Things that Should be Added to Affidavits and Expert Opinion Letters, Reports, and Declarations

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: First let me emphasize the need to consult with competent legal counsel who is licensed in the jurisdiction in which your property is located. Second, let me emphasize that unless you have an “expert” who actually has credentials including experience, academic degrees, authorship of published books etc., the evidence from the expert might be allowed but it will most certainly be ignored.

In answering an email recently is edited some passages that I realized should probably be available for everyone to see whether they are lawyers, auditors, analysts, paralegals or homeowners.

Also as a caveat this field is evolving every time the banks move the goal posts. But for now, I think the wording below, if properly defended by someone who is coached well as an expert witness, will get traction more often than not at the preliminary stages of motion practice. And remember this wording is only an abstract from a much larger document:

“We could find no evidence supplied by the “lender” that shows that a payment or value of any kind was transferred to anyone in connection with the funding or purchase of the subject loan. In my experience normal practice in the industry would be to provide such information along with the documentation, or the documentation would be considered incomplete and would not be accepted by a title company or a bank that was refinancing a property. In those case where the proof of payment is excluded it is standard practice in the industry to supply same upon request. Such request was made and the foreclosing parties have ignored the request. This indicates, in my opinion, that the loan was purchased or funded by third parties in an table funded loan which is predatory (illegal) per se according to the the Federal Truth in Lending Act and Reg Z).

The significance of the above statement is that (a) the mortgage or deed of trust supposedly collateralizing the property was never perfected and is therefore unenforceable and (b) that none of the foreclosing parties is a
“creditor” within the meaning of applicable state statutes and therefore cannot submit a credit bid in lieu of cash, should the property be subject to an auction. But it would also indicate that any Notices of Default, Notices of Sale, substitutions of parties or trustees would be ineffective (the equivalent of wild deeds out of the chain of title) since the foreclosing parties could not be considered creditors, beneficiaries, assignees or lenders.

The facts in this case strongly indicate that the wrong payee was named on the note, the wrong “lender” was named on the note and mortgage, and the terms of repayment on the note were incomplete in that they failed to refer to the Master Servicer, and the indenture to the mortgage bonds that were sold to raise the capital to fun mortgages and fees — fees that were both disclosed and undisclosed. Undisclosed fees are required to be be credited or repaid to the borrower. Those fees include any sort of compensation to any party, disclosed or not, whose compensation or profit resulted from the apparent closing of the loan.

Hence the amount due or claimed by the collection letters and notices are are incorrect, if there were such fees and compensation. Based upon common practices in the industry such fees that would be ordinarily generated by transaction identical to the subject loan would include a tier 2 yield spread premium, and other transfer or servicing fees that did not appear on the borrowers disclosure statements nor on the HUD 1 settlement statement.

In addition, the accounting provided to the borrower and my office is incomplete in that the only accounting provided relates to direct transactions between the subservicer and the borrower and does not include the transactions between the Master Servicer  and all sources of payments or fees from the co-obligors including not bot limited to the subservicer, insurance payments, guarantees, proceeds from hedge instruments designed to protect the investors but yet allocated to the investor, and Federal bailouts. These payments received by the investment bank or its affiliates acting as Master Servicer (agent for the principal REMIC or its investors who purchased mortgage bonds) would most likely have occurred in this case following current industry practices.

The effect of receipt of money by agents of the REMIC or investors is to reduce the balance owed to the investor. If the payment was made to purchase the loan or bond then the purchaser would be the correct party to demand collection. If the payment was made without purchase of the subject loan or bond, then the payor would possibly have an action in contribution but it is doubtful that the action in contribution would be secured under the most favorable of circumstances, thus eliminating foreclosure as an option in collection. And if the payment was made with express waiver of subrogation, then the balance due to the REMIC or investor is reduced without any right of claim against the borrower, thus extinguishing the obligation, note and mortgage — to the extent of the payment.

As a general rule the banking industry has reported such fees, payments, profits and compensation as their own and has neither paid or disclosed the receipt of money to the investors who as a group constitute the principal in a principal agent relationship.

Hence, the obligation due on the books of the REMIC or investors remains unchanged despite the receipt of actual monetary payments by their agent. This in turn requires an accounting from the Master Servicer, Investment Banker and affiliates as to the nature of payments received and a determination by the court as to how those payments should be allocated.

The significance is again that the amount demanded might be far in excess of the actual debt due to the real creditors, thus nullifying the effect of collection procedures, notices and other actions undertaken by the putative “lender” who, as aforesaid, is not a creditor. The effect of this practice is to collect more than once on the same debt, obligation, note and or mortgage.

150 Responses

  1. Purchase and assumption agreement of what….? They are still swapping the same worthless credit slips they have been swapping all along. SPE’s to launder more fake loans that never happened….? Sheeze…

  2. @ Christine – I would like a copy of the deposition sent to me at: tenbips@yahoo.com.i would also like to know if the deposition mentions,or the case exhibits includs a copy of the complete Purchase and Assumption Agreement.

    I find it difficult to believe the FDIC and JP Morgan did not set up an SPE to wash the loans through, with some of the assets going direct to the JPM balance sheet and the notes being bled through the SPE onto the subsidiary balance sheet to retain tax priviledge and reclamation on losses via balance sheet derivatives and FHLB advances sucked up through stock purchase / financing.

  3. BSE……that is unreal how the judge won’t allow discovery. The judge in my case told me I have every right to ask for discovery. The servicers attorney already told me they don’t have any discovery. It is about to get really interesting soon. I am sounding the alarms because I have a pretty good idea about what these greedy jerks are planning. They want a bankrupt nation of RENTERS. Then it will be complete communism. These tyrants will declare the debt too big and institute a World Tax….like a property tax for the peasants who can’t afford to pay these crooks. That will be everyone when Obamas done with us. I refuse to cooperate with them and all of their manufactured commie crap…I feel strongly we all need to unify against this tyranny under one common theme ….freedom and independence. Too many people are afraid of these greedy jerks. Well not me. I broke no laws, but they did. ..United We Stand…..Divided We Fall.

  4. Just watched trailers pre movie – reminder of inside job – my council at the time that was released said the theatre was filled with old ladies lol , those lil ol ladies got an education And did not take things for granted they had a darn backbone, ,
    Maybe inside job should be promoted again because I’m not sure the people -enough people really understood and Its all there and still no outrage

  5. Stripes

    I like your postings . Good stuff. If I can figure out a way to WIN
    then I would. After 4 years I can not get into discovery. No judge will allow. They protect the government and the banking cartel , the government is the culprilt or they are Santans helppers for the cartel. Who ever is behind alll of this stole enough money to pay for 2 wars and start a third war. It is coming….Trust me .

  6. Don’t believe the fiscal stiff story….time to demand the cops seize the politicians pension money….and throw them in prison for life under the NDAA they instituted…no right to an attorney or a trial.

  7. Local media pushing refis…don’t do it America..! These crooks owe us Gazillions…! Time to end their criminal ponzi scam now. Don’t send them another dime…Crooked banker on the local news lying and saying there are no more illegitimate foreclosures because the banks are working out refis..Don’t believe their lies…they are felons.

  8. These politicians have the gall to tell us there is a fiscal cliff…a fiscal deficiency …when the traitor politicians have allowed the FED to suck $50 trillion+ dollars of our wealth out of this country in the last 4 years.. ? and we are still bailing out these bankster crooks who never lent us any money in the first place and pocketed all of our payments as usury. ….? We are a nation of fools.

  9. CNBC reporting the riddler, Walmart, wants another pipeline to the jokers who have hijacked the U.S. Treasury Department and wants to allow Walmart to lend mortgage credit to the American people! That must mean Walmart has a bank charter and we own them too….! Boycott and sue these crooks America…!

  10. If these Supreme Court justices refuse to repeal obamacare and the microchip….and they keep lying and telling us the U.S. Constitution does not protect us from tyranny, invoke your 9th amendment right and repeal it yourself.

    Amendment IX clearly States… The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

    E-mail that message to the White House…the Senators…the Congresspeople…the Mayors….the Governors…..the Legislators….the Supreme Court…..Geithner..Bernanke…..Wall Street…the media…your local court houses…just do it America..!

  11. BSE…I should say, I agree there is a massive cover up, however, I do not agree with the we can’t win part. The American people have become stupified cowards who don’t know how to stand up for their rights and are just “too busy ” to find out how to do it. I spit in the eye of these tyrants because the truth is….we are the 9th amendment …the maker of all of the notes…WE THE PEOPLE PAY FOR EVERYTHING IN THIS COUNTRY…UPFRONT….at the origination…get a clue America and do your homework….no attorney can invoke your Constitutional Rights in fraudclosure court and tell these judges like it is. Tell that judge that you will not be a party to your own robbery or this fraud. Demand justice be upheld.

  12. I agree BSE. Obama and all the other traitor politicians lije Barney Frank..Chris Dodd….Simpson -Bowles….. know the plan is for a nation of slaves to the gazillion dollars in debt created by their criminal friends on Wall Street. They don’t want us to own anything of value. They want everyone working for them. Too many Americans don’t equate property ownership with freedom. They have been severely dumbed down and are willing to accept what these criminals did and give up everything they worked their entire lives for. They are stupid enough to believe they should have to start over at 50 years old and believe they can rebuild….duh…they blame themselves as if we were the ones gambling on Wall Street with the nations wealth. How many Americans knew the banks were going to be converting bills of credit into stocks and bonds on Wall Street and we were all going to be used as poker chips….? Certainly not me or anyone that I know because, if we would have known that, we would not have walked, we would have ran away. What did they tell us….we might sell your loan to another bank….? Well not only did they not sell anyones loans…there were no loans….and…..none of this was in writing…..none of it. Therefore, they fraudulently induced every one of us to sign a bogus check and a non existant contract. Well all I can say to that is, I am not giving these crooks another dime and I am getting the hell out of fraudclosure court by myself, with no attorney because there are none. The judge is going to beg me to dismiss the bogus fraudclosure when I get through calling every single one of these criminal liars out. They are going to know what the U.S. Constitution means and what the Rule of Law is in this country….the U.S.A……It will be shock and awe U.S. patriot style. No wonder Obama & his wife turned in their law licenses way before his coup of the WH…..they have no respect for this country….or its citizens …at all. Anyone who doesn’t believe that is true should read the U.S.Constitution…the Bill of Rights and all of the laws of this land…that’s right ALL OF THEM….every single one…and stop watching stupid television and crying in their beer and popping pills…and wake up before its too late.

  13. stripes

    I see no wins. I only see fraud and cover up in the systems.
    It continues at the highest level. The system will cause more damage. I have good attorneys and spoke with several. Things do not add up, we have proof. We have gotten no where in 4 years. Judges will not allow cases in court. This is the telling story. They make excuses for the fraud. They continue with foreclosures, they continue to kick families to the curb. They destroy and deflate neighborhoods . I will not pay for fraud. They know but will not admit.

    Honest Banks do not inflate appraisals.
    Honest banks do not loan money who do not qualify.
    Honest banks do not design loans to fail.
    Honest banks do not destroy neighborhoods.
    Honest banks do not deflate pledged collateral.
    Honest banks do not bet against the borrower.

    This country does not want anyone to succeed. The system (Congress) is corrupt and see us as sub human. Obama continues the cover up. Just remember the debates when he was asked what caused the financial crisis. His comment ” Uggh Homeowners bought too much house.” Hey A$$ for a president I can pay for my house. But not for fraud You and your banker buddies deflated and destroyed my neighborhood. “It is called destruction of property”. Obama you need to grow some balls and stand up for home owners.

  14. Just want to add I despise all of the isms….socialism, communism….and any RE DOING of failure is sadistic. This Obama Revisionism crap, disguised as nice sounding words like….lets just move forward…hope & change is no more than complete communism…..It is another criminal cover up for fraud to reinstitute more fraud…I believe in a Constitutional Republic where the people rule and the rule of law applies to everyone. No foreign investors should ever be allowed to invest in any of our natural resources or in anything the people pay for. That creates tyranny & oppression….take your money out America. Stop shopping & using their crappy credit. Everytime you use their credit you are giving these FED/BANK investor crooks a license to steal…..they are robbing the U.S. Treasury Department and pocketing all of your payments as usury evertime you use their credit. They are the entitlement people who believe we are put here solely to be their slaves. Stop allowing them to rob us into bankruptcy. We have to stop enabling our abusers. Boycott Christmas and all of their manufactured holidays because these crooks owe us gazillions. Stop shopping in their multinational Corp and paying homage to massive fraud and criminality they commit in our names with our signatures.

  15. The American people in general have lost their free will to fight. That is because they were never properly educated. When you are poorly educated, you will fall for just about anything. I am talking about all of the college educated including the ivy league college educated. Even those people are very misinformed about what freedom and independence really is. They believe working for these tyrants is freedom. They are well paid to disinform because they are misinformed. Those who call Obama a socialist just don’t get it at all. We have been socialists for a long time. Ever since the 16th amendment and F.D.R. It was all well planned by our foreign enemies. Obama is a re-socialist… a complete communist. The failure of socialism NEVER happened…we were hijacked & robbed of all of our wealth by the crony capitalists. Both the foreign and domestic FED investors & Bank investors have hijacked the free markets in America with shadow banking….and off balance sheet investment scams via the Wall Street bums. The result of that is our enemies are controlling us by investment scams and are invested in everything we fund & pay for upfront. This was allowed by the traitor politicians from within. Make the crooks produce the documents that prove they paid for anything …. they can’t, because they don’t. These were dirty deeds done dirt cheap and they don’t own this country, and they never have. When they destroy what we build and offer help, tell them to go back to hell where they came from. We don’t need their kind of help. They have been doing the same scam all through history….they destroy so they can steal. They have no souls. The victims of all of these so called natural disasters that are happening nationwide should be demanding the U.S. Military aid them and tell Obama and his FEMA black op federales to get the hell out of town.

  16. Ask yourselves… would you have registered criminal fraud? These were not securities …… these sheisters were selling investments in their gambles. This was all done off the record on the qt ….. That proves the 2008 stock market crash was a giant fraud if there are no records of these transactions and subsequent sales. How could they Insider trade & crash things that never existed? Ask for the prospectus….than you got them red handed.

  17. Read the law a d may I offer this and it’s in my appeal : clear and convincing evidence is defined as ” the measure or degree of proof that will produce in the mind of the trier of fact a firm belief or conviction as to the truth of the allegations sought to be estaished” this standard has been described as falling between the preponderance standard of civil proceedings and reasonable doubt standard of criminal proceedings.
    See also rule 702 fed rules of evidence
    However it states that “the expert witness is the most common source there are other techniques for supplying it.”

  18. Lots of luck finding those filings LOL…I have yet to see any S-4 forms registering any such securities….wonder where all the records on all of those illegitamite 10-k, 10 Q, 11- k, 8k and 2k-1 filings can be dug up….?

  19. You guys are still lame as ever. Split personality LOL….God forbid someone tells the truth. Get a grip, it’s not such a huge deal. News flash…lots of Americans know about the Vatican and the other lies.

  20. Its like split personaliities

  21. @MS
    re expert witness reports and testimony

    i would think an expert could testify as to standard acctg procedure—where that can be made relevant. For example i have a set of scedules from AHM 2004-4 SEC filings 8K——the columns on total MBS balances are about half the sum of the lines above. This to me is evidence of poor oversight practices sloppy sloppy—and to extent it can be said to permeate the entitre process —make all statements unreliable–then its relevant–but i think i need an acctg expert to state that it is not good industry practice for SEC filings to fail to add up

    now we might think that is obvious –a matter of judicial notice–but i put in front of a self professed CPA in these postings and that person not only failed to see the lack of add up –ie column did not foot but also had no sense of the importance–obviously no expert—just a relatively ignorant layman–so if i had a jury –they might not understand columns are supposed to add and i cant argue it and be sure i wont get shut down–it might go right by as it did the purported CPA on this site–

    but experts on securitization–i dont know one way or the other—-i guess id rather have a report and if its denied as expert testimony–call it legal argument

  22. Of course it is DCB. She’s just stuck a little closer to her legal stuff until she couldn’t stand it any longer. Now comes the four horsemen riding off towards the vatican and the fed in bed with the treasury crap all over again….

    It was a short respite…..

  23. DCB – I was quoting NG in the editorial …

    Expert witnesses are persons who are qualified,by actual experience and on the job careful study, in executing tasks ….to form definite opinions conclusions etc.

    U.S. Supreme Court observed that the reliability of a scientific technique may turn on whether the technique can be and has been tested; whether it has been subjected to peer review and publication; and whether there is a high rate of error or standards controlling its operation The law deems persons having no such experience to be incapable of forming accurate expert opinions or drawing correct conclusions.

    Thus, if specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness is qualified as an expert by first hand , procedural and verified application before knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data; (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case. [see Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137, 149-152, 119 S.Ct. 1167, 143 L.Ed.2d 238 (1999),] .

    Several courts have stated that the true criterion in determining the qualification of expert witnesses is not whether they employ their knowledge and skill professionally or commercially, but whether the jury can receive appreciable help from them on the particular subject in issue. Many courts also require the witness to exhibit sufficient knowledge of the subject matter before his or her opinion to go to the jury.

    Chief, from what I have seen here there is no one qualified , remotely to testify in a case involving subject matter claims. You got an attorney traveling the country testifying in MERS Claims … If you attack Mers You will lose….lock stock and Barrel. Mers is an ally and can be the e most valuable tool in your arsenal ….

    ….ignorance are bliss.

    You’re experts are frustrated with the fact basic general ledgers are allowed to continue their advantage [Save the attack back at me and try to comprehend this ….] The lender is a tax payer corporation who formed a REIT its first year. The Seller is the corporation subsidiary formed as a tax shelter LP. The tax payer corp. transfers the mortgage “whole” to the LP as a creditor for a Third Part Originator (NG calls brokers – whatever…) Do not attack the Broker “TPO” – You cause the original NON COMPLIANT tax shelter scheme to fall unto a lawful M&A (good going NG) Do not attack the “Transferor” under the Purchase and Sale agreement or the “Transferee”. Never ever acknowledge servicing unless you know what SERVICING and MASTER SERVICING really is (under SEC guidelines and enforcement). Know what MersCorp does and how it does it. .. . Understand Bailment laws, Bailee’s agreements, related indexes Swaps, bailee’s acceptance letter, Curtailment is securitization; Current Indexes movement , Private E-exchanges with Euro / Asian Banks, “spot” transitional borrowing by US banks and Fed funds (Trillions) secured by ASC 320 FAS 140 capital accounts , how mortgages allow massive capital to invigorate the markets, and moves capital like a mass tides ebb and flow ….
    It’s not crime just exploited ….(until you get into the real dirt these fools thought they would never be challenged on …

    My point – Mers Arguments are going to make a court Yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnn! Linda Green and win a house – Right .
    I mean compared to the inside job the street has continued to remain tight lipped about and conceal. If you think I am bluffing – Good,but find some great revelations and insight (and insider mea culpa) – read Hank Paulson’s book (Auto biography that rambles into stuff it should not) . Good luck

  24. this is ivent isnt it

  25. Anyone watch the Geithner and Boehner interview on FOX today..? Sadly a big portion of the country believes the lies these traitors are feeding them…. that we owe these crooks more money. They are hurling us right into fraudulently induced bankruptcy. They are going to destroy us.

  26. The origination fraud.

  27. @ST
    you said “Original crimes”

    What is an original crime?.

  28. As I have stated, this is a vast and monolithic conspiracy. I can agree with you about the lawlessness, however, the mass corruption that is aiding & abetting this coverup is enormous in its scope. That is why the real reason for this is being hidden from the masses along with who the real players are hiding behind the scenes of this. We are up against a lot more than mortgage fraud. This is really about the theft of all of our freedom and independence by communist investors who hate our freedom and independence & …they despise our Constitution. That is why we do need to keep invoking all of our legal rights under all of the laws of this land. I believe just as strongly we also need to call out these liars who are continuously bombarding us with more lies and deception. That is more criminal IMHO, than the Original crimes.

  29. @STRIPES

    I do not now why you have felt compelled to leave behind the thoughtful and precise legal points supported by citations and have jumped off into extremist rants—you can do it —but now you have become irrelevant–sounding a lot like some wackos that used to populate this site with a lot of crap

  30. The truth is, they should have been arrested and all of their ill gotten gains seized during their last manufactured great depression….none of the wars, nor the assassination of J.F.K would have ever happened if not for the traitors from within America. This treason continues up to today.

  31. Masterservicer is quite the story teller and knows the truth is…the title cos never secured the legal lien for the crooked investors because their banks never paid the Treasury back for the original credit they took out in our names. Thankfully there were some honest Americans who have morals.

  32. @MS

    Thanks for the comment–but its a bit over my head–
    After an explanation that i did not fully understand due to its brevity; You said; “In my experience normal practice in the industry would be to provide such information along with the documentation, or the documentation would be considered incomplete and would not be accepted by a title company or a bank that was refinancing a property”

    Could i implore you to describe exactly what information we should be looking for that should be in the hands of the title floks or whoever? and who should have it if one is gobe?.

  33. BTW masterservicer…..I am completely unimpressed with Billionaires & Trillionaires who took unfair advantage of the American people in every way, shape & form imaginable in order to hoard everything for their greedy selves.

  34. Masterservicer knows the banks were simply swapping credit slips and selling investments in credit they issued in property they never held legal title to because of the origination fraud and the fact they turned the issuance of credit into stocks & bonds was scurrilous to say the least. As a result, the investors via the FED, their banks, servicers and attorney networks have no legal right to buy, swap, sell, or take anything from, or in the names of, the American people. They should have had their wealth seized and been imprisoned before they manufactured that stock market crash in 08. I blame the traitor politicians.

  35. You never cease to amaze me masterservicer….Why don’t private auditors take a wallk over to the Treasury and audit them all the way back to 1982…? I don’t give a damn about bailment or how many trillions these crooked investors invested in this scam. Show me the receipt that says the Originator payed the U.S. TREASURY back BEFORE any of these transactions occurred as the law requires otherwise all of the investor assets should be seized and they should all go to prison .. for life. 3 felonies=life in prison.

  36. I believe this is the reason the investors in this scam on both sides want everyone working on their Govt slave plantation. They can watch us, watching them. They are control freaks. I like to call them our frenemies but they are more our enemies than our friends. You know them by their actions and their lies. They can lie straightfaced without a flinch. Many are simply victims of brainwashing or need a job. It is an awful thing how they have managed to weaken so many americans so severely they are willing to accept almost anything. They dont have a clue that in exchange they are losing all of their freedoms and all of their independence. They don’t get the fact that property ownership and self employment….self sustainability is freedom. It’s a damned shame.

  37. “We could find no evidence supplied by the “lender” that shows that a payment or value of any kind was transferred to anyone in connection with the funding or purchase of the subject loan.

    **consideration was provided and a counter argument here defeats the householder arguments for a novae needed to foreclose. By payment are you referring to cash….what does a depositors account hold ….so there was no liquidity ? Fed did all this with no payments from world investors……

    In my experience normal practice in the industry would be to provide such information along with the documentation, or the documentation would be considered incomplete and would not be accepted by a title company or a bank that was refinancing a property.

    Bailment darling —you were never in the industry poser – or you would understand bailment over bafflement….Have you traded $ 1 billion …walk me through it BUBBA ….please

  38. I agree Dc..we need alot of true America patriots who get it. Unfortunately, the globalist brainwashing campaign has done a lot of damage. Many don’t see the vast criminal conspiracy at work here or don’t want to see it because they are not feeling it yet. They feel a false sense of security with these traitors. My own mother puts her full faith & confidence in obama. It will be a rude awakening one day for all of them.

  39. Christine and the stopa post te re credit card settlements. I did this years ago after co
    Ing out of bk. settled my debt not difficult but make sure they fax you an official signed letter of the offer and that the debt is settled in full and be sure you are, in fact payi g the right person. Sadly because of environment we find ourselves in the predators of the predators are scamming so just be diligent when dealing with the ” debt Settlers”

  40. @STRIPES

    I was a govt data compiler so to speak for a few years recently–i have a sense of the desire to get info —get it even if we dont know what to do with it because if we bump it against enough data tables, we might find something we didnt expect–all the time this happens

    now for one–i think its appropriate ro demand that certain people in sensitive areas of endeavor have the chips —-id start with people who are licensed to be Bain type carried interest brokers. The price of the privileged status and 15% tax rate is constant surveillance–the chip records GPS so we can read where hes been while secreting stolen money wherever

    there are many things that can be done to give tools to combat crime—not street crime which is where the emphasis is today –but real syndicate stuff

    The chips should be conditioned on use of a privilege–waiver of a right—attorneys—bankers next class–weve seen that bankers have more power to wreak havoc than ted bundy ever dreamed off—more than bin laden

    Im not employed by anygovt today–but private investigation for bounty is a good gig–it can take the burden off govt and privatize law enforcement–these guys love privatization right so lets give it to em
    give bounty hunters expanded poers to get access to info to prove crimes

    We need to be able to establish patterns of criiminal conduct using “link analysis” —thus if like to know that my person of interest was in the presence of another so i can expand the group involved in the conspiracy. The use of eavesdropping equipment on cellphones and hacking on computers is already here–but we need to be able to put people together who avoid these investigation tools by getting together in an unbugged room –the glf course has been a mainstay–people think these guys go there to relax –BS—they go there to avoid survellance–ugs

    we need a way to reach them–to find the low level crook that will testify against the higher ones

    Eg LO Brown is now most likely spilling her guts about the conversations with client servicers who were using DOCX services to patch over holes in their own documentation–eg suppose you as a debt collector have only an unidorsed note that was supposed to have been placed in a pool by indorsement per the PSA and REMIC rules 5-7 years ago—-so you need something that will establish that the party paying you has an interest in the note that they have asked you to collect on—-Who do yoy call–a hint –not Ghostbusters—DOCX

    The assignment of mortgage is a perfect way to conceal a forged note indorsement–its bolder–looks more govtmental–more authoritative—its much more attention getting than a plain old unnotarized indorsement undated note–where indorsement is by stamp and a squiggle of an initial—-so scare the bejjebers out of a poor homeowner and his atty by filing the elaborate official-looking assignment –DOT –or Release of Mortgage etc

    The note lurks with little or no attention in the background

    the problem was that Brown foolishly did the same thing her clients were trying to conceal–forged documents—they did not expect that–which is why they are so pissed at her and why the govt and her clients have thrown the book at her and offered her up as a sacrificial lamb—she failed her part of an elaborate cover up of undated forged indorsements and lack of possession of real ORIGINIAL notes which are required under UCC to sieze a property without putting up a lost note affidavit and bond

  41. Sometimes the letters mean nothing. The investors of the defunct trust are and have their own servicing groups. The problem why homeowners are falling behind as I have discovered is a number of issues,
    1. The Mayors know fully what is going on and promote the fraud , with the full knowledge they are promoting the lie to purchase Bonds in these homes.
    2. The Mayor has permitted the Shadow Banking Industry to fully take control of all communications of the Homeowner and the Banks.
    What do I mean by this ?
    The phone lines are being redirected to a third party.
    The Mail is being redirected to a third party.
    3. You then become a target for the State. These things are all State controlled.
    4. The Legal System knows full well the Banks do not have the Note or the Deed. However, agreements were made with the Mayors to allow them to back these loans with Bonds. This is the Pension Funds.
    5. Mayors are trying to get control of the Police departments for a reason. One the Pension Funds , control over the crime with the Mayors declaring Martial Law when it all hits the fan.

    Is anyone in St.Louis tired of the fraudulent foreclosures?
    Why aren’t the state officials demanding the Banks to have their documents?
    Because the know they don’t and the loans are all voided,
    It is the State that is reclaiming Property that are in voided Trust and reselling the loans back to the homeowners under such fraud of Modifications.
    They are refinancing these loans and resecuritizing.

    WHY NOT ASK THE MAYOR HIS INMVOLVEMENT IN THESE FRAUDULENT FORECLOSURES? Mediation is what he has pushed.
    Why do you need mediation? You don’t. Simply apply the law.

    ** no note or deed , no foreclosure. It is the Law !

  42. BSE …I see the Obama administration and their federal agencies as complete commies…….and Congress, the Senate and the Governors and Mayors as a bunch of Roman soldiers working for both sides. They should have all been forced to resign by now. They are a bunch of traitors and freedom haters.

  43. @ALL re year end disclosures

    If you file a clear cogent and well supported complaint with a regulatory agency about some entity’s non-compliant conduct, next step is to send a cover letter and a copy of the complaint to the audit committee members of the company board of directors and the outside auditor—before year end.

    the Sarbanes Oxley provisions mandate that such items be investigated and quantified–to determine if they should be disclosed–to investors in the company stocks and bonds

    they duck and dodge these things so you must as a practical matter send a complete copy to each individual—the audit company magr of the audit–look at the annual report to identify the individuals who sit on the audit committees –the CEO. CFO-audit manager—-copy your congressman and others so you can prove when and what you sent

    if they do not disclose it–their own shareholders can set up class actions for failure to disclose –if the information later results in stock price deteriorating

    this is what my local Congressman Mike Oxley from Findlay Ohio made into law–it is his legacy and that of his supporters –he earned his big office on the Hill

    use this device–copy as many regulators as you can at all levels of govt to make sure you get the ones with jurisdiction over the issues that you raise–above all keep it clean–no rants “just the facts maam”

  44. No secrecy order. Just exercising my right to free speech. There are a lot who may not like that of course. I see the Jesuits (the vatican assassins) are winning this war in the U.S. with Obama in power and that is the dreaded complete communism. That final battle will be decided in WW III unless we all willingly accept complete communism and the microchip which is highly unlikely.

  45. I am just a concerned natural born U.S. Citizen Dc.. who is caught in the crossfire like many are. The power struggle from within the Vatican goes way back in history. The Aldobrandinis -v – the Borgias or you can spell that Borja. The Italian mob v the Spanish Italian mob. The Jesuits v the Romans. The commies v the socialists.

  46. @ALL
    C and Stopa exactly right about end of year—of course not all have a 12/31 eOY–some have fiscal years that differ. but generally they are correct about 12/31

    the Annual Report must reflect disclosures about cases that maymaterially affect future income and cash for the banks—same re regulatory issues

    thus if they have notary regulatory issues –somebody filed a complaint with regulator–it must be disclosed if the auditors thinj its material

    one benefot of TBTF–is that they are soooo big that the materiality excuse for non-disclosure jumps—so they can conceal more issues of regulatory non-compliance and cases that might be embaressing /costly

    so now is the time to file cogent well-supported complaints with regulators and amend lawsuits–its a bit like battelship game–you may know something is wrong–but you dont know if its material–you must shoot and cross your fingers you will get a hit

  47. Interesting Christine. I see this as a power struggle from within the power structure between the fed & bank investors. An investor war. They all believe they own the place but in reality, they don’t. We are caught in the crossfire.

  48. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/02/opinion/sunday/the-mortgage-challenge.html?_r=0

    The Mortgage Challenge

    Published: December 1, 2012 25 Comments

    Facebook
    Twitter
    Google+
    Save
    E-mail
    Share
    Print
    Reprints

    The biggest economic policy error of President Obama’s first term was the failure to effectively address foreclosures. The administration’s efforts were far too limited for far too long. By favoring the voluntary cooperation of banks in reducing monthly payments for hard-pressed borrowers, they did more to shield the banks from losses than to help homeowners and stabilize the market.

    Readers’ Comments

    Share your thoughts.
    Post a Comment »
    Read All Comments (25) »

    Last year, as the campaign drew near, the administration began to reshape its flagging strategy by promoting more refinancings and principal reductions. But it is unclear whether the new efforts will pan out — and, even if they do, they still will not match the scale of the problem.

    Recent signs of a housing recovery aside, nearly three million loans are now in or near foreclosure, according to Moody’s Analytics. In addition, some five million borrowers who are current in their payments have high-rate mortgages that they have not refinanced, in part because of excessive bank fees. In all, nearly 12 million borrowers collectively owe $600 billion more on their mortgages than their homes are worth, a loss of wealth and a load of debt that make a strong and steady economic recovery all but impossible.

    The question now is whether Mr. Obama will use his second term to get mortgage relief right and, in the process, put the economy on a firm footing. A first test of his resolve will be the swift nomination of a new director for the agency that oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-controlled mortgage companies that own or back most mortgages. The acting director, Edward DeMarco, has opposed administration plans to reduce principal balances on underwater loans, even though research shows that principal reduction is generally the most effective form of relief. The fact that he is still in charge casts doubt on the administration’s commitment to debt forgiveness. A nominee who supports such relief would underscore the administration’s determination to improve and expand its relief efforts. Senate Democrats could help by revising the chamber’s rules to make sure the new nominee is not blocked by a filibuster.

    A new director also could revise onerous rules that have prevented some borrowers from taking advantage of today’s low rates to refinance. Big banks won’t like the needed revision, because it would curb the fees and rates they charge on refinancings by fostering competition with midsize and smaller banks.

    While new leadership at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is a key to more relief, the push for more help also could be strengthened through a pair of bills that would expand refinancings and principal reductions, introduced by Senator Jeff Merkley, Democrat of Oregon, and by two other Senate Democrats, Barbara Boxer of California and Robert Menendez of New Jersey. The administration supports the bills, but what’s needed is a strategy for getting them passed, including the use of the president’s bully pulpit.

    A sound mortgage-relief agenda also requires an enforcement plan. Last January, Mr. Obama promised an investigation into mortgage abuses to hold wrongdoers accountable and generate fines that could be used for providing mortgage relief. Vastly more resources are needed to support the investigation, which so far has yielded two pending cases against big banks by the New York attorney general, Eric Schneiderman, and two settlements by the Securities and Exchange Commission. In his recent budget, Mr. Obama has asked for $55 million, but in the deficit-obsessed Congress, the money won’t be forthcoming unless the president makes it a priority.

    The White House must also champion strong national standards for banks to follow when processing mortgage payments, defaults and foreclosures. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is expected to release new rules next year, but early indications are that the rules may be weak, allowing for many of the problems and abuses that have long plagued the foreclosure process. The White House cannot direct the rule-making process, but it can send a message to the banks and regulators by setting high and transparent standards, using as a template rules that it helped create in a recent legal settlement with big banks over foreclosure abuses.

    There is also one thing that the administration must not do: get sidetracked into premature discussions about reprivatizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The future of those two companies — and reviving the private mortgage market — is important, and the White House has put forth sound recommendations. But the foreclosure crisis, and its damage to homeowners and the economy, is still paramount. In the next term, the focus should be on debt reduction, refinancing, enforcement and true consumer protection.

  49. @STRIPES

    Out of curiosity, what is your background? educationally and business? are you afraid they will discover your identity?
    are you under a secrecy order of some type?

  50. Vatican is mafia right?

    who is the other side?

  51. Resolving Bank Disputes, Credit Card Debts in 2012

    Posted on November 30th, 2012 by Mark Stopa

    As the end of 2012 draws near, it may not matter to you if your old credit card debts and other bank obligations remain outstanding as the calendar flips to 2013. What difference does a new calendar year make? None, right?

    Well, it might not matter to you or me, but let me assure you … it matters to the banks. You see, this is the time of year when the banks and credit card companies are scrambling. They’re trying to get bad debts off their books before the end of the year so their books are cleaner for 2013. Don’t believe me? Trust me – I’ve started seeing it with the volume of unsolicited offers I’ve seen in my cases in the past few days, some with specific instructions that the offers have to be accepted and completed before the end of 2012.

    So how can this matter for you?

    If you owe $20,000 in credit card debt that you haven’t paid in two years, offer $5,000 as a one-time cash payment – to be made before the end of the year.

    If you’ve been saving to try to pay a second mortgage, now is the time to offer 10 or 20 cents on the dollar – to be paid by December 31.

    Yes, deals like this are possible any time of year. The next 31 days, though, are probably your best chance of getting the best possible deal. In fact, the closer we get to the end of the year, and the greater your ability to pay cash, the more likely you are to get a good deal.

    So while you’re enjoying the holidays, take a minute and re-assess your finances. If you’re able, make an offer to try to resolve some of your debts before the end of the year. With the banks motivated to clean up their books heading into 2013, you might be surprised at the deal you can get.
    Mark Stopa
    http://www.stayinmyhome.com

  52. @STRIPES

    Let me tell you how bad it can be;
    In 2004 i was induced to enter into a refi loan by promises of a year-long teaser rate of 1.25%—-given a years’ payment coupons for the payments calced using that low rate. My insurance immediately went up—i had no idea why. No one would tell me more than it was because i had taken out that kind of loan. it took 6 years for me to find out.

    The teaser was taken away immediately although i couldnt tell it–i received no billing statements. the benefit reduced interest that had been the bait n switch bargain i was expecting was on the lender books [old AHMSI] added to my principal. I became a subprime borrower with my very 1st coupon payment ….!!!!

    About the same time my inurance agent related the bad news about the huge jump in insurance premiums –i tried to set up an autodeduct for my coupon payments with AHMSI—–refused, I was shocked. Whoever heard of a collector that did not want auto-deduct?????

    I did not figure that out for many years either—diversion of payments–lost payments–etc not possible with auto deduct right.

    that was for starters

    then came double tracking–i got a very interesting job in govt–problem was 75% in DC–so i had to move and pay sky high rent there –begged new AHMSI to let me do short sale or just walk away from the debt–evoking guffaws of laughter from Luis Trejo in AHMSI California office not to worry “Iv never heard of us pursuing a deficiency”, he assured me. yeah right.

    so i moved took the job—and the real fraud started

    A complaint attaching a forged [per DOJ plea] DOCX assignment plus an unindorsed note —-

    upon questioning the assignment, the opposing counsel filed a motion to enforce a settlement whereby i must deliver a deed to my house in exchange for ….well that part was never explained–i guess the agreement never got that far…

    Problem with the agreement–it was supposedly verbally made with a sprinkling of emails —by my attorney….!!!! he was subpoenoed to testify against me….!!! I had expressly limited the scope of his engagement to prevent this ….

    they dragged me into court to force this on me

    they set off the actual tevidenceiary hearing —and worked out a complex agreement in a couple hours starting with their deal—-

    subsequently they violated virtually every pronmise they made–except payment of key money–which did not even cover atty fees

    the preservers caused/allowed the property to freeze –the servicer offered me a cut if i would file the insurance claim

    it gets worse from there

    today they are seeking judicial intervention to sieze control over my farm next door because it is easier to get access to the house through my farm than to complete a driveway across their own property wgich was effectively taken from me using forged documents–so now my farm which was not subject to their lien is under siege —and i face risk of an injunction not to interfere with their use of my farm

    how bad is that?

  53. The quiet title theory is a really good take DC. It kind of is but they are being really deceptive about it. The Judge agreed with me this could very well be a dispute between the servicer and the title company.

  54. The black, white, grey popes ….the Italian black nobility -v- the Spanish black nobility. World powers have taking sides. Socialism v communism.

  55. I see it as a power struggle for control of the world and the Vatican from within the Vatican. It is happening globally. A -v- B They both want to rule the world.

  56. @STRIPES

    The german natl audit group –like GAO i guess and OMB rolled into one has demanded to audit the Fed reserve gold holdings because BOE, FED and france hold all the german gold—-post WW2 thing—germany is 2nd largest holder of gold —-suspicious that its not there–they want to sample it all—-i suspect they will end up repatriatiing it and gold prices will skyrocket as they did when Vens did their little bit—

    germans are not all that trustful of new york and london

  57. Iv heard that he gold in the basement at tradecenter disappeared–removed by recyclers –mafia run operations—

  58. @STRIPES

    you said; “I consider 9/11 an act of insurrection against the United States and the manufactured stock market collapse in 2008, and the subsequent nationalization of the FED and their TBTF corp an act of rebellion ”

    OK I understand the stock market and TBTF stuff well enough to agree but i fail to see the linkup to 911???? Are you saying there is a global jewish conspiracy?

  59. This is why there have been no real investigations into 9/11.. and no audits of the Treasury …..or the TBTF… no accounting as to where all of our wealth went…. the stock market collapse of 2008 was confirmed to have been caused by Insider Trading by the Fed banks and their investors. This is why we are nearly bankrupt as a nation and are on the precipice of losing all of our freedom and independence to our foreign enemies. The American people have been silenced from all of their rights by a Government that has been hijacked by a Global crime syndicate who are controlling our demise by way of corrupt politicians who are acting as one agency disguised as many different agencies and are acting like a tyranny and are robbing and oppressing the American citizenry into complete communism. Too many Americans are in denial of this because they have been very insidiously given creature comforts in the form of entitlements that have already been stolen from them by the POLITICIANS, the FED, the BANKS and their INVESTORS via a giant Wall Street ponzi scheme. This is bankrupting all of us. This credit fraud that has been committed against every American citizen by these entities is being carefully hidden from most Americans. They are all in for a big surprise when they all wake up broke and homeless one day soon in the land their fathers conquered. Then it will be anarchy and manufactured hell on earth by these crooks. No new tax named obamacare, which is really a Global tax in the form of nationalized healthcare, or anything else will save us. This massive fraud debt created by Wall Street is unsustainable and in the end will create complete communism.

  60. I was referring to the second half only…But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave, but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void. I consider 9/11 an act of insurrection against the United States and the manufactured stock market collapse in 2008, and the subsequent nationalization of the FED and their TBTF corp an act of rebellion against the United States. As far as the emancipation of slaves ties into this.. reparations being give to those who feel a sense of entitlement as a wronged party is based on a far flung theory that the citizenry had something to do with harm done to any person or persons is diabolical and maniacal. Where was the due process that said WE THE PEOPLE in the Private Sector harmed the PUBLIC SECTOR…? To enslave an entire nation to save a select group is not only unjust and oppressive, it is terrorism and tyranny. These imposters who have hijacked America with these crazy ideologies not based in law or fact are dangerous psychopaths.

  61. is this a form of quiet title–pretty hard to grasp on two lines–i need to run up my antenna a couple notches

  62. @STRIPES–i think you are using a bit of ppetic license there–is this the same person that posted earlier?

    Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

  63. I forgot to add…the following persons they joined as defendants are the defendants….

  64. I will site for you the exact wording…..Plaintiff by its attorneys States as follows….Plaintiff files this complaint pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/15-1101 et seq, to foreclose the mortgage, trust deed or other conveyance in the nature of a mortgage (hereinafter called “Mortgage”) hereinafter described and joins the following persons as defendants ….name of original mortgagee, trustee, or grantee in the mortgage……Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as Nominee for failed bank.

  65. So in reality, the nationalization of the GSE’S was treason because the nationalization of the FDIC….THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK….and all of their TBTF cohorts posing as American institutions robbed US…and are in reality, fictitious payees because of the Origination Fraud….Remember….NO EX POST FACTO LAWS….but the traitor politicians used DODD-FRANK……..fascism to allow TBTF…..our foreign enemies to bankrupt us. The bailouts were not law….and the preservation of public pension funds by Amendment 14; section 4 is not assumable by either the United States or any State nor is any debt or obligation that is incurred by insurrection or rebellion against the United States; all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

  66. the fictitious payed has joined me the defendant to foreclose on MERS..

    ok i see typo—but how can a fictitious payee–you mean originator–im losing this –is there a case#

  67. In my case, the fictitious payed has joined me the defendant to foreclose on MERS..there are surely millions of these fraudulent actions nationwide.

    payed?–is this a mistatement?

    who is who?

  68. Bernanke pretends to be a separate entity from the banks who were proxies for the FED…the FED were the Issuers of the Original Bills of Credit they issued to us….insured by us through them by them….the PUBLIC/PRIVATE GSES who were in fact the FDIC in disguise. It is all fraud by the FED and it is destroying us. This is treason at every level being played out by the Politicians who are pretending to be dumb about what has occurred here.

  69. Correct typo….fictitious payee.

  70. The point about Article 3 is huge. It is perfection of a negotiable instrument. It creates a security. Without that, all of these entities are fictitous; IMPOSTERS. What the FED did by buying back worthless instruments and null mortgages from the their own issuers (banks) was fraud because of Fraud in the Factum. MERS is a big part of fraudclosuregate..In my case, the fictitious payed has joined me the defendant to foreclose on MERS..there are surely millions of these fraudulent actions nationwide.

  71. MERS ASSIGNMENT of mortgage is a “mere distraction” Se Bank of New York vs raftogianis

  72. @STRIPES

    IV never put much interest in MERS ‘legal effect–as far as i could ever tell it is just a registry—crap in crap out—no legal effect. it records interests in real estate–not notes—–and its really giving it a lot of credit to say recording–its really just a placeholder in a commercial system–of no legal effect—i do not see how mers has anything to do with art 3

  73. “Fronti nullifides”….no reliance can be made upon appearance…. “Nulla Poena Sine Lege”……..no penalty without law…… Nullum Crimen Nulla Poena Sine Lege Poenali Praevia Lege Poenali …. No crime, no punishment without a previous penal law. No ex post facto laws. Says Roman Law.

  74. “Nimia potestas, nulla potestas.”

  75. For example..via MERS, how did mortgages get transferred from say ..Chase to Citi…with no legal assignment ever being recorded or the Original note and mortgage never being returned to us..? Who paid off the Original payee…..who was the U.S. Treasury Dept.? No one did…the American people were robbed…from every end imaginable.

  76. Think about it DC…MERS is not a bank. Therefore, MERS could not legally transfer anything. Article 8 governs investment securities…Article 4 governs banks….Article 9 governs secured transactions. Article 3 governs transactions involving security instruments….Article 3 is Perfection via Article 5/3 …..Performance…Consideration …….Delivery and Acceptance…by the Issuer of the Original Bill of Credit. Evidenced by the Legal Assignment…however, that legal assignment would be evidence of fraud by the Issuer because they turned those mortgages & notes into stocks and bonds…..and the Original paid notes and mortgages from the Issuer …the Originator, should be stamped paid and in our possession…..because we were the makers of those unindorsed checks they cashed. Securitization can only be performed by the Originator and only if they actually sold the loans….which they did not…… MERS only duty was to track servicers. They were not holders ….nor did they ever have legal authority of a holder…Successor and Assigns is hogwash.

  77. …..MERS hid fraudulent transfers….credit swaps——-Now im not imaginative enough to see the connection here. I can see how the MERS /DOCX type stuff fits together to patch the hole left by failure to timely negotiate by indorsement—-so that a forged indorsement is concealed by filing a copy of unindorsed note plus an assignment of mortgage, i see the natural fit there—but im just not seeing far enough to get an image of MERS covering up these other elements. Im not denying it –i would appreciate some additional explanation to understand the point–which sounds important

  78. Citations were not needed there. The proof is in the public records and the Original filings. Knowledge about the intricacies of these transfers and sales is not needed. This is basic property law…first year law students know this. The fact is these were no longer negotiable instruments once the origination fraud occurred….that is why there is Fraud in the Factum in every aspect of this crime spree…. from loan mods to refis to fraudclosures…..MERS hid fraudulent transfers….credit swaps. This was quite simply a complex money laundering operation to commit the theft of our wealth …independence and freedom by non-disclosure. This continues to this day.

  79. on this last one you left out citations

  80. @STRIPES

    re what judges should or should not be expected to know.
    each time a person interfaces with the judge in her case, the party should think about the perception and foundation the judge has.

    We are taking about a complex interlocking sets of criminal enterprises. Not necessarily one large controlled conspiracy but many little ones operating amidst non-criminal operations.

    This is common for criminal enterprise–hide in plain sight/ The private lables certainly were. There was the DOCX piece. There are others.

    But a judge in a county court up until recently was not expected to unravel the intricacies of complex white collar schemes occurring far away. It is not fair to expect so much of the vaste majority–it takes awhiile.

    When predator frauders operate it takes a while to figure out just how badly the beat up everybody–its still rolling out.

    The county judge must rely on well-known facts and expert opinions found in Dept of justice investigations and pleadings –for example–who would have guessed that Brown was conducting forgery training sessions? That means it is pervasive to do forgery but only brown has had an entire organizations work product condemned. the judges can look to those documents as authority on fraud fact finding. The badges of forgery.

    So now it us for advocates to deny the documents in issue with plausibility.

  81. Point #1 and the only point that really matters…the banks never sold the loans ….. they swapped credit slips….what the so called private labels …..like Goldman, Lehman, Merill and others as well as the GSE’S did was investment scam in property that the American people paid for. They are all proxies and they all work for the FED investors and the Bank investors…the Billionaire Boys Club had their greedy fingers in everyones pie and it was business as usual….they never paid for anything and they give nothing of value in return. The politicians were all in on the big swindle of all of the livelihoods, businesses, wealth, freedom and independence of the citizenry.

  82. If the judges are not well schooled in how this scam worked, they shouldn’t be sitting up there taking away the property of WE THE PEOPLE who pay for everything in this country upfront at the origination. Being unqualified to make such life altering decisions as taking a citizens property away…..is fraud by misrepresentating yourself as a judge …..a so called LEGAL EXPERT… This amounts to a criminal act of stealing a Natural Born U.S. Citizens freedom and independence …and it is unexcusable IMHO…..These judges have continuously ruled against the citizenry on a legal theory…that a legal binding contract exists that has no legal basis or law in fact. That is disgraceful, abhorrent behavior.

  83. The securitization part never happened. The courts are trying to enforce a legally unenforceable contract…Standing is a critical issue going to the foundational basis of Constitutional Government, (Raines -v- Byrd). The text of Federalist NO. 78 by Hamilton counterbalanced the tone of “judicial supremacist” and does by no means suppose a theory of a superiority to the legislative power. It only supports the power of the people is superior to both, (Marbury -V- Madison). Don’t forget, WE THE PEOPLE are Amendment IX…the maker of all of the notes. Those fraudclosing are entitlement people who can’t let go of the fact they were sold nothing by Wall Street and they own nothing. They are control freaks and the only power they wield is fear. The only control they have is in what we don’t know.

  84. ponits made by Ester,
    if a judge is not well versed/knowledgable of a particular subject matter , then he is ouitside his SMJ to rule wouldnt you say, so he takes the ruling under adviselment/ consultation with those that do know or, hello – discovery and fact finders – a jury. no excuses

  85. There is no question the crime is evident. There is fraud and the beauty of the American Dream has been stolen from the people. The people have been violated by La Banko Nostra who have chosen the Courts, the Judicial Branch, the true balance, as the get away vehicle for their crimes. While politicians and congressional committees are commonly bought off, while government officials or “wanna be” president hopefuls maintain off shore bank accounts as a validation of proof they have no real faith in the United States economy or banking system, its difficult to wrap your head around Judges falling into that category. Yes I am aware that sounds a bit naive. Yes I can see a Judge being paid off for a particular case but to seen Judges across the entire United States close a bind eye to the people and not decide cases on the merits – NOT HEAR AND DECIDE CASES ON THE MERITS – that’s just too difficult to believe. One can only view that as a total failure of the judicial system. Many may say Judges are just not well versed in securitization and the financial complexities of what is really taking place in foreclosure. Well then Judges have still failed us by not educating themselves to the problem and that’s just not acceptable.
    http://discoverytactics.wordpress.com/
    There is nothing complicated about the problems so let me bullet point them for every Honorable Judge reading this post:
    • The Note is NOT NEGOTIABLE because there are a number of conditions and it is not an unconditional promise to pay;
    • If the Note is NOT NEGOTIABLE then the property is not secured by the Mortgage or Deed of Trust (“DOT”);
    • It’s not that securitization is illegal HOWEVER, if the Note was securitized it means each owner should have endorsed the Note and the Mortgage/Deed of Trust should have followed it and a) if the Note is not properly endorsed to reflect all of the parties mentioned in the securitization documents (PSA – like the Originator, Sponsor, Depositor, Issuing Entity etc.) no movement in the case should take place until a full accounting (validation and verification of the debt) occurs to convince the court who the proper Creditor is to be paid and b) if the Mortgage/DOT did not follow each transfer, the Mortgage/DOT should be deemed a nullity;
    • Acknowledge that when the Note is securitized the monetary value of the Note is aggregated with other notes (“pooled”) and the aggregated amount is turned into a bond/security instrument. once the Note was converted into a stock/security, or stock/security equivalent, it is no longer a Note because the loan has been de-recognized. De-recognition is an accounting term which refers to the removal of an asset or liability (or a portion thereof) from an entity’s balance sheet. In essence, the Note was gutted and all relevant accounting ledgers, including the so-called lender’s general ledger shows the Note to hold a “zero” value. IF BOTH THE NOTE AND THE STOCK/SECURITY, OR STOCK/SECURITY EQUIVALENT, EXIST AT THE SAME TIME, that is known as double dipping. DOUBLE DIPPING IS A FORM OF SECURITIES FRAUD;
    • Acknowledge that if a Note was securitized and the montary amount was aggregated with other Note amounts, the total aggregated amount was factionalized and broken up into classes/tranches. A TRUE ACCOUNTING MEANS IDENTIFYING A) DID THE NOTE ACTUALLY REACH THE TRUST and if so b) how many classes was the loan found in, determine how much was paid off and how much remains;
    • Yes MERS was named the Mortgagee and/or Nominee on the Mortgage/DOT HOWEVER, if the Mortgage/DOT follows the Note and the Note was sold multiple times, securitized and factionalized, THE MORTGAGE/DOT CANNOT SECURE THE NOTE ANY LONGER and MERS CAN NO LONGER A) ACT AS NOMINEE FOR THE ORIGINAL LENDER and b) CAN NO LONGER BE THE MORTGAGEE TO THE ORIGINAL MORTGAGE/DOT;
    • If a PARTY IS BRINGING ACTION IN ANOTHER’S NAME, have that party show proof of authority to do SO NOT JUST ALLEGE IT;
    • Give a little bit MORE SCRUTINY TO THESE BOGUS ASSIGNMENT OF MORTGAGES – YOU CAN’T KEEP IGNORING THE WHOLE ROBO-SIGNING ISSUE;
    • Start sanctioning the fraudclosure firms filing false affidavits and pleadings and MAKE THE BAR DROP THE HAMMER ON THEM;
    • Acknowledge the fact that it does not matter who makes payments on the Note as long as payment is made AND IF PAYMENT IS MADE NO DEFAULT HAS TAKEN PLACE;
    • Acknowledge the fact that when the Servicer brings the foreclosure action on behalf of another, CHANCES ARE IT IS REALLY EQUITABLE SUBROGATION IN THAT THE SERVICER MAY HAVE BEEN MAKING THE PAYMENT ON BEHALF OF THE BORROWER (BECAUSE SECURITIZATION DOCS LIKE THE PSA REQUIRE SUCH) AND WANTS ITS MONEY BACK but because there is no written agreement between the Borrower and the Servicer for those payments, the Servicer is foreclosing instead;
    • Acknowledge the Borrower is indeed a party to all third-party securitization documents (AS NOTED BY THE OCC) and allow these documents into the case as most if not all docs mention the Borrower (not by specific name but as the Borrower and described as such) and none of THOSE DOCUMENTS WOULD NOT EXIST BETWEEN THIRD PARTIES IF THE BORROWER DID NOT EXIST AND PLAY A ROLE;
    • TOLL THE STATUTE OF LIMITATION ACCORDING TO THE FRAUD THAT EXIST – the whole world knows this whole messed is premised on fraud so please stop acting like you’re the only people on the planet would do not see the fraud.
    No one is asking for special treatment. All the people ask for is to enforce the belief and notion that justice is blind, is impartial and the Court – YOU YOUR HONOR – will hear and judge a case on the merits! Let the attorneys argue the cases and he that argues best wins! Stop stacking the deck against the American people. Don’t let fraudclosure attorneys run your courtroom like prosecutors calling case after case like prosecutors! How dare you allow them to get so comfortable in your courtroom.! That room is sacred and all the American people ask is for the COurt to stop failing us. Bring HONOR, INTEGRITY and JUST back into YOUR COURTROOM! Don’t let your courtroom be owned by La Banko Nostra too!!!
    Leave a comment
    from → foreclosure defense, foreclosure offense, Securitiza

  86. @STRIPES—
    If the original issuer really sold that mortgage and note to a second bank, —-yes right on–but the private lables moved the paper directly to trusts that they sponsored most of the time–thusly facilitating duplcate sales—they then covered that up by retaining servicing rights

    So the 1st time they would face a public record challenge is when they file the Schedule of loans with SEC –and with Se State vis Art 9 finance statement

    so how to get around that? Screw it –seek an exemption from electronic filing–to allow a submission of a lenghty list of loans by a so called “manual filing” –separate from the electronic submissions of the indenture etc—-then simply ignore the duty to mail in that manual filing–60% of AHM and Option one sponsored trusts failed to file the manual filings

    next challenge —indorse tens of thousands on notes ???? if they are endorsed as bearer paper–they are subject to theft right/

    holder needs only possess

    and if they insert the trust name up front—–then its not as liquid–it cant be sold twice for one thing which is why the schedules were not filed–the unfiled schedules tend to be back to back for a sponsoring originator like ahm [now bankrupt of course]

    so they either scan the unindorsed version to facilitate electronic indorsement/forgery much later—and destroy the original–or bury the original unindorsed at a title co or the warehouse—either way they dont indorse until well after the deadline for REMICS

    yeah–fraud today to cover up fraud at the inception–the pile of frauds just keeps mounting up

  87. @STRIPES
    YES up front is the way it SHOULD be—–but rarely ever ——–in fact

    for one thing they never admit its lost—-because to do so means posting a bond—costly—or something to assure the maker hes not gonna get double claimed–indemnity etc

    so they attach a copy of something that was supposed to have been altered by indorsement years ago which in company of a bogus assignment looks like its naming the plaintiff—but in fact its a copy of the wrong document–the copy to have meaning vis the complaint must be contemporaeous copy–i wish i had a case to cite —the copy should be of the indorsed note–not an historical thing that does not longer exist

    so we get to where they bluff it through–well deliver the note later trust us—and like a fool we believe them –theft by deception

    they did not hold much less own the note or they wouldv attached a copy of the actual contemporaneous indorsed note–but they duck and dodge because they did not have the indorsed note when they filed–they must create it with a forged indorsement

    so they deliver this forged crap later as late as possible so even if you figure it out by looking at the stamps etc—-its too late–house gone and destroyed or sold to a bona fide purchaser

    UCC not written expressly with frauders in mind–leaves us wandering–what remedy when this happens?

    fraud is hard to find and harder to prove–and they depend on this

  88. The reality is, Comity is not the rule of law, and is in fact an infringement upon all of our legal rights to due process in defense of our Liberty and Property. There is a legal theory in the Civil courts that a legally enforceable contract exists, however, when no provable evidence of an agreement exists, there is no law in equity for an illegitimate contract. Under Title 26 U.SC. there must be 3 parts present for a contract to be valid. For a contract to exist there must be probable evidence of an agreement; and there must be an Obligation of some task that has to have been Performed or an act that has been done and there must be Consideration, an exchange of substance (HJR 192, July 5, 1933), to wit, dollars for labor or time of your life in exchange for goods. In the U.S. Silver or Gold in exchange for labor, substance for substance; not substance for credit. Without those 3 parts, there can be no lawful contract.

  89. In reality, all notes should be indorsed because they were cashed at the Treasury by the original issuer of the bill of credit. If the original issuer really sold that mortgage and note to a second bank, there needs to be legal proof due consideration was paid back to the payee who paid the Original bill of credit to the Issuer….. otherwise all subsequent transfers can only be considered counterfeits and forgeries and the party trying to collect on those notes are IMPOSTERS…fictitious payess….they are covering up for the default of the Originator who issued you the original bill of credit. These are felons.

  90. DC…the UCC both State and Federal law says a lost note affidavit must be presented at the onset of the fc action ..Prove status of the holder of the instrument….by 5/301 or 5/309….5/8-307 States clearly that the Purchaser must have Proof of Authority with any requisite necessary to obtain registration …To obtain requisite of Security Entitlements all said requirements must be met. It really is all about perfection. Third parties are not entitled to anything without that…that has to have been performed by the Issuer of the bill of credit at the Origination.

  91. @STRIPES

    Yes I like and agree your posts

    In my wortless opinion –the connection between DUE PROCESS in these cases to mortgage process —-is the elimination of risk of duplicate claims by alternative holders of the note

    if they attach an unindorsed copy of note to a complaint–it says noting about the plaintiff’s right to collect–may as well attach a piec of toilet paper

    the UCC allows enforcement by a thief—at least attempted enforcement—-so you must follow the presentment process to test the authenticity of the claim when they finally do produce the note–say possibly pursuant to a settlement agreement—-

    it should be done upfront—since UCC exposes you to double collection–you must aggressively hang onto the due process jurisdictional issue—-see UCC 3-309—–where the claimant loses the note –a thief can come after you–or more likely the theif comes 1st–the true holder later

    if you waive due process and standing–the thief collects and the holder can too…thats the heart of the rules to prevent that unjust result

  92. @—GUEST

    You want the servicer to produce the note with indorsements?

    If you are in a judicial and sue you they are supposed to attach a copy of the indorsed note–ie a copy of the note as it exists at that time—since theoretically it shouldv been indorsed to a trust years ago

    However they wont –or at least wouldnt —because they did not indorse them –they only do it if you contest the siezure–they gin up a stamp of an employee of the oginator and the employee stamps that officer stamp and forges initials ———-or uses a stamp combining the officer legend and initials –google danielle Sterling for example

    they attempt to bluff through the whole process —desperately avoid putting the indorsed note-or copy in the court record because even the attys know the indorsement was added years late and had to be forged—they try to avoid fraud on the court now—so your effort must be carried out–call the bluff–they may have a copy of the doument you signed on day one–but the actual current indorsed one is made up for you when needed–and of course is probably unauthorized–fails UCC or authentication evidence standatrds

  93. @STRIPES

    I like your posts —short sweet–citing cases–i look forqward to more–thanks

  94. nod lps, sub of trustee lps, assignment of mtge lps. the notary on my nod pled guilty

  95. Yes my email is hhand3girlzoo@gmail.com I don’t know if AZ is a lost cause? I will say I think that it is a lot more difficult than most states. I think the Ron Ryan Brief posted the other day looks good. This however is just my opinion. I think it is very important you take the offensive.

    Couple things to consider. MERS isn’t registered in AZ with the AZ corp commission or secretary of state. So how are they conducting business? Even a foreign entity must be registered per AZ statute. I like the part in Ryan’s brief where he references MERS and their by laws. I would look to how the judge responds to interpret this into my pleadings if the judge was favorable to this.

    Also, what about the alleged trust? Is the trust registered in AZ? Does it have to be? Idk? My opinion is it would have to be registered in AZ to conduct any type of business. So what do you have if you have a defunct lender an unregistered nominee (MERS) and an unregistered Trust? (A big fat lie) I would ask the judge this question. Maybe, send a FDCPA letter to the servicer asking them these questions. I would think you could allege the parties lack standing and try to make them disappear before anything even gets started.

    If you are planning a quiet title I’d look to A.R.S. § 12-1103(B). Read the statute. Send the 20 quiet claim prior to launching your suit. This will at least protect you somewhat. I do think that AZ is very hard. I think you need a good attorney. Even if you don’t have enough money maybe you can find one who you can pay to litigate your case and you can do the rest? That damn procedure thing.

    The bottom line is you have to sue. The problem is your case will probably take months or maybe even years to get to the court. I still haven’t been before a judge and it’s been 2 years. In the interim the trustee continually tries to sell the home and at the last minutes postpones the date. So they can foreclose with a pending case.

    I will say if you can afford an attorney get one. I really don’t know if anything I’m doing/or have done will work. I really am not an authority on this. I only do research on the internet and read cases to try and save my own house. I don’t want to lead anyone astray but I will only share what I know or specific cases I’ve read.

  96. […] Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, currency, Eviction, foreclosure, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, securities fraud Tagged: accounting from Maser Servicer, allocation of payments, amount demanded, co-obligors, insurance. hedge instruments, lawsuit against Investment Bank, Master Servicer accounting, subservicer Livinglies’s Weblog […]

  97. Good link that explains a lot about why we are here and who the powers that be are behind the scenes of this national nightmare. The title to the link sounds like it is about religion but, it is really not. It is about the method and the ideology:
    http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/decept35.htm

  98. Do not believe the reports in AZ regarding Home values up 20%. These are up from rock bottom 2 yrs ago. That is all. More foreclosures to come. I have 5 more in my neighborhood – two of which are double foreclosures.

  99. Sounds like Stalin or Musollini is in charge down there. Can’t believe you guys are putting up with them telling you there are no laws that protect you. I hate to tell you this but that sounds like complete communism. I think you guys are living in Stalingrad..

  100. hman

    Looks like AZ is a lost cuase. Do you have an email ?

  101. 18 U.S.C. 513 Securities of the States and private entities..(a) Whoever makes, utters or possesses a counterfeited security of an organization, with intent to deceive another person, organization, or government shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for no more than 10 years or both. ……

    Any unauthorized change by addition of words or numbers or other changes to an incomplete instrument relating to the obligation of a party that is filed as a document, that is evidence of a debt take on the character of presentment upon filing of “false or forged” documents in public office, is a felony. Discharge of the promissory note renders the Deed of Trust a nullity, (Carpenter v Longan).

  102. CW filed Lp and Cival Case as CWHL owner of the note and mortgage via broker and MERS. in 11-08. Loan was current at the time of filing. We thought the case was dismissed as their were no hearings. BOA took over the servicing from CW on 04-09. At that time BOA claimed a $12,000 default and refused anything short. So I sent them copies of the payments. I was ignored while we were bombarded with loan mod packages via FED EX and USPS. Kept telling them there was no hardship, had the money and wanted their records. 04-10 BOA set a hearing under old still open 2008 court case without notice to us. I found out by chance and requested reinstatement figures. Recieved three differant sets of figures in March, April and May. Paid in Full on March. Still in default in April, payment not applied. Request new P.O. and not only pay it but sent a few hundred extra on principal and the May payment in a seperate check via certified mail. Demanded CW same as BOA attorney to drop suit. He does. I get June statements showing May&June statement due. A serpeate statement/bill for the property taxes. (ESCROWED). I call and call and call! I get NOD form BAC. Hired attorney, Found out about LP. Attorney send QWR and request for LP release. Been in Limbo ever since. We want to do the right thing if we could figure out what that is. There was NO assigmnet made to CW til after we hired attorney. Assignment was of the Note and Mortgage together from MERS to CWHL and from CWHL to BOA in 09-11. The loan was never registered with SEC, Fannie or Freddie. Broker lender was not and is nots not MERS member. I have no assignment of the Note from broker lender to MERS. And the MERS was filed for CW two years after they were absorbed by BOA.

  103. AZ is non-judicial. Lenders often sight Hogan and Julia Vasquez. Id read these for bad case law. Also, don’t even try the show me the note route. Trustee’s don’t have to show the note to foreclose. Read the verdicts on these cases and you’ll see what I mean. This has been shot down over and over in AZ.

    Also, more recently I forgot the case but it was determined that the false recording statute does not apply to Assignments of mortgages. Robosigning allegations will be looked at the other way. Seriously! I’d give the case if I remembered. I’m at work so I don’t have time to look it up. I take this to mean a borrower could record something if the statute doesn’t apply to these paticular documents. Good luck getting anything recorded though. Trust me I tried. Maybe you are smarter then me. I hope so.

    Anyway, again not giving advice but pursant to the Hogan case it does state the trustee has a duty of care to the borrower so take it for what it is worth. I’d hit the trustee with something. They have also been deemed to be debt collectors so you can hit them with a FDCPA letter and see if you get a response.

    I’ve been able to block my sale date multiple times but not sure what will work in your case. I’d also write certain authorities letters such as the AG and County Attorney. Not sure if it will do anything but it can’t hurt? Only takes time.

    I wish everyone good luck. It’s a hard fight for sure but keep fighting.

  104. Guest, I’d check that assignment to CW and see who it supposedly went to since BOA bought CW in 2008. I think CW lending may still be operating but I’d take a close look at the actual company name.

  105. Plaintiff must prove at the onset of their foreclosure action, a cause of action that is at least a casual connection between the injury and the conduct complained of – the injury has to be “fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant, and not the result of the independent action of some third party not before the court.” (Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Org., 426 U.S. 26, 41-42, 1976).

  106. debt collecter filed lien (not lp) after we hired attorney to get 08 CW LP released from title. Broker loan with MERS mortgage. No evidence CW was ever lender, funder, owner or holder. MERS assignment done to CW on Note and Mortgage in 2010 (two years later) and before CW LP was released.. Ask debt collecter via attorney numerous times without response.

  107. Would love some critique on my pleadings if anyone has time to look at it.

  108. Just curious…is AZ a non-judicial state? Either way they are violating your due process rights if you are a Natural Born U.S. Citizen. Seems the politicians down there are more concerned in causing distractions with illegal immigrants trying to gain illegal entry than the rights of their own Natural Born citizenry against foreign IMPOSTERS. The 5th Amendment Takings Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which found its genesis in Section 39 of the Magna Carta declared that no land would be taken without some form of due process. “No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned or disseised, or exiled, or in any way destroyed, nor will we go upon him nor send upon him, except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of this land.”

  109. Hman
    Thank you. I’ll look at that case now Ofcourse my pleading is a bit different but m in this until I fall down and can’t do it any more

  110. I want to know how to force the debt collector/thief to produce the note and endorsements. We set in jepordy of duel collections on the same note. We want to payoff and get out of limbo, but we have set stalled out years without the proof we need, we can not afford to pay a thief and the true PII. No lawsuit, only debt collector harassment and reporting on credit report.

  111. Guest….in response to their complaint tell the court the Plaintiffs are violating your Constitutional and your Legal rights and you as a Defendant, wish to invoke all of your Constitutional rights afforded to you as a Natural Born U.S. Citizen to compel the court to uphold all of your due process rights.

  112. Just my 2 cents on the thread. The Lis Pendens will not stop a foreclosure. It just gives notice to parties of pending litagation. It is a deterrent but it will not stop. Deb you are right. We are getting railroaded in AZ.

    The recent case in Madison v groseth was dismissed. “the Court of Appeals upheld dismissal of Ms. Madison’s pro se suit against the Groseths, who were the successful bidder on the trustee’s sale of Madison’s home. The dismissal of the case was determined appropriate and affirmed because Madison was deemed to have waived any of her objections to the sale. A.R.S. § 33-811(C) mandates that unless the borrower obtains an injunction by 5:00 the day before the scheduled sale, all defenses and objections are waived. The borrower cannot pursue the lender or the new purchaser for any defects in the pre-sale process, nor can she sue for damages related to the foreclosure.”

    “The trustor, its successors or assigns, and all persons to whom the trustee mails a notice of a sale under a trust deed pursuant to § 33-809 shall waive all defenses and objections to the sale not raised in an action that results in the issuance of a court order granting relief pursuant to rule 65 [injunction], Arizona rules of civil procedure, entered before 5:00 p.m. Mountain standard time on the last business day before the scheduled date of the sale. . . .”

    You have to get an injunction to stop the sale or you will be toast. This is where most of us get screwed. At the hearing the judge will usually ask you to post a bond. Keep in mind you are personally guaranteeing payment of the bond so if you lose you lose the house and owe the money. If you don’t pay the bond the foreclosure will be allowed to move forward. Also it looks really bad on you if you don’t pay. To get the permenant injunction you have to post the bond. So sometimes even when you win you lose. The injunction just allows you to go to court and you could still lose.

    I wrote the trustee making him aware of my allegations and stating he had a fiduciary responsibility to me. I forgot the case? Hogan I think.

    Just wanted to share my experience not giving advice.

  113. Good points stripes
    I made the record though
    But, they go off on tangents that the court blesses hence the word ” trampled on”

  114. @stripes, what do you mean by invoke your constitutional rights. How do we do it?

  115. Invoke your Constitutional power then Deborah. Only you can invoke your Constitutional rights as a law abiding, tax paying, Natural Born U.S. Citizen. If there is no probable evidence of an agreement present at the onset then they are obviously concealing something. A State statute is only valid until proven otherwise. There is no law in equity for an illegitimate contract.

  116. DCB
    At the time I placed lis pendens I was prose desparately ignorant I would do a few things differently now anyhow my posture is “I want my due process”. It’s that bad. My case was mauled by prior bad acts and too long a story now but frankly there was merit in the original pro se attempt 3.5 yrs ago but I’m in Az and we ate getting trampled on. My posture is court of appeals and my right to amend and additional rights. 9 th circuit wynn v callan et al ( HSBC posturing and i mean ” posturing” they are not a party (- oh yes they jolly well
    are ) case number 12 16192

  117. BTW……..These UCC requirements are…..both State and Federal Statutory Law requirements regarding negotiable instruments. Constitutional, State and Federal Law supports….. Standing is a critical issue going to the foundational basis of Constitutional Government with respect to the doctrine of separation of powers. (Raines -v- Byrd).

  118. DC…The court lacks subject matter jurisdiction (article 5) because subject matter applies to negotiable instruments and a copy of a note and a copy of a mortgage can only be considered counterfeit and forged instruments by failure of Plaintiffs to prove status (article 3) of the instrument as required by State & Federal law. They are concealing, uttering and suborning perjury …..and committing numerous other felonies…. by hiding FRAUD IN THE FACTUM…and the true fact that instrument is not legally enforceable.

  119. DCB
    Precious

  120. @STRIPES

    And let me point out a trap—

    The standing is Rule 17 seeminly related to ripeness, some discretionary element—-jurisdiction is more basic –it is constitutional Due Process —is the defendant gonna be subject to duplicate claims on the note if plaintiff proceeds–eg a thief enforcing note–allowed under UCC but not due process——-

    The COPY OF NOTE that they attach to the complaint MUST be a Copy of the INDORSED NOTE—not just an old unidorsed copy–only the indorsed copy shows anything about the current holder-owner

    if they ask you–was there a copy of the note attached –restate the question–Your honor do you mean a copy of the indorsed note?

    The copy of note has a critical temporal aspect —the question means Is there a copy of the note as it should exist today–ie indorsed to the plaintiff or his agent as shown by POA.

    This is soooo important–but rarely mentioned and seemingly little known

  121. @DEB
    heres a robosigner in training–they start early learning to forge–sorry lori–this one wont be ready to hire before you get outta jail and off probation

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/30/nice-try-25-attempts-to-get-away-with-it_n_2217153.html

  122. @DEB

    Would you please restate your procedural posture –its a bit blurry

    If i understand correctly.
    You filed a lis pendens because you were seeking something by litigation What?

    The bank filed foreclosure

    then bank filed quiet title to wipe away lis pendens? or vice versa

    anybody filed workwans liens for services performed —eg while there is a foreclosure pending and you plow money in for aa water heater etc

    we homeowners are over a barrel–after they move to foreclose—we lose our legal title –or at least its clouded—but maintenance must go on—but since collector claims the property all maintenance in fact benefits the bank–not us—so we either need the protection of morkers liens or the maintenance is not performed

    public policy suggests prevent waste to the property but file a claim

  123. Plaintiffs must establish both State and Federal Statutory law, the UCC requirements meeting the criterion for qualification as “the real party in interest” at the onset of their foreclosure action by proving status of the holder of the instrument.

  124. Beauduke
    I had a lis pendens theyforeclosed I’m still in court judge quieted title should not have happened. That’s only one part of my problem. But it shouldn’t have happened and they reconvened the property. It just gets bigger.

  125. In most cases, the fraud is apparent on the face of the documents. These servicers are felons and are proxies the banks are using to cover up massive bank fraud by the banks and the bank attorneys are aiding & abetting these crimes. They should all be treated as felons.

  126. Deb, thanks for the reply. I’m in the same boat as far as not having an attorney. I’m in Colorado and don’t know of one to handle this even if I could afford one. I actually have Dave Kreiger’s book but have been trying to get my ducks in a row before I do a quiet title. Also, now with a judgment lien recorded, I don’t know if I could even get a quite title with that clouding the title. I was just curious if the lis pendens and judgment would prevent a foreclosure without taking care of them first (by the “creditor”).

  127. beauduke
    if you leave the lis pendens there then if they take your home they have to file a suit against you to get it removed and Quieted, bare in mind its a state court action and the party must have standing to bring that action ( try selling a home with a lil Liz on the county land record,)
    this means the burden of proof is on them, also maybe get in to see a quiet title attorney a guy by the name of dave kreiger has written a book called clouded titles, google it he will work with council aparently but never engaged him myself- well mainly because i have no council now.
    just a few pointers im not an attorney just think you should dig your heels in re lis pendens research the heck out of it.

  128. Just a general question about the impact of a lis pendens. I have just “acquired” a new servicer and so now the games begin anew. I filed a lis pendens a couple years ago and now I have a recent judgment lien filed against the property. The question is, what impact, if any, does having the lis pendens and lien recorded if they try to foreclose? Does this make things to prickly for them to move forward?

  129. @CHRISTINE
    I was looking at a piece in your post cutnpaste—–in a quick scan –and i appreciate the ease if its not too long—anyway thanks for this one

    “The reporting of the uncollectible mortgage can be enjoined by a private action under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which was enacted by Congress to provide fairness to the consumer in the banking system, which is dependent upon fair and accurate credit reporting and unfair credit reporting methods undermine the confidence of the public in that system”

    Ok i had such a grievance —misreporting by collection agency—duplicated amounts on two diferent account #s —2 different ants which is how it works when the collector accrues the unpaid interest and whatever else they can toss on—while the trustee —ignores the accrual and operates on a cash recognition basis.

    this allows you to be booked into the credit bureau twice for the same loan. but the collector controls the characterization of both. So the servicer can if it suits him economically carry a phantom loan balance and report it to the bureau. The address are the same–but that is it as far as a machine reader goes. Itll look like you went bad on your beach house —walked with adverse effects—maybe a “deed in lieu” without specifying youv settled w/o foreclosure —and its just as bad as foreclosure—but the 2nd acount balance they will show for you basically indicates that you still owe the debt that the collector waived—

    so its worse than bankruptcy—a person who goes through bankruptcy is freed of debt whereas one who on credit bureau accounts –shows him as a deadbeat on one house—dumped it—and still owe on your main home–and they have it on alert status

    now the ooming potential bankruptcy scares all creditors—bad history and you owe a lot–no car loan—no cards—no furnture or appliances–maybe rental less a problem–but cost of financing rises.

    The worst effect is —lots of employers will not touch you—fed govt wont touch you–you look like you are ripe to take a bribe—so no govt work—basically the servicer by this use of records has power to take away your income in retaliation for intransigence.

    But its very difficult to get relief for something they did after the fact—you must check your credit every day–or pay one of these outfits to watch for somebody that decides to crucify you.

  130. since im a bad lawyer and dont know how “real” lawyers do things correctly –i just attach the journal such as the fla piece to a request for judicial notice and file it–so the judge or his asst can read it if they are as confused as i am by the bank-manipulated ucc

  131. the fla piece is really good

  132. this was the law review art i was thinking about–its really great –see especially page 3 re failed indorsements in hands of thief

  133. Extremely informative article in the Florida Bar Journal about negotiability, holder in due course, transferability, etc. in mortgage contracts. A must read. Too long to post.

    http://www.floridabar.org/DIVCOM/JN/JNJournal01.nsf/8c9f13012b96736985256aa900624829/ab90f3a395acd39f85257ac2006cab6a!OpenDocument

  134. Copy and pasting things that are readily available does not help us…hey, we can all access this. Help is in need of pleadings, complaints, appeals and procedure. Articles are very, very deceptive and misleading. There is nothing in these articles to plan our strategy. The government, banks or courts, however, gracious the intent of this information…is going where?

  135. The Use of Injunctions in Combatting the Consequences of Mortgage Fraud and Predatory Lending
    Font size: Decrease font Enlarge font
    CMS admin November 28, 2012
    image

    The reporting of the uncollectible mortgage can be enjoined by a private action under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) learn more by sending an email to keneade@gmail.com or by calling (323) 782-8802

    By Kenneth Eade

    In 2007, the U.S. began to experience its worse housing and foreclosure crisis since the Great Depression. The economic crisis we are currently experiencing had its origin in an economic “bubble”; a distortion in the economy that occurs whenever a major commodity or service (in this case housing) becomes such an object of speculation that its perceived value inflates far beyond its actual value. One of the characteristics of such an economic bubble is that it often sets off a chain reaction throughout the economy, causing unusual expansion while it is still growing, and massive losses when it implodes. According to the Federal Reserve Board, the continued weakness of the housing market presents a significant barrier to a vigorous economic recovery.

    At the heart of this crisis is mortgage fraud. The economic bubble that caused the real estate crisis can be attributed to the mortgage banking industry which operated a fraudulent and systemic lending scheme that allowed unwarranted speculation in home prices. This speculation created “phantom equity” where the perceived value of the home, fueled by unsustainable mortgages, far outpaced the home’s true value. When the bubble burst, that phantom equity instantly evaporated leaving the homeowner with a home worth less than was owed. This negative equity, coupled with substantially increased mortgage payments forced homeowners into foreclosure.

    Many people have lost their homes to foreclosure, had their credit rating ruined, and suffered unspeakable damage at the hands of predatory lenders. Four million U.S. homeowners have lost their homes to foreclosure since June 2009, when the 19-month U.S. recession ended, according to RealtyTrac Inc. Robo-signing, falsification of mortgage documents and affidavits, and the failure to follow Pooling Service Agreements in loan securitization and the issuance of mortgage backed securities has cast doubt on the ownership of many mortgages and whether the servicing lender even has the right to foreclose or collect on them. Lenders have duped homeowners into mortgage loan workouts or due date extensions or even advised them to go into default to be eligible to apply for a workout or the federal HAMP program, only to end up foreclosing on them after receiving hefty payments.

    The mortgage fraud problem is much more far-reaching than just being a major cause of the 2008 crisis, which cost the economy an estimated $100 billion in losses by the end of 2009. The Government Accountability Office predicts that “elevated levels of default and foreclosure will persist” due in large part to declining home prices.

    For most American households the family home is by far the largest tangible asset, a buffer against misfortune, and often a significant savings vehicle to fund retirement. By eroding household wealth, the decline in housing prices has contributed to greater weakness in consumption, which further weakens the economy and threatens a recovery. The extraordinary strict mortgage lending standards that prevail in the aftermath of the crisis have stagnated recovery, by limiting or preventing lending to creditworthy buyers. The excess of REO properties in real estate inventory depress the real estate market and, since most people’s homes are their only significant asset, it reduces their buying power not only for consumption, but for higher education, which causes a generational ripple effect. The loss of property tax revenues as a result of depressed property values and the reduction of the property taxpayer base is also a contributing factor to another rare phenomenon of this crisis-municipal bankruptcy.

    The U.S. government bailed out the banks by printing extra dollars, bypassing the individual homeowners who are victims of the fraud, who were the intended beneficiaries of the bailout, and instead, subsidizing the banks. The result was that the perpetrators of the fraud were enriched, the foreclosures continued, wealth was redistributed away from the middle class to the top tiers of society, and the economy continued its meltdown, leaving the bill for the bailout to the victims of the crisis and their descendants for generations to come.

    In California, as in many other states, it is against the law to collect a deficiency balance on a purchase money loan after the property subject to the loan has been foreclosed upon. Such statutes were enacted to balance the equities between the consumer and the banks; to protect the consumer and give him power against the banks, some of which have been deemed “too big to fail.” The state Legislature enacted the anti-deficiency statutes in light of the foreclosures and abusive deficiency judgments obtained by lenders during the Great Depression. [Spangler v. Memel], 7 Cal. 3d 603 (1972).

    A common practice of major real estate lenders leading up to the 2008 Financial Crisis in closing a loan for a borrower who was otherwise unable to qualify for a first mortgage for the entire amount of the indebtedness was to combine a HELOC with a purchase money first mortgage to enable the borrower to purchase the property. Of course, it makes no sense to offer an equity loan on a property that has not yet been purchased by the borrower, but that didn’t seem to bother the major banks.

    Several class actions have popped up around the country complaining of banks and collection agencies who attempt to collect deficiency balances on these “uncollectible” second loans and who report the loans as bad debts on the borrower’s consumer credit profiles. This attempt to take a second bite at the apple, after having overvalued the real estate for the first and second mortgages, and having already foreclosed on the property, throws people who have already been thrown out of their homes into “financial homelessness.”

    Home equity loans are normally excluded from the application of the California deficiency statutes, but if the home equity loan is masquerading as a purchase money loan, it fits the definition of a purchase money loan as a mortgage or deed of trust given by the purchaser at the time of the conveyance of land to secure the unpaid balance for the price. Loans masquerading as something different have long been deemed to be purchase money loans by state Courts of Appeal. For example, in [Allstate Savings and Loan Association v. Murphy], 98 Cal. App. 3d 761 (1979) the court held that a construction loan was the equivalent of a purchase money loan and was entitled to the protection of section 580(b). In [Brown v. Jensen], 41 Cal 2d 193 (1953), the state Supreme Court held that a second mortgage taken out at the time of sale and used as a purchase money loan is a non-recourse loan to which 580(b) applies.

    Attorneys should consider taking action under two federal acts which have been found to be effective in consumer cases. Action can be taken under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) to enjoin the collection of these illegal loans, which are contrary to public policy. The FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from using abusive, unfair or deceptive practices to collect debts. Lenders who hide behind bank takeovers and business combinations but still continue to service a fraudulent loan cannot avoid the reach of the act, if the claims are based solely on the collection and servicing practices of the lender as the owner and servicer of a loan that is presently uncollectible under California law not any past torts of the original lender.

    The reporting of the uncollectible mortgage can be enjoined by a private action under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which was enacted by Congress to provide fairness to the consumer in the banking system, which is dependent upon fair and accurate credit reporting and unfair credit reporting methods undermine the confidence of the public in that system. The importance of fairness to the consumer is a vital element of the legislative history of the FCRA. In cases where creditors are able to exercise non judicial remedies to recover their collateral to loans and then seek deficiencies, it is essential that consumers have a remedy for creditors who break the law.

    Kenneth Eade is an international business lawyer, based in Los Angeles.

  136. The Use of Injunctions in Combatting the Consequences of Mortgage Fraud and Predatory Lending

    CMS admin November 28, 2012
    image

    http://www.newswire.net/newsroom/financial/69760-The-Use-Injunctions-Combatting-the-Consequences-Mortgage-Fraud-and-Predatory-Lending.html

    The reporting of the uncollectible mortgage can be enjoined by a private action under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) learn more by sending an email to keneade@gmail.com or by calling (323) 782-8802

    By Kenneth Eade

    In 2007, the U.S. began to experience its worse housing and foreclosure crisis since the Great Depression. The economic crisis we are currently experiencing had its origin in an economic “bubble”; a distortion in the economy that occurs whenever a major commodity or service (in this case housing) becomes such an object of speculation that its perceived value inflates far beyond its actual value. One of the characteristics of such an economic bubble is that it often sets off a chain reaction throughout the economy, causing unusual expansion while it is still growing, and massive losses when it implodes. According to the Federal Reserve Board, the continued weakness of the housing market presents a significant barrier to a vigorous economic recovery.

    At the heart of this crisis is mortgage fraud. The economic bubble that caused the real estate crisis can be attributed to the mortgage banking industry which operated a fraudulent and systemic lending scheme that allowed unwarranted speculation in home prices. This speculation created “phantom equity” where the perceived value of the home, fueled by unsustainable mortgages, far outpaced the home’s true value. When the bubble burst, that phantom equity instantly evaporated leaving the homeowner with a home worth less than was owed. This negative equity, coupled with substantially increased mortgage payments forced homeowners into foreclosure.

    Many people have lost their homes to foreclosure, had their credit rating ruined, and suffered unspeakable damage at the hands of predatory lenders. Four million U.S. homeowners have lost their homes to foreclosure since June 2009, when the 19-month U.S. recession ended, according to RealtyTrac Inc. Robo-signing, falsification of mortgage documents and affidavits, and the failure to follow Pooling Service Agreements in loan securitization and the issuance of mortgage backed securities has cast doubt on the ownership of many mortgages and whether the servicing lender even has the right to foreclose or collect on them. Lenders have duped homeowners into mortgage loan workouts or due date extensions or even advised them to go into default to be eligible to apply for a workout or the federal HAMP program, only to end up foreclosing on them after receiving hefty payments.

    The mortgage fraud problem is much more far-reaching than just being a major cause of the 2008 crisis, which cost the economy an estimated $100 billion in losses by the end of 2009. The Government Accountability Office predicts that “elevated levels of default and foreclosure will persist” due in large part to declining home prices.

    For most American households the family home is by far the largest tangible asset, a buffer against misfortune, and often a significant savings vehicle to fund retirement. By eroding household wealth, the decline in housing prices has contributed to greater weakness in consumption, which further weakens the economy and threatens a recovery. The extraordinary strict mortgage lending standards that prevail in the aftermath of the crisis have stagnated recovery, by limiting or preventing lending to creditworthy buyers. The excess of REO properties in real estate inventory depress the real estate market and, since most people’s homes are their only significant asset, it reduces their buying power not only for consumption, but for higher education, which causes a generational ripple effect. The loss of property tax revenues as a result of depressed property values and the reduction of the property taxpayer base is also a contributing factor to another rare phenomenon of this crisis-municipal bankruptcy.

    The U.S. government bailed out the banks by printing extra dollars, bypassing the individual homeowners who are victims of the fraud, who were the intended beneficiaries of the bailout, and instead, subsidizing the banks. The result was that the perpetrators of the fraud were enriched, the foreclosures continued, wealth was redistributed away from the middle class to the top tiers of society, and the economy continued its meltdown, leaving the bill for the bailout to the victims of the crisis and their descendants for generations to come.

    In California, as in many other states, it is against the law to collect a deficiency balance on a purchase money loan after the property subject to the loan has been foreclosed upon. Such statutes were enacted to balance the equities between the consumer and the banks; to protect the consumer and give him power against the banks, some of which have been deemed “too big to fail.” The state Legislature enacted the anti-deficiency statutes in light of the foreclosures and abusive deficiency judgments obtained by lenders during the Great Depression. [Spangler v. Memel], 7 Cal. 3d 603 (1972).

    A common practice of major real estate lenders leading up to the 2008 Financial Crisis in closing a loan for a borrower who was otherwise unable to qualify for a first mortgage for the entire amount of the indebtedness was to combine a HELOC with a purchase money first mortgage to enable the borrower to purchase the property. Of course, it makes no sense to offer an equity loan on a property that has not yet been purchased by the borrower, but that didn’t seem to bother the major banks.

    Several class actions have popped up around the country complaining of banks and collection agencies who attempt to collect deficiency balances on these “uncollectible” second loans and who report the loans as bad debts on the borrower’s consumer credit profiles. This attempt to take a second bite at the apple, after having overvalued the real estate for the first and second mortgages, and having already foreclosed on the property, throws people who have already been thrown out of their homes into “financial homelessness.”

    Home equity loans are normally excluded from the application of the California deficiency statutes, but if the home equity loan is masquerading as a purchase money loan, it fits the definition of a purchase money loan as a mortgage or deed of trust given by the purchaser at the time of the conveyance of land to secure the unpaid balance for the price. Loans masquerading as something different have long been deemed to be purchase money loans by state Courts of Appeal. For example, in [Allstate Savings and Loan Association v. Murphy], 98 Cal. App. 3d 761 (1979) the court held that a construction loan was the equivalent of a purchase money loan and was entitled to the protection of section 580(b). In [Brown v. Jensen], 41 Cal 2d 193 (1953), the state Supreme Court held that a second mortgage taken out at the time of sale and used as a purchase money loan is a non-recourse loan to which 580(b) applies.

    Attorneys should consider taking action under two federal acts which have been found to be effective in consumer cases. Action can be taken under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) to enjoin the collection of these illegal loans, which are contrary to public policy. The FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from using abusive, unfair or deceptive practices to collect debts. Lenders who hide behind bank takeovers and business combinations but still continue to service a fraudulent loan cannot avoid the reach of the act, if the claims are based solely on the collection and servicing practices of the lender as the owner and servicer of a loan that is presently uncollectible under California law not any past torts of the original lender.

    The reporting of the uncollectible mortgage can be enjoined by a private action under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which was enacted by Congress to provide fairness to the consumer in the banking system, which is dependent upon fair and accurate credit reporting and unfair credit reporting methods undermine the confidence of the public in that system. The importance of fairness to the consumer is a vital element of the legislative history of the FCRA. In cases where creditors are able to exercise non judicial remedies to recover their collateral to loans and then seek deficiencies, it is essential that consumers have a remedy for creditors who break the law.

    Kenneth Eade is an international business lawyer, based in Los Angeles.

  137. http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/11/28/shadow-banking/print

    November 28, 2012
    How Wall Street “Privatized” Money Creation
    Shadow Banking
    by MIKE WHITNEY

    Regulators are worried about the explosive growth of shadow banking, and they should be. Shadow banks were at the heart of the last financial crisis and they’ll be at the heart of the next financial crisis as well. There’s no doubt about it. It’s simply impossible to maintain a system where unregulated, non-bank financial institutions are able to create their own money (credit) without oversight or supervision. The money they create–via off-balance sheets operations, securitization, repo or other unmonitored mega-leveraging activities–feeds into the economy, creates artificial demand, lowers unemployment, and fuels growth. But when the cycle slams into reverse (and debts are no longer serviced on time), then thinly-capitalised shadow banks begin to default one-by-one, creating a daisy-chain of counterparty bankruptcies that push stocks into a nosedive while the economy slips into a long-term slump.

    Sound familiar?

    The reason the global economy is still in a shambles a full 5 years after Lehman Brothers collapsed, is because this deeply-flawed system –which had previously generated 40 percent of the credit in the US economy–was still in rebuilding-mode. But now, according to a new report by the Financial Stability Board, shadow banking has made a comeback and is bigger than ever. The FSB found that assets held by shadow banks have swollen to $67 trillion, a sum that’s nearly as large as global GDP ($69.97 trillion) and greater than the $62 trillion that was in the system prior to the Crash of ’08. The more shadow banking grows, the greater the probability of another financial crisis.

    So what is shadow banking and how does it work?

    Here’s how Investopedia defines the term:

    “The financial intermediaries involved in facilitating the creation of credit across the global financial system, but whose members are not subject to regulatory oversight. The shadow banking system also refers to unregulated activities by regulated institutions.

    Examples of intermediaries not subject to regulation include hedge funds, unlisted derivatives and other unlisted instruments. Examples of unregulated activities by regulated institutions include credit default swaps.

    The shadow banking system has escaped regulation primarily because it did not accept traditional bank deposits. As a result, many of the institutions and instruments were able to employ higher market, credit and liquidity risks, and did not have capital requirements commensurate with those risks. Subsequent to the subprime meltdown in 2008, the activities of the shadow banking system came under increasing scrutiny and regulations.” (Investopedia)

    Shadow banking may have “come under increasing scrutiny”, but not a damn thing has been done to fix the problems. The banks and their lobbyists have beaten back all the sensible reforms that would have made the system safer. Instead, we’re back at Square 1, where credit is expanding in leaps and bounds by–what Pimco’s Paul McCulley called–”a whole alphabet soup of levered up non-bank investment conduits, vehicles and structures”. What we are seeing, in essence, is the privatizing of money creation. Privately-owned financial institutions of every stripe are increasing the amount of credit in the system even though the underlying collateral they’re using may be dodgy and even though they may not have sufficient capital to honor claims if there’s a run on the system.

    Let’s explain: When a bank issues a mortgage, it is required to hold a certain amount of capital against the loan in case of default. But if the bank securitizes the mortgage, that is, it chops the mortgage up into tranches, pools it with other mortgages, and sells it as a bond (mortgage backed security), then the bank is no longer required to hold capital against the asset. In other words, the bank has created money (credit) out of thin air. This is the ultimate goal of banking, to maximize profits off zilch capital.

    So how is this different than counterfeiting?

    There’s no difference at all. The banks are creating “near money” or what Marx called “fictitious capital” without sufficient resources, without supervision, and without any regard for the damage they may inflict on the real economy when their ponzi-scam blows up. What matters is profits, everything else is secondary.

    We live in an economy where the Central Bank no longer controls the money supply. Interest rates only play small part in this new paradigm where risk-oriented speculators can boost broad money by many orders of magnitude by merely increasing their debt levels. This new phenom has intensified systemic instability and caused incalculable harm to the real economy. Keep in mind, that ground zero in the financial crisis was a shadow bank called The Reserve Primary Fund. That’s where the trouble really began.

    In 2008, the Reserve Primary Fund (which had lent Lehman $785 million and received short-term notes called commercial paper) was unable to keep up with the withdrawals of clients who were concerned about the fund’s financial health. The sudden erosion of trust triggered a run on the money markets which sent equities plunging. Here’s how Bloomberg sums it up:

    “On Tuesday, Sept. 16, the run on Reserve Primary continued. Between the time of Lehman’s Chapter 11 announcement and 3 p.m. on Tuesday, investors asked for $39.9 billion, more than half of the fund’s assets, according to Crane Data.

    “Reserve’s trustees instructed employees to sell the Lehman debt, according to the SEC.

    “They couldn’t find a buyer.

    “At 4 p.m., the trustees determined that the $785 million investment was worth nothing. With all the withdrawals from the fund, the value of a single share dipped to 97 cents.

    “Legg Mason, Janus Capital Group Inc., Northern Trust Corp., Evergreen and Bank of America Corp.’s Columbia Management investment unit were all able to inject cash into their funds to shore up losses or buy assets from them. Putnam closed its Prime Money Market Fund on Sept. 18 and later sold its assets to Pittsburgh-based Federated Investors.

    “At least 20 money fund managers were forced to seek financial support or sell holdings to maintain their $1 net asset value, according to documents on the SEC Web Site.” (“Sleep-At-Night-Money Lost in Lehman Lesson Missing $63 Billion”, Bloomberg)

    The news that Primary Reserve had “broken the buck” sparked a panic that quickly spread to markets across the world sending stocks into freefall. Primary Reserve was the proximate cause of the financial crisis and the global crash, not subprime mortgages and not Lehman Brothers. This fact is obfuscated by the media to conceal the inherent dangers of the shadow system, a system that is just as rickety and crisis-prone today as it was in September 2008.

    Although there are ways to make shadow banking safer, the banks and their lobbyists have resisted any change to the current system. Recently, the banks delivered a stunning defeat to Securities and Exchange Commission chairwoman Mary Schapiro who had been pushing for minor changes to money market accounts that would have made this critical area of the shadow system safer and less susceptible to bank runs. Schapiro’s drubbing at the hands of an all-powerful financial services industry sent shockwaves through Washington where even diehard friends of Wall Street –like Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner–sat up and took notice. They have since joined the fight to implement modest regulations on an out-of-control money market system which threatens to crash the financial system for the second time in less than a decade.

    Keep in mind, that the changes Geithner, Bernanke and Schapiro seek are meager by any standard. They would involve “a floating net asset value, or share price, instead of their current fixed price,” or more capital to back up the investments in the money market fund (just 3 percent) in case there’s a panic and investors want to withdraw their money quickly. That sounds reasonable, doesn’t it? Even so, the banks have rejected any change at all. They believe they have the right to decieve investors about the risks involved in keeping their money in uninsured money market accounts. They don’t think they should have to keep enough capital on hand to cover withdrawals in the event of a bank run. They’ve decided that profits outweigh social responsibility or systemic stability.

    So far, Wall Street has fended off all attempts at regulatory reform. The banks and their allies in Congress have made mincemeat of Dodd Frank, the reform bill that was supposed to prevent another financial crisis. Here’s how Matt Taibbi summed it up in a recent article in Rolling Stone:

    “At 2,300 pages, the new law ostensibly rewrote the rules for Wall Street. It was going to put an end to predatory lending in the mortgage markets, crack down on hidden fees and penalties in credit contracts, and create a powerful new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to safeguard ordinary consumers. Big banks would be banned from gambling with taxpayer money, and a new set of rules would limit speculators from making the kind of crazy-ass bets that cause wild spikes in the price of food and energy. There would be no more AIGs, and the world would never again face a financial apocalypse when a bank like Lehman Brothers went bankrupt.

    Most importantly, even if any of that fiendish crap ever did happen again, Dodd-Frank guaranteed we wouldn’t be expected to pay for it. “The American people will never again be asked to foot the bill for Wall Street’s mistakes,” Obama promised. “There will be no more taxpayer-funded bailouts. Period.”

    Two years later, Dodd-Frank is groaning on its deathbed. The giant reform bill turned out to be like the fish reeled in by Hemingway’s Old Man – no sooner caught than set upon by sharks that strip it to nothing long before it ever reaches the shore.” (“How Wall Street Killed Financial Reform”, Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone)

    Congress, the White House and the SEC are all responsible for fragile state of the financial system and for the fact that shadow banking has not been brought under regulatory oversight. This mess should have been cleaned up a long time ago, instead, shadow banking is experiencing a growth-spurt, adding trillions to money supply and pushing the system closer to disaster. It’s shocking.

    MIKE WHITNEY

  138. GOOD STUFF CHRISTINE.

  139. DISADVANTAGES OF THE REVERSE MORTGAGE

    Compiled by Nancy B. Detweiler

    Advertisements for reverse mortgages are everywhere, proclaiming “Seniors First.”

    Don’t fall for it! In blunt language, “Seniors First” means “Screw seniors first.” Even more distressing is the fact that reverse mortgages are advertised as government sponsored. Cities list the reverse mortgage as one means for the elderly to pay their real estate taxes. Government joins with the banks to cheat the elderly.

    ********

    The following list of disadvantages of the reverse mortgage is taken from a report by The Consumers Union West Coast Regional Office.

    1. High up-front loan fees and potential lender windfalls. Fees and interest on financed fees can quickly use up a substantial portion of a borrower’s equity, before the borrower actually receives much cash.

    2. The origination fee is based on the home’s value, which is much greater than the usual loan amount. Thus, the borrower pays an origination fee that is often higher than that charged for a traditional mortgage.

    3. Accrued interest is compounded into the principal of the loan rather than paid off in installments. The interest rates tend to be high and may exceed the rates of a standard 30 year mortgage by as much as 3-5%.

    4. Some reverse mortgages also charge higher closing costs and higher mortgage insurance payments than a standard mortgage.

    5. A borrower who must suddenly move out of his home (for dire medical reasons, for example) will be hit hard with the costs of a reverse mortgage. This person will owe a substantial amount in fees and interests, while he may have received very little in cash advances. A 1995 study released that 60% of reverse mortgages are paid off for reasons other than the borrower’s death.

    6. A reverse mortgage can drain off the equity in the house, leaving little or nothing to bequeath to the borrower’s children.

    7. As an agency comes to rely on revenue generated by referral fees, it will have more of an interest in encouraging borrowers to take out reverse mortgages.

    8. Over a period of 10 years, the borrower may receive $36,000 (for example) but by the time he does so, he will owe approximately $70,000 to the lender.

    9. Reverse mortgages are typically adjustable rate loans, with a life-time cap. [We are now seeing the adverse impact of adjustable rate mortgages on those who cannot afford them. The elderly cannot afford them as evidenced by their need to take out a reverse mortgage.]

    Taken from Ms Financial Savvy

    http://www.msfinancialsavvy.com

    10. Seniors report being lied to, subjected to heavy handed tactics by the mortgage brokers, and scammed. They have reported their mental status being placed at risk because they are constantly monitored by the lender. For example: One client related having to take his wife to the hospital and coming home to find real estate appraisers measuring his home.

    ********

    The list of disadvantages and horror stories goes on and on.

    IN MY OPINION: It is unconscionable for our local media and government to assist in propagating the reverse mortgage. AARP should be ashamed of its organization for allowing such mistreatment of the elderly to occur. The AARP lobby on capital hill is very powerful, yet we have a government backed banking program that recommends the reverse mortgage and its corrupt practices to the elderly as a means of solving their economic difficulties. What a disgraceful lie!

  140. Nothing happens “just by chance”. What this country is going through was intended, designed and meant to be. We allowed it by our apathy. We can change it by our actions. It takes more than simply voting.

    “If the American people ever allow the banks to control issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers occupied.” Thomas Jefferson

    Are we seeing the culmination of Jefferson’s fear in 2008?

    THE BANKERS’ MANIFESTO OF 1892

    “We [the bankers] must proceed with caution and guard every move made, for the lower order of people are already showing signs of restless commotion. Prudence will therefore show a policy of apparently yielding to the popular will until our plans are so far consummated that we can declare our designs without fear of any organized resistance. The Farmers Alliance and Knights of Labor organizations in the United States should be carefully watched by our trusted men, and we must take immediate steps to control these organizations in our interest or disrupt them.

    At the coming Omaha Convention to be held July 4th [1892], our men must attend and direct its movement, or else there will be set on foot such antagonism to our designs as may require force to overcome. This at the present time would be premature. We are not yet ready for such a crisis. Capital must protect itself in every possible manner through combination [conspiracy] and legislation.

    The courts must be called to our aid, debts must be collected, bonds and mortgages foreclosed as rapidly as possible.

    When through the process of the law, the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and easily governed through the influence of the strong arm of the government applied to a central power of imperial wealth under the control of the leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders.

    History repeats itself in regular cycles. This truth is well known among our principal men who are engaged in forming an imperialism of the world. While they are doing this, the people must be kept in a state of political antagonism.

    The question of tariff reform must be urged through the organization known as the Democratic Party, and the question of protection with the reciprocity must be forced to view through the Republican Party.

    By thus dividing voters, we can get them to expand their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us, except as teachers to the common herd. Thus, by discrete action, we can secure all that has been so generously planned and successfully accomplished.”

    In order to warn Americans, the1892 Bankers’ Manifesto was revealed by US Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr. from Minnesota before the US Congress sometime during his term of office between the years of 1907 and 1917.

  141. Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan Apparently Can’t Remember
    Anything

    POSTED: November 27, 12:55 PM ET by Matt Taibbi

    Thank God for Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan. If you’re a court junkie, or have the misfortune (as some of us poor reporters do) of being forced professionally to spend a lot of time reading legal documents, the just-released Moynihan deposition in MBIA v. Bank of America, Countrywide, and a Buttload of Other Shameless Mortgage Fraudsters will go down as one of the great Nixonian-stonewalling efforts ever, and one of the more entertaining reads of the year.

    In this long-awaited interrogation – Bank of America has been fighting to keep Moynihan from being deposed in this case for some time – Moynihan does a full Star Trek special, boldly going where no deponent has ever gone before, breaking out the “I don’t recall” line more often and perhaps more ridiculously than was previously thought possible. Moynihan seems to remember his own name, and perhaps his current job title, but beyond that, he’ll have to get back to you.

    The MBIA v. Bank of America case is one of the bigger and weightier lawsuits hovering over the financial world. Prior to the crash, MBIA was, along with a company called Ambac, one of the two largest and most reputable names in what’s called the “monoline” insurance business.

    Bank of America: Too Crooked to Fail

    The monolines sell a kind of investment insurance – if you invest in a municipal bond or in mortgage-backed securities backed or “wrapped” by a monoline, you have backing in case the investment goes south. If a municipality defaults on its bond payments, or homeowners in a mortgage-backed security default on their mortgage payments, the investors in those instruments can collect from the monoline insurer.

    When companies like Countrywide issued their giant piles of crappy subprime mortgages and then chopped them up and turned them into AAA-rated securities to sell to suckers around the world, they often had these mortgage-backed securities insured by companies like MBIA or Ambac, to make their customers feel doubly safe about investing in their product.

    The pitch firms like Countrywide made went like this: not only are these mortgages triple-A rated by reputable ratings agencies like Moody’s, they’re fully insured by similarly reputable insurance companies like MBIA. You can’t lose!

    With protection like that, why shouldn’t your state pension fund or foreign trade union buy billions’ worth of these mortgage-backed products? It’s not like it would ever turn out that Countrywide made those products by trolling the cities of America stuffing mortgages in the pockets of anything with a pulse.

    After 2007-8, when all of those mortgage-backed securities started blowing up, suddenly all of those insurance companies started having to pay out billions in claims. Ambac went bankrupt and MBIA was downgraded from AAA to near-junk status. The entire monoline industry was shattered.

    The analogy one could make is that Countrywide sold a million flood-insured houses in New Orleans and Biloxi even though they could already see Katrina gathering in the Caribbean. Then, after the storm, the insurers decided to sue.

    MBIA sued Bank of America (which acquired Countrywide in 2008), claiming that Countrywide lied to MBIA about its supposedly strict underwriting standards, when in fact the firm was cranking out mortgages hand over fist, without doing any real due diligence at all. (Whether the monolines should have known better, or its agents perhaps did know better and sold the mountains of insurance anyway, is another matter). In its suit, MBIA claimed that Countrywide turned itself into a veritable machine of mortgage approvals:

    Countrywide Home Loans’ senior management imposed intense pressure on underwriters to approve mortgage loans, in some instances requiring underwriters to process 60 to 70 mortgage loan applications in a single day and to justify any rejections…

    As a result of all of this, MBIA got stuck insuring a Himalayan mountain range of dicey mortgages. When the securities those mortgages backed started to fail, MBIA ended up paying out $2.2 billion in claims, helping crack the hull of the formerly staid, solid, AAA-rated firm.

    Suits like this have the whole financial world on edge. The possibility that the banks might still have to pay gigantic claims to companies like MBIA (among a wide range of other claimants) has left Wall Street in a state of uncertainty about the future of some of the better-known, Too-Big-To-Fail companies, whose already-strained balance sheets might eventually be rocked by massive litigation payouts.

    In the case of Bank of America, MBIA has long wanted to depose Moynihan because it was precisely Moynihan who went public with comments about how B of A was going to make good on the errors made by its bad-seed acquisition, Countrywide. “At the end of the day, we’ll pay for the things Countrywide did,” was one such comment Moynihan made, in November of 2010.

    As it turns out, Moynihan was deposed last May 2. But the deposition was only made public this week, when it was filed as an exhibit in a motion for summary judgment. In the deposition, attorney Peter Calamari of Quinn Emmanuel, representing MBIA, attempts to ask Moynihan a series of questions about what exactly Bank of America knew about Countrywide’s operations at various points in time.

    Early on, he asks Moynihan if he remembers the B of A audit committee discussing Countrywide. Moynihan says he “doesn’t recall any specific discussion of it.”

    He’s asked again: In the broadest conceivable sense, do you recall ever attending an audit committee meeting where the word Countrywide or any aspect of the Countrywide transaction was ever discussed? Moynihan: I don’t recall.

    Calamari counters: It’s a multi-billion dollar acquisition, was it not?
    Moynihan: Yes, it was. Well, isn’t that the kind of thing you would talk about?
    Moynihan: not necessarily . . .

    This goes on and on for a while, with the Bank of America CEO continually insisting he doesn’t remember ever talking about Countrywide at these meetings, that you’d have to “get the minutes.” Incredulous, Calamari, a little sarcastically, finally asks Moynihan if he would say he has a good memory.

    “I would – I could remember things, yes,” Moynihan deadpans. “I have a good memory.”

    Calamari presses on, eventually asking him about the state of Countrywide when Moynihan became the CEO, leading to the following remarkable exchange, in which the CEO of one of the biggest companies in the world claims not to know anything about the most significant acquisition in the bank’s history (emphasis mine):

    Q: By January 1st, 2010, when you became the CEO of Bank Of America, CFC – and I’m using the initials CFC, Countrywide Financial Corporation – itself was no longer engaged in any revenue-producing activities; is that right?

    Moynihan: I wouldn’t be the best person to ask about that because I don’t know.

    There are no sound effects in the transcript, but you can almost hear an audible gasp at this response. Calamari presses Moynihan on his answer.

    “Sir,” he says, “you were CEO of Bank Of America in January, 2010, but you don’t know what Countrywide Financial Corporation was doing at that time?”

    In an impressive display of balls, Moynihan essentially replies that Bank of America is a big company, and it’s unrealistic to ask the CEO to know about all of its parts, even the ones that are multi-billion-dollar suckholes about which the firm has been engaged in nearly constant litigation from the moment it acquired the company.

    “We have several thousand legal entities,” is how Moynihan puts it. “Exactly what subsidiary took place [sic] is not what you do as the CEO. That is [sic] other people’s jobs to make sure.”

    The exasperated MBIA lawyer tries again: If it’s true that Moynihan somehow managed to not know anything about the bank’s most important and most problematic subsidiary when he became CEO, well, did he ever make an effort to correct that ignorance? “Do you ever come to learn what CFC was doing?” is how the question is posed.

    “I’m not sure that I recall exactly what CFC was doing versus other parts,” Moynihan sagely concludes.

    The deposition rolls on like this for 223 agonizing pages. The entire time, the Bank of America CEO presents himself as a Being There-esque cipher who was placed in charge of a Too-Big-To-Fail global banking giant by some kind of historical accident beyond his control, and appears to know little to nothing at all about the business he is running.

    In the end, Moynihan even doubles back on his “we’ll pay for the things Countrywide did” quote. Asked if he said that to a Bloomberg reporter, Moynihan says he doesn’t remember that either, though he guesses the reporter got it right.

    Well, he’s asked, assuming he did say it, does the quote accurately reflect Moynihan’s opinion?

    “It is what it is,” Moynihan says philosophically.

    There’s nothing surprising about any of this – it’s natural that a Bank of America executive would do everything he could to deny responsibility for Countrywide’s messes. But that doesn’t mean it’s not funny. By about the thirtieth “I don’t recall,” I was laughing out loud.

    It’s also more than a little infuriating. In the pre-crash years, Countrywide was the biggest, loudest, most obvious fraud in a marketplace full of them, and the legion of complainants who’ve since sued (ranging from the U.S. government to Norway’s Sovereign Wealth Fund to state pension funds in Iowa and Oregon, among others) have found it painstaking work trying to get Bank of America to do the right thing and pay back the money its subsidiary took in its various ripoffs. And with executives boasting such poor memories, this story is going to drag on and on even longer.

    Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/no-evidence-he-was-stoned-but-bank-of-america-ceo-brian-moynihan-apparently-doesn-t-remember-much-of-the-last-four-years-20121127#ixzz2DYGL48u5
    Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

  142. neidermeyer – “thank you sir – may I have another”

    Price estimates – now that is grand! lol

  143. @iwantmynpv

    Please send email address. Thanks

  144. iwantmynpv –

    Can I get your e-mail address please? Thanks.

  145. @ iwantmynpv ,

    Shows how out of touch I am ,, I saw the ticker “Z” and thought “Woolworths”… Zillow is a worthless company ,, all it has to peddle are wildly out of touch pricing estimates.

  146. “Putative Lender”, now you guys are getting it. I recently came out of retirement and have finished a terrific application for homeowners and attorneys alike.

    I am set up with a law firm – and due to my stellar record – 15 of 15 for Summary Judgment in 4 months, I am getting calls from homeowners in other States. Would be inerested in a New Jersey Attorney and Florida Attorney who do not over-litigate files, and will explain to clients- that being reasonable and settling is the best way to keep their home!

    I can handle all lit support from NY and have an expert staff that produces a superior product.

    If you like to win, and you are a practicing attorney with FC or BK background please reply on these pages.

    2013 is the year homeowners do a bit of ass-kicking. Not one of these schmos will come to close to BASEL III reserves and the shoe is going to offcially drop in Europe with the announcement of the pending collapse of France.

    Whomever shorted TRLA and Z – you have a tidy profit – you should cash out half the position and stay short the rest until January 6, 2013.

  147. Undisclosed fees are required to be be credited

  148. The fact of the matter is that almost all these securitized “loans” have robo signers. Finding out that you too have one, is not, in and of itself, “the magic wand” for Quiet Title.

    What Neil has said, over and over and over again is that you must request in your initial suit (and then subsequently in your Motion To Compel) the ORIGINAL wire transfers from the funding which was done at the initial closing on your property.

    Here is one of many times he has given specific instructions:

    Quote:

    “There are three possible written instruments that might be “evidence of the loan” (i.e. the obligation to repay:

    1.The closing agent’s instructions from the wire transfer receipt together with the written memo

    2.The bond received by the creditor not signed by the borrower

    3.The note possible signed by the borrower but refers to a monetary transaction that occurred between parties other than those named on the note.

    End Quote:

    And even better if you subpeona the “closing entity” to provide you with certified copies of the wire transfer receipt itself. There is a Statute of Limitations for how long the closing entity must hold on to these documents in your files before they are stripped and shipped, so time is of the essence.

    Once you have received that document, compare it to the “lender(s)” name listed on your closing statement. Do your due diligence in finding out if they are essentially the same entity through any type of corporate structuring. If you find that they are not essentially one and the same entity, (which odds are, you will) then the Note essentially becomes unenforceable (i.e. they cannot seize the asset tied to it) because it invalidates the “contract” between you and the pretender lender.

    Contract law in all 50 states says that in order for a contract (such as a mortgage loan agreement) to be valid, it must have three things.

    1.) An Offer
    2.) Acceptance
    3.) Consideration

    You had the offer of a mortgage loan, you accepted it from a SPECIFIC party to the transaction, but that party to which you accepted the offer did not put forth ANY Consideration.

    Instead, they took the money from the Pension Funds, that was meant to be used to buy the SPV’s and NOT TO FUND ANYONE’S MORTGAGE, and then pretended that they later securitized that mortgage and sold it in tranches to the original investors that are the ACTUAL creditors on you Note.

    Your pretender lender on your note and on your closing statement most likely NEVER advanced a dime to you, and most likely made money acting as an intermediary to the transaction without disclosing this to either party to the transaction.

    Can we all say FRAUD, FRAUD, FRAUD??? And serious violation of UCC Laws, DTPA laws, Identity Theft laws etc.. etc..

    Then once you have done your due diligence on all this, be like Captain America who quoted:

    Doesn’t matter what the press says.
    Doesn’t matter what the politicians or the mobs say.
    Doesn’t matter if the whole country decides that something wrong is something right.
    This nation was founded on one principle above all else: the requirement that we stand up for what we believe, no matter the odds or the consequences.
    When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth, and tell the whole world —
    “No, you move.”

  149. @ALL
    In light of the 11/22/12 release of the DOCX confession of CEO Brown –1st thing is see if your documents were prepared by DOCX—seemingly inherently invalid [ask your atty]

    even if there is no DOCX —go google the names of signers on your court documents——many will show up as robosigners beyond DOCX

    Look at Danielle Sterling initials for example–she was an employee of old American Home Mortgage and seems to have gotten her stamp into others as well—both on assignments and note indorsements

    query the effect of a note which was indorsed over to your plaintiff [negotiated] by any robosigner–but especially Sterling who has given an affidavit on it –see Mark Stopa material on this

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: