The only beef I have with the article cited in the link below is that it fails to ask, “why?” Why were fabricated documents needed at all? Why was MERS needed at all? Why were “servicers” needed at all? The rise of “servicers” only occurred within a specific period in a very specific sector of the marketplace. And they performed no servicing functions —- even though lawyers produced “records” of such activities in pursuit of foreclosure.
The failure of “legal standing” sounds like a technicality. It is not. It means, in plain language that the party named is (a) not a person or legally organized business entity, (b) has no claim or (c) both. In nearly all foreclosure proceedings the answer is “c.”
In May 2011, a very well-researched and well-written article was published by Huffington Post, written by L. Randall Wray, a professor of economics at the University of Missouri. It was called “Requiem for MERS” because the author made the same mistake I made 5 years earlier. We thought that by simply revealing the obvious facts about MERS, the entire securitization system would collapse.
For him, that was 11 years ago. For me, it is now 16 years ago.
Despite numerous admissions, investigations, victories in court, and settlements totaling about $1 trillion so far, the basic fraudulent premise of “securitization” survives: the illusion of the sale of a loan account that was eliminated in the process of securitization. The truth is exactly 180° opposite from the illusion.
And human beings tend to accept that which is repeated and that which continues to be repeated. So despite the Senate hearings in which people like Elizabeth Warren and Katie Porter accurate pinned down the witnesses and made them admit that 95% of foreclosures were based upon fraudulent instruments, the entire topic went dark on Capital Hill and in mainstream media, which had been hot on the trail of the fraud.
We have repeatedly reported that foreclosures are falling while local media reports that foreclosures are spiking. And because big media still has the hue of credibility, most people, including law enforcement and lawmakers, believe it to be true.
But the number of inquiries I am receiving from lawyers and homeowners has spiked to levels that were only matched in the heat of the 2008 crash. But most lawyers continue to have a problem with the basic premise of my strategies and tactics, which have been successful for 16 years.
Suppose you proceed on the premise that there is no case, no claimant, and you admit nothing. In that case, persistent aggressive litigation is likely (but not guaranteed) to produce a judgment or very satisfactory settlement for the homeowner.
As law students, we learn about trial practice; those who teach always remind us to start at the beginning. It is often, at the very first, most basic premise that the weaknesses or falsity of the opposition are revealed. And by ignoring that investigation and that analysis, it is often how lawyers and their clients lose cases they could have won.
The only beef I have with the article cited in the link below is that it fails to ask, “why?” Why were fabricated documents needed at all? Why was MERS needed at all? Why were “servicers” needed at all? The rise of “servicers” only occurred within a specific period in a very specific sector of the marketplace. And they performed no servicing functions —- even though lawyers produced “records” of such activities in pursuit of foreclosure.
Homeowners were confronted with “servicers” right after they concluded the issuance of a note and mortgage only in situations where the “transaction” was being controlled and funded by a Wal Street securities brokerage firm that called itself an “investment bank.”
And for the most part, the most obvious signal of the fraud was the presence of a private entity with absolutely no credibility or function: MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., MERS Corp. et al).
see https://www.huffpost.com/entry/requiem-for-mers-and-the_b_812940
======================
*
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 COMMENTS ON THIS BLOG AND ELSEWHERE ARE BASED ON THE ABILITY OF A HOMEOWNER TO WIN THE CASE NOT MERELY SETTLE IT. OTHER LAWYERS HAVE STRATEGIES DIRECTED AT SETTLEMENT OR MODIFICATION. 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: foreclosure |
The reason for MERS is that the securities are flawed. With Ginnie Mae MBS the Notes are endorsed in blank and Ginnie becomes the owner of that loan without a legal way to call the loan due because they not purchased the debt. What is a loan that does not have a collectible debt.
Even as MERS talks about its system does not start until the Deed of Trust is first recorded at the local register office, it also end at the register office as in non-judicial foreclosure take place by the owner of the debt. The foreclosure are performed in the county that governs what takes place.
Ginnie requires that in order for the mortgage loan to be removed first by the lender/issuer before a foreclosure can be perform. So these banks are shut down because they don’t have money and could not by back these loans. The trick to the UCC3 requirement is whether the Note been transferred as it between the bank and Ginnie with the bank usually the servicer and custodian of records so there not going to be a question as to when this happen because Ginnie can pass back the blank endorse Note to the bank that relinquished to then, as there seem to be no record of the date of transfer on the Notes.
Problem I see is that because the borrowers are so ignorant to what happen to them, and attorneys that have never face this situation allow with the public and regulators who are under the impression that the borrowers are just these deadbeats who are indebted to somebody no matter what.
The servicer that continues to service the mortgage loan even as the bank has failed is working for who at that time is working for who if the loan was not sold as with Washington Mutual Bank (WAMU)? The answer is they are not working for anybody, but are going to continue to collect monthly payments, payoff and proceeds from foreclosures but who the counterparty that is owed? Its not WAMU because they stopped existing.
What I am doing is getting the politician back into play as Neil suggested a few months ago because believe the mortgage servicing account should still be active as the monies are distributed illegally to Ginnie out of the borrowers account which because it is an accounting fraud the account cannot actually be close and should be drawing interest. A crime cannot cause a legal action.
I just found a document in the county register’s office where this situation I went through was address as to the title issue, so why was the loan not removed from the Ginnie pooling when the error was uncover? It was because there was no legal way to cause an assignment to be recorded by the originator that sold the loan without having the Deed of Trust recorded while owning the mortgage loan debt and not recording an Assignment of Deed of Trust makes this loan a unsecured loans which does not have the power of the DOT and needs to address this through UCC9.
But there a huge issue outside of just my loan, however, you just cannot get the minds you need to fight with you and make this money that sitting there. The Holm v Wells & Freddie Mac tells us that they could not provide the court with proof of purchase and it was Freddie not Long Beach or Countrywide!