Fraudulent Foreclosure Remedy: Return of the Home

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

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

CUSTOMER SERVICE 520-405-1688

     “….employees and agents of a number of banks had used the system to “repeatedly” submit court documents on mortgage holders, “containing false and misleading information that made it appear that the foreclosing party had the authority to bring a case when in fact it may not have [had]”.

Editor’s Comment: 

If you read the release below carefully you’ll discover that Morgan Stanley has literally agreed to pay any fine requested by the Federal Reserve.  The Fed has again determined that the banks are using false, faulty, fraudulent and forged documents in connection with the processing of foreclosures, modification requests and anything else related to the bogus mortgages that have long since been paid. 

I strongly urge all readers of this blog to write letters to the Federal Reserve, the OCC, OTS, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to stop pretending that the acceptance of fines is an adequate substitute for the return of stolen property. 

It is astonishing to me that the apathy and confusion in the media and marketplace have allowed and even promoted the concept that the theft of these homes using fraudulent documents is somehow resolved by the payment of money based on the recurring assumption that the underlying obligation is still due, that the default actually exists, and that the enforcement through foreclosure is a foregone conclusion. 

In nearly all cases the enforcement of the note and mortgage is far from a foregone conclusion.  In fact, the reason why none of these cases have actually reached trial where evidence was required to be submitted, is that the original documents signed by the borrower are fatally defective.  These defects are not merely technical. These defects reveal the fact that at the option of the securitization participants, they shifted the risk of loss from the borrower to the investor and eventually to the US taxpayer.  The right to use collateral pledged to a complete stranger to the transaction was void from the beginning, waived several times, and unenforceable since the original debt was paid off completely.

Any lawyer that goes into court without understanding these facts is going to concede issues that will doom his client to failure and loss of the home.  Any lawyer that puts these facts in issue, especially if accompanied by third party reports and services provided by this blog and many other sources, will be forcing the judge to either allow litigation to proceed into the discovery stage (at which point the case will settle), or face an appeal where there were clearly issues of fact that the judge disallowed based upon bias and prejudice. 

Homeowners should understand by now that they are not deadbeats.  They are victims of a fraudulent scheme to sell bogus securities to pension funds which in turn are now limited in their ability to pay benefits to the same victims who were depending upon that income to pay for the house they acquired in transactions that did not comply with Federal or State lending laws.  This is not a matter where the identity of the creditor and compensation to various undisclosed parties were omitted.  In this case we now know with certainty that these disclosures required under law, were actively hidden from both the borrower and the investor even after many borrowers confronted the banks and servicers with clear evidence that there were two parts to each transaction, to wit: the closing with the borrower, and the closing with the investor.  None of the foreclosures reveal the terms of repayment to the investor as per that portion of the total documentation that set forth repayment to the investor/creditor (i.e. the so-called securitization documents with which the participants in the securitization chain were in constant non-compliance). 

Special message to the borrowers:  You are not a deadbeat if you refuse to make a payment that is not due.  The securitization method used by Wall Street merely employed your signature for the purpose of making profits that actually exceeded the total amount of your mortgage.  If you want to oversimplify the matter then think of it this way: who should get the “free house”, a bank that never loaned the money and was paid many times over or a homeowner who invested their last pennies into a deal that was fraudulently presented?  If you put it another way, had you known that the appraisal was inflated and that there were at least a half-dozen levels of fees, commissions and trading profits being earned on your transaction, would you still have entered into the transaction?  More specifically, if you knew that the fees and profits generated exceeded the principal due on your mortgage, would you have entered into the transaction?  I invite you to consider the possibility that you were not a borrower incurring a legitimate debt but rather a victim in a con game that was so well played that you still believe you owe money that your own tax and pension dollars have long since paid off.  Here’s another way of thinking about it; imagine that you have been paying your “debt” from your checking account while at the same time the bank was withdrawing the same amount or more from your savings account for the same debt.  Now they wish to declare you in default because you refuse to pay from your checking account.  Your answer should not be “you’re right, I’m a deadbeat.” Your answer should be, “You’re a thief and I’m reporting you to the police.”

So now you’ve gone to the police and they’ve verified the skullduggery of the banks.  The remedy that the police are asking you to accept is that the police will receive a fine or contribution of $100 and you’re still expected to pay out of your checking account or they’ll take the house, and guess what, they’re still going to continue taking money out of your savings account.

Morgan Stanley to be fined in electronic mortgage system and foreclosure scandal

Bank criticized over Saxon unit’s automatic robo signing of foreclosures

By Leo King

The US Federal Reserve has issued a punishing court order to Morgan Stanley, as it prepares to fine the bank over the use of automated ‘robo signing’ of documents relating to foreclosures for struggling US mortgage payers. It ordered the bank to make significant process, data and systems improvements.

The issue relates to a troubled electronic mortgage registry created by a range of the largest banks, which is allegedly plagued with errors. Those that have brought claims against the banks have said access to the database was deliberately restricted by the banks, and that mortgage foreclosures were often based on incorrect data entered by the banks as they rushed to offload the loans.

The court order issued this week concerns the Saxon business, which Morgan Stanley has sold to mortgage servicing group Ocwen Financial. The Fed said Morgan Stanley retained responsibility for the impact of Saxon’s actions. Saxon had issued over 225,000 residential mortgage loans.

Robo-signing typically involves employees of mortgage servicing companies automatically signing off foreclosure papers without checking them, in the interests of fast processing the papers.

The practice was allegedly supported by the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS), which opponents claim may have resulted in unfair foreclosures for many home buyers. The database was created in 1995 to simplify the recording of mortgage sales and to allow banks to more easily sell on loans.

According to recent complaints by New York State against a number of banks, as well as being used fraudulently, the database was also “plagued with inaccuracies and errors”. New York State Attorney General Eric Schneidermann said that employees and agents of a number of banks had used the system to “repeatedly” submit court documents on mortgage holders, “containing false and misleading information that made it appear that the foreclosing party had the authority to bring a case when in fact it may not have [had]”.

“The banks created the MERS system as an end-run around the property recording system, to facilitate the rapid securitization and sale of mortgages,” said Schneiderman in February.

“Once the mortgages went sour, these same banks brought foreclosure proceedings en masse based on deceptive and fraudulent court submissions, seeking to take homes away from people with little regard for basic legal requirements or the rule of law.”

This week, the Federal Reserve issued its court order, known as a consent order, against Morgan Stanley. The order demands that the bank hire an independent consultant to review its foreclosures, and said the bank was required to “provide remediation to borrowers who suffered financial injury as a result of wrongful foreclosures or other deficiencies identified in a review of the foreclosure process”.

Should Morgan Stanley decide to re-enter the mortgage servicing business while the consent order is in effect, it will be “required to implement enhanced corporate governance, risk-management, compliance, borrower communication, servicing, and foreclosure practices” that were “comparable” to enforcement actions against other banks over the same issue.

The consent order against Morgan Stanley orders the bank to create a proper plan around acceptable usage of MERS, including strict processes around proper data entry on MERS and around the appointment of officers authorized by MERS.

Additionally, Morgan Stanley and Saxon were ordered to create a proper plan for the use of strong management information systems to inform correct decision-making around mortgages and foreclosures. The systems also needed to monitor compliance with legal requirements, ensure the accuracy of records around money owed and any foreclosure proceedings, and provide all information officers need from borrowers.

High-risk residential mortgages have remained a key focus of attention since the financial crisis, because many troubled and complex financial products were based on them.

Last year, the Federal Reserve issued a similar consent order against Goldman Sachs. The robo signing scandal has engulfed a swathe of the largest US banks, with others including Bank of America, Citi, JP Morgan and Wells Fargo also being investigated.

In the Morgan Stanley case, the Federal Reserve said that in 2009 and 2010 Saxon had begun 60,313 foreclosures on home buyers judged to be struggling to pay their mortgages. It accused the company of engaging in “a pattern of misconduct and negligence in residential mortgage loan servicing and foreclosure”.

Morgan Stanley had not commented at the time of writing, but has agreed to pay whatever fine the Fed sets.

109 Responses

  1. Wonderful post! We are linking to this great content on our website.

    Keep up the good writing.

  2. these robo-signing title insurers anything (Page 111) insure anything
    http://ag.state.nv.us/newsroom/press/archived/2011pr.pdf

  3. guest

    Well, think you are correct. Grand jury against judges?? No way.

    But, there should be a grand jury for others. Government does not want to investigate. Problem for them is that the AG settlement accomplishes nothing. Loans/homeowners are for CURRENTLY owned bank loan — remember, all “private” securitization shut down after the crisis hit.

    Where is the settlement for the crisis fraudulent debt collection fiasco?? Leaving it to the courts — whose sole goal is to dismiss on technicalities. Number one — Statute of Limitations.

    Of course, no discovery allowed, and no discovery by government. So — just need to find the discovery — on our own. It is there, but hard work without government support.

  4. @all: Randy Kelton is not an attorney, and you can’t get anything to Grand Jury. He talks much crap…

  5. […] more here: Fraudulent Foreclosure Remedy: Return of the Home « Livinglies's … ← The Note Industry in Tough Economic Times How Short Sales, NOD’s & […]

  6. enclavedebacle,

    Where is this attorney located? Like his Grand Jury procedure.

  7. tnharry,

    While I respect everyone’s opinion here — you do not know what you are talking about. You do not know what has really gone on.

    This is not a criticism , but simply trying to tell you — go back –go back — to the drawing board.

  8. @ Nora C @ Agenda 21 author seems to be from the same cabal:
    http://coleman300.com/Store/Details/35

  9. @ALL…please all you interested in winning…watch this video. Randy and his clients are WINNING!! Using this technique. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkLbX1K1UQ8&feature=relmfu

  10. @carie – i’ve managed to shrug off the negative comments many make about me, but screw you. i gave you so much advice here and more through email that you kept soliciting from me. you ignored everything I suggested and everything that enraged and others suggested in favor of a “do nothing and complain” plan. neither that nor posting “it’s not a loan” on this site over and over worked out for you and now you’ve been sowing your sour grapes on a daily basis

  11. @enclave – yes, i got that out of my BoA handbook that I keep in my Wells Fargo briefcase. believe me or don’t believe me, i don’t care. try a simple google search and learn something for a change. you already claimed you went all through TILA and Reg Z…

    here’s just one cite I can point you to. do your own search to satisfy yourself. http://bit.ly/kQVO8B

    or you can file a lawsuit using that as your basis. i’d start packing if that’s all you have though

  12. @enclave

    Re. your last comment—that’s tnharry’s “mo”…best to ignore.

  13. @tnharry…where did you get that BS from BoA or Wells Fargo??? Facts–the closing costs are paid BEFORE the TILA DS is created.
    Why would the closing costs change the APR???
    The APR is the APR and under TILA there can be ONLY one.
    The amount financed is the “principle” and can ONLY be one number.
    3) Disclosures are not clear and conspicuous when the disclosure statement includes contradicting terms. Varner v. Century Finance Co. Inc., 738 F.2d 1143 (11th Cir. 1984) (disclosing two different dollar amounts under the same heading is confusing). See also Ahttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPBkX0ZNC7U&feature=relmfu
    ndrews v. Chevy Chase Bank, 240 F.R.D 612, 618 (E.D. Wis. 2007) (Disclosure found unclear where the Truth-In-Lending Disclosure Statement shows the APR is 4.047 percent and other disclosure that “strongly implie[s] that the cost of the loan expressed as a yearly rate” at 1.950 percent); Ralls v. Bank of N.Y., 230 B.R. 508, 516 (E.D. Pa. 1999) (where there is a contradiction between TILA disclosures and other information provided by the lender, the disclosures are unclear).

    Do everyone a favor and let people share credible information that may save their lives and homes. Why disagree just because you feel like it?

    Please view this video…

  14. @enclave – i don’t know what to tell you. i googled it to make sure what i was thinking was accurate and found pages on point in no time.

    Q: WHAT IS A TRUTH IN LENDING DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND WHY DO I RECEIVE IT?

    A: Your Disclosure Statement provides information set forth by federal law (Regulation Z, RESPA). The Disclosure is designed to give you information about the costs of your credit so that you may compare those costs with those of other loan programs or lenders.

    Q: WHAT IS THE ANNUAL PERCENTAGE RATE? (Box “A” above)

    A: This should not be confused with your note rate. The Annual Percentage Rate, or APR, is the cost of your credit expressed as an annual rate. Because you may be paying closing costs, also known as prepaid finance charges (origination fee, discount points, mortgage insurance, interest), the APR on the disclosure is often higher than the interest rate on your loan. This APR can be compared to the APR of other loan programs to give you a consistent means of comparing rates and programs.

    Q: WHY IS THE ANNUAL PERCENTAGE RATE DIFFERENT FROM THE INTEREST RATE FOR WHICH I APPLIED?

    A: The APR is computed from the Amount Financed based on what your proposed payments will be on the actual loan amount credited to you at the time the loan is closed.

    For example, a $50,000 loan with $2,000 in Prepaid Finance Charges, a fixed interest rate of 12%, and a 30 year term, the payments would be $514.31(principal and interest only). Since the APR is based on the Amount Financed, ($50,000 – $2,000 = $48,000) while the payment is based on the actual loan amount ($50,000), the APR would be 12.553% which is higher than the interest or note rate.

  15. @tnharry I do respectfully differ I have been through ALL provisions of TILA and what I stated in my last post are ALL Huge TILA violations and the basis for the Note to be invalidated.

    I do thank you for your opinion…but the APR on the TILA and one the Note MUST BE THE SAME. The AMOUNT FINANCED MUST be exactly the same as the “Principle” in the Note.

    The fact that they added the already paid Closing Costs to the Amount Financed to come up with the “Principle” is FRAUD!

  16. @enclave – you haven’t found a smoking gun. the note rate and TILA disclosure rate are always different because the TILA disclosure takes into account the “total cost of credit”, which includes prepaid charges, etc. the “prepaid” charges you refer to as the difference between the two numbers represents point, origination, etc. it’s all right there in the settlement statement. sorry – but you probably haven’t found evidence of fraud, just one more of the thousands of settlement statements generated everyday

    not trying to rain on your parade – i’m sure you can find better bases for relief than this

  17. County Recorder confesses to complicity in foreclosure crimes by recording fraudulent docs… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVyca1ecQRg

  18. […] Fraudulent Foreclosure Remedy: Return of the Home « Livinglies's … […]

  19. @ALL……..I am VERY EXCITED to report that prose has had an Easter Miracle. You say what the????

    Please follow and examine these docs in your own cases…OK??

    I was looking closely at the closing documents. Found the Truth-in-Lending Disclosure Statement and….

    1. The Annual Percentage Rate on the TILA DS is 6.998% on the Note it is 6.25%.

    2. The Amount financed on the TILA DS is $378,712.66 the “Principle” on the Note it is $385,700.00.

    3. Crunched some numbers under the terms of the Note (6.25%) and…found a $20,062.36 SURPLUS!!! Pro se WAS NOT IN DEFAULT AT THE TIME OF THE FORECLOSURE NOTICE!!!!

    IT GETS BETTER!!!

    The #$!*&!!ers (Superlative added) added Total Prepaid Finance Charges of $6,987.34 to the Amount Financed $378,712.66 to come up with the “Principle” $385,700.00 in the Note!!!!!!!!!!
    THE NOTE IS A FRAUD AND MUST BE TOSSED!!!!

    Opinions? Cases? Please….

  20. ian,

    ABSOLUTELY LOVE IT. That is really GREAT. You should also be a writer. Wonderful.

    Nora C —

    Yes. Government is responsible. They are not responsible for the fraud. They are responsible for not investigating the fraud. And, why have they not investigated?????

    We have gotten nothing. The fraud remains.

    To all others — change your strategy. You have been on the wrong avenue.

  21. The foreclosures are all a part of Agenda 21. Yes, our government or more correctly, the bank-government entity we call our government, is directly responsible, and you people need to stop chasing the fairies. This is the most important “research”. They have you completely distracted with unimportant issues, while they turn us all into FEMA
    camp residents and make OUR COUNTRY into a wilderness again

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/un_agenda_21_coming_to_a_neigh.html

  22. ANONYMOUS- right on the mark, as usual. If this fraud wasn’t so horrifying and disgusting, it could even be humorous. When speaking with friends and aquaintances about the current real estate fiasco, and they ask, ” well, which bank are you with”?
    me: there is no bank.
    them: Well then who’s your lender?
    me: my lender went under in 2008
    them: is your mortgage in one of those trusts?
    me: it’s supposed to be, but the SEC told me it was never put in the trust.
    them: Well then where is it?
    me: I’ve spent 3 years trying to find out, and quite honestly, I have no idea where it is.
    them: (exasmperated by now) Well who do you send your payments to?
    me: XXX
    them: well do they own your mortgage?
    me: no, investor P61 allegedly owns it
    them: who is investor P61?
    me: I was told that the information was confidential, so I went on the Investor ID site at the MERS page, and found out that P61 was ZZZ.
    them: Great! So they own your mortgage?
    me: Hard to tell. They went out of business in 09. They couldn’t scrape up 250k to renew their bond, so the CA Dept of Corporations shut them down.
    them: So they were taken over by another company?
    me: No, they owed BBB bank 30 million dollars, and had no real assets, so nobody bought them. There were no successors and assigns.
    them: Can’t you track it by the loan number and find out who owns it?
    me: That’s another problem. I had a purchase money mortgage and two subsequent refis, but I have 9 loan numbers, and God only knows how many instrument numbers. I hit Google Search and my computer started smoking.
    them: well, how about contacting the Trust certificate holders? Maybe they can help!
    me: I could only identify 2 partial certificate holders, the Fijiian Coconut Growers Co-Op, and the Ugandan Ministry of Defense. Coconut growers have fallen on hard times, and they tried to sell me their shares, so I told them I would get back to them. The Ugandans lost everything in the Madoff ponzi scheme, but feel that the market will be coming back due to the HAMP program. For awhile, the MBS investment paid out, and they used the money to buy some used Russian MIG fighters, but now they can’t get any spare parts. They put me in touch with someone named “Eddie”, in Secaucus NJ. I understand he has ties to the Garbanzo crime family.
    them: so what can you do?
    me: exactly.

  23. usheeple

    Answer this — WHAT LENDER??? The Trust?? Trustee?? Securities investors? Not the lender — not the creditor. There is NO lender. Who are you going to call??? Ghost busters??

    Why refinance? Because interest rates are going to go up — eventually, and many stuck in high adjustable rate debt. Not all are under-water.

    All of the subprime were modifications of (false) collection rights. All that survives is debt collection rights. THERE IS NO LENDER — only a debt buyer.— undisclosed. .

  24. haha so ‘stinky’ yes.

    being sued by Fannie (hiddien via Wells Fargo) all the while Fannie is sueing the pants off MortgageIT/Deutche Bank for fraud for misrepresentation of originations……

    mm….. i sent QWR way back when basically say when you are finished sueing my originator for my loan then I will gladly deal with you!!!!

    haha atleast it makes you feel better to write it.

    I am a big boy and am willing to move on if there were any real decision maker to deal with.

    meanwhile they can deal with my lawyer and rot in court.

  25. @ ANONYMOUS, great points & explain: “So, let me send a paying “subprime” refinance victim to you. Can you provide valid mortgage title insurance.?? If you do, will be in big trouble — because no one else can.” Q: he can’t get title coverage for a refinance with same lender, or with another lender? Why not?? & why refinance? to pay lower rates?

  26. @iwantmynpv & tnharry,

    I knew there had to be indemnities involved because I’ve followed several foreclosures that I’d bet my last dollar that they couldn’t be resold as REOs because the buyer wouldn’t be able to obtain title insurance… well those properties sold in less than 9 months. Now it all makes sense.. Title insurers are getting indemnities from pretender lenders and pretender lenders are getting indemnities from buyers… WOW!!! That’s just dirty… indemnities for fraud…

  27. @ anonymous – so I would suffice to say that your would agree that this is all an intentional unwind of private dollar expansion. The contraction was planned and Bernanke erred by moving too fast to the upside causing the liquidity spook a full two years before it was to be unwound.

    Listen up folks, it is simple, if we the people cannot or will not borrow, our corporate US Governemnt must. Velocity can never slow beyond debt service.

  28. tnharry – my underwriter gets indemnification from the lender. It hits the fan and you don’t own the loan – we ain’t not be’s covering yo stuff.

  29. carie

    Checking out those grantor/grantee bogus docs. PO BOXES included. All bogus.

    And, who will you get for discovery/depo??? Straight from the PO BOX.

  30. chas404,

    Oh yeah Chas — something has long time “stunk.” Check those “wonderful” PSA trusts — to see if they ever received mortgage title insurance. Check with the Custodian. Check the dates.

    Required by PSAs for immediate delivery of mortgage title insurance. DID NOT happen.

    Oh, yeah, have a bridge to sell. All free and clear, clear mortgage title insurance. Anyone game???Yes

  31. Folks, I am waiting on Stewart Title to mail me a copy of the old lender policy for $250k for 2003 purchase which was ‘indorsed’ and upped to $312k supposedly during my 2005 refinance.

    This was after having wrong title committment letter in my 2005 settlement file and 6 months of Stewart employee emails saying there was no 2005 lender title insurance policy funded although the HUD shows my $1200 premium.

    Florida Ins Dept people reviewed Stewart paperwork and seem to sign off on it.

    I still think something stinks. I thought in Florida they just write new policies with reissue rate discounts and do not reuse the old policy and adding indorsements.

    May be a ‘robo-indorsed’ title insurance policy. we will see.

    I am willing to be wrong but they have acted in a shady manner during this whole process.

  32. Forgot to write that it says:”…without covenant or warranty, expressed or implied, to____________(herein called Grantee),all right, title and interest in and to that certain property…”

  33. usheeple

    That’s because they fix the title AFTER the foreclosure. Foreclosing party is NEVER the party you see on documents or in court. New “homeowner” purchases “BORROWER ” mortgage title insurance — not just lender title insurance. All clear. Except, if the purchaser suspected fraud, he/she can not get valid “borrower” mortgage title insurance. Will not cover. However, this is not the real problem. .

    Problem is, can you fix mortgage title for those not in default who simply want to VALIDLY refinance??? NO. You cannot. And, why not?? Because just like the foreclosure victims, all subprime were placed in false default. That is what subprime was about!!! Refinances nothing more than change of servicer to false default. No mortgage title available. You cannot have mortgage title on false “loans.” Title companies are now well aware of the problems. So, let me send a paying “subprime” refinance victim to you. Can you provide valid mortgage title insurance.?? If you do, will be in big trouble — because no one else can.

    Foreclosure victims have been victimized. And, it is CRIMINAL. AG settlement is just for surface “misbehavior.” The real crime remains unaddressed.

    And, the real problem will continue to eat away at the US economy, until even the culprits of the crime are affected.

    Hey, we are all vulnerable to the “multiplier” effect of the fraud — you included. Just a matter of time..

  34. @ carie
    means: property was stolen, but they have nothing to do with it!!!!!!!

  35. @anyone (except tnharry)

    When a foreclosure mill “sells” a property (with no proof of loan ownership and fraudulent, fabricated documents) and the Trustee’s Deed says that they:
    “…hereby GRANT and CONVEY, but without covenant or warranty, expressed or implied…”
    —what does that specifically mean? Does that have something to do with the fact that they know the title is screwed up and they are protecting themselves from a future lawsuit? Have Trustee’s Deeds always had that in their paperwork, or is it only since the MERS monster was created?

  36. From the SunSentinel March 16 re the Attorneys Title Fund Insurance Fund, Inc. publishing an article:

    “a Fund member should not close and insure any transaction where the title search and examination depends on the outcome of a lawsuit seeking to extinquish an outstanding mortgage without obtaining approval from the Fund’s legal underwriting department.”

    http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/condoblog/2012/03/florida-associations-should-be-aware-of-marketability-issues-with-mortgage-terminator-judgments.html

  37. @make it happen – Neil once stated in a post, without attribution or other supporting evidence, that title insurors weren’t insuring foreclosure properties. despite that it was only anecdotal, that’s been accepted as truth here. every day I see policies issued for both foreclosure sales and REO sales. it’s just not true.

  38. […] Fraudulent Foreclosure Remedy: Return of the Home « Livinglies's … […]

  39. @usheeple, enraged & carie,

    I’d have to agree with usheeple. I’ve seen many properties with broken chains of title resold with title insurance. I believe it has something to do with a disclosure pretender lenders are requiring buyers to sign upon making an offer. In addition, the pretender lender will only deliver a “Special Warranty” Deed at closing. A Special Warranty Deed only covers the period that the grantee (pretender lender) held title to the property. I believe the disclosure the buyer signs with the offer to purchase contract contains an indeminity regarding title insurance coverage, that coupled with the Special Warranty Deed must be enough to satisfy title insurers.

    Like you Carie, I’ve been searching for the answer to that question as well, especially when the break in the chain of title is as clear as day. I would offer the fact that the break couldn’t be ignored when the property is sold again, but as we’ve all learned, the current buyer will never have the opportunity to sell it…. it’ll be conveniently foreclosed upon first…..

  40. Happy Easter Everyone:

    If you live in a subdivision like I do we are filing suit because the power of sale is viold I never past title because I never had title to past look up your developer or builder look this is a example of the master deed filed in every county in Texas:

    This EIGHTH MODIFICATION AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) is made andentered into as of May 31, 2002, by and between LEGACY/MONTEREY HOMES L.P., an Arizona limited partnership, ) HANCOCK-MTH COMMUNITIES, INC., an Arizona corporation and HANCOCK-MTH BUILDERS, INC., an Arizona corporation, jointly and severally (collectively, “Borrower”), and GUARANTY BANK, a federal savings bank (“Lender”).

    W I T N E S S E T H:

    WHEREAS, pursuant to a certain Master Loan Agreement (the “LoanAgreement”) dated as of January 31, 1993, between Lender and Borrower, Lender made a loan (the “Loan”) to Borrower, evidenced by a certain Revolving Promissory Note (the “Note”) dated as of January 31, 1993, payable to Lender in
    the stated principal amount of SEVENTY-FIVE MILLION AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($75,000,000.00), with interest and principal payable as set forth therein; and

    WHEREAS, to secure the Note and Loan, Master Form Deed(s) of Trust(With Security Agreement and Assignment of Rents and Leases) (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Master Deeds o Trust,” whether one or more), which Master Deeds of Trust have been recorded in certain counties in the State of Texas as more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto; and which
    Master Deeds of Trust are incorporated by reference pursuant to the terms and provisions of certain Deeds of Trust Incorporating by Reference a Master Form Deed of Trust (With Security Agreement and Assignment of Rents and Leases) (hereafter collectively referred to as the “Supplemental Deeds of Trust,”
    whether one or more) recorded in such counties and encumbering certain real and other property (the “Property”) described in such Supplemental Deeds of Trust (such Master Deeds of Trust and Supplemental Deeds of Trust hereafter collectively referred to as the “Deeds of Trust,” whether one or more); and

    WHEREAS, the Deeds of Trust were modified pursuant to a ModificationAgreement (the “First Modification”), and recorded in various counties in Texas,which First Modification modified certain terms and provisions of the Loan as set forth therein; and

    WHO is the borrower the developer a money purchase is a loan where all or a portion is made to purchase the home its a extension of his the developer loan, who at closing pass off servicer rights there is no loan because it was due with a letter of credit, to buy down the developer debt and I am not a homeowner I am a tenant, because the developer ALREADY passed title as collaterial for the loan WEW!!!!!!

  41. @ enraged & Carie:
    Dreamin again??? title insurers insure any property stolen through any kind of criminal operation, especially foreclosures… If you doubt this then send me any buyer for a stolen house and I will have it insured by a title insurer in no time…

  42. ANON. Yes
    How can I get that evidence how can I get even close

  43. Global warming is a ruse. The earth has passed through both cold and warm periods in her history, and she will do so again. You don’t even hear much about it anymore, since so many thousands of angry scientists filed that law suit againtst that idiot Al Gore with his “Inconvienient Hogwash”. Global warming is scientifically nonsense. Just another way to get more money out of the poorer classes and give it to the oligarchs, through “carbon taxes”. Total nonsense when you start charging farmers if their cow farts, don’t you think? I mean come on.
    There are more trees on this planet now, than there ever were, and every drop of water that was here a thousand years ago is still here. We don’t even need the oil that the U.S. government is overthrowing neighboring governments to get control of, under the phony guise of promoting “democracy.” It’s just more fear mongering and lies. We also don’t need dangerous nuclear reactors, and fukushima is the best
    proof of that I can use to illustrate my point. Cold Fission is about to be perfected. It will provide unmeasurable amounts of clean, free and safe energy, putting the greedy utility companies out of business in literally a year or two.
    What we need to do is turn off those stupid squawk boxes inundating brains with NeoNazi lies and propaganda. Round up the bad boys in the non government entities perpetrating crimes around the world like the Brookings Institiute and Tavistock, get a noose around the necks of the Trilateral Commission members and Council on Foreign Relations crime syndicate and string them up. End of problem.
    Government is supposed to serve us, remember? It is our tool to keep order with, we are not at it’s mercy. Stand up and end this assault on us by a corrupt congress and an overreaching elite who have managed to get control of our nations laws and those who write them. Stop buying things and stop being too easily tempted, stop being a “consumer” and start being an active voice speaking from a truthful heart. There’s no global warming, but there is global arming. You’ve been tripped up by the loss of your homes, exactly as they planned. These evil people know how to push your buttons. The have think tanks populated by Nazis who are paid to sit and figure out how to work you over psychologically. They are expecting mice, not men. You are sticking your leg out waiting for the trap to shut on it with your eyes tightly closed in fear, hoping the pain won’t be as bad as you think it will. Get your damn leg out of that trap, open your eyes and load your rifle. Be the resistance that ends it, not the end of resistance.

  44. Dear Niel:

    We tried all of the above in CA and they have stolen our property rights with the help of the UD judge since we did not file a timely appeal. We were thrown out of Federal court where we got 2 default judgements and
    the state case was dispositioned ? I guess a new legal term adapted by the Judge.

    We to have to file a new case.

    We offered the pretender 168k and they refused wanting 350k and have now listed the property first at 175k now at 166.5 k.

    We filed a lien on the property since the original loan was on 2200 sq ft and we added about 1300 sq ft and garage trying to get our share of the creditor bid of 293k.

    Any Ideas ? anyone.

  45. Yes, ANON, they MUST protect the precious “debt”—not humans…to hell with humans…they don’t care how many ignorant humans commit suicide over this…even if the “debt” IS just an illusion…which it is.

  46. And, do not focus on title insurance. This was not the insurance that “Servicer Advanced” prior loan — and report you in default. This insurance was specific to servicer and mortgagee.

    The problem is, once this occurs, there can no be further valid mortgage title insurance. Government wants to clear this up, by pushing through foreclosures. And, to that, they are succeeding. Or, covert to rentals. Anything to eliminate YOUR mortgage title insurance, to which you will never get.

    And, we wonder why the foreclosures are being pushed through??

    Government decided there must be scapegoats. Those that take the hit — for the betterment of the REST of society. This was their ECONOMIC cost/benefit analysis. This is how they decided what they were going to. Anyone familiar with economic cost/benefit analysis??

  47. Happy Easter and Passover.

    Just one problem with this post. These were not mortgages. Not mortgage loans — at least if subprime.

    Not enough people standing up for their rights. Too many attorneys that do not want to make a bad name for themselves in courts.

    And, too many who are still trying to protect “investors.” These were debt collection (false) security investors. The initial debt collector investors — and the only one who can be anyone’s creditor (until they dispose of) — were the banks themselves. Oh yeah — the very same that the government bailed out, and AGs settle with – without investigation.

    Did security investors know they were investing in debt collection cash flows??? They should have — if they read the Prospectus.

    Over for many. Need this blog to confront the truth.

  48. @Enraged,

    you wrote:

    “Remember Marcy Kaptur of Ohio who, just for that reason, told Ohioans in 2009 “Refuse to leave. Don’t move out. You’ll be squatters in your house but don’t leave as the banks can’t prove anything.”

    That’s BS because the sheriff WILL eventually show up…with or without banks’ “proof”. How can you “squat” if you are being escorted out by a lawman with a gun? I really resent that statement…you have to sue or declare BK to stay in your house that the banks can’t “prove” they own. And BK isn’t a sure thing, either—EVER….no matter what kind of BK you do. I didn’t “voluntarily go”, as you say…I had a horrible BK attorney, and I explored other options that didn’t work like I had hoped…I had kids to think of and keep in their school and a very short window to make decisions—that were financially and emotionally practical. If I had “squatted” like Marcy Kaptur said—I would have been pulled out of my house by the sheriff.

    I frankly don’t care what tnharry has to say—he works for the enemy.

    We have to do whatever it takes—and if that means sue AFTER the house is stolen, then why not? We need to do SOMETHING to make these “investor/vultures think twice…

  49. I’m on the iPhone typos galore sorry

  50. Enraged
    The apprisal business needs cleaning up
    Period.

  51. Carie
    I hear you but the insurance is void if fraud is PROOVEN so the title insurance new owners thinknthat have isn’t worth the paper it’s written on but until it’s proven it’s a done deal
    If you cannot show a chain of title and absolute perfection of title to the new ” owner” then they can not get a true satusfaction of the mortgage if they were to pay off the loan
    Hence I am over home ownership until mers is declared unlawful. We are thus renters the homes were never ours would never be ours could never be ours that is a false belief.
    I rent now and I love it I rent from a landlord who has had this place in his Family for a long time
    He is not a sophisticated investor type i might resent that . I am at peace inthis home and so i can fight from a better position. Yes having my prior home taken was hard to deal with it was something I never want to go through again and frankly it felt like a posh jail bythe time they had terrorized me out of there. We know a
    robust real estate market could bring back the
    economy but who wants clouded title ? Apparently the government.

  52. @Deb,

    Appriasers know exactly what they have to do. When I filed for Chapter 13, way back then, the attorneys i had retained (a firm that advertizes on TV. I was younger and dumber…) agreed that my 2nd could easily be discharge since it had been sold to a JDB by the servicers a few months earlier. In order for me to do that, the attorneys needed to produce a current appraisal. They gave me couple of names of appraisers.

    I had one of them come and appraise the house. He asked me flat out “How much do you owe on the first?” Guess what? His appraisal came within $5,000 of my first… even though a smaller house next to mine had just sold for the total I owed on mine.

    The game is rigged from every angle. Appraisers work for attorneys. They know what’s expected from them and they deliver to keep working.

  53. @Deb,

    Then, they would smarten up real fast and probably realize that something wasn’t kosher. They even might join the ranks of other people like them, who’ve lost it all, and start… a long overdue revolution.

  54. @Carie,

    Can only answer (partially) your title insurance question.

    Since it has become public knowledge that most titles were clouded, a number of title insurers have simply refused to write insurance on foreclosed houses since 2010. More and more will come to that decision, which means that more and more houses will not be sellable to savvy investors.

    Also, many people are coming to learn through discovery that they were billed for title insurance at closing but… the policy was never written or the search was never conducted: when trying to obtain the underwriting file, they realize that there is… none! Some of those policies cost upwards of $1,000 and people paid for nothing. In fact, had anyone, who wrongfully lost a house to an undisclosed and unknown, previous bank they never had anything to do with, filed immediately against the title insurer, it is probable that the house could not have been taken away or that they would have had a cause of action against the title insurer for failure to perform the title search, breach of contract and unfair and deceptive business transactions except that… by now, many of those title insurers that were in business 6, 7 or 10 ago have gone belly up. They’re gone. No more money available and no one to go after.

    As far as suing for quiet title after being evicted and voluntarily moving out, I know of no known case where it happened. Especially where the evicted homeowner did not fight the foreclosure nor eviction in court. Any judge looking at a filing by a plaintiff who simply walked away without contesting in court would look at the action and simply say that the homeowner smoked any chance he had to obtain anything from the court the day he decided to forego on court’s help in the first place. Actually, i can even venture to guess that an overworked judge looking at such a case might even impose sanctions on the homeowner for frivolous claim and abuse of the court system and, at the very least, I can very well see him impose on the homeowner the other party(ies) legal defense costs.

    Not a good plan in my views. When people say “possession is 9/10 of the law”, they are onto a lot more than we give them credit for. Remember Marcy Kaptur of Ohio who, just for that reason, told Ohioans in 2009 “Refure to leave. Don’t move out. You’ll be squatters in your house but don’t leave as the banks can’t prove anything.” She didn’t say: “First, move out. Then, regroup and try to fix your inaction.”

    I know it’s not what you want to read but I seem to recall that tnharry told you exactly that a couple of days ago…

  55. I got to thinking about this eminent domain thing and if people are jobless homeless and so poor that they are dependent on the government-then imagine if the electricity was turned off and they did not even have their tv !

  56. Can someone please answer this question—if they know:

    How can the re-sellers of these illegally foreclosed upon houses get title insurance? Do the insurance companies find a way around the bogus docs that have been recorded? What is involved in that? What would happen if the homeowner that was (illegally) evicted sued the buyer for quiet title—with proof that the recorded docs were fraudulent and fabricated—thereby sold illegally? I mean, since the house was sold at auction with “no covenant or warranty regarding title”…

  57. Enraged
    Thx I agree wholeheartedly dont get me wrong.
    But I’m not sure appraisers knew the length n breath of the frauds behind the selling forward
    And concealment conversion and derivatives (that was based on the number he gave the seller ) and now covert eminent domain perhaps that sshafer talks about below, which i believe is a distinct possibility. None the less it’s
    where it all began to induce a signature.

  58. @Deb,

    We’re long past “negligence”. Negligence is what causes an unintentional tort. All this was intentional alright. It’s called fraud. And it goes way beyond market value.

    I was simplys adding water to your water mill…

    As you mentioned, you’re a nurse. As such, you know the difference between performing your work “negliently” and causing harm willfully. in the first case, unless the negligence is egregious, you’d be keeping your board registration. In the latter case, you would be barred forever from practicing as a nurse and you would go to jail. I think it’s fair to say that we’re all wanting bankers and other actors responsible for this horrendous mess to be barred forever from handling anyone else’s money and to go to jail.

  59. @sshafer,

    Can you not use capitals? Most people just don’t read capitals because they put a real strain on the eyes. That would be a pity if you had serious information that was missed bcause we skip your posts, wouldn’t it? Thanks in advance.

    Rome did indeed take a long time to implode but… the rest of the world, other than what was under its rule, was untouched: Asia, the Americas, Northern Europe, Central Europe and anything South of the Sahara. What this country has caused is a worldwide crisis in which everyone, without exception, has been affected.

    I don’t think it will last that long. As a matter of fact, I think it will go very fast and quite a few people will be put out of their misery before it tapers down and we can start rebuilding. I give it a few years. 5, 10 at most. It will all depend on what the world does about global warming and energy, since both will impact on water and food supplies.

  60. Enraged
    To get into discovery you gotta pass muster
    State a claim ect ect
    The writing is on the wall now
    Now we are all homeless and financially ruined
    My point this morning is when something is so grossly wrong it is obvious, and when basic written standards of professional / ethical practice does not reconcile with what was represented as done… Or not done… or what was relied upon to be done it is negligent misrepresentation of real market values. Stretching the numbers to please the seller(s) who was motivated by greed.

  61. READING THIS STUFF IS HARD TO DIGEST. YOUR GIVEN THE ANSWERS AND NOT TAKING ACTION .

    QRW: WHY , SERVICING IS PROHIBITED IN THIS TYPE OF STRUCUTRED FINANCE . AND MERS IS A NOMINEE HOLDING TILE FOR THE TRUSTOR – YOU

    THE LENDER NEVER SOLD THE FILE . FORGET THE NOTE. BUT THE SELLER (INTO TRUST ) IS THE FDIC BANK; THE FED (FHLBB DID NOT KNOW?)

    WATERFALL: EQUAL TO TRILLIONS IN GOODWILL. WHERE DID THE UPFRONT CASH COME FROM ? AND THE COMMON STOCK REPRESENTING THE UPFRONT CASH IS HELD IN THE NAME OF THE BANK . . .AS OWNERS

    DUETSCHE BANK NOW EMERGES WITH HSBC AS A PLEDGEE HOLDING THE OWNERSHIP SHARES OF BANK LINES . THAT MEANS BANK STOCK, SWAPPED OUT FOR COMMON STOCK MEANING THIS WAS ONE CLUSTER FRUIT OF A MERGER AND AQUISITION GONE WRONG.

    BIGGER ISSUE IS WHO SANCTIONED PLAYING GAMES WITH OFF BALANCE SHEET FINANCING TO LOWER THRIFTS TEIR 1 . IT WAS IS ALL A MIRAGE. CASH HAND OVER FIST AND 10 TIMES OVER THE DEBT HELD BY BANKS NOW UNER THE FHLBB AS CHARGES . LOOK AT CITI FINANCIALS GROUPS STATEMENTS …

    NOW WHAT EMERGES IS THE WORLD OWNS THE US REAL ESTATE AND MAJOR US BANKS ASSETS , COMMON STOCK ETC , LOCKED UP UNDER A REVERSE PURCHASE M,&A THAT WENT TERRIBLY WRONG. .

    MY ADVICE. . . . TAKE A ROBO SIGNITURE TO LUNCH.

    REALITY CHECK – LOOK FOR OBAMA (6/2012) TO MARSHAL IN ALL U.S.A. HOLDING (TITLE TO YOUR HOMES) DECLARING SINGLE FAMILY REAL ESTATE IS HEREAFTER GOVERNMENT OWNED .

    the path ’12

    (It took Rome nearly 800 years to implode…)

  62. @Deborah,

    It’s been my point all along: we, potential buyers, are expected to have known accounting, to have known what was going on with real estate, to have been able to anticipate that a man-made economic crisis was looming, to have been able to determine our future ratio income to debt once our jobs had been lost and to have refused to sign a mortgage that potentially would exceed said income.

    We dealt with “experts” who made a living handling real estate transactions. It was their expertise. Not ours. Those “experts” (our own government subsequent caught with its pants down, heavily deregulated banks, realtors on commision, appraisers on the take, lenders who didn’t lend anything but palyed with transfers of numbers from one computer system to the other, etc.) created a monster they knew or should have known was dangerous and would bring this country down to its knees. Those experts not only allowed it but actively participated and promoted it. Those experts did away with any reasonableness and due diligence, including failing to assure that homeowners would purchase PMI

    Today, and despite the number of “experts” involved who knowingly breached all ethics codes and tried to cover it up with fraud, homeowners are blamed for absolutely everything. In my book, “No” has always been a valid answer. “Can I buy a house with what I earn?” “No, you don’t earn enough”. “Ok, then. How much do I need to earn to buy a house?” “You need a substantial down payment and you need PMI. Come back when you can.”

    Most of us would have understood, had we been treated as adults, capable of understanding what the requrements were. Not only weren’t we but we were lied to, conned out of undisclosed fees, conned out of title insurance that was never underwritten, conned into refinancings that never existed, etc.

    Yes, the standard of care required from all the “experts” involved was systematically and methodically breached. And today, we, homeowners working as car mechanics, postal workers, teachers (with our expertise but a different one) are being held, retrospectively, to that of economists, accountants, realtors, banks, etc.

    Prospectively, the experts blew it, even though they held all the information needed for them to know, without a doubt, what they were creating. How fair is it to now hold homeowners to their standards, the same standards they, themselves, purposely didn’t abide by by unrestrained greed?

  63. @ Everyone

    Our faith for victory in is the blood of Jesus. Just Believe!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    The Spiritual Side of Wrongful Foreclosure:“

    A Message of Hope to Homeowners” By: J. Allen Zow, Sr.“

    Midnight hour — tears streaming down your face, friends have left youall alone, you get worried in the midnight hour…Haveyou ever been inthe Midnight hour?”1 Wrongful Foreclosure is like living in the midnight hour—from the unlawfulnotice of foreclosure to the potential court ordered eviction. While there are millions of familiesfacing the bitter reality of wrongful foreclosure, it is not just a physical, emotional and financialordeal but also a spiritual battle. Satan is a spiritual being who, among other things, is describedas a “thief”. (John 10:10) In order to carry out his job description he must use human beingswilling, ready and able to do his bidding. At the very core of every wrongful foreclosure arethree spiritual satanic goals—to steal, kill and destroy. Steal your home,kill your land ownership rights and destroy your family and shelter.However, for those of you who recognize the annual celebration of the resurrection of Jesus[Yeshua] Christ, you have HOPE and VICTORY! Jesus said, “I came that they [that’s you] might have life, and that they might have it abundantly. (John 10:10)Don’t you dare celebrateon Sunday unless you promise yourself to never give up and not yield to the‘deadly emotions’2 associated with foreclosure.Why shouldn’t you give up? Simple– because Jesus died and wasresurrected such that you might have evidence of hope through faith. The competent evidence of Jesus resurrection is more reliable and verifiable than any fact you will ever know or believe.Otherwise, you would not have billions of people celebrating his resurrection (not the easterbunny and eggs) annually all over the world (Christians, Catholics, Messianic Jews, etc.). Theintegrity of God’s word is perfect, holy,pure, sovereign and immutable in all respects. The purpose of this article is to focus you on the spiritual side of this devastating season of your life and to encourage you to resist the feelings of fear and panic.I used the term “season”because all seasons (winter, spring, summer and fall) change at some designated point. Youmust hold on and not give up as you wait for a better season to come.1 Lyrics from the song “Lost Without You” by superstar Gospel Artist Bebe Winans and Debbie Winans. 2 Anger, anxiety, bitterness, fear, depression, hostility, resentment, stress and any other negative emotion.

    Make no mistake about it, when faced with wrongful foreclosure, most people are thrustinto survival mode. Some of you reading this article have considered the ultimate surrender of suicide, I implore you by faith to resist theliethat theft or attempted theft of your home is justification for the termination of your physical life. There are numerous reports of heart wrenching horror stories of wrongful foreclosure documenting the devastation of families composed of the elderly, widows, children, disabled, veterans and the sick. At some point those responsible for wrongful foreclosure will have to reap what they have sown and answer to the true and living God. Oppression of the poor and helpless is one of the most deplorable crimes of the Bible. The Lord hates—lying tongues, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes and a proud look. (Proverbs 6:16-19) Wrongful foreclosure is driven by the love 3 of money to commit theft. An appropriate scriptural insight to wrongful foreclosure is the story of Jesus whipping 4 the money changers out of the temple of God. According to the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, in pertinent part: Money-changers:
    “a money-changer,” or “banker” (Matthew 21:12; Mark 11:15);”changers” in John 2:15; …”a banker” or “broker”; one who both exchanges moneyfor a small fee and pays interest on deposits (Matthew 25:27), the King JamesVersion “exchangers,” the American Standard Revised Version “bankers”)The historical record shows Jesus entered the temple and began to drive out all those whowere buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves.” (Matthew 21:12) “…Since the Jews, coming up to the feasts, would need to exchange the various coins in common circulation…there were money-changers who exacted a premium for the exchange. This fee was a kollubos (about 31 cents inU.S. money, i.e. in 1915), hence, the name kollubistes. The Jews of Christ’s day came from manyparts of the world, and the business of exchanging foreign coins for various purposes became alucrative one [similar to Mortgage-backed securities], the exchangers exacting whatever fee theymight. Because of their greed [fraud] and impiety, the money changers took advantage of this practice to get rich. Jesus drove them from the courts of the temple.”5 Jesus decided to send a clear message to the moneychangers that he would not tolerate the desecration of the temple of God and the cheating of the people through unscrupulous business practices which were unlawful under the mosaic law — thou shall not steal. Sounds familiar? In 2012, greed, fraud and corruption by certain banks is commonly known and remains unabated. It was reported that even some churches have decided to send a strong message to the 3 Some people erroneously conclude that money is evil; it is the “love” of money which is the root of evil. 4 According to John 2:15, he used a plaited whip of rush ropes.

    Moreover, 49 Attorneys General executed a settlement with major banks [moneychangers] primarily due to wrongful foreclosure misconduct described generally in the Complaint 7 as“…premature and unauthorized foreclosures, violation of servicemembers’ and other homeowners’ rights and protections, the use of false and deceptive affidavitsand other documents, and the waste and abuse of taxpayer funds.”Through faith, your midnight hour can turn into the noonday sun.Faithis the substance of things hoped for, theevidenceof things unseen. (Hebrews 11:1) While you are entangled in thefiery battlefield of the legal system, I urge you to focus upon the word —‘substance’in the definition of faith.Substance in Greek is hupostasi,defined as“asupport; ground work;confidence; subsistence; reality; essence; also used in the Papyri [ancient plant-based paper].” Inancient times the proof of land ownership was written on Papyrus to record a clear
    chain of titleof deeds.In the reconstruction of archives context, the identification and ownership of real estatecould be determined by archaeologists examining papyrias far back as 83 CE8. Consider the following:Papyrus Paper“Because they prove ownership,title deed so occupy a prominent place in familyand personal archives of a private nature.When one person sold property to another,he turned over the older title deeds for the property to the newer owner. In thesecases, it is important to identify real estate through the remaining title deeds. Once the identification of the last owner of the property is known, it is clear which archive the title deeds belong to…The owner might bundle the papyri relating tohis property…the most recent and theolder title deeds, a copy of a bank receipt [Bill of Sale] and a declaration of property to the bibliophy lakes [Archives/RecordKeepers/Register of Deeds] of the metropolis [city]

    C.E.: “Common era.” This abbreviation came to replace the previously used A.D. (anno Domini, Latin for “in the year of the Lord”). The common era covers the time from Christ’s birth to the present day.

    As we see, thousands of years ago, people were concerned about assuring the chain of title toland was accurate to establish proper ownership. Talk about undermining basic fundamental landrights, instead of recordinga homeowner’s complete chain of title, MERS and the banksters haveused the bundling of homes as mortgage-backed securities to cloud your title and dirty your land deed through concealment. Moneychangers, deceptive practices, fraud and dirty land deeds canlead to wrongful foreclosure directly impacting your financial health.From a spiritual perspective, your faith is the same as having a“clear” and “clean” title deedto the most important ‘house” youwill ever own – your physical body.10 The ultimate securitydeed is spiritual which impacts your soul for eternity. In other words, the most important title of deed is to your body,in which scripture tells was unlawfully ‘assigned’ to Satan in the Garden of Eden. However,the good news (celebrated around the world) is the resurrection of Jesus which lawfully transferred the title deed to our bodies and souls back to the original fee absolute owner—God through the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus! Hence, thehistorical and heavenly record reflects a “Bill of Sale”stamped paid in full with the blood of Jesus. In support of this assertion, I ask the reader/homeowner to ponder Apostle Paul’s question,“Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you havefrom God , and that you are not your own? For you have been bought [Bill of Sale] with a price:therefore glorify God in your body.” (1 Corinthians 6:19-20)Jesus said, “
    In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have toldyou. I go to prepare a place for you.”(John 14:2) Rest assured, no matter what happens to yourearthly home as you fight wrongful foreclosure, your faith will carry you through the “midnighthour”of stormy weather. If you believe in Jesus, God is required by law (his own words) to stepin to protect his property rights [children of God]. Therefore, spiritually speaking, the wrongful foreclosure battle isnotyours but it really belongs to God, your father. Hence, “Do not fear orbe dismayed because of this great multitude[banks, “foreclosure mill” law firms, etc.], for the battle is not yours but God’s. (2 Chronicles 20:15)We see what Jesus did to the moneychangersover two thousand years ago; imagine how he will deal with them in 2012for their “dirty [Mis]deeds.” In closing, I urge you to have trust in the integrity and veracity of God’s word which transcends all negative circumstances, including but not limited to: corruption, credit defaultswaps, robosigning, securitization, erroneous court rulings and wickedness inhigh places. According to 2 Timothy 1:7, you are not to operate in fear but power, love and a sound mind.Remember three things as you seek to obey God’s word:

  64. In essence and to over simplify they leveraged the promise to pay. (and hedged their bets)
    and we go around in circles from there.
    prooving they used your identity to make far far more than you promised, based PRIMARILY on a hyperinflated value of the real property that was supposed to back THEIR obligations that never were in good faith either is hard without the accounting, and derecognition has been going on in all kinds of ways we will never know how much money they made (stole)
    I am going forward with the right to rely on the appraisal- reliance, if the loan is more than the REAL collateral value who would have promised to pay for that. THIS IS NOT THE MAGIC BULLET but in my case its obvious. the appraisers were whining for years about the pressures they were under, some were malliable and others got no work and left the profession, and gradually the air was pumped into the ballon each new wave of building up 50k 100k as high as possible. but when the median home value placed on a home outstrips median income by 50% and home values are rising rapidly we have a very unstable market. the USPAP standards are written, the appriaser knows what he is supposed to do, just as i do in my profession. I would never deviate from those standards, they are the minimum safety standards. As a nurse ( or rather i quote the opposition ” shes a nurse your honor”)
    i know better than anyone the catastrophic result if you take it upon yourself to deviate from those tried and tested methods, – look at mers, land records are pointless now, the integrity is gone.

    just sharing ideas.

  65. For those who haven’t yet made the jump.

    Credit Union Membership and Accounts At An All Time High
    by Gina Ragusa
    March 20, 2012

    Subscribe By Email

    Although it’s always made sound financial sense, being a credit union member hasn’t always been “what the cool kids” were doing in the past.

    Credit unions were often misunderstood, leaving consumers wondering if they had to be part of a union or could only join if they worked for a certain company. Of course the other misunderstanding, which continues today was one that credit unions didn’t have the same robust product, service and technology offerings as the big banks.

    If the term “slow and steady wins the race” could be applied to any situation, it certainly works in credit union world 2012. As fast and furious mega banks appear to be tanking by desperately adding more fees to prop up fat salaries, an increasing number of consumers are seeking solace at a local credit union.

    Following Bank Transfer Day and the subsequent news of increasing fee structures at big banks, it’s no surprise that the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) reported that more than 1.3 million Americans opened an account at a credit union last year, considerably higher than the 600,000 who made the move in 2010.

    The latest numbers brings credit union membership to a record 91.8 million. Credit union advocates believe that these numbers are only going to rise as big banks try to court that 1%.

    Christianne Gribben, AVP/ Marketing at Clearview Federal Credit Union ($740 million, Moon Township, PA) says that consumers are starting to focus on their bank statements only to find they are being charged fees for transactions that should be free. “There has been an increased amount of consumer education and awareness due to some of the new bank fees that received less than favorable media coverage,” she explains. “That has prompted some consumers to start to pay more attention to their bank statements and ask questions about how they can avoid paying fees. In many cases, consumers have realized that they can avoid unnecessary fees by switching their accounts to a credit union.”

    In fact people are so fed up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has created a complaint board for consumers who are overwhelmed and feel taken advantage of by big bank practices.

    “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.”

    Credit Unions Report Upward Trend

    Mike Bridges, VP, Marketing and Communications from the
League of Southeastern Credit Unions released the latest data demonstrating that the increase in new members and account was not a fluke.

    Bridges reports that Alabama and Florida credit unions added $2.7 billion in assets in 2011 year over year from 2010, which includes $1.3 billion added in the fourth quarter.

    Membership rose in the fourth quarter with southeastern credit unions adding 34,000 new members for a total of 110,000 new members between the states for 2011 – 75,000 new members in Florida, the largest gain in more than five years, and 35,000 in Alabama, the largest gain in four years.

    “When we look at the membership and asset numbers for 2011, it’s certainly some of the best we’ve seen in years,” said LSCU President/CEO Patrick La Pine.

    “The membership numbers are most likely higher for credit union members that are using a credit union for their primary financial institution,” he adds. “Through our Image Campaign research, we found many people moved their money from a bank to a credit union after already having a savings account or loan with the credit union.”

    In the northeast, accounts and membership also continue to swell. “2011 proved to be a strong year for Northeast Credit Union as our brand promise, built on trust and personal relationships, resonated with our members and attracted new members to the Northeast Credit Union family,” says Amy Moy, Senior Marketing Communications Specialist for Northeast Credit Union ($697 million, Portsmouth, NH). “Our net income grew by $2.2 million — a growth rate of 45.7% and we loaned $581 million dollars to members — growing loans outstanding by 2.8%. In 2011, we also had net membership growth of 3,684 new members, allowing us to reach a total membership of 72,437– an annual growth of 5.4%.”

    Gribben sees the trend continuing, despite numerous regulatory hurdles thrown at the financial institution industry. “There is quite an opportunity for the credit union industry to grow. Clearview has been a big proponent of the iBelong campaign that originated in Pennsylvania and now has spread to several other states. One unified credit union messaging campaign could be very effective in educating consumers on the benefits of credit unions. Credit unions will certainly face increased competitive and regulatory challenges in the future, so it all depends on how they respond to these challenges.”

    Why Credit Union Popularity Now?

    Anyone who has lived through the “Great Recession” knows that troubled economic times have changed the way many people live and manage money. However, some credit union executives believe that the combination of the Occupy Movement and other grassroots campaigns finally resonated with consumers and made them act.

    “With the attention that the Occupy Wall Street movement and the Move Your Money Project have received, public awareness about credit unions has increased dramatically,” Moy says. “ As people seek to learn about the alternatives to large for-profit financial institutions, they’re finding that it is easy to join a credit union and that they don’t have to give up the great online services that has made managing their money easy and convenient. As more and more people learn about their banking options, they are finding great products, free educational programs, sound advice, and personalized services – all available at their locally-based member-owned credit unions.”

    La Pine also believes external factors and some internal promotions drove more consumers to credit unions. “These strong 2011 numbers, highlighted by the fourth quarter, shows us that the LSCU Cooperative Image Campaign along with Bank Transfer Day, created a powerful one-two punch for attracting new members and getting existing members to move their money to a credit union.”

    Moy adds that as more reports in the media point to big banks increasing fees, an increasing number of consumers will turn to a credit union.

    “Perhaps if there were just one or two isolated stories about bank bailouts or increases in bank fees, the attention being paid to credit unions would fade. Instead, the headlines continue to show large financial institutions settling claims for wrongdoing and testing fees for their products and services to penalize customers they deem unprofitable.”

    She believes that there isn’t one single event, headline, or movement responsible for the boom, rather each has contributed to a larger conversation that continues to be amplified. “People are watching and listening to what is happening around them and they are searching for information and options that they can trust. People want to feel good about the institutions they do business with, and credit unions offer people the opportunity to put their money and their trust in an institution in which they are a member-owner and one that is committed to putting the needs of its member-owners first.

    Moy adds that the most important thing consumers should know about a credit union is that it is owned and controlled by its member-owners and exists for the benefit of its member-owners. “Credit unions are focused on helping their member-owners with their financial needs rather than making a profit for investors and are committed to the credit union creed of people helping people.”

    Resources:
    http://articles.latimes.com/2012/mar/02/business/la-fi-bank-fees-complaints-20120302

  66. @Steve,

    Don’t worry. I’m in litigation in federal court. I decided over 2 years ago to attack the servicer. Couldn’t spend my life writing to Peter, Paul, Jack and whoever else: serves no purpose other than waste time and it gets you nowhere. I got tired of it and I made a choice. So far, so good.

  67. I GOT TO SAY ….WAS IT NOT SOLIMAN , THE ACCOUNTING GUY WHO SAID BEWARE OF PRO TANTO AND ITS NOT THE BANK FORECLOSING.

    GO DO A PRO TANTO SEARCH ON THE INTERNET. MY GOD EVERY LEGAL WEB PAGE IN THE COUNTRY IS ON THIS NOW.

    HE IS THE GUY WHO SAID THESE FORECLOSURES ARE EMINANT DOMAIN AND GOVERNMENT ENFORCED . SOLIMAN ALSO SAID THESE FORECLOSURES BREACH DIVESTITURE OF ASSETS UNDER ACCOUNTNG RULES FOR DE RECOGNITION SAFS 140 .

    DONT FEEL BAD. I FELL FOR THE ROBO SIGNITURE AND PSA NON SENSE TOO.

    PATH …

  68. Thanks keepon,

    Didn’t know about the name change. Just looked over the AHMSI website and it use to say AHMSI is ‘ funded ‘ by Wilbur Ross but I don’t see it anymore. Not sure how funded separates you from being the owner.

    @ Enraged

    If your original lender is bankrupt and settled with SEC as the same as American Home Mortgage did. Then I don’t understand why the DOJ didn’t go after the bankruptcy fraud. It seems like the only way to access original records. Might want to try out those letters here.

    Report bankruptcy fraud.

    http://www.justice.gov/ust/

  69. Guys, I think we missed this. Read it very carefully. HUD wants to go after the “Notry employees” of the banks where robo-signing was practiced. Repeat: HUD wants to go after the employees. Even though the article clearly states that those employees were following company policy. Remarkably, it lists the extent to which those employees were only following orders. Yet, they will be fined.

    I swore years ago never, ever to work for corporate Amrica. I hated it. If now, employees become responsible for the misdeeds of their employers, people are going to go back to being self-employed. Less risky…

    Unbelievable!

    http://www.nationalnotary.org/bulletin/bulletin_articles/hud_recommending_sanctions_against_bank_robo_notaries.html

    HUD Recommending Sanctions Against Bank ‘Robo’ Notaries
    RSSMarch 20, 2012 The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is considering sanctions against Notary employees of at least one of the five banks involved in the $25 billion National Mortgage Settlement and may recommend sanctions against Notaries of the other four banks.

    HUD’s Office of Inspector General issued reports last week detailing the “robo-signing” practices of the five mortgage lenders that agreed to the Settlement. One report specifically recommended that HUD’s Enforcement Center “pursue appropriate administrative sanctions against Notaries who may have violated state Notary requirements.”

    Those sanctions could include fines and a temporary or permanent ban on working on HUD programs. The report also noted that HUD officials had “referred the apparent Notary violations” to the appropriate Secretary of State’s office.

    All five reports concluded that the banks implemented policies and document processing procedures that required their employees to notarize large numbers of foreclosure documents outside the presence of the signers. Among the specific practices noted:

    •One bank set a target of notarizing 70 to 80 documents per hour and evaluated employees based on their ability to meet document-processing quotas.
    •Managers at another bank would bring stacks of pre-signed documents to Notary employees and wait while they were notarized.
    •Notary employees at another bank permitted co-workers to use their stamps.
    •Notaries failed to maintain records of their notarizations in states that have journal requirements.
    •Employees at two banks were rebuffed by upper management when they raised questions about the notarization and document processing practices.
    The HUD reports clearly indicate that senior management had a responsibility to implement policies that safeguarded the integrity of the notarial act. The reports also point to a general lack of training for bank employees.

  70. Tresspass Unwanted,

    Your words are very well spoken and very well taken… Thanks for all the insight you offer, it helps me tremendously each and every time I read your comments.

    Thank you Neil Garfield for this outlet. We appreciate all you do to assist us. Whether we agree or disagree, we all know this blog is here to assist us with research to reach our own understanding. Get Well Soon, my friend!!!

  71. Amazing.

    Nobody goes to jail. Nobody goes out of business. They just decide which shop to close and which to open. Same faces, same M.O., different name.

    Recycling as an art form…

  72. FYI:
    Wilbur Ross’ AHMSI changes name to “HOMEWARD RESIDENTIAL”, adds correspondent lending
    http://www.housingwire.com/news/wilbur-ross-ahmsi-changes-name-adds-correspondent-lending

    …how about because they’re trying to hide from the reputation they’ve created as AHMSI from borrowers in the next round of frauds! Fess up Wilbur! Be proud!

  73. J.P. Morgan: are you kidding? Return of home?? On my dead body… Wishful thinking…and read my lips from 80 years ago: http://www.pathwaytoascension.com/manifesto.htm

    THE BANKERS’ MANIFESTO OF 1934
    “Capital must protect itself in every way, through combination and through legislation. Debts must be collected and loans and mortgages foreclosed as soon as possible. When through a process of law, the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and more easily governed by the strong arm of the law applied by the central power of wealth, under control of leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. This is well known among our principal men now engaged in forming an imperialism of capital to govern the world. By dividing the people we can get them to expand their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us except as teachers of the common herd. Thus by discrete action we can secure for ourselves what has been generally planned and successfully accomplished.”

  74. @Steve,

    Right on! I used to write to everything that moved. I would bitch about my servicer’s unjustified NODs, send copies of payments, I wrote about my servicer telling me “Want a mod? No can do. You need to be behind at least 60 days.” I wrote everyone about everything.

    All I ever got was a letter from OCC telling me: “Your request has been escalated. Call us.”

    Fannie has never, ever answered anything. I even wonder if secretive Fannie can read… Obama did answer though: “Your request has been forwarded to OCC. Here is their number.” And I got another letter from OCC: “Your request has been escalated. Call us.”

    By then, it was too late. I had filed suit. Amazing how filing suit gets you some action. Immediately afterwards, Servicer said: “What do you want to go away?” So, I said: “I want a mod with principal reduction.” Servicer said: “We don’t do that.” Been in suit for over 2 years. By now, servicer probably smoked the entire house in legal expenses. And since I can’t pay for an attorney and a mortgage, with economy and all, you know, I haven’t send one cent to Servicer since filing.

    It’s a game of wearing the enemy out.

  75. Speaking about MERS…

    Funny! I used to get both my loans when I checked the site. Today, my small one is completely gone! Nowhere to be found. Whatever way I check it (SS No., address, name, you name it), it’s completely gone! Vanished! It used to show the previous servicer and trustee. Then, I would get the JDB. Today, nothing. Nada. Zip.

    Go figure…

  76. “I strongly urge all readers of this blog to write letters to the Federal Reserve, the OCC, OTS, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to stop pretending that the acceptance of fines is an adequate substitute for the return of stolen property.”

    Sort of tried that Neil,

    The OCC and OTS does not regulate private lender American Home Mortgage. The SEC settled with American Home Mortgage for accounting and stated-income fraud in 2009 but American Home Mortgage had already filed bankruptcy selling servicing rights to American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. in 2007. I wrote the Federal Reserve asking why wasn’t this brought to the U.S. Trustee Program under bankruptcy fraud. The reply letter said to take the matter up with your state representative. My state rep. said if in foreclosure to contact HUD.

    The point? What do my questions inquiring about lender fraud and bankruptcy fraud have to do with contacting my state representative or even a foreclosure. You can and should write those letters but I don’t think they’re being read.

  77. I find the “editor’s comments” better than the article. The pitance paid in fines juxtaposed against the real financial losses of the “borrowers” is a farce. The settlement is another sweetheart deal for criminals who have already successfully robbed EVERYONE else in the deal, having stacked the deck in advance.
    I wrote to the OCC. Got an acknowledgment three years ago, and a case number. Nothing since. Fannie is complicent in the massive financial crime, as is Freddie. Fannie committed accounting fraud by overstating her assets by ten million dollars, and failed to notify regulatory agencies when she discovered billions of dollars worth of bogus loans sold her by the Wall Street banks. She’s more interested in protecting the profit stream generated by servicing rights than tax payers who foot the bill, or borrowers who were defrauded. Writing to the regulators will have no impact whatsoever. Get your pichfork out and go after the bankers yourself. Until they’re staggering under the load of litigation we can and must generate, we aren’t getting anywhere. Even if you just push until the judge orders Discovery, and they settle to avoid having the truth come out, you have a victory.

  78. It’s right there. But Scribd is soooo slow, always better to go directly to the source, right?

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/50584286/MERS-Disclaimer-as-to-Its-Records

  79. @Nabdulla,

    Can’t get the spelling of your name right… Chronic ADHD or early Alzheimer’s… Sorry anout that.

  80. @Nabullah,

    Right out of MERS’ website… You have to love it: “We are the new and improve land recorder but… don’t hold us to our info ‘cuz we didn’t put it there. THEY did (whoever THEY are).”

    MERS® ServicerID is a fast and free tool to identify the servicer of any loan registered on the MERS® System.

    DISCLAIMER: MERS makes no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy or reliability of the information provided. MERS disclaims responsibility or liability for errors, omissions, and the accuracy of any information provided. MERS does not input any of the information found on the MERS® System, but rather the MERS Members have that responsibility regarding mortgage loans in which they hold an interest. Users of this information have the responsibility to verify the accuracy, currency and completeness of the information. The information does not constitute the official legal record and is for informational purposes only. The servicer listed should be contacted for further information.

    MERS® ServicerID MERS® ServicerID MERS® ServicerID MERS® ServicerID MERS® ServicerID MERS® ServicerID MERS® ServicerID MERS® ServicerID

    http://www.mersinc.org/MersProducts/index.aspx?mpid=7

  81. @ johngault

    “johngault, on April 2, 2012 at 11:09 am said:
    ….MERS itself disclaims the veracity of the info in its database and says it’s not to be relied on (posted at scribd)….”

    Where can I find this on scribd?

    Thanks 🙂

  82. Neil –

    You have returned post-op with a clarity unseen before: Thank You.
    We hope you recover fully, as you are our Billy Jack!

    This report goes to the gills of all pretender-lenders: we demand evidenciary full accounting from origination-lender–>borrower, not servicer–>borrower and ALL of the accounting ledgers; not just statements w/affadavits from paid employees under risk of job loss/reprimand (depose them all, object & stress them out like you’ve been made to do!). I encourage all readers to explore and discover their courthouse records, look for notarization & dating irregularities, middle men who acted as though they were parties of interest but were just names used along the broken chain of title & lender-borrower “Arms Length Transaction” disclosures. Just ask yourself: if your sister lent money for your bike, but brother was nearer to collect her payments yet you lost one in the mail or while on vacation missed the postage stamp, would you let your brother take your bike … and then be sued later by your sister!?

    Einstein said it: clear, concise and brief, with basic examples and language so we all can understand and communicate.

  83. Let’s keep going fw on this front as well!

    Ed DeMarco, head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency — which oversees Fannie and Freddie — has stood in the way of (principal) reductions and he’s claimed the support of Fannie and Freddie. But that’s no longer the case. Even Fannie and Freddie now support principal reductions. It’s time for Ed DeMarco to step aside by signing this Whte House petition:

    https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/!/petition/push-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-issue-principal-reductions-underwater-homeowners/qtS3crg7

    Sat. 4/7 25,000 signatures required
    17, 411 signatures 7,589 more needed

    “Senator Demands Answers from Freddie Mac’s Regulator” ( Acting Director Edward DeMarco)
    http://www.propublica.org/article/senator-demands-answers-from-freddie-macs-regulator

    ProPublica and NPR reported on Monday [1] that Freddie Mac, the taxpayer-owned mortgage-insurance company, placed multibillion-dollar bets that pay off if homeowners stay trapped in expensive mortgages with interest rates well above current rates.

    Questions the senator put to the regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, include why Freddie made the deals in the first place, when the FHFA learned of the trades, what role, if any, the FHFA played in them, and what the FHFA plans to do about the billions of dollars worth of deals Freddie still has on its books.

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

  85. http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/06/real_estate/mortgage-settlement/index.htm?iid=HP_LN

    Settlement appears to be for the following wrongs – which have nothing to do with what was stolenso that still falls under OCC but under the OCC Review, they are supposed to hire someone to go through their theft by fraud documents (that they called as foreclosures)

    My opinion is that no judge nor attorney can represent your interest unless you agree with their agreement.
    If you agree, you will go through the process to show your agreement which would include signing some document and accepting some payment, and maybe by accepting the payment there is an understood agreement in the settlement that you’ve agreed to it.

    Remember – Maxim of Law: if it’s not included it’s excluded.

    From MSM assessment in this article this is what the settlement covers.

    * $17 billion toward modifying mortgages for delinquent borrowers.

    * The modifications will include large principal reductions of as much as $100,000 or more for roughly one million homeowners who are underwater on their mortgages and behind on payments.

    * $3.7 billion will go toward refinancing mortgages for borrowers who are current on their payments.

    * supposed to help some 750,000 borrowers take advantage of historic low interest rates.

    * $5 billion in fines to the states and the federal government, the only hard money involved in the deal.

    * payments of $1,500 to $2,000 to homeowners who lost their homes to foreclosure.

    * Those payments will total $1.5 billion, according to the consent agreement.

    * Other funds will be paid to legal aid and homeowner advocacy organizations to help individuals facing foreclosure or experiencing servicer abuses.

    Also my opinion, they only way that $1,500 to $2,000 would be some sort of settlement is that may be what some homeowners were out of while they played the HAMP game.

    Unless the OCC settlement satisfies what it was written for, that’s the only way I can see homeowners get their restitution.

    If I am robbed, i don’t want the robber to send me paperwork to say, I may have robbed you and I may have just taken property you didn’t own, send me paperwork that I robbed you and I’ll review it and compensate you according to how I feel I’ve caused you harm or damage.

    That district judge needs to be arrested for accepting that knowing how many people have been dispossessed by fake paperwork and for using the judicial system to trick people into fresh contracts with these banks that don’t have the original note and no right to the payments they are demanding now.

    If no one plays their game, they will have to recognize that they lose.

    I am not going to pay anyone I don’t owe for a right to keep what is already mine.

    If they steal it, then they stole it, but we move from attempted business transactions to criminal activity.

    The settlment is not deceptive. Enough info has gotten out that the banks hold no valid papers and have no right to foreclose. This is just a way to get valid contracts for these homes.

    Those that were robbed have not received our restitution.

    All the assignments by robo-signers, all the non-assignment thefts, all the thefts by substitute trustee, theft by banks/servicers/businesses that were bankrupt or gone when the theft took place, etc.

    Also no one ‘lost their home’. We know exactly where our home is.

    I have learned that they ‘program’ us to speak a certain way and by using their terms its as if we all have the same understanding. Stop talking their language, their language is a lie and their media is used to teach you their language.

    ‘lost’ and ‘foreclosure’ have different definitions in a real legal (not online internet legal) dictionary.

    To lose something is as if you were irresponsible and it’s your fault that it was lost.

    That takes away their activity in stealing if you say you lost it.

    Foreclosure is as if they were the creditor and had all their paperwork in order and you actually owed them money and you failed to perform the obligations of the contract between the two of you and it’s your fault that they had to come and take the property because you didn’t pay them as promised on the money they loaned you.

    Has nothing to do with whether payment is made by anyone else, and has nothing to do with whether they are really the creditor and has nothing to do with whether they had assignment of the mortgage or anything.

    When you speak words that ‘validate’ something that may not be validated in writing, then the ‘current verbal discussion’ is the new contract that supports whatever they are claiming a right to.

    Never understand them…they are using terms you don’t understand even when it’s words you were taught in school. They went to different schools they have different definitions and they would never use the words the same way you do because in their controlling system they know what it means and they know they need to get your trust and to get you to understand what they are doing so they are not obligated by any consequences of what they’ve done to you.

    That’s why someone insane cannot be tried, because they could never ‘understand’ what is being done to them, but those of us not crazy don’t understand, we just think we do. We’d have to know that our thoughts is not their thoughts and our words are not their words and our intentions are not their intentions so there really is no agreement of the parties because I want something different from what they want.

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

  86. Misleading title “Fraudulent Foreclosure Remedy: Return of the Home”

    What are real solutions for the “Return of the Home”? Once this question is answered, the massive foreclosure fraud will ALMOST come to a complete stop… What’s the point of foreclosing if the home would have to be returned?

  87. Neil, I cannot believe you suggested we write to the Fed. They are behind this whole scam! That’s equivalent to phoning the Fox to tell him the chicken house door was accidentally left open. He knows!

    Get yourself a copy of Ron Paul’s book, End The Fed, buddy! Or how about G. Edward Griffen’s book, The Creature From Jekyll Island. I couldn’t put that one down. Or, How the Federal Reserve Runs The Country, by William Greider, or Web Of Debt, by Ellen Brown.

    The banks that are perpetrating all the fraudulent foreclosures are MEMBER BANKS!

    The Fed is responsible for the debt based economy we have. There is no new money and the economy cannot grow unless there is new debt.

    We have been enslaved by the moneyed vultures who own this private ATM called the Federal Reserve. They have to go. None of this suffering is even necessary. If the Treasury prints money again, and we don’t have to pay interest on it like we do to the Fed, we can pay off the national debt in two years! No more income tax! No more loss of civil rights and personal freedoms. No more being a debt slave for the rest of our years. Peace and prosperity–no more senseless wars. No more contaminated water, genetically modified foods and dangerous chemicals. No more cancer causing vaccines! Real friendship with other countries and no more TSA!

    By getting rid of the root of the problem, we correct 90% of what’s wrong with our beloved Republic. This is one “borrower” who damn sure ain’t writing to the Fed.

  88. Carie:

    Really sorry for typos – must learn to proofread.

    More on your “cancellation of instrument”….

    “Evidence is provided to the court to clearly show that the assignment describes an impossible act and court is asked to cancel instrument and any subsequent instruments which are based on the filing of the assignment.”

    Realize I took liberties and expanded that to include the DOT in addition to the ADOT. Can’t speak for anyone else’s docs (no mers here) but the NOD says the beneficiary is the one on the DOT and the simultaneous ADOT comes from servicer (not even the lender/beneficiary on the DOT) to the trust.

    Thinking the NOD is an “impossible act” also because it is naming an impossible beneficiary. So cancel them all and let’s hear it now from the trust. Make my day. If I am in default to them, they can have the money they are owed or the house. If not I stay and do not pay. They have to show up and prove up. Will the real beneficiary please stand up? If not stand down.

  89. addendum to previous post:

    “(fraud beneficiary who never was a lender/beneficary isn’t even authorized to be a servicer who recorded false fraudulent documents signed and forged by pretender ceo’s of pretender)”

    add:

    “who are really pretender DOT trustee (trustee sales company collector foreclosure mill) pretending to be the pretender lender/bneficary)”

  90. @Carie:

    “Complaint for Cancellation of Instruments”

    Thanks!

    Was wondering how to type that up.

    That ought to take care of the defunt “lender/beneficiary” on the DOT who was paid in full years ago (who never funded the loan) and the servicer only a servicer (fraud beneficiary who never was a lender/beneficary isn’t even authorized to be a servicer who recorded false fraudulent documents signed and forged by pretender ceo’s of pretender) ADOT to the trust. This (respectfully your honor no free house and no deadbeat no debt) leaves the opening for the trust to “lawfully” record their interest (which they did not, will not and cannot do which is not the homeowners fault and which is not just benign sloppy lazy mere paperwork error but hides fraud). I am so ready to call this bluff one way or another.

    “Now, there is occasionally an argument about whether or not 2932.5 pertains to deeds of trust and not just mortgages but I think we have that one licked..)”

    Think there are a few ways to do that to.

  91. And this:

    ANONYMOUS, on April 3, 2012 at 3:56 pm said:

    “…Most insurance processed the same way. Does not matter WHO is providing. IF FHA, then you may have a false claims act, as government sponsored. Of course, the AG settlement did not include FHA loans. Not sure if yours is one or not. Not the point. The point is, insurance covered for whomever was guaranteeing the loan — as to a default — whether or not you actually defaulted. But, then again, borrower never had opportunity to respond as to the false default/insurance coverage.
    FHA, and all insurance providers, covered by servicer agreement. Ninety days is standard. Ninety days is all it takes for ANY loan to be reported in default. In fact, GSEs consider 1 month as in default. They use false due dates to accomplished. These false due dates have been reported to the Securities and Exchange Commission. In addition, whether or not the loan is in actual default is a huge question. That is why servicers want you to default before they consider you for mod, so they can collect insurance — and present your “mod” to extended default debt buyer. All about debt buying. Biggest business across the globe. HUGE — and hugely leveraged. Massive collapse if truly exposed. MASSIVE COLLAPSE.
    So then, who the heck are they considering a mod with???? Removed from any so called trust. All up to the servicer. All up to the servicer to continue to conceal the “creditor” debt buyer. That is their job. But, TILA AMendment, and Fed Res Opinion says NO — NO MORE. Cannot conceal.
    As to Judges — defense attorneys just not presenting the law. Need a real “working” seminar…”

  92. @Neil G.

    WHY don’t you EVER talk about this?:

    ANONYMOUS, on April 3, 2012 at 2:31 pm said:

    Servicers tell you to be in default so that they have time to remove your “collection rights” cash pass-through from any bogus mortgage-backed trust they claim you were in. Again, these subprime trusts were not valid mortgage backed securities trusts. Securitization did NOT come from balance sheet receivables. There were no receivables, as these subprime trusts were simply cash pass-through of collection rights INCOME to already classified default debt.
    Three months gives them the opportunity to “SWAP OUT” the bogus pass-through — from the bogus trust.
    NO FINANCIAL STATEMENT accounting for receivables supports the subprime trusts. NONE. WHY? There were no receivables on any entities balance sheet because they were only debt collection rights — whose cash flows are reported on INCOME STATEMENTS — not balance sheets.
    Securitization of receivables??? NO — Bogus. Securitization of ASSIGNMENT of default debt cash flows??? YES. ALL supported by enhanced credit enhancement to generate higher ratings by rating agencies. Security investors know they were duped. But, security investors are NOT, and never were, your creditor.
    When will the homeowner get the same attention in court as the security investors??? The homeowners were the target — far worse than security investors fraud, who are sophisticated investors. Security investors should have know better, the Prospectus outlines the type of investment they were investing in. Not the same case for homeowners, they are considered not sophisticated. And, why is this not addressed? Because the government knows the price tag is too large. Would put banks out of commission.
    The subprime “MORTGAGE” (NOT mortgages) is the biggest sink-hole. Nothing in the AG settlement addresses these “loans.” NOTHING.
    SINK HOLE.
    Wasted time. SOL expiring. And, I still hear —- oh — those poor investors put up the money — and lost. NO NO NO.
    I have asked — multiple times —- distinguish between “security investors” and “investors.” NO ANSWER.
    And, we wonder why we are not winning. .

  93. Hope the link comes through….Might have to copy and paste in your browser… http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE8350MS20120406?irpc=986

  94. Barry Fagan The reason I believe they finally released Richard Fine was because of media attention. Also Richard Fines daughter works or worked for the Huffington Post. I dont know her name.

    http://articles.cnn.com/2010-05-24/justice/jailed.lawyer.richard.fine_1_superior-court-judges-los-angeles-county-contempt?_s=PM:CRIME

    I hope I am of help.

    NEVER AGAIN.

  95. Barry Fagan If I was you I would notify or get on the Huffington Post Blog. I would get media attention. You live in malibu a Celebrity involved and the LA Times etc.. Otherwise in my opinion they will bury you alive.

    I wish you the best of luck and it looks like you are the one (Attorney) who gets it in California. You have alot of Guts.

    NEVER AGAIN.
    Be Strong and Courageous.

  96. http://foreclosurediscovery.net/blog/complaint-for-cancellation-of-instruments/

    Complaint for Cancellation of Instruments
    Mar 4, 2012 by Colin

    Complaint for Cancellation of Instruments

    We have all been challenged and disappointed by the attitude of the CA courts in regards to our varied efforts to challenge foreclosure in this state. I have been working on cases where assignments have been recorded which purport to transfer interest from MERS directly to a trust after the closing date and where notes are often not endorsed according to PSAs. I am still optimistic about these types of cases, but they are complex and therefore expensive.
    I have been looking for simple ways to stop foreclosure which may bring a bank to settle out of frustration. One new idea is the following.
    After an assignment to a securitized trust or a servicer is filed and foreclosure proceedings have been initiated, homeowner files suit for cancellation of instruments.
    Ca. Civ. Code 3412. A written instrument, in respect to which there is a reasonable apprehension that if left outstanding it may cause serious injury to a person against whom it is void or voidable, may, upon his application, be so adjudged, and ordered to be delivered up or canceled.

    The law can not be any clearer. And indeed homeowners are injured parties and the instruments are patently false. Evidence is provided to the court to clearly show that the assignment describes an impossible act and court is asked to cancel instrument and any subsequent instruments which are based on the filing of the assignment.

    According to Civ. Code 2932.5 which is what gives a new assignee the right to foreclose, the assignment must be duly acknowledged and recorded.
    Ca. Civ. Code 2932.5 Where a power to sell real property is given to a mortgagee, or other encumbrancer, in an instrument intended to secure the payment of money, the power is part of the security and vests in any person who by assignment becomes entitled to payment of the money secured by the instrument. The power of sale may be exercised by the assignee if the assignment is duly acknowledged and recorded.
    Without a recorded assignment which names the new beneficiary of record, non judicial foreclosure as per Civ. Code 2924 cannot take place. (Now, there is occasionally an argument about whether or not 2932.5 pertains to deeds of trust and not just mortgages but I think we have that one licked..)

    Bank cannot file a new assignment which truly represents the nature of the parties’ interest, this is not possible because assignments took place years ago when notes were securitized and adequate records were not made because MERS was used. Banks would have to create new assignments, customized for the case and show the note to overcome these facts.

    Complaint is short, simple, can be argued in pro per if necessary and we can gather quite enough evidence to make our case. Pooling and Servicing Agreements clearly describe how transfers will be done and by what date. They describe the transfer as being done by the Depositor, and Depositors are not MERS members.

  97. @keepon

    The “foreclosure reviews” are TOTAL BS—from start to finish…I knew it the second I laid eyes on it…they came up with it only to PRETEND like they are “helping’…just like the “settlement”, just like HAMP, and just like the robo-signing rhetoric—ALL PART OF THE MASTER DESIGN…to PRETEND…and do NOTHING—except “FULL STEAM AHEAD!!” with the foreclosures…

  98. “The review program has also suffered from a lack of communication about how the audits will be conducted, what kind of financial harm qualifies for a payout and the tradeoffs participating homeowners will face. Indeed, many of the details of how the program works are still not clear. ”

    All of these pitfalls were examined during Senator Menedes’ Hearings several months ago. All of the pitfalls were denied by the OCC agents/ bankers/accountants who apparently paid no heed and proceeded on thier way. Listen for yourself. Testimony makes a record. So do Consent Orders. What good are hearings and consents if these arrogant ‘professionals’ are simply allowed to continue to ‘make road-kill’ of Homeowners without consequence even AFTER caught in the hi-beams?’

    Senator Menendez Presides Over Hearing on Foreclosure Reviews …
    ► 14:43► 14:43
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_CkhfQilBQDec 14, 2011 – 15 min – Uploaded by SenatorMenendezNJ
    Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation and …

  99. @Shelley

    When was that show clip actually on TV? Seems older to me…not sure, though. It says “posted” on April 6th, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it aired for the first time on April 6th.

  100. I am one of those “Responsible” homeowners eligible for a review (based on the Consent Orders of the Treasury/FRB/OCC). However, as has been reported by some of the most credible and trustworthy national reporters, such as Abegail Fields, Gretchen Morgenson, Yves Smith, Adam Levitten, Neil Garfield, and others, the review process is being conducted by people who were hired and paid for by the BIG BANKS. And so far, as one insider (a temp. reviewer for Promontory, the firm reviewing Wells Fargo and BOA’s misdeeds during foreclosures) revealed, that of 10,000 reviews ONLY 4 foreclosure actions were questionable, and later deemed legitimate. Moreover, this reviewer, who had fifteen years of relevant experience, also revealed that the higher-ups at Promontory ordered him “not to dig so deep” and “put away [my] shovel.” Unfortunately, all of this information was speculated months ago by The NY Times, Reuters, and numerous national and international publications. And it all reveals a collusion between President Obama’s hand-picked appointees to the OCC, Treasury and other regulators, and their owners: The Big Banks and Wall Street. Such collusions and the consequences of “toothless” consent orders and engagement letters (as well as “The Settlement,” which is another slap on the wrist of the fraudulent banks and a slap in the face of the American Homeowner) only mean that the wronged homeowner continues to be re-victimized, insulted and humiliated, while the banksters laugh their way back to their real home: The Bank.

  101. Barry Fagan v Wells Fargo Bank Re Motion to Recuse Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Norman P Tarle Pursuant to CCP 170.1 (a) (6) (C)

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/88312042/Barry-Fagan-v-Wells-Fargo-Bank-Re-Motion-to-Recuse-Los-Angeles-Superior-Court-Judge-Norman-P-Tarle-Pursuant-to-CCP-170-1-a-6-C

  102. Thanks Neil, I am forwarding this post to everyone I know. Seems like a lot of people trying to attack and confuse people in the comments so I will just drop in news of good articles and begin working on my cases against the judges and bankster lawyers and read your post.

  103. Why is the Federal Reserve still trying to resuscitate MERS ?
    i was watching the Ohio(?) Supreme Court case, FreddieMac v. (?) and the judge asked the defendant’s lawyer how long have the defendants live in the house while litigatiing the case or something like that and it came to me like a bolt of lightning. Instead of answering, ask the judge how much money has the bank(s) made on this loan and if they don’t know, then ask them to ask the bank.

  104. **A Day Without the 99%: May Day 2012

    The 1% needs us to continue reaping their profits, but WE DON’T NEED THE 1%. This May Day, Occupy Wall Street, in coalition with numerous other organizations and occupations, calls for a Day Without The 99%: No Work, No School, No Shopping, No Housework, No Compliance. Let’s take the streets, reclaim our communities, and support each other. NOT the 1%. On May 1st, let us stand together to reclaim our jobs, our communities, our lives. Withdraw your consent and strike!

    If you’d like to be added to the announcement and/or discussion listserv or have any questions regarding meeting time, location, structure, please contact mayday@nycga.net or learn more at http://www.maydaynyc.org

  105. Thank you Neil!!!

  106. For this topic, yes. Return the home and let the homeowner decide if they want the people to move out or give the homeowner rent for the privilege of continuing to live there.

    If they move out, the homeowner should have some money to re-pair and re-decor-ate the home to their liveable standard.

    I don’t want to move in on someone else’s carpet or wall color or whatever they didn’t repair or damaged in the home like plumbing, or roof, or landscape or driveway.

    —————————————————————————————
    A recent article worth discussing now that we are talking that we should be given our property back because our ‘property rights’ had been violated.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/06/foreclosure-review-occ_n_1404076.html?ref=business

    Highlights.

    1. …Hale is taking a pass. “I’m reluctant to waste my time,” he wrote in a recent email exchange. “I just don’t trust a word they say,”
    2. So far, just 136,000, or 3 percent of qualifying borrowers, have mailed in forms requesting a loan audit
    3. Mailings to notify borrowers eligible to apply to program were first sent beginning Nov. 1, 2010.
    4. …the review program has been dogged by complaints that it is not adequately independent.
    5. Many observers have pointed out that the financial companies were permitted to choose their own auditors to review the claims.
    6. Many companies hired to review the loans, including Promontory Financial Group and Treliant Risk Advisors, are professional firms that directly serve the mortgage companies for other consulting assignments, McKenna said.
    7. The review program has also suffered from a lack of communication about how the audits will be conducted,
    8. what kind of financial harm qualifies for a payout
    9 and the tradeoffs participating homeowners will face.
    10. … many of the details of how the program works are still not clear.

    AND THE KICKER HIGHTLIGHT IS:
    * * * The Wall Street Journal, citing anonymous sources, reported that the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and another banking regulator, the Federal Reserve, have not agreed whether those who receive compensation from banks should relinquish their right to sue.

    What the……(fudgesicle!)

    Didn’t they pitch that ‘you can still sue’ in the online and MSM (Main Stream Media) sites.

    ….’you can still sue’….you can still sue…..all over the place !

    And when I said it didn’t make sense to take the money as part of a ‘settlement’ and still go to court to sue them, saying, “yeah they paid me a settlement but I’m still suing because of what happened to me”, it wouldn’t make sense? And how aboutclearing the title to the property by the way contracts are created and recognized …offer….acceptance….consideration? Someone else could see the property owner received a settlement with the OCC and say, “hey, the homeowner no longer has a claim since they accepted the settlement and it’s been, one, two, three, 8 years and they haven’t sued. ”
    Wouldn’t they maintin and be able to provide a list of this class action review (settlement) recipients upon request?

    It’s all deceptive. I saw an article where, Home Affordable Refinancing Program, HARP, is not getting as many requests for refinancing for underwater homeowners as expected. Those that do, are paying a higher interest rate on the refinanced amount; and they were stating how the banks aren’t even going outside their own clients to attract other banks’ customers for refinancing.

    We know why, MSM just won’t state it. No one owns the chain of title but they are getting paid, and so the banks do well to get a new contract it’s a homeowner that hasn’t been dispossessed by theft.
    All those homes stolen and resold without clear signature from the original homeowner that would lead to transfer of the title is not worth it to adding to their books; as it would be a liability and not an asset.

  107. “This week, the Federal Reserve issued its court order, known as a consent order, against Morgan Stanley. The order demands that the bank hire an independent consultant to review its foreclosures, and said the bank was required to “provide remediation to borrowers who suffered financial injury as a result of wrongful foreclosures or other deficiencies identified in a review of the foreclosure process”.

    Wrong again!!! It is NOT up to the bank to hire anyone and audit anything but to our government officials. Until they get that part, nothing will change. For Pete’s sake, we pay high salaries for government employees. Let’s put them to work!!!

    Neil, I find the title of this article extremely misleading. “Remediation” does not mean “return of the home”. The infamous $1,800 to $2,000 provided for in the AG settlement per wrongly-foreclosed homeowner also qualifies as “remediation”. Yet, it is a far cry from “return of the house”. A remedy IS NOT a cure. It only alleviates the symptoms when theu flare up. An audit of the banks by bank appointed and paid for contractors is unacceptable. At the very least, Schneiderman should insist on hand picking the contractors, advancing the money required to perform the task at hand and THEN send the bill to the bank. Anything short of that is, again, smoke and mirror!

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: