The 4 Dog Defense: Bank PR at its most pernicious

Livinglies Team Services: see GTC HONORS Services, Books and Products


For more information please email us at or call us at 954-495-9867 or 520-405-1688

This is not legal advice on your case. Consult a lawyer who is licensed in the jurisdiction in which the transaction and /or property is located.



While watching a show on TV called “the Human Experiment” I was reminded about the four dog defense that was created in the 1950’s as growing awareness about the significant damage to health and early deaths were being tied to Tobacco. Shortly afterwards the four dog defense was adopted by the Chemical Industry and by others dealing with “crisis management.” But it has been in use for the last 10 years as the primary playbook of Wall Street. The only thing I would add is that there might be a fifth dog — “OK we did it, but we are not paying anything and we reject any punishment or rescission of the illegal transactions.”

As many health and consumer advocates have found out by personal experience, the most pernicious part of this strategy is that it works — for decades, which is is what we are dealing with on the latest round of Wall Street malfeasance. You hear someone on TV saying that “the loan products were within industry guidelines and posed no significant threat to the consumers or the economy when they were approved.” And because we who live in the United States want to believe that if it’s on the shelf at the store or the bank, then it’s safe and has been tested for efficacy.

Thus the Tobacco industry, the chemical industry, and the financial industry have taken advantage of the misapprehension that their next purchase, their next financial transaction is safe and they used that wrong presumption as part of their marketing. They made it appear as thought they were in competition with each other to give you a 3% loan. If true, they were flat out pedal to the metal trying to lose money.

Nobody asked why they would spend hundreds of millions of dollars and create entities like DiTech and Quicken Loans that seemingly had more money than the Banks. Somebody somewhere, close to the levers of power, should have noticed. Either they didn’t or they ignored it — until the crash came. At that point it was most important that people cover their behinds and least important to actually fix the problem without dumping a $20 Trillion dollar invoice on people who had the misfortune of buying contaminated loan products.


Someone complains about a product (tobacco, chemicals, or loans). In the PR context, this is compared to someone complaining that the seller or manufacturer has a dog that bit them and hurt them.

1. My dog doesn’t bite. So Tobacco industries and chemical industries and banks all tell us that what they are selling is harmless and attack the contrary claims as based upon “junk science” or conspiracy theorists. They completely deny that any harm exists much less that it caused harm to anyone by their tobacco, chemical or loan. Proprietary “independent groups” looking very official release reports that say there is no real harm in tobacco or chemicals and that the proliferation of more than 400 loan products from a starting point of just 5 different loan products was actually good for the consumer, good for the marketplace and good for the country. The corollary to this in the mortgage market is the denial that they even had a dog. Remember back in 2001-2009? There were no trusts. It was just a “Standard loan” with a “Standard foreclosure.”

2. My dog didn’t bite you. So after some years of information and data coming to light, perhaps with the help of the press, the next step is to admit what was no longer deniable (remember the famous phrase “previous statements on this subject are inoperable”?). In this context the company says that its tobacco, chemical or loan can cause damage but it didn’t cause damage to you. And as usual the regulators are actually members of the industries they are supposed to regulate. In the arena of the financial markets look back at comments from Treasury Secretaries Paulson and Geithner under Presidents Bush and Obama and Fed Chairmen Greenspan and Bernanke, we see that they sought to reassure the public that the toxic waste masquerading as triple AAA investments and “standard loans” were well contained within the subprime crisis — leaving those of us who knew otherwise wondering if they were all stupid or just lying. In foreclosures, this translated, as “OK we lied, there are trusts but that doesn’t concern you or hurt you.” We also had various pronouncements that there was nothing illegal.

3. My dog bit you but didn’t hurt you. More years have passed and now it is obvious that the toxic tobacco, chemicals and loans (and MBS) may have had some impact on you, but it isn’t serious and nothing significant is expected to happen (see above). The recurring refrain is that the release of these toxic substances and toxic financial products could cause harm, but the use of them was within restricted environments in which you would not be effected and you were not effected. No harm, no foul. And we have added bonus that the invisible hand of the marketplace will make any necessary corrections inevitable. So maybe the loans were mostly predatory (predatory per se if they were part of a pattern of conduct of table funded loans); but you were not harmed — the investors got their investments and are getting paid (see link above) and the borrowers received their loans — so what is the harm? Why should a little thing like violation of public policy announced by Congress and the Federal Reserve make a difference — you got the loan, you didn’t make the payments, so ANYONE could step in and collect, enforce or foreclose. What difference does it make if nobody in the chain ever had an economic interest? You failed or refused to make the payments and the fact that the “servicers”, “banks” or “trustees” couldn’t answer basic questions about the loan is irrelevant. 90 seconds per case was plenty on the rocket docket.

4. My dog bit you and hurt you but it’s not our fault. 

This is the classic ultimate defense of shifting responsibility to the victims. The investors should have known better than to believe the investment banks. The borrowers should have known better than to take toxic loans. If they were injured it was their choice to smoke, their choice to ingest skin products, water, food and other substances that caused cancer, killed you or killed your life savings and took away your home, your lifestyle and your job. It was your choice to smoke, to drink toxic water and buy into a toxic loan. So any injury is YOUR fault. In the foreclosure context this translates as “OK, the Trust never acquired the loan, the servicer therefore has nothing to service, nobody has any right to collect except the investors whose money was used in ways they never imagined. It doesn’t matter that we can’t show you proof of funding or proof of purchase because you didn’t make your payments. This is eroding now as more judges are asking the question “what difference does it make if the borrower is alleged to have stopped making payments, when the party alleging it had no right to collect, enforce or foreclose?”

Which brings us to the fifth dog which is that even if the behavior of Wall Street executives and employees was illegal we must allow them to keep their ill-gotten wealth and we must maintain the big banks because if they are required to report the truth on their financial statements they will all fail, leaving 7,000 community banks and credit unions to pick up the pieces. So various PR settlements, fines and even “damages” have been the subject of agreements. None of them address the essential fact that the homes were not free to anyone, that the homeowners invested heavily in maintaining the home, and that the homeowner and the investors — the only two real parties in interest — have been excluded from both the litigation and the settlement process.

The parallel strategy is intimidation. If the Banks convince you that worse things will happen if they are made accountable for all the damage they created, then government, courts and people will back off. It’s the one strategy that works nearly all the time: “scare the s**t out of them!”

76 Responses

  1. I can’t swear to what I made of david’s list, the one he sent me and I showed (parts of) three of them here. But I can swear that if borrowers are charged interest prior to funding, someone is making a boat-load of money, esp if the loan didn’t actually fund until the next month. Kind of hard to believe they’d do that, even for me fwiw. It reminds me for some reason of that one woman’s efforts to show that the old loan which was supposed to be paid off was put in false default instead of paid off. OR, maybe more likely, a somewhat but not too complicated strategy could find the bankster paying the existing loan (servicer advance) at its note rate of, say 6, and cashing in on the spread between that and the rate on the new money, something a lot higher after the teaser rate couple of months. There would be other ways to pull that off, also. Doesn’t mean they did, but she appeared to have done a lot of work, so maybe there was some validity to her thoughts. If they didn’t fund refi’s for a month or so, they surely would’ve had time to orchestrate something along these lines.

  2. Let’s say one finds out he was wrongfully charged 17 days unearned interest on his settlement statement (again, interest may only be charged from the loan disbursement). What’s to do about it? Maybe the only thing is what I said – assert that the figures going forward are all wrong because they would be.
    The payment of unearned interest might affect the a.p.r., but it also might be so slight as to not make a material difference as to the a.p.r., but tila disclosure of amt financed violation triggers at 35.00 after default has been asserted (before that it’s like 150.00), meaning the tolerance for error in the amt financed is only 35.00 after alleged default, is called, so then it matters since the per diem on a 400k loan at 6.50%, say, is quite a bit, like 72.00 per day. But if one learns this 7 years later, that is, past tila’s 3 years and doesn’t want to take on and “should have known issue” *, probably best to assert the default figures are incorrect and look to state law for other remedies. Say your bankster has you in court or filed non-j f/c and you feel strongly the default nos. are wrong, just based on the unearned but collected / charged interest. I’m not sure of the best route to make an issue of it. Maybe an attorney or ? will weigh in.

    *if one were not privy to the actual date of disbursement, imo there’s no way one could’ve known of the unearned interest charge. What – were we supposed to hire forensic auditors and hope their sleuthing turned up the date of disbursement? I don’t know too much about attorneys being involved with closing since by and large they aren’t with deeds of trust (v mtgs). But if there were an attorney involved on behalf of the homeowner, she probably should have made it her business to know when the loan actually disbursed, and therefore what the attorney should’ve known might be imputed to the borrower.

  3. There is a 5th dog, “That is not my dog”. I posted a comment when this story came out that was removed. Because a large percentage of the claimains state they act for someone like Freddie that will not make a legal claim to own the “loan”, the alleged owner denies ownership and the servicer still forecloses with no possible agency relationship.
    We are too quick to delete posts these days. I have been posting here since about 2010, and I don’t post nonsense.

  4. There’s clearly at least one loan in the list which appears to be a first payment default. First payment was due mos ago. So what it looks like the jerkies did is show its current balance diminished by 1 cent so the orig balance and the current balance, which would actually be higher than the orig balance, doesn’t shout the default. imo.

  5. re: the nov 2nd closing and funding. I guess there’s no reason a lender couldn’t charge interest on the HUD 1 from november 2nd thru the end of november (v a two day credit) and properly having a first payment due on January 1st instead of Dec 1st. It just means more money at closing to the borrower. No harm no foul if so, “as long as” he was because the loan balance will never be accurate if not, even if it’s less. The REG Z TILA form and rules relevant thereto, for instance, concern themselves with accuracy of figures, low OR high.
    But the rest of them stink.

  6. I think the funding date relationship to the note date is a big clue to this funding issue, lending support to NG’s assertion the money paid to buy certs was used to fund these loans. It doesn’t take a month or longer to fund a loan, or shouldn’t. If the lender’s warehouse line were tapped, he oughtn’t be soliciting and or making new loans. That strikes me as under I don’t know but something as unlawful. But, again, what we care about just now is the borrower’s default figures being wrong. These funding dates are rotten.









    11/02/2005 11/02/2005 01/01/2006

    07/08/2005 06/10/2005 08/01/2005

    10/12/2005 09/09/2005 11/01/2005

    10/12/2005 08/30/2005 10/01/2005

    from david. Hope this lines up right. Get this: the last entry shows
    a note date of 8/30 and a funding date not until 10/12 (!) and omg
    a first payment due on 10/1 which is BEFORE THE FUNDING DATE!!!
    It would’ve been unlawful to record that collateral document (mtg, dot) prior to the funding date btw. imo.

    And the first one is a purchase, not a refi. It closed and funded on the same date. But with a date of nov 2nd, the first payment should’ve been due on Dec 1, not jan 1 and the buyer/borrower should’ve been given a 2 day interest credit. Figures are also wrong when they’re off because less is owed, assuming that’s the outcome of this messd up up firts payment due date.

  10. I’m looking at a doc david sent me. Not sure what I’m looking at or for, but I do see something odd already. On it, there is often a full month between the note date and the funding date. I can only believe the “funding date” there refers to the funding of the loan at origination and nothing else, like the date the last guy paid anyone because that wouldn’t be called a funding date imo. There are also problems with the first payment date. And of course these things matter a great deal.
    Where it becomes particularly problematic for lenders is in the interest charged at closing. Remember, interest is paid in arrears.

    Generally, when a loan closes AND FUNDS by the fifth of a month, the borrower is given an interest credit for five days because the first payment will be due on the first of the following month. When the first payment is due on the first of the following month, the borrower will be paying interest in arrears for an entire month. But interest on those five days isn’t earned, hence the five day credit.

    When a loan closes and funds after day 5, the borrower is charged interest (see HUD 1 Settlement Statement, complicated in “escrow” states) thru the end of the month: close November 15th, first payment due January 1. When one pays the Jan 1 payment, she pays interest for the month of December (only), which is why interest will be charged on the HUD 1 from nov 15th thru the last day of the month.
    Reread this, please, til you get it. If i haven’t said it so you can, tell me, because it’s important.

    If a loan doesn’t fund for a month after the note date, the lender may NOT charge interest from the “contemplated” date of funding. The lender may only charge interest from the date of actual funding (and that’s the date of the loan though it’s often otherwise treated differently, as if the date of execution of the note is the loan date).

    So if one were charged interest from say the 7th thru the end of that month on the HUD 1, but the loan didn’t actually fund until the 6th of the next month, the borrower is owed a refund of the interest collected on the HUD 1. (and/ but, like I said, escrow states make this more difficult since one may not be or isn’t given a finite funding date – an absurdity to me, but even then, a month out is ridiculous). Further, if you did a refi and your loan didn’t fund for another whole month from the note date, interest for that whole month is also due on the loan being paid off. One might have been charge duplicate interest for a month or more – 1) interest on the new unfunded loan and 2) interest on the “old” loan being paid off.

    Default figures must be accurate. If anyone were charged interest on an unfunded loan, none of the figures on the loan are going to be accurate since UNearned interest was collected/ charged/ paid. In other words, the relationship between the amt collected (or credited even) on the HUD 1 and the actual funding date is critical. I haven’t looked at a servicer’s figures for quite a while, so I don’t recall how that initial interest debit or credit is dealt with on those forms, but one thing is true. They can’t be ignored: all figures are wrong when the interest credit or debit shown on the HUD 1 is improperly calculated, which imo is always the case when a loan doesn’t fund when it “should”, which is, as to an owner occupied refi, the 4th business day after the docs are signed. (No funding til 3 day “no reason” right of rescission expires). In ‘escrow’ states, they seem to think they may dawdle (don’t know why they think this). But I’ve never heard of a whole month before.

    Lenders often if not always collect interest for some # of days for the payoff of the exisiting loan in a refi, which is to be expected, like 3 to 5 days. It takes time to get the payment where it’s going. At least that used to be true (and the old lender must refund to the borrower any interest collected and remitted which is not owing because it received the payoff in less time than interest was collected for.) If everything is now done by wire, then lenders shouldn’t be charging more than is necessary since wires are almost concurrently sent and received. But for sure, not funding the new loan for a whole month, say, causes the borrower unnecessary and unfair interest on the old loan. You might look at your HUD 1 to see if you were charged for a wire fee for the payoff. If you weren’t, doesn’t necessarily mean the payoff funds weren’t in fact wired. .

  11. Credit reports have been rigged for some time. The credit reporting agencies are in on the scam, because as you say, who’s on first? If you are representing that entity A is not being paid, but he has no right to collect, then maybe we have a co-conspirator.


  13. david b – I’d like to understand the language in the ‘statement’, but I can’t. I know it’s hard to make columns here at LL. Mine never show up right. Can you either email me the stmt or blackout private info and put it at scribd and then link? Actually, I’ll see if your user name here is your email address.

  14. Ian, I don’t know anything about what’s reported to credit bureaus. Far as I know (but I don’t know), they report alleged defaults. But as you’re probably surmising, to do so, surely they must identify the party not being paid. Interesting querry! Since the alleged assgts to the trust are being done as current events but after the borrower’s default, the defaulted party for the credit report (on the 1 x 30 days late, say, and then the 1 x 60 days late, etc) has to be someone else, right, since by the time these alleged assgts are done, borrowers are way late and f/c is on the horizon.
    Or maybe you’re pointing to the fact that the loan isn’t in default with the Creditor since advances are being made and it could if not would bring up a host of claims to report it otherwise – very interesting.

    I hope someone who can speak to this issue of the credit report will: were you reported late and to whom?

  15. ian,

    David bellanger- if your two items are in headed columns, with one amt under “original balance” and the same amount again under “balance paid to date”, then the implication is obvious to a judge or anyone.

    so what would be so OBVIOUS? TO ANYONE AND A JUDGE ?


    349,349,79 349,349,79






  16. David bellanger- if your two items are in headed columns, with one amt under “original balance” and the same amount again under “balance paid to date”, then the implication is obvious to a judge or anyone.
    If, however, the amounts and the line item descriptions are just presented haphazardly in no order, then it doesnt appear as a standard book keeping entry.



    500,000 DOLLARS ??

  18. can any here explain the following statement. what the meaning is legally.

    349,349,79 349,349.79



  19. JohnGault- or anyone, how many servicers/debt collectors out there never report a thing to the credit bureaus? And, why? Any ideas anyone?

  20. “clean-up call (I went and looked) definitions:

    “Also called a cleanup buyback, an option in securitization transactions in which the issuer may reduce its own administrative expenses (jg: like having to make advances, I’d say) by buying back the remaining issue when the principal has been reduced to an insignificant amount, usually to less than 10% of the original issue. This option is often exercised for mortgage-backed securities.”

    “Early redemption of the entire balance of a debt issue when a relatively small amount of the original issue remains outstanding. For example, mortgage-backed securities are gradually paid down as mortgages backing the bonds are paid off by homeowners. At some point the issuer of the mortgage-backed securities may decide to reduce its own administrative expenses by calling the balance of the issue.”

    ‘A clean-up call, also known as a calamity call, is a feature of a collateralized mortgage obligation (CMO) that requires the issuer to pay off a portion of the CMO if the underlying mortgages don’t generate enough cash to make the principal and interest payments on the CMOs.”

    “How it works/Example:

    Let’s say Company XYZ has issued $450 million of CMOs that have principal and interest payments of $2 million per month. CMOs are bonds that are backed by a pool of underlying mortgages. The interest and principal payments toward those mortgages become the interest and principal payments that go to the CMOs.

    If several of the homeowners suddenly default on their mortgages or prepay their mortgages (by selling their houses before the mortgage is paid off), the CMO issuer might find itself unable to make those $2 million monthly payments to its holders. In this situation, a clean-up call may require the CMO issuer to pay off a portion of the CMOs.

    Why it Matters:

    Clean-up calls sound calamitous, but really they are a form of protection against default for buyers of CMOs. They also reduce the issuer’s reinvestment risk.”

    jg: I guess because the issuer or someone can buy its way out of
    the obligation to subsidize payments to the trusts / deriv holders.
    Sounds to me like fnma’s right to repurchase after making 4 payments is a form of clean-up call.

    “any clean-up call associated with a securitization must be an eligible clean-up call. The proposal defined a clean-up call as a contractual provision that permits a servicer to call securitization exposures (for example, asset-backed securities) before the stated (or contractual) maturity or call date”

    jg: holy moly. Did or does this allow servicers to make a clean-up call in the form of 86’ing the trust because of severe advances aka
    “securitization exposures” so they may 86 their future advance obligations ? Sort of shafts the investors, I’d say. Well, they must have agreed to it – or their funds’ managers forgot to tell them.

    The last one is from

    and has more info fwiw. I’m just looking to see what’s what with advances.

  21. ““Except as provided in section 860G(d)(2), ‘if any amount is
    contributed to a REMIC after the startup day, there is hereby imposed
    a tax for the taxable year of the REMIC in which the contribution is
    received equal to 100 percent of the amount of such contribution.”
    26 U.S.C. § 860G(d)(1).3.18 Section 11.04 of the PSA provides,

    “This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York and the obligations, rights and remedies of the parties hereunder shall be determined in accordance with such laws.”

    jg: I’m certainly hard-pressed to understand why courts, other than
    Glaski,’s declined to adjudicate “the obligations, rights, and remedies of the trusts “in accordance with such laws” when ruling in favor, essentially, of post-closing transfers to the trusts. (We need the section of the trust law which says post-closing transfers are void pursuant to the law which it is courts’ mandates to uphold. It’s probably in Glaski. Must be. But here we’re looking at advances.)

    “Except as provided in section 860G(d)(2), ‘if any amount is
    contributed to a REMIC after the startup day, there is hereby imposed
    a tax for the taxable year of the REMIC in which the contribution is
    received equal to 100 percent of the amount of such contribution.”
    So says 26 U.S.C. § 860G(d)(1).

    So looking at 860G(d)(2), we can see it says

    “(d) Tax on contributions after startup date

    (1) In general

    Except as provided in paragraph (2), if any amount is contributed to a REMIC after the startup day, there is hereby imposed a tax for the taxable year of the REMIC in which the contribution is received equal to 100 percent of the amount of such contribution.

    jg: way I read this, if advances are not exceptions, they’re not necessarily prohibited; they create tax liabiliites, though. Wonder how this works when the odd real estate sale amt these days exceeds the amt due on the note since the trust is the alleged seller and thus recipient of those funds (unless there’s an infamous credit bid) and so if only for a moment or two (before the excess is tendered to the borrower), it has a ‘new’ contribution. Or maybe it’s not seen that way since it’s going to be given to the homeowner.

    (2) Exceptions

    Paragraph (1) shall NOT (my emphasis) apply to any contribution which is made in cash and is described in any of the following subparagraphs:

    (A) Any contribution to facilitate a clean-up call (as defined in regulations) or a qualified liquidation.

    jg: I don’t know what a clean-up call is, unfortunately.

    (B) Any payment in the nature of a guarantee.

    jg: okay, but guarantee payments reduce principal and pay interest
    to the extent of the payments, as when Uncle Joe guaranteed
    my loan.

    (C) Any contribution during the 3-month period beginning on the startup day.

    (D) Any contribution to a qualified reserve fund by any holder of a residual interest in the REMIC.

    jg: I wouldn’t say these advance payments fall in this category of
    post-closing contributions if for no other reason than they’re
    apparently tendered as p & i, not headed to a reserve fund.

    (E) Any other contribution permitted in regulations.

    jg: we’ll have to determine if the advances fall under this one….?

    CFPB Seeks More Information To Support Rulemaking

    What I like about it, is a debt collector has to know what purpose they serve other than receiving info over the fence that ‘purported consumer’ A owes someone some money so shake them down for it, using all ‘legal means necessary’, and I use the term legal means loosely.

    The questions I want to know too?
    How many people do you hire to collect this?
    How much do you net when you collect it?
    Do you own the debt you are collecting?
    What do you do with account information you receive?
    How do you report the debt owed to credit bureaus?
    (really, if I don’t owe you but some court gave you the account for a traffic ticket saying I owe the court some fine, do you stick yourself out there in my credit account saying I owe you the fine cause some court says I owe them the fine? Do you represent the court in a capacity to be them in my credit report?)

    Wouldn’t it be interesting that every debt ever collected violates any form of debt collection because no one will show the true nature of the transaction, that purportedly created the debt, yes someone created a debt collection industry and a credit reporting industry to scarlet letter the rest of us into behaving and complying to coercion in order to live our lives.

    Trespass Unwanted.

  23. Trust does not foreclose on anyone.
    People foreclose on people and say they are doing it on the behalf of a trust, or servicer, or bank, or other entity.

    Remember in the days when robosiging was front page news? According to clouded titles, the report indicates its still going on, even though banks promised to change their ways, but I digressed.

    Remember when there were people who were claiming to be representatives of MERs, yet MERS stated they had no employees, or maybe I got that wrong, ignore my ignore-ance, and remember when people claimed to be foreclosing for a trust, without ever claiming the trust was the creditor, because they’d have to claim the owner of the trust is the creditor, and the owner would or probably should be the trustee of the trust, and if the trustee was the creditor, he/she could not be trustee, at the same time, and a trustee of the trust already has the power to foreclose for the beneficiary of the trust, so why would a trustee hire someone to represent the trust, when the trust already has a representative to protect it, and I can go on, and on, but really, our words mean things and if I showed a youth or a child a piece of paper and said this is a trust, this trust took someone’s home, that youth or child would ask how can something that is not alive and not animate do anything to something that is alive and animate, like how can a cartoon in Who Framed Roger Rabbit, harm a living man who is not a cartoon, how can a fiction harm the living?

    The key word is people, someone with life, has done a thing.
    Did they have right, power, authority, authorization, standing, permission, etc, to do that thing? If they did, who gave them the right, power, authority, authorization, standing, permission to do that thing and did they have the right, power, authority, authorization, standing, permission to give them that thing?

    When you get to those answers, what did they have? A note, a claim of a note, a copy of a note, a claim of an assignment, who made the assignment and where did they get their right, power, authority, etc….

    It’s right before our eyes, but we can beat the facts in our head so much trying to get the big picture which is obscure for a reason, and if we touch the fact that is closest to us, who sent the letter, Ans. law firm, who hired the law firm, ans some bank, who gave the authorization for the bank, Ans. Employee, what did the employee have access to, to give this authorization, and did this employee have right, power, authority, etc…to do this…

    I mean if you draw a picture and point a finger and did a rescission, or maybe even did a debt validation letter, or any number of other things, you can get to something closer than PSA as a link in the complex chain of fraud.

    If people got rid of claims of a fiction, and maybe stick with ’employee of bank’, or employee of trust, or employee of law firm, or worker for the county, or more specific people who are doing these things, you’ll pull back the curtain a lot faster and won’t appear to be grasping at the entire haystack when you can point your finger at the needle that started the harm.

    Just an honorable opinion, not statements of fact.
    I know nothing, everything I think I know, I find out something new and so I know nothing. I do not give legal advice. I use my imagination.

    I do have a question that has pondered me for a while.
    A man who talks to G-d, by some divine assignment…..ends in ope, and is called a -oly -ee ; how is it he has to get his assignment from other men who decide he’s the one who is appointed the one who can talk to G-d?

    I ask a lot of questions lately, because so much has been handed to me as information that is known by everyone but no one can tell me where they got the information from, except another someone.

    We live in a hearsay world, and facts are the only thing judged when you got into the business of court.

    They see a business name, and know the business cannot move without a representative doing it, and the representative standing there asks for a summary judgment I guess and ponder if it’s because right now they are the representative, and they didn’t do the things alleged, or send the letters alleged or ignore papers alleged, or whatever. I mean no one names the representative, they only name the represented, which is a fiction and doesn’t speak, think, talk, eat, sleep, move, it doesn’t do nothing.

    Why are we stuck like that, in that world of fiction saying it does things that it does not do?

    Questions, questions.

    I’m no better, still renting, someone in my property, but it’s still my property. I haven’t figured it out, and I won’t stop, but I’m not using court business to get it back, court business was used to steal it.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, People, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  24. JG, I think you can be assured that the servicers are lying, have always been lying and have always been dealing in fraudulent documents, forgery and fraud on the court.





  26. You are a party to the trust created in the instrument that created the corporate estate.


  27. What do those 1098s say?
    I did not file a fraud.

  28. louis /jg.

    this should be the question to the court. because the banks say we the borrower are NOT A PARTY TO PSA. RIGHT. OK.




  29. So is it a secured 1st lien or a leasehold?

    Get them to take a position in writing…..

  30. The advances are now required to be disclosed on the borrowers monthly statements.

    Trustee fees to fc on those advances.

    That’s desperation after… Security 1st fail

  31. louise: “do we have any pleadings yet that state exactly what and how much the servicers were contractually required to advance? Another questions is: do these advances count as payment on the note? ”

    jg: Q1: Not that I know of – yet. Some info I’ve seen and posted here says only the servicer retains records of its advances (as in the trust allegedly doesn’t, which is almost impossible to fathom, unless they’re in on the game and pretend they haven’t created a liability i.e., do business imo, in the form of payables).
    Q2: The trillion dollar question – are those payables UNDER THE NOTE ITSELF? I believe not, but we need the contracts, all of them. I don’t believe we can know the answer with any degree of certainty, as least on non-agency loans – where I believe at least F & F have made and are making strictly voluntary payments pursuant to their guarantee which should be applied to loan balances, without the entire agreements between all the players.
    I guess the challenge is to make sure the judiciary is aware of these
    so-called advances (so-called since after reading david’s material, looks like they might just as likely be just plain payments on cmo’s, but in the usual hornet’s nest we find, then why would the servicer be reimbursed for its own obligation? That would make them more crooked than we even think, kind of like Sears not telling the bk court it was getting paid by debtors after all) and point out that there is no way a judge may rule on this issue without all the facts. These advance issues are unavoidably material to claims of our default as to the Creditor. The only way imo we’re in default if the Creditor is getting paid is if the guy paying the creditor is his partner of some kind, if that’ll even get it. imo. We’re only getting, and thus so is the judiciary, ONE set of books, and those books in no way tell the whole story. But even without all the books, the fashion in which servicers may apply Henry’s loan proceeds to Claire’s advances, or whatever I tried to describe, stands as evidence there’s something rotten in Denmark or at least is necessary to informed adjudications. imo. Maybe the first question, after ‘educating ‘the judiciary, is: IS it our business if a third party has (contractually) agreed (if not co-signed essentially) to pay our Creditor; is this so material to an adjudication as to our default that an adjudication simply can’t be made without its consideration? Of course I believe it can’t.
    The servicers have essentially TURNED THEMSELVES into our Creditors, since reliance is on the only (one of many) set of books they want to see the light of day – the set of books which has only payments to THEM. (and those books don’t even disclose who they’re paying! for that matter, without the other books, how do we even know they’re paying anyone?) Even if they assert the UCC art III for poss and other junk, or even the “mers” assignments, it doesn’t change the fact of third party payments and our balances as a result, i.e., the alleged default figures, which must as a matter of law be correct. So then, maybe instead of attacking the default per se , attack the default figures themselves and argue the balance shown by OUR CREDITOR,
    not the servicer, is the ONLY one to support a claim of default. A person who has willfully hidden the fact from both the borrower and the court that it makes payments to borrowers’ creditors, has for years, and in conjunction with that, has also willfully withheld the “other” books from scrutiny is hardly worthy of credibility. In fact, to me, it makes them downright liars when they submit figures – in any forum or venue (NOD, court proceeding, to borrower) – which reflect only borrower payments TO THE CREDITOR. Servicers are NOT the creditors. Unless they are and perhaps they’d like to chat about that.

    lay opinions – ask 10 lawyers, esp one who used to work on the other side if you can find one

  32. Fraud on the Face of the contract and misrepresentation used as an inducement t sign.

    IF you can not beat them..join them.

    Is everyone prepared for the coming Judgment Day where we will All face the wrath for their evil ways?

  33. Nope. ..Can Not have it Both ways JG!
    Both can not exist at the same time.

    Keep going guys….you are on a roll.

  34. READ this statement close.

    (k) With respect to each Mortgage Loan, (A) immediately prior to
    the transfer and assignment to the Purchaser, the Mortgage Note and the Mortgage
    were not subject to an assignment or pledge, except for any assignment or pledge
    that had been satisfied and released, (B) the Seller had good and marketable
    title to and was the sole owner thereof and (C) the Seller had full right to
    transfer and sell the Mortgage Loan to the Purchaser free and clear of any
    encumbrance, equity, lien, pledge, charge, claim or security interest;

  35. David: “The pooling and servicing agreement provides that the depositor assign to the trustee for the benefit of the certificateholders without recourse all the right, title and interest of the depositor in and to the mortgage loans. Furthermore, the pooling and servicing agreement states that, although it is intended that the conveyance by the depositor to the trustee of the mortgage loans be construed as a sale, the conveyance of the mortgage loans shall also be deemed to be a grant by the depositor to the trustee of a security interest in the mortgage loans and related collateral.”

    Whaaat?! They cannot have it both ways: it’s a sale or the loans are collateral for a loan, but canNOT be BOTH. Now, non-delivery could if not would mol invoke the UCC, arriving in a (mere) security interests for the trusts, which btw, as we know must have true purchases and aren’t entitled to mere security interests in their tax-preferential makeup. But contracts can’t say two separate and distinct things since if they do, there’s no meeting of the minds (a major element of a contract) as to what’s what, and for what it would have been worth, which is zero imo, these two widely diverse scenarios aren’t even stated as alternatives. Purporting to give the trusts merely security interests has a host of ramifications, that is, if that could even be found on the basis of such a crazy deal because it’s so crazy, it could be called “no deal” and that’s why the UCC would get in the act: to determine the rights and positions of the parties upon the performance of one of them (payment) to the extent anyone could perform on a crazy, no-meeting-of-the-minds agreement. But just say this contract were written as stated. When the dust settled, the non-delivery would mean someone (trust? grp of investors?) had security rights in the instruments. Holy crud. This would handily explain why servicers make “advances”. They’re not advances, they would more appropriately be called payments on their own obligations as creditors of the trusts? group of investors?

    But as to :

    ” the depositor assign(s) to the trustee for the benefit of the certificate holders without recourse all the right, title and interest of the depositor in and to the mortgage loans.”

    These are words of conveyance. To the extent the loans are somewhere, as part of the agreement, identified with the requisite particularity, and if the trust performed by paying, imo there’s been a legally cognizable transfer / assignment (x in public records, making the agreement binding only on the parties thereto and also to those with “actual” notice – v. what we get by the “constructive” notice of recordation). EXCEPT that they queered it by adding the business about the loans being merely collateral for a loan (“security interest”, much like a warehouse lender has until he’s paid) after stating the loans are a true sale! This can’t be – to me, it’s an impossible contract. In fact, I can hardly believe it was written this way.
    David, where’d you get this, may I ask?

    “Here, I’m selling you my house for 300k, but your payment is also security for the 300k which you loaned me”! not

    The only other possible interpretation is that the trusts have security interests until the loans are delivered (which, again, is what the default law UCC would find IF an enforceable contract were first found, if an enforceable contract finding were a condition precedent to finding a security interest), but it really isn’t written that way. Maybe this is paraphrasing by someone gone awry. Otherwise it’s garbage. imo.

  36. JG, do we have any pleadings yet that state exactly what and how much the servicers were contractually required to advance? Another questions is: do these advances count as payment on the note? Another issue is that these servicers do not own the loan nor does the trust, that means somebody is filling their pockets at our expense and the expense of the investors. BTW, I just thought of something else: if any money did get to the trust, was it stolen as well? We know it is one giant rat’s next of theft, fraud, forgery, unjust enrichment, violations of Federal law 1033, 1034, Fraud and False Statements robo-perjury, RICO and conspiracy to commit fraud and other crimes. It is my sincere belief that karma will out, and it will all come out.




    This is a Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement (the “Agreement”) dated as of
    February 27, 2006 by and between GMAC Mortgage Corporation, a Pennsylvania
    corporation, having an office at 100 Witmer Road, Horsham, Pennsylvania 19044
    (the “Seller”) and Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc., a Delaware
    corporation, and having an office at 8400 Normandale Lake Boulevard,
    Minneapolis, Minnesota 55437 (the “Purchaser”).

    The Seller agrees to sell to the Purchaser and the Purchaser agrees to
    purchase from the Seller certain mortgage loans on a servicing-retained basis as
    described herein (the “Mortgage Loans”). The following terms are defined as

    Aggregate Principal Balance
    (as of the Cut-Off Date):
    $550,003,046.49 (after deduction of scheduled
    principal payments due on or before the Cut-Off
    Date, whether or not collected, but without
    deduction of prepayments that may have been made
    but not reported to the Seller as of the close
    of business on such date). Closing Date:
    February 27, 2006, or such other date as may be
    agreed upon by the parties hereto.

    Cut-Off Date: February 1, 2006.

    Mortgage Loan:
    A fixed rate, fully-amortizing, first lien,
    residential conventional mortgage loan having a
    term of not more than 30 years and secured by
    Mortgaged Property.

    Mortgaged Property:
    A single parcel of real property on which is
    located a detached or attached single-family
    residence, a two-to-four family dwelling,
    manufactured home, a townhouse, an individual
    condominium unit, or an individual unit in a
    planned unit development, or a proprietary lease
    in a unit in a cooperatively-owned apartment
    building and stock in the related cooperative

    Pooling and Servicing Agreement: The pooling and
    servicing agreement, dated as of February 27,
    2006, among Residential Asset Mortgage Products,
    Inc., as company, GMAC Mortgage Corporation, as
    servicer and Wells Fargo Bank, National
    Association, as trustee (the “Trustee”).

    Repurchase Event:
    With respect to any Mortgage Loan as to which
    the Seller delivers an affidavit certifying that
    the original Mortgage Note has been lost or
    destroyed, a subsequent default on such Mortgage
    Loan if the enforcement thereof or of the
    related Mortgage is materially and adversely
    affected by the absence of such original
    Mortgage Note.

    All capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings
    assigned thereto in the Pooling and Servicing Agreement. The parties intend
    hereby to set forth the terms and conditions upon which the proposed
    transactions will be effected and, in consideration of the premises and the
    mutual agreements set forth herein, agree as follows:

    SECTION 1. Agreement to Sell and Purchase Mortgage Loans. The Seller agrees to
    sell to the Purchaser and the Purchaser agrees to purchase from the Seller
    certain Mortgage Loans having an aggregate amount equal to the Aggregate
    Principal Balance as of the Cut-Off Date.

    SECTION 2. Mortgage Loan Schedule. The Seller has provided to the Purchaser a
    schedule setting forth all of the Mortgage Loans to be purchased on the Closing
    Date under this Agreement, which shall be attached hereto as Schedule I (the
    “Mortgage Loan Schedule”).

    SECTION 3. Purchase Price of Mortgage Loans. The purchase price (the “Purchase
    Price”) to be paid to the Seller by the Purchaser for the Mortgage Loans shall
    be the sum of (i) $537,891,820.77, (ii) the Class PO Certificates and Class IO
    Certificates and (iii) a 0.01% Percentage Interest in the Class R Certificates
    issued pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement. The cash portion of the
    purchase price shall be paid by wire transfer of immediately available funds on
    the Closing Date to the account specified by the Seller.

    The Purchaser and Seller intend that the conveyance by the Seller to the
    Purchaser of all its right, title and interest in and to the Mortgage Loans
    pursuant to this Agreement shall be, and be construed as, a sale of the Mortgage
    Loans by the Seller to the Purchaser. It is, further, not intended that such
    conveyance be deemed to be a grant of a security interest in the Mortgage Loans
    by the Seller to the Purchaser to secure a debt or other obligation of the
    Seller. However, in the event that the Mortgage Loans are held to be property of
    the Seller, or if for any reason this Agreement is held or deemed to create a
    security interest in the Mortgage Loans, then it is intended that (a) this
    Agreement shall be and hereby is a security agreement within the meaning of
    Articles 9 of the Pennsylvania Uniform Commercial Code, the Delaware Uniform
    Commercial Code and the Uniform Commercial Code of any other applicable
    jurisdiction; (b) the conveyance provided for in this Section shall be deemed to
    be, and hereby is, a grant by the Seller to the Purchaser of a security interest
    in all of the Seller’s right, title and interest, whether now owned or hereafter
    acquired, in and to the following: (A) the Mortgage Loans, including (i) with
    respect to each Cooperative Loan, the related Mortgage Note, Security Agreement,
    Assignment of Proprietary Lease, Cooperative Stock Certificate, Cooperative
    Lease, (ii) with respect to each Mortgage Loan other than a Cooperative Loan,
    the related Mortgage Note and Mortgage and (iii) any insurance policies and all
    other documents in the related Mortgage File, (B) all amounts payable pursuant
    to the Mortgage Loans in accordance with the terms thereof, (C) all proceeds of
    the conversion, voluntary or involuntary, of the foregoing into cash,
    instruments, securities or other property, (D) all accounts, general
    intangibles, chattel paper, instruments, documents, money, deposit accounts,
    goods, letters of credit, letter-of-credit rights, oil, gas, and other minerals,
    and investment property consisting of, arising from or relating to any of the
    foregoing and (E) all proceeds of the foregoing; (c) the possession by the
    Trustee, the Custodian or any other agent of the Trustee of any of the foregoing
    shall be deemed to be possession by the secured party, or possession by a
    purchaser or a person holding for the benefit of such secured party, for
    purposes of perfecting the security interest pursuant to the Pennsylvania
    Uniform Commercial Code, the Delaware Uniform Commercial Code and the Uniform
    Commercial Code of any other applicable jurisdiction (including, without
    limitation, Sections 9-313 and 9-314 of each thereof); and (d) notifications to
    persons holding such property, and acknowledgments, receipts or confirmations
    from persons holding such property, shall be deemed notifications to, or
    acknowledgments, receipts or confirmations from, securities intermediaries,
    bailees or agents of, or persons holding for, the Trustee (as applicable) for
    the purpose of perfecting such security interest under applicable law. The
    Seller shall, to the extent consistent with this Agreement, take such reasonable
    actions as may be necessary to ensure that, if this Agreement were determined to
    create a security interest in the Mortgage Loans and the other property
    described above, such security interest would be determined to be a perfected
    security interest of first priority under applicable law and will be maintained
    as such throughout the term of this Agreement. Without limiting the generality
    of the foregoing, the Seller shall prepare and deliver to the Purchaser not less
    than 15 days prior to any filing date, and the Purchaser shall file, or shall
    cause to be filed, at the expense of the Seller, all filings necessary to
    maintain the effectiveness of any original filings necessary under the Uniform
    Commercial Code as in effect in any jurisdiction to perfect the Purchaser’s
    security interest in the Mortgage Loans, including without limitation (x)
    continuation statements, and (y) such other statements as may be occasioned by
    (1) any change of name of the Seller or the Purchaser, (2) any change of type or
    jurisdiction of organization of the Seller, or (3) any transfer of any interest
    of the Seller in any Mortgage Loan.

    Notwithstanding the foregoing, (i) the Seller in its capacity as
    Servicer shall retain all servicing rights (including, without limitation,
    primary servicing and master servicing) relating to or arising out of the
    Mortgage Loans, and all rights to receive servicing fees, servicing income and
    other payments made as compensation for such servicing granted to it under the
    Pooling and Servicing Agreement pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth
    therein (collectively, the “Servicing Rights”) and (ii) the Servicing Rights are
    not included in the collateral in which the Seller grants a security interest
    pursuant to the immediately preceding paragraph.

    SECTION 4. Record Title and Possession of Mortgage Files. The Seller hereby
    sells, transfers, assigns, sets over and conveys to the Purchaser, without
    recourse, but subject to the terms of this Agreement and the Seller hereby
    acknowledges that the Purchaser, subject to the terms of this Agreement, shall
    have all the right, title and interest of the Seller in and to the Mortgage
    Loans. From the Closing Date, but as of the Cut-off Date, the ownership of each
    Mortgage Loan, including the Mortgage Note, the Mortgage, the contents of the
    related Mortgage File and all rights, benefits, proceeds and obligations arising
    therefrom or in connection therewith, has been vested in the Purchaser. All
    rights arising out of the Mortgage Loans including, but not limited to, all
    funds received on or in connection with the Mortgage Loans and all records or
    documents with respect to the Mortgage Loans prepared by or which come into the
    possession of the Seller shall be received and held by the Seller in trust for
    the exclusive benefit of the Purchaser as the owner of the Mortgage Loans. On
    and after the Closing Date, any portion of the related Mortgage Files or
    servicing files related to the Mortgage Loans (the “Servicing Files”) in
    Seller’s possession shall be held by Seller in a custodial capacity only for the
    benefit of the Purchaser. The Seller shall release its custody of any contents
    of the related Mortgage Files or Servicing Files only in accordance with written
    instructions of the Purchaser or the Purchaser’s designee.

    SECTION 5. Books and Records. The sale of each Mortgage Loan has been reflected
    on the Seller’s balance sheet and other financial statements as a sale of assets
    by the Seller. The Seller shall be responsible for maintaining, and shall
    maintain, a complete set of books and records for the Mortgage Loans which shall
    be appropriately identified in the Seller’s computer system to clearly reflect
    the ownership of the Mortgage Loans by the Purchaser.

    SECTION 6. Delivery of Mortgage Notes.

    (a) On or prior to the Closing Date, the Seller shall deliver to the Purchaser
    or the Custodian, as directed by the Purchaser, the original Mortgage Note, with
    respect to each Mortgage Loan so assigned, endorsed without recourse in blank,
    or in the name of the Trustee as trustee, and signed by an authorized officer
    (which endorsement shall contain either an original signature or a facsimile
    signature of an authorized officer of the Seller, and if in the form of an
    allonge, the allonge shall be stapled to the Mortgage Note), with all
    intervening endorsements showing a complete chain of title from the originator
    to the Seller. If the Mortgage Loan was acquired by the endorser in a merger,
    the endorsement must be by “____________, successor by merger to [name of
    predecessor]”. If the Mortgage Loan was acquired or originated by the endorser
    while doing business under another name, the endorsement must be by
    “____________ formerly known as [previous name].” The delivery of each Mortgage
    Note to the Purchaser or the Custodian is at the expense of the Seller.

    In lieu of delivering the Mortgage Note relating to any Mortgage
    Loan, the Seller may deliver or cause to be delivered a lost note affidavit from
    the Seller stating that the original Mortgage Note was lost, misplaced or
    destroyed, and, if available, a copy of each original Mortgage Note; provided,
    however, that in the case of Mortgage Loans which have been prepaid in full
    after the Cut-off Date and prior to the Closing Date, the Seller, in lieu of
    delivering the above documents, may deliver to the Purchaser a certification to
    such effect and shall deposit all amounts paid in respect of such Mortgage Loan
    in the Payment Account on the Closing Date.

    (b) If any Mortgage Note is not delivered to the Purchaser (or the Custodian as
    directed by the Purchaser) or the Purchaser discovers any defect with respect to
    a Mortgage Note which materially and adversely affects the interests of the
    Certificateholders in the related Mortgage Loan, the Purchaser shall give prompt
    written specification of such defect or omission to the Seller, and the Seller
    shall cure such defect or omission in all material respects or repurchase such
    Mortgage Loan or substitute a Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan in the manner
    set forth in Section 7.03. It is understood and agreed that the obligation of
    the Seller to cure a material defect in, or substitute for, or purchase any
    Mortgage Loan as to which a material defect in, or omission of, a Mortgage Note
    exists, shall constitute the sole remedy respecting such material defect or
    omission available to the Purchaser, Certificateholders or the Trustee on behalf
    of Certificateholders.

    (c) All other documents contained in the Mortgage File and any original
    documents relating to the Mortgage Loans not contained in the Mortgage File or
    delivered to the Purchaser, are and shall be retained by the Servicer in trust
    as agent for the Purchaser.

    In the event that in connection with any Mortgage Loan: (a) the
    original recorded Mortgage (or evidence of submission to the recording office),
    (b) all interim recorded assignments, (c) the original recorded modification
    agreement, if required, or (d) evidence of title insurance (together with all
    riders thereto, if any) satisfying the requirements of clause (I)(ii), (iv),
    (vi) or (vii) of the definition of Mortgage File, respectively, is not in the
    possession of the Servicer concurrently with the execution and delivery hereof
    because such document or documents have not been returned from the applicable
    public recording office, or, in the case of each such interim assignment or
    modification agreement, because the related Mortgage has not been returned by
    the appropriate recording office, in the case of clause (I)(ii), (iv) or (vi) of
    the definition of Mortgage File, or because the evidence of title insurance has
    not been delivered to the Seller by the title insurer in the case of clause
    (I)(vii) of the definition of Mortgage File, the Servicer shall use its best
    efforts to obtain, (A) in the case of clause (I)(ii), (iv) or (vi) of the
    definition of Mortgage File, such original Mortgage, such interim assignment, or
    such modification agreement, with evidence of recording indicated thereon upon
    receipt thereof from the public recording office, or a copy thereof, certified,
    if appropriate, by the relevant recording office, or (B) in the case of clause
    (I)(vii) of the definition of Mortgage File, evidence of title insurance.

    (d) If any of the documents held by the Servicer pursuant to clause (c) above
    are missing or defective in any other respect and such missing document or
    defect materially and adversely affects the interests of the Certificateholders
    in the related Mortgage Loan, the Seller shall cure or repurchase such Mortgage
    Loan or substitute a Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan in the manner set forth
    in Section 7.03. It is understood and agreed that the obligation of the Seller
    to cure a material defect in, or substitute for, or purchase any Mortgage Loan
    as to which a material defect in or omission of a constituent document exists,
    shall constitute the sole remedy respecting such material defect or omission
    available to the Purchaser, Certificateholders or the Trustee on behalf of

    (e) If any assignment is lost or returned unrecorded to the Servicer because of
    any defect therein, the Seller shall prepare a substitute assignment or cure
    such defect, as the case may be, and the Servicer shall cause such assignment to
    be recorded in accordance with this Section.

    SECTION 7. Representations and Warranties.

    SECTION 7.01. Representations and Warranties of Seller. The Seller represents,
    warrants and covenants to the Purchaser that as of the Closing Date or as of
    such date specifically provided herein:

    (a) The Seller is a corporation duly organized, validly existing
    and in good standing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and is
    or will be in compliance with the laws of each state in which any Mortgaged
    Property is located to the extent necessary to ensure the enforceability of each
    Mortgage Loan;

    (b) The Seller has the power and authority to make, execute,
    deliver and perform its obligations under this Agreement and all of the
    transactions contemplated under this Agreement, and has taken all necessary
    corporate action to authorize the execution, delivery and performance of this
    Agreement; this Agreement constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation of
    the Seller, enforceable against the Seller in accordance with its terms, except
    as enforceability may be limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency,
    reorganization, moratorium or other similar laws now or hereafter in effect
    affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights in general and except as such
    enforceability may be limited by general principles of equity (whether
    considered in a proceeding at law or in equity) or by public policy with respect
    to indemnification under applicable securities laws;

    (c) The execution and delivery of this Agreement by the Seller
    and its performance and compliance with the terms of this Agreement will not
    violate the Seller’s Certificate of Incorporation or Bylaws or constitute a
    material default (or an event which, with notice or lapse of time, or both,
    would constitute a material default) under, or result in the material breach of,
    any material contract, agreement or other instrument to which the Seller is a
    party or which may be applicable to the Seller or any of its assets;

    (d) No litigation before any court, tribunal or governmental body
    is currently pending, nor to the knowledge of the Seller is threatened against
    the Seller, nor is there any such litigation currently pending, nor to the
    knowledge of the Seller threatened against the Seller with respect to this
    Agreement that in the opinion of the Seller has a reasonable likelihood of
    resulting in a material adverse effect on the transactions contemplated by this

    (e) No consent, approval, authorization or order of any court or
    governmental agency or body is required for the execution, delivery and
    performance by the Seller of or compliance by the Seller with this Agreement,
    the sale of the Mortgage Loans or the consummation of the transactions
    contemplated by this Agreement except for consents, approvals, authorizations
    and orders which have been obtained;

    (f) The consummation of the transactions contemplated by this
    Agreement is in the ordinary course of business of the Seller, and the transfer,
    assignment and conveyance of the Mortgage Notes and the Mortgages relating to
    the Mortgage Loans by the Seller pursuant to this Agreement are not subject to
    bulk transfer or any similar statutory provisions in effect in any applicable

    (g) The Seller did not select such Mortgage Loans in a manner
    that it reasonably believed was adverse to the interests of the Purchaser based
    on the Seller’s portfolio of conventional non-conforming Mortgage Loans;

    (h) The Seller will treat the sale of the Mortgage Loans to the
    Purchaser as a sale for reporting and accounting purposes and, to the extent
    appropriate, for federal income tax purposes;

    (i) The Seller is an approved seller/servicer of residential
    mortgage loans for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The Seller is in good standing to
    sell mortgage loans to and service mortgage loans for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
    and no event has occurred which would make the Seller unable to comply with
    eligibility requirements or which would require notification to either Fannie
    Mae or Freddie Mac; and

    (j) No written statement, report or other document furnished or
    to be furnished pursuant to the Agreement contains or will contain any statement
    that is or will be inaccurate or misleading in any material respect.

    SECTION 7.02. Representations and Warranties as to Individual Mortgage Loans.
    The Seller hereby represents and warrants to the Purchaser, as to each Mortgage
    Loan (except as otherwise specified below), as of the Closing Date, as follows:

    (a) The information set forth in the Mortgage Loan Schedule is
    true, complete and correct in all material respects as of the Cut-Off Date;

    (b) The original mortgage, deed of trust or other evidence of
    indebtedness (the “Mortgage”) creates a first lien on an estate in fee simple or
    a leasehold interest in real property securing the related Mortgage Note, free
    and clear of all adverse claims, liens and encumbrances having priority over the
    first lien of the Mortgage subject only to (1) the lien of non-delinquent
    current real property taxes and assessments not yet due and payable, (2)
    covenants, conditions and restrictions, rights of way, easements and other
    matters of public record as of the date of recording which are acceptable to
    mortgage lending institutions generally, and (3) other matters to which like
    properties are commonly subject which do not materially interfere with the
    benefits of the security intended to be provided by the Mortgage or the use,
    enjoyment, value or marketability of the related Mortgaged Property;

    (c) The Mortgage Loan has not been delinquent thirty (30) days or
    more at any time during the twelve (12) month period prior to the Cut-off Date
    for such Mortgage Loan. As of the Cut-Off Date, the Mortgage Loan is not
    delinquent in payment more than 30 days and has not been dishonored; there are
    no defaults under the terms of the Mortgage Loan; and the Seller has not
    advanced funds, or induced, solicited or knowingly received any advance of funds
    from a party other than the owner of the Mortgaged Property subject to the
    Mortgage, directly or indirectly, for the payment of any amount required by the
    Mortgage Loan;

    (d) There are no delinquent taxes which are due and payable,
    ground rents, assessments or other outstanding charges affecting the related
    Mortgaged Property;

    (e) The Mortgage Note and the Mortgage have not been impaired,
    waived, altered or modified in any respect, except by written instruments which
    have been recorded to the extent any such recordation is required by applicable
    law or is necessary to protect the interests of the Purchaser, and which have
    been approved by the title insurer and the primary mortgage insurer, as
    applicable, and copies of which written instruments are included in the Mortgage
    File. No other instrument of waiver, alteration or modification has been
    executed, and no Mortgagor has been released by the Seller, or to the best of
    Seller’s knowledge, by any other person, in whole or in part, from the terms
    thereof except in connection with an assumption agreement, which assumption
    agreement is part of the Mortgage File and the terms of which are reflected on
    the Mortgage Loan Schedule;

    (f) The Mortgage Note and the Mortgage are not subject to any
    right of rescission, set-off, counterclaim or defense, including the defense of
    usury, nor will the operation of any of the terms of the Mortgage Note and the
    Mortgage, or the exercise of any right thereunder, render the Mortgage Note or
    Mortgage unenforceable, in whole or in part, or subject to any right of
    rescission, set-off, counterclaim or defense, including the defense of usury,
    and no such right of rescission, set-off, counterclaim or defense has been
    asserted with respect thereto;

    (g) All buildings upon the Mortgaged Property are insured by a
    generally acceptable insurer pursuant to standard hazard policies conforming to
    the requirements of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. All such standard hazard
    policies are in effect and on the date of origination contained a standard
    mortgagee clause naming the Seller and its successors in interest as loss payee
    and such clause is still in effect. If the Mortgaged Property is located in an
    area identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency as having special
    flood hazards under the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, as amended, such
    Mortgaged Property is covered by flood insurance by a generally acceptable
    insurer in an amount not less than the requirements of Fannie Mae and Freddie
    Mac. The Mortgage obligates the Mortgagor thereunder to maintain all such
    insurance at the Mortgagor’s cost and expense, and on the Mortgagor’s failure to
    do so, authorizes the holder of the Mortgage to maintain such insurance at the
    Mortgagor’s cost and expense and to seek reimbursement therefor from the

    (h) Each Mortgage Loan as of the time of its origination complied
    in all material respects with all applicable local, state and federal laws,
    including, but not limited to, all applicable predatory lending laws;

    (i) The Mortgage has not been satisfied, canceled or
    subordinated, in whole or in part, or rescinded, and the Mortgaged Property has
    not been released from the lien of the Mortgage, in whole or in part nor has any
    instrument been executed that would effect any such satisfaction, release,
    cancellation, subordination or rescission;

    (j) The Mortgage Note and the related Mortgage are original and
    genuine and each is the legal, valid and binding obligation of the maker
    thereof, enforceable in all respects in accordance with its terms subject to
    bankruptcy, insolvency and other laws of general application affecting the
    rights of creditors. All parties to the Mortgage Note and the Mortgage had the
    legal capacity to enter into the Mortgage Loan and to execute and deliver the
    Mortgage Note and the Mortgage. The Mortgage Note and the Mortgage have been
    duly and properly executed by such parties. The proceeds of the Mortgage Note
    have been fully disbursed and there is no requirement for future advances

    (k) With respect to each Mortgage Loan, (A) immediately prior to
    the transfer and assignment to the Purchaser, the Mortgage Note and the Mortgage
    were not subject to an assignment or pledge, except for any assignment or pledge
    that had been satisfied and released, (B) the Seller had good and marketable
    title to and was the sole owner thereof and (C) the Seller had full right to
    transfer and sell the Mortgage Loan to the Purchaser free and clear of any
    encumbrance, equity, lien, pledge, charge, claim or security interest;

    (l) The Mortgage Loan is covered by an ALTA lender’s title
    insurance policy or other generally acceptable form of policy of insurance, with
    all necessary endorsements, issued by a title insurer qualified to do business
    in the jurisdiction where the Mortgaged Property is located, insuring (subject
    to the exceptions contained in clause (b) (1), (2) and (3) above) the Seller,
    its successors and assigns, as to the first priority lien of the Mortgage in the
    original principal amount of the Mortgage Loan. Such title insurance policy
    affirmatively insures ingress and egress and against encroachments by or upon
    the Mortgaged Property or any interest therein. The Seller is the sole insured
    of such lender’s title insurance policy, such title insurance policy has been
    duly and validly endorsed to the Purchaser or the assignment to the Purchaser of
    the Seller’s interest therein does not require the consent of or notification to
    the insurer and such lender’s title insurance policy is in full force and effect
    and will be in full force and effect upon the consummation of the transactions
    contemplated by this Agreement. No claims have been made under such lender’s
    title insurance policy, and no prior holder of the related Mortgage has done, by
    act or omission, anything which would impair the coverage of such lender’s title
    insurance policy;

    (m) To the Seller’s knowledge, there is no default, breach,
    violation or event of acceleration existing under the Mortgage or the related
    Mortgage Note and no event which, with the passage of time or with notice and
    the expiration of any grace or cure period, would constitute a default, breach,
    violation or event permitting acceleration; and neither the Seller nor any prior
    mortgagee has waived any default, breach, violation or event permitting

    (n) To the Seller’s knowledge, there are no mechanics, or similar
    liens or claims which have been filed for work, labor or material affecting the
    related Mortgaged Property which are or may be liens prior to or equal to the
    lien of the related Mortgage;

    (o) To the Seller’s knowledge, all improvements lie wholly within
    the boundaries and building restriction lines of the Mortgaged Property (and
    wholly with the project with respect to a condominium unit) and no improvements
    on adjoining properties encroach upon the Mortgaged Property except those which
    are insured against by the title insurance policy referred to in clause (l)
    above and all improvements on the property comply with all applicable zoning and
    subdivision laws and ordinances;

    (p) The Mortgage Loan constitutes a “qualified mortgage” under
    Section 860G(a)(3)(A) of the Code and Treasury Regulation Section
    1.860G-2(a)(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7) and (9), without reliance on the
    provisions of Treasury Regulation Section 1.860G-2(a)(3) or Treasury Regulation
    Section 1.860G-2(f)(2) or any other provision that would allow a Mortgage Loan
    to be treated as a “qualified mortgage” notwithstanding its failure to meet the
    requirements of Section 860G(a)(3)(A) of the Code and Treasury Regulation
    Section 1.860G-2(a)(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7) and (9);

    (q) The Mortgage Loan complies in all material respects with all
    the terms, conditions and requirements of the Seller’s underwriting standards in
    effect at the time of origination of such Mortgage Loan. The Mortgage Notes and
    Mortgages are on uniform Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac instruments or are on forms
    acceptable to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac;

    (r) The Mortgage Loan contains the usual and enforceable
    provisions of the originator at the time of origination for the acceleration of
    the payment of the unpaid principal amount if the related Mortgaged Property is
    sold without the prior consent of the mortgagee thereunder. The Mortgage Loan
    has an original term to maturity of not more than 30 years, with interest
    payable in arrears on the first day of each month. Except as otherwise set forth
    on the Mortgage Loan Schedule, the Mortgage Loan does not contain terms or
    provisions which would result in negative amortization nor contain “graduated
    payment” features or “buydown” features;

    (s) To the Seller’s knowledge, the Mortgaged Property at
    origination of the Mortgage Loan was and currently is free of damage and waste
    and, to the Seller’s knowledge, at origination of the Mortgage Loan there was,
    and there currently is, no proceeding pending for the total or partial
    condemnation thereof;

    (t) The related Mortgage contains enforceable provisions such as
    to render the rights and remedies of the holder thereof adequate for the
    realization against the Mortgaged Property of the benefits of the security
    provided thereby, including, (1) in the case of a Mortgage designated as a deed
    of trust, by trustee’s sale, and (2) otherwise by judicial foreclosure. To the
    Seller’s knowledge, there is no homestead or other exemption available to the
    Mortgagor which would interfere with the right to sell the Mortgaged Property at
    a trustee’s sale or the right to foreclose the Mortgage;

    (u) If the Mortgage constitutes a deed of trust, a trustee, duly
    qualified if required under applicable law to act as such, has been properly
    designated and currently so serves and is named in the Mortgage, and no fees or
    expenses are or will become payable by the Purchaser to the trustee under the
    deed of trust, except in connection with a trustees sale or attempted sale after
    default by the Mortgagor;

    (v) If required by the applicable processing style, the Mortgage
    File contains an appraisal of the related Mortgaged Property made and signed
    prior to the final approval of the mortgage loan application by an appraiser
    that is acceptable to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac and approved by the Seller. The
    appraisal, if applicable, is in a form generally acceptable to Fannie Mae or
    Freddie Mac;

    (w) To the Seller’s knowledge, each of the Mortgaged Properties
    consists of a single parcel of real property with a detached single-family
    residence erected thereon, or a two- to four-family dwelling, a townhouse, an
    individual condominium unit in a condominium project, an individual unit in a
    planned unit development or a proprietary lease on a cooperatively owned
    apartment and stock in the related cooperative corporation. Any condominium unit
    or planned unit development either conforms with applicable Fannie Mae or
    Freddie Mac requirements regarding such dwellings or is covered by a waiver
    confirming that such condominium unit or planned unit development is acceptable
    to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac or is otherwise “warrantable” with respect thereto.
    No such residence is a mobile home or manufactured dwelling;

    (x) The ratio of the original outstanding principal amount of the
    Mortgage Loan to the lesser of the appraised value (or stated value if an
    appraisal was not a requirement of the applicable processing style) of the
    Mortgaged Property at origination or the purchase price of the Mortgaged
    Property securing each Mortgage Loan (the “Loan-to-Value Ratio”) is not in
    excess of 95.00%. The original Loan-to-Value Ratio of each Mortgage Loan either
    was not more than 80.00% or the excess over 80.00% is insured as to payment
    defaults by a primary mortgage insurance policy issued by a primary mortgage
    insurer acceptable to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac;

    (y) The Seller is either, and each Mortgage Loan was originated
    by, a savings and loan association, savings bank, commercial bank, credit union,
    insurance company or similar institution which is supervised and examined by a
    federal or State authority, or by a mortgagee approved by the Secretary of
    Housing and Urban Development pursuant to Section 203 and 211 of the National
    Housing Act;

    (z) The origination, collection and servicing practices with
    respect to each Mortgage Note and Mortgage have been in all material respects
    legal, normal and usual in the Seller’s general mortgage servicing activities.
    With respect to escrow deposits and payments that the Seller collects, all such
    payments are in the possession of, or under the control of, the Seller, and
    there exist no deficiencies in connection therewith for which customary
    arrangements for repayment thereof have not been made. No escrow deposits or
    other charges or payments due under the Mortgage Note have been capitalized
    under any Mortgage or the related Mortgage Note;

    (aa) No fraud or misrepresentation of a material fact with
    respect to the origination of a Mortgage Loan has taken place on the part of the
    Seller; and

    (bb) If any of the Mortgage Loans are secured by a leasehold
    interest, with respect to each leasehold interest: residential property in such
    area consisting of leasehold estates is readily marketable; the lease is
    recorded and is in full force and effect and is not subject to any prior lien or
    encumbrance by which the leasehold could be terminated or subject to any charge
    or penalty; and the remaining term of the lease does not terminate less than ten
    years after the maturity date of such Mortgage Loan.

    (cc) None of the Mortgage Loans are subject to the Home Ownership
    and Equity Protection Act of 1994 (“HOEPA”);

    (dd) No Mortgage Loan is a “High Cost Loan” or a “Covered Loan,”
    as applicable (as such terms are defined in the then current Standard & Poor’s
    LEVELS Glossary which is now Version 5.6c Revised, Appendix E);

    (ee) No Mortgage Loan originated on or after October 1, 2002
    through March 6, 2003 is governed by the Georgia Fair Lending Act; and

    (ff) No mortgage loan is a high cost loan under the predatory
    lending law of any jurisdiction in which a mortgaged property is located.

    SECTION 7.03. Repurchase. It is understood and agreed that the representations
    and warranties set forth in Sections 7.01 and 7.02 shall survive the sale of the
    Mortgage Loans to the Purchaser and delivery of the related Mortgage Loan
    documents to the Purchaser or its designees and shall inure to the benefit of
    the Purchaser, notwithstanding any restrictive or qualified endorsement on any
    Mortgage Note or Assignment of Mortgage or the examination of any Mortgage File.
    Upon discovery by either the Seller or the Purchaser of a breach of
    representations and warranties made by the Seller, or upon the occurrence of a
    Repurchase Event, in either case which materially and adversely affects
    interests of the Purchaser or its assignee in any Mortgage Loan, the party
    discovering such breach or occurrence shall give prompt written notice to each
    of the other parties. If the substance of any representation or warranty has
    been breached, the repurchase obligation set forth in the provisions of this
    Section 7.03 shall apply notwithstanding any qualification as to the knowledge
    of the Seller. Following discovery or receipt of notice of any such breach of a
    representation or warranty made by the Seller or the occurrence of a Repurchase
    Event, the Seller shall either (i) cure such breach in all material respects
    within 90 days from the date the Seller was notified of such breach or (ii)
    repurchase such Mortgage Loan at the related Purchase Price within 90 days from
    the date the Seller was notified of such breach; provided, however, that the
    Seller shall have the option to substitute a Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan
    or Loans for such Mortgage Loan if such substitution occurs within two years
    following the Closing Date; and provided further that if the breach or
    occurrence would cause the Mortgage Loan to be other than a “qualified mortgage”
    as defined in Section 860G(a)(3) of the Code, any such cure, repurchase or
    substitution must occur within 90 days from the earlier of the date the breach
    was discovered or receipt of notice of any such breach. In the event that any
    such breach shall involve any representation or warranty set forth in Section
    7.01 or those relating to the Mortgage Loans or a portion thereof in the
    aggregate, and such breach cannot be cured within ninety days of the earlier of
    either discovery by or notice to the Seller of such breach, all Mortgage Loans
    affected by the breach shall, at the option of the Purchaser, be repurchased by
    the Seller at the Purchase Price or substituted for in accordance with this
    Section 7.03. If the Seller elects to substitute a Qualified Substitute Mortgage
    Loan or Loans for a Deleted Mortgage Loan pursuant to this Section 7.03, the
    Seller shall deliver to the Custodian with respect to such Qualified Substitute
    Mortgage Loan or Loans, the original Mortgage Note endorsed as required by
    Section 6, and the Seller shall deliver to the Servicer with respect to such
    Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan, the Mortgage, an Assignment of the Mortgage
    in recordable form if required pursuant to Section 6, and such other documents
    and agreements as are required to be held by the Servicer pursuant to Section 6.
    No substitution will be made in any calendar month after the Determination Date
    for such month. Monthly Payments due with respect to Qualified Substitute
    Mortgage Loans in the month of substitution shall not be part of the Trust Fund
    and will be retained by the Servicer and remitted by the Servicer to the Seller
    on the next succeeding Distribution Date. For the month of substitution,
    distributions to the Certificateholders will include the Monthly Payment due on
    a Deleted Mortgage Loan for such month and thereafter the Seller shall be
    entitled to retain all amounts received in respect of such Deleted Mortgage
    Loan. Upon such substitution, the Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan or Loans
    shall be subject to the terms of this Agreement in all respects, and the Seller
    shall be deemed to have made the representations and warranties contained in
    this Agreement with respect to the Qualified Substitute Mortgage Loan or Loans
    and that such Mortgage Loans so substituted are Qualified Substitute Mortgage
    Loans as of the date of substitution. In furtherance of the foregoing, if the
    Seller repurchases or substitutes a Mortgage Loan and is no longer a member of
    MERS and the Mortgage is registered on the MERS(R) System, the Purchaser, at the
    expense of the Seller and without any right of reimbursement, shall cause MERS
    to execute and deliver an assignment of the Mortgage in recordable form to
    transfer the Mortgage from MERS to the Seller and shall cause such Mortgage to
    be removed from registration on the MERS(R) System in accordance with MERS’
    rules and regulations.

    In the event of a repurchase by the Seller pursuant to this Section
    7.03, the Purchaser shall (i) forward or cause to be forwarded the Mortgage File
    for the related Mortgage Loan to the Seller, which shall include the Mortgage
    Note endorsed without recourse to the Seller or its designee, (ii) cause the
    Servicer to release to the Seller any remaining documents in the related
    Mortgage File which are held by the Servicer, and (iii) an assignment in favor
    of the Seller or its designee of the Mortgage in recordable form and acceptable
    to the Seller in form and substance and such other documents or instruments of
    transfer or assignment as may be necessary to vest in the Seller or its
    respective designee title to any such Mortgage Loan (or with respect to any
    Mortgage registered on the MERS(R) System, if the Seller is still a member of
    MERS, the Purchaser shall cause MERS to show the Seller as the owner of record).
    The Purchaser shall cause the related Mortgage File to be forwarded to Seller
    immediately after receipt of the related Purchase Price by wire transfer of
    immediately available funds to an account specified by the Purchaser.

    It is understood and agreed that the obligation of the Seller to cure
    such breach or purchase (or to substitute for) such Mortgage Loan as to which
    such a breach has occurred and is continuing shall constitute the sole remedy
    respecting such breach available to the Purchaser or the Trustee on behalf of
    the Certificateholders.

    SECTION 8. Notices. All demands, notices and communications hereunder shall be
    in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when deposited, postage
    prepaid, in the United States mail, if mailed by registered or certified mail,
    return receipt requested, or when received, if delivered by private courier to
    another party, at the related address shown on the first page hereof, or such
    other address as may hereafter be furnished to the parties by like notice.

    SECTION 9. Severability of Provisions. Any provision of this Agreement which is
    prohibited or unenforceable or is held to be void or unenforceable in any
    jurisdiction shall, as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective to the extent of
    such prohibition or unenforceability without invalidating the remaining
    provisions hereof, and any such prohibition or unenforceability in any
    jurisdiction as to any Mortgage Loan shall not invalidate or render
    unenforceable such provision in any other jurisdiction. To the extent permitted
    by applicable law, the parties hereto waive any provision of law which prohibits
    or renders void or unenforceable any provision hereof.

    SECTION 10. Counterparts; Entire Agreement. This Agreement may be executed
    simultaneously in any number of counterparts. Each counterpart shall be deemed
    to be an original, and all such counterparts shall constitute one and the same
    instrument. This Agreement is the entire agreement between the parties relating
    to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any prior agreement or
    communications between the parties.

    SECTION 11. Place of Delivery and Governing Law. This Agreement shall be deemed
    in effect when counterparts hereof have been executed by each of the parties
    hereto. This Agreement shall be deemed to have been made in the State of New
    York. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State
    of New York State of New York, without regard to the conflict of law principles
    thereof, other than Sections 5-1401 and 5-1402 of the New York General
    Obligations Law, and the obligations, rights and remedies of the parties
    hereunder shall be determined in accordance with such laws.

    SECTION 12. Successors and Assigns; Assignment of Agreement. This Agreement
    shall bind and inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the parties hereto
    and their respective successors and assigns; provided that this Agreement may
    not be assigned, pledged or hypothecated by the Seller to a third party without
    the prior written consent of the Purchaser.

    SECTION 13. Waivers; Other Agreements. No term or provision of this Agreement
    may be waived or modified unless such waiver or modification is in writing and
    signed by the party against whom such waiver or modification is sought to be

    SECTION 14. Survival. The provisions of this Agreement shall survive the Closing
    Date and the delivery of the Mortgage Loans, and for so long thereafter as is
    necessary (including, subsequent to the assignment of the Mortgage Loans) to
    permit the parties to exercise their respective rights or perform their
    respective obligations hereunder.

    [Signature Page Follows]

    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Seller and the Purchaser have caused their names
    to be signed hereto by their respective officers thereunto duly authorized as of
    the date first above written.






    (a copy can be obtained from the Trustee)

  38. louise from ” paula rush”:

    “They contractually signed up to advance taxes and insurance when loans are in default….”

    That wouldn’t be so bad, but that’s hardly all they sign up to advance.

  39. db@1:14:
    “All of the mortgage loans were purchased by the depositor from the seller pursuant to a mortgage loan purchase agreement, dated as of the issuance date, between the seller and the depositor.”

    A “mortgage loan purchase agreement”…..the missing document (unless the trust were also a party to that agreement between the seller and the depositor?) Am I missing something here that I think there should be purchase agreements with the trusts, ones which identify with specificity the loans being bought and sold and at what price? Or are we, at least I, to believe the non-described loans referenced in the PSA’s is IT?! Here’s a typical description in a conforming loan psa:

    loan balance number of loans ltv weighted ave. rate
    300,001 to 350,000 136 aver 84% 6.77%
    350,001 to 400,000 152 aver 86.02% 7.135%
    and so on

    I did see one PSA wherein it was alleged that so and so attorney in like Baltimore had the schedule of loans at issue (!) Not making that up and don’t think I misunderstood, either.

  40. The following tidbit from a post on FB: Makes it very clear that we borrowers are always in the cross hairs to fleece us some more.

    Paula Rush
    August 5 at 2:43pm

    Its all about the advances. They contractually signed up to advance taxes and insurance when loans are in default, and they get paid back first upon liquidation. Talk about a conflict of interest!

  41. I’ve said that propping up trusts with servicer advances inflates the values of the derivatives, give them an artificial value. Quite by accident, really, I stumbled on a class action lawsuit against Sears.
    Acc to the article, Sears “encouraged” bk debtors to yet pay Sears.
    Sears, however, forgot to mention this in the bankruptcies. There would be other ramifications of this behavior, but as to the stock value:

    “The suit, which is seeking class-action status, said Sears’ failure to get certain debt reaffirmations approved by the court “artificially inflated” Sears’ stock from Oct. 4, 1996, to April 10, 1997.”

  42. DB. ..
    Exactly what type of title are they depositing their interest in?
    Title to the property?
    Title to the estate?
    Define mortgage loan….
    Mortgage Note?
    Contract for deed?
    Lease with option to purchase?


  43. Issuing Entity

    The depositor established a trust with respect to the GMACM Mortgage Pass Through
    Certificates, Series 2006-J1 on the issuance date pursuant to the pooling and servicing agreement.
    The pooling and servicing agreement is governed by the laws of the State of New York. On the
    issuance date, the depositor deposited into the trust a pool of mortgage loans, secured by one- to
    four-family residential properties with terms to maturity of not more than 30 years. All of the
    mortgage loans were purchased by the depositor from the seller pursuant to a mortgage loan purchase
    agreement, dated as of the issuance date, between the seller and the depositor. The trust does not
    have any additional equity.

    The pooling and servicing agreement provides that the depositor assign to the trustee for
    the benefit of the certificateholders without recourse all the right, title and interest of the
    depositor in and to the mortgage loans. Furthermore, the pooling and servicing agreement states
    that, although it is intended that the conveyance by the depositor to the trustee of the mortgage
    loans be construed as a sale, the conveyance of the mortgage loans shall also be deemed to be a grant
    by the depositor to the trustee of a security interest in the mortgage loans and related collateral.

  44. I only warranted title a few mega minutes at closing…..
    The exectory contract……..breach of contract.

  45. The realestate tax bill comes in the name of the Estate….
    Not the borrowers name on the loan….
    The borrower hold title by a Trust Deed. My name is not on it.

    But my name is on those unfilled Warranty Deeds.
    And under the fraudulently induced contract…
    I have to defend title….

  46. As for hiring a good attorney or even affording one – rarer than rockin horse do do regarding the subject matter.

  47. Sorry SC i just get a bit irritated, glad you have it… Each case is different of course i just do not get what you are talking about, so i guess its correct for you to say ” never mind”. Deb out ,🙏

  48. The Mortgage…
    The Mortgage Note…
    The Note…

    Hire Good Attorney !

  49. They have been all tongue tied and refuse to explain how MY mortgage is almost $90.000 more than his note.

    And all we wanted to do was…..never mind.

  50. If I didn’t have it in writing.. Deb. .. I wouldn’t be posting it.

  51. SC the ” never mind” OLD

  52. SC
    You gotta EVIDENCE what you state

  53. They were selling the notes far above face value. …
    Then the started buyingvthem at face value and that should tell you something there.
    No early penalty payoff…

    Public records show the so called mortgage I consented to…..
    MY mortgage….never mind.

  54. TU…they made Creditors debtors.
    What does that make non borrowers with one half interest in the Estate?
    A Creditor? A Debtor?
    A Trustor ? A Settler? A Granter? A Depositor?

    And you wonder why people don’t know who they are…..
    What’s the word for it? Multiple something…..

    JG…P & S agreement. 👏👏👏👏👏
    Due on Sale clause.

  55. Reblogged this on California Freelance Paralegal and commented:
    Great blog post by Neil Garfield on the lame defenses offered by big corporations and the big banks in particular.

  56. Java think about AIG

  57. if entity bought certain assets one being servicing rights, BUT they are NOT the successor in interest, then what are they ( indeed debt collector) what WAS the predecessor ? If they say they are lender but then why declare the buyer of ” certain assets” not the successor per FDIC by the way, if you were a servicer of your own loan who is the trustee and what is his interest as far as being in court purportedly deriving his right for certificate holders of a securituzed Alt Alt a trust.

  58. Imo. I blame the lawyers. The bankers are criminals, we already know that. But I could never understand how the lawyers never got together and defended (or attacked) on behalf on 4 million homeowners. All that money there for the taking and the greediest bunch of professionals known to man, don’t go after the pot of Gold..makes no sense , unless it goes to the very very top and were told to stay AWAY……sounds about right to me. …..hopefully this dam of deceit finally breakswide open before end of the year and the lawyers walk AWAY with NOTHING !!

  59. “Due to the complexity and volume of servicing fee disbursements, servicers have struggled to appropriately control for risks that may result in unnecessary losses and incorrect assessment of fees to borrowers.
    Prior to the servicing fee disbursement, servicers have the opportunity to mitigate the risk of non-reimbursable advances by having strong controls around ordering non-reimbursable products/services. At the point of disbursement, servicers should have controls for the appropriateness and collectability of advances, compliance with regulatory, investor and insurer guidelines, and oversight
    into the vendor invoicing process.
    Ineffective disbursement processing controls and oversight may result in significant reputational risk and regulatory exposure.
    Certain states and counties have specific regulations around
    which fees and costs can be assessed to the borrower in various circumstances. Therefore, invoice processing decisions and the recoverability coding of expenses should consistently reflect these
    **With the new Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFPB) requirement to disclose advances on the borrower’s statement, misclassifications to the borrower’s account are increasingly visible.

    jg: “requirement to disclose advances on the borrower’s statement”?
    Whoa. News to me. Anyone seeing this?
    ‘misclassifications’ to the borrower’s account are “increasingly visible”.
    Yeah, I’ll bet, if they have to make (new) disclosure.

    “Servicers have several non-foreclosure loss mitigation options that result in repayment of servicing advances. Loan modification allows the servicer to capitalize past due balances and is a key trigger for recovery of servicing advances from the investor of the loan (or
    insurer with the FHA partial claim). The modification underwriting process can be challenging, as the capitalized amount must follow strict investor guidelines and often relies on expense estimates from
    vendors. As such, servicers should consider performing a final assessment prior to the execution of the modification, as advances not included in the modification may result in a loss……

    Key areas of focus
    • Establish controls to ensure modification underwriting and repayment plans INCLUDE ALL eligible advance balances.”

    jg: no stinking wonder it took so long to get a “modification”; they had a LOT of juggling and math to do.
    This all stirkes me as serious crapinzki (borrower gets tricked into agreeing to pay back the servicer advances under a NEW note) and what’d they do with all that HAMP money apparently not even on the radar here?! Did they just eat the hamp funds?

    “Servicing advance reimbursement via investor/ INSURANCE CLAIMS is a highly complex process and many servicers often fail to optimize
    their recoveries…….”

    jg: what a bummer

    “Heightened scrutiny from HUD claim audits around the execution of loss mitigation actions, specifically short sales, has resulted in unexpected losses from non-compliance with HUD servicing guidelines.”

    jg: read “Busted!”

    “Key areas of focus:

    • Evaluate whether claims should be filed or if there is a risk of potential losses under the FALSE CLAIMS ACT.

    jg: I think that would be best, but of course, only as long as the risk of getting nailed is there.

    “Investor reporting
    Investor Reporting’s primary responsibility of managing investor custodial accounts means that their processes have a direct impact on disbursement and recovery of P&I advances, recovery of advances from private label security trustees, and execution of GNMA early pool buy-outs……..”


    According to the chart in this white paper, servicer advances are sometimes recoverable from INSURANCE (and, they still don’t show the payments credited to a loan balance?!) Maybe AIG was an insurer which did in fact insure servicer advances. Services are double-dipping by, at a minimum, dinging the borrower for a false balance, certainly when they’ve collected on insurance. Be like if I got paid by my insurance on my broken fence and also hit my neighbor up because his kid broke it.


    What’s here is a FORM OF Loan Servicing Agreement out of the SEC. I haven’t read it, don’t know if it contains “musts” or is just some sec-team’s impressions.

  62. I said found under “mortgage servicing ancilliary servicing agreement”). Nope, it was prob under “mortgage servicing participation agreement” for those who want to find more before they disappear.

  63. “(a) With respect to those Mortgage Loans registered with MERS as of the Sale Date or any Subsequent Sale Date, as applicable, Seller shall, within fourteen (14) days of the applicable Servicing Transfer Date, notify MERS (jg: read make entry into the computer software program), in accordance with MERS’ operating procedures, of the sale of the Mortgage Servicing Rights, and shall be responsible for the fees of MERS (jg: shouldn’t this read MERSCorp?) related to reflecting Purchaser as the owner of the Mortgage Servicing Rights. Seller shall provide Purchaser or its designee with the MERS mortgage loan identification number for each MERS-registered Mortgage Loan pursuant to Section 7.07.

    (b) Within ninety (90) days after each Servicing Transfer Date, Seller, .shall prepare and send for recordation Assignments of Mortgage …….for any related Mortgage Loan that is NOT assigned of
    record to and registered with (the – sic) MERS (monopoly – sic) as of such Servicing Transfer Date, in compliance with the applicable Servicing Agreements and the protocol detailed on Exhibit I (in the monopoly playbook – sic) ; ………..
    provided, further, that, in the case of any such related Mortgage Loans subject to foreclosure proceedings, such Assignments of Mortgage shall not be recorded, but shall be sent by Seller to either
    Purchaser or the applicable foreclosure attorney (at Purchaser’s direction). ,,,. Seller shall assure that all necessary documentation pursuant to Applicable Requirements related to demonstrating the CHAIN OF TITLE …….

    (c) Prior to the … Servicing Transfer Date, Seller shall provide Purchaser with a list of the names of each PREDESSOR or Affiliate (or predecessor of each such Affiliate) of Seller (in each case, including any former names thereof) that may be relevant to Purchaser’s verification of the CHAIN OF TITLE …….. “

  64. The dog was insured by the fdic

  65. bearer bond noun
    bearer certificate noun
    bearer cheque noun
    bearer form noun
    bearer note noun
    bearer noun
    bearer paper noun
    bearer security noun
    bearer share noun

  66. Those who purchased a foreclosed home will find it difficult to keep the home, and as much as they like living there; there was someone before them who liked living there too, but was forced out, otherwise they would have sold, or short sold.

    If I were me, having my house after someone made me leave, I would not want to leave it.

    I took care of the home, with much love. When it was appraised 10 years after I had it built, the appraiser thought it was still new.
    I took care of all upkeep and was not going to wait 20 years to replace the 20 year roof.

    I took care of the landscape and even put a historic redbud tree from Franklin Roosevelt’s property in the back yard.

    So there are people that would love to quiet title my home and make it theirs, but it’s not theirs. It’s mine, and the system was used and abused to make the real creditors appear as debtors, and to force us from our property and deprive us of our liberty using contracts of coercion and duress, and fraud.

    The law is clear that no one should benefit from the fruit of the poison tree, and no judge should help someone benefit.

    all these claims that the judicial don’t get it, is nonsense. If a lawyer is not trained or license to defend a particular area of law, it is mal practice to attempt to do so without the basic information to comprehend what is happening.

    Same with a judge hearing a case or cause where there is no training or comprehension of what is before the bench. A judge can do as the supremes do and hire a bunch of paralegals to go through case law and use the latest and greatest case law to determine the course of action, but they chose not to do that, or maybe they were supreme in their own court and only an appeal would let them know they were not.

    I made it clear in my answer the court was not how I expected to receive the remedy. I won’t indicate how I stated it, but anyone reading my answer would see, there is no way I accepted a decision of the court, and if you saw the filings I made with the agencies at the beginning, you’d know I was withdrawing any consent to be mistreated and misused and robbed.

    Many states benefitted from people like me, they got a nice fat check as the cost of doing business, and nothing trickled down to the people who provided the data.

    It is treason, in my opinion, to let an army come into your state, rob your people of their life and property, as most of us spent our live buying, and maintaining our property, and as a reward for allowing the thief to pilfer the state, the state agents accept a nice check.

    That’s treason, in my opinion.

    To continue to allow someone to benefit from fruit of the poison tree when one knows that they have allowed prior successes of the same kind and don’t want to change course because of how many they allowed through, well they are, in my opinion, a danger to society, because they have in my opinion usurped their purpose from an original promise or oath to something new with full knowledge, understanding, and intent. They, in my opinion, must be removed, and for the values of the items given away with their authority, it would be a, further opinion of mine, an off with their head punishment for it was their head that betrayed their country.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, People, State, Independent, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  67. “ii) Within seven (7) Business Days prior to the required payment by Purchaser, the Seller has provided Purchaser with customary documentation and support, which may be in electronic form, for all properly made P & I Advances as to which Seller is entitled to recovery, accrued but not recovered or reimbursed through the close of business of the day prior to each Servicing Transfer Date including documentation related to loan level delinquent P & I Advances; provided that the right of Purchaser to withhold payment for such P & I Advances for insufficient documentation and support shall apply only to the P & I Advances with respect to the Mortgage Loans without such documentation and support. ”

    (From the agreement I just linked). So looks like the busy NationStar
    ended up with BofA’s receivables, also. What I’d like to find, I think, is something which defines these servicers as partners of the trusts because I don’t think that’s allowable under trust laws (nor for that matter do we know if third party advances are). For what it would be worth since they’ll never let us win other than case by case. imo.

    But what we can and should win is an antitrust suit against MERSCorp et al.


    Entitled (and found under “mortgage servicing ancilliary servicing agreement”):






    Dated and effective as of January 6, 2013 “

  69. Well, this one was easy since i knew the word, at least:

    The term “ancillary agreements” describes the various agreements executed and delivered by the parties at the closing of (a)….. transaction to supplement the terms of the definitive acquisition agreement. **Although the ancillary agreements needed vary from deal to deal, most will fit into one of the following categories:

    Escrow agreements;
    Documents of transfer;
    Agreements for post-closing services;
    Agreements for post-closing commercial arrangements; and
    Agreements restricting the seller’s activities after closing.”

    jg: **It’s the docs of transfer and acceptance as to mtg loans that turn an executory contract into an executed one. If there is non-delivery (or even non-acceptance), the contract remains executor, and because it’s about notes, is impacted by the UCC (security interests created if payment is made) as long as executory, I believe.

    “Documents of Transfer

    Documents of transfer are delivered at the closing of asset acquisitions to evidence and effect the transfer of assets and liabilities from the seller to the buyer. This category of ancillary agreements includes bills of sale, assignments and assumptions, and deeds. Documents of transfer are typically short, simple agreements between the buyer and the seller that state that the seller has transferred the specified assets or liabilities to the buyer, and that the buyer has ACCEPTED the assignment of such assets and has assumed any such liabilities.. …. Deeds are used to transfer real property.
    Although these agreements are not executed and delivered until closing, they are typically negotiated at the same time as the definitive acquisition agreement and the agreed-upon forms thereof are attached as exhibits to that agreement. This approach avoids complications and disputes in the period between signing the definitive acquisition agreement and closing the transaction.”

    jg: I’ve opined we’re missing docs. We’re missing the agreement itself for the trust to purchase sufficiently-defined loans. To me, the Purchase and Sale Agreement is the “definitive acquisition agreement” (one party agree it will sell X and the other party agrees it will buy X, and X must be clearly defined). Until there is mutual performance, the contract remains executory and also until there is mutual performance, the UCC may well be or just plain IS in play, such as by giving the buyer security interests with all those attendant isms in the identified loans if he has paid but not received. Here the mutual performance is payment for the loans, assignment of, transfer of, and acceptance of the instruments which evidence the loans and give rise to rights / interests. The assignments and transfers, etc. are normally the culmination of a “definitive acquisition agreement”. (But we’ve got banksters saying those agreements mean jack in favor of poss of bearer notes).

    Not sure that ancilliary is the right word for the PSA, but I think this helps clarify that we’re missing the document which identify the loans being bought and sold and that ‘missing it’ isn’t satisfied by an alleged assignment for lack of the agreement between the assignor and the assignee to buy and sell in the first place. Like the assignments say “for value”. Okay. Do tell. Wherein was that amt of value determined, esp now that these assignments are being done as to years-old loans?

  70. Sunman, I am no spring chicken either. Have been fighting for eight years and multiple lawsuits. I am dreaming up my next lawsuit. I am in appellate court now and who knows? Not going to give up.

  71. If one or more other documents or recorded (recorded how? audio? recorded in a letter, recorded in an agreement, recorded in books? me: all the above) statements materially impact or could impact one party to an agreement’s duties and or rights, such as a third party’s agreement to make payments, play banker, what not, this might be handy:

    “An adverse party has the right to REQUIRE (me: as in fork them over) the introduction of any other part or any OTHER writing or recorded statement “that in fairness ought to be considered at the same time.” Fed. R. Evid. 106.

    This rule prevents parties from taking concepts or facts out of context (but this isn’t exclusive – sic), and the trial judge has considerable discretion in deciding whether the introduction of the balance of the document or OTHER documents should be addressed…….”

    Today, the contracts we sign don’t make for complete views of what’s what since there have been other agreements made which materially impact our contracts. I bet there’s a name for these other contracts. I’ll see if I can find it.

  72. I’m with you on this one Louise.
    Doesn’t help a lot of us that have already lost everything though.
    Is there a chance to claw back those lost homes and lives?
    I did not think I would be starting over at 66… But I am. They stole over 45 years of my labor when they took my home of 32 years. And I am one of the lucky ones. I am still standing….

  73. I hear you Neil…..
    But what happens when the borrower goes to sell and the New Title Insurer required proofs of those transactions or otherwise not insure?

    And what so what do you do when other parties tell you that the party who made the claim in public records and via US mail is lying to you about who owns the loan?

    Oh Right. .you hire an attorney. ..
    Many Blessings to All!

  74. So, the entire truth is close to coming out. How will this be handled? Since Ocwen (in my case) does not own my house, and there are two notes and MERS cannot transfer anything because it does not own the note, what next? These banks should have been shot down in 2008 and banksters should have gone to jail. We own our houses outright, because TARP funds and many other payment streams including insurance paid for them. In fact, as far as I can tell, they owe us money, lots of money because they sold the note multiple times and made money on our signatures which involved ID theft. Phooey!

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: