Tonight! Legal Jujitsu Pays Off for MERS, Investment Banks 3PM PDT 6 PM EDT

Thursdays LIVE! Click into the WEST COAST Neil Garfield Show

with Attorney Charles Marshall and

Private Investigator Bill Paatalo

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

 

We break down on the Show today the latest from MERS. Now before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, to try and reverse a quiet title judgment taken in State Court against Central Pacific Mortgage (CPM), claiming since CPM, the original lender, past shortly after origination all beneficial interest in the note and mortgage (DOT–Cal is a deed of trust state) to MERS, the fact that MERS was not noticed in the lawsuit at the State level which went to judgment, same judgment is reversible, arguing that MERS was the only beneficial interest holder in the chain of title–not just an intermediary passing the beneficial interest to other successors-in-interest to the loan origination.

Which is to say, where large pools of money are at stake, institutional players to a given mortgage loan’s chain of title, will indeed engage in legal Jujutsu to get or prevent the loss of that money, contradicting their typical arguments which were made in countless previous cases.

Then Charles Marshall will address the latest Covid-19 legal impacts, covering the latest on both the national foreclosure moratorium and eviction front, as well as the latest in California’s moratorium landscape.

One Response

  1. Hey Neil, your legal acquaintance, Mark Fields here. This is not dissimilar, (and this comment may pop-up the invariable epiphanous light in their minds, and facilitate larger, more respectable PPP’s, EIDL’s, and in my cases, Subrogation, or Vendor Lien Positions, from having funded the original 25% down + closing+ furniture packages for certain vacation rental zoned assets, along with a few Wells Fargo Issued 1099-A’s that in certain circumstances “do” increase your tax base, however, in every “yet filed” amended returns for the SBA approved affiliate/24 weeks of $100,000 PPP monies #1 & #2, plus EIDL at $500,000 rolled into PPP#2, thus forgiven:-) couple of my own, (‘former”) properties that are part of a larger, Master Asset Group, totaling (61) residences I own/owned as a holder of co-beneficial interest, in as many individual land trust, as well, have Trustee “fiduciary obligations & severable rights” whose original Warranty Deed received as Grantee from developer seller, general seller, auction, etc….if mortgaged, required (2) (and I can’t believe we never once tried this, nor have I ever read or seen case law on either), 2 Title Policies, Lender Policy for Mortgagee, Owner Policy for Mortgagor; both most likely from the same insurance company, issued through the same title agent, (closing agent), helpful, although not necessary if they are still around, Title Agent that is, and if not checkout original HUD-1 if lost, or forgotten policies and declaration pages. Both policies “should” be idfentical with regards any of the listed, and attached “Exceptions”; meaning, to some of all occurances up to the face amount PLUS cost of legal; these exceptions are not covered if claim ever made; conversely, most likely, (at least my current (2) real live, beta testers) list out what “IS” covered, to simplify trying to maze around (61) policies, several whom were traded from TICOR to Fidelity to Chicago…..NO Thank you. In my first time ever approaching the reality of filing an actual title claim; Beginning 01/20/2021; its unusual.

    Number #1
    Any efforts, attempts. and or attacks, as to cloud title by any means, not limited to, forgery, theft, fraudulent assignment, judicial order illegally and or wrongfully obtained; all for the purpose to defraud insured and take what is rightfully owned by insured, insureds assignee’s, grantees, heirs, beneficiaries, and “OR” a single interest maintained by insured, through Grantor, and or Warranty Deed to Trustee, for the benefit of insured, and insureds interest; discovered through via random research, or after a new owner has unknowlingly taken possesion with judicial orders; this fraudulant conveyance of transfer, lis pendens, deed-in-lieu of foreclose or mechanics, vendor, merchant lien, in place of, and or, as equal to the insured’s original mortgagee; shall be covered as toi the extent of the face value listed on the original title commitment and endorsement.

    My number #1 is essentially, (on the surface for now), covering day one, what I’ve been paying outside counsel for representation since 2004, on some cases, whilst OC is a junior Marshall Watson/Stern/Choice/Stephens, (Members of the Original 5), are robosigning, doc-x forgeries, and stamping “original” orders, no doc-stamp payments, with (12-TWELVE) $563,000 UFSJ, in the same neighborhood,(silently) auctioned off to themselves for $100, AND NO stamps paid, and only then did they file original;-) notes and mortgages, along with dozens of unsigned (OR STAMPED) Motions, Orders, even on FSJ, yet Osceola Judge said we didn’t have standing cause it was transferred to trust……..wow…..

    Moral or the pending story, is a question. “why didn’t and don’t we request our own owners policy and if needed, lenders policy we paid for, to process payments for face value, plus legal” Vs. the years of stress in going to court.. I have one in review, not mentioned above, and after spending a fortune and losing more, I by chance, just recently, armed with this hope, began to scour my closing docs and assignments from the Developer Seller whom, after seller financing at 55%LTV a new $1.8mm Pentthouse in October of 2012, two weeks later I was first to be hospitalized through a rapid and grotesqly fraudulent foreclosure and sale……….Called First American on this past Monday, and drew their atttention to the seller/developer/title attorney created Corporate Resolution, requiring my own trustee to authorize my signature for the Familty Trust and issuing a $992,500 down-payment transfer, and as a requirement to obtain funding for the balance.

    Neil, On the front page, halfway down, dead center of the corporate resolution, the legal description for which represented all that money, is not the same as is on the Original and Recorded Warranty Deed. and the front dec. page of the mandatory flood insurance policy required to obtain said funding, and a requirement of my original signatures, shows the address with my name listed in a different tower with a diffent address, and on the 2nd signature page, it has name, address and signature of another tower and unknon party.

    During my last conversation with First American Title Insurance Assigned Claims Counsel; he stated that I will soon receive their decision, in writing, and that my coverage is limited to face value of the Original Owners Policy, and nothing further are they liable for……Neil, On the Original HUD-1, October 15th, 2012, I paid $9.962.50 for the Owners Policy alone, and apart from the Lenders Policy, for which, I paid $7,886.00, according to the HUD, as listed on the dec. page of the original policy, and lastly. as informed by Claims Counsel; they separately and apart, with the Owners Policy as my only recourse for title coverage claims, has coverage for attacks on title concurrent with maximum amount not to exceed: $1,800,000, One Million Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars.

    Mark F.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: