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

I have posted the following document on Scrib:

(Onewest Bank Gets a Spanking)

Onewest Bank filed a motion to compel responses to Discovery against me.
Thanks to the Info on Neils site- I knew Onewest bank was not
a real party in interest. I refused to respond to their bogus discovery.
I had to educate my Probate Attorney as to the issues.

It helped that I obtained t a email FOIA response from the FDIC that indicated their sale of the assests of INDYMAC bank in March 2009 did not include the “loan” that has been under litigation now for 25 months.
Instead of OWB attorneys getting their requested $2,300 in sanctions against me, as the Personal Representative of My 88 year old dads Estate- THe Judge “got it” and sanction them for $750.
For the record- this California Judge relied on C.C.P 378(A) to based
his decision to sanction the Onewest Bank “tall building” Attorney(s)

I hope this info will help others fighting the good fight here in California.

Stay Strong,

Steven Mark Rosenberg, MRED

19 Responses

  1. For what it is worth Neil; There are two seperate Israel’s on is the people from Egypt led by Moses, while the other is the land of Jews as found recorded in the bible at 1st John 2, 22 The Antichrist. The real israe went on uo to England called the Royal tribe of Judah, starting with the Man Judah, King David, King Richard with the round table on down to King George the 6th, the father of the present Queen Elizabeth. Then ther is the tribe of Joseph with the Birthwright . God Speed with your lawyers.


    As a homeowner that has been directly affected by the banks and their attorneys and in researching the bank’s wrongdoing, I have discovered that at least 8 financial institutions that we all executed Notes and Mortgages DID NOT exist when those docs were executed.

    These 8 financial institutions have outstanding notes and mortgages worth Billions, if not TRILL;

    Most Mortgage Docs used throughout the country state in paragraph (D) that the “Lender” is XXXX, ORGANIZED AND EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF XXXX

    When I did the search with the Department of State, Division of Corporation in that particular State, I discovered that the “Lender” XXXX DID NOT exist when the Note and Mortgage were executed.

    Here you a good example:

    AMERICAN BROKERS CONDUIT does not and has NEVER existed as a Corporation in the State of New York.

    Here is the link for New York, Department of State, Division of Corporations where you can verify this information and cheack any other financial institutuion that claimed to be “Organized and Existing under the Laws of New York:

    There are thousands of Notes and Mortgages executed with a Non-Existing Corporation called AMERICAN BROKERS CONDUIT.

    I have information on 8 and probably more corporations in different States that homeowners / borrowers executed Notes and Mortgages with but now I am discovering they were Non-Exisiting Corporations.

    Contracts, including Notes and Mortgages executed with Non-Existing Corporations are UN-ENFORCEABLE.

    If the Notes and Mortgage are Un-Enforceable, this means that any Summary Judgment entered, and any action taken thereafter, including sales of the property, Evictions, are VOID

    In addition, the Loan Servicing Company that has collected money from the borrower/homeowner should refund all moneys received because they were not authorized to collect the money. Who authorized them? An Officer of a Non-Existing Corporation?

    If you are in foreclosure, use this as a defense and if the bank already foreclosed and your house has been sold in public auction, then use it to get your property back…….in judicial states you file a MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT FOR FRAUD UPON THE COURT COMMITTED BY THE PLAINTIFF.

    I am NOT an attorney and do not intent to be one. I am a homeowner who has been directly affected by the wrong doings of the banks and have spent a lot of hours researching and looking for their wrong doings. This finding is one of those results.

    If you need more information, you can contact me at

  3. hman—

    It’s all BS.

    Deutsche doesn’t “own” ANY “loans”…It’s a LIE. Even their own “spokesman”—a Mr. John Gallagher—said as much:

    “…Deutsche acts as a trustee and has an administrative role in such cases, but has “no beneficial ownership stake or interest in the underlying mortgage loans,” spokesman John Gallagher said.
    The trust company holds legal title for the benefit of investors.
    Gallagher said loan-servicing companies, not the trustee, “are responsible for foreclosure activity, maintenance of foreclosed properties and resale of foreclosed properties.”

    And guess what—the “investors” that he speaks of ALSO have no standing to foreclose—and do not in any way “own” a “loan”.

    They PRETEND like you have a “loan” in a “trust”. You don’t. The trusts are empty…always have been. They fabricate fraudulent documents to pretend like some “Substitute Trustee” has the right to steal your home…and commit fraud on the court…because the courts are ignorant—or paid to keep the whole truth covered up. The robo-foreclosure mill is a setup for the theft of straw men/pretenders.

    Ask them to show you a ledger and balance sheet showing how your payments have been going to an actual “mortgage loan”…they can’t.

  4. johngault,

    Whoa — hold on!!! First, HUD is not relevant as to “Discharge” — that is the obligation of the party “being paid.” And, my friend, if not right party — then not discharged — no matter who Robo-signs a false discharge — or prepares a false HUD statement. Prior loan –not paid — period. And, as a result there is simply no “secured” mortgage loan currently existing — of course!!.

    As to RICO — RICO extremely difficult to plead in courts of law — admitted — it has always been this way. RICO pleadings are more worthy as plead by the US Government — Department of Justice — that is their obligation. Nevertheless, anyone aware of the elements — can plead properly. False pretense, among other elements, is easy to demonstrate — even if discovered at any future date – since could not have been discovered by false HUD statement. And, that is what is now happening.

    Ms./Mr. Gault — you will not find the evidence in the closing documents. If that is what you are relying on, you are missing critical information. Closing documents rarely reveal the fraud – intent was to conceal. You need to go back and investigate prior documents — prior documents to the HUD in question — you need to recover prior records. You need to investigate “insurance” coverage. You need to examine prior discharges — and do not let ANYONE tell you — that prior records do not exist — they do.

  5. JOHN Gault thanks for the insight.

    I do not recall getting a notice from HomeComings but I am not certain it was several years ago. The disk I was sent was in response to a QWR I sent to Aurora Bank. It was from a law firm representing Aurora. I requested many documents including the notes and assignments, etc…It does state the assignments are missing but can be ordered via MERS.

    I was dealing with Aurora Loan Services but they changed their name or filed bankruptcy I don’t really know specifics. I live in Phoenix,AZ.

    Other things interesting is I had 3 loans all in the same Trust. 2 out of the 3 have already foreclosed. I’m fighting now for my primary. These were transfered to Aurora from MERS as assignee from my Out of business lender on my DOT. This was done 2 separate times years after the original lender was out of business and the MER’s “officer” is the same “officer” signing the documents on my substitution of trustee.

    I’m sure having the 3 loans in one trust has some significance but I’m not sure how to use this to my advantage.

    At this time nobody is trying to foreclose and Aurora has stopped calling as per my request in response to my Debt Validation letter. I am in the process of writting a letter to the 3 credit bureaus to have them removed and from there I will write a letter to the Attorney General about the robosigning.

    I think Deutsche will be the one to attempt a foreclosure. The response I got said Deutsche Bank…Is the current owner of the note.

  6. Anonymous and Carie – assuming your allegation of false default is
    spot on, you might want to consider what crimes or torts this encompasses. I don’t know if you read the material at my link about RICO, but it says that obtaining a signature (yours) by false pretenses falls under “crimes related to racketeering”. It is not sufficient imo to describe the acts (“I was induced to sign a bogus note and deed of trust”) – you have to go further and recite what those acts violate – what statutes, what rules, what rights.
    You have to describe both the false pretense which induced you to sign a new note and dot and then cite the violations, some of which may be found imo in the RICO statues. Others will be found in state and federal statutes. The ‘record’ may not support your arguments, unfortunately, which is not to say other ‘records’ wouldn’t. Your old deed of trust was released and your HUD 1 Settlement Statement no doubt shows the payoff of the orignal loan, right – or does it? I am not an attorney, but I have a background which at one time qualified me to determine the accuracy of closing documents. I will look at yours. Now, if your HUD shows the payoff, that’ll be a roadblock. It’s been awhile, but I’ll look at your docs if you want. As I’ve said, I am at least expecting the disclosure of your A.P.R. to be whacked, which in my lay opinion is grounds for rescission if you can take the heat, and it might be fierce, or at least be a whole lot of work.

    I haven’t been able to research something very significant for all of us, and that is what to do when the evidence we need to prove our cases is in the sole possession of the other guy. I just don’t believe there is not an
    avenue on the books already for us to get the discovery we need when we need it, and I’ve asked attorneys to weigh in, but no one has. The evidence or at least clues you need might be, if you’re lucky, in your closing documents, but the real ‘goods’ are more likely in someone else’s.
    A, if your home is already gone, then you’d have even more work, but since you’re so passionate about this stuff, you may be up for it. Carie seems to have already found a roadblock for her bankster.

  7. hman – Is Aurora trying to foreclose on you? In an ongoing case in NV, a PHH or JPMorgan employee in the guise of MERS executed an assignment of the deed of trust which also purports to assign the note. When challenged because MERS (read member-self-assignment) may not assign the note for lack of interest, PHH now states the assignment of the note was “surplage”. I call it a false instrument – it’s a crime to record a false instrument. The homeowner’s attorney has now alleged that the note and dot are separated by the assignment of the dot to PHH, who is not the owner of the note. It’s allegedly held by some securitized trust, but then, as par for the course these days, the In this case it’s PHH, but it might just as well be Aurora because they advance the same bs arguments routinely.
    You and anyone with a “MERS” assignment might find these pleadings informative:
    This is the homeowner’s amended objection to the proof of claim and the
    motion for relief from stay.
    This is the response from the bankster
    This is the homeowner’s reply to the bankster’s response.

    The bankster is alleging that the note has been transferred from the trust
    to JPMorgan Mortgage Acquisition (by allonge of course), which is right up Anonymous’ alley.
    It is not the Trust which is trying to foreclose, it’s now the servicer for a party theretofore not in the act at all. I haven’t looked up the alleged allonge, but I have no doubt there is no evidence in the record of the signator’s authority to make the endorsement.

    You said the file is missing assignments according to Aurora. You’ve got a lot to work with in your favor then, imo since they admitted
    assignments are missing but are nonetheless in your face. Did you ever get a notification from Homecomings that the servicing of your loan was being transferred to Aurora? What state are you in? Maybe someone here knows of a good attorney. Even if you don’t have the funds for an attorney, you could see if there is a group working pro bono in your area for homeowners. From what you’ve said, this lay person sees no path
    to your home by Aurora.
    You said “I got a disk from Aurora showing that the collateral file is MISSING ASSIGNMENTS and is being ordered from MERS.” That would be laughable if it weren’t so egregious. But a caution: Aurora will just say
    the assignments were done, but what they meant is they weren’t in the file. IMO, tho, it is an admission that the assignments aren’t done because it can’t be read to say they are done but they are asking MERS for copies, since MERS executes NOthing and MERS certainly has no
    archive for documents executed in their name. MERS has no idea who’s doing what in its name, and that was one of the subjects of its Cease and Desist Consent Order. One thing in your favor is that an assignment of a deed of trust, unlike an endorsement on a note, must be DATED and
    notarized with a date of the notary, also.
    One last thing. Aurora has a history, a pattern, of false claims, which works in your favor especially when they call you a deadbeat. You might be interested in this case wherein the court found Aurora to have made false claims about being a plaintiff. The court said it was quite” innovative of Aurora to claim to be a plaintiff when not a plaintiff”. They were warned, but continue this behavior nonetheless. I can’t find it (I posted it some time ago at scribd), but it’s ALS v. Sattar in NY.
    Are you dealing now with Aurora bank instead of ALS? I heard ALS filed bk and was taken over mol by Aurora Bank, but can’t find any more info.

  8. ANONYMOUS, on September 28, 2011 at 5:09 pm said:

    “…All certificates (Notes), to trusts (bank owned trusts) were sold first to the security underwriters (banks’ subsidiary) — the OTHER bank subsidiary was the Depositor that purchased the loans from so-called “originator.” Off-balance sheet bank-owned trust — was just an accounting conversion of on-balance sheet receivables — to certificates that the subsidiary security underwriter purchased. All a bank can transfer from it’s receivable balance sheet — is current cash flows. Thus, securitization is an accounting conversion of on balance sheet receivables — to off-balance sheet ‘”certificates” — purchased by subsidiary security underwriter. From there, derivative (meaning derived) CDO “securities” are sold to subsequent pass-through cash flow security investors. And, from there CDO Squared –further pass -through cash flows to derived- derived “security holders.” At all times the Depositor owns the Trust — and the Security Underwriter owns the certificates. Both the Trust and the certificates are “derived” from the “loans” — in case of subprime — fabricated.
    So, who owns collection rights to fabricated loans??? Not the squared CDO “security” derivative investors, not the CDO “security” derivative investors. MAYBE — the certificate holders/buyers — who are the security underwriters — who purchased from the Depositor — who are both subsidiaries of the bank that purchased the fabricated loans by which the false securities were “derived.”
    Of course, that is until the “bank” disposes of collection rights — elsewhere.
    If you make too complicated — courts never get it. Although my above explanation may sound complicated — it is not — all supported by PSA and Prospectus.”

    “…did servicer advance payments or not? Only ledgers will tell — and both servicers and securities trustees MUST have those ledgers. Because if they did not advance as required by PSA — then the “security investor” argument as creditor is immediately quashed — even without application of TILA Amendment as to defined Creditor.”

    thank you, ANONYMOUS.

  9. Interesting. I’ve written a FOIA request and the response I got was they had no information on my loan.

    My loan went from my Mortgage broker (table funded) to first servicer HomeComings financial (GMAC) and now to Aurora Loan w/Deutsche as Trustee. My Pooling and servicing agreement does mention Deutsche as Trustee on Behalf of the Certificate Holders but they will not identify the “Creditor” they only say my originally creditor was the original mortgage broker who is out of business.

    My Pooling and Servicing agreement does not mention Aurora as a party; servicer, master servicer, sub servicer, etc…. My first servicer (Homecomings) is out of business. It’s not clear how Aurora claims to be a party to my loan.

    What should I ask for in a FOIA request to strenghten my case? I’d like to prove my loan was never purchased or transferred/assigned.

    Nothing has ever been recorded on county recorderer. I got a disk from Aurora showing that the collateral file is MISSING ASSIGNMENTS and is being ordered from MERS. This should be proof they separated the chain of assignment from the note.

  10. Pat and curious: it does take a solid inner strength to keep fighting but also, and most importantly, some solid rage. The alternative for me is to get a gun and go shot a few bankers. The thing is: that would really be dumb since they would be dead (and know nothing any more about what they caused) and I would be put in jail for many, many years.

    I do want revenge. I want bankers to experience everything they put Americans through. I want to see them lose it all, become unhirable, become pariahs and end up on the streets, rumaging through trash cans.

    I know… not how I was brought up but that vision keeps me going.

  11. I have been saying this for a while now. People that anything with the former Indymac must read DBNTC vs FDIC 09-3852 in California Federal District Court Central Division. The judge ruling on the motion to dismiss DBNTC explains everything you need in defeating Onewest in any claim they try to put at you.

    People must understand that the FDIC made a “pass through” receivership before selling anything to Onewest. The only thing that pass through was servincing rights. FDIC kept the liabilities of Indymac Bank and gave Onewest the asset. Which was the servicing rights.

    Also read Mbia vs. fdic Case No. 1:09-cv-01011 it deals with the samething, but check this quote out in this matter:

    “After a mortgage loan is in default, if a servicer of a mortgage loan determines that net recoveries to be achieved by foreclosing upon or comparably converting the mortgage loan are unlikely to equal or exceed the outstanding principal balance of the delinquent mortgage loan (plus certain costs and expenses related thereto), the servicer will charge-off such delinquent mortgage loan, meaning that the servicer will write down or recognize the outstanding principal balance of such -11-mortgage loan as zero, without a corresponding payment or receipt of principal”

    Funny huh.


    FDIC BOARD MEETING to be held Tuesday, Oct.11.

    Discussion Agenda:

    Memorandum re: Update of Projected Deposit Insurance Fund Losses, Income, and Reserve Ratios for the Restoration Plan.

    Memorandum and resolution re: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prohibitions and Restrictions on Proprietary Trading and Certain Interests in, and Relationships with, Hedge Funds and Private Equity Funds.

    The meeting will be held in the Board Room on the sixth floor of the FDIC Building located at 550 17th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

  13. Pat,

    “It takes nerves of steel, depression and anxiety medication to continue to fight.” You just described me to a T. I am brave, very bold and another “B” word! Anyone who believes this is a cake walk has already walked or eventually will.


  14. Neil,

    How about a Home Owner Success Section. I am one who can tell you do not accept false debt collection or misinformation on your credit reports. It takes nerves of steel, depression and anxiety medication to continue to fight.

    I am 3-0 in cases I have been involved after reading and learning from this site and all that are brave enough to speak up. After what has been done to my family and the American Public I will tie these pretenders up in court, and do my very best to be one “Who Gets It” and tells eveyone I know who will listen they need to wake up and FIGHT!

    I an in non-judical so the battle is twice as hard and pray I save my home or at least cost these Pretender’s a whole lot of money while they try and steel my home.It is amazing how many confidential wins I hear of this practice needs to stop also so the turth can come out.

    Keep Fighting..

  15. b davies,

    No response because they don’t know what to do.

  16. The servicers are going down…down…down…

  17. Onewest has made millions on the confusion that occurred with the asset purchase agreement.
    I have been involved with the FDIC inspectors generals office with this issue. I talked with the FDIC. Onewest did not buy anything but servicing on most of the cases. [there is an asset loan purchase and an asset servicing purchase] if they purchase servicing the note is not involved.
    They have done assignments of DOT with these cases assigning the note to them selves. This is a scam. Also there are no assignments after Dec 2010. So any assignment done after that time is bogus. [FDIC Onewest Power of Attorney]

    The investigator looked and sent me all the agreements. Somehow there do not seem to push Onewest to come clean with this scam. There was a $1.8 million property that they have just done this to in Sunset Beach CA. It was sent to the FDIC and there has been no response.

  18. Wow I want to own a servicing company to.Just imagine a whole bunch of free loans free money every month from millions of hard working honest people and plus you you have a stupid ass government stupid old judges that don’t even know the law plus 80% percent of lawyers to all on your side believeing the servicing scam how did these servicing companies get into this racketeering it’s like a Mafia wow they need to be taken out mafia style and the law is on their side . Let’s protest they be shut down now

  19. Neil ,

    This is the kind of information that WILL GET LOST in the normal ebb and flow on this site … This should be preserved…

    Without a proper and easy to use indexing system this site loses much of it’s effectiveness.

    While this applies directly to OneWest it has implications for all California cases.

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: