain of title between the
    original beneficiary (the original lender or mortgagee) named
    in the deed of trust and the present lienholder conducting the
    foreclosure sale? Basically, the lienholder “of record” must
    be the same lienholder in charge of the sale.

    In my case, there was no such thing showing a chain of title.
    So I try to learn ‘something’ in every document that comes my way.

    See if there is anything mentioned in here that was not done. A breach of contract/breach of trust is a big deal. No one is interfering with the obligations of a contract if one person is trying to enforce a contract/trust that they already breached or violated. If your case is not about that failure, it may be why you feel the way you do. Don’t expect the judge to show his hand though. It ain’t final until the judge signs the documents. I think within so many days (14 days) you can indicate whether you agree or disagree with the ruling, and state your fraud in your response. I don’t know what it does, if anything, to the ruling, but there must be a reason you have that opportunity. I would use every opportunity available, because I’ve learned that for every problem created, there ‘HAS’ to be a remedy. If you can’t get remedy in court, maybe you can get it after the first ruling where you refuse to ‘contract’ and accept that ruling by remaining silent for 14 days. Seems there is a time-wait before the other party can move forward after the ruling. I would use that as an opportunity to give the case a different focus from other cases. Maybe the judge would revisit and reverse. You’ll never know if you don’t use what’s available to you.
    Locate the Rules of Civil Procedures. I found one for a state, it said-
    In the Rules of Civil procedures, RULE 59. New Trials (section)
    (B) Time for motion. A motion for a new trial shall be served not later than fourteen days after the entry of the judgment.
    (D) On initiative of court. Not later than fourteen days after entry of judgment the court of its own initiative may order a new trial for any reason for which it might have granted a new trial on motion of a party.
    I think if you can peruse the Rules of Civil Procedure for your state, it may help you, in case the judge rules against you.
    A judgment is a contract. If you disagree, I would suggest you exercise your right to disagree within 14 days of that ruling.
    I hope I helped in some way with my questions and my statement. I admit I don’t know court procedure, don’t deal with attorneys, and don’t know how to stand before judges. I know nothing and I don’t know legal things.

  15. You’re right on it, ANONYMOUS. The power is also evident in the media. Why hasn’t one TV news station given any coverage to the mortgage and foreclosure fraud? NOPE! Blame the borrowers! Look at the advertisers feeding them their revenue: CHASE what MATTERS; TOGETHER, WE’LL GO FAR(GO)….INTO BANKRUPTCY! ; CITI NEVER SLEEPS; every time I see a Wells Fargo commercial I want to throw up! But these guys are BIG, HUGE advertisers! The 9:00 news investigative reporter doesn’t DARE go down to the courthouse and look at the bogus paperwork. They are obliged to turn that “blind” eye (kinda like ALGORE and the massage therapist, whooda thunk it?). Who in Sam Hell ever thought you’d see the National Enquirer get nominated for a “Pulitzer Prize”? I say we should call them, the NATIONAL ENQUIRER. I know that the schlub (too pejorative?) I talked to at the Wall Street Journal shelved his article. My farrginn neighbor is pissed at me because he thinks I’M PART OF THE PROBLEM. And that jerk collects unemployment and works cash jobs! Talk about a double standard!! I say we start picketing banks. All these big securitizers (except Deutsche) are national branch banking associations. US Bank, Wells, Citi, CHASE, all these guys have branches in principal cities. Let’s do some picketing.

    Stan, are you in? Fridays in Racine? Wells Fargo across from the mall? See you at 10:00 a.m.

  16. angry & NOT TAKING IT!,
    I always put my disclaimer, I know nothing and even if I think I know something I know nothing. I don’t give legal advice because I don’t know legal things.
    It’s hard to say whether I won. I won’t ever feel like I won anything because I live an honorable life, and can’t for the likes of me figure out how I got into this situation. But I claim it and will try to cleanse it. I contribute to charities, I donate to the poor, I feed the needy, I give to the homeless, If I have it and you need it, it’s yours. I help everyone. My neighbors and people that know me will tell you I walk on a different spiritual level and that I’m always positive and helping someone.
    I’m a giver. ……… that being said……………..
    I made up my mind, ‘It’s my home and they can’t have it’.
    So I guess there is really some things I just won’t ‘give’ away.
    The case is difficult. A merger of sorts, but the customers weren’t informed but the SEC (and investors were). I dug and found it. I was not happy to not be informed. I have a right to know about things that would potentially affect me.
    Our only notice something was ‘amiss’ was a welcome letter to a new bank. My ears perked up, I had never heard of this bank.
    In their haste to steal, in our correspondence with each other, I communicated with the Senior Vice President. Many letters. His letters had many different signatures. Their customer service was never informed I was communicating with the Senior Vice President office. There was about a letter a month for four months. I sent all mine Registered Mail/Return Receipt, and they sent theirs, regular mail. I got them all. They delayed verifying their ‘right to collect payments’; since I had never heard of them and kept inquiring about that ‘stated right’. They moved forward with an acceleration by filing a notice in the courthouse. In it they stated there was a substitute trustee. Then they did the sale. I was there the day of the sale. The day of the sale I retrieved mail from the post office, it was some info the attorney/substitute trustee had sent to indicate they were the beneficiary (holding both note and deed). Yes, they literally stated they were now the beneficiary of my Deed of trust and was the holder of the note and the Deed of trust and had was appointed as substitute trustee.
    There was an overlap from their statement that they had the Note and Deed and when the Senior Vice President sent his proof his company had a ‘right to collect payments’. So I figured customer service provided info to the attorney, and the Senior Vice President got his info from another source. The number of days both were making the claim to possessing the documents was very ‘tight’ to say the least. Mathematically impossible for what was done.
    The attorney’s note was a copy of the original, their Deed was not a copy of the original. It deviated from the original Deed.
    The bank’s note was from the title company and a copy of different Deed, not a copy of the original. So all in all, I had two different copies of notes and two different copies of he original Deeds.
    Identifiable different copies. It didn’t take a rocket scientist.
    Finally the original trustee gave the substitute my legal title to my property and the substitute gave my legal title to the new bank. I had printed it out when it only belonged to the substitute and the mortgage company, but later, the substitute refiled and attached me as Grantor to that transfer so it appeared I gave the title to the new bank.
    **** That was the straw that broke the camel’s back. ****
    I hated the fact that people were ‘Appointing’ themselves to me in the public without my permission, but it really bothered me that she filed a document as if I’d done something that I did not do.
    “She bore false witness against me!”
    That was FRAUD. Every filing appeared to be created from some agreement between other parties, except when it came to this. It lit a fire in me, to be pulled into a transfer of my legal title to someone when I couldn’t even get my hands on it. My heart beat fast, i could not sleep, my mind reeled with thoughts of how to tell the world she made that up. I wouldn’t have transfer that Trustee Deed to anyone.
    I went to the county, I filed a Notice of Fraud. I figured the fraudulent filers got a Notice of my notice of fraud, because a claim of Fraud is a serious claim in the public. In my notice, I pretty much stated “I have not established a trust relationship with (name and name and name and name) and I named all the entities. I called out the Appointment of Substitute Trustee in file # , as not being made by the Lender of Record. Then I stated the original trustee handed the title to the substitute trustee and so the original trustee no longer holds the legal title and is no longer the trustee without the title, and he aborted his position as Trustee when he transferred it. Since the Substitute was an invalid appointment, the document has no valid trustee. Without a valid trustee and without a valid beneficiary the document is now void and unenforceable, and I stated that I had settled the account with the beneficiary before they abandoned their claim, and mentioned i had a case for Identity theft and consumer protection in a real estate transaction open with the attorney general.(I did not reveal the case number)”
    It had to be notarized, so i put the information was true, correct and complete and not meant to mislead and signed. No need to sign at arm’s length since I created the document. Everything I stated was verifiable by looking at all the filings. It is difficult to dispute the truth.
    I don’t know what will happen. I know a person has 4 years to reclaim their home from a faulty foreclosure. I figure this will have to go into a court for it to proceed any further, but I figure the bank would have to prove who they are to me and by what authority they are demanding money and claiming an ‘interest in my home’.
    —–I have an interest in my home, too ———
    I figure it will be hard to enforce a document where both entities gave up their right to it. There are three names, me, the trustee, and the beneficiary, and I have proof two of the three gave up their position. The Deed is the only thing that secures the home for the debt. Without a position in it, you can only demand money. I’m disappointed in the original trustee. I feel he failed in his responsibilities by handing my legal title to the new bank. I was shocked to find out the new bank was the original trustee’s ‘customer’ just like they were the customer for the ‘substitute trustee’. That was a conflict of interest that money and not status or ‘capacity’ or standing allowed him to give away my property (the legal title) I entrusted with him for the benefit of the beneficiary. He had no right to make a side agreement to transfer my legal title to ‘anyone’.
    It’s my property in his possession.
    If I ever sign a deed again, I’ll pick the trustee, or be a co-trustee so it will take both of us to verify the standing of the party trying to claim a right to the home.
    I will ‘never again’ create (sign) a trust that locks me out of it unless I’m make an irrevocable trust for my purposes that are in my interest.

    I just don’t ‘trust’ anyone. And I had an attorney for about three weeks. It was before I filed the Notice, she kept calling the new bank, the ‘lender’ and I told her, “when I signed an agreement with you; you defined yourself as ‘attorney’ and me as ‘client’ yet you so freely call this bank I never did business with my ‘lender’. I have no document that labels them that, and no trust agreement with them. I do not know who they are. They never lend me money, I don’t recognize them as a creditor” She mentioned a merger with my former lender, but I told her, as a mortgage business they could have sold the Deed and Note and gotten into a situation that forced them to merge. I have a right to know who’s trying to do business with me and by what authority they are trying to do it. I told her if I pay the wrong entity without question and the right one shows up. I’ll look stupid for not asking. There isn’t a court in the world that will give me my money back because the judge will ask me why I didn’t verify their right to collect payments” I admit I did not appreciate the hit man mentality of that bank trying to put the squeeze on me to accept them as a authority over me when I had ‘never heard of them before’. The way they treated me, I’d never have done business with them nor sought to be their customer. They were rude.
    I eventually told the attorney I would not use her services.
    I don’t know what will happen next.
    In their world they create trust agreements on the fly, but they all are untrustworthy. So now, I make sure I focus on never creating a trust agreement. At the store, you want my phone number. I say, ‘I don’t give it out’. You call my home for a survey, I’ll tell you, ‘you called my personal line, I only answer those questions on my business line.’ Then I leave them hanging, cause I don’t give them a business line phone number and I don’t tell them ‘I really don’t have a business line’. I never use the words ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on the phone when talking to strangers. they ask a yes or no question and i respond, if you say so, I do not make statements of affirmation or negation over the phone. You ask for id, I show a debit card and my picture on a sam’s card or company id card, before I consider pulling out a state id.
    I do not trust. We were taught to tell the truth and trust, but our world is a ‘satan’ world (so to speak) and the main focus is fear, theft, lies, deception, etc…and telling them a truth helps them know your best defense and hurt you. I give just enough info to have a conversation, but I don’t show my entire hand. So each step they moved to take the house I moved only one step to stop them. They did not show their entire hand on how they would attempt to steal, and I didn’t show my entire hand on how I would attempt to stop them. I did just enough for what they’d done to me.
    If you read a software licensing agreement it’s an expressed contract, you click I Accept and you can’t change the terms of the agreement. it’s full of ‘you agree to’, ‘you accept’, ‘you will not’, ‘you understand’, etc.
    My eyes have been opened, but I don’t know when the nightmare will end. I do know, it’s my home, and they can’t have it, and I’m not giving it to them, so I guess if they’ll get it if they steal it, but I will do my best to prevent that theft.

  17. I’m starting a mortgage banking company called “without recourse.” how much would these people owe me?

    also, looking for a few attorney’s in Chicago that “get it.” Any takers?

  18. 2 Anonymous… too old, it is experience and knowledge that is needed in this crisis!

    It saddens me to note the deflation of spirit in your post.


    Where is the outrage… Fannie Mae who back’s 95% of residential mortagages in this county has the where withall to sift “personla data” yet this taxpayer bailed out entity with POTOUS approvial shoves homeowners back to the “servicer” protecting ever shifting “creditors” for that information!

    Ever Shifting!

    That is the outrage here… perhaps that is where it starts!

  19. edgetraderplus,

    I understand your frustration. Mr. Obama was elected as a “people” president. But the bailout occurred before Mr. Obama was even sworn in. This is politics, in America, to the highest degree, is not just dependent on the current President – but also on Congress/Senate.

    This is not just about the current President – and he has certainly done nothing to help – this is about a Congress that is very afraid of Wall Street – and powerful individuals who will insure that representatives are not re-elected if they do not agree to Wall Street’s terms. This about a Congress who cares only about their re-election – and we, the small people, are not large campaign donors, and are not lobbyists. This is about an America that is on the verge of a break down – and about Congressional members who are only worried about their own re-election and pensions. This is about a system that has gone haywire. And, this is about the American people who have not joined together to challenge the abuses we are now enduring.

    What has been occurring cannot be fought alone. While we may succeed in one court – we will lose in a hundred other courts. Attorneys are afraid, or lack knowledge, to take on the system as a whole.

    Believe me, I am hearing “disgust” from insiders about the people who are not paying their mortgages. The insider wealth is being disrupted. The consensus is that the people are to pay – they are to pay (for Wall Street’s follies) until they die. It does not matter that the loan was induced by fraud – or that the foreclosure continues the fraud – they WANT THEIR MONEY – and it does not matter HOW THEY GET IT.

    And, the administration does not seem to get it that our economy is over two-thirds based upon consumption – that is, it is based upon the people. STOP SPENDING. STOP GOING TO RESTAURANTS, STORES – Do EVERYTHING IT TAKES – to force this administration to recognize their wrongs. The people make up America – not Wall Street. Wall Street is dependent upon the PEOPLE. STOP SPENDING.

    We do not have the power – but we have the numbers – we are larger than the establishment that is making decisions. Decisions that have destroyed – and continue to destroy America – and our lives.

    I am too old – but you younger people have the stamina. It is up to you.

    Again, this does not mean to do not fight your own battle. It just means – that if we are to win the “war” – we must join together. We have the power – power that we have not tapped.

  20. Truly astounding they can “sift through” the American People’s DATA but we can’t “SIFT” through Fannie Mea’s! Bogus trust’s de-solved MBS pools… In fact through their actions scantiness and promoted by Dodd & Frank…. the economy is destroyed…and the POTUS declare’s Hand’s Off Fannie & Freddie once again with Dodd & Frank at the helm of financial reform.

    “Fannie Mae (FNM: 0.3871 +1.87%) is sifting through borrower data to determine who is strategically defaulting and who is not after announcing more efforts this week to crack down on those who walk away from their homes. And if the GSE determines someone strategically defaulted, then they say they will hold the borrower accountable for all associated costs of getting the house back on the market, in areas that lawfully allow deficiency judgments.”

  21. Tuesday 29 June 2010


    You have posted several time that the government is promoting the pushing through of foreclosures. Why would you expect a president who ensuring the total debasing of US “currency,” [hard to call a commercial debt instrument “currency,” but that is what most are willing to accept], rewarding Wall St and banks with bailout money, to care one wit about consumer confidence?

    I have lived in this country all my life, but I am not a US citizen, so I do not complain to the parasitic federal government. My efforts are spent staying out of equity and preparing for the inevitable.

    Enjoy your other insights.


  22. trespass unwanted,

    very well stated,

    i know this very same scenario [the time & life lost ] rage & anger , disillusion , pity … make the language of love much harder to reach & retain…
    Our hearts get harder http://www.foreclosurehamlet.org/video/heartsgetharder-1

  23. One more post from me.

    This is the perfect day to contact the President. Reported today that consumer confidence had a sharp drop. This report – in combination with Europe’ debt problems – is causing a market sell-off this morning.

  24. Everyone should contact the President – regarding my last post. Not that it will help – but – let them know. Simply type in “Contact President Obama”.

    Here is what I wrote:

    Dear Mr. President:

    How could you let this happen? How could you let people still be held responsible for “deficiencies” in loans that were fraudulently inflated (and induced) by Wall Street from the onset. You should be ashamed of the following:

    (I enclose what I posted here -“Fannie Mae to Charge Strategic Defaulters, for Everything
    Friday, June 25th, 2010)

    And continue with – Twenty-five percent of the people are “under-water” – that is a large voting block – that will, at reelection time – speak out.

  25. to edgetraderplus – PSA is easy to get if you know name of Trust.

    For all others – re- what has been discussed here about the government. Did anyone see this? Proof in the pudding.

    Fannie Mae to Charge Strategic Defaulters, for Everything
    Friday, June 25th, 2010

    Fannie Mae (FNM: 0.3871 +1.87%) is sifting through borrower data to determine who is strategically defaulting and who is not after announcing more efforts this week to crack down on those who walk away from their homes. And if the GSE determines someone strategically defaulted, then they say they will hold the borrower accountable for all associated costs of getting the house back on the market, in areas that lawfully allow deficiency judgments.

    Often when a home forecloses, Fannie Mae brokers and contractors discover vandalism and missing appliances and fixtures when they ready the home for resale, the GSE said. The cost of making those repairs and replacements will be included in the determination of the deficiency amount, a Fannie Mae spokesperson said, in addition to the difference in the mortgage balance and the proceeds from the foreclosure sale.

    Those who Fannie Mae and its servicers deem strategically defaulted will not be able to secure a Fannie Mae-backed mortgage for seven years after the foreclosure and could face legal action in order for the company to recoup mortgage debt.

    Fannie will base its assessment of who is and who isn’t walking away from their home on income verification, information on the borrower’s credit report, and borrower documentation related to the disposition of prior mortgage loans, the spokesperson for Fannie said.

    When a borrower applies again for a Fannie Mae-backed mortgage, he or she would have to produce evidence of hardship or extenuating circumstances to get the loan.

    “Borrowers who worked with their servicers to address delinquency and/or avoid foreclosure, will be viewed more favorably than those who do not,” the spokesperson said.

    According to the announcement this week, Fannie is instructing its servicers to monitor delinquent loans on the verge of foreclosure and recommend cases where the company can pursue deficiency judgments.

  26. Tuesday 29 June 2010

    Does anyone know how to obtain a Pooling and Servicing Agreement, or how to make the demand for one that the plaintiff must produce in court?

    Originators are not about to admit to being a table funder or let it be known they are operating from a PSA.


  27. Tuesday 29 June 2010


    What you are experiencing is the reality of the system, and the judicial system is an enabling part of the overall system. Yes, words most people accept at face value are not the same words of art used in courtrooms. Tresspass Unwanted says a lot, and the comments are worth re-reading for comprehension.

    You are also experiencing first-hand that the real opponent is not the plaintiff, but the judge, aiding and abetting the system which excludes benefiting those
    outside the clique.

    Your efforts in court should be designed for the next phase: appeals. To get to the appellate stage, you have to be on record making objections to what the judge does/says against your interests. Objections, by the way, have to be in a specific format stating WHY the objection is made. Otherwise, it is ignored by the court, and appeals.

    It ain’t easy. It is frustrating, and for sure, it is unfair, but it is what it is, and we all get to deal with what is and not what we expect things to be.

    Keep focused and forcing the other side to prove everything, and take NOTHING for granted. Read cases that are similar to some of your circumstances. You will learn how judges handle them and make decisions. They are a great learing tool.

    Keep pressing…and I say that from experience.


  28. To Trespass Unwanted…

    Have you won your case? I agree kiss, this is the best advice I have learned from Neil’s site, a hard one for me to learn. Ok maybe I am still struggling, but it is because the world you are discribing is not a world I have seen. From the very first day I got more of the style described by “Anonymous” I hate to say it, but this is the way it is. The Judge actually speaks for the Lawyer, making suggestions, asking questions, as if he was never in a Courtroom. I presented evidence of fraud, because my case is more about fraud than anything else, I have documents that if nothing else, would cause the Judge to require the opposing party and other called upon parties to supply the discovery I request. He does not give me an inch. Yes, I can make a motion to demand the discovery, but the Judge has literally ignored everything I have said. No standing, there are several parties claiming to have HAVE documentation ORIGIN|AL, I have show this as well, not one has come forth with any documentation. Not one original document, and I have been asking for over 3 years. They do not have original documentation because if they were to show it, they would see it is fraudulent, it is blank of pen and ink. There are no real signatures on the original because they are not signed the way the Photoshop version says they are. They are forged documents. In several cases there are several very obvious forgeries. The Judge has not allowed this as part of the argument. I am not an attorney, obvious, but he is going forth based solely (as it appears presently) on procedure. The facts should be aloud, but they are only concidered for the Plaintiff. The law is on my side, if the Judge is on my side, I am completely unaware.

    Modification, is not even a concideration for me at this point. My civil case against the original Parties is being put at risk by this former subsidiary who is not even present only the Attorney has spoken, only evidence that could be obtained online at Public Records. Old at that, but not even copies of original form. There is surely enough to question the Plaintiff.

    Anonymous my experience is very frustrating because I am being ignored. Maybe the Judge is trying to give me an education in law, but the effort have to put into this is going to drive me straight to the asylum. I feel like I am slowly dying, physically from this deeply frustrating experience. I feel close to quitting. That is really hard for me especially with the time and research I have invested. I feel like showing up with the keys for the Judge.I am afraid if he does let them foreclose on my home they will have to drag me out by my feet kicking and screaming. I can not even glance at the feeling imagined for a possible loss, it makes me feel ill. I was going to say there could be no worse UNJUST feeling, but I know this is still only a material posession, I must keep that in perspective. But with the suffering of my children and the lost years I am well fueled by now. I cannot imagine how I will be able to walk away and survive the feeling of no justice, I cannot bear the thought of UNJUST what is the word for the lack of justice? Just saying this fills me with venom like substance circulating in my solar plexus The thing is, I don’t even want to live here anymore.I never thought that would happen. It has. They cannot force me out they cannot leave me homeless, but it looks like this may be their intention.

  29. I have a question, has anyone here published all of their documents online? I keep telling myself I am going to but I am afraid there is some rule against it.I n event I lose I WILL publish my documents, with hopes that many would do so and things would be more clear as to the level of deception against which we are faced. There are people who put documents online from their cases. At the very least the games those reindeer play would be out there for all to see.

    My story is becoming so twisted and convoluted I feel like I am losing my ability to speak the language. English is translated to lies. I find it more difficult to express myself when telling my story with every passing day.
    I don’t know how to respond to anything because though I have the evidence and the defense to this foreclosure I will go nowhere without the Judge who seems so far to support opposing team. That team includes one Attorney. Although he has recently added an “Attorney in Fact” from a collection from Asset Recovery,

  30. Monday 28 June 2010

    Well expressed, Trespasser.


  31. I never treated my home as an ATM, I never took money out of my home to fix it up, take vacations, pay bills, buy cars. I put money in by making payments from day one, and never took any out, not even at closing. I had equity. I refinanced for a lower interest rate, and got caught in a really big net in this crisis.
    That being said, whatever we did to get in this situation, the first step is to forgive yourself and the second step is to take responsibility for ‘our’ actions (mine included), and the third step is to locate the breach, and call it out, and stick to it, and keep it simple. I can’t give advice because everyone does something different to make their solution different, and even if you told me everything you did, there is something you will not tell and that may be key to solving the problem, you are dealing with a different bank, they are filing different papers, you had different agreements, you may talk to them on the phone and I did everything in writing, there is so much that is different, that I can’t possibly tell anyone what they ‘need’ to do or how to solve the problem.
    Contracts can be verbal or written or by gesture (handshake, shaking head yes or no, giving a thumbs-up, or at in auction setting raising your numbered playcard to agree to the auctioned value just called out, etc), and trying to help someone who doesn’t understand contracts, trying to protect themselves from getting into contracts that don’t preserve their rights, and protect their rights in contracts that may be void, unenforceable,or breached, well that would be impossible. Even my home phone says, “You’ve reached, xxx-xxxx, leave a message and if we want to talk to you, we’ll call you back.” I know not to establish a contract (agreement) even with my own answering machine. If someone leaves a message after I gave my name, and welcomed them on my answering machine for calling me and stated I’d return their call as soon as possible, then they would consider their message as received, and accepted, and we are in some verbal agreement (implied by having an answering machine that let them know they were calling me (my name was given), welcomed their call and said I’d call them back).
    I wish everyone well in their efforts to preserve their homes from this abuse and greed.

  32. II know nothing!
    If I think I know something I know nothing.

    If the Deed or Mortgage was invalid, there is one way you would defend yourself against the ‘breach of the trust’. It seems people have gone to court to ‘argue’ the merits of the case, and thus establish an understanding that the Deed of trust as a valid trust, and if it is valid, and there are no provisions violated in it, then “no law impairing the obligations of contracts shall be made”. Expect a jugde to ignore every wonderful law you cite, because trusts do not have to obey a law. It’s a private agreement between two consenting parties. One actually signed consenting to the terms.

    You can argue all the ‘law’ you want and lose. And Law is copyrighted material for ‘lawyers’ licensed to practice it. AND as part of their system, you ‘agree’ to abide by their ruling. They know their system of ‘trust’ is not ‘conscionable’. Their system is a ‘trust’.
    If you say I stole your car and I argue I did not before a judge, he will assume there is some merit to the accusation, since I have arguing the merits of the case, on where your car was parked, and what time of day it was, and whether you left the keys in it.
    If I didn’t even see your car, or don’t know what kind of car you drive, why am I in court arguing over your accusation.
    You accuse me of stealing your car, and I take you to court to fight you first, my, that’s what it looks like when someone who should not be foreclosing starts to foreclose and you take them to court first. Now you see why judges do what they do?
    People need to stop doing what everyone else is doing. When they get you to go to the ‘arena’ first to fight, they have already won.
    You are the last one to know it.

    You need to do something different. You need to show there was no ‘trust’ relationship between you and these entities that popped up after your bank went bankrupt, or after your bank merged, or sold it’s assets to someone, or had no right to assign your obligation to another.
    I can bet a lot of the people have ‘signed’ modification documents without protecting their interest. Each document is one layer of deception that takes you further from keeping your home. The longer you negotiate with a bank/entity that you never established a relationship with before the crisis, the longer they can show you have established a business and trust relationship in your dealings with them. They spend months dragging people through a modification process only to foreclose on you. Or after dragging you through the process they get payments from you too, only to foreclose..
    You aren’t doing yourself a favor by ‘working with’ a bank who took over your ‘trust’. I read my Deed, and it said things could be sold, transferred or assigned, but it never, I repeat never, said anything about the Lender could assign it’s rights as a beneficiary to anyone else. I’ve been all over it, and although we all talk about notes without allonges and deeds without assignments, mine never said anything about those things. I went with the crowd when I pushed back on what was happening to me, but if I stuck with the basics..it’s not in there. ITS NOT ALLOWED.
    If it’s not in the Deed/Mortgage, it’s not allowed. So I do not argue over things that aren’t expressed in my Deed of ‘Trust’. The document is already unconscionable anyway so why would I let someone pull me into arguing and validating things that didn’t get expressly identified or stated in that ‘one sided document’. Why would I sign something else from them? They don’t sign anything to me. No signatures from VP or their robo-signer saying they will do anything for me. Nothing from them at all.
    If you have to fight, your case may be weak.
    I say it over and over, they breached the trust. Find out what they did and call it out. Let them take you to court, and you stick to a basic argument like a broken record. A case can be as simple as, “I did not establish a trust agreement with these people”. Or” I made a promise to pay someone else, I don’t know these people.”
    Judges by the nature of their position will fuss, argue, sweat, and even spit and sputter while talking to get you to change your tune, or argument, or enter into a ‘trust’ agreement with the court.
    Stay in the language of love, and be a broken record.
    They can introduce a box full of paper, bring a truckload, and my basic statement will remain the same, I don’t know who these people are. yep, I see they got a note, I didn’t give it to them, I don’t know these people. Yep they got an assignment of my contract, but I signed a Trust with someone else and none of the provisions told me they would abandon their claim and hand it to someone else. None of the provisions told me I had to work with anyone else. I read it.
    I’m telling you, there are people who have no issues with them when they KISS (Keep It Simple St..pid). Anyone pulling me into court would have to prove there was an agreement (a trust between us, a trust relationship between us) before they could prove they had standing to take my home. I don’t want to see papers, I want
    I dto know who you are, and why are you trying to steal my home? I don’t need an attorney to ask that in court!
    I’m telling you, you are chasing a carrot on a stick, and running into court and losing and wondering why. There is no short cut for this problem. Let your heart beat fast, get nervous, and stand up for yourself. All of these people using lawyers that get it, would be posting that their lawyer that ‘gets it’ won their case. So far I see Pro Se’s and a few unique arguments get through when an attorney is involved. If you keep it simple, there may not even be a case, so nothing to report.
    Who are you? FDIC, so what? You can’t enter into an agreement I made a long time ago with someone else, unless I agree. Yes, someone else failed and you took over, but that’s a risk you chose to take. I have no trust relationship with you. Yes, I know what FDIC stands for, but who are you to me? I never sat across a table from you and handed you anything!
    You can’t sit back and be quiet, and think things will go away.
    Speak, and preserve your rights. Watch how you sign things.
    I know, the majority of you will continue to ignore me.
    It just takes the one or two who will ‘trust’ themselves enough to do something different from the ‘sheeple’ and sign ‘at arm’s length’, even if the judge makes a ruling; and preserve their right to ‘not trust’ what they are signing. Heck, on a case I didn’t agree with, I’d write, I don’t agree with the ruling, and sign at arm’s length.
    I wonder how many of those would get ‘revisited’. Oh we won’t find out because people aren’t preserving their rights when they sign documents. They have a statement, “It’s not personal, its just business” If you step into their world you have to know what you are doing and preserve your rights. The banksters preserved their rights before they agreed to run these banks. So nothing is going to happen to them, if anything their ‘attorneys’ assume the risks by ‘representing them’. But they are paid very well to represent them.
    There is a nice reveal of the term ‘without recourse’ to redirect you from the ‘at arm’s length which provides more protection’. Someone is reading these blogs and the information is getting back to them. They will let things out to redirect your attention.
    A little at a time more stuff is coming out for as long as we have been rejecting their solution to their problem. Without recourse will not work on the documents you are signing for modification.
    There is no ‘fight’. When Joshua defeated Jericho, he lay in wait, and ran as if defeated, but ended up being the one doing the defeating. The weakness of all these foreclosures and power of sales are they are an illusion. If you see a power of sale from someone with a ‘right’ to do it, then one was done, if you don’t know the entitiy that did one, then how valid is it that they did one against you? It’s no longer called a foreclosure, it’s a theft? Call it out? If the bank has no right to steal, don’t run to court to stop them, let them steal, then go to court for theft, or file a complaint with the police for theft.
    You are learning from the bankers that want to teach you how to fight them. If my home does not belong to you and you file documents to set yourself up as having a right to my home, you’ve committed fraud. I will file a Notice of Fraud, that you committed fraud. Title searches see more than just Deeds of Trust. Your knowledge is limited, but your spirit is strong enough to learn, if you’ll just listen and stop ‘Trusting’ these businesses. A modification will give them a legal right to take your home as soon as anything unfavorable take place. Right now, they’ve breached the trust. Do not help them establish a better Trust document with that Modification.
    If you ‘weren’t a registered voter’, there are things they ‘can’t’ do
    to you because you are not a part of their system.
    If you were a ‘non-resident alien’ (legal term in older Black’s Law Dictionaries) they would have deal with you on different terms, it’s not that easy to you from your home.
    The T.V., media, and public education left you and still leaves you uneducated to things. I watch people complain, daily, but I also know, if you ‘seek ye shall find’, and if you find it, you will still have to stand up and use what you learned, you can’t rely on someone else to do what you can do for yourself. Stand up in the ‘lion’s den’ on your own faith, and state what you can state – to save what you want to save from the lions. If an answer is given to you in these blogs and you ignore it, then you have made a decision. You may be unaware you have made it, but it is your decision, so you deal with the consequences. There is only ‘you’ to save you, because you are your own savior. Yes, no one will know the hour of his return, because the return happens when you take responsibility for what you helped create (you are a creator, you created that document with your signature, you are the Settlor), so you take responsibility for dealing with that document. It is breached. Either they get the house because you were ‘afraid’ to stand up, or they don’t because you call it out as ‘breached’ and don’t enter into a new agreement (modification that is not breached). Those of you that ‘belong’ to the system, are dealing with the solutions the system is providing for you.
    I’m not a Christian, even though I make those references. I am spiritual and know we are here to help each other. People who are ready to hear, will hear and understand, some aren’t ready and will hear and not understand, and some will hear and discard what they heard. Jesus spoke that parable in the bible, in different words, but it does apply to what you are learning and how you are receiving what you are being told.
    Feel it, if it doesn’t feel right, then it’s not your time to know, let it go.Something else you will learn will draw you back to things you didn’t understand before. Stay in the light.
    I do not know legal things so I cannot give legal advice.
    Light and Love,

  33. Dear Anonymous




    “Be Strong and Courageous”

    (Deut. 31:6)


  34. Very well said ANONYMOUS.

    As someone who has been in the legal field for 20 years, I can vouch for the fact that judges are routinely legislating from the bench. It is rampant in the State of Florida – in an opinion issued by the 5th DCA in 2008 (Douglas v. DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY, 995 So. 2d 1144 (5th DCA 2008)), the court stated: “we find no viable defense to foreclosure…”

    That opinion sums up how foreclosures are seen in Florida. Foreclosure defense is seen as a futile attempt at prolonging the inevitable. The judges and mediators believe that homeowners who fight foreclosure actions are in actually shirking their responsibility.

    It’s a sad state of affairs. Large corporations are allowed, with impunity, to write off and/or write down their debts – so why is a homeower viewed as a deadbeat? Don’t we have the same right to protect our financial futures? Aren’t we entited to recourse for wrongs committed against us?

  35. THE A MAN –

    Yes, but more than that – states (i.e. courts) are under pressure to put through foreclosures – without question – and as fast as possible.

    The US Government made a big mistake when they bailed out the banks and left the people to sink. They thought it would be a quick and easy disposal of foreclosure victims – but the people have been fighting back. The US Government will never go back and say they were wrong – they just will not do it. So, there is increasing pressure on states and courts to accommodate the foreclosures – so that the government can move beyond the nightmare.

    Good presentation of the law is simply ignored in courts. The judges and courts are paid by the taxpayers. These states, particularly those with large budget deficits, just want the foreclosures to be done with and over.

    We are not battling adversaries in foreclosure, we are battling a system that is intent on ignoring the “law” to their own advantage – a system stacked against us. From day one of the mortgage crisis- Mr. Hank Paulson stated that the foreclosures must go through – without help from the government – and Mr. Paulson not only completely ignored the people – he ignored the fraud.

    Heard today that many of the foreclosures are in the hands of government. The government purchased many of the toxic tranche security investments of the fraudulent SPVs. Although I will repeatedly state that MBS security investors do not own the loan – and this should be clear by now – the MBS security investors have a say in loan modifications and foreclosure decisions.

    Thus, the very US Government that has implemented “HAMP” programs for loan modifications, and as the current “investor” holder of MBS tranches, is the very party that is DENYING loan modifications – and refusing principal reductions.

    The US Government, and with it’s influence on state revenues (and indirectly – courts) – is the very party that is promoting foreclosures across the US.

    You may have the best argument in court – with clear interpretation of the law – and still lose. And, no one here will be able to generally trump the decisions because we will never make it to the Supreme Court of the United States. Our wins are a hit and miss -you win if you are lucky enough to get an astute and fair judge – who are few and far between..

    Our actions are, primarily, with the US Government – and they are immune to legal action.

    We are nothing but “casualties” of the mortgage fraud “war.” And, until someone figures out a way to beat the system – in entirety – we will remain victims.

    Since the first day I started posting here, I have emphasized that more needs to be done as whole. This does not negate individual actions – but it would support our system for victims of rampant fraud. This has just not been done – we need a leader to organize. I nominate – THE A MAN.

  36. Maher , I just wanted to let you know , I appreciate your post’s.






    “Be Strong and Courageous”
    (Deut. 31:6)


  38. I second that – the A MAN is absolutely, positively correct!!!!

  39. THE A MAN —– is right.


    “Be Strong and Courageous”

    (Deut. 31:6)




    securitized back assets are really junk bonds.


    Soliman – Wait, play on words. The trust never ever sees any loans or physical assets. We all discussed this back in 2008. The trust can only hold passive investments. It’s a closed end fund so nor could ever barter the physical loans in and out of trust holdings under the PSA. It must remain sealed and autonomous.
    Essentially, the buyer and the seller as an FDIC member bank acknowledge that there is an additional source of repayment other than underlying collateral; Therefore, the loan made by teh creditor is not collateral dependent.

    Notice how I said loan as these were not by any stretch of the imagination a true bonefide sale.

    The seller makes good on the payment determined regardless of the WAC and CPR over a term.
    If the pool generates $1.0 million a month and the Seller collects only $75,000 the trust will not look to the assets. NO WAY!

    The seller forwards the total amount which includes a $25,000 shortfall.

    The Seller can substitute the asset in the servicing scheme to cover a deficit but the PSA and Trust care nothing for the assets as their recourse are certificates as collateral and “Sellers” promise to pay.

    ….this kind of an arrangement is exactly what got Keating in trouble. These investors were lured by an FDIC member banking giant guaranteeing dividends. They were sold with more than just a PPM I can assure you.

    Purchasing stock issued by a member bank using depositor sourced funds for equity investment into business combinations transferred less than arms length.

    That while registrants sold investment funds unrealistic cash flow projections for over burdened cash strapped borrowers speculating the lender could continue to control the markets appreacaiton. ….stop is that not enough


  43. Soliman – Guys, you’re reaching here and grasping. The information you’re uncovering is solely related to the warehouse lender and seller. Its standard language in a “Bailee” agreement. The collateral is shipped to the prospective purchaser under the terms and conditions set forth in a standard Bailee.

    The transferor provided a non recourse endorsement upon good deleivery under a bailment agreement so not to circumvent liability assumed by the parties receiving the assets as intended successors and assigns.


Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: