Who Owns My Loan? The answer is a surprise to most people

the “loans” were never sold because there was nothing to sell. The transaction is not “booked” as a loan receivable” or as any receivable because everyone is paid off completely upfront 100%.

But the homeowner or other property owner is completely unaware of the reality of their transaction  — and the transformation from what the homeowner intended to what the investment bank intended. 

Homeowners are not bound by consent to a transaction that was neither presented nor accepted by them if they knew nothingn about it.

If the banks wanted to propose a transction  in which the homeowner agreed to treat the extra-legal creation of a virtual creditor as though there was a real creditor with a real account receivable, then they should have said so.

But then they would have had to disclose the revenue generated from the real transction — and given the homeowner the opportunity to bargain for a piece of the pie.


Instead they dictated the terms of acceptance by hiding those terms from homeowners who were trapped into a spiral of increasing prices despite flat valuation of assets. In many cases — espcially in disadvantaged, undereducated communitnies — peopel were trapped into transctions that were most likely to fall into a situation where a “default” could be declared even though no money was due. This gave the investment banks even more leverage because they knew the “default” would occur and could place bets (hedge and insruance contracts) on that happening.


If you want to know whether your transaction is subject to securitization claims, this cannot be determined from the face of the documents you send to me and I can offer no opinion of value. But I can tell you now that virtually all installment contracts are used as the launch point for securitization schemes. However, such schemes do NOT (contrary to what the banks say) securitize any obligation or debt.

Many property owners ask the wrong question — “Who owns my loan?” The real question is whether the loan account receivable still exists or ever existed. In most securitization schemes there is no loan account.
The banks fabricate documents to enforce the promise you made to make payments and almost everyone including the debtor agrees that it SHOULD be paid. But when put to the test, in litigation, the lawyers for the named claimant are always unable and unwilling to produce any original source evidence supporting the truth of the matter asserted — that the debt or obligation exists.
The reason for this is that the plan was always to sell securities while pretending to loan money. Part of the plan was designed to convince (i.e., mislead) everyone into thinking that the securities were shares of debts and loans. They were not, and so the “loans” were never sold because there was nothing to sell. The transaction is not “booked” as a loan receivable” or as any receivable because everyone is paid off completely upfront 100%.
Since the sale of the securities is based on data relating to the transaction with eh property owner instead of being shares of ownership in the transaction, there is no limit to the number of securities that can be sold. I have previously written that the average initial cycle of securitization produces at least 12 times the amount of money that was nominally stated in the transaction with the homeowner.
In cases where there the new transaction is based upon a fictitious payoff of an old transaction controlled by the same investment banker, the multiple is nearly infinite. The prior transaction was already paid off in full. And there is no current demand by the investment banker to collect money from itself.
Nobody paid me to write this. I am self-funded, supported only by donations. My mission is to stop foreclosures and other collection efforts against homeowners and consumers without proof of loss. If you want to support this effort please click on this link and donate as much as you feel you can afford.Please Donate to Support Neil Garfield’s Efforts to Stop Foreclosure Fraud.
CLICK TO DONATENeil F Garfield, MBA, JD, 75, is a Florida licensed trial and appellate attorney since 1977. He has received multiple academic and achievement awards in business, accounting 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. You will receive an email response from Mr. Garfield  usually within 24 hours. In  the meanwhile you can order any of the following:

Click Here for Preliminary Document Review (PDR) [Basic, Plus, Premium) includes 30 minute recorded CONSULT). Includes title search under PDR Plus and PDR Premium.

Click here for 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. Suggestions for discovery demands are included.
CLICK HERE TO ORDER CONSULT (not necessary if you order PDR)


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.

2 Responses

  1. We need a list of willing firms to represent real people. We could blog and comment all night long but until someone proves what is written, nothing will change. Send me a list. We have visited multiple times, help is needed. We need contacts, please!

  2. Okay. Can you answer please 1) Does this mean “No Funding?” That is a serious violation of TILA. But appears to not matter to courts.
    By what is described here appears that no funding ever occurred. 2) Only Servicers report to IRS. Who is collecting money when it is paid? Is this suggestive of IRS fraud – when servicers report but pass on collected funds elsewhere and that party does not report to IRS? 3) What if the investment bank is NOT the same bank for a refi or purchase? Where does money go then? Where did funding come from? Appears nowhere land. Understand the accounts receivable. But it appears all is a “default” reported debt from onset, or, none of this by financial accounting could ever occur. Bottom line — what really did homeowners sign onto? Contract with the devil? In past week alone – 46 federal court foreclosures – not one is won by the homeowner. Not one is won. And this is only federal court. And, many had attorneys. So appears – attorneys not doing their job – or afraid to do it. For the rest — problem before they start due to precedent law. This is all harmful not just to homeowner, but also to our economy and to our culture. Need a good precedent law win. No hiding — get it out there.

Contribute to the discussion!