For further information please call 954-495-9867 or 520-405-1688
The following article is for general information only. Slight changes in facts or procedures at trial can have a substantial impact on the conclusions or reports suggested in this article. This is not a legal opinion on your case. Before making any decision or taking any action, the reader is instructed to seek the advice of an attorney who is licensed in the jurisdiction in which your property is located or where the transaction was consummated.
============================
I offer my insight here as a guide to attorneys and to homeowners who need to know that when they use words, they probably don’t know the meaning of the words they are using.
A good example came in from a reader who asks “is the effective date of an assignment the 1) date it was signed; 2) date it was notarized; or 3) date it was recorded?”
As simple as this question appears it actually is missing facts, and assuming that the assignment was “effective” at any time. So first let me say that an assignment is not effective in any sense of the word if the assignor didn’t possess any rights or ownership that could be enforced by the assignor. The existence of the assignment does not raise the status of non-ownership. It is like a Trust: if the trust exists on paper but doesn’t have anything in it, the trust instrument is not effective in relation to any money or property or other rights. If the assignment is from a party who has nothing, then the instrument purporting to assign something is not effective. But presumptions arise in processing evidence in court that could result and often does result in finding the assignment valid and that the assignment is effective in creating rights now owned by the assignee.
The only “exception” to this is that if someone pays for a negotiable instrument in good faith and without knowledge of the maker’s defenses then the risk of loss does shift to the maker (borrower on a note). So the sale of a note that was in fact executed by the maker DOES raise the status such that a fraudulent “transaction” that could not be enforced by the “holder” of the note becomes, by operation of law, a valid claim against the maker. Such a transfer might be called an “assignment” or “endorsement”. The maker may still sue the intermediary parties asserting claims of fraud or other matters but the note can no longer be contested because the transaction was not consummated — thus making the transfer “effective” even though the prior party who was the assignor, endorser or transferor had absolutely no right to enforce the instrument.
An assignment is presumed to be a valid transfer of rights if it is facially valid. It is effective upon delivery, as I understand the laws governing negotiable and/or security instruments (like mortgages). The date of the assignment is generally presumed to be the date it was delivered. All of this can be rebutted by (a) discovery into what transpired in the assignment and (b) proof (admissible evidence) showing that nothing was actually transferred because no payment was made or because of other reasons that might defeat the assertion that the instrument is a negotiable instrument.
The date the document is notarized might be evidence that the date of the assignment was incorrectly stated or it might not. If the signor acknowledged his signature after the date it was signed, the date of notarization changes nothing. If the date of notarization was years later then there is at least reason to propound discovery or requests to the other side seeking to discover if the assignment was backdated AND seeking to discover whether the assignor had anything to assign. If an assignment is backdated it may or may not mean anything. If the actual date of the assignment is much later than the actual transaction in which the note and mortgage were transferred it would only be relevant if the foreclosure started before the assignment was executed. This is not universally true in all states. The issue of when a foreclosing party can initiate the proceedings (before or after the receipt of the assignment instrument) is in the process of being decided by several courts across the country.
The date the document is recorded is potentially relevant. If the document was recorded years after the date of the assignment, that might be evidence of backdating or that the assignment was fabricated. The instrument itself is effective as to all people who know about it, starting from when they knew about it. Upon recording, it is effective as to the world, if it is a valid assignment in fact.
If all this sounds convoluted to the reader, it s proof that the days of pro se litigation are nearly over with respect to the defense of false claims for foreclosure.
The “effect” of an invalid assignment cannot be improved by the fabrication of an instrument that explicitly or implicitly refers to a transaction in which the paper was acquired. The effect of such an invalid assignment also cannot be improved by notarization or recording. A recording gives notice of the existence of a claim of an interest in real property.
The existence of the claim doesn’t mean the claim is valid. Judicial notice of the existence of the recorded assignment is appropriate ONLY to the extent that the Court recognizes that the assignment exists in the public records of the county where deeds and mortgages are recorded. What is written on the recorded instrument is hearsay subject to objection by the opposing party. So the assignment would not be “effective” in court as to proving the matters stated in the assignment; BUT if no objection is made, the proffer by the assignee of the instrument as to both existence and content will probably considered to be accepted into the record as evidence.
Filed under: foreclosure | Tagged: assignments, UCC |
Furthermore, it would not matter if every one of them started wearing gold crosses today, they disrespected mine, & that proves their own maliciousness was intentional.
Not one of them can say they’re CATHOLIC or religious either.
Not only did I wear my GOLD CROSS on my neck to their illicit court proceedings, but, I wore my rosary bracelet which means that I’m honest.
For them to say otherwise, would be them trying to disprove the entire CATHOLIC CHURCH & every other religion.
They’re using their religious theories to call us liars.
It’s RELIGIOUS SACRILEGE.
They can’t say they don’t know your religion because these spies know everything regarding us.
If not, my GOLD CROSS tells them everything they need to know.
Therefore, in ILLINOIS, we have the ILLINOIS STATES ATTORNEY, RACKETEERING with our TITLES UNLAWFULLY, by not ACTING IN IT’S OWN NAME for nefarious reasons.
They violated the PUBLIC TRUST, by RACKETEERING with COUNTERFEITS to fund their own MORAL ROT & cause SOCIETAL DECAY & CHAOS.
They did it to steal, but mainly to embarass us by their own embodened brazeness.
It’s cold, calculating & extremely mischeivious to try & undermine people with morals when they have none.
Proven by the legal fact, I never sgned no contract with that ILLINOIS STATES ATTORNEY witch, or none of these DRUID witches.
Their frauds could never be considered INVESTMENT SECURITIES because the SECURITIES don’t exist.
When they willfully & wantonly ignored ARTICLE 3, they destroyed not only the value of our properties, they destroyed their LEGAL STANDING.
Under ARTICLE 9 these frauds could never be CAUSE OF ACTION in law or theory because there is no DISCOVERY of their ASSETS that could possibly show PROOF OF LOSS.
That’s why the PLAINTIFFS do not ACT IN THEIR OWN NAME & that is unlawful.
The SPY AGENCIES would not reveal they’re engaging in ACTS OF RICO for MORGAN STANLEY or ACTING ON BEHALF OF DEFUNCTORY AGENCIES the likes of LEHMAN BROTHERS who we obviously never signed contracts with them or their weasel INSURANCE BROKERING RACKETEER, MAURICE GREENBURG of AIG.
Nothing of monetary value was ever exchanged & that’s not hard to prove, because I never received no CAPITAL GAINS from the proceeds of their ILLICIT IN HOUSE BROKERAGE DEALS.
The 60 mile radius that circumvents that particular FREEMASON BLUE LODGE does not include their other lodges that probably span the entire STATE OF ILLINOIS & goes much further beyond that realm.
For example, the “CANADIAN BANK,” MARSHALL & ILSLEY” that says it’s AMERICAN to hide & money launder ILLICIT SALES.
They’re in reality, hiding they’re PROPRIETORS OF DEATH for DRUG CARTELS the likes of MERCK, who just happen to love IBM STOCK PLUMMETS because they buy in on the seedy side of HUMAN TRAFFICKING AKA SECRET HUMAN SACRIFICE .
It’s FRAUDULENTLY INDUCED FREEMASON hell in OAK FOREST, ILLINOIS 24/7.
That radius spans within 60 miles of the FREEMASON BLUE LODGE on OAK PARK AVE.
That’s who really needs to get AUDITED by the FEDERAL BANKING REGULATORS for WE THE PEOPLE.
The ongoing cover up for the BANKSTER GANGSTERS like DAVE CLARK from FIRST MIDWEST BANK needs to end.
Because RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION OF CATHOLICS IS UNLAWFUL, therefore, the “means,” DOMESTIC TERRORISM, do not justify their UNLAWFUL “end” which is their unholy SACRILEGIOUS CRUSADE on ROMAN CATHOLICS.
That is done by the FREEMASON SPIES playing the DEVIL’S OWN ADVOCATE by questioning their own illicit operations & blaming the victims for their intentional wrongdoings.
They’re like BANK ROBBERS blaming the CUSTOMERS for them robbing the bank
The justices, judges, cops, lawyers, politicians, ATTORNEY’S FOR PLAINTIFF, SPY RING, etc AKA AIG/INFRAGUARD intended to cause the UNLAWFUL CONFLICT OF INTEREST AKA MERS (MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT SERVICES).
It’s DOMESTIC TERRORISM by the way it operates in open secret.
Why are judges in Rhode Island not giving favorable orders to home owners? See this judgement on defective assignment. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-rid-1_14-cv-00532/pdf/USCOURTS-rid-1_14-cv-00532-0.pdf
How could one file an appeal on this?
Last I checked, CRIME SYNDICATES don’t have LEGAL RIGHTS in the U.S.A.
Let me clarify in my previous comment, they think they have the right to steal by their own LAWLESSNESS.
They want to try to make everyone else look bad because they’re dirty dealing in the demonic.
That’s the fraud they engage in that’s really not hard to prove if you recognize the signs.
That is not to say everything they do is right in front of your eyes.
It’s SATANIC GANGSTERISM & it’s demon conjuring is widespread & virulent.
That’s who these criminals hiding behind BANKS & SERVICERS the so called “INVESTORS,” really represent is the demonic realm.
Clearly they’re on drugs & they do plently of drinking too, because they have no spirituality & no consciences.
In FRAUDCLOSURE we have AGENTS OF EVIL questioning their own unlawful operations they engage in for AGENCIES OF EVIL.
They can hardly say we’re the cold, calculating predators when they never had the proper legal documentation to swap out our TITLES UNLAWFULLY.
Theses evil criminals do not want us having PROPERTY TITLES in our nmes & that’s the bottom line.
There is no justification for that type of selfishness & greed, legal or hypothesized.
It is merely jealousy of other people & what they own.
Sharing TITLES with crooks is not legally feasible or morally just so they think they hve the right to steal them by their own LAWLESSNESS.
That type of dirty dealing has its origins in the demonic.
That’s when the DRUG CARTEL gets revealed because their lifestyle gets more secretive but more open ended so to speak.
It can only hide its true identity long enough until it gets revealed by its own self centered egotism.
So when the next round of WALL STREET DEBT FRAUD enema’s gets fraudulently induced & they tell their employees they’re the new WALL STREET GERIATRICS PATIENTS under the e care fraud & they don’t care how young they’re purported to be.
The DEBT FRAUD CLAN wants their wives crowns, their girlfriends sex tapes, their pets, their kids, their properties, their keys to their PORSCHES & AUDIS & the COCAINE & HOOKERS will be on the house.
The SEC COMMODITIES & EXCHANGE BROKERING COMMISSION should be routed out by their own enablers for gambling on whether or not we think we own our own fingerprints or not.
Rush Limbaugh was selling spray to spray on license plates to make them undetectable to the DEBT FRAUD CARTEL.
How bout some of that for our fingers so the WALL STREET EXECUTIVE BRANCH can’t steal our legal rights to our own fingerprints because they’re sacrilegious debt fraud tramps?
They finger print ID their AGENTS which s IDENTITY THEFT on steroids.
They’re so smart they’re dumb because they’re being tagged by the NAZI controllers they work for.
Do they even know whatCONTROL FRAUD means?
The criminals use their FRAUD to criminalize everyone else by using them to cover it up.
So don’t settle for CONTROL FRAUD should be our motto, because the WALL STREET BOD’s want to use that to frame everyone else for more heinous & egregious DERIVATIVES FRAUD the likes of which no one has ever seen.
They think the U.S. is they’re ticket to paradise because people don’t know what DERIVATIVES FRAUD is used for.
LOOK UP OMERTA.
So true Ims53. The greatest deception is the fact there isn’t one fact, legal or hypothecized that makes ACTS OF RICO legal.
I don’t care if you’re some FRAUD AGENT named DAVE who says you’re VP or PRESIDENT of RUSSIAN SPY HOOSKOW INC AKA THE MORTGAGE BANKSTERS ASSOCIATION HOODLUMS or not.
I’m not their debt fraud patsy slave maiden.
They’re died in the wool commie liars to the core of their rotten APPLE.
ivent its fraud right down to the birth of their grandchildren. the local courts, banks, govt, all are guilty. this electronic internet crap legitimizes every transaction. The internet is an evil tool. beware the buyer these days and do not do business over the internet. everything is fictitious and put your money in an internet bank, chances are you will never see it again. WAKE UP People. Everyone is being deceived!
There is so much electronic signatory fraud they can’t cover it up.
One ATTORNEY I spoke with said “there’s lots of those,” when I told him the name of the BANKSTER from FIRST MDWEST BANK who signed off on their own fraud.
DAVE the BANKSTER is pretending to be everyone by doing that.
He is claiming that he has personal knowledge of everything that occurred from the start of the scam to the day he signed off.
That means he incriminated himself in covering up his own fraud.
No one knows where those e signatures go, or what they’re really signing.
OBAMA could be signing MULTIPLE TRANSACTIONS with our enemies & we would never know.
These crooks pass so many lies to cover up their SECURITIES FRAUD, they can’t be trusted thats for sure.
The DRUG PUSHERS manage to infiltrate everything to get their evil work done but it’s never really done.
That’s why evildoers never stop doing evil because their main objective is to undermine by deceit.
That’s how they mange to escape criminal prosecutions & they buy peoples loyalty too, or make promises they can’t keep.
That’s why the crooks use banks & investing to DIRECT DEPOSIT & hide PAYOLA.
That’s what is unlawful regarding ELECTRONIC TRANSACTIONS, they’re used to DESTROY EVIDENCE for CRIME SYNDICATES.
The ROBO PEN that OBAMA uses is to cover up crimes because ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES cannot be secured.
In the link below they said MEDICI POPES were KHAZARS but they weren’t placed there by the MEDICIS because they’re not traitors.
If the link I posted below is blocked, you can GOOGLE it.
MEROVINGIAN BLOODLINE:
http://www.bibliotecapeleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_blacknobil07.htm
BLACK HAND: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hand
I saw the opened ended “loan” comment & I just want to say every BANKSTER COUNTERFEIT is “OPEN ENDED.”
The reason is because the ORIGINATION was FRAUDULENT, & that’s what the BLACK HAND want to cover up, is how they use FRAUD IN THE ISSUING OF CREDIT to rob us.
They can’t run their gazillion % profit CORPORATE DRUG CARTEL without it.
I truly believe that Ims53.
The DRUG LORDS want to send their GANG BANGER DRUG DEALER thugs out of the major cities out to the suburbs to slum up the place. It’s DOMESTIC TERRORISM by the DRUG CARTELS namely, the RUSSIAN MOB.
Daley did it in CHICAGO when he was MAYOR. He sent the SECTION 8 crew out to the suburbs so the METROSEXUAL LAWYERS & RAHMS COMRADES could buy up the joint like it’s CHEAP CHICKEN MONDAY in the local JEWEL.
I have SECTION 8-ers in my town because of it & crime is rampant here now.
One night I went into the local BP for cigarettes & there was this giant MOB HOOD in there wearing this PRINCE HALL FREEMASON skull cap & coat with GANG TATTOOS on the back of his neck. I was horrified & I don’t go there no more.
Looks like alot to DBs post on transfer.
78 FR 251 pgs. 79730-80365 – Integrated Mortgage …
http://www.federalregister.com/Browse/Document/usa/…/fr/2013/…/31/2013-282...
Dec 31, 2013 – On May 11, 2011, the Board proposed amendments to Regulation Z to implement section … Act. The Bureau’s Regulation Z took effect on December 30, 2011. ….. 97 78 FR 32547 (May 31, 2013), finalizing a proposal to delay the ….. Web site and place a Web site link on the integrated disclosures directing …
on 2015-10-08 i sent an inquiry to “www.scotusblog.com” asking:
Quick question… looked for status on 15-260 certiorari… no matches…
Is there anything indicating if/when to be heard?
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/petitions-were-watching/
it pertains to the securitization question in Anh-N.-Tran-et-al.-v.-Bank-of-New-York-SCOTUS-Certiorari
they answered today:
It will be before the Justices in a couple of weeks; the electronic docket will say when that will be. The key thing to watch for is whether any of the Justices order the respondents to file a response; the Court will deny review without requiring a response, but it won’t grant it.
CFR › Title 12 › Chapter X › Part 1026 › Subpart E › Section 1026.39
12 CFR 1026.39 – Mortgage transfer disclosures.
CFR
eCFR
Authorities (U.S. Code)
Rulemaking
prev | next
§ 1026.39 Mortgage transfer disclosures. Link to an amendment published at 78 FR 80130, Dec. 31, 2013.
(a) Scope. The disclosure requirements of this section apply to any covered person except as otherwise provided in this section. For purposes of this section:
(1) A “covered person” means any person, as defined in § 1026.2(a)(22), that becomes the owner of an existing mortgage loan by acquiring legal title to the debt obligation, whether through a purchase, assignment or other transfer, and who acquires more than one mortgage loan in any twelve-month period. For purposes of this section, a servicer of a mortgage loan shall not be treated as the owner of the obligation if the servicer holds title to the loan, or title is assigned to the servicer, solely for the administrative convenience of the servicer in servicing the obligation.
(2) A “mortgage loan” means any consumer credit transaction that is secured by the principal dwelling of a consumer.
(b) Disclosure required. Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, each covered person is subject to the requirements of this section and shall mail or deliver the disclosures required by this section to the consumer on or before the 30th calendar day following the date of transfer.
(1) Form of disclosures. The disclosures required by this section shall be provided clearly and conspicuously in writing, in a form that the consumer may keep. The disclosures required by this section may be provided to the consumer in electronic form, subject to compliance with the consumer consent and other applicable provisions of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (E-Sign Act) (15 U.S.C. 7001 et seq.).
(2) The date of transfer. For purposes of this section, the date of transfer to the covered person may, at the covered person’s option, be either the date of acquisition recognized in the books and records of the acquiring party, or the date of transfer recognized in the books and records of the transferring party.
(3) Multiple consumers. If more than one consumer is liable on the obligation, a covered person may mail or deliver the disclosures to any consumer who is primarily liable.
(4) Multiple transfers. If a mortgage loan is acquired by a covered person and subsequently sold, assigned, or otherwise transferred to another covered person, a single disclosure may be provided on behalf of both covered persons if the disclosure satisfies the timing and content requirements applicable to each covered person.
(5) Multiple covered persons. If an acquisition involves multiple covered persons who jointly acquire the loan, a single disclosure must be provided on behalf of all covered persons.
(c) Exceptions. Notwithstanding paragraph (b) of this section, a covered person is not subject to the requirements of this section with respect to a particular mortgage loan if:
(1) The covered person sells, or otherwise transfers or assigns legal title to the mortgage loan on or before the 30th calendar day following the date that the covered person acquired the mortgage loan which shall be the date of transfer recognized for purposes of paragraph (b)(2) of this section;
(2) The mortgage loan is transferred to the covered person in connection with a repurchase agreement that obligates the transferor to repurchase the loan. However, if the transferor does not repurchase the loan, the covered person must provide the disclosures required by this section within 30 days after the date that the transaction is recognized as an acquisition on its books and records; or
(3) The covered person acquires only a partial interest in the loan and the party authorized to receive the consumer’s notice of the right to rescind and resolve issues concerning the consumer’s payments on the loan does not change as a result of the transfer of the partial interest.
(d) Content of required disclosures. The disclosures required by this section shall identify the loan that was sold, assigned or otherwise transferred, and state the following:
(1) The name, address, and telephone number of the covered person.
(i) If a single disclosure is provided on behalf of more than one covered person, the information required by this paragraph shall be provided for each of them unless paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section applies.
(ii) If a single disclosure is provided on behalf of more than one covered person and one of them has been authorized in accordance with paragraph (d)(3) of this section to receive the consumer’s notice of the right to rescind and resolve issues concerning the consumer’s payments on the loan, the information required by paragraph (d)(1) of this section may be provided only for that covered person.
(2) The date of transfer.
(3) The name, address and telephone number of an agent or party authorized to receive notice of the right to rescind and resolve issues concerning the consumer’s payments on the loan. However, no information is required to be provided under this paragraph if the consumer can use the information provided under paragraph (d)(1) of this section for these purposes.
(4) Where transfer of ownership of the debt to the covered person is or may be recorded in public records, or, alternatively, that the transfer of ownership has not been recorded in public records at the time the disclosure is provided.
(e) Optional disclosures. In addition to the information required to be disclosed under paragraph (d) of this section, a covered person may, at its option, provide any other information regarding the transaction.
Effective Date Note:
At 78 FR 80130, Dec. 31, 2013, § 1026.39 was amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2) and (d) introductory text and adding paragraph (d)(5), effective Aug. 1, 2015. For the convenience of the user, the added and revised text is set forth as follows:
§ 1026.39 Mortgage transfer disclosures.
(a) * * *
(2) A “mortgage loan” means:
(i) An open-end consumer credit transaction that is secured by the principal dwelling of a consumer; and
(ii) A closed-end consumer credit transaction secured by a dwelling or real property.
(d) Content of required disclosures. The disclosures required by this section shall identify the mortgage loan that was sold, assigned or otherwise transferred, and state the following, except that the information required by paragraph (d)(5) of this section shall be stated only for a mortgage loan that is a closed-end consumer credit transaction secured by a dwelling or real property other than a reverse mortgage transaction subject to § 1026.33 of this part:
(5) Partial payment policy. Under the subheading “Partial Payment”:
(i) If periodic payments that are less than the full amount due are accepted, a statement that the covered person, using the term “lender,” may accept partial paymentsand apply such payments to the consumer’s loan;
(ii) If periodic payments that are less than the full amount due are accepted but not applied to a consumer’s loan until the consumer pays the remainder of the full amount due, a statement that the covered person, using the term “lender,” may hold partial payments in a separate account until the consumer pays the remainder of the payment and then apply the full periodic payment to the consumer’s loan;
(iii) If periodic payments that are less than the full amount due are not accepted, a statement that the covered person, using the term “lender,” does not accept any partial payments; and
(iv) A statement that, if the loan is sold, the new covered person, using the term “lender,” may have a different policy.
ivent so true about “bankster blight” it is so evident in florida. every foreclosure on my street has been bought by some Brazilian . and then they send their illegal alien workers to rip up the house with no permits. I am watching it go on next door to me as I type this. they leave their left over chicken bones from lunch and their syrofoam containers all over the back yard and some yellow dring in a milk gallon container that looks like piss. its disgusting!
In the U.S., MAJORITY RULE can mean one person discovers the U.S. GOVERNMENT is some IMPOSTER. So that one person decides to find ways to not cooperate, comply & conform with the enemy.
reminding everyone that in America – they have this thing that the majority makes the rules…
at last count We the People are the majority… LET’S RULE!
We have foreigners coming in this country repurchasing BANKSTER BLIGHT on behalf of the crooks who made it happen intentionally.
The proof is in OBAMA letting in so many illegals to steal what the BANKSTERS like him intentionally destroyed.
Moreover his TRANSPACIFIC UNION PACT was treason because he’s enabling our enemies to rob us.
Even term limits won’t stop these DEVILS ADVOCATES because HUMAN TRAFFICKING is the name of their numbers game & TRADING WITH THE ENEMY is what the U.N./NATO does.
That’s why GLOBALIZATION is criminal because it’s used by our enemies to engage in UNLAWFUL SEARCH & SEIZURE. That’s how the WORLD DICTATORS spy & steal our freedoms by fraudulent investing in their own crimes.
They destroy the structures with us in them & then blame their victims & that’s how they steal our liberty.
.
The U.S. SUPREME COURT defends no ones legal rights but defends our enemies who want to stesl ours.
That’s proven by the fact they lied when they said the HEALTHCARE SCOFFLAW was legal. It’s not because murderous dictatorships can’t override the FREE WILL of the people by making murder by DRUG CARTELS legal.
thanks to all who know they are in abundance and not in lack…
your voices expressed here in small meaningful phrases are much more powerful than those who would use meaningless overwhelming argument to confuse and harm you…
love and prosper…
(and stand your ground on the land our families died for – at all costs)
greg
I don’t care what the FASCIST U.S. SUPREME COURT says because they LEGALIZED ANIMAL SACRIFICE & HUMAN SACRIFICE.
They never inquired what role the U.S. DOJ played in 9/11 either. They’re traitors in black robes & therefore, they’re the NEANDERTHALS who think we should care what those HUMAN TRAFFICKERS think.
thanks Hammer
i’m about ready to ask you to use that hammer on my skull and send me to a place where apes don’t pretend to be people…
greg
You got it Greg. People can’t let go of their daddys in court or on Wall St. Legalism to prop up these criminals and traitors. The law made nothing perfect.
greg, on October 8, 2015 at 7:58 pm said:
FOR G0D’S SAKE –
THIS IS PROOF THAT EDUCATED PEOPLE ARE IDIOTS OR JUST SO ENTRENCHED IN THEIR BELIEFS THEY WOULD RATHER DIE FOR NEWTON THAN LEARN QUANTUM THEORY
SCOTUS DETERMINED THAT THE PEOPLE – THROUGH CONGRESS ASSEMBLED – DETERMINED, FOR THEMSELVES; THE INTENT AND OUTCOME OF TILA MATTER AND MADE IT PLAIN ON ITS FACE FOR THE WORLD TO SEE
SCOTUS NAILED DOWN THE FACT THAT ALL LOWER COURTS ARE FORECLOSED TO SPEAK OR RULE AGAINST IT ANYMORE
SCOTUS TELLS ALL LOWER COURTS THAT THEY BETTER NOT WAR WITH CONGRESS AND BETTER CORRECT ALL PAST MISTAKES INCONSISTENT WITH THE PEOPLE’S PLAIN MEANING
SCOTUS TELLS ALL LOWER COURTS TO USE TILA TO ACT IN DEFENSE OF THE PEOPLE’S VOICE AND NEEDS – NOT THE BANKS OR CORPORATIONS
P E R I O D ! ! !
P E R I O D ! ! !
P E R I O D ! ! !
ANYTHING ELSE IS A COUP DE TAT ! ! !
ANYTHING ELSE IS TREASON ! ! !
greg
greg, on October 8, 2015 at 7:41 pm said:
one can create legal proof, duties, obligations and judgments without (outside of) any court!!!
– it is this ongoing craziness that every damn thing must go before “black-robed daddy” to settle claims that is destroying America…
– that guy on the bench is NOT my daddy…
– things can still be legally settled with teeth between parties without an arbitrator or administrator or court…
– and if you bind them to a counter offer version of a contract after they make an initial offer, and tell them in writing to answer or counter, else accept – you can get them to the SAME enforceable place that credit card companies get you when you don’s send back a cut-up credit card after they send you notice of change of terms…
– if you get them into a legal agreement separately that stipulates that all issues are final and settled, they are foreclosed to bring it before a judge without violating the contract – and if you were sharp enough to add stipulations for recourse upon such breach of contract, you can collect or lien them up to their eyebrows… and a judge (if they do sue) should rule in your favor)
– everyone forgot that THEY (The People) ARE the U.S., and the corporations we ALLOW to exist are there to serve US and the U.S.!
– we can also create adhesion contracts that bind them to a post to the same degree that they create adhesion contracts which bind us to a post…
– think of it as “What’s good for the Goose is good for the Gander Law”
everyone is drunk on litigation!
greg
That’s why there is no value in the DRUG INDUSTRY because they prescribe death because they’re the CULT OF DEATH.
I dont care what they believe, because they worship death.
They’re ungodly & therefore if they offered me trillions for my signature they would not get it from me.
I’m no citizen of this FASCIST STATE OF ILLINOIS or subject of the FASCIST OBAMA REGIME.
Therefore, I choose to invoke my U.S. SOVEREIGNTY, beause that is my NATURAL BORN LEGAL RIGHT to do so, because I don’t take orders from FASCIST DICTATORS whose main objective is to steal our U.S. SOVEREIGNTY by engaging us in unlawful psycholgical warfsre.
The proof of the UNLAWFUL CONFLICT OF INTEREST by the crooked MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENT DRUG CARTEL LEADERS is their constant barage of commercial self promoting PSYCHOTROBE telling us their DRUGS kill people.
Moreover, who wants to hear how CIALIS can give dirty old men problems for 4 hours.
Imagine little kids hearing that crap & wanting to know what does male erection mean? It’s horrendously obscene.
please remember to call into our fledgling follow up Q&A show 15 min after Neil concludes at;
Phone# 724.444.7444 Call ID139335 (just hit 0 for anonymous guest)
or from your computer at:
http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/139335
6:45PM EST for up to 1 hour
BTW – there is no strict format anymore until we get more participants and need the organization
thanks
greg
Therefore, we should request their WALL STREET INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS. There is definitely UNLAWFUL CONFLICT OF INTEREST ISSUES when DRUG CARTELS DICTATE U.S. POLICY & their perps don’t go to jail because they think they’re TOO BIG TO FAIL.
greg, on October 8, 2015 at 5:49 pm said:
please remember to call into our fledgling follow up Q&A show 15 min after Neil concludes at;
Phone# 724.444.7444 Call ID139335 (just hit 0 for anonymous guest)
or from your computer at:
http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/139335
6:45PM EST for up to 1 hour
BTW – there is no strict format anymore until we get more participants and need the organization
thanks
greg
FRAUDCLOSURE is psychological rape by the STATE FASCISTS.
The main proponents of this war on our legal rights in ILLINOIS, posing like the ILLINOIS STATES ATTORNEY, THE ILLINOIS SECRETARY OF STATE & THE ILLINOIS STATE AG, think they’re ABOVE THE LAW by pretending to be people they’re not. They’re DERELICT in their DUTIES because they do not uphold the law, they CRIMINALIZE THE INNOCENT to steal by violating our legal rights.
The RED LIGHT CAMERAS prove that. They’re whoring for the DRUG CARTELS who they fraudulently invest in with our money.
They’re HUMAN TRAFFICKING by RACKETEERING with our TITLES UNLAWFULLY, to PERSECUTE CATHOLICS for believing in GOD & to hide they’re DRUG PUSHERS for OBAMA .
The BIG SWINDLE is they’re IMPOSTERS ; FICTITIOUS PAYEES who belong in prison namely for DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE because they’re FOREIGN NATIONAL hired thugs.
please remember to call into our fledgling follow up Q&A show 15 min after Neil concludes at;
Phone# 724.444.7444 Call ID139335 (just hit 0 for anonymous guest)
or from your computer at:
http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/139335
6:45PM EST for up to 1 hour
BTW – there is no strict format anymore until we get more participants and need the organization
thanks
greg
The proof the FRB is covering up there own BANK FRAUD is they procured nothing, & therefore, nothing backs the FRAUDULENT CREDIT SLIPS they were SWAPPING they surmise to be “debt.”
The FDIC could not possibly have insured the risk created by WALL STREET CREDIT BROKERING with our BIRTH CERTIFICATES unlawfully & police the innumerable UNCERTIFICATED CERTIFICATES they never issued that resulted from their SLEIGHT OF HAND dirty tricks.
Our property, titles, persons, papers, houses & effects is not their collateral to destroy the value of because they’re clever cons. They borrowed their own credit & the money was never printed. Moreover, electronic transfers of credit do not constitute lawful money & therefore, loaning credit is psychotrobe & the collection of it is PSYCHE WAR by GANG STALKERS whose identities never get disclosed because they’re terrorists.
Max Keiser said the only thing in the vault of the FRB is PABLO ESCOBAR & MOUNTAINS OF COCAINE.
That’s probably true, & that’s why the STATE POLITICIANS have no legal standing over nothing or no one because they’re invested in that fraud.
They want FAKE SIGNORS to EXTINGUISH their fraud & then they will use their unscrupulous ways to steal everything from us eventually.
They used up the CORPORATE FICTIONAL NAMES & those were never legit so to cover that fraud up, they want to get us to rescind our identities & our BIRTH CERTIFICATES by having us sign off on something.
That way they can hide the CORPORATE FICTIONAL NAME & hand the SETTLEMENT MONEY we’re owed to their COMRADES by FRAUDULENT TITLE TRANSFERS hidden behind the ORIGINAL FILL IN THE BLANK NOTE IDENTITY THEFT of our social numbers.
It’s BIRTH CERTIFICATE FRAUD by our enemies.
MORAL HAZARD is their catch phrase for SECURITIES FRAUD being underwritten by our enemies to hide their own BANK FRAUD.
How do wantoned felons RECONSTITUTE their own FAKE CONTRACTS?
By engaging in WAR CRIMES under many guised by using FAKE IDENTITIES.
For example, why would OBAMA want to let 200,000 SYRIAN REFUGEES in when the econony stinks?
He clearly wants to cause economic calamity because he keeps refinancing fraud & reprinting the same debt fraud to oppress us because he thinks he’s ABOVE THE LAW.
Sh88, you don’t have to be a rocket scientist or an attorney to read into all the neverending fraudclosure process. It started with the banksters and it will go full circle back to the banksters. I have never seen so much lawlessness in my lifetime either and I am 55. I say don’t get mad, get even in an honest way. After all, we know the devil never wins!
Thank you lms53.
It’s true, they have us beating their dead horses in these courtrooms because they don’t have the SECURITIES. They don’t care because there’s no honor in this country in the value of humanity.
It’s blah blah blah in FRAUDCLOSURE COURT in regards to the law because SECURITIES FRAUD is the demonstration of LAWLESSNESS.
Therefore, we’re living in one LAWLESS NATION of FRAUD UNDERWITERS whose job it is to try & UNDERMINE our LEGAL RIGHTS by CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD.
They’re TITLE COVETERS who convey their own FRAUD UP ON WALL STREET & their CPA’s never get subpoenaed to testify regarding what their FRAUD CLAIMS mean to MISREPRESENT.
Because they represent LAWLESSNESS. That’s why the fake Governance of SPY AGENCIES don’t reveal the RPII in ANY CASES. Whether it be FRAUDCLOSURE or ANY SUIT their job is to DESTROY EVIDENCE we’re living in LAWLESSNESS being fake governed by thieves who by robbing us, try to force us to live on fraudulent credit slips they COUNTERFEITED.
ivent you are dead on. you should look at the clerk of courts picture for broward county florida, the devil himself. these certificate of title issued by the courts is just pushing the fraud farther. it is one corrupt system. there is no justice at state level. you are wasting your money and time. stop paying the attorney and if you want to stay work it out with your mortgage company (servicer, trustee, who knows) we already know there is no third party. take it to the federal court if there is to be any justice at all.
No laws matter because the SECURITIES were never CONSTRUCTED by PERFORMAMCE by the ISSUER of the ORIGINAL FAULTY FRAUDULENT CREDIT SLIP they hid.
That’s why the secret THIRD PARTY is being hidden in FRAUDCLOSURE.
That’s because the HIDDEN HAND is the BLACK HAND of SATANISM AKA THE LEFT HAND PATH.
They’re one vast SKULL & BONES CRIME SYNDICATE of DRUG DEALERS pushing DEATH under the guise of FRAUDCLOSURE AKA TRADING WITH THE ENEMY.
The reason why is they don’t want to ACCOUNT for the money they hid from DRUG RACKETEERING under fictitious names.
The deliberate NON-DISCLOSURE regarding what those multiple COPIES of those PARTIAL GRANT DEEDS represent is FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT of PERTINENT FACTS.
There were 5 UNSIGNED copies of PARTIAL GRANT DEEDS lobbed in by PLAINTIFFS following the commencment of their FRAUD SUIT with no determination of their meaning or origin.
That can only be considered to be UTTERING FAKE CONTRACTS under the guise of CREDIT BROKERING by some unknown, unregistered THIRD PARTY ASSAILANT because I never signed those.
That’s barring the fact we know these fraudulent conveyances were charged off years before the inception of these suits.
Therefore, these FRAUDCLOSURES could be MURDER HITS by some unknown ASSAILANT who could even be the JUDGES.
If you review the record, you can see PREJUDICE by the JUDGES who outright refuse to cooperate with DEFENDANTS requests for A MORE SPECIFIC BILL OF PARTICULARS like PLAINTIFFS ACCOUNT SUMMARY & RECORDS regarding their hidden CORPORATE PASS BOOK ACCOUNTS that would require them to produce the BILL OF SALE for these FRAUDS.
Furthermore, JUDGES making FRAUDULENT TITLE TRANSFERS during court proceedings under names like THE JUDICIAL SALES GROUP is SECURITIES FRAUD by PUBLIC SERVICE WORKERS who WE THE PEOPLE employ.
The PLAINTIFF must prove it had standing from the time lawsuit was filed. PLAINTIFF must show how the endorsement happened prior to the inception of the lawsuit. ROBERT MCCLEAN, Appellant v J.P. MORGAN CHASE BANK, N. 4D-3429; Feb 8, 2012; FLA 4th DCA APPELLATE.
No legal transfers could have ever occurred because the SECURITIES dont exist. In other words, FRAUDCLOSURE is VOODOO WORSHIP of things thst don’t exist & never did because STOCK BROKERS don’t lend money they BROKER CREDIT UNLAWFULLY.
Proven by the fact unsigned, unauthorized PARTIAL GRANT DEEDS convey nothing, & that’s evidence of CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY because they won’t say what those represent.
Therefore that’s FRAUDULENT REPRESENTATION by FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION of COUNTERFEIT SECURITIES by the PLAINTIFF.
SATANIC ACTIVITIES OF SECRET SOCIETIES:
http://www.cuttingedge.org/ce1011.html
Solis v. Fidelity Consumer Discount Co., 58 B.R. 983 (Pa. 1986). Any misgivings creditors may have about the
technical nature of the requirements should be addressed to Congress or the Federal Reserve Board, not the
courts. Disclosure requirements for credit sales are governed by 15 U.S.C.S. § 1638 12 CFR § 226.8(b), (c).
Disclosure requirements for consumer loans are governed by 15 U.S.C.S. § 1639 12 CFR § 226.8(b), (d). A
violator of the disclosure requirements is held to a standard of strict liability. Therefore, a plaintiff need not
show that the creditor in fact deceived him by making substandard disclosures. Since Transworld Systems Inc.
have not cancelled the security interest and return all monies paid by Ms. Sherrie I. LaForce within the 20 days
of receipt of the letter of rescission of October 7, 2009, the lenders named above are responsible for actual and
statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1640(a).
What does the Note say?
P.S. .. I have the allonge from the closing package.
And the 2012 bloopers…the infamous all – in – from MERS undated.
Thursday 8 October 2015
Cheers Bob G:
Then it is a rookie pro se argument I would still make. I agree with every
other aspect: conveyed, transferred, negotiated, delivered, etc, but
not assigned. For me, it is a presumption to include assignments into
the rest of the group. Calling it synonymous is conceding an element
of proof that I would make the other side bear.
Beyond assumption/presumption, I do not see any authority that expressly
states notes can be assigned, as a matter of law. It is another aspect
judges like to sweep under the rug and preclude borrowers from arguing,
thx…
mn…trying to argue that a note cannot be assigned is a rookie pro se argument and mistake. notes can be assigned, conveyed, transferred, negotiated, delivered, etc. they are all pretty much synonymous. whatever lawfully transfers the note from one party to another is lawful, regardless of the terminology. the court looks to substance over form. period.
Wednesday 7 October 2015
Great input, Bob G…I was not aware of the DeWitt case. Thanks. Slorp
is a must read for everyone who wants to increase their probability of
success, which may not be saying much given how the courts are the
largest hurdle in a foreclosure case. Any judge can bend the outcome
however he/she wants the outcome to be.
—
In re the post by Garfield, what am I missing? Nowhere in the UCC does
it say a note can be assigned. Nowhere! Notes can only transferred.
Any assignment purporting to transfer the note is void. Only the mortgage can be transferred.
On that basis, one need not argue as a third party intervenor, but one
who can always challenge a void instrument, regardless of who the
other parties are. The assignor in anyone’s case claiming to be the
holder based on an assignment was assigned nothing, with respect to
the note.
Argue the wrong issue[s] and one never has to worry about being right.
At least this is my limited understanding of notes and assignments. If I
am wrong, someone correct me, backed by case site authority, for I do
not want to be misleading to anyone.
Cheers…
mn
@bobhurt
bob…slorp does provide an interesting alternative perspective and opinion re standing to challenge assignments to a trust in the context of a foreclosure action. it’s worth a read. it’s a fed appellate decision, written by more than one judge.
as you know, defendant mortgagors are claiming that since these late transfers to the NY trust violate NY EPTL 7-2.4, and the PSAs are governed by NY law, the transfers are void, not voidable as the statute says. the courts for the most part have disregarded these arguments.
however, i have it on good authority from someone inside NY’s Appellate Division, Second Dept., (the department that heard the Erobobo appeal), that there’s a major league battle going on amongst the justices there regarding this very issue.
further, it seems as though no defendant has defended based upon the 1858 NY Court of Appeals decision, DeWitt v. Brisbane, holding that a mortgage/note transfer/assignment that violates a statute is absolutely void. this is known as the Dewitt Exception to the well-settled law that a nonparty to a contract or one who is not an intended third party beneficiary has no standing to challenge the assignment. Dewitt is still good law.
In any event, i wanted to discuss a few matters with you off this forum. can i reach you via some other URL? lost you email from a couple of years ago.
thanx.
In KALICKI II, would misprision of felony by Justice J. McIntyre void the ruling and allow review by a higher court? Knowing that a party to a case acted in a criminal manner by proffering evidence as a fraud upon the court and the judge not pursuing prosecution seems outside the protective shield judicial immunity provides the judiciary. The fact that it was issued UNPUBLISHED gives rise to the question of criminal intent.
As for me, I plan to write a letter of complaint to the CA State BAR Assn naming Justice McIntyre as unfit to sit on the bench.
@BobHurt = Your Livonia case was superseded by Slorp. And in CA, Civ. Code 1203 allows ANYONE with an interest to challenge a document entitled to be recorded. There is a 1-year limitation to employ it, though.
Bob you can post tge millions of cases that were wrong or where courts are commiting treason ignoring the supreme court all day long. You’re not arguing standing or doing fc defense ur challenging validity of the mortgage as u preach w rescission without a lawyer or going to court. The creditor has to prove their standing,debt with a void note. That’s procedure of TILA not foreclosure that is benefit for “lender”. Do u see the difference? Why homeowners argue against it is bizarre. And accepting that courts can ignore TILA is as if every county refused to give gay marriage licenses!
In my personal experience after rescission sent bankster tried to change eviction lawyer that was a fc mill but tgey wouldn’t take it after cease and desist, think that says something. But CA might be the new FL so not having any great expectations but right is right.
Hi lms, 2nd try since DBs monster post blowed me up! Still deep in unlawful detainer, city limbo. On TILA depends on court it looks like and prob settlements we aren’t hearing about. In my experience banksters are in complete denial contrary to business as usual, free house scare tactic. If homeowners go along tgey may get their way and change law but until then these decisions and bias is wrong. The point isn’t free house it’s making them prove standing, debt change in leverage. Of course u have to have facts and have been consistent but even that’s not true if the thing foreclosing on u is an imposter or criminal and can’t step up. Don’t fall for the false morality games.
Whaaaaaaa …. Fraud Upon The Court? Or Fraud By The Court?
“The Kalickis conceded in the prior action and during oral argument that Chase is the servicer of the loan. Accordingly, whether E*Trade presently holds their note is irrelevant to their obligations under the note and deed.
And people u can cite fraud under TILA1
KALICKI II – http://stopforeclosurefraud.com/2015/10/04/jan-kalicki-et-al-appellants-v-etrade-bank-appellee-we-agree-as-to-the-claims-for-wrongful-foreclosure-trespass-and-violation-of-the-ucl-and-reverse-the-judgmen
IANAL – but it seems to me that if 2 contending beneficiaries are known to the court in a clear title cause of action, one or the other, or both, contenders have to present a fraud upon the court. They can’t both be innocent. You will want to read the learned justices’ contortions that wrings the last iota of Justice from their edict. It’s no wonder it, too, is UNPUBLISHED.
Creditors never destroy their notes because the note IS the debt. Where did you get the idea that they destroy the notes?
Asset Securitization Comptroller’s Handbook November 1997- THIS GO’S TO YOU SAYING THE BORROWER IS NOT A PARTY TO THE PSA.
Exhibit 1: Parties Involved in Structuring Asset-Backed Securities.
Borrower. The borrower is responsible for payment on the underlying loans and therefore the ultimate performance of the asset-backed security. Because borrowers often do not realize that their loans have been sold, the originating bank is often able to maintain the customer relationship. From a credit risk perspective, securitization has made popular the practice of grouping borrowers by letter or categories. At the top of the rating scale, ’A’- quality borrowers have relatively pristine credit histories. At the bottom, ’D’- quality borrowers usually have severely blemished credit histories. The categories are by no means rigid; in fact, credit evaluation problems exist because one originator’s ’A’ borrower may be another’s ’A-’ or ’B’ borrower. Nevertheless, the terms ’A’ paper and ’B/C’ paper are becoming more and more popular. Exhibit 2 is an example of generic borrower descriptions used by Duff and Phelps Credit Rating Corporation in rating mortgage borrowers. The borrowers’ characteristics in the exhibit are generalizations of each category’s standards and fluctuate over time; however, the table does provide an illustration of general standards in use today. For example, an ‘A’ qualit
ANOTHER YOU SHOULD READ,
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 140 FAS140 Status Page FAS140 Summary Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities (a replacement of FASB Statement No. 125) September 2000
If your note has been securitized, it now belongs to someone other than the holder of your mortgage. This is known as bifurcation — the deed of trust points to one party, while the promissory note points to another. Thus, a foreclosure defense claims that since the relationship between the deed and the note has become defective, it renders the deed of trust unenforceable.
Your promissory note must also have a clear chain of title, according to the nation’s Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), the body of regulations that governs these types of financial instruments. But over and over again, borrowers have been able to demonstrate that subsequent assignments of promissory notes have gone unendorsed.
In fact, it has been standard practice for banks to leave the assignment blank when loans are sold and/or securitized and, customarily, the courts have allowed blank assignment to be an acceptable form of proof of ownership. However, when the Massachusetts Supreme Court in U.S. Bank v. Ibenez ruled that blank assignment is not sufficient to claim perfection, it provided another way in which a foreclosure can be challenged.
A foreclosure defense can also argue that once a loan has been securitized, or converted to stock, it is no longer a loan and cannot be converted back into a loan. That means that your promissory note no longer exists, as such. And if that is true, then your mortgage or deed of trust is no longer securing anything. Instead of the bank insisting that you have breached the contract specified in the promissory note, foreclosure defense argues that the bank has actually destroyed that agreement itself. And if the agreement doesn’t exist, how can it be enforced? A corollary to this argument states that your loan is no longer enforceable because it is now owned by many shareholders and a promissory note is only enforceable in its whole entirety. How can thousands of people foreclose on your house?
Home Mortgage information
How to find out if your lender and Servicing Bank followed these laws: HUD/FHA, Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, Reg. X § 3500.21(f)2 of the United States Uniform Commercial Code as well as a request under counterfeiting securities under Title 18 U.S.C. § 474; Truth In Lending Act [TILA] 15 U.S.C. § 1601-1667j (Full Disclosure at closing); Fair Debt Collections Act, FDCA; Fair Credit Reporting Act, FCRA; U.C.C. – ARTICLE 3 -§3-501 (b) 2 (1); and State Real Estate Mortgage Laws, and what it will mean to you, your family, and your mortgage loan.
This Mortgage Debt Education Notary Presentment process with a mortgage deduction,
cancellation of mortgage, and forgiven mortgage debt works, because the lender/bank does not record this promissory note nor most assignments or transfers with your local county court recorder office in your courthouse like they are supposed to by all State statutes or Laws.
The lender/bank cannot prove that you owe any money, because they don’t have the original blue inked signed promissory note that they used to get 9 times the amount of your note from your strawman U.S. Treasury account and was later securitized and sold to a Trust for a group of investors that changed or unlawfully converted your promissory note check into a stock or bond certificate when they recorded it with the Securities Exchange Commission, SEC, and now no one knows where your mortgage note is nor the unrecorded assignment in 99% of all mortgages issued since the 1990′s are.
Since the loan was illegally securitized by being sold, pooled into a trust, and turned into a stock or bond certificate when recorded with the SEC, or not if it were privately securitized, the alleged holder and owner can no longer claim that it is a real party of interest, as the original lender has been paid in full as proven by your mortgage/deed of trust under the “RELEASE” paragraph and on the front or back side of your last note page where your Lender/Bank endorsed and cashed your FREE loan to them.
After your lender sold your note and mortgage into the Trust, they were digitized into electronic format and only copies in PDF form exist as an intangible under UCC Article 9 and your note has been stripped of money.
This is why there are no original blue inked signed notes available for foreclosure, just a counterfeit copy of your note remains that these banks pawn off as the original to the judges and courts to start an illegal foreclosure action against you just on the bank’s say so with no proof of mortgage loan debt. The note or mortgage has not been authenticated under Federal Law!
If your mortgage or deed of trust has been sold or assigned and you’re paying another bank, or even the same bank, then your mortgage may have been securitized illegally, under the Trust’s Pooling and Servicing Agreement, and no one has the real, original promissory note and mortgage.
Without that note, no one can legally foreclose on your home if you confront the PRETENDER Lender, servicer, Trustee, investor, or anyone who claims to be an interested party or who claims they have the note and mortgage/deed of trust with our proven Mortgage Education process on the Public side of the Uniformed Commercial Code of Federal laws.
Securitization is illegal, because the promissory note and mortgage or deed of trust was divided and separated from the closing and with this illegal method that the banks came up with to protect them and to screw you out of a free loan to pay the previous mortgage and seller that is proven by many Court Cases.
There is a Pooling and Servicing Agreement, PSA, for every lender or bank that they must follow under the SEC. They never follow their own PSA! This is what makes it fraud and also breaks the Chain of Title to prove that they actually DO NOT own your loan.
It is always the best to include a Securitization Audit with this educational process that proves the bank fraud by a 3rd party expert that will hold up in any United States of America court if completed by a competent auditor that improves your chances of winning your case up to 97%. Our auditors are very competent enough to be and Expert Witness in any State court which is a proven fact.
Have You Paid Off Your Mortgage?
Want Proof Of Your Mortgage Pay Off For The Court?
The Bill of Exchange is used as legal money as a check or draft to pay off your residential home mortgage loan or commercial property mortgage loan under the Federal Uniform Commercial Code, UCC, of Federal Law, and can get your mortgage discharged for a FREE and Clear Home or Commercial Property.
This negotiable instrument for mortgage loan pay off falls under UCC, Article 2, definition of Money; and under UCC, Article 3, §3-103(4), Certified Check and (5), Maker; §3-104(a)(b)(c), Negotiable Instrument/Draft; §3-108, Payable on Demand; §3-303, Value and Consideration; §3-602 Payment Discharged; and §603(a) Tender of Payment under simple contract, (b) Mortgage Loan Debt Discharged if refused, and (c) Discharged Interest if refused.
This is another POWERFUL and PROVEN foreclosure avenue that you can do and use to convince the judge that you have paid off your Note and Mortgage in Full and have yet to be relieved of your fraudulent payment obligation, under Federal Law, by the foreclosure banks, Trustees, and lenders.
It has worked in many courts in many States.
It should work in your State too!
This Bill can be used as an offset to your residential home or commercial property mortgage loan.
IN Carpenter v. Longan 16 Wall. 271,83 U.S. 271, 274, 21 L.Ed. 313 (1872),the U.S. Supreme Court stated, “The note and mortgage are inseparable; the former as essential, the latter as an incident. An assignment of the note carries the mortgage with it, while assignment of the latter alone is a nullity.
This is when the so-called Lender sold the note without the mortgage; thus, separating the note and the deed of trust or mortgage forever as in the case with MERS.
By the Federal Banking Laws, the banks cannot lend you their money, nor lend their depositors’ account money, and they cannot lend you their credit per the Federal Banking Law, so where did they get the money to lend you?
YOU gave it to them with your signature on the promissory note as a FREE LOAN, when they changed your promissory note into a check or money and put it in your Private Reserve checking account that only the lender knows about and waiting 3 years to claim your money as abandoned or lost funds after the lender
or bank endorsed it, without your knowledge, authority, or consent!!!
This fraud is under the Federal Disclosure Law.
The Allonge or Alteration against Federal Law changed your mortgage promissory note into a security instrument, cash money, without your knowledge or consent; thus, your lender created money out of thin air with bookkeeping entries, without full disclosure, and with your unknowing promissory note debt signature since most of you are only a number and not a real person made in God’s image anymore.
Your name in all capital letters shows that you are a fictious entity, a corporation, and not a flesh and blood man or woman!
Because this alteration changed your promissory note into a FREE loan for the Lender or Bank. This is how the bank’s assets increased along with getting the interest that you are paying while your assets decreased.
Did you know that when your lender or bank stamped their allonge on your original note and endorsed their new check, that your mortgage was prepaid, because the Lender was Paid-In-Full the second time for your mortgageand note, and your mortgage was Paid-In-Full by you at your closing?
The reason your lender or bank gave it back to you in the form of a loan, collecting both the principal back plus interest is, because your Lender or Bank does not have to pay Federal income taxes on your mortgage lien loan and can charge interest..
Why is this, you ask.
Because the banks, Federal Reserve Private Corporation, own the U.S. Government of the UNITED STATES Corporation, the IRS, the Treasury Department, and the AIG Home Insurance Corporation or CMHC for Canada.
This is just FREE SPEECH folks, given to us by the United States of America Constitution… a gift from our fore-fathers and not the UNITED STATES corporation central government.
If you don’t believe me, look at the Federal UCC Article 3 and it will define the UNITED STATES as a corporation, not as a free country in the Americas!
An endorsed, allonge on the front or back of your last page of your mortgage promissory note would show that your Lender was Paid-In-Full and your home and mortgage should have been pre-paid by law and released back to you according to your Mortgage or Deed of Trust “RELEASE” paragraph, don’t you agree?
Read your Mortgage or Deed of Trust and you will find that under the RELEASE Paragraph that it says upon full payment the note and mortgage will be re-conveyed or released back to you and you would be responsible for the recording fees.
READ YOUR MORTGAGE OR DEED OF TRUST
READ YOUR MORTGAGE OR DEED OF TRUST and see for yourself.
Well, no bank nor lender will show you the back of or on the last page of your mortgage promissory note where that new check was endorsed, then cashed, and deposited to them and the lender was paid-in-full against Federal and State contract law, because there was no meeting of the minds, between you and your lender or bank.
Mortgage Lien Release Education with a mortgage deduction elimination, cancellation of mortgage debt, or forgiven mortgage debt Notary Presentment process may eliminate foreclosures and stop the lender/bank cold and you could get your home free and clear of any first mortgage lien and mortgage debt, because the Notary is an officer of the State and appointed by the Governor of your State, on the private and public side of the UCC, and has the power to wield positive results for mortgage debt relief combined with the other two legal processes.
Most Notaries do not know how much power they have!
The Notary Presentment Administrative Judgment Process just works and has for Centuries.
You could Save Tens or Hundreds of Thousands of dollars in both mortgage debt Principal if you take action and if done correctly you could not only get your payments refunded but also the principal amount.
Further said, once the Note was converted into a stock or bond certificate, as it has been after a time, when Securitized, it is no longer a Note or security as it had been before sold into the BANK TRUST. If both the Note and the stock, bond equivalent, and the note exist at the same time, that is known as double dipping. Double dipping is a form of Federal securities fraud that the foreclosing banks commit every day, because you homeowners do not challenge nor fight for your property.
Once a loan has been securitized, which most notes have been many times, it forever loses its security component (i.e., the Deed of Trust), and the right to foreclose through the Mortgage or Deed of Trust is forever lost according to the Federal UCC Law.
But this is how illegal foreclosures are carried out by your bank with the help of some judges today. This is because the Judges have not taken the time to learn about Bank Securitization and why it is illegal. Most judges don’t care, because they have ties with the very banks that may be foreclosing on your property.
There is no evidence on Record in any State or Province to indicate that the Deed of Trust/Mortgage was ever transferred concurrently with the purported legal transfer of the Promissory Note in every instance, such that the Deed of Trust/Mortgage and Note has been irrevocably separated, thus making a nullity out of the purported security in a property Mortgage Loan or Mortgage Debt, as claimed under the Federal Rules of Evidence: Rules 901 & 902.
Just look at your court recorder deed of trust/mortgage that was recorded without your promissory note and in most cases without the assignment or true sale being recorded either. This recording shows that they have been separated, the chain of title has been broken, and are illegal
You will also need the need to file a short quiet title law suite for you after you complete Phases 1 and 2.
REMEMBER, this administrative process and securitization audit are EVIDENCE that could win your case to get your home free and clear with a legally signed mortgage lien release from the Judge.
SC still there are guidelines including title and valid transaction issues. If banks don’t comply they don’t get clean bill of health. There is also individual lawsuits available.
They removed lack of standing damages from the settlement.
Correct Charles…but FHA & VA in addition to the homeowners had a problem. Those who claimed ownership before they died left us all with additional title issues.
I worked with them hand in hand early in the game.
There can be no time limit of fraud as Wells Fargo Bank did not purchase the loans they were servicing for Washington Mutual Bank who stop existing after Sept 25, 2008. In the year 2025 because it is 2025 does not make Wells Fargo Bank the lawful owner on the debt because in 2025 they still did not purchase the FHA & VA loans of the 1.3 million loans they were and are servicing!
Time does not make a crime that took place not happen, and maybe the statutes of limitation for the criminal crime, but nothing can never come of an criminal act. So no matter what the time frame is the legal owner of the properties are the victims that were recorded one the properties when the foreclosure took place!
A trust deed and a trustee agreement are much like a note and mortgage….. One without the other has No Effect!
All that follows has no effect.
Ima… They need the MIA trustee agreement to go with the recorded trust deed granted my husband and filed.
I wanted the Warranty Deed granted to both my husband and I from the real Trustee/Benificiary of the sellers Estate. When I contacted her..she had to hire an attorney of her own because of what her deceased parents attorney had done. She was also shocked to find out two years later that her deceased parents trust had not been closed.
Unlike most purchase loans….her parents had paid off the mortgage years earlier .. Held clear title in revocable living trust.
Oh…and the banks TITLE dept and the conversation with their title attorney. ..he thought I was bluffing!
People who know me know ..
I don’t bluff or gamble…
I don’t make empty threats…
And I always follow through….
Bob Hurt…. Great Debate with Neil!!! 😄
well shadowcat, I am sorry that happened to u, but I can see how the title insurance would not cover you if the lender declares default. I am paying cash so they cant pull the bs of not receiving payments because there will not be any. my concern is the mtg that the seller has with chase. I ask the title agent who they received the payoff from and it was the lender that is recorded in public records (chase) but whose to say where the payoff will go and I will not rest until the satisfaction of mtg. has been recorded in the county. I know the banks have 30 days from sale date. the deed has been recorded showing the transfer of owner ship but still waiting to see satisfaction of mtg. I don’t see how the title company can pull a bait and switch at the end without you being properly noticed. title companies are very shady too. now there is an online system that the title companies use to store the docs, but there is delay before you can go in. the mtg business is getting shadier and shadier. better walk out with all your loan docs and copy of deed in case they try to pull a bait and switch
Ima…hire an experienced attorney. I paid $240 an hour. It was better to pay the attorney than a party who stole tens of thousands of $$$ from me under false pretenses . The property and the loan were both in my husbands name only. ..they changed it at the last minute along with the lender.
This was to be our retirement home. After the purchase we rented our former home out as it was November.
Now after closing…there was no account open in their system so our payments were not applied. After 3 months of me calling the service finally had an account in their system . BUT they had already sent investor advances on our behalf … Didn’t apply our payments .
They had the loan in default on the 1st payment. All because the loan was not in the services system . Those greedy buttwipes had the grand idea we were going to pay late fees for their errors.
They thought Wrong! So they put our payments in a suspense account for 10 months….and charged more fees. Now comes along BAC and refuses any payment except the entire amount they claim due…the 1st years payments… I sent them proof of payments and the loan is current according to my records. They refused payments for a year then tried to sneak into court behind my back and FC. .. That’s when I paid what they demanded…and ask for a full payoff. They refused….even via my attorneys requests.
My then attorney is now with the Federal Prosecutors office and a Friend. But I ride their gr’asses about lack of prosecutions.
Hi Hammertime, don’t really know that much about this TILA recission idea. From what I read from Neil, it is really not a favorable thing in the court. The judges read it like, the borrower is trying to get a free house or at least be relieved from the one that got them in trouble and get all their monies returned to them. I can see why because then it further looks like the borrower does not want to accept responsibility for their “deal with the devil” forgetting that it is the devil bank that lured unsuspecting people into their mess. It has not been that long that the values were inflated and the appraisers stamped their seal of approval while the banks sat back waiting for the borrowers world to fall so they could fly in with their fiery red eyes and reclaim the property so they could cash in on it over and over again. I think TILA rescission is just another way for a unsuspecting person to pay an attorney to lose in the longrun, but I just don’t know enough about it. If banks are sincere ( and we know they are not) to really work with the borrower, they should meet somewhere in the middle and put it to rest.
you know shadowcat, its all bs, but we all have to do whats best for us for ever how long. I have my doubts about this loan mod, but I need to stay because of my work. sounds like now “clear title” is just another stall tactic for the banks. I don’t know how they can separate title from whoever (and I know it is the original lender) is offering me this loan mod. (at least in my case) but I am done with lawyers and really since they foreclosed on me, it is a bit of relief. at least I don’t have to worry about giving my hard earned money to a lawyer that don’t know crap about real estate law or he conspired with bank attorney, to further defend me. If you would see my court file, you would not believe the mistakes. In one pleading,they claimed I had a mtg ( an entirely different amt) from my original mortgage. if everybody is going to court, they better get judges in there that fully understand the entire purchase process. the judges really don’t know that much more than anyone else in the court room. Shadowcat, a question. what happened with the title you warranted? did you sell and pay for title insurance for the new buyer and then they could not warrant title. I would like to know because I am looking into buying a property, but chase holds the mortgage and I am wondering where the payoff is going to and will there be a valid satisfaction of mortgage recorded.
Completely agree LMS. This is where I do agree foreclosure defense is worthless. The rules are about paperwork not equity.
Even so settlements, bill of rights now require valid transactions and reliable evidence. This is being ignored just like TILA.
Stay out of the courts and don’t make a deal w the devil.
Loan Modification pending clear title…..
Deed in lieu pending clear title ….
Short Sale pending clear title….
Purchase with Title Insurance pending clear title…..
Like I have said all along..everybody is going to court.
Try waiting 5 years to get an LP release from a party who filed without the note or assignment. That’s what happens when you reinstate or redeem.
Try Selling!!!
I tried buying …. But things got sticky…..
I warranted a title that I didn’t hold.
furthermore, I hope you are not trying to drum up business for poor unsuspecting people still trying to cling on to their homes such as myself. I just got a loan modification pending clear title. well what the he** does that mean? Im not the one that traded the note around town supposedly. If they have offered me a loan mod and I have accepted it by paying the agreed upon amt. Isnt the same entity that offered me the loan mod, the same people that hold title. Man they must really think that the avg joe consumer is really stupid. Frankly I am tired of all you attorney’s stealing our money like the banks. I hope and pray that all future home buyers, first time or other really understand what they are getting into with the home buying process especially purchasing a foreclosure. it is very scary these days. what do you mean when you say this puts pro se people out. Thank god I was able to get a college degree and I can interpret the law. At least I take it for ever how it reads and I don’t try to manipulate it.
bottom line Neil, if the “Assignment” or the “endorsement” (and I don’t know when they started calling these bogus note endorsements a legal assignment of property interest. either way you put it, if it is not legally recorded in public records, it should be invalid. Any transfer of a mortgage/note should be made known to the borrower and legally recorded. All this keeping note separate from the mortgage is what started this mess and obviously this scheme is to keep all involved in mass confusion. a person’s home should never be something you can trade on wall street. all you attorneys are in the learning process too. the courtrooms are a joke. Most of the attorneys are barely out of college and probably have not gone through the home buying process and after this securitization mess that was created,why would they want to buy a home. all these attorneys are programmed to do is foreclose and it is really quite simple why. because the chain of title is broke and the only way they can start fresh is run it through the court system where a “certificate of title” is issued and the new purchaser is basically getting a clean title. God forbid, someone come forward to claim ownership but that will not happen either, because as you say Neil, there were no investors, no trustee, no trust, Nada! Its all a façade.
My assignments were done by Security Connections. Must be SONE outfit they got there as they can’t even back date documents after the fact correctly !!!
BANK B assigned BANK C………. BEFORE…….. BANK A assigned BANK B…..
All documentation still in files…..argued with all parties involved pro series….house still fraudclosed against !!!
Still waiting for just one lawyer in country to contact me ……hey, how about you Mr. Garfield ???????
All three of the assignments for my property are forged and obviously forged by more than one document preparation company.