Analysis and Stories of Quiet Title Action

And an upcoming book too which I can’t wait to buy and read. I have always believed that quiet title actions are the key to this whole mess — basic  black letter law applied fairly and consistently with the law of contracts, the law of property, and the recording laws of each state. It helps to be able to know more than your opponent when it comes to the securitization of your loan. This is a good read.

Comment on Mass Extinction of Pools Becomes Clearer by Dave Krieger

Today, July 30, 2010, 13 hours ago | Dave Krieger
Avirani and Indigo …

I have been working on a book about this whole mess for quite some
time and it is about to be published. The book presents several angles
on attacking the lenders. Your takes on WITHOUT RECOURSE are a
blessing, since you are citing case law.

All of these posts (pertaining to anonymous) do come with a caveat.
Bear in mind when you post that the banks are reading this blog too. I
happen to know of a few law firms right now (foreclosure mills) that
read this blog on a daily basis. I also know of a few judges that are
reading this blog as well. All of this I know through direct contact
with clients, as well as assisting their attorneys as a paralegal with
case work.

RE: UCC … every case is state specific. You can’t quote the federal
UCC because the states have adopted it into their own versions and
altered it to please the political machinery. Max Gardner told me
this. In my research for the book, I have talked to hordes of
attorneys about this stuff and they are very candid when they say that
these foreclosure mills, all part of the grand scheme, are fully
briefed by the banking community as to how to answer these suits and
what they can and cannot get away with. The mavericks that tend to
become arrogant (like Stern) get caught bringing fraud on the court.
Aside from that, the individual attorneys I have spoken with admit
that they do not have the resources to share information as readily as
the foreclosure mill networks do. This is why we have a problem.
Attorneys have egos and the more successful ones know that if an
outside source brings them something credible that sounds plausible
enough to win with then there’s a chance the homeowner is going to get

Seemingly expected … not all of the stuff I share with the hosts of
this blog get shared with the community. When you know that the “other
side” is watching what homeowners are posting on this and other
related blogs, you will find bits and pieces of interjections that are
designed to sway the reader or as in a court case, “get them off
point”. The best way for a defendant lender to win is to get the
Plaintiff homeowner off point, to where the plaintiff goes off on
serious, unproven, unchartered, unsupported (without case law)
conspiracy theories that have no merit because they are just that,
This is true … your allegations of disinterested counter parties
lodging false information on these blogs has merit.
One can only verify through (1) research; and (2) discovery.

This is why I wrote my book on quiet title actions (along with
everything else in the kitchen sink). In order to weaken the other
side, thousands of lawsuits a week are going to have to get filed,
because there are NOT enough foreclosure mills to defend them. True,
the court system will be clogged like a sewer with these actions.
True, a lot of these banks will typically get their attorneys to
remove the case to federal court, thinking they can get a slam dunk on
diversity jurisdiction (multiple defendants from other states makes in
federal according to their rationale) so they can get a 12(b)(6)
ruling. This is why the entire cause must be centered around quieting

Instead of going after all of these counts, as I have seen in the
past, take only the quiet title as your lead cause and build your case
using key points (not as counts, but as predicators) … this is what I
have seen the good attorneys do in their pleadings … and believe me …
these class actions inure to the benefit of the attorneys that file
them and because of the class, only one law firm needs to take it on.
If you’ve got thousands of homeowners filing quiet title suits in
state court (sticking to state statutes) the lenders do not know how
to react. They usually are in the driver’s seat, foreclosing on the
homeowners. They have a scheme for that. They have a tested
methodology that has worked up to a point. They know what they can get
away with … at least up until now. You will notice that the suits that
are winning are individually filed or individually defended.

If you do not have the Federman decision … I would be happy to send it
to you, as it doesn’t seem to be posted on here. The last paragraph of
the order invites Bank of America and MERS to come forward and produce
documentation to prove agency. Hon. Arthur Federman is a very smart
and highly regarded bankruptcy judge. It’s just too bad that people
don’t read his decisions BEFORE filing bankruptcy. (I sent the Order
to Neil but I haven’t seen any reference to it being posted on here
yet. hint hint)

The banks either (1) can’t produce the note; or (2) tie themselves in
some way through contract to prove agency. I write about that in my
book. These flaws are NOT hard to prove. I have talked to attorneys
who say that the banks’ attorneys come into court with a pomposity
that reeks when they walk in the door. They are not expecting any
attorney to be able to wade through the gobbledygook of paperwork and
arguments they present, because generally, the homeowner has hired a
lawyer that doesn’t know his a** from a hole in the ground. (Neil is
right on that point.)

In quiet title actions, supporting state case law is very relevant,
because the judges’ law clerks can research it and apply it to your
case. If you start putting in federal questions, you give the other
side cause celebre to remove it to federal and slam dunk you. Quiet
title actions are a state right and no federal judge can quiet title
to property sitting in state jurisdiction. The filings are in the
county recorder’s offices (and I seriously doubt that 99.9% of all
borrowers signing the Deed of Trust even knew what the hell they were

The theories of who loaned who credit and who got paid first and who
got screwed second is NOT the crux of your case. It’s the original
documentation that created the fraud and the subsequent filings in the
county courthouse that become part of your quiet title action. You
see, most states declare in statute that as long as you retain
possession at the time you file a quiet title suit, you can move
forward, even if you are in foreclosure. Some states even allow quiet
title actions to be filed POST FORECLOSURE, POST EVICTION! Again, this
is state specific, where federal law and rules cannot be applied. This
I know from research. I cannot give this out as legal advice

Blogs are great sharing tools provided the information being shared is
credible and can be verified.

The lenders’ foreclosure mills shrink up like a man with erectile
dysfunction when placed under this kind of stress, because of the
burden of proof is virtually split between the Plaintiff, who makes
allegations supported by case law and the Defendant lender that has to
tie all of the ends together. Once the quiet title action is filed the
lender can’t go back in and record documentation after the fact to
perfect their security interest … they have to bring it into open
court, where you can impeach it. I have two successful quiet title
actions under my belt personally, so I know how they work.

I also happen to know what the “four corners” rule/doctrine is. It’s
the entire content of the page taken as a whole versus the specifics
contained therein. This is very useful in wrongful foreclosure
actions. Couple a wrongful foreclosure action with quiet title … and
then find your state statute that makes it a state jail felony to file
such fraud with the county court clerks/recorders/register of deeds …
bring the local county recorder and the DA into your case; show them
the docs; show them where they are suspect; get them on your side; the
judges ruling on your cases are more likely to see reason because you
have the county working with you to stomp out fraud. Even as a pro se
Plaintiff (which I shudder to think could pull this off, but could) it
would lend a lot of credibility to your case if you have outside
sources with credibility jumping into the fray. This is how County
entities that record documents, such as deeds of trust, become aware
as to WHY they are being deprived of income because of MERS. … and let
me tell you here and now MERS ain’t no Viagra. If you look at your
original deeds of trust and see who the players are, you will figure
out WHY the whole thing is a fraud, without me having to get on here
and tip my research to the banks who are wondering the same thing.

Comment on Mass Extinction of Pools Becomes Clearer by gwen caranchini

Today, July 30, 2010, 13 hours ago | gwen caranchini
This is a great post from Dave who I am using myself to help me in my
pro se case–I am a former trial attorney of some 30 yeasr in civil
rights cases in Fed and State Courts so “pro se” for me is a bit
different. Dave is always right on with his case law and his theories.
The def are attempting to remove my quiet title action to fed ct and I
am objecting. I have also filed a complaint with the FBI alleging the
fraud in the HAMP program based upon what is going in in my case and
the fraud in the MERS filings which when you look at all the docs at
the courthouse TOGETHER the fraud becomes clear in several different
ways. Dave is the brightest paralegal I have ever met and should be a
lawyer. I have never had one thing he sent me prove to be wrong–this
guy has also got the common sense approach to this and is not out
there with legal theories that are hard to prove. He knows too what
dis we need. You all would do well to listen to him, get his posts and
use his services.

Comment on Mass Extinction of Pools Becomes Clearer by gwen caranchini

Today, July 30, 2010, 11 hours ago | gwen caranchini
Stupendous Man–the case Dave is referring to is “In Re Box” decided
June 3 before Arthur Federman in the United States Bankruptcy Court
for the Western District of Missouri. I sent dave that case. It is a
wonderful decision, especially the last page. A bit of an update on
that case as I spoke to the Trustee’s office as a followup. Apparently
BAC continues to ask to be heard at creditor’s meetings on this matter
even after relief from stay was denied BAC. The trustee is refusing to
acknowledge BAC has a position at the creditor’s meeting because it
has not proved it holds the note in question as Judge Federman found.
The last page of Federman’s decision told BAC that when they had the
note or claimed to have the note they could ask for an evidentiary
hearing that showed they had the note and could establish agency for
being able to seek foreclosure on the note. To date, some 7 weeks
later, they have yet to do so and given that the Trustee continues to
deny them the right to speak at creditor’s meetings.

Comment on Mass Extinction of Pools Becomes Clearer by Dave Krieger

Today, July 30, 2010, 11 hours ago | Dave Krieger
The basic quiet title actions follow to form and purpose. You use
whatever basis for your claim as necessary. There are a lot of
templates you can use out there. Many attorneys use ProDoc which have
state specific stuff in it. If you look at cases that are specific to
your cause and you go to the law library to look them up … find cases
that are specific to your area or where someone has filed pleadings in
a court near you. Then go to that court with the case # and get a copy
of the pleadings directly from the case file. You can then see how it
was formatted. Before you pay for pleadings though, make sure the
outcome was positive via the case cite. No sense pulling case
pleadings that were incorrectly plead. The case cite itself will tell
you whether or not the case was successful in the case of the
homeowner. My two quiet title actions were against a defunct
corporation in Arkansas over resort property I acquired from the
state. They did not challenge, thus I was awarded. I didn’t have to
prove fraud. This is part of how you make money on tax deed sales, by
quieting title BEFORE you sell. Since I invest in real estate, quiet
title actions have been a particular interest of mine for some time.

78 Responses

  1. […] Analysis and Stories of Quiet Title Action […]

  2. I obtained a quiet title to my property in Colorado 2 years ago, after the defendant US Bank defaulted.

    However, in issuing the quiet title the Judge eliminated the Rule 105(b) provision that the QT also blocks claims of persons claiming under the defendant.

    Now the former servicer for the loan JPMorgan has filed a non judicial foreclosure and has provided an original document to support its claim which it obtained from the defendant.

    I argued that it was barred under the QT however the Court ruled that it has a claim because of the limited QT ruling. The court also stated from the bench “you can’t have your house for FREE.” I of course reminded the Court that there was an underlying unsecured note which could be acted on.

    The elimination of 105(b) renders the QT effectively useless because the defendant to the suit can simply transfer his intrest to another person who can then sue, and the original defendant is not harmed.

    I assert that at the moment of the issuance of the order the defendant in a QT suit has his interest (represented by the Deed of Trust in Colorado) in the subject property extinguished and therefore can not transfer an interest to another which he himself does not own.

    I am about to lose my home to this imposter claimment because of this ruling. An appeal to the appellete court takes a long time but that may be where I have to go

    Any ideas of comments please let me know

  3. @Chris…..”It is July 15, 2011 and I filed a “quite title” action Pro-Se on June 15, 2011…the 30 day period is here to respond and Ocwen and New Century have not done so. Can anyone tell me the next step in this process?”

    Chris, basically the Defense is required to answer your complaint within the time limit of 30 days. If they fail to do so, in essence your complaint is UNOPPOSED and you do not need to file an opposition to their non-answer, however an action to quiet title is not usually granted by default.

    Since your latest hearing on this matter was probably on AUGUST 15, 2011, I’d love to hear how the judge ruled on your case.

  4. It is July 15, 2011 and I filed a “quite title” action Pro-Se on June 15, 2011…the 30 day period is here to respond and Ocwen and New Century have not done so. Can anyone tell me the next step in this process?

  5. I won a home foreclosure Motion for Summary Final Judgement because plainttif lawyer didny suficiently negated my defenses responses.

  6. […] Quiet Title Analysis & Stories Analysis and Stories of Quiet Title Action « Livinglies’s Weblog […]

  7. Please provide contact info to purchase your Quiet Title Book.


  8. Dave, please contact as soon as you can. I have a market for your books I’d like to discuss.

  9. I would also like a copy of the Hon. Arthur Federman Order. AND … could you also tell me how to get a copy of your book my contact is:

  10. Please forward info in regard the purchase of the book, “Analysis & Stories of Quiet Title Action”.
    Thank you.

  11. On 4/ 28.2010 ,Floridas 9 TH DC denies plainttif;Motion For Summary Final Judgement on grounds of:not sufficiently negated by plainttif;sReply/Response to Affirmative Defenses.Plainttif;shas no filed no sworn and specific affidavit with regard thereto.What should I do next;have not heard nothing about the case>Please Help

  12. Hi Dave,

    Thank you, in advance … I would also like a copy of the Hon. Arthur Federman Order. AND … could you also tell me how to get a copy of your book my contact is:

    “Fight the good fight … Finish the race … Keep the Faith.”

  13. Hi Dave I would like a copy of Hon. Arthur Federman Order.
    In addition could you tell me how to secure a copy of your
    book my contact is:
    Thank you

  14. Storm

    Not arguing with you about certain points. But, if lack of standing is discovered it is not easy for the right party to then come forward – fraud as already been committed – and homeowners have lost valuable time to seek help under government programs (law) that mandates the same.

    Your strategy is fine – however, you have to know who the bank is and who is the agent is – you have to know who you are dealing with before. And, it is not so easy for real party to “get it right” – the next time.

    But, anyway – as long as you are helping the people – best to you.

  15. Anonymous:

    As you can tell I’m not a fan of either. And standing, if not found, does get the case dismissed, but allows the bank to come back and do it right, just wasting more of the homeowners money. It just stalls the foreclosure! We can show the homeowner how to stall it for free, without wasting their money.

    You wouldn’t believe the amount of homeowners who’ve come to us after they’ve wasted their time and money on such nonsense, looking for some sort of relief. Often too late because the statute of limitations has run on their ability to have recourse.

    Again, the ONLY chance for the homeowner to get any type of restitution is to find evidence against the AGENTS of the bank. The attorneys we’ve enlightened will not waste their time any longer with “produce the note” or “standing” arguments. There’s too much of an upside for them and their clients using our methodologies..

    There are countless cases of homeowners being made well using our strategies. An added benefit, the banks will usually settle because they don’t want some jury awarding “punies” like in the case we’ve been discussing.

  16. Storm

    Thank you for reply. Never been a fan of produce the note. But, – very simple – if party has no standing – not real party – case must be dismissed. This is an opening for counter-claims – and all the elements of fraud flow nicely from there. If you disagree – do not use it – that is your choice.

    Yes, left out that part because largest proportion was for punitive damages. Nevertheless, do not dispute credit for the 2008 case.

    Good luck.

  17. Hi Anonymous:

    I didn’t forget “to tell us that your Wells Fargo case was reversed as to punitive damages.” I just gave you a case showing one can beat the bank with wrongdoing! Not wasting time with some useless “standing” or “produce the note argument that gets the homeowner NOTHING!


  18. Storm

    You forgot to tell us that your Wells Fargo case was reversed as to punitive damages.

  19. Storm

    Thanks. Find your blog interesting. So you work for “Gordon & Simmons LLC,” in Frederick Maryland??

  20. Hi Anonymous:

    Just click on my name and it will take you there directly.

  21. Storm

    Thank you. Think I may have the wrong web site – can you provide again???

  22. Dave:

    I would be interested in seeing the Federman decision and how I can obtain a copy of your book when it’s ready for release.

    National WAMU Support Group

  23. Hello Dave,

    Great information!! I am looking forward to the book also. Could you send me the information on the Federman decision. Thanks in advance…

  24. Anonymous

    Glad you are back…

  25. Storm

    Please provide the link to the judgement against Wells Fargo . Oh I mean “Wells Forget You”

  26. Hi Anonymous:

    On the opening page click on “Find Out More By Clicking Here.” That will take you to the page about loan mods being a scam. On that page click on “Click Here To Read About How Mortgage Fraud May Entitle You To Millions From Your Predatory Lender.” PRESTO!

  27. Storm wrote:

    Storm, I think that everything on this site is showing that there’s ample evidence that there’s wrongdoing on their part.


    All you have? Your conclusion that asking for proof of standing, or showing that the securitization chain is completely fraudulent, or better yet, has already been paid in full many times over…. gheez, this argument is getting old. Foreclosure stalling? Foreclosure is a done deal no matter what the legal standing is? This is insane. Totally insane.

  28. Hi Storm

    So nice of you to welcome me back – Thanks!!

    Just cannot find your million dollar judgment against Wells Fargo. Perhaps you can publish here.

    Hey, there is lots of wrong doing!!! – Agree with that!!!!

    Did find reference to loan modifications. However, to date, any modifications have been minimal in nature – and a problem as to the real creditor. Please provide some details of the loan modification specifics that you negotiate.

    Much appreciated.

  29. Monday 2 August 2010


    I did prod you, purposefully, but not to be unkind, for I do know the situation of which you speak. I also AM DEALING with lying debt collectors, [I use that term in court instead of referring to them as attorneys] who have fabricated bogus assignments, AND two previous judges who were behind the bogus effort and against me. I am now dealing with a third judge on the same case, 3 1/2 years old.

    Is the current judge against me as well? If you know anything about the reputation of Cook County’s judicial system, I need not answer. BUT, I am much sav vier being in front of any judge and not backing down in the slightest, and my pleadings have gotten stronger.

    If you think the system is not gamed on Cook County, or elsewhere from your location, it is not a reason for giving up.

    My point was to spur you on and not make light of your plight, for no one else will fight your battle more ardently than you. My foreclosure battle has been conducted without the benefit of this site, until just a few months ago. What I see being posted here is a quick study law guide to fight almost any foreclosure situation, and each case is unique.

    You are right about the “system.” It is not designed to help anyone here, but to take away, instead. Deal with what is. You sound intelligent enough to create your own destiny, once you can move past the understandable bitter disappoinments.

    You keep up the fight as well!

  30. Leo II, I couldn’t have said it better.

    Edgetraderplus, I HAVE read the case law, for 3 1/2 years now. And I know that with thousands of foreclosures going through the system daily, why is it that we only hear about one or two here and there being even somewhat victorious? Because the system is gamed! I don’t stand a chance in hell pro se against totally ruthless liars and cheats who are willing to forge, backdate, lie about chains of title etc., all under the watchful eye of a judge who thinks I’m the louse standing in front of him/her.

    I know that some inroads have been made, but they’ve been made by some pretty savvy attorneys who’ve managed to stay focused on the big picture and not get bogged down on what hasn’t worked in the past.

    Yeah, maybe I was venting, maybe even whining a bit, but pushing a boulder up a mountain for so many years gets old. Hats off to all who are fighting the good fight. But when you’ve had your ability to work taken away from you, and next stop your home, it’s real easy to want to give up on a system that has, in my opinion, totally failed it’s constituents.

    I totally understand what some are saying here between the lines. That checking out of the system is starting to look totally appropriate right about now. Disavowing anything contractual with a system so flawed appears to me to be the next logical step, as I’ve just about given up hope that our judicial, legislative, and executive branches will suddenly see the light and decide to take their hands out of Wall street’s back pockets. Ain’t gonna’ happen. Not in my lifetime.

    Keep up the fight all.

  31. In re: Agent Provocateur:

    Maybe it’s someone who would steer you away from Legal Aid by posting a message which includes something like this:

    “Got no money? (Terrific use of language, eh?) Then start defending yourself without using an attorney. It can be done. Start reading the cases that challenge jurisdiction for lack of proper party standing, and create your own, fashioned after
    one or several that makes the necessary points.”

    So, it’s really, really easy to just wake-up one morning and like making a bowl of instant oatmeal, you can become an instant attorney and bet the house that a real attorney won’t kick your ass all over the court house steps.

    Someone who would offer such incomplete and misguiding advice would bear watching, as would at LEAST ONE OTHER.


    Thank you for staying with use..
    Unitl lambs become lions Never Give Up !

  33. Does anyone ever feel like your stuck in some twisted movie episode of SAW and the judiciary’s that old guy and the opposing lender/attorney’s that wacko chick? Because I sure as hell feel like it…. I thought cruel and unusual punishment was against the law…. & we haven’t even broken any, what the hell…

  34. All–When we have lawyer Breidenbach over on Mass Extinction calling ANONYMOUS a ‘shill for the servicers’, well is it any wonder ANONYMOUS is getting fed up with these attacks when she posts her very knowledgeable posts which help us all.

    In case you all have not noticed, I too have greatly diminished my posting on this site, until several days ago when I read the ‘shill’ post by Breidenbach.

    There is absolutely NO reason tfor name-calling or to be insulting. Going thorough this foreclosure- fraud stuff is stressful enough.

    All of us need to be mindful that there are numerous opposing counsels and their staff scouring these blogs, posting on these blogs–and they are posting under various guises–so I’d recommend never using your real name as your blog name and be careful of stating too many of your real facts of your cases lest they be able to read your strategy or where you might be ‘weak’ with your legal proceedings.

  35. Monday 2 August 2010


    Saw your first post on “without recourse.” Thank you for the explanation and supporting case sites.

    Great contribution!

  36. I noticed the allusion to WITHOUT RECOURSE…

    It appears to me there is some faulty understanding as to what “WITHOUT RECOURSE” means or what the legal effect is.

    I read the blog post titled WITHOUT RECOURSE: Hangman’s Noose and there seems to be the idea that because the pooling agreement says something about replacing the collateral it changes the party liable to pay the note..

    First , there is no evidence the note itself was negotiated into the pool. I haven’t seen a note that says “pay to the order XYZ Trust Pooling and Service agreement”. We have no idea what document actually assins the payments into the trust. I can gurantee it isn’t the note itself .
    Secondly “without recourse” means that when the payee negotiates the document to another party the are guaranteeing the signature not payment . THEY ARE NOT GIVING CREDIT. WITHOUT RECOURSE means it is a straight up sale of the paper.

    The extension of credit is a loan. The key part is because the acceptance is “without recourse” no credit was extended. The bank guarantee’s nothing except that the endorsement is genuine.

    An indorsement “without recourse” is nevertheless an implied warranty of the genuineness of the signatures to the paper. Challiss v. McCrum, 22 Kan. 157, 164, 31 Am. Rep. 181; see, also, Charnley v. Dulles (Pa.) 8 Watts & S. 353, 361

    An “indorsement without recourse” of a past-due note impliedly warrants that the note is genuine, and that it is what it purports to be on its face—a living debt New York Security & Trust Co. y. Lombard Inv. Co. (U. S.) 65 Fed. 271, 277.

    “The indorser without recourse contracts that the bill or note is in every respect genuine, and neither forged, fictitious, nor altered. Undoubtedly, and by universal admission, this principle applies to the signatures of the drawer, acceptor, and maker of the bill or note, who are the original parties, and it is often expressed in language to the effect that the indorser warrants that it is a genuine instrument—citing many authorities.” Palmer v. Courtney, 49 N. W. 754, 756, 32 Neb. 773



    The words “sans recours” or “without recourse” have no exact legal significance, except when employed by an indorser to limit his liability on a negotiable instrument which has been, by the act of indorsement by him, assigned to a third person. An indorsement followed by this phrase relieves the Indorser of liability for the payment of such a paper in the event it is dishonored by the maker or acceptor. Thompson v. First State Bank, 29 S. B. 610, 611, 102 Ga. 696.
    Many authorities say that the transfer of a note or bill without recourse is a sale.Brittin v. Freeman, 17 N. J. Law (2 Har.) 191, 227
    When the indorsement of a note Is “without recourse,” the indorser specially declines to assume any responsibility for its payment. According to the meaning of the term in the law merchant, this is the express condition of the contract, as much as if stated in detail in so many words. Youngberg v. Nelson, 53 N. W. 629, 51 Minn. 172, 38 Am. St. Rep. 497; Palmer v. Courtney, 49 N. W. 754, 756, 32 Neb. 773.
    An Indorsement of a promissory note “without recourse” Is evidence of an unwillingness to be answerable for the solvency of the maker—a prudent precaution, particularly where the note has a long time to run before it matures. Such Indorsement passes the note, with all its negotiable qualities. Epler v. Funk, 8 Pa. (8 Barr) 468, 469.
    An Indorsement on a note of the words “without recourse” is an express declaration of the absence of responsibility. It is no more than the expression of the implication of the law from a transfer by delivery merely, and, except as passing the legal title to instruments which under the statute are made assignable, and are not by the law merchant negotiable by delivery, its obligations and effect, as between transferror and transferee, is that of a transfer by delivery. Bankhead v. Owen, 60 Ala. 457, 461.
    An assignment of a negotiable instrument without recourse only relieves the assignee of the responsibility by reason of the insolvency of the obligors, but there is an implied warranty that the signatures are genuine, and the assignee is not required to use the same diligence in testing the genuineness of the paper as is required in testing the solvency of the obligors in case of a mere assignment for value. Maze v. Owingsville Banking Co., 63 S. W. 428, 23 Ky. Law Rep. 574.

    As you can see they do not give any credit to the solvency of the maker. Credit is trust. If someone won’t put money where their mouth is there is no trust in fact. The are giving no credit or trust to the financial solvency of the prior maker or indorsers.
    Banks are not loaning their credit. The are not giving credit. They are taking the note as if it were cash. It’s a straight up asset.

  37. Monday 2 August 2010

  38. Sorry to press the issue. Can someone *please* post Dave Krieger’s contact information?
    It is supposed to be on the forum, but I cannot find it. Email/website/phone number or all of the above.

    Thanks again!

  39. Monday 2 August 2010


    Not quite sure what your post intends to accomplish, other than venting? Listen, there are a lot of people on this site under duress, faced with losing their property and having their lives turned upside down, as well.

    Instead of being passive and accepting of your plight, and I understand it fully, stop the “victim” mentality and do what many are are doing, fighting back.

    Got no money? Then start defending yourself without using an attorney. It can be done. Start reading the cases that challenge jurisdiction for lack of proper party standing, and create your own, fashioned after
    one or several that makes the necessary points.

    That is putting one foot in front of the other and moving forward. Or, you can set up your tent and hum songs.

    Life is all about making choices. You may not have chosen your circumstances, but you can choose how to respond to them.

    You have found the answer, which is this site, the exact resource you need to turn your situation around. Make use of it, or not. Your choice.

  40. Hi Anonymous:

    Glad to see you decided to stay!

    As I’ve stated many times before going after the agents of the banks works VERY well, IF there is some evidence of wrongdoing on there part. Tha’ts just common sense. And again, as I’ve stated many times before, these “produce the note” and “securitization” arguments are great for stalling a foreclosure, which WILL eventually happen if that’s all you have, unlike the wrongdoing of the agents which get homeowners money or other tangible benefits. Just go to our website and see the woman who got judgment against Wells Fargo for 1.25 million!

  41. To Everyone:

    After you sleep on it – you feel a little better. My only goal for ever posting anything is to help people in whatever way I can. I will continue to do that – no matter what. And, if there is something I feel I need to post here – I will. However, I will no longer respond to individuals motivated by self-interest.

    Hopefully, someday I will also fully share my own actual experience with you. To date, what I have shared evolves from experience – and not theory. Contrary to what some believe, I never suggest a legal strategy – I am not an attorney – and all is meant to be construed for educational purposes only.

    To all the Storms, Davids, Daves, and Patricks out there – wishing and a hoping – just does not help. I have seen no methodology presented by any of you (outside of quiet title – which we all agree with) – that works. It would be helpful if you posted your success stories. Sadly, until we see a dramatic turn around in the number of foreclosures, or government intervention to stop the fraud, we will continue to see so many lose their homes. Again, I am confident that this will turn around – but want to see this happen sooner rather than later.

    There is occurring a slight shift is court sentiment. And, believe we can attribute that shift to Neil – and to all of you genuine people here who care about the TRUTH.


  42. Monday 2 August 2010

    Leo II:

    Let’s not get goofy, here.

  43. Definition of “agent provocateur”:  

    a secret agent hired to incite suspected persons to some illegal action, outbreak, etc., that will make them liable to punishment.

    Now who might that person or persons, be, as it relates to this site?

  44. Dave can you email me your email and web site info

    I am preparing my own quiet title action


    Thank you for all the time and effort you have put into sharing your knowledge and discoveries with us!

    I skim every comment that gets posted on this blog and I have learned that if your name is at the top – it is time to pay very close attention to it.

    You and NG * have both been emphasizing that the accounting is just as important as the law in this fight. In my non-legal pro se opinion, I believe that the accounting is where we win. The banks can wiggle around UCC and various legal requirements, but accounting is quite difficult to “modify” for purposes of litigation.

    (* and Soliman once I could understand what he was saying)

    Judges also do care about the accounting because who got paid what, when and why is at the very heart of judicial common sense. It is our job to explain why the accounting isn’t what the judge assumes it is.

    Anonymous, I won’t ask you to stay and continue to devote your time and stress thoughtfully posting in this forum. However, I would ask you to interject helpful hints now and then as you feel like it.

    Please do not leave, we all need you.You have provided the good, excellent and correct stuff about this securitization, which most o th people and the attorneys do not know. Since I have researched a lot on this securitization and I know you are correct what ever you have posted. We all need you so please reconsider and stay back for all of us.

    Thanks and Be Safe





  48. dear ANONYMOUS

    I can not help but say to you ; your comments here have been instrumental in furthering “OUR” understanding of the Securitization of MBS.
    Without your comments the majority of the homeowners,layman & most others unfamiliar with the sec would have no real understanding of the given complexity of these matters [or more like crimes] designed to hide & deceive & just plain F#CKover the majority of the population. Please reconsider –
    THANK YOU SO MUCH for your efforts here either way .

    A-MAN- “Paul Pulatie” works for the banks?? He does forensic audits & from everything he has told me “Paul Pulatie would be on “ourside” .so I”ll have to ask that him next time i speak to him.

  49. First post, but been lurking forever it seems. Hats off to everyone here who’s kicking this
    can further down the road. Having said that, I thought I’d explain another side of this
    drama that’s unfolding before us.

    My wife was an architect, with several decades of award winning work under her belt
    before being let go several years ago, along with pretty near the entire architecture
    department of a well known corporation. The CEO has been written up in several biz
    mags since then about how well he’s charted a course during these difficult economic
    times. His response is always the same, “Aw! I’m good at this stuff!” Truth be told, firing
    half of the staff is one hell of a way to forge ahead.
    Me, I’m a contractor, also with many decades of fine work under my belt, please excuse
    the ego. Many happy clients over the years. Then, seemingly overnight, my ability to earn
    a living evaporated. Wall street, in it’s lust for more, gutted my industry to the point of
    complete destruction. Everyone I’ve worked with for decades, from cabinet builders to
    framers, from electricians to plumbers, are dead in the water, total annihilation. I built a
    garage in 2009, that’s it. So what happens next?
    Dr. Greenspan (I hesitate, wishing to preface his name with the term I’d like to use), on
    Meet the Press just this morning, 8/01/2010, said that there’s been a measurable increase
    in economic progress among 1. The higher income earners, who have seen their 401k’s
    increase to the tune of 800 billion dollars. That’s nice. I’m so glad for them. 2. The big
    banks, who are doing exceedingly well, bless them. And 3. Large corporations are seeing
    very nice profits.
    People, how long will it take before the average person sees through this facade, before it
    becomes exceedingly clear that the U.S. has been gutted? Pillaged? This is nothing short
    of a huge circle jerk, one in which the rich just keep raping the poor, over and over again.
    Having said that, I still know people who to this day, still believe that this is a problem
    directly attributable to people who took out a loan that they couldn’t afford. I’ve been
    accused by people I know of taking on more mortgage than I could afford. There’s never
    any mention that I have been buying and selling houses for nearly four decades,
    successfully, I might add. This points to how well the banking system is able to guide the
    mechanism underlying the truth. Blame others.
    This has never been as blatant as is occurring right now, with Wall Street acting as if
    they’ve been gutted by financial reform, all the while winking to the Feds. It’s like bad
    summer stock, the bankers shouting out way too loud to the diners in the rear of the
    dinner theater, only in this case, it’s to the average Joe on Main Street who just might
    believe this crap come mid-term elections.
    So, back to me for a moment. My wife and I having been totally gutted by these
    criminals, and I don’t use that term lightly, we’re now totally insolvent. Laid bare. I don’t
    mean that we’re down to living off of our savings. We have NOTHING LEFT! What
    little we had went into arranging the long sought after and desperately hoped for loan
    modification, which, when it finally arrived from Countrywide in late 2008, modified us
    upwards, all the while tacking on enough fees to put our mortgage back to it’s original
    principal balance, some ten years previous. This was all under what we thought would be
    the protective watch of our AG’s office, who simply shrugged the whole business off.
    “What can we do?” They said, sheepishly.
    Now what’s one to do? The first response is to start lightening the load, like a gondola
    scraping the treetops….out with satellite TV, out with the land line, never another dinner
    out. Clothes are from Goodwill from now on. Food stamps? Yes, thank you very much.
    And like a poor soul who has fallen into icy waters, you pull everything in as close as
    possible, letting the extremities bear the brunt of the assault on the system. Food matters.
    Nothing else. Warmth matters, nothing else. Dryness matters, you know the rest.

    But just when you think you’ve pulled in as much as you can, the junk debt buyers fly in
    like so many carrion eaters, ready to pick at your open wounds. They will, by using the
    easily accessible and for sale to the highest bidder court systems, throw out a summons
    that you only have 20 days to respond to. Where-oh-where does one find the money to
    keep these vultures at bay? How to afford an attorney to fend off this attack? VLN?
    They’re months out! And if you don’t respond within 20 days, you’ll find that on the 21st
    day, your checking account has been wiped out, with the courts approval. It pays to have
    lobbyists in high places.

    The anxiety level increases. It’s so easy to see why people resort to self-medicating, how
    spousal abuse/child abuse and divorce rates rise because of these circumstances. And yet,
    all of the above actions are not only being done in a perfectly choreographed dance
    between the Treasury, the Fed, The Executive branch, Congress on both sides of the aisle,
    as well as the entire Judicial branch of government. This is truly shameful.

    Folks, we are so screwed! The people who have accused me of taking on more mortgage
    than I could afford will be viewing this whole game quite differently shortly, I fear, when
    their job is finally cut, when their bank comes-a-calling due to their inability to keep up
    with their payments. They’ll scream like stuck little pigs, “We’ve done nothing wrong!
    Please help us!” There are millions of deaf ears all around America right now.

    And just what exactly will the bankers do when they get all of the properties? What does
    one sector do when they’ve finally captured all of the land, all of the housing, from Baltic
    Avenue to Boardwalk? What happens when a large percentage of the population has had
    their credit scores destroyed so as to completely remove them from future home
    ownership status, meaning, that they couldn’t buy these distressed properties from the
    banks even if they wanted to? Do the banks just watch as all of the ill-gotten gains,
    meaning, homes that once were perfectly manicured by people who cared for them, who
    planted gardens in the soil, who crafted communities of people helping people, crumble
    from lack of care? Just what exactly is the end game here?

    I started this diatribe to explain about my particular situation, one that I don’t have an
    answer for. My wife and I, nearing retirement age without two coins to rub together, are
    considering selling one of our vehicles to buy a tipi to place on a friends land. It will be a
    rough row to hoe, but what do you do when faced with situations such as these? All we
    know to do is accept our fate. Tent cities are springing up everywhere. It could be worse, I

    BTW, I recently spent some of my last few dollars with “AN ATTORNEY WHO GETS
    IT”. Although a very nice guy, my last $200 was spent in 45 minutes being told that,
    although the egregious behavior of the banks is reprehensible, and actionable, given my
    resources or lack thereof, all he would be able to achieve would be to put me back into
    the original mortgage agreement. “But”, I argued, “I know that they don’t have standing. I
    KNOW that they aren’t the holder of my note.”

    “Sorry,” he said, “That’s just the way it is.”

    “Damn, that sucks.” I said, as I hummed the Bruce Hornsby tune in my head. Some things
    will never change.





  52. Anonymous–don’t go! Seriously, your posts have been very informative and welcome. But I know it must be time-consuming to post all the quality info that you have posted in the past…

    One poster below mentioned that there’s not enough “successful clean strategy” talk on this site. Well, there is and there isn’t, in my opinion. That is to say, as much as there can be talk of successful clean strategy, it’s here. There are links to dozens and dozens of cases, pleadings, order, rulings, etc.

    The thing is, everybody’s situation is at least slightly different. So a successful clean strategy for one might not work at all for another. Plus, since much of what the “lender” did, or the way they did it, is unknown to us. Or at least we can’t prove it. We know what they did but don’t have the hard evidence in a lot of cases.

    So we have to piece it together as best we can, little by little, and hopefully one day one of us will crack this thing wide open and a successful clean strategy that works for pretty much everyone will emerge.

    Of course, all the strategy, evidence, and case law in the world won’t sway a judge who is just in the habit of backing up the banks.

    Also, the A-Man is awesome. So what if he prefers all caps? I like his “never again” refrain and “Bank of Amerifraud,” etc.

  53. Edge.. I am missing something apparently. Where is his contact info? Could you please repost it for the sake of me not being able to see it?


  54. Ian.. certainly not directed at you. More so at people that write entirely in CAPS, and drivel on endlessly with pseudo religious comments interspersed. It taints the whole blog with the wacko stink, and it is that kind of offtopic conspiracy theory nonsense that will lose you a court case. Evidence and facts and law is what we need.
    Perhaps some editing of non-helpful comments would be in order.

    Hopefully that will be the last of it…
    “NEVER AGAIN” 😉 …

  55. Sunday 1 August 2010

    Well, Angela, thank you for your most “inciteful” editorial. Now that you have finished, maybe you could take the time and go back to read David Krieger’s contact information, which he kindly provided for his yet to be published book, on that very same thread that caught most of your attention.

    Who is the “we” to which you refer, for surely I am not included, by choice.

    FYI, sharing successful strategies is what these posts and threads are all about. Sorry they cannot be spoon-fed to you.

    You are most welcome!

  56. Angela in Atlanta- I hope that capitalizing certain words in the post below yours doesn’t count as ranting and bitching. On the other hand it is simple and to the point. The mortgage/note had to be assigned to the sponsor>depositor>trust in order to qualify as a bankrupt-remote-entity(BRE). This was required under the applicable IRS guidelines for such structures. End result? If it didn’t follow the rules, the pass-through trust was assessed a 100% tax. Also violated the PSA and the assignment and assumption agreement. Also SEC rules. So this simple paragraph I have written here is enough to cast aspersions on the whole process. Log in about 100 case cites and you are set. But sorry to capitalize anything, which annoys the readers and frightens the children.

  57. Can someone please post Dave Krieger’s contact information?

    Also if someone could post actual links to *successful* cases with case numbers that would be helpful for this and future posts.
    There is too much ranting and not enough successful clean strategy on this blog.
    Bitching about loan servicer’s wanting money is pointless; of course they do.. they will do what they can to get it.
    That kind of nonsense cheapens the whole blog as it makes casual observers think it is just a bunch of wackos spouting garbage because they can’t/won’t pay their mortgage.

    We need to keep the detritus to a minimum and focus on sharing successful strategies and case law with actual links. Pasting successful court pleadings would be great too.

    Please also state your State of origin and contact info so we can get in touch.
    Ang in Atlanta

  58. Anonymous-I second Dan Edstrom’s motion, that you reconsider leaving the site. I hate to think that someone from whom I am learning is leaving, probably because of repeated (and, I feel, undeserved,bashings from Storm (pinhead) among others. As we all get deeper and deeper into the fraud, and begin realizing and consequently ranting and venting about playing against a stacked deck, I feel that we “can’t see the trees for the forest”. Starting at the VERY BEGINNING of the securitization process, MOST FORECLOSURES GO FROM “lender” to MERS to TBTF Bank, as Trustee for XXXX_X trust. Every single one, (that means all) skip the sponsor and the originator, and if the loan has been sold, figure it out, some of these foreclosure complaints purporting to identify the “lender,or whatever we are calling them this week, are missing DOZENS AND DOZENS of assignments. And the ones that they do have, are FORGED, FABRICATED, and BACKDATED. What else do we all need? Come on, throw in a few notarizations from nonexistant notaries, even the most jaded judge in the country wouldn’t want to subvert the entire contractual law process! would they?

  59. Dave Kreiger (or anyone else with info),

    Can you please post Dave’s website and contact information? Very interested in your Quiet Title action work.


  60. Matt Weidner Blog entry: Void Foreclosure Judgments Everywhere…They’re Subject to Collateral Attack Forever

    This blog can be read here: X_

    In California:

    California Civil Code 3518:
    He who has fraudulently dispossessed himself of a thing may be treated as if he still had possession.

    California Civil Code 3539:
    Time does not confirm a void act

    Anonymous: Please don’t go. I (and I am sure we) very much appreciate your postings.

    Dan Edstrom
    dmedstrom “at”

  61. Geezzee Laweezze… you go away for a few days and its like your children have had a house party… and all hell broke loose!

    The host of this blog keeps it open.. get it OPEN… one would have to be of a simple mind to think that this and other blogs were not being read by and open to subsequent “opinions” in an attempt to get the dog’s off the trail. Finger pointing, bruised ego’s, rants without substance, inciting civil unrest and personal insults are the most obvious.

    With that however most people who post here have done some serious ground work and appear to be quick studies given their circumstance… KUDO’s to them!

    As a writer and researcher, have been there done that, so to speak, and while I may hold definitive opinion’s regarding the current situation, I truly understand that we the people are under assault.

    And I do not like it!

    It is understood that the bottom feeder’s as well as those seeking answers and a solution read and post on this blog…

    Keep it real! It is unraveling each and every day… as the current pissing matches here seem to indicate!

    KUDO”S to Neil & Brad for keeping this forum possible!

  62. Sunday 1 August 2010

    For me, I have difficulty keeping track of what is posted here, and it is hot or miss to keep up on a particular theme/thread information.

    Not directly related to quiet title, but to proof of standing as issues related to building a case for quiet title, another little gem from Mr Gartner is:

    A little from here, a little from there, and one can construct their own formidable pleading.











  64. Here is the Box case for those looking:

    Seeking Rememdy


    ELIZABETH WARREN,0,515146.story



    I enjoyed reading your postings on this site.
    Your thoughts and input were very educational.
    Maybe you will reconsider.
    Thank you again !

  67. Hi Dave I would like a copy of Hon. Arthur Federman Order.
    In addition could you tell me how to secure a copy of your
    book my contact is:
    Thank you

  68. Sunday 1 August 2010

    There was also brief mention of quiet title in a previous thread, back in April:

    For some reason. links are not always made hot, so cut and paste.

  69. Sunday 1 August 2010

    A MAN:

    You strike me as naive, at times. “Lenders” and foreclosure mills are an insidious lot whose sole concern is the “almighty” fiat “dollar.” The other side has the capability of twisting reality, and the courts, in general, accept whatever they present to keep the wheels of [in]justice going and the money flowing.

    What does “honesty” have to do with anything, especially in a statutory court that is a fiction, and a fiction cannot deal with what is real?

    Do you think most judges are not on the take and in bed with the opposition? They are plied lavishly with “gifts” of all kinds…money, trips, etc, and have a “vested” interest against home owners.

    I do not know who Abraham is, and for sure, he is not my father, nor do I know or care who Isaacs is. Are they going to help anyone with a foreclosure case?

    “NEVER AGAIN.” What does that mean? Do you think your “pen” is mightier than the sword, or are you taking Shakespeare literally in the belief that “thinking makes it so?” It happened in the 1930s, it is happening again, today, and it will continue to happen for as long as the corporate federal government is in charge.

    Instead of invectives, how about something more practical that can be useful, other than staging a rally in front of some judge’s home? Try it yourself and see how it works for you. You might then find yourself a fan of Oscar Wilde and “The Ballad of Reading Gaol,” after he was incarcerated.



  71. One caveat and I am not sure but Paul Pulatie also represents the banks. please clarify.

    Regarding anonymous you are one of the main people on this blog that make sense. so hopefully continue.




  72. Sunday 1 August 2010

    The In Re Box case was posted on Matt Weidner’s blog, one who lets no moss gather around his efforts,

  73. Hi David:

    I’ts always a breath of fresh air to see your well stated comments. I also agree with Paul Pulatie about the useless legal theory posted hear that justs wastes the homeowner’s time and money they can’t afford to spend on some “produce the note,” or other type securitization argument that that just stalls the foreclosure and has no real remedy for them!

    We too know that your methodology has merit because we use it as well; along with other methodologies that actually give the homeowner positive outcomes.

    We should get together and compare notes. And I can’t wait for your publication I know it will be outstanding!

  74. Not sure what Mr. Kreiger – is referring to as a caveat “all of these posts (pertaining to anonymous) do come with a caveat” Certainly, the same might be implied as to Mr. Kreiger’s own posts.

    There can be no dispute – that “quiet title” involves the chain of title, or lack thereof, in securizations. This is not “theory” but rather stated in SEC documents. And, what has happened to those securitizations since the crisis is equally important – however, much is not publicly disclosed – that is an issue for discovery and courts should be informed of its importance. Many courts do not understand the process – if they can be informed from blogs such as this one – that is to the borrowers benefit. And, so can the government benefit by exposure of what is really happening. As far as plaintiff foreclosures attorneys – there is only so much – and so far – they can go to conceal the real party and title.

    From what I have seen in Quiet Title actions – foreclosure victims are often denied that right. I do not agree with this, and believe it can be challenged.

    Attorneys who practice borrower bankruptcy, foreclosure mediation, and loan modification – derive their business from ongoing borrower hardship. This is not to say these law firms cannot be helpful – and I sometimes advocate this course. But, there must be caution, and developed knowledge by consumer, to insure that the consumer’s best interest will be represented. Some of these law firm have also developed a source of income by representing Fortune 500 companies – which could be a conflict of interest.

    I will not post on this site again. I hope that some have found my sharing and experience useful. And, I wish all the victims here the best. Someday, I do believe we will win the battle.

    Much thanks to Neil Garfield.

  75. Dave

    Please contact me off forum. I have something to discuss with you should be of mutual interest.



  76. Dave, I would like the order also, and how does the Quiett Tiltle work in CA if you don’t have tender?

  77. Hi Dave

    Could you send me the Order of
    the Honorable Arthur Federman
    Thank you

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: