Webinar: Why Start with Assignments of Mortgage? Because that is where the fake transaction is made to appear real. Beat that and you beat the case against the homeowner

Register today for $100 early bird discount! Click here:

Examination and Challenge of Assignments of Mortgage

96% of all fake foreclosure claims are not challenged! Maybe it is time to start!

ASSIGNMENTS OF MORTGAGE ARE THE KEY AND SOMETIMES THE ONLY FAKE DOCUMENTS USED TO RECONSTITUTE THE VIRTUAL TRANSACTION INTO THE ILLUSION OF A REAL ONE FOR PURPOSES OF ENFORCEMENT OF THE NOTE AND MORTGAGE WITHOUT OWNERSHIP OF THE UNDERLYING OBLIGATION.

AND THERE SHOULD BE NO DOUBT THEY’RE FAKE — THE MAJOR PLAYERS ADMITTED AS MUCH WHEN THEY PROMISED IN SETTLEMENTS WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT NOT TO DO IT ANYMORE BUT CONTINUED ANYWAY.

Courts are not inclined to refuse the application of presumptions arising from “facially valid” documentation even though the sources are demonstrably not credible and are given to lying, deceit and misleading argument by lawyers who are protected by litigation immunity. So it is up to the defense lawyer to do as much as possible to perform the three tasks of every litigation defense attorney:
  1. Keep the evidence out
  2. Get the evidence out once admitted
  3. Knock down the evidence down in importance or credibility once it is admitted and efforts to remove it have failed. 

The CLE approved Webinar next Wednesday teaches lawyers how to perform all three functions with successful results and provides a proven business plan, under which some lawyers have become millionaires. Homeowners are also welcome to attend at a discount to teach them what lawyers do to defeat fake foreclosrue claims and to convince them not to try to do it themselves. 

When you go searching for information on your “loan” you will ordinarily be brought to a website that has a URL like http://www.SPSservicing.com and a dashboard that reports various things about your loan. But neither SPS nor you have any source data for making or accepting such reports. That is all done through a web of technology servers that perform a variety of tricks using companies that have the sole mission of coordinating between various computers without regard to who owns them, who maintains them, and whose data is being used. Through automated routines that spit out correspondence without any human being involved or signing. And they spit out fake notices and fake assignments of mortgage.

If  “mistake” is discovered or revealed, the players can claim plausible deniability because it was a machine that performed the task of fabricating the documents and that sent them for signature to yet another third party who neither knew nor had any authority to speak for any creditor who owned the underlying obligation, the legal debt, the note or the mortgage.

*

Just imagine if you could make any claim you wanted in court using machine-generated documents that were signed by machines using the names and signatures of people who you did not know and did not employ. You could claim anything if the court accepted the facial validity of such documents. And if the opposition was sufficiently ignorant to believe that they were in breach of some duty owed to you, in most cases, they would not even challenge your claim. 96% of all fake foreclosure claims are not challenged!

*
By looking at the source code on the apparent website of a company claiming to be a servicer you are immediately faced with the issue of facial validity. And you make assumptions that this”servicer” site is run by and based upon internal data and accounting by the supposed servicer arising out of receipts and disbursements by that company.
*
But when you dig, you will find hyperlinks to platforms outside of the alleged servicer. Investigation shows that the website of the company claiming to be a servicer is neither maintained or owned by that “servicer.”
*
I think homeowners should retain technology experts to race this behavior and show incontrovertible proof of misrepresentation and deceit.
*
I just reviewed another case involving these questions. It looks to me that the reference is contained in the source data and coding strongly suggests the presence of at least a third party — https://www.dynatrace.com/company/trust-center/customers/reports/ — and routines that literally pick out the images that will be used in the production of a report. Those images probably include the letterhead on which notices are sent or other correspondence is sent.
*
Dynatrace appears to be a company that monitors the inter-activity of multiple servers and coordinates reports. Based upon their website, it appears likely that the automated routines performed by this company result in the production of correspondence, notices and probably other documents without any human intervention (or authority). In response, the foreclosure players claim that Dynatrace works for SPS and that outsourcing is no crime. They’re right. But if the data constitutes a misrepresentation of SPS activities, then that is an entirely different matter — if SPS was not really involved in receipts and disbursements then their records of the payment history are worthless hearsay that can be barred from evidence. 
*
So what that means is that, as I have been saying for years, the company that is claiming to be the servicer is merely a figurehead and is not performing any functions that you would ordinarily associate with a true servicer. To get more specific, the company claiming to be the servicer neither receives nor disburses any money. As such, it maintains no records of any financial transaction with homeowners or with investors.
*
Steering you toward the claimed servicer is the material misrepresentation that interferes in your business relationship with whoever might be the creditor if there is one. My analysis indicates that this is part of a larger process in which
*
(1) the homeowner is lured into a transaction that appears to be a loan, but without a lender or even a loan account surviving the deal
*
(2) the transaction is treated by all concerned on the financial side as a virtual one in which there is no lender or debt, but there is a note and mortgage and
*
(3) through completely automated processes involving no human hands or approval, documents are fabricated for the sole purpose of creating the illusion of a reconstituted or actual debt with a designated and real creditor. ASSIGNMENT OF MORTGAGE ARE THE KEY AND SOMETIMES THE ONLY FAKE DOCUMENTS USED TO RECONSTITUTE THE VIRTUAL TRANSACTION INTO THE ILLUSION OF A REAL ONE FOR PURPOSES OF ENFORCEMENT OF THE NOTE AND MORTGAGE WITHOUT OWNERSHIP OF THE UNDERLYING OBLIGATION. AND THERE SHOULD BE NO DOUBT THEY’RE FAKE — THEY ADMITTED AS MUCH WHEN THEY PROMISED IN SETTLEMENTS WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT NOT TO DO IT ANYMORE BUT CONTINUED ANYWAY.

*
If you really want to win these cases then you better know what I am teaching in EXAMINATION AND CHALLENGE OF ASSIGNMENTS OF MORTGAGE. If you are just looking to delay the “inevitable”, you are contributed to the wealth of Wall Street and the illegal, immoral and unethical ruination of American consumers.
*
THE $100 EARLY BIRD DISCOUNT ENDS TODAY! LAWYERS EARN 2.5 CREDITS IN FLORIDA AND GENERALLY BETWEEN 2.0 AND 2.5 CREDITS IN MOST OTHER STATES. Click here to register! 

2 Responses

  1. Java – true — But, must challenge the funding. If there was no funding – there can be no securitization. Period. Thus, not a third party. And, believe me — there was no funding. No funding, no consideration, no accounting, no securitization, no mortgage, no note, and no loan BECAUSE – none of those can occur without FUNDING showing PAID OFF of prior loan by YOU – the homeowner. A recorded document in County does not prove any of this — all are bogus. Funding to Homeowner and by Homeowner – just did not happen. And that is why we had the GREAT FINANICIAL CRISIS explosion – for no other reason. We are approaching wrong in courts. PROOF of SATISFACTION by Homeowner MUST be demanded. Funding – just did not occur. They cannot and will not show that. Must demand it. And, if people trace prior records — they will find cause to demand it. DON”T STOP AT LAST TRANSACTION.

  2. Once Again. The Judges do not allow for the Homeowners to object to the AOMs saying they are a 3rd party. Have you ever even been in a Fraudclosure courtroom since 2010 !!!!!!

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: