Winning Cases Against the Mega Banks

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  Comment: It is hard to interpret what people mean when they say they are winning cases. In the example below the case is oversimplified. Wells Fargo, as usual, wanted to foreclose on the home of an 80-year-old woman regardless of whether she was in default or not. Her main defense was simply that she was never in default. Wells Fargo took the position that the payments they accepted could be allocated towards expenses of the foreclosure, which never should’ve happened in the first place.

It was quite clear that the homeowner had made all of her payments. It was quite clear that Wells Fargo had not applied the payments properly. And after three years of litigation, during which most people would have folded, judgment was entered in favor of the borrower and against Wells Fargo.

No big surprise except for the persistence of the homeowner in fighting off a big bad bank despite dwindling resources and a gaggle of people who were treating her as a leper because she was a deadbeat who didn’t pay her bills and was trying to get out of a legitimate debt.

Of course as it turns out, she was neither a deadbeat nor was she trying to get out of the debt even though it probably is not a legitimate debt and Wells Fargo is most probably not a legitimate creditor in relation to this homeowner.

I am happy that this woman got what she wanted. But some questions that linger on include why Wells Fargo failed to do the proper accounting to bring her loan account up-to-date? Why did Wells Fargo want that foreclosure regardless of whether she was in default or not? And what other payments received from third parties in the form of insurance or credit default swaps were not applied to the appropriate receivable account on the books of the real creditor?

My opinion is that in all probability there is still plenty of meat left on the bone. This homeowner  probably has several causes of action for slander of title, breach of contract, probably fraud, and abuse of process,  just to name a few.

And another thought comes to mind: would the result  or the timing have been different if the roles were  reversed? This particular case is so obvious as to whether or not money was actually paid and received that it is difficult to comprehend how it could possibly have stretched out to three years.

The only way I can think of is that the judge had a preconception of the relationship of the parties and assumed that the debt was real and was in default instead of forcing Wells Fargo to immediately prove lack of payment and their status as the real creditor. For those who complain that the courts are jammed up with foreclosure lawsuits, this case is instructive as to why that is happening.

If judges would simply take each case on its own merits and require each party to actually prove their position rather than rely on dubious and rebuttable presumptions, most of the foreclosures wouldn’t be filed and those that ended up in litigation would be over in just a few months.

 The bottleneck in the court systems across the country is not caused by volume. It is caused by bias. Judges assume that a big-name bank with 150 year old reputation on the line would never make a claim they couldn’t back up. If judges would stop making that assumption and require the backup at the beginning of the litigation the bottleneck would vanish.

Oregon Woman Wins 3-Year Fight Against Wells Fargo Foreclosure
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2013/04/oregon-woman-wins-3-year-fight-against-wells-fargo-foreclosure/

 

51 Responses

  1. Here’s a hot one. The receiver for the commercial property filed an emergency motion to ask the courts permission to use an insurance check to repair our burned down business. The receiver also wants to apply a $20,000.00 insurance overpayment to the “principal” without being granted a foreclosure. Doesn’t that defeat the purpose of the receivership? That is just beyond the pale. The judge should ream them out for even suggesting they be allowed to pocket a dime without proof the Security ever existed. Scumbags.

  2. 1ofthemany…..Thank You for your kind words and thoughts. I really needed that boost.

  3. Stripes, I agree, a class action would be too easy on them hence the tort and yes even that is not enough, they deserve much more but again as I have stated, seems all will just continue to b & m and hurt one another.There is a little sharing of knowledge (thankful for that) and nothing else. We do not “truly” help one another-our brother and sister humans…all want lots of $$$ but, I still say collectively we would trample much evil. Alas.. it appears we are all lone rangers because the evils have won and separated us. It is a shame that we have let this happen. I do however, thank you for your words and acknowledgement. Most will be doomed by their own doings and their own reality of what the evils want you to believe, so be it, I shall not comply. Stripes …keep the faith and may you be blessed with victory. I have seen you fight many and you have stood strong through it all. There are many ways to conquer the evils.

  4. 1ofthemany….some people just don’t like the truth being spoken openly at this site. That’s where all the b & m is coming from. The way I see it, there must be a lot of relevant information here or there would be no b & m about it.

    These things need to be said, these crooks have it coming for the suffering they have intentionally caused this nation & its souls with their financial weapons of mass destruction. I see this is a war on souls. It is an evil that is almost beyond belief. We have fallen too far as a result of their evil doings. As far as a class action is concerned, that would be too easy on these crooks. They deserve to be wrung out.

  5. Neil and all,
    ever had the backbone to pull your/this audience together and do a massive filing on these thieves…..you/we have a huge following/sounding board ..one would think you/we would use it. I have addressed a few here over the last few years (5) (yes Neil also he is unreachable more so lately)but all I see is bitching and posting biting and insults from all and this has not done anything regarding the harm placed upon ALL and now the insults of meager payoffs from the devils advocates..hah No TY. “suing them” is what needs to be done as they are on the defense. so simple…but alas….no guts no justice so we still run around blindly alone as they continue to rape and pillage our once wonderful county peeling it right off our very own backbone…yep we are pretty stupid…must be the water.
    Sorry to be so cruel but it is what it is. Nothing from Neil and Co or from John Q Public..we will never make it this way NEVER. WE have to UNITE some day or everything slowly crumbles, this is a challenge being stated here… anyone? Yes our emotions souls and lives have been extremely HARMED and it is rampant, Bless us ALL
    Unbelievable
    a short read below for the ones that care to know, please no childish jabbing, I can take a slap or two but nothing more please; I do not have the time as the banks take up sooo much energy and I am fresh out of energy at the moment but “I”will replenish as the banks need me to banter and they need me to make them understand they are bad bad people. I have notes I have recordings I have it all and then some so it is useless begin a lone rider—fraud coercion and I will not list all as you all know them…good luck and Love thy Neighbor

    Message sent in Peace

    @TU IMHO..you seem to be much further than most here, good for you!

    TY all for the info you do share
    I will get out of this matrix… even if alone, I will create my own reality not thiers

    tort

    n. from French for “wrong,” a civil wrong or wrongful act, whether intentional or accidental, from which injury occurs to another. Torts include all negligence cases as well as intentional wrongs which result in harm. Therefore tort law is one of the major areas of law (along with contract, real property and criminal law) and results in more civil litigation than any other category. Some intentional torts may also be crimes, such as assault, battery, wrongful death, fraud, conversion (a euphemism for theft) and trespass on property and form the basis for a lawsuit for damages by the injured party. Defamation, including intentionally telling harmful untruths about another-either by print or broadcast (libel) or orally (slander)-is a tort and used to be a crime as well.

  6. The media should not be speculating and cajoling about what happened to these peoples loved ones with no evidence. That is evil. CNN has some idiot actually laughing while she speculates. WTF?

  7. There are hundreds of people standing in line outside a courthouse in Boston waiting for some answers. Where is the video of someone setting down a black bag….? I thought they used pressure cookers..? Why are there so many discrepancies…?

    CNN saying “hopefully” they didn’t get on a plane and leave the country?….. WHAT….? The media saying this is not about speed by the govt this is about accuracy…..the damage is already done…WHAT…? STOP CHANGING THE STORY THAN YOU IDIOTS….

  8. Now the media is reporting there is no suspect in custody. The fact they keep changing their story is IMHO, suspicious. Get your story straight jerks.

  9. These people are imposters who destroyed our Security, that is what they are concealing.

    The serpent moves more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God has made.

  10. Why does the Patriot Act protect the rights and comings & goings of known criminals? Why are suspected terrorists being allowed in? Why do the Politicians want illegal aliens to have legal rights while our peace and security is in peril? Why are illegal aliens being allowed to steal our legal rights? For example, why are we not being told DHS released possibly dangerous criminal illegals from prison into the populus? Why were they not deported?

  11. The media reporting they arrested a suspect in the Boston bombing….as usual this all comes a day late & a dollar short. That bombing should have never happened. Oops we goofed……NO…THEY FAILED TO PROTECT OUR PEACE & SECURITY LONG AGO, AT THE ORIGINATION FRAUD….That why they always accuse the wrong people for the wrong reasons……… to hide the presence of the true criminals. Why are they treating us like criminals while arming our enemies and letting in known terrorists like Saudi nationals….? Why are these criminals being let in here….?

  12. Every number has polar opposite meanings, a good meaning & a bad. The Creator speaks to us through the numbers, not the script because the script can easily be altered, the numbers cannot.

    How do you know these people claiming to be our Government are imposters? Everything they do is the polar opposite of what they should be doing. The Altering of words to fraudulently induce a destroyed contract is criminal.

  13. What I see is clear….the numbers always tell the truth, not the script. The script can easily be altered by interpretation, the meanings of the numbers can never be altered. For example no audits of TBTF …. and 9/11.

  14. There is a lot of redacting of numbers on all of the documents as well. The court should never accept that because the rule of law says………..Any unauthorized change by addition of words or numbers or other changes to an incomplete instrument relating to the obligation of a party that is filed as a document, that is evidence of a debt take on the characteristic of presentment and filing of “false or forged” documents in public office is a felony…….Changing a mortgage after execution without authority constitutes forgery (People v Cotton) and is a felony…… Forgery and having Possession of a forged instrument are distincy felonies, (People v Chronister)………A copy of a security is null and void when the intent to force someone into parting with something of value in redemption for such a counterfeit is a criminal act punishable by fine, 10 years in prison or both.

    Entering unauthorized notes indorsed in blank with no legal assignment or affidavit attached is evidence of forgery upon presentment.

    They plead in their original complaint that an error in the numbers in regards to the Property Description was an error in the script. That is FRAUD……..that is not a scrivener’s error, that “error” in the numbers is an Alteration to the original contract….The signature affixed onto any instrument is only valid until it is discovered that false representations of the facts relevant to all the elements of the transactions were deliberately orchestrated, and that you were wrongfully induced to sign because of those false representations.

    A State Statute is only valid until proven otherwise.

  15. Neidermeyer…. they monetized and overissued investments in things that did not exist so the cusip number makes sense. I was thinking they could have done the same scam with the PIN NUMBERS, the PROPERTY INDEX NUMBERS. Certainly anything is possible when they want to screw you. They will stop at nothing to falsely inflate the value of nothing to destroy the value of everything.

    They are scoundrel’s who still don’t have the receipt. I never agreed to any of it, including they never had my permission to lay bets on anything that would endanger my peace & security or my legal right to defend my Life, Liberty or Property.

    Thanks neidermeyer.

  16. From my point of view, it’s a terrible waste to lodge a complaint by simply returning Rust’s check….let the bank’s be squeezed for every last dime. They don’t give a rat’s ass as to any logic or moral lessons in this whole crime spree; else it never would have happened. Ask every city’s wheelchair bound 80 year old cancer patient who’s been tossed unmercifully to the curb by these assholes.

    The better route, IMO, is to do as Stop Foreclosure Fraud is suggesting…..demand your entire file. I’ve said from the beginning, the fact that they shared our files with the very banks that we’re calling out as criminal was never in the mix and would appear to me to be a criminal act in and of itself. They should NEVER have been privy to their adversary’s litigation points, especially seeing as how it was expressly stated that the IFR would NOT halt private litigation, so there’s simply no excuse for exposing each and ever one of our files to the very criminals we are railing against. From Stop Foreclosure Fraud:

    For those homeowners who received a check for the OCC/Fed consent order with the big banks: I request that each and every one of us call the General Counsel’s phone number (202-649-5400) and tell them that FAR MORE IMPORTANT to you would be a certified letter from the OCC stating what federal and state laws were broken by your servicer and therefore the reason you were provided the check in the first place. Please help start this chain of requests.

  17. johngault I know that in Nebraska MERS claim was different than all the other states, however as MERS has zero employees and is not a “mortgage bank” and has absolutely zero employees makes it impossible for MERS to possess and house any blank Notes.

    MERS is an electronic data company that does not enter any of the data as it is all supplied by the member of MERS. First this that should make MERS unless in court is that they got no way of verifying the information that is entered into its system.

    MERS has a conflict of interest in being this electronic registry to its shareholder, and as I believe that all case that have gone to court are fighting using MERS claim as gospel, but there not a body that even regulates this outlaw company that cause 100yrs of year of land title to become void, because you cannot track the actual holder of the debt!

  18. Legal Maxim: No one can sue in the name of another.

    as stated in John Gault’s post..
    As a prudential matter, a plaintiff must assert “his own legal interests as the real party in interest,” Dunmore v. United States, 358 F.3d 1107, 1112 (9 Cir. 2004), as found in the FED. R. CIV. P. 17, which provides “[a]n action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party
    in interest.”

    @Charles Reed,
    A lot of Dinar Holders hold Wells Fargo in high regard. They are waiting with baited breath to go in and cash in. I’ve seen some things Wells Fargo has been accused of and not a bank I’d want to do business with. The only reason I see they are too big to fail is they bought up the smaller banks we were patronizing with our business. Doing so, made them third party interveners to standing contracts already in place. They had no representative to re-negotiate those contracts so they are putting their heavy handed enforcements on any that we are attempting to honor. They have some papers, a computer, and act with impunity.

    @neidermeyer,
    Dang! I am overly impressed by the simplicity of the deep seated knowledge that we forgot to remember. Universe smiling on such a powerful update of that knowing.

    Well I’m off to the post office to return an offer I CAN and WILL refuse for cause.

    An offer of settlement should receive a counteroffer since it appears they are attempting to bring some ‘consideration’ to the table. I mean their first offer was a ‘review’ of what they had done wrong. Now they are indicating they’ve done some wrong and providing some consideration for their actions.

    So I’ll make refuse for cause their offer and provide them with my counteroffer. I am not representing anyone. I AM that I AM. I AM Me.

    There’s enough information in the SEC filings, court records for the foreclosure case, the County Clerk Records showing theft by attorney as my home purchasing agreements contained papers with my signature on it and the theft paperwork contains all papers that do not have my signature on it. The law firm cannot show I hired them to represent me.

    I was discriminated against for being a flesh and blood body and not being a corporate body, for not hiring a representative to state my living claim of right, living People contracted among each other to go to war with the peaceful inhabitants and dispossess us from our shelter. There is theft by deception, theft by conversion, economic duress, terroristic threat (forced to evacuate a building), FDCPA violations (cannot threaten nor take property if you do not have an interest secured in the property), Federal and State Constitutional violations (illegal search and seizure, etc), Trust Law violations (trust is for the benefit of the beneficiary, if the beneficiary no longer wants the trust property, they assign it to another beneficiary or it reverts back to the Grantor of the trust – the trustee has no power to decide the Grantor cannot have their property back in void mortgage trust. It was not an Irrevocable trust), Contract Law violations (Consent makes the law. -:- A contract is a law between the parties, which can acquire force only by consent. -:- Consent makes the law: the terms of a contract, lawful in its purpose, constitute the law as between the parties. -:- To him consenting no injury is done. -:-
    He who consents cannot receive an injury. — so there we have it, it requires my consent and looking at all the paperwork in the world for creating the obligation of owning the home you see my consent, but creating the situation where the home was stole you do not see my consent in any paperwork what so ever. lawyers, and judges, and employees of an N.A bank (National Association bank), are the only ones who consented to steal.

    Title 42 USC 1983, Civil action for deprivation of rights

    Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance,
    regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the
    District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any
    citizen of the United States or other person within the
    jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges,
    or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable
    to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other
    proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought
    against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such
    officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted
    unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was
    unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress
    applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be
    considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.

    Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
    Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law

    This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.

    This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.

    Acts under “color of any law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under “color of any law,” the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.

    Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

    We have UCC violations, and more, and as much as OCC and Board of Directors of the Federal Reserve would like for this to ‘go away’; I would not be in their life nor they in mine, if their N.A. bank hadn’t robbed and dispossessed me under unconscionable terms.

    I don’t need them to pour over the papers of the thief. There is plenty of paperwork elsewhere that the thief doesn’t control that will show what was done.

    Trespass Unwanted, Life, Creator, In Esse (In Being, Actually Existing), Free, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  19. JG- the judge contradicts himself in my case,
    i filed a judicial complaint by the way.
    im off to work , ill be getting back on that later thank you very much.

  20. @ Stripes 10:22

    I hadn’t considered that possibility ,,, could the banks obtain a CUSIP for a security that was never created? How are CUSIP numbers created and assigned? If the SEC just assigns a “batch” of numbers to BAC and a batch to WF and another batch to JPM or GS so that they can attach a number to whatever product they create without having a delay in the filing…

  21. @ John Galt ,

    Should have just quoted yourself .. A is A …

    ************************************

    “To exist is to be something, as distinguished from the nothing of non-existence, it is to be an entity of a specific nature made of specific attributes. Centuries ago, the man who was-no matter what his errors-the greatest of your philosophers, has stated the formula defining the concept of existence and the rule of all knowledge: A is A. A thing is itself. You have never grasped the meaning of his statement. I am here to complete it: Existence is Identity, Consciousness is Identification.

    “Whatever you choose to consider, be it an object, an attribute or an action, the law of identity remains the same. A leaf cannot be a stone at the same time, it cannot be all red and all green at the same time, it cannot freeze and burn at the same time. A is A. Or, if you wish it stated in simpler language: You cannot have your cake and eat it, too.

    “Are you seeking to know what is wrong with the world? All the disasters that have wrecked your world, came from your leaders’ attempt to evade the fact that A is A. All the secret evil you dread to face within you and all the pain you have ever endured, came from your own attempt to evade the fact that A is A. The purpose of those who taught you to evade it, was to make you forget that Man is Man.

  22. Part 2 – I can’t find it. But the court (Jones) goes on to explain that holder has a distinct meaning and does not mean that one in poss is necessarily the holder of a note (as I recall). As to rule 17, this is from part of the sam) case:

    “MERS (or anyone – sic) must have both constitutional and prudential standing, and be the real party in interest under FED. R. CIV. P. 17……
    Constitutional standing under Article III requires, at a minimum, that a party must have suffered some actual or threatened injury as a result of the defendant’s conduct, that the injury be traced to the challenged action, and that it is likely to be redressed by a favorable decision. Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Am. United for Separation of Church and State, 454 U.S. 464, 472 (1982)(citations and internal quotations omitted).
    Beyond the Article III requirements of injury in fact, causation, and
    redressibility, MERS (or anyone -sic) must also have prudential standing, which is judicially-created set of principles that places limits
    on the class of persons who may invoke the courts’ powers. See Warth v. Seldin, 422, 499 (1975). As a prudential matter, a plaintiff must assert “his own legal interests as the real party in interest,” Dunmore v. United States, 358 F.3d 1107, 1112 (9 Cir. 2004), as found in the FED. R. CIV. P. 17, which provides “[a]n action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party
    in interest.”

    jg: some yeahoo holding a note endorsed in blank is not (necessarily) the real party in interest, having suffered no injury, and may not invoke the court’s jurisdiction.
    lay opinions – ask a lawyer or 10

  23. dw – your judge was da judge in a decisive case in NV DC #09-00669 (on appeal from the bk court re; relief from stay).MERS was arguing it was the ben AND THE NOTE HOLDER (take note, charles, as opposed to what MERS swore in Nebraksa). An excerpt:

    judge Jones:

    ” It makes no difference if the note or dot says you are a beneficiary
    or a noteholder (the note, of course, says neither – sic) if you are not in fact that animal. In other words, we could call you the lender in the deed of trust. We could call MERS — we could them anything. But if you are not, in fact, the beneficiary, you’re not a beneficiary……You are simply, whether it calls you beneficiary or agent or nominee; nominee is something we can take cognizance of (I rest my case), but you hold no beneficial interest in the note (he surely meant dot – sic), other than legal title. Isn’t that the truth?”

    Mr DeVyver – is this the opposite or re-vivor? (MERS att):

    “Well, I would…I would disagree with you there.
    ……The evidence was that MERS was the noteholder. It did hold the note……The note was endorsed in blank and aff testimony (good ol’ aff testimony – no cross, what a load in general – sic) establlshed that MERS was in physical possession of the note at the time the mtn… was filed, and under NV law that makes MERS the holder.”

    jg: Is there a hole for me to get sick in? (dylan) Let me tell you how MERS “had possession”, so puhleeze listen up: a straw officer at the servicers had the note (allegedly – key word) and that was probably the copy from the stinking servicing file. Let’s see – THAT made MERS the holde! No wait! that makes the servicer the holder! NO wait again! That makes the trust the holder by way of the servicer, or maybe it’s the trust that’s the holder by way of the straw officer. If it’s an fha or va loan, it makes the issuer the holder, but let’s say it’s the trust so we can use their credit bid! Oh, hell, it makes ME the note holder.

    Judge Jones: “Even if that note had been transferred, or the ben interest in it had been transferred to someone else?

    DeVyver: ” …..The ben interest, that is the (nameless, faceless – sic)
    investor I guess as I would call it, even if that changed hands, yes, ……because it’s the party who holds the note who is entitled to enforce it.”

    jg: Not! Not in federal jurisdiction. First of all, MERS didn’t hold the note any more than I did, but even if they had, it wouldn’t matter. The holder provision of the UCC butts heads with Rule 17 and looses. MERS was not the holder of the note. please read on – took me a while to find this deal!

    The att goes on to defend MERS as noteholder…..

    Judge Jones: “That’s an irreconcible conflict….”

    jg: well, dang, I didn’t copy the next page. dang again. It’s the vip
    part. I’ll go look for it in a couple thousand cases. Yawn!

  24. If we can’t go anywhere and feel peace and security without being treated like criminals we should boycott all of it until the rule of law is restored.

    I don’t feel any safer or more secure being groped and searched by a stranger wearing a uniform than any other stranger. These people are all on a sick power trip and hide behind their uniforms. The Boston marathon proves all of this so called increased security serves no real purpose. If a criminal wants to do harm, all of the Security in the world is not going to stop them. All a criminal needs is an opportunity and they will always find it if they intend harm.

  25. Lie and cover up is all they do. They prey on what you don’t know and use that to destroy you. They make up their own rules as they go along. For example, UCC 3 governs commercial foreclosures therefore, Illinois Mortgage Foreclosure Law cannot govern a commercial property, because no criteria can be met. What do they do? They tell you the court offers them the option to appoint a receiver based on “allegations” of the complaint, the terms & provisions of the mortgage and note, by motion upon reasonable probability that plaintiff will prevail on a final hearing on this matter ….735 ILCS 5/-151706(d)…

    So they bypassed the Rule of Law UCC 3….CREATE THE SECURITY…and appoint a receiver with no evidence the SECURITY was ever created. They call a copy of a recorded mortgage and a copy of a note evidence a SECURITY exists. A recorded mortgage is not evidence a Security was created, it is only evidence that a debt once existed, nothing more. A recorded mortgage is not evidence a Security was ever created or ever existed as required by law in regards to issuing investments in Security Entitlements.

    There is no legal remedy for not creating the Security as the law requires and a court appointed receiver being used as a “fix” for not creating the Security is not a proper legal remedy and is deceptive.

    They also add very deceptively that the defendant must show good cause why the receiver should not be appointed.

    How about the plaintiff intentionally concealed the fact they have no receipt and that means the defendant holds Legal Title to the property? This is our property, not their department store where they can offer a store credit in exchange for Securities Fraud they committed with our autographs.

    Little did we know our autographs were so valuable.

  26. For all of those in WA and also for the rest of us, we have to get that Peeters case and see what mullarkey they came up with. (It went back to superior court in Snohomish County, WA., so that’s where the guts will be found)

  27. Check out CNBC Mad Money right now.. Cramer has pictures on the set of Lenin & Mao….

  28. Ah, a separate settlement. That’s why it says Wednesday.

    Still doesn’t resonate. How is it different settlements have checks going out at the same time?
    Doesn’t resonate.

  29. LOL,
    How does one find out if they have ‘one of those checks?’

    They cash it! Ba-da-bing!

    That is interesting. The payment is final, people will ‘go see if they are one cashing a bounced check’, end up with final settlement and wonder what happened?

    They happened! That’s what.
    My knowing says this is not true.

    3.9 million will not have a bounced check. It’s the Federal Reserve and the OCC for heaven’s sake.

    LOL.
    Some people create their own experiences.

    The programming is very, very thick.
    The non acceptors may end up being discriminated against and called names like hold outs but we may get their remedy.

    ———–
    Did you catch that last line?
    ———————
    Rust Consulting declined to comment Wednesday, and a U.S. Bank spokeswoman said she had no information on the matter.

    Wednesday? Wednesday? Checks are dated Friday, how can someone decline to comment on Wednesday when it’s not Wednesday yet?

    Something doesn’t resonate.

    Trespass Unwanted, Life, Creator, In Esse (In Being, Actually Existing), Free, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  30. Sorry to Add Insult to Injury …. Bad Checks?

    Are The Rust Consulting Independent Foreclosure Review Checks Bouncing?

    We are getting reports from the trenches that the foreclosure settlement checks that were mailed out Friday to harmed homeowners are bouncing. Other reports are coming in that there are insufficient funds to cash. We would assume what is happening, if at all, is the latter since it takes time for a check to clear, or not.

    We have not been able to confirm as of yet but will post results as soon as we get them.

    If you had you check denied for insufficient funds or any other information regarding the cashing/depositing of the checks email us at info@4closureFraud.org

    A quick Google search shows that Rust Consulting has had issues with this in the past…

    Nearly 600 Michigan homeowners who were owed their share of a $27.5-million class action are angry that the checks bounced, leaving a trail of fees and frustration.

    Rob Lalain, 34, of Novi was one of the plaintiffs and said his check for $635.34 dated Sept. 5 bounced. He was hit with a $10 bad-check fee.

    “It’s pretty damn weird. It is a $27-million lawsuit, and they are sending out bad checks,” Lalain said.

    Lalain is one of the more than 66,000 new-home buyers in Michigan who won the settlement after they were overcharged for title insurance while home builders got discounts. The arrangement violated federal law.

    The settlement, approved in February, applied to people who bought newly built homes between December 1998 and July 2005 and purchased title insurance from Chicago Title Insurance Co. of Missouri, Transnation Title Insurance Co. of Arizona, First American Title Insurance Co. of California or Lawyer’s Title Insurance Corp. of Virginia.

    The problem was caused by an error by U.S. Bank of Minneapolis, he said. Yellen said he hired Rust Consulting of Minneapolis to handle the payout to plaintiffs in the class action. Rust then arranged for U.S. Bank to accept the funds from the defendants and handle the check processing to the class members.

    Rust Consulting declined to comment Wednesday, and a U.S. Bank spokeswoman said she had no information on the matter.

  31. Wells Fargo Bank is the mob and should be treated as so. However with a trillion dollars in assets that is a unrealistic action in a Obama Administration because its not oil.

    The financial industry is Democrats bread and butter and have brought and paid for Obama.

    Wells Fargo does not care about the bad press they just move keep moving forward as it is war and the winner writes the history. Those that don’t have a beef with Wells are going to do business with this “to big to fail bank” because they are to big to fail!

    They control 1/3 of the mortgage business in America doing what they do. When I worked at Wells Fargo you have personnel not trained in all the programs or ethics, but they were a used car lot team of KILLERS.

    As we now see who as far as a regulator was calling these clowns out? Nobody!

    Wells has burn the villages babies and all, and has turn that into a money making event, as somebody got to bury the dead, and who do you think is selling plots?

  32. @Deborah wynn
    I know. I know.
    I had to ‘center’ because of how it jostled my inner peace when I opened the letter.

    Trespass Unwanted

  33. This nation has become a hell hole for one reason. Money comes before souls. If your not making tons of money for the investors you are considered worthless.

  34. JG bain, really, we need that pleading

  35. IM CURSING IM SORRY my mother would be disappointed- however, she taught me how to fight bless her, and im angry re the 300 usd re settlement…the whole world should be weeping, im so incredibly disgusted to trhye core of my being, i better stop blogging

  36. yeah… last time i sat in a bank listening to that stupid sarky music i wanted to ffin screaM…I MOVED TO A CREDIT UNION. NO MUSIC BUT ITS COMMUNITY ORIENTED.

  37. Banksters are claiming a (dangerous) new victory in WA state: Peeters v Green Tree Servicing, LLC. Remanded to state court around 08/2012 so I can’t get the necessary pleadings or decision. Can anyone? It was
    12cv01133 in WA WD. Gwen? anyone? I hear the banksters actually relied on Bain!

    **Also I would appreciate a link to any filing where boA has made the statements referenced by I think gwen and dw. **

    Here’s a little goodie I didn’t know about. it’s called “Cameras in Courts. 14 courts volunteered in 2011. You can go to this link and listen to
    hearings,which I haven’t done yet.

    http://www.uscourts.gov/Multimedia/cameras.aspx

  38. So we can get this straight, the Foreclosure Review was a farce, and the settlement is even more inequitable.

    I have before me a check that indicates .
    Why you are receiving a payment (for some reason this information is in a rectangular box.)
    How to cash the check (for some reason this instruction is in a rectangular box also)
    The payment amount is final.
    There is no process to appeal the payment.
    Both of the above statements centered in the document and also boxed.

    First of all, there is no way this Paying Agent represented my interest. It’s obvious it represented PNC’s interest.

    The final is $300. Seriously! $300.

    My youth said, “they stole our house and they are offering $300!”

    Signed by someone named Paul V on a microprinted line. I’ll need a really good magnifier to see what the microprinted signature line states.

    So here’s the details of the check.
    ——————————————————————-
    Top left has paying agent info Top right has Independent Foreclosure Review.
    Clear to indicate “Your payment is enclosed.”

    Left contains the STATUTORY NAME AND CURRENT shelter LOCATION in ALL CAPS, right has a reference number and a property address, the paper representation of the “real e-state”

    Dear Trespass,

    You were recently sent a notice that you are eligible to receive a payment as a result of an agreement between federal banking regulators and PNC Bank in connection with an enforcement action related to deficient mortgage servicing and foreclosure processes.

    (in bold) This letter includes your check. (stop bold) It also explains the amount of the payment, why you are receiving a payment, how to cash the check, and other important information and disclosures.

    <larger font bold)
    Your payment is: $300.00.

    in a margin to margin rectangular box, text is positioned left and in bold

    Why you are receiving a payment

    end rectangular box

    Earlier this year, PNC Bank entered into an agreement with federal banking regulators — the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. This agreement resolved the Independent Foreclosure Review required by the regulators. Additional information about this agreement can be found at (underlined) occ dotgov website (can't provide link or it falls into moderation) and (underlined) federalreserve dotgov website (can't provide link or it falls into moderation.)

    Regulators determined your payment amount based on the stage of your foreclosure process and other considerations related to your foreclosure.

    in a margin to margin rectangular box text is positioned left and in bold

    How to cash the check

    end rectangular box

    (bold) You must cash or deposit the check within 90 days, or the check will be void. (end bold) All borrowers listed on the check must sign it to cash it.

    In a larger rectangular box not margin to margin. Text is centered

    …………………… The final payment amount is final. ……………….

    ……………..There is no process to appeal the payment. ……………

    End rectangular box.

    I placed the …… because I needed to show how the lines looked on the check, how they were centered.

    ==================================================

    No need to be angry. If you break my neck and offer me $3 for "consideration" and consideration is important in considering a matter settled with these legal people running our country, I have a few choices. We have a right to contract and a right not to contract.

    So there is an offer on the table. I broke your neck, I came to an agreement with the clerk at the gas station around the corner, and a school teacher in the next school district and we agree I can settle with you for $3. Information about this agreement can be found at 'some official looking location, ah, a posting in the local classifieds).

    You must cash or deposit the check within 90 days or the check will be void. Everyone else injured listed on the check must sign it to cash it.

    This payment amount is final
    There is no process to appeal the payment.

    ===========================================

    There is some details on the back (non public side of the letter)
    several bullet-ed items, one indicate that you don't waive legal claims against "your servicer" and you may pursue additional actions related to "your foreclosure."
    (emphasis mine – notice how they shift the burden of what happened)

    Another bullet states

    This payment does not mean that you necessarily suffered financial injury or harm.

    So why would they tell me I suffered no financial injury when they stole my home? Why do they consider $300 is a settlement?
    Unless they are sending checks to 'everyone' who suffered no financial injury from the; why did I get a check if I suffered no financial injury or harm? Written like an attorney.

    —————–
    I have three choices, really.
    Cash the check for the $3 consideration for breaking my neck, a situation I have to live with forever, and all the work I did to have a pristine body are gone because this is all I'm getting according to a bunch of people I don't know.
    Sit on the check until it becomes void – not an option because silence is acquiescence, assuming they sent the check to the proper address and the postman delivered it properly. — lots of bar codes on the front as if there is some tracking of this 'thing'.
    Or some type of 'refuse for cause', indicating why it is refused.

    These people did not do any review.
    They stole 4.4 million homes because there is not a note out there where they could enforce payment for a debt not loaned and there is not a deed of trust that is enforceable by them if they lacked the standing to foreclose per Statute of Frauds.

    They have a private agreement and have listed the parties they have an agreement with.

    I'm not registered to vote for a board of governors for the federal reserve. I can't appoint the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and I sure as hell didn't have a business relationship with PNC.

    The point is, none of them are representatives in any sense of the word, not by contract, agreement, nor registration into their system of control.

    They can offer $1 in consideration to settle a wrong, and it falls on me as to whether I accept that offer or if I dispute the offer.

    No there is no process to appeal the payment, but an appeal carries it's own legal definition from a refusal for the settlement being inequitable for the harm done.

    Sure the payment amount is final, as per their agreement, but someone has to be able to tell them, if I find their 'consideration' an act of Turpitude, then they need to make a agreement with 'me' to settle.

    I am not bound by their private agreement among each other.

    There is so much more I'd want to say, but I'm tired.
    10 years of sweat equity, life labor to purchase some property for me and my heirs and I'm robbed, and forced to leave by threat or engage in war with my brothers and sisters to attempt to stay.

    This is turpitude.
    Turpitude. In it's ordinary sense, inherent baseness or vileness of principle or action; shameful wickedness; depravity. In its legal sense, everything done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals. An action showing gross depravity. Traders & General Ins. Co. v. Russel, Tex.Civ. App., 99 S.S.2d 1079, 1084.

    So in essence, the corporations entered into an agreement for the consideration the Creator will receive.

    The next thing is 'important'. What does the agreement take care of?
    This agreement resolved the Independent Foreclosure Review required by the regulators.

    Who are the regulators? Office of Comptroller of the Currency and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

    Clear as day it's not resolving the theft.
    Why in the bee-jee-bees will I accept a settlement that has NOTHING to do with me nor what was done to me by PNC?
    The settlement is 'their agreement' among themselves.
    I was robbed just a title search would have given them the basic details.

    Their settlement agreement is not my settlement agreement.
    Their consideration is not my consideration.

    A valid contract has an offer, acceptance, and consideration.
    They have provided an offer of settlement with a consideration of $300 and all they need is acceptance to have a valid contract.
    They want that acceptance within 90 days.

    Seems they failed to realize who they were dealing with.
    I'm sure that check should have gone to the AG for the state or someone who owns/created the STATUTORY NAME.

    I'm tired. So tired.
    I will NEVER trust this system. NEVER EVER NEVER EVER NEVER. I didn't agree to it, I don't accept it, I don't want it, I didn't ask for it. It has to GO.

    Trespass Unwanted, Life, Creator, In Esse (In Being, Actually Existing), Free, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  39. So we can get this straight, the Foreclosure Review was a farce, and the settlement is even more inequitable.

    I have before me a check that indicates .
    Why you are receiving a payment (for some reason this information is in a rectangular box.)
    How to cash the check (for some reason this instruction is in a rectangular box also)
    The payment amount is final.
    There is no process to appeal the payment.
    Both of the above statements centered in the document and also boxed.

    First of all, there is no way this Paying Agent represented my interest. It’s obvious it represented PNC’s interest.

    The final is $300. Seriously! $300.

    My youth said, “they stole our house and they are offering $300!”

    Signed by someone named Paul V on a microprinted line. I’ll need a really good magnifier to see what the microprinted signature line states.

    So here’s the details of the check.
    ——————————————————————-
    Top left has paying agent info Top right has Independent Foreclosure Review.
    Clear to indicate “Your payment is enclosed.”

    Left contains the STATUTORY NAME AND CURRENT shelter LOCATION in ALL CAPS, right has a reference number and a property address, the paper representation of the “real e-state”

    Dear Trespass,

    You were recently sent a notice that you are eligible to receive a payment as a result of an agreement between federal banking regulators and PNC Bank in connection with an enforcement action related to deficient mortgage servicing and foreclosure processes.

    (in bold) This letter includes your check. (stop bold) It also explains the amount of the payment, why you are receiving a payment, how to cash the check, and other important information and disclosures.

    <larger font bold)
    Your payment is: $300.00.

    in a margin to margin rectangular box, text is positioned left and in bold

    Why you are receiving a payment

    end rectangular box

    Earlier this year, PNC Bank entered into an agreement with federal banking regulators — the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. This agreement resolved the Independent Foreclosure Review required by the regulators. Additional information about this agreement can be found at (underlined) (http://) www dot occ dot gov and (underlined) ((http://)) www dot federalreserve dot gov.

    Regulators determined your payment amount based on the stage of your foreclosure process and other considerations related to your foreclosure.

    in a margin to margin rectangular box text is positioned left and in bold

    How to cash the check

    end rectangular box

    (bold) You must cash or deposit the check within 90 days, or the check will be void. (end bold) All borrowers listed on the check must sign it to cash it.

    In a larger rectangular box not margin to margin. Text is centered

    …………………… The final payment amount is final. ……………….

    ……………..There is no process to appeal the payment. ……………

    End rectangular box.

    I placed the …… because I needed to show how the lines looked on the check, how they were centered.

    ==================================================

    No need to be angry. If you break my neck and offer me $3 for "consideration" and consideration is important in considering a matter settled with these legal people running our country, I have a few choices. We have a right to contract and a right not to contract.

    So there is an offer on the table. I broke your neck, I came to an agreement with the clerk at the gas station around the corner, and a school teacher in the next school district and we agree I can settle with you for $3. Information about this agreement can be found at 'some official looking location, ah, a posting in the local classifieds).

    You must cash or deposit the check within 90 days or the check will be void. Everyone else injured listed on the check must sign it to cash it.

    This payment amount is final
    There is no process to appeal the payment.

    ===========================================

    There is some details on the back (non public side of the letter)
    several bullet-ed items, one indicate that you don't waive legal claims against "your servicer" and you may pursue additional actions related to "your foreclosure."
    (emphasis mine – notice how they shift the burden of what happened)

    Another bullet states

    This payment does not mean that you necessarily suffered financial injury or harm.

    So why would they tell me I suffered no financial injury when they stole my home? Why do they consider $300 is a settlement?
    Unless they are sending checks to 'everyone' who suffered no financial injury from the; why did I get a check if I suffered no financial injury or harm? Written like an attorney.

    —————–
    I have three choices, really.
    Cash the check for the $3 consideration for breaking my neck, a situation I have to live with forever, and all the work I did to have a pristine body are gone because this is all I'm getting according to a bunch of people I don't know.
    Sit on the check until it becomes void – not an option because silence is acquiescence, assuming they sent the check to the proper address and the postman delivered it properly. — lots of bar codes on the front as if there is some tracking of this 'thing'.
    Or some type of 'refuse for cause', indicating why it is refused.

    These people did not do any review.
    They stole 4.4 million homes because there is not a note out there where they could enforce payment for a debt not loaned and there is not a deed of trust that is enforceable by them if they lacked the standing to foreclose per Statute of Frauds.

    They have a private agreement and have listed the parties they have an agreement with.

    I'm not registered to vote for a board of governors for the federal reserve. I can't appoint the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and I sure as hell didn't have a business relationship with PNC.

    The point is, none of them are representatives in any sense of the word, not by contract, agreement, nor registration into their system of control.

    They can offer $1 in consideration to settle a wrong, and it falls on me as to whether I accept that offer or if I dispute the offer.

    No there is no process to appeal the payment, but an appeal carries it's own legal definition from a refusal for the settlement being inequitable for the harm done.

    Sure the payment amount is final, as per their agreement, but someone has to be able to tell them, if I find their 'consideration' an act of Turpitude, then they need to make a agreement with 'me' to settle.

    I am not bound by their private agreement among each other.

    There is so much more I'd want to say, but I'm tired.
    10 years of sweat equity, life labor to purchase some property for me and my heirs and I'm robbed, and forced to leave by threat or engage in war with my brothers and sisters to attempt to stay.

    This is turpitude.
    Turpitude. In it's ordinary sense, inherent baseness or vileness of principle or action; shameful wickedness; depravity. In its legal sense, everything done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals. An action showing gross depravity. Traders & General Ins. Co. v. Russel, Tex.Civ. App., 99 S.S.2d 1079, 1084.

    So in essence, the corporations entered into an agreement for the consideration the Creator will receive.

    The next thing is 'important'. What does the agreement take care of?
    This agreement resolved the Independent Foreclosure Review required by the regulators.

    Who are the regulators? Office of Comptroller of the Currency and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

    Clear as day it's not resolving the theft.
    Why in the bee-jee-bees will I accept a settlement that has NOTHING to do with me nor what was done to me by PNC?
    The settlement is 'their agreement' among themselves.
    I was robbed just a title search would have given them the basic details.

    Their settlement agreement is not my settlement agreement.
    Their consideration is not my consideration.

    A valid contract has an offer, acceptance, and consideration.
    They have provided an offer of settlement with a consideration of $300 and all they need is acceptance to have a valid contract.
    They want that acceptance within 90 days.

    Seems they failed to realize who they were dealing with.
    I'm sure that check should have gone to the AG for the state or someone who owns/created the STATUTORY NAME.

    I'm tired. So tired.
    I will NEVER trust this system. NEVER EVER NEVER EVER NEVER. I didn't agree to it, I don't accept it, I don't want it, I didn't ask for it. It has to GO.

    Trespass Unwanted, Life, Creator, In Esse (In Being, Actually Existing), Free, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  40. So we can get this straight, the Foreclosure Review was a farce, and the settlement is even more inequitable.

    I have before me a check that indicates .
    Why you are receiving a payment (for some reason this information is in a rectangular box.)
    How to cash the check (for some reason this instruction is in a rectangular box also)
    The payment amount is final.
    There is no process to appeal the payment.
    Both of the above statements centered in the document and also boxed.

    First of all, there is no way this Paying Agent represented my interest. It’s obvious it represented PNC’s interest.

    The final is $300. Seriously! $300.

    My youth said, “they stole our house and they are offering $300!”

    Signed by someone named Paul V on a microprinted line. I’ll need a really good magnifier to see what the microprinted signature line states.

    So here’s the details of the check.
    ——————————————————————-
    Top left has paying agent info Top right has Independent Foreclosure Review.
    Clear to indicate “Your payment is enclosed.”

    Left contains the STATUTORY NAME AND CURRENT shelter LOCATION in ALL CAPS, right has a reference number and a property address, the paper representation of the “real e-state”

    Dear Trespass,

    You were recently sent a notice that you are eligible to receive a payment as a result of an agreement between federal banking regulators and PNC Bank in connection with an enforcement action related to deficient mortgage servicing and foreclosure processes.

    (in bold) This letter includes your check. (stop bold) It also explains the amount of the payment, why you are receiving a payment, how to cash the check, and other important information and disclosures.

    <larger font bold)
    Your payment is: $300.00.

    in a margin to margin rectangular box, text is positioned left and in bold

    Why you are receiving a payment

    end rectangular box

    Earlier this year, PNC Bank entered into an agreement with federal banking regulators — the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. This agreement resolved the Independent Foreclosure Review required by the regulators. Additional information about this agreement can be found at (underlined) http://www.occ.gov and (underlined) http://www.federalreserve.gov.

    Regulators determined your payment amount based on the stage of your foreclosure process and other considerations related to your foreclosure.

    in a margin to margin rectangular box text is positioned left and in bold

    How to cash the check

    end rectangular box

    (bold) You must cash or deposit the check within 90 days, or the check will be void. (end bold) All borrowers listed on the check must sign it to cash it.

    In a larger rectangular box not margin to margin. Text is centered

    …………………… The final payment amount is final. ……………….

    ……………..There is no process to appeal the payment. ……………

    End rectangular box.

    I placed the …… because I needed to show how the lines looked on the check, how they were centered.

    ==================================================

    No need to be angry. If you break my neck and offer me $3 for "consideration" and consideration is important in considering a matter settled with these legal people running our country, I have a few choices. We have a right to contract and a right not to contract.

    So there is an offer on the table. I broke your neck, I came to an agreement with the clerk at the gas station around the corner, and a school teacher in the next school district and we agree I can settle with you for $3. Information about this agreement can be found at 'some official looking location, ah, a posting in the local classifieds).

    You must cash or deposit the check within 90 days or the check will be void. Everyone else injured listed on the check must sign it to cash it.

    This payment amount is final
    There is no process to appeal the payment.

    ===========================================

    There is some details on the back (non public side of the letter)
    several bullet-ed items, one indicate that you don't waive legal claims against "your servicer" and you may pursue additional actions related to "your foreclosure."
    (emphasis mine – notice how they shift the burden of what happened)

    Another bullet states

    This payment does not mean that you necessarily suffered financial injury or harm.

    So why would they tell me I suffered no financial injury when they stole my home? Why do they consider $300 is a settlement?
    Unless they are sending checks to 'everyone' who suffered no financial injury from the; why did I get a check if I suffered no financial injury or harm? Written like an attorney.

    —————–
    I have three choices, really.
    Cash the check for the $3 consideration for breaking my neck, a situation I have to live with forever, and all the work I did to have a pristine body are gone because this is all I'm getting according to a bunch of people I don't know.
    Sit on the check until it becomes void – not an option because silence is acquiescence, assuming they sent the check to the proper address and the postman delivered it properly. — lots of bar codes on the front as if there is some tracking of this 'thing'.
    Or some type of 'refuse for cause', indicating why it is refused.

    These people did not do any review.
    They stole 4.4 million homes because there is not a note out there where they could enforce payment for a debt not loaned and there is not a deed of trust that is enforceable by them if they lacked the standing to foreclose per Statute of Frauds.

    They have a private agreement and have listed the parties they have an agreement with.

    I'm not registered to vote for a board of governors for the federal reserve. I can't appoint the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and I sure as hell didn't have a business relationship with PNC.

    The point is, none of them are representatives in any sense of the word, not by contract, agreement, nor registration into their system of control.

    They can offer $1 in consideration to settle a wrong, and it falls on me as to whether I accept that offer or if I dispute the offer.

    No there is no process to appeal the payment, but an appeal carries it's own legal definition from a refusal for the settlement being inequitable for the harm done.

    Sure the payment amount is final, as per their agreement, but someone has to be able to tell them, if I find their 'consideration' an act of Turpitude, then they need to make a agreement with 'me' to settle.

    I am not bound by their private agreement among each other.

    There is so much more I'd want to say, but I'm tired.
    10 years of sweat equity, life labor to purchase some property for me and my heirs and I'm robbed, and forced to leave by threat or engage in war with my brothers and sisters to attempt to stay.

    This is turpitude.
    Turpitude. In it's ordinary sense, inherent baseness or vileness of principle or action; shameful wickedness; depravity. In its legal sense, everything done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals. An action showing gross depravity. Traders & General Ins. Co. v. Russel, Tex.Civ. App., 99 S.S.2d 1079, 1084.

    So in essence, the corporations entered into an agreement for the consideration the Creator will receive.

    The next thing is 'important'. What does the agreement take care of?
    This agreement resolved the Independent Foreclosure Review required by the regulators.

    Who are the regulators? Office of Comptroller of the Currency and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

    Clear as day it's not resolving the theft.
    Why in the bee-jee-bees will I accept a settlement that has NOTHING to do with me nor what was done to me by PNC?
    The settlement is 'their agreement' among themselves.
    I was robbed just a title search would have given them the basic details.

    Their settlement agreement is not my settlement agreement.
    Their consideration is not my consideration.

    A valid contract has an offer, acceptance, and consideration.
    They have provided an offer of settlement with a consideration of $300 and all they need is acceptance to have a valid contract.
    They want that acceptance within 90 days.

    Seems they failed to realize who they were dealing with.
    I'm sure that check should have gone to the AG for the state or someone who owns/created the STATUTORY NAME.

    I'm tired. So tired.
    I will NEVER trust this system. NEVER EVER NEVER EVER NEVER. I didn't agree to it, I don't accept it, I don't want it, I didn't ask for it. It has to GO.

    Trespass Unwanted, Life, Creator, In Esse (In Being, Actually Existing), Free, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  41. Oh…Deb… Your Creative…. I Like You! LOL!

  42. I actually recorded them all .. but its how my operating system rolls. I always denied everything they said except my name and address. I denied we owed them a debt and I denied we had a financial hardship. I kept telling them the only hardship we had was them. Buttwipes!!

  43. christine ive done exactly that, but first i put them on hold and play airport music

  44. Yea Christine, I have their proclamation recorded many times, it goes like this .. I am not authorized to speak to you if you are recording this conversation. Me says … I understand Sweetie, its not a problem, you have been very helpful. Is there someone I could speak with? Reps says, hold on let me get my supervisor… ladelade da da da for 30 minutes and then Click. WORKS EVERYTIME. Not only do you have a recorded denial to speak with you, you have phone records to show the length of the call on hold.

  45. I said earlier:

    2) Bank employees to whom you say, over the phone: “I understand this is recorded but hold on right there. I need to plug my tape recorder too… It will only take a second… Bear with me…. Here we go! What were you saying?” suddenly become very, very quiet.

    Try it. Practice it with the plumber. The marketer who pesters you in order to sell you something you don’t want, never knew anything about and would have had for years if you really needed it. Try it on the gas company employee who tells you you’re gonna be shut off. The electric company. Just anybody. They call you. They want something from you. They want MONEY!!! Make them prove you must pay it.

    Record them. Tell them you are recording them. You have no idea how fast life becomes easy and simple. Nobody bothers me. It’s on record that, unless it’s in writing, I won’t do anything I don’t feel like doing. Just try it!

  46. Good Questions Neil … But some questions that linger on include why Wells Fargo failed to do the proper accounting to bring her loan account up-to-date? Why did Wells Fargo want that foreclosure regardless of whether she was in default or not?

    ——————————————————————————————–

    Why? Why? Why? Oh Right …. The Ins proceeds .. What do you call that? Oh Right … Fraud. And the unmarketable titles….. What do they Call that? Oh Right … Harm

  47. Is it Legal to Record the Bank’s Phone Call or Conversation?
    Posted on April 15, 2013

    Lender and servicer modification abuse, dual tracking and deceptive business practices have caused undue emotional stress on homeowners. The Courts usually demand a precise record in order to establish a claim against the banks and their pals. Foreclosure is a dirty business and you need to have the right tools and knowledge to make your points.

    You’ll notice that the banks and servicers normally will not correspond to homeowners using email. The banks prefer homeowners fax their information and the banks use the telephone letting you know they are recording their calls.

    It’s time to turn the tables. Take good notes and keep a complete file of all your conversations and correspondence with the banks and servicers – but you may also want and need to record the telephone conversations you have with the banks. Here are some tips from a private investigator on the legality of recording telephone conversations. Click here for the latest telephone recording devices. Continue reading [here] →

    http://deadlyclear.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/is-it-legal-to-record-the-banks-phone-call-or-conversation/#more-3863

    Very good advice in my book. It is amazing how:
    1) Banks that told you “This call may be recorded for quality assurance purpose [hogwash. They want to get on record that you admit owing anything to anyone because, in many states, as soon as the recording picks up the warning, recording you becomes legal!!! ] refuse to send you the transcripts of allegedly recorded phone conversations when you demand it by RRR letter. They do. They really do record and refuse. Actually, they tend to have “lost” them when asked to produce them during discovery…

    2) Bank employees to whom you say, over the phone: “I understand this is recorded but hold on right there. I need to plug my tape recorder too… It will only take a second… Bear with me…. Here we go! What were you saying?” suddenly become very, very quiet.

    3) If you ever keep good records (when, where, who and what) and you can make a thorough timeline with names, dates, time, phone numbers and substance of a call), banks tend to fold. Not openly, of course. Not obviously either. They just tend to… disappear in the background. Your case drags on and on. No one really appears in court. It’s postponed ad vitam eternam. Once in a while, the judge replacing the interim judge replacing the original judge send you a note but… the thing is in limbo as though limbo was the pace to be.

    File anything against a bank with solid info on when, where, who and what and read the trash their attorneys file back. Pitiful, pathetic regurgitation of irrelevant case law upon irrelevant case law.

    People: banks didn’t get that far on their own. They used the one thing they knew they could because you keep demonstrating it over and over: fear (while arguing “It was a question of principle. That’s why I didn’t fight further. It was the PRINCIPLE.” Principle my foot. Fear is more like it!)

    Anyway. Nothing I can do against people’s fear. Except point out how unfounded it is in any circumstance and how playing out yours, day in, day out, has allowed banks to get that far.

  48. I wonder if her attorney told her she is left with an unmarketable title when she pays her mortgage off? Oh well, no need to worry about a pesky little thing like that… she will probably die before she pays it off anyway. Why bother her with such little details? I wish you would have represented her Neil! Buh Humbug!!

  49. We had a very similar situation. Fought the foreclosure for 12 years, since 4/2001.

    Was not in default. We even paid 13 months instead of 12

    Wells Fargo finally won on 7/13/12

    I have the proof of payments made and received bu wf

    What can be done about it?

    Sent from Wicho Lacayo’s I-Phone

  50. “Judges assume that a big-name bank with 150 year old reputation on the line would never make a claim they couldn’t back up.” Bingo! That’s what i have been saying all along. In fact, it is even more simple than that and i saw it being played live in a few cases: judges have a stupid knee-jerk reaction that goes along those lines: “Courts are a last resort when everything has failed and legal actions are not a picnic. No one in his right mind files just for the hell of filing. Therefore, the great majority of cases filed are meritorious and since the bank filed first, it can back up its claims.” The bias is not necessarily so much in favor of the banks as it is in favor of the one who sues first.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: