The Winner is James: What was missing was any reference to confirming the initial transaction giving rise to the creation of a debt account.

see https://livinglies.me/2020/09/18/free-30-minute-consult-to-the-first-person-who-can-answer-the-question-correctly/

James got it exactly right not only on the content but also the style. By creating the illusion of a “before” and “after”, the banks have constructed a scenario where our minds tend to fill in the gap with a real transaction — when there wasn’t any such transaction. James please write to me at neilfgarfieldesq@gmail.com to set up the CONSULT.

As counterintuitive as it might feel and seem, there was no before, no after, nor any transaction that was actually a loan transaction. the real transaction was a securitization contract that was never based upon ownership of the loan receivable. Since no money exchanged hands relating to sale of the debt, securitization of the loan cannot be said to exist at any point in time.

Then we frequently go on to admit the existence of the debt, the validity of the note and mortgage and the existence of a creditor who owns the debt — even though there is no such account (because, from the investment bank’s point of view, the debt has been paid off in full).

The company is offering services that would ordinarily (custom and practice in the banking industry) perform several verification tasks — typical for interbank transactions. Verification and confirmation of the debt is one of them. What they are saying is that they will perform all these services regardless of whether or not the loan exists.

The bottom line is that the best strategies in foreclosure defense comes from observing what is not being said or represented. For that to be productive you need to know what would ordinarily be said. Lay people typically have no idea what should be said so they respond to what IS being said and they go down that rabbit hole.

AND the main thing that is NEVER said is “Your Honor, we own this debt, the homeowner refuses or failed to pay it and we are forced to cover our losses through this foreclosure action.” They don’t say that because none of it would be true — subject both the lawyer and the “client” (who isn’t really a client at all) to pay sanctions and even be criminally liable for uttering false instruments and suborning or committing perjury.

Neil F Garfield, MBA, JD, 73, is a Florida licensed trial attorney since 1977. He has received multiple academic and achievement awards in business and law. He is a former investment banker, securities broker, securities analyst, and financial analyst.*

FREE REVIEW: Don’t wait, Act NOW!

CLICK HERE FOR REGISTRATION FORM. It is free, with no obligation and we keep all information private. The information you provide is not used for any purpose except for providing services you order or request from us. In the meanwhile you can order any of the following:

*CLICK HERE ORDER ADMINISTRATIVE STRATEGY, ANALYSIS AND NARRATIVE. This could be all you need to preserve your objections and defenses to administration, collection or enforcement of your obligation.

*CLICK HERE TO ORDER TERA – not necessary if you order PDR PREMIUM.

*CLICK HERE TO ORDER CONSULT (not necessary if you order PDR)

*CLICK HERE TO ORDER CASE ANALYSIS 

*CLICK HERE TO ORDER PRELIMINARY DOCUMENT REVIEW (PDR) (PDR PLUS or BASIC includes 30 minute recorded CONSULT)

*FORECLOSURE DEFENSE IS NOT SIMPLE. THERE IS NO GUARANTEE OF A FAVORABLE RESULT. THE FORECLOSURE MILLS WILL DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO WEAR YOU DOWN AND UNDERMINE YOUR CONFIDENCE. ALL EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT NO MEANINGFUL SETTLEMENT OCCURS UNTIL THE 11TH HOUR OF LITIGATION.

  • But challenging the “servicers” and other claimants before they seek enforcement can delay action by them for as much as 12 years or more. 
  • Yes you DO need a lawyer. 
  • If you wish to retain me as a legal consultant please write to me at neilfgarfield@hotmail.com.

*Please visit www.lendinglies.com for more information.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: