The Sad Future of Housing According to Zillow

Is housing on a ‘sugar high’?–is-housing-on-a-sugar-high
If you are seeking legal representation or other services call our Florida customer service number at 954-495-9867 and for the West coast the number remains 520-405-1688. Customer service for the livinglies store with workbooks, services and analysis remains the same at 520-405-1688. The people who answer the phone are NOT attorneys and NOT permitted to provide any legal advice, but they can guide you toward some of our products and services.
The selection of an attorney is an important decision  and should only be made after you have interviewed licensed attorneys familiar with investment banking, securities, property law, consumer law, mortgages, foreclosures, and collection procedures. This site is dedicated to providing those services directly or indirectly through attorneys seeking guidance or assistance in representing consumers and homeowners. We are available to any lawyer seeking assistance anywhere in the country, U.S. possessions and territories. Neil Garfield is a licensed member of the Florida Bar and is qualified to appear as an expert witness or litigator in in several states including the district of Columbia. The information on this blog is general information and should NEVER be considered to be advice on one specific case. Consultation with a licensed attorney is required in this highly complex field.

Editor’s Analysis: The Banks have been paying a lot of money to plant articles around the country and in media generally to give us the impression that the recession is over, they did their job in preventing it, and the housing crisis has turned the corner with prices rising. Housing prices are rising in some places because of a glut of cheap money (see mortgage meltdown 1996-2008); other than that the whole thing is an outright lie. Even their own analysts don’t agree with the articles and statements made on behalf of the megabanks.

You can’t take half the blood out of a person and expect them not to be anemic, weak and dizzy. The megabanks took more than that out of our economic system and parked it around the world out of reach of all but the select few who are members of the club. For the rest of us, earning a living is becoming increasingly difficult, getting approval for a reasonably priced mortgage is difficult unless you go for one of the new deals that are out there at 2.5%, 15 years fixed rate, supposedly. Besides the fact that they are going to steer you into an entirely different loan product in the classic bait and switch, they are restarting the “securitization” scheme that wrecked us in the first place.

Who is making money at 2.5%? How can you even have a budget for advertising much less appear dozens of times per day on TV, radio, magazines and newspapers? The answer to these and other similar questions lies in the fact that on average, the mortgages are going to be at much higher rates than those advertised, the incidence of force-placed insurance on fully insured homes will be increased to become a regular major contributor to income to the megabanks in the form of kickbacks or commissions and simply price gouging, and no doubt someone has come up with a really creative way to make certain the loans, on the whole, go into default decreasing the value of a “portfolio” or “pool” of loans to less than half of the nominal value placed on the note — but increasing the profits from betting against the same mortgages they represented as being underwritten according to industry standards.

The fact is that the Federal Reserve cannot keep rates down indefinitely, and the rush to gold and other currencies shows that the big players who know more than you do are getting ready for a major devaluation of currency in the U.S. The “inflation” that accompanies a devaluation might work to the benefit of the homeowners who owe the old dollars but can pay with the new dollars (if they have any). But increased rates mean higher payments, and higher payments combined with no credit and low wages and low median income spells disaster for the demand side of housing. Simply  put: housing prices are going down again and they are already starting to slip.

The only reason inventories of homes for sale are “low” is because of the shadow inventory of homes set for foreclosure sales, the zombie houses that have been stripped and are worthless and the homeowners who are so far underwater that they can’t make it to the closing table. It is a very unpersuasive recovery. Zillow outlines it chapter and verse.

Working backwards, the reason for all this is simple theft using exotic sounding names of financial instruments that were never funded or used. In the end, the loan was from the investors and the debt was and is between the investors and the homeowners. Everyone else is an intermediary. Those conduits for the loan have no stake in it. They have their agreements for fees but that is about it.

There are only two ways of going on this: (1) do the same thing all over again and kick the can down the road to the next blowout recession or (2) stop kidding ourselves that housing prices are going anywhere but down unless we expose the truth of what happened in these so-called mortgage loans funded with money stolen from investors under the premise that the money would fund a REMIC trust which would then acquire loans and be secured, on record, for their interest. Anyone out there see the trust on any document in any loan closing that didn’t end up in litigation? No?

That’s because the intermediaries were and are asserting ownership stakes in loans that never came out of their pocket, loans for which they have no risk of loss and loans that were acquired on paper by other intermediaries when the debt was at all times material hereto owned by the investor lender. AND THAT is why you must LEAD with the deficiencies in the money trail and NOT with the DOCUMENT trail, which will merely have you running down a rabbit hole dug special for you.

The Future of Home Values – Taking a Closer Look at Price-to-Income Fundamentals

198 Responses

  1. At this moment I am going away to do my breakfast, afterward having my breakfast coming again to read further news.

  2. NOT GOOD! This case was in the Idaho Supreme court by a pro se and an attorney tried to save it with only a week to prepare his oral argument This is bad for Idaho and other states. MERS is bursting with joy.

  3. Seeing the victims families of the Boston tragedy express their heartbreak is heartbreaking to watch. That should have never happened to them. These terrorists are thieves. Our Security is not being protected because there was no accountability for what those financial criminals on Wall Street did to our Securities.

    The result of that ongoing coverup is having a terrifying effect on the psychology of the nation.

    One soul lost, because of a cover up of negligence by anyone or for anyone whether it be a beloved pet or a human being is one soul too many.

  4. I agree with what J.F.K said in his speech on Secret Societies. A mistake does not become an error until you refuse to correct it.

  5. Carie….I see it all going back to the Origination Fraud. That Negligence in the care or taking of an instrument is no different than what that vet did in taking or caring for my pet. The coverup for that original negligence makes it criminal negligence.

  6. @stripes
    You reminded me of the time my husband was told by a lawyer (when he was a witness in a lawsuit) : “You’re a great witness—you could make a lot of money if you are willing to lie on the stand!”
    Tells you all you need to know about our “justice” system.

  7. Haven’t read the opinion, Matthew G. Kaiser at the Kaiser Law Firm PLLC thinks this of the opinion:

    “And, seriously, this post doesn’t do justice to how much fun this opinion is to read. It’s nice to see judicial snark doled out for a win for a guy who is accused of a crime.”

    Thanks everyone comments regarding our “forever family” pet, and also on my comment on accountability indicating prosecution of everyone who should have known better is complex, but not impossible.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, Independent, Conscience, People, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  8. The way I see it when it comes to race, these people were put there to cause another blame game. I see the race of people is being used as symbolism for the black hand. I see this whole thing as being an evil belief system because it knows no boundaries. These people involved in these evil doings are of all races, nationalities and religions. That is what is so dangerous about this. You can never know who your enemy is if you do not know what they worship and believe. It is incredibly awful because they use what you do not know against you.

    Like my sick pet for example, I could never have known he had sepsis but that vet knew immediately what it was and it was her fault because she was negligent when she administered a shot. Instead of being honest about her negligence, she lied and manufactured a story to cover up her negligence and that is what makes her Negligence criminal. 2 other veterinarians concur, what happened to my pet should have never happened. I am heartbroken of course but, I am also concerned about any other pets she could do this to. This person is dangerous in her recklessness. She may need mental help. She cost a precious life by being negligent with my family pet and then she tried to cover it up by misdiagnosing his illness and that should never happen. I am still awaiting the rest of the autopsy report but I met with the vet who did the autopsy yesterday and she concurred with another vet that she too saw definitive signs of a sepsis blood infection in the area the shot was administered. . She felt he was not treated properly and he needed to be hospitalized by that vet.

    I do not differentiate between that negligence and any other type of negligence. These people are supposed to be trusted professionals. Any cover up for negligence should never be tolerated or accepted. Covering up for your own or someone elses negligence is criminal because it effects another persons Life, Liberty and Property. There is no replacing a member of the family but there needs to be at the least, some accountability, some legal recourse so it never happens to anyone and their family ever again.

  9. iwanmynpv I love it. Eric Holder and the DOJ and there investigators over at the FBI are busy arresting Vinny and them for trash routes and strip clubs bring in millions, while the bank CEO and their mob of banksters worldwide stole trillions of dollars and what does Bernanke and the Fed do? Print $16 trillion out of thin air and give it to the bankster with the the cooked books, loans at zero to .5% interest rates!

    Now if you want to be called a racist speak the truth about who a lot of these clowns are! It not racist to say crack is mainly so by blacks or to our south that the Mexican drug cartels are selling drug, because they are. So why when the boys in New York working in the Financial sector are over represented by a small group of the same group it being racist to call them out? No saying that every one from that group of people are Financial bandits.

  10. to Be or NOT TO BE, that is the question
    (shakespears hamlet? i think)

  11. congrats tresspas. much work you have put into that last piece you wrote. Natural law of man, his nature, how god intended for him to be can not be violated, in fact its impossible.

  12. yeah, Trespass nice try.. I mean, I certainly get it. Go ask Lynne Merideth how the whole inalienable rights thing goes in a society fixated on Tiny and Snooki and couple of cheap whores whose former family members were alleged wiseguys.

    Which begs i ask one more question; when an alleged wiseguy gets caught robbing a bank he gets 20 years… When an officer of that same bank gets caught stealing enmasse, he gets the GAAP rules changed and a couple of propaganda terms in the press to distance himself /her from the fleecing to the tune of 12 trillion.

    Guess Vinny, should have figured out a way rob Bernanke’s Bank, with a quick nod and wink from Ben.

  13. Trespass good piece, as it calls to attention for me that through this all that there are over 10 million household in a conflict with one banking industry, who created the poison that they delivered to their customers and now they customers are having to fight in court that they were harmed, when there are 10 million other victims of the same poison.

    The crime I have presented to those responsible to regulate our banking system and those who are responsible for prosecuting crimes as a result of the action of these corporation, has failed to conduct their basic duty.

    I talked about Ginnie Mae who talks of lenders repurchasing the loan from the Ginnie Mae Mortgage Backed Securities pools, but as the GSE cannot purchase or sell a single home mortgage loan at all, how was there a sale and without a sale occurring, how can there be a repurchase to something that never occurred.

    Lender freely hand over blank Notes for a zero sum, so why is it not given back at a zero sum? The reason its not freely given back the blank Notes is because there is no provision under the law for a body having possession of the blank Note to sell or give the Note to another because the possessor is not on the face of the Note at all and is not a entity that could act in the contract even if it they had a endorsed Note to them, because one must be able to preform the function of a lender to be on the face of the Note as the “holder in due course”

    Very easy to solve the Ginnie Mae end of this crime and that simply to gather up the Notes, and this case is solved for every foreclosed government home mortgage loan borrower. If the loan was in a Ginnie Mae pool then we know for a fact, that the Notes are blank because they must be, then they are forever blank because they never will have an endorsement resulting from the blank endorsement because it is impossible for blank to endorse the Note as blank is blank. Plus there is absolutely no proof of purchase, because there is no purchase!

  14. Very well said Trespass. Time for some accountability by these crooks.

  15. Accountability. State of being responsible or answerable. See also, Liability.

    We need to Ensure Accountability and Transparency

    A business owner is responsible for what the business does.
    If the business dumps a poison into a protected area, and it is shown and known that the owner was aware that it had ownership of the poison and was responsible for it’s disposal and it hired staff that had processes and procedures but no oversight for the disposal, then the owner’s hold harmless agreement is with his corporation. It does not extend out to the lives harmed, maimed, killed, or otherwise affected by his actions.

    No corporation’s owner or manager who has a hold harmless on file in UCC between them and their corporation, can ‘force’ the rest of us to recognize his ‘private contract’ with his corporation when he harms us.

    The rest of the lives on this planet are not filed in an artificial database in any agreement with the CEO/Chairman/etc, and did not agree that he could usurp our God given rights to peaceful enjoyment of our property.

    They can shuffle wealth all they want on paper.

    Judges know better. To have to unequal people in the court room. One standing on their own right and one standing a representative of a corporate body who’s owner is hiding behind it and wants to take it.

    One you can see, and one you cannot see.
    It’s an inequitable exchange where the judge, in the course of doing business and making money decides to discriminate against the One standing in his courtroom on their own right, and decide for the benefit of the one who is represented.

    Discrimination is against the law, even in the legal system.

    The judge cannot justify removing the right to property with ‘impunity’ because someone exercised their right to say ‘no’ and was not represented by another when they did that.

    The judge is so caught up in the rules of the game of court, that he assumes everyone brought there under duress or under coercion should learn the rules in 21 days or give up their rights which is ‘unalienable’.

    That means even the judge can’t take them away if we didn’t give them to him.

    They have immunity except under certain circumstances.
    They have a responsibility to go over the things that are sitting in their records that holds the judges signature where he violated his immunity.

    Nothing is too big to prosecute.
    Complicated? Yes, but too big to prosecute? No.

    Just start asking questions.
    Law firm, do you know the real estate laws of your state? Yes.
    Do you know the penalties for violating the real estate laws of your state? Yes.
    Regardless of the agreement you have with your client, which has nothing to do with the rights of the people you went against, if you violated the real estate laws of your state, you are accountable for the statutory fine for each count, and any prison term related to it.
    If you were hired to perform a real estate transaction and you were incompetent, improperly trained, and you interfered with the rights of another, then you are accountable for what you’ve done. Your incompetence is no excuse. Had you been a food preparer and someone died from the food you cooked, you’d be accountable. Had you been a surgeon and your incompetence caused a death you would be accountable.
    Theft of property when you know you should know the law because you are attorneys make you accountable.

    Your contract with your client does not provide immunity from the People you usurped their rights and forced to evacuate a building by your actions, and forced a constitutional violation of unlawful search and seizure, and no due process.

    Judges, if you looked at two flesh and blood beings in your courtroom and only one claimed to represent a corporate body, and you failed to recognize the standing of the Other before you; that is not the fault of the One who stood before you on their own right. That is your fault for failure to recognize.
    You have no immunity in your judgements if by your incompetence you did not verify the standing of both parties before you.
    You have no immunity in your position if you discriminated against life in favor of a statutory person that was represented.
    You have no immunity in your position if you never intended to provide due process to those who walked before you, who had hands and feet and could speak the words of the Creator before you as you asked them to ‘swear and oath’ to the truth.
    The presence of the body cures the error in the name; the truth of the name cures an error in the description

    In truth, the physical body of one who was not representing the Creator, but who is the Creator was before you. If by name you ‘thought or wanted to presume it was a corporation, you could have had a right without any presence in your courtroom.

    Once there is a physical presence in your courtroom, you had a duty to verify the identity and standing before you. If you aren’t told someone is representing something they DID NOT create, you cannot presume they are representing something they DID NOT create and violate their unalienable right.

    One should know with whom they deal.
    An error in the name is immaterial if the body is certain.
    You had a body of a representative of a body of a corporation, and a body containing the Creator.

    You know that if there is a spiritual affinity within three degrees of anyone in your presence, you must recuse yourself from the proceeding. That means you lacked in personam jurisdiction, and you need both in personam and subject matter jurisdiction to hear a case against the Creator before you.

    You have served the undead, and your own rules serve as the proof of your willful incompetence. Your own rules do not provide you with any immunity from your actions.

    The real party is not appearing in these courtrooms.
    No one can sue in the name of another.

    Where truth is, fiction of law does not exist. (these are your legal maxims, they are there for a reason, so the undead does not rule over life.)

    Fiction is against the truth, but it is to have truth.

    He who does not speak the truth, is a traitor to the truth.

    To swear is to call God to witness, and is an act of religion.
    You have one standing on His own Right and being the Creator providing witness to what is being done, and you have another who’s swearing is representative of the hearsay of their client who is not there to be called as a traitor to the truth.

    The real party does not show up because they cannot swear to the truth in your court room.

    Your discrimination is against religion.
    You call those before you to swear, an act of religion and you discriminate against those who speak the truth as they stand in their own right, and you support those who lie as they represent their client and provide you with hearsay evidence of a purported wrong.

    Your immunity does not absolve you from what you have done to One you have a spiritual affinity with.

    Your signature and seal locks your fate for what you have refused to reverse in your confidence in the Will of the undead corporate body, that has been brought to life through representation.

    You failed to recognized the people in your courtroom and you failed to recognize their standing.

    Your incompetence should lead to your removal.

    As for the owners of the corporations. For the amount of suits that carry their name where they had no right to property from the living; where they cannot pretend life is not alive, in being; and where their procedures and charters are written to violate their own constitutional protections, they have no ‘hold harmless’ agreement with anyone in the world. Their hold harmless is on paper and it may be for them with their self, but that paper does not extend out and become a force against our Will.

    They must be identified, and pulled from society. Go back and look at the agreement they think provides them protections and see if the Creator in the rest of us, and the life on the planet has any agreement or attachment to what they claim provides them immunity.

    When you see nothing that protects them from violating the Universal Law of Free Will, and nothing indicates they have unilateral power over the Earth and all it’s inhabitants, and nothing gives them immunity from their acts against the living while they hide behind the corporate bodies they created, then there is a duty to remove them from their ‘self proclaimed seat of power’, and let the rest of us live according to the natural order of things.

    Stop discriminating against our desires to have the right to be free to live naturally and in peace and harmony.

    Stop discriminating against us.

    Earlier in time, is stronger in right. First in time, first in right.
    He who is before in time, is preferred in right.

    The people are created before the creation of corporate bodies.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Conscience, Corporeal, Life, Free and Independent State, In Being, Alive, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  16. TY JG- back at ya. lost a few “freinds” along the way though. part of it i guess.

  17. I will do what I need to do Deborah. The truth needs to be exposed and if that takes alot of blogging, so be it.

    Being an animal lover, I know he was not just “a dog”…he was an example of Gods creative works…his divine perfection. He brought totality to my life and the lives of my family. I know there will be hell to pay for all of this evil being done by these evil doers. I am keeping the faith because the innocent deserve justice for the many evil wrongdoings of others.

  18. These evil doers of evil things are not people IMHO Deborah. They are not human because they will stop at nothing to conceal their evil. They will sacrifice the lives of the innocent and destroy the natural order of things to conceal their evil. I do not catergorize this evil as people.

  19. dw – holy moly! you certainly fought the good fight, didn’t you? My hat’s off, madam!

  20. sorry about the dog stripes. (god- spelt backwards)
    please, dont start hogging the blogg, keep the peace

  21. yeah stripes not trip, more like trap

  22. stripes way i see it, and ive travelled far n wide- iS THIS people are people

  23. Deb… and I did not trip….you and I were greatly deceived by their evil on a Friday. The Creator knows this is true and that is my belief. I would not want to be them because they can fool us and themselves but they can never fool the Creator.

  24. Failure to state a claim on its merits. What merits can be used to state a claim based on criminal fraud & deceptive practices….? Evil has no merits. One act of evil destroys any and all merits and claims.

  25. I have to say this. That case I quoted from ukg i think is odd and shows how a court can go east or west with equal ease. The court clearly wanted the issue (fraud re: the appraisal) litigated. Is this because the court wanted someone nailed who deserved it – or because the plaintiff players were weak and the case could set precedent over the issue in the banksters’ favor? Damn sorry deal when one wondering is legitimate. Hope it’s because the banksters have it coming. But really, my point is that a court with a diff bent could have come up with other reasons and justification on the books to uphold the dismissal. that’s kind of messed up.

  26. JG, rule 60b intrinsic and extrinsic evidence can be raised.

  27. Christine and stripes
    My home was an expression of whats inside me, the one they got Free, AND MADE MUCH MUCH FROM IT THAN I MAY EVER KNOW, now come on christine, an english mans home is his castle n all…the rights to land came from the english, so they desecrated something sacred, darn right its just a house- but it represents certain rights, and i bought the land i cultivated it i grew orange trees from little tiny plants, my art is on the walls,the floors the kitchen, someone is enjoying them.well good, i think of it still but it became a posh jail once they told me to move out via a note on the front door after a 14 hr day – yeah, friday, always on a friday. i still cant half believe my american dream turned into the american big jokes on me. but its not funny really, but im ok i laugh all the time, lifes a trip, when you trip, just get the hell up(. thats what vikings do, )

  28. dw quoted:

    “A dismissal for failure to state a claim is on the merits. See Johnsrud v. Carter, 620 F. 2d 29, 32-33 (3d Cir. 1980). ”

    Big news to me. I don’t believe it and think it’s a rogue decision! I see its value in the context. Yes, I do, but I’ve always read that a dismissal is not an adj on the merits, as is one for sj. But, yes, leave to amend should be given freely unless those things exist as were articulated.
    Judges withholding amendment force people (who know how to or have the dough) to appeal. Don’t know why a rule 60 mtn would be discouraged if there’s good reason for one. Btw, it’s my understanding that a rule 59 mtn must be filed within 10 days, but it suspends operation of the judgment (unlike a 60 I THINK and that’s a caveat for sure)

  29. The truth is christine, my pet had more soul in one paw than you have in your entire body.

    I don’t care what you think …you are an evil bitch. It won’t be game over until the Creator says so.

    As evil increases with every passing day, so does the Creator’s day of vengeance and redemption. I have faith you are all going to pay for your evil works on earth and I anxiously wait to see that day come and I pray you will all burn in the hell you created right in front of gods witnesses to all of your evil.

  30. A few days ago, think it was ukg (?) who linked a case that was noteworthy for the following. It was a March 3013 decision on a 4th C appeal from WV DC (the banksters had gotten dismissal of all counts out of the lower court but THIS homeowner said not so fast):

    “We “should hesitate to dismiss a complaint under Rule 9(b)
    if [we are] satisfied (1) that the defendant has been made
    aware of the particular circumstances for which [it] will have
    to prepare a defense at trial, and (2) that plaintiff has substantial prediscovery evidence of those facts.” Harrison, 176 F.3d
    at 784. From McCauley’s complaint, we are able to glean the
    following facts: (1) the time of the alleged fraud was late
    summer or fall, 2006, when the appraisal and loan were made;
    (2) the appraisal was undertaken at McCauley’s home, to
    which Ocean Bank sent an appraiser; (3) the false representation consisted of the representation from Ocean Bank that
    McCauley’s home was worth $51,000 or more; (4) the identity of the person making the misrepresentation was Ocean
    Bank; and (5) as a result of the misrepresentation, McCauley
    agreed to the $51,000 loan. J.A. 99-101. Moreover, McCauley’s fraud complaint is not the type of frivolous action or strike suit Rule 9(b) is designed to avert.
    Thus, we hold that McCauley’s complaint meets the requirements of Rule 9(b).
    In concluding that McCauley properly states a claim for fraud, we make no judgment as to the merits of her argument, but simply determine that it would be incorrect to prevent her from pursuing her claim in district court at this stage………..
    Appellees further argue that McCauley fails to state a claim against
    Deutsche Bank because it is a subsequent holder of her mortgage and did not participate in the alleged fraud of the originating lender. They
    note that Rule 9(b) requires that where fraud claims are asserted against multiple defendants, the claim must allege the facts outlining each defendant’s participation in the fraud. Therefore, they argue, because McCauley’s allegations all deal only with Ocean Bank’s actions, she fails to properly state a fraud claim against Deutsche Bank, which is only derivatively liable.
    However, “in a suit to enforce a lien securing a negotiable note, the same defenses are generally available as would be in a suit on the note itself.” Miller v. Diversified Loan Service Co., 382 S.E.2d 514, 517 (W. Va.1989); see also W. Va. Code section 46-3-305; Herrod v. First Republic Mortg. Corp., Inc., 625 S.E.2d 373, 388 (W. Va. 2005) (Starchar, J., concurring) (“To the extent that borrowers are defrauded, as a matter of contract law, they have defenses against the holder of the obligation in an action for recoupment.”). McCauley’s fraud claim against Deutsche Bank thus may not be dismissed on this basis. “

  31. We The People are proud of our roots & our heritage and that is what makes us proud Americans. It is the politicians who obviously do not know their own asses from a hole in the ground.

  32. And… I know I struck a serious cord when moron gets out of pet mourning to go on her verbal, all-caps diarrhea. That’s right, stripper. Game is over.

  33. “It’s only a house.”… NO….It is much more than “only a house”.. it is our peace and security.


    We The People are not being protected by any security…..Our security has been destroyed as a result of high treason. We are in reality, fighting an unseen foreign and domestic enemy. How do we defend our Life, Liberty and Property by fighting these horriffic crimes by these hidden criminals who are being concealed by those who we are supposed to trust to protect our Security…..our legal rights? That is not our job, that is what we pay the politicians to do. They had just ONE JOB…..TO PROTECT OUR SECURITY….THE AMERICAN PEOPLES TRUST……THE SECURITY OF OUR WEALTH….THAT PROTECTS OUR LIFE, LIBERTY AND PROPERTY AT THE U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT.

    WAKE UP CALL….THEY FAILED US MISERABLY…..THERE IS NO LONGER ANY TRUST AS A RESULT OF THEIR FAILURE…..Therefore, the politicians CANNOT insure our peace and security because they failed all of us. These so called trustees for the peoples trust have allowed the destruction of our peace and security by allowing criminals to destroy and dismantle our peace and security….

    We can no longer trust them to do anything for us.

  35. Deb,

    I know you are. That’s why I don’t understand your fear. It’s only a house. Look at what your ancestors were able to accomplish!

    Why do you thing Americans are always telling you all about their ancestors, as in “I’m 1/8 German, 1/8 Swedish, 1/4 Italian, 1/8 Cherokee 1/8 French and 1.4 British”? I hope you laugh as hard as I do when you hear that nonsense but there is so much truth to it: they have no roots, they have no idea why they believe and act as they do and they have no direction. So, 911 happens to them. Here. Nowhere else, mind you. Nobody else needs as much attention diverted from wrongdoing..

    Is that a great country or what? Think about it: Scots, British, Irish have jailed their bankers. French and German go after their politicians. Here? Not a chance!!!

  36. iim late today but JG
    you talked about rule 15 (a) and the right to ammend, we should be able to ammend more than once in the interests of justice- my case i was denied so i went for that 60b, many attys poo poo it, but if its done right it provides a “grade reservoir” for the judge to protect the system, its not used enouigh in my humble opinion.
    my appeal raises these issues -9th circuit 12-16192

    “Rule 15(a) declares that leave to amend ‘shall be freely given when justice so requires’; this mandate is to be heeded …. In the absence of any apparent or declared reason – such as undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of allowance of the amendment, futility of amendment, etc. – the leave should, as the rules require, be ‘freely given.'” Foamn v. Dabis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962).

    Though technically unopposed, defendants’ pending motions to dismiss are denied because the Rules of Civil Procedure “encourage an opportunity to amend before dismissal.” 2 James Wm. Moore, et al., Moore’s Federal Practice § 12.34[5](3d ed. 2000). A dismissal for failure to state a claim is on the merits. See Johnsrud v. Carter, 620 F. 2d 29, 32-33 (3d Cir. 1980). To dismiss plaintiffs’ claims on the merits, without first permitting an opportunity to amend, would constitute a forfeiture resulting simply from noncompliance with the Rules of Civil Procedure.”
    (obviously- not an attorney, but rules is rules)

  37. Here you go…

    “BOSTON — Two bombs exploded in the crowded streets near the finish line of the Boston Marathon on Monday, killing three people and injuring more than 130 in a bloody scene of shattered glass and severed limbs that raised alarms that terrorists might have struck again in the U.S.

    A White House official speaking on condition of anonymity because the investigation was still unfolding said the attack was being treated as an act of terrorism.”

    “… terrorists might have struck again [wink, wink, wink] in the US.” “…an act of terrorism”.

    There. We set the stage. Who’s going to be the villain of choice?
    N. Korea? Iran? Damn it, we sooooo much need a good war to restart the economy! And when we succeed, we’ll be able to put all those foreclosures on the sideline and, who knows, if we play our cards right and have a few of our patriots boys killed, people will be too busy being scared and they won’t fight so much for truth.

    Johngault, I won’t insult you. Do you see a pattern somewhere, though? Think Pearl Harbor and everything since then…

  38. Local news talking about “zombie mortgages,” mortgages where the banks suddenly stop the foreclosure process before completing it. The recommendation is…. do not leave your property until the judge grants the fraudclosure and it is recorded at the County Recorder of Deeds Office.

    WOW..what a bunch of lying sleezebag crooks..

    I see what happened in Boston today as proof our security is a fake & a fraud and means nothing because the peace and security of our free & open society has already been strategically dismantled by the banksters.

    Calls for increased security are ridiculous as long as the real criminals, the banksters are conducting business as usual, there will be no peace and no security.

  39. and TU- me neither , no tv, well i have a screen, for movies- cant watch listen it makes me ears bleed



  42. Never heard of “Hungry For Change”.
    Will check into it.

  43. Helping Homeowners Harmed by Foreclosures: Ensuring Accountability and Transparency in Foreclosure Reviews, Part II

    Wednesday, April 17, 2013 <—-
    10:00 AM – 12:00 PM

  44. Hmmm…speaking of manufacturing something “that causes a demand for it”,
    How about addictive and fattening MSG-laden products, addictive and fattening high-gluten pumped products, addictive and fattening high sugar content products (which is basically everything in the supermarket except fruits and vegetables)?
    Well, no problem—“here’s a product that will help you lose weight (not) and here are products to help manage your diabetes and high blood pressure (among other things) that you got from these (FDA approved) highly addictive, highly fattening, non-nutritious, and devastatingly unhealthy products”…cha-ching!!!

    Anyone who thinks that eating products that are “FDA approved” are “fine”—needs to watch the documentary “Hungry For Change”—it is eye-opening!

  45. Deb,

    Old countries that lasted for millenia, mostly matriarchal: Celts, Gallic, Vikings, Irish, Franks, Saxons, Nordic countries generally. Finland debt-forgiveness didn’t happen out of nowhere… Irish debt forgiveness isn’t happening out of nowhere. Why do you think they went for the all-or-nothing? Typically feminine thing. Archeologists know all about it. Christians… not so much! The Gawd of Christians hated women from the get go. There is a reason…

    Our folks taught us right. Deb, don’t fret: we’re good.

  46. I don’t have t.v., but
    If someone doesn’t want something you have, and they certainly don’t trust it and it has no value, what better way to get them to use it than to have an event that causes a demand for it.
    injuries, hospitals, ambulance, psychiatric counseling, abrupt airline return fees, medical staff, funerals, investigation agency overtime, hotel security, food expenses for the round the clock staff, gas prices, materials cost to repair damage, labor to repair, overtime ours to get the city back to normal, etc – is someone cha-ching, cha-ching, cha-ching-ching.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Conscience, Corporeal, Life, Free and Independent State, In Being, Alive, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  47. like wheres ya focus

  48. Christine- thats great

  49. In a nutshell, this is what we are talking about. America flunk on common sense, social programs, honesty, transparency, everything it purported to have killed hundreds of thousands of natives for. America flunk big time. Hell, it can’t even prosecute fraud, by George! Constitutions and all, America condones fraud. And waste. It was OK as long as China and India were sleeping. Not so much anymore… Because whatever intelligence America relinquished in the name of comfort, someone grabbed and ran with it. Historically? Right on target. Egypt. Greece. Rome.

    Truth? Joke? Makes no difference: “Behind every joke is a grain of truth”. Buddha.


    When NASA first started sending up astronauts, they quickly discovered that ball-point pens would not work in zero gravity.

    To combat this problem, nasa scientists spent a decade and $12 billion developing a pen that writes in zero gravity, upside down, on almost any surface including glass and at temperatures ranging from below freezing to over 300 c.

    The Russians just used a pencil…

  50. johngault look you not in the business and you showing that fact because in all loans there is interest paid until you make you first payment. so whether it the 5th or you close on the 20th, from that day your interest start.

    John you don’t get anything days of interest for free, it nothing personal, as it just business. If you won the lotto on Apr 30th and you closed on the the Apr 5th you and wanted to pay the loan off on Apr 31th, I am due 27 day of interest for you holding my money for 27 day.

    Do you think that you would own nothing for borrowing the money? You owe $443 for the remainder of Apr for being able to used $100,000. Now this should make you understand why it a bank pays a broker $2,000 in yield and the loan is paid off in less than 90 days would mean the bank would only make $1.479.45 but paid a broker $2,000 is a losser, so it may be a 120 day clawback if the broker got the $2,000.

    As you see with this crisis banks are not in it to lose money!

  51. @JG—I would say that the subprime “manufactured false default” for massive monetary gain is definitely a form of “conspiracy”…wouldn’t you?:

    “After the repeal of Glass-Steagall, de-regulation then went into effect, around 1999-2000.
    At that time, the GSE’s (Fannie/Freddie) put the existing NOTES into a FALSE DEFAULT/CHARGE OFF, so that new (fake) “notes” could be put into the newly created MERS system of NON-FUNDING, and be easily traded on Wall Street…along with all the derivatives.
    In addition—deregulation prevented public disclosure of identity of current creditor — for which borrowers were entitled to by federal law. And, GSEs purchased the false MBS securities (were actually only collection right to default) and derived derivatives, thereby — purchasing the false securities/derivatives to their own default debt.”

  52. Lest we forget—we WILL get there:

    “All truth passes through three stages.
    First, it is ridiculed.
    Second, it is violently opposed.
    Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”

    –Arthur Schopenhauer


    Moving right along – this is the imo well-written complaint over NS not honoring Aurora’s “modification”. I mentioned yesterday or so. It settled rather quickly. It’s full of goodies (laws) worth saving. imo.

  54. charles! you show me a settlement statement with interest collected from april 5th to May 31st and I’ll eat it! Course, I should be careful with that because Lord knows what shinanigans were pulled. But in that (doubtful) case, the first payment wouldn’t be due until july 1st.

  55. Well, I was referring to Boston as to conspiracy because I am so not in for hearing a bunch of speculative dribble. So I was just beseeching people to not start on it. I don’t know if this financial stuff is the result of a conspiracy. I do know it stinks and is a crock that it has gone one continues unchecked. I or anyone would have to be dense not to agree with christine about only some bit players getting nailed. Because I don’t want to believe Obama is a bum, I believe someone(s) have us by the short-hairs, which may be worse (for all I know)

  56. johngault look at your settlement statement and the line that has interest and dates let said from Apr 5, til May 31 is 58 day with a loan that $100,000 at 6% is $16.43 x 58 = $953.42

    You see many people want there closing cost to be lower and are wanting to close on the last day of the month, but it does not matter because you have to live somewhere and its costing you per day to live somewhere. So if you cost on Apr 30 you only pay 31 days of interest and you payment is due May 1st.

    But if you living in a hotel at $50 a day why not pay the $16.43 a day instead and moving early and save yourself some money that tax deduct about for 2013?

  57. Incidentally, next attack should be in DC if, between now and 4/29, Congress hasn’t been able to sell us a war. Expect some very, very threatening TV reports about N. Korea and Iran in the next few days. I don’t watch TV but I will monitor. just for the hell of it.

    The rule of the game. That’s how it’s played in this country. Weapons are the last profitable industry this country has left.

  58. And JG,

    Make no mistakes. For the next couple of weeks, we’ll KNOW that the Boston Marathon bombing was a “terrorist” thing, plotted by:
    1) N. Korea
    2) Iran
    3) Moslems (take your pick).

    And then, in 3 months, the truth will come out: it was planned to get people to riot and get crushed. Or… it will be the next “they had weapons of mass destruction (whoever they choose as the villain of the moment)”.

    John, that is how the game is played, has been played and will keep being played until people say “Enough”.

  59. johngault I not trying to get you mad but I have personally closed thousand of loan and the interest is not paid in the rear as the interest is paid first. The reason a loan that closes on the 5th of Arp does not have a payment until Jun 1st is because we have collected the interest at the closing and if you look at your HUD statement you will see the interest that is collected for everyday until the Jun 1st.

    What you don’t see is if a loan is brokered of is made by a correspondent lender is that we are paid a yield to originate the loan and that yield is whatever the points is set up in the agreement. But what it amount to is a couple of the homeowners first payments. If a lender did not collect the interest up front and the borrower paid the loan off early, the lender would loss money and banks are not into losing money.

    Now look I said that FHFA which is over Fannie & Freddie have come up with a streamline NEW program in the last week or so. Simply look up FHFA not FHA which is a totally different program and the head of that Division is a guy name DeMarco that Dem want fired because he has prevented Prime underwater borrowers from refinancing there mortgages since he took office in Sep 2009.

    Look this stuff is confusing and is why they gotten away with it, but as with how loan making money if your originating them is to use the customer payment just in the way that the passthrough payment pay the “investors” who are buying the securities.

    One last thing is I have read every thing you have wanted me to but, I believe when you are reading it and the term that they are using, if you not in the business, don’t always mean what you think they are talking about because it confuses the outsider. Take investor of the securities? are they the owners of the Notes? No….take the issuer of the securities are they not the lender of the Notes that are placed into the pools. Ginnie Mae is the insurer, and this means that they are a insurer and not the owner of the Note, because they do not purchase the debt and the investor are not purchasing home mortgage loan because there not a 100% guaranty by the government for making loans. Mortgage are not being repurchase because there were never sold, but they are using the term repurchase which make you think someone has sold and someone has purchase and its not the case.

    You ask me for links but I don’t need links to tell me what what because it was my job to know, and my knowledge come from regulation and not links of some person who guessing at how something works.

    Get your settlement statement from you closing and I will show you where you paid interest upfront in your closing closing cost!

  60. John, here is the definition of conspiracy.


    A secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.
    The action of plotting or conspiring.

    plot – cabal – scheme – intrigue – collusion

    Tell me with a straight face that collusion and secrecy were not a part of that banking insanity resulting in millions of people losing their homes through theft and robbery. And you know where it hurt the most, for a while anyway? To realize that it didn’t matter who was president in this country: it would remain business as usual. For Pete’s sake, do your remember that infamous Obama speech: “Banks didn’t do anything illegal. Unethical, maybe but not illegal.” The Man of Change was as much a puppet as any Bush, Clinton or, to some extent, Alzheimer’s-ridden Reagan (how about conspiracy: everyone on Capitol Hill knew he was half comatose for years before we heard anything about it).

    John, conspiracy has been the name of the game for decades, if not centuries. The proof is in the pudding: how else would you explain that judges went along…? That they failed to uphold the foreclosure laws and still do?

  61. JG,

    Think about it: doesn’t that banking insanity presupposes a “conspiracy”? MERS creation sure as hell came out of a conspiracy: it was done without anyone’s knowledge and we were put in front of the fait accompli. Libor manipulation was a hell of a conspiracy. Robot signing was also a conspiracy. To defraud. It’s everywhere, John and it has been going for way too long. The thing is: now, we start learning about how deep in went.

  62. No interest is paid up front by a borrower, exactly, charles. Well, sometimes a small amt is. Interest is collected on the hud for the remainder of the month because interest is paid in arrears, and when a loan closes after the 5th of the month, the first payment is not until almost 2 mos. later. The rule of 78 has no application here. I’m not aware of repurchase agreements when the borrower pays off within 90 days, but if so, from the hip, there is nothing wrong with it. Or, alternatively if a contract calls for repayment of yield or svcing premiums if a loan is paid off within 90 days of origination, Still, I would be surprised at contracts calling for either. The risk of repayment to the lender is always there and to me, it’s in fact a risk to be borne by
    a loan purchaser. The only time I can think when an originator might agree to that is if the originator solicits a refi within that time from the borrower, which is frowned on if not impossible. I forget which.

    charles – please give me a link to this ‘new’ fha deal. thanks . .

  63. Everything is a conspiracy jg. FOX News said there are at least 90 active conspiracies at any given time.

  64. A lot of what we were lied about will be disclosed between 4/29 and 5/3 in DC. Foreclosure fraud is only a teeny tiny bit of it. The fact is that we have been robbed of trillions for over 100 years while the industrial military complex was developing, on our dime, zero point free technology to clean up the air, the water and reverse all the damages caused by endless wars and pollution is going to be disclosed worldwide, in several languages.

  65. Thank You carie for your kind thoughts and words. My neighbor said, where would we be without our dogs? I know that place is empty and it is certainly not a good place to be. Our pets are our heart and soul. Thank You again carie.

  66. God help us.
    I hope to heck no one will start with the conspiracy theories here. Just don’t. Puhlease. Don’t. It’s bad enough.

  67. johngault switching a bit to Fannie and Freddie were so resistance because with these modification and a loan is in a pool them the lenders have made side deal of an exact amount of money being paid to investors. So unlike a simply refinance were monies are not actual lost because the interest is paid upfront in the rule of 78, where you just don’t make as much as if the loan at the higher rate when full term.

    Any loan when its paid off early never losses monies unless you paid out to much yield but that only like a couple of payments of interest paid and that why there are clawbacks if the loan is paid out early within the first 90 days or so, as the bank has not recoup it payment to the broker or correspondent.

    Now you see the head of the FHFA DeMarco now coming out with a streamline product which I believe is like a streamline government loan that an actual refinance and not a modification, so they are not on the hook to pay investors while taking a loss with the last mortgage contract.

  68. johngault I read everything you linked and all your comments. Here what I believe is not understood and that is all the loans that were in the government loans that were a part of the HAMP portfolio, which was 20% of the 4.2 million and of that 20% there were 86% of those loan were in Ginnie Mae pools and were not modified because Ginnie Mae who in theory is in physical possession of all the blank Notes of loans in the pools and they hire the servicer with in the case of the large lenders as they servicer the loan themselves.

    So as the lender turned issuer is now servicer and custodian of record, but as custodian of record for Ginnie you are a part of Ginnie do to the commitment. The reason you have to be authorized to lend is that you have to meet the fair housing rule and be regulated. Now this is not to say that a regular person cannot lend in a private sitting but that person is not acting as a mortgage lender.

    Now what taken place let say with CW is at the end of its existence it could not sell loan to Ginnie Mae and my not could get MIP approval for these loans. Just because you originate a FHA loan does not mean it going to be approved for MIP.

    Ginnie Mae is not a home mortgage lender and they are not signed up for the HAMP and the lenders were not buying these loans at $200,000 from the pools and having to turn around and modify the loan at 2% for 40years or any other terms.

    This is in my opinion the bulks of the 800,000 loans that in Sep 2012 that the OCC & Fed said should have been modified but instead where foreclosed. Every FHA, VA & USDA loan is a full documented loan and not some subprime stated adjustable rate mortgage attached to the LIBOR, so put on your underwriter’s hat and realized that the average government loan balance was $100,000 at 6% to 6.5% interest rate, so how is it possible that with rates as low as 2% cutting the payments almost in half were not all the government insure loan not modified?

    There are not modified because the payment to the “investor” is base on a loan with a payment of 6.5% that paying the “investor” with a spread of 3% and the borrowers are refinanced at 2% which is a negative of 1%? I guessing at the exact yield, but the fact reminds a modification does not work for a loan in the Ginnie Mae pools. You could only modify the loan under the FHA HAMP if the loan was not pooled. Who buying the loan at full price from Ginnie Mae pool to lose money?

    The lender already been advanced the fund from the sell of the securities and not matter what unless they foreclose are still obligated to pay X dollars every month, because it was always a separate transaction. So it makes since that the option of foreclosing on the loan and receiving the MIP from the FHA or Guaranty Fund from the VA, plus the other insurances placed on some of these loans, while at the minimum making the “investor” whole while as in my case with a $202,000 balance the bank received $429,095 from the foreclosure and two insurance claims.

    I foreclose on myself if I was making over $227,000! It all in the servicers accounting records, and I just happen to get the copy of my file, thank to untrained staff at Wells Fargo.

    Now why I got a hold of all the document including the still blank Note was because the leader never prepared to have to defend its position with the different agencies and the agencies did not understand why I was asking for what document because they at the OCC were never trained in originating or foreclosing as bank were pretty much trusted to do the right thing.

    I can take from the moment my loan was locked because I was there to the very last accounting entry. I have bet my life of this and I feel this is what I was meant to do in life was this very moment in time, and is why I have over a year ago submitted a Whistle-blower claim!

  69. @Trespass and stripes

    I just now read your animal/family member stories. What we do for the love of these animals some people just don’t understand—but they truly are family, and deserving of the love you give them. When I lost my house the most important thing—other that my husband and kids—was to keep my animals with us…even if it meant living in the street—I didn’t care as long as we had an intact family—which included my two dogs and cat. They fill places in our hearts that only someone who loves animals can truly understand. A big part of my art is painting animal portraits—they are the best—bless you guys for caring so much for them!

  70. This is where I got that video I posted:

    All this stuff is just added to the list(s) of things we are being lied to about by our government and military…the time to wake up is now…independent investigation of truth is the most important thing we can do.

  71. stripes – I’m a jerk. I thought about sending condolences on your loss, but got busy and or wouldn’t. Never mind why. So let me say now I was sorry to hear about your pet. and also about trespass’s
    fiasco with the poochie who is lucky to have such a loving family.

  72. charles said;
    “If their was a sale to the trust of the loans the trust would have to be a mortgage lender to be able to preform the contract”
    I just don’t think that’s true. I’m pretty confident the notes weren’t endorsed or delivered – so no sale and seller UCC indenture for full
    balance of note when monies exchanged hands – but
    as to the trust having to be a licensed lender, doubt it. But maybe. I really can’t say I know for a fact. I’d be glad to hear anything you come up with in support of that proposition. But, I stand by what I said about
    modifying loans – requires license and a reg Z. SOMEone – either the note owner or its agent (not to be confused with non-agent) must be licensed to routinely modify loans. I can’t prove it, at least not today.

  73. @Trespass Unwanted…….Thank You very much for your kind thoughts and words. I am so happy to hear your beloved pet is still with you. Mine will be in my heart forever. We are all heartbroken but we are keeping the faith because his life had meaning and brought our family so much happiness. Thank You Trespass.

  74. charles at 6:27 – I doubt that anyone has to be licensed to purchase
    loans, altho as to GSE loans, servicers must be approved.) I mentioned that FHA told an unapproved servicer to eat a rock when it submitted claims on fha loans.) Aurora recently sold its servicing portfolio (and imo it has claimed to courts to own those loans) to NationStar. I wouldn’t be surprised if Aurora lost its servicing approval and that’s why the sale of its svcg portfolio.
    Not really sure that a loan can’t be purchased by unlicensed peoples. I think it can be. Why not?
    But I have always opined that anyone has to be licensed to “modify” a loan AND that modification requires a truth in lending regulation Z disclosure of the a.p.r., etc, which to my knowledge isn’t happening, nor are these yeahoos who are purporting to modify licensed as lenders and qualified to do a Reg Z disclosure, and it’s just plain WRONG if not criminal for unlicensed people who don’t own the loans (or gee, do they?, FNMA says the loan must be repurchased to modify, so who else does? all GSE’s? probably) to purport to modify a loan and not give the homeowner a REG Z. A disclosure of the a.p.r. is a very big deal. As a reminder, the larger the difference between the a.p.r. and the note rate, the higher the cost of the loan. Not getting an a.p.r. when a loan is “modified” is imo a violation of TILA because a
    modification, IF it were honest, is essentially a refinance. Maybe the TIL Act actually addresses it. I don’t know, but it should and even if it doesn’t, no “modification” should be done without a disclosure of the
    a.p.r. – period.
    And there are implications most of us don’t think about when it comes to “modification”. How does this impact current guarantee or insurance, whether govt or private, for instance? GNMA, also for instance, says it will pay the issurer but only after the issuer repurchases a defaulted loan (gnma will not pay the investors unless the issuer is insolvent, as I said). What about private mortgage (PMI, GMAC, MGIC)? How does that work with modification? We care because it must surely play a role in decisions to “modify” loans.
    Charles, I’m disappointed that you haven’t read my material, which I linked at scribd, since it appears you haven’t and this was YOUR big deal and why I looked at it in the first place. Under the “side agreement between GNMA and the issuers, the issuers are to repurchase the loans (gag) to receive the ben of guar / insurance.
    Why, then, 1) are GSE loans being foreclosed in the trusts’ names (like I said, imo it’s either fraud -or- the ben of guar / ins is being waived -not!) and 2) what impact does this’ side agreement’ have on the status of the transaction/contract between the borrower and the alleged trusts? The answer to number 2 requires thoughtful consideration by the legal community. Like to see that, I would.

  75. Chemtrail whistleblower (military)—MUST WATCH and SHARE, people—get the word out:

  76. The Crucial Sentence In Jamie Dimon’s Letter To JPMorgan

    If Jamie Dimon could take it all back he would. He can’t go back and fix what happened last year but he promises–promises!–that he’ll do everything he can to make sure it never happens again.

    NEW YORK, NY – OCTOBER 02: People pass a sign…He’s talking about the London Whale, of course. The trading loss that cost JPMorgan Chase $6 billion and its reputation as the safest big bank. The promise came in his annual letter to shareholders today. In it the chairman and CEO puts it all out there; the regrets about the London Whale fiasco, the mistakes made leading up to the loss, the lack of proper controls in place at the bank, his sadness at disappointing the regulators, lessons learned and a vow to return the bank to its place as “the safest and soundest bank on the planet.”

    Dimon’s letter to shareholders is his best work yet since the London Whale mess. And it’s little surprise that it comes in the form of communication with shareholders–a group he’s always felt deserved a clear and honest explanation about the matter before others. He’s much less demure in testimony before lawmakers in Washington, for instance.

    But while Dimon’s honesty, regrets and apologies are getting the most attention there’s a non-whale sentence in the letter that struck me as the most important.

    I make this promise: We will be a port of safety in the next storm.

    In a single sentence, Dimon is telling not just shareholders, but the world really, that another financial disaster is inevitable. When it arrives, his bank will be “a source of strength, not weakness, for the global economy” much like it was in 2007 an 2008 during the financial crisis when it bought Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual.

    That’s a bold statement coming from the executive whose own reputation has been tarnished over the last year. Whether or not he’s right about JPM’s role during the next crisis is anyone’s guess but he’s dead on about another storm. The worst part about it is we don’t have our act together as a nation if the storm hits sooner than later.

    Doesn’t take a genius to know it’s about to blow… Nice of Jamie boy to give us the heads up though.

  77. IFR Scandal: Magnitude of Mortgage Servicing Failure
    posted by Alan White
    Screen shot 2013-04-14 at 9.56.52 AM

    A remarkable tabulation of the more than 3 million homeowners found to have been victims of mortgage servicing errors or fraud was released last week by the Fed and other bank regulators. About 25,000 foreclosures were started while homeowners were in bankruptcy, nearly 200,000 foreclosures were completed on homeowners in approved modification plans, and another 168,000 foreclosures sales were conducted while modification requests were pending.

    Recall that these wrongful foreclosure tallies include only servicing in 2009 and 2010, and that the 3 million estimated violations by 11 banks are out of a nationwide total of about 50 million mortgages outstanding, about 7 million of which were delinquent at any given time in that period.

    Worse, Senator Warren extracted an admission from bank regulators and the “independent consultants” at a hearing on Thursday (short version here) that neither the regulators nor the consultants checked the tally, which was produced by the bank servicers themselves. The Fed and OCC also declined to release bank-by-bank tallies, or to share their investigation results with consumer victims who might want to seek compensation from the civil justice system. If the large bank servicers are too big for the Fed and OCC to regulate, perhaps the CFPB can tackle this job when its mortgage servicing rules go into effect next January.

  78. French Ministers Disclose Full Financial Holdings – Full List
    Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/15/2013 – 12:45

    As Europe jerks from one political debacle to another, the French (mired in the PR disaster of Cahuzac – a tax tzar guilty of tax fraud) have decided forced honesty is the only policy left if they are ever to regain any credibility. From the Commission for Financial Transparency, below is the full list of all French ministers assets – from cars and property to stocks and bonds.

    Any chance we would have something like this here? Naaaahhh!
    Too radical for this country. It’s all there though: assets, bank accounts, stocks, anything and everything, including real property. Compare that with Romney’s refusal to even release his tax returns and Congress not being liable for disclosure under FOIA and you have it.

    Guess which country will survive, no matter what happens worldwide? Because nothing works as well as honesty and transparency to stop people from believing in conspiracies and start rioting. Those French have never forgotten the lessons of the past.

  79. Stripes, sorry to hear about your loss. I know how pets complete a family. We had a puppy that a neighbor’s daughter tossed into the air and upon landing her leg was broken. We had no vet as we had her for a month and a half, so we rushed her to an emergency clinic. $700+ later she had a cast but the leg was set improperly due to the center being busy. We were told they had to hurry up and set it, but to come back within two days to have it reset. We were there the next day and it was reset. We took her there again and again since she was grown and the cast had to be changed often. We kept that place since they had the records for her they had done her first treatments for anything (since we’ve had her), but we ended up with an incompetent staff member. He set a cast too tight, in my opinion.
    I brought her back telling him I thought it was too tight, he said it was fine. I asked for an x-ray, he did that also and said it was fine. The puppy would look at me with telepathic eyes that she was in pain and I tried to keep her in comfort. Eventually, a woman removed the case and the leg was clawed (happens when the bones and everything die from no blood circulation, it just draws up like a claw.) So we had to have the leg amputated. As you say, it’s not about the money. It’s family. We are peaceful, so although the girls parents knew what she’d done, the mother insisted she wasn’t paying a dime for the bill. We kept the dog, and she has three legs. It seemed the family was more upset we didn’t put our dog down because we had more problems from them scoping out the home, passing back and forth in front of the home, sitting at the curb of the home, and all kinds of activity as if we did something wrong keeping the dog. The amputation was $2300. The puppy is breed registered and we paid $450 for her. She’s still with us 5 years later. Her joint for the other leg is giving way. I have to carry her most times for bathroom breaks. When I carry her, I can make her hip or knee bone pop back into it’s joint for some relief for her. She’s life. She’s family.

    Stripes, my heart is with you and your family as you deal with this.
    I fortunately still have our member of our family, and I know how I would have felt if someone had told me they couldn’t help her if I took her to them, and I had no time to say my goodbyes.

    Your pet knows you tried, if that’s a consolation. They have souls, they just can’t talk but they can feel our energy and they have a knowing about our intentions that we may not comprehend right now.

    Trespass Unwanted, Corporeal, Life, Free, Independent, Conscience, People, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  80. Last column written by a 45-year veteran columnist of the Orlando Sentinel. I fully agree with him. What I don’t get is why, despite all of it, we still pay their salaries for them to keep at it. Oh, and by the way… don’t try sending anyone of them anything: their mail boxes are full (!) or they simply acknowledge what you sent with a “please do not reply to this e-mail address” with no additional comment on what they will do about what you wrote, or the published address we all have… simply doesn’t exist. And if one or two receive what you write, they:
    1) Don’t read it;
    2) Read it but couldn’t care less
    3) Read it, care somewhat but have too much of a conflict of interest to act on it or even broach the issue
    4) Read it but are frightened to death to do anything.

    A sorry bunch indeed… If Warren doesn’t get results, we’ll know where we stand. We already knew. It will only reenforce what we knew.

    545 vs. 300,000,000 People
    -By Charlie Reese

    Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

    Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

    Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

    You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The President does.

    You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

    You and I don’t write the tax code, Congress does.

    You and I don’t set fiscal policy, Congress does.

    You and I don’t control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

    One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

    I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

    I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator’s responsibility to determine how he votes.

    Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

    What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.. ( The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.)

    The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House?( John Boehner. He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. ) If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to. [The House has passed a budget but the Senate has not approved a budget in over three years. The President’s proposed budgets have gotten almost unanimous rejections in the Senate in that time. ]

    It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted — by present facts — of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can’t think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

    If the tax code is unfair, it’s because they want it unfair.

    If the budget is in the red, it’s because they want it in the red.

    If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it’s because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan ..

    If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it’s because they want it that way.

    There are no insoluble government problems.

    Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.
    Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like “the economy,” “inflation,” or “politics” that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

    Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power.

    They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses. Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees… We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

    Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.

  81. Louise
    I cant get this egg off my face

  82. Thank You guest..

  83. Louis,

    If you try to post something with a link, it may or may not go through. More than one link will block any post. Also, if you misspell your address or your name, it kicks it out.

  84. Regarding missing posts–Several of my posts did not appear at first. Some time later (as much as several weeks went by) and my post appeared. I am not sure if that is deliberate or not or whether there is a glitch in the software.

  85. johngault yes I am reading your stuff and as stripes is saying there is no trust that the lenders are repurchasing the loan from because there is never a sale. If their was a sale to the trust of the loans the trust would have to be a mortgage lender to be able to preform the contract.

    One cannot just purchase a mortgage loan and not be able to address issues that arise from the contract as for an example is the HAMP agreement the the servicers signed making it a right to have the loan process for the modification and not some if the lender wanted to process it, and is the reason for the phony IFR.

    You don’t have a review of foreclosures if there was not an agreement to process all the loan qualified for the modification.

    If there was a sale to a trust then that trust would be listed on the Note in the endorsement spot and once the one was repurchase the trust would endorse it back to the lender with the exchange of money for what the balance of the loan is worth.

    Now there is no where in this country were you have Ginnie Mae or some trust on title as the lien holder, because there is no proof of exchange of monies. Now I do know what they are doing and the repurchase term is referring to the value given to the loan in the pool so that the total securities payment layout is not effected.

    Let say it with a bank that is currently still alive, then they try and replace that loan or pay what the amount is that the loan was given so that at least the total principal investment is returned. Ginnie Mae is not guarantying future earning of the securities, but only the initial principal investment.

    There are no trust because if they were under the UCC 3 and possession of the actual blank Note the trust would have to be a lender working in that capacity. But what we have bee doing is following Ginnie illogical tale, instead of who is and is not a lender and who is on the face of the Note just as the Treasury Secretary signature must be on the Note of our currency in order for it to be actual legal tender. A home mortgage Note is like US tender and must have a owner of the debt in order to cash the Notes. At no time is Ginnie on the face of the Notes and cannot claim any ownership.

    Here the point that Ginnie uses if position with the government to deflect contract talks because the local government don’t have a clue about securities and are taking the player action as legal because of the implied involvement of the Fed Gov.

    Bottom line is Ginnie Mae on the Notes and did they paid for the Notes, and the answer is no! So they cant possess the blank Notes all day long, but the blank Note which is no longer a Note, has turned into a worthless piece of paper!

  86. Deb Wynn: It is reprehensible, but there are shills on this site for the banking powers that be. There are also people trolling for business. They may be legit, but there are also some people who want to take your money and do nothing to help you. I have personally seen all of these scenarios here. JVE is legit.

  87. Good Morning, I’m sorry to hear about your Pet, Stripes. JG and CR, I will be back tonight to discuss this further. Today is a busy day, I am meeting with attorneys for another homeowner. I will fill you in later …. this case is a Hot Potato.

  88. Ginnie, Freddie, Fannie, Ellie nor any tax payer funded & insured foreign entity that borrows our wealth to invest in their own Securities Fraud has any legal rights to take anything away from the American people.

    First of all, the fact these are Federal institutions means they are foreign controlled and operated. What that means is they should have never been allowed to invest in our Securities. Secondly, they can never own, hold or be entitled to our Securities. Thirdly, they were insolvent before they were bailed out. That was criminal and that intent to conceal those facts is heinous. These criminals are not being bailed out because they are TOO BIG TO FAIL. The fact there were there never any audits, conceals their crimes. The name TBTF is deceptive because that name in fact conceals not only their identity, they are foreign imposters, but their robbery of our peace & security. The ongoing coverup of the true identity of TBTF hides their identity and their crimes against We The People are escalating. These Concealments are is in fact criminal by their intent to deceive and their intent to deceive is criminal on many levels.

    Therefore, these entities must be held accountable, shut down and forced to pay back everything they stole from We The People and they must be jailed for their crimes.

    Foreign espionage is ineffective because their true identities have been revealed. As a result, their cover has been blown. I don’t care if they say they are French, German, Spanish, Mexican, Italian, Russian, Jewish, Catholic Muslim immigrants or they are a Servicer or

    an attorney for some bank, some Corp or even a private business, there is no security….as a result of mass concealment of these crimes our peace and our security has been destroyed.

    As a result of this massive coverup and ongoing crime spree with no accountability by these crooks for their crimes, there is no rule of law because there is NO TRUST…. Therefore, no one is safe because imposter felons have hijacked all of us and are running the country. No one can be trusted, because the truth is, our peace & security have been compromised by concealment of the crime of Securities Fraud by these Imposter felons.

    We are rapidly going the way of complete lawlessness to conceal the crimes of a few. Because of the concealment of the origination fraud by these crooks, not one American is safe from these crooks….not one. We are going the way of mexico, the criminals are all armed and protected and we are at the mercy of these criminals who hide behind trusted names that cannot in fact, be trusted, AT ALL.

  89. charles – tomorrow i’ll try to finish your comment. only started it tonight. No one is buying a loan back from gnma. the repurchase referenced is the one whereby the issuer repurchases the loan from the trust (which is a farce since it most likely never got there). I’m reading your stuff….did you read mine???

  90. Here’s some good news about the proper application of the law.
    In a class action alleging all sorts of stuff relevant to NationStar and
    U S Bank dishonoring a modification agreement (apparently entered into by NS’s servicing preceder, Aurora, looks like NS and U S Bank folded like a cheap suit and settled (amended C was only filed in December). I will link the april 10th decision when i have more energy so anyone interested can read (plagerism by your attorney!) the counts against the banksters. lay opinions – ask a lawyer or 10.

  91. johngault Ginnie Mae game is to throw terms that confuse the anybody not working in the industry. These loans are first underwritten to approve the borrower, next after it closed if a correspondent is involve it underwritten to be accepted by the purchaser, next it underwritten for FHA insurance (MIP), and next it underwritten to be accepted into the Ginnie Mae pool.

    Remember Ginnie cannot buy or sell a home mortgage loan at all, so when they talk of the lenders/issuer buying the loan back, its not a repurchase because there was never a home mortgage sale. The investor are not buying home mortgage loans they are buying securities and the issuer are being advanced fund from the later transaction of the sale of securities.

    Yes the lender/issuer/servicer is collecting the payment but its a passthrough arrangement which is BS, as the lender is no long the lender because Ginnie Mae is suppose to be in physical possession so that they have this collateral. However Ginnie is slick calling the lender a issuer and allowing them to act as the servicer and custodian and Master Servicer and contracts these same corporations to now act as this custodian agent, where they are holding the Ginnie pooled loan in a separate building to not get the loans effected with the other loan the bank owns.

    Yes the borrowers payments do pay the payment of the investors that purchase the securities, but I say this is illegal because there no actual holder of the debt. Now what blown this issue apart is that WaMu has 1.3 million government insured and pooled Ginnie Mae loans, but they are insolvent. Wells Fargo since 2006 has been acting as the servicer but this cannot take place because WaMu is not in possession of the blank Notes.

    So when Ginnie is saying the lender is responsible for the payment and that if the borrower does not make its payment them the ex-lender/issuer make the payment. First the sell of securities is a totally separate transaction and is the issuer obligation that a payment reached the investor.

    So as in the case of WaMu who is now insolvent since Sept 25, 2008 when repurchasing a loan that was never sold? Now here were MERS steps in to cloud the issue and acts as if Wells Fargo purchase the loan from another old link in the ownership chain.

    As the world knows that WaMu is dead and they placed the loans into the pools, what happens is that Ginnie needs to have the loan foreclosed in order that it can pay its insurance obligation to the investors. MERS fraudulently get Wells Fargo assigned into title and they administratively foreclose, and the proceeds of the foreclosure, insurances, which can amount to twice of what is owed. Then the loans are released to the acting lender after the fact but the Notes are right now still blank and will remain so until the end of time, as WaMu who need to endorse the in a sale is dead.

    This is why I believe it was know that WaMu was going to fail because the fatal mistaken in this Ponzi was to let WaMu going under, and have those loan out of WaMu hand. Out of WaMu hands blew the lid on this Ponzi plus having a stupid loan officer be able to have been there from the start now to the finish of the con, and be able to piece together the GAME!

  92. More appropriately, enforcing the tax rams of 1099’s from bogus parties would make the IRS complicit. imo.

  93. Charles – gnma does NOT take possession of notes! Please stop!
    guest at 7:14: gnma ‘makes sure’ the investors get paid – by gnma’s
    agreements with issuers which state the issuers must make sure the investors get paid. It isn’t gnma paying the investors. It’s the issuers, who are supposed to do this in order for the Issuers to get the insurance or guarantee. The only time the investor may be ‘made sure’ by gnma as opposed to by the issuer is if the issuer is insolvent. It’s another con and imo is third party interference in contracts. When the borrower quits making payments, by way of that agreement, the issuer must keep up the payments to the investors and ultimately repurchase the loan from the investors, not foreclose or make a credit bid in the trust’s name to hide the “side-agreement”.
    Why do you suppose there is debt forgiveness? Think it’s the IRS being kind? I rather doubt it. It’s more likely they are well aware that a 1099 coming from any bankster is suspect in the bankster’s right to issue a 1099. Allowing 1099’s to be issued by bogus parties would make the IRS complicit, would it not?

  94. Giving legal rights to criminals just because it is part of an agenda to rob the American people out of all of their Life, Liberty and Property is criminal by its deception. Just because a person is wealthy or is well educated or has a reputation of being a legitimate business does not mean anything when they know they can use money or status or cronyism to get away with crimes. Many types of cronyism are being used as a weapon to steal everything from the people and that includes our children and our pets.

  95. I mentioned a long time ago that under rule 15, an amended complaint is ‘at will’ unless an answer had been filed, but couldn’t find my cases in support. Just came across one:

    “Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), “[a] party may amend the party’s pleading once as a matter of course (“at will” – sic) at any time before a responsive pleading is served.” “A motion to dismiss is not a ‘responsive pleading*’ within the meaning of Rule 15.” Crum v. Circus Circus Enters., 231 F.3d 1129, 1130 n.3 (9th Cir 2000). “A motion to strike is not a ‘responsive pleading’ within the meaning of Rule 15.” Appling v. Service Management Systems, Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6299, citing Neifeld v. Steinberg, 438 F.2d 423, 425, n.3 (3d Cir. 1971); Phillips v. Borough of Keyport, 179 F.R.D. 140, 145-46 (D.N.J. 1998).”

    Even after an answer has been filed, when amendment thus requires leave of court or stipulation, a court (when a stip is not forthcoming) is not to unfairly withhold leave to amend. The pi$$ing match is in whether or not amendment will save the complaint. lay opinion

  96. Illegal immigration is in fact another huge issue. Back in the day, people illegally immigrated to the U.S. to avoid deportation. These days, people illegally immigrate to game the system and sponge off of the U.S. TAXPAYERS. They commit crimes and are not deported. That is a crime.

  97. The real question is why are We The People being left to fight for the Security of our Property Rights when these entities NEVER HELD THE SECURITY OR NEVER HELD THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF HOLDER OF THE SECURITY?


  98. guest and charles and anyone else who gives a hoot: since it was not blocked, please take a minute to read the gnma material at my link and comment.

  99. I wasn’t offended, chiristine, but thank you. Not at all. If I’m naive, it’s in my belief that the proper application of the law will prevail. Be nice if it were sooner than later. That’s only going to happen with the right arguments. I have some dark opinions, believe me, but it wouldn’t be productive to comment about them here as I would surely alienate people we need. It’s been a battle to hold my tongue from time to time.
    I have thought about letting it rip, but decided against it…for now.
    As to that gnma deal, I’ll try again, because I’m newly shocked and disgusted by what I found.

  100. JG,

    I didn’t mean to offend you by calling you naive. If I did, please accept my apologies. The fact is: we have had 7 years of the greatest financial scandal ever visited upon humanity. We have been told that we HAD to save the banks or the economy would collapse. It was with no strings attached. We subsequently were told that banks did nothing illegal. Unethical, maybe but illegal? No. We then discovered, as time went, that MERS had come into existence without congress’ klnowledge: somehow, I believe that congress, from that point on, had the legal ability to do something about it. It did nothing.

    Later on, we learned about the non-recording of transfers (required by state law. Obviously a breach about which states did nothing), the foreclosures initiated by an entity not a party to the original transaction, the backtracking through creation of fraudulent documents and the robot-signing. To nail the coffin shut, a settlement was entered into by the biggest offenders whereby, in exchange for a puny 25 billion, they would be exonerated from any criminal wrongdoing spelled out, in great detail, in a complaint necessary for the commission of such settlement. That, mind you, after having tampered with Libor rates for years.

    Can banks do that? They did, didn’t they? And that is probably only the top of the iceberg. I am not particularly privy to the wrongs committed against investors but i am sure there are plenty as well. I too voted for Obama the first time around.

    Very few judges have dared take the right position. Not necessarily because of corruption but because of fear. We saw some seriously pathetic congress hearings in which bankers showed contempt for the legislators. We, taxpayers, have been paying the wages of hundreds of agency staff which, to date, have done next to nothing to investigate the situation (SEC and DOJ come to mind) even though not one aspect of mortgage has remained untouched by rempant fraud. Can banks do what they did? Yes, they can! Are they allowed to? Apparently so: no one has been prosecuted other than very low hanging fruits. Fish rots from the head down. Not one head has fallen. The fish keeps rotting and stinking every day a little more.

    If Elizabeth Warren doesn’t get results, we will know that your question was purely rethorical. Sad but true.

  101. There real problem in this country is the massive coverup about the fact the banks and Wall Street destroyed our security and there is no security. As a result of that coverup, the rule of law is not being upheld in this country. When there is no accountability for these felonies by these felons, every Americans Life, Liberty and Property are in PERIL.

    A horrible tragedy has befallen my family as a result of the destruction of our legal protections and criminals believing they are above the law and money comes first in the U.S.A.

    Our family pet was refused proper medical treatment by the Animal Hospital that had been caring for our pets for the past 30 years.

    The substitute vet, one Megan Wellbourne, unbenounced to me, apparently infected my pet with blood poisoning by improperly administering an injection to my pet 2 weeks ago and by the time my pet showed signs of illness he was seriously ill.

    I took him to her the morning after he had been ill for 1 day vomiting and seemed listless the next day. She said she did not like his breathing and came back with an itemized bill and told me the treatment she offered came with a condition that he have a $500.00 test he did not need. I told her he is sick & needed immediate care, I agreed to the first half of the treatment was iv and iv antibiotics with hospitalization. She proceeded to take my pet away to which I responded, he is staying here then, to which she responded no, he only needs to stay if he were to have the $500.00 test. She took him away and improperly treated him without my knowledge. I took him home believing she gave him an iv and antiobiotics which I came to find out later, she did not. I did not discover this treatment may not have been administered, until upon my arrival home, upon discovery of antibiotics may not have been administered, I called back and to my horror, was informed they did not administer the iv or the iv antibiotics. The message relayed to me was, they needed the results from the blood tests, even though she knew my pet was not breathing properly. They told me they would call me back. Upon the return of their call, hours later, they prescribed oral antibiotics. I expressed that my pet was to weak to be administered antibiotics orally. They told me, if he could not take them bring my pet in for a shot in the morning. I knew this was wrong. By this time, it was closing time and I ran to get the antibiotics. I returned home and my pet was becoming more and more listless. We made a decision to rush him to the emergency vet. The emergency vet immediately ruled out pancreatitits or any other illness the family vet surmised and said it looked like sepsis….blood poisoning. He suggested leaving our pet overnight and every treatment the family vet gave was improper. By morning, my pet was barely hanging on, we were told to rush him to the family vet, and they were instructed what to do. By the time we arrived, my pet was near death, they took 5 minutes to get to my critically ill pet. They told us, there was nothing they could do for my pet, he passed away moments later.

    I trusted this animal hospital and I come to find out, they were apparently negligent in my pets care and trying to coverup their own negligence. I am awaiting autopsy results from another animal hospital. We will be burying our beloved pet tomorrow. May I add the negligent vet wanted to cremated our pet immediately after his passing. We told them absolutely not. We are bringing our beloved pet home. May I add, this was never about the money, we just wanted the proper treatment for our seriously ill pet. We never owed these people any money that was not promptly repaid.

    I pray for strength that I may find justice for my beloved pet. Myself and my family are absolutely devastated. We have since discovered an array of similar public complaints against oak forest animal clinic of improper diagnosing and treatment of peoples beloved pets that have led to tragedies like our family tragedy.

    We know nothing will replace our beloved pet but, like the coverup for the negligence of what the banks and Wall Street did, was a serious crime, that by deception about something I did not know, and a coverup of negligence, I could not have known of the illness the vet caused by their negligence or the deadliness of this illness they caused.

    All I know is, all of these greedy criminals must be stopped from preying on all of us and our families. They must be shut down and held accountable. Our pet just turned 9 less than a month ago and was robbed of almost half of his life. We were robbed of our real life guardian angel who can never be replaced. They stole the soul of our home because of negligence. That is why negligence is fraud and is a serious crime and should never be ignored or dismissed as merely a mistake. Negligence is no mistake and any attempt to conceal negligence puts a nation and its peoplein perilthat no one should ever have to endure.

    God help us all.

  102. Thank for writing that guest as I was lazy and had that information in my file but did not feel like typing it all. What happen is Ginnie Mae creates this false reality of a pass though payment and talk about mortgage servicers or custodians but the fact is Ginnie Mae does not have the power with a blank Note to direct any of these matter.

    Remember the lender are relinquishing the blank Note to Ginnie Mae who cannot accept payment or arrange for somebody to collect it for them the home mortgage payments. Now that I know exactly what going on it crazy the lawyer did not think this crap through.

    A lender originates a loan or purchase a new loan (correspondent), take it and packages it and pools it, as Ginnie Mae has it underwrote or reviewed for the Ginnie Mae pool and accept it and give the loan a certification as the blank Note is at the time Relinquish to Ginnie Mae without a purchase, and that is the last time the lender will and can ever own that loan.

    The reason the lender can never own the loan again, because the Note is invalid as it is no longer a Note because its does not contain a debt at all. And as Ginnie who take physical possession (but may in some cases have an out in some cases) of the loans cause the Note to be forever a non-negotiable piece of paper.

    Ginnie Mae throw out servicer or subservicer, but Ginnie own the Note without the debt so there no actual servicer, because there no party that can collect the payment as the lender cause the debt to be wipe clean when the relinquished the Blank Note.

  103. From an amicus brief in a 9th C appeal::

    “In response to the devastating effects of foreclosure on renting families, Congress passed the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act (PTFA), part of the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act. Pub. L. No. 111-22, div. A, tit. VII, §§ 701-704, 123 Stat. 1632, 1660-62 (2009), amended by Pub. L. No. 111-203, tit.
    XIV, § 1484, 124 Stat. 1376, 2204 (2010). Under the PTFA, a bona fide tenant’s tenancy survives the foreclosure and any bona fide tenant, regardless of the length of the lease term, is entitled to at least a 90-day notice to vacate.”

    Did we know this?

  104. christine, I’m hardly naive, or if i am, I would be delighted as I’m pretty sure I’ve become a cynic or am fighting it tooth and nail. They canNOT
    submit bogus numbers. That they do and get away with it doesn’t mean they can – unless it does(!) If what we’ve been doing hasn’t stopped them, then clearly it’s time for plan B. SOMEone got a plan B up and running because the bankster was in fact sanctioned 3 million in that one case for bs numbers. This ‘naive’ person still believes
    the banksters are indentured to the investors for the full amts of the
    loans that were supposed to be transferred and weren’t for lack of endorsement and delivery (if for no other reason).
    And in addition to submitting, or tendering in any manner, bad numbers to courts and homeowners, the banksters are likely making investors eat the bogus fees, etc.
    Who in this pitiful, wretched, heinous act watches out for the investors? I’d say exactly NO one, whether or not one thinks they deserve being watched out for. At this point, I’d rather be on the same page with them then fight them as well. I’ll tell you how un-naive I am, I doubt I will
    see in my lifetime any attorneys fight the real fight which imo is available to the investors. I don’t mind being naive or being perceived as naive. Just wish, maybe, it were true. The one delusion to which I can and will confess is that I thought, hoped, prayed even, that Obama would do the *!&! something in his second term. Oh, but wait. Because of the way this deal has been run for years now, he’s a tad busy trying to keep any value to the dollar, in a nutshell…… maybe his biggest battle has another, more appropriate name. I don’t know. But that’s what I call it, at least just now. And while I’m at it, I thought NG would start getting real here sometime. As far as I can recall (and that’s not saying much I know), the takeaway for strategy is denial.

    About gnma: guest and charles have come up with other material
    which appears to conflict with what I read. okay. I can’t argue very darn effectively when my material has been 86’d here. I’m not whining. I’m stating what is a fact to me.

  105. Ginnie Mae, through its Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS) Programs, guarantees securities that are backed by pools of mortgages and issued by mortgage lenders (issuers) approved by Ginnie Mae. Security holders receive a “pass-through” of the principal and interest payments on a pool of mortgages, less amounts required to cover servicing costs and Ginnie Mae guaranty fees. For the HMBS program, the Ginnie Mae guaranty ensures that security holders receive the timely payment of principal and accrued interest on the security. If an issuer fails to ensure that the funds necessary to make timely payment are available, or otherwise defaults in the discharge of its responsibilities, Ginnie Mae, in accordance with its guaranty, will make payments to security holders.

  106. I’m certain the REIT funds in my 401K, exposed me as an investor in real estate. I’m still attached to funds that were robbed of whatever was owed (IOUs, FRNs, unbacked, unsecured) for what I was investing in.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Conscience, Corporeal, Life, Free and Independent State, In Being, Alive, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  107. 6-2. Program Procedures. The parties involved in the MBS program are Ginnie Mae, the
    securities issuer, the securities dealer, the investor, a custodian of mortgage documents, a
    mortgage servicer (often the issuer), and a transfer agent. Once approved by Ginnie Mae,
    the issuer of the MBS is responsible tbr acquiring eligible mortgages, creating a pool of
    mortgages to he held by a custodian, issuing the securities backed by a pool of mortgages.
    arranging for the marketing of the securities, servicing the mortgages in the pool.
    administering the securities outstanding, and making the full and timely payment of all
    amounts due to the investors. The issuer is responsible for using its own resources to cover
    shortfalls in amounts due to investors that result from mortgage delinquencies or
    For each pool or loan package of mortgages and the accompanying issue of securities, there
    can be only one issuer. While the issuer is responsible for servicing the pool or loan
    package of mortgages, the servicing may be carried out on behalf of the issuer by another
    servicer (hereafter referred to as a subcontract servicer), which must also be a Ginnie Mac
    approved issuer. The issuer is responsible and fully liable for the satisfactory performance
    of any work performed by a subcontract servicer. All activities of any subcontract servicer
    must be covered by a contractual agreement between the issuer and the subcontract servicer
    and approved by Ginnie Mae. The issuer may not delegate or transfer to others its
    obligations to (a) withdraw funds from a principal and interest (P&l) custodial account for
    any purpose. (b) sign any accounting reports and certifications to Ginnie Mae, and (c)
    withdraw mortgage documents from the document custodian. In addition to obligations
    described above. Ginnie Mae MBS program issuers may not delegate or transfer the
    following obligations to others: (a) sign checks to Ginnie Mae. (b) sign remittance advice
    to security holders. (c) fund guaranty fees due Ginnie Mac. and (d) maintain the register for
    security holders.

  108. johngault its in their regulation and also I got a letter from the VP of Ginnie Mae Mortgage Backed Securities who was writing me on behalf of the HUD Sec were the guy talk about only providing insurance to investors.

    John think about it, why does the lender need insurance? Its the investor who needs insurance, to get their monthly PI payment. Let take a WaMu that not here any longer that went through bankruptcy so Ginnie Mae has put the billions to make WaMu hold who has already drawn advancements to the max and has folded and know the loan are defaulting with not way to cash the blank Notes.

    Check this out, as a home mortgage loan is blank it cannot be cashed just like a personnel check or a dollar bill that does not have the US Treasury signature on it, then it is not proper US currency.

  109. The Servicer and MERS are both agents of the Principal .

  110. What Ginnie Mae does is guarantee investors the timely payment of principal and interest on MBS backed by federally insured or guaranteed loans. Ginnie Mae is never the investor or the owner of the note dispite what might have been listed on the MERS website or what you might have been told by the servicer bank.

  111. charles – where did you get your info in para 2? That is NOT what I read from gnma. GNMA does NOT insure the investors. In fact, gnma makes it crystal clear it wil lonly make good the ins / guar to the issuer after the issuer has made good to the investors. I quoted chapter and verse, but it was blocked here at this site to my dismay.and puzzlement last month.

  112. as to the knowledge of a trust that a note is in default, knowledge of an agent is knowledge of the principal. I think. Knowledge to the servicer, who altho not an agent that I know of per se, may well be imputed to the trust would be my thought, i.e., trust probably not a hidc and therefore subject to all available aff defenses (but we’ll argue this right AFTER getting the more definitive statement for the date of transfer by way of an under oath aff from the trust and not someone else or other good and suff evidence from the secn TRUSTEE). all n my lay opinion only. So what does one do when you ask for that more def.
    stmt and it comes from some yeahoo alleged vp of the servicer and not from bony as trustee? We need to work on this one immediately if not sooner.

  113. johngault here what happens with Ginnie and that is unlike Fannie or Freddie is that you have the lenders who are turned into issuers, and the investors who purchases the securities/pools and Ginnie who is the insurer.

    Now the MBS are 100% insured by the Federal Gov through Ginnie, where the investor is assured of receiving 100% of their principal investment. Ginnie does not insure the lenders/issuer who have received fund from drawing against the sold securities.

    Now as Ginnie require that the blank Notes are relinquish, and under UCC 3 the moment Ginnie take possession the blank Notes belongs to Ginnie as it is the only proof the transaction occurred.

    I don’t believe there is a Trust and the servicers act as a Trust and custodian because Ginnie Mae cannot have outside of their possession the no longer have any legal claim what so ever.

    Let take WaMu for example when it was seized it did not have possession of the Notes and it was not considered a part of their assets and sold to JPMorgan Chase because Ginnie Mae laid claim to the blank Notes they have possession of as WaMu as with other lenders are not indebted as the lenders does not owe anything against the loan they have made.

    But in relinquishing the Notes, what happens is that frees the hoe owner from the contract with a lender as it not a lender that in possession of the blank Notes. It happens in every loan placed into a Ginnie pool but in the case of WaMu the weakness in the arrangement is exposed because WaMu is a “defunct bank” and has no claim to the 1.3 million loan Wells Fargo has been servicing for WaMu since 2006.

    We know that Ginnie did not purchase the loans and the WaMu was not sold to Wells, but the blank Notes are needed to be turned into cash to pay the investor because there is no lender to replace a bad loan or pay Ginnie to pay the investors who purchase the securities and monies were advance.

    Now the con is that as these lenders never intended to keep these loan on there books as a long term 30yr mortgage, and the pools simply provided a way to originate loan with actually the Fed’s money, who never wanted the risk of originating and servicing these servicing these loans. Its the perfect crime ALMOST!

    I believe the only reason WaMu was allowed to have Wells service WaMu government loan is because someone somewhere figured the bank would go under, and if those 1.3 million loans were in WaMu physical possession the FDIC would have seized and sold the loan because they had not physically left WaMu’s possession, but that Wells Fargo took over the servicing and even purchase the building and hired the WaMu personal, who was going to know that was not working for Wells now!

    They thought of everything but one of their own ex-mortgage loan officers (only a 10 month tour) would figure this mess out.

  114. JG,

    “They can’t just throw out any figures which suit them. They MUST be correct.” Sometimes, John, i find you incredibly endearing with your naivety. Maybe they can’t but… they did. Been doing it for 20+ years and nowadays, when audited, they still do it.

    Do you realize that the S&L was just a trial run to see how far they could go before getting in trouble and once they tested the waters, Glass-Steagall was repealed? Do you think it was just random?

  115. “Inchoate Rage

    Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/14/2013 – 10:13

    To talk about something as being “inchoate” means that it is still in its formative stages and is undeveloped. If rage is “inchoate”, it does not yet have a specific cause or those who feel the rage are not sure of the nature of what is causing the emotion. Like their compatriots all over the world, Americans know that what is coming out of their politicians and “financiers” is a load of malevolent hogwash, but they cannot put their finger on precisely why this is so. Many suspect the truth but do not want to face it because of what it implies about their own actions as well as the actions of their rulers.”

    So… What would be the opposite of inchoate rage of the type we ought to start feeling, after 7 years of the same insanity? Full blown rage? Explosive rage? Nuclear rage? Postal rage? Webster’s states that “mature” is the opposite of inchoate. “Mature” isn’t too helpful though. “Mature” is why things don’t seem to evolve one bit: nobody appears concerned enough and afraid enough of what that rage might turn into. Time to give our official elects a sample, no?

  116. I opined the default figures must be correct as a matter of law. I also listed some sanctions cases and one of them was In re Jones. I found one such case in 2012, not 2007 as my earlier comment indicates, If you search “in re jones wells fargo” on yahoo, the second hit is from
    stopforeclosure fraud and discusses the case with a link to the decision. WF was sanctioned big bucks for misapplication of the payments to fees AND tendering errant amt due…..3 million, think it was. We should all add this case to our arsenal. imo. They can’t just throw out any figures which suit them. They MUST be correct.

  117. JG,

    The investors did not buy loans. They bought certificates given them a certain number of shares but they never really knew which alleged loans those certificates corresponded to. Investors invested money with servicers and said: “Make it grow as fast as you can, as much as you can. Don’t want to know how. Just do it.”

    No math is ever going to explain anything in a system where numbers were pulled out of a hat and…TaDaaaaaa! 22% return on a ghost investment. Just don’t ask for your money back too soon, ‘cuz we ain’t got no liquidity!

  118. Here’s one for people good with math. When the investors (allegedly) bought the loans, there was interest due to the investors on them, so if the investors paid the face amt literally, we’re missing some stuff here, such as that interest or any principle reduction made by payments between the orig of the loan and the alleged transfer date. WHERE are those numbers found? The servicers fork over their alleged accounting numbers when pressed or sometimes when not, but what if the point at which the start (the number reflecting what is owed on the note) is wrong? Then every other number is also wrong. Those numbers must be correct as a matter of law. Where is the accounting for what was owing and due on the notes when the investors paid for them? They don’t get to start at the face amt if payments were made before the investors (allegedly) obtained their interest (altho it appears that’s just what the banksters did – sold the notes to the investors at face value as if time stood still from the origination of the loans – got any idea how much money we’re talking here on a pool of 50,000,000 in loans?. NG seems to say the investor’s funds were not used to purchase existing loans, but rather were used to actually fund the loans. Got me, tho I wouldn’t doubt it. But what, then, is that called, NG? Was it theft of the investors’ funds by the banksters? Was it misappropriation of those funds? What? We need to look at it, if it in fact happened, from a ‘normal’ legal perspective first, and then throw in trust law, and also the fact that the investors are not licensed lenders, for what that may be worth in your (NG) perspective that the use of the investor funds made them the (unwitting) lender, with which I personally disagree.
    I would call it something else, though admittedly I don’t know just what.

    One of the ways I can think of to find out (what was paid), which imo a reasonable court couldn’t legitimately ignore, is the fact that it makes a diff if the payment for a note is a promise to pay or is actual payment. (I think, but my memory, ya know, is that one is only a hidc to the extent of the amt of payment actually made (it’s in the UCC somewhere) Which reminds me, Charles, if I may. Please stop casually making reference to “holder in due course”. HIDC has a specific meaning within the law. There is a holder and there is a hidc, the primary distinction being that a hidc is not subject to many of the aff defenses againt a mere holder. That distinction is why I have opined that homeowners should if not must (to me) request / demand a more definitive statement: is the claimant claiming as a holder or a hidc? It is legally impossible for a transferee to be a holder in due course if a note has been transferred after its default is known to the transferee. In my lay opinion, any declaration or affidavit in regard to the time of transfer (as it relates here to holder v hidc) MUST come from the claimant (here the trust) and not from some attorney or the servicer.

    Our grounds, until someone who gets paid to think comes up with something better, for the reasonable request for a “more definitive statement” is so that we will be able to assert available defenses to the note, as applicable. What we want of course is the date of the transfer of the note and it is not bogus imo to assert what I have stated as our grounds, as our need to know, because we do in fact have a need-to-know-clearance.

  119. thank you, dw. I did try to email you a month ago, but i know I got one
    letter wrong in your email, so now I have to go back thru all my notes for the last couple mos to find your real one. I remember i figured out which letter I had wrong but then I ‘got busy’. I’ll try to find it tho I admit it’s a job I hate! Sometimes I don’t know why I take notes since
    I hate going back over them. Bet I’m not alone……….

  120. charles – not sure what you’re trying to say. Am sure NG blocked what I was trying to say a month ago about gnma loans (why, NG?). GNMA doesn’t buy loans. the loans are insured or guaranteed by fha or va. That’s no secrect. BUT, gnma, in published info, states that gnma’s ins or guar does not extend to mbs investors/ trusts. If banksters want to avail themselves of those benefits, they must make the investors whole and then gnma will pay the ISSUERS, and NOT the investors, for any losses pursuant to their written contracts.
    Thus it appears to me that either fraud (on fha and va if not the homeowner and courts) is being committed when fha or va loans are being foreclosed in the names of the secn trustee or that gang is waiving the fha ins / va guarantee. Which do you pick?
    I have tried to get people to copy missives before they disappear or are changed. Who knows. I know I can’t get them all. I hope you save what you find where it can’t be messed with.

  121. johngault here what get me is the State of Nebraska has MERS by the balls, as MERS took them to the NE Supreme Court and won stating that they were not a “mortgage bank” and in addition MERS has not register with the NE Secretary of State Office to do business in the State. State Statute 20-20,168.

    Now back in 2010 then started to register back did not complete the application process. Now NE states that these businesses that are not register cannot use the State’s court system. However in 2008 what NE did was to enact Statute 76-2710 which is part of the Foreclosure Protection Act, where it is written that one without financial interest could act, and that a electronic registry could not act as the beneficiary for the owner of the debt unless it had permission from the holder of the debt. Class IV felony

    Now as NE been made aware of this fact and as with Washington Mutual Bank (WaMu) government insured loans being foreclosed and in some cases not even WaMu was ever in title, yet as the bank was seized and these loan were in Ginnie Mae pools placed there by WaMu as the issuer of the securities, and having first relinquish the blank endorsed Note without a purchase occurring, the debt been wipe away.

    On Jul 31. 2006 WaMu and Wells enter into a servicing agreement arrangement that I challenge because at this point WaMu does not hold the blank Notes so it cannot hold the debt. In addition to relinquishing the Notes, WaMu as with everybody else they sign HUD 11711A (Ginnie Mae has recently changed its web page), but this form releases releases financial interest of the loans by the lenders.

    This form makes sure that in the event that an issuer default on the securities payment and is in financial trouble as what WaMu & IndyMac were in the FDIC did or a bankrupt court seized assets it was already a done deal that the lender/issuer had first already handed over ownership with the blank Note, and the HUD 11711A is just back up.

    From the very being as MERS does at some point does a Transfer Beneficial Rights – Option 1 with transfer the title inside of MERS to Ginnie is nothing more than smoke & mirrors because Ginnie does not purchase the debt. But in addiction they cannot accept payments and cannot have a surrogate do so for them. Wells Fargo could not have a valid mortgage servicing agreement with WaMu or Ginnie Mae because neither is the “holder in due course”!

    I have this feeling that money been thrown at people in NE to not act on the trap they set on MERS back in 2008, but I don’t think the writers of the Statute knew the depths of MERS at the time, and did not understand the pooling process at all!

  122. UKG-darn i wish i had known you had JVE contact info- i definitely would not have put out my email otherwise. i realise he cant help everyone but as you said, he appears honorable hence i wanted to talk to him, but this other JVE went off on a massive tangent- without even speaking to me…

  123. HI JG- so glad your back !

  124. UKG i dont think this was the same JAN VAN Eck…ill never know unless he gives me his profile and i can speak in person- i have the emails do you want to see em, ill send…thing is im sick of the nuances ive been trown, i could say a hell of a lot more but im litigating…as you know. im the real deal…but im afraid some just want money, nothing more.

  125. johngault,
    Good questions.
    When you start with questions you can see past the programming.
    You are opening eyes with the questions you’ve asked.
    Everyone assumes the answers are correct until One starts asking how is that correct, who did that, why is that how it’s done, where was this decided, the questions unlock the programming.

    Spoon boy: Do not try and bend the spoon. That’s impossible. Instead… only try to realize the truth.
    Neo: What truth?
    Spoon boy: There is no spoon.
    Neo: There is no spoon?
    Spoon boy: Then you’ll see, that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.

    Asking questions leads you to the truth.
    The programming is very thick.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Conscience, Corporeal, Life, Free and Independent State, In Being, Alive, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  126. Because I’ll tell you what (I think). Any authority for MERS to assign the lender’s interest is found NOT in the dot, but in a separate document known as the MERS Membership Agreement. I’m going to hazard that MERS has made some amendments post-Consent Order ( resulting in no more foreclosures in its name). BUT, prior to any amendments, MERS, the nominee or agent (pick one), only authorized assignments in its name when the beneficial int in the note was held by a non-member. Member to member assignments were not authorized: NO assignments were authorizedin MERS name by the members to other members.
    Does anyone get how legally tweaked (read impossible) it is for a nominee or agent (again pick one) to be telling the principal the rules of conduct? (Let’s say you give me your power of att to sell your home or attend your closing while you’re out of town. Think I can tell you the rules, the sales price, etc? In the absence of expressed authority -found in some other doc-, MERS has exceeded its authority by assigning dots ) The point I’m really trying to make is that we can’t find MERS authority to assign jack in the dot. If the auth exists at all, it’s in another document which is very, very rarely introduced and imo when it has been, it hasn’t been construed correctly. Even if a court finds MERS is a nominee (in lieu of agent), no where is MERS authorized in the dot imo to assign the beneficial interest. Even if were found there,
    there are other Controlling Documents (such as the membership agreement) which are willfully kept from homeowners and courts alike.
    We don’t have to sit for this, but we do. Why hasn’t NG mentioned this
    stuff? There are legit presumptions and then there is bs the banksters pose as valid presumptions and we let them. (A presumption is something taken as a fact and is accorded prima facie validity unless challenged. imo). The smallest unchecked tale can turn into a nightmare for homeowners.

  127. i.e. …. for value recieved

  128. Well, christine, I’ll simply acknowledge there’s some truth in your comment, but with a caveat: we have yet to throw everything there is to throw at them, partly for our legal ignorance.
    And on that note, MR. GARFIELD, any chance you’ll move to the really helpful? I’ve been hearing this stuff for years now and it’s of no value if we can’t get to the truth through discovery. “There is no trial without discovery.” Now that’s a very old adage of the law for a fact. But for another fact, what we get without discovery (and properly arguing
    relaxed pleading*, is a stinking dismissal or summary judgment. Homeowner: “these guys are lying”. Bankster: “judge, she can’t prove that. She’s just making wild accusations with no evidence.” Well, no sh$t. Most of the time we can’t prove it. (*But must we just then?) We need discovery, esp if one doesn’t argue the mers assignment of the dot including the note is prima facie evidence it is just now being assigned to a trust and a trust for whom there is no evidence of MERS nominee or agency status to boot, nor, more importantly, is there evidence of that status as to anyone after the original lender (for whom – orig lender – nominal status may be a legit presumption, but not agency imo). Neil hasn’t even discussed what a nominee may do or not. The dot says it can do x y z for the orig lender. That’s nice. It doesn’t say the nominee may assign its interest;not even that it may assign the int of the orig lender. WHO, NG, is a successor or assign? What bar makes one a successor or assign of the orig lender? Language in the note? Where?
    *How do we get at evidence singularly in the possession and knowledge of someone else? The rules of pleading are relaxed when that’s the case. NG, what’s that good for at the pleading stage? lHow do we argue this? and get at that info? First of all, the banksters have an obligation under rule 26, think it is, to fork it all over without being asked. Yeah, that’s happening. Imo it’s sanctionable (and possibly could lead to dismissal with prejudice in favor of the h.o.) that they don’t fork it over. We need answers and direction we’re not getting here. Denial is AN avenue, but it’s not the whole enchilada by far, and at this date, I’m feeling let down and that’s being kind.

  129. Now you got it JG! That is why the document trail is a dead end/worthless so you have to follow the money trail.

  130. ” In a withering opinion, the judge said MERS “presented no admissible evidence” in its case. And he found that sanctions should be imposed against [Mark T.] Domeyer, the attorney representing MERS, for bringing such a sloppy motion to court. The bottom line, Bufford said, was that the true owners of the loan — highly unlikely” to be original lender Freedom — did not come forward in court and MERS failed to prove any right to act on their* behalf.”

    “their”:who is they? This is why we still care about the Vargas case.
    Who is they? For whom is MERS (read servicer employee) purporting to assign anything? WHO authorized MERS to assign the dot to
    a trust (or anyone else)? WHERE is the evidence of that 1) order and 2) authority? In the Vargas case, as many others, the lender orig named in the dot is toast, so for whom is MERS acting at this date?
    Even if (the banksters are claiming) the note is held by the trust, we still need an answer: WHO authorized MERS to assign the dot? It can’t be the assignee, so who is it? An agent (gag) may not come into a court of law (or purport to act in its own right in any situation) and purport to act for an unknown principal, any more than I may purport to act for you. And in so far as MERS has claimed agency, every assgt should be executed by MERS as agent for XYZ, not simply by MERS.
    Here a more definitive statement may be required. Is MERS purporting to assign the dot in its own right or as an agent? If MERS claims it is acting in its own right in executing an assgt, there are diff if not additional arguments to be made (because whether MERS (or anyone) may assign the interest of a party for whom it serves as nominee is not a fact in evidence imo and there is certainly no evidence MERS is a nominee for anyone other than the orig lender despite the language
    “successors and assigns” in the dot)

  131. John Gault,

    “However, a creditor is not liable if he can show by a
    preponderance of the evidence that the violation was unintentional and resulted from a bona fide error”

    Hate to burst your bubble but when “50% of all audited mortgages have errors” and we can prove active, willful, wanton fraud, that little save-the-families regulation signed by our prez ain’t gonna make one bit of a meaningful difference. Not in the big picture anyway. Know why? They are all Oops! If servicers were able to Oops! over 4 millions foreclosures, they’ll Oops! everything else.

    Your cases originate mostly from one single state; Texas. What about the other 49?

    The bar’s been deliberately set too high for people to be able to prove fraud. Hey, even our own, taxpayer-paid DOJ can’t prosecute fraud. What are our chances to see that regulation enforced?

  132. DEB; Ian (Jan van Eck) is a gentleman and has a good legal mind. he is only offering help. it can be difficult as everyone has differences in their cases. I have spoken with him personally. He’s a good egg.

  133. The following cases from the Fifth Circuit all deal with the misconduct of the lender, the servicer, or the attorney for one or the other:

    In re Jones, 391 B.R. 577 (E.D. La. 2008).

    In re Wilburn, 404 B.R. 841 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 2009).

    In re Hight, 393 B.R. 484 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 2008).

    In re Stewart, 391 B.R. 327 (Bankr. E.D. La. 2008).

    In re Mounce, 390 B.R. 233 (Bankr. W.D. 2008).

    In re Parsley, 384 B.R. 138 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 2008).

    In re Sanchez, 372 B.R. 289 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 2007).

    In re Allen, 2007 WL 174708 (Bankr. SD. Tex. 2007).

    In re Porcheddu, 338 B.R. 729 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 2006).

    Almost all of these cases involve sanctions of one sort or another, and some are quite severe.

    Another case of sanctions is In re Nosek from MA.


    On May 20, 2009, President Obama signed into law the “Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009”, Pub. L. No. 111-22, 123 Stat. 1632 (the “Act”).
    Section 404(a) of the Act amends the Truth in Lending Act (“T-I-L”), 15 U.S.C. § 1641 et seq., to require any creditor who purchases or is otherwise assigned a mortgage loan to provide the borrower with written notice of the transfer within thirty days. Within the meaning of the Act, a mortgage loan includes
    any consumer credit transaction that is secured by the principal dwelling of a consumer.
    Act at § 404 (a)(2). Such written notice must provide: (a) the identity, address, and telephone number of the new creditor; (b) the date of the transfer; (c) how to reach an agent or party having authority to act on behalf of the new creditor; (d) the location of the place where the transfer of ownership of the debt is recorded; and (e) any other relevant information regarding the new creditor. Act at § 404 (a)(1).
    Section 404(b) of the Act creates a private right of action against any creditor who fails to comply with the new notice requirement. In such a private action, a creditor may be liable for actual damages, attorney’s fees and court costs, and twice the amount of any finance charge in connection with the transaction. 15 U.S.C. § 1640(a) (2006). However, a creditor is not liable if he can show by a
    preponderance of the evidence that the violation was unintentional and resulted from a bona fide error, notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error. Id. at § 1640(c).

    Additionally, a creditor who willfully and knowingly fails to provide
    the required disclosure may be held criminally liable and fined up to
    $5,000 or imprisoned up to one year, or both. Id. at § 1611.

    Most of this info is from an article written by attorney R. Glen Ryan in 2009.

  134. just a lil note- someone by the name of Ian lounsbury wrote to me as Jan Van Eck- and , i did put my email out publically, on here, hoping for help,
    so jan if thats really you, i apologise publically. but the legal stuff in the email just did not seem to add up as bona fide or pertinent to the posture of my case, or perhaps my understanding is off, im posting this and i may indeed have “egg on face” but my gut says, otherwise…, if Jan Van Eck is a real person, write to neil garfeild then neil can pass it on perhaps, just need to know who is the real slim shady.and thats all i have to say about that- except- i asked “ian lounsbury” for his phone number and atty profile before i sent all kndsa sensitive documents he asked for, to which- no, no sir, did not get that from him. not to get too paranoid but just so you all be careful when putting your personal email up on here. i made a mistake in doing that, im still nieve to some degree. aw well…

  135. Tesla, Keshe, the end of the biggest cover up of all times and one more story on how much we know and why we have never been given access to it. I have no doubt that foreclosures and the economic crisis were meant as distractions to keep people destabilized, fearful and prevent them from learning the truth.

    Too late. The system has collapsed. What we are seeing is only the evidence of it, piecemeal. The last ditch effort is to throw humanity into a war with N. Korea. it won’t happen. The future of humanity looks brighter than it has ever been.

  136. Senator Introduces Amendment to Overturn “Citizens United”

    By Edward McClelland
    | Wednesday, Mar 13, 2013 | Updated 11:39 AM CD

    Here’s the text of the amendment introduced today by Sanders, an Independent from Vermont:

    SECTION 1.
    Whereas the right to vote in public elections belongs only to natural persons as citizens of the United States, so shall the ability to make contributions and expenditures to influence the outcome of public elections belong only to natural persons in accordance with this Article.

    SECTION 2.
    Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to restrict the power of Congress and the States to protect the integrity and fairness of the electoral process, limit the corrupting influence of private wealth in public elections, and guarantee the dependence of elected officials on the people alone by taking actions which may include the establishment of systems of public financing for elections, the imposition of requirements to ensure the disclosure of contributions and expenditures made to influence the outcome of a public election by candidates, individuals, and associations of individuals, and the imposition of content neutral limitations on all such contribution and expenditures.

    SECTION 3.
    Nothing in this Article shall be construed to alter the freedom of the press.

    SECTION 4.
    Congress and the States shall have the power to enforce this Article through appropriate legislation.


    Universities Join Effort to Overturn Citizens United Decision
    Email 12 Smaller Font Text Larger Text | Print

    By Anjuli Sastry
    Apr 11, 2013 4:05pm

    Students at the University of California at Berkeley will vote on a referendum this week as part of an effort to convince the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn its controversial 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision nearly three years after the original ruling.

    READ MORE: Upcoming Supreme Court Case Could Further Upend Campaign Finance Law

    According to the decision, political spending to support individual candidates constitutes a form of protected speech under the First Amendment, and the federal government cannot deny corporations or unions the right to spend.

    If the Berkeley referendum is passed, campus leaders will send annual letters to the President and Congress asking for Congress to pass and the California legislature to ratify an amendment to the decision. The campus already passed a resolution condemning the decision in 2010.

    RELATED: Proposed Constitutional Amendment Claims Money Is Not Speech

    The hope, said Morgan Prentice, a UC Berkeley sophomore and the referendum’s campaign manager, is that the Supreme Court will take notice and stop giving corporations what Prentice said was an unfair advantage to influence political decisions.

    “(Public higher education) competes against other interest groups on a state level for money,” she said. ”If those interest groups are able to spend more money on elections, they might have an upper hand in getting more money than us.”

    RELATED: Citizens United Bounces Back To Supreme Court

    The campus effort comes after the California State Legislature passed a resolution in 2012 that proposed a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United. A number of other California cities, including San Francisco and San Diego, have already passed resolutions condemning the decision.

    A total of 27 constitutional amendments have been approved. The Move to Amend coalition, made up of organizations and individuals opposed to Citizens United, was one such group that proposed an amendment in February.

    UC Berkeley isn’t the only university where students have taken a stand against the Citizens United decision.

    Last year, the University of Washington passed its own resolution to oppose the decision and notified Congress and Washington state senators, but it won’t be sending letters to Congress anytime soon.

    “There was no direction in legislation to continue that effort,” said University of Washington junior Ada Waelder, who is also the student senate speaker. “It’s hard working with the Supreme Court. You can’t generally lobby it.”

    The university hopes to continue working with other universities nationwide to try to get a constitutional amendment passed and ratified, Waelder said.

    This post has been updated. An earlier version misstated the process for amending the Constitution

  138. I’m definitely capturing a copy of that ruling info linked below.
    The second page of that article
    Pennsylvania Court Deals Blow to Secrecy-Obsessed Fracking Industry: Corporations Not The Same As Persons With Privacy Rights
    Goes further to say
    The plain meaning of ‘people’ is the living, breathing humans in this Commonwealth.”
    and it said
    Summing up, the Court said “it is axiomatic that corporations, companies, and partnerships have ‘no spiritual nature,’ ‘feelings,’ ‘intellect,’ ‘beliefs,’ ‘thoughts,’ ‘emotions,’ or ‘sensations,’ because they do not exist in the manner that humankind exists… They cannot be ‘let alone’ by government, because businesses are like grapes, ripe upon the vine of the law, that the people of this Commonwealth raise, tendm prune and their pleasure and need.”

    It’s clear by their writing that corporate persons are unequal with the people. I won’t bastardize what was written because it was well spoken. Corporations are a corporate body with no soul, and are unequal to the People. Legal Maxim: Unequal things cannot be joined together.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Conscience, Corporeal, Life, Free, Independent, People, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  139. The Bank will tell you , what the home is worth , like my neigbours home and not Zillow and not Corelogic.
    Example : Foreclosure sale from B of A was $ 100,000.00 to
    a realtor. He sold the home after 3 months for $ 168,000.00 .WOW
    The price did go back to the original price , that is all , there is no raIse.

  140. Guest- i have faith, i will triumph

  141. American-born (patriot?) presidential candidate Bachmann had thought about it. She picked the wrong country and the wrong time. Still, that’s what people are going to do more and more. Those who speak several languages, have exportable skills, no cultural prejudice and no fear of the unknown. But that’s ok: Chinese and Russians are moving in. Globalization is happening: better make the best of it. I would venture to guess that international law is the ticket for the future.

    Doug Casey On Second Passports
    Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/13/2013 – 20:43

    Getting a second passport is just part of a larger “permanent traveler” strategy. The ideal is to live in one place, have your citizenship in another, your banks and brokers in other jurisdictions, and your business dealings in yet others. That makes it very inconvenient for any one government to control you. You don’t want all your eggs in one basket – that just makes it easier for them to grab them all. I understand it may not be easy for most people to structure their affairs that way. That’s exactly why most serfs stayed serfs; it was hard and scary to think of anything other than what they were told they should do.

  142. Oh well… the whole domino effect. More in the making of a third world country.

    China Takes Another Stab At The Dollar, Launches Currency Swap Line With France
    Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/13/2013 – 21:51

    One more domino in the dollar reserve supremacy regime falls. Following the announcement two weeks ago that “Australia And China will Enable Direct Currency Convertibility”, which in turn was the culmination of two years of Yuan internationalization efforts as summarized by the following: “World’s Second (China) And Third Largest (Japan) Economies To Bypass Dollar, Engage In Direct Currency Trade”, “China, Russia Drop Dollar In Bilateral Trade”, “China And Iran To Bypass Dollar, Plan Oil Barter System”, “India and Japan sign new $15bn currency swap agreement”, “Iran, Russia Replace Dollar With Rial, Ruble in Trade, Fars Says”, “India Joins Asian Dollar Exclusion Zone, Will Transact With Iran In Rupees”, and “The USD Trap Is Closing: Dollar Exclusion Zone Crosses The Pacific As Brazil Signs China Currency Swap”, China has now launched yet another feeler to see what the apetite toward its currency is, this time in the heart of the Eurozone: Paris. According to China Daily, as reported by Reuters, “France intends to set up a currency swap line with China to make Paris a major offshore yuan trading hub in Europe, competing against London.” As a reminder the BOE and the PBOC announced a currency swap line back in February, in effect linking up the CNY to the GBP. Now it is the EUR’s turn.

  143. Nice 1 Christine


    Pennsylvania Court Deals Blow to Secrecy-Obsessed Fracking Industry: Corporations Not The Same As Persons With Privacy Rights
    “In the absence of state law, business entities are nothing.”

    “This court ruling is a significant development for the growing movement to restore democracy to the people,” said John Bonifaz, the co-founder and executive director of Free Speech For People, a national campaign launched on the day of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC. “The ruling is the newest example of dissent within the judiciary to the fabricated doctrine of corporate constitutional rights. It will be held up for years to come as a powerful defense of the promise of American self-government: of, by, and for the people.”

    Judge O’Dell Seneca cited the text of the 1776 Pennsylvania constitution, the history of its various provisions, related recent case law from other states and policy considerations, and rejected the various claims by corporate lawyers that “made no attempt to parse those texts and construe them in light of the full document.” The Court wrote, “Nothing in that jurisprudence indicates that that right [of privacy] is available to business entities.”

    “There are no men or woman defendants in the instant case; they are various business entities,” it wrote, saying business entities are created by the state and subject to laws, unlike people with natural rights. “In the absence of state law, business entities are nothing.” If businesses had natural rights like people, “the chattel would become the co-equal to its owners, the servant on par with its masters, the agent the peer of its principles, and the legal fabrication superior to the law that created and sustains it.”

  145. You all heard Sen Warren, there is so much more … You already know this information would drastically change the outcome of your case. Please … if there ever were a Good Time to get an Informed attorney … Its Now! These Buttwipes are Still Doing Business as Usual … Outside the Law and in violation of the Consent Orders and debt collection laws! Its Time To Nail Them and Protect Your Homes and Yourselves from Further Harm! Get an Attorney or Go To Your Local Legal Aid for Assistance NOW! NOBODY SHOULD EVER BE ALLOWED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM AND KEEP FAMILIES TIED UP IN COURT FOR YEARS ON TRUPMPED UP … COVERED UP FRAUD! I been shouting for Years the number of homeowners who were NOT IN DEFAULT and FC’ed on Anyway. We wont get started on the multiple liabilities put on the homeowner without their knowledge and we don’t want to get started on the titles. That Really Gets Me Steamed!

  146. Deb, you have every right to feel that way. Those Feeling are Exactly what will Break Up TBTF! No One Does Business with Institutions they don’t Trust! Hang In There … The End is Near and Before Long QTs will out number the FCs. Keep Your Faith!

  147. @ trespass
    i dont trust anybody- lately

  148. carie- yes

  149. Hello … They are in violation of the April 2011 consent orders. Did you listen to the video? What BOA (and others) filed in 2011 was a Criminal Act, Criminal Slander to Title for Starters! Buttwipes were given immunity for CW crimes but then Turn Around 5 months later and do the same dam thing!! GO KICK THEIR ASS!

  150. @Deborah Wynn, thanks.
    I spelled Accubanc wrong.
    I will wikipedia the info.
    I don’t trust wikipedia; they still don’t properly show the $6.2 billion dollar trade loss JP Morgan Chase had from the London Whale, /jamie-dimon-jpmorgan-apologies, , almost a year later when everyone agrees it’s higher than wikipedia is showing $5.8 billion in their List_of_Trading_Losses link.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Conscience, Corporeal, Life, Free, Independent, People, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  151. Re. “Fund ’em”:

    “…Subprime loans were Fannie/Freddie CHARGE-OFF/REJECTS. In this case, NO MONEY is transferred because the loans are simply assignment of debt collection — thus, NO FUNDING is necessary. This is why the investors in subprime loan cash pass-through funded nothing — all they did was purchase pass-through of cash flows to debt collection-modified CHARGE-OFFS. And, what did the Fed purchase as part of the financial crisis bail-out?? They purchased the COLLECTION RIGHTS from the banks that owned them. These were NOT, never were, and never will be, VALID mortgage backed securities backed by VALID mortgage loans.
    This is contrary to the MBS the Fed purchases TODAY — those ARE valid Fannie/Freddie qualified loans whose cash flows have been converted to valid mortgage backed securities…”

  152. jesus c i typed ” neidermeyer” right,

  153. @ neidermeyer
    I work with indian nurses, none of them were allowed to buy property, they could afford to either, there were many Indian nurses came here with their families and the first thing they did was buy a home of their own- at the height of the bubble- these people were targetted too. they have very very high moral values and kept paying despite being upside down, they fell for the loan mod con too, and subsequently many lost their first real home and then went back to india, talk about cruel.

  154. ET, – “fundem” i believe some bank execs car plates

  155. Trespass, wikipedia nat city/pNC- if its not been removed pnc paid for nat city with tarp money if i remember rightly

  156. […] Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, Eviction, foreclosure, GARFIELD GWALTNEY KELLEY AND WHITE, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, securities fraud Tagged: home prices, housing prices, median income, underwater home supply, zillow Livinglies’s Weblog […]

  157. Homeowners For Justice Recontrust BOA MERS Countrywide Fraud
    eeggup eeggup·138 videos
    Subscribe 20

    Like 0 Dislike 0 .




    I dislike this



    About Share Add to



    Transcript Statistics Report .

    Published on Mar 18, 2013

    Excellent Web Site Homeowners For Justice Recontrust BOA MERS Countrywide Fraud

  158. Mortgage fraud fighting is only one of the ways we have to reassert our power. It wasn’t taken away from us: we allowed it. Up to us to take it back. It has nothing to do with violence. The science of physics is proving it over and over.

  159. You Can’t Trust Our National Banks Mortgage Paper Trail
    4/12/2013 by Barry Fagan

    73 page downloadable document with a chapter entitled,


    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Conscience, Corporeal, Life, Free and Independent State, In Being, Alive, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  160. I will add the assistant attorney general over a voice message, I think, told me the attorney general does not represent persons, it represents the state of ………….

    I looked up the definition of a person, because at the time I thought that was what i was. I mean I learned it in school, everywhere I go people would say, I’m just a person trying to make ends meet, or I’m a person working hard for a living. All these references to being a person. My deed mentioned i was a single person so why would the assistant attorney general tell me they don’t represent this word I hear all the time and it’s on my documents?

    After I learned what a ‘person’ was, i called back and left a message stating. I am not a person, I am one of the People and the attorney general represents me because the People are the state.

    Ignorance of the law is not bliss, but it’s not cool to put someone in a category that by your placing them in a category you think you can violate their rights and not be guilty of violating a federal law of discrimination.

    Also, a better clue for their system. All corporations have a number that they file their taxes with, it’s called an EIN. The people don’t have EINs. The corporations do. (well some guru’s were teaching people to get EINs and give up their SSNs) but the point…I’m making…is….the transaction is with a SSN so that means we are dealing with living people as corporations are persons per that Citizens suit that made it to the supreme court.

    Now if anyone thinks they are executing our will, they are not. They are not appointed trustee over the People, they are appointed trustee over a person. If they are playing a game with the person that will interfere with the people, their ignorance does not absolve them of the harm they caused to the people who have not given expressed consent to their transactions.

    IRS code knows that the infant is not dead (nondecedent) if it has a social security number, so they can’t act like we are dead and they are executing our will nor act like we are corporations because the numbers that identify us as living is the SSN number.

    They need an accompanying death certificate to execute our will. I don’t care about probate court when we were born, they have enough laws to know better and to protect us or go away because they are not doing what they were created for.

    They can play paper games all they want, but they can’t cross paper with the living and act like the living don’t matter and the paper has the power.

    Someone living is backing that paper, that living someone is an equal; and equal has no power over an equal.

    They need to fix this, reverse everything back to 2009, give back money’s paid. It created out of thin air anyway.

    Fed Reserve is not so important they can control people via slavery by paper for their IOU notes, or by their claims to our right to property.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Conscience, Corporeal, Life, Free and Independent State, In Being, Alive, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  161. Deborah Wynn
    Hi Deborah, I don’t know. I bought my home beginning with selecting a lot they valued at $4000. The home builder priced the value of the home. They already had the appraisal and the prices were pretty much the same plus enhancements.

    I did refi after 9/11 and paid points to drop two percentage points from 8.5% to 6.5%. I was offered a 7/23 Conversion loan that could go as high as 11% in 7 years and lock for the next 23 years.
    At 6 years the interest rate was 8%, I refi’d to lock in the 8% because I was already making the same payments from the first refi. I was paying the same price plus some from when I purchased the home, even though I chose to drop the interest, it was so I could apply more toward principal.

    Because of the length of time it takes to go from telling the bank you want a rate to getting the refi takes time, i decided to lock in at 8% and it stayed for the refi to complete.

    It was 3 years later that I found out National City servicer was out of business and PNC Mortgage servicer would take over in November. November 11, 2009. I immediately sent a letter indicating what they decide to do is their business but I was not engaging with anyone new unless we had the same agreement I signed for, which was, I get title when the home is paid for.

    The entire time I was buying, refi’ing for one rate, refi’ing to lock in. I was dealing with the ‘same people’. The mortgage company used to be Accubank and became National City Mortgage but the same lady did the closing, the same trustee was on the paperwork.

    This was my first home purchase and I had already homestead before I did the refi, and I thought with mortgages you deal with the same people, that it was a business relationship and that agreements were binding. You say I owe you, I promise to pay you.

    But this new company I would not pay with out the same agreement. I intentionally would not pay them without the same agreements. When Accubank became National City Mortgage they filed the assignment in the County Clerk records to indicate the transfer of beneficiary.

    So there was nothing about anything I was learning from the historical aspects of a mortgage that made me think anything was wrong.

    With National City Mortgage letterhead paper I’m told to stop paying National City and start paying PNC Mortgage. With my limited knowledge, knowing I’d placed my signature and seal more than 25 times on documents and I made a promise to pay National City, I found it hard to believe someone I didn’t know would just tell me to break that contract and promise.

    So i asked if they had the assignment and they told me they had an interest in my home, and referred me to their law firm.

    Everyone dealt with me heavy handedly and I thought, how can these people interfere with the obligations of a standing contract and business relationship that was over 10 years old? I went to the Attorney General’s office with all the documents, and letters, and paperwork and proof of this established relationship and with questions on how I could be threatened by someone I didn’t know?

    I even made a ‘final payment’ to National City Mortgage in October. The check was held past November 5, and cashed on November 6 by PNC Mortgage. I WAS !

    So I started doing research on PNC Mortgage and found out they took over National City Bank in 2008, but took over National City Mortgage Servicer on November 5, 2009.

    When the law firm sent me the purported evidence of the debt, I had paid National City Mortgage twice in December 2008, one for the December 2008 payment and one for the January 1, 2009 payment. so my first payment in 2009 was in February.

    The history of the paperwork went back to my original agreement on the home before the refinances, and it showed all payments, so they know what our equity is in these homes. But for 2009, in February it was showing PNC was the recipient of my payments in their paperwork. I put that info int he Attorney Generals’ information.

    I checked my credit reports, two of the three credit reports showed PNC Mortgage servicer was my servicer and one showed National City Mortgage, I got that in e-mail and that was given to the Attorney General’s office, so all indications were I had a business relationship with PNC except for the most important, the one where there is an assignment of the beneficiary status and the right to take my home if National City wanted them to take over.

    So I told PNC, that the deed states they can sell the note or partial interest in the note to anyone, do they have the note? The response was you need to pay us or we will take your home.

    I said, no. Not without an assignment, not without agreement to give me what I am paying for in the end, possession of the title when I’m finished paying. Do you have the title? More threats to foreclose.

    My Deed of Trust stated the Trustee would assign a substitute trustee for the beneficiary, but this law firm assigned their self.

    No interaction from the trustee, except I made a phone call to them after standing outside the court house, disputing the sale verbally to the County Clerk and that Substitute Trustee and anyone interested in purchasing the home. I said, look at your records, we are right here, just look, they do not have the right to the home, they are not even assigned the mortgage; but people looked at me like I was crazy for protecting a God-given right to property and peaceful enjoyment thereof.

    I called that trustee after watching that Substitute Trustee say, Since the lender is not here, I will place a bid on their behalf for the amount owed, and they did their going once, twice, sold game.
    I told that trustee, do not give them the title to my home, they were not assigned the mortgage, and he said’ Their client is our client too.”

    I knew then I was not dealing with anything legal, I was dealing with money and I don’t have enough of that to be a match. I was putting what I had into owning that home.

    I never played with home equity lines of credit, nor any other use your home as an ATM game. Every improvement was from me laboring for the unbacked currency to purchase some product to improve the home for my enjoyment.

    The appraiser did come out and appraise the home when I’d been in there for the last refi. The appraisal was $50,000 more than what was owed, but I was refinancing for less, so I didn’t care. It was about the price other people were selling their homes for, I wasn’t selling I was locking in a rate. So unfortunately I can’t comment much on the appraiser’s role in the transaction, but I did improve my home to be kept up with what others were selling for in the area.

    Put my home against a neighbors for same or similar price and mine would be sold first I guarantee you that.

    There is no way this system does NOT know where the illegal acts and activities are. They have access to clouds of data and can pull anything they want out of it. They can tell you if I at oatmeal on my 6th birthday if they wanted to (just kidding but they have access to this information).

    Every transaction is traceable. Our County Clerk database is accessible online, so law firms can post their recordings without having to go to the desk clerk and passing papers. I’m sure later they may mail them in, but they upload these things from their offices. The government taps all kinds of communication and can find these details. The title companies know. The County Clerk knows.

    A subpoena to both to show a broken title will show who the homeowner is and that a harm above $300 was caused by these people.

    The business lacked standing among other things with my situation so $300 is not my remedy. I’m outside the 3.9 million they are settling with. The reason I came to this site, the reason I didn’t pay the thief was because I was paying attention to the farce long before it came to me. I saw what they did to others. I knew about the you have to default before we can help you people. I knew about the we can’t take your payments because you defaulted even though we told you to default before we will help you, now that we are rejecting your payments for not paying we will take your home, people.

    I saw all that, and I knew everyone wasn’t a deadbeat.
    I overestimated my power in the agreement of the contract I entered into. Other people I never met, assumed a power over me I never knew they had. It’s as if I’d signed a power of attorney that said, rob me and file all the documents to do so.

    When I went to the court, the judge was worried I was recording the proceeding. The bailiff called me to a back room to ask if my cell phone was on. I told him, no. I wouldn’t disrespect anyone like that, I’d tell them if I was recording them. I wonder if the court room had a video of me standing there saying they were suing the wrong party and the foreclosure they claim to have bought was a fraud foreclosure.

    There are federal laws that at least give us restitution from whoever is claiming the right to steal. If they can’t find anyone to put in jail, they know where the asset is sitting. It’s sitting squarely in a GSE, Government Sponsored Entity, Fannie Mae. So they wanted to put the burden on me and the government to fix what they did.

    Back it up to the law firm, and let them sue their client for giving them bad info. I don’t care.

    But if I tell you something is mine and I didn’t give it to you, you can’t have it, and you sure can’t sell it after stealing it and tell me I have to settle for a check you send one way in the mail.

    The OCC does not represent the people. By their charter they probably represent the government’s interest in the banks. So let them pay the government the settlement.

    But they are crossing jurisdictional boundaries to reach over to the free and independent states and pay us $300 from robbing us of right to property.

    They are outside of our jurisdiction, they cannot violate Federal Laws and then turn around and settle directly with us.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Conscience, Corporeal, Life, Free and Independent State, In Being, Alive, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  162. Deborah, my mortgage broker way back when came back to me post-appraisal – pre-refi and said excitedly, “The appraisal came in too low, we have to get it raised!” I was pretty much unphased, as I’ve had zero experience in life raising low appraisals. Is this where you bake bread in the oven prior to the appraiser’s arrival, to put that homey ambiance in the air? Does one “stage” for the appraiser? Or do you simply wave a $20 in the air towards the appraiser, temptingly, like….play your cards right and this could be yours? “Photoshop out the rotted flower boxes and there’s another $20 in it for you!”

    He then said, “What have you done to the house that could raise the price?” I explained that I had done nothing save for building an entrance deck, but the appraiser had seen that. “How much did it cost?” he asked. “$3K.”

    It wasn’t until years later when I was going through paperwork trying to defeat these rat-bastards that I noticed a $20K deck on the app that was taken over the phone. One can only guess that in this instance for this particular appraiser, it was raise the appraisal $$$ or look for work elsewhere, as in blackballed. Remember, whatever it takes to “Fund ‘em!”

  163. trespass unwanted
    who bent the appeaisers arm up his back and told him to stretch the numbers, who does he have a duty of care to. no appraisal no loan, no stretching- no bubble. now in understand some of what you say, but when we start at the beginning, it starts with something of value, that we borrowers thought had a certain value, in reality, not in fantasy.

  164. imagine 3.9 million checks that are accepted as inequitable settlement for unlawful acts and deceptive practices and fraud.

    In the real world, if a crime is committed and the two sides agree to settle, there is a prosecutor in the background that still wants to take this to trial.

    I believe Eric Holder was right. They are too big to prosecute.

    We have so many people who violated Title 42USC1983 that to prosecute one act against one homeowner with testimony, evidence and discovery would take a lot of resources.

    Banks have computer systems with junk info. Who’s responsible for that, that can be prosecuted?

    Lawyers for the banks wrote the Deeds of Trust and Promissory Notes. Most of those institutions gave the homeowners 30 and some had 40 year notes, but the banks and institutions never planned to be around for 30 years or 40 years, on average they were around for 10 years and passed their paperwork to longstanding institutions. Were they created for the purpose of getting these promises so they could pass it to long standing institutions? Who’s responsible for that?

    Skynet (the banks computers) kicked out names of people to be robbed (aka, foreclosed) on. The people who did the work of taking the homes saw the name and began to implement the plan. Who’s responsible for that? The employee of the bank doing the job they were hired to do? The employee who manages the computers? The programmer who wrote the database program? The One who loaded that name into the computer whether manually or a digital transfer of information from a title company?

    Someone at the bank contracted a law firm and established an agreement they would complete, file, and sign the paperwork as representatives of the bank to rob (aka foreclose, accelerate the note, create new contracts of modification, serve as the one who would offer HAMP but not complete the enrollment, etc) the homeowners with claims of knowledge of the transactions, to the best of their knowledge, and legitimize the paperwork in our county records. Who’s responsible for that? Each attorney? The law firm owner? The bank employee that established the contract? The One who wrote the process for hiring law firms for foreclosure?

    The attorney in the law firm assigned their self as substitute trustee and posted the notice of sale or acceleration of note in the courthouse. These documents are temporary. They give the right to do all the remaining things that are permanent, but the court destroys these documents after a year or two. Who’s responsible? The one who set up the process that notices are temporary and destroyed at their expiration date? The one who filed the notice that started the purported right to create all the permanent paperwork in the County Clerk’s office?

    The law firm assigned an attorney or many attorney’s, any to act, as Substitute Trustee, such that any one can initiate the paperwork for the theft. Some instances each of the attorneys filled out a portion of paperwork that was filed that contained the homeowner’s name but not the homeowner’s signature. These papers only contain the signature of that Substitute Trustee, (any one of them) who initiated the paperwork and filed the document in the public. If it takes 10 documents to start the theft and there are six Substitute Trustees and each signs one particular document to the best of their knowledge, and one signs documents specific where there cannot be six who could have the authority to sign, who’s responsible? Each trustee for the portion they signed to the best of their knowledge? The one who signed the key documents?

    The homes were sold outside a courthouse and someone bid in them, credit bid or otherwise. Who’s responsible? The One who initiated the sale? The County Recorder who didn’t match the seller with the mortgagee on file, or accepted a credit bid to indicate the sale was complete?

    The law firm signed papers indicating the sale was complete to the bank/servicer that did initiated the theft, the trustee transferred the title to the property to the substitute trustee. Did the Trustee fail in their fiduciary duty and should be prosecuted? How about the Substitute Trustee who filed documents to transfer Deed to the bank/servicer or Warranty Deed to Fannie Mae?

    The law firm took the case to court in nonjudicial states to have the homeowner evicted since they had the courthouse sale as evidence they purchased the home (even if no money changed hands). Judge does a summary judgement even though there is enough evidence in the answer to show the ‘purported sale’ is a fraud, and was theft. Judge decides not to view the evidence filed in their own court and gives the homeowner 7 (seven) days to defend their right to property. After 7 (seven) days the judge signs an order or writ of possession for the life and their property to be removed from the premises. The judge’s order is to a sovereign figure in the community, a sheriff. The judge’s order states specifically the sheriff, any sheriff in the state is ordered to appear on a specific day and has the judges permission to ‘place their hand’ on the people and their property to remove them from the premises. The judge’s actions gives the sheriff immunity for any damages to people or property because they will not be prosecuted for anything related to that order, including harm or injury and potentially death because their job is to ‘evacuate the building’ (a terroristic threat). Who is responsible for this? The Trustee for allowing this to happen when they know the Substitute Trustee is representing someone who does not have proper assignment or interest in the property they want to steal? The Substitute trustee who recorded all those documents transferring the property to the bank/servicer even though the bank/servicer had no right to the property? The judge for not being honorable, for not managing their fiduciary responsibility to the people for justice, for not reading the paperwork before them, for not knowing real estate law and having basic requirements for paperwork filed to claim a right over someone else’s right to property? The sheriff for following orders blindly to remove people and their property with impunity? The legislators who wrote up these rules in the property code?

    After the home is vacated by force or threat of force for those of us who have a right to not have someone’s hands placed on us against our will; or have our property moved/damaged/or destroyed by threat someone could put their hands on it with impunity; we have the realtor sitting there waiting on the sheriff to leave and for the house to be vacated. The realtor marks the home abandoned and contacts a locksmith to change the locks. The realtor claims the home and posts an notice in the window for anyone who would attempt to enter that it’s his property now. The property is entered into the Fannie Mae database by the law firm that caused the homeowner to flee by a judge’s court order. The realtor waits 6 (six) months for no one to show up to claim the property; and initiates a sale of it. Who is responsible for selling property that doesn’t belong to them? The realtor for being an opportunist and getting a commission to sale property that should not be sellable? the judge? The Substitute Trustee who issued warranty deed to Fannie Mae?

    What about the people who moved in and want to claim ownership of the home? They figure they bought it fair and square. They have moved in, their kids like the home, they like their neighbors, the location, the schools, and they have established their family in that location and don’t want to leave. They want to quiet the title to keep the home and they are going to make sure they make the payments so it doesn’t get taken from them. Do they have a right to benefit from someone else’s theft and oppressive act? Do they have a right to establish their family where someone else had already chosen that location and established their family first? Can they claim to be a victim of paying for a foreclosed home with an unclean title and deserve a right to keep it since they are currently making payments?

    Is there any way, a $300 settlement check is the only settlement available for what was done by “somebody” in this to big to prosecute system, such that even if this measly thing called a settlement is cashed by the most desperate former homeowner who needs money now, to eat, or live, or have shelter that, that’s the only remedy they can expect for what was done to them by so many in such a convoluted and nested way that it was designed to have too many players for no one participant to be accused of the entire crime?

    My answer is no. My answer is the $300 is the beginning of the total settlement the 4.4 million homeowners are allowed to have. My answer is, the regulators made an agreement based on incompetence and ignorance, and unless they are indicating all homes are worth less than a dollar because 4.4 million means 4.4 million homes, not just people who were forced into injustice, then they need to go back to the table and take some more money off.

    The homeowner has no participation in a banks derivative gambles and if the bank needs the money for their derivatives and the homes as assets to back them, that’s not our problem. The banks, the bank owners, the banks trust owners, the board of directors and everyone associated with the banks, the law firms, the county clerk, the legislature of the state, the sheriff’s office, Fannie Mae and anyone who ended up with these titles and whoever else is involved is paying pennies on less than $1 for what was done to steal the 4.4 million homes from more that 4.4 million people because some were married and they count, and some had children and they count too.

    They are big enough to fail. Take them all over, wipe out their bogus derivatives by paying a silver dollar from the US Mint, reverse their crime. Invalidate every sale made from a 2009, through 2010 action because they admitted the theft, give us our restitution and compensatory damages, let the banks pay for the people who bought foreclosed homes to move out and give them all their money back. Yes it means they lived in the homes for free, but that’s not entirely their fault, they thought they were purchasing something for their family, they can’t have it, it was not transferrable.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Conscience, Corporeal, Life, Free and Independent State, In Being, Alive, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  165. “…the debt was at all times material hereto owned by the investor lender…”

    Gobbledy-gook and…so not true. Give us a break, Neil…you’re not helping anyone by making this stuff up. Ridiculous.

  166. Can the Homeowners sue? yes Would this information be beneficial to the homeowners in their lawsuits? yes


    Oh Please Do Tell or We Will Burn You At the Stake Publically. Oh Wait …. we are doing that anyway. teeheeheee

  167. “…You now know individual cases where the banks violated the law and you’re not going to tell the homeowners, or at least it’s not clear yet whether or not you’re going to do that?”

    “Senator Warren, we don’t have to tell them anything or prosecute anyone because of deregulation. Deregulation means we gave them a green light to do whatever they want…oh well…that’s the way the fraudulent cookie crumbles…”

  168. E. ToLLe,

    Exactly. One can pursue individually a civil action without having to wait for anyone else. In a criminal case, once can only file the complaint and wait until authorities decide to… prosecute. Very different ball game. So far, anyone who has gone to the law enforcement authorities has found them to be very reluctant to do anything.

  169. Just delete the space between stop and forclosurefraud on the Link below and it will take you to the link. The link will not post here .. but I’m pretty creative and have good problem solving skills. *Grins*

  170. http://stop

  171. MERS Helps Wall Street Steal Your Home

    Wall Street Takes Your Homes, Your Deposits, and Your Social Security
    The financial sector created MERS to destroy property records so that it would be easier to steal homes.
    In truth, since they screwed up all the property records, even the banksters have no idea who owes who what. So they just start foreclosing on everything. Don’t owe a mortgage? Who cares, they foreclose anyway.

  172. I second your motion E-Tolle…………….

    What do we want? Bankster prosecutions

    When do we want them? NOW!

  173. TU, you wrote, “….but it’s the victim who makes the complaint that ultimately gets the ball rolling in their remedy.” AND, “Waiting on someone else to file the complaint or riding on the complaint of others is why so many aren’t seeing the remedy they want.”

    A criminal statute neither creates nor implies a corresponding private right of action. So, we’d have to rely on someone else to bring these guys up on criminal charges. And I’ve seen just how worthless my AG’s been on matters such as this. I believe my AG would be more likely to bust her grandmother than to take down a bankster. Ditto my local FBI. My County Attorney nixed the conversation pronto, ain’t happening, no way, but told me to go to the police, which is highly comical. Sheriff Andy Taylor simply sang another bluegrass ditty while I begged for justice. This whole system is so screwed….when arguing that a recording crime had been committed, my county recorder’s office told me that only banks can record documents. Imagine that.

    I just can’t see how the act of deliberately hiding found criminal acts would not be considered misprison. I want to see thousands of suits making small rocks out of boulders.

    What do we want: Bankster prosecutions

    When do we want them: NOW!

  174. I would also like to add the same goes for the Buttwipe FC Mill Attorneys! They did the same thing! Buttwipes!!

  175. This is one reason BOAna is in Deep Doo Doo over the 2011 fraudulent filings ….. Buttwipes Are Disposable!

  176. If a homeowner threatened you with this …. Would you risk filing a lawsuit against them? Buttwipes!!


    Hit them all under 18 USC § 4 – Misprision of Felony

    Elizabeth Warren grills federal officials on Illegal Bank Foreclosures
    Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. (Id.)
    Conviction requires proof of concealment.

  178. Frolow v. Wilson Sporting Goods Co., the Federal Circuit

    Equity should not rush in where an adequate remedy at law exists.

    Trespass Unwanted, Corporeal, Life, Free, Independent, Conscience, People, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  179. E. Tolle, they are boxed into agreements. They see wrongdoing, they issue penalties, sanctions, cease and desist orders but it’s the victim who makes the complaint that ultimately gets the ball rolling in their remedy.

    There is no one I can think of who can be robbed of their home and not know they have been victimized.

    Waiting on someone else to file the complaint or riding on the complaint of others is why so many aren’t seeing the remedy they want.

    If I can file a complaint with the FTC, it’s not class action, so I’d think they can write a letter, make a phone call, fax something from an office store, or use the online complaint form to state their claim.

    Unless they feel the ‘representative’ in Congress is going to file the complaint on their behalf, and there we have it.

    Pennies on the dollar is wrong. It’s more like 1000th of a penny on the dollar.

    If they have homes going for $300. I’ll buy that.
    Someone robbed while living in a homestead state, and removed from their primary shelter, should really see a better remedy than $300.

    And the statement we wanted to get money into the hands of the people as soon as possible.
    $300 does not get someone who is homeless, off the street as soon as possible.
    $300 does not pay the funeral expenses of someone who took their life when their home was being stolen and they were used an order that they are being forced to leave it.
    $300 will not bring to life someone who being treated for a major illness died from the stress of being robbed of the only shelter they had.
    I can go on and on.

    Someone at the bank, hired an attorney, and they decided a legal settlement without purposely taking into account the fact that a financial war and paper terrorism was waged on free people. This was not the course of doing business. Attorneys filed notices and recorded papers and initiated court proceedings and the people were robbed by that activity, the decision of judges, and the true owner of the banks.
    Whoever is holding the property from 2009 through 2010 on their books is holding a hot potato.

    The Independent Foreclosure Review basically admitted to breach of contract, theft by deceptive practices, fraud, violation of federal bankruptcy laws, violation of Civil Service laws, and because each number they put in the chart for an act In progress, Completed and rescinded are counts against them for the acts they committed.

    A balance in a computer means nothing. I paid a servicer for 9 years and 10 months and when another took over, they had the database modified to indicate they received 10 months worth of payments, but their SEC filing clearly shows they did not take over until the 11th month of that year. Shuffling digits in a computer does not give standing or create a binding agreement between the parties.

    Trespass Unwanted, Corporeal, Life, Free, Independent, Conscience, People, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  180. Thank You TU, … They took her off the drug and tested her liver again last week, but her count went up not down. We have to wait another two weeks to retest again (waiting to get it out of her system) to see if it is still going up or down. No sign of any noticable tumors so we are Praying the levels drop as the drug level in her system decreases.

  181. Guest, I’m sorry they were incompetent or didn’t care about you or your family.
    I’m glad your daughter’s body told her something was wrong by displaying illness, otherwise she would not have gone to a doctor.
    I’m glad that doctor did the right tests and got you pointed in a direction of hope.

    Trespass Unwanted

  182. Speaking of drugs … my youngest daughter 28 has been taking injectable treatments to keep bowl diease in remission. It been almost 3yrs since she went in remission. Apparently because this drug causes two forms of cancer in additon to numerous other issues like liver failer they were supposed to be testing her blood every three months when she went in to get her injections. Nope .. they were NOT! Got sick last month and seen another doc, ran tests and sent her to the Cancer center the nest day. Friggin Bfuttwipes!!

  183. Warren: So I just want to make sure I get this straight. Families get pennies on the dollar in the settlement for having been the victims of illegal activities or mistakes in the banks’ activities. … You now know individual cases where the banks violated the law and you’re not going to tell the homeowners or at least it’s not clear yet whether or not you’re going to do that?

    Response: We haven’t made a decision what we’re going to tell the homeowners.

    Would anyone on LL care to fill me in on why this isn’t an admission of misprision of a felony?

    Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

    This offense, however, requires active concealment of a known felony rather than merely failing to report it.

    The fact that the OCC pretends to be an authority under the United States shouldn’t be allowed to enter into the equation, when they’ve admitted that they’ll more than likely sit on any damning information concerning felonies unearthed in their blocking moves for the banks. The consultants, and the regulators, should be held accountable under this offense. This debacle needs to be the focal point for the attack on the 1%, as there can’t possibly be a more in-your-face mistreatment of citizens for the protection of the banks. Boiled ropes and lamp posts.

  184. As far as the variences in the learning styles in the vidio, I would like to add that one Learning Style may be approperiate for one Child but is not for another child. One learning style does not fit all and it should never be used school wide. It is Imparitive that parents take a roll in meeting the teachers and having a say in placing their child with the teacher that best fits their childs learning needs. ( i.e. … a hands on learner) …. Yes! Parents can do That! Visit the classrooms and observe the teachers teaching style and match your child with the teacher your child will be most successful with each year. Make a Mistake… request a change.

  185. Very Powerful Vidio Christine! And soo True! The best way to stop this abuse for profit scam is to Educate the Parents!

  186. Nothing happens in a vacuum.

  187. Neil
    Great work

    Gordon Forbes III
    Pacific Coast Video
    Sent from my iPhone

  188. The economy will never really recover until the fraud in the housing sector is exposed and cleaned up. There is actually plenty of money to give homeowners their houses back free and clear. The story of no money, is all BS. Break up the big banks and put some legislation in place that is actually adhered to. I think the regulators need to be exposed as well. They are worthless and toothless. We need to construct some new prisons for all the bankster, appraiser, mortgage broker, attorney, title company thieves and make sure they do some real time. Check out Iceland.

  189. So neidermeyer, I guess you’re suggesting that I should invest my entire life’s savings….all $300 from the Non-Independent Foreclosure UnReview in a safe investment? Thanks for the tip!

    As to the rest of what you write, of course you’re right. When even right of center publications like Forbes question the purchase of 1.6 billion hollow point rounds by the DHS, it gives one pause, especially when considering that these little warheads are illegal by international convention, and that many that they ordered are for sniper use only. The momentary pause should be immediately followed by a rush to buy some acreage and heirloom seeds, oh, and a few cases of ammo as well. If you can’t join them, prepare to fight them.

    Like I said yesterday, the fact that on the same day the OCC was revealing their 100% capture and complicity in shielding the criminal banks, the CEO of Amerika – Obama, was secretly meeting with the very banksters behind that criminality….it gives one even more pause. It’s no longer something that they go to lengths to hide…. he answers to them when they call, day or night.

    I’m starting to think that Dimon gave Obama the white house cufflinks, not the other way around.

  190. E. Tolle ,

    “They” are envisioning a future for the USA similar to that of India where they will live in palaces as their flunkies steal every last grain of rice from our bowls.. we the former owners and producers will be the land slaves , the tenant farmers. Some will resist which is why they are attempting serious gun control right now (heavy emphasis on “control”). While a fortunate few will escape to land they own free and clear and outside “their” control.

    There is a good reason Indians put their savings into gold and silver jewelry rather than into paper rupees in the bank … It might be a good idea to follow the lead of a people that have gone down this road centuries before us.

  191. Absolutely Javagold. It couldn’t be more obvious.

    And Guest brings up a huge bone of contention with the Illegal Foreclosure View, that of credit destruction. How in the hell can these idiots in their $5K suits think that millions of former mortgagors with shiny checks for $300, but with a hole the size of Texas in their credit report, can climb the wall of reparation is beyond me. It’s like these guys are playing hide-and-seek with facts and conclusions that are inescapable….unless the whole person is returned to a state of normalcy, credit repaired, their micro and therefore the macro economy will never return. The former borrowers will continue to sign up for Monsanto food stamps by the millions.

    But, well…. they got theirs, what’s their worry? It’s not like they’ll lose their homes now, is it?

  192. You do not have to be a rocket scientist to understand this. Thus it’s obvious that it is being done on purpose.

  193. Guest,

    Im just imagining the demographics: millions of baby boomers living in reduced circumstances as they “retire” and wait to exit, potentially permanent dearth of well paying jobs, except in pockets where government flourishes (ie Washington Metro area}, and the permanent lack of demand for mortgages due to ruined credit suffered by millions of victims of the banks, of which I am one, of course. So few people are benefiting from any “settlements” that it wont even register as a factor in the overall economy, IMHO.

  194. Jim, its kind of hard to get the economy going again when they wrecked so many of our credit records and credit scores with their fraud. On the other hand they profit Greatly by giving you a higher intrest loan with your bad credit score. Every consumer fighting this should DEMAND as part of the settlement that their credit history be restored and repaired. Talk about Harm to a Consumer …..

  195. seems fairly obvious with baby boomers going over the cliff as well as millions never again qualifying for a mortgage

  196. I Agree 100% Neil. ….

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: