Official Transcript Case Number 40-0918273 CA
Mr. Smith: Your Honor this foreclosure suit was filed over 5 years ago. It is time for judgment to be entered. We have never loaned the Defendant any money, so we can’t be held to have violated any lending laws as the Defendant asserts. We never purchased the loan so we can’t be held for having defrauded anyone as the defendant asserts. We are here on the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Attached to the motion is a nondescript business record showing the payment history of the Defendant, and the date he stopped making payments. The Defendant does not deny he stopped making payments. We left out the trial payments the Defendant made to us for 14 months because we decided not to offer a permanent modification. So we know the Defendant defaulted on the loan. Also attached to the complaint as alleged in the motion is a promissory note that was fabricated in my office, so we know it is the genuine article, contrary to the assertions made by the Defendant. Also attached to the complaint is a mortgage signed by the Defendant. The Defendant does not deny that he signed a note and mortgage at closing. The note and mortgage named the originator of the loan, who also did not loan any money to the Defendant. We have a facially valid allonge, endorsement and assignment that were fabricated in the offices of our vendor in Jacksonville. Each instrument is facially valid, showing a forged signature without authority, two false witnesses and a notary in proper form by virtue of a notary stamp we borrowed from someone in Texas. The signature of the Notary was properly affixed with permission of the Notary in Minnesota by a signatory whose title is that of an official signatory and assistant secretary. Attached to the motion for summary judgment we have an affidavit signed by another assistant secretary of the servicer of the Plaintiff who attests to having familiarity with the records of this loan and affirming that all statements made in the affidavit are true. If Judgment is not entered in favor of the Plaintiff, the entire financial system of this country will collapse because of the many people who bought the loan papers from the originator and still more parties who bought the same loan from the broker dealer who fabricated the deal. It’s a real mess your Honor, and we need to sort it out, starting with the entry of Judgment in this foreclosure. And, oh yes, Your Honor, the servicer presents these facts as agent for the broker dealer who sold bonds to investors who were paid, but they were paid out of their own money that they advanced into the pool. So the amount from the borrower is still due, even thought the proceeds will first go to the servicer, who never made any payments under the servicer advances.
The Court: Mr. Jones?
Mr. Jones: Your Honor, they just admitted to the whole thing being faked, forged, and perjured. You must enter judgment for the Defendant.
Mr. Smith: We never said we faked it. We said we fabricated it. Just because the document was created for the purpose of foreclosing the mortgage doesn’t mean it isn’t valid. It is entitled to a presumption of validity, especially where it has been recorded, which makes it self authenticated even if it is wrong and contains terms, facts and conditions that were plainly untrue.
The Court: I’m afraid he has you there, Mr. Jones, and so I am going to enter Judgment for the Plaintiff, who has been living rent free for 6 years. The creditor, whoever they might be, is entitled to have this house forfeited to recover their damages. No debt should go unpaid simply because of complex transactions on Wall Street. But I am cutting out $29 in inspection fees because they are too high. Judgment is entered for the Plaintiff with a sale date in 90 days, because we have so many of these damn things.
EDITOR’S NOTE: OK I admit it. I made the whole thing up. There is no such case.
Filed under: foreclosure |
Want to correct this, then Mr. Jones must file a complaint against the attorney and judge and go to the media. But my guess is Mr. Jones is too chicken. Outside of taking the law into our own hands their is really nothing we can do.
Rock I hear you on attacking the contract. Meanwhile I recall a fun case with Greentree on a lost note Motion to Amend: HSBC v. Marra. It will prove fun to Pacer this one and see where it ended up. http://mattweidnerlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/HSBC-v-Marra-Lack-of-Standing-and-PSA-Viol.pdf
neid – they’re more likely interrogatories (questions), unless you’re asking them to admit stuff, specific stuff. “Admit you’ve got 3 eyes”.
“Admit you wrote the debt off three years ago”. lay opinions
admissions
requests for production
interrogatories
You need to file a Motion for a supplement of information and additional discoverable/discovery information…check Federal Rules of Civil procedure. In my non-lawyer opinion.
Neidermeyer,
Requests for admission.
Usually, it’s filed at the same time as the other two requests: interrogatories and request for production of documents.
HELP ,
I need a quick answer on something I should know… I need to get answers from a third party that entered evidence against my b-i-l in a debt case where the plaintiffs counsel unexpectedly gave us a big clue in an affidavit on how to win,, a deposition is out of the question ($$$) ,, What do I call a filing to send a set of questions out for response prior to a hearing?
Housing Bubble 2.0 Veers Elegantly Toward Housing Bust 2.
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2014-04-17/housing-bubble-20-veers-elegantly-toward-housing-bust-20
They’re not even trying to blame the weather this time. “Housing affordability is really taking a bite out of the market,” is how Leslie Appleton-Young, chief economist for the California Association of Realtors explained the March home sales fiasco. “We haven’t seen this issue since 2007.”
In Southern California, the median price soared to a six-year high of $400,000, up 15.8% from a year ago, as San Diego-based DataQuick reported. It was the 24th month in a row of price increases, 20 of them in the double digits, maxing out at 28.3%. Ironically, prices per square foot are increasing fasted at the bottom third of the market (up 21%), versus the middle third (up 15.9%) and the top third (up 14.3%).
Ironically, because at the bottom 65%, sales have collapsed.
People, wheezing under the weight of their student loans and struggling in a tough economy where real wages have declined for years, hit a wall. Private equity firms and REITs, prime beneficiaries of the Fed’s nearly free money, gobbled up vacant homes sight unseen in order to convert them into rental housing, and in the process pushed up prices – exactly what the Fed wanted. But now high prices torpedoed their business model, and they’re backing off. So sales of homes priced below $500,000 plunged 26.4%, and sales of homes below $200,000 collapsed by 45.7%.
(continues) see link
poppy – that was another lay opinion (albeit a more learned one).
Poppy, think it was, everyone. Got an answer to my question re asset (note) of a corp which is toast:
“Depends on why the charter was revoked. If it was for non payment of corporate franchise tax to the state of incorporation then corporate status can be restored and operations can continue (which I noted). If it was for another reason, then the shareholders become equity partners in a de facto partnership and unresolved liabilities become personal to the directors whose responsibility to the stockholders would most likely be deemed neglectful. Thus the sale of any assets would most likely require, depends on the state that issued charter, stockholders consent.
Operative question is why revoked. ”
Says to me what I said: if the corp is toast, no “corporate” anything
is available, including an endorsement or assignment, not by a now
non-existant corporation or by the former corporation’s former agent or former poa or nuthin’ (the / any relationship died with the death of the corporation).
You know how I always say the UCC is default law, a last resort to
resolve a conflict when the resolution of the issue isn’t readily available from / in the contract? Well, the issue of who may enforce our notes is in fact defined, enunciated in the note itself. I’ve tried to explain what i think the note says, but Patrick did a pretty good job two years ago:
Patrick, on March 5, 2012 at 12:53 am said:
“….. The terms of the promissory note contract requires a two part test to determine if an entity is the note holder entitled to enforce the instrument. (1-sic) The note must be acquired via transfer and (2 -sic) the entity must be entitled to receive payments made under the note. This requires the plaintiff, or anybody alleging possession of the
genuine note, to recognize the debt transfer by reporting the instrument as a financial asset along with the corresponding liability on its balance sheet ledger…..” (I think this may have been the topic of NG’s broadcast last Thursday, but I missed it and don’t know where I can find it)
The NOTE say who may enforce – not the UCC. If there were an ambiguity, the UCC could be invoked, but there ISN’T:
” I understand that the Lender* may transfer this note. The Lender
or anyone who takes this note by transfer and who is entitled to receive payment under this note is called the “note holder”.
This language does a few things, and imo, THESE things are wholley
dispositive of who may enforce the note:
1) the note defines the person (entity) who may transfer the note, and it isn’t “MERS” (or the servicer or anyone else). It says the LENDER.
2) It limits the enforcement of a note to someone who has taken the
note by ‘transfer’. That does NOT describe a person in mere
possession or a thief. A thief certainly doesn’t qualify and one in possession of a note must demonstrate it has the note as a result of transfer and that he is entitled to payments. Imo, the bankster’s reliance on the default-law UCC Article III ( which I hasten to note MERS decried, anyway, is misplaced and positively errant, because OUR note defines the party who may enforce.
3) It says that the ‘note holder’ will be someone who has taken the
note by TRANSFER and is entitled to payments under the note.
So why is anyone looking at the default-law UCC for who may enforce? There’s no need to because THESE notes clearly define who is entitled to enforce (when not the original payee, and that’s unless you believe the orig payee is not the lender). The ONLY thing necessary if anything, is a look at the UCC for its definition of
‘transfer’. This is found in Article III (applicable as long as article III is itself applicable to these notes):
“UCC § 3-203. TRANSFER OF INSTRUMENT; RIGHTS ACQUIRED BY TRANSFER.
(a) An instrument is transferred when it is **delivered** by a person other than its issuer for the **purpose** of giving to the person **receiving delivery** the right to enforce the instrument.
(b) Transfer of an instrument, whether or not the transfer is a negotiation, vests in the transferee any right of the transferor* to enforce the instrument, including any right as a holder in due course, but the transferee cannot acquire rights of a holder in due course by a transfer, directly or indirectly, from a holder in due course if the
transferee engaged in fraud or illegality affecting the instrument.
jg: “any right of the transferor” – must HAVE a right to transfer a right
(c) Unless otherwise agreed, if an instrument is transferred for VALUE and the transferee does not become a holder because of lack of indorsement by the transferor, the transferee has a specifically enforceable right to the unqualified indorsement of the transferor,
but negotiation of the instrument does NOT occur until the indorsement is made.
(d) If a transferor purports to transfer less than the entire instrument, negotiation of the instrument does not occur. The transferee obtains no rights under this Article and has only the rights of a partial assignee.”
Imo, the language in the note puts a restriction on the class of people who may enforce the note. If the note were otherwise a negotiable instrument, the condition expressed in the note (above) may well preclude the note from being a negotiable instrument; if the person
in possession of a note doesn’t meet those conditions, he has no claim against the borrower, imo. The note not only says it may not and won’t be enforced by a thief, but it does in fact make assurances by putting restrictions on who may enforce, who is the “note holder”: one who has taken by transfer and is entitled to receive payment under the note.
For sh$ts and giggles, I note the UCC has its own def of aggrieved party.
Ҥ 1-201. General Definitions (subject to definitions contained in other articles of the Uniform Commercial Code that apply to particular articles or parts thereof:
2) “Aggrieved party” means a party entitled to pursue a remedy.”
According to the legal dictionary (not Black’s, but Blacks no doubt has one), the definition of “remedy” is:
“The manner in which a right is enforced OR satisfied by a court when some HARM or INJURY, recognized by society as a wrongful act, is inflicted upon an individual.
The law of remedies is concerned with the character and extent of relief to which an individual who has brought a legal action is entitled once the appropriate court procedure has been followed, and the individual has established that he or she has a substantive right that has been infringed by the defendant.”
And just a reminder, an injured party is entitled to only one remedy. He doesn’t get five, or even two.
Non-judicial foreclosure is a legally cognizable remedy recognized in many states, but because of the lack of court oversight, requires strict compliance with contractual terms and statutes (unless one has the misfortune of being in a state where courts don’t enforce strict compliance).
Well, that’s my take. If there are arguments, I’d like to hear them (really).
These are strictly lay opinions – ask a lawyer
U.S. Cities in 20 States “Abandon” the Dollar
By MONEY MORNING STAFF REPORTS
Recently, famed billionaire Warren Buffett warned we should “fear paper money.”
And with the U.S. dollar losing 38.5% of its value since 2002, Buffett’s concerns are unfortunately justified.
However, he probably couldn’t have imagined a secret currency crisis that’s developing very quickly across America now.
36 cities in 20 states have taken aggressive measures to abandon the U.S. dollar.
Did Your City Just “Dump the Dollar?”
Click the infographic above to find out
And more are planning to do so in the near future.
In an exclusive interview with Money Morning, Silicon Valley veteran and Fox Business analyst, Michael Robinson investigated this startling trend.
“These cities and towns are essentially telling people they no longer want them to pay their water and heating bills, or parking tickets, really anything with U.S. dollars anymore,” Robinson said.
However, it’s not just the cities taking steps to protect themselves from the rapid decline of the once mighty dollar.
It’s the citizens themselves.
“Look at Vicco, Kentucky. Everything escalated here so fast, police are refusing to be paid their salaries in U.S. dollars.” Robinson revealed.
“And the mayor and city commission couldn’t do anything to stop it. In fact, they had to pass legislation to allow it.”
And if that wasn’t shocking enough, this crisis is now spreading from local governments into the private sector.
Throughout America, 200,000 businesses have followed the lead of these cities and are now giving their employees the option of being paid their salaries in something other than the U.S. dollar.
But it’s what that “something” is that has many people at the Federal Reserve and on Capitol Hill worried.
More: What is replacing the dollar in these U.S. cities and companies? That was the most shocking part of the Robinson interview. (Click here to watch it).
Michael Robinson is a former board member of one, Silicon Valley venture capital firm and a senior advisor for two others.
He worked alongside Lee Iacocca and Roger Smith, the CEOs of Chrysler and GM, as they led the robotics revolution that saved the U.S. automotive industry in the 1980s.
In the 1990s he was one of five people involved in the early meetings for what would become the $160 billion “cloud computing”phenomenon.
And post-911, as cyber security was becoming a focus for our National Intelligence Community, Robinson was with Dave DeWalt, the CEO of McAfee Inc.
But his Silicon Valley, venture capital background is only one hat of many he’s worn during his career.
A Dangerous Trend For Paper Money
Since 1913 every major currency has lost over 90% of its value. Click here to see what’s replacing “money” all over the world.
Robinson was also a Pulitzer Prize-nominated, investigative journalist, who has been featured in The New York Times, Detroit News, The Wall Street Journal, San Francisco Examiner, and the Kansas City Times.
Robinson made international headlines when he exposed an $80 million scandal at Bank of America that forced the financial giant to shake up its executive ranks.
And his 1990s book, Overdrawn: The Bailout of American Savings, correctly predicted the corrupt dealings of our financial institutions would eventually drive the country to the brink of an economic collapse.
Michael began tracking this trend of U.S. cities taking aggressive measures to abandon the dollar after uncovering and closely examining a transcript of a secret 5-hour meeting that took place in a rural, UK cottage.
Attending this meeting was the head of Google, Eric Schmidt, as well as an advisor to the Secretary of State, a Director of the International Crisis Group, and the Vice President of the Council on Foreign Relations.
They discussed a new form of money they believed was “changing society.”
A Dangerous Trend For Paper Money
Infographic: One chart reveals how this currency crisis could crash the stock market at a moment’s notice.
Click here to view it.
And judging from what is taking place in these American cities and businesses, that is exactly what’s happening.
After conducting the interview, Money Morning Publisher, Mike Ward, mentioned one particular part that startled him the most.
“Michael pulls out a chart that shows how this dollar crisis can cause a massive stock market collapse, we’re talking historic, at any moment. I couldn’t believe my eyes. People need to see this before it’s too late.” Ward said.
Michael Robinson predicts that, as more U.S. cities take action to abandon the dollar, it will become clear this is the most important economic story happening in the world.
“Folks need to understand, this isn’t just happening in America. In China they’re abandoning both U.S. dollars and gold for this new form of currency. In Germany, entire towns have abandoned the EURO. So no money is sacred,” Robinson warned.
Editor’s Note:After initially airing this interview exclusively for their readers, Money Morning has released it to the public, so that people across America can understand exactly what’s happened and what’s coming…
http://moneymorning.com/ext/articles/bitcoin/36-cities-in-20-states-abandon-the-dollar.php?iris=183550&utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=cpm&utm_content=ko1&utm_campaign=bitcoin
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/04/16/breaking-new-emails-show-lois-lerner-contacted-doj-about-prosecuting-tax-exempt-groups-n1825292?utm_source=TopBreakingNewsCarousel&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=BreakingNewsCarousel
BREAKING: New Emails Show Lois Lerner Was in Contact With DOJ About Prosecuting Tax Exempt Groups
“Attack the Contract” the Single Family Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac Uniform Instrument -Uniform Covenants paragraph 20 Sale of Note, Change of Loan Servicer, Notice of Grievance ” Neither Borrower nor Lender may commence, join, or be joined to any judicial action (as either an individual litigant or the member of a class) that arises from the party’s action pursuant to this Security Instrument, until such Borrower or Lender has notified the other party (with such notice given in compliance with the requirements of Section 15) of such alleged breach and afforded the other party hererto a reasonable period after the giving of such notice to take corrective action”.
When a Lender fails to “Record the Note” can the Lender bring judicial action against the Borrower or is it a Breach of Contract?
Respectfully, I disagree with just attacking the contract…it all depends.
Cases are all different, the servicer is not always a “real” servicer, nor is the perfection of a lien irrelevant as in the case of securitization…in my non-lawyer opinion…all ideas here are helpful, depending on what is involved in your particular situation.
I have personally found reading “cases that were lost” much more valuable than the wins…the mistakes are sometimes minimal and very telling, no single path to victory….IMHO
That’s the 1st thing useful you’ve said here today Rock …
Attack the Contract .. Yes Sir!
Christine, I feel you, but I’m afraid crashing the taxing system will do more harm than good to our communities. We just need to light the fire under the IRS carcus and hold them accountable!
Christopher, sorry but these arguments NEVER win, you need to attack the contract.
http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/prnewswire/press_releases/Georgia/2014/01/07/MN41655?ana=prnews
Here is a related video on the jury trial coming soon as referenced in my prior comment on Wetmore: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7msc4zW2yXs
And don’t look now but the hits keep coming: Wetmore v. Northwest Trustee Services is going to a Jury Trial, which I will more than likely video most of. http://stafnetrumbull.com/jury-decide-case-northwest-trustee-services/
Very poor lawyering in Zhong case…good gawd
Also Rock I know for fact that Stafne Law has settled some of these cases to homeowner benefit. But of course Scott is not going to give me specifics….. because ethically HE CAN’T.
But my point to you is that you can’t get me coming and going bro, just sayin’.
@ Rock
No disrespect here, but a 12(b)(6) is a guaranteed appeal.
The case of Zhong…really? Robo signing is a fact…presenting fraudulent paperwork before the court, Zhong lacks authority to enforce a PSA, but is a party to it as if you are claiming to work for the trust and one does not exist…the lie is right there and they are claiming losses that do not exist, Zhong plead REMIC information wrong, wrong, wrong…..court is correct Zhong does not have standing to challenge the REMIC status, but they do have the ability to challenge the existence of it! And splitting the note and deed, yes it can be challenged, but not by laymen…In my non-lawyer opinion….
The homeowners fail much of the time due to procedure (myself included) and not tying the behavior to your loss. I’ve said this a hundred times, you must know your case and how their behavior has injured you…daunting, time consuming and frustrating. But most homeowners do have claims.
Rock that is a big assumption and assumes facts not in the record. Just because it has happened does not mean, ipso facto, that it happens every time. Gentleman’s bet on this one.
I have a question. If an attorney files fake notes and misleads the court can they be disciplined and lose their license to practice law in federal and state court? And if so, how do you find out what company has their malpractice insurance?
That would make Whitey Harrell No… 80,000th?
Support the system or stop feeding it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kKobmkIr8Q&feature=youtu.be
Published on Dec 19, 2013
Jury finds US Citizen INNOCENT after being tried for NOT paying his Taxes!!!
Many readers know that I and others opine that Hultman had no authority to appoint everyone and his cousin as mers’ officers. I’ve linked (long time ago) Hultman’s depo in a case wherein it came out the alleged resolution of the board of directors passed a resolution for a previous corporation with a similar name as the current one, but not for the current one. Attorney Mark Malone (and Abigail Sullivan and other good-guys – my heroes) deposed Hultman or were involved in the case in 2010 and here are Malone’s comments to C Peterson regarding those “appointments”, which would be tweaked even if there were such a corp resolution:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/137423153/Mark-J-Malone-on-MERS-and-Hultman-s-Deposition-in-UKPE-v-BONY-Et-Al
It continues to be the most heinous abomination that Mers, etal aren’t prosecuted for the robo-signing done in MERS’ name.
MERS HAS TO GO
REFUSE TO SIGN A MERS MORTGAGE
Christopher, they’ll just come back and foreclose judicially! Therefore, what did the homeowner win except a large legal bill, and a little more time before they call the movers.
I can give you dozens of cases in Washington State, where the homeowner got booted making useless arguments, like MERS, securitization, etc.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9340894268253428432&q=Zhong+v.+Quality+Loan+Service.+Corp&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47&as_vis=1
Hello Rock: Sale reversal right here caught on KingCast/Mortgage Movies cameras. BoA and ReconTrust got body-slammed. http://mortgagemovies.blogspot.com/2014/01/kingcast-and-mortgage-movies-cameras.html
Friday, January 31, 2014
KingCast and Mortgage Movies Cameras See Banks Take Two Big Hits: Bradburn v. Recon Trust Post Foreclosure and Quality Loan Servicing/CHASE in Pre-foreclosure.
Christopher, let’s see these so-called wins.
http://piggybankblog.com/2012/10/04/neil-garfield-from-livinglies-blog-might-be-one-big-fat-disappointment/
CW, You are Not Alone My Friend!
( Fidelity, LPS, and the ABA’)
I’m Not their BFF anymore either.
Something about me NOT closing for them after they abused my and my Business Associates . Legal Acknowledgements intended use, …
Christopher, Exactly!
Shame on Them!
I Guess the Safegaurd Goons have not learned their Lesson..
They are back for another Dose here in Illinois!
I will send you a follow-up on WW3 ….
Granny Out!
Rock, to hell with you. There are homeowner wins all over the Country and I have shot some of them on video here in Washington you fool. And even if there were not any wins, Attorney Garfield’s analysis still has merit. Just because the Courts typically overlook the law grants you no reason to denigrate Neil. Who the hell are you anyway probably some low-life bank shill.
Meanwhile I just keep documenting real life scenarios like this one: Funny how now that I am not a closing attorney BoA hates me; I thought we were BFFs….
http://mortgagemovies.blogspot.com/2014/04/kingcast-and-mortgage-movies-see-bank.html
Thursday, April 17, 2014
KingCast and Mortgage Movies See Bank of America Finally Give Loan Mod to a Brain-Injured Tiananmen Survivor Jane Mair in Seattle, Washington.
And Mr. Hamilton, have you pondered how a “registry” is a named nominee or a beneficiary of the note and/or deed? Curious question, given a registry is a repository, not a human being, that can actually, actively participate in the transfer of anything!
The deed offices have a clerk, he/she is not a nominee or a beneficiary and actually stamp and look at the paperwork, DAH
So annoying….
“Reforming an archaic legal infrastructure and addressing the mountains of paper that impose burdens on modern mortgage finance is a daunting task”
Modern mortgage finance, you mean multiple sales of notes, right guys? Yeah, that is a lot of paperwork. By “archaic” you mean legal and lawful recorded documents…..oh yes, that would be time consuming and expensive. You’d actually have to pay the townships for the transfers and such. Woe is me! Poor things
U.S. Regulators Examining Departures at Mortgage Registry
By Jesse Hamilton Apr 16, 2014 12:01 AM GMT-0400
As the rest of the housing industry recovers, a little-known firm with a key role in U.S. mortgage finance remains stuck in limbo, wrestling with regulators, lawsuits and the departures of senior employees.
The turbulence feeds uncertainty about the fate of Mortgage Electronic Registrations Systems Inc., or MERS, which documents the ownership and resale of about half of U.S. home loans. A breakdown could force clients such as Fannie Mae (FNMA) and Bank of America Corp. to make costly changes to their loan businesses.
Management hasn’t completed fixes promised in a broad 2011 U.S. settlement designed to stop foreclosure abuses, according to two people briefed on MERS’ operations. Regulators rejected one of the firm’s consultants as unqualified and are examining why four employees hired to help with reforms — including the chief legal officer — recently quit, said the people, speaking on condition of anonymity because the matter is private.
The closely held Reston, Virginia-based firm, a unit of Merscorp Holdings Inc., is also facing scores of lawsuits and state probes that challenge its business model as well as the legality of its filings in hundreds of county courthouses.
“Merscorp Holdings Inc. has an unwavering commitment to work with regulators under the consent order and to take all necessary steps to make the company and our members stronger,” President and Chief Executive Officer Bill Beckmann said in an e-mailed statement. He said the company can’t comment on personnel or its communications with U.S. agencies.
The biggest customers of MERS are also owners: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac (FMCC) and Bank of America. Others with stakes include Wells Fargo Inc., Citigroup Inc. (C) and the Mortgage Bankers Association.
‘Certain Defects’
“If the use of MERS is found not to be valid, we could be obligated to cure certain defects or in some circumstances be subject to additional costs and expenses,” Bank of America reported in a February filing. “Our use of MERS as nominee for the mortgage may also create reputational risks for us.”
Fannie Mae, in its annual financial report filed in February, also noted the potential effects if the lawsuits or regulatory pressures force changes in MERS.
“A large portion of the loans we own or guarantee are registered in MERS’s name and the related servicing rights are tracked in the MERS System,” Fannie Mae’s report said, adding that if the firm couldn’t function in the same way, lenders could be forced to go back to time-consuming and expensive methods of recording land transfers.
Faster Paperwork
U.S. mortgage lending contracted in the first quarter of 2014 to $226 billion, as interest rates rose and credit standards tightened, the lowest amount of lending since 1997, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association. Still, the housing finance industry is far healthier than it was after the 2008 credit crisis, with foreclosures and delinquent loans abating and profits surging at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
The year 1997 also happens to be when the MERS system began operating. It was established by the industry to speed up real-estate paperwork, especially changes in ownership and servicing rights for loans, a process previously done by hand in local jurisdictions. Instead of firms sending representatives to each courthouse, MERS began to stand in for them.
“There’s a kernel of a good idea in there, but it was done so sloppily,” Ira Rheingold, executive director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates, said of the digital registry. “It really became quite a mess.”
Popping Bubble
Investors could buy loans more easily under the electronic MERS system, which helped feed Wall Street’s growing appetite for securitization — the bundling of loans into packages of investments. That, in turn, helped inflate the housing-price bubble that popped in 2008.
MERS quickly found itself caught between the industry that created it and borrowers losing their homes — many of whom hadn’t heard of MERS until they received foreclosure notices. The crush of home seizures exposed flaws in the paper trail and lax control over the massive list of “certifying officers” MERS used to execute documents in its name.
U.S. investigators later accused the banks, mortgage brokers and MERS of failing to properly track loan ownership in many cases, and permitting “robo-signing” of documents that threw the legality of some transactions into doubt.
‘Unacceptable’ Risks
The case led to a $10 billion federal settlement last year in which the loan servicers agreed to send cash to borrowers who’d been subject to flawed foreclosures.
A related probe by federal officials found that MERS exposed its clients to “unacceptable operational, compliance, legal and reputational risks” by having weak oversight of the documentation, improper corporate governance and insufficient legal expertise devoted to the system.
While the company didn’t admit wrongdoing, MERS agreed to an order from its bank members’ regulators — the Federal Reserve, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and the Federal Housing Finance Agency – – to fix faults that let it become a platform for robo-signing. It promised to beef up its staff and revamp practices based on the recommendations of consultants.
At least four of those subsequently hired by MERS — the firm’s chief legal officer, its national litigation coordinator, its corporate counsel and its chief internal auditor — have now departed, the people briefed said. They exited before MERS has been cleared from its settlement obligations, and the federal overseers have been scrutinizing their absence, the people said.
Consultant Rejected
Beckmann, the MERS CEO, said the company couldn’t discuss employee matters. Michael B. Skalka, the chief legal officer and the most senior of those who left, declined to comment.
Friction between MERS and its regulators showed up again recently when the overseers rejected a consulting firm MERS proposed to hire in connection with the settlement. The agencies told MERS the firm wasn’t qualified for the work, the people said. They didn’t name the firm.
Bryan Hubbard, a spokesman for the OCC, which has been supervising how MERS is implementing the terms of the settlement, declined to comment. Andrew Wilson, a Fannie Mae spokesman, declined to comment on MERS.
Beyond Washington, MERS is a target of lawsuits filed by local governments and borrowers. Municipal and county officials accused MERS of cheating them out of filing fees, which was previously a reliable stream of revenue. Other suits have argued it overstepped its authority in foreclosures. MERS has won some victories while other cases remain unresolved. In Pennsylvania, a federal judge has allowed county officials to gather a class-action suit against the firm.
‘Overwhelmingly Positive’
As legal challenges mounted, President and Chief Executive Officer R.K. Arnold retired in 2011 to be replaced by Beckmann, the former chairman of CitiMortgage Inc.
“Merscorp Holdings, Inc. has had an overwhelmingly positive litigation record,” Beckmann said. “The core team of dedicated lawyers who have been handling these matters is still with the company.”
He said that he knows of no mortgages that have been invalidated because of MERS’ involvement. The company still operates in every U.S. county, he said, “meeting a need that no one else does.”
Even if the company survives its legal challenges, the government could someday pull the rug out from under it.
Corker Bill
The Federal Housing Finance Agency, which oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, included in a five-year strategy published in 2012 a plan to develop a new electronic registration system. Denise Dunckel, an FHFA spokeswoman, declined to comment on the plan’s progress.
In 2011, Senator Bob Corker, a Tennessee Republican, introduced a bill that would have created a new registration system he called “MERS 2” to be regulated by the FHFA. A version of the idea has resurfaced in a bipartisan housing finance bill from Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson, a South Dakota Democrat, and Senator Mike Crapo, an Idaho Republican. Their measure calls for studying the establishment of a new national mortgage registry — though it also left room for the states to handle the job.
“Reforming an archaic legal infrastructure and addressing the mountains of paper that impose burdens on modern mortgage finance is a daunting task, but if ever there was a time to consider such an effort, it is now,” Stephanie Heller, deputy general counsel and senior vice president at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, wrote in a paper last year.
Geoff Walsh, an attorney with the National Consumer Law Center in Boston, said he’s not surprised MERS is still laboring under its 2011 settlement.
“They’ll probably stay under the order until something comes up to replace them,” Walsh said. “Hopefully it’ll be a public system.”
To contact the reporter on this story: Jesse Hamilton in Washington at jhamilton33@bloomberg.net
You mean like Get Smart, the shoe phone?
We can be entertained again with another This That and The Other.
a talkshoe
Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, People, Free, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino
Yeah, well the securitization has its place…but the immediate things need to be addressed. e.g. assignments, authority, proper paperwork, DAH….most of the shit the banks provide, 12(b)(6) In my, non-lawyer opinion.
No, you can’t make this ch#^ up
Actually as a matter of Law
This is good, and God, because it was discovered in time,
I asked for a transcript of the hearing ( one to which I was not invited) a judgement followed ( one to which I only recently became aware of) it was purportedly archived and files are managed by an outside company
, I called and guy could not find the transcript I asked if this was unusual his reply was yes very unusual, so as court instructed via recorded message and press the particular button for x y or z, ( note they go to the trouble of saying we will not call you back to let you know we are getting you the transcript ( one just has to hang tight a and live in hopes I guess) I asked for the Audio. About 2 weeks later I got a voicemail stating the disc was ready for pick up, I paid my 25 bucks and got the disc ( drive length n breath of town to get the bugger) I go to open it and- you guessed it, no can do , so I try something else I find I have to put in a certain code per the disc , I enter it, umm nada. So I’m a tad pissed and I stew on it for about a week intending to go get my 25 bucks back and talk with the actual gal that burned the disc at the court, she’s off sick so I call again and leave 2 messages. Nada. So I call the other number ( there’s 2 ) to obtain archive transcripts and I say ” I need the actual written transcript yesterday I’ll pay triple if I have to this is urgent and it’s going to play an important role in my appellate case can you please help me, and the gal did, called me back same day and left voicemail that she was told by… That there was no hearing and so no transcript just a motion to enter judgement, prepared by a foreclosure mill atty , it gets worse or better depending who you are, but there’s a bloke and his family living in my house for years already and they have no right to possession,as a matter of fact.
How did that 5 million dollar award come about, by attacking the mortgage transaction, not making useless arguments involving securitization or any of the other nonsense bandied about on this blog.
Ha, Ha, Ha US Bank…we need more of this!
AWARD OF $6 MILLION TO HOMEOWNER–AGAINST US BANK!
http://www.scribd.com/doc/218656999/US-BANK-LOSER-FRAUD-LOAN-JUDGE-UPHOLDS-A-6-MILLION-DOLLAR-SETTLEMENT-FOR-THE-HOMEOWNER-AND-AGAINST-US-BANK-Mcculley-Final-judgment-4-14-2014
Kathy Utiss,
Thanks for your comment.
You can tell from some of the communication here, there is an agenda, and others are just having discourse and others are seeking remedy.
My opinions are:
The legal system is a school system. The judge a teacher. If you don’t follow the rules and procedures and have proper grammar or wording and know the meaning of words in your document and have all i’s dotted and all t’s crossed and used double spacing with some particular font on some specific length of paper, you are graded to fail the cause and lose the case.
That is not a justice system, and that’s why the remedy is outside of the courts.
The courts have been researched to be corporations owned by someone specific. We would think they are owned by the county but that is also a corporation registered with a secretary of state, so that means the law enforcement of that county are corporate owned.
We think they are of the people, by the people, for the people, when all of them are businesses within businesses and their purpose is to transfer money and property or collect insurance, as when one of their employees kill someone (cop kills someone he’s accused of something that is yet unproven; but they can always find six or twelve people who will listen to the lie and believe it and render verdict against the accused because they think the one that is lying doesn’t lie.)
If a thief wants money, he’ll lie to get it, lie to keep it, and lie to keep from giving it up.
Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Life, Free, Independent, State, People, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino
Kathy,
The largest welfare recipients are the corporations….Billions on Billions. Not to mention the tax exempt status or reduced taxation….
I mean when GM, Ford and Chrysler (Ford-no bailout, kuddos) fly in with their 50 + million dollar Lear jets with a tin cup…really? Get on the coach ticket…if you have private jet, you ain’t broke!
Hey Java,
In NC after 90 days you can submit paperwork to rescind the sale as “incomplete”…under certain circumstances…like the final dispensation of funds and to whom…each state is different!
I find it interesting that people are being negative here in the comments about Neil. This year marks 10 years ago as of Feb this year I started to begin to understand everything about this whole MANUFACTURED CRISIS! For the naysayers get a life! Don’t like what Neil says? Don’t read his posts, and don’t comment then. Here is the reality. I was reading that April 15th, 2016 will be 150 years from the Civil War. Well I’m from a family whose notoriety was well known. Hell they even made my great grandmother World Famous as a Fictional character! However, what better way to hide a fortune than to say someone never existed. But in reality they did! And what if the Civil War was over all the assets we’ve now lost today to a corrupt system?! Designed to rape and pillage any American family generation after generation. Well I have such a story. I’ve decided to call it American GOLD Never GONE! I thank GOD for showing me to let my fingers do the research! What if all the outlaws Jesse James, Billy the Kid, or Presidents Roosevelt, Lincoln, Kennedy were killed off to keep stealing American assets? Did some of them play double roles by a CRIMINAL ELITE? I believe so or else we would of known our TRUE IDENTITIES were stolen by them. As with the whole land patent system we’re supposed to be notified of such ownership to collect our rightful heritages. Heritages they wish to keep from us. And keep others from knowing about. As it would give them competition in voting. As you have to have land patents to become electors in our country. Then they keep anything they did a secret! American Gold Never Gone tells of such a story! A true life mystery surrounding these corrupt thieving killing vultures upon us American citizens! I don’t kid they do murder people. They steal fortunes and stop you from making a fortune all with the endorsement of several judges at any level in any city county state or federal court! Hell the media or attys don’t do much to help anyone or else the crisis could of been stopped in 2008! they don’t want resolve they want us to not exist! They are past being biased! Yea right…want to learn how much they’ve kept from all of us? read my blog I’m an everyday working financial analyst who has a war chest of info surrounding all this corruption! at mortgagefraudclosure.blogspot.com catch up or read up as u to could be the next Jason Bourne living with the TWILIGHT ZONE as your real reality because of them. Then all the employers and agencies who are in on this? OMG! They want people on welfare and food stamps vs making them as responsible as they can be!
I’ve asked BOA ( the servicer) and Fannie Mae (investor) for a breakdown who/what/where of All the monies from sheriff sale Fraudclosure and they both refused to give them to me.
Fannie Mae are a bunch of aholes. They fraudclosed yet there name is nowhere on the paperwork and they refuse to answer any , even the most simple, of questions.
Oh my gosh! Fnma guarantees the certs, but it pays the trust.
THE TRUST. What if there are no loans actually in the trust?! (if there are no loans in the trust, there are no certs to issue or guarantee) Remember that article I cited which said F & F were on the hook for
2 trillion? Well, they can’t have paid 2 trillion, but they’ve paid a LOT.
But wait a minute. On fnma certs, who is the seller to the trust? It just can’t be fnma because fnma wouldn’t guarantee certs on loans it hadn’t itself transferred, right? That or the loans we’re talking about being un-transfered aren’t fnma loans. Anyone know who fnma sells the loans to (someone originates loans. it could be the aggregator, but at any rate, there’s an aggregator, which could be a CW or BofA, who sells the loans to fnma, generally in blocks of X $$.) Then what?
Does anyone know if it’s fnma which sells the loans to the trusts or ???
I mean… it does seem pretty official.
James Smith, you can be entertained and maybe learn how to look in the code and at other agencies for remedy.
One talkshoe private call called This That and The Other had people discussing their experiences and how they started learning and some of the mistakes they made and some of the areas they decided not to pursue.
It is entertainment and educational purposes only.
I know nothing and if I think I know something I know nothing.
I do not give out legal advice because I don’t know legal things.
The last debt owed is to mankind.
The master they serve lost the war against man, according to a rumor, and these minions are so low on the list, they will not be told. they are still doing business as usual stealing from mankind. Their ethereal body is supposedly already delivered to ‘the lake of fire’, their physical body in this density will find out. Surprise!
People maybe should be careful who they give oath and allegiance to unless they don’t care or have full knowledge of who/what they serve.
In my opinion, if they hide the definition of words and their meanings from us, the one’s who taught them that dark art, also hid the real (id)entity behind the names they have given oath and allegiance to.
Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, People, Free, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino
Funny, ian, I don’t remember anyone speaking to her or asking her anything? Just saying
All, I need some assistance and advice. We received a Notice of Foreclosure a few months back. I have still been corresponding with Wells Fargo telling them they have no standing. After several QWR’s and letters to OCC and CFPB, WF responded with more documents than they did in the past. This time they included 2 Allonge Notes which I had never seen before. Keep in mind that they did not respond with the documents even to OCC and CFPB. Then it clicked I went on to the Baltimore More Public Records and there it is a Deed of Trust had been posted there on the 11th of this month. I have not been able to view it yet, but I can imagine what it is. I need some help on which way I should go with this. I need to know what I need to do in order to prove that the documents are Fraudulent. I am sure they are. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. James 443-677-2799, Thanks
Ian,
I did not refer to the brief. I was answering a previous post.
Christine- okay, please explain “blind and stupid” on a point by point basis. In case I’m missing something, what are the problems with the Erobobo amicus brief, pray tell. Thanks.
What I particularly like is the “elementary” way it is explained. As I travel through this the folks getting this done well are the one’s who speak plainly, precisely and decipher the facts in a way that most can understand. The people who try to speak like legal experts and blather about financial concepts even a PhD cannot fathom, lose the body of folks…who in many cases may be a jury. very bad posture and presentation. If you don’t thoroughly understand what you are speaking about, get someone who does or shut up…A recipe for losing, IMHO.
Blind and stupid is much closer to the truth.
Poppy- I read that over the weekend, and it appears to me as if the amicus brief nails it.
What is the judge going to say? Who knows?
Looks like “securitization fail” finally hits the courtroom in all it’s splendor. These two attys explained “incidental beneficiary rights” very well, and the difference along with a great analogy, which even the most brain dead among us can understand. Thanks for posting Erobobo for those here who don’t check stopforeclosurefraud each day
Thanks for the insight…you are the eight world wonder!
“…fabricating more nonsense to feed to your blind followers.” Yep. Blind doesn’t even come close it any longer…
Our brief focuses on four areas that are the subject matter of this appeal: (1) demonstration that mortgagors in Residential Mortgage Backed Securities (“RMBS’) foreclosure actions are indeed third-party beneficiaries of the PSA’s, and thus have standing to object to a trustee’s ultra vires acts; (2) that EPTL §7-2.4 applies to RMBS trusts in New York making ultra vires transfers void, not voidable; (3) a showing that the subject mortgage notes are never transferred to the trusts; and (4) proving that the investor beneficiaries cannot legally ratify a trustee’s ultra vires acts, thus making the acts void, not voidable. We also explain why the foreclosing deal principals claim that they have transferred the notes and mortgages to the trusts long after the closing date, and why the alleged transfers are not subject to the Internal Revenue Code’s 100% prohibited contributions tax. Our brief suggests that the New York judiciary has been “had” by the RMBS foreclosing deal principals and their lawyers for at least the last six years.
See more at: http://stopforeclosurefraud.com/2014/04/12/wells-fargo-vs-erobobo-brief-of-amici-curiae-robert-garrasi-and-james-hunter/
WELLS FARGO vs EROBOBO | BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE ROBERT GARRASI AND JAMES HUNTER – 2014-04-12 13:11:27-04
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., AS TRUSTEE FOR ABFC 2006-OPT3 TRUST, ABFC ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-OPT3, Plaintiff–Appellant, – against – ROTIMI EROBOBO, et al. Defendants–Respondent.
Appellate Department Case No. 2013-6986 BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE ROBERT GARRASI AND JAMES HUNTER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT–RESPONDENT ROTIMI EROBOBO
Interest of Amici Curiae Robert Garrasi and James Hunter request permission […]
Mine too.
There is no such case : But I will copy this, because it fits 90% my case.Thanks Neil
That’s rich. So, we need to pay for our own, making it more and more difficult to franchise the court and get recorded testimony! NICE
finally some useful info from Neil
Oh, in CA there are no ‘transcripts’ as the court reporters were dismissed as a cost cutting measure and the audio recording systems were shut down, even though the filing fees were doubled.
I’m disappointed he left out the bid-rigging which is so prevalent in CA, and the third party payoff from JP Morgan to supplant the judges’ retirement fund.
You know I’ve long been a proponent of going after the bonds for judges…I know, I know, risky business, but someone will take note if enough people do it!
The land records lie…originators did not lend and should NOT be listed as they did. And the “assignments” are laughable. The notary signatures in every state I checked, based off the application to be a notary: initials are fine with the first and middle name, but last names MUST be in full and legible. I have seen signatures with only initials and one in particular: L.A. Llanos, signed: L.l.l that’s a signature?…L. A….middle initial wrong and no last name and this is a CA notary, where the rules are very specific, brought to you from our friends at BOA, N.A. delivered to Core Logic.
NEIL i would love to send to this to every judge certified mail just for them to read it to let them them know that we know what corruption is happen and we know what they are letting this fraud to move forward and if not least they are helping facilitate it
A sense of humor lightens things up a bit. Neil made this all up, but speaks from experience. Everyone ought to mail multiple copies to county judges,
Recorders of deeds, prothonotaries, and county sheriffs offices.
JAVAGOLD NOTE. OK I ADMIT IT. THIS REALLY DID HAPPEN. THERE IS/WAS SUCH A CASE.
SERVICER B assigns mortgage to SERVICER C in January. Servicer A assigns mortgage to SERVICER B in April….
DEFENDANT: Your honor, we all know April does not come before January….So it could not happen as the plaintiff papers state and claim as factual…
JUDGE : it doesn’t matter ……Next !!!!!
ah but this is exactly what happened to me in El Dorado county CA, Neil forgot the true aspect of property law “possession is 9 tenths of the law” and they proceeded knowingly with criminally filed documents in the taking
A little humor here, Neil…too bad the shit isn’t funny, but your take on it 100%…
Mr. Garfield, this is a new low even for you. Since you can’t produce any wins, you’ve now stupid to fabricating more nonsense to feed to your blind followers.