For further information please call 954-495-9867 or 520-405-1688
==============================
TILA remedies and requirements actually address the “free house” complaint head on: If banks misbehave in material and important ways (as defined by statute and not in the minds of a judge or lawyer) then yes, the homeowner should get a free house. That is what all three branches of the Federal government have said and no re-interpretation of TILA rescission or TILA remedies will be allowed since last week when the Supreme Court unanimously decided that TILA meant what it says. Any Judge or lawyer who thinks otherwise is in fairyland. The fact that a Judge doesn’t “like” the result of a “free house” (as the Judge perceives it) means nothing. The Judge is required to apply the law as decided by the United States Supreme Court.
Practically everyone is asking questions about whether the statute of limitations starts running from the date the documents were signed on the alleged loan or if it could start at a later time. The answer is a grey area, but as pointed out by James Macklin last night on the Neil Garfield show, there is a legal doctrine called equitable tolling that could suspend the start of the running of the statute of limitations for TILA rescission and TILA claims.
“The equitable tolling principles are to be read into every Federal Statute of Limitations unless Congress expressly provides to the contrary in clear and unambiguous language, see: Rotella v. Wood 528, 549, 560-61,120 S. Ct. 1075, 145 L. Ed. 2d 1047(2000). Since TILA does not evidence a contrary Congressional intent, it’s statute of limitations must be read to be subject to equitable tolling, particularly since the Act is to be construed liberally in favor of consumers.”
Basically the doctrine says that the statute starts to run, unless otherwise provided in the statute, when the claimant knew or should have known or most have known of the grounds for, in this case, TILA Rescission or TILA claims. The basis of that is obvious to anyone involved with these fake mortgages and fraudulent foreclosures for 8 years like I have. The very facts that give rise to TILA rescission and other TILA claims, are intentionally withheld by the parties at the fake closing where the borrower signs settlements documents, the note and the mortgage.
The strategy of the banks has been to wait out three years and then pursue foreclosure and when the borrower raises TILA defenses, the answer is that the statute of limitations has run. With the recent unanimous Supreme Court decision that effectively smacked thousands of lawyers and judges in the face for re-interpreting basic law and the specific and express provisions of TILA, this bank strategy should no longer work.
So now if you gave notice of rescission within three years of the date of the fake closing, your mortgage is null and void “by operation of law” and the “lender(s)” are required to give you (a) a satisfaction of mortgage for county records (b) a canceled original note (c) refund all the money you paid at closing for points, fees, costs etc. and (d) refund all the money you ever paid for interest and principal on the loan. Your debt becomes unsecured and there is no requirement for you to offer them any money at all in order to have the TILA rescission (“I hereby rescind my loan”) be effective. If you EVER sent such a notice within the three year period then your mortgage was void by operation of law at that time — unless the “lender(s)” filed a lawsuit (within 20 days of receipt of your notice of rescission) seeking declaratory relief saying your rescission was not based on any mistakes, errors, omissions or misbehavior on their part.
So all those hundreds of thousands of letters sent back to borrowers saying their letter of rescission was not effective were wrong. Dead wrong. And all those foreclosures that happened anyway were wrongful and void. And THAT means that what I said in 2008 is now true — that hundreds of thousands of homeowners who sent notices of rescission still own their homes even though on paper their homes were sold to third parties. The only thing that could interfere with that conclusion would be a state statute that existed at the time of the fraudulent sale that said that you have 1 year or some other length of time to challenge the title.
So now that we know that nearly all the loans were table funded and therefore “predatory per se” (REG Z) the question becomes when did the three year statute of limitations begin to run.
There are two schools of thought on this. The first one is simple, as one caller on the Neil Garfield Show pointed out last night. If the disclosures were intentionally withheld, then even the three day rescission might still be available because the deal never actually closed and because the disclosures were fraudulent.
But in any event the statute would start to run as soon as the “borrower” found out that there were multiple people involved in his fake closing that were never disclosed — all of which undisclosed parties were involved in serving as conduits or aggregators and all of whom were paid an undisclosed amount of money arising out of the “closing.” So it is possible that even though your loan was the subject of a faked closing in 2005, you might still have a right to rescind and should send the notice of rescission since it forced the burden of proof onto the pretender lenders. This is especially important in nonjudicial states where the borrower must sue to prevent foreclosure and there is confusion over the alignment of parties.
Incidentally to drill in the point that this statute has teeth, the “lender” must pay the borrower all money paid including what was paid to third party vendors. The loss falls on the “lender” for misbehaving. If it didn’t bother the US Government (Congress, President and Supreme Court) when it passed TILA that the borrower would get a “free house” why should it bother anyone else?
Filed under: foreclosure | Tagged: AMGAR, BURDEN OF PROOF, disgorge ment of all money by lender, fake closings, free house, mortgage void by operation of law, statute of limitations, TILA Claims, TILA rescission |
Reference TILA, is there any recommended counsel in miami we can speak to?
thank u.
ivanandiris@yahoo.com
Better than the bank or the servicer getting a free house!
Reblogged this on Deadly Clear and commented:
A lot of homeowners never received the extra copy via the lender. So, Peter, how do you squash that version of a free house? Hard to close the doors to the public on that one, huh? [inside Hawaii humor]
JohnGault,
I actually have put together a Damage Analysis that I use on every loan and which encompasses things like you suggest. It took two years to finalize, but it provides for how the Borrower and the Investor is financially damaged when a modification is improperly denied.
It also identifies modification terms that will reduce greatly the chances of borrower re-default..
Alina, who knew (not I)? Good for you – bravo!
Well, gene, kick some serious tail! Something that has cracked me up all along is lenders’ averments in court docs (particularly in bk POC’s) and maybe on the NOD (of course I forget) that they have attempted to mitigate when they have done no such thing.
Have you ever seen this addressed in a case? If so, I’d like to see it.
As part of your case strategy, you might want to add something I just came across. There’s contention on fees awards. That’s not new, but what was new to me was reading that if one makes an offer in compromise which is rejected, while the offer itself isn’t likely admissable, the rejection can later form the basis for a fee award if one prevails in the action. Least that’s what I got. So if it’s so, one might make an offer, it gets rejected – or ignored – and if one does win, there’s some help with the fee award. I got this from Davis v Beling NVSC 53182.
Gene,
Agreed, fact patterns differ from case to case. I also agree that you will find 100s of cases going the other way especially in CA or anywhere in the 9th Cir. That is the reason Jesinoski is so great. Justice Scalia scolded the courts that agree with the 9th like they were errant children.
Thankfully, I am in the 11th Cir. which has a lot of case law that will now be backed up by Jesinoski.
btw, I won my TILA federal lawsuit against the originator. The federal court awarded actual and statutory damages.
@ UKG ,
I give you a gold star… this is how we all win in the end..
JohnGault,
No problem. I usually don’t get deep into this stuff because it is so complex. Well, actually TILA/RESPA is simple compared to the other issue.
The most successful actions now are on Default Servicing of troubled loans. There is good case law coming down from the Appeal Courts about servicer misconduct, especially in CA. This can lead to good modifications, dependent upon the specifics of the case.
BTW, I prefer loan forbearance over principal reductions now. Reductions no longer have the benefit of being exempted from IRS debt forgiveness and income consideration. Forbearance avoids that, and at least with a large majority of my current clients, they will not pay off the loan before they die, so who cares? Maybe their heirs, but if the heirs only care about their inheritance and not their parents, they can take a flying leap………
Got an interesting case today…………servicer foreclosing on Feb 3. FHA loan and the servicer never offered or set them up with the required in person meeting, or failed to get FHA permission to foreclose. Attorney is itching to fight this one……..automatic win in most cases.
Thanks for sharing that info, Gene! I’d have like to have been in court that day you referenced. I hope some one here will benefit from these discussions.
JohnGault,
How to present the rescission argument to get past the Motion to Dismiss is actually case by case specific. There is no one size meets all argument.
1. If you are arguing TILA violations on the Truth in Lending Disclosure, you will have to identify specifically where the errors are and then what it should have been. With APR, you will have to show either the 1.8 or 1/4% understatement of APR. (Overstatements are not rescindable.) Most only allege APR violations but ignore how this occurred.
Some have successfully argued that they did not receive the TILDS, another violation, but most do not even attempt to offer a reason why, and that leads more often than not to dismissal.
If you are arguing problems with understated Finance Charge or Amount Financed, then you need to be just as specific. And you must meet the dollar amount tolerances.
Then you need to offer an argument of why the violations were not discovered before any default occurred. For this, you can argue that you never looked at the paperwork prior to the default, but this opens up the lender to alleging that you did a lack of due diligence, and now are only doing the rescission to avoid foreclosure. Courts usually take a dim view on the homeowner using this argument.
You can argue that you looked at the documents upon receiving them, but you were not knowledgeable enough to understand the process of calculating APR, etc and did not have the software needed. Only at default when you had someone look at the documents, did this become an evident problem. This should meet with more success. (BTW, most attorneys don’t know the proper way to calculate APR or Finance Charge, and even the lender processors and underwriters do not fully understand this. This is why I was called in with the bank litigation.)
2. Right to Cancel documents are the other major area of contention. Two arguments are generally presented.
A person might argue that they did not receive the RTC or else not enough copies. In response, the lender pulls out the RTC acknowledgement signed by borrowers that they received the correct number of copies. Homeowners must then file a rebuttal to this.
I have seen successful rebuttals based upon an argument that the documents were never reviewed until an expert or attorney pulled them out of the borrower package, and the documents were in the original order given to the borrower. The borrower would claim that they never even looked at the documents until the attorney requested them. Some courts have allowed this action.
I have also seen an argument be successful that was based upon the Acknowledgement having both borrowers signature on the document and not a separate Acknowledgement for each borrower. This would then be followed with the claim that each borrower did not receive their own copy.
An interesting side note is that each borrower must receive their own copy of the Truth In Lending Disclosure, but this is where lenders more frequently failed to comply.
Don’t forget that these arguments apply to all parties on the Deed or Mortgage, and not just on the Note.
With the Right to Cancel, dates on the document are always a concern. These arguments generally fall into a couple of arguments; whether the dates were entered and whether they were correct.
Whether the dates were correct or not is an easy argument to make. Just calculate the days, and then you know whether you have an accurate allegation that the court can rule on. Of course, I have seen some courts rule that since this is years after the original 3 day rescission time, the court dismissed the allegation. But this is generally not the case from my perspective.
For the dates not being present, you must look at the jurisdiction. For example, the 9th Circuit requires the dates to be present, but it is either the 4th or 5th Circuit that does not require the dates to be present.
A final thought, in the 4th Circuit, there are cases where you can rescind the loan after the loan was paid off. In the 9th, it is not allowed under TILA, but under state rescission law, it has been allowed. (I was testifying in one case in CA where the broker attorney was being a smart ass. One loan had been paid off with a refinance to a new loan. I had stated the errors in both loans. The attorney made the remark to me that since the first loan was paid off, it could not be rescinded. I replied that this was inaccurate and cited the case under CA law. The judge and both sides looked up startled, and ask me to clarify. I responded and the attorney quickly dismissed me from the stand, not wanting any more surprises from me.
3. As to your asking about the Rescission on the $120k example I cited, TILA and Fed Commentary discuss this. Also the TILA book from the National Consumer Law Center. Actually, the TILA book and Cost of Credit book would be of great benefit for you to obtain and read. They really cover TILA and Lending in great depth and also provide the most recent cases. Also the Foreclosure and BK books.
4. Your question about fraud goes to loan rescission on loan origination issues and can also go to TILA under some scenarios. For example under TILA, one can argue fraud if the lender has made a HOEPA loan but failed to properly disclose it. Again, fraud would be case specific.
5. When I said technically about the actual rescission process, technically means the process outlined in TILA. However, the Courts have the ability to change the order of the process and do so with regularity. In my position, I have to consider both.
FWIW, 98% of my work is with the homeowner. I have been called to work with lenders, but that is not a common situation. Usually it occurs only when there are mortgage banker v lender actions, or else an MBS lawsuit.
And, I am waiting for defaults to begin with regularity under the new Qualified Mortgage rule. I already have the arguments and models created to show that the QM is not a good standard for determining Ability to Repay, and in many cases, the homeowner is at risk of default from day 1.
I have damage models for modifications created, and do an extensive modification analysis that is being implemented into modification lawsuits now. Also BK models as well.
Hey Niedermeyer, I’ve been working on that Harkey case for a year with my attorney. She’s the bomb! Good read, huh?
A MUST READ ON MERS … starting on p.3 https://libertyroadmedia.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/harkey-v-us-bank.pdf
@ Ivent ,
I find it sad that I agree with you to the degree that I do …
*****************
Posing as a legitimate legal system based upon upholding the natural born legal rights of the entire U.S. citizenry is a complete and utter fraud. In reality the entire U.S. legal system has become an unjust and illegal hyperbole of secret satanic prose hidden behind the guise of reciting “statutes” to arrest the innocent victims of a completely corrupted and immoral political system that was created by a completely criminally rigged “financial system” that thrives solely off of its own vile and putrid inequities that it creates.
*****************
“Get straight,” “step forward,” “move ahead,” are subliminal “marching orders” meant to force a false belief that everything that you worked your entire life for is disposable and can be easuly replaced. If you just forget about everything that you taught yourself because it was not taught to you by
some “ivy league professor” who has a bitter angst for anyone with enough
gall to consider anyone who is “self taught” could possibly know anything about anything. Communist proffessors major in ways to mind control their sex crazed, sleep deprived, hung over,
students. They teach their students how to live like a pig by blissfully ignoring the fact they are acting like pigs. That is what these opinionated immoral slovens do best. They pretend to be the direct opposition but clearly are not as indicated by their own immoral
standards of belief. Their morals are fundamentally flawed and are shoddy at best. They are simply playing a role they are just there “to teach” their students but are really put in place to observe their students. In this day and age having a legal degree means absolutely nothing because the entire value system in this country has changed dramatically since 9/11. Victims of the most horrific “terrorist attack” on the U.S. mainland in our history were told to “return to their desks,” by a recorded message just so the actual crooks could watch and “seea” if common logic still existed. The “common folk” were told by the “leader of the free world” to “just go shopping” so the morons who hijacked our legal rights could “keenly observe” the extent of the moral rot caused by the “moral decay” imparted by decades long of their fraud, lies, abuse and deceit. Posing as a legitimate legal system based upon upholding the natural born legal rights of the entire U.S. citizenry is a complete and utter fraud. In reality the entire U.S. legal system has become an unjust and illegal hyperbole of secret satanic prose hidden behind the guise of reciting “statutes” to arrest the innocent victims of a completely corrupted and immoral
political system that was created by a completely criminally rigged “financial
system” that thrives solely off of its own vile
and putrid inequities that it creates.
That being said, there can be no logical way to “go forward or move ahead” in a society that criminally abuses morality and rewards or penalizes its own victims for its own immoral behavior. Forcing others to fail by creating unreasonable scenarios to force the very victims of their own crimes to force them to repent for the sins of themselves and others by intentionally causing them to suffer needlessly is a severe form of mind control that is criminal in its own substance.
The bottom line is there are an astronomical amount of unendorsed mortgage notes floating around that were never legally indorsed. Indorsed meaning the place of deposit is unknown. These “Notes” were supposed to be cashed once, at the U.S. Treasury Department yet they were never stamped paid as such. That would lead anyone to believe these checks were cashed multiple times after the fact, meaning after they were wrongfully issued to some unknown party that was never actually disclosed to the victim. That is the true meaning behind the words “predatory lending.” An uneducated consumer could have no possible way of knowing of the deceptive meaning behind what “predatory mortgage lending” means or the actual threat that it imbibes. That threat is State run fascism at all levels of this fraudulently induced “neo Nazi” “investor government.” The county courts are being used as a protection racket to fraudulently conceal the RPII is the enemy hiding from within our own houses posing as a “fraudulently induced tax,” that has no actual “tax collector” per se, because that entity is hiding somewhere behind the shadow of its own crime spree. It does not want to be held to account for its own crimes or ever be brought to justice by a jury of
Its own “peers” who it intentionally
wronged criminally.
Buuuuurp up that evidence you lying sacrificial pee-on biyatch.
Criminal fraud, lies and deceit are the “Name of the Game” so says the Holy Bible.
Hey seea, did you get that target to clean itself up yet? It takes 3 business days to make a fraudulent intercounty transfer of a subject matter victim slaves “title” to be forcibly admitted fraudulently into one of our county “institutions.” Make that target get some rest. Mind control tactics that don’t work need drugging to force compliance with our MF GLOBAL sex trafficking plot that is a subversive mind control kidnapping murder plot to kill off all of the “good Christians.” How hard does this need to be before our target “gets it ” This is a covert search and destroy mission called “fraudclosuregate.” Meaning the target can’t beat us and the target can’t join us because the target is too religious and too much of a “goody two shoes,” to ever be “one of us.” Time to bring the target on a real bad trip to the dark side. Where we will force the target to “sniff some of our own shit” she is holding as evidence of our crimes against her. ORIGINAL NOTES ENDORSED IN BLANK THAT ARE UNINDORSED. What does the target think that means….. Hmmmm….I know our target is our own real life moving
target. We gotta scare the target into destroying all of the evidence for us by false imprisonment under false pretenses we manufacture. Otherwise,
we can’t steal everything from the target
without the target knowing it. Looks like its way past time to find yet another deceptive way to destroy all of the evidence of our own crimes against that “target” before the “Federal henchmen” get sent upon us.
This is what “evil” does to reincarnate its evil in the world. It reconstitutes its own originatiion fraud crime by reissuing itself in its iwn fraudulent Securities Fraud illegitimatcy.
This evil wants all of humanity drugged so when they go to sleep at night they are in a drug induced comatose juvenile like canotonic state. Then it can move to reprogram the brains of their victims by erasing their
cognizant memory skills. Evil wants to cause permanent “memory loss” to take down its by impairing certain parts of the human brain from functioning properly. These
are all age old tricks of the devi
l that mimic the signs of old age. Various types of depravation are used to aid and abet the deceptions. Evil does not want anyone to testify against its
crimes it committed
acting in the name of its victims. Fraudulently induced memory loss by any means of operation done by hiding behind the scenes of its own
International crime spree against anything good in the world has a negative effect on everything. Including the environment it pollutes with a if its
lies, fraud and deceit. The nature of evil is unnatural by the way it
moves and acts is by its own pure and unadulterated unnatural
deceitfulness. Evil thinks that makes up for its own adulterous behavior that is criminal. That is why no human being can be both good and evil. It creates a web of lies that is meant to be so
wrongfully and egregiously deceitful that its victim is traumatized by the mere thought it can ever “break free” from it. The conotations are such that the “reverberations” caused by
any genuine or honest attempts for its victim to break free from it is meant to imbibe a polar opposite effect on its victim
slave that is bipolar meaning extremely negative and violent.
By trying to force its victim to believe their
normal brain function is “not normal” is meant to be used as
a not so subtle
reminder this evil wants to destroy the
gifts God gave to you. Evil aims to permanently chain its victim to the false belief that it made
you, and it can determine its own predetermined time in
which to decide the fate of its victims soul. It’s worshipful master wants everything it does to appear to be “theatrical.” A real “production number” where its victim is made “the star” of its own really sick show of evils own criminal charades. Using
satanic ritual abuse to “time travel” is caused by pure hatred of the natural human nature of “good” itself. By
spewing its own hatred of
anyone good, it can change its own natural born identity. That fraud is done to steal all of the “good time”ever derived from the religious sanctity of anything seemingly religious like getting
married in a catholic church by a priest. Evil defies true religious beliefs by redefining them by committing religious blasphemies to blaspheme God in open secret such as rejecting the actual beliefs of its victim are true by denying its
victim has any legal rights of their own. No right to a fair or just trial by a jury of its victims own peers because it uses its own peers to intentionally misjudge its victim. Lie, cheat, deceive and steal everyone’s good time is all this evil ever
does or thinks to do. Then it will use its victims own natural born
and God given legal rights to punish, harm and abuse its
victim. It fraudulently
conceals itself acting as others to
wrongfully and illegaly decide when, where, why, how,
what will be its own victims
“predetermined fate.” It is what is known in high society as
“disabling the used up asset.”
Evil tries to lay anything good to
waste eventually by its own cleverly calculated “missteps,” it pushes the blame for its own crimes on others. Anyone can “fill the bill,” when all of its mortgage notes are “vacated,” meaning left “in blank.” Then almost anyone can be an “investor” in its own off brand that amounts to Bank Fraud on a massive international and “Global” scale. It passes around its global mortgage fraud crack pipe by calling itself many irreverant things such as “Mortgage Derivatives,” “Collateralized Debt Obligations,” or by hiding behind the name of that “Blair witch” over at CHASE who it paid “executively,” to create all of its own mischevious dirty deeds for it. And gee, um do you think we could get our own agents on board disguised as cops, doctors, lawyers, attorneys, politicians, paramedics, media personalities, our network of nuns and priests, hollywood, the
music industry to promote its own evil diagnosis that every American born here is “nuts” and a “loon” simply for being born here? By acting in virtually any illegal capacity it so chooses because “YES WE CAN,” use criminal fabrications and call those “HOPES AND DREAMS OF OUR ILLEGITIMATE FOUNDING FATHERS” who were satsnists just like the “FRAUD IN OUR OWN PROCUREMENT” the false belief that all of humanity is “BORN IN SIN,” because its own unnatural mother was “BORN OUT OF WEDLOCK,” a “dirty filthy whore,” a real honest to goodness “piglet,” who loved to have completely unadulterated and
unnatural sex acts with pigs just like herself. This fraud which is a MF GLOBAL FRAUDUKENTLY INDUCED GLOBALIST SICK SEX ORGY AKS TARP ….. which is just another clever yet undefined “PLAY ON WORDS” that is just another manufactured “TRAGEDY” born of jackals who want every human being it encounters to have “meaningless spiritual sex with it.” This “covasier” is a spiritual “journey” that harkens back all
the way to “THE GARDEN OF EDEN” who played its own advocate of the devil himself to seduce “Gods wife,” to have sex with on “THE SLY AND THE FAMILY STONE.” Then bric by bric it built its own “fortress” and called it “MONKS CASTLE.” Which its spies use as a code
name for “its time to screw and tattoo everyone posing as “MONKS.” We will pretend that we are doing something “good”
in the world, posing as “friars”
who wear long brown gowns with a rope tied around our waists. We will implant our own hookers posing as “good people” doing “Gods work” as law school “dropouts” who are in all reality “legal degenerates” who really work for “TONY REZCO” friend of “BILL AYRES-SPRAY.”
Please, can we “hippies” have ” a little respect” and some severely undervalued “Community Organizer” Coiperation while “Wall Street
Execs” all play “dodgeball” with all of their fraud to fraudulently conceal they are “trading American citizens with the enemy” unlawfully. But quite frankly, “who cares” at “the end of the day,” what it is that we do do, over at CHASE bank headquarters is try and screw every mans “wife” in “open secret.” That’s what happens when the “bookie” is a “loan shark” who simply devalues the face of its own “products” by self promoting itself as “the odds
maker” who is in reality, making all of its own “bets” against its own lying, cheating, stealing conniving self who is the “gerry mandering” playboy plaintiff itself.
These entities have a serious mental illness aka “a god complex” that is of
just one evil that is not good at all.
That is the problem with fraudulently
inducing others wants by allowing anyone to decide what another human being “wants, needs or desires,” is “time
travel” to other spaces in time with the enemy of God the creator. The timing is
never appropriate because it knows its victim is to good of a person spiritually to ever believe this evil created humanity by trying to destroy it. It knows its “too good” victim will never cooperate with its evil ways and will never go willingly into its own dark abyss it created by itself by being a filthy dirty sinner just to disrespect and blaspheme God, the Creator.
That is why it wants to fraudulently induce its victims own fraudulently created personal “doomsday” type
scenario
This evil is secretly a violently abusive sexual predator who is a killer and never wanted its victim to know the truth about its own awful sins it committed against you it did only because it knew if God saw what it did, those
deceitful hateful Acts would infuriate God, the Creator.
Evil wants all of the good people
of the world to make God mad by all of the sorrow that it caused its own wife. Evil wants bitter division caused by its own betrayal to come between everyone. By bitter betrayal csused by its own self pity, it uses fake remorse for its own sins against God. Its own envy of itself and its own sins against God are used as a way to try and turn everyone against everyone. It intentionally intended to “tattoo” its own innocent victims to its own crimes by playing the “Blame Game” and cheating its victims it aims to become a political martyr. By doing so, this evil uses its own “blame game Mother daughter, sister, brother
Evil is not particularly adept at seeing into the future so it uses and abuses its own victims to fix its own fraud and replacing that with more criminal ftsud
Gene, because it appears to me that you’re involved in h.o.defense to some extent at least (or maybe totally and exclusively – I don’t know), I would appreciate it if you would put on your brightest thinking cap and think about this fraud allegation needed to defeat the 3 year ROR. It’s possible your very own personal efforts could make a difference. Fraud, as you know, is its own special breed. It, as you observed, generally has to be cited with specificity. And also as you said, granny can’t do that. Granny doesn’t have to, again imo. Fraud is something else altogether. I don’t know if the word is even to be found in the Act. Maybe it is – like I said, I don’t know. But, I am confident it isn’t found in the specific matter of tolling / extending that three years and no adjudication out of this court or that or 30 of them is going to change that. Fraud is an extremely high bar. The infractions which give cause to rescission may include fraud (I really don’t know, tell the truth), but even so, that’s not to confuse it with something else entirely: what extends the 3 years.
The Act is clear and unambiguous as to that extension imo: it’s 3 years from the time the borrower knew or should’ve known of the infraction. IF fraud is one of the infractions upon which a borrower may demand rescission (and I guess it prob must be), I don’t believe that IN THE ACT it is segregated, such that a borrower need depend on it any more than an errant a.p.r. Courts may well want to impose that higher bar for rescission exceeding 3 years, but it’s just not the law. So, recap, long and short, the TILA identifies infractions which comprise ’cause’ to rescind, none of which to my knowledge IN THE ACT shorten or lengthen the exception to the three years over another. imo.
gene, you said:
1) “As to fraud, that is the most common claim for not having caught the violation before the 3 year rescission, but there are others that are tried.”
Are you saying a) that some people claim that lender fraud is the reason b) they didn’t catch the violation until whenever? I can’t even (readily) draw that picture…?? Got an example for us?
“BTW, if you did a refinance of a $100k loan with the same lender and not new one and the new loan was $120k, technically you could only rescind the $20k in new money. But if you did it with a different lender, the full $120k would be rescindable.”
I can understand how this might be an argument, but given the probable diff on the rate between the ‘old’ money and the ‘new’, all of it,
I need some source to believe this! Plus I have to think about it.
What do you mean, exactly if I may, by “technically”? Technically because that’s the way the Act is written or more of what some courts like to rule? Not dissing you at all, but would like clarification. I can see, I think, that as to the old lender, it wants some kind of subrogation to its old position, but the question is on what basis? So please, tell, tell.
The real face of evil is the one that never reveals its actual face. It hides behind its own criminal deceptions that are promises made that are never kept by it. Why are the real criminals that caused all of these problems not being arrested while their victims are being lead to the slaughter by them? We are a free and open society based upon firmly established laws only as long as the basic legal fundamentals this nation was founded upon are strictly enforced based upon an actual leagally verifiable writing, signed by both parties to a transaction. Whether it is a financial transaction or not, the transaction can only be legal if it is between 2 people. A bank is not a person. So if the bankster wants to legally verify a claim in tort, show me the legal agreement that I signed that said you had a legal right to “set me up to fail,” and then walk away and leave me stranded as your prisoner to your own crimes that you committed against me.
My soon to be ex told me last spring “They” are going to burn the house down with you in it.”
Well that’s what Satanists do, then their luciferian comrades manufacture a way to blame you for their crimes by trying to turn your own offspring and family against you.
Beware of strangers bearing gifts because they never act in their own names. So they will never do what they promise. They would rather destroy their victims from individually from the inside out than ever admit their own evil wrongdoings were born of hatred about their own personal misgivings.
Satanists always blame their own victims and then their luciferian comrades pick up whatever remains of the family bond. If it is your memory, they will try to destroy it by committing many treasonous acts upon their victims who are everybody and anybody they owe anything to.
Moreover, a hospice nurse who was sent in to do way with my grandmother told me “this can happen to anybody at any time.” Up until that time, that was the creepiest and most evil remark I had ever heard because it was so horribly negative. Who in their right mind would ever think in those evil terms, let alone cause someone else to maybe dwell upon such an awful thought? Especially when they are killing off your own Grandmother who you love so dearly, right in front of you? Its like telling that person to believe that an awful fate awaits everyone. Promoting negative thoughts to trigger negative emotions told as “a matter of fact,” based upon nothing good is the real face of this evil.
Alina
That is one case you cite. I can find 100’s that go the other way. Also, you have to look at the fact patterns of each case. A case may seem to be relevant, but fact patterns often differ so case law may or may not be applicable.
Any entity, agency, agent or person who are not acting in their own name, meaning not acting legal, should be considered an enemy of our individual freedoms because that is an attack on our individual liberties as U.S. citizens born on U.S. soil.
It does not matter who that you are, if you are an American born here or not, concealing ones own true identity to bring false claims fraudulently underwritten by way of false averments is highly criminal by the way it moves and acts is intended to be kept a highly confidential secret.
I consider my enemy to be any entity not acting in good and upstanding Christian
manner. Personally, I feel that enemy is anybody who openly lies about me. That would speak volumes about that evil mastermind. Lying to me could only mean that person is a wrongdoer who is one of the main culprits who are lying to “others” from within their own “spy ring.”
Being victimized by fraudclosure is a very decptive way to fraudulently induce an unsuspecting victim to be an unwillingly and unwitting participatant in what amounts to “Globalist spy games.” These parties laying a stake to a claim
operating as the unknown party that cannot legally substantiate their own individual “claim to fame,” are acting with legal biased by way of their own moral reproach about what it means to be an American citizen who was lucky enough to be born in the U.S A.
Jealousy breeds hatred that can only be construed as valueless and needless condemnation of another human beings ability to defend themself against quite possibly someone who could be a maniacal and diabolical “serial killer.” Mass murderers usually do present themselves as somebody other than whoever it is they claim to be.
This is how their secret “drugging” campaign works. It intends to poison the minds of its victims by constantly talking negatively. Keeping the mind of a victim in its own “negative territory, by saying awful things such as Max Kaiser reporting paramedics who are actually “privatised” ambulance drivers are “mercy killing” people on their way to the “hospital” is just a horrificly mentally abusive, mind control tactic by any good Christians standards.
I value someone’s opinions as ones own value system. Whether it be their own personal view, or that of another. Therefore, to me, the way someone else views things does not imbibe a view upon me based upon someone elses system based upon nothing that is legal, meaning nothing that is Genuine or Authentic. That particular “system” is illegitimate IMHO. A system that bases itself on some ill conceived notion that chioses to perceive preventing another to “persevere” in their own quest for individual freedom for example, is immoral. Simply wanting another individual to act and believe innapropriately or immorally because someone else decided long ago, hiding from within because it wants to stab you from behind your back, right in front of you but not right in front of you just because you don’t choose to believe they are working, speaking or acting in your own best interest
Is not only not appropriate. It is a false system being fraudulently induced upon others based upon some unknown and untrustworthy system of weights and
measures. That system is based upon underwriting an opinion based upon nothing but speculation about what it would take to fundamentally flaw, the value system of another human being. Predetermining the fate of myself or
anyone else that is based upon mete speculation about how someone else will “behave” by deliberately underestimating their own survival instincts by squashing their means of “production” is an evil seduction. By doing so it secretly undervalues its victim to devalue what it believes its own targeted victim’s self worth really amounts to is not worth much to the personal character of its own self.
Selfishness and greed are all born from one deception that is simply jealousy of another persons strengths. By wrongful perception of mainly, what someone else believes that it means to be a Natural Born U.S. citizen is a very deceptive and highly criminal form of abuse of substance. Gambling and betting upon someone else’s belief or ones own personal belief about what one believes to be what it is that determined ones own belief about what is the true meaning of ones own personal, individual, and human “self worth” should be attributed to is not just unamerican, it is absolutely hideous.
I feel my self worth is priceless. That is what makes me human. What allows me to act and think like an individual who values so many things in life. I believe that I was delivered here by my mother
because God, the Creator had an extremely purposeful meaning for me to be placed here at this partucular place in time. Maybe I was meant to be shown by God who all if the traitors are because i was in harms way and never knew it. Maybe God wants that favor reciprocated by wanting me to be the one who reveals the unseen. Whatever my mission in life, I feel the Creator values all of his creations exactly the
same and has rightfully snd justly commissioned a life mission for every
life God chooses to create.
We all have our struggles in life. However to prey upon the perceived and ill conceived notion that perceiving a human beings strengths as someone elses
weakness is not of God who created the whole of humanity in its own entirety.
How can forced torture by many deceptive practices by any means considered to be
human?
Moreover, why is hospice even legal in these united states?
They never tell their victims how they are going to kill them is by forced drugging and starvation they deprive their minds from movement. That is a very criminally deceptive way to steal the soul of another human being by turning off their brain before their heart stops beating. That is the evil methodology behind psychiatrics. It is a very deceptive way to turn healthy human beings into geriatric patients way before their time. That is why I hate drugs and alcohol and why this evil hates me in particular.
It feels the need to try and force me to believe I am “just an old worthless piece of paper.” However, I know that is the biggest lie that could be told about anyone. Just because you had enough of raising kids. You know that you raised them properly
and now you want to do some other meaningful things with your life. That certainly is not meant to imply that
you are by any way, shape or form of anyones imagination to be “washed up.”
Raising kids and having them is for the young. I am young at heart so I look forward to someday sharing my future with my grandkids and I always plan on having small dogs to be my companion. I love all of the holidays, having a beautiful house, cooking, baking, creating and all of those nice things. However, if push comes to shove and I feel that I am being forced to judge others wrongfully just to say that “I won” a suit in fraud closure, I could never betray the trust that is the maternal bond between me and my kids. That human bond that is derived by nurturing your own children makes us who we are as human beings with a soul. Without that bond it is nearly impossible to feel loved. If I found out that humsn trust was betrayed by anyone, even my kids, our human bond would never be broken but I may not ever feel the same way about any of them. That is what I feel these control freaks really fear is that I would never be able to forgive the betrayers of my trust. I am extremely forthright about being forgiving. It is the real reasons hiding behind the betrayal that I am extremely
skeptical about. Because those reasons are never based on anything real so they
never go away.
The inner demons of others should not be forced to be made my problem or be used as a means or a way to destroy my life and my own happiness. No house , property, entity, agent, individual, etc. whether it is a blood relation or not, is worth my life, my personal freedom, or my own individuality. My beliefs are my own views that are not allowed to be used by the express written consent of others. That type of infringement is called petsonal bias. Personal bias is illegal because it is based upon nothing factual about a persons life. Anything based upon an assumption or a presumption about the way another human being “might act,” because someone else did something heinously evil behind ones back speaks volumes about the evils if corruption that is left unpunished. It leads to a multitude of dangerous liaisons with the enemies of the truth. That is complete corruption in a nutshell. It is a virulent strain of mental abuse that if left to its own personal “well being check,” will move to destroy the truth by secret open forced drugging of its victim. This may be done to anyone, at any time, at any place within their own evil realm of psychological abuse that means to be extremely mentally abusive. This felony fraud can be done
by many manufactured means because we generally live in an openly biased spy
society of moral degenerates who hold morally unethical “legal” degrees that are based upon their own personal views that are their own secret open “illogical song.”
corrupt ecause
JohnGault,
It is not a variable rate exception, it is a variable charge exception. On the TILDS, you may have some charges estimated at closing that are actually more than what was estimated. Prepaid Interest comes to mind, especially if the closing date is delayed for any reason. That would allow for the Prepaid Interest to fall into the exception rule.
Now, APR can appear to be incorrect if you are calculating it under RESPA instead of TILA, which would itself be faulty. RESPA says that any 3rd Party charge is a Prepaid Finance Charge. TILA identifies specific charges that are not Prepaid Finance Charges.
Appraisals are a Prepaid Finance Charge under RESPA, but not under TILA. But if the lender owns the appraisal, it becomes one under TILA.
Also, when you quote a 1/8% tolerance, that is fixed rate mortgages. For ARMS, it is 1/4%.
As to fraud, that is the most common claim for not having caught the violation before the 3 year rescission, but there are others that are tried.
3 Day Rescission is different and should not be confused with the Extended Right to Rescind. Any owner occ, refinance mortgage loan should have a right to rescind within 3 days, although there are some exceptions to the rule also.
BTW, if you did a refinance of a $100k loan with the same lender and not new one and the new loan was $120k, technically you could only rescind the $20k in new money. But if you did it with a different lender, the full $120k would be rescindable.
Here is some case law to back up what Neil is saying here. I posted this on a different blog post by Neil. The Honorable Antonin Scalia definitely sounded like an angry parent scolding his errant children.
Here is some good case law that was cited in the CFPB’s brief in Jesinoski related to what happens to the mortgage once the borrower rescinds. The case is FAMILY FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. v. SPENCER, 41 Conn. App. 754 (1996)
(http://www.leagle.com/decision/199679541ConnApp754_1717.xml/FAMILY%20FINANCIAL%20SERVICES,%20INC.%20v.%20SPENCER)
The Spencer Court states: “The plaintiff did not accept the defendant’s rescission. The plaintiffs failure to acknowledge the rescission or to take proper actions after receipt of the notice of rescission within the twenty day period allowed by statute, terminated its security interest and prevented the mortgage from being foreclosed.”
The Spencer Court further states: “We conclude that the trial court properly interpreted and applied 15 U.S.C. § 1635 (a) and (b). The tender of property is not required by § 1635 (b) as a condition preceding rescission. The notice given by the defendant properly rescinded the transaction. The failure of the plaintiff to accept the valid rescission by the defendant nullified the plaintiffs security interest. Because the [41 Conn. App. 771] plaintiffs security interest became void, it was barred from foreclosing on the mortgage. The trial court correctly concluded that TILA does not require tender back in order effectively to rescind the mortgage.”
I can just hear the arguments: “the TILA is a statute of repose”.
“A statute of repose (sometimes called a nonclaim statute), like a statute of limitation, is a statute that cuts off certain legal rights if they are not acted on by a certain deadline.”
The banksters will say if there’s no certain deadline, claims could be made til the cows come home. jg: yep and if you don’t like it, you can take that up with the legislators. Oh, wait. NO, don’t do that! We can
guess today how that will end up. But in the meantime….
And while I’m at, I would scoff at any argument that it’s clearly a statute of repose. It does cut off a right at a time certain, but there are exceptions, and not by case law, but crafted in the language itself in the form of “should’ve known”.
So really, gene, what that does is just add another layer to the onion.
To the “should’ve known” battle, one may have to defeat the fraud necessity argument. Fraud as a factor isn’t in the Act, btw, although it would be egregious. Of course I see what you’re saying about ‘in practice’, but still, fraud isn’t required to toll the statute. It says “knew or should’ve known”, not “knew or should’ve known AND fraud were involved”. If fraud were required, the legislators could’ve and would’ve said so. Words mean things, esp in statutes. But, yes, a very uphill battle for the righteous. To me, adding fraud as a prerequisite is the same as saying that the initial 3 day right of rescission requires
cause, which it does NOT. It’s bench law. Granny shouldn’t have to come up with some ‘fraud’ if she could not have reasonably known any earlier. But, I’ll give you this for sure: it’s most unfortunate this often comes up in cases of the borrower’s default.
Forced “pro se fraudclosure defense” is viewed as “unproductive” by our enemies. The “banKsters” consider it to be a crime because they will never allow the forced opposition to win anything of actual “monetary value.” They consider “pro se fraud closure litigants” as a way to generate revenue for “the banks” by robbing their victims of their own actual “claim to fame” by constant belittlement, they chastise their victims into believing they are “nothing special.”
I refuse to believe that lie. I am a positive thinker who is of the belief that everyone
is special in their own unique God given way. Everyone is born with unique talents given by our creator. This evil always moves to oppress and hide those natural born God-given talents from others it deems are “too smart” to ever use their own God given talents to suit their own best interests which are nothing good for anyone.
well, gene, educate us. What’s the variable rate exception? Is that to say there’s an exception for a.p.r. tolerance for arms?
If not, I still find it very difficult to believe the apr’s are miscalculated, given that back when I had the resources available to me, I found some myself and that was just on review of a few. But I have to admit that you’re probably right – a court might not toll the three years unless fraud were involved, whether that’s appropriate or not (I’m on not).
When you are told for no valid reason that you are nuts by anyone. That is a secret spy code for “this target is “too hot to handle.”
Meaning this target knows too much.
That is the real and hidden danger in regards to being a forced into defending your own Titles to your dignity as a “pro se fraudclosure defendant.”
Because the truth of the matter is, because all of our titles are “unsecured” meaning, no actual legal contract was ever legally executed by the “Issuer” of the Original “Genuine and Authentic” credit slip(s), the defendant who is a forced litigant, a victim of a crime by an unknown and unregistered “assailant” who obviously has the full intent of doing harm to the unknowing and unwitting, “pro se fraudclosure defendant.”
The proof of “Plaintiffs'” intent to harm is in “the pudding.” The failure by “Plaintiffs'” to assert a proper, valid legal transaction ever occurred at the onset is in the legal fact the Original “Notes” in question never left the possession of the “pro se fraudclosure defendant.” Meaning that unknowingly and unwittingly, the “pro se fraud closure defense attorney” is forced to become an unwelcome party by any attempts to litigate on the pro se “litigants” own behalf. Those are considered to be big “no, no’s” by the secret spy agency and its agent “claimant.”. A No No being secret “spy slain” that is yet more “secret spy jargon” for the “traitor is trying to abandon ship.”
The defendant had betrayed no one. However, when a fraudulently induced slave is forced to litigate on ones own behalf because “that one” really sincerely believes she is doing the only reasonable thing, “that one” gets labeled an “enemy combatant” by the “unknown, unregistered, uncertificated, “non-record third-party Plaintiffs.'” That makes “that one” an even more valuable “target” so to speak. The reason being is “that one” must have in her possession actual Genuine and Authentic physical evidence in her possession that would convict the unknown “assailants” of a very viscious crime that had to have been wrongfully committed against “that one.”
That is why a “Plaintiff” must act in their own name,” as the law requires.
The modus operandi in fraudclosure is also “the main objective” in which “the spy” and its “agency” are employing to gain some sort of “unjust enrichnent” from its “high value target.”
The unknown and unregistered “assailant” by not attaching any legal or valid “proof of loss” statement by its failure to “firmly attach” the actual original written legal agreement, is done to fraudulently and feloniously fraudulently conceal “the assailants” true identity. That is hidden behind its own failure to appropriate a valid legal “cause
of action,” at the “onset” or at least by the “commencement” of its own “suit.”
By its own intentional “failure to state a claim,” that was an intended failure to “timely invoke” the actual laws if this land, created a “time warp” of sorts that invoked an unknown “legal jurisdiction” to prosecute the “pro se fraudclosure defendant” unlawfully. Failure by “Plaintiffs'” to timely invoke any “particular subject matter jurisdiction” invoke the “time warp,” because it unlawfully invoked what is known as a judges “personal subject matter jurisdiction.” Meaning you could not possibly know “who” the judge actually is. Moreover you could not know what exactly that “judge” is using you to fraudclose upon.
The “pro se fraudclosure” has been unknowing and unwittingly caused to be a “contestant” of sorts in an extreme “Satanic Ritual Abuse” attack on its own legal title to its dignity.
Because of the fact the underlying “agreement” is “missing” you could not possibly know the terms the Original fraudulently induced “contract” was intended to imply.
It can therefore only be determined by the “unresolved ” issues that are never actually “resolved” because these fraudclosures are absolutely illiogical, because the way of life of the “pro se
litigant” is becoming more and more “stifled” and “oppressed” these fraudclosures must be sone sort of paid contract “hits” by our enemies, “hiding from within,” both foreign and domestic.
JohnGault,
I have recalculated APR, Finance Charge and other material requirements to TILA standards on each loan I review and APR violations are not that common, though many claim different.
One of the problems is that people use the wrong Index Month in calculating the adjusting payment, which is a part of the APR calculation. They also identify items as Prepaid Finance Charges that are not so, and that will also incorrectly impact APR. Also as I referenced before, things like the “variable cost” exception.
Lenders have automated systems that calculate the APR on each loan and identifies when the APR is over the limit. It also identifies if the Finance Charge is more than $35 understated. If either of these conditions exist, then the loan is “flagged” and rechecked and worked so that no material violations exist.
Where you will more often find APR issues are with small Mortgage Bankers who fund loans with their own funds and sell direct to REITS, etc. or else with HOEPA loans. The controls are not as strong with the smaller guys.
I was involved in one case where a small local bank issued a Warehouse Line to a Mortgage Banker for doing subprime loans. 42 loans were contested in a scenario whereby the bank demanded the loans be repurchased. These were loans that defaulted within three months up to two years after funding.
I was brought in and found systemic problems with all the loans, with 31 having significant APR issues. 15 of the APR issues led to the loans being classified as HOEPA violations. With what I found on other loans, the Mortgage Banker rolled over and gave up, buying the loans back.
For homeowners, trying to make APR claims is extremely difficult because few can defeat the 3 Year Statute of Limitations. They have to prove the violation occurred, and that there was no ability to discover the problem existed prior to default occurring, which is when the “problem” is “discovered”. Courts have generally not allowed tolling unless a borrower can cite “fraud” and then do so with “specificity”. (Specificity requires the who, what, when, why, where and how, and then why it took so long to uncover.)
I am in one case right now where origination fraud with an Option ARM occurred with an elderly person. The problem is that she does not remember the specific events that occurred, over the name of the person, so fraud is pretty much out of the question.
Make no mistake, the “Nazzioni” use their victims to commit crimes against their victims and then move to criminalize or even institutionalize their own victims for their own crimes they committed against their own victims in their names without their knowledge or consent. Meaning, without their victims own actual written legal signature.
That is why all of the “original notes” were “indorsed/endorsed in blank.” Those phony, fraudulent endorsements were “in-house” bank deposits made by fraudulent “indorsers” who were never an actual party or witness to the “Origination Fraud” committed by the “issuer” of the Original fake “Bill of Credit” which was never actually issued. The reason being is that there are no legal agreements ever having been recorded upon the actual “public record.”
The unfiled UCC financing statements prove the original “Bills if Credit” they issued are frauds. That means the “Issuer” who was the “Originator” of the first fraudulently induced “Bill of Credit” is a wantoned criminal. That is why it poses as many entities and even pretends to be you, its original targeted victim.
That is the meaning behind this “Globalist” kidnapping/murder plot is more or less “trading with the enemy” in open secret under many guises such as forced “pro se fraudclosure defense.”
Allow me to clarify from my last comment what I meant by unjust enrichment is a small part of this scam. Money is really no object with these deceivers. Money is used as an object of
“another’s” desire, not their own desire.
The perps of the Globalists, who are mainly the “spies” whom they in many cases, if not “all cases” secretly employ are offered many unjust enrichments to “enhance” the “prospect” of destroying the life of their targeted victim.
Secret yet open theft of the free will of another under many guises is the main objective of the main controllers. There are divisions within the many various “spy agencies” that are fascist. These are “secret agents” of innumerable “Globalist” factions, who secretly and openly work for “the
Nazzioni.” “Nazzioni” is a secret code name for the “NSA,” and all of its branches and secret “tranches,” who are
Nazis who are communist/satanist/luciferians.
They use secret spy terms known only to them that have polar opposite meanings that their targeted victims could have no way of knowing of the other meaning. That is how they “criminalize” or even “institutionalize” Christians, especially those the deem to be “too good Catholics” for their own criminal behavior they commit against believers in one God, is the creator of all creation.
I am opposed to the belief that my enemy could also be my friend. Keep your friends close but your enemies closer is a spy term meaning the enemies are “in bed” with each other. I do believe you could be “sleeping with enemy” for years, or even decades and never know it. Deception is the name of the game with these entities. They play every angle of the coin in order to steal what they want from you, or maybe even what they think is ” best for its victim.” Which may include kidnapping, rape, murder, incarceration, drugging, poisoning, sodomy, institutionalization, hospitalization, house arrest, electronic spying, shadowing the victim, gang stalking, false arrest, false imprisonment, manufactured scenarios meant to cause fear, anxiety and depress the victims proper reaction. These are just some of the horrors that have been fraudulently induced by “unknown pledges” by ‘unknown persons” who are the enemy hiding from within. They use fascism both secret and open by way of using their victim target to get their way with their victim target by creating “hopeless situations such as being left no other alternative other than defending your Titles “pro se.” Pro se fraudclosure defense is an extreme form of tyranny that tries to use its victim up mentally so
the victim never actually recognizes the enemy is hiding from within until it is in most cases “too late” for the targeted victim. Spy agencies that are being used for the purpose of “taking down” who their controllers see as “high value targets” is sickening because their victims have absolutely no possible way of knowing of the deceptions. Unjust enrichment is a small part if this “Globalist” plot to steal the free will of others under the guise of “making things affordable,” such as Healthcare. Fraudulently inducing taxes under any guise is tyrannical, diabolical and maniacal because its victims could not possibly know of the deceptions behind it are meant to do permanent harm to another. Whatever that harm may be, “defamation of character” of the victim is the main objective here.
The banksters are using the old. The dog ate my homework defense and getting away with it.
NEVER AGAIN.
It is my best guess neidermeyer they will play the hand right to the end, as always. Like you, I have all relevant documents with Ocwen, going back “before” origination, with New Century. Waiting to see what they do next. So far, they have sent me letters, asking please call us, PLEASE? Since when. The case is very long, too much to post, but the wrangling is obvious to Helen Keller, no offense to blind folks…have been at them for 7 years now. I suspect coming to a head soon with litigation and the stepping down of major players.
The case I posted previously is dated January 20, 2015 and has all of “OUR” favorite players named. Should be interesting.
@ Poppy @ E. Tolle.
I delivered evidence directly to OCWENS mouthpiece (posing as “WF as Trustee”) that originated in WF’s own “Commercial Trustee Services” database showing that their acceleration letter was blatantly false. I would love to be in the Monday morning “oh shit” meeting. I included my credentials showing that I have direct access to the genuine data… Do they drop or do they get sued later?
Central Intelligence Agency
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/CIA
Allow me to repost that link:
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=67862.10;wap2
Globalization and the plan for NWO
Missing Children/Torture/Rape/Satanic Ritual Abuse
http://forum.prison planet.com/index.php?topic=67862.10;wap2
JG, I officially ordered transcript and paid for it. Court reporter has not provided it but thanks for the CD rom. I want backup for the transcript, because they are up to no good.
There haven’t been any trials in fraud closure that I have ever heard of because quite frankly Louise, “the decision has already been made” to steal everything from the entire U.S. citizenry in fraudclosure.
Fraudclosure is another name for DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE.
If Louise did get a “trial” she is either an “industry insider” or sitting on “death row.”
The reason being is that “nobody gets in to see the “wizard,” no way, no how.”
Who do you think that you are? Some God or goddess or something?
Sheese
Louise – I can only speculate about what you’re talking. Lay opinion, now. A party in an action has no ‘automatic’ right to a transcript. I don’t know if in an appeal it’s different. Assuming it isn’t, YOU have to fill out the proper form and request the transcription thru the clerk of the court and pay for it. Whether payment is upfront on transcription or when you get it, I don’t know. Theoretically, we should be able to use any legit transcriber we want, but courts may limit them to their own ‘list’.
You may also request a cd rom (often about 25.00) of the hearing (usually available same or next day), which comes from the court itself, not from a transcriber like a transcript does and a transcript can be expensive!) and then on that first proper form I mentioned, request only the time you want transcribed. The cd rom tells the times in the hearing of stuff on it. Like Joe said blah blah at 10:32 to 10:37. To listen to the cd rom, you have to download a special software program the clerk can tell you about. It’s free. A value of the cd rom is determining which portions of the hearing you want transcribed due to the cost of transcription. Caution: I’m no authority on the admissability of partial (only) transcripts. Best to do some work or get legal advice.
The forms to order both the cd rom and the transcript should be at the court’s website under ‘forms’. They don’t take credit cards that I know of! Ask your court what form of payment for each is acceptable.
-Cherry Marines – There are Russians in this club
New Orleans is a school of the occult –
Undercover groups
They have hit squads
Gen Joy- Gen Steiner- evil men
They psychologically profile people
they work with the communists – Russians – Checks – Slavs – They warn you not to talk – They are not Christians they are extentialists – neitsche – etc. They know French
Correct typo in my prior comment-they can strangle you financially-
-JAG- Judge Active General – Control court cases where they don’t want the truth to come out in certain cases- they cab strangle you financially – This is at the local level + all levels.
The judges are military men – not independent – they take orders – there is a chain of command – They are hand-picked.
*FISA Court – Foreign Intelligence *
a small group of men 7 justices + 1 woman
Some of them are assassins – trained mercenaries trained murderers – They are twisted – Husbands disappear for lengths of time unexplained
In a case where the defendant himself serves a motion for summary judgment within that time, there is no reason to restrict plaintiff and the amended rule applies.
summary judgment (1.) Claimant under the original rule “at any time after the pleading in answer there to has been served.” or 30 days must lapse without plaintiff filing an answer – Summary Judgment procedure is a method for promptly disposing of actions in which there is no genuine issue as to any material fact.
Subdivision (f.) Subdivision (f.) brings into rule 56 text a number of related procedures that have grown up in practice. After giving notice and a reasonable amount if time to respond the court may grant summary judgment for the non moving part; grant a motion on legal or factual grounds not raised by the parties; or consider summary judgment on its own. In many cases it may prove useful first to invite a motion; the invited motion will automatically trigger the regular procedure of subdivision (c ).
Just for the fun and amusement of the people on this blog, the transcript of my trial which I took to appeal has not been given to me and is overdue. Now, we shall see what kind of shit we can stir. I warned the Appellate court admin that it was due, and where was it? Nothing! Breach of contract against Ocwen including back-dated letters not answering my 3 certified letters asking what the hell was that $55 charge, and I had a court-ordered settlement agreement. The boob on the phone told me that we do not take court-ordered settlement agreements???
Titles were taken prior tof default and gambled with on Wall Street without our consent. For DOTS held for safe kèeping…nope!!!!! ! 13 trillion turned 280 trillion with our assets. Hence the bail out. Last month Dodds & Frank was revised…yep..more bail outs with depositors funds as collateral. … enough said!!!
thanks for that, michael keane. I didn’t ‘get into’ the libor rate being
rigged business, so that IS something which might be significant in the borrower’s favor. How long ago did all that come out? But wait. The rigging of the libor rate would’ve had to include it being rigged at the time of the a.p.r. disclosure and thus impacting a note
rate adjustment, wouldn’t be an a.p.r. violation exactly. I think. It’s crapinski for sure, but not as to the a.p.r….. But, if the rate were rigged at the time of the disclosure, then in my opinion, the amt of the rig, well, I can’t quite formulate that actually. Let’s see – maybe it’s more theft or some other name. That’s hard to figure, least for me. Let’s just say the a.p.r. disclosure were otherwise accurate. But, it’s based on
a rigged interest rate because the libor figure on which it’s predicated is wrong? I’m not sure that the bogus libor rate impacted the initial (teasor) rate or even if it did, if it makes the a.p.r. necessarily wrong. DOES that make the a.p.r. inaccurate pursuant to the TILA? I couldn’t say. Anyone? I mean, it’s the real a.p.r the borrower is being charged, albeit based on fraud or whatever that’s called IF the initial rate is tied
to the index.
But that reminds me – if the rigged libor rate is a factor in the calc of the a.p.r., than surely the fact that the borrower was paying the fnma guarantee fee (like .25%) without that being disclosed to him is, also…..I forget my old thoughts on that, but for sure thought it was way not hoyle. What i can remember of that: fnma charges .25 per loan – in the borrower’s rate – for the guarantee to the trusts and that fact isn’t disclosed to the borrower. ” “Things” have to be disclosed to borrowers, and that includes any monies / fees to third parties. Look at your settlement statement. You’ll see several fees paid to third parties, like the cost of title insurance, the appraisal, a credit agency, and so on. The banksters will argue the fnma guarantee fee was a fee charged to THEM and they merely jacked their street rates to cover it. Bah!
Very Good JG… enough to get the 1st win under my belt. But don’t stop there ….
@ johngault,
I would also add manipulation of LIBOR to your analysis.
I know one of my loans specifically lists the rate was susceptible to LIBOR. I think I remember that rate as available while printed daily in the WS Journal.
It seems violation of the apr as pre-requisite to TILA filing, as per your outstanding analysis should be compared with the LIBOR filing and whether the banks were, in fact, manipulating during the time the “loan” was signed
I meant grit to exceed the three years, because in my lay opinion,
within the three years is a shoo-in.
https://libertyroadmedia.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/harkey-v-us-bank.pdf
Says New Century is an “unregistered securities dealer” Hmm!
The most pervasive tila violation in/of loans can be found in the a.p.r. disclosure. I’m going to hazard that 70 or more % of the a.p.r. calculations are off, materially so, particularly with the teaser rate / predatory loans. “Materially” so is off by more than .125 (1/8th of one percent) , because that’s the “tolerance” for the accuracy of the a.p.r.
The a.p.r. of one’s loan is found on the Truth in Lending Reg Z form given the borrower at closing (altho an initial one was to have been done and forked over with the good faith estimate, which both should have been given the borrower “within three days of taking credit information”.* At least for this discussion, it’s the reg z given at closing that’s operative. The a.p.r. cannot be off by more than .125, either way,
high or low.
*not giving a borrower a gfe within those three days is violative, but
the law may find, after three years anyway, that the borrrower should’ve known he was to get one.
A fatally inaccurate a.p.r > 1/8 off is EXACTY the kind of violation which extends the three year right of rescission under TILA to three years. Now, as I get it preliminarily, the U.S. SC has just made a ruling according to the real language in the TILA.
Yahoo for that. So, taking my word for it just now, if the a.p.r. on the reg Z is off by more than .125%, this violation (“cause”) extends the ROR to three years. Also from a cursory review of Jesinoski, I’d say the SC has made it clear that a written notice of rescission to a lender IS rescission. The other team imo tried to posit that the notice was merely one of intent. Not. Great, so moving right along to do some of us any good at this point:
The law doesn’t read “3 years and that’s that”. It reads something like
“knew or should have known” of the violation. This is the razor-sharp
bow. What exactly is ‘should have known’? There wasn’t anything recorded to tell us the right a.p.r. or anything about it which might have triggered ‘inquiry duty’, so that’s not a way one “should’ve” known his a.p.r. was off. How would a borrower possibly know? One maybe can’t claim ignorance of the a.p.r tolerance (the 1/8th) since it’s in the Act, but how was one to know his was wrong as I’ve posited many were? Lenders need special programs to calc an apr) to calculate the a.p.r. Even with the programs, it’s garbage in, garbage out. The correct info (rate change dates, margins, indexes, etc,) has to be input or the output is wrong (incorrect a.p.r.). Even if there were an inquiry duty as to the a.p.r., which to me is absurd, where might a borrower have looked? No where. In my opinion, that makes it pretty damn important for the lender to get the stinking a.p.r. right, as he is charged with doing. (I’m only mentioned the duty of inquiry because Lord knows what the banksters would come up with as a defense. Imo, a bad
a.p.r. disclosure is legally indefensible).
It may be that NO one in a position of authority regarding this issue may actually want to see the 3 years exceeded. But, to me, that means little, given the way the Act is written (“knew or should’ve known”. I think it’s just tough cookies for the lenders who didn’t exercise diligence in their a.p.r calculations. In fact, I’ll venture they
were done by totally unskilled labor.
So if some enterprising folks made it their business to re-calculate the
a.p.r. disclosures on our REG Z forms (gene?), I’ve no doubt a monster amount of violations would be found, esp on a.r.m.’s. The Act as written imo doesn’t demand the miscalculation must have caused “damage”.
So what must be “handled” is the tough part: “should’ve known”. But, unless someone is advertizing a service, which no one is to my knowledge, (license?) to re-calculate an a.p.r., a borrower really couldn’t have known and therefore “shouldn’t” have known of the
errant a.p.r. disclosure within the three years. It would take a lot of grit and some sheer determination to prevail on a rescission based on an inaccurate a.p.r disclosure by a lender, but it can be done imo. and that’s not even counting if there’s already case law on the “should’ve”.
Note: this is not advice. It’s a lay person observation / opinion. Even if one got the goods, without a strong litigator, well, you know.
(and it might take a village.)
Forbes
Ocwen Financial to Pay $2.5 Million, Allow Monitor of Its California …
Wall Street Journal-16 hours ago
Under that agreement, an outside monitor is ensuring that Ocwen is complying with the terms of the settlement and instituting proper practices …
Ocwen Financial Keeps California Mortgage License, Sued By …
Forbes-17 hours ago
Ocwen Financial (OCN) Affiliate Said to Default on Debt (HLSS)
StreetInsider.com-21 hours ago
Ocwen Shells Out $2.5M To Keep Calif. Mortgage License
Law360 (subscription)-13 hours ago
BlueMountain Capital Management, LLC Delivers Notice of Default …
IT Business Net-6 hours ago
Explore in depth (62 more articles)
I sent the request for a TILA recission to the Banksters. I was told by their “agent,” absolutely no way would they rescind their own Counterfeits and Forgeries.
I think the reason why is they would be admitting guilt and asking the Secret Service to come and put the cuffs on them.
They are all evil jackasses, every single lying and deceiving last one of them. From the top down. This massive Global Securities Fraud crime leads right to “the servicers,” like Angel Garcia from Bay view Loan Servicing/LNR. They are collecting payments and redistributing those payments wrongfully.
“The servicers” and their entire completely corrupt and useless “attorney network,” which would include “the servicers,” and all of their Mortgage Note
Counterfeiting minions in “Banks and
Banking,” who would include many of “the politicians” who assisted in helping “the servicers” who are in actuality, all the “attorney’s for Plaintiff’s,” all need to
go to Federal
prison for life ASAP.
Like as soon as tomorrow, they should all be arrested and taken the hell out of here. They are all aiding and abetting our enemies in the destruction of our great nation.
Fraudclosure is a very deceptive way to destroy their own evidence by putting the blame on innocent U.S. citizens.
Mainly, those U.S. citizens who were born here, on U.S. soil.
Fraudclosure is another name for “DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE.”
Just as “ROBOSIGNING,” which was never the “big scandal” it was made out to be, is another name for FRAUD & FORGERY.
Robosigning was no more than political posturing by the far left that was meant to be mentally abusive to their victims defending their own Titles to their dignity pro se in “fraudclosure.”
None of this would have ever happened if not for the “freemason lawyers,” whi are the so-called “Globslists,” and their “attorney network” of “Globalists.” These are the real traitors “hiding from within.”
@ iwantmynpv,
I would add manipulation of LIBOR to your analysis.
Also, I am specifically looking for the credit default swaps, collateralized debt obligations and/or the synthetic collateralized debt obligations taken against the ability of my wife and I to continue paying after the seventh year after the teaser rate re-adjusted.
Yes, the Boston Tea party was over the “Stamp Act”, no doubt.
Tom Paine called the “Continental” the “Cornerstone” to the Revolution.
Article 8 (section 8? I forget) is unfortunate in its wording ,,, “Coining money” … as opposed to “creating money” and some would have us believe it a fatal defect insofar as fiat currency is concerned. I disagree,
The Third Reich and the American Revolution had the same monetary equivalent vis-à-vis their contemporaries and it, in turn, led each to financial success in the face of overwhelming odds.
Consider: neither had commodity-based currency while instead, each operated on IOU; the Germans through Reichsmarks redeemed through state-owned banks; the American Revolutionaries, through “Continentals” redeemed through land-banks with differing rates peculiar to each colony.
In the end, of course, much different outcomes although the initial start-up and successes inherent to each are beyond dispute.
@ iwnatmynpv,
You are correct, sir.
michaelkeane, am I correct that you are claiming a correspondent bank funded your loan with an actual credit card belonging to the closing bank / officer of the closing bank, and sold it three times in the second market?
Hey, e.tolle. Good to see you, too! I love your humor but wasn’t able to discern what of what you said is true – monitors? You’re kidding, right?
Mike, first off… TSMIMITW stands for; The Second Most Interesting Man In The World. ego,, or no ego, the guy that makes those
Dos Equis beer commercials is one interesting son of a bitch, and far more interesting than I am.
Jamie Dimon was able to stave off losses on a short position in silver for years. Chase had a cost basis in the high 20’s and was able to ride silver to 50, and when it appeared that the calls were coming – he went to treasury and had them instruct the CFC to raise maintenance levels for silver and gold positions, and averaged is short up, and intentionally started media propaganda to start the selling…
Physical assets are no longer relevant because of the ETF’s, which are reset by a bank every day.
If you want to see how they make their money on the REMIC scam, look at form 10k. These loans are bankruptcy remote for a reason…
Initially, we the mortgagors fund the purchase of the swap through higher interest rates, the more credit risk – the higher the rate, i.e sub-prime, enhanced DO / DU for GSE crapola. These instruments were included as balance sheet collateral / hedge, which allowed the SPE to skirt reserve requirements, and since they would pick the loans from the pool that would convey cash flow to the trust… they knew the bets would pay off, not as a form of insurance, but as a trading profit.
They destroyed America for money… and it isn’t about greed, it’s about control and what’s to come. Banks do not exploit for tomorrow, the planning, looting and internal destruction is filtered in gradually, lest the folks rise up and revolt.
The Boston tea party had nothing to do with tax, it had to do with colonial script issued by the colonies, backed by productivity and gold, and not the Bank of England.
It took two other central banks, and 129 years and a couple of dead presidents to get us back on the debt tit, but they got it done.
@ iwantmynpv,
I posted shorting the banks a couple weeks ago. After all, JP Dimon and Goldman are soon to embrace their mutual weapon of mass destruction: a 22 trillion dollar derivative designed to short oil futures.
I hope they destroy each other. To suggest a 22 trillion dollar hit will leave them both standing seems far-fetched.
Incidentally, did you know the international shortfall to notional derivatives has been estimated by those far smarter than me to be 682 trillion dollars?
I feel the bankers’ end-game is simply to force the foreclosure as that will trigger short sale pay-offs as listed against the underlying assets: AKA derivatives.
Certainly the banks are already solvent by anybody’s stretch of imagination.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if there were a way to embolden those among us in distressed property proceedings to gain a working knowledge of the derivatives taken in our names while leveraged against our properties?
I confess such things are beyond me, although I am willing to bet there is a way to find out.
I think the names of those who committed the fraud at inception are necessary to such enterprise.
It so happens, on one of my distressed properties, I have the name of that banker and I also possess the credit card statement he used to “cash advance” tertiary funding as a third party to the loan.
On line 507 of the HUD form, the payment he received at closing mirrors the “Cash Advance” on his credit card statement.
So, he vetted us for our ability to pay, and then, as part of a larger scheme to defraud two banks and an insurance company, on a house which may have been intentionally burned, he then conspired w others, our own attorney included, to fashion three mortgages at closing.
He told us if we didn’t sign, we would be forced to sue to claim the money we spent renovating from the fire.
It also turns out he was employed by the bank that owned a $200,000.00 mortgage and insurance on the subject property.
I have long-considered he obviously took short positions against us vis-à-vis what he promised at the outset and what we were then coerced into at closing.
Had we failed to sign, the conspirators told us we stood to lose some $80,000.00, our life savings.
@ iwnatmynpv,
I recognize we are sympatico. No sweat.
Insofar as A Populist Uprising as condition precedent to central bank destruction…:
Agreed. Although I feel some have started already.
I also believe, should the time present itself, the people of this nation have recourse to history and, in particular the “Greenback” even as it still exists as a viable substitution for reserve notes.
I am intrigued by use of the internet as information center as contrasted with and counter-point to big media. Time will tell.
Recently I learned Japan has opted to abandon petrol altogether with new reliance on hydrogen… again, time will tell.
If I take the 42 solar panels on my roof and use them to power an electrode in my pool, the by-products are oxygen and hydrogen. It is a technology that already exists despite media manipulation.
The fact it will require an eclectic and utilitarian approach, to say nothing of “Unitarian” has also, not escaped my notice.
It seems likely those of us calcified in response as gifted to us from our own experiences are already beyond the upheaval boiling some years below the surface.
I think the youngsters are already wise beyond their years as pertains to banks.
I think they have already moved on as pertains to self-designed banker entitlements.
I am still curious “TSMIMTW”?
As a quick note to those that do take me seriously, I have no friends, and NG only allows me to comment here because i add the comical relief we all require.
I will admit, I also IALSNED, and michael, you should not take anything I say seriously. I am on your side.
TSMIMITW
michael – no trophy, just a plain old certificate. The people cannot defeat the banks through their own missteps, and they will not disappear as a result. The only way to get rid of the reserve system banks – is for the folks to stop using them, and to simultaneously short the shit out out of the equity portion of the balance sheet and tell congress that they cannot limit short selling on depository and investment banks.
Because our reserve system banks are leveraged to the hilt, with loan loss reserves that are far worse than any regulator will admit (see HTM v. HFS). During 2010, the FRC made major changes to capital structure, which effectively positioned it to never be defunct or bankrupt.
I will address a couple things outright. Lehman was let go as punishment to Dick Fuld. As you can see, the rest of the investment banks forced congressional leaders to change laws, therefore allowing them to immediately convert to bank holding companies, inclduign some favorites like AMEX, which is almost exclusively a credit transaction bank.
As far as credit unions and community lenders, take a look at the other less known GSE, The FHLB, explains a lot about that theory,and funding sources. When shit hits the fan, they will be the first to go, because they lack the cheap funding sources to and capital reserves to withstand the credit squeeze. No access, means goodbye. If the reserve system banks go, so goeth the savings banks.
As I recall, the last time a Greece bank was required to take a hit, the merely stepped in and stole the deposits. The vote is tomorrow, and there will be no monetary change. Before you see a Greek default, the bodies of dead Greek legislators will be piling up in the streets.
Iceland could pull it off because of their size, and aside from a bank that primarily funded by British depositors, the folks had no recourse and decided to burn down the government instead. To get 350 million Americans aboard for that type scenario is impossible.
The banks have long replaced our ideals as a unified America. That is always the first step to conquer a nation. The only way we can win back America is for the people of this nation to unify, and form its own cooperative bank, with the funding strictly from the people. At the same time we take all of our funds deposited and take huge short positions in the banks, and require our pension funds and IRA managers to sell all shares of the reserve system banks held in our accounts…
When the banks reach to the equity side funding source to raise capital, the mass dilution will cause all foreign investors to sell, we the people cover our short position with those shares, which adds trillions in capital to our bank.
We can start next week… LOL
@ E. ToLLe,
Thanks,
IIRC; I learn something new everyday; or, ILSNE.
NPV, even though it’s surprising that your ego can fit thru the internet portal, I do enjoy reading your comments.
Michael Keane, if I recall correctly, IIRC means if I recall correctly. But I can’t recall for sure.
@etolle – i have no competition. I have the worst ego problem by far…
@ E. ToLLe,
Thanks. I don’t understand why we can’t be civil.
Certainly everyone’s nerves are thin and everyone’s level of understanding is unique unto themselves.
With that in mind, I feel open discussion serves, if for no other reason than to help one another puzzle through what, at least to me, is a predicament I never felt I would be in.
I think “NPV” is “Net Present Value” and I also think it is representative of the “Straw Man” argument wherein our identities were stolen at birth to be used as subservient to third-party commercial interests.
I can wait to hear from iwantmynpv to elaborate further.
I also feel this article is relevant to the discussion:
Tuesday, Jan 20, 2015 11:24 AM EST
“We know exactly who today’s dream killers are”: Why postal banking is so needed — and on the rise
Lower-income Americans have been under-banked and abandoned. Now a progressive movement is fighting back (Updated)
David Dayen
I frankly, do feel banks are coming under fire for legitimate reasons and I also feel humanity will seek alternatives.
Incidentally, E.ToLLe, “IIRC”? I am not much of a computer guy.
@ Michael Keane, I don’t recall the exact meaning of that acronym that NVP uses, but IIRC, it has something to do with having the most seriously inflated ego on Neil’s blog. Although he has plenty of serious competition these days.
Good, E.Tolle, the dementia is spreading into forbidden areas, i.e. seeing criminality for what it really is.
JG, another thing….as you might recall, and pertinent to your writing of the attorney-in-fact issue, in my case….the attorney in fact not only instigated the foreclosure in the name of a long defunct lender, but he did this through a power of attorney recognizing his “power” by….wait for it…..signing the authorization HIMSELF! He granted himself the power to do all the nasties in the name of a defunct lender and MERS, all the while the bank was dead and never even a member of MERS! Go figure! Superhuman powers no doubt.
And you may also recall from my case, in addition to the alleged “original” note admitted into the pretend legal arena, there was a new, suddenly appearing and now endorsed-in-blank note right beside the original, obviously meant to clear up any confusion on the part of the judge, who really didn’t need any help as it was his intention to rule for the bank all along no matter the facts presented. But this is seen on the new and improved LL as scratching old wounds, even when it’s hoped that the discussion might overturn rocks hiding these types of nasties in other pertinent cases, 42 of them to be exact, that might benefit a new run at these assholes down the line.
@ iwantmynpv,
Thank you for conferring my new title. I confess I usually don’t win trophies very often.
I am somewhat confused over your closing “TSMiMITW”?
We used to hang one similar in the bar: IITYWYBMAD.
Certainly central banking is a scourge and not going anywhere, anytime soon.
At the same time, my credit union, according to my business manager has explained they are getting new customers daily.
It is also refreshing to see an alternative to Wall Street and its affiliates as indicated by the State-Owned Bank of North Dakota.
I often read Ellen Brown and recognize the conversation regarding banks as public utilities has begun to find its way, despite censorship by mainstream media etc.
Certainly some nations in Europe have had more than enough and I look forward to their further renunciations of “debt-slavery” visited upon them by central banking filth.
In fact, I think Greece is poised, yet again, to finally and forever more, do just that:
EU Showdown: Greece Takes on the Vampire Squid
Posted on January 6, 2015 by Ellen Brown
Of course, you may be one of those USA-centric types unable to view the real world beyond the zones best delineated by the likes of Honey-Boo-Boo and Kim Kardashian. If so, how sad for you.
In an effort to lighten your mood, I can suggest Gene Burnett’s, “Jump You F&%$@rs”. In further effort to broaden your horizons, you may also google the recent postings worldwide of any number of bankers who have recently come to their just rewards… perhaps you may find it more causally efficacious to combine the two.
Certainly Lehman is no more, among others and I also think this site hosts a tally of the number and names of banks that are failing (unless I am thinking of MSfraud); certainly it will take time for the rest to follow.
JG, welcome back, long time no see….uh….read. However, be forewarned that several changes have taken place in your absence. There are now LL monitors that “allow” only certain types of discussions to occur here. Pro se’ers are warned in advance that many topics are off limits, strictly taboo, as the new moderators take extreme issue with any attempt at advancing discussions of elements of law that they’ve determined are not legitimate topics. Criminality by a banks legal team is one of these topics. These distinctions are vague, however, such as when the actions of the banks may be illegal, but not unlawful, or the attorney in fact’s actions may be unlawful, but perfectly legal. Severe headaches may result from weighing these apparently divergent traits.
All non-lawyer-represented litigants who frequent LL are on notice that those millions of us who lost our homes in the first go-round with the banks have no rights to assemble here on LL to discuss future litigation strategies, as this is seen as simply aiding directionless, drifting mind syndrome, which just might make its way into the DSM-VI’s future publication of mental disorders. We mustn’t spin our wheels discussing blatant illegality on the part of the banks….it’s an obvious attempt at licking wounds and furthering the diseased behavior. Our bad. Pass the Prozac, please.
@ Christine – you are normally a well reasoned “commenter.” What’s the deal? Thousands of years or empirical banking, always backed by force and fear – simply will not disappear anytime soon.
Providing support to MK’s fantasy of banks casually going away is just plain silly.
Having said that, I too see the evils that Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Garfield, Lindbergh, McFadden, Kennedy, and many others before them, recognized and preached regarding “strong arm banking”.
Unfortunately, the barriers to dismantling an embedded currency system are far greater than any one individuals hopes. The first obstacle begins with education. That is why home schooling will eventually be entirely illegal in the US.
The social security scam is the great “identifier.”, whereby, parent(s) voluntarily exchange the sovereign rights of their children for no good purpose, aside from the hospital or medical center insisting that the child get SS number before they release the birth certificate / record of birth. This does happen!!!!!
Birth, and the ability to tax the fruits of that new born entities labor and productivity becomes the essential balance sheet of reserve banks actual lending. Just like the income tax, the SS tax, masqueraded as an entitlement, was, and currently is, nothing more than the central bank commandeering and arranging another source of revenue to guarantee the debt service of the corporate U.S. to itself.
Because the dollars held all over the globe are “fractionalized” into existence, any competing currency, crypto, gold silver etc… could only compete with federal reserve notes in two forms. The removal of a central currency peg (trade value) – or a military establishment rivaling those of the alleged developed nations.
Finally, you, I and michael keane will all of had our last shot of Jameson and our rotting corpses sprinkled over with particles from the Earth’s Crust, long before the global banking machine goes away.
… And that is be’s the facts.
TSMIMITW
@ Michael Keane… You said “Take heart, the banks are on their way out and good riddance.”
Although, I have seen many ridiculous comments on this site. You should be happy to know… You now hold clear title to first place, and your certificate of “Most Ridiculous” will be attached as an addendum to the Sheriff’s Notice.
TSMIMITW
JG,
And that was relevant to what and to whom…?
“First, Respondent states that Petitioner did not provide any evidence to establish that Deutsche Bank National Trust Company had the authority, as the attorney in fact for First National Bank of Nevada
to assign the Note to Residential Funding Corporation in the second assignment.
.Respondents make no argument and cite no authority to establish that such evidence is needed. Therefore, we do not address the merits of this alleged error and deem it abandoned.”
Holy cow! A homeowner finally brought up the matter of the alleged attorney in fact’s authority to do something. I can’t even believe how many attorneys don’t make this argument about the authority of someone to do an act for another. Maybe the attorney in fact’s authority was limited to ordering paper clips. Unfortunately, this homeowner didn’t go far enough – he didn’t say what principles or law demands that evidence of the scope of the authority (or even of the relationship itself) allegedly conferred on Deutsche as “attorney in fact” needs to be demonstrated. So the court deemed the matter abandoned ( a tad harsh? I don’t know. Maybe not). I just have never been able to believe how many relationships are asserted and unchallenged, even by attorneys who should know better. There just can’t be anyone here who hasn’t seen a notice of default, for instance, executed by so and so for such and such as its pick one – agent, att in fact, hitman, whatever. This particular case has an interesting discussion on bs affidavits and declarations, also. If you want to see it, go here:
https://avirani.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/tila-scotus/
scroll down and follow the links to the actual ruling in “Simpson” on
the left.
JG,
Your point being…? We can read.
“The Jesinoskis mailed respondents written notice of their intention to rescind within three years of their loan’s consummation,” wrote Justice Antonin Scalia in the court’s ruling. “Because this is all that a borrower must do in order to exercise his right to rescind under the Act, the court below erred in dismissing the complaint. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the Eighth Circuit and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
Unrelated but DELICIOUS ,,
Ocwen sued by investors for mortgage payment negligence
http://www.housingwire.com/articles/32707-bond-investors-accuse-ocwen-of-failing-to-collect-mortgage-payments
Rachel Williams,
What are your specific questions on TILA?
A lot of drifting minds, with no direction, no common sense and no win, come here for therapy. Many come to lick their wounds after the fact. Others come to attack anything and everything, just for the disgruntled hell of it. Same disease.
Are you here to get sympathy after having played your cards wrong and not being able to move past a tough experience, and to revisit where the system you subscribed to for so long went wrong? “Ponzi scheme”, “utility companies”, “treasury department”. What’s the thought process there?
Come on! At some point, people will have to take responsibility for what they poorly did and the result thereof! Where do they really think that attitude will take them them? To a win? To serious and solid help?
Ok I have read through the rescission messages however, what amazes me and perhaps if anyone else have had this experience but, the utilitiy companies and the treasury departments are all on board for the fraud. How can you rescind a alleged loan when it does not exist? They foreclosed many years prior and or at the time of the loan? Someone please answer this one. You must know your treasury department is on board with the fraud to hide the payments received. How much does one know about Monsanto and the fraud upon homeowners ?
He is correct , the banks never , never held title in the first place and many of these loans were cancelled , money taken by the servicers and where did this money go? To other loans which were forced into foreclosure. It is a Ponzi scheme on a huge scale which once again, is why Madoff stated” he has not done anything the government has not done ” This does not make it ok, however it clarify one thing here ” Do as we say, not as we do”
Michael, I hear you.
We have many laws; too many and it isn’t getting any better since every member of Congress big ambition is to leave his/her mark by sponsoring anything they may end up being known for, hence the reason for all those laws with their name on it: Glass and Steagall, Dodd and Frank, and many, many more… Hubris is huge in the human psyche!
The beauty of it is that we have so many laws that they end up contradicting each others. Unless fully repealed, those laws are still on the book. It is a game. A sick one but a game nevertheless. Those who play it right might get ahead. Those who don’t can’t. Our adversaries are the lawyers, whose only, very lucrative occupation is to research every one of them them on someone else’s dime, while we have to work eight-hour shifts just to survive and sacrifice our free time to barely scratch the top and be able to quote one or two.
It is a game though. When people start realizing it, they’ll learn how it’s played and they’ll take more risks and plead better. Or they’ll prioritize and decide the game is not for them and they have better things to do with their time and energy, in which case the game will run out of players.
Just imagine, for the hell of it: what if people decided the game is over and they won’t play anymore? No more paying taxes, no more bank account, back to basics: dealing with neighbors, trading, going back to a human scale. Plant their yards, barter, exchange and ignore the gamblers for good. Banks wouldn’t last three days. Military bases wouldn’t last 2 months. The whole thing would implode and we could move on to bigger and better things.
Won’t happen. Still too much fear on the part of too many who truly believe that every decision in life is a life-or-death proposition and refuse to see that they got it so wrong: life is a life-AND-death proposition. We’re born, we live, we die. That “live” part is the game. A sick one for those anyone hung on to that “God-Bible-Kuran” bit.
And banks and governments only survive on that life-or-death mentality. The Chinese don’t have that life-OR-death mentality. They’re way ahead of the game.
Toby said he thinks TILA requires a release of the collateral instrument
but that lenders may not do it. Well, then, seems to me that would
be a defense or offset to tender (if the lender otherwise performed) if the homeowner could demonstrate the failure to release materially
impacted his ability to tender. Maybe the homeowner had Joe Brown
lined up to buy his house, but Joe moved on because of the hassle
about the loan showing on it.
I’m about halfway thru reading the Jesinoski transcript and was reminded of something. The three day right of rescission the borrower is told about in the form at closing is based more on a borrower’s potential remorse than any infraction with the loan. I don’t believe the rescission during those three days (applicable to owner-occupied refinances) requires ’cause’. A borrower may just say “I changed my mind”. He doesn’t need a reason. There are other consumer transactions which have that same three day right to change one’s mind for any reason or no reason at all, but I forget what they are.
It’s the extension of the right to rescind for three years which is mol a
penalty to the lender for an infraction, and this is something peculiar to home loans. Say the three day right of rescission applied to the refinance of a boat (this may be a bad example; as I said, I forget). If that guy get’s remorse / changes his mind anytime after the three days, he’s out of luck. This 3 year deal only applies to refinances of owner-occupied real property. (It may apply to second mortgages, but I don’t remember). Imo the legislators recognize that a home is the single largest asset most of us will ever have and they endeavored to see that we were protected from ‘irregularities’, at least those covered by TILA.
In a nutshell, the right to rescind is extended to three years for cause,
whereas the three day right requires no cause. Imo.
@ Christine,
Agreed. With one caveat, in our case, the banker employed by the lien-holding bank, masqueraded as the “Lender” and also used his personal credit card to provide tertiary funding.
So, not all things banks and bankers do is “perfectly legal”.
It also so happens, this same individual concealed from us, with others, the presence of insurance owned by his bank prior to fire that destroyed the interior of the property.
He then lied, saying we would and could be given a single fixed loan while he also explained we could purchase the property “AS IS”.
Then, he and his pals concocted a wholly fraudulent “Appraiser’s Certification” unbeknownst to my wife or I until 2011 after it was delivered into our possession by the NJDOBI.
They used the fraudulent appraisal to trick the insurance paid-out, and, because agents from the lien-holder and “lender” were involved, it was also used to trick their own banks.
My subsequent research now proves, the “Lender” is no such thing; after all, this nit-wit used his personal credit card to fund the loan. I now have a copy of his credit card statement and along the margins are his handwritten math given to conspiracy and fraud.
This info came into my possession when the attorney, claiming to represent us, died, and I went thereafter to his office; his nit-wit wife and legal secretary gave me the complete file, un-redacted.
It proves our own attorney is complicit in the fraud. There is more actually, but I feel I have made my point.
Each fight is different, don’t give up and be creative in discovery. For example, I suggest every defrauded borrower visit their attorney’s office unannounced tomorrow and get their file.
In the meantime, the Fed was created in 1913 as was the 16th amendment that provides for income tax. These are the instruments of “British Central Banking”.
Together, with “free-trade agreements”, We as Americans have squandered our birth rights. End the FED; I am not your friend; corporations are not people.
Gene,
“You are absolute correct about the debt remaining if a rescission occurs and is successful.” I’ve been vocal for a number of years about “the free house” and so have you. It comes down to people having no clue about the difference between “legal” and “lawful” and doing everything they can to plead to emotions instead of cold, calculated reason.
Yep. Alan Bloom was very right about the dumbing down of America. If I had a kid now, I’d home school (where it hasn’t been outlawed yet).
You guys keep mixing apples and oranges. Something may be legal and yet immoral, unethical and unlawful. Something may be moral, ethical and lawful and yet illegal. Until you make the distinction between “legal” and everything else, you will not go very far in your fight.
Everything banks do, while completely immoral, unethical and often unlawful, is perfectly legal! That’s why judges have to take the stands they are forced to take: laws have been written for centuries by a congress fully subservient to banks and, subsequently, to the federal reserve.
Add to that the mumbo jumbo contained in the great majority of pro se filings and… Voila! No winners on this site.
Michael Keane,
You are right: the whole system is on its way out. Worldwide. Which is a pretty good thing since the federal reserve (QE anyone?) is neither federal nor a reserve. It is the instrument created by the banks (do your research on who sits on the board of directors) to lend, with interest, private money to government so that it can malfunction and is forever indebted to them. And just to throw that in, for those completely unaware of it… IRS is a creation of the federal reserve to directly siphon a hefty percentage of people’s exchanging their time for the privilege of employment and an increasingly meager salary.
Where is your money going? Well… out of 198 countries in the world, 146 currently have American bases, arming whoever does the federal reserve bidding and blowing them up when they stop. All on your dime.
National Security? Surely you jest! So much for a godly country with churches at every street corner. Bomb, bomb, bomb. The American legacy.
I respect Gene’s research as well as his career. Having said that, and without having read any tila cases for some years, a bad decision by courts doesn’t make them right or even imo binding precedent. Many courts are very fond of bench law, asserting their own views while others make ‘innocent’ misinterpretations /applications of statute in reaching a particular end. But one thing is true: if a particular case in one’s juris says “Y” and one doesn’t agree with Y, i.e., that the court shouldn’t rely on Y, one must be prepared to argue why Y is incorrect or one will lose on stare decisis if nothing else. imo. So he is correct, also in my opinion, that one must beware of precedent (and especially bad precedent). Not being a lawyer, I can’t know the precedent Jesinoski will be in this juris or that, but it does seem to me it
would be the bomb since it’s the U.S. SC, but caution, ONLY as to what was actually decided in Jesinoski.
JohnGault,
TILA is clear on cancelling the security interest. The debt remains and the Note is evidence of the debt. And, if a rescission is successful, the Deed of Trust would be reconveyed and then recorded.
When you mention the process of rescission, the cited statutes are correct, but courts have leave to amend the steps. This is because all too many borrowers have tried to rescind but had no ability to tender. The courts caught onto the inability to tender and called the borrower’s “bluff”. Essentially, the attempt to rescind without an ability to tender could pose legal problems for the borrower. (I leave to you to determine what those would be.)
Christine,
You are absolute correct about the debt remaining if a rescission occurs and is successful.
BTW, rescission only applies to owner occupied homes, that have been refinanced. It does not apply to non-owner occ, 2nd home, nor purchase money.
@ Gene, @ Rock, @ Toby
The pre-condition to NG’s statement in your post:
“there is no requirement for you to offer them any money at all in order to have TILA rescission (“I hereby rescind my loan”) be effective.”
Is best summed in his opening sentence:
TILA remedies and requirements actually address the “free house” complaint head on: If banks misbehave in material and important ways (as defined by statute and not in the minds of a judge or lawyer) then yes, the homeowner should get a free house.
“… if banks misbehave in material and important ways…”.
Further, NG believes as do I:
… nearly all the loans were table funded and therefore “predatory per se” (REG Z) …”.
Some among us possess the actual, material evidence of the multiple frauds we have been forced to endure. As a matter of fact, in one of our cases, own attorney conspired to withhold from us the evidence necessary for us to bring cause of action.
Instead, he conspired with others to defraud two banks and an insurance company while subjecting us to fraud of “bait-and-switch”.
I don’t feel I am going out on a limb to gauge Mr. Garfield’s intent with regard to this post even as Toby Fernsier correctly describes the steps necessary to any banking entity so foolish as to provide further evidence of their misdeeds while operating under the mistaken assumption they should deny rescission within the prescribed 20 day window.
I also feel Neil Garfield is quite clear in his assessment rescission forces the criminals to further elaborate on their deceit even as he has explained they have 20 days in which to do so.
Frankly, I feel the naysayers are those predisposed to sowing confusion and half-truth while only “…present(ing) one sided arguments.”.
The facts are: laws were broken, multiple frauds enacted and evidence may be available even as I believe more is on the way.
Take heart, the banks are on their way out and good riddance.
Robbery anyway you discuss it!
Consumers…High and Dry.
Sharksnessmen = Shark in a Business Suit.
Even if a homeowner/borrower has the money to tender…what would be the benefit to them ????
johngault, on January 23, 2015 at 1:05 pm said:
“I think we’d all be interested in knowing if a part of step 2 is the lender noticing its release of the collateral in public record. That’s what step two says, right?”
That’s my guess, but it’s important to remember that we’re dealing with the biggest criminals in the world, represented by well-funded amoral lawyers. They’d have no problem ignoring the need for public records, just fight it later.
Of course they’ve gotten sloppy, and I treat every document and statement from the banks as fraudulent, it’s just a matter of figuring out which of their mistakes is most useful.
Quiet title won in County court is my end game, I think it should be everyone’s(http://cloudedtitles.com/). If I see a way to use TILA to get there, I’ll use it. I am concerned filing a TILA rescission would interfer with a motion to Quiet Title.
“On Nov. 4, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Larry and Cheryle Jesinoski v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc., et al., (No. 13-684), a case that will resolve a circuit court split on portions of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) that give a borrower the right to rescind, or cancel, a mortgage loan. At issue in the case, which has been making its way through the courts for nearly five years, is whether under TILA, a borrower can exercise his right to rescind a transaction by notifying the creditor in writing within three years of the transaction’s consummation.”
If you want to read some oral arguments (transcript) from the case, go back to NG’s post on November 6th and follow the numbers – 13-684-4425 – at the top of his post til you get to the transcript.
And one more thing:
Fighting the bank in court and winning still leave you with scars, such as… a tax liability on WHATEVER money you get in damages, including the attorney’s fees you get back through judgment.
In fact, and even though you may have paid the attorney from your own pocket all along, banks will issue a 1099C for the ENTIRE amount of the judgment against them. Why? Because they declare the entire amount as a LOSS!!!
Up to you to fight them and have them reissue a correct 1099-C or a retraction. And then, you’re in for a sweet fight against the IRS.
Thank you for that research, Toby. That’s always been my understanding: the creditor has to do X first. I suppose if the creditor wants to make some argument against doing X first, its free to do so in a proper forum, but without more, that wouldn’t itself suspend the 20 days imo. Whether or not a lender would prevail if it demanded evidence of the borrower’s ability to tender upon the lender’s performance (of step 2), I couldn’t say without research. But doing nothing is not an option for a lender who has received a notice of rescission. imo. If you have time, I think we’d all be interested in knowing if a part of step 2 is the lender noticing its release of the collateral in public record. That’s what step two says, right?
I can’t speak to Gene’s assertion that the note isn’t cancelled on
rescission. Maybe he’ll support the statement for our benefit. Seems like a smart fellow capable of doing so.
Gene and Rock,
christine, on January 15, 2015 at 5:21 pm said:
It has to be very clear that rescinding a loan only means that one specific contract is being rescinded under the Truth in lending Act: the lender gets back whatever he advanced without any interest, penalties and whatnot but… the borrower must be able to give back that exact amount originally lent. TILA is great when one has the money to pay back. The reason TILA gives only 3 DAYS for borrowers to reconsider the contract for no reason whatsoever is because it is expected that they still have whatever was lent to them.
The Jesinoski case allows the plaintiffs to get out of the contract without penalties 3 years after the fact for good reasons. That’s all.
The question of the principal lent remains: it has to be paid back. Unless the Jeninoskis have the money to pay back that principal, they are in a bind: they owe it. Except that, now, it may have become insecure. That SCOTUS decision does not, by any stretch of imagination, mean a free house. Anyone telling you the opposite has a bridge in Brooklyn to sell Hapless.
Gene and Rock,
I have been saying it for years: rescission DEMANDS that whatever money was lent to the borrower to put him in the house MUST be paid back if he still wants to legally keep parking his butt in it.
NG doesn’t get it, never did and apparently never will. Then again, NG is completely oblivious to the fact that the SELLER got a check and that money (whatever its shape or form) changed hands and is accounted for on ledgers. There’s a point when too much bad lawyering destroys every ounce of simple common sense. That’s where NG has been for a very long time. Hence the lack of winners on this site: they throw away their own common sense the minute they start visiting this blog.
This is not about a free house its about Freedom and not living in a Totalitarian Country. Our due diligence was and is taken Basically we are being Lynched.
NEVER AGAIN
Toby,
You are correct in the statutory interpretation, as far as you go. The problem that you do not address is what happens if the lender denies your rescission claim. You have to go to court and prove the rescission claim, and that is where the Court changes the procedure and higher courts have upheld the practice.
Now read the court cases in the different states and see how the steps in the process can change per the courts.
I sent in a letter re TILA and rescission within the 3 year time limit and received nothing at all in return.
Javagold,
When NG is wrong, I am going to call him out on it when I have time.
The fact is the NG continuously states opinions that go totally against RESPA/TILA statutes. I have read time and again all the TILA/RESPA regs, and have also gone over the Fed Commentary that explains how to interpret the regs. Few people have ever even looked at Fed Commentary.
So does one go by his opinions or by what the statutes and rulings say.
Rock is completely correct in his post. Tender is required by the homeowner, or at least proof that they have the ability to tender.
NG is incorrect that the Note is void if rescission is granted. Only the security interest would be cancelled, not the Note. And if I am the lender, I would immediately take action against the borrower for the value of the note. That way, I tie up the ability of the homeowner to try and sell or refinance so that I would recover my money at some point in the future.
I have been involved in the foreclosure crisis since 2007, and have worked with over 5000 homeowners in foreclosure, being retained to provide expert witness testimony, foreclosure and mod analysis, and other actions. I have gone through Court Hearings challenging my professional credentials to provide opinions and have been found competent to testify to lender policies, practices and procedures in all manners of lending and foreclosure, and to testify to borrower damages.
When I get involved in an action, I MUST be absolutely correct in what I do and say and I must be able to back it up with regulations and other proof. There is no room for error or speculation. If I speculate or make errors, I get nailed and my credibility is gone. I have seen that happen to so called experts time and again and as a result, the homeowner losses.
I have also seen time and again the laziness of both homeowner and lender attorneys. They write up filings short on details, and the allegations get dismissed, but hopefully with leave to amend. To alleviate this problem, the attorneys I deal with have me review complaints, etc. before they get filed so we can ensure that things are correct and to avoid the lender Motions to Dismissed.
Court actions are not for editorializing or throwing out theories that have no basis in fact, or else arguments that are invalid. Homeowners lose when that occurs.
I found this on TILA and tendering back property:
”
According to the Act and Regulation Z, the rescission process should proceed as
follows:
•
Step One: By operation of law, the security interest automatically becomes void and the consumer is relieved of any obligation to pay any finance or other charge.
•
Step Two: The creditor has twenty days from receipt of the consumer’s
cancellation notice to return (or credit back) any money or property given to anyone, and to take any action necessary to reflect the termination of the security interest.
•
Step Three: After the creditor has complied with the preceding mandate, the consumer is to tender back to the creditor any money or property received. 15U.S.C. § 1635(b); Reg. Z §§ 226.15(d)(1),226.23(d)(2).
Both the statute and the regulation cast the creditor’s step-2 duties as conditions precedent to step three: if it does not comply, the consumer’s obligation to tender does
not arise.
http://quiettitleaction.com/Rescission%20of%20Closed-End%20Mortgage%20Loan%20Transactions.pdf
Gene. Does NG ever speak the truth in your eyes ? I understand he is not 100% … I understand he is trying to make sales… I understand he could be a liar, a thief and/or incompetent…….but is everything he posts for 6 years a big fat ZERO ?????
I find that impossible to believe !!
I only comment when I see a post that’s totally egregious. I literally could comment everyday, because almost every post by Garfield is factually and legally incorrect.
Once again, either Garfield is either totally incompetent and doesn’t understand TILA rescission, or just trying to rip homeowners off. As with most of his posts, its most likely both.
His statement: “there is no requirement for you to offer them any money at all in order to have the TILA rescission (“I hereby rescind my loan”) be effective.”
That is not the law, the homeowner must pay back (tender) the money lent to the homeowner, or there is no rescission. 15 U.S.C. § 1635(b); Reg.Z §§ 226.15(d)(3), 226.23(d)(3).
Matter of fact, most courts make the borrower plead tender or the case gets dismissed:
“Rescission is an empty remedy without Plaintiffs’ ability to pay back the principal of the loan (less interest, finance charges, etc.). Requiring Plaintiffs to allege that they can tender at this point in the litigation is consistent with Yamamoto.” Santos v. U.S. Bank N.A., 716 F.Supp.2d 970 (E.D. Cal., 2010)
Modifications are not subject to TILA disclosure requirements, unless the Interest Rate is increased.
What NG fails to point out is that the Courts have the ability to change the order that rescission is conducted. A court can have the borrower be required to show proof of tender offer prior to any cancellation of the security. If the borrower cannot tender, then the rescission would be ineffective.
NG also fails in his “table funded predatory per se” arguments. If he would read TILA/RESPA and Fed Commentary, he would know that the subject of Table Funded loans is referenced, and for TILA/RESPA purposes, the lender for disclosure purposes is the table funder, and not the one who provides the funds for the warehouse line of credit or the one who has contracted to buy the loan. Sloppy work on NG’s part.
For violations leading to rescission, there are specific categories under TILA. These include Right to Cancel documents being provided, and whether the Truth In Lending Disclosure was accurate in APR, Amount Financed, etc. For these categories, there are “error tolerances” built in that are allowed.
Again, what NG and most “forensic auditors” do not know is that certain charges that are subject to variable costs are “exempt” in calculations in the TILDS disclosures. For example:
The area in the TILDS that most auditors find errors is with the Finance Charge. This is because lenders calculate “prepaid interest” on the new loan of usually two or three days, based upon funding date and closing date. If the loan takes longer to close, likely caused by a paperwork or signing defect, the prepaid interest days could be four to seven or more. Auditiors then calculate the difference in the prepaid interest and this is the claim for rescission.
If they would read TILA/RESPA and Fed Commentary, they would find that this is an “exception” for calculating the finance charge and finding errors. Hence, there is no violation.
What NG fails to mention when he talks about the tolling position is that this is a difficult argument to present. Courts in most states have already ruled on tolling, and generally since the homeowner had the documents in their possession for many years before suddenly “finding” the errors and only after going into default, the Courts have found that the borrowers had not done their own previous due diligence and therefore tolling is not allowed.
These are very complex issues that require a full understanding of the laws in each state, Federal Rulings, RESPA/TILA and Fed Commentary. One cannot simply buy a TILA AUDIT software program and think that it will uncover violations leading to rescission. The software programs are written by people who do not understand the nuances of the laws and also lending practices.
Be careful about accepting what NG writes on this stuff. He presents one sided arguments that often are contradictory to the actual laws and case law findings.
I found this website and I think it does an adequate job of explaining the big picture:http://www.courtfool.info/en_home.htm.
There is zero doubt the central bankers have rendered themselves insolvent… even, or perhaps better, especially, according to their own rules.
Humanity, the-world-over, has been ensnared in their evil for far too long.
This is not about a “free house”.
I have been attempting to say for some 4 years or so, it is about short-sale bets placed, as “derivatives” on any given “borrower’s” ability to re-pay what they were told is a “loan”.
Of course, readers of Neil Garfield understand no such “loan” was ever “given” and instead, any number of frauds were employed to induce signatures so bankers could then manipulate interest payments on phony “pools of loans” that never held title to equity in the first place.
Also do you suggest continue to make monthly payments after sending rescission letter ????
What about any modifications that have taken place in the last TWO years, would those still qualify inside a 3 year window ????