Why Title Insurance on “Securitized” Properties are Worthless

Featured Products and Services by The Garfield Firm


LivingLies Membership – If you are not already a member, this is the time to do it, when things are changing.

For Customer Service call 1-520-405-1688
Editor’s Comment:  
If you can’t rely on the title report issued by the title agent and title carrier, what chance do you have of getting clear title to that bargain you were picking up dirt-cheap?

While many writers are theorizing about title problems, there are actual cases being litigated but are largely missed in reporting because nobody catches their significance. It all boils down to this: title insurance companies are (a) going to avoid paying or defending a claim that they deemed is not covered by the title policy and (b) generally, even when you would expect that they would be liable for such damages they cannot responsible for damages caused by title defects arising out off record transactions like in MERS. The courts are heavily favoring the title companies in most cases.

Hot off the presses, Mark A Brown and Christopher W Smart have published an article in The Florida Bar Journal July/August Edition starting on page 47–see link below. While they disagree with some of the rulings contained in that article it is obvious that one way or the other, you are pretty much screwed when dealing with foreclosure properties unless you have safeguards in place by renegotiating the contents of the title policy (something we were successful at here in Arizona), AND by obtaining cures of all potential title defects via Court Order. While this increases the expense of closing, is assures the buyer of something he is not getting now — clear title without clouds or defects and real insurance if the defects cannot be cured.

In cases involving foreclosure resulting from off record activity, even if the title insurer wins it will be years before the issue is resolved and if a temporary injunction is not entered preventing the new foreclosure from a pretender lender, the foreclosure will be allowed and so will the eviction. The worst case scenario is that the person buying such property for use or investment ends up, at a minimum, out of the house, no right to possession, no way to sell it, and no way to refinance it. No title, no possession and clawing their way back to the money or the house with the former “owner” and the title insurer fighting you every step of the way.

As the authors point out, if you have a contract to sell or finance your property, the buyer or financing entity is not going to wait around for 3 years while you figure out how to offer clear title. The very fact that there are many decisions, each in conflict with the other, presents an obvious cloud on title, which will stop any sale or financing, and probably presents a fatal defect in title for which the title carrier should pay you in full but (a) only if you make them through additional litigation and (b) without the damages you suffered during the long delays of seeking curative title instruments and litigating the rest of the case.

Does this make title insurance worthless? Yes, if you allow them to make exceptions for properties on which there was off record activity and they disclaim that that title is as reported in the policy. The position of the carriers, apparently supported by the courts, is that the title report given to you by the title company does not need to be correct and could even be negligent without any liability arising out of their conduct. Their liability is limited strictly to what is in the title insurance contract in its FINAL form, which often differs remarkably from the policy COMMITMENT.

For “unreasonable” delays there are a few scattered cases in which the insured buyer was allowed damages but then there is another fight over the right to recover attorney fees when you finally get them to pay — and no lawyer is going to take one of these complex cases on contingency.

If you already own property and you took no protective measures then you might want to initiate a transaction in which the property is refinanced or title changes to a trust or another party in which new title insurance is required. Then hire someone who knows what they are doing to hammer out the right title policy terms, and file a quiet title action to confirm that title is as reported. If you don’t own the property yet, then operate on the same assumptions and (a) make sure you actually have good title and (b) you actually have a title policy that will pay if the title had defects or was clouded.

It is insane that the title carriers are getting away with this. Everyone relies on the title report from the title agent and the title carrier. The way these cases are going, the buyer must always get an independent title and securitization review if they want to sleep at night. And closing without a licensed, competent attorney who is familiar with off record transactions like MERS, maximizes your risk even though it minimizes your expense. My suggestion is that you treat it as part of the cost of the house. If you spend another $3,000 it is money well spent.

At a minimum it would seem that if you are buying property you should obtain the combo title and securitization report here or elsewhere from someone who knows what they are doing.





155 Responses

  1. Wonderful post! We will be linking to this particularly great article on our website.
    Keep up the great writing.

  2. RICK’S comment at bottom of page is the real definition of title insurance, a scam: http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/372005_Title_Insurance.asp

  3. @dcb: Pacific zone, awaiting to take a dip in the arriving Fukushima nukes …

  4. @GUEST
    Just out of curiousity what time zone are you in?

  5. @tnharry: well they have that joint-policy fraud in Ca. (40 millions) and many other states. But these title robo-signers creatively invent anything a fraudster client pays them for. For instance they have sold millions of dollars worth of title policies insuring title to non-existing properties, such as ocean-front lots inside water lines, making buyers believe they were sold beach-side buildable lots!!!

  6. @guest – i’ve never seen one of those joint policies in my small section of the real world.

  7. […] Read more… Posted in Banks, MERS, News Around The Country, States « Getting Lost in the Weeds: Following the Money Trail “A day of reckoning may soon be coming.” Yves Smith » You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. […]

  8. @tnharry: find “Joint Protection policy (JP) insuring both the owner and lender” here: https://www.fntic.com/glossary.aspx

  9. @tnharry: See: https://www.fntic.com/glossary.aspx for “joint protection policy (JP)”. Title insurance is most create form of robo-signing. Here they give you a list of bogus protections such as the forgeries in Martha’s case, but in truth you ain’t protected against any one of these…u’r simply screwed with a robo-promise of protection…they can name a policy anything a scam artist banks, realtors, or sellers, want them to call it, just pay them well and they’ll fabricate it it…that’s all they do… http://fntimages.fnistools.com/images/recos/1167/documents/titlepolicycomparisons.pdf

  10. Gotta, love it…same crap different day! ~ Bickering and back biting. Seems this site is more Enrageds’ site than Neils.

    After all this time do you not all realize each loan is very specifically different, but for many of the same reasons? There is very little help out there, even with Judges. As we speak the pensions are rattling and the CDS’ (trillions of dollars) are rearing their heads.

    With municipalities and states going after the banks for investment losses, this should fissure quite nicely. With Federal pensions taking losses, the judges should start to listen, as now it is their honey pot at risk.

  11. Banks can & banks do because they are in on the frauds with title companies & county recorders & courts. & no title policy gives you protection for anything. its a total fraud. No matter what is wrong with your documents as a buyer no title company would pay a penny. that whole industry is a robo-signing scam.

  12. So here we are folks … the home owner can not sell and transfer good title to the next buyer. The ironic part now is … The banks cant either!

  13. @ enraged, the homeowner policy covers you from the date of purchase of your home back to previous transactions before you bought the property. It does not cover you from the day you bought it forward. Each time you refi, the new lender (ha) requires a new policy to protect their intrest from the day of the refi back. The problem arises when a homeowner has a title issue arise after the purchase and before the refi of the loan. Basically the buyer has NO protection from the day the purchase forward on an error made after the purchase. This is why when the wrong party filed lis pendens … they basically screwed the homeowner leaving them with a clouded title.

  14. @tnharry,

    I have that policy and I just read it. Apparently, you are right. I am covered against any lien, encumbrance or cloud I could not have know of at the time I signed the paperwork.

    So, the question arises: why did i have to pay again for title insurance in the refi and whom does that cover? And why was I refused access to the policy, allegedly discarded less than 5 years after refi, when my state SOL on contract is 15 years?

    The more answers I get and the more questions I have. I hate that!

  15. @tnharry,

    I have to obtain and read the first policy from top to bottom to rule out any provision stating that, in case of a refi, it would automatically expire or be cancelled. Otherwise, refi lender will have a lot of explaining to do…

  16. what’s this joint policy you speak of? you have the owners policy, lender has the loan policy. you get credit for simultaneous issue, but theiy’re not joint

  17. @tnharry: and what happens after refinance when owner & lender have joint title policies at inception?

  18. @guest & enraged – you don’t get a new title policy when you refi generally. there’s a new “lender’s” policy that protects the lender’s lien perfection and priority. the “owner’s” policy was generated at purchase and doesn’t change upon refi

  19. WOW!!!!! What has happened to this site? Well, the the comment posts at least. Is there some sort of feud going on with you ladies. This site was and still is very helpful to people, but now a bit reminiscent of 8th/9th grade bItchery.

    PEOPLE… PLEASE!!!!! Back to the matter at hand. There are VERY SERIOUS problems out there, and I believe we all have similar root problems. Please be on point, do not lose focus and constantly repeat the same tired story, cuz guess what…. WE ALL HAVE ONE!!!

    To continue to spout out “only your story” and hi-jack this site with your unique tragedy is a huge disservice to the people that take the time to write actual factual discoveries that help guide us toward what we all seek in the end. To end FRAUD/FORGERY and seek some sort of JUSTICE.

    We all want to keep our houses that I’m sure we’ve been paying on since the day we were given the keys. We all precipitated in the American dream of home ownership and are proud of it. Unfortunately there is a profitable business out there of stripping this away from far too many, and yes, the deck is stacked against us. Emotions will fly, and rightfully so, but we can’t lose site and focus of taking back our homes based on pure emotions.

    These little arguments are so silly, it makes me not want to come back to this site, which but the way, has helped me tremendously in the areas of confidence of my case and knowing I’m most certainly not alone or crazy in this foreclosure fight.

    From the bottom of my heart, I appreciate the wealth of knowledge that I’ve incorporated in my own individual court case. The type of information that has even put attorneys on notice as I interviewed each one preemptively for my battle. In my opinion, this info could not have come from a better place and I’d like to thank all for their input, opinions and intelligent insight as to fraudulent foreclosure. (with the exception of a few that still beat a dead horse & can’t seem to move forward and produce NEW info)

    People… This is a long life draining experience, I know. And yes, emotions can get the best of us at times, but we need to channel that energy into digging for the truth. We all know that standing before a judge, open our mouths and let that garbage fly out of it won’t stand for a minute in court, so why should it here. That being said… We all know there’s some truth to it too.

    PLEASE!! Play nice & be helpful. As I stated earlier, this site has helped me immensely and I don’t want to leave and find a new home for information because of what seems like infighting.

    Thank you & the very best of luck(if needed) to you.

  20. @Guest,

    I haven’t really looked into it. You know… 24 hours per day and major fraud to track down every step of the way… Makes for pretty damn long days already!!!

    But… I knew it would become necessary for me to look into it when i made the connection between lender and title insurer… Just haven’t had the time yet.

    Pisses me off! Life passing me by while I’m stuck looking into what fraud regulators (that I pay) should be looking into in order to shut down banks (that I pay) our government (that I pay) refuses to discipline and congress (that I pay) refuses to legislate. other than that, everything is just faaaahn!

  21. @enraged: when you refinance you create a brand new loan and your former title insurance policy expires (although it was worthless to begin with). So, the new loan demands a new title insurance policy, partly to give legitimacy to the new loan. To make sure their forgeries are air-tight they get it from a different title insurer. However, catch is that all title insurers have been nothing but rob-signers. Their Mafia is to collect all documents in their “Title Plant” and to robo-sign any new documents they want and steal any property they want whenever they want.
    And they told you a lie that they don’t have your file after five years. They don’t destroy them, even if their paper files are destroyed they have to keep at least their pdf files from scanned documents. They just won’t give them to anyone, even in litigation. and they have an even bigger influence on judges and county recorders, than banks do. They have you cold.
    Have ever you seen states, or counties, sue title companies and succeed?

  22. Las Vegas,

    And come to think… When I refi’ed, I clearly paid for title insurance but… with a completely different company (which, as you may recall from previous posts, happens to have been created by no other than… the lender! Different name but same officers. Double dipping on a large scale…) So, i don’t have any idea why my title insurer changed and by which operation of the Holy Spirit.

    What I do know is that the former Title Insurer is still in business but refused to send me my underwriting file before I filed suit. Allegedly, they do not keep files after 5 years. Which i find even more interesting, since in my state, the SOL on contract is 15 years…

    More research to do, more S*#& to discover, more of my life stolen while I dig into it.

  23. Las Vegas,

    I believe more and more that Radian is to titles what Mers is to mortgage notes and Corelogic to accounting. Radian appeared on my property records with the recorder out of nowhere a few months ago. one of those “after the fact” recording to backtrack the lack of adequate recording and make it appear legit.

    I looked into it and found that Bloomberg looked into it as well. Once again, everything about that company is suspicious as hell.

    Here it is:


    Company Overview

    Radian Services LLC operates as a subsidiary of Radian Guaranty Inc.

    United States
    Key Executives for Radian Services LLC

    Radian Services LLC does not have any Key Executives recorded.

  24. we are talking about title here? someone asked awhile ago about radian. i found : radian lien protection


  25. @DCB,

    You’re not too far off. Just learned that it’s a new moon… whatever that may trigger.

  26. Thanks, dcb—she knows what she’s done and continues to do…it’s pretty pathetic…I really don’t understand her motives.

  27. @Carie—look dear—im a disinterested 3rd party–dont know either of you–nor even to whom you are responding—take a break for your own good—-No I do not see what you are getting at. Its a fight that im not sure you know why it continues —-and I damn sure dont know why im wasting time writing this except that its making me wonder if its a full moon tonite–anybody know?

  28. @dcb: good finding that American Bar Association (ABA) = Bank-Bar = American Banking Association (ABA) & its not a coincidence either: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_rothschild01.htm#Ministry%20of%20Justice-%20American%20Bar%20Association

  29. @dcb—you realize all her rage is now directed at me…why can’t she let it go? Very strange.

  30. @DCB,

    It’s part of the self-infliction thing. Some people never grow out of it.

  31. I’ll give it a rest when the attack poodle stops attacking me…sorry, but she can’t let a day go by without insulting me…I just don’t get it…it’s so weird.

  32. Common sense is not a flower that grows in everyones garden. Just sayin ……

  33. @ CARIE

    Would you pls give it a rest—-you are not helping your case.

  34. @attack poodle

    You still haven’t told me why you LIED about doing a “project” with ANON…

  35. In case the attack poodle missed it:

    “Practically every property sold has the potential of a lawsuit brought by either the “former” (still legally the owner) homeowner, prior lien holders etc.”
    “We have numerous reports of junior landholders re-establishing their rights and homeowners regaining the title, possession and use of the property.”

  36. Uh oh—attack poodle on the loose again!

  37. Naw tn. Not rage.

    Just a healthy does of irritation against self-made victims who don’t like the result of what they, by themselves, accomplished after having asked over and over for help from everyone and who blame the entire world for their self-inflicted misery which, incidentally, they claim to have “gotten over” and to be “moving on” while still beating the same dead horse ad nauseam.

  38. Title Insurance = Robo-signing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVrxAm4Ogoo

  39. Ok, dcb. Sorry!

  40. @CARIE
    I am not accusing you of having that–but you must remember that any atty –has to be very concerned about getting wacked by the bank-bar

    its really dangerous to do anything that is adverse to banking interests

  41. @dcb

    Thanks for your sane answer.
    ..but—this is troubling—who did I “trap” that got in trouble? You said: “trap lawyers into providing advice and getting themselves in trouble for just trying to help people.”

    Sorry…just wanting to understand something…not “trap”. Promise I won’t ask anymore questions…since unfortunately my motives continue to be misinterpreted…oh well.

  42. @Carie

    I know little of DOT states’ law–the trustee of a real trust is the nominal beneficiary –and he holds that position for the benefit of the MBS investors. Unless a DOT statute soecifies that a 3rd party trustee is to hold the deed until the occurence of a condition subsequent–ie proof of satisfaction and release o of note—-it would appear that the self-enforcing aspect of the DOT schema would result in the trustee of the MBS trust being the trustee under the DOT.

    Certainly black letter law would state that you must use a different party as trustee of a trust for the benefit of other persons [ie the MBS holders] to prevent self-dealing. It is likely that the condition might be waived if the underlying trust documents allow it–however it might fail various separateness rules in IRC and/or state law. Thus a grantor that names one of the beneficiaries of the trust as a trustee might create a future litigation situation for that appointed dual role trustee—sticky. However I doubt there are no circumstances where the issue could be waived with disclosure etc.

    But if they did not dot the eye’s and cross the T’s then there would be violations of statute or common law which might arise to fraud or a statutory right to set aside the title based on a prohibited act without showing fraudulent intent—–WAS there Fraud–if so all bets are off—-the actions may be void ab initio.

    That is the self-enforcing element of anti-fraud common law–if the local enforcement is asleep at the switch–then you enforce by setting aside a transaction conceived and executed in fraud–as to you.

    It is often easier to cut to the bottom line if you set up a really egregious example: lets say a chinese internet hacker gets your account data from MERS’ databases—or a bank-trustee–wherever—basically the hacker knows that you are in default–the house address is XYZ———and he hires an unquestioning attorney with TH’s skillset—the hacker provides TH with a starement that he HACKER is “holder” of the note—-HACKER has a buddy create a nice-looking document or two indicating that he is assignee of the mortgage you executed—-or the DOT equivalent—all created in a far away jurisdiction by convicted forgers—signing using their own criminal names as officers of MERS

    TH uses all this stuff to get title to your house in HACKERS name——and then HACKER sells the house to his wholly owned LLC –which now holds title to the house

    if it was a mortgage state—did HACKER actually relieve you of the debt on the original note–which was never provided in the case?
    Did HACKER actually have power to transfer title by deed or release a mortgage ? NO. Can the real holder pop up a few years from now and demand payment YES—–Do you have a defense on the debt that you allowed your house to ibe stolen by deceit and forgery? Or that you actually paid off the debt to the HACKER— NO.

    This is the point consistently overlooked. While the fraudulent action went down and they may have even been able to get the title into the hands of a bona fide purchser, you are certainly on the hook to the real noteholder—who may also be able to challenge the current occupants’ title as a BFP–if there was a fat discount or other facts which suggested that the purported BFP has unclean hands–ie not a BFP.

    So lets take it one step further and state that your house was worth enough to HACKER–eg a mcmansion worth a million or two—-that he went one step further and paid a countryman to go into the bank’s ware house and literally steal the original note and waive it around at the hearing—–

    is your situation better or worse because the theft by deception was more sophisticated because HACKER had insiide help at the bank?

    If the state locked em all up upon confessions —–the evidence issue is surmountable—-otherwise that is your biggest problem—but even fraud is limited by a statute of limitations—but does the inability to raise fraud as a tort for damages relate back to to make the transaction legitimate—–this is your legal question—-public policy would suggest not—–the BFP rule is designed to protect society from failing titles—–but you still have no defense on the stolen note–unless you assert that it was stolen via negligence by the bank—this is lessened and the theft scario more likely if the originator warehouse operator is in bankruptcy when the theft occurs———-

    put the pieces together and you are looking at a very real possibility of collusion by several parties to steal homes based on inside information and gaps in the process—–

    so if you camp out on the front yard of your formwr home in the hands of the LLC——-and you can raise the details iv noted as reasonable prospects—even if you cannot meet a civil burden of proof as a plaintiff——then the question is whether the prosecutor can meet his heavy burden of proof to prove that you are a tresspasser beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Im not giving you legal advice–nor suggesting anything–indeed this is all very generalized hypothetically speaking discussion of maters not yet tested.

    But whoever would attempt this sort of thing better be watching the statutes of limitation and be prepared to face arguments that the claim is without basis etc if you do not do your research and have resonable evidence —and no individual should do it w/o a lawyer–because you have to accept the probability you will be sitting in jail for a while—camoing in the front yard is not as dangerous as breaking into the house etc———-

    a cynical person might infer that if the warehouse operator was under control of a bankrupt originator and the mortgage loan schedule was never filed as part of the securitization –and the assignment etc was robosigned that there is a very real chance that there are a lot of people whose homes have been handed over by local courts to frauders with a good scheme and lawyers—and who still owe the debt

    as election approaches an OWE sitin on the front yard with the wrongly dispossesed former occupant——might get the natl attn needed for all people to understand the depth of the problem–the need for solutions and out of box thinking–but like others here i wish you would quit asking the same question repeatedly and doing nothing—or worse quit trying to trap lawyers into providing advice and getting themselves in trouble for just trying to help people

  43. Uh oh—the attack poodles are back—must ignore—must ignore.


    As I said, it’s a straight forward question—and I am in contact with others who are fighting IndyMac/OneWest. Guess you are not interested in giving an opinion—even though YOU SAID that the trustee cannot be the beneficiary…I was just looking for a sane, truthful answer on this blog that has turned into a forum for attack poodles…oh, well.

  44. don’t take it personally carie, but when I pose my opinion you get pissed off and resort to your go to move of name calling. I passed “fool me twice” territory long ago. i hope you get another participant for mental masturbation. as for me, i’ll just go solo.

  45. welcome back enraged. you seem to have found some new “rage” in your hiatus

  46. Pathetic rants. This site is not meant as a therapy session.

  47. Come on, tn—I am merely trying to discuss something—I can’t believe you don’t see how obvious it is that the docs are stating something you yourself said in your comment about “basic trust law”—the information on the docs is as simple as I have stated—your answer might be helpful to OTHER people who are involved in a fight with Indymac/OneWest—because I guarantee they have the same paperwork…that’s all. I have had people ask me things who are fighting them—and I would like to help if I can.

    How about anyone else? It’s pretty straight forward.

  48. no thanks carie – i’m not going to make wild guesses on the meaning and implication of words on a page without seeing the docs themselves and perhaps several more docs to put them in context. i’m not going to pile on you since you’ve taken quite a bit in this thread already, but it seems like a purely academic discussion anyway since your sale went down with you having full notice and knowledge of all of your claims and you did nothing. i’ve suggested before that you may have irreversibly waived your available claims on this property

  49. Hi tnharry—just wondering if you saw this on the other post and what your thoughts were…thanks.:

    my docs:

    The Assignment Of Deed Of Trust says that MERS—”as assignor”, “grants, sells, conveys, transfers” to—Deutsche Bank National Trust Co, as Trustee of (the MBS)…”all beneficial interest”…

    …you said:
    “basic trust law says you can’t be trustee and beneficiary ”

    And—my Sub Of Trustee says:
    “…the undersigned is the present beneficiary under said Deed Of Trust…”
    And guess who the “undersigned” is? Yup:
    “Deutsche Bank National Trust Co, as Trustee of the (MBS)…”

    What do you make of that?
    I mean—both docs are saying that a trustee of the MBS is the beneficiary—right?
    Yet—as you say—“basic trust law says you can’t be trustee and beneficiary ”…

  50. Good Morning tnharry … you bankster you … tehehe. For the rest … I am not an attorney and I will not give you legal advice. If you want legal advise hire an Attorney! If you are having problems finding an attorney to take your case …try a differant approach. Dont start with I’m entitled to or I want Free & Clear house.

  51. @ALL
    Re requirement of recording:
    As most attorneys may remember, the 1st week or so of Real Estate Law 101 deals extensively with the issues attendant to recordation of deeds and interests in real estate. From my own recollection I was taken back by the heavy reliance on caselaw dating to the 1830’s etc. Thats how old this string is. The recordation statutes were established to provide a means by which purchasers of interests in real estate could determine whether there was a prior claimant–to prevent seller fraud. It was not uncommon for people then–and more recently—to sell an interest in land–then sell it again. The same holds true for mortgages. An antique land fraud involved mortgaging a property —then turning around and selling it as unencumbered real estate.

    The recordation statutes were set up to prevent fraud by repeat sellers. The recordation statutes provide a defense to the buyer who records—often involving a so called “race to the courthouse.” Thus, the purpose is to prevent an earlier assignee of mortgage from being cutoff by a later assignment for value. The intended beneficiary is not the promissor of the underlying note which is secured by the mortgage assigned. That is the older black letter law analysis.

    The problem that has been introduced into this seemingly well established legal tradition that unsettles the tradition is the involvement of the securitization process, the weaknesses of the UCC in protecting makers from fraudulent presentation of copies of notes and/or use of lost note affidavits without surety bonds and the use of common paper and evolved copy technology.. In the distant past –the 1830’s during which recordation evolved to prevent fraud, there was little risk that a purported creditor could present a forgery to a living debtor.

    Today–it is virtually impossible for the debtor to ascertain the authenticity of his own note. The predatory originators assisted in clouding authenticity by mandating that the closing be made using the predators’ proprietary black ink pen. Thus although the ancient recording “law” did not protect debtors but the reality of current practices vis note preparation and security-authenticity issues suggests that the recordation of assignments presents a means for the debtor to determine if the purported mortgage-holder actually has the authority to release the mortgage.

    Thus the Fla Court may be right on the old law but wrong on the implications today. In abscence of a system of recordation and registry of notes—and the limited ability of a homeowner to chase international frauders—who may improperly assert a right to release a mortgage and surrender a note—today it is the debtors that need protection less than the creditors. Should the court rewrite the law or should the legislature?

    It is now a federal problem if international lenders are permitted to enter a state to forclose and collect through tiers of agents. Homeownership is a local interest. It was a local oversight matter–hence the recordation statutes at County level applied. a return to this process is needed. the recent development in local communitities siezure of properties in distress may be the reform tool needed to put the issue back where it belongs.

  52. @tn—false DEFAULT debt…not false debt…there is a big difference.;)

  53. Tnharry said, “I’m just a bankster shill/foreclosure mill monkey/false debt collector…”

    Finally we agree on something!

    Just kidding tnharry. I’m actually proud that the blog went the way of Lord of the Flies and you and I had nothing to do with it! :’)

  54. @guest – did you even read the opinion before stating your conspiracy theory??

    “First, this Court must be clear that the recording of mortgage assignments, under Florida law, is at the complete discretion of the Party wishing to record the document. The parties concede there is no statute or judicial decision that requires the recording of mortgage assignments.”

    I know reading can be hard and all, but that seems pretty fatal to a complaint seeking a judgment for failing to record assignments to me. Then again, what do i know, I’m just a bankster shill/foreclosure mill monkey/false debt collector…

  55. @ edith: Did you know that the judge may be one of “Friends Of Angelo” (FOA) ? and been paid off long in advance not to rule anything against BanGsters? Courts will never let you find that out, its kept tight worst than the highest classified government secrets. The same judge could easily find dozens of cases allowing federal courts to adjudicate such claims. its all in their hands, so they could dump or keep cases in their courts.

  56. wow this thread certainly got interesting…

    as to the Florida MERS case cited, i can’t say i’m terribly surprised by it. as I’ve said before (and been lambasted for it), if an assignment is not required by law to be recorded, then the MERS fee cases fail to state a claim. it’s been tried in several states as a qui tam issue and I’m not aware of any of those succeeding.

  57. 07/20/2012 Case Nr. 3:11-cv-1153-J-20MCR, District Court, Middle Florida, Jacksonville, Division
    DID YOU KNOW? Class action law suit entered by Clerk of Court in Duval County, Jacksonville, Florida v. MERS has been DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE? Judge Schlesinger ….”The relief Plaintiff seeks is not available in this Court. Despite the popular misconception, an Article III court cannot resolve any and all disputes. The remedy that Plaintiff seeks can only be obtained by a change in the Florida Statutes…. Plaintiff has no right to seek recovery from MERS for the nonpayment of recording fees

  58. Thanks, Martha—it IS surreal…and I don’t drink. I’m just an artist and a mom—menopausal and mostly right brain—so sometimes I ask the same question more than once…sorry to everyone.

  59. This is all so surreal on here. Especially after two glasses of Zin.
    Who really…is Anonymous…. and Carie, do not let them lead you into this BS. The “attack beetles”will attack anyone, last week it was me, and tonight your the little moist hen on the table.

    I am not afraid. I am not hiding behind some internet fake name, and until we can all be unafraid we will never be free.

    We must stand together, and decide together what we want.

    This site is over-run by commies, and socialists who want your children to be slaves to the system and DISSOLVE property ownership in the U.S. as we know it.

    If you stand behind your words, then you should stand behind your names.

    Or at least provide some credentials on here, as this is.. after all a political site,. not some AA or anon or whatever secret -help seeking site.

  60. As I said before—ANONYMOUS is a friend of mine—WHY are you LYING about a “project”?

  61. @enraged—-by the WAY—you never owned up to this LIE:

    Anonymous is doing very well. How do I know? We’ve been working on a project together for months. Something much more involved than the pathetic rants of people who have nothing better to do than sit behind their computer all day asking over and over the same questions answers were given to by many, many people long ago.


  62. Ok Dear–I couldnt follow the trail of breadcrumbs —-getting too tired—old man—would you just tell me straight up what your training is–i dont care what position you may have had—-realtor—–broker—-but id like to ask some questions about the exposure to supposed BFPs if you fall in this category

  63. KC, said, “you have a great case, hire a lawyer”

    GEE I have tried to hire over TEN different lawyers!

    Lets see,

    On July 12th 2007, the CONVICTED criminal DONNA DEMELLO had me sign deeds of trust on LOT 256.
    She handed me the grant deed to lot 256, and I saw the loans of lot 256, and the loan MIN numbers for Countrywide and indymac.

    Then she gave my husband keys to LOT 107, and he moved me into this house on lot 107. ( I did not realize what was happening)

    Then the defendants in conspiracy FORGED my name to DOTS on LOT 107—DATED JULY 12th, 2007, and they placed NEW loan MIN numbers on the forgeries, hiding the lot 256 MINS.

    Then they CONVEYED lot 107 to me on JULY 13th 2007,


    Then almost three years later, I find out the LOAN NUMBERS are WRONG, and the grant deed is dated a day after I knew I had did the escrow, and then in 2011 I find out the WHOLE SCHEME.

    They even bribed my husband to deceive me.

    I would give a lawyer 90% of all damages, If they take this to trial. But the problem is trust, and of course everyone is afraid of the beast. I need a really old lawyer. God, Please send me one old man who is not afraid.

  64. The truth is in the threads, enraged…everybody sees your character.

  65. Whatever. Funny though that you’re the only one whining that I “attack” you. That’s fine with me.

  66. DCB… your getting warm.

  67. Asking a question is not “using”. And you’re the one who loves to attack—me in particular. I have NEVER “attacked”, except as being defensive when you throw it my way first—which is constantly.
    Tell you what—how ’bout we just ignore each other? You don’t mention me, and I won’t mention you—sound good? Just mind your own business and pretend like I’m not even here and we’ll get along fine.

  68. @Carie, do you remember the Golden Rule? I was poking at you to refresh your memory. It didnt feel so good did it? Once a teacher always a teacher …..

  69. @KC title counsel——limited warrantee deeds etc?

  70. @Carie,

    Sorry you did. Many people have tragedies in their life. Many people on this site have tragedies in their life. They don’t attack at the drop of a hat. Cubed2k had tragedies up to his eyeballs. He didn’t lash out all the time. He drunk himself into a stupor but he didn’t take it on everyone else.

    Once again, those are excuses. You use people for what they can give you and then, you discard them and, worse yet, you turn on them. Are you really surprised that they call you on it?

  71. @ DCB read the first post again .. right above leave a reply. And read my post in the previous article.

  72. get a lawyer–always good advice–even a lawyer should get a lawyer—problem iv found is that they want $25k to read the comlaint??? Is that market or just for me?

  73. Martha, I did not infer I was a prosecutor. And like I said before Martha… you got a Great Case! Hire an Attorney! You are not doing yourself any favors.

  74. Okay, enraged and KC—I guess I have to tell you two one last thing: I had a fucking TRAGEDY in my life which I have told NO ONE here about—that happened at the SAME TIME as the foreclosure—but you two think you know ALL about me…well you DON’T. You two are some of the cruelest people I’ve ever seen.

  75. @KC
    at least you apparently use a real name—would you be so kind as to do a brief background—-are you a state/or fed investigator/litigator –or were you—out of curiousity so i understand your perspective

  76. @DCB, I’m here because I do not want to be part of the problem. I’m waiting to be part of the solution. In the meantime .. I laid myself off work and I’m bored. I laid out the bacon for all to share .. but they were to busy biting the hand that was feeding them to realize it.

  77. KC , I have not intentionally twisted anything you said, but you do realize that by your statements about the price of Carie’s house, that you implied to readers that she lived beyond her means.

    You obviously know my case very well as it’s probably infamous in the annals of law gossip by now.

    And you infer you’re a prosecutor.
    Yet…I then must ask WHY AM I DOING YOUR JOB?
    I have given the STATE proof of a TEN YEAR long fraud scheme, and still the person that did this sits in a TITLE OFFICE.

    I am just a housewife and yet it’s clear to me this forgery has gone on for years, and yet no one will stop it.
    Root for my case all you want, but you know I cannot win, not when I have NO SUPPORT, no help, and the court is allowing SABOTAGE of the records.

    I HATE living In this house now, and it’s a hell, but I have to fight for what I think is the last America Right, and that is to own property.

    Is it right that I claim I own this house FREE AND CLEAR, as the CRIMINALS-by mistake-dated the FORGED DEEDS OF TRUST, a DAY BEFORE IT WAS EVEN CONVEYED TO ME?

    What is FREE? It cost me way more then the value to even maintain it, and I HATE living here. I lost my husband, my Daughter (as she is scared of the criminals coming after me, or her)
    I am alone in a VACANT house that is a HELL.


  78. @Carie,

    I AM “engaged in litigation”.

    Good one! I sent you to a number of attorneys. You didn’t contact any of them. Each time, it was the same refrain: “They don’t understand securitization. They’re after people’s money and they do nothing. I saw one and all he wanted me to do was file for BK. I don’t want a mod: they’re all pretender-lenders. Etc.” I told you whom to contact to get referrals to attorneys who handle foreclosure defense even in CA. Nope. It was never good enough. You know how hours I spent doing research for you? You want me to post all those e-mails? And to top it off, you snap and you bite when people put your nose into it.

    If you don’t want to be honest with us, big deal. We don’t care: it’s your life. At the very least, be honest with yourself.

  79. @dcb—it’s only 10:00 in CA—and I’m leaving now—I only stayed because I couldn’t believe the extent of their “bitchness”—but, I “get it” now—I’ll never go THERE again—useless! Good NIGHT!!

  80. Sheesh Carie … you all but wrote a book on your life here! Did you forget to take your meds again?

  81. i always enjoyed reading anons posts–very consistent insightful and useful—–very helpful to me particularly 2009-10————why is anon no longer posting—-????? is he/she barred by a settlement?

  82. You know what—I’m SO done with the catty, bitchy behavior from you two—ridiculous!

  83. maybe not have to be engaged–or in support role to be a victim–but why in the world would you be chattering a couple hours at nite–to no purpose—is this the bitching hour–iv missed it before i guess

  84. Yes, dcb—they think they know everything about me—which is really wierd and sad…I did lose my home—for a variety of reasons—which they know nothing about—but my fight is not over.

    For some reason they like to pick on me because I post things from ANONYMOUS which I believe are true. I’m not really sure why they feel so compelled to attack me–it’s really odd.

  85. Oh Really Carie …since when are you engaged in Litigation? I cant wait to hear this …… ! @DCB, you do not have to be engaged in litigation to be a victim of the banks.

  86. ok–then i misunderstood others comments–or they mistated?

  87. @DCB

    I AM “engaged in litigation”.

  88. @MR

    I think a big part of the problem is the lack of substantive legal knowledge on the part of both govt prosecutors as well as homeowner representation. The field is dominated by litigators and the cases are dominated by technical procedural detail—which of course is the strategy of the spaghetti makers.

  89. @KC

    I never said I wanted a “free house”—EVER. The only people who use that term are people who stick up for the banks…like you.

  90. Martha .. dont twist my words like Carie does. I never said anything about the actual appraisel values. I was referring to the loan amounts and purchase prices. I am Very Pro on Principal Reductions! And my info on Carie comes from her own postings here.

  91. @ KC’s comment; interesting point carie–if you are not engaged in litigation–why are you here? maybe its a mistatement–but I sure wouldnt be here if it wasnt to keep abreast of things–be it recent cases–regulations or even foreign events that eventually rattle the markets here–like next day

    but why you? Of course I know the site is both monitored electronically and by people—not a big surprise–looking for breaches of confidentiality and non-disparagement

  92. KC—you have NO IDEA what really happened in my life and why I did what I did. You really are a supreme you-know-what…unbelievable.

  93. Right on again, Martha…who ARE these b-words, anyway? Scheesh!

  94. DCB. Be careful, as you are certainly right. And there is no law anymore. Not at least in the courts I have seen. This is a loss, as now there can be no passion for the beauty of the law, not from a lawyer at least, as you know the truth about six months after you passed the bar I would guess.

    I used to love to argue points, (in my paralegal days) but not anymore, when the truth is now known, and the end is already written.
    I wanted to go to law school for years now.. until I found out the truth.
    A dream is shattered every day for me it seems.

    Still. everyone has to work, so it could be worse!

  95. You can roll the ball all you want Carie, but you cant fool me. Like I said I’ve been a leader in fighting for transparency and disclosure for 10yrs (thats longer than Neil). I’ve been actively involved in collecting evidence and seeking prosecutions. I ruffle all the Judges feathers … Trust Me! But I dont buy the story that you deserve a free house anymore than the Bank. If you want respect … earn it! If you want a house, you have to be able to pay for it! If fraud is commited against you .. you come back with both barrels fireing. You walked off like a whimppering brat because you could not pay your bills and you choose not to do anything about it except complain complain and complain more. At least Enraged can admit the truth. I respect her for that!

  96. @dcb

    Yes—RICO would be nice…PLEASE.

  97. KC said:
    “As far as Carie … welll she lived in a $300,000 plus house. I live in one less that $150,000. I live within my means and I do not want anything for free or because I think I’m entitled.”

    Wow—really? KC has no idea what my history is and what my life was or is like now–or what kind of tragedies I have endured—and yet she judges so cruelly…

    Who do you guys think SHE works for? Yup.

  98. KC., so now its down to the level of the FAKE value of the HOUSE we live in that determines our “worth” as a fighter of Fraud, as you said:

    “Martha.. I was referring to those who forged your name as the dirty birdies. NOT anyone here! I was actually rooting for your case! As far as Carie … welll she lived in a $300,0000 plus house. I live in one less that $150,000. I live within my means and I do not want anything for free or because I think I’m entitled.”

    I live in a house that is FAKE valued at over $500K., so that must send me off the charts on the “entitlement factor” you mention.
    Never mind I am frugal by nature, and prefer thrift stores to SAKS.

    I too, lived within my means, yet I am a victim of CRIMINAL fraud, and the people YOU helped put in prison KC, did this to me.

    I am a victim of a complex lot and loan number switch, by a mastermind of a criminal network, second only to MADOFF, and I do not care about this overpriced house.
    I care about my rights to own property as an American. I live here under siege, and I am not happy in this prison of fake luxury, as once I found out about the fraud, this house became a prison for me.
    I am not fighting for this burden of a house, but for my rights as an American not to be defrauded, and to own property with a clear title, and a manner and a law that supports this right to own property in a clear fashion, an not colluded and clouded by MERS and the cartel.

  99. Will do. Shouldn’t be too long now.

  100. Yes thats it ENRAGED–thankyou–please remember to throw it onscreen if it ever comes out in my lifetime

  101. @ MR
    You keep referring to discussions of “the law” —-i hate to tell youbut iv been a licensed member of the Ohio bar [not association] active since 1977—–managed hundreds of cases and dozens of lawyers—-and frankly –i do not see much substantive law followed —-

    the securitization smokescreen backed up by mers and robosigners has left all the securities, real estate and UCC specialists–not to mention us tax geeks—grasping to try to shove these events into niches we recognize to unsort it—i am of the opinion that entire bowl of spaghetti was intended —-god knows if you cant figure out what has been done by whom to whom–you cant prove criminal intent—-although i do not thinks that an honest effort has been made to apply RICO as it was intended

  102. Wow, KC—the only thing I—and everyone else—is “entitled” to is the TRUTH and the PROSECUTION of CRIMINALS.

    Do you really believe that these perpetrators of massive fraud should get away with it? Really? That’s what you imply when you attack and judge me, just for wanting truth and justice. Sickening.

  103. DCB,

    Just found it.

    Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. v. Duane Schwartzwald et al. Still on appeal. No decision yet.

  104. im counting on global warming –for my sons–its too cold in ohio for me

  105. Ok..Carie.. go ahead and correct my typing error … hahaha…$300,000.

  106. DCB. Yes,. my heart is with the already retired pensioner, or elders, but, then again, the current situation seems to be that everyone seems to think that the people who are REVOLTING against the foreclosure and FRAUD of the REAL ESTATE SCAM, are going to HURT THE PENSIONS, so they must be stopped at ALL COSTS,
    and it’s literally pitting the fraud victims against the pensions. And somebody has to lose, right?

    No one wants to discuss good old law, and order, and it seems that a communist EQUITY is going to be forced on us, no matter what.

    The Pensions have been built on illusions, and even me, just a housewife has figured this out. Woe to all of us.

  107. DCB,

    Too damn cold at my age. Ever been to Quebec City for Thanksgiving or Christmas? 3 feet of snow from October ’til April. Maine, in comparison, is tropical…They even set up tents in their driveways to protect their cars.

  108. Martha.. I was referring to those who forged your name as the dirty birdies. NOT anyone here! I was actually rooting for your case! As far as Carie … welll she lived in a $300,0000 plus house. I live in one less that $150,000. I live within my means and I do not want anything for free or because I think I’m entitled.

  109. It’ obvious your a woman, as your message is conflicted to say the least.
    maybe a transvestite? like the alpharetta robosgners

    just a joke–ladies this is humorous to say the least–i needed a laugh–keep going

  110. @Enraged

    I tell my sons “go north young men” Canada has enormous natural resources and a stable political system–and seem to be able to rein in their financials—with only 30 million mouths to feed. Only problem is you must be young with a desired [listed] skill—-or 500k to invest in a chinese restaurant—largely same as US immigration policy—-legal anyway

  111. sometimes the delay in here is weird, but KC just said

    Kathy Charlotte, on July 19, 2012 at 8:53 pm said:
    LOL Martha! You hang in there girl, .. those dirty birdies you are dealing with were on my hit list. We have them jailed now but we are still trying to unwind the damage.

    and then, before I could repost, KC said right after this:

    Kathy Charlotte, on July 19, 2012 at 9:01 pm said:
    WOW Martha! You are Way off Base!

    WHAT in the world occurred between the post of 8:53 and 9:01 that CHANGED YOUR POSITION, K.C?” and made you say “I was way off base,” after just telling me to “hang in there”
    It’ obvious your a woman, as your message is conflicted to say the least.

  112. @MR
    Frankly there was too much metaphor there fr me to fathom what the connection was—–although I agree with the premise that the real target of the financial community is to sieze and/or diminish the pension assets. The federal rules compel those to be held by the very characters that seem inclined to simply wire the client accounts offshore the day before the collapse of the accounts manager—–it scares me every time I see Fidelity receive mention for participarion in investments in Ireland for example—-its bad enough to have your house siezed but to have your life savings forcibly held in the hands of these people—and if you live on a retirement distribution—if Schwab or Fidelity etc pull an MF Global or Peregrine on us—I cant buy groceries next day—options get limited quickly

  113. DCB,

    I’ve been self-employed for 7 years. And I’m not doing it right. Need to become LLC before that JDB that’s been snooping around comes and get my car. I’m telling you: with no retirement, a judgment against me (can’t get blood from a turnip), a house payment I haven’t made in 2 years, a sinking income and no friggin’ Swiss Bank account to fall back on, the grass definitely looks greener where economies are booming… That would be Africa, maybe Singapore or Hong Kong, Canada might be a possibility too. Too much choice!

  114. Ha, KC, I come out against YOUR attack on Carie, and yet you ROOT for ME? Are on some of enraged’s Haladol or whatever this is she seems to accuse evryone on needing? LOL!
    They are DIRTYBIRDS. “to quote Kathy Bates” and I am going after them, and I hope you are too, even if you do not agree with my tactics.

  115. WOW Martha! You are Way off Base!

  116. ps… Martha, I’m not talking about Enraged either. She keeps her snowballs clean unlike others here.

  117. DCB, as the elaboration you requested, my comment was inspired by the attack on Carie… as KC seems to think everyone is out to take her retirement money.. from those solidly fabulous POOLS of real-estate mortgage/investments her pension made no doubt, as in she said below:

    by Kathy Charlotte, on July 19, 2012 at 7:07 pm said:
    Carie, …. I’m pretty sure no matter witch way the ball bounces, unless it comes with a free house and a false debt so you can get a free ride on my retirement money….. You Wont Be Happy! Shoo Fly Shoo!

  118. Are you referring to the Ohio S Ct? If so Iv had me eyes pealed and have seen nothing of it—-do you have the name—is probably time to look it up—-iv got the name buried in an endnote to a fprospective filing—-sort of awaiting the result

    but been somewhat distracted by the bank of the day newsdrama—ps what employer are you hiding behind–not that its all that important but just another piece of trivia

  119. LOL Martha! You hang in there girl, .. those dirty birdies you are dealing with were on my hit list. We have them jailed now but we are still trying to unwind the damage.

  120. What can I say Enraged, … I’ve had the Banks, the Attorneys and the Judges feathers ruffled for almost 10yrs now. But I am not about to open a can of worms for the few like-minded who want something for nothing. Greed is Greed,

  121. @enraged, lol, was that your dung I just wiped off my Jags window?

  122. DCB, Don’t feel lonely. It goes right by everybody…

    By the way, I didn’t keep track of the case in Supreme Court I mentioned a few months ago. Have you followed what came out of it?

  123. Please LEAVE permanently, enraged—your special brand of rude obnoxiousness has really worn itself out…thank you.

  124. @MR
    “commie socialist/pension posters paid to post b.s. on the sites”

    would you pls elaborate–that one went by me.

  125. haha–right on, Martha.

  126. Birds of a feather flock together… And then, they shit on your car!

  127. Where are the debates about the LAW?
    The law is a beautiful thing. Where are the discussions about LAW?

    Why do most of the pernicious, obnoxious posters (mostly man-hating women) on here blah-blah about politics? This site seems to be nothing more then who can repost the same news blahshat that we are subjected to by the bought-n-paid-for press, and LOBBY WHORES.

    We are being force fed this bull-shat, like pretty white geese on a foi gras farm.

    It’s gotten to be nothing more on here then back-pat postings to the others in-the-communist-camp about non important matters, and…. who gives a RATS ASS that the NOTARY must sign off on the closing.

    THE NOTARIES are the ones doing the FRAUDS!

    Its so obvious who they are, when they can only call you crazy and make innuendos about straight jackets. Nothing changes, but the names.

    Enraged needs to be tarred and feathered, and is hiding behind the cloak of her employer.
    The good old days of public shame need to come back.

    Nothing that would hurt them in a permanent way, but humiliate them, yes that’s what tar and feathers could do.
    Then again in this world. it seems like nothing is stopping them.

    SANDUSKY can rape hundreds of baby boys, and an entire freakin town COVERS IT UP!

    If Carrie is a FLY, then the pile of crap she is hovering over is the commie socialist/pension posters paid to post b.s. on the sites.

  128. @enraged

    I said I know all the answers to your questions about ANON—you said “no you don’t”…that’s called a “lie”.

    And you attack me for posting true things from ANON.

  129. Good Carie. I lie and I attack you. Be well.

  130. @enraged

    I know the answers to ALL those questions about ANONYMOUS…why do you continue to lie and attack me? I just don’t get it…very strange…oh well.

  131. Oops,

    KC I may have misread you… If i did, very sorry about that.

  132. KC—To quote Willie Wonka “You’re really weird”…*splat* yourself.

    The truth is the truth—only one truth…and you obviously are not interested in it…oh well…can’t win ’em all.

  133. @Pie,

    There was something a few days ago in Die Zeitung (or was it Die Welt) about China getting interested in buying some share of DB and I believe it was Le Monde that mentioned something about China becoming very, very interested in Portugese debt…


    Childish. I won’t tell you anything Anonymous hasn’t told you. Not my place and i respect people too much to betray what they tell me. All I can say is this: people i call my friends, I know everything about them and they everything about me. So, try to answer that: is Anon a man or a woman? What state? How old? Married, kids? Foreclosure or not? What’s Anon’s educational background? Do you know any of that? No, you don’t. All you do is cut and paste and repeat over and over what Anon said and that you still don’t get. I have yet to read one idea from you.

    I’m done with that. Keep your insecurities alive and well if you want. Not my problem. Oh! And I will go away when I’m good and ready. No one forces you to read and learn anything.


    Funny, that pack mentality. Probably why America is where it is… I have to say, though, that your contribution is really valuable. The things I learn from reading your posts!!!

  134. Who’s version of the Truth would that be Carie? The one that suits you? I’m not the one forclosed on. I have no desire to file a lawsuit, and do not plan to, nor do I have a lawsuit pending against me. Could it be that I know something you don’t? *Splat*

  135. @enraged – China is coming? Bush One said that when he opened the door in 89, Clinton reinforced it when he took the door off the hinges,and baby boy Dick Cheney stool pidgeon allowed them to take the door home. The current idiot is stillasking why there is no door, and who else wants to socialize the MBS losses through fannie and freddie.

    @ carie – there are several maiden lane llc’s, whcih one specifically has the federal reserve corp bought all these insolvent pool assets into.

    One was for AIG, one for BSC and Maiden lane II LLC holds most citi crap on repo’s. Not sure I understand your premise.

    Second, the federal reserve corp is not a member of any of these LLC’s, versus the Federal Reserve Bank of NY is the limited partner for each.

  136. Just gettin’ the truth out, KC…that’s all…so, you can “shoo”—if you like–’cause I’m not.

  137. Carie, …. I’m pretty sure no matter witch way the ball bounces, unless it comes with a free house and a false debt so you can get a free ride on my retirement money….. You Wont Be Happy! Shoo Fly Shoo!

  138. More from ANONYMOUS:

    Neil just never quite “got it.” Agree with him, as to the subprime, that the origination is false. But, it is false for different reasons than Neil asserts. Neil has to separate his markets. My focus has always been — subprime refinance.

    Subprime refinance was GSE’s rejects. And, subprime was in great demand because of the higher interest rate it paid to security investors. Security investors, however, are not the creditor — they are not the creditor for prime debt, not the creditor for subprime, not the creditor for GSE loans. They are, in fact, never the creditor. And, they do not fund any loans. They fund the BANKs — who are the “investors” in the debt. If you were ever to name security investors for TILA violations, or request rescission, you would be immediately tossed out of court. This is NOT the way the market works — no matter how Neil tries to slice and dice it to “make-it” work. It does not work, will not work in court, and counterproductive to foreclosure defense. Neil has never quite understood the distinction between security investors and investors. Ask him to define this in terms of Freddie/Fannie. Freddie/Fannie is the INVESTOR, security investors invest in Freddie/Fannie pass-throughs. They are NOT the same. And, niether Freddie/Fannie, as investor, or security investors in Fannie/Freddie pass-throughs — are the lender/creditor under federal law.

    I also agree with Neil that the financial transaction occurred with a different party than stated at origination. But, Neil has the “trail of money” wrong. Subprime refinances were created by reporting default to the GSEs, prior to refinance, to make sure the GSE could not “invest” in the refinance. Banks wanted themselves to be the “investor.” . GSEs charge off the falsely reported debt, servicer or mortgagee collects insurance and pays GSE –and, simultaneously, purchases rights to the (false) default debt. And, the mortgagee “modifies” the default debt by calling it a refinance. Borrower remains in default with GSE.

    NO funding is necessary, unless borrower requests “cash-out.” These (false) default debts were, perhaps, modified several times. No problem for debt buyer “investor” — because, if borrowers did not pay the high rates — foreclosure was the option. Default is default to courts, they just do not know that the loan was a (false) default before actual default.

    Now, ask Neil, whether or not he knows if prior loan was paid off — to a specified trust — at the time of the last so-called refinance. Does Neil think that the loan was not securitized prior to last refinance?? They were. What about the security investors to the prior trust — before refinance? Nothing prior is validly paid off. And, that is the money trail that he is missing. Why was prior loan not paid off?? It did not have to be — refinance was only modification of the false default debt.

    The wire transfer are meaningless, except that we can sometimes use them to help show that loans were table funded. Was money actually transferred by the stated wire transfer?? Maybe, but that money was paid right back to the party who is “modifying” the loan by the claimed refinance. In other words, payoff of prior loan is directed right back to the party that owns the collection rights. There is never a payoff of anything.

    There is no “trading” of ownership of the “loan” (although some debt buyers may “swap” collection rights). There is a “trading”/transfer of servicing rights.

    Also, I do not dispute that banks were beneficiaries of payouts. But, not sure which payout Neil is referring to. First, the banks were the investors to default debt/collection rights, they were the ones that purchased the collection rights from the GSEs. Prospectus may not outline that the “loans” were first sold to an affiliate of the security underwriter (some do), but is clear by the conversion of the so-called loans to certificates in a trust, that they are sold to the security underwriters. These security underwriters, actually their parent corp., were the “investors.” The subprime lending corporations (now all gone) worked for these “investment/commercial” banks. Banks could operate as both investor and lender by repeal of Glass Steagall (which, by the way, many are calling for return to). Second, once the certificates were allocated to tranches, and sold to the the “investment/commercial” banks, the banks kept the upper tranches for themselves, and pawned off subordinate tranches to other “investors” — most often, another bank. Lower tranches may have been sold to other entities. But, the bigger effect upon the public, was the Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDOs) that were derived from organizing multiple trusts, multiple certificates, and multiple tranches — into a CDO. A SYNTHETIC derivatives that leveraged the fake loans — over and over.

    Credit default swaps are often executed with cash and without transfer of collection rights. The banks do this privately, to parties not divulged publicly or to the borrower. That is, if they can dispose of collection rights. For a long time, market was shut down. But, thanks to government assistance (ha-ha), it has been greatly been revived.

  139. Funny how the real wackos stick together…

  140. I’ll “grow up” if you go away again—please!!!! It was actually peaceful here while you were gone…oh well.

  141. Oh Look Enraged, I found that Straight Jacket! Do you want to second my nomination of who gets to wear it? 🙂

  142. @enraged

    How come you are not answering my question about ANON? Seriously?

  143. @ToLLe,

    Thanks. I missed you too but i wanted to cool off a bit and see what was different when i wasn’t on. not much, I’m afraid. Still the navel-of-the-world bit. No time for that nonsense.

    For everyone else interested in the big picture, here is more

    Jun 20 – Europe debacle:

    China pledged $43 billion, Russia and India $10 billion each, and South Africa $2 billion.

    Also of note, via Reuters, the BRICS are discussing currency swaps in their national currencies, to reduce the use of the dollar and euro, and they are discussing creating a joint reserve fund to use in crises. Both would have a big impact on Brazil’s economic relations with its fellow BRICS countries.)

    And now, the piece of resistance:

    By NBC News wire services

    Checkbook diplomacy? China pledges $20 billion in credit to Africa

    BEIJING — Chinese President Hu Jintao on Thursday pledged African governments $20 billion in credit over the next three years and called for more China-Africa coordination international affairs to defend against the “bullying” of richer powers.

    Hu made the lending pledge during the opening ceremony of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation in Beijing. The credit line is double the amount offered in 2009 at the last forum held in Egypt.

    Hu promised more Chinese help for African countries in building agricultural technology centers, training medical and other personnel, and digging wells to expand access to clean water. China will encourage investment and assistance in infrastructure that facilitates trade within Africa, he said.

    China has emerged as Africa’s main trading partner and a major source of investment for infrastructure, pouring billions of dollars into roads and developing the energy sector across the continent.

    So… China and Asia: check!
    China in Europe: check!
    China in Africa: check!
    China in the US: check!

    Connecting Australia and China… check!

    The Australia China Business Council (ACBC) is the premier business organisation dedicated to promoting business and trade between Australia and the People’s Republic of China.

    ACBC is a membership-based organisation, with Branches in New South Wales, Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Victoria providing business-focused information and events for members in all industries.

    With China’s continuing strong economic growth, there are many significant opportunities for Australian and Chinese business to create lasting and highly valuable commercial partnerships.

    Brush up on your Chinese guys.


    Sorry if it’s too long. People need to get that “securitization” is a load compared to what is happening worldwide. Grow up.


    Can you visualize them hanging? Actually, from what i understand, Chinese prisoners go to rehab camps where they relearn to think right. And they work for their room-and-board too! With their hands, mind you. Visualize. See them in whatever-color-suit, sewing quilts that are going to be sold for peanuts. Manufacturing solar panels that are going to be sold peanuts. And hearing the voice from the loud speakers telling them how to think, what to think, when to think and where to think?

    Sweet dreams, my friend.

  144. Straight Jacket Anyone?

  145. @KC
    We don’t need to be insulting and rude here—that’s not “behaving”.

  146. Somebody needs to go back to their corner til they can learn to behave.

  147. Also, @enraged—the “pathetic rants” (if you are referring to me) are directly from ANONYMOUS—so what the heck are you saying? You are not making sense. Very strange.

  148. @enraged

    There you go again—you show up after you promised to leave and start with the insults—really, really sad…why do you feel the need to be so rude?
    And I’m not sure which Anon you are talking about, but ANONYMOUS is a friend of mine—so you are actually LYING, or are deranged.
    Stop insulting people and acting superior—it’s ridiculous and extremely unkind. We were doing fine here without your insults.

  149. @ Enraged, nice to see you…uh…read you. I’ve missed my banker news digested for me with my morning cup. 🙂

    Glad to hear you’re working on a project. Between you and ANONYMOUS, that can only spell trouble for the bad guys, of that I have no doubt. Give her my best.

    Stick around.

  150. Nobody on this site appears to get the big picture. Here it is. Foreclosures are only a distraction to keep people from asking the hard questions and getting the proper perspective. It’s working! Whether you want socialism or not, it’s coming. And one thing is certain: JPM and cohort won’t be able to play with utility rates much longer. It’s all good. ‘Cuz the answer ain’t gona come from Barmitt Obamney!

    “China will buy some of the pension assets of General Motors (NYSE: GM), many of which are large investments in U.S. public companies. (FT)” [And that, after China purchased one American bank in May and was given the green light to open three banks in Chicago in June. Comment mine]

    Read more: Media Digest (7/19/2012) Reuters, WSJ, NYT, FT, Bloomberg – 24/7 Wall St. http://247wallst.com/2012/07/19/media-digest-7192012-reuters-wsj-nyt-ft-bloomberg/#ixzz217NgLw7e


    You were right. I did show up this time. Not because it’s entertaining but because it is afflicting.


    Anonymous is doing very well. How do I know? We’ve been working on a project together for months. Something much more involved than the pathetic rants of people who have nothing better to do than sit behind their computer all day asking over and over the same questions answers were given to by many, many people long ago.


    China is coming. Bankers are done. 🙂

  151. E tolle … are you wearing those rose colored glasses again?

  152. @EMINENT
    DRAFT: Exercise of Eminent domain powers for purposes of prevention of injury to the community in respect of mortgaged real estate.
    Eminent domain must be exercised for the greater good. Not for the benefit of individuals except as members of the public. Long-established common areas uses can be determined easily by daily and historical reference, by judicial notice, such as roads in general use, public parks and office buildings housing taxpayer services and other agencies. The proposals for eminent domain constitute the recognition of old fashioned public necessity in response to a public need.
    Who is entitled to exercise eminent domain to prevent/regulate uses of property to harm to the community:
    The 1st question is the degree of emergency. Is there imminent risk of harm to the community. For purposes of illustration only assume that an incorporated micro-municipality of 20 homeowners democratically constituted observes that 30% of the homes in the community within weeks with a high perceived objective risk that the homes would be frozen to achieve insurance recoveries followed upon by stripping of fixtures including windows and doors then left without further attention. The 70% face a very real imminent risk and enjoy power to act as a community to defend itself against damaging interlopers. This is the community police power: To prevent destruction to property and devaluation of property. To prevent the feeding frenzy of salvage-scavengers.

    A formula must be developed for local communities to take action that will survive a restraining order. A properly constituted community has police power and a reasonable basis for acting. They must demonstrate: Why are they acting, is it reasonable –is there a well laid out record made to support the actions taken? They must present reported evidence of past damages in the community, judicial notice of facts including government findings would help. They must do this to withstand motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment.

    ESTABLISHING “NEED”: The community must make a finding of fact to justfy the steps which may need to be taken to resolve or mitigate the public costs of vacant housing. The mere act of vacating a home dissembles an entire maintenance operation for the facility. The neighbors must step in as an interested “community” of affected persons. They must make a finding that their community of neighbors has or will suffer from extended vacancies in homes in the affected community of homes;
    • they must observe: passively participate in the:
    • the preservers quickly removing first furniture and tools, then fixtures
    • observe the slow deterioration of a house left to injury by vandals, doors left unlocked and open in winter gales; quickly followed by “weather related insured loss”: snow and rain and frozen pipes
    • The salvage follows—pipes and wire ripped from water soaked walls and ceilings
    • Removal of doors, windows—even brick and 2X4’s
    No individual neighbor even has the right to complain to police and prosecutors that the home next door is being savaged by unknown characters by day and by night—or even ask whether the actions are endorsed by whichever party may assert control over the building. Total strangers to all parties may proceed to steal personal property from a house along with its fixtures. Nobody has standing to demand he establish his authority to demolish the property which the uncertain owner—absent such community groups.
    The recognition of need and delegated power of the State is made by a local governmental subdivision. The power of condemnation lies with all government publicly financed political “subdivisions” including townships and micro-municipalities. Privately contracted group arrangements allowing seizure of homes in distress could extend to condominium associations, any developer-planned arrangement. Use of governmental power at the level of a “community association” may be possible to support police action on an emergency basis. Emergency is a defense to trespass. Even the local volunteer fire department should have a solidly defensible interest with the addition of personal risk from homes stripped and left for lightning and arson.

    A local government agency-operated housing development makes a determination whether a property is a maintenance and general value problem for the greater community of its neighbors. The agency board condemns the “use” of a property in possession of an uncertain occupant property. The properties are effectively taken into protective custody by local boards. The association boards assume management of the process of disposition of such homes after vacated or on imminent risk—as upon the local court making a decree. Like any other condemned or escheat property the local association may manage and dispose of the physical asset. Leases and resales are among avenues available and reasonable. A past example of all of these concepts was seizure of distressed ghetto houses to facilitate construction of tenements.
    The agency must deposit a non-recourse note backed by an association signed mortgage against the property itself—subject to any claim by the association for necessary costs to preserve the property. Contributed services by community members are legitimate charges if documented properly.
    The notes would be held in the hands of a custodian governed by the community review board to meet standards of administrative due process. The custodian must then determine based on filings by claimants—the trust, servicer, collection agency, who has an interest may attempt to prove that interest in a quaisi judicial formal administrative hearing. If no party proves ownership of the homeowner-makers note through which these secondary parties assert claims—then the escheat laws of the state apply and the local association’s note transfers to the state within 5 years. The state may agree the property revert to the community association and that group then has full authority to do seller financed sales, common in the 1970’s and early 1980’s.

  153. I got really excited for the first time in years. I thought the news headline read, “Manhattan Breaks Off and Floats Out To Sea”. It turns out it was an island sized glacier from Greenland.

    Too bad.

  154. Unfortunatly negotaiting with title insurer was/is not effective. Just another years delay …. Prosecution is the 1st Step! No more being rewarded for getting caught with your hand in the Cookie Jar! Especially Grandma’s … *Splat*

  155. @ Neil.. Great Article! Not only are the title companies doing this, they are hiding it from the homeowners. There is no Transparency and this is the Very reason I have not closed loans for almost a year now. Steps are being taken as we speak to require disclosure by including a check list that the Notary must sign off on in ever closing package. I giggled to Lis …. I may just be going back to work soon. But then again all those refi’s fizzled out. HMMM … do you think Transparency will fire them back up? If not … I’ll just ask my Friend the Sheriff for a job mopping floors. *grins*

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: