Under the category of “WAIT! WHAT?
The Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) renewed proposal to prohibit conflicts of interest in securitizations is critically flawed and would impose significant impediments to the ongoing functioning of the assetbacked securities market, industry advocates said recently.
It is astonishing that anyone could say that with a straight face. The fact is that the entire value proposition that certificates sold under the name “Mortgage-backed securities” is based on conflicts of interest.
The certificates do convey any right title or interest to the purchaser of the certificates. AND the certificates are uncertificated, depending wholly upon “record-keeping” by the mega banks, which is not audited.
Mortgage data is a reference point in the prospectus, but no recital of a transaction in which any right, title, or interest was ever transferred — all recitals refer to future events. No reference to any purchase transaction.
So mortgage liens, deeds of trust, assignments of mortgage, and endorsements are not legally or even tangentially involved in the issuance or sale of the certificates.
Next is the word “Backed.” Those certificates are not backed by anything other than the sole unfettered discretion and free will of the investment banks that issued them while they were inventing the names of common law trusts ore ven statutory trusts that did not exist with respect to any payment, debt, note or mortgage ever issued by a homeowner.
Lastly is the word “securities.” Of course, they are securities. But they were removed from that classification by laws that repealed Glass-Steagal in 1998, signed into law by Bill Clinton (hopefully with a pen). So they are not legally securities even though everyone keeps referring to them as securities.
And through the use of 15D filings, the investment banks gain access to SEC.cov to upload documents that are NEVER reviewed for compliance with any law because no law applies. Then the lawyers tasked with arguing for foreclosure download those documents with the sec.gov website in the heading of the document. The homeowner, the court, and even the homeowner’s lawyer is none the wiser, as the lawyer asks the court tot ake judicial notice of a government document, which it is not.
============
*
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, 76, 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 |
Excellent article and finally the industry is getting called to the carpet. This explains a lot of things but the “certificate” is still unclear – can you elaborate more about what a ‘certificate’ looks like where/how it is ‘created’ the nexus to this entire financial scheme and a ‘certificate’ is still not understood . . . do you mean like a ‘stock certificate’ – is there an actual paper with seals etc., or is a ‘certificate’ re MBS or ABS ‘financial products’ like digital artwork people pay a lot of money but don’t actually have something they can hang on a wall or even touch – are the ‘certificates’ solely ‘electronic’ if so – how does a ‘holder’ acquire or sell? I believe this whole certificate holder aspect has not been fully discussed but I’m sure Neil can articulate in another article! Thanks Neil; because of you I am still in the battle!
Regulations are the key. Read them.