Here is an example from one of my more savvy readers who still makes the key error: This person refers to the “Depositor” in the chain of “Securitization” references contained in various documents. None of those entries are legally significant in any way unless they (refer to real-world transactions ) and (b) are contested by homeowners.
Companies named as depositors are nothing of the sort. They are small undercapitalized companies that have virtually no income or employees. Their sole purpose is to create an implication that the sale of an unpaid loan account (or a group of unpaid loan accounts) has been sold. This is a lie — not merely a misrepresentation deigned to mislead.
So here is my response to one inquiry I received.
Correction: they were NAMED as the depositor.
With only $300k in revenue, they could not have been processing the volume of “loans” referenced.
To be the depositor, one would be the owner of the named asset. The named asset is a loan receivable due from a homeowner.
You get to be an owner by paying for it or getting it as a gift.
They never deposited ownership of the loan receivable account.
They never took ownership of any loan receivership account, which is easily provable by asking for their general ledger to see if they ever listed it as an asset arising out of entries against other asset accounts that enabled the “depositor” to pay for the asset. It is all smoke and mirrors.
To be blunt: People who lack education, knowledge, and training in investment banking and law have no right to express an opinion. If they choose to do so, they are hurting not only themselves but thousands of others.
================
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 14 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 |
usedkarguy – they were not “trust” corpus for private label MBS. Not formed that way.
Hi all. I don’t think the “trust corpus” held ANY loans legally. Loans were pledged to multiple securities. They had no choice but to default them, at all costs. Hence, new loan accounts for anyone who survived.
FJB.
Hmmm — Thanks for great comments John Reed and Papergate! How important it is to make comments and be heard! To Neil – interesting post. Correction – the private securitization scheme was not “investment banking” – it was a con. Second, check with the IRS as to importance of “Depositors” that largely became defunct. “Pool of Assets” is NOT a “trust.” What exactly was in that pool of assets that was reported to IRS as OWNED by the STATED Depositor?? The PLMBS is far cry from what was once known as “investment banking.” Papergate is correct, many, not even Greenspan, knew what really went. Yet Paulson carried forward and begged for settlements – of which the CLAIMED “uneducated” homeowner victims got nothing.
Points made by all . . . yes education by the ‘bar’ (attorneys) should be in lock-step with all involved who produced the crisis including the US Government. It is not a ‘pretty’ enough public issue or source of major donor funds to be explored – only the few of us are doing the heavy lifting – thanks in part to guys like Neil!! He’s only 1 in – 1M who are willing to toe the lines and help educate us – but thanks to John you’ve been working hard too!! If the homeowners are uneducated – so are those in charge who should know and impart knowledge to the rest of us – even Paulson and Bush weren’t sure what the hell was going on – how are we if the most powerful haven’t a clue – I’m extremely grateful that Neil has continued to stay in the trenches with us – and continue to educate us mass messes!!! Thanks Neil for all you do!
HOMEOWNERS?!?!?! How about Judges and Plaintiff’s Attorney’s! If Plaintiff’s Attorney’s knew the actual, legally mandated steps tp securitization … would they still be ordering up forged and fraudulant docs? And if Judges knew what they were doing… do ya think 24+ Million homes would have been allowed to be stolen by the Lenders? Whereas I can certainly understand your frustration with less than knowledgeable “homeowner’s” (people who’ve had to learn their own occupations and were essentially conned into these, created by lawyers, financial bear traps, I ask you this… why the Hell isn’t our Legal Industry educated on this stuff by now? Just how the Hell slow are they all? It’s been 24 Years since the financial crisis hit and these issues became public… and I for one have been republishing related articles since 2008 which have accumulated to total in excess of 60,000 articles! What… once you get a BAR card you quit reading public news and information?