WATCH OUT! BEFORE YOU BUY THAT NEXT PROPERTY — TITLE ISSUES

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

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

GRAVE PITFALLS IN BUYING A HOME TODAY

If you are paying cash, that is no protection against later claims of owners who never legally lost title or gave title notwithstanding what is recorded in the title registry. Those documents if false would return the prior owner to title and possession of the property. That would leave you literally out in the cold without home or the money you put into the deal. And as we have already seen, the fact that a title company or even an ACTUAL lender (actually lending their own money) is willing to close doesn’t mean that title is clear. Both have been consisting violating basic underwriting standards of the industry for at least 15 years.

If there is or was one or more loans going back perhaps 10-15 years in the chain title, they were probably subject to some claim of securitization. If securitization is an issue the plain truth is that the players in the securitization chain can’t tell you what you need to know about title. They just don’t know because they never cared. There is a big difference between

  • WHAT THEY SAID THEY DID — that would be the closing documents with the borrower
  • WHAT THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO DO — that would be the closing documents with the investor — the securitization documentation
  • WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DID — that would be the actual money trail — where it came from, where it went, or kept it, or passed it on, and who was ultimately receiving the bulk of the payments or proceeds of payments from the borrower, the servicer, other third parties, insurers or federal bailout.

Each of these factor into title or potential claims on title. each of these factor into any foreclosure and subsequent sale. And ultimately each of these will need to be cleared through signatures and recorded affidavits of all the possible participants, a court order quieting title or both.

CASE IN POINT: I know of a situation in Phoenix where the famed foreclosure mill Tiffany and Bosco is involved. There was a foreclosure and then there was a deed from husband to wife. Obviously that raises eyebrows. If there was a foreclosure and it was valid then the husband to wife deed is a wild deed and can be ignored. But the husband and wife deed is corroborated by the fact that one of them or both were on the original deed and the original mortgage that was foreclosed. So the husband -wife deed is not clearly wild — it is questionable at best and at worst, part of the proof that the foreclosure sale was illegal, ineffective or invalid. 

Now the property went apparently from the party who submitted the successful bid at an “auction” that may or may not have been authorized because it was ordered or conducted by a “Substitute trustee”by virtue of a substitution of trustee that may or may not be an authenticated document. And the Notice of Default and Notice of Sale may or may not have named the actual creditor. In most cases, it does not appear that the substitution of trustee names the actual creditor, which is why the judicial states have a much larger backlog of foreclosures than non-judicial where the pretender lenders get away with substituting fabricated paperwork in lieu of actual chain of title.

Thus the highest probability is that if you are buying a residential piece of real estate, there are title questions that are overhanging the transaction. This is a bad thing that endangers your investment and your plans but not so bad that it can’t be fixed. I think I would get an affidavit from Bosco saying that to his knowledge and belief there are no facts, documents or circumstances under which any third party could claim an interest in the real property other than as stated in the commitment — and that he is in a position to know. That affidavit should be executed in recordable form along with the Warranty Deed when they close. Considering what we know, an affidavit from the witnesses and notary saying that Bosco actually signed it would be in order as well and also executed in recordable form and recorded as attachments to the deed. If they refuse to do the affidavits, then watch out.

The seller is said to be an LLC and the title company already wants to know who that LLC is, who formed it and  what chain of authority is present to convey title. There are a thousand reasons why title is being portrayed this way. But it is possible that Bosco was the successful bidder, that Bosco created the LLC and that Bosco named himself as Trustee. The conveyance from husband to wife indicates an outstanding interest in the property. If the policy contains an exception for this conveyance it is giant loophole in title and the insurance. The commitment says they want details on the incorporation of the LLC. I would ask for those documents as well.

But overall, this is not evidence, in and of itself that the whole thing is a sham. The 24 month period referred to in the commitment represents a common look back period for the commitment. It doesn’t mean that is all the work they will do. I think the whammy will come when they issue the actual policy. THAT will be materially different from this commitment. And they say so right in the commitment.

Leaving off Schedule A, considering the naming of the Seller and buyer later on, does not seem wrong and in fact is common practice so the commitment is not used in lieu of a policy. Many people if they read anything, read the commitment. The commitment is basically a preview but not the real thing. The practice in the industry is to issue the commitment with exculpatory language such that when they issue a policy that is materially different from the commitment, you probably won’t notice it.

I think you must take the position that the title to this property is probably hopelessly mired in doubt and clouds. But here is what you could do. You could file a quiet title action based upon the questions raised by the commitment, with cooperation of T&B et al and name everyone in the universe. After the time for answers has come and gone, the defaults are entered and final judgment is entered. Then title is clear. The burden of doing so SHOULD be on the seller, but they might insist on you doing it yourself.

The lawsuit should recite the fact that there are questions of title relating to the securitization or attempted securitization of the loan. It should be served on the last known servicer and the last “lender”. The lawsuit should occur BEFORE the closing which means that the seller LLC should be the plaintiff. And the deal should be that if the Judge doesn’t sign the order, there is no deal and all money is refunded.

If you follow this I believe that you will receive something practically nobody else has — clear title. As the title issues become more and more in the news, the fact that you received a clear title order from a Judge would increase both marketability AND price when you want to sell it. And remember, the Final Judgment signed the judge must (a) be clocked in with clerk who gives you a certified copy and then (b) the certified copy recorded in the title registry of the county in which the property is located. Do that as soon as you can lay hands on the Judge’s Final order.

Check with a licensed attorney knowledgeable in real estate and title issues and who has some working knowledge of securitization before you take any action based upon this article. This is for general information only and not meant as advice on any particular case. You should not proceed with the purchase of anything as important as a house without the assistance of an attorney licensed in the jurisdiction in which the property is located.

 

29 Responses

  1. Neil accurate here.

    Have had my disputes with Neil as to distinction between “security investors” and “investors.” But, Neil is absolutely correct here —- “WATCH OUT! BEFORE YOU BUY THAT NEXT PROPERTY — TITLE ISSUES “

  2. what is BPO order?

  3. just a florida homeowner trying to save my home. not enough lawyers in florida to go around, way to many foreclosures. sorry to bother you. evryone has been helpful.

  4. I am an Ohio atty—cant offer advice on such matters generally much less florida–sorry. Im simply trying to ascertain how to get a copy of the form from OCC—-so I can see how to file pro-bonos for vets???

    Frankly I am quite confused by the variety of commentary on the internet re this seemingly simple question. I imagine Ill have to assemble the form from the basic OCC form with the stated questions iv seen imported and then rely on the doctrine of substantial compliance.

    I do not know how much you know or if you are Phishing for bases to file ethics complaints or what have you—Im trying to assist veterans here —it seems to me that there are a disproportionate number of attorneys engaged in foreclosure work in florida–let me know who you are so I can run a background check on you–if you are a collection agency plant–ill report you to appropriate authorities—if I hear nothing from you ill just be wary–and maybe report the contact anyway.

  5. @dcb my sister is of sound mind she just does not understand the amout of fraud that has occured. take for instance her husband died and peopel from her job collected 7k for her to buy a home for her and her daughter. she was having a hard time being a single mom and wanted to sell her home and move near me. she befriended a mortgage broker from a coworker who scammed her. she ent to closing of both homes on the same day. the nortgage broker was suppose to be buying her home and he didnt he quick claimed it from her and so her where was her 50k equity?? he then has her sign a side contract if she solf she owes him 40k + 13% intrest a year. i still do not understand what occured, in the next room she sign for her new home a subprime mortgage. adjustable in 2 years. so this guys quick claims the house 2 more times never refinances the mortgage and stopps paying that home forclosed on in 2010 as well has her new home witht he subprime mortgage. still behooves me where did her equity go that she was suppose to have made on the sale. this guy should be lynched for taking advantage of widows who not understand realestate. i tried to help my sister get a lawyer but she refuses to help herself only wants to put it behind her. the guys name is terry saunders he is from hollywood florida and moved to spring hill, florida doing the same thing here. no money down houses to buy. so sad,

    i know worry about my own mess. which it surley is. but i am well educate don securitization. i know these loans have been sold and pay for and they have no standing to foreclose. i have mortgage application fraud, appraisal fraud and modificaiton fraud. cnat get a freaking lawyer in florida to call me. so sad. not sure what to do?????

  6. get a POA and file in her name as atty in fact–if nothing else the remediation allows cleansing of credit record–so if she doesnt want to struggle over proofs and $$$—at lest make the claim and ask for relief of clearer credit

  7. The OCC site indicates you file the claim with them directly–i keep hearing they are supposed to send to you but makes no sense for reason you identified–how are they to catch up with people that have moved–like all right?

    please people send me links to these alternative explanations–im going to talk to them tomorrow

  8. problem with doing this after foreclosure review is how do they find the homeowners. my sisters home foreclosed in 2010 by chase. her 13 yr old daughter was served. did not know what the papers were and never gave them to her mom. my sister didnt know what was happening , her subprime mortgage adjusted to higher then her actual monthly salary , never disclosed to her. she got scared and left the home and moved 300 miles north. so how can they find her? i told her about the review but she wants nothing to do with it. she wants that part of her life over with. me on the other hand. tried to modify when i couldnt sell wells fargos mod was more then the original mortgage and that was after months of losing paper work. when i couldnt affor that higher mortgage i asked to be review for a hamp loan again and now in 2010 i was told i could not be helped unless i stop paying my mortgage????? and then of course i found all the other frauds. appraisal fraud , application fraud, and the modification frauds. losing my paper work and moving my file. i got a call from wells fargo the presidents office that the frauds are being investigated??????????????anyone know whatthats about. i wrote the OCC, congressman richard nugent, senator marco rubio, and pam bondi. so everyone knows about the frauds. so whaere do i go from here. how is htis case defended. i am still in my home.

    so i do not know how they are going to find people who have been foreclosed and moved seems defeated

  9. The following is not legal advice. it is preliminary ans speculative analysis based upon sketchy information–which itself is speculative. The reporters are attempting to ascertain what is happening but do not take it to the bank. Best take it to an attorney well-schooled in ADMINISTRATIVE LAW.

    The following appeared on November 11, 2011–authored by HUFFPOST–which please be mindful is a part of the MURDOCH press and so lacks credibility in my book–and may be merely designed to confuse. But taken at face value the one piece worth noting is:
    ” The restitution payment process is designed to be easier and quicker than a foreclosure review scheme announced by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency last week, the source said. Under that program, mortgage servicers are sending out letters this month to 4 million former homeowners asking them if they want their foreclosures audited, a process that could take months. Receiving a restitution payment from the new possible settlement would not preclude borrowers from suing their banks or asking the OCC to review their foreclosure, the source said, stressing that the payments are solely for bad servicing and are not meant to make borrowers whole if they were wrongfully foreclosed.”

    So now there are two distinct programs–one actually announced by OCC–and for which a form can be obtained online at the official OCC website–along with a description of the 2-tier ADMINISTRATIVE appeals process. This REAL LIVE program is designed to award damages to make wrongfully foreclosed people whole. This program applies only to foreclosures in 2009-2010. At least somethoing about the foreclosure and/or deed in lieu DIL had to occur 2009-2010. The 3 obvious classes of such people that can be generally described are those:
    1) veterans on active duty in that time frame that were foreclosed.
    2) victims who were engaged in some phase of loan modification negotiations but were foreclosed while so doing, and
    3) vicims who were foreclosed or DILed out of their homes by collectiona agencies [aka loan servicers] using defective documentation –most notably docx “created” by a rob-signing process

    This is not an exhaustive list. Homes seized because they were next door–or the wrong houses etc would also fall into this class–which underscores one point. The info posted on websites asserts that loan #’s MUST be provided–how will that be possible if your home was accidentally seized despite the fact you had no loan? So basically the specific “requirements” on the OCC claim forms should be seen as guidelines–the rule-making process may not be fully effective at this point–notice and comment may be defective so even the so-called rules may be appealed in connection with the administrative review process.

    Now lets discuss the REAL OCC program wth a view to each class –in summary.
    Obviously vets whose homes were seized in defiance of federal are the most sympathetic group and damage claims for them should be pursued most agressively. The two prong proofs of 1)”entitlement” [ie I was a vet on active duty when my home was seized] and 2) “amount of damages is easier –it shuld be relatively easy to prove the active duty and date the foreclosure activities occured–ANY overlap should trigger a claim–although the reviewers likely will even try to squeeze a guy with both legs blown off–send the photos ok!

    Damages should be easier–the SPIRIT of the program is to make victims whole. So how?
    1) Vets Iv spoken with received large upfront signing bonuses –$25,000-$300,000 depending on rank, training, initial enlistment or re-up. Given the size of these payments it is not unusual for the vets to have plunked down 25% downpayments. The predatory collection agencies appear to have seized homes from these soldiers even if they were making payments–hard to fight the 800 number and defend while you are doing night patrol in a black-zone in Baghdad. So equity in the home —or amount of downpayment is a certain damage claim. The guys Iv spooken with also noticed when they got back that everything from their toothpast to Grandad’s gun collection conveniently disappeared without trace–along with all records of purchase. The Administrative law process does not demand the anachronistic rules of evidence–if your evidence is credible it comes into the decision-making. Hearsay is OK. [Lawyers hate admin proceedings because its a more level playing field–beware the whiners]
    How to prove damages? The vet should make an affidavit listing ALL her stuff–item by item. A verifying affidavit by a credible 2nd party is good–but not necessary. Get grandma to state what she saw–let her list the heirlooms. Get another affidavit from the local furniture ealer to state what the replacement cost for these items of furniure and applicances would be. NOT FMV used–its not even certain that there is an FMV of cloth-covered furniture or bedding or clothing because of bedbugs. For vets go with replcement cost. A range is needed—-insurance companies have algorhythms –based on value and size of house and incomes etc–what are people similarly situated likely to own and what type of replacement cost. A person living in a $150,000 house is likely to have bought midrange items. Insurance adjusters have tables and can estimate the amount of a fire loss—-they either do replacement or FMV dependening on the policy coverage–go with the replacement but place in evidence the FMV too. For heirlooms which the preservers put 1st in their trunks along with the guns etc—–its harder–document and appraise.

    Now be brave for the vets—-claim everything at max value. They earned it and you have the high-ground. Hard to say the vet was COMPLICIT.

    Now Claas 2: the party that the collection agency demanded default as a condition to “modification” —–these are fairly sympathetic. Often the story goes: “we were working towards modification–sent the docs 4 times –told dont worry about the notices on the door–went to work at 8AM and when I got home at 6PM –my house was empty!” In my view if you can prove this “entitlement” fact pattern, then follow the vets’ proof of damages process–affidavits if no invoices. Not surprisingly invoices along with family albums disappeared too. Do your best to support the big ticket items with credit card records etc—but dont drop the claim because no receipts–it is a reasonable assumption you were not sleeping on the floor. Now lets note—the collection agencies charge for every keystroke–every copy—so you should too. I recently outfitted an apt–it cost for everything from ice-cube trays to toilet paper [not to be confused with robo-signer docx–which used a higher grade of paper]. You list everything down to thumbtacks and that half-used jar of mayo!
    And lets not forget any professional fees incurred during the modification process–and costs of reconstituting your income tax files.

    The 3rd class–those who were induced or intimidated into abandoning or otherwise lost homes via the speedy foreclosure process guaranteed by use of no questions asked rob-signing.
    Maybe these folks are not as sympatheitc victims as the shell-shocked vets or the tricked beievers in Tim Geithners mock-HAMP pretend program, but they were victims of deception nevertheless.

    The 3rd class–victims of faulty doumentation—these people are in effect assessing penal damges for collection agencies abusing due process–subverting the court systems etc. Basiclly ungluing the framework of modern civil property law and the concept of perjury.
    How to prove it—if the documents were created by some notorious outfit–use the newspapers to demonstrate that fact–attach the articles –links etc. Make sure you note if LPS/DOCX and/or MERS had a hand in the process because they signed Consent Orders promissing not to do bad things–albeit without admitting they did [THANKS FOR NOTHING OCC] If there was a “corrective filing” it pretty much cinches this issue. So look to the Recorders office for a 2nd assignment of mortgage—if they amended the supporting documentation for the complaint etc. These cases are the toughest to establish the “entitlement” aspect–because of these proof issues. One might suggest that because Linda Green’s several signatures appeared on the front page of an October 2010 NYT that any docx signed by her is bogus–but technically the reviewers may not see it that way–but try anyway. In my view her indiscretion is so egregious and widespread that the burden of proof on her signature should shift to the collection agency seeking to stand on her signature–the appeals officers may be inclined to agree. After all it is the constitution that she undermined. And how are we supposed to know what the real Linda Green signatre looks like–the real one is most easily proved by the servicer–not the victim. MERS’ involvement with its endless list of VPs etc same–MERS has the list of authorized persons at the time–and should be able to provide that –we do not—let em publish the list OCC –please–or else shift the burden of proof now rather than after the fact as we appeal this issue innthe DC District Court–and demand all cases where they did not so shift the burden be set aside.

    Lets speed it up and get it over with.

    If MERS did not actually properly appoint anyone then lets have it be known now—or just make use of MERS in Assignments of Mortgage per se defective to move things along.

    So lets assume participation by MERS and/or DOCX/LPS was per se bad documentation for arguments sake–or corrective documentation was filed, so our victim of faulty documentation has met the “entitlement” prong. Now what were the damages?

    Well this is arguably a tad more grey than damages for the others. The others flat out did not expect to lose everything over a day at work–either at Wall Mart or in Baghdad. The faulty documentation folks may or may not have. It is a facts and circumstances case it seems to me. If the victim was apprised by her lawyer that the case would be pstponed pending corrective documentation–assuming it was possible to correct–ie the collection agency had a provavble right. [by no means certain, see AHMSI v HUD Federal District Court in Texas–AHMSI had no standing to own notes or pass title to real estate in name of trusts] ——then this victim was equally as SURPRISED as the other 2 classes. You need an affidavit as to state of mind here at least –and the same damages hold as the others. The attorneys’ word should be set out in affidavit. Lacking an attorney–the defendant victim should state whether she was aware that the fake documentation was an issue and expected it to be corrected before seizure. Of course this must be factual–sworn.

    Then proceed to damages.

    This brings up the item noted at the beginning–the ALMOST AGREED AG deal. Now Im sorry but Im in the ranks of the skeptics on this one. We have heard the AGs have a deal almost as often as we have heard Europe’s troubles are over. There is no deal. But lets say there was a deal as referred to. Is a “safe harbor” payment by somebody adequate?

    I am absolutely speculating here –but it seems to me that the $1000-1500 being discussed here is totally distinct and separate from the OCC damages. The AG purported almost deal is punitive in nature–the OCC real deal is compensatory economic damages. The 2 are additive and in no way should anyone waive anything by agreeeing to receive the AGs punitive damages.

    So make your claims for compensatory damages–as innovatively as possible and just wait fot the maybe AG deal—-which may devolve state by state–so in NY you might get a check for $1500 but in Ohio—you are much more likely to be awarded with a prorata share of a very large SHAFT. In either case –dont hold your breath–and focus on the OCC REAL DEAL—-the AG almost deal sounds like a nasty distraction to me–more bait n switch to keep people from filing OCC claims

    Now on OCC claim PROCESS. The OCC site now clearly sets ou the form–either online or pdf print. I would recommend the completion of the printed form myself–along with a witness to the fact I placed the form in the envelope a sent it registered mail to OCC. PROVE NOT ONLY THAT YOU SENT IT BUT WHAT YOU SENT.

    Also as a practicuioner of admin law for 35 years, including a few in IRS —– this is not advice–but a warning to use an atty–and a good one versed in admin law—

    There is a doctrine called exhaustion of administrative remedies. Basically the doctrine is that you must make the factual record at the bottom —lay out all arguments there in detail–or waive them. All adnmin determinations MUST be subject to review at the discretion of the claimant. Possibly in this instance the servicers may also be able to appeal–its not yet clear to me. Certainly they will appeal any adverse decision by a reviewr or 2nd tier hearing officer if the record is incomplete, the decision arbitrary etc.

    So 1) make a complete record at the reviewr level—-everything–attach support affidavits, invoices etc–anything that establishes either “entitlement” to damages or the amount of damages. No matter what.
    2) be prepared to appeal –in all liklihood the reviwers will be doing data entry if you do not use the electronic submission–im skeptical of the electonic submission because I do not see how you put the necessary proofs in–basically it is an aplication for a safe harbor award–something like the minimum necssary to shup you up–and you will not really be able to claim exfhaustion of remedies or a complete record—-the reviwer will deny this or award reduced amounts because you f=did not put proof on the record and then its too late to supplement the record. Iv seen attys with decades experience lose on this—–it is a huge trap for unwary attys–the evidence gate along with the argument gate closes hard when you hit that submit button—it may get you your $500 faster but its a quick way to toss away a good $15000 CLAIM–dont fall for the trap–warn all the attys –make the record at the reviewer level even if you expect them to ignore it.

    The claim goes to the OCC if the servicer is named—not just the servicer–I suggest you send to both, as if serving a complaint. If the servicer is not named, dont fret send it to OCC also as well as your state consumer protection and FTC–lose nothing but postage and copy costs.

    If the claim is denied in part or full then there is an appeal ON THE RECORD before the reviewer. No additional iformation can be offered except to respond narrowly to the reasons stated for denial. Likely these reasons will have been made by the servicers’ employees who will file opposition to the well-constructed claim. the claimant should be entitled to see the opposition as a matter of due process ans Adminstrative Procedures Act or its equivalent as adopted by OCC.

    the appeals officer decision itself is subject to review by the OCC Ombudsman. And that decision or the lower officers determination will be a final appealable Order by the agency that can be taken to a District Court. It is unclear to this writer at this time oif appeal to the Ombudsman is in lieu of appeal to the District Court —

    Generally speaking the foregoing is the way federal administrative processes operate—however nothing herein is intended nor represented to be authoritiative—except the need to get a qualified attorney’s advice BEFORE HITTING THAT SUBMIT BUTTON.

    The sort of AG deal is completely different–there is no process –there is no agreement. If someone confuses the two and simply inserts in the OCC form something akin to
    “Ill take the AG agreed $1000–then the claim will be subject to denial and no real opportunity to appeal may exist–because no basis for damages will have been set out.

    On the other hand if OCC should wish to simplify and expedite the program it should clearly state in a public ruling—“if you qualify for relief, you may elect to accept as liquidated damages the amount of $X in lieu of a detailed proof of specific dameges.”

    So far OCC has not adopted this procedural option–it should. Get a good attorney if you are not one–if you are grab your admin law hornbook and red it cover to cover ASAP.

  10. Get ‘Good Title Commitment’ thorugh:

    inShare. Want to Know Which BPO and REO Companies Pay the Fastest?
    Then, you’ve come to right place! I have been asked by one of my BPO Training Students recently, “Which BPO and REO companies pay the fastest?”

    Here is the list I gave him specially for BPO companies that pay consistently within 7 days:

    1. Advanced Collateral Solutions (ACS, through Rels)

    2. Rels Valuations (Valuation Support Services)

    3. Core Logic (through Rels)

    4. eMortgage Logic

    5. LAMCO (Lenders Asset Management Company)

    6. Ocwen

    7. RRR (Residential Real Estate Review)

    8. REO Brokerage Group

    This is just a sample of companies that I have found to consistently pay within 7 days of completing a BPO order. There are many more great companies to work for that pay within 14 days.

    If you want to learn more, I’ve got a detailed list of over 120 companies too, plus more detailed information about BPO training and lots more having to do with the broker price opinion business. Come check it out for yourself, click here to go to: my website.

    Be well,

    Nicole Ocean

    BPO Trainer/Realtor

    http://www.nicoleocean.com

    Check out my newest eBook about

    “All You Ever Wanted to Know About Automating Your BPO Orders,”

    http://www.nicoleocean.com/automatebpos.htm

    360-223-2482

  11. @leah can you contact a LAWYER THAT CAN AT LEAST DO A MOTION TO DISSMISS RELATED ALL THESE ISSUES PLEASE GO TO FORECLOSURE HAMLET AND PLEASE CONTACT ON THE SITE JAMES M HE IS IN TEXAS. SOMEONE MAY HAVE HIS PHONE # LET US KNOW

  12. Leah Dean – Especially be aware of this in places like Texas. Texas is a non-judicial state and the banks do not have to produce documents to foreclose. Therefore, take for instance my home at 2616 Mill Creek Dr., Pasadena, TX 77503. My home is being foreclosed on December 6, 2011 at 10:00 a.M. in front of the Harris County Court. My home has a Promissory Note that states Lender is America’s Wholesale Lender and the D/T follows. My Deed of Trust also reads that MERS is the sole beneficiary with sole rights to foreclose on property. Now here is the clincher and my argument with Bank of America, who now services the loan. Bank of America and Recontrust are proceeding with foreclosure on the home which states that Bank of New York, Trustee to asset backed securities owns the note (wait)…… is this correct? Well let’s see… Under the SEC and the PSA listed under CWABS 2007-2 it appears that we have false information. My loan number 155397447 sits right in the middle of this investment pool. Well, none of this matters because Texas like I said is a non-judicial state and Bank of America does not have to produce any documents stating that they can lawfully foreclose on the property and unless I hire a lawyer and pay thousands and thousands of dollars, I loose my home on December 6, 2011. So folks, be very aware if you live in Texas and you want to buy this property, the chain of title is broken. The home sits in a investment pool and has been sold on Wall Street and none of the assignments to the promissory note have been done so therefore the chain to the Deed of Trust is no longer valid.

  13. @Carie, Anonymous and the like,

    I’ve got my own pet theory and it works:

    Stop paying mortgages and let the chips fall where they ought to. If they give you hell, fight the right fight: demand the documents.

    Stop using banks. Flog to credit unions only to the extent that they are exactly that: Credit (they take your money to lend it and everyone profits) and Unions (creditors belong and have their say). Otherwise, keep your cash and manage it yourself. Lets see how long banks last.

    Simple. It resolves everything. If 50% of the 99% does that, everything gets addressed right away. Even if only 25% of the 99% does, it changes the whole political scene. Unity creates strength.

    Otherwise, we’re wasting time and energy on a whole bunch of… nothing.

  14. BTW, Sen. Corker has reported more donations from general contractors, the automotive industry and commercial banks since last November than anyone else in Congress, $6.5 million so far. Corker’s ill-placed concern that the impact of the 5% skin in the game could be damaging towards the very same institutions, the “securitizers” that caused the present crisis is reminiscent of Adam Levitin’s recent statement uttered against the 50 state AG settlement handing a boon to the banksters, again the very ones who caused this crisis, when he said, “It’s got all the chutzpah of the patricide pleading for mercy because he’s an orphan.”

  15. Read the following Sen. Bob Corker bill and understand what’s really going on here. Hear the double-speak for what it is. This guy is an imposter. He claims to be doing the work of the people, when he’s actually a chief officer for the financial industry. See how they claim the 5% skin in the game is a bad thing…..

    The arbitrary five percent risk retention standard in the current (Dodd/Frank) bill would be replaced with a Federal Reserve Board study/report to Congress on the impact of risk retention on capital markets.

    “Additionally, the arbitrary five percent risk retention standard in the Dodd bill will greatly limit the availability of consumer credit and put many small and mid-sized lenders out of business,” Corker added. “Its impact on securitizers who retain servicing rights could further devastate credit availability, jobs and local economies. To prevent these unintended consequences, our amendment would strike the retention requirements in the current bill, and instead direct the Federal Reserve Board to study the impact of risk retention on capital markets and report back to Congress with their recommendations. Risk retention can be accomplished through several different means, and it is important that Congress fully understand those approaches before legislating a provision that could significantly harm capital formation.”

    One day we’ll all wake up to the understanding that all our homes were taken purposely. And that $16 trillion dollars was shifted from the taxpayer to the 1% under the guise of threatened collapse. That the austerity reforms were put into place the world over not because they were necessary, but because they served the wealthy. That the widening gap between the haves and the have nots wasn’t accidental, it was planned. That the selling off of important infrastructure like utilities and forest lands wasn’t because our governments sold them to raise money, they were gifted to the elite. And that all the farmland that grows the shit they call food is owned entirely by them.

    We’ll then understand that it was all a very purposeful theft, and that it couldn’t have been done without Congress, Bush and Obama. All for the central banks and their owners. Tilt. Game over. Unless we awaken.

  16. jjg007

    Yes — heard this too. And, who do they want to take over??? The bank perpetrators!!!!. Nice and cozy. Fannie/Freddie — falsified mortgage loans as in default — in order to purchase higher yielding MBS (not really MBS — they were fraudulent) from the banks who “took over” the former GSE loans by insurance fraud.

    And, the banks perpetrators are going to take over Fannie/Freddie??????

    PLEASE — tell whoever is promoting this bill — NO.

  17. GOP Wants to ‘Nationalize’ MERS
    PrintEmailReprintsFeedback
    Share |
    Friday, November 11, 2011
    By Austin Kilgore
    A new Senate bill proposing to wind down the GSEs by at least 10% a year also includes a provision that would replace the private MERS System with an identical platform run by the Federal Housing Finance Agency — along with new national standards for mortgage title transfers.

    The bill outlines the director of the FHFA to establish “MERS 2” and incorporate a single national database for all mortgage title transfers, to be maintained and operated by FHFA.

    “The rules of the Director shall ensure that property title is transferred in accordance with all applicable provisions of law,” the text of the bill reads. “All mortgage transfers shall take place according to national standards and shall be recorded in the MERS2 system.”

    In the wake of the criticism and legal challenges to the Mortgage Electronic Registration System and its parent company, Merscorp, the idea that the MERS model is in need of an overhaul or replacement is not new.

    In its May cover story, “MERS 2.0 vs. Life After MERS,” Mortgage Technology reported that while changes are clearly coming to MERS, industry participants don’t all agree on what the future of the loan registry looks like. Aside from the changes Merscorp has already implemented or identified, some said a simple rebranding would be enough to resuscitate MERS, while others called for its complete dismantling.

    In his first-ever, and so far only, media interview since becoming president and CEO of Merscorp in April, Bill Beckmann told MT that Merscorp can and must succeed as a revamped company with a higher level of scrutiny on its operation.

    “If this model doesn’t work, there are only two outcomes I could see,” Beckmann said in the interview, which appeared in the September issue of MT. “One would be a nationalized approach. Personally, I think that’s nuts. Why would you go that route when you’re already 60% of the way there with something the regulators and the constituents say is OK?”

    “The other alternative is going backwards again,” he continued. “Why would you ever want to go back to a situation where you have 50 people inventing and investing in the same systems and different processes? That adds cost and complexity to the process that’s going to get passed on the consumer in the end. It’s going to be harder to comply to, rather than easier.”

    Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., introduced his “Residential Mortgage Market Privatization and Standardization Act” bill Wednesday, calling for the reduction of the government sponsored enterprises’ portfolios of mortgage-related assets and a reduction in the credit guarantee the GSEs provide mortgage-backed securities investors to 90%.

  18. https://www.oag.state.tx.us/newspubs/releases/2010/100510_sample_bank.pdf
    Signing affidavits which falsely claim personal knowledge of facts.

    So, no, getting an affidavit with a best of my knowledge won’t cut it.

    @buck,
    I discussed the sheriff in my post on this site at
    /2011/11/09/ny-times-ag-settlement-without-investigation-a-sham-700-billion-in-negative-equity/#comment-103556

    The sheriff is sovereign. He’s elected. He has a duty to the people. What he’s selling is property of a corporation, a person. Yes, it’s far fetched but we were asleep and didn’t know what was done.

    The Deed of Trust probably says the borrower was Buck, a single person or Mr and Mrs Buck a married person. We totally missed it.

    He is given the right to put his hands on a person. He has hands. A person has a body (body of a corporation? ring a bell), but a corporation has no hands.

    You’ve heard of corporal punishment…it’s against a body…they don’t have to recognize anything except a body to take the place of what they are charging.

    We never truly identify ourselves on the documents we sign. A president of a company cannot sign a single document that affects that company without putting his name and his capacity. John Doe, President and CEO. By doing so, John Doe is protected from claims against him personally, and the company he represents settles things for him.

    Yet we are treated as representatives of our corporation.
    You that don’t know the other side of this need to give yourself a 6 month intense education to catch up. It’s crazy what’s been done. There are a lot of audios on the internet that will teach you things and help open your eyes.

    But needless to say, regardless of what the Sheriff did, he’s not the enemy. He was doing his job and he didn’t know there was fraud behind it. I know who to point to in all of this. I do not point to a customer service rep, I do not point to the mail man, nor the man with the gun (sheriff) who had permission to remove me from my home with his hands.

    I do point to all the lawyers in the law firm, who perpetrated the crime for the lender. They had a duty if I told them this was not true, to verify, but they decided the lender was accurate and proceeded, so that’s their liability. I point to the senior vice president of the mortgage servicer company. He knows I asked for certain proof to be provided and all he’d say was -not that I owed him or anyone he knew or his servicing company any money- but that “he had an interest in my home”! I responded. “I have an interest in my home, too!” I blame the judge. I provided all the evidence of failure to comply with Property Law, the constitution, deceptive trade practices, and more and she was so enamored that Fannie Mae was represented in her little country hick entry way, employee area, court room plus judge chamber courthouse that she didn’t read anything in the answer and arrogantly helped them steal the home, even when I said they are suing the wrong one.

    Spiritually, judgment has been served, but I also have a right to be here, so from a physical perspective I watch Divine Law play out on this planet. I sometimes wonder if these type of people vibrate at a different frequency such that when we move up in Love and not War, they cancel themselves out and ‘poof’ they are gone because they can no longer live here with the rest of us. I sometimes wonder if that’s how the ‘rapture’ is described in the bible. Two people are in the field and suddenly one is gone and the other remains.

    They gave us our day in court, and they get their day. I focus on the here and now because what happened is in the past and I won’t live in the past, and what may happen is in the future and I don’t wait for future events. I just live right Now, and Now, and Now and know that what I do Now has an impact on the future and becomes my new past.

    I will get my property back.
    I will be made whole.
    Why? Because I’m Divinity/Divine and I had it and can have it by Divine right.

    Trespass Unwanted, life, corporeal, state, jure divino, free.

    Sometimes the answer is right before our eyes, and those that can see it eventually will.

  19. Wild Deed, I like it!

    Tsk. Tsk. Neil. This comment is stretching it too far.
    ————————————————————————————-
    Thus the highest probability is that if you are buying a residential piece of real estate, there are title questions that are overhanging the transaction. This is a bad thing that endangers your investment and your plans but not so bad that it can’t be fixed. I think I would get an affidavit from Bosco saying that to his knowledge and belief there are no facts, documents or circumstances under which any third party could claim an interest in the real property other than as stated in the commitment — and that he is in a position to know.
    ————————————————————————————-
    I don’t think anyone’s affidavit can override anyone’s ownership of property. It’s not a contract, and it doesn’t carry the power of a contract. At best it’s a sworn oath that something is true, correct and complete to the best of someone’s knowledge, but even then, if they are unaware of something their affidavit is no good..it’s just ‘good intentions’ if I can use that word ‘good’ for what has happened.

    The original owner or their successor or assign, as in the one who settles their estate whether it be a family member or someone in probate is the only one that may have the ability to free up the cloud on that title, and who would do such a thing without just compensation for what was done.

    No theft can be covered by an affidavit. I provided proof of that in a prior post where I provided a link to a sample letter sent from the Texas AG to lenders. It specifically stated that if they were using affidavits to give them the power to do such things they were in violation of many other things.

    Nope.
    Not buying it.
    My best guess, and it is a guess, is that the foreclosures between 2009 and 2010 which OCC is sending letters to 4.5 million robbed owners in an attempt to get them to request a review…my best guess is there are millions of owners and they found fault in the 4.5 million they are sending letters to. Of those if they can get a new contract, my best guess is, they will have something written that pretty much says, if we agree to do this for you, will you absolve us of all wrongdoing and not pursue us in the future for legal matters, and my best guess is many people will agree to it and that’s a few of the 4.5 million they don’t have to be held accountable for stealing their homes and waging economic warfare against.

    But their economic warfare went beyond stealing the home. They are on credit reports, people are paying more money for the damage done to them via purchases that require financing, so even if they pay us out of one budget, they are getting the money back in another.

    The harm is huge, not just the dispossession from a home.
    People may well learn the legal definition of dispossession, to.

    All I can tell you is if they do something against you and it was against your free will, they are accountable. If you help them out, you can thank yourself and not blame anyone else.

    The only problem that occurred is they violated the Universal Law of Free Will. They just need you do enter an agreement of your free will and agree not to go after them and they will be made whole before you are.

    Those are opinions and guesses, not statements of fact.

    A maxim should go in here somewhere, hmm..let me find one.

    —————————————————————
    Arbitrium est judicium.
    An award is a judgment. Jenk Cent. 137.
    —————————————————————

    I guess they’ll award homeowners the right to have a modification. That will be interesting…your judgment for ‘you’ losing the home (it does say lost the home on the form) will be a modification. I won’t laugh. I won’t laugh. I won’t participate in that game, either.
    —————————————————————
    Nemo damnum facit, nisi qui id fecit quod facere jus non habet.
    No one is considered as committing damages, unless he is doing what he has no right to do. dig. 50, 17, 151.
    —————————————————————

    Let’s say if the banks did things they did not have a right to do, then rather than pay damages they could to use the OCC review to get people into new contracts or to get them to agree to a side settlement that would favor the bank.

    —————————————————————
    Nemo dat qui non habet.
    No one can give who does not possess. Jenk. Cent. 250.
    —————————————————————

    That’s what I’m talking about. The 4.5 million foreclosures between 2009 and 2010 are probably wholly full of proof someone supposed gave what they didn’t possess, and these supreme court decisions are pointing that out. If they get a signature from 4.5 million homeowners will it be settled their way?

    They have never been interested in the homeowner.
    Part of the settlement needs to be they back off the credit report with a positive entry, not a write off.

    Proceed with caution.

    Trespass Unwanted, life, corporeal, state, jure divino.

  20. @cubed2k

    Did you catch this Dylan Ratigan clip? It’s a good one!

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37560195/#45246622

  21. Foreclosure Filings Are Increasing…..Thanks, Banks….But Unemployment Is The Real Story

    November 10th, 2011 | Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.
    http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/2011/11/foreclosure-filings-are-increasing-thanks-banks-but-unemployment-is-the-real-story/

    News flash people…..foreclosures are only going to get worse as long as state and federal “leaders” continue to dither around about unemployment…and they ain’t doing nothing to rebuild our gutted out economy. Sorry Tricky Rick Scott 10 McDonald’s jobs do not equal the one engineering job at NASA…..

    Court records show that the 10 largest lenders in Sarasota and Manatee counties filed 591 early-stage, or lis pendens, actions in October — a 32 percent increase from the 447 filed in September.

    Sarasota Tribune
    http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20111110/ARTICLE/111109463/2416/NEWS&tc=email_newsletter?p=1&tc=pg

    And the Top Ten Markets where foreclosures are skyrocketing……

    Foreclosures have increased 14% between the second and third quarter of 2011, following five straight quarters where the number of foreclosures has gone down. This increase could dampen the recovery of the American housing market and harm economic recovery for cities where foreclosures rose significantly. Based on data recently released by RealtyTrac, 24/7 Wall St. has identified the 10 metropolitan regions where foreclosures increased by more than 30%.

    Read more: The Cities Where Foreclosure Rates Are Skyrocketing – 24/7 Wall St. http://247wallst.com/2011/11/09/the-cities-where-foreclosure-rates-are-skyrocketing/#ixzz1dJ3hjlvr

  22. I admit I did not read the entire article but, the jist as far I can tell, is that titles are never clear with the prospect of declaring a former foreclosure as void for fraud. My observation is that fraud may be a defense if it is a non-judicial foreclosure. However, if the homeowner settled with the lender, I have a hard time seeing any court upsetting such a “quit claim”. If it was a judicial foreclosure, it is unlikely to result in a declaratory judgment of void since judges usually back other judges. My big question here is what about a sheriff sale. Doesn’t a sheriff owe a duty to the public to hold and convey a clear title or himself be subject to a criminal or civil suit for fraud.?

  23. they are suppose to just not fast enough for families losing their home and do not have 100k to defend them selves. i do not understand how i ca nuncover fraud after fraud but i do not have money to sue wells fargo. how does a government like the untied states of america allow a bank to ramshackle its residents into losing their homes and then actually blame it on us for purchasing more then we can afford. when we all know we had to submit our paycheck stubs before being approved for a mortgage. there is something called verification of income have we not heard of that???? i feel what i did was mereley “ask” the bank if my salary can afford this home. i never asked the mortgage broker to lie and and increase my salary to make it seem like i can afford the home. i had the choice of 2500 other homes for sale. the mortgage broker got greedy. my appraisal was fraudulent. and modification fraud having been told by wells fargo not to pay. so i do not undertsand why this is our fault ??

  24. @ dave that actually happened to me. i called a lawyer for foreclosure defense and he could not help me because he had some wells fargo cases. seems like i cant get a call from any lawyer in florida.

  25. […] Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, currency, Eviction, foreclosure, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, securities fraud Tagged: affidavits, bankruptcy, borrower, buying a house, countrywide, disclosure, foreclosure, foreclosure defense, foreclosure offense, foreclosures, fraud, LOAN MODIFICATION, modification, quiet title, rescission, RESPA, securitization, TILA audit, title, title insurance, trustee, WEISBAND Livinglies’s Weblog […]

  26. We got a real doozy for you today folks, from sunny Wisconsin, home of the Union Beat-Down!

    In the Spirit of Bob Fosse I’ll say “It’s Showtime, Folks” — KingCast and Mortgage Movies Across America folks, red-eye to I’ll tell you where later!

    It appears that Union Federal Bank has jumped the gun in making Randy L Paul’s tenants fork over money to them just because they filed a foreclosure action. As I will note in today’s movie from the Courthouse, the case law I have seen researched holds that they have to have a hearing first, especially in a State that has not ratified the Draconian Universal Assignment of Rents Act (UARA). And the Court has allowed it to happen, thereby violating this mans Substantive and Procedural Due Process Rights…..

    Time to check the CAFRA Accounts, right. Today comes the Courtroom. Stay tuned for the next city after a weekend pause and reflection.

    http://mortgagemovies.blogspot.com/2011/11/bob-fosse-kingcast-and-mortgage-movies.html

    THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2011

    Bob Fosse, KingCast and Mortgage Movies say It’s Showtime, Folks! — in Madison, Wisconsin.

  27. i have a thought?
    if you are not in foreclosure yet i would go and talk to all of the foreclosure mills in your state giving them enough information that when they do start to foreclose that they can’t represent the banks cause you already have consulted with them?
    any thought on this?
    thanks
    dave

  28. can someone answer this. how does a man and a woman bound by marriage. wife buys house man not on note. but 2 salaries are need to support home (mortgage broker lies on application) so couple are at a deficit at closing.. what happens at foreclosure. wife has a foreclosure husband does not?? i jst do not understand how they separated husbands and wives notes and mortgages. seems scammy to me

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: