MERSCORP Shell Game Attacked by Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway


What’s the Next Step? Consult with Neil Garfield

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, Tennessee, Georgia, California, Ohio, and Nevada. (NOTE: Chapter 11 may be easier than you think).

EDITOR’S NOTES AND COMMENTS: My congratulations to Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway and his staff. They nailed one of the key issues that cut revenues on transfers of interests in real property AND they nailed one of the key issues in perfecting the mortgage lien.

As we all know now MERSCORP has been playing a shell game with multiple corporate identities, the purpose of which, as explained in Conway’s complaint, was to add mud to the waters already polluted by predatory loan practices and outright fraud in the appraisal and identification of the lender. This of course is in addition to the very gnarly issue of using a nominee that explicitly disclaims any interest in the property or loan.

The use of MERS, just like the use of fabricated, forged, robo-signed documents doesn’t necessarily wipe out the debt. The debt is created when the borrower accepts the money, regardless of what the paperwork says — unless the state’s usury laws penalize the lender by eliminating the debt entirely and adding treble damages.

But the use of a nominee that has no interest in the loan or the property creates a problem in the perfection of the mortgage lien. The use of TWO nominees doubles the problem. It eliminates the most basic disclosure required by Federal and state lending laws — who is the creditor?

By intentionally naming the originator as the lender when it was merely a nominee and by using MERS, as nominee to have the rights under the security interest, the Banks created layers of bankruptcy remote protection as they intended, as well as the moral hazard of stealing or “borrowing” the loan to create fictitious transactions in which the bank kept part of the money intended for mortgage funding. Since the mortgage or deed of trust contains no stakeholders other than the homeowner and the note fails to name any actual creditor with a loan receivable account, the mortgage lien is fatally defective rendering the loan unsecured.

When you take into consideration that the funding of the loan came from a source unrelated (stranger tot he transaction) then the debt doesn’t exist either — as it relates to any of the parties named at the “closing” of the mortgage loan. So you end up with no debt, no note, and no mortgage. You also end up with a debt that is undocumented wherein the homeowner is the debtor and the source of funds is the creditor — in a transaction that neither of them knew took place and neither of them had agreed.

The lender/investors were expecting to participate in a REMIC trust which was routinely ignored as the money was diverted by the banks to their own pockets before they made increasingly toxic over-priced loans on over-valued property. The borrower ended up in limbo with no place to go to settle, modify or even litigate their loan, mortgage or foreclosure. This is not the statutory scheme in any state and Conway in Kentucky spotted it. Besides the usual “dark side” rhetoric, the plan as executed by the banks creates fatal uncertainty that cannot be cured as to who owns the loan or the lien or the debt, note or mortgage. The answer clearly does not lie in the documents presented to the borrower.

Now Conway has added the hidden issue of the MERS shell game. Confirming what we have been saying for years, the Banks, using the MERS model, have made it nearly impossible for ANY borrower to know the identity of the actual lender/creditor before during and even one day after the “closing” of the loan (which I have postulated may never have been completed because the money didn’t come from MERS nor the other nominee identified as the “lender”).

The Banks are trying to run the clock on the statute of limitations with these settlements, like the the last one in which Bank of America would have owed tens of millions of dollars had the review process continued, and instead they cancelled the program with a minor settlement in which homeowners will get some pocket change while BofA walks off with the a mouthful of ill-gotten gains.

The plain truth is that in most cases BofA never paid a dime for the funding or purchase of the loan. That is called lack of consideration and in order for the rules of negotiable paper to apply, there must be transfer for value. There was no value, there was no cancelled check and there was no wire transfer receipt in which BofA was the lender or acquirer of the loan. Now add this ingredient: more than 50% of the REMIC trusts BofA says it “represents no longer exist, having been long since dissolved and settled.

The same holds true  for US Bank, Mellon, Chase, Deutsch and others. Applying basic black letter law, the only possible conclusion here is that the mortgages cannot be foreclosed, the notes cannot be enforced, the debt can be collected ONLY upon proof of payment and proof of loss. This is how it always was, for obvious reasons, and this is what we should re turn to, providing a degree of certainty to the marketplace that does not and will never exist without the massive correction in title corruption and the wrongful foreclosures conducted by what the reviewers in the San Francisco audit called “strangers to the transaction.”

See Louisville Morning Call here

See Bloomberg Article here

58 Responses

  1. Ray Shelton, on December 19, 2013 at 12:20 am said:

    US Bank and SN Servicing has submitted Forged documents in our federal bankruptcy case too and we will never stop perusing them in court for damages. We are also asking our Federal judge to prosecute their current attorney out of Jacksonville Florida who continued to defend this case knowing that forged document are before a federal court. All the offending parties at SN Servicing and their attorneys are committing a serious crime against our country. We have filed a formal complaint with the FBI and the US attorney general and many great Judges all across this nation are finally stopping them from this kind of fraud on American families. US Bank and SN servicing and their attorneys are also violating a serious consent order that was to protect the people from these crimes but they could care less. Please feel free to have your clients join a class action suit so that we can end their behavior with a multi billion dollar punitive damage suit. Join us, call Ray Shelton in Florida at 352 274 8467

  2. I am reading the complaint to see if it actually attacks “MERS Shell Game”. In the meantime, from the complaint:

    “Kentucky’s public policy for accurate, transparent, and current land records makes it a criminal offense to file records that are forged, are groundless or contain material misstatements. Kentucky law further provides that instruments missing complete and accurate information regarding the person preparing the instrument and the address information of a person receiving an interest in the property by way of the instrument should not be received or permitted to be recorded.”

  3. JG…they don’t own anything and they destroyed those instruments by committing massive fraud by counterfeiting and forging those instruments to the tune of $700 trillion dollars….

  4. From the Bloomberg article:

    “MERS data isn’t used by servicers to make loan- modification, refinance or foreclosure decisions, the company (MERS- sic) said.”

    Why not? Because MERS acknowledges that what is shown in its database is not reliable – see MERS Disclaimer at scribd and who knows where else. So when a member uses MERS’ name to transfer a collateral instrument, it does so on WHAT basis? What is the source of information which tells a bankster to assign a coll instrument to someone?

  5. NG said:
    “…and by using MERS, as nominee to have the rights under the security interest, the Banks created layers of bankruptcy remote protection as they intended….”
    How does naming a nominee on a collateral instrument promote bk remoteness? You also said the nominee has the “powers”. Where is the power to assign the instrument given to the nominee? Even if naming the nominee as such is taken (not) as an agency, it’s nonetheless a limited agency, limited to what is articulated in the instrument. And even that may only be found by implication (providing the document to the borrower by the originator) since the originator doesn’t sign the document to make the appt of the limited agency.
    Let’s say the dot is dated 01/03/06. XYZ gets a judgment against
    the originator on 01/04/06. Do you think this asset, the loan, made by
    the originator is exempt from attachment simply because it names a nominal beneficiary?

  6. Yves here. This post by Linda Beale, who was involved in the tax angles of securitizations in her prior life on Wall Street, first appeared on Angry Bear and on her blog, A Taxing Matter.

    It’s a very helpful addition to the discussion of the foreclosure crisis. Because it is also a bit technical at various junctures, I’m departing from my usual practice with guest posts and adding some commentary. Linda’s post follows:

    Yves Smith has an op-ed in the Oct. 31, 2010 New York Times on the mortgage mess. See Naked Capitalism, here, for full op-ed.

    As noted, the mortgage crisis goes much deeper than just bank use of robo-signers for documents. When the securitization process took off in the early 2000s, banks became sloppy. Loan product was needed, so niceties like documentation became an expendible. Subprime loans were more grist for the mill–the faster mortgage lenders could process them, banks could buy and securitize them, the more money they could all make. Since they were selling off the mortgage loans, they didn’t care how good they were. And since they were often selling them via securitizations that they “sponsored”, they didn’t want to have to do all that legal busywork that location-specific transfers of mortgages and notes required, including payment of recording taxes in the county where the land was located every single time a loan was moved from one owner to another, though they still wanted to collect all kinds of fees from servicing the mortgage loans that they “sold” via securitization.

    Just a little aside on the way these REMIC securitizations worked (edited noon 11/1). Often, original mortgages and notes were put in a trust and pass-through certificates were issued by the trust–this is the case in particular when Ginnie, Freddie, or Fannie aggregated a pool of mortgage loans and issued certificates representing ownership interests in that pool of loans which are treated as obligations secured by interests in real property under Treas. Reg. 1.860G-2(a)(5).

    Certificate holders were “beneficial owners” of the mortgage assets of the trust for tax purposes, though the Trust, or the trustee on behalf of the trust, would hold legal title to the mortgage loans. The certificates, representing interests in mortgages, could then be contributed to a REMIC, or mortgage loans could be contributed directly into a REMIC trust. REMIC regular interests are also treated as qualified mortgages under Section 860G(a)(3)(C), and they could therefore be contributed to another higher-tier REMIC, resulting in “re-REMICing”. The state law entity status for a REMIC doesn’t matter–trust, partnership or mere segregated pool of assets (no state law entity at all) could all elect REMIC treatment for mortgage loans under the Federal income tax rules for REMIC securitizations, if they satisfied the federal tax code requirements.

    Yves here. Achieving REMIC (Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit) treatment was an important objective in these securitizations. They were created in the 1986 Tax Reform Act. REMICs are pass through entities, meaning the entity (in this case a REMIC trust) is not subject to Federal income taxes; investors are taxed only on the income they receive.

    The discussion of re-REMICing is a bit scary. Tom Adams weighted in:

    She is just describing a very arcane aspect of the trust construction: because of various restrictions on “regular” and “residual” interests under REMIC, most MBS actually had two or three layers of REMIC regular and residual interests in them, which was needed to get deal features like interest only certificates, or certain over-collateralization structures.

    No one, other than tax attorneys, were able to decipher this details, but if you look at the definitions sections of a PSA, you see all of the crazy definitions around the regular and residual interests.

    All of the mortgage loan assets and any other eligible collateral would go into the REMIC I trust, which would then issue certain interests, which would go into the REMIC II trust, and so on, until the tax attorneys were satisfied the appropriate structure had been created, then the certificates are issued to real certificate holders.

    Back to Linda:

    The requirements generally were that the REMIC had to hold only certain assets consisting of “qualified mortgages” and “permitted investments” (covering certain cash flow investments, qualified reserves, and foreclosure properties); it had to issue only permitted REMIC interests consisting of “regular interests” that were treated as debt for tax purposes under the tax code and one class of “residual interest” that was treated as the owner of the REMIC under the tax code (special tax rules applied to require the holders of the residual interest to report certain amounts of income with respect to the REMIC on their tax returns ); and it had to satisfy an “arrangements” test to ensure that the residual interest was not held by inappropriate organizations and that appropriate information was provided. Qualified mortgages had to satisfy a loan to value ratio and had to be contributed to the REMIC either at startup or within 90 days under a fixed-price contract OR be substituted for defective loans within 2 years of startup. If a loan were discovered to be defective after that, it would need to be sold out of the REMIC within 90 days, or the REMIC would hold a “bad” asset that could cause the REMIC to lose its qualification as a REMIC. (There is a de minimis rule that lets a REMIC hold an insignificant amount of bad assets, but that generally would not cover a REMIC with lots of mortgages that fail to qualify.) If a REMIC is disqualified, it is almost certainly a “taxable mortgage pool” under section 7701(i) of the Code that is subject to corporate taxation without the ability to be consolidated with other members of the same affiliated group.

    Earlier private REMIC securitizations–the ones that were done in the late 1990s, for example–were careful to include detailed representations in the pooling and servicing agreement that the Depositor/Sponsor would assign the mortgage loans to the trustee for the benefit of the certificate holders–including the original note endorsed to the Trustee, the original mortgage, assignments of the mortgage, original assignment of leases and rents (for commercial properties), and original lender’s title insurance policy. The trustee was to hold such documents in trust for the certificate holders. The following is an illustrative sample of representations that would have been included in a commercial REMIC pooling and servicing agreement regarding the transfer of mortgage loans from a current owner to the depositor/sponsor who would transfer them to the trust.

    X is the sole owner and holder of the Mortgage Loan and will have, on the Closing Date, good and marketable title to the Mortgage Loan;

    X has full right and authority to sell, assign and transfer the Mortgage Loan as contemplated by the Mortgage Loan Purchasing Agreement; all of the obligations of X with respect to the Mortgage Loans are legal, valid and binding and enforceable against X except as may be limited by bankruptcy, insolvency or reorganization (or other similar laws affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights, generally) and by general principles of equity; the execution and delivery of the documents contemplated by the Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement has been duly authorized and such execution and delivery….will not constitute a violation of any federal, state or local law or the rules of any regulatory authority.

    As of the cut-off date, the information pertaining to the Mortgage Loan set forth in the Mortgage Loan Schedule is true and correct in all material respects; X is in possession of a file on each Mortgage Loan containing, among other things and to the extent applicable, the note, loan agreement, mortgage or deed of trust, and all amendments, allonges or the like thereto, records of payments, correspondence, and borrower’s address and each such file will be transferred to the Trustee, and X has not withheld any material information with respect to such Mortgage Loan…

    The assignment of the related Mortgage to the Trustee constitutes the legal, valid and binding assignment of such Mortgage…

    But when the banks got greedy in the early 2000s, they applied that brand of “financial innovation” that was bragged about as bringing us the nirvana of a service-oriented, financial transaction-dominated economy that would grow and grow and grow. (Of course, it did at first, making lots of money for the financial institutions and particularly for investment banks. But then it crashed, costing taxpayers while banks continued to make money out of cheap (taxpayer-made-possible) credit coupled with low interest to depositors and high fees for anything and everything.) Two things began to happen.

    1. For convenience, the assignment/allonge was “indorsed in blank”–meaning that the sponsor wouldn’t actually complete the document that transferred the mortgage loan to the trustee because it was “not practical to record mortgages in the name of the trustee” so the sponsor “retains record ownership subject to an obligation to transfer it to the trustee upon its request.” James Peaslee & David Nirenberg, Federal Income Taxation of Securitization Transactions (3d Ed. 2001) at 86 n.64 (concluding that this would be done only when the sponsor was “creditworthy” and so the fact that legal title wasn’t conveyed should “not be very significant”).

    Of course, the boom in mortgage lending, securitization glut, and ultimate bankruptcy of key sponsoring banks such as Lehman and Bear Stearns suggest that this “practical” issue had substantial consequences, at least for the legal proceedings even if not for the IRS tax status of entities (where legal title is not necessarily determinative of tax beneficial ownership). The danger, of course, is that bankrupt sponsors that retain legal title might be treated as owning the mortgage loans and the securitization vehicles to which the loans were purportedly transferred would be left with nothing, with the result that there would be questions whether the securitizations were legitimate (and if a REMIC, whether it had been disqualified from REMIC status because it had too many defective assets and therefore owed corporate taxes).

    MBSGuy reacted to this section:

    The article is that it notes some specific events that led to the shift in process and policy for delivery of notes and mortgages. this is the closest I’ve heard that this was a deliberate shift from the practice in the past, as a cost saving measure (coinciding with the adoption of MERS in private label deals – about 2005). I have heard this mentioned 2 times before, but everyone seemed fuzzy on the details.

    If it was official and deliberate policy, it would explain why the banks got so freaked out about it all of a sudden. I don’t, however, understand why they would not have changed or adjusted the agreements to reflect the change in practice. How did they not see that this would create problems later: “We are going to stop following the old method of delivery, but we are going to keep the documents the same”. Doesn’t that sound like a major misrepresentation problem?

    As a buyside person, I did not know that they had deliberately decided to stop delivery the notes and assignments to the trustee in the name of the trust. That would have been important information for me to have. As an old timer, I would have asked – how will they foreclosure? How will they not violate REMIC rules?

    If it is as she suggests, the case against the banks and the trustees just got stronger, in my opinion. I am not yet convinced that it wasn’t just bad practices, as opposed to deliberate choice.

    Back again to the original post:

    2. The reason it was “not practical” to record the mortgage in the name of the trustee was that there are almost always local law mortgage recording taxes to be paid every time a transfer is made. And of course, recording such taxes would be costly for a securitization–lawyer fees, servicer fees, the recording taxes themselves, document delivery and verification, etc. That would cut into the profits from the securitization for the sponsor (who might well also be the servicer). By keeping the legal title with the original sponsor, in spite of the pooling of the mortgages in a securitization, there would be no transfers until it was time to put the documents in somebody’s hands for foreclosing. That led to another financial innovation–the Mortgage Electronic Registry System (MERS), invented and owned by Chase, CitiMortgage, Bank of America, HSBC, Mortgage Bankers Association, Fannie, Freddie, various mortgage companies and title insurance companies.

    MERS apparently exists primarily to permit banks to avoid multiple transfers and multiple mortgage recording taxes in local jurisdictions where the property is located with each purported assignment of the mortgage. MERS claims that it serves to provide a consistent database that reduces errors caused by frequent assignments and reassignments of mortgage loans. See MERS fact sheet (pdf available at home page). But it seems to do the opposite–eliminate the actual assignment even though securitization has moved the mortgage loan from originator to bank sponsor to servicer or whatever, and avoid the ability of anyone to know who actually owns the mortgage loan from looking at county property records. MERS indicates that it records the mortgage (in its name) and that it can foreclose on mortgage loans as the “nominee for all parties” –or the bank that claims to “own” the loans can foreclose on them. See MERS statement about JP Morgan Chase (Oct. 13, 2010).

    The fact sheet further indicates that MERS expects its standing to foreclose as the agent for the noteholder to be upheld in litigation and reiterates that MERS holds legal title (which is the reason that only one recording tax has to be paid, if MERS is held valid) and that it will transfer the legal title to the servicer/sponsor bank for foreclosing if requested. (This transfer usually takes place, by the way, by the servicer bank personnel signing the indorsement from MERS to the servicer bank as an officer of MERS–another kind of robo-signing that the industry has perfected.) This does mean that many Servicers/Sponsors may have interacted with borrowers as though they held legal title when they did not.

    As Yves Smith notes, “While a standardized, centralized database was a good idea in theory, MERS has been widely accused of sloppy practices and is increasingly facing legal challenges.” On the website, I see that MERS claims that it always has possession of the full documentation and that its arrangements for bank personnel to act as personnel of MERS are perfectly legitimate.

    Yves here. The claim that MERS “always has possession of the full documentation” is completely untrue. I have depositions of the MERS CEO and general counsel to the contrary. Back to the post:

    Yet I can’t help wondering, if MERS always has possession of full documentation, why are there groups that advertise their ability to create documents, as Yves Smith also notes regarding “Lender Processing Services”? Further, the idea of letting anyone represent themselves as an employee of MERS when they actually are an employee of a party that might have a reason for committing fraud by inappropriately claiming to own a mortgage seems at least a questionable practice and one that should not be tolerated when it compromises the integrity of the mortgage system. If I were a judge dealing with one of these foreclosure cases, I would have serious qualms about accepting such a document as “proof” that a particular bank had a right to foreclose.

    As noted, under the rules before MERS, the trust established with original mortgage loans would hold legal title, and the trust would be entitled to act on the mortgage loans on behalf of the REMIC as beneficial owner. That’s especially important, since pooled trust certificates may not be held in a single REMIC vehicle–in fact, they are often scattered in various REMICS, and in REMICs of REMICs (REMICs squared and cubed, which may themselves be “re-REMICed” in the same deal or in later deals). But if the trust doesn’t actually hold legal title–because legal title is left with MERS from the first, in spite of the documents tracing a transfer from the sponsor to depositor to trust–that means that the trust actually holds in trust no mortgage loan but only its rights under the various documents and agreements it has entered into with MERS (and that borrowers have, probably unknowingly, signed off on in borrowing to buy property from a lender that is securitizing through MERS) to be able to acquire legal title if needed and then assign it, possibly, to the Servicer who will act on the foreclosure on the trust’s behalf.

    Do each of those assignments get appropriately recorded (and taxes paid)? Does this electronic database satisfy the state and securities law requirements? If not, the important tax question is whether this limited actual legal right supports a REMIC’s claim to “hold” qualified mortgages (aside from the question of whether these mortgages were “qualified” in the first place, in cases where appraisals were rigged and borrowers’ ability to pay was unexamined)? It seems that the legal title should not be determinative for REMIC status. If the loans are defective and do not qualify as “qualified mortgages” for REMIC status, however, it is possible that some REMICs would have “bad” assets that would disqualify the REMIC if the loan is not sold within 90 days of discovery of the defective loan problem.

    Moreover, if a bankruptcy court were to determine that a sponsor or other entity actually owned (not just as legal title, but as beneficial owner in the tax sense) mortgage loans that had been thought to be included in the REMIC pool (and thus the court order allocated all funds connected with that loan, or foreclosure rights and sales proceeds, to parties other than the REMIC investors), it would appear that the decision removing the loan from the pool would create a loss to REMIC investors but would not in itself jeopardize REMIC status. If the problem of non-existent documents and unverified loan quality was substantial, however, is there some possibility that the sham transaction doctrine could be applied to the REMIC to cause it to lose REMIC status ?

    That’s a hard call but seems unlikely given the highly “constructed” nature of the REMIC as a special tax entity under the Code–any entity or even a non-entity can be given REMIC status if it meets the requirements, regular interests are treated as debt even if they wouldn’t independently be considered debt under general tax principles, residual interests are treated as equity even though they may have no entitlement to proceeds and primarily represent a liability to includes certain “phantom income” amounts in income, the sponsor may continue as servicer and continue to hold the mortgage loans (in a segregated pool) even when they are REMICed, tiering of REMICs results in a final allocation of mortgage payments that may differ considerably from the initial allocation in the first-tier REMIC, servicer and trustee actions are taken under the pooling and servicing agreement with respect to the mortgage loans according to whatever the documents permit or require (such as servicer advances to which it has reimbursement rights), etc.

    Linda does not leave readers with much in the way of reasons as to why the IRS would let certain violations of REMIC rules that would seem flagrant to a layperson get a free pass. But tax law takes a very different view of matters like beneficial ownership. However, there are certain issues that might not be easily finessed. For instance, if a bankruptcy court were to conclude that a bankrupt originator still owned a bunch of loans that had supposedly been securitized, that could mean the securitization vehicle would no longer be able to be treated as the beneficial owner of the loans. That would seem to pose a problem for the REMIC treatment.

    However, the reality is that the IRS, which is part of the Treasury, is not about to take a strict view of the regs because it will create lots of havoc with MBS investors.


  7. September 27, 2012
    Leave a Comment What is Going On here Counsel ?

    Foreclosures have taken to an uncharacteristic methodology and unorthodox style whereupon the devisees and instrumentalities used by Federal Agents are seen are forcing the majority of this case to evolve into judicial setting. Then there is the FDCPA used by foreclosure attorneys who are alleged secured creditors ?

    Consider MersCorp rights to transfer assets without recording assignments – Cannot do in a private placement. But really, No per diem interest in calculating a payoff figure surety claims. And what about the promissory notes that are endorsed in blank Bailment claims

    Servicing breach under ABS 1122 AB for material violations see attestation reports and New York Fed pursuing claims as the beneficiary- ABA wire

    Debt collectors engaged under Federal color of badge and authority abusive practices and the ongoing controversy amongst domestic FASB and overseas IASB accounting rules capitation.

    Foreclosure claims brought for a title holders interest versus actual ownership cannot F/C on interests and claims in US Bankruptcy Courts that no foreclosure exists – installment sales contract

    Aggressive pursuit to grant modifications that seldom succeed – laches and the Passage of TARP legislation allowing GSE to short title short selling options

    Foreclosures are required to include hedging strategies see above and the Trustee sales that credit bid in excess of the property value

    Beneficiaries must enter a credit bid versus setting opening bid. Now consider the executed bank endorsements and assignments familiar to bailment law.

    There is the matter of the GSE ’s FNMA and FHLMC purchasing assets subsequent to direct endorsements. And the Time delays and postponement of Sheriff and trustee sales dates. There is the revolving bank lines of credit that accumulate over time versus revolve

    Lawyers for the household plaintiffs dropping cases at trial and the The 1996 changes marking the commencement of alternative lending that should mention cautious literature by ABA warning of the advent of civil forfeiture and the timing of the Introduction of Mers Corp for Bailment uses

    Title companies offered government indemnities against surety claims /Introduction of a uniform instrument held for national use

    Entry into commercial paper markets by banks /Reverse predatory lending pricing devisee that are submerged

    At sale the grantee is the foreclosing beneficiary/Combo loans to 100% where the sponsors cannot exceed 80 %LTV /Consumption of early payments stream with nothing left for overcollateralization / Corridor financing used in securities deals to avoid GAAP / Reverse REPO’s used as ingress versus egress /Negative pledge for bonds are executory /Good will at 10:1 ratio is a restraint on alienation MersCorp avoids

    Tax payer funds used to capitalize private placements and each de-novo /Bank financing that clearly violates FIERRA and Sarbox legislation /Cancellation of third party debt “bonds” passed thru to the household /Economic corollaries that cause the states civil code enforcement to fail /Demands for controlling recognition to establish values versus appraisals /New administration revokes the Constitution, brings F/C through a national collections effort and warns of the reprisals against for bank and lender who controlled or inflated values. ….

    while president Obama suggests doing away with appraisals.

  8. MS….maybe we should just call them fraudulently induced debt bombs because the value of the credit the banksters lent was destroyed by the origination fraud and a quadrillion dollars in investment fraud by Wall Street. Therefore, NO… we cannot call them credit obligations. We cannot call them anything but what they are….criminal fraud and unsustainable debt……fraudulently induced debt bombs.

  9. Comments – originating lender and since they are not perfected mortgages can we begin referring to them as credit obligations.

    Party A originates and holds to sell the loan.
    If party B gives the origination task to party A then B creates a second receivable. The tax shelter and generous accounting rules will not work with out a TPO

    False – CWHL Inc sells to CWHL Servicing LP .

    BofA NA originated the receivables as underlying financing into each settlement . CWHL is still the owner of the asset – but it is removed from the equation under bailment laws .

    Mers Corp is an agent for bailment. How a lender or bank can carry a mortgage long term is impossible . Mers Cured this issue.

    Ps I never guess – I always going to give you facts vs conjecture and guessing. The guessing is killing you folks


    Living Lie – But the use of a nominee that has no interest in the loan or the property creates a problem in the perfection of the mortgage lien.

    MersCorp represents the whole loan asset under a bailment arrangement. Mers Corp is representing the intervening assigned assuming the originating lender is using a TPO .

    MersCorp has also evolved into a protection mechanism for the title having been stripped from the estate and made free of liens and all encumbrance under a fictitious deed of trust .

    Whatever transfers into a trust is left there for the ages and cannot come out – barring an alteration of the paid in capital account or election to folds the series . Its a gate keeper for substituting assets in an out of ….

  11. What a bunch of shit……What use is all this theory about the EVIL that lurks behind all that IS? Solutions would be appropriate at this point in time. Anything less is just a big mind f*ck….Thank you. What works? Then let’s do THAT! Share it here and everyplace you can. So, we know the banks have screwed the world….Then let us create a national bank, print our own money, interest free. Read Ellen Brown. The solution is so simple, if we just open our eyes….and yes, I lost my home of 32 years…I can relate.

  12. Christine….if you think Marx words are not evi and inhuman, than it is you who are evil and inhuman. You have no soul.

  13. “Marx’s description of one pure evil is one pure evil.”

    Again, the depth of that open-door ramming statement is simply… well, it is so subhuman that words are even escaping me!

  14. We already know they are all immoral and that includes Obama and all the politicians. They don’t get hired by this outfit to be saints. However, it is all an illusion, that is what they won’t tell you.


    Obama says the acts may have been immoral, but not illegal. The DOJ said they couldn’t get convictions if they tried (so they didn’t try).
    Which is it?

  16. It all goes back to the first big lie that evil taught us to believe….the original sin is the first real lie that evil taught us to believe……they want us to believe the BIG LIE that the Creator would not want us to eat of the tree of knowledge….that is a dangerous lie because the tree of knowedge holds the truth. ….. the real words of the Creator are being hidden from us. Evil is a master deceiver and counterfeiter of the truth.

  17. A debt collector can only collect on Consideration and Costs (taxes, Ins, legal expenses). If there was No Consideration or very little consideration (lets say for .40 cents on the dollar) …. what amount should they be trying to collect from you? Not the taxes( or ins) if you are paying them as legal required by state law. But I dispute the amount of consideration given by the (unsecured) debt collector and the amount he claims is owed. He does not want to disclose this … so he stalls.. re-direct and pushes more fraud docs til he gets that Tax lien and has a Legal Claim to FC. Not so Hard to understand is It? He wants your house, that is where his profits is … not getting ppaid back his consideration.

  18. You are merely counterfeiting an illusion E Tolle and it is one pure evil.

  19. Marx’s description of one pure evil is one pure evil. Like the protocols of the elders of Zion…jesuitism…the Talmud….it is all the hidden face of one pure evil.

  20. The only proof I see is that stripes/ivent is the president of the Asshat club. You haven’t an original idea in that void you call your head.

  21. As I said….they counterfeit the truth. They want no one to believe this kind of evil exists….but the proof of their fraud is apparent on its face and it is all the creation of one true evil.

  22. It’s a big satanic club….and they want all of us in it. Look around…the proof is all around us.

  23. strop/assvent, have I told you lately what a moron you are?

  24. Totalitarianism and satanism are the same thing. They want everyone to join their evil club and become evil.

  25. Beware the deceivers….they want to keep the land of illusion operating by making everyone believe they are not a giant fraud. Well they are all working for one evil…TOTALITARIANISM.

  26. Wall Street, the banks, the politicians, the corps, the military, the cops, the judiciary, the educational system..everything is being run by this one evil… can call it socialism…communism..Marxism…Leninism…the new world order…totalitarianism …..fraud….robosigning ….fraudclosure is all COUNTERFEITING BY ONE TRUE EVIL…

  27. You can’t correct what is broken when people don’t even know what is broken. Democracy is TOTALITARIANISM in disguise. Evil always counterfeits good. America is a Costitiutonal Republic that is being secretly controlled by Democracy..Democracy is a fraudulently induced dictatorship being controlled from behind the scenes by one evil dictator. That evil dictator counterfeits everything good and distracts everyone from its evil self.

  28. True power is the ability to see beyond the illusions. The only power our enemies have is their ability to distract everyone from how they operate. Their secrets, deceptions and lies are the evil machinations that allow them to control everyones minds. An enlightened person is a person who has the ability to look beyond the lies they tell. They use many evil tricks to deceive us and make us their mind slaves. If you know they are all illusions that allows you to solve problems, not fraudulently fix them.

  29. So Mr Buttwipe, We know you are Not a Morgagee, No Morgagee insurance for You! What is the Real Amount Due (Consideration)? Can You Prove Please? Game Over! And The Homeowners Live Happily Ever aka Getting Their Life Back.

  30. Marx’s description of the French finance aristocracy of the 1840’s in “The Class Struggles In France” could not be more appropriate in describing the 21st Century Wall Street masters of the universe:

    “Since the finance aristocracy made the laws, was at the head of the administration of the state, had command of all the organized public authorities, dominated public opinion through the actual state of affairs and through the press, the same prostitution, the same shameless cheating, the same mania to get rich was repeated in every sphere, from the court to the Cafe Borgne to get rich not by production, but by pocketing the already available wealth of others, Clashing every moment with the bourgeois laws themselves, an unbridled assertion of unhealthy and dissolute appetites manifested itself, particularly at the top of bourgeois society- lusts wherein wealth derived from gambling naturally seeks its satisfaction, where pleasure becomes debauched, where money, filth, and blood commingle. The finance aristocracy, in its mode of acquisition as well as in its pleasures, is nothing but the rebirth of the lumpenproletariat on the heights of bourgeois society”.

    As history has a way of repeating itself, and back to the 1840’s, along came a figure who struck a chord with just about everyone. Remind you of anyone?

    Louis Napoleon Bonaparte was elected president on 10 December 1848 by a landslide. His support came from a wide section of the French public. Various classes of French society voted for Louis Napoleon for very different and often contradictory reasons. Louis Napoleon, himself encouraged this contradiction by “being all things to all people.” One of his major promises to the peasantry and other groups was that there would be no new taxes.

    Oh Gawd….how many times must we do this? We know that the same exact situation occurred with the Roman Senate and the oligarchy at that time. All the way back to the Vedic period as well. We are gluttons for punishment from slimy wealth cornering assholes. Serves us right, UNLESS WE TELL THEM ENOUGH IS ENOUGH AND GET IN THEIR FACES WITH THREATS OF PITCHFORKS!

  31. What I mean is … Extort That!, You Buttwipe Debt Collecter! And I hope you Choke on It!

  32. Oh … and I was reasured by my ins co of 30yrs that they would NEVER accept another payment or put Another Mortgagee on our Policy without our Proof and Our Verification! BOA was removed as Morgagee for the Last and Final Time! PFFFT!!! We are So Done trying to do the Right Thing! Extort That Buttwipe Debt Collector!

  33. HeeHeeHee …… Another payment being sent back to BOA for homeowners ins. This is the third year in a row now, but this time is different! I had my insurer make BOA prove thay had a right to be named as Morgagee on my Policy. I was tired of their yearly game with our Ins! *Grins* They couldnt prove it. No more.. see ya later … Its Bye Bye Mortgagee Forever! Bite My Ass BOA!

  34. Actually, Robot is probably the best reason we can’t do away with abortion… The only time it will be useful is after it croaks and little worms get to feed on it. Yeah. That’s it. Robot’s ultimate purpose if to be part of the food chain.

  35. “MERSCORP is a strawman entity. MERSCORP is the banks proxy to hide their crimes against us. The banks used MERSCORP TO CONCEAL THEIR MASS CRIMINAL FRAUD.. The banks used MERSCORP to commit, hide and dump all of their massive criminal fraud.”

    I have to say that brainless Robot’s limitless platitude does not cease to amaze me… If Gawd ever wants to know whether humanity was such a great plan after all, all he has to do is read its damn, stupid, useless posts…

    E. ToLLe,

    I know how you feel. That’s why I make it such a point to look for evidence that things are getting better. And the mistake people make is look to government to fix what government created in the first place. The way i see it is that, even though it is taking a very, very long time, people are slowly developing a conscience. Think about it: how many attorneys started out as being part of the problem? I know mine was before he lost everything and decided to take on that fight and bring solutions. So did Cox in Maine and many others. It is well known that, once people have put into question all their conditioned beliefs and assumptions, they never, ever go back to them. Those guys who crossed the fence will never go back to trusting one bank. In the end, it is victory. Just takes a long time.

  36. choke on a wingbone strips/unvented

  37. I should clarify, the Latin Vulgate is the secret language of these deceivers. They counterfeit God. The U.S. Constitution was 99% inspired by God…that is why they wish to destroy it. Like fedspeak, it is all the art of the con. The knights templars, the bank owners, rule by secrets and deception…..they use those weapons to hide their lies & defraud us. They are well practiced at the art of deception..the art of the con.

  38. The way I see it is ….. they do not want every Stripper (tax evader) and Insolvent to take advantage of a situation that would cost the American Taxpayers anymore than it already has. So they are flushing the pipeline free of them first. I get It! The rest of us who paid and can afford to pay will Not go down with them. We will Save our Homes!

  39. I agree poppy…..

    E Tolle…..All of these so called “governmental agencies” are being controlled by Communists. They were put in place to try and ease us into TOTALITARIANISM … The truth is, they are very deceptive criminals and frauds and they are NOT going to help WE THE PEOPLE……..WE THE PEOPLE have to help ourselves by exposing these lying, deceiving commie crooks…

  40. Ahhhh…. but E-Tollee. Its a Good Sign! MERS never had any authority to transfer the Notes in Most States. So as it stands, every title slandered with a MERS FC or a MERS transfer of the Note is a Wild Deed / Zombie Title. What I keep saying is the Buttwipes are in the Same Boat they put Us in!

  41. So, about the KY AG…. why have I stopped raising both arms… yelling yippee when reading about yet another governmental agency going after these criminals? What will be the outcome this time? Should I feign excitement yet again?

    We all know the answers to these questions, as they’ve become rhetorical over time. Without admitting any guilt the bad actors will open their checkbooks, the accounts of which are funded by taxpayer monies, and write checks equaling .01% of the ill-gotten gains. The governmental agency will then crow like a rooster having been satisfied, and eventually the AG will run for governor having splashed his/her name around as the bad-ass on the beat.

    So I yawn once again, knowing full well that the assembly line of borrowers to debtor’s prison is still in full steam ahead mode. Actually it’s more like a crowded line of sickly cattle at a CAFO. They know exactly how to game this stuff, and the only thing we can do is bleat.

    To make matters worse, I have no doubt that Iwantmynpv truly likes chicken.

  42. I agree Poppy! Telling the Truth can lead to a Solution! Snowballing the Lies down the hill will create an Avalanche of Damages. @ Stripes…. Did you make that Call to the County Collectors Office Yet?

  43. They call it “semantics” I call it outright LYING!

  44. MERSCORP is a strawman entity. MERSCORP is the banks proxy to hide their crimes against us. The banks used MERSCORP TO CONCEAL THEIR MASS CRIMINAL FRAUD.. The banks used MERSCORP to commit, hide and dump all of their massive criminal fraud.

  45. Naaaaa….. They are using words like defaulted “Taxes” and Tax Sales . The States have been harmed (loss of filing fees, costs to sort out all the deed records due to the banksters, not to mention the loss in real estate tax revenue by the homeowners who stopped paying them. Funny Thing .. you know …. how they pay the taxes on properties they want, but they do not pay them on properties they dont want …… they dump those on the State Taxpayers to ……. Very Intresting indeed!

  46. BANK OF “AMERICA” CEO Brian Moynihan being interviewed on CNBC from the “WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM” in Davos, Switzerland by COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS MEMBER…Maria Bartiromo….He said most of their “bad mortgage deals” are behind them. He must have forgot to mention they just turned their criminal fraud into more deceptive criminal fraud….Mortgage Fraud is now being called..The FED is “repurchasing” their own “soured mortgages” (CRIMINAL FRAUD) because they full intended to destroy US and create a TOTALITARIAN NATION OF RENTERS….Perfect example of how they use deception to MOVE their NEW WORLD ORDER scam FORWARD.

  47. They use deceptive wording to steal because they are evil. Like robosigning….an innocent sounding word for forgery so they can steal…..the word foreclosure really means, the banks are stealing from us, not vice versa….They are in reality using innocent sounding words … DEMOCRACY …. to steal everything from us. It is all a cover up for criminal fraud. BEWARE THE DECEIVERS…..

  48. After reinstating the loan (fees and all), we were tired of these buttwipes. Because they had (still have) my husbands credit tied up, I went to transfer the note and mortgage to my name … Whooaaa said my local bank ….. no can do! So we retained an attorney and been in limbo ever since ….

  49. Everything is a play on words with these crooks. The Latin Vulgate is how they counterfeit.

  50. Neil is Right! Deny and Discover! I took this approach before any litigation was started by BOA. That puts BOA on Notice of Fraud! If they file a FC they would be committing fraud upon the court (just for starters)…. My husband has made no admissions of anything, signed nothing and applied for nothing. MERS assigned the note and mortgage together to CW in 2011, CW LP was filed in 2008. CW LP was released in 2011 after MERS assignment …CW, BAC, BOA. Buttwipes went and screwed up our title even more than they already had.

  51. It doesn’t matter what we call them, they are all proxies, robberbarons for the rich. Since we are talking about political jargon, the latest corporate meme they are selling is, they are now calling people seeking employment, candidates. Apparently when seeking employment in this country, you are in reality, going on the campaign trail.

  52. Correct, iwantmynpv…look at the HUD, fees to originator, then fees to the LENDER (commitment fees), very separate entities. It is very clear. These court proceedings should be 5 minutes with a 15 minute recess, Jude comes back and rules Defendants/Plaintiffs, whomever; dismissed WITH prejudice! Game over!

  53. And for all the foregoing reasons listed above, they go after you on Taxes and Insurance to get a Tax lien. As of 2013 the crooks are still producing, forgeing fraudulent docs to get fc. Like the one we got stating they had paid our taxes for 2010 and 2011, but the kicker was they also claimed the 2012 tax bill (not yet due or payable) …. $15,000 hahahaha … I have the reciepts for 2010 and 2011, I can not pay the 2012 tax bill until it comes due in May of 2013! Buttwipes!!!

  54. Understand that what behind the Federal Government in looking the other way is that Ginnie Mae that is 100% government owned is involved in these crimes. Why do you think the FHA loss $70 billion in loan losses.

    Where is that GAO report that was suppose to be release. I informed DOJ back on Oct 21, 2010 and not the first time telling Eric Holder Wells Fargo crime against me and their operation, where they are servicing Washington Mutual Bank’s government loans, foreclosing on them without having the legal ability to do so.

    MERS help Wells Fargo accomplish submitting a fraudulent assignment of title, however instead of settling when caught as I talked to MERS co-found in Williams Hultman who told me I did not know what I was talking about, but Hultman should have realized that the one state at the time was one it should not mess around in was the state of Nebraska because the the NE Supreme Court case in which MERS took the NE Dept of Bank & Finance to court and won the fact that they are not a “mortgage bank”.

    MERS is not even register with the Secretary of State Office to do business which is required by state law, which even in 2013 they are still not register and never has been register to do business in the state.

    MERS lies in filing assignments were Ginnie Mae is in physical possession of the blank Notes, as Ginnie is not a lender and is not a member of MERS as a lender and cannot be place on titles at the local county level because they cannot and do not purchase the debt.

    What you have is a Ponzi scheme that I have submit a whistle -blower case about the securities are worthless as there is not underlying collateral for the securities. As Ginnie Mae is not even sign up for the HAMP because the fact that they are not a lender and by law cannot buy or sell a home mortgage loan and cannot if they wanted change a interest rate or term and cannot have a surrogate do it for them.

    The fact is that the monthly payments could never be collected when Ginnie Mae was in possession of the endorse in blank Notes. So what you have is not only properties illegally seized with the help of the government but you got years of payments that were illegally taken from the homeowners.

    The DOJ needed to understand Contract Law! ME

  55. Neil,

    To avoid further confusion, can we call the “closing lender” something other than Nominee? Can we simply call them “glorified mortgage brokers”, and since they are not perfected mortgages can we begin referring to them as credit obligations.

    It is cold in NY today and I am fond of chicken.


  56. […] MERSCORP Shell Game Attacked by Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway […]

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: