Multiple reports around the country have demonstrated that there is overwhelming evidence of corruption in the office that records instruments in the title chain of real property.*In a few rare interviews, the people who run such offices have complained that they are being forced to record documents that are actually outside of the chain of title. This is all caused by fabricated documents used to weaponize the procedures allowed for the pursuit of foreclosure remedies.*20 years after it all began, it is apparent that the only real correction is going to come from political action rather than legal action. You must make noise to get people to listein. As Victor Frankel said decades agao, evil only flourishes when good people do nothing.
*
People are always venting about their frustration, which is well-founded, with the recording offices that allow facially invalid documents to be recorded in the chain of title.
*
Once that is recorded, getting the document out of the chain of title is expensive and time-consuming, and even futile in the new era of false claims of securitization.
*
The new era is marked by false claims that loans were created and “securitized,” meaning that the claimed underlying obligation was purchased and sold. No such transactions ever take place in current securitization infrastructures and therefore all documents relying upon that premise are false and misleading.
*
Perhaps more importantly, the meaning of this false claim clearly manifests the truth that the transaction with homeowners did not create an unpaid loan account receivable nor anyone to own it.
*
Anyone who has a passing interest and understanding in securities analysis knows that the transaction was mostly for the revenue derived from the sale of unregistered, unregulated securities. Payments coerced from homeowners were and remain an unnecessary bonus.
*
So people are asking how they sue the Clerk of the county Recording Office to stop the recording of false documents.
*
You start off with the presumption that any agency of the federal, state or local government is cloaked with the presumption of immunity.
*
This does not cover individual acts of malfeasance, and which the individuals who are guilty of committing a crime can be punished for doing so. Such individuals are known to exist. They literally get paid through intermediaries for the securitization schemes. I personally know of multiple instances where that has occurred. But these individuals cannot respond to a civil judgment because they generally have no money. And they are not prosecuted criminally unless you can serve up, on a silver platter, the complete case against them and present it to the local prosecutor.
*
The next issue is whether the agency actually knew about the malfeasance and condoned it. We all know this is probably true. But in order to allege the proper elements of a lawsuit against the agency, you would need to state the ultimate facts upon which relief could be granted. The mistake frequently made by homeowners is alleging opinions that they are confident must be true. Such allegations are dismissed under our system. Secondly, even if you were able to make the proper allegations, you would then have to prove them. This would require a ground battle in disclosure.
*
So the bottom line is that unless you have a lot of money and a lot of time on your hands is pointless to pursue this avenue of relief in the current context and in the current judicial climate. As far as I know, the probability of finding a lawyer who would be willing to take such a case based on contingency fees is zero. And even if you found such a lawyer, the costs and expenses of the lawsuit and preparation for the lawsuit would exceed the probable resources of anyone trying to pursue the case.
*
The better route, at this point, in my opinion, is to use petitions, telephone calls, and a lot of noise directed at the recording office and the press.
Filed under: foreclosure |
This is still a government issue. Seems to me what is being recorded is claimed debt collection rights that are not verified or validated under the FDCPA. Now, what if a small bank is actually funding payoff of what they think is a “mortgage?” And they later find out – no mortgage existed and, therefore, nothing was paid off. The fake “trusts” claim the right to “enforce, collect, and discharge.” Any discharge is not of a mortgage. It is impossible to pay off a ‘mortgage’ that does not exist. Title is so destroyed it is impossible to fix.
Just a bunch of Monkeys pounding a keyboard. These public Parasites are paid a salary and benefits and pensions by your ever increasing property Taxes. Enough is Enough!!!!!
Wrote the Gov of NE last week about this as Wells Fargo Bank who was never my lender got outside legal to ROBO sign a Assignment of Deed of Trust claiming that Wells paid value for the mortgage loan from the originator or its successors. Even as I provided the register office a letter from the originating bank that they sold the loan to Washington Mutual Bank (WAMU) before the Deed of Trust was filed by the originating bank after it had already sold the debt and had no remaining interest in the mortgage loan. Even providing a letter from Wells stating that they were not the owner of the mortgage Note which the now say that Ginnie Mae was the owner of the debt that they foreclosed for still did not make the register do anything. Because I had a Dept of VA loan I believe the register believes a debt is owed to the Fed Gov nd that it does not matter what the homeowner’s rights are, because the VA does purchase most of these properties in foreclosure. The VA who in this case as I assume most cases is not running a title check and is going off what Ginnie Mae has in it file a the issuer of the MBS and purchase and pay out VA Guaranty Fund insurance claim. No one else would have been able to purchase the loan at the foreclosure sale as the title not clear. Even with Wells admitting that they did not purchase the debt and the fact that Ginnie Mae can never buy or sell a mortgage loan still the agency refused to address that fact that Wells could not place a lien against my property!