For more information on foreclosure offense, expert witness consultations and foreclosure defense please call 954-495-9867 or 520-405-1688. We offer litigation support in all 50 states to attorneys. We refer new clients without a referral fee or co-counsel fee unless we are retained for litigation support. Bankruptcy lawyers take note: Don’t be too quick admit the loan exists nor that a default occurred and especially don’t admit the loan is secured. FREE INFORMATION, ARTICLES AND FORMS CAN BE FOUND ON LEFT SIDE OF THE BLOG. Consultations available by appointment in person, by Skype and by phone.
————————————
Patrick Giunta, Esq. the lead litigator for the livinglies team has done it again. He filed a lawsuit against Wells Fargo while the trial on a foreclosure was underway. Wells Fargo now faces a loss in the foreclosure where their witness admitted to being unable to explain the chain of ownership, the balance and the reason why Wells Fargo refused to cooperate in the sale of the property that would have paid them in full.
This corroborates my strategy that presumes that the foreclosers don’t want the house or the money. What the banks want is a foreclosure judgment that forces the loan onto an investor who does not even know of the existence of the proceedings. besides it being illegal and unfair, it raises questions of jurisdiction and standing, because the actual source of funds — the investors who in reality own the debt directly — receive no notice of the proceeding — and they think they barred by the terms of the Prospectus and Pooling and Servicing Agreement from even inquiring about the status of the “pool” (which is most likely non-existent except where foreclosure judgments have been entered).
Here Judge Dimitroleas, Federal Judge in the Southern District of Florida, ruled that the Homeowner has rights of action for money damages against dubious claims from “holders”, “servicers” and even “trustees.” Along with other claims, Giunta survived a motion to dismiss the homeowner’s claim for fraudulent misrepresentation — as to the status of the loan, the ownership and the balance.
The fact pattern of this case clearly corroborates the fact that “servicers” are claiming ownership or rights to enforce debts that they don’t own and don’t have any authority to represent the creditor because they are making false claims of securitization. Thus the banks cannot say they actually represent the investors who THOUGHT they were buying mortgage backed securities from a funded trust that was originating and acquiring loans. If they admit the facts in reality they are admitting to committing fraud on the investors, the insurers, the guarantors, and of course the borrowers. The presumption regarding ownership or rights to enforce is directly contrary to the actual facts. And the threshold for rebutting those presumptions is fast falling in Federal and State courts.
Patrick Giunta is located in Broward County Florida.
see Grave – (DE28) – Order on Motion to Dismiss
Filed under: AMGAR, CASES, CORRUPTION, discovery, escrow agent, evidence, expert witness, Fannie MAe, foreclosure, foreclosure defenses, GTC | Honor, investment banking, Investor, MBS TRUSTEE, MODIFICATION, Mortgage, Motions, Pleading, securities fraud, Servicer, Title, TRUST BENEFICIARIES, trustee | Tagged: claims of "servicers", claims of "trustees" of REMIC trusts, claims of ownership of the debt, Federal court, Fraudulent misrepresentation by banks and servicers, Wells Fargo |
[…] Giunta Prevails on Wells Fargo Motion to Dismiss — Federal Court. He filed a lawsuit against Wells Fargo while the trial on a foreclosure was underway. Wells Fargo now faces a loss in the foreclosure where their witness admitted to being unable to explain the chain of ownership, the balance and the reason why Wells Fargo refused to cooperate in the sale of the property that would have paid them in full. Same in pdf. […]
James, this is how:
A servicing agent has standing to prosecute a foreclosure case on behalf of the principal. Mortgage Electronic Registration Service v. Azize, 965 So. 2d 151 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (court held that a party who was not the beneficial owner of a mortgage had standing to foreclose upon the mortgage); Taylor v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co.,
44 So. 3d 618 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (Florida Rules of Civil Procedure allow an action to be prosecuted for someone acting for the real party in interest).
Can someone help me out. Im just trying to figure out how WF can initiate a foreclosure on behalf of a Creditor that no longer exists. Below are the opening statements of the Foreclosure Letter:
Dear Mr. Smith:
Please be advised that this law firm has been retained by Wells Fargo Home Mortgage (“Servicer”) regarding a default in your Deed of Trust/Mortgage Note payable to Mortgage Lenders Network USA, Inc.(“Creditor”) in the original principal amount of $135,000.00 (“Note”). Repayment of the Note is secured by a Deed ofTrust/Mortgage on the referenced property.
neidermeyer,
Could you email me regarding your comment:”then all hell breaks loose for OCWEN posing as WF…”, and/or case info where OCWEN is posing as Wells Fargo???
My email is – mrsdiamond@msn.com
Much Appreciation,
Lisa~
Information for any interested parties: Some optimism from deadbeats New Century in CA and FL….
If memory serves Giunta is originally from New Century claim, Delaware, where the claim was dismissed by Judge Carey.
Others: White just got a vacate order (Bar date issue, New Century) from the appeals Court in Delaware 2014 when Carey again dismissed his claim
Galope got a big win, also from Delaware, the Carey court (New Century). Won in the 9th Circuit court, CA… Article III, bank appealed AND lost! She also has a Libor Case, manipulating interest rates pending. Carey dismissed this one too
Then Cromwell had a small win for payments and misc in her home state….she was also in Delaware, Carey Court with New Century. Carey dismissed her….
I am in the same case with a reconsideration pending, Carey dismissed everything I had….and the paper trail is “rock solid”. When he dismisses again, an appeal is absolute, as we found the affidavit from the bar date evidence, so far the higher courts are not buying Carey opinion….and Carey had a memorandum saying: he did not think New Century “notice was sufficient in 2011”, then reversed in 2013 his opinion, with no intervening law to substantiate it! Actually the affidavit states less notice was given than originally thought.
Anyone in this check it, please.
Deb, we have only gotton 1098s. I stopped filing them with our taxes because they were wrong. Plender was claiming they were paying tax n ins on our behalf, Not True as I personally paid them n have reciepts to prove it. After their failed attempt of forced placed ins this year, they are now claiming abandament. I think they may attempt 1099a this year. I’m not concerned. An Eye for an Eye. Life is Good!
Ms. Wynn, there are no “perverted rulings” if the contract has breaches, errors, set-offs, tortuous conduct, etc., etc., and you know what you’re doing.
This would include not using a foreclosure defense attorney, who makes only stall arguments like “securitization,” “chain of title,” “MERS,” “assignment,” etc.
Rock
That is essentially what we are trying to do. You must show the breach why when where who, you can’t just say it. It’s very complex with road blocks every step of the way and perverted rulings albeit due to concealment if the true material facts, and tricks by the very experienced and ruthless opposition. Make no mistake. ( ironic since we all have made em)
There is nothing in the order that comes anywhere close to what Mr. Garfield claims it says. Moreover, its laughable this is considered a “win,” it surely fails in comparison to what homeowners receive when they attack the mortgage contract.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/homeowners-receiving-multimillion-dollar-awards-155900638.html
Wins are not prevailing, partially, on a motion to dismiss where it’s headed to trial. Wins are when homeowners receive financial compensation or free title, and his happens only, when homeowners attack the contract.
So guys why I have a1099a and no 1099c ( yet) is going to come out in the wash and I’ll keep ya,ll posted. And the numbers are 90k out so let’s talk about the debt shall we.for starters.
Cookie et al
Consider
http://www.loansafe.org/forum/threads/issuance-of-1099-c-still-leaves-debt-collectable.24756/
This is amazingly good stuff… I just need to hang in there til December when I’m expecting a cash infusion … then all hell breaks loose for OCWEN posing as WF…
BOA is Moot. I am not on the note and I can play hardball better than liers, cheaters n thieves. Game Over!
Hint. A greedy attorney stole title to the sellers estate and our estate. Tried to cover it up by signing as poa for trustee n altered trustee deed making it look like a contract for deed from seller estate to us. Fuzzy Stuffs.
Why would her attorney tell her to tell me to have my attorney draw up a trustee agreement for her to sign? The Trustee Agreement is needed to file with the Trustee Deed for us to take ownership n. Pledge as collatoral for the loan.
When I contacted the benificiary/trustee of the sellers estate and asked why the Warranty Deed wasn’t filed, she discovered her deceased parents trust was still open and hired her own attorney as I did. The loan my husband took out was paid to them in cash, as there was NO existing mortgage on the property. So why was title still in trust? Why is there no lien for the mortgage in a lien theory state?
You need to focus on the party who has the Right to file a satisfaction of mortgage.
Here what I am saying as I was beating the “holder in due course” drum when I made my SEC whistleblower claim. I did not want to go it alone but as you can see with yesterday the battle against those who don’t to see success but only failure.
Attorneys are telling people it don’t matter who you pay because you created a debt, so if Joe Blow Bank claims they own your house, simply go along with their claim even if they are not on the Note, and never purchase the debt!
Holder in due course may be smoking gun for these lawsuits. During a motion, the judge brought up holder in due course and in her ruling about producing documents under motion to compel is all about holder in due course.
It a little but different but it all about chain of ownership!