Az Scapegoat Gets 15 Years for Fraud


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


Editor’s Comment: 

In this case Countrywide is portrayed as the victim. This comes in handy when BOA, owner of CW, is dodging questions about how anyone didn’t know what was going on in mortgage origination. Of course they knew and CW is no more a victim than any other co-conspirator in a scam.

What should have happened here was that the defendant who is now going to jail should have been flipped to testify against the other participants in this scam. Instead, prosecutors have now made it easier for the investment banks to point the finger at “bad apples” which diverts attention from the real story — bad mortgages and bad foreclosures.

While it appears that this defendant made millions of dollars on her part of the scam, it is far more important that CW and others made far more money than that on the same loans. And even more importantly, the foreclosures on defective loans, which posed no actual risk of loss to the banks, were and remain a blight on our system of title registries. It is still true that the the banks interposed themselves as “creditors” for the purpose of taking bailout money and acquiring title to property and money that at all times was the property and money owned and owed to the investors who put up the money and the homeowners who put up their homes.

This is the essential fact of our present situation: the banks have stepped into the shoes of the investors without putting up one dime. The windfall from bailouts, foreclosures, insurance and hedge products is so large that regulators and prosecutors fear for their jobs in failing to bring the perpetrators and the system to justice. And as long as the risk falls on the homeowner and the investor with the banks taking all the money and property, there will be a Fundamental imbalance in our system that cannot be corrected by any means other than return of the property and money to the victims of this fraud. The fraud is too large. There is not enough money in the world to let the banks get away with this AND bring back prosperity. We can only have bank oligopoly OR a return to normal commerce — we can’t have both.

Former AZ Countrywide Loan Officer Gets 15-Year Sentence For Mortgage Loan Fraud

By Herman Thordsen


On March 7, U.S. District Judge Neil V. Wake sentenced Paige Kinney, aka Jamielee Miller, to 15 years in prison. Kinney had previously pleaded guilty to various charges related to a mortgage fraud scheme and to charges of bankruptcy fraud, wire fraud, mail fraud, and bank fraud in two separate indictments.

Ann Birmingham Scheel, Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona, highlighted the significance of this sentence by stating, “Mortgage fraud has deflated property values, harmed lending institutions, and ruined entire neighborhoods in our community. This defendant was undaunted by the mortgage fraud indictment and continued to commit fraud crimes while awaiting charges. I commend the IRS and the FBI on a tenacious and thorough investigation that led to this significant sentence.” (As I have been writing, the prosecutors are coming down harder and harder. It behooves the “target” to find competent counsel before indictment.)

Dawn Mertz, special agent in charge of Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation said, “Ms. Lawler used her position as a loan officer to carry out a $40 million mortgage fraud scheme. After she was charged in the mortgage fraud case, she continued to commit egregious financial crimes. She used her position and her knowledge to manipulate and erode our financial systems. Ms. Lawler’s sentence reflects the severity of the financial crimes she imposed upon our community.”

Kinney played a leadership role in a $40 million mortgage fraud scheme that targeted Countrywide Home Loans and other lenders. From January 2005 through December 2007, Kinney and others conspired to commit mortgage fraud by using unqualified straw buyers to purchase properties, knowing that the straw buyers did not intend to live in the homes or be responsible for the loan payments. Kinney would obtain mortgage financing to purchase homes in the names of the straw buyers by submitting fraudulent mortgage loan applications and altering documents, such as bank statements, to misrepresent the straw buyers’ assets, income, employment status, liabilities and other debts, sources of earnest money and down payments, and their intent to make the property a primary residence. Based on these misrepresentations regarding the buyers’ ability to qualify for loans, lenders issued loans that exceeded the homes’ sales prices. Once the funds were obtained from the lenders, the extra proceeds, known as cash back, were directed to bank accounts that Kinney controlled. In total, Kinney caused lending institutions to issue $38,745,215 in fraudulent loans. Out of those loan proceeds, $8,754,485.17 was directed as cash back to bank accounts controlled by Kinney and other conspirators. Kinney used the cash back for personal expenses; for the purchase of luxury vehicles, jewelry, and homes in Phoenix and San Diego; to make mortgage payments; and to compensate straw buyers for their involvement in the scheme.

Kinney continued her illicit activities while she was waiting for her trial on the mortgage fraud charges. According to her plea agreement on the second indictment, Kinney declared bankruptcy and then attempted to hide assets and liabilities from the bankruptcy court by falsifying her name and Social Security number. Kinney also committed additional financial fraud by arranging for friends to fraudulently obtain a loan to purchase a Mercedes. In addition, she committed insurance fraud by staging a phony burglary of her residence and then collecting $130,000 from Allstate Insurance Co.

Judge Wake noted that the defendant engaged in a “breathtakingly aggressive fraud” when sentencing Kinney to 10 years in prison on the mortgage fraud scheme and to five years in prison on the second indictment, to run consecutively with the mortgage fraud sentence. Judge Wake also ordered Kinney to pay $22,000,000 in restitution (usattyaz3812)


Busy little beaver, wasn’t she? But to continue doing it while on bail is really “felony stupid” to the point of 15 years in federal prison. Reminds me of “Maggie Cuevas” from years ago in Southern California and in and around San Bernardino.



On March 8, Gregory Flahive, his ex-wife Cynthia Flahive and Mike Johnson were arrested on 19 felony counts, including grand theft by false pretense, conspiracy, and false advertising. The arrests of the owners and managing attorney of a law firm are alleged to have taken thousands of dollars in up-front loan modification fees for services that were never performed for homeowners, many of whom ended up losing their homes. Those arrested were booked at the Sacramento County Jail with bail set at $50,000 bail each.

This is a federal arrest. If it were state the odds are (based upon my experience) that the bail would have another zero and be $500,000 per person.

It is alleged they targeted and later deceived homeowners by leading them to believe that, as attorneys, they would advocate on homeowners’ behalf with their lenders and put homeowners in a position to obtain mortgage modifications under TARP’s housing program, HAMP. It is further alleged they took thousands of dollars for their services but did little, if any, legal work and the homeowners lost what little money they had left and, in some cases, lost their homes to foreclosure.

“Homeowners facing foreclosure are being targeted by predators, including those who use their law license to gain credibility and scam innocent Californians,” Attorney General Kamala Harris said. “My office’s Mortgage Fraud Strike Forces is dedicated full-time to cracking down on these deceptive practices and protecting homeowners from fraud like this.”  (More down and more to come. Does anyone need an attorney out there?)

Gregory and Cynthia Flahive, ex-spouses and owners of Flahive Law Corp., and Johnson, its managing attorney, allegedly took up-front fees of up to $2,500 from homeowners in Placer, Sacramento, Butte and Yuba Counties for loan modification services that were never performed. In California, it is illegal for foreclosure consultants to collect money for services before they are performed.

The Folsom-based law firm advertised its services on flyers, radio, and televised infomercials, offering to provide loan modification services and help clients with bankruptcy, IRS tax relief, and credit card modification.

In a 2010 infomercial, the Flahives said that, as a law firm, they had “extra leverage” with the banks. They described one of their unique services as a “mortgage violation audit” in which they reviewed a client’s loan documents to find bank violations that could be used as leverage to modify a client’s home loan. In fact, the investigation revealed that, in some instances, the client’s lender had no record of contact with the Flahive Law Corp.

Former clients of the Flahive Law Corp. filed complaints with the Attorney General’s office, as well as with the Better Business Bureau and the State Bar of California. The State Bar of California launched an investigation, which was turned over to the Attorney General’s Mortgage Fraud Strike Force in summer 2011.

In one example of the firm’s deceptive practices, a victim who sought to lower his mortgage payments was told by Gregory Flahive to reject his lender’s offer of modification. The homeowner was told the Flahive Law Corp. could secure a better interest rate, reduce his principal, and possibly get his second mortgage eliminated. Four months later, the victim lost his home to foreclosure.

Agencies that assisted in serving today’s search and arrest warrants include SIGTARP, the Folsom Police Department, the Rancho Cordova Police Department, and the El Dorado Sheriff’s Department.

In December, SIGTARP, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and the U.S. Department of the Treasury established a taskforce to combat mortgage modification scams exploiting HAMP and to raise public awareness of the scams. (sigtarp3812)


This means the SIGTARP in this attorney’s opinion will soon be hitting Southern California with a vengeance on all loan modifications from 20005 forward. If anyone out there was doing loan mods and collecting advance fees from 2005 on and had complaints filed against them, they may want to see a knowledgeable attorney now and get an opinion on “you know what.”




In Miller v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals considered whether the foreclosing plaintiff had submitted sufficient evidence of its right to foreclose. Originally, the foreclosing plaintiff had filed an action against delinquent borrowers in Colorado state court. To support its ability to bring that action, the foreclosing plaintiff submitted a copy of the underlying note endorsed in blank. The state court accepted that copy as sufficient evidence to authorize the foreclosure. The Millers bought their home from IndyMac Bank in 2006. Their deed of trust named MERS as the beneficiary to IndyMac, and provided that the deed and note could be sold more than once without notice to the Millers. The delinquent borrowers then filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy.

The foreclosing plaintiff attempted to lift the automatic stay which prevented the foreclosure from going forward and used a copy of the note endorsed in blank to support its’ position.  Plaintiff informed the court that it anticipated receiving the original note in the near future.  Based on that representation, the bankruptcy court granted relief from the stay.  The bankruptcy appellate court agreed.  The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals did not.

The Tenth Circuit reverse the two lower courts ruling that merely possessing a copy of a note endorsed in blank was not sufficient under Colorado law to show that the entity seeking relief from the automatic stay was a “party in interest” that was entitled to such relief. Possession of the original instrument was essential.

A foreclosing party under Colorado law had to submit evidence that:  (1) it possessed the original note endorsed in blank; (2) it had constructive possession of it; or (3) it (or someone previously) had lost the original note, but it still somehow had the right to enforce the note.  A mere copy of the note endorsed in blank was insufficient proof by itself to allow a party to lift the automatic stay and pursue the related foreclosure proceeding.  (Miller v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., 10th Cir.)


Comply with all foreclosure related procedures—no matter how technical. Otherwise, unnecessary and costly litigation may ensue.




On March 8, Charles Donaldson was sentenced to 41 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release for conspiracy to commit wire fraud in connection with a mortgage fraud scheme which caused the issuance of over $4.7 million in fraudulent mortgage loans and homeowners to lose over $1.2 million in equity in their homes.

Co-conspirator Mary Dean was a loan originator and operated Sunset Mortgage Co. from her home. Donaldson, who was also a loan originator, steered clients to Dean’s mortgage brokerage franchise.

Beginning in 2005, Donaldson identified homeowners who were in financial distress because they were unable to make the mortgage loan payments and enticed the homeowners to participate in a foreclosure rescue plan. Donaldson told the homeowners that he would locate “investors” to purchase their homes and thereafter, the homeowners would pay rent to the “investors,” who would pay the mortgage and receive a small percentage of the homeowners’ equity; that the remainder of the homeowners’ equity would be transferred to Donaldson, who would hold it in escrow; and that the homeowners would buy back their properties after 12 to 18 months, giving them time to repair their finances and credit while they continued to live in their homes.

Donaldson recruited family members and associates as “investors” to purchase the properties and paid them a small percentage of the seller’s equity at the time of settlement. Prior to the sales of the homes, Donaldson created and recorded second deeds of trust or promissory notes that purported to show debts owed by the homeowners to Donaldson, and which were secured by the existing equity in their home. At the closing of the home sales, the title companies disbursed funds to Donaldson’s bank account to payoff the liens he had created. Donaldson assured the homeowners and “investors” that he would assist them with their rent and mortgage payments, using that equity which he claimed he was holding in his escrow account. In fact, Donaldson and Dean knew that Donaldson was simply putting these funds into his personal checking account, and using them for personal and business purposes, including the purchase of a personal residence with a cashiers check in the amount of $169,132.60.

Donaldson and Dean obtained the new mortgage loans on the properties in the names of the “investors” with higher monthly mortgage payments, and most times, higher interest rates, than that which the homeowners were currently paying. In the loan applications Dean falsely represented that the “investors” intended to live in the homes as primary residents and inflated the incomes of the “investors.” In some instances, Dean submitted fraudulent loan applications for the same “investor” to purchase multiple properties as their “primary residence” in a short period of time. Donaldson assisted Dean by procuring false verification of employment letters.

Based on the false loan applications, lenders funded loans at high interest rates for the “investors,” yielding large transactional fees and premiums for Dean. Donaldson and Dean knew that the homeowners who sold their homes to the “investor” had lost control of their homes, could not afford the new mortgage loan with higher payments and interest, and could not qualify for a refinance.

The homeowners and “investors” were forced to use their personal savings and credit cards to make mortgage and rent payments until they were no longer able to do so. Donaldson only used a small amount of the equity from the sale of the homes to assist with the payments and the loans went into default. Fourteen of the homes have been foreclosed upon and foreclosure proceedings against two other homes are ongoing.

As a result of the scheme, lenders provided over $4.7 million in mortgage loans. Their final loss remains uncertain as some of the homes remain in foreclosure to this day. The homeowners lost over $1.2 million in home equity. More than 20 victims were defrauded by Donaldson and Dean.

Dean has also pleaded guilty and faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison and a fine of $250,000. (usattymd3812)


The government went back to 2005—over seven years ago to get to the defendants. They are slowly working their way forward in time. Donaldson used some of his money to buy a home. Unfortunately, the government has made reservations for him at a different residence.

43 Responses

  1. Chris you are absolutely correct. When you see the Article nine UCC laws and the Carpenter V longan case from the U.S. Supreme court distinguished, makes you wonder why there is any fight at all in the courts to wether MERS is legal or not. Mers has sent a letter to realtors that they must all pay dues and become members. Wow when did MERS make the laws? One of my web friends said that is an old law. Most of the good case laws are and so is the U.S. Constittution and the Bill of Rights. It is good standing law. MERS seems to be taking over for the legistlature. Making its own bank rule. I hope the U.S Supreme court justices show due justice and make this monster illegal in Washington State. See the State of Nebraska v MERS case. Ruled against MERS then reversed cause MERS claims not to be a beneficiary after all so does not need to comply to State CPA laws and state deed of trust law. Mers is not in compliance with any state CPA or Deed of Trust law due to it is not registered to be doing business as a financila instittution. Now I see the OCC letter dated January 14, 2005 has been removed from the OCC web sight. You can still find it on scribe. This letter states National bank law does not preempt state law. Of course our represenatives are trying to change this for bank rule also. MERS IS SUPPOSE TO BE REGISTERED TO BE DOING BUSINESS AS A LENDER OR FINANCIAL CORPORATION , in every state from what I gather. MERS has been tossed out of court for just this reason in a couple of state cases. If they now claim as they did in Nebraska, that they are not the benificiary nor lender nor foreclosure, as it stipulates in their bi laws then why is any court giving them credibility for foreclosing or assignning any assignment. Only the owner of the note can assign or come to court against them. Not a servicer or a holder of nothing. MERS claims to be holder of the deed of trust but not the “NOTE”, The deed of trust and the note have to be together and transferred together at all times and not separated by MERS OR ANYONE ELSE or it is NULL AND VOID by the UCC article 9 statutes and Carpenter V Longan 1884 U.S. Supreme Court case law. I am not an attorney just my two cents also.

  2. Chris, I totally agree. I have objected to every claim and allegation in the defenses replie, due to lack of standing. So has my son, and now the defense against him is asking for permission in the Appeals court for his approval to represent Countrywide, instead of MERS, BOA, RECONTRUST, & BAC. Telling is it not? No answer from Chase or Deutsche Bank in reply to my motion for proof of authority to represent. Something smelly is up when they have concealed all my county docs and removed my public records. They are hiding from the public, what I have done to protect myself. And hiding their assignment was never assigned from Long Beach. Long Beach the strawman originator for WAMU, is the only one on public record holding my deed of trust. Never assigned to anyone else, unless they hid that as soon as I filed a law suit. I had no idea Long Beach and WAMU were so bad, like the rest of us. I trusted banks to be banks and be trust worthy. I was recommended to go to a mortgage broker that had done a loan for a friend. I was warned my credit score would go down if I shopped banks, and so I didnt. I was pretty nieve to all of this. I have identity theft to battle, whom were caught but caused me a lot of greif so my score was below 800 due to thatb, but not less than 720. I thought that was a bad score. I did not want to push a lower score. I had just paid off over twenty thousand in credit cards that the bills had been stolen out of my mail box at home and were behind to mail theft. I had asked for all my mail to be sent to my place of business and did not exspect the bills to be going to the home mail box. I had just moved onto my business commercial property and paid out over threehundred thousand out of pocke tto move due to a corrupt mayor hiding my permits and then deniing me a modular building so I lost the business loan for the move due to no permanent building to move into. I was being told my eightthousand square foot modular was illegal in auburn, My husband and I being policy lied to by our mayor on three occasions. I was so busy fighting city hall I was not keeping track of what bills were not showing up and thought all the bills were coming to the salon. When I found out the two credit cards were diliquant due to mail theft about the time the theives were caught i ran into the banks to pay them in full. Thinking the this would not harm my credit, but they were so late, the bank had discharged them off so I was harmed. I was pretty overwhelmed by it all. Seemed like I was fighting demons from all sides. And still am. Those credit cards and the three hundred thousand to move due to a corrupt mayor pretty much hurt me a lot, then in 2005 I began to see the bankster fraud hit the ecnomy and harm me again, with no back up to protect myself over the mayors breach of oath of office and since perjury in depostions. I found out ten months later the mayor and city planners were llying to us so we are still here seven years later. After 13,500.00 a month in lease girls walked out due to thinking I was going to be put out of business by the mayor. Five of them returned a couple years later and I am back up to half the rents I used to make. Takes a long time to build up to 21 lease people. Now the ecnomic bank crimes and the judicial crimes. It has been a real hill to climb however I am not a quitter.

  3. @ All again

    This MERS thing…how can a private club, MERS, not in compliance with neither State or Federal regulations be anything but a storage shed? It is a “dues generating, members-only entity”. How can anyone construe that to mean a “legal” standing, authority based transferee…with what copies of a note and deed on a CD of any given property? Since when does a private “country club” have legal authority to designate how the entire civilized world should act, under the law? Hogwash…all of it! It should have zero credibility in a courtroom.

    My piece.

  4. @ All

    I am scheduled for a pretrial conference and it strikes me that the Defense attorneys have no knowledge of who signed the paperwork they are presenting, where it was actually signed, if the notary had actually witnessed the assignment and signatures, who the lender is, how the servicer has acquired the authority, if the loan is in fact in compliance with all applicable laws and Statutes, etc…to me, I will be objecting a lot and simply asking the court to postpone the proceedings until we validate the Defenses position of actual authority. I have found many of the attorneys do not even know who they are dealing with, nor can they provide “evidence” of proper transfer/assignment. This baloney is all hearsay evidence, not proof from the Defendants. In a criminal trial, this would never pass the smell test, ever. (actually, it should be a criminal trial), but that’s for another day! No legal advice here folks, one victim to another speaking.

    My $.02

  5. re: Paul mcMorrow posted by enraged. Where is it evidenced that everyone in the note’s chain is a MERS’ member? The real fact is this is NOT a fact in evidence and never is. It’s never even attacked. (I have opined the investors aren’t, fwiw).
    In the case of In re Walker, for instance, a co. called Bayrock had originated the loan and MERS was named in the dot. According to my info, Bayrock was not a MERS’ member on the date the dot was executed (dot = Nov of one year, Bayrock’s membership appl = January of next year). For sec’n, there are generally four noteowners in the act – could be tons more for all we know. No where is it ever evidenced in any litigation that all those folks were MERS’ members. It’s an unwarranted and likely dispositive assumption. And here, I hasten to add, ‘casual’ reliance on MERS’ database as ‘evidence’ would be positively errant. MERS still shows entities who have been toast since as far back as 5 years as members. Plus there is the stmt from the horses mouth: MERS says its records are not to be relied on
    (scribd, etc.). And isn’t that interesting? If MERS says its own database is not to be relied on, on what is it relying when it executes
    assignments? (as if, because MERS doesn’t, members do in its name, the now-infamous self-assignments). But still. Say MERS did execute assignments. Based on what, pray tell? I’ll say what: the servicer
    either has or pretends to have the note endorsed in blank and by virtue of this possession, which could be merely a bailment for all we know, says we need this dot assigned to us. Even if a court determined that poss of a bearer note provides for enforcement by one in possession, I give, how’s this possession entitle the possessor to an assignment of the collateral instrument?

  6. @lasvegas – I’m reading the material at your link on sec’n – thanks.
    It reminded me of something. Courts are generally finding that borrowers have no standing to argue that a loan going in a trust missed the psa cut-off date (and did it factually as a matter of trust law or just tax rams to investors – big diff) MERS, for instance, claimed from day one that it would be beneficial to borrowers as it would make sec’n easier and sec’n meant more funds for lending. In addition to their sales’ propaganda (noticeable, I would think), I’m pretty sure this was rattled off in other venues, like litigation. What MERS said isn’t relevant, tho, because they’re not a party to the psa, either. Or are they? If MERS is the ben, the nominee, or the agent for the noteowner (the investors aren’t MERS’ members, but that’s for another argument), then an argument might be made that by way of MERS,
    the borrower is an intended beneficiary of securitization, just like a NJ court (and other courts now, also) found that the borrower was an intended beneficiary of HAMP (with a private right of action), it might be found that the borrower is an intended beneficiary of sec’n / the psa. Yeah, it’s kind of a stretch, but in the absence of something ELSE, it might be a place to start. I feel that there are other reasons a borrower has standing, but they’ve to date escaped me (and apparently others).

  7. @lasvegas – didn’t MBIA lose this argument with the FDIC et al over was it IndyMac Fed in CA a couple years ago if not last year? If I remember correctly, MBIA was refused discovery in regard to bs loans which it had been induced to insure. Wonder if this gang of attorneys for MBIA has talked with the CA attorneys……… Is the CA case over? (if I remember correctly and it was in CA) Anyone know?
    We know homeowners get the shaft from courts a lot, but protecting banksters from insurance companies strikes me as odd, still. In the cases of the homeowners, courts appear to rely on the benefit of the bargain theory when siding with banksters (guess it doesn’t matter from whom one got some alleged benefit – just anyone who wants to enforce will do, apparently), but what equitable consideration is there to be ‘found’ by a court when playing dead on discovery for an ins co?
    Poor MBIA. They must not be in the Lobby-Club and their failure is seen, unlike AIG’s, as negligible. What are they thinking?!
    It’s class-warfare. It has to be. A group being protected is at or nearing retirement age. Pension funds are at risk, right? (But does protecting the bankster protect those funds? Isn’t our argument that it doesn’t? The truth is, we don’t (least I don’t) know where the sam hell those funds from the sales of foreclosures go) Well, without those pension / retirement funds, there will be a bigger drag on social programs in short order, like probably social security and Medi-what-do-you-call-it, whereas what’s happening to the rest of us, the younger and generally without the medical ailments of the older (for instance), is born by us in the form of homelessness, poverty, and other miseries which we handle any way we can, mostly on our own. Some of us get some benefits, like unemployment $$ for awhile, but maybe these considerations are much less than what will be demanded against the benefit programs if pension funds are wiped out.
    I don’t know why the MBIA attorney wrote a letter to a judge asking for leave to file a mtn for discovery-violation sanctions unless by some weird stip the parties agreed to not file such a mtn until a certain time. Anyone want to take a bet that MBIA won’t get the discovery? Nah. I won’t bet. It’s too sickening. The probable truth is that such discovery would uncover a whole lot of other “inconvenient truths”
    about the whole mess: MERS, securitization, all of it, is an ill-conceived and fatally flawed scheme.

  8. Neil, does your group look into securities fraud for our PSA. I have the analysis from your group for the PSA , it is in blank. Is there a way to find if the loan has been accounted for in multiple trust and if it was in a default credit swap?

  9. Suffolk County NY. the officials have someone in the back ground. Commiting mortgage fraud for them. A lot of self dealing going on here. We truly lack a legal system here. A lot of dressing up and pretending. All employees appear to be mobsters.

  10. Here in Suffolk County NY. Government employees & court officials. Are among those robbing fannie & freddie. I know this to be a fact. As I know who is doing it for them. We in NY do not have a legal system. We have mobsters dressed up as Cops, sherriffs, judges clerks etc.

  11. If these goons were backed by the white house they would get away with much more including:

  12. Dying Truth did you file lack of standing and fraud upon the court in the Appeals court. Look up fraud upon the court statutes. You can file fruad upon the court over and over until justice is done and ask for a vacate of the judgment. Using the Carpenter V Longan case and the Article 9 UCC laws should prove that on their own. All our mortgages are void and nullified. I would not give up. I have also asked the opposing lawyers to give affirmative proof of authority to represent as well. That puts the lawyers on the line for representing them. I am not an attorney so check this out with an attorney. I am Pro Se. Where there is a will there is a way. We must not give up battling these unconscionalbe evil doers.

  13. Neil right: this makes gangster lenders look like victims. These petty arrests are to fool public that there is justice. Their aint…

  14. […] Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, currency, Eviction, foreclosure, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, securities fraud Tagged: scapegoats Livinglies’s Weblog […]

  15. to brian davies,

    is your chapter 7 still pending ?

  16. So, we know that Ohio’s class action against MERS is in full blown. O’Brien (MA) is now considering joining, even if it puts his job in jeopardy. And let’s not forget the TX counties class action against MERS. We do have a few heroes. The more lawsuits are filed and the weaker the banks will be. In the absence of a government worthy of that name, that may be the only way to go. Whatever it takes…

    “Essex official wants to sue over mortgage mess

    BY: Paul McMorrow
    March 26, 2012

    John O’Brien is a national folk hero to anti-foreclosure activists. The Southern Essex Register of Deeds has garnered national attention by accusing big banks of acting like a “criminal enterprise.” After an audit revealed widespread flaws in banks’ handling of mortgage paperwork, O’Brien likened his Salem registry to a crime scene.

    So when a New York law firm began soliciting local registries to join a class action lawsuit against an embattled mortgage clearinghouse, O’Brien should’ve been the first to sign on. He wasn’t. O’Brien was told he didn’t have the authority to join the effort. Deed registries in Norfolk, Bristol, and Plymouth counties are now pushing ahead with the case, while O’Brien is left standing on the sidelines.

    O’Brien’s inability to sue over mortgage paperwork filed in his own registry highlights a quirk in Massachusetts state government. The state eliminated most of its county governments more than a decade ago, even as it retained some of the trappings of county government. District attorneys and sheriffs are still elected at the county level, for example, but they’re funded by the state. The consolidation of county governments also left the state’s 21 registries of deeds intact.

    The registries remain elected offices, but most registers are now employees of Secretary of State Bill Galvin’s office. They don’t have the sort of leeway they once had under county government, and that includes ability to retain outside lawyers and initiate lawsuits on their own. It’s a constraint registers in Norfolk, Bristol and Plymouth counties aren’t working under.

    Several months ago, O’Brien says, he received a call from the New York law firm Bernstein Liebhard. The firm is representing Ohio’s counties in a class action lawsuit against the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS), an electronic clearinghouse large banks and mortgage investors use to buy and sell loans. The Ohio lawsuit alleges that MERS cheated county deed registries out of millions of dollars in recording fees; since MERS handles loans from across the country, Bernstein Liebhard wanted to enlist O’Brien as a plaintiff in a Massachusetts lawsuit.

    O’Brien says he would jump at the chance, but has been unable to get authorization to do so from Galvin’s office.

    The MERS clearinghouse played a key role in turning home mortgages into financial commodities. MERS is owned by the banks and mortgage investors trading loans on the clearinghouse’s online platform. Mortgage companies would typically name MERS as a mortgage holder when filing paperwork with local registries of deeds; MERS members would then trade mortgages among themselves without recording each transaction at the registry, since every buyer and seller in the MERS clearinghouse was, technically, part of MERS.

    The system allowed financial houses to assemble and sell large pools of loans rapidly, because MERS members weren’t recording mortgage transfers at the local level. The electronic clearinghouse’s critics charge that it encouraged sloppy record-keeping, obfuscated the true holders of homeowners’ mortgages – and cheated local registries of deeds out of billions of dollars in recording fees. The Ohio counties’ October 2011 class action suit was quickly followed by suits from state attorneys general in Delaware, Massachusetts, and New York.

    “The fundamental thing about our legal system is, you don’t commit fraud, and yet it’s happening every single day,” O’Brien charges. “These banks and MERS have wreaked havoc with the land recordation system. They didn’t want you to know how many times they sold your mortgage.”

    O’Brien estimates that his Salem registry has lost $44 million in recording fees to MERS.

    The lawsuit Attorney General Martha Coakley filed against MERS in December primarily deals with land recorded with the state Land Court; the vast majority of O’Brien’s business doesn’t flow through the Land Court, so O’Brien worries that the state lawsuit is missing the mark. And that has O’Brien talking about stepping out of line and signing on with the county class action lawsuit, setting up a potential showdown with Galvin’s office.

    “I’ve waited for orders from above for long enough,” he says. “I have an obligation to my constituents. I’m derelict in my duties if I don’t go after this. I’m 99.9 percent sure I’m going to go ahead and do what I think I have the authority to do, and if I’m wrong, prove me wrong.”

  17. Go to and see the Carpenter V. Longan from the 1984 U.S. Supreme court. I have been waiving this case law around and no one has done anything with it, and here it is being exposed as case law that should kill MERS.

  18. Dying Truth, I didnt mean to insult anyone. I am trying to keep hope alive we have a better chance in the Appeals court, at least in the last year or less. My attorney that I hired immediately when I found myself to be in modification fraud, whom told me she would take my case, then changed her mind due to her words, “the judges would only adjudicate for the bankers and not the homeowners”, ( December of 2009) has told me we are in better shape now than we were then and have a better chance to win now, due to discovery. At first, I became very irritated she changed her mind after taking my money, then tells me I have a better chance saving my house in bankruptcy, which is not what I hired her for. So I went Maverick and filed Pro se. I am pretty scared myself in the Appeals court, cause I am pro se and I have learned a lot since I first filed. I know the courts are as corrupt as hell and I am fighting for my home as hard as I can, and beleive there is hope. Melissa knows I am fighting on my own and says she will help me if I loose. She and I did not see eye to eye, but I do understand her and where she is coming from. I hope I see better results than you did. Melissa is the attorney in the Bains case asking the U.S. Supreme court in Olympia if the rule of law still stands in the Washington courts? I trully believe if the rule of law did stand there would not be one foreclosure! I hope there is hope in the nineth circuit now more proof has surfaced. There is more reports and more case law and more evidence on a daily basis. I have sent in newly discovered case law and reports almost every month. I sure hope the rule of law still stands in the U.S. Appeals court. I am certain it does not in the state courts. No matter how factual and how good you,and Melissa has a good reputation among attorneys for knowing her stuff, even she knew she could not protect me in the state courts, no matter howmuch evidence and how much truth I had, due to the lack of the rule of law in the state courts. Melissa obviously questions the rule of law having standing in the state courts, to ask that loaded question in the U.S. Supreme court. She told me she is ready to start my case when I am ready. She must have more hope for homeowners now. i have not had the Appeal judgement yet. I dont sleep at night and I am numb all the time. The stress is awful for all of us. I am obviously a fighter and I dont give up. I am so sorry for everyone effected by this horrific crime, that is not victimless, but victimizes all of us. How dare these banksters claim this is a victimless crime. i hope the banksters become their own victims soon, and it wont be soon enough. I pray the government officials dont allow this to turn into a blood bath. So many of my friends, customers and family are terrified at what is happening and what is to come next.

  19. I can speak from personal experience that when I have alleged underwriting errors and fraud on my loans the servicer has claimed no knowledge and no wrong doings.. I guess this is a “perfect” system because the servicers didn’t initiate the loans so they can claim no wrong doings. They can point the finger back at the originators.

    My servicer claimed no knowledge of fraud, yet they sued my broker for fraud and misrepresentations to buy back some faulty loans. How can they claim “no knowlege” on one hand and sue the broker on the other.

    Yet the servicer will try and spin it like you commited the fraud when you submitted the documents. (Even though it’s the broker who falsified info).

  20. This gal for fifteen years really thought she was invicable,continuing the fraud whie under the mircoscope.problem is this mindset is the thinking of all of these crooks. The courts need to address the criminal activitys in this , not just a slap on the wrist to see some changes.

  21. Going after the brokers will prove beneficial only if the courts want to find fraud at the bank level. They may not offer the broker a reduced sentence if they don’t want him to point the finger at the big bank. The courts could try and portray him as the bad guy and not the banks just like they do the homeowners.

    There is already,especially within the last year a lot of info coming out about all the fraud. Coupled with all the resignations? Something is going on. The question is if the broker “snitches” on the bank will the bank be protected by the settlement as Dying Truth Suggests, I think so.

  22. A faint light in the horizon means that the tunnel does have an end…

    From Max Gardner blog:

    The Next Line of Defense in the Battle Against Foreclosure Fraud

    Written on March 26, 2012 by Editor in Uncategorized (that would be Max Gardner himself, I suppose…)

    Law enforcement officials across the country let us all down with a bank “settlement” that was all concession to the institutions that caused the problem and very little protection for the victims of the foreclosure crisis or the economy. It’s still the rare court that fully understands the issues and has the courage to do the right thing. With all that happening in the forums where consumer protections is supposed to take place, it’s no surprise that the battle is spreading, and some unlikely warriors are stepping up to the wrestle the giants.

    In this video, Rachel Maddow talks to Jeff Thigpen about his lawsuit to force banks to “clean up the mess they made” of his records and describes a North Carolina program by which laypeople are being trained en masse to examine mortgage records and find the fraud: Standing up to Banks

    We’ve reported extensively on Thigpen’s efforts to fight the banks in the past: the Guilford County, NC Register of Deeds has conducted an exhaustive examination of records, held press conferences and publicized information about robo-signing and other fraud issues relating to mortgage transfers and foreclosure, and last summer announced that his office would no longer accept documents with known robo-signer signatures for recording.

  23. @Bill,

    I know all too well. We’ve already lost a few people on this blog, who literally were flipping in front of us. And it doesn’t take long either. That’s why we need to fight: it forces us to focus, remain grounded and keep abreast of what’s going on. And that’s why I keep posting uplifting things here. To prevent too many of us from sinking into despair and give them a reason to keep fighting. Because once the anger susbsides (and unless we fight, we can’t sustain that life saving anger), despair sets in.

  24. @D.T.

    I too agree. It was the rule way back then. And then, gov. deregulated. We need to get back to stringent regulations.


    I’ve asked the same question a few times. No one knows where he is. He was in a pitiful shape and I’m concerned he may have done something irrational.

  25. E,G, Martha Raysik, First American Title is almost certainly involved in all of this. How the Title Companies can swap coverages is another part of this i don’t understand. If I remember correctly, they were a “link” between Countrywide, and “Bank of America”, ; also Recontrust, (One of MANY “subsidiaries” of B of A), and finally the Real estate company that was one of the originators of at least MY mess. E.G. “Enraged”. There is and will continue to be a HUGE onslaught of mental health related issues. From alcohol to suicides.

  26. Davies v. Deutsche Bank. This is my rough draft. Current review of 15 usc 1641(g), declaratory relief claims, psa arguments, fraud, tender and quiet title in California, and tender exemptions.

    Comments welcome as it is not filed until May 10, 2012. I want to nail them as my dismissal was without evidentiary hearing or voluntary discovery as required by court rules. Has the endorsements and arguments included.

  27. Never give up—never surrender…

    Anybody know what happened to cubed2k?

  28. I agree DT. It’s like pruning trees when the orchard’s dying and needs total replanting.

    We need existing law enforcement. We shouldn’t have to defend ourselves by showing the courts these already on the book laws. It’s insanity. And it’s ordained all the way to the top. Fuck ‘em all.

  29. Enraged,
    Like I said before Amend the Constitution to prohibit any and all Usury (the charging of interest). Problem solved.

  30. Wouldn’t that guy be covered under the AG settlement?

  31. Treating the symptoms while permitting the disease to flourish.

  32. from las vegas’ scribd document:

    Post- Ownership Notice

    The recent and ongoing foreclosure crisis has highlighted a potentially critical problem related to notice. As we discussed earlier, in the flurry of securitizations, originators of loans did not always deliver borrowers’ notes to the new owners and did not always endorse the loans. Without possession of the notes and the endorsements necessary to establish a valid chain of ownership, owners of notes do not have the right to foreclose.

    Oftentimes, the owners don’t correct the deficiencies until after borrowers have defaulted and they are preparing to foreclose. This means that at the time the owners become holders they had notice that the notes were defective, which would preclude them from being HDCs. This, in turn, should enable borrowers to raise defenses to any foreclosure or collection actions the holders bring.

    Page 29

  33. She can still turn whistlblower in jail cant she or work a deal for lesser time to whistleblow on the rest of the banksters!

  34. STILL siting behind a desk at FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY SIGNING DOCUMENTS is ….Donna K. McWilliams Escamillo the partner of
    Donna K. McDaniels Demillo,
    Wo was Indicted for eighty straw man loan frauds in 2010, yet mysteriously still not sentenced. (aka DONNA DEMELLO)-google her!

    These women conspired in one of the most massive straw man loan schemes, that I estimate to include over thousands of homes.
    They acted TOGETHER!
    I personally have a copy of their SHARED notary Journal, in that shows over twenty names doubled up over just a four month period, and they have been working with FATCO for over ten years in various capacities.

    These two women are responsible for a massive fraud, yet the FBI has only arrested Demillo. WHY?


    They now know about the other Donna, I have laid this out on this blog exactly how they framed people and stole their identities.
    I have provided the list of names for the short span even in just one journal.

    I have provided the exact scenario they used to dupe victims.

    Tell me why, Escamillo is still Free, Mr. G-Man.

    They preyed on the elderly who would “forget” what occurred, and the simple minded wives (like me)

    This IS against my Country. They are the INVADERS.

  35. Get the low-hanging fruit and they will sing like a canary!

  36. Glad to see we are making progress…Yipeeeeeeee

  37. Too brazen. Only a question of time before it comes back to bite them so hard that we’ll never have private banks for a thousand years. We’ve been promised 1000 years of peace, quiet and enjoyment of life. Can’t happen with banks roaming around… Will start as soon as banks are outlawed.

    I know, I know. many people are afraid of government handling the issuance of money and fixing interest rates.

    Yet, and according to The Secret of Oz and to people such as Bill Black, that’s the only way.

  38. “After she was charged in the mortgage fraud case, she continued to commit egregious financial crimes. She used her position and her knowledge to manipulate and erode our financial systems. Ms. Lawler’s sentence reflects the severity of the financial crimes she imposed upon our community.”

    Ooookaaaay… Hmmm…

    Aren’t the banks still robo-signing after the AGs filed this very detailed lawsuit against the 5 big banks, spelling out everything they did, including fabricate defauts when dual-tracking people in modifications and forge documents to foreclose on them? How does that sound for “egregious financial crimes”?

    Low hanging fruit, as usual. When all the low hanging fruit is gone and the situation still deteriorates, someone will have to start lifting his arm a little higher, won’t he? ‘Cuz they’re bound to run out of low hanging fruits pretty quickly and not one dent will have been made in redressing our economy. I don’t care if they go after a few bad girls. There’s a whole army a real bad boys worth going after in a big way!

    Just read something that struck a chord: “if you focus on the worse case-cenario and it happens, you’ve lived through it twice.” So, I go to sleep visualizing all those Dimon, Stumpf, Moynihan, Blankfein and others, all lined up in shackles, orange suits and handcuffs, being denied the right to go to the bathroom while court proceedings are in sessions and crossing their legs in desperation. Only way i can fall asleep… short of Ambient or some similar crap.

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: