HOW TO ARGUE FLORIDA ASSIGNMENT FRAUD TO JUDGES

Good Stuff —- Now we are working on a script. Comments invited including edits. Let’s get on the same page do what the pretender lenders are doing. We should have a common message that all the Judges hear from all the lawyers.

HOW TO ARGUE FLORIDA ASSIGNMENT FRAUD TO JUDGES
http://www.amartinezlaw.com

In accordance with the Disclaimer posted on this site, nothing here shall be construed as legal advice. The information below is strickly commentary designed to help enhancing the presentation skills. The hiring of an attorney is very important. If you are in need of legal assistance, consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.

The Assignment Not Attached To The Complaint & Is Dated After The Complaint Was Filed

It is important to note here that judges like rulings from the appellate division that cover their circuit or other opinions from WITHIN their circuit (colleagues). Find those cases first and if you can’t and have to use other Florida cases, show the judge WHY they should rule the same. Remember you have 5 minutes to bring it home.

I’m going to use Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee for FFMLT 2006-3 as the Plaintiff and Marshall C. Watson as their counsel for this example.

Judge: We’re here on Defense Counsel’s Motion to Dismiss. Counsel please proceed.

Defense Counsel: Good morning Your Honor. This Motion is based on 3 points that warrant dismissal of this action (we will only focus on one – Standing)

1) Plaintiff lacks standing to bring this foreclosure action against my client (FACT/OPINION). The allegations in the complaint allege Plaintiff is the OWNER and HOLD of the NOTE that they seem to have apparently LOST (FACT) but have failed to identify, WHEN they became the OWNER and HOLDER of the Note (FACT) and HOW they became the OWNER and HOLDER of the Note (FACT), or the approximate date WHEN they allegedly lost the NOTE (FACT) and explaining HOW they allegedly lost it (FACT). They have attached a copy of a print out from court records AND NOT THEIR CLIENTS FILES of the Mortgage (FACT) which indicates First Franklin as the ORIGINAL Lender (FACT) and does not mention Plaintiff Deutsche Bank anywhere on THAT document (FACT). No NOTE or a CERTIFIED COPY of such nor has a LAWFUL and EQUITABLE ASSIGNMENT been ATTACHED to the Complaint (FACT) in support of their allegation that they are the OWNER and HOLDER of the NOTE (FACT).

STOP RIGHT HERE (EDITORS NOTE): First always state facts and not opinions. If you have to state an opinion it better be extremely persuasive and you need to have sufficient evidence to back it up. Second, if there was a Notice of Filing after the complaint was filed and you filed your Motion to Dismiss of the Assignment you want to say:

In an attempt to cloud the court’s judgment (OPINION), PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL has magically caused an Assignment to appear (FACT) which according to the date was CLEARLY drafted, executed and filed AFTER the filing of this action (FACT) where numerous case-law opinions throughout Florida PROHIBIT such Assignment filings warranting dismissal (FACT)!

STOP RIGHT HERE (EDITORS NOTE): You don’t want to come off as condescending here. Your want to come off as confident to your position and a little fantastical about Opposing Counsel’s Actions (Not PLAINTIFF) in filing the Affidavit this way. You have to end your speaking presentation here because you don’t ever want the judge to cut you off to allow opposing counsel to speak but you want your last words to the judge the prompt the question…what case law and opinions do you have to support your position?

Judge: Plaintiffs Counsel what do you have to say?

Plaintiff’s Counsel: Your Honor, our Complaint clearly states a cause of action (OPINION). Plaintiff is in possession of the original Promissory Note and we are prepared to drop the Re-establishment Count Your Honor. Since we have possession of the Original Note, the Court should find that an equitable assignment occurred prior to the actual dated assignment and the date of the assignment is irrelevant (OPINION). We only need to have possession to be the holder in due course judge which allows us to bring this action. I have numerous case-law to support our position.

Judge: Such as?

Plaintiffs Counsel: Well Your Honor, WM Specialty Mortgage, LLC v. Salomon, 874 So.2d 680 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) and Johns v. Gillian, 184 So. 140 (Fla. 1938) clearly state that because Plaintiff had possession of the original Promissory Note the Court should find that an equitable assignment of the mortgage occurred prior to the actual dated assignment and the date of the assignment should be deemed irrelevant.

Judge: I see…Defense Counsel?

Defense Counsel: Your Honor, Counsel’s argument is misplaced (FACT/OPINION). WM Specialty Mortgage requires that, whatever the form of the assignment, there MUST first be an “unconditional” transfer of interest BEFORE the assignee may maintain a foreclosure (FACT). Unlike the matter presently before the Court, in WM Specialty Mortgage the Plaintiff alleged facts of a physical transfer of the mortgage to the assignee prior to the Plaintiff filing suit (FACT). The allegation of physical delivery SUPPORTED an equitable assignment (FACT) and based on THAT fact the Court in WM Specialty Mortgage overlooked the late executed assignment and allowed the foreclosure to continue (FACT). In the matter before this Court, the Plaintiff made no allegation IN THE Complaint of physical delivery (FACT) within the holding of WM Specialty Mortgage and the allegations in the Complaint do not rise to the standard of showing an “unconditional” transfer of the assignor’s rights to Plaintiff (FACT) nor has Plaintiff alleged in the Complaint it is the HOLDER IN DUE COURSE which counsel is alleging here.

Your Honor, before Plaintiff’s Counsel responds, I’d like the court to note that PRESENTING Affidavits that are dated AFTER the a Complaint is filed and the foreclosure has been initiated in the manner done so EXACTLY as seen here (FACT/OPINION), is a pattern and practice amongst the law firms Marshal C. Watson, Florida Default Law Group, Law Offices of David J. Stern and Shapiro & Fishman (FACT) who represent over 90% of foreclosures in the State of Florida (FACT). In fact the argument I’ve just expressed to the court comes straight from Judge Anthony Rondolino of the 6th Judicial Circuit in and for Pinellas County BANK OF AMERICA vs. COLLEEN M. MCKENNA Case No. 09-4179-CI-13 (FACT) which Marshall C. Watson was counsel of record for, where His Honor granted Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss against Marshall C. Watson for the very same reason (hand a copy of 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 833c to Judge) (FACT). At a glance I have over ten (10) cases where this tactic has been used and the case was dismissed as a result (FACT) (hand Judge the cases with the points highlighted). Those cases are BRANCH BANKING AND TRUST COMPANY vs. REGINALD JENKINS, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 642a, CHASE HOME FINANCE, LLC v. JANET DOBSON, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 428a, CITIMORTGAGE, INC. vs. MICHAEL EASOM, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 100b, CREDIT BASED ASSET SERVICING AND SECURITIZATION, LLC v. TAMMY D. HARDY, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1147a, SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC. vs. ELENA V. FULLERTON, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1146b, THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON v. MARY L. BARNICH, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 100a, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION v. BRENDA C. ROSE, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1044a, US BANK N.A. v. JESUS TACORONTE, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 17a and WACHOVIA BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION vs. JUANITA NORTON, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1043a.

All of these cases support that where an Assignment is filed AFTER the Complaint is filed and the Complaint fails to allege and/or Plaintiff fails to submit other documentary evidence showing conclusively an EQUITABLE TRANSFER of the Note (FACT), Plaintiff lacks standing to bring a foreclosure action and the case should be dismissed (FACT). I would ask the court at this time based on the OVERWHELMING support I have provided to dismiss this case.

STOP RIGHT HERE (EDITORS NOTE): I cannot tell you what the judge will decide or what Opposing Counsel will say after this point…you be the judge. What I will say is that Judges want to hear the FACTS. You have presented the FACTS very well here. The key to success in this example is your flow of words in a strong and confident manner without studder, interruption or indecisive pause.

Another very important point and cross argument I want to point out is the Assignment is 99% of the time from MERS to the Plaintiff. There are two (2) important positions to take on this.

(1) While the Mortgage may name MERS as the Nominee for Lender, it does so only in the Mortgage and the Mortgage interest only. MERS is not mentioned ANYWHERE on the Note hence it can not assign an interest greater than that which it is entitled to. The MERS assignment (outside of the number of fraudulent issues that may exist on the face of it) will casually state in the language that it is transferring ALL beneficial interest in the Mortgage AND Note. Be sure to bring to the court’s attention that MERS name is not mentioned anywhere on the NOTE as the Lenders Nominee and Plaintiff has NOT provided evidence to support MERS ability to transfer the beneficial interest of the Note.

(2) In instances where the Plaintiff is Trustee for a securitized pool of loans, find the Pooling & Servicing Agreement at http://www.secinfo.com/. Show the court that it would be impossible for MERS to transfer interest to Deutsche when it is clear from the case caption that this loan is part of a pool of loans (FYI – just because they allege your loan is part of a pool does not mean it is but for argument sake use this allegation against them). The Pooling and Servicing Agreement will show who the Depositor is, Servicer, Master Servicer and Deutsche as Trustee. This document is evidence that a) the loan transferred from the original lender to at the very least, the Depositor (where is the evidence of this transfer?), and from the Depositor to the parties in the pool (where is the evidence of this transfer or transfers) and that the Trustee gets its alleged power from this pool and agreement which only begs the question…why is counsel here attempting to claim this Note has moved from MERS to Plaintiff directly?

This is a great point to proving the assignment is a fraud. Watch what opposing counsel answers to this because it will probably amount to testimony at which point you need to be quick to say to opposing counsel “unless you intend to recuse yourself as counsel from the Plaintiff please refrain from testifying on their behalf.” Because at this point anything opposing counsel says will not be supported by anything alleged in the complaint or in the court record and that should always be your…”maybe so your honor but Plaintiff has not alleged such in the complaint…Plaintiff has not submitted any documented evidence to support what counsel is saying here today.”

Well my fellow soldiers of the cause, that is my 2 cents. Master this in 5 minutes and I think the outcome will be a positive one. I’d be very interested to hear any comments and feedback on this. My next topic will be Summary Judgment. I hope this helps.

Anthony Martinez Esq.

22 Responses

  1. I am a victim of corruption, conspiracy, fraud, theft civil and constitutional violations by judges, attorneys and powerful, wealthy and illegal entities from Bronx County New York. All of my businesses and personal property and belongings have been stolen and I am presently depressed, physically, emotional and financially bankrupt. The Bronx county courthouse has been systematically depriving its citizens of due process of law. In my case judges deprived me of my constitutional rights to due process. I was never served with notice of default. I was denied the right to due process of the law but such is a common thing in our judicial system today.

  2. This is a great article for anyone that’s looking to acquire real estate and hold it for the long-term. Quite a few years back, I was in the same boat and I went out and acquired a portfolio of approximately 20 residential properties.

    The goal, of course, was to take advantage of leverage, tax breaks, OPT and OPM. I figured that if I wanted to be a real estate investor that I was going to have to take the plunge and acquire some property. What I found throughout my time as a landlord, however, is that there are other ways besides buying property to acquire valuable real estate at steep discounts.

    Private lending is a technique that plenty of master investors are currently using to acquire interests in real estate for pennies on the dollar. It might be worth some discussion here.

    Thanks for the well thought out and well-written articles!

  3. In California unconcionable contract clauses can be stricken out by the court. As a real estate agent I know that many of the homeowners who have taken mortgage contracts which included power of sale provisions are unaware that the provision is even in the mortgage agreement. Some do not read english, others are rushed through the escrow process to get there loan. The agreement does not make it clear that the bank does not have to go to court to take your property. But, more importantly, I have researched extensively the provision of a power of sale and concluded that they are unconstitutional when the party seeking the remedy is a federally chartered bank corporation created under an act of Congress for public and national purposes. My research is posted under “UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF A POWER OF SALE PROVISION, OR UNDER REALITY A NATIONS OF LAW SECTION ON THIS WEBSITE.

    1670.5. (a) If the court as a matter of law finds the contract or
    any clause of the contract to have been unconscionable at the time it
    was made the court may refuse to enforce the contract, or it may
    enforce the remainder of the contract without the unconscionable
    clause, or it may so limit the application of any unconscionable
    clause as to avoid any unconscionable result.
    (b) When it is claimed or appears to the court that the contract
    or any clause thereof may be unconscionable the parties shall be
    afforded a reasonable opportunity to present evidence as to its
    commercial setting, purpose, and effect to aid the court in making
    the determination.

  4. I read somewhere, hearsay, that the Deed of Trust was a ‘trust’ and subject to ‘trust law’, and could by the nature of a trust agreement have unconscionable terms, but by the nature of a mortgage, the Deed and Note go together and must stay together, once bifurcated, we have those issues we all discuss over and over.

    Anyway, that same information said that once the lenders and pretenders securitized these notes, they moved into Contract Law, and as such they are bound by the terms of Contract Law and the courts have a duty to enforce Contract Law when they are hearing these foreclosure cases.

    The courts are still treating these as Trusts, where someone breached their fudiciary duty when as a contract, the terms of unconscionability come into place.

    The courts have failed us, if this is true…and I believe it’s true because if the Deed and Note stayed together there is no way they could move from Trust Law, and a judge has a duty to know whether they are ruling on a trust agreement or terms of a bad contract and providing unjust enrichment to a side that operated with unclean hands and received clear titles laundered through the court systems, based on the ‘trust’ the judges had in the underling attorneys who present their client cases to them.

    Judges have been hoodwinked by the bankers who are using officers of the court, underling attorneys, to get them to sign off on bad contracts and walk away with the goods with ‘clean hands’. If that ain’t an organized crime/Mafia like situation, I don’t know what is.
    When police officers were corrupt at least they knew who they were dealing with…when judges assist in such corruption, the theft of the United States by the lowering of their gavel and the placement of their seal, well that’s the ultimate ‘hijacking’ of the country through the justice system.

    That took a lot of planning.
    Getting Congress to pass resolutions, getting courts to render decisions, getting states to offer drive thru foreclosures, and getting judges to sign off on the theft and cleaning up the transactions.

    Someone was very patient and knew how to work this.

    I saw a sign today, a realtor was offering a land to be divided however a business wanted, but this time it was ‘for lease’.

    What obligation do the corporations, even if overseen by the government, have to provide us with real ownership of anything any more after getting this stuff handed to them free and clear?

    What rights do we have when someone takes our money and disappears and hands off the rights to collect the money and take the property to the next guy in line. Do this every 10 years, and we get jacked.

    When is the last homeowner you know of that has a released lien and a released Deed after paying off their home.

    I’ve read stories of people have titles handed down for generations and someone creates a title and lien and records it in the public and forecloses on them, rendering their true and correct original useless to defend in a court of law.

    Not Justice…………just..us.

    Light and Love,
    Trespass Unwanted, in propria persona, a freeman
    (even though I’m a woman 🙂 )

    I still know nothing, and if I think I know something I don’t know nothing and I don’t give legal advice because I don’t know legal things, but I’m learning every day, and I can assure you, I’m awake!

  5. I know nothing, and if I think I know something, I know nothing. I do not give legal advice because I don’t know legal things.
    (I know a little more each day, but I still know nothing. 😉

    Black’s Law 5th Edition
    Unconscionability…. Basic test of “unconscionability” of contract is whether under circumstances existing at time of making a contract and in light of general commercial background and commercial needs of particular trade or case, clauses involved are so one-sided as to oppress or unfairly surprise party. Division of Triple T Service, Inc. .v. Mobile Oil Corp., 60 Misc.2d 720, 304 N.Y.S.2d 191, 201. Unconscionability is generally recognized to include an absence of meaningful choice on the part of one of the parties, to a contract together with contract terms which are unreasonably favorable to the other party. Gordon v. Crown Central Petroleum Corp., D.C.Ga., 423 F.Supp. 58, 61.
    Typically the cases in which unconscionability is found involve gross overall one-sidedness or gross one-sidedness of a term disclaiming a warranty, limiting damages, or granting procedural advantages. In these cases one-sidedness is often coupled with the fact that the imbalance is buried in small print and often couched in language unintelligible to even a person of moderate education. Often the seller deals with a particularly susceptible clientele. Kluger v. Romain, 58 N.J. 522, 279 A.2d 640.

    Uniform Commercial Code. (1) If the court as a matter of law finds the contract or any clause of the contract to have been unconscionable at the time it was made the court may refuse to enforce the contract, or it may enforce the remainder of the contract without the unconscionable clause, or it may so limit the application of any unconscionable clause as to avoid any unconscionable result. (2) When it is claimed or appears to the court that the contract or any clause thereof may be unconscionable the parties shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to present evidence as to its commercial setting, purpose and effect to aid the court in making the determination.
    U.C.C. (“in this place is that special S symbol”) 2-302.

    Section 2-3-2 should be considered in conjunction with the obligation of good faith imposed at several places in the Code. See e.g. U.C.C. 1-203

    Restatement of Contracts. If a contract or term thereof is unconscionable at the time the contract is made a court may refuse to enforce the contract, or may enforce the remainder of the contract without the unconscionable term, or may so limit the application of any unconscionable term as to avoid any unconscionable result. Restatement of Contracts, Second, (Tent.Draft) (“in this place is that special S symbol”) 234.
    ———————————————————————————————

    My Note: Courts have a duty to not just concentrate on procedure when dealing with unconscionable contract.

    —————————————————————————————
    Black’s Law 5th edition states this about a Court of Law.

    In a wide sense, any duly constituted tribunal administering the laws of the state or nation;the course of the common law and governed by its rules and principles, as contrasted with a “court of equity”
    —————————————————————————————-
    Black’s Law 5th edition states this about a Court of Equity.

    A court which has jurisdiction in equity, which administers justice and decides controversies in accordance with the rules, principles, and precedents of equity, and which follows the forms and procedure of chancery; as distinguished from a court having the jurisdiction, rules, principles, and practice of the common law. Equity courts have been abolished in all states which have adopted Rules of Civil Procedure; law and equity actions having been merged procedurally into a single form of “civil action”.
    ——————————————————————————————-
    If they were merged into ‘civil action’
    Black’s Law 5th edition states this about a Civil action.

    Action brought to enforce, redress, or protect private rights. In general, all types of actions other than criminal proceedings. Gilliken v. Gilliken, 248 N.C 710, 104 S.E.2d 861, 863
    The term includes all actions, both those formerly known as equitable actions and those known as legal actions, or in other phraseology, both suits in equity and actions at law. Thomason V. Thomason, 107 U.S.App.D.C. 27, 274 F.2d 89, 90.
    In the great majority of states which have adopted rules or codes of civil procedure as patterned on the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, there is only one form of action known as a “civil action.” The former distinctions between actions at law and suits in equity, and the separate forms of those actions and suits have been abolished. Rule of Civil Proc. 2; New York CPLR (that special S symbol) 103(a)
    ———————————————————————————————–
    Well that answers my question of how to invoke a court of law, over being in a court of equity- There is no court of law, they are obsolete individually and merged, there is only a “civil action” encompassing both law and equity.

    So judges have a duty per Rules of Civil Procedures, to provide for a Restatement of Contracts. We’ve lost our homes due to the ignorance of our judges. You’d think they went to law school and got a real education in law. Why is it, so many have lost their homes and continue to do so, even when the Lenders are doing the Restatement of Contracts and calling them Modifications, and taking the homes anyway.

    Someone either posted in a blog, or I read an article, both are hearsay, but it seemed to show something like 3 million modifications, about 500,000 of them temporary, and another 200,000 permanent, and it was stated, again hearsay since I can’t provide the source, that the permanent modifications ended up becoming temporary modifications in about 6 months, and ended up being a foreclosure after that.

    I’ve met people who have been discussing their modification with the ‘lender’ for 2 years. Hoping it will finally go through. Can you imagine how they will feel with even that portion of the contract is unconscionable and some judge acts like they are the deadbeat and kicks them and their kids out to the curb and issues orders granting permission to sheriffs or others to have their possessions tossed out on the lawn?

    Right now, the courts are another unconscionable contract.

    A contract’s creation can be verbal, written, or gesture.

    When the banks, their bosses, and their attorneys are the ‘misuser’ of judicial and non-judicial foreclosure to enforce their unconscionable contracts; we answer, counter claim, and enter a court for justice. No justice is served.
    The unconscionable contract is enforced and we realized we’ve gone from one unconscionable contract into another.

    I gave evidence without getting into the securitization of the note.
    I never thought my note was securitized until the new servicer popped up.

    I made a promise to pay, but someone promised me I’d get my title back, when I satisfied my promise. What I got was someone who ran off with my money, left me with no title, and no home.

    I was kicked out of my home, because the business that promised to give me my title when I paid in full, walked away, and a new business that could not keep and would not keep the promise of the first business, demanded I keep my promise to pay, only pay them instead.
    The new business would not providing evidence of holder-in-due-course of the obligation, but was a misuser (legal term) of my state’s non-judicial foreclosure laws. Then to conceal their theft, they conveyed a special warranty deed to the Fannie Mae, and sued on Fannie Mae’s behalf for possession of the property.

    The courts, issued an order for me and mine to be dispossessed via forcible detainer by sheriff; because I would not help a law firm and it’s client violate U.C.C., RICO, TILA, FDCPA, and many other Acts.

    The banks commit Misprison (a legal term)
    The rulings of the judges that conceals the misprison and hands them clean titles to stolen property from unconscionable contracts.

    The citizens and the free are telling the judges of these courts what is going on and the blind scales of justice keep kicking the citizens and the free out into the streets.

    There are some good judges and Attorney Generals out there.
    We need more, and we need more reversal of the orders that have already gone through. If the property was resold, the injured party is due costs for the contract value of the property, not the sale value, and are due restitution.
    If you can’t pay for the crime, then don’t do the crime. I care not that a banker doesn’t get to keep his bonus because he and his bank, has to pay injury claims to one his corporation has harmed.

    I’ll say it again:
    The banks commit Misprison (a legal term)
    The rulings of the judges that conceals the misprison and hands them clean titles to stolen property from unconscionable contracts.
    Any judge’s ruling contrary to U.C.C. makes the court an accomplice of the bank’s misprison and the court transfers a stolen title to an un-entitled entity.

    Many should be in jail for what has been done several million times this year alone to citizens and Ones who are free.

    Light and Love,
    Trespass Unwanted, I AM free

  6. 1) While the Mortgage may name MERS as the Nominee for Lender, it does so only in the Mortgage and the “Mortgage interest only. MERS is not mentioned ANYWHERE on the Note hence it can not assign an interest greater than that which it is entitled to. The MERS assignment (outside of the number of fraudulent issues that may exist on the face of it) will casually state in the language that it is transferring ALL beneficial interest in the Mortgage AND Note. Be sure to bring to the court’s attention that MERS name is not mentioned anywhere on the NOTE as the Lenders Nominee and Plaintiff has NOT provided evidence to support MERS ability to transfer the beneficial interest of the Note.”

    If a MERS assignment purports to do something it cannot do, transfer an interest in the note: “together with the note or notes therein described or referred to, the money due and to become due thereon with interest and all rights accrued or to accrue under said deed of trust” (language of my assignment) What becomes of the integrity of the assignment as far as the deed of trust from MERS as nominee to the Pretender?

    Does anyone have a referrence to important case where the court has dealt with this objection?

    davidwood100@yahoo.com

  7. This is a draft of the summary judgement . I’m asking that the case be dismissed with prejudice and the note and Mortgage be satisfied.

    1. The Bank of New York Mellon formerly known as the Bank of New York as “successor trustee” to JP Morgan Chase Bank ,NA as trustee for the certificate holders of the Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities , Inc. Asset Backed Certificates Series 2003-2 brought the Foreclosure action as “Successor Trustee” to JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA
    2. The Bank of New York Mellon nor it’s Predecessor JP Morgan Chase Bank , NA is the real party in interest and therefore lacks standing to bring this Foreclosure as “Successor Trustee” to JP Morgan Chase Bank , NA For the certificate holders of Bear Stearns. The Bank of New York Mellon stated in it’s filing of the Lis Pendens and the Summons and Complaint that it is the owner and holder of the Note and Mortgage that simply is not true. The Bank of New York was never the owner and holder of the Note and Mortgage nor its predecessor JP Morgan Chase Bank Prior to the filing of the Lis Pendens and the Summons and Complaint which was filed on March 3, 2009 and the Assignment of the Mortgage was entered at the Register of Deeds on March 19, 2009.
    3. The Bank of New York Mellon nor its predecessor JP Morgan Chase Bank is the real party an interest and therefore lacks standing to bring this Foreclosure as “Successor Trustee” to the Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities, Inc. Asset Backed Certificates, Series 2003-2. Ms.xxxxLoan was never a true sale into the Asset Backed Securities. Ms.xxxxxLoan had to be a true sale and properly packaged in order to be put into the Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities as provided for in the prospectus for the Bank of New York Mellon to be the “ Successor Trustee” to JP Morgan Chase Bank and for the Bank of New York Mellon to bring about the Foreclosure for the Certificate Holders (Investors) of the Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities as “Successor Trustee”. According to the Prospectus, pg. 1 Bear Stearns is the Issuer and the DESPOSITOR. EMC was the seller, JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA was the trustee and Wells Fargo custodian and agent for the Trustee.EMC NEVER assigned the Note to Bear Stearns. The Prospectus Under the heading Assignments of The Mortgage Loans; Repurchase pg. S40 states ,”At the time of the issuance of the certificates, the DESPOSITOR will cause the mortgage loans together with all principal and interest due with respect to such mortgage loans after the cut-off date to be SOLD to the TRUST” The Prospectus goes on further to state on pg S40 – S41 (a-f) what documents the depositor will deposit with Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota , National Association, as custodian and agent for the trustee(JP Morgan Chase).Therefore the proper chain of title to the Note should be as Follows:
    A. RBMG assigns/sells the Note to EMC
    B. EMC assigns the Note to BEAR STEARNS( The DESPOSITOR)
    C. BEAR STEARNS ( the DESPOSITOR) assigns / sells the Note to the Trust ( JP MORGAN CHASE.
    D. The Bank of New York Mellon as “Successor Trustee” to JP Morgan Chase
    That simply did NOT happen. According to the Affidavit Dated March 18, 2010 of Johnson the Assistant Vice President of EMC . EMC demonstrates their chain of title beginning with #5. and ending with #9.
    The Sworn Affidavit of Johnson Asst. Vice President states:
    #5 RBMG assigned all of it’s right, title and interest in the Note to EMC by a lost Note Affidavit and indemnification agreement dated June 18, 2002, which is simply not true.
    (A) The Lost Note Affidavit DOES NOT state any where through out the Entire document that RBMG assigns Any right ,title and interest in the Note nor does it state for value and consideration or For and in consideration of the sum of and therefore is NOT a true Assignment of the NOTE.
    (B) The lost Note Affidavit that was produced by the Plaintiff is signed by Seidelson Vice President of RBMG. Upon information and belief that simply is not true. Seidelson was merely a Customer Relation manager as clearly shown on the letter an envelope from RBMG dated June 26, 2002. Eight days after the lost note affidavit.
    (C) EMC Never assigned the Note to Bear Stearns. According to the Prospectus EMC was the seller, Bear Stearns was the DESPOSITOR , JP Morgan Chase Bank, Na as Trustee . The prospectus says , “ At the time of the issuance of the certificates, The DESPOSITOR will cause the mortgage loans, together with all principal and interest due with respect to such mortgage loans after the cut-off date to BE SOLD TO THE TRUST”
    (D) In Johnsons sworn affidavit #6 states EMC then assigned the loan to JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA as Trustee in or around June 2003 which is clear evidence that a true sale never occurred . EMC was supposed to assign the Loan to Bear Stearns.
    (E) In. Johnsons sworn affidavit #7 Visa as Asst. Vice President Admits that the Note was Never assigned to JP Morgan Chase. # 7 states “ It appears that a written Assignment of the Note from EMC to JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA as Trustee WAS NOT PREPARED. Again this is Clear Evidence that The Bank of New York Mellon nor its predecessor JP Morgan Chase will never be the real party in interest as the Bank of New York Mellon is the “ Successor Trustee” To JP Morgan Chase Bank and Bear Stearns would have caused the sale to the trust .(JP Morgan Chase)
    (F) In . Johnsons sworn affidavit #8 “ The successor Trustee to JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA.,Is The Bank of New York Mellon, formerly Known as The Bank of New York” As stated in C,D,and E that simply is not possible.
    (G) In Johnsons sworn affidavit #9 “EMC does hereby assign all its right, title and interest in the Note to the Bank of New York Mellon. EMC WARRANTS and REPRESENTS that is has NOT previously sold or assigned the Note to any other entity.
    This is clear and convincing evidence that a true sale never occurred. Ms. xxxxx Note was never assigned to anyone including EMC. EMC never sold, assigned or transferred the Note To anyone . EMC never assigned the NOTE to Bear Stearns who was the issuer and DEPOSITOR into the Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities ,Inc. Asset Backed Certificates Series 2003-2 By the sworn Affidavit dated March 18, 2010 from Johnson the assistant Vice President of EMC The Bank Of New York Mellon “Successor Trustee” its predecessor JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA. as Trustee and Bear Stearns was not and is not the owner and holder of the Note and can never be. Therefore The Bank Of New York Mellon and JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA is Not the real party In interest, lacks standing and is a fraud upon the court in this Foreclosure Action.
    4. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc.(MERS) . MERS is listed on the Mortgage as Nominee for RBMG. MERS is NOT mentioned ANYWHERE in the Note. Therefore MERS DOES NOT have nor has ever held an interest in the Note. Furthermore MERS has never held the Note or Mortgage in its possession .MERS DID NOT have any authority as nominee for RBMG. RBMG is and has been defunct since 2005 when it was absorbed by Netbank and subsequently dissolved all together when it was taken over by the FDIC in 2007. MERS own website states that the last known servicer was the FDIC as Receiver of Netbank, MIN# INACTIVE.
    (A) MERS was no longer tracking the loan per a letter dated July 13, 2002 from MERS. The letter stated that the servicing was transferred off of MERS and the MIN# deactivated. MERS had no authority to act on the behalf of or Nominee for RBMG as RBMG deactivated the loan on the MERS system. Therefore the Assignment is Fraudlent and unlawful and MERS can not assign the Note or Mortgage to anyone including the Bank Of New York Mellon as it has no interest in the Note. MERS simply had no authority as evidenced in the letter.
    5. Ms. xxxxx is the only true owner and holder of the Note. The Note was delivered to Ms. xxxxx. Ms. xxxx has in her possession the original “wet Ink”Note endorsed in blank , With out Recourse by Cindi Callaham the Senior Vice President of RBMG, Inc.
    (A) UCC 3-201 Negotiation:
    “IF an Instrument is payable to bearer it may be negotiated by transfer of possession alone”
    EMC Mortgage, The Bank of New York Mellon, JP Morgan Chase and MERS have acted in a concert of action to cause harm to Ms. xxxxx , and has done so tremendously. EMC, The Bank Of New York Mellon, JP Morgan Chase and MERS have conspired against Ms. xxx in an attempt to cover up the discrepancies in the Securities.

    welcome comments … I do not want to ramble in front of the judge… I hope this is straight to the point

  8. yesterday I met a lawyer in Springfield VA, Mr Bryl. He seems to be very fair and very objective. Has had some success here in VA. I will be talking further to him. I am also trying for him to take our case.

    Let us see.

    I have great hopes but realistic expectations.

  9. DEAR MR. MARTINEZ,

    YOUR ARE A HERO IN MY BOOK. THIS GIVES US A BETTER PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT TO DO, HOW TO REACT, COURT FINESSE AND MUCH MORE.

    I WILL PRAY FOR YOU AND YOUR CLIENTS EVERY NIGHT YOUR SUCCESS WILL MEAN A LOT FOR A GREAT DEAL OF PEOPLE. I WISH MORE LAWYERS WOULD DO WHAT YOUR ARE DOING AND WOULD STOP BEING SO SELFISH. THE MORE LAWYER DO THE RIGHT THING THE MORE VICTORIES IN THE BOOKS FOR US TO FIGHT THE GOOD FIGHT.

    HERE IN VIRGINIA OUR EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN THAT THESE LAWYERS HAVE BEEN KIND OF GUN SHY AND ARE NOT NECESSARILY WILLING TO SHARE WITH OTHER LAWYERS, THINKING THAT IF THEY KEEP THE “SECRETS” FOR THEMSELVES THEY WILL CORNER THE “MARKET”.

    ONCE AGAIN THANKS FOR YOUR HELP, AND WISH YOU ALL THE BEST.

    IF YOU KNOW ANY LAWYER LICENSED IN VIRGINIA WILLING TO TAKE A CASE AND MAY BE WORK ALONG SIDE WITH YOU AS A CO COUNSEL, THAT WOULD BE AMAZING.

  10. ANY ONE WITH ANY INFO HOW TO FIGHT THE FIRST MAGNUS FINANCIAL LIQUIDATING TRUST OUT OF ARIZONA. FIRST MAGNUS FILED FOR BANKRUPTCY BACK IN 2007, THEY HAD A HISTORY OF BEING FINED DUE TO RESPA AND TILA VIOLATIONS, KICK BACKS, ETC.

    IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY SOLD 100%OF ALL THE LOANS THEY EITHER BROKERED, ORIGINATED OR THROUGH THEIR CRIMINAL NETWORK OF BROKERS AND CORRESPONDENT LENDERS NATION WIDE.

    I REFINANCED IN JANUARY 2007, THEIR LOCAL BROKER IN VIRGINIA CAP FIRST MORTGAGE, HAD THEIR L.O. , WHO WE NOW KNOW IS AN UNDOCUMENTED ALIEN, and now lives in florida, COME TO OUR HOME AND FILE A LOAN APPLICATION. THE SIGNATURES AND DATA ON THE LOAN APPLICATION IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM OUR INFO.

    THEY HAD A YSP ON THE HUD 1 THAT WAS NEVER DISCUSSED WITH US. MY WIFE’S INCOME WAS INFLATED MORE THAN 10 TIMES, THE HOME APPRAISAL WAS INFLATED 30%. HER IMMIGRATION STATUS WAS ALSO ALTERED FROM A LEGAL RESIDENT ALIEN TO US CITIZEN. i WAS TAKEN OFF THE LOAN WITHOUT MY KNOWLEDGE AND ONLY APPEAR ON THE MORTGAGE AND TITLE.

    THEY TOLD US WE HAD TO GET MONEY OUT OF THE DEAL FOR IT TO BE APPROVED EVEN THOUGH THE ONLY THING WE WANTED WAS TO LOWER OUR INTEREST RATE AND CONSOLIDATE THE TWO MORTGAGES WE HAD INTO ONE FIXED RATE LOAN. AT THE TABLE WE WERE TOLD WE HAD BEEN APPROVED FOR AN LIBOR ARM WITH AN INTEREST ONLY PERIOD AND A TWO YEAR PRE-PAYMENT PENALTY. WE NEVER GOT OUR GFE.

    WE RESCINDED THE LOAN SEVERAL MONTHS AFTER WE SETTLED. WE WERE FORCED TO GO INTO BANKRUPTCY AND WE FILED PRO SE, WE WERE ABLE TO STOP THE CROOKS FROM TAKING THE HOUSE. IN FACT THEY DID NOT EVEN APPEARED, NOR FILED ANYTHING TO PRESENT THEIR CLAIM. THAT WAS TWO YEARS AGO, NOW AFTER TWO YEARS THEY ARE BACK, THEY ARE TRYING TO COLLECT AND FORECLOSE AGAIN.

    I AM HAVING TROUBLE FINDING IF THE LOAN WAS SECURITIZED. THEY APPARENTLY HAVE NO RECORDS OTHER THAN COPIES AND THE TITLE COMPANY IS OUT OF BUSINESS AND HAVE SINCE DESTROYED THEIR RECORDS.

    i AM PLANNING TO DO AN ACTION TO QUIET TITLE AND THEN AMEND AND EXPAND THE COMPLAINT AS I MAY BE ALLOWED IN VIRGINA.

    EVERY LAWYER I HAVE TALKED TO TELLS ME SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

    i DO NOT HAVE A LOT OF MONEY BUT I CAN CONTRIBUTE A LOT TO FIGHT FOR MY CASE IN A VERY OBJECTIVE WAY.
    I HAVE PAID FOR THREE DIFFERENT MORTGAGE REVIEWS, ANALYSIS. i HAVE NOT ORDERED THE LIVINGLIES REVIEW BUT I AM PLANNING TO DO SO SHORTLY AS SOON AS I SAVE SOME ADDITIONAL CASH. I NEED A LAWYER WILLING TO TAKE THE CASE ON A CONTINGENCY OR SOME SORT OF A HYBRID REPRESENTATION AGREEMENT.

    I KNOW THAT VIRGINIA IS VERY PRO PRETENDER LENDER AND THE CASE LAW DOES NOT NECESSARILY IS ON MY FAVOR. BUT I KNOW THAT THE WORST THING I CAN DO IS NOT TO GIVE IT A FIGHT.

    IF YOU ARE A LAWYER AND WOULD LIKE TO WORK WITH US LET ME KNOW.

    THIS IS JUST A SUMMARY OF JUST ONE OF THE TWO TRUSTS I HAVE ON MY HOME. ON THE OTHER TRUST, THINGS ARE NO DIFFERENT AND IT INVOLVES HSBC.

    I NEED HELP.

    PELUCHEVEN@HOTMAIL.COM

    571-426-9950

    WILL FIGHT UNTIL THE END.

  11. Transcript of Hearing of Palm Beach Rocket Docket Court. Horrible !!!

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/36808660/PBC-Rocket-Docket-101-Judges-Against-the-Backlog-Unite-Transcript

  12. In another post, I put ‘actions’ take the case into a court of law, and suits keep the case in a court of equity. I see someone used the word. ‘class action’. If we knew how to invoke a court of law, or a court of justice with an action, and not necessarily a class action, but if we could figure it out, the money conveyor belt in and out of the courts will stop.

    Those words are a trigger for me, but I don’t know what to do with them. I’m seeing them more and more, like people kept seeing 11:11. I’m seeing them more and more and they mean something. How can we use it? We need a remedy.

  13. I have had a heart attack early this year and am only in my late 40’s, I believe from all of this financial, fraudulent, fabricated, predatory lenders, lawyers, servicers.

    So everyone should see a doctor regularly, it does affect your health.

  14. mary

    —I would like to remind you that you can
    go after New Century in their bankrupcty chpt 11 in Delaware.
    Discuss with your attorney the possiblity of filing an AP or Adversary Proceeding. A Proof of Claim form, or B10, needs to be filed asap.

    New Century Mortgage and Home123 Corp are settling with some pro se homeowners.

    You might also be able to get discovery. That is being allowed for some pro se homeowners.

  15. BRAND NEW–REPORT ON “Foreclosure bad for Health”

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/36800760/FORECLOSURES-BAD-FOR-HEALTH-Sept-2010-Agency-Says

    Everyone please—if you feel depressed or are having panic attacks or anxiety etc., while dealing with this foreclosure/eviction stuff and the courts, make certain you go to your doctor.

  16. Mary,
    If you are in South Florida, call Dillon Graham Esq. tel 305-445-9185. He is one of the top gun Foreclosure Defense lawyer. If you are in Central or West Coast,
    call Matt Weidner Esq.; Mark Stoppa Esq.; Wasylik Esq.;Thomas Ice Esq.; Carol Asbury Esq.; Scott Fistel.
    Their fee are reasonable and payment plans available.
    If you plan to fight Pro-Se, download the Florida Civil Rules and Procedures at http://www.floridabar.org. To win the war you must know the Rules of Engagement. Check out http://www.foreclosureprose.com for more info.

    If you hire a lawyer, make copies of all pleadings you can find from April Charney Esq. and Matt Weidner Esq. at http://www.matttweidnerlaw.com/blog . Give them to your lawyer and says “Can you do better”. He will say “yes of course”. Leave them with him . He’ll know what to do. Tell him about livinglies website.
    I think according to Florid Civil Rules, the movant party (i.e the party who file Motions) is the party responsible to call the Judge Clerk and the other party lawyer to set a hearing date. Without a hearing, Court can’t hear your case and render decision.
    In many cases , I see that after many months, the Plaintiff would set a hearing and inform the Defendant.
    Or they file Motion for Summary Judgment and set the hearing. Defendant then must defend yourself before and during the hearing with many other Motions.
    At some points before the hearings of Summary Judgment , Defendant can file an Answer with as many as Affirmative Defenses as possible to set the ground for defense at the Summary Judgment or trial. Most of the time, the Pro Se lost at the hearings because the Plaintiff lawyers bring out many cases laws and court tricks ; the Pro Se could not counter attacks . A hearing is a mini Trial. To go to a hearing without a lawyer is like go to war with sticks against the enemy who owns machine gun. My 2 cents. Drop me an e-mail at ocean11@the-beach.net, I’ll send you more info. I hired a lawyer for my case but I keep on learning. I even signed up few law classes at the nearby University . They have senior discount 😉 Best wishes.

  17. PSS And they never even filed the alleged Note yet

  18. PS. I have objected to the alleged Note, months ago..

  19. Mary

    Do not know where you are from but, yes, this is great info – if you live in Florida. Florida is slightly ahead of the fraud – believe that may be due to some some law firms who have been relentless in their practice to help homeowners (thanks to them).

    But, in most other states – there are few decisions favorable to homeowners – in some states there are no decisions at all – foreclosures are easily put through by judges (maybe even staff). And, this remains a hugh problem. It does not matter if you an affidavit from GOD – telling the court that the mortgage origination was criminal in intent – and that the foreclosure is fraudulent. The court will just ignore you – and work around GOD’s affidavit – or not address it at all.
    Sometimes, as you state, the court will wait months – or longer before they even respond to you.

    While Florida is taking steps, in court – and by AG – almost all other states are still handing foreclosures to pretend lenders as if it is free candy. Judge Schack is one exception. In order for the rest of us to benefit from astute judicial decisions – we must have Federal District Court case law – and federal courts are likely even harder to deal with than state courts. We need law firms (like some Florida law firms) who will fight hard for us. We also need class actions that can provide real damages relief to people – and not just attorney fees. And, we need SOME help from the US Government.

  20. “Plaintiff is in possession of the original Promissory Note”

    Object here.

  21. Need advice: LP filed 5/26/09. Pl states lost note. Then drops lost note count. 8/25/09 files asg of mortgage from Mers/servicer, as VP, for New Century whom has been ordered by sec to cease and desist and filed bankruptcy on 4/2/07, to BOA by merger to lasalle, as trustee under the psa of 3/1/07. No other information. This asg is backdated to 2/21/09, signed and notarized june 4, 09 and recorded in county records on 8/35/09. Signed my Marti Norieg, notarized by Melissa Bell in harris county texas.Pl atty in florida prepared said asg.

    I have motioned to dismiss in january 2010, with no response from court. There has been no movement on this case for 8 months now.

    I have brought to the courts attention that NCMC is in bankruptcy with the case number and attached the sec cease and desist information. Never mind the information on MERs authority. Also pointed out that there were no attachments to prove authority to assign the mortgage. The note has a stamped signature of a party on the back which looks like it was photocopied on there, was not even on the front. No date and no proof of authority.

    Pl answers to interrogatories were objected to, except for two, regarding the note and mortgage, of which the servicer stated they have, again, nothing else. Motion to compel was ordered on December 1, 2009, they answered the same two questions and objected to rest, overly broad, vague,… So again I motioned to dismiss complaint for failure to answer. Nothing.

    What do I do now, because they obviously didnt have the right or authority to assign this mortgage and as shown above it is straight from Originator to supposed trust by mers/servicer. I have been told that this Plaintiff caption is not even a trust.

    Any advice on how to get this dismissed with prejudice and removed?

    Ps I have had an attorney, who I swore was trying to sell me out, so I had to let them go. They were down south. Took my money and stalled without doing much of nothing or attacking nothing. Wanted me to give them all the answers, for them.

  22. great information, thank you

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: