Tonight I Am Excited! Supreme Court Decision in Florida and Oral Argument in SCOTUS Points to New Directions.

Thursdays LIVE! Click in to the Neil Garfield Show

Tonight’s Show Hosted by Neil Garfield

Call in at (347) 850-1260, 6pm Eastern Thursdays

I am nothing if not persistent. 12 years ago my analysis of the real estate market caused me to make a number of conclusions about the real estate market being priced far over value, about the crash, and about the  tsunami of foreclosures. But most of all I predicted that there probably was no real party in interest that would stand up because doing so would be admitting to criminal or at least illegal activities.

With the help of Brad Keiser, we also correctly predicted the fall of the investment banks and in what order. So far everything I have ever said about the foreclosure marketplace has eventually turned out to be true despite chronic attempts to “discredit” my articles by paid non-legal informants for the banks.

There is a reason why banks don’t simply come to court with proof of funding of the loan origination and proof of funding of loans transfers dressed up like sales. The reason is that none of the players on center stage or anything but stooges — conduits who are being paid a monthly fee for doing the bidding of investment banks like Goldman Sachs. We are all fighting a ghost.

I am not predicting the future of foreclosure defense litigation except to say that at the moment the court are starting to question the roles and place of the players who are sent up to the front of the stage  having a dubious if not nonexistent role in the loan process, the debt, note or mortgage. The FDCPA wording is fuzzy as to who is covered. SCOTUS could go either way. But the very fact that a case was brought before the Supreme Court in which a foreclosure mill was being sued is testament to the fact that foreclosure defense attorneys are stepping up and starting to shake a tree that was once a steel and concrete edifice.

The Florida Supreme Court decision on attorney fees was not just about attorney fees. And the acceptance of an FDCPA case by SCOTUS was not just about the FDCPA. In both cases the underlying theme is the absence of any credible definition or foundation for the roles played by those who pursue foreclosure if the loan (ike nearly all loans) were subjected to false claims of securitization.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: