BANKRUPTCY PRACTICE: NAME ONLY THE ORIGINATING LENDER OF RECORD

submitted by Brian Davies

EDITOR’S NOTE: By naming only the originating lender of record — that is, the only instrument in the title record as per the county recording office, you immediately shift the burden onto any pretender lender to explain what they are doing in court. If you look down into the records in the link below you’ll see Davies objection and some excellent points he raises. My opinion is that the property value is unknown and unencumbered by a mortgage, if you know about the securitization path. Combine that with our loan specific title review, you get a value to put in if you want to, and then name only the originating lender as a creditor under unsecured claims because the mortgage was split from the note and note was split from the obligation. The MERS assignment is icing on the cake.

It’s my opinion that if you show the home as encumbered by the mortgage it is an admission of the validity of the encumbrance. That is an admission of a “fact” that is probably false. Why would you do that? In my opinion, generally speaking, NONE of these securitized “mortgages” are secured, NONE of the obligations are properly or legally described in the note and NONE of them are properly secured with a perfected lien in favor of an actual creditor. The security instrument is an “incident” to the note. But the note neither names the actual creditor nor discloses the true facts of the deal. The note is contrary to the Good Faith Estimate in that respect as well (a TILA violation).

So the obligation that arose when the borrower took the money is NOT described in the note, at least not completely. That means that the note, which is normally presumed to be evidence of the obligation, is not a complete description of the obligation and in fact is not even correct insofar as it identifies the creditor or lender. The note also does not contain the terms of the mortgage bond given to the lender (investor).

The mortgage bond received by the lender (investor) contains terms and parties that are not included in the note. Neither the bond nor the note are complete descriptions of the obligation.

Thus neither the note nor the bond can be accepted into evidence as the complete statement of the obligation. Even together they fail to show the actual path that the money traveled and they provide the context and conditions under which the note or mortgage could be accepted by the pool —- conditions that were in nearly ALL cases unfulfilled. There can be no proper accounting of the amount due nor a determination of whether there is  an actual default (failure of the CREDITOR to receive payment, not merely the the failure of the borrower to make a payment which might not be due).

MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM STAY BY ONEWEST. A PARTY NOT EVEN MENTIONED IN THE CHAPTER 7 FILING. HOWEVER, MOVANT ONEWEST COMES INTO THE COURT WITH 1) NO STANDING, 2) FALSIFIED AFFIDAVITS 3) DISCOLORED NOTES NOT COPIES OF THE ORIGINALS 4) SIGNED AFFIDAVITS BY BRIAN BARNHILL THAT ARE INACCURATE 5) DEED OF TRUST THAT IS FAULTY AND NOT PERFECTED 6) A SECOND ASSIGNMENT OF THE DEED OF TRUST WHICH TRIES TO CORRECT SECURITY INTEREST AND TITLE ISSUES.. DEBTOR ASKS FOR SANCTIONS. READ THE ENTIRETY AS IT IS LISTED AS UNSECURED DEBT, ONLY ORIGINATOR IS LISTED

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39002836/ONEWEST-HAS-NO-STANDING-MOTION-FOR-RELIEF-FROM-STAY-WITH-OBJECTIONS

They will get caught

14 Responses

  1. BANKRUPTCY PRACTICE: NAME ONLY THE ORIGINATING LENDER OF RECORD, By Brian Davies

    No they will not get caught. The trustees and the attorneys are all in line together. The loans were fraudulent as you stated from inception. This was of course my case as I later learned. Filing BK chapter 7 , due to the employers involvement ,shell company for wells Fargo and the Kroenke Group. This is indeed how Wal-Mart is the number 1 land owner. They are saturated with the courts and the attorneys. The Trustees are just the icing on the cake for many of you that do not know what is going on in the courts. The Judges are in place to ensure the highest rate for pension funds. Your talking about their retirement money which is why so many of these Judges are appointed by the Governors. They are put in place to secure the pension money. I personally was driven into the BK courts unknowing my BK had already taken place. The foreclosure had already taken place several years prior and I was paying rent for several years. Yes, there is fraudulent loan out there and presuming which came from my employer without a doubt. The employer which works as well with Wellsfargo and Citi bank as debt collectors under Credit Control.
    This is the greatest game being ran by unsuspecting homeowners. Yes , The company which is in line with wells Fargo , operating as a insurance replacement firm is also associated with THF Investors , TH Lee , and the none other social security, disability firm which all disabilities are ran through : ” The Shaw Group ” What will never be stated here is there Is nothing one can do about this massive fraud as the courts are in place to stop you and prevent due process. The land Clerks are all involved in this massive fraud and yes the states are foreclosing on people. It is their pension and profits using new companies or businesses. catholic Charities along with the Knights of Columbus is heavily involved. It almost makes my laugh when I see Vee Stiviono alleging the pro ball owner is a racist. Do you not know much of this fraud is being run through Pro Ball franchises. Urban lenders solutions is part of this scenario, The Pro ball players capital is being used to fund much of this fraud. These are things that will not be told to you or you will work hard to figure out. This is where the race card holds true. Ironically enough NAACP to give award. What a joke. You think they did not know this man used these type of words or descriptions of these players in the past? They were in full knowledge and did not care. They are useless as is most African American so called advocacies. Looting the nation !

  2. Wouldn’t you want to throw all the other pretenders in as unsecured for a small dollar amount so that you benefit from the automatic stay in BK?

  3. Someone said hire a competent attorney.. that is really hard.. there are a bunch out there that tell you things can’t be done.. then those that want a zillion dollars.. If you are bankrupt and broke and job income down how do your afford 4 or 5 K for a good lawyer ?

  4. Every loan has a RESPA servicing rights disclosure that states home many loans the broker or lender kept for servicing. they read it wrong to most people telling them that the broker or lender sold the loans. We were never given a full disclosure as to the real sale of our notes to any undisclosed investor. So there are TILA and RESPA Violations right here as well.

    the warehouse lender, the aggregator, the wholesale lender and the brokers colluded and procured through fraud and omission the loans as well, they handled the documents, they chose the appraisers, they filled the loan applications with the necessary info to get the loan to fly and close , this was done even up to but not limited to the alteration of the borrowers immigration status. Sometimes for simple laziness.

  5. – cross posting –

    “TO TRACK YOUR MORTGAGE IN THE MERS SYSTEM”

    https://www.mers-servicerid.org/sis/

    SOURCE:

    http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/2010/06/who-owns-the-note-an-earthshattering-new-resource/

  6. HERE IS WHY THE 7 WAS FILED. EXPARTE TRO DENIED BECAUSE
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/39136639/Davies-v-Ndex-Exparte-Application-for-Tro-Tro-Order-08-26-10

    THERE WAS NO EMERGENCY.

  7. Lucy

    Thanks – I did get a chuckle!!

    The fraud in foreclosures is just an extension of credit card debt collection fraud that has been going on for a long time – only on a much larger scale. Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act – the current creditor must be identified – but no one ever does that – they falsely name the original creditor. Credit card debt was securitized too. You know where the word securitization comes from? – “securities” – it is the process of converting current receivables into securities. Have said many times securities must be derived from assets that are current – liquid – easily converted to cash. See Securities and Exchange Commission – Regulation AB.

    A long time ago – in conversation with the SEC – they explained that when delinquent debt is removed from securitization the collection rights are not SOLD – they are, instead, “swapped” out of the Trust. The actual security that was originally tied to the receivables – never changes hands – but the collection rights do.

    When all is going smooth – the banks could easily sell – or swap – collection rights to third parties. But, when everything collapsed – this became more difficult because the third parties no longer had the capital to uphold the contracts (swaps are contracts – not securities). Therefore, the banks may – or may not still possess collection rights. Regardless, the trust/trustee – are NOT the creditor.

  8. Ok, this is probably a dumb question, but can FL’s Homestead Exemption statute be used against pretender lenders?

    http://law.onecle.com/florida/homestead-and-exemptions/222.01.html

  9. Unbelievable-
    Anonymous, thought you might get a chuckle out of this.

    http://4closurefraud.org/2010/10/10/4closurefraud-exclusive-president-obama-falls-victim-to-chase-robo-signer/

  10. I would suggest that Zoe’s issues are more complex.

    When the “Lender” had the sister sign a Form stating that the loan was likely to be sold, what was really happening was that the Lender was not using their own funds to originate the loan. In actuality, the “lender” was really a Broker.

    Why is this significant? Because, folks, a Broker has a fiduciary duty to the Borrower – not to the Funder. That fiduciary duty includes the duty to take utmost care to ensure that the Borrower is not harmed. It also requires full disclosure of the pending funding by another, and what is going to happen to that Loan. Since none of that happened, your sister has a gigantic claim against the Broker. Sue him.

  11. Zoe, I’m not an Attorney. This is just my opinion. Your Sister should seek competent legal advice.

    That being said, I don’t think it was a secret to anybody that the loans were being sold. That isn’t the problem. The problem is that in the haste to package the many loans into a pool of loans to be sold off and securitized, the proper and necessary endorsements, and assignments weren’t obtained. And in some cases, weren’t intended to be obtained.

    That’s why you’re hearing about fraudulent assignments, and notary signatures in the news. Because the pretender lenders are INTENTIONALLY commiting fraud to cover up the missing paper trail.

    So when your sister signed a document acknowledging that her loan would be sold, she wasn’t giving her lender permission to mess up the paper trail(not abide by the law) for her loan, and then commit fraud by attempting to cover up their mistakes, all so they can foreclose on the house.

    I have the same document regarding the sale of the loan. it’s nothing more than a disclosure.

    Good luck

  12. I was aroused reading the debtor’s motion. Is that bad?

  13. At closing, my sister was given a form to sign stating the she knew the loan would be sold. How would that document play into this?

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: