For further information please call 954-495-9867 or 520-405-1688. We provide litigation support in all 50 states.
———————————–
On an upbeat note, we are getting more and more communication from homeowners who have won their cases outright and not subject to confidentiality agreements. Fortunately these happy homeowners have realized that the fight is not yet over but that they are obviously in control of the narrative. A word of caution about the case cited in yesterday’s article where the Judge granted a “free house” to a homeowner. The New Jersey bankruptcy case is potentially persuasive but legal authority that the Judge in your case must obey.
Banks have gone to great lengths in framing the narrative on these mortgages and these foreclosures. Almost everywhere you hear the phrase “free house.” Of course nobody really knows what anyone means by that phrase. “free houses” are a myth, just like the trusts, the assignments and the “holders” of the note and mortgage. Preventing the mortgagee from enforcement does NOT give a free house to anyone, regardless of the circumstances. It is a rare circumstance that the buyer of the new house does not expend thousands of dollars or tens of thousands of dollars or even hundreds of thousands of dollars on the house that they think they now own.
I know thousands perhaps millions put a down payment into a house thinking that their payment was equity they would retrieve when the house was sold or refinanced. A typical case I have witnessed is a home purchased for $500,000 with $100,000 down payment —- 20% of the purchase price based upon appraisals that wildly speculative and untrue.
Then the house gets sold in a short sale for $300,000. If that homeowner had fought the bank and the bank was found not to be the owner of the mortgage or note or debt and the mortgage was found to be unenforceable or even void, did that homeowner get the house for free. $100k down, plus $50k in improvements, furnishings etc. The homeowner is out $150,000 no matter what happens and that is not free. There is no such thing as a free house and there never was. But mortgages and notes are sometimes ab initio (from the start), unenforceable or void and in today’s market most of them fall somewhere in that category.
And there is an area of confusion between property law, bankruptcy law and contract law. Which brings us to the case decided in New Jersey by a bankruptcy court judge. It is the case of Washington versus specialized loan servicing and the Bank of New York Mellon as trustee for the certificate holders of an allegedly asset-backed trust.
This case is far from a cure all that will fix all other foreclosures. I doubt the Judge had jurisdiction to declare the mortgage void. And therein lies a potential problem for the homeowner that won here. The homeowner might lose on appeal or still have a problem even if the bank’s appeal is turned down.
I will point out again that Bank of New York Mellon represents itself as trustee for the certificate holders and old minutes any representation for the trust itself. One might conclude that the trust does not exist and that the certificate holders who obviously are the investors are the real parties in interest as I have repeatedly stated for more than seven years.
And by the way, NJ does not have a homestead exemption, so the debt, which is real and if it can be computed after giving credit for all payments to the creditors from all sources, is still owed and the homestead can still be foreclosed based upon a money judgment. So a free house is just not the right term to describe any of this.
I don’t think the judge realized that the investors were being directly represented by Bank of New York Mellon and that the reference to the bank as a trustee was merely a self-serving statement by the bank in order to block any inquiry into the identity of the certificate holders who were the obvious real parties in interest. In the months and years to come the distinction which I am drawing here will become increasingly important in court rooms across the country.
The bankruptcy judge carefully analyzed the statute of limitations and concluded that there was no way that the loan could be enforced and that therefore the claim in bankruptcy was void. The judge that he didn’t like to give anyone a free house but that was what he had to do in this case in New Jersey.
The foreclosure case in the state court was dismissed for lack of prosecution without prejudice. The effect of that dismissal was one of the things that was in dispute that the bankruptcy judge decided. The bad news is that I am not so sure this decision will be upheld if it is appealed. But even if it is upheld I’m not so sure that the homeowner actually received the free house that the judge expressly said was being given to him by the judges decision. Bankruptcy Judges are known to have an inflated view of their jurisdictional authority. The District Court Judge above him in the same courthouse might have been able to declare the mortgage void, but I doubt if a bankruptcy judge has that authority. But the decision to prevent enforcement of the mortgage in the bankruptcy proceeding and the decision to cause the alleged creditor to be unsecured instead of secured (which is what I have been advocating for 7 years) is probably valid.
The judge decided that both the note and mortgage were unenforceable. He also decided that because they were unenforceable that Bank of New York Mellon did not have a secured claim for purposes of the bankruptcy proceeding. The judge went further than that by stating that the underlying lien is deemed void pursuant to 11 USC 506(a)(1) and (d). So for purposes of that bankruptcy proceeding court made a determination that Bank of New York Mellon did not have secured status. The Court also seemed to accept the agreement of both size that Bank of New York Mellon or a specialized loan servicing had the original note and mortgage.
The Question I have is the same question that Is being asked in many circles today. When all is said and done the mortgage still is present in the county records — it was recorded so it still exists in the county records of the County recorder in the jurisdiction in which the property is located. My question is whether in the absence of a court order stating that the mortgage is void or nullified, and in the absence of the recording of such an order at the county recorders office, will this homeowner be legally correct in assuming that the mortgage will not affect his title and that no payment will be required at the time the homeowner seeks to sell or refinance the property.
It may seem like splitting hairs and maybe It is. But I think there’s a difference between a lien that is in the county records and therefore encumbers the title answer the question of the enforceability of the lean. When you pull up the title chain by hand or by computer, the mortgage will be there. Would you buy that property without getting rid of that mortgage? Would you lend money on that property? In this case the Bankruptcy judge has decided for purposes of the bankruptcy proceeding that the secured status of Bank of New York Mellon did not exist.
I question whether that decision automatically means that the mortgage was in fact nullified or void unless the County recorder accepts the court order for recording and the recorded order is interpreted as nullification unemployed mortgage document. And THAT basically means you need to file a quiet title action, which bring you back to attacking the initial loan transaction ab initio (from the beginning). Unless you can say that the note and mortgage should never have been released from the closing table, much less recorded, I think there is a potential problem lurking in the shadows. The homeowner might be prevented from selling or refinancing the home without the AMGAR program or something like it.
Otherwise what it comes time to sell or refinance the property, the homeowner may find that he still must deal with either paying off somebody claiming to own the mortgage or the homeowner is required to file a quiet title action to resolve the question. Of course the longer the homeowner waits before taking any action to sell or refinance the property, more likely it is that the homeowner will in fact end up with the property unencumbered by the mortgage. My point is that I don’t think that question has been answered and I don’t think that the answer will be consistent across the country.
It is my opinion that nullification of the mortgage as a void instrument that never should’ve been released much less recorded is first required for the Court can consider of cause of action to quiet title in favor of the homeowner and specifically against the encumbrance filed in the county records as a mortgage. I would also Council caution on applying this bankruptcy case to other cases in the State judicial system even in New Jersey.
But I would also say that the distaste of people sitting on the bench for hey results that benefits the homeowner signals bias for which there is no proper foundation. There is no question that these loans, debts, notes, mortgages, assignments and transfers. collection modification and foreclosures are all clouded in obscure schemes created by the banks and not the borrowers. 50 million borrowers did not wake up one morning and meet in some stadium with the idea of defrauding the banks and the federal government and insurers, guarantors and investors. But a handful of Wall Street titans who had become accustomed to their power, did in fact arrogantly pursue a scheme that did defraud borrowers, investors, insurance companies and the U.S. government.
To say that nobody can file a foreclosure is not to say that the debt cannot be enforced. There are causes of action based solely on common law or the note. If a real creditor could step forward showing a real advance of funds, they would probably prevail in at least establishing that the debt is owed from the homeowner and possibly get a money judgment. In states that have little or no homestead exemption the lien can be recorded, attaches the chain of title for the house and can be foreclosed as a judgment lien. But of course that would require the party seeking to enforce the debt to show that they actually advanced the money as a creditor. And THAT is the problem for the banks. If they had that evidence there would be no argument over the enforceability of the alleged loan documents that I call worthless.
They would have produced it long ago if the notes and mortgages were valid documents. They didn’t, they can’t, and that is why Elizabeth Warren is absolutely right in demanding that the principal balance of the debt be corrected downward. And it is stink and no crime for a Judge to apply the law evenly and allow the chips to fall where they may. If that means nobody gets to enforce the mortgage it doesn’t mean the homeowner received a free house.
The debt is due, after all adjustments, and it could be enforced by other means — unless the truth is that the borrowers ARE off the hook because the original debt, upon which all other debts deals rely as their foundation, has already been paid off. Then the homeowner doesn’t owe the money on the original debt and if somebody wants to make a case against the homeowner for recovery of what they actually lost then let them bring that action. Otherwise too bad. If the original debt is paid off through any third party payment (i.e., if the certificate holders have received payment in full directly or indirectly on their investment), then there should be no possibility of a mortgage foreclosure because that is the only debt that is allegedly secured by a mortgage. Other parties who have been lurking in the shadows would have to come into the limelight and allege and prove their case including the allegation that they are losing money as a result of these complex and obscure transactions.
The banks started this and they should suffer the consequences. There is plenty of blame to go around. To have homeowners pay the full price for the bank’s misbehavior, for the servicer’s fraud, and the Wall Street bank’s greedy method of siphoning the life out of our economy is just plain wrong. Even if we want to treat the loan documents as real, the consequences should be spread around and not on banks who are reporting higher and higher profits from aggressive release of reserves that comes from money they stole from investors —- a fact that is now dawning upon securities analysts as they downgraded Wells Fargo and other banks.
Filed under: foreclosure | Tagged: bankruptcy, common law, contract law, Elizabeth Warren, equity, free house, judgment lien, principal balance, property law, unclean hands, Wells Fargo |
@Shadowcat, I am hoping you will contact me “mikekeane@optonline.net”. I have actual evidence to jail actual bankers and I am interested in your insights, should you be willing to look at it- as it is composed of 6 pages or so.
Did anybody see CNN IvoryTower last night on Student loan debt. They F#cked these students and parents pretty hard.
UNITED STATES OF AMERIFRAUD.
http://www.msfraud.org/notice-to-potential-bidders_you-will-be-bidding-on-a-lien-not-a-property_11-14.html
The Notice to Potential Bidders is now included in all Notice of Trustee Sale recordings in California. I’ll bet most foreclosure buyers still think they are bidding on actual property. They aren’t; they are bidding on a debt that the current owner can’t collect on.
When a big powerful collection agency gives up on a debt, they auction it off on the Courthouse steps just as though real property were involved.
It is well known, yet never discussed, that the mortgage-backed securities are backed by nothing at all. The same mortgages were used over and over again. The investors are mostly pension funds which, as a result, are substantially underfunded. The only people who don’t know about this are the pensioners themselves.
Not satisfied with that, many lenders are further engaged in the process of stealing people’s homes. As everyone now knows, fraudclosure victims got little of the tens of billions of dollars from all of those fraudclosure settlements. The agreements themselves were gifts to the big banks and servicers, allowing them to take billions on tax credits for reducing mortgage balances on mortgages they didn’t even own.
I got no money in my settlement agreement with a party I did not sue. Did you get that? An unnamed party to my law suit settled on behalf of several other defendants. But, the new entity sent me a 1099 for nearly half a million dollars. That 1099, along with other provisions of the government settlements, net $1.3 million off of the settlements total obligation without this party ever paying out a dime.
The joke is, I know, that these people have no right to any money I am paying them, and they totally lack the legal ability to foreclose. I’m just waiting for the legal landscape to catch up to what we know.
Within the terms of the government settlements, was the agreement to stop fraudclosing on homes they couldn’t prove their claim to. Pretty much all of them. This in part has led to the term “zombie foreclosure” because the majority of securitized loans have irreparable breaks in the chain of ownership since they were used as collateral in many different pools of made up loans.
Up until the settlements, Fidelity Title subsidiary, Lender Processing Services (LPS), unit DOCX would simply fabricate and forge documents for a fee. Servicers would robosign and falsely notarize them. Then the foreclosure mill law firm, posing as a substituted Trustee by virtue of the paperwork in hand only, recorded them to get a stamp of authenticity.
The banks and major servicers agreed to stop doing it, although most continue simply because there is no deterrent to doing so, or they have created shell companies who do it for them.
Bank of America wound up with a warehouse full of old Countrywide predatory loan files that they could no longer pursue; but that wouldn’t apply to an entity not a signatory to the settlement agreement. So, those boxes of files were sold off to new servicers, many of whom weren’t even in the game until the settlements were agreed to.
These companies (Nationstar, Greenpoint, etc.) were formed, often by former senior executives of now defunct mortgage originators, with the express purpose of coercing as many revenue streams as possible out of boxes of trash, essentially loan origination files, not custodial files.
There are no custodial files and many of the loan origination files were destroyed when street level originators went out of business.
These new entities send letters saying they are the new servicer and they are ready to modify the loan. Why not? If ten people out of 100 agree to send them $2,000 per month on the “Modified” loan, that’s a great business model. They know that there are no legal parties who could lawfully foreclose, and because 96 percent of foreclosures are uncontested, there is almost no obstacle to them threatening or attempting to foreclose.
This is actually a new loan that winds up waiving many of the borrower’s rights going forward. Foreclosing isn’t the primary purpose of these entities, blackmail is. “Start paying me or I will steal your home because I can manufacture the documents needed to do it.”
So, nothing has changed. Despite the billions in settlements and the promise to never do it again, nothing has changed. They are thumbing their noses at the justice system because they know that there will be no consequences. It’s a low risk business plan that converts worthless documents into either revenue streams or valuable real property while everyone looks in the other direction.
If the servicer doesn’t really know who the Trustee is, then who are they sending the payments to? They aren’t sending anything to anyone. It’s all a scam.
To further illustrate, here is an excerpt from a letter I wrote on behalf of a fraudclosure victim to the Vice President of Bank of New York Mellon, Mr. Gavin Tsang, and supposed Trustee for many, many pools of tranched-up loans.
Regardless of the current status of your loan, you should challenge the Trustee. You may have no obligation to continue making your payments. Feel free to use this with appropriate changes.
Dear Mr. Tsang:
Please find enclosed a copy of an Assignment of Deed of Trust purporting to transfer the alleged note to my property to Bank of New York Mellon as Successor Trustee to JP Morgan Chase as Trustee for The Holders of SAMI II Trust 2005-AR8 for value received, by MERS, an entity claiming to be the holder of the Deed of Trust.
I am certain that you will immediately note that there are numerous irregularities that conclusively prove that the Assignment is fabricated, forged, robosigned, falsely notarized, and unlawfully recorded in violation of California Law.
Nonetheless, these fabricated documents are being used to coerce me into taking out a loan with an entity named Nationstar Mortgage.
For months, in numerous correspondences, Nationstar insisted that JP Morgan Chase was the beneficiary of the note referenced in the Assignment and that Chase had retained them to commence foreclosure upon the property referenced in the assignment of Deed of Trust.
They advised me to address any questions to Chase.
On July 21, 2014, JP Morgan Chase wrote, “In response to your inquiry, we have determined that CTX Mortgage is servicing your loan. We have no record of any mortgage loans for you.”
Upon providing Nationstar Mortgage with the written statement from Chase, they now insist that you are the one who initiated the foreclosure. They imply, but do not come right out and say, that you sent them the Note so that they could proceed.
But, there is no evidence that MERS, you, or anyone other than CTX ever possessed the note.
Consider the facts.
Fact: The SAMI II trust is a REMIC trust formed in 2006 under the laws of New York State and governed by a Pooling and Servicing Agreement.
Fact: The Pooling and Servicing Agreement clearly requires the original Mortgage Note with all applicable riders, bearing all intervening endorsements showing a complete chain of endorsement from the originator to the last endorsee, endorsed “Pay to the order of _____________, without recourse” and signed in the name of the last endorsee forwarded to the Trustee within 90 days of the closing of the trust.
If we believe the forged Assignment, that requirement of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement was not met.
Fact: The assignment of Deed of Trust, transferring the Note with it for valuable consideration was, according to the four corners of the document, executed on September 27, 2011, by Alice Rowe.
Fact: As Trustee for the Holders of SAMI II Trust 2005-AR8, Mortgage Pass Through Certificates, you could not have, nor would you have, accepted that late transfer because applicable law governing the agreement, EPTL 7-2.4, specifically prohibits such transfers as ultra vires acts that are void ab intio.
Fact: If you received and accepted the Note in 2011, you would have tax filing requirements and would have needed to disclose this transfer on the Trust’s Federal REMIC annual tax return, Form 1066, Schedule J, Part III, which shows the Trust’s taxable mortgage loan contributions after the startup or closing date for each taxable year.
Fact: That would have cost investors substantial tax penalties.
Fact: The so called endorsements of the Note are also forged and are ineffective in that they are not on the original Note but what appears to be a separate sheet of paper with three rubber stamps.
Fact: The undated endorsement of the Note, if that is the Note, by CTX employee, Danita Ford, is a forgery since Danita Ford left CTX Mortgage more than five years before the loan was even originated. This fact alone unavoidably creates the impression of willful deceit since you or your agents are the party proffering this dubious document as a tenuous link to collect an alleged debt.
Unavoidably, these circumstances create several questions as to whether or not I am attempting to modify my loan with an entity that has any legal authority to actually do so and they are fabricating documents to hold over me the threat of foreclosure if I do not agree to a new loan with them.
Where was the Note from the closing of the loan until you received it from Alice Rowe sometime in late September or early November of 2011? It had to be somewhere other than the Trust. MERS didn’t have it, they are nothing but a member accessed data-base with no custodial operations.
California has no requirement that the Assignment of the Deed of Trust be recorded so why would Nationstar record it?
Because, according to the chain of title, excluding the fabricated 2011 void assignment, Bank of New York has no link to the transaction and CTX remains the beneficiary under the Deed of Trust and the only party with whom I could negotiate a modification.
CTX is the last known party to actually have possession of the Note and Trust Deed.
Either the loan was placed in the trust or it wasn’t. The production of Form 1066 establishes the truth, one way or the other.
If you are not participating in this obvious fraud, you are involved by implication. They have no legal authority and are using you to facilitate interstate criminal activity. If you have the note, it should be reconveyed to me since, as you know, it has already been satisfied.
Please advise Nationstar and their accomplices, Sage Point, to withdraw and cause to be rescinded all forged documents creating a cloud on my title.
And for those of you considering bidding on a foreclosed property, take note of the title of the article and the title to the property….very closely. The scams continue.
This country has been here before.
Google the “Greenback”. Greenbacks are still available in the public treasury, although their numbers have been considerably depleted.
By any stretch, the international banking cartel has destroyed itself through its consistently fraudulent behavior.
Of course, the terror emanates from the fact they used the American Dollar as their vehicle for mass destruction.
Or, perhaps more to the point, they used their version of the American Dollar, for it is clearly stamped across the top, “Federal Reserve Note”.
Now that we know they have bankrupted themselves, we should, as a nation, repudiate them and their possession of our treasury bonds as their illegal behavior is their sole consistent trait even as it has been concealed for the past 100 years.
The Greenback is neither owned, nor operated by the international banking cartel; it is instead the province of “We The People”.
The shortfall to “Notional Derivatives”, the world-over, should those “short-sale” bets fail to pan out (should homeowners fight), is 680 Trillion Dollars.
Our identities have been stolen in order for the fraud to be placed as “short-sale” bets against our performance on loans we all know have been paid already, any number of times.
Repudiate the bankers; repudiate their bogus claims we are indebted to them; repudiate their possession of our currency; restore the “Greenback”; return the central bank to its proper function as a public utility.
CIA Insider Warns: “25-Year Great Depression is About to Strike America
You will want to remember this date May 23, 2015.
According to one of the top minds in the U.S. Intelligence Community, that is when the United States will enter the darkest economic period in our nation’s history.
http://moneymorning.com/ext/articles/rickards/25-year-great-depression.php?iris=262714
Ok since someone has to say war, consider the alternative
a parallel example of what it’s going to take to save our kids
YouTube this – and if it doesn’t stir your ” emotion” nothing will.
UN climate summit poem ” dear matafele peinem”.
This planet earth is the only home we have.
“I’m never eating pork fried rice again – even if the guy is actually Korean.”
That really ought to make a serious dent in their actions. By the way… the US has that ability too. That’s one of the (many) reasons the dollar is out the door, regardless how much the feds manipulate the markets to artificially sustain it. Once Canada, Qatar and Saudi Arabia signed those trade agreement in… Yuan, that was it. Can’t say we were taken by surprise either. Question: which one of those countries will be dumb enough to start WWIII? PCR thinks… we are!
To all… I have no emotion, it never amounts to more than business. I just work hard at my business.
This just in… Russia and China have already breached our electric grid. Many folks say they already have the capacity to wreak havoc and cause billions in damage.
I’m never eating pork fried rice again – even if the guy is actually Korean.
Shadowkitty – not only do i have my own npv – I have my own npv calculator.
You can stop the message by shooting the messenger, just won’t change the results. Sell the damn cabin in NH. Too many trees and clean air up there…lol
Also, I said the smartest guy… not the smartest irish chic!!!
Christine, same on this end (undeliverable). I keep resending them.. but?
HMMM
NPV,
Don’t know about that…
Remember the flack I kept getting for saying out loud what no one wanted to hear and is taking place, regardless? You know… with the BRICS countries, China taking over as world power (they do own 1 in 5 houses in Portugal and 1 in 4 in this country. Don’t have the numbers about Canada and Australia but it’s not that far behind…)
People have to learn that resisting the truth doesn’t make it untrue. And shooting the messenger doesn’t stop the message. Anyway, i did win in Fed Court by doing exactly what i said i would. I have 2 more battles to wager: in state court here and in NH for the damn cabin which no longer pays for itself.
Iwantmynpv,
if you got your NPV, you have my consideration, if not… you’re just another cute face.
*Grins*
I think it takes more than smart or strategy. You need the good judge clued in , period
Npv IQ is one thing emotional intelligence is quite another put both together then your the smartest guy on here 😁
Yes but it’s right regarding accounting
What’s more important to them hello
If that’s wrong it’s all wrong. I have a trustees deed upon sale debt amount 90,000 usd more that’s over and above the debt amount on the 1099a how do you account to 90,000usd let me guess attornry fees? Thing is both documents were issued on the same day.
some news, what we know already :
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/21/fed-too-big-to-jail_n_6201476.html
Christine, I know you have been gone for a spell. Just to bring you up to date… I am still the smartest guy on these boards.
TSMIMITW
Lets add Anon and Jan van Eck along with a few others to that list Christine. Not many come back after being constantly attacked by bloggers or Neil blocked them/us because they/we disagreed with him and didn’t take shfft from other bloggers. I didn’t need case law, I had my own win behind me. You did exactly what I wanted to do and my attorneys wouldn’t allow me to …. take that Bull(y) by both horns and drag it thru the legal system and let it know that Society as a Whole would not tolerate this Criminal Behavior no matter how big they were. Back then small law firms and the homeowner didn’t have the resources to take on a Monster of this size. So we Whacked them at Lack of Standing and left it at that. The way I looked at it was if they didn’t want the payoff for what ever reason, they sure weren’t going to get the house either. I just had to know why they didn’t want payoff and wanted a fc. I didn’t like the answer. I don’t care for the label “The End Game”, but that’s exactly where we stand.
SC,
We’re not the only ones but true, practical help hasn’t been very forthcoming here since the first day I posted, long ago.
Too bad that a lot of very solid pointers offered by Gene, Tnharry, Bob G., Rock and the likes, have been lost in the insanity of disgruntlement and anger we were all thrown into or got pulled into without realizing it at the time. Too bad they got discouraged.
Actually, being kicked out of LL for a while is a good thing. It allows one to refocus on what’s important, what works and what doesn’t and to take a step back from personal attacks and the knee-jerk tit-for-tat we were all conditioned to respond to. Ain’t gonna happen to me again. Not because LL is the best help anyone could ever get (where are the wins? The kind of question one gets kicked for asking) but because too many with a crack at winning come here with big eyes and hope and get misled into making bad moves by those who made them all and can’t come clean and say: “I goofed. I lost. Don’t do what I did: it doesn’t work.”
Foreclosures go on. Consciousness is shifting upward. LL still has no wins. People still need help before it’s too late. Paying for it becomes a luxury. Let’s keep on doing what we can to empower people to take hold of their dreaded, scary paperwork so that they can get legal representation before falling for bad advice. Then, it’s up to them.
I agree Christine and I know you give a lot of time and referrals to not only those in just your state by you come here and cover the country, many owe you much gratitude. I have been doing title abstracts and timelines for duped borrowers who have hired attorneys and need to keep the legal expenses down. Showing a pattern of misbehavior is easy enough to do, it shows intent to deceive.
SC,
You were trained well and so was I. We probably have our parents to thank for it… But, as I recall, you didn’t just open the envelope and tossed the letters in a big cardboard box as many people did, when they didn’t just throw them in the trash for fear of dealing with the unpleasantness of the situation! There was some method in how we kept everything, even if it was odd looking to our families at the time.
Method is what banks/servicers have been using all along to bypass law, regulation and inquiries, and method is what homeowners have lacked. We may not be able to help old cases but we should focus on teaching newbies how to move forward and improve their odds: it may get a lot worse before it gets better.
Compounding bad moves based on still unchartered territories (LL has yet to produce one win on its theories… and pointing it out probably will get me kicked out once more but who’s counting, right?) with a lack of practical info has been the demise of many homeowners.
Then again, there’s only so much we can accomplish…
SC,
Incomplete list. Mine is not on it. And I don’t see yours either. CA is missing a few good ones and so is MA. Barnes and Stopa in FL are missing too. Some states are completely absent as well.
People’s best bet is still to get referrals from the few homeowners who got some result they are happy with. Or to seriously read recent wins posted on Msfraud and Stopforeclosurefraud. The landscape has been changing faster than Andelman’s been able to keep current.
Christine, I packed up my papers and went to the attorney right away and we made the timeline, we sent QWRs , Payoff Demand Letters and Production Requests for accounting, and ordered Title Reports. Each time – the newest flavor produced a new record with polished up figures.
For 30yrs these words ring in my ears from my very dear friend and former real estate and estate attorney>>>>> “Keep Everything In Writing”. I have always and will continue to do that.
http://mandelman.ml-implode.com/trusted-attorneys/
Trusted Attorneys List, State By State.
Best of Wishes to Everyone!
Them Kittens needed a spotter on the balance beam.
Java,
You have no idea how weird everyone’s story is. Every day, two or three people tell me about theirs. Sometimes, it is so convoluted, I don’t even understand what happened. Very few cases are alike. However, the servicers’ M.O. is consistent: they send NODs or past due notices of some sort for a few months, regardless if you keep paying monthly. Then, they entice you into trying to get a mod or they offer a repayment plan that is grossly inadequate to bring you up to date while still sending NODs with incorrect accounting and they still dual track with the same result as 7 years ago. Anything during that scenario can happen, including servicer’s being purchased or having merged, having gone bankrupt or having transferred/conveyed/sold/assigned the loan. The more servicers are involved, the more timelines and QWRs will be needed but it still should be the first step for homeowners to take stock of their situation.
What case law is showing now is that servicers’ M.O. can pretty much be countered by the same starting strategy on the part of homeowners: a) timeline, b) QWR, c) consultation with an attorney, d) decision on a strategy and a goal and… e) action. In some instances, it is possible to correct previous bad moves by getting back on the right track and resuming the above a, b, c, d and e. The longer people wait, however, and the more difficult and stressful it becomes. When the situation grabs you so hard by the head that even your hair hurts, then you really need to step back, regroup, organize and review your paperwork, do the timeline and consult someone asap. No two ways about it.
MCJ,
$12,000 discrepancy is not unheard of when people wasted two or three years trying to deal and negotiate with bad faith servicers. At the time, it was the only thing they could do, trusting that servicers had just made “a mistake”. Nowadays, we know better. Wasting two years won’t help. The minute anyone gets a NOD is the minute a QWR should be sent and the case positioned for an attack.
Unfortunately too, many QWRs were unsuccessful in the sense that, whoever was peddling them, he/she failed to stress how important it was to conclude the litany of requested info with the mandatory “I hereby contest every amount, principal, interest, fee, etc. included in every statement and NOD received to date, pending receipt of a full accounting of my alleged mortgage loan.” Many people sent a QWR but omitted to deny and contest the charges. Those ended up not being considered by the court as they were deemed defective QWRs. There is no excuse today for not doing it right right from the get go.
Yes Christine. I did reach out and I got the feeling in so many words that I was told I was too far gone. So I fight on my own. (Hey it’s cheaper and no one will fight harder…lol)
And I believe my story is weirder than anyone in country !!! As the house in I’m now ,I believe has more issues, than the one I lost. So I will eventually get to see if all the Monday morning QBs here are correct about attorneys. As the next rodeo , I will have an attorney represent. And we will see how great they do , compared to me, as a foolish pro Se. Until then I fight the past Fraudclosure. And prepare for a economic collapse, that makes foreclosures mute !!!
Java,
We haven’t talked in a while. So I don’t know where you are any more or if you’re still barely hanging on while still in the house. Sadly, there are cases that are irremediably lost because trusting people grasped at any straw sent their way by many ignorant or unscrupulous individuals at the expense of common sense and made so many bad moves that they foreclosed on salvaging their cases.
We are 7 solid years into that mess and, still today, no one is teaching people to gather their documents and sort through them first, long before trying to theorize on anything else but the obvious. That’s a pity and it’s cost millions their home. I remember sending you to 2 attorneys and I also remember that you contacted both. Unfortunately, if they told you you were too far gone, I’m afraid they probably know what they’re talking about. I’m terribly sorry if you fell for a lot of the BS spread all over the internet. Hopefully, what I write will help some newbie before he/she falls for it too.
You still have my e-mail, right? You want to shoot me a note to let me know?
Mycookie (KFC)…….it’s never been about me refusing to get an attorney (although as an intelligent human being with hard proof I shouldn’t need one). But first it was not being able to find one that was willing to go against servicers /debt collectors. And now although I have one I would trust. I’m not sure if its way too late to waste time and money …but if I’m told otherwise , I will get the attorney to hire YESTERDAY.
Java, you have to do what’s best for your family. Its just my husband and I now, the kids left the nest a long time ago. They can’t divide us! When someone lies, cheats and steals from my Cookie Jars and My Equity they can count on Hell on Earth to come down on them! If you have to get a 2nd job or sell the shirt on your back- Get an Attorney!
And I will add that there are serious advantages to doing a timeline as a starting point to a defense (or an attack, if someone believes, as I do, that the best defense is a good attack): it forces homeowners to sort and organize their paperwork and it clarifies for them what the issues are and, when they finally get convinced that they need an attorney, they won’t dump in his lap 2 feet of docs, expecting him/her to do the sorting for them.
Organizing and sorting paperwork oftentimes makes the difference between finding representation or fighting alone, with all the pitfalls associated with not understanding procedures.
Yes Christine, that how what started the ball rolling,, a $12,000 discrepancy.
Yes Christine. However, what I don’t understand is, what are the sheep supposed to do. I have the proof. Yet the house is still taken away. So do I/we continue to fight or move on ???
That’s the part of the puzzle I am not understanding. As a fighter , I refuse to give up. But I’m not sure even what the goal/fight is any more.
Java, Christine ( Enraged) and I have encouraged you, Ivent/Stripes and many others for 6yrs to get an attorney. It cost Ivent/Stripes her marriage (God Bless Her), before the Truth hit her like a Rock (as it did me). She’s still got the house, but its a cold lonley place now. Be grateful every day this didn’t cost you a marriage or worse yet, a life. Did you appeal?
Javagold,
What you are saying is what I have consistently been telling people: amounts on NODs never match the amounts on the corresponding monthly mortgage statement. It doesn’t matter if the discrepancy is $20.00 or $2,000: if the amounts are different, the inference is that the accounting is incorrect. That is what my case was based on and, to this day, the servicer has never been able to explain why. That is the reason I was able to prevail. Remarkably, as time passes by and homeowners pile up NODs, the discrepancies appear to increase exponentially. After a year, amounts may differ by thousands of dollars and servicer keep ignoring requests for explanation.
Something as simple as accounting will take anyone farther than any theory on securitization. It is something judges can understand and are perfectly capable of relating to, especially if they, themselves, are paying a mortgage. Anyone can be accused of having skipped a payment, even if it’s not true. Add to that the written proof that you spent two or three unsuccessful years trying to get answers from the servicer and the judge can only start squirming on his bench at the prospect of finding himself in that position.
Most of anything else alluded to on LL is irrelevant, as far as homeowners fighting in court is concerned (with few exceptions). It may give some idea of how widespread the fraud was. It still isn’t relevant to homeowners’ fight. And just for the hell of it, analyzing retrospectively all discrepancies between NODs and mortgage statements on a timeline does not require any expensive combo mortgage analysis peddled by many and is doable by pretty much anyone. it can even become a family project to draw up as many timelines as you have mortgages. That should be the starting point for anyone in financial difficulty with the servicer.
They claimed the wrong amount due on (my) NOD and I DID NOT
over paid!
I FOUGHT THEM ON IT BUT OF COURSE EVENTUALLY LOST EVEN WITH MY PROOF IN BLACK AND WHITE….
BUT YES Sumbutty Owes Me A lot of Money!
FDC/Federal Deposit Corporation Trust, CANCELLED OCT 2014
Who are the depositors?
What was deposited?
You’re Never to Old to Learn!
Ask Questions and Keep Asking Questions!
Oh Look! The Kittens found their Mittens and now they shall go and have Birthday Cake.
Many Blessings to All
Every case is different, consult an attorney in the jurisdiction your property is located.
They claimed the wrong amount due on (my) NOD and I over paid!
Sumbutty Owes Me A lot of Money!
Put them on NOTICE of Notice of your “”right for salvage and surety claims for subrogation.””
Deb, how could I grant transfer and convey a Warranty Deed to a property I’m not on the title to? Duh! And why was I being sued with my husband and not the Turkey Attorney on the Trustee Deed with my Husband as the grantees? And why wasn’t the a Trustee Agreement from the Sellers Estate filed with that TD? Why wasn’t the note filed with the mortgage? I wanted answers and called the Trustee/Beneficiary daughter of the deceased estate(her parents estate). Guess what? She didn’t know what I was talking about and when she found out, she hired her own personal attorney. We agreed she would concede but BAC wanted to be Turkeys! So I lit the FIRE under their Gr” ass!
I couldn’t figure out who was seeking judgement to prevent me from redeeming a property that my name was not on title to, nor was I a borrower on the note. I offered my husband full price for sale to me and requested payoff from the servicer and help from their legal dept in correcting clouds on title. They Blew Me Off! That was their Biggest Mistake because it led me to the Truth.
The Purchase and Sale Agreement.
“”” trustor shown on deed had never elected nor implied or was properly disclosed a willingness to abandon his fee simple rights to the estate””””
Escrow Account? HA!
Keeping your butt parked, maintaining the property, hiring and attorney and Paying the re taxes and ins is a sure fired way to PROVE YOUR POINT!
That and Stating your Claim by giving Notice of your “”right for salvage and surety claims for subrogation.”” and taking back what was stolen from you, >>>> the title to your LIFE estate, the title to your Home and your Identity and Credit.
Oh Look, My 5 Grandkittens have arrived, Shadowcat Out.
The mortgage originated is in fact a”” taxable event”” to the borrower at settlement where we allege you induced him/her to release and transfer his/her title.
Did the plaintiff attorney motion the court for judicial notice that counsel was on his own ?
And representing an IRS “best efforts” claim for alleged abandoned asset?
You’re forcing a controlled sale against a consumer trustor who is entitled to a “”right for salvage and surety claims for subrogation.””
Just want to say thank you to all on here who try – we all try
I’m in gratitude to all, no judgement,no wrong or right it’s a minefield. just grateful.
Behave Cat!
***The lender is neither a mortgage lender nor servicing agent. The lender here is an indentures trustee operating solely in that capacity as securities and investment funds administrator.
***You may be forewarned prior to sale that the ————
“”” trustor shown on deed had never elected nor implied or was properly disclosed a willingness to abandon his fee simple rights to the estate””””
WHEW! I got that cat in the hat now its time for some green eggs n wabbit. We now return you to your regulary scheduled list of excuses why you don’t have an attorney representing you In the jurisdiction the property is located and instead taking non-legal advise given on LL. . . . . . . . Live Love Learn and Laugh!
NO TRUSTS!
THE FDC TRUST WAS CANCELLED!
“After-acquired-title doctrine” vests the legal title in the property in party B even though buying it before party A had legal title to the property and therefore, had no right to transfer the title. This is an application of the principle of equity to property law.
I want that Warranty Deed Destroyed!! I am NO Criminal!
We are past the 6yr SOL also
But I stopped them long before when I discovered the contract for deed between the deceased sellers living revocable trust as grantors and their attorney and my husband as grantees on the trustee deed.
The deceased sellers trust remained open 2yrs later and a Warranty Deed had not been filed from them to us.
Then there was the Warranty Deed we signed we thought was to us, but in reality my husband and myself granted and warranted the deed to the grantee capital asset funding company. For the longest time my head was spinning because the mortgage said we granted bare legal title irrevocably free of liens and encumbs to MERS.
And then there is the note itself and the terms used there.
Here we thought we were Granted a WD. NOPE!
We Granted One!
The After-Acquired Property Doctrine
13. The “After Acquired Property Doctrine”. Wickopedia says this is a common law doctrine which is applicable when real property or personal property to which party A obtains title only after falsely selling the property to party B for value. The actual sale occurs when party A did not have proper title. An example would be Colonel Sanders pretends to sell “My Old Kentucky Home” to Daniel Boone for $1000 (US) but does not own the property at the time and then uses the money to actually buy that same property from the true owner. The apparent outcome would be that Colonel Sanders and not Daniel Boone would own the property. Because the result of the set of transactions would be an injustice, a legal concept called the “After-acquired-title doctrine” vests the legal title in the property in party B even though buying it before party A had legal title to the property and therefore, had no right to transfer the title. This is an application of the principle of equity to property law.
Fee Simple>>> If a fee simple was conveyed, all restrictions are meaningless and unenforceable. 🙂
Deb, Jan van Eck posted on the prior post. Now he really knows how to whack a mole on a conversion charge after sale.
Maybe he can help.
The lender is neither a mortgage lender nor servicing agent.
The lender here is an indentures trustee operating solely in that capacity as securities and investment funds administrator.
For you?
The estate and its unencumbered equity are used to fund the depositors account.
Deb, I only know and can prove the conversion, origination fraud. Unfortunatly I only know that its another conversion at sale. You would have to talk to an attorney about what to do after the sale. You know I would help you if I could. What I do know is a buyer of an REO faces the same wrath/risks the buyers of your home face. That is exactly why the RE market can not recover. No one trust the banksters! The friggin rabbit holes they dug to cover up their fraud was crime upon crime upon crime, and I am ashamed our gov helped cover it up!
“best efforts” claim for alleged abandoned asset,
unclaimed property escheats to the state
Shadowcat this is not crticism you are clearly passionate about the subject, but anyone can allege anything and you can even be 100 percent in truth but without proof and admissible evidence in proving the points that caused harm at the correct time prescribed by law it’s ” play it again Sam.” And very bloody confusing.
First, your promissory Note is destroyed for economic de-recognition (accrual) purposes and therefore is lost to the lenders claims of a breach by the borrower. Its recognition is by a controversial accounting revision under ASC 310, ASC 320 and ASC 380 using futures derivatives and short title methods, devises and instrumentality. Indeed the note is void whereby the Mortgage “deed” is discounted to create a notional value paid as a futures strike price and securities option Call Date. Next, realize the lenders liens are stripped from title rendering it free of all encumbrances. The estate and its unencumbered equity are used to fund the depositors account. A depositor’s account is held as mark to market consideration transferred into a Delaware LP, “paid in capital account.” The LP Paid in capital account is valued at $250 price per share. Therefore the number of shares is equal to the value of the property appraisal. This allows for the shares to represent title under a purchase and sale agreement for purposes of a 1031 exchange.
Deb, read and attack the Mortgage.
The mortgage your office originated or is holding as a successor is in fact a taxable event to the borrower at settlement where we allege you induced her to release and transfer her title. Now the question begs what are you foreclosing upon and who the party in default is.
Did the plaintiff attorney motion the court for judicial notice that counsel was on his own ?
And representing an IRS “best efforts” claim for alleged abandoned asset?
The Trustor’s contribution of real property maintains it is lawfully siesed of the estate; while providing him an estate for years for tax purposes and to allow that he remain in possession
Anyone hear of this activity showing up on their mortgage accounts (years/months after Fraudclosure)…..accounts by the way, that I would assume should be closed and zeroed out…..investor repayment ????…..internal docs show every quarter transactions still posting …..WTF !!!!!…..seriously WTF !!!!
The lender is neither a mortgage lender nor servicing agent. The lender here is an indentures trustee operating solely in that capacity as securities and investment funds administrator.You may be forewarned prior to sale that the trustor shown on deed had never elected nor implied or was properly disclosed a willingness to abandon his fee simple rights to the estate.
Shadowcat the equity was never there.
Hence the hedging and proprietary trading im not getting your word ” unemcumbered” with regards to the depositors position can you explain this statement you made for me to get this I wish to know what you mean
Take #2
The estate and its unencumbered equity are used to fund the depositors account.
This deposit account was for a bond offering held to the Trustor’s contract for the date it was executed. Hence, the notices could not be filed until the expiration of the Bond roll over term.
RE: The release is the anniversary of the date the security was executed : You’re forcing a controlled sale against a consumer trustor who is entitled to a right for salvage and surety claims for subrogation. This is clearly a claim manufactured to commence the date of expiration of another contract.
Enforce the Contract they are in Breech! Most say File the dam Warranty Deed !
I said …. I want it destroyed!!!!!
FRAUD voids the whole dag gone kit and kaboddle!!
Trust Me this 3rd Party/Homeowner/ Grantor will kick the Dust from Hell to Kingdom Come!!
But they didn’t file the Warranty Deeds at the recorders office after they induced us into signing them at closing. No Trust!! (No recorded Liens? That’s Why!!). Fraud on the Face of the Contract and Fraud in the Inducement! Understand how a non borrowing homeowner became a borrower and creditor?
The estate and its unencumbered equity are used to fund the depositors account.
And shadowcat
The Defunct SERVICER by another name ( debt collector) obtained certain ” assets” ” one being ” servicing rights” they are NOT the successor in interest ( to who in the first place, the wizard of oz.. Right that’s who, the man behind the curtain) . Question is who is who was and why is the servicer declaring itself the LENDER on that 1099a and yet I can’t get a 1099c I asked the IRS what the heck? No response 3 tries – no response- but they did try to garnish my salary and did for two weeks, that 1099a Has MY nAME and property on it. And why is there a trustee PURPORTEDLY representing certificate holders ( pass through) for a certain trust in court fed as a trustee as such and a buyer in STATE court trying to ( well in fact did behind my back) obtain a default judgement by posturing as a buyer ( highest bid at public auction my bum) contradictions all over the place. I’m not even started. I will get this all layed out, the truth infront of the appellate judges and then let them shoot the baby in the face, until then , onward.
However if rules apply to me then they apply to all as far as taxes go – well should by their own rules found on line public info
But do not expect any help from IRS.
That’s fward
Java I’m on that wabbit. Its wabbit season!
Let’s see if they dare confirm their fraud upon the court
Deb Wynn. No 1099 given to anybody, anywhere. This rabbit hole is getting worse and worse to go down.
Max Gardner’s Dirty Dozen Ruels for Ownership of the Mortgage Note–A Baker’s Dozen
http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/max-gardners-dirty-dozen-ruels-for-ownership-of-the-mortgage-note–a-bakers-dozen
The After-Acquired Property Doctrine
13. The “After Acquired Property Doctrine”. Wickopedia says this is a common law doctrine which is applicable when real property or personal property to which party A obtains title only after falsely selling the property to party B for value. The actual sale occurs when party A did not have proper title. An example would be Colonel Sanders pretends to sell “My Old Kentucky Home” to Daniel Boone for $1000 (US) but does not own the property at the time and then uses the money to actually buy that same property from the true owner. The apparent outcome would be that Colonel Sanders and not Daniel Boone would own the property. Because the result of the set of transactions would be an injustice, a legal concept called the “After-acquired-title doctrine” vests the legal title in the property in party B even though buying it before party A had legal title to the property and therefore, had no right to transfer the title. This is an application of the principle of equity to property law.
Oh My Heavens, the Cat is Out of the Bag.
Just Saying that In subsequent events, my title to real property was liquidated into equitable shares valued at four shares per $1000 in property value. My understanding is that title was transferred and sold, leaving me with an installment agreement, reverse purchase and sale or land sale contract. The notice of default is therefore false misleading and materially altered to reflect a variety of claims.
Don’t Fight Them! Join Them! Enforce the Contract!
The mortgage your office originated or is holding as a successor is in fact a taxable event to the borrower at settlement where we allege you induced her to release and transfer her title.
Unless you can say that the note and mortgage should never have been released from the closing table, much less recorded, I think there is a potential problem lurking in the shadows.
They assert that they are representing the current beneficiary’s interest in the subject collateral and defaulted mortgage. The claims they make are purporting to be a lender, are not in line with whom issues the 1099 for income attributed to the post foreclosure.
Right Deb?
Where either party cannot complete performance for which a consumer relied upon in a bargain, the timeing of the cessation of activities liquidation of assets by a receiver would constitute a material breach excusing the performance of the other. This is the standoff taking place amongst participating parties in the mortgage backed securities arena. The mounting interparty and counter party litigation is clearly an indication of the mis-joinder present in so many lawsuits that is never revealed in claims brought by and through plaintiff’s counsel
The question then is how the commercial lender transfers the mortgages into the trust apparatus.
The answer is by economic contribution as paid in capital. Hence the wire received by the settlement agent on (date) is reversed, literally to covert the commercial lines into common stock. This is the reason for the debt forgiveness as no debt can exist other than the obligors – banks to bondholders.
The bond holders debt is charged causing the 1099 C used to create the valuable NOL taken by the tax payer corporation BofA . The property is abandoned under the discharged mortgage and thereafter purchased back by the trustee under the FMS – thus the reason for the 1099 A . The 1099 B is for the diffidence used to calculate the payment made to date by household for the bond issuers date calling the defaulted pass-thru; calculated to the property address.
Don’t Fight Them! Join Them! Enforce the Contract!
Irreparable harm is more likely to succeed if it can be shown the parties willfully breach the agreement, as is or in the alternative for claims, whereby you’re seeking enforcement to avoid loss
Our conclusions are, the lender is not the party named to the promissory note as you think. If this can be shown than concern yourself next with the purpose for filing claims. Are you filing claims for repudiation or enforcement.
Arguments state the note holder is a borrower only to the time the title holder is released from title. The devices and instrumentality use to corrupt the transaction are being applied again as the only means available to resurrect title. If so, and this is the case, enjoin the parties and enforce the transaction as it reads. This is the job for the attorneys. Hence, get the court to enforce the provisions of the transaction with no requirement to consider at what cost to either party.
Herein you will find the prayer for enforcement a far greater cost to the opposition. Consider where they now must stumble for a whole new itinerary of affirmative defenses under a common law courts ability to decide the equitable elements as applied by letter of law.
Incidentally, when I say “our loans”, I merely intend to use that terminology as a point of origin given our understanding We had actually received “loans”, not conversions in fraud based upon fictitious loans predicated upon stolen identities.
I apologize for sounding a broken record.
The prize are the “short sale” pay-offs once the underlying asset (monthly payments) either cease coming in, or, as described by Neil Barofsky, pgs 95-7, in his book “Bailout”, the banks trick owners into default through promised modification predicated upon “dual-tracking”.
Once the 90 day PSA terms are violated, derivatives bets are then realized.
How do We discern what derivatives have been levied against our performance on our loans?
How do We discover the amount those derivatives are worth?
Java
From who and where is the irs form 1099c the
Satisfaction of the debt did they get one. I’m guessing not
The answer is NO and NO. But they sure change their underwear a lot, I mean attornies. TeeHeeHeeHeee
Did the plaintiff attorney motion the court for judicial notice that counsel was on his own ?
And representing an IRS “best efforts” claim for alleged abandoned asset?
Take #3
Take #2
The mortgage your office originated or is holding as a successor is in fact a taxable event to the borrower at settlement where we allege you induced her to release and transfer her title. Now the question begs what are you foreclosing upon and who the party in default is.
re; Unless you can say that the note and mortgage should never have been released from the closing table, much less recorded, I think there is a potential problem lurking in the shadows
re; Otherwise what it comes time to sell or refinance the property, the homeowner may find that he still must deal with either paying off somebody claiming to own the mortgage or the homeowner is required to file a quiet title action to resolve the question. Of course the longer the homeowner waits before taking any action to sell or refinance the property, more likely it is that the homeowner will in fact end up with the property unencumbered by the mortgage.
SCRATCHED!
Dont forget the Banksters got bailed out. So the only Free House goes to the Banksters. And who knows how many times the sold the same loan to multiple investors.
The only “‘FREE HOUSE” or Free goes to the Banksters. Plus dont forget if you file for Bankruptcy you credit is ruined for 10 years.
NEVER AGAIN
Wouldn’t this be a case where a Quiet Title Action could finalized the order?
In hearing of homeowners fraudclosed on…house sold at sheriff sale for more than alleged owed by servicer/fraudcloser…….and 3 years later, their mortgage account still shows as active and mortgage balance owed in full…….how can that be ???…..where is satisfaction of mortgage ???…..where is the hard money from sheriff sale @ 3rd party buyer ???…..