FORECLOSURE LAWYERS THE NEXT TARGET

COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary

Last 2010 Workshop: December 11 Sacremento CA 50 Seat Maximum Register NOW!!!

Editor’s Note: The keystone of leverage that the pretender lenders have been using is that there is a general practice (which incidentally is completely necessary) of accepting the lawyers’ representations as true on basic “obvious” components of the motion or case in front of a judge. The problem is the same moral hazard that produced lying and cheating by the banks when they sold bogus mortgage bonds, synthetic derivatives, and securities products disguised as loans that could never be justified, repaid, or viable.

It is unfortunately true that not only are the foreclosure lawyers misrepresenting basic facts — including their own authority to represent — but also that they have found it profitable and risk-free to literally create fabricated forged documents and submit these as a fraud upon the court which the court will take as being true or at least carrying a favorable presumption. After all the firms that represent banks are usually involved in local politics, appointments and elections and many judges either previously represented banks, or are friendly with those attorneys. Jusges are erring on the side of banks because it is not credible in their minds that a friend would come into court and

  • say he represents a client when he doesn’t
  • say that the plaintiff is the creditor and seeks to foreclose when it isn’t the creditor and he has received no such instruction from THAT client
  • say that the documents are true and correct copies of originals in his possession or in possession of his client when they have yet to fabricated and forged much less in existence as of the date they purport to represent
  • say that the the homeowner received a loan from the creditor the lawyer represents

These are normal starting points which normally are accepted at face value. The problem for homeowners is that these starting representations are largely untrue and baseless — but you are facing a judge who would find it difficult to believe that lawyers would risk their licenses, reputations and even liberty for the sake of a client who was trying to game the system and steal homes.

My suggestion is that if you want to gain any credibility with the Judge, you need to find a succinct message or introduction that addresses these points to get the Judges attention and get the Judge to start listening instead of thinking what he wants for lunch. Once you acknowledge the obvious, you can transition to the fact that YOU would not have taken the case unless you thought there was merit to the homeowner’s position and a high likelihood that they could prevail on the merits if given the chance to contest the action of the pretender lender in accordance with the rules of civil procedure and the laws governing the admissibility of evidence.

Although increasing numbers of courts are continuing to reject improper and fraudulent foreclosures, the Congressional Foreclosure Panel examination of mortgage services and foreclosure practices did not include foreclosure lawyers.

Lawyers are officers of the court; knowledge of applicable laws and civil procedure is not required from mortgage lenders, nor loan servicers.  In states that require judicial foreclosures, lawyers are the ones who file lawsuits to seize and sell property; and lawyers are responsible for filing and recording foreclosure property deeds.

An investigation could prove helpful to sorting out whether improper and illegal foreclosure proceedings are linked to any self-dealing conduct disadvantaging lenders, investors, homeowners, and city governments.

Inadequate or questionable foreclosure can lead to useless property deeds that impede real estate sales. Increasing numbers of title insurance companies are refusing to cover foreclosed properties; and certain mortgage default claims, are being denied because of  defective foreclosure proceedings.

Attesting to the need for federal probe of foreclosure lawyers, are the extensive investigations of Florida foreclosure lawyer David J. Stern.  Irrefutable proof of foreclosure fraud at the Stern law firm caused Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and other lenders to remove their foreclosure files from that law firm.


Despite years of flagrant foreclosure illegalities, the Florida attorney general took no action until evidence was made public by investigative reporters at Mother Jones.  But not even the finest investigative reporter can prosecute fraud; and the only adjustment to that appalling foreclosure situation, was the lenders’ retrieval of their files and removal of their business from the Stern law firm. 

Perhaps Florida’s longstanding problem of foreclosure fraud has been not addressed because of inability to acquire essential information and evidence from mortgage lenders and foreclosure lawyers. As reported in the news, the court denied the Florida attorney general’s power to subpoena the Stern law firm.

 

In all likelihood, Mr. Stern’s files that were removed by lenders contained information helpful to prosecuting fraud, and determining vital elements about mortgages and foreclosure that need to be addressed or curtailed.
Foreclosure fraud is not limited to Florida. Among conclusions contained in the 127-page Congressional Oversight report, all 50 State Attorneys General have the task of determining the scope and factors of fraud, and report those findings to the Panel. Because the lawyers are likely to prevent the discovery process, I say to AG’s, ‘good luck with that’!
Additionally, investigating foreclosure lawyers could reveal legal loopholes that need to be changed for  creating remedies for the mortgage disaster; and reveal how possibly tens of thousands of families have illegally lost their homes and are now living on the streets, and in tents and shelters. Without including an examination on the lineage of fraudulent foreclosure, the banking industry may be brought to its knees, and take American citizens with it. BUT THE REAL PERPETRATORS WILL ESCAPE –AGAIN.

THE PETITION
The Congressional Oversight Panel excluded an essential component from its examination of the foreclosure crisis: foreclosure lawyers.  Rather than mortgage lenders, lawyers are the ones who file judicial proceedings.
For every foreclosure property deeds are filed and recorded by lawyers; and lawyers, not lenders, are the ones who file petitions to seize and sell properties in states that require judicial foreclosures.  Moreover, lawyers are the persons who are required to know applicable laws and civil procedure.
The November 2010 report by this Oversight Panel proves that Congress understands the alarming economic and social factors associated with illegal foreclosures.  The goals and interest of Congress to change the disastrous mortgage and foreclosure situation cannot be met without including an investigation into the function and practices of foreclosure lawyers in the mortgage crisis.
The following facts and reasons demonstrate why it is imperative for foreclosure lawyers to be examined as thoroughly as this Honorable Congress has done for the banking industry:
– With deliberate use of defunct lenders or lenders without “standing,” certain foreclosure lawyers intentionally execute false foreclosure proceedings. With the identity of a defunct lender, some lawyers carry out “simulated” foreclosure auctions, and instruct auction sheriffs to record property deeds into the names of defunct lenders.
– Some foreclosure lawyers purposely create delays –which are not authorized by their lender clients, of home foreclosures.  Blatant misrepresentation to conceal those delays often succeeds by falsely portraying to the courts and to their clients, that homeowners caused the delays through schemes to get ‘free houses’.  However, the reason that some free houses were ordered by judges to be awarded in certain cases was due to egregious fraud on the courts and sanctions against those lawyers.  These lawyer falsehoods cause courts to be hostile to homeowners –also known as deadbeats, when such fabrication enable foreclosure lawyers to engineer foreclosure litigation which generates additional legal fees from lender clients.
– Various illegal activities, as well as actionable wrongs committed by foreclosure lawyers give rise to lawsuits for damages.  Most of those wrongs are malpractices that are concealed from lender-clients and Investors, who incur the legal tabs.  An example of conduct for which foreclosure lawyers are being sued is, Unfair Debt Collection Practices associated with acts of fraud, civil torts, and unconstitutional wrongs.
– Certain foreclosure lawyers file appalling, fraudulent proceedings in U.S. bankruptcy courts –including deliberately false “Motions to Lift Automatic Stay,” on behalf of non-existent lenders, and lenders that do not own “secured interests” in mortgage notes.  Fraudulent bankruptcy filings by foreclosure lawyers violate federal bankruptcy law, illegally conceals the fact of “unsecured” mortgage debt, and unfairly deprives bankruptcy debtors from specific rights under Bankruptcy Statutes, namely, “avoidance.”
– Some foreclosure lawyers obtain unjust profit from foreclosure fraud when they falsely file “deficiency judgments” against former homeowners.  Unconscionable  deficiency judgments from “simulated” auctions include foreclosures that were executed in the name of non-existent lenders.  Use of defunct lenders’ identity also enable ‘straw buyers’ to “credit bid” and walk away owning those homes!
– Until recently, courtroom judges have utterly disregarded the legal requirement of “standing.” Instead, almost all judges formerly demanded that homeowners cure their mortgage arrears or their homes would be auctioned.  Most judges still ignore laws of standing, and thereby facilitate the ease of foreclosure fraud, and the injustice of numbers of people becoming illegally homeless.
In the same manner, as mortgage lenders have been examined concerning its mortgage and foreclosure activities and practices, foreclosure lawyers must also be made to explain their foreclosure performances.
Lastly, please allow me to suggest to you a testimonial: “Foreclosure Fraud Assault – A Cry For Help”
Allan O’Brien Denchfield

37 Responses

  1. The California justice system is fraught with FRAUD. It begins with the A.G. and goes all the way down to judges, pro-temp judges and commissioners. You could put the truth right before their eyes – they will look away and side with the banks.

  2. Frankee:

    No we are not asking anything. We are going to tell them what has to be done. We must take the position that it is in our Court now and it will soon be back in their Court. But when you do that, you have to have a real deal. I did not say anything about asking them (the banks) nor did I say they could do modifictions. YOu are confused. We have to have one program for those that are just now becoming delinquent up to 120 days. Another program that would address the homeowners who have already lost their homes so that they get an acceptable loan voucher or purchase voucher, whatever so they can buy another home with terms that more than meet the needs of the homeowner who would give up his right to sue if the lender meets his conditions. I just don’t understand where you got modifications from. I have been defending homeowners for years and never lost but one case and I am not about to start now. But homeowners need to think about what is really best in leiu of getting a free home because that , except under extraodinary circumstances, probably will not happen. That is a measurement that will have to be individually settled between the homeowner and the lender who foreclosed. And remember, the feds are going to have to butt out except to the extent whereby we need to address some of the criteria that banks must follow in order to maintain their standing. That is something that will have to be part of the offer or deal, whatever. It appears that no one wants to work this out so. I’m done.

  3. You are not even close to what I was suggesting, but let me try this time to communicate it to you and others. As restitution to the homeowners who have already lost their homes, due to unlawful means by the lender, that homeowner could receive a loan voucher with terms acceptable to the homeowner. He could not exercise his right to the voucher until such time that he returns to work if he is currently unemployed. Otherwise, a cash settlement package might be better. Or, if you would like to have the home back and the lender still owns it, then a negotiated settlement in favor of the homeowner would be right and the homeowner would probably end up signing a release not to sue them further. There are some real avenues here that might satisfy the homeowner, but these things need to be discussed, organized and something acceptable agreed upon – then a deal of sorts to get what we are asking is submitted and the negotiation goes on. There is enough now on the table to prove all of the wrong doing, mis deeds, the fraud and everything else that we can show which has caused the demise. I never said get them to do modifications. Where did that come from? Well, I have tried to get everyone signing on to this site to understand that if they want to win this fight, and certainly they could do it, they got to do more than talk. This response is a total mis understanding of what I was trying to convey. I’m very sorry for the homeowners because all they are doing is discussing and rehashing what has been done to all of us. WE know, okay. So what do some of you suggest?. I am trying to make some suggestions but it appears to be going no where. I am done. Put your energy into that if you wish, I am more interested in coming up with a resolution if that is any possible now. I happen to think that it is.

  4. Joyce Louise, you wrote:

    “but how about forcing the banks to provide a loan to those homeowners who lost their homes through unlawful means.”

    Oh, I see. You mean, ask the same banks that fraudulently baited these millions of folks into predatory loans and bogus appraisals in the first place, then fake mods, ask them if they will please consider them for a modification.

    Something wrong with this picture.

  5. Concerned:

    Yes, that was a figure of reference only. There is an awful lot that will play a part in how we would approach a resolution and you have hit one of those issues on the head. It is a complex issue and I cannot list all of the bank practices that would need to be looked at, the off balance transactions, potential reserves, MI companies that were forced to pay on fraudulant claims (otherwise they might lose potential business if they are even still in business) There is just so much to what is required to consider and we must be aware. There are many issues that go directly to what it will even take to protect a homeowner from foreclosure, change in terms (not modifications, but actual write downs) and best of all the ability for us to come up with a plan that will make the culprits pay, not the taxpayers and how those funds which must be deducted from their profits are used in special reserves to take care of this mess. We need people like you and Angry – who will offer what they truly feel so we don’t miss the mark – that of going after the banks to make them pay for the losses. We can never fully recover the way we would like but we can get dawn close if we try. For those that actually lost their homes, just as a thought now, that is all it is, but how about forcing the banks to provide a loan to those homeowners who lost their homes through unlawful means. Within that plan, the deal would be based on the homeowner being financed a new home with definite criteria that is satisfactory to him. This is a suggestion now and not even on the table. I am trying to show you some of the stuff that could be included in such an offer (deal) whatever you want to call it and it address homeowners who have already lost their homes. It is a big big order.

  6. Concerned and Angry and NOt Taking It Anymore:

    Concerned: Thank you so much for your comments. Please understand that the numbers that I used were simply to show how such a plan could work It was a scenario as I was trying to get people to speak up. I know from what I am reading here is that our mindset is just as important as their mindset and we have to be able to defend what we want by using the most successful strategy. If everyone is hell bent on bringing the banks down, that is not what I am all about.. The bank structures will stand, but the contents will be removed to that far distant land that Angry and Not Gonna take it any more was talking about. Everyone assumes I am not amenable to coming up with just punishment for them. Let me assure you, as far as I am concerned, that is a priority as well as saving as many homes as we can from this point on and getting restitution if possible for those that have already lost their home through unlawful means.. We all as human beings, greatly resent what has been done to us. Like Angry and Not Gonna take it anymore said, they drew first blood. Weigh and measure the justification that you believe you want so we can come up with a plan accordingly. When are we going to have a Homeowners Summit. Any ideas. The plan that I would like to see has not been completed but there has been a request by a well known senator asking for the plan which I will not give to them because I do not represent the homeowners nor speak for them. I do find it necessary to offer what I can to make sure that what needs to be considered is brought up in a realistic and sensible way. Believe me, when the going gets tough, the tough get going. You heard that a thousand times I am sure. You fellas need to have a little faith. Perhaps someone will step up. Thank you both for your comments as you make some very good points.

  7. Joyce Louise,

    Oh, but I DO know there are numerous ways in which these ‘deals’ were ‘insured’ or ‘hedged’.

    What made me really skeptical of your abilities was that in one of your posts, you suggested a possible ‘fix’ of writing down all mortgages by $100,000. I do not know HOW or WHERE you came up with a flat amount like that. It really looked like a band-aid fix that would enrich the fraudsters. In the post where that was suggested, I do not recall your request that the complete balance sheet (including ‘off-balance sheet transactions) be revealed.

    If that is your actual position, that everything must be divulged, then I agree. As was covered in a prior exchange of ideas, you backed off from your ‘flat write-down’ amount. What I had seen of your ideas may have been misleading. I can only comment on what is presented.

  8. Concerned:

    While I agree with you on a couple of your comments, trust me on this, there are programs that can work. This is a very complex and far reaching situation that must be dealt with in increments and well planned strategies. One must understand the mindset of the participants in this demise that we all now find ourselves in all because of the greed. I have already addressed the fact that we need to see the individual general ledgers on what has and has not been credited to these accounts. Also, the nature of the fraud by the lender/servicer/law firms. One must put the whole ball of wax into perspective and I am not sure you have a handle on that. We need to address the issue head on. Certainly any approach I would use would not be a bandaid to resolve the problems we now face. They would exact, right on target and lasting. The third phase of course would be in the way of future prevention. And there are private random firms that can do the job of oversight rather than the feds trying to do this. With the repurchase issue now presenting itself, we need to move on this.

  9. STARVE THE MONKEYS…like it or not its coming!

  10. Joyce Louise
    while i agree that most situations can be solved by a mutual & reasonable agreement, this requires the parties too be reasonable [subjective -yes].
    The banks and financial servitude industry is nether reasonable nor interested in anything NOT SLAVE based. These monsters of money need to be evacuated from our planet ,plain & simple.There is no place for them that their malignant disease will not spread. I sorry.. but these sub species of humans has reached epic proportions ,until the collapse and eradication of financial servitude industry , our old gov , banking system,corporate power scheme,military industrial complex will only fester & remain non-negotiable. the patient is terminal &can not be cured.END THEM!
    Please do not get me wrong ,I am a peaceful and loving person & never condone violence ,but this is US OR THEM..we will survive this because we strong ,we are many , we are RIGHTEOUS ,WE ARE DETERMINED, and NOW WE ARE CORNERED .
    Corner me & you will fall…THATS THE END of it.
    They drew 1st blood,so its fight or flee , but there is NO WHERE TO FLEE TO..this LAND IS OUR HOME.
    NOW WE ARE ANGRY & NOT TAKING IT!

  11. THANK YOU NEIL, for posting the PETITION I started at Change.org. “Request for Congressional Foreclosure Panel to Examine Foreclosure Lawyers”
    http://www.change.org/petitions/view/request_for_fraudulent_foreclosure_investigation

    Now, I urge those of you who see & read what Neil has posted: SIGN THE PETITION, please –and tell OTHERS about it -please! 🙂

  12. Anonymous & Joyce Louise,

    The only way these ‘deals’ would be fair is to force the offender-pretender-lenders to open up the FULL set of books, showing how much had been paid by all the various methods of ‘insurance’ on the schemes and offset that from the balances shown as ‘owed’ by the borrowers.

    Otherwise your methods are just overly enriching those who have NOT one penny invested into the properties or loans. The other point, the ACTUAL entity that was still owed anything would have to be fully divulged. This would cause situations in which the borrowers had been ripped off while the middlemen kept the funds to be exposed.

    Do you REALLY expect the fraudsters to do ANY of this?

    If they won’t do it, the government needs to shut the ones who will not fully comply down.

    Otherwise, we are indeed likely to see riots. The economy is in the toilet and will only get worse. We have additional points over the next few years when more of these mortgages will reset, so we can only look forward to additional ‘waves’ of deepening misery.

    Without opening the ‘books’ we have no way of getting this mess ERADICATED in a way it will not and can not come back. We have to put Glass-Stiegall back in place and make other changes. Banks will have to exit the ‘servicer’ industry. They also have to leave the mortgage industry PERMANENTLY. Money lending for property needs to be returned to the local credit unions and LOCAL banks.

    Trustees need to be regulated. They must be independent and able to act to protect both the borrower and the true lender without any favoritism.

    Bandaid approaches will not work.

  13. Anonymous:

    Well my friend, thanks for the compliment. I have been down this road before in the 80’s and funny thing, we were able to cut some deals with the lenders and the GSO’s. It was a challenging time for us, but we were able to get the job done. Why, because we offered them a deal they could not resist. In this case, we may have now reached a point with the feds who I believe are now ready and would definitely like to see it happen. “A: deal It is up to us to come up with the deal. We have an awful lot of homework to do though.

  14. Joyce Louise,

    You are so genuine. Wish there were many more like you. Banks are not going to cut a deal with anyone. And, attorneys- well……..

    Up to AGs — it they do not stop fraud now — it will continue and continue to destroy America.

  15. WOCCA = Wisconsin Organized Crime Control Act.

  16. I firmly believe that the homeowners, both those in default and those not in default, need to cut a deal with the big banks and others to resolve this issue, with a special forgiveness for those who already lost their homes. Both the lenders and the homeowners are going to have to do something and if the AG’s come out trying to advance somethign more in the interest of the lenders rather than the homeowers, it will be too late to negotiate anything on our behalf. Plans by the homeowners should be submitted to a designated email address with a panel that will review it, look it over and get the approval from the homeowners as to which approach would be best. Although I hope the best for the AG’s to get something done, I am not sure they will be able to. WE know nothing of what they are doing. So perhaps waiting until January will be course of action you all may want to take. I have no idea. We have to t hink about the homeowner as a whole and get them protection as quickly as possible. Having an attorney to walk us down this path would help, but that may not be possible or the homeowners may not want to hear of doing such a thing. Where are the ideas and who are the people who can help make it happen for us. Need some input here. How about the builders who played such a big part in tis mess, but now find themselves out there like us. I bet one of them will support the idea if it is reasonable and if it makes a win win situation for them, the homeowner and a way to get out of the mess for all of the other participants in their contributions to the demise of our country’s econonmy. Now don’t get upset with me, I am just trying to come up with something that will show them we are not going to take lying down, but yet we will not violent in our attempt to do so. We may be hostile, but not violent.

  17. Roger Rinaldi,

    Actually both the faxed fraudulent documents and wiring of any money to pay off a fraudulent claim would both involve wire fraud but you are talking a FEDERAL charge, not one that the state boys will touch.

    The problem will be getting the feds interested in doing anything if it does not match their current ‘agenda’.

  18. I filed a grievance with the “Office of Professional Standards” here in Wisconsin regarding the bad affidavits. I also sent an e-mail to the County District Attorney; he’s not interested. If a fraudulent affidavit is faxed from Maryland to Wisconsin, does that constitute “wire fraud”? I guess not.

  19. Filing a lawsuit against law firms is difficult because no attorney wants to go up against other attorneys for mal practice. I do think some attorney out there though may consider a huge class action suit against the law firms and since we have thousands who have been foreclosed on due to the negligence of the lawyers (who will blame it all on the servicers will not hunt this time), we won’t have a shortage of documents already filed in the court records in addition to those that were threatened with foreclosure. 2.5 million already foreclosed on. Seems like the banks, servicers and their law firms will the target under one huge suit. I wonder which attorney group will step up and get it done. AG’s are doing something, what, I have no idea, so get ready for a real suit if they can’t get it done.

  20. Kev in Nevada: I meant to type game plan as there should be some way to help you resolve this issue. I do not condone any violence with this issue, but I do believe it can be settled as I have tried to convince others. We need the rest of America to step us and help us get this done. Where are they as they too will suffer the consequences.

  21. Kev in Nevada

    My last three clients filed TRO’s to stop foreclosure with ancillary Judges after they had lost in district court because the judges were beginning to reconsider the standing issue. I could not tell if you were talking to an ancillary judge for a TRO or if you were talking about the judge’s in district court . At any rate all three judges stopped the sale or the right for the lender to foreclose. There is hope. If they have already foreclosed and considering the time that may have passed since you had your hearing, can you not file in the precint court for stopping the eviction stating the very same issue. Sounds like you have already tried the TRO route. I do hope you will not be evicted. Where is our voice. I understand Fannie and Freddie and some banks are not going to do the eviction process over the holidays. Check that out. It will give you more time to come up with a gang plan.

  22. There was a man on a business network today that basically said the same thing as Jan…. that there will soon be violance in the streets…as there are in Europe right now. In a cradel to grave society such as England , students are rioting over a raise in tution fee’s… surley a young person can pick up a part time job to cover this…and this is cause for distructive rioting… please!

  23. This is no surprise to me, after everything we’ve been through. From 2004, when I rec’ an offer to refi our existing loan. From a company that claimed they would lower our monthly payment (fraud), to the judge granting a Wit for UD last week (Despite even after, I informed the judge that I could prove, the Plaintiffs’ case has no standing.)
    Furthermore, that which the Plaintiff claims in proof of their standing, is actually proof of the fraud that is/was being commited upon the court,

    What I can’t believe is the fact that they’re getting away with it, and even though I can prove it, nobody will help us.

    Now for Christmas, my family’s getting evicted from our home in a few days.

    ALL I WANT FOR CHRISTMAS IS A LITTLE JUSTICE. But I guess that’s too much to ask for. ;(

  24. What is the proper sentence for any lawyer that abuses the process ,, enters court with his faxed instructions in hand from (lender) Deutsche stating to foreclose in the name of XYZ as lender… because as we all know (and the lawyer knows) the forged chain of ownership docs were created for XYZ.

    I’ve been shutdown in court before where the “trusted” component of the process blatantly lies, luckily never in such a dire situation as foreclosure. It is near impossible to fight.

  25. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by fastpup, USA Advocate. USA Advocate said: FORECLOSURE LAWYERS THE NEXT TARGET: http://t.co/iUkIYPf […]

  26. Hey Gwen, Missouri’s foreclosure laws are pretty favorable for the homeowner with no deficiency available to the lender and 12 months to redeem home if bought by lender at foreclosure.

  27. My own case in a non-judicial state has evidence of fraud on the Bankruptcy court in the very ‘proof of claim’ that was filed for Litton & BoNY as trustee for CWABS. The materials filed do not contain any indication of how the current parties claim to have become the parties to whom a debt is owed nor even any right to represent same.

    They even presented a copy of A note that is totally unacceptable since it is a copy that was retrieved from the title company’s scanned documents. This image was taken of A copy of A note, stored in a database, then reprinted this year. It is NOT even A copy of the ‘wet-ink’ note. It is also completely devoid of any assignments, even assignments in blank and the note does not have any connection to the parties filing this garbage as evidence of their proof of claim. No alonge is provided, nor would one be appropriate since the only signature area that was used is at the very top of a nice big blank page. No power of attorney is provided whatsoever. Other than the bogus copy of A note, there is a copy of a copy of the Deed of Trust and a copy of the modification agreement that Litton refused to honor.

    Separately from that, Litton’s Debra Lyman’s name was applied to an assignment of the Deed of Trust that was filed with the county recorder’s office DURING the bankruptcy STAY. That is more fraud on the court. The assignment curiously attempts to assign the supposedly defaulted loan into that LONG-CLOSED CWABS pool. Apparently it is just another case like in the KEMP case where CountryWIde failed to generate the chain of assignments or perform the transfers to the trust per the directions in their own-designed PSA.

    If Debra Lyman indeed is the one who signed this attempted single-step assignment (as opposed to the multi-step assignments stipulated by the PSA), she should loose her own law license. From the looks of it, either Litton personnel forged her signature or she signed a document that she should have known was not legal for her to sign.

    Think about it, if Litton is working for the BoNY Trustee, then having a Litton employee signing the document that transfers the DOT to those she is working for is SELF-SERVING.

    I note that McCalla-Rymer’s attorneys who filed the Proof of Claim did not include a copy of that assignment for the BK court to see that they were violating the stay.

    I am disgusted with the law firms that stoop to this level of contempt for the laws the attorneys are SUPPOSEDLY sworn to uphold.

    Litton in TX and McCalla-Rymer in GA are just part of the multi-state involvement in the frauds on the courts. I’m sure that discovery is going to show involvement of our pals at LPS. Their company shows up on supporting documents to the various notices.

  28. no offense Neil…
    lawyers have always been at the heart of this country irks , no different this time.
    i want to lodge a few of those anonymous grievances, at the end of a pointed stick , this is a public service.
    yes i’m bitter…for good reason too.

  29. I write about the observed practice of US lawyers to fraudulently utter, in front of judges, prejudicial statements of arguable and questionable beliefs as if they were fact.

    Is there a term for these sorts of lies: the lies and patently false assertions that lawyers routinely utter in front of judges?

    This sort of lawyers perjury often takes place when a lawyer states a “hoped for fact”, or perhaps a fact he/she wishes to prove, without preceding the utterance with the qualification “upon information and belief”.

    A simple way to place this sort of information before a court might be to precede it with the word “arguendo”.

    It also strikes me as being extraordinary that lawyers are allowed to state any fact(s) at all except those that have been established by a prior trial upon the facts; and even then only then when pertinent to the instant litigation.

    Over the course of a 10-year legal action in NY City involving whether my insurer or my cooperative apartment corporation should pay for exploding steam pipe damages to the physical premises of my family’s leased cooperative apartment . . .

    . . lawyer Daniel White for 55 Liberty Owners Corporation and Robert Spadaro for my insurer USAA uttered serially untrue statements to the long sequence of apparently corrupt judges who sort of heard the case.

    I found myself paralyzed by the lies these two lawyers told – one after the other: what do you say in a court as a non-lawyer civilian when the licenses lawyers cavort with the judge by lying? It’s really disheartening.

    One of Daniel White’s particular lies to Judge Carol Huff was most memorable.

    Lawyer White actually told Judge Huff that the reason why “I” did not want to pay the $25,000 to repair “my” apartment’s damage from the landlord’s exploded steam pipes was because “I” was not insured.

    Well – my insurance policy and USAA’s lawyer were standing right there in the court when lawyer Danial White lied to the judge.

    I was insured but my insurer USAA was characteristically evading its obligation to indemnify my wife’s and my obligation to repair the damage even though it was landlord’s exploding steam pipes which caused the damage.

    USAA’s skillful evasion of its obligations is another story for another time.

    At one point I finally interrupted and stated my concern to Judge Huff that the lawyers were being patently untruthful.

    So help me God – this is what Judge Huff said.

    She said that all lawyers lie; that lawyers are allowed to lie; and that she (the judge) would sort out the truth. But if I were to utter one single even minimally questionable fact – that I would be jailed for contempt.

    A review of the pertinent Federal Statute:

    18 U.S.C. § 1001 False Statements (The Martha Stewart Act)

    shows indeed that lawyers are allowed by Federal Statute to tell lies to judges; to wit,

    b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party’s counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.

    Truth is stranger than fiction.

    So: what do we call these sorts of lies that lawyers tell judges?

  30. here is the link to the Novemberber 16, 2010 oversight committee panel findings.

    http://cop.senate.gov/documents/cop-111610-report.pdf

  31. This is a political problem. It will only be solved with the help of politicians and Attorney Generals.

    Jan Van Eck we are unfortunately seeing this happen already in the modern form of Wikileaks with the war and soon as he said he will expose a major bank.

    Operation Payback: WikiLeaks Supporters’ Cyberattacks Target Online ‘Enemies’

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/08/operation_payback_wikileaks_cyberattacks_n_793861.html

  32. I found a case in Mo that should be kept in mind: when you hae a substitute trustee or trustee who is foreclosing and you have filed a quiet title action, this trustee needs to be named in the quiet title declaratory judgment action. Makes sense.
    Also, I sued my trustee for breach of fiduciary duty as well as attempted wrongful foreclosoure (I paid up before they could foreclose but they also attempted foreclosure again after being told they could not do so by BOA’s attorney!). Most states have laws that say that the trustee owes an EQUAL duty to both the creditor and the debtor. If the trustee is not looking at the paperwork that is flawed, or is having some paralegal just process paperwork without having an attorney look over it there is clearly a breach of fiduciary duty. Thes are lawyers after all–they have a duty to determine whether the debt is “real” ad that the peron claiming the right to foreclose does in fact have the right–notice? Well hasn’t there been enough lawsuits against the banks that are all over the place for “notice” to these trustees. Also, ask the trustee for their malpractice policy and whether there have been any claims against them. When my foreclosure trustee entered an appearance pro se, I figured out real quick that they had lost their E & O policy andI want to know why–too many lawsuits? Too many mistakes? The lawyers are ballistic over this and I am waiting for ruling on it from the trial court but I am sure that I will get this info. They have to provide you insurance info in most states and claims against them. There is a lot of room for discovery and something to hang the banks on with their dealings with these so called independent trustees.

  33. I predict that this will escalate to the point where specific foreclosure attorneys, possibly the entire firm, end up being shot by outraged homeowners. If not immediately apprehended, I suspect the shooter will never be identified; the list of potential suspects would contain thousands of names. Just watch; violence is around the corner. I shudder as to how this all ends up. And I blame the Court system for this; judges who are prepared to take falsified documents proffered by the foreclosure bar at face value are corrupting the land court process.

  34. Msj

    If I were you, I would prepare a simple flow chart showing the chain of the endorsed note in one column and the Assignment of the Deed of Trust, in another column) that will reflect 1) For the Note, the actual endorsements shown on the Note 2) Any record of the assignments of the Deed of Trust that they provided and then compare those assignments to the Note Endorsements to see if you have an assignment for each endorsement on the note.

    Then read sec. 4.1 (the Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement) in your pooling agreement to check to see who the Seller (Originator, the one who made you the loan, and first endorser on the Note) is and who the Purchaser is, (normally the Depositor (securities dealer): See how the Seller and Purchaser’s name on the PSA agreement compare to the endorsers on the Note and the Assignments of the Note and Deed of Trust.

    Since you have not yet seen a copy or the original of the Note, you will not know who the endorsers are and if no assignments have been provided to you or recorded in the public records, you will not have that either. But if you go to the Pooling And Servicing agreement and look at the section for “Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement within that PSA, you will at least know where to start.

    All you can do in your response is asked for the original note, the Deed of Trust (or recorded copy) and any and all assignments related to the endorsement and transfer of your note. Then you can compare the note, and look for any assignments based on the note or legal entities shown in the Mortgage Loan purchase agreement.

    You need to ask for that part of the PSA that identifies your loan(should be a listing of all loans individually by name or address, etc, something) as being part of the Pooling Agreement. so you can prove whether or not your loan is even shown. The securities dealer may have only fled the agreement without attaching the mortgage loan schedule. One Judge told the bank that he personally looked and there was no way to identify the homeowner as being in the trust and he took the time to go through the entire 458 pages. So he threw it out. as proof of ownership by the bank saying it did not apply to my client..

    I am sorry this may be so confusing, perhaps I should have left it up to Neil. He is the expert and well appreciated.

    By the way, if the company that you signed the note with is out of business, make sure you note the date the Note was endorsed and also whether or not a Power of Attorney was needed to prepare and execute the assignment.

    You can asked for the original note, any and all assignments, power of attorney if applicable, but it comes down to whether or not your loan was ever transferred to the trust. That is the question of the day. A break in the chain of endorsement of the note and transfer of ownership of lien rights, the Deed of Trust) is critical to the enforcement of any foreclosure. Check to see if Any Transfer of Servicing Rights has been recorded if the transfer is between companies that were not originally affiliated with each other.

    The other question is: Have the Judges progressed enough in their thinking over the past two months to actually consider the Standing Issue as a valid claim.

  35. Dear Neil and Any who reads this

    I want to first say GOD bless you all for thw terrific and fantastic work you’ve done and are continuing to do. I’m also fighting a fraudulent foreclosure that was wrongfully and unlawfully ruled. I’m going to trial and would like to know if you could give me a list of documents I need to request from the so called trustee Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. besides the producing of the original note. I have that right and they are trying to take it away from me and it’s not happening. I would greatly appreciate your assistance.

    Thank you

  36. Proving fraud on the Court has become much easier and thank you for your article. We have several cases whereby the documents submitted to the Court show that the lawyers did whatever it took, filing false affidavits, personal knowledge of custodians that did not have personal knowledge, making up allonges, etc. The AG’s do not have to look very far, just look at the individual case court filings. Unfortunately, it was one thing for the banks to so take advantage of the people, but for the attorneys to back them up by following through with such antics, is unconsionable. I believe without question that Fannie and Freddie, FHA and the VA knew or should have known what was going on and to some extent supported the quick and easy foreclosure of homes and as you said “here comes the Judge” following in their footsteps. Just like we all knew the dangerous loans were being made, the law enforcement officers knew the mortgage foreclosure system as well was corrupt. There was a land title company in California that talked about the manner in which Title Companies were not handling the foreclosures properly by the way the Trustee’s deeds were filed and their article got no attention whatsoever. I used that article in a court room session, attempting to explain to the judge about the lawyers representations and he allowed me to talk for 15 minutes with my ending up saying “who are these people” referencing the securities, the banks, the servicers, all in it together working in tandem to take my client’s home. The Judge after listening, said, well your client took the money from someone, so he has to repay it. My point exactly sir: Whom did he get the money from, it looks like there are two or three creditors here. This is not anything new. It has been going on for years, but the Judges would not stop and make them prove up even when we laid out the fraudulent affidavits, endorsed notes, etc. Same old stuff.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: