Feeling the heat as an increasing number of judges and regulators piece together the gigantic puzzle called “securitization,” the “sales” of “loans” and bonds continues in jumbo fashion. The numbers are staggering with purported “sales” of hundreds of billions of dollars of loans. So who is foreclosing, who is getting the proceeds of sales, who is getting the money, the title, the insurance, and the rest of the third party payments?
The problem is that the new trusts are not any better in form or substance than the old REMIC trusts, from which most of the loans are coming. They violated property laws, tax laws and probably criminal laws and now they are being given the opportunity to cover it up so that the whole system doesn’t collapse. So the homeowner has been thrown under the bus to pay for the horrendous, negligent and mean spirited acts of Wall Street.
There are reports of giant pools of loans being sold for pennies on the dollar; this gives credence to the position taken by investors, insurers, government agencies, guarantors and others who paid money into the pit called Wall Street. They claimed the acts were fraud, pure and simple, and they claimed the money had been mismanaged. They got their settlements while the homeowners were hung out to dry. They had paid for losses that never happened to the insured bank — who had pirated the ownership of the bonds away from the pension funds and other investors buying “residential mortgage backed securities.” Yet the banks got to keep the money and were given even more money.
According to the 1998 laws passed by Republicans and Democrats these are not securities in the sense that they cannot be subject to SEC regulation. So they are not securities. in fact not one letter of the acronym RMBS reflects the truth about the trusts or the loans.
Their connection to real estate is tenuous and mostly unfounded at best.
As to being mortgage backed, there doesn’t seem to be an enforceable mortgage in the pools that are being repackaged to create yet another layer that investors and homeowners must penetrate in order to show the loan balance is zero and the debt was never secured.
As for residential, the only thing true is that most are eventually destined for the dust heap, as the former residences of people who were fooled into signing papers that locked them into deals in which they were sure to lose or abandon their homestead.
As the outrage dims, Wall Street broker dealers are emboldened to cover up their lies with yet more lies, layers and “laddering.” So many loan pools have been terminated, according to reports I have received from Wall Street, that there are few left, if any. Between Federal Reserve purchases and the repackaging of the pools with or without the knowledge of investors, there is virtually nothing left of the “creditor” for whom foreclosure sales are allegedly being conducted.
And yet judges continue to assume that the borrower is the bad guy instead of realizing that the judiciary is being used as the final nail in the financial coffin of pensioners whose money was advanced for loans that were professionally managed but never given the documentary protection they were promised and who are now facing shortfalls in the near future when pensions become due and payable. Or maybe judges know the borrower is not the bad guy and simply feel that someone must pay for all this and it might just as well be the middle class.
http://www.housingwire.com/articles/29867-credit-suisse-brings-another-jumbo-rmbs-to-market
Filed under: foreclosure |
Max Gardner has a list of items that you should look for which would probably indicate fraud. One of them is “The assignment is executed by a party who claims to be an “attorney in fact” for the signor.” One of my recently created bogus assignments has the exact same thing. Can someone explain to me the significance of this and what would make this fraudulent? jsmith5915@msn.com or 443 677 2799.
woooohoo! petition for rehearing at Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied to banks—-in Helen Galope’s LIBOR case!!
http://www.scribd.com/doc/222985488/Helen-Galope-s-LIBOR-appeal-case-Order-for-Rehearing-Denied-to-the-banks
And this is the very reason why GE America lost an enormously lucrative contract with Algeria, who pays cash for everything and is intent on developing its country, to Alstom Europe. How do I know? I was there to see why and hear about it.
http://www.invertedalchemy.com/
For example grantor/taxpayer owns stock in a closely held business, ABC Inc.
ABC Inc. stock continues to appreciate rapidly. However, ABC Inc. is an S-Corp
and grantor does not want to forego the “S” distribution earnings. Therefore,
grantor decides to sell off a portion of ABC Inc.’s stock to the intentional grantor
trust in exchange for a promissory note. The promissory note will provide for
interest only payments with a balloon payment at the end of 15 years. The note
must carry interest at the Applicable Federal Rate as published by the federal
government. The interest payments will be paid with S corp earnings. In the
meantime, the S corp stock owned by the grantor trust will appreciate outside of
the grantor’s estate. At death, the balance of the note will be included in the
grantor’s estate which will be far less than the value of the appreciated stock of ABC Inc.
http://www.mijs.com/publications/estateplan/IntentionalGrantorTrust.pdf
Gordon Duff of Veterans Today was one of the first people to break the Wanta-Reagan-Mitterand news 18 months ago. Worth looking into and asking the hard questions.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/11/06/roadmap-to-redressing-economic-terrorism-in-america-archival-by-demand/
A Charitable Remainder Trust (“CRT”) can be established during the lifetime of the creator of the trust (the “Grantor”) or upon the death of the Grantor. Transfers to a CRT established during the lifetime of a Grantor will produce an income tax deduction for the Grantor. In addition to the income tax deduction provided to the Grantor who establishes a CRT during the Grantor’s lifetime, the CRT itself is a tax exempt entity and will not recognize income resulting from the sale of long-term capital gain property contributed to the CRT by the Grantor. For example, if the Grantor contributes to a CRT appreciated and unencumbered real estate or marketable securities that the Grantor has owned for a period exceeding one year, and the trustee of the CRT later sells such appreciated long-term capital gain property, no taxable gain will be recognized by the CRT and, therefore, the assets comprising the CRT will not be diminished by the payment of federal income taxes.
A CRT created upon the death of a Grantor, although not providing the Grantor with an income tax deduction, can avoid the imposition of federal income taxes with respect to items of “income in respect of a decedent”(“IRD”), such as funds in an individual retirement account (IRA), a qualified retirement plan accountor an annuity contract.
Once created, a CRT generally distributes, at least annually, a flow of income to one or more individuals for either the life or lifetimes of the individual or individuals, or for a term of years not to exceed twenty years.
Besides the fact that a CRT can be created during the Grantor’s lifetime (inter vivos) or upon the death of the Grantor (testamentary), there are two different types of CRTs. The Charitable Remainder Annuity Trust (“CRAT”) is a CRT that pays a specific amount (a fixed annuity payment) to the non-charitable beneficiary or beneficiaries. The amount of the annuity payment will not change regardless of whether the value of the CRAT increases or decreases over the term of the trust. A Charitable Remainder Unitrust (“CRUT”), however, pays the non-charitable beneficiary a percentage of the value of the CRUT determined at the inception of the CRUT as to the first year of the CRUT. The payment from the CRUT to the non-charitable beneficiary in succeeding years is recomputed based on the percentage of the value of the CRUT at the beginning of each subsequent year of the CRUT. Moreover, unlike a CRAT, the Grantor can make additional contributions to the CRUT from time to time.
Reasons for establishing an inter vivos CRT would include being able to diversify investments without incurring capital gains taxes, converting non-producing or under-producing long-term capital gain property into higher producing investments without incurring capital gains taxes, creating what may be determined to be a non-commercial annuity that thus, may be determined to be exempt from judgments obtained by creditors under current Florida law, and attaining charitable goals by providing a future benefit to one or more charitable organizations. Oftentimes, a client who establishes an inter vivos CRT will use some of the extra cashflow he or she receives from the CRT to purchase a life insurance policy on his or her life in an “estate tax-free” environment, such as an irrevocable life insurance trust. This added strategy avoids a reduction in the wealth that will eventually pass to non-charitable beneficiaries, such as the client’s children and grandchildren.
A client may establish a testamentary CRT to avoid the imposition of income taxes on IRD, such as an IRA or a qualified retirement plan account. By establishing a testamentary CRT and naming the testamentary CRT as the beneficiary of the IRA or qualified retirement plan account, those funds will not be subject to income tax when paid to the testamentary CRT, and a charitable estate tax deduction will be available based on the value of the charitable remainder interest as of date of death of the Grantor.
In drafting an agreement to establish a CRT, there are certain provisions that can provide the Grantor or members of the Grantor’s family with flexibility, such as the power to change the ultimate charitable beneficiary or beneficiaries, and the power to change the individual or entity serving as the trustee of the CRT.
CRTs tend to be most popular during periods of higher interest rates because a high applicable federal mid-term rate results in a greater amount being able to be distributed to non-charitable beneficiaries without a consequential reduction in the amount of the income tax deduction and estate tax deduction that would otherwise be obtainable.
Because a CRT is irrevocable, i.e. it cannot be changed, significant thought should be put into the various provisions before the trust agreement is signed. Through the counsel provided by a knowledgeable and experienced estate planning attorney, a client can be made aware of the various issues that need to be considered in tailoring the trust agreement to fulfill
the objectives of the client.
In conclusion, a CRT is an extremely viable tool to minimize or avoid the imposition of federal income taxes with respect to appreciated capital gain property and items of IRD, as well as to reduce estate taxes. As with all estate planning tools, the CRT has some disadvantages, but those disadvantages are often insignificant when compared to the potential income and estate tax savings.
Charitable Remainder Trusts
We are a small law firm with a strong reputation. We are able to assist clients in the areas of: Wills and Trusts
Estate, Gift and Generation Skipping Transfer Tax Planning
Probate, Trust Administration and Guardianship
Assets Preservation Planning
Formation of Family Limited Partnerships, Limited Liability Companies, Limited Liability Partnerships and Corporations
Trust and Estate Litigation
Establishment of Foundations and Other Charitable Organizations
Super Lawyers
visit superlawyers.com
Donors?
“I need to see Change!”
Doesn’t happen in a vacuum. What are doing exactly…?
We ARE the change you want to see. Not very impressive…
If there is ONE book everyone would benefit from reading in order to understand what really happened, why we are allowing Washington to recreate the cold war and what it will take to resolve the quagmire a handful of individuals have thrown humanity into in the last 25 years, this is this one:
http://wantarevelations.com/wanta-black-swan-white-hat/
Ambassador to Reagan and his closest secret agent, he carried out the collapse of the Soviet Union as planned by Reagan. When Reagan left office, enormous disarmament treaties worldwide were in place and were starting to be implemented. Few people have ever heard of him. Fewer even have heard of the Reagan-Wanta-Mitterand accord.
The money does exist to throw the entire government and Congress out, close the federal reserve, establish individual state banks, restore employment, pay off the trade deficit and wipe out the national debt.
For those who know nothing about Lee Wanta, he gave his first ever interview on 5/4/2014, on Coast2coast. Worth listening to. He has finally decided to come public with the entire story.
The solutions exist and have all be thoroughly thought out. Whether people will have the desire to participate by educating themselves and taking action remains to be seen. All it takes for a revolution is 10% of the population willing to take action. Don’t know if there are that many in this country: probably not, based on the fact that 96% of foreclosures remain unchallenged (not even 5% of people take action to save their own skin! What is the likelihood that they will do anything to assure their own kids’ future?)
My Husband has Many Medals … and Honorable Awards,
A Pension and 401K too.
And had you taken Lesson 101…
The first thing you would have learned about me is duct tape don’t stick when your all steamed up.
Lesson 102 … My Silence can not be Bought. I need to see Change!
Momma Teapot says to baby Teapot …
1st you Boil
2nd you Steam
3rd you Whistle
Didn’t say nuttin about Duct Tape…
Take a hike KC. The last ten posts? Do you ever go without typing even the smallest thought?
Your poor husband must be a vegetable after years of hearing your brain drooling. Poor thing. He deserves a medal, and you deserve a good duct taping.
Constructive Fraud ….
Fraud on the Face of the Contract…. (successor liability)
Fraud in the Inducement …..
~~Theft by Conversion~~
~~Theft of Title to the Estate prior to default~~
Some days you just feel like hanging the dirty laundry out to dry.
http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Guest-Speaker-Pages-Info.html
MERS …
“The parties appear to have defined the word [nominee] in much the same way that the blind
men of Indian legend described an elephant — their description depended on which part they
were touching at any given time.”
Its business model makes it impossible to legally foreclose on any mortgaged property
registered within its system — which includes half of the outstanding mortgages in the US.
MERS was a fraud from day one, whose purpose was to evade property recording fees and to
subvert five centuries of property law.
Its chickens have come home to roost.
http://www.myprivateaudio.com/0_-_Excellent_commentary_by_Randal_Wray_-_MERS_IS_DEAD.pdf
Follow the links at the bottom of the page and Enjoy!
Many Blessings to All
For real property held in the trust, the laws of the state in which the property is located govern that property. After you read the trust instrument, you’ll also know what the grantor’s plans are for the trust over time and for the people included in it as beneficiaries.
Ҥ 31B-2.1. Delivery to other persons of instrument of renunciation by the person renouncing.
(a) In this section:
(1) “Beneficiary designation” means an instrument, other than an instrument creating a trust, naming the beneficiary of:
a. An annuity or insurance policy;
b. An account with a designation for payment on death;
c. A security registered in beneficiary form;
d. A pension, profitsharing, retirement, or other employment-related benefit plan;
e. An individual retirement account or retirement annuity; or
f. Any other nonprobate transfer at death.
(2) “Deliver” means to deliver in person or to send, properly addressed, by first-class mail, telephonic facsimile transmission equipment, electronic mail, or third-party commercial carrier, or by any method permitted by G.S. 1A-1, Rule 4.
(b) The failure to deliver a copy of an instrument of renunciation by a method permitted by G.S. 1A-1, Rule 4, or by a method that results in actual receipt tolls any statute of limitations with regard to any right of action for breach of fiduciary duty.
(c) If a fiduciary renounces an interest in property pursuant to G.S. 31B-1(a)(9e), a copy of the instrument of renunciation shall be delivered to each living person whose beneficial interest is affected by the renunciation and to any co-fiduciary who did not join in the renunciation.
(d) In the case of an interest created under the law of intestate succession or an interest created by will, other than an interest in a testamentary trust, a copy of the instrument of renunciation must:
(1) Be delivered to the personal representative of the decedent’s estate; or
(2) If no personal representative is then serving, be filed as an estate matter with a court having jurisdiction to appoint the personal representative.
(e) In the case of a beneficiary renouncing an interest in a testamentary trust, a copy of the instrument of renunciation must:
(1) Be delivered to the trustee then serving;
(2) If no trustee is then serving, be delivered to the personal representative of the decedent’s estate; or
(3) If no personal representative or trustee is then serving, be filed as an estate matter with a court having jurisdiction to enforce the trust.
(f) In the case of a beneficiary renouncing an interest in an inter vivos trust, a copy of the instrument of renunciation must:
(1) Be delivered to the trustee then serving;
(2) Except as provided in subdivision (3) of this subsection, if no trustee is then serving, be filed as an estate matter with a court having jurisdiction to enforce the trust; or
(3) If the renunciation is made before the time the instrument creating the trust becomes irrevocable, be delivered to the settlor of the trust or the transferor of the interest.
(g) In the case of a beneficiary renouncing an interest created by a beneficiary designation made before the time the designation becomes irrevocable, a copy of the instrument of renunciation must be delivered to the person making the beneficiary designation.
G.S. 31B-2.1 Page 2
(h) In the case of a beneficiary renouncing an interest created by a beneficiary designation made after the time the designation becomes irrevocable, a copy of the instrument § 31B-2.1. Delivery to other persons of instrument of renunciation by the person renouncing.
(a) In this section:
(1) “Beneficiary designation” means an instrument, other than an instrument creating a trust, naming the beneficiary of:
a. An annuity or insurance policy;
b. An account with a designation for payment on death;
c. A security registered in beneficiary form;
d. A pension, profitsharing, retirement, or other employment-related benefit plan;
e. An individual retirement account or retirement annuity; or
f. Any other nonprobate transfer at death.
(2) “Deliver” means to deliver in person or to send, properly addressed, by first-class mail, telephonic facsimile transmission equipment, electronic mail, or third-party commercial carrier, or by any method permitted by G.S. 1A-1, Rule 4.
(b) The failure to deliver a copy of an instrument of renunciation by a method permitted by G.S. 1A-1, Rule 4, or by a method that results in actual receipt tolls any statute of limitations with regard to any right of action for breach of fiduciary duty.
(c) If a fiduciary renounces an interest in property pursuant to G.S. 31B-1(a)(9e), a copy of the instrument of renunciation shall be delivered to each living person whose beneficial interest is affected by the renunciation and to any co-fiduciary who did not join in the renunciation.
(d) In the case of an interest created under the law of intestate succession or an interest created by will, other than an interest in a testamentary trust, a copy of the instrument of renunciation must:
(1) Be delivered to the personal representative of the decedent’s estate; or
(2) If no personal representative is then serving, be filed as an estate matter with a court having jurisdiction to appoint the personal representative.
(e) In the case of a beneficiary renouncing an interest in a testamentary trust, a copy of the instrument of renunciation must:
(1) Be delivered to the trustee then serving;
(2) If no trustee is then serving, be delivered to the personal representative of the decedent’s estate; or
(3) If no personal representative or trustee is then serving, be filed as an estate matter with a court having jurisdiction to enforce the trust.
(f) In the case of a beneficiary renouncing an interest in an inter vivos trust, a copy of the instrument of renunciation must:
(1) Be delivered to the trustee then serving;
(2) Except as provided in subdivision (3) of this subsection, if no trustee is then serving, be filed as an estate matter with a court having jurisdiction to enforce the trust; or
(3) If the renunciation is made before the time the instrument creating the trust becomes irrevocable, be delivered to the settlor of the trust or the transferor of the interest.
(g) In the case of a beneficiary renouncing an interest created by a beneficiary designation made before the time the designation becomes irrevocable, a copy of the instrument of renunciation must be delivered to the person making the beneficiary designation.
G.S. 31B-2.1 Page 2
(h) In the case of a beneficiary renouncing an interest created by a beneficiary designation made after the time the designation becomes irrevocable, a copy of the instrument (2009-48, s. 5.)”
“The Estate is created in the Instrument that creates the Trust.”
My Cookie Jar!
Out on the Farm .. We Learn from a young age.
“Never count your Chickens Before the Eggs Hatch”,
Always put some back for a Rainy Day.
Many Blessings to All
Time for the Ballgame followed up by the Lego’s Movie on Big Screen on the Stadium Field.
Take Me To The Ball Game ….
Didn’t sign or agree to anything!
Irrevocably Yours, KC
There once was a Bully Debt Collector who came after me.
No debt I had, onLY property.
My husband now .. he borrowed sumtin from subbody but its unsecured you see …
When you draw the drapes .. you’ll see, a debt collector in a compromising position with your trustee …
Trustee choice to not only fc borrower estate … but on me and my heirs/beneficiaries too.
Trustee choice is not in the best interest of my estate .. you see..
I know that … and he needs permission/admission or signature from me.
BAD TRUSTEE!!!
My Friend is Now our Newest District BK Trustee! Good Man!
RE: ” IRS will wait until people don’t file for a few years then come after you with penalties and interest. So anyone not filing have to know bow to defend the action or they should consider sitting what they didn’t pay aside for the d-day that all kinds of letters end up in your mailbox needing to be responded to with a postmark within 3 days.”
Uh Huh … that path doesn’t work, I was mad in the early 2000s, thought along the lines of Christines thinking.. Its happens Exactly like you said! … Keep the Cash Handy. They do come, when they think you are so far up shit creek without a paddle, there is no possibility of return.
Had to pay my friend … to laugh at me and send me to the accountant.
Cost Me …. penalty and fee.
My friend says … no way to count the last three.
Only that after thee …
wasn’t there … Thank Heavens!
Good Morning Sunshine,
T.U., the audio and all six of his video series are Very Informative,
I have seen one of his conferences previously.
When a party seeks to take an action on my behalf, I like to know what all the facts are before I authorize a trustee or agent or attorney to act for me.
All these years and you didn’t mention you went on the Hunt …
GREAT! BITE’EM!
And I find it very interesting that Gordon Duff’s take isn’t too far off PCR’s. Two solid American-born who don’t mince their words about their country.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/05/02/300349/
And Obama being completely inexperienced and naive (and with his own dark secrets, making him Oh so much easier to control and rein in), he is not today nor was he ever in any position to accomplish anything. He wanted the job for the sheer thrill of it. The exhilaration of public life, power and applauds. Read his book: it’s all spelled out in black on white. Still hubris, whatever form it takes…
I would strongly suggest everyone listen to one recent interview given by Paul Craig Roberts on what is right around the corner…
http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/KWN_DailyWeb/Entries/2014/5/2_Paul_Craig_Roberts_-_U.S._To_Collapse_Just_Like_Rome.html
I agree with the essence of what Christine says – know where your power lies and I agree with what Winston Churchill once said ” the only thing worse than allies, is – no allies”
just contemplating the bigger picture
You know it will be the last straw when IRS don’t follow the tax code
They stipulate having authority to do so ( the uniform application of tax law ) then they are going to have to rewrite it to suit the banks – I think that will be the last straw
We pay taxes for what – definitely not to support the rich getting richer by criminal acts.
Apologies for typos. I hate autocorrect
KC,
Not quite. The guy did a three hour audio at the link upper left of the page is the audio.
He talked about the injustice he suffered even as he knew what was happening and that he was being railroaded. It made him learn the law even though he doesn’t practice nor five legal advice. He had some things to share in bits and pieces that make a great puzzle picture.
Its a Talkshoe call. Talkshoe is a website but the host featured him on a page on her site and linked to the Talkshoe call.
IRS will wait until people don’t file for a few years then come after you with penalties and interest. So anyone not filing have to know bow to defend the action or they should consider sitting what they didn’t pay aside for the d-day that all kinds of letters end up in your mailbox needing to be responded to with a postmark within 3 days.
Trespass Unwanted
In my book, running is the same as desertion.
The rest of us will stay behind, protect the homestead and do what it takes to shut down the war machine in Washington ourselves.
Same Goal …. different approach.
Different outlook, different goals, different game play.
Not joined at the hip with this suicidal country I believed in and no longer do but am stuck in for the time being. Sure as hell connected with the rest of the world. And 37 countries open to me when the shit hits the fan.
They put people in prison for tax evasion everyday, I see page after page of public notices on property tax sales/fc of home. I also see the take over by public health for no water. I see income tax liens filed against the titles where the tax lien exceeds the value.
What you are suggesting is all those who have income taxes deducted by their employers demand they stop.. and if they don’t , picket them, and if that doesn’t work just quit.
Oh Good Heavens!
Wouldn’t the banks and the IRS love that!
And certain starvation of our families.
I see you facing losing your home and facing prison, you can serve a better purpose elsewhere. You and I know that!
Right Idea…Bad Execution Plan!
Pay away. Donate to IRS on a voluntary basis and don’t complain when you get nothing to show for it.
I got better plans for my money. Free country.
I see where you are taking the IRS and War connection.
But this is not the forum for that. Coming here and accusing people who abide by the law of being a Supporter of War is pissing me off!
I’ll write you in Prison if that is the path you choose!
Two Wrongs Don’t make a Right!
“The phone number listed for the “Trust” rings in the office of my “loan servicer”. Yeah, Ian, similar with me. SEC says trust isn’t recorded with them, and the address is the same as that of a shady bank. How odd.
Sorry. I no longer comment on obtuseness. Gotta a real life to live.
Shell games here are the very same shell games abroad. Mucho fluff and deep seated resentment.
Washington is now officially in the business of manufacturing discontent worldwide. Rome wasn’t even half as stupid and reckless as to openly shoot itself in the foot. As someone said: “Whatever “they” have on Obama better be really good for him to act so stupid for so long! Oh, wait a minute… Maybe what “they” have on him is that he really is that stupid!”
To think that I actually voted for him the first time around is… well… pretty humbling.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-02/eu-commissioner-warns-any-sensible-person-should-oppose-further-russia-sanctions
“EU Commissioner Warns “Any ‘Sensible’ Person Should Oppose Further Russia Sanctions”
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 05/02/2014 – 13:21
Obama won’t be happy! “It would harm everybody, the Europeans and the Russians,” warned Olli Rehn, the European Commissioner for Economic Affairs, adding that “any ‘sensible’ European Union citizen should oppose further sanctions on Russia because of the economic cost for Europe.” As Merkel and Obama cozy’d up for discussions this morning, we can only imagine the promises being made if only she would support his crusade (which she clearly indicated she did not want to). Perhaps she should check in with her nation’s CEOs (who have vociferously demanded no more sanctions) and, as Rehn acknowledges, the slowing Russian economy is already having a “negative impact” on Finland and Austria, and “that economic fallout probably will spread to Germany, Poland and the Baltic countries.”
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/names.html
T.U. is this what you are talking about?
Christine, comments?
T.U., “The Plaintiffs Note” yes sir! Nice Link!
Scot, I advise you to seek legal advice in your jurisdiction.
You other two knuckle heads behave! You know the bar .. is closed!
exactly on the money Christine
Guy spend time in jail over IRS issues.
http://www.my private audio(dot)com/Dan-Benham.html
remove the spaces correct the spelling of (dot).
My opinions:
Social Security number ended up being the issue (backbone) of his problems as he saw it.
Seems the social security number is attached to a lot of our woes.
DTCC holds 80% of the notes of the mortgages in this country.
He spoke to someone at DTCC to find out who owned the notes.
Would you guess yes or no that we own our notes?
We’ve been ‘robbed’ and the legal system was used for the theft.
We are the Creators; the Creditors.
We have been distanced from our rights, privileges, immunities, and protections by someone with no standing to bring the suit to displace us.
The remedy is outside the courts.
When they trace the money trail and find fraud in the banks, they need to back up some more and find the fraud in the courts.
Just trace the money trail. Bitcoin is digital, all transactions can be seen, so is all this other stuff. All these court filings and money transfers associated with the true creditors, just pick one and follow the money.
There is no statute of limitations on fraud; giving thanks for that.
Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, People, Free, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino.
Scott/Christine/Charles- “….the trusts have been terminated”. I have stated here before, that at the Congressional hearings regarding the ratings agencies habit of giving AAA ratings to virtually all MBS, the head of Moody’s stated ” we didn’t rate them all, we only rated 43,000 of them”. Plus S&P and Fitch were rating MBS deals also. In January of this year I saw that Fitch had only 1,420 MBS which they were currently assigning a rating to. My question would be ” what happened to the other 70-80 thousand (or more) MBS REMIC Trusts?”. I went on to add that the entity which is affiliated with the Trust in which my “mortgage” resides trades at 6 cents per share on the OTC martlet. The phone number listed for the “Trust” rings in the office of my “loan servicer”.
Scot,
The only way that I found out that my loan was securitized is by the Complaint for Foreclosure that was filed with a note stamped “Pay to the Order of Without Recourse” by such and such National Association Bank regulated by the OCC. The N.A. bank never had a closing at a title company, recorded the mortgage but never recorded the note because the N.A. bank signed it over to “unknown creditor” when an assistant secretary stamped “Pay to the Order of Without Recourse” on the note. Thanks to Neil for the informing article describing the “Hangman’s Noose”. Yes this information was a HARD SLAP IN THE FACE and VERY CRUEL to find out after defending a foreclosure for four years when the “Note” is in front of everyone’s face including my own, but it was not the “Note” that I signed.
I hope the glass is half full now.
I agree with Scot that Neil does not give a blueprint how he get somewhere as he just arrives there. Although He right about the loan not being secured, but it because the loan are not secured is why the Securities are no valid and no trust can foreclose on the properties, because they are not lenders of home mortgages, and have no proof of extending monies to home owners or that they purchase home mortgage loans.
Neil expecting case to be won but the attorneys like Neil are all over the place with different theories instead of presenting the facts that simply the parties claiming a loan due have no right to a payment due.
Its already been established that the title is wrong because in cases the wrong parties without any proof of ownership, have been placed in title. Neil and other cannot understand that in order to lend legally that the lender got to be authorized under banking rule to lend and be regulated. However he out their saying that this trust has before the fact provided the monies for the funding of the loans, so now your off in some rabbit hole trying to get the judge to give you discovery for some alleged moneyman instead of the Note does not have your name endorsed on it and you got no receipt so why are you in court claiming a debt due!
In order to be in court you must have been harmed and without the proof of a contract for debt there can be no claim brought, because the plaintiff cannot show any interest at all. Servicers are not in court having their name inserted on the Notes and assignment of title stating them as the owner when ownership is held by another.
JPMorgan cannot foreclosed as JPMorgan when Fannie or Freddie has purchase the loans, but the two agencies problem is that they are not recorded in the land recording offices as the lien holder. So if there was not a assignment signed and dated at the time of the sale by the seller, there is no home mortgage loan because Fannie and Freddie are not home mortgage lenders. So at best the two have some unsecured loan to the lender because the law does not grant the two agencies to lend as they not license or regulated to do so!
People are losing because the attorney don’t understand but expect the Judge to understand.
Scot,
You must be new here. Not showing how to actually DO the research has been NG’s m.o. all along. Understand that he can’t do that without risking his lucrative useless report peddling…
Neil, another great article with good information. You state that most of the loan pools have been terminated. However you do not state how a homeowner can determine if loan pool the homeowner’s note is allegedly reported to be in has been terminated. In a way this is VERY CRUEL. You tell every homeowner out here that most likely the trust that is foreclosing on them has been terminated but you won’t tell them why or what is most important how to prove your statement. What are the homeowners suppose to do in court. Are they suppose to say your honor I read an article that said most of the loan pools have been terminated. Neil we are not the banks. We cannot go into to court and simply make a statement or file a complaint without facts or evidence. Even when we he homeowners submit hard evidence and facts the courts do not acknowledge the evidence. The court still rules based on presumption. To tell us homeowners that your loan pool most likely has been terminated and not tell us how to prove this is a HARD SLAP IN THE FACE. What is the difference between this and our state AG offices suing the banks and servicers for billions of dollars for illegally foreclosing on their homeowners homes. The states receive Billions of Dollars from the banks and servicers for the illegal actions against the homeowners. The states than say we are doing our job we stood up for the homeowner. We received billions of dollars but you homeowners will not see any of this. In fact you are still going to lose your homes do the the illegal foreclosure activities of the banks and servicers. But we should be happy because the states AGs won. Again another slap in the face. Another example is there is a man dying of thirst and Neil you are holding a glass of water in front of him. You tell the dying man if you drink this glass of water there is a very good chance you will live but you do not give him the glass of water and the man dies. You tell us that most likely most of the loan pools have been terminated but do not tell us how to determine if a loan pool has been terminated. Because of this the homeowner dies/loses their home to foreclosure. I don’t see the difference. Directions to determine if a loan pool has been terminated or not is not legal advise. Neil please don’t tease us anymore.