Southern California Attorney Charles Marshall discusses the importance of establishing that the servicer doesn’t have standing by battling erroneous presumptions, compelling discovery, and by refusing to retreat. Yvanova, Gieseke, Sciarratta and Lundy decisions prove that homeowners have right to challenge a fraudulent foreclosure pre- and post-sale and can prevail.
San Diego attorney Charles Marshall who had a case vacated in Gieseke v. Bank of America, after BOA won summarily without having to provide an oral argument based on a lack of standing. The case was remanded the case back to District Court where it will be reconsidered. Gieseke Remand Order 5 20 16 from 9th Circuit.
https://livinglies.me/2016/05/25/californias-gieseke-decision-a-new-playing-field-emerges/
California-licensed attorney Charles T. Marshall (CA Bar # 176091) earned his Juris Doctorate in 1992 from the University of San Diego School of Law. His practice includes Foreclosure Relief, Civil Litigation, Bankruptcy, Immigration, Estate Planning and all facets of Personal Financial Management.
Charles Marshall can be contacted at:
Email: cmarshall@marshallestatelaw.com
Phone number: 619.807.2628 or 619.755.7825
THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE IS NOT A LEGAL OPINION UPON WHICH YOU CAN RELY IN ANY INDIVIDUAL CASE. HIRE A LAWYER.
Filed under: foreclosure | Tagged: attorney charles marshall california, attorney charles marshall foreclosure defense, california defense, california foreclosure defense, gieseke v. bank of america |
Heyhey everybody – does anybody around here know how to do a “Securitization Report” ?? I tried calling MERS and they obviously said no way …. is there anyway to figure out who the investors might be?
Thanks.
Scott Thompson
http://www.columbiamortgageplus.com
1031….Contact me…I am also in Colorado:
feet4fins@yahoo.com
terry evans again. Mr. Marshall, I have a document in my hand that was sent to me from Carrington mortgage in Ca. It states that they got approval from Hud to change my note from FHA to conventional and sale the property. BOA had this mortgage when TBW went under. I fought them since 2009. I have documentation from the law firm that audited TBW dated 2010 that proves GNMA purchased my mortgage in Aug. 2009. GNMA audits state that 20,000 of these mortgages didn’t have documents. BOA refused to maintain my ins. and put their own insurance on house. when it burned in 2011 they kept insurance money. The foreclosure letter came from a ca. p.o. box. when I opened it, it was from mccalla raymer..Also I found at the court house dated Feb. 2013 that Carrington had signed a agreement with BOA to be their subservicer and have power of attorney. Prommis solutions paper work I found states that most of their business was in Ca. and Ga. I also found a sec document saying that M R default was started by mccalla and converted to prommis in Delaware but operated out of ga. A judge in ga. told me that they had to apply insurance money and the foreclosure letter had to tell what it would take to cure the default. I plan on accusing the FHA of fraud. what does Ca. law state on posting a false assignment at the clerks office and not canceling the deed to secure debt. Carrington has done neither. what atty. generals don’t understand is the mortgages at TBW was from many states. Can you change the mortgage after foreclosure in Ca. Somebody is stealing.
this is were am coming from, so far no one has standing to be in court,. especially a trust that we know doesn’t exists,
there is no proof on any kind, they do. we have all doc’s that say they dont. now i also call again to the security and exchange commission asking for proof of what i have said to you, and has been told to me , many times from them. but want something on there letter head explaining it.. THAT SAYS they have no idear if the company filling did what they filed.
that anyone that files anything with the security and exchange commission, meaning anything filed, registration,prospectus, a pooling and servicing agreements, etc,etc. does not mean that that company followed through with what was filed. they said to me that congress
did not give them authority to check on them as to what they filed, to make sure they followed though on what was filed. so again who is watching the fox, in the chicken coop? NO ONE. EVERYTHING IS BEING ASSUMED IT WAS DONE.
so no one knows. again this is why all banks have been settling all charge of fraud, because they did not follow through anything that was filed.
so AGAIN UNTIL THE TRUSTEE CAN PROVE THERE IS A TRUST OR TRUSTS STILL ALIVE, AND NOT CLOSED. AND GET A FULL DISCOVERY OF ALL BOOKS OF THE TRUST TO SEE WHEN WHERE, OR IF THEY PURCHASED THE LOAN, FOR TRUST. NO ONE HAS STANDING.
Way to go Mr. Marshall. I hope you can get many fellow attorneys on board across the US to help all of us property owners. I am doing my best, but we have Rule 120 here in Colorado that is, more than likely, unconstitutional, and I really got hosed by a phony, once part time judge who would not even let me speak or present copies of the forged, fabricated, and phnoy documents sent by two lawfirms- one the Janeway law firm was even fined nearly $1 million dollars by the Colorado Attorney General John Suthers in late 2014 and they are trying to foreclose on me now- really interesting they are still doing the same old thing and that is Colorado Injustice for you and Rule 120.
This is huge news… I would love to know how these same rulings should affect prior valid rescission claims that were denied by the lower courts. IF, as the law says, the note is void ab initio upon receipt of the notice, then it means that any transfers after that time are then VOID. This being the case,the principles in Yvanova (and the rest) are the same: VOID.
PLEASE opine on this aspect of Yvanova, I am surprised you haven’t already. Thanks, and a HUGE thank you to Charles Marshall for fighting HARD for his clients and being a STONG advocate and refusing to succumb to the tidal wave of bad rulings and lackadaisical attitudes of our courts. Most of them don’t even TRY to understand TILA Rescission. It’s a crime.