Although it may not be apparent, you are probably dealing with Credit Suisse, and that frequently means that you are also dealing with either Morgan Stanley or JP Morgan Chase. Contrary to what you might be thinking, it is extremely unlikely that a legal transfer of ownership of a loan account receivable due from you has ever been transferred. To put a finer point on that, what you call a “loan” has never been purchased or sold.
The origination by Washington mutual is strictly for the purpose of providing either Morgan Stanley or JP Morgan Chase a vehicle for the sale of securities, working in concert with Credit Suisse. When Chase acquired Washington Mutual, no assignments of security instruments wherever executed because none of those security instruments were owned by Washington Mutual.
The underlying obligations had long since been eliminated by the process of securitization. But by not reporting the elimination of the loan account receivable, Wall Street has been able to maintain the illusion that they still exist.
*
That means that all claims based on your transaction’s purported sale or securitization are false. And that means that SPS, which is owned and controlled by Credit Suisse, is not authorized to administer, collect or enforce any payments allegedly due from you — even though it probably received some written authorization from Credit Suisse, JPM Chase, or Morgan Stanley.
*
It is also likely that there is no loan account receivable anywhere, much less an owner of it. That in turn could mean that there is no liability or at least that there are no payments due. And that means that nobody can declare a default. A default does not exist if there is nobody who can truthfully claim they differed a loss due solely from not making a payment, even if it is on some schedule somewhere.
*
Many inquiries I receive report that they are “current” in their scheduled payments. This in my opinion is the start of misconceptions about their transactions. They are not “current” if they have been making payments that were neither owed to the recipient nor to any creditor for whom the recipient was acting.
*
They have been the victim of deceit and trickery. And they may be entitled to judgment against various parties for disgorgement, plus interest and under certain circumstances, attorney fees, costs, and maybe compensatory and punitive damages.
*
this would be a good time to start making tracks in the sand and forcing the hand of the people and companies that are currently collecting money from you without crediting the receipt to any loan account.
*
The statement sent by SPS is merely a report on the data history of collections and sometimes some payments. It is not a loan account that would show the existence of an asset receivable on the books of a creditor, nor a credible source for the balance of any amount claimed as due. And it is not the accounting by a servicer that would show receipts from you, processing of same, and disbursement to creditors.
*
At this point, you most likely have no information in which a specifically identified creditor claims you owe them money. That is because it is most likely that no such creditor exists. But that doesn’t stop them from pretending otherwise. The documents you signed create legal presumptions in their favor. Those legal presumptions lead to conclusions of fact that are untrue. But without challenging them, those legal presumptions can lead all the way through to illegal collections and enforcement.
*
In my experience, the only successful strategy for homeowners is to lay traps and make challenges for the parties involved in fraudulent claims for the administration, collection and enforcement of nonexistent loan accounts.
*
I would suggest that you follow the administrative strategy that we offer on
lendinglies.com. Thus far, proactive lawsuits challenging the right of a company that has been designated to be a “servicer” have been unsuccessful.
*
The general consensus is that you must wait until the end of litigation before you file your lawsuit for recovery of payments that you have made that were illegally collected, and for declaratory, injunctive, and supplemental relief removing the lean from your chain of title.
*
There are some strategies that show promise on the early end of this spectrum. But first, you have to establish the inability of anyone to answer basic questions about the existence, status, and ownership of the presumed loan account for which they seek rights of administration, collection, and enforcement.
I recommend that you start with our administrative strategy. I also strongly recommend that you begin your search for effective counsel.
*
Most lawyers, like most judges, have no experience in investment banking. They are completely unaware of the realities of what Wall Street is calling securitization. Nearly all of them believe that the initial transactions were loans and that the loans were sold into the secondary market where they were divided into pieces that were sold to investors.
*
As far as I can tell this never happened with any loan. And in my own experience as the lead attorney defending homeowners, I have prevailed most of the time simply by not accepting a single thing alleged or implied by the other side.
*
It is the job of the defense lawyer to test every single allegation against his or her client. Lawyers are consistently failing to do this when faced with foreclosure litigation.
*
I suggest that most homeowners order the Administrative Strategy. This will provide the foundation for a collateral claim for violation of the FDCPA and RESPA. By asking questions that they are legally required to answer about subject matter that they are legally required to know and answer, you can establish their refusal or inability to explain their actions. Claims under FDCPA and RESPA can result in an award of attorney fees.
*
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.
==============
DID YOU LIKE THIS ARTICLE?
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)
*
CLICK HERE TO ORDER CASE ANALYSIS
*
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. In addition, although currently rare, it can also result in your homestead being free and clear of any mortgage lien that you contested. (No Guarantee).
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.
Contribute to the discussion!