Livinglies's Weblog

*

If you do the PDR then I will open a folder on my ftp site (Box.com) in your name and you can upload them to that folder which is secure. Then you can use that folder as your own digital storage in relation to this case or any other case. You will have control over the folder and can create subfolders for each separate matter. You can then give access to either your entire folder or just one of the subfolders to third parties like an attorney.

*

I do carefully read the previous report and findings, if any, and I generally find them to be very  thorough and informative on factual and procedural matters up until the date of the report. But like most examiners or other lawyers they lack experience with terms of art and systems in the world of Wall Street finance. That results in overlooking the elephant in the room — the question of whether your debt exists and if so, to whom do you owe your obligation to make payments?

*

In most cases the claim is related to the presumption of the existence of a debt and the action proceeds on the blind assumption that the claimant is allowed to pursue the debt.

*

This happens because of the blind assumption that the forced sale of the house will actually result in payment to a creditor even if they are not properly or legally presented to the court. Most borrowers and their lawyers believe that too. And if that was correct then there is adequate room in the law to apply the doctrine of damnum absque injuria which means a violation for which there is no injury.

*

*

If you can raise sufficient doubt that the proceeds are going to a creditor or would go to a creditor then the burden shifts back to the foreclosure mill, who has absolutely nothing once the presumptions are considered rebutted.

*

That is when judgment is entered for the homeowner and that does happen. That ONLY happens if there is proper enforcement of good demands for discovery followed by timely and proper objections to presumptions and “evidence.”

*

The reason is simple: there is no creditor — that is the whole point of cloaking homeowner transactions under the rubric of “securitization of debt.” If the debt is not sold then it isn’t securitized. AND if the debt was sold ONCE after origination then that doesn’t mean there were any subsequent sales of the debt, note or mortgage to investors. So it still isn’t securitized.

*

The investment banks were counting on a lack of understanding of how these securitization schemes work and they were right about that. Even 100 PhD’s at the Federal Reserve could not figure out what was going on until it was too late. Alan Greenspan admitted that and further admitted that his belief in free market forces was misplaced. There was nothing free about the market for what was falsely named residential mortgage backed securities. It was and remains under the complete control of a handful of trillion dollar banks.

*

It’s now clear that the certificates were not intended to be securities, they were never intended to be regulated as securities, they were never secured by any interest in any property, and had nothing to do with enforcement of any mortgage, nor the receipt of any money from the homeowner or the property.

*

The reason why most homeowners lose is that they either fail to contest the action at all (96%) or they quit because they lose faith or run out of money (2%) or they settle for a “modification” (1%). Of the remaining 1% about 1/3 encounter judges who simply refuse to rule for the homeowner regardless of the facts.

*

But 2/3 of those homeowners win their cases flat out. And nearly all of those occur at the very end of litigation. They stuck it out. This is followed by payment to shut up. Winning homeowners get substantial consideration for agreement to keep quiet, expunge the case from the court record and other things that hide the fact that the action was completely wrong, illegal and fraudulent.

*

The goal therefore is to develop a specific case strategy for each loan that is in dispute. And then the goal is to develop a plan for the use of tactics to use in court. This is where only an experienced trial attorney can make sound decisions. And this is where, after analysis of your individual case, I can write the narrative, suggest the strategy and suggest the tactical plan.