Major Economists Tell Obama to Reduce Mortgage Debt

What’s the Next Step? Consult with Neil Garfield

CHECK OUT OUR NOVEMBER SPECIAL

For assistance with presenting a case for wrongful foreclosure, please call 520-405-1688, customer service, who will put you in touch with an attorney in the states of Florida, California, Ohio, and Nevada. (NOTE: Chapter 11 may be easier than you think).

Editor’s Comment: I think Obama is stuck on the idea that correction of loans to reflect their true value is a gift to undeserving people — because that is the message he is getting from Wall Street. I have demonstrated on these pages that correction of loan principal is not a gift, it is paid in full, and even if you disagree with indisputable facts, it is the only practical thing to do as Iceland has clearly shown, with the only growing economy in Western nations.

Now we find out that Obama was given exactly that advice 18 months before he won reelection. Let’s see if he does it. He sought got the advice of seven of the world’s leading economists who all agreed that reduction of household debt — and in particular the dubious mortgage debt that Wall Street is using to make more and more profit, is something that the administration should do right away.

We can only guess why the administration has not done it, but I know from background sources that this ideological battle has been going on in the White House since Obama was first elected. What is needed is for Obama to take the time to get to know the real facts. And those facts show clearly that (1) the foreclosures that already were allowed to proceed did so on imperfected liens which is to say the right to foreclose was absent regardless of the amount and (b) the principal claimed as due on those loans was (1) not due to the people who claimed it and (2) far above the real amount that was due because the banks stole the money from insurance, credit default swaps and federal bailouts from investing pension funds and other managed funds.

The banks claimed ownership of loans they neither funded nor purchased and also had the audacity to claim the losses and then overstated the losses by a factor of 10. The insurance companies and counterparties on the credit default swaps, along with the federal government, paid the banks who didn’t have a dime in the deal and therefore lost nothing. The investors received small pittances in settlements when they should have received from their investment bankers (agents of the investors) the money that was received.

An accounting from the Master Servicer and the trustee or manager of the “pools” would clearly show that the money was received and not allocated in accordance with the contrnacts nor common law. As a result we are left with a fake loss that was tossed over the fence at the investors. Had they allocated the gargantuan payments received from multiple insurance policies on the same bonds and loans, the principal would be reduced anyway.

This is why I keep saying that you should use Deny and Discover as  your principal strategy and direct it not just to the subservicer who deals directly with the homeowner borrowers but also the Master Servicer who deals with the subservicer, the insurance companies, the counterparties on credit default swaps, and the federal government.

Following the money trial will in most cases show that the lien recorded was imperfect and not enforceable because the party who was designated as the lender was not the lender, hence “pretender lender.” Following this trail from one end to the other and forcing the books open will show that most loans were table funded (predatory per se as per TILA reg Z) — and not for the benefit of the investors, but rather for the benefit of the bankers (a typical PONZI scheme).

In an economy driven by consumer spending, the reduction in household debt will drive the economy forward and upward. The real total in many cases is zero after credits for insurance, CDS, and federal bailouts. If you leave the tax code alone, and let the “benefit” be taxed, the federal government will receive a huge amount of taxes that the banks evaded, but they would get it from homeowners, whose tax debt would be a small fraction of the mortgage debt claimed by the banks.

The problem can be solved. It is a question of whether the leader of our nation studies the issues and comes to his own conclusions instead of being led on a string by Wall Street spinning.

Failure to act will produce a wave of strategic defaults because like any business failure, the “businessman” — i.e., the homeowner — has concluded that the investment went bad and they will just walk away — resulting in another windfall to the banks who after cornering the world’s supply of money will have cornered the world’s supply of real estate.

dc83f25e-2e87-11e2-89d4-040c9330702a_story.html

126 Responses

  1. December 12, 2012

    Income Tax Department
    ATTN: Whistleblower Division

    The City of __________needs revenue. The wells that it is accustomed to dipping have declined to offer more. I have some rational suggestions for “broadening the tax base” by administrative extension to reach those who are subject to local income and sales taxes—but presently avoid or evade those taxes.

    There are three classes of persons that take advantage of local competitors by evading taxes.
    1) Mortgage loan servicers
    2) So-called seized property “preservers”
    3) Debt collectors that seize and dispose of homes

    MORTGAGE LOAN SERVICERS
    In this category the most predatory entities are so called “private label” operations not associated with traditional financial institutions, and thus tend to be fly-by-night operations prone to bankruptcy filings on a 3-5 year cycle. They have headquarters usually located in tax-exempt states Florida or Texas, so they pay no state or local income taxes if they escape taxation if they can escape tax by source of payment jurisdictions—such as Findlay and rural School Districts. Ostensibly they collect payments from homeowners, skim a sizable portion of those payments, and remit the remainder to investors, who are often offshore hedge funds—also insulated from Federal Taxation.

    Traditional banking operations pay taxes. The predators operate on the fringes and demand equal or greater services by local communities—due to the predatory nature of their operations, further described below. These entities make filings in local courts, obtain title to real estate (REO), employ agents who are usually foreign to the local jurisdiction—and generally have nexus with local communities. They should file income tax returns and apportion their income like any other multi-jurisdiction entity. They should bear the cost associated with the receipt of local revenue earned with the full support of local governmental institutions. Quid Pro Quo. The flip side is the anti-competitive effect on honest tax-paying financial institutions, as well as the added unpaid burdens on citizens who must otherwise bear the burden of the shortfall in costs of services rendered to these free-riders. Such entities include private companies and small public companies, among others discoverable by review of Clerk of Court records and County Auditor and Recorder’s records. They hide in plain sight.

    SEIZED PROPERTY “PRESERVERS”
    There is usually a group of “out of town” operators who work in close association with servicers and collectors. These are self-styled “preservers including small public companies and sub-contractors. Often the fly-by-night servicer debt-collectors engage the services of these foreign “arrangers” who subcontract sometimes nefarious activities by out of town subcontractors. The class of preservers may also include less controversial preservation contractors of local origin performing legitimate but taxable services on behalf of traditional financial institutions. The fly-by nights however create the greatest burden on the local government resources at all levels.

    A typical sequence may involve the seizure of a home upon a foreclosure complaint which is either completely unsupported or supported by DocX-sourced forged documents. The fly-by-night operators are particularly prone to these predatory collection techniques. See for example the November 20, 2012 Indictment and Plea Agreement on state and Federal Conspiracy charges of Loraine O. Brown, formerly CEO of DocX and VP of Lender Processing Services Inc. a public company. A November 20, 2012 Press Release http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2012/November/12-crm-1400.html stated in part:

    “WASHINGTON – A former executive of Lender Processing Services Inc. (LPS) – a publicly traded company based in Jacksonville, Fla. – pleaded guilty today, admitting her participation in a six-year scheme to prepare and file more than 1 million fraudulently signed and notarized mortgage-related documents with property recorders’ offices throughout the United States…. Many of these documents – particularly mortgage assignments, lost note affidavits and lost assignment affidavits – were later relied upon IN COURT PROCEEDINGS, including property foreclosures and federal bankruptcy actions. Brown admitted she understood that property recorders, COURTS, title insurers and homeowners relied upon the documents as genuine….”
    The use of forged documents is indicative that the homes are in fact seized by a person in possession of account information—but lacking ownership of the actual loan documents. This aberrant activity triggers unusual activity by the preservers acting on behalf of the pretender-claimants.
    Due to the flimsy character of the claim upon which the collector seizes property after having intentionally or unintentionally committed fraud upon local courts, the collectors seek to maximize cash-inflows as quickly as possible—before their schemes are discovered. This may involve conspiring with an out of town preserver to seize possession of a vacated home—then actively cause or passively permit the freezing of the homes piping—followed by extensive water damage. The houses often are covered by the foreclosed homeowners’ casualty insurance policies which survive 90 days after vacate date. The servicer–collector grabs the insurance proceeds which may easily exceed the fair market value of the home. The homeowner was required to carry insurance to cover the loan amount—while the house value may be far less.

    The out of town preservers that facilitate the destruction benefit by having 1st opportunity to salvage the destroyed homes’ fixtures, pipes and wiring. In some instances—depending upon the age of the home—the salvage may reach to door frames, windows and other building components. Obviously, the preservers profit from both payments received by performance of legitimate preservation services by legitimate financial institutions while the shadiest operators receive lesser payments made up for by rich salvage profits. In any event the services are performed locally and are subject to both local income tax and sales tax under certain circumstances.

    DEBT COLLECTORS THAT SEIZE AND PERMIT DESTRUCTION OF OR SELL STOLEN HOMES
    As touched upon above, the class of fly-by-night servicers doubles as debt collectors. There is a twist that has come to light in the past year. The servicers-turned debt collectors tend to focus on properties and promissory notes held by sham entities long-ago economically abandoned by legitimate financial institutions.

    In the heyday of the predatory mortgage originations, the private label operators such as American Home Mortgage group, Option One and many others now bankrupt created predatory loans which were supposedly sold once, twice or more often to federal tax-favored investor-funded “trusts”. The trusts, aka REMICs in IRS parlance, typically collapsed when the inflated and predatory nature of the loans was discovered by investors—often public employee pension funds. Subsequently, it has been discovered that the exempt status of the purported “predatory” REMICs never met minimum requirement for exempt status. A failed REMIC is properly treated as a taxable corporation under the Internal Revenue Code and Regulations under IRC Section 7701. So it is also fully taxable under State and local codes which piggyback the IRC. See Once a Failed Remic, Never a Remic, Brooklyn Law School Legal Studies, Research Papers, Accepted Paper Series, Research Paper No. 317 December 2012; http://ssrn.com/abstract=2185420

    The abandonment by legitimate institutions of swaths of homes and promissory notes involved in these predatory failed trusts has presented great opportunity to the predatory collectors. This drives the above-described rush to “seize and freeze” and otherwise dispose of homes ASAP to unsuspecting local real estate investors. Under companion cases issued by the Ohio Supreme Court in the last two months, the use of unsupported Complaints and forged documents to seize homes was condemned. The full ramifications are not yet known, however, the judgments seem to support the recovery of the homes by the defrauded owners. See Fed. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald, Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-5017. Decided October 31, 2012. http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/ROD/docs/pdf/0/2012/2012-Ohio-5017.pdf ;and the follow up case Washington Mutual Bank, FA. V. Wallace Slip Opinion 2012-Ohio- 5495, decided December 5, 2012. http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/ROD/docs/pdf/0/2012/2012-Ohio-5495.pdf The two highly unusual UNANIMOUS decisions by the Ohio Supreme Court relied heavily upon the academic input of Ohio State University Law School scholars including Professor Emeritus Douglas J. Whaley, an expert on the Uniform Commercial Code, upon which the case turned in part. http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/faculty/bios.php?ID=66

    One might speculate that this expectation has been known by the predators since at latest November 2009, when the DocX scam came to light—and fueled their casualty insurance schemes. In addition to the seizure of homes abandoned by collapsed fraudulently executed purported failed REMICS, the most predatory debt collectors have apparently also acquired access to collection accounts from legitimate banks and legitimate REMIC trusts, and upon those forged documents acquired title, albeit voidable, to many other homes. Sadly, because these debts were not abandoned by failed REMICs, the unrepresented banks are initiating procedures to pursue homeowners who in essence paid the wrong party by permitting seizure of their homes by collectors lacking authority from banks. See for example a discussion of pursuit of deficiencies—a known consequence of default—now expanding to include pursuit of claims collected by servicer-collectors without approval by the owner bank. See for example; “LOANS STILL DUE DESPITE FORECLOSURE” The Columbus Dispatch Sunday February 19, 2012.
    TAX CONSEQUENCES OF UNLAWFUL SEIZURES BY DEBT COLLECTORS-Where the money is?
    Those unscrupulous servicer-debt collectors that engage in the foregoing conduct—effectively condemned by the Ohio Supreme Court and the United State Department of Justice in re Indictment of Brown, above have substantial federal, state, and local income tax liability. More than 95% of foreclosures are not contested—ergo few costs are incurred to seize those homes. The full amount of the proceeds of insurance and/or any proceeds of sale of the seized properties to now effectively defrauded local investors—virtually all is taxable income. The collectors, directly or though “sham” trusts, may continue to own as “REO” [real estate owned] properties throughout the City of Findlay, County, State and Nation. These vacant properties are subject to attachment by tax liens which may be enforced upon issuance of Jeopardy Assessments.

    The Ohio Supreme Court has placed Ohio in the vanguard of efforts to correct and redress the abuses. It remains for local communities to levy tax on the culprits and take back those title-damaged properties for sale by clean tax-title. There is no other solution to the cloud that now hangs over these ravaged homes.

  2. I’m in review/appeal of summary judgment now,

  3. Peg,

    That mark is NOT on the copy the Note originating bank sent me. That means it was added after the Originating bank sold it to WF.

    Which means the warehouse or WF wrote it in.

    I discovered 3rd party lender by requesting escrow file by subpoena.
    When I deposed the lender, they admitted the warehouse lender (line of credit) in which the originator’s contribution was 2%.

    You don’t need a court order to get documents, you need a subpoena if you are in discovery.

    In my limited experience, I would say the lender signed once and past the note on. The other signatures happened at other destinations. The lender is going to give you a copy of the note they had at that time. So it is reasonable that it would exhibit one signature.

    If you are not in discovery, try to get the judge to issue an order for the documents you want. A court order is much more powerful than any discovery request. Quicker too.

  4. Hi David,
    You can’t be certain that the originator used their own funds at this point.

    You’re right. They could be lying.

    The second signature is probably WF to Freddie.
    If you’re talking about the figure * squiggle mark, it’s in the space ABOVE the endorsement from the originating bank on the copy from WF and Freddie to court.

    That mark is NOT on the copy the Note originating bank sent me. That means it was added after the Originating bank sold it to WF.

    Does not appear to comply with Freddie guidelines for endorsement in blank, much less with the law.

    That’s true -not Idaho or UCC law.

    The signatures missing were added later, including the 4th page (possibly back of 3rd page, but you don’t know that without seeing the alleged original, could be an allonge).

    Yes, looks like WF retained assignment.
    You don’t know it wasn’t securitized. They won’t tell you without discovery. In my case I had to pull it out like teeth.

    That’s what I heard has to be done.

    You also need to make them show consideration that was paid by all parties. Show me the double entries on your books, receipts, purchase agreements, delivery receipts!

    I asked the originating bank for that. They said that was private and i needed a court order to allow them to give that info to me.

    The timing of originator to WF to Freddie is normal. Nothing there. Standard operating practice, except for the possible third party lender (warehouse).
    How do i find out about this 3rd party lender?

    Except the Assignment of the DOT(copy from the county records and copy from the originating bank only show WF Freddie isn’t on it.

  5. @Peg

    You can’t be certain that the originator used their own funds at this point.

    The second signature is probably WF to Freddie. Does not appear to comply with Freddie guidelines for endorsement in blank, much less with the law.

    The second alternative is that there was a warehouse lender. The or
    inator sends the note to the warehouse to complete its side contract, the warehouse fills in WF in the signed first signature and ships it off to WF or even directly to Freddie.

    The signatures missing were added later, including the 4th page (possibly back of 3rd page, but you don’t know that without seeing the alleged original, could be an allonge).

    Yes, looks like WF retained assignment.

    You don’t know it wasn’t securitized. They won’t tell you without discovery. In my case I had to pull it out like teeth.

    You also need to make them show consideration that was paid by all parties. Show me the double entries on your books, receipts, purchase agreements, delivery receipts!

    The timing of originator to WF to Freddie is normal. Nothing there. Standard operating practice, except for the possible third party lender (warehouse).

  6. good to hear. 

  7. Good to know. I have gone back several times and got copies just for that reason. i always get them certified and the clerk staples and clips them. Never remove the staples for copying, because the court will reject them as certified if you do.

  8. Some of my docs have been taken off of scan and can not be reviewed. and some of my sons and many I have seen are gone off county records.

  9. I got my own certified copies from the county clerk.

  10. The banksters are hiding as much of the crime as possible so find the chain of title and ask for the master servcing copy from the county records. .

  11. Hi everyone,
    Update.

    My stomach is in knots….

    I just got a copy of the Note/DOT and assignment of mortgage from the originating bank. ..

    Comparing the copy of the note from them, to the copy RCO submitted in its exhibit to 2 courts for WF and Freddie is different!!!

    Its only 3 pages long – not 4…
    It has only on endorsement to WF…not 2…and does not have the squiggle figure eight mark…(which takes up the blank space between my signature and the endorsement…so they added a separate fourth sheet for the stamp of the second endorsement to WF.

    That second endorsement does not say from what entity it is from to WF…

    So I do not know who gave that second one to WF….

    It shows that the loan in its entirety was sold to Wells Fargo 14 days after signing. Not just the servicing rights…the whole thing. I spoke with the bank and she confirmed this. they sold the whole thing to WF…and they did fund their own loans. Funds not necessarily from a GSE.

    That means that Freddie Mac would have gotten involved through WF on Feb 6 2006. About one month after WF bought it.

    I think WF sold it to Freddie Mac, but retained the servicing rights and did not record the assignment to Freddie.
    The note was never signed over to Freddie.
    Sense the Note/DOT is made out to WF then that means that the note and DOT was split.

    That means Freddie’s credit bid was invalid.
    They have been playing bait and switch with the courts.

    It also looks like the loan was never placed in a trust…

    HELP!!!!!
    Peg

  12. Pegsworld,Dave Kreiger just sent me the proof of Rob McKenna taking funds from NW Trustees and Crab tree people. It is on pdf though so email me at Shelleystotalbodyworks@comcast.net and I will email the pdf to you.

  13. The GSE’S were the insurers of the credit slips, not the lenders. The lender to the FED BANK…. was the Treasury. The Originating bank was the Issuer of the Bill of Credit to you at the Origination. If your Mortgage was ever transferred to a second bank then you should have received your original mortgage & note stamped paid from the Treasury. There should also be a legal assignment on public record no more than 90 days from the closing of the trust.

  14. Hi stripes,

    Do you mean did FHLMC – Freddie Mac pay the Treasury back? and when?
    Don’t know…Don’t even know how to find that one out.
    At what point does “no subsequent sales or transfers are valid.” come into play?
    When it was sold forward before closing or after some other intervening unrecorded assignment?

  15. Hi David,

    I don’t understand the two endorsements from originator to WF.

    I don’t either!!!

    There could be a warehouse involved….

    ??? do you mean the custodian custody site? Or foreclosure mill ware house?

    You may see such a third party funder on the title company document discovery. Not the copies they gave to you, the copies they kept in their own file.

    Right, they are not on my copy. That would be the collateral file, right?

    They have to tell you, and the Trustee does too. That’s Freddie’s rules according to their Servicing Manual I have.
    The main problem I see in your case is that WF has an assignment and thereby claims “secured creditor”.

    Right – to foreclose…
    They are trying to pick up one end of the stick without picking up the other end…In this case both WF and Freddie have a hold of the stick.
    Now WF is standing around with frosting all over it’s mouth saying “What cake?”

    They are not creditor or Holder of the Note. At most they are servicer, and the only standing they have is the constitutional standing conferred by having a right to fees.
    Right…

    I think I know what happened.
    The loan was sold forward to Freddie Mac before signing by the originating bank.
    The originating bank then sold the servicing rights to Wells Fargo.
    The originating bank then sold the loan to WF.
    They sold it in 2 parts…
    Wells Fargo sold the loan to Freddie, but retained the servicing rights – but that assignment from WF to Freddie was intentionally left unrecorded per Freddie’s instructions.
    Freddie had WF foreclose in WF’s name.
    Freddie had WF rig the bid so that Freddie would be the only bidder.

    Having Northwest trustee’s and their twin, Routh Crabtree &Olson PS. attorneys for both WF and Freddie, along with their very own third party notice providers & auction house – Foreclosure Expeditors/ Initiators, LLC. allowed this – no one would know if an auction really took place.

    Freddie bid by credit back as REO.

    Voila’ !!!!the magical Idaho Trustee’s Deed of Trust (manufactured,(notarized) in the state of Washington) took care of any defects in title because according to Idaho law, a third party bidder (successor in interest)is protected from any defects of title or any issue with notice, any and all wrong doing etc.

    Now Freddie files to evict in magistrate court (family/small claims court) as successor in interest.

    Oppps for Freddie …I’ve been reading these posts….You can’t do that! Be a successor in interest and place a credit bid!!!
    Freddie is arrogantly now saying oh yes we can – we are both! Creditor with the right to credit bid (because its really ours all along, we just didn’t record it)
    and we have the protection rights of a successor in interest(because, we didn’t record it)

    The second issue is the alleged note is locked up in trust where the Freddie Trust Agreement controls. The law of the agreement is first US law, where US law is silent, New York Trust law follows.
    In discovery, you could find out what trust it was committed to or whether it was committed at all.

    i would love to find out….

  16. Did the Originator …..the Original Issuer of the Original Bill of Credit pay the Treasury back before any other transaction occurred? That is all that really matters because, if not, no subsequent sales or transfers are valid.

  17. @peg

    I don’t understand the two endorsements from originator to WF. There could be a warehouse involved. You may see such a third party funder on the title company document discovery. Not the copies they gave to you, the copies they kept in their own file.

    “And they are not the creditor. You can’t hold a DOT and someone holds the note, especially when the note holder also claims to own your mortgage.
    Right. They would be the servicer – but the originating bank said they sold the whole thing – servicing and all to Wells Fargo…But Wells now said it was only the servicer and would not tell me who they were servicing for”

    They have to tell you, and the Trustee does too. That’s Freddie’s rules according to their Servicing Manual I have.

    The main problem I see in your case is that WF has an assignment and thereby claims “secured creditor”. They are not creditor or Holder of the Note. At most they are servicer, and the only standing they have is the constitutional standing conferred by having a right to fees.

    The second issue is the alleged note is locked up in trust where the Freddie Trust Agreement controls. The law of the agreement is first US law, where US law is silent, New York Trust law follows.

    In discovery, you could find out what trust it was committed to or whether it was committed at all.

  18. I think it does. The Deed of Trust is a standard 12 pg Fannie/Freddie form.

  19. Does the mortgage claim it and all riders to it are a Security Instrument….that right there should render the entire shabang a nullity….Some task has to have been Performed by the Issuer for that to be true….otherwise the Plaintiffs are in possession of an overdue instrument….3-304..

  20. Hi david,
    “NOTE:
    Pg. 3) The First endorsement of the Note is an unidentifiable “squiggle” mark.”
    Does it say “without recourse”, payee, printed name?

    Not by the figure 8 squiggle mark…

    It does say “without recourse”,

    On a separate sheet of paper which is not numbered and not apart of the standard Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac Note /form 3200 1/01, 1001001011061, item 16461.2(0312) was submitted by the same counsel, RCO, to the bankruptcy court on SEPT 23 2010 and to magistrate court as exhibit “A”
    The 4th unattached separate sheet of plan paper is stamped in block letters with the name of the signing party stamped in block letters:

    WITHOUT RECOURSE
    PAY TO THE ORDER OF
    WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
    William G. Arnolds (hand written signature)
    William G. Arnolds (Print)
    Assistant Vice President

    This doesn’t conform to the legal description and purpose of an “allonge” (See: UCC § 3-210 through § 3-205).

    For an Endorsement to constitute part of the Note, it must be on “…permanently affixed to the negotiable instrument so that it becomes a permanent part of the instrument” Endorsements must be written or stamped on the face of the Note or physically attached on a piece of paper to the actual Note (Allonge).
    and…
    The UCC does not recognize an Assignment as a valid means to transfer a Note in which the transferee becomes a “holder”. See: UCC § 3-210 through § 3-205.

    If anyone is the Holder, it is Freddie or the Freddie trust. FHLMC needs an an assignment.

    Good to have that confirmed.

    And they are not the creditor. You can’t hold a DOT and someone holds the note, especially when the note holder also claims to own your mortgage.
    Right. They would be the serviser – but the originating bank said they sold the whole thing – servicing and all to Wells Fargo…But Wells now said it was only the serviser and would not tell me who they were servicing for…

    I think i have a pretty good idea what they did.
    Pinning them down and using what is (or not) in the county records and their exhibits to catch them in their lie in a way the judge will understand.

  21. @Peg

    “NOTE:
    Pg. 3) The First endorsement of the Note is an unidentifiable “squiggle” mark.”

    Does it say “without recourse”, payee, printed name?

    “Which raises question to the authenticity of notary signatures and witness in conflict of interest in violation of IC § 51-108. (See also IC § 51-119).”

    Send a demand for the notary journal entries. Don’t forget the nominal fee for copies.

    Then the Notary records of this person from Secretary of State.

    You need discovery of the signer in deposition.

    “FHLMC LACKS ASSIGNMENT TO SECURITIZE
    There is no record through MERS and/or County records showing the loan was ever securitized into the secondary market and into an investment pool; which is the primary function of a GSE “secondary investor” such as FHLMC.”

    Right. You have a non MERS loan. And County records do not track securities.

    “Furthermore, court exhibits and County Records do not show FHLMC as “the holder of the deed of trust is the agent of the holder of the note” Bellistri v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 284 S. W.3d 619, 623 (Mo. App. 2009).”

    If anyone is the Holder, it is Freddie or the Freddie trust. FHLMC needs an an assignment. (See Shelly’s post below on Freddie/Fannie mortgage shell game)

    “According to County records that would only be Wells Fargo.
    While, FHLMC very well maybe the creditor in Idaho, only the creditor OF COUNTY RECORD has the right to place a credit bid.”

    And they are not the creditor. You can’t hold a DOT and someone holds the note, especially when the note holder also claims to own your mortgage.

  22. i would be very interested in a copy of that!!!

  23. I am trying to get a copy fof the champaign donations to Rob McKenna. Dave had the copies of the donated money that was public. Once it was exsposed he refunded it.

  24. transfer tax evasion if as you state–what is 2nd hand hearsay and what did you hear—need aff or at risk of libel-slander

  25. I used to know but it has been a long time and can not remember. This public info may vary in each state. Dave Krieger looked it up so he will be my first person to find where and how. And I have asked him to send a copy of his chart and article he had on the web. I went to an auction to watch and it looks like NW Trustees are the ones coming in a group of about three and bid rigging at the auctions making it look like several are bidding and the price is kept so high no one else bids, however they are credit bidding for zero dollars so keeping the price high guantees them to steal the house without paying a dime. All fraud and illegal. Three men came out of NW Trustee tower ski skraper in Bellevue and did all the bidding. One said Joe you can have this one and Mike you can take that one and Joe it is yours. Then they stole every house between them and walked back into NW Trustee building together.Some say the sale was ten dollars on county records. So maybe they paid ten dollars for each house.

  26. There is a way to find the public info on them. I am investigating how it is done. And did email Dave.  I am sure we will find the judges in conflict of interest whom are blocking justice as well. .

  27. Hi Shelley

    Thank you.
    It may do me little good, but to know that it was not a non issue that RCO is in bed with NWT Inc and politics.
    RCO & NWT & Wells Fargo took out a default guarantee insurance policy, charged me for it and named themselves as the beneficiaries of the policy. They then file default a few days later and recorded a trustee;s deed of trust to Freddie Mac on the one year to the date of the policy.
    Please pass my request for info on RCO & NWT to Dave Krieger of Clouded titles.

    You never know? Maybe if this becomes an issue for the Idaho DOJ and in the court, they can be further exposed.
    Keep up the good work.
    Peg

  28. If the the funds from the CrabTree and NW Trustees was not a conflict of interest what is? We need to stop the corruption by exsposure.Dig up dirt on the AG’s and judges that are not ruling by the rule of law.And expose the good judges going by the rule of law and reporting fruad es for the credit they deserve,

  29. Email Dave Krieger of Clouded titles he had the docs on his Clouded title sight a while back. I will email him. I have been to a couple of his siminars and out to dinner with him and a few from the siminar. I have an email for him.I just gave a site with an article that Rob was asking the public to focus on the fact that he refunded it.

  30. A servicer….a third party debt collector …. can’t give anyone a loan mod…… Those loan mods were never supposed to happen because by law, they couldn’t. So why were we allowed to be tortured by these FED jerks in the first place. …? Because the politicians are compromised.

  31. Well Chuck…let me tell you what the servicer told me after telling me we were approved for the Obama Plan … We were then told we were denied at the last minute by the U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT …. yep…&…….I am now thankful I was denied that loan mod by the Treasury & I believe the FED investors were setting us up to fail by giving us a loan mod when the truth was the FED was in default and therefore we were not.

  32. Hi Shelley,

    OMG!!!!

    Crabtree???!!!! Do you mean Crabtree & Olson? the “sister” company to Northwest Trustee Services Inc.???!!!!
    They are located in Wash state but operate in 9 states including Idaho.
    My case involves Crabtree & Olson/Northwest trustee Services Inc.
    the paperwork in my case went back and forth from Idaho to Wash…

    “He knew he had taken champaine donations from Crab Tree and crab tree was taking over for RECONTRUST, that was leaving the state…”

    What state did they leave to?

    “Over ten months after he accepted Crab Trees money he was exposed for it and only then returned the funds. ”

    Where can i find any documentation on this -any leads???!!!
    PEG

  33. Here Here ! I agree ! It is a matter of pushing for the rule of law and doing our best to exspose the judges that judge by bias and the rule of bank law. The judges are the key. Very few are judging by the rule of law and are biased with conflicts of interest and are not recusing themselves., violating mandated 18USC 4 statutes.and tons of case law and multiple additional statutes, including the US Consitution. Judgesand AG’s are suppose to disclose their portfolios.We need to investigate everyone of them. The AG Rob McKenna in WA state, filed a case against only RECONTRUST and should have for all the foreclosers. He knew he had taken champaine donations from Crab Tree and crab tree was taking over for RECONTRUST, that was leaving the state. So he tried to use just one forecloser to make himself look good.Over ten months after he accepted Crab Treesmmoney he was exposed for it and only then returned the funds. Dig deep and into the details. .

  34. Not only have Obama been told by economist, but with the OCC & Fed acknowledging that 800,000 loans should have been modified under the HAMP program and were not, and $70 billion in loan losses over at the FHA, signals that there is Fraud over at Ginnie Mae.

    FHA average loan balance is $100,000 which give us 700,000 FHA loan and the others are a combination of VA & USDA loan that have been illegally foreclosed. There were 800,000 False Claims against the Federal Government and at this point America is owed $264 billion that includes Treble Damage!

  35. Seriously Dc…this is the biggest financial fraud in history committed without our knowledge, in our names with our unauthorized signatures. These politicians have allowed these crooks to dishonor us in every way imaginable and that is no non issue. That is the truth and that is a disgrace.

  36. I rarely joke on this site and not at all today.–theres nothing to laugh about

  37. Hi David,
    A:
    “The originating bank may be looking at something you do not have access to, or even the look up tool, in order to state Freddie owns your Mortgage.”

    I think you’re right. They do have agreements with Freddie that they will not give me a copy of without a court order.

    “Look at the two endorsements again. One endorsement may be by WF in blank which would reflect the sale to Freddie. Freddie’s policy is to have the servicer/seller stamp or sign in blank. Then it is to be deposited with an approved custodian”

    NOTE:
    Pg. 3) The First endorsement of the Note is an unidentifiable “squiggle” mark. (See IC § 73-114 (1)-(6)).

    Farther down page 3:
    #1.
    “Without Recourse, Pay to the order of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Home Federal Bank”

    A separate paper submitted with Wells Fargo and the FHLMC Exhibit s that is not attached to the Note; and which does not fit the legal description of an allonge states: .

    #2.
    “Pay to the order of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. William G. Arnolds Assistant Vice President”
    (See IC § 51-109(5) and see also UCC § 3-210 -§ 3-205).

    Also:
    DOT – NOTARY ISSUES:
    My copy of the DOT in my possession, dated DEC 14 2005, is standard original size and quality and was not signed in the presence of a notary and therefore, is without notary stamp, date, or signature.
    (See IC § 55-707, IC § 51-109).

    CONDITION OF DOT
    NWT-RCO (for Wells Fargo & FHLMC) copy of the DOT Exhibit A,
    is REDUCED SIZE and is of poor quality, in which a notary signature, stamp, and notary filled information was added to page 12 of a copy of the DOT, between DEC 15 2005 and JAN 10 2006.

    Conversely, in stark contrast, the notary seal applied to the copy is the exact size as a standard state of Idaho notary stamp.
    The notary seal is NOT reduced in size proportion to the DOT copy in which it was applied and is darker and higher quality than the copy of the DOT.
    (See IC § 51-107(c). (…a notary cannot certify a copy of a copy of any kind.)

    Exhibit A, copy of the NOTE, shows “Peg Mixdorf ” as the Endorsement Signatory for Home Federal Bank to Wells Fargo.

    Exhibit A copy of the DOT, “Peg Mixdorf”, also is the Notary for Home Federal Bank Assignment to Wells Fargo N. A. in conflict of interest, See IC § 51-108. See also IC § 51-119.

    Which raises question to the authenticity of notary signatures and witness in conflict of interest in violation of IC § 51-108. (See also IC § 51-119).

    Applicable Idaho Code:
    IC § 51-117. CONDITIONS IMPAIRING VALIDITY OF NOTARIAL ACT a) Failure of the notary public to require a person whose acknowledgment is taken to personally appear before him…

    IC § 55-808 PLACE OF RECORD Instruments entitled to be recorded must be recorded by the county recorder of the county in which the real property affected thereby is situated.

    IC § 51-117. CONDITIONS IMPAIRING VALIDITY OF NOTARIAL ACT a) Failure of the notary public to require a person whose acknowledgment is taken to personally appear before him…

    IC § 55-808 PLACE OF RECORD Instruments entitled to be recorded must be recorded by the county recorder of the county in which the real property affected thereby is situated.

    BANK TO BANK ASSIGNMENT X’S TWO of the DOT
    Conversely, RCO, on behalf of FHLMC submitted to magistrate court the identical Exhibit A copy of the Note/DOT that RCO had submitted to the bankruptcy court on SEPT 23 2010, on behalf of Wells Fargo for standing in Motion Relief of Stay, shows that Home Federal Bank directly assigned the DOT to Wells Fargo on JAN 10 2006 to Wells Fargo Bank:
    “…to secure the payment of Promissory Note”
    Recorded in Ada County, Idaho, No.: 10600448.

    FHLMC LACKS ASSIGNMENT TO SECURITIZE
    There is no record through MERS and/or County records showing the loan was ever securitized into the secondary market and into an investment pool; which is the primary function of a GSE “secondary investor” such as FHLMC.

    Furthermore, court exhibits and County Records do not show FHLMC as “the holder of the deed of trust is the agent of the holder of the note” Bellistri v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 284 S. W.3d 619, 623 (Mo. App. 2009).

    According to County records that would only be Wells Fargo.
    While, FHLMC very well maybe the creditor in Idaho, only the creditor OF COUNTY RECORD has the right to place a credit bid.

    ANY insight you can shed on this is sooooo appreciated….
    Thank you for reading this.
    Peg

  38. DC..I am pretty sure you are joking but, If not, that’s fine because I’m sure not.

  39. @Peg

    You said:
    This is were i’m confused…I spoke with the originating bank. they state Freddie ” owns your Mortgage”

    But they (the originating bank) say they sold it to Wells Fargo Servicing rights all. Their records show only one assignment of the DOT to WF and only one endorsement of the Note to WF.

    But the copy of the Note/ DOT produced by WF and Freddie to the courts show two separate endorsements of the note from the originating bank to WF only.
    They will send me a copy of their copy..

    A:
    The originating bank may be looking at something you do not have access to, or even the look up tool, in order to state Freddie owns your Mortgage.

    Look at the two endorsements again. One endorsement may be by WF in blank which would reflect the sale to Freddie. Freddie’s policy is to have the servicer/seller stamp or sign in blank. Then it is to be deposited with an approved custodian.

  40. @ALL
    STRIPES SAID
    “The truth is …..you can’t legally be a successor in interest if the Original Issuing bank….the Originator of the Original Bill of Credit never paid the Treasury back before they traded credit slips or sold any investments. These were all fraudulent financial transactions. Not knowing is not a valid argument by any of these entities. ”

    This is useless BS—–it is a distraction–she is either an idiot or intentionally distracting newbies up hopeless deadends

  41. The truth is …..you can’t legally be a successor in interest if the Original Issuing bank….the Originator of the Original Bill of Credit never paid the Treasury back before they traded credit slips or sold any investments. These were all fraudulent financial transactions. Not knowing is not a valid argument by any of these entities. These are bankers..they knew precisely what they were doing and they meant to do permanent harm to every American. The politicians are traitors who are allowing America to be governed by the foreign investors like the Sauds, the Illuminati bankers, the Black Nobility families, the Brits, the Germs, the BRICS..our foreign enemies.

  42. I AGREEi They belong in the hall of shame

  43. Obama and the Politicians are getting paid well to be traitors. They are all in Dishonor to their country & fellow citizens. That is including these traitors in so called law enforcement and the heads of the U.S. Military. What a disgrace.

  44. Hi David,
    Thank you for taking the time to help me understand all this.

    If Freddie described themselves as “Successor in interest”, and placed a credit bid, those would be very good clues to alleged ownership.

    They did – in their motion to the court.

    What did the look up tool say? “We own your Mortgage?”

    Yep -“We own your Mortgage?”

    If they own your mortgage (or loan) they have purchased your note.

    This is were i’m confused…I spoke with the originating bank. they state Freddie ” owns your Mortgage”

    But they (the originating bank) say they sold it to Wells Fargo Servicing rights all. Their records show only one assignment of the DOT to WF and only one endorsement of the Note to WF.

    But the copy of the Note/ DOT produced by WF and Freddie to the courts show two separate endorsements of the note from the originating bank to WF only.
    They will send me a copy of their copy..

    In Idaho, which is a non-judicial foreclosure state…IC 45-1506 et seq. requires that the recorded creditor (of the DOT and transferring assignment to that creditor) of the County records were the property is situated is the party that can place a valid credit bid only. All others must pay cash. Freddie didn’t pay cash.

    Freddie is seldom before the court, hiding behind Servicer vultures, interlopers.

    That is exactly what happened in BK. WF filed foreclosure.

    Whoever is before the court with a claim has to prove the basis for claim when objected to. …they would probably admit their interest. But not much more.

    I objected to it. They now say they are the creditor, therefore, their credit bid was valid. In addition to being only “successor in interest’ and therefore with the protection rights(finality of sale without knowledge – constructive or otherwise to any defect of title or compliance to Idaho code as to notice…) of a third party as well.

    But you can only be one or the other…

  45. @DAVID

    You have a DOT situation right–this adds twists beyong the judicial–at least the have to pick a plaintiff here–an indenture bank trustee which you can verify from an sec filing—trick seems to be to assure that trustee is the correct party.

    Within past year iv had both the purported trustee bank employees and the opposing counsel state that BoA is the party in interest –the holder- then recant————–this puts me on notice under UCC that i must join BoA now to cut off its interest–but what in capacity?

    Now we have in Ohio a situation where we have had one family settle –with one of these about a month ago [post election] and two weeks after the settlement —-a 2nd bank trustee shows up and reasserts the claim as the proper party in interest–at least any deficiency—-this is awful—this is the inevitable result of widespread use of forged documents—iv seen forged assignments, forged indorsements in foreclosure filings and in satisfaction of settlement obligations to allow recovery of the original note, needed to defend the claim of the next trustee—forgeries used to sieze your homes are wortless to defend against a second claimant wirh or without the original note

    they know which notes en masse are forged—so you become a “lead” for sale immediately after you settle.

    it extends to people who did loan payoffs–the forged release and forged note are useless in the 2nd claim defense

    everybody should read this and shuuder

  46. The banks believe in fairtales come true and have been living a fairtale life whlie laughing all the way to the bank and the Bahamas, while sipping wine on their yachts..

  47. I believe the Michelle Sjolander depot and John Kemp depo and these articless are support of my belief. Freddie and fannie own nothing.

    http://foreclosuredefensenationwide.com/?p=488

    http://foreclosuredefensenationwide.com/?p=488
    http://foreclosuredefensenationwide.com/?p=393

    http://www.stellionata.com/in-the-news/38-headlines/7662-120509-jpmc-v-waisome-lawrence-nardi-deposition

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/98123628/Secret-FDIC-JPMorgan-Chase-Bank-118-Page-Purchase-and-Assumption-Agreement-for-Washington-Mutual-Bank
    And Lorraine Browns guilty plea.
    The banks needed MERS badly to pull this sham off once the fraud had been discovered in part in the 1990,s.

  48. Sorry typo error. It was safer for the photo copy notes and not the real notes to be in the securities pools and not the real note. The banksters and fraudsters pulled this scheme off for years before being discovered.

  49. Read this article Freddie and Fannie had a policy in place directing the lenders to never deliver the notes to Freddie and Fannie, My belief is Freddie and Fannie did not want any proof of securites fraud and tax evasion. The notes could be shredded, lost or found or duplicated bty fraud assignments which had gone undetected for years and even when discovered very diffulcult to get a judge to look at the proof. so it was safer to to have the real note in the securites pools and just sell the investors fake notes times however many pools they wanted to sell them to for money out f thin air by fraud. Then steal the property later on for more greedy profit. Fannie and Freddie are a shell game and as much a part of this crime as the rest of the lending industry.is what I am guessing and looks pretty right on to me. http://propertydefensenetwork.com/blog/2012/07/26/welcome-to-freddie-and-fannies-mortgage-shell-game/.

  50. Peg,

    Wouldn’t Freddie need to put it through securitization via MERS?.
    Is there another way to securitize it without a MERS min no. ?

    I would think so. Can some one take your note without MERS tracking and commit it to a pool? Can they place the pool in an MBS? With MERS, it was destined to be securitized. Without MERS, they need the assignment chain. I never thought of MERS being essential to the Securitization.

    Wouldn’t the request for the production of the full collateral file be done through discovery?

    No, they won’t give it to you. The collateral file contains alleged originals. Note, DOT, maybe Assignments. If you want to inspect originals, you can use the judge’s help with a viewing appointment. This is risky for the pro per. If you take a forensic examiner with you, his conclusions are discoverable. Good to have a lawyer for that one.

    “Freddie has portfolio loans too’ does this mean non – MERS and not securitization of the loan, but held onto it?

    Much of Freddie’s holdings are in their own portfolios. If and how they invest them, whether they just hold, I don’t know.

    If Freddie described themselves as “Successor in interest”, and placed a credit bid, those would be very good clues to alleged ownership. What did the look up tool say? “We own your Mortgage?”
    If they own your mortgage (or loan) they have purchased your note.

    Isn’t it up to Freddie to prove ownership and then produce the recorded records from the county that they are the creditor of record?

    I don’t know how Idaho recording law works. Recording not always required. Whoever is before the court with a claim has to prove the basis for claim when objected to. Freddie is seldom before the court, hiding behind Servicer vultures, interlopers. Not before the court, you won’t get much out of Freddie without a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition. In written discovery, they would probably admit their interest. But not much more.

  51. Hi David,

    Wouldn’t Freddie need to put it through securitization via MERS?.
    Is there another way to securitize it without a MERS min no. ?

    Wouldn’t the request for the production of the full collateral file be done through discovery?

    “Freddie has portfolio loans too’ does this mean non – MERS and not securitization of the loan, but held onto it?

    “They won’t tell you anything besides what is on their look up tool”.
    That’s right. That’s the only place I find any connection.

    However, in the State of Idaho – only the creditor of record – recorded in the county recorder’s office in the county were the property is located, can place a valid credit bid.

    Freddie is not the recorded creditor but did place a credit bid…

    That’s why they initially stated they were only “successor in interest’ to Wells Fargo via the auction sale as a third party. And therefore, not responsible for the lapse in following Idaho statutory code as to notice. (we’re non-judicial…)

    Isn’t it up to Freddie to prove ownership and then produce the recorded records from the county that they are the creditor of record?

    I think that even if they could produce an UN-recorded assignment from the collateral file, it shouldn’t make a difference, because they willfully did not record it in the county before filing the NOD as required.

    That means they spit on Idaho law and lied to two courts and dare them to do anything about it.

    Freddie wants it both ways in this case.
    I just pray this judge says “Not in my court!”
    Peg

  52. @Peg

    Freddie has portfolio loans too. Their mission is to make money so that they can recycle it to banks which fund more loans (They say), and they do that through securitization.
    They won’t tell you anything besides what is on their look up tool. Freddie is not part of the SEC system, no Edgar data. Revealing their ownership is not hard but then you hit a brick wall that can only be cracked with discovery. In my case, a researcher I hired got some conclusive data from the Freddie loan files on their online website.

  53. @dc
    Your question:
    the servicer causes the mill to assign it to the servicer? this is what
    actually happenes—does the trustee Bank play any role whatsoever–does it keep records? Who would you ask to admit owning the note?
    Who owns it under this twist: servicer or trustee bank? who do they say? servicer?????

    My answer:
    According to testimony in a deposition I conducted, the Servicer caused to be executed a Substitution of Trustee and Assignment to the Servicer. This was done in my case without any signatures or a declaration of default. Just a transfer of the usual documents by which the signer for MERS (Trustee) signs, notarizes and records the documents.
    No, the alleged owner Freddie Mac plays no direct role, neither does the Freddie Trust they allegedly sold the loan (or loan in Pool) to. Freddie as the investor and owner of note has their Servicers follow a two volume serving manual.
    In my case, Servicer admitted Freddie owned the note. You may need discovery to force the admission. The trustee is also required to tell you who the owner of the note is. They all use the term “investor” rather than owner.

  54. I got really good info on this pod cast on this not too common type of assignments…
    He’s the guy that accidentally ran across it in another case. Tom Cox deposed Jeffery Stephon and his work coined the phrase “robosigner”

    http://mandelman.ml-implode.com/2012/07/fannies-decoy-assignment-a-new-foreclosure-defense-a-mandelman-matters-podcast-with-atty-tom-cox/

  55. Thanks david,
    i didn’t know about it probably being securitized it into a Freddie MBS which is, according to UCC 9 a true sale without MERS.

    How do they do that without recording in the county or through MERS?

    MERS is also NOT a nominee in the County records and the loan and or address is not in the MERS system.

    There is a place for the MERS MIN 18 digit No. on the recorded DOT.
    It’s not there.

    It is my understanding that this direct double bank to bank assignment which does not involve MERS happened between 2004 and 2006 in about 15% of non MERS loans.

    The second assignment transfered nothing as the originating bank already assigned it away previously…

    Freddie did have the servicer do their dirty work, but in these cases like mine they violated the law to do it.
    Idaho code requires that only the creditor RECORDED in the county recorders office can place a bid by credit (Appel v. FHLMC, Idaho 2006) – and that’s why they put the motion forward as “Successor in Interest” to Wells Fargo as a third party only and therefore with the rights of a BPV third party.

    That’s why not going through MERS – in this case – should be fatal, as MERS is the mechanism used that has allowed them to use a servicer do their dirty work..
    The only place the unrecorded assignment would be is in the full collateral file.
    So they may have an unrecorded assignment in that file somewhere, but that willful failure to follow Idaho code to record means that its unenforceable.
    Plus fraud upon the court…

    ‘Discovery is essential in unraveling the onion, and tracking the money trail” Damn right!!!

    They will not want to produce that collateral file.
    If this turns out my way, then they should be dying to come to the table and propose a “win – win” workout. But they haven’t yet.
    That tells me there is even more to this and it absolutely means following the money trail.
    How much damn money did they get altogether in my loan that they might lose if the sale is rescinded???!!!

    Thanks for the info and i sure want the hamster wheel in your head to run – let me know what comes up… mine’s tuckered out for now. Been at it for 4 years now.
    Peg in Idaho

  56. @DAVID
    you said;
    ” The Servicer transfers the Trustee to a friendly foreclosure mill which records an assignment of DOT the Servicer upon their own (not Freddie’s) request. With the Assignment, the servicer can claim standing as secured creditor, and pretend they are the party to which the obligation is due”

    the servicer causes the mill to assign it to the servicer? this is what actually happenes—does the trustee Bank play any role whatsoever–does it keep records? Who would you ask to admit owning the note?
    Who owns it under this twist: servicer or trustee bank? who do they say? servicer?????

  57. @Peg
    When Freddie’s lookup tool says “We own your loan”, it indicates they bought it from the bank. It also means that they are the “investor” and “owner” of the note. In some situations, they own less than 100% interest. Being owner of the note, they would be the secured creditor and beneficiary, at least at first. They probably securitized it into a Freddie MBS which is, according to UCC 9 a true sale.
    In most cases with MERS, Freddie has a servicer do their dirty work. The Servicer transfers the Trustee to a friendly foreclosure mill which records an assignment of DOT the Servicer upon their own (not Freddie’s) request. With the Assignment, the servicer can claim standing as secured creditor, and pretend they are the party to which the obligation is due. Discovery is essential in unraveling the onion, and tracking the money trail.

  58. Hi dcbreidenbach…

    Damn, your timing is good…

    I was just sent and finished listening to Marxism…class war fair –
    and the Marxist visionary vs Marxist historical fact…
    It’ here in America today…

    This was the most informative encapsulation of the prob i have found to date from a credible source.

    Marxism happening in America – redistribution of wealth
    Lt. Gen. (Ret.) W.G. (Jerry) Boykin
    Tuesday, March 3, 2099

    http://www.morningstartv.com/oak-initiative/marxism-america

    http://www.morningstartv.com/oak-initiative/marxism-america-part-ii

    Then watch economic-warfare

    Kevin Freeman
    Friday, February 10, 2012

    http://www.morningstartv.com/oak-initiative/economic-warfare

    explains and connects the dots to the housing bubble …

  59. @ALL
    Interesting fact in Financial Times this weekend relevant to rich vs poor and govt tolerance:

    fully 10% of the $172 billion global market for luxury goods –brand name clothing -etc -is in domestic Italy. Thus, although the rich in Italy have an extremely difficult time paying taxes—they have no difficulty affording GUCCI handbags and ARMANI suits. And the entire country is perched on the verge of financial ruin–propped up by Germany etc

    It would appear that the well-healed in the US feel a compelling need to follow Italy’s example. Italy also boasts the largest number of yacht registrations in the world. It is nice that Italy is able to get repeated bailouts from its generous northern neighbors but now that the US has adopted that economic model–who is the sucker here that will bail out the bilionaires who want 300 foot yachts instead of 200 footers—-and if every well off Italian can buy a GUCCI—–then the truly noveau rich in the US must get gold covered and diamond encrusted bags or feel degraded by common tax evaders who acquire the same thing—-

    yes this appears to be the true dimension of the fiscal cliff—if tax rates rise on the wealthy —it will mean a marked cutback on diamond encrusted handbags—with earth shaking consequences–the end of civilization as we have come to know and love it

  60. I’m still in my home…I filed for, and was granted a TRO to prevent Freddie Mac from removing me, when i appealed the SJ…i pay a $500.00 bond to the court until this is resolved.

  61. Hi guys,
    I live in Idaho

    I didn’t actually get a copy of the insurance policy itself, just the notice of the insurance which listed the company, type, date, policy #, premium cost, and beneficiaries…It was served with the notice of sale, after the sale was actually canceled.

    There is a major problem in the Note/DOT.
    It’s NOT a MERS…
    So no transfers would be made through that data base as an alternative to recording in the Ada County recorder’s office.

    It’s a direct “Bank to Bank” endorsment of the note and assignment of the DOT. Two times – both from the originating bank to Wells Fargo for servicing.
    However, the originating bank would only be able to assign/endorse once – “A to B, B to C, C to D…” order – not “A to B, A to B…”

    There are NO intervening Assignments/endorcments recorded to or from Freddie Mac, nor to or from Wells Fargo.
    Freddie Mac was the only bid placed – by credit bid…
    Only the creditor of RECORD can do that and Freddie Mac is not the creditor of record.

    Freddie Mac produced a copy of the Note DOT as an exhibit, showing the double bank to bank assignments to Wells Fargo in the BK 7 motion for lift of Stay and again, the same Copy of the Note/DOT for eviction after the second sale date done without notice to code.

    How that “proves” that they had a right to place a bid by credit is amazing!!! – they attached an affidavit to it, then state that the affidavit is prima facia…

    The only loan connection to Freddie Mac is an online Freddie Mac web site which states Freddie Mac owns your loan. (not Note)
    So maybe Freddie Mac did acquire it at some point but never recorded it and put Wells Fargo up to filing foreclosure after stringing me along in 3 + HAMPs to create a default.

    Now they REOedit back and the Trustee’s Deed of Trust from the auction sale gives the chain of title a clean start over for a third party bidder – but their problem is that a third party bidder can’t place a credit bid, they must pay cash…
    To have the clean start protection of a third party, they must have no knowledge of any defects or issues with title or notice. But they must have if they were the creditor in fact and they got insurance for it!!!

    That is why their first motion stated they were only a third party “successor in interest” to Wells Fargo.

    So I challenged their right to a valid credit bid if they were not the creditor.

    So they changed their position to creditor -and kept the third party”successor in interest” – telling the court they now have twice the reason for summary judgment and the court granted it.
    The decision is under appeal now.

    I’m getting dizzy…
    Peg

  62. It is interesting that now they are concerned with reducing household debt. I do not really think that banks have made out too badly since Obama has been in office. While the bailout perhaps had the intention of making more loan money available, added regulation and scrutiny of the banks and the banks more cautious way of lending has seemingly just left the market a float.

  63. @PEG

    on info and belief, the collectors insure homes at the amount of the loan–say twice the value of the house –then get possession and cause the house to freeze and be vandalized-iv experienced something like that—-the forced place insurers ask no questions because they get fat premiums from others—they cash out your house quickly—it seems worst if they have a weak claim on the house–eg forged note forged assignment etc worse in background

  64. @PEG
    What state are you in and what month of year were they trying to sieze possession–were they trying to put a replacement insurance policy in place in order to set you up for a sieze and freeze?

  65. @PEG
    If i understand basically it was a mistake to send it to you?

    Would you share a scan of it?

    dcbreidenbach@aol.com

  66. Hi dcbreidenbach, david, Ian,

    Thanks for the kudos…
    I got the info from the policy itself, because It was served with the “Notice of sale ” a few week s after that sale date was rescinded.

    When I called Northwest Trustees and Wells Fargo, both said it was just “routine insurance papers” nothing to worry about, because the sale was rescinded due to HAMP.

    Then I saw all of Neil’s youtube training videos and there is one were he said that you should look to see if the beneficiaries of any policies match or are different from the entity(s) in the closing papers etc.
    I did.
    I brought it up in the court motion to fight eviction after the “auction sale”

    I felt The existence of this policy, timing, and the beneficiaries named (or not named), is a smoking gun to the probability of other CDS’s etc. involved.

    I call the insurance co and they were puzzled by it. Didn’t recognize the Policy number or the type.

    I have been trying to figure out the connection of this policy to the fraud in my case.

    I would appreciate any info anyone can find on this -that’s why I am posting the info.

    FORCED DEFAULT GUARANTEE INSURANCE POLICY
    Date: MAY 18 2010,Northwest Trustee Services, Inc. procured the Insurance Policy in the amount of $141,972.00; $805.00.charged. “Notice of Insurance Policy: First American Title Co., Premium Amt.: $805.00, Name of the Assured: Northwest Trustee Services, Inc., Routh Crabtree Olson, P.S., and Wells Fargo Bank, NA”. (Policy No: 5002516-1280)

    In FHLMC’s NOV 21, 2011 Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment (filed without Leave of Court and served the day after the hearing!!!) at 5, pg. 4, states:

    “5. TRUSTEE VERSES BENEFICIARY. Defendant repeatedly suggests that the trustee cannot be the same party as the beneficiary under a deed of trust. In the case at hand, Northwest Trustee Services served as the TRUSTEE under the deed of trust. They were never the BENEFICIARY under the deed of trust. This allegation is completely unsupported and fails to form a cognizable defense to Plaintiff’s requested relief. ”

    Boy did it hit a nerve with Routh, Crabtree & Olson LPP!!!
    (one of the beneficiaries named in the policy…)
    I had merely pointed out that the beneficiaries under the Forced Default Guarantee Insurance Policy are NOT the SAME as the beneficiary(s) under NOTE/DOT and raises issue of material fact as to the identity of the real creditor-in-fact…Case in point; the insurance policy specifically lacks FHLMC as a “beneficiary” as the actual holder of the promissory note.
    Which begs the question; if FHLMC is the alleged creditor, wouldn’t they be the beneficiary of this insurance policy?

    Furthermore, Wells Fargo Bank, and NWT Inc. procured the Insurance policy before the recording of the Successor of Trustee Assignment on JUNE 1 2010 in Ada County, Idaho.
    (NOD was recorded on the exact same time and date.)

    The Insurance Policy allegedly is in event of a Default; but not loan modification. This creates a strong incentive and perverse conflict of interest which equates personal enrichment, which speaks to motive. See FDIC v. Dintino, 167 Cal. App. 4th 333, 346 (2008).

    Unjust enrichment requires the receipt of a benefit and the unjust retention of that benefit at the expense of another. See Peterson v. Cellco P’ship, 164 Cal. App. 4th 1583, 1593 (2008).

    Coincidentally, the Trustee’s Deed of Trust was notarized on MAY 18 2011 in Washington State on the one year anniversary of the policy of MAY 18 2010.

    In alternative, the Insurance Policy is a type of title insurance to cover defects of title not covered by the title insurance obtained in 2005 through Alliance Title Insurance Co.

    Back Ground:
    No lapse of coverage occurred that would warrant a replacement “forced placed insurance.”

    I had an extended insurance policy “to secure indebtedness” to Home Federal Bank- not to FHLMC or Wells Fargo N.A. when I purchased my home on Dec. 14, 2005. I had placed 35% down ( $ 80,000.00) for a fixed rate conventional 30 year mortgage at 6.25 % Interest rate.

    “Order No.; 5000529414SL, Policy No.: 74123-34869 Schedule “B”, 8): A Deed of trust to secure indebtedness: Amount: $147,900.00…Trustee: Brad L Williams, Attorney of C/O UPF Inc. Washington Corp. Beneficiary: Home Federal Bank, Recorded /dated: December 15th 2005, Instrument No.: 105191493.”

    Furthermore, I also had standard homeowner’s coverage through a State Farm Home Owner’s Insurance Policy.

    Violation of Idaho Code…

    IC § 41-2651 DEFINITIONS (1)“Mortgage Guaranty Insurance” (2) “Authorized real property security” means an amortized note, bond or other evidence of indebtedness, not exceeding one hundred three percent (103%) of the fair market value of the real estate, secured by a mortgage, deed of trust, or other instrument constituting a first lien.

    FHLMC states $123,000.00 as Fair Market Value in its credit bid. The Default Guarantee Insurance Policy, as well as the IRS 2011 1099a filed by FHLMC states $141,972.00; which is about $14,000
    more than 103% Fair Market Value cap pursuant to IC § 41-2651 (1).

    Feel free to run with this guys…let me know what you dig up…
    Thanks
    peg

  67. @SE

    I cant speak with certainty and i do not believe anone truly can because the twists that outright intentional fraud put on an orderly system result in massive confusion. That is purposeful–frauders know it is difficult to fit fraud into the niches which legal transactions are supposed to occupy.

    you said ” if the note is invalid due to void by nullification due to not being transfered to a trust within 90days due ”

    No –a note is enforceable whether it goes into a trust or not–the trust is a relatively new and complicating twist. If an individual note is not on the schedule of loans placed into the trust–and is not timely negotiated either—then the trust closes without it.
    That is a REMIC rule that is in the language of PSAs.

    If none of the notes are scheduled into the trust–likely there trust fails. ie there was no real trust formed. In either case –if the last holder–perhaps the note payee lender itself—simply never conveys the note or batch of notes and they remain its property.

    this is no big deal if its a sinlgle overlooked note–unless it was yours as maker—-but if the whole batch was not conveyed either by schedule under Art 9 or by negotiation under Art 3—-then the securities issued are simply unsecured debt of that origintor–

    as far as we homeowner makers are concerned its irrelevant —except that we must know who the owner of the note is or we do not know who to pay–or who to let our house go to as part payment

    UCC allows a theif with apparent right to force you to pay–and then allows the legitimate complanant to come out of the wordwork and collect again–force you into bankruptcy most likely

    that is our interest and due pricess on the front end MTD rule 17–all that stuff is supposed to protect you from double claims which are very real—i have been pursued relentlessly for 3 years by a non-bank debt collector-liquidator–supposedly on behalf of a trustee bank

    in the past 11 months both the employees of the trustee bank and the atty for this servicer have stated or written that BoA was the servicer of this loan–both recanted later—but it puts me on notice under UCC –if i pay the 1st debt collector–im liable to BoA—nice predicament–and even now the servicer atty says my risk is entirely speculative—i call it “contingent liability”

  68. For one if the note is invalid due to void by nullification due to not being transfered to a trust within 90days due to PSA law then does the note have negotiable status?. It is void not just void to the trust. It is dead! No debt to recover?. No longer secured by property?. You have to owe a debt to have it considered in BK? And unsecured debt that is not secured by property is dischargable in BK. Checks are like notes and notes are like checks. If a wet stamp check is not cashed within six months it is invalid and not negotialbel anymore I am pretty sure not possitive but in certain designated time a check can no longer be cashed. It is dead. A note that was suppose to be entered into a trust is nullified and void after 90 days. None negotiable? I would think? So the banks are cashing in on voided notes. Fraud? The Mortgage is not secured by the note? The note is void? The mortgage separated from a note and questionable due to this and the separated statis by MERS to defraud?Is BK is effected? I think it would be.

  69. That was a quote from Weidners blogg. With case law. I will see if it all posted.

  70. @SE

    “the note follows the mortgage”
    This is a rule that seems inviolate—it only affects the secured status of the property as best i can tell–and it one of those features of importance to bankruptcy courts—frankly im so ignorant i dont see that separation and destruction of the mortgage helps a lot–except where they are trying to drag the note behind an assignment of mortgage using MERS

    so aside from that–what does it do for a person not in BK?

    Actually the mortgage follows the note is a double-edge sword.

    if there is a defect in transfer of the note–the ART 9 assignment by schedule as per PSA fails—the UCC Art 3 negotiation fails upon a forged indorsement –or the document physically transferred was not the ORIGINAL note—then the party seeking to enforce is a theif that is not a holder—-not entitled to enforce period

    He cant release the debt–stamp the note or copy paid—and most of all he cant relase the mrtgage–it follows the note directly into the lost note dustbin—lost intangibles escheat to the state–it is not finders keepers to benefit the servicer-finder

  71. @Peg

    Thanks for the offering on default insurance. What kind of company would issue a default policy after months or years of no payment and immediately before a Notice of Default?

    Anyway, I’ve been granted broad discovery without limited scope, or protection of defendant’s records and pursuing the “holy grail” of insurance payouts.

    It will have to pried out of their cold dead hands. Any further success stories, cases would be appreciated. Like the others said, there are no discovery specifics so far.

  72. […] Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, currency, Eviction, foreclosure, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, securities fraud Tagged: CDS, CONSUMERS, credit default swaps, Economist, insurance, Obama, principal correction, principal reduction, taxes Livinglies’s Weblog […]

  73. THE MORTGAGE FOLLOWS THE NOTE! THE MORTGAGE FOLLOWS THE NOTE! (So throw that homeowner bum out into the street!)
    November 30th, 2012 | Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.
    Americans who have been subjected to the abuses of an out of control banking and financial system, along with their co-conspirators in the largest crime spree ever perpetrated upon a human population, this nation’s court system, have sat in the front row while they and their communities go plunging over desperate financial cliffs. The crime spree continues on unabated in this nation, especially in the case of the 5 major banks who received a big fat Get Out Of Jail Free Card (except that no one actually went to jail). Actually, they didn’t just get a card, they were all lavishly rewarded for their ongoing crimes spree in the form of billions of dollars of taxpayer money that was handed to them so that they could make their board members rich and their executives even more rich…

    of course these criminal masterminds should be rewarded for engineering such a hijacking and stealing of trillions of dollars…this is Amerika after all!

    But I digress. That wasn’t what I wanted to talk about today. Today I wanted to talk about how our court system has been directly complicit in this massive thievery, this extraordinary campaign of fraud and forgery and theft. We know that dogs will roll in the dirt and that criminals will engage in criminal behavior. That’s just what the Wall Street criminals have been conditioned and bred for over the last several decades. And as our government, at ever level, continued to reward their increasingly brazen crime sprees…their crimes just got bigger.

    But what’s most disturbing, especially to a fool like me that felt that our nation’s court system would actually fulfill its sacred Constitutional duty to enforce laws and protect citizens from the abuses and and out of control criminal banker class, is to sit here year after year and watch the way “our” nation’s court system has been nearly completely co-opted and corrupted and now stands in service to the very criminal enterprises that have plunged this nation into legal, social and economic chaos.

    There is one court opinion, repeated universally in the context of foreclosure cases, that illustrates just how Florida’s court system, both at the trial level and at the appellate level are bending and contorting the laws that should serve all of us in order to serve the interests of the banks and institutions. The twisted logic and omitted reasoning found in this case has been used as a Weapon of Mass Family and Community Destruction. The legal theory so perverted and twisted up in this decision has spawned an entire industry of fraud and forgery that…again…goes unabated.

    Mortgage Promissory Notes ARE NOT NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS…..a fact that is finally starting to get widespread attention and discussion in this space. I’ve been whimpering this argument for years (as evidenced by some of my earliest pleadings I just uncovered)…but apparently after being roundly beaten up about this for many years by judges, I abandoned those very valid arguments. Well, the one opinion that opens the door to all the negotiability of notes delusion/fraud is a 1938 case Johns v. Gillian…and that oft quoted passage, “the mortgage follows the note”. The problem is, the conspirators in this fraud always omit the key words that follow that sentence in every single instance…the key words they omit are,

    unless there be some plain and clear agreement to the contrary

    And just what is the definitive proof that there is a “plain and clear agreement to the contrary”? Well, the entire MERS system is in fact a plain and clear agreement that makes it very clear the note and mortgage were separated, sent off into different directions, where clearly the mortgage did not follow the note into the stream of note commerce. But no one ever wants to think about all of that….it’s the big pink elephant that sits in the middle of the desecration of our entire legal system room…..our courts bending over backwards using a decades old misconstruction as a tool of community destruction…..

    However, it has frequently been held that a mortgage is but an
    incident to the debt, the payment of which it secures, and its
    ownership follows the assignment of the debt. If the note or
    other debt secured by a mortgage be transferred without any
    formal assignment of the mortgage, or even a delivery of it, the
    mortgage in equity passes as an incident of the debt, unless
    there be some plain and clear agreement to the contrary, if that be the intention of the parties.

    A mere delivery of a note and mortgage, with intention to pass the
    title, upon a proper consideration, will vest the equitable
    interest in the person to whom it is so delivered.

    Generally speaking, wherever it was the intention of the
    parties to a transaction that the mortgage interest should pass,
    but a written assignment was not made, or else the writing was
    insufficient to transfer the legal title to the security, equity
    will effectuate such intention and invest the intended owner of the mortgage with the equitable title thereto.”

  74. http://deadlyclear.wordpress.com/2012/11/30/expert-witnesses-fraudulent-assignments-of-mortgage-are-void/

    You really want to stop a FORECLOSURE? I went to Financial Screen Shots – got the link from stopforeclosurefraud com. I ordered the Loan Search Within 2 days I got back the info showing my loan was securitized. I order the full package of all My documents and it contained everything! I have absolute evidence my mortgage note was sold in 2008. I stopped paying 2011 and I am being foreclosed by Bank of America. My lawyer says they have absolutely NO STANDING and he plans to sue the lawyers bringing the case into court. I finally have BOFA in a lie! More proof at http://deadlyclear.wordpress.com/2012/03/15/securitized-distrust/ Anyway, felt such a need to express myself. Good luck everyone.

  75. @PEG

    I echo others–where did you find the insurance info? nobody has yet—how/where–link?

  76. pegsworld123- great work- there hasn’t been one specific article linking credit default insurance to a particular loan on this site in the 4+ years I have been here. You are the first. How is this determined? Maybe you shouldn’t post it. But many of us have looked for the definitive evidence of this mortgage fraud, and you found it. Congrats.

  77. Hi david,
    I think it happened in my case. Default insurance was taken out days before a notice of default was recorded after 3 completed HAMP trials.
    The insurance was taken out on May 18 2010 -the recording of the Trustee’s Deed of Trust on May 18 2011.
    It went back REO to FHLMC- Freddie Mac- through a credit bid, but FHLMC is not the recorded creditor.

    The policy names the sub trustee,FHLMC attorneys and Wells Fargo as the 3 beneficiaries – not FHLMC… .

  78. I haven’t seen anyone yet who was able to discover the TARP, CDS, and default insurance payouts and tie it to a particular loan in a legal proceeding. If I’m wrong, show it to me.

  79. Constructive criticism is not effective if one is not given the proper knowledge/tools to make the change. Its not enough to tell a child what is wrong without explaining what is right. Otherwise you just send mixed signals and create confusion.

  80. the loan forgiven after a foreclosure.”
    In late 2007, Congress passed the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act to help the rising number of homeowners whose finances were being demolished by foreclosures. The act prevents homeowners from being taxed for the cancellation of any debt by a lender during a loan modification or foreclosure. The federal act applies for the years 2007 through 2012. And then there is this danger on top of the outrageous egregious crimes against responsible homeowners. One way or the other the government is attempting to take our properties when this government is responsible for the hellish mortgage hollocaust.

    http://www.ajc.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/politifact-a-foreclosure-cliff-could-be-looming/nTJ9D/

    http://deadlyclear.wordpress.com/2012/09/29/define-responsible-homeowners-please-an-open-letter-to-president-obama/#more-2928
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_and_the_Financial_Crisis:_Anatomy_of_a_Financial_Collapse

  81. @ guests

    yes i appreciate constructive criticism—–i am more aware of my own deficiencies that anyone else

  82. @guest, I do not see you offering up any proof that what dcb or ms says is incorrect. If your going to tell us they are wrong, then you should at least give us the correct answers. It would give you a little credability, otherwise your just full of it ….

  83. @GUEST

    are you saving the world by reducing your CO2 footprint –is that what pricked you—-shut down those coal mines and pit up a solar panel?–are you one of those folks?

  84. @dcb comments of Nov. 21: re LPS/Docs/Fidelity:
    I recall from previous occasions your crappy rants. Keep them up if you wish, but you may be derailing unknowing others who may think you know what your writing about. You don’t. You just think you do.
    also folks beware of a fraud here calling itself SERVICEMASTER.
    P.S:
    By the way, I am not the same guest who had some run-ins with Debra Wynn on other pages.

  85. i ‘liked’ so i could get my face next to Maher.

  86. i can’t believe ANYONE still thinks OBOZO is going to do anything right for homeowners.

  87. SE

    you are looking at the “parasites” wrong–they prevent a lot of environmental impact by reducing the carbon footprint of the average consumer. By seizing your income and assets they reduce your disposable income until you cut back to sustainable levels.

    By accumulating wealth from you—they assure that it will be more wisely spen on less wasteful things. And they then have more ability to create demand for the finer things that are less carbon intensive. For example–if you had more, you might give it to tyour kids for college thereby impairing their future payments of debt.

    It is obviously much better to have one 300 ft yacht than a bunch of new refridgerators–or roofs repaired. The yacht industry will collapse if the tax rates go from 15% to a staggering 17%. Then where will Italy be? and they need to keep the deduction for operating the yacht. It is clear that such a big yacht has to have a large crew—and they are specialized and expensive becausethere have been so many billionaires addd the past few years . The prices for good servants and crews are being pushed up by the plain ole newby billionaires. its the govt fault–and the added costs need to be deductible to balance out the govt running up the number of billionaires.

    Same thing for airplanes—double.

    Actually should increase the 10% tax credit for purchase of new jets since some of the parts are made in omaha–20% would add 10 local jobs. And Boeing has a 2% cutback on sales because of the military cutback —so its only fair to make it up by billionaire built spcially luxurious boats —-gilded. –yes restore the gilded age–exempt all income over $100 million–fairness—they do not propertionately cost as much in social securty–so they are overpaying for use of social and govt value added–they should not pay for general police protection because they have their own security. example

  88. HERE IS ANOTHER BAD JOKE BY BEHEMOTH TBTF BANKS! THE LIES ! PARASITES and bloodsuckers claiming to be beneficial to society, Vomitable! http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/11/deutsche-bank-universal-banks-are-a-benefit-to-society-really/

  89. @C
    They get to deduct ALL of it–any outlay of cash is either deducted immediately or spread over a short time in the future–unless by some accident they paid tax in tha past–then they carry the loss backward in time. The issue is whether they can pump the amount deducted to higher than cost. In UK for example they get to deduct more than they spend. Up to 20% more at onepoint. Uplift.

  90. I have realized for a long time charatible organizations are for the most part scams. Preying on our conscious and charitable hearts. When I give it is hoping that some small portion does get to the needy. In most cases dont give at all unless it is local and a school fund or church fund. Right now Iahve so many family members living at my house and some close relatives that need help I dont give outside the family unless it is to school fund. So sad you can not trust anyone. Buffet absolutely shows his charatible color by pushing the devil to the Sec job. He is satan himself.

  91. “There is no charitable intent–the charitable trust is bogus”. True. Especially when most of their money is invested into Monsanto and big Pharma, which, all the while, they push on unsuspecting peons under the guise of “philanthropy”.

    They make money from their inventions, they make money from their investments, they make money from the philanthropy and they destroy the earth and people’s health. And they get to deduct most of it from Uncle Sam.

  92. @SE

    OMG is right–Jamie Dimon as treasury secretary????? Buffet likes to portray himself as a kindly thoughtful grandfatherly type. However, Lets look more closely.

    Buffet is the inventor of the billionaire charitable trust gimmick. Here is how it works; the old bilionaire sits on stocks personally for a couple decades–Buffet–biggest Bill Gates. Any of these guys that started outfits and obtained a bunch of dirt cheap founders stock.

    Then they create a charitable trust–like gates HIV in Africa thing

    The real purpose is to put the control block of stock over in a permanent family-controlled trust. They obtain a deduction when they make each contribution of part of their stock–planned to wipe out tax liability from other income and to put any income received from dividends or sales of the stock in the tax exempt “charity”. The amount of the charitable deduction is the present FMV of the stock–not the original cost—-so lets say buffet has a historical cost of $10/share for Berkshire—but present FMV is say $1000/ share. He gets a deduction of $1000—worth say $150 in a tax credit at his low 15% rate—so he literally makes money by pulling the shares out of one pocket and placing it in the other. And then future income taxes are avoided completely—-he controls berkshire as the representative of the trust rather than in his own name

    There is no charitable intent–the charitable trust is bogus—and the enforcement of the tax law is under the aegis of the treasury Secretary——people talking about changing charitable deductions? Awful idea from Buffets view. So he will fire up the many true charitable givers–folks who give a few things to Goodwill–a few bucks weekly to their church—and he will use then as pawns to protect the largest tax scheme going–well maybe largest–it certainly will be if its not wiped out

  93. Tuesday, November 27, 2012

    The 0.1% Circles the Wagons: Buffett Pumps for Dimon as Treasury Secretary

    “But the real reason for Buffett’s enthusiasm is really simple. Dimon is the loudest mouthpiece of the utterly shameless banking industry bullshit. He’s rejected the idea of international capital rules, calling them “anti-American.” That’s code for “American banks [along with international banks] might make less money, can’t have that.” And he’s ranted about journalists being overpaid.

    Dimon is so full of himself that he chewed out two central bankers: Bernanke and Mark Carney of Canada, soon to be the governor general of the Bank of England. Carney, an ex Goldmanite, was less easily cowed than Bernanke and (for those who had heard of the Dimon temper tantrum, which certainly included readers of Reuters and the Financial Times) gave him a bureaucratic dressing down in a speech the following day:..

    … Dimon also had the bad taste to get pissy about a Department of Justice lawsuit against JP Morgan for pre-acquisition conduct of Bear Stearns. It’s hard to be sympathetic.

    Read more at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/11/the-0-1-circles-the-wagons-buffett-pumps-for-dimon-as-treasury-secretary.html#oEmftWzZh7LIKl1X.99

    Everyone who is someone believes it’s a done deal. The mere thought of it makes me want to throw up.

  94. Tuesday, November 27, 2012

    The 0.1% Circles the Wagons: Buffett Pumps for Dimon as Treasury Secretary

    “But the real reason for Buffett’s enthusiasm is really simple. Dimon is the loudest mouthpiece of the utterly shameless banking industry bullshit. He’s rejected the idea of international capital rules, calling them “anti-American.” That’s code for “American banks [along with international banks] might make less money, can’t have that.” And he’s ranted about journalists being overpaid.

    Dimon is so full of himself that he chewed out two central bankers: Bernanke and Mark Carney of Canada, soon to be the governor general of the Bank of England. Carney, an ex Goldmanite, was less easily cowed than Bernanke and (for those who had heard of the Dimon temper tantrum, which certainly included readers of Reuters and the Financial Times) gave him a bureaucratic dressing down in a speech the following day:..

    … Dimon also had the bad taste to get pissy about a Department of Justice lawsuit against JP Morgan for pre-acquisition conduct of Bear Stearns. It’s hard to be sympathetic.

    Read more at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/11/the-0-1-circles-the-wagons-buffett-pumps-for-dimon-as-treasury-secretary.html#oEmftWzZh7LIKl1X.99

    Read more at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/11/the-0-1-circles-the-wagons-buffett-pumps-for-dimon-as-treasury-secretary.html#oEmftWzZh7LIKl1X.99

    Everyone who is someone believes it’s a done deal. The mere thought of it makes me want to throw up.

  95. @c –@anybody

    dual-tracking is/was ingrained since at least 2008—

  96. GET RID OF YOUR MORTGAGE through a Quiet Title Lawsuit
    Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 12:03 AM

    By LENOIR LAW FIRM

    A quiet title case is a lawsuit by a homeowner against the bank claiming to hold the homeowner’s mortgage loan to force the bank to prove that it owns the mortgage and promissory note for the loan. If the bank cannot prove that it owns the mortgage and promissory note, the homeowner wins the quiet title case.

    Winning the quiet title case means that the homeowner’s mortgage is extinguished (deleted) and the homeowner owns the property free and clear of the mortgage. The homeowner may keep or sell the home without paying the former mortgage debt.

    Winning a quiet title case in New York became much easier in 2011 when the law changed to help homeowners. The change of law occurred in the case of Bank of New York v. Silverberg (2d Dept. 2011), in which a New York Appellate Court ruled that all trades of mortgages on the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) system were invalid because MERS never holds any of the underlying promissory notes.

    MERS (mis)handles the majority of mortgages in New York and the United States. If your mortgage loan paperwork mentions Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS), then MERS probably mishandles your mortgage and the Silverberg case should invalidate your mortgage debt in a New York quiet title action.

    Keep in mind that the change of law created by the Silverberg case may not be permanent, so it is important to start your quiet title action as soon as possible.

  97. @C
    I wish hed have cited a source for the “actionable” remark—that is a real weakness—

  98. @ CHRISTINE

    THANKS SO MUCH–i owe you

  99. Marques LIVES! Homeowner wins, then loses, then WINS!

    http://mandelman.ml-implode.com/2011/05/marques-lives-homeowner-wins-then-loses-then-wins/

  100. No!!!! They make you sign a waver to not do that!!! Dang…. I guess some else tried that…
    A for Green land, No I don’y think their banks got a basil out. They got taken away – de-privatized and bank excs went to prison…

    The people got sooo upset, they went down in mass and pelted the gov buildings with rocks!!!
    Everyone got principle reductions too…

  101. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRtFD4lRSYY

    Homeowner Wins Twice Against Freddie Mac

    The nation’s largest mortgage company may finally be bending to public pressure. A St. Paul homeowner has scored a pair of victories against Freddie Mac that have allowed her to stay in her foreclosed home, but only after being misled in a move that’s called “dual tracking.”
    Caylin Crawford’s problems began when she had a snowboarding accident and wasn’t able to work for a few months. Without the income, she realized she would have trouble making her monthly mortgage payments. U.S. Bank was the originator of her mortgage and Freddie Mac had purchased it on the secondary market. She called U.S. Bank and explained her situation. A U.S. Bank representative told her she could probably qualify for a HAMP (Home Affordable Modification Program) loan but she had to stop making payments, which she did.

    While negotiations were in progress, U.S. Bank sent a letter on Oct 11, 2011 stating they would not proceed with foreclosure. But eight days later she got a notice saying her home would be sold at a sheriff’s auction.

    The practice is called “dual tracking” and has been used against other Twin Cites homeowners by other lenders such as Citibank.

    Crawford then began a frustrating process of trying to negotiate with U.S. Bank, where she found the company apparently did not want the negotiation to be on the record. She said the bank refused to reply to her email even though it had done so in the past. When she called U.S. Bank, representatives would ask if the call was being recorded. Crawford says if she would say yes, the bank representative would insist that the recorder be turned off or they would hang up. Crawford said other foreclosed homeowners she has talked to have run into the same problem with U.S. Bank.

    U.S. Bank’s Vice President of Media Relations Nicole Garrison-Sprenger says “both of those practices are not policies of U.S. Bank. To say so would be false.”

    After about 10 months of negotiations, Crawford filed a wrongful foreclosure suit against U.S. Bank and Freddie Mac on August 2, 2012 — the day before her eviction hearing. She waited until the last minute in hopes that the bank or Freddie Mac would move.

    Crawford said Freddie Mac turned the case over to a legal firm that charges $560 an hour and specializes in fighting these types of cases.

    All this over a $40,000 mortgage that Crawford had already paid off $12,000 in principle in just four years.

    U.S. Bank bought the home from itself at the foreclosure auction for the full $40,000. “They made quite a bit of money” from the sale said Crawford. Even though the home was sold, she was allowed to stay in it.

    OccupyHomes MN Helps Out
    After her home had been sold out from under her, Crawford contacted OccupyHomesMN in September, 2012 with the objective of helping others avoid her situation. She was told that they needed to solve her problem first. At her first OccupyHomesMN meeting she started to tell her story when her mother jumped in and recounted the entire tale.

    Crawford had an OccupyHomesMN barbeque in her back yard in September, 2012 with about 50 people joining her. The all got out their cell phones and left a recorded message for John Lucas, Jr., Freddie Mac regional director in Chicago. Four days later she got a settlement offer. As part of the settlement, Freddie Mac would allow Crawford’s mother to buy the home and let Crawford stay there.
    The settlement was a surprise for several reasons. Freddie Mac usually refuses to deal directly with homeowners, and it prohibits the sale of foreclosed homes to the owner or anyone related or otherwise that might allow the owner to live in the property. Freddie Mac representative Brad German confirmed that was the policy when he was contacted in September.

    Pattern of problems
    Freddie Mac and its sister agency Fannie Mae have come under increasing attack by those involved with mortgage or foreclosure problems. The UpTake has been following The Cruz Family of Minneapolis battle with Freddie Mac for months. Freddie Mac is now selling the Cruz house even though the issuing bank wants to rewrite the mortgage.

  102. Homeowners – 1, Bank of America, Wells Fargo -0

    by Brian Mahany

    Despite the turning tide, big banks continue to win many court battles. Individual homeowners just can’t afford to take on the banking giants and their Park Avenue lawyers. Now and then, however, homeowners win. And some times they win big. Every victory empowers more and more homeowners to come forward. Last week’s victory in the federal 1st Circuit Court of Appeals is likely to cost Bank of America millions.

    Recently there have been a spate of lawsuits against big banks regarding forced place insurance. Just last week we wrote about the fate of one of our clients who is facing the loss of his home over a forced place insurance snafu.

    All mortgage lenders require borrowers to maintain insurance on their homes. If the house is destroyed by fire or tornado, lenders want to be sure they will get paid. If one allows their insurance to lapse, lenders have the right to “force place” insurance on the home. In concept that seems fair, however some lenders have been charging exorbitant rates for such insurance, take kickbacks from the insurance company and even place insurance on homes that are already insured.

    Two homeowners in Massachusetts sued Bank of America claiming the bank was illegally forcing homeowners to maintain excessive amounts of flood insurance and also collecting kickbacks from the insurance companies. The trial court dismissed their claims.

    On appeal, a three judge panel reversed the trial judge and said the homeowners presented viable claims. The First Circuit Court of Appeals controls federal courts in Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Puerto Rico. Although not binding in other states, rulings from federal appeals courts carry great weight everywhere.

    For its part, Bank of America continues to deny any wrongdoing but last week’s loss will probably bring all parties to the settlement table. In our experience, big banks don’t want to face juries these days.

    Bank of America isn’t the only big bank accused of this practice. Wells Fargo, Chase, Citibank and U.S. Bank have all been accused of similar misdeeds. Two weeks ago a federal judge in Pennsylvania said force place insurance charges against Wells Fargo could proceed.

    None of these cases are over. Homeowners could still lose in all of them. The tide is turning, however, and little by little the big lenders are realizing that their reign of terror is over.

    Some may criticize my words as being overly harsh but after representing many people who have been victimized by Bank of America and others, no words can express the anxiety, stress and emotional distress they have suffered.

    Mahany & Ertl represents homeowners and others who have claims against banks and mortgage companies. We are not a traditional foreclosure defense firm. If you are facing the imminent loss of your home, contact an attorney in your area for assistance. Contact us, however, if you think you have claims against your bank for something illegal they may have done to you.

    From wrongful lockouts, to forged documents to wrongful denials of HAMP mortgage modifications, we may be able to help you get justice and end the uncertainty. For more information, contact attorney Anthony Dietz or the author Brian Mahany or (414)704-6731 (direct). All inquiries are protected by the attorney client privilege and kept in strict confidence.

    Already have a private or local legal aid lawyer helping you with your foreclosure? We can often assist and prosecute the claims against the bank while they assist you with the foreclosure.

    Whatever you decide to do, don’t delay. In many states once the foreclosure case is closed it is impossible to bring new charges against the bank. Every state is different as are the facts of each case. While we can’t give you legal advice by a blog post, we do need to warn you that these cases are usually time sensitive.

    Mahany & Ertl – America’s Fraud Lawyers (c) Proudly Giving Homeowners A Voice from our offices in Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Detroit, Michigan; Portland, Maine and Minneapolis, Minnesota. Legal services available in many jurisdictions.

  103. Homeowners – 1, Bank of America, Wells Fargo -0

    by Brian Mahany

    Despite the turning tide, big banks continue to win many court battles. Individual homeowners just can’t afford to take on the banking giants and their Park Avenue lawyers. Now and then, however, homeowners win. And some times they win big. Every victory empowers more and more homeowners to come forward. Last week’s victory in the federal 1st Circuit Court of Appeals is likely to cost Bank of America millions.

    Recently there have been a spate of lawsuits against big banks regarding forced place insurance. Just last week we wrote about the fate of one of our clients who is facing the loss of his home over a forced place insurance snafu.

    All mortgage lenders require borrowers to maintain insurance on their homes. If the house is destroyed by fire or tornado, lenders want to be sure they will get paid. If one allows their insurance to lapse, lenders have the right to “force place” insurance on the home. In concept that seems fair, however some lenders have been charging exorbitant rates for such insurance, take kickbacks from the insurance company and even place insurance on homes that are already insured.

    Two homeowners in Massachusetts sued Bank of America claiming the bank was illegally forcing homeowners to maintain excessive amounts of flood insurance and also collecting kickbacks from the insurance companies. The trial court dismissed their claims.

    On appeal, a three judge panel reversed the trial judge and said the homeowners presented viable claims. The First Circuit Court of Appeals controls federal courts in Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Puerto Rico. Although not binding in other states, rulings from federal appeals courts carry great weight everywhere.

    For its part, Bank of America continues to deny any wrongdoing but last week’s loss will probably bring all parties to the settlement table. In our experience, big banks don’t want to face juries these days.

    Bank of America isn’t the only big bank accused of this practice. Wells Fargo, Chase, Citibank and U.S. Bank have all been accused of similar misdeeds. Two weeks ago a federal judge in Pennsylvania said force place insurance charges against Wells Fargo could proceed.

    None of these cases are over. Homeowners could still lose in all of them. The tide is turning, however, and little by little the big lenders are realizing that their reign of terror is over.

    Some may criticize my words as being overly harsh but after representing many people who have been victimized by Bank of America and others, no words can express the anxiety, stress and emotional distress they have suffered.

    Mahany & Ertl represents homeowners and others who have claims against banks and mortgage companies. We are not a traditional foreclosure defense firm. If you are facing the imminent loss of your home, contact an attorney in your area for assistance. Contact us, however, if you think you have claims against your bank for something illegal they may have done to you.

    From wrongful lockouts, to forged documents to wrongful denials of HAMP mortgage modifications, we may be able to help you get justice and end the uncertainty. For more information, contact attorney Anthony Dietz at adietz@mahanyertl.com or the author Brian Mahany at brian@mahanyertl.com or (414)704-6731 (direct). All inquiries are protected by the attorney client privilege and kept in strict confidence.

    Already have a private or local legal aid lawyer helping you with your foreclosure? We can often assist and prosecute the claims against the bank while they assist you with the foreclosure.

    Whatever you decide to do, don’t delay. In many states once the foreclosure case is closed it is impossible to bring new charges against the bank. Every state is different as are the facts of each case. While we can’t give you legal advice by a blog post, we do need to warn you that these cases are usually time sensitive.

    Mahany & Ertl – America’s Fraud Lawyers (c) Proudly Giving Homeowners A Voice from our offices in Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Detroit, Michigan; Portland, Maine and Minneapolis, Minnesota. Legal services available in many jurisdictions.

  104. So everyone should ask for the note when forclosed on. They dont do it. They dont know to do it. That needs to be publicized as much as possible.

  105. It’s false debt anyway. Fabricated out of thin air through collusion between RE agents and appraisers.

  106. Dcbreidenbach,

    Try this. It is the actual letter sent by Richard Roman to a couple of senators.

    http://www.msfraud.org/law/legislative/Request-inquiry-into-robosigning-to-Banking-Committee_11-12.pdf

  107. @ELEX
    “That way the title companies are off the hook for document storage, ”

    The suggestion makes sense–is there a reason you state that title cos have custody of the original note—-how can that be if its supposed to be negotiated to a trust years ago? ??? any thoughts please

  108. For every foreclosure that has occurred there is a Trustee of Sale holding an original promissory note for the foreclosed loan.

    All states have to do is pass law that in event foreclosed owner does not request original note back, those notes are forwarded to the state for sequestration for a period of 5 – 10 years (forgery SOL). After that time the counties record destruction of note in Recorder’s office. That way the title companies are off the hook for document storage, and the states have ability to determine the number of notes ‘missing in action’ by sampling sequestered notes from time to time, and lenders have access to notes for further collection purposes if necessary.

  109. @CHRISTINE

    i went and looked for anything at that link re CFPB——lots of stuff—if you can point me to the source please do–i would appreciate it

  110. I appollogize mu scroll took more than I scrolled. So sorry.

  111. I recommend you all do this and perhaps the tides will change.
    http://www.msfraud.org/national-mortgage-settlement-an-admission-by-banks.html

    PLEASE REPORT TO THE NATIONAL MORTGAGE SETTLEMENT MONIITORS THAT THE BANKS STILL ARE ATTEMPTING OR HAVE THROWN YOU OUT OF YOUR HOUSE WITH FRAUD ROBO DOCS AND WHAT EVER YOU WANT TO REPORT.

    REPORT CONTINUED ABUSE.
    The National Mortgage Settlement….REPORT YOUR CONCERNS NOW!
    November 23rd, 2012 | Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.

    I will remain critical of the National Mortgage Sellout until consumers get treated fairly…which is to say that I will always be critical of this deal that sold out consumers and was a gift to the banks…a reward for their wrongdoing.

    It drives me nuts that reporters fail to report that the settlement was primarily a slap on the wrist for engaging in billions of dollars in insurance fraud. Our children will be paying for the fraud for decades…the banks giving a few dollars back will not change that disgusting fact.

    I was recently quoted in the St. Petersburg Times as saying that the settlement remained a failure as long as families are still being thrown into the street. I am told that this should no longer be happening as much under the terms of the settlement.

    And so, like an abused spouse, I return to the abuser hopeful again that it will stop.

    I am advised that the Mortgage Settlement Monitor wants to hear from consumers who are not receiving proper treatment….

    http://nationalmortgagesettlement.com/

    ShareScridb filter
    Posted in Financial News, Foreclosure, Laws, Mortgage News, Uncategorized | Tags: florida foreclosure, Foreclosure, foreclosure attorney, foreclosure cases, foreclosure defense, foreclosure process, lawyers for homeowner rights, matt weidner, matt weidner law, mortgage foreclosure, Mortgage Settlement Monitor, national mortgage settlement, nationalmortgagesettlement.com, non judicial foreclosure, stop my foreclosure, The National Mortgage Settlement….REPORT YOUR CONCERNS NOW!, top foreclosure news, weidner foreclosure law | No Comments »

    ——————————————————————————–
    From: Shelleystotalbodyworks@comcast.net
    To: “perrito2 x2”
    Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 12:19:24 PM
    Subject: Fwd: Matt Weidners Most dangerous Period of Our Nations History. We are in an economic war with internal terrorist.

    ——————————————————————————–
    From: Shelleystotalbodyworks@comcast.net
    To: “Shelleystotalbodyworks Ann Erickson”
    Cc: stevemorberg@yahoo.com, “Shawn Newman” , “carrisland” , “Ha Dao” , “John Long”
    Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 12:17:19 PM
    Subject: Matt Weidners Most dangerous Period of Our Nations History. We are in an economic war with internal terrorist.

    We’ve Entered The Most Dangerous Period in Our Nation’s History….
    November 25th, 2012 | Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.
    I began my day with an article wherein Goldman Sachs CEO and war criminal Lloyd Blankfein argues that his subjects (he’s the Lord, the taxpayers are his reluctant subjects) will need to accept dramatic new reductions in the safety nets and other programs that they have already paid for. (Huff Post)

    In case you have not recognized it, this nation and in fact this world is at war…and Lord Blankfein and his banker/Wall Street ilk are the enemy of The People. The banker class, along with the government they own, have decided how they will run this world and how they will order our lives. (we are all subjugates to their global economic order) They have decided what they will do with the fruits of our labor (confiscate then concentrate it among themselves) and they have decided what their government will do. (commit genocide, murder, subjugate the people) all to develop then perpetuate some dangerous and evolving new world order.

    The question of course is what will be the series of events that trigger the most dramatic and violent aspects of the evolution that is coming. One has to come after all. We all accept this conversation of a fiscal cliff, but the talking classes are not yet talking about the necessary and inevitable side effects of Lord Blankfein and the members of his ruling class telling the Rest of Us who are paying his multi million dollar salary that we won’t be eating as much as we cared to….or that our children will not be receiving the medical care they need to survive.

    Yes, at some point in time there will be a blow back. We see the first puffs of smoke from this coming war coming to us from the protests of tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands in Greece and Spain. Or at least we would see those pictures if The Media, such as it is were actually showing us such pictures. But of course they are not. After all, did you see Mitt Romney pumping gasoline? And hey! A Kardashian sister ate another Kardashian sister.

    What will everyday Amerikans do when their lifestyles become compromised or worse, when they are unable to meet their basic needs because the economic model blasted down upon them will not permit their families to thrive….or maybe even survive?

    What will cops do when they realize that Lord Blankfein has stolen and pilfered their pensions? What will judges do when they too realize that their precious retirement accounts are delusions? Perhaps this realization will put into a bit more of a focus such questions as,

    “What does it matter…..is your client paying his mortgage?”

    And of course the answer must always be….

    “But who shall he pay it to?”

    Should he pay into a fundamentally corrupt and criminal system? And even though their court system (it really doesn’t make any sense to call it “our” court system anymore does it?) continues to affirm and confirm their corrupt enterprise do we not have some moral obligation to confront the illegitimacy of a system that has broken down? Indeed the court system that once was “ours” has become so desecrated that it has lost legitimacy among those who give it its power only through consent.

    The clear and present danger is the threshold we have crossed….

    ShareScridb filter
    Posted in Foreclosure | No Comments »
    NY TIMES: NATION’S BANKS STILL ABUSING THE SWEETHEART SETTLEMENT THEY GOT
    November 23rd, 2012 | Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.

    Maybe the New And Improved President of the United States of Amerika will stand up and hold Wall Street and The Banks accountable. Kinda hard to imagine that though when he’s the president they bought. But if the political pressure were strong enough, maybe the Monitor of the National Mortgage Sellout would actually do something to hold them accountable…..(breath holding);

    From NY Times:

    In February, when five big banks settled with government officials over evidence of foreclosure fraud, the deal was greeted with skepticism. The banks agreed to provide $25 billion in mortgage relief to hard-pressed borrowers, $17 billion of it from reducing the principal on troubled loans. The government considered that a victory, because banks resist principal reductions, but banks have a reputation for promising amends that never seem to get made.

    NYTIMES

    ShareScridb filter
    Posted in Foreclosure, Mortgage News, Uncategorized | Tags: florida foreclosure, Foreclosure, foreclosure attorney, foreclosure crisis, foreclosure fraud, foreclosure news, foreclosure pinellas, lawyers for homeowner rights, matt weidner, National Mortgage Sellout, NY TIMES: NATION’S BANKS STILL ABUSING THE SWEETHEART SETTLEMENT THEY GOT, weidner foreclosure law | No Comments »
    The National Mortgage Settlement….REPORT YOUR CONCERNS NOW!
    November 23rd, 2012 | Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.

    I will remain critical of the National Mortgage Sellout until consumers get treated fairly…which is to say that I will always be critical of this deal that sold out consumers and was a gift to the banks…a reward for their wrongdoing.

    It drives me nuts that reporters fail to report that the settlement was primarily a slap on the wrist for engaging in billions of dollars in insurance fraud. Our children will be paying for the fraud for decades…the banks giving a few dollars back will not change that disgusting fact.

    I was recently quoted in the St. Petersburg Times as saying that the settlement remained a failure as long as families are still being thrown into the street. I am told that this should no longer be happening as much under the terms of the settlement.

    And so, like an abused spouse, I return to the abuser hopeful again that it will stop.

    I am advised that the Mortgage Settlement Monitor wants to hear from consumers who are not receiving proper treatment….

    http://nationalmortgagesettlement.com/

    ShareScridb filter
    Posted in Financial News, Foreclosure, Laws, Mortgage News, Uncategorized | Tags: florida foreclosure, Foreclosure, foreclosure attorney, foreclosure cases, foreclosure defense, foreclosure process, lawyers for homeowner rights, matt weidner, matt weidner law, mortgage foreclosure, Mortgage Settlement Monitor, national mortgage settlement, nationalmortgagesettlement.com, non judicial foreclosure, stop my foreclosure, The National Mortgage Settlement….REPORT YOUR CONCERNS NOW!, top foreclosure news, weidner foreclosure law | No Comments »
    Obama’s 49 State Attorney General Sellout Was Just a Bailout(Bribe)(Payoff) For The Banks….
    November 22nd, 2012 | Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.
    It’s not “our” government anymore. Not at the local level, not at the state level, not in the courts and certainly not at the federal level. Trial court judges are often prejudiced against the interests of the lowly unwashed masses of defendants that appear before them. They often care not of the plight of the individual and frequently care less about the larger implications of the gross and systematic patterns of abuse.

    And, as I learned so abruptly recently, Appellate Courts are unwilling to fulfill the sacred obligations to restore justice, righteousness and the Rule of Law to this sick and desecrated nation.

    As I’ve said repeatedly before, the War is over and The Banks have won. At least for now.

    But there will be other wars…those wars are raging now in Greece. Spain comes next, and then more of Europe. Amerikans will be slower on the uptick but the anger and the consequences for the delayed reaction will be far more radical….and explosive.

    At some point in time, the Amerikan people will wake up and take their vengeance out on the institutions and the individuals who have oppressed and enslaved us. Those who cheated, lied, stole, committed gross fraud, crimes and unspeakable abuses will be held to account. And the government apologists, the co-conspirators in their crime sprees will be held to account. Yes, Mr. Obama, these were crimes. Yes, Ms. Bondi, forgery and fraud are crimes. No, Mr. Geithner you may not use my child’s money to “foam the runway” for the banks.

    And yet this is what they have done. Because they are owned by Lord Blankfein. They all kiss the ring of Jamie Dimon. They slather up and ooze and schmooze with the criminal masterminds that robbed the wealth of two generations, concentrating that wealth…the accounts and equity and labor of millions of Amerikans…in the hands of the few.

    What will happen when Amerika’s lost generation…those 20 somethings who enter a gutted workforce after watching their parents be gutted and robbed finally enter their age of awareness and awakening? Will they have the courage to rise up against their oppressors? Will they be willing to strike back against those who robbed them of their American birthright and plunged them directly into the prison of debt and destitution that they face? Will they peacefully reject repayment of their trillion dollars in extortionate debt obligations? Will they pay taxes to fund an increasingly regressive tax system? Will they hop on the broken down, jalopy of a falling apart bus with their parents as it goes careening off the fiscal cliff or will they all jump off at the last minute while the bus falls into the abyss a la Thelma and Louise?

    There would be fitting justice for the youth of this world, and of this nation, to starve and leave fallow the adults who created the fiscal cliff. There would certainly be fitting justice for the youth to rise up and exact revenge and vengeance from the bankers and financiers who rigged the system to their own benefits. Will there be a Revolution? Will the youth thrown the money changers from the temple?

    As I experienced recently with the manifestly unjust rejection of my appeal in Florida’s 2nd DCA, we can no longer count on this nation’s courts to protect and defend liberty…to ensure justice…to level the playing field, to perpetuate a nation governed by the Rule of Law. The courts, like the rest of this utterly corrupt nation, have turned their backs on all that was good and honorable and just in this nation.

    But I digress….I started with an article about the most glaring example of all that I just described…consider what I just said as you read this article….

    On November 19th, the core of the Obama “Justice” Department’s “49 State Settlement,” of the millions of fraud claims by the suing mortgagees against the mega-banks who were trying to foreclose on robo-signed and other dubious mortgages, was finally announced, and it basically gave the mega-banks what they wanted: all of the money they could possibly get out of those mortgagees, and with future U.S. taxpayers furthermore absorbing the resulting losses, in the form of taxpayers needing to pay off the federal debt for the massive bailouts of Wall Street and its “counter-parties,” losses which were being absorbed by Timothy Geithner’s U.S. Treasury, and by Ben Bernanke’s U.S. Federal Reserve.There would be no prosecutions of mega-bank executives for any of the frauds those mega-bank executives had planned and overseen, which had led to these enormous crimes, and thus to the 2008 crash. Those mega-bank executives were permitted to keep their millions of dollars in pay and bonuses, which they had earned from these frauds.In order to understand what was happening here, one needs to know first this relevant background, the back-story:
    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/obamas-foreclosure-fraud-settlement-2012-11#ixzz2CxPRxULf

    ShareScridb filter
    Posted in Foreclosure | Tags: 49 State Attorney General Sellout, Ben Bernanke’s U.S. Federal Reserve, florida foreclosure, foreclose on robo-signed, Foreclosure, foreclosure attorney, foreclosure cases, foreclosure defense, foreclosure news, foreclosure pinellas, foreclosure process, Jamie Dimon, lawyers for homeowner rights, matt weidner, Obama’s $26 Billion Foreclosure Fraud Fix Was Just A Settlement For Big Banks, Obama’s 49 State Attorney General Sellout Was Just a Bailout(Bribe)(Payoff) For The Banks…., robo-signed, Timothy Geithner’s U.S. Treasury, weidner foreclosure law | 1 Comment »
    The banks have failed to meet their settlment and are in admission of guilt by this settlement payment.

  112. Attorney General (of course not florida attorney general) Brings Racketeering, Fraud Against Document Mill (but no relief for homeowners)

    November 26th, 2012 | Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.

    LANSING – Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette today announced he charged Lorraine Brown, former president of mortgage document processor DocX, with racketeering for her alleged role in authorizing the fraudulent signing of mortgage documents filed in Michigan. The felony charge comes as the result of an ongoing Attorney General investigation into questionable mortgage documentation filed with Michigan’s Register of Deeds offices during the foreclosure crisis.

    ”Shortcuts like robo-signing are just one piece of the mortgage foreclosure crisis,” said Schuette. “Our investigation remains ongoing, and we will bring to justice every lawbreaker we find.”

    In April 2011, Schuette launched an investigation after county officials across the state reported that they suspected Assignment of Mortgage documents filed in their offices may have been forged. A “60 Minutes” news broadcast had shown that the name “Linda Green” was signed to thousands of mortgage-related documents nationwide, but with many different variations in handwriting. County officials in Michigan reviewed their files and found similar documents, thus raising questions about the authenticity of the documents filed.

    (press release)
    Scridb filter

  113. Foreclosure Defense Requests Inquiry into Robo-Signing

    The CFPB has publically and unequivocally declared robosigning and similar illegal banking activities as “actionable” and within its purview and jurisdiction.

    http://www.msfraud.org/

    Click on the link to read the letter sent to the Senate by Atty Roman, asking for an investigation once and for all.

  114. November 24, 2012
    National Mortgage Settlement: An Admission By The Banks?

    By Dan McGookey
    “Hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars of damages could be sought by homeowners wrongfully dispossessed of their homes.”

    In April, 2012, the federal government, along with 49 state attorney generals, worked out an agreement with the nation’s five largest servicers, (J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citi and Ally (GMAC)), resulting from the robo signer scandal which came to light in late 2010.

    Robo signing, of course, is the practice of employing unauthorized persons to execute documents such as Assignments of Mortgage and affidavits, en masse, in order to expedite foreclosure cases. Consistent with the Wall Street Bank’s arrogant belief that they are above the law, they gave no regard whatsoever to the legality, much less the morality, of the process of robo signing, so long as it increased their bottom-line profits.

    However, as the old saying goes, “What goes around, comes around”, so that the banks may finally get their just desserts as a result of this, only the latest in a long line of indiscretions. In what could, and hopefully will be, the final fallout from the scandal, making the $25 billion settlement (purportedly only $5 billion in reality), look puny, the letters notifying victimized homeowners of their right to submit claims for damages against the settlement fund may prove to be their undoing in that they come scintillatingly close to an admission of illegal conduct by the participating servicers. Should a court hold that is the case, it could be the shot heard “round the financial world” in that hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars of damages could be sought by homeowners wrongfully dispossessed of their homes. As with the Independent Foreclosure Review process we discussed in last week’s Consumer Mortgage News, the National Mortgage Settlement provides opportunities for homeowners far beyond the amount they might recover through the program itself. It potentially provides homeowners a right to recover the real amount of his or her loss resulting from a wrongful foreclosure, not simply a nominal amount worked out within the confines of the very cozy relationship between the government and the banks which it has deemed to be “too big to fail”. Therefore, the best advice to homeowners is to submit a claim under the the National Mortgage Settlement if invited to do so, and keep your eyes open to much more exciting opportunities possibly to come.

  115. please tell me if i am right or wrong??? iceland must have gave their banks a baolout just as the US gave their banks. when the banks did not comply with helping the homeowners they decided to make all existing mortgages paid off to boost their economy. We do not hear the behind the scenes we dont live there.

    America gave our banks a bailout as well. the money was suppose to pay off all the existing mortgages to date and then help the homeowners is strategic ways to boost the economy. with out oversight this was never done. look at the failed hamp loan.

    the next action of “O”‘s should be the same as iceland’s mortgage forgiveness for all existing mortgages to date. they were all paid off anyway. this will boost the ecomony. the banks that have scammed us should fail and the others like county banks and credit unions will survive. just like the savings and loan problem. we need this reset badly. for homeowners as well as businesses. imagine if you were renting and now the home was paid off? rents can be reduced substantially, imagine you had a mortgage to pay and now you dont?? this will be the boost the economy needs.
    we need to get the word out to O. we are not asleep we are awake and we know whats going on.

  116. Since so much time has gone by since our President got the advice from seven top economists to correct the mortgages 18 months ago!!….I am of the opinion that he is waiting on something else to save the day. Because any leader in their right mind would have addressed this problem AGES ago.

    For instance, an economic collapse would take care of the debt, a discharge in bankruptcy…or global funds mysteriously appear out of nowhere. The countries of the world will make a fresh start, a “re-set.” NOT as corporations with the fiat play money controlled by the central banks, but as countries with their own currencies and their own banks, like it used to be.

    Do you remember when the administration was spending money like it was going out of style? Think about it.
    No one would do that unless they knew something in advance.

  117. sending this to every AG and Congressman or woman and the president in massive waives of emails will suppor these economist that know what needs to be done morally and economically.

  118. Even if the administration cant unilaterally reduce mortgage balances it would be a great step forward if the pursuit of seizures of homes with documents bearing forged signatures, misrepresentations, and deception were interrupted. Today even if you pay off the house–the securitization mess and predatory collection practices—forgeries so permeates the system, that obligors are not actually released from debts and the releases of mortgages are invalid. These are clouds and hidden bombs which will be adversely affecting multitudes of people for years to come.

    The recent indictment of the leader in this race to forged documents LO Brown at DOCX, was just a well-documented example. The servicers utilized the DOCX service in large part because they have difficulty proving the authenticity of notes.

    State courts need to require that the clamant produce the ORIGINAL note with the intial complaint, and have an accompanying affidavit of the client trustee employee swearing it owns that note–exclusively. and a sworn statement by the atty that she represents the client —and is not aware of any false documents, forged signatures etc used to prosecute the action. Theft by deception is inherently destructive not simply becauseof the immediate impact on the victim–but because the effects of deception by its nature linger and affect other people for years. The deceptions tend to turn up at a later date—after the deceivers are paid and gone. This leaves the victims , familiies, buyers, title insurers , communities neighbors all in a lurch –trying to make the real world wrap around the decption.

    Example:suppose that a debt collector files an action in foreclosure and attaches a copy or original of a note with a forged indorsement–or delivers same to the hapless homeowner in exchange for a home to settle the matter. typical deed in lieu situation–or short sale–ie a cooperative homeowner.

    Now the forgery was done intentionally–or not—the note is not owned or held by the theif. the theif cannot inlaw release either the debt or the mortgage. So if the forgery slips through undetected, without any economic protection such as a surety and the collector disappears as a whisp of smoke–“where are the parties?”

    the homeowner-maker still owes the real debt because UCC is mercilous.The home is still subject to the purportedly “released” mortgage–only cut by a bona fide purchaser–with no notice there is a fraud involved. The actual owner of the note has a harder time collecting because the value of the seized home was stolen by all standards. Not a pretty picture–especially for the hapless homeowner.

    The worse matter: this set of circumstances exists for the average homeowner with no default at all. The refi sets him up–does title insurance cover him if the servicer takes his money and runs? Probably not. If the title guys are tangled up –then the rates go up to cover the theft. The problem today is that the consequences of the crime are so exhausting, so unjust, so painful–that everybody conceals it from the victimized homeowner(s) —rather than try to fix it when discovered. The attys for the ghostly disappearing debt collectors actually assert they are unwitting victims when they are finally cornered–and can no longer extend the decetion.

    Any attys involved should spend at least a year or two in a time-out chair contemplating how they landed there. They made plenty preying on victimized homeowners so a period of timeout is simply disgorging unjust receipts–the blood-money.

    In my opinion–that is what the term should be at the top of the debt collectos’ atty invoice. “BLOOD-MONEY FOR DECEMBER 2012” .

  119. It is time for everyone to send this message by email to the president. It only takes a few minutes. WE ARE NOT IRRESPONSIBLE HOMEOWNERS THE BANKS ARE IRRESPONSIBLE ECONOMIC CRIMINALS, WITH RECLESS DISREGARD FOR HUMAN RIGHTS. : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_and_the_Financial_Crisis:_Anatomy_of_a_Financial_Collapse

    http://deadlyclear.wordpress.com/2012/09/29/define-responsible-homeowners-please-an-open-letter-to-president-obama/#more-2928

  120. Reduce mortgage debt? What for? So long as you can purchase a storage container to move in, you’ll be mortgage-free once and for all. I think I’ll start exploring the temperatures in nearby caves: that’ll save me a whooping $2500.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/

    Tyler Durden’s picture

    The Housing Recovery: From REO-To-Rent To Containers-To-Condos
    Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/26/2012 – 12:21

    With REO-to-Rent now yesterday’s trade, the Baltic Dry Index stumbling along near its lows (along with a glut of containers), and a ‘recovery’ in US housing, what better than to leverage all of these themes; to wit, as ABC News reports, the first U.S. multi-family condo built of used shipping containers is slated to break ground in Detroit early next year. So forget Trailer Parks, now the increasingly mothballed ports of America will be wonderful waterfront property courtesy of your very own (slightly used) cargo container. One proponent of this ‘cargotecture’ warns that although containers can be bought for as little as $2,500, they should not be thought of as a low-cost housing solution. Tempted? We are sure; below are several current developments.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: