CLE CONTEST RESULTS: 2 WINNERS ONE PRIZE! KELLY E (AGAIN) AND FSF

For review, here were the questions:

#2 CHALLENGE: Free Attendance at 9/29/21 CLE Lawyers Webinar to the First Lawyer or Homeowner Who Correctly Answers the Question

QUESTIONS:

  1. How many different entities named in the assignment could claim ownership of the mortgage lien?
  2. Which one has the highest likelihood of establishing the right to foreclose?
  3. In a foreclosure, which of the entities named in the assignment, if any, will likely receive the cash proceeds from the final liquidation (sale to third party) of the foreclosed property?

All 3 must be answered. Essay answers will not be accepted.

FSF posted the following:

1 none , because the trust agreement says so

2 none
3 none , it becomes revenue for the servicer

This wasn’t the answer I was looking for but on reflection it was correct. No entity COULD make a claim if there was a document in existence that said they could not and which governed the actions of the referenced entities.

The trust agreement in REMIC trusts states explicitly that the named  Trustee gets nothing except temporary bare naked title without any rights as to any payment, underlying obligation, debt, note or mortgage. All claims of entitled or authority derived from the presumed ownership of a “loan” are therefore without foundation and could not be made, except in the procedural sense anyone can claim anything until challenged.

So the answer from FSF is better actually than mine or Kelly E (see below)

FSF will get a free pass to the seminar on 9/29/21 at 3 PM EDT. Upon request, FSF may pick a licensed practicing attorney to attend also for no admission fee. The attending attorney will receive 2.5 credits in Florida and probably 2.0-2.5 in any of 26 other states that previously approved my presentation for CLE credit.

Kelly E also posted a correct result:

1) 4 possible names, perhaps more if you dissect the trust and trustee name further than I already did in my mind, which they like to do.
2) I don’t believe any would have the right to foreclose.
3) None. It will go to pay self-proclaimed servicer(s), attorneys, etc.
Kelly gave the answer I had in mind. If you look at the referenced entities they ar provide a list of entities that might or could make claim (based on the face of the instrument:
  • U.S. Bank N.A.
  • CWABS, Inc.
  • CWABS Inc. Trust
  • Holders of certificates, even though both the holders and the certificates are unidentified.

So the answer to my question as I meant it is 4. But FSF got it right because of the way I wrote it. I asked the question using the word “Could.”

Neither FSF nor Kelly got the answer to the second question entirely correct although they both have the right idea. The one with the highest likelihood of “establishing” the right to foreclose, given the current climate, is U.S. Bank even though it a claim without foundation or merit. But they are both right because the claim is false.

Both FSF and Kelly E hit the answer to the third question dead on right. It was a trick question. Both of them recognized it. The proceeds of foreclosure based on a claim derived from an asserted or implied securitization of an alleged debt goes only to the bookrunner investment bank who pays the servicer (and others) for their good work in obtaining the money. The question was which entity named in the assignment will get the money? The answer is NONE.

4 Responses

  1. I think Ian won the first contest, and Java the second (did Neil not see Java’s post – none, none none? Or did someone cheat and use that? Hah. But, the assumptions Neil gave were only assumptions. Courts do not accept assumptions. I have been saying here for a long time — collection is reported as revenue – and not necessarily for stated “servicer” – who is not likely any servicer with even claimed authority. Specifically, money is collected, but because there was no accounting, collection is debt collection from onset and payments are reported under “income” revenue statement. Like, Java, I been saying unsecured. And, Ian has the answer — question the authority. Trustees never get assets/payments unless they are also a security investor. However, it is incorrect to state that trustee hold only “bare legal title.” Trustees are the only LEGAL HOLDER according to ALL law. We all know that. The questions answer then goes deeper into the character of the debt that was claimed sold to Depositors to said trusts – with legal rights held by trustee. Have scoured PSAs – and not one says “bare legal title.” They hold title to trust assets — and are legally responsible for fraud. Who has the right to collect? Who has the right to collect is different from foreclosure. There is no right to collect because loans were procured by fraud, and no right to foreclosure as loans are not secured. The only way the answers will come out is by looking at authority and what was intended to be conveyed, and servicer, and most important – Master Servicer Rights. So — I don’t have any prizes – but if I did — Ian and Java would get them. No offense to Kelly or FSF — and I may be wrong but I never seen them post with any input on Neil’s blog. They read what Neil and others post — and we all have been here a long time. But, like everything else — that’s the system!!!

  2. Thanks Anon.
    Where’s my free pass to the class ????
    None. None. None !!!

  3. Yeah – didn’t Java have NONE NONE NONE – first? And, does anyone understand — if the trustee has no Legal Holder claim (which I agree) — there is NO Mortgagee. NO legal holder – None — meaning no mortgagee – no mortgage – and although mortgage follows the note according to “law” – If there is no mortgagee – there is no mortgage – and there is no note. But you have to get past — that you have no STANDING to challenge. You don’t do that — you are finished. Whining does not count.

  4. Well it looks like no one mentioned in the recorded document has any authority to do anything, let alone get paid any money.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: