Michigan Appellate Court Dismisses BOA Foreclosure for Lack of Standing — but for the wrong reason?


And next is an interesting favorable decision in the State of Michigan entered June 6, 2013 but not yet published. Sobh-v-Bof-A, Chase et al

Bank of America was found to LACK STANDING to Foreclose. So far so good. But the reasoning of the Court leads me to question whether the right record was in front of them. They ASSUME that the Chase-Wamu merger transferred the loans only because, as I see it, nobody read the merger agreement. The receiver, as I pointed out in prior posts, acting on behalf of the FDIC, the trustee in WAMU bankruptcy, Chase and WAMU executives were sort of playing fast and loose with the rules.

It turns out that Chase never paid for anything. While it could be argued that they assumed the liability on billions of dollars in deposits, they also got the money that was on deposit. The agreement says the consideration is zero in no uncertain language. In fact, later on in the agreement and then again outside the agreement, they slipped in a provision wherein Chase was putting up $1.9 billion, but getting more than $2 billion back out of a tax refund owed to WAMU, so they had negative consideration and there is no recital of any net loss they were taking when they assumed the deposits of WAMU.

It also turns out that, straight from the receiver’s lips, if you are looking for an assignment, you won’t find one because there isn’t one. And the merger and assumption agreement specifically does NOT include the bogus mortgage loans and other liabilities (put back) in the securitization scheme which is most of all loans originated by WAMU. Chase didn’t want to buy the loans because they correctly perceived that the liabilities on those loans and the liabilities to alleged REMIC structures that never received an interest in the loans, and the liabilities to insures, counterparties on credit default swaps and to the Federal government and Federal Reserve might vastly exceed the nominal value of mortgages originated by WAMU. Then there was also the liability for predatory or fraudulent loan practices. Altogether, Chase didn’t want to be saying it owned ALL the loans. It just wanted to be able to say it some of the time when they had an uncontested foreclosure and they could get a free house.

So Chase got an affidavit from the receiver that said that Chase owned the loans by operation of law because of the merger. That affidavit has been used hundreds if not thousands of times in foreclosures where Chase perceived the risk to be low. Thus in uncontested cases, Chase alleged it owned the loans even if they were “securitized” and got away with it because, well, there was nobody to say otherwise.

A good thing that the Michigan court said was that the Chase had the burden of proving the chain of ownership which was the history of the piece of property. A bad thing that the Court said was that Chase “acquired” the loans but that the foreclosures were voidable because the assignment was never recorded. In Michigan the absence of a recorded assignment is deadly so they ran with that idea and decided fro the borrower and against Chase who will no doubt now enter into a settlement or modification for which they have no authority to even talk about because they do not now nor did they ever own the loans.

Just because the loans were considered a hot potato and nobody wanted them doesn’t mean that anyone can claim them. But that is exactly the plan of engagement adopted by Chase. So all that happened here was that Chase was chased out of Court with permission to come back when it had the assignment recorded. tricky business there. Will they fabricate that instrument or will they simply settle with the borrower for what they can get? Whatever they get, it is free money because at no time in the history of the loan has Chase ever been at risk unless, now that they are acting as though they have control over the loan portfolio, a court decides that if you fake it or made it. Greed has no bounds. If Chase had simply left the loan portfolio to wallow in its own crud, no argument could be made against Chase for all the chicanery that went on with the borrowers and investors. Now that they have led courts to believe they have apparent authority, maybe they have apparent liability as well.

42 Responses

  1. Chase takes liberty to fradulantly record a Wama note originated in 2006 notorized by Riley for Chase in 2012… 6 years later. Chase thought they could get this on in foreclosure as well, it took handing $10k to
    Their Atlanta Attorney in 2013, to return to homeowner. Since fraudulent allonges, and assignments have been added to loan documents.

  2. That is true justme……do your own research because the serpent moves more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God has made.

  3. satish shetty, thanks for the WMC info. my attorney will appreciate that info CA is far from WI, but that is universal. same thing with BofA, Countrywide stuff. no chain of anything.

    justme, be careful who you listen to

  4. The truth is clear and undeniable christine. We were robbed by Imposters, communists posing as names we could trust. They have hijacked the country and what they want is everyones worst fears come true, Totalitarianism. Anyone playing along with these crooks will be sorry one day. That is the bottom line. There will be no voting these frauds out. They have everything rigged in their favor. The best we can do is stop complying, conforming and cooperating with them because they are imposters and nothing they have done or are doing is legal under any of the laws of this land. OBAMACARE and the acceptance of the mark of the beast will be the end of freedom for anyone accepting that mark. That is the truth, so help me God..

  5. Look who’s talking, “enraged”—you’re the one constantly butting in and spewing your hate. It all starts with you and you know it.

  6. For three hours straight, between 4:20 pm and 7:33 pm, three hyenas are wasting their time and energy drooling about me instead of growing a brain. Truly amazing… Too funny!

    Great country indeed!

  7. I remember a podcast from a while back that always comes to mind when dealing with these people. The person said they don’t care about you, your family or the dog you have buried in the backyard.

    That made me mad and want to find out who these people are. What I found out was startling. Not only are they communist but they are satanists. Satanists are communists. That is why they are complete control freaks.

    To those who say no, they are atheists, they believe they are God, that is the same thing. Just more of an intelligent disguise.

    Bottom Line…..They get joy out of watching good people suffer. They lie and tell us the only way for the soul to be redeemed is when we suffer. That is a power trip for these people to watch us suffer and struggle and die.

    They want to crucify everyone because they believe that gives them power. This was never about the properties per se. This is the ultimate power trip for these people to condemn us for their crimes and use that lie to steal everything from us.

    If nothing else, this is a lesson in how evil works. It feeds off of what we don’t know. That empowers this evil. Like any evil mastermind who poses as a professional you will in most cases, trust them and never know what hit you and then you or your loved one ends up dead.

    The only thing that protects you from them is what you know and that is what they really fear.

    If you do the research on the Synagogue of Satan, the real players hiding behind the scenes of this you will see what I mean.

  8. I get an adrenaline rush from learning like some people get from drinking red bulls but there is no crash, I just want to keep learning as much as I can. It’s awesome. Esp when there is no teacher influencing your thought process. I really can see Internet learning as the wave of the future.

  9. I am actually not miserable. I feel empowered by the knowledge I have sought and found. It is that knowledge and empowerment that makes christine and some others miserable. Knowledge is power and gives the People power. They don’t want that.

  10. Believe me this bunch of thieves do not want us believing we are smart enough to beat them. All I can say is we need to educate ourselves because then they can’t fool you.

    They may use lowlife Stasi tactics like inflation/deflation and taxing us out of our property but they can never take what you learn away from you.

  11. Right on, Poppy—she’s got some serious issues. Delighting in other people’s misery is the lowest of the low. That’s the last thing this world needs.

  12. If you COULD see me in front of a judge and I had asked for a motion TO summary judgement, would you laugh? Would you laugh in front of my 2 little kids that may be loosing their home? Would you laugh when I showed you years of my receipts of full mortgage payments and then showed you what the ‘lenders’…applied; often 80% of the payment,the rest literally goes no where. Would you then laugh when I showed you the recorded mortgage & satisfaction of mortgage from the previous owners showing they had my home as collateral up until a year ago? What if they defaulted>not funny. My fake title insurance, my random payment applied as two, where interest was conveniently taken twice. My late charges from paying on time but the payments were not posted until a week later? Yes, I have the receipts to prove it. Would you laugh then? Is that funny?
    This was a loan we were fortunate enough to have, not even a full year out of graduating HIGH SCHOOL. I suppose it might be then funny too when I showed you the loan application that was submitted, the one WITHOUT signatures that was known we did not take part in that showed income 3,000+ more than was true…. how managing for years we were also fortunate enough to get a loan modification…that INCREASED our monthly payment; why that made it all the better… Why yes, I might see how one would find all this funny indeed…..*there goes your sarcasm & humor when living in lies*
    Not very typical, however while in this predicament and seeking a bit of advice here and there whatever it may be… run across an individual who has written many, many,many a post for the bettering of this situation among others and nimbly, unintentionally, became privy to subject laughter & humiliation. All in all – whatever the outcome- I have already taken from this as a whole a very fulfilling passion for the understanding of legislature, rigour of law, and the drive to learn more with the intention to use it for the better, not in blog blunder.

  13. Some people are just evil poppy. I recognize that inhuman quality in Christine and a few others. I would really rather they be openly evil then secretly evil. It is more perilous when they hide it and pretend they are human. Our frenemies so to speak. Those are the Serial Killers.

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

  14. There is something very wrong with a person who finds humor at the expense of other’s. Even if you are not fond of a person to laugh at their plight is vicious and mean. We are all suffering and if one can win, we all can…this situation is not laughable….Just saying.

    Karma’s a bitch!

  15. SADOMASOCHIST….DEFINITION …..The definition of sadism and masochism, in particular, the deriving of pleasure, especially sexual gratification from inflicting or submitting to physical or emotional abuse.


  16. I really don’t see why you would find humor in very serious legal issues such as these unless you were some sort of sadomasichist. There is nothing funny about this crime scene.

  17. And either were the bank attorney’s.

  18. Funny, the judges aren’t laughing Christine.

  19. All that S&L fraud was laundered into the FDIC and hidden on March 23, 2006…

  20. “Or file a motion to summary judgement.” HAHAHA!!! Motion FOR summary judgment. And apparently, it runs in the family too. Boy oh boy! I’d really want to see her before a judge… Gawd have mercy! My ribs hurt from laughing so much!


  22. Read about the Corporate Scam here…..

  23. I really don’t think any of the crooks expected we would be putting up much of a fight. For the few that are, the judges are caught in the middle of this crime scene. Well to that I say, the law is the law for everyone. Even the U.S. TREASURY DEPT/DEPT OF JUSTICE and the FEDERAL RESERVE BANK/WALL STREET and THE SUPREME COURTS as well as the Politicians are not immune to the Rule of Law. Pretend ignorance doesn’t hold water when you are educated in the most prestigious law schools in the country. Even if their commie professors hate America and use it to destroy it. Corporate Resolutions do not give them a get out of jail free card. If it did, we would all become Corporations to commit illegal acts.

  24. @Deb

    ”pervasive posture of innocent opacity”.

    Ha—like the servicer saying: “We can’t tell you the name of the real creditor because of privacy laws…”

    The cover-up is all-encompassing.

  25. One thing I can tell you is the judges get switched around a lot in Cook County.

  26. Justme….. In my motions I asked for monetary compensation and clear titles for being halled into court for their attempts to collect my house and business property in exchange for no proof of claim. Their Negligence in the taking and paying of the instruments and deceit fraud and forgery and “lack of standing”…their failure to prove a legal cause of action…state a claim or show any evidence of harm done to them….nothing based in law or fact……nothing but heresay….nothing factual….that you can put your finger on that is concrete or particularized …for their attempts to collect an unlawful debt from the onset.

    I really can’t tell you what the judges are thinking. I am doing what I believe is right.

  27. Do you think it would be ‘easier’ for a judge that was on the fence or did not want to make a big commotion and slam on the bank, to rule for a dismissal, or something of the like, in place of awarding a big counterclaim or -something not argued as well as it could be by little miss pro`se…..Rule on fair is fair (ha)….not decimate the homeowner as well as not call attention to a ruling in favor of the little guy on big bank. Judges in it for the right reasons, but do not want to be under the scope…..

  28. Yep…Lee Farkas got all that prison time 30 years for $2.9 billion in mortgage fraud while the rest of the crew got trillions for handing us their unlawful debts. He got his millions confiscated and thrown in the hoosgow for 30 years for profit sharing with the peasants.

  29. I didn’t file a counterclaim per se because the Plaintiff failed to invoke the courts subject matter jurisdiction in my cases so I asked for relief based on the facts presented so far. I challenged the sheister Plaintiffs. My cases are pending.

  30. If we knew the U.S. TREASURY was giving away our money for free, we would all have joined the party. Shit…except for Lee Farkas who only went to prison for helping the poor under the guise of mortgage fraud and Bernie Madoff who made CHASE look like the crooks that they truly are, it pays better to be a thief in the U.S.A of Russia.

    Make goombas with a Politician or a few and help sell AGENDA 21 and crony capitalism as free market capitalism and you too can become Mark Cuban rich or you can have fun managing a bankster hedge fund and you to can become a billionaire like Steve Cohen…! It’s good to be a bank fraud salesman…..! FUGGETABOUT the best way to rob a bank is to own one…..just make goombas with some politicians and sell investments in fraud for the banksters. You will be in like Bill Gates and be wiping your ass with the U.S. DOLLAR while helping to burn the U.S. CONSTITUTION all at the same time….! It’s good to be a hedge fund manager in the U.S.A……..they get to use our stolen wealth to become billionaires and party like it’s 1999 everyday of the week doing nothing legal, moral or ethical…!

    It’s Satan’s NEW WORLD ORDER dream come true…!

    Become a satanist and worship the false idols of money, power and greed by screwing everybody and you will be guaranteed a ticket to all the best Hollywood premiers why you can even become an U.N. AMBASSADOR like Angelina and if you tell everyone you let them cut you off your tits to promote Genome investing we will give you all the free children a Satanist want could want for their coven.


  31. Have you ever seen a counterclaim that asked for none other than “what the judge deems fair & just?”

  32. Justine
    You should know they continue with a
    ” pervasive posture of innocent opacity”.
    I cant resist an oppertunity to say thAt line sorry. Keep your guard up justine.

  33. Correct error….file a MOTION TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT….NO GUTS, NO GLORY.

  34. Or file a motion to summary judgement.

  35. Justme….I wouldn’t let them off the hook and let them withdraw their fraudclosure case. Tell the judge you want the case dismissed, a hearing on the matters on the fraud and tell the judge you want monetary compensation and clear title for harm done & permanent harm intended.

  36. Well good luck trying to be a lawyer with a pair of goody two shoes on in this state. It’s all about machine politics around here. In Illinois a good lawyer knows the law and a great lawyer knows the judge.

    They are better off trying to figure out how to fight this for themselves, by themselves.

  37. I had to throw this in here I cannot find a similar question bout this site and it’s worth it if i can get an answer…..Whist fighting F/C pro se, fairly well, being fairly far into it, is it typical for the lender to start sending the homeowner financial analysis forms to reinstate the loan instead of proceed with court? If they know you have “good solid dirt” might this be a sign of a ‘give in’ to stop it from trial? Curious. Either way they are not getting it

  38. Fraud upon the court by the officers of the court is one way you could go back to court and remedy the situation if all other options have been exhausted, but you need a competent lawyer.

  39. Oh, and by the way, they were sent right to the Title Company by the court to sign off their house to these crooks from Chase. They were fraudclosed on and denied due process because they couldn’t afford appropriate legal council. This farce happened in Illinois a so called “judicial state” in (go jump in the) Lake County.

    After the fraudclosure, they were able to scrape together enough money to hire an attorney and try to stop eviction. The attorney they hired asked CHASE “attorney’s” to see all the documents they used to be granted that fc. CHASE attorney’s told them they don’t have to produce any documents one they are granted a fc.

    That is a perfect example of how our tax money, those public utility bill payments & those mortgage payments are going into the pockets of imposters and criminals and is being used to work against WE THE PEOPLE.

  40. True Neil, according to my communication with FDIC as receiver, it has no record of any loans transferred to Chase and cannot produce any such records.
    under the plain terms of the P&A Agreement, JPMC did not become WMB’s successor in interest. Since its closure, the FDIC as receiver has controlled WaMu.” Deutsche Bank v. FDIC, JP Morgan Chase, et al, Case No 1:09-cv-01656, Document 55-1 (Motion to dismiss filed 11/22/2010, p.33).
    On September 26, 2008 WaMu (the “bankruptcy Petition date”), WaMu commenced a voluntary case pursuant to Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the United States bankruptcy Court for the district of Delaware as Case Number 08-12229 (MFW). The automatic stay in WaMu’s chapter 11 cases prohibit any entity, including the FDIC and JP Morgan Chase, from, among other things taking any action to obtain possession of property of the debtor’s estates or to exercise control over such property.
    In December 24, 2008 in a RESPA Fee litigation related to Washington Mutual, in Case No:02-5944 (RRM)(SMG), Federal Insurance Deposit Corporation (FDIC) caused to be filed a 19 page Memorandum of Law in support of FDIC-Receiver’s motion to stay proceedings pending exhaustion of mandatory administrative claims process along with supporting exhibits. Exhibit “B” filed in support contains a copy of the signed Purchase and Assumption Agreement and schedules 2.1, 3.2, 3.5, 3.2(c). this list will not contain any information related to any loans it purportedly acquired.
    According to JP Morgan Chase on September 25, 2008, WaMu was put into federal receivership and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) was named receiver. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of a Purchase and Assumption Agreement (the “PAA”) between the FDIC as receiver of WaMu, and Chase, dated September 25, 2008, Chase acquired certain of the assets including all loans and loan commitments, of WaMu,. As a result, on September 25, 2008, Chase became the owner of the loans and loan commitments of WaMu, including the loan, by operation of law.
    JP Morgan Chase also claims to be a successor in interest in various cases. This assertion is factually wrong and erroneous.
    The purpose of Section 1823(e) is to limit the enforceable obligations of FDIC Receiver to those liabilities and obligations of the failed bank the existence of which was readily discernable by bank examiners prior to the bank’s closure. See Langley v. FDIC, 484 U.S. 86, 91 (1987); E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. FDIC, 32 F.3d 592, 600 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (“The key question is whether [the case concerns] . . . ‘matters that would generally be reflected in the records of ordinary banking transactions.’”) (citation omitted). This prevents counterparties and creditors from alleging the existence of unrecorded agreements imposing obligations upon FDIC Receiver as the failed bank’s successor-in-interest, since FDIC Receiver lacks the institutional history of the bank yet is expected to honor all of its valid obligations. See FDIC v. Great Am. Ins. Co., 607 F.3d 288, 293 (2d Cir. 2010).
    according to JP Morgan Chase, in a case styled United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Case Number 09-CV-01656-RMC, Document 55, styled Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Trustee for the Trustes listed in Exhibit 1-A and 1-B, Plaintiff, vs. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as receiver for Washington Mutual Bank; JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.; and Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corporation, “Under the plain terms of that agreement, JPMC did not become WMB’s successor in interest. Since its closure, the FDIC as receiver has controlled WMB. While JPMC purchased all of the assets of WMB, it assumed only specified liabilities: those that had been reduced to a dollar amount on WMB’s general ledger and subsidiary ledgers and supporting schedules which support the general ledger balances.”
    Further it does not appear that JP Morgan Chase acquired its interest by operation of law. The FDIC was appointed as the Bank’s receiver and 12 U.S.C. 1821 governed the FDIC’s authority. That provision states, in pertinent part: (d) Powers and duties of Corporation as conservator or receiver***(2) General powers: (A) Successor to institution. The Corporation shall, as conservator or receiver, and by operation of law, succeed to-
    (i) All rights, titles, powers, and privileges of the insured depository institution, and of any stockholder, member, accountholder, depositor, officer, or director of such institution with respect to the institution and the assets of the institution with respect to the institution and the assets of the institution; and
    (ii) Title to the books, records, and assets of any previous conservator or other legal custodian of such institution. [12 U.S.C. 1821(d)(2)9A)(i) and (ii) (Emphasis added).]
    The FDIC’s authority to dispose of the Bank’s assets is set forth in 12 U.S.C. 1821(d)(2)(G), which provides: Merger; transfer of assets and liabilities
    (i) In general
    The Corporation may, as conserver or receiver-
    I) merge the insured depository institution with another insured depository institution; or
    II) subject to clause (ii), transfer any asset or liability of the institution in default (including assets and liabilities associated with any trust business) without any approval, assignment, or consent with respect to such transfer.
    (ii)Approval by appropriate Federal banking agency.
    No transfer described in clause (i)(II) may be made to another depository institution (other than a new depository institution or a bridge depository institution established pursuant to subsection (m) or (n) of this section) without the approval of the appropriate Federal banking agency for such institution.
    Consistent with this authority, the FDIC and the defendant JP Morgan Chase entered into a Purchase and Assumption Agreement, pursuant to which defendant purportedly acquired plaintiff’s indebtness. The agreement states that defendant, as the “Assuming Bank,” desires “to purchase substantially all of the assets and assume all deposit and substantially all other liabilities of the Failed Bank[.]” Article III of the agreement, pertaining to the “purchase of assets,” provide, in relevant part:
    3.1 Assets Purchased by Assuming Bank. Subject to Sections 3.5, 3.6 and 4.8, the Assuming Bank hereby purchases from the Receiver, and the Receiver hereby sells, assigns, transfers, conveys, and delivers to the Assuming Bank, all right, title, and interest of the Receiver in and to all of the assets… of the Failed Bank….[T]he Assuming Bank specifically purchases all mortgage servicing rights and obligations of the Failed Bank.
    Reading the agreement in conjunction with the federal statutory provisions, it appears that FDIC as receiver, rather than defendant, acquired the bank’s rights, titles, powers and privileges “by operation of law.” Defendant simply purchased the loans from the FDIC after they were transferred to the FDIC by operation of law.

    This is limited information I am posting right now and there is a lot more that I have researched, used in court and prevailed. I continue to litigate in California and hopefully look forward to continued success in matters related to false claims and assertions being made by JPMorgan Chase in various courts nationwide.
    Good Luck and God Bless us all!

  41. I remember when my sister’s husband went to court for a hearing on Chases fraudclosure on them. Her husband came home from court and told told her there was nothing he could do because Chase was “all lawyered up.”….. if they only knew those lawyers were paid for by all of us, them included and were really attorneys from the U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT. The banks don’t pay for shit.

    So, while my brother in law was left standing before that judge with no attorney because they could not afford appropriate legal council, our tax dollars and stolen mortgage payments are being used to “lawyer up” the crooks from Chase with attorney’s from the U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, paid for by all of us.

  42. Right on Neil.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: