NJ Foreclosure Mill Goes Bankrupt

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


For more information please email us at gtchonors.llblog@gmail.com 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.


see 30,000 Cases to be Transferred from Bankruupt NJ Lawfirm

It’s a growing trend. More law firms are backing out the foreclosure mill business. The reasons are pure economics. The number of contested foreclosures is rising exponentially. The foreclosure firms get a small flat fee for each foreclosure case. The numbers don’t add up.

In addition, these firms are finding themselves in the cross hairs of bar associations who are starting to look at the use of fabricated documents and fabricated testimony from robo-witnesses and robo-signers.

These firms made tens of millions of dollars in profits simply because nearly all homeowners were allowing the foreclosure by default. As the news reveals that homeowners are being foreclosed by entities that have no right to collect, enforce or foreclose on the original mortgage loan, attorneys are all coming to the same conclusions: (1) these cases are winnable and (2) the actual claim is being filed on behalf of the servicer to recover servicer advances which are themselves being “securitized.”

First they said there were no trusts, the  they said there were trusts but the servicer had the right to represent the trusts, then came the time that trustees issued statements prohibiting (pursuant to PSA) the “servicer” from using the name of the Trustee,  then US Bank and others began replacing the Trustees of the empty, penniless trusts and allowing the foreclosures to be filed in its name.

AND now they are returning to the first strategy where they deny the existence of a trust when it is obvious that the only reason why Citi and others would call themselves “servicers” is to avoid liability for the origination of the loan and to make it more difficult for the borrower to show that there is a REMIC Trust out there that claims ownership or that did claim ownership of the loans.

That makes it difficult to show that there is no known creditor on the original MORTGAGE LOAN. There are claims, but not by any creditor or successor on the MORTGAGE LOAN. But without foreclosures, if the loans are modified, the real claims of servicers and investment banks serving as Master Servicers completely vanish. THAT IS WHY THEY FORECLOSE INSTEAD OF MODIFY OR SETTLE.

But the overall strategy is the same: make it as confusing as possible and play into the prejudice of the judges to pull the wool over their eyes. These claims are mostly unsecured because the real claim is to recover the money paid by the Master servicer and then ignored by the sub-servicer when they send out notice of default (no default if the creditor was paid), and ignored when the final accounting of what is due from borrower to the owner of the MORTGAGE LOAN is used as the basis for foreclosure.

The law firms are now on notice that they are representing parties with conflicts of interest. Foreclosure means the servicer gets money paid by the Master servicer from the reserve fund created when the original MBS were sold. Modification would mean revealing that the actual creditors on the MORTGAGE LOAN are (a) not showing a default on their books and (b) not being allowed to mitigate d damages because they don’t learn of the misguided “processing” (i.e., loss of documents and putting up numerous hurdles and obstacles and false reports that the investor rejected the modification or settlement).

So where the economics are turning sour, the liability for civil, criminal and regulatory liability is driving the big foreclosures mills out of the marketplace. They are doing it through bankruptcy so that claims from borrowers for wrongful foreclosure won’t be effective to recover from partners in the law firms.

10 Responses

  1. It is past time We The People start prosecuting and hanging these pigs until we run out of trees, telephone poles, bridges and high-rise buildings from which to launch them into their just rewards.

    I am greatly encouraged by the new focus on hydrogen as an alternative fuel source.

    Unless We exhaust the field of banking pigs while employing them in the Fukushima Clean-Up and Re-education Camps, We should remember hydrogen may be useful to fuel a vast armada of dirigibles from which to launch the banking filth, and their lawyers.

    Investigate Wall Street, Prosecute Wall Street, Jail Wall Street.

    Plant more acorns, We are gonna’ need more trees.

    Corporations are NOT people and I Am NOT your “friend”.

  2. DwightNJ

    No one gets charged without an injured party.
    No one is considered an injured party without a criminal complaint.

    I don’t know how many people filed a complaint naming the people who harmed, them, but I do read a lot of people saying ‘someone needs to do something’, I just can’t tell if they are some of the someones.

    I’m sad to know they are the ones that harmed you.
    I’m still complaining and I do have to click the box that the complaint will be public. I do click the box even though I’m a very private people.
    (persons are corp-or-rations/corporations/fiction, people are real/corp-or-real/corporeal)

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life

  3. http://mp3.logosradionetwork.com/ROL/16k/ROL_2015-07-31_16k_Hr3&4.mp3

    A nice opinion piece – pretty much asking the same questions and demanding the same answers.

    Like people on the internet would say – pix or it didn’t happen.

    How about proof or it’s not fact.

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

  4. I feel your pain dwight,
    Its absolutely shocking to me what they are in fact doing outside rules and law, over and over, just keep calling them out thars what i am still doing – and will continue to, eventually the truth arises in its glorious light.

  5. This is the NJ foreclosure mill that I fought against as a Pro se after the first attempt was filed against my property in 2007 ..

    Zucker, Goldberg & Ackerman was one of the busiest firms in the fraudclosure scam industry, they have been down-scaling for a few years now before this bankruptcy was filed. They have spent a few years trying to clean up their mess in order to escape liability for their crimes. Yes I said crimes !!

    They have committed criminal acts upon the courts, and they need to be charged and prosecuted for those crimes. In my case they had reached a final judgment because I never answered the complaint, but I submitted an emergency motion to vacate the judgment and dismiss the complaint due to fraud and lack of standing in the 11th hour just weeks before the sheriffs sale.

    I demanded that they produce the note in court because the one they had shown in their exhibits as part of their certification was obviously a downloaded computer copy of the note from the origination, it was missing the blank endorsement stamp from Washington Mutual who had gone out of business in 2008 .. it was now 2010 and they had this note with no stamp from WaMu ..

    Well they obviously committed a violation of judicial conduct rules by having an “Ex Parte” communication with the judge about this new problem that I had raised in my motion, because when I showed up to court for the hearing the judge and the foreclosure mill lawyer had the plan all pre-arranged on how he will help them escape my motion.

    The judge acted like their personal attorney as he prosecuted their case for them .. the mill lawyer stood by in silence as the judge made excuses for them and the missing endorsement on their certified note. He never asked them on the record about the note ..he simply acted as their attorney and defended them .. he eventually agreed to let me see the “real note” but said they would need time to locate it (he never asked them during the hearing, which lends to my assertion that they had communicated with each other before the hearing and worked out a strategy to defeat my motion .. this is whats called Ex Parte communication and it is a serious violation of a judges cannons of ethical behavior which could lead to him being removed from the bench). So three months later the mill lawyer returned with a blatant fabrication of the note which now had a fresh stamp added in blank from Washington Mutual .. I objected and asserted that it was a fraud and was only a fabricated note. The Zucker, Goldberg, Ackerman law firm attorney was a young kid fresh out of law school , he looked nervous and agitated as he continued to lie on the record for the mill that he was working for , he knew he was doing wrong and it was written all over his face .. the judge treated “Ryan” like his son, arguing and defending the young mill attorney at ever turn .. What saved me was that the Robo-Signer scandal was breaking right at that point when we were back in court .. NJ Chief Justice and the AG had just made a media press conference about the “concerns of faulty documents being submitted in foreclosure cases nationwide, and how New Jersey would not allow it .. the integrity of the judicial system is at stake” they announced as the placed a freeze on all uncontested foreclosures by the 5 main banks involved.

    So my judge was now forced to “act” like he was suddenly concerned about faulty documents … he ordered another hearing and told Ryan to produce some witnesses from Wells Fargo who could testify to the facts of these documents. The NJ Court Administrator also had just released a notice to the Bar stating that any attorney involved in foreclosure cases in NJ would be held accountable to certifications made in their cases about the validity and authenticity of the docs.

    The foreclosure mill was way in over their head at this point, they were quickly substituted out for Wells Fargo’s main lawfirm Smith Reed who came in and requested adjournments for a year before finally asking the judge to sign an Order vacating the judgment, vacating the sheriffs sale and dismissing the complaint .. without prejudice. Oct. 2011

    Now again in May 2014 .. a new mill has filed again, same default of 2007 alleged ..same acceleration .. same fraudulent Assignment with known Robo-signers from LPS ..

    This complaint asserts that Wells Fargo is the lender and is also on the notices .. but that is not true .. Fannie Mae is the alleged owner as per the replies to my QWR .. I have documents sent by Wells Fargo that state Fannie Mae is your lender and owns the loan. So right here they have a major problem. They cannot assert that they are the lender in a foreclosure case if they are not really the lender.

    Also ..the 6 year statute of limitations had already run prior to then filing this new complaint … they are time-barred .. and were time barred prior to the May 2014 complaint.

    Also .. I raised that I had already rescinded this loan in 2007 , but it was ignored. This may not be important now if the SOL argument prevails .. at the very least they have committed a violation by sending notices stating that they are the lender ..and not mentioning Fannie Mae .. this could kill this complaint alone .. but I don’t want them being allowed to re-file or to ask the judge to allow them to fix the error in their paperwork and be allowed to proceed.

    The rescission of 2007 was ignored .. and then after they filed again in 2014 , I again sent a rescission notice (2nd notice) with my QWR .. they again ignored the rescission notice and only answered the QWR.

    Now some may argue that this 2014 rescission is irrelevant since I had already mailed one in 2007 (but have no proof of return receipt) I did submit my copy of the 2007 letter that I mailed to them. The TILA statute makes no mention that a borrower has to mail it certified. Since it is not mandated in the language of the statute , I argue that my assertion and copy of my 2007 letter should suffice. They replied to that 2007 letter saying they are aware of “a problem” but they never make mention of the Rescission Notice I mailed to them.

    Right now Wells Fargo has been granted Summary Judgment on this 2014 complaint.

    The judge dismissed all of my arguments and assertions about the TILA Rescission , Standing, 6 yr SOL , etc. etc.

    The paralegal investigating my case says he found evidence that the plaintiff Wells Fargo had no Standing when they filed the complaint. Something about Fannie Mae owning my loan and having the note.

    He says that the notices they sent out falsely assert that they, WF, are the owner and lender, and that is a violation of the Fair Foreclosure Act

    He is preparing motions to submit right now based on those violations and also arguing that the plaintiff lacked standing when they filed.

    Also that they were time barred when they filed, the six years had run.

    He is telling me to leave the TILA rescission argument out for now, because they could use it against me if I am arguing these other points.

  6. Bankrupt or not, they are still culpable for their acts.

  7. Charkes Reed
    Bravo, and stick it to em.

  8. 800,000 FHA & VA loans denied (100%) during 2009-2010 all in Ginnie Mae MBS, as they could not prove ownership because 100% of the mortgage Notes were endorsed in blank and relinquished to Ginnie Mae without a purchase of the debts!

    Kozeny & McCubbin the same firm that lost $2.9 million decision in the Holm v. Wells Fargo & Freddie Mac as they tried to claim a Washington Mutual Bank loan after WaMu had been declared a ‘failed bank” meaning they no longer existed as there assets were sold, however the Ginnie Mae pooled loans once relinquished to Ginnie are never again the property of the issue of the MBS!

    I got a copy of the “forgery” from the foreclosure mill in Kozeny & McCubbin, who’s attorney in Sara Knittel who is an acted as a Assistance Secretary for MERS! I been preaching this since talking with MERS co-founder in Bill Hultman in Aug 2010!

  9. The thing i found interesting regarding these fireclosure mills is they were the ones recording these ” wild” deeds as being authorized ( in the first place ) they were the ones filing the forcible detainers, they were the ones recording ” as ” requested” by, i think they are realizing they are what is called the ” low hanging fruit”. Now let me add, on judges presumptions they git what they went into court to get, but had they disclosed what they knew or should have known, the outcome would be completely different even in non judicial foreclosure states.
    The next five years will reveal what we are going to hand down to out kids, i pray our courts do their job.

  10. Reblogged this on California Freelance Paralegal and commented:
    It couldn’t have happened to a more deserving group of people. Blog post from Neil Garfield discussing the news that a New Jersey foreclosure law firm (foreclosure mill) is bankrupt and that 30,000 cases will be transferred to other law firms.

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: