Livinglies's Weblog

These foreclosure cases are fraudulent in that they are not foreclosures. A foreclosure, by definition, is limited to the enforcement of a security instrument in which ownership of the instrument and the underlying obligation is vested in a creditor who is named as the claimant.  With very few exceptions, none of the foreclosures over the last 25 years have satisfied the definitions or conditions precedent for the filing of a foreclosure action. Virtually all of them are 100% reliant on the presentation of fabricated documents containing false information about transactions that never occurred.  Those documents memorialize nonexistent transactions. They are all legal nullities.

*

 Although hundreds of people in government, perhaps thousands, have understood this from the beginning, the decision made at the top (based on false information) was to sacrifice homeowners (and veterans). This policy is based upon the erroneous presumption that the entire economy would collapse if the truth about the transactions with homeowners was revealed.

*

The erroneous information was that “banks were in trouble.” History shows that many banks, financial institutions, and nonfinancial actors would go out of business when the music stopped. This was true regardless of government policy. Many of them did go out of business, and the government policy designed to protect lending or banks did nothing to stop that. The sacrifice was in vain, and we suffered the great recession, from which we have still not fully recovered even after 15 years.

*

The flash point of anger, frustration and resentment is a public that is aware that trillions of dollars was spent propping up virtual loan accounts and unregulated securities (derivatives), none of which had any real value.  Many experts now agree that much of that money did not need to be spent, printed or invented.

*

The required stimulus of the economy could have been directly obtained without spending one dime of public money or printing new currency. By following the example of Iceland and others, the nationalization of our lending structure could have resulted in a reduction of 25% or more of household debt — forcing the major securities brokerage companies (“investment banks”) to accept their share of the risks they and created by their creation of an illegal and extra-legal spider web of schemes.

*

All of the agencies charged with the responsibility of protecting the general welfare of the public have done nothing because of policy generated from the very top of government. Part of this is the result of “willing ignorance.” This in turn has resulted in forcing a nearly impossible burden on consumers, and in particular, homeowners. Each of them is required to protect themselves in prohibitively expensive litigation.

*

Each of them is required to step in to protect themselves where federal and state agencies have failed to do so. And in each case where they prevail, there is no authoritative law upon which others can rely. This is because the fraudulent actors do not appeal any decision in favor of homeowners or consumers. Therefore any decision in favor of a homeowner or a consumer becomes an event only applicable to that one case.

*

 This policy from the top is the only thing supporting the big lie: that the transactions with homeowners were originated as loans and maintained as such on the books of creditors. Nothing could be further from the truth. But because of general acceptance of the big lie, lawyers from foreclosure mills and judges routinely ridicule or even get mad at homeowners and lawyers alike who raise proper and timely objections to allegations and purported evidence of the existence of an unpaid loan account receivable owned as an asset on the books and records of an identified creditor.

*

Let me be clear: There is no such thing as a virtual loan account, and there is no law support for enforcing a virtual loan account. And to put a finer point on it, veterans on or off the battlefield should be protected, and court officers should be held to a much higher standard of care in foreclosing and evicting people who put their lives on the line so we could even have these discussions. Such persons should be held in the highest esteem, and policy should favor the highest priority in protecting them from any hint of overreaching, unconscionable, or fraudulent business practices.

*

These are not idealistic suggestions. They are practical imperatives. History shows that by protecting specific demographic populations targeted by aggressive, illegal, and fraudulent behavior, the government exposes such practices to the general population, which causes policy and enforcement changes. In short, that is what leads to a society built on the premise of government for the welfare of the people.