MERS and Fannie Mae sue Short Sale Seller and Buyer

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION ANALYSIS – CLICK HERE

Licensed Real Estate Agent

Camarillo, CA

July 04, 2011

OMG! Just when you think you’ve seen it all, along comes a new horror story that makes the thought of doing short sales even more disgusting than before!!

Because of our intense hatred of all banks (BofA and Chase head the top of the list) we decided to stop doing short sales, and most conventional real estate transaction last summer and have been buying and flipping properties instead!

The last short sale we did was one we were referred to in October of 2009 (no good deed goes unpunished!!). The client (Tom) had recently lost his job due to downsizing and, to make matters worse, his mother had been diagnosed with a life threatening disease. There was no way we could turn this opportunity down to assist him so we took the listing on his one bedroom condo in southern California. He had purchase it in 2007 for $224K and we figured the current value was about $125K. We put it on the market and got an offer for $130K within a couple of weeks! Tom moved out of state to assist his mother in her remaining days on earth and we were happy to have an offer. After 5 months of negotiating with BofA (loan servicer) with 2 different negotiators, we finally got approval for a sale price of $123k!! (First negotiator said it was worth $180K!!!- Surprise)!

We closed the deal in April, 2010 and both the Seller and Buyer were ecstatic! All was right with the world!

Fast forward to July 2011! Last week, we received a document from our Seller that he had received. Are you sitting down? It was a LAW SUIT on behalf of MERS and Fannie Mae (Plaintiffs) against the Seller and Buyer (Defendants) and a possible 23 other defendants, (Does) who are at this point unnamed!

The Law Suit maintains that: ————“The Substitution of Trustee and Full Reconveyance on the County records which purports to reconvey MERS’s interest in the property is a mistake and was not properly prepared or recorded by ReconTrust. An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Plaintiffs and Defendants concerning their respective rights and duties in that Plaintiffs contend that the Substitution of Trustee and Full Reconveyance is a mistake and, therefore, of no force or effect which should be stricken from the public records and that Fannie Mae’s Deed of Trust is valid and enforceable.!”

WTF!!!! I thought that the movie Too Big To Fail was unbelievable but this is ABSOLUTELY INCREDIBLE!!! Here is MERS (those bastards who were identified on 60 minutes as putting phony signatures on thousands of mortgage documents) maintaining that Recon Trust (not a party to the suit) MADE A FRIGGIN MISTAKE? They did not properly prepare or record the reconveyance of the loan!!!

To top it off, the scum sucking lawyers (and I apologize to any scum out there that may be offended by the comparison) have filed a LIS PENDENS on the property such that the new buyer could not sell the property if she wanted to!!!!!

This lawsuit FAILS to mention that monetary consideration of $123K was ACCEPTED by BofA for the purchase of the property!!

I have to stop because my blood pressure is getting dangerously high!!!!

Has anyone EVER seen this before!!! I suspect that Fannie and MERS are probably putting these lawsuits out en masse in the hope that- WHAT- they get the property BACK so they can sell it now for $89K?

ABSOLUTELY AMAZING!!!!

59 Responses

  1. @Jo La @
    sounds like you are a realtor maybe so perhaps you might see some logic in this expplanation of some instances. [Iv seen some nasty looking spec purchasers of junk housing that walk on the debt—-this is plainly bad policy because it drives up prices without real market value supporting those prices]

    Lets say that a originator/securoitizer broker teams up with a local realtor to put a kid in a overpriced house while looking the other way on income etc–maybe kid is a drug dealer —etc

    then sucks in another arms length buyer at a high price with promise of really good financing and appreciation etc

    now you have 2 comps in the neighborhood—and can go solicit refis to people—low interest rates–maybe 1% teaser for a year–like credit cards were doing at the time————you induce the homeowners who were happy to dive into a pool that you know as a realtor is only one foot deep

    who is at fault–well all of course but your buddy the broker picked up the phone and called that homeowner and convinced them to take a loan that the broker knew was too much—that the rate would reset much higher than expected and that the teaser was only 20 days not 365 and would immediately put the homeowner in subprime status because he immediately will accrue negative amortization

    now who is most at fault—the homeowner who did not know she was swimming with sharks in her backyard pool—-the broker who is now rich and retired—the originator that sold the loan for a 15% premium because they knew the rates were much higher than the homeowner expected—-or the investor who bought the mbs using professional advisers who were either bought off or just stupid?–or the professional advisor?

    or the investment bankers that put it all together to bilk investors using homeowners who likely were also the investors through some pension trust—-i would agree kick the women and children in the streets because dad got suckered—just as soon as you take away the ill gotten gains from the intermediaries and put em in jail –but for some reason we just never get past kicking the women and children in the streets

    at least until the taxes no longer come in and the sheriffs and judges get laid off –then im not sure what happens–are you?

  2. @Christine:

    The reinstatement described seems to resurrect the persons’ liability on extinguished notes, along with the mortgages. So if I understand correctly, the banks have aleady taken possession of these peoples’ homes, with waivers of rights, possibly even confidentiality agreements which deprive the people of free speach— under inducements of cancellation of indebtedness. Now then, like a nightmare, the servicers are back, already in possession of the homes–possibly having already sold those homes —and want to re-establish the right to seek recovery of the entire face of the note–not just the deficiency. So $$$ in the pocket—homeowner with nothing—–and now come back again to torture these people and obtain a judgment that can be sold to a 3rd party and then pursued fpor 5-10 years?

    They probably justify this action on the basis of their own sloppy—perhaps even fraudulent production of false documents —-to re-open and extend the pain and suffering of these people by dint of the negligent and/or intentional or gross misfeasance. It seems a fairly obvious tort—the negligence of the bank through its agents and or joint-venturers is inflicting emotional distress along with whatever is happening on the credit and job impairment side. It takes ones breath away—-thoughts like estoppel, motion for summary judgment on the issue of negligence and causation seem to lie. The only issue to be determined seems the amount of damages that the servicers owe to the victims here. Apart from the tool of the abuse–the filing of legal documents used as a cudgel to brutalize these people.

    Am I missing something here?

    Is this the servicers’ view of repentant conduct?
    This is the result of aggressive AG and govt investigation?

  3. Yeah, but…. old or new news, this says to me that had B of A done a foreclosure instead of a short sell, the homeowner would be facing a claim from FNMA and I’m not even going to mention those other yahoos. Odd FNMA didn’t name B of A.

  4. The headline for that story was very misleading. If we take the facts pled as true, there was no “payment in full” by those homeowners…

  5. The insanity and sloppiness of the banks continues…

    Mortgage Reincarnation After Payment in Full: Financial “Services” Industry Revokes Satisfactions of Mortgages
    http://ning.it/kU5UfKWell, watch out New York! Look here (h/t Alina)

    This is the legal notice that Chase has filed. It states there are over 400 satisfactions that they want expunged. Hearing on July 25, 2011 at 11:00 am.

    Excerpt:

    Through inadvertence and error, a Satisfaction of Mortgage for each of the mortgages listed in Exhibit “B” was executed by the Plaintiff, and was recorded in the SUFFOLK County Clerk’s Office. A Schedule of these Satisfactions of Mortgage is annexed hereto as Exhibit “C”. SEVENTH: That the mortgages listed in Exhibit “B” given by defendants have not been paid in full and should not have been satisfied.

    The satisfactions listed on Exhibit “C” are erroneous. EIGHTH: Plaintiff requests that the Satisfactions of Mortgage referenced in Exhibit “C” be expunged, vacated and cancelled of record pursuant to New York Real Property Law Section 329; as if they were never recorded and that the mortgages referenced therein on Exhibit “B” and all subsequent references to said mortgages in the SUFFOLK County Records be reinstated as if said Satisfactions were never recorded and that the rights of the Plaintiff, its predecessors and successors and/or assigns, pursuant to said mortgages be restored, all in the interest of equity.NINTH: That the Plaintiff is now the sole, true and lawful owner of each of the notes and mortgages securing the same and there are no pending proceedings at law or otherwise to collect or enforce said notes and mortgages. TENTH: That Plaintiff advised each of the defendants listed on Schedule “A” of this matter and an original letter informing the defendants that:”Chase recently became aware that the lien on your existing Chase mortgage loan was inadvertently releases. While we believe that the entire debt is still secured by a mortgage on your property, we are taking steps to correct the public land records and to restore the released lien on your mortgage in the records of the county clerk’s office.
    LEGAL NOTICE
    SUMMONS AND NOTICE OF OBJECT OF ACTION STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK CHASE HOME FINANCE LLC, a/k/a Chase Manhattan Bank a/k/a Chase Manhattan Bank, NA a/k/a The Chase Manhattan Bank a/k/a Chase Home Mortgage Corporation a/k/a JP Morgan Chase Banka/k/a JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA a/k/a Chemical Bank Plaintiff, vs.GEORGE M ACKERSON, Et, Al. Defendant(s). INDEX NO.: 15300/07

    TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT: You are hereby summoned to answer the Complaint in this action, and to serve a copy of your answer, or, if the Complaint is not served with this Summons, to serve a notice of appearance, on the Plaintiff(s) attorney(s) within twenty days after the service of this Summons, exclusive of the day of service (or within 30 days after the service is complete if this Summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York). In case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the Complaint.The Attorney for Plaintiff has an office for business in the County of Erie.Trial to be held in the County of Suffolk.The basis of the venue designated above is the location of the Mortgaged Premises.Dated this 20th day of June, 2011,Steven J. Baum, P.C. Attorney(s) For Plaintiff(s) 220 Northpointe Parkway Suite G Amherst, NY 14228 TO:GEORGE M ACKERSON, GAIL R. ACKERSON, JAMES ALBANESE, ANGELA RAMIREZ,THOMAS C. AUGUSTOWSKI JR,BRETT BACHMAN, JANET BACHMAN,SHARON LYNN DAFFNER aka SHARON BAKES,THOMAS H. BALACKI, SUZANNE L. BALACKI, JESUS M BARDEGUEZ, JOANNE BARDEGUEZ,STEVEN BAUVER, ROBIN BAUVER, DONALD BERMAN, ROBERTA BERMAN META BERNSTEIN, ERIC P BIAGI, SUZETTE BIAGI, PATRICIA BOCK, JOSEPH BOCK, CRAIG D. BOEHNER, FREDERICK BOSSERT, MADELEINE BOSSERT, JOHN P BRADLEY, ROSA BRADLEY, PETER BRANCIFORTE, BONNIE BRESALIER, SCOTT M. BRESALIER, JOSEPH J BRESLIN, CHERYL M. BRESLIN, EDWARD A. BROWN, ANN MARIE BROWN, DOUGLAS P. BROWNE, KAREN K. BROWNE, MONA BRYAN, KENNETH BRYAN, RICHARD W. BUCKHEIT, DIANA L. BUCKHEIT, EREC B. BURGESS, ANN V. BURGESS, SCOTT BURNBAUM, JEAN BURNBAUM, JANE D CAHILL, JOSEPH B CALANDRINO, DENISE CALANDRINO, GEORGE M CAMPBELL, KERRY A. CAMPBELL, ANTHONY S. CAPRI, LISA M. CAPRI, MANMIT CHADHA aka MANMIT S CHADHA, NAVELLA CHADHA, DIANA CLEMENTE, RAYMOND COCCIA, ARLENE COCCIA, IRVIN COLON, INEZ A. COLON, ROBERT P COMBA, ANNMARIE COMBA, THOMAS A COOK, PATRICIA L. COOK, JOSEPHINE COREY, GEORGE R CORNELL, DONNA L. D’ANDREA, LYNN A CORSO, SCOTT L CORWIN, ELIZABETH CORWIN, LYNDA A. COSTELLO, DEBRA S CRANE, DONNA A CULLEN, JOHN G. CULLEN, RICHARD A DANZIG, MICHELLE DAVI, JOHN P. DAVI JR, WILLIAM J DAVIS IV, MICHELLE DAVIS, JAMES DOUGHERTY, PATRICIA DOUGHERTY, ROBERT C DROMERHAUSER, MARY K. DROMERHAUSER, ROBERT A DUNN, MARLA BECKER DUNN, TERRY DURHAM, VALERIA BRYANT, WILLIAM M DYMOND, ROSEMARIE DYMOND, JOHN EHRHART, DAWN EHRHART, MARK S ELUTO, BARBARA EULTO, JOHN ERICSON HEYKE IV, HERBERT ERNEST, IRENE ERNEST, ANTHONY S FARRINGTON, KATHERINE FARRINGTON, CYNTHIA A FIORE, DAVID FORLANO DDS, KAREN FORLANO, PAULA A FRANCIS, BERNARD FRANCIS, RICHARD J. FRANKLIN, JOANNE FRANKLIN, MICHAEL FRIEDMAN, EILEEN FRIEDMAN, RIINA FRIEDRICH, ALFONSO FRIERSON III, SCOTT O FRYCEK, DANIELLE FRYCEK, NICHOLAS A GAMASTA, JAMES A. GANNON, KAREN A. GANNON, THOMAS A GARGIULO, JEANNE GARGIULO, ALVIN R GAY, SHEILA GAY, PHILIP P. GEHA, LINDA H. GEHA, JUNE GERMANN, MATTHEW GERMANN, NICHOLAS GIODANO, RUSSELL GIUFFRIDA, CHRISTINA GIUFFRIDA, NICHOLAS GIURICICH, HELEN GIURICICH, ALBERT A GLUTZ, BRENDA SHELLEY GLUTZ, DENNIS GORDON, ELIZABETH GORDON, TIMOTHY P GOSS, PATRICIA J. GOSS, THOMAS GRABOW, SAMANTHA GRABOW, M. PERRY GRANT, LARS GUSTAFSON, JILL GUSTAFSON, WILLIAM J HACKETT, MADELAINE D. HACKET, CHARLES HARKIN, DEBRA HARMON, DEAN K HEARN, SONYA L. HEARN, DONALD R HEHIR JR, LAURA E. HEHIR, ROBERT D HELLER III, DENEEN HELLER, DAVID W. HERNANDEZ, ROBERT E. HERRMANN, SUSANNA F. BUTLER, KATHY HIN, RUSSELL L HIRSCHHORN, JILL S. HIRSCHHORN, ROBERT HOLDEN, JOANNE HOLDEN, ELEANOR HOSEK, JOHN A. HOSEK, TREVOR HOUGH, KIM HURST-HOUGH, SUZANNE HOVA, STANLEY JERYGA, MARA LAUVA, SHAUN JOHNSON, LOWELL E. JONES, DEBORAH GRIFFIN JONES, RUTH A JURUSIK aka RUTH A JURUSIK, CHESTER JURUSIK, PRASAD KAMBHAMPATY, RAMA KAMBHAMPATY, FREDERICK KAMERER, CAROL KAMERER, RASHID KAREEM, STEVEN J KARPOWICZ, DONALD KEARNS, ELIZABETH H. KEARNS, KEITH M. KELSKEY, SHARON K. KELSKEY, ROBERT E. KIFER, LINDA KIFER, BRIAN J. KLETCHKA, NOELLE C. KLETCHKA, VOLKMAN KOEHLER, HEIDI KOEHLER, DAVID JACOB KRAUS, BARRY N. KREISWIRTH, STACY KREISWIRTH, SALVATORE J LA SCALA, FRANK LANDRIO, NICOLE LANDRIO, PAUL LASCALA, CHRISTOPHER P LAWLOR, DESPINA EVANGEL LAWLOR, CAROLINE R INGRAM ak/a CAROLINE R. LAZZARUOLO, CHRISTINE LEBCI, MAHMET LEBCI, GERALD G LEIBOWITZ, HEIDI LEIBOWITZ, NIR LEVY, KAREN LEVY, DANIEL R LONG, JOANNE LONG, ROBERT LYONS, ALAN MACCARY, VIVIAN M. MAHL, SUSAN L MALLON, JOHN MALONE, MAUREEN MALONE, GLENN W. MANDLER, PETER S. MATTIACE, DANIEL P MCCARTHY, CHRISTINA MCCARTHY, SHARON ANN MCCOBB, BRIAN MCCURDY, ELIZABETH DUANE MCCURDY, SCOTT MCLEAN, GINA E. MCLEAN, NEIL F. MCNEIL, KAREN MCNEIL, DENNIS J MCWILLIAMS, ELLEN MCWILLIAMS, VIRGILIO MENDOZA, FLORENCIA D. MENDOZA, SHARON D. MERCER, ALLEN K. MERRILL aka ALLEN MERRILL, GWENDOLYN MERRILL, RANDALL F MICHAELS, CAROLYN K. MICHAELS, ROBERT J. MILLER, ANNE J MILNE, JACOB OJITO, MARY B MINKOFF, WARREN J. MOLINO, MARIE A MONGIARDO, JOHN P MONTGOMERY, KAREN M. MONTGOMERY, ROBERT A. NEGRIN, WILLIAM H. HORNSBY, ROY P NEMERSON, LISA L. NEMERSON, JOHN T NEWTON, CATHALENE NEWTON, MARTIN NIERENBERG, ROSEMARY NIERENBERG, FAUSTO M NUNEZ, JUANA NUNEZ, KEVIN O’BRIEN, JOYCE O’BRIEN, LUIS ORE, LINDA DEPINTO, JOYCE A PALAZZOLO, FRANK PALAZZO, VINCENT A. PECORARO, LOIS S. PECORARO, MICHAEL T PELLERITO, LISA M. PELLERITO, ALBERT W. PENCE, SUSANNA MILLER-PENCE, STEPHEN J PERCIBALLI, DENISE L. PERCIBALLI, FRANK PIRRI, PATRICK E. POOLE, IGINA POOLE, VINCENT B. PRAINITO, KATHLEEN J. PRAINITO, CHRISTOPHER B PULITANO, DEBORAH A. PULITANO, RICHARD QUIGG, BARBARA A. QUIGG, NEIL B RANALDO, VICTORIA JOHNIDES, GREGORY REFF, ROBERT A REICH, JAMES REILLY, TINA REILLY, RICHARD RITTER, DIANE RITTER, ROBERT ROBERTO, DEBRA A. ROBERTO, MATTHEW RODRIGUEZ, KAREN RODRIGUEZ, JOHN ROMANO, MARIE ROMANO, ROBERT RUGGIERO, JOAN RUGGIERO, JOHN RUSSELL, MICHELE POLIDORO-RUSSELL, RONALD D. RUTH, LINDA RUTH, EDUARDO SANCHEZ, SANTOS LEONOR SANCHEZ, FRANCES M. FOWLES, EDWARD J. FOWLES, FRANCIE L. FOWLES nka FRANCIE L. SANTANA DONNA SANZERI, LISA WILD, ANTHONY SCALICE, DONNA ELAYNA MARKIEWICZ, JOSEPH SCHENK III, ELINA MONTICCIOLO SCHENK, LOUIS SCHIAVETTA, PATRICIA SCHIAVETTA, DAVID M. SCHIFF, ARTHUR J SCHLESINGER, NAOMI J. SCHLESINGER, LARRY S. SCHRAM, JODI SCHRAM, BENSON J SCHULTZ, SUSAN SCHULTZ, ROBERT S. SCHWARTZ, DIANE SCHWARTZ, NEAL D SCHWEITZER, SUSAN SEIFF SCHWEITZER, KEVIN P SHAY, MARIE J. SHAY, JEROME SHIMONY, MARTELLE SHIMONY, BRUCE D. SIEGEL, LAURA SIKORSKI, LORENZO J. BRIEBA, LAURA SILVERSTEIN, STEVEN SILVERSTEIN, ADAM C. SIWEK, JOAN SIWEK, GERARD SMALDINO, JENNIE A. SMALDINO, SUNIL SOOD, PHILIP O SPAMPINATO, IRA SPERLING, JULIE SPERLING, JAMES J SPIEGEL, BARBARA SPIEGEL, CHRISTOPHER J. STELMACH, LISA M. STELMACH, JEFFREY T. STERN, SHARON M. STERN, CONSTANTINE STEWART, CRISTINA P. ROXAS, PEPITO R. ROXAS, ROBERT S STRAUB, ROCHELLE STRAUB, JAMES M STUREK JR, REGINA STUREK, KEVIN M. SWEENEY, CYNTHIA SCHOOK, SWEENEY, EUGENE R TEAGUE, CHRISTINE E. TEAGUE, ROBERT F THIERWECHTER II, DOROTHY D. THIERWECHTER, ROBERT J TREUBERT, VERONICA TREUBERT, LAWRENCE M. UHRLASS, JAMES A. UNGER, SUSAN L. UNGER, HECTOR T URGARRIZA, KENNETH T VANBELL, DANA C. VANBELL, ANGELO A. VANELLA, HEATHER SCOPO, PHILIP A VARCA SR, KATHLEEN VARCA, SANDRA VEERAPEN, SHARON M. VELTRE, JENNIFER LENCINA, SEBASTIANO VITELLI, JR., LAURIE A. VITELLI, CHARLES P WAHRHEIT, PATRICIA ANN C. WAHRHEIT, CHRISTOPHER WALKLEY, NANCY WALKLEY, WILLIAM K. WALSH, KATHLEEN A. WALSH, KURT WASSERMAN, AMANDA MEYERS, JEAN A WELLER, WILLIAM WELLER, JOHN J. WHALEN III, RICHARD WHITMAN, KATHLEEN WILEY, MICHAEL WILEY, THORNDIKE WILLIAMS JR, MARK WILLIAMSON, COLLETTE WILLIAMSON, RICHARD J. WISNIEWSKI, KELLY A. WISNIEWSKI, DAVID WOLMETZ, CAROLYN STEINMAN, HOSSEIN YAJADDA, SORAYA ZABIHI, JEFFREY D ZELENKA, BARBARA A. ZELEN, KALARRY ZINGER, SABRINA ZINGER, ANDREW ZLOTNICK, OLIVIA CASSIN, ALESSANDRO CASSIN, JOHN DOE (Said name being fictitious, it being the intention of plaintiff to designate any and all occupants of premises being foreclosed herein, and any parties, corporations or entities, if any, having or claiming an interest or lien upon the mortgaged premises.), Defendant(s) In this Action.The foregoing Summons is served upon you by publication, pursuant to an order of HON. PETER FOX COHALAN of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, dated the 8th day of JUNE, 2011 and filed with the Complaint in the Office of the Suffolk County Clerk, in the City of Riverhead. ORDERED, that this unopposed motion by the Plaintiff, Chase Home Finance LLC et al., to reform certain land records within the Suffolk County Clerk’s Office and expunge the erroneously filed satisfactions of mortgages on some 400 or so named defendants is hereby granted to the extent that the Court will conduct a hearing on July 25, 2011 at 11:00 a.m. to personally hear from any aggrieved defendants who oppose the application to withdraw the alleged erroneous mortgage satisfaction filed. The plaintiff allegedly filed a numerous number of satisfactions of mortgages with the Suffolk County Clerk and is now by this application attempting to undo its error. The defendants number in the hundreds and therefore service of papers on these defendants seems impractical except as those where service pursuant to CPLR § 308 was accomplished. Therefore, it is Ordered That the plaintiff file the above captioned action for one (1) day in both Long Island Newsday and in a local official paper in each of the 10 Towns of Suffolk County noticing the application to expunge the erroneously filed satisfactions of mortgages and advising of the date and place of the hearing before this Court on July 25, 2011 at 11:00. The plaintiff will provide proof of filing with the Court on the date of the hearing of publication in Newsday and one of the official town newspapers for each of the ten (10) towns of Suffolk County on Long Island, New York; and it is further ORDERED, that any defendant wishing to be heard by the Court may appear, either by an attorney or on his/her own behalf on the scheduled hearing date, for purposes of being heard as to why an Order should not be granted expunging the appearing defendant’s own satisfaction of mortgage which was allegedly recorded erroneously in the Suffolk County Clerk’s Office, and for an Order granting any other relief requested in the plaintiff’s complaint; and it is further ORDERED that for all defendants purportedly served with a copy of the summons and complaint by personal service pursuant to CPLR § 308 (1) or (2), the plaintiff shall promptly serve upon those defendants a copy of this Order by first class mail, and shall promptly thereafter file the affidavits of service with the Suffolk County Clerk; and it is further ORDERED that for all defendants purportedly served with a copy of the summons and complaint by CPLR § 308 (1) or (2), the plaintiff shall promptly serve upon those defendants a copy of this Order and a copy of the summons and complaint by personal service pursuant to CPLR § 308 (1) , (2) or (4), and shall promptly thereafter file the affidavits of service with the Suffolk County Clerk; and it is further Upon proper service on those defendants appearing and of the publication of the hearing and if there is no opposition, the Court will sign an order provided by the plaintiff expunging the erroneously filed satisfactions of mortgage as to the defendants named in the caption. The plaintiff is directed to serve a copy of this Court’s order on the Suffolk County Clerk’s office within thirty days of receipt of a copy of this order as well as on the Court’s Calendar Clerk to ensure proper calendar entry on the Court’s hearing calendar for July 25, 2011 at 11:00 a.m.The foregoing constitutes the decision of the Court. STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT : COUNTY OF SUFFOLK CHASE HOME FINANCE LLC, a/k/a Chase Manhattan Bank a/k/a Chase Manhattan Bank, NA a/k/a The Chase Manhattan Bank a/k/a Chase Home Mortgage Corporation a/k/a JP Morgan Chase Banka/k/a JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA a/k/a Chemical Bank Plaintiff, vs.GEORGE M ACKERSON, GAIL R. ACKERSON, JAMES ALBANESE, ANGELA RAMIREZ,THOMAS C. AUGUSTOWSKI JR, BRETT BACHMAN, JANET BACHMAN,SHARON LYNN DAFFNER aka SHARON BAKES,THOMAS H. BALACKI, SUZANNE L. BALACKI, JESUS M BARDEGUEZ, JOANNE BARDEGUEZ,STEVEN BAUVER, ROBIN BAUVER, DONALD BERMAN, ROBERTA BERMAN META BERNSTEIN, ERIC P BIAGI, SUZETTE BIAGI, PATRICIA BOCK, JOSEPH BOCK, CRAIG D. BOEHNER, FREDERICK BOSSERT, MADELEINE BOSSERT, JOHN P BRADLEY, ROSA BRADLEY, PETER BRANCIFORTE, BONNIE BRESALIER, SCOTT M. BRESALIER, JOSEPH J BRESLIN, CHERYL M. BRESLIN, EDWARD A. BROWN, ANN MARIE BROWN, DOUGLAS P. BROWNE, KAREN K. BROWNE, MONA BRYAN, KENNETH BRYAN, RICHARD W. BUCKHEIT, DIANA L. BUCKHEIT, EREC B. BURGESS, ANN V. BURGESS, SCOTT BURNBAUM, JEAN BURNBAUM, JANE D CAHILL, JOSEPH B CALANDRINO, DENISE CALANDRINO, GEORGE M CAMPBELL, KERRY A. CAMPBELL, ANTHONY S. CAPRI, LISA M. CAPRI, MANMIT CHADHA aka MANMIT S CHADHA, NAVELLA CHADHA, DIANA CLEMENTE, RAYMOND COCCIA, ARLENE COCCIA, IRVIN COLON, INEZ A. COLON, ROBERT P COMBA, ANNMARIE COMBA, THOMAS A COOK, PATRICIA L. COOK, JOSEPHINE COREY, GEORGE R CORNELL, DONNA L. D’ANDREA, LYNN A CORSO, SCOTT L CORWIN, ELIZABETH CORWIN, LYNDA A. COSTELLO, DEBRA S CRANE, DONNA A CULLEN, JOHN G. CULLEN, RICHARD A DANZIG, MICHELLE DAVI, JOHN P. DAVI JR, WILLIAM J DAVIS IV, MICHELLE DAVIS, JAMES DOUGHERTY, PATRICIA DOUGHERTY, ROBERT C DROMERHAUSER, MARY K. DROMERHAUSER, ROBERT A DUNN, MARLA BECKER DUNN, TERRY DURHAM, VALERIA BRYANT, WILLIAM M DYMOND, ROSEMARIE DYMOND, JOHN EHRHART, DAWN EHRHART, MARK S ELUTO, BARBARA EULTO, JOHN ERICSON HEYKE IV, HERBERT ERNEST, IRENE ERNEST, ANTHONY S FARRINGTON, KATHERINE FARRINGTON, CYNTHIA A FIORE, DAVID FORLANO DDS, KAREN FORLANO, PAULA A FRANCIS, BERNARD FRANCIS, RICHARD J. FRANKLIN, JOANNE FRANKLIN, MICHAEL FRIEDMAN, EILEEN FRIEDMAN, RIINA FRIEDRICH, ALFONSO FRIERSON III, SCOTT O FRYCEK, DANIELLE FRYCEK, NICHOLAS A GAMASTA, JAMES A. GANNON, KAREN A. GANNON, THOMAS A GARGIULO, JEANNE GARGIULO, ALVIN R GAY, SHEILA GAY, PHILIP P. GEHA, LINDA H. GEHA, JUNE GERMANN, MATTHEW GERMANN, NICHOLAS GIODANO, RUSSELL GIUFFRIDA, CHRISTINA GIUFFRIDA, NICHOLAS GIURICICH, HELEN GIURICICH, ALBERT A GLUTZ, BRENDA SHELLEY GLUTZ, DENNIS GORDON, ELIZABETH GORDON, TIMOTHY P GOSS, PATRICIA J. GOSS, THOMAS GRABOW, SAMANTHA GRABOW, M. PERRY GRANT, LARS GUSTAFSON, JILL GUSTAFSON, WILLIAM J HACKETT, MADELAINE D. HACKET, CHARLES HARKIN, DEBRA HARMON, DEAN K HEARN, SONYA L. HEARN, DONALD R HEHIR JR, LAURA E. HEHIR, ROBERT D HELLER III, DENEEN HELLER, DAVID W. HERNANDEZ, ROBERT E. HERRMANN, SUSANNA F. BUTLER, KATHY HIN, RUSSELL L HIRSCHHORN, JILL S. HIRSCHHORN, ROBERT HOLDEN, JOANNE HOLDEN, ELEANOR HOSEK, JOHN A.
    HOSEK, TREVOR HOUGH, KIM HURST-HOUGH, SUZANNE HOVA, STANLEY JERYGA, MARA LAUVA, SHAUN JOHNSON, LOWELL E. JONES, DEBORAH GRIFFIN JONES, RUTH A JURUSIK aka RUTH A JURUSIK, CHESTER JURUSIK, PRASAD KAMBHAMPATY, RAMA KAMBHAMPATY, FREDERICK KAMERER, CAROL KAMERER, RASHID KAREEM, STEVEN J KARPOWICZ, DONALD KEARNS, ELIZABETH H. KEARNS, KEITH M. KELSKEY, SHARON K. KELSKEY, ROBERT E. KIFER, LINDA KIFER, BRIAN J. KLETCHKA, NOELLE C. KLETCHKA, VOLKMAN KOEHLER, HEIDI KOEHLER, DAVID JACOB KRAUS, BARRY N. KREISWIRTH, STACY KREISWIRTH, SALVATORE J LA SCALA, FRANK LANDRIO, NICOLE LANDRIO, PAUL LASCALA, CHRISTOPHER P LAWLOR, DESPINA EVANGEL LAWLOR, CAROLINE R INGRAM ak/a CAROLINE R. LAZZARUOLO, CHRISTINE LEBCI, MAHMET LEBCI, GERALD G LEIBOWITZ, HEIDI LEIBOWITZ, NIR LEVY, KAREN LEVY, DANIEL R LONG, JOANNE LONG, ROBERT LYONS, ALAN MACCARY, VIVIAN M. MAHL, SUSAN L MALLON, JOHN MALONE, MAUREEN MALONE, GLENN W. MANDLER, PETER S. MATTIACE, DANIEL P MCCARTHY, CHRISTINA MCCARTHY, SHARON ANN MCCOBB, BRIAN MCCURDY, ELIZABETH DUANE MCCURDY, SCOTT MCLEAN, GINA E. MCLEAN, NEIL F. MCNEIL, KAREN MCNEIL, DENNIS J MCWILLIAMS, ELLEN MCWILLIAMS, VIRGILIO MENDOZA, FLORENCIA D. MENDOZA, SHARON D. MERCER, ALLEN K. MERRILL aka ALLEN MERRILL, GWENDOLYN MERRILL, RANDALL F MICHAELS, CAROLYN K. MICHAELS, ROBERT J. MILLER, ANNE J MILNE, JACOB OJITO, MARY B MINKOFF, WARREN J. MOLINO, MARIE A MONGIARDO, JOHN P MONTGOMERY, KAREN M. MONTGOMERY, ROBERT A. NEGRIN, WILLIAM H. HORNSBY, ROY P NEMERSON, LISA L. NEMERSON, JOHN T NEWTON, CATHALENE NEWTON, MARTIN NIERENBERG, ROSEMARY NIERENBERG, FAUSTO M NUNEZ, JUANA NUNEZ, KEVIN O’BRIEN, JOYCE O’BRIEN, LUIS ORE, LINDA DEPINTO, JOYCE A PALAZZOLO, FRANK PALAZZO, VINCENT A. PECORARO, LOIS S. PECORARO, MICHAEL T PELLERITO, LISA M. PELLERITO, ALBERT W. PENCE, SUSANNA MILLER-PENCE, STEPHEN J PERCIBALLI, DENISE L. PERCIBALLI, FRANK PIRRI, PATRICK E. POOLE, IGINA POOLE, VINCENT B.
    PRAINITO, KATHLEEN J. PRAINITO, CHRISTOPHER B PULITANO, DEBORAH A. PULITANO, RICHARD QUIGG, BARBARA A. QUIGG, NEIL B RANALDO, VICTORIA JOHNIDES, GREGORY REFF, ROBERT A REICH, JAMES REILLY, TINA REILLY, RICHARD RITTER, DIANE RITTER, ROBERT ROBERTO, DEBRA A. ROBERTO, MATTHEW RODRIGUEZ, KAREN RODRIGUEZ, JOHN ROMANO, MARIE ROMANO, ROBERT RUGGIERO, JOAN RUGGIERO, JOHN RUSSELL, MICHELE POLIDORO-RUSSELL, RONALD D. RUTH, LINDA RUTH, EDUARDO SANCHEZ, SANTOS LEONOR SANCHEZ, FRANCES M. FOWLES, EDWARD J. FOWLES, FRANCIE L. FOWLES nka FRANCIE L. SANTANA DONNA SANZERI, LISA WILD, ANTHONY SCALICE, DONNA ELAYNA MARKIEWICZ, JOSEPH SCHENK III, ELINA MONTICCIOLO SCHENK, LOUIS SCHIAVETTA, PATRICIA SCHIAVETTA, DAVID M. SCHIFF, ARTHUR J SCHLESINGER, NAOMI J. SCHLESINGER, LARRY S. SCHRAM, JODI SCHRAM, BENSON J SCHULTZ, SUSAN SCHULTZ, ROBERT S. SCHWARTZ, DIANE SCHWARTZ, NEAL D SCHWEITZER, SUSAN SEIFF SCHWEITZER, KEVIN P SHAY, MARIE J. SHAY, JEROME SHIMONY, MARTELLE SHIMONY, BRUCE D. SIEGEL, LAURA SIKORSKI, LORENZO J. BRIEBA, LAURA SILVERSTEIN, STEVEN SILVERSTEIN, ADAM C. SIWEK, JOAN SIWEK, GERARD SMALDINO, JENNIE A. SMALDINO, SUNIL SOOD, PHILIP O SPAMPINATO, IRA SPERLING, JULIE SPERLING, JAMES J SPIEGEL, BARBARA SPIEGEL, CHRISTOPHER J. STELMACH, LISA M. STELMACH, JEFFREY T. STERN, SHARON M. STERN, CONSTANTINE STEWART, CRISTINA P. ROXAS, PEPITO R. ROXAS, ROBERT S STRAUB, ROCHELLE STRAUB, JAMES M STUREK JR, REGINA STUREK, KEVIN M. SWEENEY, CYNTHIA SCHOOK, SWEENEY, EUGENE R TEAGUE, CHRISTINE E. TEAGUE, ROBERT F THIERWECHTER II, DOROTHY D. THIERWECHTER, ROBERT J TREUBERT, VERONICA TREUBERT, LAWRENCE M. UHRLASS, JAMES A. UNGER, SUSAN L. UNGER, HECTOR T URGARRIZA, KENNETH T VANBELL, DANA C. VANBELL, ANGELO A. VANELLA, HEATHER SCOPO, PHILIP A VARCA SR, KATHLEEN VARCA, SANDRA VEERAPEN, SHARON M. VELTRE, JENNIFER LENCINA, SEBASTIANO VITELLI, JR., LAURIE A. VITELLI, CHARLES P WAHRHEIT, PATRICIA ANN C. WAHRHEIT, CHRISTOPHER WALKLEY, NANCY WALKLEY, WILLIAM K. WALSH, KATHLEEN A. WALSH, KURT WASSERMAN, AMANDA MEYERS, JEAN A WELLER, WILLIAM WELLER, JOHN J. WHALEN III, RICHARD WHITMAN, KATHLEEN WILEY, MICHAEL WILEY, THORNDIKE WILLIAMS JR, MARK WILLIAMSON, COLLETTE WILLIAMSON, RICHARD J. WISNIEWSKI, KELLY A. WISNIEWSKI, DAVID WOLMETZ, CAROLYN STEINMAN, HOSSEIN YAJADDA, SORAYA ZABIHI, JEFFREY D ZELENKA, BARBARA A. ZELEN, KALARRY ZINGER, SABRINA ZINGER, ANDREW ZLOTNICK, OLIVIA CASSIN, ALESSANDRO CASSIN JOHN DOE (Said name being fictitious, it being the intention of plaintiff to designate any an all occupants of premises being foreclosed herein, and any parties, corporations or entities, if any, having or claiming an interest or lien upon the mortgaged premises.) SUMMONS INDEX NO. 15300/07 ORIGINAL FILED WITH CLERK ON 5/18/07 to the above named defendants:YOU ARE HEREBY SUmMONED to answer the Complaint in the above entitled action and to serve a copy of your Answer on the plaintiff’s attorney within twenty (20) days after the service of this Summons, exclusive of the day of service, or within thirty (30) days after the completion of service where service is made in any other manner than by personal delivery within the State. The United States of America if designated as a defendant in this action, may answer or appear within sixty (60) days of service hereof. In case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the Complaint.SUFFOLK COUNTY is designated as the place of trial. The basis of the venue is the location of the mortgaged premises.DATED: May 7, 2007 Westbury, New York STEVEN J. BAUM, P.C. Attorney for Plaintiff 900 Merchants Concourse, Suite 412 Westbury, New York 11590 (716) 204-2400 STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT : COUNTY OF SUFFOLK CHASE HOME FINANCE LLC, a/k/a Chase Manhattan Bank a/k/a Chase Manhattan Bank, NA a/k/a The Chase Manhattan Bank a/k/a Chase Home Mortgage Corporation a/k/a JP Morgan Chase Banka/k/a JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA a/k/a Chemical Bank Plaintiff,vs.GEORGE M ACKERSON, GAIL R. ACKERSON, JAMES ALBANESE, ANGELA RAMIREZTHOMAS C. AUGUSTOWSKI JRBRETT BACHMAN, JANET BACHMANSHARON LYNN DAFFNER aka SHARON BAKESTHOMAS H. BALACKI, SUZANNE L. BALACKIJESUS M BARDEGUEZ, JOANNE BARDEGUEZSTEVEN BAUVER, ROBIN BAUVER DONALD BERMAN, ROBERTA BERMAN META BERNSTEIN, ERIC P BIAGI, SUZETTE BIAGI, PATRICIA BOCK, JOSEPH BOCK, CRAIG D. BOEHNER, FREDERICK BOSSERT, MADELEINE BOSSERT, JOHN P BRADLEY, ROSA BRADLEY, PETER BRANCIFORTE, BONNIE BRESALIER, SCOTT M. BRESALIER, JOSEPH J BRESLIN, CHERYL M. BRESLIN, EDWARD A. BROWN, ANN MARIE BROWN, DOUGLAS P. BROWNE, KAREN K. BROWNE, MONA BRYAN, KENNETH BRYAN, RICHARD W. BUCKHEIT, DIANA L. BUCKHEIT, EREC B. BURGESS, ANN V. BURGESS, SCOTT BURNBAUM, JEAN BURNBAUM, JANE D CAHILL, JOSEPH B CALANDRINO, DENISE CALANDRINO, GEORGE M CAMPBELL, KERRY A. CAMPBELL, ANTHONY S. CAPRI, LISA M. CAPRI, MANMIT CHADHA aka MANMIT S CHADHA, NAVELLA CHADHA, DIANA CLEMENTE, RAYMOND COCCIA, ARLENE COCCIA, IRVIN COLON, INEZ A. COLON, ROBERT P COMBA, ANNMARIE COMBA, THOMAS A COOK, PATRICIA L. COOK, JOSEPHINE COREY, GEORGE R CORNELL, DONNA L. D’ANDREA, LYNN A CORSO, SCOTT L CORWIN, ELIZABETH CORWIN, LYNDA A. COSTELLO, DEBRA S CRANE, DONNA A CULLEN, JOHN G. CULLEN, RICHARD A DANZIG, MICHELLE DAVI, JOHN P. DAVI JR, WILLIAM J DAVIS IV, MICHELLE DAVIS, JAMES DOUGHERTY, PATRICIA DOUGHERTY, ROBERT C DROMERHAUSER, MARY K. DROMERHAUSER, ROBERT A DUNN, MARLA BECKER DUNN, TERRY DURHAM, VALERIA BRYANT, WILLIAM M DYMOND, ROSEMARIE DYMOND, JOHN EHRHART, DAWN EHRHART, MARK S ELUTO, BARBARA EULTO, JOHN ERICSON HEYKE IV, HERBERT ERNEST, IRENE ERNEST, ANTHONY S FARRINGTON, KATHERINE FARRINGTON, CYNTHIA A FIORE, DAVID FORLANO DDS, KAREN FORLANO, PAULA A FRANCIS, BERNARD FRANCIS, RICHARD J. FRANKLIN, JOANNE FRANKLIN, MICHAEL FRIEDMAN, EILEEN FRIEDMAN, RIINA FRIEDRICH, ALFONSO FRIERSON III, SCOTT O FRYCEK, DANIELLE FRYCEK, NICHOLAS A GAMASTA, JAMES A. GANNON, KAREN A. GANNON, THOMAS A GARGIULO, JEANNE GARGIULO, ALVIN R GAY, SHEILA GAY, PHILIP P. GEHA, LINDA H. GEHA, JUNE GERMANN, MATTHEW GERMANN, NICHOLAS GIODANO, RUSSELL GIUFFRIDA, CHRISTINA GIUFFRIDA, NICHOLAS GIURICICH, HELEN GIURICICH, ALBERT A GLUTZ, BRENDA SHELLEY GLUTZ, DENNIS GORDON, ELIZABETH GORDON, TIMOTHY P GOSS, PATRICIA J. GOSS, THOMAS GRABOW, SAMANTHA GRABOW, M. PERRY GRANT, LARS GUSTAFSON, JILL GUSTAFSON, WILLIAM J HACKETT, MADELAINE D. HACKET, CHARLES HARKIN, DEBRA HARMON, DEAN K HEARN, SONYA L. HEARN, DONALD R HEHIR JR, LAURA E. HEHIR, ROBERT D HELLER III, DENEEN HELLER, DAVID W. HERNANDEZ, ROBERT E. HERRMANN, SUSANNA F. BUTLER, KATHY HIN, RUSSELL L HIRSCHHORN, JILL S. HIRSCHHORN, ROBERT HOLDEN, JOANNE HOLDEN, ELEANOR HOSEK, JOHN A. HOSEK, TREVOR HOUGH, KIM HURST-HOUGH, SUZANNE HOVA, STANLEY JERYGA, MARA LAUVA, SHAUN JOHNSON, LOWELL E. JONES, DEBORAH GRIFFIN JONES, RUTH A JURUSIK aka RUTH A JURUSIK, CHESTER JURUSIK, PRASAD KAMBHAMPATY, RAMA KAMBHAMPATY, FREDERICK KAMERER, CAROL KAMERER, RASHID KAREEM, STEVEN J KARPOWICZ, DONALD KEARNS, ELIZABETH H. KEARNS, KEITH M. KELSKEY, SHARON K. KELSKEY, ROBERT E. KIFER, LINDA KIFER, BRIAN J. KLETCHKA, NOELLE C. KLETCHKA, VOLKMAN KOEHLER, HEIDI KOEHLER, DAVID JACOB KRAUS, BARRY N. KREISWIRTH, STACY KREISWIRTH, SALVATORE J LA SCALA, FRANK LANDRIO, NICOLE LANDRIO, PAUL LASCALA, CHRISTOPHER P LAWLOR, DESPINA EVANGEL LAWLOR, CAROLINE R INGRAM ak/a CAROLINE R. LAZZARUOLO, CHRISTINE LEBCI, MAHMET LEBCI, GERALD G LEIBOWITZ, HEIDI LEIBOWITZ, NIR LEVY, KAREN LEVY, DANIEL R LONG, JOANNE LONG, ROBERT LYONS, ALAN MACCARY, VIVIAN M. MAHL, SUSAN L MALLON, JOHN MALONE, MAUREEN MALONE, GLENN W. MANDLER, PETER S. MATTIACE, DANIEL P MCCARTHY, CHRISTINA MCCARTHY, SHARON ANN MCCOBB, BRIAN MCCURDY, ELIZABETH DUANE MCCURDY, SCOTT MCLEAN, GINA E. MCLEAN, NEIL F. MCNEIL, KAREN MCNEIL, DENNIS J MCWILLIAMS, ELLEN MCWILLIAMS, VIRGILIO MENDOZA, FLORENCIA D. MENDOZA, SHARON D. MERCER, ALLEN K. MERRILL aka ALLEN MERRILL, GWENDOLYN MERRILL, RANDALL F MICHAELS, CAROLYN K. MICHAELS, ROBERT J. MILLER, ANNE J MILNE, JACOB OJITO, MARY B MINKOFF, WARREN J. MOLINO, MARIE A MONGIARDO, JOHN P MONTGOMERY, KAREN M. MONTGOMERY, ROBERT A. NEGRIN, WILLIAM H. HORNSBY, ROY P NEMERSON, LISA L. NEMERSON, JOHN T NEWTON, CATHALENE NEWTON, MARTIN NIERENBERG, ROSEMARY NIERENBERG, FAUSTO M NUNEZ, JUANA NUNEZ, KEVIN O’BRIEN, JOYCE O’BRIEN, LUIS ORE, LINDA DEPINTO, JOYCE A PALAZZOLO, FRANK PALAZZO, VINCENT A. PECORARO, LOIS S. PECORARO, MICHAEL T PELLERITO, LISA M. PELLERITO, ALBERT W. PENCE, SUSANNA MILLER-PENCE, STEPHEN J PERCIBALLI, DENISE L. PERCIBALLI, FRANK PIRRI, PATRICK E. POOLE, IGINA POOLE, VINCENT B. PRAINITO, KATHLEEN J. PRAINITO, CHRISTOPHER B PULITANO, DEBORAH A. PULITANO, RICHARD QUIGG, BARBARA A. QUIGG, NEIL B RANALDO, VICTORIA JOHNIDES, GREGORY REFF, ROBERT A REICH, JAMES REILLY, TINA REILLY, RICHARD RITTER, DIANE RITTER, ROBERT ROBERTO, DEBRA A. ROBERTO, MATTHEW RODRIGUEZ, KAREN RODRIGUEZ, JOHN ROMANO, MARIE ROMANO, ROBERT RUGGIERO, JOAN RUGGIERO, JOHN RUSSELL, MICHELE POLIDORO-RUSSELL, RONALD D. RUTH, LINDA RUTH, EDUARDO SANCHEZ, SANTOS LEONOR SANCHEZ, FRANCES M. FOWLES, EDWARD J. FOWLES, FRANCIE L. FOWLES nka FRANCIE L. SANTANA DONNA SANZERI, LISA WILD, ANTHONY SCALICE, DONNA ELAYNA MARKIEWICZ, JOSEPH SCHENK III, ELINA MONTICCIOLO SCHENK, LOUIS SCHIAVETTA, PATRICIA SCHIAVETTA, DAVID M. SCHIFF, ARTHUR J SCHLESINGER, NAOMI J. SCHLESINGER, LARRY S. SCHRAM, JODI SCHRAM, BENSON J SCHULTZ, SUSAN SCHULTZ, ROBERT S. SCHWARTZ, DIANE SCHWARTZ, NEAL D SCHWEITZER, SUSAN SEIFF SCHWEITZER, KEVIN P SHAY, MARIE J.
    SHAY, JEROME SHIMONY, MARTELLE SHIMONY, BRUCE D. SIEGEL, LAURA SIKORSKI, LORENZO J. BRIEBA, LAURA SILVERSTEIN, STEVEN SILVERSTEIN, ADAM C. SIWEK, JOAN SIWEK, GERARD SMALDINO, JENNIE A. SMALDINO, SUNIL SOOD, PHILIP O SPAMPINATO, IRA SPERLING, JULIE SPERLING, JAMES J SPIEGEL, BARBARA SPIEGEL, CHRISTOPHER J. STELMACH, LISA M. STELMACH, JEFFREY T. STERN, SHARON M. STERN, CONSTANTINE STEWART, CRISTINA P. ROXAS, PEPITO R. ROXAS, ROBERT S STRAUB, ROCHELLE STRAUB, JAMES M STUREK JR, REGINA STUREK, KEVIN M. SWEENEY, CYNTHIA SCHOOK, SWEENEY, EUGENE R TEAGUE, CHRISTINE E. TEAGUE, ROBERT F THIERWECHTER II, DOROTHY D. THIERWECHTER, ROBERT J TREUBERT, VERONICA TREUBERT, LAWRENCE M. UHRLASS, JAMES A. UNGER, SUSAN L. UNGER, HECTOR T URGARRIZA, KENNETH T VANBELL, DANA C. VANBELL, ANGELO A. VANELLA, HEATHER SCOPO, PHILIP A VARCA SR, KATHLEEN VARCA, SANDRA VEERAPEN, SHARON M. VELTRE, JENNIFER LENCINA, SEBASTIANO VITELLI, JR., LAURIE A. VITELLI, CHARLES P WAHRHEIT, PATRICIA ANN C. WAHRHEIT, CHRISTOPHER WALKLEY, NANCY WALKLEY, WILLIAM K. WALSH, KATHLEEN A. WALSH, KURT WASSERMAN, AMANDA MEYERS, JEAN A WELLER, WILLIAM WELLER, JOHN J. WHALEN III, RICHARD WHITMAN, KATHLEEN WILEY, MICHAEL WILEY, THORNDIKE WILLIAMS JR, MARK WILLIAMSON, COLLETTE WILLIAMSON, RICHARD J. WISNIEWSKI, KELLY A. WISNIEWSKI, DAVID WOLMETZ, CAROLYN STEINMAN, HOSSEIN YAJADDA, SORAYA ZABIHI, JEFFREY D ZELENKA, BARBARA A. ZELEN, KALARRY ZINGER, SABRINA ZINGER, ANDREW ZLOTNICK, OLIVIA CASSIN, ALESSANDRO CASSIN JOHN DOE (Said name being fictitious, it being the intention of plaintiff to designate any an all occupants of premises being foreclosed herein, and any parties, corporations or entities, if any, having or claiming an interest or lien upon the mortgaged premises.) Defendants. COMPLAINT INDEX NO. 15300/07 The Plaintiff herein by and through its attorneys STEVEN J. BAUM, P.C., complains of the defendants above named, and for its cause of action, alleges: FIRST: That the plaintiff herein was, and at all times hereinafter mentioned, is a banking corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Ohio, having its principal place of business located at 1 East Ohio Street, IN1-9033, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 SECOND:That at all times hereinafter mentioned, the defendants set forth in “Schedule A” reside at the address, set forth therein and are made defendants in this action because they are the current owners of the real property stated therein. THIRD: Each of the defendants for the purpose of obtaining from Plaintiff, a sum of money, duly executed and acknowledged a certain note, consolidated note and/or consolidation modification and extension agreement whereby they obligated themselves to the terms of repayment of said sums and rights of the lender. FOURTH: That as security for the payment of said indebtedness, a mortgage was executed, acknowledged and delivered to Plaintiff, whereby the defendants mortgaged the premises more particularly described in Exhibit “A” (hereinafter called “mortgaged premises”), under certain conditions with rights, duties and privileges between or among them. A schedule of the mortgages given by Plaintiff to Defendants is attached hereto as Exhibit “B”. FIFTH: That said mortgages were duly recorded in the SUFFOLK County Clerk’s Office, as indicated on Exhibit “B” and the mortgage tax due thereon was duly paid. SIXTH: Through inadvertence and error, a Satisfaction of Mortgage for each of the mortgages listed in Exhibit “B” was executed by the Plaintiff, and was recorded in the SUFFOLK County Clerk’s Office. A Schedule of these Satisfactions of Mortgage is annexed hereto as Exhibit “C”. SEVENTH: That the mortgages listed in Exhibit “B” given by defendants have not been paid in full and should not have been satisfied.
    The satisfactions listed on Exhibit “C” are erroneous. EIGHTH: Plaintiff requests that the Satisfactions of Mortgage referenced in Exhibit “C” be expunged, vacated and cancelled of record pursuant to New York Real Property Law Section 329; as if they were never recorded and that the mortgages referenced therein on Exhibit “B” and all subsequent references to said mortgages in the SUFFOLK County Records be reinstated as if said Satisfactions were never recorded and that the rights of the Plaintiff, its predecessors and successors and/or assigns, pursuant to said mortgages be restored, all in the interest of equity.NINTH: That the Plaintiff is now the sole, true and lawful owner of each of the notes and mortgages securing the same and there are no pending proceedings at law or otherwise to collect or enforce said notes and mortgages. TENTH: That Plaintiff advised each of the defendants listed on Schedule “A” of this matter and an original letter informing the defendants that:”Chase recently became aware that the lien on your existing Chase mortgage loan was inadvertently releases. While we believe that the entire debt is still secured by a mortgage on your property, we are taking steps to correct the public land records and to restore the released lien on your mortgage in the records of the county clerk’s office. A court may possibly require Chase to name you (and possibly other borrowers with the identical issue) in a legal action to correct the land records of the county clerk. If this occurs, you will receive notice of this action from a process server or by mail. This action will not seek money or any other relief from you, and will have no effect on your credit rating. Chase will be responsible for all costs of any action, and will pass non of these costs on to you.If you have any questions, please call (800) 965-4395. Chase is supplying this toll-free phone number to you and other borrowers for whom chase is filing a petition to restore its mortgage of record. This number will connect you with a Chase representative who is familiar with this matter and can respond to your questions.”A copy of said letter is attached hereto as Exhibit “D”. ELEVENTH: That as of the date of this Complaint Plaintiff has not received any negative reply to the letter referenced in paragraph Tenth or any requests of the Defendants not to proceed with this action.TWELFTH: That Schedules “A”, “B”, “C” and “D” are expressly incorporated and made a part of the Complaint for all purposes with the same force and effect as if they were completely and fully set forth herein whenever reference has been made to each or any of them.WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff requests an Order vacating and canceling the Satisfactions of Mortgage referenced in Exhibit “C” above be expunged, vacated and cancelled of record pursuant to New York Real Property Law Section 329 as if they were never recorded; and that the mortgages referenced therein on Exhibit “B” and all subsequent references to said mortgages in the SUFFOLK County Records be reinstated as if said Satisfactions were never recorded and that the rights of the Plaintiff, its predecessors and successors and/or assigns, pursuant to said mortgages be restored, all in the interest of equity.
    Dated: May 7, 2007 Westbury, New York DATED: June 20, 2011 Steven J. Baum, P.C.Attorney(s) For Plaintiff(s)220 Northpointe Parkway Suite G Amherst, NY 14228 The law firm of Steven J. Baum, P.C. and the attorneys whom it employs are debt collectors who are attempting to collect a debt. Any information obtained by them will be used for that purpose.

    8466-1T 7/7

    LEGAL NOTICE

    Notice of formation of 155 JULE POND DRIVE, LLC Arts. of Org. filed with the Sect’y of State of NY (SSNY) on 5/9/2011. Office location, County of Suffolk. SSNY has been designated as agent of the LLC upon whom process against it may be served. SSNY shall mail process to: c/o Jay P. Quartararo, Esq., PO Box 9398, Riverhead NY 11901. Purpose: any lawful act.
    8437-6T 6/9, 16, 23, 30; 7/7, 14

    LEGAL NOTICE
    ORDER FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS
    SURROGATE’S COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
    COUNTY OF SUFFOLK

    And people are still paying their mortgage, why?

  6. @Duane DeSalvo

    Would you please post the case and location–I would like to look at the grounds asserted to set aside the sale. or Email dcbreidenbach@aol.com

  7. What does it prove other than show who the named insured is. And it always includes the phrase “and its successors or assigns as their interests appear”…

  8. @tn … lots.

  9. ELIZABETH WARREN TRYING LIKE HELL:

    http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/14/news/economy/elizabeth_warren/index.htm

    “Warren has been working long hours to prepare the bureau for its new role, which will include such tasks as inspecting the books at the nation’s biggest banks that control most of the nation’s mortgages.
    Darrell Issa, the California Republican who chairs the committee, said the hearing was being held to ask “whether or not the American people can feel comfortable that what was envisioned in Dodd-Frank is indeed what they want” in a consumer bureau, he said at the beginning of the hearing.
    The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was created as a part of last year’s Dodd-Frank Act, which Congress passed to rewrite the financial rules of the road to prevent the next financial crisis.
    The bureau’s primary duty is to oversee financial products — such as mortgages and credit cards — and ensure they’re clear, understandable and don’t obscure hidden fees that consumers can’t figure out.
    But ever since Republicans took over the House at the start of the year, they’ve been focused on curbing and reversing powers of the consumer bureau, saying the new federal agency has too much power and lacks oversight.”

    Wow…the irony makes my head explode.

  10. @Nancy – are you referring to the Lenders Policy of TItle Insurance? What is that supposed to prove?

  11. Dear BSE:

    What you don’t have is ‘evidence’ and what is good evidence or you would have cause of action and/or affirmative defenses under contract law that a judge loves to sink their teeth into.

    For example, do you havde a copy of the ‘Title Company Policy’ that must remain active during this event as long as the loan is open until the REO Broker purchases the property on behalf of the temporary lender who is the REO Broker’s Parent.

    You need to be in the ‘good’ hands of a good litigator who knows the laws that would protect you. The same old is not working. Find the financial transactions that the court under contract law may find fault.
    Seek experts like paularush.com cloudedtitles.com who work with lawyers so you are not at the mercy of the court as a victim.

  12. I have seen many shortsales get sticky because the title company messed up on their end. I also have seen many shortsales go into foreclosures simply because their agent couldn’t find who truly owns the loan. But worst of all are those who make enough money, and are using a shortsale to leverage overpaying years earlier. Best was a man who made 8mil a year went to shortsale his home he bought for a million claiming he made no income. Well he just didn’t pay himself looking closer at his financials the money was there but he shifted how he got paid. Also I have an issue of people using shortsales to stay in their home longer to avoid foreclosures. It ills me some of these people have milked the system for 3 to 5 years when everyone else respectfully pays a mortgage or rent. In a perfect world I would like to see everyone who doesn’t pay there mortgage on time kicked out of their home after 4 months of none payment, teaching people to be more responsible.

  13. NancyDrewe

    Got the Luminaq report. Judge will not give me my day in court to prove the point. Using the best avaible atty out here. So far been shot down twice. Working on the third round I am nearly kicked out of the housse after 2 plus yrs of a hard fought battle. AZ courts cover the fraud. McCain does nothing but spend time blaming Mexicans or working on dollar deals in Iraq.
    If you are upside down in AZ, the force you to the streets..If is lawless out here..They expect home owners to be worse off than renters..So it is a strategic default better yet a strategic force out by AZ courts and banksters. Obama is full of $hit if you think he has a plan..He provides cover for the fraud and Wall Street abnksters.
    Call H.O.P.E – expect them to tell you to cut back on the food bill.
    Call H.A.M.P. – You will be .01% form qualification
    Call Consumer Credit Counsel – They will suggest free legal service on thier web sites…

    No help in site…Pay double for your home and pay for their crime or walk away destroy your credit and never think about home ownership again…

    F***K This country and it’s President …

  14. take your pills marco

  15. Another dirty short sale deal. Some brokers and realtors know exactly whats going on just like the mess that got us here. Now worse ex criminal mortgage brokers title clerks and whatever robo signers relived they have not gone to jail are back to work again. What happened here is that someone did not get theyre piece of the action kickback bribe or comission as realtors like to call it. Someone is letting know that probaly greed like always . OR SEX LOTS of people still belive all these sales are real and its the bank but no please learn a little bit more before comments are made just confusing the slow people.

  16. Dear tnharry,

    good to keep us all guessing

  17. tnharry—I think NancyDrewe is MSoliman is saveamericaone, etc…he has many names…

  18. That’s two different threads in one day Nancy – I can’t tell if you’re a shill for Luminaq or the cloudedtitles site

  19. Dear BSE,

    Luminaq report ‘which loan trust’ is your loan a revenue stream of… will allow you to become proactve. WHen you get the report contact cloudedtitles like I’ve done.

  20. @Everyone that STILL doesn’t “get it”:

    When you START with a LIE…EVERYTHING AFTER THE FACT IS A LIE…think Casey Anthony…

    America was GRANDLY MANIPULATED…AND WE ARE STILL BEING MANIPULATED…by Wall Street and the banks…and the government…

    WE ARE NOW LIVING IN THE “WILD WEST OF HOUSING” AS A RESULT…it’s every man/woman for himself/herself… with independent investigation of TRUTH…

    ‘Cause the “people in charge” ‘AINT TELLIN’ IT!!!

  21. so much conjecture caused by lack of facts. c’mon neil – the story’s 10 days old. surely there have been some new developments out there on it since it was first reported. and Gene – dual track is exactly what I was thinking. maybe all of the defendants are due to the property having a “busy” chain of title and the perceived need to name everyone and anyone as in a quiet title case.

  22. foreclosureinfosearch, on July 13, 2011 at 3:25 pm said:
    NEARLY EVERY FORECLOSURE YOU SEE WITH ANOTHER LESSER KNOWN NAME IS A RECOVERY DONE FOR RECOURSE PURPOSES. WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE REST OF THE FORECLOSURES ARE FOR A RECEIVER , YOU THEN UNDERSTAND THE REAL PARTY IN INTEREST IS ALWAYS HIDDEN.

    THUS THE REASON MERS WILL CONTINUE TO PROVIDE ITS WORTHLESS ADDED VALUE TO EACH FORECLOSURE AND TRANSFER WHILE PARTIES AVOID EVER RECORDING THE ASSIGNMENTS MERS HAS NO LEGAL RIGHT TO EXIST LIFE AFTER THE FORMATION OF THE ORIGINAL TRUST AND INITIAL DELIVERY

    MSOLIMAN

  23. Dear Gene.

    If the Court rules that the FDIC did not have the legal righ both the plaintiffs in error and defendants in error — would all of the transactions be undone?

    ‘ejectment’?

  24. Gene:

    “However, concerns about MERS’s right to foreclose are somewhat like maneuvering chairs around on the Titanic—given that MERS has announced that it intends to no longer do any foreclosing in its own name. On February 16, 2011, MERS proposed new rules that prohibit its members from initiating foreclosures in the name of MERS. (Freddie Mac has recently done the same, and Fannie Mae took the same position some time ago.) Thus, the Gomes decision upholds a procedure that soon will be obsolete.”

    http://www.rogerbernhardt.com/index.php/ceb-columns/152-challenges-to-california-foreclosures-based-on-mers-transfers

  25. Re: title insurance. I am looking at a “Special Warranty Deed (Not Statuatory)”signed by the VA on a home sold at a Sheriff’s sale. How is the buyer supposed to do all this checking. A statement at the bottom says “No title search was performed on the subject property by the the preparer”. “The preparer of this deed makes neither representation as to the status of the title……..nor any matter except the validity of the form of this instrument.” The preparer based info on information supplied by Grantor/Grantee and/or their agents; ….This is a CW/BAC f/c and I would imagine ReconTrust is involved as well. People buying homes at sheriff’s sales best be getting their own TI as the seller is releasing themselves of liability for clouded title.

  26. The more that I consider this case, the more likely that there was either a dual track foreclosure, or that Fannie did not approve of the Short Sale.

    If there was a dual track foreclosure, and the Trustee Sale occurred first, then why would there be 21 other defendents? I can see quite a few, but 21 seems a bit much.

    Also, would it not be easy to show that the Trustee Sale occurred prior to the Short Sale, therefore the Short Sale was void? Then, one would argue that the Substitution and Reconveyance were void.

    Even if Fannie did not approve the Short Sale, why are they going to such extremes? Did they believe that something was wrong with the Short Sale? Was the purchase price too low, in their opinion? Was it non-arms length? Do they believe some type of fraud existed?

    Imperfect information leads to too many questions……

  27. No sympathy here. No short sale is legal I believe, as the parties who agree simply have no rights to convey. Your a real estate agent, you should know this. Anyone who thought they could make a quick buck or get a bargain off someone else’s short-luck is in for a rude awakening. People are living in a house next door, that was short sale, and oh yes the “bank” approved it! A rep of Indymac said, it was golly good, the only problem was that Indymac had been out of existence for a month! People are swallowing the lies still hook line and sinker. Not a good time to buy, unless your title insurance company is owned by a relative, that will back your deal 100 percent.

  28. tnharry – FDIC is a shareowner of MERS. MERS only records transactions no money changes hands through MERS. The money specifically related to all MERS transactions changed hands between Temporary Lender to Settlement Agent. Settlement Agents ‘trust account’ to Borrower. Agency for all transactions related to ‘collateral’ in state property located governed by the Settlement Agent.

    The IL Supreme Case Law 1852 a friend ask me to look at last night. The discussion confusing but used in other cases as primary mandatory authority. I am not a lawyer and did not think about the fact you were discussing CA. Rather just interested inunderstanding how Plaintifs in error and Defendants in error can come back and take back property. I believe that is what this case discusses and found rather interesting.

    Discusses assignments and allonges and I don’t have access to tools that may bring into the light of day important knowledge to utilize. Sorry to bother you. You are a professional and I’m just a consumer. Thank you.

  29. @ tnharry,

    The volume is a little alarming (400 of em). How could that many erroneous releases, all involving Chase, and all in the same county have occurred?

    Then again, I am not in the industry so I suppose it is possible.

  30. Leapfrog,

    Read Gomes v Countrywide. That was a compelling CA 4th District case.

    With MERS, you have to look at Agency laws for the particular state. And now that the 4th Dist has confirmed the agency, until there are Appeals Court rulings in other districts in CA, the 4th would be the ruling that others would review for relevance. So far, since the 4th’s ruling, I have seen nothing that has come out in Appeals Court that would dispute it.

    Gomes, until it is overruled, or state Appeals Courts rule differently and the CA Supremes step in, is considered the controlling authority at the moment. And, it confirmed the Agency Relationship in CA.

    Federal Courts should now also consider it in any case.

    Furthermore, if you look at the Consent Decree by the OCC, it revealed that the OCC could act with regard to MERS because MERS was the agent for lenders and servicers.

    The OCC action could provide the basis for lenders to claim that the agency relationship was confirmed by the Federal Government, and that Federal Preemption also applied. Would not that make a “compelling argument”?

  31. As they used to say in the US Army, situation normal, all F—- up!
    or to paraphrase, there is the right way to do something, the wrong way and the mega bank way to do something. Some how it eventually gets done, you just have to be patient!

  32. Kickboxer: Yikes! Wonder if this same scenario could happen in a refi situation? I refied 3 times in 10 years and had Homecomings/MERS on the first one. Then a non-MERS on second (that I know of – MERS not on DOT). Then a defunct originator/CW/MERS.

  33. Here’s another “pet theory” for you:

    THE (FAKE/FRAUDULENT) LOAN WAS ILLEGAL FROM THE START.
    THE (FAKE/FRAUDULENT) LOAN WAS NEVER “TRANSFERRED” TO A (FAKE/FRAUDULENT) TRUST.

    Of course EVERYTHING that comes after that will be ROYALLY SCREWED UP.

    Our courts and our lives will be A NIGHTMARE for a very, very long time, thanks to the sociopathic materialists that “rule the world”…

  34. @kickboxer – those types of cases are actually quite common. I’ve been involved in several where the bank seeks to set aside a release recorded in error. It’s a fairly routine matter. Unless the borrower actually has reason to believe and can show that the mortgage was paid in full, it’s clearly a mistake and is set aside almost every time. With that said, I know I’m going to be pounded by comments that “all the mortgages have been paid by the bailouts” etc. But this was merely in response to that specific issue…

  35. Jan does make a very good point that I did not include. For whatever reason, Fannie is not happy with the short sale, and is trying this avenue to reverse the short sale.

    I believe that there is a major problem for Fannie. The actual auction does not appear to have occurred prior to a Trustee Sale occurring. If so, no Substitution would be required prior to the Short Sale.

    However, with the new owner, a Reconveyance and Substitution would be required since owners and Trustees have changed, and documents have changed.

    If the Short Sale was properly done, then it is a simple matter to correct the Reconveyance and Substitution. One simply executes new ones to replace the previous ones.

    Now, if as tnharry mentioned, a Trustee Sale had also occurred, then that might explain why Fannie would try to argue the documents were unlawful. Of course, to be effective, it would mean that the Trustee Sale had occurred prior to the Short Sale being completed.

    This is why without full information and documentation, it simply is not possible to come to actual conclusions. All one can do is to make “assumptions” and any conclusion would be dependent upon the “accuracy of the assumptions”.

  36. Have there been other lawsuits filed involving short sales?

    What do you all make of this:
    http://4closurefraud.org/2011/07/12/chase-to-400-new-yorkers-who-have-a-paid-off-home-in-suffolk-county-sorry-suckers-you-still-owe/

  37. I wonder if its superior court (Ventura county) or fed court? I did a little snooping on Ventura and didn’t come up with anything where FNMA or MERS was plaintiff. Not enough info to run through PACER. As for the comment on appellate courts here in CA upholding MERS, I know of only ONE in CA that has upheld MERS and that would be for that particular district only. Fed courts here in Nor Cal are not liking MERS. Glad to see Neil picked up this story. Sure would like to find out the case number though.

  38. tnharry,

    I have seen this many times with substitutions in CA, so it is most likely an error as you say, and that I also pointed out.

    It would not be likely that the home was foreclosed upon after the short sale, because then the homeowner would file the action against B of A and Freddie.

    What is frustrating is that so many people here start commenting and throwing out “ideas” that have no basis in fact to the case at hand. They react with their own “pet” theories.

  39. The descriptive of this suit seems to raise the issue of the implied authority of the servicer, BofA, to act on behalf of the principal claiming to hold the Note and Mortgage (the deed of trust), FNMA, which trust deed in turn is held by MERS under the “bare legal title” theory. The “settlement” seems to be between BofA and the buyer/seller, and to the exclusion of the other two entities. BofA accepted funds, yet it is not apparent that (1) either BofA had any authority to do so, or (2) in the alternative actually handed those funds over to FNMA as the owner of the Note. At this point, nobody knows.

    What seems to be the case, is that FNMA’s signature is absent on the short-sale agreement. So you end up with an agreement (“the contract”) between only the “servicer” BofA and the buyer/seller, apparently without reference to any other document that would establish a foundation for the proposition that BofA as servicer had the authority to bind the owner of the Note, FNMA. Meanwhile, to muddy the waters a bit more, the entity ReconTrust has, in its typical artful fashion, “created” documents and filed them on the Land Records.

    So now the apparent owner of the Note, FNMA, comes along and says in effect (as to BofA): “Who are these guys? Their job is to go collect interest money and pay the taxes. Nobody said anything about selling the property on which I have a Note.” And BofA presumably says or will say: “Hey, wait a minute, I have an indemnification agreement, if anyone wants to go after me, FNMA has to pay my legal fees and Judgment.” And the Buyer says: “Hey, I paid fair value for the property, so it should be mine.” To which somebody else will say: “Sorry, you did not sign with the owner of the Note, so maybe you have a claim on the property, but I have a claim also by trust deed, which makes me the owner until it is retired.”

    So it goes to Court and the Judge is some “old guy” of about 86 who has been in a mental fog for at least the last twenty years, and you actually expect him to sort this out? No chance. Whatever the result, it will be by caprice.

  40. Or another scenario is that they did the short sale and foreclosed anyway in error. It sounds much more likely that the appointment of trustee and reconveyance are being set aside not due to robo-signing or other nefarious acts but because they were conducted in error and stupidity. But again, we’re all guessing here since no one’s linked the case.

  41. Isn’t it time to do a proper evaluation of what is known?

    Here is what is known.

    1. The actual purchase was a Short Sale.

    2. Fannie held the loan, and took losses on the short sale.

    3. A safe assumption would be that the loan was in default, based upon the Substitution being executed.

    4. MERS and Fannie filed a lawsuit against the buyer and seller based upon a defective Substitution of Trustee and Reconveyance. 23 other parties were involved. A “safe assumption” was that Recon Trust, and B of A or Countrywide was involved as well. (CW, if CW was the original lender, and BAC/B of A doing the servicing.) (Notice how I identify assumptions, versus fact.)

    5. It is unknown what the defect in the Substitution was.

    6. There are only a few issues related to defective Substitutions of Trustees in CA. A Substitution may be defective due to:

    Issues related to the Notary.

    Issues related to who signed the Substitution.

    Lack of an Affidavit of Filing and Mailing being executed at the same time as the execution of the Substitution, if done concurrent with, or after filing of the Notice of Default.

    Substitution of Trustee recorded after the Trustee Sale had occurred.

    7. Analysis:

    a. Fannie believes that based upon one of the above reasons, the Substitution of Trustee is void. If void, then the Trustee Sale and Trustee Deed Upon Sale and Reconveyance were unlawful.

    8. Under CA law, 2934.5, for a Trustee Sale and Trustee Deed Upon Sale to be lawful, the Substitution of Trustee must occur prior to the Trustee Sale. Otherwise, the Sale is void.

    Furthermore, any defect in a Substitution of Trustee may either make the Substitution of Trustee void, or voidable. If void, then the Sale is unlawful. If voidable, then a Court would have to make the determination of whether the Substitution is actually void or voidable, and then corresponding remedies.

    We cannot make an adequate determination of what has occurred without access to the Substitution. Once it is available, then further analysis of the situation could be made.

    8. Comments:

    I have seen two issues with Substitutions arise within the last three weeks. One made the Substitution void, and the other may be void. This type of issue is actually more common than what would be expected.

    Now, for the MERS “haters”, since MERS is a participant in the action, it would suggest that there is no issue with MERS and the signing. In fact, in CA, the Appellant Courts have ruled that MERS has a legitimate “agency relationship” with lenders and servicers, so this would be off the table with regard to the above case.

    Likely, I suspect that the issue is related to when the Substitution was actually recorded, and if so, it was probably done after the Trustee Sale was executed. If so, this would void the Substitution without question.

  42. SETTLEMENT;
    I was told; that you can always make a settlement agreement that both parties are conceding something and the borrower requires indemnification by the party negotiating the settlement if another party seeks to come at you(borrower) later; ask for attorney fees to defend such action and for them to pay any judgment or liens.

    Spell out the reason you are agreeing to the short sale; I am agreeing to a short sale to avoid the timely and costly litigation process and agree to release all my claims against the Originator, Servicer and all other parties. In return The Servicer agrees to release the borrower of all liability of the Note, Mortgage, and deed of trust. Also, include language about the deficiency being forgiven and the party will file a Satisfaction document for the Note/Mortgage/Deed for the original documents. (ask the pretenders; “investor” or “Trust” to sign off too…they more than likely won’t)

    It is my understanding the Settlement agreement has to have a detailed reason of the history of the matter as well. Such as, we claimed our loan was sold and table funded and the note was never endorsed or assigned to the Trust and to avoid costly litigation to prove this matter, the borrower agrees to a settlement. This settlement is not an admission or concession to the borrowers claims, but is a release of those claims. The loan servicer, originator, and stated “owner” or “investor” should be mentioned in the document.

    AND for all that above, you agree to release all claims or future claims against the said property and agree to not raise any issues that would cloud the title at a later date, in return your are fore given any deficiency, future claims, future liability for the Note, Deed, Mortgage.

    You read about these big settlements before the case goes to trial or the party suing proves its case all the time…we all have the right to settle. This is not legal advice, just recapping what I have been told and trying to help others close this chapter. COMMENT ADDS APPRECIATED

  43. why would you cite an Illinois case from 1892 in a California court?

  44. Could they ‘possibly’ (the attorney’s) try to use 18th Century Law surrounding Ejectment? and Plaintiffs in error and Defendants in error? Fountain v. Bookstaver, 141 Ill. 461, 31 N.E. 17 (1892) This was an action of ejectment, in the court below, by plaintiffs in error, against defendants in error, to recover possession of lot

    There is no controversy as to the fact that immediately upon the making of this last indorsement Mary E. Bookstaver took possession of said lot under said mortgage, and has continued in possession thereof from that time to the bringing of this suit, and she set up said mortgage as a defense on the trial in the circuit court. Plaintiffs in error insist that defense is not available to her, first, because she has not shown such a title to the mortgage as entitles her to claim under it in this suit. In support of this position they say, the legal title to the mortgage indebtedness never passed to her by the said indorsements, because they were written on a slip of paper attached to the notes, and not on the notes themselves. Generally, an assignment of a negotiable instrument must be indorsed on the instrument, viz., written on the back of it, that being the meaning of the word “indorsement.” If, however, by reason of the number of indorsements, the back of the instrument is so covered as to make it necessary, “an extra piece of paper may be tacked or pasted on the instrument, and all future indorsements may be written on the attached paper.” (Tiedeman on Com. Paper, sec. 265; 1 Daniell on Neg. Inst. sec. 690.) It can not be seriously said there is no [*466] evidence in this record tending to bring the assignment in question within this exception to the general rule. It appears from the notes copied into the bill of exceptions, that many indorsements of payments of interest had been made upon them prior to the date of the assignment to the defendant, and that fact, in the absence of all proof to the contrary, is sufficient to warrant the conclusion that the backs of the notes were covered, and that the “allonge” or additional piece of paper [**18] was necessarily attached in order to make further indorsements on the same.

    The contention that the proof fails to establish the agency of Henry Golightly to make said assignment, is overcome by the evidence of Joseph Bookstaver, who testified that said Henry was the husband of Louisa, and that he made the assignment in pursuance of an agreement by the witness with her. Authority to an agent to execute or indorse a negotiable instrument may be given by parol, and no particular form of words is necessary for that purpose. 1 Daniell on Neg. Inst. 209.

    It is further contended that the indorsements on said notes did not amount to an assignment of the legal title to the mortgage, and therefore gave the defendant no right to the possession of said premises. It can not be denied that if the legal title to the notes passed to said Mary E. Bookstaver, she thereby became the equitable assignee of the mortgage. The rule has been often announced by this and other courts, that, the mortgage being a mere incident to the debt to secure which it is executed, whatever is sufficient to transfer the title to the debt will also transfer the interest of the mortgagee, and the mortgagee having assigned the mortgage debt, thereafter holds the mortgage for the benefit of the assignee of the debt. In this case it is shown that the mortgage was in the possession of the defendant, she offering it in evidence on the trial, together with the notes. Can she then, as the legal holder of the mortgage indebtedness and the equitable [*467] holder of the mortgage, being in the peaceable possession of the mortgaged premises, be dispossessed thereof by the grantees of the mortgagor, until the debt has been paid or otherwise legally extinguished? Plaintiffs in this action occupy no better position than would William Golightly were he prosecuting this suit. (Kruse v. Scripps, 11 Ill. 98; Taylor v. Adams, 115 id. 574.) Especially is this so since the defendant was in the peaceable possession of the mortgaged property long prior to the conveyance by the mortgagor, and neither the mortgagor nor the grantors of plaintiffs assumed to do more than convey their “interest” in the premises by quitclaim deeds. Had this action been brought against the mortgagee in possession, or one holding under him as tenant, the mortgage would have been a complete defense, as was held in Hall et al. v. Lance et al.25 Ill. 281, and Keil et al. v. Healey et al.84 id. 104, and this for the reason that ejectment can not be maintained against one lawfully in possession.

    It is difficult to see upon what principle the possession of an equitable assignee of a mortgage, when peaceably acquired, is less lawful than would be that of the mortgagee himself, or his tenant; and so it was held in Kilgour v. Gockley, 83 Ill. 109, that an “assignee of a mortgage, after condition broken, being in possession of the real estate mortgage, and also being the holder of the note secured by the mortgage, and the assignee thereof, can defend his possession under the mortgage, in ejectment brought by the mortgagor or those claiming under him.” It is true, in that case Justice DICKEY, in rendering the opinion of the court, speaks of the note and mortgage as each being assigned; but as we have already seen, a mortgage is as effectually assigned by a transfer of the mortgage indebtedness without any indorsement upon the mortgage as with it. In principle, Harper et al. v. Ely et al.70 Ill. 581, and Oldham et al. v. Pfleger, 84 id. 102, are to the same effect as Kilgour v. Gockley.

    [*468] It is further contended that the Statute of Limitations had run against the mortgage indebtedness, and therefore all right of possession to the mortgaged premises in the mortgagee, or his assignee, was at an end when the suit was brought. If this was an action by the holder of the mortgage to foreclose the same, or to obtain possession of the premises under it, there would be some question as to whether there is sufficient proof of payments on the mortgage indebtedness to prevent the bar of the statute; but if we are correct in our conclusion as to the rights of the defendant already in possession under the mortgage, no question of limitation is involved in the case. From what has already been said, it will be seen that Mary E. Bookstaver entered into possession in 1883, after condition broken, and before the Statute of Limitations had run against the indebtedness. By so doing she pursued one of the recognized modes under the law for the collection of the mortgage debt. She occupied the same position in that regard as an original mortgagee in possession, and “became liable to account for the rents and profits actually received or which by proper diligence she might have received, to be credited upon the indebtedness from year to year, first in extinguishment of the interest, and then of the principal.” (McConnel v. Holobush et al.11 Ill. 69.) Manifestly, while she was thus proceeding to collect the debt in a lawful manner no statute of limitations could run against her. She had the right to remain in possession until the debt was fully satisfied. Harper et al. v. Ely et al.70 Ill. 581; Keil et al. v. Healey et al.84 id. 104; Emory v. Keighan et al.88 id. 482.

    It is finally insisted that all rights of the defendant under said mortgage were terminated by a tender to her or her attorney of the balance due thereon, prior to the bringing of this suit. All that was shown by the evidence in that regard was, that a certain amount of money was offered to one of defendants’ attorneys as the amount remaining due on said notes, and that he refused to accept it. It is not even attempted [*469] to be shown, by computation or otherwise, that the amount so tendered was the full amount of the balance due on the mortgage indebtedness. Treating the defendant as entitled to the same rights in this action as a mortgagee in possession, an accounting between the parties as to the amount remaining due her, if anything, can not be settled in this action. 1 Jones on Mortgages, sec. 716; 3 Wait’s Actions and Defenses, p. 67; Adams on Ejectment, 106; Oldham et al. v. Pfleger, 84 Ill. 102.

    The judgment of the circuit court was right, and will be affirmed.

    Judgment affirmed.

  45. No we have not actually seen this but we knew it could happen and we have discussed this issue before, we have warned about buying foreclosed homes and short sales mainly in the context of title issues associated with properties with loans of origination during 2001 to 2009. The most important issue is the counter claims, file counter claims.

  46. TnHarry

    Fair enough. Just wondering which side of these controversies you typically represent . Doesn’t matter I suppose. I’m learning everyone here has an agenda

    That said, my ousting involved at the end the active and eager participation of a realestate agent and the Pretender lawyer who literally prodded and threatened local county functionaries into threatening to seize my personal property if I didn’t leave my farm.

    I’d like to send a little buckshot their way.

  47. I knew short sales were bad news, but this does take the cake. I knew over the long run that short sales would come back and bite people in the butt. Whoever said it is realtors, brokers and title insurance companies for the next wave of litigation–I have to agree.

  48. Why should these idiots who live on Capital Hill care about foreclosures. They use your tax dollars and live for free. What a scam ! Nothing but a cover up for the banks and Wall Street. It is time to wake up. Enough of the lip service. Why should I pay for my house and the foreclosure down the street. Any one upside down has 3 choices. Either (1) Continue to pay the dirty bastards that committed the fraud and voluntarily allow your money to be stolen by these dirty bastards, (2) Walk away and allow these dirty bastards to ruin your credit and then steal your house., (3) Stand up and fight the dirty bastards.It is time to make a choice – BE a PATRIOT and STOP your MORTGAGE PAYMENT
    They will do nothing until we take a stand, Shut down these dirty bastards !
    .

  49. Marie – I stand by my comment that “due diligence and title insurance will go a long way to providing security in transactions.” Doing a good title search and/or audit independent of your closing company’s search will arm you with knowledge to do the transaction and assume the risk or to walk away. For that matter, get an independent appraisal. Those two things would have been so useful for the people who are now complaining about fraud and collusion. These are voluntary transactions – arm yourself with knowledge and then walk away if you don’t like it. And the title insurance angle is there as backup if needed.

    I’ve been in a lot of cases where the real estate agent is added as a defendant, and the agent has gotten right back out of those cases for various reasons in 98% of them. Absent some direct involvement in actual fraud, the stack of paperwork signed with an agent gives them a lot of waivers. And frankly, the agents didn’t create the problem nor are they perpetuating it. I think it’s counterproductive to spread the attention around to so many. Readers of this site need to be focused in their message rather than going in so many directions at once. We know the bad guy is Indymac or BofA or Wells Fargo. While suing everyone under the sun brings more money to the mediation table, it does however water down your argument when your attention (and by necessity, that of the court) is so divided. This is directed specifically to the recent trend of posts encouraging going after the trustees, agents, law firms, etc. If you have a smoking gun and a clear “bad actor”, then the old line that less is more should apply.

  50. Tnharry

    With all due respect….

    That’s a nonresponse to the illumination of another potential morass.

    And just because your situation is idyllic doesn’t address the potential liability for possibly millions of others from various species of transfers. Unless that response was tongue in cheek, in which case you got me.

    But why should I care. My property was stolen; at least there’s little more for me to lose. Actually glad to know the pain will be shared by the outer rings of this criminal galaxy. Real estate agents: you’re next

  51. I suspect that suit is a mistake and will soon be withdrawn by the mortgage company. Does anyone have updated news or a cite to the case itself?

  52. You will want to make sure your E&O is up to date and your attorney is up to speed on these issues. Expect to be on the wrong side of litigation once and/if these and other clients discover that you had prior knowlege and did not disclose the potential for problems with obtaining clear title.

    This is one of the next waves of litigation we’re expecting to see pursued – going after real estate agents and brokers as well as title companies and their agents.

    Be very careful and be prepared.

  53. and really old news. this has been discussed in the comments several times already

  54. You are being Debbie Downer a little bit. My mortgage is neither a MERS deed of trust nor a securitzed mortgage. I’m not alone, but I admit I’m in a minority. There are still plenty of people not in the investor/holder mess. Lots more properties are completely without mortgages. This IS a mess, but it doesn’t quite warrant shooting oneself in the foot. Due diligence and title insurance will go a long way to providing security in transactions.

  55. The Foreclosure Rocket Docket, You Tell Me What The Numbers Mean….

    July 11th, 2011 · 12 Comments · Foreclosure

    If you’re reading this blog, I’m going to go way out on a limb and give you credit for being one of the smartest persons on your block. I think there’s a pretty good bet you’re far more in tune than a big portion of the population of zombies wandering around out there.

    And now, I want to ask for your input….your analysis. You are all bright people with many important professional and analytical skills…I want to know what you think these numbers mean…..

    I would like to share my opinions, my thoughts, my commentary, but. Well. I’m not. I can’t. I won’t. Unfortunately. But I’m very, very interested in what all of you think these numbers mean…..

    Please read, then log in and leave your comments for all the other readers to consider….

    Third Quarter of FY 2010-11 Status Report

    courreportcard
    http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Third-Quarter-of-FY-2010-11-Status-Report.pdf

    http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/courreportcard.pdf

    J. R. Homeowner // Jul 12, 2011 at 12:08 PM

    There is really only ONE number in all of that reporting that stands as a testament to the legacy of the “rocket dockets” in Florida.

    The total number of cases that went to trial in the 2010-2011 year reported.

    0.06 PERCENT!!

    THAT NUMBER is what the crafters of the rocket dockets are probably most perversely proud of, and it is that same shameful number that should horrify every citizen.

    Excuse me, I think I’m going to be sick now….

    Reply

    Matthew D. Weidner, Esq. // Jul 12, 2011 at 10:04 PM

    EXACTLY….THAT’S THE POINT!

    John // Jul 11, 2011 at 10:35 PM

    At first glance of the backlog, you could say that the court is clearing the cases. Which would then lead you to assume that foreclosures have peaked, and that things are getting better.

    But….”Type of Dispositions” tells a slightly different story. If we assume that “dismissed” means that the bank brought the action, then either voluntarily or involuntarily exited the action, that’s about 70,000 foreclosures that should be in backlog. UNLESS – that is a typical dismissal rate? Do you have the data going back to 2006?

    Because to me, that’s where the real story is told. The last page has specific data from 2006 on to now. Those numbers tell a story of increasing foreclosures (which I would tend to believe is also rate of foreclosure), then declining clearing rates, then increasing clearing rates – at about 2009 – when the legal community in Florida – and judges too – woke up to the fraud.

    So, what I would say this data says is – the banks have a HUGE shadow backlog (maybe 200K plus) in excess of the reported backlog. Which means the real estate market will go down. Couple that with unemployment insurance ending at the end of this year, 1/5 new graduates w/o a job but most likely with unforgivable student loan debt, and the clear need from the US government and state governments to slash budgets (which will have to come with layoffs) – and I think I wish I had dual citizenship in a country like….Chile?

  56. Sorry to b debi downer–but this IS going to happen on all the short sales across America. The bank had no right to transper that property. If the loan is in a trust forget about it. Its all clouded and done with dirty hands. Sue your title company here and let the fun begin. It is horrifying as we have all known now for years — I don’t know how realtors shall survive this when there’s nothing to sell with out long term huge consequences. If u r serious about remaining in the realestate field; have the owner of properties to do a forensic audit to see who actually IS the investor. Anything shy of that, u might as well take out a .38 and shot your self in the foot. I am so sorry but this is the way of the US right now. U can thank our very favorite uncle sam for this shit and put ur seat belt on this is the way for a very long time. Debi. 5613899339

  57. Disgusted listening to the debt ceiling negotiations, I sent this last night to my friend and US Senator Dan Inouye:

    “It’s been 4 years and the economy is no better off. Home values continue to plummet and foreclosures and bankruptcies are at an all time high. We’re nearing a stalemate with Republicans and the President is alienating his own party.

    The government needs money. Would you please pull out a calculator and multiply $900 X 67 million X 12 months = $723,600,000,000. That’s annual revenue from taking over just the MERS mortgages. It seems pretty clear to me that the banks have been paid by TARP, Treasury, insurance and FDIC funds. That figure is likely doubled – why are we leaving this money in the hands of the crooks that stole the investor funds in the first place?

    There is no money for new mortgages, homes are sitting empty, people are homeless and have such bad credit they cannot even rent.

    I’m astute enough to know the banks have been paid… The fact that they over leveraged themselves should not be on the backs of the homeowners they cheated or the American public.

    Take over the mortgage revenues… Let my people pay… They want to pay on their mortgages. Remove the inflation, give them a good interest rate for 30 years and collect the damn money for the government… We’re broke – because of the banks!”

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: