Beware of Mediation With Pretenders in Nevada


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


Editor’s Comment: 

It should come as no surprise that the would-be foreclosers are not creditors, not authorised servicers and are not acting officially in any capacity. They just want another house acquired through a “credit bid” that enables them to get a deed without putting up a dime.
If there is any surprise, it is that the report is absurdly low as an estimate of those going to mediation in Nevada without any right to do so and pretending they are lenders which is a crime . And there is precious little understanding that all the other mediations took place under the same cloud. 
So a homeowner reaches an agreement with, for example, Bank of America, when in fact BOA doesn’t own the loan, never funded the loan, and is claiming rights to represent investors who don’t know the deal is in the process of negotiation. And of course BOA is claiming the loan is part of a pool serviced by BOA pursuant to what? We already know the loan never made it into the pool so even if BOA was the servicer it still has no right to be at mediation, much less foreclose.
Just to be clear, even if they show up with the paperwork doesn’t mean the documents were not fabricated. Quite the contrary. The banks would not be looking for amnesty if the documents were real. The Missouri indictments never would have issued if the documents were real. 
All evidence points to a much higher percentage of false claims in support of fraudulent foreclosures. If we took apart each document the way one Arizona sheriff says his department analysed Obama’s birth certificate, we would find that none of the foreclosures of mortgages that were subject to claims of securitization were anything but pure fraud.

A third of the time, lenders don’t have paperwork in foreclosure mediation sessions


Friday, March 2, 2012

When homeowners headed for foreclosure sit down with their bank to see if they can work out an agreement, state law requires the lender come equipped with documents proving who owns the home, among other things. In one-third of those mediation meetings, however, banks failed to produce the required documents, according to an analysis of the last six months of 2011.

The figures appear to provide statistical evidence to support what many homeowners have claimed — that banks aren’t negotiating in good faith to help them stay in their houses.

JP Morgan Chase had the highest rate of noncompliance with the state law. It failed to produce required documents in 52 percent of mediations, which homeowners may request before a bank forecloses. The figures were released Thursday by the state’s Foreclosure Mediation Program.

Bank of America, by far the biggest private lender in Nevada, did not produce the necessary documents 41 percent of the time.

Overall, out of the 3,183 mediations from July 1 to Dec. 31, lenders were missing documents on 1,148 occasions, or 36 percent of the time.

“The noncompliance rate since the beginning of the program has been shockingly high,” said Barbara Buckley, head of the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada and the former Assembly speaker who authored the foreclosure mediation bill. “I had hoped by now that the lenders would begin complying.”

Bill Uffelman, president of the Nevada Bankers Association, said “the numbers speak for themselves.”

“The fact that they’re missing required documents, produced somewhere along the life of the loan, indicates insufficient record keeping,” he said.

Representatives of the banks could not be reached after the figures were released.

The state’s Foreclosure Mediation Program started in September 2009 was intended to allow homeowners to sit down with their lender before going through foreclosure. It does not force banks to make any concessions but it does require they do the following:

• Show up at mediation sessions.

• Bring documents, such as a certified copy proving ownership and a chain of title.

• Have the authority to negotiate on behalf of the lender.

• Participate “in good faith,” as determined by the mediator, who is appointed by the Nevada court system.

When the program started, it struggled to get bank representatives to show up at all, said Verise Campbell, administrator of the program. In the last six months of 2011, banks had representatives present in all but 2 percent of mediation sessions.

Despite the large percentage of sessions where banks have not shown up with documents, it is an improvement compared with the early years of the program. Lenders failed to bring documents in 50 percent of the cases during the first two years of the program, Campbell said.

The numbers released Thursday show “improvement, but banks still need to focus on their document compliance,” Campbell said. “It’s clearly the weak link in their compliance.”

The numbers provided the first look at participation by lending institution. In addition to Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase, the report gave the rate of not bringing required paperwork for the following lenders: Wells Fargo, 31 percent; Ally/GMAC, 50 percent; US Bank, 32 percent; Citigroup, 12 percent.

Transparency about which lenders are complying and which ones aren’t could compel those noncompliant banks to produce documents, Buckley said.

The courts could use these statistics to issue fines against banks that fail to comply with the state program, Buckley said.

Lenders who don’t comply with the program “don’t deserve to proceed with foreclosures,” she said.

37 Responses

  1. Practical analysis ! For my two cents , people need a IRS W-4 , my wife filled out and faxed a sample document here


  3. Neil said this:

    “It should come as no surprise that the would-be foreclosers are not creditors, not authorised servicers and are not acting officially in any capacity. They just want another house acquired through a “credit bid” that enables them to get a deed without putting up a dime.”

    What about when a real estate “investor” does a bid and gets the property and records a Trustee’s Deed…are they giving cash to the debt collector? Like in my case a RE investor bought it and is on the newly recorded Trustee’s Deed, and the foreclosure mill’s website says it sold for $339,500, which was the starting “bid”…so did he give cash to the debt collector—OneWest Bank, FSB? Because that is the debt collector (not owner of note) entity that the foreclosure mill said I would have had to make a check out to…

    Anybody? Thanks.

  4. Hey Enraged,do you know a guy named Georg Poltzer? Something fishy about him check him out.I went through my docks from my sale this guy is playing both ends for the middle He is very smart .Go to the source.He helped me sell my fraud bullshit and I think he is at the source of this as far as I can see toothless website

  5. Posted Feb 29, 2012
    comments say one year ago this supposedly took place, and the recent talk of arrest was recanted to a subpoena to show up for some Lehman (sp?) Brothers suit

    Trespass Unwanted, corporeal, life, free and independent state, sovereign, allodial, in jure proprio, jure divino

  6. “….but apparently it’s….true enough for Fox News, who did a story on it….”


    Oh sorry zurenarrh….that’s some funny shit right there, I don’t care who you are!

    Links to Geithner’s arrest? Better yet, some 8X10’s of him in an orange jumpsuit….that’d be like porn for me!

  7. E. Tolle,
    I also had my doubts about Geithner’s arrest, but apparently it’s true. Or true enough for Fox News, who did a story on it, citing Bloomberg.

  8. @ Enraged, have you gotten into the bubbly? That last post is uncharacteristically lacking any substance whatsoever.

    Please reveal anywhere that states that Geithner was arrested. Although we all know that there’s absolutely no doubt he should be, we also all know that they’d rewrite the constitution to keep one of their players from facing the music. Ain’t gonna’ happen.

    When it comes to the game of musical chairs, those guys will all be sitting when the music stops, leaving all of us wallflowers to scrounge for ourselves. Different set of laws at the top. We can’t even see it from here.

    March 2nd, 2012 | Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq. general public just has no idea how difficult the job our elected circuit court judges have. Specific to this foreclosure crisis, the banks have exponentially increased the case loads our judges are expected to hear, while at the same time the Florida Legislature has effectively cut their salaries, reduced their staff and reduced the pay for the staff that remain. The working conditions and the working environment for these public servants is demanding and difficult.

    Most times the disputes and arguments heard by these judges are weighty and significant. By and large the people that are arguing in front of them are very intelligent, very prepared. These attorneys are also usually supported by competent and organized support staff, paralegals and assistants. They have a team of support players and resources to support the effort.

    Our judges on the other hand largely head into battle each day alone and not properly supported. For hours on end, they and their staff are forced to sort through the roughly 368,000 foreclosure filings that are a mess of contradictions and confusion. Then, in the middle of all this, they stop work on all these cases to preside over a two week long, gut wrenching trial where a young family lost an infant in a medical malpractice case. For two weeks, the judge alternates between hearing devastating emotional testimony then days of technical, complex medical testimony. And then it’s right back int the foreclosure quagmire. A disturbing parade of hard luck stories, job loss, divorce, misery.

    As a judge you undoubtedly feel moved at times by the gut wrenching stories. As a member of the community, you are not immune to the very difficult economic circumstances ripping across this country. Aside from what you see in your courtroom, you suffer the same economic uncertainty as everyone else. As a judge you know family members, friends, co workers who are suffering the same very real tragedies that hear about for eight hours a day, every single day. But even if a homeowner or a good defense attorney presents compelling evidence and testimony, you are handcuffed and boxed in by appellate court decisions that force your hand in so many areas. Wearing the robe means you’re a judge first and foremost, your duty is to the law and as conflicting as it must be sometimes, you must serve her before the heartaches you see pouring out before you.

    And you are provided no room for error, especially the reversible kind. Just think about it, how would you like to have every single word out of your mouth reduced down to writing? And how would you like to have every single word and every single decision you make picked apart by a team of extraordinarily intelligent and extremely gifted superiors who not only probably have many more years of experience then you do, but also have the benefit of lots of time and a whole lot of dedicated support staff, bright young lawyers and teams of judicial assistants that can ponder and second guess for months over a decision that you made late in the day in an instant? Every single word you speak, every word you write, subject to intensive critical review. Not just the final, formal decision at the end of the trial, but every decision, every fork in the road, every thought in your brain along the way. Examined under a microscope. Picked apart and attacked. Publicly. For all the world to see and read about. Forever.

    Given all of this, how would you like to walk into a highly charged and very difficult environment every single day and listen to people arguing and battling bitterly?

    Now as you think about all that, I want you to slip on the black robe, enter the courtroom and get prepared to do this job. The transcript that follows provides just a brief perspective on the difficult job our judges do. The fact of the matter is many of the issues our trial courts are facing are new and novel, complex and confounding. There are oftentimes no definitive guideposts or opinions you can rely upon for the answers. Listen as this judge drills down into a 30 year practicing lawyer, demanding out of him answers and details, no vagueness or generality. Listen to this judge’s command of the facts and the law and consider that while the lawyers in front of him may have only a few hundred cases, this judge is responsible for many thousands of cases. This is a great example that shows why our judges are deserving of so much respect……


  10. Bill Black will have his wish.

    Geithner was arrested last week, questioned by Judge Napolitano and release. I read that last week but the source was so iffy that I didn’t post it anywhere. Toady, it’s coming from Bloomberg…

    I keep saying that it is moving and shaking…

  11. Question for you.

    Did Bank of America HELOCs even have promissory notes? Or just the mortgage contract?

    Anyone? Anyone?

  12. Saw this link at Jeff Rense website.
    It’s dated March 1, 2012

    Nevada Supreme Court holds MERS assignments valid

    Proof there is a bunch of judges that are willing to go down on the Titanic together rather than admit there’s a problem with the structural integrity of the ‘sinking ship’.

    Might I add, of all the people in the world I could have been when I was born here. I am glad I’m not them.

    Trespass Unwanted, corporeal, life, free and independent state, a people, sovereign, in jure proprio, jure divino

  13. How about every major newspaper or online article using INSURE when they mean to use ENSURE?

    ensure never used. forgotten.

    although blogs more informal.

  14. Sorry—I can’t take it anymore…

    @ certain people who do this over and over—it’s “YOU’RE” for “you are”…not “YOUR”…and, it’s “COULDN’T” care less…not “COULD” care less.

    Thank you.

  15. Banks’ fees pay off — for credit unions

    More than 1.3 million Americans shift funds amid higher costs for checking, savings and credit accounts.

    The L.A. Financial Credit Union in downtown Los Angeles offers free debit cards and free checking in response to the news of fee hikes at the large major banks. (Mark Boster / Los Angeles Times / March 1, 2012)

    Reporting from Los Angeles and Washington— Consumers fed up with the rising tide of bank fees helped the nation’s credit unions more than double their number of new customers last year, new figures show.

    More than 1.3 million Americans opened new credit union accounts last year, up from less than 600,000 in 2010, the National Credit Union Administration reported. That brings the number of credit union members to a record 91.8 million.
    Credit union growth: An article in the March 2 Section A about the growth in U.S. credit union membership in response to rising bank fees said credit unions hold $96 billion in assets. The correct figure is $960 billion.

    Activists say those numbers might swell even further if major banks try to squeeze more fees out of their customers.

    “We’re going to be playing bank fee Whack-a-Mole for the foreseeable future,” Fred R. Becker, chief executive of the National Assn. of Federal Credit Unions said Thursday. Ultimately, he added, “people are going to switch” to credit unions.

    Credit unions were given a boost last year as major banks became targets of the Occupy Wall Street movement. It didn’t help when Bank of America began plans to impose a $5 fee for debit cards, triggering howls of protest from consumers, Congress and even the White House.

    Seizing the moment, consumer groups organized November’s “Bank Transfer Day,” which encouraged people to switch their accounts from for-profit banks to nonprofit credit unions and smaller local banks.

    The $96 billion in credit union accounts is dwarfed by the $12.6 trillion floating in the nation’s banking system. But the shift into these funds serve as a warning sign to banks, which critics say have long operated as if they had no competition.

    “Consumers have made it loud and clear that they are fed up,” said Norma Garcia, manager of Consumers Union’s financial services team in San Francisco.

    Pattie Sullivan, a Rancho Mirage retiree living on Social Security, said her bank surprised her in January by raising the annual maintenance fees for her two small retirement accounts from $15 for both to $30 each, or $60.

    Sullivan said she wants to move her money but can’t afford to do that with the larger account, for $78,000, because it’s tied up in a five-year certificate of deposit at 3.35% annual interest — more than any bank is currently paying. She’s thinking of picketing her bank.

    “I’m on the brink of going to Home Depot, getting material and making a sign for when I go up there,” she said.

    Though BofA backed away from the debit-card charge, the bank said Thursday that it is continuing to test a new menu of checking accounts that includes higher fees. A spokeswoman said it hasn’t been determined when the fees would be rolled out.

    Criticism of excessive fees slapped on customer checking, savings and credit accounts has escalated during the last year. It has led the government to announce Thursday another way for Americans to register their gripes about service.

    The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, created in the aftermath of the financial crisis and near-meltdown of the banking industry, is now logging consumer complaints about their accounts. The agency said it expects to field calls on problems related to opening and closing accounts, dealing with low account balances and using debit or ATM cards.

    “Deposit accounts play a critical role in the lives of most Americans, but these products and the laws governing them are complicated,” said the bureau’s director, Richard Cordray. “Consumers need someone on their side to keep banks and credit unions accountable — that is our job at the consumer bureau.”

    Last month, the agency launched a broad investigation of overdraft fees charged by banks and started soliciting public input on a new disclosure box about the fees on monthly statements.

    The backlash against banks led to a broad overhaul of the financial system, including tough new restrictions designed to protect consumers. That has led banks to report a steep drop in revenue during the last few years.

    For instance, new legislation halved fees that merchants pay when their customers make debit-card purchases. That led to a big decline in revenue in the industry and caused major banks like JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo & Co. to raise fees on checking accounts to help recoup anticipated losses.

    Consumer advocates and bank consultants had expected even more fees to be levied on consumers. But those efforts appear to have subsided after the widespread public lashing suffered by Bank of America.

    JPMorgan Chase consumer chief Todd Maclin said at an investor conference Tuesday that big banks lose money on most customers with less than $100,000 in deposits and investments. But he said it would be extremely difficult for banks to compensate by imposing new fees given the current hostile environment.

    Unlike BofA, JPMorgan Chase is no longer testing new checking fees, a spokesman said. But industry analysts point out that banks must charge for their services — it’s just a question of how, and how much.

    “Big banks need to pick their poison,” said banking attorney Jeremy T. Rosenblum, a consumer finance expert at Ballard Spahr in Philadelphia.

    “They can passively accept government-mandated revenue losses, or they can charge new fees and risk offending consumers and, worse, bureaucrats who have been given enormous power over them. I think that, sooner or later — perhaps in many cases after the elections — banks are going to have to take the political risk.”

  16. Nevada Mediation – yesterday – bankster appeared and immediately called “authorized rep” and started talking numbers about loan mod re HAMP -it was okay – but at no time did the bankster atty indicated until after the mod was accepted by me then the mediator said the bank didn’t have all of the docs. If the HO is required to bring and s ubmit financial docs to banksters, now the bankster atty are being deceptive
    servicers get paid by Fannie Mae etc to do a loan mod – so now i am in temp mod so I will continue to write letters if when the loan is paid off will I get teh note back paid in full and I also read in news on internet that Fannie and Freddie will be now considering principal reductions commencing end of april – at my mediation no reduction in principal arrearges added in as well as foreclosure fees – i requested a copy of the foreclosure fees to audit it and the bankster atty said we are not waving their fees, no mod of the new mod agreement – I t hink I will be writing directly to execs at Fannie Mae and making inquiry on HAMP principal reductions -seems so odd that the BPO lists my house at 115-117K and now new loan will be$155-something is soooo very wrong with this picture-I have done a lot of research on this subject – but until the case law is actually beneficial and sanctions of the banksters imposed at all levels from mediation, courts and of course Headquaters for financial institutions all we can do is be aware and informed and try to make the best decision for us in through the fraud and deception of our institutions and government -God bless the Sheeple.

  17. 3-2-12: 115 resignations from world banks.

    The list now includes:

    2/15/12 (WORLD) World Bank CEO Zoellick resigns

    2/17/12 (USA) Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein out as by summer

    2/20/12 (USA WA) First Financial Northwest Director Spencer Schneider Quits

    2/22/12 (USA) Goldman Sachs Hedge Fund Group Chief Howard Wietschner to Retire

    2/24/12 (USA) Evercore Partners Head Eduardo Mestre steps down
    3/1/12 (USA FL) Florida Venture Forum [Venture Capital] Exec Dir Robin Lester quits

    3/1/12 (USA) PineBridge Investments said Win Neuger has resigned as chief executive. Neuger helped build AIG’s third party asset management business, PineBridge still manages AIG assets

    3/2/12 (USA) Deutsche Bank Student Loan CEOJohn Hupalo quits to start student loan counseling firm
    3/2/12 (USA) Citigroup Richard Parsons to step down as chairman

    Complete list here.


    Nevada Supreme Court Holds MERS Assignments Valid!
    By Kerri Panchuk• March 1, 2012 • 1:03pm

    The Nevada Supreme Court ruled in two separate cases that a mortgage assignment from Merscorp, parent company of registry Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, does not invalidate a foreclosure.

    MERS is the electronic mortgage registry that ended up in the limelight when issues arose about securitized loans. MERS was created to record mortgage assignments as loans move through the securitization process.

    In the Volkes v. BAC Home Loans Servicing case, the plaintiff claimed a foreclosure was invalidated by a MERS loan assignment. The Nevada Supreme Court validated the assignment, saying it does not impede on MERS ability to foreclose.

    The court made a similar ruling in U.S. Bank v. Davis, saying, “We reject appellants’ contention that the assignment was invalid solely by virtue of its connection to MERS.”

    MERS responded to the case saying, “The Nevada Supreme Court has made it unquestionably clear that the MERS business model complies with Nevada law.”


  19. Thanks m.soliman trying to follow.

    “these arguments miss the gravamen brought in pleading the matter”

    Just a note – the quote was from the judge’s ruling in that case not the arguments. The same CA judge ruled in Salazar. Wish there was a list somewhere – successful published cases with short analysis of significance and side by side the failing published cases with short analysis of significance.

    It seems to me it always comes down to getting the judge to compel discovery of the accounting and perhaps the missing “writings” and how to put enough evidence that a legitimate “controversy” exists in order to have a chance at getting them to do that.

    They are looking at the recorded documents first and foremost and then ruling on existing laws using real property statutes and UCC codes ect. – regarding these (or say they are even if ignoring the laws). The “bankers” say the rest is irrelevent and the judges buy into that. Isn’t it difficult even for attorneys and experts to get the discovery needed (and usually hopeless for homeowners)? Can’t just use “theory” or “hearsay” or “information” to get them to do that at least in non-judicial where the burden of proof is on the homeowner. Don’t you have to start with the recorded documents and show there are true issues of fact with these that require further discovery of the accounting trail or unrecorded “writings” for instance to settle the “controversy”? The issue of standing seems to be key….?

  20. This article is evidence why there can be no settlement of the AGs with these terrorists.

    “The state cannot diminish rights of the people.”
    Hertado v. California, 110 US 516

    The laws and statutes are already in place.
    We don’t need a ‘modification of the laws’ to work with the ‘modification of the terrorists’ so that they flip a switch and make the offenders the victim and the victims the offender.

    Game over.
    Let the Universe cleanse this planet of the abomination that exists so the Creator within can live here under the initial ‘Truth’.

    The Earth has been cleansed before.
    Thus the words ‘replenish’ in Genesis.
    Two examples.

    # Genesis 1:28

    And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and “””replenish the earth”””, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

    # Genesis 9:1

    And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and “”””replenish the earth””””.

    Trespass Unwanted, corporeal, life, free and independent state, a people, allodial, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino.

  21. […] Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, currency, Eviction, foreclosure, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, securities fraud Tagged: 60 minutes, affidavits • attesting • Daniel Edstrom • DTC-Systems • fabricating • false information • false sworn documents • foreclose • illicit business practices • improper statements • imp, AHMSI, appraisal fraud, attorney general, auction fraud, Chris Koster, credit bids, DocX Indictment, foreclosure fraud, FORECLOSURE SETTLEMENT, foreclosures, forgery, housing market, housing prices, investors, linda green, LPS, Missouri, mortgage fruad, mortgages, Robo-Signing, settlement, strategic default, Wells Fargo Livinglies’s Weblog […]

  22. There cannot be a trustees sale for satisfying the condition for “rolling” assets into a new trust . Your all on arguments that lost merit in 2009 and as of 2012 your part of a new five year bond offering called a negative pledge .

    The trustees sale is concluded as a “wash” got it. The collections specialist has standing like MERS. Its all part of a M&A and acceptable under a structured financing scheme .

    If you all wont listen to what is wrong counsel , maybe you’ll listen to what they did right!



    ….keep on guessing!

  23. From Cirilo E.Cruz, Plaintiff, v. Aurora Loan Services LLC et al ., August 11, 2011:
    “The trustee is bound by no fiduciary duties, and has no duty to defend the rights of the beneficiary, or authority to appear in the suit in its behalf. Id. at 462.

    M.Soliman – The trustee is incidental to a fiduciary and acting incidental to trust . The bigger question is how can a title company insure the deal and act as a collateral agent for assets held in a isolated and remote trust . Title insurance and need for a fiduciary is moot where the true indentures trustee and co trustee are in fact held as a fiduciary.

    The entire construction here is moot where the assets are charged as of October 2008.

    The trustee of a deed of trust serves merely as a common agent of both parties. Vournas v. Fidelity Nat. Tit. Ins. Co. 73 Cal. App. 4th 668, 677 (1999). Because the beneficiary’s economic interests are threatened when the existence or priority of the deed of trust is challenged, it is the real party in interest under a deed of trust. Monterey, 49 Cal. 3d at 461 (trust deed beneficiary must be named in a mechanics lien foreclosure suit since trustee does not protect its interests). See also Diamond Heights Village Assn., Inc. v. Financial Freedom Senior Funding Corp., 196 Cal. App. 4th 290, 304 (2011) (beneficiary is the real party in interest in a fraudulent conveyance action to void the security).”

    Holding to the conventional foreclosure these arguments miss the gravamen brought in pleading the matter. The conventional mortgage is lost to divestment of the deed that is actually the HUD -1 statement .

    If the HUD -1 represents the corpus whereas the divestiture argument holds the assets were transferred from one form and substance to another and later diluted as the borrowing entity . ..the Not for Profit entity . To argue standing for a custodial role and trustee with domain over a deed of trust is to miss the lions share of the argument .

    The charges taken by the Fed and transfer of beneficial interests in an indenture from TR certs to TC certs is to have charged off the debt.

    The note fails while the basis in assets are argued in court like NY Supreme court and BofA intervenor hearings under the states jurisdiction governing the filing requirement for the debtors.


  24. From Cirilo E.Cruz, Plaintiff, v. Aurora Loan Services LLC et al ., August 11, 2011:

    “The trustee is bound by no fiduciary duties, and has no duty to defend the rights of the beneficiary, or authority to appear in the suit in its behalf. Id. at 462. The trustee of a deed of trust serves merely as a common agent of both parties. Vournas v. Fidelity Nat. Tit. Ins. Co. 73 Cal. App. 4th 668, 677 (1999). Because the beneficiary’s economic interests are threatened when the existence or priority of the deed of trust is challenged, it is the real party in interest under a deed of trust. Monterey, 49 Cal. 3d at 461 (trust deed beneficiary must be named in a mechanics lien foreclosure suit since trustee does not protect its interests). See also Diamond Heights Village Assn., Inc. v. Financial Freedom Senior Funding Corp., 196 Cal. App. 4th 290, 304 (2011) (beneficiary is the real party in interest in a fraudulent conveyance action to void the security).”

    ….can’t highlight anything – so please note:

    “or authority to appear in the suit in its behalf”

    My servicer is calling the DOT trustee “the attorney” (no sale date scheduled).

  25. Haven’t received NOD from BOA…however I received a sticky note on my door today from LMI Custom Couriers. It said they missed delivering me a package. I’m not expecting a package…They have a # for me to reschedule a delivery time. I google their website…not much there. Started in 2010…some responses while googling is this could be legal papers….is this the proper and legal way to serve me with foreclosure in a judicial state??? Where’s NOD prior to foreclosure delieverd via mail or fed-x that BOA normally uses??? Sticky note has a tracking # on it but no where to enter it on their site… Read one story where one of their couriers nearly beat the door in to deliver and kept yelling to the top of his lungs for someone to open the door. A pregnant lady who was very scared of course did not answer. Why would a courier for a company stand and continue to beat on the door?? Why would the courier care so much? Why not knock and when no one answers leave to sticky note and go on…fed-x doesn’t do that..I was not home at time but look for them to return…I assure u if someone tries to strong arm me to sign for something its not gonna be pretty…..

  26. hman and Carie

    I have NOD and ADOT both recorded. Was notified in writing of the NOD but not the ADOT (found this myself – it is a TILA violation for new beneficiary not to not notify the homeowner of the change in beneficiary).

    No trustee sales date scheduled yet –not 90 days yet (received a receission NOD but another got filed simultaneosly) – assume a scheduled trustee sale will be recorded and I will be notified (know I can assume nothing) but assume this at least is the law. If this is not correct would someone let me know.

    There has been no notification of substitute trustee and I am having trouble searching the county records for this currently. Been told by servicer (pretender lender who assigned all beneficial interest to the trust on the ADOT) to contact origninal trustee on DOT for “other charges” that they said have occurred “we don’t know how much they are” and the servicer referrred to the DOT trustee company as the “attorney” and gave me a phone number and address (already sent a letter to that address in order to receive this – it is the original DOT trustee). I politely and breifly educated the rep on what a trustee on a deed of trust was supposed to be and said if I have to speak with an attorney to get this information perhaps I better have an attorney speak for me (not that I can afford one).

    hman sounds like he received the SOT in writing a few times. Carie – did you receive the SOT in writing? Thanks.

    Anyone is it law that you are notified in writing of SOT? Trustee Sale date in non judicial? (already know it is law that you receive the NOD in writing and notification from the new beneficiary of the change in beneficiary as per ADOT in writing– not that law is followed).

  27. What should we make of this…? Is Obama actually genuinely looking for “justice: for all?

    I’d like but I’ve been so disappointed, I think I’ll wait and see…

  28. Oh, and when I threw a fit asking who is real creditor—the stupid foreclosure mill sent me something in the mail that said my original lender/creditor was MERS—and my current creditor/lender was Deutsche. CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT TOTAL CRAP??? And then the assh*les sold my house. Pure insanity…and we’re livin’ it.

  29. @joann and hman

    In my case they recorded SOT and ADOT right before the trustee’s sale. It’s their little routine…doesn’t matter that the trust is closed and empty…doesn’t matter (in Deutsche’s case) that their own spokesperson said in public that Deutsche is ONLY the Trustee of the mbs trust—and has NO beneficial stake or ownership in any of the “loans” that are being foreclosed on…Deutsche is PRETENDING to be acting on behalf of security investors—BUT THE INVESTORS ARE NOT PROMISSORY NOTE OWNERS OR LOAN OWNERS. It’s the servicer’s job to send you ’round and ’round in circles with all kinds of stupid lies while they foreclose on you behind the scenes.
    Pure MADNESS.

  30. Joann,

    It’s been my expereince that I have been given notice of substitution of trustee through the mail when a change occured. I do not know if this is the case for everyone. It has also been my expierence that the substitution of trustee and the NOD usually occur the same day.

    I think the word “lender” applies to the original lender but who that person is is debatable. Some people say the “originator” took a loan to loan the money. Some say the security investors certificates funded the transaction. I’ve heard people say it’s the depositor.

    IMO it can never be the trustee. They have put in nothing? My point is how can the “Trustee” be the “lender”. This seems like a conflict of interest? How are they going to perform due diligence upon themselves?

    Obviously, this has to be a lie? Am I missing something?

  31. Hman:

    “They say…….The deed of trust also allows the lender to subtitute a trustee at any time.”

    The DOT does say this and uses the word “lender”….The question I have is still “define lender”. Is it ok for the defunct originator who sold the mortgage years ago to do this (using successor servicer pretender lenders name) or does it have to come from the current “lender/beneficiary” (same entity on my DOT) now with an ADOT naming a “new” “lender/beneficiary” trust? Non judicial. Question for anyone is not what should be the case but what is the case and perhaps further question can you challenge this effectively or not.

    In my county the substitute trustee recordings do not link to the Grantor/Grantee index (as in searching on your own name and things like NOD and ADOT do show up) and you have to monitor every single filing daily by the all possible “lenders” who could make a substitute trustee recording to watch for this. In addition you cannot open the actual file from the online listings you have to go to the courthouse to see them. Then the onsite courthouse system does not function properly in a search (“too many listings” whether 2 days or 2 months or 2 years) unless you have all the possible file numbers painstakenly listed from the internet link from home first and search each one separately . I pointed this out to the recorder clerks. They could care less – non-judicial and don’t buy that there is any reason for deadbeats to monitor anything (implied if not in actual words). I am really surprised attorneys in the area have not made a big deal out of this but that just tells you how many attorneys have anything at all to do with foreclosure defense here! My guess is not a single attorney has ever tried to keep a watch out for a substitute trustee for a client. Frankly very few ever defend foreclosures in this county (CA) and lose if they try.

    Anyway – anyone – do you get notified in writing by the “lender” when a substitute has been recorded?

  32. If the banks are required to show up for mediation, but they are not required to make any concessions, then what’s the point??
    I mean really? It looks like just another hoop the homeowner gets to jump thru. In the end the banks will say they complied and tried to help the homeowner but it was unsuccessful so they get the house. What a croc! What a stupid program and what a waste of time. Also, with all the information we have about robo signers and pretender lenders, you’re telling me that only 33% of the banks didn’t have the the required documents? Does that mean 66% of them did? No way!!!

  33. My “servicer” has sent me an allonge claiming to give them POA to act on behalf of Deutsche. The Copy of the note has been endorsed to Deutsche.

    They say the trustee has the right to act on behalf of the certificatholders and the trustee has the right to appoint an agent to act on it’s behalf. The deed of trust also allows the lender to subtitute a trustee at any time.

    I don’t think it is legal to substitute a trustee if you are in default? but it’s been done to me 2 times already.

    Deutsche Claims to be the “owner” (they don’t say creditor) and they are also the securitization trustee. They pretend to be the creditor in court. They also place the credit bid in my foreclosure. Assume for a minute that Deutsche met the criteria of “creditor”. How can they substitute themselves as trustee? They are taking direction from themselves? If the lender is also the trustee why is a trustee (Trust Deed) even needed in the first place? You would have a mortgage.

    If the lender and trustee were the same then the trustee would be the impartial 3rd party to themselves? Can anyone answer how the trustee and lender can claim to be the same party? This makes no sense to me.

  34. Enraged I agree. I didn’t fight during my first foreclosure. I was ignorant and this stuff was still underground. A lot has come out in the last 5 years.

    I tried to do the “right thing” and do a modification. After the mod process the servicer told me it’s only their job to process and submit the paper work but it was up to the “investors” guidelines whether you are approved or not. I asked who is the investor? Can I talk to them directly? They wouldn’t tell me.

    Finally, after a year they told me my “invetor” was RALI. That was the name of the “trust”. The employee that told me this didn’t even know what it meant. This is when I started digging. I haven’t stopped. I’ve tried to educate people around me. What I’ve experienced is only people that are in foreclosure or nearing foreclosure actually care.

    People that can afford to pay their mortgage think everythings ok, even with their title. Things are becoming more and more main stream and I think the general puplics perception will change but who knows what else has to come out before this happens.

    I don’t think things will start to go the way of the homeowner until puplic perception is changed. Also, some people claim the economy is recovering. The economy will not recover until the fraudsters are held accountable. Foreign money will not invest again in the US because there has been no penalty for fraud!

  35. It seems to work the same way here In Florida. My mediation was odrered by the Judge March of last year, HSBC Bank as Trustee for Wells Fargo certiicates series 2007 PA-5. So we all sit down at a big table with the exception of HSBC , then their Attorney dials up the bank and BAM !!!!!!! Wells Fargo is on the phone saying they are allowed to act in the behalf of HSBC to mediate this loan.

    I was not happy and told my Attorney this meeting is over and insisted they enter something into the court records on HSBC letter head giving them the authorization to do so. They tried to schedule another mediation meeting in November and we made the same request which they have ignored as well. So I refused to comply with their request and my Attorney sent them a letter as to the vaild reasoning.

    Last week I recieved a copy of the Plaintiff’s Motion for Waiver of Mediation to the court , which indicated an Exhibit A attached ( negative notice letter ) which was not attached. I have no idea what that could be !!!!!!!! Once again , Florida Default Law Group making up more games and as usual not playing by any one set of rules. I noticed on their web site they have proudly listed all of their Clients and it did not suprise me that HSBC was nowhere on this posted list. The Games They Play !!!!!!!

  36. Well… what do we expect? So far, we’ve indulged those banks, given them money to help homeowners modify with absolutely no string attached, especially those relative to whether the bank was, indeed, the proper party to modify anything.

    And we keep recompensating them to the tune of millions in bonuses for a job so well done. When are homeowners and tax payers (one and the same people, by the way) going to start making serious demands on the banks?

    For every homeowner who can’t find an attorney in the state he lives in, there 10 others who could be fighting and simply don’t. Apathy? Fear? Ignorance? Some church-induced feeling that they borrowed, therefore they owe? What about getting some good church-induced teaching that stealing is a sin, that greed is a sin, that lying, cheating and committing fraud are sins? How is it that, in many people’s mind, banks are as big as they are because they did something right while they, themselves, are broke because they failed the “good stewardship” test? I am speaking from experience: the idea that I am going after a bank resonated as such a vicious sin in my church that… I simply quit going! I had to sever all ties with those losers who keep dragging this entire country down with them. The idea of fighting for what is right is considered heinous by those so-called “christians”.

    Who needs that? Theists are afraid people will start thinking for themselves. Atheists are afraid… they won’t.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: