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


“I think what Judges are missing here is that if a party could not plead or prove a judicial foreclosure they shouldn’t be allowed to proceed in a non-judicial procedure. The question is how to prevent that miscarriage of justice and due process. If disinterested parties who would be sanctioned for bringing the claim in a judicial foreclosure are allowed to proceed as the forecloser in a non-judicial action, we have a very clear procedural and constitutional problem in the application of non-judicial procedures.

It converts a convenience for the inevitable and designed for judicial economy to a device for fraud wherein the courts, when they get involved, are made complicit in the fraud. A simple denial, like any in any judicial action, should be sufficient to require the forecloser to either commence judicial foreclosure or go away. At this point, with all the dismissals at trial and all the defaults entered once the borrower gets to the point where the Court allows discovery, it is pretty obvious that these mortgage problems cannot be adequately resolved without strict adherence to the requirements of due process, to wit: pleading and proof.” Neil F Garfield

I was in Federal Court yesterday providing moral and other support to a bankruptcy lawyer on three appeals. The other side made the usual arguments being dismissive of any problems with the foreclosure process and how the Judges should concentrate on the fact that the borrower had not paid — and not whether the payment was due — or whether the right person or company was claiming the payment (or the house)…. when out of the blue the Chief Judge of the BAP panel who frankly did not seem too friendly to the borrower, said ON RECORD something like the following (I’ll get the transcript and insert it later):

“Now hold up a minute. I sit as a presiding Judge in Bankruptcy Court In the State of [deleted] and on multiple occasions I have had on the same docket multiple parties each claiming to be holding the original note and each claiming the right to enforce it and each asking for a motion to lift the automatic stay. …….

[and then the Judge sitting next to him said]

“I sit on the same Bench in the State of [deleted] and I’ve had the same problem many times.”


After the recent revelations from the US Bankruptcy Trustee in another case showing that LPS has been involved in a pattern of conduct constituting systemically fraud in the creation of false “original documents” and after dozens of similar reports from state court Judges around country, I think we can comfortably say that there are three possibilities:

  1. In each case all of the pretender lenders had an “original note” created by LPS or some similar entity specializing in creating and fabricating false documents (one of which showed up in Virginia where the borrower had signed in black ink and the “original” had her signature in blue ink), and NONE of the “originals” was authentic.
  2. In each case, ONE of the pretender lenders had the authentic original note and the other pretender lenders had false “original” documents.
  3. In each case NONE of the pretender lenders had the authentic original note nor any right to have it in their poessession except as an accommodation to the creditor.

You will note that the pretender lenders are usually careful about saying they are the “holder” and not that they are the holder in due course and especially not that they are the owner of the note and never do they say they are the creditor. In short, they are playing words games with Judges who think they understand what is being represented and when the borrower’s attorney points out the discrepancy, the Judge views it as a technical matter that is meant to distract from the simple fact that the poor borrower hasn’t paid his debt —-

When in fact, the distraction has already occurred and a completely disinterested party is going to take the order of the Judge, even if it is just an order lifting the stay and use it in any further proceedings stating that the matter has already been litigated and decided against the borrower — despite the fact that there has never been any evidence introduced into the record, nor could there be, since there never was any evidential hearing or discovery.

Show me the note sounds good, but if they DO show it to you, even if your client is ready to admit it, do NOT allow it to be authenticated without being examined.

29 Responses

  1. I want to tell you about my mortgage refinance I took out in 2001. I went directly to a lender and the originator refinanced one loan two times for extra fees for herself I am sure, I thought she would consolidate my 2 loans, totaling 88,500.00. I went to the Recorders office and discovered a second loan of $20,000.00 in a “wild” Deed of Trust. The loan of 13,500.00 was paid and she kept the rest of the $20,000.00 which was $6,500.00. Maybe she gave some to the title company who recorded the “wild” Deed of Trust, I’m not sure. The wild Deed of Trust was re conveyed 2 months later when she financed the loan again with the 1st mortgage, so the loan was flipped. I ended up with a new mortgage amount of 110,000.00. I do not understand why the Wild Deed of Trust was recorded? It did not give any constructive notice.Was it a way to also avoid reporting the loan and not pay taxes? That might be tax fraud.Anyway, along with many other ways they rip people off was also pulled on me, the only difference may be is I was able to sell my place in 2006. My question is, do these “wild” Deeds of Trust break the chain of title and if so are “wild” Deeds causing some of the problems now because the chain of title was broken? Was it the lenders intention to break the chain of title and, do wild Deeds show the balance paid in full? I know I have to many questions. Thanks

  2. I filed a motion to vacate the final judgement and dismiss the complaint in my case against Wells Fargo. We were almost at the date of sheriffs sale on November 16, 2010 when I decided to fight back, The Judge in this NJ Chancery Div. is known for always siding with the lenders/plaintiffs ….

    1) First Hearing … I argued that Wells Fargo was just the servicer of the loan, that they had never owned the note.

    In 2004 we refinanced with Commerce Bank and they “indorsed the note “Pay To The Order Of Washington Mutual Bank” … and signed it.
    They named MERS as nominee for Commerce.

    We paid our mortgage payments to WaMu for years

    At some point close to when WaMu was seized by the U.S. Government and then auctioned off to CitiBank or somebody, Wells Fargo had become the servicer of our loan, and we started sending our payments to them. We allege that WaMu never transferred or delivered the note to WF.

    In WF’s foreclosure complaint they only state that they were given the assignment of mortgage by MERS as their “chain of title” proof , but they don’t show the assignment of mortgage in the complaint, they only state that it is unrecorded at this time.

    Over a full year later, they finally record it in the county records, and it shows that it was created by MERS and signed 2 weeks after the complaint was filed. The complaint was filed on September 25, the assignment of mortgage signed on October 8.
    The assignment simply states that Commerce Bank by way of MERS is now assigning Wells Fargo the mortgage so together with note and mortgage WF can enforce .. etc.

    Never a mention of Washington Mutual, no record of any assignment to Washington Mutual.

    At the hearing I point out to the Judge that the assignment is dated after the complaint was filed, but he shrugs his shoulders and says “well thats the way things are done sometimes, but you borrowed money and you need to pay them back
    I stated that we never borrowed money from WF, they are trying to take our house now but we have proof showing our note was indorsed to WaMu at the time of the loan. WaMu was packaging and selling off notes to securities before they went under. Wells Fargo has never proved they own the note.

    So the Judge adjourns the case until Jan. 31, 2011 and tells Wells Fargo to produce the note …. WF had shown a copy of the note at the first hearing, it did not have a stamped indorsement from WaMu , it was only a copy of the original note that Commerce had indorsed to WaMu.

    2) Second Hearing …. WF shows up to court with a note that now has fresh dark-inked stamp on it, indorsed in blank from WaMu … I objected to it saying it could be a copy that they had just added a stamp to … but the Judge says “no, thats the real note…it’s right there” … I responded by saying “well it hasn’t been authenticated as beig the real note”,
    and the Judge says “well yes, what do you mean by authenticated? We’re authenticating it right now, I know thats the real note”. I try to argue that it’s a contradiction of what the attorneys certification shows exhibit “c” as the true and accurate copy, now we have two diferent versions of the note, one is indorsed and one isn’t … but the Judge refuses to accept my argument.

    But I also raise the issue of “robo-signers” being used on documents in my case. I point out that the State of NJ has issued orders regarding Robo-signers and that they are considering dismissing the complaints of 6 major banks involved, one of which is the plaintif here, Wells Fargo.

    The Judge agrees with me on this point and adjourns the case again, asking the plaintiff to show him why the documents in this case should be relied upon … I also ask the Judge to have them prove when they got the note, on what date, where has it been? He agrees and tells them to provide all of that.

    3) Third hearing …. plaintiff submits an affadavit signed by an employee of Wells Fargo, who says she reviewed the normal business records and can thereby swear to the facts that “WF had the note on or before Sept. 25 when the complaint was filed” … but at the hearing I try to point out that this lady does not have personal knwledge of these facts and she is not supporting it with any evidence of what records she read this from, who entered put these comments in the record, when did they enter these comments? etc, etc .. the judge does not agree with me and says the affadavit is good.
    I argue that NJ Appelate Division just reversed a case in January 2011 on the same issue, an affadavit alone by someone who says they read the business records “does not” constitute personal knowledge. The Judge still disagrees with me.

    But now he says he is still concerned about the use of “robo-signers” on the assignment of mortgage which i pointed out to him, LPS , MERS robo-signers Topako Love, Matthew Allan Banaszewski , Josh Baxley named in the NJ Appellate reversal case against Wells Fargo…

    The Judge says he now wants to hold a Plenary Hearing regarding the issues of Robo-signers …

    and he scheduled it for June 21, 2011 .

    WF attorneys were fuming mad ….

    The Judge is saying that maybe we need to get some depositions or something, but I want to make sure there are no robo-signing going on here.

    Now I’m just a union construction worker who builds casinos in Atlantic City … I’m not sure how to prepare for this … I don’t know what to expect.

    I’ve done a great job so far , but this Judge is tough, he’s spent years siding with the lenders, but he knows I’ve presented valid issues… and that I have the State Supreme Court Chief Justice Rabner on my side , who ordered that the 6 worst banks involved in robo-signing show cause why NJ shouldn’t dismiss all of their pending cases…

    I’ve already insinuated in my papers that I was going to forward this case to the Judges who issued the show cause order , to show them that Wells Fargo hasn’t corrected a damn thing.

    Now how do I prepare for this Plenary hearing?

    What if they bring in a WF employee to give a deposition ?

    How do I know what to expect ??

    Should I file some discovery motion?

    Should I subpeona the robo-signers ?

    Thanks for any replies,

    DMF in NJ

  3. […] SEE 2-federal-judges-announce-multiple-lenders-with-the-same-original-note […]

  4. John,

    I can only tell what I know re CC default. I am Judgement proof in the sense that I have no assets, hence I decided to default on all my CC cards. I was not using them and in fact they were at their limits, I was not using them for a year and I was paying them. Then in 2008 the rates all went to around 30%. I paid for a year, I had decided to get of debt. And I started researching into money, debt, etc. I google searched everything, lawsuits regarding debt, FDCPA, Calif Rosenthal Act, Fed Reserve site, Money videos, read web of debt book, and so on. A simple google search on defaulting CC debt always comes up with they can sue you and if your debt is high enough they will, etc. I looked and looked to verify this. My conclusion came to that is really a scare tactic to keep one paying. I also found thru looking at contracts, UCC, secured debt vs unsecured debt, etc that one has no contract with a debt buyer. But, if you start communicating with the collection company why that becomes an implied contract and now they have grounds, hence I do not communicate with the several collection companies sending me collection letters. I ignore phone calls and I do not write them validation letters. I do not know, so far only letters I receive, home phone is off the hook. I just put letters in my drawer.
    What I learned is that the credit card company will start calling after first month missed. Then more calls and some letters stating we can help, you are two months behind. The window is 6 months. Around the 4 or 5th month they will send a letter offering you a discount. So you can call them and either take the offer or try for bigger discount. Or ignore them all together. Then after 6 months you are sold to a collection company who pays pennies on the dollar. Collection company now sends letters/phone calls and they offer discount as well. But, remember the Credit Card company wrote off the debt from their books or cash flow into some ABS. The debt buyer simply bought something and now hopes you will pay for it. In this case they bought debt. My view is why should I pay for something they bought, I do not owe them money as they did not lend me money. The credit card company got their default insurance so they are whole. The credit card company, which is a business and/or public company now views me as a bad customer so they do not want to do business with me, see it’s all business, and I do not wish to do business with them.
    So it is going on 2 years now since I defaulted. I have had several collection companies sell the debt between themselves, each time the amount they pay is less and less. It’s probably down to .001 cents on the dollar. There are a ton of collection companies, and debts are sold in packages. They go for the low hanging fruit and make as much as possible as soon as possible off people who do not know. Calif statue of limitions is 4 years so I have two to go, my credit score is 500. I pay all cash. I bank at credit union. I would switch banks before you default. I also keep some money in the credit union but I keep most cash at my own bank, my home, and I add to it weekly as I earn money.
    If at anytime somebody tries to sue me, I file bankruptcy on all of the defaulted cards. I have default on $40k. My wife $100K. Me its been two years, her 1 year. I don’t know, so far nothing.
    Funny thing is I get credit card offers in the mail all the time. It’s a numbers game. So there you have our economy 40% is financial. All these companies chasing paper, debits and credits, balancing books, etc.
    Dudes of the powers that be, where’s the real products in the “economy”? Every year the real products get less and less and the fake products of money, debts, yields on investment, etc get more and more.

  5. @John Gault

    link to debt valid letter:

    You’ll have to edit it.

  6. Here’s a link to a yeah-hoo article on Mers. It’s not written from our perspective, however. It is informative as to the 22.00 in recording fees the members saved to help destroy our economy.

    MERS: Tracking Loans Electronically.

  7. Not multiple lenders — just insurance fraud — and record keeping cover up.

  8. @cubed2k
    Write a debt validation letter please, post at scribd.com, and link it here. Thanks
    I’ll do the same with letters for judges.
    Wait to link it here for a ‘buzz’ article here.

  9. I just made a painful decision. A credit card co. with whom I have NEVER been late just raised my rate to 30%. I’m not paying it. I may give the bums their principle, but I am not paying 30%.

  10. @hkcon That is a sad tale of woe. You can either file a rule 59 motion for reconsideration (w/in 10 days) or I guess you could file an action in the state court.. Wish I could be more helpful. I am actually horrified by what your judge said and his refusal to look at evidence. But, I’m not a lawyer. It is all those procedural things that trip us up. And judges like yours , of course.

  11. cubed2k – good idea!

  12. Abbey,

    I read that ruling by the Judge in your link. Page 28,29,30 – the Chase guy couldn’t answer the Judge’s questions on who owned the Note. Unbelievable. Should the folks now file for Quiet title. There’s the court deposition with Chase admitting they don’t know?

  13. oh by the way that was in CA northern district

  14. I was recently incourt on a motion for relief and the judge expressly said that his granting of the motion (to the bank) would not preclude me from filing in state court, that all my rights were intact. he did not want to entertain any standing issue whatsoever, would not even look at the letter from the sec of state (new york) saying that no entity or corp or trust bearing the name of blah blah blah ever existed. I also honesteade my house in the bk and did not reaffirm, exempted it, and disputed the security. I am now 6 mos. in the bk with no discharge, a releif from stay granted and a sale date of 03/14/11







  16. I forgot to mention on my last post, it is

    The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act in Section 15 809


  17. @John,

    I think everybody that has a loan, whether it be mortgage, car, student, credit card, store, etc. should write a debt validation letter. Even if one is current or in default. If lots of folks did this it would gum up the works a bit. Some interesting responses will be had since all these things are securitized as well in ABS.

  18. Neil,

    I think all of us need to stop evading the question:

    Was there really ever a loan as alleged? I think it is just mind conditioning over the course of 2 centuries.

    And, is the homeowners really the borrower or would it be more appropriate to say that the bank is THE BORROWER and used the homeowners INVESTORS [CREDITOR] to obtain the SIGNATURE AND funds which THE BANKS milked the public for TO OBTAIN MONEY FROM the Fed Reserve; who in turn, would graciously provide the fiat money that was not worth the paper its printed on?

    I believe that many of these Judges hearing these court cases know that the homeowners are the CREDITORS and NOT THE DEBTORS OF THE ALLEGED SO CALLED “LOAN”! Yet, they continue to whine about the tender rule neglecting their duties because they say the homeowners “owe” the money when nothing could be further from the truth! The fraudulent mortgage contract or deed of trust only says so. It doesn’t make it true just because something in writing says it to be so! We know only too well the DOTs are WRITTEN IN FRAUD through the FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE OF LANGUAGE USED TO DUPE AND DECEIVE THE SIGNER-HOMEOWNER-PURCHASER SO WALL STREET CAN REAP ON THE FIAT MONEY FOR THEIR CORPORATIONS.

    That makes these judges conspiratorial liars and part of the RICO conspiracy along with other members of the U.S. Congress who approved $780 Billion $$’s in bail out money for Wall Street without the permission of the American taxpayers.

    The truth is that if we search to find the answers to this very reasonable question–YOU will probably arrive with the same conclusion I did and your answer would emphatically be: “NO! !! there was never a loan!” as these pretender lenders would like us to believe and making false claims to the courts.

    Therefore, if there was never a loan from someone who only alleges there was one–how can these judges say “if you can’t pay” “you can’t stay [inside your home]”? And, then hinder and thwart a Trial by Jury which is EVERYONE’S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT BEFORE THEY ARE DISPOSSESSED OF SHELTER AND INVESTMENT ETC.?

    And, shame on the coward Judges for continuing to live this lie in their courtrooms. They won’t fix it because these Judges who probably have no moral conscience by ordering to throw families out to the streets have (by majority) personal investments attached to the Wall Street crooks!

    It’s all over the news. Don’t these Judges get it that they are hurting themselves when they hurt the people?

    The defense lawyers need to start questioning the personal knowledge the foreclosure mill lawyers have about the case (about their client being in default when they were not). Besides, how can homeowners actually default on money that actually belongs to them and serves as their entitlement to claim as they wish with it because it had been granted them by U.S. dot gov CORPORATION?

  19. If two federal bankruptcy judges(Moe and Larry waiting for Curly to say “I GOT IT”) can sit on the bench and not have a clue as to why there would be more than one entity claiming ownership of the note, they are not only complicit to the fraud, the are accomplices to the fraud. As one of your readers states, and as I have also, all they have to do is follow the law as it has been written.

  20. Any information on what legal strategies are bearing fruit for the homeowners in non-judicial states? Specifically how to positon before foreclosure (NOD) to give yourself a chance to have the proceedings redirected into a judicial setting.

    As Dylan Ratigan recently stated on his show, the fact that no one has gone to jail yet behind this pervasive, intentional fraud speaks volume to the notion that we are purportedly a nation of laws.

    Our standing in the world will never improve unless these crimes are prosecuted as they should be. If we don’t rest assured GOD’s wrath will!

    Peace and Blessing to all who labor for justice!

  21. First of all, I believe the existing laws protect homeowners WHEN THEY ARE ARGUED AND APPLIED PROPERLY. The problem is that we the people are not trained in properly arguing and demanding that existing law be applied and enforced properly.
    From what I have seen, judges may issue mandates for their own courtrooms. Judge Grossman did. So have others. Judges can essentially say to the pretenders, “Don’t even think about coming into my courtroom without x, y, and z.”. They can do this because showing up with x, y, and z is actually the law as it is today, right now.
    We’re going to have to get there, that is, to be able to articulate our own cases, I think. There just aren’t enough attorneys to go around. (Who’d have ever thought you’d hear that?)
    In the meantime, YOU and I need to write every judge in our jurisdictions and tell them what we expect them to do: follow the law. Send them letters, send them anything which appropriately expresses our unhappiness with decisions being made which are not based on an appropriate application of the laws and rules. ” I believe in the proper application of the law and as to foreclosures, I don’t believe this is done in your courtroom. I am not kindle. I am a voter.” Only say this to judges whom you feel have not ruled properly.
    We can be our own lobbyists for the cost of a few stamps. The names and addresses of judges can be found at the courts’ websites. Wouldn’t it be great if all courts got thousands of letters in the next week?

    As Patrick Henry said, “Why sit thee here idle? What would the gentlemen have? Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!”

    We are economic prisoners.
    We didn’t start the fire – they did.
    We were unwittingly used as kindle to burn all but a few. They’d like to keep the fire going. Not.
    Wall Street and its cronies plundered and looted and used and abused and have demoralized an entire citizenry. Congratulations, you traitors. We’re going to save our homes and right after that, we want you in jail. Jail first is good, too. We are ultimately going to lose if we don’t all stand up. They will use their clout and any trick they can to see to it. Taking 20 minutes to write a letter, copy it, and mail out copies that our voting voices are heard loud and clear is somewhere to start.
    Let’s write to the judges, write our legislators. No, we dont want to, but it has to be done. Remember, the pen is mightier than the sword, and we are the voters. Do it now! Yes, me and yes, YOU. Post an I wrote the letter.
    And if you live in AZ, check out attorney Findson’s website while you’re at it.

  22. MERS Hires Lobbyists and Lawyers to Kill Arizona SB 1259 ( from Findsen Law Website)

    The bill passed through the Senate Republican caucus yesterday. MERS has reportedly retained Tri-Advocates, a division of Squire Sanders law firm to kill our bill, SB 1259, on Monday. Why are they so afraid of truth telling? A foreclosing party should be legally authorized. It should be easy to come up with a summary of transfers that must have already occurred at foreclosure, for the conveyances of real property interests in the deeds of trust to be legal. I’m glad that we’ve had an opportunity to create new jobs for lobbyists in Arizona but SB 1259 should pass. It’s a no brainer for Arizona citizens who oppose the theft of houses, and support transparency.

  23. Ha HA HA !

    Use the powerful MERS fraud-detection tools to detect a borrower’s undisclosed liens. Through functionality built into the MERS® System, lenders can verify a borrower’s property information on a mortgage application and determine if he or she has obtained other mortgages secured by the same property, or is a borrower on an undisclosed number of mortgage loans—two scenarios that might indicate fraudulent activity.

    For MERS members and subscribers, the MERS® System and MERS® Link offer tools to support both pre-funding and post-funding fraud detection audits. By searching on the borrower’s name, social security number or the property address, these tools can assist in the identification of undisclosed liens and multiple loans per borrower or property. Members can also perform similar searches via an XML system-to-system interface.

    For the general public, MERS® ServicerID is a fast and free tool that identifies the servicer of any loan registered on the MERS® System.

    MERS continues to collaborate with existing data providers to bring more tools and services to our members and the public in the prevention and detection of fraud

  24. More crap from MERS:

    MERS for Homeowners

    Welcome to MERS for Homeowners
    What is MERS?
    What is a servicer?
    How can I find out the identity of my servicer?
    Why do I need to know the identity of my servicer?
    Where can I get more information on my loan or the basics of obtaining a mortgage?
    How do I inform MERS that my personal information is inaccurate on a MERS system?
    FAQs On Disputing Your Personal Information


    While MERS primarily provides services to mortgage companies, we also offer an important benefit to homeowners—we keep track of the identity of Servicers that registered loans on our system.


    The servicer is YOUR mortgage company. It is the company that handles the day-to-day tasks associated with managing your loan. Their duties include but are not limited to:

    Collecting and remitting loan payments
    Responding to borrower inquiries
    Making advances when required
    Accounting for principal and interest
    Holding funds for payment of property taxes and hazard insurance (also called Managing your escrow account)
    Making any physical inspections of the property
    Counseling delinquent mortgagors
    Supervising foreclosures and property dispositions in case of defaults
    After your mortgage loan closed, your lender more than likely outsourced the job of managing your loan to another company called a SERVICER. This is the company you call when you have questions about your loan.


    MERS can help! You may:

    Dial the toll-free MERS® Servicer Identification System at 888-679-6377, an automated touch-tone system, or
    Access MERS® Servicer ID, a free web-based system.
    Before calling or accessing the website above, please have the following information ready:

    The property’s mortgage identification number (MIN), or
    The borrower’s name and social security number, or
    The property address

    There are three reasons why you must always keep track of the identity of your Servicer:

    Your Servicer is responsible for handling any questions you have about your mortgage loan. Payoff amount? Contact them. Taxes and hazard insurance? They should have that information too. Check your payment booklet. Do you see a toll-free number you can call or a website you can access?
    Your Servicer is also responsible for collecting your payment. To avoid late fees and potential fraud, make sure you are sending your payment to the correct Servicer.
    If you are unable to make the payments on your mortgage and wish to negotiate the terms of your loan, you may only do so with your Servicer. Contrary to popular belief, it is your Servicer and not the lender that can negotiate the terms of the loan with you.



    “Federal courts enjoy the sole power to interpret the law”



  26. Leapfrog: Mr. Hultman has been the target of my blogs and research for a long time. I think he’s a rat and has been ‘less than candid’ with courts on numerous occasions. I hope he doesn’t give up being the MERS’ officer being deposed and signing those bs declarations because his bs is so easily outed. I am guessing it is his appt of a particular law firm and an alleged business relative of Countrywide as signing officers for MERS that done ‘im in with his own company.

  27. Yes but a hearing on motion for relief from stay is a limited venue and cannot encompass some issues. It’s not a lawsuit, per se – it is a motion’s hearing in a bk case. As such, from the hip, I don’t believe a granted motion for relief from stay is res judicata. If it’s granted, I think a borrower would still be free to file a suit in the state court to contest the actual foreclosure. The hair I’m splitting is the difference between the limited forum of a motions hearing and an actual suit. The alternative, of course, is to file an adversary proceeding in the bk court prior to the motion being granted.
    Perhaps one of your more learned readers would deign to comment on this.
    One of the mistakes borrowers are making on their bk petition is listing the da– servicer on the
    schedules. List the lender as “unknown” and maybe even disputed. Then make sure you have filed a homestead on your home – you should do this, anyway, before you file bk. Actually, I would do it, bk or not. List the homestead exemption on your schedule. Look up the homestead statutes in your state. It’s easy. Just google
    “your state homestead statutes”, or like if you live in Nebraska, say, try ‘NRS homesteads”, or Arizona try ‘ARS homesteads’. Keep googling til you get it. The R is revised and the S stands for statutes. I’m not a lawyer. This is not a substitute for legal advice.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: