Livinglies's Weblog

Almost everyone writing articles about consumer finance, mortgage loans, and servicing is now in agreement that there are viable meritorious defenses for the consumer. True, they are not obvious to the casual observer, which is part of the problem.

see NCLC Digital Library – 12 Ways to Fight Foreclosure of Zombie Second Mortgages – 2022-03-28

But the defenses available to consumers and to homeowners, in particular, are sufficient to defeat most attempts to administer, collect or enforce any alleged loan account receivable mostly because no such account exists on the books of the party named as the owner of the”note”.

• Further, there are sufficient and meritorious grounds to force repayment of money previously paid by the consumer.
• And finally, there are sufficient and meritorious grounds to claim damages for breaches of statutory duties requiring disclosure and equitable remedies for restitution arising from the consumer’s involuntary assumption of unknown risks.

What is apparent in the above links is the conflict between common law, previous statutory law, and current regulations regarding transfers of rights to unpaid loans. Common sense dictates that you should be under no duty to pay anyone other than the “lender” who gave you money unless that “lender” instructs you to pay someone else on their behalf in writing.

That instruction never comes now although it was ALWAYS required by all previous laws, rules,.. regulations, and court doctrine. Instead, agencies are continuing along the path of requiring only the transferee to give notice of a transfer of ownership of “the note” in lieu of any notice from anyone instructing the debtor consumer that the underlying obligation and been transferred to a successor lender because it was sold to that successor.

Consumers contact their State AG and the CFPB who maintain their office under charter to protect consumers who lack the resources to protect themselves. Instead of doing their jobs, the agencies and law enforcement shoves it back in the face of hapless consumers who know little or nothing about the law and who only want to pay their bills — but only to people to whom they owe money. That is not an unreasonable caveat.

So I have proposed to multiple lawyers, consumers and advocates across the country that they start suing the agencies seeking equitable (injunctive relief), specifically mandating that the agency do its job and more specifically that the CFPB and FTC do their job.

Here is my summary:

• Adm Agency has a duty as specified in its charter as passed by specific legislation.
• Specifically, CFPB was formed to investigate and resolve consumer complaints regarding lending and servicing – recognition that consumers are at a disadvantage in clarifying, confronting or contesting claims made for administration, collection, and enforcement of alleged unpaid loan account receivables.
• More specifically these agencies are required to intervene on behalf of consumers when false claims are made as to the existence, status or ownership of allegedly unpaid accounts receivable owed by the consumer.
• CFPB breached its duty by adopting rules and policies that converted its primary mission into a message carrier. The effect was to delegate back to the consumer the burden of investigational and resolution. [specify rules and policies]
  • GIVE EXAMPLES FROM SPECIFIC CASES
  • DON’T MAKE WILD CONSPIRACY ALLEGATIONS
• Court should enter an order that
  • Finds CFPB in breach of duties of supervision, investigation and resolution
  • Orders CFPB to adjust its rules and policies
  • Specifically order CFPB to require confirmable proof that parties acting as presumed servicers and actually performing servicing functions with respect to the receipt, processing, and distribution of money paid by consumers
  • Specifically order CFPB to require confirmable proof that parties named as claimants, DOT beneficiaries, or successor mortgagees maintain a loan account receivable (GAAP compliant) on their own accounting ledgers
  • Specifically order CFPB to require confirmable proof that parties named as claimants, DOT beneficiaries, or successor mortgagees attest and acknowledge that they authorized specifically identified parties to act on their behalf for the administration, collection and enforcement of unpaid debts owed by specific consumers, borrowers or debtors.

==============

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 DONATE

Neil 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.

Filed under: CFPB, CORRUPTION, Fabrication of documents, forensic investigation, FTC, Government Financial Complex, SEC, Servicer | Tagged: FDCPA, RESPA, zombie, zombie foreclosures |