Electronic Recording and Delivery act (ERDS)

Thank you Martha Nali:
THIS IS IMPORTANT. Anyone with more information on this, please send it in or post it in the comments. Whether this act would have any effect on old transactions, is doubtful, but I would have to see the whole thing and get some comments before I made up my mind. I’m also not sure that MERS is doing anything with documents. As far as I know they never touch a document or a dime. They are just a database “service” in which the pretender lenders pretend to keep track of the loans. The database is really just a cover for using MERS as a straw-man.

Forget about the notary rules. Forget about the signatures-
The Electronic Recording and Delivery act (ERDS) has now allowed the MERS computer (That’s what it is) to “notarize” events- such as assignments- That never happened.
The counties are passing laws that allow this to happen as long as the “Notary stamp” is on file.
It completely obliterates what we have came to believe the act of notarization means.
The notaries do not even know this, and it is being slowly fed into the systems, and you can find only a few completely in digital format, but they are doing it. No actual notary event is happening.

False witness–Did God know about this coming?

This does not mean you cannot declare a document forged as to the notary, if it was done “Old School”, (with a human) and lacks truth for whatever reason-you did not sign, papers switched etc.. ( my case)

FURTHER, all the “Robo-signatures”, as Neil likes to call them.
Forget all you ever knew about trying to authenticate the names….

MERS is a computer using software that employs highly advanced logarithmic calculations, to distort a false signature each time it is applied. (FONT) The names you see signed, –yes there might be a human behind the name sometimes, but the chances are it’s an “Identity” created to sign the documents.

Mr. Lin, in China who is the head linguistic software developer in the world, (Microsoft) pioneered this software that has allowed MERS to impersonate humans, I allege. (it was not his intent, he just works on the design)

The MERS computer applies a distortion that is unique and varied each time to the “Font” that has been established for each identity—so as to trick the human eye into thinking they are seeing a true human signature, that is varied and slightly different of course each time it is signed.
All the signatures DO NOT MEET ERDS code.

All this talk about the signatures is failing to realize what has finally happened. MERS can impersonate humans, and can foreclose on 10,000 homes a day without any human interaction. It does not need a human, unless it is challenged

and then her clarification and interesting history

As clarification, when I say notarize “events” that never happened, as in assignments… Neil has blazed that path already, in documenting that the “assignments” did not happen, or do not happen until the computer is challenged.

( I am quoting Neil verbatim in my own pleadings, and owe him a debt for this work on here)

What I am specifically saying, is the ERDS language is allowing counties such as Los Angeles, to pass county codes, which allow 100% digital notarizations. IF THE STAMP IS ON FILE WITH WHOEVER IS DOING IT–Think Title Company.

So the actual event that I am talking about NOT happening is a face-2-face meeting of the notary, and the signer, and the computer is in fact acting as both in effect, as it generates the documents, with signatures of both the notary and the signer.

I have found some 100% digital notaries’ in the recorder’s office that are pure text-no pretend wet ink signatures even.

The system they have designed to rob us blind with is fully in place, and will be implemented slowly, so as not to cause uproar. I almost cannot believe this is happening, as its sounds too ala-Kaczynski, but the law has already been written that allows this. ERDS.
And for all you outside of California…There is a saying, So goes California…

A man’s word is now just a font.

Martha Raysik,
11th generation descendent of William Bradford.
Passenger on the Mayflower, and
Governor of Plymouth Colony.

34 Responses

    ERDA (Electronic Recording Delivery Act) was passed instead of URPERA due to concerns about real estate fraud. ERDA as written with oversight from the California Department of Justice to ensure transactional integrity during the actual electronic delivery process.

    These are the counties in California using the ACS solution for CERTNA (The ACS solution is only one of the two certified for use in California)

    San Bernardino
    Santa Clara
    Santa Cruz
    San Joaquin
    El Dorado

    The other system certified is called SECURE.

  2. The best way to forcing the electronic signature and imaging issue to be resolved is to USE IT AGAINST THEM…

    What happens if homeowners sudden start receiving docs stating PAID IN FULL… hmm, the foreclosure mill lauches thier rabid dogs but the homeowner shows up with their-own set of docs stating PAID IN FULL – with the proper signatures…? There was no RETURN address because it must have been left by a carrier… gee thanks Countrywide…

    So, who’s docs will the judge accept..? What happens if the docs are filed in the land records before the foreclosure mills file their assignments and the suddenly find the Certificate of Satisfaction – what can they do then? If they lost the originals they probably lost the certificate of satisfaction too, right?

    Just a thought…

  3. CEA ,

    I could do something like that.. I have skills but they’re (in the computer world) considered out of date and I’ve had data-security run-ins previously so I might not be who you want. The problem is that on pure electronic records you could never be sure what or when something MIGHT have been altered because of programs that bypass the audit trail .. you might have to inspect 10 years of daily audit files to find one alteration but more likely you will find that a file contains data on thousands of loans and is updated daily or weekly and you will not know when the exact line item you are interested in was updated.

    The only way I see the fraudulent document problem being resolved is if the courts get po’d and seize the records of all the mortgage giants or appoint an admin team to guard them and fire most of the existing staff. Finding fraud is easy most of the time , it’s a simple logic game, boring & tedious , but something you can train almost anyone to do.

    I would guess that most of the mortgage giants use secure offsite storage companies like “Iron Mountain” for document storage and keep only a scanned copy for themselves on an “optical jukebox” (such as the ones made by Kodak’s data systems division) and accessed through a database engine IMS&DB2/sql for example.

  4. neidermeyer: Thanks! Great input. 🙂
    I checked it out. Wow. What about XML based stuff? Food for another opportunity to watch the predators?

    >NOTHING is secure in the digital world.

    Thanks for your support. Let the world know about it. Seems like that you know your stuff. Would you be interested in starting a DIGITAL innocence project, stopping wholesale digital fraud and forgery?
    If I would have your skills, I would!!!
    Go for it.

  5. Sunday 1 August 2010



    > “The awakening will come as more & more people realize this is NOT about money –”

    This is ALL about money. Were it not for the Fed Res Act of 1913, when Congress abdicated its Constitutional responsibility for being the shepard of this country’s money, and let a foreign source take control of this nation’s money supply, none of this would be happening.

    This country was founded as a Republic with an organic Constituion that protected the inalienable rights of one against the will of many. What this country has now is a democracy, the worst form of a governmental system known, run by a federal corporation controlled by foreign sources..i.e. New World Order, [NWO], the Bilderburg group.

    Read the 14th Amendment. Prior to it, there was no such “class” as a “United States” “citizen.” A “United States” “citizen” is a 14th Amendment “citizen,” one without sovereignty.

    It always has been and always will be about money.

    The last Breidenbach post makes little sense to me. Anyone who pens their hopes on an “agency” making the “right” rules will be perpetually disappointed. What are administrative agencies, anyway?

    The are purely statutorily-created, without accountability to anyone. The reason for creating an agency via statute is that they operate outside of the Constitution. Ageny creation is no accident, for that very reason.

    “Follow the money” and you will always end up back at the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, when this country effectively lost its representative form of government. What exists to day is merely a “show” for the benefit of the masses who have no clue.

    This country has been under military rule since the South ceceded and Lincoln took control via Executive Order. Once the South ceceded, there was no longer the necessary quorum to keep the this country united.
    That is why Lincoln took the action that he did.

    To this very day, there has never been a lawful quorum reconvened for the organic states to survive. I am simplyfying this, but the crux of the information is there, and can be verified. No one has to take my word for it. DYODD.

    [Do Your Own Due Diligence]

  6. Mr. Breidenbach – very well written…

    Sadly, it appears to reaffirm the necessity for the people to start preparing for the inevitable confrontation. If we wait for congress to address this – our children and future generations are condemned. If we “hope” our judicial system will wake up and protect the people by hold up our constitution then we betrayed our founders and ancestors who gave everything to remove such shackles of totalitarianism arrogance.

    Patrick Henry said it best… some will recognize the last sentence…

    “…The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable — and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

    It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace — but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

    Patrick Henry – Virginia – March 23, 1775

    The awakening will come as more & more people realize this is NOT about money – houses or mortgage lending – etc… This is about the fundamentals of this country which were carefully penned in our Declaration of Independence – US Constitution – and Bill of Rights. This is about PRINCIPLE and NOT losing a house. What they are attempting to take is MUCH MORE THAN OUR HOUSES…

    Welcome to the new APARTHIED – USA…

    Keep the Powder Dry…

  7. FINREG Rule-Making the Next battle?
    There are numerous complaints from conservatives, political and economic, as to the continuation of the federal GSEs and guarantee programs that dominate the market place. These matters now are coming to the forefront of Congressional consideration in the wake of passage of FINREG. The bifurcated approach was practically driven: one bite was too much to swallow, and the methods of solution are dramatically different.
    FINREG has been described as a broad general outline for actions yet to be taken by as many as 16 federal agencies through rule-making processes. One of the most potentially significant pieces of this regulatory maze is supposed to be the Consumer Protection Agency tucked away in Federal Reserve. The rule-making process will be long and tortured. Agency lawyers basically offer up drafts for comment by the public. The “public” translates into “special interests”. These are generally consumer protection groups, or industry groups. Legions of industry specialized lawyer-lobbyists comment in technical terms that are incomprehensible to 99% of the lawyers in the country. The complexity tends to make it an insider ball game. Industry lawyer-lobbyists that worked the bills know where the choke points are—where the skeletons are hidden. Consumer advocates are few and far between—generally outgunned– certainly underpaid in comparison to the well-financed industry groups. Disinformation is industry’s stock in trade. Confusion is its currency. By the end of the process even the most well-meaning regulators are overwhelmed. What to believe? Who to believe? Much like the judiciary, the rule-makers receive comments from the industry side, and wait to hear the consumer rebuttals. If the rebuttals are poorly framed, the consumer comments are placed in the shadows. Even when the most aggressive rule-making process generates in a proposed rule, the rule-regulation may be held in suspense for decades. The existing agencies will be best able to engage in rule-making quickly. No doubt industry-originated drafts are already circulating in at least some instances.
    For an entirely new rule-making authority, it may take a year or more simply to find the writers, employ them, then map a strategy and initiate the formal rule-making process. Years pass—other agencies with a head start fill the void. Conflicting rules are inevitable—the new agency may be consumed initially simply by attempting to stake out its jurisdiction by submitting comments to other agencies rule-making either directly in the public record or through back-room confrontations. What is the effect?
    Generally, regulations emerging from a rule-making procedure are either or “interpretative” or “legislative” rules. Interpretative regulations cite to various legislative provisions to clarify already reasonably definitive statutory mandates. The interpretative rules are promulgated by the agency charged with jurisdiction over the subject matter. The responsible agency writes rules to clarify broader statutory language, or conflicting statutory language. Sometimes this type of rule-making will parrot statutory language in order to provide the agency with a statement of internal policy upon which specific case determinations may be based. These latter agency decisions may be referred to as rulings but more correctly are described in administrative law as “orders”. The agency that promulgates interpretative regulations is bound by and must follow those regulations in its individual case decisions/orders. Interpretative regulations may be applied retroactively in the reasonable discretion of the agency. The retroactive application is often challenged by industry members subject to orders based on the regulation. Generally the industry will argue that the interpretation conflicted with underlying statutory intent as reflected by committee reports, floor speeches by sponsors etc. The industry may also argue that the orders pursuant to interpretative regulations may not issue for retroactive application in event that they conflict with long-standing administrative practice by that agency, and may even go so far as to state that the longstanding practice was implicitly incorporated by statute even if not specifically referenced. The theory is that the legislature is all-knowing, and adopts administrative rules implicitly when legislating in that area because the legislature would have specifically altered the treatment if it had so intended. These fears tend to make retroactive application difficult and contentious.
    A legislative body may also authorize legislative rule-making. Generally, this will be done by language such as the “agency shall write rules to implement the purposes” of the general legislative mandate. Other times, there will be a more ambiguous direction: “this section shall be effective upon adoption of regulations”. In the latter case, the agency is basically vested with authority to decide for itself if and when it needs the rules to be created and applied. Agency discretion in the context of legislative rule-making is tantamount to a punt by Congress to the agency of matters too complex for legislation. These matters are supposedly within the special expertise of the agency and its word is law virtually equivalent to Congress’. Legislative regulations are drafted by persons appointed or supervised by the then-current Administration.
    The regulatory path generally follows the following course: Congress passes a statute with Committee Reports. The agency determines the priority of required or permitted action. The Agency publishes intent to engage in rule-making in a described area. Sometimes this is described as “Advance Notice of proposed Rule-Making” or ANPRM. Sometimes it is simply notice of Proposed Rule-Making. In any event, the notice generally constitutes the beginning of agency hearings and/or opening of a comment period during which the agency is accessible to introduction of information, supposedly on the record.
    The agency takes comments, hears testimony and investigates facts. It makes determinations of fact and law and writes regulations accordingly. The agency will typically publish “proposed rules” incorporating and addressing the comments made during the open hearing process. The notice of associated with published proposed rules should invite further comment—but on a more limited basis. The proposed rules may stand in place for years, while under attack from all sides. Eventually—as much as 20 years later—the proposed rules tested by time may become “final”.
    What does this mean to the community of mortgagors—subjects of predatory loans and predatory collection practices? To bring it home dramatically to relate to current discussions, the decision by Bankruptcy Court Judge Federman, in B.R. Western District Missouri Case # 10-20086; In re: Box stated at page 8, “The fact that the February 18, 2010 assignment [typical MERS as nominee of a bankrupt originator] was made after the bankruptcy case was filed does not render it per se invalid in that there is no rule prohibiting a creditor from assigning its claim postpetition.” [Emphasis Added]. This has implications with respect to tracking custody, obtaining discovery, simply unraveling the transactions. It touches upon the after-acquired note issues, and generally invites frauders and their successors to carry on in good stead.
    In another hot recent case, Cleveland vs Ameriquest et al, U.S.C.A. 6th Cir. No. 09-3608, the Court responded to Clevelands’ assertions of injury by underwriters that “began to direct lenders on the types of loans to meet the [underwriters’] securitization needs….and turned a blind eye even when the loans made no economic sense.” The District Court below had decided that the city had no claim that the defendants had abetted a nuisance, ”because subprime lending…is legal”. Interestingly, the facts pled suggested that the city asserted not just subprime, but predatory, subprime lending. References to official sources bear out this connection between predatory and un-economic loans. Quoting from a well-done brief on the topic;
    “Specifically, in the matter of Associates Home Equity Services v. Troup, 343 N.J.Super. 254, 267 (App. Div. 2001) the Appellate Division opined:

    Predatory lending as been described as: a mismatch between the needs and capacity of the borrower… In essence, the loan does not fit the borrower, either because the borrower’s underlying needs for the loan are not being met or the terms of the loan are so disadvantageous to that particular borrower that there is little likelihood that the borrower has the capacity to repay the loan. (citations omitted).

    This definition set forth by the Appellate Division is entirely consistent with Federal guidance on the topic. Specifically, by “Advisory Letter” AL 2003-2 from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) to the Chief Executive Officers of All National Banks…, the OCC stated:

    The terms “abusive lending” or “predatory lending” are most frequently defined by reference to a variety of lending practices. Although it is generally necessary to consider the totality of the circumstances to assess whether a loan is predatory, a fundamental characteristic of predatory lending is the aggressive marketing of credit to prospective borrowers who simply cannot afford the credit on the terms being offered. Typically, such credit is underwritten predominantly on the basis of the liquidation value of the collateral, without regard to the borrower’s ability to service and repay the loan according to its terms absent resort to that collateral. (emphasis provided).

    Furthermore, Section 39 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act generally requires Federally Chartered banks to establish “safety and soundness” standards for underwriting loans. At 12 C.F.R. Part 30—Appendix A, “Interagency Guidelines Establishing Standards for Safety and Soundness,” the various federal agencies who regulate banking institutions were directed to consider a number of factors in implementing loan underwriting guidelines.
    At subpart “C.” lenders are directed to “…establish and maintain loan documentation practices that:
    2. Identify the purpose of a loan and the source of repayment, and assess the ability of a borrower to repay the indebtedness in a timely manner.

    At subpart “D” lending institutions are directed to “establish and maintain prudent credit underwriting practices that:
    3. Provide for consideration, prior to credit commitment, of the borrower’s overall financial condition and resources, the financial responsibility of any guarantor, the nature and value of any underlying collateral, and the borrower’s character and willingness to repay as agreed.’”

    So the question now is whether the City of Cleveland failed to properly assert that subprime predatory lending was the subject of the complaint—or the Court has ruled that “predatory lending” is legal?

    Much if not most of the mortgage crisis arose as a result of predatory lending on steroids. The reasons were varied: 1) to generate fees all around by refinancing loans and originating new ones, 2) to obtain products to sell to investors as a steep markup—more fees/profits and last but not to be over-looked in respect of predatory loans, the servicer is entitled to hold the proceeds of foreclosure until the tranche MBS are “called” bought out and the trust is closed—or investor payout as prescribed in the MBS themselves whichever comes 1st. the main driver for “designed to fail” or predatory loans was the probability that the loans would default and the originator’s servicing rights’ foreclosure pool would grow as the foreclosures went on according to plan.

    Now clearly the above 2 issues among many are critical to the continuation or termination of the practices which have crushed the entire home-owning population of America, along with the economy, the future of our children, and destroyed the prospect of comfortable retirements for even the most diligent workers. The length and breadth of the damages from this obscene—but not illegal?—behavior is without parallel.

    The last hope for correction in the future if not the past is the orderly and honest establishment of a keen regulatory system that directly addresses these and related issues. This will occur in Agency hearing rooms, in Comments and testimony before the agency staffs. A coordinated effort by advocates is necessary to identify cases of abuse, why they happened and what would prevent the same thing occurring again.

    If I have misstated, understated or need to identify further stark examples of judicial distress due to confusion of the law, please post your suggestions. We need to identify corrections before the industry glosses over them. Do not play defense—play offense.

  8. This seems like fear mongering. UCC 3 is exempt.

    Sec. 7003. Specific exceptions

    (a) Excepted requirements
    The provisions of section 7001 of this title shall not apply to a
    contract or other record to the extent it is governed by –
    (3) the Uniform Commercial Code, as in effect in any State,
    other than sections 1-107 and 1-206 and Articles 2 and 2A.

  9. Yeah I saw something about this on the California AG’s (loaf’s) website and thought it signifigant also in the differences between the recording barcode stamped in the top righthand corner. I’ll email Neil the two defferent pages I’m talking about. And yes it is the Title companies that are doing this and they’re certainly frightened whenever confronted with questions.


    Here is a power point:

    and more info here…


  11. Saturday 31 July 2010

    One other point. What everyone will see is that the “opposition” is not dumb and never rests. As all the court cases are digested, the “rules” of taking out a mortgage will change to strengthen against the mistakes made and take the wind out of the sails of many arguments being currently used.

    Not only will the financial system adjust, but the courts will abet and endorse the changes to keep the system active and generating needed revenue for the STATES.

    The “lenders” may take some hits, lose some cases, but those losses pale when compared to the many foreclosure successes, and it is considered as a cost of doing business.

    I have seen this happen in Cook County where the language of mortgages was changed to offset strong arguments used to defeat plaintiff opposition.

    Still, what is presented on this site is great, and everyone can help by taking action and bringing the fight to the opposition. It does not take all of the foreclosure cases to go up against Goliath, even 10%
    of all cases being challenged would put a huge dent
    in the efforts of lenders and clog the court system.

    There is a ton of valuable information to arm anyone who chooses to take a stance. At a minimum, everyone should learn to challenge jurisdiction for lack of proper party standing to even initiate a complaint.

    Never give up. The other side is careless and has made a lot of mistakes. Learn what they are and hit the opposition over the head with them.

  12. Review Section 16 of UETA -Uniform Electronic Records Act–on transferable records. (page 48) and read the comment section.

    For right now, you have to opt-in or agree to this.


    See my earlier post for some Calif. exemptions to UETA.

  13. Saturday 31 July 2010

    David puts forth some common sense positions on how many people are being ripped off, and ends on a note of hope about a day of reckoning. Sadly, I do not see it.

    Why not?

    While seemingly a digression, there are three United States recognized by the courts:

    1. The organic united states of America, referring to the 50 states organized under the organic Constitution.
    The country most people believe is where they live, but is not true. [Note the spelling of the country]

    2. The UNITED STATES which can sign treaties with other countries, and

    3. The Federal corporate UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    spelled in all caps because it is a corporation. THIS is the corporate government to which everyone is accountable as a “United States citizen,” a status which did not exist prior to the 14th Amendment.

    That premise stated, the corporate USA is owned by the NWO, Bilderberg-types who dictate what is to be done in this country. Thier primary ruling instrument is via the Federal Reserve, by controlling the currency. Every bank in this country is under the rule of the Federal Reserve, and the banking system will be protected AT ALL COSTS, public be damned!!!

    Why do you think the banking system and Wall Street has been bailed out by the trillions, and the public gets programs that amount to chump change, like “Cash for Clunkers,” etc.

    Why are none of the federal programs supposedly “designed” to help “citizens” not helping those they are supposed to help? The corporate federal government does not give a rat’s ass about you and the hundreds of millions of others, plain and simple.

    The federal government has all the “people” dealing with symptoms, instilling a sense of patriotism to keep the everyone commited to supporting their “country,” which is the corporate USA run for the benefit of its corporate pets, the banking system and Wall Street, used to bilk “citizens” out of their property.

    The very same thing happened to farmers during the 1930s when they lost their farms, just as people as losing their homes in the updated version of the corporate government stealing from the unsuspecting populace.

    This may sound like an off the wall notion, but until people can abandon “cognitive dissonance” and the belief in the lies their corporate gov’t is feeding them, nothing is going to change, and for sure, those in power are not about to experience a conscience for people for whom there is no regard in the first place.

    “Your” government is literally at war with you. It ain’t my government because I disavow it at every turn possible by asserting my unalienable rights any time I am confronted by “it,” the foreign corporate federal government that literlly has NO JURISDICTION over me, speaking of jurisdiction on another thread.

    You cannot fight the fight without knowing the players. I was born in and have lived in this country all my life, but I am NOT a “United States citizen,” as defined by the 14th Amendment.

    Few here will understand most of this, but it needs to be said. Does it relate directly to forelcosures? No. Indirectly, it explains a lot of why what happens, happens.

  14. With every day-week-and-month that passes more people are losing everything they own. The country reeks of guilt-manipulation. The government & justice system ignore the FACTS and continually do the bidding of the manipulators.

    IMHO – this will not stop until there is such a consequence ripped from THOSE doing their bidding they will fear going to work. This will not stop until it is made personal. How many brokers have gone to jail? How many bankers – mortgage lenders – agents – etc..?

    My previous post about 965-thousand families is FACT already accepted in the courts – admitted by Countrywide… 965-thousand families are beating their freaking heads against the wall – pull their hair out – having family arguments – self-medicating – and THEY HAVE NO IDEA THEIR LOANS WERE DELIBERATELY DESIGNED SO THEY WOULD NOT REPAY… These are families where moms & dads are pulling two jobs if possible – doing everything they can to avoid the strategically calculated STAIN and noose being placed around their necks… all while these lenders chuckle and giggle – even TAUNT these families by offering modifications…

    965,000 families were sold ILLEGAL Mortgages and the Fed & State Governments KNOW IT – while our putrid judicial system does NOTHING…

    These criminals have no conscience. They are no different from the insurgents of the Middle East. They obviously have NO problem destroying our families. Therefore – the feeling is mutual. This is NOT about – well, such & such foreclosure mill is merely doing their job… This is NOT about some substitute trustee filing paperwork just doing their job and unfortunately foreclosing on these homes… This is NOT about some jackass’s career choice – or Suzie paralegal just earning a living… They have been given the benefit of the doubt – they have continually spit in our faces… I highly recommend these folks find NEW EMPLOYMENT or suffer the consequences. I would gladly place the names of their families, including their children on al-Qaeda websites – with perverted insulting comments and GOOGLE MAPS directly to their homes…

    In a short time, it will be very obvious this is NOT a damn LEGAL battle. There is NOTHING LEGAL about it. This is an eye-for-eye – tooth-for-tooth – life-for-life – VERY PERSONAL confrontation…

    If creating 965,000 damn ILLEGAL mortgage loans – KNOWING – those families could NOT repay the loan is NOT worth fighting a damn BLOODY fight over – then what the hell are our men & women doing overseas..? Until we wake up and MAKE THIS FIGHT PERSONAL – they will NEVER stop. Until we STAND UP and FIGHT using whatever means necessary – WHATEVER MEANS NECESSARY – these lying bastards will continually – relentlessly – pound these people into poverty.

    If a thief broke into my neighbor’s house, should I watch – call the police – maybe record the screams of the plundering, raping, and brutalities, OR – do I take my Desert Eagle 44 over and DROP THE PUNK..? I know what I’ll do… Yes, I will call the police – yes, I’ll even give the punk the opportunity to surrender until the police get there – but if not… send a body-bag…

    Are those who created the 965,000 ILLEGAL mortgages any different? NOT IN MY BOOK… and they need to GET THE DAMN MESSAGE…

    The day of reckoning is quickly approaching…

    Keep the powder dry…

  15. CEA ,

    For grins look up an IBM utility called AMASPZAP , it leaves no footprints in the SMF (audit trail data) records and bypasses RACF.. It’s been around since system360 days. I’m not saying it’s what would be used to alter saved image data or database records but it goes to show that NOTHING is secure in the digital world.

  16. If enough people find these electronic documents to be of no value, they may pull back from purchasing property. Banksters and investors would find themselves as landlords of either rentals or of vacant property. They would find out the costs of doing all the maintenance. Neighborhoods will continue to deteriorate as more inventory has to be converted to rentals.

    Certain states have a very pro-tenant stance in the courts. The landlord gets stuck with bills that are for more than just ‘normal wear and tear’ time after time. Now the banksters and investors will find that their source of income has to depend on rental values instead of the normally more steady income from mortgages.

    It can be hard to evict if the tenant looses their job and files a bankruptcy. Although the banksters are not the ones footing the bill during the current wave of foreclosures, when they eventually get too many homes and have a large rental inventory, they will start seeing that they don’t make that much on the rental of single family homes, even when they have nothing invested in them.

    I’m hoping that as prices tumble, that more people refuse to buy.

    The more the courts and financial systems rely on totally electronic documents, the less value I see in purchasing property.

  17. Seeking Remedy, >…they can make any digital watermark, seal, cypher, stamp, or whatever look official.
    Thanks! 🙂
    Time you GOOD IT guys testify in court!
    Question is, who is “they”? Bad IT guys?
    I smell a battle of the experts.
    Go for it!

  18. So the a$$ mongers continue! They do this thinking they are getting the upper hand. Just a quick note here bankers and brokers…….americans will take a kick, and another kick, and yet another kick. We are tough…..but…..we will kick back, and in a big way. If you are on the up and up, then no worries…..but…..if you are on the side that is systematically f’ing the people…..it is only a matter of time. Your will reap what you sow.

    I am in IT. Unfortunately, they can make any digital watermark, seal, cypher, stamp, or whatever look official. When it comes down to it, the heart of the matter is binary. There are 10 types of people who understand binary……those who do, and those who don’t.

    Putting 100% trust in a digital realm is sure death to the truth. Putting documentation that is dependant on pure ‘TRUTH’ in a digital realm is sure death! Come on, what is a few bits among friends anyway?

    Next stop…..lets put a chip up our a-ttention and put all our money there too!

    This is starting to get ugly, people. Stand up and FIGHT HARD! If you fail in your fight, at least you know you fought the good fight………

    Seeking Remedy

  19. As clarification, when I say notarize “events” that never happened, as in assignments… Neil has blazed that path already, in documenting that the “assignments” did not happen, or do not happen until the computer is challenged.

    ( I am quoting Neil verbatim in my own pleadings, and owe him a debt for this work on here)

    What I am specifically saying, is the ERDS language is allowing counties such as Los Angeles, to pass county codes, which allow 100% digital notarizations. IF THE STAMP IS ON FILE WITH WHOEVER IS DOING IT–Think Title Company.

    So the actual event that I am talking about NOT happening is a face-2-face meeting of the notary, and the signer, and the computer is in fact acting as both in effect, as it generates the documents, with signatures of both the notary and the signer.

    I have found some 100% digital notaries’ in the recorder’s office that are pure text-no pretend wet ink signatures even.

    The system they have designed to rob us blind with is fully in place, and will be implemented slowly, so as not to cause uproar. I almost cannot believe this is happening, as its sounds too ala-Kaczynski, but the law has already been written that allows this. ERDS.
    And for all you outside of California…There is a saying, So goes California…

    A man’s word is now just a font.

    Martha Raysik,
    11th generation descendent of William Bradford.
    Passenger on the Mayflower, and
    Governor of Plymouth Colony.

  20. This is slightly off-topic but along the same “electronic cronyism” by the lenders… While reading a big Investor’s Lawsuit against Countrywide I came across this little trivia nugget helping to expose even more FRAUDS… keep in mind this little part – “…as many as 15%-20%…” then consider the enormity of such a comment…

    Here is one snip that goes directly to the heart of lawsuit…

    Par – 100
    The Supervising Underwriter further stated that since late 2004, Countrywide’s Structured Loan Desks employed software called the Exception Processing System or EPS in order to obtain approval for loans that were exceptions to and should have been rejected by Countrywide’s underwriting standards. As many as 15% to 20% of the loans generated each day at the Company’s Structured Loan Desks were run through EPS and very few were ever rejected. This practice was confirmed by documents publicly filed in an Alaskan criminal case against a former Countrywide manager charged with extending improper loans, which reveal that the objectives of EPS were to “[a]pprove virtually every borrower and loan profile” and “[p]rocess and price exceptions on standard products for high risk borrowers.”

    Par – 101
    The Supervising Underwriter further stated that if a potential borrower applying for a SISA* loan provided a bank name, address and account number for asset verification, it was the practice at Countrywide not to verify the bank balance…
    *NOTE – SISA = Stated Income – Stated Asset

    Oh but WAIT – there’s more… this is the same lawsuit exposing Countrywide for selling 142-Billion Dollars worth of mortgage loans to consumers that Countrywide “KNEW” could NOT repay… AND that those consumers DID NOT KNOW IT. CORRECTION – those consumers DO NOT KNOW IT… but you can believe the rabid foreclosure mills have already geared up for blitzkrieg…

    Using Countrywide’s own data – the able means there are over 965-thousand families getting ready for the fast-track to HELL. The relentless ram-cram – pound them into poverty – too poor to defend…

    Using the “Supervisor’s Underwriting” numbers that adds another 127-170 thousand families per year on average being tossed to the streets…

    So, doesn’t it makes sense they need to TWEAK the existing laws & crony methods to cover their asses as they continually gang-rape the American people…

    Keep the powder dry…

  21. 1)ERDS or no ERDS, legal defense teams should challenge “print-outs” and consider the services of a forensic document examiner.

    2)Basic rules of evidence applies: Even an ‘original’ notarized document is meaningless unless authenticated by a competent fact witness, who, by definition, is a person who signed it.

    3)There is no such thing as ‘digital evidence’. How many electrons can you put on a witness stand?

    4)“Secure client portal”? 100% foolproof? Data can’t be manipulated? Hacker proof? For a good laugh, speak to an IT security expert – at a dull party!

    Disclosure: I am not a forensic document examiner nor an IT security expert. But someone should hire them and then buy the foreclosure attorney’s houses for pennies in the dollar. Just kidding.

  22. Here is just one of the eClosing products available now!


  23. All of you should be aware that the industry is moving to a completely electronic closing for a refi or mortgage loan.

    In the future-there will be NO paper.

    This has already been decided by the powers that be.
    It is far to costly to process and move around paper. It’s heavy and there is postage. Paper is burdensome now.

  24. In California there are two competing CERTIFIED systems for ERDS

    One is SECURE used by Los Angeles County, Orange, Riverside, Santa Barbara, San Diego and maybe a few others.

    contact info: Renee.Ramirez@rec.ocgov.com

    The second is the one developed by ACS for CERTNA (contract for its development awarded Aug. 2008).
    This system is used by Fresno County, Kern County and possibly a few others.

    contact info: Patrick.Honny@CERTNA.com

  25. Map of states which have enacted the URPERA or Uniform Real Property Electronic Recording Act


  26. Remember–not everyone has MERS!

    In California the award for the contract to develop ERDS was not granted until August 5, 2008.

    Each County has to approve the use of ERDS system.
    To date, there are only a few counties in California using the new ERDS system. I believe Fresno County is one and San Bernadino County another. The Board of Supervisors of each county must approve the use of ERDS & probably set aside money to use it!!

    If your county has not yet approved the use of ERDS and it is up before your county board of supervisors, I suggest you attend the meeting and be ready to vocalize why you believe no county funds should be used on ERDS!!

    Here are some California exemptions to UETA (not an exhaustive list, but some apply to mortgage and foreclosures)

    The California exemptions to UETA take three forms:

    First, there is a general exemption for all statutes that require that “specifically identifiable text or disclosures in a record or a portion of a record be separately signed, including initialed, from the record.”

    Second, there is a special rule for statutes requiring notices of cancellation. While not technically an exemption, this special rule restricts the application of UETA so that a notice of the right to cancel can’t be delivered electronically unless the right to cancel can be exercised electronically.

    Third, there is a list of specific statutes. The statutes are listed in the bill text. The remainder of this document describes statutes that Consumers Union sought to have exempted, and which were exempted. We believed that the purpose of the statutory requirements for a written notice to the consumer would not be equally well satisfied by sending only an electronic notice.

    1. Statutes requiring notice of disposition, eviction, repossession, and balloon payments:

    California’s loan statutes contain two kinds of notice requirements: 1) notices that must be contained in the initial contract and 2) notices that must be provided at the time of or following repossession or other action to foreclose on the security. A broad variety of disclosure requirements for initial contracts were not exempted. However, post-default notices present a different issue. There will be far fewer of these notices. They serve a special notice function, and they often inform consumers that their legal rights will be affected by the next step taken by the other party or by a failure to respond to the notice. Certain kinds of post-contract notices, including notices of intent to dispose of collateral, were exempted from SB 820, California’s UETA.

    Civil Code section 2983.2, Rees-Levering notice of intent to dispose of a repossessed or surrendered motor vehicle.

    Civil Code section 2963, balloon payment notice.

    Civil Code section 2987, notice of disposition of leased vehicle to lessee and guarantor after early termination by the lessee.

    Civil Code section 2924i, balloon payment notice.

    Civil Code section 2924j, foreclosure.

    Civil Code section 2924.3, collection on mortgage by agent.

    Civil Code section 3071.5, signed release of an interest in a vehicle subject to a lien. Because this is a permanent release and relinquishment of a property interest, it should not be satisfied by an electronic click that other documents have defined to equal a signature.

    Civil Code sections 1950.5(f) and (g)(1), requirement for landlord to provide a written accounting of disposition of security deposit.

    Financial Code section 22328, post repossession, predisposition notice to all persons liable on a loan secured by a motor vehicle lien. Includes notice of right to redeem notice of conditional right to reinstate loan.

    Civil Code section 1812.2, 1812.3, retail installment accounts, predisposition notice. Ten day predisposition notice of intent to resell or retain goods financed under a retail installment account. Includes notice of right to redeem.

    Public Utilities Code sections 779.1, 10010.1, and 16482, utility shutoff

    These provisions allow utilities to notify customers by mail that their services will be shut off or discontinued, first at least 10 days prior to the proposed termination, and then within 24-48 hours of termination. The provisions include notification to a third party designated by customers 65 years of age or older. Electronic mail is not yet reliable enough in its delivery for these notices. Further, the definition of receipt in the UETA is not certain enough to assure actual receipt for it to apply to these provisions.

    Code of Civil Procedure section 1162, This section is cited in the various eviction codes. It requires mailed notice to augment posting or to augment personal delivery to a person other than the addressee. A variety of eviction-related statutes require of notice in the manner prescribed by Section 1162 of the Code of Civil Procedure. See e.g. Civil Code Sections 799.65 and 827. The following was added to California’s UETA:

    Here is a link to UETA info:

    URPERA has not bee enacted in all 50 states yet.

    For information on the Uniform Real Property Electronic Recording Act (URPERA)


  27. San Fransico open your Golden Gates….

    press release
    July 27, 2010, 8:00 a.m. EDT · Recommend · Post:

    DocuSign Hosts Memorable 2010 ESIGN Summit in San Francisco
    President Clinton and Executives from Salesforce.com, National Association of REALTORS(R) and Box.net Address Positive Impact of Electronic Signature and the ESIGN Act on Global Commerce and the Environment

    SEATTLE, Jul 27, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) — On Wednesday, June 30, DocuSign(R), the market leader and global standard for electronic signature, hosted the 2010 ESIGN Summit in San Francisco to commemorate the 10-year anniversary of the Electronic Signatures in Global National Commerce (ESIGN) Act that President Bill Clinton signed on June 30, 2000, and to celebrate the Congressional Resolutions designating June 30 as National ESIGN Day.

    DocuSign CEO and president Steve King welcomed more than 300 attendees with the news that DocuSign led a coalition to make June 30 National ESIGN Day. Both houses of the U.S. Congress passed the resolutions to make this happen (see separate press release for details). The ESIGN Summit began with a special message from Representative Jim McDermott (D-WA) who commented on the transformation the ESIGN Act has had on how we conduct transactions and commerce today, and applauded DocuSign’s leadership in driving e-signature adoption to increase productivity and efficiency for businesses and government.

    In his address titled “Embracing Our Common Humanity,” President Bill Clinton greeted the attendees, citing a number of significant anniversaries that are observed by his foundation. Along with presenting a balanced budget to Congress and the Middle East peace process, he noted that the ESIGN Act will have one of the largest impacts over how people live and work. President Clinton spoke about the top challenges the world faces today, and the ways information technology can be used to better the lives of people around the world. He expressed his belief in the transformative power of the Internet and said he was concerned most about expanding its use worldwide to connect more people and remove additional barriers. “We’ve learned throughout all of human history that trust is the basis for all commerce…We have to work harder to get countries not to block it, than keeping bad apples out of it,” he commented.

    Next Gary Thomas, first vice president-elect, National Association of REALTORS(R) (NAR), discussed the importance of relationships in the real estate industry. The largest trade organization in America, NAR made a strategic financial investment in DocuSign in November 2009 through its Second Century Ventures fund. “NAR’s 1.1 million REALTORS(R) are helping people realize the American Dream of home ownership. Our alliance with DocuSign enables REALTORS(R) and their clients to track business from any place any time. Now real estate closings are radically faster, contracts don’t have to be faxed back and forth, and home buyers and sellers don’t have to come into the office to sign papers–they can even be signed from an airplane 30,000 feet in the sky,” he said, referring to a recent San Francisco Chronicle story about a couple who signed their real estate documents midflight with DocuSign.

    Kendall Collins, chief marketing officer at salesforce.com, shared the company’s vision for Cloud 2, collaboration that leverages mobility and social networking features popularized by Facebook and Twitter like profiles, status updates and real-time feeds to empower enterprises with a new level of productivity only possible in the cloud. In speaking about how electronic signatures are moving to Cloud 2, Collins said traditional wet signatures are slow, provide no tracking and are not environmentally friendly. “I am happy to say that the last mile of every transaction is now done in the cloud. We are delighted today to be talking about our relationship with DocuSign, a leader in electronic signatures.”

    DocuSign founder and chief strategy officer, Tom Gonser, joined salesforce.com on stage to demonstrate how integrating DocuSign’s electronic signature platform with Salesforce Chatter can foster collaboration within an entire organization, sending alerts when a contract is opened, signed and when a deal is won in real-time.

    Aaron Levie, co-founder and chief executive officer of Box.net, described the new workplace that takes place outside the walls of a single organization between networks of vendors and partners and business, where content is centralized in the cloud to integrate, manage and access online. Levie announced, “We are excited about the ability to now easily transact business in the cloud through our partnership with DocuSign. The millions of documents on Box.net can now be signed and transacted with DocuSign.”

    In conclusion, DocuSign’s Tom Gonser spoke about the evolution of how business transactions have been signed through the ages and showcased DocuSign’s latest innovations that are adding new levels of flexibility, collaboration and mobility to core business processes of completing business transactions. Gonser related that electronic signature technology has moved beyond just signing documents and that DocuSign has created a platform that manages the entire document electronic signature process–with powerful collaboration and negotiation tools to accelerate business from anywhere, anytime. He demonstrated the first Apple(R) iPad(TM) electronic signature application, illustrating how easy it is to access documents for signature via handheld devices and the rich real-time reporting DocuSign offers.

    Attendees praised DocuSign for driving the National ESIGN Day resolution and taking the industry lead on raising awareness of the key role of electronic signatures in the growth of commerce trend toward more environmentally friendly and efficient business practices. DocuSign chairman Keith Krach commended the event for bringing together industry luminaries and leaders in markets such as finance, e-commerce and real estate. “DocuSign is not only leading the industry with the most advanced product, the most strategic partnerships and the greatest number of customers, by creating the industry discussion about the future of business transactions, DocuSign is validating its position as the market leader and global standard in electronic signature.”

    To learn more about the 2010 ESIGN Summit, visit: http://www.docusign.com/esign-summit.

    To view a short video of the event, click: http://www.docusign.com/DocuSign-2010-ESIGN-Summit.

    About DocuSign, Inc.

    DocuSign, Inc. is the market leader and global standard for electronic signature. DocuSign provides the world’s largest and fastest-growing electronic signature platform, empowering businesses to complete transactions online quickly and securely while improving compliance and dramatically reducing costs.

    DocuSign is the only cloud computing-based electronic signature platform that entirely replaces slow, expensive paper transactions with a fast, efficient and completely digital solution. Accessible from any Internet-connected device, DocuSign supports virtually any document and form type in simple and complex workflows, and provides broad user authentication options, data collection, secure document/data storage and retrieval, as well as real-time negotiation and collaboration tools.

    DocuSign employs the industry’s only multi-site enterprise class, SAS-70 data centers delivering 99.9% uptime for customers over the last four years. With more than 5 million unique signers processing millions of transactions per year, DocuSign is trusted by more people, more companies, more times than any other electronic signature provider in the world. In addition, DocuSign is the official and exclusive provider of electronic signature for the National Association of REALTORS(R) 1.1 million members, under the REALTOR Benefits(R) Program.

    To learn how DocuSign can accelerate your business, visit http://www.docusign.com or call (866) 219-4318. Subscribe to the DocuSign blog at http://www.docusign.com/blog and follow DocuSign on Twitter at http://twitter.com/DocuSign.

    DocuSign, the DocuSign logo and “the fastest way to get a signature” are trademarks or registered trademarks of DocuSign, Inc. in the United States and/or other countries. All other marks are the property of their respective owners.

    Photos/Multimedia Gallery Available: http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/mmg.cgi?eid=6373900&lang=en

    SOURCE: DocuSign, Inc.

  28. i got it, that’s why most of this fabricated documents were recorded through the courtesy of title company. i don’t know why these so called “trustees’ hide as a debt collctors. used title company to record their bogus paperwork unless they are a member of ERDS.

  29. yes–this is consistent with the new e-sign note program that Chase announced yesterday or day before—an e-signature is obviously going to require an e-notary—this sort of signature program is used in human resources activities commonly today. Chase announced a company name that is its service provider–going to be a big name in future here. Iv been mulling carefully how would this be regulated? Main problem here is that the lenders are jumping the gun-doing things before the rew regulatory structure emerges. By the time that happens as a matter of law, its difficult to apply rules retroactively. The temptation will be adoption of industry practices in effect at the time. The lack of government filings oversight suggests a debacle–more feeding frenzy.

  30. I hope all seen the MERS v2? Introducing “eVAULT” from BNY….

    We are in major crisis if this all is allowed! Hackers can easily break in to ANY system!


  31. I certainly hope this does not go nationwide.

    If nothing is done to ensure that the documents start out with true wet-signatures before they are recorded, what is the point of even recording the docs? Currently MERS is being used to avoid doing just that.

    Now with electronic filing, unless there is a way developed to find the electronically generated signatures, there is little point to recorded contracts under this system.

    Boy could this system make some hackers rich. All they’d have to do is hack the title company or financial sites computers and extract the latest ‘recording’ and generate a false document that is sent to the recorder’s office. It might require working with a ‘dirty insider’ but this system makes this feasible.




  33. I believe this is in California. I have not seen this any where else.

    Here is a link with a VIDEO on this…


Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: