BKR Judge Finds MERS Has No Right To Transfer Mortgages, Finds Entire MERS Process Illegal

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

STATUS OF 50% OF ALL MORTGAGES NOW QUESTIONABLE

BLOOMBERG: U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Robert E. Grossman in Central Islip, New York, in a decision he said he knew would have a “significant impact,” wrote that the membership rules of the company’s Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, or MERS, don’t make it an agent of the banks that own the mortgages…”

““MERS and its partners made the decision to create and operate under a business model that was designed in large part to avoid the requirements of the traditional mortgage-recording process,” Grossman wrote. “The court does not accept the argument that because MERS may be involved with 50 percent of all residential mortgages in the country, that is reason enough for this court to turn a blind eye to the fact that this process does not comply with the law.”

EDITOR’S NOTE: “Significant impact” is an understatement. By finding that the enabling documents of MERS membership do NOT create an agency relationship, Judge Grossman has correctly pointed out one of the most important reasons why our title systems throughout all 50 states are now corrupted. His finding casts a very dark shadow on the question of whether ANY mortgage involving MERS is secured by the property, and finds no doubt that virtually all foreclosures of MERS-related (nominee) mortgages were invalid.

This clearly means that the requirements for a clear chain of title are left unsatisfied. Any certificate or deed issued in which MERS was previously named in the chain of title is probably void (not voidable). Any homeowner who thinks they lost their home in foreclosure probably still legally owns that home. Any petitioner in bankruptcy whose estate included a home on which there was a purported encumbrance with MERS named as nominee had a much larger estate than the one filed with the help of automated computer schedules.

Any Motion to Lift Stay that involved MERS that was granted was done improperly — and is subject to reversal by an action to quiet title, an action for wrongful foreclosure, or a motion for reconsideration based upon representations being a fraud upon the court.

Any modification, short-sale or mediated settlement involving MERS, any auction sale or post auction sale of property, will need to be unwound and returned back to status quo with the homeowner possessed of fee ownership of the property. And then there is this question: if the party identified as “lender” did not lend the borrower the money, and if MERS is not an agent that can be recognized at law, was a mortgagee or beneficiary identified in the mortgage or deed of trust? Clearly, not. Does that mean the instrument purporting to create an encumbrance is simply a wild instrument to be ignored, or is some court action required to either remove it or correct it? Who has standing to correct it?

For 3 1/2 years I’ve been saying, contrary to many other analysts including those on the borrowers’ side, that the mortgages and notes were invalid and that the only thing left was a liability owed to an unknown third party that for its own reasons has not sought to collect on that liability and whose claim was both undocumented and unsecured. This conclusion is corroborated by extrapolating the consequences of Judge Grossman’s decision, which is the only decision that could be made if we are to follow the rule of law. “We’re big and this is how we have been doing it for years”does not trump “this is the law and you didn’t comply with it.”

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 02/14/2011 15:31 -0500

There was a time when news, especially very bad news, moved stocks. The last time that occurred was in the middle of 2009, before most robots had any idea just how massive the chairsatan’s schizoid break with reality was. Now, that the appropriate sociopathology is fully priced in, bad news tends to have an even more profound upside impact on stocks than good news, as it guarantees that the Zimbabwe stock market will be upon us far sooner than if the economy were to have to go through another inter-QE episode. Which is why the just released news out of US Bankruptcy Judge Robert Grossman of Central Islip, New York, that MERS lacks rights to transfer mortgages will likely send the entire S&P circuit breaker up.

From Bloomberg:

“Merscorp Inc., operator of the electronic-registration system that contains about half of all U.S. home mortgages, has no right to transfer the mortgages under its membership rules, a judge said…U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Robert E. Grossman in Central Islip, New York, in a decision he said he knew would have a “significant impact,” wrote that the membership rules of the company’s Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, or MERS, don’t make it an agent of the banks that own the mortgages…”

“MERS’s theory that it can act as a ‘common agent’ for undisclosed principals is not supported by the law,” Grossman wrote in a Feb. 10 opinion. “MERS did not have authority, as ‘nominee’ or agent, to assign the mortgage absent a showing that it was given specific written directions by its principal.”

MERS and its partners made the decision to create and operate under a business model that was designed in large part to avoid the requirements of the traditional mortgage-recording process,” Grossman wrote. “The court does not accept the argument that because MERS may be involved with 50 percent of all residential mortgages in the country, that is reason enough for this court to turn a blind eye to the fact that this process does not comply with the law.

“An adverse ruling regarding MERS’s authority to assign mortgages or act on behalf of its member/lenders could have a significant impact on MERS and upon the lenders which do business with MERS throughout the United States,” Grossman wrote. “It is up to the legislative branch, if it chooses, to amend the current statutes to confer upon MERS the requisite authority to assign mortgages under its current business practices.”

“Without more, this court finds that MERS’s ‘nominee’ status and the rights bestowed upon MERS within the mortgage itself, are insufficient to empower MERS to effectuate a valid assignment of mortgage,” the judge wrote. “MERS’s position that it can be both the mortgagee and an agent of the mortgagee is absurd, at best.”

And with MERS now found to be a fraud, we expect MERS Commercial authority to be likewise eliminated. Which means that the entire US mortgage market, both residential and commercial, is a lie, and built on fraudulent foundations, and that every single MERS-mediated transaction will likely have to be unwound.

In reality what will happen, is that the Banker lobby will have to purchase a few more Appelate Judges, and in the worst case, a SCOTUS dude here and there, appeal the ruling to death, and end up victorious. After all, it is only taxpayer money.

82 Responses

  1. @cubed2k
    Do a quiet title immediately. Put you current loan owner and MERS in the same position they found themselves in that case.

  2. Thanks Allan for the Videos, enlightening. You are giving me more confident to proceed.

  3. Last week, I posted material on scribd,
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/48563245/Mers-is-Being-Had-by-Its-Members,
    about MERS’ members being out of control, the mandante to record an assignment when the beneficial interest in the note is held by a non-member such as a trust, and how MERS cannot stop its members from doing anything they want or don’t want. I stated that MERS has no idea if members actually enter ‘jack’, in a word, into its computer system as to transfers of interest in the note. I found this in a MERS contract with an alleged member in the Upke case:
    “Merscorp, Inc. and Mortgage Electronic Registration
    Systems, Inc. are not responsible for the accuracy of any information provided by member…or any information entered into the MERS System by or on behalf of the member.”
    MERS is not responsible? Oh.
    How nice for them.

  4. Here are some free videos that we have recently released to explain further how we can help homeowners protect their private property.

    Part 1 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKMf30ax4uc

    Part 2 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCB8Qo9K25w

    Allan Hennessey presents How to Stop Foreclosure in its Tracks Preview – 11/2010 At Winston Shrout seminar Featuring Guest Speaker Roger Elvick.

    Topics include: Foreclosure “Stop Foreclosure” “Bank Fraud” Loans “Home Loans” “Land Patents” “Public Record” “Federal Trustee Services” forensic loan investigation, fraud, obama, securitization, administrative process, notary protest, mers, contracts, and much more…

    For Full Seminar Version Go to http://www.MortgageClaimCenter.com and subscribe for free.

  5. […] BKR Judge Finds MERS Has No Right To Transfer Mortgages, Finds Entire MERS Process Illegal […]

  6. Thanks Gregory Bryt, Esq.
    I read over that case. I also read over my DOT. My DOT states it must be recorded. It is not recorded and has not been recorded since we refinanced it in 2008 , I check land records every couple of weeks. My first DOT is in limbo, only shows on MERS site.

  7. I do not respond to these emails of people who talk on things that they know nothing about. I have donated weekends with my familt helping people on this blog for free.Countless hours with long distance calls all free unpaid.So when you mentioned your Loan career unblemished.Good for you.What have you done with your time to help people.Share a story that can help someone and you will be adding value instead of trying to hurt the people that give day to day to many for the crusade.
    Be part of the solution not part of the problem.

    God bless you all and God bless America…

    I have been in mortgages since 98 (from customer service to Correspondent Lending/Secondary Market {where we packaged your loans for SALE} to Loan Officer {Conventional, Conforming and Non, plus Sub-Prime}… with no indictments nor disciplinary actions taken against me by any Local, State or Federal Agencies… how’s that for an expert, SOLIMAN…)

  8. Pardon ,, j ai etudie la lang por cinq ans mai je n parle pas bien l’ anglais ….il est tres difficile….je suis desolee …Mon o’ Madamn Gault

    Correction stands -(typos – Im very familiar with the concept – typos that is )
    .
    STARE DECISIS –
    ANONYMOUS brought this doctrine up , his arguments were very well prepared and I never did reply ….its worth understanding

    •Duhaime, Lloyd, Poetic Justice: Law Poems, The Stare Decisis Calf Path
    •Lawrence v Texas 539 US 558 (2003)
    •Stuart v Bank of Montreal 41 SCR 516 (Canada, 1909)
    •Van Kleeck v Ramer 156 P. 1108 (1916)
    •Vasquez v Hillery 474 US 254 (1986
    MSoliman
    expert.witness@live.com

  9. Here’s what’s gonna happen here. I’m going on record in case I don’t live long enough to see it happen. The contract with the members is actually with Merscorp. The current corporate version of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. is the 3rd, in case ya’ all didn’t know it. And while I’m at it, it appears MERS III didn’t adapt some of the resolutions of MERS I and II. Who cares? You do, because if that’s true, they are doing things which are not authorized by its board. I got that idea from the depo of MERS ‘real’ secretary, Hultman, in
    Upke which is at Scribd, fyi.
    MERS III ( a new corporation) was created to be bankruptcy remote.
    MERS as you know has zero employees. It has a few officers. The computer techies work for Merscorp, not Mers.
    It’s just a matter of time before MERS is outed for what it is – a sham, a scam, a computer system, itself being used and manipulated by its members, who are the ONLY ones to do assignments, enter transfers, etc. There is NO MERS except a computer system, okay?
    So we all need to start thinking in terms of “MERS’ members” instead of “MERS”. MERS doesn’t do anyhing at all. Only it’s members do.
    So because this will all come to bear on Merscorp, the party with whom the members actually have their contract to use (and abuse) the computer system, Merscorp must dissove itself of its assets for when the ‘s’ finally hits the fan, and moving assets takes time.
    We will find a corporation which has made itself
    ‘ bankruptcy proof’ (their bk, not ours) by removing its assets outside the timeframe which would make that removal ‘un-doable’ by a bankruptcy court when they file bk.
    In other words, my money is on MERScorp moving its assets out of our reach in the bitter end. The good news is those of us who haven’t already lost our homes to the maurading MERS’ members may be able to hold onto them.

  10. Monsieur Soliman, sTare decisis, please!

  11. Someone call a dr. As Bob Dylan once said, “Is there a hole for me to get sick in?” MERS file a mtn to intervene pursuant to rule 24. Rule 24 does not apply to chapter 7’s. Secondly, since the matter was so dang res judicata (which means the thing decided) because of the state court action, MERS
    arguments should have been limited to defense of the thing decided, but they made wholley new arguments outside those raised in the state court action. And I’m only on p. 2 of their stinking memo.

  12. Because of Rooker-Feldman decision, the foreclosure acts as evidence that US Bank owned the house. That means that a court cannot go back and reverse a decision unless it is fraud or a few other restrictions.

    M.Soliman – Decided matter for what? U.S. Bank’s as a trustee for property deemed a passive investment Res judicatta may be raised from beliefs for claims alleging adjudicating the matter in earlier decision by a decree entered in a receivership hearing; FDIC is the final bankruptcy and therefore the subject act or process of adjudicating. The trustee represents the write down – or variable charge to what? A Passive investment? The Sole fixed charge taken for an interest in collateral is a warehouse line also – Charged to a failed thrift?

    The debt collector is a best effort claim with no merit and courts mind set for share decisis –principle by which judges are obliged to respect the precedents established by prior decisions.

    No dispute you must compute – – -the FDIC as is conservator for the receiver. For this reason

    Repudiatory powers and rights or avoidance power of the FDIC are omnipotent and must command a litigant’s respect for agency jurisdiction over these matters. If so the FDIC can silence the US District and State local courts jurisdiction and cause decisions (such as the Ibanez in MA) to be avoided or stayed; for this purpose etc.

    There was no asset awarded to U.S. Bank’s as a trustee for property deemed a passive investment. Merely relief from creditors’ claims filed against trust assets. That asset is a receivable due the trustee from a failed bank.

    The trustee represents the write down – or variable charge to what? A Passive investment? The Sole fixed charge taken for an interest in collateral is a warehouse line also – Charged to a failed thrift?

    The debt collector is a best effort claim with no merit and courts mind set for share decisis –principle by which judges are obliged to respect the precedents established by prior decisions.

    The collections effort does not own the asset and cannot enforce their will on the court as a creditor. What gives?

    Prior adjudication and decision by enforcement of the agencies right to repudiate al contracts and understanding.

    M.Soliman
    expert.witness@live.com

  13. Thanks to the guy who posted the tip about p. 5 in the MERS’ response. Did you post that doc somewhere?
    If not, I’ll go get it and post at scribd. I posted a depo of MERS in Upke at scribd yesterday. It is very interesting and informative. I’m lousy with links, tho – sorry.

  14. Did someone here assert that MERS has been making the trusts MERS’ members?

  15. Marilyn, to simplify: Once a final decision is made in a case in a state court, say, one may not go to a different court looking for a different result. Courts want us to assert all our rights and defenses in the first court which we COULD have asserted in the first court. They don’t want us to come up with ‘stuff’ later which we could have come up with in the first court case.
    That’s even why some innocent prisoners are still sitting in jails Abbreviated, it’s “Too late!” It’s our system; it’s what it is.

  16. Faith, thumbs up on the t-shirts.

  17. […] BKR Judge Finds MERS Has No Right To Transfer Mortgages, Finds Entire MERS Process Illegal […]

  18. Our mortgage started with CTX, now defunct and being sold. The “nominee” was MERS, who assigned it to Central Mortgage for servicing. Last year we redeemed our home from foreclosure to the sum of close to $16000.00 before MERS was even a legal company in California. Who do I contact to find out what to do? Does this mean that technically, nobody holds our mortgage since CTX is now defunct? Also, the Grant Deed of Trust recorded with the county live in is a different number from the one we signed and is included in our loan documents. Different loan number also. Any one have any suggestions for me?

  19. I encourage everyone with a MERS loan in a nonjudicial state to read MERS v. Southwest Homes of Arkansas. That case has it all. Among other things, it addresses MERS’ bogus position that it can do things because it is named as a “beneficiary” in a deed of trust. What if the deed of trust named it as “county recorder’s office” or even “lender”? Would that have any validity? Of course not. Read that case over and over again.

  20. Maher. I applaud your willingness to offer your help despite the ignorance displayed towards you. This is my one and only comment. Good luck to those with kind hearts.

  21. Marilyn: The reason the homeowner lost was because of this:

    For the reasons that follow, the Debtor’s objection to the Motion is overruled and theMotion is granted. The Debtor’s objection is overruled by application of either the
    Rooker-Feldman
    doctrine, or
    res judicata
    . Under those doctrines, this Court must accept the state court judgment of foreclosure as evidence of U.S. Bank’s status as a creditor secured by the Property.Such status is sufficient to establish the Movant’s standing to seek relief from the automatic stay.The Motion is granted on the merits because the Movant has shown, and the Debtor has notdisputed, sufficient basis to lift the stay under Section 362(d).

    Basically, because of Rooker-Feldman decision, the foreclosure acts as evidence that US Bank owned the house. That means that a court can not go back and reverse a decision unless it is fraud or a few other restrictions.
    Hope that makes sense.

  22. ian,

    Yes — heard that — “Deutsche Börse and NYSE Euronext have formally unveiled their plan to create what would be the largest stock and derivatives exchange run from dual headquarters in Frankfurt and New York.about the NYSE.”

    Biggest problem in the foreclosure mess is the derivatives. Foreclosure mills are still attaching themselves to the original trust — whether or not the loan was actually transferred to the trust — AND — after the loan has been REMOVED from the trust by “SWAP” out — derivatives. THIS IS THE FRAUD.

    Do not like where foreclosure proceeds may be actually passed on — very concerned about this.

    And, why is the government still allowing and protecting??? Believe the reason is that the market is huge — and that there are political international consequences that the government is afraid of..

    But, we cannot accept fraud to cover for Congressional/Government mistakes. We are speaking out. And, courts are beginning to know that there is no legal argument for the fraud.

    Let us get an accounting as to where foreclosure proceeds actually go. Who is aiding and abetting WHAT????

  23. Anonymous- thank you for finishing up my incomplete statement. Of course, MERS isnt the creditor, or the lender, or the beneficiary, and no one can find out who is. I mistrust that with the bailouts, loan backstops, and guarantees for defaulted assets by the Govt. departments and agencies, that the GSEs are the creditors: unless it is Deutschebank, who is to own 60% of the NYSE, the sale/merger of which is being finalized right now. Whats that about? I can only guess. When the mortgage creditors are finally revealed in a meaningful way, there will be blood in the streets.

  24. Somebody asked how they can find out who their lender is since the original lender went BK. I would suggest they pull a copy of all three of their credit reports and see who is showing up on their credit report as the mortgage lender as well as what mortgage balance they show owed.

  25. Ian,

    I agree. But, always stepping one step ahead — even if MERS claims any authority — by any wording and by any agreement — they are only Nominee — and, therefore, MUST identify the current creditor. TILA and FDCPA protect consumers against false creditors such as MERS.

    Derivatives are the culprit for concealment. And, Congress allowed deregulation of derivatives. They (Congress) have no gracious way out to admit their huge error. Nevertheless, the courts are starting to get it. Derivatives are NOT — and never will be — part of any original trust — whether or not the loans were validly placed in trust or not.

    The people are victims of a system that allows concealment of collection rights. And, Congress/Government just do not know what to do about it — so they let it magnify. But, there are ways to show the trust is not the creditor — just need courts to allow discovery. Slowly, this is happening.

  26. People of AMERICA… you know that you are being conned when someone attempts to draw your attention by declaring, “PEOPLE OF AMERICA”…

    There isn’t any speculation; this way… we have WINS!!!
    Get the Foreclosure Assistance that you need and deserve… minus the BULL and with no Chaser.

    We can work with folks in most States and could make some quality referrals…

    lowecommunityresourcepartners@live.com

    send an email and even if, we can’t help you, we will still leave you with some accurate and up-to-date information (we probably can help… but I cannot Guarantee that the Sun will rise tomorrow:)

  27. HEY, WOULD KIM THOMAS (OF GEORGE E.BABCOCK) AND M SOLIMAN PLEASE SLOW DOWN, WITH THE MULTIPLE-CHESSY-ADVERTISEMENTS??? Use your own website to advertise… (on second thought, hire someone who is familiar with SEO and generating website traffic to build you another site which would make YOUR website more efficient and actually allow the people who you may be able to assist… FIND YOU instead of you and M. Soliman placing your advertisements on this board and giving your expert advice)…

    IT IS SAD THAT, AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME OF DIFFICULTY AND NEED, WE GET A GREAT INFORMATIONAL SITE SUCH AS “LIVINGLIES”, GIVING SPOT-ON ADVICE AND INFORMATION TO THE PEOPLE WHO NEED IT… only to have the like of the KIM THOMAS’, M.SOLIMAN’S and the GEORGE E.BABCOCK’s of the world attempt to hock their “EXPERT?” services, give supposed “EXPERT ADVICE?” and HOCK THEIR CHESSY WEARS… Here’s a news flash folks… If the KIM THOMAS’ and M. SOLIMAN’S of the world were woth their weight in salt… they wouldn’t be on this site advertising… THE FOLKS WHO THEY COULD HELP WOULD… (wait for it)… (wait for it)… THE FOLKS WHO THEY COULD HELP, WOULD BE ABLE TO FIND THEM, DIRECTLY THROUGH/BY… word-of-mouth… state/local reputation… or at least a better website… (success brings in clients, KIM and not posting your ‘FOR PROFIT’ adds on an informational site)…

    If anyone needs help in MA, RI, CT or any of the other 47 States in this great land (and some of the territories) please email me and we will be able to assist you or give some, reasonably helpful advice… FOR FREE…

    lowecommunityresourcepartners@live.com

    How’s that???

    God bless you all and God bless America…

    I have been in mortgages since 98 (from customer service to Correspondent Lending/Secondary Market {where we packaged your loans for SALE} to Loan Officer {Conventional, Conforming and Non, plus Sub-Prime}… with no indictments nor disciplinary actions taken against me by any Local, State or Federal Agencies… how’s that for an expert, SOLIMAN…)

    ps PLEASE STEER CLEAR OF ANY PERSON WHO ATTEMPTS TO SELL YOU THAT UCC, STRAWMAN, SOVEREIGN SCHTICK… 98% of those BUMS get/have received there information from idiots, crooks, con-men, militia-NUTS, birthers and people who are currently LOCKED UP…

    love u

  28. AMERICA STAND UP AND BE HEARD!! MA-RI-CT HOMEOWNERS! FIND OUT ABOUT GEORGE BABCOCK RECLAIMING AMERICA ONE YARD AT A TIME. MA.& RI & CT.IF YOUR HOME HAS BEEN FORECLOSED ON CALL US WE WILL MAKE IT RIGHT FOR YOU. WE CAN HELP YOU RIGHT AWAY! NO FAMILY LEFT BEHIND! BUDGET PLANS FOR EVERYONE.WE CAN HELP YOU STAY IN YOUR HOME. THE BANKS MADE A LOT OF MISTAKES IN THE PAPERWORK AND WE OFFER TO FIND THEM.FREE CONSULTATION ON ANY LEGAL MATTER.CALL KIM THOMAS 401-352-5609 or 401-274-1905. WE CAN HELP THE LAW OFFICES OF GEORGE E.BABCOCK ………………………………………………………………………ESQUIRE. CHECK OUT OUR WEBSITE: http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.babcocklawoffices.com%2F&h=911e4
    IF YOU HAVE A MERS WHICH STANDS FOR MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SERVICES WHICH WOULD BE IN MOST CASES ON THE 1ST PAGE OF YOUR MORTGAGE PARAGRAPH C. CALL KIM THOMAS OR GEORGE BABCOCK AT 401-724-1904

  29. I’m confused, if the judge found for MERS and the homeowner lost – how is this good news? And, if Judges keep contradicting each other, how will the mess ever be resolved? It seems to me that MERS was set up to be a loop hole – a fail safe system – so that investors, banks, whoever, can take our homes after making millions off the sale of the deed. Why aren’t there more lawyers willing to help and without charging the homeowner an arm and leg? I just want to save my home and not pay the crooks a dime more than I really owe.

  30. Wouldn’t be easier if the servicers tell the creditor on whose behalf they are collecting payments for to put the claim in the creditors name or have the creditor go to court? Why would the creditor continue to run up legal fees …Why doesn’t the creditor ever “Show Up” to court. Could it be that the Creditor has already been paid in full? or as this article states:”The reasons why nobody who actually has authority over the note is involved is if they step forward, under the Uniform Commercial Code, TILA and other laws they are stepping into the shoes of the originating lenders, poolers and securitizers who committed all these criminal and civil frauds.” –NY TIMES: What do the market traders know that the rest of the world does not?

  31. So Cal 7, thanks for the link to Whalen’s article. He sees right through the fog for sure. This in particular stuck out for me:

    There is good reason to think that the large banks deliberately made the changes in the bankruptcy laws so that unsecured debts, which are typically retained in the banks’ portfolios, would see smaller losses. Mortgages, which are largely owned by investors and guaranteed by the federal government, are seeing far higher losses. If you think that such duplicity is beyond even the capabilities of the largest banks and the armies of lobbyists that serve them, think again.

    “The banks negotiated a means by which they collect unsecured credit ahead of first mortgages and all mortgage losses go to the federal government,” notes a veteran attorney. “These losses will be funded by US taxpayers because the banks duped unsuspecting conservatives and liberals in Congress into thinking it is evil to let Bankruptcy Judges decide whether debtors can afford to pay their first mortgages.”

    Would someone please remind me what these rat bastards are good for, save for wrecking the entire planet and everything we hold dear? That includes the administrations as well, present and past.

    This blatant over-reach by the elites into manipulating congress to screw the taxpayers once again is yet more reason to take to the streets in America. Their securitization fraud is nothing but fraud, pure and simple, and until we decide that we’re no longer playing their debt game, we’ll continue to live in servitude. They all need to go the way of Egypt.

  32. HEY, WOULD KIM THOMAS (OF GEORGE E.BABCOCK) AND M SOLIMAN PLEASE SLOW DOWN, WITH THE MULTIPLE-CHESSY-ADVERTISEMENTS??? Use your own website to advertise… (on second thought, hire someone who is familiar with SEO and generating website traffic to build you another site which would make YOUR website more efficient and actually allow the people who you may be able to assist… FIND YOU instead of you and M. Soliman placing your advertisements on this board and giving your expert advice)…

    IT IS SAD THAT, AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME OF DIFFICULTY AND NEED, WE GET A GREAT INFORMATIONAL SITE SUCH AS “LIVINGLIES”, GIVING SPOT-ON ADVICE AND INFORMATION TO THE PEOPLE WHO NEED IT… only to have the like of the KIM THOMAS’, M.SOLIMAN’S and the GEORGE E.BABCOCK’s of the world attempt to hock their “EXPERT?” services, give supposed “EXPERT ADVICE?” and HOCK THEIR CHESSY WEARS… Here’s a news flash folks… If the KIM THOMAS’ and M. SOLIMAN’S of the world were woth their weight in salt… they wouldn’t be on this site advertising… THE FOLKS WHO THEY COULD HELP WOULD… (wait for it)… (wait for it)… THE FOLKS WHO THEY COULD HELP, WOULD BE ABLE TO FIND THEM, DIRECTLY THROUGH/BY… word-of-mouth… state/local reputation… or at least a better website… (success brings in clients, KIM and not posting your ‘FOR PROFIT’ adds on an informational site)…

    If anyone needs help in MA, RI, CT or any of the other 47 States in this great land (and some of the territories) please email me and we will be able to assist you or give some, reasonably helpful advice… FOR FREE…

    lowecommunityresourcepartners@live.com

    How’s that???

    God bless you all and God bless America…

    I have been in mortgages since 98 (from customer service to Correspondent Lending/Secondary Market {where we packaged your loans for SALE} to Loan Officer {Conventional, Conforming and Non, plus Sub-Prime}… with no indictments nor disciplinary actions taken against me by any Local, State or Federal Agencies… how’s that for an expert, SOLIMAN…)

    ps PLEASE STEER CLEAR OF ANY PERSON WHO ATTEMPTS TO SELL YOU THAT UCC, STRAWMAN, SOVEREIGN SCHTICK… 98% of those BUMS get/have received there information from idiots, crooks, con-men, militia-NUTS, birthers and people who are currently LOCKED UP…

    love u

  33. Great points, Ian. Succinctly stated and very useful.

  34. This is also what my friend, Dave K has been saying all along! MERS is BS! Until the banks get out of the pockets of these judges, or the judges stop allowing TOTAL FRAUD from being perpetuated on the courts, the injustice will continue. This rulling is a step in the right direction. What we need thought is ALL judges to follow the letter of the law. Problem being is the blindfold has been ripped off lady justice a long time ago, especially in regards to the Banks.

    A Man, I thought I had heard Buford retired.

    We need more judges in California to “get it” and get this crisis behind us!

    -Seeking

  35. ANONYMOUS- right in plain view on pg.5 or so of the MERS response, “…. MERS owns no beneficial interest in the promissory note”. Right before that, “….MERS is the mortgagee of record, and the nominee for the lender, its successors and assigns” .
    In Black’s Law Dictionary: ” Borrower, known as the mortgagor, gives the mortgage to the lender, known as the mortgagee”. MERS has stated that they are the mortgagee of record, yet also state that they do not lend money. This does not follow, as the mortgagee,according to Blacks, IS the lender, who lends money. So they purport to be the lender (mortgagee) as well as the nominee FOR the lender. When in actuality, MERS is neither, because they cannot be both at the same time. As it someone standing before the judge said ” I am the accused, and I am also the nominee for the accused, who is me.” To which the judge would respond, ” You can only be one or the other.

  36. Please someone provide me with a CASe#. would like to read that ruling. Thanks.

  37. Okay —- anyone want to look at this??? Response from MERS to New Jersey order.

    Seems to me that even if “borrower gave authority to MERS” at origination – to act in event of default — MERS must identify on whose behalf they are acting.

    Opinions???

    http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/superior/mers.pdf

  38. I have noticed that on the Deed of Trust, the Lender is always typed or written in, the Trustee is always typed or written in BUT “MERS” as the nominee and beneficiary is part of the pre-printed form that comes from millions and millions of Fannie mae and Freddie Mac forms that almost every title co. uses. A title co. gave me a blank once to do a private loan. Of course, “MERS” was on that also.

    This should be the first CLUE that the BANKSTERS were putting their scheme in place and that FANNIE and FREDDIE were right there from the beginning.

    Is it legal to have “MERS’ preprinted on all the forms like they are?

  39. john-
    I have had t-shirts made up – got MERS?
    along with – home owners fighting back – printed on them. I wear one while grocery shopping. I discuss the subject on my facebook page and in my neighborhood.

  40. FREE HOUSE?
    Here’s a clue from a Sovereign National-not a “citizen”
    I am a Secured Party Creditor.
    That means I have control of the $1,000,000 bond value placed on my birth certificate.I can discharge any and all “debt” up to $1,000,000, because I have Power of Attorney.Not any bank or lawyer or govt. asshole.
    The BC registration into the Dept. of Commerce, was done when I was an infant, therefore an invalid contract, therefore voidable.
    Look up “STRAWMAN” online and use it.
    Ihave been in my home for 43 months no mortgage due to the theft of my $20,000 down payment.
    “Fraud voids a contract Ab Initio”.

  41. hey! looks like mortgage defense jobs are opening up !!! http://phoenix.craigslist.org/cph/lgl/2206727014.html

  42. As Angelo pointed out, MERS can’t appeal Grossman’s decision–they won. Or did they? They “won” in that their motion was granted, but everything else about the ruling was a loss for them. Pretty shrewd on Grossman’s part. It’s clear from what I’ve read of the ruling so far that Grossman was not happy that his hands were tied and would have denied the MERS motion if he could have.

    That also makes the ruling that much more forceful because Grossman is saying–“I’ve gotta follow the law here and grant MERS’ motion even though it is extremely distasteful to me.” So he is setting an example by following the law but coupling that with a devastating critique of MERS that they have to let stand and which can provide citations for future litigants. In other words, Grossman served MERS a shit sandwich that they have to eat–they did ask for it, after all…

  43. Who is Rominger replacing? That would be Andrew J. “Buddy” Donohue, who came from another outfit not exactly known for investor protection: Merrill Lynch. Merrill, of course, is the brokerage that we taxpayers bailed out during the financial crisis. Now known as Bank of America Merrill Lynch, it has since been fined for letting day traders and its own proprietary trading desk front-run clients.

    So again, we have the fox guarding the hen house.

  44. Who is Rominger replacing at the SEC? That would be Andrew J. “Buddy” Donohue, who came from another outfit not exactly known for investor protection: Merrill Lynch. Merrill, of course, is the brokerage that we taxpayers bailed out during the financial crisis. Now known as Bank of America Merrill Lynch, it has since been fined for letting day traders and its own proprietary trading desk front-run clients

    So again, we have the fox guarding the hen house.

  45. Fraud in the factum. Fraud in the foreclosure.

    The lenders employee signing substitution is MERS. MSoliman pointed out years ago that the loan applications are sometimes missing from the borrowers documents. My district attorney who couldn’t get the title company (who over saw the the final signing) to release all documents. So, filing a complaint with the Department of Insurance in Calif., I just got the Title Co. to comply. The bad news is if should I request any more documents, I will need a subpoena. Still can’t get the originals and MERS- (the lenders) still took the home.

    larry g walker,

    Let me guess, you have American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. who has always been (DBA) as American Brokers Conduit that both filed BK in 2007.

  46. Sorry Ian…it’s late in this time zone and I’m tired. My humor detector is a little off this evening. I hadn’t heard about R.K. Arnold retiring…very interesting.

  47. zurenarrh- the first sentence was written in jest. You got it, we are on the same page. Another thought, MERS cannot assign what it doesn’t have. (the note) Yet, there in all it’s pleadings they are transferring the note. Which they never have, according to their owner’s manual. They are a fraud of massive proportions, no one raised an eyebrow when MERS pushed the century-old recording statutes aside and plopped itself right in. By the way, there was never a law passed anywhere to declare this. There was the Minnesota ruling 6 or 8 years ago saying in effect that MERS is in the right, the way they do things. Minnesota stands by itself to that end. MERS CEO(ex ceo as of 3 wks ago) perjured himself in Congressional hearings and court appearance. Or maybe he just “mispoke” .
    MERS doesn’t have a leg to stand on, and is getting more wobbly by the day.

  48. CALL KIM THOMAS 401-352-5609 or 401-274-1905. WE CAN HELP THE LAW OFFICES OF GEORGE E.BABCOCK …

    Damn good attorney . . . good fighter. Rate counsel in these matters by dollar volume and sanctions. He is not afraid and does get a lot of cases stayed and stayed and stayed .

    He’s an insider. Comes out swinging . . .Yo G what up….This Kim dude though . . . .Ah haaaa

    Peace

    M.Soliman
    expert.witness@live.com

  49. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES –
    The TARP Member Do Not Want You To Know About

    ACCOUNTING FOR CAPITALIZATION
    COMMON STOCK
    PREFERRED STOCK
    DERECOGNITION
    SECURITIES OFFERED AGAINST RECEIVABLES
    NOMINEE PROTECTS THE BORROWERS RIGHTS
    MERS REGISTERS the TRUST
    CHARGES
    WRITE DOWNS
    BOOK VS GOODWILL

    I’ll tell you , IASB and European accounting community are going insane laughing at how this country throws Enron in jail and then enforces the greatest accounting comedy in modern times.

    This is a sin, its like telling the world every disclosure a stock holder ever reads again or analysts evaluates is guaranteed to be distorted.

    Its like going to the horse races – like that not hard enough. But handicappers also have to predict which horses are drugged….

    It make you sick to your stomach – and not one case I have seen will isolate the accounting rules fraud need to foreclose . Any CPA’s out there…

    M.Soliman
    expert.witness@Live.com
    ——————————————————————–
    MERS is the Ford Pick-up truck 100 speeding drivers used to get into accidents while driving drunk!

    Sue Ford ? Drunk drivers who speed are not allowed at the wheel of MERS.

    Joinder – Us
    Misjoinder – Them

  50. Ian,
    Just trying to express solidarity with you. I’m pretty sure I understood what you said, that MERS IS the banks. You did qualify that statement with “it appears” that MERS is the banks. That of course can be taken a number of ways, the two most obvious ways being 1) it “appears” that MERS is the banks because MERS IS the banks or 2) it “appears” that MERS is the banks but MERS actually isn’t the banks.

    Given the context of your statement and the information available on Living Lies, the only logical conclusion I can come to is that you meant #1 above.

    Now you may not be prepared to sign on to my further extrapolation that a MERS mortgage is essentially a deal with every MERS member (and ultimately then, a deal with no one), but at least give me that we are in agreement that MERS IS the banks.

    I’m no expert–I am but a simple layman with a great deal of tenacity. However, it doesn’t take an expert to understand what MERS does.

  51. READER – . . .is that MERS represents itself as both the mortgagee, and a nominee of the mortgagee (or lender)- how can it be both?

    Gee’s come on , think! Really think. Mers is the Benficiary for all successor and assigns. Think hard here . “IS” “FOR”

    Example:

    “HERE IT IS”.
    “WHO IS THIS FOR?”

    M.Soliman
    expert.witness.com

  52. zurenarrh- I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure that what you heard is what I actually meant. But you’re pretty close.
    I sort of let my hackles down, took a deep breath, wrote MERS in the middle of a sheet of paper. Then I took 3 other sheets of paper, labelled WHAT THEY DO, HOW THEY DO IT, and the 3rd sheet labelled RECORDING REQUIREMENTS. Then wrote down everthing I could think of on each of the 3 sheets and just stared at them. And you and I kind of came to the same conclusions so far. Keep digging.

  53. READER – I understand that one may pay for an expert opinion but, They simply don’t have the dough to pay for the ‘Expert Opinion”.

    EXPERTS WHO ARE INSIDERS ARE THE ONLY CHANCE YOU HAVE WITH EVEN THE MOST SKILLED ATTORNEYS LITIGATING

    They can be found. But you need to have an insider’s assessment of the fraud and fraud between the lines. (and do not hire an expert to do a modification or short sale- they do not exist and that’s the insanity I deal with)

    – Court local rules and attorneys or presiding judge will determine the expert’s merit. The decision will determine the expert’s knowledge) But you need to have a fighting chance….Case in point

    WHO DOES MERS REPRESENT?

    More to follow on MERS – people, this is not a MERS issue and the real culprits are laughing…

    M.Soliman
    expert.witness@live.com

  54. Ian,
    You and I are completely on the same page–MERS IS the banks. MERS is not, despite the language of my deed of trust, “a separate corporation.” MERS IS its members, just like any gang of street thugs IS its members. No members, no MERS.

    And that’s part and parcel of the reason why the MERS-as-beneficiary language in mortgages is fraudulent. Because if MERS is a beneficiary and MERS IS its members, then no beneficiary has been disclosed to “borrowers.” That is to say, through MERS, “borrowers” are essentially making a deal with every MERS member–banks, servicers, brokers, etc.–but are being told that they are making a deal with only one “separate corporation.” That flies in the face of full disclosure and in fact is the exact opposite of disclosure.

  55. What can they appeal, they won the ruling. They just a lashing like no other…

  56. john gault- it was either the kansas or missouri MERS case wherein the judge concluded that MERS was a ‘straw man at best”. And people keep inferring that MERS is “used by the banks” whereas it could be said that MERS IS the banks, since without them,(the banks) there would be no MERS. Apart from some title companies,default servicers and associated riffraff.

  57. Finally able to start reading the Grossman ruling…MERS admits that its very existence is at stake in this case.

    I’m also appalled by MERS’ constant assertion in this and other cases that the party that gives them authority to do what they do is the borrower himself. As if any of us at closing could have said “Yeah, I don’t want this MERS to be able to foreclose on me, so if you take that part out of the mortgage/deed of trust, I’ll be happy to sign it.”

    It’s the ultimate insult added to injury, and the blame-the-victim mentality at its disgusting zenith. Constant appeals to the “private contract” aspect of a mortgage do not change the fact, in the language of the mortgages themselves, the “lenders” represented MERS to be something they weren’t/aren’t, i.e. mortgagees/beneficiaries. That is a fraudulent misrepresentation at best.

  58. And, yes, you may cite this case. It’s not binding in your jurisdiction, perhaps, but if you accumulate enough of these decisions, it would be pretty hard to ignore. If you want to help yourself, start studying the laws of agency, starting with googling the words “implied agency” and “expressed agency”.
    Keep at it til you get it on your own – MERS is not an agent.

  59. Mr Babcock, you better have won a case.

  60. This news needs to go viral.

  61. That’s crap. The judge suggests legislation may correct a fatality in a private business contract and he further would have to mean it to be retroactive to preclude the alleged damage to the parties to that contract. There is no’ future’ damage. All those jerkies have to do is follow the dam- law, record the dam- assignments when they’re supposed to, and present the same evidence on a claim you and I would have to. If their business model has caused them trouble, and it has and more than most of us know, it is just that – THEIR trouble.
    And, as the court is so very fond of saying, no damage to that gang has been demonstrated by the judge’s finding; it is at this point speculative.
    And It is decidedly NOT up to the legislation, dear perhaps-well-meaning-Judge, to correct a private contractual flaw.
    And ,if they were to even try such an unlawful action, that is, an alleged legislative move to impact an existing contract , I suggest anarchy would follow.
    That was a careless, errant, and dangerouse comment and the judge should retract it post haste.

  62. Faith, does that mean you do?.

  63. I expect an appeal.

  64. POST THIS NEWS on YOUR FACEBOOK – already

  65. AMERICA STAND UP AND BE HEARD!! MA-RI-CT HOMEOWNERS! FIND OUT ABOUT GEORGE BABCOCK RECLAIMING AMERICA ONE YARD AT A TIME. MA.& RI & CT.IF YOUR HOME HAS BEEN FORECLOSED ON CALL US WE WILL MAKE IT RIGHT FOR YOU. WE CAN HELP YOU RIGHT AWAY! NO FAMILY LEFT BEHIND! BUDGET PLANS FOR EVERYONE.WE CAN HELP YOU STAY IN YOUR HOME. THE BANKS MADE A LOT OF MISTAKES IN THE PAPERWORK AND WE OFFER TO FIND THEM.FREE CONSULTATION ON ANY LEGAL MATTER.CALL KIM THOMAS 401-352-5609 or 401-274-1905. WE CAN HELP THE LAW OFFICES OF GEORGE E.BABCOCK ………………………………………………………………………ESQUIRE. CHECK OUT OUR WEBSITE: http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.babcocklawoffices.com%2F&h=911e4
    IF YOU HAVE A MERS WHICH STANDS FOR MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SERVICES WHICH WOULD BE IN MOST CASES ON THE 1ST PAGE OF YOUR MORTGAGE PARAGRAPH C. CALL KIM THOMAS OR GEORGE BABCOCK AT 401-724-1904 AND GET RELIEF FROM YOUR PROBLEM!

  66. i live in the ozarks of missouri, and i do have mers listed on the deed of trust as a nominee, and also beneficiary. however when i ask the county recorder to help me with my deed of trust, and to who was my lender, *( the lender on the deed of trust filed bankruptcy in 2007) and there has been no new activity on the deed of trust since it was recorded on 3-22-2006, She stated that she had heard of mers but did not know exactly who or what they were. At present time because of mers, and the county recording system, i have a clouded title, and i cannot sell the home, and because we do not know who our lender is and or who to pay off, no banking or mortgage company is willing to refinance, and the title insurance companies are not willing to issue a home owners policy. so where do we go from here, what are our options.

  67. angelo

    Agree as to Judge Schack. And, let us hope NJ continues it’s path as a “national leader” (“list” of members for below omitted to save space).

    For immediate release: February 14, 2011
    For further information contact:
    Winnie Comfort or Tammy Kendig
    609-292-9580

    New Judiciary Committee Seeks to Improve Court Access and Fairness
    Chief Justice Stuart Rabner has announced the formation of the Supreme Court Committee on Access and Fairness. The Committee will comprise judges, court managers, and representatives from outside organizations to work together on ways to enhance the public’s trust and confidence in the courts.
    The chief justice has appointed Judge Glenn A. Grant, acting administrative director of the courts, as chair of the newly formed committee. Appellate Judge Francine I. Axelrad, who chairs the Supreme Court Committee on Women in the Courts, and Superior Court Judge Susan F. Maven, who chairs the Supreme Court Committee on Minority Concerns, will serve as vice chairs.
    Chief Justice Rabner said, “The millions of litigants who come to the courts each year for a just resolution of their cases are entitled to believe that they have been treated respectfully and fairly in a neutral forum. At the same time, all people, regardless of income, language barriers, or cultural or educational background, must have full access to the courts. This committee will look at ways to improve our operations so that we can meet those needs in every case.”
    The committee, which will hold its first official business meeting today, will create a statewide campaign to focus on how the courts administer justice in the face of such challenges as the continued increase in the number of self-represented litigants, the economic pressures applied to litigants and to the courts, and the need to treat each case and each litigant with dignity and respect.
    Judge Grant said, “New Jersey has been a national leader in addressing issues of access and fairness. With wide representation from all parts of our legal system, this committee will take the critical next step to bring together our many efforts to improve the quality of justice and court experience for our many constituencies.”
    Beginning in the early 1980s with the Supreme Court Task Force on Interpreter and Translation Services, the Supreme Court Committee on Women in the Courts and the Supreme Court Committee on Minority Concerns, the New Jersey Judiciary has a strong tradition of critical self-analysis. More recent efforts include the Ad Hoc Working Group on Pro Se Materials, internal training programs to build cultural competency for staff and judges, and the statewide ombudsman program.
    The access and fairness committee was formed as a result of a recommendation in the 2009 Report of the Advisory Group on Self-Representation in the New Jersey Courts. Formed in 2008, the advisory group analyzed the Judiciary’s efforts to serve litigants who represent themselves in court and made 25 recommendations to make the courts more accessible and fair for all litigants.
    A list of members is attached.

  68. Ian

    You know — did not know BofA even had a trust division — but likely acquired through some past acquisitions such as LaSalle Bank.

    BofA trying to rid itself of past bad mistakes. Trustees are nothing — next big fall — after MERS..

    But, courts have to first realize that old “creditors” — even though they were never really a creditor — are not current creditor. Think courts are slowing getting the message.

    And, cannot be as to your MERS question. But, then again — MERS is rarely accurate — so any contradiction is par for the course.

  69. Hell yeah! That part about MERS pretending to be both the mortgagee AND the agent of the mortgagee is a beautiful and simple debunking of the MERS myth.

    I addressed this in interrogatories to MERS–I asked them which of the these two statements is true: 1) MERS IS the beneficiary (per the language of the deed of trust or 2) MERS ACTS as the beneficiary in the land records (per the language on MERS’ website). I assume they’ll just object to the question, but I don’t plan to let this angle go…

  70. Much credit needs to go to Judge Schack and his colleague’s in Kings County. They have been way ahead of the curve on this, and the BK judge cited numerous cases from Schack. Hopefully this will get more credibility moving forward.
    You need to remember that the defendant lost the motion, but the Judge decided to give his opinion anyway because MERS stepped in as third party not involved in the case, besides the fraudulent assignment.
    I want a ruling that favors the defendant and rules that any mortgage assignment from MERS is an unsecured creditor, and then the whole house of cards is going to crumble.

  71. Great, just great! Now there is more blood in the water!
    All the banksters do is sidestep the issue and reshuffle the cards to help them win.
    Over and over again.
    You block them over here and they come out the woodwork over there!
    But we are winning a little at at time, and at least judges and borrowers are asking questions and not letting them bulldoze over everybody like before!

  72. Thank you Judge Grossman. Now you see how we are abused by the Mortgage Industry. Thank you for standing up for the little guy.

    Bravo!!!!

  73. USBank has purchased Bank Of Amerika’s trust division to include thousands of securitized loan pools, custodial contracts, etc. BOA will retain their loan servicing arm. The price was $35million, and with that, USBank gets 10billion dollars in deposits. That’s the gist of a practically invisible news blurb in the msm today. Why are they selling this part of their business? It certainly isn’t to raise 35 million dollars and lose 10 billion in deposits. As we all know, the trustee doesn’t do anythink except allow servicers to forge credentials in their name, and pursue foreclosures without the trustee’s knowledge. Anyone have their ear to the ground?

  74. @Faith – Regarding your suggestion that one stand outside a store and poll to determine who, if anyone, is aware of how to look up their mortgage:

    In visiting my Clerk’s office to find my document files I raised the topic with the Assistant Clerk regarding mortgage problems, recording, etc. She answered by saying she didn’t know anything about it. She doesn’t really watch the news.

    In mentioning this situation in passing to two friends, one a city planner who deals with land and titles and one who is an administrative manager of a center for telecommuters neither of them had a clue. Two days later, within a few hours, both sent me emails asking how they can determine if their mortgage is “in MERS”. Now four days later and innumerable email queries they’re aware and scared.

    If these two, who are in daily contact with business and industry had no idea, and the Assistant Clerk of the Court had no idea, what does this say with regard to “shadow banking” and the complicity of both the news media and the government?

  75. What ever happened to Judge Buford? He had it right in bankruptcy court here in Southern California.

    http://stopforeclosurefraud.com/2010/03/19/judge-buford-slams-mers-for-its-own-confusion/

    Why was he the only one?

    Criminal Charges against Judges must be applied

  76. The judge is right, of course. My worry is if some type of statute of limitations is legislated that does not challenge the judge’s ruling but lets the banksters go forward business as usual by creating a time limit under which one can challenge MERS.

    By the way, in my own , uneducated, but common sense guided comments over the past six months, I have been saying the exact same thing as what the judge said, as have many many others.

    But its important for those of you who don’t know all the terminology to never let go of common sense beliefs.

    For instance, what everyone now calls the “INVESTOR”, I maintain is a fraudulent term as these alleged investors are actually RE-INVESTOR’S who are usurping (aka stealing) credit from the construction industry and those who provided the actual land and the building of the homes and who are in fact the real investors when it comes to the creation of homes.

    The after the fact investors??? Makes no sense. Banks, backed by money from the government, were the sales agent (along with the realtors) for matching homes to homeowners. I guess it was about 10 years ago when suddenly home loans and mods were magically suddenly needing to be approved by “INVESTORS”?

    It’s a load of crap. The government backs mortgages, and the banks are supposed to be instruments of the government that follow strict guidelines.

    All the stuff that has happened in the past 10 years is just fantasy, fantasy that has now hurt millions of people by first falsely giving them the belief that they had immeasurable wealth because of rising real estate prices, then stomping on them hard when the false deck of cards came crashing down.

  77. Two trains have entered the tunnel at full speed, one from the west, one from the east. The western train is the above….the eastern train, at least in Minnesota is:

    “When MERS began having mortgages recorded in its name as nominal mortgagee, questions arose in certain jurisdictions as to whether MERS had the authority to act on behalf of its members. See, e.g., MERSCORP, Inc. v. Romaine, 8 N.Y.3d 90, 828 N.Y.S.2d 266, 861 N.E.2d 81, 82-83 (2006).  

    As a result of questions raised about the MERS system, the Minnesota Legislature passed an amendment to the Recording Act that expressly permits nominees to record “[a]n assignment, satisfaction, release, or power of attorney to foreclose.” Act of Apr. 6, 2004, ch. 153, § 2, 2004 Minn. Laws 76, 76-77 (codified at Minn.Stat. § 507.413 (2008)).   The amendment, frequently called “the MERS statute,” went into effect on August 1, 2004.   Id., § 2, 2004 Minn. Laws at 76-77.”

    This is going to get messy. THERE WILL BE BLOOD!

    How can this be rectified?

  78. Stand outside your local grocery store in a suit with a clip board with info and ask anyone who catches your eye if they know how to look up their mortgage on line. We need to educate the public to what is going on.

  79. One of the questions Judge Grossman asked, or points he made, is that MERS represents itself as both the mortgagee, and a nominee of the mortgagee (or lender)- how can it be both? I never thought of this before. Anyone else?

  80. How does this help the borrowers and homeowners in states other than New York? Is one able to somehow proffer this decision as an exhibit in a bankruptcy or QT action? I understand that one may pay for an expert opinion but, under the current circumstances of a majority of homeowners ,now struggling to manage their day-t0-day, that option isn’t realistic. They simply don’t have the dough to pay for the ‘Expert Opinion”.

    So, how can this be used/exploited by the borrower to substantiate their claim that their mortgage is not a valid obligation?

    Sadly, if most borrowers don’t access ZH and Market Ticker and Neil’s blog and others they may not even be aware of the accumulating decisions that weigh against their “lender’s” actions. The daily news is silent on this as are the usual t.v. news broadcasts. Is there a manner in which those of us who have this new information can use it to fight the banks?

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: