Does Ms. Wilson know that fabricating securities is a federal crime?
By the Lending Lies Team
Those of us the foreclosure defense industry don’t experience much laughter. For hours each day we try to provide guidance to people who have been victimized by their servicer, attorney and/or the courts. Often, by the time they come to us, the homeowner is in emergency-mode.
Yesterday, we did have a good laugh. While doing some preliminary research on a “corrective” Assignment of Deed of Trust, we did a little background on an employee at Ocwen who had signed the assignment. We discovered a profile for the document signer Amber K. Wilson on the Linked-in website.
It appears that Amber K. Wilson has been a Servicing Operations Specialist at Ocwen since May 2015. Located in Iowa, Amber was looking for an, “entry level position that offers internal growth potential” and requires that she, “be able to be a leader as well as follow instructions.” It looks like she may have landed her dream job as a Servicing Operations Specialist at Ocwen Loan Servicing. There is no doubt that she has job security in the burgeoning field of document fabrication, or that she can follow instructions by signing deceptive documents by the thousands.
According to her profile on Linked-in, Ms. Wilson says her current duties include, “Researching Mortgage Documents to verify a full Chain of Title is present. If it is not create the needed Documents (sic). Work from Excel Spread Sheet daily as well as several internal data programs.” Is Amber K. Wilson admitting on a public website that Ocwen Loan Servicing creates documents to create a “proper Chain of Title” if there are errors?
It is fraudulent to recreate a chain of assignment with fabricated documents to create the appearance the current servicer has standing. As Neil Garfield has repeatedly pointed out- copies of the note and assignment don’t document an actual transaction (sale, transfer)- they are nothing but window dressing to create the illusion an event occurred. Homeowners and their attorneys MUST obtain proof that a transaction actually occurred- not simply rely on documents that paint a story the service hopes to tell.
Amber began her job at Ocwen during March 2014 as a customer service representative where she “helped” homeowners with service issues. She is likely well versed in Ocwen’s documented practice of providing disinformation to ensure a default. Ocwen was recently forced to pony up $30 million to resolve lawsuits that claimed it didn’t properly include disclosures for loans it was servicing.
Amber operates a side business called Amber Wilson Imagery so she may have an eye for detail. Her background at Grainger (through Manpower), opening boxes at a Target distribution warehouse and assembling bathroom cabinetry likely provided excellent preparation for her current duties analyzing complex securitizations, real estate documentation and verifying they are accurate.
In this case, the Deed of Trust Amber K. Wilson signed is a complete sham and is referred to as a “corrective assignment” in an attempt to perfect two incorrect assignments filed 3 and 5 years before. The document in question lists a bankrupt Taylor, Bean, Whitaker/MERS assigning the Note to US Bank. Amber’s notarized signature witnesses a complete fictitious transaction.
Unfortunately for the homeowner who is a Vietnam Vet and the victim of these sham documents filed in the county records by Ocwen, he may become homeless unless he is able to find an attorney to stop this fraudulent foreclosure from proceeding. He served his country, is in poor health due to a dousing of Agent Orange, and his country does nothing to stop predatory servicers from taking advantage of our nation’s most vulnerable- our veterans, the elderly, and families who were offered predatory loans the lender knew would fail.
I wonder if Ms. Wilson, in pursuit of a glamorous career in the field of document fabrication realizes that she is verifying a legal document in which she has no personal knowledge, engaging in illegal practices, and assisting a corporation in stealing homes they don’t own.
The take away message from this post is that homeowners should research everyone listed on their loan documents. Who did they work for? Who do they work for now, and who did they work for when the note or assignment was signed? Compare their signatures on different documents- do they match or it likely someone else has signed their name? Is the signer named in other lawsuits?
I look forward to the judge reviewing Ms. Wilson’s job description on Linked-In. It would be great to depose Ms. Wilson. It is a federal crime to forge or fabricate assignments, notes and file them in the country records. Any falsified documents should result in sanctions for servicers and their attorneys. This little fun fact on Ms. Wilson likely won’t result in a slam-dunk win to defeat foreclosure but it does demonstrate that Ocwen is engaging in fabricating documents and doesn’t bother to educate their employees not to broadcast this crime on a public website.
By the way, shame on you Ms. Wilson and shame on your employer.
Say Hello: https://www.linkedin.com/in/amber-wilson-18616b87
Filed under: foreclosure | Tagged: amber k. wilson ocwen, corrective deed of trust, fabricated documents, Ocwen |
Good luck Bruce. Happy 4th to you too. 🙂
I am totally confidently sure that Judge Brown, Portland Fed Dist Ct is in “pocket”with the local Portland Law firm that helped Ocwen/AHMSI/HSBC rapeds me of my $340K equity and home or in the pocket of HSBC/OCWEN/AHMSI or both.
I am planing to bring criminal charges against AHMSI/Ocwen for manslaught (1st or 2nd for causing the death of my 44 yr old son on Feb 16th 2009 on the basis that they conned my son, tortured my son in to mental anguish by reniging on the loan mod that they solicited him for and accepted a $1492 cashiers check drawn on Wells Fargo in Salem on Jan 29th 2006, promised him a $250 bonus cash card to complete the deal only to then tell him the deal was off becuase they “claim” he never sent the cashiers check. I will meet tomorrow AM ect to discuss this with Wells (SF,CA) by phone and if they co-operate as I am sure they will then I will file a criminal complaint with a Federal agency. These bastards may have stolen my money so Fat Ass Embrey could escape to Malta but the cuse of my sons death I will prove. Won’t get me any money buty it will disrupt this criminal “non bank” who bought the assets of AHMSI from Wilbur Ros. I plan to add his name as a defendant and any employee of AHMSI and Ocwen who conspired to steal not just the home but also the $1492 they claim they never received. Me, nothing to loose, they, a hell of a lot if the charges hold up. Wish this disabled old vet a bit of luck. They have battered me since 2009 and I know the same has happened to other victims.
God Bless and a Happy 4th
Best of luck with the FBI but personally I wouldn’t put much hope into it.
Page 11
“FBI officials stated that the FBI is unable to address every potential allegation of mortgage fraud but attempts to work higher level cases which involve multiple victims, higher dollar losses or fraud activity, and organized groups involved in fraud. Additionally, some SARs may not provide sufficient information to open an investigation, or they may relate to an individual home mortgage which the FBI would NOT address.”
https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2014/a1412.pdf
We have discovered clear fraud in our assignment of mortgage deliberately done by B of A which is now reported to the FBI. May I know under what statute creating or fabricating false securities is a crime so that we could pass this information as well.
thanks for sharing believesyou.
Trespass Unwanted
Residential Credit Solutions had a guy like this gal, too.
http://homeburglarz.blogspot.com/2015/11/the-beating-heart-of-illegal.html
SPITFIRE, geezerkatz totally agrees with you as what you describe is EXACTLY what happened to me. A Portland Fed Dist Ct Judge (ANNA BROWN, sliced and diced my Pro Se arse, gave my $340,000. equity to 3 criminal operators, (OCWEN/HSBC/AHMSI and put my now 77 yr old disabled vet into financial and health ruination. I believe that Judge Brown should be disbarred for allowing 3 bad guys to take my home with ZERO lack of ANY proof of standing under Federal Law (TILA) she even dismissed me, a pro se litigant with PREJUDICE and never allowed me to set foot in her court. Any halfassed Juducial Assistant could have easily discovered that HSBC was, infact under FBI investigation for LAUNDERING S . AMERICAN DRUG CARTEL ILLICIT PROFITS, HSBC apparently had Fat Ass William, lets hide in Malta, partnered up with HSBC because HSBC appeared in Fed Ct as a co-litigant with Ocwen, which had Browns judicial asst could easily have learned that OCWEN was, in fact in the gunsight of CFPB…instead she opted to give my home (free and clear) to these criminals and destroy my final years. Go figure, eh?
also I tried to post a comment and it contained the word
de-mon-stration and the first two syllables prevented the entire posting.
Not sure if that was Neil or wordpress, but the d-m-n word prevented an entire post.
It may be something in the post that kept it from being seen, no direct intervention, is my guess
and Javagold, you are no troll.
Trespass Unwanted
Javagold,
Are you sure it’s deleted?
If it has two http links in it, it won’t post, it sits in mo-der-ate-shun.
I found if I type that word, my post end up in that state too.
if you have two links, repost with one, then add the link in another.
Trespass Unwanted.
I am trying to put Pennsylvania onto the fraud because they are not blind
Ha! Do not feel bad. I have been following Neil almost 6 years now and I was the 1st person to respond to this post at 6 a.m. the morning it posted and he deleted my post. I too, calls em like I see’s em.
I said that it made me VERY angry that in spite of the fact, as this article QUOTES:
” It is a federal crime to forge or fabricate assignments, notes and file them in the country records. Any falsified documents should result in sanctions for servicers and their attorneys. This little fun fact on Ms. Wilson likely won’t result in a slam-dunk win to defeat foreclosure”
And exactly WHY IS THAT?
Why is it that ALL court officials including the JUDGES, the attorneys and the clerks KNOW what is going on, and continue this corrupted scheme?? To say they do not would be to say that they are completely imcompetent fools incapable of logically following the money or at this late great stage in this theft by proxy shell game, they simply do not care. In either case, they have no business in the “business” of purportedly administering “Justice”.
Not only that, but the Legal System works to continuously fill the coffers of the attorneys while bilking what little resources the homeowner has left from the servicers / bogus trusts and trustee’s, substitute trustee’s and so called “Note” holders greedy little hands, who habitually lose payments, do not apply overage payments, initiate forced placed insurance when the property is already FULLY insured, inflate the escrow account shortages and on and on and on it goes. But day after day, month after month, year after year, we watch as they not only bend, but break, distort and pervert every known Land Law known to man for the ast 200 years in this country and we still believe in the Legal System?? That it has our interests at heart?
ROFLMAO because I am too tired to cry. What a frickin joke.
Am I saying that ALL attorneys and ALL judges are greedy and corrupt. No I am not. There are always exceptions to the Rule. Most notably Matthew Weidner (FL) Mark Stopa (FL) Max Gardner (NC) April Charney (FL) and a small handful of notable Judges that are gaining notoreity for simply doing what they are PAID BY US to do. Follow the damn Letter of the Law.
Why is that so damn difficult???
Previous Post Deleted by Neil. I’ve been here a long time. So I’m no troll. But I call it like I see it. No results !!!!!!
Reblogged this on Justice League and commented:
Wow!
@Trespass, Steve I agree but we may be hitting a tipping point where homeowners are finally fed up with the legalese and the nonsense of fining servicers while the Monitor gives them a clean slate and you have the same characters or their non bank partners doing the same fraud like this woman is doing. A good sign is I’m hearing homeowners NOT in foreclosure are now researching their loan and docs. I see more and more homeowners that may have been intimidated by all the note, securitization talk calling out the garbage for what it is.
Steve,
Good food for thought indeed.
I find it interesting that as much as courts have purportedly told people their place is not the place for the constitution, the violation of a constitutionally protected right give us the standing we need to stop what they do to us.
For some reason, we don’t see our rights in the case in a way that we can phrase it in our own words and forget that legalese [fake pretend english language where words don’t have the same meaning as everyday use, unless and until it’s not in the statue, then they run to a Webster’s dictionary to define it] and stop them in their tracks.
Trespass Unwanted
@ Tresspass,
Reflecting on the crisis we already discovered lawyers had no interest in defending borrowers or that they couldn’t be found. When it came to filing a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) or anything prior to foreclosure, no advisement or direction was found anywhere in the mortgage documents. Should a borrower really have to search the internet to be able to provide a challenge. Just food for thought.
concrete harm sufficient to support Article III standing.
http://www.consumerfinance.gov/policy-compliance/amicus/briefs/keen-v-jpmorgan-chase-bank/
Date filed
JUN 16, 2016
pgs 4 – 6
B. The Spokeo Decision
In Spokeo, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the well-established principle that a plaintiff invoking the jurisdiction of an Article III court must establish “injury in fact.” Spokeo, 136 S. Ct. at 1547. In particular, “a plaintiff must show that he or she suffered ‘an invasion of a legally protected interest’ that is ‘concrete and particularized’ and ‘actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical.’” Id. at 1548 (quoting Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992)). Spokeo also reaffirms the longstanding principle that the required “legally protected interest” may be an interest that Congress has granted legal protection by creating a statutory right. See id. at 1549 (reaffirming that “Congress may ‘elevate to the status of legally cognizable injuries concrete, de facto injuries that were previously inadequate in law’” (quoting Lujan, 504 U.S. at 578) (alteration omitted)); accord Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 500 (1975) (“The actual or threatened injury required by Art. III may exist solely by virtue of statutes creating legal rights, the invasion of which creates standing” (quotations omitted)). Nonetheless, the invasion of such a statutory right will not “automatically” satisfy the “injury-in-fact requirement” in every instance; the fact that Congress has “grant[ed] a person a statutory right and purport[ed] to authorize the person to sue to vindicate that right” is not necessarily enough. Spokeo, 136 S. Ct. at 1549. For example, a plaintiff cannot “allege a bare procedural violation, divorced from any concrete harm, and satisfy the injury-in-fact requirement of Article III.” Id. Rather, the invasion of a statutory right must itself be “concrete and particularized” and “actual or imminent.” Id. at 1548.
A particularized injury is one that “affect[s] the plaintiff in a personal and individual way,” id. (quotations omitted), while a “concrete” injury is one that is “de facto,” id. That is, to be “concrete,” the injury must “actually exist”; it must be “real,” not “abstract.” Id. A concrete injury need not be tangible, however. Id. at 1549. An intangible injury can also be concrete. Id. In assessing whether an intangible injury is sufficiently “concrete,” the Court recognized that “Congress is well positioned to identify intangible harms that meet minimum Article III requirements” and, thus, that “its judgment is … instructive and important.” Id.1
This is the information in the subscript 1 after the Id just above.
The Borrowers misread Spokeo as holding that a plaintiff must have
suffered either “tangible concrete injury” or “a risk of subsequent tangible concrete injury” to have standing. Mot. at 2 (ECF No. 23). In fact, Spokeo recognizes that an injury-in-fact encompasses other types of harms. Thus, Spokeo reaffirms that “intangible injuries can … be concrete” and cites as examples of concrete yet intangible injuries the violation of First Amendment rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion. Spokeo, 136 S. Ct. at 1549 (emphasis added). Such violations are by themselves “concrete” even absent any risk of subsequent “tangible” injury. Spokeo, to be sure, recognizes that “the risk of real harm” can “satisfy the requirement of concreteness”—but it in no way suggests that such a risk (or an existing tangible injury) is the only way to satisfy that requirement. Id.
Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, Independent, People, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino
Thanks Poppy,
And yes wliyd (on blog talk radio) is discovering they are debt collectors. And CFPB has gone after debt collectors with their Amicus and also their enforcement, and if you read through their Amicus and enforcement, a lot of what they reveal about debt collectors is pretty much what MERS or servicers or law firms are;…. but people are using the same challenges in different courts expecting different results and see the trees but cannot step back far enough from the base of the problem to see the forest.
When the proper challenge is made, its unpublished or sealed with NDA or dismissed or non-suited with some agreement, who knows.
We aren’t reading the things that drop out or disappear.
Thanks again Poppy, it is a small town court house, and as much as the challenge against subject matter jurisdiction, was for want to go after a challenge that the case was in the wrong venue,
ie, some states only allow the Superior Court or courts that hear cases regarding Temporary Restraining Orders (TRO) to have subject matter jurisdiction to hear cases involving real property disputes;
Someone decided not to challenge venue as part of the lack subject matter jurisdiction because your court is a limited jurisdiction court and does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate cases involving real property;
In a complaint someone had made to the CFPB, the other side tried to say that someone gave notice and was supposed to appeal the case if they had issue; but someone never told anyone they would appeal and giving notice of appeal whether one pursues it or not would have probably put the first court decision as stare decisis, but again I don’t know legal things, and a challenge to jurisdiction could be made in either court, and appeals court would here it de novo [as a new trial] anyway, is my guess.
stare decisis or something from legal-dictionary thefreedictionary com
Stare Decisis
[Latin, Let the decision stand.] The policy of courts to abide by or adhere to principles established by decisions in earlier cases.
Trespass Unwanted
Lest not forget many of these scabs are “debt collectors”…can we establish the debt is “unsecuritized” if so, game over!
The clerks have “zero” authority, jurisdiction or experience to hear these cases….in those “faux” hearings we are essentially testifying against ourselves; a violation of the Constitutional Fifth Amendment…the clerks, last time I checked filed shit and I literally mean shit. Every time I go in there they never ask for ID, nada…I could go through any file, anytime, copy it, add stuff, etc….they use these small counties to hide shit and the loose rules prevent oversight! Plus the revenue is great for them…the entire set up is a scam, from beginning to end.
And I am no lawyer, but I have to say, IMHO the trust stuff…ratings, sales of MBS, Bonds in the prospectus all garbage. They have sold the certificates to unsuspecting investors, cheating them too. If you dug deep, you’d find the REMICs buy and large are worthless…junk bonds. Now they are taking the non-performing loans, which are many and putting them through holding companies and trying to legitimize them through REIT Trusts and foreclose with the REMIC. This is what all the paperwork is about, because they cannot foreclose in the name of the original players, so they create a line of deception and the only thing the lower courts care about? Did you sign this note? If you say yes, you are sunk! In reality does anyone here actually got a “blue ink” copy of the original closing paperwork? If so, there are few. So, when anyone asks do you recognize this paperwork, NO is an honest answer….it’s their case, let them prove everything!
They all suck! Most lawyers have sold their soul for modest cash…whores IMHO
Meanwhile ex CEO escapes to Malta and #Ocwen gets to self report and Monitor Joseph Smith gives them a thumbs up on “relief”. He needs to be investigated and booted out like the FEMA guy w hurricane Katrina disaster.
Ah well…the tide is turning…just have a look at brexit and his many investors that affected!
Low enrgy thinkers end up with low energy results.
Question for non-lawyers out there:
Someone challenged the subject matter jurisdiction of their foreclosure and mailed it to the court using an express mail service not usps, with a pre-paid return envelope and instructions to file stamp them, keep one copy return the remaining so they can send them to the Plaintiff and schedule a hearing, but it would have to be phone conference because they no longer live in the State the theft took place.
The way it was sent, the court would get it before 10:30am in their time zone on a Friday.
Let’s say the challenge is solid, it was challenged when the property was stolen but the judge said she had it and moved forward and here it is challenged again.
The return envelope is delivered by the express mail service, the following Monday, (after hours in the court’s time zone) and it’s empty.
The ‘someone’ called the court on Tuesday, and when they finally spoke to the clerk, she said she got it, but didn’t know what happened to the prepaid envelope the instructions mentioned. She was told it was returned to the sender, empty.
The clerk was asked if the sender needed to send another envelope, and she said no, she sees the instructions and will pay the postage to send the copies back, this was a Tuesday.
The week ends with nothing.
The following Monday, the ‘someone’ calls the clerk and she says she hasn’t forgotten about it, she’s just been so busy; and ‘someone’ told her, they think they have to notify the other side within a specific time of the documents being filed, and asked, are they file stamped or just being held. The clerk said they were file stamped, she didn’t say what day and someone didn’t ask, because they want the court to have their challenge to subject matter jurisdiction. The clerk mentioned something about having to schedule it and needing time to get it done.
The ‘someone’ told her, if they don’t see anything in the mail, they’ll call again the following Monday.
The week ends with nothing.
So question, should ‘someone’ worry or just let the clerk who has her duties do what she does, and when they get the documents in the mail, do what they [someone] do, and mail them to the opposing party?
From the time it’s filed, it is assumed the clock starts ticking.
The challenge is solid, so someone has all these thoughts about what the other side is doing, do they have a head’s up, are they trying to buy time to deal with losing the challenge and having to pony up some remedy, and what about the judge, the someone has thoughts about what happens if subject matter jurisdiction is challenged and a judge claims to have it and didn’t and it’s challenged again, and there is solid evidence the judge never had it; is there some concern in the background for the judge having moved without jurisdiction and the clerk knows and the judge knows and the delay will go on forever?
Someone doesn’t know if they are losing time to force the clerk to do something or the judge to do something with their challenge.
The court’s clerk has possession of the documents, all signed with original signature for filing and sending to the other party, since mid June. Followup phone calls on a Tues and following Monday, and since there is nothing, followup Monday.
Someone lives in a different state, unless they fly into that State and walk into that court, they rely on the grace of the clerk who has taken the calls and said she’s busy but will get to it and schedule a hearing.
Is there a time barred event happening that the someone is unaware of? Can a Plaintiff, court, or clerk get past a subject matter jurisdiction challenge by holding the filing for an extended period of time?
Any ideas, suggestions, thoughts, how does it make you feel if you were stuck in that situation?
I know nothing, and if I think I know something, I know nothing. I do not give legal advice because I do not know legal things.
Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, People, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino
I’ve been saying for a long time that an assignment of an interest in real property, i.e., a dot, requires acceptance (just like another deed – a deed which conveys fee simple, like in a typical sale and purchase). I’ve said there are reasons people might not want to accept a deed and that’s why they require acceptance. This is the closest I’ve come, since I don’t spent 24/7 doing research these days, to demonstrating the acceptance requirement and just one of any number of reasons one might not want to accept a deed.
“A common situation over the last six to seven years is real property with a mortgage that exceeds the value of the property. This situation can pose a dilemma for an Estate. If the real property has been left to specific individuals, the specific individuals may not want the property. They can disclaim their interest in the property to avoid taking title to property that is “underwater”;
So Uncle Don might’ve run off to Australia in a hurry and recorded a deed to you of his underwater ranch in texas, but you didn’t accept it by HIS recordation.
It’s just plain ludicrous to think anyone, including a trust, would accept the late assignment of an interest in an asset that is underwater, at least certainly not if they had an alternative remedy for the failure to deliver timely. All this current nonsense was precipitated by the MERS Consent Order – no f/c’s in its name, but that bs might have been outed universally by litigants in time, anyway.
To add a layer to plausible deniability, imo, trusts (no evidence such a
trust even exists btw),are issuing POA’s to others and then the others (read servicers) will do the deeds so the trusts can say they knew nothing, lame as that sounds and is. But when one only risks a financial slap on the wrist, and one can pay that with the zillions made off from the populace, well, heck…….. .
I’ve been saying for a long time that an assignment of an interest in real property, i.e., a dot, requires acceptance (just like another deed – a deed which conveys fee simple, like in a typical sale and purchase). I’ve said there are reasons people might not want to accept a deed and that’s why they require delivery and acceptance. This is the closest I’ve come, since I don’t spent 24/7 doing research these days, to demonstrating the acceptance requirement and it’s just one of any number of reasons one might not want to accept a deed.
“A common situation over the last six to seven years is real property with a mortgage that exceeds the value of the property. This situation can pose a dilemma for an Estate. If the real property has been left to specific individuals, the specific individuals may not want the property. They can disclaim their interest in the property to avoid taking title to property that is “underwater”;
It’s just plain ludicrous to think anyone, including a trust, would accept the late assignment of an interest in an asset that is underwater and in default to boot, at least certainly not if they had an alternative remedy for the failure to deliver timely. All this current nonsense was precipitated by the MERS Consent Order – no f/c’s in its name, but that bs that MERS was entitled might have been outed by litigants in time, anyway.
To add a layer to plausible deniability, imo, trusts (no evidence such a trust even exists btw),are issuing POA’s to others and then the others (read servicers) will do the deeds so the trusts can say they knew nothing, lame as that sounds and is. But when one only risks a financial slap on the wrist, and one can pay that with the zillions made off from the populace, well, heck…….. .
I’d love to see a picture/ bio of ‘Leticia Arias’ who ‘notarized’ my Ocwen docs for a “Scott Anderson’ – yeah, a pic of him also…would love to send him and her nasty letters. So far not much on L.A. although I may have found Scotty on LI.
@ BLD ,
Ronald Farris is the President and CEO of that turd we know as OCWEN… I will be suing after I put one last piece in place , I’m having an attorneys title opinion drawn up that will completely bugger the land records for my property when it is filed in the public records. I’m surprised Neil doesn’t offer that service.
The Trust
The depositor will establish a trust with respect to the certificates under the pooling and servicing agreement. On the closing date, the depositor will deposit the pool of mortgage loans described in this prospectus supplement into the trust. Each certificate will represent a partial ownership interest in the trust.
each certificate is a separate trust, meaning that the cusip number , is the trust. so am asking them to show me, were when,how,who what. in what certificate is my said mortgage in??
Transfer of Mortgage Loans
The diagram below illustrates the sequence of transfers of the mortgage loans that are included in the mortgage pool. GMAC Mortgage Corporation will, simultaneously with the closing of the transaction described herein, sell the mortgage loans to Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc., as the depositor. The depositor will then transfer the mortgage loans to the trustee, on behalf of the trust that is the issuing entity. The trustee will accordingly own the mortgage loans for the benefit of the holders of the certificates. See “Pooling and Servicing Agreement — The Trustee” in this prospectus supplement and in the prospectus. For a description of the affiliations among various transaction parties, see “Affiliations Among Transaction Parties” in this prospectus supplement.
sell the mortgage loans to Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc., as the depositor, as of at lease 1 feb 2006, Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc. was sold owner of all 1127 mortgage loans and note. MERS- UNDER THEY TERMS , YOU MUST BE A MEMBER OF MERSCORP, TO DO ANYTHING ON THE MERS SYSYTEMS.
WELL , Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc., NEVER WAS A MEMBER OF MERSCORP. MERS, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATIONS, SYSTEMS.
SO ANY AND ALL , CONVENES, OR ANYTHING ELSE THEY SAY GMAC MORTGAGE CORP, HAD WITH MERS. IS GONE.
NOW. THAT WOULD MEAN, THAT NO ASSIGNMENT IS LEGAL THAT WAS DONE BY MERS IN 2012.
AND IT WOULD ALSO MEAN THERE IS NO WAY AM IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT TO THE REAL OWNERS OF THE MORTGAGE AND NOTE.
Issuing Entity
The depositor will establish a trust with respect to the ( GMACM Mortgage Pass Through Certificates, Series 2006-J1 ) on the closing date pursuant to the pooling and servicing agreement. The pooling and servicing agreement is governed by the laws of the State of New York. On the closing date, the depositor will deposit into the trust a pool of mortgage loans that in the aggregate will constitute a mortgage pool, secured by one to four family residential properties with terms to maturity of not more than 30 years. All of the mortgage loans will have been purchased by the depositor from the seller pursuant to a mortgage loan purchase agreement, dated as of the closing date, between the seller and the depositor.
The pooling and servicing agreement provides that the depositor assigns to the trustee for the benefit of the certificateholders without recourse all the right, title and interest of the depositor in and to the mortgage loans. Furthermore, the pooling and servicing agreement states that, although it is intended that the conveyance by the depositor to the trustee of the mortgage loans be construed as a sale, the conveyance of the mortgage loans shall also be deemed to be a grant by the depositor to the trustee of a security interest in the mortgage loans and related collateral.
he mortgage pool will consist of 1,127 fixed rate mortgage loans with an aggregate principal balance outstanding as of the cut-off date, after deducting payments of principal due on the cut-off date, of approximately $550,003,046.49. The mortgage loans are secured by ( first liens ) on fee simple or leasehold interests in one- to four-family residential real properties. The mortgage pool will consist of conventional, fixed-rate, fully-amortizing, level monthly payment first mortgage loans with terms to maturity of not more than 30 years from the date of origination or modification. With respect to mortgage loans which have been modified, references in this prospectus supplement to the date of origination shall be deemed to be the date of the most recent modification. All percentages of the mortgage loans described in this prospectus supplement are approximate percentages by aggregate principal balance as of the cut-off date unless otherwise indicated
so what i show you earlier, at wells fargo site, all 1099 were to second loans trust. GMACM Home Equity Loan Trust Series 2006-J1 REMIC
would not be first liens.
Risk Factors
The offered certificates are not suitable investments for all investors. In particular, you should not purchase any class of offered certificates unless you understand the prepayment, credit, liquidity and market risks associated with that class.
The offered certificates are complex securities. You should possess, either alone or together with an investment advisor, the expertise necessary to evaluate the information contained in this prospectus supplement and the prospectus in the context of your financial situation and tolerance for risk.
You should carefully consider, among other things, the following factors in connection with the purchase of the offered certificates
Senior Certificates:
A-1
5.75% $ 251,679,000
AAA/AAA
Senior/Accretion Directed/PAC/Fixed Rate
A-2
5.75% $ 8,569,000
AAA/AAA
Senior/Accretion Directed/PAC/Fixed Rate
A-3
5.75% $ 9,871,000
AAA/AAA
Senior/Accrual/Fixed Rate
A-4
5.75% $ 133,426,000
AAA/AAA
Senior/Accretion Directed/TAC/Fixed Rate
A-5
5.75% $ 14,099,000
AAA/AAA
Senior/Accretion Directed/Companion/Accrual/
Fixed Rate
A-6
5.75% $ 97,885,000
AAA/AAA
Super Senior/Lockout/Fixed Rate
A-7
5.75% $ 6,526,000
AAA/AAA
Senior Support/Lockout/Fixed Rate
PO
0.00% $ 7,322,284
AAA/AAA
Senior/Principal Only
IO
Variable $ 0
AAA/AAA
Senior/Interest Only/
Variable Rate
R
5.75% $ 100
AAA/AAA
Senior/Residual/Fixed Rate
Total senior certificates:
$ 529,377,384
Class M Certificates:
M-1
5.75% $ 11,001,000
AA/NA
Subordinate/Fixed Rate
M-2
5.75% $ 3,300,000
A/NA
Subordinate /Fixed Rate
M-3
5.75% $ 2,475,000
BBB/NA
Subordinate /Fixed Rate
Total Class M Certificates:
$ 16,776,000
Total offered certificates:
$ 546,153,384
Non-Offered Certificates
Class B Certificates:
B-1
5.75% $ 1,375,000
BB/NA
Subordinate/Fixed Rate
B-2
5.75% $ 1,100,000
B/NA
Subordinate/Fixed Rate
B-3
5.75% $ 1,374,662
NA/NA
Subordinate/Fixed Rate
Total non-offered certificates:
$ 3,849,662
Total offered and non-offered certificates:
A current report on Form 8-K will be available to purchasers of the offered certificates and will be filed by the issuing entity, in its own name, together with the pooling and servicing agreement, with the Securities and Exchange Commission within fifteen days after the initial issuance of the offered certificates.
http://www.secinfo.com/d198Gy.v8.htm
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 8-K
CURRENT REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): March 6, 2006
RESIDENTIAL ASSET MORTGAGE PRODUCTS, INC.
,
on behalf of the
GMACM Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-J1
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
The Purchaser and Seller intend that the conveyance by the Seller to the
Purchaser of all its right, title and interest in and to the Mortgage Loans
pursuant to this Agreement shall be, and be construed as, a sale of the Mortgage
Loans by the Seller to the Purchaser. It is, further, not intended that such
conveyance be deemed to be a grant of a security interest in the Mortgage Loans
by the Seller to the Purchaser to secure a debt or other obligation of the
Seller. However, in the event that the Mortgage Loans are held to be property of
the Seller, or if for any reason this Agreement is held or deemed to create a
security interest in the Mortgage Loans, then it is intended that (a) this
Agreement shall be and hereby is a security agreement within the meaning of
Articles 9 of the Pennsylvania Uniform Commercial Code, the Delaware Uniform
Commercial Code and the Uniform Commercial Code of any other applicable
jurisdiction; (b) the conveyance provided for in this Section shall be deemed to
be, and hereby is, a grant by the Seller to the Purchaser of a security interest
in all of the Seller’s right, title and interest, whether now owned or hereafter
acquired, in and to the following: (A) the Mortgage Loans, including (i) with
respect to each Cooperative Loan, the related Mortgage Note, Security Agreement,
Assignment of Proprietary Lease, Cooperative Stock Certificate, Cooperative
Lease, (ii) with respect to each Mortgage Loan other than a Cooperative Loan,
the related Mortgage Note and Mortgage and (iii) any insurance policies and all
other documents in the related Mortgage File, (B) all amounts payable pursuant
to the Mortgage Loans in accordance with the terms thereof, (C) all proceeds of
the conversion, voluntary or involuntary, of the foregoing into cash,
instruments, securities or other property, (D) all accounts, general
intangibles, chattel paper, instruments, documents, money, deposit accounts,
goods, letters of credit, letter-of-credit rights, oil, gas, and other minerals,
and investment property consisting of, arising from or relating to any of the
foregoing and (E) all proceeds of the foregoing; (c) the possession by the
Trustee, the Custodian or any other agent of the Trustee of any of the foregoing
shall be deemed to be possession by the secured party, or possession by a
purchaser or a person holding for the benefit of such secured party, for
purposes of perfecting the security interest pursuant to the Pennsylvania
Uniform Commercial Code, the Delaware Uniform Commercial Code and the Uniform
Commercial Code of any other applicable jurisdiction (including, without
limitation, Sections 9-313 and 9-314 of each thereof); and (d) notifications to
persons holding such property, and acknowledgments, receipts or confirmations
from persons holding such property, shall be deemed notifications to, or
acknowledgments, receipts or confirmations from, securities intermediaries,
bailees or agents of, or persons holding for, the Trustee (as applicable) for
the purpose of perfecting such security interest under applicable law. The
Seller shall, to the extent consistent with this Agreement, take such reasonable
actions as may be necessary to ensure that, if this Agreement were determined to
create a security interest in the Mortgage Loans and the other property
described above, such security interest would be determined to be a perfected
security interest of first priority under applicable law and will be maintained
as such throughout the term of this Agreement. Without limiting the generality
of the foregoing, the Seller shall prepare and deliver to the Purchaser not less
than 15 days prior to any filing date, and the Purchaser shall file, or shall
cause to be filed, at the expense of the Seller, all filings necessary to
maintain the effectiveness of any original filings necessary under the Uniform
Commercial Code as in effect in any jurisdiction to perfect the Purchaser’s
security interest in the Mortgage Loans, including without limitation (x)
continuation statements, and (y) such other statements as may be occasioned by
(1) any change of name of the Seller or the Purchaser, (2) any change of type or
jurisdiction of organization of the Seller, or (3) any transfer of any interest
of the Seller in any Mortgage Loan.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, (i) the Seller in its capacity as
Servicer shall retain all servicing rights (including, without limitation,
primary servicing and master servicing) relating to or arising out of the
Mortgage Loans, and all rights to receive servicing fees, servicing income and
other payments made as compensation for such servicing granted to it under the
Pooling and Servicing Agreement pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth
therein (collectively, the “Servicing Rights”) and (ii) the Servicing Rights are
not included in the collateral in which the Seller grants a security interest
pursuant to the immediately preceding paragraph.
SECTION 4. Record Title and Possession of Mortgage Files. The Seller hereby
sells, transfers, assigns, sets over and conveys to the Purchaser, without
recourse, but subject to the terms of this Agreement and the Seller hereby
acknowledges that the Purchaser, subject to the terms of this Agreement, shall
have all the right, title and interest of the Seller in and to the Mortgage
Loans. From the Closing Date, but as of the Cut-off Date, the ownership of each
Mortgage Loan, including the Mortgage Note, the Mortgage, the contents of the
related Mortgage File and all rights, benefits, proceeds and obligations arising
therefrom or in connection therewith, has been vested in the Purchaser. All
rights arising out of the Mortgage Loans including, but not limited to, all
funds received on or in connection with the Mortgage Loans and all records or
documents with respect to the Mortgage Loans prepared by or which come into the
possession of the Seller shall be received and held by the Seller in trust for
the exclusive benefit of the Purchaser as the owner of the Mortgage Loans.
GMACM MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2006-J1
ISSUING ENTITY
GMACM MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES,
SERIES 2006-J1 (THE “CERTIFICATES”)
The mortgage pool information in this free writing prospectus was derived from a preliminary pool of
mortgage loans which is not representative of the mortgage loans that will comprise the final mortgage loan
pool. The preliminary pool of mortgage loans represents only a portion of the final mortgage loan pool and
mortgage loans that are included in the preliminary mortgage loan pool may be removed from the final mortgage
loan pool. It is expected that the characteristics of the final mortgage loan pool will differ, and may
differ materially, from the characteristics of the preliminary pool of mortgage loans set forth below.
Although the characteristics of the final mortgage loan pool are expected to be similar to the
characteristics of the preliminary pool contained in this free writing prospectus, they are not expected to
conform in all material respects.
I hope you took screen shots to preserve this evidence before she or Ocwen gets wind of it and takes it down.
Javagold (“gold coffee?) I know exactly what you mean not being able to find ANY attorney or law firm to help you battle criminals. By and large MOST all attorneys are the chaff from the wheat losers who are worthless. Had on , a dude name of Spaulding in Salem, OR, Paid him near $2k and he “took” my case. But when my litigation was headed to Federal Court ole Spaulding all of a sudden informed me that “OPPS, sorry but I don’t do Federal Court cases. He lied and squirmed that he told me this when he scarfed up the last of my liquidity, which he most assuredly did not. He kept my money and drove screws into my foreclosure ladened body in the process. There are NO “pro bono attornies in the Capitol of Oregon, only a bunch of crappy can’t do nothing for you fat cats. Give em $10 grand and maybe they will listen, for a while but a 75 yr old phart, disabled vet, like me ain’t got no liquidity.
Any way I totally empathize with you re attorneys and also your case. OCWEN/HSBC/AHMSI put nails in my coffin and even CFPB can’t enforce its own $2 billion “penalty with these mafioso Florida criminals. As you may know Fat Freddy Embrey few the coop, chickenshit prick that is now and always was. Gutless he abandoned Ocwen, a company he corupted and got a bunch of 2 bit creeps to do his dirty work. Once again, CRIME, INDEED, DOES PAY” They got my $340 equity and Fat Freddy is using my money to put wind in his sails heading to Malta:-)
Ronald Farris,
Sue them. Too many homeowners are led to believe they are ‘settling’.
Too many folks have no idea many banks and servicer attorneys do not have the authority to modify, mediate or settle.
I think Amber is trying to cover her behind by telling everyone that’s exactly what she is paid to do.
@ Iam Lazarus, Exactly, the Attorney General is the only one.
However, years back in Calif. I sent indisputable forged evidence against (AHMSI) and they wrote back stating I needed to seek out a lawyer. Years later the 49 AG’s settled out of court with Ocwen and AHMSI for poor foreclosure servicing. It all really is meaningless.
This begs to question…a very serious question that I would hope living lies team can address. Many people who come to this site have had the very unfortunate experience of having their foreclosure defense attorney working hand in hand with the banks attorneys. This could explain why so much fraud is being committed upon the court.
When the foreclosure defense attorneys see all of these completely bogus assignments, why aren’t they in front of a judge demanding sanctions?
This is one of the ways to stop all of this aggregious behavior from the banks attorneys. Sanctions and demand bank attorneys lose their license at a minimum.
See Butler and Hosch where after being shutdown, Hosch the owner of the infamous forclosure mill was forced to give up his license. Now he is being sued for another 12 million.
Homeowner’s cannot commit fraud upon the court. They would be jailed for such an offense. Foreclosure defense attorneys know well that the only way the bank can prevail and steal is fraud as well as committing perjury.
Anyone???
An open letter to OCWEN … they know my name… Hopefully this will further suppress OCN’s abysmal stock valuation.. it should rightfully be $0.00 …
***********************
Ronald M. Faris ,
I am writing to you directly because of problems I have been having in getting OCWEN to answer any question regarding my connection with them (via Option One loan number 0123456789 and OCWEN Acct# 0123456789 ) or how they can in good conscience accept payments from me.
Prior to accepting your mod agreement your legal representation was already apprised of the fact that the note in question was VOID due to Bank of America’s admissions in 11 CV 10549 in the US District Court Central District California (Los Angeles) . That was the AIG v. BOA case wherein BOA was found to be the underwriter and funder of all notes in Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2007-FXD2 . Because the notes did not name BAC/BOA as the lender but instead named a stranger to the transaction the note is void and unenforceable and any assignment chain beginning with Option One is fraudulent and invalid. I did contact BAC prior to accepting the mod agreement with your firm and strangely enough they disavowed any connection with my Option One Note although it was already decided in Federal Court.
This leaves you with a huge problem. Any agreement you have with WF as Master Servicer , despite all appearances of propriety are also VOID as WF never received the notes , the power of attorney you have from WF is ineffective. This leaves the Settlement and Release , the AOM and any other agreement based on your “authority” regarding any other note purchased from AHMSI / Homeward that was originally included in Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2007-FXD2 as VOID.
The lawsuit between AHMSI and LPS regarding the release of the OOMLT 2007-FXD2 underwriting folders to AIG shows that there was for many years prior to your purchase of those notes coordination in hiding the truth regarding these notes. They were AHMSI’s biggest “hot potato” at that point and that is why you got them at such a big discount. OCWEN was aware of this when they purchased the notes.
I can only speculate that in 2011/2012 OCWEN expected the courts to continue ignoring basic “black book” law in assuming without verification that purported lenders were presenting valid documents that supported real transactions and that taking a gamble on this known fraudulent issue and assuming protection was worthwhile to your CEO at the time. That is no longer the case with Yvanova , Bolling and others. The tide has turned, truth is now being required in many courtrooms.
You have accepted more than a years worth of payments from me without authority of any kind. You also continued a foreclosure lawsuit after being apprised of the void nature of the note by a Federal decision. That lawsuit was initiated by LPS and AHMSI , co-conspirators in hiding the nature of the notes from AIG , the Settlement I signed with you is a nullity due to fraud on OCWEN’s part. My wife is insisting that I continue to make payments on the mod because quite simply you have frightened her with your lies.
What can you do for me to avoid a wrongful foreclosure suit?
Add another OCWEN name to the fire ,, FRED JEUNE prepared my fraudulent assignment on Jan 17 2014
Experience
Owner/Photographer
Amber Wilson Imagery
May 2005 – Present (11 years 2 months)
Manage operations, photograph clients,
edit photographs. they most love that, maybe she can edit notes, mortgages signatures, etc etc
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
May 2015 – January 2016 (9 months)Waterloo, Iowa Area
Researching Mortgage Documents to verify a full Chain of Title is present.
If it is not create the needed Documents. go hand and hand with (edits photographs. doesn’t it.
Work from Excel Spread Sheet daily as well as several internal data programs.
Wow, my last assignment, one of many from Ocwen, comes from Iowa with a notarized signature from another specialist, from Idaho, indicating the Idaho signer drove from Idaho to Iowa….and the notary from Iowa stated: she appeared in person to sign these affidavits (legal documents)….NOT!
Also, the building Ocwen claims is the business office is for sale….I can find Ocwen nowhere on the listing address as leasing the space, more WOW’s!
It goes on and on….the new gig in court: The Motion to request foreclosure started with Ocwen (Plaintiff) working as a servicer, for the REMIC.(continued a month)…in the same motion/case on the continuation they changed the Plaintiff to their attorney/trustee Brock and Scott of N Carolina (continued again) now we have Ocwen omitted, Brock and Scott omitted and the same case has a new Plaintiff CSMC NC1-osi, 2007….going all the way back to New Century…not one time have they requested a change in the Plaintiff….have these a-holes ever heard of the Rules of procedure? Apparently not!
I would share the documents here if space, time and confidentiality were not important at this time…..everyone here would laugh at the folly of this stuff….if it weren’t so serious….I mean after all, they are stealing property on a daily basis, with impunity!
[…] Ocwen Employee admits she “Creates needed Documents” […]
This is EXACTLY what OCWEN/HSBC/AHMSI did to me. They failed to produce proof of standing from 2009 to 2014 then they got an “Amber”” to create false documents then marched into Portland Oregon Federal District Ct Judge Anna Brown and with NO LEGAL proof of standing Judge Brown, wanting to assist several allegedly criminal banks and servicers to make a 75 yr old disabled vet get out of their criminal activity way! The Judge assisted them to steal my $340k equity then forbade me (dismiss with prejudice to appear pro se to argue TILA, thus putting me deep into the poorhouse to spend my final years. The Honorable Judge is a bitch to not uphold the Federal Law of TILA and instead witting or unwittingly abetting crooked adversaries to “legally” steal my retirement funds. Now Ocwen has advised me they “losy” all my documents provided to them when CFPB entered the picture over 2 yrs ago and since CFPB really does not POLICE Ocwen Ombudsman I continue to be helplessly poor. Just sayin, thats all.
The “False-Creditors” have completely flipped the narrative … and even the best foreclosure defense attorneys have been “sucked-in” to the notion that the onus is on the homeowner to DISPROVE BIG-FOOT IS REAL?!? (..the homeowner must now scour the world for Sasquatch?!?)
“”…The take away message from this post is that homeowners should research everyone listed on their loan documents. Who did they work for? Who do they work for now, and who did they work for when the note or assignment was signed? Compare their signatures on different documents- do they match or is it likely someone else has signed their name? Is the signer named in other lawsuits?…””
(the take-away message should be … [Creditors] provide evidence that “Sasquatch” exists first, THEN, we can object to expose their claim as disallowed and bunk … with no affirmative defenses, whatsoever!!))
“”…It is a federal crime to forge or fabricate assignments, notes and file them in the country records. Any falsified documents should result in sanctions for servicers and their attorneys…””
AGREED … however, homeowners cannot prosecute false-creditors for their federal crimes against homeowners. (the only person who can is the Attorney General) For a homeowner to cry-out that a “crime has been committed” is meaningless because no one is listening.
Avoid being “sucked-in” to the trap that the onus is on the homeowner to discover all the fraud perpetrated against them, before the homeowner can disallow a false-creditors secured claim. The burden of proof lies with the false-creditor … and, IT MUST BE KEPT EXACTLY THERE.!!
Unfortunately, nobody had figured out how to force these false-creditors to reveal themselves … until now. It’s time to flip the narrative back to where it belongs … onto the false-creditor to provide proof of their alleged perfected secured status … period. (..forget everything else)
God bless us all..
What really makes me so incredibly ANGRY about this article is the final paragraph statement :
“It is a federal crime to forge or fabricate assignments, notes and file them in the country records. Any falsified documents should result in sanctions for servicers and their attorneys. This little fun fact on Ms. Wilson likely won’t result in a slam-dunk win to defeat foreclosure but it does demonstrate that Ocwen is engaging in fabricating documents and doesn’t bother to educate their employees not to broadcast this crime on a public website.”
How is it that WE KNOW and the JUDGES KNOW and the ATTORNEYS KNOW that this is a FEDERAL CRIME and the punishment should be doled out ACCORDINGLYand yet in almost every single instance The Law is SUBVERTED, PERVERTED and IGNORED?? How is it that these judges continue to turn a BLIND EYE to this CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR??
Oh wait, let me GUESS….
The judges are ALL in the Banksters pockets that rule this once Sovereign nation and we are all just their slaves, peons and as such of no consequence. Or maybe…just maybe, this was planned all along. Maybe all this ties very nicely into their little U.N. Agenda 21 Plans??
Furthermore, there is NO correcting a defective “Note” or transfer of note or Deed if the Chain of Title has been BROKEN. There is no taping, stapling, gluing or band aid fixes. Once broken it is VOID.
All this craziness with Ocwen and its Criminal counterparts and Brother’s in Crime will not stand. The American Public is FED UP with these judges bowing and scraping to these SERVICERS that never had a single dime of their own funds in ANY of these properties that they stole from home owners who DID have significant investments of THEIR own money in these properties.
Time to RISE UP people… Make no mistake. We ARE the next Venezuela if their plans unfold as they have long conspired for them to. If we do not stand up this insanity be SPEAKING OUT and EDUCATING others, then we are dooming our children and our grandchildren to serfdom as they will all end up homeless and destitute.
By DESIGN, I might add.